Preservation Wins the Case in the Supreme Court of Canada Building

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.

CCI Newsletter, No. 36, Fall 2005

Preservation Wins the Case in the Supreme Court of Canada Building

by James Hay, Senior Conservator, Furniture, CCI

After years of successful lobbying by the architectural heritage community, maintaining the heritage character of historical buildings undergoing renovation is now an accepted responsibility. In a showpiece of built heritage like the Supreme Court of Canada building in Ottawa, renovations must be carried out with the least possible damage to the visible fabric of the building. To do otherwise would be nothing short of criminal. It was therefore not surprising that CCI's furniture/decorative arts conservators were asked for advice and support during the recent upgrades to the mechanical system of the Supreme Court building.

When the building was designed by famed Canadian architect Ernest Cormier in the 1930s, it was intended to be thoroughly modern — to incorporate the latest services — so that it would serve as a showpiece of the best design, the best materials, and the best methods of construction in Canada. The building shell was completed in 1939, but instead of becoming home to the Supreme Court of Canada, the edifice was put at the disposal of the military for the duration of World War II. It was only after the war that the interiors were completed and the Supreme Court at last moved in. Over the years the structure has seen many small and large changes. However, for better or worse, the building plant continues to function today with all the heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, electrical, and plumbing systems originally installed in 1939. But the workings of the Supreme Court of Canada are not the same today as they were then, and the original systems are no longer adequate.

One of the most obvious changes is the increased caseload that the Supreme Court faces today in response to the growing Canadian population. Handling this increase has required a tripling in the number of support staff, which has been accommodated by converting storage spaces into office spaces and housing four staff members in offices originally intended for one. Other important drivers of change have been the revolution in communication technologies, which seem to require new wiring every 5 years, as well as the requirements of operating in two official languages with the subsequent need for space for simultaneous translation booths. Modern improvements in health standards have also played a role as they necessitated a search for improvements in the air quality. And all the while the basic plant has been wearing down.

Plans are now being made to update the building: to replace the original support systems, such as the electrical and plumbing systems; to incorporate modern information technology systems; and to improve the air quality throughout to meet modern code standards. As Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) staff have carried out preliminary investigations of the building plant, as it now exists, they have discovered a confusing array of retrofitted water pipes and wiring inside passages originally designed to move only air. These incongruities contribute to the disrupted, inefficient, and inadequate air-handling capacities of the building. In fact, present airflow patterns are not even in accord with the standards current in 1939!

CCI was consulted on this project through our counterparts in the Heritage Conservation Program of PWGSC. Our task was to determine the condition of the building materials behind the 7.3-m-high (24-ft.) walnut-panelled walls in the Main Courtroom. We would have 14 days in the winter of 2005 to carry out this investigation and, of course, we could not cause any visible damage to the panelling.

The general supposition was that we would have to remove the panelling to see the condition of the building materials behind it. To do so, we would first have to determine if the panelling was installed in a way that allowed it to be removed without damage.

The investigation

We began by removing the TV monitors that hung on the walls in spaces that had originally held brass and glass Art Deco light fixtures. Looking through the wiring holes behind the monitors we were able to see a wall of terra-cotta bricks behind the panelling. The air ducts that interested us were behind that terra-cotta wall. Using a borescope borrowed through contacts in the construction industry, we pushed a fibre-optic cable through the holes. Viewing through the borescope, we were able to determine that there was an airspace of about 3-4 cm between the panelling and the terra-cotta brick wall behind it. We could also see that the metal fasteners holding the panelling to the wall were imbedded in quantities of mortar bedded to the terra-cotta wall. In short, there was a strong and permanent installation holding the panelling. The only way to remove it would be to tear it out of its fasteners, and doing so would wreak such havoc that it might require many weeks to put right again. With only 10 more days to complete our investigation, we knew for certain that removing the panelling was not a viable option. But was there another way to gain the necessary information?

The resolution

We investigated the interior of the duct openings in the walls beneath the panelling, and discovered that the metal grillwork could all be removed — creating a space that was large enough for an individual to place his/her entire head in the duct. Doing so, it was possible to see all the electrical conduit and water lines installed in those spaces since the building was constructed. This discovery allowed the various architectural consultants to gain access to the building's fabric in the Main Courtroom, without damaging, in any way, the original panelling installed to Cormier's designs. When the consultants finished their investigation, we reassembled the metal grills, reinstalled the TV monitors on the walls, and ensured there was no trace of our investigation. And everything was right again for court sessions to resume on schedule. Case dismissed!

By carrying out this investigation with a preservation mindset, we managed to save thousands of dollars and avoid any damage or destruction to original heritage material — and we managed to do it all without disrupting the work of the Supreme Court of Canada.