Toronto Ontario Place: New Science Centre | 4s | Province of Ontario | Snøhetta + HPA

Substantive discussion:

On aesthetics: I don't mind it, I don't love it

On Function: I think the land-based building is too far from the Pods. The building needed to be sited further west, which would mean reorganizing other elements of the overall plan.

On Iconic status: I think aside from a bit more design inspo and probably a slightly larger square footage, I would have liked to see the idea of one flagship, permanent exhibit that was showcased to the world through giant glazing.
 
Last edited:
rdaner said:
^Thanks! I see HP mentioned but no Snöhetta.
Click to expand...

They are mentioned here - https://www.infrastructureontario.c.../new-ontario-science-centre-contract-awarded/

Infrastructure Ontario (IO) and Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Gaming (MTCG) have awarded a fixed price contract of $1.04 billion to Ontario Science Partners to design, build, finance and maintain a new state-of-the-art Ontario Science Centre facility. The new Ontario Science Centre will be located on the mainland at Ontario Place and will include the preservation of the historic Cinesphere and Pod complex.

The Ontario Science Partners team includes:

  • Applicant Leads: John Laing Limited, Sacyr Infrastructure Canada Inc. and Amico Major Projects Inc.
  • Design Team: Hariri Pontarini Architects & Snøhetta
  • Construction Team: Sacyr Canada Inc, and Amico Design Build Inc.
  • Facilities Management: Johnson Controls Canada L.P.
  • Financial Advisor: Agentis Capital Advisors
Click to expand...
 
Honestly I'm impressed ... I was expecting something very boring ... moreover, 400,000 square feet was also larger than I had thought it would have been (even if it includes the Cinesphere). I could have sworn the initial plan was for something half that size.

As a reference the original science center is around 550,000 square feet.
 
ChesterCopperpot said:
They are mentioned here - https://www.infrastructureontario.c.../new-ontario-science-centre-contract-awarded/
Click to expand...

I trust Hariri Pontarini and I'm delighted that Snohetta got the nod. Perspective: they got the Student Learning Centre built on an academia budget and Ryerson is no UofT. If it looks even as good as the SLC then I'll be happy.

Northern Light said:
On aesthetics: I don't mind it, I don't love it
Click to expand...
Same. I think it needs a little more refinement. Its walk up presence can be improved. This is Ontario Place, people will be walking along the shore. Give them some place to dwell. Snohetta is known for achieving that with their steps and ramps.

30628b663bd0a687bb59a97a3c552937bccf84a8-2000x1000.jpg


Northern Light said:
On Function: I think the land-based building is too far from the Pods. The building needed to b sited further west, which would mean reorganizing other elements of the overall plan.
Click to expand...

I think they handled this well. Building a matching bridge to connect to the original bridge that connects the pods feels like it's always been there. That's not a long walk, maybe one minute but it'll be longer because people will stop and appreciate the view. Ideally, the Science Centre building would go where Therme is but that's just not going to happen unless Therme goes bankrupt before any of this starts getting built 🤞🏼
 
I don't get the clock motif though?
Or is it a sundial?
 
taal said:
Honestly I'm impressed ... I was expecting something very boring ... moreover, 400,000 square feet was also larger than I had thought it would have been (even if it includes the Cinesphere). I could have sworn the initial plan was for something half that size.

As a reference the original science center is around 550,000 square feet.
Click to expand...
This is a great point - the press release also states that total exhibition space is increasing over the old facility which is important to note. The old facility definitely had lots of poorly utilized circulation spaces.
 
Sure, it would have been cheaper, would it have been as iconic ... architecture wise, yes - but location, no. There are so many arguments (not here but in other places) that the science center was meant for schools because it was easier to get too ... I don't see how that can be justification to go one direction or another.

Whether we agree with the implementation there is clearly a desire to turn Ontario Place lands into a year round destination - I would argue what is being done here (completely ignoring the cost side) will likely have a really good chance of accomplishing just that.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top