SUPARKBIA
Design Studio II Master of Landscape Architecture Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Design University of Toronto Fadi Masoud + Elise Shelley 2018
“Around the world, the vast majority of people are moving to cities not to inhabit their centres, but to suburbanize their peripheries. By 2030, an estimated 1.5 million square kilometres of land worldwide will become urbanized at the edges of cities. Many countries are already majority suburban. In North America, 69 percent of the population lives in suburbs and over 75 percent of jobs lie outside the urban core. The sheer magnitude of land conversion taking place demands that new attention and creative energy be devoted to the imminent global suburban expansion... Despite all the predictions and evidence pointing to a future horizontal city form, the fields of Design and Planning still lack a robust, unbiased intellectual and theoretical platform to examine and debate it. Not since rapid postWorld War II suburban expansion was ushered in by the stewardship of landscape architecture has any design field taken the lead on suburban futures. The allied Planning and Design fields have proven unable to significantly shape suburbia, which has continued unabated and in forms primarily driven by market-driven economic policies, speculation, tax policies, and lax government regulation‌ The results are widespread suburban models that are wasteful, unsustainable, and inequitable for many social and economic reasons. Perhaps as a reaction to our own ineffectiveness, the allied design fields have overwhelmingly avoided suburbia.â€? Future of Suburbia Biennale Theme and Exhibition MIT Leventhal Center for Advanced Urbanism (2015)
Left Ross Racine - White Eagle Park (2009)
01 02 03 04
CONTENT
INTRODUCTION
Toronto Is Suburban
SITE
Suburban Park Figure Ground Catalogue and Index
REGION
Contextualizing the Suburban Park
TRANSFORMATION
Designing Dynamic Suburban Parks
1
Introduction
01
According to Census Canada, the country is still a suburban nation. More than two-thirds of the nation’s population lived in some form of suburban neighbourhood in 2016. In the Toronto region, more than 86 per cent of the population lived in a suburban neighbourhood. Within every one of Canada’s 33 census metropolitan areas, the proportion of suburban residents is over 80 per cent. The latest census numbers highlight which spots in the Toronto’s census metropolitan area — a region stretching from Oakville and Milton in the west, Pickering and Ajax in the east, and up north to New Tecumseth, Mono, and Bradford — are experiencing significant growth. While nearby Mississauga is barely growing, areas further away like Milton, King, WhitchurchStouffville, Brampton and Caledon experienced upwards of 10 per cent growth over the 2011 to 2016 period. That’s more than double the 4.5 per cent growth rate of the actual city of Toronto during that time. The rate of transformation along Toronto’s edges is an opportunity and fertile ground for design innovation; this is especially true where landscape architects are already playing a significant role in shaping the polycentric metropolis.
Introduction
TORONTO IS SUBURBAN
2
Introduction 3
Suburban Park Revitalization The suburban fabric is inherently a landscape of patches and corridors of development and open space. The Toronto Regional Conservation Authority (TRCA) manages and owns massive swaths of open greenspace in the GTA. Greenspace is defined as parks, ravines, nature reserves, and hazard lands (floodplains, steep slopes and other areas where natural conditions restrict development) that are publicly secured lands (owned by conservation authorities, municipalities, and provincial or federal government). While there is no agreed standard for the optimum amount of greenspace that should be preserved in urban settings, the average in urban areas across Canada was 8.4 ha per 1,000 people in 2011. Over the last five years, the amount of greenspace per 1,000 people across the TRCA’s jurisdiction has likely decreased due to population increase. Currently, TRCA’s jurisdiction is the most urbanized and densely populated urban area within the province. According to provincial planners, it is projected to remain one of the fastest growing areas of the province for at least the next 25 years. The population of the GTA is expected to grow to an estimated 9.5 million by 2041, requiring new housing, schools, roads and other infrastructure for more than three million new residents. The TRCA’s target for 2021 is to acquire more than 1,000 ha of additional greenspace and
to complete an inventory of the public greenspace within GTA region. Its longterm target is to maintain or surpass the ratio of 8.4 hectares per 1,000 people. Meaning landscape architects can and should play an active and critical role in transforming and designing parkland that fosters higher environmental performance and social inclusion through design innovation. Studio Structure An in-depth study of systems allowed students to examine how design concepts can translate in different physical and cultural contexts. The primary theme of the course focused on landscape relationships with special attention given to redefining the boundaries between landscape, urbanism, and the concept of public space. Students explored the ecology and phenomenology of planting, earthworks, surface materials, and their implications for the design of constructed space and environments. Assignments integrated strategies learned in various support courses, including site engineering, urban ecosystems, planting design, visual communication, and history and theory, and encouraged experimentation with a variety of visual representation techniques to interrogate the quantitative and qualitative aspects of space and program. The studio examined, critiqued, mapped and designed the future of suburban parks, their ubiquity, and the value of public
Introduction 4
open space in the suburban context in the 21st Century. It explored themes brought on by contemporary research on suburbia such as: Heterogeneity Diversity and the increased hybridization of ecological and social characteristics vs. the standard and the generic. Productivity and Performance The harnessing of suburban space to generate net positive eco-system services and value vs. consumption, waste and depletion. Experimentation The freedom in suburbia to invent new, recombinant forms and functions of architecture and landscape.
