Death of Clubland (aka: Is Adam Vaughan trying to kill the Club District?)

[adma]

I don't see him making it into a second term.

Er, how are you that sure? Just because the club district is *your* livelihood to the point of potentially influencing your vote, doesn't mean it's the case throughout the ward.

Besides, it isn't like an Olivia Chow type would change the status quo significantly--more than likely, any candidate who'd run against Adam Vaughan on such pro-club-district/pro-"vertical sprawl" grounds would wind up looking like a slick dork or a Dichotomyesque anti-socialist crank...

 

[grey]

Exactly. Improving this district is the one issue that any candidate will agree on, and the way to improve it is to push out these piss-poor venues.

 

[Hydrogen]

Adam Vaughan is the one who once referred condos as "vertical sprawl." Hopefully I don't have to explain what is wrong with putting the words "vertical" and "sprawl" together?

The man writes on his website about "intensification" as it is exclusive of high-rise condos. I have seen enough of his quotes in the media and his own writing to know that he and his supporters are just suburbanites living in the city.

I know what you are think: "A suburbanite from the 905 just criticized Adam Vaughan. He must be doing something right." Whatever. I never go clubbing, but I still think Adam Vaughan is an idiot. He is no better than the people in Ajax who protest bus routes in their neighbourhood. It is the same sort of mentality.

Just so you are informed, you might want to understand that the comments on things like vertical sprawl are making reference to inappropriate scale and the absence of anything else in a neighbourhood, such as businesses, services, retail and the like. Just because you want high-rise developments everywhere does not mean that they actually will fit everywhere. CityPlace is an example of vertical sprawl.

Since you admittedly don't live in the area in question, the situation is not the same as bus routes in Ajax. I hope that I don't have to explain that.

Unfortunately you actually have not clarified why you think Vaughan is an "idiot" - other than by showing your own misconception of what his take on development and intensification is.

 

[MetroMan]

Er, how are you that sure? Just because the club district is *your* livelihood to the point of potentially influencing your vote, doesn't mean it's the case throughout the ward.

Indeed, I could have been clearer. I just didn't want to go on to one of my long posts.

What I mean is that he is fighting a war against many of his own constituents. It isn't just club owners who make a living from the club district.

From the people who work in those clubs, I personally know many who live in the Trinity-Spadina ward. In addition to that, you have all the support industries of which I am a part. Printers, designers, photographers, drink execs... the list goes long.

There are several beverage company executives who are dotted around the ward in some of the new condos.

Further, you have restaurants and tourist inclined small businesses where the owners live on the floor above the store/restaurant.

I know my ward well and I know my industry well. Adam Vaughan has made it personal and has started a war with the very people who voted for his first term.

Unless he plans on winning by a landslide, the small difference between him and his opponent will have vaporized as a result of the voters he has alienated.

 

[MetroMan]

Exactly. Improving this district is the one issue that any candidate will agree on, and the way to improve it is to push out these piss-poor venues.

You can improve this district without killing it.

I would advocate for a Vegas style strip which is easier to control, police and regulate. Let's take Richmond St. West as an example.

Allowing clubs to locate only along that strip from University to Spadina would enable the city to focus its attention to serving that market in a very focused way.

This street would be designed to be closed to traffic during the busy weekend nights. It would be a pedestrian zone which would solve sidewalk crowding and people wandering off drunk into the street.

Rather than fighting against this financial asset, the city would work with Tourism Toronto to promote it.

While I think that the industry needs to be regulated better – sidewalks shouldn't be artificial holding areas to make clubs look busy – I feel that it has contributed greatly to the renaissance of this former industrial area of the city and should be allowed to continue to do so.

Full disclosure here: Professionally, I'm in the creative communications field and my company serves mainly nightlife entertainment.
Socially, I don't like going to clubs. They're packed, people are often cocky, rude, and noisy. I don't even drink. I regularly see drunk people's behavior which has turned me off from enjoying a drink myself.

That said, I see the club district as a unique asset to this city. One that should be improved upon, not eliminated.

 

[Hydrogen]

You can improve this district without killing it.

Full disclosure here: Professionally, I'm in the creative communications field and my company serves mainly nightlife entertainment.
Socially, I don't like going to clubs. They're packed, people are often cocky, rude, and noisy. I don't even drink. I regularly see drunk people's behavior which has turned me off from enjoying a drink myself.

Many of the people who live in the area want to see it improved. For them, however, that does not suggest death, but change to something better.

As for the people you describe frequenting the clubs, how do you "improve" on them? In part, it is their poor behaviour that has brought a bad to name to Entertainment District.

 

[gei]

As a resident of the ward, I also can't wait to get him the hell out of here....

 

[unimaginative2]

Ditto. ^

The difference is remarkable. The neighbourhood used to be quite bustling with people late at night, even on weekdays. Now, other than on Fridays and Saturdays, it's pretty much dead. Also, the low-cost clubs seem to be the ones Vaughan hates the most. It's pretty hard to find places now without a $10+ cover.

Maybe Vaughan's a nice guy. I don't know. But he's the biggest opportunist and self-promoter I've ever seen, and I've seen a few. There isn't an article on city hall written in any newspaper where he doesn't elbow his way in for a quote, usually quite vulgar to attract attention. He's launched campaigns against nightlife throughout his ward, even nice little restaurants on College that let people dance. Some might say he's a puritan with a bizarre hatred for dancing, but I don't think that's it. His ambitions to run for higher office couldn't be more blindingly obvious, and he's decided that being known as the slayer of the club district will play well in Scarborough and Etobicoke.

