Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0246/26TEY
- Status
- Closed
- Approved
- Submitted
- 31 March 2026
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 333 Old Weston Rd
- Ward
- Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
- Submitted
- 31 March 2026
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Hearing date
- 27 May 2026
- 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
To legalize and to maintain the existing one-and-one-half-storey detached dwelling (municipally known as 333 Old Weston Road), and to reconstruct the existing rear one-storey addition, and side (south) ground floor deck and stairs, which were constructed without an authorized building permit. Also, to reconstruct the front porch stairs, and to convert the basement into a second dwelling unit. The existing second residential building on this lot (municipally known as 102 Ford Street), and the existing Place of Worship (municipally known as 331 Old Weston Road) will be maintained and unaltered. There will be a total of three residential dwelling units on this lot (two units within the residential building located at 333 Old Weston Road, and one unit within the building located at 102 Ford Street).
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 9
27 lobbied · 333 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 27 | 169 | 67% (n=27) | 33% | 26% | 29% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 333 | 134 | 95% (n=279) | 5% | 6% | 30% |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (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.