Site 5
02 SUBURBAN PARK FIGURE GROUND CATALOGUE AND INDEX
Studio members were broken into 5 groups of 5 students. Each group was assigned to a different suburban region of the city. Group members generated a graphic index of 10 total parks from that area to draw, model, analyze and compare. A very strict and uniform graphic standard and template was assigned. Students drew and modeled the parks in 3-D in order to generate plans and serial section obliques of the 10 parks. This included topography, circulation and paths, vegetation, fences, program and activity, and surface and ground materials. Students were required to research municipal data pertaining to the age of the park, annual maintenance cost, and project developers and designers, where possible. The final collection of 50 parks from the five sites were then indexed and compared in order to act as a research survey for subsequent phases of the studio.
Site
SITE
6
7
Site
SCARBOROUGH
Valley Down Park Allan Kerbel Park Duggan Park Rosalea Park Centennial Park Gage Park Meadowland Park Joyce Archdekin Park Robert Reid Trail Park County Court Park
Malvern Park Shawn Blu Rose Park Harvest Moon Park Littles Park Hupfield Park Neilson Park Berner Trail Park Pinetree Park Burrows Park Murison Park
NORTH YORK
`MARKHAM
Dan Iannuzzi Park Driftwood Parkette Driftwood Park + Hydro Finch Langdale Court Greenbelt Yorkwoods Park Fingrove Park Stanley Park Spenvalley Park Sentinel Park Bratty Park
Montrose Woods Briarwood Park Toogood Park Village Park Leighland Park Personna Park Calvert Park Crosby Park Coledale Park Carlton Park MISSISSAUGA Buttonbush Park Meadowvale Sports Park Syntex Green Mullet Creek Park Glendenning Park Osprey Marsh Churchill Meadows O’Harra Park O’Connor Park Duncairn Park
Site
BRAMPTON
8
9
Site
10
Site
BRAMPTON
PARKS OF THE ETOBICOKE CREEK WATERSHED 1
2
3
4
Site
6
13
5
Site
1. Valley Down Park 2. Allan Kerbel Park 3. Duggan Park 4.Rosalea Park 5. Centennial Park 6. Gage Park 7. Meadowland Park 8. Joyce Archdekin Park 9. Robert Reid Trail Park 10. County Court Park
14
7
9
10
Site 15
Valley Down Park 1986 1.7 ha Designer unknown
City of Brampton - 43°7'11.05N 79°77'66.00"W Elspeth Holland
Site 16
Allan Kerbel Park 1997 3.33 ha n Designer unknown
City of Brampton - 43°42'11.05N 79°46'43.09"W Elspeth Holland
Site 17
Duggan Park 1938 9.05 ha Arick Construction
City of Brampton - 43°41'43.3"N 79°45'50.9"W Zhengbang Wang
Site 18
1950 3.29 ha Designer unknown n
Rosalea Park City of Brampton - 43°41'23.7"N 79°45'31.7"W Zhengbang Wang
Site 19
Centennial Park 1967 16.61 ha NAK Design Strategies
City of Brampton - 43°41’12.93"N 79°45'05.83"W Ted Marchant
Site 20
1945 1.64 ha Designer Unknown
Gage Park City of Brampton - 43°41’01.44"N 79°45'29.92"W Ted Marchant
Site 21
1967 8.49 ha City of Brampton
