UNION STATION RAILWAY CORRIDOR Cherry, Scott & John

Home , Cherry Street (Toronto), Don station, Front Street (Toronto), John Street (Toronto), Railway Lands, Roundhouse Park

UNION STATION RAILWAY CORRIDOR Cherry, Scott & John Street Interlocking Towers

Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

FOR METROLINX

April 2013

Taylor Hazell Architects Ltd. 333 Adelaide Street West, 5th Floor Toronto, Ontario M5V 1R5 tel 416 862 2694 fax 416 862 8401 contact Mark Wronski [email protected]

AND

TACOMA Engineers ContentWorks 176 Speedvale Avenue, West 137 Second Avenue, Suite 1 Guelph, Ontario Ottawa, ON K1S 2H4 USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Report Description and Intent

VOLUME 1 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report Cherry, Scott & John Street Interlocking Towers

VOLUME 2 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value and Building Condition Assessments Cherry Street Interlocking Tower Scott Street Interlocking Tower John Street Interlocking Tower

VOLUME 3 Heritage Evaluation Recommendations Cherry Street Interlocking Tower Scott Street Interlocking Tower John Street Interlocking Tower

USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

Acknowledgements

Project Team

Project Director James Hartley, Metrolinx

Project Manager Jill Taylor, Taylor Hazell Architects

Heritage Consultant, Historian and Julie Harris, Contentworks Inc. Author Conservation Engineer Will Teron, Tacoma Engineering

Conservation Architects Jill Taylor and Mark Wronski, Taylor Hazell Architects Senior Review Jill Taylor, Taylor Hazell Architects

Project Support Laura Filice, Metrolinx

Site Visit Support

Metrolinx Laura Filice and Laura Games

TTR Christopher Melo and Warren Ledbetter

The author also accessed the research, analysis and insights of Dr. Christopher Andreae, the author of the Metrolinx Heritage Impact Assessment John Street Interlocking Tower, Track A1/B Alignment, November 2012 by Golder Associates as sub-consultant to Morrison Hershfield Limited.

USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

Report Description and Intent

This document is the first of 3 Volumes that compile all the Heritage Reporting that Metrolinx had commissioned from Taylor Hazell Architects Ltd and their consultants, historians Contenworks Inc. and heritage structural engineers, TACOMA Engineers, undertaken in the fall and winter 2012 – 2013 for the the three Interlocking Towers within the Union Station Railway Corridor at Cherry, Scott and John Streets.

This document, Volume 1 contains the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) for all three Towers.

Volume 2 contains the Statements of Cultural Heritage Value (SCHV) and an accompanying Building Condition Audits (BCA) for all three Towers.

Volume 3 contains the Heritage Evaluations and Recommendations for heritage significance for each Tower based on the criteria and terms of reference that form part of Ontario Regulations 09/06 and 10/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

They have been bound as individual Volumes as a convenience due to size, and to facilitate ease of distribution of pertinent information to the wide range of stakeholders within Metrolinx.

These documents are intended to be submitted for review to Metrolinx Heritage Committee that has been established as part of the Interim Heritage Process.

They compile all relevant heritage and building assessments, establish character defining attributes and elements for the Towers, their current condition, along with evaluations and recommendations in conformance with the MTSC Standards and Guidelines and the Ontario Heritage Act.

It is intended to be the prime resource for the Heritage Committee during their review of these properties to arrive at a final recommendation to the Chief Executive Officer of Metrolinx regarding the heritage significance of these assets.

This document is confidential and shall not be circulated beyond assigned Metrolinx staff, the Heritage Committee and the Office of the CEO.

USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

VOLUME 1

Union Station Railway Corridor Cherry, Scott and John Street Interlocking Towers

Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report

Prepared by:

Contentworks Inc. 137 Second Avenue, Suite 1 Ottawa, ON K1S 2H4

USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ...... 3

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTIES ...... 4

DATA SHEETS ...... 5

MAPS ...... 11

HISTORICAL SUMMARY AND CURRENT CONTEXT ...... 14

HERITAGE RECOGNITIONS ...... 16

JOHN STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES ...... 16

SCOTT STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES ...... 17

CHERRY STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES ...... 17

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ...... 19

METHODOLOGY ...... 19

DESIGN AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS...... 19

APPEARANCE AND FUNCTIONAL DESIGN SUMMARIES FOR EACH TOWER ...... 20

HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS ...... 24

THEMATIC OVERVIEW ...... 24

SIGNAL TOWER DESIGNS ...... 25

INTERLOCKING HISTORY ...... 26

TORONTO TERMINALS RAILWAY ...... 27

INTERLOCKING FOR THE USRC ...... 28

DESIGNER ...... 30

USRC Interlocking Towers Cultural Heritage Reports Volume 1

CONTEXT ...... 31

FIGURES ...... 34

INTRODUCTION

Taylor Hazell Architects (THA), with services by Julie Harris, Contentworks Inc., was engaged by Metrolinx to prepare a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) for three interlocking towers located in the Union Station Rail Corridor in Toronto. The CHER is commissioned as part of the Metrolinx Interim Heritage Process that is currently being undertaken for the agency’s inventory of properties and applies to those that will be acquired in the future.

A CHER documents the history, architecture, landscape and context of a property for an evaluation of its heritage value and determination of its heritage attributes. A heritage evaluation is required prior to work or dispositions affecting properties of heritage interest or value. A CHER provides the criterion and framework within which the heritage significance and attributes of the property will be evaluated under the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s Standards & Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties (cited here as Standards & Guidelines) and the regulations of the Ontario Heritage Act.

This report includes sections relevant to understanding the history of all three USRC towers and sub- sections specific to each one of the towers. The work follows up on the recent (fall 2012) Heritage Impact Assessment John Street Interlocking Tower, Track A1/B Alignment undertaken for Metrolinx/GO Transit by Christopher Andreae, PhD, of Golder Associates as a sub-consultant to Morrison Hershfield Limited. The CHER integrates sections of Dr. Andreae’s report directly in its text whenever possible, especially with respect to the operational history of the towers. Additional research was undertaken in Ottawa and Toronto by Contentworks in October 2012 on the histories of the Scott Street and Cherry Street properties, and to address other issues that were outside the scope of the Golder/Morrison Hershfield study.

The THA team conducted site visits of the three towers on 29 October 2012. In their roles as Project Manager, Conservation Architect, Conservation Engineer and Historian, Jill Taylor, Mark Wronski, Will Teron and Julie Harris conducted a review of each building and its physical context with assistance from TTR staff. An additional site visit to the Towers was conducted by the Conservation Architect to gather more information on December 6th, 2012.

| 3

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTIES

The Union Station Rail Corridor (USRC) includes three interlocking towers located (from east to west) facing the tracks at Cherry, Scott and John streets (Map 1Map 1 Map 2. Map 3) The most easterly tower is Cherry Street, located about 1.9 km from the Scott Street tower and 2.7 km from the John Street tower. The towers (equipment and personnel) govern all train movements along seven-kilometres of the USRC between Don River at the west and Bathurst Street on the east.

For the purposes of the CHER only, the boundaries of each tower are defined as follows. A property description based on excerpts of information from a an AutoCAD file of formal survey provided by Metrolinx from Hatch Mott MacDonald in March 2013 has been included for reference purposes only.

Tower CHER Boundaries CHER Key Features Cherry Street The tower is part of the USRC which is considered as a Cherry Street Interlocking (Cabin A) single property for the purposes of this study. The portion of Tower with its addition that property under study includes the footprint of the tower dating from the 1950s and with its 1950s addition and its exterior stairway, as well 3 the guard rail along the top metres on the north, west and east sides. On the south side, of the USRC bridge. the property under study includes the guard rail that extends along the edge of the USRC bridge.

Scott Street The tower is part of the USRC. The portion of that property Scott Street Interlocking (Cabin B) under study is the footprint of the tower and its exterior Tower stairway with 3 metres of land on the north, south, west and east sides.

John Street The tower is part of the USRC. The portion of that property John Street Interlocking (Cabin C) under study is the footprint of the tower and its exterior Tower stairway to the north.