Full disclosure for Adma: I neither work for nor frequently patronize any of the clubs in my neighbourhood, though I do enjoy a late-night burrito or roti from time to time.

 

[doady]

Just so you are informed, you might want to understand that the comments on things like vertical sprawl are making reference to inappropriate scale and the absence of anything else in a neighbourhood, such as businesses, services, retail and the like. Just because you want high-rise developments everywhere does not mean that they actually will fit everywhere. CityPlace is an example of vertical sprawl.

"Vertical sprawl" is a stupid term no matter what it is used to refer to. The two words have opposite meanings.

And I'm not sure how Cityplace can be considered an example of "inappropriate scale" considering that it was not built upon an existing neighbourhood and that is right beside the Skydome and CN Tower. If Cityplace is "inappropraite scale" then anything above one storey must be also.

 

[syn]

Ditto. ^

The difference is remarkable. The neighbourhood used to be quite bustling with people late at night, even on weekdays. Now, other than on Fridays and Saturdays, it's pretty much dead. Also, the low-cost clubs seem to be the ones Vaughan hates the most. It's pretty hard to find places now without a $10+ cover.

$10+? Try $20+! I only went to a few places this summer, but it surprised me how common $20 cover is.

Maybe Vaughan's a nice guy. I don't know. But he's the biggest opportunist and self-promoter I've ever seen, and I've seen a few. There isn't an article on city hall written in any newspaper where he doesn't elbow his way in for a quote, usually quite vulgar to attract attention. He's launched campaigns against nightlife throughout his ward, even nice little restaurants on College that let people dance. Some might say he's a puritan with a bizarre hatred for dancing, but I don't think that's it. His ambitions to run for higher office couldn't be more blindingly obvious, and he's decided that being known as the slayer of the club district will play well in Scarborough and Etobicoke.

Full disclosure for Adma: I neither work for nor frequently patronize any of the clubs in my neighbourhood, though I do enjoy a late-night burrito or roti from time to time.

It's kind of sad that Vaughn has made it his tenure's work to destroy a district simply because he doesn't share enjoy the same kind of entertainment they do.

 

[Hydrogen]

The "district" is more than night just nightclubs. It is evolving.

 

[taal]

Is it?

It is evolving but not naturally and that's the problem.
You need to understand gentrification is one thing, as much as some oppose it, for the most part, it is a natural process that occurs do to shifting demands and rising prices. This is not what is taking place here.
The clubs are being forced out due to naive zoning regulations and political bullying. I think there should be a balance ... less clubs, more competition is not in any way a bad thing and in many ways could be great for the neighborhood. Making it more livable during the day time will arise with the increase in population but it needs to be done at it's own pace. Vaughn is forcing the matter and that only spells disaster. Will the club district die? No it definitely won't ... regardless of what some people are saying new clubs are opening that seem at least to me to provide better service / entertainment compared to the two or three that closed in it's place. Still, we need a better plan for this area. A plan without biases and a plan that recognizes the importance of the club district for business and tourism.

 

[Hydrogen]

How does a neighbourhood evolve "naturally"? This evolution is a product of changes made by people.

As for clubs closing, some have done so because the management failed to live up to their licensing agreements. As for "naive" zoning, what does that mean? The official plan has always included residential development.

Making it more livable during the day time will arise with the increase in population but it needs to be done at it's own pace.

The pace is the one that is happening. A physical area has no agency; people do. By the same token, change can also be stymied when people avoid moving to or setting up businesses in the area because of the negative reputation brought on by some clubs and patrons.

 

[taal]

Yes exactly ... by people, which tend to drive slow moving shifts in demands not something so rushed and forced like were seeing.

Are you arguing both cannot co-exist? To bring business in we need to eliminate the night life which produces the bad reputation the neighbour hood has?

Is there no comprise? If you see / here Vaughn's attitude toward the matter that seems to be the case ... no comprise, let's just get rid of them all. How will that work in the long run. We're effectively killing our night life as these clubs have no where else to go due to the current zoning bylaws regarding where clubs can open. Moreover I think it's good to have an area with a high concentration of clubs. Whether it be more policing or better management I think we can make it work without 1) kicking out all the people *that is all the new residents* 2) removing all the clubs.

 

[Hydrogen]

Are you arguing both cannot co-exist? To bring business in we need to eliminate the night life which produces the bad reputation the neighbour hood has?

If you've read through the thread you would have noted that I have never called for the elimination of all clubs in this area. There are still over 65 such establishments in a roughly one square kilometre area. That is a very high concentration.

We're effectively killing our night life as these clubs have no where else to go due to the current zoning bylaws regarding where clubs can open.

There is more to nightlife than nightclubs. If any damage has come to be done to these establishments due to changes in regulation, much of it has been generated by the clubs and the patrons themselves. If anything, clubs have been given a holiday due to slow by-law enforcement by the city.

Moreover I think it's good to have an area with a high concentration of clubs. Whether it be more policing or better management I think we can make it work without 1) kicking out all the people *that is all the new residents* 2) removing all the clubs.

Don't expect that special area to be a central downtown neighbourhood with a rapidly growing residential population. It's unrealistic to think that this area would somehow remain a permanently unchanged preserve of clubs while all around neighbourhoods were changing. As I mentioned earlier, the plan for the area has always included residential development.