Toronto Ryerson's Mattamy Athletics Centre + Loblaws at the Gardens | ?m | ?s | Ryerson University | Turner Fleischer

[Art Vandelay]

well technically they have 2 Maple Leaf Gardens banner signs facing Carlton ...

but yes you are likely correct the rendering could have just missed that detail, they should really keep the MLG sign above the entrance canopy on Carlton

I would have thought Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment would own the trademark Maple Leaf Gardens.

 

[KA1]

Metro

Metro won't be as quite as busy and shoppers will finally be able to move in there. This whole area has been vastly under-served since the residential boom picked up 15 years ago.



Remember that the stands have to stay. The tiered concrete areas on all four sides support the walls and, consequently, the ceiling. There's nothing much of significance inside aside from the rink and the memories, it's all about the outside of the building.

I live in College Park. I don't think Loblaws will have too much effect on Metro.

First of all there is a "captive" market. Residents from Phase 1 & 2 can access Metro underground without having to face the 'elements'. Phase 3 will be up by 2012/2013.

Second, without sounding like a smug, College Park is an upscale development. Individuals are not going to walk up to Loblaws just to save a few cents here and ther.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I live in College Park. I don't think Loblaws will have too much effect on Metro.

First of all there is a "captive" market. Residents from Phase 1 & 2 can access Metro underground without having to face the 'elements'. Phase 3 will be up by 2012/2013.

Second, without sounding like a smug, College Park is an upscale development. Individuals are not going to walk up to Loblaws just to save a few cents here and ther.

Sounds smug to me, but so be it.

Loblaws will take a fair amount of business away from Metro but I'm sure it will survive and do just fine. It's not like most of those who live in the College Park apartments or the upscale "Residents of College Park" condos are all Forest Hill/Bridle Path types or that they are the only exclusive shoppers there. That store draws regular shoppers from many blocks in each direction plus those who work in the Courts, the mall, the offices above etc. who potentially grab a few groceries on their way home. Further, is there really any difference with general pricing between Loblaws & Metro? It's not like comparing one of those food retailers to Food Basics. Me, I can't wait for a proper sized food store with wide aisles and a better selection of goods than what Metro offers at College & Yonge or Church & Gould.

 

[KA1]

Loblaws

Sounds smug to me, but so be it.

Loblaws will take a fair amount of business away from Metro but I'm sure it will survive and do just fine. It's not like most of those who live in the College Park apartments or the upscale "Residents of College Park" condos are all Forest Hill/Bridle Path types or that they are the only exclusive shoppers there. That store draws regular shoppers from many blocks in each direction plus those who work in the Courts, the mall, the offices above etc. potentially grab a few groceries on their way home. Further, is there really any difference with general pricing between Loblaws & Metro? It's not like comparing one of those food retailers to Food Basics. Me, I can't wait for a proper sized food store with wide aisles and a better selection of goods than what Metro offers at College & Yonge or Church & Gould.

To a certain extent, you have a point. At Metro, by around noon time, quite a few things are gone -- especially, if you are looking for, say, Lactose free milk. You might have to wait till the next day. At times, I have found their vegetables not so fresh, despite the slogan of previous stores name Dominion -- always fresh (owned by the same company).

There are certain items that are avaiable only at Loblaws -- especially, foods of different ethnic variety. May be, when the weather is co-operating, I will go to Loblaws once in a while.

 

[p5connex]

Not that I want to talk about Metro vs. Loblaws, but Metro really is a couple steps below Loblaws in terms of quality and variety of product. If anything the Metro in College Park is horrible, usually overpriced, poor customer service and lack of good fresh veggies- However, it is leaps and bounds ahead of the Metro in Little Italy.

pee five

 

[KA1]

Not that I want to talk about Metro vs. Loblaws, but Metro really is a couple steps below Loblaws in terms of quality and variety of product. If anything the Metro in College Park is horrible, usually overpriced, poor customer service and lack of good fresh veggies- However, it is leaps and bounds ahead of the Metro in Little Italy.

pee five

I fully agree with you. I, myself, go to China Town (Spadina and Dundas) and St. Lawrence Market for most of the shopping. However, living in RoCP, I can not run to these places for small things.

 

[TOareaFan]

Not that I want to talk about Metro vs. Loblaws, but Metro really is a couple steps below Loblaws in terms of quality and variety of product. If anything the Metro in College Park is horrible, usually overpriced, poor customer service and lack of good fresh veggies- However, it is leaps and bounds ahead of the Metro in Little Italy.

pee five

Unless the recession caused them to shelve their plans.....the new Metro under Aura should be able to be a far more pleasant experience and allow for better competition with the new Loblaws.

 

[cassius]

"The Gardens was purchased by Loblaw in 2004 from Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment Inc. for an estimated $13-million, but has been sitting virtually idle since then. It planned to convert the building into a flagship supermarket, but has delayed doing so as it focused on more urgent operational troubles."

Is the $13m figure accurate? I've seen condos up for sale for more than that. $13m sounds like less than the land alone.

