Ontario awarded nearly $1 million in contracts to various companies to write a business case on moving the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place on Toronto's waterfront, The Canadian Press has learned.

A report in December from the auditor general found that a proposal in the spring of 2023 to government decision makers to relocate the science centre, including the business case, noted that a "site-wide parking solution" was needed to meet Ontario's lease obligations with Therme. It proposed that new parking be integrated with the new science centre building "in order to dispel public/stakeholder concerns relating to cost and impact on the environment," the auditor wrote.

The business case itself was "incomplete," the auditor general said, including not factoring in financing or incremental parking costs.

https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-a...iness-case-on-moving-science-centre-1.6926580
When we continually elect this government of clowns, we should expect a circus.

I'm aware that these reports are rarely started with a blank slate; there is some goal in mind. But it's so very disappointing that the government is so obviously spending public funds to benefit private companies.
 
Ontario awarded nearly $1 million in contracts to various companies to write a business case on moving the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place on Toronto's waterfront, The Canadian Press has learned.

A report in December from the auditor general found that a proposal in the spring of 2023 to government decision makers to relocate the science centre, including the business case, noted that a "site-wide parking solution" was needed to meet Ontario's lease obligations with Therme. It proposed that new parking be integrated with the new science centre building "in order to dispel public/stakeholder concerns relating to cost and impact on the environment," the auditor wrote.

The business case itself was "incomplete," the auditor general said, including not factoring in financing or incremental parking costs.

https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-a...iness-case-on-moving-science-centre-1.6926580
Anyone wanna ask how much the Ontario Line business case costs?
No? no one? COOL
 
When we continually elect this government of clowns, we should expect a circus.

I'm aware that these reports are rarely started with a blank slate; there is some goal in mind. But it's so very disappointing that the government is so obviously spending public funds to benefit private companies.
...governing for everyone..with money. /sigh

Edit: And in B4 that's true with all governments...just some demonstratively more so than others.
 
Last edited:
@AlexBozikovic has a good column on Ontario Place out.

At first blush, its one many of us here would agree with, with a theme of nix Therme and keep OP as some variation of a public park


What adds some extra value here is Alex' takedown of Richard Florida and John Alschuler, both rightly earned.
 
@AlexBozikovic has a good column on Ontario Place out.

At first blush, its one many of us here would agree with, with a theme of nix Therme and keep OP as some variation of a public park


What adds some extra value here is Alex' takedown of Richard Florida and John Alschuler, both rightly earned.
Right so, @AlexBozikovic makes good articles, this one misses the mark.
A spectacular art gallery is an object of civic pride, a draw for international tourists, and a type of place that brings in people on foot and sends them out into the street looking for cocktails and tapas, ready to tell their friends at home about the glories of the city. Toronto politicians don’t understand such places, even though Ontario Place was one of them – in 1971.

Then there is Therme Canada’s spa. That is a largely windowless box that requires the total demolition of an eight-acre island, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of water infrastructure and a huge parking garage – so its visitors can eat lunch inside, exit with their wet hair, get in the minivan and go home. It has no business in a central city. That is why existing Therme facilities are in the European boonies in Bavaria and Bucharest.

UUUH Windowless box? And this is the older worse version.
1718828721733.png

OKEEE. Is that the new talking point? I thought we were talking about the complete opposite.
Also somehow agrees and disagrees with the original author about tourists who said:

>e. According to a study of
26 American downtowns that I mentioned earlier, such visitors account for approximately
two thirds—(61.7 percent) of downtown activity (see Figure 3), significantly more than
residents, who account for about 10 percent of activity (11.2 percent), and office workers,
who account for a little over a quarter of activity (27.1 percent).30 The cities that have
recovered the most, the study concludes, are those that had “the highest share of daily
visitors downtown in 2019.”

I mean if youre going to make a call for a park, then do so. But get your facts straight

I wouldnt call it a "takedown" when he agrees with the authors LOL
 
Right so, @AlexBozikovic makes good articles, this one misses the mark.


UUUH Windowless box? And this is the older worse version.
View attachment 573882

Ok, so ....you know that's not what's being built, right?

Sigh.

This is the current iteration:

1718829994705.png



Most of us expect less glass in any actual, constructed version, should that come to pass.

I wouldnt call it a "takedown" when he agrees with the authors LOL

This (below) sounds like agreement to you?:

1718830182878.png


I think you need to re-read the piece.
 
For those interested Richard Florida's report on the Waterfront, funded by Therme..........

But which does cover much more than just Therme, I will directly link it here:


FWIW, I'm not a huge fan of the overall report, which i would call 'thin' on substance and actionable items, and in describing impacts and outcomes.
 
Ok, so ....you know that's not what's being built, right?

Sigh.

This is the current iteration:

View attachment 573891


Most of us expect less glass in any actual, constructed version, should that come to pass.



This (below) sounds like agreement to you?:

View attachment 573893

I think you need to re-read the piece.
oh, nice picture from a different angle.Im not sure if you think thats a gotcha or something. In any case, we want more glass apperently? Thats what they designed the park/path above the water park for? I don't understand. Why are we complaining about less glass now? doesn't make sense. I couldn't care less whether it's the original full glass box or walking path, but it appeals to some people

Well obviously, he doesn't say he agrees LOL but this is definitely agreement with tourist traps.

A spectacular art gallery is an object of civic pride, a draw for international tourists, and a type of place that brings in people on foot and sends them out into the street looking for cocktails and tapas, ready to tell their friends at home about the glories of the city. Toronto politicians don’t understand such places, even though Ontario Place was one of them – in 1971.

