Address · Ward 3 · Amber Morley

935 The Queensway

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page

Registrations naming this address: 0
Communications on those registrations: 0
Applications at this address: 3; No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items: 0; Items naming this address

About this address

Ward: Ward 3 · Amber Morley
Location: 43.62376, -79.51235
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

Registrations that mention this address

These 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

Submitted 3 August 2023Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 23 184025 WET 03 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted 13 January 2020Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 20 104057 WET 03 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted 21 May 2019Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 19 156707 WET 03 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)

Data table· 3 rows

Application	Type	Submitted	Status
23 184025 WET 03 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	3 August 2023	Closed Closed (outcome not recorded)
20 104057 WET 03 SA Development application	Site Plan Approval (SA)	13 January 2020	Closed Closed (outcome not recorded)
19 156707 WET 03 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	21 May 2019	Closed Closed (outcome not recorded)

Linked lobbying registrations

No published links to development or Committee of Adjustment applications.

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 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=2
Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied19%
Matched, unlobbied15%

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

573 lobbied · 763 matched

Median days

Lobbied1,925
Matched, unlobbied1,793

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=64
Matched, unlobbied98% n=70

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Appeal rate

Lobbied13%
Matched, unlobbied13%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 3: 37 lobbied and 72 matched unlobbied applications in 25 matched strata
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

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
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

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 3

24 lobbied · 100 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied1,629

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=5
Matched, unlobbied70% n=10

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied30%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 3: 24 lobbied and 100 matched unlobbied applications in 18 matched strata
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

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.

Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.