elad
New Member
BEST THOUGHT SO FAR!!!!
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
generalcanada
Senior Member
gil penalosa proposed this, no one gave it any thought
Northern Light
Superstar
UT's own @AlexBozikovic is out with some more thoughts on this proposal in the Globe and Mail. As usual, his opinion is so wishy washy you can't discern his point of view at all............ LMAO (just kidding).
www.theglobeandmail.com
The article above is paywalled. If you can read it and support Alex's work, please do, if not, a few highlights below:
Let me start by saying Alex has previously expressed his negative views on this project, and he and I, and many of you are in agreement on its shortcomings. That said, this piece adds value. Alex takes a closer look at the most recent plans in detail; looks at the absurd cost of the proposed parking garage, considers a very practical alternative; does a good job giving the lay person insight into the building's scale and probable architectural finishes...... on top of which, its just a good, thorough, eviscerating takedown.
***
On the parking:
***
On the scale:
On the appropriateness of Therme in this location:
On the alternative:
Point, Set, Match to Alex. He's got this one just right.
The proposed waterpark at Ontario Place will be Toronto’s worst building
A proposal for an indoor waterpark by Therme, an Austrian company, will dramatically alter the strong heritage value of Ontario Place
www.theglobeandmail.com
The article above is paywalled. If you can read it and support Alex's work, please do, if not, a few highlights below:
Let me start by saying Alex has previously expressed his negative views on this project, and he and I, and many of you are in agreement on its shortcomings. That said, this piece adds value. Alex takes a closer look at the most recent plans in detail; looks at the absurd cost of the proposed parking garage, considers a very practical alternative; does a good job giving the lay person insight into the building's scale and probable architectural finishes...... on top of which, its just a good, thorough, eviscerating takedown.
***
On the parking:
***
On the scale:
On the appropriateness of Therme in this location:
On the alternative:
Point, Set, Match to Alex. He's got this one just right.
3Dementia
Senior Member
Happy New Year Ontario Place? Sorry you'll still be pretty much abandoned for the foreseeable future.
@Northern Light (and Alex too) are easily in my top 5 UrbanToronto contributors (the other 3 are photographers of course) and I have showered applause on those many, many contributions (like most folks here I'm a cheapskate so my lazy applause is limited to likes and loves clicks).
But... I'm going to put myself on the wrong side of this discussion for a minute or so:
1. Is $30 million for Trillium Park the "grand vision" that will revitalize, reinvent and restore this entire site to its former glory (and human traffic)?
No.
2. Where's the big plan (and $$) to restore and re-animate the Pods and Cinesphere as genuine destinations all year which is at least promised by Therme? Are we going to paint the rust with Tremclad and have occasional art shows here?
3. I love the Live Nation plan for the Molson Stage... all weather, all season concerts on the lake ('world class' venue don't you know ;-).
Will Live Nation stick with their plan without another new big splash (quasi-partner) at Ontario Place, generating (local and tourist) visits and cash-flow... another "there there" type of offering?
Highly doubt it.
A new park is of course great but c'mon... it ain't rocket science to say after all these years this Place still needs (and deserves) a grand re-think beyond more disconnected (under-used?) parkland on an island across the Lake Shore highway, next to a soccer stadium.
So if no Therme... then what? Seriously, what?
@Northern Light (and Alex too) are easily in my top 5 UrbanToronto contributors (the other 3 are photographers of course) and I have showered applause on those many, many contributions (like most folks here I'm a cheapskate so my lazy applause is limited to likes and loves clicks).
But... I'm going to put myself on the wrong side of this discussion for a minute or so:
1. Is $30 million for Trillium Park the "grand vision" that will revitalize, reinvent and restore this entire site to its former glory (and human traffic)?
No.
2. Where's the big plan (and $$) to restore and re-animate the Pods and Cinesphere as genuine destinations all year which is at least promised by Therme? Are we going to paint the rust with Tremclad and have occasional art shows here?