Joyce Archdekin Park City of Brampton - 43°40'33.87"N 79°44'54.21"W Hillary DeWildt
Site 22
1965 4.7 ha Designer unknown
Meadowland Park City of Brampton - 43°40'49.43"N 79°45'03.05"W Hillary DeWildt
Site 23
1985 5.92 ha Designer unknown
County Court Park City of Brampton - 43°39'47.3"N 79°43'24.2"W Ambika Pharma
Site 24
1989 0.91 ha Region of Peel & TRCA
Robert Reid Trail Park City of Brampton - 43°39'56.01"N 79°43'47.85"W Ambika Pharma
NORTH YORK
PARKS ALONG BLACK CREEK REGION
Site
10
1
27
3
2
1. Dan Iannuzzi Park 2. Driftwood Parkette 3. Driftwood Park + Hydro Finch 4. Langdale Court Greenbelt 5. Yorkwoods Park 6. Fingrove Park 7. Stanley Park 8. Spenvalley Park 9. Sentinel Park 10. Bratty Park
9
Site
8
28
4
5 7
6
Site 29
2005 1.08 ha Toronto City Council
Dan Iannuzzi Park City of North York - 43°76’69”N 79°50’99”W Sing Zixin Chen
Site 30
Year Unknown 7.7 ha Designer Unknown
Sentinel Park City of North York - 43°75’60”N 79°50’07”W Sing Zixin Chen
Site 31
Year Unknown 8.7 ha Designer Unknown
Driftwood Park and Finch Hydro Corridor City of North York - 43°44’03”N 79°30’28”W Bonnie Chuong
Site 32
Year Unknown 4 ha Designer Unknown
Firgrove Park City of North York - 43°44’50”N 79°31’16”W Bonnie Chuong
Site 33
Year Unknown 0.4 ha Designer Unknown
Yorkwoods Park City of North York - 43°44’47”N 79°30’51”W Yuanyuan Ye
Site 34
Year Unknown 1.9 ha Designer Unknown
Bratty Park City of North York - 43°45’18”N 79°29’46”W Yuanyuan Ye
Site 35
Year Unknown 2.82 ha Designer Unknown
Spenvalley Park City of North York - 43°74’42”N 79°50’85”W Wenpei Fang
Site 36
Year Unknown 1.79 ha Designer Unknown
Stanley Park City of North York - 43°59’21”N 80°16’81”W Wenpei Fang
Site 37
Year Unknown 1.72 ha Designer Unknown
Driftwood Park City of North York - 43°46’04”N 79°30’49”W Chiling Zhou
Site 38
Year Unknown 2.52 ha Designer Unknown
Langdale Court Greenbelt City of North York - 43°45’17”N 79°30’18”W Chiling Zhou
SCARBOROUGH
NORTHEAST SCARBOROUGH PARKS
Park-Community Relationships i
By: Bronwyn Austin, Blake Creamer, Alyssa Lagana, Alexan
1
Site
2
41
1970s 5.79 ha
Malvern P
City of Scarborough - 43°48'32
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) [Developer]
Year Built Area: 10.17 ha
0
100
Burrows Hall Park City of Scarborough - 43°47'36.78"N 79°13'37.70"W
Developer/Designer
0m
Year Built Area: 7.86 ha
Bronwyn Austin
100m
Designer / Developer
Littles Park City of Scarborough - 43°49'03.37"N 79°12'16.82"W 0
10
20m
6 8 7
1973 Area: 2.68 ha
Berner Trail Park City of Scarborough - 43°48'05.13"N 79°13'22.48"W
0 Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation [Developer]
1976 Area: 3.58 ha
Pinetree Park 0
50
100
150m
100
150m
Blake Creamer
Year Built Area: 3.23 ha
City of Scarborough - 43°47'58.37"N 79°14'02.67"W
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) [Developer]
