Legal challenge against blanket rezoning taken to Alberta Court of Appeal
Roughly 70 per cent of speakers were against blanket rezoning, with opponents criticizing how densification of established communities would alter their neighbourhood's character, increase traffic and parking congestion, and strain civic infrastructure.
Article content
Critics also argued the move would stifle the opportunity for neighbourly input on land-use decisions, by removing the public hearing that would typically accompany a rezoning application.
Article content
Supporters of blanket rezoning argued it would help with Calgary's overall housing supply and affordability by easing and accelerating the approval of more attainable housing types in communities that were previously zoned for single-family detached homes.
Article content
Another benefit, proponents argued, is that densifying older neighbourhoods is a cheaper alternative to boost housing than continuing Calgary's urban sprawl.
Article content
Article content
Miller disputed the affordability argument, adding blanket zoning has only served the development sector.
Article content
'This whole upzoning was premised on the fact it would bring about affordable housing, and the anecdotal evidence is that it's not creating more affordable homes,' he said. 'It's simply allowing developers to profit significantly by speculating on the land.'
Article content
Council ultimately supported citywide R-CG zoning, albeit with a suite of amendments related to public feedback and privacy requirements, and listing rowhouses as a 'discretionary use' rather than a permitted use.
Article content
In June 2024, Calgarians for Thoughtful Growth and its then-300 members sought its initial judicial review by filing its legal challenge to the Court of King's Bench.
Article content
'We sought a court review of the bylaw because we believe it exceeds the city's legal authority, was adopted through a process lacking fairness and impartiality and disregarded the overwhelming majority of public input received during the hearing process,' the group's release stated.
Article content
Article content
Justice Michael Lema issued a 39-page ruling siding with the city in late January. He argued council and the city were within their legal right under the Municipal Government Act to implement blanket rezoning, and did so in a procedurally fair manner while providing sufficient notice to the public.
Article content
A city spokesperson said Thursday that the municipality does not typically comment on matters that are before the courts.
Article content
The city previously stated that blanket R-CG zoning 'supports increased housing supply and housing choices for Calgarians' by speeding up the redevelopment process and removing cost barriers and political uncertainty.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vancouver Sun
19 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Hearing on constitutionality of Alberta separation question to proceed: judge
EDMONTON — A judicial review of a proposed Alberta separation referendum question will go ahead, after an application to quash the proceeding and have the question approved without scrutiny was denied. Court of King's Bench Justice Colin Feasby said in his ruling Thursday that a judicial review and full hearing on the constitutionality of the question would benefit democracy. 'A referendum on Alberta independence that could lead to the breakup of Canada is serious business,' the judge said, adding that he thinks there are valid arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'The citizens of Alberta deserve to have these arguments made properly and heard in full. Democracy demands nothing less.' Alberta's chief electoral officer, Gordon McClure, referred the question to court last month so a judge could determine whether it violates the Constitution, including treaty rights. The proposed question: 'Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?' The group that submitted the question, the Alberta Prosperity Project, applied last week to have the referral quashed. Feasby said there was a high threshold to throw the review out and arguments made by the group's lawyer fell short. 'The referendum proponent calls (McClure's) referral to the court premature, an abuse of process and an affront to democracy. It is none of those things,' the judge said. 'The referral to the court may result in delay, but it reinforces the legitimacy of the referendum process by ensuring that unconstitutional questions are not put to a vote.' Lawyers for Justice Minister Mickey Amery and the chief electoral officer didn't take a position on the application to quash the referral. However, the minister and Premier Danielle Smith have criticized McClure, saying they think the question is constitutional and should have been approved. Feasby said McClure was following best practices set out in other provinces and other parts of the world. The judge also said McClure taking a stance would be seen as a partisan move from an official who's supposed to be independent. Jeffrey Rath, the lawyer for the Alberta Prosperity Project, said outside court he wasn't surprised his application failed. But he's confident the question will survive the scrutiny of the review to come. 'We're going to move forward and it'll give us a lot more opportunity to continue to talk to our fellow Albertans about the benefits of independence,' Rath said. 'We're looking forward to getting this process forward and having Albertans finally have their say on whether or not Alberta should remain part of Canada.' The judge scheduled three days for a hearing in November. Some interveners will be allowed to take part, Feasby said. 