Almost all of the exhibition space at the Ontario Science Centre is unaffected by structural concerns raised by engineers and the province did not have to take such drastic action by shutting down the whole building, says an architect from the firm that designed it.
Brian Rudy, a partner and principal architect at Moriyama Teshima, said immediate repairs could be done in the coming months, and the rest phased in over the next decade, all while keeping the building open to the public.
“The vast majority of exhibition spaces are completely safe,” he told reporters at Queen’s Park on Friday, and of the panels that do need to be replaced, “it’s a drop in the bucket, probably less than one per cent. And again, those panels can be very easily repaired, cordoned off where they are an issue and the public can be completely protected.”
Closing the building “was not a necessity, but a choice,” he added.
The science centre was shuttered last Friday in a move that took many by surprise, after engineers deemed parts of the roof to be at risk of collapsing because of the use of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, also known as RAAC.
The Ministry of Infrastructure said parts of the building only had a few months before they would be structurally unsound, and that the centre would be closed to the public immediately, giving staff time to clear out the exhibits.
In the United Kingdom, more than 100 schools had to be shut down last fall after similar issues with RAAC were discovered.
The Rimkus Consulting Group’s engineering report on the science centre estimated a cost of $22 million to $40 million and two to five years to repair the existing science centre buildings on Don Mills Road, and said fixes in “high risk” locations could cost as little as $522,500.
That would have allowed the centre to remain at least partially operational before an already scheduled move to the Ontario Place property in 2028 that’s part of a controversial renewal that includes a privately owned spa.
The government is now looking to temporarily relocate the science centre.
The 52-page report, now under peer review by another engineering firm, said only one of the RAAC panels is classified as “critical risk,” while five per cent were “high risk,” two per cent “medium risk” and 92 per cent “low risk.”
But the firm emphasized that was a preliminary assessment, warning that “the compromised panels have been functioning with a reduced factor of safety, when compared to the original design intent.”
“A significant snow or rain loading occurrence could exceed the reduced load carrying capacity of the distressed panels, placing them at an increased risk of sudden collapse,” the report said.
A senior government official told the Star the government had to act because “any risk of collapse is too much risk.”
Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma has said “we had every intention on keeping the science centre open until the new science centre is built, but I cannot ignore the health and safety warning … I have an obligation to protect the public.”
NDP Leader Marit Stiles said Thursday it would cost less to repair the existing site instead of shutting it down, relocating it temporarily and moving it to the Ontario Place redevelopment on the waterfront.
On Friday, Liberal MPP Adil Shamji, whose Don Valley East riding includes the science centre, said “the building is safe … it should remain open (and) repairs can and should responsibly be done and that the province has the means to do it.”
Shamji said the government is “taking details that are technically accurate, but coming forward with the completely flawed interpretation of those technically accurate details.”
Rudy said the most pressing repairs “could probably be done in three to six months” and the rest spread out over a years-long schedule.
He said his firm designed the Toronto Reference Library “and it has been fully occupied for the entirety of its life … and we’ve done a complete rejig of that building — every square inch of it has been rebuilt and reconstructed. And it’s never closed its doors to the public. We do it by co-ordinating all areas, fixing them and opening them up.”
“As an architect and as part of the team of professionals that build cities, we don’t build cities by tearing down our historic structures,” Rudy said.
”… This is such an amazing building that we all remember from our childhood, and we all remember taking our children through. How can we allow this building to be desecrated in this way and maybe potentially torn down? It’s just unthinkable.”
