quote:

Originally posted by slingshot THE TORONTO ISLANDS ARE NOT A FUCKING RETIREMENT HOME.

+1111

___________________
TECHNO IS THE BEST NOISE ON EARTH.
Save Techno - Stop Minimal / Tech-House

skip-f*ckn-intr are you the token islander bitching about Sprackman , you seem very bitter for someone who is not connected with the Island I smell a plant

quote:

Originally posted by skip-f*ckn-intr Uh I don't know what map you are looking at but the docks isn't downtown or in the city centre. If the industrial and shipping noises that preceeded the docks didn't annoy the people on the islands, then I don't think that it is just the noise of living in a busy area that is what is bothering them. Sprackman's been breaking the law for years, like it or not he is the author of his own fate. Turning this into a publicity campaign is just embarassing. As far as a majority's fun being ruined by a minority consider the millions of people who visit the Islands, it is city park after all - as a retreat from the heat and congenstion and noise of the city? Is it necessary to subject them to the noise of the docks as well? Maybe we should suggest moving the party to High Park instead.

the airport and redpath were there before the islanders , but you don't want them either
STFU and go back to your island

Just so you know techhead, people were living on the Island before the airport was built. I am not an Islander, but many of my friends are, and I have never heard any of them complain about Redpath, some might, just not any I know.

I joined this forum because I heard from a former coworker how Islanders are totally getting slammed here. What he told me sounded like there was a lot of misinformation about the whole debacle, understandable because noone here wants the Docks to close and it seems on the surface like a bunch of spoiled whiners are shutting down everyone else's fun. I don't think it is that simple. The islanders I know don't want the Docks closed, they just want to be able to sleep at night. I like the island, I like the Docks, (but not so much Sprackman's behavior). I was hoping that maybe a compromise could be found if people knew the other side of the story, rather than what was being presented in the press. If Mister Sprackman is true to his word then maybe a dialogue can be opened. it is just too bad that it had to come to this. Clearly I made a terrific error in judgement in joining this forum as it is a whole lot easier to just get angry and hope that the other side loses, rather than listening to what both sides have to say.

Good luck to you

___________________
\m/

Canadians love conservatism

Today at the restaurant I work at; a Portugese lady ask me if it's "OK to smoke outside on the street". I was kinda surprised at the odd question...but for only a second cause she must of spent a day in Canada realized that, you can't drink anywhere except designated places, can't smoke even certain placed outside, like patios and near entrances/exits, prolly can't shit in all the toilets except specially designated ones. The external world must think Canada is full of, cancerously filled alcoholics, who can't drive...cause the speed limits are 50km/h everywhere; and all the police does is hide behind trees with a little radar gun, because in Canada cops don't have real guns, since they're always holding the other kind...

___________________
"I live my life 2 tata's at a time."

quote:

Originally posted by skip-f*ckn-intr Just so you know techhead, people were living on the Island before the airport was built. I am not an Islander, but many of my friends are, and I have never heard any of them complain about Redpath, some might, just not any I know. I joined this forum because I heard from a former coworker how Islanders are totally getting slammed here. What he told me sounded like there was a lot of misinformation about the whole debacle, understandable because noone here wants the Docks to close and it seems on the surface like a bunch of spoiled whiners are shutting down everyone else's fun. I don't think it is that simple. The islanders I know don't want the Docks closed, they just want to be able to sleep at night. I like the island, I like the Docks, (but not so much Sprackman's behavior). I was hoping that maybe a compromise could be found if people knew the other side of the story, rather than what was being presented in the press. If Mister Sprackman is true to his word then maybe a dialogue can be opened. it is just too bad that it had to come to this. Clearly I made a terrific error in judgement in joining this forum as it is a whole lot easier to just get angry and hope that the other side loses, rather than listening to what both sides have to say. Good luck to you

well atleast you're trying to make a conscious effor to open up some dialogue .. which is about the only thing I haven't seen in this whole debacle ..

___________________
Palm Trees > Pine Trees , Sand > Snow

still hoping that somebody can help answer some of these questions..

quote:

There seems to be a lack of important information from the articles I've seen on the news covering this. My questions: 1. Has anyone ever addressed the apparent "inequalities" of the islander resident privileges earlier? If not, why must it wait until something like the Docks is threatened before people start to take notice or care? If they never complained about noise levels would they have continued to live through their 99 year lease without anyone crying Communism? Was the land trust on the Island that was set up by the former NDP government in 1993 ever put to a vote at Queen's Park? 2. What exactly are the standard conditions that the Docks nightclub must abide by as far as noise levels are concerned? How is this even measured (by decibel level) or enforced? 3. The Toronto Island Community Association claims that the Docks nightclub has violated the conditions of the noise bylaws in the past. How exactly were these alleged violations addressed with the club management, how often did they allegedly occur, and how did the club management respond in turn? 4. Who is Jerry Sprackman referring to at the end of the article when he states: Groups who stage raves in and around his property share the blame, he said, and if they don’t stop, “we are going to sue their behinds off” because “I’m getting sick and tired of being accused of things.” Is he referring to the Cherry Beach party organizers and promoters? If anyone can answer some of these questions I'd appreciate it for the sake of my own curiousity. Thanks.

