Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0078/25EYK

250 Wincott Dr

Ward 2 · Stephen HolydayDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: OMB Appeal; Refused
Submitted: 24 February 2025; Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Minor variance (MV)
Addresses: 250 Wincott Dr
Ward: Ward 2 · Stephen Holyday
Submitted: 24 February 2025
Status: OMB Appeal
Outcome recorded: Refused
Hearing date: 26 June 2025
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 adjust the parking standards for the proposed buildings.

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.

Trinity Development Group Inc.
SM36644 · 26 May 2025 · “250 Wincott Drive”
Trinity Development Group Inc.
SM31594 · 16 April 2021 · “250 Wincott Drive”
Trinity Development Group Inc.
SM22981 · 8 April 2016 · “250 Wincott Dr.”
Trinity Development Group Inc.
SM22091 · 4 August 2015 · “250 Wincott Drive.”
Trinity Development Group Inc.
SM22096 · 27 July 2015 · “250 Wincott Drive”

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 2

7 lobbied · 115 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 2: 7 lobbied and 115 matched unlobbied applications in 5 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	7	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	115	Hidden: 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
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.