lobbyTO

Address · Ward 1 · Vincent Crisanti

6620 Finch Ave W

Registrations naming this address
1
1 client organisation
Communications on those registrations
9
4 offices contacted
Applications at this address
1
No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
0
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 1 · Vincent Crisanti
Location
43.73513, -79.60230
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

  • Ward 1 Etobicoke North5
  • Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore2
  • Ward 38 Scarborough Centre1
  • Ward 9 York Centre1
Data table· 4 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 1 Etobicoke NorthMember of council5115 December 2013
Ward 5 Etobicoke-LakeshoreMember of council2219 November 2013
Ward 38 Scarborough CentreMember of council1015 December 2013
Ward 9 York CentreMember of council1015 December 2013
All registrations· 1 row
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM17172A. Mantell & Sons6620 Finch Ave. WestPlanning and Development, Planning Policy / Study20 September 2011 – 31 December 20159

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

1
Data table· 1 row
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
15 245239 WET 01 CD
Development application
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)30 October 2015Closed
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.

Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide

28 lobbied · 95 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=3
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%
Data table· 2 rows
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide: 28 lobbied and 95 matched unlobbied applications in 23 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied28—100% (n=3)0%0%0.04
Matched, unlobbied95—100% (n=6)0%0%0.03

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.