A move to reduce the size of infill developments in Edmonton neighbourhoods failed on Tuesday at an Edmonton city council meeting.
Much like Calgary’s blanket upzoning bylaw, Edmonton council approved a rezoning bylaw in 2024, known as the infill bylaw, that permits large townhouse developments, with as many as eight units, mid-block, throughout the city.
Cllr. Karen Principe, who represents Ward tastawiyiniwak, brought forward a motion that would have reduced the number of units in the developments mid-block to six.
Principe said the move would address concerns expressed by Edmontontians about capacity issues that relate to parking and waste management. Additionally, her motion included increasing the minimum size of residential units in new mid-block infill developments.
Principe said reducing from eight to six units was a reasonable compromise from reducing the number to four, which has been debated in previous city council meetings and public hearings.
The motion was defeated by an 8 to 4 vote, after a debate that focussed on capacity rather than affordability and choice.
Cllr. Coun. Thu Parma, representing Ward sipiwiyiniwak, voted in support of Principe’s motion but acknowledged she believed there were issues with it.
“It's not the perfect motion, but I do believe that it is one that will push towards the policy decision that we want,” she said, adding Edmonton has seen an increase in the use of restricted covenants over the last year as a way to stall multi-unit developments.
A restrictive covenant is a clause in an agreement between neighbours that restricts, limits or prevents the actions of someone named in an enforceable agreement. If a signatory wants to sell her/his home and have it replaced by an infill development, all other signatories must agree.
“I guarantee in 20 years we are going to see some problems with the restricted covenants, pitting neighbours against neighbours, which is not the Edmonton way,” said Parma.
Edmonton administration presented a report to councillors earlier in February, that overviewed the potential impacts of capping the number of units allowed on mid-block infill developments at six, instead of eight.
The report suggested reducing the number of units in infill developments could have the effect of discouraging developers or landlords from providing housing that would increase density.
At Tuesday’s meeting, administration told councillors if Principe’s motion passed and was successful, it could have a negative impact on developers that have projects under construction.
Cllr. Erin Rutherford from Ward Anirniq voted against the motion, saying she fully supports increasing density throughout the city, provided it’s done properly.
“To me, one of the unintended consequences, if we approve this today, is that areas that are already seeing a lot of pressure around multiplex development are actually going to see more of it, because they are going to have lower property values that will spur that on,” said Rutherford.
Ward O’day-min Cllr. Anne Stevenson, who also voted against the motion, said decreasing the number of units allowed on infill developments would impact housing choice and affordability.
“These changes will make building housing in Edmonton harder and less certain. So, for those reasons, I can't support this,” she said.
Mayor Andrew Knack told reporters that, as it stands, almost two-thirds of lots in the city do not allow buildings with eight units and that in several neighbourhoods where lot sizes accommodate eight-plexes, residents are seeking restrictive covenants to keep them from being developed.
He added restrictive covenants are, “a very valid legal tool.”
“The challenge is that there’s always a variety of opinions,” Knack said, adding “different blocks are choosing to restrict their property rights in different ways.”
“Even there, there isn’t unanimous agreement around whether it should be two units, whether it should be four, whether it should be building height, whether it should be building width. At the end of the day, our role is to try to find rules that generally benefit and support the vast majority of what we’re hearing.”
Ward Karhiio Cllr. Keren Tang, who voted against Principe’s motion, said providing as many housing choices as possible for development is paramount.
“We want more property rights and more choices about what to do with their properties,” Tang told reporters. “It’s not necessarily about what type of person is going to live there. To me, choice is important, and that’s kind of why we’re doing this.”
