Page 1

TORONTO PARKETTES 1 Map, 1 Catalogue and 8 Situations…or an Attempt to Exhaust the Potential of Typological Analysis in Small Public Space Design

A Project by Department of Unusual Certainties


1

PARKETTES 525 Opportunities for Intervention

There are over 500 public parkettes* in Toronto. For the most part they have the look and feel of ‘left-over’ space in the city, consisting of minimal design and investments – some grass, a bench and a garbage can. Usage of these spaces is low, and the City’s Parks and Recreation Department has little strategy for making them more attractive with most of their focus on larger parks and the promotion of active recreation.

The consistency of application of each strategy to each typology allows users to identify that the park situation they are currently experiencing, is not stand alone, but one in a series of ‘lakefront slips’ or ‘awkward situations’ that compose the city. ‘Random, leftover spaces’ as parkettes are usually perceived and experienced thus take on a unified whole, each one belonging to a specific subset, that citizens take note of as they travel and experience the city.

As a whole parkettes represent a major untapped resource in the city. Combined they amount to 124 ha roughly the equivalent to 8 Trinity Bellwoods, and most Torontonians live within walking distance of at least one parkette. Furthermore their shape and size provide a unique spatial quality that larger parks cannot provide.

While the approach tends towards the formal – a way of tying together and making understandable a diversity of spaces, through formal design moves – another related design methodology presents itself, which ties the essential qualities of each space to an appropriate programmatic intervention.

How can these spaces be better programmed and designed?

Project Methodology Through mapping, cataloguing, and speculative design, Department of Unusual Certainties offer a method, among many, for reconceiving small public space in the city. Our investigation begins with an attempt to categorize the stock of parkettes in the city. Categorization occurs through analysing the basic formal qualities of each space. By pairing spaces with similar qualities 8 different typologies are deduced, each exuding essential qualities unique to their category. By understanding the essential qualities of each typology, we can than apply a design strategy to that space which plays off of and amplifies those qualities – making more explicit the nature of these spaces – and at a city wide-scale making more evident the existence and character of these specific small park spaces. So for example, the heterogeneous infrastructures that collide to make an ‘awkward situation’ are brought together and amplified by marking those infrastructures with a consistent appliqué. The intimate interface between user and lake, as presented in Lakefront Slips is amplified by an intervention which allows a single user to enter into a confessional with the lake.

*a parkette is defined as any park space under 0.5 hectares


2

8 TYPOLOGIES Understanding Intervention

The Parkette is a creature of both circumstance and chance. These two attributes establish the parkette as a unique space found within the confines of the city as compared to many other types of predictable and planned public space. Looking closely at the spatial patterns of Toronto’s parkettes one can immediately notice both the similarities and differences between them. There are many determining factors that define the spatial characteristics of parkettes. In some cases it is a political / planning decision and in other cases they are result of the surrounding infrastructure.

These typologies express the first step in analysis in order to better understand the design potential of parkettes. Further analysis of each typology reveals that within each of the specific categories sub categories are present. This is expressed through a series of diagrams which illustrate the different spatial conditions of each typology.

Built Form Department of Unusual Certainties has developed 8 different typologies which Toronto parkettes can be classified into. These Typologies are as follows:

Urban Cut Awkward Situation TrafďŹ c Islands Road Allowances Subway Surplus Lands Grid Interrupted Lakefront Slips Considered Spaces

