ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

SOLARIUM BUILDING
PARADISE LAKE, ONTARIO

CHARLES SIMON ARCHITECT INC.

ALLEN ASSOCIATES

Caroline Prochazka
M. Arch Candidate
University of Waterloo
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

SOLARIUM BUILDING
PARADISE LAKE, ONTARIO

Table of Contents i
Quick Facts 1
Introduction 2
Program 3
Floor Plan 4
Site 6
North-South Building Sections 6
Sustainable Design 9
Living Machine Diagram 11
Environmental Controls 13
Office Wall Assembly 14
Conference Room Wall Assembly 14
Construction 15
Foundation Wall Assembly 15
Sod Roof Assembly 15
Metal Roof Assembly 16
Integration of Systems 16
Costing 16
Leadership in Energy Efficient Design Certification 17
Conslusion 18
Endnotes, Image and Drawing Credit & Bibliography 19

i
 SOLARIUM BUILDING

QUICK FACTS Site Conditions Located on 77 partially wooded acres of

former agricultural land
Building Name YMCA Environmental Learning Centre, Aesthetics4 Client prioritized functionality and was not
Solarium Building seeking a “one and only” style building
City Paradise Lake, Ontario
Country Canada Structural System Wood-frame, Steel truss for glazed
Year of Construction 1995-1996 greenhouse wall.
Architect Charles Simon Architect Inc. Mechanical System Primary: Air pump to circulate heated
Consultants1 Structural / Project Manager / Contractor: greenhouse air; Secondary: wood-fired boiler
Walter Fedy Partnership, Environmental / Special Construction Curtain walled solarium
Energy Engineers: Allen Associates, Daylighting South-facing curtain wall, interior clerestories
Mechanical / Electrical Consultant: Peter and north-facing clerestory windows.
Meridew, Landscape: Mackinnon Hensel Shading Roof overhangs on all sides except at curtain
Program Day Centre, Resource Centre, Assembly wall; some self shading
Facility Acoustics Wood finish interior, recycled tire flooring in
Gross Area2 360m² or 3900sf assembly room
Owner/User Group3 Kitchener-Waterloo YMCA Ventilation Floor and clerestory vents in greenhouse for
Climate Temperate, Cold-humid summer cooling; operable windows.
Adaptability Operable windows and louvers
User Controls Occupant control greenhouse vents,
operable windows, air pump and boiler.

Estimated LEED rating Certified

Budget5 $400,000 Pre-tender budget

Cost of Constructions6 $575,000 (Approx. $1,600/m² or $148/sf)
Maintenance Cost7 Estimated between $600 and $1000, variable
by year and weather conditions
Special Circumstances Cost overrun due to rapidly fluctuating labour
costs at time of construction. Extra capital
expenses for living machine and solar water
heater (for demonstration purposes).

1
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

INTRODUCTION

The architectural trends of the 20th century were dominated by a tendency to

separate building design from the building site. With industrialization and mass-
production came the dream of a universal architecture. The design field began
to eliminate site-dependence in building design, and express globalization
through buildings which could exist anywhere8. In the 1960’s more ecologically
concerned individuals sought to return to vernacular forms of architecture, using
more organic massing and experimenting with materials, though historically they
have been perceived as part of a fringe movement. More recently, however,
sustainable architecture has gained the spotlight through some much-lauded
‘green buildings’. Many of these buildings, however, have demanded new high
performance products and have often combined limited environmental design
principles with highly individualized massing and construction technologies.
Fig.1 Aerial site photo showing Solarium Building (circled), new residence (top
This case study will review the Solarium building, built in 1996 at the Kitchener- right) and Paradise Lake (right)
Waterloo YMCA Outdoor Centre at Paradise Lake. The design of the Solarium
Building returns to age-old, reliable, building materials and seeks to re-invest The design for the Solarium Building followed the principle of ‘practice what
the building in its site. The site is 15 minutes from Waterloo, in southern Ontario. you preach’9. The goal of the YMCA was to create an outdoor center which
Local architect Charles Simon designed two buildings built at that time as part of embodied the environmental values to be taught on site10. Charles Simon,
the YMCA Environmental Learning Centre (Fig.1). The Solarium building (Fig. architect, was brought into the design discussions early in a planning capacity,
2&3), which is the Day Centre for group activities demonstrates that current to devise a site strategy11. With the co-operation of Allen Associates, Peter
technology already allows for sustainable design. Sustainable design, here, Meridew and the Walter Fedy partnership, an outline was generated for the
is not a matter of engineering new environmentally sound technologies, but building strategy, passive design approach and the general goal.
more an exercise in creating a sensible, comfortable space and maximizing
the potential of existing materials. While it is now, more than ever, possible to The design team avoided the use of newer (untested) products in favour of
build in a sustainable way, some advancement must still be made in municipal more traditional building materials, from local salvage sources where possible.
building codes to allow design projects to take full advantage of their available The success of the new building was crucial to encouraging others to delve
resources. into sustainable design12. Sustainable architecture in the southern Ontario

