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

Sorry I don't understand your second point regarding parking being developed? There is already so much parking there, why would more be needed?
In Toronto, there are plans for developing (replacing) parking lots with higher density, mixed use buildings. Any parking will be for contractors and deliveries to the buildings (IE. communications, repairs, painting, furniture delivery, etc.).
 
Maybe I'm in the minority, but costs (and questionable business case methods) aside I think Ontario Place is a way better and obvious location for OSC. The existing building is an architectural gem but it's dilapidated and pretty unaccessible to much of the city. OSC at Ontario Place would be a great use of a landmark building IMO and much closer to rapid transit once go expansion and Ontario line are complete.

I get that most people's complaints are with the lack of transparency in the process and railroading of the initiative, which I fully get. But in the abstract the idea has a ton of merit... I wonder what people's opinion of it would be if a politician other than Doug Ford suggested it.
 
Maybe I'm in the minority, but costs (and questionable business case methods) aside I think Ontario Place is a way better and obvious location for OSC. The existing building is an architectural gem but it's dilapidated and pretty unaccessible to much of the city. OSC at Ontario Place would be a great use of a landmark building IMO and much closer to rapid transit once go expansion and Ontario line are complete.

I get that most people's complaints are with the lack of transparency in the process and railroading of the initiative, which I fully get. But in the abstract the idea has a ton of merit... I wonder what people's opinion of it would be if a politician other than Doug Ford suggested it.

I don't think there's anything wrong w/your take, but I will offer that:

1) The proposed version of the OSC at Ontario place would be roughly 1/2 the size of the existing facility.

2) The province still has not resolved how to close the transit gap from the Exhibition Station to Ontario Place. While not a huge walk, its not small, especially outdoors in adverse weather.

3) The OSC as its stands has ok'ish, surface transit access with 2 fairy frequent surface routes, but it will soon be at the intersection of the Eglinton Crosstown and the Ontario Line which will be pretty good transit access.

4) Without the OSC, the current building's future is in doubt, repairing/restoring it would likely be fairly expensive.
 
I didn't advocate for more.

You asked about developing what was there.

Keeping in mind the north parking lots are already set to be redeveloped, so that parking will be gone.

The issue then is whether any of what remains will need to be retained for any future building function; and if not, if you are preserving a building/facade because you want people to see it, that may be limit what and where things are built around it, so that a view can be retained.
Being in the area for years, I have never seen the north parking lots being used. But I get your point.

We + Developers will get a clearer idea next week of the status of OL construction in this area and if it is sooner than expected I wouldn't be suprised if some developer swoops in. Lets see how this plays out.

With no OSC as in institution this whole site will be a challenge to maintain / survive.
 
- Even though they consider a 50 year timeframe, seems like they refuse to consider that the Ontario Line will be complete LMAO Assuming that construction until 2031 will harm visitors
- Seems like they assume 500 million inflation adjusted cost is needed for an renovation of both the buildings and exhibits over the next 20 years
- Estimates are about a 3 year full closure of the current OSC to clear out asbestos
1701293122500.png

1701292875652.png
1701292729822.png
 
- Even though they consider a 50 year timeframe, seems like they refuse to consider that the Ontario Line will be complete LMAO Assuming that construction until 2031 will harm visitors
- Seems like they assume 500 million inflation adjusted cost is needed for an renovation of both the buildings and exhibits over the next 20 years
- Estimates are about a 3 year full closure of the current OSC to clear out asbestos
View attachment 523689
View attachment 523688View attachment 523686
Maybe we need a "future of the Ontario Science Centre" site thread... because the parking lots would be perfect for housing, and the building itself could be a magnificent anchor of a post secondary institution, or a cultural facility. The idea of two "science centres" in the same city is not financially viable, I suspect.
 
It's a water park. Is wonderland for crass women?
I'm referring to spas, not water parks. And I'm referring to *why* Doug Ford could plausibly be "the type of guy in the least bit interested in spas" (that is, in response to Doppleganger's quizzicality)--he uses the K's as a benchmark.

Basically, it's about spas appealing to those who are...

