LDA21-0342- Griesbach Rezoning & Plan Amendment

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

Engagement has concluded

***This discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report will be made available here when completed. ***

Please review the information on this page and share your thoughts on the proposed rezoning and plan amendment and ask any questions below, before the end of the day on January 3, 2022 . 

We will use any feedback that you share to make sure our review of the application takes local context into consideration and is as complete as possible. Feedback will also be summarized in the report for City Council so that they are aware of the public’s perspectives prior to making a decision.A black and white map of the area around the property that is proposed to be rezoned (137 Ave and 97 Street)

APPLICATION DETAILS

The City has received a proposal to rezone a 1.7 hectare (17,000 m2 ) site located at 9704 137 Avenue NW on the northwest corner of 97 Street NW and 137 Avenue NW and amend the Griesbach Neighbourhood Structure Plan within the Village Centre. The application was made by Dialog on behalf of the developers (Deveraux, Tacada and Forum).

Proposed Rezoning
The application proposes to rezone the property from the (GVC) Griesbach Village Centre Zone to the  (RA8g) Griesbach Medium-Rise Apartment Zone. The proposed RA8g zone would allow for the development of mid-rise, multi-unit unit housing buildings with a maximum height of 23 metres (6 storeys) and a minimum density of 75 units per hectare. The applicant’s stated intent is to build two, 6 storey (23 metre) tall residential-only apartment buildings with approximately 200 units total (117 units per hectare) and 271 parking stalls (171 surface stalls and 120 underground stalls).

Plan Amendment 

The application also includes an associated amendment to the Griesbach Neighbourhood Area Structure Plan (NASP) within the Village Centre to facilitate the proposed rezoning. Currently, the approved neighbourhood plan requires buildings to be a mix of commercial and residential uses with a maximum height of 4 storeys. The proposed amendment would allow for free-standing medium to high-density residential only buildings up to a maximum of 6 storeys (23 metres) at this location.

The City has not yet taken a position of support or non-support on this application. The City’s position will be determined by a thorough analysis of the proposal that includes technical considerations (e.g. traffic and drainage impacts) and alignment to applicable City land use-related plans and policies.

Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and other documentation in the right hand sidebar for more information.

***This discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report will be made available here when completed. ***

Please review the information on this page and share your thoughts on the proposed rezoning and plan amendment and ask any questions below, before the end of the day on January 3, 2022 . 

We will use any feedback that you share to make sure our review of the application takes local context into consideration and is as complete as possible. Feedback will also be summarized in the report for City Council so that they are aware of the public’s perspectives prior to making a decision.A black and white map of the area around the property that is proposed to be rezoned (137 Ave and 97 Street)

APPLICATION DETAILS

The City has received a proposal to rezone a 1.7 hectare (17,000 m2 ) site located at 9704 137 Avenue NW on the northwest corner of 97 Street NW and 137 Avenue NW and amend the Griesbach Neighbourhood Structure Plan within the Village Centre. The application was made by Dialog on behalf of the developers (Deveraux, Tacada and Forum).

Proposed Rezoning
The application proposes to rezone the property from the (GVC) Griesbach Village Centre Zone to the  (RA8g) Griesbach Medium-Rise Apartment Zone. The proposed RA8g zone would allow for the development of mid-rise, multi-unit unit housing buildings with a maximum height of 23 metres (6 storeys) and a minimum density of 75 units per hectare. The applicant’s stated intent is to build two, 6 storey (23 metre) tall residential-only apartment buildings with approximately 200 units total (117 units per hectare) and 271 parking stalls (171 surface stalls and 120 underground stalls).

Plan Amendment 

The application also includes an associated amendment to the Griesbach Neighbourhood Area Structure Plan (NASP) within the Village Centre to facilitate the proposed rezoning. Currently, the approved neighbourhood plan requires buildings to be a mix of commercial and residential uses with a maximum height of 4 storeys. The proposed amendment would allow for free-standing medium to high-density residential only buildings up to a maximum of 6 storeys (23 metres) at this location.

