PROJECT Maisonneuve Library, restoration and extension

ARCHITECT EVOQ Architecture

PROJECT Octogone Library, transformation and extension

ARCHITECT Anne Carrier Architecture in consortium with Les architectes Labonté Marcil

TEXT Odile Hénault

PHOTOS Adrien Williams

Late last spring, as I was lining up outside Montreal’s Théâtre du Nouveau Monde, waiting for the doors to open, I started a casual conversation with the person nearest me. At one point, totally out of the blue, she asked: “Have you visited Montreal’s new libraries?” Before I had a chance to answer, she went on: “You know, they are the result of architectural competitions. A great system!” I couldn’t help laughing and thinking this was the moment I had long been waiting for… The word was spreading! The news was reaching the public! 

Over the past three decades, the Quebec government has gradually set in place an enviable competition system for cultural buildings—that is, museums, theatres, interpretation centres, and libraries. It results from a policy adopted in June 1992 by the province’s Ministry of Culture, which aimed at “holding public competitions for cultural facility projects presented by municipalities and organizations and produced with the assistance of government grants, the cost of which is over $2 million” (Ministère de la Culture du Québec, La politique culturelle du Québec, 1992). 

A new cultural landscape

Thanks to this policy, a new cultural landscape has gradually emerged across Quebec’s major cities as well as in its smaller municipalities. Competitions have been behind the design of at least 16 theatres, 20 museums of various sizes, and numerous interpretative pavilions. As far as libraries are concerned, the wave of competitions started in 2001 with the small Bibliothèque de Châteauguay (by Atelier TAG with JLP architectes). Since then, more than 20 libraries were the object of competitions. Several of these new cultural institutions have gone on to win awards, and to be covered in journals such as Canadian Architect. 

The benefits to the public are obvious, even though the average Montrealer (with the exception of my theatre-going friend) is mostly unaware of the competition process at work. Needless to say, architects have gained a lot from this policy, which has allowed them to explore ideas and concepts they might not have been able to address in a standard RFP system.  

Two competitions 

It is often presumed that while design competitions may be suitable for new-builds, the complexities of additions and renovations put them out of reach for competitions. However, the contrary is proving to be the case: quite a few of Quebec’s library competitions have been for additions or the quasi-total transformation of existing buildings. 

This is the case for two recently-inaugurated amenities in Montreal: the Maisonneuve Library and L’Octogone both fit into this latter category. They are also among the largest of the city’s 45 branch public libraries, including seven that were the objects of architectural competitions. Both Maisonneuve and L’Octogone existed as libraries before 2017, when separate competitions were launched to renovate and expand them. 

The Maisonneuve Library

The Maisonneuve Library is a rather unique case, since it is sited in a historic City Hall—part of a grand City Beautiful plan carried by a few enlightened entrepreneurs, who developed this sector of Montreal at the turn of the 20th century. Opened in 1912, their new City Hall only filled its role for a short period as the heavily indebted Cité de Maisonneuve was amalgamated to Montreal in 1918. The Beaux-Arts building, designed by architect Louis-Joseph Cajetan Dufort, remained standing through the last century, relatively unaltered—thankfully—by its successive occupants. In 1981, it became part of Montreal’s public library network.

Four teams were selected to take part in the Maisonneuve Library competition: in situ atelier d’architecture + DMA architects; Saucier + Perrotte/DFS inc.; Chevalier Morales Architectes; and Dan Hanganu architectes + EVOQ Architecture. All four teams are considered to be among Quebec’s most creative architectural firms, a reputation they acquired mostly through competitions. They were paid the pre-tax sum of $82,000 to take part in the competition, a sum which was included in the winning team’s eventual contract. 

The challenge for the four teams was to triple the size of the 1,240-square-metre original facility with a contemporary intervention that would pay homage to the former City Hall. The Hanganu-EVOQ team had a definite advantage, EVOQ being one of very few offices in Quebec with a strong expertise in heritage preservation. Their parti was therefore centred on restoring the historic building (then in an advanced state of disrepair) to its original splendour, and treating it as a jewel inserted at the centre of a sober, contemporary composition. The alignment of the new curtain walls and the rhythm of a brise-soleil took their cues from the existing neoclassical colonnade.

On the exterior, stone façades and monumental doors were carefully restored. On the interior, similar attention was paid to the original plaster mouldings, wood panelling, and mosaic floors. The former piano nobile’s marble staircase and its two imposing stained-glass features were painstakingly restored by a team of remarkable artisans, who still work using traditional construction methods. 

Every effort was made by EVOQ—which now includes the late Dan Hanganu’s former team—to ensure the library would be fully accessible to all. This led to the design of a circular entrance pavilion, projecting from the east wing. An architectural promenade takes one from the new entrance, through the historic building, and onwards to the west wing. A sheer delight. The subtly handled transition points between old and new celebrate the original 1900s monument and the skill of its builders.

Slightly less convincing is the west wing’s shelf wall, visible from Ontario Street. It reflects an influence from Sou Fujimoto Architects’ Musashino Art University Museum & Library in Tokyo (2010), with its striking wooden shelving doubling as wall structure. In both cases, aesthetics seem to have been chosen over utility as any books stored in these areas are challenging to access.

While intent on keeping alive the memory of the past, the local librarians simultaneously embraced the progressive outlook of the International Federation of Library Associations and Federations (IFLA). The Maisonneuve Library looks clearly to the future, particularly in its mission is to improve local levels of digital literacy. Gone are the administrative offices hidden away from the public: staff members wheel mobile stations around the building, plugging into a large array of floor outlets. The library’s offerings also now include a playful children’s area, a Media Lab, and a small roof garden. Silence is no longer the rule, except for in a few enclosed spaces. 

Octogone Library

Another major library competition was also launched in 2017: this one for Octogone Library, in a totally distinct environment situated towards the western tip of the Montreal Island. A suburban street pattern is prevalent in the borough and the site of the library is off a banal commercial strip. The area’s most interesting feature is perhaps the adjoining Parc Félix Leclerc, with its gentle landscape and large weeping willows. 

The original Octogone Library building was the outcome of decades-long advocacy efforts by the local community, which did, finally, lead to the government commitment for a public library in 1983. The following year, a low-scale, rather Brutalist building opened its doors to the public. The architects were Bisson, Hébert et Bertomeu. The long-awaited amenity was named Centre culturel de l’Octogone in reference to its role in the community and to its geometry. 

When the 2017 competition was launched for a renovation and addition to the existing building, the resulting proposals aimed to perpetuate the memory—and the name—of the 1984 building. Again, four teams were selected to participate in the competition: Atelier Big City with L’Oeuf; BGLA with Blouin Tardif architects; EVOQ Architecture with Groupe A; and finally, Anne Carrier architecture in consortium with Labonté Marcil, the winning team. The octagonal foundations were deemed solid enough to handle the loads of a new construction, but the existing walls presented competitors with a number of difficulties.

Carrier and Labonté Marcil’s entry was, as noted by the jury, a “vigorous” and “joyous” response to the program. The team had opted not to adhere too closely to the original octagonal plan and to refer instead to a far more significant symbol for LaSalle citizens, the 1827 Fleming Mill. The project’s most striking feature is a central helicoidal stair, or “hub”, which immediately attracts attention as one enters from either side of the new building. 

The second-level plan is laid out to evoke a mill’s three giant “blades” revolving around a central pivot, which culminates in a quiet, more secluded, circular space enlivened by an airy artwork. Produced by artist Karilee Fuglem, this piece alludes to L’Octogone’s extensive collection of graphic novels and comics—the largest such collection in Montreal’s library network.

Conclusion

While architectural competitions have yet to spread across Canada, Quebec can boast a rich repository of experience in this domain. At the end of three decades, and with dozens of projects successfully built through the competition process, the province’s landscape of libraries, theatres, and museums is obvious proof that competitions are worth the effort. 

Of course, there are improvements to be made. The process has gradually been burdened with overly complicated programmatic specifications—some preliminary documents are now up to several hundred pages long. The constraint of tight budgetary commitments in a highly volatile context can also seriously hinder creativity. But in the end, despite the need to revisit and simplify the process, a healthy competition culture has emerged, not just in Montreal and Quebec City, but all over the province. 

