News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.3K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.3K     0 

^ Ditto.

Adma: I think we all know that, if a casino is built, there's very little chance that it won't contain a significant amount of overwrought kitsch. As such, to have any sort of realistic conversation, we have to deal in relative aesthetic merits, rather than absolutes. I.e., yes, it will be fugly, but hopefully not New York Towers fugly.

CoolCanadian: By the same token, you would do well to refrain from citing overwrought kitsch and using Fordian/Lastmanian adjectives in support of your arguments. The retractable-roof mall and year-round waterpark are saleable ideas (even in this forum), IMHO, but only if they're not conveyed with inane/overblown/huckster vocabulary.

Yup. 'Huckster' sounds about right. A casino-resort has its benefits and drawbacks, but to constantly sell the idea as if it were the savior/main attraction of the waterfront cheapens any argument.

Other than that, Adma ought to step back a bit- aesthetics are totally subjective and elitism is shown by assuming that only one way of seeing the world is correct.
 
^Just because you don't think this is a nice building, and would not be cool at OP with a mega entertainment complex, doesn't mean that others agree with you. Obviously it's not going to look like this.

marina_bay_sands_singapore.jpg


I think that's a nice building. It needs to be something iconic and grand.

You sound like the kind of person who wants to see this at OP...

mini_golf_rv_park.jpg

Haha....good for you cool c! Maybe the older generation need some quiet time in their onwardly years :p
 
I think Cool's point was not that we should have this project but that if the public sector is partnered with the private sector (which is more likely to happen in a downtown project) we can get a project of this scale a quality (personal aesthetics aside).
As pointed out above, any casino project with a major gaming industry partner will assuredly be more showy and possibly gaudy than we would necessarily all like but when you add up the total construction value, the thousands of man hours of labour in construction, the thousands of full time employment positions and the benefit to Toronto as a tourist and convention (trade show) destination, it's not a difficult proposal for a lot o people to support. The goal here is to have something great (all hyperbole aside) built and if that means teaming with a private sector partner and giving them a piece of our jewel of a waterfront, it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.

Adma, just out of curiosity, which of these casino "Visions" would you like to see built on Toronto's waterfront? If none of these what would you propose?...assuming is was given the go ahead for let's say Ontario place!
benidorm-casino-tower_mUpTs_58.jpg

Casino%20Royale%20concept.jpg

Fabulous-Great-And-Impressive-Mohegan-Sun-Casino-Building-Concept.jpg

W_Las_Vegas_Hotel_Concept_Architectural_Watercolor_Illustration.jpg

NOAH-new-orleans-arcology-habitat-500x363.jpg

mgmgrand-atlanticcity.jpg

revelrender.jpg
 
The only one of those pictures that is in any way pedestrian friendly and animated, is the Los Vegas one but even that, is totally inappropriate for Ontario Place or anywhere on the waterfront. It might fit into the amusement park on Centre Island though.
 
The truth is, this cannot really be compared to Vegas. Toronto is completely different. I'm saying that if the redevelopment of OP is spectacular, but includes a casino, I think it's fine.

MGM wants to spend billions making a resort complex at OP that be nice in the skyline. I'm not saying it will look anything like my pictures, I'm just saying it could be on that scale.

We should wait and see what they have in mind, because redeveloping OP into something that the whole family, and tourists, will love is what I want, and I think most people on this forum will agree.

I'm hoping for something huge, iconic and fun. If there is a casino there too, I have no problem with that.

Also, MGM has said only 5% will be a casino, so this is very possible.

The truth is, for those of us who don't gamble, it will be nice to enjoy the numerous other activities and look at the grand unique buildings. For those of us who do, it will be nice to have a world class casino in Toronto.

I'm not saying the

We want to make OP something to be proud of, and if that includes a world class casino, among other things, then I'm all for it.

MGM, like other companies, would not partner without the casino part. So what if the 5% casino is what sparks the rest of a great development?

I'm not saying the casino needs to be the anchor. It will be there, but why can't other things be there too and live in harmony with the casino.
 
Last edited:
The truth is, this cannot really be compared to Vegas. Toronto is completely different. I'm saying that if the redevelopment of OP is spectacular, but includes a casino, I think it's fine.

MGM wants to spend billions making a resort complex at OP that be nice in the skyline. I'm not saying it will look anything like my pictures, I'm just saying it could be on that scale.

We should wait and see what they have in mind, because redeveloping OP into something that the whole family, and tourists, will love is what I want, and I think most people on this forum will agree.

I'm hoping for something huge, iconic and fun. If there is a casino there too, I have no problem with that.

Also, MGM has said only 5% will be a casino, so this is very possible.

The truth is, for those of us who don't gamble, it will be nice to enjoy the numerous other activities and look at the grand unique buildings. For those of us who do, it will be nice to have a world class casino in Toronto.

