WHY SIGN THE WWWCC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT?

 

Perhaps we should stop thinking of it as a Restrictive Covenant and start thinking of it for what it is intended to be:

​

A Protective Covenant.

​

This is about protecting something most of us have spent decades building — the value, character, livability and long-term desirability of our homes and neighbourhoods.

Edmonton's zoning rules have changed significantly. What may now be permitted on a residential property can look very different from what existed when many of us purchased our homes.

​

So the question is no longer simply:

“What is beside my house today?”

The more important question is:

“What could be beside my house tomorrow?”

That is where the WWWCC Restrictive Covenant matters.

​

CITY ZONING AND A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ARE NOT THE SAME THING

​

This is an important distinction.

City zoning determines what the City may approve. A restrictive covenant is a separate private property right registered on title that a developer must also consider.

In fact, the City of Edmonton itself acknowledges that even where a proposed development complies with zoning, other requirements — including restrictive covenants and caveats registered on title — may still need to be considered by the applicant.

That is precisely why this covenant matters.

The City may change its zoning regulations over time. A properly registered private covenant creates an additional layer of protection attached to participating properties.

It does not replace zoning.

It works separately from it.

​

THERE IS STRENGTH IN NUMBERS

​

Once properly registered, the covenant runs with the land. It does not simply disappear when a participating homeowner sells. The covenant remains attached to the property for future owners, subject to the terms of the covenant and applicable law.

And this is where participation becomes so important.

The more properties that participate, the stronger the network of protected properties becomes.

Imagine a developer considering purchasing a property surrounded by homes participating in the same restrictive covenant.

The developer doesn't simply look at Edmonton's zoning map.

They also have to look at title.

And there sits the covenant.

​

Could someone attempt to challenge, modify or remove a restrictive covenant? Yes. No responsible committee should tell residents that an RC can never be challenged.

But having to deal with a registered covenant is very different from purchasing an unrestricted property and simply proceeding under the zoning bylaw.

The covenant creates another legal consideration — and potentially another significant hurdle.

​

SOMETIMES THE BEST PROTECTION IS THE DETERRENT ITSELF

​

We may never have to enforce this covenant.

That could be its greatest success.

Consider the small infill builder or developer looking for their next property.

They have two potential lots.

One has no restrictive covenant.

The other has a registered covenant and sits among numerous other properties participating in the same covenant.

Which is the easier property to pursue?

The covenant may cause that developer to simply move on because of the cost of going to court to remove the covenant - the greater the number of properties subject to the covenant, the greater the cost to the developer to remove the covenant.

The best dispute is often the one that never has to happen.

​

NOW LOOK AT IT THROUGH THE EYES OF A BUYER

​

Imagine two comparable cul-de-sacs directly across from one another.

Each has a home for sale.

Same approximate size.

Same condition.

Similar price.

Similar lot.

Same schools, parks and neighbourhood amenities.

But there is one important difference.

​

On the first cul-de-sac, the homes participate in a restrictive covenant designed to preserve the area's predominantly low-density residential character.

On the second cul-de-sac, there is no such protection.

​

Which home gives the buyer greater certainty about what may happen around them in the future?

We are already seeing buyers ask questions about infill and redevelopment when considering established Edmonton neighbourhoods.

It is becoming part of the conversation.

Because buyers aren't just buying a house.

They are buying the street.

They are buying their surroundings.

They are buying the neighbourhood.

​

And they are buying what they believe those surroundings will look and feel like five, ten or twenty years from now.

A restrictive covenant can offer something that may become increasingly valuable:

PREDICTABILITY.

​

NOW CONSIDER THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT EXAMPLE

​

Imagine owning a beautiful home that you have maintained and invested in for decades.

Then the property next door is redeveloped into a substantially more intensive housing use than what previously existed.

That could mean more occupants, vehicles, garbage storage, deliveries, turnover and activity immediately beside your home.

A rooming or lodging-house scenario may sound like an extreme example.

