A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
From the Star:
If Downsview Park matters, why has nothing begun?
Jun. 1, 2006. 01:00 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
By any standard, it was a bit of a fiasco.
The star of the show, Toronto's world-famous designer Bruce Mau, was on hand to talk about "Why Downsview Park Matters," but by the time the evening was over, nothing could have seemed further from the truth.
But it wasn't all Mau's fault; the land in question, about 250 hectares that was a Canadian Forces base and Bombardier facility, still hasn't been given to the Downsview Park corporation.
Though it was the federal government that launched an international competition in 1999 to design "Canada's first national urban park" (whatever that is) the land remains in the possession of the Department of National Defence.
Mau and his good friend, Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas, won that competition. But since then Koolhaas has apparently washed his hands of the matter and moved on. Poor Mau, however, is still part of the team that would transform this neglected site into ... well, that's the question.
What Mau should have done at his session, which was sponsored by the University of Toronto's Global Cities Program, was to elucidate a vision of Downsview Park so marvellous and compelling that resistance was futile. Instead, he played a series of meaningless intellectual games that gave a pretty good idea of what the park won't be. But beyond that, it was hard to grasp what he was on about.
He did say it would be "a post-park model." Right. He also declared that we live at "the end of the era of the park," and that it will be "an event in the life of the city." Hmmm.
Though Mau also declared that designing the park isn't "a landscape issue," Downsview Park chair David Bell quickly reminded guests that 20,000 trees would be planted this spring. (Isn't it summer already?)
By the time the dust settled, at least one Downsview board member, former Famous Players president John Bailey, had told all present that if this were the private sector, everyone would have been fired by now.
Speaking of which, why not? Bailey's idea was the one that rang through the muddle of good intentions and hit home. Why not? Just get rid of the whole bunch and start again. There's nothing much to lose by taking such drastic action. We're no further ahead now than when the competition was launched seven years ago. If anything, the legacy of cynicism means that getting the public to buy into the project will be harder than ever.
Stephen Harper, here's your chance to endear yourself to Torontonians.
In the meantime, there are landscape architects — Canadian, European, American — who could turn Downsview into something spectacular. The waterfront competitions now underway give some indication of what's possible. It could be amazing.
Mau is right about one thing: namely that the notion of the park has changed. No longer is it leftover space, or even an antidote to the city. Now it has become more pro-active, not simply a place to walk but a place to experience.
How to pay for the new Downsview? By developing the land at the edges as a high-density, mixed-use urban community focused around the park.
So far, the land sold by the corporation has been built up with big-box stores; not a very promising start to what must be a model of sustainability and intelligence.
As it stands, expectations for Downsview are low and it has fallen off the political table as an issue. Mayor David Miller and his federal and provincial friends, now so active on the waterfront, have given it a wide berth. Miller sent his regrets to Mau's presentation.
Yet the potential is enormous, transformative even. Already the subway reaches the park, but so far there's little reason for anyone to use it.
It's time to get serious about Downsview, to wake up to the possibilities. Instead of viewing it as a problem that won't go away, we must understand that it's an asset, one so vast it could enable us to make Toronto the city we'd like it to be.
_________________________________________________
Indeed it is time to get serious about Downsview. Scrap the whole project as it stands right now, re-evaluate what the goals for the area should be, and engage in a precinct planning exercise similiar to those practiced by TWRC on the waterfront. We don't need a park searching for a mission - what's needed is something that would help to revitalize the area.
AoD
If Downsview Park matters, why has nothing begun?
Jun. 1, 2006. 01:00 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
By any standard, it was a bit of a fiasco.
The star of the show, Toronto's world-famous designer Bruce Mau, was on hand to talk about "Why Downsview Park Matters," but by the time the evening was over, nothing could have seemed further from the truth.
But it wasn't all Mau's fault; the land in question, about 250 hectares that was a Canadian Forces base and Bombardier facility, still hasn't been given to the Downsview Park corporation.
Though it was the federal government that launched an international competition in 1999 to design "Canada's first national urban park" (whatever that is) the land remains in the possession of the Department of National Defence.
Mau and his good friend, Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas, won that competition. But since then Koolhaas has apparently washed his hands of the matter and moved on. Poor Mau, however, is still part of the team that would transform this neglected site into ... well, that's the question.
What Mau should have done at his session, which was sponsored by the University of Toronto's Global Cities Program, was to elucidate a vision of Downsview Park so marvellous and compelling that resistance was futile. Instead, he played a series of meaningless intellectual games that gave a pretty good idea of what the park won't be. But beyond that, it was hard to grasp what he was on about.
He did say it would be "a post-park model." Right. He also declared that we live at "the end of the era of the park," and that it will be "an event in the life of the city." Hmmm.
Though Mau also declared that designing the park isn't "a landscape issue," Downsview Park chair David Bell quickly reminded guests that 20,000 trees would be planted this spring. (Isn't it summer already?)
By the time the dust settled, at least one Downsview board member, former Famous Players president John Bailey, had told all present that if this were the private sector, everyone would have been fired by now.
Speaking of which, why not? Bailey's idea was the one that rang through the muddle of good intentions and hit home. Why not? Just get rid of the whole bunch and start again. There's nothing much to lose by taking such drastic action. We're no further ahead now than when the competition was launched seven years ago. If anything, the legacy of cynicism means that getting the public to buy into the project will be harder than ever.
Stephen Harper, here's your chance to endear yourself to Torontonians.
In the meantime, there are landscape architects — Canadian, European, American — who could turn Downsview into something spectacular. The waterfront competitions now underway give some indication of what's possible. It could be amazing.
Mau is right about one thing: namely that the notion of the park has changed. No longer is it leftover space, or even an antidote to the city. Now it has become more pro-active, not simply a place to walk but a place to experience.
How to pay for the new Downsview? By developing the land at the edges as a high-density, mixed-use urban community focused around the park.
So far, the land sold by the corporation has been built up with big-box stores; not a very promising start to what must be a model of sustainability and intelligence.
As it stands, expectations for Downsview are low and it has fallen off the political table as an issue. Mayor David Miller and his federal and provincial friends, now so active on the waterfront, have given it a wide berth. Miller sent his regrets to Mau's presentation.
Yet the potential is enormous, transformative even. Already the subway reaches the park, but so far there's little reason for anyone to use it.
It's time to get serious about Downsview, to wake up to the possibilities. Instead of viewing it as a problem that won't go away, we must understand that it's an asset, one so vast it could enable us to make Toronto the city we'd like it to be.
_________________________________________________
Indeed it is time to get serious about Downsview. Scrap the whole project as it stands right now, re-evaluate what the goals for the area should be, and engage in a precinct planning exercise similiar to those practiced by TWRC on the waterfront. We don't need a park searching for a mission - what's needed is something that would help to revitalize the area.
AoD