Ontario Place: A Call for Counterproposals - Selections by The Future of Ontario Place Project

Ontario Place: A Call for Counterproposals Jury and public selections March 2021

Jury Prize ($1500)

Megalandscape Ontario MEET THE TEAM CATHERINE HOWELL Catherine received her MLA from the University of Toronto where she focused on urban scale sites that incorporate a plethora of systems in seamless integration. While at U of T, she worked at the Green Roof Innovation Testing Lab (GRIT Lab) and as a garden designer, focusing on the important base skills of landscape composition. Catherine believes that these grass-roots skills, in combination with regionallyminded interventions, are what make landscape architects the designers of future cities.

RAMSEY LEUNG Ramsey received his M.Arch from the University of Toronto, where he concentrated in environmental studies, forest biomaterials, and urbanism. He also received a B.Sc. in Life Sciences from Queen’s University, which he applied towards design work with cardiologists and biomedical engineers of minimally invasive surgical devices. Ramsey has also earned a “Foundations in Public Participation” certificate from the International Association for Public Participation; Living Future Accreditation from the ILFI; and has authored multiple publications.

JOSEPH LORETO A recent graduate of the M.Arch program at the University of Toronto, Joseph is currently an Intern Architect with the OAA and practicing in Toronto. Joseph’s keen interest in multi-disciplinary design intervention on a wide variety of scales informed his research and Master’s thesis at U of T, which investigated the impact of architectural, landscape, urban design, and land-use policy practice on suburban employment landscapes. He also received an Honours Bachelor of Arts from U of T, focusing on architectural design, art history, and human geography.

JURY COMMENTS “This scheme’s incremental approach with an emphasis on community engagement will ensure that Ontario Place responds to the city’s future and evolving needs.” BRIGITTE SHIM (PRINCIPAL, SHIM SUTCLIFFE ARCHITECTS)

“This proposal is both visionary and pragmatic. Most notable is the understanding of the potential of the combined Ontario Place and Exhibition Place to produce desirable development and revenue to fund and maintain needed public improvements. Promoting a transit-oriented development on the Exhibition Place grounds allows for advantageous relationships to new transportation infrastructure without interrupting Ontario Place’s heritage landscape.” KEN GREENBERG, (PRINCIPAL, KEN GREENBERG CONSULTANTS)

“Slowness by design is still able to build a coherent and intentional project – both offshore and onshore – with ecological and social integrity.” MARC RYAN (PRINCIPAL AND CO-FOUNDER, PUBLIC WORK)

“I really appreciate the incremental approach and the acknowledgment and accommodation for likely missing and marginalized stakeholder voices. Rather than limit their design with the assertion that they couldn’t anticipate the needs of future generations, this team lays the groundwork for community-empowered development with an initial multi-tiered ecological, infrastructural, and rezoning plan.” ASHLEY MENDELSOHN (ARCHITECTURE CURATOR)

101

Megalandscape Ontario Although the Design Challenge Brief calls for a new masterplan in counterproposals to opaque developments currently underway, we do not propose another autocratic masterplan. Instead, our counterproposal suggests a flexible, phased, long-term framework through which an always unfinished public place can allow for a process of inclusive, community empowerment – envisioning new relationships for future generations, slowly. This framework is established through a reconception of the site as including the Exhibition Place lands to the north. Working with the topography of land and the ecology around water, a coherent mega-landscape forms over a generous period of time, acting as a dynamic - yet stabilizing - binder between neighbourhoods, infrastructures, and ecosystems. Its stability would stem from its governance by a nonpartisan body similar to Waterfront Toronto, holding a longterm lease agreement with all three levels of government. Its dynamism would emerge from the space it creates; places for incremental evolution through bottom-up community participation and empowerment, rather than top-down planning. Within each proposed phase, key interventions are proposed. However, these interventions are not utopias to be imposed, but are instead stimulants for public conversation and collaboration, encouraging transformation and evolution over time. Fundamentally, this counterproposal is an invitation for all Ontarians to build something together.