Will there be more posts discussing the crassness of women and no substantive comment about the water park?

It's not about the crassness of women. It's about the crassness of *Doug Ford's* women.

By that measure, you might as well label my digs at Great Wolf Lodge as being more generically about the crassness of children.
 
Last edited:
Maybe we need a "future of the Ontario Science Centre" site thread... because the parking lots would be perfect for housing, and the building itself could be a magnificent anchor of a post secondary institution, or a cultural facility. The idea of two "science centres" in the same city is not financially viable, I suspect.
It all depends on what exhibits are at the 2 locations. like If one is really old and un-modernized and the other is flashy and new obviously the old one will get much less attendance
 
The hard reality is that all museums(I place OSC in this category) will eventually require costly upgrades and renovations from time to time. The British Museum's 'Rosetta Project' is estimated to cost 1 billion pounds, Berlin's 'Pergamon Museum has closed for 14 years for an extensive reno that is estimated to cost 1.2 billion euros, and even Paris's Pompidou Centre is set to close for five years for renos that will cost around 260 million euros. Though the OSC is the purview of the province, I'm not sure what the answer is to Toronto's financial and infrastructure woes. Parks are being neglected, major roads are cracking, pockmarked, and crumbling. Yonge St. is not only an embarrassment but a very real hazard to cyclists and we still have an unfunded Queens Quay East LRT to build in the near future. Though I almost choke to suggest it, perhaps one option for the OSC might be a PPP, or at the very least, naming rights for a corporate donor(I really, really hate this one...just the thought of 'Rogers Science Centre' in bright crimson signage makes me want to throw up in my mouth). My preference is for the OSC to remain at its present site, somehow find the money, close it while the renovations are being done, and when it finally reopens, it will have two shiny new transit lines ready to bring in throngs of paying visitors. Ontario Place, though in a more central and prominent location, will still require costly modifications and the Ontario Line's Exhibition Station will provide less than ideal connectivity. Lastly, there is also the least ideal option, which is to do nothing. When it was announced that the ageing, seismically inadequate Royal B.C. Museum would have to be completely rebuilt at a cost of $800 million, it raised such a public outcry that it was immediately cancelled by the NDP government. Sometimes politicians have to go against the grain of public opinion, be able to see beyond the next election cycle and do what is right for the greater good.
 
Last edited:
The reconstruction of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris will expected to be fully covered by the €850 million in donations received from 340,000 individuals spanning 150 different countries. Seems they'll keep it in the same place from before the fire in 2019. Expected completion is by the end of 2024.
 
The reconstruction of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris will expected to be fully covered by the €850 million in donations received from 340,000 individuals spanning 150 different countries. Seems they'll keep it in the same place from before the fire in 2019. Expected completion is by the end of 2024.
Yeah, but that's just Notre Dame;)
 
Well this is a water park.

To re-quote the Doppleganger quote I originally quoted: "From a cursory glance at Mr. Ford, one might be forgiven for concluding that he wasn't the type of guy in the least bit interested in spas, be it patronizing or promoting them, but clearly, he is."

Whether it's *presently* a water park or not is irrelevant to the point of that original quote--unless you're somehow implying that "spa" = "water park". Which it isn't--though it's not like they can't coexist...
 
Maybe we need a "future of the Ontario Science Centre" site thread... because the parking lots would be perfect for housing, and the building itself could be a magnificent anchor of a post secondary institution, or a cultural facility. The idea of two "science centres" in the same city is not financially viable, I suspect.

Here's one of them
 
To re-quote the Doppleganger quote I originally quoted: "From a cursory glance at Mr. Ford, one might be forgiven for concluding that he wasn't the type of guy in the least bit interested in spas, be it patronizing or promoting them, but clearly, he is."

Whether it's *presently* a water park or not is irrelevant to the point of that original quote--unless you're somehow implying that "spa" = "water park". Which it isn't--though it's not like they can't coexist...
I'm not sure there's any point in defending yourself to this person no matter how well you try to respond to it. You know what you said. He can think what he wants to think. We move on...

...and leading by example by placing one on /ignore if need be. I know I did.
 

Back
Top