Miguel Tremblay

The court considered an application by Place Laurier Limited for leave to appeal an arbitration award regarding the fair market value of land subject to a ground lease.

The applicant argued the arbitrator failed to apply the correct legal test for determining the highest and best use of the land and did not provide sufficient reasons for the valuation.

The court found that while some issues raised extricable questions of law, the arbitrator had not erred in law and provided sufficient reasons.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the City of Ottawa's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Application to permit a 26-storey mixed-use building.

The City opposed the development, arguing it did not conform to the Official Plan's height and density hierarchy and failed to provide appropriate transition to the adjacent low-rise neighbourhood.

The Tribunal found that the Official Plan does not contain an implicit height and density hierarchy, and that the proposed development provides suitable transition through setbacks, stepbacks, and building orientation without relying solely on angular plane analysis.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the Zoning By-law Amendment in part and deferred the Site Plan Approval appeal to allow the parties to reach an agreement.

Multiple appellants appealed the City of Ottawa's enactment of a site-specific zoning by-law amendment permitting a nine-storey, 62-unit residential apartment building.

The appellants raised concerns regarding shadow impacts, traffic safety, tree preservation, and conformity with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's and City's experts, finding that the proposed development would not create undue adverse impacts on traffic or forestry.

The Tribunal concluded that the amendment has regard for provincial interests, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Official Plan, and represents good land use planning.

The appeals were dismissed.

The applicant appealed the City of Ottawa's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit a six-storey self-storage building and a restaurant on an arterial mainstreet.

The City argued the site was a gateway and the use was inappropriate as it lacked residential development.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan and Secondary Plan.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence that the development introduces an innovative mix of uses, improves the public realm, and represents an efficient intensification of an underutilized site.