Toronto Union Station Revitalization | ?m | ?s | City of Toronto | NORR

Platform 27 said:
In any event, from an interior design/human circulation standpoint, the layout of the concourses has been nailed down already. There are some pretty cool computer simulations to be found buried somewhere on the City of Toronto's pages.
Click to expand...

Thanks for directing my attention there. I just had a look and there is much more information there than I had expected. See http://www.toronto.ca/union_station/video.htm for the video and http://www.toronto.ca/union_station/union_rev.htm for the main revitalization page and associated links. All of the animated clones in the video were a bit creepy . . . just in time for Hallowe'en.
 
AKS said:
if the canopy over the moat can be used for walking, it wouldn't be such a bad idea. It will increase the pedestrian sidewalk width which will be a plus. If we expect an increase in pedestrian traffic at Union station, we definitely need wider sidewalks otherwise they will spill onto the street.
Click to expand...

EnviroTO said:
Covering over the whole moat wouldn't really be protecting the original design. The plan is to take over more of the street and to calm traffic. Renderings show the street being indistinguishable from the sidewalk except for bollards holding in the traffic and the middle island removed.
Click to expand...

The canopy over the east side of the moat up Bay Street, or at least some of the east side of the moat itself up Bay Street, together with some encroachment into Bay Street would be good for an expanded sidewalk - the pinched sidewalk up Bay Street to Front Street here is a nightmare for pedestrians and already spills them into the street when congested.
 
unimaginative2 said:
I was actually talking about the Union subway station expansion, not the Union Station itself. As far as I know, the subway station has no architect.
Click to expand...
That seems unlikely ... and the attached 2008 TTC report about artwork notes that the new platform artwork is being done in consultation with the "project's architects". I'm sure if one were to dig further back in the Commission reports, that there would be mention of the one being hired.
 
The point is that they hired Norman Foster to design out at Steeles, and they hired nobody of note to design at Union. That makes no sense.
 
unimaginative2 said:
The point is that they hired Norman Foster to design out at Steeles, and they hired nobody of note to design at Union. That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

It makes sense if the 2/3 of the Spadina extension is being funded by other levels of government and the Union renovation is coming directly out of the TTC's capital budget. I'm not 100% sure about the funding for Union, perhaps somebody in the know can chime in.

Not that I think the money is better spent at Steeles. That's just the way the funding situation works out.
 
Pretty sure the Union Second Platform is either almost or totally fully funded by Waterfront Toronto, it's necessary for all the development in the Portlands etc.
 
As far as I know, the Union Subway second platform is being financed by Waterfront Toronto, which I think is 2/3 funded by other levels of government ... so isn't that the same thing?

Though surely the use of better known architects (though perhaps someone should identify the Union Subway architect ...) is more a function of the timeframe this was done, and the lack of options working in such a constrained space, with no surface structures. I don't think a starchitect would have added much.
 
A respectable firm could have chosen some decent finishes and touches like lighting, as well as seemlessly incorporating the art with design motifs. Where were the architects for the Yonge line renovations? It's likely the same old song for the TTC: banality for downtown, creativity for less prominent stations in the suburbs.
 
junctionist said:
A respectable firm could have chosen some decent finishes and touches like lighting, as well as seemlessly incorporating the art with design motifs.
Click to expand...
What's your point? You don't even know who the architect is ... but your implying they are not respectable?
 
nfitz said:
Though surely the use of better known architects (though perhaps someone should identify the Union Subway architect ...) is more a function of the timeframe this was done, and the lack of options working in such a constrained space, with no surface structures. I don't think a starchitect would have added much.
Click to expand...

I think you've got that backwards. A tricky situation like Union is where you want to deploy a good architect. Its not just a matter of choosing the tile colour. Constraints require thinking, which is why you hire an architect.

Out at Steeles West any architect or engineering firm can design a station that works well, because there are no constraints. You dont need to think (well, maybe a little).
 
jwill said:
I think you've got that backwards. A tricky situation like Union is where you want to deploy a good architect. Its not just a matter of choosing the tile colour. Constraints require thinking, which is why you hire an architect.
Click to expand...
I figure that's where you hire a good engineer; what you need is a really functional space ... so unless you plan to do a "Westminster Station" on it then the concepts are pretty straight forward.

jwill said:
Out at Steeles West any architect or engineering firm can design a station that works well, because there are no constraints. You dont need to think (well, maybe a little).
Click to expand...
Which is how we ended up with the very functional, but extradorinarily dull BD stations.
 
I'm not saying we shouldn't hire architects for the spadina extensions, but its relatively straightforward to get the stations working well. The architects will mostly be responsible for aesthetic improvement.

Architects are educated to make functional spaces (though they often choose not to). Engineers will make sure the exits are sized properly for expected flows, but an architect can find ways to improve on this very basic level of design. Its their job to create efficient, comfortable and legible circulation routes in a building.
 
junctionist said:
Was it unreasonable for me to think we should have have known by now? I was speculating! See the part of my comment you didn't quote.
Click to expand...
The part I didn't quote "Where were the architects for the Yonge line renovations? It's likely the same old song for the TTC: banality for downtown, creativity for less prominent stations in the suburbs." I'm not even aware what renovations have been done downtown apart from the Bloor platforms at Yonge-Bloor ... I can't imagine one is going to call an architect to paint!

As for the creativity in the suburbs ... surely this is because there hasn't been a completely new downtown station designed since the early 1960s, unless you count Dupont, the only 6 new stations in the last quarter-century have all been in North York; so it's more a function of age than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top