Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0206/15SC
- Status
- Closed
- Approved
- Submitted
- 15 June 2015
- Appealed
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 0 Gatineau Line
- Ward
- Ward 21 · Michael Thompson
- Submitted
- 15 June 2015
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Hearing date
- 15 October 2015
- Decision
- Approved
- Objection at the hearing
- Not recorded
- Appealed
- Yes
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
To maintain the existing off-site parking lot within the Hydro corridor to the north of the Scarborough General Hospital at 3050 Lawrence Ave E without further time limits. Note: In August 2002, the Committee of Adjustment approved a minor variance to permit a parking lot for a period of 5 years (File A260/01SC). In June 2007, the Committee of Adjustment approved an extension on the previous variance (File A133/07SC). The Committee of Adjustment's decision was subsequently appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The OMB in October 2009 permitted the variance for the existing parking lot until June 2015.***OMB HEARING DATE JULY 12 2016 AT 10AM***
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 21
3 lobbied · 48 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 | 3 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | 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.