[k10ery]

Except we do have this...Harbourfront Centre. Which draws over 4 times the visitors and Millennium Park couldn't hold a candle to Harboufront's cultural programming. So what if Millennium Park is perceived as more famous?

Ok...it doesn't have a $28 million Big Shiny Bean, but I wouldn't really want to trade in something like Festival of Authors for it. With Toronto's 1% for art program, there are, and will be no shortages of public sculptures, as there seems to be no shortage of development...especially on the downtown waterfront. We just might be able to have our cake and eat it too.

Percent for art is a boondoggle. It has financed dozens of lowest common denominator pieces, and dozens more afterthoughts thrown down willy nilly around condo buildings. Even our own Kapoor looks to me like a child's paper mache science project, thrown away unceremoniously after the fair.

Far better to impose a real development charge for public space improvements, including art, put the money in the reserve fund, and finance a smaller number of projects in the right places.

 

[Tuscani01]

Except we do have this...Harbourfront Centre. Which draws over 4 times the visitors and Millennium Park couldn't hold a candle to Harboufront's cultural programming. So what if Millennium Park is perceived as more famous?

Ok...it doesn't have a $28 million Big Shiny Bean, but I wouldn't really want to trade in something like Festival of Authors for it. With Toronto's 1% for art program, there are, and will be no shortages of public sculptures, as there seems to be no shortage of development...especially on the downtown waterfront. We just might be able to have our cake and eat it too.

In addition to the Harbourfront Centre, we also have the CN Tower, ACC, Skydome, Ripleys Aquarium, and Roundhouse Park all within a stone's throw of Queens Quay (Literally). The CN Tower is closer to the lake than Cloud Gate (The Bean) is to the lake in Chicago.

The Toronto Islands are also a massive tourist destination, and the ferry docks are right at the Central Waterfront. (Not to mention the Islands themselves ARE part of the waterfront.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Percent for art is a boondoggle. It has financed dozens of lowest common denominator pieces, and dozens more afterthoughts thrown down willy nilly around condo buildings. Even our own Kapoor looks to me like a child's paper mache science project, thrown away unceremoniously after the fair.

Far better to impose a real development charge for public space improvements, including art, put the money in the reserve fund, and finance a smaller number of projects in the right places.

So what isn't a "boondoggle"? And Millennium Park was the poster child for boondoggle, so I don't see how that is a good model to follow (let's throw a half billion dollars worth of big name design at one tiny area and have vast swaths of the city in ruins).

While I think the process would benefit from being better juried, I disagree with your general statement on all accounts. I think we have had some great art out of the deal, and more/smaller budgeted art installations means more local artists can get exposure (who's the next Etrog?). While I like established international superstar artists, I don't think "branded" art is always the way to go, regardless of the PR value. I'd rather risk some duds and take my chances with 200 separate art installation by individual developers than leave it all up to City Hall, who used to have some savvy people on board for this kind of thing, but certainly don't any more. Look at Cityplace...the buildings are duds, yet the art collection is actually quite good.

I don't even agree with your assessment of the Simcoe Place Kapoor.

 

[Tewder]

Ok...it doesn't have a $28 million Big Shiny Bean, but I wouldn't really want to trade in something like Festival of Authors for it.

The Bean is more than just a bean, it's a destination and landmark... and you offer a false choice. Toronto can have both and why not?

 

[Torontovibe]

I agree. And to think, there are still the bridges, East Bayfront, Portlands, and Ontario Place that have yet to be built!

Ontario Place is Toronto's world class park but it seems to be undervalued by the city. It has a unique, spectacular design, that you won't see anywhere in the world bit here. I'm sill in awe of those floating pods and this whole park in general. I'm NOT happy with what governments have done to it over the years but the fact is, it's still there and intact, so I still think it has the potential to be our great, world class park. It just needs to be fully utilized and upgraded. It needs a direct TTC connection and the parking lots need to be dealt with but this place has crazy potential. Why are there so few Torontonians advocating for this park? I seriously have no clue! I guess people just don't see the possibilities that I do.

