Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 23, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000200

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: NHD Developments Limited
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment
Description: To permit two 45-storey residential towers connected by 8-storey podium & one 35-storey residential tower
Property Address: 4001 Steeles Avenue West, 5000 Jane Street, and 360 Hullmar Drive
Municipality/UT: Toronto
Municipal File No.: 22 140023 WET 07 OZ
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000200
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000200
OLT Case Name: NHD Developments Limited v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: NHD Developments Limited
Subject: Site Plan Approval
Description: To permit two 45-storey residential towers connected by 8-storey podium & one 35-storey residential tower
Property Address: 4001 Steeles Avenue West, 5000 Jane Street, and 360 Hullmar Drive
Municipality/UT: Toronto
Municipal File No.: 22 140023 WET 07 OZ
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000201
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000200

Heard: May 15, 2025, by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
NHD Developments Limited	Justine Reyes Christopher Tanzola
City of Toronto	Sarah O’Connor

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY D. CHIPMAN ON MAY 15 2025, AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Link to Order

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision relates to appeals brought pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, and s. 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11 as amended (collectively “Acts”) from the failure of the City of Toronto (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframes of the Acts with respect to applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) and Site Plan Approval (“SPA”). The appeals have been filed by NHD Developments Limited (“Appellant”) regarding properties known municipally as 4001 Steeles Avenue West, 5000 Jane Street, and 360 Hullmar Drive, Toronto (together referred to as the “Subject Property”).

2The Subject Property is approximately 4.16 hectares (“ha”) with frontages of approximately 245 metres (“m”) along Steeles Avenue West, 195 m along Jane Street, and 262 m along Hullmar Drive. The Subject Property currently contains one 14-storey rental apartment building, one 17-storey residential apartment building, surface parking, underground parking, and a two-storey commercial plaza building.

3The Tribunal received a request from the Parties, on consent, that the SPA appeal (OLT-23-000201) which was filed along with the ZBA, be placed on hold pending the outcome of the Tribunal’s decision relating to the ZBA. The Tribunal granted the request.

4Having been informed that the Original Proposal has been revised, the Tribunal provides the following statistical comparison of the Original Proposal and the Revised Plans filed in support of the Settlement Proposal:

	Original Proposal (April 2022)	Settlement Proposal (November 2024)
Gross Site Area Net Developable Area	41,325 m2 / 4.13 ha 10,738 m2 / 1.07 ha	41,325 m2 / 4.13 ha 10,738 m2 / 1.07 ha
Height Tower A1 Tower A2 Tower B	45 ST (142.5 m plus 6 m MPH) 45 ST (142.5 m plus 6 m MPH) 35 ST (112m plus 6m MPH)	37 ST (118.6 m plus 6 m MPH) 42 ST (133.6 m plus 6 m MPH) 27 ST (88.3 m plus 6 m MPH)
Total GFA	109,193 m2	93,305 m2
Density (FSI)	4.2	3.87
Total Dwelling Units Studio 1-bedroom 2-bedroom 3-bedroom	1,621 units 4 units 1,079 units 396 units 142 units	1,384 units 12 units 910 units 323 units 139 units
Total Amenity Space Indoor Amenity Outdoor Amenity	6,524 m2 3,282 m2 (2.02 m2 per unit) 3,242 m2 (2.0 m2 per unit)	5,536 m2 2,768 m2 (2.0 m2 per unit) 2,768 m2 (2.0 m2 per unit)
Total Vehicular Parking Residential Visitor	724 spaces 639 spaces 83 spaces	702 spaces 631 spaces 71 spaces
Total Bicycle Parking Long Term Short Term	1,216 spaces 1,102 spaces 113 spaces	1,038 spaces 941 spaces 97 spaces
Loading Spaces	2 Type ‘G’	2 Type ‘G’

SETTLEMENT HEARING

5Planning evidence and opinion to support the revised ZBA were provided by Mr. Antonio Volpentesta, a land use planner and partner with Bousfields Inc., with over 34 years of experience in a wide variety of planning matters. Mr. Volpentesta is a Registered Professional Planner and a full member of the Canadian Institute of Planners and the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. He was qualified by the Tribunal to provide expert land use planning evidence.

6Mr. Volpentesta provided a comprehensive contextual and planning rationale in support of the Proposed Development. In addition to the key revisions listed in the chart above, he noted there has been a number of improvements recommended for the existing residential buildings on the Subject Property as part of the Settlement Proposal.

7He testified that the requested ZBA, as revised pursuant to the Settlement, warrants approval on the following grounds:

1. The proposed residential use is compatible with the adjacent land uses.
2. The Proposed Development will provide an opportunity for residential intensification and will make efficient use of the existing services and infrastructure.
3. The Proposed Development increases the housing supply and diversifies the existing housing stock of the immediate area and the City.
4. The Proposed Development adopts a housing form that is able to accommodate a higher density while maintaining a compatible built form with the surrounding high and low-rise properties.
5. The Proposed Development’s site layout and design improves the building relationship with the public realm, promotes overall land-use, and ensures the built form is compatible with the scale and character of the immediate surrounding area.
6. There are a diverse mix of land uses (Employment Areas, Commercial, and Industrial) in the vicinity of the Subject Property. The Proposed Development, therefore, contributes to the achievement of complete communities, enables future residents to live close to work, schools, and supports nearby businesses.
7. The Proposed Development makes efficient use of the nearby transportation infrastructure. In turn, these services enable future residents to opt for alterative modes of transportation and reduce their reliance on automobiles. The Subject Property is at the intersection of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue West, which is serviced by two existing bus routes that are part of the Toronto Transit Commission’s (“TTC”) “10 Minute Network” with bus service every 10 minutes or better all day, every day.
8. The proposed ZBA conforms with the City’s Official Plan, which outlines the criteria to consider when reviewing an increase in density to ensure development does not represent an undue concentration of density. The Settlement Proposal facilitates a higher-density residential development that optimizes valuable land resources while maintaining a positive public/private interface and compatible built form with the surrounding uses. The Settlement Proposal considers policies related to urban structure, urban design, built form, those pertaining to the Apartment Neighbourhoods land use designation, and optimizes existing infrastructure and servicing, including public transit.

