lobbyTO

Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)

Committee of Adjustment application A0778/15NY

99 Erskine Ave

Status
Closed
Refused
Submitted
18 August 2015
Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
1
0 meetings · 1 office

Application record

Type
Minor variance (MV)
Addresses
99 Erskine Ave
Ward
Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
Submitted
18 August 2015
Status
Closed
Outcome recorded
Refused
Hearing date
26 November 2015
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

To permit the addition of two-storeys to the approved 32-storey building, resulting in a 34-storey residential apartment building. No other changes are proposed to the built form. Related planning files include consent application B033/14NY, 07 277684 NNY 25 OZ and 10 288680 NNY 25 SA.

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

1 linked registration · 1 communication · 0 meetings · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Councillor Jaye Robinson, Ward 451
Data table· 1 row
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor Jaye Robinson, Ward 45Councillor staff107 February 2017

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 15

5 lobbied · 419 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 15: 5 lobbied and 419 matched unlobbied applications in 5 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateObjection rate
Lobbied5Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied419Hidden: 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.