Queensview Development to Continue

In 2018, Council agreed to a deal where the parking lot at 36 Queen (opposite the Post Office) would be sold to a developer who would then build Condos that included public parking spaces as well as spaces for residents.  The original deal allowed the public parking spaces to be charged at a rate no more than twice Town rates.  The 5 storey condos would be “high end” with a roof top garden – see the presentation by the developer in resources below.  The time frame for this project expired due to Covid as well as planning department delays but the developer continued work on it.  At Monday’s Committee of the Whole (CoW) meeting, Council agreed to an extension (which may take the form of a new agreement) and a new timeline.  The new closing date will be no later than 30 June 2024 when it’s expected that Site Plan Approval will be given.

The memo to Council from Treasurer Ian Davey describes the development:

The proposed Queensview Gardens is a mixed-use development for the combined properties at 22 and 36 Queen Street and will be comprised of 73 dwelling units and 5,100 square feet of at-grade commercial space. Three levels of structured parking are being provided to accommodate a total of 162 vehicles, including 65 “Green P” public parking spaces (to replace the existing McGill Street public parking spaces) 21 commercial spaces and 76 residential spaces dedicated to the 73 residential units.

36 Queen St - Parking Lot being sold
36 Queen St – Parking Lot being sold

See also Developer’s presentation in Resources below.

The plan shows underground parking – if so, then pumps and backup power may be required (as used in Third Street Condos) since it would be under the water table.

The price for the lot has no doubt increased significantly since 2018 but an appraisal in mid 2021 said that the value had not increased at that point.  In 2018, I reported:

The agreed sale price is $600k and the appraised value is $1,133K (22 Queen sold/closed for $1,050K in July 2017). But the Town gains with the addition of an indoor parking facility valued at between $960K and $1,600K which makes the total value to the Town between $1,560K and $2,200K. The Condo Corporation will manage the 64 spaces and charge parking fees at no more than twice Town rates (as set out in its Fees and Charges By-law). This parking arrangement will be secured with a 99 year lease.

There was an update to Council in March 2021 – see report in Resources below.

Ian Davey said that there were 4 conditions/items to be completed before the deal could close:

  1. Due Diligence (each party explores the accuracy of what they have been told) – completed in 2019.
  2. Environmental – soil studies etc – partially completed.
  3. Site Plan Approval – no later than 30 June 2024. See timeline in memo fro Ian Davey.
  4. Negotiation of a Parking lease.

He also said he was confident the project is viable and would proceed – one reason was that ex-Planning Director Glenn McGlashon was now acting as a consultant for the developer.

Council voted to extend the agreement to 30 June 2024 but asked that they be provided an update on the appraisal from 2021 before a final decision is made at the Regular Council meeting next week.


Print Article: 


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
14 July 2022 8:53 am

High rates for parking and infraction Tickets must be the New high income earner for the Town
The By Law fellow nearly got me yesterday He was already writing the ticket on my car 7 Mins before it was due to expire

Reply to  Sandpiper
15 July 2022 8:52 am

Did you take a photo and send it to the director of legislative services? I’m sure the town would like these things.

14 July 2022 6:41 am

I wonder if all of the underground parking spaces will have hook-ups for the coming wave of EV’s?

14 July 2022 6:35 am

With condos across from the post office, beside the Frink, at the corner of Albert ( Queen? ) and Division, and at the Quigley Pro Hardware site, traffic in the downtown is going to be dazed and confused and parking space is going to be at a premium.

We need to keep the parking lot at the corner of Queen and McGill, not offer it to developers at a reduced rate.

When is the next municipal election?

Cobourg taxpayer
13 July 2022 2:16 pm

A couple concerns; the parking rate for public parking spaces can be “no more then twice town rates” in this proposed parking structure at 36 Queen. Hourly parking at $5 per hour and $40 for the day will in all likelihood increase to twice that so this has become much more financially viable then before. It will be interesting to see if the public will pay these rates.
In 2018 the town agreed to sell this property for $600000, with an appraisal of $1.133k. In2021 the value had not increased!!!! How is that possible? Anyone following real estate values knows this is bs. Fortunately Council is getting a reappraisal. I wonder how much more the developer will pay for 36 Queen? Glen Mcglashon as consultant can advise. Too bad he’s no longer on the public purse so he could explain how “planning department delays” slowed this project down, maybe consultants work faster then public servants.

Ken Strauss
Reply to  Cobourg taxpayer
13 July 2022 3:31 pm

If the property was appraised for $1.133M in 2018 then why was it “sold” (given away) for half its value?

Reply to  Ken Strauss
13 July 2022 5:42 pm

Excellent Question I bet you can’t get a reasonable answer
especially when 2 properties just half a block away to the west
both sold for over $1 Mil each and then had to be cleaned and demolished
as well

Reply to  Ken Strauss
15 July 2022 7:56 am

I seem to remember that there was some special deal with parking. The developer had to have a certain number of parking spots for public use was a condition of the sale. Maybe this condition is why the lot was sold at a greatly discounted price. It will be interesting to see if the public parking condition will actually result in useable public parking spots. If not, will there be any penalty to the developer?

