jje1000 said:
You’re understating the 19th century, London was the Imperial metropole during that era, and the wealth and treasures of the world, both honest and ill-gained, endlessly flowed into that city.
Click to expand...
That's just a question of scale. There are things London does TODAY to encourage tourism. Free museums, multiple market streets where vehicle traffic is blocked off.
 
I am not getting involved in the public vs private vs pods debate but will say one thing. The waterfront has changed tremendously since OP was built and there are several kilometres of publicly accessible shoreline that today offer superior access and recreation for Ontarians than the noble first stab at reimagining our waterfront in the 1970s. If a portion of of OP is repurposed by private investors it will in no way reduce accessibility to Lake Ontario. 😀 I personally spend more time at Sugar Beach and the promenade there.
 
Some people will want to hang at Sugar Beach and some people may love Humber Bay and that's cool.
But Ontario Place is still absolutely prime land (prime land that taxpayers created, BTW) in the central waterfront. Given the historically poor job we have done preserving public land along our waterfront, and especially in the central waterfront, I don't think we could or should be cavalier about selling off any public access here.
 
The problem is see first and for most with Ontario Place is that it's just so inaccessible unless you are willing to drive there or do a massive hike. I say this as a few years ago I decided to head down there to try my luck fishing, the area is renowned amidst anglers for having the perfect habitat for large trophy species of pike, musky and bass. The deep depths keep things nice and cool during the middle of summer and the structures allow for a lot of cover. Something that is challenging to find in a urban setting, even the Islands don't offer such a paradise.

This is my two cents, but to make the area be attractive there really needs to be some strong transportation/access links. Giving it some thought as I write about my fishing expedition, it would be nice if Ontario Place was transformed into a park but one that is recreating an Algonquin Park/Northern Ontario Backcountry environment and experience. Not sure what the feasibility would be or if a urban environment would allow for Northern Ontario tree and fauna species to thrive.
 
yrt+viva=1system said:
The problem is see first and for most with Ontario Place is that it's just so inaccessible unless you are willing to drive there or do a massive hike. I say this as a few years ago I decided to head down there to try my luck fishing, the area is renowned amidst anglers for having the perfect habitat for large trophy species of pike, musky and bass. The deep depths keep things nice and cool during the middle of summer and the structures allow for a lot of cover. Something that is challenging to find in a urban setting, even the Islands don't offer such a paradise.

This is my two cents, but to make the area be attractive there really needs to be some strong transportation/access links. Giving it some thought as I write about my fishing expedition, it would be nice if Ontario Place was transformed into a park but one that is recreating an Algonquin Park/Northern Ontario Backcountry environment and experience. Not sure what the feasibility would be or if a urban environment would allow for Northern Ontario tree and fauna species to thrive.
Click to expand...

RE: inaccessible: Just 500m/9min walk north of ontario place is basically going to be a transit superhub. Exhibition GO (All day electrified 15min service) , Ontario Line (subway), three streetcar lines (Bathurst, Harbourfront and King via new dufferin extension), Dufferin bus (including express).

The only barrier is that 8-10min walk south to Ontario Place, which apparently will eventually be solved, there are rumors IO is already reviewing several proposals with the city.
 
calimehtar said:
And to put my feelings into more concrete and specific recommendations - the only politically easy thing to do is make a park, the right thing is to look at the entire area from exhibition place to Ontario place as a whole, use about a third of it for amusement (a permanent replacement for the cne , stadium, food and drink...spa or no spa, science center or no science center) a third for connected parkland, and yeah take that lovely surface parking and make it into a mixed use neighbourhood.

How is that different from the current use? I think it would about double the space used for amusement, slightly increase the area allocated to park and completely eliminate surface parking which is about 1/2 the space at a combined Ontario place/exhibition place. The single story Enercare centre should be merged into the mixed use neighbourhood and all parking rebuilt underground
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with this approach that Exhibition Place and Ontario Place should be looked at holistically particularly in the context of public/private. As the mayoralty candidates line up with their pearl-clutching commitment to public uses for OP, Council was silent on the construction of a private hotel on public property, the construction of a private commercial sports field, the privatization of the heritage Ontario Government and Horticulture buildings and the pay-per-use of the Coliseum, Automotive Building and Enercare Buildings (as well as charging entrance fees to the CNE). One could also mention the mismanagement and lack of vision for the entire complex, including the shameful demolition of landmarks like the Shell/Bulova Tower and the Grandstand and the indecision over the future uses of modernist icons like the Queen Elizabeth Theatre, the Better Living Centre and the Food Building. I'm not particularly in favour of turning the whole complex into mixed-use, but surely the Therme proposal is not philosophically different from any of the other private uses in EP, it's just in the wrong spot.
 
thecharioteer said:
I agree 100% with this approach that Exhibition Place and Ontario Place should be looked at holistically particularly in the context of public/private. As the mayoralty candidates line up with their pearl-clutching commitment to public uses for OP, Council was silent on the construction of a private hotel on public property, the construction of a private commercial sports field, the privatization of the heritage Ontario Government and Horticulture buildings and the pay-per-use of the Coliseum, Automotive Building and Enercare Buildings (as well as charging entrance fees to the CNE). One could also mention the mismanagement and lack of vision for the entire complex, including the shameful demolition of landmarks like the Shell/Bulova Tower and the Grandstand and the indecision over the future uses of modernist icons like the Queen Elizabeth Theatre, the Better Living Centre and the Food Building. I'm not particularly in favour of turning the whole complex into mixed-use, but surely the Therme proposal is not philosophically different from any of the other private uses in EP, it's just in the wrong spot.
Click to expand...

You point is well taken. The philosophy of public vs private use is certainly not being equally applied by some of the absolutists, and there is a similar dereliction of care when it comes to Exhibition Place's assets that we saw with Ontario Place pre-2012 (although I'd quibble with the necessity of retaining the Food Building or Better Living Centre-- a debate for another time).

However, I think the key difference here is one of scale and context: Ford and Therme's proposal is simply too big and would demolish too much nice parkland. If they came back to the table with a scaled down attraction (delete the mainland entry pavilion and bridge, don't build any more parking, smaller overall footprint, consider putting it on the big patch of concrete on the east island where the old waterpark stood...) I wouldn't be opposed to a spa/waterpark or other private uses here in principle. But as currently proposed we are throwing out the baby with the bath water.
 
Looks like a small building on the "mainland" and all the pods and cinesphere

OP.jpg
 
Bayer said:
Well it's decided. The Science Centre will be moved to Ontario Place.
Click to expand...

From the above presser:

1681838482411.png

1681838522785.png


***

For now, I reserve my comment to making fun of the line about Billy Bishop Airport which implies this will one of the many ways one can now get to Ontario Place! LOL That's one seriously expensive ticket to OP!
 
That Billy Bishop comment is funny, typical PR press release hype up every meaningless line.
this really shows the impact of the redevelopment, look at all that public space

FuA1UeRXwBsJNYn
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top