To:Corporate Services Committee
Budget Committee
From:City Clerk, Office Consolidation Sub-Committee
Subject:Phase I Renovations to Toronto City Hall - Recommended Actions in Response to
Office Consolidation Sub-Committee Motions and Additional Budget Requirements
Recommendations:
The Office Consolidation Sub-Committee recommends that:
- the six (6) existing washrooms located on the 2nd floor be renovated and additional
funds in the amount of $14,200 be allocated for this purpose;
- glass replacement to prevent sound spilling from Committee Room No. 1 into
adjacent hallways be approved and funds in the amount of $18,200 be allocated for
this purpose;
- the funds in the amount of $18,000 be allocated to renovate the Glass House and two
adjoining rooms located on the underground parking level of City Hall to
accommodate the Council drivers in one location;
- the western square Councillor's Corridor be renamed as Corridor "D", and the "C"
reception area be renamed Reception "C and D";
- the Meeting Rooms be renamed to reflect the corridor in which they are situated.
The Sub-Committee reports for the information of the Budget and Corporate Services
Committee's having requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services:
- to report further on overall parking policy for all the Civic Centres and egress options for
the employee parking at City Hall; and
- to further report on the feasibility of upgrading the East and West Tower elevator system to
improve access to the Council Chamber, at an approximate cost of $80,000.
Background:
The Sub-Committee had before it the report (April 9, 1999) from the Commissioner of
Corporate Services regarding Phase I Renovations to Toronto City Hall - Recommended
Actions in Response to Office Consolidation Sub-committee Motions and Additional Budget
Requirements.
The Sub-Committee's recommendations are noted above.
Yours truly,
City Clerk,
Office Consolidation Sub-Committee
Gail Fowler
990412.02
c: Commissioner, Corporate Services
(Report dated April 9, 1999, addressed to the
Office Consolidation Sub-Committee from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services)
Purpose:
To recommend actions to follow-up on the Phase 1 renovations to City Hall in response to
motions adopted by the Office Consolidation Sub-Committee and to identify additional
budget requirements.
Source of Funds:
Funds in the amount of approximately $50,400 will be required to implement the changes
necessary to complete the renovations recommended in this report. An additional $80,000 will
be required if additional upgrades to the existing East and West Tower elevators to provide
better access to the Council Chamber are endorsed. These costs could be accommodated
within the $10.5 million earmarked in the 1999 Capital Budget for Facilities and Real Estate
Division amalgamation initiatives, once the budget is approved by City Council.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the following actions and additional funding requests pertaining to
Phase 1 of the City Hall renovations be endorsed:
(1)Action A:That the six (6) existing washrooms located on the 2nd floor be renovated and
funds in the amount of $14,200 be allocated for this purpose.
(2)Action B:That glass replacement to prevent sound spilling from Committee Room No. 1
into adjacent hallways be approved and funds in the amount of $18,200 be allocated for this
purpose.
(3)Action C:That funds in the amount of $18,000 be allocated to renovate the Glass House
and two adjoining transportation rooms located on the underground parking level of City Hall
to accommodate the Council drivers in one location.
(4)Action D:That the new wayfinding signage system on the 2nd floor which designated the
corridors to Councillors offices as "Streets A, B & C" not be modified.
(5)Action E:That the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back on an overall parking
policy for all the Civic Centres and egress options for the employee parking at City Hall.
(6)Action F:That the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back on the feasibility of
upgrading the East and West Tower elevator system to improve access to the Council
Chamber, at an approximate cost of $80,000.
Background:
At its March 10, 1999 meeting, the Office Consolidation Sub-Committee adopted motions
requesting that I report back on various minor design modifications it requested respecting the
completion of the Phase 1 City Hall renovations project and to identify additional budget
requirements.
Discussion:
The Facilities and Real Estate Division Project Team analyzed the design modifications
requested by the Sub-Committee, in terms of whether they are technically feasible and what
the cost implications are. The relevant issues along with recommended actions and additional
funding requirements are discussed below.
