Jump to content

      














PROPOSED
Parkway
Uses: rental, commercial
Address: 1518 Cook Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 6
Parkway is a proposal to restore the two-storey Wellburn's Market building at the intersection of Cook Street ... (view full profile)
Learn more about Parkway on Citified.ca
Photo

[North Park] Parkway (Wellburn's Building redevelopment) | 6-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

#181 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 11,339 posts

Posted 07 January 2020 - 10:26 PM

They're finally getting around to clearing the shelves at Wellburn's. The produce was taken away a few weeks ago but the freezers are still stocked. I assume they were still running.

 

0106201407-01.jpg

 

WELLBURNS 1914 - 2019


  • Mike K. likes this

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#182 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 11,339 posts

Posted 08 January 2020 - 08:02 AM

The closure of Wellburns has hit the shoplifting community hard. It is requested that Save-On reduce its security contingent for the time being as a courtesy measure.


  • Mike K., Nparker, Bernard and 6 others like this

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#183 victorian

victorian
  • Member
  • 42 posts
  • LocationHarris Green

Posted 08 January 2020 - 12:48 PM

why do so many modern buildings extend the same look/feel/cladding right down to the ground? I've likened this to making an all-or-nothing bet on the success of the esthetic and the cladding.

 

I assume it's because profit doesn't require attention to quality of materials, aesthetics, etc. Many developers don't have to look at the buildings once they're built either. Why make buildings look nice if you don't have to? 



#184 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,370 posts

Posted 08 January 2020 - 01:35 PM

 

Why make buildings look nice if you don't have to?

 

This is my point. Developments are scrutinized backward and forward and yet the obvious/important stuff continues to be missed. Heck, we've seen numerous examples where the initial proposals were very good but then went soundly in the wrong direction as a result of addressing the CoV's criticisms and recommendations (which often seem to have no relevance whatsoever to Victoria's established architectural environment).


  • Nparker likes this

#185 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 8,863 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 03:38 AM

the community association here distributed a form letter template for businesses to send to council to oppose this project.

I’ll try to get a copy. but over lunch the other day it was described to me.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 09 January 2020 - 03:38 AM.


#186 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 24,774 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 05:41 AM

The NPNA opposing a development project? Say it isn't so.

#187 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 8,863 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 05:56 AM

The NPNA opposing a development project? Say it isn't so.

 

it's not just that they are opposing it but they have crafted a form letter for everyone else to oppose it too - for all the exact same reasons their letter says.

 

that's terrible.

 

i'll try to get a copy today if i can.



#188 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 53,087 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 08:18 AM

Here it is. I don’t think I’ve ever seen something like this before.


The NPNA CALUC has some concerns about this development. Please feel free to use this email as a template when you write to City Council and our Councillor reps (Sharmarke Dubow and Marianne Alto), and make sure to cc us (board@npna.ca, coordinator@npna.ca).

Dear Mayor and Council,

As it stands, the proposed redevelopment at 1050-1058 Pandora Avenue and 1508-1518 Cook Street does not demonstrate a benefit to the community. Monthly rents of the proposed 103 units will likely start at $1,700 for a one bedroom apartment - compared to their current rate of $1,150 for a two bedroom. Furthermore, there are no provisions in the development proposal for affordable housing. It is likely not going to be many North Park residents who will be renting in the new buildings, as they have on average, the lowest incomes in the city.

The two large proposed new buildings will also contribute to further crowding at the corner of Pandora and Cook and will continue to box in Franklin Green Park. This park is a small but precious green space that is well used and loved by the community. The buildings close proximity to the park will remove any sense of open green space or sun in this park that has already being crowded by recent development in the area.

We ask that you consider how this development can contribute, not remove, community amenities in the North Park neighbourhood, while using this as an opportunity to apply an equity lens to the discussion of new developments.

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


#189 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 24,774 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 08:39 AM

The NPNA are a menace.



#190 Brantastic

Brantastic
  • Member
  • 430 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 12:09 PM

I’d say the loss of affordable housing for unaffordable housing in the city’s lowest income neighborhood is a fair concern but the rest is utter nonsense.

