top of page
.png)
Infill Action Letters
We need your voice to ensure that Edmonton’s growth doesn’t come at the cost of our mature neighbourhoods.
We have launched a grassroots lobby campaign to demand better control, oversight, and common-sense regulations regarding local infill development. Our non-partisan group is actively taking our neighborhood concerns straight to the decision-makers, including the Alberta Provincial Government, Shadow Ministers, Federal MPs, Metropolitan MLAs and Mayors, and our own city council.
Rapid density changes are placing immense strain on our infrastructure, public safety, and community character. We cannot afford to stay silent. Please support this vital community initiative by signing our official lobby letters today to show all levels of government that sustainable, responsible development matters to Edmontonians.
AND watch our website for weekly new letters you can sign as we continue to lobby for change, and to save our neighbourhoods.
Join us at our events where you can meet the organizing team, people from other communities, and learn more about our campaign. Please invite your neighbors and friends. And note, paper copies of our letters are available at all events.
Our upcoming events:
Doors open at 6:30, Meetings start at 7:00.
Sept. 14
Ritchie Community League
7727 - 98 Street
Sept. 29
Bellevue Community League
Oct. 6
North Millbourne Community League
Letters For NDP Ministers
Date: September 2026To: MLA Andrew BoitchenkoRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Boitchenko, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Boitchenko, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Jackie Armstrong-HomeniukRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Armstrong-Homeniuk, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Armstrong-Homeniuk, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Shane GetsonRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Shane Getson, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities. While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, and loss of property rights and property value. The inappropriate overdevelopment happening here is negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, is producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately result in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Getson, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Brandon Lunty Re: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Lunty, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Lunty, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Dale NallyRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Nally, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Nally, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Searle TurtonRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Turton, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process.Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Turton this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026To: MLA Nate GlubishRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Glubish, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Glubish, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Fill Out These Forms to Send Infill Action Letters to the Government of Alberta
Once you submit this form, the eight letters mentioned above will be automatically sent to the Government of Alberta ministers on your behalf. The information collected will not be shared outside of this campaign.
Metro Region MLA letters
Date: September 2026To: MLA Andrew BoitchenkoRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Boitchenko, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Boitchenko, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Jackie Armstrong-HomeniukRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Armstrong-Homeniuk, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Armstrong-Homeniuk, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Shane GetsonRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Shane Getson, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities. While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, and loss of property rights and property value. The inappropriate overdevelopment happening here is negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, is producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately result in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Getson, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Brandon Lunty Re: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Lunty, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Lunty, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Dale NallyRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Nally, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Nally, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026 To: MLA Searle TurtonRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Turton, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process.Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Turton this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Date: September 2026To: MLA Nate GlubishRe: Restoring a Pillar of Alberta’s Planning Framework in Edmonton– This is a Plea for Help from Your Neighbours in Edmonton Dear MLA Glubish, The Infill Action Campaign was formed to advocate for responsibly managed redevelopment in Edmonton, and to restore Alberta's planning framework where citizens participate in decisions that affect their communities.While this may appear to be solely a local planning issue, it is not. The location, scale and pace of redevelopment in Alberta's capital city affects regional and provincial transportation systems, infrastructure plans, public safety, housing affordability, environmental objectives and fiscal health.The Infill Action Campaign is seeking the support of the Premier and relevant ministers to restore balanced growth in Edmonton.While municipalities should control urban development, they also operate within broader regional and provincial systems. The question in Edmonton is whether growth remains aligned with the provincial planning framework, local conditions, urban development goals and the desires of its residents.The Municipal Government Act establishes a hierarchy of planning tools, including Area Redevelopment Plans which reflect the public interest. Edmonton, however, repealed 75 local plans and another 54 plans and planning tools by 2024, replacing them with the Zoning bylaw 20001 and broad District Plans. At the same time, federal funding programs accelerated redevelopment and influenced local land-use policy. The resulting question is not whether Edmonton should grow, but whether that growth remains locally accountable, responsive to community conditions, the public’s interest and aligned with Alberta’s broader interests.Two Cities, Two ApproachesIn 2018, the Alberta Government gave Edmonton and Calgary greater flexibility through their City Charters, but the two cities took very different approaches to public participation.During Edmonton’s transition to Zoning Bylaw 20001, public engagement relied heavily on electronic notice and an abbreviated public process that began during COVID-19. Calgary, by contrast, delayed key processes until restrictions eased and then broadened participation, ultimately engaging thousands of residents. As local-area planning was disappearing in Edmonton, it was being strengthened in Calgary giving Calgary greater capacity to respond to local conditions and adjust course when necessary.This marked a major shift in how Edmonton broke away from Alberta’s planning framework. Federal incentives—like the CMHC’s MLI Select program and Housing Accelerator Fund —began driving the location, scale, and speed of redevelopment. While these programs were meant to boost housing supply without overriding local controls or public input, the reality in Edmonton was different. Because the city eliminated neighbourhood-level planning, federal money doesn’t align with local conditions and community priorities.Without a strong neighbourhood-level mechanism, redevelopment becomes increasingly difficult to manage, and residents become mere bystanders in the process. Why This MattersPublic participation is not merely a democratic principle; it is a practical growth-management tool that helps direct development to locations suited to local conditions.Calgary, for instance, uses local area plans to adapt city-wide objectives to local conditions and to incorporate local information about conditions that city-wide zoning alone cannot fully capture.Edmonton identifies Priority Growth Areas, nodes and corridors to focus growth and infrastructure investment. While sound in principle, this approach lacks the local-area planning information that makes plans effective. Growth is consequently outpacing the City’s capacity to manage enforcement, infrastructure and regional transportation impacts, creating longer-term financial risks. These concerns are detailed in information sheets available on request.To correct this, meaningful local area planning and impact assessments must be re-instated.Our AskWe are asking that federal funding, provincial policy, municipal objectives and local conditions be aligned. Growth should be managed, not simply permitted.We are asking you to help address Edmonton’s concerns by supporting our request for a cross-ministry provincial review of Edmonton’s planning and development framework, and our request for restoration of neighbourhood-level planning that brings residents and the development industry to the same table.We are asking you to support changes to the MGA that can put some kind of pause and course correction on what Edmonton’s city council is doing to our neighborhoods: the destruction of neighborhood character, loss of green spaces and tree canopies, the loss of property rights and property value, negatively affecting the housing supply in Edmonton, producing a shortage of single-family homes, and will ultimately resulting in infrastructure failures.Our communities are in crisis, and we need a course correction. Residents are leaving and enduring financial loss on the sale of their home just to get out. Our neighborhoods are becoming destabilized. These once beautiful single-family homes, purchased by ‘developers’ are now abandoned houses, boarded up, weeds overflowing or sit as empty bull-dozed lots filled with weeds surrounded by construction fencing. And arson is striking both demolition sites and new infills. We cannot let this neglect become our new normal.MLA Glubish, this is an election issue. People are looking to the Provincial government for leadership on this very serious issue. Please help us.Thank you for your time and consideration. Signature: __________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________________ Email Address: ______________________________ Neighborhood: _______________________________
Fill Out These Forms to Send Infill Action Letters to the Government of Alberta
Once you submit this form, the eight letters mentioned above will be automatically sent to the Government of Alberta ministers on your behalf. The information collected will not be shared outside of this campaign.
About This Campaign
Our neighbourhoods are changing rapidly, and the City is ignoring community concerns. That is why community leaders launched this Infill Action Campaign—a grassroots Lobby Campaign, asking the government for balance between redevelopment and neighborhood stability.Since Bylaw 20001 took effect in January 2024, Edmonton's mature neighbourhoods have been overwhelmed by rapid, as-of-right redevelopment. Buildings with up to eight rental units are now going up on single 600 m² lots where a single-family home once stood, with no environmental review, no infrastructure assessment, and in most cases, no direct notice to the neighbours next door.Two years in, the pattern is clear:
Unit counts per lot are risingLivable, single-family homes are sent to the landfill Mature trees are being lost faster than they can regrowReal-world build quality and accessibility gaps are showing up in finished unitsStormwater and sanitary systems built for 1980s occupancy levels are being pushed past capacityAppeal rights exist on paper but are, in practice, out of reach for most homeownersRepeated pleas of Edmonton homeowners fell on deaf years of Edmonton City Council
Our campaign begins with letters to six ministers and the premier of Alberta:Expertly Guided: Built with help from retired city and provincial planners.Targeted Impact: No more scattered letters. We mapped Edmonton’s specific infill issues directly to the exact provincial ministers with the legal power to intervene under the Municipal Government Act (MGA). We’ve written the letters for you.Ministers Contacted: Letters have been prepared and ready to be sent to Premier Danielle Smith and Ministers handling: Municipal Affairs, Transportation, Environment and Protected Areas, Infrastructure, Public Safety and Emergency Services, Assisted Living and Social Services.Edmonton doesn't have to choose between building homes and protecting its neighbourhoods, safety, and infrastructure that make our homes and communities livable.We're asking the Government of Alberta to:Conduct a cross-ministry review of how Edmonton's redevelopment policies are performing against provincial goalsEstablish provincial minimum decision standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate real impact before approving intensive infillRestore democratic oversight by pausing unnotified approvals and reinstating meaningful public notification, consultation, and appeal rightsConduct an audit of asset stewardship to ensure municipal land decisions deliver transparent, measurable public benefit
If you own a home in Edmonton, current infill practices may already be affecting your property, your street, or your sense of security in your own neighbourhood.If you want to see accountability restored and homeowners treated as partners in how their neighbourhoods change, not bystanders to it, this campaign is for you.
Letters For UCP Ministers
To: The Honourable Nathan Neudorf, Minister of Assisted Living and Social Services Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent request for provincial intervention: Edmonton infill redevelopment & housing mismatch Dear Minister Neudorf:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to ensure new housing meets the needs it is intended to serve. The Housing Accelerator Fund coupled with the CMHC loans to support it have ultimately contributed to chaotic redevelopment. Every month of delay compounds the problem, and we are asking for intervention.Alberta's record on housing supply speaks for itself. Your ministry has "helped clear the way for more homes to be built faster”. Alberta built nearly a quarter of all housing starts in the country in the first half of 2025. You are almost halfway to the goal of expanding supply to 25,000 units by 2031. These are real achievements, and this request is not meant to slow that momentum.Both cities accounted for 89% of housing with 50% from Calgary and 39% from Edmonton. This is not because Calgary is bigger. Housing starts per 10,000 residents were higher and the highest in Canada. Calgary’s strategy, which concentrated growth in already-serviced, higher-capacity corridors and downtown zones, gained more units, whereas Edmonton added volume through multi-unit buildings dispersed broadly across interior lots in established, mature neighbourhoods.The challenge for Edmonton is to match Calgary's effective strategy while keeping rents lower than Calgary's to deliver the type of housing that Alberta families need within their budgets, the standard your mandate sets.CMHC's June 2026 rental update shows a widening gap. Vacancy is rising fastest in newer multi-unit buildings, while older stock stays tight, with lower vacancy. This gap has widened since fall 2025. Also, Edmonton's 2023 Housing Needs Assessment found the city short roughly 70,000 purpose-built rental units, especially three-or-more-bedroom units. Real estate professionals report that infill units are less attractive than suburban alternatives and that this mismatch can push multi-unit vacancy higher. New units are taking longer to lease, with incentives like free rent becoming standard, and continue to remain inaccessible to a large group of renters.No City process currently monitors or consolidates market information to channel redevelopment toward the housing forms that are appealing to people. Older neighbourhoods are becoming less attractive as places to live. The city does not collect data on whether long-term housing is being produced for working families and the recent lodging house issues in Edmonton suggest that several neighbourhood multi-unit infills are converting into short-term rentals illegally. This would indicate that unit count alone is a poor proxy for housing need, and that redevelopment is outpacing the City's ability to match supply to the households it is meant to serve.Alberta does not need to choose between the number of permits issued and meeting Albertans' housing needs. Housing should be designed and built for a purpose that includes maintaining neighbourhood stability. We are asking you to direct the following immediate actions in collaboration with your ministry partners:Cross-Ministry Review of Edmonton's redevelopment policies from a provincial perspective as to whether infill redevelopment is producing affordability, housing that is attracting permanency of tenure and supports stability of neighbourhoods.Provincial Minimum Decision Standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate that redevelopment policy advances affordable housing opportunities and maximizes public assets (infrastructure, environmental, transit) in the process.Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restoring mandatory public notification, consultation, and appeal rights until clear regulations are enacted.Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit and investment return for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton.Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our ballots. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS, ASSISTED LIVING AND SOCIAL SERVICES, FINANCE AND TREASURY BOARD.Housing Affordability Framework that Goes Beyond Unit CountsEdmonton is permitting record numbers of multi-unit dwellings on the assumption that more units equal more affordability. The data available so far suggests otherwise: a growing housing crisis.Background: Housing Strategy Driven by Assumptions2024: Bylaw 20001 permits up to 8 dwelling units on a 600 m² lot as-of-right. The number of units produced is the sole measure used to assess effectiveness in creating housing affordability.2023 Housing Needs Assessment: the City identified Edmonton a shortage of 70,000 purpose-built rental units. The supply being produced is smaller 1- 2 bedroom unit, while the growing demand is for three-or-more-bedroom units (Councillor Michael Janz, citing the 2023 Housing Needs Assessment).The same Needs Assessment: said that households including a person with a health or mobility challenge are the single largest group in Core Housing Need. The City's own reports call for unit development to be matched to household size and accessibility need but this is not happening.Result: There has been no official City monitoring of how new units perform in terms of size, pricing and design to meet the household needs of Alberta’s citizens facing the affordability crisis.The Vacancy SignalCMHC's 2026 Mid-Year Rental Market Update Reports report that vacancies are rising in new housing built after 2020. However, older, stabilized buildings with family-sized units are in steady demand.CMHC says this gap has intensified since its fall 2025 survey. Rental operators report new units are taking longer to lease, despite incentives such as free rent and signing bonuses.The national vacancy rate for purpose-built rental rose to 3.1% in 2025 from 2.2% in 2024, above the 10-year average. CMHC says a 3% vacancy rate is a “healthy market” benchmark. However, the Alberta vacancy appears to sit between 4% - 5%.CMHC projects that Edmonton’s rental vacancy rate will climb to between 4.5% and 4.8%.CMHC found that units affordable to lower income households remain scarce even as overall vacancy climbs.Result: There are signals of a disconnect between housing needs and the type of new housing units produced through infill neighbourhood redevelopment.The Suitability GapMedia investigations and City data point suggest that multi-units in mature neighbourhoods do not meet the needs of households seeking family-style design, neighbourhood stability, amenities and open spaces.According to a Globe and Mail Report (Dave LeBlanc, How to build apartments fit for families), larger units in multi-unit buildings are frequently laid out with narrow spaces and limited light. Councillor Michael Janz is quoted as saying family-friendly apartments are difficult to find in Edmonton, with only about 1 in 13 Edmonton apartments offering more than two bedrooms.Edmonton capped second-floor space on garage suites at 50 m², disability advocates and architects reported that it is impossible to fit a genuinely barrier-free, wheelchair-accessible unit within those parameters.According to City Administration July 2026 reports many multi-units approved as row housing are being converted into lodging style housing and short-term rentals.Housing options for young people seeking starter homes in mature neighbourhoods are decreasing as infill developers are offering higher than market prices.The Affordability Gap is Not ClosingEdmonton's Core Housing Need was estimated at roughly 49,000 households in 2022, projected to rise to approximately 59,000 by 2026The City's analysis reveals a deficit of units renting at levels that most renters can afford.A City-commissioned market housing affordability analysis expects renter affordability to improve only “gradually” but not sufficiently to meet housing needs, even as vacancy rates rise.Result: There is no evidence that the housing supply being produced is resolving core housing needs of citizens.Housing Strategy GapsData Point: Vacancy by building ageStatus: Not tracked by City of EdmontonData Point: Unit size/type mix delivered under Bylaw 20001Status: Not monitored against Housing Needs Assessment targets for family- and accessible-sized unitsData Point: Tenant demographics in new multi-unit infillStatus: Unknown – as the City does not monitor these outcomes of their redevelopment strategy.Data Point: Rent levels achieved vs. affordability thresholdStatus: City's own $1,100 affordability threshold is not cross-checked against new-build asking rentsData Point: Secondary use as lodging houses / short-term rentalsStatus: Acknowledged by Administration as unanticipated; scale and impact on housing stock not quantifiedData Point: Core Housing Need trajectoryStatus: Rising — 49,000 households (2022) to a projected 59,000 by 2026, in spte of record high development permit approvals.The City is approving multi-unit density faster than it is measuring what that density delivers.Without a research program tracking occupancy, affordability, and suitability outcomes and a housing strategy that ties zoning permissions to the City's own Core Housing Need targets, unit-count growth as the indicator risks becoming a supply statistic that never reaches the households the city says it is trying to house.