Ontario Place deserves a much higher profile and way more love than it gets. I can't wait for the Libs to reopen it to the public and hopefully spend some serious cash making it a top attraction again.

I love parks that have their own unique style, vibe, branding, purpose, look and feel. That's why I like Sugar Beach. The umbrellas, sand pit, landscaping and location give it it's own unique identity. It feels festive, urban, animated and yet, relaxing. It just works, which is obvious by the large summer crowds. I also like all the events and entertainment that they have here throughout the year.

All new parks in Toronto deserve the same kind of planning and effort. Trees and grass just doesn't cut it these days in the downtown core. We need a bit of style and pizzaz!

 

[freshcutgrass]

The Bean is more than just a bean, it's a destination and landmark... and you offer a false choice. Toronto can have both and why not?

Didn't say we couldn't...just pointing out that what we currently have draws more people and has more to offer, so there's no reason for this "bean envy".

 

[freshcutgrass]

Ontario Place is Toronto's world class park but it seems to be undervalued by the province (fixed). It has a unique, spectacular design, that you won't see anywhere in the world bit here. I'm sill in awe of those floating pods and this whole park in general. I'm NOT happy with what governments have done to it over the years but the fact is, it's still there and intact, so I still think it has the potential to be our great, world class park.

While Zeidler's Pods/Cinisphere are still intact (thank god), the rest of what was Ontario Place really isn't intact any more...figuratively or literally. It was initially impressive partly due to it being cutting edge, which isn't the case any more. It was also not built to make money and offered a lot of value. Children's Village was the greatest playground in the world...gone. Ontario North Now was part of the educational side of Ontario Place (much like the Science Centre was)...that was abandoned as well. Replacing the nicely integrated Forum with a big corporate stage was just another nail in the coffin.

Ontario Place was a good idea from a time when we elected people to come up with good ideas. And occasionally they did.

 

[dowlingm]

Far better to impose a real development charge for public space improvements, including art, put the money in the reserve fund, and finance a smaller number of projects in the right places.

That sounds like the calls from the burbs for Section 37 money to be "shared".

 

[Torontovibe]

Except we do have this...Harbourfront Centre. Which draws over 4 times the visitors and Millennium Park couldn't hold a candle to Harboufront's cultural programming. So what if Millennium Park is perceived as more famous?

Ok...it doesn't have a $28 million Big Shiny Bean, but I wouldn't really want to trade in something like Festival of Authors for it. With Toronto's 1% for art program, there are, and will be no shortages of public sculptures, as there seems to be no shortage of development...especially on the downtown waterfront. We just might be able to have our cake and eat it too.

I like elements of Millennium Park (love the bean, as do most tourists) but that was not what I was advocating for on the east central waterfront. I like Harbourfront for what it is but it actually contains no great attractions. I realize that as a whole, its many events make it a great place but if I was taking a friend there today, there is no daily attraction that would stand out. I could take them to the Power Plant Museum or the Museum of Native Art but both those are really third rate attractions that very few tourists go to. I've been to that native art gallery and it's empty almost every day. The kind of tourist area I was thinking of is quite different than Harbourfront. I'm thinking more along the lines of Sydney's Darling Harbour with maybe a few of Melbourne's charming retail/restaurant alleys thrown in there. Harbourfront is not really a tourist zone. I bet on any given day, there are more Torontonians there, than tourists but I'm not suggesting that's a bad thing. The waterfront should be for both Torontonians and tourists. For myself, I want a first rate museum or art gallery. A new semi-touristy farmers type market on the waterfront would be nice. A movie theatre and a few amusements would also help in making it an entertainment destination. We are only limited by our imaginations. If we demand better options, we will get better, yet we rarely do that. In the end, I think the best situation is something that would meet the needs of local residents, Torontonians from all over the city and tourists wanting great destinations. Is there someway to offer something for everybody? South Street Seaport in NYC does that.

