AG:

Of course its greed...this Liberal government has managed to take Ontario Place to the ground, and now they need the private sector to fund any new development.....Gee
Click to expand...

Huh? If I have not mistaken, the downward trajectory of attendance at OP began way before the Liberals. And besides, shouldn't you be glad that they are considering public-private partnerships of some sort?

Again, the funding is tight cause they have mismanaged our money, its even hard to believe these guys are in power
Click to expand...

Mismanagement is one thing, a 16B deficit can't possibly be attributed solely to that element. Like remind me, just how much did the Harris government use to upgrade this place?

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
AG:
Huh? If I have not mistaken, the downward trajectory of attendance at OP began way before the Liberals. And besides, shouldn't you be glad that they are considering public-private partnerships of some sort? AoD
Click to expand...

Im ok with it, but in no way agree with the residential part which i believe is threatening.


AlvinofDiaspar said:
Mismanagement is one thing, a 16B deficit can't possibly be attributed solely to that element. Like remind me, just how much did the Harris government use to upgrade this place?
AoD
Click to expand...

Either way they built this place and didnt do much to maintain its world class status
 
Im ok with it, but in no way agree with the residential part which i believe is threatening.
Click to expand...
Either way they built this place and didnt do much to maintain its world class status
Click to expand...

That's not what your original post was about, so I felt the need to ask again - what does that have to do with the Liberals, exactly? If you are going to inject a political dimension to this debate, be prepared to back it up instead of trying to weasel your way out of it.

AoD
 
The plans for Ontario Place seem to be right out of Jane Jacobs' playbook. Thing is I don't know how well this will work at this location. Not only are the grounds are separated from the rest of the city, but it would be difficult to create streets here as well. With Lake Shore being a mini highway, the Exhibition grounds, the Gardiner and railway all separating it from the city, it will be difficult to create a neighbourhood which will feel accomplish this vision.

Hate to say this, but if a residential neighbourhood is desired, a tower in the park design might work here.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Of course its greed...this Liberal government has managed to take Ontario Place to the ground, and now they need the private sector to fund any new development.....Gee:confused:
Again, the funding is tight cause they have mismanaged our money, its even hard to believe these guys are in power
Click to expand...

My, what a short and convenient memory you have. Yes, it would suit your anti-leftie agenda to pin the destruction on the Libs but then reality gets in the way. Harris took power in the summer of 95, which just happened to be the year that Ontario Place started its decent. That's when the Forum was closed and 2002 the HMCS Haida was sold off. It was during Harris' time that much of Ontario Place was closed down, so don't blame the Liberals for that. Blame your beloved Cons. If anything, it will most likely be the Liberals who repair the damage, done by Mike Harris.
 
That's all McGuinty has been doing during his tenure as premier, fixing the mess left behind by Mike Harris.
 
Having read the report, I can say that I'm mostly happy with the recommendations with the exception of residential being considered. No. No. No. Selling off plots of land at Ontario Place for private residences is wrong and I will protest it every step of the way. I have a feeling many (most?) Torontonians will stand where I do on this.

I say this because of where Tory is proposing the residential to go: on the west side of the island. The entire island should remain publicly accessible and publicly owned. Lease properties for private companies offering public access to services on the island (restaurants, bars, stores, and other businesses) but keep the lands public.

A compromise would be to allow private development on the parking lots on the mainland. Low rise (3 to 5 story) neighbourhoods here would make sense and create a community that would create a year round bustling OntarioPlace and further lead to traffic calming measures on Lakeshore, reconnecting the city back with the lake.
 
Torontovibe:

To be fair Molson was probably a decision made by the NDP government, not Harris, and the decline of OP (by attendance) started even before the NDP. There is more than enough blame to go around for everyone - it's definitely not a left vs. right (and centre, even) issue. Besides, the "mission" of OP has never been terribly clear or compelling.

Speaking of the report - generic residential might not work very well - but I can definitely see room for something architecturally spectacular - like the Habitat in Montreal that would serve as a vsual anchor for the place.

AoD
 
Last edited:
I have an idea lets build condos on every square centimeter of Toronto, that would be awesome especially right before the bottom falls out of the local condo market. Sounds like a great plan
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Torontovibe:

To be fair Molson was probably a decision made by the NDP government, not Harris, and the descent of OP (by attendance) started even before the NDP. There is more than enough blame to go around for everyone - it's definitely not a left vs. right (and centre, even) issue. Besides, the "mission" of OP has never been terribly clear or compelling.

Speaking of the report - generic residential might not work very well - but I can definitely see room for something architecturally spectacular - like the Habitat in Montreal that would serve as a vsual anchor for the place.

AoD
Click to expand...

I agree that this is/was/will be a cross party/ideology issue...I was (and still am) not clear on the working definition of greed being used.
 
MetroMan said:
Having read the report, I can say that I'm mostly happy with the recommendations with the exception of residential being considered. No. No. No. Selling off plots of land at Ontario Place for private residences is wrong and I will protest it every step of the way. I have a feeling many (most?) Torontonians will stand where I do on this.

I say this because of where Tory is proposing the residential to go: on the west side of the island. The entire island should remain publicly accessible and publicly owned. Lease properties for private companies offering public access to services on the island (restaurants, bars, stores, and other businesses) but keep the lands public.

A compromise would be to allow private development on the parking lots on the mainland. Low rise (3 to 5 story) neighbourhoods here would make sense and create a community that would create a year round bustling OntarioPlace and further lead to traffic calming measures on Lakeshore, reconnecting the city back with the lake.
Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, those parking lots are located right off the martin goodman trail. While the view of the parking isn't great, it at least doesn't obstruct the view of the lake and the park on the other side of the parking. Putting up even low/mid rise in that spot would turn the MG trail into a glorified sidewalk. I understand why you don't want the residential on the island, but I don't think those lots are any better as a location. If anything, the parking there should be moved/removed and those spaces turned into more parkland.
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Speaking of the report - generic residential might not work very well - but I can definitely see room for something architecturally spectacular - like the Habitat in Montreal that would serve as a vsual anchor for the place.

AoD
Click to expand...

Maybe something supported by piles jutting out over the lake - architecture inspired by the original OP design - car free community with a bike/boatshare program - pedestrian bridge leading to the OP parking lot with some zipcars etc

Something residential could work here, it would just have to be in context with OP.
 
As always, the acceptability of residential will come down to the execution.

For example, could you imagine handing over the west island to Bjarke Ingels and let him go nuts with a sort of out-there low-to-mid-rise residential project replete with Scandinavian-eco-whimsy and futurist hat-tipping to the Zeidler heritage? Possible the most perfect site in the city for him to do the kind of projects what he does best.

On the other hand, imagine the Government of Ontario simply auctioning off the site for the highest $, no design strings attached, and Concord Adex coming in with the richest bid.
 
Last edited:
Platform 27 said:
As always, the acceptability of residential will come down to the execution.

For example, could you imagine handing over the west island to Bjarke Ingels and let him go nuts with a sort of out-there low-to-mid-rise residential project replete with Scandinavian-eco-whimsy and futurist hat-tipping to the Zeidler heritage? Possible the most perfect site in the city for him to do the kind of projects what he does best.

On the other hand, imagine the Government of Ontario simply auctioning off the site for the highest $, no design strings attached, and Concord Adex coming in with the richest bid.
Click to expand...

The winner of the "let logic prevail before heaping criticism" gold medal!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top