Concrete As A Residential High Rise Exterior

[Snark]

I know that there has been a bit of dissatisfaction expressed here over the years about most residential towers outside of Toronto being constructed as the standard formed-in-place or prefab concrete.

There's a reason: they're bullet proof and last forever. Low maintenance costs. Is glass and other "thin" curtain wall constructions more attractive? Certainly.

I've been told stories though for 5 or 7 years now about how many of them don't last. There is a good article by the CBC on the issue. A good read:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ed-condos.html

[haljackey]

Everything in moderation.

You can build a glass condo tower that looks amazing but is costly to maintain or you can build a concrete tower that's solid as a rock but has little visual appeal.

A good mix of the two weighs the pros and the cons so the pros from each design outweigh the cons.

[Symz]

That's an interesting point they make. Sure we all like shiny buildings, but are we doing the responsible thing by building these monoliths of power & prosperity.

[Wharn]

I don't mind some of the concrete tower blocks, just that the vast majority of them are so heroically ugly that the negative externalities that they impose on a society that has to look at them every day far outweigh any future retrofitting costs.

[Symz]

Originally Posted by Wharn

I don't mind some of the concrete tower blocks, just that the vast majority of them are so heroically ugly that the negative externalities that they impose on a society that has to look at them every day far outweigh any future retrofitting costs.

Like commie blocks?

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Wharn

I don't mind some of the concrete tower blocks, just that the vast majority of them are so heroically ugly that the negative externalities that they impose on a society that has to look at them every day far outweigh any future retrofitting costs.

Word.



.

[bolognium]

Interesting article. I don't necessarily mind concrete towers, it's just that our skyline is really getting overwhelmed with uninteresting buildings.

Coincidentally, One London Place just had some of its windows replaced this afternoon. Click for fullsize:

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Word.



.

I just realized how many times I used "that". Sounds awful, must have been posting around 2:00am or something

[MolsonExport]

^made up for by the "heroically ugly" descriptor.

[Snark]

Originally Posted by Wharn

...that the negative externalities that they impose on a society that has to look at them every day far outweigh any future retrofitting costs.

Agreed, except that society won't be paying those future retrofitting costs - the owners will, and they don't want to.

In the end, it's still the same old thing: money talks and bullsh1t walks.

[ssiguy]

I don't mind concrete but can't they paint them any other colour but grey? London's skyline is beginning to look like a study in Stalinist architecture.

[MrSlippery519]

It can be done tastefully, I think developers just need to take a little more time to think of the impact to the area...some of those commie blocks are just ridiculous, if they just added some color or something to differentiate the buildings even that would help.

[Chadillaccc]

London has wayyyy too many concrete exteriors for a city its size. Including the 2 Renaissance Twins and the two twins near One London Place as major examples.

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

London has wayyyy too many concrete exteriors for a city its size. Including the 2 Renaissance Twins and the two twins near One London Place as major examples.

Agreed...however I think the Renaissance twins are actually quite nice for concrete towers they are done a lot better than most. That said they would look better mixed in with a few nice glass 25-30 floor residential of course.

[haljackey]

I would classify buildings like the Renaissance and City Place hybrids. They're concrete but they have some character. City Place is painted white and Renaissance beige.

The Crown on King developments should have some character to them as well.

Someone needs to take a paintbrush to the City Centre towers, the Hilton and commieville (AKA Cherryhill).

[MolsonExport]

Cherryhill is bad, but that god awful property across from costco is far worse.

Slabsville, Inc.

[Blitz]

^ The Proudfoot quadruplets?

The Hilton looks terrible, I have to look at that mess every day. You'd think a more upscale brand like that would be embarrassed about the appearance of their building.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I don't mind concrete but can't they paint them any other colour but grey? London's skyline is beginning to look like a study in Stalinist architecture.

I don't think the grey concrete is an issue, I think uninspired designs are a much bigger problem. Even if you paint a standard tower block a cheerful yellow, it's still gonna look like shit just because it's just a soul-crushing, unimaginative box.

Originally Posted by Blitz

The Hilton looks terrible, I have to look at that mess every day. You'd think a more upscale brand like that would be embarrassed about the appearance of their building.

I'm not sure if they would. There are lots of Hiltons that look like rubbish, but they tend to be in places where they don't get a lot of exposure- such as Laval or London. Posh vacationers with money don't really care about them, and since business travelers are just treating it as a place to sleep they don't care either.