The student housing market in Waterloo has been expanding quickly in the last few years. The area around the University of Waterloo and Laurier has been filled with construction, as glitzy towers go up and up. It is a real dream for the civil engineers, who can see buildings of all designs being constructed over the months as they trudge to school. What’s more, the competition to attract students is fierce; each new project is filled with amenities and services that the property owners think their primary market wants, trying to get a little edge over all the other buildings that are clamouring for attention. Unfortunately, with each new term there is a building that promises too much and fails to deliver.
ICON was (and is) a top contender for the title of most-luxurious student housing. Its lease website bills it as “The next generation of student living.” Located literally across the street from campus at Phillip and Columbia Streets, it is a convenient place to live. It offers every amenity one could ask for: workspaces for the fabrication-minded, private study lounges, a fitness center and rooftop basketball court, and Wi-Fi everywhere. There’s even a daily shuttle to the aforementioned adjacently-located campus, and a weekly shuttle to the grocery store. Everything about the twin 25-story buildings that make up ICON are designed to be attractive to students, even the sleek mobile app they use for rent payments.
Unfortunately, ICON is also the latest student housing project that was not ready for the first day of classes. On September 2—the evening before the move-in day—students who had purchased leases in ICON received an email saying that the building would not be complete for at least another week. The reason given is that the city did not grant the occupancy permit they required to allow people to move in. In exchange for the trouble, ICON waived September’s rent and tried to accommodate students in local hotels.
As may be indicated by the fact that the city did not grant the occupancy permit, the buildings are not close to being ready for occupation. On September 9 the south tower was deemed safe, and tenants started moving in. However, those tenants complained of missing interior doors and furniture. One apartment complained of flooding, which turned out to be the result of a poorly-brazed pipe fitting; not catastrophic, but hardly encouraging to the already frustrated students.
Local news sources took notice, interviewing students and indirectly putting pressure on ICON’s management. Waterloo Mayor Dave Jaworsky weighed in, saying that his primary concern was that students have a place to stay. He further commented that ICON’s lack of communication about why the buildings were delayed and how they were working to move people in “[made him] extremely disappointed.” All the publicity was undoubtedly good news for students, helping them pressure ICON into producing results. The bad news is the fact that this is a familiar story.
The previous two years have also seen unfinished apartments leaving students stuck with poor or no housing. In 2014, One Columbia at King and Columbia was unfinished, forcing students to live in hotels until mid-October. Students attempting to cancel their leases and find new apartments found Schembri, the management of the building, uncooperative. In 2015, Accommod8u’s property 228 Albert St. was nearly as bad. While students were able to move in on time, they reported exposed wiring and unpainted walls. They were also asked to not use their balconies until further notice. While the 228 Albert St. tenants may not have suffered through the pains of relocating during the term, they were still subjected to a positively un-stellar experience in what was supposed to be a top-end apartment for which they had paid appropriately.
It’s possible to understand the property owners’ predicament; they want to get their buildings open as soon as possible to start generating income. Failing to open in September is a good as not opening until January, since few people will be looking for housing during the term. Perhaps the negative press from these three failures will cause builders to adopt more liberal timelines. Or perhaps there will always be unknowing or unscrupulous renters who are drawn in by the glitz.
Leave a Reply