Address · Ward 3 · Amber Morley
268 Royal York Rd
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Location
- 43.61458, -79.49821
- 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
4- Submitted 22 September 2022Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 22 207193 WET 03 OZUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 30 December 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 252097 WET 03 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 10 November 2021Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 21 236297 WET 03 SBUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 9 November 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 236250 WET 03 OZOMB Appeal · In progress
Data table· 4 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 207193 WET 03 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 22 September 2022 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 252097 WET 03 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 30 December 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 236297 WET 03 SB Development application | Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB) | 10 November 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 236250 WET 03 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 9 November 2021 | 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
268 Royal York Rd · Site Plan Approval (SA)
21 252097 WET 03 SA · submitted 30 December 2021 · Under Review · from registration SM32530 (Royal Mimico Developments Limited)
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 SM32530: 266 Royal York Road (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 252097 WET 03 SA at 268 Royal York Rd: Revised Site Plan Control application to permit a mixed-use development consisting of a mixed-use building with 37 storey and 23 storey towers (respectively 127 m and 84 m in height including mechanical penthouses) and a 3 level below grade parking garage as an initial phase, a multi-storey self-st… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 266 Royal York Road
Matched fields
- address
- 266 ROYAL YORK RD
- application_address
- 266 ROYAL YORK RD
268 Royal York Rd · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
21 236250 WET 03 OZ · submitted 9 November 2021 · OMB Appeal · from registration SM32530 (Royal Mimico Developments Limited)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
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 SM32530: 266 Royal York Road (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 236250 WET 03 OZ at 268 Royal York Rd: The proposed development consists of a mixed-use building with 36 storey and 29 storey towers (respectively 116.2 m and 98.7 m in height excl. mechanical penthouses) 413 sqm of retail at grade, a 12,374 sqm multi-storey self-storage building as a future phase, and a 1,146 m² public park.Related app… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 266 Royal York Road
Matched fields
- address
- 266 ROYAL YORK RD
- application_address
- 266 ROYAL YORK RD
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
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval 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=2) | 0% | 19% | 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 | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (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.
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 3
24 lobbied · 100 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 24 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 4% | 0.25 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 100 | 1,629 | 70% (n=10) | 30% | 4% | 0.14 |
| 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.
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 Subdivision (SB), Ward 3
1 lobbied · 1 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide
16 lobbied · 48 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 16 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.