Address · Ward 8 · Mike Colle
4050 Yonge St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 8 · Mike Colle
- Location
- 43.74414, -79.40820
- 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· 7 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 8 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 3 | 1 | 6 May 2021 |
| Mike Colle Ward 8 | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 12 January 2021 |
| Ward 15 Don Valley West | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 14 January 2021 |
| Mike Colle | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 19 August 2024 |
| Jaye Robinson Ward 15 | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 12 January 2021 |
| Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 14 January 2015 |
| Ward 25 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 30 January 2015 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM31100 | Easton's Group | 4050 Yonge Street | Planning and Development; Combined Application | 12 January 2021 – 24 August 2026 | 5 |
| SM21273 | 1293446 Ontario Inc. | 4050 Yonge Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 14 January 2015 – 31 December 2025 | 7 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
10- Submitted 2 March 2026Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0091/26NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 26 February 2026Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 26 121876 NNY 08 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 4 October 2023Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0531/23NYAwait Expiry Date · Approved
- Submitted 9 August 2023Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0434/23NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 21 September 2021Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 21 215447 NNY 08 SBClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 14 February 2020Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 20 115845 NNY 08 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 14 February 2020Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 20 115847 NNY 08 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 19 May 2015Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 15 159238 NNY 16 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 23 December 2010Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 10 319455 NNY 16 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 30 April 2010Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 10 167159 NNY 16 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 10 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0091/26NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 2 March 2026 | Closed Approved |
| 26 121876 NNY 08 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 26 February 2026 | Under Review In progress |
| A0531/23NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 4 October 2023 | Await Expiry Date Approved |
| A0434/23NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 9 August 2023 | Closed Approved |
| 21 215447 NNY 08 SB Development application | Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB) | 21 September 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 20 115845 NNY 08 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 14 February 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 20 115847 NNY 08 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 14 February 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 15 159238 NNY 16 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 19 May 2015 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 10 319455 NNY 16 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 23 December 2010 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 10 167159 NNY 16 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 30 April 2010 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 8
7 lobbied · 357 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 7 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 357 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.
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 8
25 lobbied · 70 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 25 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 8% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 70 | 727 | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 4% | 0.00 |
| 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.
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.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide
16 lobbied · 48 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 2 rows
| 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.
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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 8
33 lobbied · 57 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 33 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 12% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 57 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 27% | 0.03 |
| 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.