CANADIAN BEST PRACTICES IN SUSTAINABLE RETROFIT DESIGN

Wojciech Kujawski, architect, Adjunct Research Professor at the School of Architecture at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada; member of the iiSBE Board of Directors and the Canadian GBC 98, 2000, 2002 and GBC/SB05 Teams, LEED Accredited Professional

1. Emerging issues in sustainable architecture.

Introductory questions to problems of today:

What will we, contemporary architects, face in our profession because of unstoppable world development?

Should we all operate in a global / world context? The design of cities and buildings – destruction or improvement of our environment? Do we have reasons for fear or anxiety and can we honestly fight the statement:

“architecture is the art of how to waste space”?

Besides regular definition of a sustainability building and common understanding that such a building should contribute to social and economic development and be environmentally-friendly with its design open to alternatives, it has also to help communities and societies move towards sustainability. When we consider today’s construction, we observe clear results of years of our negligence, greed of developers, lack of professional ”honesty” between architects and a very significant lack of proper education towards sustainability. Additionally, there is a wrong perception that it would be easier to build a new building than to “repair” the old one. It happens very often on a new site, or on an old one with demolished building in both cases leading to depletion of land or resources or both of them. Some people still consider our cities as sources of unlimited new construction possibilities: it is enough to simply demolish the old building, be it an office, an old factory or a school, or just enlarge the urban buildable area by pushing politicians to re-zoning, or “bribing” or blackmailing communities for favorable decisions giving them unrealistic promises while never thinking about fulfilling them later. And then, to build a new building, designed with a dictate of those who pay for the design and construction and sell or lease it. However, that situation is changing rapidly because we are already facing a crisis. New versus Retrofit as the reality and necessity in today’s construction. Existing building stock of today require major retrofit / renovation due to either very high operational cost related to energy inefficiency or to costly “regular” maintenance (the older building, the costlier maintenance) due to the fact that each building has to be remodeled or reconfigured several times over its life span, with changes to interior partitions and possibly the addition of new products or systems. The ratio of buildings requiring renovation to a number of all existing buildings is currently so high that the “replacement construction” is virtually

impossible and for many reasons, financial and environmental including. In that context ideas of combining the reuse of the existing stock with good energy and environmental solutions could result in interesting sustainable developments. It seems to be logical but how often we seem to forget that logic with its solutions? When considering major sustainability issues for a building, we always must consider three factors: Ecological, Economical and Societal (= social, cultural, ethical etc). The first two, although basic, are easier to achieve, especially with good financial backing, the third one is the culprit in many failures, as a matter of fact, too many. It encompasses history of the place, cultural heritage and very often decides about the perception of the place by providing employment, entertainment, basic amenities etc. So, when revitalizing or retrofitting the urban area we should take into an immediate consideration social / neighborhood connection. Such a small scale approach is needed to achieve better sustainable goals. Analysis of three designs across Canada with the overview of the case study assessments based on Green Building Challenge 2000 and 2002: Angus Technopole in Montreal and Red River College in Winnipeg are the examples of successful, community created and supervised projects and Telus Building in Vancouver is a corporate project in the centre of Vancouver. Recent years brought a lot of fresh air into the sustainable architecture’s approach to retrofit. Three presented here Canadian buildings represent new trends in this just starting development and are known as “no-frills”, solid designs with no cost overruns and with their performance verified over last few years of operation. They are neither the very best energy achievers, nor the architectural wonders and yet two of them are outstanding for the simple reason of being totally co-designed by local communities and the third serves as the showcase for corporate acceptance of the new rules of renovation versus demolishing in a prime and expensive spot downtown.. Two case studies responded to the challenge being almost perfect examples of a co-operation between a willing developer, design team and all interested parties from the unemployed factory workers through to students, community activists and office clerks and business people. Both buildings provide examples of large urban developments on previously designated sites: industrial and commercial. They reflect the collective will of the local populace and aim at providing employment opportunities in what became, in the case of Montreal, a depressed area with more than 20% unemployment [1].

