generalcanada
Senior Member
Nostalgia aside, what is the definition of "better"
I was just saying Therme wouldnt be dealing with theese issues had they not made such an easy pr blunder
Toronto Ontario Place | ?m | ?s | Infrastructure ON
- Thread starter vistaway
- Start date
I was just saying Therme wouldnt be dealing with theese issues had they not made such an easy pr blunder
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It's like the decision was made to move without showing exactly what the plans of the move - vis-a-vis the exhibits and the limitations of the site - will be.
AoD
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
The more important question is how does Therme or even our provincial government define "better" here. And how would that impact the public use of OP and it's environment and sustainability.
Keep in mind that Therme is in this to make money, everything else is a secondary consideration at best.
adma
Superstar
If you're arguing that the only alibi on behalf of the OP Forum was "nostalgia" and its replacement is "better", then you just don't get it.
Northern Light
Superstar
Ontario Place 4 All; the group opposed to the current scheme and seeking judicial review of the Ontario government's decision to exempt the current project from a full EA has won a modest battle, insofar as the court has now ruled that their litigation can proceed. The Ontario gov't had been seeking to quash their case.
www.thestar.com
From the above:
The text of the legal decision, in full, can be found here:
From the above, are the summing paragraphs that matter:
To clarify on the above, the government passed a law which it asserts, retroactively exempted the Ontario Place West Island project from an EA.
Ontario Place for all essentially argues (my reading) that the legislation the government enacted, as worded, fails to achieve the government's stated objective.
The judge did not rule on the substance of the assertion above, but rather that it had sufficient merit to go before a full panel of the court without being summarily quashed by her.
***
It is unclear to me if any injunctive relief has been sought or obtained here, or will be sought.
Group fighting Ontario Place spa plan scores legal victory over Doug Ford
A group fighting construction of a spa at Ontario Place won a small legal victory over Doug Ford’s government — but the real battle is yet to come
www.thestar.com
From the above:
The text of the legal decision, in full, can be found here:
From the above, are the summing paragraphs that matter:
To clarify on the above, the government passed a law which it asserts, retroactively exempted the Ontario Place West Island project from an EA.
Ontario Place for all essentially argues (my reading) that the legislation the government enacted, as worded, fails to achieve the government's stated objective.
The judge did not rule on the substance of the assertion above, but rather that it had sufficient merit to go before a full panel of the court without being summarily quashed by her.
***
It is unclear to me if any injunctive relief has been sought or obtained here, or will be sought.
generalcanada
Senior Member
This really is like a baby step in the lawsuit.Ontario Place 4 All; the group opposed to the current scheme and seeking judicial review of the Ontario government's decision to exempt the current project from a full EA has won a modest battle, insofar as the court has now ruled that their litigation can proceed. The Ontario gov't had been seeking to quash their case.
Group fighting Ontario Place spa plan scores legal victory over Doug Ford
A group fighting construction of a spa at Ontario Place won a small legal victory over Doug Ford’s government — but the real battle is yet to come
From the above:
View attachment 553278
View attachment 553279
The text of the legal decision, in full, can be found here:
From the above, are the summing paragraphs that matter:
View attachment 553280
To clarify on the above, the government passed a law which it asserts, retroactively exempted the Ontario Place West Island project from an EA.
Ontario Place for all essentially argues (my reading) that the legislation the government enacted, as worded, fails to achieve the government's stated objective.
The judge did not rule on the substance of the assertion above, but rather that it had sufficient merit to go before a full panel of the court without being summarily quashed by her.
***
It is unclear to me if any injunctive relief has been sought or obtained here, or will be sought.
I guess the win is the quote that the judge says the arguments are not completely "frivolous" but then again the judge hasnt even ruled on the arguments themselves. Simply letting a panel of 3 rule on them
As a non-legal observer whats the point of this hearing anyway, even if a win by the government here would allow them to automatically appeal LOL
hawc
Senior Member
Is it really going to change the end result or will the government just spend time and money fighting this and we'll be in the same place when it's all over?
generalcanada
Senior Member
Honestly, OP4A has a small chance to win this. Though even if they did, the government might just use the notwithstanding on it.
I cant see Ford taking the L on this and giving up
mistersg1
Active Member
It seems for whatever reason, after catching up on this discussion nearly a year later, that Adma seems to have a certain distaste for the theme park industry and entertainment destinations in particular.
To make it clear, like it or not, no one was playing in the Forum when Wonderland built Kingswood….and wouldn’t reestablishing the prime concert venue downtown be the ultimate goal which the Molson Amphitheatre clearly did?
It should have worked easily in Ontario Place’s favour, as a concert ticket meant free admission, and there was (and still to this day) no reasonable restaurants nearby, that one was captive to spend money on the grounds of Ontario Place.
You do speak of playing in the playground at High Park attended by parents, and I’ve always asked, what makes my experience so much different when my mother and I walked to Norton Place Park here in Brampton three decades ago? I’ve been trying to read your posts as others have and you seem to think that all children just magically appreciate architecture.
