20 De Boers Dr

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page

Registrations naming this address: 0
Communications on those registrations: 0
Applications at this address: 6; No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items: 0; Items naming this address

About this address

Ward: Ward 6 · James Pasternak
Location: 43.75209, -79.46543
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

Registrations that mention this address

These 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.

None.

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

No communications recorded.

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

Submitted 10 July 2024Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 24 178354 NNY 06 OZUnder Review · In progress
Submitted 20 May 2022Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0027/22NYClosed · Approved
Submitted 29 March 2019Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 19 132479 NNY 06 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted 17 July 2018Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0545/18NYApproved with Conditions · Approved
Submitted 31 May 2017Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 17 170226 NNY 08 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted 14 October 2016Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0065/16NYClosed · Approved

Data table· 6 rows

Application	Type	Submitted	Status
24 178354 NNY 06 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	10 July 2024	Under Review In progress
B0027/22NY Committee of Adjustment application	Consent (severance) (CO)	20 May 2022	Closed Approved
19 132479 NNY 06 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	29 March 2019	Closed Closed (outcome not recorded)
A0545/18NY Committee of Adjustment application	Minor variance (MV)	17 July 2018	Approved with Conditions Approved
17 170226 NNY 08 SA Development application	Site Plan Approval (SA)	31 May 2017	Closed Closed (outcome not recorded)
B0065/16NY Committee of Adjustment application	Consent (severance) (CO)	14 October 2016	Closed Approved

Linked lobbying registrations

No published links to development or Committee of Adjustment applications.

Council and committee items naming this address

None.

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 6

13 lobbied · 16 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

573 lobbied · 763 matched

Median days

Lobbied1,925
Matched, unlobbied1,793

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=64
Matched, unlobbied98% n=70

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Appeal rate

Lobbied13%
Matched, unlobbied13%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 6: 13 lobbied and 16 matched unlobbied applications in 12 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	13	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	16	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	573	1,925	100% (n=64)	0%	13%	0.08
Matched, unlobbied	763	1,793	98% (n=70)	2%	13%	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.

Committee of Adjustment applications

Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide

26 lobbied · 179 matched

Median days

Lobbied184
Matched, unlobbied115

Approval rate

Lobbied79% n=24
Matched, unlobbied88% n=133

Refusal rate

Lobbied21%
Matched, unlobbied12%

Appeal rate

Lobbied15%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Objection rate

Lobbied25%
Matched, unlobbied25%

Data table· 2 rows

Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide: 26 lobbied and 179 matched unlobbied applications in 21 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	26	184	79% (n=24)	21%	15%	25%
Matched, unlobbied	179	115	88% (n=133)	12%	3%	25%

Submission to hearing. Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.

Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.

Committee of Adjustment applications

Minor variance (MV), Ward 6

2 lobbied · 14 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Minor variance (MV), City-wide

173 lobbied · 3,646 matched

Median days

Lobbied126
Matched, unlobbied114

Approval rate

Lobbied75% n=154
Matched, unlobbied91% n=3,058

Refusal rate

Lobbied25%
Matched, unlobbied9%

Appeal rate

Lobbied19%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Objection rate

Lobbied43%
Matched, unlobbied27%

Data table· 4 rows

Minor variance (MV), Ward 6: 2 lobbied and 14 matched unlobbied applications in 2 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	2	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	14	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Minor variance (MV), City-wide: 173 lobbied and 3,646 matched unlobbied applications in 103 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	173	126	75% (n=154)	25%	19%	43%
Matched, unlobbied	3,646	114	91% (n=3,058)	9%	4%	27%

Submission to hearing. Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.

Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.

Development applications

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 6

17 lobbied · 41 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 6: 17 lobbied and 41 matched unlobbied applications in 12 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	17	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	41	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	449	—	100% (n=61)	0%	4%	0.07
Matched, unlobbied	1,237	727	97% (n=96)	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.

Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.