OLG Toronto/GTA casino proposal (where to put it?)

[freshcutgrass]

Forget Woodbine and Ontario Place, i would not be a bit surprised... if a casino complex is included in the plans to re-develop the LCBO HQ + Warehouse Site @ Queens Quay.

I wouldn't be that surprised either if they floated that idea. They are after all looking to unload that property.

But, if the province wants a casino in the city, then they are going to go the route with the least political backlash. And I doubt the city or Waterfront Toronto or the general public will see this as an ideal part of waterfront revitalization.

That's why Woodbine is the logical spot for various reasons...the least amount of political backlash for a casino...it's already there now, and an enlarged version is already planned and approved for the new project. Plus, the project is stalled because Cordish is having a hard time securing leases for the initial phases. Giving them the ability to develop a full-fledged casino instead what they had planned may be the push that gets this development under way. I's be happy if they scrapped the big-box super-centre phase, and replaced it with a casino complex instead.

 

[TrickyRicky]

I saw that piece on the Agenda on TVO as well. Ken Greenberg helped convince me that Ontario place or the Ex is not an appropriate site for this venue. I agree with freshcut that Woodbine would be the obvious and most agreeable location. It's proximity to the airport and airport hotel district is also a plus.

The question before Toronto and council at city hall however becomes this: There is a 100% chance of a casino being built in the GTA regardless of the real or perceived social consequences. Do we want this or do we want revenue and business to siphon to an adjacent municipality? I could see the city rejecting the casino and it going to say Vaughan corporate centre. The net result would be that Toronto businesses and city hall would loose the revenue and yet we would still be stuck with a large percentage of the social costs.

 

[James]

Just to add another perspective to the concept of a Toronto casino, from Niagara's POV:

http://www.niagarathisweek.com/article/1315624--toronto-s-gain-niagara-s-loss

Toronto’s gain Niagara’s loss

News that Ontario Lottery and Gaming plans to build a new casino in Toronto and close “under-performing” casinos in the province is bad news indeed for Niagara.

This region has seen thousands of decent paying jobs go up in a whiff of smoke in recent years, as long-time, major employers pulled the plug for good. Many of those people who lost their jobs are no doubt among the thousands of people working at Niagara’s two casinos, Casino Niagara and the larger, fancier Fallsview Casino.

But those casinos have faced serious challenges in recent years, with border security issues, competition from new casinos across the river and a Canadian dollar now at par with the U.S. greenback eating into business.

As part of its plans to overhaul gambling in the province, OLG may well be planning to close one of Niagara Falls’ casinos.

Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, who made the announcement on Monday, said the changes — including expanding the sale of lottery tickets — will increase OLG revenues by more than $1 billion a year. He said they will create more than 2,300 net new jobs in the gaming industry, and nearly 4,000 additional jobs in the hospitality and retail sectors within a few years.

But it’s a sure bet Niagara won’t be celebrating any time soon. A new Toronto casino will most certainly mean the end for at least one of our casinos, which — for better or worse — have become the place of last resort for employment for many Niagara residents. It would also mean removing the reason for Toronto residents to come here to gamble, eat in our restaurants, shop in our shops and visit our attractions.

It would also become direct competition for our remaining casino, and could be a major blow to Niagara’s all-important tourism and hospitality sector.

If there’s any region in Ontario that doesn’t need yet another major blow, it’s Niagara. This region has struggled with one of the highest unemployment rates in Canada and the number of people on welfare has soared 41 per cent since the 2008 recession hit, new statistics from the Region show.

The OLG can talk all it wants about how the planned changes will boost revenue and create jobs, but the exact opposite will likely be seen in Niagara. The OLG will be cutting off its nose to spite its face.

 

[freshcutgrass]

...and that's why you don't put your future into gambling casinos. Toronto is too big to have this problem, but since the only advantage to a casino is extra revenue, that extra revue plays such a minor role in Toronto's economy, the disadvantages far outweigh the small advantage.

I liked that video too....some interesting points. One of the more interesting points was when they mentioned the small casinos operating out of hotels in resort areas. The key point was that they were small, intimate affairs that didn't dominate the local fabric of the city.

Perhaps the real problem is this idea of "mega-casinos". They are like Walmarts or big box supercentres....they are bad urban planning. If we must have casino operations in Toronto, perhaps the best way to go is to have several small ones that don't upset the urban fabric, rather than some giant mega-casino that would.

 

[adma]

The question before Toronto and council at city hall however becomes this: There is a 100% chance of a casino being built in the GTA regardless of the real or perceived social consequences. Do we want this or do we want revenue and business to siphon to an adjacent municipality? I could see the city rejecting the casino and it going to say Vaughan corporate centre. The net result would be that Toronto businesses and city hall would loose the revenue and yet we would still be stuck with a large percentage of the social costs.