The legal definition of ‘Owner’ for the USRC and the three interlocking Towers within it, is being clarified by Metrolinx. However, regardless of ownership identified on deed and title, Metrolinx, a prescribed public body, occupies the building and through arrangements with various parties is permitted to operate out of, maintain and alter the interlocking Towers and their equipment. Therefore the property shall be subject to the evaluation requirements of the Standards & Guidelines for Provincial Heritage Properties, issued under section III.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

4 |

DATA SHEETS AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS

Building Name Cherry Street Interlocking Tower

PIN 21077-0302

Corridor USRC

Street Address 385 Cherry Street

Community/Municipality Toronto

Status Owned

Construction Date 1930-1931

Construction Date Source Canadian Railway and Marine World, 1930: 640a, and H. L. Black, “Interlocking System Installed at Toronto Union Station,” Railway Signaling 24, no. 5 (1931): 401-405.

Date(s) of Addition(s) 1950s

Source for Date(s) of Addition(s) Site survey, 2012

Architect, Landscape Architect, and/or Canadian Pacific Railway - John Wilson Orrock, Chief Engineer of Builder Buildings

| 5

CHERRY ST. INTERLOCKING TOWER PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Based on the information from the HMM Survey the description of the property for Cherry St Tower appears to be:

REGISTRAR’S COMPILED PLAN 12161, LOT 12 P.I.N. 21077-0091 (LT) EASEMENT AS IN INSTRUMENT NO. CA684805, CA684815 & CA684816

This description will be confirmed by Metrolinx

6 |

Building Name Scott Street Interlocking Tower

Corridor USRC

Street Address N/A

Community/Municipality Toronto

Status Owned

Construction Date 1930-1931

Construction Date Source Canadian Railway and Marine World, 1930: 640a, and H. L. Black, “Interlocking System Installed at Toronto Union Station,” Railway Signaling 24, no. 5 (1931): 401-405.

Date(s) of Addition(s) No additions.

Source for Date(s) of Addition(s) N/A

Architect, Landscape Architect, and/or Canadian Pacific Railway - John Wilson Orrock, Chief Engineer of Builder Buildings

| 7

SCOTT ST. INTERLOCKING TOWER PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Based on the information from the HMM Survey the description of the property for Scott St Tower appears to be:

REGISTRAR’S COMPILED PLAN 12161, LOT 2 P.I.N. 21397-0060 (LT) PART 33, PLAN 64R-16700 ABOVE P.I.N. 21397-0056 (LT) PART 2, PLAN 64R-16700 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT AS IN CA684815 & CA684816

This description will be confirmed by Metrolinx.

8 |

Building Name John Street Interlocking Tower

Corridor USRC

Street Address N/A

Community/Municipality Toronto

Status Owned

Construction Date 1930-1931

Construction Date Source Canadian Railway and Marine World, 1930: 640a, and H. L. Black, “Interlocking System Installed at Toronto Union Station,” Railway Signaling 24, no. 5 (1931): 401-405.

Date(s) of Addition(s) No additions

Source for Date(s) of Addition(s) N/A

Architect, Landscape Architect, and/or Canadian Pacific Railway - John Wilson Orrock, Chief Engineer of Builder Buildings

| 9

JOHN ST. INTERLOCKING TOWER PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Based on the information from the HMM Survey the description of the property for John St Tower is very complex and appears to be:

PART 1, PLAN 66-R PART 43, 66R-18658, EASEMENT AS IN C878773, and PART 32, 66R-15360, EASEMENT AS IN 1144EW & 1145EW and PART 42, 66R-18658, EASEMENT AS IN C878773

This description will be confirmed by Metrolinx.

10 |

MAPS

Map 1: Overall map showing the locations of the three interlocking towers in the context of the USRC, municipally designated heritage properties and the Railway Lands East Secondary Plan. (THA, 2012.)

| 11

Map 2: Cherry Street Interlocking Tower, site map. (THA, 2012.)

Map 3: Scott Street Interlocking Tower, site map. (THA, 2012.)

12 |

Map 4: John Street Interlocking Tower, site map. (THA, 2012.)

| 13

HISTORICAL SUMMARY AND CURRENT CONTEXT

The three USRC interlocking towers at John, Scott and Cherry streets (Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3) were constructed for Toronto Terminal Railways (TTR) in 1930-1. The TTR was incorporated in 1906 following a series of complex negotiations and agreements concerning the operation and construction of a new set of rail facilities in Toronto to be managed and co-funded by the City of Toronto, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) and the Grand Trunk-Canadian National systems. The intention of the project was to help relieve congestion and eliminate dangerous intersections in downtown Toronto and to improve rail services. Construction of the new Union Station, its approach tracks, and the viaduct took more than 17 years, ending with the installation of interlocking plants in the towers in 1931.

Each of the interlocking towers was conceived to house expensive and technically sophisticated interlocking equipment, and to provide work spaces for signal staff (Figure 4 and Figure 5). The towers provided maximum visibility outwards to the rail corridor and specialized, segregated work spaces. Each of the towers is attached to the railway viaduct with the ground storey at the level of the tracks and a rear entrance at or near the grade of the adjoining street level (Figure 6). They are solid brick structures on a concrete foundation with design elements rendered in brick, stone, metal and wood. They were originally covered by a hipped roof with wide over-hanging eaves; the John Street tower’s roof was replaced by a flat roof but the others are intact.

Inside, the towers contain a functioning electro-mechanical interlocking system from the 1930s, including power systems, racks of relays, a control board and an interlocking machine (Figure 7).

While the three towers are based on almost-identical plans, they have each been altered over time. The John Street tower has been significantly altered by the removal of its original roof. The Scott Street tower is largely unchanged. The Cherry Street tower is smaller than the other two; an addition was constructed on its north wall to increase its workshop area in the 1950s (Figure 8).

The context of each tower has also changed. The Cherry Street tower was set on the north side of the viaduct within an industrial, rail-focused area (Figure 9). Today (2012), the historic structures and rail lines are gone, but the tower’s structural relationship with the viaduct has not been altered (Figure 10). The Scott Street tower’s context changed with the construction of the Gardiner Expressway and its ramp in the late 1950s (Figure 11 and Figure 12), but the tower is still clearly associated with the viaduct and the train sheds of Union Station (Figure 13). The John Street tower was heavily modified by the construction of the Rogers Stadium Walkway and by the placement of a bridge pier and a new building close to its east and north elevations (Figure 14).

In 2000 the USRC, including the towers, was purchased by Metrolinx from the TTR and the City of Toronto. The TTR operates the towers under an agreement with Metrolinx. A contract to design, install and commission a new train control signal system for Union Station was awarded to Siemens Canada Limited on November 13, 2007. The initiative was part of the GO Transit Rail Improvement Program, a federal/provincial funding program established in 2004 to upgrade GO Transit rail infrastructure. Design work for signal improvements began in January 2008. The new signal system is intended to allow for faster recovery from train delays or equipment malfunction. It will also be designed for increased train speeds. All signalling operations will be streamlined and consolidated into one control center. This will result in the decommissioning of the three interlocking towers in 2018. For John Street, additional changes are anticipated because a new track will be added to the USRC very close to the track-side elevation of the tower. Metrolinx is planning to depress the bay window, remove access via the front door, add an entrance to the back or side of the tower, add a fire exit, install a GPS antenna, and add an

14 |

air conditioning unit.

| 15

HERITAGE RECOGNITIONS

JOHN STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES

The John Street tower has not been included on the City’s Inventory.

A search for adjacent heritage properties in the inventory was conducted using the following street names: John, Bremner, Rees, Front and Lake Shore. This search was conducted in conjunction with a search through the heritage properties identified in the Union Station Heritage Conservation District (HCD) plan. The HCD will be discussed in more detail below.

The CN Tower at 301 Front Street, which is located directly across the rail lands from the John Street tower, was municipally listed in 1992. It is also included a contributing resource in the Union Station HCD plan.