1.Second Floor Existing Washrooms
Motion:The Sub-Committee deferred consideration of the Scope of Work- Washrooms and
requested a further report on the Cost of Options.
Comment:
Prior to the renovations to the 2nd floor of City Hall taking place, there were six (6) existing
washrooms in the inner East and West Tower corridors. Funding to renovate these washrooms
was not included in the Phase 1 scope of work. Giving these washrooms a minimal facelift in
keeping with the appearance of newly renovated 2nd floor will require minor work, including
repainting washroom ceilings and stalls, replacing small mirrors with new larger mirrors and
installing some new hardware, at a total cost of $14,200. This renovation will take
approximately 2 weeks.
Recommended Action:
Action A:That the six (6) existing washrooms located on the 2nd floor be renovated and
additional funds in the amount of $14,200 be allocated for this purpose.
2.Reduce sound transference from Committee Room No. 1 into adjacent hallways
Motion:The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report back
to the Sub-Committee on the measures to prevent sound spilling from Committee Room No. 1
into adjacent hallways; such report to identify possible funding sources.
Comment:
Reducing the sound transference from Committee Room No. 1 into adjacent hallways will
require the replacement and upgrading of the room's existing original glazed windows with
thicker tempered and laminated glazing and checking the sound baffles above the ceiling.
Sound transference will be reduced along the new glazing although not along the doors. The
renovation will take approximately 4 weeks lead time plus 2 weeks installation, with an
associated cost of $18,200.
Recommended Action:
Action B:That glass replacement to prevent sound spilling from Committee Room No. 1 into
adjacent hallways be approved and funds in the amount of $18,200 be allocated for this
purpose.
3.Glass House and Council Transportation Rooms
Motion:The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report
further on the Glass House Renovations for Limousine Drivers, as well as cost and timing.
Comment:
There are currently eight Council drivers using the two existing transportation rooms behind
the Glass House located on the underground parking level of City Hall. Prior to
amalgamation, there were five drivers using these two small rooms and after amalgamation
three more drivers moved from Metro Hall. With the relocation of the Mayor and all
Councillors to City Hall, there is a functional need to consolidate space for the Council drivers
at one location at City Hall. Combining the Glass House and the two adjoining rooms into one
larger unit will better accommodate the drivers' requirements.
The design fees, demolition, painting, carpet installation, installation of data & electrical
services and HVAC modification will take approximately 3 weeks, at a cost of $18,000.
Recommended Action:
Action C:That funds in the amount of $18,000 be allocated to renovate the Glass House and
two adjoining rooms located on the underground parking level of City Hall to accommodate
the Council drivers in one location.
4.Second Floor Signage - Streets A, B & C
Motions:The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report
back to the Sub-Committee on the design, location and layout of the wayfinding signage for
the Councillors' corridors - Street A, B, & C.
The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report back to the
Sub-Committee on the cost and implementation of altering the laneway signage on the south
side of the Councillors' corridors to include a pathway titled Street D.
Comment:
The wayfinding system developed and implemented for the second floor Councillors' offices
was based on a "street" concept, corresponding to the three distinct zones of councillors'
offices along the north, west/south-west and east/south-east sides of the second floor. Each of
the three streets is entered by way of its own corresponding reception area located at the
entrance to each street.
Altering the signage on the south side of the Councillors' corridors to include a pathway titled
"Street D" would not be feasible without having a significant impact on the Mayor's offices
and Councillors' two south reception areas.
The consultants on the project who included Karo, Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg
Architects and Paul Arthur of PAVL collectively recommend that the wayfinding system as
implemented not be modified, as indicated in their submissions attached as Appendix A.
Recommended Action:
Action D:That the new wayfinding signage system on the 2nd floor which designated the
corridors to Councillors' offices as "Streets A, B & C" not be modified.
5.Parking Policy and Employee Parking
Motion:The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report on
work with the Parking Authority of Toronto for accessing employee parking.
