Toronto CampusOne Student Residence (was University Place) | 79.85m | 25s | Knightstone | Diamond Schmitt

I think the word would be shrewd or insiduous... wrong usage of the word cynical...
 
Granted this is a university residence, but consider the broader residential market. There is a massive housing demand for areas west of Spadina between King and Bloor that far exceeds what the low rise housing stock can absorb. There are very few sites to redevelop, so threads like this will become increasingly common.

Although I do think that this tower is appropriate, it would set such a damaging precedent that the project mustn't be approved. Having said that, this part of the city is going to have to evolve in the near future, and I'd expect to see lots more projects like the Beverley/Queen midrise popping up west of Spadina. U of T should move this project to either the east side of McCaul south of College, or somewhere along Bloor. A nice 12 storey building like the one proposed at Beverley and Queen should be built instead, and in a perfect world would incrementally replace the underdeveloped residential side streets found farther west.
 
Just to clarify: this proposal comes from a private developer, not the University. Don't criticize the University for it. And in any case I'm not quite sure where the University could "easily" build 30 storeys on their campus. There is very little room left on the campus, unless they were to start demolishing existing buildings.

This site is a good one for a midrise building. I'd be glad to see 15 storeys or so. But not something of this height. The design may be good, but you can't just pretend that the context doesn't exist.
 
Actually, the SW corner of College/McCaul would be perfect for this one. There's already quasi-institutional uses to the south to act as a buffer, and it would draw the building closer to the old OPG building
 
I thought this was a U of T proposal? Based on the title of this thread anyway.
 
Observer Walt said:
Just to clarify: this proposal comes from a private developer, not the University. Don't criticize the University for it.
Click to expand...
According to this article, the university is leasing this land (which it owns) to the developer specifically so that it can build a new student residence. Although a private developer may be the one actually building, this is UofT land, and a UofT project.

And in any case I'm not quite sure where the University could "easily" build 30 storeys on their campus. There is very little room left on the campus, unless they were to start demolishing existing buildings.
Click to expand...
Aren't they going to demolish the buildings on College St. to construct the residence? Why is demolishing buildings on campus so problematic? All the new buildings that have gone up on campus in recent years have demolished older ones.
 
Tulse said:
Aren't they going to demolish the buildings on College St. to construct the residence? Why is demolishing buildings on campus so problematic? All the new buildings that have gone up on campus in recent years have demolished older ones.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you're thinking of the last generation or so, most of them have been add-ons, or infill, or replacements of relatively minor stuff--and what's left all too often is burdened by heritage or related zoning asterisks...
 
adma said:
Actually, if you're thinking of the last generation or so, most of them have been add-ons, or infill, or replacements of relatively minor stuff
Click to expand...
I think that significantly downplays the huge construction burst of this past "generation". Morrison Hall, Graduate House, Woodsworth Hall, Bahen Centre, Leslie Dan Pharmacy Building, Donnelly Centre for Cellular & Biomolecular Research, New College, ...all of these built since 2000, and almost all over 10 storeys or more.

and what's left all too often is burdened by heritage or related zoning asterisks...
Click to expand...
Of course, the College Street site has a similar "asterisk".
 
Tulse said:
I think that significantly downplays the huge construction burst of this past "generation". Morrison Hall, Graduate House, Woodsworth Hall, Bahen Centre, Leslie Dan Pharmacy Building, Donnelly Centre for Cellular & Biomolecular Research, New College, ...all of these built since 2000, and almost all over 10 storeys or more.
Click to expand...

...most of which is the aforementioned "add-ons, or infill, or replacements of relatively minor stuff", technically speaking. The biggest "heritage losses" being the St George Graduate Residence and the Botany Building glasshouse, the latter of which was moved to Allen Gardens, anyway...
 
Then I'm not sure what your original point was -- is it that all these projects have taken up all the spots for a project of this size?
 
Tulse said:
According to this article, the university is leasing this land (which it owns) to the developer specifically so that it can build a new student residence. Although a private developer may be the one actually building, this is UofT land, and a UofT project. ...
Click to expand...

The University owns 245 College (I had forgotten that). They leased it to Knightstone for 99 years (effectively the same as selling it). Knightstone owns 253 College, the larger part of the site. It was never owned by the University. Knightstone will own the building outright, and they are taking on the development risk. It's not a University project at all.

As for the required demolition, that would not be a bad thing, in most people's opinion. The buildings involved are a small two-storey office building, and an old industrial warehouse, dating from (I think) the 1920s, and not in the best of condition. The loss of these two structures will not be considered a disaster by too many people. Demolition is not, in itself, a bad thing, unless it involves the loss of a heritage building, which is not the case here. Property renewal, in older parts of the city, often involves demolition, and the usual result is an improvement.
 
Knightstone will own the building outright, and they are taking on the development risk. It's not a University project at all.
Click to expand...
The preliminary planning report summarizes the project this way:

"This application proposes a privately built and operated, 42-storey academic residence. A 3-storey podium is proposed to contain retail, academic services and lecture halls to be used by the University of Toronto at 245-51 College Street, and 39 and 40 Glasgow Street."

As I read that, yes, it is being built privately, but for the use of the University (and presumably the "academic residence" is for UofT students exclusively), and on land partially given to the builder by the University. Only in the most technical sense is this not a "University project", unless I am misunderstanding something.

As for the required demolition, that would not be a bad thing, in most people's opinion.
Click to expand...
I agree -- I don't think anyone is terribly concerned about what will be torn down, merely the height of what is to be built.
 
Tulse said:
I agree -- I don't think anyone is terribly concerned about what will be torn down, merely the height of what is to be built.
Click to expand...

Without getting into a discussion of the possible precedent that this might set for the area, what exactly is objectionable about the height, in and of itself? How will the surrounding neighbourhood be impacted negatively?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top