JURY REPORT
FOREWORD
The 2009 Toronto Urban Design Awards, the 6th since amalgamation, celebrate the best urban design
in Toronto. Unlike other design awards programs that highlight individual projects, the Urban Design
Awards honour the improvements to urban life made by designers who are focusing on context—the
way their designs fit into the surrounding environment and contribute to the creation of great public
spaces.
To create a successful “place,” each new building, open space and streetscape element has to
follow a similar set of rules—some written, some unwritten—so that the sum of parts works as a
coherent, well-proportioned whole, despite being built by many individuals and over a long period of
time. We have worked hard over the years to refine the submission requirements to emphasize place-
making and context and we have observed an enthusiastic response from the design community and
noticeable improvements in the urban design quality of submissions. We have also been pleased to
see an increasing number of award entries making reference to, or being influenced by City policies
and initiatives such as Transit City, the Coordinated Street Furniture Program, Tower Renewal, Percent
for Public Art, the Avenues and design guidelines for Tall and Mid-Rise buildings. The design and
development community of Toronto should also be congratulated for continuing to strive for great
design and “green” design principles even during these tough economic times.
This year’s competition drew an impressive 117 entries in 7 categories. The Jury—Ian Chodikoff, Jack
Diamond, Eha Naylor and Michael Van Valkenburgh—were impressed by the depth and breadth of the
submissions and had lengthy, spirited debates about both the meaning and importance of the program
as well as individual projects. Collectively, they decided this year to make the Award of Excellence
the singular top prize in each category. Therefore, there are fewer Awards of Excellence and more
Honourable Mentions than in the past. The Jury, through their comments, also used the Awards as an
opportunity to send a number of important messages to the City and the design community. The report
is therefore full of concrete ideas, criticisms and lessons that can be applied beyond the individual
award winning projects.
A core group of city staff worked extremely hard, particularly after a lengthy and unplanned labour
disruption, to organize yet another successful awards program and gala celebration at the Palais
Royale. I would also like to extend my deepest thanks to our new and returning sponsors for their
generous support and commitment to promoting design excellence in Toronto.
Robert Freedman
Director, Urban Design
Toronto City Planning
Gary Wright
Chief Planner and Executive Director
Robert Freedman
Director, Urban Design
Alka Lukatela
Program Manager, Civic Improvements
Design:
Design, Print and Mail, City of Toronto
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword
Award Categories .................................................................................................................. 2
Jury Statement .................................................................................................................. 3
PRIVATE LOW-SCALE BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT
Award of Excellence 40R_Laneway House ................................................................................ 4
PRIVATE MID-RISE BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT
Award of Excellence Academy Lane & Beach House Lofts........................................................ 5
Honourable Mention 294 Richmond ........................................................................................... 6
Loggia Condominiums............................................................................... 7
Toy Factory Lofts ....................................................................................... 8
PRIVATE TALL BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT
Award of Excellence Spire .......................................................................................................... 9
Honourable Mention JAZZ ........................................................................................................ 10
PUBLIC BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT
Award of Excellence Toronto Public Library - Pape/Danforth Branch ...................................... 11
Honourable Mention Bloorview Kids Rehab ............................................................................. 12
Artscape Wychwood Barns .................................................................... 13
Transformation AGO ............................................................................... 14
SMALL OPEN SPACES
Award of Excellence Spadina Wavedeck ................................................................................ 15
Honourable Mention Toronto Botanical Garden ...................................................................... 16
Ireland Park Toronto ................................................................................ 17
VISIONS & MASTER PLANS
Award of Excellence Mayor’s Tower Renewal Opportunities Book ......................................... 18
Honourable Mention Lawrence Heights Revitalization Development Concept Plan .............. 19
Lake Ontario Park Master Plan ............................................................... 20
STUDENT PROJECTS
Honourable Mention Water Theatre......................................................................................... 21
2009 Jury ................................................................................................................ 22
Sponsors ................................................................................................................ 23
AWARD CATEGORIES The City of Toronto accepted entries
for the 2009 Urban Design Awards in
massing, the natural environment and sustainable
design.
seven major categories. In this category, all building scales are eligible
(low-scale, mid-rise and tall), as well as new
1. Elements construction and restoration/transformation.
A stand-alone object, landscape element or small- Buildings in both urban and suburban contexts will
scale piece of a building which contributes significantly be considered.
to the quality of the public realm. Submissions may
include, but are not limited to: benches, doorways, Submissions may include, but are not limited
signage, canopies, porches or colonnades, gateways, to: education, health care, recreation, cultural,
light fixtures, walkways, stairways, barrier-free access, community and civic buildings.
fences and works of art.
