{"id":613464,"date":"2026-04-19T00:59:29","date_gmt":"2026-04-19T00:59:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/613464\/"},"modified":"2026-04-19T00:59:29","modified_gmt":"2026-04-19T00:59:29","slug":"calgary-rezoning-repeal-is-in-the-books-what-about-replace","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/613464\/","title":{"rendered":"Calgary rezoning repeal is in the books. What about replace?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The question on many Calgary development minds is: OK, we\u2019ve repealed citywide rezoning\u2026 what\u2019s next?<\/p>\n

The notion of a replacement for Calgary\u2019s beleaguered citywide rezoning bylaw changes was a common theme throughout the public hearing, in the written submissions and throughout the debate. <\/p>\n

Still, while some Calgary city councillors wanted to tinker with the existing rezoning bylaw, Calgary Mayor Jeromy Farkas campaigned on and has since continually reinforced the desire to repeal and then have a replacement.<\/p>\n

\u201cRepeal and replace the blanket rezoning bylaw with a more targeted, community-informed strategy that supports gentle density while building a variety of homes at a more affordable price point,\u201d reads Mayor Farkas\u2019s campaign website<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On April 13, several groups came together outside Calgary\u2019s municipal building to hold Mayor Farkas to account.<\/p>\n

\u201cMayor Farkas made a promise to Calgarians when he was running for mayor that he would repeal and replace blanket rezoning,\u201d said Willem Klumpenhouwer, co-founder of More Neighbours Calgary, in a prepared media release that day.<\/p>\n

\u201cHe\u2019s kept one promise but broken another. Where is the replacement?\u201d<\/p>\n

While we don\u2019t know when work on the replacement version will begin (perhaps it\u2019s already started) or end, councillors are confident that common ground on density in neighbourhoods can be found.<\/p>\n

Ward 12 Coun. Mike Jamieson, who was a vocal supporter of a citywide rezoning repeal, said that in between now and Aug. 4, when the repeal is implemented, city councillors can come together on the density items that the majority agree upon.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to be a city that does move forward and does develop, and we need to also bring certainty to our businesses, to our development industry, that Calgary is open for business,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe do want a beautiful city, but we really have to restrict this blanket approach to everything. It has to go back to community input. That\u2019s the key.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pleasing the majority: Coun. Chabot<\/p>\n

Ward 10 Coun. Andre Chabot said that he was happy with the repeal decision. When asked if he was confident a new direction could be found amid a large number of people who don\u2019t appear to want any change in their community, he said they\u2019d have to appeal to the majority of Calgarians.<\/p>\n

\u201cI agree that there\u2019s no way to please everyone. What you have to do is try and please the majority,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cUltimately, we need to increase our intensity of use to make our city more affordable and more sustainable. We can\u2019t just continue to grow out. We have to grow up as well.\u201d<\/p>\n

Chabot said a \u201cmade in Calgary solution\u201d would be the best path forward.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s going to require a lot of work, and I agree it\u2019s not going to get 100 per cent buy-in, but as long as we can get the majority of the citizens on side, we\u2019ll be able to move forward a lot more effectively and efficiently on a go-forward basis with a strategic-plan-focused method.\u201d<\/p>\n

Thankfully, thousands of Calgarians gave them a path forward \u2013 literally \u2013 with reams of submissions and hours of in-person submissions and questions.<\/p>\n

While councillors have their own interpretation of what the majority said they wanted, a full data analysis done by Pixeltree\u2019s Serene Yew<\/a> pulled out the most common areas where public hearing participants \u2013 both for and against \u2013 matched in charting a way forward. The top match was Local Area Plans, which was mentioned 385 times among participants.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese are compromise themes that speakers from different stances independently converged on \u2014 ideas with cross-stance support that could represent starting points for council action,\u201d read Yew\u2019s description of the data.<\/p>\n

Where can Calgary city council start on a replace?<\/p>\n

We\u2019ll look at a handful of the top compromise areas and offer pros and cons of each as part of a replace process. \u00a0Note: LWC has removed repeal with a clear replacement, as that\u2019s what\u2019s being discussed in this piece. Also, refine current zoning bylaw was removed because council opted not to follow that path. <\/p>\n

Local Area Plans (385 crossovers)<\/p>\n

The first, and arguably the most common place to start, would be with Local Area Plans. It was a solution brought up by councillors and speakers alike.<\/p>\n

LWC has already examin<\/a>e<\/a>d this tool<\/a> and how it went from being an ostracized planning exercise to being the belle of the development ball in a post-rezoning world.<\/p>\n

Pros: More extensive community input, relatively clear maps showing where density can occur.<\/p>\n

Cons: Ambiguity in defining the typology in Neighbourhood Local, Flex, etc. A clearer definition of what low-density means, and therefore a need to outline \u2018middle-density\u2019 areas in Local Area Plans (this could be the crux of the debate).<\/p>\n