The John Street Roundhouse, which consists of the Roundhouse, Water Tower, Coaling Tower and Sanding Tower, is located at 222 Bremner Boulevard, just south of the CN Tower. It has been municipally designated, included as a contributing resource in the Union Station HCD plan, and named a National Historic Site. The John Street Railway Gatehouse and Switch Cabin D Manual Interlocking Tower, which were relocated to the John Street Roundhouse site, are municipally listed.

The John Street tower is located within the Union Station Heritage Conservation District (HCD) but it is not listed as a contributing resource. Following its purchase of Union Station, the City of Toronto completed a master plan for the station that included a recommendation for further study of its physical context. The City developed the Union Station District Plan in 2006, which led to the Union Station HCD Plan and to the designation of the HCD under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The heritage value of the HCD is associated with Union Station’s role as a transportation hub and its impact on the development of downtown Toronto. The HCD illustrates several periods of development patterns and architecture. The HCD boundary runs from Wellington on the north, to Yonge along the east, Lake Shore Boulevard/ Harbour Street on the south, and Simcoe Street to the rail corridor and Rees Street on the west.

It should be noted that the Scott Street Tower is located approximately one block outside the boundaries of the Union Station HCD, but was included in the original study area defined by City staff. During the course of the study, however, the eastern boundary was shifted from Church Street to Yonge Street for reasons related to the Union Station, rather than the USRC, as the core theme of the HCD and its heritage value.1

The John Street tower also falls within the boundaries of the Railway Lands East Secondary Plan (2009). The Secondary Plan states (Section 7 – Heritage; Guideline 7.1):

Aspects of the history of the railways will be incorporated into parks and public open space in the Railway Lands by restoring and integrating significant railway heritage structures and artifacts, including, subject to Section 10.2 [Metro Convention Centre], the CP Roundhouse, the

1 E.R.A. Architects Inc. “Appendix 4 – Heritage Conservation District Plan”, Union Station District Plan. May 2006, p. 38.

16 |

adjacent coal/sand loader and water towers, the John Street signal tower and Cabin D.2

Other parts of the Section on Heritage provide guidelines on other heritage structures and archaeology related to area’s railway history.

SCOTT STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES

The Scott Street tower has not been included on the City’s Inventory.

The Scott Street tower is located about 300 metres east of Union Station’s Bush train sheds. The station and its sheds are a National Historic Site of Canada, while the station itself is also a federally recognized Heritage Railway Station under the Heritage Railway Stations Protection Act and municipally designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The site is also protected by a heritage easement agreement. Both the station and the sheds are visible from the Scott Street tower on the USRC.

A search for adjacent heritage properties in the inventory was conducted using the following street names: Scott, Esplanade, Yonge, Lake Shore and Church. Within the vicinity of the Scott Street tower one property is listed – the LCBO Office & Warehouse at 55 Lake Shore Blvd E. Two nearby properties are municipally designated – Greey’s Toronto Mill at 4 & 6 Church Street and the Warehouse at 9 Church Street. The LCBO Office & Warehouse is a mid-century modern structure that is located on the other side of the Gardiner Expressway. It has no direct historic and landscape relationship with the tower. The two designated properties are not visible from the Scott Street Tower and they have no historical connection to it.

CHERRY STREET TOWER AND ADJACENT HERITAGE PROPERTIES

The Cherry Street tower has not been included on the City’s Inventory.

A search for adjacent heritage properties in the inventory was conducted using the following street names: Cherry, Mill and Lake Shore. The only adjacent heritage property is the Gooderham and Worts Distillery at 55 Mill Street. The property was municipally designated in 1973 and named a National Historic Site of Canada in 1988. The Ontario Heritage Trust holds multiple Conservation Easement Agreements on the property.3 It should be noted, however, that the site has changed since the designations. It is now developed as the “Distillery District”, a mixed-use area that incorporates restored industrial buildings with new construction, including high-rise buildings being erected across from the Cherry Street tower.

The Cherry Street Tower is located within the West Don Lands Precinct Plan (2005)4, but it does not include a specific reference to the building as a heritage feature in the precinct.

The study does not include archaeology, but it should be noted that the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower is located near the former site of the Toronto Rolling Mills Wharf identified in an Archaeological Conservation and Management Strategy (ACMS) completed for Waterfront Toronto in 2008. The site is located immediately south of the Cherry Street tower on the site of the USRC. According to the ACMS:

2 City of Toronto, Railway Lands East Secondary Plan, Toronto Official Plan, City of Toronto Urban Development Services (November 2002), p 6. 3 Heritage Easement Ag: CA397773, CA397771, CA397781, CA397779, CA397777, CA397775, CA397783, AT228498 4 City of Toronto, West Don Lands Precinct Plan. Online at www.toronto.ca/waterfront/pdf/wdl_precinct_plan.pdf.

| 17

"Remnants [of the cribwork of the wharf] may survive buried in fill if the structure was not removed during reconfiguration of the Don River channel."5 The feature was given a grade 2 ranking and a recommendation for "documentation during construction monitoring."

5 Archaeological Services Inc. et al. Waterfront Toronto: Archaeological Conservation and Management Strategy. Prepared for Waterfront Toronto, October 2008.

18 |

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

METHODOLOGY

A portion of the historical information provided in this report has been drawn from a 2012 heritage study for Metrolinx of the John Street Interlocking Tower by Dr. Christopher Andreae of Golder Associates and from sources identified in the Golder report. Additional research was conducted online, at Library and Archives Canada, and at the Canadian Museum of Science and Technology. The Archives of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP Archives) located two historic photographs of the Cherry Street Interlocking Station; the TTR located copies of the six architectural drawings included in this report; Donald Thomas, Safety & Regulatory Affairs for the Canadian Pacific Railway in Calgary located the drawing of the Cherry Street tower and the construction specifications. He also provided observations on extant signal buildings in North America. Due to time limitations, no research was conducted on site at the CP Archives. It is possible that additional information about the towers could be found with additional research, but the buildings and their equipment are well-documented in the sources consulted for this study. The specifications requested from CP by Metrolinx were acquired from Dave Sobol on December 28, 2012.

DESIGN AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Following the production of drawings by the CP’s Chief Engineer of Buildings in mid 1930, the TTR issued tenders in October 1930 for the construction of the signal towers at Cherry, Scott, and John streets with a requirement for work be completed by the end of the year. The Cherry Street interlocking machine was placed in service in its tower in March 1931; the Scott Street machine was installed in June; and the John Street machine in August of that year.6 The towers were designed to meet standardized approaches to rail structures in both their functional design and their conservative neoclassical decoration. The deep overhanging eaves (Figure 3), for example, provided shade, reduced glare and protected windows from snow and rain to improve visibility. The tall attic space combined with solid masonry walls helped keep buildings cooler. The fireproof construction helped reduce the risk of fire. Round-headed windows, variations in brickwork, and restrained classicism helped establish the branding of railways.

The set of three interlocking towers share identical architectural treatments in terms of their construction, finishes, decorative detailing and functional organization. Each of the three towers also consists of two storeys (titled “ground floor” and “1st floor” on the plans) and a basement, but the Scott Street tower has a lower entry level to compensate for the lower grade on the south side of the viaduct. Each one is attached at the basement level to the outer side of the viaduct’s walls. Only the Cherry Street tower has a boiler chimney; the other towers were steam-heated from the central heating plant at Union Station.7 The Cherry Street tower also has a smaller footprint than the other two towers because it housed a smaller interlocking machine.

The towers are solid masonry construction with composite reinforced concrete and steel- floors and board-formed cast-in-place concrete foundations. The Scott Street tower, which was located on infill, is

6 Canadian Railway and Marine World, "Toronto Union Station and Waterfront Grade Separation" January 1931: 16. 7 Black, 401‐405

| 19

set in caissons.

Exterior decorative elements and finishes are rendered in brick, stone, wood and metal. As built, the towers were covered by steep wood-framed, asbestos-shingled, hip roofs with deep flared eaves. The wide overhanging eaves helped protect the windows from mid-day sun, which, in turn, allowed the windows to be kept closed as much as possible to keep soot and dust of the interlocking machine. The eaves also helped keep the windows free of rain and snow. The Cherry Street tower still has its asbestos shingles and its metal cap, but the roof of the John Street tower has been completely replaced and the roof of the Scott Street tower is covered with asphalt shingles.

