lobbyTO

Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0415/15SC

20 Leafield Dr

Ward 22 · Nick MantasDataset pageReport an error on this page
Status
Closed
Refused
Submitted
24 December 2015
Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations
0
None published
Communications on linked registrations
0

Application record

Type
Minor variance (MV)
Addresses
20 Leafield Dr
Ward
Ward 22 · Nick Mantas
Submitted
24 December 2015
Status
Closed
Outcome recorded
Refused
Hearing date
12 May 2016
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

The owner is requesting consent to sever the land at the rear of 2783 Victoria Park Avenue into two lots, and has applied for variances for the proposed lot shown as Part 4 on the attached Lot Division Plan. The owner is proposing to build a new single family dwelling.

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 22

1 lobbied · 4 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 22: 1 lobbied and 4 matched unlobbied applications in 1 matched stratum
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied1Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied4Hidden: 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.