Opinion: Walking the walk(shed) on transit-oriented development in Calgary
As a Calgarian who has spent time living outside of Alberta, I am accustomed to people asking what makes this province unique, beyond the stereotypes. My answer is often a simple one: Albertans are doers, not talkers or virtue-signallers.
Article content
When it comes to land use and urban planning, however, the City of Calgary has generally failed to live up to the action-oriented standard its residents expect.
Article content
Article content
Article content
Calgary has laudable goals as a city, as outlined in its Municipal Development Plan. One of these objectives relates to transit-oriented development (TOD), which is rooted in the principle that public transit nodes should be surrounded by dense, mixed-use communities, allowing the greatest number of people to benefit from the investment in transit infrastructure.
Article content
Article content
Transit-oriented development benefits are wide-reaching. In financial terms, it ensures a better return on investment by encouraging more residents to use public transit. At a basic level, this helps Calgary Transit fund itself. It also reduces traffic congestion, alleviates strain on feeder bus routes, lowers greenhouse gas emissions and encourages healthier commute patterns through riders walking or cycling to and from stations. Greater revenue for Calgary Transit also allows the agency to reinvest these funds into better frequency and service.
Article content
Article content
Opponents of the recent citywide upzoning initiative often claim that the 'burden' of density should fall within a certain radius of these transit nodes rather than in their communities. Even the most car- and single-family-home-loving city councillors vaunt the benefits of transit-oriented development, arguing that if density must happen (which it does, to boost housing supply and lower prices), that it should happen near transit stations so as not to induce greater vehicular traffic in low-rise communities.
Article content
While I would argue that the 'burden' of modest citywide densification is overstated, it is fair to suggest that the most dense forms of development should be reserved for transit nodes. If all sides of the housing debate purport to support TOD, why do we see less of it in Calgary than almost any other major city in Canada?
Article content
The simple answer: the city refuses to legalize it, with more than 70 per cent of residentially zoned land within a 10-minute walk of most CTrain stations being reserved for very low-density homes.
Article content
In the North American context, transit-oriented development can be thought of in two ways: public-private partnerships to build on city-owned land around stations (e.g., park-and-rides) and private or non-profit developments on privately owned parcels near a station. The city's current strategy relies on the former approach.
Article content
While developing on city-owned land is necessary, it won't lead to enough growth in housing stock for Calgary to meet its housing objectives and create truly desirable transit-friendly communities. Development on privately owned parcels near LRT stations must accompany the public lands approach.
Article content
Unfortunately, this is made nearly impossible in Calgary due to antiquated and unambitious zoning policies.
Article content
Article content
Using publicly available land-use data from the City of Calgary and GIS tools, I dug into Calgary's situation and found the overwhelming majority of land near CTrain stations zoned for residential use prohibits both medium- and high-scale density of any kind.
Article content
Let's dig into the numbers.
Article content
Calgary's total area is 853 square kilometres, 29.3 per cent of which is zoned for low-density residential use. Only 4.2 per cent and 0.3 per cent (2.2 square kilometres) is zoned for medium- or high-density residential use, respectively. This means that 33.7 per cent of Calgary is zoned for residential use, of which the majority (87 per cent) is zoned for low-density exclusively. The rest of Calgary is zoned for uses such as parks, commercial, industrial, utilities and institutions.
Article content
Ideally, the 4.5 per cent of Calgary's land zoned for medium- or high-density residential use would be concentrated around CTrain (or MAX BRT) stations.
Article content
Article content
Rather than draw a generic radius around each station, I calculated an isochrone — or a 10-minute 'walkshed' — around each of Calgary's 45 CTrain stations. On a map, this creates a shape that represents everything within a 10-minute walk of each station (assuming a walk speed of five km/h). These walksheds take into account sidewalk access, local geography and other features.
Article content
If Calgary were serious about enabling transit-oriented development, all land zoned for residential use within a 10-minute walk of each CTrain station would be zoned for medium- or high-density residential use.
Article content
Medium-density residential includes townhouses and fourplexes. High-density residential refers to any development greater than five storeys. In an ideal TOD world, no residential land within these walksheds would be zoned for low-density residential, which in Calgary largely refers to single-family homes and, more recently, rowhouses and duplexes.
Article content
Of course, much of the land surrounding CTrain stations is zoned for other important non-residential uses. This is important to facilitate job access for workers and provide transit connections to amenities such as parkland and hospitals. While one might persuasively argue that more land around CTrain stations should be zoned for some kind of residential use, let us put that conversation to the side for now and focus exclusively on land already zoned for residential use, regardless of how much density is permitted.