'Difficult choices will be made on who participates, and it's going to be what, in my view, is a representative group that can bring the important issues forward for the court to consider,' he said. A lawyer for Amery told the judge that the minister plans to make submissions. Other groups, including the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation in northern Alberta, have also said they want to be heard. Opposition NDP justice critic Irfan Sabir, in a statement, called on Smith and Amery to stop encouraging the Alberta Prosperity Project and their desire for a referendum on separation. 'The premier and this (United Conservative Party) government need to stop pandering to these extremist groups, especially those led by her own party members who want to destroy our country,' said Sabir, referring to Mitch Sylvestre, the chief executive officer of the Alberta Prosperity Project, who is also president of a UCP constituency association. If the proposed question is approved, the Alberta Prosperity Project and Sylvestre would need to collect 177,000 signatures in four months to get it on a ballot. A competing referendum question was approved by McClure in June and asks if Alberta should declare an official policy that it will never separate from Canada. Efforts to gather signatures for that proposal, put forward by former Progressive Conservative deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk, got underway earlier this month. Lukaszuk, who is also seeking to intervene in the review, needs to collect nearly 300,000 signatures in 90 days in order to get his question on a ballot. His application was approved before new provincial rules with lower signature thresholds took effect. He told reporters Thursday that Feasby's decision to carry on with the review was 'a win not only for democracy but for Elections Alberta and its independence.' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Calgary Herald
a day ago
- Calgary Herald
Legal challenge against blanket rezoning taken to Alberta Court of Appeal
Article content Roughly 70 per cent of speakers were against blanket rezoning, with opponents criticizing how densification of established communities would alter their neighbourhood's character, increase traffic and parking congestion, and strain civic infrastructure. Article content Critics also argued the move would stifle the opportunity for neighbourly input on land-use decisions, by removing the public hearing that would typically accompany a rezoning application. Article content Supporters of blanket rezoning argued it would help with Calgary's overall housing supply and affordability by easing and accelerating the approval of more attainable housing types in communities that were previously zoned for single-family detached homes. Article content Another benefit, proponents argued, is that densifying older neighbourhoods is a cheaper alternative to boost housing than continuing Calgary's urban sprawl. Article content Article content Miller disputed the affordability argument, adding blanket zoning has only served the development sector. Article content 'This whole upzoning was premised on the fact it would bring about affordable housing, and the anecdotal evidence is that it's not creating more affordable homes,' he said. 'It's simply allowing developers to profit significantly by speculating on the land.' Article content Council ultimately supported citywide R-CG zoning, albeit with a suite of amendments related to public feedback and privacy requirements, and listing rowhouses as a 'discretionary use' rather than a permitted use. Article content In June 2024, Calgarians for Thoughtful Growth and its then-300 members sought its initial judicial review by filing its legal challenge to the Court of King's Bench. Article content 'We sought a court review of the bylaw because we believe it exceeds the city's legal authority, was adopted through a process lacking fairness and impartiality and disregarded the overwhelming majority of public input received during the hearing process,' the group's release stated. Article content Article content Justice Michael Lema issued a 39-page ruling siding with the city in late January. He argued council and the city were within their legal right under the Municipal Government Act to implement blanket rezoning, and did so in a procedurally fair manner while providing sufficient notice to the public. Article content A city spokesperson said Thursday that the municipality does not typically comment on matters that are before the courts. Article content The city previously stated that blanket R-CG zoning 'supports increased housing supply and housing choices for Calgarians' by speeding up the redevelopment process and removing cost barriers and political uncertainty.
Toronto Star
a day ago
- Toronto Star
Alberta separatist group suffers setback after judge orders review of referendum question
An Alberta separatist group has suffered a setback in their attempt to put a referendum to Albertans, after a judge confirmed that its proposed question must be first reviewed by the courts to determine whether the question violates the Constitution. 'A referendum on Alberta independence that could lead to the breakup of Canada is serious business,' Court of King's Bench Justice Colin Feasby wrote in a decision released Thursday. Despite arguments from Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) that there was never any harm in just asking if Albertans wanted to be a 'sovereign country,' Feasby countered that it's not 'plain and obvious' that the proposal was constitutional, and that arguments on both sides needed to be heard. 'Democracy demands nothing less,' he concluded.
