A Legacy for Future Generations

The Long-Term Vision and Plan for the Parliamentary Precinct

The Plan for Restoring the Precinct

Urban Design Solution
The Need for New Accommodation
Parliamentary Accommodation Options
Implementation Scenarios

A 25-Year Program

Urban Design Solution

As part of the planning process for change within the Parliamentary Precinct, it was important to define the boundaries of the Precinct. Two Urban Design Solutions were developed by the consulting architects, one focusing development within a compact area north of Wellington Street, east of Kent Street, and west of the Rideau Canal, the other within a wider area stretching westward past the Supreme Court to currently vacant land just east of the National Archives.

During the process of consultations with stakeholders, including the Parliamentary Buildings Advisory Council, it became clear that the Urban Design Solution that focused on the more compact development zone was preferred because it is more in keeping with the tradition of the Precinct and it offers a better solution to these key needs and considerations:

• A more compact Precinct will place all buildings within a convenient distance of each other, saving time and enhancing efficiency as Senators, Members and parliamentary staff move from site to site within the Precinct each day;
• A compact Precinct will maintain the distinction between the parliamentary triad (central lawn bordered by buildings on three sides) and the Supreme Court just west of the Precinct;
• The more compact zone will present fewer security concerns, particularly as Senators and Members move from building to building.

See Figure 1: Proposed Parliamentary Boundary

The Need for New Accommodation

The three major occupants of the Precinct - the Senate, House of Commons, and Library of Parliament - have each projected their accommodation needs over the next 25 years.

The House of Commons has identified the need for nine new committee rooms to accommodate a growing number of public hearings - as well as the need to renovate existing committee rooms to bring them up to modern standards. The new committee rooms will provide the public with easier access to committees, equipped with state-of-the-art technology. In addition, new office space will be needed for Members of Parliament who will represent new ridings as Canada's population grows and to relocate members presently housed outside the Precinct.

As the Senate's needs have grown, some of its activities have been relocated to offices outside the Precinct. To make its operations more efficient in the years ahead, the Senate would like the 39 offices and two committee rooms currently housed outside the Precinct to return to the Precinct. Although there will be no increase in the total number of Senate Committee Rooms, some of the existing ones will be replaced because they do not meet the requirements in terms of size, location or infrastructure.

The Library of Parliament has a variety of needs for the coming years. As an example, additional resources for the Library to support Committee functions were requested during the Speech from the Throne which opened the 37th session of Parliament.

By consolidating the requirements of the Senate, House of Commons, Library and others, PWGSC has determined that there is a substantial need for new space in the Parliamentary Precinct.

Parliamentary Accommodation Options

The recommended Urban Design Solution (compact) identifies three possible options to address the need for new accommodation within the Precinct. Since the Library renovation has already been approved and is underway, these options focus on choices for accommodating the House of Commons and the Senate at the end of the Long Term Plan.

All three options include the same new construction north of Wellington Street - a new building at the corner of Bank and Wellington, an infill building between the Justice and Confederation Buildings, and an infill (below or above ground) in the East Block Courtyard (an infill is an addition to an existing building). What is different in the options is how Senate and House of Commons offices and committee rooms could be distributed among the buildings.

The three accommodation options are as follows:

Option A

Option A has a total new floor space of 28,000m². In this option, Senate offices would occupy the new building at Bank and Wellington. The East Block infill would be the site of the temporary Senate Chamber and permanent Senate committee rooms, and new House of Commons committee rooms and Members' office suites would occupy the infill between the Confederation and Justice buildings.

Advantages

• All parliamentary functions would be located north of Wellington Street, allowing for a clear definition of the Precinct which would facilitate security
• The Senate and House of Commons would occupy separate facilities (other than Centre Block)
• Best proximity of new Senate space to existing Senate space

Disadvantages

• House of Commons highest priority is new committee rooms. In this option, they could not be built as a stand-alone facility
• The size of the Confederation/Justice Infill (c21,500m² ) may not be acceptable from an urban design/heritage perspective. It would also have a significant impact on the existing suites in the Confederation and Justice Buildings, by not conserving internal courtyard views
• Mixes committee room and office functions which is less advantageous from a security perspective

Figure 5: Accommodation Option A

Option B

Option B also has a total of 28,000m² of new floor space. In this option, the new building at Bank and Wellington would be used for House of Commons committee rooms, while the infill between the Confederation and Justice Buildings would be used by both the Senate and House of Commons for new parliamentary office accommodations. The East Block Infill would be used, as in Option A, for new committee rooms for the Senate and the temporary Senate Chamber.

