HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & City of Ottawa


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 4:24 AM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by bless-u View Post
I think 24 Sussex has its historical significance being the resident of our Prime Ministers even for a relatively brief period, though not as strong as other heritage buildings like the Parliament Building, for example. However, we shouldn't deny its special status. Demolition may be a bit drastic. It probably makes a stronger case for turning it into a museum. I believe in conservation.
As you said the significance of 24 Sussex is it is the Prine Minister's residence. Turn it into a museum and it becomes just another old building that in 50 years only historians will remember the significance of. We don't need to shoehorn a nameless museum into an old building. It is likely too small to house anything significant and too remote to get much attention from its location. People might be interested for a decade or two but then what. Keep refurbishing a building that no one ever visits?

Demolished (and rebuilt) or referbished it should remain the Prime Minister's residence IMO.

Quote:
A 19th Century building in good condition is certainly worth keeping IMO
But it's not in good condition. That's why it needs to be referbished or replaced. If it has some architectural significance that I'm not aware of, by all means keep it, but just because its old does make it worth keeping.

Last edited by roger1818; Jan 16, 2018 at 4:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 1:34 PM
HighwayStar's Avatar
HighwayStar HighwayStar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PHX (by way of YOW)
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
But it's not in good condition. That's why it needs to be referbished or replaced. If it has some architectural significance that I'm not aware of, by all means keep it, but just because its old does make it worth keeping.
So back to my question... has the NCC just put the whole thing on the back-burner for the forseeable future??

I googled around and can't find any reference to anything other than full-blown inactivity on the file.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 2:16 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayStar View Post
So back to my question... has the NCC just put the whole thing on the back-burner for the forseeable future??

I googled around and can't find any reference to anything other than full-blown inactivity on the file.
I think it remains political suicide. The only way this is going to work is if the decision and oversight is turned over to some sort of cross-party committee (maybe co-chaired by a former Liberal PM and a former Tory PM) and there was a move-in date far enough in the future that nobody involved in the decision would be seen as benefiting from it.

Personally, I like the idea of turning it over to a TV personality (Mike Holmes, etc). If Mike Holmes says they need to spend big bucks the public will believe him.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 4:31 PM
bless-u's Avatar
bless-u bless-u is offline
True North
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
Demolished (and rebuilt) or referbished it should remain the Prime Minister's residence IMO.
But a lot of people are concerned about the renovation cost and the initial quotation does seem high and the final cost at completion will likely be even higher, which leads to the suggestion of total demolition and rebuild. I find it a bit drastic to have it demolished, but I do agree the building is too old and probably not worth the huge investment. To me, it'd be more sensible and cost effective to build a new one with all the necessary modern technology and security hardware, but on a new site close by and leave the existing building alone. That's just me....

Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
But it's not in good condition. That's why it needs to be referbished or replaced. If it has some architectural significance that I'm not aware of, by all means keep it, but just because its old does make it worth keeping.
I think the building envelop, the stone structure itself, is fine. The fading interior seems to be the main problem. It will still make a very decent, even handsome, home for most people, but it is quite inadequate for Prime Ministers with all the security needs and concerns. I quite like the building personally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 5:32 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by bless-u View Post
I think the building envelop, the stone structure itself, is fine. The fading interior seems to be the main problem. It will still make a very decent, even handsome, home for most people, but it is quite inadequate for Prime Ministers with all the security needs and concerns. I quite like the building personally.
The exterior was pretty extensively modified.

OG


Recent
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 10:04 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
I get that Harper refused to move out, but the NCC could have taken that time to do the necessary studies on what the next steps should be while he (Harper) sat on his ass. Make the plans before evicting.

If they just renovate the building into nothing more than a residents for the PM instead of adding a bunch of functions that can be and are currently accommodated elsewhere (PMO, meeting places for dignitaries...), it doesn't have to cost a ridiculous amount.

