Frequently Asked Questions

A restrictive covenant (RC) is a private contract between neighbours that is registered against their land titles. The contents of an RC depend on the agreement made between the neighbours. The restrictive covenant creates a private property right that runs with the land. Signing onto a restrictive covenant is voluntary.

Restrictive covenants are not new and have been around for over 100 years in Edmonton. Before zoning bylaws became the norm, RCs were used to identify architectural guidelines and what types of land uses and buildings could be built on each street in a community.

Restrictive covenants are a way for neighbours to preserve the distinct residential character of their area and restrict the type of development on their local streets. Many people feel that blanket rezoning and other planning policies are putting this character at risk. Residents who elect to apply a restrictive covenant to their property are helping their neighbours and themselves by protecting the features they enjoy in their community.

Restrictive covenants were very common in the 1950s and earlier when there were no zoning bylaws controlling development. There has been a dramatic shift in planning policies in Edmonton over the past few years to increase density in established neighbourhoods. The most notable change was the blanket rezoning of all residential properties in 2023 to RS zoning, which allows rowhouses in addition to single-family and semi-detached homes.

Since rowhouses have a much larger building envelope, they can overwhelm and overshadow neighbouring homes, reduce trees and soft landscaping, and significantly change the character of a street. The addition of 8-12 dwelling units on one lot increases intensity of use and can create parking problems, among many other issues.

Homeowners would register a restrictive covenant on their land titles to benefit their neighbours and themselves by ensuring the preservation of the character of their street. Most people purchased their homes on the understanding that their street would remain a single-family area and that other homes on their street would have similar lot coverage and setbacks even after renovations and upgrades.

This creates a consistent streetscape and allows for a generous amount of greenery including large trees. It also reduces the potential for overshadowing and overlooking of neighbouring properties, which can negatively impact quality of life and property values.

The single-family residential areas of Glenora are characterized by a mature tree canopy, pedestrian pathways, small parks, and a quiet community-centered atmosphere. The homes in Glenora are highly sought after and turnover is relatively low. Many residents are the original homeowners, and many are young families who have chosen to live in Glenora — including many who were raised here and chose to move back to raise their own families.

The desire to own a single-family home is very strong in Edmonton. As these single-family areas become more scarce, demand will increase.

Restrictive covenants that limit each property to one dwelling unit plus one basement suite and/or garage suite would prevent the construction of multi-family infills and apartment buildings that would overshadow adjacent homes and create additional traffic and parking congestion. This enables the preservation of the mature urban tree canopy and soft landscaping. Restrictive covenants are one tool to help preserve single-family residential areas. They are enforced by neighbours and have been consistently upheld by the courts.

A restrictive covenant is a “burden” on the land. This means it restricts what the landowner can do on the property. In this case, it would prevent landowners from subdividing their lands or building anything other than a single-family home, possibly with a basement suite or garage suite. This also impacts future owners of your property. For example, a person who buys or inherits the land would be prevented from replacing the house with a higher-density development on that lot.

It is difficult to change a restrictive covenant after registration. Removing or modifying one requires an application to the courts. Restrictive covenants on a street may make these properties more desirable for an individual or family to purchase. It increases certainty for purchasers who want to live on a low-density residential street and want assurances that future developments will follow the same single-family development pattern.

Most developers, however, want to increase the density of properties they purchase, so a restrictive covenant would discourage a developer with that intention from purchasing land with an RC registered against it.

It generally takes several months to apply to get an RC discharged by Court Order, and other property owners subject to the restrictive covenant would likely oppose it. It is a time-consuming and frequently expensive process that is often seen by developers as a reason to buy properties without restrictive covenants. While many people will want a restrictive covenant on their property, some may choose not to for various reasons. The greater the number of people who sign a restrictive covenant, the more effective it becomes. Even if there are gaps between properties with restrictive covenants, it helps prevent the accumulation of multiple properties for larger development projects (also known as land assembly).

No. The proposed restrictive covenant does not conflict with Edmonton’s Land Use Bylaw. The City of Edmonton’s recent amendment uses permissive wording and allows for several different residential built forms: single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplexes, rowhouses, townhouses, secondary suites, and backyard suites.

The restrictive covenant would not conflict with the bylaw by limiting redevelopment to single-family dwellings, as that is a use permitted under the new base zoning. The RC would limit the impact of the recent land use bylaw amendment.

Restrictive covenants typically last indefinitely unless they include a specific expiration date. Restrictive covenants registered against a property’s title continue to affect the land and its owners unless they are modified or discharged.

The cost is a one-time, non-refundable fee of $150.00 for each property. Initially, these funds will cover the cost of legal fees and disbursements related to drafting and registering the restrictive covenant.

If income exceeds expenses, the remainder of the funds may seed a legal defence fund held in trust by Ogilvie LLP. Eventually, Ogilvie LLP would transfer the unused funds to a group established to administer the legal defence fund.

If you require financial assistance, please email glenora.rc@gmail.com, and the team can assist.

Any person who has signed the same restrictive covenant can enforce it. Enforcement can be done by a single individual or a group of signatories to the RC.

Those who have signed onto the restrictive covenant can bring an application to the Court to enforce it. This can include seeking a court injunction against the construction of a building that does not comply.

Similarly, if the owner of a property subject to a restrictive covenant applies to the Court to have the covenant removed, other neighbours who have signed onto the covenant can oppose the application. Notice of such a court application must be given to all properties subject to the covenant.

If property owners whose properties have restrictive covenants do not defend them, developers may choose to ignore them. Neighbourhoods that vigorously defend their RCs discourage developers from disregarding them and encourage them to invest elsewhere. The success rate in maintaining restrictive covenants is very high, as most RCs are upheld by the courts.

The City cannot enforce or remove a restrictive covenant, as they are private contracts. Property owners must enforce restrictive covenants.

To help with this, we are working to establish a legal defence fund. Any funds that are surplus to actual legal costs will be used to establish this defence fund. The greater the number of homeowners who participate in the RC initiative, the more funds will be available for future court actions.

Some Edmonton communities such as Old Glenora (Carruthers Caveat), Westbrook, Hardisty, Rio Terrace, and Crestwood have older restrictive covenants that were implemented when their communities were built. Others have recently begun to implement RCs in response to rezoning.

There are also many Calgary communities that have implemented restrictive covenants in response to similar bylaw amendments.