Amir Nikzad Thesis Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Amir Nikzad Thesis Presentation

on

  • 435 views

Thesis Presentation

Thesis Presentation

Statistics

Views

Total Views
435
Views on SlideShare
433
Embed Views
2

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

2 Embeds 2

http://www.linkedin.com 1
http://www.slashdocs.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Pop growth accompanied by dev growthNew sustainable communities to meet resident expectationsParks are essential, social, economical and environmental benefits Shift from an oil economy to a carbon economyLandscape will have significant valueParks as greening structures for citiesExtent of services depended on sustainability of parksMunicipal government are fundamental since they have sig influence on dev and land-use decisionsas a condition of development or redevelopment or subdivision approval or consent, shall require theConveyance of parkland, or cash in lieuFor residential purposes: 5% of the land being developed or 1 hectare per 300 dwelling units, which ever is greater;
  • Physical form2. Social program3. Promoters4. Intended and actual beneficiaries5. Public reaction
  • Recurring strategies in sustainable design, construction and maintenance practices, plant choices, composting, water harvesting, public-private partnerships and community stewardshipLarger role in solving urban problemsintegration of urban infrastructure into parks. By using parklands to treat city wastewater and stormwaterurban land reclamation, built on military bases, industrial yards, landfillsmight be used to improve and maintain physical and psychological healthincrease social well-being. Direct public participation in the conception, creation and stewardship of Sustainable Parks, reconnects citizens to each other and to the landscape.3.The form of the park, its relationship to the city, its style and management practicesThe use of drought tolerant, low maintenance species, recycled yard waste for soil amendment, wood chips from debris for paths and mulch, recycled plastic lumber for benches, and low maintenance, local, or renewable materials resulted in evolutionary aesthetic and landscape management practices for sustainable parks.
  • Provide habitats for wildlife, aiding biodiversity.Help to stabilise urban temperatures and humidity.Absorb pollutants in air and ground water.Provide opportunities for the recycling of organic materials.Slow storm water runoff and reduce drainage infrastructure.Provide a sense of the seasons and links with the natural world within the urban environment.Add value to the surrounding property, both commercial and residential, consequently increasing tax yield to maintain public services.Contribute to attracting tourists.Encourage employment and inward investment to an area.Help to create a favourable image of a place.
  • conventional methods of development have had huge negative impacts on the natural environment. Humans often underestimate the value of these services when making land-use decisions.Sustainable development is essentially a shift in how we make decisionsintegrating environmental considerations with economic and social valuesAn environmentally sustainable landscape, must engage its users on multiple levels – physical, aesthetic, cultural, spiritual – and its creation and maintenance must be economically feasible.
  • To assist in collecting data from the interviews
  • The rating system works on a 250 point scale, with levels of achievement for obtaining 40, 50, 60 or 80 percent of available pointsrecognized with one through four stars, respectively.
  • To understand the nature of the limitations, when the interviewees indicated that a specific sustainable strategy was not implemented, the researcher presented the following options:
  • Do you require that the consultants develop a site maintenance plan that outlines the long-term strategies and identifies short-term actions to achieve sustainable maintenance goals?
  • By opening up a meaningful discussion about the long-term economical benefits of adopting sustainable strategies in comparison to the conventional methods of development, the budget could be provided.
  • Capital costs include materials and construction work, as well as design and engineering services.BudgetMaintenance costs include all anticipated annual operating expenses, such as routine inspection, seasonal start-up and shutdown, etcReplacement represents overhauls that are not annualSalvage (or resale) is subtracted from money costs, usually allowing 20 percent of the original cost of materials.SupportEngaging the public in conception, creation and stewardship of the projectDuring construction of the site, ensure that the project provides economic or social benefits to the local community.During site use, ensure that the project provides economic or social benefits to the local community.Interpret on-site features and processes to promote understanding of sustainability in ways that positively influence user behavior on site and beyond.
  • Open spaces, local, provincial and national parks, conservation easements, buffer zones, utility corridors, and transportation rights-of-way.Sites with buildings including industrial, retail and office parks, military complexes, airports, botanical gardens, streetscapes and plazas, residential and commercial developments, and public and private campuses.