Masterplan caption: This panel depicts an axonometric view of the proposed Megalandscape and its extents, illustrating a flexible, phased, long-term framework through which an always unfinished public place can allow for a process of inclusive community empowerment. Lakeshore Blvd. and the Martin Goodman Trail serve as the east-west spine, while multiple northsouth axes tie the islands, exhibition lands, city, and province together. Proposed programmatic interventions are listed and called out on the drawing. Yet, since our counterproposal is only a framework for future participatory design, areas where programmatic proposals are uncertain have been annotated as such, inviting the public to engage with the drawings as if they are incomplete or in a state of flux.

4 Submission 101

Caption: While multiple stakeholders have been considered in our counterproposal, including the several that have been identified on the design-challenge website, an inclusive engagement strategy realizes that there may be many stakeholders whose voices are missing, including those that have been marginalized. Through a collaborative design process that is continuous and iterative, new voices may participate over time. Our counterproposal to reconceive the site as including the Exhibition Place lands to the north could be used as a flexible framework within which programmatic ideas could be explored by all participants as designs are developed. This panel depicts how our counterproposal might be used as a “straw-dog” to stimulate dialog within the collaborative design process that we propose.

6 Submission 101

Phase 1

Phase 2 Ontario Line rail stations aligned with Dufferin and Strachan Streets

The northern edge of Lakeshore Blvd. is re-graded and a land bridge removed to improve porosity across the site

The pods are preserved as described in our heritage approach and on the following panel

Phase 3 Rezoning to allow residential development, with underground connections to Liberty Village

Parking lots are converted into recreational beaches along a new shoreline. The shoreline fronting Brigantine Cove to the east may allow for a wetland ecosystem

Decontaminated landfill from Ontario Line and Lakeshore Blvd. work extends the western island and allows for an extension of Dufferin Street to the island by a bridge

Parking lots are converted into an open mall. If required, parking could be built underground

The east island is better integrated with the lakeshore park system and the city cycling network

Program Bands

LIVE K O LO

E G N LOU H S U L

The amphitheatre is relocated north of Lakeshore Blvd.

Our counterproposal allows for and encourages incremental evolution over a generous period of time. Our flexible framework may be striated into four generalized programmatic bands to guide future participatory design processes at a smaller granularity of scale, with the intensity and prescription of development increasing northwards across the site. The southern-most band suggests a return to Michael Hough’s original vision of an untamed place that is more amenable to non-human habitats. Our proposal to allocate residential development within the most distant phase allows for deliberation as to the mix of affordable and market-rate housing, in addition to innovative land governance opportunities.

Caption: Our counterproposal allows for and encourages incremental evolution over a generous period of time. Our flexible framework may be striated into four generalized programmatic bands to guide future participatory design processes at a smaller granularity of scale, with the intensity and prescription of development increasing northwards across the site. The southern-most band suggests a return to Michael Hough’s original vision of an untamed place that is more amenable to non-human habitats. Our proposal to allocate residential development within the most distant phase allows for deliberation as to the mix of affordable and market-rate housing, in addition to innovative land governance opportunities. This panel diagrams the three conceptual phases of our counterproposal and the programmatic bands that could guide their development.

Caption: The Pavilion Pods and their surrounding areas become “Post-Anthropocene Pods” where human contact is discouraged and, after SPEA rehabilitation and habitat framework has taken shape, nature is left to reclaim the architecture and areas around. This panel depicts the possible strategies through which the pods’ exterior structures could be leveraged to integrate Ontario Place with broader ecosystems along Toronto’s lakeshore; provincial migratory pathways; and ecosystems beyond.

8 Submission 101

Caption: Megalandscape Ontario harkens back to Ontario Place’s original aspirations of being “a place for all Ontarians”. By physically knitting the site into the province through infrastructural connections to regional networks and ecological consistency, our counterproposal aims to create a place that fills a void of gathering for all people, plants, and animals of the province and beyond. This panel depicts our aspirations of how a megalandscape could interconnect a multitude of networks at both urban and provincial scales.

