Summary#

Calgary Council passed Bylaw 110D2026 on October 6, 2026. It changes the land-use district for 1.31 hectares at 1603 – 24 Avenue SE and 2501 Alyth Road SE in Alyth/Bonnybrook, Ward 9, from Industrial – Heavy (I-H) to Industrial – Edge (I-E). City staff say the goal is to support the site’s existing and future uses while reducing the potential for conflicts with nearby homes.

• The change applies to the two parcels at those addresses.
• The land remains industrial, but the I-H district is replaced by I-E.
• Council passed the bylaw unanimously, 15 to 0.
• No development permit application had been submitted when City staff prepared their report; this decision does not approve a specific development.

What it means for you#

• Property owner and businesses on the site: City staff say the I-E district allows a broader range of uses suited to existing tenants and gives the owner more leasing flexibility. The owner named in the report is 703825 Alberta Ltd.
• Nearby residents: The district change removes the potential for uses allowed under I-H that could create off-site nuisances or conflicts, according to City staff. It does not guarantee that future development will avoid impacts.
• The public: The decision changes land-use rules for these parcels; it does not itself build or approve a project. One member of the public spoke at the hearing. City staff reported receiving no public comments through their circulation process.

Money#

City staff reported no anticipated financial impact.

• The materials provide no cost estimate for the landowner, businesses, or future development.

What is unclear#

• The materials do not list the exact uses or development rules allowed under I-E. The Land Use Bylaw text was not supplied, so the full difference between I-H and I-E could not be checked.
• No development permit application was submitted, so the form and effects of any future project are unknown.
• The hearing record does not state the position taken by the person who spoke.

Case for#

• City staff say I-E would better fit the site’s proximity to residential land while preserving its industrial function.
• Staff say the change reduces the potential for heavy industrial activities that may be unsuitable near homes.
• Staff say it supports existing businesses, future uses, and continued use of a heritage asset.

Case against#

• The site remains industrial. A change of district does not by itself ensure that future uses or development will have no effects on nearby residents.
• The decision was made without a specific development proposal to assess, so the practical effects will depend on what is proposed later.
• The materials do not explain the precise uses I-E permits, making it hard to judge what activities may replace uses allowed under I-H.