Address · Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
123 Parkway Forest Dr
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
- Location
- 43.77556, -79.34174
- 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· 17 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shelley Carroll | Councillor staff | 10 | 3 | 3 February 2025 |
| Councillor Shelley Carroll | Councillor staff | 7 | 3 | 14 February 2022 |
| Development Review | City staff | 4 | 4 | 22 November 2024 |
| Toronto Water | City staff | 2 | 2 | 21 November 2024 |
| Ward 17 Don Valley North | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 14 February 2022 |
| Ward 10 York Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 15 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 23 Willowdale | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 24 Willowdale | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 25 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 26 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 33 Don Valley East | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 7 August 2014 |
| Ward 34 Don Valley East | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 8 York West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Ward 9 York Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 10 August 2014 |
| Shelley Carroll | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 22 October 2024 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM36037 | Choice Properties | 123 Parkway Forest Drive | Planning and Development; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Develop… | 14 October 2024 – 7 April 2026 | 13 |
| SM31597 | Choice Properties | 123 Parkway Forest Drive | Planning and Development; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Develop… | 22 April 2021 – 22 April 2027 | 13 |
| SM20146 | ELAD Canada Operations Inc | 123 Parkway Forest Drive | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 5 March 2014 – 31 December 2014 | 11 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
6- Submitted 20 November 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0033/25NYAccepted · In progress
- Submitted 26 September 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application COA-5715369Cancelled · Withdrawn
- Submitted 29 July 2025Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 25 202228 NNY 17 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 8 August 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 195222 NNY 17 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 22 December 2016Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 16 270214 NNY 33 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 24 June 2015Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 15 179745 NNY 33 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 6 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| B0033/25NY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 20 November 2025 | Accepted In progress |
| COA-5715369 Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 26 September 2025 | Cancelled Withdrawn |
| 25 202228 NNY 17 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 29 July 2025 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 195222 NNY 17 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 8 August 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 270214 NNY 33 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 22 December 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 15 179745 NNY 33 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 24 June 2015 | 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
123 Parkway Forest Dr · Site Plan Approval (SA)
25 202228 NNY 17 SA · submitted 29 July 2025 · Under Review · from registration SM31597 (Choice Properties)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.79
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 SM31597: Development of 123 Parkway Forest Drive, North York ON M2J 0G1 (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 25 202228 NNY 17 SA at 123 Parkway Forest Dr: Site Plan application for the redevelopment of the lands with a 33-storey residential apartment building with 384 rental units, including six (6) affordable rental housing units. The existing 19-storey residential apartment building with 188 rental units will be retained. Five (5) of the ten (10) e… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development of 123 Parkway Forest Drive, North York ON M2J 0G1
Matched fields
- address
- 123 PARKWAY FOREST DR
- application_address
- 123 PARKWAY FOREST DR
123 Parkway Forest Dr · Site Plan Approval (SA)
25 202228 NNY 17 SA · submitted 29 July 2025 · Under Review · from registration SM36037 (Choice Properties)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.86
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 SM36037: Development of 123 Parkway Forest Drive, North York, ON M2J 0G1 (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 25 202228 NNY 17 SA at 123 Parkway Forest Dr: Site Plan application for the redevelopment of the lands with a 33-storey residential apartment building with 384 rental units, including six (6) affordable rental housing units. The existing 19-storey residential apartment building with 188 rental units will be retained. Five (5) of the ten (10) e… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development of 123 Parkway Forest Drive, North York, ON M2J 0G1
Matched fields
- address
- 123 PARKWAY FOREST DR
- application_address
- 123 PARKWAY FOREST DR
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Consent (severance) (CO), Ward 17
1 lobbied · 1 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 26 | 184 | 79% (n=24) | 21% | 15% | 25% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 179 | 115 | 88% (n=133) | 12% | 3% | 25% |
Submission to hearing. 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 17
14 lobbied · 20 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 14 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 20 | 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=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 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 17
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
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval 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 | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 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 Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 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.