At 32 years old, Quebec’s architecture policy is entering middle-age, and it’s perhaps worth considering how it might be adjusted to prompt even more innovative, mature expressions of architecture. Can programs be loosened to allow for more daring concepts? Is there a place for open design competitions, creating opportunities for younger generations of architects? Despite some shortcomings experienced over the last three decades, Quebec has successfully put competitions to the test. And the rest of Canada could learn from it.

Odile Hénault is a contributing editor to Canadian Architect. She was the professional advisor for two pilot competitions that led to the adoption of the Quebec Ministry of Culture’s 1992 policy on architectural competitions.

Maisonneuve Library

CLIENTS Ville de Montréal and Arrondissement Mercier-Hochelaga-Maisonneuve | ARCHITECT TEAM EVOQ—Gilles Prud’homme, Sylvie Peguiron, Marianne Leroux, Georges Drolet, Nathan Godlovitch, Anne-Catherine Richard, Lynda Labrecque, Simona Rusu, Alexis Charbonneau | ARCHITECT (HISTORIC BUILDING, 1911) Louis-Joseph Cajetan Dufort | LANDSCAPE civiliti | ENVELOPE ULYS Collectif  | STRUCTURAL NCK | CIVIL Génipur | MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL Pageau Morel | ENVELOPE/QUALITY CONTROL UL CLEB | ELEVATOR EXIM | DOORS, HARDWARE SPECIALISTS ARD | COMMISSIONING Cima+ | FURNITURE/SIGNAGE/MULTIMEDIA GSMProject | ERGONOMICS Vincent Ergonomie | LIGHTING LightFactor | SUSTAINABILITY WSP | ACOUSTICS Octave | METAL/HISTORIC DOORS M&B Métalliers | MOSAIC Artès Métiers d’art | ORNAMENTAL PLASTERS Plâtres Artefact | MASONRY Maçonnerie Rainville et Frères | CONSERVATOR/MASONRY Trevor Gillingwater  | STONECUTTERS Alexandre, Tailleurs de pierres + sculpteurs | STAINED GLASS Studio du verre  | ARTIST (PUBLIC ART) Clément de Gaulejac | AREA 3,594 m2 | construction bUDGET $38.6 M | COMPLETION June 2023

Octogone Library

CLIENTS Ville de Montréal and arrondissement lasalle | ARCHITECT TEAM AC/A—Anne Carrier (FIRAC), Robert Boily, Martin L’Hébreux, Patricia Pronovost, Mathieu St-Amant, Andrée-Ève Gaudreault, Brenda Côté. LES ARCHITECTES LABONTÉ MARCIL IN CONSORTIUM—Pierre Labonté, Jean Marcil, Andréanne Gaudet, MICHEL DESMARAIS | Structural/mechanical/electrical EXP | LANDSCAPE Rousseau Lefevre  | INTERIORS Anne Carrier Architecture/les Architectes Labonté Marcil en consortium | CONTRACTOR Décarel | ergonomics VINCENT ERGONOMIE | acoustics Octave | SCENOGRAPHY GO MULTIMEDIA | aRTISTS (PUBLIC ART) CLAUDE LAMARCHE (1984), KARILEE FUGLEM (2024) | AREA 4,500 m2 | BUDGET $28.6 M | COMPLETION October 2024

As appeared in the November 2024 issue of Canadian Architect magazine

The post What Quebec can teach Canada about competitions appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Metrolinx has launched a design competition to encourage teams to submit innovative urban design and landscape architecture solutions for the Ontario Line infrastructure that will be built around the existing rail corridor extending from Eastern Avenue to Gerrard Street in Toronto. Submissions to the first stage of the two-stage process, including team compositions and a sample of past projects, are now due July 14 at 3 pm. From the responses that are received, up to four teams will be selected to participate in the design competition.

The competition is a unique, first-of-its-kind collaboration between the communities surrounding the corridor and Metrolinx, combining the vision and goals from community groups and local BIAs with Metrolinx’s objectives for the rail expansion.

The objective of the competition is to solicit creative design solutions, responding to the challenge of integrating new transit infrastructure into established neighbourhoods. The site of the competition runs along both sides of a two-kilometer stretch of rail corridor which will accommodate both the new Ontario Line and the expansion of GO Transit (a regional express rail system). These boundary conditions could be a point of friction between the transit infrastructure and the adjacent urban context. Metrolinx is soliciting proposals that use design excellence principles to transform these interfaces into a unique urban environment that enhances the adjacent neighbourhoods, commercial streets, and parklands.

The scope of the design competition includes the rail corridor to retaining walls, abutments, bridge underpasses, station plazas, aesthetic lighting, murals and other landscape items within four Community Zones identified along the Joint Corridor. The goal for the competition is to achieve an innovative, integrated, context-sensitive design solution that is implementable. Embedded within the proposals there should be a focus on ecological performance and biodiversity.

The Ontario Line and Competition Site

The Ontario Line is a planned 15.6 km, 15-stop rapid transit line in Toronto connecting Exhibition Place, through downtown, to the Ontario Science Centre. While fostering community growth and development, the delivery of the Ontario Line requires a unified integration of new architectural, civic and landscape components into the existing urban form. The design and construction of this alliances will establish an enhanced user experience within the existing public realm.

Ontario Line’s proposed Joint Corridor is the area of this design competition. The “Joint Corridor” title denotes the 2 km stretch where two rail expansion projects overlap – Ontario Line two tracks on the west side and an additional new GO rail track on the east side of the rail corridor. The Joint Corridor area for this competition will run above ground from north of Eastern Avenue to south of Pape Avenue.

The Riverside and Leslieville neighbourhoods have developed in close proximity to the historic GO Transit rail corridor. To accommodate the additional volume of the Ontario Line plus the GO Transit electrification expansion, the rail corridor will be raised, widened, and bridges will be replaced. It is these infrastructural changes that have opened up the opportunity for Metrolinx to run a design competition for the Joint Corridor.

The winning team from the competition will receive a $100,000 honorarium for their design concept, and the three shortlisted design teams will receive honorariums of $25,000. The winning design concepts will be translated into tender documents by the Ontario Line Technical Advisor, contracted to Metrolinx.

The nine-person jury includes two community members from the Lakeshore East Community Advisory Committee, a representative for the Riverside and Leslieville BIAs, four architecture, urban, and landscape design professionals, a City of Toronto representative, and a Metrolinx representative.

In response to questions that have come up about the competition format and procedures, Metrolinx has offered the following:

Will Metrolinx retain the copyright as part of the transfer of sole ownership of design concepts? What impact could this have with respect to professional liability insurance?

Upon the selection of the winning Design Proposal, only the winning Design Team is expected to irrevocably assign and transfer to Metrolinx all of the rights, titles and interests (including Intellectual Property rights) of the winning Design Proposal free and clear of any interest of any kind that would interfere with such assignment and transfer in consideration of the fee described in Article 4.0.

The other shortlisted Design Teams are only expected to sign a release and they will not be asked to assign and transfer any rights of their Design Proposals.

This decision was made to protect Metrolinx’s interests, as the winning Design Proposal will be translated into tender documents and Metrolinx may need to modify it to meet the project’s needs. Every effort will be made to maintain the intent of the winning design proposal through the construction documentation and construction processes. Metrolinx has a strong interest in this competition being successful and we will be monitoring the post-competition efforts to deliver the winning design concepts.

The winning Design Team can use the winning Design Proposal in promotion and marketing materials or for its business development. Also, Metrolinx wants to clarify that any Respondent to this competition is not required to be a licensed architect or landscape architect and will not be required to hold professional liability insurance for this purpose.

With respect to the transcription of the design proposal into construction documents, we have found that it requires ongoing effort and oversight to ensure that innovative concepts get built. If the Design Team is not involved after the competition, what assurances are there that the design intent will make it all the way through to the completion of the project?

We understand the challenges in getting innovative ideas built. The seven-year effort on the Davenport Diamond elevated guideway and public realm projects is both a testament to those challenges and a demonstration of our commitment to achieving the design excellence objectives of that project.