Then again, the Woodbine context might as well be more tied in with Vaughan Corporate Centre and all that. So for Toronto to reject a casino even out there might be a little abolitionist-extreme...

 

[k10ery]

I saw that piece on the Agenda on TVO as well. Ken Greenberg helped convince me that Ontario place or the Ex is not an appropriate site for this venue. I agree with freshcut that Woodbine would be the obvious and most agreeable location. It's proximity to the airport and airport hotel district is also a plus.

I watched this. I couldn't believe how biased or just plain bumfuzzled these guys are. Casinos didn't CAUSE urban blight in Atlantic City or St Louis or Godforsaken Detroit. If anything, urban blight caused the casinos.

It's interesting that in Ottawa the politicians and the people do not seem to be much opposed to the casino proposal. Maybe it's because they can look across the river and realize a casino can look like this:

I don't think that's inward looking or poorly integrated with the waterfront. And by all accounts it has brought tourism to the region and a pretty good restaurant too.

 

[gristle]

It's interesting that in Ottawa the politicians and the people do not seem to be much opposed to the casino proposal. Maybe it's because they can look across the river and realize a casino can look like this:

That casino is in Gatineau Quebec - which is strong example of urban blight.

 

[caehlan]

Melbourne would be a good example to follow

If we are looking for inspiration on how a casino can be nicely integrated into a city, I would suggest taking a look at the Crown Casino in Melbourne, Australia.

It's one of the major components of a revitalized waterfront areas known as Southbank.

It brought with it a five star hotel, lots of great restaurants plus a massive entertainment and shopping complex. There is a beautifully wide, cafe lined, art decorated walk way beside the Yarra river. An incredibly popular spot with the locals and tourists alike.

It's located a 10 or so minute walk from two major train stations and multiple tram stops even closer. Across the road from a major convention center and a whole lot of new condo developments.

The city hasn't gone to hell in a hand basket since it was introduced.. for the most part the social fabric stayed the same. Have no idea how much the city has benefited from it financially... even if it's only breaking even, just having the extra attraction makes the city a somewhat more interesting place to explore and spend time in.

 

[freshcutgrass]

It brought with it a five star hotel, lots of great restaurants plus a massive entertainment and shopping complex. There is a beautifully wide, cafe lined, art decorated walk way beside the Yarra river.

But a casino is not a prerequisite for any of those things. Why is the casino necessary? What value does the casino have itself?

From what I can tell, the actual casino itself isn't exactly what I'd call a successful urban design...it doesn't seem to engage the street very well at all, and architecturally, it looks like a giant barn. And that's all casinos ever are...just big windowless barns for gambling.

[/URL][/img]

 

[caehlan]

Its not always a prerequisite for sure.. but when someone wants to build a casino, it's amazing what a city can request of the developers. You can squeeze them quite a bit for nice added perks to the city and they will still build it considering what a cash cow a casino is. It's something Toronto hasn't done enough of to the developers here... especially the 100s of new condo developers. You can place a tonne of demands on them to make the public realm a nicer place and sure you may scare away a couple of them, but the rest will still build and find it profitable to do so.

Granted the angle your photo is from doesn't look the best, but this part of the city used to be a run down old warehousing district and this is a major improvement over the old space. This is the mainly just a back entrance for tour buses and what not. Take a look from many other angles and it looks quite nice.

Or google search some more.. https://www.google.ca/search?q=Crow...ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CCAQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=979

 

[freshcutgrass]

Its not always a prerequisite for sure.. but when someone wants to build a casino, it's amazing what a city can request of the developers. You can squeeze them quite a bit for nice added perks to the city and they will still build it considering what a cash cow a casino is.

Sounds a lot like making deals with the devil....never a great idea in hind site. Besides, Toronto is not in a position to reap any "cash cow" benefits from a casino...this is purely a provincial cash grab, with Toronto as the patsy. Toronto isn't going to make any big money from any casino....it's just the one who has to live with the social physical consequences of having one.

It's something Toronto hasn't done enough of to the developers here... especially the 100s of new condo developers. You can place a tonne of demands on them to make the public realm a nicer place and sure you may scare away a couple of them, but the rest will still build and find it profitable to do so.

Oh really...between the LTT, Section 37 provisions and the One Percent for Art program, Toronto has made out pretty well I'd say.

Granted the angle your photo is from doesn't look the best, but this part of the city used to be a run down old warehousing district and this is a major improvement over the old space.

