Ottawa and the suburbs have the oddest new home subdivisions (well outside of the Atlantic).Originally Posted by Bordello
Brick is an upgrade, having gutters is an upgrade, having copper pipes is an upgrade, there is no underpad in carpetted areas; another upgrade; casement windows is an upgrade.
The subdivisions don't have concrete curbs plus they're poorly lit. If a developer tried any of these things in Toronto or Calgary they'd be out of business within days.
-
Dec 8th, 2005 03:30 PM #16
it's more expensive to stucco an existing house than rebrick it.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked Audiogenic for this post.
-
Dec 8th, 2005 09:26 PM #17
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked Kenneth for this post.
-
Dec 8th, 2005 09:35 PM #18Wow. I'm amazed they can get away with that anywhere.
Originally Posted by Kenneth
_______________
Heatware 50 Positive, 0 Negative
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked deep for this post.
-
Dec 8th, 2005 10:53 PM #19
Yeah, the developers here in Ottawa like to take alot of shortcuts. I'd like to see Mike Holmes get his hands on one of their homes. One house is probably enough to last an entire season. The biggest developer here is Minto. They're a pretty shady company. I think they have operations in Toronto too.
All those things you listed are upgrades, but I'm pretty sure that gutters are standard though.
Originally Posted by Kenneth
_______________
('' ,)
Go Sens Go!
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked Bordello for this post.
-
Dec 9th, 2005 01:23 AM #20I know someone with a detached Minto home in Kanata (3 years old); no gutters. The only upgrade is for multi-section gutters and not the single rolled which is common place. I know they try to push as many detached homes at a lower price point (you don't see as much semis/towns as you see in Toronto; but there are way too many shortcuts.
Originally Posted by Bordello
Minto is mainly a Condo developer in the GTA; yet here there quite upscale. Marble entry ways, granite countertops, hardwood floors, all standard.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked Kenneth for this post.
-
Dec 10th, 2005 05:52 PM #21
Where are u people getting your info from????
A High Quality Stucco job is much more expensive then brick.
I am currently building a house and I'm going with stucco.
Beige Stucco ext with a nice dark brown trim and band. Also added 3 feet of stone on the bottom all the way around and up the front entrance (Arch)
The Exterior (Stone / Stucco) combo is costing me $42,000
(26 stucco, 18 for the stone (9g to buy and 9g to install)
Brick Exterior would have costed $20,000 installed.
Stucco looks amazing and is actually great in our climate - The 1 1/2" Styro. around the house acts as extra insulation.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked kgeorge78 for this post.
-
Dec 11th, 2005 12:30 AM #22
I wonder how the cost of brick (which there isn't much of here on the westcoast) or stucco compares to either
a) hardiplank (a fiber cement siding with 50 year warrantee ... http://www.jameshardie.com/homeowner...hardiplank.php) or
b) SmartSide (engineered siding with a 30 year warrantee ... http://www.lpcorp.com/lpsidingproduc...lapsiding.aspx)
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked CheapScotsman for this post.
-
Mar 23rd, 2011 10:49 PM #23
Stucco keeps your house warmer in the winter and colder in the summer because of the extra layer of foam which acts as insulation. The disadvantage if stucco is you have to clean it once in awhile and is more fragile than brick.
_______________
Had to change my avatar because an anal retentive *bleep* complained.
MW3 Kills and Killstreaks - Episode 2
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked diggler649 for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 01:58 AM #24
my new home build will have a stone and stucco front exterior and brick exterior for the rear and side. The sales rep told me that mosts espensive houses and expensive houses in europe use stucco. i didn't really buy that argument but the elevation I wanted only had that as the exterior.
I did some research on the internet and found for the most part this is true. that stucco is more expensive.
but for the past year i've been driving to work in midtown in toronton, so i sometimes drive through the streets in the bridle path area and the bayview york mills area. this area has some pretty expensive homes. some of the house in the bridle path and certain enclaves in the area have huge multi million dollare mansions and homes. and they almost all of them have stucco exterior for the entire house. and looking at these homes, they really beautiful homes and you can't help but to imagine the cost and the size of the houses. i also notice that there are not a lot of huge all brick homes in this ritzy part of north york. and now that i see it, a huge all brick home would look ugly compared to a huge all stucco home.
so i now appreciate the look of stucco exteriors. done right, it does look better than brick.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked gladiator1942 for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 07:55 AM #25
Stucco will never outlast brick. We'll see an increase of stucco repair guys in 10-20 years! There is no replacment for a solid brick house!
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
1 person has thanked speedysa for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 08:13 AM #26
All things being equal, I love the look of both brick, and stucco, provided the finish is suited to the architecture of the house. I have a 120 year old double brick Italinate in cream/buff brick, that may possibly need to have the entire outer brick wall replaced in the next 100 to 150 years or so. There are no mortar issues or brick issues whatsoever at the moment. I am not certain if modern brick has life expectancies of 200 to 250 years or more, but I would actually imagine better built brick homes might.
Modern 'stucco' finishes are quite different from traditional 'stucco', and are a modern engineered cement, sand, lime and acrylic mix, vastly superior to stucco that was installed in canada prior to the 1990's. The life expectancy of traditional stucco finishes could be as low as 10 years, and would typically not exceed 25 to 50 years unless one was really lucky. The 'new stuff' if properly installed and applied has the potiential of having a useful life expectancy of between 50 and 100 years or so.Last edited by fieldhousehandyman; Mar 24th, 2011 at 10:49 PM.
_______________
"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is."
Just a guy who dabbles in lots of stuff learning along the way. I do have opinions, and readily share them
http://fieldhousechronicles.blogspot.com/ is where you can find me ranting occasionally!
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked fieldhousehandyman for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 08:16 AM #27Deal Fanatic




- Join Date
- Oct 7th, 2005
- Location
- Richmond Hill
- Posts
- 5,770
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
1 person has thanked coolspot for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 08:26 AM #28_______________
The OFFICIAL Hardwood Flooring Thread
Winner "BEST of '09, '10 & '11" on Homestars.com
www.floorwood.ca
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked patrob for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 10:26 PM #29
All brick construction in every home is a southern Ontario thing. In areas like the prairies where brick is hard to come by, stucco is the finish of choice. If done properly, the look is fantastic. Durability is not a concern, although I would agree that brick would last longer.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked will888 for this post.
-
Mar 24th, 2011 11:03 PM #30
I guess I'm the only one here with cedar wood siding. Personally I think it looks the best, but I'd be fine with stucco, brick, or stone (or cement) too, if done tastefully and appropriate for the type of house. I don't like vinyl siding much though.
The part about being tasteful and appropriate is key… I visited one house that all sorts of nice finishes that were reasonably good quality, and the exterior was done in stone. All together, it looked pretty mediocre unfortunately, because it seemed it was designed by a contractor with little grasp of aesthetics.Last edited by EugW; Mar 24th, 2011 at 11:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
LOG IN TO THANK
No one has yet thanked EugW for this post.
Search Forums


