Summary#

Calgary City Council defeated a motion to pass Bylaw 11P2026, which would have amended the Millican-Ogden Area Redevelopment Plan for 7443 – 20A Street SE in Ogden, Ward 9. The stated goal was to allow more housing types on the site.

• The defeated amendment would have changed the site’s plan designation from “Low Density Conservation” to “Low or Medium Density Multi-Dwelling Residential” and set a maximum density of 75 units per hectare.
• The change was intended to support a proposed four-unit townhouse building with four secondary suites and a detached garage. The related development permit was awaiting Council’s decision on the plan amendment; Council did not decide that permit through this vote.
• The motion was defeated 2 to 10. The minutes list Councillors Ward, Yule, Pantazopoulos, Jamieson, Clark, Kelly, Chabot, Wyness and McLean, and Mayor Farkas, as voting against.

What it means for you#

• People living near the site: The requested amendment was not adopted, so the area plan was not changed for this site. The vote did not itself approve or refuse the development permit.
• People considering the proposed homes: The amendment that would have aligned the area plan with the existing R-CG land use district did not pass. The available material does not say what happens next with the pending permit application.
• City: The decision did not change the rules for other properties in Ogden.

Money#

City staff reported no anticipated financial impact from the proposed amendment; the report gives no cost estimate.

What is unclear#

• The minutes say Councillor Clark moved the motion but also list Clark as voting against it. The materials do not explain this inconsistency.
• The materials do not say what steps, if any, will now be taken on the pending development permit.
• The minutes record one person speaking at the hearing, but do not identify that speaker or say whether the speaker supported or opposed the amendment.

Case for#

• City staff said the amendment would allow more housing choices and make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and nearby amenities.
• City staff considered the proposal compatible with nearby development and said their mobility assessment did not anticipate traffic congestion.

Case against#

• The Millican-Ogden Community Association opposed the proposal, citing concerns about congestion and privacy.
• A written public submission opposed the change, raising concerns about parking, building scale, fit with the neighbourhood and safeguards against construction differing from what was presented. The submission also referred to another address, 7425 – 20 Street SE; the materials do not establish that those concerns describe this application’s site.