daptive
Active Member
Some people like looking at old historical things. For them, they can enjoy it. Same reason old trains are on display.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Union Station Shed Replacement & Track Upgrades (Zeidler)
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
In case anyone have forgotten - the renderings from the last round of renos tried to depict the renovated shed in the same way - bright and well-lit. The end product begged to differ.
AoD
cplchanb
Senior Member
Even if they replaced the corrugated roofing with glass or have some sort of ceiling panel it would be a huge improvement.
crs1026
Senior Member
I'm both a heritage supporter and a railway enthusiast, and even I hate that trainshed do-over with a passion. When we conserve old structures, we preserve the important attributes.... but we don't re-install outhouses just because they were what was used when the structure was young. Back in the day, trains were sooty and gritty... we don't need to preserve that attribute.
The mistake was trying to do both the green roof and the heritage conservation....in this case, the two were not compatible and there was a piling-on of too many agendas (each worthwhile in its own right, but taken together, just a mess).
Had the green roof not been in the plan, there might have been a more creative design for translucent panels or open air, to let in even more natural light while preserving the interesting detail of the old structural members and roofline.
We need to look ahead, as well. If there is development that covers the trackage to the west and east of the station, arrival in Toronto will be a ride through a very gloomy dirty concrete tunnel (the stretch west of John Street already has a bit of that, but if you've ever been to Newark, or Chicago, or Philadelphia.....). The station needs to be a bright cheerful place that celebrates the arrival, not a drab subterranean cavern that makes you want to get out quickly.
On my last couple of visits, I have found the end product to be better than I had expected... the grey at least reflects a little more light than the traditional black. But yeah, we could just save a little of the trainshed to interpret the old days, and do better with the rest of the overhead space.
- Paul
The mistake was trying to do both the green roof and the heritage conservation....in this case, the two were not compatible and there was a piling-on of too many agendas (each worthwhile in its own right, but taken together, just a mess).
Had the green roof not been in the plan, there might have been a more creative design for translucent panels or open air, to let in even more natural light while preserving the interesting detail of the old structural members and roofline.
We need to look ahead, as well. If there is development that covers the trackage to the west and east of the station, arrival in Toronto will be a ride through a very gloomy dirty concrete tunnel (the stretch west of John Street already has a bit of that, but if you've ever been to Newark, or Chicago, or Philadelphia.....). The station needs to be a bright cheerful place that celebrates the arrival, not a drab subterranean cavern that makes you want to get out quickly.
On my last couple of visits, I have found the end product to be better than I had expected... the grey at least reflects a little more light than the traditional black. But yeah, we could just save a little of the trainshed to interpret the old days, and do better with the rest of the overhead space.
- Paul
cplchanb
Senior Member
Honestly it's not the shed that holds the heritage value, but the station building, which is rightfully being preserved.
Garuda
Active Member
Nah demolished it and extended the new glass roof. There’s conservation and there’s an eyesore that gives me claustrophobia each time I’m there.
A similar carbon copy of the train shed exists in Winnipeg. So there’s that.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
I'm curious why the roof couldn't have had a wood finish in the inside. Why paint the wood light grey if you can make it wood and throw light on it.
crs1026
Senior Member
nfitz
Superstar
They said it couldn't be glass, because of the green roof.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Wouldn't the light grey turn to dark grey with dirt as well? I would think that something transparent could be put in front of that wood or applied to the wood that would be washable. They did just put a glass box over the middle of the trainshed and they are going to need a cleaning regimen for that as well.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It would eventually - the new cast concrete vents didn't take long to turn dark grey (though the rest of the shed would take longer - given it's further away from the exhaust). Fundamentally putting glass atop the existing framework is frankly lipstick on a pig.
AoD
EnviroTO
Senior Member
It is a heritage bush train shed that needs to be preserved but that doesn't mean it needs to look like crap. Nowhere in the bush shed design was it called out that grey concrete platforms, dark grey elevators, grey paint on all surfaces, and poor lighting were key design elements. There are many plain warehouse / industrial heritage properties which have made better decisions leading to greater visual interest. If it is a heritage element, why paint it grey and have it poorly lit when you can do something and shine bright lights on it? Does it make sense to call it a heritage element worth keeping and then try and hide it with grey paint to make it look like an overcast sky?
Why not mix dark brown into the concrete and give it a deck texture? Why not paint the metal pieces black for contrast or a turquoise to give it an aged copper look? Why not shine lights up at the roof so the refracted light shines down on the platform? How did the solution become shades of grey everything and lights that leave many shadows.
Last edited:
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,585
- Reaction score
- 25,248
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
The reason (or history) of why 'something goes atop it" is an OMB decision from the 1990s when Brookfield Place (or BCE Place) got permission to add height or density and the added height for the Dominion Public Building was compensation for this. (No, I am none too keen on it but it was/is yet another example of 'planning' by a distant provincial body.)
APTA-2048
Senior Member
I just want to say the lighting in the train shed is pretty ugly. It doesn't look consistent either.
Also the huge metal boxes completely block the upper level windows on the train. I suppose it's not a huge issue since you're getting off soon, but I personally find it uncomfortable.
Also the huge metal boxes completely block the upper level windows on the train. I suppose it's not a huge issue since you're getting off soon, but I personally find it uncomfortable.
yrt+viva=1system
Senior Member
Here we are many years later and still dealing with lipstick on a pig...heck a pig with lipstick might even look better!
It’s too bad the trainshed wasn’t demolished like the building at One Bloor before heritage status was given. I have to say, I wonder at what point do they give up on the trainshed?
Even Newark Penn Station looks much better!
It’s too bad the trainshed wasn’t demolished like the building at One Bloor before heritage status was given. I have to say, I wonder at what point do they give up on the trainshed?
Even Newark Penn Station looks much better!
Last edited: