Stage 1
The proposed buildings are informed and connected by the history of the site to the modern era. Our design concept for the key Wellington Street elevation has been inspired by the scale and rhythm of the historic financial buildings once occupying the site and referred to as Bankers Row. These buildings created a well-defined urban edge with consistent scale and massing running alone the length of Wellington Street. The notion of 'Crown and Town' was created.
Key to the architectural expression on Wellington Street and Metcalfe is the reading of a series of 11 expressed bays. The bay design is underpinned symbolically by the idea of an organic tree structure. At the base of the building timber structural trees connect to steel branches which rise and form the columns of the bays. These in turn split, separate and extend to the roof to become a series of individual fins. On the very top of the building the facade design resembles the unwrapping pattern of the bark of a birch tree.
Conceptual Conservation Approach
Conceptually the conservation approach is to insert the new building volumes behind the existing historic facades to introduce new continuous floor construction behind these renovated facades. This will allow for more efficient and more useable provision of space and construction that meets modern day standards in terms of safety and performance. Notable historic interior features will be retained and re-located within the new buildings. On Wellington Street the Union building, the last fragment of Bankers Row, will have its facade and important interior features retained.
Stage 2
We recognise the extraordinary setting for this project and the national significance of the Parliamentary Precinct to all Canadians and the Indigenous Peoples. Block 2 occupies a hugely important location within this historic Precinct, directly opposite Canada's Parliament buildings. Our proposals are respectful to the dignity of the Parliamentary Triad and the Indigenous Peoples Space (IPS) and reinforce the visual and symbolic pre-eminence of Parliament Hill.
Our concept proposes the re-instatement of a tightly defined street frontage repairing the urban fabric. We seek to complete the 'fourth wall' of the Parliamentary Triad and the great lawn. It is a bold reinforcement of the 'Crown and Town' symbolism. Simultaneously, our design presents a new identity embracing all the peoples of Canada. This new identity reflects the broad diversity of modern-day Canadians based on mutual respect, and a shared connection with nature, the seasons, Canada's distinct regions and its unique landscapes.
The proposed buildings are informed and connected by the history of the site to the modern era. Our design concept for the key Wellington Street elevation has been inspired by the scale and rhythm of the historic financial buildings once occupying the site. These buildings created a well-defined urban edge with consistent scale and massing. The new buildings align their façades with the IPS building and unification of the block is further reinforced by the introduction of volumes which are largely symmetrical around the IPS building. The design is therefore both respectful to the macro scale of Parliament and the local setting and scale of the classified IPS building.
Our proposals are offset respectfully from the IPS, allowing it room to breathe. The flanking walls are curved to provide a soft, rather than truncated interface and to imply a symbolic circular volume offset which is generated from the centre of the IPS. These curved flank walls are stone faced and windowless to allow privacy into the IPS site and flexibility for future uses. The walls could be inscribed or carved; it is for the Indigenous people to decide how they would like to utilise these assets.
Our design reflects a contemporary architectural language that has evolved from the understanding of the values of the site. The new buildings and additions are compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place. The scale, proportions and massing of the additions reflect the tripartite organization of the historic structures. The stepped back and scalloped upper storeys serve as unifying element tying the individual buildings together and reflecting the evolved program of the block from individual independent buildings to a united single complex.
The use of natural and traditional building materials - stone, wood and metal - provide a continuity with the historic material palette. The expressed tree-like structure, scalloped crystalline upper storeys, sculptural ceilings, woven meeting pods and undulating atrium spaces introduce organic forms to the site and embody a new Canadian architectural expression that is rooted in nature and a more inclusive and representative understanding of the nation's history and evolution.
(From competitor's text)
Stage 1
The jury was impressed by the balanced approach to the unique contextual challenges of the competition and its site. The design scheme has very carefully respected the scale and datums of the buildings along Wellington St while attempting to reinterpret them in more contemporary ways. The jury appreciated the inspiration taken from the 'Bankers Row' buildings, while creating a more inviting and transparent ground floor condition. The upper two floors pay homage to the gothic roofs in the area, and the symbolic material reference to the Canadian climate and the north has potential. The jury also felt there was an interesting attempt to create engaging and warm interior spaces through the skylit atriums and meeting pods. The overall programmatic organization of the East and West blocks is coherent and, while there are various items that would need to be addressed, these appear to be mostly resolvable. The design scheme also respects the presence of the IPS and uses the elevations and massing of the new buildings to frame it when looking back from the Centre Block and the Parliamentary Lawn. In this way, the design scheme appropriately does not try to compete with, or dominate, the IPS in its urban presence.