2
 SOLARIUM BUILDING

climate must address both heating and cooling. The Solarium building is an
example of climate sensitive design. Working with air currents, earth-mass and
sunlight, the building is sheltered from northern, winter winds, captures south,
summer breezes to ventilate the greenhouse, uses winter sun to heat itself, and
capitalizes on daylight wherever possible. The design also incorporates a living
machine and a solar water heater (both fairly recent technologies). Both of these
are highly analogous to natural systems. The living machine is a condensed
version of toxin filtration through a natural wetland (reflecting the nature of the
site to the north of the building). The solar water heater demonstrates principles
of convection, radiant heat and another use for abundantly glazed areas. As
all environmental systems are connected to the glazed greenhouse space, the
success of this space directly impacts the success of the entire building. The
solarium building is an example of ‘low-tech’ sustainable architecture.

Fig.2 (Above) Solarium building main entry from the west. Fig.3 (Below) Rear
view, bermed north-east side of the building. PROGRAM

The day centre provides space and programming for children’s summer camps,
church and youth group retreats as well as occasional conferences. The plan
of the building is divided into four principal areas (Fig.4): a foyer and office
area of 79m², a large greenhouse of 77m², an assembly room of 105m², and a
washroom area of 29m² (Fig.1). Mechanical spaces occupy an additional 19m².
The primary circulation axis runs east-west from the parking area towards
Paradise Lake while the primary program axis, that of the greenhouse and
assembly room, is aligned north to south to optimize ventilation and lighting.

The section of the Day Centre is dominated by the pairing of the greenhouse
and assembly room. These two rooms can become one large space when
the folding doors are opened (Fig.5 & 6). The dramatic slope of the glazing

3
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

To Burrows
Building

W.C. W.C. Assembly Room

14.5m2 14.5m2 105m2
Mech.
19m2

To Parking Foyer
34m2

Office
45m2
Greenhouse
77m2
(+21m2)
To Paradise Lake

To Older Bunk
Houses

Fig.4 Solarium Building Floor Plan

4

Fig.5 (Above) View from conference room to solarium. Fig.6 (Below) View of
the conference room and north wall from the second storey of the greenhouse.
SOLARIUM BUILDING
emphasizes the design of the natural ventilation. Access to the mezzanine
allows one to experience the significant heat gain at the top of the solarium. The
greenhouse wraps over the assembly room and provides direct light through
clerestory windows while shading the roof of the assembly room to reduce heat
gain. The earth on the north side huddles up to the assembly room, to shelter it
from cold winter winds and further insulate it from summer heat (Fig.7).
A similar section is developed through the office and washrooms (Fig.8). The
office receives direct south light in the winter, and is sheltered from light in
the summer by the roof overhang. An additional outdoor trellis could provide
shading if it were hung with vines, but to date the trellis is bare. Clerestory
windows provide lighting to the foyer and washrooms. As the success of this
building depends primarily on ample sunlight, it is only suiting that the focal
point is a large greenhouse. The greenhouse alone provides interior climate
control for the whole building, including lighting, heating and cooling, fresh air
supply, water purification as well as some water heating functions.
In the office and assembly room, the usable space is relatively unaffected
by the environmental strategies which have been implemented. It is the
quality of the spaces which is greatly improved here. The assembly room and
washrooms are well lit and comfortably ventilated. The glazed doors between
the assembly room and greenhouse enhance the assembly space through a
visual connection to the sunny, airy, neighbouring space. By comparison, the
greenhouse, while generating these amenities for the rest of the building, is a
much less useable space in itself. More than 50% of the floor area has been
devoted to and greatly segmented by the living machine, by the tanks as well
as by simulated marsh and waterfall areas. The usability of the remaining floor
area fluctuates dramatically with the season. While summer heat gain can be
vented by stack effect, drawing air in by lower louvers and exhausting hot air out
5
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

