UrbanDan said:
I believe that connecting HBS (and the future GO station) to Jane station via S. Kingsway would solve a lot of transit problems in the area. Not only for HBS, but also for South Swansea which will add more density in the next couple of years.

At first, I would like to see frequent bus service. However, the best option, I believe, is to build (now forgotten) Jane LRT which would extend to Park Lawn GO station via S. Kingsway. This way there would be more users of the new GO station and HBS would be connected with Bloor West Village, Bloor Subway, Crosstown LRT, and so on.
Click to expand...
The Jane LRT would almost surely have to be built underground for most of its length. Given how much that would cost and the lack of intensification on most of Jane at the moment it wouldn't make much sense to prioritize rapid transit there, at least not before resolving the disaster Dufferin already is and will grow even more to be with all the development happening there (the easiest fix there being turn the "Ontario Line" northward from the Ex to run under Dufferin to Eglinton).

With the Queensway streetcar, the inevitable shutdown of the remainder of King St. to through traffic and the new GO RER station HBS should be pretty well served by transit in the future. I could see them doing a dedicated BRT route from there up to Kipling Station to link the two growing centres in Etobicoke though.
 
Definitely veering into transit fantasy discussion, but I have for years been suggesting that the Relief Line/Ontario Line be extended to Humber Bay Shores and then Queensway (heading to Sherway Gardens), and that was before the announcement of First Capital's plans for 2150 Lake Shore. I believe that The Queensway should see similar densities to Humber Bay between the street and the Gardiner Expressway, supported by rapid transit. This would be forward planning for dealing with our housing supply problem.

HumberBayDRL.png

See Thumbnail.
 
WislaHD said:
Definitely veering into transit fantasy discussion, but I have for years been suggesting that the Relief Line/Ontario Line be extended to Humber Bay Shores and then Queensway (heading to Sherway Gardens), and that was before the announcement of First Capital's plans for 2150 Lake Shore. I believe that The Queensway should see similar densities to Humber Bay between the street and the Gardiner Expressway, supported by rapid transit. This would be forward planning for dealing with our housing supply problem.

View attachment 258320

See Thumbnail.
Click to expand...

Does HBS really need two new subway stations when it's already going to have 5 minute GO service? And that curve on Park Lawn looks really sharp.
 
kali said:
Does HBS really need two new subway stations when it's already going to have 5 minute GO service? And that curve on Park Lawn looks really sharp.
Click to expand...
Five-minute GO service? That's dreaming. So are ideas of LRT here other than the Waterfront West route, and we'll be lucky to get that. Rebuilding the HUmber Loop a few years from now so that buses can pass between The Queensway and Lake Shore would be helpful for improving local links, and within the realm of cost-effectiveness.

42
 
interchange42 said:
Five-minute GO service? That's dreaming. So are ideas of LRT here other than the Waterfront West route, and we'll be lucky to get that. Rebuilding the HUmber Loop a few years from now so that buses can pass between The Queensway and Lake Shore would be helpful for improving local links, and within the realm of cost-effectiveness.

42
Click to expand...

Even ten minute peak service should be more than enough to connect HBS to downtown. I'm not seeing the need for two entirely new subway stations (which would cannibalize the GO ridership) as per Wisla's proposal.
 
kali said:
Does HBS really need two new subway stations when it's already going to have 5 minute GO service? And that curve on Park Lawn looks really sharp.
Click to expand...
Like it shows, there is adequate stop spacing between the two stations. I'm not against one of them being cut (if this was moved from transit fantasy to actual plans).

It's been roughly 4 years since I made that map, but I recall making sure that the Park Lawn turns were less sharp than at Union Station. I think there is more land there than people realize, if you transposed the Humber Bay area over downtown, it is huge. In any case, I am sure there would be other configurations, including those that remove the Park Lawn stop for a more direct route to The Queensway (which would be too bad, since there is actually a lot of density to the north along Berry Road).
 
ADRM said:
And before even considering new fill, I'd certainly start by repurposing the nearly 2 acres of surface parking on the existing parkland in Humber Bay Park East.
Click to expand...

That’s certainly well worth considering, IMO, though the lots have been jam packed this past weekend. But that may be a consequence of the COVID-19 situation, rather than a long term reality.

I think I might start, however, with repurposing one of the three lots on the west side of Mimico Creek, preferably the middle lot.

The lot farthest from Lake Shore Blvd provides parking for the well used boat ramp. I am not sure how many boat ramps there are in the city but it can’t be many. People shouldn’t have to become members of yacht clubs to enjoy boating. I think I would keep that lot. The first lot in from Lake Shore has been used by a very successful seasonal Farmers’ Market on Saturdays for a number of years. I think I would also leave it as a parking area. The middle lot is mostly empty much of the time. (Although people use to to do doughnuts with their cars after winter snows!) It could profitably be grassed over as park area, IMO.

A few days ago some posters reacted to a photo of an open area on Marine Parade and called for more trees. In fact, there are lots of trees in the Humber Bay Parks. If you need to be convinced, flip through the photos in the Eau du Soleil thread. In the foreground of lots of shots of the towers, taken from a variety of angles, you will see an abundance of trees. What is lacking is actually open space to get a pickup game of futból going or to play catch or simply to have children run around freely. It doesn’t look to me as if the park in the Mr. Christie proposal will meet those kind of needs. I hope the city would seriously consider grassing over the middle parking lot on the west side of the creek to serve that purpose, whether or not there can be more landfill.

There are several other things that could be done to increase the useable park space of HBS, but this post is too long already. My apologies.
 
Last edited:
toaster29 said:
Your statement is too general. In Scarborough, you are probably right. In Etobicoke, a lot of the ridership comes from Park and Rides at Islington and Kipling. I don't have the ridership breakdown, maybe you could share that since you are making the assertion. In North York, along Yonge, much of the ridership comes from people living within walking distance - NYCC, Yonge/Eg, Shep/Yonge - urban nodes like the one here at Park Lawn/Lakeshore. Density is an important factor in determining rapid transit planning, this is well documented - not my opinion. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it should be the most important factor.

It makes more sense to build a subway line to where people are situated altogether in one node, than to build a station that then requires sending out 15+ bus routes to reach the same number of people.
Click to expand...

If you want to check what percentage of ridership comes from park and ride, just check the number of parking spaces. A few hundred parking spaces can't generate thousands of riders at a station.

Sheppard subway alone throws in tens of thousands of riders on Yonge line. Not to mention buses on either side or Steeles, Finch, Lawrence, York Mills (and the list can go on).

It makes sense to build a subway where it can serve more people, not where there is a one small pocket of density. Usually denser places equate to more riders but not always. Ridership figures of the stations in low density areas of North York and Scarborough are enough to prove that. A catchment doesn't mean walking distance. It also means people arriving via buses, which is usually a lot more than walk-ins unless you are talking about downtown like areas.
 
UrbanDan said:
Why not keep Food Terminal there and sell air rights to a big developer? Proximity to the new GO station would make if worthwhile and everyone would be happy.
Click to expand...

Original idea and I like it, but I feel like you would have to temporarily shut down and rebuild the entire terminal and it may not be easy/economical to temporarily relocate a business that would hurt many (I presume) if it was shut down for a couple of years.....perhaps the food terminal activity could be temporarily shifted to a side of the larter lot while they dig and build a more densely functioning food terminal (I am completely speculating here and have no idea if this could work)

There are also probably major approval/engineering issues with having a food termial buried under residential space (engineers are creative but I figure that it would be expensive and may not fly within the context of the planning instruments/principals), but if they can build residential on top of rail why not on top of a food terminal

If you wanted to pull it off you would also probably have to offer to build substantial office space above the new underground food terminal (near the new GO Station) + throw in a good amount of affordable housing for added political brownie points
 
UrbanDan said:
Well if it's put on an auction, we would find out 🙂
Click to expand...

well

just remember there's a water treatment plant right across the street

so ideally if you were going to do mixed use, you'd have like 5-7 towers near the south west corner of the lot and the rest would be offices.

probably would want an enclosed canopy between the buildings with direct access from 2150 just so you can avoid breathing that crisp lake shore air
 
formerTorontonian said:
Very original idea and I like it, but I feel like you would have to temporarily shut down and rebuild the entire terminal and it may not be easy/economical to temporarily relocate a business that would hurt many (I presume) if it was shut down for a couple of years.....perhaps the food terminal activity could be temporarily shifted to a side of the larter lot while they dig and build a more densely functioning food terminal (I am completely speculating here
Click to expand...

I agree that it would not be an easy task. However, with the new GO station, it might be feasible and profitable.

First step would be to have an auction for the air rights. After that, it will probably change couple of hands until the developer with the right engineering and organizational skills (and political influence) can do something meaningful.

Adding a lot of political brownie points would definitely be necessary though...
 
DopeyFish said:
well

just remember there's a water treatment plant right across the street

so ideally if you were going to do mixed use, you'd have like 5-7 towers near the south west corner of the lot and the rest would be offices.

probably would want an enclosed canopy between the buildings with direct access from 2150 just so you can avoid breathing that crisp lake shore air
Click to expand...
Plenty of people live near the Humber Sewage Treatment Plant - there's only very rarely an issue with it.

Meanwhile, if you want to talk more about the Food Terminal, you should take it to the Food Terminal thread. Thanks!

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top