Committee of Adjustment application · Consent (severance) (CO)
Committee of Adjustment application B0047/16NY
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 21 July 2016
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Consent (severance) (CO)
- Addresses
- 23 Franklin Ave
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Submitted
- 21 July 2016
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Hearing date
- —
- Decision
- decision not made - appeal was made due to that
- 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
—
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.
- VERIZON HOMES COMPANY LTDSM22872 · 7 March 2016 · “23 Franklin Ave”
- 1940844 Ontario Inc.SM22726 · 1 January 2016 · “23 Franklin Avenue”
- Bijan MoiniSM22598 · 23 December 2015 · “23 Franklin Avenue”
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 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 2 rows
| 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.