A key issue we face with the Joint Corridor Design Competition is schedule pressure. Once a winning scheme is selected there will be limited time available to translate and incorporate those concepts into the tender documents. The tender release dates are fixed, and we want to make sure these design concepts are captured in the bid package we put out to the market so that they get priced and built. We have confidence in the ability of the design leads on the OLTA team to successfully translate these concepts into tender documents. Metrolinx has a strong interest in this competition being successful and we will be monitoring the post-competition efforts of the OLTA teams.

The delivery of this work is linked to the schedules of other projects that have been carefully mapped out for the next eight to ten years. Delays in these critical enabling works in the Joint corridor could hold up both the Ontario Line and GO Expansion programs. We already have contracts in place for the GO Expansion program and impacts to their schedule could carry very significant risks and penalties for Metrolinx.

Why was the decision taken not to seek the provision of further work or services from the winning Design Team after the winning scheme is selected?

Metrolinx recognized that this situation could be a disincentive for some teams. This decision was not taken lightly. The Joint Corridor Early Works package is large and very complex, and we have already pushed the tender deadlines to accommodate the design competition. Given the time pressure this process was determined to be the most feasible way to meet our deadlines and achieve the objectives of all the project stakeholders (including the local community and BIA).

In reviewing the schedule and deliverables for the Early Works tender package it was determined that the best way to deliver the winning scheme was integrate it into the workflow of the OLTA team. We recognize this situation may not be viewed as ideal; however, our objective is to make sure that the design concepts are realized in the built project.

These documents have been carefully drafted and extensively reviewed by our Procurement and Legal teams, the Ontario Line Technical Advisors, the Project Delivery Team, and the Fairness Advisor. The text in those documents was carefully considered with respect to the needs and objectives of all the stakeholders.

For more information about the competition, visit: https://www.metrolinxengage.com/en/content/ontario-line-neighbourhood-updates-east-ontario-line-joint-corridor-design-competition

The formal Request Document and Design Brief are available at: https://www.metrolinx.merx.com

The post Deadline to enter teams for Ontario Line Joint Corridor extended appeared first on Canadian Architect.

PWGSC has announced six shortlisted teams for the Block 2 international design competition, to redesign the urban block facing Parliament Hill in Ottawa.  The six finalists were selected from a long-list of 12 competitors who prepared initial design concepts, which were evaluated by a team of technical advisors, as well as by a jury that met in Ottawa earlier this fall.

The following teams will advance to stage 2 of the competition:

• Diamond Schmitt Architects (Toronto, Canada) in joint venture with Bjarke Ingels Group (New York, United States), KWC Architects (Ottawa, Canada) and ERA Architects (Toronto, Canada)
• NEUF Architects (Ottawa, Canada) in joint venture with Renzo Piano Building Workshop (Paris, France)
• Provencher Roy + Associés Architectes Inc. (Montréal, Canada)
• Watson MacEwen Teramura Architects (Ottawa, Canada) in joint venture with Behnisch Architekten (Boston, United States)
• Wilkinson Eyre (London, United Kingdom) in association with IDEA Inc. (Ottawa, Canada)
• Zeidler Architecture Inc. (Toronto, Canada) in association with David Chipperfield Architects (London, United Kingdom)

“I’ve always known that at some point we would get around to filling in the biggest missing piece—which was what we now call Block 2, but we could also call the fourth side of Parliament Square, or the closing of Parliament Hill,” says Honorary Jury Chair John Ralston Saul. “I realize that there is the whole utilitarian aspect to what the building on Block 2 will have to be and do [in containing Parliamentary offices, among other functions]. And we know that the Sparks Street side of the building will be some kind of architectural palimpsest, given the number of protected buildings.”

“But the Wellington side—the Fourth Side of Parliament Square—cannot help but call for drama, inspiration, and frankly, magic. There has to be something astonishing about what is done there, which will fit in with the magic of the other three Parliament buildings,” says Saul.

“When we met in September, the path at the centre of the Parliamentary Lawn was full of the desperately sad, tiny shoes symbolizing the dead children from the residential school atrocities,” wrote jury chair Bruce Haden in a guest editorial for Canadian Architect. “It was a heartbreaking reminder of the responsibility of this future architecture to provide an inspirational and timeless backdrop to both the triumphs and tragedies of our Canada.”

The post Block 2 competition finalists announced appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The post International architectural competition launches for new Montreal Holocaust Museum appeared first on Canadian Architect.

In 2020, a design competition kicked off in Ottawa to reinvigorate an oft-forgotten portion of Parliament Hill. Block 2—the city block directly facing Parliament Hill on Wellington Street—will be revitalized through the winning design submitted by one of the twelve teams currently in competition.

The project is technically challenging, with a requirement to be zero-carbon-ready. It must also negotiate the presence of several heritage-designated buildings, as well as a mid-block parcel designated as the Indigenous Peoples Space, which is being concurrently designed. But beyond these considerations, there is a philosophical element that needs to be incorporated into the final design of Block 2. To bring these concerns to the forefront, writer and political philosopher John Ralston Saul was invited to serve as the Honorary Chair for the Block 2 Design competition.

“I’ve always been interested in what they call Block 2,” says Saul. “I’m not an architect—I’ve been trained as a historian, political scientist, philosopher—but one of the pieces I’ve always worked with is architecture. Architecture runs through all my novels, it runs through my essays. It’s always been an element in how I think about things when I write philosophy.”

Saul has held a longstanding fascination with the role the three Parliament buildings—East, Centre, and West Block—play in the Canadian psyche. For him, the buildings, originally constructed following an 1859 competition, were central to the shaping of Canadian democracy. When the original Centre Block burned down in 1916, it was immediately replaced by an even more dramatic building: an architectural statement about international engagement and the sacrifice of Canada’s soldiers in World War I. The Great Lawn framed by the three buildings remains a key national congregation space where Canadians and visitors from abroad meet, hold demonstrations and celebrate.

Parliament’s siting on a cliff overlooking the Ottawa River is equally significant. “It’s all connected to the idea that Canada is a place of rivers and lakes, and that for thousands of years, everything happened along those rivers and lakes,” says Saul. “Right up until the railways, all transportation was by water, most of it by Indigenous means of transport. And the Ottawa River is one of the great liquid highways of Canada.”

“The rivers in Canada weren’t about divisions—they were about linkages,” he adds. “It’s hard to think of a more dramatic setting or intentional concept for legislative buildings.”

For Saul, the design competition and reinvigoration of Block 2 is the third—and final—major architectural opportunity, coming after the 1859 competition and the 1920 Centre Block, to make a built statement at the heart of Canada’s democracy.

“I’ve always known that at some point we would get around to filling in the biggest missing piece—which was what we now call Block 2, but we could also call the fourth side of Parliament Square, or the closing of Parliament Hill,” says Saul. “I realize that there is the whole utilitarian aspect to what the building on Block 2 will have to be and do [in containing Parliamentary offices, among other functions]. And we know that the Sparks Street side of the building will be some kind of architectural palimpsest, given the number of protected buildings.”

“But the Wellington side—the Fourth Side of Parliament Square—cannot help but call for drama, inspiration, and frankly, magic. There has to be something astonishing about what is done there, which will fit in with the magic of the other three Parliament buildings.”

“This is an opportunity to do something completely different,” says Saul.

What is that statement to be? Saul notes that the project’s success must be based on re-examining and revaluating the earlier designs. “What did we get wrong the first two times around? What did we leave out? What has changed?”

“First of all, we are completely missing the astonishing contribution and role played by Indigenous peoples, first with their own forms of democracy over thousands of years, which we never talk about in modern times,” says Saul. “It was erased from the public conversation.”

Working with Indigenous groups to incorporate principles and architectural elements into the design shouldn’t be the only consideration for Reconciliation brought into the project, but it is a important step. Saul believes that the “single most important task in Canada today” is “rebuilding a 500-year-old relationship with Indigenous Peoples.”

“There were all of the treaties and relationships that existed for centuries, and then they were betrayed in vicious, violent, and evil ways,” said Saul. “Indigenous peoples have found a way to reclaim and change the discourse to a more honest narrative that Canada needs to reconcile with to build any lasting relationship.”

Indigenous beliefs on the relationship of people to place is another consideration for the project that Saul believes can benefit the design teams.

“It’s not about humans being above the place, or building their buildings to look down upon the place. It’s about the people and place being one and the same.”

In addition to Canada’s relationship with Indigenous Peoples, there is another core aspect of our national identity absent from major governmental buildings and symbols.