Transportation Routes / Parking Lots, etc. Parkette Condition


3

525 PARKETTES 7

3

1

7

1

1

7

9 1

1

1

3 1 9

1

16 1

7

9

1

1

1

9 9

8 7

9

9 6

94

8 7

7

9

1 1

9

1 1

1

9

9 1 1

6 7

9

1 9

3

9

1

1

6

1

1 9

3

9

7

1

1

3

9 8

8 9

7

7

9

8

4

4

1

1

1 9

9

7

1 1

7

1

7

8 3

1 1

1

6

4

3

8

4

3

3 3

3

1

1

8 1

7

9 8 4 3

1 8

7 7

1

4

1

3

1

8

33

3

3 1

9

1

1

6

9 3

8

2

2

2 2

8

7 3

8

3

3

8

11

7

1

1

1

1

1

7

1 2

2

42

83

1 9

7

5 5

5

5

5 5

5

5

9

8

1

9

8

1

6

6 1

6

7

7 3

6

1

9 3

9 9

9

1 1

3

1 1 6 6

1 7

2

1

1

1 1

3 1

4

1

1

8

4 1 1

4

6

6

4

1

8

1

1 4

6 6 6

5

1

6 1 9 84

1 5 5

6

68

8

1

6 1

4

91

1

4

1

4 2

1

1

1 1 1

1

4

17 4 9

8

3

7

9

41

1 3 1

9

4

8

7

6

4

7

1

6

3

1

1

87

8

1

1

2 2

6

1

4

4

7

6

6

1

1

1

9

9

4

9 3

91

9

9 7

3

8

4

37

9 1 1

9

4

3

7 7

1

7 9 8

1 3

1

8

7

8

1

1

8 8 8 8

1

1

1

3

4

8

1

3

7 3

6

3

1

1

9

8

6

8 8

7

9

9

4

9

2

1

3

8

1

1

1

4 3

4

9

3

2

4

9

3

1

1

1

3

7

9

1

1 7

8

3

1 8

19

9 4

1

9 11

73

9 1 1 1 1 1

1

7

9 1

7

7

7

8

1

7


4

6 7 1

7

7

6

9

7

9 1

9

4

6

8

1

1 1

1 9

3

2 7

6

1

1 4

6 6

6

1

1

8

9 8

1 1

7

9

9 6

4

9 1 7

1 6

4

9

9

6

9

9

7 5

3

7

3

4

7 9

1

7

9

1

4 1

1

1

9

2

1

2 6

2

6 2 1

4 7 1

1 1

7

7 7 7

9

7

7

1

3

7 7 3 1

7 9

1

Urban Cut

6

Considered Space

2

Subway Surplus Lands

7

Awkward Situations

3

Islands

8

Grid Interrupted

4

Road Allowances

9

Other

5

Lakefront Slips


5

URBAN CUTS Current Situation

Projected Situation

Urban Cuts are parkettes produced from cuts in the regular pattern of the figure ground of the city. The ‘cut’ may be read as the surgical removal of developable space from a block. Because the cut usually mimics the shape and size of adjacent plots, it suggests the ghostly presence of an aborted construction. For instance one can look at a residential block with a plot cut out of it and imagine the house that could have filled that space.

Three strategies can be applied that would in different ways emphasize this typology as an urban cut.

The cut also reveals unintended views of the city - to firewalls, alleys, backyards, and garages; functional elements of the city, which are not dressed up or intended for public viewing and judgment. While some can interpret this as ugly, it also represents a rare act of humility in the city. In some instances the cut memorializes tragedy – where the cut is either the product of a fire or a condemned and demolished building. In other instances it simply symbolizes a certain ineptitude amongst the building industry. Instead of consciously designing park space, the developer simply removes a few plots of land from the development scheme to meet the minimum park space requirements.

The first strategy is to invoke the spirit of the building that once stood or could have stood where the park is now. A skeletal frame is erected to mimic the building’s envelope. Viewed from the street, a continuity and rhythm is restored to the succession of built objects. One reads; building, building, building – except the one building is a folly, with park growth bursting through its seams. The second strategy is to amplify the destructive qualities of the cut, by letting nature take over – a wilful act of letting go, acting as reminder that nature is just one cut deep and ready to move in the second we stop holding it back. The third strategy is to let the public space of the street spill into the cut. There is no need to create the separation between one public good (the street) and another (the parkette) especially when they are adjacent to each other. Instead the cut produces a merger of the two. Sidewalk paving extends into the cut, and a hard-scaped super sidewalk appears.