To make it clear, like it or not, no one was playing in the Forum when Wonderland built Kingswood….and wouldn’t reestablishing the prime concert venue downtown be the ultimate goal which the Molson Amphitheatre clearly did?
It should have worked easily in Ontario Place’s favour, as a concert ticket meant free admission, and there was (and still to this day) no reasonable restaurants nearby, that one was captive to spend money on the grounds of Ontario Place.
You do speak of playing in the playground at High Park attended by parents, and I’ve always asked, what makes my experience so much different when my mother and I walked to Norton Place Park here in Brampton three decades ago? I’ve been trying to read your posts as others have and you seem to think that all children just magically appreciate architecture.
old boy
Senior Member
At the very least, it keeps the Ford people in the limelight for their simple crassness as if another example were necessary - bread and circuses and buck-a-beer.
adma
Superstar
It's not just a matter of "appreciating architecture"; it's a matter of appreciating a sense of place and the richness of the world. And beyond the fact that the urban scale around Norton Place Park is different from that around High Park, the thing is--for me, it wasn't just about walking west to High Park and back; that was only a chosen example. It was also walking north to Loblaws/Towers and back, or to other such places not obviously "child-geared". And not just walking, but driving and taking transit, my looking out the window and following along--so hypothetically for you, that equivalent "development of scope" ought to have involved Norton Place Park, *and* Bramalea City Centre--and maybe even downtown Brampton or other lay-of-the-land coordinates. A window-onto-the-world perspective on Brampton and even points beyond that wasn't simply bound to the child-geared--almost like, one is never too young for a kind of gateway to "civic consciousness" and the insatiable curiosity that comes with it.
So it's not a distaste for "the theme park industry and entertainment destinations in particular"--it's a distaste for that as a ***single-loaded, perspective-skewing be-all and end-all***. It's tantamount to Neil Postman-style "amusing to death"--and even worse when it informs a notion of childhood as being all about entropically kid-centric "amusement". Or, the kitschification of childhood, as non-kitsch is deemed to be too adult-table "challenging".
Look at it this way: already for me, when it came to childhood trips to and from the Ontario Science Centre, "getting there was half the fun"--that is, as terrific as the Science Arcade and everything was, I engaged to and was fascinated by the process of our getting there, whether by way of Eglinton or Don Mills or Overlea or the DVP or whatever other artery, the various coordinates and cross-streets and landmarks. I was aware of it as part of "something bigger", including Edwards Gardens some distance to the north where I *also* spent a lot of childhood visits. And as part of "something bigger", *all of this* became something richer. But it wasn't just about my precocity; it's almost as if I intuited something *any* child could have--and indeed, really *might* have had back then, or at least it was something generally easier to come by in an era before "in-car entertainment" a la Disney or Nintendo served as an en-route distraction.
Whereas if for you, a childhood trip to the Science Centre (or Ontario Place) would have been as disconnective as if you were transported there by ambulance, then I'm sorry--you were a lot more deficient than I was, particularly if you're still going to fall upon that deficient perspective as a "default".
And that's how "entertainment destinations" as an end in themselves become both a crutch for the deficient, and fuel for further deficiency. Thus Great Wolf Lodge as the Thing That Ate Niagara Falls, at least as far as "family visits" go. (Then again, I speak as someone who, even in my single digit years, actually actively *preferred* to go to the Falls and back by way of the Lakeshore and Old Hwy 8 than by the QEW, engaging to the Grimsby-Beamsville-Vineland-Jordan sequence of places--because for the healthy, curious kid, it's visually interesting and stimulating. Whereas Great Wolf Lodge implicitly caters to idiot-disconnective "Are we there yet? This trip sucks!" kids, or at least to idiot parents eager to offer their kids something "better" than their own idiot-kid "Are we there yet? This trip sucks!" memories of Niagara.)
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
...who needs The Constitution anyways. /s
mistersg1
Active Member
The thing that gets me is why do you think my time growing up was that much different from your time growing up.......it seems you mentioned my liking of Nintendo Power Pod as being problematic, but I mentioned this because I have always had a liking for video games (not so much now) but you get my point. Like it or not, video games have become cultural items nowadays, older ones I mean, there's a map you can easily find online which redoes the TTC subway diagram into a Mario 3 map. I've noticed some NHL teams, even the Ottawa Senators employing sounds from video games, as they use the Zelda series famous "discovery sound" when someone gets released from the penalty box. I know this is a bit of a tangent, but I'm sure the biggest age demographic of those who own a Nintendo Switch were probably in their late 20s and 30s.
My mentioning of the Power Pod is more or less curious, with how big Nintendo is, and yet almost no information on the internet existing about it. I can easily tell you everything else we did that day like the Children's Village, and that water play area. Let's not also mention the west island attractions.