The buildings were solidly constructed to reduce the risk of fire and structural decay. The projection of the Train Director’s Bay, for example, was constructed of wood but clad with metal (cast iron indicated on archival drawings but possibly copper based on visual inspection). The interior staircases consist of prefabricated steel units. All interior finishes are resistant to wear and fire.

Inside, each building followed the same hierarchy of spaces. The basement level used as an entrance, workshop and electrical/battery room. The ground floor of each tower is used for relay housing and for the power chases. The relays are mounted on wooden racks directly under the machine. These relays transfer the mechanical action of the levers into electric signals fed to the individual interlocking components in the track. A total of 1,531 relays were used in the three signal towers8; the number is similar today.

The interlocking machine is set in the first floor (the top level) of each tower. The levers are located on the track side of the machine such that the signal operator has his back to the rail corridor. A large bay window on the track side provides the Train Director with a view of the track layout in both directions.9

During a site visit in November 2012, TTR personnel confirmed that very few changes have occurred in the manner in which the buildings have been used since their construction in 1931. By the end of 1931 the Union Station area was handling approximately 125 trains a day.10 Today GO Transit, as the primary user of Union Station, operates over 180 daily trains through the station while Via Rail’s intercity traffic also uses the USRC. The change in traffic has been a less important factor in pushing change in the functioning of the towers than upcoming changes to the type of equipment that will be used to manage rail routs, switches and signals.

Most interlocking towers, as well as most railway structures other than railway stations, dating from before 1950 in North America have been abandoned, demolished or moved. Signal Cabin ‘D’, an 1890s structure that was used for signalling on the USRC, for example, was moved off the property in 1983 and is now located near the former John Street Roundhouse. The Scott Street and Cherry Street towers are rare examples of interlocking towers in North American from the early 20th century in almost-original condition; the John Street tower has been modified with the removal of its roof.

APPEARANCE AND FUNCTIONAL DESIGN SUMMARIES FOR EACH TOWER

Tower Summary

8 Black, 401‐405. 9 Black, 401‐405. 10 Black, 401‐405.

20 |

Cherry Street Exterior (Cabin A) The Cherry Street Interlocking Tower is a three-storey building with an attic level set on a Drawings rectangular footprint about 12 m wide and 6 m deep. The height from the basement floor to the attic floor is 12 m; the roof is 3.6 m in height. Figure 15 Its lively silhouette is due to the shape of its roof, its tall chimney and the pagoda-like roof Figure 16 cap. In spite of its strictly utilitarian function, it features styling more commonly associated with railway stations, including the combination of classically inspired and Arts and Crafts Figure 17 elements, the steep hip roof with flared eaves, generous fenestration and blind arcading for Figure 18 some of the ground-floor windows. Its decorative elements are rendered in brick, stone, wood and metal, with limestone accents at window sills, arch keystones and the wash course; bricked arches; paneled doors; moldings; cast-iron11 paneling on the support for the projecting Train Director’s Bay; a copper cap on the roof; and the broad roof overhang Photographs with exposed rafter ends.

Figure 3 Ornamentation is concentrated on the track side, which is clearly the building’s primary elevation. It includes the Train Director’s Bay with its metal paneling and heavy stone Figure 19 brackets, the largest number of windows, the building’s sign (“Cherry St”), and a handsome arched doorway for a broad transomed multi-lite door. The middle windows on the ground Figure 8 floor below the bay do not feature the blind arcading of the other windows. Figure 10 The tower conveys its technical function in its symmetry, exposed concrete foundation, Figure 20 solid brick construction of the top two storeys, and resistant materials inside and out. Its railway associations are clearly expressed in its roof shape, the projecting Train Director’s Figure 21 Bay, and the quality of its construction, of which the brickwork with raked horizontal joints and raked verticals is typical. The survival of the roof’s asbestos shingles (in terms of their Figure 7 shapes and colours, rather than the material itself) and the copper roof cap contribute to an immediate appreciation of the building’s age. Figure 22 The small, strictly utilitarian one-storey addition on the north side uses a different colour of Figure 23 brick and lacks the quality of materials found in the 1930-1 structure. It leads to the original entrance, with its transomed door with 3-over-5 lites.

Interior

Inside, the building’s function is evident in the hierarchy and division of spaces, as well as its materials, finishes and limited decoration. Only a few elements have decorative treatments, namely, the paneled doors, the staircase and railings, and mouldings around openings. Most of the windows throughout the building retain all of their original oak mouldings, but the window units have been replaced and mouldings have been painted.

The most important room in the building is the control room on the top floor, where the interlocking machine and the Train Director’s Bay window are located. It is heavily fenestrated to bring natural light into the room. The floor covering was specified as “battleship linoleum”; newer linoleum is in place today. The interlocking machine is installed in the floor (and drops down through the ground floor ceiling); it takes up about a quarter of the space in the control room. The machine has its own interior chamber that is wide

11 The drawings specify ‘cast-iron’ but the 2012 inspection did not confirm whether the material was iron or copper.

| 21

enough for technicians to step down into the machine for maintenance and configuration of the wiring. The back wall is used for the track diagram board and a clock.

The ground storey has a large room separated from the stairway by a door. There are windows on three sides of the room including track side . The windows have been partially obscured by equipment and racks. Into the stairway opens the primary entrance, a glazed door with a transom. The room contains hundreds of relays installed on purpose-built racks. The ceiling drops in the centre of the room to accommodate the bottom of the interlocking machine and the conduit chases. Steel columns are installed to help carry the load of the machine to the ground floor.

The basement was originally divided into four areas: the workshop; the power room, with its concrete basin for the batteries, space for the electrical panels and reinforced concrete conduits integrated into the ceiling; a coal bunker; and an engineers room for maintaining the heating and power system. The interior doors leading to the power room and engineers room are intact.

A prefabricated painted-steel staircase with oak rails joins the three floors – basement, ground (track level) and 1st storey – on the east side inside the building. The steel newel posts are formed as pilasters with pyramidal caps.

Scott Street Exterior (Cabin B) The Scott Street Interlocking Tower is a three-storey building with an attic level set on a Drawings rectangular footprint about 15 m wide and 6 m deep. The height from the basement floor to the attic floor is 12m; the roof is 3.6m in in height. Figure 24 This three-storey building displays a striking silhouette due to the shape of its roof, but the Figure 25 impact is lessened from some views due to the concrete Gardiner Expressway looming above the building. In spite of its strictly utilitarian function, it features styling more Figure 26 commonly associated with railway stations, including the combination of classically inspired Figure 27 and Arts and Crafts elements, the steep hip roof with flared eaves, generous fenestration and blind arcading for the ground-floor windows. Its decorative elements are rendered in Figure 28 brick, stone, wood and metal, with limestone accents at window sills, arch keystones and the wash course; bricked arches; paneled doors; moldings; cast-iron12 paneling on the Photographs support for the projecting Train Director’s Bay; and the broad roof overhang with exposed rafter ends. Figure 2 Ornamentation is concentrated on the track side, which is clearly the building’s primary Figure 29 elevation. It includes the Train Director’s Bay with its metal paneling and heavy stone brackets, the largest number of windows, the building’s sign (“Scott St”), and a handsome Figure 30 arched doorway for a broad transomed multi-lite door. Figure 31 The tower conveys its technical function in its symmetry, exposed concrete foundation, Figure 32 solid brick construction of the top two storeys, and fire resistant materials inside and out. Its railway associations are clearly expressed in the directional sign on its roof, its roof shape, Figure 33 the projecting Train Director’s Bay, and the quality of its construction, of which the brickwork with raked horizontal joints and raked verticals is typical. Changes to its rear Figure 34 (south) elevation to support a new entrance and stairwell have a minimal impact on its

12 The drawings specify ‘cast-iron’ but the 2012 inspection did not confirm whether the material was iron or copper.

22 |

overall exterior appearance. The roof is missing its copper cap, which was identical in Figure 35 design to the cap that remains on the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. It was likely removed when the asbestos shingles were replaced by asphalt shingles. Figure 36 Interior

Inside, the building’s function is evident in the hierarchy and division of spaces, as well as its materials, finishes and limited decoration Only a few elements have decorative treatments, namely, the paneled doors, the staircase and railings, and mouldings around openings. Most of the windows throughout the building retain all of their original oak mouldings, but the window units have been replaced and mouldings have been painted.

