[Torontovibe]

Adma for Mayor! All that we need here is a general sprucing up of the grounds, reprogramming or re-purposing of the iconic buildings and reduced or removed entrance fee. Perhaps converting those eastern parking lots into parkland so that OP is more tied into the waterfront park system would help to make it more easily accessible too. I think the majority of voices on here that are so eager to see it all torn down were born after OP was past its prime and so cannot see its potential to return to its former glory.

Isn't there already enough parkland surrounding Ontario Place? (Marilyn Bell Park, waterfront parks west of OP, June Callwood Park under construction) There are also plans to reconfigure Lakeshore to turn all those large grass islands into more parkland. The more empty parkland, the fewer people there are per acre. The parks are already underused as it is. Don't forget, the massive Lake Ontario Park is underway in the east. How much more parkland do we need in that area?

I think we need more buildings and major attractions. More empty parkland is not going to bring in people, when there is parkland all over the waterfront. There is a reason why Harbourfront and the beach are the 2 areas that attract large crowds. (attractions, entertainment, stores and the beach)

They also want to turn OP into a year-round attraction. That means buildings to escape the cold. I want to see more World's Fair type buildings/exhibits. I believe that was kind of the original plan, to make it like an Ontario pavilion in a World's Fair.

 

[khris]

I really feel that an LRT line on Lake Shore would really help this area out a lot.

 

[junctionist]

I agree, more parkland on the western waterfront won't do us good, unless it became some sort of flagship park while the strips of underused greenspace lining the Lake Shore in the west end were developed into year-round attractions.

What's going on at the province? They passively accept their landmark legislature building's view corridor being ruined and now they ask for proposals that leave the demolition of their iconic Ontario Place buildings a possibility. They seem to lost their way and it's disturbing.

 

[alklay]

We seem to have a real problem with re-using buildings in interesting ways. It would be a shame and crime if we lost the old Ontario Place structures.

 

[whatever]

I did this for myself just to get a sense of the scale involved. If you move the parking underground (or even into a multi-level facility) it looks like you could fit more than half of Wonderland into the East Island and the surface parking lots, without touching the pods, the Cinesphere, or the West Island green space. Six Flags, anyone?

 

[W. K. Lis]

With Wonderland, each year it seems that they announce and open a new ride or attraction. However, with Ontario Place, they don't seem to do so. Even if you just alter something (like they do inside department stores), it will produce a desire to see what has changed. If you don't change something, anything, they won't come.

 

[Tulse]

I think the comparison to Wonderland is a bit odd, since I've never really seen Ontario Place as a straight-up theme park. But, then again, I'm not ultimately clear on what Ontario Place is, exactly. Yes, it has some "rides" like a theme park, but it feels far less "commercial" and more earnest than the standard theme park (perhaps that is a legacy of its government roots). What exactly is the role of Ontario Place? What purpose does it currently serve (and is that purpose served better by other venues)?

I am persuaded that some of the architecture may be historically important and worth preserving, but I'm not sure if the concept of Ontario Place is worth preserving, largely because I don't know what the concept is. I immigrated here well past its heyday, so I may be missing something obvious to those longer-term residents. Anyone want to explain to me what Ontario Place is supposed to be?

 

[that_girl_there]

But, then again, I'm not ultimately clear on what Ontario Place is, exactly. Yes, it has some "rides" like a theme park, but it feels far less "commercial" and more earnest than the standard theme park (perhaps that is a legacy of its government roots). What exactly is the role of Ontario Place? What purpose does it currently serve (and is that purpose served better by other venues)?

I agree, I think there needs to be a clear vision for what Ontario Place is. I haven't read through this thread but I understand from the paper that they want to make the park more educational. Considering the state of the Science Centre, I'm wondering if there will be the money to upkeep an educational park?

Six Flags, I think, would be hugely successful in that spot. Denver has a Six Flags in their city centre and it's awesome. I just think there would need to be some serious zoning control to make sure the site doesn't get overly developed and ruin Toronto's overall waterfront goals.

 

[Solaris]

I can't believe Ontario Place's management team would even 'considering' the demolishing of the cinesphere and the 5 pavillions/pod on the water, those are definitely landmarks that are unique to Toronto ...

not to repeat the many reasons already stated why these buildings should be maintained/retrofitted, let me put it this way ... I found the structure so unique and iconic my fiance and I decided 2 years ago to have our wedding at this venue ~

 

[Team Me]

I think the comparison to Wonderland is a bit odd, since I've never really seen Ontario Place as a straight-up theme park. But, then again, I'm not ultimately clear on what Ontario Place is, exactly. Yes, it has some "rides" like a theme park, but it feels far less "commercial" and more earnest than the standard theme park (perhaps that is a legacy of its government roots). What exactly is the role of Ontario Place? What purpose does it currently serve (and is that purpose served better by other venues)?

I am persuaded that some of the architecture may be historically important and worth preserving, but I'm not sure if the concept of Ontario Place is worth preserving, largely because I don't know what the concept is. I immigrated here well past its heyday, so I may be missing something obvious to those longer-term residents. Anyone want to explain to me what Ontario Place is supposed to be?

This is a great observation. The fact that this sits on such an important part of our city, but that it's almost impossible to define now speaks volumes about how its decline is probably due more to its mismanagement than anything else. It's such a hodge-podge of half-rate attractions right now that don't form any sort of whole... and certainly don't feel worth the price of admission. And as this project moves forward we need to be sure that people don't equate what Ontario Place has become with the buildings themselves. I can think of literally hundreds of ways you could respectably re-appropriate that existing architecture while completely revamping the purpose of why people go there.

 

[thecharioteer]

The Zeidler pod buildings (1971) are also some of the few buildings that ever made it into international books on significant Canadian architecture back in the 70's and 80's.

