If stone is expensive and time consuming on an building to be used . Why can't a cladding companies at least create some form of new metal cladding that really mimics the stone look. To blend in with the old facade. And then using that famous blue green window look that this city got to have! That would definitely be a change from the same old blue green cladding look !!
 
Big Daddy said:
Stone would be nice but it is heavy (costs) and stains easily. Down the road you have to reclad anyway (a.k.a. FCP)
Click to expand...

You also have to eventually replace a glass facade or concrete curtainwall panels. FCP's situation wasn't the norm. They used the wrong stone (not granite) and they also cheaped out on it. It's not the only marble facade in Toronto. It's the only one that has had its facade replaced.
 
cd concept said:
If stone is expensive and time consuming on an building to be used . Why can't a cladding companies at least create some form of new metal cladding that really mimics the stone look. To blend in with the old facade. And then using that famous blue green window look that this city got to have! That would definitely be a change from the same old blue green cladding look !!
Click to expand...

That wouldn't be cheap either. The alternative to stone is to fake the look of stone using a concrete base or stucco.
 
^carrara marble wasn't a "cheap out" ..... was it a bad choice for freeze/thaw Toronto? Yes. Scotia granite better. But the Reichmann family ignored "marble history" and it certainly wasn't a cheap out. Mistake yes, cheap no. Not cheap at all.
 
upload_2018-2-23_11-4-34.png


upload_2018-2-23_11-5-8.png


upload_2018-2-23_11-5-49.png

source
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-2-23_11-4-34.png
    upload_2018-2-23_11-4-34.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 971
  • upload_2018-2-23_11-5-8.png
    upload_2018-2-23_11-5-8.png
    2.2 MB · Views: 977
  • upload_2018-2-23_11-5-49.png
    upload_2018-2-23_11-5-49.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 974
Not that this is real proposal, but lord if you are so pinched as to having to save a few pennies by keeping a building of this sort and then tack another 40s+ above it, not giving a damn about how the two buildings will jive and producing an aesthetic disaster in the process, you might as well give up now.

Pure. unadulterated. junk.

AoD
 
Last edited:
If this building was to be built. Would they have to demolish the old structure and rebuild it again ? Or just keep the facade part of this building ?
 
Same approach as 488 University I'd imagine



edit: Good god - that's terrible
 
I'm more amazed that a group of intelligent creative professionals sat around a table and came up with this. Bewildering.
 
3Dementia said:
^carrara marble wasn't a "cheap out" ..... was it a bad choice for freeze/thaw Toronto? Yes. Scotia granite better. But the Reichmann family ignored "marble history" and it certainly wasn't a cheap out. Mistake yes, cheap no. Not cheap at all.
Click to expand...

I'm not implying it was spandrel glass cheap. The choice to use a thinner rather than a thicker tile was a budgetary move that didn't pay off.
 
From KWT's latest newsletter:

Very negative community feedback on a 42-storey addition on top of a 20-storey existing building cantilevered over McGill Parkette. City staff and I told the owner of 415 Yonge St. their application was not supportable. They didn't listen and filed their re-zoning application anyway.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top