Watch on Video – A Bold New Vision for 24 Sussex Drive
According to the National Capital Commission, the official residence of the Prime Minister of Canada, 24 Sussex Drive, is in a disastrously uninhabitable condition and is symbolic of our general national malaise.
No one has lived there for approximately ten years. Current and former leaders were reluctant to spend millions of dollars restoring a building that appeared to benefit only themselves. The estimated bill to rebuild lumber mill owner Joseph Curriers’ stately heritage mansion is over $36-million. Rodent infestations, bowed and crumbling stonework, and potentially dangerous wiring are the most notable problems. However, the unspoken question is, should we save this building or build a new one?
The case for saving the existing building is that it is architecturally valuable and has an interesting history. (It has had three previous owners and extensive renovations.) There are few remaining buildings from the years around Confederation in 1867 in Ottawa, which was just a small logging town when Queen Victoria chose it for the capital of the newly created Dominion of Canada. Demolishing this historic building thus appears to be cultural vandalism.
This choice does not have to be either/or. There could be an open competition or contest for an imaginative transformation of the current building while also requesting proposals and bids for a new, bold residence and meeting centre. The property size, over five acres, could allow for two or more new buildings. Submissions may contain unforeseen innovations, shapes, configurations, special-purpose rooms, decorations, building techniques, materials, and other features.
Since the Ottawa area is seismically active, the new building(s) should withstand geological instability. Innovations generated while building the new Ottawa residence could apply in other geologically active areas such as the Pacific coast. (British Columbia’s building standards became mandatory in the 1970s, unlike California’s, which required licensed professionals to approve construction plans and issue permits under the Riley Act of 1933.) Norwich University notes five relatively new ways of handling geophysical stresses.
Structural weather-resilience margins should exceed known extremes. Temperatures in the Ottawa area can have a wide range (-38.9⁰C to +37.8⁰C), an average annual snowfall of nearly two metres – and a record of over three metres.
The competition could also require that any new buildings adhere to criteria set by Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) standards. The Canada Green Building Council describes LEED this way:
LEED helps owners and developers create high-performing, resilient buildings that reduce carbon emissions, save water, conserve energy and reduce waste. LEED also improves people’s quality of life by delivering the optimal conditions for health, comfort and productivity – such as better quality air and natural light.
However, LEED does not have to dominate all other considerations. Other requirements should include invulnerability to eavesdropping; a bomb shelter; a varied array of energy sources (for resilience to disruption of one or more of them) and energy storage in case of power failures; defences against security threats; secure, capacious, and versatile meeting facilities; the capacity for easy replacement of worn or damaged components or materials; and smart home technology throughout the structure.
Canada produces every possible building material, including cutting-edge synthetic ones such as fibre-reinforced polymers and carbon fibre composites. There are also many new sustainable ones, including geopolymer concrete, and wood. Attractive, innovative public buildings, even some high-rises, have featured wooden beams, posts, panels and other wood products, not just in decorative roles, but in load-bearing structural ones.
The use of Canada’s abundant forest products in any design proposal would be a strong endorsement of the industry. Low-rise residences and meeting facilities on the 24 Sussex Drive campus would be an ideal showcase for mass timber construction or a more customized, architecturally innovative design. However, contest organizers should not stipulate wood in the rules, as it could exclude worthy and creative proposals.
Contest judges can use preliminary submissions to establish baseline budgets and cost limits. Canadian architects and engineers are talented and deserve an opportunity to highlight their ideas. Judges can use designs that did not win first prize for other buildings, such as guest houses for visitors, or conference, recreation, or reception venues.
This project could excite not only the building sector but also Canadians in general, as applicants compete to put forth amazing and impressive contemporary designs that can be adapted for residential, conference, hospitality and office buildings – smaller or larger ‒ in the future. Canada needs to dream big and boldly again – this contest could do a small part of that.
Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
