Ontario Land Tribunal / Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement
ISSUE DATE: March 28, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-25-000044
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Signature Hill Corporation Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To facilitate 40-Storey building with 477 residential units. Reference Number: 24 185909 NNY 08 OZ Property Address: 250, 252, 254, 258 Viewmount Avenue Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-25-000044 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-25-000044 OLT Case Name: Signature Hill Corporation v Toronto (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Signature Hill Corporation Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To facilitate 40-Storey building with 477 residential units. Reference Number: 24 185909 NNY 08 OZ Property Address: 250, 252, 254, 258 Viewmount Avenue Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-25-000045 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-25-000044
Heard: March 21, 2025, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties Signature Hill Corporation (“Signature Hill”) Counsel Eileen Costello
Parties City of Toronto (“City”) Counsel Sara Amini
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. CHIPMAN ON MARCH 21, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal convened a first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in respect of the Appeals filed by Signature Hill Corporation pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, (“Act”) on an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) which relate to applications for a proposed residential development at 250, 252, 254, 258 Viewmount Avenue in the City, for which no decision was rendered by the City.
2The OPA and ZBA applications seek to permit the development of a 40-storey residential building with 477 residential units.
Service of Notice of CMC
3The Tribunal received an Affidavit of Service sworn by Andrew Everton, dated February 18, 2025, confirming that proper Notice of this first CMC had been served and was marked as Exhibit 1.
Requests for Party Status
4The Tribunal received one Party status request from Counsel to 278-280 Viewmount (“280 Viewmount”). Mr. Hoffman explained that 280 Viewmount is on the same side of the street, within the same block and has an application before the Tribunal with mediation sought. Mr. Hoffman stated that although 280 Viewmount is supportive of the property at 258 Viewmount, it has an interest in built form, servicing and transportation.
5Ms. Costello, on behalf of Signature Hill objected to the granting of Party status to 280 Viewmount. She indicated that there was insufficient information before the Tribunal in relation to the request. She brought the Tribunal to a site map of the two properties to illustrate that although they are both on the same side of Viewmount Avenue several properties exist in between them.
6The Tribunal, needing to understand fully what impacts would derive from the development of the Signature Hill property on the 280 Viewmount property, exercised its jurisdiction under s. 10.11 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, and requested Mr. Hoffman to bring a Motion to the Tribunal with a clearer explanation as to the specific reasons for Party status to be granted:
10.11 Tribunal May Initiate a Motion
The Tribunal may, at any time in a proceeding, initiate a motion to inquire into any matter or question of law in relation to its jurisdiction, and may determine the parties to that motion and issue directions necessary to inquire into the matter.
7The Tribunal set a Motion hearing date. Having done so, the Tribunal did not advance the request by Signature Hill to set a 10-day Merit hearing until the outcome of the Motion hearing is determined.
PARTICIPANT STATUS REQUESTS
8The Tribunal received the following Participant status requests. The first was from Osmington Gerofsky Development Corp. who was represented by Ms. Sarah Kagan (Jason Park, in absentia). She indicated that her client has filed a redevelopment application, consisting of two towers that are 35 and 39 storeys in height, with a six-storey base building, across the street from the Signature Hill property. She stated that Participant status was being sought to protect the interests and ensure there is no adverse impact on the future redevelopment of her client’s lands.
9Mr. Ori Mandowsky also requested Participant status. In his submission he cited concerns related to mobility, traffic management, infrastructure, and density.
10Having heard no objections, the Tribunal granted Participant status to the two requestors.
MEDIATION
11The Parties indicated that it was premature to seek Tribunal-led mediation at this time.
MOTION / CMC HEARING
12Ms. Costello advised that ongoing discussions with the City have been positive. Ms. Amini, counsel to the City, indicated that she would be seeking City Council’s direction on the applications and would look to provide Ms. Costello with an Issues List as soon as possible.
13Both the City and Signature Hill indicated that they would work with Mr. Hoffman in an effort to address 280 Viewmount’s issues with the hope that the Motion hearing could be converted to a second CMC to advance this matter.
14The Parties agreed to the following dates for the submission of materials related to the Motion Hearing: Motion Record by 280 Viewmount be submitted by May 1, 2025; Response to Motion by 258 Viewmount by May 12, 2025; and any Reply by 280 Viewmount by May 20,2025.
15Should the Issues raised by 280 Viewmount be resolved, the Tribunal directs that the date set aside for the Motion Hearing be converted to a second CMC. If this occurs, the Parties are directed to submit to the Case Coordinator a draft Procedural Order and Issues List 10 days in advance of the next hearing date assigned below.
16Accordingly, the Tribunal set a Motion hearing/(possible) second CMC for Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 10 a.m. by video conference.
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709076365
Access Code: 709-076-365
17Parties are asked to log in to the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
18Parties and Participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
19Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling in to an audio-only telephone line: Toll-Free +1 (888) 299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373. The Access Code is as indicated above.
20Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the Video Hearing to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
ORDER
21THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS its directions contained above in this Decision.
22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that Participant status is granted to Osmington Gerofsky Development Corp. and Mr. Ori Mandowsky.
23No further Notice will be given.
24This Member remains available to assist with the case management of this proceeding, subject to the availability of the Tribunal’s calendar.
“D. Chipman”
D. CHIPMAN MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.