PDA

View Full Version : 24 Sussex



moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:06 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

You can build a very nice house for $10M. I remember in Alberta, the Premiers home on St Georges Cr was knocked down rather than reno. Is Sussex so amazing that it deserves $10M?

The risk of here of course, which is probably why Harper was cautious, is that you end up with a cost over-run (often the case with reno's), or issues like our former Governor General faced (Clarkson), with acusations of out of control spending. Or a risk of comparisons to Redfords Sky Palace?


http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2625649.1445869615!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/crumbling-24-sussex-makes-canada-look-like-a-bunch-of-cheap-guys-chretien-1.2626618


A bit old and colonial for my taste (is that an air conditioner sticking out one window?), but what do you think?

H.L.
26-10-2015, 12:18 PM
I think this house should be renovated, I thought that when Harper moved in., I would like to hear from Trudeau, not his mummy.

Paul Turnbull
26-10-2015, 12:27 PM
What I've read doesn't sound like making a palace but renovating to bring it's infrastructure up to standards. Given what's being spent to renovate Parliament itself $10m isn't bad to refurbish an historic property that is also the official residence of the Prime Minister.

JamesL
26-10-2015, 12:27 PM
I remember in Alberta, the Premiers home on St Georges Cr was knocked down rather than reno.

That was the Lieutanant-Governor's house, which Lois Hole chose not to occupy, preferring her own home in St. Albert. And the government subsequently purchased another home down the street for Normie Kwong to occupy: https://www.assembly.ab.ca/lao/library/lt-gov/residence.html

moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:28 PM
^There is an interesting debate in London right now about repairs to Westminster parliment (which would come to billions). Some have suggested, it could be turned into low income housing with a new purpose built parliment built...

This is very dangerous stuff for politicians, anytime they do something that can perceived of making their lives more comfortable off the public purse. I think if I was PM, I'd knock it down and put something cool and modern up (safer bet in terms of the cost than a reno), or turn it to a museum and just buy an "off the shelf" suburban home as the new cheaper to maintain PM residence.

Glenco
26-10-2015, 12:29 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

You can build a very nice house for $10M. I remember in Alberta, the Premiers home on St Georges Cr was knocked down rather than reno. Is Sussex so amazing that it deserves $10M?

The risk of here of course, which is probably why Harper was cautious, is that you end up with a cost over-run (often the case with reno's), or issues like our former Governor General faced (Clarkson), with acusations of out of control spending. Or a risk of comparisons to Redfords Sky Palace?


http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2625649.1445869615!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/crumbling-24-sussex-makes-canada-look-like-a-bunch-of-cheap-guys-chretien-1.2626618


A bit old and colonial for my taste (is that an air conditioner sticking out one window?), but what do you think?

I think you are being small minded. This building needed fixing 40-50years ago. Just because it was good enough for Harper is not an argument for doing nothing.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:34 PM
I think you are being small minded.
I wonder if that's what Redford and Clarkson said to their advisors as they gave the construction / reno orders? I can see why Trudeau's getting his mommy to do the talking for him, he is trying to build the case first / insulate himself for when the cost over-runs occur / his wife over-does the interior budget.

EveB
26-10-2015, 12:34 PM
I don't get the sense that this is about building a palace either. In fact, my read is that he doesn't really want to live in this house at all. This is, however, the best time to do repairs. And I think we are talking about repairs, including apparently the HVAC if that window air conditioner is any indication. Also plumbing fixtures are apparently in sad shape (not out of date, actually barely functional).

It's a no win for housing that politicians are going to occupy. On the one hand, you need something good enough to entertain visiting dignitaries in suitable style. On the other politicians are always accused of simply feathering their own nests if they renovate official residences (this isn't private property).

However, there is a continuing debate on these very boards about heritage properties. The sad fact is that mere nostalgia doesn't keep these properties in decent shape. And when they cease to be in decent shape, demolition is the most efficient option.

Paul Turnbull
26-10-2015, 12:36 PM
Justin Trudeau will move into Rideau Cottage, not 24 Sussex (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-24-sussex-1.3289102?cmp=rss)

For now at least is seems he will be living down the street. Prudently, he's not making a decision on 24 Sussex right away.


The notice said the prime minister-designate will make decisions about 24 Sussex Drive after he has been "fully briefed" by officials.

Jaerdo
26-10-2015, 12:37 PM
At least this one isn't as bad as Trudeau Sr. and Mulroney, both of whom used donations to their parties to fund renovations for ridiculous things like a pool.

highlander
26-10-2015, 12:37 PM
I don't know what's wrong with 24 sussex, but I see 4 window air conditioners in that photo.

That alone is enough to tell me that there's plenty of work to be done without turning it into a palace.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:38 PM
Maybe my idea of turning it into a museum, and having somewhere more comfortable / modern / cheaper, makes sense? I don't think I'd want to live in it.

Marcel Petrin
26-10-2015, 12:39 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.

The fact is that the building has been in desperate need of repair for a long time. The National Capital Commission asked Harper in 2008 and 2011 to move out so that the building could be fixed up, to which he refused. It makes very good sense for Trudeau to not move in to it while it's renovated. This is a national historic asset, and it should be cared for accordingly.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/justin-trudeau-should-fix-24-sussex-right-away


Stephen Harper in recent days has borne the brunt of the blame for the building’s parlous state. That’s a little unfair. Had he acceded to the requests of the National Capital Commission in 2008 or 2011 and moved out to allow for renovations, the opposition would certainly have made hay. What? Spend $10-million (that was the estimate then, it will be higher now) on a home do-over for the Harpers, even as the Conservatives are hacking back federal departments?

Nevertheless, Harper erred in blocking those repairs, and here’s why: It wasn’t his house, any more than it will now be Justin Trudeau’s house. The PM had no business countermanding both the NCC and the Auditor General in determining what repairs are needed, or not, to a government property. Prime ministers are transient residents. Fixing 24 Sussex isn’t their call.

The place is full of asbestos, for lord's sake.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:42 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.
I'm being a bit tounge in cheek, just concious of how these thing's seem "obvious" to do, when they are done, but can then end up looking horrible when looking back, re other scandals we have seen. I'm not convinced it makes sense this be the PM's residence, and it seems even he is thinking about that. As to asbestos, the last home I had, had - its not an issue as long as you don't disturb it.

highlander
26-10-2015, 12:44 PM
At least this one isn't as bad as Trudeau Sr. and Mulroney, both of whom used donations to their parties to fund renovations for ridiculous things like a pool.

A pool is significantly less ridiculous in southern Ontario than it is in Alberta.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 12:46 PM
^I think swimming pools were all the rage for politicians back then for parties, thinking of that UK movie, the Profumo affair. Hotties in swimsuits, old politicians, such was life...

Paul Turnbull
26-10-2015, 12:47 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.
I'm being a bit tounge in cheek, just concious of how these thing's seem "obvious" to do, when they are done, but can then end up looking horrible when looking back, re other scandals we have seen. I'm not convinced it makes sense this be the PM's residence, and it seems even he is thinking about that. As to asbestos, the last home I had, had - its not an issue as long as you don't disturb it.

But it's very difficult to upgrade the major infrastructure of the house, plumbing, heating, foundation, etc, without disturbing it.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 01:45 PM
from Wiki


Since then, very little has been spent on renovating the building, leaving parts of it somewhat worn and outdated. The house lacks central air conditioning, being cooled only by a series of window-mounted air conditioners. In November 2004, Prime Minister Paul Martin complained about the house's heating system. According to his statement, the century-old house gets "too cold in the winter and too hot in the summer." Harper moved in on February 9, 2006, and has said he may move out temporarily during a future summer, so that renovations may be done. On May 6, 2008, the Auditor General reported that the house is in poor condition and needs about C$10 million in repairs and upgrades, which would require at least 12 to 15 months of "full access" to complete.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 01:59 PM
Its interesting Rideau cottage was renovated at much lower cost, and has an historical designation.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 02:07 PM
Maybe they should have an audit to audit the list of the auditor generals repair expenses that total 10M bucks.

Air Conditioning? In OTTAWA? Its called open the damn window. Or be happy its warm at all for a period of time and you know, maybe go outside or something..

Heres a consideration. in general. What is it about renovations in this day and age that now always come with these radically expensive list of *needed* repair expenses.

Back in the late 70's/early 80's Old Strathcona gathered some funds to convert the old bus barns into a farmers market, convert the old post office into a retail market, convert some odd local facilities to Fringe suitable theaters. The old thinking used to be bless this thing is still standing, lets make some kind of use of it which its present condition can still afford.

That whole line of thinking would be dead now. Old Strathcona foundation would be petitioning for 100M in funding.

Most of us spit and polish repairs and do it ourselves. Do a damn good job of it as well.

Repairs are fine but why always the exorbitant sticker price?

Maybe they've found mold in all the stonework..:rolleyes:

Marcel Petrin
26-10-2015, 02:21 PM
It's a historical building. Those are never cheap to fix, repair, or upgrade. Also, all the work will have to jump through about a million different levels of red tape from numerous government departments, agencies, and so on. That results in significantly higher costs as well, like it or not.