To: The Honourable Grant Hunter, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent request for provincial intervention: Edmonton infill redevelopment & is causing irreversible tree canopy lossDear Minister Hunter:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to manage its impacts on the environment and every month delay compounds harm that cannot be undone.Redevelopment under Edmonton's Blanket Zoning Bylaw 20001, accelerated by federal Housing Accelerator Fund incentives, is on pace to double before the end of this year, even though the City of Edmonton is currently ahead of its housing targets. This is producing serious environmental damage and shifting related costs onto taxpayers, due to no system in place to manage the cumulative effects.Your mandate letter commits you to "relentlessly defend against federal overreach into areas of provincial jurisdiction" and to "accelerate and complete all outstanding land-use plans... to ensure alignment with government environmental and economic policy." What is happening in Edmonton falls directly within both concerns.The evidence is stark. Edmonton's mature neighbourhoods hold the majority of the city's private tree canopy. A University of Alberta study found 48.5% tree canopy loss on redeveloped parcels, with no regrowth. City landscaping requirements for permitted residential uses are too weak to protect existing trees. Developers have little incentive to preserve them, and enforcement typically arrives only after the damage is done. The result is accelerating, unchecked loss with direct consequences for stormwater management, urban heat, soil stability, and public infrastructure costs the province ultimately shares.Alberta does not need to choose between housing supply and environmental protection. We are asking you to direct the following immediate actions in collaboration with your ministry partners:Cross-Ministry Review of the cumulative impacts of Edmonton's infill policies across relevant ministries.Provincial Minimum Decision Standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate cumulative impacts before approving intensive multi-unit infill in established neighbourhoods.Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restore mandatory public notification, consultation, and appeal rights until clear regulations are enacted.Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit and investment return for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton.Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve these issues urgently. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our votes. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA ENVIRONMENTErosion of Environmental Resources as Provincial AssetsEdmonton is approving residential intensification one lot at a time without assessing the cumulative environmental impacts on mature urban ecosystems, natural drainage, soils, or tree canopy. This is no longer solely a municipal issue. Environmental systems cross regional and municipal boundaries. The Background of How We Got HereJanuary 1, 2024: Edmonton's Zoning Bylaw 20001 came into force, permitting up to eight dwelling units on many 600 m² residential lots as-of-right without review of environmental impacts nor direct notification to neighbouring property owners.During the first year, residential redevelopment approvals increased approximately 30% city-wide, with a fourfold increase in redevelopment areas, which are established older neighbourhoods with expansive tree canopies. This has accelerated changes in the local ecosystem.Despite subsequent Council motions in 2025 and 2026, and numerous presentations from concerned citizens - redevelopment has continued rapidly without environmental impact assessment. The Environmental GapThe majority of Edmonton's urban tree canopy is on private lots in mature and established neighbourhoods.A University of Alberta study found 48.5% tree canopy loss on redeveloped parcels, with insufficient replacement planting to restore lost ecological function.Trees provide essential environmental services by intercepting rainfall, improving infiltration, stabilizing soils, reducing erosion, filtering pollutants, reducing urban temperatures and supporting biodiversity.Current landscaping requirements primarily measure replacement plantings rather than preserving the environmental services provided by mature trees.Natural Drainage System are Being Reduced SignificantlyRemoval of mature trees and vegetation is accompanied by larger building footprints, excavation and increased impervious surfaces.The cumulative result is reduced rainfall infiltration; greater stormwater runoff; reduced groundwater recharge; increased localized flooding; and higher downstream infrastructure demand.Natural drainage systems are being replaced by engineered systems without evaluating cumulative watershed impacts. Soil and Environmental Stability in Edmonton is becoming a Provincial ConcernRedevelopment increasingly requires deep excavation, removal of mature root systems, addition of retaining walls, altered drainage patterns and extensive grading.Residents are reporting increasing construction failures including excavation collapses, slope instability, adjacent property movement, drainage failures, basement flooding and sewer back-ups. These incidents suggest cumulative environmental effects that are not currently evaluated across redevelopment areas.Enforcement in Edmonton is very weak on tree protection on private properties, which signals to builders that there are no repercussions to further destruction of trees and erosion of soil conditions.Current approvals assess individual sites. There is no requirement to evaluate cumulative impacts on tree canopy, soil stability, groundwater, neighbourhood drainage, watershed function, urban heat island effects or ecosystem resilience. Why this is a Provincial ConcernEnvironmental systems function cumulatively across landscapes and watersheds, not individual parcels.The Minister's mandate includes coordinating land-use planning with environmental policy where municipal decisions create cumulative impacts.The Alberta Land Stewardship Act establishes that land-use decisions should respect property rights while balancing them against the overall greater public interest. Fragmented redevelopment that progressively removes natural environmental assets without cumulative assessment is inconsistent with this integrated stewardship principle.Environmental degradation increases provincial costs through flood mitigation, emergency response, infrastructure investment, urban heat adaptation and watershed management.The cumulative loss of natural infrastructure is no longer solely a municipal issue. It affects provincial environmental resilience, climate adaptation, public expenditures and long-term land stewardship.Tipping Point IndicatorsTree canopy: 48.5% loss on redeveloped parcelsNatural drainage: Reduced infiltration and increased runoffSoil stability: Increasing excavation failures and drainage impacts.Urban heat: Loss of mature canopy intensifying heat island effects.Environmental assessment: No cumulative neighbourhood review. Land stewardship: Environmental systems assessed lot-by-lot rather than at watershed scale.Edmonton's redevelopment model is transforming mature neighbourhoods faster than environmental systems can adapt. Trees, soils and natural drainage function as interconnected infrastructure, yet approvals continue to evaluate each redevelopment site in isolation.Provincial leadership is needed to restore coordinated environmental stewardship, ensure cumulative impacts are assessed before irreversible losses occur, and align municipal redevelopment decisions with Alberta's environmental policies, land stewardship principles and long-term public interest.
