Toronto Sun Life Financial Tower & Harbour Plaza Residences | 236.51m | 67s | Menkes | Sweeny &Co

Minutes from the May 9 WT DRL:

2.0 Private Development Proposal: 1 York Street
ID#: 1047
Project Type: Buildings/Structures
Location: 1 York Street
Proponent: Menkes Developments Ltd.
Architect/Designer: architectsAlliance (aA) with Sweeny Sterling Finlayson & Co. Architects Inc. (&Co)
Review Stage: Conceptual/Schematic Design
Review Round: Two
Presenter(s): Peter Clewes, architectsAlliance
Delegation: Mark Sterling, &Co.; Adam Feldman, aA; David Copeland, &Co.; Jude Tersigni, Menkes

2.1 Introduction to the Issues
James Parakh, Urban Designer with the City of Toronto, introduced the project, reminding the Panel of the context and the comments from March 2012.

2.2 Project Presentation
Peter Clewes, Principal with Wallman Architects, presented the project’s evolution since the last presentation in March 2012.

2.3 Panel Questions
The Chair then asked the Panel for questions of clarification only.
One Panel member asked how the tower separations conform to the City’s “Tall Building Guidelinesâ€. Mr. Parakh answered that the guidelines state that the separation should be 25m exclusive of balconies, adding that a more recent consultant study recommended 20m inside the downtown area.

Another Panel member asked for further description of the skin of the office tower. Mr. Clewes answered that on the south side, it was a simple flush glazed system with vertical frit on the glass, and on the West side there are a series of vertical fins. Mr. Sweeny added that it is a high performance curtain wall that is insulted and fritted, adding that they are targeting LEED Gold.

Another Panel member asked what the urban design strategy was for Harbour Street. Mr. Clewes answered that the ground floor is set back 3m creating a 6-7m sidewalk.

2.4 Panel Comments
The Chair then opened the meeting to Panel comments.
Several Panel members congratulated the team on the presentation and the degree of responsiveness to the issues brought up at the first meeting. Another Panel member commended the team for taking the large program and humanizing the scale of the development.

Another Panel member Panel member stated that they were concerned over the potential lack of animation on the York Street façade, noting that they were concerned about the vast stretch of potentially empty space.

Another Panel member stated that they were not convinced by the “weaving†façade of the residential towers, feeling that they would like to see another option. Another Panel member agreed that the weave should be developed studied further.

Another Panel member felt that the office tower should be presented in more detail, noting the focus of this presentation was weighted toward the residential towers and podium. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that it did not look like a floorplate of a “Class A†office building. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that more development needed to happen on the office building, and how the lobby relates to the York Street corridor.

One Panel member felt that the site seemed like a “traffic islandâ€, noting that it is a challenge to domesticate the edges. Another Panel member questioned Harbour Street as an urban realm, feeling that a greater understanding of the traffic implications of this development would be helpful to the Panel. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that more background of the proposed PATH system, including what has been built and what is planned, would be helpful. One Panel member liked that the residential towers had direct access to the PATH without having to go all the way to the ground floor.

Another Panel member urged to team to more fully consider the play between the programmatic elements represented in the form and massing, feeling that the office tower compresses the residential towers and creates an awkward relationship. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that the elements should read as an urban ensemble or composition.

Another Panel member noted their surprise to see the retail component of the building in the black, monolithic box instead of the double wall with digital patterning previously presented. Another Panel member stated their strong support for the material palate.

Another Panel member felt that the choice of cladding in the podium seemed to override its reading as a continuous element, adding that the office lobby breaks up the reading of the façade.

Another Panel member felt that the relationship between the building and the Gardiner Expressway should be studied further, feeling that the design should respond to the columns and concentrate on how it is perceived from the north and the south. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that the project should be presented within the context of what is happening at 10 York Street as well.

Another Panel member felt that the entrance court to the residential towers was underdeveloped, noting that it can potentially add a lot of value to the project. Another Panel member agreed, feeling that the drop off and pick up areas in general seem under developed.

One Panel member stated that the team was seeking a lot of height and density that needed to be earned in the Public realm.

2.5 Summary of the Panel’s Key Issues
The Chair then summarized the recommendations of the Panel:
1) Further develop and define the office building and lobby space related to the York Street corridor.
2) Present the office tower in more detail at the next Design Review Panel meeting.
3) Provide more detail on the “animation†strategies for the ground floor.
4) Provide more detail on the Sustainability strategies for the buildings.

2.6 Proponents Response
Mr. Clewes and Mr. Sweeny thanked the Panel for their feedback.

2.7 Vote of Support/Non-Support
The Chair then asked the Panel for a note of support, non-support or conditional support for the project.
The Panel voted in conditional support of the building, with one Panel member voting in non-support of the project.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/uploads/documents/wdrp_minutes_may_2012_1.pdf (p. 5-7)

AoD
 
Thanks for posting that... it's always fun to read through those DRP minutes. However, I am always dismayed that they don't post the slideshow presentations online from the meetings so we can see these different design characteristics that they are referring to; the podium, the retail areas, the drop-off court for the residential towers, etc.

I agree with the DRP that the weaving effect of the residential towers looked weak from what we saw of it. I don't know why they wouldn't even alter the design so that there are always two floors with the same shape, and go from there; the weaving effect would look stronger if it was not divided up by 1 floor... I feel that this is what causes it to look a bit unconvincing.
 
tweeted this morning by @JShamess, an ICI agent with Colliers....

One York Street by @MenkesLife 800,000 SF of modern #office development commenced marketing! #CRE (Occupancy 2016)
Click to expand...
 
innsertnamehere said:
I thought this was being built on spec?
Click to expand...

lol, built on spec does not imply they'll build it and let it sit empty forever. It could function as a giant storage locker for the condos near by ? :)

I hope they don't build on spec though, generally when that starts happening you know the bubble is about to burst, that's exactly what ended the last commercial real estate boom, a decade + ago.

I know it's been mentioned a couple times that it would be built on spec but there hasn't been any official confirmation. They're likely wouldn't be either if they're indeed building on spec, we'll just see it constructed when the condo starts. So that's still likely far in the future.
 
It looks like development advertisement signs are coming very soon to this site. This weekend I noticed that there are large wooden frames up in 3 or 4 different locations around the existing parking lot.
 
Here's the Sign

Photo0050.jpg
 
hmmm... looks almost exactly like the new RBC office building that is going directly east of here. Maybe the architect was offering a 2 for 1 special?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top