The design scheme has a very clear functional layout with good atrium spaces with circulation and cafeteria, Parliamentary Office Unit (POU) spaces with proposed light at both façade and atrium ends, an effective use and placement of the unassigned spaces and overall, an approach that maximises views.
The jury was, however, disappointed that the IPS was not more explicitly reflected in the design text or overall scheme. The importance of reconciliation and the IPS was a central aspect of the Competition Brief and yet was not expressed as a priority in this design scheme. Jury members felt that due to the strategic massing relating to the urban context, some of the monumentality of traditional colonial government structures are also maintained. As a result, the heaviness and formal ordering of the buildings seem to crowd the IPS. Modifications to the scheme with more generous treatment of the space between the new buildings and the IPS is encouraged to resolve this tension and allow for future exterior design possibilities led by the IPS.
There was some concern by the jury that the interior spaces remain largely diagrammatic and are so radically different from the exterior, resulting in a series of competing design languages; the base tree columns with curtain wall; the middle 'bays'; the "crown" (which jury members felt was disproportionately tall when the mansard roof was made vertical); the undulating wood ceiling treatments; and the wood-clad pods. While the Jury understands that the interior and exterior expressions can be different as a means of bridging urban design and architectural / program considerations, the jury felt that the design has not yet brought interior and exterior together into a coherent design strategy and recommends an editing process to strengthen the overall expression. Interior treatments and uses of pods could be rationalized, simplified or possibly revisited. On the exterior, there is an opportunity for the current "crown" and "defensive structure" metaphors used to describe the top two floors to be revisited to emphasize the collective aspiration for Canada to transcend its colonial foundations, and how the horizontality of the band could express this, both from exterior and interior perspectives. It is also recommended that this element not encroach over the space surrounding the IPS.
The Sparks St (south) side of the block remain relatively undefined in the design scheme and requires better representation to fully understand some of the design decisions and their effectiveness, such as the 'upgrading' of the Valour building facade. The massing used in the conservation approach diagram suggests adding the new buildings directly above the existing heritage buildings. The jury recommends stepping these additions back to be more respectful of the existing heritage facades and volumes.
The design scheme would benefit from a more explicit description of its conservation approach based on the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. This description should include a clear statement on the primary treatment chosen for the project, with reflections on how it applies to each heritage building and the overall design approach.
Technical concerns noted by the jury included:
• the proposed use of wood in the interiors is to be reviewed for compliance to code requirements
• various aspects of the structural design
• the use of bronze that is considered an ongoing maintenance issue
• Placing POUs on top of LoP will likely have challenges in terms of maintaining the LoP in operation. It also appeared to create building code issues in terms of exiting.
• While the quality of entrances is perceived positively, adjustments towards a more dignified entrance approach is advised.
• The design scheme and proposed façade text mentions the 10 provinces of Canada but ignores the 3 territories.
• The design narrative places no emphasis on the issue of Reconciliation
Stage 2
The jury admired the enthusiasm expressed by this proposal, demonstrating a rigorously comprehensive research and design process. The design team clearly challenged themselves to meet the complex and challenging parameters of the design brief. The tripartite approach to the massing of the new buildings was entirely appropriate and provided a rich continuity with the existing buildings and scale of the Parliamentary precinct, while reinforcing its 'town and crown' identity. The urban and historical analysis was evident, including the attempt to reinstate the street frontage of the Bankers Row, which leads to an overall material palette and spatial composition responding to both the urban and cultural contexts. The transparent ground floor creates an openness to the street that is welcoming and visually inclusive. The jury also appreciated the focused technical analyses and study models that exceeded the requirements of the design brief but added depth to the proposal.
