24 Sussex Drive [Prime Minister's residence] | Vacant

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

No, but it is important for our Prime Minister and his/her family to have a safe and secure place to live. Having a pool is reasonable to me as having them go to a public pool would be a security nightmare. Not sure if Rideau Hall has an appropriate pool they could use, but if not, having them travel to 24 Sussex when they want to swim seems reasonable to me.

Surely DND or the RCMP have a secure pool the PM could use. I am not sure it is practical to try to put every possible recreational activity in the official residence. To me the baseline should be what PMs typically have before they assume the office.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Surely DND or the RCMP have a secure pool the PM could use.

Yup. That would be super convenient for them and is a great solution.

I am not sure it is practical to try to put every possible recreational activity in the official residence. To me the baseline should be what PMs typically have before they assume the office.

I agree, but private pools are not uncommon for people to have. Now if it was something like a private tennis court, that would be a different story, as few people have those.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Surely DND or the RCMP have a secure pool the PM could use. I am not sure it is practical to try to put every possible recreational activity in the official residence. To me the baseline should be what PMs typically have before they assume the office.

Not sure why that would be the baseline. So if the PM had tennis courts before he took office, we add those in? If he didn't have a pool, we close it up?

I don't want to take this on a tangent, but it strikes me as a bit petty to begrudge the PM a pool or other such "luxuries". PM is a really hard job, with long hours. It isn't easy for him or her to go to public facilities. Having some recreational facilities in the residence, whether it be a pool or tennis courts, or whatever seems pretty reasonable to me.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree, but private pools are not uncommon for people to have. Now if it was something like a private tennis court, that would be a different story, as few people have those.

How many people do you know with an indoor pool?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

How many people do you know with an indoor pool?

No one, but given our winters here, I don't begrudge them for it either. Besides, if they were building it tomorrow, that would be one thing, but it is already there, so it is another matter altogether.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Not sure why that would be the baseline. So if the PM had tennis courts before he took office, we add those in? If he didn't have a pool, we close it up?

I don't want to take this on a tangent, but it strikes me as a bit petty to begrudge the PM a pool or other such "luxuries". PM is a really hard job, with long hours. It isn't easy for him or her to go to public facilities. Having some recreational facilities in the residence, whether it be a pool or tennis courts, or whatever seems pretty reasonable to me.

I don't think it is being petty. I think it is a core element of our system of government that our political leaders are supposed to live a reasonably humble lifestyle. It is a key tool for reducing corruption, and certainly we don't want to follow the example of some far less pleasant countries and try to pimp out our leaders' lifestyles.

While we have had a handful of rich PMs, but most of them were accustomed to pretty modest lifestyles before taking office and it makes no sense to try to Trumpify our political offices.

Somehow the RCMP is able to accommodate a myriad of photo ops (going to the movies, jogging, meeting foreign leaders at Claude's chip-wagon, trick or treating). Surely they can also make the necessary arrangements if the PM wants to partake in some recreational activities.

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don't think it is being petty. I think it is a core element of our system of government that our political leaders are supposed to live a reasonably humble lifestyle. It is a key tool for reducing corruption, and certainly we don't want to follow the example of some far less pleasant countries and try to pimp out our leaders' lifestyles.

While we have had a handful of rich PMs, but most of them were accustomed to pretty modest lifestyles before taking office and it makes no sense to try to Trumpify our political offices.

Somehow the RCMP is able to accommodate a myriad of photo ops (going to the movies, jogging, meeting foreign leaders at Claude's chip-wagon, trick or treating). Surely they can also make the necessary arrangements if the PM wants to partake in some recreational activities.

I don't think anyone is advocating gaudy and exorbitant expressions of wealth. But the notion that a well maintained house with some variety of nice, private amenities is too rich for our elected leaders and their families, is equally nonsensical.

It's a similar attitude that posits that designing public buildings better than drab-utilitarian-monolith is too rich for the likes of us... which leaves us all poorer.

[rocketphish]

NCC needs $83M to address 'critical' maintenance at 24 Sussex, other official residences

Blair Crawford, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: October 16, 2018

The National Capital Commission says it needs $83 million over the next 10 years to fix up its six official residences in the Ottawa area, including the iconic and currently vacant prime minister’s residence at 24 Sussex Drive.