the clerestory louvers, winter heat gain is retained in order to heat the rest of the
building. On a sunny afternoon in February, where the exterior temperature was
-4 °C, temperature readings in the greenhouse showed that the temperature
ranged from 22 °C in the lower level to 43 °C on the mezzanine. In addition,
the presence of the living machine introduces humidity to the room, resulting
in a high (c.60%) relative humidity in the greenhouse13. The hot air is siphoned
off at the mezzanine into ducts and redistributed through the building, warming
the other spaces. While part of the floor space of the greenhouse is occupied
by a seating area, the hot, humid, afternoon microclimate results in the entire
room being almost unusable. There is, however, a period of the morning where
temperatures drop as low as 12 ºC in the winter, offering a few hours of more
comfortable temperatures. This is unfortunate as the greenhouse would seem
to be the most enjoyable space, offering bright sun and the soothing noise of
bubbling water. In this context, the greenhouse is an oversized, though lovely,
mechanical room. Fig.7 (Above) Principle North-South section showing summer sun in solarium.
Fig.8 (Below) Principle North-South section showing winter sun penetration.

SITE

The Solarium building was built almost simultaneously with the Burrows
building, a residence for visiting groups. As a pair, the two buildings sit at
opposite sides of a natural wetland. The Day Centre sits towards the centre of
the site facing south towards the older camp buildings. This location allows the
large greenhouse to be unaffected by the shadows of the surrounding trees.
The form of the greenhouse comes from consideration for prevailing winds and
sun angles on the site.

Prior to construction, the site was lightly treed and covered in meadow. The site
development had only two key requirements: that all trees should be kept, or if

6

Fig.9 (Above) Bermed North wall of the building. Fig.10 (Below) View into the
Greenhouse from the exterior of the building
SOLARIUM BUILDING
they are obstructing the building, should be transplanted safely elsewhere on
the property; and sod roofing, along with berming would replace some of the
meadowland that the building would disturb.
The site is harnessed in two primary ways. Facing the large meadow to the
south, the building can maximize heat gain in the green house. The sunlight is
harnessed to provide solar heating and cooling, as well as to give light to the
water-purifying plants. The earth-berm up against the north wall uses the earth
mass as insulation for the assembly room (Fig.9). Furthermore, with the raised
grade level the summer vegetation of native plants is visible through the north
windows of the assembly room, improving the view from the room.
The orientation of the building is informed primarily by the quantity and
quality of light required in each space. The greenhouse has the greatest light
demands and thus faces due south. The office/resource centre is also south
facing. The assembly room requires abundant light, but for the purposes of
presentations and children’s activities, indirect light is preferred, to lessen
heat gain and provide even, diffuse lighting. The north orientation promotes
such lighting, though some direct light is allowed through clerestory windows
to the greenhouse. The placement of the large greenhouse to the south of the
assembly room results in self-shading - the greenhouse keeps the assembly
room in shade, thus further reducing heat-gain. The washrooms, while of least
priority and placed against the north side, also benefit from clerestory windows
to significantly reduce electrical lighting needs.
Initial site work included burying a cistern to collect storm-water run-off. The
intention was that this cistern would then supply water to a feed-pipe at the top
of the greenhouse, pouring water over the glass at night. This would absorb
some of the internal heat and provide evaporative cooling of the building.
7
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

Unfortunately, the piping from the cistern to the roof froze in the first winter,
and the system had to be re-worked to feed from well-water. Fortunately, as
the Solarium is a small building, with a sod roof along with both natural and
soft landscaping, storm-water retention without the cistern does not pose any
difficulties.

The use of such a greenhouse (Fig.10 & 11) to provide the amenities for this
building is a climate specific choice. As the construction only makes indirect
use of the thermal mass (by passing warm air ducts through the concrete floor
- Fig.12), it is not suited to extreme climates, such as hot desert regions or
even very cold climates. In a hotter climate, the louvre ventilation and night time
radiant cooling alone would not be adequate to remove the rising temperatures.
Instead, a significant amount of thermal mass would be required to slow the rate
of temperature increase in the space. This excess heat could then be removed
by night-time evaporative cooling as described above. Fig.11 (Above) View of closed louvres on interior of solarium. Fig.12 (Below)
View of in-floor ducts running from greenhouse through the rest of the building.
In a colder climate, summer ventilation would work well, but winter heating
would require a greater contribution from a mechanical heater or, again, direct
gain in thermal mass in order to store adequate amounts of heat that would last
into the night time hours. As the building exists, with the majority of its interior
finished in wood, the range of temperatures inside the greenhouse are only
comfortable when the vents are open in the summer. In climates similar to that
of Paradise Lake, such as drier regions of similar seasonal temperatures, the
building might be able to make more use of the greenhouse space. In such a
case, the relative humidity inside might dissipate, causing less condensation
(as well as a decreased potential for mold growth) and making the heat in the
greenhouse in the winter drier, and hence more tolerable.

