Connect with us

Politics

Ontario Science Centre Closure Sparks Controversy and Concern Over Building Safety

Published

on

Ontario Science Centre Closure Sparks Controversy And Concern Over Building Safety

The decision to immediately close the Ontario Science Centre due to the risk of a roof collapse has ignited a wave of controversy and concern among politicians, advocates, and the public.

Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma announced the unexpected closure, citing a report by Rimkus Consulting Group that highlighted the precarious condition of the building’s roof.

The engineering report revealed that the roof panels in each of the three buildings at the Ontario Science Centre were deemed to be in a distressed and high-risk state, requiring urgent repairs to prevent potential collapse.

According to the Ministry of Infrastructure, the estimated cost of the necessary roof repairs ranges from $22 million to $40 million, with a projected closure of up to two years during the extensive renovation process.

While emphasizing the need for public safety, Michael Lindsay, President of Infrastructure Ontario, emphasized that the lightweight concrete material used in the construction of the science centre has posed challenges over time, particularly in managing water exposure.

As the province grapples with the closure and relocation of the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place, concerns have been raised by advocacy groups such as Save Ontario’s Science Centre, led by co-chair Floyd Ruskin. Ruskin criticized Premier Doug Ford‘s government for prioritizing the development of the Therme spa facility at Ontario Place over the preservation of the science centre.

Liberal MPP Adil Shamji joined the chorus of opposition, accusing Ford of neglecting public infrastructure to benefit private interests. The closure of the science centre, especially amidst plans for its relocation, has been viewed as a strategic move by the government to advance commercial ventures.

Provincial NDP leader Marit Stiles condemned the decision, attributing it to a lack of investment in revitalizing the science centre and accusing the government of diverting public funds to support contentious projects.