4. Small Open Spaces
A small open space, generally related to and
2. Buildings in Context - Private defined by adjacent buildings or natural/manmade
An individual building or a composition of buildings, elements, which provides an extension and
that achieve(s) urban design excellence and is addition to the public realm in an exemplary way.
precedent-setting for a project of its type through The small open space need not be publicly owned,
its relationship to the public realm, pedestrian but must be publicly accessible. Submissions
amenity, detailing and massing, and the natural may include, but are not limited to: courtyards,
environment. Submissions should document and plazas, forecourts, gardens, trails, mews and small
highlight how the project contributes to successful neighbourhood parks.
city-building through its contextual relationship
and measures of sustainable design. 5. Large Places or Neighbourhood Designs
All types of buildings are eligible whether A design plan for a new or renovated large-scale
“landmark” or “background,” new construction or a area of the city. The project must be completed to
restoration/transformation. Projects in both urban such extent to allow the jury to clearly understand
and suburban contexts will be considered. and evaluate the plan. The submissions in
this category should clearly state the existing
The Building in Context category consists of three
conditions and demonstrate how City objectives
sub-categories that reflect a range of scales:
for establishing a clear public structure of streets,
a. Low-scale A low-scale project is four storeys parks, open spaces and building sites are met.
or less, not withstanding its land use. Submissions The submission should also highlight major
may include, but are not limited to: residential areas of innovation, particularly those related to
uses such as houses and townhouses; and retail, infrastructure, environmental management and
office, or industrial facilities on main streets and sustainable design, as well as provide evidence of
arterials. community involvement and acceptance.
b. Mid-rise A mid-rise building is generally taller Submissions may include, but are not limited to:
than a house or townhouse, but no taller than large parks, area/district plans, neighbourhood
the street right-of-way which it faces (typically plans, Transit Oriented Developments (TODs),
4-12 storeys). Submissions may include, but are subdivisions, industrial parks, campus plans and
not limited to: mixed-use “Avenue” buildings, streetscapes. Both urban and suburban contexts
small apartment/condo buildings, commercial and will be considered.
industrial buildings.
c. Tall A tall building rises higher than the width 6. Visions and Master Plans
of the right-of-way of the principal street on which Unexecuted visions for the city, studies and master
it is located. A building that has both tall and mid- plans of high inspirational value with the potential
rise components should be entered in this category. for significant impact on Toronto’s development.
Submissions may include, but are not limited to: Submissions in this category may include but are
residential or commercial buildings. not limited to: theoretical and visionary projects, as
well as any project fitting the description of Large
3. Buildings in Context - Public Places or Neighbourhood Designs that is unbuilt.
An individual building or a composition of buildings,
with a primary function to serve the public and/or 7. Student Projects
is largely accessible to the public. Public Buildings Students in urban design, architecture, landscape
are focal points for communities of various sizes, architecture and other design programs are invited
from small neighbourhoods to a national body. to submit theoretical or studio projects relating to
Submissions should demonstrate urban design and Toronto.
architectural excellence through a relationship to
The Jury reserves the right not to present awards in every category.
the public realm, pedestrian amenity, detailing and
Jury Statement
When considering the submissions for these urban design awards, there has clearly been significant
JURY STATEMENT
progress over the past few years on evolving the image of Toronto’s urbanism. However, for many
of the projects reviewed, aspects pertaining to the treatment of the landscape and the public realm
were still lacking in design resolution. Many projects contained an unevenness in their approach to
urban design, especially as it pertained to dedicating sufficient thought to landscape architecture
and the buildings’ treatment at the ground or street level. The jury recognized and appreciated that
many of the projects were important examples of recent urban design guidelines established by the
City of Toronto—especially when it came to introducing townhouses and mid-block intensification
along the city’s many avenues. However, the quality of the submissions during this cycle of the
urban design awards program suggests that there remains considerable room for improvement.
Nevertheless, those responsible for the future of Toronto’s urban environment—design professionals
and developers alike—are to be commended for their efforts over the past few years, but certainly
more effort must be made to continue the evolution of Toronto’s built environment.
Unfortunately, the jury decided not to give an award in the Elements category this year. With only
a handful of entries, none of the projects captured the imagination of the jury, who were interested
to see small design interventions that could successfully trigger the imagination of the public while
serving as a catalyst for a heightened awareness or delight of public space.