Article content
Of Calgary's 45 CTrain stations, 33 (almost all outside the downtown) have land zoned for some kind of low-density residential use within a 10-minute walk. On average, 29 per cent of the areas within a 10-minute walk of these 33 stations is zoned exclusively for low-density residential use. For at least four of these stations, that number surpasses 50 per cent. On the surface, this may not seem like a bad percentage. Surely this would imply that the rest of the residential land within these walksheds is zoned for medium- or high-density.
Article content
Article content
A deeper look at the data, however, demonstrates this not to be the case.
Article content
Only 12 per cent of Calgary's 36 square kilometres zoned for medium-density residential use are within a CTrain walkshed; for high-density residential, this share is 19 per cent. Put more simply: 71 per cent of the residentially zoned land within a 10-minute walk of the 33 CTrain stations is zoned exclusively for low-density residential use.
Article content
Where the city does allow homes to be built near transit stations outside of downtown, it overwhelmingly refuses to allow anything denser than a duplex. How can Calgary expect to foster car-light, transit-oriented communities when its own zoning policies quite literally prohibit it from doing so?
Article content
Calgary should take its lead from other forward-looking municipalities across the country and proactively upzone the areas near its CTrain stations. This would send a strong signal that Calgary is serious about tackling the housing crisis and cultivating the kind of communities that many newcomers and skilled workers want to live in.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edmonton Journal
21 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
City of Calgary announces procurement of 120 electric transit buses
More than 100 emission-free buses will be rolling along Calgary's streets in the next three years. Article content Calgary Transit is purchasing 120 new electric buses, the city announced Friday, thanks to funding support from a previous federal government grant. Article content Article content The procurement of Canadian-made Nova LFSe+ electric buses from longtime supplier Nova Bus will replace some aging diesel-fuelled vehicles and strengthen service reliability, the city said in a news release. Article content Article content The e-buses are already being used in Banff, Toronto and Ottawa, and have 'proven performance in Canadian climates,' the city said. Article content Article content 'Thanks to federal support, the investment will increase fleet size while diversifying fuel sources and reducing long-term costs,' the release stated. Article content Under the previous Justin Trudeau government, federal ministers announced a $325-million grant for the City of Calgary in June 2023 to aid in the purchase of 259 electric buses. Article content In line with federal targets, the city is aiming to decarbonize its transit system by 2050. Calgary Transit is in the midst of an almost half-billion-dollar fleet transition. Article content The funding breakdown for that transition is $100 million from the city, $123 million from the Canada Infrastructure Bank and $220 million from the Zero Emission Transit Fund. The federal funding includes both bus costs and infrastructure and facility upgrades. Article content Article content The electric bus program is only one part of our multi-faceted fleet plan that will continue to look at different opportunities to incorporate other fuels in our fleet as well,' Calgary Transit director Sharon Fleming said in an interview Friday. Article content Article content Deliveries will begin in 2027 and all 120 buses are slated to be in use by the end of 2028. Article content Once in service, the 120 e-buses would account for approximately 10 per cent of the city's bus and shuttle fleet, according to Fleming. Article content 'It will also give us an opportunity to try electric buses,' she said. 'If we're to one day go to hydrogen buses, a lot of the platform that we use to run the electric buses is actually replicated in the hydrogen fuel cell buses, so it gives us some learnings we could use in the future.'
