lobbyTO

Address · Ward 25 · Neethan Shan

511 Conlins Road

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page
Registrations naming this address
2
2 client organisations
Communications on those registrations
9
2 offices contacted
Applications at this address
2
4 published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
0
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 25 · Neethan Shan
Location
43.79984, -79.18734
How this address was located
Matched to the nearest civic number on the same street in the City's address points. Matched address: 517 CONLINS RD (6 civic numbers away).

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

2

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

  • Councillor Jim Hart7
  • Ward 44 Scarborough East2
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor Jim HartCouncillor staff7115 August 2017
Ward 44 Scarborough EastMember of council2126 July 2017
All registrations· 2 rows
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM24668SD Homes Inc.511 Conlins roadPlanning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Plan of …8 June 2017 – 28 May 20180
SM24571Conlins Enclave Incorporated511 Conlins RoadPlanning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Site Plan16 May 2017 – 29 December 20209

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

2
Data table· 2 rows
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
16 240218 ESC 44 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)20 October 2016Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
16 240263 ESC 44 SB
Development application
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)20 October 2016Final Approval Completed
Approved

Linked lobbying registrations

These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.

Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored

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 25

3 lobbied · 4 matched

Hidden: 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 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 25: 3 lobbied and 4 matched unlobbied applications in 3 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied3Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied4Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—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

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 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
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied16Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied48Hidden: 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.