166

Alex Wilson / Thorogood Gardens / Glasgow Parkette / Grey Parkette / Bright Street Playground / Lucy Tot Lot / BedfordBloor Parkette / Brunswick Avenue Parkette / John St Parkette / Hillsdale Avenue Parkette / Grafton Avenue Park / Mcgill-Granby Parkette / Woolenscote Park / Maria Street Parkette / Perth Avenue Parkette / Melbourne Avenue Parkette / Bloor Ossington Playground / Lake Crescent Park / Kimbark/Coldstream Ravine/ Ontario Street Parkette / Sonya’s Park / Dundas Parkette / Paperbirch Walkway / Eastdale Playground / Sculpture Garden/ Beaty Avenue Parkette / Loring/Wyle Parkette / Primula Parkette / Tiverton Avenue Parkette / Ritchie Avenue Parkette / The Mission Ground Parkette / Mac Pherson Avenue Parkette / Hillmount Parkette / Asquith Green Park / Dundas Watkinson Parkette / Macklin Hancock Parkette / Yonge Theatre Block Park / Dundas/St.Clarens Parkette / Casa Loma Parkette / Dunn Avenue Parkette / Larrat Park / Pottery Playground / Carlaw Avenue Parkette / O’Shea Walkway / Joseph Burr Tyrrell Park / Margaret Fairley Park / Woodsworth Parkette / Debell Lane Parkette / Larry Sefton Park / Avalon Park / Pemberton Parkette / De Grassi Street Parkette / Empress Parkette / Thompson Street Parkette / Alexander Street Parkette / Spencer Cowan Parkette / St. Clements/Yonge Parkette / Jennifer Kateryna Koval’S’Kyj Park / Coxwell Parkette / Irene Avenue Parkette / James Canning Gardens / Gledhill Park / Rees St Park / Roxton Road Parkette / Harlandale Parkette / Carr Street Parkette / St. Simon’s Church Grounds / St. Hilda’s Parkette / Woodrow Park / J.T. Watson / Dufferin/King Park / Snider Parkette / Barkdene Park / Clovercrest Parkette / Empress Tot Lot / Albert Crosland Parkette / Cawthra Playground / Ailsa Craig Parkette / Aldwych Park / Alamosa Park / Basswood Parkette / Horsham Parkette / Kenneth Park / St. Clair Gardens / Gustav Parkette / Huron St Playground / Greenfield / Longmore Lands / Coxwell Avenue Parkette / Pelham Avenue Playground / Haney Park / Amsterdam Square / Scotia Parkette / Stanley Avenue Park / Huron - Washington Parkette / Norman Jewison Park / CloseSpringhurst Parkette / Smithwood Park / Tichester Park / Festival Park / Bowan Court Parkette / Lions Gate Park / Holley Park / Roseneath Park / Henrietta / Morse Street Playground / Hillside Park / Gamble Park / Geary Avenue Parkette / Telfer Park / Bishop Park / Conlands Parkette / Wildwood Crescent Playground / Bedford Parkette / Pleasantview Park / Lord Seaton Park / Avenue Road Playground / Joel Weeks Parkette / Maple Leaf Forever Park / Bayhampton Parkette / Kemford Parkette / Florence Gell Park / Barlett Parkette / Merril Park / Aneta Circle Parkette / Weston Village Park / Dane Parkette / Talara Park / Garden Avenue Parkette / Chandos Park South / Woburn Avenue Playground / St. James Town West Park / Craigton Court / Marian Engel Park / Kirkdene Park / Mcallister Park / Donnybrook Park/ Charles G. Williams Park / Hanover Park / Arlington Parkette / Donmount Park / Chandos Park North / Erwin Krickhahn Park Nairn Park / Midwest Park / Wilson Heights Park / Davenport Square / Old Orchard Park / Triple Crown Park / Sumach / Shuter Parkette / Conacher Park / Cortleigh Parkette / Vine Avenue Playground / Bristol Avenue Parkette / Chater Court Parkette / Brandon Avenue Parkette / Ranee Park / Cummer Parkette / Wilson Heights Parkette / Brookfield Park / Dell Park / Parliament Square / Beresford Park / St. Andrew’s Playground / Thompson Street Parkette / Alexander Street Parkette / Spencer/ Cowan Parkette / St. Clements/Yonge Parkette /Jennifer Kateryna Koval’S’Kyj Park / Coxwell Parkette /


