The City of Calgary is inviting public feedback on future floodplain policies and regulations. Engagement opportunities are occurring between January 29 to March 3, 2024 via the Calgary River Valleys Project. Feedback is being accepted in an online survey available at engage.calgary.ca/rivervalleys.
CRCAG’s board and committees have met to discuss the survey and potential responses. This resource details the responses that were agreed upon and provides additional context and comments where necessary.
This resource has been provided as information for members to consider as they craft their own responses.
CRCAG Board
CRCAG’S RESPONSES TO THE CALGARY RIVER VALLEYS PROJECT SURVEY
For each of the survey tabs, there is a coloured section in this deck
For each of the “cards” within the survey tabs, we’ve provided:
our suggested response
any additional context or copy, where deemed necessary.
HOW TO READ THIS RESOURCE
Access the survey:
Deadline is March 3
CITY WIDE QUESTIONS
This section captures questions from the City Wide Questions tab.
---
Housing
Be consistent. Use the same climate change resilience as has been designed into mitigation projects.
Climate Change
Retain undeveloped areas of the Floodway and High Hazard Flood Fringe - room for the river.
New Development (Greenfield)
Build community mitigation and insist that the Province build upstream mitigation.
Support for Homeowners
CITY WIDE QUESTIONS
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
This section captures questions from the Flood Hazard Area Zones tab.
Floodway
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Build community mitigation and insist that the Province build upstream mitigation.
Other comments:
Floodway
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
---
Question 1 context:
High Hazard Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Existing properties need to be able to maintain and enhance their property so they can continue to hold value and be a nice place to live.
Question 3 context:
---
Question 1 context:
---
Question 2 context:
There is a risk of over-regulating. The City needs to be sensitive to the many building owners that would be impacted in this new zone. We are advocating to keep regulatory flexibility.
Other comments
High Hazard Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
---
Other comments:
This question lumps density, land use, and building design together and asks for a single response. Very poor question design, thus we’ve not much choice but neutral.
Question 1 context:
No firm definition of “living spaces” is provided to help answer this question. This makes providing a confident and informed answer very difficult.
Question 2 context:
Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Protected Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
---
Other comments:
---
Question 1 context:
If we cannot quantify the impacts yet, how can we reasonably craft regulations at this time?
Question 2 context:
Protected Flood Fringe
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Areas with Upstream Flood Mitigation
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Draft flood hazard zones along the Elbow River between Glenmore Dam and the Bow River confluence are not being displayed in the online flood map viewer and information related to flood hazard zones in draft reports has been removed.
If the maps for these zones have not been released to the public yet, why is the City seeking public feedback on how to regulate these areas?
Remove this question from the survey — it is irrelevant to the purpose of the survey.
Other comments:
---
Question 1 context:
If we cannot quantify the impacts yet, how can we reasonably craft regulations at this time? For example, how groundwater impacts these areas.
Question 2 context:
Areas with Upstream Flood Mitigation
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
Groundwater
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
---
Other comments:
Groundwater
FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONES
LAND USE PLANNING
This section captures questions from the Land Use Planning tab.
Density and Regulatory Options - Secondary Suites
LAND USE PLANNING
---
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
Density and Regulatory Options - Secondary Suites
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
LAND USE PLANNING
Density and Regulatory Options - Residential Density
LAND USE PLANNING
The High Hazard Flood Fringe question doesn’t make sense - if you can only replace an existing single detached dwelling on the same footprint, why would subdivision even be brought up?
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Density and Regulatory Options - Residential Density
LAND USE PLANNING
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Land Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
For any existing commercial, institutional, industrial in the zone, we advocate to grandfather the building in (e.g. schools and medical centers).
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
Although it is unclear whether the commercial, institutional, industrial reference is to new or existing buildings, CRCAG’s involvement in community conversation we understand it refers to new buildings.
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Land Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Vulnerable Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
1:100 is what we are designing to and 1:200 is a future aspirational target. We should not be putting property level restrictions in for future state.
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Vulnerable Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Polluting Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
---
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Land Use in Flood Risk Areas - Polluting Uses
LAND USE PLANNING
Building and Site Design - Main Floor Elevations
LAND USE PLANNING
1:100 is what we are designing to and 1:200 is a future aspirational target. We should not be putting property level restrictions in for future state. The inclusion of 1:200 is outside the scope of this survey.
Further, there should be no limitation in protected areas. These areas are protected to the provincial design standard. If that standard must be raised then the installed mitigation must also be raised.
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
There is no option to submit an answer to this question. Please use the copy of what we provided for “Other comments”.
Protected Areas context:
Building and Site Design - Main Floor Elevations
LAND USE PLANNING
No
Building and Site Design - Building Footprint
LAND USE PLANNING
---
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Building and Site Design - Building Footprint
LAND USE PLANNING
Building and Site Design - Basements
LAND USE PLANNING
What is the point of backflow valves or sump pumps in a new home to address river flooding?
Other comments:
---
Floodway context:
---
High Hazard Flood Fringe context:
---
Flood Fringe context:
---
Protected Areas context:
Building and Site Design - Basements
LAND USE PLANNING
Areas with Upstream Protection
LAND USE PLANNING
Draft flood hazard zones along the Elbow River between Glenmore Dam and the Bow River confluence are not being displayed in the online flood map viewer and information related to flood hazard zones in draft reports has been removed.
If the maps for these zones have not been released to the public yet, why is the City seeking public feedback on how to regulate these areas?
Remove this question from the survey — it is irrelevant to the purpose of the survey.
Comments on the approach:
Areas with Upstream Protection
LAND USE PLANNING