ShonTron
Moderator
Here's what the inside of the shed looked like on Tuesday Sept 4.
|
|
|
TOareaFan
Superstar
Thanks to both for the pics.....I was one of the people (to be honest) that wondered if, given the capital needs all over our transit system, a new roof was worth building at this time......already I am convinced....this sort of transformation makes transit use more enjoyable....a more enjoyable experience lowers the reluctance to use transit...etc etc.
as for taking the pic with your phone.....glad you did not claim to use a nokia....that stuff just ain't believable any more!
Jonny5
Senior Member
I was one of these people as well. And I am now convinced it was definitiely not worth it. "One of those things that makes taking transit more fun"... what a pathetic goal for such a massive expense. This is invisible to more than 90% and maybe even 99% of viewpoints in and around Union Station. On the platforms that have had the roof cut open, the natural light does not spread anywhere beyond the small open cut section which is about 10%. And the platforms were already sufficiently bright and very well lit the thousands of times I have been in there. I am extremely dissapointed and consider this one a failure. We could have gotten so much more impact in so many other places than somewhere the overwhelming majority will never go and the tiny minority that do will spend only moments.
Last edited:
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
Hold on, I haven't been down there to verify your criticism Jonny5 but only a fraction of the project has been built right?
TOareaFan
Superstar
To each his own opinion....but please do me the favour when you "quote" me in the future....actually quote me....or at least identify what you are putting in quotes is not what I said but what you heard when I said something else.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Well, more than a fraction, I don't know the exact amount, and it is for sure less than half, but I think it's enough for me to pass judgement. The most visible part is already done. You can tell by the pictures posted here that the almost everyone who is not in a plane or in the CN Tower will see this from Maple Leaf Square. It looks impressive from there. But it is such a limited location to show off such an extravgance. That is what bothers me. The rest of it is boxed in by office buildings, Union Station itself, or blocked from view because pedestrians have to walk under the rail corridor. I'm sure it will look great from the SkyWalk, but again, that is such a limited audience. I would much rather have something in a far more prominent location in the city.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Jonny5:
You do realize that the main purpose of the atrium and concourse improvements below is for the sake of GO users, not individuals looking at it from the outside, right? And only 1/5 of the atrium is in place...plus hardly any interior refurbishment of the old train shed have occurred (which frankly is a cheap out considering the atrium should have been a complete replacement of the old shed instead). In comparison to transit improvements to station hubs elsewhere, this project is downright miserly.
AoD
You do realize that the main purpose of the atrium and concourse improvements below is for the sake of GO users, not individuals looking at it from the outside, right? And only 1/5 of the atrium is in place...plus hardly any interior refurbishment of the old train shed have occurred (which frankly is a cheap out considering the atrium should have been a complete replacement of the old shed instead). In comparison to transit improvements to station hubs elsewhere, this project is downright miserly.
AoD
Last edited:
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Anyone making a judgment this early on anything other than the length of time it is taking to finish is a bit premature. They haven't finished anything other than the Panorama Lounge. Not one section of the shed is completely done, and not one section of the atrium is done, and not one section of the moat is done, and not one section of the new underground mall is done, and not one section of the new GO concourse is done, and not one set of tracks is done. What the heck would someone be judging things based on?
Jonny5
Senior Member
I am not talking about the concourse, or the mall, or the moat, or the interior. I am talking about (and I believe I was clear about this) the train shed only. I think Metrolinx over-estimated the deficiencies of the existing shed and over-estimated the impacts of the improvements of the new shed and how much thy enhance the city, which I believe on a dollars for observation basis is too low.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
My only regret is that the new section didn't replace the old trainshed in its entirety, I honestly don't care that this trainshed is historical, it's ugly. And I like the AGO-esque look, even if it is done on the cheap.
Platform 27
Active Member
There's one Union Station, and it's not exactly portable. It's in as prominent a location in the city as it's ever going to be.
Unless you're expressing the hope that Metrolinx, a government body, should have taken the money they were given to improve transit, and instead cut a cheque to someone to build an OMGSUPERTALL!!ELEVENTY!! at Yonge and Bloor, so there could be better "dollars per observation"?