___________________
Palm Trees > Pine Trees , Sand > Snow

To the friend of the islanders:

How is it that the islanders are still complaining yet according to the city itself, the docks has not received one noise complaint all year??

Second: Why do this little group of people think they can run city hall and waterfront development? I have no question that the islanders probably heard noise from the docks. But my question is, how can they expect not to hear noise from the mainland?

And, its not just the docks they are after. They want the airport to close, they want to stop party boats from partying, and im sure they want a major say in Robert Fung's master waterfront plan (or whoever is in charge these days).

Sound travels over water. Therefore the islanders are at a greater disadvantage than most since they are surrounded by water. That means that unlike on mainland, the island will absorb everything that goes on around them. But thats called trading off. You want to live near water next to the nation's largest city? Expect sound to bounce across the water!

As has been said many times on this message board the solution is very simple. If islanders dont like noise emitting from the docks, the party boats, the airport, the power generator, or whatever else they will whine about next, then move to a place where the peacfullness meets their expectations.

We live in the second biggest country in the world. We have wide open spaces next to water everywhere. Places where the only noise you will hear coming across the lake is from birds and loons. I suggest those who dont want to hear city noise move there.

And what if i was in their position you may ask?

I used to live above a pub. Every thurs-sat night they would play loud music and my living room above would shake to the boom boom boom. It was annoying at first. But eventually i got used to it. Under the law (because our laws are fucked) i had every right to complain. But i didnt.

1) because they were there first

2) because i chose to live in a mixed used commercial/residential area

3) i lived in a built up part of town in the middle of a downtown section.

4) if i wanted utmost peace and quiet there were plenty of other places i could live. However i WANTED to be within walking distance of everything. So therefore the music was the trade off.

5) im not selfish and consider myself a tolerant neighbour

Personally id be in this fight whether it were the docks, a party boat, a factory, or anything else. Why? Because its high time that people start accepting that there are certain trade offs involved in picking a location to live. And that if they are not willing to make those trade offs then they should move.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by jester Everything in this country is illegal.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery…" Winston Churchill

‎"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law" - Winston Churchill

quote:

1. Has anyone ever addressed the apparent "inequalities" of the islander resident privileges earlier? If not, why must it wait until something like the Docks is threatened before people start to take notice or care? If they never complained about noise levels would they have continued to live through their 99 year lease without anyone crying Communism? Was the land trust on the Island that was set up by the former NDP government in 1993 ever put to a vote at Queen's Park? 2. What exactly are the standard conditions that the Docks nightclub must abide by as far as noise levels are concerned? How is this even measured (by decibel level) or enforced? 3. The Toronto Island Community Association claims that the Docks nightclub has violated the conditions of the noise bylaws in the past. How exactly were these alleged violations addressed with the club management, how often did they allegedly occur, and how did the club management respond in turn? 4. Who is Jerry Sprackman referring to at the end of the article when he states: Groups who stage raves in and around his property share the blame, he said, and if they don’t stop, “we are going to sue their behinds off” because “I’m getting sick and tired of being accused of things.” Is he referring to the Cherry Beach party organizers and promoters? If anyone can answer some of these questions I'd appreciate it for the sake of my own curiousity. Thanks.

1) The islands terms of residence were made law, first by the Rae government and then with changes under Mike Harris. Since they were acts of the provincial pariliament, yes they were voted on, twice.
The 99 year leases were a way of the province and the city ensuring that they hold title to the land. The prices of the houses are fixed based on the cost of the materials to build the homes, this was done to a) avoid giving islanders a lottery type wind fall and b) to avoid speculation. I am sure that there are a lot of islanders who would have been or would be happy to sell their homes at market rates, but the law forbids this. For better or worse.

2) noise complaints after 11 pm don't require a sound pressure measurement, they rest on what i think is called a test of reasonableness. During hours before 11, I think that there is a sound pressure measurement required. As noted earlier peoples windows have been shaking in their frames sometimes. ( I will admit that that is third hand, but it does get pretty loud over there sometimes, and as a former resident of Adelaide and John streets, my idea of what constitutes loud is pretty tolerant.

