Toronto Ontario Place | ?m | ?s | Infrastructure ON

[adma]

Re the knocks on the OSC being overly "interiorized":

(1) it only really pertains to the bottommost building--and there are enough glimpses to the outside there and on the way down there that one is always conscious of the symbiosis w/nature, in a "getting there is half the fun" way (IOW it's not exactly like the industrial-park setting of Ottawa's science museum)

(2) it's also more pertinent to the first quarter century or so of the OSC's existence, when what lay outside really was predominantly a glimpsed-from-within affair--since then, there've been more efforts to break the sealed environment and make use of the grounds with trails and outdoor terrace features. (But within reason, as we're still dealing with a de facto nature preserve. Still, people *are* more encouraged to go outside than they used to be)

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Ive said it before and i say it again

"Ontario Place was a beloved waterpark before and it will be again," Whether you pay $40 to the government or to a private company should make absolutely 0 difference to you

Strong "Tell me you don't know anything about Ontario Place without telling me you don't know anything about Ontario Place" vibes here, dude.
It ws a waterpark?

I don't see what socialism has to do with it either except in the broad scheme of the privatization of public land. I don't have a problem with paying admission to a privatized attraction there; I paid to go there back in the day, I've paid for concerts there, I've paid parking there, I've paid to see movies at the Cinesphere. I've paid for overpriced food.

This is a secret deal where taxpayers are paying a lot of money to help a private operation that is based on wildly speculative/ambitious attendance numbesr and which is, at least in my ophion, a complete under-utilization of one of the most desirable sites in this city, province and maybe country. Youi know - the former, erm, waterpark.

Oh, and this is a joke:

For the record Im as liberal/socialist as it gets, while a government run attraction would be cool, and while I think the government should do all p3/infrastructure projects themselves instead of contracting out, That's just not the world we live in, Be realistic here, We are getting a good deal out of this

You LITERALLY have no idea what deal we're getting out of this because it is not public and won't be. What we do know is that taxpayers will be paying for their parking lot and for land rehab costs. What their lease is, how much money is coming back to taxpayers is completely secret and will almost certainly remain so.
Unless you work for Therme which, you know, seems possible.

 

[christiesplits]

Bailao who the first mayor candidate to champion this idea, including housing at the existing OSC site.....(could someone named Kouvalis whose well connected to Ford have something to do with the commonalities?) ....has said
she wants to retain the existing OSC building as a 'community hub'.

This was the first thing I thought about. Kouvalis is an advisor to Bailao and of course has close access to Ford.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I wonder if the OP site can provide enough space for a new Science Centre with at least a similar amount of square footage. Personally I am not overly for or against the move, but I would like to see the middle portion of the existing complex preserved.

AoD

 

[Northern Light]

I wonder if the OP site can provide enough space for a new Science Centre with at least a similar amount of square footage. Personally I am not overly for or against the move, but I would like to see the middle portion of the existing complex preserved.

AoD

Just took a quick gander.

If you eliminated the 'box' at the bottom, you would have roughly 3ha (plus some road space) that could be recovered for nature.

If you repurposed the south parking lot as housing, you have 1.5ha in play.

You could then retain the main (upper) and intermediate buildings, if so desired for some type of community purpose.

That would leave 1.3ha give or take a bit that sits between the OSC and Don Mills road, this could be a public park, either of the ceremonial/grand version or the neighbourhood type and preserve a clear view of the OSC from the east.

I don't think that's a bad compromise, providing one can find a good use for that building.

 

[mistersg1]

In its final years, yes it practically WAS a waterpark, remember the "Kids Just Wanna Have Fun" radio spots where they heavily emphasized Soak City as Toronto's only water park.

Ontario Place may have had a sort of evolution over the years, it may have started being something more akin to a "museum", or something that you would classify in that realm of the ROM, AGO, OSC, or Toronto Zoo. But as time went on, it slowly evolved into an amusement park, sure while it didn't have very many rides, at least until the 20-aughts, I think it's obvious to understand that it moved away from a cultural institution to something for amusement.