The most important room in the building is the control room on the top floor, where the interlocking machine and the Train Director’s Bay and desks are located. It is heavily fenestrated to bring natural light into the room. The floor covering was specified as “battleship linoleum”; newer linoleum is in place today with a mat in front of the interlocking machine. The interlocking machine is installed in the floor (and drops down through the ground floor ceiling); it takes up about a quarter of the space in the control room. The machine has its own interior chamber that is wide enough for technicians to step down into the machine for maintenance and configuration of the wiring. The back wall is used for the track diagram board and a clock.

The ground storey has a large room separated from the stairway by a door. There are windows on three sides of the room including track side. The windows have been partially obscured by equipment and racks. Into the stairway opens the primary entrance, a glazed door with a transom. The room contains hundreds of relays installed on purpose-built racks. The ceiling drops in the centre of the room to accommodate the bottom of the interlocking machine and the conduit chases. Steel columns are installed to help carry the load of the machine to the ground floor.

The basement was originally divided into three areas: the workshop; the power room, with its concrete basin for the batteries, space for the electrical panels and reinforced concrete conduits integrated into the ceiling. The interior doors leading to the power room and engineers room are intact. The basement appears to have been altered to remove the interior stairs to the street level doorway on the south elevation as shown on the archival drawings. It was replaced at some point by a doorway to an exterior set of metal stairs. There is a short door opening on the south elevation in the location shown for the original exterior door on the archival drawings.

John Street Exterior (Cabin C) The John Street Interlocking Tower is a three-storey building with a flat roof set on a Drawings rectangular footprint about 15 m wide and 6 m deep. The height from the basement floor to the original attic concrete slab is approximately 12 m. It has been modified with the removal Figure 24 of its former steep wood framed roof to allow the installation of the John Street bridge above. Figure 25 In spite of its strictly utilitarian function and modifications, it retains classically inspired Figure 26 ornamentation as seen in its generous fenestration and blind arcading for the ground-floor

| 23

windows. Its decorative elements are rendered in brick, stone, wood and metal, with Figure 37 limestone accents at window sills, arch keystones and wash course; bricked arches; paneled doors; moldings; and cast-iron13 paneling on the support for the projecting Train Photographs Director’s Bay.

Figure 1 Ornamentation is concentrated on the track side, which is clearly the building’s primary Figure 14 elevation. It includes the Train Director’s Bay with its metal paneling and heavy stone brackets, the largest number of windows, the building’s sign (“John St”), and a handsome Figure 38 arched doorway for a broad transomed multi-lite door.

Figure 39 Interior

Figure 40 Inside, the building’s function is evident in the hierarchy and division of spaces, as well as its materials, finishes and limited decoration Only a few elements have decorative Figure 41 treatments, namely, the paneled doors, the staircase and railings, and mouldings around openings. Most of the windows throughout the building retain all of their original oak Figure 42 mouldings, but the window units have been replaced and mouldings have been painted.

The ground storey has a large room separated from the stairway by a door. There are windows on three sides of the room including track side. The windows have been partially obscured by equipment and racks. Into the stairway opens the primary entrance, a glazed door with a transom. The room contains hundreds of relays installed on purpose-built racks. The ceiling drops in the centre of the room to accommodate the bottom of the interlocking machine and the conduit chases. Steel columns are installed to help carry the load of the machine to the ground floor.

HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS

13 The drawings specify ‘cast-iron’ but the 2012 inspection did not confirm whether the material was iron or copper.

24 |

THEMATIC OVERVIEW

The three USRC interlocking towers were constructed for TTR in 1930-1 as part of an ambitious and successful project that began in 1906 to replace Toronto’s central railway station and to segregate, as much as possible, rail operations from the city’s road network. The towers are linked in history and function to Toronto’s Union Station, to the rail viaduct, and to Toronto’s railway lands. The primary role of the structures was utilitarian, but they also served to publicize both the presence of the railway line and the commitment of the companies to rail safety. 14

The towers functioned as a set, with each building housing an interlocking machine and its associated power and cabling systems to allow the Train Director and signal staff to direct trains entering and exiting Union Station along the recently completed viaduct (Figure 45, Figure 46, Figure 4 and Figure 9). Interlocking towers were constructed around the world beginning in the 1890s when mechanical interlocking technology was introduced to interconnect signalling and switching operations in a manner that would ensure that trains could not use the same tracks or cross tracks unsafely. At the time of the construction of the USRC towers, the controlling unit for an interlocking system was normally housed in a two- or three-story structure with the operations floor on the highest level. Because interlocking systems were very expensive (the USRC machines and signals cost about $1M in 1930s, equivalent to about $13M in 2012), railways normally erected solid, fire-resistant structures built specifically to the size of the machinery. In all respects, the USRC towers were consistent in their design, construction and layout with buildings of their type constructed for major railways in North America. In 1911, over 5000 interlocking plants were in operation on North American railways. Today, however, the three USRC interlocking towers are thought to be the only structures of their type in use with c 1930 original equipment in North America.15

The towers were designed by CP’s competent and versatile building engineering design group directed by John Wilson Orrock (1870 – [undetermined]), Chief Engineer of Buildings. Orrock was directly responsible for several high-profile CP buildings, such as the new wing for the CPR’s Banff Springs Hotel in 1926-7. He also oversaw the design of many stations and utilitarian structures by other CP architects. The three interlocking towers, which stood alongside one of Canada’s busiest train corridors and housed very expensive rail equipment, demonstrate CP’s capacity to extend its design motifs to utilitarian structures.

SIGNAL TOWER DESIGNS

Hundreds of structures for housing signalling equipment (generally known as signal buildings if they were single-storey structures and interlocking or signal towers if they were taller) were built for Canadian railways; thousands were built in the United States. A single-storey frame structure was a common form

14 The importance of combining aesthetic appeal and utility for signal towers was described in Railway Engineering and Maintenance (Chicago: Simmons‐Boardman Pub. Co, 1948): 1053. The most dramatic examples of the willingness of the railways to use architecture as a form of publicity are the railway hotels. The President of the CPR in 1918 said, very directly, that hotels represented a “small return on the investment” but they also had such “contingent advantages to the company and to the localities served by the Company lines” that “[the CPR] would not be without the hotels even though they were operated at a loss.” Quoted in: W. Kaye Lamb, History of the Canadian Pacific Railway (New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1977), p 322. 15 Conversation with Don Thomas, Canadian Pacific Railway, 21 November 2012. Mr. Thomas is the CP staff member who handles most of the company’s interest in the Heritage Railway Stations Protection Act. He is also recognized as one of Canada’s leading authorities on historic railway structures.

| 25

in isolated locations where only a few levers were required. For busy trainyards, however, multi-storey structures were the norm in the late 19th century and well into the 20th century.

The USRC Interlocking Towers were consistent in scale, lay-out, form and materials with recommendations for these types of buildings set out by American Railway Engineering Association and followed by Canada’s Board of Railway Commissioners. In their design and construction, signal towers were expected to combine “beauty” with “utility” to help promote the railway to their customers and instill confidence among ticket-buyers that railways were investing in safety.16 The history of railways is full of lessons concerning the difficulty of developing and implementing standards, but companies and suppliers found it useful to comply with guidelines set out by various authorities, such as the American Railway Engineering Association.17

While there was no official standard for the design of interlocking towers, the guidelines were clearly stated in various publications of the period from the 1890s to the 1950s. John Wilson Orrock, Chief Engineer of Building, CPR, who was in charge of the design of the USRC interlocking towers, wrote two editions of a North American guide titled Railroad Structures and Estimates where he described recommended designs for signal towers. 18 His publication and others recommended that towers be two stories above track grade with the projecting Train Director’s bay fronted by a plate-glass window (Figure 43). Fire-proof construction of brick or concrete was standard, and, in most cases, deep overhanging eaves were common. The newest signalling tower identified during research for this CHER was a tower constructed in 1984 in Hoboken, New Jersey and decommissioned in 2005 (Figure 44).19 In most respects, the Hoboken tower followed many of the same principles of the structures built from the 1890s into the 1950s.