Do we want to build CityPlace on the waterfront? I don't think many people think of CityPlace as a destination. Residential communities with a dry cleaners and a Tim Horton's do not make great destinations for Tourists or Torontonians. I fear the east waterfront will turn into just another residential community and I wanted more then that on our last patch of central waterfront. Sadly, I will not get what I want. Developers are turning it into just another normal neighbourhood, so it seems. Yeah, I know, it will have some offices and stores/restaurants but from what I have seen, it's pretty much like a shorter CityPlace. I see nothing here to create a great destination.

Toronto needs more residential, I get that. Build more condos EVERYWHERE but save the most valuable parts for something different, something of value for all Torontonians, not just local residents. Creating a major destination on the waterfront would have helped the city in a lot more ways. Great destinations create great cities and the synergy that could develop from that, is unlimited. How did Times Square develop into what it is? Too many people in this city think small and fail to consider other options. Was creating a major tourist district on this waterfront land even considered by the city? I have not heard a single politician say a word about exploring those opportunities. (besides Doug Ford, who of course, I thought was a joke) I haven't even heard developers say anything about tourism potential. Nobody is talking about tourism or even major attractions. We are treating this land as if it were Liberty Village or downtown North York.

It's the freaking CENTRAL WATERFRONT people! I hate seeing great potential go to waste. I wish the aquarium was built there. The synergy from that could have created an amazingly lively place. (much like Roundhouse Park was on Sunday)

Actually, the only real tourist zone that Toronto has, is the area between the CN Tower/aquarium/Roundhouse Park/Steam Whistle/Railway Museum. It was a fun, lively place last weekend. That's the kind of mix and synergy we need on the waterfront to create a truly world class (yes, I said it, deal with it! lol) destination. Have a little bit of ambition and imagination for this city, people!


Build typical residential communities on Etobicoke's waterfront but save the downtown waterfront for something special that serves a higher purpose.

Sheesh, sometimes it's hard being a Torontonian!!!

 

[Tewder]

Except we do have this...Harbourfront Centre. Which draws over 4 times the visitors and Millennium Park couldn't hold a candle to Harboufront's cultural programming. So what if Millennium Park is perceived as more famous?

Didn't say we couldn't...just pointing out that what we currently have draws more people and has more to offer, so there's no reason for this "bean envy".

You do realize there is more to Chicago's waterfront than Millennium Park and the Bean right? So you're basically asserting that Harbourfront generates more visits than the combined usages of all the Chicago waterfront venues combined? Navy Pier, Soldier Field, the Field Museum and so on??

 

[Hamiltonian]

Wow. Look at all that green!!!

 

[egotrippin]

Far better to impose a real development charge for public space improvements, including art, put the money in the reserve fund, and finance a smaller number of projects in the right places.

Agreed and then some. A huge chunk of the "art" installations in front of every new condo look seem pretty pointless and half-assed. The money would go so much further if it was pooled and allocated across fewer, but far more significant and worthwhile projects.

 

[freshcutgrass]

I like elements of Millennium Park (love the bean, as do most tourists) but that was not what I was advocating for on the east central waterfront. I like Harbourfront for what it is but it actually contains no great attractions. I realize that as a whole, its many events make it a great place but if I was taking a friend there today, there is no daily attraction that would stand out. I could take them to the Power Plant Museum or the Museum of Native Art but both those are really third rate attractions that very few tourists go to. I've been to that native art gallery and it's empty almost every day. The kind of tourist area I was thinking of is quite different than Harbourfront. I'm thinking more along the lines of Sydney's Darling Harbour with maybe a few of Melbourne's charming retail/restaurant alleys thrown in there. Harbourfront is not really a tourist zone. I bet on any given day, there are more Torontonians there, than tourists but I'm not suggesting that's a bad thing. The waterfront should be for both Torontonians and tourists. For myself, I want a first rate museum or art gallery. A new semi-touristy farmers type market on the waterfront would be nice. A movie theatre and a few amusements would also help in making it an entertainment destination. We are only limited by our imaginations. If we demand better options, we will get better, yet we rarely do that. In the end, I think the best situation is something that would meet the needs of local residents, Torontonians from all over the city and tourists wanting great destinations. Is there someway to offer something for everybody? South Street Seaport in NYC does that.