8
 SOLARIUM BUILDING

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN
Embodied Energies of Principal Materials
The foremost criteria in materials selection for the Solarium building was the 3
Material Embodied Energy
R’s principle: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle14. Where possible, materials were
(MJ.kg)
salvaged from demolition sites in the surrounding cities. Many of the large
Wood (EE value does not account for salvage and recycling) 1.16
structural timbers come from an old factory in Hamilton. Old concrete formwork
Concrete (reinforced) 1.6 was reused as sheathing. Other wood was collected and milled into siding
Steel (virgin, galvanized) 34.8 by local Mennonites15. In this way the construction of the Solarium building
Aluminum (virgin, extruded anodized) 227 embodies significant parts of local history.
Batt Insulation 30.3
EPS Insulation 117 The Solarium building contains five primary building materials: wood, concrete,
Glass (float) 15.9 metal (steel and aluminum), insulation and glass. These all have remarkably
different embodied energy coefficients (EEC), all of which are tempered by their
Table.1 (Above) Embodied energies of principal materials. Fig.13 (Below use in the building. Wood, the most prominent material in this building, when
Left) Fans and ducting used to redistribute hot green house air. Fig.14 (Below managed prudently, is a renewable resource with very low embodied energy.
Right) View of solarium under construction. The wood in the Solarium building is primarily from recycled or salvage sources
and was re-milled on site. Table 1 summarizes the embodied energy of the
materials in the Solarium building.

Efficient reuse of materials means fewer trees are required to make several
buildings and the embodied energy is diluted over a greater time-period. The
balance of the materials is recyclable to varying degrees and contains varying
amounts of recycled content. By far, the curtain wall on the greenhouse has
the highest total embodied energy of all elements in this building. The recycled
content of the aluminum is uncertain, although aluminum is lightweight and
easy to recycle and this suggests some benefit to its use in this design. Virgin
aluminum consumes great quantities of energy in the smelting process, though
once purified, it takes little energy to melt and reshape old aluminum. There are
also very limited amounts of aluminum in the ducting. Two large ducts carry

9
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

hot air from the mezzanine back to the main floor level (Fig.13). Under the
assembly room are lengths of downspouts which carry warm air to the north-
side floor vents16. As an indication of the degree of consideration applied to this
design, one must consider that aluminum was used only in those areas of the
building where strength and reliability were important. The steel trusses were
also an important selection for the structure of the sloped glazing wall. The
tension cables allowed for a lighter structure, but the galvanized coating on the
vertical members implied virgin content and prevented the use of recycled steel
in this instance17.

The power and resources saved by using the greenhouse to naturally heat
the building may offset the embodied energy of the structure. The glazed
greenhouse wall requires a strong foundation to support the weight of the
glass and the large trusses. The use of concrete foundation and slab on grade
Fig.15 (Above) Living machine primary storage tank. Fig.16 & 17 Living
throughout the building has both benefits and drawback. As a weighty material, machine intermediate plant takes from the second storey of the greenhouse
the total embodied energy is quite high. The aggregate, however, is crushed (Below Left) and from the main floor (Below Right).
concrete from another demolition site. A similar reuse can be applied when the
Solarium outlives its usefulness. The thermal mass potential of the concrete
was considered as significant to the design18. Unfortunately, due to the number
of children using the facility, the floor has been covered with recycled tire
flooring to provide a softer surface. While this provides a more functional space,
it greatly decreases the thermal storage ability of the concrete floors.