INTERLOCKING HISTORY20

The electro-mechanical interlocking system of train control for which the interlocking towers were built was planned, purchased and installed at Union Station, Toronto in 1929-1931. The system is used to safely and efficiently move trains into and out of the station over multiple track routes. An interlocking plant was a critical component in preventing conflicts between train operations; as a result, it was a decisive factor in improving railway safety in busy corridors.

With interlocking, train routes were selected by signalmen in the towers, who manipulated track signals

16 The importance of combining aesthetic appeal and utility for signal towers was described in Railway Engineering and Maintenance (Chicago: Simmons‐Boardman Pub. Co, 1948), 1053. The most dramatic examples of the willingness of the railways to use architecture as a form of publicity are the railway hotels. The President of the CPR in 1918 said, very directly, that they represented a “small return on the investment” but they also had such “contingent advantages to the company and to the localities served by the Company lines” that “[the CPR] would not be without the hotels even though they were operated at a loss.” Quoted in: W. Kaye Lamb, History of the Canadian Pacific Railway (New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1977), 322. 17 See: Railway Engineering and Maintenance. Chicago: Simmons‐Boardman Pub. Co, 1923 etc. including the 7th edition in 1946. 18 Orrock, John W. Railroad Structures and Estimates. New York: J. Wiley & Sons, 1909 and 1918. He acknowledged numerous authorities, including Engineering News, Railway Age Gazette, Maintenance of Way Engineer, Railway World, and Engineering and Contracting. 19 http://position‐light.blogspot.ca/search/label/interlocking%20tower. Accessed 27 November 2012. 20 Most of the text in this sub‐section is taken directly from: Dr. Christopher Andreae’s report, Heritage Impact Assessment John Street Interlocking Tower, Track A1/B Alignment, November 2012. He explains that this is a very simplified description of complex technology.

26 |

to inform the train engineer of what route the train would take, and simultaneously and automatically changed the track switches to direct the train to the correct tracks. At the same time, other signals were automatically changed so that other engineers knew that they had to stop because the line was blocked. The signalmen chose the route by mechanically setting up the signals and track switches on an interlocking bed inside an interlocking machine installed in the signal tower. The mechanical actions of the interlocking bed were then transferred into electrical signals that were carried by underground cables to the signals and track switches located within the railway corridor; hence the device name of “electro-mechanical interlocking”.

The design of the interlocking bed was such that the signalman was physically prevented from setting up a route that would result in a collision. Obviously this was an essential safety feature. Interlocking also reduced congestion in areas of dense train traffic, such as at Union Station, by setting up routes. This provided additional train capacity, and faster travel than earlier signalling systems.

The safe control of trains on tracks had been a problem since the earliest days of railway operations. The first practical mechanical interlocking system21 was developed in Britain in 1856 and manufactured commercially from about 1861 onwards. Mechanical interlocking was first used in North America in 1875 on the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad. In 1884 a hydro-pneumatic interlocking system was developed to permit the location of track appliances and signals further from the signal cabin than was possible with the mechanical system. A more reliable electro-pneumatic system became available in 1891. In the same year, the first electro-mechanical interlock was installed in railway service in North America. By 1919 there were approximately 5,300 interlocking plants of all types operating on North American railways.22

The first practical electric interlocking system was developed by John Daniels Taylor who organized the Taylor Switch and Signal Company to manufacture and market a system that was first deployed in 1890- 91. In 1900, a separate company, the Taylor Signal Company, improved the existing designs and became the only all-electric commercial system in existence.23 The General Railway Signal Company was organized in 1904 as a merger of the Taylor Signal Company and the Pneumatic Signal Company; it became one of the major suppliers of North American signals. In 1936, railways began to install a newer version of all-relay systems that used buttons, rather than levers, to activate signals and switches. The machines were much smaller, which reduced the footprint and required height of signal buildings.

Old Union Station was outfitted with a mechanical interlocking system in 1889-90.24 Four signal cabins were constructed of which one, Cabin D, survives in a new location at Roundhouse Park near the John Street Roundhouse.

TORONTO TERMINALS RAILWAY

Toronto’s urban development was greatly influenced by the development of the USRC and its associated rail developments, especially Union Station. Construction of the new Union Station, its

21 Mechanical interlocking used human power to move the levers in the interlocking machine that operated switches and signals through pipe connections or wire pulls. A clear history of interlocking equipment can be found in: Alstom, A Centennial: History of Alstom Signaling Inc. (Formerly General Railway Signal Company), 1904‐2004. Online at: http://alstomsignalingsolutions.com/Data/Documents/History.pdf. Accessed 29 November 2012. 22 Union Switch & Signal Division, The Search for Safety (American Standard Inc., 1981), 22‐23. 23 Union Switch and Signal Division. 24 Railroad Gazette, “Interlocking at Toronto,” April 3 (1891): 228.

| 27

approach tracks, and the viaduct was carried out over 17 years, ending with the installation of the interlocking plant in 1931. The USRC interlocking towers are among a handful of structures surviving from the USRC development period or earlier, including Union Station, the Train Shed, the Cherry Street subway, the Toronto Terminals Railway (TTR) Canadian National (CN) Express Building and the John Street Roundhouse.

The three Union Station Railway Corridor (USRC) interlocking towers were constructed for TTR in 1930-1. The TTR was incorporated in 1906 following a series of complex negotiations and agreements concerning the operation and construction of a new set of rail facilities in Toronto to be managed and co-funded by the City of Toronto, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) and the Grand Truck-Canadian National systems. The TTR controlled the system from Don Station to Bathurst Junction, a distance of 5 km that covered 42 km of track.25 The intention of the project was to help relieve congestion and eliminate dangerous intersections in downtown Toronto, to improve rail services, and to build a new Union Station.26

The TTR’s early history was full of controversy and setbacks due to issues that arose between the parties to the agreement. The City of Toronto, for example, tried to pull out of the agreement; a proposed urban design plan by John Lyle to weave the new station into the city’s urban fabric was shelved; World War One changed economic and labour conditions; and CN took over the Grand Truck Pacific Railway. Finally, when the whole project was close to completion, the stock market crashed. After 17 years of work, however, almost all of its major elements were built as planned, including one of the largest rail separation projects on the continent. The defining end moment was the installation of the interlocking plant in 1931.

The TTR’s direct physical legacy includes the redevelopment of a long swath of railway lands from the Don Valley to Bathurst Street, the rail viaduct with its steel retaining walls and earth embankment, Union Station, the CN Express Building, the Union Station Train Sheds, Signal Cabin ‘D’ (built earlier but used by the TTR), the Cherry Street subway and bridge, and the three interlocking towers considered in this study. The two most complete interlocking towers are the Scott Street and Cherry Street structures. CP’s legacy with respect to the TTR and the USRC includes the former CP John Street Roundhouse built on land set aside for CP by the TTR and the Fairmount Royal York Hotel completed in 1929 by CP across from Union Station. The Canadian Pacific Building, the firm’s Toronto offices built in 1911 at 69 Yonge Street on the southeast corner of King and Yonge streets, predates the 1912 THC plans.

INTERLOCKING FOR THE USRC

Before the interlocking system was completed, six tracks were in service between Cherry Street and John Street to handle traffic into Union Station. About 60 switchmen were required to handle the hand- thrown switches in the area. A loudspeaker telephone system directed by two signalmen provided instructions to various points on the layout to the switchmen to operate the track. One of the signalmen was located in a small temporary cabin at the east end of the layout and a similar cabin at the west end. When the interlocking system was completed, the loudspeaker system was installed for direct

25 Donald M. Wilson, The Ontario & Quebec Railway: A History of the Development of the Canadian Pacific System in Southern Ontario (Belleville: Mika Publishing Company, 1984), 215. 26 A detailed and informative history of the planning of Toronto’s waterfront, including the railway lands, is the two‐volume study by Wayne C. Reeves, Visions for the Metropolitan Toronto Waterfront (Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto, 1983). Reeves’ work was originally commissioned in 1991 by the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department for its new waterfront plan.