More than a quarter of the commission’s properties are considered to be in “critical” condition, according to an NCC’s Asset Portfolio Condition Report for the Official Residences of Canada. The report, dated April 2018, was released publicly on Tuesday.

The report also urges a $24.6-million increase in the NCC’s annual maintenance budget for the properties.

“Without sustainable funding, the deferred maintenance deficit will continue to grow and more assets will resemble the current state of 24 Sussex Drive,” the report states.

The commission also says it needs “predictable access” to the residences to do its work.

“Without both a sustainable source of funds and access to the residences to undertake regular repair, maintenance and scheduled capital improvements, the NCC will not be able to fulfill its mandate with respect to the official residences,” it says.

“Extensive and urgent repair” is needed at 24 Sussex, which hasn’t seen significant investment in more than 60 years, the report says.

Many of the building systems at 24 Sussex “have reached the point of imminent or actual failure” and must be replaced, while the aging electrical system poses a fire hazard, it says. The building is full of asbestos and has no central air conditioning. The building, 80 per cent of which is considered to have a “state function” as opposed to being a private residence, also lacks accessible entrances and bathrooms.

The RCMP has also recommended security upgrades to the residence, although the cost of these is not covered by the NCC.

The Caretaker’s House at 10 Sussex Drive, adjacent to the main gate and now used for RCMP officers, is listed in “critical condition” and had the dubious honour of being judged to be in the most decrepit of all the NCC’s properties. (Second worst was 24 Sussex and the third most critical was the PM’s summer residence at Harrington Lake)

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his family opted not to live at 24 Sussex, his boyhood home, and instead moved into Rideau Cottage on the grounds of Rideau Hall.

Rideau Hall itself, the oldest and most prestigious property in the portfolio, was rated to be in the best condition, thanks to $65 million in capital and maintenance spending over the past 10 years.

Harrington Lake, which was built in 1925, is also rated in “critical” condition and in need of major rehabilitation. A $3.5 million renovation begun last year will improve the heritage structure’s “building envelope”, repair its chimneys and fireplaces, improve its foundation and make it more energy efficient.

Stornaway, the residence of the leader of the Official Opposition, is rated in good condition, and has undergone significant renovations and improvements since 2005, but still requires a new roof, new hardwood flooring as well as replacing wiring and electrical panels.

The Farm, an 1891 farmhouse near Kingsmere in Chelsea, is home to the Speaker of the House and is in poor condition, according to the NCC report. The house needs upgraded wiring and has suffered numerous plumbing failures in recent years, the report says, rating the work at The Farm as medium priority.

The stone building at 7 Rideau Gate, between 24 Sussex and Rideau Hall, is used as a guest house for state visitors to Canada and is rated to be in fair condition and of a high priority for maintenance. It requires a new fire alarm, a new boiler, new carpets and replacement heritage windows.

The building is often used for government dinners and other functions when not needed for foreign visitors.

In all, the NCC manages 56 buildings at the six official residences in the national capital region, four of them in Ottawa and two in Quebec.

[email protected]
Twitter.com/getBAC

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...e-at-24-sussex-other-official-residences

[J.OT13]

That's not bad for the six over 10 years. I assume that doesn't include not the full modernization of 24 though.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Please return 24 Sussex to its former glory, regardless of costs and restore the pool too if need be.

I have no issue with the pool, but given the worsening news we are hearing about the state of the house, I think it should just be torn down and re-built.

It's not that historic a building (significantly altered in the 1950s). A new build would provide an opportunity for a showcase of green Canadian building techniques and Canadian products, and it would likely be significantly more energy efficient.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I have no issue with the pool, but given the worsening news we are hearing about the state of the house, I think it should just be torn down and re-built.

It's not that historic a building (significantly altered in the 1950s). A new build would provide an opportunity for a showcase of green Canadian building techniques and Canadian products, and it would likely be significantly more energy efficient.

It seems implicit in the report that renovation is the preferred option. Unless the information has been put out to encourage support for a rebuild.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I have no issue with the pool, but given the worsening news we are hearing about the state of the house, I think it should just be torn down and re-built.

It's not that historic a building (significantly altered in the 1950s). A new build would provide an opportunity for a showcase of green Canadian building techniques and Canadian products, and it would likely be significantly more energy efficient.

