Summary#

Council passed Bylaw 100D2026 at third reading on September 15, 2026. It changes the land use district for 1.89 hectares at 10717R–84 Street NE, in Residual Sub-Area 5F (Ward 5), from Special Purpose – Future Urban Development to Special Purpose – Community Institution. The stated aim of the application was to allow a place of worship and related uses; approval of the land use change does not itself approve a building or development.

• The land is now in the Community Institution district, which the City report says would allow a place of worship and other associated uses.
• The applicant’s submission described an intended place of worship for 500 people, with space for community events and educational programming.
• Council approved the change despite the Calgary Planning Commission’s recommendation to refuse it. The vote was 14 to 1; Councillor Wyness voted against.

What it means for you#

• The landowner and Radha Madhav Cultural Association: The land use designation now allows the proposed institutional use. A development permit and subdivision application had not been submitted when City staff wrote their report.
• People who may use the site: The application describes a possible place of worship and related activities, but the bylaw does not require that this development be built or set its final details.
• Nearby residents and the public: The site has no City water, sanitary or stormwater connections, and access is by a private gravel road. The land use change does not itself provide those services or approve a servicing plan.

Money#

No cost estimate is available; City staff said the City had no funding to extend services to the site.

• Staff said service and financial implications were unknown. The proposal may rely on private servicing, but its details and long-term costs were unknown.
• Staff said future infrastructure needs could affect City capital and operating budgets.

What is unclear#

• Whether, when or how the proposed development will proceed, and what its final design and operating details would be.
• How the site would be serviced and accessed, and who would pay for any required infrastructure.
• People spoke at the public hearing, but the supplied minutes do not give their views. Late confidential submissions were also distributed, but their contents are not available here.

Case for#

• The applicant’s submission described a place of worship for 500 people, with space for community events and educational programming.
• City staff said the proposal may provide added space for members of the faith community and residents in northeast Calgary.

Case against#

• City staff recommended refusal, saying the area has no approved Area Structure Plan and that a permanent use could limit comprehensive future planning.
• Staff said the site lacks City water, sanitary and stormwater services. They warned that private servicing was unconfirmed and could bring feasibility and long-term maintenance risks.
• Councillor Wyness voted against the change. The supplied materials do not state the reason for the vote.