And we're honestly questioning the need for central air conditioning for the official residence of the elected leader of our nation?

Jaerdo
26-10-2015, 02:28 PM
^ They also have to worry about increased security against the ever increasing numbers of crazies, which is without a doubt included in the cost.

nobleea
26-10-2015, 02:33 PM
Air Conditioning? In OTTAWA? Its called open the damn window. Or be happy its warm at all for a period of time and you know, maybe go outside or something..

I assume you're kidding, right? Ottawa summers would be unbearable without AC. You're living just above the poverty line if you don't have AC over there. The humidity is deadly. My parents live there now and I grew up there. You want your prime minister sleeping in his own sweat? Our leaders, regardless of their affiliation (or yours) should have access to all the reasonable luxuries that modern life affords. If there's a mice infestation, you going to tell him to get a damn cat?

Open a damn window anywhere in Alberta, sure.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 02:59 PM
The place has 50 year old single pane windows, asbestos, old plumbing and wiring, almost no insulation etc. The utilities last year were reported to be $90,000!

$10 Million is chump change.

Read and weep... :smt010

Parliament’s $3-billion ‘mother of all renovation projects’ is on time and on budget

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/parliaments-3-billion-mother-of-all-renovation-projects-is-on-time-and-on-budget-but-there-is-grumbling

Titanium48
26-10-2015, 03:20 PM
Its interesting Rideau cottage was renovated at much lower cost, and has an historical designation.
The needed work included roofing, foundation repair and mechanical / electrical systems (sounds like they pretty much gutted and rebuilt it) on a large official residence just down the street, all for $400,000. 25x that price for 24 Sussex looks very suspicious.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 03:23 PM
The $10 Million is chump change.
You could build a heck of a nice brand new house for that though. I am sure you could probably knock this one down, build brand new, and just "stick" the facade / stone on. It would be a lot more energy / heat efficient too - shouldn't it be renewable, with solar pannels, and windmills and all that other green stuff Trudeau wants to invest in?

noodle
26-10-2015, 03:30 PM
25x that price for 24 Sussex looks very suspicious.

You're suspicious about a figure given by the Auditor General? If you're not gonna trust the auditors, who are you gonna trust?

River Valley Green
26-10-2015, 03:33 PM
Sometimes I can't believe what cheapskates Canadians are. If the executive residence of the Whitehouse needed $10M+ in repairs, no one would bat an eye. The Prime Minister needs a house to live in. This house needs to be secure, safe and structurally sound...more so than any other house in the nation. And it's a part of our history to boot.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 03:53 PM
Sometimes I can't believe what cheapskates Canadians are. If the executive residence of the Whitehouse needed $10M+ in repairs, no one would bat an eye.
We aren't the US though. Trudeau won't be flying around in Air Force One, and I don't think we would like it if he did. We don't treat our PM as "royalty" (even if they do "descend" into their jobs like Trudeau has). The media out East is all, "we have to do this", "its a shame it hasn't been done", etc. To his credit, IMO, Trudeau hasn't actually jumped on that yet. Just because this has "always been the PM's home", doesn't mean that the best way to renovate it is to refurbish as oppose to rebuild, and it doesn't mean its the best use of taxpayers money, versus perhaps refitting this for some other purpose. $10M is a lot of money for a house, and this isn't even a new house, its just some basic repairs.

River Valley Green
26-10-2015, 04:08 PM
Trudeau will be flying around in Royal Canadian Air Force VIP aircraft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Air_Force_VIP_aircraft). This no doubt costs more than him flying business class (is that okay???). But regarding 24 Sussex, what is your suggestion, exactly? The only real alternative is that the head of the country not have an official residence. He or she can just live wherever they used to live, security and privacy concerns be damned.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 04:26 PM
Air Conditioning? In OTTAWA? Its called open the damn window. Or be happy its warm at all for a period of time and you know, maybe go outside or something..

I assume you're kidding, right? Ottawa summers would be unbearable without AC. You're living just above the poverty line if you don't have AC over there. The humidity is deadly. My parents live there now and I grew up there. You want your prime minister sleeping in his own sweat? Our leaders, regardless of their affiliation (or yours) should have access to all the reasonable luxuries that modern life affords. If there's a mice infestation, you going to tell him to get a damn cat?

Open a damn window anywhere in Alberta, sure.

My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.

I suspect most of you would melt if you lived in some place like India.

34C is the hottest its ever been in Ottawa in 123yrs. Maybe go outside on the patio the one day of the year its like that. Sit in the shade if you have to.

Todays concept of need is so unbelievably consumerist. Must have, must have..

As long as the taxpayer is paying for it..

Under the Trudeaus I wonder what the final cost might be.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 04:29 PM
Trudeau will be flying around in Royal Canadian Air Force VIP aircraft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Air_Force_VIP_aircraft). This no doubt costs more than him flying business class (is that okay???). But regarding 24 Sussex, what is your suggestion, exactly? The only real alternative is that the head of the country not have an official residence. He or she can just live wherever they used to live, security and privacy concerns be damned.
I don't mind the jets for the PM (as long as used responsiblity - it would put other passengers at risk if he flew commercial). No comparison to Airforce One though, in terms of cost, which IMO is a good thing.

I have made a few suggestions re the residence:

1. Rideau Cottage (he seems to like this one, and it was refurbished at much more reasonable cost), at 1 Sussex
2. Build a new place with modern environmental standards / security and turn 24 Sussex into a Museum / tourist attraction
3. Build a new place at 24 Sussex, perhaps incorporating some of the stone

For $10M, all of those are acheivable. Refurbishing 24 Sussex, wouldn't surprise me at all if that $10M turns into $30M.

nobleea
26-10-2015, 04:43 PM
For $10M, all of those are acheivable. Refurbishing 24 Sussex, wouldn't surprise me at all if that $10M turns into $30M.

I think you underestimate how much inefficiency there can be in federal building projects. It's not hard to be on time and on budget when your timeline and budget are 2-3x higher than they ought to be.
I think we only have to look at Worthington here in our backyard as to what happens when someone tries to 'refurbish' a historical building on the cheap.

nobleea
26-10-2015, 04:44 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.

I suspect most of you would melt if you lived in some place like India.

34C is the hottest its ever been in Ottawa in 123yrs. Maybe go outside on the patio the one day of the year its like that. Sit in the shade if you have to.

Todays concept of need is so unbelievably consumerist. Must have, must have..

As long as the taxpayer is paying for it..

Under the Trudeaus I wonder what the final cost might be.

AND GET OFF MY LAWN WHILE YOU'RE AT IT.
It's quite clear that you're being argumentative for the sake of it. I don't know if you enjoy it or are senile.

noodle
26-10-2015, 04:47 PM
C) all of the above.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 04:50 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.

I suspect most of you would melt if you lived in some place like India.

34C is the hottest its ever been in Ottawa in 123yrs. Maybe go outside on the patio the one day of the year its like that. Sit in the shade if you have to.

Todays concept of need is so unbelievably consumerist. Must have, must have..

As long as the taxpayer is paying for it..

Under the Trudeaus I wonder what the final cost might be.

AND GET OFF MY LAWN WHILE YOU'RE AT IT.
It's quite clear that you're being argumentative for the sake of it. I don't know if you enjoy it or are senile.

Or maybe acknowledge that your suggestion that air conditioning is an absolute must have in Ottawa is hogwash. You were the one calling out my post in a driveby. Then you claim I'm being argumentative. Wow.

You initiated the mocking argumentative reply, I responded in kind to that.

Lets see, who's post was uncalled for?

Gemini
26-10-2015, 04:51 PM
The $10 Million is chump change.
You could build a heck of a nice brand new house for that though. I am sure you could probably knock this one down, build brand new, and just "stick" the facade / stone on. It would be a lot more energy / heat efficient too - shouldn't it be renewable, with solar pannels, and windmills and all that other green stuff Trudeau wants to invest in?
Cripes, there are approximately 35 million Canadians so it would work out at about 33 - 36 cents each. Fix the place. It's historical value is tremendous. If you cant afford the 33 cents moa I'll spring for it. I don't know what the house Trudeau lives in now looks like but for all I know it could be way more cozy, better decorated and more suited for his family needs than 24 Sussex.
You can't compare Princess Redford's sky palace to 24 Sussex. Redford was a free loader, the palace was to be her 'Ms Important" pad. It would have been historical/hysterical for all the wrong reasons.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 04:56 PM
Alberta has a dismal record of keeping it's official house in order. So typical of Alberta to say that it is cheaper to tear a building down than to renovate it. If I recall, renovations were to have cost $360,000. I wonder how much has been spent so far in demolishing the bungalow, designing a new one and e v e n t u a l l y building a new one. If I was a gambling man I would say something around $5 million.