Large public places remain an extremely important aspect of the city, providing exciting places for
assembly and recreation. Large public places add value to entire precincts of the city, facilitating
growth, densification and further qualitative refinements at all scales in the public realm. Regretting
the fact that no awards were given in this category, and given the numerous large public projects
currently in development, the jury is certain that there will be more entries submitted in this category
during the next awards program.
In general, the jury was not impressed by the visions proposed in the student category. Many of these
projects were unconvincing in their intentions, never mind their applicability in a contemporary urban
setting. Questions of inappropriate scale and overall conceptual rigour created serious problems for
the jury who were looking for inventive proposals that had innovative contributions to the future of
Toronto’s urban environment.
Despite all the criticism, the jury was most impressed by the range in problem-solving abilities of
design practitioners operating in Toronto and there were several encouraging moments amongst
the entries. The jury’s message when awarding this year’s projects is to not necessarily give awards
based solely on aesthetics, but to acknowledge meritorious projects for their overarching sensibilities
that suggest an intelligent recognition and response of a given project’s place within its context.
Certainly, Toronto has experienced incredible growth over the past few years, and this is evidenced
in the breadth and complexity of the submissions, as was the level of sophistication and global
awareness. We encourage the city and any designer practicing in Toronto to continue to believe in
innovation and a dedicated concern for improving the public realm, no matter the budget or scale of
design intervention.
From left:
Eha Naylor, Michael Van Valkenburgh,
Jack Diamond, Ian Chodikoff.
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Low-scale building
40R_LANEWAY HOUSE
40R Shaftesbury Avenue
Project Team
superkül inc | architect
Clients Jury Comment
Elena Soni and Jorge Soni Architecturally speaking, this is a wonderful residence and a real surprise upon discovery. The
neighbouring houses are of an almost wildly different range of styles, and this house adds both a
profound and playful complement. It is a clever piece of design and its presence debunks the myth
that you cannot provide a single-family home in a dense urban space. Forget about making the
streets wider. This project supports a rationale for simply making fire trucks smaller to fit within
a denser urban fabric. The project also begs the question as to why we couldn’t develop central
garbage pick-up locations to serve such tightly knit housing in the centre of the city.
Clad with rusted metal panels, the exterior of the building was clearly designed to exude a rough
aesthetic befitting a laneway residence of this kind. It is somewhat ironic that the building’s material
palette and formal gestures are anything but unrefined. This project is certainly a perfect piece of
infill.
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Mid-rise building
ACADEMY LANE AND
BEACH HOUSE LOFTS
1842 & 1852 Queen Street East
Project Team
WHA Architects Inc.
The Walsh Group
Jury Comment STREETCAR Construction
This project is a very sympathetic integration with the scale of the street. So many Toronto buildings of a
similar scale and context contain second and third floors that are unappealing to tenants. This is one of
the few projects we’ve seen that represents an exemplary “Avenue” development for the City of Toronto. Developer
The architecture is authentic and has deftly introduced some very decent housing above the retail stores on STREETCAR Developments
the ground level—an ideal situation for a mixed-use building of this kind. The building extends flush to the
street, which makes for a development that is firmly engaged with the public realm. The roof gardens are a
real bonus, as they make use of an important opportunity to increase the project’s sustainability quotient.
So often, we waste the space on the roof with poorly resolved mechanical systems. Another successful
element to this project is the scaling down of the residential component behind the building.
One of the drawbacks to this project is the lack of sun protection for the ground-floor retail tenants. The
easiest way to provide sun protection is the provision of an awning that is either permanent or retractable.
Even if a glass canopy was provided over the sidewalk, better protection could be provided for its ground-
floor occupants and passersby.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Mid-rise building
294 RICHMOND
294 Richmond Street East
Project Team
Sweeney Sterling Finlayson &Co
Architects
Architect/Urban Designer
Developer
CTL Group
Jury Comment
This building makes good use of such a tight site. It is commendable that this project comprises a
component of rental housing. While the seemingly random pattern of the façade left some members
of the jury decidedly unimpressed, we should definitely compliment the architects on successfully
devising a single-loaded building (with rental housing, no less) on an extremely tiny site.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Mid-rise building
LOGGIA CONDOMINIUMS
1040-1050 The Queensway
Project Team
SMV Architects
Architect
Insite Landscape Architects
Landscape Architect
Halsall Associates
Structural Engineer
Jury Comment Able Engineering
Mechanical/Electrical Engineer
This building sets a precedent for mid-rise buildings on main streets, especially one as busy as The Trow Associates
Queensway. The simplicity of the design was appreciated, as was the straightforwardness of the Civil Engineer
building’s architecture. Although the jury appreciated how the building’s massing acknowledged the
single-family residential buildings to its north, a more nuanced approach to its context would have
been preferred. For example, a greater distinction between its Queensway façade, and the façade
facing the adjacent houses would have made the project’s urban presence more sophisticated. Developer
Moreover, it would have been preferable to scale down the residential side and scale-up the façade BrandyLane Corporation
along the busy arterial. Designing for a more permeable ground floor would also have been preferable
through the addition of front doors along the ground floor of the building.
Of great disappointment was the unresolved landscape architecture strategy with respect to the
sodding and tree planting along the sidewalk. Since this project will set a precedent for future
development in this neighbourhood, the landscape architecture had the opportunity to become
precedent-setting for its ability to create a much more dynamic sidewalk condition. The project also
raised the difficult challenge of what a landscape in this context can realistically contribute to a
neighbourhood that is beginning the process of densification. It remains to be seen how a more
intense urban or civic landscape can be realized—and the jury will undoubtedly have to wait many
years before this area of the city achieves its maximum potential. Assuredly, the efforts put into this
development indicate that its urbanization intentions are headed in the right direction.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Mid-rise building
TOY FACTORY LOFTS
43 Hanna Avenue
Project Team
Quadrangle Architects Limited
Architect
Builder/Developer
Lanterra Developments Ltd.
Jury Comment
This project contained several strategies which allowed the complex to successfully interact with the
public realm of Liberty Village. Opening the courtyard to the street was a deliberate and supportive
enhancement of a created public space. The project exudes a neighbourhood feel and overall, the
general configuration of the building was quite clever. The tapered end of the building, a genuine
palette of industrial materials and a conservative but effective application of plantings and greenery
provides for a welcomed urban gesture to this renovation of an old industrial building located within
a newly intensified downtown urban area.
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Tall building
SPIRE
33 Lombard Street
Project Team
architectsAlliance
Developer
Context Developments
Jury Comment
The building meets the ground/sidewalk in a contemporary manner. If you want to identify a base to the
building, the architects have achieved this in a reverse manner. Instead of conventionally stepping the
tower back, the balconies are set forward, and protrude to the lot line, from the sixth floor and above.
This was likely done because the architects couldn’t get a permission to hang the balconies over the
sidewalk. Consequently, the architects have designed the base of the building in an unusual manner, but
one that opened up the possibility for interesting retail and commercial activity at grade. The building
has a limited material palette that was achieved in a minimalist way.
This project simply understands where it is located and its purpose within the city. The north-facing
grasses are healthy—except in the areas of the deepest shade—and appropriate for a reduced-
light landscape design. Perhaps the designers initially wanted a single species of very hardy grass.
Nonetheless, the final material palette used for the plantings remains restrained and is growing better
than any other landscape the jury had visited. The rusticated natural stone curbs at the base of the
tower are also extremely minimal, effective and consistent with the rest of the building. The design of
the entry lane completely accommodates the automobile in a friendly way. By not following a literal
circle for the entry driveway, the result is a landscape that feels both urban and pedestrian, yet succeeds
in accommodating the vehicles on the site.
One criticism lies in the fact that there could have been some form of canopy incorporated into the
project’s design—the ground-floor retailers must pull down their blinds throughout most of the day to
protect themselves and their goods from extreme sun, glare and solar gain.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PRIVATE
Tall building
JAZZ
167 Church Street
Project Team
Burka Architects Inc.
Architect
NAK Design Group
Landscape Architect
E.R.A. Architects Inc.
Heritage Architect
Developer Jury Comment
Concert Properties Ltd. Functionally, the jury decided that this project achieved some success with its approach to urban
design, despite the architecture of the tower above and the inherent difficulties of maintaining
the building’s historic façade. For this project, there was certainly a slavish attention paid to the
historic building in the centre of the block. After seeing the results of saving this historic façade and
incorporating the existing development into an average downtown residential development, the jury
felt that it might have been better to have a contemporary building of the same scale rather than
retain the historic façade. Nonetheless, the project is certainly commendable in that it made an
honest attempt to unify a variety of buildings on the block while introducing a variety of scales in
the development’s overall massing. The jury also realizes the degree of complexity required in saving
an historic building while increasing the block’s density to ensure a commercially viable project that
benefits the health of this neighbourhood.