Anyway, the most recent article I've seen was in Le Droit.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/l...82218011186680

According to the article, the building needs to be renovated, but it is not falling apart. The reason is so damn slow is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Everyone wants their say; the NCC, Heritage, Finance, the Privy Council, the RCMP...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 12:05 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
I get that Harper refused to move out, but the NCC could have taken that time to do the necessary studies on what the next steps should be while he (Harper) sat on his ass. Make the plans before evicting.

If they just renovate the building into nothing more than a residents for the PM instead of adding a bunch of functions that can be and are currently accommodated elsewhere (PMO, meeting places for dignitaries...), it doesn't have to cost a ridiculous amount.

Anyway, the most recent article I've seen was in Le Droit.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/l...82218011186680

According to the article, the building needs to be renovated, but it is not falling apart. The reason is so damn slow is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Everyone wants their say; the NCC, Heritage, Finance, the Privy Council, the RCMP...
The minimum cost estimate I've seen is $38million. Harper didn't want to touch it and I doubt that Trudeau will either. The involvement of multiple agencies is not the reason things are slow. Perhaps a benefactor will come forward to renovate the place as a gift to the nation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 12:11 AM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post

If they just renovate the building into nothing more than a residents for the PM instead of adding a bunch of functions that can be and are currently accommodated elsewhere (PMO, meeting places for dignitaries...), it doesn't have to cost a ridiculous amount.
Isn't that sort of the problem? 24 Sussex isn't used for any state, official or office functions so it is mostly just an oversized private house that hosts the odd working dinner or garden party. Two years of closure doesn't seem to have affected much.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 11:36 PM
bless-u's Avatar
bless-u bless-u is offline
True North
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
The exterior was pretty extensively modified.
The aesthetics of the previous renovation was rather subjective. It turned the Victorian style mansion to a somewhat Georgian Style mansion. It was done more for personal preference than necessity, it seemed. I wonder how extensive the interior renovation was.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 2:37 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,339
Trudeau says he doesn't see himself ever returning to live at 24 Sussex
Trudeau says no prime minister wants to be seen spending taxpayers' money on their home

By Catharine Tunney, CBC News
Posted: Feb 01, 2018 5:00 PM ET Last Updated: Feb 01, 2018 9:27 PM ET




Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says it is unlikely he'll ever return to live at 24 Sussex Drive, the deteriorating, mouse-infested, hydro-draining and oft-spoofed official residence of Canada's head of government.

Trudeau told CBC Radio's The House that he doesn't see himself returning to his boyhood home at any point.

"I'm fairly resigned to not live in that house for the entire term," he told host Chris Hall in an interview airing Saturday.

The stone mansion was originally named Gorffwysfa, Welsh for "place of peace." But it has been anything but for the prime ministers who have lived there.

"There's a real challenge in this country. Anything that a prime minister decides that they can potentially benefit from — that's one of the reasons that that house has gone into the ground since the time I lived there — is that no prime minister wants to spend a penny of taxpayer dollars on upkeeping that house," said Trudeau, who moved his family into the nearby Rideau Cottage after taking office.

An auditor general's report in 2008 called for "urgent" repairs to the stone mansion. The report said the 35-room residence, built in 1868, hasn't had major renovations in 50 years and pegged the repair bill at $10 million.

It also found the windows, plumbing, electrical systems, heating and air conditioning in poor to critical condition, and noted the home had no fire sprinklers and contained asbestos.

But Trudeau won't have to fight in the House of Commons to fix up his former house.

Both Conservative and NDP spokespeople told CBC News they believe the residence should be repaired and that they would support Trudeau if he went ahead with renovations.

The Conservatives later contradicted that position with Ontario Conservative MP Erin O'Toole saying that he would only consider supporting renovations and repairs once Trudeau had repaid the costs of his trip to the Aga Khan's island home.

Conservative Party spokesperson Jake Enwright, who had given the original statement, later told CBC News that O'Toole's comments reflected the party's updated position on the prime minister's official residence.