6

Urban Cut Typology Study 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1 1

1 1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1

1

1

1 1

11

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

Mid-Block Full

Corner

1

1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1 1

1

1

Nib

1

1

1 1

1

Commercial

1 1

1

1 1 1

1

Hydro Corridor

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Mid-Block Partial

1

1

1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1

1

1

1

11

1

1

1 1

1 1 1

1

1


7

AWKWARD SITUATIONS Current Situation

Projected Situation

Awkward Situations result from the layering of competing ecologies and infrastructures in the city. Railways, gullies, highways, and other systems imposed on the traditional grid create a host of different awkwardly sized parcels, that often get left over as parkland. Common to these spaces is a certain heterogeneity of views. Standing in the centre, one can observe a multitude of systems that collaborate in the functioning of the city - a train whizzes by, the hydro towers buzz, cars back into the graffiti covered laneways. Like an unusual meeting between neighbouring strangers, the Awkward Situation has the potential to delight, surprise and horrify.

To bring together the different infrastructures that front onto an awkward situation, a common colour theme is applied. Back lane garages, railroad trusses, overpass walls, fences and house facades are all painted with the same appliqué – producing two opposing effects both uniting the space and amplifying the difference between each infrastructure. The strategy purposely focuses attention on the element that creates the park – the park’s edge. What happens in the middle is of no consequence.

66

Fairford Avenue Parkette / Kelsonia Parkette / Vesta Parkette / Percy St Playground / Delahaye Parkette / Staines Parkette / Saulter Street Parkette / Weston Village Parkette / Parkview Gardens Parkette / Caledonia/Rogers Parkette / St. Philips Road Parkette / Courthouse Square / Futura Parkette / Fiona Nelson Parkette / Gideon Park / Wembley Parkette / Harold Town Park / Mc Cleary Playground / Russell Hill Parkette / Carlaw - Badgerow Parkette / Kildonan Park / Candlebrook Crescent Park / Kiwanis Parkette / Neville Park Blvd Ravine / Knights of Columbus Park / Chelsea Avenue Playground / Jeff Sloan Playground / Trimbee Park / Sadler Parkette / Loredo Park / Knotwood Park / Rambert Crescent Parkette / Golf Club Parkette / Humber Gate Park / Gerrard/Carlaw Parkette / Hideaway Park / Columbus Parkette / Hickorynut Parkette / Adanac Parkette / Garthdale Parkette / Playter Gardens / Cayuga Park / Willard Gardens Parkette / Love Crescent Parkette / Northern Linear Park / Waller Avenue Ravine Lands / Graham Park / Ricardo Parkette / Edinborough Park / Cairns Avenue Parkette / Kenworthy Park / Frost Park / Pricefield Road Playground / Bathurst St Slopes / Lynndale Parkette / Mooregate Tot Lot / Oakcrest Parkette / Municipal Park / Ormskirk Park / Rosemount Gardens Parkette / Diana Park / High Level Pumping Station/Park / Haimer Park / Sunnylea Park / Kildonan Park / Candlebrook Crescent Park / Kiwanis Parkette /


8

Awkward Situations Typology Study 7

7

7 7

7

7 7

7

7

7

7

7 7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7 7 7

7 7

7 7 7

7

7 7 7 7 7

7 7

7 7

7

7

7 7

7

7 7

7

7

7

7 7

Interior Court Yard

Suburban Corner

Natural Intrusions

7 7 7

7

7

7 7 7

Infrastructure

7 7

7 7

7

7 7


9

ISLANDS Current Situation

Projected Situation

An island refers to a park space surrounded on all sides by road. The smallest islands are the green spaces in the middle of suburban cul-de-sacs. The largest islands are parks that occupy an entire block of a neighbourhood. The island typology is notable for producing a tension between openness and isolation. On the one hand the space is the most open of all the typologies - one can look into the park from any point outside the park. On the other hand the island is inherently isolated. The act of crossing the road provides a mental and physical barrier. One must consciously choose to enter the park by crossing the road. The island is always a destination