Perhaps the most significant success of this project is the northeast corner, which has become a
vibrant outdoor space with an appropriately inviting café on the corner. However, with the exception
of the northeast corner, the public realm and the design resolution of the streetscape has an
underwhelming urban quality that is lacking in the opportunity of introducing a rich material palette.
0
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PUBLIC
TORONTO
PUBLIC LIBRARY–
PAPE/DANFORTH
BRANCH
701 Pape Avenue
Project Team
Hariri Pontarini Architects
Jury Comment
Client
This library exudes a sense of confidence and a high degree of integration into its busy streetscape. It is
seamlessly inserted into a very urban context and the new architectural pieces are uncompromisingly Toronto Public Library
contemporary. That is a real feat for the architects and a testament to the dedication of a client
who clearly values the benefits of successful architecture as a way of engendering community and
community space: the creation of this very accessible neighbourhood library is exemplary.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PUBLIC
BLOORVIEW
KIDS REHAB
150 Kilgour Road
Project Team
Montgomery Sisam Architects
Stantec Architecture Ltd. In Joint Venture
Client
Bloorview Kids Rehab
Jury Comment
This building is a lot better than most public commissions, even some of Toronto’s recent well-
publicized cultural institutions. Although not stellar in its approach to urban design, this project has
evolved into a genuinely active and vibrant health campus. The project successfully brought its scale
down to the residential neighbourhood to its immediate south in a wonderful design move. Overall,
there is an honest, even authentic component to this contemporary building that has sensitively
addressed its context—both the residential neighbourhood and the ravines to its north. The best
part of the ground plane addresses where the building meets the ravine. It is an institutional building
that has clearly married its programmatic requirements to the site in a light-hearted expressive form
that exudes a definitive sense of hope—very appropriate given its function as a healthcare facility
for children. The campus avoids the pomposity of most institutions and its architectural language is
appealingly appropriate. Its limited and yet non-minimal material palette is also admirable.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PUBLIC
ARTSCAPE WYCHWOOD
BARNS
601 Christie Street
Project Team
Joe Lobko Architect Inc. / du Toit
Architects Limited
ERA Architects Inc.
Stantec Consulting
Blackwell-Bowick Partnership Limited
The Planning Partnership
Michael Dixon-University of Guelph
BA Group
Leber Rubes Inc.
Jury Comment Gottschalk + Ash International
The building is to be commended for its ability to successfully transform old streetcar barns into The Dalton Company Ltd.
a veritable community centre that is vibrant, inviting and accessible. Picking up on its industrial
heritage, the approach to this adaptive reuse urban commission is appropriately spare and raw in
strategic places. The project is also the result of a series of careful and responsible resolutions to Developer/Client
a complex set of programmatic criteria involving a hefty range of stakeholders—including active
community organizations and financial supporters. However, the materials used throughout the Artscape
renovations could have been even more “crude” than what was selected and detailed. Perhaps the
architects could have selected a more industrial-type product for the building’s doors and windows.
Owner
It should be noted that jury feels very strongly that an honourable mention should be given to the City of Toronto
building only. As far as the project’s landscape architecture is concerned, the selection of plant
materials was generally wrong. It is unfortunate that the design team took the landscape budget and
spread it evenly across the site. This was a mistake that resulted in a mediocre result that should
have taken greater efforts to decide upon where the project’s budget should have been spent more
appropriately. Clearly, the landscape designers were hobbled by a woefully inadequate budget but
their response to spread too little money evenly across the site only made matters worse.
HONOURABLE MENTION
BUILDING IN CONTEXT | PUBLIC
TRANSFORMATION
AGO
317 Dundas Street West
Jury Comment
Project Team
This building is a positive contribution to the neighbourhood. Generally speaking, its massing and
Gehry International, Architects, Inc.
presence—especially along the very public side of the gallery facing Dundas Street—represents
Architect
some very fine elements that comprise the project. The way in which the galleria gives protection to
the sidewalk is quite extraordinary, as is the successful unification of the sidewalk and loggia. The
singular element of the wood and glass canopy can be considered quite dramatic. Incorporating the
Client old Henry Moore Sculpture Centre was also a success. The project decidedly avoided fussing over
Art Gallery of Ontario details such as downspouts and steel bracing, thereby adding an appropriate sense of artistry and
even honesty to the renovation. Overall, the Dundas Street elevation provides a very welcoming
cultural institution, despite its weaknesses in failing to more clearly define the building’s front
entrance.