When I went in the 1990s, it was clearly on the side of being an amusement attraction, and I'm sure most visitors thought of it as such. I regularly had season passes for Wonderland growing up, and the few times I went to Ontario Place, it was different, but in its heart, more of an attraction like Wonderland than say the then Metro Toronto Zoo.


As for free admission, I think you are nitpicking here, as for only a brief period in the 1990s, Ontario Place had admission to enter the islands. Even with the free admission, other than use the Children's Village, explore the Nintendo Power Pod/Lego Discovery Pod, or wander the islands, you couldn't do much if you didn't buy a Play All Day Pass.


If this concept was considered to be built in Downsview Park, I bet you'd probably still kick and scream about it because you don't want to a foreign company as you see it building an attraction. This was clearly the case with Canada's Wonderland, many politicians vehemently opposed the plan solely based on anti-Americanism, but yet it has become the GTA's most visited attraction, and highest visited theme park on this continent outside of CA and FL.

 

[DirectionNorth]

In its final years, yes it practically WAS a waterpark, remember the "Kids Just Wanna Have Fun" radio spots where they heavily emphasized Soak City as Toronto's only water park.

Ontario Place may have had a sort of evolution over the years, it may have started being something more akin to a "museum", or something that you would classify in that realm of the ROM, AGO, OSC, or Toronto Zoo. But as time went on, it slowly evolved into an amusement park, sure while it didn't have very many rides, at least until the 20-aughts, I think it's obvious to understand that it moved away from a cultural institution to something for amusement.

Which may or may not have been the best use of waterfront land in Downtown Toronto.

When I went in the 1990s, it was clearly on the side of being an amusement attraction, and I'm sure most visitors thought of it as such. I regularly had season passes for Wonderland growing up, and the few times I went to Ontario Place, it was different, but in its heart, more of an attraction like Wonderland than say the then Metro Toronto Zoo.

As for free admission, I think you are nitpicking here, as for only a brief period in the 1990s, Ontario Place had admission to enter the islands. Even with the free admission, other than use the Children's Village, explore the Nintendo Power Pod/Lego Discovery Pod, or wander the islands, you couldn't do much if you didn't buy a Play All Day Pass.

Like the waterfront airport, the Ontario Place lands are about opportunity cost. Is "an attraction like Wonderland" the best use of the land? And our taxpayer dollars? Even if they only wanted the land, I'd be neutral to Therme's proposal, but I'm not a fan of a few hundred million dollars of our money going towards making someone else money.

As it is, the Exhibition Lands are also a barrier for any publicly accessible land. But that's a different debate.

If this concept was considered to be built in Downsview Park, I bet you'd probably still kick and scream about it because you don't want to a foreign company as you see it building an attraction. This was clearly the case with Canada's Wonderland, many politicians vehemently opposed the plan solely based on anti-Americanism, but yet it has become the GTA's most visited attraction, and highest visited theme park on this continent outside of CA and FL.

Lots of assumptions here. Glad this is a good-faith debate.

I wonder if the OP site can provide enough space for a new Science Centre with at least a similar amount of square footage. Personally I am not overly for or against the move, but I would like to see the middle portion of the existing complex preserved.

AoD

In my opinion, the current Ontario Science Centre site isn't the worst in the world. Moving it would be somewhat wasteful, but I'm not a fan of its layout either.

I wonder if it's possible to incorporate the current structure into a new OSC? Would be expensive and difficult though.

 

[mistersg1]

Lots of assumptions here. Glad this is a good-faith debate.

No assumptions here at all, this is the 2021 Theme Index, go to page 29, it has the 2019 numbers for reference, Wonderland clearly meets exactly what I said, nearly 4 million guests, and other than when the Jays are the hottest ticket in town, what other attraction sees 4 million people walk into yearly?

https://aecom.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/reports/AECOM-Theme-Index-2021.pdf

 

[generalcanada]

Strong "Tell me you don't know anything about Ontario Place without telling me you don't know anything about Ontario Place" vibes here, dude.
It ws a waterpark?