$10 million for 24 Sussex is a lot but it is a big old house (34 rooms) that is 150 years old (read money pit and as old as Canada itself) and it not only is the official residence but also hosts dignitaries as G8 country so the work has to be great, the security, the modern conveniences and a a modern commercial rated kitchen and facilities. You can spend a lot of money repairing the roof, foundations and plumbing alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_House_(Alberta)


Until 2005, Alberta had separate buildings for the official residence, office, and entertaining venue for the viceroy. The lieutenant governor lived in a Crown owned house in the Glenora district of Edmonton (a single storey bungalow at 58 St Georges Crescent),[3] while holding an office at the Legislative Assembly building, where Royal Assent is granted and where the lieutenant governor received the premier. The house in Glenora was demolished in 2005 and, as of 2008, there is no official residence for the lieutenant governor. Lieutenant Governor Norman Kwong resided at another house near this house during his term.[4]

Whenever the sovereign is in the provincial capital, he or she resides at a hotel, normally the Hotel Macdonald.

In 2011, the government of Alberta stated a new Government House would be constructed after 2015

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 04:59 PM
For $10M, all of those are acheivable. Refurbishing 24 Sussex, wouldn't surprise me at all if that $10M turns into $30M.

I think you underestimate how much inefficiency there can be in federal building projects. It's not hard to be on time and on budget when your timeline and budget are 2-3x higher than they ought to be.
I think we only have to look at Worthington here in our backyard as to what happens when someone tries to 'refurbish' a historical building on the cheap.

If you were the contractor working on a renovation of a 150 year old home and having to deal with bureaucrats every day, I bet you would quote high too. Heck, we could not get builders to even quote on a $75 million rec center.

BTW how much did it cost to build a toilet on Whyte Ave.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 05:01 PM
The $10 Million is chump change.
You could build a heck of a nice brand new house for that though. I am sure you could probably knock this one down, build brand new, and just "stick" the facade / stone on. It would be a lot more energy / heat efficient too - shouldn't it be renewable, with solar pannels, and windmills and all that other green stuff Trudeau wants to invest in?

Does that new house come with 150 years of history?

Probably it would cost $1 million just to tear down the old one.

Paul Turnbull
26-10-2015, 05:19 PM
In comparing Rideau Cottage with 24 Sussex it's not clear how much ongoing maintenance has been done over the years prior to the latest renovation. The problem with 24 Sussex is things have been left for decades and that pushes costs up dramatically.

Whether it remains the PM's residence or not, the building should be restored as it's of major historic importance to Canada.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 07:39 PM
Alberta has a dismal record of keeping it's official house in order. So typical of Alberta to say that it is cheaper to tear a building down than to renovate it. If I recall, renovations were to have cost $360,000. I wonder how much has been spent so far in demolishing the bungalow, designing a new one and e v e n t u a l l y building a new one. If I was a gambling man I would say something around $5 million.

$10 million for 24 Sussex is a lot but it is a big old house (34 rooms) that is 150 years old (read money pit and as old as Canada itself) and it not only is the official residence but also hosts dignitaries as G8 country so the work has to be great, the security, the modern conveniences and a a modern commercial rated kitchen and facilities. You can spend a lot of money repairing the roof, foundations and plumbing alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_House_(Alberta)


Until 2005, Alberta had separate buildings for the official residence, office, and entertaining venue for the viceroy. The lieutenant governor lived in a Crown owned house in the Glenora district of Edmonton (a single storey bungalow at 58 St Georges Crescent),[3] while holding an office at the Legislative Assembly building, where Royal Assent is granted and where the lieutenant governor received the premier. The house in Glenora was demolished in 2005 and, as of 2008, there is no official residence for the lieutenant governor. Lieutenant Governor Norman Kwong resided at another house near this house during his term.[4]

Whenever the sovereign is in the provincial capital, he or she resides at a hotel, normally the Hotel Macdonald.

In 2011, the government of Alberta stated a new Government House would be constructed after 2015

My understanding from what I've read is 24 Sussex is rarely anything other than a residence. Official functions of any kind being very limited in that residence and with several other options available.

From Wikipedia;



Unlike 10 Downing Street (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Downing_Street) or the White House (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House), it is used almost exclusively as a place of residence; the prime minister's work is carried out by the Office of the Prime Minister (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_the_Prime_Minister_(Canada)) in Langevin Block (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langevin_Block), near Parliament Hill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Hill), though informal meetings between the prime minister and other government or foreign officials may take place in the residence (foreign heads of state on state visits are officially received by the monarch or Governor General of Canada (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_General_of_Canada) at Rideau Hall (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rideau_Hall)).[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Sussex_Drive#cite_note-5) One consequence of the building's lack of official bureaucratic functions is that 24 Sussex Drive has never been widely used as a metonym (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonym) for the Office of the Prime Minister.


This runs exactly counter to what you're stating and is the crux of the issue. This facility is for the Prime Minister and family only. It is not for dignitaries, international functions, or a place for visiting heads of state. Its with that in mind that people are raising contention to the exorbitant expense. There is no international embarrassment (as inferred throughout the thread in not completing all of the renovations)


Due to its expansive size, its very limited use, and obvious redundancy spending a lot to continue this poorly suited residence is spending good money after bad. Who needs 34 rooms for its present use. I remember hearing past presidents wives saying just keeping this clean keeps a cleaning staff busy. This is simply way too big a facility for its current use.

I would also recommend changed use.

kkozoriz
26-10-2015, 07:39 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.

The fact is that the building has been in desperate need of repair for a long time. The National Capital Commission asked Harper in 2008 and 2011 to move out so that the building could be fixed up, to which he refused. It makes very good sense for Trudeau to not move in to it while it's renovated. This is a national historic asset, and it should be cared for accordingly.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/justin-trudeau-should-fix-24-sussex-right-away


Stephen Harper in recent days has borne the brunt of the blame for the building’s parlous state. That’s a little unfair. Had he acceded to the requests of the National Capital Commission in 2008 or 2011 and moved out to allow for renovations, the opposition would certainly have made hay. What? Spend $10-million (that was the estimate then, it will be higher now) on a home do-over for the Harpers, even as the Conservatives are hacking back federal departments?

Nevertheless, Harper erred in blocking those repairs, and here’s why: It wasn’t his house, any more than it will now be Justin Trudeau’s house. The PM had no business countermanding both the NCC and the Auditor General in determining what repairs are needed, or not, to a government property. Prime ministers are transient residents. Fixing 24 Sussex isn’t their call.

The place is full of asbestos, for lord's sake.

Moa has said that he has no problem with us continuing to sell asbestos to other countries so I don't imagine he'd be too concerned about exposing a Liberal PM and his family to it either.

kkozoriz
26-10-2015, 07:44 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.



Exactly. Let's get rid of electricity and indoor plumbing while we're at it. Bloody politicians today are such wimps.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 07:58 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.



Exactly. Let's get rid of electricity and indoor plumbing while we're at it. Bloody politicians today are such wimps.

Because one is just like the other:rolleyes:

it is quite possible, and very easy, to live without air conditioning. I actually prefer not having air conditioning in houses, malls, restaurants and dislike it when its on in public facilities. I find almost any place that uses air conditioning is over air conditioned. A rapidly increasing phenomenon.

in contrast electricity and plumbing are obvious advantages that are widely appreciated and make a big difference. Heating in Canada obviously does as well.

Air conditioning offering not even close to the same quality of life advantages. Really we're talking excessive cost and maintenance and utility bills for no real discernible or enjoyable gain.

Heating is necessary in Canada. Air conditioning is not, at all, and I'm not sure what is not understood about that.

EveB
26-10-2015, 08:02 PM
According to the official site (http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/node/13258):


The house at 24 Sussex Drive is the official residence of the Prime Minister of Canada during his or her term of office. Part of the house is reserved for the use of the family, with furniture and decorations suited to their tastes and preferences. The public part of the house belongs to the nation, however, and it is there that the Prime Minister welcomes guests and associates for a wide range of public functions: luncheons and dinners, meetings, and receptions. These rooms are decorated and furnished in keeping with their important public function.
This seems to indicate that it does have an official function. Which matches my memory from reading a couple of Prime Ministerial autobiographies.

However, I don't think Justin and family are that eager to move back there as apparently it didn't have many happy memories. It may very well be that they might find the alternative living quarters quite satisfactory. In which case, this is perfect timing to do something with the place as a heritage property.

moahunter
26-10-2015, 08:22 PM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.

The fact is that the building has been in desperate need of repair for a long time. The National Capital Commission asked Harper in 2008 and 2011 to move out so that the building could be fixed up, to which he refused. It makes very good sense for Trudeau to not move in to it while it's renovated. This is a national historic asset, and it should be cared for accordingly.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/justin-trudeau-should-fix-24-sussex-right-away


Stephen Harper in recent days has borne the brunt of the blame for the building’s parlous state. That’s a little unfair. Had he acceded to the requests of the National Capital Commission in 2008 or 2011 and moved out to allow for renovations, the opposition would certainly have made hay. What? Spend $10-million (that was the estimate then, it will be higher now) on a home do-over for the Harpers, even as the Conservatives are hacking back federal departments?

Nevertheless, Harper erred in blocking those repairs, and here’s why: It wasn’t his house, any more than it will now be Justin Trudeau’s house. The PM had no business countermanding both the NCC and the Auditor General in determining what repairs are needed, or not, to a government property. Prime ministers are transient residents. Fixing 24 Sussex isn’t their call.

The place is full of asbestos, for lord's sake.

Moa has said that he has no problem with us continuing to sell asbestos to other countries so I don't imagine he'd be too concerned about exposing a Liberal PM and his family to it either.
Where did I say that? Please don't tell lies, I don't support Quebecs asbestos export industry.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 08:46 PM
Due to its expansive size, its very limited use, and obvious redundancy spending a lot to continue this poorly suited residence is spending good money after bad. Who needs 34 rooms for its present use. I remember hearing past presidents wives saying just keeping this clean keeps a cleaning staff busy. This is simply way too big a facility for its current use.

I would also recommend changed use.

So change it to what? A gallery or historical home? That will cost $10M as well. One of the reasons it has not been used officially is that it is quite rundown. I remember comments about it's condition when the last Trudeau was using it.

Edmonton PRT
26-10-2015, 08:58 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.



Exactly. Let's get rid of electricity and indoor plumbing while we're at it. Bloody politicians today are such wimps.

Have you every lived in Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa Replacement? When the heat and humidity hits over 40C and those uninsulated stone walls soak up the sunshine, the place would be most uncomfortable. You also have antiques and paintings that must be kept at a stable temperature or they are ruined.

In winter, Ottawa is one of the coldest national capitals on the planet and the cost of heating the place is crazy.

Why oh why Replacement do we not have a roofless arena? Why do we need to heat it in winter when it is -30 outside? Are the Oilers and their fans just a bunch of pansies as well? The place is not used for hockey in summer (especially since we do not make the playoffs), so why did they install A/C???

Channing
26-10-2015, 09:11 PM
34C is the hottest its ever been in Ottawa in 123yrs. Maybe go outside on the patio the one day of the year its like that. Sit in the shade if you have to.

It's very humid here in Ottawa. If you factor that in, since 2009 the year maxiums:

2009 42C
2010 45C
2011 46C
2012 43C
2013 45C
2014 40C
2015 42C

Survivable? Very. But is that warm and uncomfortable? Yes.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 09:23 PM
My, how did our forefathers even exist without air conditioning? You make it sound like arduous hardship. Unbearable? What unbelievable pansies North Americans have become. Even the slightest difference in temp, humidity is deemed some kind of hardship in our temperate climate. How about just roll with it. Easy enough to do.



Exactly. Let's get rid of electricity and indoor plumbing while we're at it. Bloody politicians today are such wimps.

Have you every lived in Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa Replacement? When the heat and humidity hits over 40C and those uninsulated stone walls soak up the sunshine, the place would be most uncomfortable. You also have antiques and paintings that must be kept at a stable temperature or they are ruined.

In winter, Ottawa is one of the coldest national capitals on the planet and the cost of heating the place is crazy.

Why oh why Replacement do we not have a roofless arena? Why do we need to heat it in winter when it is -30 outside? Are the Oilers and their fans just a bunch of pansies as well? The place is not used for hockey in summer (especially since we do not make the playoffs), so why did they install A/C???

When did I ever question the use of heat? Why is it so necessary at C2E to see endless strawman arguments like this? It starts to be frustrating. Heating in Canada is obviously a creature comfort a benefit, if not a necessity. Air conditioning is no such thing. Quite simple.

I've spent considerable time in Toronto in summers and haven't had a problem with the heat or humidity. Toronto is somewhat hotter than either Ottawa or Montreal afaik. I've spent time in those cities as well.
I do have problems if theres an inversion in Toronto which retains pollution but air conditioning doesn't save you from that either.

Personally I actually dislike air conditioning due to having difficulty with arthritis. The air conditioning causes intense pain. One of the reasons I would never bother with it. I'd rather take the heat which I find much more comfortable. I actually like being active in hot weather most of the time. A few years ago I had some problems with that but due to another as yet undiagnosed medical condition. Other than that heat of the nature described in Ottawa should present no difficulty for the average healthy person.

Replacement
26-10-2015, 09:36 PM
34C is the hottest its ever been in Ottawa in 123yrs. Maybe go outside on the patio the one day of the year its like that. Sit in the shade if you have to.

It's very humid here in Ottawa. If you factor that in, since 2009 the year maxiums:

2009 42C
2010 45C
2011 46C
2012 43C
2013 45C
2014 40C
2015 42C

Survivable? Very. But is that warm and uncomfortable? Yes.

Thank you for the information but from weather pattern information I have looked at these instances are very rare.

Is it really worthwhile cost wise, ecologically, energy wise, to use air conditioning in a Canadian climate? I ask people this often.

I see a lot of people here on the board talking about reducing footprint, reducing electricity reliance and having less energy intensive buildings. Yet I just say something as simple as "air conditioning is not at all needed" and instead of that being supported as the ecologically sound, reduced dependency concept that it is it gets flamed. (not by you).

I thought people were supposed to be consuming less? Its something I advocate for. Perhaps the Prime Ministers residence could involve more responsible role modeling in that regard.

I don't know how people reconcile one view, that its good to the environment living in buildings requiring less energy and advocating for that, while at the same time choosing a mode like air conditioning that increases their utility and consumer need. Seems like defeating the purpose to me.

One would think in present day people would be motivated to reduce, not expand their energy reliance and that a refit of 24Sussex would help model that.

Channing
26-10-2015, 09:52 PM
Let's look at the maximum humidex for the last few months then:

May 2015 37C
Jun 2015 34C
Jul 2015 42C
Aug 2015 40C
Sep 2015 41C

Still looks like a problem. Let's break it down further to maximum in a week:

Jun 22 2015 34C
Jun 29 2015 30C
Jul 6 2015 37C
Jul 13 2015 41C
Jul 20 2015 34C
Jul 27 2015 42C
Aug 3 2015 29C
Aug 10 2015 38C
Aug 17 2015 40C
Aug 24 2015 31C
Aug 31 2015 38C
Sep 7 2015 41C
Sep 14 2015 35C
Sep 21 2015 26C

Over 35 degrees in 8 weeks, over 40 in 4 weeks. In a 3 month period, excluding May which went over 35 too.

EveB
26-10-2015, 09:55 PM
I agree with PRT. It would be penny wise and pound foolish not to have air conditioning in the rehabilitated building. (1) there are antiques and paintings that have to be preserved, (2) they will be installing state of the art insulation and passive cooling features so A/C will be no big deal, and (3) A/C is a relatively normal feature in Ottawa residential and office buildings (I did a rental search). The Trudeaus are entitled to a standard that is equal to what a normal upper middle-class family enjoys.

These days A/C seems to be part of many home-owners normal heating system. Again, no big deal.

kkozoriz
27-10-2015, 01:02 AM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.

The fact is that the building has been in desperate need of repair for a long time. The National Capital Commission asked Harper in 2008 and 2011 to move out so that the building could be fixed up, to which he refused. It makes very good sense for Trudeau to not move in to it while it's renovated. This is a national historic asset, and it should be cared for accordingly.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/justin-trudeau-should-fix-24-sussex-right-away


Stephen Harper in recent days has borne the brunt of the blame for the building’s parlous state. That’s a little unfair. Had he acceded to the requests of the National Capital Commission in 2008 or 2011 and moved out to allow for renovations, the opposition would certainly have made hay. What? Spend $10-million (that was the estimate then, it will be higher now) on a home do-over for the Harpers, even as the Conservatives are hacking back federal departments?

Nevertheless, Harper erred in blocking those repairs, and here’s why: It wasn’t his house, any more than it will now be Justin Trudeau’s house. The PM had no business countermanding both the NCC and the Auditor General in determining what repairs are needed, or not, to a government property. Prime ministers are transient residents. Fixing 24 Sussex isn’t their call.

The place is full of asbestos, for lord's sake.

Moa has said that he has no problem with us continuing to sell asbestos to other countries so I don't imagine he'd be too concerned about exposing a Liberal PM and his family to it either.
Where did I say that? Please don't tell lies, I don't support Quebecs asbestos export industry.

We had quite the spirited discussion about it. You had no problem with selling it to other countries even though we find it to be a major health hazard. Of course, at the time Harper was also in favour of it so it's not surprising. I was objecting to Quebec exporting asbestos and you were in favour of it since the countries they were selling to didn't have regulations against it.

kkozoriz
27-10-2015, 01:06 AM
Should one of Trudeau's first acts be to build a nice palace for himself, renovating a building that Harper was able to manage fine in, for $10m plus?

Already spinning this as a negative for Trudeau, eh? Nice.

The fact is that the building has been in desperate need of repair for a long time. The National Capital Commission asked Harper in 2008 and 2011 to move out so that the building could be fixed up, to which he refused. It makes very good sense for Trudeau to not move in to it while it's renovated. This is a national historic asset, and it should be cared for accordingly.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/justin-trudeau-should-fix-24-sussex-right-away


Stephen Harper in recent days has borne the brunt of the blame for the building’s parlous state. That’s a little unfair. Had he acceded to the requests of the National Capital Commission in 2008 or 2011 and moved out to allow for renovations, the opposition would certainly have made hay. What? Spend $10-million (that was the estimate then, it will be higher now) on a home do-over for the Harpers, even as the Conservatives are hacking back federal departments?

Nevertheless, Harper erred in blocking those repairs, and here’s why: It wasn’t his house, any more than it will now be Justin Trudeau’s house. The PM had no business countermanding both the NCC and the Auditor General in determining what repairs are needed, or not, to a government property. Prime ministers are transient residents. Fixing 24 Sussex isn’t their call.

The place is full of asbestos, for lord's sake.

Moa has said that he has no problem with us continuing to sell asbestos to other countries so I don't imagine he'd be too concerned about exposing a Liberal PM and his family to it either.
Where did I say that? Please don't tell lies, I don't support Quebecs asbestos export industry.

My mistake. It was MrOilers.

Edmonton PRT
27-10-2015, 04:46 AM
If the official residence of the leader of Canada who is trying to reduce Canada's CO2 footprint, is not energy efficient and uses $90,000 in utilities a year, it is high time to renovate the home he lives in.

KC
27-10-2015, 07:56 AM
When I was in Ottawa I believe I was told that 24 Sussex was just some resident's house, a wealthy resident's house, that the government bought. Maybe sell it off and buy a nicer, better property or build elsewhere on the property - and build something tailored to a PM's lifestyle and security needs.

Per Wikipedia... It's government history only started in 1951.





24 Sussex Drive, or Gorffwysfa, also referred to simply as 24 Sussex, is the official residence of the Prime Minister of Canada, located in the New Edinburgh neighbourhood of Ottawa, Ontario. Built between 1866 and 1868 by Joseph Merrill Currier, it has been the official home of the Prime Minister of Canada since 1951. It is one of two official residences made available to the prime minister, the Harrington Lake estate in nearby Gatineau Park being the other.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Sussex_Drive

moahunter
27-10-2015, 08:19 AM
^It's a shame this place isn't in Ottawa, all I can say, is "wow":

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2015/10/4242_-3.jpg?w=940&h=564

Now that's a home for a PM... and "only" 23m

http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/1027-na-integral

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2015/10/4242.jpg?w=940

Gemini
27-10-2015, 10:18 AM
^Geez that's fugly. It looks like an insane asylum or a VD clinic for the rich.

Titanium48
27-10-2015, 10:44 AM
When did I ever question the use of heat? Why is it so necessary at C2E to see endless strawman arguments like this? It starts to be frustrating. Heating in Canada is obviously a creature comfort a benefit, if not a necessity. Air conditioning is no such thing. Quite simple.

I've spent considerable time in Toronto in summers and haven't had a problem with the heat or humidity. Toronto is somewhat hotter than either Ottawa or Montreal afaik. I've spent time in those cities as well.
I do have problems if theres an inversion in Toronto which retains pollution but air conditioning doesn't save you from that either.

Personally I actually dislike air conditioning due to having difficulty with arthritis. The air conditioning causes intense pain. One of the reasons I would never bother with it. I'd rather take the heat which I find much more comfortable. I actually like being active in hot weather most of the time. A few years ago I had some problems with that but due to another as yet undiagnosed medical condition. Other than that heat of the nature described in Ottawa should present no difficulty for the average healthy person.

Apparently you like very hot and humid weather. Most Canadians don't. The one and only time I went to Toronto, walking out of the airport felt like walking into a sauna. I would be absolutely miserable for 3-4 months a year in that climate without air conditioning.

With respect to costs and environmental footprint, the reduction in winter heat loss from adding a reasonable amount of insulation will more than offset the costs of summer air conditioning. If the building needs a HVAC overhaul anyways, adding air conditioning shouldn't add any more than $10,000 to the total cost.

Edmonton PRT
27-10-2015, 11:06 AM
^Geez that's fugly. It looks like an insane asylum or a VD clinic for the rich.

:smt044

Or the Clockwork Orange home...

Jaerdo
27-10-2015, 11:09 AM
I think that Trudeau should scrap 24 Sussex, sell the place, and build a high rise downtown. PM unit at the top, rest of the building affordable housing. He was all about affordability in his campaign, so put your money where your mouth is.

It would make a great headline as well: "Canadian Prime Minister to Live With Nation's Poorest".

Komrade
27-10-2015, 11:18 AM
Am I the only one that has a deep sentiment to old buildings? I cant wrap my head around how people are ok with demoing old stuff to put up new stuff. We need to preserve our history. Our Art.

moahunter
27-10-2015, 11:20 AM
^that home isn't art, its just a place the government picked up for the PM to live in years ago. There's nothing particularly special about it, other than the crazy price tag to renovate it.

moahunter
27-10-2015, 11:21 AM
^Geez that's fugly. It looks like an insane asylum or a VD clinic for the rich.
Lol, I guess we just have different "tastes" - mine are closer to the gay mathematician who built this. Still, it goes to show how far money can go, $10M should go a lot further than a frickin roof, some wnidows, asbestos removal and some air conditioning. Its better to start again.

Replacement
27-10-2015, 11:29 AM
When did I ever question the use of heat? Why is it so necessary at C2E to see endless strawman arguments like this? It starts to be frustrating. Heating in Canada is obviously a creature comfort a benefit, if not a necessity. Air conditioning is no such thing. Quite simple.

I've spent considerable time in Toronto in summers and haven't had a problem with the heat or humidity. Toronto is somewhat hotter than either Ottawa or Montreal afaik. I've spent time in those cities as well.
I do have problems if theres an inversion in Toronto which retains pollution but air conditioning doesn't save you from that either.

Personally I actually dislike air conditioning due to having difficulty with arthritis. The air conditioning causes intense pain. One of the reasons I would never bother with it. I'd rather take the heat which I find much more comfortable. I actually like being active in hot weather most of the time. A few years ago I had some problems with that but due to another as yet undiagnosed medical condition. Other than that heat of the nature described in Ottawa should present no difficulty for the average healthy person.

Apparently you like very hot and humid weather. Most Canadians don't. The one and only time I went to Toronto, walking out of the airport felt like walking into a sauna. I would be absolutely miserable for 3-4 months a year in that climate without air conditioning.

With respect to costs and environmental footprint, the reduction in winter heat loss from adding a reasonable amount of insulation will more than offset the costs of summer air conditioning. If the building needs a HVAC overhaul anyways, adding air conditioning shouldn't add any more than $10,000 to the total cost.

I'm a lifelong Edmonton resident. Of course I like hot weather any chance I can get. I've heard people from here even go to tropical or equatorial climates on vacation to get more of it;)

heh

When its hot I just learn to accept and enjoy it. I actually have no difficulty with it. Only one time I didn't do well with heat and it was due to an undiagnosed medical condition. It was a few years ago.

Alas, I'm one of a large population of people who basically cannot tolerate air conditioning as anybody with arthritis can attest to. If I'm sitting or walking in a place with air conditioning it literally feels like somebody is pounding me in the knees with a hammer. Nothing else brings on that feeling, Only air conditioning. People that don't have this affliction don't understand that. Of course I'm dismayed that more and more places have air conditioning and that its such a supported entity in this climate. For myself, and many, air conditioning is the worst alternative and not something that gives comfort. Instead it gives pain.

Not too coincidentally either many PM's are old. Some future PM's won't even want to turn on the air conditioning.

Anyway, enough of that. Back to the discussion.

sundance
27-10-2015, 11:59 AM
Technology has changed houses dramatically over the years, you have a 150 year old house that has tried to change with the times to sometimes less than effective results. The White House had been so retrofitted by new utilities so many holes were cut in the walls and beams that a piano fell through the floor, at the time of Truman they gutted most of the building in built it from the inside out.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/white-house-mostly-reconstruction-original-180955229/?no-ist

24 Sussex Drive isn't in as bad of shape, but it has been the home of the PM for the past 50 years, it is 150 years old, which would be a historic monument here. Alas in Ottawa there are a lot of structures from that time.

It is probably time to renovate, remove the asbestos, upgrade the electrical, plumbing, put in better AC, ensure the roof and envelope is in good condition to last until the next renovations.

GreenSPACE
27-10-2015, 12:39 PM
Again, one of the worst threads ever. Thanks everyone.

H.L.
27-10-2015, 12:46 PM
Again, one of the worst threads ever. Thanks everyone.

Why read it? Anyway, your welcome.:)

Chmilz
27-10-2015, 12:48 PM
Renovate it. Heck, spend $20 million. Make it worthy of hosting the leaders our own and of other countries.

Dave
27-10-2015, 01:25 PM
I guess this discussion thread illustrates all the worst things about politics. If you make the needed and expensive repairs to the place you get accused of building a "palace", so no one has had the courage to fix it for 40 years, the problems get worse, the bill bigger and it all gets left for the next person to deal with.

I suppose some people will not be happy until the roof caves in. I suspect at that time those same critics will be the first to criticize and say something should have been done sooner.

I also find it a bit ironic that we are having a discussion about expensive repairs to a historic building on an Edmonton forum. Isn't our favorite civic past time tearing down (or more recently burning down) historic buildings? Then we wonder why people who visit our city criticize it for having no character.

In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.

moahunter
27-10-2015, 01:31 PM
In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.
This is the private PM residence though - why would the world leaders be going there? There are plenty of government buildings with plush interiors in Ottawa already for government functions.

KC
27-10-2015, 02:17 PM
^It's a shame this place isn't in Ottawa, all I can say, is "wow":

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2015/10/4242_-3.jpg?w=940&h=564

Now that's a home for a PM... and "only" 23m

http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/1027-na-integral

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2015/10/4242.jpg?w=940

Has a nice 1950s/60s look to it. I'm not dazzled by it in anyway though. Such stick-built styling often has a commercial look to it.

KC
27-10-2015, 02:19 PM
I think that Trudeau should scrap 24 Sussex, sell the place, and build a high rise downtown. PM unit at the top, rest of the building affordable housing. He was all about affordability in his campaign, so put your money where your mouth is.

It would make a great headline as well: "Canadian Prime Minister to Live With Nation's Poorest".

I was thinking the same thing. Huge wasteful houses aren't exactly great symbols of environmentally conservative ideals.

Replacement
27-10-2015, 02:24 PM
I guess this discussion thread illustrates all the worst things about politics. If you make the needed and expensive repairs to the place you get accused of building a "palace", so no one has had the courage to fix it for 40 years, the problems get worse, the bill bigger and it all gets left for the next person to deal with.

I suppose some people will not be happy until the roof caves in. I suspect at that time those same critics will be the first to criticize and say something should have been done sooner.

I also find it a bit ironic that we are having a discussion about expensive repairs to a historic building on an Edmonton forum. Isn't our favorite civic past time tearing down (or more recently burning down) historic buildings? Then we wonder why people who visit our city criticize it for having no character.

In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.

Good post Dave but have you been in Ottawa? Theres no shortage of historic buildings there and its more the norm. This particular building doesn't stand out in any way in its environs and in fact was a private dwelling initially.
You are correct. If this same building was in Edmonton I would be arguing in its defense. This is not a disconnection or a double standard in that Edmonton lacks historical artifice and Ottawa doesn't.

In short what makes the argument for preservation in Edmonton is that Edmonton lack in historical architecture so it is imo valued. Its partly the shortage that results in that value.

Anyway consensus is spend the money and do the repairs and myslef I accept that consensus and the opinions and arguments expressed.

That said whether world leaders visit 24sussex often is a disputed point. Several sources say the residence is just a residence and rarely holds functions or high level meetings with foreign dignitaries.

KC
27-10-2015, 02:24 PM
I guess this discussion thread illustrates all the worst things about politics. If you make the needed and expensive repairs to the place you get accused of building a "palace", so no one has had the courage to fix it for 40 years, the problems get worse, the bill bigger and it all gets left for the next person to deal with.

I suppose some people will not be happy until the roof caves in. I suspect at that time those same critics will be the first to criticize and say something should have been done sooner.

I also find it a bit ironic that we are having a discussion about expensive repairs to a historic building on an Edmonton forum. Isn't our favorite civic past time tearing down (or more recently burning down) historic buildings? Then we wonder why people who visit our city criticize it for having no character.

In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.

I think it should be fixed up but possibly not as a PM's residence as I would guess that would likely add significantly to the cost and leave them with a suboptimal design. So it not a money thing for me. It's more about doing it right.

Replacement
27-10-2015, 02:26 PM
I think that Trudeau should scrap 24 Sussex, sell the place, and build a high rise downtown. PM unit at the top, rest of the building affordable housing. He was all about affordability in his campaign, so put your money where your mouth is.

It would make a great headline as well: "Canadian Prime Minister to Live With Nation's Poorest".

I was thinking the same thing. Huge wasteful houses aren't exactly great symbols of environmentally conservative ideals.

Precisely. it was never designed as such. 34 rooms for a private residence and current use is excessive. This building is poorly insulated, what insulation it does have is largely asbestos, and it has single glazing windows all around.

I'd be curious to know as is what the actual appraised worth of this building is. Odd that hasn't been part of the discussion.

Dave
27-10-2015, 02:34 PM
In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.
This is the private PM residence though - why would the world leaders be going there? There are plenty of government buildings with plush interiors in Ottawa already for government functions.

Yes, world leaders actually go there. I think EveB had an earlier post on the official uses of the place.

KC
27-10-2015, 02:36 PM
I imagine a PM's residence ideally requires all kinds of security and military characteristics. Safe rooms, bullet and blast proof areas, walls, windows, etc, plus a communications room, security personnel areas, room for a residence for a cook or whatever. Retrofitting some old house may not be the best use of the funds. Possibly more should even be spent, but on a residence that doesn't put all kinds of unnecessary restrictions on a design.

JamesL
28-10-2015, 11:35 AM
Laureen Harper apparently converted the third floor of 24 Sussex to a foster home for dozens of cats:


The Harpers used part of 24 Sussex as a foster home for dozens of cats, taking in special-care felines with an upstairs space set aside with litter and toys. Mrs. Harper is known around Ottawa to recruit friends “and anyone she came across” to come over and adopt a cat, said Jim Armour, a former press aide to Mr. Harper. Mr. Armour said he ended up adopting two cats after a visit to the third floor.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-canadas-new-prime-minister-cant-go-home-again-1446038865

Gemini
28-10-2015, 12:14 PM
What price can you put on the history of a building. Why demolish it when it can be modernized. It's not impossible to bring it into the 21st at a cost of 33 cents for every Canadian. If it runs over to twice as much it would be approx. 66 cents per Canadian. What's the problem if it is giving air conditioning, a modern kitchen and renovated for a more modern age. 10 Downing Street is over 300 years old and I don't think the P M of Great Britain is moving any time soon.

moahunter
28-10-2015, 12:17 PM
What price can you put on the history of a building.
But whats so special about this building, versus any other old single family home in a wealthy part of Ottawa, other than, for a short period in time, its been used as the PM's residence? It wasn't built for that purpose, and has no particular architectural merit.

Gemini
28-10-2015, 01:21 PM
The place has not been renovated since 1950 when then PM St. Laurent, the first PM to move in there, did so. It's plumbing, heating, wiring is all just about that old. I'm sure there are not many of us who would want to live in a house with 1950's utilities. We might love the house but not the way it functions. If this house is fixed for present and future use it could last well into the next century. It's also not just that P.M's. live in it, think of all the people that have been guests there and will be quest there. Why build some soulless brass and glass crap that looks like an airport hanger when we can keep a historical building that will last for a couple of centuries more.

H.L.
28-10-2015, 01:39 PM
The roof was done. PET wanted a pool and a sauna. Things have been done, mostly cosmetic, except for the roof

Paul Turnbull
28-10-2015, 01:52 PM
Done or not, it apparently was still leaky when Paul Martin was there:


When the wife of former Canadian leader Paul Martin opened the doors to the official prime ministerial residence for a hospice fundraiser 10 years ago, one volunteer couldn’t believe what she saw: buckets on the floor of the living room, filling with rain leaking through the roof. Window sills were lined with towels to soak up moisture, and plastic covered the windows to keep out a draft. All of this, Mrs. Martin explained to hospice volunteer Lillian Smith, was just another routine day.

Gemini
28-10-2015, 01:56 PM
^Geez, most of us would not/could not put up with that in our own homes.

moahunter
28-10-2015, 06:06 PM
Dump with no architectural merit:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-drive-should-be-torn-down-1.3292650

It's not good enough for trust fund baby Trudeau.

EveB
28-10-2015, 06:13 PM
If the roof does leak and the HVAC is really broken, it wouldn't even be good enough for most of us.

moahunter
28-10-2015, 06:19 PM
^it shows how down to earth Harper is.

Replacement
28-10-2015, 06:32 PM
Done or not, it apparently was still leaky when Paul Martin was there:


When the wife of former Canadian leader Paul Martin opened the doors to the official prime ministerial residence for a hospice fundraiser 10 years ago, one volunteer couldn’t believe what she saw: buckets on the floor of the living room, filling with rain leaking through the roof. Window sills were lined with towels to soak up moisture, and plastic covered the windows to keep out a draft. All of this, Mrs. Martin explained to hospice volunteer Lillian Smith, was just another routine day.

The entire roof was replaced in 1998. Theres no way it should be leaking 10yrs ago and if it is somebody should be calling in some warrantee work.

But I agree with Maureen McTeer on this. 24Sussex isn't much, its of no particular architectural significance and is quite an unimpressive facility. I doubt its even worth 10M aside from land value.

Frank Wilson
28-10-2015, 06:39 PM
. . . call Mike Holmes already

Drumbones
28-10-2015, 07:22 PM
Would be cool for Holmes to have it on tv but not likely with security and all but it would be done right for sure

EveB
28-10-2015, 09:10 PM
I don't see the problem with security because no one will be living there and the security measures could be inserted off camera. It would be an interesting program.

Edited to add: One of the panelists on one of these videos I watched made the suggestion that the optics could be handled by the current PM promising not to move in during his term of office. The house would become available only for the person being voted in at the next election. I bit it would time out nearly perfectly.

kkozoriz
28-10-2015, 09:48 PM
^it shows how down to earth Harper is.

Yeah, it's really down to earth to put off needed repairs to a publicly owned building.

If he were really as down to earth as you claim, he'd be living in a 3 bedroom bungalow in a subdivision somewhere in the suburbs. That's how you show you're a man of the people. Not flying an armoured limo to India or appropriating one of the CF's airbuses for your own version of Air Force One.

Sonic Death Monkey
28-10-2015, 10:23 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-drive-should-be-torn-down-1.3292650

How much would it cost to raze it and build a new grand mansion (as Mrs. Joe Clark suggested) compared to renovating it?

Gemini
28-10-2015, 10:40 PM
^Geez that's fugly. It looks like an insane asylum or a VD clinic for the rich.
Lol, I guess we just have different "tastes" - mine are closer to the gay mathematician who built this. Still, it goes to show how far money can go, $10M should go a lot further than a frickin roof, some wnidows, asbestos removal and some air conditioning. Its better to start again.

Let's just say they decide to bring it back to it's former glory. Victorian staircase, fireplaces, cornices etc. Say the price comes in at 20 million. That's still a under a dollar from each Canadian. It's in a prime location looking over the river etc.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRgFBaGBVMh0DFHk09Pdm09KgNGfmnz0 CqM_Cl3lNHZILlhO0wJ

https://www.google.ca/search?q=pictures+inside+24+sussex+drive&safe=off&rlz=1T4GUEA_enCA657CA657&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CBwQsARqFQoTCJ6c54Ht5sgCFRdbiAodmf4LnQ&biw=1093&bih=476

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSACqezMUNbZl1Ia3Dsg7pMqKFzusFYW RWPVSJ6Qld68drhaEAO



It may not be everyone's taste but I'm sure it can be fixed up to last another couple of hundred years.

Replacement
28-10-2015, 10:41 PM
Nobody answered this so I'll do it myself.

24 Sussex is appraised to be worth 7.2M.

We're spending probably over 10M, and probably at least 3M more renovating it than the damn thing is worth. lol

Who would do that?

Lets keep in mind as well that a comparative listing appraisal such as has been done recently for 24sussex would assume it is in the same shape as comparable listings which it is obviously not. Really I doubt anybody would pay 6M for this residence.

kkozoriz
28-10-2015, 10:59 PM
Here we go. 1/2 block off Sussex and only half a mill. Much cheaper that renovating and it would let the PM display his "man of the people" bona fides.



59 Cathcart St, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 5B7
$549,000

Currently a duplex front and back. Owner will convert back to a single family home. Two bedrooms, two bathrooms plus den or a walk through three bedroom. Location and charm. Stroll to museums, market and Ottawa's best amenities. Half block off Sussex and Confederation Blvd. Antiquity with many upgrades.

http://www.realtor.ca/Residential/Single-Family/16237312/59-Cathcart-St-Ottawa-Ontario-K1N5B7-LowertownByWard-Market

Gemini
28-10-2015, 10:59 PM
^^I think you are missing the point of a renovation. The house and land surrounding it may be worth $7 million plus but what price can you put on the historical value?. It's housed PM's for the last 65 years. 65 years no doubt of phenomenal growth in Canada. It's hosted countless dignitaries. 65 years may not seem like a long time to be a PM residence but if it's restored there will be a lot more history in it. 10 Downing Street has been home to British PM's for over 300 plus years. Now I am sure it's been renovated countless times in countless ways and nobody has even whispered about replacing it for new digs. You might pay $10 to buy a poppy on Remembrance Day but the symbolic meaning of that poppy is priceless.

kkozoriz
28-10-2015, 11:09 PM
The renovations to Parliament are costing $3 Billion. Think of what we could build if we knocked it down and built a modern glass tower complex. We could certain;y do it for less than $3 billion, especially if they gave up the pricy riverfront location and located in a light industrial complex someplace, similar to what Esso is doing in Calgary. I bet the whole thing could come in under a billion. There, just saved 2 billion dollars without breaking a sweat.

Frank Wilson
28-10-2015, 11:10 PM
I don't see the problem with security because no one will be living there and the security measures could be inserted off camera. It would be an interesting program.

On second thought, indeed it could make for decent watching albeit a huge project for Mike and the producers many years; however, one of the side benefits would be broad engagement for viewership, more interest in our parliamentary system is a plus. And if Mike does a great job (under-budget and ahead of schedule) maybe The Order of Canada.

Frank Wilson
28-10-2015, 11:15 PM
The renovations to Parliament are costing $3 Billion. Think of what we could build if we knocked it down and built a modern glass tower complex. We could certain;y do it for less than $3 billion, especially if they gave up the pricy riverfront location and located in a light industrial complex someplace, similar to what Esso is doing in Calgary. I bet the whole thing could come in under a billion. There, just saved 2 billion dollars without breaking a sweat.

Move it all out to Orléans Industrial Park, under a billion for sure with left over bread for a new Peace Tower too.

Gemini
28-10-2015, 11:23 PM
The renovations to Parliament are costing $3 Billion. Think of what we could build if we knocked it down and built a modern glass tower complex. We could certain;y do it for less than $3 billion, especially if they gave up the pricy riverfront location and located in a light industrial complex someplace, similar to what Esso is doing in Calgary. I bet the whole thing could come in under a billion. There, just saved 2 billion dollars without breaking a sweat.
Why not demolish the Parliament building and get the politicians to work from home and save all their correspondence etc on a huge data base. When they want to pass bills etc. let them do it through Skype. When they feel in need of a photo-op they could call the press then wave out of their front door. :rolleyes:
Yeah, another bland glass tower shaped like an upended cigarette box is all they need in the capital. It will blend in nicely with the other non-descript glass boxes there.

kkozoriz
28-10-2015, 11:59 PM
The renovations to Parliament are costing $3 Billion. Think of what we could build if we knocked it down and built a modern glass tower complex. We could certain;y do it for less than $3 billion, especially if they gave up the pricy riverfront location and located in a light industrial complex someplace, similar to what Esso is doing in Calgary. I bet the whole thing could come in under a billion. There, just saved 2 billion dollars without breaking a sweat.

Move it all out to Orléans Industrial Park, under a billion for sure with left over bread for a new Peace Tower too.

Forget the Peace Tower. We're trying to do this on the cheap don't ya know?

Plain box with a chain link fence topped with razor wire would take care of most of the security problems too. Can cut back even more on the RCMP.

This is Canada, darn it! Let's show the world just how cheap government can be.

Komrade
29-10-2015, 09:14 AM
The idea of taking 24 Sussex and turning it into a sustainable eco-friendly home has a degree of merit also. That would be cool to see.

Dave
29-10-2015, 04:23 PM
Done or not, it apparently was still leaky when Paul Martin was there:


When the wife of former Canadian leader Paul Martin opened the doors to the official prime ministerial residence for a hospice fundraiser 10 years ago, one volunteer couldn’t believe what she saw: buckets on the floor of the living room, filling with rain leaking through the roof. Window sills were lined with towels to soak up moisture, and plastic covered the windows to keep out a draft. All of this, Mrs. Martin explained to hospice volunteer Lillian Smith, was just another routine day.

The entire roof was replaced in 1998. Theres no way it should be leaking 10yrs ago and if it is somebody should be calling in some warrantee work.

But I agree with Maureen McTeer on this. 24Sussex isn't much, its of no particular architectural significance and is quite an unimpressive facility. I doubt its even worth 10M aside from land value.

It sounds like the moisture problem may be more due to the windows than the roof, but the place seems to have a lot of expensive problems to fix.

I lean towards preserving historic buildings and I think historic significance goes beyond the age and the architectural style of the building. I don't think personal taste really much matters as I am not going to live there and neither are you unless you plan to run for PM or are married to them. I suppose Ms. McTeer is entitled to her opinion as she actually did live there.

However, the repair cost cited does seem high. The long list of repairs makes me wonder about what is essential, what is a good idea and what is nice to have (ex. if off site caterers or kitchens can be used for functions, the kitchen needs may not actually be that great). It seems to be a fairly long wish list and bureaucrats seem to be good with coming up with lists like that.

It seems like repairing and replace windows is essential to prevent moisture and deterioration and improve comfort. Better insulation would help too and there could be a big energy cost saving (not sure if this is factored into offset against the quoted cost), but requiring asbestos removal might be costly so it may or may not turn out to be better to skip this. I wonder if they can come up with some sort of 5 year or 10 year plan so the cost gets spread out over time, perhaps the house gets renovated in sections with a bit done each summer when the Prime Minister can go to the summer cottage. It doesn't need to be a palace, but it should be comfortable to live in and be presentable.

Dave
29-10-2015, 08:03 PM
I guess this discussion thread illustrates all the worst things about politics. If you make the needed and expensive repairs to the place you get accused of building a "palace", so no one has had the courage to fix it for 40 years, the problems get worse, the bill bigger and it all gets left for the next person to deal with.

I suppose some people will not be happy until the roof caves in. I suspect at that time those same critics will be the first to criticize and say something should have been done sooner.

I also find it a bit ironic that we are having a discussion about expensive repairs to a historic building on an Edmonton forum. Isn't our favorite civic past time tearing down (or more recently burning down) historic buildings? Then we wonder why people who visit our city criticize it for having no character.

In my opinion cheap always shows. The world leaders who visit are likely too polite to say anything about that air conditioner hanging out the window, but I am sure it does not improve their impression of our country.

Good post Dave but have you been in Ottawa? Theres no shortage of historic buildings there and its more the norm. This particular building doesn't stand out in any way in its environs and in fact was a private dwelling initially.
You are correct. If this same building was in Edmonton I would be arguing in its defense. This is not a disconnection or a double standard in that Edmonton lacks historical artifice and Ottawa doesn't.

In short what makes the argument for preservation in Edmonton is that Edmonton lack in historical architecture so it is imo valued. Its partly the shortage that results in that value.

Anyway consensus is spend the money and do the repairs and myslef I accept that consensus and the opinions and arguments expressed.

That said whether world leaders visit 24sussex often is a disputed point. Several sources say the residence is just a residence and rarely holds functions or high level meetings with foreign dignitaries.

You are correct, I have been to Ottawa and there are a lot more historic buildings in Ottawa, than in Edmonton. It is a very picturesque city and is one of Canada's gems (up there I think with Victoria, St. John's and Quebec City).

However, the purpose of me bringing up Edmonton in this discussion is because this is an Edmonton forum and I don't think historic buildings are really valued here. There is a tear it down rather than preserve it mentality that is very strong here. Ironically, I think historic buildings are probably more appreciated and valued in Ottawa, even though there are a more of them in Ottawa.

One big problem with tearing it down is once it is gone, it is gone. If we (or our children) come to regret the decision in 20 years, it can't be undone. If anything, I just hope people are not so quick to say "tear it down" just because the cost of fixing it up seems too high. I think we may come to regret that type of reflexive and perhaps short term thinking.

KC
01-09-2016, 07:34 AM
I'd like to save all old buildings. However, this one doesn't exactly meet the needs of the role it has now. I also believe in repurposing and giving old buildings lots of time (maybe decades) to find repurposing uses. I'd say maybe another lot could be acquired and used as the PM residence if this house is so valuable, but if not, and there's no room for a new house, then take this one down, use as much of the stone as possible and build something that won't be a continual and costly problem. Or pay up, but the interior while saving the facade and any interior features that are worth retaining and build a properly designed house behind it.


Interesting about the wiring type and design:

Ancient wiring at 24 Sussex Drive put Harper and family at risk, report says

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/canada/ancient+wiring+sussex+drive+harper+family+risk+rep ort/12162799/story.html

moahunter
01-09-2016, 07:59 AM
^I think should just sell it and let someone else who wants the prestige of owning a former PM's place, pay for all the repairs. Don't do it on taxpayer dime, buy something else for the PM's family that doesn't require costly renovation. Use the money saved from the sale and purchase of something cheaper, to provide some affordable accommodation for some people who need it.

moahunter
23-11-2016, 09:05 PM
Insane, of will cost 38 million to repair 24 Sussex. Seriously? You can knock it down and build a fantastic home for a fraction of that. Or as this article notes, you could buy four replica White Houses:

https://news.nationalpost.com/news/four-white-houses-or-two-castles-in-montreal-what-the-38m-earmarked-for-renovations-at-24-sussex-can-buy

$2,200 per square foot...

Gemini
23-11-2016, 09:54 PM
Maybe they are going to re-name it 24 Trump and decorate it in gold fixtures, drapes with gold thread woven through them, gold everywhere. Trump Tower North.
Yes, that is an insane amount of money. Maybe build a brand new annex as the residential part and just renovate the old 24 Sussex to be used as a museum.

Dave
24-11-2016, 05:46 PM
Insane, of will cost 38 million to repair 24 Sussex. Seriously? You can knock it down and build a fantastic home for a fraction of that. Or as this article notes, you could buy four replica White Houses:

https://news.nationalpost.com/news/four-white-houses-or-two-castles-in-montreal-what-the-38m-earmarked-for-renovations-at-24-sussex-can-buy

$2,200 per square foot...

I suppose we should at least be thankful we are not paying the $460 million to renovate and upgrade Buckingham Palace. I saw that in the news a few days ago too. By the way, the Truman repairs to the White House in 1952 were $5.2 million, so if that were in today's dollars it would probably be 9 times that or $46.8 million. Fixing up these old places seems to be quite expensive.

It sounds like there are a variety of proposals for 24 Sussex being discussed and my sense was the $38 million one went beyond repair and renovation of earlier proposals and involved considerably expanded living and meeting space. It might make the place much more functional, but I am not sure it is the right option. I think it is more likely they will go with the earlier less expensive proposals which were mostly repair and upgrades to the existing space.

H.L.
24-11-2016, 07:10 PM
Sophie was involved, need we say more?

Marcel Petrin
25-11-2016, 09:37 AM
Sophie was involved, need we say more?

Citation needed.

Dialog
25-11-2016, 12:29 PM
Drive-by misogyny never needs a citation.

moahunter
25-11-2016, 12:33 PM
Drive-by misogyny never needs a citation.
Its reasonable to infer though, given how many nannies she needs for her kids, on taxpayer dime, unlike the previous spouse of PM.

Marcel Petrin
25-11-2016, 02:08 PM
It's "reasonable to infer" that Sophie Gregoire has infiltrated the National Capital Commission and dictated to an arm's length Crown Corporation what to do with the building?

Right.

H.L.
25-11-2016, 03:54 PM
Drive-by misogyny never needs a citation.
Its reasonable to infer though, given how many nannies she needs for her kids, on taxpayer dime, unlike the previous spouse of PM.

I'll infer what I want, he's a twit and she is a bigger twit.

Gemini
25-11-2016, 06:40 PM
I'd like to see 24 Sussex renovated but that is an expensive renovation. They could probably build a replica for half the price. 24(B) Sussex Drive. I can't see any sitting P M or his/her spouse having much of a say on how it's renovated. It will more than likely have to be kept true to it's original look except for all the electrical/plumbing elements. Some construction company sees a government construction contract and the dollar signs start spinning.

KC
25-11-2016, 08:35 PM
I'd like to see 24 Sussex renovated but that is an expensive renovation. They could probably build a replica for half the price. 24(B) Sussex Drive. I can't see any sitting P M or his/her spouse having much of a say on how it's renovated. It will more than likely have to be kept true to it's original look except for all the electrical/plumbing elements. Some construction company sees a government construction contract and the dollar signs start spinning.
It started off as just some guy's house and the government bought it. It might have some history to it now, but that will all be gutted in any renovation. I figure they should just tear it down and start fresh, designing and building something tailored to the role. Reuse the stone where they can.

Gemini
25-11-2016, 09:38 PM
I guess the Trudeaus are residing at Rideau Cottage until the powers that be decide how they are going to proceed with 24 Sussex Drive.
I don't know how much land is left on the Ottawa River to build a new P M residence or if they pull the old house down and build in the same spot. I should imagine the land along the river comes at a premier price and as they say, location is everything. It seems that some of 24 Sussex Drives residence have been able to request changes. Trudeau Snr had a indoor pool built & Joe Clark had gold leaf put on some ceilings (Clark could be a Trump supporter) and some other dude had the deck closed in. I very much doubt National Capitol Commission would let Trudeau Jnr incorporate his vision for 24 Sussex as such is his green initiatives he would probably want an open fire pit in the middle of the main hall to keep the place warm and to cook on.

KC
23-07-2019, 05:42 PM
They always throw in the ever scary asbestos word. As if asbestos isn’t also in most valued heritage buildings as well.

Anyway this place sounds like a dump plus it was nothing too special from day one, a make-do mediocre old house, so I’d still agree that it should be given up and a new shack built or another used.

Chris Selley: If the PM needs an official residence, we can do a hell of a lot better than 24 Sussex | National Post

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-if-the-pm-needs-an-official-residence-we-can-do-a-hell-of-a-lot-better-than-24-sussex

Marcel Petrin
24-07-2019, 09:11 AM
I'm not one to lose much sleep over historical buildings, so I'd be fine with knocking it down and building an appropriate and modern official residence. Problem is, it's a lose-lose for whoever happens to be in power, no matter what the decision is. Hence why it's been left to rot for decades. No PM has been willing to be the one to "build a palace" for themselves, or to spend tens of millions on a building of mediocre heritage/importance because they know that they'd be handing the opposition a giant cudgel to beat them with. Chretien, Martin, Harper and Trudeau have all just kicked the can down the road.