“The other big missing element is that we are a country of immigration,” said Saul. “We have not—in the other three buildings—imagined how to conceptualize what role immigration has on the Canadian identity.”

The challenge will entail designing buildings that convey these ideas without being didactic, or relying on traditional design elements from earlier government buildings.

“You have to stand back from all of the assumptions that we have and break those rules to take us down a different road,” says Saul.

This fall, the twelve design teams have submitted entries to a first stage of the competition; soon, a shortlist of up to six teams will be announced to advance their designs further, with the winner chosen next spring. The hope is that all Canadians will see an aspect of themselves reflected in the chosen design.

“I am incredibly excited and honoured to be part of this process,” says Saul. “Whatever happens with the site, if it is successful, will change how we imagine ourselves.”

The post RAIC Journal: A Philosophical Approach to Block 2 appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The borough of Verdun, in Montreal, has announced that it will honour architect Dan Hanganu with a renamed park on Île-des-soeurs. The architect, who passed away in 2017, was a long-time resident of Île-des-soeurs. The island is also the home of his first major project, a series of townhomes considered pivotal in transforming the idea of urban dwelling in Montreal.

The mayor of Verdun made the proposal in early June to rename Parc Elgar to Parc Dan Hanganu, and the resolution was adopted by the municipal council the following week.

A design competition is planned to renovate the park in conjunction with the renaming.

Settled in Montreal since 1970, Dan Hanganu was the first architect to be granted, in 1992, the Prix Paul-Émile Borduas, the highest award given the Government of Québec in the field of architecture. Made officer of the Order of Canada, in 2010, and officer of the Ordre national du Québec, in 2005, his work has had a profound impact on Québec’s urban landscape.

Among his many achievements are the Montréal Museum of Archeology and History Pointe-à-Callière (in consortium with Provencher Roy), the Anglicane in Lévis, the Abbatial Church of Saint-Benoît- du-Lac, the École des Hautes Études Commerciales (in a consortium with JLP), the Cirque du Soleil headquarters, le Théâtre du Nouveau Monde, and the Centre d’Archives de Montréal (in consortium with Provencher Roy). More recently, he and his team built the Monique-Corriveau Library and the Pavilion 400e (both with with CLC) in Québec City as well as the Marc-Favreau Library, in Montréal.

The post Verdun honours Dan Hanganu with renamed park appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Twelve teams have been long-listed for Public Services and Procurement Canada’s (PSPC) Parliamentary Precinct Block 2 International Design Competition. This project aims to preserve the Parliamentary Precinct for all Canadians, ensure it meets the needs of a 21st-century Parliament, and make it greener, safer, and more accessible.

In partnership with the RAIC, Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) officially launched an architectural design competition to redevelop Block 2,  which faces Parliament Hill to the north and is the threshold to city life to the south.

On May 21, 2021, PSPC invited the 12 firms that will participate in the architectural design competition for Block 2. These teams had the highest evaluated scores out of the applications received following the Request for Qualification (RFQ). All teams include at least one Canadian firm.

The following teams were selected to participate in the architectural design competition for Block 2:

• Architecture49 Inc. in joint venture with Foster+Partners and in association with DFS Inc. Architecture & Design
• BDP Quadrangle in joint venture with Herzog & de Meuron
• Diamond Schmitt Architects in joint venture with Bjarke Ingels Group, KWC Architects and ERA Architects
• Grimshaw Architects in association with Daoust Lestage Lizotte Stecker
• Hassell in association with Partisans
• Hopkins Architects in association with CORE Architects Inc.
• KPMB Architects
• NEUF Architects in joint venture with Renzo Piano Building Workshop
• Provencher Roy + Associés Architectes Inc.
• Watson MacEwen Teramura Architects in joint venture with Behnisch Architekten
• Wilkinson Eyre in association with IDEA Inc.
• Zeidler Architecture Inc. in association with David Chipperfield Architects

In collaboration with PSPC, a multidisciplinary independent jury will provide insight to evaluate the range of design concepts submitted and will select the six best designs to advance to Stage 2 of the competition. Architects, Bruce Haden and Anne McIlroy, will serve as Chairperson and Vice-chair for the design competition jury.

The post Twelve teams long-listed for the Parliamentary Precinct Block 2 International Design Competition appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The Ontario Association of Architects’ (OAA) biennial SHIFT Challenge event celebrates five ideas that “exemplify how architectural thinking is uniquely positioned to respond to the critical concept of resiliency.”

As part of its Virtual Conference Week, the OAA will host a free event next month to recognize a selection of innovative ideas submitted by active OAA members. Members were asked to explore the intersection of architecture and resiliency, be it physical, economic, environmental, cultural, social, virtual, or spiritual.

“Whether in a literal sense or in a figurative one, the concept of resiliency involves flexibility, inherent strength, and elasticity. It is a quality in objects to hold or recover their shape; it is an ability in people to stay intact in the face of challenges or to rebound quickly from difficulty. The goal was to propose innovative, yet practical and feasible ideas that advance design thinking at scales from small spaces to entire ecosystems,” says the OAA.

The online event, open to the public through the OAA’s YouTube channel, begins at 4:30 pm on Thursday, May 20 with short introductions of each of the five ideas selected by this year’s jury of design and planning experts.

The honorees for this year’s SHIFT Challenge are:

• Temporary Foreign Worker Communities: This holistic design approach illustrates the possibilities for healthy, nurturing, and adaptable living spaces for those responsible for helping ensure Ontario’s food supply (team led by architect Gordon Stratford).
• Mining Scars of Single Industry Communities: The Lakeshore Basin: The phased remediation of a mining basin in Kirkland Lake, Ont., shows how to transform an industry relic into a sustainable and thriving community resource (team led by intern architect Holly Sutton).
• Ontario Place: On-to-our Next Adventure: This plan to preserve the provincial landmark public space supports the needs of a new generation of communities (team led by M.Arch, candidate Victoria Cardoso).
• K-Town: A Future: A bottom-up approach to revitalizing diaspora commercial strips in urban areas while maximizing multi-use opportunities (team led by architect Steven Fong).
• The Mini-Midrise: A new vision of main street midrise development can be achieved in cities, even on small plots of urban land (team led by architect Naama Blonder).

  

Additional online events that showcase the individual SHIFT ideas, as well as a special digital publication, are planned for the fall.

To learn more about previous participants or find out how to participate in future SHIFT Architecture Challenges, visit www.shiftchallenge.ca.

The post OAA Announces Selections for SHIFT2021 Challenge appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape (SAPL) at the University of Calgary has announced the winners of an international design ideas competition at a virtual event. Titled CBDX: CITIES FOR ALL, the competition sparked an international discussion around equitable, inclusive cities.

Organized in teams of one to five, 405 people from around the world participated. The competition elicited 145 submissions from 108 cities, representing 26 different countries.

The competition call asked, “How might matters of equity and activism, ecology and environment, and health and wellness converge, and unfold, within our future cities?”

“The climate crisis and social inequality have converged against the backdrop of a pandemic, prompting us to rethink the way cities are being designed, built and operated. It is an opportunity for architects, planners, landscape architects, and other creative practitioners and students to imagine how we can make our futures better for everyone. The ideas generated from this competition offer a glimpse into how a city for all might look, how it might operate, and how it might come into being,” says John L. Brown, SAPL Dean.

The three winning entries—”2050 Lagos Amphibious City,” by Gi chul Choe (South Korea) and Joanne Li (China), “Brewing Flower Power: An Ice Teaporium Celebrating Women’s Rights,” submitted by Diana Guo (Canada), Tian Wei Li (Canada) and Joanne Li (China), and “Process not Product” from Mattie Wong (USA) — all addressed the competition prompt in innovative and refreshing ways.

As assistant professor, Alberto de Salvatierra, inaugural faculty lead and jury chair, describes, “Cities—which often ossify systemic inequities through the built environment — have become the fulcrum upon which movements for equity and justice have found increasing leverage. Solutions must come from, and be for, everyone. This competition provides a platform to highlight how architects and designers might address underrepresented and marginalized voices.”

The top entries — three winners, 15 honourable mentions and 26 finalists — will be exhibited at citiesforall.com and in downtown Calgary at SAPL’s City Building Design Lab and City Hall until the end of April. Entries will also be published in an inaugural annual volume later this year.

