Closing science centre unnecessary, says firm of architect who designed building

Closing the Ontario Science Centre building is not necessary, the firm of the architect who designed it said June 25, offering its services free of charge to the provincial government for roof repairs in a bid to keep it open.

Ontario announced mid-day Friday that the science centre would permanently close in its east Toronto location at the end of the day after the province received an engineering report on the state of the roof.

That Rimkus Consulting report said some roof panels are at risk of collapse, and Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma said the engineers told government officials that the roof should be replaced in its entirety, which would take two to five years.

But it is not the only option presented in the report, and the firm of the late architect Raymond Moriyama wrote in a statement Tuesday that the decision to “abruptly, rashly and permanently” close the science centre was a shock. It is urging the government to reverse course.

“The Rimkus engineering report makes it clear that closing the OSC is not a necessity,” the firm wrote.

“Repairs are needed, but on a manageable scale and with potentially minimal impact on the public experience of the building. We offer our architectural services pro bono to the Government of Ontario to realize the necessary roof repairs and we encourage the structural and building science community to similarly offer pro bono services for this scope to accomplish the recommended repairs immediately.”

Surma has said the closure is necessary to ensure the safety of visitors and staff, and explained the timing by saying that even though the engineers deemed the building safe until Oct. 31, when risk of the weight of snow on the roof starts, the employees need time to decommission the building and move all of the exhibits out before then.

The government has had plans in the works for a while to move the science centre from its east Toronto location to a redeveloped Ontario Place on the city’s waterfront, with the planned new building slated to open in 2028. Government officials have said they will look for a temporary location in the meantime.

Surma has justified the move, in the face of vocal opposition, by citing a government-commissioned business case that showed the relocation would save about $250 million over 50 years, but the cost savings largely come from the new building being half the size of the current one.

The government says there will be more exhibit space in the new building, but Moriyama Teshima said halving the size of the science centre “does a disservice to the people of Ontario.”

The firm has been pushing behind the scenes to keep the doors open at the science centre’s east Toronto location.

“We see this as imperative to preserve and improve the OSC as a much needed and loved cultural and educational asset serving communities in this time of population growth,” they wrote.

Regenerating and revitalizing the current building would also be more environmentally friendly, the architects wrote in their statement.

Moriyama Teshima Architects’ full statement is below:

When it first became public that the Government of Ontario intended to move the Ontario Science Centre (OSC), Moriyama Teshima Architects (MTA) released a public statement regarding our firm’s position on that decision. The substance and sentiment of that letter still stands for MTA.

The government’s recent decision to abruptly, rashly, and permanently close the OSC was a shock. We have never swayed from our belief that this institution must be preserved and is a critical part of the province’s identity—a place of wonder and discovery for Ontarians and visitors alike. We have, behind the scenes,
maintained a persistent commitment to ongoing explorations for keeping the doors open at the Don Mills Road location—ways to revitalize both the site and building. We see this as imperative to preserve and improve the OSC as a much needed and loved cultural and educational asset serving communities in this time of population growth. Additionally, rejuvenating the building is the only pathway to the necessary reduction in carbon associated with new building materials. Preliminary analysis has identified a new building at half the size, such as the one proposed for the Ontario Place site, to have 7 times the embodied carbon impact compared to reusing the existing building. Regenerating and revitalizing this remarkable building and its site is the only responsible approach in the climate emergency. Preservation rather than erasure of our cultural heritage is the only responsible approach to evolving our cultural identity.

The Ontario Science Centre was one of many architectural projects initiated by the federal government in the lead-up to the Centennial of Confederation in 1967—collectively known as the Centennial Projects. This is not the only reason that the OSC is extraordinary. It stands as one of the first hands-on, interactive, science-based museums in the world and as such, it represents a facility of significant cultural heritage and value to our city, province, and country. Its ravine setting was deliberate and makes it a unique building in the province and relevant to its place in Toronto, the city of ravines. It was, and remains, an educational institution aimed at sparking the imagination of our youth and is pivotal to the Ontario curriculum that was revised less than 2 years ago to ensure that all students see themselves as confident and effective science and technology learners and practitioners. That revision to the provincial curriculum specifically named the OSC as a key partner and education stakeholder in the provision of new resources and training to support the implementation of the STEM curricula.

Our position remains that a relocated science centre on a significantly smaller scale and with the reduced program being contemplated for the tight Ontario Place site does a disservice to the people of Ontario, and to the educational mandate of both the Government of Ontario and the OSC. We believe that the existing building on Don Mills Road should be rejuvenated and retained as the Ontario Science Centre—a function for which it was purpose-built. There is considerable potential for the existing building to be further augmented to continue to serve as an essential community anchor for this growing neighbourhood. With multiple new housing developments being planned, this area is fast becoming a major urban node in this city, supported by the coming intersection of the Eglinton Crosstown and Ontario Line subway. More than ever, this is the right location for a significant cultural asset that recognizes the potential of areas of Toronto outside of the central core.

We agree with the assessments by our trusted colleagues, including Alex Bozikovic of the Globe and Mail and Elsa Lam of Canadian Architect Magazine, who have called out the government for their hasty closure of this much-loved institution. The Rimkus engineering report makes it clear that closing the OSC is not a necessity.

Repairs are needed, but on a manageable scale and with potentially minimal impact on the public experience of the building. We offer our architectural services pro bono to the Government of Ontario to realize the necessary roof repairs and we encourage the structural and building science community to similarly offer pro bono services for this scope to accomplish the recommended repairs immediately. The offer of our services, combined with funding that has been generously offered by members of the community, should leave zero barriers for the province to reverse this decision and pursue a path that will keep this vital resource safely operating for years to come. We are optimistic that the government will listen to the voices of our community and move forward with a revised plan for the OSC.

The post Closing science centre unnecessary, says firm of architect who designed building appeared first on Canadian Architect.