 

[jn_12]

Considering the Building is a heritage building and the true definition of a fixer-upper, it sounds reasonable. MLSE didn't want to be bogged down with the building and they knew the next owner would be paying a lot to get the place up and running so they gave a discount.

 

[junctionist]

They also likely sold it for cheaper because of the clause that forbids its use as a competing venue to the ACC. They could profit more by taking the step to eliminate one source of potential competition. They likely have profited off of that.

 

[isaidso]

Will Ryerson use this for basketball or hockey?

 

[marcus_a_j]

Hockey

 

[whatever]

Looks like work is getting started. Buttcon has their site office set up on the NE corner of the building, so I assume they're in there surveying and cleaning up

 

[marcus_a_j]

From The Star

DiManno: Gardens no place to hawk grocerieshttp://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/735175--dimanno-gardens-no-place-to-hawk-groceries?bn=1

Some years back, when the contents of Maple Leaf Gardens were auctioned off, I bought as much nostalgia as my bank account could afford: banners and lithographs, a giant painting of Pat Burns (which I gave him as a memento) and a greens section seat. A season ticket-holder friend, equally smitten by the old building's charms, purchased one of the ancient turnstiles.

Even before the Cashbox on Church St. went dark, on the last night the Toronto Maple Leafs played there, I palmed assorted relics, including a washroom sign from the press box.

This had personal significance because, in my salad days as a sports reporter, there was no female restroom in that all-male bastion. For several years, I'd used the men's lav as colleagues stood guard. There was no such thing as taking a discreet pee.

My relationship with the Gardens stretches back to public school age, when I would sneak into the building on the afternoon of a game and hide in the washroom until the puck dropped – the blue-haired attendants didn't mind – then search out an empty seat or claim a spot in the standing room section at either end, behind the blues.

I was a rink rat and the Gardens offered so many bolt-holes for the non-paying patron.

Much later, as a working reporter, I came to know all the grand dame's eccentric nooks and crannies, from the miserable little visitors' dressing room to the wives' lounge to Harold Ballard's elegant private suite, with its velvet drapes and special lighting that illuminated an oil portrait of his late wife.

So, yes, I feel proprietary about the Gardens, as do so many others who grew up in Toronto when that address was a shrine. And it is appalling to me that a venue with such history will soon be transformed into a humongous flagship Loblaws store, a sacrilegious misuse of hallowed ground.

I'm not moved that hockey will return to 60 Carleton St. – one floor up from the existing ice level, future home turf for the Ryerson Rams and the university's synchronized figure skating club. Include me out from all those lauding the scheme concocted and approved for resurrecting the facility, a decade after it was shuttered.

This is in no way meant as criticism of Ryerson, which found a way to breathe life into an old pile of bricks that had been left to moulder. At least the Gardens won't be levelled for yet another condo monstrosity. Students, in particular, are to be commended for agreeing via referendum to ratchet up their tuition fees by $126 per, towards the $20 million the school is kicking in for an athletic centre. A further $20 million will be invested by the feds through the government's infrastructure stimulus plan and an equal sum by Loblaws to pay for the 70,000-square-foot street-level store and underground parking.

The supermarket chain also kicked in a $5 million donation last week to launch the fundraising drive for another $20 million Ryerson needs to raise.

The students and Ryerson's administration have shown the kind of initiative so sadly lacking in this city's political custodians, who declined to purchase the premises from Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, with Loblaws pouncing on the property instead five years ago. With ice time for youth and recreational leagues in Toronto already at critical mass – witness last week's controversy over girls' hockey teams getting the shaft – the decision to pass on the Gardens looks even more foolish in retrospect. A little forward thinking could have meant two ice pads to ease the crush, with a variety of small retailers and restaurateurs offered commercial leases.

But that would have required vision, the kind Conn Smythe had when he built the Gardens in the midst of the Depression. I am one of those purists that Loblaws executive chairman Galen Weston speculated would be "extremely angry'' over the Gardens' extreme makeover as supermarket.

But my objection is not merely about desecration and cha-ching optics, with a mega grocery emporium usurping a historical landmark (even if fine details – like the art deco marquee – are retained).

My parallel whinge is that the one thing Toronto does not need is yet another honking big supermarket downtown.

I live not far from the Gardens and, in the last decade, a half-dozen grocery colossi have sprung up in this extended neighbourhood. These are food plazas fit for the suburbs, an ill fit for the city core.

Downtown living has always meant supporting local businesses – the butcher, the baker, the fishmonger, the funky clothing shops, the homey cafes – that provide a personal know-your-name service and attention to detail lacking in the mega and multi-merchant. These cavernous supermarkets suck up all the air and destroy the integrity of neighbourhoods.

A city changes, evolves, adapts. Its cosmopolitan vitality depends on avoiding stagnation. Yet the Gardens had a place and a purpose that will now be altered beyond recognition, only its external façade and girder-vaulted roof surviving the change.

They built things to last, in another era. But a grocery store, for the love of God? Too bad a shamed building can't wear a brown bag over its head.

 

[jn_12]

I thought there was a ban on posting anything by Rosie Dimanno? Did anyone manage to make it through the first sentence?