The windows are triple glazed in order to minimize heat loss. Glass, however,
is very easy to recycle and depending on the amount of recycled content, the
EEC will decrease. Through an embodied energy analysis, it becomes clear
that several concessions were made in order to provide the greenhouse wall
(undoubtedly the most important element) with a structure which was strong,
but not bulky. The design of the Solarium building incorporates conservative

10

Fig.18 (Above) Living machine “swamp” waterfall. Fig.19 (Below) Diagram of
Living Machine system.
1. Black/Grey Water from Washrooms
2. Setting Tanks (Anaerobic Bacteria)
3. Aerobic Tanks (Plants
4. Aerobic Tanks (Fish, Snails)
5. Simulated Marsh (Native Grasses)
6. Storage Tanks (Potable Water)
7. “Swamp” Waterfall
SOLARIUM BUILDING
use of well tested, recyclable materials. A long-term benefit of this building is
that when it comes to the end of its useful life, it can be recycled nearly 100%.
The water requirements in the Day Centre are very low. The faucets, low flush
toilets and urinals are the only plumbing in the building. The design aims to
purify all water used in the building through a living machine. Municipal bylaws,
however, required the building to have a full septic system regardless of the
planned living machine. This duplication of systems initially allowed for the
delay in the installation of the living machine until necessary funds were raised,
but at present, with the living machine installed, the septic tank and bed are
redundant.
The living machine (Fig.15,16,17&18) is a sequence of closed and open tanks
which contain different bacteria, plants and organisms. Each tank functions
like a mini-ecosystem and works to break down the waste products in the
water19. Through a sequence of five tanks and an artificial marsh (Fig.19),
waste water is purified and made potable. The waste water is first pumped into
a closed sewage tank where bacteria working through anaerobic (oxygen free)
processes begin to breakdown the harshest toxins. The water is then pumped
through three open tanks containing plants and aerobic (oxygen needing)
bacteria. These tanks contain primarily umbrella plants, red taro, cala lily and
yellow iris. The proportion of plant species, as well as the types of bacteria
varies slightly depending on the mineral and toxin content of the water in each
tank. The water is then pumped to a final cleansing tank where snails and fish
digest any remaining waste matter. From this tank, the water is sent through an
artificial marsh, in the south-east corner of the greenhouse, planted with native
Ontario plants, for final filtration. The resulting clean water is then stored in two
tanks for later use. This clean water can also be pumped to a small waterfall
and artificial swamp in the south-west corner of the greenhouse so that samples
11
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

can be taken for testing. The swamp included an additional heat exchanger so
some water can be warmed and sent back into the purification tanks to promote
bacterial growth. Callum McKee, the Director of the Outdoor Centre, hopes to
add sand filters to the clean water storage tanks in the near future to remove the
risk of e.coli and choliform contamination20.

The Solarium building also employs a solar water heater in the glazed
greenhouse wall to generate hot water for the washrooms. The system is quite
small in scale, yet requires a lot of piping. Callum McKee noted that it takes
several minutes to get hot water to flow from the washroom faucets. For this
reason, most of the water used at the centre is cold.

While the Day Centre is connected to municipal hydro power, it has been
designed to minimize electrical loads. The low energy light fixtures, and the fans
for the air pump together use only 2 kW of power. Discounting the load of the Fig.20 (Above) Firewood used for the boiler is stacked near the west entrance.
recently added office components, such as computers, fax and photocopiers, Fig.21 (Below) Daylighting in the main foyer space.
the centre can run on less energy than an electric tea kettle21. Office computers
and appliances used have been selected for efficiency. The water pump for the
living machine draws 1.8kW but only runs for a few seconds a day.

While the building aims to primarily use the greenhouse for heating and cooling,
a wood-fired boiler was installed as a fail-safe to supplement the heat from the
greenhouse, to ensure occupant comfort. A typical winter temperature cycle
in the building dips to 12 ºC in the early morning, and while this is more than
adequate for plant survival, the few hours before the greenhouse is able to
provide significant heat to the human occupant could be uncomfortably cool
without the use of the boiler22. While wood is not the cleanest burning fuel, it is in
plentiful supply and a wholly renewable resource soon to be harvested entirely
on site23.