As for the back of the building which overlooks Grange Park, the project certainly contributes to
an oppressive and overbearing feeling to the park. Selecting a blue titanium cladding was not a
problem for some of the members of the jury—it’s not so much the colour of the metal cladding as
the uncomfortable effect of such a large wall that insensitively incorporates the existing and historic
Grange buildings. The protruding stair on this façade did not impress the jury much. Its presence
seemed poorly resolved, even arbitrary. At least one landscape architect on the jury felt that the
south façade all but crushes the beauty of Grange Park—this can be seen as retrograde with respect
to contemporary attitudes about park design and landscape. Nonetheless, the jury endorses buildings
that are contextually responsive by not being “the same” on every side.
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
SMALL OPEN SPACE
SPADINA WAVEDECK
Spadina Avenue and Queen’s Quay
Project Team
West 8 + DTAH In Joint Venture
Halsall Associates
Schollen & Company Inc.
Mulvey Banani International
David Dennis Design
Brian Ballantyne Specifications
Somerville Construction
Client
Jury Comment
WATERFRONToronto
This project is appropriate, exciting, and beautifully executed. Its presence is delightful and
deceptively simple. It was certainly no small feat to achieve a design of this calibre and inventiveness
along Toronto’s waterfront. Certainly, a project like this would not have been possible even five years
ago. This project expressed a clear and powerful idea that seems effortless in doing something
very big—extending the public’s imagination of what Toronto’s waterfront can become in the future.
Furthermore, the wavedeck is the right scale for what it should be in its urban context. The wavedeck
commission was a great opportunity that has since evolved into even greater projects being built
in other areas along the same waterfront precinct. It is reassuring to the jury, and undoubtedly the
general public, to experience how Toronto’s waterfront has matured to a point of enjoying projects of
this level of sophistication being realized today.
HONOURABLE MENTION
SMALL OPEN SPACE
TORONTO BOTANICAL
GARDEN
777 Lawrence Avenue East
Project Team
PMA Landscape Architects
Thomas Sparling Inc. In Joint Venture
Cathie Cox
Horticulturalist
Paul Ehnes
Plant Consultant
Client
Toronto Botanical Garden
(formerly The Civic Garden Centre) Jury Comment
These gardens are delightful in its urban design and this project earnestly demonstrates an honest
and intense commitment to the landscape. The project doesn’t have an overbearing grandeur to its
design—maybe this is what is so good about it. It is not trying to overwhelm you, or knock you out
with an overwhelming sensory experience. The delight of this project lies within its rich and nuanced
landscape, one that is carefully presented and finely crafted so that you can—and want to—wander
through the site and either enjoy a process of discovery or quickly find what you were looking to
see. One of the many delightful gestures is the water feature—you can actually touch the water. In
essence, the project comes down to certain basic aspects of humanity where the scale makes you
feel right. This project is a borderline Award of Excellence winner, and a real success.
On another level, the project should be commended for its Modern idiom. So many recently completed
botanical gardens—in the US or Canada—are steeped in a design aesthetic of almost suffocating
nostalgia. It is refreshing that visitors can visit and discover plantings in a botanical garden while
being inspired to develop their own gardens using a contemporary design approach. There wasn’t
anything that was too sentimental or cutesy about this project. It was fresh and delightful. It is by far
the strongest landscape project.
HONOURABLE MENTION
SMALL OPEN SPACE
IRELAND PARK TORONTO
5 Eireann Quay
Project Team
Kearns Mancini Architects Inc.
Architect
Rowan Gillespie
Sculpture
Quinn Design Associates Inc.
Landscape Architect
Read Jones Christoffersen Consulting
Engineers (RJC)
Picco Engineering
Jury Comment Structural Engineers
Definitely a positive addition to Toronto’s waterfront, Ireland Park remains awkwardly located McDonnell Engineering Inc.
between an asphalt parking lot for the Toronto City Centre Airport and the beautiful and sublime Lighting & Electrical Engineer
Canada Malting Silos. Nevertheless, the project is deserving of an honourable mention due to the
beauty of its weighty and haunting presence. Lighting Nelson & Garrett Inc.
Custom Lighting Design
Ireland Park makes you reflect on the purpose of a park, and certainly the potential of this section of
the city’s waterfront. The backdrop of the Malting Silos is a perfect foil to the sculptural installation. Kenaidan Contracting Ltd.
