Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
K2 Condos | 21 fl | U/C
#61
(09-20-2017, 08:49 AM)rangersfan Wrote: I can't help but thinking that this development seems incomplete or was done on the cheap.

The King St facing side looks sharp with interesting cladding and large windows, but the side facing Regina looks like a completely different building with smaller windows.

I still like the massing of the project, just don't understand why there is not a uniform finish to the building's exterior.

My ever-cynical first reaction was to think it would be easier to identify local residential projects that don't look like they were done on the cheap.
Reply
#62
(09-20-2017, 09:39 AM)panamaniac Wrote: My ever-cynical first reaction was to think it would be easier to identify local residential projects that don't look like they were done on the cheap.

Barrel Yards.  Caroline.  RED.  Bauer Lofts.  144 Park.  1 Victoria.  City Centre.  Arrow Lofts.  Trio.

I don't have any Northdale projects for the list, although I'm sure there must be at least a few.
Reply
#63
(09-20-2017, 10:14 AM)tomh009 Wrote:
(09-20-2017, 09:39 AM)panamaniac Wrote: My ever-cynical first reaction was to think it would be easier to identify local residential projects that don't look like they were done on the cheap.

Caroline.  RED.  Bauer Lofts.  144 Park.  1 Victoria.  City Centre.  Arrow Lofts.  Trio.

I don't have any Northdale projects for the list, although I'm sure there must be at least a few.

I think most of those also look pretty cheap. The sad reality is that this region has a very low standard for architecture and construction quality, and developers are always looking to maximize their profits as much as possible, like any other business. What happened is that the Region started growing too fast, so developers could build almost anything they wanted as there was not a lot of competition for a while. That is starting to change and you can see new projects trying to differentiate themselves by having better amenities or higher quality interiors, etc. I lived at Bauer and trust me, it was built cheaply and it shows.
Reply
#64
(09-20-2017, 10:20 AM)urbd Wrote: I think most of those also look pretty cheap. The sad reality is that this region has a very low standard for architecture and construction quality, and developers are always looking to maximize their profits as much as possible, like any other business. What happened is that the Region started growing too fast, so developers could build almost anything they wanted as there was not a lot of competition for a while. That is starting to change and you can see new projects trying to differentiate themselves by having better amenities or higher quality interiors, etc. I lived at Bauer and trust me, it was built cheaply and it shows.

I want to highlight this because I have never been inside most of the buildings I listed.  I listed ones that do not (to me) look cheap on the outside, without knowing what corners were cut on the inside.  Building cheaply and cutting corners is a problem for much of the North American construction industry.

That said, I will claim that Auburn's projects (Arrow Lofts and Barrel Yards) are decently built -- again, relative to our local practices in this country.
Reply
#65
(09-20-2017, 10:14 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Barrel Yards.  Caroline.  RED.  Bauer Lofts.  144 Park.  1 Victoria.  City Centre.  Arrow Lofts.  Trio.

I don't have any Northdale projects for the list, although I'm sure there must be at least a few.

I suspect that many people would instantly rule out any building that has the brushed steel siding that is on pretty much every new Northdale project, but I still say that the 3 new colourful towers on Albert St are very striking and don't seem "cheap" to me.
Reply
#66
Those ones on Albert are definitely good on the outside but I've heard the interiors aren't very well done from someone who lives there.
Reply
#67
How "well done" could the interiors of apartments meant as high-turnover student rentals be? I think a lot of the latest stuff near the universities look great, along with some of the developments Tom mentioned- I think Red and Cortes turned out looking quite nice, specifically
Reply
#68
Cortes is indeed looking good so far, too! (Again, judging the outside, not interior finishes.)
Reply
#69
Truthfully, most of the recent buildings in the region are cheap. As pointed out above, it was a micro-development boom. Most of it was related to the demand for universities. In 15-20 years these buildings are going to look gross...I know a lot about architecture and materials, believe me. It's safe to say most of the condominium buildings are going to age well - i.e not "fall apart" like apartment buildings tend to do as they age over the decades. But a lot of these low-rent student housing blocks are not. Call me cynical, perhaps, but I know it'll happen. It's something architects and developers dread within the industry. Little booms of cheap places that pepper a city, only to start having problems. CityPlace in Toronto is a good example of this. The buildings even *look* good - neomodern glass condos - but a quick search will show you even a couple years after being finished, many were plagued with problems. Now just think what block of student flats in a mid-sized city, built for a fraction of the price, will look like in a while.

You can easily tell apart one from another those buildings in Waterloo Region which are built to last - and will. They look good and are built good. And you can see (again, as mentioned above) that developers are more and more looking to build to a higher standard of quality. Student housing is what it is (you can't compare them to condos) but the city should have been a little more picky (maybe they really couldn't, I don't have any work involved in WR, so I don't know how the bureaucracy is here). The skyline uptown is nothing but these mammoth blocks of low-quality, low-rent buildings. Indeed, I hope some of them are covered up by better looking developments.
Reply
#70
"I know a lot about architecture and materials, believe me."

We believe you.

"You can easily tell apart from one another, those buildings in Waterloo Region which are built to last - and will. They look good and are built good."

It's not so easy for me. Can you give an example of a recent building that was well built and built to last, and a recent building that was not? People keep saying things like "this region has a very low standard for architecture and construction quality," but without giving many specifics us laymen are left to take those people at their word, or not. I know you're making a broad generalization, but what are the patterns you're seeing that make you believe construction here is generally done on the cheap? What are you seeing in, for instance, a building like Red that screams to you "low quality," that I am missing when I look at it and feel that it looks pretty nice and probably on the whole reasonably well-constructed?
Reply
#71
I'm curious too. To be honest, I'm mostly happy that the street-aesthetic has improved over some of those earlier Northdale building.
Reply
#72
(09-22-2017, 06:33 AM)MidTowner Wrote: What are you seeing in, for instance, a building like Red that screams to you "low quality," that I am missing when I look at it and feel that it looks pretty nice and probably on the whole reasonably well-constructed?

I don't think he's referring to the Red as an example, but rather to the Northdale cluster in general.  In his post he said:


(09-22-2017, 06:19 AM)ac3r Wrote: It's safe to say most of the condominium buildings are going to age well - i.e not "fall apart" like apartment buildings tend to do as they age over the decades. But a lot of these low-rent student housing blocks are not.


My assumption was that Red was in that former category.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)