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

[jje1000]

That wouldn't be a bad idea at all- considering ROM still have so many artifacts that are in storage for the lack of display space, and that it is fairly standard practice to have a standalone museum of nature, and a ravine site with a wetland is ripe for opportunities. So if we streamline it - ROM on Bloor would be solely for History/Cultural artifacts; the old OSC would be a Museum of Nature (include mineralogy and astronomy); and the new OSC at OP would cover Science/Tech. Not a bad mix.

AoD

Definitely so, and a new "Ontario Natural Museum" at the current OSC site could combine both the animal/mineral collections at the ROM (seeing), with a strong ecological educational component (doing), perhaps integrating some of the former OSC exhibits like the rainforest or tornado machine.

I think the ROM would be much stronger with a focus on anthropology, archeology, and Canadian History. The question though is who gets the dinosaur and evolutionary exhibits, I think the ROM will fight tooth-and-nail to keep them.

 

[DSC]

Coming to General Govt Committee next week.

GG3.20 - Ontario Place Redevelopment - Declaration of Surplus​

Consideration Type: ACTIONWard: 10 - Spadina - Fort York
Attention
April 14, 2023 - Revised Report from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management - Ontario Place Redevelopment - Declaration of Surplus was posted.

Origin​

(April 4, 2023) Report from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management

Recommendations​

The Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management recommends that:

1. City Council declare surplus the City-owned parcels of land and water located at Ontario Place and described in Attachment 1 (the "City Property"), with the intended manner of disposal to be by way of agreements to exchange real property with His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure and His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, as the Chief Planner and Executive Director of City Planning and the General Manager of Parks, Forestry and Recreation have confirmed that the land being exchanged is (i) nearby land of equivalent or larger area and (ii) of comparable or superior green space utility, and all steps necessary to comply with the City’s real estate disposal process as set out in Article 1 of City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 213, Real Property, be taken.

2. City Council approve, as the approving authority under the provisions of the Expropriations Act, the disposal of the City Property to His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure without giving the owners from whom any part of the City Property was expropriated the first chance to repurchase such part of the City Property on the terms of the best offer received by the expropriating authority.

Summary​

The purpose of this report is to seek authority for the City of Toronto (the "City") to declare surplus City-owned parcels of land and water located at Ontario Place as described in Attachment 1 (the "City Property") with the intended manner of disposal to be by way of a land exchange with His Majesty the King in right of Ontario (the "Province"). City Council authority for the proposed land exchange will be sought in a separate report in the next reporting cycle, subject to City Council approval of this report.

As per Toronto Municipal Code, s. 213-1.3, it is necessary to declare surplus the City Property before proceeding with the land exchange. Under Toronto Municipal Code, s. 213-1.6, authority to declare City property surplus has been delegated to the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services unless the local Councillor requests the matter to be determined through the appropriate standing committee, which is the case in this instance.

Financial Impact​

There are no financial implications resulting from this approval.

The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial implications as identified in the Financial Impact section.

Background Information​

(April 14, 2023) Revised Report and Attachments 1-2 from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management - Ontario Place Redevelopment - Declaration of Surplus
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/gg/bgrd/backgroundfile-235841.pdf
(April 4, 2023) Report and Attachments 1-2 from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management - Ontario Place Redevelopment - Declaration of Surplus

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Definitely so, and a new "Ontario Natural Museum" at the current OSC site could combine both the animal/mineral collections at the ROM (seeing), with a strong ecological educational component (doing), perhaps integrating some of the former OSC exhibits like the rainforest or tornado machine.

I think the ROM would be much stronger with a focus on anthropology, archeology, and Canadian History. The question though is who gets the dinosaur and evolutionary exhibits, I think the ROM will fight tooth-and-nail to keep them.

It can be the same organization with the same board but with two sites.

AoD

 

[Northern Light]

It can be the same organization with the same board but with two sites.

AoD

An allusion here might to the Smithsonian which is a multi-site museum; albeit on a vastly larger scale (23 sites)

 

[Admiral Beez]

As a kid Ontario Place had Future Pod, a mini Science Centre.

“In 1982, Future Pod opened in Pod Five; in it were displays of the province's advancements in technology, communication and energy. It included a full size replica of the Canadarm, a robotic appendage used on space craft, in zero gravity.”

The history of Ontario Place in Toronto from 1969 to 2011

My initial visit to Ontario Place was during the summer of 1971. It had officially been opened by the late Premier Bill Davis on May 22 of that yea...

www.blogto.com

 

[Parkdalian]

Aside from the obvious problems related to transparency and corruption, a related question I have: Why do we need to move the Ontario Science Centre? Why can't the Ontario Government create a new attraction at Ontario Place that has the spirit of the Ontario Science Centre - a public educational facility that is an attraction in itself?

It's clear that Toronto has a lack of tourist attractions for a city of its size. But it's also clear that there is no creativity and thoughtfulness in the Ontario Government and they are unable to imagine what a new tourist attraction would look like. Instead, they have to shuffle around the last few dying embers of publicly funded attractions from decades ago, or they have to ask private industry to come up with ideas.

