Address · Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
55 Mac Frost Way
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
- Location
- 43.83922, -79.23002
- 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
3These 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· 16 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 37 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 8 | 0 | 26 April 2013 |
| Ward 43 Scarborough East | Member of council | 8 | 0 | 22 February 2013 |
| Mayor's Office | Councillor staff | 5 | 3 | 24 April 2013 |
| Ward 39 Scarborough-Agincourt | Member of council | 5 | 0 | 21 February 2013 |
| Engineering & Construction Services | City staff | 4 | 0 | 28 June 2023 |
| Transportation Services | City staff | 4 | 0 | 28 June 2023 |
| Ward 3 Etobicoke Centre | Member of council | 3 | 0 | 26 April 2013 |
| Ward 38 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 21 February 2013 |
| Ward 42 Scarborough-Rouge River | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 21 February 2013 |
| Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 26 November 2012 |
| Office of Councillor Milczyn | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 26 November 2012 |
| Mayor | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 14 March 2013 |
| Ward 35 Scarborough Southwest | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 21 February 2013 |
| Ward 4 Etobicoke Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 26 April 2013 |
| Ward 40 Scarborough-Agincourt | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 23 November 2012 |
| Ward 41 Scarborough-Rouge River | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 23 November 2012 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM34546 | Calexico Holdings Inc. | 55 Mac Frost Way | Planning and Development; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Develop… | 6 June 2023 – 6 June 2024 | 8 |
| SM19064 | Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club | 55 Mac Frost way | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Plan of … | 14 March 2013 – 31 October 2013 | 6 |
| SM18711 | Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club | 55 Mac Frost Way. | Planning and Development Application, Plan of Subdivision | 22 November 2012 – 22 May 2013 | 35 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
8- Submitted 23 October 2017Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 17 252055 ESC 42 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 28 February 2017Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 17 122532 ESC 42 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 19 April 2016Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 16 142834 ESC 42 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 24 December 2014Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 14 267698 ESC 42 SBClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 20 June 2014Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 14 177430 ESC 42 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 October 2013Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 13 251204 ESC 42 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 19 July 2013Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 13 206923 ESC 42 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 3 February 2012Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 12 117151 ESC 42 SBClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 8 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17 252055 ESC 42 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 23 October 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 17 122532 ESC 42 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 28 February 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 142834 ESC 42 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 19 April 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 14 267698 ESC 42 SB Development application | Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB) | 24 December 2014 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 14 177430 ESC 42 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 20 June 2014 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 251204 ESC 42 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 16 October 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 206923 ESC 42 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 19 July 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 117151 ESC 42 SB Development application | Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB) | 3 February 2012 | 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
55 Mac Frost Way · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
14 267698 ESC 42 SB · submitted 24 December 2014 · Closed · from registration SM18711 (Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.77
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 SM18711: Scarborough Community Council approved the draft Plan of Subdivsion for 55 Mac Frost Way. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 267698 ESC 42 SB at 55 Mac Frost Way: A residential development located at the north end of the Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club consisting of a total of 37 dwelling units. Specifically, the development envisions 14 semi-detached dwelling units and 23 street townhouses on an extension of Mac Frost Way, with one block for a stormwater m… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Scarborough Community Council approved the draft Plan of Subdivsion for 55 Mac Frost Way.
Matched fields
- address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
- application_address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
55 Mac Frost Way · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
12 117151 ESC 42 SB · submitted 3 February 2012 · Closed · from registration SM18711 (Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.92
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM18711: Scarborough Community Council approved the draft Plan of Subdivsion for 55 Mac Frost Way. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 117151 ESC 42 SB at 55 Mac Frost Way: Proposed 37 lot residential draft plan of subdivision consisting of 9 detached lots in order to develop single detached dwellings and 5 blocks in order to develop 28 freehold townhouses. Proposed lots/blocks would have frontages on Staines Road and a new public street. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Scarborough Community Council approved the draft Plan of Subdivsion for 55 Mac Frost Way.
Matched fields
- address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
- application_address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
55 Mac Frost Way · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
12 117151 ESC 42 SB · submitted 3 February 2012 · Closed · from registration SM19064 (Cedar Brae Golf and Country Club)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.77
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 SM19064: On Two occasions our application. for rezoning and plan of subdivision for 55 Mac Frost way were unanimously approved by community council. It has been deferred back to community council on both occasions by Toronto city council. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 117151 ESC 42 SB at 55 Mac Frost Way: Proposed 37 lot residential draft plan of subdivision consisting of 9 detached lots in order to develop single detached dwellings and 5 blocks in order to develop 28 freehold townhouses. Proposed lots/blocks would have frontages on Staines Road and a new public street. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: On Two occasions our application. for rezoning and plan of subdivision for 55 Mac Frost way were unanimously approved by community council. It has been deferred back to community council on both occasions by Tor…
Matched fields
- address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
- application_address
- 55 MAC FROST WAY
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.
Part Lot Control Exemption (PL), City-wide
2 lobbied · 6 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 | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 6 | 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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 23
2 lobbied · 2 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 | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 2 | 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 23
2 lobbied · 2 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 | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 2 | 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.
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.