The Plague of EIFS

[adma]

For me, one heart-breaking EIFS reclad is the small apartment building on the northwest corner of Bloor and Keele. It was originally a brown brick building with dark windows in one of the better late 60s/early 70s styles. It didn't stand out in a big way but it was very attractive and worked well in that spot. When the EIFS went on, a bunch of cheap, fakey historical detail was added and now the building looks like slum housing. The worst offense are the inappropriately centred 'keystones' that clash with the windows.

Actually, IIRC that used to be concrete mini-Brutalist, not brown brick--but I suppose Brutal was too brutal and they decided to, harrumph, "humanize" it. But a good example of the EIFS-mummified 70s brick you're talking about is at the SW corner of Yonge + Imperial.

And while I don't know where the photo documentation might exist, a decent anti-EIFS statement might be in the form of actual, original stuccoed-a-la-Arts & Crafts dwellings that were reclad in EIFS because, well, stucco is stucco, y'know, I suppose. (One example that stands out in my head is at Superior and Stanley in Mimico--look at it now, and you can just tell that some recently-present Voysey-esque character and texture has been extinguished.)

 

[Anna]

...And while I don't know where the photo documentation might exist, a decent anti-EIFS statement might be in the form of actual, original stuccoed-a-la-Arts & Crafts dwellings that were reclad in EIFS because, well, stucco is stucco, y'know, I suppose. (One example that stands out in my head is at Superior and Stanley in Mimico--look at it now, and you can just tell that some recently-present Voysey-esque character and texture has been extinguished.)

It's EIFS-in-progress on Google Streetview in August 2011.
And here's the before:

"Descendants of the family lived in the house for over 100 years before its sale to new owners in 2011."
http://mimicohistory.blogspot.ca/2011/12/dr-william-woods-house-41-superior.html

 

[adma]

Ah, miracle of miracles, thank you...

 

[thecharioteer]

I would call this 'red brick houses, as painted by Lawren Harris'

Good point, Anna! Perhaps I took Harris's artistic use of the colour red a bit literally. Speaking of Harris, his own house at 2 Ava Crescent in Forest Hill, designed by the architect Alexandra Biriukova in 1930, is stucco on concrete block:

 

[flonicky]

Actually, IIRC that used to be concrete mini-Brutalist, not brown brick--

Pretty sure you're misremembering. I had a friend who lived there so I used to visit the building from time to time pre-conversion. A concrete to EIFS conversion isn't something I would have mourned.

 

[LowPolygon]

Pretty sure you're misremembering. I had a friend who lived there so I used to visit the building from time to time pre-conversion. A concrete to EIFS conversion isn't something I would have mourned.

a lovely little late 70s dark brown brick and smoked glass building is what i recall as well. may have had some concrete detailing. and you're right: it was just sort of quietly there. in any case, it's a totally depressing travesty now...

 

[adma]

Sorry; I still seem to remember that as a "concrete bathplug" sort of thing, with brick scarcely if at all factoring into it. (But it doesn't make what was done to it any more excusable.)

Of course, the Eug types would say "so? it isn't like it was heritage or anything, and it's their right to improve as they see fit, etc--better than a concrete bathplug"

 

[freshcutgrass]

No kidding. Like, when I "sprung" the EIFS metaphor onto Eug in the Mayor Ford thread, I didn't realize that there'd be an anti-EIFS spinoff thread where Eug winds up being the cramped, constipated Joe-Blow-mediocre epitome of what the anti-EIFS argument is battling against...

I don't know why you would be even remotely surprised....what makes a Rob Ford apologetic is exactly what makes a EIFS apologetic.

The real danger is the numerous side streets around town that are being ruined with this crap. It's like newbies don't like red or yellow brick--what's wrong with these ppl?!

This is hardly anything new. Entire swaths of victorian homes were ruined by the Portuguese immigrants decades ago, with their flat-fronting, angel brick, wrought iron and Madonna tiles by the front door. The only conciliation is, that it was soooo frigging tacky, it sort of adds a bit of comedy to the tragedy. A lot of these homes are also in desirable old neighbourhoods, and the values are so high that it pays to actually "re-victorianize" them, which when done right, actually looks ok.

It's an age old problem....you can't criminalize bad taste (just like we have to let idiots vote).

 

[adma]

I don't know why you would be even remotely surprised....what makes a Rob Ford apologetic is exactly what makes a EIFS apologetic.

Though actually, despite the thread in question, Eug (a past-Smitherman and not-terribly-likely-future-Ford voter) *isn't* the heavy-duty Fordista some of those threads Ford-defenders are--or at least any "apologetic" on his part is out of empathy for his neighbours. Which isn't unlike his EIFS defence, in fact....

 

[thecharioteer]

One important aspect of the EIFS discussion relates to the wall/brick/rain screen failures in 1960's high-rises, a central issue in the "Tower Renewal" programme. In many cases, the recladding of these towers is a logical solution. The four high-rises at the York Mills/Leslie intersection, two already reclad, illustrate the issue:

 

[LowPolygon]

One important aspect of the EIFS discussion relates to the wall/brick/rain screen failures in 1960's high-rises, a central issue in the "Tower Renewal" programme. In many cases, the recladding of these towers is a logical solution. The four high-rises at the York Mills/Leslie intersection, two already reclad, illustrate the issue:

very true, Charioteer. as much as i dislike the solution (which seems in any case to more frequently take the form of metal siding rather than EIFS), one can't really argue that there's a problem with these larger buildings. nor does one logically expect the owners of these kinds of buildings to employ anything other than the cheapest, most efficient solution.

and i suppose the fact that the vast majority of these kinds of mid 60s-early 70s high rises are pretty unremarkable to begin with lessens the 'sense of loss' inherent in these tower block reclads.

it hurts more when one sees it applied to the smaller, more significant, international style apartments, like the Rosedale Ravine Apartments from 1956. this building was listed as part of the South Rosedale Heritage Conservation District in 2003, but somehow the owners were still able to get away with destroying it with EIFS at a later point.

 

[freshcutgrass]

it hurts more when one sees it applied to the smaller, more significant, international style apartments, like the Rosedale Ravine Apartments from 1956. this building was listed as part of the South Rosedale Heritage Conservation District in 2003, but somehow the owners were still able to get away with destroying it with EIFS at a later point.

Someone actually came up with those fake window frames on the end of the building as an architectural flourish.

Lots of people think this looks nice.

 

[adma]

very true, Charioteer. as much as i dislike the solution (which seems in any case to more frequently take the form of metal siding rather than EIFS), one can't really argue that there's a problem with these larger buildings. nor does one logically expect the owners of these kinds of buildings to employ anything other than the cheapest, most efficient solution.

Though the metal-siding solution seems be a cheap commonplace from *before* the Tower Renewal programme--and indeed, one that it was intended to alleviate.

and i suppose the fact that the vast majority of these kinds of mid 60s-early 70s high rises are pretty unremarkable to begin with lessens the 'sense of loss' inherent in these tower block reclads.

Not so much that they're unremarkable, but that we're *conditioned* to their so-called "unremarkability"...indeed, I'd consider it something of a "weak spot" in the Tower Renewal programme, in that it pays short shrift to encouraging some kind of aesthetic consistency with what existed before. Thus not only EIFS-ing, but inapt balcony replacements as well. (Then again, such softballing might have been necessary to make it all politically palatable--otherwise, it might have been viewed as a commie-block-conoisseur's conceit.)

Though if there's anything that demonstrates "Tower Renewal" aesthetics at their best-in-spite-of-EIFS, it's the twins on Hillsboro and Davenport overlooking Ramsden Park...

 

[thecharioteer]

Not so much that they're unremarkable, but that we're *conditioned* to their so-called "unremarkability"...indeed, I'd consider it something of a "weak spot" in the Tower Renewal programme, in that it pays short shrift to encouraging some kind of aesthetic consistency with what existed before. Thus not only EIFS-ing, but inapt balcony replacements as well. (Then again, such softballing might have been necessary to make it all politically palatable--otherwise, it might have been viewed as a commie-block-conoisseur's conceit.)

Case in point the "renovation" a few years ago of a small (rather interesting) building on the west side of Avenue Road south of Eglinton, in which the central curtain-walled central portion was replaced with punched windows in a stucco-panelized wall:

 

[adma]

And in a different vein further south at Chaplin Crescent, the brick 30s Moderne walkups that were made to look more coffee-table Moderne than necessary through stuccoing...