Calgary Herald
a day ago
- Calgary Herald
Opinion: Walking the walk(shed) on transit-oriented development in Calgary
Article content As a Calgarian who has spent time living outside of Alberta, I am accustomed to people asking what makes this province unique, beyond the stereotypes. My answer is often a simple one: Albertans are doers, not talkers or virtue-signallers. Article content When it comes to land use and urban planning, however, the City of Calgary has generally failed to live up to the action-oriented standard its residents expect. Article content Article content Article content Calgary has laudable goals as a city, as outlined in its Municipal Development Plan. One of these objectives relates to transit-oriented development (TOD), which is rooted in the principle that public transit nodes should be surrounded by dense, mixed-use communities, allowing the greatest number of people to benefit from the investment in transit infrastructure. Article content Article content Transit-oriented development benefits are wide-reaching. In financial terms, it ensures a better return on investment by encouraging more residents to use public transit. At a basic level, this helps Calgary Transit fund itself. It also reduces traffic congestion, alleviates strain on feeder bus routes, lowers greenhouse gas emissions and encourages healthier commute patterns through riders walking or cycling to and from stations. Greater revenue for Calgary Transit also allows the agency to reinvest these funds into better frequency and service. Article content Article content Opponents of the recent citywide upzoning initiative often claim that the 'burden' of density should fall within a certain radius of these transit nodes rather than in their communities. Even the most car- and single-family-home-loving city councillors vaunt the benefits of transit-oriented development, arguing that if density must happen (which it does, to boost housing supply and lower prices), that it should happen near transit stations so as not to induce greater vehicular traffic in low-rise communities. Article content While I would argue that the 'burden' of modest citywide densification is overstated, it is fair to suggest that the most dense forms of development should be reserved for transit nodes. If all sides of the housing debate purport to support TOD, why do we see less of it in Calgary than almost any other major city in Canada? Article content The simple answer: the city refuses to legalize it, with more than 70 per cent of residentially zoned land within a 10-minute walk of most CTrain stations being reserved for very low-density homes. Article content In the North American context, transit-oriented development can be thought of in two ways: public-private partnerships to build on city-owned land around stations (e.g., park-and-rides) and private or non-profit developments on privately owned parcels near a station. The city's current strategy relies on the former approach. Article content While developing on city-owned land is necessary, it won't lead to enough growth in housing stock for Calgary to meet its housing objectives and create truly desirable transit-friendly communities. Development on privately owned parcels near LRT stations must accompany the public lands approach. Article content Unfortunately, this is made nearly impossible in Calgary due to antiquated and unambitious zoning policies. Article content Article content Using publicly available land-use data from the City of Calgary and GIS tools, I dug into Calgary's situation and found the overwhelming majority of land near CTrain stations zoned for residential use prohibits both medium- and high-scale density of any kind. Article content Let's dig into the numbers. Article content Calgary's total area is 853 square kilometres, 29.3 per cent of which is zoned for low-density residential use. Only 4.2 per cent and 0.3 per cent (2.2 square kilometres) is zoned for medium- or high-density residential use, respectively. This means that 33.7 per cent of Calgary is zoned for residential use, of which the majority (87 per cent) is zoned for low-density exclusively. The rest of Calgary is zoned for uses such as parks, commercial, industrial, utilities and institutions. Article content Ideally, the 4.5 per cent of Calgary's land zoned for medium- or high-density residential use would be concentrated around CTrain (or MAX BRT) stations. Article content Article content Rather than draw a generic radius around each station, I calculated an isochrone — or a 10-minute 'walkshed' — around each of Calgary's 45 CTrain stations. On a map, this creates a shape that represents everything within a 10-minute walk of each station (assuming a walk speed of five km/h). These walksheds take into account sidewalk access, local geography and other features. Article content If Calgary were serious about enabling transit-oriented development, all land zoned for residential use within a 10-minute walk of each CTrain station would be zoned for medium- or high-density residential use. Article content Medium-density residential includes townhouses and fourplexes. High-density residential refers to any development greater than five storeys. In an ideal TOD world, no residential land within these walksheds would be zoned for low-density residential, which in Calgary largely refers to single-family homes and, more recently, rowhouses and duplexes. Article content Of course, much of the land surrounding CTrain stations is zoned for other important non-residential uses. This is important to facilitate job access for workers and provide transit connections to amenities such as parkland and hospitals. While one might persuasively argue that more land around CTrain stations should be zoned for some kind of residential use, let us put that conversation to the side for now and focus exclusively on land already zoned for residential use, regardless of how much density is permitted. Article content Of Calgary's 45 CTrain stations, 33 (almost all outside the downtown) have land zoned for some kind of low-density residential use within a 10-minute walk. On average, 29 per cent of the areas within a 10-minute walk of these 33 stations is zoned exclusively for low-density residential use. For at least four of these stations, that number surpasses 50 per cent. On the surface, this may not seem like a bad percentage. Surely this would imply that the rest of the residential land within these walksheds is zoned for medium- or high-density. Article content Article content A deeper look at the data, however, demonstrates this not to be the case. Article content Only 12 per cent of Calgary's 36 square kilometres zoned for medium-density residential use are within a CTrain walkshed; for high-density residential, this share is 19 per cent. Put more simply: 71 per cent of the residentially zoned land within a 10-minute walk of the 33 CTrain stations is zoned exclusively for low-density residential use. Article content Where the city does allow homes to be built near transit stations outside of downtown, it overwhelmingly refuses to allow anything denser than a duplex. How can Calgary expect to foster car-light, transit-oriented communities when its own zoning policies quite literally prohibit it from doing so? Article content Calgary should take its lead from other forward-looking municipalities across the country and proactively upzone the areas near its CTrain stations. This would send a strong signal that Calgary is serious about tackling the housing crisis and cultivating the kind of communities that many newcomers and skilled workers want to live in.