Caption: Lakeshore acts as a seam between Ontario Place and The Exhibition grounds, facilitating connections to the city as a whole with increased pedestrian permeability through the flattened re-grading of Lakeshore and the continuity of key axes. This panel emphasizes the importance of permeability across Lakeshore Boulevard; not by a landbridge, but by vibrant pedestrian activity on both sides of the boulevard and along the north-south axis of the site.

10 Submission 101

Summary of the public stakeholders considered and proposed public engagement strategy. An objective to “spread knowledge” of the site’s heritage value, as per the Design Challenge Brief, is a sufficient first step in a public outreach and engagement strategy to imagine the future of Ontario Place as a public asset for all Ontarians. However, simply informing the public does not equate with engaging the public to be a part of a “collaborative design process”. Valuable work at informing and consulting the public has already begun but, any future engagement should expand on this work by involving, collaborating with, and eventually empowering public stakeholders to re-imagine inclusive placemaking practices. While several stakeholders are identified on the design-challenge website, an inclusive engagement strategy realizes that there may be marginalized stakeholders whose voices are missing, including Indigenous Peoples, people with disabilities, or non-human stakeholders. The first step in our outreach strategy is to involve those that have not yet been consulted. Collaborative techniques should then be tailored to stakeholders but may include charrettes using our counterproposal as a straw-dog; community walking tours through the site; or social media campaigns linked to an appreciative hashtag focusing on what people love about Ontario Place, rather than what they would like to change. Stakeholders’ thoughts could then be visualized and transmitted through a variety of media towards not only spreading awareness, but empowering collaborative knowledge building.

Outline of approach towards heritage conservation The “interconnected” megastructure forms of the Pavilion pods and their walkways are all design attributes identified in the 2014 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value. These structures are also noted for their contextual attributes of being “set against [their] naturalized surroundings”. While there are merits to preserving these structures, in our contemporary context of climate crisis their interconnectedness cannot be anthropocentric. Our approach to heritage conservation is that these structures should be recontextualized as nature, instead of against naturalized surroundings. The pods require significant financial investments to maintain structural integrity for human occupation, threatening to overshadow any revitalization efforts for Ontario Place as a whole and yielding a possibility of their demolition by fiscally minded governments. Yet, a short-term adaptation of the pods into anchoring a streamside protection and enhancement area (SPEA) could safeguard them against demolition while plans are developed for their restoration and eventual human occupation. Their suspension cables could act as a scaffold for bird nests, volunteer plant species, and pollinators; their underside suspension cables for creating a bat habitat; and their lake-bed compression pylons for creating a fish habitat. Through such strategies, the pods could be leveraged to integrate Ontario Place with broader ecosystems along Toronto’s lakeshore; provincial migratory pathways; and ecosystems beyond.

Special Mention ($500)

Alluvium: Water, Habitat, and Community MEET THE TEAM PAUL ARKILANDER Paul is a Master of Planning student at Ryerson University’s School of Urban and Regional Planning. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in Biology from Wilfrid Laurier University and his Bachelor of Education from the University of Toronto.

TALI BUDMAN Tali is a Master of Architecture student at the University of Manitoba where she was awarded the SSHRC Canada Graduate Scholarships-Masters (CGS-M), Maxwell Starkman Scholarship in Architecture and Bill Allen Research Scholarship in Architecture. She received her Bachelor of Environmental Design at the University of Manitoba in 2018.

RYAN COATES Ryan is a landscape designer and sessional instructor at the University of Manitoba, where he recently received his Master of Landscape Architecture and was awarded the University Olmsted Scholar.

CONNERY FRIESEN Connery is an Architectural Intern at 2architecture Inc and recently graduated with his M.Arch from the University of Manitoba. His work has been published both nationally and internationally and he is a recipient of the Henry Adams Medal. Previously, he received his Bachelor of Environmental Design from the University of Manitoba (2018).

