Address · Ward 8 · Mike Colle

2406 Dufferin St

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page

Registrations naming this address: 0
Communications on those registrations: 0
Applications at this address: 3; No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items: 0; Items naming this address

About this address

Ward: Ward 8 · Mike Colle
Location: 43.69696, -79.45128
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 8 November 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 235229 NNY 08 OZOMB Appeal · In progress
Submitted 8 November 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 235230 NNY 08 SAUnder Review · In progress
Submitted 8 November 2021Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 21 235231 NNY 08 SBUnder Review · In progress

Data table· 3 rows

Application	Type	Submitted	Status
21 235229 NNY 08 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	8 November 2021	OMB Appeal In progress
21 235230 NNY 08 SA Development application	Site Plan Approval (SA)	8 November 2021	Under Review In progress
21 235231 NNY 08 SB Development application	Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)	8 November 2021	Under Review In progress

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 8

33 lobbied · 57 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=3
Matched, unlobbied100% n=3

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied12%
Matched, unlobbied26%

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

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=78
Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

Lobbied12%
Matched, unlobbied14%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 8: 33 lobbied and 57 matched unlobbied applications in 22 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	33	—	100% (n=3)	0%	12%	0.00
Matched, unlobbied	57	—	100% (n=3)	0%	26%	0.03

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
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

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 8

25 lobbied · 69 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=3
Matched, unlobbied100% n=2

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied8%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=63
Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 8: 25 lobbied and 69 matched unlobbied applications in 16 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	25	—	100% (n=3)	0%	8%	0.00
Matched, unlobbied	69	—	100% (n=2)	0%	4%	0.00

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.

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

Development applications

Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide

16 lobbied · 48 matched

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

Data table· 2 rows

Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide: 16 lobbied and 48 matched unlobbied applications in 15 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	16	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	48	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.