Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
1414 Yonge St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.68662, -79.39392
- 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
0These 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.
None.
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
No communications recorded.
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
9- Submitted 2 October 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0069/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 30 September 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0065/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 30 September 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0066/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 30 September 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0067/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 30 September 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0068/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 4 June 2025Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0038/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 24 September 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 217377 STE 12 CDUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 13 September 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 211696 STE 12 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 16 July 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 185451 STE 12 OZCouncil Approved · Approved
Data table· 9 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| B0069/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 2 October 2025 | Closed Approved |
| B0065/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 30 September 2025 | Closed Approved |
| B0066/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 30 September 2025 | Closed Approved |
| B0067/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 30 September 2025 | Closed Approved |
| B0068/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 30 September 2025 | Closed Approved |
| B0038/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 4 June 2025 | Closed Approved |
| 21 217377 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 24 September 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 211696 STE 12 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 13 September 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 185451 STE 12 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 16 July 2021 | Council Approved Approved |
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
1406 Yonge St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
21 185451 STE 12 OZ · submitted 16 July 2021 · Council Approved · from registration SM31710 (Metropia)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM31710: 1406-1428 Yonge Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 185451 STE 12 OZ at 1406 Yonge St: To allow a 50-storey mixed use building with commercial at grade, containing 534dwelling units.Inactive file: Paused on request of applicant until September 2026. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 1406-1428 Yonge Street
Matched fields
- address
- 1406-1428 YONGE ST
- application_address
- 1406 YONGE ST
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), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 2 rows
| 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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 12
5 lobbied · 11 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 11 | 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 | 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.
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 12
32 lobbied · 72 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 32 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 3% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.05 |
| 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 12
44 lobbied · 60 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 44 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 14% | 0.02 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| 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.