Background:
Staff of the Facilities & Real Estate Division have had numerous discussions and met with the
Parking Authority about:
i) options for the overall parking policy at all Civic Centres; and
ii)the egress options for the employee parking at City Hall.
Overall parking policy:
This policy is currently under development and will be presented to the Property Management
Committee in May 1999 prior to presentation at the Office Consolidation Sub-Committee.
Egress options at City Hall:
As a result of the discussions with the Parking Authority, it is apparent that some detailed
work is required to resolve compatibility issues with proximity card readers (between the City
system and the Parking Authority's new system) for egress from the employee parking lot at
City Hall. The overall parking policy will present options for the issues of corporate pool cars
and ultimate responsibility for management of the employee parking area which may impact
on the egress options. Until these issues are resolved, any expenditure on parking gates and
anti-passback controllers for a different egress from the employee parking area may be
unnecessary and is therefore not recommended.
The project has therefore been divided into two phases:
PHASE ONE work (scheduled completion April 30, 1999) involves:
a) Providing an IN gate at the entrance of the Taxi Tunnel. Alongside this IN gate will be a
pedestal housing a long range proximity card reader and an intercom.
b) Connecting the existing IN overhead door to function in conjunction with the card reader
for 24 hour access when the overhead door is down (11:00 PM - 7:00 AM).
c) Providing an intercom station near the handicapped lift.
d) Repainting the Official Parking Garage signage to turn the old entrance into the new exit
and vice versa.
e) Providing a new high speed roll-up overhead door with a door contact at the Official
Parking entrance. A parking pedestal housing a long range proximity card reader and an
intercom will be placed by the entrance before this overhead door. Along with this door will
be the necessary safeties, loop detectors, and associated hardware.
f) Providing a new high speed roll-up overhead door with a door contact at the Official
Parking exit. This door will open automatically upon sensing vehicular movement inside the
Official garage. No card read out will be necessary.
g) Providing an OUT gate at the Taxi Tunnel exit. Alongside this EXIT gate will be a pedestal
housing a long range proximity card reader and an intercom.
h) Connecting the existing OUT overhead door to function in conjunction with the card reader
for 24 hour egress when the overhead door is down (11:00 PM - 7:00 AM).
PHASE TWO work involves:
a) Providing a new employee parking vehicular exit.
b) Closing the existing employee parking vehicular exit.
Phase Two is being coordinated with the Parking Authority. Its progress will be reported at
the next Office Consolidation Sub-Committee meeting.
From April 15 to April 30, we will be taking and producing all of the employee access cards.
At this time, we will be posting information about the upcoming upgrades to the Official
Garage, Taxi Tunnel, and Employee Parking Garage.
Recommended Action:
Action E:That the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back on overall parking policy
for all the Civic Centres and egress options for the employee parking at City Hall.
6.Access to Council Chamber and 2nd Floor City Hall
Motion:The Sub-Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report on
access to Council Chamber and the 2nd floor, such report to include:
(a)Volumes during Council Meetings - Upgrade Present Elevators; and
(b)Safety Issues (Fire Alarm Drill), Stairs.
Comment:
(a) There are 3 inner core elevators and 4 East and West Tower elevators providing access
from the basement, 1st, and 2nd floors to the Council Chamber. The Project Team and Otis
Elevator engineers are currently investigating the possibility of upgrading the existing East
and West Tower elevator system and signage to provide better access the Council Chamber.
Early estimates from Otis Elevator indicate that this modification will cost approximately
$80,000, as indicated in the memorandum attached as Appendix B.
In the interim, temporary signs have been installed in the main and second floor lobbies of
both the East and West Towers to direct people to the Council Chamber.
(b)Fire alarm drills which include complete evacuation of the building are conducted at City
Hall once a year in accordance with the Ontario Fire Code. Notices informing occupants about
of the date and time of any drill are posted at least 48 hours in advance. Fire drills apply to the
entire building including the 2nd floor and the Council Chamber.
Recommended Actions:
Action F:That the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back on the feasibility of
upgrading the East and West Tower elevator system to improve access to the Council
Chamber, at an approximate cost of $80,000.