28 |

communications between the Train Directors at Scott Street and John Street.27

As designed, the station was reached by six main tracks extending east and west along the new viaduct. At the station, the number of tracks expanded to ten inside the train shed and two tracks running south of it. “Ladder” tracks at each of the station platforms allowed trains from any of the six approach tracks to reach any of the twelve tracks serving the station proper.

Since almost all of the trains originated or terminated at the station, the train shed was operationally divided into two halves; one for eastbound and the other for westbound traffic. Only a few passenger trains operated on through schedules.28 The full section of track was controlled by three interlocking towers located near the intersections of the viaduct with John, Scott, and Cherry streets.

Two projects were undertaken to cover the full implementation of the interlocking system: Toronto Terminals Railway Company, a jointly owned subsidiary of the Canadian National and Canadian Pacific railways supervised construction of the three signal towers; the General Railway Signal Company had the contract to install the signal equipment.29

As built, the rail corridor includes three interlocking towers located at John Street, Scott Street and Cherry Street that govern all train movements along a seven-kilometre track corridor associated with Toronto Union Station. The corridor extends from near Bathurst Street east through Union station to near the Don River and is the same width as when it was built.

Each of the three towers is responsible for its own section of track, but as a set they managed the entire USRC as described in the following table.30

Tower Controlled Section Cherry Street Tower 4.5 kilometres of track from Sherbourne Street, east to almost the Don River; (Cabin A) completed with 71 working levers with 41 spare lever spaces

Scott Street Tower 1.2 kilometres of track from the center of Union Station, east to Sherbourne (Cabin B) Street; completed with 169 working levers and 23 spare lever spaces (the same as John Street).

John Street Tower 1.3 kilometre long area from the center of the Union Station platform to a point (Cabin C) just west of Spadina Avenue; completed with 169 working levers and 23 spare lever spaces.

The number of levers for controlling switches, crossovers, signals and locking was a common measure of the complexity of the interlocking operation. A lever could regulate a single switch or signal or a multiple combination of both. In order to simplify operation and conserve equipment, some locations, such as crossovers, had two switch machines controlled by a single lever. At others, as many as three signals were controlled by one lever. The three new interlocking machines had a combined total of 409

27 H. L. Black, “Interlocking System Installed at Toronto Union Station,” Railway Signaling 24, no. 5 (1931): 401. 28 Black: 401‐405. 29 Canadian Railway and Marine World, "Toronto Waterfront Grade Separation," October 1930: 640A. 30 Black: 401‐405.

| 29

working levers controlling 546 individual track appliances or signals.31

In order to accurately detect the location of trains, the tracks were isolated into short sections that were energized such that the presence of a train completed the circuit. As the distance of the track circuit from the tower increased, additional electrical systems were required to maintain the track signal. Most of the track signals were dwarf signals installed at track level. A few signals were three-arm, high signals located on towers. All outside cables for circuits, signals and switches were laid underground.

The effectiveness of the interlocking system required a secure supply of electricity. The system used at Toronto, like most others, relied on both alternating (AC) and direct (DC) current. Until the early 1920s, most interlocking plants worked exclusively on DC power. By the end of the decade both were in use. At Toronto the track switch machines operated on 150 volts DC while AC power was used for the track circuits. A total of 1,350 DC relays and 181 AC relays were used in the three signal towers. Union Station was provided with commercial power at 13,200 volts, 25 cycles. This was reduced to 2,200 volts and distributed to the three towers. It was then transformed to 110 volts for use throughout the interlocking system. In the event of a power failure, a steam turbine plant within the station provided emergency backup power. In addition, each tower had a storage battery supply to provide back-up in event of power failure.

The interlocking plant was supplied and installed by the General Railway Signal Company under the jurisdiction of J.R.W. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of the TTR. The contract was worth over $1 Million at the time. The work was under the immediate supervision of H.L. Black, Superintendent of Signals. The installation work commenced about September 1930.32

In addition to controlling the operation of trains into Union Station, the John and Scott towers also provided a system for passenger access to the platforms in order to expedite the departure of trains. A “train starting” system of coloured lights provided communication between the Conductors, Gatemen, and Train Directors in the towers. The lamps were mounted in a small cabinet on the desks of each of the Train Directors at John and Scott streets. When a train was ready to receive passengers, a button was pressed by a platform man to light a red lamp on the Train Director’s desk and at the Conductor’s station on the platform. The Train Director pressed his acknowledging button that turned off the red lamp and lit a yellow lamp at the gate, to notify the Gateman to open the gate to passengers. At the time of departure, the Gateman closed the gate and pressed his button. This extinguished all the yellow lamps and lit a green lamp at the Director’s desk. This light notified the Director and Conductor that all passengers were through the gate. No evidence of remnants of this system was noted during the Golder or THA site visits in fall 2012.

At some time, fluorescent signs with two-ended arrows were installed on the roof of the John and Scott towers to advise the Conductors about which side of the train platform should be used for loading and unloading. The fluorescent sign is still in place on the Scott Street Tower, but it is no longer in use; the sign on the John Street Tower has been removed.

DESIGNER

The three USRC interlocking towers were designed for the TTR (jointly owned by the CNR and CPR) by

31 Black, 401‐405. 32 Black, 401‐405; and Canadian Railway and Marine World, "Signalling and Interlocking for Toronto Central Terminal Area" June 1930: 360.

30 |

the CPR’s competent and versatile building engineering design group directed by John Wilson Orrock (1870-undetermine). The drawings held by the TTR and the CP for the design of the towers include a title and signature block and an approval block. Signatures are required by the “Engineer of Buildings C.P.R”, “Chief Engineer T.T.R.”, “Chief Engineer of C.P.R.” and “Chief Engineer of C.N.R.”. On a separate line, the block includes “Chief Engineer’s Office, C.P.R. Montreal August 27 1930 ” and the plan number. Orrock may have been assisted or supervised the work of Colin M. Drewitt, an Associate Architect of CP at the time.

Orrock came to Canada from Scotland in 1891 to join the CPR as a draughtsman. He later held the position of chief draftsman, assistant engineer, and finally Chief Engineer of Buildings for the CPR in 1924. 33 In this position he was put in charge of major railway hotel reconstruction projects, including the Chateau Frontenac in Québec City and the CPR Hotel at Lake Louise. He also supervised extensions to the Palliser Hotel in Calgary, AB and the Empress Hotel in Victoria, BC, and was either fully or partially responsible for the design of several station buildings, including the Park Avenue CPR Station, Montréal, QC and the Union Terminal in Regina, SK. Orrock’s skill as both an engineer and architect, as well as his Scottish background, was evident in his work on the design of a new wing for the CPR’s Banff Springs Hotel in 1926-7 as an extension to W.S. Painter’s 1911 wing. The wing was built over the winter within a massive wooden structural cocoon. Orrock continued and refined Painter’s unabashedly picturesque design, with references to both French château and Scottish baronial architecture in its steeply pitched roofs, multiple dormer windows, corner turrets, solid massing, rough stone treatment, and Tudor-inspired interior design. He retired from his position in 1937.

In 1909 and 1918 Orrock published the first and second editions of Railroad Structures and Estimates.34 Each edition included an estimate of the cost of building, outfitting and operating a mechanical interlocking plant. The second edition, published in 1918, also included the techniques and costs of building the Union Station viaduct, as well as sample designs for structures, such as signal towers.

Drewitt, whose involvement is less certain, was an architect for CPR in Montreal during the period 1928- 1932. In the early 1930's he was designated as "associate architect" which was the senior architectural position on the CPR payroll.

CONTEXT

For the purposes of this study, the ‘area’ is defined as the USRC; the surroundings are adjacent lands. The three towers were designed, built and operated as a set within the physical, historical and operational context of Union Station, the viaduct and adjacent rail yards. For the set as a whole, the USRC context remains intact but the surrounding landscapes have changed.

