Address · Ward 22 · Nick Mantas
4577 Steeles Ave E
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 22 · Nick Mantas
- Location
- 43.82364, -79.30584
- 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 22 Scarborough-Agincourt | Member of council | 3 | 0 | 29 June 2022 |
| Councillor Ward 22 | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 21 December 2021 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM32726 | Terra Bona Developments Ltd. | 4577 Steeles Ave East | Planning and Development, Planning Policy / Study; Planning and Development, Rental Housing Demolit… | 20 December 2021 – 20 December 2022 | 4 |
| SM21531 | Valleymede Building AMA COrp | 4577 Steeles Ave East | Planning and Development, Planning Policy / Study | 12 March 2015 – 31 March 2016 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
1- Submitted 6 March 2008Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 08 116996 ESC 22 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 1 row
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08 116996 ESC 22 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 6 March 2008 | 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
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 22
6 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 | 6 | 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.