lobbyTO

Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0244/19TEY

1630 Bloor St W

Status
Closed
Withdrawn
Submitted
8 March 2019
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
2
1 meeting · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Minor variance (MV)
Addresses
1630 Bloor St W
Ward
Ward 4 · Gord Perks
Submitted
8 March 2019
Status
Closed
Outcome recorded
Withdrawn
Hearing date
—
Decision
Withdrawn
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

Proposal to construct a new mixed use complex with two 6 storey commercial/residential buildings, and a 3 storey residential townhouse building. Address includes 1630 and 1632 Bloor St W. This application is for lot 3 consisting of a 6 Storey Multiple Use Building with commercial at grade

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

2 linked registrations · 2 communications · 1 meeting · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Councillor Gord Perks1
  • Ward 4 Parkdale-High Park1
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor Gord PerksCouncillor staff103 February 2019
Ward 4 Parkdale-High ParkMember of council1114 January 2019

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 4

8 lobbied · 130 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 4: 8 lobbied and 130 matched unlobbied applications in 6 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied8Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied130Hidden: 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.