The strength and brilliance of the project’s urban design component was to intelligently incorporate Contractor
the power of the silos into the overall aesthetic of the memorial park. Unfortunately, the crudity of the Trinity Custom Masonry Ltd.
landscape, such as the border hedges at the base of the silos, seriously detract from the memorial’s Shamrock Garden & Landscaping
power of place and are completely contradictory to the elegance and simplicity of the park’s design. Specialist Subcontractors
Perhaps these hedges were planted as an afterthought, and against the intentions of the original
designers? Another of the jury’s small criticism of the project relates to the scale of the wall inscribed
with the names of the Irish who perished as a result of sickness and malnourishment. This aspect of
the memorial fails to achieve its full effect, certainly during the daytime. Client
While the engagement with the silos and the view out towards both the city and Lake Ontario is
Ireland Park Foundation
captivating, the project still feels as though it is in the wrong place in the city. The future of the
malting silos will undoubtedly affect the long-term success of this special place.
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE
VISION AND MASTERPLAN
MAYOR’S
TOWER RENEWAL
OPPORTUNITIES BOOK
1000 sites throughout the City of Toronto
Project Team Jury Comment
E.R.A. Architects Devising a better way to improve the sustainability of 1960s high-rise towers is noteworthy. To
University of Toronto John H. Daniels produce a document that makes better use of the ground plane in Toronto’s inner suburbs represents
Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, a timely, responsible and strategic response to many challenges associated with the public realm.
and Design Potential scenarios that include urban agriculture or public markets may not be entirely feasible
as illustrated. However, to envision such positive changes for the lives of so many Torontonians is
certainly deserving of an award.
Client
City of Toronto
HONOURABLE MENTION
VISION AND MASTERPLAN
LAWRENCE HEIGHTS
REVITALIZATION
DEVELOPMENT
CONCEPT PLAN
Lawrence Avenue West / Allen Road
Project Team
Sweeney Sterling Finlayson &Co
Architects
Architect/Urban Designer/Project Manager
Jury Comment The Planning Partnership
This comprehensive neighbourhood redevelopment plan for a very commendable and complex Landscape Architect
initiative, provides a rather convincing attempt to unify two halves of a neighbourhood divided GHK International
by a large arterial (the Allen Expressway). The plan displays a clear desire to create a residential Planning/Public Consultation
community of mixed-income that contains a variety of public amenities, along with a healthy variety
of public space that allows for numerous recreational and social activities. The ongoing challenge N. Barry Lyon Consulting
of a planning endeavour such as this is the social dimension—understanding the daily lives of Economics
the children and the workaday lives of their parents. A sophisticated and innovative approach to Dillon Consulting
community consultation will be essential. The jury recognizes that this concept is a first step towards Transportation/Infrastructure/Sustainability
revitalization of this neighbourhood and awaits a more developed and implementable plan.
Client
Toronto Community Housing
HONOURABLE MENTION
VISION AND MASTERPLAN
LAKE ONTARIO PARK
Cherry Beach, the Outer Harbour,
the Baselands, Tommy Thompson Park,
Ashbridge’s Bay Park & the Beaches
Project Team
James Corner Field Operations
Landscape Architect/Urban Design Lead
Schollen & Company Inc.
Landscape Architect
North-South Environmental Inc.
Habitat Strategies
Kidd Consulting
Public Engagement
Archaeological Services Inc.
Archaeological Survey Jury Comment
CCL/IBI This proposal is a masterful exploration into a regionally-scaled park system that affects a range of
Marine Engineer birds, plants and animals—not to mention the potential for enhancing the ability to enjoy the shores
Unterman McPhail Associates of Lake Ontario. The vision for this new park system synthesizes a complex range of ideas and ele-
Natural Heritage ments that will undoubtedly contribute to improving the identity of this cultural landscape known as
Lake Ontario. Some of the design gestures feel out of scale with human habitation, but surely this
Poulos & Chung Ltd. can be corrected in the next design phase.