It's the busiest passenger transportation facility in the country. In fact, it could quite possibly be the most visited building in the country on a daily basis: I just went on a bit of a weird Google digression and it's ahead of the Eaton Centre and West Edmonton Mall but couldn't find how the Rogers Centre or the ACC do in aggregate over the course of a year. In any event, there are few or no buildings in the city where the quantity of people seeing the interior are less of a "tiny minority" than this one.
Every building ever built is seen by more people outside than inside, so I'm really puzzled by this stance that architecture only has value inasmuch as it can impress a large number of people passing by outside and to hell with how it is perceived by people who use the building as intended.
(And yes, they're there for a relatively short period of time, but by that logic there'd be much fewer beautiful train sheds anywhere in the world.)
We go through this every five pages on this thread. Much as many of us would have loved it torn down and replaced from scratch with a fancy Calatrava, demolishing the whole Bush train shed was never an option with the federal heritage people. The fact that you "honestly don't care that this trainshed is historical" is kind of irrelevant, it was what they cared that determined what had to stay put.
(Sort of ironic when you think about it... back when it was built the Bush train shed was the cheap, utilitarian and forgettable choice for meeting the need, which seems to have carried on as the quintessential Toronto way of building transit. And now that shed is being enshrined as part of the city's historical record.)
Oh, and you probably mean OCAD rather than AGO, and I think the resemblance will always be there but will shrink a little as construction progresses -- as the top structure grows wider (and thus relatively thinner-looking) and gets more glassed-in, I imagine it'll progressively look less and less like a "large box on stilts" and more like a roof.
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
3rd in Can/US after Penn Station and Grand Central; and there is a good chance that by 2020 it will have more users than Grand Central even without REX type service.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Like I said already not one section of the train shed is finished yet. It is a little premature to judge the end result when every aspect of the shed is unfinished.
Platform 27
Active Member
And, on the subject of the new atrium being "invisible to more than 90% and maybe even 99% of viewpoints in and around Union Station", we have to consider that the station now has basically gained a south-facing façade from scratch where before there was basically nothing:
The atrium being exactly as prominent as it is -- no more, no less -- is kind of ideal architecturally because it creates a sort of two-faced station: the Beaux-Arts stone façade on the north continues to engage with the Royal York across Front without visual intrusion of modern renovation (technically, the new glassed-over moat will change that a bit), while from the south we have a sort of brand-new neomodern station, all glass and matte steel, that synchs well with Southcore.
I think replacing a somewhat wider slice of Bush shed with glass atrium might have been better as far as the interior is concerned -- as it is, I'm concerned it'll still be pretty dark at the midpoint of each segment of the preserved Bush shed on either side. That said, it wouldn't really have made much of a difference externally at street level from the south, as Telus and the ACC would block most of the widened atrium from view.
Also, someone can correct me if they know more, but I think that fritted glass is going to be on top of the roof as well, and I'm also a little curious how much darker that'll leave the interior once finished.
Yes, it'll always be the view of "the back door" rather than "the front door", but as Southcore grows and becomes more of an integrated part of the city, I think that it'll be hard to claim straight-faced that the viewpoint above comprises just 1% of the ways of outwardly engaging with the station.
The atrium being exactly as prominent as it is -- no more, no less -- is kind of ideal architecturally because it creates a sort of two-faced station: the Beaux-Arts stone façade on the north continues to engage with the Royal York across Front without visual intrusion of modern renovation (technically, the new glassed-over moat will change that a bit), while from the south we have a sort of brand-new neomodern station, all glass and matte steel, that synchs well with Southcore.
I think replacing a somewhat wider slice of Bush shed with glass atrium might have been better as far as the interior is concerned -- as it is, I'm concerned it'll still be pretty dark at the midpoint of each segment of the preserved Bush shed on either side. That said, it wouldn't really have made much of a difference externally at street level from the south, as Telus and the ACC would block most of the widened atrium from view.
Also, someone can correct me if they know more, but I think that fritted glass is going to be on top of the roof as well, and I'm also a little curious how much darker that'll leave the interior once finished.
Last edited: