[DSC]

This is on Executive Committee Agenda again next week:

 

[Northern Light]

This is on Executive Committee Agenda again next week:

View attachment 523384

My understanding is that the above is incorrect.

 

[allengeorge]

What should Toronto do with the loneliest part of Queens Quay West? The city is looking for answers

'This is the last opportunity to do something on the west side of Queen’s Quay'

www.thestar.com

Apparently the storm water shaft was no longer necessary. Also the ‘thinking’ is that instead of hiding the Gardiner, use this lot as a connector. The BIA president wants some underground parking here, but, I think the position on that should be default no, unless critically necessary.

Also, budget got revised upwards to ~16M but no progress on new design or proposed timeline.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

There seems to be a familiar theme running through all of this...

From the article linked above: "Having discarded the original plan for a park on the site, due to a change in technical requirements, the city is going back to the drawing board..."

...as the change in technical requirements also seems to be stalling this park revitalization here:

Humber Bay Park Revitalization | ?m | ?s | City of Toronto | DTAH

Not sure if there's an HBS catch-all thread, but in lieu: DTAH selected for Humber Bay Park Phase 1 Implementation Following the successful completion of the award-winning Humber Bay Park Master Plan, DTAH has been selected by the City of Toronto to lead the landscape architecture for phase 1...

urbantoronto.ca

So...what's up with that?

 

[kotsy]

What should Toronto do with the loneliest part of Queens Quay West? The city is looking for answers

'This is the last opportunity to do something on the west side of Queen’s Quay'

www.thestar.com

paywall bypass: https://archive.is/HiCzI

 

[DSC]

Has the City taken over the planning (and building) of this park from Waterfront Toronto??

 

[ward10]

Probably an unpopular opinion, but I’d prefer to see this site re-visioned as housing. There’s superior park space across the street, towers here block out the noise and exhaust from that elevated freeway thing and in housing crisis, I say that’s the priority. Interested to see what happens here (though with the loss of the ridge, not super optimistic).

I agree. Alluring as the park concept was, it was always going to be an awkward, noisy strip that left a gap in QQW. The folks advocating for a bentway-style “connection” use for this site have clearly never been down to Rees and seen the hostile backs of the pumping station and roundhouse that await pedestrians on the other side

Imo this site is much better used for Housing Now. In an environment where the waterfront east LRT is a big-dollar pipe dream, why would we throw away transit-oriented sites that exist today? More residents would mean more businesses and foot traffic for a section of the waterfront that already has plenty of parks

 

[LUVIT!]

I rarely say no to parkland. However Ido say no to parkland here. A continuation the urban streetwll here would be refreshing. Perhaps with more of a set back from Queen's Quay with a a wide sidewalk with plenty of seating and a double row of trees with a walkway between. I'd say a linear green walk with shops and a 'break' in the centre to allow for a connection between the two towers with more shops down the centre spine? Just throwing an idea out there.

 

[Northern Light]

Has the City taken over the planning (and building) of this park from Waterfront Toronto??

I haven't heard that, as yet.

 

[Northern Light]

What should Toronto do with the loneliest part of Queens Quay West? The city is looking for answers

'This is the last opportunity to do something on the west side of Queen’s Quay'

www.thestar.com

Apparently the storm water shaft was no longer necessary. Also the ‘thinking’ is that instead of hiding the Gardiner, use this lot as a connector. The BIA president wants some underground parking here, but, I think the position on that should be default no, unless critically necessary.

Also, budget got revised upwards to ~16M but no progress on new design or proposed timeline.

I agree. Alluring as the park concept was, it was always going to be an awkward, noisy strip that left a gap in QQW. The folks advocating for a bentway-style “connection” use for this site have clearly never been down to Rees and seen the hostile backs of the pumping station and roundhouse that await pedestrians on the other side

Imo this site is much better used for Housing Now. In an environment where the waterfront east LRT is a big-dollar pipe dream, why would we throw away transit-oriented sites that exist today? More residents would mean more businesses and foot traffic for a section of the waterfront that already has plenty of parks

I rarely say no to parkland. However Ido say no to parkland here. A continuation the urban streetwll here would be refreshing. Perhaps with more of a set back from Queen's Quay with a a wide sidewalk with plenty of seating and a double row of trees with a walkway between. I'd say a linear green walk with shops and a 'break' in the centre to allow for a connection between the two towers with more shops down the centre spine? Just throwing an idea out there.

A few thoughts.

1) I wouldn't simply trade the (potential) parkland away without securing alternative lands.

2) I believe the above is feasible.

3) I would not support underground parking under a park as strata builds of this sort have all sorts of issues.

4) I would not oppose parking here under new development, if parkland went elsewhere.

5) Parkland in the area remains over subscribed (more demand than space / amenity in decent weather)

 

[rdaner]

Interesting news! I wonder if there would be an appetite for expanding the scope of the project by considering areas above the Gardiner as fair game. Think Snohetta’s Calgary library where the LRT goes through the building of the Ministry of Defense building in Paris. Also there are those two lots north of the Gardiner that are used for parking. This would be an ideal area to acknowledge both the east-west flows as well as the north-south pathway with something simple but dramatic!

And as an aside I would much rather see a useable facility going underneath rather than parking such as a hockey arena or gym.

 

[Northern Light]

I wonder if there would be an appetite for expanding the scope of the project by considering areas above the Gardiner as fair game.

Nope.

That definitely is not on the table.

 

[TossYourJacket]

Interesting news! I wonder if there would be an appetite for expanding the scope of the project by considering areas above the Gardiner as fair game. Think Snohetta’s Calgary library where the LRT goes through the building of the Ministry of Defense building in Paris. Also there are those two lots north of the Gardiner that are used for parking. This would be an ideal area to acknowledge both the east-west flows as well as the north-south pathway with something simple but dramatic!

And as an aside I would much rather see a useable facility going underneath rather than parking such as a hockey arena or gym.

It's a lot easier to run a zero-emissions electric LRT through a structure than a highway full of air-polluting cars, as you don't need to include the same level of ventilation systems (and we're way too far away from EV mass adoption for the fumes from cars to be ignored).

 

[ward10]

5) Parkland in the area remains over subscribed (more demand than space / amenity in decent weather)

I think the challenge with tackling “not enough parks” is that urban parks work best when they’re slightly oversubscribed. I think as seen from the sidewalk usage or from sherbourne common’s two halves, the water side of QQ will always have more appeal

Your mention of decent weather gets at the area’s unique dual roles as tourist destination/regional amenity and everyday neighbourhood. From my experience of QQW in shoulder seasons and weekdays, there’s more supply than demand from the local area. Little Norway and Coronation parks could also be modified to be more porous / have more seating to help with peak demand

 

[Northern Light]

I think the challenge with tackling “not enough parks” is that urban parks work best when they’re slightly oversubscribed.

I certainly prefer 'vital' parks, to sparely attended ones..........

But I don't think people passing through on a typical weekend in spring/summer/fall should find there are no free places to sit.

We also have sports facilities that are in very short supply. One UT member who lives downtown but plays soccer has reported having to travel up to an hour away to play; that's unreasonable.

I think as seen from the sidewalk usage or from sherbourne common’s two halves, the water side of QQ will always have more appeal.

I agree.

Your mention of decent weather gets at the area’s unique dual roles as tourist destination/regional amenity and everyday neighbourhood. From my experience of QQW in shoulder seasons and weekdays, there’s more supply than demand from the local area. Little Norway and Coronation parks could also be modified to be more porous / have more seating to help with peak demand

Establishing additional connections along the water's edge (bridged slips) so that people shift more easily from one space to the next would certainly help; though it does necessarily address specific facility shortages.