But the larger point is not whether that exact development ever appears beside your particular property.

The point is that without additional private protection, you are largely relying upon whatever municipal zoning permits now — and whatever future City Councils may decide to permit later.

The covenant gives participating homeowners another layer of control over that uncertainty.

​

THIS IS NOT ABOUT STOPPING CHANGE

​

Neighbourhoods evolve.

Families change.

Homes are renovated.

Older houses are replaced.

New families move in.

That is healthy.

​

Our objective is not to freeze Westridge, Wolf Willow and Country Club in time.

It is about establishing reasonable boundaries around the type and intensity of redevelopment that participating homeowners believe is appropriate for these neighbourhoods.

There is an enormous difference between replacing an aging home with another home compatible with its surroundings and fundamentally changing the intensity of use of a residential property.

​

THEN THERE IS RESALE

​

Nobody can responsibly guarantee that signing a restrictive covenant will increase the value of your home.

But we can ask a very reasonable question.

If two otherwise comparable homes were available, and one offered a buyer an additional registered layer of protection against certain forms of redevelopment while the other did not — could that influence the buyer's decision?

For some buyers, we believe the answer will increasingly be yes.

Now reverse the situation.

What happens to the marketability of an otherwise beautiful home when something substantially different has been built immediately next door?

Buyers notice.

Buyers consider it.

Buyers price risk.

And some buyers simply move on to another property.

Your home does not exist in isolation.

What happens around your property can affect how buyers perceive your property.

​

AND THAT IS WHY WAITING FOR EVERYONE ELSE TO SIGN DOESN'T WORK

​

It is easy to think:

“I'll wait and see how many other people sign first.”

But every person who waits is waiting for someone else to create the protection they themselves want.

Someone has to be first.

Then another homeowner joins.

Then another.

One street becomes ten properties.

Ten become fifty.

Fifty become hundreds.

And suddenly a developer looking at Westridge, Wolf Willow or Country Club doesn't simply see desirable land with redevelopment potential.

They see a neighbourhood filled with titles carrying private restrictions that must be considered before they proceed.

That changes the conversation - especially if the owners whose title has a covenant registered on it mount a public relations campaign against the developer.

​

THE COVENANT ALSO OUTLASTS US

​

One of the most powerful aspects of a properly registered restrictive covenant is that it is attached to the land, not simply to the person who signs it.

You may sell your home.

Your neighbour may sell.

Families will come and go.

But subject to its terms and applicable law, the covenant continues with the participating property.

So what we are creating today isn't simply about protecting our own enjoyment of our homes.

We are making a decision about what we leave behind.

For the next homeowner.

For the young family who eventually buys our house.

For our neighbours.

For our streets.

And ultimately for the future of Westridge, Wolf Willow and Country Club.

​

YOU MAY NEVER NEED TO ENFORCE THIS COVENANT.

And that is exactly the point.

Its greatest value may simply be sitting quietly on title.

A developer pulls title.

They see the covenant.

They investigate what it means.

They recognize that neighbouring properties are also participating.

And perhaps they decide there is an easier property somewhere else.

No confrontation.

No court battle.

No redevelopment fight.

They simply move on.

That is the power of deterrence.

​

STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.

​

PROTECTION THROUGH PARTICIPATION.

The City has changed the rules governing what can potentially be built in our neighbourhoods.

We cannot control what future City Councils may decide.

But property owners do have an opportunity to take an additional step themselves.

The WWWCC Restrictive Covenant is our opportunity to say:

We value thoughtful redevelopment.

We value our neighbourhood's predominantly single-family character.

We value predictability for homeowners and future buyers.

And we believe what happens next door matters.

For a relatively small effort today, we have an opportunity to create a layer of protection intended to last well beyond our own ownership.

The more homeowners who participate, the stronger that message becomes.

So perhaps the final question isn't:

“Why should I sign?”

​

Perhaps it is:

“If this can help protect my property, my street and the future character of my neighbourhood — why wouldn't I?”

Where do I sign?