8The Tribunal finds the uncontradicted evidence Mr. Volpentesta that the ZBA is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, conforms to the City Official Plan and is in keeping with applicable policies and guidelines of the Province of Ontario and the City.

9The Tribunal is satisfied that the Proposed Development, through the ZBA, represents an efficient use of land, resources, and infrastructure, and it achieves important local and provincial policy objectives.

10Further, the Tribunal is satisfied that the Settlement reached by the Parties is fair and reasonable and that the resulting ZBA represents good planning in the public interest. The Tribunal commends the Parties in working collaboratively in order to reach a settlement in these proceedings.

ORDER

11THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed, in part, and is approved in principle on an interim basis, contingent upon receiving and approving the Zoning By-law Amendment submitted in a final form, which is confirmed to be satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

12The Tribunal will withhold issuance of its Final Order contingent upon confirmation from the City Solicitor, that the following pre-requisite matters have been satisfied:

a. The final form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is satisfactory to the Executive Director, Development Review Services, and the City Solicitor;

b. The owner has provided a revised Functional Servicing Report, a revised Stormwater Management Report, a revised Hydrological Report, and a revised Geotechnical Study, to be reviewed to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

c. The owner has provided a revised Parking Study, a revised Loading Study, a revised Traffic Operations Assessment, and a revised Transportation Impact Study, to be reviewed to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services;

d. The owner has provided a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study, including a Wind Tunnel Study, to be reviewed with recommendations implemented as part of the amending Zoning By-law(s) and/or secured in a development agreement, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the Executive Director, Development Review Services;

e. The owner has provided a revised Sun/Shadow Study, to be reviewed with recommendations implemented as part of the Zoning By-law(s) and/or secured in a development agreement, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the Executive Director, Development Review Services;

f. The owner has provided an acceptable Land Use Compatibility Study, Noise Impact Study, Vibration Study, and Air Quality Study, to be peer reviewed by a third-party consultant on behalf of the City of Toronto and at the owner's expense, with recommendations to be implemented as part of the amending Zoning By-law and secured in a Site Plan Agreement, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review Services;

g. The owner has made satisfactory arrangements with the City and has entered into the appropriate agreements for the design and construction of any improvements to municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support the development, according to the accepted Functional Servicing Report, Stormwater Management Report, Geotechnical Report, and Transportation Impact Study accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and the General Manager, Transportation Services;

h. The owner has provided a revised Tree Preservation Plan and a revised Landscape Concept Plan to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry, and Recreation;

i. The owner has provided a revised Landscape Plan and Civil Utilities Plan identifying, among other things, the location of the existing Bell Canada infrastructure and easement shown outside the area to be conveyed as parkland, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry, and Recreation; and

j. The owner has made satisfactory arrangements and has entered into an appropriate agreement(s), with such agreement(s) to be entered into prior to Site Plan Control approval, to secure the following matters to support the development:

i. The owner shall continue to provide and maintain the existing 647 retained rental units as rental housing for a period of at least 20 years commencing from the date the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment come into force and effect, with no application for demolition or conversion from residential rental use during the 20-year period, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

ii. The owner shall undertake improvements to the existing rental buildings at its sole expense and at no cost to tenants of the existing rental buildings, including access to exclusive outdoor amenity area for the existing rental buildings and access to a component of the indoor amenity area at the ground level in the proposed new buildings for tenants of the existing rental buildings, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; and

iii. The owner shall develop and implement a Construction Mitigation and Tenant Communication Plan, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

13The Panel Member will remain seized for the purposes of reviewing and approving the final draft of the Zoning By-Law Amendment and the issuance of the Final Order but is not seized of the Site Plan Approval appeal (OLT-23-000201) unless the Tribunal’s calendar will permit.

14If the Parties do not submit the final drafts of the Zoning By-law Amendment, and provide confirmation that all other contingent pre-requisites to the issuance of the Final Order set out in paragraph [13] above have been satisfied, and do not request the issuance of the Final Order by Monday, November 17, 2025, the Appellant and the City shall provide a written status report to the Tribunal by that date, as to the timing of the expected confirmation and submission of the final form of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment and issuance of the Final Order by the Tribunal.

15In the event the Tribunal fails to receive the required status report, and/or in the event the contingent pre-requisites are not satisfied by the date indicated above, or by such other deadline as the Tribunal may impose, the Tribunal may then dismiss the appeal.

16The Tribunal may, as necessary, arrange the further attendance of the Parties by Telephone Conference Call to determine the additional timelines and deadline for the submission of the final form of the instrument, the satisfaction of the contingent pre-requisites and the issuance of the Final Order.

“D. Chipman”

D. CHIPMAN
MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.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.