Do we want to build CityPlace on the waterfront? I don't think many people think of CityPlace as a destination. Residential communities with a dry cleaners and a Tim Horton's do not make great destinations for Tourists or Torontonians. I fear the east waterfront will turn into just another residential community and I wanted more then that on our last patch of central waterfront. Sadly, I will not get what I want. Developers are turning it into just another normal neighbourhood, so it seems. Yeah, I know, it will have some offices and stores/restaurants but from what I have seen, it's pretty much like a shorter CityPlace. I see nothing here to create a great destination.

Toronto needs more residential, I get that. Build more condos EVERYWHERE but save the most valuable parts for something different, something of value for all Torontonians, not just local residents. Creating a major destination on the waterfront would have helped the city in a lot more ways. Great destinations create great cities and the synergy that could develop from that, is unlimited. How did Times Square develop into what it is? Too many people in this city think small and fail to consider other options. Was creating a major tourist district on this waterfront land even considered by the city? I have not heard a single politician say a word about exploring those opportunities. (besides Doug Ford, who of course, I thought was a joke) I haven't even heard developers say anything about tourism potential. Nobody is talking about tourism or even major attractions. We are treating this land as if it were Liberty Village or downtown North York.

It's the freaking CENTRAL WATERFRONT people! I hate seeing great potential go to waste. I wish the aquarium was built there. The synergy from that could have created an amazingly lively place. (much like Roundhouse Park was on Sunday)

Actually, the only real tourist zone that Toronto has, is the area between the CN Tower/aquarium/Roundhouse Park/Steam Whistle/Railway Museum. It was a fun, lively place last weekend. That's the kind of mix and synergy we need on the waterfront to create a truly world class (yes, I said it, deal with it! lol) destination. Have a little bit of ambition and imagination for this city, people!


Build typical residential communities on Etobicoke's waterfront but save the downtown waterfront for something special that serves a higher purpose.

Sheesh, sometimes it's hard being a Torontonian!!!

The fact that you refer to the Power Plant as a "third rate attraction" is why the rest of your giant rant loses any credibility.

 

[Torontovibe]

The fact that you refer to the Power Plant as a "third rate attraction" is why the rest of your giant rant loses any credibility.

You think Power Plant is a top attraction? Do you have any attendance figures to back that up? Is there any other attraction at Harbourfront that you also consider a top attraction?

If you consider the Pwer Plant Gallery, which doesn't even have a permanent exhibit of its own, a top rated attraction, well that about says it all. We have completely different standards/criteria for what a great (world class) attraction is.

Harbourfront has no major attractions, it has a number of nice small attractions (temporary exhibit spaces) and small performing arts spaces but nothing that is a destination attraction on its own. Canada Square isn't going to impress anybody, that's for sure!

See, now this is going to make it seem like I'm anti-Power Plant Gallery, when I'm not. The Power Plant Gallery is a nice attraction to have in Harbourfront and it's FREE! It will provide a good hour of interest but it is what it is, a small but nice attraction. How many people on this site have gone in the last year? How many tourists or even Torontonians go to Harbourfront specifically to go to this gallery. I's bet very few. It's not on many people's radar. Watch people's travel videos on Youtube and you won't see it anywhere.

Yes, I watch Youtube travel videos, lol, because I'm very curious as to what people are doing in Toronto and giving me ideas for my own Youtube channel. I've probably watched hundreds of videos of people traveling to Toronto and I don't think I've seen a single one of the Power Plant. All tourists to Toronto seem to go to one place, Niagara Falls! lol ROM and the aquarium are pretty popular too. Harbourfront, doesn't seem to be that popular.

 

[k10ery]

The fact that you refer to the Power Plant as a "third rate attraction" is why the rest of your giant rant loses any credibility.

Power plant is great, but it's true it gets very little traffic, even when the promenade is busy. It's a mystery to me. It's free, people!