Just eyeballing it I think Grange Park is quite a bit bigger. There is a good amount of connected open space that isn't part of this park proper.

AoD

Grange Park is 1.8ha/ 4.5 acres

College Park is 0.75ha/1.9 acres

The budgets for the two projects: (last re-do of both spaces)

Grange Park: 12.5M

College Park: 8.2M

I don't remember the 'actuals' for either, but they shouldn't be too far off.
 
Just an update on what I consider the best place for anyone to have a mud wrestling event right in the heart of the city (yesterday);
20250521_124037.jpg
20250521_124041.jpg
20250521_124043.jpg
 
It's also just a horribly suburban mindset when it comes to park design in Toronto - there is a notion that every park needs open grass space even when it's not suited to it. This should have been planting beds with paved areas and lots of benches - not lawn.

I swear this superblock is cursed by bad planning in general - with developments treating the park space as an afterthought.

AoD
 
Open grass in urban areas works fine but you absolutely have to border them with flower beds and/or those one foot high decorative 'fences' otherwise some people will walk all over them. In other words, you create a physical barrier and foot paths that make sense. And if it needed to be said, just sticking a few flowers in the way isn't sufficient.

Works fine all over Europe but a lot of municipalities in Canada haven't figured this out yet.
 
Open grass in urban areas works fine but you absolutely have to border them with flower beds and/or those one foot high decorative 'fences' otherwise some people will walk all over them. In other words, you create a physical barrier and foot paths that make sense. And if it needed to be said, just sticking a few flowers in the way isn't sufficient.

Works fine all over Europe but a lot of municipalities in Canada haven't figured this out yet

Fine if the intent is for public use, but at least be prepared to reseed/sod every spring with temporary barriers in high traffic areas. I don't believe that was done in this case.

And let's not even get into the problem of path setting...

AoD
 
What a joke - and completely preventable and predictable too. It's like the designers didn't spend 5 seconds actually sitting in the old park to see how it was actually used.

It is.............I agree.

But ya know........I was curious, so I went back and looked at the old aerial photos, before the last re-do.............and I can see it............... that's exactly what the designers here did......

The desire line really isn't there........but the reason for that is very apparent.........and when they modified the design, they should have been conscious of that.

1747926443640.png


You can see the NW to SE angle isn't there...........but duh..............there's a big round rink/summer-time water feature blocking the route. Additionally the washroom/mechanical building is sited at the north end of the feature, further obstructing that path.

Compare to the post re-do layout:

1747926625933.png


They shrunk the building and moved it to the east side of the rink/water feature; they also modified the shape of the water feature, and they removed the water in the summer.

So they created the very desire line we're talking about by removing the 2 most significant obstacles to it forming.

I previously showed and costed the solution here (a paved path bisecting the lawns in the north-west roughly down the middle, with landscape design features forcing traffic onto the paved space.)

But its worth saying here, while I would not recommend it, you can clearly see how some small strategic design choices would have cut down the issue of cross-traffic substantially:

1747926886133.png


There is partial obstruction at the south end, but there is no ornamental fence protecting the planting bed, which oddly ends right at the most desirable point for a cross-path.

There is no obstruction at the north end at all.

***

This is not the only place in the park with this problem, just the most conspicuous by far.

Have at look at the south-east side of the rink/skate trail:

1747927046515.png


You can't see it well here, but area between the benches and the Yonge Street access has been trodden, there's no plant material left.

Now I understand what they were doing here........this is a space for you to get off the skate trail and sit, out of the way. I disagree w/all the seating turning its back to Yonge....but I
digress.

But this is an obvious desire route, people coming in from Yonge want to get to/from the skate trail, and/or use that route to get to the desire line to the north.

If you wanted people not to use that route, then you make this a long, curved bench that fully obstructed the route in question. (not the right choice in my estimation, but would work
better than the status quo).
 
Last edited:
You absolutely can make grass work, but that doesn't mean you should opt for it. It just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what this park is and how people use it. I'm not going to College Park if I want to sit down on the lawn with friends over a few drinks and snacks - I'm going to Queens Park, U of T, Allan Gardens, the lawn at TMU.

This should have been a garden oasis in the heart of the city with plenty of lush greenery and flexible seating.
 
You absolutely can make grass work, but that doesn't mean you should opt for it. It just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what this park is and how people use it. I'm not going to College Park if I want to sit down on the lawn with friends over a few drinks and snacks - I'm going to Queens Park, U of T, Allan Gardens, the lawn at TMU.

This should have been a garden oasis in the heart of the city with plenty of lush greenery and flexible seating.

Agreed.

****

This also brings up the question of the lackadaisical effort at a kids playground here.

It does get some use. But I think its a pretty sad excuse for what it is.

My preference would probably be to remove it from the space as over-programming.

But if there were a desire to keep a kid's playground, that grass area (reorganized with everything else) could provide enough space for more credible effort.
 
Great to hear! Just thinking, are there other parks that use turf? I can't picture any...

Off hand, I only recall seeing it used on a few sports fields and in few dog relief areas.

I don't recall a broader landscape use, and I don't agree with it either.
 
The City has quietly posted improvements to College Park addressing the north entrance and grassy area. To be replaced with artificial turf with a new path, plantings and benches.
https://www.toronto.ca/city-governm...projects/college-park-landscape-improvements/

Construction to begin and complete this fall.

They are clearly proposing to address the desire line issue, by creating a new path. Good.

Turf is unnecessary and undesirable as far as I'm concerned. Giving people a place to walk is 1/2 the battle, but the other 1/2 is simply discouraging/preventing them walking where you don't want them.

Just anchor each end with seating and/or tall shrubs/and/or decorative fence.

If you don't want sod, grand......lets do native sunflowers if we don't add trees, and pair them with bee balm and New England Aster.

Or if we're shading........how about a grove of ferns with wild geranium interspersed.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top