I'm not saying the

We want to make OP something to be proud of, and if that includes a world class casino, among other things, then I'm all for it.

MGM, like other companies, would not partner without the casino part. So what if the 5% casino is what sparks the rest of a great development?

I'm not saying the casino needs to be the anchor. It will be there, but why can't other things be there too and live in harmony with the casino.

http://www.saveontarioplace.ca/
 

You can try to force the government to open OP again but it was closed for a reason. It was losing money. If it gets opened again it will just be more tax dollars going down the drain. Without a better plan to make it thrive more and bring in earnings or at least enough to negate the losses, it will just be another added burden to the province's budget.
 
No: actually, what I want to see at Ontario Place is this.

5949116056_fa6dffee5c.jpg


And I think most people on this forum will agree.

Dude!!! What do you not get. That Ontario Place is gone. It's being closed for a reason. You, and some people like it, but it is not making any money. For its time it was very innovative, but now its dead.

They already decided to close it, and there nothing that will be done to save the old OP.

We should focus on making something unique and innovative for our time. Something great. And if it includes a casino (and more), then so what?

Seriously, why would you even post a pic of the old OP. Its not being closed because they are evil and want to get rid of a cool design. Its being closed because the majority of people don't want to spend time there.

You are living in the past. If OP was still profitable, it would not be closed. They had it FREE last year and still not enough people went.

You can claim they made it free for the anniversary. That's not true. They made it free in hope more people would come and spend money once there, as attendance was falling.

For Wonderlands anniversary last year they put on a million dollar light show. This year they have a new coaster. They would never beg people to come by making it free. If OP was doing well, they would have done something for last year, not just make it free. Our iconic tourist attraction on the waterfront should not be doing so bad that even when free its not that busy.

The smile fact is, that OP will never come back because people don't want to go there.

Stop living in the past.

Why can't you accept the fact that it is possible for a billion dollar entertainment complex with a casino (and more) to be just as amazing as OP was when it opened, if not more.

And I'm my opinion, its not even looking that good anymore. The Cinesphere looks cool and the pods are ok, but its looking old and nothing special.

Seeing this as a tourist would not make me want to visit the place..

WikiOntarioPlace_Toronto_ID2.jpg


WikiMolsonOntarioPlace_Toronto_ID3.jpg


Even in this commercial it doesn't look that great..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zWwDN0dA8I

It was great while it lasted. Now let them build something that makes people say "woah!", just as OP did when it first opened.
 
Last edited:
^^ I could understand your premise if the government put some serious effort into studying OP and made serious attempts to turn it around. That is NOT the case. There has never been any real effort to rethink OP and try to make it a great park. It has been allowed to deteriorate and that's what lead to declining attendance. It still gets anywhere from a half million to 1 million people per year, so it's not a deserted wasteland.

I want to see a serious study done by trained professionals (Not politicians like John Tory) on how to save OP. I want to hear solutions and not throw in the towel so easily. The park should still be open to the public, while the experts debate future plans.

And what you see in that last picture is construction materials, as they were building a new sunbathing area and promenade. They spent millions on the new area but now nobody gets to use it. How ridiculous is that?
 
Last edited:
According CTV Toronto, 300,000 people walked into the park even if they didn't buy anything and just walked around.

I'm so happy that now there's a mission critical need to get that much needed revitalization going. Let's not forget that plans were announced for a full revitalization over a year ago.

Now that they are forced to do something, it's great that the task force has finally been announced. A terrific choice in John Tory and thankfully he's come back after we've kicked him to the curb so many times in politics.

Let's not forget, Ontario Place was never an amusement park. It was and still is like an old fashion "expo" type showcase for Ontario that hasn't kept up with the times. There really is nothing left there. The only difference from long ago was the Lego pavilion and video games pavilion, which were really cool. Also a few restaurants and more people being there. Tearing down the Forum took out its heart. The place was literally left to hollow out and die.

The Forum was a great outdoor venue that brought people into the park at all hours of operation as it was centrally located. It was easy to spend money at the restaurants and outlets when you walked by and saw them. The Molson Amphitheatre was built and took people away from needing to go inside Ontario Place and even from Kingswood at Wonderland.

The water park is still a major draw but not enough to sustain the entire place. The flume is fantastic. The Cinesphere was amazing and was a huge draw, but why go to a very run down Imax theatre where so many new ones have been built? The silos that once or may still show Ontario 16mm films about Ontario Pulp and Paper sure wouldn't be a draw today.

The place is temporarily closing because the attendance doesn't support the operating costs, especially since the province is in greater debt than the Bob Rae days, which no one thought would ever be possible again.