Brownfield redevelopment doesn't require this compromise. It's possible to integrate almost any kind of facility within the framework of revitalizing prime city locations....with the exception of casinos. The inward nature of the building itself, plus the nature of the business they are in make them one of the few things that simply never make a positive contribution. That's why people avoid them. The only people advocating them, are desperate people. And in this case, the desperate people is the the provincial government coming up with any scheme to cut their deficit. And it's best to distance yourself from desperate people who want to make deals with you...you will get screwed in the end.

 

[caehlan]

Toronto has made out pretty well from all the recent development? On paper maybe. Jump down a few threads to "Shabby public realm" and you'll see there is fairly regular sentiment in Toronto that we could have done a better job with urban design. Not a bad thing to admit we have room for improvement.

Your talk of making deals with the devil and only desperate people wanting anything to do with casinos makes me feel like I've stepped back into the times of prohibition. I've heard it a bit from others against the casino, like they see Toronto as a pretty young virgin who will be defiled by a horde of drugged up gamblers swarming into Dundas square looking for their next fix. Reality is this city already has a fairly diverse social and cultural fabric, if a casino was added it would just be another weave in that fabric.

I hope one day you get to see it's not the evil monster you think it will be. Until then, maybe take a trip to Melbourne and take a stroll down Southbank and see if it changes your mind a bit.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Jump down a few threads to "Shabby public realm" and you'll see there is fairly regular sentiment in Toronto that we could have done a better job with urban design. Not a bad thing to admit we have room for improvement.

Try to stay on point. I countered your claim that Toronto does not exploit the condo boom fiscally to its advantage. And show me a single shred of evidence that suggests that casinos are an improvement to the public realm or part of competent urban planning policies.

 

[caehlan]

Fiscally we may have benefited and I agree that section 37 and the arts program are great additions on paper.. but I think the city and the developers could have done much better in actually executing aesthetic improvements to Toronto. I'm just one person though.. maybe others do not agree and I'm okay with that.

A casino floor by itself is not an improvement to the public realm. It's the extras that the casino will build to make the visitors and the city happy that I hope will improve the place. These things will never get built otherwise as we live in a cheap city, full of developers who are squeezing two bedroom homes into 650sqft to make an extra dollar and we have a broke provincial government. It would be great if we had local generous rich families and companies like the Wrigley's to help build us a Millennium Park from Chicago.. however we don't. Competent urban planning can only extend as far as the wallet allows. Casinos will increase the size of our wallet. It will be up to us to make sure it's handled properly by our city and Government.

Google has a preview of a book "Fluid city: transforming Melbourne's urban waterfront". It looks like it goes into some detail on the Casino design as well as its impact on Melbourne. Think I will try to hunt down a copy and see if I can become a bit more educated on the example I offered up beyond the superficial reasoning.

To answer the original question of this thread.. the soon to be old LCBO buildings would be an ideal space.

 

[freshcutgrass]

but I think the city and the developers could have done much better in actually executing aesthetic improvements to Toronto.

That's a trap, as nothing is ever good enough. So I won't bother with a long list of improvements that were made, since all you see are the ones that weren't made.

A casino floor by itself is not an improvement to the public realm.

Right. So why would anyone choose to add things that do not improve the public realm?

It's the extras that the casino will build to make the visitors and the city happy that I hope will improve the place. These things will never get built otherwise as we live a cheap city, full of developers who are squeezing two bedroom homes into 650sqft to make an extra

You don't need casinos to build hotel rooms, retail space or cultural attractions. And in Toronto, it's glaringly obvious. It's condos that help build TIFFs and National Ballet Schools and Distillery Districts and Canoe Landing Parks and Trump, Ritz, Shangri-La and Four Seasons hotels. And the condos themselves have a positive effect from an urban planning perspective. There's no down side....no cross to bare as in the case of casinos.

It would be great if we had local generous rich families like the Wrigley's to build us a Millennium Park from Chicago..

First of all, the City of Chicago borrowed $270 million it didn't have to build MP. And tell that to the Michael Lee-Chins and the Kenneth Thomsons. I think our Gehry was a better deal than Chicago's.

Competent urban planning can only extend as far the wallet allows. Casinos will increase the size of our wallet.

A bit of a contradiction, as casinos have been proven by study after study to be an example a bad urban planning. And the only wallets that may be fattened, are the provincial government's and private companies that manage the casinos. Toronto might get some pocket change to deal with the issues regarding the people gambling in the casinos...who's wallets will be emptied.

the soon to be old LCBO buildings would be an ideal space.

To be specific, there are no "ideal" places...only places where less harmful. And the downtown waterfront is certainly not one of the places.