Ken Strauss
Reply to  Kevin
15 July 2022 9:53 am

Kevin, there is currently public parking available on the property and all money from parking charges goes to Cobourg. Why is it sensible to sell for half the market value, get fewer parking spots, allow gouging of residents for twice the current parking charge and Cobourg loses all parking revenue plus any future increase in property value? It seems like a sweet deal for the developer but horrible for Cobourg!

Reply to  Ken Strauss
15 July 2022 11:03 am

Ken S.
That may have been the price to get the development.
The Auto Electric (AE) property offers limited development opportunities for developers. It also has to be demolished and may require environmental cleanup.

The AE property combined with the parking lot is a much more attractive development property, providing space for a significantly larger commercial/residential development with “owner” parking. Public parking will also be provided, albeit at a premium price.

The Town will get significant development fees plus higher property taxes. The AE’s current taxes are “modest” and the parking lot pays no taxes to the Town,

Yes, the Town will lose the parking revenue, but it will also lose the expenses related to the parking lot, including the County and School property taxes paid by the Town.

It would be interesting to see the Town’s cost/benefit analysis for this transaction, assuming one was done.

Last edited 8 months ago by Bryan
Hale Geezer
Reply to  Cobourg taxpayer
15 July 2022 1:08 pm

Big numbers such as  $600000 are much easier to read if you put in commas, as:  $600,000.
Thank you.

13 July 2022 8:20 am

As with most new underground parking access for Local Pick up trucks , vans etc
will be lost due to the low ceiling heights or suspension of utilities & pipes etc

It will also reduce the number of vendors that will be able to attend most functions at Victoria park Ie: the Highland games when the show up with their trucks and trailers carrying their goods .
So how will this additional lack of parking space affect the approval of the Project at the south west corner of Division and Albert that was already short 20 + parking spaces and had relied on the additional parking lots in the immediate area for approval .
I wonder if Glen is acting for them as well ??

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Sandpiper
13 July 2022 12:07 pm

It’s none of your business. Glen is a private citizen. Get used to it.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
13 July 2022 5:38 pm

But as late as last week in a meeting the New Director of Planning
” Called Glen for his input and guidance as a consultant for the Town ”
Now please explain how this works CONFLICT

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Sandpiper
13 July 2022 8:50 pm

What conflict?

Reply to  Sandpiper
13 July 2022 9:33 pm

Glen isnt employed by the Town. What conflict?He consults and staff can choose to listen or not.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Informed
14 July 2022 10:48 am


Glenn McGlashon
Reply to  Sandpiper
18 July 2022 10:58 am

For clarity, transparency and for purposes of full disclosure, since my retirement from the Town of Cobourg I have established a private planning consultancy and have been assisting the Town’s new Director of Planning & Development in the transition to her new position and by offering historical background information on past projects that I have knowledge of, when requested. I also have a very select number of private clients in Cobourg and, as part of my arrangement with the Town, I have fully disclosed them and abstain from any discussion or involvement surrounding these clients and their landholdings in accordance with my governing body’s professional code of ethics. This is quite standard in the industry. Your clients, Sandpiper, own land in a distant sector of Town and have no relationship whatsoever to my client, Queensview Gardens, or their landholdings and subsidiaries — my role in this case was simply to offer my background knowledge on your clients’ lands to the Director. There is no conflict, period. With respect to the reference in John’s main column to “planning department delays”, I can say with total confidence that any delays in this project were not a result of the Town’s Planning Department (past or present) given that there have been no development applications filed as of yet by Queensview, with the exception of the minor variance application that was filed, processed and approved swiftly by the Town earlier this year. In addition, Planning Department staff organized a pre-consultation meeting in early March between Queensview’s project team and the Town’s Development Review Team to help facilitate discussion and identify key issues and informational requirements for the eventual submission of a complete application for Site Plan Approval. As in many cases for projects of this magnitude ($60+ million, multiple levels of structured parking, complex… Read more »

Reply to  Glenn McGlashon
18 July 2022 6:27 pm

well said Glenn now get back on the golf course!

Glenn McGlashon
Reply to  ben
18 July 2022 10:57 pm

Indeed I will Ben!

12 July 2022 5:28 pm

one reason was that ex-Planning Director Glenn McGlashon was now acting as a consultant for the developer.”

So much for Glenn’s quiet retirement!

SW Buyer
Reply to  ben
12 July 2022 5:38 pm

A marketing slogan perhaps:

Want results? Hire Glenn….fixer extraordinaire

Wally Keeler
Reply to  ben
12 July 2022 10:01 pm

Oh it’s wonderfully quiet. He gets to utilize his experience and knowledge for a fair fee in a manner that eschews the public interest aka ingrates. He is 100% self-agency, beyond the reach of the rest of us. A friend who lives in North Vancouver told me that when the revolution comes, the wealthy high up the mountain will party while rolling their empty champagne bottles down the streets to the masses below. Helicopters arrive.

Mr. McGlashon has become a sovereign individual, he earned it, I applaud his situation.

Hale Geezer
Reply to  Wally Keeler
15 July 2022 1:11 pm

Not sure of the relevance, but the scenario is hilarious.