Tower Context and Changes

Cherry Street Tower Area (Cabin A) The Cherry Street Interlocking Tower is attached to the north side of the viaduct

33 “Orrock, John Wilson,” Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Canada, 1800‐1950. Online at: http://dictionaryofarchitectsincanada.org/architects/view/124. Accessed 21 November 2012. 34 J. W. Orrock, Railroad Structures and Estimate (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1909). Online at: http://archive.org/details/railroadstructu01orrogoog. Accessed 21 November 2012.

| 31

at the Cherry Street subway and bridge. The subway was built in 1927-8 (Figure 45). The Cherry Street tower maintains a physical and functional relationship to the USRC, the viaduct and the Cherry Street subway. The tower is visible when approaching Union Station by train and from nearby streets, including from within the present-day Distillery District. The tower plays an important role in establishing the long history of the USRC and the viaduct.

Surroundings

The northwest corner of the intersection was originally occupied by one-storey warehouses associated with the large Gooderham & Worts Distillery. The land immediately to the north of the tower consisted of privately operated rail yards. To the south were large wharves.

The entire area north of the viaduct is currently under redevelopment. By the end of 2013 high-rise structures will be located within 100 metres of the building, but the right-of-way is sufficient width to sustain some clear views of the towers from the east, west and north. To the south, the Gardiner Expressway plays dual roles in obscuring views to the tower at ground level from the south (Figure 47), but also providing views to the tower from the freeway.

Scott Street Tower Area (Cabin B) The Scott Street Interlocking Tower is attached to the south side of the viaduct about 300 m east of Union Station. The Scott Street tower maintains a physical and functional relationship to the USRC, the viaduct and Union Station and its train sheds (Figure 13). The tower is visible when approaching Union Station by train. The tower plays an important role in establishing the long history of the USRC and the viaduct.

Surroundings

At the time of its construction, the land behind it (to the south) was new infill along the lakeshore (Figure 11).

Today (2012), the lower level is almost at the grade with an off-ramp of the Gardiner Expressway, which looms above it. The area is infrequently visited by pedestrians and shadowed by the elevated Gardiner Expressway (Figure 12 and Figure 13).

John Street Tower Area (Cabin C) The John Street Interlocking Tower is the only tower on the west side of Union Station but it almost hidden by surrounding structures (Figure 48).

Surroundings

When built, the properties behind (north) of the tower consisted of extensive rail yards (Figure 49. The immediate surroundings of the John Street tower have been significantly altered by the installation of large modern structures within a few metres of the tower on three sides and above, and by major construction,

32 |

such as the CN Tower and its access bridge, close to the John Street tower (Figure 39).

| 33

FIGURES

Figure 1: Main elevation of the John Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 2: Main elevation of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

34 |

Figure 3: Main elevation of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 4: Interlocking machine and display board of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower, 1959. (J. W.F. Scrimgeour, reproduced by: John Hinson, “Scott Street Toronto Union,” The Signal Box, www.signalbox.org, Accessed 8 November 2012.)

| 35

36 |

Figure 5: Train Director’s desk in the John Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 6: South (rear) elevation of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (Tacoma Engineering for Metrolinx, 2012)

| 37

Figure 7: Equipment in the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 8: Additions to the north (rear) elevation of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

38 |

Figure 9: Completing the Cherry Street subway in May 1929, looking east across to the corner of the Gooderham & Worts property. The low warehouses in the foreground were demolished and are being replaced by new high-rise structures. (City of Toronto Archives, Series 372, s0372_xx0079_it0429.)

Figure 10: East elevation of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower next to the Cherry Street Subway. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 39

Figure 11: Aerial view, 1934, of the USRC east of Union Station (seen in the bottom right). An arrow has been added to mark the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (City of Toronto Archives, Series 372, s0372_ss0079_it0676, as reproduced in Old Time Trains. Onlineat www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/TTR/Union_Station.htm. Accessed 27 November 2012.)

Figure 12: Oblique aerial view of the Scott Street InterlockingTower (bottom) and the Bush train sheds of Union Station (top). (Bing Maps, www.bing.ca, Accessed 27 November 2012.)

40 |

Figure 13: Looking west along the USRC, the Scott Street Interlocking Tower is visible on the left and Union Station is visible on the right. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 14: Southwest corner of the John Street Interlocking Tower beneath the John Street Bridge. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 41

Figure 15: South elevation drawing of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (CPR, Calgary Office.)

42 |

Figure 16: North elevation drawing of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (CPR, Calgary Office.)

| 43

Figure 17: Longitudinal section drawing of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (CPR, Calgary Office.)

44 |

Figure 18: Electrical plans for the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (CPR, Calgary Office.)

Figure 19: Southeast corner of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 45

Figure 20: Copper cap on roof and Director’s Bay on The south elevation of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 21: East elevation of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower and the guard rail on the subway bridge. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

46 |

Figure 22: Metal stairs and screen in the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 47

Figure 23: Southwest corner of the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower. (http://torontorha.blogspot.ca/2012/03/railway-heritage- footprints-in-west_08.html, accessed 23 October 2012)

48 |

Figure 24: Track side elevation drawing of the John Street and Scott Street Interlocking towers. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

| 49

Figure 25: Side elevation drawing of the John Street and Scott Street Interlocking towers. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

50 |

Figure 26: Cross-section drawing of the John Street and Scott Street Interlocking towers. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

| 51

Figure 27: South elevation drawing of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

52 |

Figure 28: Basement floor and Cross Section drawing of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

Figure 29: Director’s Bay on the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 53

Figure 30: Blind-arch transom on the trackside of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 31: Original entrance door at sub-basement level of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

54 |

Figure 32: Interlocking machine and display board of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 55

Figure 33: Staircase in the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

56 |

Figure 34: Train Director’s desk in the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 35: Southeast corner of the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (http://torontorha.blogspot.ca/2012/03/railway-heritage- footprints-in-west_08.html, accessed 23 October 2012)

| 57

Figure 36: Looking east at the Scott Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 37: Floor plans for the John Street Interlocking Tower. (Josh Eisen, Toronto Terminals Railway)

58 |

Figure 38: Southeast corner of the John Street Interlocking Tower beneath the John Street Bridge. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 39: Windows on the west elevation of the John Street Interlocking Towers. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 59

Figure 40: Entrance to the John Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 41: Equipment in the John Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

60 |

Figure 42: Staircase in the John Street Interlocking Tower. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

Figure 43: Elevations and plan for the Montclair Interlocking Tower as reproduced in: John W. Railroad Structures and Estimates. New York: J. Wiley & Sons, 1909 and 1918, p. 25

| 61

Figure 44: Hoboken Signal Tower, built 1984 and decommissioned in 2005. (http://position- light.blogspot.ca/search/label/interlocking%20tower, accessed 27 November 2012)

Figure 45: John Street Subway under completion, September 1929, showing the steam pipe running along the side of the railing placed over the railing. The railing at Cherry Street is still intact. (City of Toronto Archives, Series 372, s0372_xx0079_it0627.)

62 |

Figure 46: Scott Street Interlocking Tower, 1959. (J. W.F. Scrimgeour, reproduced by: John Hinson, “Scott Street Toronto Union,” The Signal Box, www.signalbox.org, Accessed 8 November 2012.)

Figure 47: Looking north at the Cherry Street Interlocking Tower from the Martin Goodman Trail. (THA for Metrolinx, 2012.)

| 63

Figure 48: John Street Interlocking Tower as seen from the south end of the John Street Bridge. (http://torontorha.blogspot.ca/2012/03/railway-heritage-footprints-in-west_08.html, Accessed 23 October 2012.)

Figure 49: Aerial view, 1934, of the USRC looking west of Union Station (seen in the bottom right). An arrow has been added to mark the John Street Interlocking Tower. (City of Toronto Archives, Series 372, s0372_ss0079_it0677, as reproduced in Old Time Trains. Online at: www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/TTR/Union_Station.htm. Accessed 27 November 2012.)

64 |