MetroMan:

As for decking over the rails, the experience with the CityPlace bridge doesn't bode well for the prospects of this happening. CN are uncompromising old farts. It's like they're from the railroad era...
Click to expand...

That maybe, but I have a feeling the ability of a global property developer with the backing of OMERS probably have quite a bit more leverage with CN.

AoD
 
Wow, love it or hate it, you have to admit, it's an ambitious plan! Personally, I say go for it, there's so much talk of a casino destroying the city, but I'd like to know, why? It's not going to be a Vegas style run by the mob, it's going to be run by the Ontario government, as such, I can't see how it would destroy anything. There's just too much paranoid, unfounded ignorant fear out there, fearing it will make people addicted to gambling, huh? I have news for them, the OLGC has been thriving of gambleaholics for decades, so the difference being????? The plan itself looks awesome, and the fact they will build over the GO tracks and create a green space between those new towers is amazing, I'm curious to see how, if all proposed it actually built, the Gehry towers will look with this project?
 
Ed007Toronto said:
You have to drive to downtown Detroit. No need to do so here. And hopefully it finally pushes the Downtown Relief Line to the forefront.
Click to expand...


Casino will be open 24 hours. TTC will have to run later service or people who gamble at night will be forced to drive.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
MetroMan:



That maybe, but I have a feeling the ability of a global property developer with the backing of OMERS probably have quite a bit more leverage with CN.

AoD
Click to expand...

What does Oxford get out of decking over the rail corridor? This looks to essentially be a gift to the city to entice them into approving the casino component. Sure there is some park facing retail, but I doubt it could account for the massive price tag and bureaucracy to deck over the rail.

Also, let me rephrase my question: How likely is any of this to happen without a casino?

EDIT: I'll leave the question but I just read The Star article and it says the whole project is contingent on the casino money to make financial sense. Still, I don't think OMERS bought this property to leave it as it is. Casino or not, something will happen here, perhaps just not as ambitious.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
I didn't even know melbourne's casino existed. I just kept thinking of cities like Niagra falls NY, Detroit, etc. that have horrid downtowns with casinos in them.
Click to expand...

I'm not in favour of a downtown casino, but I will acknowledge that Niagara Falls NY and Detroit and Windsor (and East St. Louis, which also has a casino) is a chicken-and-egg thing. Except in Las Vegas (which is in a league of its own), people generally don't visit casinos and spend money elsewhere in the surroundings, though the small Greektown Casino in Detroit didn't hurt it. Casinos are often a tool of desprate towns to get business in.

Anyway, Downtown Detroit, at least the immediate downtown core, continues to improve, but this isn't because of the two downtown casinos (and a third not far away), but more because of the new office space and tax incentives for businesses to move downtown, and small, but growing downtown condo-dwelling population. I also don't think the new baseball and football stadiums hurt either.
 
MetroMan:

What does Oxford get out of decking over the rail corridor? This looks to essentially be a gift to the city to entice them into approving the casino component. Sure there is some park facing retail, but I doubt it could account for the massive price tag and bureaucracy to deck over the rail.
Click to expand...

It's hard to tell from the rendering, but given the absence of bridges in it linking MTCC North and South, it might very well be that (part of) the expansion is underneath the park within the landbridge decking.

AoD
 
Metroman,

re. How likely is any of this to happen without a casino?, I can't fathom why the casino should be a make-break item for this development. In other words, if there is a market for what is on offer here, minus the casino, then I think the development will get built. BTW, one of the first things I noticed, as you did, was the improved framing of the CN Tower. I hope to see something like this happen with no watering down of the architectural concept(s).

I see "supertall" in the renders. Take a good look at the height of the the two notched skyscraping knockouts in relation to the Ritz to the north.
 
I'm not a fan of a casino at this location, but it's hard not to be intrigued by this project.

If this does go through, I hope transit is expanded to accomodate.
 
Reading the comments on the Star and Globe, you'd think they're building an incinerator for the lower class.

I don't understand this babying of society. If there are problem gamblers, it is not our responsability as a government and society to protect them from themselves. People should be free to make their decisions in life, no matter how poor.