Former prime minister Paul Martin, who once went to Canadian Tire with comedian Rick Mercer to buy plastic to cover the home's drafty windows, said government should be removed from ruling on renovations..

"I didn't maintain it, neither did the prime ministers who came before me, and obviously that has continued," he told CBC News.

"I believe that if it had been turned over to an independent commission, it would have been treated as a non-partisan issue long ago."

Martin, who lived at 24 Sussex between 2003 and 2006, said questions about the residence have followed him even after returning the keys.

"People have actually approached me on the street to talk about it. Everybody I've ever talked to believes, as I do, and I think that most people do, that it should be kept up," he said.

"This is a house that belongs to Canada."

Kim Campbell, the only prime minister besides Trudeau not to live at 24 Sussex since the 1950s, said she agrees the house shouldn't deteriorate.

"Especially in this time of heightened security concerns, an official residence creates a secure 'bubble' in which the prime minister's family can live," she said.

Former prime minister Joe Clark told CBC News that the home is "of no interest whatsoever to him."

His wife, Maureen McTeer has been vocal of her distaste for the home.

"An old, crumbling building with asbestos, which we know is poison, really is so lacking of vision, if you will, and [does not reflect] who we are as Canadians," she said.

In his biography, former prime minister Brian Mulroney said that when he considered renovations — to be split between government, the Progressive Conservative Party and himself — Jeanne Sauvé, the governor general at the time, warned him it would be a mistake.

He said she told him: "'None of what you propose to do will be appreciated. In this town, no good deed goes unpunished. You are needlessly penalizing your family, and any expenditure you or the party make at 24 Sussex will be turned against you.'"

Mulroney and his wife Mila Mulroney were attacked in the press when it became known the party gave them $308,000 to pay for renovations at 24 Sussex and Harrington Lake, the office's country home, including a massive closet for shoes and expensive wallpaper. It became known as "Gucci-gate."

"When I left office, we were accused in the media of trying to 'remove' furniture from 24 Sussex. Yet it was ours, we'd paid for it, and in fact we left most of it behind," he wrote.

Trudeau's mother, Margaret, whose marriage to Pierre Elliott Trudeau unravelled during their time at the home, once described it as the "crown jewel of the federal penitentiary system."

While the home itself dates back to Confederation, it was originally built for a prominent logging baron.

Louis St-Laurent was the first prime minister to move in during the 1951, the last time the house saw a major renovation.

Trudeau the younger says he's "looking into how to maintain that particular piece of infrastructure."

"I've made the decisions to talk to experts and to look at the NCC and allow them to make the determinations on what the future of 24 Sussex will look like," he said.

The National Capital Commission maintains Canada's official residences, but wouldn't comment on the cost to repair 24 Sussex.

"The words of the prime minister encourage us to continue working with the government to advance the NCC's plan to renew 24 Sussex Drive," said Mark Kristmanson, CEO of the National Capital Commission,

When asked if the $10-million projected renovation costs have climbed in the decade since the auditor general's report, an official pointed out it wouldn't have included extra security measures in the wake of the Oct. 22, 2014, Parliament Hill shooting.
Even though it sits vacant, the federal heritage building racks up maintenance bills.

Between November 2015 and March 2016, it cost $180,000 to keep it heated, lit up and clear of snow. The hydro bills alone for that five-month period weighed in at $38,881.

An official speaking on background said those bills aren't out of the ordinary.

On top of that, Global News reported that the NCC has awarded nearly $113,000 in outside contracts linked to 24 Sussex since the start of 2016.

Listen to the full interview with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on The House this Saturday at 9 a.m. (9:30 a.m. in Newfoundland) on CBC Radio One and SiriusXM 169.