The City has not yet taken a position of support or non-support on this application. The City’s position will be determined by a thorough analysis of the proposal that includes technical considerations (e.g. traffic and drainage impacts) and alignment to applicable City land use-related plans and policies.

Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and other documentation in the right hand sidebar for more information.

Tell Us What You Think About The Application

Please let us know what you like and what could be better about this application. What should Council know as they decide whether or not to approve the rezoning? Other people that visit this part of the site will be able to see your comments.

Please note you must be registered on Engaged Edmonton in order to provide feedback.  However, only your username will be displayed publicly, all other information is kept confidential.  We use this information to distinguish between feedback received from the neighbouring/local area residents and other interested stakeholders.  All comments go through a moderation process, and may take up to 1-2 hours to publicly appear on the website.

If you are unable to provide feedback on this site, you may also provide feedback to the Project Planner directly via the contact information under the "who's listening" section of the page.   Please refrain from commenting on the site, and providing a duplicate comment to the planner.  It is not necessary to do both in order for feedback to be captured.

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

I am somewhat disappointed not to have a large grocery store as what was originally planned. :( Reading the info, I do have to say though, I am surprised by the number of surface parking stalls. It seems like an awful lot in my opinion, especially when a transit station is across the street. I don't know the complexities regarding the zoning, but somehow I would think less surface parking would allow for more business space.

richard1 6 months ago

I completely disagree with this Rezoning. What is the purpose of defined zones, if a developer can make an application to rezone, with no regard to the existing residents.

We moved to Edmonton five years ago. We purchased a home in the west end of the city backing on Rural Residential Land. We did our due diligence. We contacted the City of Edmonton to confirm the zoning. The City confirmed that we would be backing on Rural Residential Land. The City was already in procession of the application to rezone. They confidently did not disclose the information. Within 4 months of occupancy, we received A Notice of Rezoning. We compiled a group of residents and forwarded the petition to the City, opposing the development. We paid $5000.00 to have an independent report prepared. The report clearly outlined the excessive loss in property value should this be approved. It outlined the loss of enjoyment of life and the environmental impact.

We asked for a larger buffer zone and trees to be planted to defuse noise.

Council, with no regard to the residents, rubber stamped the development.

Due to health concerns, my husband and I make the decision to relocate. We sold our home, AT A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS and moved to Griesbach. We have been here 5 months….and now are faced with Rezoning.

Another resident advised the City of her son’s medical condition. He required a quiet environment to thrive in. She had just moved in. On the same day she received her document advising of Rezoning. Council just ignored her concerns. The consequences have been tremendous.

We were presented with a list of possible businesses that would occupy the new development. A PET CREMATORIUM was foremost on the list .

Now I as again. What is the purpose of zoning? The Council at that time gave no support to the residents.

The greatest insult was: One of the landowners who, were profiting by the development, advised that it should be passed because THERE WAS ALREADY AN ILLEGAL BUSINESS on the land in question. I do hope you have collected business tax on that property?

I understand if you find this incredible. I suggest you discuss with Andrew Knack.

I do hope the new council has greater concern for the people who voted for them. Your job is to take care of The City Of Edmonton. The City Of Edmonton is its people.

Gerrie Day 6 months ago

I mistook the wrong area for rezoning. I thought it was for the area along Greisbach Parade. As for the rezoning at the Sobey's area I DO NOT SUPPORT the rezoning. Everyone against it explained perfectly and I agree with them.

I'm still annoyed with the 2 condos going across the street from me.

Willis 6 months ago

I do not support. We have already to much condos in this area

Allan K 6 months ago

I DO NOT SUPPORT the rezoning.
Griesbach Parade already has a lot of traffic; due to 97 Street and 137 Avenue. The was no traffic analysis done, now with 6 stories In increased traffic is more problematic.
More vehicular traffic will affect pedestrian traffic and public safety and parking will be a huge issue.