#191 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,870 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 09 January 2020 - 12:17 PM

I’d say the loss of affordable housing for unaffordable housing in the city’s lowest income neighborhood is a fair concern but the rest is utter nonsense.

 

It's a concern, but it is consistent with the Affordable Housing Policy that the current Council adopted in June: projects that are 100% rental in perpetuity are exempt from the requirement to provide 20% affordable housing.


  • Nparker likes this

#192 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,503 posts

Posted 09 January 2020 - 01:31 PM

The NPNA letter states:  "Furthermore, there are no provisions in the development proposal for affordable housing. It is likely not going to be many North Park residents who will be renting in the new buildings, as they have on average, the lowest incomes in the city."

 

This statement seems a bit unfair.  If North Park residents have the lowest incomes in the city, then it might be safe to assume that a significant portion of the community's renters are living in subsidized/affordable housing of some sort.  Even if Parkway included subsidized units, it is unlikely that many existing residents of subsidized housing within North Park would *transfer* to Parkway for a number of reasons:

  • Priority placement for (theoretical) subsidized housing in Parkway would likely go to  individuals and families who are currently wait-listed for affordable housing
  • Some existing subsidized housing residents are in facilities that have special support services (including addiction recovery) which might not exist in the new subsidized housing
  • Turnover for subsidized housing units is likely low to begin with.  I know of one person who's lived in the same subsidized building on Fisgard (in North Park) since at least the mid 2000s, he's got a great setup and support (he's elderly), and I can't think of a compelling reason why he (or most of his neighbours) would need to transfer to new subsidized housing at Parkway

Also, I should point out that there are a number of new affordable/subsidized rentals under construction or proposed in neighbourhoods adjacent to North Park including 2300 Douglas, 11 Chown Place, 210 Gorge East, and Crosstown (former Tally Ho) just in one adjacent neighbourhood (Burnside-Gorge).  While these aren't in North Park proper, their 'equity' examination of the Crystal Pool location included Burnside Gorge along with Fernwood.  So if a proposal like Parkway comes along and doesn't have a subsidized component, NPNA should at least consider the fact that a lot of affordable housing is in the works close by... 


  • Mike K., Nparker, grantpalin and 1 other like this

#193 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 09 January 2020 - 05:34 PM

Here it is. I don’t think I’ve ever seen something like this before.


The NPNA CALUC has some concerns about this development. Please feel free to use this email as a template when you write to City Council and our Councillor reps (Sharmarke Dubow and Marianne Alto), and make sure to cc us (board@npna.ca, coordinator@npna.ca).

Dear Mayor and Council,

As it stands, the proposed redevelopment at 1050-1058 Pandora Avenue and 1508-1518 Cook Street does not demonstrate a benefit to the community. Monthly rents of the proposed 103 units will likely start at $1,700 for a one bedroom apartment - compared to their current rate of $1,150 for a two bedroom. Furthermore, there are no provisions in the development proposal for affordable housing. It is likely not going to be many North Park residents who will be renting in the new buildings, as they have on average, the lowest incomes in the city.

The two large proposed new buildings will also contribute to further crowding at the corner of Pandora and Cook and will continue to box in Franklin Green Park. This park is a small but precious green space that is well used and loved by the community. The buildings close proximity to the park will remove any sense of open green space or sun in this park that has already being crowded by recent development in the area.

We ask that you consider how this development can contribute, not remove, community amenities in the North Park neighbourhood, while using this as an opportunity to apply an equity lens to the discussion of new developments.

What a pile of NIMBY shit!

 

1) There are no large proposed buildings\

2) More rental units at any price will mean a medium and long term reduction in rental rates.    When vacancy rates are low renters tend not to move because of the odds of getting a better place is low.   New units will free up cheaper units as people move into it.  Also, if there is a glut of units on the market prices will fall.   There is no such thing as a rental unit that does not help housing.