Conclusions:
This report responds to items recently raised by the Office Consolidation Sub-Committee
following completion of the Phase 1 renovations to City Hall. In most cases, actions are
recommended to either fine-tune work already done or undertake additional work resulting
from minor design modifications requested by the Sub-Committee. The time required to
complete the work along with cost estimates are identified.
Contact Name:
Suzane Borup, Executive Director, Facilities and Real Estate Division, phone 397-4156, fax
397-0825, e-mail SusanneBorup@city.toronto.ca
____________
APPENDIX "A"
- Memorandum from Karo, March 18, 1999
"Please find the following outline of wayfinding system strategy and our response to the City's
request to place councillors' names on the reverse side of the fin signs:
Karo's mandate from the beginning of this project was to make the areas associated with the
renovation of the City Hall more accessible to first-time visitors and the general public, with
particular sensitivity to those citizens who are physically and/or cognitively challenged. Our
rationale was that if a first-time visitor can effectively find their way to the services and areas
they require, then users and staff familiar with the facility and the wayfinding program will
surely be able to navigate.
With this in mind, we developed a wayfinding system for the second floor councillors' offices
based on the Street concept, corresponding to the three distinct zones of councillors offices
along the north, west/south-west and east/south-east sides of the second floor. Each of these
three streets is entered via its own corresponding reception area, located at the entrance of
each street.
The system works as follows: When a member of the public comes to City Hall looking for a
councillor, a ground floor directory indicates the councillor's name, street (A, B or C) and the
corresponding office number, such as A14, B35 or C56. They then proceed to the street
reception area which acts as a control point of entry for that zone of councillors' offices. A
sub-directory listing the councillors and their corresponding office number is located at each
reception. The wayfinder gains access to the office area and proceeds to the office number that
corresponds to their councillor's name.
As the wayfinder moves from the reception area through the street, they are addressed by a
series of "door fins" which indicate the entrance to a particular councillor's office. The office
number, councillor's name, ward name and ward number are indicated on the fin sign. If a
wayfinder passes the office number they are trying to locate, they turn around and come back
to the office number they require. The office number is repeated on a disk mounted to the
glass on the latch side of the door. This method of locating a councillor's office is also
reinforced by the overhead directional signage which directs wayfinders to particular office
numbers and streets.
The majority of the fin signs are single sided because, in most locations, the reverse side of
the fin backs on to the glazing of the neighbouring councillor's office. The reverse side was
intentionally left blank so that it would not confuse wayfinders as to who belongs to which
office. As you are aware, accessibility issues relating to signage dictate that, among other
things, room identification signage must be consistently located adjacent to the room entrance,
typically on the latch side of the door. If the signage were located on both sides of the fins, the
clarity of the system would immediately break down and wayfinders would become confused,
frustrated and disoriented, which will lead to more wayfinding related question being directed
to the councillors' office staff.
Locating the councillors by office number was the only option available to us. Councillors
cannot be organized by name, in alphabetical order, due to the temporary and fluctuating
nature of their office locations (they shift every election). Nor have they been located by ward
number because citizens rarely know which ward number they live in. As a result of these and
the lottery system for "equitable" locating of councillors, the wayfinding system must relate to
the only permanent item - the office number.
Thus, the system instructs wayfinders to look for an office number, not a councillor's name.
Staff should know the office number of the councillor they are looking for. If they miss an
office number, they can either look up to suspended directional signage, or to the next office
and observe which number they are at. Staff should be informed how councillors office
locations have been allocated and instructed to look for them by office number, not name.
Our system was carefully thought out and the necessary information has been consistently
confirmed at key points along the way. It was fully approved prior to implementation and is
fully in accord with the best wayfinding principles.
For the reasons cited in this memo, namely the confusion which will arise from conflicting
messages and sign clutter, as well as the incurring of unnecessary expense, the consultants
involved (Karo, Shirley Blumberg (KPMB Architect), Paul Arthur (PAVL) and Geoff Eden
(City of Toronto Accessibility Committee) collectively recommend that the fin signage remain
as implemented.
