Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0016/21SC
- Status
- OMB Appeal
- Refused
- Submitted
- 8 January 2021
- Appealed
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 4694 Kingston Rd
- Ward
- Ward 25 · Neethan Shan
- Submitted
- 8 January 2021
- Status
- OMB Appeal
- Outcome recorded
- Refused
- Hearing date
- 22 July 2021
- Decision
- Refused
- Objection at the hearing
- Not recorded
- Appealed
- Yes
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
To permit the construction of a twelve-storey mixed-use building with 168 residential units and 65 square metres of office space. Cross reference application: Site Plan Application 2019 256358 ESC 25 SA.
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
Firmland Acquisitions Corporation · registration SM27902
Applications in support of redevelopment of 4694-4696 Kingston Rd.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.76
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 SM27902: Applications in support of redevelopment of 4694-4696 Kingston Rd. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Committee of Adjustment application A0016/21SC at 4694 Kingston Rd: To permit the construction of a twelve-storey mixed-use building with 168 residential units and 65 square metres of office space. Cross reference application: Site Plan Application 2019 256358 ESC 25 SA. (Committee of Adjustment Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Applications in support of redevelopment of 4694-4696 Kingston Rd.
Matched fields
- address
- 4694-4696 KINGSTON RD
- application_address
- 4694 KINGSTON RD
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 3 communications · 3 meetings · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 25 Scarborough-Rouge Park | Member of council | 3 | 3 | 1 September 2021 |
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
None.
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 25
1 lobbied · 9 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 9 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.