Toronto CIBC SQUARE | 241.39m | 50s | Hines | WilkinsonEyre

  • Thread starter Suicidal Gingerbread Man
  • Start date
maestro said:
Think it's fair to question this lengthy rebuilt of an obsolete piece of infrastructure that was pretty utilitarian in the first place. Something new could be have been built in possibly less time with less construction headache for commuters with the lasting legacy of a modern structure that allow for smoother boarding and off boarding. Oh yeah, wide enough to cover all tracks too.
Click to expand...

ProjectEnd said:
Sure as shit wasn't a 'golden age' for the structures that held them. What a gloomy, awful reminder of the past.
Click to expand...

This is my beef with the bush shed. The structure and its lighting at night is something to behold. But during the day it is dark and gloomy, and despite the heritage character, that is not appropriate for a modern public space. It is also not appropriate if it is introducing additional cost and delay to a significant improvement of the space: electrification, which would reduce noise, vibration, and emissions. These benefits extend to nearby buildings, including CIBC Square (see, I'm on topic!).

We have already introduced an alternative roof in the centre of the shed which provides the additional light and adequate space for electrification. While we could explore some preservation (e.g. the wall segments on the south platforms), the rest should be razed and the middle shed expanded at both ends.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Sure as shit wasn't a 'golden age' for the structures that held them. What a gloomy, awful reminder of the past.
Click to expand...

I'm thankful for the reminder. Without reminders, people start to think that our past isn't significant. In reality, we built this massive station with a large train shed nearly a century ago. It speaks to our development as a city at the time as a nascent metropolitan city.
 
junctionist said:
I'm thankful for the reminder. Without reminders, people start to think that our past isn't significant. In reality, we built this massive station with a large train shed nearly a century ago. It speaks to our development as a city at the time as a nascent metropolitan city.
Click to expand...

The reminder is the Great Hall. Anymore more like the inefficient train shed is just being greedy.
 
maestro said:
The reminder is the Great Hall. Anymore more like the inefficient train shed is just being greedy.
Click to expand...

It's like forcing people to remember through lived experience that they didn't have soap and detergent before. Also, I wonder how of said purists have the opportunity to experience the charming shed and the ancillary access staircases on a daily basis during rush...

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
It's like forcing people to remember through lived experience that they didn't have soap and detergent before. Also, I wonder how of said purists have the opportunity to experience the charming shed and the ancillary access staircases on a daily basis during rush...

AoD
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. It's a functional piece of infrastructure that serves our needs. Every big city commuter station gets busy at rush hour. You can build a nicer shed, but it won't change the fact that there are a lot of passengers, a lot of trains, and limited space.

While it's important to preserve it in some form, I'd like to see the city build something better to serve the bigger city that Toronto is today vs. when it was built. The replacement should be spacious, airy, bright, and should have excellent architecture, like Berlin Hauptbahnhof.
 
junctionist said:
No, it isn't. It's a functional piece of infrastructure that serves our needs. Every big city commuter station gets busy at rush hour. You can build a nicer shed, but it won't change the fact that there are a lot of passengers, a lot of trains, and limited space.

While it's important to preserve it in some form, I'd like to see the city build something better to serve the bigger city that Toronto is today vs. when it was built. The replacement should be spacious, airy, bright, and should have excellent architecture, like Berlin Hauptbahnhof.
Click to expand...

It's a dysfunctional piece of infrastructure that couldn't even serve the needs of yesterday with efficiency. It's not just the shed in and on itself - it is how preserving the shed more or less restricted how you redevelop the entire station - including the loading area underneath and how platform access is handled. That's the point.

And yeah, raising Berlin Hauptbahnhof misses the point that the original station on site was levelled headhouse and all to produce the condition for this carte blanche. That context doesn't exist for Union when one couldn't even get rid of a shed. Anyhow, best leave that for the Union Station thread.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
It's a dysfunctional piece of infrastructure that couldn't even serve the needs of yesterday with efficiency. It's not just the shed in and on itself - it is how preserving the shed more or less restricted how you redevelop the entire station - including the loading area underneath and how platform access is handled. That's the point.

And yeah, raising Berin Hauptbahnhof misses the point that the original station on site was levelled headhouse and all to produce the condition for this carte blanche. That context doesn't exist for Union when one couldn't even get rid of a shed.

AoD
Click to expand...

It may not work that well, but it works. Hence, using it is not akin to rejecting soap and detergent in your hygiene routine. That's just silly. There are plenty of options for preservation that will allow something more functional to be built. Perhaps preserve a part of it and build a new shed, or a new station altogether like Berlin Hauptbahnhof somewhere else, like near the Unilever site. That's the point. We need to figure out how to achieve these two goals and move past whining about and denigrating the old shed.
 
Ground level view of the new construction gate from under the Lake Shore/Gardiner east bound on-ramp

IMG_0480.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0480.jpg
    IMG_0480.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 345
junctionist said:
It may not work that well, but it works. Hence, using it is not akin to rejecting soap and detergent in your hygiene routine. That's just silly. There are plenty of options for preservation that will allow something more functional to be built. Perhaps preserve a part of it and build a new shed, or a new station altogether like Berlin Hauptbahnhof somewhere else, like near the Unilever site. That's the point. We need to figure out how to achieve these two goals and move past whining about and denigrating the old shed.
Click to expand...


You got to be kidding me. It barely working is not good for a growing transportation hub. (and expresses how Torontonians just don't know better) It's the way it is structured; too small, too low, too many columns.

relocating the shed and building a new one was the only way to have achieved both goal. A section could have been built for the use of the Railway Museum in Roundhouse Park or even perhaps incorporated as part of the Toronto Hydro project.
 
maestro said:
You got to be kidding me. It barely working is not good for a growing transportation hub. (and expresses how Torontonians just don't know better) It's the way it is structured; too small, too low, too many columns.

relocating the shed and building a new one was the only way to have achieved both goal. A section could have been built for the use of the Railway Museum in Roundhouse Park or even perhaps incorporated as part of the Toronto Hydro project.
Click to expand...

I think you're being too arrogant on this one, as if you know better than everyone. You think I'm saying that the shed is fine the way it is. I'm not. I argue that it's not obsolete, but it's clear that it's far from being a satisfyingly functional structure for today's usage. Still, it's a historic structure that should be respected.

I'm not against relocating the shed, though I think the whole thing should be moved in that case so that its scale can always be appreciated. That strikes me as sensible if it means we can continue to have our main train station next to the Financial District with a new, more practical, and more attractive train shed. But a new shed might necessitate a second level of platforms, so it's going to be really expensive. That's probably why it hasn't been done yet.
 
A fourth boring machine has been added and a new pile of very long steel 'I' beams. One of the new 'I' beams has been installed on the top of the berm. They stopped boring on the Lake Shore side after they had installed a steel beam in every third hole that was bored

4th boring machine.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 4th boring machine.jpg
    4th boring machine.jpg
    2 MB · Views: 359
Depressing revisions to tower 2 in the application info centre. The high mechanical penthouse was a distraction from the bulbous form of the office floors. Has that been already discussed or is that another thread?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top