Harvie and Gray v. Alberta Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8, Canmore (Town) and Boruk on behalf of Red Dot Development Ltd.; Canmore (Town) v. Alberta and Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8, (1981) 31 A.R. 612 (CA)

• Judge: McDermid, Clement, Prowse, Harradence and Stevenson, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: September 30, 1981
• Citations: (1981), 31 A.R. 612 (CA)

Harvie v. Dev. Appeal Bd. (1981), 31 A.R. 612 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Harvie and Gray v. Province of Alberta, Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8, Town of Canmore and Boruk on behalf of Red Dot Developments Ltd.; Town of Canmore v. Province of Alberta and Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8

(Nos. 13271, 13272, 13282, 13283)

Indexed As: Harvie and Gray v. Alberta Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8, Canmore (Town) and Boruk on behalf of Red Dot Development Ltd.; Canmore (Town) v. Alberta and Development Appeal Board for Improvement District No. 8

Alberta Court of Appeal

McDermid, Clement, Prowse, Harradence and Stevenson, JJ.A.

September 30, 1981.

Summary:

Residents of the Town of Canmore, Alberta, appealed from two decisions of the Development Appeal Board of Improvement District No. 8 granting development permits for two motels, complaining that the permits did not comply with the general Municipal Plan.

The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

LAND REGULATION - TOPIC 4145

Land use control - Appeals to the courts - Leave to appeal - On question of law - Planning Act, S.A. 1977, c. 89, s. 146 - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from decisions of a Development Appeal Board granting development permits to two motel projects, where the proposed developments complied with the general Municipal Plan - Two of the five judges on appeal discussed the status of a municipal plan and the judicial reviewability of decisions of a Development Appeal Board - See paragraphs 19 to 58.

Cases Noticed:

Funk v. Alberta Planning Board (1979), 19 A.R. 552; 11 A.L.R.(2d) 316, consd. [para. 18].

Howard Investments et al., Re (1972), 30 D.L.R.(3d) 148, consd. [para. 20].

McLeod et al. v. Egan et al. (1974), 2 N.R. 443; 46 D.L.R.(3d) 150, consd. [paras. 22, 46].

Service Employee's Etc. v. Nipawin District Staff Etc., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 382, consd. [para. 22].

Yellow Cab Ltd. v. Board of Industrial Relations et al. (1980), 24 A.R. 275, consd. [para. 22].

C.U.P.E. v. New Brunswick Liquor Corporation (1979), 26 N.R. 341; 25 N.B.R.(2d) 237; 51 A.P.R. 237, consd. [paras. 22, 47].

Sheckter, Re (1979), 14 A.R. 492; 9 Alta. L.R.(2d) 45, consd. [paras. 23, 40].

O'Hanlon et al. v. Municipal District of Foothills, [1979] 6 W.W.R. 709; 17 A.R. 477, consd. [paras. 24, 41].

Murray et al. v. Council of Municipal District of Rockview et al. (1980), 21 A.R. 512; 12 A.L.R. 342, consd. [para. 24].

International Union, United Automobile Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (U.A.W.), Local 720 v. Volvo Canada Ltd., [1980] 1 S.C.R. 178; 27 N.R. 502; 33 N.S.R.(2d) 22; 57 A.P.R. 22; 99 D.L.R.(3d) 193, consd. [para. 44].

Goode v. City of Edmonton (1908), 7 W.L.R. 609 (Alta.), consd. [para. 52].

Statutes Noticed:

Improvement Districts Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 170, sect. 18(1) [para. 33].

Interpretation Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 189, sect. 2(a), sect. 2(c), sect. 3(1) [para. 52].

Planning Act, S.A. 1977, c. 89, sect. 1(40) [para. 34]; sect. 2, sect. 44, sect. 53(1) [para. 13]; sect. 46 [para. 36]; sect. 59(1) [para. 20]; sect. 59(3) [para. 32]; sect. 61 [paras. 13, 35]; sect. 66(1) [para. 14]; sect. 83(3) [paras. 12, 37]; sect. 146 [paras. 20, 39]; sect. 147 [para. 39].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Rogers, The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations (2nd Ed.), p. 470 [para. 52].

Counsel:

J.D.B. McDonald, for John Harvie and James K. Gray;

K.H.P. Ham, for the Town of Canmore;

R. Dudelzak, for the Harvie Heights Community Association;

E.S. Decter and T.T. Mudry, for Canyon Investments Ltd. and Stavro Melathopoulos;

F.J. Fleming, Q.C., for Ron Boruk on behalf of Red Dot Developments Ltd.;

W.J. Nugent, for Attorney General for the Province of Alberta.

This case was heard before McDERMID, CLEMENT, PROWSE, HARRADENCE and STEVENSON, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal.

On September 30, 1981, the judgment for the Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

STEVENSON, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 5;

CLEMENT, J.A. - see paragraphs 6 to 25;

PROWSE, J.A. - see paragraphs 26 to 73.

McDERMID and HARRADENCE, JJ.A., concurred with STEVENSON, J.A.: