Blanket Rezoning – Repeal or Reform?
by Melanie Swailes on behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee
Blanket rezoning was a “hot” topic leading up to the civic election in October 2025. Opinions were strongly divided among candidates, with some in favour of a repeal, while others opted for “reform”.
Area residents with whom I spoke generally agreed on some common themes: yes, we need more housing, and more specifically, “affordable” housing. Many spoke about the difficulties their adult children were having in finding a suitable place to live, especially with the high costs of renting or purchasing a home. At the same time, many people mentioned examples of blanket-rezoned buildings which they didn’t like at all – too high, too massive, no trees left, inadequate parking, and too much crammed onto a single lot. In my opinion, this is a failure to properly consider the “C” part of R-CG – the “Contextual” aspect.
Contextual dwellings are homes built within older residential communities (typically built before 2008), with rules that keep a similar look and feel as the street.1 Any proposed development is supposed to conform to the “context” of surrounding properties, not be jarringly different. Context means that houses in Brentwood look different than say, Ranchlands or Crescent Heights, because they were built during different time periods, with different materials and trends. As well, R-CG is a “Discretionary” use, “meaning that the community will be circulated for comments and notice will be posted on the site, soliciting feedback in the development permit process.”2 Why then are there so many examples of buildings that do not seem to fit in sensitively, and why does it seem that opposition is ignored or dismissed as mere NIMBYism?
The biggest change blanket rezoning brought about was that it allowed for a Land Use Change (rezoning) without a Public Hearing before Council. Any property owner has always had the right to apply for a rezoning, but it would have meant a full Public Hearing in which anyone could speak in favour or in opposition, followed by a vote by the elected members of Council. Some people felt that this was a waste of Council’s time (especially since most applications were approved) but arguably, eliminating the right of impacted neighbours to speak took away important oversight. Owners who purchased homes in an area amid other R-C1 (single-family) homes are often shocked to find that the new zoning of R-CG allows an application for an eight-unit dwelling next door, and even more surprised to find out that Council is not involved.
A “blanket” approach can never consider subtle nuances or uniqueness of communities. Over 300,000 properties were blanket rezoned, leaving neighbours nervously wondering just what might get built next door. First, let’s be clear on the number of units. A Development Permit (DP) application for a rowhouse with four secondary suites has a total of eight separate dwelling units: eight front doors for the eight unrelated parties occupying those homes. Lot coverage also has a huge impact. While R-C1 had a maximum coverage of 45%, R-CG allows for 60% for the buildings, with additional amounts taken up by garbage bins, bike storage, and internal sidewalks, leaving very little space for trees or landscaping. Height and massing are also common complaints because R-CG allows for three-storey buildings up to 11 metres tall. In Brentwood, many homes are bungalows so a three-storey building next door can be overwhelming in scale, as well as placing the home in shadows, rather than allowing sunlight onto the property.
All of these concerns were raised repeatedly during the weeks of the blanket rezoning hearing. Many presenters begin by stating, “I’m not against change or more housing, but……” Representatives from about 50 community associations worked together to compile a list of the items which we felt needed to be addressed, and met directly with Mayor Gondek, but almost none of those ideas made their way into the final reports or Motions. There were numerous Motions Arising, which included the need for guidelines, and better community engagement, but those have progressed far slower than the number of new buildings popping up. If reform is to be possible, it would require far greater resources and guarantees than have been shown to date.
Does blanket rezoning work? It depends on what the goal is. If it is to make it easier for a developer to replace a single house with four or eight units, then yes: drive around Bowness or Mount Pleasant and you’ll see the number of houses being torn down and replaced by eight-plexes.
If affordability is the goal, then we’ve failed miserably. According to the City of Calgary News Release (March 24, 2025)3, “Calgary ….. (recorded) the highest housing starts in Canada with 20,165 units, setting a new record and making 2024 the first year Calgary surpassed 20,000 units.” However, while the City exceeded its original target for total builds, it reached only 25% for non-market (affordable) housing starts with a total of 186 units. Also keep in mind that older houses being torn down were often what is called Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing, or “NOAH” homes. For every new rowhouse which gets built, usually an older house (which often contained a suite, legal or otherwise) was torn down, so some of the “cheaper” rental units were removed. It seems that the majority of housing being built is higher-end housing, which is more profitable to developers or investors, but is not where the greatest need lies.
Instead of a blanket approach, in Brentwood, citizens and Planners worked over several years to create guidelines on how redevelopment should happen, culminating in the Brentwood Station Area Redevelopment Plan (ARP), completed in 2009. This document recognized that “not all areas are appropriate or desirable for change”, instead, designating “Areas of Stability” and “Areas of Change”. Areas of Change reference “the locations where redevelopment is welcomed and where significant opportunities exist to achieve the vision of a major regional node and livable community” (the Brentwood and Co-op Mall areas, the University Research Park, and the park and ride lots). The ARP promotes “Areas of Stability” defined as “established residential communities surrounding Brentwood LRT” in which “the character of these places will remain the same”. This ARP recognized that there is value in certainty and predictability.
Most residents understand the need to grow and change, but they also wish to have a strong voice in how that happens. Public participation is vital for urban change in order to “get it right”. A blanket approach paints everything with the same brush, while eliminating the voices of community members directly to their elected representatives. Trust in the Planning process, and indeed, in municipal governments, can only happen when people feel heard.
If you would like to join our community association, you are always welcome to do so. Contact the office at [email protected] or at 403-284-3477.
1. https://www.calgary.ca/development/permits/dmap-faq.html
Click here to the Brentwood Community News home page for the latest Brentwood community updates.