50
Blake Creamer
Hupfield
City of Scarborough - 43°48'3
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) [Developer]
100
1. Burrows Hall Park 2. Littles Park 3. Malvern Park 4. Neilson Park 5. Murison Park 6. Pinetree Park 7. Berner Trail Park 8. Hupfield Park 9. Shawn Blu Rose Park 10. Harvest Moon Park
ships nships in Scarborough, ininScarborough, Scarborough, Ontario Ontario Ontario
Lagana, ana, ndra Alexandra Ntoukas, Alexandra Tharshni Ntoukas, Ntoukas, Shanmuganathan Tharshni Tharshni Shanmuganathan Shanmuganathan
3
4
Site
5
Park Malvern Malvern Park Park
1” Margin
Scarborough City 2.99"N of Scarborough 79°13'02.17"W - 43°48'32.99"N - 43°48'32.99"N 79°13'02.17"W 79°13'02.17"W 0
d Park
200m100
100
Year Built Area: 10.04 ha
Year Built Year Built Area: 10.04 Area: ha 10.04 ha
Neilson ParkNeilson Neilson ParkPark
200m Shanmuganathan 200m City of ScarboroughCity - 43°48'52.59"N ofCity Scarborough of Scarborough 79°13'28.36"W - 43°48'52.59"N - 43°48'52.59"N 79°13'28.36"W 79°13'28.36"W Tharshni Tharshni Tharshni Shanmuganathan Shanmuganathan
Canada Mortgage and Canada Canada Mortgage Mortgage and and 100 Housing Corporation Housing (CMHC) Housing Corporation Corporation (CMHC) (CMHC) [Developer] [Developer] [Developer]
100 100
42
1” Margin 1” Margin Year Built Area: 4.39 ha
Murison Park
Murison Murison Park Park
Year Built Year Built City of Scarborough - 43°47'52.71"N City of Scarborough City of 79°12'19.02"W Scarborough - 43°47'52.71"N - 43°47'52.71"N 79°12'19.02"W 79°12'19.02"W Area: 4.39 Area: ha 4.39 ha
Designer / Developer DesignerDesigner / Developer / Developer 0m First Name. Last Name First Name. FirstLast Name. Name Last Name
Bronwyn Austin 100m0m
0m
100m
Bronwyn Austin Bronwyn Austin
100m
10
9
100
100
100
1984 2.09 ha
Shawn Blu Rose Park
Shawn Blu Shawn RoseBlu Park Rose Park
1984 1984 City of Scarborough - 43°48'43.10"N 79°12'34.25"W City of Scarborough City of Scarborough - 43°48'43.10"N - 43°48'43.10"N 79°12'34.25"W 79°12'34.25"W 2.09 ha 2.09 ha
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) [Developer]
0 50 and Canada Mortgage Canada Mortgage 100m and 0 Housing Corporation Housing (CMHC) Corporation (CMHC) [Developer] [Developer]
0 Tharshni 50 50 100m Shanmuganathan
100m
Tharshni Shanmuganathan Tharshni Shanmuganathan
1990s 1.67 ha City of Toronto
Hupfield Hupfield Park Park
Harvest Moon Park
Harvest Moon Harvest Park Moon Park
1990s 1990s City of Scarborough - 43°49'15.66"N 79°12'32.47"W City of Scarborough City of Scarborough - 43°49'15.66"N - 43°49'15.66"N 79°12'32.47"W 79°12'32.47"W 1.67 ha 1.67 ha 0
10 of Toronto City of Toronto City
0
20m
0
10 Alexandra Ntoukas 10
20m
20m
Alexandra Ntoukas Alexandra Ntoukas
31.55"N City of 79°12'48.30"W Scarborough City of Scarborough - 43°48'31.55"N - 43°48'31.55"N 79°12'48.30"W 79°12'48.30"W
