Toronto West Harbour City | ?m | 36s | Plaza | BDP Quadrangle

maestro said:
The precast panels should also outlast the brick providing the hangers and mounts don't rust away.
Click to expand...

Exactly... thereby making brick an unnecessary (at least in a few ways) expenditure.

People on this board are quick to criticize, but snap your fingers and make them a developer-- and I bet they'd be the one deciding to use precast brick instead of "real brick".

Part of architecture is making things attractive yet cost effective. This is, after all, the real world we live in.
 
SP!RE said:
I'd say bricklaying has become effectively dead and irrelevant, IF this staining process is as time-efficient and if the precast brick panels last long amounts of time as brick generally does.

It sucks (for those of us who are nostalgic, as I'd say almost all humans naturally are), but if these precast panels do their job and look like brick, then... well... bye bye real brick in the 21st century.
Click to expand...

I won't patronize you, as I understand that you're a member here and thus follow local development. So if you will, please focus attention on some of the other numerous projects that have used real brick, rather than resorted to a faux approximation: Casa, East, and even the TCHC building at 501 Adelaide St. E. There are plenty of others that have as well, and using an average-at-best faux historicist building as an anti-brick example probably isn't the best defense for your argument. Bricklaying is not a dead art, as it's still being actively practiced in the industry. These coloured precast panels look no more like brick than a detailed drawing glued to the building's facade would. Just the use of a brick styled detailing indicates that there is still a demand for that style, and the use of real brick vs. fake will separate the cheap developments from the superior ones.

I've reread your posts, so I'll say that I'm still not sure if you're defending the use of these panels or simply stating reality. If it's the latter, my feelings against the precast brick still stand, but I apologize for coming off as being rude.
 
I, as per usual, am not taking a stance at all really-- I am holding the two viewpoints simultaneously. It's an architectural debate that could go on for ever, depending on how is debating.

I don't think you were rude at all though.

From a strictly and purely modernist and efficiency-oriented point of view, real brick and bricklaying practises make no sense. From a greedy-developer point of view, same thing. But from other perspectives, brick is still preferred. I am not even going to begin to take sides on that one haha.
 
I too prefer brick/block however, it's track record is about the same as using thin carrera marble sheets. Of course we've made improvements on the installation process (better drainage) to possiby prevent the rapid deterioration on many slabs of the late 60s and 70s.
 
Last edited:
egotrippin said:
So if you will, please focus attention on some of the other numerous projects that have used real brick, rather than resorted to a faux approximation: Casa, East, and even the TCHC building at 501 Adelaide St. E. There are plenty of others that have as well, and using an average-at-best faux historicist building as an anti-brick example probably isn't the best defense for your argument.
Click to expand...

Good point. I don't know if developers or designers recognize enough the long tradition and heritage imortance of brick in this city. Probably the better ones do. The legitimacy of the design of this project has always been somewhat at question, or 'on the line' so to speak that using brick would probably have helped push it somewhat in the right direction.
 
I can't help but think of the horrid plastic/rubber faux brick that you can find stapled/nailed to some houses in certain parts of they city - kind of like exterior wallpaper. It seems that, for quite some time, we've been trying to find a way to re-create the look of brick without actually using brick.
 
I have a feeling that this is simply a case where it would have been too expensive/difficult for real brick to be used as a decorative element inside panels of pre-cast.

I have a feeling that real brick will continue to be used when it is possible and economical to use it (as we have seen in many present institituonal and condo projects) but that for certain instances, such as this decorative element in a precast panel, a little paint will do the trick.
 
Last edited:
OldManKensey said:
I can't help but think of the horrid plastic/rubber faux brick that you can find stapled/nailed to some houses in certain parts of they city - kind of like exterior wallpaper. It seems that, for quite some time, we've been trying to find a way to re-create the look of brick without actually using brick.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes! INSULBRICK!

This from AllExperts:

Insulbrick
Insulbrick is a form of brick-colored asphalt or asbestos siding that was used in the mid-20th century (most commonly from 1940-1960) to insulate a building and give it the appearance of bricks. The material came in rolls or sheets, and was applied like shingles to the side of a building.

Insulbrick deteriorates relatively quickly. The "bricks" themselves break from the backing, leaving a brown-black covering behind.

Insulbrick has fallen out of favor due to the creation of more realistic, more maintainable forms of siding. It does not appear to be manufactured any longer, and no existing supplies are known.
 
OldManKensey said:
I can't help but think of the horrid plastic/rubber faux brick that you can find stapled/nailed to some houses in certain parts of they city - kind of like exterior wallpaper. It seems that, for quite some time, we've been trying to find a way to re-create the look of brick without actually using brick.
Click to expand...

Hence my earlier Insulbrick comment - an asphalt material that was used, I believe, from the '30s to the '50s before aluminum siding came along. Before Insulbrick there was an embossed metal siding that resembled masonry - which I still spot occasionally on the sides of wood frame houses in my neighbourhood.

Then, of course, there's faux flooring. Laminate is a photograph of wood for the dedicated 21st century fauxiste - just as linoleum faked it for earlier generations. And before that there was faux wood grain, mahogany or walnut maybe ( which I discovered painted on the pine floors of the Winter Palace, when I had red oak floors laid a couple of years ago ).
 
Urban Shocker said:
Hence my earlier Insulbrick comment - an asphalt material that was used, I believe, from the '30s to the '50s before aluminum siding came along. Before Insulbrick there was an embossed metal siding that resembled masonry - which I still spot occasionally on the sides of wood frame houses in my neighbourhood.

Then, of course, there's faux flooring. Laminate is a photograph of wood for the dedicated 21st century fauxiste - just as linoleum faked it for earlier generations. And before that there was faux wood grain, mahogany or walnut maybe ( which I discovered painted on the pine floors of the Winter Palace, when I had red oak floors laid a couple of years ago ).
Click to expand...

Aha - my bad Urban Shocker, I had no idea what that stuff was called.
 
October 24 Picture

4040227341_625f07df38_b.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41002894@N07/4040227341/
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top