3) The 2 bedroom unit rent quoted does not exist\

4) The main rental building in the area is a decaying pile of crap (It is the building behind Castle Hardware).  Of course it is affordable because no one that does not have to will not live at 

5) The park they mention is not used much at all.   I spend most of a year right next door to that park and it was empty of anyone other than homeless people 99% of the time.  A smart council would sell that land for redevelopment and then put some money behind park amenities that people actually use.


  • AllseeingEye and DavidSchell like this

#194 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,036 posts

Posted 10 January 2020 - 12:36 PM

I will guarantee that once the building is occupied, 100% of the residents will be North Park residents and that they will all be able to afford living there.
  • Nparker, Bernard, lanforod and 1 other like this

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#195 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 8,863 posts

Posted 10 January 2020 - 12:52 PM

Everything needs to be cleared from the store by the end of January, when it will be boarded up and closed for good after 105 years in business.

“I really want to thank all of Victoria for supporting us all of these years,” Lum said.

 

https://www.vicnews....llburns-market/



#196 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 10 January 2020 - 06:20 PM

In 2013 and then again in 2015/16 I worked close to Welburn's and used it.   Boy was it bad.  Run down yes, but much more importantly filthy.   The selection was not great   Fresh fruit and veg were not great.   The prices were not cheap even though they paid minimum wage and obviously did not spend money on a lot of stuff other stores spend it on.    Staff also told me it was not a great place to work, bad management culture.

 

The only reason Welburn's lasted as long as it did was because it had no competition for quit a distance.   I was certain once Save On moved in they would be gone rather quickly.


  • DavidSchell likes this

#197 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 24,774 posts

Posted 10 January 2020 - 06:30 PM

... The prices were not cheap even though they paid minimum wage and obviously did not spend money on a lot of stuff other stores spend it on....

Being a nearby resident I visited Wellburn's semi-frequently - at least before Save-on-Foods opened - since it was convenient. I am sure they had a reputation for being cheap, but the dingy setting did not equate to low prices. Aside from sales, no one saved much money by doing all their shopping here.



#198 Mixed365

Mixed365
  • Member
  • 998 posts

Posted 12 January 2020 - 11:56 AM

In 2013 and then again in 2015/16 I worked close to Welburn's and used it.   Boy was it bad.  Run down yes, but much more importantly filthy.   The selection was not great   Fresh fruit and veg were not great.   The prices were not cheap even though they paid minimum wage and obviously did not spend money on a lot of stuff other stores spend it on.    Staff also told me it was not a great place to work, bad management culture.

 

The only reason Welburn's lasted as long as it did was because it had no competition for quit a distance.   I was certain once Save On moved in they would be gone rather quickly

 

Yeah - it was the worst of both worlds. 

If it were super cheap/had a decent selection while being run down/dirty, it'd have its place in the market. However, the prices were quite comparable to Save On and the quality was low. 

 

I wish we lived in a world where it would have survived. The idea of a local grocer store is not only rare, but quite likable IMHO. 

That being said, it makes sense it is gone now. 


  • Mike K. likes this

“To understand cities, we have to deal outright with combinations or mixtures of uses, not separate uses, as the essential phenomena.”
- Jane Jacobs 


#199 DavidSchell

DavidSchell
  • Member
  • 441 posts

Posted 12 January 2020 - 02:54 PM

In 2013 and then again in 2015/16 I worked close to Welburn's and used it.   Boy was it bad.  Run down yes, but much more importantly filthy.   The selection was not great   Fresh fruit and veg were not great.   The prices were not cheap even though they paid minimum wage and obviously did not spend money on a lot of stuff other stores spend it on.    Staff also told me it was not a great place to work, bad management culture.

 

The only reason Welburn's lasted as long as it did was because it had no competition for quit a distance.   I was certain once Save On moved in they would be gone rather quickly.

 

Reminds me of another local grocer also located on Cook St. 


  • Bernard, thundergun and Victoria Watcher like this

#200 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 15 January 2020 - 09:53 PM

A local grocer that works and is on the cheap end is Fairway.  Welburns could have been a Fairway equivalent but chose not to be one



 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users