Oxford is offering a dramatic improvement to one of the dreariest stretches in Toronto. That part of Front St is essentially a suburban drag with big buildings around it. They are also connecting our landmark to the rest of the city. As MetroMan said, this new park will be a perfect place to contemplate the CN Tower. The big scar of rail through this part of the city will be hidden from view by a park. 1MM sqf of retail to further animate this area and give the thousands of stadium/arena visitors a place to visit and spend money afterwards.

The casino is nothing but an extra in the grand scheme of Toronto's offerings. I am not a gambler by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't mind going once in a while to play slots and have drinks. This was one of my activities when bored in Ottawa - at least the Lac Leamy casino was only a 10 min drive away.

-- Furthermore, problem gamblers are just going to gamble somewhere else without this casino. If you want to gamble, nothing is going to stop you from taking the 'free' (with free casino membership) bus to Fallsview. Plus Toronto will make some money from this. Probably a trivial amount, but better than nothing.
 
TonyV said:
Metroman,

re. How likely is any of this to happen without a casino?, I can't fathom why the casino should be a make-break item for this development. In other words, if there is a market for what is on offer here, minus the casino, then I think the development will get built. BTW, one of the first things I noticed, as you did, was the improved framing of the CN Tower. I hope to see something like this happen with no watering down of the architectural concept(s).

I see "supertall" in the renders. Take a good look at the height of the the two notched skyscraping knockouts in relation to the Ritz to the north.
Click to expand...

I'm conflicted. Would Oxford really propose such a massive development and spend all this money on it to be strictly contingent on a casino? There has got to be more to the story.

I also see "supertalls." Just look how tall that one building towers over the 30-story condo at City Place. Here is a tip: try counting the floors. There is no way the towers are coming in that tall.
 
Filip said:
Plus Toronto will make some money from this. Probably a trivial amount, but better than nothing.
Click to expand...

The amount in property taxes that will be made in millions of sq.ft of office, commercial, residential, and hotel space is not so trivial. But that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I've always been behind the casino proposals in Toronto not because I gamble or would ever set my foot in there beyond a curious first once or twice but because casinos play in ballgames worth billions of dollars, the same kind of billions of dollars that transportation and big city infrastructure play in. With an OLG casino here, you can bet your house that the Province will want to bring in as many people down here as they can fit in a DRL and an Airport train. I'd imagine that building 100 story parking garages is not happening, so a downtown relief line will become a big priority that means incoming dollar signs, not just spending. Build a subway, make more OLG money. It's a formula that all of a sudden gives sense to spending $1B on a subway line downtown.
 
MetroMan said:
The amount in property taxes that will be made in millions of sq.ft of office, commercial, residential, and hotel space is not so trivial. But that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I've always been behind the casino proposals in Toronto not because I gamble or would ever set my foot in there beyond a curious first once or twice but because casinos play in ballgames worth billions of dollars, the same kind of billions of dollars that transportation and big city infrastructure play in. With an OLG casino here, you can bet your house that the Province will want to bring in as many people down here as they can fit in a DRL and an Airport train. I'd imagine that building 100 story parking garages is not happening, so a downtown relief line will become a big priority that means incoming dollar signs, not just spending. Build a subway, make more OLG money. It's a formula that all of a sudden gives sense to spending $1B on a subway line downtown.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's this type of small-town thinking that makes me ashamed to live in Toronto. So many 'world class cities don't have casinos' comments coming from everywhere... Um.. Yes they do. Most world class cities I know have casinos.. Sometimes more than just one.
 
fedplanner said:
I'm conflicted. Would Oxford really propose such a massive development and spend all this money on it to be strictly contingent on a casino? There has got to be more to the story.

I also see "supertalls." Just look how tall that one building towers over the 30-story condo at City Place. Here is a tip: try counting the floors. There is no way the towers are coming in that tall.
Click to expand...

Think about it, the new hotel rooms would primarily get their business from the casino, this also applies to the retail. I do question the retail, 1 million square feet ? Even the casino and the like, is there really demand for all that retail, it seems excessive to say the least.

Particularly given the fact union station is suppose to have a couple hundred thousand square feet of retail as well. That's the part of the project I question the most.

But the condo / office / along with the convention center expansion seem fairly independent. The convention center is about 600,000 square feet today, medium sized by convention space standards ... the thing to keep in mind is the direct energy center is about 1 million square feet of convention space. Its rare for any one convention to ever use the entire center, even large events (MCC or the direct energy center), but this would probably make it easier to host multiple conventions simultaneously.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top