Address · Ward 3 · Amber Morley
315 Royal York Rd
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Location
- 43.61641, -79.49777
- 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
3- Submitted 27 April 2023Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 23 138783 WET 03 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 7 October 2019Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 19 232985 WET 03 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 31 December 2008Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 08 232382 WET 06 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23 138783 WET 03 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 27 April 2023 | Under Review In progress |
| 19 232985 WET 03 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 7 October 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 08 232382 WET 06 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 31 December 2008 | 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
327 Royal York Rd · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
19 232985 WET 03 OZ · submitted 7 October 2019 · Closed · from registration SM26938 (VANDYK group of companies)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.77
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 SM26938: Development Application and Zoning Application for 327 Royal York Road (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 232985 WET 03 OZ at 327 Royal York Rd: An application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a transit-oriented development (TOD) integrated with the Mimico GO Station for 315 Royal York Road (Metrolinx lands) and 327 Royal York Road (Vandyk lands). The proposal includes two residential towers with heights of 34 and 35-storeys on a 4 to 8… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development Application and Zoning Application for 327 Royal York Road
Matched fields
- address
- 327 ROYAL YORK RD
- application_address
- 327 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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 3
24 lobbied · 100 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 | 24 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 4% | 0.25 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 100 | — | 71% (n=10) | 29% | 4% | 0.14 |
| 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 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.