The terms of reference for rejuvenating OP should state upfront that the preservation of these buildings (and the Cinesphere) are a given. Pressure should be put on Joe Pantalone (as Ward Councillor, CNE Board member and mayoral aspirant) to set the wheels in motion to have these buildings included on the City's Inventory of Heritage Properties, perhaps at the first Council meeting after the summer recess.

Challenges will include the fact that the buildings are owned by the Province who are not subject to City legislation (though they do apply for rezonings, etc. as a courtesy). The bigger challenge will be the inertia of City Hall in moving fast on heritage issue.

Perhaps their preservation should be asked of all mayoral candidates, particularly our ex-Health Minister Smitherman.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Maybe if they rebuild the single-screen IMAX Cinesphere with are larger multi-screens IMAX Cinesphere, I would accept that.

 

[thecharioteer]

An archival pic (see more on the Photo thread "Lost Toronto in Colour"):

 

[adma]

Anyone want to explain to me what Ontario Place is supposed to be?

Or, was supposed to be. Best I can say is: Toronto's permanent-attraction answer to Expo, with all that wide-eyed bushy-tailed optimism that we associate with World's Fairs (and re the more immediate context, it also served as a de facto "new Ontario Government Pavilion" for the CNE, replacing the present Liberty Grand). Trouble is that it came at the tail end of when World's Fair optimism made uncynical sense (and even Montreal's attempt to make Expo "permanent" via Man And His World flopped). Nor did it help that the pods' hoped-for exhibits, content, etc never quite materialized as hoped. And...you know. It was the late 60s/early 70s. Back in the era which gave us "Love Story" and "Jonathan Livingston Seagull", a little conceptual flakiness was to be expected. (In which case, maybe call it a "Park-In", just like "Be-In", "Laugh-In", etc.)

 

[jn_12]

The revitalization of Ontario Place was one of the key points of the Sorbara Report. It was expected to be done for 2017 as part of Ontario's plan to double tourism receipts (to $44 billion) by 2020. Here is what the report had to say about Ontario Place:

Ontario should revitalize Ontario Place as the flagship of a new era in Ontario tourism by opening it all year, developing a master plan that includes the surrounding area and investing in local infrastructure.
Context
At the moment, Ontario Place is a prime example of an attraction not meeting its potential. It’s a symbolic attraction for this province and it needs attention.

“When we first began some years ago to consider the concept of a major new provincial development
adjacent to the C.N.E. [Canadian National Exhibition], it became apparent that…there was a need in Ontario
for something akin to a spiritual home, a touchstone of stability, a place where people could come, see
and reflect upon the society that has been created in Ontario…In short, we wanted a place to re-affirm our
identity as Ontarians and Canadians,” Premier John Robarts, Remarks at Ontario Place Countdown Reception,
November 3, 1970.

Over the years, a series of studies have been completed on Ontario Place Corporation. These studies explored ideas for the site that included a mixed-use district, a full merger with Exhibition Place, free admission to the grounds, as well as options to make Ontario Place a year-round destination. Other ideas have included moving the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place or developing the site as an urban entertainment centre. With 96 acres of parkland including water lots and waterfront, it is clear much more could be done. Ultimately, Ontario Place could be a large public provincial square surrounded by entertainment, dining and shopping.

A new vision for Ontario Place could help it become a place that is accessible for all people and recapture its original mandate to highlight the best that Ontario has to offer. Now is the time to revitalize Ontario Place and have it become the flagship of a new era in Ontario tourism by the 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017.

Next Steps
• Develop a new vision for Ontario Place that will showcase the province’s distinctive personality.
• Create a long-term master plan for Ontario Place, with future consideration for the surrounding
area to create a renewed cluster of tourism attractions on the Toronto western waterfront.
• Establish a provincially led body to oversee the development of the master plan, under the Ministry
of Tourism.
• Offer free access to the public to the grounds. (Ticketed admissions to some entertainment areas
should be maintained.)
• Open Ontario Place’s doors year-round as a first step toward a new Ontario Place.
• Develop a series of pedestrian/cycling trails linking neighbouring sites and residential areas.
• Develop a transportation strategy that would allow easier access for visitors to reach Ontario Place
from downtown Toronto.
• Aim to have a revitalized Ontario Place become the flagship of a new era in Ontario tourism by the
150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017.

Yes, the domes and pods are important and should be maintained, but this revitalization project needs to be looked at through a tourism lens. Also, much of what people are saying (cost of admission, accessibility) are reflected in the above. The government knows what the problems are, it's now just a matter of figuring out how something that is already in place can be rejuvenated in the same way the ROM and AGO were.

The real issue is whether Ontario Place is captivating enough for tourists and whether anything short of world-changing will put it on the tourism map again. I don't think there's enough will to do that and I think the infrastructure investment would be much better put towards content.

Preferably, I'd like to see a City of Toronto/Province of Ontario Museum. It would serve multiple purposes (education of citizens, tourism and the growth of cultural/heritage tourism) and it would acknowledge that the "expo" aspect of Ontario Place doesn't really sell unless it's actually an "expo". The location to me is a problem unless there are plans to create some year-round attractions at the CNE (which I have long been in favour of). The idea of the CNE/Ontario Place/Princes Gate being a large museum/attraction pedestrian area/park would provide a huge boost for the city and province's tourism sector and would create a logical start/end point for tourists visiting. Currently, the CNE grounds is a huge barrier between Ontario Place and the rest of the city's tourism routes (which I've very quickly mapped out here: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=U...d=103289965457372614691.00048bd4ddf9af410fd7f )

To me, it makes no sense to pour so much money into Ontario Place without finding a year round use for the CNE. It's a massive asset waiting to be capitalized on and with the way the waterfront is going, only makes sense.