12

Fig.22 (Above) Interior view of lower louvers in greenhouse. Fig.23 (Below)
Exterior view of upper louvers at the mezzanine level.
SOLARIUM BUILDING
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS
In a climate where the winters are characteristically cold and often sunny, and
summers are hot and humid, the significant loads are winter heating and summer
ventilation. As a ventilation scheme, the greenhouse is extremely effective in
summer months. The green house successfully heats the entire building except
for a few weeks each year when the boiler must be fired in the mornings24. Since
the addition of the living machine, however, the greenhouse has had very high
relative humidity, and this is a concern in regards to the longevity of the building.
With a high relative humidity, the dewpoint rises and in the winter, exceeds the
temperature of surfaces such as the concrete foundation and rear exit door.
The interior lighting of the building is based on clerestory glazing supplemented
during occasional evening use by high-efficiency light fixtures. The Solarium
building demonstrates a very effective lighting scheme for this size of building;
electrical lighting is rarely used, as the clerestory lighting and greenhouse pro-
vide an abundance of natural light throughout the building (Fig.21).
The building uses a ventilation system of louvers (Fig.22&23) and operable
windows, in combination with a fan for heat distribution. While a vestibule was
included at the main entry, presumably to lessen heat loss through the doors
in the winter and buffer against heat gain in the summer, the exit doors at the
east end of the greenhouse are less than adequate for their task. The wooden
door has no weather-stripping and offers a one-inch gap at the threshold for
air leakage. Furthermore, as the air leaks out, particularly in the winter, it
condenses on the door, causing harmful mildew on the wood and ice buildup at
the base of the door. While the building was originally tested to perform at 1.2
air exchanges per hour (better than the C-2000 standard)25, it is unclear how
this leaky door would affect the test today.
13
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

The environmental design principles incorporated in the Solarium building are

primarily passive strategies. The greenhouse acts as a large solar collector
and this solar energy feeds many processes in the moderation of the internal
environment. The building offers few automated functions, relying on the user
to take responsibility for the environmental controls. Operable windows and
louvers allow the user to control ventilation. The wood-fired boiler must be fed
by hand, so heat is only produced when the building is occupied. The building
employs very few active technological interventions and in this way manages to
save on cost and resources.

When the Day Centre was first constructed, the main office was in another
building. The design for the Day Centre located the resource center in the
south west quadrant of the building. As an area for demonstrations or reading
or quiet activity, this was appropriate. The adaptation of this space to an office
environment has not been entirely successful, although the occupants seem to Fig.24 (Above) Typical office wall assembly, south side. Fig.25 (Below) Typical
enjoy the space nonetheless. The large amounts of light which can enter the conference room wall assembly, north side.
space in winter create severe glare on the computers and result in staff shuffling
their workspace to seek a shady patch26.

As discussed previously, it seems the temperature and humidity in the

greenhouse make for a space which can be used for teaching environmental
principles, although not a space for long term occupation.

The assembly room, by contrast is a very adaptable space. With a podium

style presentation corner and recycled tire flooring, the room can serve
purposes ranging from conferences and presentations, to boisterous youth-
group activities. The air quality can be kept cool for busy activities or the doors
can be opened to the greenhouse for more direct heating. Humidity does not
seem to be a noticeable problem in this room. As a building which entertains

14

Fig.26 (Above) Typical foundation wall assembly. Fig.27 (Below) Sod roof
assembly above conference room on north side.
SOLARIUM BUILDING
youth activities which are inherently noisy, the acoustic treatment is simple and
effective. The assembly room and greenhouse are each separated from the
rest of the building by wooden doors. Furthermore, the extensive rough milled
wood finish acts as an acoustic absorber, helping to dull the noise of ongoing
activities.
CONSTRUCTION
The typical wall section (Fig.24) used in the east and west greenhouse walls
and around the office has a heat loss resistance of RSI 5.44 (R=30.89, U=0.03).
The north facing wall has a slightly different wall assembly (Fig.25) with an
additional furring space, providing RSI 6.77 (R=38.44, U=0.03). The foundation
wass (Fig.26) is simply concrete with exterior rigid insulation and performs at
approximately RSI 2.08 (R=11.81, U=0.08). The roofing of the Solarium uses
two assemblies: a sod roofing (Fig.27) with calculated RSI 5.81 (R=32.99,
U=0.03) and a metal roofing (Fig.28) with RSI 554 (R=31.46, U=0.03).
These wall and roof assemblies, though more thoroughly insulated than
required by code, are not very different from those found in conventional
building practice. This would appear to indicate that sustainable architecture
is not as much a change in building practice, but a change in attitude. Current
construction techniques, if combined with creative planning and judicious
sourcing of materials, can already produce buildings which not only demonstrate
a significant reduction in resource consumption, but which function at a high
level of efficiency.
15
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

INTEGRATION OF SYSTEM

All of the systems in the Day Centre interact in the greenhouse. Heating
and cooling are both generated in the greenhouse, with the major ventilation
path following the slope of the glazing. Water is heated in a section of the
greenhouse glazing. Water is purified by tanks of vegetation which thrive on
the ample sunlight in the greenhouse. The primary source of light, south light,
enters through the greenhouse and is redistributed to the assembly room (and
to a lesser degree, to the foyer and office). The only two redundancies among
the systems are the septic bed in addition to the living machine, and the wood-
fired boiler in addition to the passive solar heating of the greenhouse. This
building strives to be an example of a design which maximizes the potential of
a space, and seeks to integrate environmental control systems.

