Case Study: The Committee Approves Six Townhouse Lots on The Queensway
Daniel Du, Development Analytics
Generated 2026-09-22

== Method ==
The parcel fabric already reflects the registered severance. We therefore measure the created lots as they now stand, and we do not reconstruct the parent parcel. The subject address returns two parcels. All six created lots share reference plan 66R-34228, effective 21 August 2025, so we gather them by plan name. We identified six parcels on that plan. Five are townhouse lots of 75 to 84 m². The sixth is a 163 m² lot at 6 Woodford Park Rd. The decision record does not say which lot carries the right-of-way easements. We use the union of the six parcels as the subject geometry.

We measure every addressed residential parcel within 500 m from parcel geometry in EPSG:2952. We keep parcels in RD, RT and RM zones and parcels with no 569-2013 zone. We exclude 27 parcels in commercial, employment and open space zones, and we exclude the six created lots. We apply no lower area floor, because the townhouse lots this study is about fall below the usual 80 m² floor. Frontage is the street-facing edge of the lot, projected along the street. For the created lots we report width as the short side of the minimum rotated rectangle, because the corner lot at 598 The Queensway returns its long side as street frontage.

The created size thresholds are the largest of the five small created lots, 84 m² and 5.8 m. A lot counts as at or below the created size if it is within 0.05 of that value.

No 569-2013 zone polygon joins to the subject parcels. We report that absence as a finding. The surrounding fabric is covered, mostly by RD (f13.5; a510; d0.45), several RT exception zones and RM (u4) (x18).

Consent precedent comes from Committee of Adjustment records since 2015. We geolocate each record to the parcel fabric. We count the lots created from the record field where it is filled, and from the application description where it is not. The open record is thin before 2015, so the precedent counts are conservative.

== Sources ==
- City of Toronto Open Data: Committee of Adjustment Applications (decision record for B0035/23EYK and A0317/23EYK to A0322/23EYK), accessed September 2026.
- City of Toronto Open Data: Municipal Parcels, Street Centrelines, Zoning By-law 569-2013 layers.

This is a retrospective demonstration on a decided public application. The Committee of Adjustment already decided this file, and it is a public record. Daniel Du was not retained on the matter. We prepared this analysis after the decision, as a work sample. It states no planning opinion.
