At the hearing, the developer’s planner argued that the site’s Apartment Neighbourhoods designation, location and context, ability to transition to nearby low-rise development, and proximity to frequent transit made it suitable for tall-building intensification. The architect said the proposal appropriately addressed its context while providing suitable light, views, privacy, and sky views. The OLT separately acknowledged its setbacks, step-backs, and centrally placed towers. The transportation engineer found the circulation and parking adequate, with little effect on surrounding roads. The City called the plan unjustified intensification requiring substantially lower heights. The Long Branch Neighbourhood Association argued that the site was not within a Strategic Growth Area and that the design disregarded tall- and mid-rise guidance, with a scale and shadow impacts incompatible with the low-rise community. Participants also cited tree loss, traffic, parking, transit access, and construction disruption.

The Tribunal found that the Apartment Neighbourhoods designation permits compatible infill but does not direct significant growth to the site. It ruled that the roughly fourfold increase in homes exceeded that policy direction and would shadow at least four times as many properties as the existing buildings. Despite the transition measures, the OLT found that the 19- to 29-storey elements were incompatible with Long Branch and failed to adequately limit impacts on neighbouring properties.