Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0279/16SC
- Status
- Closed
- Approved
- Submitted
- 16 September 2016
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 2901 Markham Rd
- Ward
- Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
- Submitted
- 16 September 2016
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Hearing date
- 8 December 2016
- 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
The applicant is seeking relief from the provisions of the Zoning By-law to permit a 30 seat restaurant/cafe on the property, which would result in a combined restaurant/banquet hall use gross floor area of 2,539 square metres. In February 2016, the Committee of Adjustment approved (file A364/15SC) a restaurant/cafe on the property, to have a combined restaurant/banquet hall use gross floor area of 2,423 square metres. In November 2014, the Committee of Adjustment approved (file A253/14SC) a banquet hall on the property to have a gross floor area of 2,234 square metres. In April 2011, the Committee of Adjustment approved (file A165/10SC) a banquet hall to have a gross floor area of 2,005 square metres on the site.
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.
- Dosarama Inc.SM22787 · 16 February 2016 · “2901 Markham Rd”
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 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 | 32 | 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.