News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

IanO

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
10,377
Reaction score
31,651

Proposed Rezoning​

The City has received an application to rezone the properties at 11414, 11416, 11426, 11428 and 11430 76 Avenue NW from the Small Scale Infill Development Zone (RF3)(External link)with the Mature Neighbourhood Overlay(External link) to a Site-Specific Development Control Provision (DC2)(External link). The Mature Neighbourhood Overlay will no longer apply.

The proposed DC2 provision would allow for the development of a mid-rise apartment with commercial uses at ground level and the following characteristics:

  • A maximum height of 20.0 meters (approximately 6 storeys);
  • Up to 113 residential dwellings;
  • A maximum floor area ratio of 3.6;
  • Commercial uses at ground level facing 114 Street and portions of 76 Avenue; and
  • On-site parking accessed from the rear lane.
This proposed Site Specific Development Control Provision (DC2) replaces the previous proposal to rezone the properties to Medium Rise Apartment Zone (RA8) to better conform with the commercial use requirements of the McKernan-Belgravia Area Redevelopment Plan (ARP) and to address certain concerns on impacts to adjacent properties. This application also increases the site area to include 11430 76 Avenue NW.

Screen Shot 2023-01-03 at 3.02.21 PM.png
Screen Shot 2023-01-03 at 3.02.30 PM.png
Screen Shot 2023-01-03 at 3.02.34 PM.png


 
I love this project already, that ground floor with the diagonal bracing?! BLESSED
I really think Pinto helped 'block-bust' (perhaps a term with the wrong history, but i'm not sure what else to say) this area for new development. clearly this developer is following their precedent.
On a side note, i think it's interesting that this project is going for a DC2 as opposed to a standard RA8. Aside from the typical DC2 elements intended to lock the zoning to a specific design (like the 4 Live-work units and very specific commercial use areas), this project is just and RA8 with massaged setbacks and increased FAR. I'm seeing work by a wide variety of firms and developers that are making that same jump from the RA8 max FAR of 3 to somewhere in the 3.5-3.8 range. From what i'm seeing at work, it's all to allow the building to get as broad on the site as Building code will allow woodframe to go as opposed to just following the RA8 zoning and leaving potential units/floor area on the table. I think it's telling that developers are going through all this trouble to rezone a property, exposing themselves to all this public scrutiny and risk council rejection, just to get that extra FAR and relaxed setbacks. I hope the new zoning bylaw will address this, and create an RA8 equivalent that better meets expectations/needs of industry, and doesn't invite all this controversy over what end up being great neighbourhood-building projects.
As a suggestion, Looking at current trends, i think a max FAR of 3.6 and no 'step-back' setbacks for higher floors (jogging an exterior wall in on higher floors is difficult/expensive in woodframe, and for the purposes of ensuring light access etc not very effective) would go a long way towards streamlining the approval process ofr projects like this, IMO.
 
For

'I enthusiastically support this rezoning and development. I can't think of a single reason why 76th Ave from 116th street to 112th street should have any single family homes on it. The area is directly adjacent to the University, the river valley (our city's most beautiful asset) and an LRT station. Residents of this development would quite literally be looking over the LRT station. I have few concerns surrounding the impact on traffic this development has since it's next to an LRT station, has direct bus connections to district entertainment (Whyte), is on multiple biking routes, and is within walking distance of restaurants and other amenities. I'd look to similar completed developments such as Belgravia square and Grand Scala. Traffic volumes have steadily increased on 76th Ave from 2011 to 2019, however there seems to be no significant jump from before and after the completion of these projects. The businesses on this site would also contribute to the growing neighbourhood vibrancy, adding amenities making the area a model in neighbourhood revitalization and densifying required if we desire a sustainable city that's accessible for all.
-SGMM'

---

Against

'As a homeowner in the surrounding area, I am highly disappointed by this proposed application. I am against this rezoning and development application. Traffic in the 114th St and 76th Ave intersection is already very busy with long wait times due to the LRT often crossing. The additional 113 residential dwellings and subsequent increased traffic would only worsen congestion at the intersection and increase traffic times on 76th Ave. In addition, the increased noise pollution from not only the initial construction, as well as once it's built, the commercial space and 6 storey building would negatively impact the neighbourhood.
-peartree'
 
With proximity to the LRT and University a development like this would make total sense. Of course any development will result in increased activity, but unless they are planning to build an after hours club or something like that the noise and activity would probably not be that significant. Most people living in this building would probably keep similar hours to the existing residences. With it being close to LRT, the traffic increase would likely not be significant.

Neighbourhoods change and evolve over time. I get that some people don't really want any change, but sometimes they tend to over react. This is not 1,000 or even 500 more people descending on the area.

I live in a fairly busy area. Some years ago, several new condo buildings were built on the street. Was there a bit more activity? Probably yes. Was it really that noticeable? No.
 
For

'I enthusiastically support this rezoning and development. I can't think of a single reason why 76th Ave from 116th street to 112th street should have any single family homes on it. The area is directly adjacent to the University, the river valley (our city's most beautiful asset) and an LRT station. Residents of this development would quite literally be looking over the LRT station. I have few concerns surrounding the impact on traffic this development has since it's next to an LRT station, has direct bus connections to district entertainment (Whyte), is on multiple biking routes, and is within walking distance of restaurants and other amenities. I'd look to similar completed developments such as Belgravia square and Grand Scala. Traffic volumes have steadily increased on 76th Ave from 2011 to 2019, however there seems to be no significant jump from before and after the completion of these projects. The businesses on this site would also contribute to the growing neighbourhood vibrancy, adding amenities making the area a model in neighbourhood revitalization and densifying required if we desire a sustainable city that's accessible for all.
-SGMM'

---

Against

'As a homeowner in the surrounding area, I am highly disappointed by this proposed application. I am against this rezoning and development application. Traffic in the 114th St and 76th Ave intersection is already very busy with long wait times due to the LRT often crossing. The additional 113 residential dwellings and subsequent increased traffic would only worsen congestion at the intersection and increase traffic times on 76th Ave. In addition, the increased noise pollution from not only the initial construction, as well as once it's built, the commercial space and 6 storey building would negatively impact the neighbourhood.
-peartree'
I love the oxymoronic comment about car congestions when this is catered to students and near-by-work audiences, near an LRT station, and was designed/proposed/to-be-built based on the existing LRT station. These narcissistic NYMBIES need be to put in their place such as higher taxes in their zones for rejecting such pragmatic approach to a greener and more efficient carbon foot-print use. These BIATCHES would be the first to complain about increase taxes as well when they are the reason taxes will go up.
 

Back
Top