salsa
Senior Member
For no good reason? I dunno, man. Art? Beauty? Aesthetics?
This is LITERALLY "why we can't have nice things."
OK, I'll grant those are awful pretty for emergency exits, but still.
That's exactly the point.
For no good reason? I dunno, man. Art? Beauty? Aesthetics?
This is LITERALLY "why we can't have nice things."
OK, I'll grant those are awful pretty for emergency exits, but still.
I've never seen Moscow's stations but I have seen a few of Montreal's and I don't really remember them being all that memorable and they certainly were not like these monsters they are building it's no wonder there are cost and construction overruns. If they had kept them simple like most of the line no one would care if they looked like other cities. Plus it would have opened by now if they weren't wasting time and money on all this extra crap on then and building them like bomb shelters.
While I appreciate the statement they're trying to make, these stations really do seem quite over the top, especially given their less than impressive surroundings. I bet the DRL stations won't be anywhere near as extravagant.
Look I get that we want to have "nice things" but we don't have to build subway stations like they are the freaking tagmahall
But apparently the anti-Toronto knowitalls have spoken:
- the 69 non-TYSSE are utilitarian chicken **** operations that impress no one, which probably helps explain why we have a paltry 1.1M daily riders using them.
- the 'whiners' are the ones who have few qualms riding bare-bones stations or are thankful for the cost-saving measures that allowed them to be built in the first place, whereas the ones who despise all our existing stations are naturally experts providing a constructive critique...
These massive stations do seem like white elephants.
Anti Toronto?
And ridership is connected to aesthetics?
It's "possible" that the passage of time will affect them? Do tell, Kreskin.
Most other cities' subway/metro stations are nothing like this. Obviously cities will have a few showcase stations, but the bare bones approach is more often than not the norm. Makes one wonder how these stations will fare after a few decades, or how much it will cost to maintain or provide capital repairs. Doubt there's many TTC yards that carry...whatever unique paneling I'm seeing on the emergency exits. It's possible these palatial stations might not look so great in a generation.
But apparently the anti-Toronto knowitalls have spoken:
- the 69 non-TYSSE are utilitarian chicken **** operations that impress no one, which probably helps explain why we have a paltry 1.1M daily riders using them.
- the 'whiners' are the ones who have few qualms riding bare-bones stations or are thankful for the cost-saving measures that allowed them to be built in the first place, whereas the ones who despise all our existing stations are naturally experts providing a constructive critique...
You can whine forever, these have been built. Your whining won't change these stations. Good on the TTF for having the foresight to build these amazing stations and not the rest of the crappy stations we have. Hopefully future stations are built to this standard.
Or maybe I'm wrong and the budget cuts to sheppard are what is driving TTC ridership growth, which is totally through the roof. No fallacies there to pick
I'm pretty sure most daily commuters wont care much about chandeliers or a giant oculus skylight as long as theyres a set of stairs and a platform that can take them downtown.