To: The Honourable Martin Long, Minister of Infrastructure Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent request for provincial intervention: Edmonton infill redevelopment & infrastructure capacityDear Minister Long:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to manage its impacts on infrastructure capacity, and every month of delay compounds harm that cannot be undone.Between May 2025 and April 2026, approximately 81% of Edmonton's redevelopment permits were issued within Small-Scale Residential Zones mostly on privately owned lots outside transportation corridors. These permits provided housing on about 13.04 hectares of land in mature neighbourhoods with aging roads, drainage, and sanitary systems. In the same period, roughly 337 hectares of vacant or underutilized land with modern infrastructure and transportation access received only a small fraction of permits. This disconnect between the location of housing supply with infrastructure investment is producing serious strain and costs onto taxpayers.Your mandate commits you to "complete work on a capital funding formula… on the amount of capital funding that should be budgeted each year to ensure long-term greater predictability… while ensuring infrastructure resiliency and effective maintenance," and to maximize the value and use of provincially funded assets." What is happening in Edmonton falls directly within both concerns. Redevelopment is proceeding without any requirement to demonstrate infrastructure readiness, undermining the predictability that your capital funding formula is meant to deliver and placing unplanned demands on provincially funded assets.The evidence is clear. Existing homes are increasingly replaced with multi-unit buildings with significantly higher occupancies. The buildings are creating more impervious surface area, stormwater runoff, and wastewater generation. EPCOR's 20-year, $1.6-billion Stormwater Integrated Resource Plan (SIRP), set in 2019, did not anticipate the servicing demands this would create and the June 2026 rainfall event exposed the vulnerability of Edmonton's aging stormwater and wastewater systems, and how failures in one part of the system can cascade across the city.Neighbourhoods are also feeling the impacts. Calls to the City’s urgent 311 calls have risen more than 50% since the new zoning bylaw took effect. We urge you to consider the benefits of addressing this problem proactively as it will cost far less than responding after infrastructure deficiencies emerge later in a crisis.Alberta does not need to choose between housing supply and sound infrastructure stewardship. We ask that you work with your Ministry partners to direct the following immediate actions:Cross-Ministry Review for an independent assessment of infrastructure capacity in Edmonton's mature neighbourhoods to align redevelopment with planned upgrades and to maximize existing capital investments.Provincial Minimum Decision Standards for municipalities to demonstrate that significant redevelopment is sequenced with infrastructure readiness and long-term asset management before approving infill redevelopments.Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restoring mandatory public notification, consultation, and appeal rights until clear regulations are enacted.Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to be consistent with the flexibility and value-maximization goals of the Real Property Governance Act to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit and investment return for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton.Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve these issues urgently. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our votes. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA INFRASTRUCTUREFragmented Municipal Redevelopment: Unassessed Provincial RiskEdmonton is approving redevelopment lot-by-lot with no cumulative assessment of infrastructure, drainage, or environmental impact to mitigate downstream risks. The consequences are no longer municipal. They are provincial.How We Got Here2024: Zoning Bylaw 20001 permits up to 8 dwelling units on 600 m² lots as-of-right without consultation or direct notification to neighbouring property owners when a redevelopment is proposed.Year one: Residential redevelopment approvals rose 30% city-wide; this was a fourfold increase in redeveloping areas, with no discretionary or area-level review. (Infill Developers Edmonton Association Position Paper.)2025: Council considered a motion to reduce mid-block units from 8 to 6, supported by ~200 residents and Administration in July 2025. It was defeated by one vote, with two supportive councillors absent.Feb 2026: A motion to reduce density from 8 to 6 in interior lots to reduce infrastructure impacts was advanced and defeated 8 to 4. Council did not dispute infrastructure strain but did not resolve it either.Result: Infrastructure, environmental protections, and financial planning have not kept pace with the rapid pace of density now permitted by right. The public responded with legal appeals and an increasing number of neighbourhoods entering restrictive covenants to protect their communities.The Infrastructure GapEdmonton's sanitary/stormwater sizing standards (Edmonton Drainage Design Guidelines, Volume 3-03) use occupancy data from 1983/1988 assuming one family household on a lot. This is not updated to align with the new occupancy levels of 8 unit+ multiplex the bylaw now permits. The occupancy load per lot increased tenfold.EPCOR's $1.6-billion, 20-year Stormwater Integrated Resource Plan (2019) has not been systematically re-calculated to reflect current redevelopment patterns straining neighbourhoods with older storm/sewer systems.Stormwater and sanitary capacity is estimated per lot, with no mechanism to aggregate and assess cumulative demand across a block or sewer catchment area and adjust development approvals accordingly.Edmonton is reaching a tipping point. June 21–22, 2026, an Alberta Emergency Alert issued for Edmonton recorded rainfall that pushed the stormwater system “to the brink”. EPCOR logged 600+ flooding calls and had to redistribute capacity across the system. Backups and flooding also hit Beaumont and St. Albert. (Global News June 2026).The Public Cost when Natural Infrastructure is ErodedA University of Alberta study found 48.5% urban tree canopy loss on redeveloped parcels, that is not balanced with sufficient regrowth. Edmonton’s tree canopy (mostly on private lots in older neighbourhoods) is being clear-cut by infill redevelopment removing the infrastructure benefits and protections trees provide.Tree loss removes a key natural drainage buffer and replaces it with impervious surfaces on lots, which reduces absorption of rain water.Environmental research reports that the tree loss directly contributes to urban heat island intensification.The result is soil instability and a reduction of natural drainage supports. This is contributing to construction incidents of infill sites caving in, sewage back-ups and basement flooding on adjacent properties. This is having city-wide systemic impacts. Reports on social media show mounting incidents of infill sites caving in.The Financial ExposureEdmonton's tax-supported debt hit $4.59 billion at the end of 2025 (up 5.1% year-over-year) which is 69% of its self-imposed debt-servicing limit.S&P Global (2024) projects tax-supported debt to reach ~146% of operating revenues by 2026, calling the trajectory “high compared with domestic peers.”Off-site levies exist for greenfield growth in suburbs. No equivalent cost-recovery mechanism exists for infill redevelopment in mature neighbourhoods. There is no dedicated levy on infill redevelopment to cover costs.Why This Is a Provincial MatterConstitutional: Under s.92(8), municipalities are creatures of the province with only delegated powers. Alberta has direct constitutional interest in how those powers are exercised and bearEmergency management: Alberta's Emergency Management Act gives the province backstop authority over local emergency response, including flood/stormwater events.Direct funding exposure: The province (with the federal government) has an infrastructure investment at risk. It has already put $59 million into EPCOR's stormwater plan and previously delivered $15.2B to municipalities through the Municipal Sustainability Initiative, now called the Local Government Fiscal Framework.Edmonton debt has climbed steadily – The city is now planning to issue roughly $2.2 billion in new debt to $5.9 billion by 2026 which the S & P called “high compared with domestic peers”.Precedent: The province has already signaled willingness to engage. Premier Smith publicly offered Edmonton financial “help” in 2024.Tipping Point Indicators Risk: Status Stormwater capacityStatus: Emergency Alert issued, June 2026Risk: Tree canopy / drainage bufferStatus: 48.5% loss, no regrowthRisk: Debt capacityStatus: 69% of self-imposed limitRisk: Infrastructure design data assumptionsStatus: 35–40 years out of dateRisk: Cost-recovery mechanismStatus: None exists for infill in redeveloping areasRisk: Interdepartmental coordinationStatus: Infrastructure, environment, drainage, and finance assessed in isolation, is a barrier to preventive action.The city is approving density faster than it is updating the systems, data, and financing tools meant to support it. Without provincial engagement, these pressures will compound into a cost the province cannot avoid absorbing through emergency response, infrastructure funding, or both.