We also have more crimes happening in Condos with parkade break ins, homeless people sleeping in the Vestibules and dumpster diving. With new condos being built there will be more of that. Some people in our build are feeling unsafe.

I personally prefer the site is used as a dog park. Since I city promotes being green, why would you add more condos ruining a unique neighborhood and on top up that help harm the environment. Because all the city cares about is making more money off taxes while ruining peoples property values. It's pretty annoying when we expressed our concerns for it to ignored

Willis 6 months ago

I do not support the rezoning. While I support higher density residential as opposed to all single family homes, that area was meant to have some commercial use to create a true shopping district. Having only residential takes away from this. I also am concerned that even though Sobeys would sell this land and have no ownership in it, somehow the restrictive covenants that they hold would remain. Griesbach residents are generally eager to support local and these covenants restrict us from doing that in this area. I am also concerned with the number of parking spaces for the total units. This is already a highly dense area with two more buildings already planned (which were already rezoned against the majority of residents’ wishes). I hope the city actually takes our concerns seriously this time as opposed to ignoring all comments.

Lsquires 6 months ago

The residents of Greisbach residents are opposed to this application as they were with the other one in the same area, but the city went against our wishes. Here we are again opposing a similar change. This area was not designed for high density. It had a 4 story maximum height restriction. The area has won numerous awards but the city seems intent on destroying all of that. It is a fact that high density apartments bring bring an increase in crime and a lack of pride for the area they inhabit. We are already having issues with noise and crime and this would only serve to make matters worse. Traffic and parking are issues. Buildings no longer must have a designated parking stall for tenants. This leads to them parking wherever they can. We are already experiencing this in front of our own building. If the issue with the Sobey area are the covenants, who would have signed such an agreement and why can’t that be changed? Further to that if the covenants must stay there are numerous other businesses that can inhabit the space without breaking the covenants other than apartments and high density. We believe that even the last rezoning in the area should go back to what it previously was. Zoning should be able to change in either direction, not just in favour of developers. A one meter setback doesn’t even leave room for snow. Will they be hauling it away from their sidewalks? This application is absurd and the last time we did this is a huge part of why we now have a new alder person. The changes would not enhance the appearance or the appeal of Greisbach. It would lower our property values. It would be high density and the area was not designed for it. It would bring with it an increase in crime and a public that is not truly tied to the community. This can result in the further degradation of the neighbourhood. Many of us purchased here because of the promised grocery. Not a higher crime rate and 6 story high density apartments. We are very much apposed to the proposed changes and would also like to see the previous changes reversed. Why would a city choose to destroy an award winning area?

Gord Hrycun 6 months ago

We are residents in Griesbach Village and are strongly opposed to the changing of the current rezoning from GVC to RA8g and amending the original Griesbach plan for several reasons.

In our opinion, in the past it appears evident that the City Administration has not shared any of the previous feedback submitted by the residents within Griesbach with the Mayor and City Council in order to make an informed decision.

1. This area was originally zoned for 4-story multi-unit housing, and this change is definitely not necessary and, in fact, it would “exhibit discrimination” against the previous developers, the Marriott Hotel and condo owners. In fact, this was one of the main reasons why we purchased our condo unit here in Victory Point. Now we are nearly surrounded by multi-storey units and with the addition of 6-storey combustible structures, they would be definitely unacceptable.

2. The area adjacent to Griesbach Village now has eight 4-storey structures. This includes seven Multi-storey Housing structures with 496 units, in an already stressed condo market within Edmonton.

3. There have already been too many fires within the City of Edmonton and throughout Alberta with the construction of 4-storey combustible multi-unit housing structures. The construction of any 6-storey combustible multi-unit housing structures is unjustifiable due to the probability that, as a result of the design or installation of the combustible building materials, that a person in or adjacent to the building or facility will be exposed to an unacceptable risk of injury due to a fire. While a 6-storey is permitted by the Alberta Building Code, ultimately the regulatory authorities having jurisdiction need to, with integrity, limit the severity and effects of fire or explosions on their multi-storey residential citizens.