The original point again:

>e. According to a study of
26 American downtowns that I mentioned earlier, such visitors account for approximately
two thirds—(61.7 percent) of downtown activity (see Figure 3), significantly more than
residents, who account for about 10 percent of activity (11.2 percent), and office workers,
who account for a little over a quarter of activity (27.1 percent).30 The cities that have
recovered the most, the study concludes, are those that had “the highest share of daily
visitors downtown in 2019.”

I think you need to re-read the piece more closely


As for the "millions of visitors". I ignored it because it doesnt mean anything

Op4a and those against it use the stat as an indication the site doesnt need redevelopment, but what theyre missing is that it includes the decades old Budweiser stage, That floating waterpark that went for like a month, the cirque de soleil that was on an ashfault desert where the old waterpark used to be. All of which are very popular

The point is cherrypicking data doesnt help anyone.
 
oh, nice picture from a different angle.Im not sure if you think thats a gotcha or something.

That is not from a different angle, the design changed, completely, this is a resubmission, which we discussed extensively in thread.

In any case, we want more glass apperently? Thats what they designed the park/path above the water park for? I don't understand. Why are we complaining about less glass now? doesn't make sense. I couldn't care less whether it's the original full glass box or walking path, but it appeals to some people

I am not going to relitigate the endless discussions that have been had already again. You have an outlier position and you know it.

Well obviously, he doesn't say he agrees LOL

You just said he agreed w/the authors, now you concede he did not. Do you see the problem?

As for the "millions of visitors". I ignored it because it doesnt mean anything

Except that it does mean something, that OP is not sitting empty with zero or near-zero use.

I have no difficulty with any argument that the status quo needs work. I just don't think Therme is the right work.

But while one can argue for whatever form of change one wishes, one cannot argue that Ontario Place is abandoned/empty, it is not.

It is neglected, and portions of the site have restricted access, something imposed by this government.
 
That is not from a different angle, the design changed, completely, this is a resubmission, which we discussed extensively in thread.
You missed my point, The facility from the angle facing northeast over the water is by no means a "sealed box without windows" which is what Alex says it is. Even the older version was the complete opposite of that
You just said he agreed w/the authors, now you concede he did not. Do you see the problem?
No you still missed my point again, I never said he specifically writes that he agrees, just that he did

Lets try again then with more clarity.

The original author said this:

>e. According to a study of
26 American downtowns that I mentioned earlier, such visitors account for approximately
two thirds—(61.7 percent) of downtown activity (see Figure 3), significantly more than
residents, who account for about 10 percent of activity (11.2 percent), and office workers,
who account for a little over a quarter of activity (27.1 percent).30 The cities that have
recovered the most, the study concludes, are those that had “the highest share of daily
visitors downtown in 2019.”

Alex said this about tourists noting that tourist traps are good for the city. This IMO is agreeing with the authors? Do you disagree?
A spectacular art gallery is an object of civic pride, a draw for international tourists, and a type of place that brings in people on foot and sends them out into the street looking for cocktails and tapas, ready to tell their friends at home about the glories of the city. Toronto politicians don’t understand such places, even though Ontario Place was one of them – in 1971.


Except that it does mean something, that OP is not sitting empty with zero or near-zero use.

I have no difficulty with any argument that the status quo needs work. I just don't think Therme is the right work.

But while one can argue for whatever form of change one wishes, one cannot argue that Ontario Place is abandoned/empty, it is not.

It is neglected, and portions of the site have restricted access, something imposed by this government.
There is 1 major difference though, "Ontario Place" can and should be defined as 2 different things.
1. the old waterpark, theme park, children's village, and log flume ride together being "Ontario Place"
2. Both islands together and everything in it.

Personally, if someone says "Ontario Place" I don't immediately think of Budweiser stage, My mind goes right to the log flume ride. That to me is "Ontario Place"

The log flume ride has been argued before, but I still maintain that by definition it is abandoned.
Which by my definition I can argue that "Ontario Place is abandoned."

Ontario Place as a theme park was closed not by this government but by the previous liberals who also would have preferred to redevelop the site to a private party.
also, we have talked before about different possible uses here before. But at this point barring a complete Suprise 180 It's just not going to happen with this government.
 
I have a tiny question about the Florida report: why are we using just North American downtowns? Wouldn’t success mean moving away from that model? 🤔
 
I have a tiny question about the Florida report: why are we using just North American downtowns? Wouldn’t success mean moving away from that model? 🤔

1) The report is primarily about waterfronts, and not downtowns, they are mentioned as a contributing/adjacent issue; in respect of waterfronts the report is very global citing many cities around the world.

2) He's citing statistics available to him that others are tracking, notably, his U of T colleagues. They didn't track those stats for other world cities (essentially downtown occupancy rates). Many non-North American cites also have development and employment concentration levels that aren't entirely analogous to the North American context.
 
If this thing is built, it'll end up as transparent as the ROM "crystal". There is a lot of equipment required to run pools like that and it's not going to be sitting under a glass bubble. They'll also discover partway through that it snows in Toronto and the structure needs to be stronger than they thought.
 
In the last 25 years Toronto got an average of about 42 inches of snow spread across 53 days in winter months (less than one inch average). Last winter (winter?) it was 20” total spread over only 20 days (1” average).

Barring a NYC-style Nor-Easter event… is this really a structural challenge engineers can’t handle? Have our indoor botanical gardens like Allen Gardens ever collapsed?
 
If this thing is built, it'll end up as transparent as the ROM "crystal". There is a lot of equipment required to run pools like that and it's not going to be sitting under a glass bubble. They'll also discover partway through that it snows in Toronto and the structure needs to be stronger than they thought.
Snow loads are not afterthoughts; structural glass exists.
… is this really a structural challenge engineers can’t handle?
Structural Engineers can accomplish almost anything... if you're willing to pay (anti-gravity sold separately).

[Obligatory: Doug Ford is corrupt, this should be public space.]
 

Back
Top