Turning brownfields into green space in the City of Toronto

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 181-198

  De Sousa, Christopher A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Brownfields; Green space; Planning; Urban environment

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

STAKEHOLDERS;

URBAN PLANNING;

BROWNFIELD SITE; GREENSPACE; OPEN SPACE; QUALITY OF LIFE; URBAN PLANNING;

CANADA; ONTARIO; TORONTO;

EID: 0037465490     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00149-4     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. American Institute of Architects, 1999. Survey of State and Local Officials on Livable Communities. Fredrick Schneiders Research, Washington.
2. Armstrong, H.W., Kehrer, B., Wells, P., Wood, A.M., 2002. The evaluation of community economic development initiatives. Urban Stud. 39 (3), 457-481.
3. Asante-Duah, D.K., 1996. Management of Contaminated Site Problems. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.
4. Benazon, N., 1995. Soil remediation: a practical overview of Canadian cleanup strategies and commercially available technology. Hazard. Mater. Manage. 7 (5), 10-26.
5. Cackowski, J.M., 1999. The Restorative Effects of Nature: Implications for Driver Anger and Frustration. Unpublished Master's Thesis, The Ohio State University.
6. City of Toronto, 1998, Brownfields Profiles for Village of Yorkville, Sorauren, Woodbine Park, and Parliament Square. Toronto: Parks and Recreation Division, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Toronto.
7. City of Toronto, 1999. Toronto Parkland Naturalization Update. Natural Environment and Horticulture Section, Parks and Recreation Division, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Toronto.
8. De Sousa, C.A., 2000. Brownfield redevelopment versus greenfield development: a private sector perspective on the costs and risks associated with brownfield redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 43 (6), 831-853.
9. De Sousa, C.A., 2001. Contaminated sites management: the Canadian situation in international context. J. Environ. Manage. 62 (2), 131-154.
10. De Sousa, C.A., 2002. Measuring the public costs and benefits of brownfield versus greenfield development in the Greater Toronto Area. Environ. Plann. B 29 (2), 251-280.
11. Ford, G., Macdonald, D., Winfield, M., 1994. Who pays for past sins? Policy issues surrounding contaminated site remediation in Canada. Alternatives 20, 28-34.
12. Fried, M., 1982. Residential attachment: sources of residential and community satisfaction. J. Social Issues 38 (3).
13. Garvin, A., Berens, G., 1997. Urban Parks and Open Space. Urban Land Institute and Trust for Public Land, Washington.
14. Gertler, M., 1995. Adapting to New Realities: Industrial Land Outlook for Metropolitan Toronto, Durham, York, Halton, Peel, Hamilton-Wentworth and Waterloo. Berridge Lewinberg Greenberg Dark Gabor Ltd., Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, Toronto.
15. Harnik, P., 2000. Inside City Parks. Urban Land Institute and Trust for Public Land, Washington.
16. Hemson Consulting, 1998. Retaining Employment Lands - Morningside Heights: A Report to the City of Toronto Economic Development, Tourism and Culture. Hemson Consulting, Toronto.
17. Hough, M., 1994. Cities and Natural Process. Rutledge, London.
18. Hough, M., Benson, B., Evenson, J., 1997. Greening the Toronto Port Lands. Waterfront Regeneration Trust, Toronto.
19. Kaplan, R., 1993. The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landsc. Urban Plann. 26, 193-201.
20. Kaplan, R., 2001. The nature of the view from home. Environ. Behav. 33 (4), 507-542.
21. Kirkwood, N. (Ed.), 2001. Manufactured Sites. E & F Spon, London.
22. Kuo, F.E., Bacaicoa, M., Sullivan, W.C., 1998. Transforming inner-city landscapes: trees, sense of safety, and preference. Environ. Behav. 30 (1), 28-59.
23. Lerner, S., Poole, W., 1999. The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space. The Trust for Public Land, Washington.
24. Metropolitan Toronto Planning, 1988. Metropolitan Plan Review: Parks and Open Space. Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, Policy Development Division, Toronto.
25. Meyer, P., Williams, R., Yount, K., 1995. Contaminated Land: Reclamation, Redevelopment and Reuse in the United States and European Union. Edward Elgar, Aldershot, UK.
26. More, T.A., Stevens, T., Allen, P.G., 1982. The economics of urban parks: a cost/benefit analysis. Parks Recreat. 17, 31-33.
27. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 1996. Guideline for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. Queen's Printer for Ontario, Toronto.
28. Page, W., 1997. Contaminated Sites and Environmental Cleanup: International Approaches to Prevention, Remediation, and Reuse. Academic Press, San Diego.
29. Shafer, C.S., Lee, B.K., Turner, S., 2000. A tale of three greenway trails: user perceptions related to quality of life. Landsc. Urban Plann. 49, 163-178.
30. Simons, R., 1998. Turning Brownfields into Greenbacks. Urban Land Institute, Washington.
31. Thompson, J.W., Sorvig, K., 2000. Sustainable Landscape Construction. Island Press, Washington.
32. Toronto Planning, 2000, Toronto at the Crossroads. City of Toronto, Toronto.
33. Tyrvainen, L., 2001. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J. Environ. Manage. 62, 75-92.
34. UK DETR, 1998. Derelict Land Surveys in 1988 and 1993. Department of Environment, London.
35. United States Conference of Mayors, 2000. Recycling America's Land: A National Report on Brownfields Redevelopment, Vol. III. United States Conference of Mayors, Washington.
36. US EPA, 1997. Brownfields Definition. US EPA Brownfields Homepage, http://www. epa.gov/swerosps/bf/glossary.htm.