Nodes and corridors (177 crossovers)<\/p>\n

\"\"Nodes and corridors are depicted in Local Area Plans (like the above Riley Communities) by different colours (red, orange, dark yellow), versus low-density areas (light yellow). RILEY LOCAL AREA PLAN \/ CITY OF CALGARY<\/p>\n

If the phrase \u2018nodes and corridors\u2019 were a person, it would be tired after the rezoning public hearing. Much like the Local Area Plans, it was often raised as a potential easy win.<\/p>\n

It would be great if Calgary\u2019s Municipal Development Plan, or better yet, the Local Area Plans, would address nodes and corridors. It would make this part really easy. Oh, wait\u2026 they already do prescribe this, and it\u2019s being done<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Pros: It makes too much sense. It\u2019s already a part of Calgary planning and development.<\/p>\n

Cons: Many people expressed concern about the over-concentration in so-called nodes and corridors, and that it creates other issues \u2013 noise, pollution, traffic, etc. <\/p>\n

\"\"Nathan Hawryluk, director of planning for the Renfrew Community Association back in 2018, provides some of his feedback at the City of Calgary\u2019s public information session on the North Hill Local Growth Plan at that time. DARREN KRAUSE \/ LIVEWIRE CALGARY<\/p>\n

On the surface, this sounds like a good idea. Getting the public on board with where development can occur in a community should make the application process smooth sailing\u2026 Until you ask someone to accept an eight-plex next to their house, when push comes to shove(l).<\/p>\n

Put another way, however, this could mean ensuring that when the community does have concerns about a development, their concerns are directly addressed (and shown that changes have been made).<\/p>\n

Pros: If you get buy-in, this limits pushback on proposed developments. There\u2019s an opportunity to reflect concerns back to a community and demonstrate that action is being taken to remedy the issues.<\/p>\n

Cons: As Coun. Chabot said, you can\u2019t please everybody, and those who don\u2019t agree may dig their heels in and make it tough for any development to move through. Further, to do proper community consultation, in a way that will appease even the most discerning citizens, it will cost an arm and a leg\u2026 meaning more tax dollars.<\/p>\n

Infrastructure first development (75 crossovers)<\/p>\n

This is another one that sounds good, especially because people will often find the path of least resistance when building up arguments as to why they oppose density. Generally, development should not go in where the infrastructure can\u2019t support it.<\/p>\n

Luckily, according to the City of Calgary (and demonstrated in another upcoming analysis piece), roughly 75 per cent of Calgary\u2019s established communities have excess capacity for added density (based on their peak projected population).<\/p>\n

Pros: On balance, this makes sense. Worth noting that the City of Calgary already has a stringent redevelopment process for added density. Based on a wide variety of calculations, they determine if there is an infrastructure upgrade triggered.<\/p>\n

Cons: Hard to find a con in this one, particularly because Calgary does have an aging infrastructure base, and it\u2019s worthwhile to ensure added density doesn\u2019t exacerbate growing strain on these assets.<\/p>\n

There are others, where all three sides were generally in agreement: Prioritizing gentle infill housing (semi-detached, duplexes), and ensuring that there are context-sensitive design and scale limits. \u00a0The latter could be covered under community buy-in \u2013 particularly as the City of Calgary has a tendency to approve in a density-at-all costs fashion, without paying specific attention to neighbourhood context or scale relative to nearby properties.<\/p>\n

Ward 7 Coun. Myke Atkinson said that no matter which way council decided to go, repeal or not, these issues remain.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe folks who have shown up have vastly said we need to be looking at fixes to the process of construction to minimize impacts on people\u2019s lives,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to look at fixes to the built form, to look at how this fits contextually into our established neighbourhoods.\u201d<\/p>\n

There are other areas where there doesn\u2019t seem to be much common ground: Parking, tree canopy, transit service, etc. LWC will dive into those in the future. <\/p>\n

There is a path forward for a replace \u2013 should that be the will of council.<\/p>\n

As Coun. Jamieson put it, citizens didn\u2019t want to see this sausage made on the floor of council with amendments to the existing bylaw.<\/p>\n

If a replacement is in the cards, however, now is the time to start sleeving up the sausage.<\/p>\n

Liked it? Take a second to support Darren Krause on Patreon!<\/p>\n

\"Become<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The question on many Calgary development minds is: OK, we\u2019ve repealed citywide rezoning\u2026 what\u2019s next? The notion of…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":613465,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[194293],"tags":[49,2798,48,133449,60,199390],"class_list":{"0":"post-613464","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-calgary","8":"tag-ca","9":"tag-calgary","10":"tag-canada","11":"tag-city-hall","12":"tag-featured","13":"tag-rezoning"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/613464","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=613464"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/613464\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/613465"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=613464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=613464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=613464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}