News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.8K     0 

Once it's all done is that steel platform toward the SW corner of the roof going to be removed? I get that they need an access point for servicing, but it would look so much better if they could hide some of that equipment inside the roof below the glass.
 
Apologies if this has been asked/answered before, but is there a reason that we cant "upgrade" the existing bush shed to install the glass roof that the design originally called for? Respect the heritage element while also allowing light in?
 
Is it? I thought they were going to simply restore it to how it was constructed, not how it was originally designed. Would the latter preclude a green roof?

I was going at the specific point of letting in light (which the new glass bit clearly does) while respecting the heritage...what better way of respecting heritage than, you know, keeping it around and functioning.
 
Doesn't look too bad, they should have done the whole shed instead of part of it. The existing shed is hideous, whether it is heritage or not.

I think once the glass shed is complete and they paint and cover the heritage shed with white paint and grass I think it will work well as a whole with a nice balance between old and new.
 
I was going at the specific point of letting in light (which the new glass bit clearly does) while respecting the heritage...what better way of respecting heritage than, you know, keeping it around and functioning.

Yes, the current reno lets some light in and respects the heritage element. I was suggesting that they could let MORE light in (and continue to respect the heritage element) by adding the glass portions to the existing roof, as it was originally designed.
 
I was going at the specific point of letting in light (which the new glass bit clearly does) while respecting the heritage...what better way of respecting heritage than, you know, keeping it around and functioning.
I 100% agree. I think if they restore it to the original condition after construction (which I believe is the plan), then it's a wasted opportunity.
 
Before we get all self-absorbed with this project, look at what Melbourne is up to:

http://vote.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/

Sorry, the Zaha proposal alone make our Union Station project look like child's play - and this is their second hub revitalization (first is the Southern Cross project by Grimshaw) - we can barely manage one.

AoD

To quote/paraphrase the great man, Hadid's proposal is bird shit architecture - like all starchitects - at its best:

The Flinders St design comp was an incoming Liberal Government's brainfart - no commitment to funding, but they wanted a competition.

Hadid's saving grace was the eastern entrance - they in effect wanted to move the tram stop (world's busiest) south onto Princes Bridge and effectively bring Federation Square directly into the station - genius. But the rest of the building would just be another brand name and it was basically a shopping centre inside: yawn.

The winner, Hassell (minor partner Herzog de Meuron) had far better interaction with the river, the roof was a throw back to the original train shed design and focused on more cultural than commercial uses outside its primary purpose of being a train station. Doubt anything will start for a decade or more.

I'm actually liking this new Union revitalisation project - why? because it's sensible. More sensible than any of the FSS proposals - HASSELL, like many, saw the need to extend the concourse over the tracks and re-use that space, and looking at the Union proposal there's a lot of scope for future projects to do the same.
 
Stick to your knitting architecture is better than bird shit architecture, or How I Learned to Stop Envying and Love the Shed.
 
IMG_20130901_191045_zps0b4252f3.jpg
 

Back
Top