[MetroMan]

I'm not a clubber myself, but I work in the industry.

I'm moving a few blocks from Pantalone's ward into Trinity-Spadina between now and the election. I'll be sure to let him know (loudly and publicly) that he's screwing over his constituents and that not all the people affected by his "war on clubland" are from the 905 like he loves to proclaim.

 

[Hydrogen]

^In order to avoid being a hypocrite, make sure that you move to within fifty metres of a club within this area.

As an issuer of licenses for these businesses, the city has the right to regulate and police these establishments, as does the province. The city can also write the laws that govern the operation of these venues. It has both that right and the responsibility to do so.

Rather than go on here about Adam Vaughan and clubs, go to a public meeting or a constituency meeting and raise your issue there. You'll probably discover that there are many citizens in Vaughan's ward who will oppose your position. The reality is that councillors are voted in on the basis of many issues, and your defence of problem clubs will likely not go over well.

 

[grey]

not all the people affected by his "war on clubland" are from the 905 like he loves to proclaim.

Speaking as a clubber, I know that's true of the establishments between Spadina and Bathurst (which I don't think are under the spotlight here), but the area between Peter and John is full of 905 area 21-and-under douchebaggery. I support Vaughan in ousting these asshats. I'm sorry for the business owners, but they've chosen to pander to that crowd. I see the closure of these venues to be the opposite of harming Toronto's nightlife (which I believe is more resilient than anyone here is giving it credit for), as the result will be higher standards.

 

[syn]

The vast majority of people who go to clubs, including those under 21, are just regular kids going out for some fun. I think a lot of us forget what it was like to be this age.

 

[TKTKTK]

Speaking as a clubber, I know that's true of the establishments between Spadina and Bathurst (which I don't think are under the spotlight here), but the area between Peter and John is full of 905 area 21-and-under douchebaggery. I support Vaughan in ousting these asshats. I'm sorry for the business owners, but they've chosen to pander to that crowd. I see the closure of these venues to be the opposite of harming Toronto's nightlife (which I believe is more resilient than anyone here is giving it credit for), as the result will be higher standards.

Oh please. Peter and John is full of 905ers in the same way it's full of 416ers. It's young people out having a drunken crazy night, and it hardly matters where they're from. The 905 isn't some outlaw state, nor is it some foreign land with no connection to Toronto.

"Higher Standards" whose would those be? Yours? Is Grey the one calling the shots downtown now? Your way or the highway back to the '905' (or is it just CityPlace?)

Keep these clubs open. Keep the entertainment district. Give the mainstream somewhere to collect so you don't have to face them everywhere else.


Worse than any clubland douchebag are the smug urban douchebags who champion destruction as a means of getting back at people they look down on. Grow up!

 

[grey]

That was a great tirade, but I was fakeposting

The only tangible benefit I see to closing this district is that there won't be mountains of flyers, bottles, cigarettes, and fast food packaging littering the streets. Last weekend I saw some jackasses in the back of a huge white stretch SUV (from the 905......just kidding) tossing cans out the window.

 

[TrickyRicky]

syn has it right. Experience in a human community exists on all kinds of layers. The larger the community the more centralized and segmented the layers are. You can't blame a neighbourhood for resisting the forces of change and specialization but you can't really blame the forces either. Young people like to go out, do dumb things, act like douches and vomit in the back alley. Didn't you? I did. Do you want to monitor this activity and control it to the extent that it optimizes the health and safety and general liveability of the city? Sure. Do you want to deny that this activity exists or that this is a valid expression of the human experience as part of a liveable city? No.

 

[MetroMan]

^In order to avoid being a hypocrite, make sure that you move to within fifty metres of a club within this area.

I wouldn't be a hypocrite if I didn't move next to a club. The area was originally designated for businesses not residences. People moving in to the area knew where they were moving into. It was the city's poor judgement that started this mess for allowing residential uses in the area.

The clubs have developed a once a derelict wasteland of warehouses. They earned their right to be there. There are plenty underdeveloped residential zones in the city.

I think the solution here (too late) would be to designate this a sort of "gated" entertainment strip. I say "gated" not in the sense of closing it off with fences, I'm suggesting they should designate a specific area for these clubs.

It would then be easier to focus solutions specific to clubs to this area: wider sidewalks or a pedestrian only street during club hours (streets already get closed most weekends), police cameras and a local station, more garbage bins, etc.

If Vaughan gets away with this, what's not to say a future councillor won't say: "Let's remove all the businesses along Bloor Yorkville to build condos. We need to get rid of those pesky spoiled rich kids congregating in a specific area".

 

[syn]

syn has it right. Experience in a human community exists on all kinds of layers. The larger the community the more centralized and segmented the layers are. You can't blame a neighbourhood for resisting the forces of change and specialization but you can't really blame the forces either. Young people like to go out, do dumb things, act like douches and vomit in the back alley. Didn't you? I did. Do you want to monitor this activity and control it to the extent that it optimizes the health and safety and general liveability of the city? Sure. Do you want to deny that this activity exists or that this is a valid expression of the human experience as part of a liveable city? No.

A good point, though that's not quite what I meant. I wasn't one of those kids who acted like a douche and vomited in the back alley - most kids aren't. People seem to forget that and reach a point where they think everyone in the under-21 crowd acts exactly the same way.

As I've said before...I have no issue with a greater variety of uses and more residential in the area. It's Vaughn's obvious disdain for clubs and anyone who goes to them that I find alarming. If he had his way, the city would have no clubs at all. People would only be allowed to do what he considered fun.

 

[grey]

I would love to see vehicular traffic banned from Richmond between John and Peter between 10pm and 1:30am on Saturday nights to create a pedestrian-only party zone, like George Street in St John's, or Hess Village in Hamilton where people can bring their drinks outdoors.

Unfortunately, with residents associations like this (go ahead and read that hilariously biased survey they're talking about), we'll probably never see anything like that.

 

[gei]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was Adam Vaughn's ancestors who came up with the prohibition laws so many decades ago. It's the same type of small minded and self-centered thinking. There's a limit to how much you need to control people.

He would probably ban weekends altogether if he thought it would mean a few less kids having fun.

 

[Hydrogen]

I wouldn't be a hypocrite if I didn't move next to a club. The area was originally designated for businesses not residences. People moving in to the area knew where they were moving into. It was the city's poor judgement that started this mess for allowing residential uses in the area.

The clubs have developed a once a derelict wasteland of warehouses. They earned their right to be there. There are plenty underdeveloped residential zones in the city.

But you should move in next to a club. They're your bread and butter. You expect others to put up with the effects, why not you?

There always have been residences in the vicinity, even before the clubs showed up in numbers. And do note that a vast majority of the businesses in the general area are not club related. As for residential development, that was always part of the plan for the area.

 

[adma]

I hope he gets what is coming to him.

Given how there's a certain thuggery associated (rightly or wrongly) with a lot of the runnings of the club district, a statement like that leaves me queasy.

But in any case, as I've stated before: it'd probably take another NDP standard-bearer to defeat Adam Vaughan, in which case those of you who loathe him would be little or no better off. Sorry, but those are the ward demos which prevail.

 

[syn]

Given how there's a certain thuggery associated (rightly or wrongly) with a lot of the runnings of the club district, a statement like that leaves me queasy.

Do you seriously think doady was suggesting violence?

 

[digi]

He has in other threads.