This week Calgary city council got a look at the Calgary Plan, which is a combined Municipal Development Plan and Transportation Plan for Calgary that will set the vision for city growth over the several decades.

While most of council voted to move it forward, some councillors just couldn’t get away from fearmongering the plan’s destructive potential.

Most notably, councillors Rob Ward (Ward 11) and Mike Jamieson (Ward 12) were the guiltiest of riling up the NIMBY opposition.

Now I know that people can shrink away when using words like NIMBY. But I believe that you can’t shy away from calling things out for what they are.

Many people, including elected officials, try and hide behind the Canadian propensity for politeness. Knowing that if anyone were to actually call them out for what they’re doing, they can just feign insult and then attack the integrity and credibility of their critic by accusing them of playground name calling – all the while, they just get to keep doing what they’re doing without ever facing a full critique of their actions.

I admit there is a risk to calling people out before you call them in. Calling people out can close off otherwise healthy dialogue; it can turn a productive discussion into a defensive one, and it can entrench a person’s position even further regardless of the availability of quality information that would change the mind of an otherwise rational person.

NIMBY stands for “Not in My Back Yard,” an acronym meant to describe the attitudes of elected officials and everyday people who pretend to support solutions to major social problems, just as long as those solutions don’t happen anywhere near them.

Most commonly it’s levelled in discussions around new housing and affordable housing. You’ve heard it before: “I support new housing… but” followed by any number of speculative excuses that don’t stand up to scrutiny or analysis.  People hate being called a NIMBY because it implies a lack of reasonableness, of rational thought, of empathy, of the critical thinking and compromise that makes for great city building.

Yet, some people just do and say things that makes it so hard to avoid calling it out for what is: NIMBYism.

Homemade map takes the development conversation in circles

Take Ward 11 Councillor Rob Ward, for example.

In an effort to drum up fear and suspicion toward the Calgary Plan, Ward posted to his social media a video of him holding a homemade map of Ward 11 with circles showing all the places that future housing could be built and where a growing population may come to live while touting a message of concern.

Rather than identify any specific challenges with the plan, Ward resorts to a NIMBY trope that “growth is important. Housing is important. Transit-oriented development can make sense in the right locations. But residents deserve transparency about what these policies mean and how they may influence future planning decisions in their communities. That is why I attempted to stop the Calgary Plan…”

This of course ignores the fact that community engagement for this plan has been ongoing for several years and has encompassed more than 47,000 Calgarians in more than 175 events through 5 different phases. This is an overwhelming amount of public participation and engagement.

This is what it means to be a NIMBY. There is no amount of engagement that will ever meet the NIMBY standard of transparency. There is no policy that satisfies the urge to freeze communities in time. Everything is viewed as a threat, and city building is viewed as a destructive force pushing upon the comforts of nostalgia.

A NIMBY will fall back onto endless engagement, never reaching unanimity, and forever stalling any forward motion in the name of some obscure undefinable characteristic that dare not be threatened – most often community character. 

Admittedly, I do find Ward’s homemade map a funny matter of perspective. The streets that Coun. Ward highlighted as having density are Macleod Trail, 14 Street SW, Anderson, Southland, and Glenmore. Many of which would be considered major transportation corridors – or to some, even highways. If building density near major transportation corridors with good transit is inappropriate, then the future of housing is hopeless.

Calgary Plan refinements will continue, despite fears being stoked

Mike Jamieson took a bit more of a simple tack, just simply accusing the Calgary Plan of being Blanket Rezoning 2.0. A major theme of the rezoning repeal debates was that a “one size fits all” approach is wrong and density should be focused on nodes and corridors.

Which is why I have to smile a bit when you see the look on councillor’s faces when they find out exactly what a node and corridor is, and how many they have in their ward. Coun. Ward just so happened to do so live on the news with a homemade map flapping in the wind.

One could argue that Ward’s map is highlighting how well serviced ward 11 communities are by public services and city infrastructure such as transit, small businesses, and main streets. You could view this map with an abundance mentality and be proud of how the city has built around these communities giving them access to some of the best services that Calgary has to offer.

You could argue that this map shows that Ward 11 is an amazing set of communities that can sustainably support more families with all the infrastructure rooted in the circles on his homemade map.

Instead, Ward chose a scarcity mindset, stoking a community fear of being overwhelmed with housing density and new families should this plan proceed.

But if not here, then where? What makes for an appropriate place to densify? Is it infrastructure? Is it access to services? Is it access to employment? Because those are the contextual definitions included in the Calgary Plan that Coun. Ward is concerned about.

Thankfully, the rest of council rejected Ward’s attempt to stop the Calgary Plan and to move forward with refinements. Even if there will be disagreements in the future and more discussions to be had, the 10 councillors that voted to let this work proceed demonstrated a respect for the tens of thousands of people who have put their time and energy into building a vision for several decades to come.

I wonder, were I to ask the five councillors who voted to stop the Calgary Plan, in an off-the-record room, “where should we plan to build homes for our growing population moving forward?” I could only imagine what their answer would be.

Airdrie.