If we were starting from scratch, I would support *A* Science Centre at Ontario Place. But to move THE Science Centre strikes me as boneheaded. As you say, if we're talking about Toronto's architectural treasures from that era, you can put OP and OSC side by side. I guess opinions about architecture are as varied as anything else but it's a signature piece of Brutalism from that era and a signature building by Raymond Moriyama.
I've seen people suggest a school or something could move into the building - maybe. But Cohn's article is pretty darned poorly written. If you're going to argue the main use of the OSC is moving, you should either articulate a new use for the building or explain why it should be razed. He just vaguely mentions "redevelopment," totally ignoring the architectural heritage of the site which,in turn, undermines his arguments about Ontario Place. You either get why both places are important or you don't.
(And, yeah, it's a shame some of the brutalism at the front of OSC got lost, though I think in general it makes the frontage way more accessible and less intimidating than it was. It's fair to say it was "careless," perhaps but I look at the pictures above and, let's be honest, the front door doesn't make it look like a place you wanna take your kids. The brutalism inside still works, as does the way the building climbs down the valley - something Cohn never references in his talk of the parking lots and whatnot.)
For that matter - plenty of "world class cities," like London and Chicago and even Las Vegas (!) have impressive ferris wheels. There is nothing wrong with a ferris wheel. The problem was that Doug had it tossed in as part of a backroom deal that included a bunch of other simplistic ideas like shopping malls and hotel where you can park your boat if you're not riding the monorail. That said, perhaps there's some expert here who knows about flight paths and restrictions around Billy Bishop but I'd be surprised if there's anywhere on site you could actually build a ferris wheel of substance at Ontario Place. Even the waterslide has a red airport light thingie on it.
So, not the smartest article, IMHO.
While the column certainly wasn't an architecture one.............I think it reflected popular sentiment.
Many people, perhaps a majority of OP visitors over the years have a fondness for the pods and cinesphere. The design has withstood time in many respects.
OSC on the other hand I never hear mentioned by anyone not devoted to architecture for its own sake.
Brutalism remains profoundly unpopular with the larger public, as it was almost from its inception.
People tend to find it somewhere between unremarkable/bland and offensive and few place a value on it.
One may appreciate it in a nuanced way; or more comprehensively as a unique example of a certain time........but one cannot say it has broadly captured the public imagination at all, really, and certainly not in a positive way.
This City has lost much that could and in my opinion should have been preserved.
I can't say the OSC reaches that level for me, even though there are aspects I appreciate and appreciated.
As an adult, and a lover of science, I haven't been in there in 10 years, at least.
That's partially about money to refurb exhibits and the like.
It's also about the building, the area in which it's located and other factors presumably (not necessarily) addressed in a relo.
I would not want to see it torn down only to be replaced by generic crap.
But nor am i overly sentimental for what was......or what remains of what was, at that site.