Advantages

• All parliamentary functions would be located north of Wellington Street, allowing for a clear definition of the Precinct which would facilitate security
• House of Commons committee rooms could be built as a stand-alone facility, which could expedite this high-priority project
• More advantageous to have committee rooms in a stand-alone facility from a security perspective
• Having all committee rooms in a conveniently located building will greatly improve public access

Disadvantages

• Places one third of Senators' offices at the far west of the Precinct, while the Senate Chamber and other accommodation is on the east side
• The size of the Confederation/Justice Infill at 12,500m² may be acceptable from an urban design/heritage site perspective, but would have a significant impact on the existing offices in the Confederation and Justice Buildings by not conserving internal courtyard views.
• The Senate would continue to occupy the Victoria Building until Implementation Phase 4 (approximately 20 years) resulting in a need to renovate it in Phase 1.

Figure 6: Accommodation Option B

Option C (approved option):

Option C also has a total of 28,000m² of new floor space. In this option, the new building at Bank and Wellington would be used for House of Commons Committee Rooms and Senate offices. The infill between the Confederation and Justice Buildings would be used by the House of Commons for new parliamentary accommodations. The East Block Infill would be used, as in Option A and B, for new committee rooms for the Senate and the temporary Senate Chamber.

Advantages

• All parliamentary functions would be located north of Wellington Street, allowing for a clear definition of the Precinct that would facilitate security
• Places Senate office units as close as possible to the Senate Chamber and other Senate accommodations
• Smaller size of the Confederation/Justice Infill greatly reduces the impact on existing offices in the Confederation and Justice buildings by conserving the internal courtyard views
• Consolidates the majority of House of Commons suites in three interconnected buildings (Confederation/Justice Infill)
• May reduce the overall cost of the plan, because although the cost of the Bank Street building will be higher, it may be more than offset by the reduced cost of a smaller Confederation/Justice Infill, and the fact that the Victoria building renovation might not be required except as possible swing space

Disadvantages

• Mixes committee room and office functions which is less advantageous from a security perspective
• Size of the building (c20,000m²) may not be acceptable from an urban design/heritage site perspective, especially since the Committee Rooms have very high floor to floor heights, so the building would actually be much higher than a building of the same number of m², used for offices only
• There would be a shortage of Senate Committee Rooms in Implementation Phases 2 and 3
• The Senate would require swing space for office units during Implementation Phases 3 and 4

Figure 7: Accommodation Option C (approved)

Implementation Scenarios

Implementation scenarios and cost estimates* were developed based on the accepted Urban Design Solution and Accommodation Option C as having the features most acceptable to the stakeholders.

A number of individual projects have been identified to fully implement the program of work reflected in the accepted Urban Design Solution. These projects include major renovations of existing facilities (i.e. Centre Block, West Block), major construction projects, and site infrastructure projects.

The implementation scenarios took into account the following considerations:

• Client program requirements
• Risk analysis (health and safety and asset integrity)
• Cash flow
• Requirements for swing space during major renovations to other buildings

Originally, four Implementation Scenarios were proposed to implement the projects. However, two of the scenarios, which involved renovation of the Centre Block in two stages, have been eliminated based on feedback from all stakeholders. The two-stage renovation was judged to be more difficult technically, more costly, more disruptive, and more time consuming. The two remaining implementation scenarios each comprise five implementation phases. The proposed scenarios and phases are summarized in this chart.

The key difference between these two scenarios is that, in Scenario 1, the renovation of the West Block does not occur until Phase 2, because the House of Commons would continue to use the 8 existing committee rooms in the West Block until completion of the new permanent committee room facility In Scenario 2 the West Block renovation occurs in Phase 1, because temporary committee rooms would be created during the renovation of the Wellington Building.

The table below identifies the main projects in each Phase under the two scenarios. In addition, there is site development work required in each phase, which relates to landscape and associated work to be done in conjunction with the renovation and construction projects.

*Costing is by component project. In all three options, the same square footage is being constructed. Accommodation Options A and B include the renovation of the Victoria Building (a projected additional cost of approximately $33M).

Scenario 1

Advantages

• Responds to the House of Commons' first priority, which is to have a new permanent committee room facility as soon as possible

Disadvantages

• Delays the renovation of the West Block until completion of the new permanent committee room building (Note: serious asbestos issues were identified in the West Block more than a decade ago, and the renovation project has already been delayed several times)

Scenario 2

Advantages

• RPermits the West Block renovation to start earlier, thereby minimizing potential health and safety and asset integrity risks
• Has no impact on the in-service date for the new permanent committee room building

Disadvantages

• Scenario 2 is approximately $15M more costly than Scenario 1 because of the need for both temporary and permanent committee rooms