Calgary zoning bylaw faces council split

Summary#

Calgary Council passed Bylaws 27P2026 and 28P2026 at third reading on July 21, 2026. They amend land-use districts to carry out the citywide blanket-rezoning repeal Council had already approved: one bylaw keeps qualifying properties in their current districts, while the other restores earlier districts to properties that were wrongly exempted or affected by appeal decisions. City staff say the goal is to apply the exemption rules consistently and give applicants certainty.

  • Bylaw 27P2026 keeps the post-blanket-rezoning districts for about 247 qualifying properties, according to the staff report. Council removed 1223 and 1227 Lake Bonavista Drive SE from its schedule.
  • Bylaw 28P2026 restores earlier districts for about 50 properties: about nine affected by Subdivision and Development Appeal Board decisions and about 41 exempted in error.
  • Council directed staff not to extend development permits that were the reason a property qualified for exemption.
  • Staff must prepare zoning-change bylaws twice a year for Council to consider in specified cases, including when qualifying development does not start by its required date or a qualifying permit is later cancelled, withdrawn, overturned or refused.
  • Council defeated an amendment to remove a long list of properties from Bylaw 27P2026. The bylaw’s main approval motion carried 10 to 5; Councillors Ward, Jamieson, Tyers, Johnston and McLean voted against.

What it means for you#

  • Owners of listed properties: The applicable bylaw changes the property’s land-use district. A property retained in a post-rezoning district may have different development rules from one returned to its earlier district. The full address lists were not supplied, so it is not possible to check an individual property here.
  • People living near those properties: The decision changes zoning, not approval of a specific building or development permit. It does not guarantee that a proposed project will proceed.
  • Owners whose exemption depended on a development permit: Staff are directed not to grant extensions for those permits. In certain later circumstances, staff must bring a proposed zoning change to Council; the change is not automatic under these directions.

Money#

City staff report no substantial extra service or financial impacts beyond the main repeal; no dollar estimate is provided.

  • The decision requires staff to prepare zoning-change bylaws twice a year in specified cases. The staff time and cost are not estimated.

What is unclear#

  • The property schedules and full bylaw text are not included, so the final zoning of individual parcels and the full effect of amendments cannot be checked.
  • The staff report proposed August 4, 2026, as the effective date. The supplied minutes do not confirm that date.
  • One defeated amendment refers to development permit applications not approved as of July 22, 2026, although Council met on July 21. The materials do not explain this date discrepancy.
  • The directions do not give the full process or timing for Council’s decisions on the twice-yearly bylaws. They refer to a “required commencement date” without stating it here.

Case for#

  • City staff say the exemptions protect projects already under review or approved from a zoning change midway through the process.
  • Staff say the bylaws provide greater certainty for owners and applicants who met Council’s exemption criteria.
  • Bylaw 28P2026 corrects exemptions staff say were made in error and addresses some properties affected by appeal decisions.

Case against#

  • Some public submissions opposing exemptions raised concerns about traffic, parking, privacy, shadows and neighbourhood character. For example, a resident opposing the proposed exemption for 2302 6 Avenue NW cited traffic and parking pressure and the scale of development relative to nearby homes.
  • A submission opposing the proposed exemption for 1223 and 1227 Lake Bonavista Drive SE raised concerns about traffic safety and the fit of a larger multi-unit development. Council removed both properties from Bylaw 27P2026.
  • Council’s main approval motion for Bylaw 27P2026 passed 10 to 5. The materials name the five councillors who voted against but do not give their reasons.

Votes

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Council rise without reporting.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following be adopted, after amendment: That Council: - Direct that Attachment 5 be held confidential pursuant to Section 20 (Disclosure harmful to personal privacy) of the Access to Information Act, not to be released; and - Direct that the Closed Meeting discussions remain confidential pursuant to Sections 29 (Advice from officials) and 32 (Privileged i…

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following be adopted, after amendment: That Council: - Give three readings to Proposed Bylaw 27P2026 to redesignate parcels at various addresses (Attachment 2) from the: - Residential – Contextual Large Parcel One Dwelling (R-C1L) (R-C1Ls) District, Residential – Contextual One Dwelling (R-C1) (R-C1s) District, Residential – Contextual Narrow Parcel One…

For (67%)
Against (33%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following be adopted, after amendment: That Council: - Give three readings to Proposed Bylaw 28P2026 to redesignate parcels at various addresses (Attachment 3) from the: - Residential – Grade Oriented Infill (R-CG) District to Residential – Contextual Large Parcel One Dwelling (R-C1L) (R-C1Ls) District, Residential – Contextual One Dwelling (R-C1) (R-C1s…

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 27P2026 be introduced and read a first time.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Proposed Bylaw 27P2026 be amended as follows: That the following parcels be removed from Schedule A: 1223 LAKE BONAVISTA DR SE (Section Map 11S) 1227 Lake Bonavista DR SE (Section Map 11S)

For (60%)
Against (40%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Proposed Bylaw 27P2026 be amended as follows: That the following parcels be removed from Schedule A, which includes all development permit applications that have not been approved as of July 22, 2026: Address Section Map 1609 BOWNESS RD NW 17C 2029 28 ST SE 9E 9755 ELBOW DR SW 21S 9803 ELBOW DR SW 21S 2201 26A ST SW 7C 611 POPLAR RD SW 18C 901 42 ST SE 15E 539 15 AV NE 22C 488 NORTHMOUNT DR N…

For (33%)
Against (67%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 27P2026 be read a second time, as amended.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 27P2026 be read a third time, as amended.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 28P2026 be introduced and read a first time.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 28P2026 be read a second time.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That Bylaw 28P2026 be read a third time.

For (100%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following Motion Arising be adopted: That Council direct Administration to: (a) Under the provisions of the Land Use Bylaw (Section 44 (8)), not grant extensions for development permits that were the reason a parcel qualified for exemption under Bylaw 27P2026;

For (87%)
Against (13%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following Motion Arising be adopted: That Council direct Administration to: (b) Prepare amending bylaws to be brought on a semi-annual basis that restore the land use designation prior to Bylaw 21P2024 Citywide rezoning for parcels that were included in Bylaw 27P2026 and the development did not commence by the required commencement date; and (c) Prepare…

For (93%)
Against (7%)

Public Hearing Meeting of Council, item 7.3.1 (Repeal of Blanket Rezoning Exemptions, LOC2026-0010, C2026-0416): That with respect to Report C2026-0416, the following Motion Arising be adopted: That Council direct Administration to: (a) Prepare amending bylaws to be brought for Council's consideration on a semi-annual basis that restores the land use designation prior to bylaw amendment 21P2024 Citywide rezoning for parcels that meet any of the following three criteria: Criteria 1 - were exempted from the Ci…

For (100%)