We would be pleased to make a presentation of the system, if required. Should you have any
questions or comments about the above, please contact me directly at (416) 927-7094 ext.
238."
2. Memorandum from Karo, March 23, 1999
"... Further to your request, please find the following regarding the addition of D. Street to the
second floor wayfinding system. As you know, A, B and C Streets all correspond to three
actual, physical spaces which are architecturally determined. Each of these areas has its own
entrance, reception area, corresponding offices, colour code and signage. If there were four
distinct areas, with their own entrances, occupied by councillors offices, then there would be a
D Street.
The request for the following cost and scheduling ramifications for the addition of D Street
illustrates a basic misunderstanding of the wayfinding system and underscores the need for an
explanation of the system.
To create D Street, the City would have to create a new distinct area on the second floor with
its own entrance, reception and councillors offices, and then link it to the other streets.
Architecturally this would be feasible if the City wishes to relocate the Mayor's office. A
fourth colour would then be applied to this area and the colour bar of the signage. Existing
directional signage throughout the renovated areas would have to be modified to
accommodate the addition of D Street. New signage for the area would be based on the
existing signage designs in place in the other streets.
Costs: We cannot comment on the additional construction cost, project management or
architectural fees which would be incurred due to a renovation of this type. Signage budgets
would be as follows:
Update & replace existing signage
Sign typeQuant Fab'n costInst'n cost
4.1 - Wall Mt'd Directional 4 3,600 300
4.3 - Atrium Susp'd 510,2502,000
4.4 - Wall Mt'd Directional 4 4,200 800
4.6 - Atrium Susp'd 4 5,200 850
Total23,2503,95027,250
Create new signage
Sign typeQuant Fab'n costInst'n cost
M.7 Councillors fin 10 10,0002,200
3.3 - Reception 1 2,200 300
4.2 - Susp'd Directional 6 12,2702,500
5.1 - Street Directory 1 2,000 800
Misc. Identification 10 2,500 350
Total 28,9706,45035,420
Total Fab'n/Inst'n62,670
Karo Design & Management28,000
Grand Total90,670"
3. Fax from Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg Architects, April 7, 1999
"We are familiar with the contents of the two memos dated March 18 and 23 which were
prepared by David Plant of Karo with respect to the addition of street D signage.
This letter is to reiterate that we concur with Karo's comments and recommendations."
4. Fax from Paul Arthur, PAVL, April 7, 1999
"I have just been apprised today that I am to send you a letter confirming my complete
agreement with the content of the two faxes sent to Lawrence, dated March 18 and 23.
On the subject of the fins, it should not be thought that the solution about the signing of the
individual offices was taken hurriedly. Nor was it taken without our asking the designers to
provide full-sized mock-ups, even prior to the installation of the fins themselves. It was the
unanimous opinion of the architect, the designer, and myself as the City's advisor on
wayfinding issues that our joint decision was the only appropriate one.
Quite apart from that observation, however, we were also unanimous in feeling that the
solution will be effective.
I do hope that the idea of redeveloping the second floor to accommodate an unnecessary
"street" will go no further."
_________
APPENDIX "B"
1. Memorandum from Otis Elevator, April 8, 1999
"In order to provide you with an elevator shuttle(s) in each tower at City Hall, we envision the
following.
Otis will supply and install two 2 new set of hall buttons, one at the main level and one at the
3C level. The new set of hall buttons at the lobby level will have a key switch. When the keys
switch is turned on, one or two of the elevators will only serve the lobby and 3C level and
only respond to calls made on one of the new sets of hall buttons. When the key switch is
turned off, the elevators will run normally, serving all floors and the new sets of hall buttons
will be inactive. The building will have to be provide appropriate signs for the public
regarding the operation of the elevators.
Please note that we need a little more time for our engineers to determine if this is even
reasonably possible and that the best budget pricing I can provide at this time is about $40,000
per tower."