A trip by car in my day was not different from a trip by car in your day....maybe the only potential was having a Walkman, but of course I never had one. A trip to Canada's Wonderland, I could tell you that we drove down Queen Street (Hwy 7), made a left on Hwy 50, and a right on Rutherford...I may have not known the names of these streets originally being 5 or 6, but I had visual memory of where these turns were. Particularly, I remember the intersection of Rutherford of Hwy 27, if heading east, you climbed a much more winding hill then it is today. The point I'm making is that there was no personal distractions in my day that a kid could occupy himself with. Nintendo or Disney were things that clearly happened at home, to paraphrase what you said. I would eventually become what is known in some circles as a "roadgeek", but this was my own personality, I'm not sure any 10 year old even back then could tell you how to get back from Niagara Falls without taking the QEW.
As for how you enjoyed the Science Arcade in your day, did you really enjoy it and learn something, or were you just "amused" by the different exhibits they had in there. The wiki article even suggests the original slogan was "Come see what would happen if Albert Einstein and Walt Disney had gotten together.", meaning it was always meant to be an "attraction" in itself.
Great Wolf Lodge didn't "eat" Niagara Falls, not by a long shot.....just as Marineland didn't many years ago. Most people go to see the falls and we easily understand that, Great Wolf Lodge is far from the falls themselves. Although there is a Great Wolf Lodge in Niagara Falls, it's incredibly naive to think that it's the main attraction there now.
adma
Superstar
Though as per my point, maybe it's not just about super-specifically *kid*-oriented attractions. Like, when you speak of re going to Wonderland at 5 or 6, I could just as well speak of re going to *Yorkdale* at 5 or 6--and there was a symbiotic getting-there and once-there pleasure to *that*.
Remember: I'm not denying that the "entertainment value" was a big part of the Science Arcade's appeal (or that of the OSC in general)--and yes, it was part of that Sesame Street-era ethos of learning and being entertained at once. But just because it was *meant* to be an attraction in itself, didn't make it, or indeed the whole OSC complex, a vacuum. There was IMO an intuitive comprehension by even the youngest visitor of "something Moriyama-higher", much as there would have been of "something Zeidler-higher" re OP--maybe less so in the Science Arcade part (which, after all, was but a concrete warehouse), but certainly in the sequence of approach. Or, think of it as a micro-version of the "getting there is half the fun" principle--crossing the bridge, descending the escalator from the rotunda part, etc. It was the subtle secret to its success.
However, if you're to speak of Wonderland-type trips, rather than of, well, Yorkdale-type trips (or just everyday-shopping and similar accompanying-the-family trips), that might say something about my Neil Postman "amused to death" point; or how the common barometer for the experiences kids are party to became overly "ergonomic" by the 80s and 90s--like, enveloping them in a patronizing "kidspace" to a fault, almost by way of soothing them and inoculating them from the trauma of the Big Bad Boring Adult World. By comparison, the kids of the Rocky & Bullwinkle generation tended to have one fruitful foot in the grownup world. I did have kid stuff, but I was also party to family newspapers and other "grownup literature" (including maps, which helped my ability to "follow along" on trips). Heck, not only would I have memorized (like you) the route from Brampton to Wonderland by 5/6, through doing my map-reading-and-beyond homework I would have insisted upon taking different routes there by 9/10 and *not* insisted upon "the most direct way" (and knowing my mother, she probably would have sought out interesting Italian bakeries or whatever as an alibi--so, once again, it would have been a latently richer trip than one simply devoted to quick-there-and-back "amusing the kids").
It's like I said: it's not even just about the walk to High Park, but also about the walk *within* High Park--the play area, and the Zoo for that matter, as part of a bigger entity, of trails and paths to follow here, there, and everywhere: ones which might not be super-specific kid-oriented, but are kid-enriching all the same. But according to the "kidspace" mentality, that everything else is an afterthought.
And yes, I was the kind of 10 year old who could figure out a non-QEW way to and from Niagara Falls--but that's in part because we *did* go momentously off-QEW at least once and I "internalized it"; plus, there was still the carryover legacy of older highway maps that showed Hwy 8, and Hwy 2/Lakeshore remained a going concern until the Mike Harris era. (Of course, family experiences are important; and if the parents never took the off-QEW way to and from the Falls in the first place, of course the kids wouldn't internalize it. The most efficient way to "other" a route is to not take it, or to not imply that it even exists as an option--and paradoxically, such timidity's often born out of a reluctance to "upset the kids".)
And come to think of it, it's not like the QEW didn't hold its own youthful fascinations for me for all the weird archaic 1939isms that remained extant into later times--yes, somehow or another, I engaged (positively, transfixedly) to *that* element; like the highway version of weird 1967 psychedelia...
mistersg1
Active Member
But taking the longer way isn't necessarily the parents want to do either. Especially my father, he was always adamant on getting places quickly. Heck, I was more of the explorer that you describe, I didn't even drive across Eastport Drive across Burlington Bay until I could drive myself. I was not reliant on GPS but did look at maps,, if not official, Microsoft Streets and Trips so I could study maps in my spare time. So it wasn't in my case the "kids fault" but that of the parents.
The pre 1997 Highway system was actually easy to follow and we all understand that, sure "downloading" could have happened, but for goodness sakes, the route shields should have remained in place, it may not officially be Hwy 11 anymore in Toronto, but they should have at least kept the shields, as it forms a route.