reteequa
Active Member
I think this would be perfect for the sidewalk labs land or at east harbour. I agree with Alex we need a mix of uses. There is no fun in walking 10 minutes across pavement to get the Ontario place.
Toronto Esports Performance Venue and Hotel | 112.23m | 30s | OverActive | Populous
- Thread starter lightarchitect
- Start date
isaidso
Senior Member
Pedestrianizing Toronto is in its infancy. The width of our thoroughfares are nowhere near wide enough to accommodate the number of lanes of traffic we've installed. What's left over for people is absurdly narrow. I suspect in 30 years, the majority of our 4 lane roads will end up 2 lane roads so that the width of sidewalks can be doubled/tripled. In some cases we'll have no choice but to install a one way one lane road or no lanes at all.
Lake Shore Boulevard is 6 lanes. Building a tree lined 20ft wide sidewalk on each side is a good start. If there's space left over for 6 lanes fine, otherwise you take some lanes out. The last 7 decades we've looked at this issue from the opposite point of view. We decided how many lanes of traffic we wanted and what ever was left over became sidewalk regardless of how little space was left. The result has been that 95% of our sidewalks aren't appealing places to be. Practically every street needs a re-do.
Queen West/Queen East is a perfect example. It's ridiculous that they tried to shove 4 lanes of traffic onto that thoroughfare. It needs to be 1 lane in each direction and no street parking. There simply isn't room for it.
Lake Shore Boulevard is 6 lanes. Building a tree lined 20ft wide sidewalk on each side is a good start. If there's space left over for 6 lanes fine, otherwise you take some lanes out. The last 7 decades we've looked at this issue from the opposite point of view. We decided how many lanes of traffic we wanted and what ever was left over became sidewalk regardless of how little space was left. The result has been that 95% of our sidewalks aren't appealing places to be. Practically every street needs a re-do.
Queen West/Queen East is a perfect example. It's ridiculous that they tried to shove 4 lanes of traffic onto that thoroughfare. It needs to be 1 lane in each direction and no street parking. There simply isn't room for it.
Last edited:
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Fad or not, the appeal of this plan is that this would be a tech-enabled medium-sized venue that comedians and other performative arts could use when not booked for e-sports, and that is a need sorely lacking in the city.I admit, I am impressively surprised that this fad...err, aspect of gaming has made the profit margin to generate funds to build their own expensive venues. As opposed to renting out ones that are already there. So wow, just wow!!
Also, the tech-enabled bit is important. The current venues in the city are not that suitable for e-sports as I understand it. If the industry were not going ambitious with a move to build a dedicated venue like this, they probably might be better off seeing what assets Cineplex were willing to part with for a quick cash grab due to COVID.
alklay
Senior Member
There is no doubt that the Ex needs mixed uses. And there is no doubt, street level uses are incredibly important. I see nothing about this development that prevents either of these two. In fact, I would suggest that this development probably increases the chances of further development on the lands and the chances of other uses. This will only increase the chance of the area becoming more dynamic, with a variety of uses in the near or immediate future (if the city and Ex allows such). Nothing prevents a cafe or restaurant or two at street level and nothing prevents the city from directing the design in that direction.
Right now this spot is a piece of asphalt. And nothing else is being contemplated. And there is plenty of asphalt all around it for other uses. So tweak the hotel design to make it more street friendly. But there are not enough compelling reasons to reject this outright.
Right now this spot is a piece of asphalt. And nothing else is being contemplated. And there is plenty of asphalt all around it for other uses. So tweak the hotel design to make it more street friendly. But there are not enough compelling reasons to reject this outright.
afransen
Senior Member
Not sure that we should be looking to add residential, but I think commercial would be good (restaurants, bars, live music, shopping).
bilked
Senior Member
Isn't that part of the issue here? It's hard to see how this area would ever function as an actual around-the-clock neighborhood without adding significant highrise residential. I'd love to see that, but there doesn't seem to be any political (or much public) appetite for that.
