nfitz
Superstar
It does indeed - at least the roof. They didn't preserve the roof itself at Union- it was all completely replaced. So why wasn't glass an option?
|
|
|
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It is probably more expensive - and they had to engineer a new design for how the glazing is used (for a structure that was never designed for it), plus having to go through discussions around heritage issues.
AoD
yrt+viva=1system
Senior Member
It might be more expensive but maybe in the long run it might be about the same cost no? Considering all the adhoc revisions and modifications that have been taking place (eg. Green roof).
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
If you are asking me - I'd raze it all to the ground. It's garbage - glazing or not.
AoD
Last edited:
cplchanb
Senior Member
it's probably the latter. I dont imagine it be any harder than designing what they currently have in the middle and stretching it the whole way. they just done want to let go of their rusting, rotting shed.
They dont even give the dignity of calling this part of the station. To me a shed is something that is flimsy and not meant to last a century. Whats the point in trying to preserve something that they dont even give much regard for.....
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I meant if they had kept the frame of the Bush shed and engineering a glass roof for it - not the new Zeidler designed atrium.
AoD
cplchanb
Senior Member
i have a strong feeling that the engineering just to make the glass compatible with the almost century old structure would probably pay for most of the atrium extended all the way. Not to mention
aesthetically it probably wont be even worth it to begin with considering it's lipstick to a warthog.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
It isn't a rusting rotting shed... they have pretty much rebuilt it at this point.
Last edited:
cplchanb
Senior Member
Obviously. I meant when they designed the glass box. They had a choice of keeping or getting the shed. They chose the former
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
The new glass box is designed around the existing limitations - and I can't say I am a huge fan of that either.
AoD
cplchanb
Senior Member
Neither am I. They should've went either full conservation or full rebuild. They couldn't decide so they did both and now it looks like they ran out of money halfway
crs1026
Senior Member
IMHO Montreal did a much better job of interpreting its Bush trainshed, while banishing the grunge.
Better hockey, too.
- Paul
Better hockey, too.
- Paul
nfitz
Superstar
Oh they absolutely did a superb job of both the roof, and renovating the beautiful adjacent station.
But they really botched the tracks to the point of them not being useable - which may be a bigger issue.
superelevation
Active Member
I must say if the plan really is just to fill in tracks we are really going to have a bad solution there, the space between the stairwells and the platform edge will be tiny.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It's lazy for one - frankly they should create a new set of stairwells at the centreline for these in-fill platforms, but these moves should have been contemplated and planned for before the work on the new concourses.
AoD