Infill In Edmonton
Infill is always a topic that generates a lot of discussion. That’s understandable especially for those of us that live in older neighbourhoods. On June 3rd, there will be a 1-year review report on the updated Zoning Bylaw and I want to share some of what I’ve been hearing over the past few months. I’ve been out in communities doing neighbourhood walks and many people have been kind enough to host me and their neighbours in their living rooms or the community halls. These have been great conversations not because everyone agrees but it gives us all a chance to hear some of the perspectives that exist when we are seeing changes in our communities.
Before I get into some of the specific changes, I want to share some older posts in case you are just getting involved in the infill conversation now. As this is something that has existed for a long time, there’s a lot of context that is necessary to help inform how we continue to refine our zoning rules.
This link: Zoning Bylaw Renewal (October 2023) provides more details on why I supported the current Zoning Bylaw back in October 2023. This covers the diverse perspectives that came forward in the years leading up to the approval of the City Plan and then this specific bylaw. It also has links to a breakdown of the years of engagement that occurred within the City of Edmonton.
This link: May 21st, 2024 Community Conversation is to a 2-hour virtual Community Conversation that is an extension of an in-person Community Conversation I hosted in April 2024. The purpose of this was to discuss in more detail the challenges of growth in our city.
This link: March 3rd, 2025 Community Conversation is to my virtual Community Conversation from March. This wasn't exclusively on infill but it does account for a good portion of the discussion. This link: April 30th, 2025 Community Conversation is to my most recent Community Conversation where we also discuss infill a bit later in the conversation.
This link: At The Edge is a short 2-minute video to show people where we have developed to. I think there are some that assume we have a large supply of land and as people will see, we are at the boundaries on the west, north, and east. I share this because I understand the tension of increased density. I live in a mature community with significantly more density than most mature communities. In fact, I did a short video to show people some of the development beside my home: Jasper Park Infill.
There’s about 5 hours of content in the links above but if you are new to the infill discussion, I would encourage you to take the time to review that information because it’s a topic we’ve spent thousands of hours on over the last decade. This is not an easy topic and it's one that has been continuously evolving since I started on Council.
As discussed in both the 2-minute video and the March 3rd video, for most of my time on Council, I've heard overwhelmingly from residents that they don't want us to keep growing out and expanding our boundaries. There are massive financial costs of outward growth and that is the single biggest driver of property taxes. We have already grown so far out that we will be dealing with the financial impacts of the land use decisions from the late 80s to a few years ago for decades. We've stopped the bleeding by saying we won't annex any additional land through the approval of the City Plan and that will also help preserve more premium agricultural land.
I can’t stress this enough, our city is changing and growing rapidly. When I first started serving on Council 12 years ago, the homes in the communities of Big Lake, Rosenthal, and Secord either didn’t exist at all, or there were a few hundred people living in the area. Now, those communities are triple the density and upwards of 4-5 times the population of almost all the mature communities within the ward I represent. That rapid growth happened in just 10 years and the last few years have resulted in some of the most rapid population growth in our city’s history.
Since we are at the edge of our city in most directions, that is what contributes to people’s desire to not annex more land. At the same time, that desire to not annex land can come into conflict with our feelings about changes to our mature communities and it’s completely fair to have those views which can be at odds with each other.
Some can rush to call anyone with concern a NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) but in reality, I think most people just want to know their community and home is going to be ok which is perfectly reasonable. The question is how do we deal with that reality going forward, especially if Edmontonians want us to hold firm on not annexing more land. Those are part of the ongoing conversations that we must have because our land use decisions are always being refined.
Of course there will never be an easy answer to how our city grows and the rapid population growth, approximately 200,000 new Edmontonians in less than 4 years, combined with the unaffordability of almost every other major Canadian city is creating even more demand for homes in our city with a depleting supply of undeveloped land.
Zoning is always something that we are adjusting. Every change is something that is monitored to see what is and isn’t working and then adjustments are made. That’s been going on for the last decade and it’s going to happen again on June 3rd. While I have some more community meetings planned and have reached out to groups like Better Infill to meet with them in advance of June 3rd, there are already some changes that I would like to see made when that report comes back. I’ve also been working with Councillor Michael Janz on this since he is the Chair of our Urban Planning Committee meeting and also has been hearing from a few neighbourhoods within the ward he represents.
Before I list out some of the key changes, I also wanted to note that our City staff are already planning on bringing forward changes so it’s possible that some of the changes that I’m about to share may come forward as part of their ongoing work. This is something they do after every change to our Zoning Bylaw because we need to respond to what is happening in the community. Here are two of the main changes that I would like to see made:
New rules for mid-block development. When I say mid-block, I am referring to any lot that is not a corner lot. Corner lots have the ability to have different features but mid-block has more design constraints. Under the current rules, we are seeing some very large 8-unit developments in the middle of a block. That can be especially disruptive when beside a bungalow on both sides but even when beside a larger single family home, it doesn’t seem to fit in many locations.
The way to fix that is by taking a page from our previous Zoning Bylaw. Under the previous bylaw, you could have 42% of the site covered but there was a requirement to have that 42% split between the main home (28%) and an accessory dwelling (ex: garage, garden suite, etc.) at 14% of the site. The new bylaw allows for 45% site coverage and while the percentage change isn’t significant, it’s clear that when doing a single building at 45% site coverage, it creates a building with significant mass and can tower over anything it is beside. Therefore, the change needs to be that anything mid-block should not be allowed to have a single building covering 45% of the site.
This is one of the most critical changes because while I have seen some nice buildings being built like the one in the feature image, I’ve seen others that are clearly out of context (see image below).
The other big change that I’ve heard a lot about is a bit more specific but we are seeing some larger lots being used to put more than 8 units per lot. There are some pie-shaped lots that are getting converted into 16 units and we should ensure that no lot, even a large lot that gets subdivided, should have more than 8 units. If people are looking to go beyond the maximum number of units, then a rezoning application would be a better tool because that would require a Public Hearing and would allow for a proper discussion about the pros and cons of a change like that.
I expect we will see more changes (ex: certain design changes to ensure entrances primarily face the front or back) but these two changes are needed to respond to the immediate concerns that are coming up in communities.
The growth of our city presents a lot of great opportunities but it can also create challenges in how we are accommodating that growth. Continuing to refine the Zoning Bylaw is an important step in providing housing choice in all communities while also working to address local concerns that we are hearing from communities. If you are interested in discussing this further or having me out to chat with you and your neighbours, please let me know and we can schedule a time to connect.
