Committee of Adjustment application · Minor variance (MV)
Committee of Adjustment application A0714/25TEY
- Status
- Closed
- Refused
- Submitted
- 22 September 2025
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Minor variance (MV)
- Addresses
- 501 Palmerston Blvd
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 22 September 2025
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Refused
- Hearing date
- 12 November 2025
- Decision
- Refused
- 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 construct a new three-storey apartment building with front and rear ground floor stairs (for three front and three rear entrances), two front and two rear second floor balconies, two front and two rear third floor balconies, two side (north) basement walkouts, and rooftop staircase access enclosure. Also, to convert the existing rear one-storey ancillary building (garage) into one garden suite by constructing a second story addition, a two-storey addition at the southwest portion of the building (with a complete basement addition below), and stairs at the west side of the building. There will be a total of 11 residential dwelling units on the lot (ten dwelling units within the apartment building and one dwelling unit within the garden suite).
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 11
16 lobbied · 354 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 16 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 354 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.