JURY COMMENTS “I value this proposal’s consideration of a human-centered scale. With its opportunities for all to engage with and participate in its spaces, one can anticipate communities building new ideas and worlds for the future.” SEAN ANDERSON, ASSOCIATE CURATOR, ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN, MOMA

107

Alluvium: Water, Habitat, and Community

alluvium: water, habitat, and co

The Anthropocene is the geological epoch where human activity is the prime influence on the environment. As we live through this era, we continue to inflict consequential harm on the environment. Today we have a yearning to re-define our relationship with nature as a possible strategy to mitigate the climate crisis. Through interventions at Ontario Place, our proposal hopes to make visible the undeniable change occurring around us, becoming a register of a collective concern about the pressing and important issue that is the global climate crisis. Interventions on the site will heighten the awareness of human impact on nature by redefining our relationship with it. Through various programs, visitors will have the opportunity to experience nature in many states and throughout time. In observing, for example, the alluvial patterns of rain and floodwaters, they can gradually begin to regard nature as a force not to be opposed but instead embraced. As authorship of design is shared and temporal, the weather and the climate, in conjunction with the designer, allow for unexpected places and experiences to occur as a result of a dialogue that is sometimes competing, sometimes affirming, and each informing the other (Hill, 2012). Rather than relying on technology to solve our problems, this team believes that the climate crisis originated from a social issue. Therefore these interventions use engagement, education and awareness as tools to motivate social change (Benjamin, n.d.).

3 4

5 7

Masterplan caption:

In recognition that a master plan entails human authorship over space, a succession plan is offered as a way to work alongside the ecology of the site and move away from an Anthropocentric mindset.

6 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

14 Submission 107

west entrance west channel/bridge wetland education center open aviary lookout point japanese temple helipad

9 boat rental 10 cinesphere 11 south marina 12 sea wall / observation ring 13 washroom 14 east commons (washrooms, restaurants, boutiques)

15 botanical garden / research center 16 loading platform 17 free music venue 18 grass hill 19 testing bed 20 plaza 21 rain tower

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

reflecting pool market trillium park wetland lake edge promenade pavillion east entrance green space

30 green space accessible p 31 brigantine c 32 centre entra 33 north marina 34 meadow 35 parking to s ontario plac

ommunity

succession plan scale 1:1500

site boundary

30 28 13

19 33

19 24 17

19 23

lake ontario

16 15

/ parking cove ance a

serve ce

14 18

site section - current 12

site section - 25 years entropic grade 01: highest level of curation entropic grade 02: medium level of curation entropic grade 03: lowest level of curation

site section - 50 years

open aviary

open aviary site plan

Since their construction in 1980 the seven silos of ontario place have housed a plethora of complex programing. For some time it acted as a theme park ride, and more recently the silos housed the wild world weather. Although, most importantly at its inception the silos housed an exhibit that educated visitors on the natural variety of ontarios northern ecosystems. As both a commentary on its past, and in respect of its origins, the aviary realizes what the silos previously only hoped to achieve; a natural exhibition space that educates the public on the plethora of indigenous avian species that exist in ontario. Through the execution of multiple key architectural moves, the silos can be fully opened to its surrounding, and re-integrated into nature. In time, the silos will become overgrown with plant life, attracting and feeding local bird species. As a result, the silos can now act as the temporary home for migrating water fowl and become the annual nesting ground for local song birds. Simultaneously, the silos will serve both as a place for nature, and a place for the public to observe and be educated on the immense variety of local bird species.

original site

key move

reflecting pool open silos

Caption: Acting as a trellis, by carefully dissecting the silos, they now can support the various plant types necessary to feed the 409 indigenous avian species of Ontario.