Case studies Angus Technopole, Montreal, Quebec, Architect: Guy Favreau, Aedifica, Montreal Building Type: Office/ Other Approximate gross area: 12,500 m2 Number of floors above ground: 1-2 Year of completion: 2000

General Description: Renovation, converted locomotive factory to industrial mall, major deconstruction effort. After Canadian Pacific closed the locomotive factory in 1992 and

threatened to demolish building or convert it to the shopping mall, a local grassroots organization, SDA, was formed to save the historic building. Building Form and Orientation The fundamental issue of this project was the integration of different functions, not only within the Locoshop, but also integration of the industrial mall and the Technopole within the neighbouring urban fabric.

Site - before development

Locomotive shop

The scale and character of the building was preserved and reinforced. Particular attention was given in planning the Technopole to the linking of the existing street grid system and streetscapes, the diversified land uses, the relatively high density, and the proximity of existing and new amenities. The site has remained a working space, reflecting both its history and responding to local working community needs. By increasing building and site density, the ratio of built area to land area was maximized, offsetting the relatively high land cost. Green building criteria enabled costs to be offset and defined a marketing key. Interior spaces provide three-dimensional flexibility to meet a large diversity of tenant needs.[2]

SSiittee

Revival of an old industrial brownfield site within the core of metropolitan Montreal

Site - after development

Residential Commercial

Main Green Features

• The envelope was significantly upgraded by roof insulation and superior insulation for all new outside walls.

• Free summer night cooling by integration of louvered windows and air extractors with skylights - reduction of air conditioning (see section).

• The building features natural ventilation, natural daylighting, and operable windows. • Existing heavy steel structural framing is fully retained • “Deconstruction” practices were emphasized instead of “Demolition” • Entire building was de-contanimated prior to deconstruction • Roof timber - partially reused in interior stairs and surplus retained for future use • Brick veneer - partially reused and the rest crushed for use in landscaping and

pedestrian walkways • The building uses existing, refurbished brick walls as "screen "walls. • Fenestration with low emissivity glass. • The building demonstrated excellent repeatability [3]

Bi-cycle paths

Industrial

Roof removed for natural lighting

Crane and Gantry, retained as braces, also act as gateway to parking lot

Provides screen between structure and street

Levels of Performance for Design at Category Level

Used as parking lot and loading docks

Seven skylights rehabilitated - 100 sq m each

Offices with modular translucent panels

Corridor with natural lighting

Exposed Heating ducts

Red River College, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Building Type: Office/ Educational – Partial retrofit Approximate gross area: 20,500 m2 Number of floors above ground: 1-5 Year of completion: 2003

General Description: This project, a $31.5 million satellite campus for Red River College in Downtown Winnipeg is a partly historic reconstruction, partly adaptive reconstruction of existing buildings with substantial new construction.

SSiittee

All major building systems are affected in all cases. Renovation /construction for approximately 2,200 students and staff seen as a catalyst in the revitalization of the centre of Winnipeg - probably the largest intact collection of turn-of-the-century and terracota architecture in North America. The main goal was to revitalize the so called Exchange District, run down part centre once the flourishing part of the of the City

EExxiissttiinngg ssiittee cciirrccaa 11990055

Main Green Features • Site development - The site was previously almost 100% buildings and hard surfaces. The

new project is similar but with a green roof and some new landscaping to mitigate habitat, groundwater and micro-climate effects.

• Water consumption - The campus is being fitted with water-conserving fixtures and controls. The vegetated roof will be irrigated exclusively with precipitation once established.

• Re-use of existing structures and materials - Phase One is primarily an adaptation of a 4600 m2

existing bldg. with a new roof and an addition. Subsequent phases incorporate

the reconstructed heritage facades along Princess Street. All heritage millwork suitable/or salvageable was removed for reuse, as were some windows and doors and interior tile and glass. A high rate of brick and stone recovery for reuse from demolition was achieved through hand methods. Timber trusses, cast iron columns and reusable lumber were salvaged as well as many other miscellaneous items. Records have been kept of materials recovered.

• Use of local and recycled materials - Purchasing from local and Canadian sources has been emphasized where possible, using Manitoba's Sustainable Development Procurement Guidelines. Further recycled content is found in materials such as steel, copper and ceiling tiles. Records of materials specified and purchased are being kept for assessment.

• Emissions of Greenhouse Gases - The aggressive energy consumption targets demanded by the C-2000 program ensure reduced environmental loading from operating energy. 20 kW Photovoltaics curtain wall on South wall. Building materials have been selected with low effective environmental loading as a criterion.