CBDX: CITIES FOR ALL is made possible through the support of Stantec. The competition was organized, in part, by the Center for Civilization.

The post SAPL announces winners of the CBDX: CITIES FOR ALL competition appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The jury has been named for the Block 2 international design competition in Ottawa. The Block 2 project aims to redevelop the existing property and buildings that comprise the city block immediately south of Parliament Hill in downtown Ottawa. Block 2 is bounded by Metcalfe, Wellington, O’Connor and Sparks streets, within Canada’s Parliamentary Precinct. 

The site, on axis with the Centennial Flame and the Peace Tower, constitutes the foreground and southern edge boundary of the grounds of Parliament Hill.

The following individuals are designated as Jury for this competition:

• Izabel Amaral, Arquiteta, Academic
• Anne Bordeleau, Architect, Academic
• Genevieve Cadieux, Visual Artist
• Christina Cameron, Professor Emeritus
• Brian Cody, Engineer, Academic
• Carmela Cucuzzella, Associate Professor
• Robert Eastwood, Architect (retired from practice)
• David Fortin, Architect, Academic
• Bruce Haden, Architect, Urban Designer
• Peter Herrndorf, Media Leader
• Piita Irniq, Former Commissioner to Nunavut, Artist
• Matthew Kreilich, Architect
• Elsa Lam, Architectural Journalist, Historian
• Pierre Leclerc, Architect, Artist
• Dorte Mandrup, Architect, Professor
• Brian McDougall, Public Works Manager, Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation
• Anne McIllroy, Architect, Urban Designer
• Kevin O’Brien, Architect
• Lisa Prosper, Scholar, Author
• Sabrina Richard, Arts and Cultural Consultant
• Jutta Treviranus, Academic
• Kirby Whiteduck, Former Algonquins of Pikwakanagan Chief, Author
• Richard Young, Architect (retired from practice)

Parliamentary jurors

• Steven McKinnon, Member of Parliament, Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Public Services and Procurement
• Senator Donald Neil Plett, Leader of the Opposition, Senate of Canada, Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on the Long Term Vision and Plan
• Bruce Stanton, Member of Parliament, Deputy Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons

Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) launched the Parliamentary Precinct Block 2 International Design Competition with an RFQ posted just before Christmas. The RFQ initiates a process to pre-qualify Respondents for a two-stage design competition related to the redevelopment of Block 2 in Ottawa’s Parliamentary Precinct. Responses to the RFQ are due March 2, 2020.

For clarity, the Jury will not be involved in the evaluation of RFQ Responses, which will remain under the responsibility of PSPC with oversight by the RAIC Professional Advisors, Competition Manager, and an independent Fairness Monitor.

The post Jury named for Block 2 Competition appeared first on Canadian Architect.

This morning, the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia (AGNS) announced that the team of KPMB Architects with Omar Gandhi Architect, Jordan Bennett Studio, Elder Lorraine Whitman (NWAC), Public Work and Transsolar has won the international design competition for the new Art Gallery of Nova Scotia and Waterfront Arts District.

The new gallery and arts district, located on the Salter Block of the Halifax Waterfront, will be a transformative, inclusive destination. It is intended to inspire and celebrate creativity and imagination, but also to challenge the status quo and reshape institutional values. Its design places people, art and culture at its core.

The winning team is the result of the largest international design competition to be held in Nova Scotia. The other finalist teams were Architecture49 with Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Hargreaves Jones; and DIALOG, Acre Architects, Brackish Design Studio and Shannon Webb-Campbell.

The winning design team’s submission features a striking peaked hat shape at the entrance, an iconic shape which a symbol of the strength, wisdom, love and power that women hold within Mi’kmaw communities.

The design offers an array of accessible experiences for all senses, and embodies a vision of a place that thrives throughout all seasons. The landscape design expands and contracts, flexing seasonally from the human-scaled, intimate gathering spaces at the heart of Salter Block to a large gathering space at the scale of K’jipuktuk, the Great Harbour.

“We proposed a sinuous building surrounded by regenerative gardens that will signal a radical new beginning for the AGNS, the waterfront, Nova Scotians, and the world of art,” said Bruce Kuwabara, Founding Partner, KPMB Architects. “We want people to experience art in a great setting. We want people to feel welcome and at home. We believe we have created a place for everyone.”

The gallery and the province will work with the team and the public to shape a final design that is a meaningful and accurate reflection of the diversity of Nova Scotian communities. Formal public engagement will begin in early 2021.

The jury was unanimous in its recommendation of the KPMB-led submission as the winning project. However, in its deliberations, it also spent a great deal of time discussing what would be an appropriate representation of different cultures, and the importance of engaging with community to reflect a diversity of cultures.

“All three designs drew inspiration from the place, and the history and the culture of the first people of this place, the Mi’kmaq,” they wrote in the jury report. “Recognizing that the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia is looking to create greater diversity and inclusion, and become a more open and welcoming place for all Nova Scotians, the jury questioned how the process allowed a design and program to encompass Mi’kmaw culture without direct involvement of Mi’kmaw leadership. With this said, the jury believes that the process has room for humility. The jury recommends that the owner and the consultant team should use this moment in time to learn, grow and move forward together.”

In the winning submission, the report continues, “the design is wholly inspired by Mi’kmaw culture.” But also, “The project is being led by the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, Develop Nova Scotia, and the Government of Nova Scotia. It is not being led by a Mi’kmaw organization and therefore presents the conundrum: is it appropriate? The jury would like to see that as part of its first steps working together, the owner and the winning team engage with Mi’kmaw leadership.”

To celebrate the unveiling of the New Art Gallery of Nova Scotia design, the Donald R. Sobey Foundation, with The Sobey Foundation, announced a $10 million gift. In April 2019, the Government of Canada announced an investment of $30 million in the new Art Gallery of Nova Scotia project through the New Building Canada Fund-Provincial-Territorial Infrastructure Component, National and Regional Projects. The Province of Nova Scotia has committed $70 million towards this project.

“Congratulations to the winning design team on their outstanding proposal for a new iconic Art Gallery of Nova Scotia,” said Premier Stephen McNeil. “As a province, we recognize the importance of inclusive public spaces connected to the arts.  Art and culture help tell the story of who we are as Nova Scotians. The new gallery will reflect the importance of art and culture to our lives, our communities and our economy.”

“Social infrastructure—public spaces, waterfronts, parks, and a reimagined art gallery—can be a touchstone for attracting population and for bringing people together,” says Jennifer Angel, President and CEO of Develop Nova Scotia. “We believe the new arts district can be a place for everyone—where all people can see themselves and are inspired to participate. To achieve this, we need to build it with everyone, which is easy to say and hard to do. Today is the beginning of the important work to bring people together to co-create our new arts district on the Halifax Waterfront, and it’s an invitation to join us in making this place for art and community a place where everyone can belong.”

The post Winning team announced for Art Gallery of Nova Scotia and Waterfront Arts District appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Three competing conceptual designs for the new Art Gallery of Nova Scotia and waterfront arts district in Halifax have been unveiled, and will be publicly presented in an online forum this Thursday. The Art Gallery is inviting public feedback on the submissions.

In April 2019, the Government of Canada announced an investment of $30 million in the new Art Gallery of Nova Scotia project through the New Building Canada Fund-Provincial-Territorial Infrastructure Component, National and Regional Projects. The Province of Nova Scotia has additionally committed $70 million towards this project.

The three teams participating in stage two of the design competition are : Architecture49 with Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Hargreaves Jones; DIALOG, Acre Architects, Brackish Design Studio and Shannon Webb-Campbell; and KPMB Architects with Omar Gandhi Architect, Jordan Bennett Studio, Elder Lorraine Whitman (NWAC), Public Work and Transsolar.

The post Art Gallery of Nova Scotia unveils competing designs for waterfront arts district appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Brooklyn Bridge Forest, a design that reimagines the Brooklyn Bridge as an icon of climate action and social equity, has been selected as the winner of the Reimagining Brooklyn Bridge competition, an international design challenge presented by the Van Alen Institute and New York City Council.