The island with its contradiction of being both open and isolated provides a space that leans towards acts more intimate in nature. Our proposal for these spaces is to create the opportunity for these intimate acts to occur - an invisible partition. The kissing couple, the meditating man, and the intensity of one on one competition are all acts which are enhanced by the islands spatial quality. The participants feel safe and hidden, happy to perform and practice more intimate activities which only usually occur indoors. However these feeling of intimacy are fleeting and can be lost by a single glance from an onlooker, breaking down their perceived wall of privacy and instead creating a stage where their private act has become a public performance.

52

Easson Avenue Traffic Island / Brule Gardens Traffic Island / Brendwin Circle / Clement Road Parkette / Riverside Drive Traffic Island / Dunvegan Parkette / Indian Mound Traffic Island / White Birch Road Island / Wimbleton Rd S. Parkette / Grattan Park / Coe Hill Drive Parkette / Duncan C. Little Parkette / King Georges/Keele Parkette / Rosevalley / Fairmeadow Parkette / Elm Ridge Drive Traffic Island / Anniversary Park / Rosevalley Park / St. Stevens Court Parkette / Symes / Viella Parkette / Connaught Circle / Maher Circle / St. Patricks Square / Green Hills Park / Walmer Road Circle / Saunders Crescent Parkette / Joel Swirsky Parkette / Dixington Parkette / Hilldowntree Parkette / Old Forest Hill Traffic Island / Lucy Maud Montgomery Park / Hartfield Court Parkette / Old Park Road Traffic Island / Dundas Dupont Traffic Island / Don Lake Parkette / Mallory Green / Whitney Park / Drumoak Road Parkette / Hearst Circle Parkette / Midvale Parkette / Windermere Avenue Parkette / Ambrose Parkette / Subway Surplus Lands - 3 / Gerrard St./ Carlaw Ave Traffic Island / Maughan Crescent Parkette / Cobble Hills Parkette / Varna Park / Haverson Park / Wartime Traffic Islands / Prince Edward Viaduct Parkette / Don Jail Roadway Traffic Island / Hartfield Court Parkette / Old Park Road Traffic Island / Dundas-Dupont Traffic Island / Don Lake Parkette /


10

Island Typology Study 3

3

3 3

3 3

3

3

3 3

3

3

3 3 3

3 3

3

3 3

3

3

3 3

3

3

33

3

3

3

3

3

3

3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3

3 3 3

Residential Circle

Residential Triangle

Intersection

Boulevard

Cul’d’sac


11

GRID INTERRUPTED Current Situation

Projected Situation

Grid Interrupted parks occur when a rogue street collides with the grid to produce a triangular plot of land. Rogue streets in this instance refer to any street that dares move in a direction different to what the grid dictates. These are spaces that purposely spite the unrelenting grid of the city, and the resulting parkette is a monument to this clash.

To emphasize the clash of streets, we propose a clash of materials. All materials are laid out orthogonal to the street edge they are closest to. As the two competing orthogonal systems move towards the centre they meet at a schism. Material is pushed up and under the other, producing a pile of rubble running down the spine or park. The rubble itself become a new seating area for people to contemplate the clash.