The Solarium building seems very rooted in the present. The design does not
seem to anticipate much change. Perhaps the activities in the building may
change slightly over time, but with respect to construction there seem to be
few areas for further development. The solar water heater could potentially
be replaced as technology advances. Also, if thermal mass were to be added,
perhaps in the greenhouse floor or in part of the wall separating the assembly
room and greenhouse, the wood-fired boiler could be made obsolete. The
design seems to have focused on the use of available and reliable technologies
rather than risking speculation on future technologies.
The YMCA site at Paradise Lake is a 15 minute drive from Kitchener-Waterloo,
near St. Clements. It is not serviced by the transit system, and is too far to reach
comfortably by foot or bicycle, using current traffic routes. For this reason, all
visitors arrive by motor vehicle: either charter bus or automobile. This seems
to be a general trend for environmental education centres: they are typically
Fig.28 Metal roof assembly used throughout the rest of the Solarium Building.
located in a naturalized environment, outside of urban centres. As such they
are out of reach of transit systems or more environmentally sound modes of
transportation. It is unfortunate that in order to learn the lesson of environmental
awareness, visitors to the centre must engage the least environmentally sound
mode of transportation.
COSTING
The Solarium building was built at a cost of $575 000 which corresponds to an
average price of $1590/m². Compared to a standard educational facility, this
cost seems high. While initial ‘grunt-work’ was done by Paradise Lake staff, and
local Mennonites provided milling services, the cost over-run, above the initial

16
 SOLARIUM BUILDING

salary of $15/hr, working half-time, 50 wks/yr, the Centre saves $15 000 each
Table 2: LEED Green Building Rating System Summary year. At this rate, the Day Centre will have paid for the living machine in only
two years.
Project Checklist
Sustainable Sites 7/14 Possible Points The triple glazed windows were an increased capital cost, necessary in order to
Water Efficiency 5/5 Possible Points decrease heat loss through conduction and ensure the success of the heating
Energy & Atmosphere: Prerequisite not met 0/17 Possible Points strategy. An additional, though small, capital cost resulted from the solar water
Materials & Resources 8/13 Possible Points heater, which does not draw on electrical resources, but is quite inefficient.
Indoor Environment Quality 8/15 Possible Points
Many of these extra capital costs were offset by using salvaged (therefore
Innovation & Design Process 1/5 Possible Points
cheaper) materials throughout the building.
Project Totals 30/69 Possible Points
Solarium Building Result Certified Status
LEADERSHIP IN ENERGY EFFICIENT DESIGN CERTIFICATION

budget of $400 000, was primarily due to a rapidly fluctuating labour market at
the time of bidding27. The living machine was installed in 1998 at an additional
cost of $30 00028 or 5% of the total building cost. Economically speaking, this
is a great reduction in floor space for a system which, though functioning well,
serves in large part as a demonstration facility. Since the municipality requires
that the building be connected to a septic bed regardless of on-site water
treatment, the cost of the living machine will never be directly recuperated.
Daily maintenance is done by the occupants and requires only a few minutes
to adjust ventilation in summer, turn the fans on and off in winter, run the water
pumps and occasionally feed the boiler. The simplicity of controls in this building
have resulted in financial savings where a designated maintenance person was
not required on staff. The Solarium building has an annual maintenance budget
of between $600 and $1000 variable by year. Assuming a maintenance staff
During the design process, the Solarium building was never subjected to a
LEED rating analysis. This is because the design pre-dates the inception of the
LEED program. Table 2 summarizes an estimated LEED analysis. A detailed
breakdown of the point allotment is attached in the LEED spreadsheet.
The LEED rating system is heavily oriented towards high density building re-
use on urban brownfield sites. For this reason the Solarium in immediately
ineligible for 9 points. Nonetheless, the Solarium succeeds in meeting a
LEED Certified standard primarily through its accomplishments in energy and
resource conservation. An additional point in the innovation and design process
category was allotted because the education of the occupants was a significant
aspect of the design intent, aiming to make evident the manner by which the
building moderates the indoor climate in response to the outdoors. It is the
overall simplicity and elegance of the systems which allows the success of the
Solarium under the LEED analysis.