The project team was led by Montreal and New York-based designer and urbanist Scott Francisco’s firm, Pilot Projects Collective. Francisco was inspired by his daily walks across the bridge from Brooklyn to lower Manhattan. The also included Cities4Forests, the Wildlife Conservation Society, Grimshaw and Silman.

The team envisioned an opportunity to reimagine the bridge as a way to connect New York City and its residents to forests and natural systems, improve quality of life, and extend the impact of the 137-year-old structure as a source of inspiration and a platform for addressing pressing problems that challenge our planet.

Rooted in over ten years of research and activism by Pilot Projects Design Collective, the Wildlife Conservation Society, Cities4Forests, Grimshaw Architects, and Silman, Brooklyn Bridge Forest triples the capacity for active transit, brings biodiverse forest and green spaces into the city, and establishes a partnership to conserve an expanse of Central American tropical forest, all while respecting and maintaining the beloved structure.

The design expands the historic wooden walkway using planks sustainably sourced from a “partner forest,” helping a community in Guatemala protect a 200,000-acre biodiverse rainforest.

A new dedicated bike path and reclaimed traffic lanes more than triple the space for active and low-carbon transit, while biodiverse microforests at either end of the bridge bring nature to New York City, and serve as green spaces for under-served communities.

Also included in the plan is an integrated community hub to provide leadership opportunities for youth, centered around the relationship between conservation, diversity, engineering and design.

“The urgency of climate change and challenges like the current COVID-19 pandemic illustrate the critical need for systems thinking locally and globally. We need public spaces and transit options designed to prioritize sustainability, health and equity. This is the time to co-create infrastructure and culture systems that protect all people and our future,” said Francisco. “We are energized by this victory for healthier cities and the global environment and look forward to working with a broad array of stakeholders to make this vision for the Brooklyn Bridge a reality.”

The post Montreal designer wins international competition to reimagine Brooklyn Bridge appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Cities across Canada are exploring the missing middle as opportunities to welcome more homes and people in their communities. The term “missing middle” refers to multi-unit housing that falls between single detached homes and tall apartment buildings. It includes row housing, triplexes/fourplexes, courtyard housing and walk-up apartments. These housing forms are considered “missing” because they have been largely absent from urban streetscapes in Canada, including Winnipeg.

As planners working with the City of Edmonton, we too, are seeking to enable medium-density development in the city’s older neighbourhoods. Edmonton’s official plan, the City Plan, envisions a growth of over one million people by 2040, and will be up for public debate in fall of 2020. The City’s Infill Roadmap, which articulates a series of actions to enable medium-scale infill, is also in effect from 2018 to the end of 2021. What both of these policies and initiatives demonstrate is Edmonton’s interest in increasing housing choices, particularly in the missing middle housing range.

But does this development orientation align with industry and consumer demand? Planners and city-builders across the nation have questioned whether households prefer mid-rise housing, and if builders see these housing typologies as more profitable than single-detached or high-rise residential buildings.

Launched in 2019, Edmonton’s Missing Middle Infill Design Competition encouraged conversations around infill and helped the public and development community envision design possibilities — inspiring builders, developers, and architects to work in collaboration on medium-scale housing proposals.

The competition solicited and reviewed design proposals that considered how the missing middle (or medium-density housing) might work on a site of five lots owned by the City of Edmonton. The winning team, adjudicated by a national jury of architects, would be given the opportunity to purchase the site and build their design. The City of Edmonton, in its communications, articulated how it might support the winning team through the development process, inclusive of the rezoning, development permit, and building permit stages. The City of Edmonton envisioned the design as serving as inspiration and a prototype for further missing middle infill development throughout other parts of the city.

Nearly 100 renderings and 30 pro formas, representing more than half a million dollars of architectural design work, were received from Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Vancouver, and Seattle, in addition to preliminary registrations from London (UK), Regina, Hamilton, Toronto, and Oklahoma City. The first-place winning design, The Goodweather, by developer Part & Parcel, builder Studio North, and Gravity Architecture, won because it was a good fit for the site, was considered likely to be successfully built and sold, and because its design could be reproduced on other sites. The Goodweather presented a well-conceived courtyard space, and situated its buildings close to the sidewalk — enhancing opportunities for interactions in the public realm. The Goodweather arranged existing housing typologies into a new, exciting configuration that hopes to bring together many demographics and generations into one pocket community. In total, there are 56 dwellings: 14 townhouses designed for young families, 21 single bedroom loft dwellings for students and young professionals, and 21 ground level dwellings designed for seniors. There are 14 single car garages and 6 guest parking stalls, all accessed from the alley.

Applicants to the Missing Middle Infill Design Competition were required to provide a pro forma. This is a document that shows how a development will spend, and make money. A pro forma ignores design and marketing language and gives the “brass tacks” of a project. It answers the critical question: “how much profit will this project produce?” Creating a pro forma requires a lot of assumptions about what materials and labour will cost, how people want to live, and what they will pay for real estate. The assumptions behind the numbers reveal some of the logic of real estate development.

By reviewing the thirty pro formas submitted to our design competition, we sought to answer three questions as part of an analysis on the financial viability of missing middle housing. What do the pro formas from the Missing Middle Infill Design Competition tell us about the most financially-feasible low and medium infill forms? What do the estimated profit margins tell us about the risks applicants see with building infill? What funding sources and financing structures are typical for infill development and how do these differ from greenfield?

What the numbers say

With land value held constant across all projects, the average profit margin for an apartment and row house is identical (11% of revenues). To test the impact of land value reductions, the land value was reduced by 25% for row house and stacked row house projects. Cheaper land makes row housing more profitable than apartments (15% vs 11% profit). Based on the data available for this study, row housing can be competitive with small apartments.

Submissions to the competition offered innovative building design and construction solutions, including mass timber prefabrication and factory assembly, and modular units that could be contracted or expanded to respond to the needs of the user and to site constraints. While these innovative techniques influenced the design of the buildings, none of them created a real edge when it came to estimates of construction costs. This means that developers are interested in innovation (at least in a public design competition), but do not expect these to cut costs.

Nine of the twenty-two projects evaluated proposed rental apartments. Three of these were among the most profitable developments (ranking first, second, and ninth). The remaining six rental projects were the least profitable of all projects. The average profit margin was lower for rental projects than for condominiums (7% vs 13%). However, maximum profit margin for rental projects was comparable to the maximum for condominiums (34% vs 32%). Overall, the financial data suggest that there is not currently a clear advantage for building rental or condominium projects, and that considerations other than pure financial return influence the developer’s choice.

Every developer will set a minimum acceptable margin that depends on what investment options they have and the risks involved. The most common margin used by policy makers, however, is 15%. The average profit margin for this site was only 11%, meaning that for most developers, it is hard to put together a successful project.

With profit margins so low, what can we say about project risk? We might assume it means that developers think infill is a slam dunk, and so they are willing to take a small return. However, when you look closely at project inputs like rent per square foot, construction costs, and condo sales timing in a slow Edmonton market, this does not seem reasonable. In fact, we found more evidence of aggressive targets (or wishful thinking) in the pro formas than conservative estimates. Would you pay $1,900 a month for an 800 square foot apartment in Edmonton? Or spend $380,000 on the same apartment, before condo fees? Would you spend $14 million on an apartment building that would earn you $670,000 annually?

Greenfield development can be done at scale and reproduced over and over, and with little engagement cost or risk. High-rise development is large enough to produce its own efficiencies through scale, and to attract investment from pension funds. Missing middle infill development never gets the scale, the momentum, or the attention to make it an easy win.

What the industry says

To accompany our pro forma analysis, we invited architects, builders, and developers to share their perspectives and assumptions around profit and risk for medium-density housing, and associated financial and regulatory barriers.

Applicants to the design competition perceived their participation as a worthwhile venture and investment because of the opportunity to build their proposal. In fact, the ideas that developer-architect teams explored are, in many cases, being explored for other housing projects. The Missing Middle Infill Design Competition helped to expand our knowledge of what scale of density is preferred and reasonable for the missing middle in Edmonton. Participants noted how the design competition was an opportunity to test new design concepts, and to potentially challenge the City’s current regulations with new innovations.