To me that only makes sense if the building is going to get some sort of public or official use.

[rocketphish]

Cost of fixing 24 Sussex? $34.5 million

Tom Spears, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: November 21, 2018

The National Capital Commission has a dilemma that every owner of a decrepit old car will understand: Should it spend $34.5 million to renovate the crumbling official residence at 24 Sussex Drive or spend $38.5 million and build a new one?

And does it have to do either, if no one lives there anyway?

After years of analyzing the “critical” needs of 24 Sussex, the NCC has now publicly estimated these figures as the costs of fixing or replacing the Victorian house and its 1950s extension. Neither is cheap.

The costs of the main residence do not include repairs urgently needed at the pool building ($5.3 million) and caretaker’s house ($2 million).

The report became public in mid-October.

For David Jeanes, an engineer and the president of Heritage Ottawa, these costs now raise this question: How can anyone decide how much to spend when no one knows what the building will be used for?

The grand old home overlooking the Ottawa River is an official residence with no residents. The building is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s childhood home but he now lives down the street at Rideau Cottage.

“The NCC’s role is not to force anybody to move into it, particularly the Prime Minister, but to maintain it,” Jeanes said in an interview.

With its small dining room, few bedrooms and limited servants’ quarters, 24 Sussex isn’t a good place to host foreign guests. Jeanes calls Rideau Cottage with its 23 rooms “much more suitable for a prime minister with a young family.”

It wasn’t possible to do a massive overhaul with the Harper family living in the house, he noted, but today it’s wide open. This is prime time to fix it up — but how?

“They (NCC) are hamstrung because they are doing it for what, for what purpose?” he said. “Is it to become a residence again? Should it have some public role? It is in a fabulous location on the cliff there.

“It’s a very expensive goal that needs to have an end goal in mind.”

He suggests a public role could be as a museum of prime ministers and/or lumber barons (both have lived there) which would reflect Ottawa’s history.

“It is a building that has other kinds of heritage value because it represents the evolution of the lumbering industry which gave Ottawa its prosperity in the 19th and early 20th centuries,” he said. Three former owners were in the Senate or House of Commons.

“In any case it is inappropriate for most ceremonial functions,” which are better handled by the Governor-General at Rideau Hall.

In the meantime Jeanes fears the building will suffer a gradual decline as long as repairs are put off.

When a private heritage building is vacant and collapsing, then a government may step in to expropriate and preserve it, he noted. “But in this case government already owns it, right?”

If nothing is done, “the building will deteriorate beyond the point of no repair, and some people would argue that it is already at that point.”

Mortar holding the limestone blocks is in poor condition and in some cases is missing completely. An engineering report says the limestone blocks are poor-quality stone prone to cracking, and the stones themselves are crumbling as water gets in and repeatedly freezes and thaws.

“To rebuild the structure using a different stone from a different quarry — that is both very expensive and it’s not actually very authentic from a point of view of heritage conservation,” Jeanes said.
The NCC has a long to-do list if it does decide to fix the home.

Top priorities include:

• The outer walls could drop stones on people without warning, an engineering report says. Interior walls are in much better shape, though they contain some asbestos.

• The electrical system is a fire hazard.

• Many areas are not fully accessible including the front and back doors, elevator, bedrooms and bathrooms.

• The heating system is at “end of life.”

The NCC doesn’t have a schedule for renovating. It said Wednesday that it “recognizes the historic and symbolic importance of the Residence of Canada’s Prime Minister” and “further information will be made available in due course.”

[email protected]
twitter.com/TomSpears1

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/cost-of-fixing-24-sussex-34-5-million

[kwoldtimer]

Anybody else starting to lose interest in what they do with it?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Cost of fixing 24 Sussex? $34.5 million

Tom Spears, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: November 21, 2018

The National Capital Commission has a dilemma that every owner of a decrepit old car will understand: Should it spend $34.5 million to renovate the crumbling official residence at 24 Sussex Drive or spend $38.5 million and build a new one?

And does it have to do either, if no one lives there anyway?

No one lives there because the current building isn't safe. That is a far cry from no one wanting to live there. The current building looks nothing like the original structure and it doesn't meet the needs of a Prime Minister, so I think it should be demolished and replaced with something that will work well for a Prime Minister and his/her family (regardless of his/her family situation).

