News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.2K     1 
News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.8K     3 
News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.8K     0 

Crosstown LRT | Metrolinx

ARG1

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
1,243
Reaction score
3,241
Location
North Toronto
“Warm and modern”.should not be the goal. Tastes change. Nothing stays modern very long.
Let’s try “Timeless and maintainable”. And maybe “upgradeable”.
I like the spaciousness and use of natural light, but imagine a decade of grime and dust on louvers and perforated panels. And a couple generations’ of upgrade to technology, signage, lighting..
How often will all that glass get washed?
Those “sterile” fifties and sixties subway stations were warm and modern when they opened… but with decades of leaking roofs, relocated turnstiles and barriers, retrofitted cabling, new security systems, and new styles of signage that don’t synch to the original design,….. when I look at station renders I try to imagine what the janitor and the next decade’s electricians see. Garbage receptacles? Safet alarm panels?

- Paul
That's hard to properly categorize. Even then, if you make something look nice for an era, it has a good chance to at the very least be a good stylistic representation of that era. If we look at the Montreal Metro for example, the original sections were entirely built with big brutalist architecture that absolutely screams the 70s, and even though its not "modern" and its hard to say if it aged well, its definitely a relic that just screams the 70s and its something many people appreciate it for.
1623420773737.png


If you look elsewhere around the world, like Moscow, you see the same thing. Sections of the Metro opened in the 40s and 50s have this classical and royal style of architecture that screams the stalinist era it was built in, meanwhile the modern metro is extremely glossy and modern.

Images Below:
Image #1: Electrozavodskaya Station on Line 3 - Opened May 15 1944
Image #2: Electrozavodskaya Station on Line 15 - Opened Dec 31 2020
(Same Station, platforms built in completely different time periods)

1623421120945.png

1623421162295.png
 

allengeorge

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
880
Reaction score
2,066
I don’t mind stations being representative of their time - that’s a plus, in my opinion. They should be designed for maintenance regardless. I think part of the problem in Toronto is that we’re historically a low-tax city that doesn’t believe in spending to maintain its public spaces well (see parks, stations, etc.)
 

TheTigerMaster

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
13,101
Reaction score
6,439
Location
Best Toronto
“Warm and modern”.should not be the goal. Tastes change. Nothing stays modern very long.
Let’s try “Timeless and maintainable”. And maybe “upgradeable”.
I like the spaciousness and use of natural light, but imagine a decade of grime and dust on louvers and perforated panels. And a couple generations’ of upgrade to technology, signage, lighting..
How often will all that glass get washed?
Those “sterile” fifties and sixties subway stations were warm and modern when they opened… but with decades of leaking roofs, relocated turnstiles and barriers, retrofitted cabling, new security systems, and new styles of signage that don’t synch to the original design,….. when I look at station renders I try to imagine what the janitor and the next decade’s electricians see. Garbage receptacles? Safet alarm panels?

- Paul
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.

20171122-dundas-1953.jpg
 

robmausser

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
4,949
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.

View attachment 327067

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

1623437355745.png


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
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
13,101
Reaction score
6,439
Location
Best Toronto
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.

View attachment 327067

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

View attachment 327208

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."
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.

Eglinton_Station_Platform_02.jpg


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
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
30,621
Reaction score
22,227
Location
Toronto
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

View attachment 327208

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."

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
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,559
Reaction score
27,662
Location
Toronto/EY
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.

1623442148429.png

from: https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=YkR1ZDl2eFNsZU45N3BXTGtlaGg2U3VDOWstaTFn
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
5,147
Reaction score
3,345
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.

View attachment 327223

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.

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.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
20,293
Reaction score
9,855
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
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.)
 
Last edited:

JSF-1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
567
Reaction score
1,100
Location
Woburn
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:
UenoStation-GinzaLine-newPlatformDoors-Jan30-2016.jpg


And after in 2018:
Tokyo-metro-Ueno-Station-platform1.jpg
 

11th

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
912
Reaction score
380
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:
View attachment 327278

And after in 2018:
View attachment 327279
Off topic, but I envy systems that have uncluttered passenger information display layout.
 

Top