Science centre closure justified by peer review: Ford government

The provincial government says a new peer review of the engineering reports it commissioned confirms the structural issues at the Ontario Science Centre which it says justifies the choice to shutter the building.

But engineers CBC Toronto spoke to this month said the initial report actually indicates the science centre could be worked on and its lifespan extended.

Neither the original engineering reports nor the peer review recommend a permanent closure of the science centre.

"There is a great need of repair in order to fix the existing science centre it would cost half a billion dollars," said Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma at the news conference Thursday.

It's why the government has decided to close the building and build a new facility, she said.

The original engineering reports were conducted by Rimkus Consulting Group and focused on the use of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) in the science centre, which is a lightweight substance popular with building construction in the 1960s, when the structure was built.

RAAC is a lightweight material, but is also weaker and has a shorter lifespan than normal concrete, engineers told CBC Toronto earlier this month.

The peer review, which Ontario says is standard practice in engineering, was conducted by engineering firm VanBoxmeer & Stranges Ltd., said the province Thursday.

That review found the original engineering Rimkus reports on the science centre, "...was a concise and comprehensive narrative that adequately addresses the risks associated with RAAC element in existing building," the VanBoxmeer review, which was released by the province Thursday, states.

"The peer review confirms the original engineering report published on June 21, 2024, was conducted in accordance with standard engineering practices," the province said in a news release Thursday.

The VanBoxmeer review says it agrees with Rimkus that "immediate remediation" is needed on critical risk and high risk roof panels before October 31 to keep the building safe.

On Thursday, John Carmichael, the board chair of the science centre and Paul Kortenaar, the CEO, released a joint statement that said confirms their agreement with the province's choices.

The centre's Board of Trustees voted to close the building after a recommendation to do so from the Ontario Ministry of Infrastructure, they said.

"We look forward to announcing the site of our interim location as soon as possible," they said. "Our future is bright, and we are excited for what lies ahead," they said.

Ford called building 'a total mess'

The announcement on the peer review comes the day after Premier Doug Ford spoke on his government's decision to suddenly shutter the 55-year-old building on June 21.

Ford doubled down on the government's messaging emphasizing that the building is not safe and needed to be closure.

He said any repairs to the building would be "foolish."

WATCH | Doug Ford says the science centre needed to close:

Ford calls Ontario Science Centre building 'a total mess' not worth fixing

2 months ago

Duration 2:28

Premier Doug Ford addressed the Ontario Science Centre building closure for the first time Wednesday, saying the building is not worth saving. Ford said a peer review of the engineering report that led to the centre's closure will come out Thursday. CBC's Lorenda Reddekopp has more.

"That place is absolutely just a total mess, from top to bottom, to front to back, to every single building," Ford said at a news conference in Etobicoke Wednesday.

Ford's comments come after weeks of public outcry over the abrupt shuttering of the building on June 21 and cancellations of programming.

The building will be emptied out by late October. The science centre will be eventually moved to Ontario Place and an interim location will be found until then, the province said at the time of the building's closure.

Engineers say report indicates fixes possible

However, CBC Toronto spoke to several engineers this month who said the province's messaging and what's in the Rimkus report do not match and thebuilding's closure could have been avoided.

The engineers said the reports by Rimkus found six panels across the three buildings were at "critical risk" of collapse. Rimkus also said between two and six per cent of panels were "high risk" and at an increased riskof collapsing.

The critical panels were either supported or replaced right away. As for the high risk panels, the reportssaid those would be safe only until Oct. 31, because the high-risk panels might not be able to handle snow.

The province has said repairing and eventually replacing allroof panels regardless of their risk level would cost between $22 million and $40 million and would take over two years to complete.

Ash Milton, a spokesperson for the Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma, told CBC Toronto earlier this month that the full capital investment to fix the building would be $478 million.

On Wednesday, a forensic engineer told CBC Toronto the Rimkus report confirms fixes could be made that would extend the building's life another two decades. But the province is making a choice not to, he said.

"The decision is not really founded on solid professional and technical findings ... the professional opinions have been misused to suit a predetermined direction that the government has decided on," he said.

Liberal MPP Adil Shamji said Thursday the province has not provide any proof that would justify the shutting of the science centre and that neither the Rimkus report nor the peer review recommend the closure.

He called the news conference from Infrastructure Ontario "spin" to suit the premier's agenda to close the building.

"Today's announcement was full of contradictions," he said at a news conference.

"A key message coming out of this is that there are repairs to be made. So let's make the repairs, instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater," he said.

Ontario Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner said it's the "negligence" of the Ford government that has led the science centre building "to fall into a state of disrepair that we should never allow for other cultural landmarks.

"Other buildings like the ROM or the CN Tower are properly repaired and restored because we recognize their historical, cultural and educational value. Why not this building in this community?" he said in a news release Thursday.