16 Submission 107

TYPICAL MODULE

SECTION

existing structure

structural modificaitons

LEVEL 65

UPPER EXHIBITION

LEVEL 55 MECHANICAL

LEVEL 45 PEDESTRIAN

URBAN CLIMATE ADAPTATION CENTER The Pods were built to show Ontario and Toronto the future city. The city of the 21st century will be one that faces the existential threat of climate change. The Pods will be retrofitted to become an arboricultural facility focused on climate proofing the endemic and declining species of Southern Ontario, particularly its Carolinian forest biome. Each pod is re-purposed to act as a greenhouse where future regional temperature ranges are simulated to subject endemic plant matter to heat stress in order to assist in the development of genetic evolution to greater heat ranges. As these seed experiments develop, new plant stock becomes available to deploy throughout the city.

LEVEL 38 EXHIBITION GREENHOUSE

exhibiton retrofit

greenhouse program

seedling beds

RAPID HEAT STRESS TESTING FOR INCREASED GENETIC RESILIENCE

whip beds

GROWTH BEDS FOR FURTHER TESTING, SOME SPECIMENS ADVANCE FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT

sapling beds

SAPLINGS ARE MONITORED FOR ADAPTABILITY BETWEEN CURRENT AND FORECAST CLIMATE RANGE

WATER LEVEL

LAKE BED

pedestrian retrofit

tree stock beds

SUCCESSFUL TREES ARE MONITORED AND SLOWLY INTRODUCED TO NEW LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT ONTARIO PLACE AND TORONTO

glazing retrofit

public access through research facility

Caption: The city of the 21st century faces the existential threat of climate change. The Pods will be retrofitted to become a facility focused on climate proofing the species of the Carolinian forest biome.

EAST ISLAND PARK AND FOREST As successful specimens are developed in the redeveloped greenhouse pods, they are introduced to the East Island and the surrounding park spaces of the city, helping to ensure a resilient urban canopy can be safeguarded for future Torontonians. The East Island takes inspiration from Trillium Park in how it is redesigned to accommodate Toronto’s newest urban waterfront park. Central to the proposal is a Great Lawn that can accommodate a multitude of groups and uses simultaneously and safely. Framing this space are 250 Sugar maples along a wide promenade which replace the felled trees from the redevelopment of the stage in the 1990s.

promenade along the Great Lawn

terrace views of lake ontario

Tulip-tree / Liriodendron tulipifera

Black Maple / Acer nigrum

Sassafras / Sassafras albidum

Flowering Dogwood / Cornus florida

Fragrant sumac / Rhus aromatica

American Chestnut / Castenea dentata

Pin Oak / Quercus palustris

Green Dragon / Arisaema dracontium

Smooth sumac / Rhus glabra

Pawpaw / Asimina triloba

carolinian forest gardens

Caption: As successful specimens are developed in the greenhouse pods, they are introduced to surrounding park spaces of the city, helping to ensure a resilient urban canopy for future Torontonians.

18 Submission 107

rain tower as a tool to re-define human-nature relations, the waterslide structure is re-imagined as a rain tower that offers people the opportunity to engage with rain water in its many states. through a reservoir system, people can experience the rain build up and anticipate a consequential event where the water flows through a walkway channel, waterfall and a series of pools, arriving at lake ontario. as the reservoir system is dimensioned in relation to toronto’s average rainfall, the event heightens an awareness of an increase in precipitation as well as toronto’s flash flooding issue as a consequence of climate change.

roof gutter

rain water cycle roof gutter

rain 01 5 mm 3

downspout radial array every 3m

rain water reservoir

walkway

reservoir

existing water slide tower

lake ontario

downspout radial array every 3m

rain 02 12 mm3

chain

rain water reservoir

chain

rain 03 20 mm3 ramp gutter

rain reservoir

ramp gutter

rain water reservoir stages

PHASE 01

walkway

existing water slide tower

waterfall

pool 01 pool 02 reflecting pool

lake ontario

PHASE 02

access to walkway

observation tower rainwater reservoir

walkway and gutter

stair water fountain pool 01 pool 02

reflecting pool

plan

Caption: As a tool to re-define human-nature relations, the rain tower heightens an awareness of an increase in precipitation over the years and Toronto’s flash flooding as a consequence of climate change.

