Committee of Adjustment application · Consent (severance) (CO)

Committee of Adjustment application B0021/18SC

Ward 24 · Paul AinslieDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Approved
Submitted: 13 April 2018; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Consent (severance) (CO)
Addresses: 675 Progress Ave
Ward: Ward 24 · Paul Ainslie
Submitted: 13 April 2018
Status: Closed
Outcome recorded: Approved
Hearing date: 21 June 2018
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

This application is for consent to sever the land into two parcels, shown as PART 2 and PART 3 on the attached draft Reference Plan. A separate application for subdivision approval will create blocks for a future mixed use development, a block for a public park, and public road allowances (File 20 13 175005 ESC 38 SB).

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.

Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM21870 · 26 May 2015 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20429 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20430 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20432 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Sandra Simpson
SM14107 · 10 February 2010 · “675 Progress Ave.”

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.

Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide

26 lobbied · 179 matched

Median days

Lobbied184
Matched, unlobbied115

Approval rate

Lobbied79% n=24
Matched, unlobbied88% n=133

Refusal rate

Lobbied21%
Matched, unlobbied12%

Appeal rate

Lobbied15%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Objection rate

Lobbied25%
Matched, unlobbied25%

Data table· 2 rows

Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide: 26 lobbied and 179 matched unlobbied applications in 21 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	26	184	79% (n=24)	21%	15%	25%
Matched, unlobbied	179	115	88% (n=133)	12%	3%	25%

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.