Address · Ward 6 · James Pasternak
530 Wilson Ave
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 6 · James Pasternak
- Location
- 43.73517, -79.44620
- 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· 4 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor James Pasternak | Councillor staff | 10 | 0 | 28 July 2020 |
| Councillor Carroll | Councillor staff | 2 | 0 | 18 September 2019 |
| Ward 10 York Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 27 June 2017 |
| Ward 24 Willowdale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 24 July 2018 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM24547 | ShipLake Properties Ltd. | 530 Wilson Avenue | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B… | 11 May 2017 – 9 June 2021 | 14 |
| SM13868 | Orfus Realty | 530 Wilson Avenue | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 15 December 2009 – 1 June 2010 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 2 November 2018Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 18 251696 NNY 10 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 23 December 2016Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 16 270444 NNY 10 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 251696 NNY 10 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 2 November 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 270444 NNY 10 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 23 December 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
470 Wilson Ave · Site Plan Approval (SA)
18 251696 NNY 10 SA · submitted 2 November 2018 · Closed · from registration SM24547 (ShipLake Properties Ltd.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM24547: Assisting with the development of 470 Wilson-530 Wilson Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 251696 NNY 10 SA at 470 Wilson Ave: The site includes 470, 490 and 530 Wilson Avenue. It is presently occupied by a four-storey commercial office building and two four-storey residential rental buildings that contain a total of 110 rental dwelling units. The applicant proposes to demolish the four-storey commercial office building an… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 470 Wilson-530 Wilson Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 530 WILSON AVE
- application_address
- 530 WILSON AVE
470 Wilson Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 270444 NNY 10 OZ · submitted 23 December 2016 · Closed · from registration SM24547 (ShipLake Properties Ltd.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM24547: Assisting with the development of 470 Wilson-530 Wilson Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 270444 NNY 10 OZ at 470 Wilson Ave: The site includes 470, 490 and 530 Wilson Avenue. It is presently occupied by a four-storey commercial building and two four-storey residential rental buildings that contain a total of 110 rental units. The applicant proposes to demolish a four-storey commercial office building and two four-storey … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 470 Wilson-530 Wilson Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 530 WILSON AVE
- application_address
- 530 WILSON AVE
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 6
17 lobbied · 41 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 17 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 41 | 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 | 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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 6
13 lobbied · 16 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 13 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 16 | 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 | 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.