In the absence of people actually living here, I can't see how the area functions as more than a venues district. Without residents "restaurants, bars, live music..." translates into destination restaurants like Muzik and Medieval Times.
If that's going to be the case, this proposal serves that purpose well and fits right in (and, while it could certainly be improved as to its street level experience, looks great overall).
afransen
Senior Member
You add a bunch of residents, and they start complaining about the venues and putting pressure on council to make them unviable. Look at King St.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
What does a high-rise condo add to the around-the-clock neighbourhood character that a high-rise hotel does not? If the objective is to ensure 24/7 activity, 365 days a year (and if the city's tourism industry could support that amount of demand) won't that be met by the guests of the hotels?
(Of course the answer to the first question posed above is authenticity, but remember we are talking about an inner-city venue district not a sleepy&leafy shoulder neighbourhood)
The problem if I could articulate it, is more so that the guests of Hotel X and any additional hotels built in the area have every incentive to stay within the hotel premises as there is not much in the way of "restaurants, bars, live music" in the immediate vicinity to interact with, or to pull them away from the hotel's amenities. Especially not year-round.
(Of course the answer to the first question posed above is authenticity, but remember we are talking about an inner-city venue district not a sleepy&leafy shoulder neighbourhood)
The problem if I could articulate it, is more so that the guests of Hotel X and any additional hotels built in the area have every incentive to stay within the hotel premises as there is not much in the way of "restaurants, bars, live music" in the immediate vicinity to interact with, or to pull them away from the hotel's amenities. Especially not year-round.
Scotian
New Member
I'm going to go with Alex here. This is publicly-owned land with incredible access to transit (and future transit) and this will be the fourth sports-related large facility on the site.
If the goal is to create a second-rate version of the South Philly Sports Complex here, great move. Otherwise this is a supreme waste of public domain in a complex littered with such examples.
If the goal is to create a second-rate version of the South Philly Sports Complex here, great move. Otherwise this is a supreme waste of public domain in a complex littered with such examples.
bilked
Senior Member
There’s nothing wrong with a hotel at this site and you’re right that they will bring more life to what’s now a sea of parking lots.
But it’s locals, not tourists who eat like locals, shop, work, play like locals and it’s those networks of interactions and relationships that define the character of a neighbourhood and create the conditions for a more organic form of growth.
If we want a venues district, this is a perfect fit and should be fun. But there’s no reason why exhibition place needs to remain a venues district. But it would take the political will to build residences and apartments.. which is just not there.
kotsy
Senior Member
That gives me the idea that this could be turned into a new entertainment/clubbing district.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
This venue would be excellent for video game concerts (both of the orchestral and the techno varieties).
They are a popular trend these days.
They are a popular trend these days.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Given the existing uses, I am not sure if we can add enough other non-transient types of uses to reach a critical mass (I certainly can't see residential uses making a difference). Maybe it is more important to think about how to do what is well so that people would want to visit and linger (what we have right now is innately hostile to that simply due to how the public/quasi-public space is designed.
AoD
edsantos124
New Member
One can only wish. I've always hoped that the nearby Ontario Place could open up to becoming the regular spot for a weekly Electric Island-like festival all summer long, it's tucked away nicely from the NIMBYs who consistently moved themselves into our entertainment district and tear it apart.
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
I am not disagreeing with you here. The fad thing was more of ongoing joke within in my circle of gaming. And that despite the cheeze sandwich elements to this, this all taken off into a multi-millions leaps and bounds so fast that our heads are still spinning. And an entire industry has sprung from it, as we're are witnessing the fruits of such now. So that's not something to scoff at, even if still makes us cringe.
That said, I'm not sure this bodes well for Mr. Bozikovic's expressed concerns though. As I gotta feeling that the power brokers that be don't really care how this will impact the public realm around them...as long as the thing gets built. So I guess the City and whatnot will have to do the hard negotiating to get something like that out of this. /sigh