The jury also found the overall approach to sustainability to be effective. There was a clear strategy to maintain the existing heritage building facades, including some structural bays for their support (Victoria building). A target for LEED Platinum, the inclusion of mass timber, the use of low carbon materials, and the preliminary embodied carbon analysis all demonstrated a firm commitment to sustainability by the design team. Skylights, operable windows, broad access to natural light, and the emphasis on an interior inspired by biophilia for overall wellbeing, all extend these values through to the experience of all users. Natural ventilation is provided by operable elements integrated into the opaque portions of the external façade. Perimeter heating is provided. Local ventilation towers in the office areas use recirculation in the spaces, which is seen critically by the jury in terms of indoor air quality. It is not clear how the meeting pods are to be provided with MEP services, supply air, electricity etc. There were also some concerns for the heat gain in the offices facing south given there are no apparent shading devices on the scalloped curtain walls of the upper floors.
The provincial recognition on the vertical stone fins, the strong connection with the natural environment expressed through the metaphor of the trees, the scalloped glazing at the top that could be read in relation to our northern climates (among other interpretations), and the response to the multi-scalar significance of the site, all express the complex idiosyncrasies of Canadian identity. However, consistent with the jury's preliminary assessment, this results in a series of competing visual languages that prevent a coherent composition, while the relationship between the interior and exterior expressions remains largely unresolved. The addition of the sculptural metal forms (described as a frieze), while consistent with the contemporary expression of the tripartite framework, added yet another design element to the project, which the jury did not feel benefited the overall design. There remained concern that the territories were not adequately recognized in the project in comparison to the provinces.
The jury did not feel that earlier feedback on the IPS was responded to effectively. While the curved stone walls on the upper floors were recognized as a gesture to the importance of the IPS, this intervention feels understated. Furthermore, the space allocated around the IPS did not change significantly and the technical review also highlighted a slight encroachment of the IPS's eastern setback. As a result, the jury feels that, in comparison to other schemes, the IPS remains overpowered by the new buildings. While the jury appreciated the effort to relate the new buildings to the architectural order of the IPS, there remains the possibility that the IPS will be redesigned and therefore these unifying gestures could be compromised in the future. Lastly, there were some building code concerns related to the glazing in the new buildings facing the IPS, due to their close proximity, that would need to be addressed.
The jury took note of the attention to user experiences created by the common areas, winter gardens, circulation spaces and offices for the Parliamentary Office Units (POU). While significant areas of the buildings were dedicated to shared spaces, lobbies, and common areas, it was noted that none of these spaces overlooked Parliament and many added little value or function to the overall scheme. While the use of curved interior and exterior walls and scalloped or canted glass creates unique and dynamic offices, at the same time the design limits the flexibility and functionality of those spaces. It was also noted that a number of offices were reduced in the Valour Building and the overall design of the offices were long, narrow and those adjacent to the IPS could lack adequate natural light.
Siting the committee rooms in suspended basket-like pods was an interesting proposal, however these spaces, as represented, create a number of safety, functional and structural concerns. The limited access to the committee rooms, via a narrow bridge, creates challenges with respect to circulation and the servicing of those spaces. In addition, the circular plan is not conducive to the many functions of the committee rooms, which support parliamentarians but also support staff, translation staff, and broadcasting requirements. The jury and technical advisors also noted there are concerns with flammability of the material affecting fire ratings, the challenge of applying sprinklers to the underside of the suspended forms, and a question of the lateral structural stability of the pods. The jury also felt the material language of the pods created an ambiguous reference to Indigenous Peoples, lacked cultural specificity and introduced a new architectural language incompatible with the rest of the building.
The jury made several comments on the treatment of the Library of Parliament (LoP). The strategy to cantilever over the LoP has multiple negative consequences; the blocking of natural light and the complexity created during construction when the LoP, which must remain open, are two of note. In addition, the expression of the LoP from the north end of the site, as well as the north entrance created could have been strengthened. It was also noted by the jury that the circulation throughout the Library was not optimal, and the proposed layout removes necessary book stacks and challenges functional requirements.
Overall, this proposal was one of the most ambitious in its attempt to bring together so many complexes, and often competing, parameters for this unique project. It is clear that the team invested an impressive amount of time and effort to synthesizing the various elements together. However, the proposal would have benefited from further editing and significant refinement and has therefore not been selected among the prize winners in the overall assessment.
(From jury report)