Ill respond to northern light separately but this part of the comment i do take offence with.

saying i dont know anything about ontario place? I can toss this back to you. "strong you dont know ontario place vibes" im getting from you, Tell me the last time you visited ontario place, ill wait....
This was mine: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...rovince-of-ontario-zeidler.13572/post-1933792
I was there as a kid, "Soak City" was a great attraction, other than the foam ball air blaster building which this redevelopment will use

I don't see what socialism has to do with it either except in the broad scheme of the privatization of public land. I don't have a problem with paying admission to a privatized attraction there; I paid to go there back in the day, I've paid for concerts there, I've paid parking there, I've paid to see movies at the Cinesphere. I've paid for overpriced food.

This is a secret deal where taxpayers are paying a lot of money to help a private operation that is based on wildly speculative/ambitious attendance numbesr and which is, at least in my ophion, a complete under-utilization of one of the most desirable sites in this city, province and maybe country. Youi know - the former, erm, waterpark.

Not sure i understand this comment? are you agreeing with me? That "speculative attendance number" is a plus in my books, if a company thinks they can make money out of that ambitious number, it doesnt matter to us since we get the same lease payments every month no matter how many people go

You LITERALLY have no idea what deal we're getting out of this because it is not public and won't be. What we do know is that taxpayers will be paying for their parking lot and for land rehab costs. What their lease is, how much money is coming back to taxpayers is completely secret and will almost certainly remain so.
Unless you work for Therme which, you know, seems possible.

So if the government said, "hey the company will be paying $100 million per year (hypothetically) in lease payments" Would that satisfy you? is that your issue with this? The secrecy behind the lease payments? Would you support the project then?

Other than the lease payments we do 100% know what were getting out of this.
- a massive beach
- a bigger trail
- swimming area and public docks
- "marshland" to be used with the science center
All of that will be paid by the company for sure

 

[generalcanada]

With respect, I think it's completely inappropriate to compare this to a serious topic of housing politics. Comparing the resistance to a themepark with the resistance of badly needed housing in the middle of a major housing and homeless crisis is a) a meaningless comparison, and b) borderline offensive to those who are fighting for more housing.


I would also add that I don't quite understand this? Therme would be free to purchase private land and build there. They would also be free to build a parking garage there if they chose to. The benefit to the government would be the same in either case. The benefits to Therme would be different.

when i hear the exact same arguments get used by nimby's who are opposed to housing, transit and any kind of infrastructure even bike lanes, they all sound the same to me.
To me, When that phrase is used I automatically assume theyre a nimby whose opinions should be discounted, especially so for housing developments

 

[jje1000]

Ha, ok - so Lord did look into it a few years ago? Iorgot about that. Interesting stuff.

I'd be curious to see the more recent report but I guess that's why we're not likely to ever see it...

It does make me wonder if Therme's initial plans were made to elicit a problem-reaction-solution response from the public. Will we see a more 'acceptable' Ontario Place plan next week, especially given that these Science Centre plans were already planned at least a year or two?

In it's final years, yes it practically WAS a waterpark, remember the "Kids Just Wanna Have Fun" radio spots where they heavily emphasized Soak City as Toronto's only water park.

Ontario Place may have had a sort of evolution over the years, it may have started being something more akin to a "museum", or something that you would classify in that realm of the ROM, AGO, OSC, or Toronto Zoo. But as time went on, it slowly evolved into an amusement park, sure while it didn't have very many rides, at least until the 20-aughts, I think it's obvious to understand that it moved away from a cultural institution to something for amusement.

When I went in the 1990s, it was clearly on the side of being an amusement attraction, and I'm sure most visitors thought of it as such. I regularly had season passes for Wonderland growing up, and the few times I went to Ontario Place, it was different, but in its heart, more of an attraction like Wonderland than say the then Metro Toronto Zoo.

Ontario Place started as a response to Expo 67, so it ultimately suffered the issues that modern World's Fairs (and even spaces like Exhibition Place) face- that with improving communications and entertainment options, the utility of said spaces has decreased in arguably the last 30 years.