3) judging by the fact that part of the terms for the docks stay included paying $14700 in outstanding fines I would guess that the docks had been warned and then fined at least three times, but probably more. I do recall that when the speakers were turned towards Ashbridges Bay five or so years agp Tom Jackobek from the Beaches wanted the club shut down immediately.

4) I have no idea, but I would imagine that is the case. The Docks has taken great pains to demonstrate that their sound system keeps sound levels reasonable and so on. I would imagine that he feels he is being unfairly tarred with a brush more unfairly. I know that islanders have complained about noise from the docks in february...are there parties on Cherry beach in the winter?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 To the friend of the islanders: How is it that the islanders are still complaining yet according to the city itself, the docks has not received one noise complaint all year?? Second: Why do this little group of people think they can run city hall and waterfront development? I have no question that the islanders probably heard noise from the docks. But my question is, how can they expect not to hear noise from the mainland? And, its not just the docks they are after. They want the airport to close, they want to stop party boats from partying, and im sure they want a major say in Robert Fung's master waterfront plan (or whoever is in charge these days). Sound travels over water. Therefore the islanders are at a greater disadvantage than most since they are surrounded by water. That means that unlike on mainland, the island will absorb everything that goes on around them. But thats called trading off. You want to live near water next to the nation's largest city? Expect sound to bounce across the water! As has been said many times on this message board the solution is very simple. If islanders dont like noise emitting from the docks, the party boats, the airport, the power generator, or whatever else they will whine about next, then move to a place where the peacfullness meets their expectations. We live in the second biggest country in the world. We have wide open spaces next to water everywhere. Places where the only noise you will hear coming across the lake is from birds and loons. I suggest those who dont want to hear city noise move there. And what if i was in their position you may ask? I used to live above a pub. Every thurs-sat night they would play loud music and my living room above would shake to the boom boom boom. It was annoying at first. But eventually i got used to it. Under the law (because our laws are fucked) i had every right to complain. But i didnt. 1) because they were there first 2) because i chose to live in a mixed used commercial/residential area 3) i lived in a built up part of town in the middle of a downtown section. 4) if i wanted utmost peace and quiet there were plenty of other places i could live. However i WANTED to be within walking distance of everything. So therefore the music was the trade off. 5) im not selfish and consider myself a tolerant neighbour Personally id be in this fight whether it were the docks, a party boat, a factory, or anything else. Why? Because its high time that people start accepting that there are certain trade offs involved in picking a location to live. And that if they are not willing to make those trade offs then they should move.

1) The docks lost their license because they had according to the findings by AGCO consistently ignored noise complaints for many years. I don't know about whether or not there had been complaints in the last year, but the Docks behavior had been in the past to ignore the law, and since there are very few remedies under the law and the $14000 in fines for previous noise violations had yet to be paid, the Alcohol and Gaming commission found them in violation of their license.

I don't know if Islanders run city hall, they have a city counsellor as do you. City council was not responsible for the Docks loss of their license it was the Alcohol and Gaming Commission who had over a month of hearings on the subject. Theirs was a finding based on the laws dealing with liquor licenses.

As for the idea that islanders simply should move, well sure, except that does that mean if someone opens a noisy club within earshot of any other residential area the residents should move? There are families living on the islands who have been there literally for generations. It doesn't seem like a particularly fair or reasonable solution to tell people who have such strong historical links to a community to move in order to make way for an entertainment facility. So your point about the pub owners being there first could be seen in a different light when it comes to the islanders in question seeing as they were there before the docks.

I know that there are actually a few islanders who work on the party boats, and that the Empire Sandy is owned by a fomer islander, so it would seem counter intuitive to suggest that they want the party boats out of the picture. So I can't really comment on that.

As for the airport, if i am not mistaken the question is about jets and airport expansion. I think that if there are intercity jets flying into the airport, the waterfront will be pretty unpleasant, including the docks patio and drive-in. This is not opposed just by islanders but by pretty much everyone who lives on the harbour and by the film studios along the water and east as far as Pape. The rock in that snowball is that without expanded commuter air service the airport will continue to bleed money in perpetuity. I think if you support a vibrant waterfront, you should think carefully about whether the amount of air traffic proposed makes sense.

___________________
\m/

IM HAMMERD! FUCK! HOY SHIT.... man, i love alcohol.

___________________
TECHNO IS THE BEST NOISE ON EARTH.
Save Techno - Stop Minimal / Tech-House

quote:

Originally posted by Jem_hadar IM HAMMERD! FUCK! HOY SHIT.... man, i love alcohol.

winner of best post in the thread goes to.....