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

Committee of Adjustment application COA-4325602

1129-1145 Huntingwood Dr

Ward 23 · Jamaal MyersDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Cancelled; Withdrawn
Submitted: 21 February 2018; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 1; Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations: 0; 0 meetings · 0 offices

Application record

Type: Consent (severance) (CO)
Addresses: 1129-1145 Huntingwood Dr
Ward: Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
Submitted: 21 February 2018
Status: Cancelled
Outcome recorded: Withdrawn
Hearing date: —
Decision: —
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

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

Archizoning Design Inc · registration SM26494
to appeal the COA notice of decision on the 1129 Huntingwood Dr, Scarborough, ON. A0060/18SC A0058/18SC B0009/18SC
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.86
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM26494: to appeal the COA notice of decision on the 1129 Huntingwood Dr, Scarborough, ON. A0060/18SC A0058/18SC B0009/18SC (Lobbyist Registry)
- Committee of Adjustment application COA-4325602 at 1129-1145 Huntingwood Dr: (Committee of Adjustment Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: to appeal the COA notice of decision on the 1129 Huntingwood Dr, Scarborough, ON. A0060/18SC A0058/18SC B0009/18SC
Matched fields
address
1129 HUNTINGWOOD DR
application_address
1129-1145 HUNTINGWOOD DR

Lobbying on linked registrations

1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations

No communications recorded.

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.

Consent (severance) (CO), Ward 23

4 lobbied · 13 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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· 4 rows

Consent (severance) (CO), Ward 23: 4 lobbied and 13 matched unlobbied applications in 3 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Objection rate
Lobbied	4	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	13	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.