Calgary Herald
a day ago
- Calgary Herald
Carney, Trump and Rocket Richard: Best defence is a good offence
Article content Canadian hockey fans raised in the Connor McDavid era, and even those like me who fondly recall the Wayne Gretzky era, may not know much about Maurice (the Rocket) Richard, but he was a 'fiery force on ice' during his 18 NHL seasons. Article content He was the first player to score 50 goals in a season, the first to reach 500 career goals and was a leader on eight Stanley Cup-winning teams. His suspension for striking an official during a fight in March 1945, by then-NHL commissioner Clarence Campbell, sparked a riot in Montreal, which was the closest Quebec ever got to replicating the French Revolution — with Campbell barely escaping the guillotine. Article content Article content Article content Richard was once asked, 'When you cross the blueline on a breakaway, do you have a plan as to how to beat the goalie?' He replied, 'When I cross the blueline on a breakaway, I don't have the faintest idea what I'm going to do. So how can the goalie know or plan for what I'm going to do?' Article content Article content Fast forward to the North American trade arena and the unwelcome contest between Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump over tariffs. Trump, all bluster and bluff, demonstrates utter unpredictability as he approaches the Canada-U.S. border line — initially proposing to impose a blanket 25 per cent tariff on steel and aluminum, and everything else if Canada didn't tighten its borders against drug and migrant smuggling. Then a month later, a 10 per cent tariff on energy exports and a further increase on steel and aluminum. Then last month, an apoplectic fit over a proposed Canadian tax (since abandoned) on digital services, then pivoting to a 35 per cent overall tariff this month after just settling for 15 per cent tariffs in reciprocity agreements with Japan and the EU. Article content Article content In goal for Canada, to defend Canada's interests, is a former high-level bureaucrat, someone accustomed to working in the polite, predictable and orderly environment of central bankers. Someone who may quite possibly be discomfited and discombobulated by unpredictability as when Trump threatens at the blueline. Article content What to do if you were Canada's coach? What's possible, with Carney in net, to better withstand Trump attacks and even to go on the offensive? Article content Bolster the defence and team around Carney — not with Justin Trudeau-tainted ministers like Dominic LeBlanc, Chrystia Freeland or David Lametti, but with negotiators and spokespeople who have had no association at all with the Trudeau regime. Not fellow public sector bureaucrats such as Marc-Andre Blanchard and Michael Sabia (although they, particularly Sabia, may play a useful support role). Article content Bring in strong executives and union leaders with experience in the areas most susceptible to attack, but also those who can shout, bluff and tweet just as vigorously as Trump from sectors such as the oilpatch, which he needs to attain his goal of continental economic security. Article content Most importantly, do not showcase an unorganized gaggle of provincial premiers posing for photo ops, but mobilizing those like Danielle Smith and Scott Moe to move Trump by getting to his populist base. Article content And coming back to goalie Carney, if, as some commentators have suggested, we are actually heading into a 'tariff war,' maybe he could also draw inspiration and wisdom from William Lyon Mackenzie King, Canada's Liberal prime minister throughout the Second World War. Article content My father, who was Alberta premier from 1943 to 1968, dealt with four prime ministers — John Diefenbaker, Lester B. Pearson, Louis St-Laurent and Mackenzie King — and their administrations. He maintained that Mackenzie King's war cabinet and administration were by far the strongest of the four, and that perhaps his greatest strength was the ability to see his own weaknesses and deficiencies, and to recruit others to compensate for them. Article content Article content It remains to be seen whether Carney can do the same. To do so would require a substantial degree of humility, which Carney professes to value most highly and to which he devoted the last pages of his voluminous book. Article content The end result might then be 'a real Team Canada' — with skill and experience at every position as well as on the bench. A team yet to be built — not yet even in the locker-room, let alone on the ice — but a team most urgently needed if Canada is to prevail in its struggles with the Trump administration.
