Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0244/17SC

Ward 23 · Jamaal MyersDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Application Withdrawn; Withdrawn
Submitted: 13 July 2017; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Minor variance (MV)
Addresses: 1088 Progress Ave
Ward: Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
Submitted: 13 July 2017
Status: Application Withdrawn
Outcome recorded: Withdrawn
Hearing date: —
Decision: —
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

The applicant is seeking relief from the provisions of the Zoning By-law to permit a mixed-use high-rise (18 storey with an 8 storey podium) building, phase 2 on the northern portion of the site, fronting Sheppard Avenue.

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.

Empire Pace (1088 Progress) Ltd.
SM24850 · 15 July 2017 · “1088 Progress Ave”
Empire Pace (1088 Progress) Ltd.
SM24544 · 11 May 2017 · “1088 Progress Ave.”
Empire Pace (1088 Progress) Ltd.
SM24546 · 11 May 2017 · “1088 Progress Ave”
Empire Pace (1088 Progress) Ltd.
SM24548 · 11 May 2017 · “1088 Progress Ave”
Ballantry Homes Inc.
SM11347 · 7 March 2008 · “1088 Progress Ave”
Ballantry (Markham Gardens) Inc.
SM11353 · 7 March 2008 · “1088 Progress Avenue”
Ballantry Homes Inc.
SM11351 · 6 March 2008 · “1088 Progress Avenue”
Ballantry (Markham Gardens) Inc.
SM11356 · 6 March 2008 · “1088 Progress Avenue”
Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Toronto
SM11391 · 11 February 2008 · “1088 Progress Avenue”

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 23

3 lobbied · 32 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 23: 3 lobbied and 32 matched unlobbied applications in 3 matched strata
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	32	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.