Our interviews also revealed that members of the industry perceive land values as a challenge to making pro formas for medium-density housing viable. Municipal government affects land value primarily through the development rights (zoning) granted to each parcel. We typically expect that adding development rights will also increase the value of land. The land in the competition was priced at for low-rise apartments, but some projects proposed lower density development, like row housing. These projects could expect to acquire land with less permitted density for lower cost in an open market, as long as upzoning is not expected.

Builders, architects, and developers cited how servicing requirements need to be made clear so that these costs can be appropriately factored into their pro formas. Some of these participants made assumptions that since the competition was put forward by the City of Edmonton, that there would be leniency on permitting timelines and additional incentives to support the winning team’s advancement through the land development process.

The interviews illuminated how design features like amenity space and public space are potentially at odds with density requirements for developments to be profitable. While developers strive to include public space so that their housing projects can entice their intended user demographics, their pro formas did not perform well with them included.

The provision of parking was also seen as a significant expense. The City of Edmonton is exploring the possibility of removing minimum parking requirements, with amendments to the Zoning Bylaw scheduled for public hearing in 2020. If these regulatory changes were factored into the design competition, would the number of parking spaces put forward by architect-developer teams be reduced, and by what measure?

Several financing models were proposed through the Missing Middle Infill Design Competition. All projects require financing for construction, but some considered interesting sources of private equity, such as co-operative housing. All participants agreed that strong design is needed to maximize access to financing.

Given the nature of the design competition, all projects expected rezoning fee reductions or waivers, timely permits, and a positive neighbourhood response. While municipal fees were not a major project cost, interviewees indicated that the success of their proposal depended on minimizing delays and project uncertainty. Part of what made the competition desirable was that there was an assembled site, and the City of Edmonton was taking on much of the community engagement work, reducing uncertainty and timelines for proponents.

Sharpening our pencils

The development of new housing can be complex and costly in the best of circumstances. When it proposes a new form in an old neighbourhood, it can be very difficult to put together a project that can please neighbours, satisfy regulators, attract buyers or renters, and convince banks and investors to put their money in.

So what lessons can we draw from the City of Edmonton’s Missing Middle Infill Design Competition?

We learned that developers and architects are creative and interested in innovating when there is support from regulators, like city planners, to do so. We learned that different infill designs are possible, and even competitive — rental apartments, condominium rowhouses, and even modular, stacking, expandable co-op housing can be viable on paper. If cities want row housing, they need to zone land for row housing and use those zones as a commitment to communities and developers to prevent price creep from pricing out desirable projects. Cities can use their zoning tools, along with long-range planning and engagement, to set community expectations and reduce uncertainty for all involved.

The pro formas tell us that most of the factors affecting real estate development are determined by the markets for labour, investment capital, and housing, which are outside of a municipality’s hands. However, interviews with developers reveal that supportive policies, regulations and proactive engagement can make the difference between a successful infill project, and a failure to launch. Cities seeking missing middle development—like Edmonton and Winnipeg—will need to work with local developers to understand the challenges facing infill in order to find effective solutions. Cities, now more than ever, are eager to sharpen their pencils, and get moving on this type of work. We are excited for the possibilities.

Jason Syvixay is an urban planner currently completing his PhD in Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Alberta. He has worked as the managing director of the Downtown Winnipeg BIZ, a planner with HTFC Planning & Design, and more recently, has joined the City of Edmonton to support the implementation of its Infill Roadmap. He has a passion for people and places, and engages in city building that listens to and empowers the community, builds knowledge and capacity, and works towards equity in urban places.

Sean Bohle is an urban planner at the City of Edmonton. He discovered a love for spreadsheets and financial models while completing graduate school at the University of British Columbia, and through subsequent consulting work on affordable housing development. At the City of Edmonton, Sean has worked on policies to provide affordable housing and community amenities from rezoning, and now leads the implementation of the Infill Roadmap.

The post Is ‘missing middle’ financially viable? appeared first on Canadian Architect.

“People are excited about the future of design and city building in Edmonton—they’re all in for architecture,” says Kalen Anderson.

As Director of Edmonton’s new City Plan, Anderson and her team have been working for the last two years to harness the energy and enthusiasm for, among other things, good design in Edmonton.

Edmonton has been undergoing a transformation in the last decade in the design of the public realm and public institutions. No longer is the city satisfied with allowing a haphazard approach to architecture and design, which reached such levels of mediocrity in the early 2000s that it prompted one former mayor to declare, “Our tolerance for crap is now zero.”

That impetus has continued through all levels of local government: this article is co-authored by a City of Edmonton councillor who trained in fine arts, and an architecture-trained senior planner for the City. Both of us believe in the value of good design, and are seeing constituents respond with enthusiasm to Edmonton’s architectural initiatives.

“Edmontonians from all walks of life are advocating for improved public and private spaces,” explains Anderson. ”Our City is showing its ambition and creativity in redeveloping its plans, from the City Plan to the Zoning Bylaw Review, to better understand the choices that need to be made to make Edmonton a healthy, attractive, urban, and climate-resilient city of two million people. More and more, we’re adopting a civic confidence that’s all about putting our money where our mouth is, to help spur greater design and enjoyment throughout our built environment.”

Edmonton is also the last major city in Canada to retain the civic role of the City Architect. Traditionally, the City Architect would have been responsible for the design of civic buildings, but Edmonton’s City Architect has taken on an additional role—of advocacy and the promotion of excellence in civic architectural design, with the understanding that if a municipal government leads by example, others will follow.

“Edmonton’s design language is becoming more sophisticated,” says City Architect Carol Belanger. “Our urban fabric is seeing a hopeful and optimistic renewal with residents, politicians, city administrators, city builders and city visionaries, all beginning to articulate the necessity for design that supports positive outcomes in the realms of community health, quality of life and aesthetic enjoyment.”

Recently, the Borden Park Pavilion, designed by gh3, won a Governor General’s Medal in Architecture—the first time Edmonton has been recognized by the awards since 1992.

Many studies have shown that the design of our public realm and urban fabric directly affects the quality of life and overall well-being of citizens. This is especially true within the residential context. The two of us have been involved in pushing for Edmonton to increase its density through well-designed infill housing, as a means to address livability, affordability and the efficient use of existing infrastructure.

Our efforts were part of the impetus for this year’s Missing Middle Infill Design Competition, which announced its winners this summer. It asked: What could economically feasible, “missing middle” density developments look like?

The competition was unique in that the City was not the client. Instead, it invited architects to partner with developers, forming teams that would be willing to purchase the competition site on Spruce Avenue and finance the project. This would provide some certainty for all parties around the project actually being constructed.

Our planning department faced challenges on how to solicit submissions. The requirements to submit were unconventionally tough; designs needed to be sufficiently resolved beyond the concept stage and technical issues such as stormwater and servicing were required to be addressed at a high level. Further, a pro forma was required, which would be vetted by the City’s internal technical committee.

Residents of the community where the linked parcels of land are situated played a significant role in defining key criteria and values for the designs to respond to.

These stringent requirements were critical in attracting serious applicants, says Jason Syvixay, Principal Planner with the City of Edmonton, who managed the competition.

“Soliciting ideas that could be financed and ultimately built was a message that we wanted to resonate loud and clear for interested teams,” says Syvixay. “The competition helped nurture relationships between builders, developers and architects, who developed proposals that pushed the envelope for design and building creativity, while applying a healthy reality check to support financial viability for missing middle housing forms. Local, national and international interest—from applicant teams to media and industry and architectural associations—helped elevate the conversation around design in the City of Edmonton.”

He adds, “As new plans and policy initiatives begin to contemplate the types of urban spaces and places that are needed to help people live prosperous lives, competitions like the Missing Middle Infill Design Competition offer a good place for urbanists, city visionaries, builders, architects and developers to start.”

Nearly 100 renderings and 30 pro formas were received from across Canada. After two days of extensive conversation and debate, the national jury chose their top designs.

“The winning submissions had very clear urban ideas. Row houses, courts, alleyways, porches and pocket parks created identity and gave unity to a missing middle neighbourhood,” says Talbot Sweetapple, one of the jurors. “The fact that this was an ideas competition that would ultimately be built by their team led to conceptual, clear and viable schemes.”

“The more successful projects paid special attention to the scale of the streetscape, provided great urban connectivity and embraced the idea of community,” he adds.

