News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 883     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 794     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 330     0 

U of T: New Varsity Stadium (Diamond + Schmitt)

"No, NYU Athletic Center is on Mercer Street, between Houston and Bleeker. But there are no development pressures in the backwater that is Greenwich Village..."

Agreed, which is all the more reason why UOT's plan for 'bleachers on Bloor" is so short-sighted.

"It's a bit of a stretch to compare Bloor & St. George to Washington Square."

Nonetheless, for the purpose of this argument the comparison stands that both are prominent, public locations (one a park, one a thoroughfare) within large urban centres where 'Town meets Gown", so to speak. Hypothetically, if one side of Washington Square was undeveloped would anyone advocate building a stadium on it?

"So you expect that the York Club will sell out for a new condo project? Do you think they'll tear down OISE to build a new Prada outlet?"

I don't have a crystal ball, do you? Do you not think it possible or reasonable that the ROM expansion/Libeskind Crystal, the expansion of the RCM and major developments in Bloor/Yorkville are going to bring enormous pressure for further development westward along Bloor?

"The existing uses aren't going anywhere anytime soon. It's a university neighourhood."

The location in question is on the very porous edge of the University, not in the heart of it; on a street that is one of the major thoroughfares/arteries of the city, crossroads of different neighbourhoods including Queen's Park/Museum Mile, Bloor/Yorkville, and yes the Annex/University district. This real estate has enormous potential indeed, and it will only get more and more valuable over the years. Surely something more interesting than a sports field could be used here??
 
Hypothetically, if one side of Washington Square was undeveloped would anyone advocate building a stadium on it?
Click to expand...

Well, if you had any knowledge of NYU or Washington Square, including ever having been there, you'd know that NYU is constantly acquiring parcels of land on the east and south sides of the square and in recent years, has built many buildings there, despite the objections of residents in the area. That they chose to build their athletic centre on a busy, dense block a couple of blocks south of the square doesn't really seem to support your argument, which is completely devoid of logic.
 
"Surely something more interesting than a sports field could be used here??"

I don't find Osgoode Hall interesting. Frankly, I have no use for it and that iron fence is an affront to Queen Street and that lawn is a waste of valuable real estate. Let's tear it down and build something that's mixed use and world class enough for the corner of Queen and University. Times are changing: how could Toronto have allowed it to exist on such an important site for so long?

"Do you not think it possible or reasonable that the ROM expansion/Libeskind Crystal, the expansion of the RCM and major developments in Bloor/Yorkville are going to bring enormous pressure for further development westward along Bloor?"

Development is proceeding west of Bedford...U of T just acquired the Medical Arts building, Woodworth just built a residence, and now they're rebuilding a modest stadium.
 
Frankly, I have no use for it and that iron fence is an affront to Queen Street and that lawn is a waste of valuable real estate.
Click to expand...

I would love to see that fence go. Without it, the front lawn of Osgoode would become a de fact extension of NPS... kind of a long linear park to compliment the sidewalk and the Opera House.

Fat bloody chance...
 
Thankfully, we have private property laws to prevent vandalism of that type.
 
"Well, if you had any knowledge of NYU or Washington Square, including ever having been there, you'd know that NYU is constantly acquiring parcels of land on the east and south sides of the square and in recent years, has built many buildings there, despite the objections of residents in the area."

...and this is of relevence because?

"That they chose to build their athletic centre on a busy, dense block a couple of blocks south of the square doesn't really seem to support your argument, which is completely devoid of logic."

I didn't realize you were the arbiter of 'logic' here - Were you appointed or elected? Nonetheless, I'd love to know how it is that building "on" the square is the same thing as building "a couple of blocks south of the square"? "...devoid of logic", indeed.

Once again, to spell it out simply for you so that you are able to understand, my contention all along is with replacing the "stadium" at this location. I have advocated for a mixed-use plan, which to my understanding of the term does in no way preclude facilities for the University, academic or otherwise; and although personally I'd rather see the stadium gone from here altogether and could care less where it goes or what happens to it, mixed-use frontage on Bloor with quality design and architecture would be fine.

"I don't find Osgoode Hall interesting. Frankly, I have no use for it and that iron fence is an affront to Queen Street and that lawn is a waste of valuable real estate. Let's tear it down and build something that's mixed use and world class enough for the corner of Queen and University. Times are changing: how could Toronto have allowed it to exist on such an important site for so long?"

You're comparing Osgoode to Varsity stadium? So I take it that in your forcing such an extreme comparison that all development is out the window! No NPS. No Dundas Square. No building of parks, roads or highways or any public spaces, and say goodbye to any grand designs for the Waterfront or Portlands: There must be parcels of land there owned by somebody for one use or another!
 
"So I take it that in your forcing such an extreme comparison that all development is out the window!"

U of T is developing the Varsity site - they're turning it from a decrepit old stadium into a modest new stadium.

"I have advocated for a mixed-use plan, which to my understanding of the term does in no way preclude facilities for the University"

Please take a look at this rendering, tudararms, and tell me where the Libeskind crystal or Chanel store along Bloor will go:
VarsityARIAL%20copy.jpg


Or did you not notice that the playing field is about 2 metres from the north and south end of the site? The middle position you're "advocating" does not exist.

There's more they could so, sure, like consume part of Devonshire, move the bleachers to the west side, and possibly put a pub or something at the corner - they might be able to squeeze 20 feet of frontage out along Bloor - but without acquiring Trinity's playing field, the Varsity playing field is unmovable, ensuring at least partial direct frontage along Bloor. They could raise the entire stadium on stilts, but why should U of T pay an enormous sum for that just to please a few armchair critics?
 
Most UofT students could care less about the football team, and the university is in no position to squander the potential revenues of such real estate. I can only guess than, given the cheap stadium proposal, they are not committing either way long-term. In 20 years, we'll probably see the stadium razed for a development.
 
I'm surprised at the hate aimed at U of T for building a football stadium to replace its old football stadium. It's U of T's land. They can do what they want. I personally wouldn't mind some mixed use along bloor. Mixed use along Bloor I think was part of the original, more ambitious Varsity Centre proposal that was shot down by student referendum. So we're getting the much scaled back version. Just because land is valuable doesn't mean it MUST get built on. Do you see anyone advocating building new condos or anything over Central Park in NYC? I don't think so!

As Scarberian has said, this site has been dedicated to football LONG before ANY of us were born. Just get over the fact that mixed use is not coming to that section of Bloor at this time. The stadium ain't going anyway, and maybe next time its redeveloped something more ambitious will happen, but its going to STAY a football stadium, so just shut it already!
 
I think it is an excellent development.

It maintains the fine old tradition, on the site, of sweaty young university students in athletic gear running around kicking and throwing things at one another. We are used to seeing youth doing that there. We expect to see youth doing that there. We want to see youth doing that there. We need to see youth doing that there.

Functionally, it is a complementary opposite to the aesthetic, artistic and cerebral world of the ROM, Gardiner Museum and Royal Conservatory. All art and no footy makes Jack a dull boy.

It is horizontal. Visually, a design opposite to the relentless march of tall condos and sparkling cultural attractions that are being shoehorned in, all along Bloor. It is shockingly wide open space, given over to the chaos of sport for some of the time, and to emptiness for most of the time. How extravagant! And, in a bold affront to the "mixed use" maniacs who feel a burning need to people every development site with: a condo, some shops, an office block, all "meeting the street" ... it is fully open to view!
 
Do you see anyone advocating building new condos or anything over Central Park in NYC? I don't think so!
Click to expand...

What does Central Park have in common with a UofT football stadium? Grass?
 
Unless there's a way to get out of it, U of T has to wait 853 more years for the city's lease of Queen's Park to end, and then it can build a stadium there. Until then, the stadium will likely stay at the Varsity site.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top