I do think that some of this blame lands at the feet of politicians critiquing the Ontario Place plans, too - often the suggestions to replace Ontario Place are for some variation on "just add trees and park benches," which yes, wonderful. But this is a big site - where are the city leaders who are imagining and visioning big things to oppose Dougie's random brain farts?

 

[Admiral Beez]

It's clear that Toronto has a lack of tourist attractions for a city of its size.

You have a point. In March 2022 I visited London. Here's the list of tourist activities I did over the course of just over two weeks.

Natural History Museum
British Museum
Victoria and Albert Museum
Kensington Palace Tour (and high tea)
Museum of the Home
Cutty Sark
Royal Geographical Society’s Shackleton's legacy exhibit
Royal Observatory Greenwich
National Maritime Museum
RAF Museum
Thames river Uber boat
HMS Belfast
St. Paul’s Cathedral (climbed right to the top)
London Monument (great fire)
London Transport Museum
Woolwich Arsenal (had to see https://sumpmagazine.com/amc-plaque.htm)
Museum of London
Charles Dickens Museum
Science Museum
Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace
Greenwich Market
Portobello Road Market (and Notting Hill)
Camden Market
Borough Market
Covent Garden Market
Little Venice (had coffee and a tart - not that sort - on a canal boat cafe)
Duchess Theatre (saw The Play That Goes Wrong | MISCHIEF)

London, UK has about four times the population of Toronto, but I challenge that our city does not have a quarter of the tourist attractions of London. And in London nearly every museum I list above was free of charge.

I like my city and my Cabbagetown neighbourhood, but I honestly don't know why anyone would visit Toronto, unless your own city or town was worse.

 

[T3G]

There is very little that Toronto has that New York doesn't also have, and do better with.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The Line 1 extension into Richmond Hill will need a shuttle bus to get to the David Dunlap Observatory.

There used to be the McLaughlin Planetarium next door to the Royal Ontario Museum. Accessible from the Museum Station. It was closed by Doug Ford's mentor, Mike Harris. Video dated 2019...

Maybe there should be a planetarium at Ontario Place.

 

[Natika33]

LILLEY: Science Centre part of much-needed redevelopment of Ontario Place

Premier Doug Ford confimed the move Thursday with a smile and a claim that it's a great idea that he can't talk about just yet.

torontosun.com

wow never thought that id be agreeing with Toronto Sun, You dont often see them actually making sense



And I live in Fort York LOL

While I agree with that one line you pulled, I don't agree with the rest of the article's idea of moving the OSC to OP, mostly because I think OP should be showcasing ALL facets of Ontario, like art and heritage & culture too. There are 5 pods, which I think could each be curated by a different Ontario institution or other body - the Science Centre, but also the ROM, the AGO, MOCA, etc. Ideally, in my mind, OP should be a mini preview or summary of all that Ontario has to offer, not limited to one facet.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

While I agree with that one line you pulled, I don't agree with the rest of the article's idea of moving the OSC to OP, mostly because I think OP should be showcasing ALL facets of Ontario, like art and heritage & culture too. There are 5 pods, which I think could each be curated by a different Ontario institution or other body - the Science Centre, but also the ROM, the AGO, MOCA, etc. Ideally, in my mind, OP should be a mini preview or summary of all that Ontario has to offer, not limited to one facet.

Good idea! They should be moving the ROM and AGO down there as well. Maybe even the Rogers Centre! One stop shopping for all tourists! /s

 

[Natika33]

Good idea! They should be moving the ROM and AGO down there as well. Maybe even the Rogers Centre! One stop shopping for all tourists! /s

See how ridiculous it sounds now though? Moving the OSC to OP means they're trying to squeeze a huge amount of programming into a small space, effectively under-valuing the programming that goes on there now and could in the future. It's not just about the building, but the content, too. As a city/province/country grows, wouldn't one want to provide more enrichment to its citizens, not less?

 

[3Dementia]

Moving the Ontario Science Centre away from its beautiful site next to a future new subway stop and a new LRT line .... only to be shoe-horned (downsized?) into a site with no transit... is not only flat-out stupid, its such a transparent distraction strategy it's laughable.

Enjoy your waterpark day with the kids, and once they're exhausted... fill those young minds with science. Nice try with the lame optics of the redevelopment.


P.S. @Natika33 's suggestion of programming the 5 pods with 'appetizer' content from 5 other diverse offerings (ROM, AGO, OSC, perhaps performing arts etc.) is the first specific idea I've heard that makes perfect sense. Great promotion and audience building tools.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...in the end, it's Doug thinking about his voter base and his friends' wallets. As this will do little for us outside of cheapening the public experience. I really hope The City finds someway of putting the breaks on all this nonsense, IMO

 

[calimehtar]

First off, I'm ambivalent about the spa for reasons that are pretty well articulated by generalcanada above. There isn't anything inherently evil about either private ownership or a spa. The sheer size of it, the publicly funded parking garage, the possiblity that something better could be there ... Sure ok.


But the debate about the spa is also a distraction from the catastrophic land use already evident there and at the cne. Why are we so upset about this parking garage when just on the other side of the expressway there are acres of surface parking which go unused 90% of the time. Where was the debate about medieval times or the Ontario place Marina?