TheTigerMaster
Superstar
These do look a lot better than the Crosstown stations.
|
|
|
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I would suggest that modularity and flexibility should be a key aspect of the architectural design for public infrastructure. That means that the design components should be easily swapped out and replaced. The schematics should be archived digitally to allow them to be re-created and modified to fit future needs. The designs should be manufacturer-agonistic, meaning that we can go to any supplier and ask them to manufacture components for the design. Ample void space should be reserved for future purposes (plumbing, electrical, etc...).
One of the problems with the 1954 TTC stations was that their Vitrolite tiles, while magnificent, were also completely unmaintainable. Only one company in the world made those tiles, and once they went out of business, they were impossible to replace. That's how we got stuck with the garbage they use today.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
robmausser
Senior Member
The crazy thing is that there are alternatives out there that look similar to the Vitrolite tile. Which was beautiful btw, you can still see it in Eglinton station.
They did a complete 180 and replaced the most beautiful tile with this
Its almost as if someone had the logical fallacy of "well beautiful tile was rare and irreplaceable, therefore the answer is to find the ugliest tile imaginable."
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
The TTC's approach to design is bizarre. There are clearly a lot of people in the organization that care deeply about design. We see it reflected in a lot of the more recent station refurbishments which are generally quite well done. But once the job is done and its time to maintain the work, all design sense goes out the window.
The tiling at Eglinton is a great example of this. The tiling themselves were fantastic, but once any maintenance is needed, they went back to their low quality garbage. I also noticed that parts of the new mural at the Union Station Line 1 platform are now missing, replaced with ugly metal coverings.
This reeks of an organizational problem at the TTC. They have people that care about design, but it appears that they do not have a seat at the table when it comes to operations and maintenance decisions. That needs to change.
We see a similar problem with the City of Toronto as well. The City might pave a road with beautiful cobblestone or granite or whatever, and then months later parts of it will be torn up and replaced with ugly asphalt.
This goes back to my previous comment as well. We can have designs that are modular and flexible, but that needs to accommodated with an organizational structure that will allow these designs to be maintained in the first place.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
There is even more drama about this than mentioned:
Fundamentally this city loves to talk about design - but isn't willing to pay for it. A similar case is how the extension to Downsview and the supposed excess coloured design choices for the Sheppard extension. You still get a lot of that even today.
AoD
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
There is even more drama about this than mentioned:
Fundamentally this city loves to talk about design - but isn't willing to pay for it. A similar case is how the extension to Downsview coloured design choices for the Sheppard extension. You still get a lot of that even today.
AoD
I didn''t realize that they almost gave Pachter a contract to cover a good chunk of the current tile w/murals.
Station Fixation took some photos of the mock-ups.
from: https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=YkR1ZDl2eFNsZU45N3BXTGtlaGg2U3VDOWstaTFn
syn
Senior Member
To the credit of the original designers, these stations have very clean designs. It shouldn't be that difficult to maintain design integrity. That's the biggest disappointment - all of this is very avoidable with the most basic attention to detail and quality control.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
When they built the Spadina extension (Spadina to Wilson), they asked the designers to make sure the lighting and wiring was accessible.
Accessibility to lighting was a problem with the original Montréal Metro stations, as well as ventilation. (Guess how many people would be needed to change a light bulb on the Montréal Metro? A lot.)
Accessibility to lighting was a problem with the original Montréal Metro stations, as well as ventilation. (Guess how many people would be needed to change a light bulb on the Montréal Metro? A lot.)
Last edited:
JSF-1
Active Member
If money was no object it would be really neat to go back and "modernize" some of our stations, although looking at what happened on Line 1 south of Bloor perhaps it is best we don't. The TTC can design some nice stations like for example St.Clair West which was desinged by the TTC's in-house architect and is imo an underrated station in the network as far as style and looks goes. One of my favourite modernization's outside of Toronto is Ueno Station in Tokyo which was pretty much unchanged from its opening in 1927. The updated version is so much better; but I guess that is what happens when you have that Olympic money. I've always wondered how different Toronto would be had we won either of our bids of the summer games.
Anyways here's Ueno Station before its modernization:
And after in 2018:
Anyways here's Ueno Station before its modernization:
And after in 2018:
11th
Senior Member
Off topic, but I envy systems that have uncluttered passenger information display layout.
nfitz
Superstar
And yet you see tourist double-deckers going to King Street under the streetcar wires all the time.
mdu
Active Member
They have trolleybuses in Vancouver, and they've run double deckers under the wires before.
nfitz
Superstar
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
It has more to do with the height of some of the railroad overpasses in the city along with some roads too. Also not every station could accommodate them with out a lot of work.