Hopefully they can think of something great to put at OP now. Hotels, rides, shopping. Maybe even a more modern "expo" like Epcot. If that means they need to partner with a company, like MGM, and include a casino, then so what? It can still be a fantastic attraction.
 
Dude!!! What do you not get. That Ontario Place is gone. It's being closed for a reason. You, and some people like it, but it is not making any money. For its time it was very innovative, but now its dead.

They already decided to close it, and there nothing that will be done to save the old OP.

We should focus on making something unique and innovative for our time. Something great. And if it includes a casino (and more), then so what?

Seriously, why would you even post a pic of the old OP. Its not being closed because they are evil and want to get rid of a cool design. Its being closed because the majority of people don't want to spend time there.

You are living in the past. If OP was still profitable, it would not be closed. They had it FREE last year and still not enough people went.

You can claim they made it free for the anniversary. That's not true. They made it free in hope more people would come and spend money once there, as attendance was falling.

For Wonderlands anniversary last year they put on a million dollar light show. This year they have a new coaster. They would never beg people to come by making it free. If OP was doing well, they would have done something for last year, not just make it free. Our iconic tourist attraction on the waterfront should not be doing so bad that even when free its not that busy.

The smile fact is, that OP will never come back because people don't want to go there.

Stop living in the past.

Why can't you accept the fact that it is possible for a billion dollar entertainment complex with a casino (and more) to be just as amazing as OP was when it opened, if not more.

And I'm my opinion, its not even looking that good anymore. The Cinesphere looks cool and the pods are ok, but its looking old and nothing special.

Seeing this as a tourist would not make me want to visit the place..

<SNIP PICTURES>

Even in this commercial it doesn't look that great..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zWwDN0dA8I

It was great while it lasted. Now let them build something that makes people say "woah!", just as OP did when it first opened.

Okay, let me tell you something.

First of all, when you open a UT response post with something like "Dude!!!", you just wind up making yourself look like a crass doofus who's totally out of his element within UT. (Likewise with your constant use of juvenile adjectives like "cool". Or "woah!", or the lack of apostrophes a la "its", "Wonderlands", etc.)

Secondly, as with your earlier post, when you use a Paradise Fun Park image with the message "You sound like the kind of person who wants to see this at OP", you wind up looking like a crass doofus who's totally out of his element within UT.

And thirdly: I don't think that anyone's denying that something should be done with/at Ontario Place; after all, that's why it closed in the first place. Not even in UT.

However, you're going to find very few thoughtful people around these parts who are willing to sacrifice Zeidler's pods and Cinesphere on that behalf. Much less on behalf of "a billion dollar entertainment complex with a casino".

The general tenor around here, you'll find, is whatever's done with Ontario Place, the pods-and-Cinesphere should stay. "Sympathetically repurposed", perhaps; but certainly not swept away--and maybe even in tandem w/casino facilities? In fact, perhaps there's more thoughtful wisdom in allowing the existing complex be the "star attraction" of anything casino-like.

Yeah, maybe to you its *ahem* it's "looking old and nothing special"--but that's you. And judging from your posting history, I'm not sure if your kind of tastes are worth bending to.

And moreover. it intrigues me how, uh, people like you use the word "people" generically, as a self-aggrandizing euphemism for tyranny-of-the-majority/insensitive-philistine-masses-like-myself. Analogous to Rob Ford's "people hate streetcars, people want subways, subways subways subways". It's all about "people", as if anyone who wasn't a vulgar philistine prone to apostrophe-elimination and overuse of adjectives like "cool" is a pointy-headed, "taxpayer"-disrespecting non-person.

In the end, you sound like the kind of person who'd advocate tearing down something like this

img_0846-95-ardwold-v2-lr.jpg


on behalf of something like this

5862foresthill.jpg


and to those who object, you'd offer: "stop living in the past", "its not even looking that good anymore/looking old and nothing special", "people don't want that kind of house", etc.

Yeah, sure. As if that were shared sentiment within UT. (Well, maybe it *is* re the "people don't want" matter--but that's more a casual-sociological-observation measure of such fare being a specialty taste, i.e. it isn't for everyone, much less if it were to be handled w/any sensitivity.)

Oh, and re "seeing it as a tourist"; of course, it depends upon the kind of tourist you are. Like, one expects more sensitivity from "Copenhagen" types of tourists than "Cancun" types of tourists; or "AGO/OCAD" types of tourists than "Canada's Wonderland" types of tourists...
 
Here are a couple of questions that I don't know the answers to.

1. Was OP ever profitable? If so, when was the last time
2. Is the Ontario gov't closing everything where "attendance does not cover the operating costs"
 
Okay, let me tell you something.

First of all, when you open a UT response post with something like "Dude!!!", you just wind up making yourself look like a crass doofus who's totally out of his element within UT. (Likewise with your constant use of juvenile adjectives like "cool". Or "woah!", or the lack of apostrophes a la "its", "Wonderlands", etc.)

