Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0062/21SC
- Status
- Closed
- Approved
- Submitted
- 25 January 2021
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 321 Silver Star Blvd
- Ward
- Ward 22 · Nick Mantas
- Submitted
- 25 January 2021
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Hearing date
- 18 August 2022
- Decision
- Approved
- 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 a three-storey self-storage building and a one-storey retail plaza. The development will have a total project gross floor area of 11,414 m², and is also subject to Site Plan Approval application (File No. 20 227397 ESC 22 SA) currently under review. NOTE: This application is subject to Performance Standard 2029 of the Miliken Employment Zoning By-law 24982. This Performance Standard applies collectively to this land, as well as the other neighbouring properties that were part of the rezoned parcel when the site-specific Zoning By-law was enacted, notwithstanding its future division into two or more parcels of land.
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.
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 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 | 4 | 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.