connections

transit

green space circulation

The ecological succession process requires seven generational thinking, examining how we can use all knowledge systems to plan for a more sustainable and equitable future. The design process will require input from all stakeholders - Indigenous communities, local and regional residents, institutional organizations, commercial enterprises, and environmental experts. These groups will be engaged through a diverse strategy using an outreach website and app, province-wide surveys, and in-person and online discussions culminating in an on-site grand (re)opening symposium to share our combined vision.

stakeholders

Caption: This panel shows how the proposal better connects the site to its environs and outlines a robust engagement strategy for developing a collective vision for the Future of Ontario Place.

20 Submission 107

Summary of the public stakeholders considered and proposed public engagement strategy. The team considers Ontario Place in the framework of the future climate. As humans are now in a time where they better understand the consequences of anthropogenic climate change, the team questions a topdown approach at a master plan and instead proposes a succession plan. In recognition that a master plan entails human authorship over space, a succession plan is offered as a way to work alongside the ecology of the site and move away from an anthropocentric mindset. By considering the hydrological cycle, habitat, and community the team proposes interventions that allow the site to become one of study, research, and leisure for humans, animals, and vegetation in a rapidly changing Ontario. With the belief that the climate crisis originates from a social issue, the architect’s role is explored as one that fosters engagement, education and awareness to motivate social change. The ecological succession process requires seven generational thinking, examining how we can use all knowledge systems to plan for a more sustainable and equitable future. The design process will require input from all stakeholders - Indigenous communities, local and regional residents, institutional organizations, commercial enterprises, and environmental experts. These groups will be engaged through a diverse strategy using an outreach website and app, province-wide surveys, and in-person and online discussions culminating in an on-site grand (re)opening symposium to share our combined vision.

Outline of approach towards heritage conservation Proponents of entropy argue that all creation deals with time and deterioration: Therefore, architecture as a framework for time is part of a system in transformation and disorder (Martinez Garcia-Posada and Blazquez Jesus, 2017). Usually, entropy caused by a change in climate is a threat to a system’s stability, provoking the designer’s role to be one of a moderator of environmental performance by constraining entropic tendencies (Lystra, 2014). With a shift in value, this proposal delves into a dialogue with transformation where cultural and social influences become creative forces that engage with the notion of change in a manner that is not only driven by fear (Hill, 2012). In dialogue with, rather than in resistance of, entropy raises the question of sustainability in design. Historically, the notion of sustainability revolved around the term climate change, suggesting a broader agenda of returning to an ideal climate that no longer exists (Hill, 2012). As entropy occurs cumulatively, this team rejects the attempt to reverse disorder but rather accepts it as an opportunity for productive design questions that aim to construct flexible strategies for sustainability and adaptability in the future. (Martinez Garcia-Posada and Blazquez Jesus, 2017). The proposed interventions are approached through an entropic lens (Motiff, 2017), in which the site’s existing structures are re-imagined into an opportunity to accept the succession and transformation inherent in the site.

Public Vote (book prize)

Toronto’s Urban Backyard MEET THE TEAM BLAIKE ALLEN Blaike Allen is a second-year Master of Architecture student at the University of British Columbia. Born in Brisbane, Australia she has split her time between Brisbane and Vancouver. She holds Bachelors of Environmental Design from UBC with interdisciplinary focus in architecture, landscape architecture, industrial design and urban planning. She enjoys finding creative solutions to design problems and is looking forward to applying this passion to her work in the professional world.

MICHAEL MONAGHAN Michael Monaghan is completing his final term of this Master of Landscape Architecture at the University of British Columbia. Prior to this, Michael completed a Bachelor of Design at OCAD University and a furniture making Diploma at Humber College. Most recently he worked as an architectural designer in Winnipeg and as an interior designer in Toronto. Having an interest in working as a multidisciplinary designer, Michael is using his MLA to explore the interconnected relationships between environment, infrastructure, architecture and people.

KATHRYN PIERRE Kathryn Pierre is a second-year Master of Architecture student at the University of British Columbia. During her undergraduate degree at the Daniels school, she discovered the complex and interdisciplinary nature of city building. At UBC, she is working through those same complexities in a new context. She uses her academic work to explore themes of accessibility, community and environmental justice. She found this competition to be the perfect way to engage with these big questions in a city she loves.

130

Toronto’s Urban Backyard In an increasingly dense urban world public outdoor space only becomes more essential to a thriving community. At its conception, Ontario place was a place for the people of Ontario, an urban backyard to be enjoyed by all and especially utilized by those unable to escape to the cottage like those with means do. In the years since opening, poor management has taken the site further from this goal. As a move to make the site more popular with the public, buildings and programs filled and attempted to monetize much of the site. As each new program fizzled to failure, the structures of Ontario Place were one by one abandoned and taken from the public realm. By stripping the site of obsolete structures and breathing new life into the structures of historical significance we will revamp the site to suit the needs of modern city while respecting and displaying its rich cultural past as a Canadian icon. Inspired by Ontario Place at the time of its conception we propose the return of the urban backyard to serve the people of Toronto. We will do this by: Decreasing program across the site Removing insignificant/disused structures, deprogramming and reimagining historic structures, and increasing green-space Increasing accessibility Better connectivity, open access to the historic structures and improved site entry points. Emphasizing Free-Play Creating spaces that are free, unordinary, interactive, and non prescriptive for people of all ages and abilities..

Masterplan caption: The overarching goal of this proposal is to reimagine Ontario Place as Toronto’s backyard by removing under-utilized structures and providing access to creative greenspaces for the public.

24 Submission 130

Toronto’s Urban Backyard

Nearby Population Densities

Nearby Population Growth

Blaike Allen Kathryn Pierre Michael Monaghan

Legend

focus area zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 0

100

150m

Deprogramming Ontario Place SKATING RINK . ECO-LEARNING CENTRE . HABITAT RESTORATION AREA . HELIPAD . GIFT SHOPS . ECOLOGY . FESTIVAL GROUNDS . NIGHTCLUB . AMPHITHEATER . EXHIBITION CENTRE (PODS, SILOS, AND VILLAGES) . WALKING TRAILS . IMAX THEATRE . JAPANESE TEMPLE . BOAT RENTAL FACILITY . WATER SLIDE . REFLECTING POOLS . ROLLER RINK . LIGHT HOUSE . MARINA . BUMPER BOAT RENTAL . CYCLING TRAILS . CHILDRENS PLAY SPACE . HARBOUR BOAT TOUR . LOG FLUME RIDE . RESTAURANTS . FREE-PLAY . WATER PLAY AREA . LASER SHOW . FREE-PLAY

GREENSPACE

Diagrams | Free-Play for All

In an increasingly dense city, backyards are a rare yet important amenity. It is up to designers to advocate for public spaces that are flexible and encourage creativity. These amenities must create spaces for free-play that are unordinary, interactive, and non prescriptive, that support countless activities but cater to none. This will bring the philosophy of free-play back to Ontario Place and create a fun, versatile urban backyard every Torontonian can call their own.

Preservation Through Adaptation

culturally significant structures

deconstruct structures to increase access

encourage public interaction under, over and around

Facilitiating Imaginative Free-Play for All

Caption: Diagrams that outline our approach to preservation on the site and illustrate our definition of free-play. Free-play is about creating spaces that are unordinary, interactive and non-prescriptive.

26 Submission 130

Focus Area 1 | The Pods The dominant features of Ontario Place are the floating pods, which have been reclad to make them appear more intriguing and approachable. A new wetland and boardwalk system allows visitors to explore all sides of the pods, including getting right underneath them.

axonometric looking north-west over the renovated pods, new wetland boardwalk network, commuter trail extension and west commons

Rendering featuring the extensive new boardwalk system, which allows for occupation of the once empty canals

A quiet wooded moment in focus area one

Caption: Focus Area number one is the area surrounding the pods and cinésphere, which has a new wetland, cladding and boardwalk system.