- 12.8 kW Photovoltaic Array

Extensive green roof

• Emissions of ozone-depleting substances - Major refrigeration compressors employ 134A refrigerant. Smaller units use the lowest ozone depletion rated commercially-available refrigerant. Non-HCFC rigid insulation materials are being researched.

• Emission leading to acidification from building operations - This is expected to be minimal. Natural gas flue venting from condensing-efficiency burners will be the only emissions.

• Construction and demolition wastes - The contractor has initiated a site waste recovery program. Demolition waste records are available for buildings removed and for construction.

• Indoor air quality - The HVAC design has a high ventilation effectiveness and excellent air distribution. Operable windows are used throughout to promote natural ventilation. Dedicated exhausts are provided in equipment areas where pollutants may develop. Low toxicity interior materials are emphasized to reduce pollutant loads.

• Thermal comfort - Solar control to reduce overheating is achieved by spectrally-selective glazing and window and shading device design. The high performance glazing eliminates the need for perimeter radiation in most glazed areas. A four-pipe fan coil HVAC system provides tight zoning as well as stable temperature control.

• Building demonstrates excellent repeatability [4]

When assessing the RRC, the Team had to take into consideration several aspects such as: • The location of the project - not the leading edge of sustainability thinking or practice

within Canada when the project started. • Winnipeg’s energy prices - the second lowest in North America • New material availability - not an issue • Waste management not seen as a problem and no tradition of conservation in the area. • … still the project has achieved a great deal

More information on: http://www.rrc-pscampus.com/index.html http://www.rrc.mb.ca/environmentalmanagement/princess.htm

Telus Building, Vancouver, British Columbia corporate project in the heart of Vancouver Building Type: Office / Retrofit Approximate gross area: 12,075 m2 Number of floors above ground: 8 Year of completion: 2000

General Description: The William Farrell Project was conceived to satisfy a number of internal business needs and revitalize a high profile location to create a strong Telus, a major Canadian telephone company, presence in downtown Vancouver. The project scope included extensive interior and exterior renovations to the 1940's section of the building, Telus mandated that the existing building should be recycled and re-used, and that green strategies should be incorporated. This is one of the few cases where a double facade is clearly logical, since it prevented demolition, allowed the re-use of existing systems and also provides a measure of pre-heating of make-up air during winter conditions.

Building Form and Orientation Preservation of the existing building determined the basnew double glazed, fritted and frameless glazing systemfrom the existing building face, and thus creates the firssolution in Canada.

Triple skin Typical

Sketches showing intended air flows through the exteriordouble skin

ic configuration of the building. A with operable windows is suspended t triple-skinned green building

floor plan

Main Green Features

• The envelope was designed as a refurbishment of an older office tower. The building has a new second layer of fritted double glazing added to the existing envelope suspended 900 mm from the existing building, resulting in the first triple skin building in Canada. This allows opportunities for natural ventilation in summer and acts as a warm buffer zone in winter. The energy target is 55% of ASHRAE 90.1.

• The client (Telus) and the architects developed a strategic green option to recycle/reuse the entire building,

• The building features natural ventilation, natural daylighting, operable windows, and individual user-controller diffusers at each station.

• The building has retained the entire structure. The interior furnishing and fitting were reused.

• Raised access floor provides flexibility for upgrading mechanical and electrical systems. • The building has bicycle storage; change rooms and showers. • The building uses PV powered fans to assist the natural ventilation. • Interior light shelves extend the natural daylight into the interior spaces. • The primary heating is to reuse waste heat from the existing refrigeration plant within the

same complex. • Building demonstrates excellent repeatability [5]

Levels of Performance for Design at Category Level

References: [1] McMinn J, “Sustained Discussion”, Canadian Architect, Toronto, January 2001, p.18 [2] Vaidyanathan V, Kujawski W., Larsson N. “Angus Technopole - Rejuvenation of an industrial brownfield site”, Canadian Team Materials in Maastricht, October 2000, p.1 [3] Kujawski W., “GBC 2000 Website”, http://www.iisbe.org [4] Zimmerman A., Kujawski W., “Case Study: Red River College”, Appendix 1 – Summary of Embodied Energy Assessment of Case Studies, Canadian Team ,October 2002, p.2 [5] Larsson N. “Telus: Revitalization of an Office Building”, Canadian Team Materials in Maastricht, October 2000, p.1