Calgary city council avoided hundreds of land-use redesignation hearings since citywide rezoning was approved, items that would have potentially added cost and time to both the city and developers.

Data requested from the City of Calgary showed that citywide rezoning enabled 478 development permits that would have otherwise required 460 land-use redesignation hearings. That data goes back to when citywide rezoning was enacted in August 2024.

“Prior to this policy change, developers were required to obtain a land use redesignation (rezoning), which included a public hearing, to change their zoning to R-CG,” read an email response from the City of Calgary.

“This district permits a broader range of housing forms, including single-detached, semi-detached, rowhouse, and townhouse dwellings.”

The information comes as Calgary’s Executive Committee approved a motion on technical merit for the repeal of citywide rezoning.

During admin questions on that motion, councillors asked about the cost of the previous public hearing on citywide rezoning. Councillors heard that the costs to prepare and execute the public hearing were roughly $1.275 million.

They were also told by the GM of Planning and Development, Debra Hamilton, that resources would have to be redeployed for this motion to move forward through to repeal.

“I believe, just from a resourcing perspective, this will require me to redirect staff from certain core work that we’re doing now onto this Notice of Motion and undertake this work, as well as potentially budget,” she said.  

“There may be core work that needs to stop. There may be applications that will not get processed or will slow down in order for me to get the team working on this piece of work.”

The item will come to a December city council meeting for debate, and if approved, would eventually make its way back to Calgary’s Infrastructure and Planning Committee. The public can contribute at that point, and in a future public hearing on the matter, expected in March 2026.

Small cost to repeal, Chabot said

Ward 10 Coun. Andre Chabot said there was no need for a lengthy public engagement on a repeal, as they’d just finished an election campaign, where he heard loud and clear this was a major issue for Calgarians.

To that end, he said that given the importance of the issue and the current budget surplus, the cost to go through the repeal process and hold another public hearing wasn’t a problem.

“I’m not overly concerned, considering we have a $210 million positive variance,” Chabot said.

“We heard loud and clear from Calgarians that they wanted us to reconsider the decision that was previously made. This motion is to actually reconsider it go to a new public hearing. I don’t believe that the cost is going to be that much of a factor, considering we have such a large surplus.”

Chabot also said he wasn’t concerned with a return to a potential addition of numerous land-use redesignation hearings, ones that Calgary city council has, in the past, approved 95 per cent of the time.

The City said they couldn’t pinpoint an average cost to hold each potential hearing.

“We do not have this information at hand, and it would be impossible for Clerk’s [sic] to calculate because we do not know which members of Administration are engaged to be on stand by to speak to questions (and it may vary from public hearing to public hearing),” read an email response.

It’s also difficult to calculate an average time taken for land-use redesignation hearings, but they often take between 15 and 30 minutes. Based on the information provided to LWC, it would have added roughly 25 more land-use items onto the agenda each month.  That could have meant between five and seven hours of additional time tacked on to currently busy meetings, forcing overtime or an additional day of the hearing.

It’s also tough to pinpoint both the cost of admin time it takes to prepare for the land-use redesignation hearing, and the resulting lost time that would be spent on other planning tasks.

In the past, the inner city developers have said that added hearing time can cost in the thousands, especially if it goes all the way to a subdivision development appeal. That added cost is tacked on to the cost of a new home and delays potential home starts.

Mayor Jeromy Farkas said that when it comes to housing in Calgary, a lot of work needs to be done, not just a repeal of rezoning. When asked, he did not respond directly to potential added costs, or the work that wouldn’t be undertaken in planning as a result.

“Addressing blanket rezoning is one piece of it, and that’s why we have to move forward with a community-driven approach, focusing the housing closest to amenities, closest to transit, to infrastructure, to employment, to education,” he said.

“So, addressing blanket rezoning is a needed first step, but we need to make sure that we’re moving ahead with plans to actually build the housing that’s affordable and attainable for Calgarians.”

Rezoning is not an issue everywhere

Ward 8 Coun. Nathan Schmidt said that councillors should be concerned about the impact of a repeal for any number of reasons. That includes legal ones, too.  

Schmidt, a lawyer by trade, had asked the city solicitor about potential legal ramifications of a repeal. And while there’s nothing legally stopping the city from pursuing the land-use bylaw change, any change made to the planning document could pose future legal risks.

“That is something that’s top of mind for me, and why I wanted to ask those questions right away, because as the fiduciaries of the city, we have a responsibility to ensure that we are not putting ourselves into any kind of legal jeopardy with the decisions that we make,” he said.

In past responses to LWC, the City said that it couldn’t speculate on potential legal impacts of something that Calgary city council hasn’t done yet.  

Schmidt also brought up the greenness of the 10 new city councillors.

“The narrative has been, we’re 10 new councillors. We’re getting our feet wet in this role,” he said.

“Is it sensible for us to be bringing this forward so soon, even though it was a live election issue? There are so many aspects to the rezoning process and housing generally that I don’t think that we’ve all fully had time to grasp and understand.”

Of course, he too sees the cost of a potential public hearing and future hearings as an issue.

“We are also a council that has indicated, through some campaigns and also with priorities, that we’re looking at stabilizing property tax increases and perhaps decreasing them,” he said.

“So, is this the best use of our time right now and money when we’re looking at trying to stabilize property taxes with this potentially big spend coming up before the next budget cycle?”

Ward 5 Coun. Raj Dhaliwal said while the process is mandated through the Municipal Government Act, he doesn’t think much has changed from the public’s perspective.

Plus, he said that while councillors are supposed to be amenable to persuasion, it’s pretty clear from the group pushing the repeal forward that their mind is made up.

“Yes, open up the city hall to have these public hearings. But if an outcome is predetermined through this (Notice of Motion), then there is no point,” he said.

Dhaliwal also that that his team hit 21,000 doors during the election. He knocked on 1,000 of them himself. Not a peep.

He said that if you want to see density, go up to Ward 5. Rezoning wasn’t even brought up.

“I didn’t hear a single person talk about it,” he said.