3. I love the Live Nation plan for the Molson Stage... all weather, all season concerts on the lake ('world class' venue don't you know ;-).
Will Live Nation stick with their plan without another new big splash (quasi-partner) at Ontario Place, generating (local and tourist) visits and cash-flow... another "there there" type of offering?
Highly doubt it.
A new park is of course great but c'mon... it ain't rocket science to say after all these years this Place still needs (and deserves) a grand re-think beyond more disconnected (under-used?) parkland on an island across the Lake Shore highway, next to a soccer stadium.
So if no Therme... then what? Seriously, what?
Northern Light
Superstar
The Province is exploring moving the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place, into the pods, (restored) along with a new pavillion on the mainland.
It could be a second campus for the OSC, but I believe it's a wholesale move that's being examined closely.
Alex and I would both be happy to endorse this idea.
Alex also notes that nixing the parking garage alone would provide 450M with which to invest in OP.
That would pay for more than a restored landscape.
What else you prefer is up for discussion; but it certainly could deliver a radically enhanced public beach, if so desired. It could certainly put back something resembling the original Children's Village. That's not a bad start. It could also provide at least one over-Lake Shore 'enhanced' connection to Exhibition Place.
I don't mind the idea of a modest-sized, publicly owned waterpark, as this was part of OP from day one. That could be paid for a by a private operator with a medium-term lease; or achieved for about 100M and be pretty spectacular.
In the alternative, the City could also build its largest outdoor pool yet and operate it as a City-owned pool, depending on secondary features (decks, cabins, concessions, kidding pool, lazy river, dive tanks etc.) price range 20M-60M
generalcanada
Senior Member
also to note is that there is a "site servicing rfp" that went out on the 19th.
seems to include the pods cinesphere and bridges
according to IO's novermber update its "less than 200 mil"
- Site Servicing RFP: December 19, 2022
seems to include the pods cinesphere and bridges
according to IO's novermber update its "less than 200 mil"
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
So this is happening?UT's own @AlexBozikovic is out with some more thoughts on this proposal in the Globe and Mail. As usual, his opinion is so wishy washy you can't discern his point of view at all............ LMAO (just kidding).
The proposed waterpark at Ontario Place will be Toronto’s worst building
A proposal for an indoor waterpark by Therme, an Austrian company, will dramatically alter the strong heritage value of Ontario Place
The article above is paywalled. If you can read it and support Alex's work, please do, if not, a few highlights below:
Let me start by saying Alex has previously expressed his negative views on this project, and he and I, and many of you are in agreement on its shortcomings. That said, this piece adds value. Alex takes a closer look at the most recent plans in detail; looks at the absurd cost of the proposed parking garage, considers a very practical alternative; does a good job giving the lay person insight into the building's scale and probable architectural finishes...... on top of which, its just a good, thorough, eviscerating takedown.
View attachment 448131
***
On the parking:
View attachment 448132
***
On the scale:
View attachment 448133
On the appropriateness of Therme in this location:
View attachment 448134
On the alternative:
View attachment 448135
Point, Set, Match to Alex. He's got this one just right.
Northern Light
Superstar
Therme? I don't know that we've seen evidence of a signed, fixed, contract as yet, but certainly all indications are that it's headed that direction.
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
...it's a case of how they get a white elephant through the constricted door of public scrutiny. One piece at a time, that is. /sigh
mildlyamusingusername
New Member
Losing the Cinesphere as a venue for movies would suck to be honest, even if they do only show second-runs and classic movies. It will be the only real IMAX theatre left in Toronto after the demise of Scotiabank theatre, and it’s one of the few left in the world that still projects film, in addition to IMAX Laser. Operating it with just science-related documentaries would be a waste of its potential. Maybe the province could find a balance if they do relocate the science centre, but for some reason I doubt it.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Which seems like a much more reasonable cost for a parking garage, assuming it's included in that.
Economies of scale here mean this garage should be able to be delivered for far, far less than $470/sf like Alex claims. Just no way this is costing $212k a parking spot when you are building such a highly efficient garage like this.
