Toronto CampusOne Student Residence (was University Place) | 79.85m | 25s | Knightstone | Diamond Schmitt
- Thread starter Observer Walt
- Start date
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
christiesplits
Senior Member
Sweet Jesus this is one pile of junk.
ADRM
Senior Member
That's far too inconsiderate of junk piles everywhere.
Student99
Active Member
wouldn't be surprised if several projects suddenly get approved on neighbouring sites.... people will soon want this monstrosity covered up from public view.
Miscreant
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2011
- Messages
- 3,616
- Reaction score
- 1,794
- Location
- Where it's urban. And dense.
It's utterly horrific in person. It's like being encroached upon by a massive blob.
ca$hflow
New Member
Who's to blame for this urban tragedy? Architect? Contractor? Developer?
am29
Active Member
^The community for rejecting the original proposal which had a much slimmer tower and from what it seemed better materials?
innsertnamehere
Superstar
the better materials would never have made it to construction. The massing of the building has nothing to do with the cladding.
Who is to blame for this one? a planner or councillor who decided they would rather have a shorter, fatter building instead of a taller, skinnier one.
Who is to blame for this one? a planner or councillor who decided they would rather have a shorter, fatter building instead of a taller, skinnier one.
maestro
Senior Member
Taller is hardly better. It wasn't much slimmer either.
Zoning controls in Toronto is to blame. Nothing remotely this large (whether taller and slimmer or shorter and fatter ) should have gotten through.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
I'm with @innsertnamehere. I'd be fine with more height and a much slimmer aspect ratio. This bloated blob is the unfortunate result of trying to recoup as much lost GFA as possible while squeezing it into a much shorter form.
That said, I also agree that, given DSAI's recent incompetence, there's no guarantee that a taller building would have guaranteed a better material palette.
That said, I also agree that, given DSAI's recent incompetence, there's no guarantee that a taller building would have guaranteed a better material palette.
Hey hey hey everybody, you're going to hurt the OMB's feelings if you don't include their part in this fiasco…
…and, as the material palette is pretty much dictated by the budget, and as the massive overbuilding here is a result of the business plan, since those things are down to the developer, put Knightstone at the top of your list if you're unhappy.
42
…and, as the material palette is pretty much dictated by the budget, and as the massive overbuilding here is a result of the business plan, since those things are down to the developer, put Knightstone at the top of your list if you're unhappy.
42
Gphorce
Active Member
Oh man, this is just downright spiteful at this intersection. The massing is offensive and the materials are so rough. So much went wrong to make this happen.
maestro
Senior Member
The OMB wouldn't have even been involved if we had enforceable allowable densities where any proposal exceeding them would be declined.
I'd love to be proven wrong but, I don't see anyone building a 40ish storey student residence especially in a point tower form. Knightstone, in particular, is a private equity management company. They will developer the most efficient, profit making program their expert American partner, Scion, can produce. The original curtain wall plan was never going to happen.