To: The Honourable Dan Williams, Minister of Municipal Affairs Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent request for provincial intervention: Edmonton infill redevelopmentDear Minister Williams:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to govern its outcomes. Every month of delay compounds harm to the stability of neighbourhoods that cannot be undone.Your mandate directs to openly dialogue with municipal leaders, take timely action, and eliminate conflicts between provincial policy and municipal bylaws. Streamlined permitting should still deliver results so that urban development lets young Albertans own homes in safe, affordable, livable communities. Edmonton's implementation of Zoning Bylaw 20001 is testing each of these commitments, and the gaps are no longer minor. They call for the kind of provincial engagement your mandate anticipates and that Bill 28 is intended to correct.The core problem is the application of a zoning bylaw to solely produce permit counts and not housing and neighbourhood outcomes. Permitting is allowing a single-family lot to be split into two parcels with eight units totalling sixteen units on one original housing lot, with no review of whether the site can function safely at that scale. Developments classifi fi ed as row housing later operate as lodging houses beyond what was permitted and without application of building code safety standards. The result is small apartment buildings with shorter term rentals outside transportation corridors, the exact opposite of the intent stated by City Council and the City Plan.Appeal rights are restricted to a very narrow reading of bylaw compliance only around the building dimensions, not the site performance criteria in the zoning bylaw. In effect, the City is approving complex redevelopments in older neighbourhoods with less oversight than it affords greenfield development. Residents and developers alike describe the process as unpredictable.The consequences run directly counter to what your mandate is meant to protect. Older, more affordable homes are being bought at above-market prices, pricing out working families and young Albertans trying to enter the market.Community leagues, advocacy groups, planners, architects, real estate professionals, lawyers and residents repeatedly brought this issue forward to City Council. They made appeals to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (SDAB). Even when a permit is revoked, the City's own enforcement falls short. Bylaw rules such as the one-year resubmission bar or the freeze on demolition during an appeal go unenforced, since the City cannot enforce its own rules.This is a governance issue. It is destabilizing neighbourhoods and impacting economic growth.Alberta does not need to choose between fast permitting and effective housing in strong neighbourhoods. We are asking you to direct the following immediate actions:Cross-Ministry Review of the cumulative governance issues that impact ability to assess a range of impacts of Edmonton's infill policies on affected communities and reinstatement of local area planning processes so that it is consistent with Calgary’s model.Provincial Minimum Decision Standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate that redevelopment outcomes align with provincial policy and that development approvals comply with all provisions of the zoning bylaw and the intent of Bill 28 standards.Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restoring mandatory public notification, consultation, and meaningful appeal rights until clear regulations to restore oversight.Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton.Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve these issues urgently. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our votes. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA MUNICIPAL AFFAIRSAligning Interpretations of the Municipal Governance ActMaintain and build relationships of trust, partnership, and open dialogue with municipal leaders across the province and bring feedback and solutions from these discussions with municipal leaders to Caucus and Cabinet for timely consideration and action. The Background of How We Got HereAs part of implementing Zoning Bylaw 20001, the City repealed all Area Redevelopment Plans, the Mature Neighbourhood Overlays, and the requirement to provide direct notice to neighbouring property owners when a single-detached residential lot is proposed for redevelopment into a permitted multi-unit development.These changes came into effect simultaneously on January 1, 2024. Public surveys showed only a small proportion of residents (6%) had any idea how it would affect redevelopment of their own neighbourhoods.Neighbouring property owners retained a statutory 21-day right of appeal, However, in practice this left as little as 7 days to become aware of the proposal, understand the applicable regulations, learn about the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (SDAB) process, prepare an appeal, and fi fi le it within the statutory deadline.The City continued using their historical permitting process for triage of development approvals leaving gaps between the zoning classifications of buildings (such as, the controversial lodging houses) and the criteria use in the application of the building safety codes which differ.This massive change contributed to multiple systemic gaps with adverse impacts in how the land use bylaw is applied and how citizens are treated in the process. The Impact on Communities of NeighbourhoodsThe immediate response expressed by hundreds and later thousands of residents over the past two years was one of surprise and concern that the planning protections they had relied upon for decades had fundamentally changed. The traditional channels to express and mitigate the impacts citizens were experiencing were blocked.Repeated presentations and submissions to City Council on the impacts were ignored.Residents accessing the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board (SDAB) discover that section 685(3) of the Municipal Government Act establishes a high threshold before the impacts of a permitted development on neighbouring properties can be considered. Recent SDAB decisions have focused primarily on numerical standards (e.g., height, setbacks and site coverage) rather than whether the Zoning Bylaw's Site Performance Criteria have been demonstrated to function as intended.The cost of retaining legal counsel for an SDAB appeal commonly exceeds $15,000, placing effective access to the appeal process beyond the reach of most average homeowners. The fact that errors in law are being recognized on Leave to Appeals, increases the cost to appellants of over $30,000 as a conservative estimate.Even where an appeal succeeds, the zoning bylaw allows a developer to submit a modified proposal before the six-month reapplication period starts, leaving the legal avenue of appeal meaningless.The Risks to Governance: Eroded Confidence in the Rule of Law and Regulatory UncertaintyNeighbourhoods are increasingly turning to private restrictive covenants to achieve protections that were previously addressed through the public planning system.The growing reliance on private legal mechanisms indicates declining public confidence in the provincial planning framework and its ability to provide equitable, transparent and consistent protection of property rights.Increasing reliance on SDAB appeals and Court of Appeal proceedings to resolve fundamental questions of statutory interpretation reduces regulatory certainty, increases costs for citizens, municipalities and developers, and delays housing approvals.Recent grants of leave to appeal raise an important question of provincial significance: whether the SDAB must consider and apply the zoning bylaw in its entirety, rather than selectively applying certain provisions. Clarification from the courts is increasingly being sought where statutory duties are uncertain. Why This Is a Provincial MatterThese issues extend beyond Edmonton and ripple across the province. They affect confidence in Alberta's land-use planning system, provincial legislation, access to justice, and the province’s ability to maintain a planning framework that is fair, predictable and trusted by citizens, municipalities and the development industry alike.These trends raise broader questions about the alignment of Alberta's legislative framework. The Alberta Land Stewardship Act (ALSA) establishes that property rights are to be respected and infringed only to the extent necessary for the overall greater public interest. This principle is now in question.The legislative hierarchy from Alberta's land stewardship principles through to the Municipal Government Act to municipal zoning bylaws becomes increasingly disconnected in practice. The alignment of local planning bylaw, ALSA and the MGA is critical to a stable society and coordinated land use. The city is approving density faster than systems can keep up, creating barriers for citizens to access their rights to appeal, their voice in decision-making and their ability to protect their properties. Provincial leadership is needed to restore alignment across Alberta's legislative hierarchy, to protect properties of homeowners, the public interest in just decision-making, and reaffirm that the planning system remains fair, transparent, accountable, and worthy of public trust.
To: The Honourable Mike Ellis, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Services Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent request for provincial intervention: Edmonton infill redevelopment & unmanaged public-safety riskDear Minister Ellis:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to manage its impacts on public safety, and every month of delay compounds harm that cannot be undone.Under Edmonton's current zoning framework, large multi-unit buildings with eight or more units are now permitted as-of-right on interior lots in mature single-family neighbourhoods. This is producing a cascading, neighbourhood-level safety problem with unsecured construction sites, drainage and grading damage to neighbouring properties, on-street parking and traffic conflicts with pedestrians. There is a documented rise in fire incidents and emergency response with no system in place to manage the cumulative effects before more permits are approved.Your mandate letter commits you to "work cooperatively with the Minister of Justice [to] create a policing priority framework to assist law enforcement [to] better align their policing activities with the priorities of Albertans with respect to public safety." Events in Edmonton fall directly within this mandate. A rapid, policy-driven shift in Edmonton’s redevelopment pattern is straining emergency response, rescue and enforcement capacity beyond what current delivery models and funding were designed to manage.The evidence is stark. Infill-related incidents grew by nearly 80% between 2024 and 2025. Complaints involving infill-related activities and properties rose by more than a third. Edmonton Fire Rescue has recorded an increase in fire incidents on redeveloping properties. Residents report unsecured construction sites at night, cracked or flooded basements from grading changes, and streets transformed by construction vehicles and overflow parking. There is no single agency mandated to address the interrelated risks arising from the development site itself.As Alberta's capital, home to a large share of the province's workforce, families, and public services, the consequences of strained enforcement and emergency response in Edmonton are provincial in scope.Alberta does not need to choose between housing supply and public safety. Both objectives can be achieved through collaboration across sectors. We are asking you to direct the following immediate actions in partnership with your ministry partners:Cross-Ministry Review of the cumulative public-safety and emergency-response impacts of Edmonton's infill policies across relevant ministries.
Provincial Minimum Decision Standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate cumulative safety and service-capacity impacts before approving intensive multi-unit infill in established neighbourhoods.
Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restoring mandatory public notification, consultation, and appeal rights until clear regulations are enacted.
Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit and investment return for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve these issues urgently. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our votes. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY SERVICESPublic Safety Framework for Residential RedevelopmentKey Performance Indicators reveal a serious public safety policy gap with respect to residential infill developments within the City of Edmonton and bylaw compliance.The Public Safety Risk IndicatorsRecent indicators point to growing pressures on municipal enforcement and emergency response systems. The evidence suggests the need for a coordinated public safety governance framework across systems.The City of Edmonton's 311 Request Dataset shows that requests explicitly coded as "Infill" increased by 78.8% between 2024 and 2025. Reports involving vacant or derelict properties increased by 36.4%.Edmonton Police Service reported that total calls for service increased 5.1% and officer-generated calls increased 19.9% in 2024, although the crime rate dropped 1.3%.Edmonton experienced numerous construction and demolition fires associated with infill redevelopment. Edmonton Fire Rescue's 2024 Annual Report shows fire suppression incidents increased 26.5%. The same report identifies fires on redeveloping properties as a significant community risk. It also notes an increase in fires involving unsecured vacant properties.Residents are directed to call the City's 311 service; however, complex issues involving multiple departments often experience delayed responses, fragmented case management, and no single point of accountability.Result: Citizens' properties are suffering damage, neighbourhoods and the societal fabric is eroding, public trust is diminished, public safety is left vulnerable and citizens are without protection and with recourse.The GapTaken together, the above-noted indicators expose this public safety policy gap.Information relating to a single redevelopment project is often fragmented across planning, building safety, fire services, bylaw enforcement, police, and municipal operations. This leaves no one agency with an accurate and complete understanding of the cumulative risks or compliance history. Citizens are told to wait for a response in 3 days, when immediate action is required. The result is escalating problems and ineffective compliance.City Council is attempting to address the issues through a Compliance Team. However, the level of regulatory and operational coordination required across systems is beyond Edmonton’s capacity alone.Why This Is a Provincial MatterYour ministerial mandate emphasizes strengthening communities, improving public safety, working collaboratively with municipalities, and identifying practical solutions to emerging issues.While the City of Edmonton continues to endeavour to address these challenges, the underlying governance framework extends well beyond municipal authority. This makes coordinated provincial leadership an essential component of any long-term solution.Currently no framework exists for measuring or managing the cumulative public safety impacts of residential redevelopment. Information remains fragmented across multiple reporting systems, which is a barrier to effective intervention to keep people and their homes safe.
To: The Honourable Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors Government of AlbertaSubject: Urgent Request For Provincial Intervention: Edmonton Infill & Provincial Transportation NetworkDear Minister Dreeshen:I am writing directly to you because the pace of infill redevelopment in our neighbourhoods is rapidly outrunning the ability of the City and the Province to manage its impacts on the transportation network, and every month of delay compounds harm that cannot be undone.Redevelopment under Edmonton's Blanket Zoning Bylaw 20001, accelerated by federal Housing Accelerator Fund incentives and CMHC's MLI Select financing, is scattering multi-unit infill throughout the interiors of mature neighbourhoods. These developments are often outside transit and transportation corridors. This is producing serious impacts on the provincial road network and shifting related costs onto taxpayers, due to no system in place to manage the cumulative effects.Your mandate commits you to "develop economic corridors across the province to increase employment, economic growth," and to "continue to expand and improve Alberta's highway network and bridge infrastructure." What is happening in Edmonton falls directly within both concerns. Growth was intended to follow transportation corridors; instead, residents are forced into short feeder trips that spill onto arterial roads and provincial highways creating unintended impacts. This is reducing forecasted ridership for LRT expansion and diminishing the returns on provincial airport and economic corridor investments.The evidence is stark. Every new driveway inserted onto a road network not designed for this frequency slows traffic and increases traffic conflicts. Thousands of new access points are being added haphazardly, with minimal data collected or analyzed on their cumulative effects on arterial roads. Once these travel patterns are entrenched, they are expensive and disruptive to reverse. The current volume of approvals makes this an urgent, near-term risk rather than a distant one.As Alberta's capital and a hub for the province's energy economy, Edmonton's transportation problems ripple outward across the regional network your ministry is responsible for. This integrated network is relied upon to create a safer, better-connected highway system, including improvements like Highway 686 linking Alberta's northwestern and northeastern economic regions, that your mandate directs you to deliver.Alberta does not need to choose between housing supply and a well-functioning transportation network. Our request for your consideration will not add regulatory burden. It asks only for consistent application of authority the City already has but is not using effectively.We are asking you to direct the following immediate actions in collaboration with your ministry partners:1. Cross-Ministry Review of the cumulative transportation and infrastructure impacts of Edmonton's infill policies across relevant ministries.2. Provincial Minimum Decision Standards requiring municipalities to demonstrate cumulative traffic and parking impacts, using existing authority such as section 7.140.7 of Edmonton's Zoning Bylaw, before approving intensive multi-unit infill in established neighbourhoods.3. Restore Democratic Oversight by pausing unnotified infill approvals and restoring mandatory public notification, consultation, and appeal rights until clear regulations are enacted.4. Audit Asset Stewardship of municipal land disposition to ensure transparent stewardship and measurable public benefit and investment return for taxpayers.Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you or your designated staff. We look forward to working with your ministry to resolve this urgently.Edmontonians support responsible growth, but housing supply must not come at the expense of community stability, safety, infrastructure readiness, and our civil/property/human rights. Given the pace of approvals, we respectfully request a meeting with you. We can be reached at infillactioncampaign@gmail.com.These issues are impacting all voters, regardless of political affiliation. How the provincial government chooses to respond to this crisis will influence how Edmontonians will cast our votes. We are all looking to the provincial government for decisive leadership to restore accountability and protect taxpayers. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]INFORMATION SHEET: ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC CORRIDORS Edmonton is approving infill density lot-by-lot with no tool that tests cumulative traffic, parking, or safety impact and it has no funding mechanism through levies to fix the roads once it does. The widening gap between local streets and the provincial highway network adversely impacts people movement and economic outcomes. The BackgroundEdmonton's zoning bylaw permitting 8+ (up to12 and more) dwellings within the neighbourhood is not supported by traffic/parking impact analysis. A single lot replaced by 8 households can add 12+ more vehicles onto a street never designed for that load.Parking shortfall: Where parking is under-supplied by the units and is pushed onto already-constrained streets.Risk Monitoring: Edmonton's Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) process is designed for large developments not to infill-scale projects, even though a number of small infill across a neighbourhood can have more impacts.Congestion impacts: traffic slowdowns, compromised emergency vehicle access, increased accidents.District Plans: Edmonton’s District Policy is explicit (Policy 3.3.1.2) that the City will “minimize roadway network expansion for vehicles by accommodating increased transportation demand through Active Transportation and Transit”. Active transportation is walking, cycling and rolling (scooters, skates). The Risk FactorsTransportation engineering studies recognize that redevelopment creates new additional conflict points. Infills generate new and higher lane traffic volumes, more maneuvers, more pedestrian interactions.U.S. studies show that doubling access points raises crash (accident) rates by 40% and this triples at driveways.The City of Edmonton’s Comprehensive Parking Study (Phase 1 Technical Study, Nelson/Nygard) found that high-occupancy redevelopment in mature neighbourhoods creates unique site-specific management challenges.Edmonton’s 311 calls related to infill increased by 78% in 2024-2025. Edmonton Police Service reported service calls increased 5.1% and officer-generated calls increased 19.9%, although the crime rate dropped 1.3%.Edmonton Fire Rescue's 2024 Annual Report shows fi fi re suppression incidents increased 26.5%. The Critical GapsThe City’s stated goal is to re-allocate road space to accommodate multiple modes of transportation: vehicles, transit and active transportation which includes scooters, bicycles, wheelchairs, etc. This will alter roadway capacity, emergency response routes, freight movement to provincial highways, services and worker movement.As residential intensification increases, project-by-project fragmented development will add to this risk.Edmonton's density strategy assumes transit-oriented development will reduce driving. The City's Mass Transit Backgrounder suggests something different: that the public transit mode share has been stuck at 8.6% since 1994, even as the region has grown.The same City report shows that half of all city jobs are now in outer suburban areas, where transit mode share is under 3%. This means jobs are “more dispersed and more difficult to serve” through public transit.Most infill redevelopment in older neighbourhoods is outside priority growth and transit corridor areas, and the new residents of these developments will need cars to access jobs and services.The report also states that residents do not use transit on short trips: the average commute outside downtown is only 6.5 km, and 4% use transit for these trips.The Mass Transit Backgrounder also notes that many automobile trips are driven by employment rather than by residential density alone. In other words, workers will be living in one place and will need cars to access work in dispersed locations across the region, where public transportation does not go efficiently. The Funding GapAlberta authorizes a municipal levy specifically to fund local-to-highway connector roads. But Edmonton's levy funds only support fi fi re halls. This leaves no dedicated infill-generated revenue for roads impacted by new infills.The City is short $1.8 billion of its $4.4 billion road and bridge repair backlog. Council's proposed dedicated road-repair property tax addresses 60% of what the city needs by 2048 (Edmonton Taproot).The combined effect of infill outside of transportation corridors, stressed arterial roads, increased vehicle traffic will increase ongoing repair costs. The City does not have an exercised levy to repair the problem. Why This Is a Provincial MatterEdmonton is a regional economic hub: local street performance connects directly to the provincial highway network.The Province bears many of the downstream consequences.Re-allocating road space for multiple modes of movement requires a high level of coordination between housing redevelopment and people/goods movement that currently does not exist. Tipping Point IndicatorsIndicator: Parking pad/roadway access points increase rapidlySupporting Fact: A single infill lot can add up to 12 new cars moving on narrow residential streets that provide access to arterial roads that connect to highways.Indicator: Parking lagging unit growthSupporting Fact: ~1 stall built per 2–3 new infill units; overflow onto local streetsIndicator: Highway-connector levy unusedSupporting Fact: Provincially authorized, but Edmonton's version funds only fire hallsIndicator: Road repair backlogSupporting Fact: $1.8B short of a $4.4B total repair billIndicator: Cumulative impact testingSupporting Fact: TIA process exists but not designed to assess infill-scale developmentIndicator: People and Economic movement patterns on city streets and provincial highwaysSupporting Fact: Public transit represents 3% mode share to zones holding ~half of city jobs”, thus the economy depends on car transportation largely.The city is approving traffic-generating density faster than it can assess, manage, or afford to fix the roads that support movement of traffic that supports the provincial economy. Tools are limited to catch cumulative impacts, and the levy that could fund the fix is insufficient. The gap connecting roadway performance and economic outcome is widening, as vehicle traffic is likely to increase beyond the City’s expectation without data analysis and realistic modelling of options and risks.
The Honourable Mickey AmeryMinister of Justice Government of AlbertaCalgary.Cross@assembly.ab.ca Request for a Cross-Ministry Review of Alberta's Legislative Framework for Access to Justice in Modern Residential Redevelopment______________________________________________________________________________ Dear Minister Amery:While Alberta's leadership in housing supply is a clear economic strength, Edmonton's Blanket Zoning Bylaw 20001, reinforced by federal Housing Accelerator Fund incentives, has exposed a significant governance gap. Modern multi-unit infill now affects infrastructure, public safety, transportation, environmental management, social services, municipal finance, property rights and dispute resolution simultaneously, yet these impacts continue to be assessed largely through separate systems. Alberta's legal and administrative framework must evolve as rapidly as the redevelopment it is intended to govern.What began as a municipal planning issue has evolved into a governance and access-to-justice issue. As redevelopment intensifies, disputes between neighbouring property owners have become more complex and often extend beyond the authority of any single decision-maker. Citizens must navigate multiple agencies, tribunals and courts, with each responsible for only part of the problem. This fragmented system has not kept pace with modern redevelopment and warrants a review of whether the Alberta Bill of Rights, the Municipal Government Act and municipal land-use bylaws continue to work together to protect legal rights and provide effective access to justice.Despite years of public feedback, legal appeals, and community engagement, opportunities for meaningful public participation have narrowed as the scale and intensity of as-of-right redevelopment in Edmonton have increased. We respectfully request that your Ministry work with its relevant ministry partners to examine whether Alberta's legislative framework has kept pace with this fundamental shift and continues to provide meaningful protection of legal rights and effective access to justice for all those affected.Why this MattersThe nature of permitted development that applies to all Edmonton residential neighbourhoods has fundamentally changed, but the governance system has not. Alberta's appeal and planning framework was designed when a permitted development typically meant a single home on a lot. Today, permitted developments may include eight or more dwellings with cumulative impacts related to site functioning which extend well beyond individual building standards. Assessing these apartment-style developments on formerly single-family lots increasingly requires coordinated consideration of infrastructure, transportation, emergency access, environmental management and neighbouring property impacts. Yet the regulatory and dispute-resolution systems continue to assess these issues largely through separate processes and agencies. This governance gap increases