46

Casmir TrafďŹ c Island / Montclair Avenue Parkette / CastleďŹ eld Parkette / Lakeview Avenue Parkette / Mount Royal Parkette / Brunswick/College Parkette / Jane St & St. Clair Av - N/E Corner Lot / Greyton Site / Frank Stollery Parkette / Newton Parkette / Birchview Blvd Parkette / Glen Park Parkette / Sunnybrook Parkette / Cynthia/Frimette Parkette / Milner Parkette / Arthur Dyson Parkette / Elmira Road Allowance / Leavenworth Parkette / Seville Parkette / Snowellen Parkette / Marble Hill / Conlins Lot / Alexander Park / Scarlett Rd & St. Claire Road Allowance / Whitehall Parkette / L.M. Montgomery Park / St. Mary Street Parkette / Millstone Parkette / Yonge Boulevard Parkette / Greenbrae Parkette / Kennedy Road Parkette / Eglinton Gilbert Parkette / Matt Cohen Park / Indian Valley Crescent / Mount Pleasant Parkette / Malta Park / Kennard Parkette / Downsview Memorial Parkette / Kenway Park / Blythdale Greenbelt / Berczy Park / Tillplain Park / Sackville Playground / Elm Park / Bruce Mackey Parkette / Bathurst-Wilson Parkette / Chaplin Parkette / Bisset Park / Greenbrae Parkette / Kennedy Road Parkette /


12

Grid Interrupted Typology Study 8

8 8

8

8

8

8 8

8

8

8

8

8

88

8

8 8

8

8

8 8

8

8 8

8

8 8 8 8

8

8

8 8 8

8

8

8 8

8 8 8

8

Primary

Secondary

8

8 8


13

ROAD ALLOWANCE Current Situation

Projected Situation

Parkettes in this situation are the product of publically owned road allowances that have been converted to park space. These spaces usually take the form of an extra space along a roadway in-between the side wall of a building and the sidewalk. In many cases they occur at the intersection of a residential street with a commercial street and for this reason many Business Improvement Areas have converted these spaces into so-called Gateway Features.

The Road Allowance at its most honourable is an extension of the Right of Way in favour of slow mobility and allows for excess activity. In this situation the road allowance is represented in all its forms. In some cases it is wide, expanding the pedestrian area into a kind of wilderness. The participant is in a space with little relation to both the movement of traffic and the occurrence of private property. In other cases it becomes quite intimate allowing for it to be appropriated by those who understand its potential- a sidewalk cafe, an impromptu store, or a place for safe play.

In one sense the road allowance parkette reveals changes in attitude or miscalculations in traffic and infrastructure planning. An extra-wide roadway that was planned for - is no longer necessary and a park is produced. In another sense they symbolize prudence and uncertainty in the planning process.

We propose that these two qualities be built upon, creating environments that allow for both short term exploration(wilderness is expansiveness) and more intense activities that are indicative to a critical mass of citizens. There also exists a relationship between the width of the road allowance and the road it is attached to. The road allowances which are the most expansive tend to be on right of ways attuned more for the automobiles, creating space for activities of quickness, while others with less expansive widths expand the right of ways potential for more uses attuned with slowness.

42

Boswell Parkette / Glenview Parkette / Hillingdon/Woodrow Parkette / Bernard Avenue Road Allowance / Wychwood Parkette / Briar Hill Parkette / Grace - College Parkette / Hillhurst Parkette / Stewart A. Mcgregor Parkette / Austin Terrace Boulevard Lands / Cecil Street Parkette / Ridgewood Parkette / Briar Hill Chaplin Parkette / Princess Street Park / Touraine Parkette / Lillian H. Smith / Riverside Drive Parkette / Cassandra Greenbelt / Rosemary Parkette / Bathurst Subway Parkette / Hoptree Park / Gladhurst Park / John Mckenzie House / Highland Creek Parkette / Montague Parkette / Mcgill Parkette / Springhurst Parkette / Bakerton Parkette / Newgate Parkette / Market Lane / Farmcrest / Marlborough Parkette / George Hislop Park / Fraserwood Park / St. Alban’s Square / Spadina Park / Sandra / St. Clair Parkette / Everett Open Space / Evergreen Park / Dupont Parkette / Beaty Parkette / Southern Linear Park / Mcgill Parkette /