4. The existing process for on-site Building inspections under the Safety Codes Act is inadequate and there are no procedures in place to audit the assurance of compliance to the applicable Codes submitted by registered Professional of record for these projects. There have been many apartments and Condo structures in Edmonton that have had to initiate costly repairs after occupancy. Therefore, increasing the maximum from 4 storeys to 6 storeys will increase the probability non-compliance issues to the owner(s) and occupants.

5. The increase to 6-storey combustible multi-unit housing complexes will result in a major issue of obtaining customized insurance coverage for condominiums at an affordable rate if coverage can be found. NOTE: Would the City of Edmonton be in a position to underwrite some of the insurance costs that are being charged to encourage such multi-family construction? In Alberta and British Columbia there are Condominiums that are unable to obtain insurance and others that unable to find insurance at a manageable rate.

6. The city recently rescinded the Bylaw that required developers to provide sufficient on-site parking. This is very alarming in this situation and will have a major impact on the street parking. The future development of any structures with two additional storeys will have a huge effect on traffic congestion and parking in and around Griesbach Village.

With this latest proposal and the fact that the city has not forced Sobeys to build or release the land so that any food retailer can build is very disturbing. In fact, these actions and/or lack of actions are making us re-think our moving to a City that considers developers over the residents who pay excessive property taxes, which keeps City Hall open.
WCL

WCL 6 months ago

We do not support the rezoning proposal. The city has planned to create 15-minute districts to allow residents access to immediate needs and amenities within a 15-minute walk from home. When we moved into Griesbach, we were told there would be a grocery store built on that land which would properly align with the city's plan to create 15-minute districts. The benefits of that plan would have been great as it would reduce the need for vehicles to get to a grocery store, thus reducing vehicle emissions for a greener city. It would finally show forward thinking from the city as our population grows. By building 2 large apartments instead of a much needed grocery store, the city would be going against their own 15-minute district plan.
Losing the grocery store would be a big loss, but the 4 storey apartment with commercial use would be much more beneficial to Griesbach than a 6 storey apartment-only building. Having a mixed use building would still align with the city's 15-minute district plan and would enhance the daily lives of existing residents. Cramming so many people into one area would put a strain on them and existing residents. More people living in a concentrated area would require more amenities, parking space, green space, medical facilities, police and fire service, more frequent public transportation, wider roads to support more traffic, etc. It would be incredibly poor planning and short-sighted to increase density without balancing it with commercial services.

yeguser1 6 months ago

While I support increased residential in this zone, I don't agree with pure residential or the 6 story height. Keeping the ground level commercial will better fit in with the area that is already purely commercial and provide services to those immediately surrounding the area. I also prefer the original 4 stories as 6 seems very dense in an area already struggling with parking. The City's Open Parking plan is great in theory until residents park in what little commercial parking is available and then visitors are unable to access commercial services. While close to transit, it's foolish to say everyone will use transit therefore parking shouldn't be considered. It would be interesting if the City could push for conditional approval - I'd say okay to this if the restrictive covenant was lifted. The developer could push for that with the owner in return.

Scottie 6 months ago

I do NOT support the rezoning - there is already condo apartment buildings to the northwest and west of GVC. Why are we trying to hide and block this area in? The rezoning would cast a shadow over the GVC and its businesses (both figuratively and literally). While I agree that the increase of foot traffic is good for businesses in the area, but also carries a potential for unwanted activities such as crime. As a resident of the area, I've already seen relaxation in architectural controls and the like. Let's not continue to ruin what was the original vision for this neighbourhood.

cwgb 6 months ago

I DO NOT support this rezoning proposal. I remember when the neighborhood was originally developed, and there was great care to make it a wonderful modern city neighbourhood. Even a lot of the trees were developed around. I moved into the area recently, and couldn’t be happier with that. But I do have concerns seeing where things have progressed from the original vision, to today. Two six storey apartments do not blend with the neighbourhood at all, this aside from the increased traffic concerns in an already busy intersection. There are even other RA8g zoned areas not developed yet. I feel with a little imagination, coupled with respect for the neighbourhood and the people in it, the area could be used for something much more enduring.

