lobbyTO

Address · Ward 6 · James Pasternak

44 Edinburgh Dr

Registrations naming this address
1
1 client organisation
Communications on those registrations
10
6 offices contacted
Applications at this address
4
No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
0
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 6 · James Pasternak
Location
43.74204, -79.43482
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

1

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.

Registrations by communications

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

  • Office of Councillor Pasternak, Ward 103
  • Ward 10 York Centre3
  • Community Planning1
  • Toronto Building1
  • Transportation1
  • Office of Councillor James Pasternak, Ward 101
Data table· 6 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Office of Councillor Pasternak, Ward 10Councillor staff327 May 2015
Ward 10 York CentreMember of council317 May 2015
Community PlanningCity staff1027 March 2015
Toronto BuildingCity staff1012 March 2015
TransportationCity staff1027 March 2015
Office of Councillor James Pasternak, Ward 10Councillor staff1019 March 2015
All registrations· 1 row
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM21530Beth Joseph Lubavitch44 Edinburgh DriveBy-law / Regulation; Planning and Development Application, Minor Variance11 March 2015 – 28 October 201510

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

4
Data table· 4 rows
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
A0064/26NY
Committee of Adjustment application
Minor variance (MV)10 February 2026Closed
Refused
A0227/18NY
Committee of Adjustment application
Minor variance (MV)21 March 2018Approved with Conditions
Approved
COA-4337681
Committee of Adjustment application
Minor variance (MV)15 March 2018Cancelled
Withdrawn
A1111/16NY
Committee of Adjustment application
Minor variance (MV)19 December 2016Closed
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

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 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
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied2Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied14Hidden: 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
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied17312675% (n=154)25%19%43%
Matched, unlobbied3,64611491% (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.