A Legacy for Future Generations

The Long-Term Vision and Plan for the Parliamentary Precinct

The Integrity of Precinct Assets

A High Risk of Failure
A Pattern of Deficiencies
Life Safety Systems
A Risk Management Matrix
Assessing The Risks
Recommended Remedial Action

Current Physical Condition of Buildings Within the Precinct

A High Risk of Failure

PWGSC commissioned Brisbin Brook Beynon Architects, together with Exige Inc. and the Antares Group, to assess the probability of system failures in the Parliamentary Precinct portfolio and describe the consequences of the most probable failure scenarios.

The report, completed in July 1999, was based on a review of research into the condition of the assets in the Parliamentary Precinct, consisting of more than 50 volumes of material produced between 1990 and 1999. As a supplement, tours were conducted to obtain a general impression of the condition of Precinct assets and to confirm the accuracy of the existing reports.

A Pattern of Deficiencies

The assets of the Parliamentary Precinct, in particular those associated with the three main parliamentary buildings, all date from the mid-nineteenth to early twentieth century. Although differences exist in their construction, these are perhaps outweighed by their similarities: all feature extensive masonry construction, sloped copper roofing, and hot water heating systems. All were built prior to the general application of modern conventions for the design of exit enclosures, fire compartments, and sprinklers. As a consequence, they have similar life-safety deficiencies and, as they age, they are developing many similar patterns of deterioration.

It was found that many of the Parliamentary Precinct buildings are experiencing a very high risk of failure in more than one primary building system. The failure of building systems manifests itself in the form of frequent break-downs, a proliferation of scaffolding, and environmental discomfort due to draughts or insufficient ventilation. In some cases, these are simply conditions inherent to all structures built in the mid-nineteenth century, but in others they are early signs of potential systems failure. In many cases, the consequences of such a failure would be the effective loss of the use of the entire asset for an extended period, resulting in the additional major challenge of having to find alternate accommodation for the official parliamentary functions.

Life Safety Systems

The report concluded that many of the assets were seriously deficient in their life safety systems. This is generally due to inherent design characteristics, such as open exit stairwells, an inadequate number of exits, or a lack of sprinkler systems. Deficiencies of this nature are extremely difficult to rectify without either destroying culturally significant interior spaces, or closing the facility for an extended period while major upgrades are undertaken in a more appropriate manner.

Since the assessment of life safety systems is somewhat problematic for older assets which pre-date modern building codes, and since a detailed survey of code compliance was beyond the scope of the Asset Integrity Study, the life safety system assessments were validated by the Fire Protection Engineers from Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC).

A Risk Management Matrix

All pertinent information was summarized in a matrix model addressing seven (7) basic building systems. These systems were evaluated using a five-point rating scale, ranging from 1 to 5, where 1 represents a minimal risk of building systems failure and 5 represents the greatest risk of building systems failure.

To clarify, life safety systems are systems or design features which aid in the prevention of the spread of fire and smoke, facilitate the rapid evacuation of the building in the event of an emergency, and enable the early detection and suppression of fires. They should not be confused with health issues such as indoor air quality, the containment of designated substances, or Fire Code deficiencies, which are largely operational issues. Life safety systems generally have little effect on the safety and well-being of building occupants until an emergency occurs.

Assessing The Risks

The buildings identified as having the highest risk of failure are the principal buildings associated with the Parliamentary Precinct.

The Centre Block and West Block are in the worst condition. The West Block also contains a large quantity of friable asbestos, which must be removed prior to any major renovation.

The Library of Parliament, the Confederation, Wellington and Victoria Buildings, and the East Block (1867) are next. These buildings were assigned a High Risk of Failure Rating for several basic building systems. That means that each of the systems is either failing wholly or in part, or is deteriorated to such a degree that it is unstable and unpredictable in its performance, and susceptible to failure in the near term.

Recently renovated and new buildings such as the East Block 1910 Wing and Centre Block Underground Services, are in good shape.

PWGSC is closely monitoring the building systems to ensure that health and safety issues do not develop that would in any way endanger the occupants of the buildings.

Many systems have been kept functioning through temporary fixes pending major renovations. Further delay will increase the risk of system failure.

Recommended Remedial Action

The following chart summarizes recommendations for remedial action based on site condition reports and risk assessments.

It is important to note that although the Asset Integrity Study clearly identifies the Centre Block as the building in the most critical need of repair, it is also the building in the Precinct that supports the most important functions - the two Chambers, as well as committee rooms and offices for both the Senate and the House.

The Centre Block cannot be vacated for renovation until alternate locations are found for these functions. As a result, renovation of other buildings and new construction has to be done first to pave the way for the closure of the Centre Block.

While, engineering studies indicate that the Centre Block is in poor repair, it can continue in operation for the 10-12 years it will take to complete projects that must proceed first. It should be noted that the costs of operating and maintaining the building will be higher, due to its deteriorated condition.