Summary#

Calgary City Council passed Bylaw 70D2026 at third reading on June 23, 2026. It changes the land use district for 1323 – 10 Avenue SE in Inglewood, Ward 9, from Residential – Grade-Oriented Infill (R-CG) to Housing – Grade Oriented (H-GO). City staff said the goal is to allow more housing choices and use existing infrastructure more efficiently.

• The change applies to a 0.04-hectare (0.09-acre) lot.
• The new district allows grade-oriented housing in a range of forms, but does not approve a specific building.
• A development permit application proposing three homes and a garage is under review. The land use change does not guarantee that proposal will be approved.
• Council passed the bylaw 14–0.

What it means for you#

• The landowners: The lot now has the H-GO land use designation. A development permit is still needed before the proposed homes and garage can proceed.
• Nearby residents: The land use change allows more housing forms on the site. The proposed three-home plan remains subject to development permit review, including review of the design, number of homes and on-site parking.
• People who live in Inglewood: The decision does not directly change land use on other properties.

Money#

City staff reported no anticipated financial impact from the land use change.

• No cost estimate or other financial details were provided.

What is unclear#

• The final design, number of homes and parking arrangements depend on the development permit decision.
• The materials do not state the height of any future building.

Case for#

• City staff say the site is near a Main Street, transit, community amenities, shops and services, and a future Green Line station, making the change suitable for the location.
• City staff say the change aligns with the Municipal Development Plan and Inglewood Area Redevelopment Plan, and could allow more housing choices while using existing infrastructure more efficiently.
• The Inglewood Community Association supported the change if the development permit allows no more than three homes.

Case against#

• Two written objections raised concerns that more housing could be out of keeping with the street’s existing character and could add traffic and parking pressure.
• One submitted objection said street parking is already limited and asked Council to reject or revise the application. The materials say one person also spoke at the public hearing, but do not state what they said.