17
ADVANCED STUDIES IN CANADIAN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

CONCLUSION

The Solarium building at the Paradise Lake camp is an example of a true

environmental education centre. The building works in harmony with the
surrounding site to adapt to the changing seasons of a Canadian climate
and educates camp participants about the value of sun, wind and light. It
demonstrates a means of using simple, tried-and-true technology to produce
integrated building systems in an architectural design. The integrated design
process resulted in building services which are all generated in the greenhouse,
but which create a comfortable interior for most of the year. With a few changes,
such as direct thermal mass and reduced water treatment redundancy,
the building could set an example for rural sustainable building. In today’s
architecture context, torn between elegant high-tech design and issues of
climate change, the Solarium building is a reasoned response to a question of
architecture and education.

18
 SOLARIUM BUILDING

ENDNOTES BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Canadian Architect. Volume 41, No. 7, July 1996 . Green Buildings 1: Natural PERIODICALS
Harmony.” Bronwen Ledger. p14-15 1. Canadian Architect. Volume 41, No. 7, July 1996. “Green Buildings 1:
2. Canadian Architect. July 1996 Natural Harmony.” Bronwen Ledger. p.14-15.
3. Interview with Callum McKee, Manager, Outdoor Services, KW YMCA 2. Perspectives: The Journal of the OAA. Volume 5, No. 2, Summer 1997. “The
Outdoor Centre. February 21, 2003. OAA Architectural Excellence Awards Program.” p.11.
4. Callum McKee. February 21, 2003.
5. Callum McKee. February 21, 2003. INTERNET SOURCES
6. Callum McKee. February 21, 2003. 1. Advanced Buildings Technologies and Practices: Case Study on YMCA
7. Callum McKee. February 21, 2003. Environmental Learning Centre: http://www.advancedbuildings.org/main_cs_
8. The David and Lucilie Packard Foundation: Los Altos Project. On-line source: ymca.htm
http://www.packard.org/pdf/2002Resources.pdf 2. Centre for Building Performance Research: http://www.arch.vuw.ac.nz/cbpr
9. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003. 3. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation: Los Altos Project: http://
10. Advanced Buildings. YMCA Environmental Learning Centre Case Study. On- www.parkard.org/pdf/2002Resources.pdf
line source: http://www.advancedbuildings.org.main_cs_ymca.htm 4. Embodied Energy Coefficients: http://www.arch.vuw.ac.nz/cdpr/embodied_
11. Interview with Charles Simon, Architect. March 10, 2003 energy/files/eecoefficients.pdf
12. Canadian Architect. July 1996 5. Ocean Arks International: http://www.oceanarks.org/
13. Caroline Prochazka. Site visit February 14, 2003. Air temperature and RH 6. Which is Better? Steel, Concrete or Wood: A Comparison of Assessments
readings taken with handheld meter c/o Terri Meyer Boake. on Three Building Materials in the Housing Sector. Department of Chemical
14. Callum McKee. January 24, 2003. Engineering, University of Sydney, Fourth Year thesis by Joanna Glover:
15. Canadian Architect. July 1996. http://www.boralgreen.shares.green.net.au/research3/chap3.htm
16. Callum McKee. February 14, 2003
17. Charles Simon, March 10, 2003 PERSONAL INTERVIEWS
18. Callum McKee, February 21, 2003 1. McKee, Callum. Manager, Outdoor Services. Interviews and tours at
19. Ocean Arks International. On-line source: http://www.oceanarks.org/ Solarium Building: January 24, 2003; February 14, 2003; February 21, 2003
20. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 2. Simon, Charles. Architect. Interviewed March 10, 2003
21. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003
22. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 IMAGE & DRAWING CREDIT
23. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003
24. Callum McKee, February 21, 2003 Professor Terri Meyer-Boake of the University of Waterloo provided the images used
25. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 on the title, quick facts and conclusion pages as well as Figures 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14,
26. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 15, 16, 17, 18, 20 and 23. The author supplied Figures 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 19, 21,
27. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 22, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28. All drawings are based on information provided by Charles
28. Callum McKee, January 24, 2003 Simon Architect. Fig.1, the site plan, was provided by Callum McKee of the YMCA.

19