14

Road Allowance Typology Study 4

4

4

4

4

4 4 4

4

4

4 4

4

4

4

4

4 4

4 4 4

4

4

4

4

4 4

4 4 4

4

4

4 4

4 4

4

Adjacent to Infrastructure

Single Loaded Major Arterial

Double Loaded Major Arterial

Single Loaded Secondary

Double Loaded Secondary

4 4

4


15

CONSIDERED SPACE Current Situation

Projected Situation

Every once in while it becomes clear that a small park space was considered in the design and development process. The resulting park often carries clear markers of its ‘considered-ness’. As opposed to the other typologies described here which have the impression of being left-over or accidental spaces, the considered space shows some signs of intent – houses which face onto the park, a prominent location in the area, special paving materials and plantings.

It is difficult to justify imposing a new design on a park space that has already been designed – without a clear reason for doing so. An intervention is required that adds to - rather than re-writes the ‘considered’ quality of the space.

‘Considered’ space should not be thought of as inherently better than the other typologies simply because some time was put into their design. Often the considerations made are superficial - added in return for development rights beyond the legal density. Other times these spaces simply seem like try-hards.

Welcome to:

AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE BY DEVELOPER JONES LIMITED TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW TO PERMIT A MIXED-USE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LANDS. A 28-STOREY RESIDENTIAL TOWER FRONTING ON X STREET (IN PLACE OF EXISTING SURFACE PARKING LOT) WILL BE CONNECTED BY A 2-STOREY PODIUM TO A 35-STOREY HOTEL AND RESIDENTIAL TOWER FRONTING ON Y STREET. 10 200615 STE 27

Parkk

We propose an intervention that makes explicit the root of all considerations. A new park naming system is recommended – one that renames the park according to the exact by-law amendments and requirements that led to the creation of the park. Princess Parkette is renamed By-Law Amendment 7625 Parkette. The signage used is large white plywood with black all-cap text in reference to the development application notification signs that mark a site prior to development.

40

Bartley Park / Agnes Mcphail Square / Skeens Lane Parkette / Dalesford Parkette / Flora Voisey Park / Joseph Workman Park / Turnberry North Park / Alan/Oxford Parkette / Turnberry South Park / Pinery Trail Park / John Chang Neighbourhood Park / Leonard Linton Park / First Canadian Place Public Park / Yonge / Scollard Park / Lorrain Drive Park / Bobbie Rosenfeld Park / Sunfield Park / Cloud Gardens / Cathederal Square Park / Isabella Valancy Crawford Park / Sheppard Square Parkette / Danforth Avenue Parkette / Mccaul/Orde / Nesbitt Park / Toronto General Hospital Grounds / Nightstar Park / Lee Centre Park / Massey Harris Park / Hillsborough Park / Sisken Park / Simcoe Park / Joyce Park / Maryland Park / East of Bay North & South Block / Bellevue Square / Zooview Park / Weston / Gunns Park / Greenbelt Park / Jean Sibelius Square / Crocus Park / Northtown Park / Yonge / Scollard Park /


16

Considered Space Typology Study 6

6

6

6

6

6 6 6

6 6

6

6

6

6

6 6 6 6

6

6 6

6 6

6

6

6 6

6

6 6

Nib

Centre

6

6

6 6

6 6 6 6

6

6


17

SUBWAY SURPLUS LANDS Current Situation

Projected Situation

During the building of the city’s subway lines swathes of land were appropriated to accommodate for the construction process. Today these lands represent a specific kind of ‘urban cut’, and have either been converted into parking lots or small parks spaces.

Currently many of the subway surplus lands are divided into distinct public spacesparks and parking lots. We propose to unite Toronto’s unspoken linear park through a process of layered subtraction. The first subtraction takes all the space currently dedicated solely to the use of parking to be left as empty planes. These planes are inhabited by an endless amount of new uses; markets, small sports fields, outdoor office space, whatever fits. In the first stage the materiality of the reclaimed space is maintained, no real design intervention is offered. This will create a patchwork of different spaces allowing for more uses other than the standard park.

