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] Wellburn's Market redevelopment | 6-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
107 replies to this topic

#1 Citified.ca

Citified.ca
  • Administrator
  • 1,504 posts
  • LocationVictoria, BC

Posted 28 April 2018 - 08:36 AM

Citified profile: https://victoria.cit...18-cook-street/

 

Exclusive--Wellburns-Market-property-acquired;-dev-plans-include-mid-rise-residential-complex.jpg

The 107-year-old Wellburns Market building at 1050-1058 Pandora Avenue is the focus of development plans that could see the heritage complex restored and modern residences built on adjacent lands currently used as a surface parking lot.

 

Wellburn's Market property acquired; dev plans include mid-rise residential complex

https://victoria.cit...ential-complex/

 

The North Park neighbourhood's Wellburn's Market building and its adjacent surface parking lot have been tentatively purchased by a Vancouver-based real-estate development firm with plans to develop the property, Citified has learned.

 
The iconic two-storey heritage registered complex, situated at 1050-1058 Pandora Avenue, was constructed in 1911 as a mixed-use commercial and residential building that 107-years on remains true to its original purpose with a Wellburn's Market as the primary ground floor commercial tenant, and a barber shop with frontage onto Cook Street and rental apartments above.
 
Redevelopment plans for the Wellburn's properties are likely to incorporate a heritage restoration of the original building while a woodframed residential lowrise is anticipated on lands currently occupied by the parking lot. [Full article]

  • Kapten Kapsell, Nparker and thundergun like this
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.

#2 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 08:38 AM

8-10 stories would be better density, but this is great news for North Park just the same.  :banana:



#3 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 08:40 AM

Of course this will probably kill any plans more substantial than a garden shed.  :mad:

 

...Development plans will be presented in the coming days to the North Park Neighbourhood Association's board...



#4 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 47,516 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:01 AM

Is that par for the course, for only a 'board' of a neighbourhood association to preview a project before the actual neighbourhood association gets a chance to see it?


  • Nparker likes this

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


#5 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:06 AM

I think they can consult how they please. The board can then help them decide how best to do a public open.
<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>

#6 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 47,516 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:10 AM

Ah, gotcha. I had never heard of a board-only meeting like that before.


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


#7 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,618 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:17 AM

Yes that is odd. It might be a good idea though.

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#8 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:43 AM

Yes that is odd. It might be a good idea though.

I am not sure anything that gets vetted by the NPNA board is necessarily going to be better for the process. Look what they managed to do to the 953 Balmoral proposal. But let's face it, any project at this location will receive a huge backlash from the anti-gentrification/BANANAs crowd.

BTW, does the property include the cinder-block junker bunker?

bunker3.JPG

bunker2.JPG

 

And is this a separate parcel of land?

Capture.JPG



#9 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 9,330 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 10:13 AM

Back in the 1820s when I was doing this sort of thing it was decided that it would be a good idea for proponents to first meet informally with the neighbourhood association board to show their ideas for a site, even if the plans were vague. Giving feedback at an earlier stage was seen as beneficial for all involved rather than showing the whole association a finished take-it-or-leave-it plan.

 

I guess the shack is included. There is a lot of room for density while retaining that great facade. It must not be destroyed. It's a great urban corner.There are so few remaining urban corners like this outside Old Town.


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

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#10 tiger11

tiger11
  • Member
  • 66 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 10:24 AM

Here is the gis map of the site to show parcel lines. My best guess is that only the area shaded with blue is included. The other parcel to the north (shaded yellow) that you mention is owned by a different party. The entire blue shaded area is owned by one party.  However, it is entirely possible that both parties have agreed to sell and will be included in the development.

Attached Images

  • Screen Shot 2018-04-28 at 11.21.37 AM.png

Edited by tiger11, 28 April 2018 - 10:28 AM.


#11 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 47,516 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 10:39 AM

Right, the original listing included the blue parcels.


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


#12 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 11:12 AM

...There is a lot of room for density while retaining that great facade. It must not be destroyed. It's a great urban corner...

I agree 100%

...My best guess is that only the area shaded with blue is included. The other parcel to the north (shaded yellow) that you mention is owned by a different party. The entire blue shaded area is owned by one party.  However, it is entirely possible that both parties have agreed to sell and will be included in the development.

If all parcels were included I think a project that stretched along the entire Cook Street block, more or less continuing the existing retail frontage would be great. I'd expand the park into the area I have outlined in red to create more of a buffer with the new development.

wellburn's2.png

A very crude approximation of the Cook Street facade.

Capture2.JPG

I don't think it should actually match the Wellburn's architecture, rather honour it in scale and rhythm. The more emphasis on the traditional urban feel the better here IMHO.


Edited by Nparker, 28 April 2018 - 11:21 AM.


#13 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,022 posts

Posted 28 April 2018 - 02:12 PM

Is that par for the course, for only a 'board' of a neighbourhood association to preview a project before the actual neighbourhood association gets a chance to see it?


The normal process is to show the proposal to the land use committee of the neighbourhood association (CALUC); this meeting would be open to the public. Then the developer would submit an application for rezoning/DP...
  • Mike K., Nparker and sdwright.vic like this

#14 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,231 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 11:34 AM

Prefer to see three distinguished buildings/styles here: the old building, something else on the parking lot, and something else again on the Mason St. corner.

 

So would they be putting any additional levels on the old building?



#15 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 11:40 AM

...So would they be putting any additional levels on the old building?

Something tells me no for a couple of reasons. I doubt the original structure could withstand any additional weight without pretty much obliterating all but the facade, and I suspect that is not desired. Secondly, I think the ONLY way this will get past the NPNA (and the North Park anti-gentrification crowd) will be to preserve the existing structure as close to its original form as possible. I am totally fine with this as long as sufficient density is allowed on the rest of the property to ensure viability.



#16 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,618 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 02:45 PM

I think it should be the podium but maybe that's just me. Also the the neighborhood association does not actually have any legal authority.

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#17 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,564 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 03:37 PM

...the the neighborhood association does not actually have any legal authority.

But they do have an inexplicable pull with some residents and members of city council. If the NPNA  doesn't like the proposal they will certainly make a lot of noise and ill-will for the developer within the community. Their actions during the St. Andrew's School proposal were deplorable.



#18 mcmusty

mcmusty
  • Member
  • 34 posts
  • LocationHarris Green

Posted 30 April 2018 - 04:10 PM

Which Vancouver developer is this? 



#19 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,022 posts

Posted 01 June 2018 - 11:53 AM

Yesterday was the deadline for the purchase to close; does anyone know if it was finalized?



#20 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,022 posts

Posted 30 June 2018 - 02:50 PM

I believe the purchase did close and the developer is District Properties Group (the developer of the Scott Building project at Hillside and Douglas).

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.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users