Alex of course also ignores that this parking will not be free, and will presumably not even be particularly cheap. I wouldn't be surprised if the garage, between Exhibition Place events, the Science Centre, Therme, and Live Nation, barely even needs a subsidy with parking revenue covering most of the capital and operating costs.
I'm also not sure it's practical to assume that even if Therme was to depart, that the Science Centre and Live Nation could effectively operate here without parking. Exhibition station may not be far, but it's also not particularly close, and there is no immediate local bus service. And regardless, the Science Centre and Live Nation are regional draws which like it or not have higher parking draws than many other activities downtown. Unless of course Alex would rather see the existing parking lot stay as a significant barrier to access of the islands.
As someone who usually agrees quite strongly with Alex, his angle on this whole project is rather puzzling to me. Perhaps there is an argument in there against leasing this to a private spa operator, but leaving the site as is more or less as an abandoned theme park which happens to be open to the public isn't particularly appealing either.
Honestly in general I'm confused about the idea that the whole island should be turned into a park or something in general - Ontario was always intended to be a regional recreational site with province-wide draws. A nice waterfront park just isn't that.
Last edited:
mildlyamusingusername
New Member
AlexBozikovic
Active Member
Hi, Alex here. Thanks for all the comments on my piece.
On parking: there are currently 1200 surface parking spots. This plan would provide 2100 underground and roughly 600 surface. This is being driven, so far as we know, by the requirements of Therme.
The $450-million estimate comes from an informed reading of a document from a cost consultant as well as other reporting. It’s a realistic number. Crazy, but real.
The $200-million contract is something else.
No public figures have been stated for the cost of the park and public realm changes.
On parking: there are currently 1200 surface parking spots. This plan would provide 2100 underground and roughly 600 surface. This is being driven, so far as we know, by the requirements of Therme.
The $450-million estimate comes from an informed reading of a document from a cost consultant as well as other reporting. It’s a realistic number. Crazy, but real.
The $200-million contract is something else.
No public figures have been stated for the cost of the park and public realm changes.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Thanks Alex - Always appreciate your insight on matters, even if we perhaps disagree here.
I note in your article that you used Altus group numbers - Where specifically did you find that number? Looking at their 2022 cost guide, they put an underground parking garage at $195-265/ft, which is in line with what I've seen in the past.
And given that most costs involved in a garage are actually in the shoring and (now in Toronto) waterproofing systems along the perimeter, which a garage of this scale would be very efficient at per square foot, I suspect costs would be on the lower range there. $200/ft would mean this was a $200 million garage - Still a lot of $$$, but per spot that's about $95k.
At $15 a day, the current parking rate for the existing lot, and a 70% occupancy rate (assumed by me, could be lower or higher, not really sure), that's $10 million in annual revenue as well. Less expenses, etc.. The total net subsidy of the garage would probably be pretty small, to the tune of $3-4 million a year. And honestly, jump that parking rate to $20 since it will now be a much higher demand parking location.. and you could be approaching break-even.
Of course - the government takes the risk on instead of Therme, but I don't think it makes much sense for Therme to operate the garage themselves here as it will very much be a shared facility for all the users of Ontario Place. There is a lot more to these kinds of decisions than just the initial capital cost, especially since the parking garage will generate revenue, and it will be critical to securing the leases for the government's tenants here.
The bigger question is what Therme's lease terms look like here - are they paying anything, if at all for the land? If so, are they paying an appropriate amount to cover their portion of the parking demand? If so, the garage may not be getting much if any subsidy from the government.
The bigger problem here, as with almost all provincial activities, is a complete lack of transparency. A lot of these questions could probably be answered just by giving some basic information which the province just doesn't release.
Last edited:
GabrielHurl
Active Member
In the Cost Guide - 2 lines below the item for UG parking garages - there's an item for (Premium for unusual circumstances) with a rate of up to $215/sf.
I assume it's been added as a worst case scenario.