Jump to content

      












BUILT
200 Cook Street
Uses: rental, commercial
Address: 200 Cook Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Urban core
Storeys: 5
200 Cook Street is a five-storey mixed-use rental apartment and ground floor commercial development in the Coo... (view full profile)
Learn more about 200 Cook Street on Citified.ca
Photo

[Cook St. Village] 200 Cook Street | Rentals | Built - completed in 2019


  • Please log in to reply
1225 replies to this topic

#81 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 63,886 posts

Posted 10 December 2014 - 10:02 AM

No, but REITs are potential property purchasers, so you never know when you might like to sell.

 

Hudson has rentals but they are individual strata lots.  Like the Sandpiper on Quadra. 

 

Sure but that doesn't preclude a building owner or developer from building a mixed rental/market condo building if they so choose -- Townline wanted to do that. Whether or not it's common doesn't mean it isn't an option.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#82 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 10 December 2014 - 10:08 AM

Sure but that doesn't preclude a building owner or developer from building a mixed rental/market condo building if they so choose -- Townline wanted to do that. Whether or not it's common doesn't mean it isn't an option.

 

I'm actually saying it simply is not an option.  It's not a legal form of real estate.  Not permitted.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#83 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 63,886 posts

Posted 10 December 2014 - 10:10 AM

Why would a major developer propose such a scheme in the first place? Could it be though that they intended to rent out strata units as per Hudson while selling only the top 20 units in the building?


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#84 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:11 PM

Just returned from the community open house for this project.

 

There were two other projects covered at the meeting. So, after nearly an hour of hearing Fairfield residents moan about a couple of small, two floor houses proposed for their neighbourhood we moved on to the Cook & Oliphant project. It became a full-out nimby-fest.

 

It would be a significant building for the Cook St. village, but the architect, Charles Kierulf, says that the new OCP allows for buildings of up to six floors, and allows for an expansion of commercial space.

 

Unfortunately I wasn't able to get any images of the project because the battery in my phone died, but we'll probably get something at some point.

 

Overall, some area residents went ape-**** over the project, but it seems the OCP allows it.


  • AndrewReeve and Mixed365 like this

#85 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 29,187 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:14 PM

Overall, some area residents went ape-**** over the project, but it seems the OCP allows it.

I am starting to think there is something in the water in this city that causes uncontrollable NIMBY-ism. How I've managed to avoid it for more than 30 years I'll never know. I must have some sort of natural immunity - I think it's called being intelligent.



#86 vicernie

vicernie
  • Member
  • 185 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:40 PM

interesting that the loudest NIBYs were living in a 4 story building on Park Blvd and complained about loss of privacy.  of course their 4 story monstrosity overlooks houses on Oliphant which lost privacy.


  • Nparker and Mr Cook Street like this

#87 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 63,886 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:40 PM

So technically speaking, if the OCP allows an even larger building, then on what grounds can this be contested? Tax payers throughout the City can argue that should council axe this proposal, our elected officials are in effect wasting a significant amount of tax payers dollars by not adhering to an OCP we paid for.


  • Nparker likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#88 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 6,115 posts

Posted 15 December 2014 - 09:41 PM

And it's hard for anyone to speak for the project when all the villagers have the torches and pitch forks out... I've been there during one of these for the RailYards.... same thing. Lot's of people against. It still happened. 



#89 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 17,175 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 07:46 AM

 

interesting that the loudest NIBYs were living in a 4 story building...

 

It's often the case. The staunchest opponents tend to be the worst hypocrites.


  • Nparker likes this

#90 Mr Cook Street

Mr Cook Street
  • Member
  • 942 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 08:40 AM

Does anyone that attended have any initial thoughts on the look of the plans?

 

Sad to hear so much NIMBY was at play. I knew that 4 story condo building would be opposed to this 'monstrosity'.



#91 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 08:58 AM

The longer I live in Victoria the more and more I am amazed that anything gets built here.

 

Incredibly strong and organized cookie-cutter opposition to modest proposals in certain areas of the city is virtually guaranteed.

 

That being said, I'd love to see the plan.


  • Nparker and AndrewReeve like this

#92 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 6,115 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 10:26 AM

^ Me too. I think redevelopment here is needed and it sounds like it's a good scale for the location. The village is a lot better now that the one bad grocery store was redeveloped. Now, the remaining bad grocery store needs to go. Although it would still make a good movie set for a zombie apocalypse grocery store scene... The one thing I would like to see is the entire strip refreshed except the old guy with his empty lot selling veggies out of a few boxes. He is precious.  


  • Nparker and Mr Cook Street like this

#93 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 11:28 AM

^ I don't want to see the whole strip redeveloped, but the two new buildings that have gone in have been very good additions. I see no reason to believe why a new building on the south end of CSV couldn't also be a positive addition.



#94 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 63,886 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 11:35 AM

But again, technically, if this proposal falls within the OCP restrictions people can huff and puff but there's nothing they can do, unless they somehow show that the OCP process was flawed and is not representative of the will of the community.

People like to get into a huff over things and development is a great means to an uppity end.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#95 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 11:41 AM

It is a large building for CSV. The closest building I can think of, in terms of massing, is the big, older, white, six floor building on Beacon Ave. in Sidney. The style and look is much better than that one but the size is similar.

 

Also, and I know some guys here won't like this, but there is surface parking at the back. The lane behind these properties will be widened and there will be parking for use by the retail tenants in the building. Some of it is covered by the building but it is ground level. The residential parking is underground. Personally I'm OK with a bit of surface parking as it is behind the building, alongside a lane, and will be for the retail spaces.


  • Nparker and AndrewReeve like this

#96 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 6,115 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 12:49 PM

Arhg I wish you took pictures!
  • Mr Cook Street likes this

#97 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 01:45 PM

But again, technically, if this proposal falls within the OCP restrictions people can huff and puff but there's nothing they can do, unless they somehow show that the OCP process was flawed and is not representative of the will of the community.

People like to get into a huff over things and development is a great means to an uppity end.

So no need to rezone?

#98 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 6,115 posts

Posted 16 December 2014 - 01:54 PM

OCP doesn't necessarily reflect the present zoning....



#99 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 17 December 2014 - 10:31 PM

OCP doesn't necessarily reflect the present zoning....

Zoning rarely truly conforms to the OCP and is sometimes totally out of sync. Oak Bay is currently in that state (as they just passed a new OCP but haven't yet rewritten their zoning bylaw).


  • Mixed365 likes this

#100 Mr Cook Street

Mr Cook Street
  • Member
  • 942 posts

Posted 18 December 2014 - 08:36 AM

Heard this will offer 62 residential units with a mix of rental and strata. The rental units will at least equal what is being lost with this new development. Anyone get those renderings yet????



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users