Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0005/24TEY
- Status
- Closed
- Refused
- Submitted
- 2 January 2024
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 44 Jackes Ave
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Submitted
- 2 January 2024
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Refused
- Hearing date
- 20 March 2024
- Decision
- Refused
- Objection at the hearing
- Not recorded
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
To alter the development standards for the residential development (as approved under Site Specific Zoning By-law 768-2021(OLT)), by increasing the number of storeys from 31 to 35, increasing the number of dwelling units from 265 to 299 and to reduce the parking space requirements from 361 resident parking spaces and 92 visitor parking spaces to 344 resident parking spaces and 83 visitor parking spaces.
Linked lobbying registrations
No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.
Other registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- QuadReal Property Group Limited PartnershipSM32528 · 2 November 2021 · “44 Jackes Ave”
- QuadReal Property Group Limited PartnershipSM26466 · 11 July 2018 · “44 Jackes Avenue”
- QuadReal Property Group Limited PartnershipSM24077 · 23 February 2017 · “44 Jackes Avenue”
- Bentall Kennedy (Canada) LPSM23536 · 20 September 2016 · “44 Jackes Avenue”
- Bentall Kennedy (Canada) LPSM22647 · 12 January 2016 · “44 Jackes Avenue”
Comparison with similar 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 12
20 lobbied · 357 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 20 | 106 | 50% (n=12) | 50% | 35% | 86% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 357 | 145 | 90% (n=291) | 10% | 5% | 30% |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
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.