I’m not certain what is more heartbreaking. The obvious neglect of a public thing or losing that public thing. Probably both.
Two contentious properties in the City of Toronto have been part of ongoing dispute about their futures. This is a blog post about architecture? Sort of. But it’s also a blog post about political dipshittery and dire necessity of the rapidly diminishing Third Place.
Image from the Ontario Archives, Science Centre, 1969
Old Science Centre button courtesy of Retro Ontario
Allow me to explain…
We need to back up to 2022 (mostly, 2023) when the first murmurs about the construction of a spa started to emerge on Toronto’s waterfront. Normally that wouldn’t really matter, except that the proposed site was on the grounds of the beloved Ontario Place.
Ontario place opening day, Image courtesy of the Toronto Guardian
If you’re not familiar, Ontario Place is an old theme park built in the early 70s that’s been converted into public and event space. The main attractions were built on what’s referred to as the West Island.
Even after its official closure, always a welcome respite from the city heat on summer days. In the winter, there were often outdoor exhibitions to tour. It’s beautiful, quiet and serene. It’s also a migratory bird route with roughly 800+ mature trees on that section alone.
Ontario Place, like many properties, is under the purview of the province of Ontario. Essentially, that means the City of Toronto never truly had any say in its operations, including any budgetary responsibility.
Shuttered by a past Ontario government in 2012, citing that it was too expensive to run, that part of the park remained silent for some time, with occasional events happening on the grounds via private rentals.
As a design practice in the public space, architecture is definitely political, and the grounds on which it sits? Even more so.
You may ask: Was Ontario Place any good?
Ontario Place log ride courtesy of the Toronto Guardian
Good Lord yes. Anyone over the age of 35 who grew up in the province here has deeply fond memories of the space. It was always met with a “yes” when parents wondered if braving traffic down the Gardiner was worth the time and effort. My mom happily snapped pictures of me on various rides and features I thought were futuristic and breathtaking, including the Nintendo Power Pod (pictures are hard to find of that one) housed in one of the connected structures hovering over Toronto Harbour.
When we heard that the cinema was reopening after Art Spin’s multi-day art installation reignited interest in the space in 2016, many Torontonians were thrilled. Still living downtown, we frequently made the trip to see movies in the Cinesphere, where IMAX films. The Cinesphere is now closed for renovations as the West Island is being redeveloped.
But this was supposed to be a post about the Science Centre.
And it certainly is. And here’s where it gets strange…
The current provincial government is no stranger to controversy, and Premier Ford is not shy about his open resentment towards the people of Toronto. Having lost the mayoral race twice, I suppose we should have seen that coming.
This is supposed to be an art and design blog, though I’ll argue that quite often, art and design are political.
As a design practice in the public space, architecture is definitely political, and the grounds on which it sits? Even more so.
How does the current government come into the Ontario Place chatter? Well, even as city Councillor and mayoral candidate, Doug Ford had his sights on waterfront property. The grounds upon which Ontario Place are some of the best pieces of real estate in the city, and the only ones under provincial control.
On principle, many have correctly argued that it should remain open to the public to enjoy. Quite suddenly and without explanation, the news was released that Therme, a spa company from Poland, was granted a 95 year lease on the provincially owned space.
Diamond Schmitt architects would be designing a park and massive glass structures to accommodate this new private spa. This would facilitate removing many existing mature trees, and the construction of a 650 million+ parking garage paid for by the Ontario taxpayer.
The multi million dollar parking garage is of course infuriating, but it’s also where this takes a stranger turn.
These announcements were followed by a bizarre press conference held about the plans for Ontario Place.
The talking points were odd that day my friends, but the most quizzical came from one speaker who basically said the quiet part loud: That Ontario Place wasn’t going to be ruined and the parking garage was needed because the Science Centre was going to be reduced in size and moved there, too.
So you see, they said, it’s okay that we’re paying for it, because it’s for the new Science Centre as well.
Folks watching, including myself, took a moment to think. And if you know about the current buzz of construction in East York, you’ll know that there sits one major stop of the hotly anticipated Eglinton crosstown transit system.
An old postcard of the Science Centre, late 1960’s
The Science Centre Station on this line has neared completion, meaning that the extremely beloved and once prized cultural and educational hub is now sitting on transit accessible prime real estate.
The Ontario Place and the Science Centre seem inextricably linked in our hearts and minds. To love one is to love the other, to remember one is to remember the other.
Not to mention, Metrolinx is also building the downtown line to meet it from the south, ripping up parts of beloved ET Seton Park’s disc golf course in the process.
The new Science Centre station, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Many deduced, and I think correctly, that the original Science Centre grounds would soon be condo fodder.
Then came the news this past weekend, to the shock, but perhaps not the surprise of many: The Science Centre had massive structural inadequacies and had to be immediately and permanently closed as of Friday, June 21st, 2024.
The fences were being put up that afternoon, even as staff were still inside.
Many residents and organizations were deeply skeptical about this decision. Some postulated that the building was purposefully neglected so as to force its closure, or even that a structural engineer had been paid off to state its lack of safety.
The former is more likely, but the fact that the latter was an immediate and popular theory shows how underhanded this entire process felt.
The more accurate take is that the engineer’s report did cite structural concerns, but that closing the facility wasn’t actually necessary. Meaning that the province use the report as an excuse, not an explanation.
And so - Ontario and Toronto suddenly and sadly have to say goodbye to another old friend when we were just figuring out how to say goodbye the first.
The Ontario Place and the Science Centre seem inextricably linked in our hearts and minds. To love one is to love the other, to remember one is to remember the other.
I often think that what we look like, as in, the physical appearance of cities and towns, reflects what we have decided to value. Or perhaps more accurately, what we think we should value.
(At the Science Centre) I would often walk past on good weather days and see parents and their children taking their bows and quivers into the trees on the Science Centre grounds. Those sorts of unique experiences help relationships grow, and help the city have uniqueness and intrigue.
Many condos sit empty downtown, their towers blocking out both rain, sun and common sense, but nothing stings more I think than the lack of cultural entities within the city’s limits. In my mind, condos are only desirable if there are interesting places are proximal.
What does this have to do with the Third Place?
The Third Place, that spot that isn’t work or home, where the average person can converse and exist without the necessity of purchase, is essential to everyone’s daily lives. The Third Place, needs to exist because we’re more than our families and jobs, existing only to work, sleep and buy stuff online. The third place exists in the library, the public park, the garden, the grounds, the waterfront.
The Third Place is often a space where we meet strangers, socialize, and just remember how to be human.
The loss of the Third Place, at least across major English speaking nations, is assumed to be incidental, but in some cases many believe it to be purposeful. A reduction in public space so that people do not gather, converse, or think about their existence past work, school, sleep, and consumption. Venues that closed over the pandemic exacerbated this trend.
The Third Place is often a space where we meet strangers, socialize, and just remember how to be human.
While the Science Centre and Ontario Place, of course, had admission prices, both properties were always public access, their grounds managed for the explicit intention of free enjoyment. There is (was?) also one of the only open air archery clubs in Canada joining grounds of the Science Centre. Considering the closure of not only the buildings, but the grounds themselves, I’m certain the future of their operations is also in question.
I would often walk past on good weather days and see parents and their children taking their bows and quivers into the trees on the Science Centre grounds. Those sorts of unique experiences help relationships grow, and help the city have uniqueness and intrigue.
The Third Place is about possibility, and not for the sole purpose of making money. This too seems like a quaint idea these days, and yes, I know a public park would cost money.
I suppose the broader question we should be asking is: What is the cost of not investing in ourselves?