Tour done, let me add a few further observations before my commentary.
While in the park, I encountered one rather obnoxious person who thought I might be taking his photo in some way, he was off in one of darker corners, near the DOLA having some sort of chat w/2 other young men, and my camera caused a significant outburst of profanity and something that sounded vaguely like a threat.
I may have gestured at the 4 police who were 40ft away, that he hadn't noticed...........at any rate, that doesn't leave a particularly good impression. Needless to say, I wasn't taking his photo and his image does not appear above.
A further issue.....unfortunately, was the number of people in the park obviously in a state of drug-induced intoxication. I counted 4. I don't want to demonize anyone suffering from addiction in any way; but I can understand how people passed out on the ground etc. may impact the comfort of others to make use of the space. I would not want to see any heavy-handed actions here; but some outreach surely seems in order.
Commentary on the Park design:
For such a small space, it is certainly very intensively programmed. Having only visited this once (recently) I don't have a good read on how well the various features are used at other times/days, but my overall
sense is that the space could handle its current program; but some re-arranging would probably be beneficial.
What the re-arranging would entail would depend on the popularity of the various features and I would need more input from park regulars or more extensive observation to judge.
My principle instinct if we were keeping change modest, would be to slightly shrink the DOLA, particularly at its western extent to push back the fencing from edge of the path and reduce any sense of claustrophobia as it were.
I would also look at how to activate the space currently contained by the fast fence.
I feel that space, given how narrow it is, is really just a bit too dark and shady. I don't know that I would want fewer trees per se, but I think I would like to see a couple of the existing ones removed in favour of something like a Birch or an Aspen that will let a bit more dappled light through. This would also help with landscaping underneath the trees.
If the desire were for a planting bed, I think dense planting, and low-height protective railings could be added along the edge.
Alternatively, some of the space could be hardened a bit and see the addition of a ping pong table or chess table etc.
Finally, I think I'd look at protecting those planting beds around the Memorial and and re vegetating the bare spots.
*****
If one were being more ambitious, I think we need to talk purpose. Which is to say, what do we want the space to be? If, for instance we wanted to focus on the child-friendly bit, we probably need a larger space for that with equipment that would appeal to older children, swings and slides and such.
But absent adding land to the park, which would be challenging, any expansion of the play area must come with a design/layout change to the park.
The only logical choice I see would be shifting the children's area to where the lawn is today, and the un-programmed space to its east.
This poses some challenges, in that the space is next to private residential property, also heritage designated; it would likely require removing 2-4 trees as well. While one could split the children's area moving only the play equipment and leaving the water feature where it is; I think this might be problematic for parents/nannies/babysitter keeping an eye on more than one child.
The DOLA seems fine, except for any excess size and challenges created by the fencing.
The Memorial is in good shape and I tend to frown on relocating these sorts of things, so I'm disinclined to do that w/the notation that if the children's area were consolidated to the north side of the park, the memorial could be
redesigned and laid out, along w/the DOLA in the space now occupied by the children's area.
****
The last thought would be on expansion, and/or relocation of any functions that the park currently serves.
I think this is an important discussion for the community because of the plan to develop a new park on the current Green P lot closer to Yonge.
If any of the 3 major functions in Barbara Hall Park were shifted over, it would substantially increase space for the remaining functions.
In terms of expansion, the limitations are substantial.
Obviously the 519 is staying, as is the heritage to the north. The building to the immediate south, along Church is quaint retail with a historical vibe, while not designated, I would find it a challenge to argue for its removal.
That really only leaves growing the park to east, along Cawthra.
The apartment complex does have ample space in front of it that is currently lawn, a semi-circular driveway and a garbage area.
The challenge w/that space is that is strata over a parking garage. Should the building ever be redeveloped, I think there is a legitimate opportunity for a modest expansion of the park here. In its current form, Parks would be loath to take a strata-lease, but it might be a good spot for the DOLA allowing the existing one to be repurposed.
The houses along Cawtha are not heritage, but do contribute something to the fabric of the area, the advantage in removing perhaps the 2 closest to the park, is that Cawthra itself could then be closed in that section and added to the park.
Is it worth the cost? I would leave that to the locals to assess.
