The federal government’s $80.5-million investment in the Canada Science and Technology Museum will see the museum reopen in 2017, but not in the location many people wanted.
The museum announced it would be shut down for several weeks after inspectors discovered mould in a wall in September.
The problem became more complex when further assessment revealed the wall was supporting an area of the ceiling that had been sealed off for asbestos the year before, says Olivier Bouffard, a spokesperson for the museum.
“The only benefit is that we still have (a museum), right?” says Roland Andersson, executive director of the Chemical Institute of Canada.
“It’s just not a good location to put something like that in a semi-industrial area. There’s no other attraction out there.”
Andersson wrote a column about the museum’s need to relocate in Canadian Chemical News magazine last year, back when the problems were limited to a leaky roof.
His interest in its relocation is to develop the next generation of scientists and engineers, whose interest is easiest to catch when they are younger.
“We need the best and the brightest in science and technology and a museum that’s strategically located,” says Andersson. “You can imagine how many more people would have visited in the last 20, 30, 50 years if (the museum) would have been built downtown.”
Having the museum downtown would also make it easier to market to tourists and a new building would get more attention, says Jantine Van Kregten, an Ottawa Tourism spokesperson.
“However, a renovated building is better than a closed building, and from what I’ve heard there’s some pretty impressive plans afoot to renovate the existing Science and Tech museum.”
The funding will go into replacing the roof, getting rid of the mould, making the building more durable in the event of a fire or earthquake and the exterior more modern looking.
The museum is also focusing on creating a digital experience, which could include more interactive options such as google glasses and large touchscreens, as well as an educational YouTube channel.
“From the museum’s perspective, the idea of being reopened in the shortest time as possible was one of our most important considerations,” says Bouffard.
Bouffard says at the time of the closure all options were explored, but renovating at the museum’s current location was the best in terms of time and cost. He says a new building and location would have taken around 10 years to complete, as opposed to two to three years of renovations.
“Basically it’s going to be, by-and-large, a new museum from floor to ceiling,” says Bouffard. “Pretty much only the outside brick will remain standing.”
During the renovation period, the museum will look at alternative places to showcase its collection.
Bouffard says the museum will suffer financially during the renovations since the average 300,000 visitors per year won’t be paying admission for the next two to three years.
“We’re hoping that what we have to offer once the museum has been reopened and is new and revamped and in a lot better shape than it’s been as of late . . . will draw our faithful visitors back and we ask for their patience in the meantime.”