AJPatrick 6 months ago

In the absence of the anchor grocery store that was originally planned, I support the zoning amendment.

Density is good for cities and saves all Edmontonians money, and I see no reason why six-story buildings on the corner of our neighbourhood, close to transit and major roads, would negatively impact Griesbach.

I like to think we are a welcoming community who like to have neighbours -- this density would help us to have more neighbours who participate in community events, walk to our local businesses, and even pay taxes.

Traffic within the neighbourhood seems like it would be only marginally impacted (and if you don't like traffic, don't participate in it!). Griesbach's traffic calming measures are an effective deterrent to driving through the neighbourhood rather than accessing from 97 street or 137 avenue.

Vaguely articulated concerns about crime and property values smack of an elitism that doesn't represent the neighbours I know and like in Griesbach.

Shelby Corley 7 months ago

It is imperative that the mixed zoning remain in place. Everyone that has bought in this community in the last 12 years has been told a walkable grocery store would be in this parcel of land. I take no issue with the height of the building or number of units, hopefully contributing to affordable housing and density. But the bottom floor must remain businesses to provide services and walkable convenience to our community (which makes it so desirable). Pushing to remove the restrictive covenants would allow the services originally planned for our community to finally come to fruition.

BZ 7 months ago

I do not support the rezoning. There is multiple apartment buildings already in the area. There is far too much traffic already going through Griesbach parade and doubtful that adding another apartment building with only access through this road would help with the traffic.

dargueta 7 months ago

I DO NOT support this rezoning application at this time. Griesbach Parade already has 2 large parcels already zoned RA8g that are not yet developed. I do not think it is the right time to add a 3rd undeveloped parcel under RA8g to saturate this corner as it will undermine the Neighborhood structure plan that has already considered the density for this corner.

As well the rezoning area was zoned for commercial use under GVC, it is a prime corner of two important intersections, 97st and 137 ave, to have this corner converted to residential is not in the best interests of the residents or the city in the long term.

PLEASE CITY listen to us for a change, the GNASP was designed for a reason, and it is this plan that makes the neighbourhood one of the best communities in Edmonton, you need to listen to you residents!!!

A G 7 months ago

Not in favor of this rezoning. The Griesbach community is full of families with young kids. Lately we see an increase in traffic on the residential streets. Adding more apartments innot going to help with this.

Also to keep thee integrity and beauty of this neighborhood intact, we do not need any more constructions.

YEG 7 months ago

This is an absolute no-brainer approval and I highly support it. This will be well separated from lower density residential areas in the neighborhood, limiting any impacts on nearby residents. It is also totally aligned and consistent with the RA8g zoning nearby, will provide a density boost to the existing adjacent businesses, and will be the closest residential to the Northgate Transit Center.

I do agree that the high level of proposed surface parking stalls is concerning. An ocean of open parking will not support the urban village concept, and it would be much better to bring additional density to the corner to replace it.

GG 7 months ago

We live in Griesbach and do not agree with this proposal. There have been too many rezoning applications that have increased the density of this neighbourhood well beyond the original plan. There will likely be more such applications in the future. It has to stop here.
Do not approve.

allmor 7 months ago

**I am not a resident in the neighborhood**. But I do see the benefits to densification. I do not particular agree with the continuity of the way the proposed development would conform and mesh with the existing development. If I were to live in the area, I would have preferred to see a proper mixed0use development, of anywhere from 3-4 storeys. This would bring a neighborhood, dense feel to the area, and bring more of those desired downtown elements into Greisbach. Looking at the ASP, this is a bit beyond what was proposed (again, mixed-use would have been more suitable), and the applicant will need to provide detailed analysis as to why the proposed development should allowed to sway far from the plan.

aeli1545 7 months ago