The designers behind the winning submission, The Goodweather, hail from Calgary, Alberta. Matthew Kennedy and Mark Erickson are the founding principals for Studio North, which teamed with Part + Parcel and Gravity Architecture to clinch the prize.

Damon Hayes Couture, creative director for Studio North, describes how the project encourages a paradigm shift away from the status quo. “The Goodweather is an intentionally intergenerational community. Transitioning from the typical North American housing model that prioritizes independence to one that encourages interdependence, our ambition was to create an arrangement that will benefit everyone in their own unique way,” says Hayes Couture. “Young families benefit from the care and supervision that elderly residents can provide. The elderly, on the other hand, become part of a vibrant community—rather than being in retirement homes that can be really isolating.”

The winning submission builds on the notion of equitability in design: Excellence in design should reflect a democratic sensibility, and not be limited to the highest earners. The design proposes a series of modular units that can be configured in various ways, from studios up to three-bedroom units for larger households. The units at grade are barrier-free and accessible to persons with mobility challenges.

For the Spruce Avenue site, the modules are combined into a 56-unit complex with a density comparable to a four-storey apartment, while maintaining the contextually sensitive massing of a two-and-a-half-storey townhouse development. There were a number of key factors in accomplishing this feat.

First, the proposal contemplated a creative solution to the parking configuration, as well as an overall reduction in parking stalls—a possibility because of a nearby Light Rail Transit station. Parking is restricted to the eastern edge of the site in attached at-grade garages that can only be accessed from the back alley, greatly increasing the amount of usable space on the site.

Second, classic design gestures create the illusion of spaciousness while maintaining modest square footage. This includes vaulted ceilings, generous amounts of glazing and lighter colour schemes for the interiors.

Last, efforts were made to ensure that most circulation spaces were charged with some form of secondary programming. On the interior, there are no pinching hallways. The studio and barrier-free units use the hallway as a kitchen. On the exterior, the circulation space between buildings doubles as communal courtyard amenity space.

“We felt a responsibility to create vibrant social spaces, so, from the start we knew that the development had to be focused around a common courtyard,” says Mark Erickson of Studio North. “We wanted it to be a beautiful space that residents of the community would feel proud of and want to spend time in, extending their living space and making an outdoor living room. Just like Edmonton’s storied river valley that cuts through the downtown, the courtyard
of The Goodweather is a meandering, forested path flanked by terraced dwellings on either side.”

Discussions with Part + Parcel, Studio North and Gravity Architecture are well underway, with a sales agreement, rezoning and development permit in progress. The finished development will be used to inspire what’s possible for missing middle housing in other parts of the city, helping to realize a key goal in Edmonton’s 2018 Infill Roadmap.

At the Art Gallery of Alberta late in May, awards were presented to the winners and the top two runners up. Bricolage by Leckie Studio Architecture + Design received the second-place award for its twist on classic urbanism, through a marriage of high quality, durable materials and simple, elegant shapes. Spectrum by SPECTACLE and RedBrick Group of Companies placed third for its innovative approach to site layout—distributing densities and amenity spaces through a checkerboard development pattern. City of Edmonton departments are already reviewing these, along with other highly ranked submissions, for their merits and transferability to other surplus city-owned sites.

The Missing Middle Infill Design Competition was a way to stimulate conversation around well-designed and economically feasible medium-density housing. By encouraging missing middle housing forms, Edmonton can support a growing population by welcoming new people and new homes into our mature neighbourhoods—creating complete communities with a variety of housing options for people at every stage of life and income.

With winning designs and plenty of ideas in tow, Edmonton is ready and eager to get started on this important housing goal, while raising the bar on city-building and design.

Sarah Hamilton, a City of Edmonton councillor, is leading the creation of a design initiative to enhance the function and aesthetics of city spaces, and sees the value of infill as part of a modern, compact and efficient city. Prior to serving on council, Councillor Hamilton worked as an educator, journalist and small business owner, and holds a Master of Arts from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

Christian Lee is the Senior Planner for the Strategic Initiatives and Infill Liaison Team with the City of Edmonton, and is a graduate of the University of Waterloo School of Architecture. Christian worked in a private architecture firm in Toronto as well as in the City of Cambridge planning department prior to moving to Edmonton in 2013.

For more information on the competition and to view all of the submissions, visit edmontoninfilldesign.ca.

The post Edmonton’s Missing Middle appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Design Exchange (DX), in partnership with RBC Foundation, has announced Toronto’s Studio for Architecture & Collaboration (StudioAC) the winner of the 2019 RBC Canadian Emerging Designer Competition.

Founded in 2015, Studio for Architecture & Collaboration is an interdisciplinary architectural practice with an initiative to produce impactful architecture that speaks to its context at a multitude of scales.

The firm is led by Andrew Hill and Jennifer Kudlats with a belief that design, architecture, and art have the ability to bring people together, start essential conversations in our cities, and help businesses flourish.

StudioAC’s portfolio contains reconstructed residential spaces that emphasize their preference for open concepts, clean lines, natural light and wood finishes.

The team’s projects include:

Broadview Loft

This downtown Toronto loft space was designed with a young professional in mind using a scheme that the team refers to as “bed box”. Bed Box features an arch entryway and elevation change to signify the sleeping quarters, and a moment of warmth contrasting the loft’s white and concrete finishes. This warmth is achieved through a floor and wall wrapper of finish plywood that holds your feet and eyes as you walk in.

Pape Loft

The Pape Loft is located inside of a converted church in the east end of Toronto. StudioAC renovated the space according to their client’s lifestyle by taking a minimalist approach to the interior furnishing. The team framed the living room with a curved element that mirrors the flooring material, which reflects the light back into the space and denotes the identity of the loft as a continuous element.

The kitchen was relocated to maximize the open space, and all the millwork is kept clean of hardware to consider the client’s desired minimalism. The second-floor is divided by a glazed partition to indicate the master bedroom and home office.

World Changers Mobile Showers

In an effort to share design with all communities, StudioAC teamed up with World Changers, a charitable organization, to design mobile showers in a donated 52-foot trailer. StudioAC used this project as an opportunity to showcase the impact of design and bring a moment of privacy to those who may feel exposed. The unit will travel to shelters associated with the Out of the Cold program to bring hygiene facilities to those in need.

Candy Loft Residence

The Candy Loft exists on the second story of a hard loft conversion in Toronto’s downtown west end. The loft was designed in a way that would create a feeling of privacy within the city. Candy Loft uses an entry corridor and the location of the service areas to buffer the living space from the rest of the building.

In order to emphasize transitions from entry to living, and public to private, the team designed arched hallways to moderate one space to the next. Solid douglas fir floor boards flanked by warm LED lights shift through the corridors. The douglas fir boards wrap the kitchen island, and the kitchen pulls are made from exposed copper to show the patina of use over time.

Reissue Retail Concept

According to StudioAC, this concept for a cannabis retail experience along Queen west was inspired by the very regulations that govern them. StudioAC states that the regulations stipulate that no cannabis products may be visible from the exterior. The exterior presents a large transparent area that introduces a retail ‘lobby’ with an abstract floating shed as its backdrop.

Once a guest moves through the lobby experience they enter a familiar but materially distinct environment defined by a floating brick element that functions also as a perimeter retail display tool. Central to this space is a display bar that will act as the focal point for product display and discussion.

Annex Hotel

What was once originally built as horse stables with exposed brick walls has since been reconstructed into a 24 room hotel. The Annex Hotel is on an atypical lot for downtown Toronto, which allowed the team to create “atypical suites” that utilizes the width of the existing building.

Each room has at least two large windows that fill the space with natural light. A long millwork element stretches from one side of the suite to the other that transforms a decorative surface to a desk space and washroom vanity. In an effort to minimize cost of furniture, the elements in the rooms were mostly built from plywood.

St.Clair Condo

StudioAC’s largest project in design development is a 9-storey Malen Capital mid-rise condo, with approximately 80 units. Located along one of Toronto’s east-west avenues, the condo has guidelines that govern and foster the development of something at this scale. The team opted for a building “that strives for a quiet singular presence with its most aggressive formal gesture being a sweeping angle that picks up the ‘form’ along the ground level retail edge”.

The post Design Exchange Names StudioAC the 2019 RBC Canadian Emerging Designer Competition Winner appeared first on Canadian Architect.