With its small dining room, few bedrooms and limited servants’ quarters, 24 Sussex isn’t a good place to host foreign guests.

All the more reason to build something new that will better meet the needs of future Prime Ministers.

He suggests a public role could be as a museum of prime ministers and/or lumber barons (both have lived there) which would reflect Ottawa’s history.

I don't really like the idea of turning it into a museum. It would be an expensive project for a location that is awkward for tourists to get to and I am not sure if there is enough room to put in a large parking lot (and would we even want to if there was?). Spending aprox. $35 for a museum that hardly anyone will visit seems a waste. It also seems like an odd combination for a museum.

“It is a building that has other kinds of heritage value because it represents the evolution of the lumbering industry which gave Ottawa its prosperity in the 19th and early 20th centuries,” he said. Three former owners were in the Senate or House of Commons.

I don't see how a mansion can represent the "lumbering industry," nor do I see a building that housed random Senators or MPs as being of significant historical value. It did house recent prime ministers (since 1951), but it was always just an address with few ever actually seeing the building. A new building would still have the same address. Even 10 Downing Street (where all you ever see is the front door) is more visually recognizable to most Canadians than any part of the actual building at 24 Sussex.

“In any case it is inappropriate for most ceremonial functions,” which are better handled by the Governor-General at Rideau Hall.

For ceremonial functions, I agree. The Governor-General is our head of state and thus is responsible for ceremonial duties. The PM is responsible for making actual decisions, so 24 Sussex should be designed for hosting private meetings with the PM, to allow him/her to quickly get back to his/her family. It could also be a location for broadcasting public addresses (the House of Commons would still be used for scrums).

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by roger1818

For ceremonial functions, I agree. The Governor-General is our head of state and thus is responsible for ceremonial duties. The PM is responsible for making actual decisions, so 24 Sussex should be designed for hosting private meetings with the PM, to allow him/her to quickly get back to his/her family. It could also be a location for broadcasting public addresses (the House of Commons would still be used for scrums).

Concur, Rideau Hall for official functions, the PM's residence for working dinners, executive meetings.
Keep the façade that faces Sussex and a complete new build facing the Ottawa River.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Concur, Rideau Hall for official functions, the PM's residence for working dinners, executive meetings.
Keep the façade that faces Sussex and a complete new build facing the Ottawa River.

Although a dining room that seats 18 or more for such working dinners (in a house that could be set up to seat three or four times that) would not seem out of line. How "small" is the current dining room, I wonder?

I think most would agree that the PM of Canada deserves to be provided with a house. The problem, however, is that there is less agreement on what the functions of the house should be, and there's nobody in charge of defining the requirements, as far as I can tell. Until that's sorted out, I'm not sure how things can go forward, although in my mind it does favour renovation over reconstruction.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Concur, Rideau Hall for official functions, the PM's residence for working dinners, executive meetings.

Agreed! You would want to keep the work space separate from the living space.

Keep the façade that faces Sussex and a complete new build facing the Ottawa River.

You could, but given that it can't be seen from the road (there are too many trees in the way), I don't know how important that would be, and it would restrict the options for the new building.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

For ceremonial functions, I agree. The Governor-General is our head of state and thus is responsible for ceremonial duties. The PM is responsible for making actual decisions, so 24 Sussex should be designed for hosting private meetings with the PM, to allow him/her to quickly get back to his/her family. It could also be a location for broadcasting public addresses (the House of Commons would still be used for scrums).

This seems to be a solution in search of a problem, relocating functions that are perfectly fine where they are to justify a needlessly expensive building project.

[Mikeed]

I almost always air on the side of preserving historical assets, but 24 Sussex is a private address that has no real value.

I still fully support the idea of completely demolishing the lot and having a design national competition. Make it a TV show.

Rick's Rant is my opinion 100% percent.


That or make Rideau Cottage the PMs residence.

At least Rideau Hall, and its grounds, is open to the public. Rideau Cottage could get a new name and landscaping can isolate it from the rest of Rideau Hall and the more public areas, maybe a fence, since 24 Sussex is a residence first and foremost. There is already a backroad it's on that can be used to isolate and keep that gate as the entrance for the MP. Increasingly I think this might be the way forward.