Focus Area 2 | The Silos To preserve the architectural heritage of the site while inviting play, the silos have been blasted, painted, cut and planted. The more intimate gathering space between the silos allows for activities of varying scales in a unique setting.

The Trilliam Dune beach strip will attract visitors from accross the west side of the city, where beach areas are lacking

The planted plaza between the silos is open for public occupation

Ascent from the West Commons to the Silos plaza

Caption: Focus Area number two is the area from the silos to the western edge of the site. It features our de-programmed design for the silos and a new dune and beach ecosystem.

28 Submission 130

Focus Area 3 | East Commons A new hub for events, this area has both hard and soft scapes to facilitate gatherings of all kinds. The new building houses administration, maintenance and can host any indoor events.

The hill-top tower serves as a lookout and important reference point for people exploring Ontario Place

The new East Commons

The connection between the new East Commons and Trillium Park

Caption: Focus Area number three is centred around a new plaza on the east side of the site. With the water slide tower at the centre, a new hard and soft scaped plaza, and market hall building have been created.

Focus Area 4 | Land Bridge The new entrance, accessed through the Martin Goodman Trail reintroduces the public to Ontario Place as a public park first rather than the event space it is currently understood as. A fun and dynamic space to explore, you can take the direct path or meander through the different pathways, heights and views.

The East Commons is reimagined as a smaller gathering point, with the Village structures as outdoor shelters

Elevated walkways set an inviting tone to the park

Pathways over the wetlands

Caption: Focus Area number four is the new land access to the eastern island and East Commons. It features playful elevated walkways, the wetlands and our reimagined Village structures as covered gathering areas.

30 Submission 130

Summary of the public stakeholders considered and proposed public engagement strategy. Our primary stakeholders are the citizens of Toronto, particularly those who live in the dense neighbourhoods near Ontario Place. By increasing the amount of nearby greenspace and making the site more accessible, we are designing for current and future Torontonians. We are considering Torontonians from further away by connecting the Martin Goodman Trail through the site, adding another point of connection from the site to the city. The governing bodies that preside over Ontario Place were considered by ensuring a sustainable financial future for the site. We have adapted existing structures to be flexible enough to host various local businesses and experiences. These places will draw in visitors and contribute to the financial longevity of the park. We have watched the multitude of interviews of Torontonians, who told us that their childhood memories of days spent in play were the happiest of the site. With the base of our proposal set here, we intend to further engage with the public to find out how our proposal can be edited to better suit their needs. We plan to host a series of “night crawls” with information spread throughout the site where the biggest changes will occur. This will give the public the opportunity to see new potential at each point. We recognize that different styles of communication will work for different communities and will engage a comprehensive communications strategy to promote these events, including email, social media, and door knocks.

Outline of approach towards heritage conservation Our proposal seeks to revive the spirit of Ontario Place at its inception as an urban backyard for Torontonians. We will do this by maintaining and adding to the valuable landscape of the site, and renovating the iconic structures so that they are embraced by the community and are valued for years to come. Our proposal asserts that the most effective way to honour historic buildings is for people to engage with them. We believe this will not be achieved by returning the structure to its original 1970s appearance, but by respectfully adapting buildings to the needs and desires of the people. When constructing an approach to heritage conservation we first identified what about the site is historically and culturally valuable. While value lies in the impressive and unique structures across the site, Ontario Place’s history as a place of recreation for the people of Toronto is equally important. By stripping down the structures and introducing playful and interactive elements we breathe new life into them, giving the ownership of these spaces back to the people. This rekindled relationship with the public ensures stewardship generations into the future. Just as many people who played and explored Ontario Place as children are those fighting for its survival today.

32 Submission 100