With files from the CBC's Chris Hall and Evan Dyer

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-s...ving-1.4511732
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 12:58 PM
Norman Bates Norman Bates is offline
Living With My Mother
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 985
How very Canadian of us, to treat 24 Sussex in this disgraceful way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 2:44 PM
eltodesukane eltodesukane is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,024
"...the repair bill at $10 million"
"...the residence should be repaired"
-- Don't repair, build a new house for less than $10 million.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 3:39 PM
ars ars is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 472
I agree with Paul Martin, the upkeep of 24 Sussex should not be left up to the PMO, there should be a committee dedicated to maintaining the property as long as it remains the official residence of the Prime Minister.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 5:00 PM
bless-u's Avatar
bless-u bless-u is offline
True North
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 118
Seems like few more residences will be renovated along with 24 Sussex:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle37829158/
__________________
"Canada is Free and Freedom is its Nationality" -Wilfrid Laurier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 6:05 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by bless-u View Post
Seems like few more residences will be renovated along with 24 Sussex:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle37829158/
24 Sussex repairs may be followed by work on Opposition Leader’s house

Daniel Leblanc, Ottawa
The Globe and Mail
Published February 2, 2018 | Updated 36 minutes ago


Long-awaited plans to renovate 24 Sussex Dr. have been put on hold as the federal government explores a bigger and more expensive strategy that would also include repairs to the official residences of the leader of the opposition and the speaker of the House of Commons, federal sources said.

Renovating the official Ottawa residence of the prime minister has long been a hot potato in Canadian politics, with successive governments hesitating to invest public funds in high-end accommodations.

However, it is also seen as a necessity given the poor state of 24 Sussex, as laid out in a number of expert reports. In 2008, the auditor-general found the building to be in poor shape – with cracked windows, aging wiring and deficient plumbing – and in need of $10-million worth of repairs. The same report said that four other official residences in the Ottawa area needed nearly $2-million in renovations.

The estimated price tag to renovate 24 Sussex has since gone up four-fold, in large part because of security requirements. It is not known what is the estimated cost at this point of renovating Stornoway (the residence of the leader of the opposition, in Ottawa's Rockcliffe Park neighbourhood), Harrington Lake (the prime minister's secondary residence, in the Gatineau Hills of Quebec), the Farm (used by the speaker of the House, and also in Gatineau Park) and 7 Rideau Gate (used by official visitors).

Instead of simply putting together a final plan to renovate 24 Sussex Dr., sources said the National Capital Commission – the government agency that oversees federal properties in the National Capital Region – has been considering a broader strategy that would also include the residence currently used by Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer.

For the government, the strategy would have the political advantage of redoing the residences of both the prime minister and the leader of the opposition in the same package.

The NCC refused to lay out its strategy at this point, stating it is still preparing options for the government.

"I can only confirm that the National Capital Commission is working with its federal partners to develop a plan for the future of 24 Sussex Dr. that includes all facets of the project to ensure the federal government is able to make a prudent and informed decision," NCC spokesman Jean Wolff said. "Further information, including how this plan may or may not serve plans for the other Official Residences, will be made available in due course."

After starting to live at 24 Sussex in 2006, former prime minister Stephen Harper refused to move out to allow wide-ranging renovations until the end of his tenure.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, on the other hand, did not move into 24 Sussex after winning power in 2015, preferring to install his family at Rideau Cottage on the grounds of the governor-general's residence.

Still, Mr. Trudeau – who lived in the residence when his father was prime minister in the 1970s and 1980s – has yet to approve a renovation package for the official residence.

"Anything that a prime minister decides that they can potentially benefit from – that's one of the reasons that that house has gone into the ground since the time I lived there – is that no prime minister wants to spend a penny of taxpayer dollars on upkeeping that house," Mr. Trudeau said in an interview with the CBC this week.

The Conservatives support the eventual renovation of 24 Sussex and will encourage Mr. Trudeau, if he is still Prime Minister when the residence is ready, to move back there.

"The residence belongs to Canada and it should be maintained," said Conservative spokesman Jake Enwright.

One senior federal official said the Prime Minister – and his successor if someone else wins the 2019 general election – will be expected to continue using Rideau Cottage until 24 Sussex is renovated. Afterward, Rideau Cottage could be used by the leader of the official opposition of the day while construction crews take on Stornoway, the official said. The speaker could then use Rideau Cottage while the Farm is being renovated.

