Address · Ward 16 · Jon Burnside

751 Don Mills Rd

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page

Registrations naming this address: 1; 1 client organisation
Communications on those registrations: 1; 1 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 16 · Jon Burnside
Location: 43.71423, -79.33586
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

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

The Gold Knight Group IncSM13857 · 11 December 20091

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

Ward 26 Don Valley West1

Data table· 1 row

Office	Office holder type	Communications	Meetings	Last contact
Ward 26 Don Valley West	Member of council	1	1	14 July 2010

All registrations· 1 row

Registration	Client	As written	Subject matter	Dates	Communications
SM13857	The Gold Knight Group Inc	751 Don Mills Road	Planning and Development, Combined Application, Site Plan and Minor Variance	11 December 2009 – 29 August 2011	1

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

Submitted 13 October 2009Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 09 178258 NNY 26 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)

Data table· 1 row

Application	Type	Submitted	Status
09 178258 NNY 26 SA Development application	Site Plan Approval (SA)	13 October 2009	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.

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 16

10 lobbied · 23 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 16: 10 lobbied and 23 matched unlobbied applications in 8 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	10	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	23	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.