Calgary’s record-breaking year for non-market housing has given way to a near-standstill, with just 58 units under a development permit in the first quarter of 2026 — a fraction of the 3,000 the city aims to build every year.

The figures come from the city’s Q1 2026 performance report, released June 4 to Calgary’s Open Data catalogue. Last year, Calgary built 1,836 units of non-market housing.

Reid Hendry, Calgary’s Chief Housing Officer, said that there are three factors behind the precipitous drop.

“One is that nonmarket housing is chunky, meaning nonmarket housing is primarily delivered through multi-dwelling forms, and so it’s not a constant stream of applications, like, say, a single-family home or a duplex, where we get applications every single day,” he said.

“Instead, non-market housing is developed in maybe a 20-unit complex or a 400-unit complex, and as those are working their way through the system, it can artificially make numbers look both higher or lower.”

Hendry also said that for many non-market housing providers, the availability of funding is a key component in delivering these homes. Market developers can speculate a little more on building homes with more robust balance sheets and a steady stream of clients.

“Non-market housing providers don’t have that choice,” he said.

“They depend on capital or financial contributions in some way from either municipal levels of government, provincial or federal, and so they’re dependent as well on when the various government entities involved in funding release those funds.”

Finally, he said that non-market housing doesn’t “create itself.” Hendry said the organizations don’t have the same economies of scale as larger developers, and at the tail end of a four-year budget cycle – like the city is in right now – capital has been spent and permit activity is likely to be reduced.

The biggest barrier is funding: HomeSpace CEO

Bernadette Majdell, CEO of HomeSpace, a Calgary charity that builds and manages non-market housing for vulnerable Calgarians, said construction costs are what they are, so to deliver housing at non-market rates, there has to be money from somewhere.

That’s often in grants or in-kind offerings like land, Majdell said. She said the City of Calgary also helps with expedited permits, so when they do get land, it doesn’t sit undeveloped.

One of the biggest challenges is that funding between the three orders of government doesn’t always come at the same time.

“If I had one wish as a non-market housing developer, it would be that our three levels of government align, because we do see that all the time,” she said.

“The city, in the last little while, in particular, has been first in, but we’ve even seen some cases where the city will fund the project, but then the province or the federal government chooses not to. So, then you have a non-market housing provider who can’t deliver on a project because they can’t get their funding together, other than the city.”

Quite often, that means waiting for another funding cycle through the province or the federal government, and they have to reapply.

“I think the lack of alignment with our levels of government is one of the most challenging pieces that we see,” she said.

Units under development can be a moving target because development permits don’t flow like it does for the market developers, Majdell said.

“It really comes in like in kind of larger development products, more spread out, because there’s just fewer providers,” she said.

Dedicated and clear path needed: Coun. Schmidt

Ward 8 Coun. Nathan Schmidt said that non-market development can be a rollercoaster at the best of times. Along with some seasonal building patterns, he noted the funding issues and land availability for non-market providers.

“There are so many unknowns that are connected to how these cycles work, that I think a roller coaster effect is to be expected, but it does show that we need a more dedicated and clearer path forward,” he told LWC.

“I think with the revamped goals of the Home is Here strategy, that’s an opportunity for us to try to bring this more under one roof, so we have better data and we can track outcomes more effectively.”

Part of that review might be looking at the 3,000-unit annual target, Schmidt said.

“I think we still need to have a goal, but that goal needs to be realistic as well, so we can properly tie our funding,” he said.

“If we want to get to 3,000 still as a council, then we need to take a hard look at how much money we’re actually going to have to spend to get there.”

Hendry said that they recently got approval from city council to adjust the actions in the Home is Here strategy, and potentially the measures of success. That doesn’t necessarily mean a change to the 3,000-unit target.

“We need to have a conversation of what were aspirational targets in 3,000 units per year, and a direct correlation to the capital that is spent on creating those 3,000 non-market units per year,” he said.

Majdell said the 3,000-unit goal wasn’t just pulled out of thin air, and that a big target is necessary. It also puts pressure on non-market providers in Calgary to step up and perhaps take more risks to build more homes.

“I know there are conversations about changing the number to be more realistic, but I think it’s good to remind us how far behind we are,” she said.

“You could take it down and make the number more achievable, or less kind of out there, but I think you do run the risk of losing some of the importance of where that number came from, and how it really is a true reflection of the need in Calgary.”