Exhibition Place has really sort of awkwardly pivoted into convention/sports events + the summer-end EX (aka Ontario's State Fair), but even so still sort of struggles to find cohesion in its spaces. Ontario Place like what you said, pivoted into entertainment, but could not really compete with actual amusement parks like Wonderland. In a certain way, the proposed move of the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place perhaps places it closer to its original exhibition/educational roots, but at the cost of another space.

It was like... stuff about mining and agriculture, as I recall? It was - if we're being honest here - boring A.F.
Like, "Hey, did you know Ontario produces more nickel than any other G20 nation??! Here is a piece of unprocessed nickel from Sudbury!" Stuff like that.

Arguably stuff like that is still nice to have, a bit of chest-thumping to remind people about the interesting elements of Ontario, and its qualities (i.e. the quality of Ontario agriculture, especially in stone fruit). It's too easy to overlook the charms of the province, as the Ontario 'brand' is somewhat understated nowadays compared to places like Quebec's.

Of course, exhibits with these sorts of things are completely passé these days, and unfortunately elicit more eyerolling than genuine interest.

 

[Northern Light]

No assumptions here at all, this is the 2021 Theme Index, go to page 29, it has the 2019 numbers for reference, Wonderland clearly meets exactly what I said, nearly 4 million guests, and other than when the Jays are the hottest ticket in town, what other attraction sees 4 million people walk into yearly?

https://aecom.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/reports/AECOM-Theme-Index-2021.pdf

Was Canada's Wonderland located on publicly owned land? Was it on a preciously rare, waterfront site, near the heart of Canada's largest city? Right, comparison is null and void.

 

[mistersg1]

Exhibition Place has really sort of awkwardly pivoted into convention/sports events + the summer-end EX (aka Ontario's State Fair), but even so still sort of struggles to find cohesion in its spaces. Ontario Place like what you said, pivoted into entertainment, but could not really compete with actual amusement parks like Wonderland. In a certain way, the proposed move of the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place perhaps places it closer to its original exhibition/educational roots, but at the cost of another space.

That is true, but I’d like to mention like I did regarding Ontario Place on KI Central, that unlike a “theme park”, was that most of Ontario Place’s attractions at least until 2000 were more centred on “doing” rather than “riding”, yes while Ontario Place did have rides, like the water slides, or the Wilderness Adventure Ride, or even SeaTrek, a surprisingly good amount of theming for a ride, many of the other attractions focused on doing, like the Children’s Village, the open ended water park, the bumper boats, mini golf, even the mega maze. In the late 90s, I remember some attraction that was kind of like a mini golf and basketball hoop hybrid, the shots got harder to make as it went on, like having to shoot a basketball through two hoops.

Only when they knocked down the Children’s Village did they try to become a poor man’s Wonderland by putting in carnie rides. But they hadn’t given up, maybe the park could have gotten a lot better if they didn’t close it out of the blue in 2012.

 

[mistersg1]

Was Canada's Wonderland located on publicly owned land? Was it on a preciously rare, waterfront site, near the heart of Canada's largest city? Right, comparison is null and void.

The point I was making, was the (supposed) extreme opposition to the project of an American company building an American theme park on Canadian soil, just look at how the council of King Township felt at the time, they were clearly extremely angry about it.

With the amount of green roofing and space to the Therme building, let’s be honest, who actually would regularly see this site, you won’t like this but only people driving on Lake Shore and those riding on the Martin Goodman trail, coming directly from the nearby neighbourhoods requires a considerable amount of effort.

Besides, wouldn’t such a green structure be more appealing on the waterfront than a bunch of out of place barn silos?

 

[Northern Light]

Besides, wouldn’t such a green structure be more appealing on the waterfront than a bunch of out of place barn silos?

There are two silos and 800 mature trees to be replaced, the latter are more my concern than the former.

Public land is not private land, the two are not equal or comparable.

Private enterprise funded by private capital is not the same as private enterprise funded by a public giveaway.