Secondly, as with your earlier post, when you use a Paradise Fun Park image with the message "You sound like the kind of person who wants to see this at OP", you wind up looking like a crass doofus who's totally out of his element within UT.

And thirdly: I don't think that anyone's denying that something should be done with/at Ontario Place; after all, that's why it closed in the first place. Not even in UT.

However, you're going to find very few thoughtful people around these parts who are willing to sacrifice Zeidler's pods and Cinesphere on that behalf. Much less on behalf of "a billion dollar entertainment complex with a casino".

The general tenor around here, you'll find, is whatever's done with Ontario Place, the pods-and-Cinesphere should stay. "Sympathetically repurposed", perhaps; but certainly not swept away--and maybe even in tandem w/casino facilities? In fact, perhaps there's more thoughtful wisdom in allowing the existing complex be the "star attraction" of anything casino-like.

Yeah, maybe to you its *ahem* it's "looking old and nothing special"--but that's you. And judging from your posting history, I'm not sure if your kind of tastes are worth bending to.

And moreover. it intrigues me how, uh, people like you use the word "people" generically, as a self-aggrandizing euphemism for tyranny-of-the-majority/insensitive-philistine-masses-like-myself. Analogous to Rob Ford's "people hate streetcars, people want subways, subways subways subways". It's all about "people", as if anyone who wasn't a vulgar philistine prone to apostrophe-elimination and overuse of adjectives like "cool" is a pointy-headed, "taxpayer"-disrespecting non-person.

In the end, you sound like the kind of person who'd advocate tearing down something like this

img_0846-95-ardwold-v2-lr.jpg


on behalf of something like this

5862foresthill.jpg


and to those who object, you'd offer: "stop living in the past", "its not even looking that good anymore/looking old and nothing special", "people don't want that kind of house", etc.

Yeah, sure. As if that were shared sentiment within UT. (Well, maybe it *is* re the "people don't want" matter--but that's more a casual-sociological-observation measure of such fare being a specialty taste, i.e. it isn't for everyone, much less if it were to be handled w/any sensitivity.)

Oh, and re "seeing it as a tourist"; of course, it depends upon the kind of tourist you are. Like, one expects more sensitivity from "Copenhagen" types of tourists than "Cancun" types of tourists; or "AGO/OCAD" types of tourists than "Canada's Wonderland" types of tourists...

Sorry, didn't know you were the grammar police. I actually think both of those houses are nice, but like the first one better.

The truth is, I can say people don't like OP the way it is because if they did it would not have had only 300000 visitors last year. Okay, 300 000, in a region of over 6 million, like it.

I'm saying the pods and cinesphere are old. I'm not saying "don't preserve it" I'm saying "wait and see, because something better could be designed".

I also think that this needs to be our huge tourist attraction. Yes, there are many kinds of tourists. But we have the AGO and the ROM. I, personally, do not wan't to see a quiet museum here, or something as such. We already have fantastic museums in Toronto. I'm not saying never build more, but not at OP.

I, personally, think OP should be our "WOW factor" tourist attraction. And I don't care if your next posts criticizes me because i said "WOW factor".

This place can be something great. It can be a shining star. It can attract millions to Toronto. I think it needs a unique design that people will appreciate, along side attractions that are fun and entertaining.

Toronto has many places that can be used for the "AGO/OCAD" types of tourists" and I think we need something for the than "Canada's Wonderland" types of tourists" as you put it.

No, I'm not suggesting we build an amusement park here. We already have one. We can have some rides here though. We can have a Cirque show. We can make this an amazing entertainment destination.

Maybe there will even be some sort of museum aspect here.

It can appeal to a range of visitors.

The truth is, Wonderland makes much more money than ROM. A world class place will make more than a museum.

You bring up billion like it means nothing. The billion dollar idea does make me excited, because it means this will be a huge, amazing project. Yes, I just used the word amazing.

So, dude, the fact is, the old OP is gone and not enough people are interested in it.
 
Here are a couple of questions that I don't know the answers to.

1. Was OP ever profitable? If so, when was the last time
2. Is the Ontario gov't closing everything where "attendance does not cover the operating costs"

I don't know the answer to your first question, but maybe in the early days? I remember going to it when I was young and it was fun. There were many people there too.

The second one, is yes. As many as possible it seems. Some are given time to change their model. I think some of the ones at risk were the farms and zoos. There was the Riverdale farm that's losing money and Ford wanted to get rid of it. I think they got a short reprieve temporarily. I think there was also talk about wanting to sell of part of the Zoo land for development. Also, I'm not sure what happened but there's a small zoo at High Park too. There was also talk of closing down libraries with low attendance. I don't know the verdict in the end because there was a lot of push and pull.
 

Back
Top