lobbyTO

Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0054/18SC

2992 Sheppard Ave E

Status
Application Withdrawn
Withdrawn
Submitted
14 February 2018
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
3
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
4
2 meetings · 1 office

Application record

Type
Minor variance (MV)
Addresses
2992 Sheppard Ave E
Ward
Ward 22 · Nick Mantas
Submitted
14 February 2018
Status
Application Withdrawn
Outcome recorded
Withdrawn
Hearing date
—
Decision
Deferred
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 construct an 18 storey residential condominium building with 160 dwelling units, ground floor retail, underground parking and to permit an on-site sales office. The lands known as 2002 Pharmacy Avenue and 2992 Sheppard Avenue East are subject to site specific Zoning By-law No. 45-2011 enacted by Council in December 2010. In September 2013 and again in June 2014, the Committee of Adjustment approved minor variance applications for setbacks, height, number of dwelling units, and parking (File A299/11SC and A095/14SC).

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

Lobbying on linked registrations

3 linked registrations · 4 communications · 2 meetings · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 40 Scarborough-Agincourt4
Data table· 1 row
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 40 Scarborough-AgincourtMember of council4226 April 2018

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

Other 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 22

1 lobbied · 4 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Minor variance (MV), City-wide

173 lobbied · 3,646 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied126
  • Matched, unlobbied114

Approval rate

  • Lobbied75% n=154
  • Matched, unlobbied91% n=3,058

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied25%
  • Matched, unlobbied9%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied19%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Objection rate

  • Lobbied43%
  • Matched, unlobbied27%
Data table· 4 rows
Minor variance (MV), Ward 22: 1 lobbied and 4 matched unlobbied applications in 1 matched stratum
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied1Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied4Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Minor variance (MV), City-wide: 173 lobbied and 3,646 matched unlobbied applications in 103 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied17312675% (n=154)25%19%43%
Matched, unlobbied3,64611491% (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.