Address · Ward 3 · Amber Morley
15 Sinclair St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Location
- 43.62400, -79.50327
- 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
1- Submitted 10 May 2022Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 22 144668 WET 03 OZOMB Appeal · In progress
Data table· 1 row
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 144668 WET 03 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 10 May 2022 | OMB Appeal In progress |
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
2 Queen Elizabeth Blvd · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
22 144668 WET 03 OZ · submitted 10 May 2022 · OMB Appeal · from registration SM24777 (Craft Development Corporation)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.78
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 SM24777: Lobbying POH and Staff to get an advise and guidance on appeal process for 10 Queen Elizabeth Blvd (OMB), and to ensure that it fits with the community plan. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 22 144668 WET 03 OZ at 2 Queen Elizabeth Blvd: Proposal for a mixed-use development consisting of three buildings on two parcels (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Lobbying POH and Staff to get an advise and guidance on appeal process for 10 Queen Elizabeth Blvd (OMB), and to ensure that it fits with the community plan.
Matched fields
- address
- 10 QUEEN ELIZABETH BLVD
- application_address
- 10 QUEEN ELIZABETH BLVD
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 3
37 lobbied · 72 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 | 37 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 16% | 0.27 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 15% | 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.