COMMUNITY-LED PRESERVATION: THE FATE OF ONTARIO PLACE (PART 2)

Muse News | Amy Intrator

---

With the school term winding down, it’s time for my final installation of Muse News. Over the past 10 months piloting this new column, I’ve learned the importance of writing responsive content that follows stories as they develop. Although I didn’t plan to follow-up on my initial Ontario Place article, over the past month there have been important developments thanks to community advocacy and supportive government officials. Today, I’m going to investigate how Ontario Place’s fate may have shifted yet again.

The setting sun on Ontario Place, but the story is just getting started. Source.

Growing Public Concern

Recently, Ontario government officials have begun pushing for the “redevelopment” of Ontario Place. This move has caused members of the public and other government officials to push back. Ontario Place was opened in 1971 as a public park and exhibition venue, and although the park closed in 2012, the new push for “development” could see the land transformed from a space of public access into an exclusive facility. Members of the public have been especially concerned that Ontario Place, known as a family destination, could be turned into a casino since Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford has a long history advocating for a casino on the land.


Community Consultation

In light of the growing concerns about the fate of the land, City Councillor Joe Cressy advocated for the creation of the Ontario Place Subcommittee of Toronto and East York Community Council, comprised of Toronto city councillors that would hear the public’s concerns about the development of Ontario Place. The newly formed subcommittee was quick to organize their first Public Consultation meeting on March 5th, 2019, at City Hall, where members of the public were invited to voice their concerns and suggestions for the future of Ontario Place.

City Hall, where the Ontario Place Public Consultation was held on March 5th, 2019. Source.

Over 36 community members signed up to voice their recommendations at the March 5th community consultation meeting. Although not every representative attended the meeting, the consultation still stretched over three and a half hours. During the meeting, each community member had 5 minutes to voice their concerns and share their recommendations for the use of the Ontario Place land. If you’re feeling ambitious, you can watch the entire meeting on Youtube, or you can read some of the news coverage from the meeting.


The Call for Museums 

The community proposals ranged from affordable housing to a transformed pier, but the constant in all the presentations: a desire to make the land accessible to the public and keep heritage features intact. Given the dual aim of preserving heritage infrastructure while growing public engagement, it’s not surprising that several proposals called for museums to be built on the land. The proposals that called for museums, education centres, or heritage spaces, all aimed to “repurpose” the land without losing those features that make Ontario Place such an iconic provincial landmark.

The cultural heritage proposals included a call for a “World Water Centre,” that would repurpose the pod structures on the land to be used as both a resource center for sustainable water and a museum to educate the public. Dale Taylor, who presented this concept, stated “Ontario Place is all about water,” and he saw this Centre as an investment in public education and city resources. Another call for a museum was Lazzelle Gelias’ proposal for an “Indigenous historical museum site.” Gelias asked the subcommittee, “who better to give this land to than the people who own it?” and she called for a site that would allow for Indigenous education and representation. Yet another call for an education site was presented by Mary Hynes, who called for a space for “year-round outdoor education” that would be open to everyone and help reconnect people back to the lakes surrounding the land.

In addition to the dozens of proposals from community members, the Public Consultation also resulted in the Subcommittee motioning for the public to remain active in Ontario Place development, and even have the land considered for status on the Heritage Register.

Ontario Place belongs to all Ontarians. We only get one chance to revitalize it & it’s critical that we get it right. Its future must be decided in public & with the involvement of the City of Toronto. Tonight our Ontario Place sub-committee endorsed a way forward to get it right pic.twitter.com/CNpkfuZUrI

— Joe Cressy (@joe_cressy) March 6, 2019

The recent developments in the case of Ontario Place indicate the importance of mobilizing the community when making decisions about heritage. The Ontario Place Subcommittee can learn a lot from museums, as many museums have a rich history of working in partnership with local communities to create a space that is accessible and enriching for everyone. But perhaps museums can also learn from the Ontario Place Subcommittee. The various proposals for museums and education centers illuminates that beyond wanting an accessible and exciting space, community members want institutions that exist in conversation with the surrounding environment.

The case of Ontario Place makes me wonder: How many museums truly exist in dialogue with their communities and facilitate thoughtful engagement with the surrounding environment?