Transportation Engineer
Nina-Marie Lister
Ecology
Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler
Economic Strategy
Client
WATERFRONToronto
0
HONOURABLE MENTION
STUDENT PROJECT
WATER THEATRE
Olympic Island, Toronto Islands
Jury Comment Project Team
Any project that attempts to improve a direct connection to the water is important. This project plays Lila Yavari
an effective role in utilizing media and sound. A lakeside city should definitely be able to put “its Lailee Soleimani
feet” in the water, as this project suggests. Moreover, using water as a reflective material for sound
can have the effect of making an interesting venue for music alongside the lakeshore. The proposal Martin Yeung
is an interesting idea to place the theatre in the water. Lakeside cities should have its immediacy in Majella Anson-Cartwright
the water to actually connect with the water. A very good example of where water plays its role for
an effective and immediate result. Omair Ali
Stephen Perkins
University
University of Toronto John H. Daniels
Faculty of Architecture, Landscape,
and Design
2009 JURY
Ian Chodikoff Ian Chodikoff is an architect, urban designer and the editor of Canadian Architect magazine. He has
Editor - Canadian Architect undertaken projects ranging from the role of large parks to the effects of transnationalism on urbanization.
Interested in multidisciplinary, collaborative and strategic design processes, he has helped facilitate a
series of charrettes and presentations with the City of Toronto and the Design Exchange to improve the
built environment in several priority neighbourhoods across Toronto. His travelling exhibition entitled
Fringe Benefits: Cosmopolitan Dynamics of a Multicultural City was launched in July 2008 and explores
the influences of multiculturalism on Toronto’s suburban communities, illustrating opportunities for social
and economic development.
He has lectured in various universities and cities across North America and Europe, has served on numerous
juries and has written in a variety of magazines and journals on issues ranging from urban planning to
sustainability. Committed to the profession, he has served on committees including the Toronto Society
of Architects, the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, as well as having been a consultant with the
Canada Council for the Arts on the subject of architectural competitions and their importance to mid-sized
municipalities across Canada.
Jack Diamond A.J. Diamond’s degrees include a Bachelor of Architecture (with distinction) from the University of
Principal – Diamond + Schmitt Architects Inc. Capetown, a Master of Arts in politics, philosophy and economics from Oxford University and a Master of
Architecture from the University of Pennsylvania.
He is a Fellow of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada and the Canadian Institute of Planners and
an Honourary Fellow of the American Institute of Architects. He has received honourary doctorates in
Engineering from Daltech and in Law from the University of Toronto. He is a Royal Architectural Institute
of Canada Gold Medalist, a member of the Order of Ontario and an Officer of the Order of Canada.
Mr. Diamond was instrumental in the movement to reinforce neighbourhoods at risk with infill housing;
he devised medium-rise alternatives at equivalent densities to high-rise residential development; as an
entrepreneur he demonstrated the economic effectiveness of recycling historic structures for new uses;
and he identified the negative impacts of sub-urban sprawl.
Extra professional activities include chairmanship of the Advisory Committee on Design to the Canadian
National Capital Commission, membership of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, a role as a
commissioner of the Greater Toronto Area Task Force. His lecture tours have included Australia, New
Zealand, the United Kingdom, South Africa and Italy.
Eha Naylor Eha Naylor, B.L.A., M.B.A., OALA, FCSLA is a Principal of ENVision — the Hough Group, a Toronto-based
Principal – ENVision – The Hough Group Limited landscape architecture and environmental planning firm with clients throughout Canada and abroad.
Her 29 years of consulting experience reflect a diversity of expertise in environmental planning and site
design for both the public and private sectors, which has earned her numerous professional awards
of recognition. She is a member of several professional associations, such as the Canadian Society of
Landscape Architects, the American Society of Landscape Architects, the Canadian Urban Institute, the
Ontario Association of Landscape Architects and the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. In 2000, she
was named fellow of the Canadian Society of Landscape Architects.
Eha has served on several professional committees, design juries and has also appeared as an
environmental planning expert witness for the Ontario Municipal Board. She continues to lecture at
a number of Canadian universities and, since 2004, has been a member of the University of Toronto
Faculty Council for the John Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Design. She has served on
several committees for the Washington based Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards and
received the Presidential Recognition Award for her efforts. Eha is currently appointed to the Canadian
federal government’s National Capital Commission Advisory Committee for Planning and Design.
She has served on design competition panels in the City of Toronto and the urban design awards jury for
the Design Exchange/National Post, Town of Oakville and Town of Markham.
Michael Van Valkenburgh Michael Van Valkenburgh is Principal of Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, landscape architects and
Principal – Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates Inc. urban designers, founded in 1982. Michael also is the Charles Eliot Professor in Practice of Landscape
Architecture at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, where he has taught since 1982. His
firm leads the Lower Don Lands Study for Waterfront Toronto and they designed the Don River Park in
the West Don Lands, soon to be under construction.
SPONSORS MEDIA
GOLD
THE CARPENTERS’ UNION
SILVER
IN-KIND
toronto.ca/tuda
09 1012