lobbyTO

Address · Ward 7 · Anthony Perruzza

2450 Finch Ave W

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page
Registrations naming this address
2
1 client organisation
Communications on those registrations
11
2 offices contacted
Applications at this address
2
No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
0
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 7 · Anthony Perruzza
Location
43.74996, -79.55420
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

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

  • Ward 7 Humber River-Black Creek9
  • Councillor Perruzza2
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 7 Humber River-Black CreekMember of council9525 October 2022
Councillor PerruzzaCouncillor staff202 March 2022
All registrations· 2 rows
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM325122450 Finch Avenue West Inc.2450 Finch Avenue West.Planning and Development Application; Planning and Development Application, Official Plan1 November 2021 – 31 December 20242
SM324752450 Finch Avenue West Inc.2450 Finch Avenue WestPlanning and Development Application; Planning and Development Application, Official Plan25 October 2021 – 15 November 20239

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

2
Data table· 2 rows
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
26 114412 WET 07 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)6 February 2026Under Review
In progress
24 253096 WET 07 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)23 December 2024Under Review
In progress

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.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 7

7 lobbied · 8 matched

Hidden: 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 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied1,925
  • Matched, unlobbied1,793

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=64
  • Matched, unlobbied98% n=70

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied2%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied13%
  • Matched, unlobbied13%
Data table· 4 rows
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 7: 7 lobbied and 8 matched unlobbied applications in 7 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied7Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied8Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied5731,925100% (n=64)0%13%0.08
Matched, unlobbied7631,79398% (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.