Amir Nikzad Thesis Presentation Amir Nikzad Thesis Presentation Presentation Transcript

  • EXPLORING the utilization of sustainable development strategies FOR the
     
    new parks IN the municipalities OF the Greater Toronto Area
    BY
    AMIR ARDESHIR NIKZAD
    Advisor: Lise Burcher
    2011
  • EXPLORING the utilization of sustainable development strategies FOR the
     
    new parks IN the municipalities OF the Greater Toronto Area
    INTRODUCTION
    Problem Statement
    Research Goal and Objectives
    METHODOLOGY
    Literature Review
    Study Questionnaire
    Study Context
    RESULTS
    Sustainable Development Strategies
    Barriers
    CONCLUSION
    Research limitations
    Future research directions
  • PROBLEM STATEMENT
    “the ‘environment’ is where we all live; and ‘development’ is what we all do in attempting to improve our lot within that abode. The two are inseparable.” (United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987)
    Southern Ontario
    Population of Canada in 2006: 31.6 million
    36% of the Population of Canada
    94% of the Population of Ontario
    4 million to Greater Golden Horseshoe by 2031
    (Source: http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESEARCH GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
    GOAL
    To explore if, and why, the municipalities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) have or have not adopted sustainable development strategies in planning, design, construction and management of their new parks.
    OBJECTIVES
    • To identify sustainable development strategies employed in planning, design, construction and management of new parks
    • To identify the barriers in employing sustainable development strategies in planning, design, construction and management of new parks
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • PROCESS FLOW CHART
    LITERATURE REVIEW
    Evolution of Parks
    Sustainable Development
    FORMING INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
    2009 version of the Sustainable Sites Initiative
    STUDY CONTEXT
    Four Municipalities in the GTA
    DATA COLLECTION
    Conducting Interviews at the Municipalities
    ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS
    Analysis and Synthesis of the Collected Data
    CONCLUSION
    Research Limitations and Future Research Directions
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • LITERATURE REVIEW
    Evolution of parks in North America
    The Politics of Park Design (Cranz, 1982)
    1. Pleasure Ground
    1850-1900
    2. Reform Park
    1900-1930
    3. Recreation Facility
    1930-1965
    4. Open Space System
    1965-?
    Not self-sufficient
    Large amounts of energy, water, labour, plants, fertilizers
    Produce noise, pesticide-laced runoff, wastewater, lawn clippings, garbage
    Environmental health not considered as one of the social goals
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • LITERATURE REVIEW
    Evolution of parks in North America
    Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fifth Model for Urban Parks (Cranz & Boland, 2004)
    Content analysis of 125 parks 1. Physical form
    5 Landscape periodicals from 1982-2002 2. Social program
    3. Promoters
    4. Intended and actual beneficiaries
    5. Public reaction
    5. The Sustainable Park
    1990-Present
    2. Can play a role
    in solving larger urban problems when integrated with surrounding urban fabric
    3. New aesthetic forms emerge for parks and other urban landscapes
    1. Self-sufficient
    With regards to material resources
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • LITERATURE REVIEW
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • LITERATURE REVIEW
    Benefits of Urban Parks
    Environmental
    • wildlife, biodiversity
    • urban temperatures and humidity
    • pollutants in air and ground water
    • recycling of organic materials
    • storm water runoff
    • natural world
    Social
    • relaxation, informal recreation, peace, space and beauty
    • improve health and personal fitness
    • cultural links with the past, a sense of place and identity
    • community events, voluntary activity and charitable fundraising.
    • educational resource
    Economical
    • value to the surrounding property
    • attracting tourists
    • employment and inward investment
    • create a favourable image of a place
    (Source: http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • LITERATURE REVIEW
    Sustainable Development
    SOCIALLY
    EQUITABLE
    Standard of Living
    Education
    Community
    Equal Opportunity
    Design, construction, operations and maintenance practices that is
    “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987)
    SUSTAINABILITY
    ENVIRONMENTALLY
    SOUND
    Environmental Management
    Natural Resource Use
    Pollution Prevention
    ECONOMICALLY
    FEASABLE
    Profit
    Cost Saving
    Economic Growth
    Research &
    Development
    (Source: 2002 University of Michigan Sustainability Assessment)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • EVALUATION SYSTEM SELECTION
    The Sustainable Sites Initiative (SITES)
    • Initiated in 2005
    • Interdisciplinary effort by:
    American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)
    Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Centre (LBJWC)
