Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0321/26TEY
- Status
- Closed
- Approved
- Submitted
- 28 April 2026
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 10 Raglan Ave
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Submitted
- 28 April 2026
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Hearing date
- 17 June 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 alter the development standards (as approved under Site Specific Zoning By-law 1174-2024 (OLT)) for the 34-storey mixed-use building by converting the building into a Seniors¿ Housing Development (to contain Assisted Living/Memory Care, Independent Supported Living, and Seniors¿ Apartments). Also, to increase the overall building height to 35-storeys and 122.5 m; increase various podium heights and the mechanical penthouse projection; reduce building setbacks and separation distances; increase the retail floor area; eliminate the minimum requirement for three-bedroom units; permit a Type ¿B¿ loading space; and modify bicycle parking spaces. There will be a total of 333 residential units on the lot (including 198 bed-sitting rooms and 135 dwelling units). A Site Plan Control application (File Number 22 132957 STE 12 SA) is currently under review.
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 12
20 lobbied · 357 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 | 20 | 106 | 50% (n=12) | 50% | 35% | 86% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 357 | 145 | 90% (n=291) | 10% | 5% | 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.