costs, delays and disputes while shifting impacts onto broader provincial systems.As more municipalities across Alberta permit greater density on existing lots, complex disputes spanning multiple sectors and government responsibilities will become increasingly common. A coordinated provincial legal and administrative framework would provide greater clarity, improve access to timely dispute resolution, and protect individual and public interests for equitable outcomes. To view photos, click here. (Online only)Our Requests to the Province:We respectfully ask your Ministry, Premier Smith and Cabinet to take immediate action to: 1. Undertake a Legal and Policy Review - Work with Municipal Affairs to review whether Alberta's legislative framework keeps pace with modern residential redevelopment and continues to protect legal rights and access to justice respecting issues raised in this letter.2. Recommend Legislative Improvements - Where gaps are identified, recommend legislative or policy reforms and support a cross-ministry approach to improve coordination, clarify responsibilities and strengthen access to justice.One potential outcome may be consideration of a specialized early dispute-resolution process.This issue requires urgent attention. This governance and access-to-justice gap increases costs, delays and disputes while shifting impacts onto broader provincial systems. Repeated reliance on civil litigation, restrictive covenants and Court of Appeal proceedings suggests the current planning framework is not resolving conflict at the earliest, lowest-cost stage, which has impacts on the Justice system.This is a non-partisan issue affecting Albertans across the political spectrum, and it matters to all citizens in where they place their confidence.Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully submitted, Concerned Citizen of Edmonton ccThe Honourable Dan Williams, Minister of Municipal Affairs, The Honourable Grant Hunter, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas, The Honourable Martin Long, Minister of Infrastructure, The Honourable Nathan Neudorf, Minister of Assisted Living and Social Services, The Honourable Mike Ellis, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Services, The Honourable Devin Dreeshan, Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors AND The Honourable Danielle Smith, Premier of Alberta Information SHEET: Alberta JusticeProperty Rights, Access to Justice and Prevention of ConflictsEdmonton’s infill redevelopment framework is creating a growing class of disputes between the owner developing a property and neighbouring owners who bear the off-site impacts. These conflicts increasingly engage provincial interests in property rights, fair proces and tribunal efficiency and efficacy.Justice Mandate Intersection with Rapid Densification in Residential Infill• Strengthened property rights: The Justice mandate identifies the 2024 amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights as a major achievement, including stronger property rights and more effective enforcement of rights.• Tribunal capacity and timely adjudication: The mandate directs Justice to increase support for Alberta’s courts and administrative tribunals so that matters are decided in a timely manner.• Protection of Rights: The governance framework related to property disputes warrant a review in the face of rapid redevelopment to balance enjoyment of individual property rights with managed growth.Property Rights Vulnerability· The 2024 amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights place renewed emphasis on property rights. This highlights the importance of a legal framework that enables timely, affordable and fair resolution of property disputes.· Municipal powers come from the Province - While the courts deliberate on Alberta Bill of Rights, the Province has an interest in its planning laws protecting all property owners with fair and accessible dispute resolution.The Growing Issue of Asymmetrical Rights· Developers receive a clear approval process and the financial benefit of increased density. Neighbours receive limited or no notice, and unrealistic appeal period, and restricted appeal rights.· Under section 685(3) of the Municipal Government Act, neighbours must first prove the Development Authority varied, relaxed, or misinterpreted the bylaw before the Subdivision Development Appeal Board (SDAB) can hear the impacts. · As permitted development has evolved from a single dwelling to eight or more dwellings, the focus of appeals has remained largely on individual building metrics rather than whether the site functions safely and effectively as an integrated development. Yet appeals still focus largely on building metrics, more than on zoning regulations related to whether the site functions safely.· Disputes over drainage, excavation, privacy, tree loss, and construction impacts often span multiple regulators, leaving no single forum to resolve them quickly and fairly.· Development permits may be issued before ownership transfers. When problems arise during this period, it is not clear whether the registered owner or the developer is accountable for compliance, enforcement, or damages.Governance and Access to Justice Gap· SDAB is a municipal appellate tribunal and operates within a provincial statutory framework. Unclear and/or inadequate jurisdiction, uncertainty about ownership, inconsistent legal tests increase costs, cause delay and consume judicial resources.· The current appeal model is adversarial, expensive and technical. Where the issue is related to an impact conflict, on an existing property and/or property owner's rights, the Subdivision Development Appeal Board (SDAB) may be unable to offer a homeowner with a practical remedy.· Repeated recourse to restrictive covenants, civil claims and Court of Appeal proceedings is a warning that the public planning system is not resolving conflict at the lowest-cost and earliest stage.Why This is an Important Provincial InterestThe Province of Alberta has strengthened property rights and has a clear interest in ensuring municipal planning systems are accountable for their outcomes. By promoting greater certainty for homeowners, municipalities, and developers, the Province can help prevent conflicts before they arise, reduce unnecessary appeals and court proceedings, and avoid significant downstream costs associated with enforcement and public safety.
To: The Honourable Danielle Smith, Premier of AlbertaSubject: Urgent Request for Provincial Oversight: Edmonton's Infill and Zoning FrameworkDear Premier Smith:We are writing to you to respectfully request that the Government of Alberta take a direct role in coordinating a cross-ministry response to the issues arising from fragmented redevelopment planning occurring in the City of Edmonton.Affordability, public safety, health of citizens, roadways, infrastructure capacity, economic production and urban financial solvency are impacted by rapid and uncoordinated redevelopment activity within the City of Edmonton. The outcomes are significant and out of step with other municipalities. This limits the Province's ability to identify and manage the cumulative risks that arise to its level as redevelopment accelerates across the city and puts both municipal assets and provincial objectives at risk. The situation has now reached the level of provincial interest and engagement to correct course.The letters attached to your ministry leaders explain the details. They request a coordinated response among multiple provincial and municipal agencies to correct the situation.Although each of these issues fall within a distinct ministerial mandate, they all stem from the same underlying problem of rapid redevelopment without regard to the impact on the lives of citizens, security of homeowners, economic growth, infrastructure solvency, housing affordability and transportation effectiveness. No single ministry, municipality, or stakeholder is positioned to resolve them independently.To be clear, we are not asking the Alberta Government to assume municipal planning responsibilities. Rather, we are asking you to consider three questions:Do Edmonton's redevelopment outcomes remain aligned with Alberta's broader economic, housing, infrastructure goals?Would greater provincial coordination help both the Province and the City align these objectives across regulatory functions and within City of Edmonton departments?Are citizens sufficiently engaged in solving the redevelopment issues they see unfolding in their own communities?Please view these photos and videos we’ve collected about the current state of infill redevelopment in Edmonton. We respectfully ask that the Government of Alberta facilitate collaboration among the relevant ministries and the City of Edmonton to address these issues as a single, integrated policy challenge, rather than a collection of disconnected jurisdictional concerns.A coordinated provincial approach would strengthen housing aligned with expressed needs of all citizens, protect property enjoyment, save the environmental features important to our city, protect our infrastructure, allow unfettered movement across our city and ensure our safety. It would position Alberta as a national leader in integrated urban policy.Most importantly, it would help secure the long-term prosperity, competitiveness, and quality of life for the nearly half of Alberta's population who live in Edmonton and its surrounding metropolitan and regional communities: communities whose economic and social well-being is closely tied to Edmonton's success.Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,[your name][your email address][location]
Fill Out These Forms to Send Infill Action Letters to the Government of Alberta
Once you submit this form, the eight letters mentioned above will be automatically sent to the Government of Alberta ministers on your behalf. The information collected will not be shared outside of this campaign.
Edmonton Infill in Pictures
bottom of page