0age and
100
100 Shanmuganathan Tharshni.
Tharshni. Shanmuganathan Tharshni. Shanmuganathan
MHC) oration (CMHC)
0
0 050 50 100m 100m 50 100m
Site 43
1970s 5.79 ha CMHC
Malvern Park City of Scarborough - 43°48’32.99”N 79°13’02.17”W Tharshni Shanmuganathan
Site 44
1984 2.09 ha CMHC
Shawn Blu Rose Park City of Scarborough - 43°48’32.99”N 79°13’02.17”W Tharshni Shanmuganathan
Site 45
1990s 1.67 ha City of Toronto
Harvest Moon Park City of Scarborough - 43°49’15.66”N 79°12’32.47”W Alexandra Ntoukas
Site 46
1990s 7.86 ha City of Toronto
Littles Park City of Scarborough - 43°49’03.37”N 79°12’16.82”W Alexandra Ntoukas
Site 47
1985 3.23 ha CMHC
Hupfield Park City of Scarborough - 43°48’31.55”N 79°12’48.30”W Alyssa Lagana
Site 48
Year Unknown 10.04 ha CMHC
Neilson Park City of Scarborough - 43°48’52.59”N 79°13’28.36”W Alyssa Lagana
Site 49
1973 2.68 ha CMHC
Berner Trail Park City of Scarborough - 43°48’05.13”N 79°13’22.48”W Blake Creamer
Site 50
1976 3.58 ha CMHC
Pinetree Park City of Scarborough - 43°47’58.37”N 79°14’02.67”W Blake Creamer
Site 51
1975 10.17 ha City of Scarborough
Burrows Hall Park City of Scarborough - 43°47’36.78”N 79°13’37.70”W Bronwyn Austin
Site 52
Year Unknown 4.39 ha City of Scarborough
Murison Park City of Scarborough - 43°47’52.71”N 79°12’19.02”W Bronwyn Austin
MARKHAM
PARKS OF MARKHAM
2
1
Site
2
55
6
7
1. Montrose Woods 2. Briarwood Park 3. Toogood Park 4. Village Park 5. Leighland Park 6. Personna Park 7. Calvert Park 8. Crosby Park 9. Coledale Park 10. Carlton Park
4
5
Site
3
56
9
10
8
Site 57
Year Unknown 1.77 ha Town of Markham
Leighland Park City of Markham - 43°52’9.82”N 79°20’40.10”W Avery Clarke
Site 58
Year Unknown 4.16 ha Town of Markham
Toogood Park City of Markham - 43°51’40”N 79°19’9.34”W Avery Clarke
Site 59
Year Unknown 6.37 ha Town of Markham
Crosby Park City of Markham - 43°52’7.04”N 79°18’51.84”W Aliya Karmali-Esmail
Site 60
Year Unknown 7.12 ha Town of Markham
Coledale Park City of Markham - 43°51’54”N 79°20’40.27”W Aliya Karmali-Esmail
Site 61
Year Unknown 6.61 ha Town of Markham
Calvert Park City of Markham - 43°52’37”N 79°20’45.6”W Caroline Kasiuk
Site 62
Year Unknown 9.32 ha Town of Markham
Personna Park City of Markham - 43°53’3.27”N 79°21’19.28”W Caroline Kasiuk
Site 63
Year Unknown 7.28 ha Town of Markham
Carlton Park City of Markham - 43°86’98.89”N 79°33’02.70”W Jennifer Tran
Site 64
Year Unknown 0.53 ha Town of Markham
Montrose Park City of Markham - 43°86’25”N 79°62’34.34”W Jennifer Tran
Site 65
Year Unknown 2.44 ha Town of Markham
Briarwood Park City of Markham - 43°52’21.68”N 79°20’0.70”W Aexandra Walker
Site 66
Year Unknown 2.75 ha Town of Markham
Village Park City of Markham - 43°12’49”N 79°19’29.75”W Alexandra Walker
NORTHWEST MISSISSAUGA PARKS
5
3
4
Site
2
67
7
1
6
1
2
3
4
5
1. Buttonbush Park 2. Meadowvale Sports Park 3. Syntex Green 4. Mullet Creek Park 5. Glendenning Park 6. Osprey Marsh 7. Churchill Meadows 8. O’Harra Park 9. O’Connor Park 10. Duncairn Park
Site
10
68
9
8
6
7
8
9
10
Site 69
1980-86 2.37 ha City of Mississauga
Syntex Park City of Mississauga - 43°60’43”N 79°75’33”W Shikha Jagwani
Site 70
1985-89 6.57 ha Markborough Properties Inc.