    United States Botanic Garden (USBG)
    • Modelled after United States Green Building Council’s
    Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
    and draws from LEED
    • 55 Individuals developing clear criteria for sustainable
    landscape design, construction, operations and maintenance
    (Source: http://www.sustainablesites.org)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • EVALUATION SYSTEM SELECTION
    The Sustainable Sites Initiative (SITES)
    “any landscape, whether the site of a large subdivision,
    a shopping mall, a park, an abandoned rail yard, or a
    single home, holds the potential both to improve and
    to regenerate the natural benefits and services provided
    by ecosystems in their undeveloped state.”
    • 233 page report released in Nov. 2009
    • New construction and major renovations
    • Pilot stage (June 2010-June 2012), 150 projects
    • 10 Guiding Principles
    (Source: http://www.sustainablesites.org)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • EVALUATION SYSTEM SELECTION
    SITES’ PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS 2009
    CATEGORIESPOSSIBLE POINTS
    Site selection 21
    Pre-design assessment and planning 4
    Site design – water 44
    Site design – soil and vegetation 51
    Site design – material selection 36
    Site design – human health and well being 32
    Construction 21
    Operations and maintenance 23
    Monitoring and innovation 18
    Total points 250
    One star 100 (40%)
    Two Stars 125 (50%)
    Three Stars 150 (60%)
    Four Stars 200 (80%)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • EVALUATION SYSTEM SELECTION
    SITES Prerequisites
    Site Selection
    1. Limit development of soils designated as prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of state-wide importance
    2. Protect floodplain functions
    3. Preserve wetlands
    4. Preserve threatened or endangered species and their habitats
    Pre-design Assessment and Planning
    5. Conduct a pre-design site assessment and explore opportunities for site sustainability
    6. Use an integrated site development process
    Site Design – Water
    7. Reduce potable water use for landscape irrigation by 50 percent
    Site Design – Soil and Vegetation
    8. Control and manage known invasive plants found on site
    9. Use appropriate, non-invasive plants
    10. Create a soil management plan
    Site Design – Materials Selection
    11. Eliminate the use of wood from threatened tree species
    Construction
    12. Control and retain construction pollutants
    13. Restore soils disturbed during construction
    Operations and Maintenance
    14. Plan for sustainable site maintenance
    15. Provide for storage and collection of recyclables
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
    Sections
    Municipality Organizational Structure
    Park Standards and Classification
    Site Selection
    • Water
    • Soil and Vegetation
    • Materials Selection
    Pre-design Assessment and Planning
    Site Design
    Construction
    Operations and Maintenance
    General Questions
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
    Barriers
    1. Limited budget
    2. Lack of support from government (local/higher)
    3. Lack of public support
    4. The strategy/initiative not sustainable
    5. Strategy not considered a priority at the moment
    6. Lack of interest and/or knowledge from the consultants and the contractors
    7. Other
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • STUDY CONTEXT
    The Greater Toronto Area
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • STUDY CONTEXT
    The Greater Toronto Area
    (Source: http://mapsof.net/toronto/static-maps/png/greater-toronto-area-map/full-size)
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    P – Policy
    Y – Implemented
    N – Not Implemented
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    5. Site Design
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    7. Operations and Maintenance
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    P – Policy
    Y – Implemented
    N – Not Implemented
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    Barriers
    • Limited budget
    • Lack of public support
    • Strategy not being considered a priority
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    47 Staff in 4 municipalities
    35 Landscape Architects
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • RESULTS
    Limited Budget
    Life-cycle Costing LCC = C + M +F + R – S
    C: Capital
    M: Maintenance
    F: Fuel
    R: Replacement
    S: Salvage
    Public Support
    Equitable Site Development
    Equitable Site Use
    Promote Sustainability Awareness and Education
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • CONCLUSION
    Research limitations
    • Study Context
    • Interviewees
    • Limited literature on history of urban parks in Ontario
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • CONCLUSION
    Future research directions
    • Verification of responses at ground level
    • Other municipalities’ park authorities
    • Other types of landscapes
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion
  • THANK YOU FOR LISTENNING!
    Introduction
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion