Version 5
We knew when it was sold that chalenges would likely ensue. And they have! Two and a half years and five versions later no one is happy!
It seems to me an addition should be harmonious or contrasting, jarring doesnt seem like the answer – nor is dismissive. The Sandy Hill (across the street essentially) Cultural Heritage Character Area Guidelines section 5.2.10 states “Additions to historic buildings should be sympathetic to the existing building,subordinate to, and distinguishable from the original. Falsifying a past architectural style in a new addition is strongly discouraged.” I so agree! In June 2018 I did a post called Architecture – Old Meets New several successful additions there. OttawaSmart gives us a tour of other heritage buildings that have successfully had additions. My go to favourite is the Bank of Canada but perhaps the Bank of Montreal vies for that top spot.
But back to proposal number 5. Although neither are brilliant, I prefer version 4 to version 5 and I could almost say I prefer version 3. See the slider image showing version 4 to 5 in the link to version 5. Heritage Ottawa is not impressed with this version nor is Mayor Watson. Peter Coffman, Supervisor of Carleton University’s History and Theory of Architecture Program explains why the addition is genuinely incompatible.
Version 1
Version 2
Version 3
Version 4
February 2019 Design
About MTBA Architects Alliances PWL Partnership who is responsible for the design of the addition.
Editorial – A few lines of hip-hop to a Shakesperean love sonnet
Heritage Sub-Committee Recommendations
Outside the Box – Proposals by Architecture students at Carleton University
Read up on the Chateauesque or Chateau Style in Canada
[…] Cut that budget! (no pun intended). Then there’s the Château! Some of you may have read my previous posts on the subject. I DO believe it would be possible to build something of our time, not a copy of […]