Meadowvale Sports Park City of Mississauga - 43°60’71.44”N 79°76’11”W Shikha Jagwani
Site 71
2005 1.21 ha Designer Unknown
Buttonbush Park City of Mississauga - 43°58’56”N 79°79’17”W Alexandre Dos Santos
Site 72
1970 0.81 ha Designer Unknown
Glendenning Park City of Mississauga - 43°59’67”N 79°72’85”W Alexandre Dos Santos
Site 73
2001 0.50 ha Caliber Homes
O’Harra Park City of Mississauga - 43°54’87”N 79°74’65”W Michael Wideman
Site 74
1980 10.00 ha Project Planning Asoociates
Mullet Creek Park City of Mississauga - 43°59’90”N 79°75’01”W Michael Wideman
Site 75
2002 14.55 ha Designer Unknown
Osprey Park City of Mississauga - 43°56’35”N 79°76’10”W Bonnie Tung
Site 76
1997 6.00 ha City of Mississauga
Duncairn Park City of Mississauga - 43°55’87”N 79°72’49”W Bonnie Tung
Site 77
2011 6.97 ha PMA Architects
O’Connor Park City of Mississauga - 43°55’31”N 79°73’93”W Likun Liu
Site 78
2001 10.76 ha Caliber Homes
Churchill Meadows Community Common City of Mississauga - 43°55’75”N 79°74’77”W Likun Liu
Region
“The park throughout is a single work of art, and as such, subject to the primary law of every work of art, namely, that it shall be framed upon a single, noble motive, to which the design of all its parts, in some more or less subtle way, shall be confluent and helpful.”
80
Frederick Law Olmsted
Left Bernardo Secchi and Paola Viganò - Le Grand Paris, The After Kyoto Metropolis (2009)
Region
03
81
CONTEXTUALIZING THE SUBURBAN PARK
THE REGION
Region
Designers were tasked with discerning and working with complex forces and process that affect the organizational and physical conditions of their sites. A critical component of the design research process necessitated the visual distillation, translation, and communication of these forces through mapping. In this case, “Mapping� does not simply imply the geospatial translation of data from one visual media to another, it is the deliberate curation of information as to reveal new knowledge, insight, and understanding of a place.
82
In the same groups and sites from the previous exercise, teams generated a series of macro-scale mappings that situated and contextualized their parks. Using a cartographic base, teams then curated data sets, graphic charts, timelines, and other info-graphic visuals using layers to construct an account of relevant associations between their research topics and suburban sites. Zooming in and out in scales to find the appropriate measure to tell that narrative, the 10 individual parks from assignment 01 were clearly highlighted. In four distinct mapping drawings, each team tackled the following topics: 1. Socio-cultural + Demographic 2. Infrastructural + Urban Networks 3. Environmental Systems, Watersheds + Geologic Layers 4. Urban Development: Values, Age, Zoning + Density
83
Region
BRAMPTON
85
Region
86
Region
87
Region
88
Region
X
Region
90
Region
X
Region
92
Region
X
Region
94
Region
X
Region
96
Region
97
Region
NORTH YORK
99
Region
100
Region
101 Region
FINCH WEST YORK UNIVERSITY
FINCH WEST
SENTINEL
DOWNSVIEW PARK
Region
TOBERMORY
102
103 Region
SCARBOROUGH
105 Region
106
Region
107 Region
Region
Toronto Schools Beyond the 401
108
109 Region
MARKHAM
111 Region
112
Region
113 Region
114
Region
115 Region
MISSISSAUGA
117 Region
118
Region
120
Region
X
Region
122
Region