News   Nov 27, 2024
 780     4 
News   Nov 27, 2024
 672     1 
News   Nov 27, 2024
 1K     1 

The Plague of EIFS

878 and 880 Dundas St West (at Broadview)

that area has some of the craziest examples of EIFS on very small houses, some real doozies on Carlaw, south of Queen. another classic area is Earlscourt around Rogers Rd and Caledonia. lots of WW1 era worker's cottages now transformed into Stately Styrofoam Manses.

 
OK, a LOT of ugly! But what do you do when popping the roof off an East York bungalow? Pretty much every house that gets renovated north of Springdale needs a 2nd floor. You end up w/ crappy brick/siding combos, brick/EIFS, or you can integrate w/ EIFS + get some insulation R-factor. So EIFS CAN add some design pluses.

As someone pointed out, the big problem is bad taste. Cornices. Doodads.
 
OK, a LOT of ugly! But what do you do when popping the roof off an East York bungalow? Pretty much every house that gets renovated north of Springdale needs a 2nd floor. You end up w/ crappy brick/siding combos, brick/EIFS, or you can integrate w/ EIFS + get some insulation R-factor. So EIFS CAN add some design pluses.

As someone pointed out, the big problem is bad taste. Cornices. Doodads.

+1. On topping off houses, I see this as a completely viable choice vs. siding. My parents house is brick ground floor and aluminum siding second floor (80's reno), and it looks hideous (to me.) If it was mine, I'd EIFS the whole thing. They've also got funky three toned bricks from 70 years ago that were unmatchable at the time, making doing the second floor in brick obvious and standing out like a sore thumb..

In my area (bluffs), they're doing 3 sided teardowns. (there's some major cost differentiation in permits when you leave one wall standing.) But they'll entirely clad it in EIFS, or put face brick on the front and EIFS the rest, that I find unacceptable - but not surprised in the least. People want fancy faucets, and they don't want to pony up the dough for what really matters.

Ya, a lot of people say EIFS doesn't last, but that also comes down to the installer. I've seen lots of examples of 5 year old brick houses that were leaking. So the quality of the installer is also a large factor. In the next two years I'm planning to redo the outside of my house in EIFS because it looks far better than siding. In a sick way, I'd rather replace EIFS every ten years vs. replacing siding every 25/30 years - I hate vinyl/aluminum siding that much.

No excuses on heritage buildings though. If I could afford a Victorian house (as an easy example) I'd want it back to it's original state as much as possible if I were to fix it.

As for that 3 story monstrosity from a few pages ago, it wouldn't matter what it was clad in, it would be hideous. Brick, siding - curtain wall? It wouldn't matter, that building is just wrong.

Back to my house, if anyone has alternatives to EIFS in residential situations (wood framed house w/aluminum siding), please let me know. Looking for an appealing (and affordable) way to reclad my house, if there's other things out there, let me know.
 
OK, a LOT of ugly! But what do you do when popping the roof off an East York bungalow? Pretty much every house that gets renovated north of Springdale needs a 2nd floor. You end up w/ crappy brick/siding combos, brick/EIFS, or you can integrate w/ EIFS + get some insulation R-factor. So EIFS CAN add some design pluses.

As someone pointed out, the big problem is bad taste. Cornices. Doodads.

I am quite familiar with East York and there are some real cornball homes, mostly with stone front facades and shoddy EIFS along the side to save money.

Occasionally a EIFS job pops up that respects the original exterior:

urb - good.jpg


urb - very good.jpg


However, with second floor additions that use EIFS this is more typical:

urb - bad.jpg


Screenshot (79).jpg


And for those who want to really "class it up" they put in a stone facade in the front. Yes, that is lime green EIFS:

urb - 11.jpg


urb 1111.jpg
 

Attachments

  • urb - good.jpg
    urb - good.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 611
  • urb - bad.jpg
    urb - bad.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 793
  • urb - good.jpg
    urb - good.jpg
    20.5 KB · Views: 869
  • urb - ugly.jpg
    urb - ugly.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 580
  • urb - very good.jpg
    urb - very good.jpg
    20.7 KB · Views: 876
  • urb - 11.jpg
    urb - 11.jpg
    20.4 KB · Views: 817
  • urb 1111.jpg
    urb 1111.jpg
    18.7 KB · Views: 792
  • Screenshot (79).jpg
    Screenshot (79).jpg
    20.5 KB · Views: 814
Last edited:
Yeah, remember re "popping" a house that what "clashes" in some eyes and hands can be "thoughtful counterpoint" in others (and not even while breaking a budget); so, brick below and "something else" above (yes, even siding) needn't be fatal. Esp. if we consider that something like that has been done for ages; think of how many East York-ian bungalows (well, not *just* E York; but it's for the sake of argument here) have sprouted upper floors in the form of fat shed dormers that are perfectly in keeping with what's already there, or that there's lots of early c20 cases of houses with brick ground floors and shingled/timbered/something-or-other upper floors. You don't *have* to do it all one even treatment, or treat what exists as dispensable...
 
My head spins just trying to process the fact that there are people who think that looks good. Not just good, but the attempted aesthetic suggests that these people really think this looks either classy/convincingly classical/tasteful. Seriously, mind=blown.
 
My head spins just trying to process the fact that there are people who think that looks good. Not just good, but the attempted aesthetic suggests that these people really think this looks either classy/convincingly classical/tasteful. Seriously, mind=blown.

Could one ask the same question of those Forest Hill Viennese-whipped cream-stucco confections that have become the go-to plutocrat style (those poor Eden Smith Arts and Crafts houses never stood a chance):



 
Last edited:
Or what happened to this poor mansion on Jarvis north of Wellesley:

jarvisstucco.jpg
 

Attachments

  • jarvisstucco.jpg
    jarvisstucco.jpg
    95.2 KB · Views: 973

Back
Top