Summary#

Calgary City Council rejected the proposed amendment to the Millican-Ogden Area Redevelopment Plan for 8012 – 25 Street SE in Ogden (Ward 9). The motion to give three readings to Proposed Bylaw 21P2026 was defeated 6 to 9 on July 21, 2026, so the plan was not amended.

• The amendment would have added rowhouses and townhouses to the building types allowed by the area plan.
• The site is in the Residential – Grade Oriented Infill (R-CG) land use district, which already supports rowhouses and townhouses.
• The proposal was intended to support a development permit application for a four-unit townhouse with four secondary suites. That permit was under review when City staff wrote their report.

What it means for you#

• People living near the site: Council’s decision did not approve the proposed policy amendment or the specific townhouse project. The report said the building and site details would be reviewed through the development permit process; the permit’s status after Council’s decision is not provided.
• The landowner and applicant: The area plan was not changed as requested. The materials do not say what happens next to the permit application.

Money#

City staff reported no anticipated financial impact from the proposed amendment.

• The materials give no estimate of the applicant’s costs.

What is unclear#

• The materials do not give the Millican-Ogden Community Association’s reasons for opposing the amendment.
• One member of the public spoke at the hearing, but the materials do not say what they said.
• The permit application’s status after Council rejected the amendment is not provided.

Case for#

• City staff said the amendment would add housing choices and could better meet the needs of different ages, lifestyles and household types.
• City staff considered the proposed density increase appropriate and said the development would fit the neighbourhood and align with the Municipal Development Plan.
• City staff said the change could make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and nearby services.

Case against#

• The Millican-Ogden Community Association submitted a letter opposing the amendment. The supplied materials do not explain its reasons.
• Nine councillors voted against the motion: Ward, Yule, Pantazopoulos, Jamieson, Clark, Tyers, Chabot, Wyness and McLean. The minutes do not give their reasons.