Marcanadian
Moderator
10 Avoca in the park (drools).
Why does everyone love these buildings?
10 Avoca in the park (drools).
Top 10 residential towers in T.O.
www.canada.com/cityguides...2c&k=38116
The Top 10 residential-tower countdown: Buildings we feel contribute more than property taxes to our town.
National Post - Kelvin Browne and Lee Jacobson
Saturday, March 11, 2006
3. 10 and 20 Avoca Ave.
A classic 1971 modernist design statement with large windows and enormous wraparound balconies, these two towers by Seligman & Dick Architects were among Toronto's first co-ops. They're poised in a prime position overlooking David Balfour Park, but don't impose themselves on their location. Stroll around the neighbourhood. If you thought they were boring buildings, consider all the nearby and newer examples of how to destroy a bucolic location with designs that scream "look at me!". (The runner-up for careful consideration of a naturally beautiful site are the twin buildings of Tower Hill at St. Clair and Spadina Road. Let's hope the new condo going up on the site doesn't ruin that.)
It's def. box-eeeeee and grey but the shading cofficientcy are amazing on this building...
now that is a Green design building....from the 70's.
Remember a green design starts from the outside in.
Green regards,
Sven
For the third time, start your own thread about it and contain the discussion.
What ? and What?
It's funny this place , ....if you have something to add go ahead
I do know, many forums do not allow 1 liner'rrrrrr, just shows you have nothing to bring to the table, so go ahead and insult I have big shoulders
To Chuck, not trying to be "smart guy", just bringing forward a very very BIG issue if (from what I see) many many buildings being built and in the design stage that don't PASS this MANDITORY requirement and this is only the mechanical side of this code...not to mention the electrical side of it calculations. Maybe this is not the best place to bring this forward...will look for other places to post without the backlash, remember I did not make this code.
To answer your question Chuck...you would need to see the manufacture specs' on the glass....70's was before my time...not sure what the standard was back then for typical double pane glass, if you get the spec on it be more then happy to calculate (maybe we should do the calc's on some of the older ones too, even thow they did not have this requirment back then)
There is info available that will give you the shading coefficient for example...
Guidelines for the Interpretation of ASHRA/IES 90.1-1989 provided by Ministy of Housing, Ontario Branch. The other is the ASHRAE Fundamental Handbook page 29.8 & 29.9 (Table 5) will show the U-Factors for Various Fenestration Products with a list of Product Types so if you look at this list you can see the values.
Ok lets' take a standard building with 60% glazing (without major shading devices on the exterior of the building) the building can meet compliance conditions only if the curtainwall is triple glazed with 1/2" argon filled spaces with almost opaque tint.
So we cont. on in table 8A-32C for window-wall ratio of 0.6 in a heated and cooled building there are only two possible conditions. With a shading factor between 0.20 and 0.39 the glazing would have to have an insulation value of 0.28 c/w a shading factor between 0.0 and 0.19 the glazing would have to have an insulation value of 0.36. Looking at Table 5 for U-fators on Products from the ASHRAE fundamentals manual there is NO product with a U-value of 0.28....this does not work. So to comply one option is you would need the U-value of the glazing must be 0.26 or less and the only products meeting this requirement are triple or quadruple glazed.
The best double glazed system is product 25, double glazed, low-E coated with a 1/2" airspace. This is a standard curtainwall product and the building can have a maximum of 40% fenestration, but if you want 60% (and seems many are way over this as much as 80%)....go to triple or even quadruple.
Does this give a little more insight Chuck?
Green regards,
Sven