Which kinds of homes the land-use rules allow, where they can be built and how applications are approved. People are shown across their recorded careers unless dates are set.
Reviewed decisions
10
Sourced statements
0
Evidence last reviewed
Oct 30, 2026
Broader residential permissions
Reviewed land-use decisions where the direction of residential building permissions is explicit. Broader permission does not establish that a home was built. Contextual amendments do not each become another independent score.
Only reviewed policy choices are scored. Each independent decision family counts once per measure; choices within one budget or policy package share that family’s weight. statements, promises, absences and contextual amendments do not contribute. Two decisions are the minimum for a position. The sensitivity range shows the score after removing one decision at a time; it is not a statistical confidence interval or a prediction.
Bylaw 70D2026 changed 1323 – 10 Avenue SE from R-CG to H-GO.
Outcome: Final reading carried with all 14 named voters in favour. Farkas has no named vote in this roll call. Zoning approval does not establish construction.
Bylaw 27D2026 replaced the parcel’s Direct Control designation with H-GO in Killarney/Glengarry. City report CPC2026-0069 describes a density increase and wider housing choice.
Outcome: Final reading carried with all 15 members in favour. A development application was under review; this vote does not establish construction.
Bylaw 17D2026 replaced R-CG with H-GO at 2001 and 2007 – 37 Street SE.
Outcome: Final reading carried with all 14 named voters in favour. Schmidt has no named vote in this roll call. Zoning approval does not establish development completion.
The Glendale application proposed changing a residential parcel from R-CG to H-GO, a district permitting a higher intensity of ground-oriented housing.
Outcome: The final reading carried 15–0. This changed land-use permission and did not establish construction completion.
Council directed work on exempting fee-simple townhouse and rowhouse developments in newly developing communities from development-permit requirements.
Outcome: Council directed preparation of amendments and an update. This direction alone did not enact the exemption.
Give final reading to the replacement of H-GO with R-CG.
The minutes explicitly change H-GO to R-CG. The City identifies H-GO as the higher-intensity redevelopment option (source), so a Yes counts toward narrower permissions. No motive is inferred.
Give final reading to higher-intensity grade-oriented residential permissions.
The minutes specify R-CG to H-GO, which the City describes as allowing higher-intensity redevelopment (source). Only final reading is scored; a missing individual vote is unknown.
Approve the proposed H-GO district for these parcels.
The City's planning report explicitly identifies a residential density increase and more housing choices compared with the existing Direct Control district. Only this site-specific application is scored.
CPC2026-0069 identifies this specific DC-to-H-GO proposal as increasing residential density and housing choice. Only final reading is scored; the recommendation’s confidential-submission direction is not a separate policy score.
The minutes explicitly change H-GO to R-CG. The City identifies H-GO as the higher-intensity redevelopment option (source), so a Yes counts toward narrower permissions. No motive is inferred.
The minutes specify R-CG to H-GO, which the City describes as allowing higher-intensity redevelopment (source). Only final reading is scored; a missing individual vote is unknown.
The City's planning report explicitly identifies a residential density increase and more housing choices compared with the existing Direct Control district. Only this site-specific application is scored.
CPC2026-0069 identifies this specific DC-to-H-GO proposal as increasing residential density and housing choice. Only final reading is scored; the recommendation’s confidential-submission direction is not a separate policy score.
Attributed statements, recorded choices and campaign commitments retain separate labels. Month/year dates retain their precision; undated records appear last. Promises show their full lifecycle.
Statements and reasons for votes
No sourced statements collected
This is a gap in the collected evidence; it does not establish a person’s views.
These are attributed statements, separate from voting scores. Date filters exclude undated sources.
Promises and actions
No sourced commitments collected
A missing commitment is not a finding that someone made no promises.
Commitments and their sourced milestones are shown across their full lifecycle, independently of the vote-date filter.
This view could not be loaded. Check your connection and try again.