The NCC is the lead agency on the file, but other federal organizations will also have a say in the final plans: the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council, the RCMP, Treasury Board and Finance.

Brian Mulroney and his family delayed moving into 24 Sussex after the 1984 election to allow for renovations, which were paid for with a mix of public and party funds. Details of those renovations, including a large closet for Mr. Mulroney, designed to accommodate 30 suits and 84 pairs of shoes, dogged the Mulroney family for years.

Bruce Carson, a former senior aide to Mr. Harper, wrote a book in which he noted that prime minister Paul Martin and his wife had found 24 Sussex to be "cold and drafty" and that the NCC wanted the Harpers to delay their move into the residence following the 2006 election. "Harper's response was that the Martins were a lot older than his family, and if it got cold, his family would wear sweaters," Mr. Carson wrote.

Follow Daniel Leblanc on Twitter @danlebla

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle37829158/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 6:13 PM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
The exterior was pretty extensively modified.

OG


Recent
Is this even the same building?!?!? What a drastic change if so!

For whatever my two cents is worth, how is it possible that The White House, which is perhaps the same vintage, is so grand looking, but 24 Sussex isn’t so? There seems to be no problems with its upkeep.

It seems a waste of money to keep the lights on, the walks shoveled and the place secured when no one is living in 24 Sussex at the moment, when you consider that the same costs are now going into Rideau Cottage. I’m a history buff and loved the thrill of walking past and briefly peering into 24 Sussex when I visited Ottawa a few years ago, but if demolishing and rebuilding is the most cost effective and safest option that gets the PM’s family back to 24 Sussex as expeditiously as possible, then so be it. Hopefully heels won’t be dragged on this issue much longer.

Last edited by YYCguys; Feb 2, 2018 at 8:28 PM. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 7:53 PM
jchamoun79 jchamoun79 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYCguys View Post
For whatever my two cents is worth, how is it possible that The White House, which is perhaps the same vintage, is so grand looking, but 24 Sussex isn’t so? There seems to be no problems with its upkeep.
For the most part, Canadians are just plain cheap.

We also tend to be resentful or disdainful of politicians and successful people in general.

And we don’t seem to value our built heritage as much as Americans do, or, frankly, people in most other countries.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 7:56 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchamoun79 View Post
For the most part, Canadians are just plain cheap.

We also tend to be resentful or disdainful of politicians and successful people in general.

And we don’t seem to value our built heritage as much as Americans do, or, frankly, people in most other countries.
The other difference is the White house has an administrative function...particularly the West Wing.

24 Sussex is purely a residence. It at most has an entertaining dignitaries function, but otherwise it is a place for the PM to live.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 8:31 PM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by c_speed3108 View Post
The other difference is the White house has an administrative function...particularly the West Wing.

24 Sussex is purely a residence. It at most has an entertaining dignitaries function, but otherwise it is a place for the PM to live.
Has there ever been a proposal in the past to expand 24 Sussex- a la West Wing- to include the PMO and other required functions?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2018, 8:38 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchamoun79 View Post
For the most part, Canadians are just plain cheap.

We also tend to be resentful or disdainful of politicians and successful people in general.

And we don’t seem to value our built heritage as much as Americans do, or, frankly, people in most other countries.
Americans seem to take great pride in Washington DC, even if they have never visited it. As a result the US Government is able to make it a capital to be proud of. Canadians on the other hand seem to talk about Ottawa with disdain and any investment in the Capital is viewed as a waste.

If the PM is afraid to spend money on renovations but the opposition leader supports it, why doesn't Andrew Sheer start a tradition of tabling a private members bill to fund the maintenance of 24 Sussex prior to the release of the budget. Make it a free vote and if it passes, the blood isn't on the PM's hands (he could choose to be absent and not vote).
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & City of Ottawa
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:45 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.