Address · Ward 16 · Jon Burnside
155 St Dennis Dr
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 16 · Jon Burnside
- Location
- 43.72178, -79.32736
- How this address was located
- Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
2These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 16 Don Valley East | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 16 September 2022 |
| Office of the Mayor | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 26 October 2022 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM33818 | Don Valley Trails Park Holdings Inc. | 155 St Dennis Drive | Planning and Development; Planning and Development, Planning Policy / Study | 26 October 2022 – 26 October 2024 | 1 |
| SM33481 | Tercot Communities | 155 St. Dennis Drive. | Affordable Housing; Parks / Open Space; Planning and Development | 22 July 2022 – 22 July 2025 | 2 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 28 February 2023Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 23 118421 NNY 16 OZOMB Approved · Approved
- Submitted 28 February 2023Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 23 118484 NNY 16 SAOMB Approved · Approved
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23 118421 NNY 16 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 28 February 2023 | OMB Approved Approved |
| 23 118484 NNY 16 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 28 February 2023 | OMB Approved Approved |
Linked lobbying registrations
These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.
Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored
155 St Dennis Dr · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
23 118421 NNY 16 OZ · submitted 28 February 2023 · OMB Approved · from registration SM33818 (Don Valley Trails Park Holdings Inc.)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.92
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM33818: Development Application 155 St Dennis Drive (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 23 118421 NNY 16 OZ at 155 St Dennis Dr: The proposed development consists of four (4) residential towers ranging between 42 to 56 storeys in height, linked by a base building. The proposed development contains 2,170 residential units, 135,413 square metres of residential uses, and approximately 348 square metres of non-residential space.… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development Application 155 St Dennis Drive
Matched fields
- address
- 155 ST DENNIS DR
- application_address
- 155 ST DENNIS DR
155 St Dennis Dr · Site Plan Approval (SA)
23 118484 NNY 16 SA · submitted 28 February 2023 · OMB Approved · from registration SM33818 (Don Valley Trails Park Holdings Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.82
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM33818: Development Application 155 St Dennis Drive (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 23 118484 NNY 16 SA at 155 St Dennis Dr: The proposed development consists of four (4) residential towers ranging between 42 to 56 storeys in height, linked by a base building. The proposed development contains 2,170 residential units, 135,413 square metres of residential uses, and approximately 348 square metres of non-residential space … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development Application 155 St Dennis Drive
Matched fields
- address
- 155 ST DENNIS DR
- application_address
- 155 ST DENNIS DR
Council and committee items naming this address
- 155 St Dennis Drive - Ontario Land Tribunal Hearing - Request for Directions2026.CC41.14 · 21 May 2026
Comparison with similar applications
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 16
4 lobbied · 8 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 4 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 8 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 0.05 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 16
10 lobbied · 23 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 10 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 23 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.