Always linear in quality, these spaces are sandwiched between the backs of commercial buildings, laneways, and adjacent residential homes. As shortcuts from station exits to nearby residential streets, they are some of the most trafficked of all the small park spaces, giving them an inherent transitory quality – as if they were only ever meant to be experienced while on the move.

The second subtraction begins to play with the materiality and design of the spaces in this new patchwork. Understanding the need for permanent, semi-permanent, and transient space dictates the design of the spaces with the end result creating a visual identity seen from both google earth (aesthetic) and at ground level (function). The linear park also becomes a new route of mobility. Pedestrians and cyclists mimic what is already happening just under their feet.

18

Euclid Avenue Parkette / George Milbrandt Parkette/ Subway Surplus Lands - 4 / Westmoreland Avenue Parkette / Susan Tibaldi Parkette / Bessarion Parkette / Logan Avenue Parkette / Main Street Parkette / Salem Parkette / George Chater Parkette / Budd Sugarman Park / Kennedy/Margdon Parkette / Traymore Park / Neil Mc Lellan Park / Langford Parkette / Coleman Park / Seaton Park / Ben Nobleman Park /


18

Subway Surplus Lands Typology Study 2

2

2

2

2

Between Between a Commercial and Parking Lot and a Street Houses

Between a Laneway and Houses

Between Houses

2 2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2


19

LAKEFRONT SLIPS Current Situation

Projected Situation

The older lakefront neighbourhoods on both ends of the city were laid out on a grid of streets without a lakefront public street. For the most part, private residential properties back onto the lake, granting the lucky few a privileged view. By-products of the grid however are the small pockets of land leftover where the north-south road meets the lake. These spaces vary in their usability, some of them precariously wedged between asphalt and a precipitous bluff, but many afford enough space to accommodate a singular bench – allowing for solitary gazing into the expansive emptiness of the lake.

The lakefront slip is akin with the traffic island in terms of the intimacy it provides to the user. The Slips provide access to the waterfront not as a place of spectacle but as a place of reflection, allowing the user to experience the massiveness of the lake. Our proposal is to treat the slips as outdoor rooms of isolation. The intervention is minimal, at the beginning of each slip a simple sign is placed read “occupied” or “unoccupied.” Upon entering the sign is turned to occupied. The user makes their way down the long corridor and finally arrives at a bench just a few metres away from the lake. The popularity of this space is immediate. Citizens from all over Toronto begin to make there way to these neighbourhoods where the slips are located and begin to line up for hours for 20 minutes of isolation.

14

Fourth Street Parkette / Neville Park Boulevard Traffic Island / Sand Beach Road Parkette / Miles Road Parkette / Lake Crescent Road End Parkette / Twelfth Street Road End / Twenty Third Street Park / Toronto Waterfront Park / Twenty Eighth Street Park / Livingston Road Park / Twenty Fifth Street Park / Thirty-Eighth Street Park / Superior Park / Norris Crescent Park


20

Considered Space Typology Study

5

No Slip

End of Road Slip

Entire Property

Connection to Waterfront

5 5 5 5 5 5

5

5

5

5

5


21

525 DAYS

We know the battle ahead will be lo no matter what obstacles stand in the power of millions of voices cal we cannot do this by a chorus of cy more dissonant in the weeks to co reality check. We've been warned city false hope. But in the unlikel never been anything false about h down impossible odds; when we've ready, or that we shouldn't try, or generations of Torontonians have simple creed that sums up the sp Yes we can

JUNE 17, 2011 - NO


22

of ACTION

ong, but always remember that our way, nothing can withstand ling for change. We have been told ynics who will only grow louder and ome. We've been asked to pause for a d against offering the people of this ly story that is Toronto, there has ope. For when we have faced e been told that we're not r that we can't, e responded with a irit of a people.

OVEMBER 25, 2012


Department of Unusual Certainties Team Brendan Cormier Christopher Pandolfi Omri Menashe

Toronto Parkettes  

Department of Unusual Certainties research on Toronto's smallest parks. From typology to program. From current use to future considerations....

Advertisement