White: Lessons learned from blanket rezoning revolt

Article content

I think it is quite clear now that most Calgarians don’t want European-style urban living — streets lined with row houses built right up to the sidewalk, with no trees. We love our setbacks, front lawns with room for a tree, even if it is smaller than it used to be. We will accept more density in our community but only if strategically located away from single-family home streets.

Article content

For decades, I have been telling urban planners that Canada, and particularly Calgary, is not Europe, and that we need a made-in-Canada model for city building.

Top 10 differences between urban living in Calgary versus European cities

• We are private homeowners, not renters.
• We love big houses, not small apartments.
• We shop weekly at big grocery stores, not specialty shops.
• We love our shopping/power centres more than our “main streets.”
• We’d rather drive than use public transit.
• We cycle for recreation, not transportation.
• We like hanging out in parks and backyards, more than streets and plazas.
• We love our privacy — hence the love of six-foot fences.
• We work longer hours and have less vacations so we can enjoy our big two-storey home every day.
• We also love the double garage for our SUVs, maybe even a pickup truck, and yes, bikes, skis and other recreation toys.

However, like the missionaries of 100-plus years ago, urban planners for decades have been trying to convert Calgarians (and Canadians) to live more like the Europeans. They have been preaching their 10 commandments, which are often diametrically opposed to most homeowners’ (which is 70 per cent of Calgarians) beliefs and values.

Article content

Article content

The 10 commandments of an urbanist

• Thou shalt worship more density next door.
• Thou shalt not fund new neighbourhoods.
• Thou shalt not covet your friend’s larger home.
• Thou shalt embrace public transit and cycling.
• Thou shalt not build more roads.
• Thou shalt not covet the parking spot in front of your house.
• Thou shalt lust to live in a walkable community.
• Thou shalt crave “main street” experience.
• Thou shalt rent out your basement to strangers.
• Thou shalt not buy another SUV.

So, what is a councillor to do when the wants and desires of Calgarians are diametrically opposed to what urban professionals are telling them is needed to create an affordable and sustainable city?

Who do they listen to? Public or professionals?

Under the Province’s Municipal Government Act, councillors have the duty to (stated verbatim):

• Consider the welfare and interests of the municipality as a whole and to bring to council’s attention anything that would promote the welfare or interests of the municipality;
• Participate generally in developing and evaluating the policies and programs of the municipality;
• Participate in council meetings and council committee meetings and meetings of other bodies they are appointed to by the council;
• Obtain information about the operation or administration of the municipality from the chief administrative officer;
• Keep in confidence matters discussed in private at a council meeting until discussed at a meeting held in public; and,
• Perform any other duty or function imposed on councillors by this or any other enactment or by the council.

Article content

Interestingly, nowhere does it say — or even imply — councillors must make their decisions based on what the majority of their constituents desire. What it does say, however, is councillors must consider the “welfare and interests of the municipality as a whole,” not just the popular opinion or special interest of the voters in their wards.

One of the things I hear most often from Calgarians is the city’s “community engagement” process is a sham and that city politicians and planners don’t listen to them. In reality, I expect they have listened but in the end, are voting (rightly or wrongly) for what they think is best for the city, not what “you or I” might think is best.

It begs the question — does anyone really know what is “BEST” for the city as a whole? We all have our biases. Ideally, council represents a spectrum of different perspectives (from fiscal conservatives to social progressives, from arts and culture advocates to sports and recreation zealots) on what should be our city’s priorities and how the city should evolve.

But does council represent the “spectrum of different perspectives in Calgary?”

Article content

Last Word

Perhaps the key lesson the “blanket rezoning” debate has taught us is that Calgary’s councillors are always caught in the middle no matter what they do. It will always be too much for some and too little for others: too much spending for some, not enough for others; too much density for some, too little for others; too much money for roads for some and not enough for others, and so on. Given the city’s heterogenous population, it is almost impossible for council to make anyone happy these days.

The blanket rezoning debate has been just another divisive issue council has faced over the past few years as it attempts maintain Calgary’s status as one of the best places to live, work and play in the world. Think — Green Line, new arena and/or Olympic bid.

I wonder what will be next!

Article content