Rebar, concrete, and more rebar

As I’ve previously mentioned, we decided very early on to excavate under our garage and take advantage of the 200 sqft that would have otherwise sat unused. Our original intention was to use a product called Insul-Deck to support the garage floor, however we’ve since had to abandon this approach in favor of a straightforward concrete & rebar structural slab.

I was actually quite keen on the Insul-Deck product, mainly because it provided the same structure and insulating benefits of an ICF wall. However our engineer didn’t exactly feel the same way. I don’t know if he’s ever worked with the product, but he certainly wasn’t sold on their engineering claims. Everything I’ve read says it should be suitable for our needs, but he remained unconvinced it would actually standup to the weight of our car. And not being someone who wants to see their car fall into their basement, I can’t say I put up much of a fight.

Building a structural slab that met our engineer’s demands apparently requires quite a bit of concrete and rebar. 10′ × 20′ isn’t a huge space, but I’m convinced we used enough rebar to hold the weight of a small fleet of tanks. Granted, I don’t exactly have a degree in engineering, so what do I know? Hopefully it’ll hold the weight of one car and a lowly motorcycle.

Another change we made was with the windows. Our original drawings called for a large window in the room below the garage, however we decided to remove it once we realized how large the window well would have been. There isn’t a great deal of room between our house and our neighbor’s, and I quickly realized that ¾ of that distance would have been eaten up by a large hole in the ground. I suppose we could have built a grate of some sort to prevent people from stepping in it, but that didn’t exactly seem like the ideal solution. I’m glad we now have a clear pathway to the backyard, but in retrospect we probably should have kept the window and simply made it shorter. By reducing the height, we would have kept the window above ground and eliminated the window well altogether. Regardless, I actually enjoy working in a dimly-lit room so I think it’ll still work out fine… even if Jess has already named it ‘the cave’.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Construction    |    14 Comments »

Tree Protection

One the reasons we were originally attracted to our home was the large maple tree that sits in the front yard. It’s quite large and quite beautiful, but we’ve come to realize that a large maple tree equals mountains of leaves in the fall and dead grass around it (who knew grass needed light to grow? Shocking, I know.) Regardless, we knew the tree was something we wanted to keep when began this renovation. What we didn’t realize was that we don’t actually own the tree, we had to erect a protection wall around it, and we needed to provide the city with a $5,089 deposit.

Trees protected by city by-laws may not be removed, injured or destroyed in any way without written authorization from the city. And that covers all parts of the tree — roots included. Tree pruning and root cutting may only be done by the City of Toronto, Urban Forestry Services. No exceptions.

Trees situated on City property are obviously covered by these by-laws, but in some instances trees on private property are covered as well. In our case, we had a smaller tree next to our garage that needed to removed before we started construction. To determine if we could actually remove it, we needed to measure the diameter of trunk at 1.4 meters off the ground, which was (luckily) 28cm. Had it been 30cm or larger, we would have needed to apply for permission and possibly paid a fee for its removal (had we been allowed to remove it at all).

The deposit acts as a form of insurance against damage, and is held until construction is complete. It includes the appraised value of the tree (as determined by the city), plus the costs required to remove and replant a replacement. So if the tree is harmed in any way, the city will keep a portion — or all — of the deposit, depending on the type, duration and impact of the damage done.

To help safeguard the tree, you must also erect a protection wall. Depending on the size of the tree, the wall must sit a minimum distance around the trunk. In our case, it needed to sit 3m away, stand 2.4m high and be made of plywood.

Definitely a lot of effort to ensure the safety of the tree… but I’d say it’s worth it (even if I’ll have to climb on the roof and shovel off mounds of leaves at least once a year!)

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Construction + Financial    |    No Comments »

Poured Foundation

It’s been a few weeks, and we’ve made quite a lot of progress on the house. We had evaluated a number of manufacturers, but ultimately decided upon Nudura for our ICF foundation. Paul Stevens and his crew from Stevens Construction handled the formation and pour of the foundation, and by all accounts they did a smashing job.

The Nudura product comes shipped in a collapsed state, which I believe reduces shipping costs and makes it easier to handle by the workers. The ‘blocks’ look to be about 7′-8′ long, and they basically just snap together. For the odd sizes, the blocks are simply cut with a handsaw. A crew of 3 guys assembled the wall, and the process looked to be pretty straightforward:

1. First, the footings are formed and poured. The footings are basically a short concrete wall that the ICF blocks will sit on, and their main purpose is to displace the weight of the structure above.
2. Once the footings have cured, the forms are removed and 2 metal strips are attached. The strips were used to keep the bottom row of the ICF blocks straight and true.
3. The ICF blocks were then assembled and wood planks are added (in certain areas) for additional support. Permanent wood forms are also built to create the window wells.
4. The blocks themselves have a “mesh web” built into them, but additional horizontally and vertically rebar is also placed inside.
5. Large metal braces are temporarily installed to support the wall during the pour. These braces acted as a walkway for the crew during the pour, plus they were also used to fine tune the straightness of the walls once the concrete is poured.
6. Additional wood bracing was also added throughout to ensure the structure is maintained during the pour.

This isn’t exactly on par with the demolition video, but here’s a little video that illustrates how the foundation walls came together.

Once everything was formed, supported and ready for concrete, I made a point of calling our architect and setting up an inspection before the pour. Nothing too major was out of place, but there were a few things that needed to be adjusted to ensure we maintained the aesthetic we were trying to achieve (one wall was jutting out about 6 inches further than it should have and would have resulted in an unsightly ‘hump’ in front of the stairs). We also decided to abandon the window in the study under the garage. I had raised concerns about this earlier on in the design process, but we made the decision on-side because it quickly became clear that the window well would have been too large for the space along the house. Once these oversights were corrected, it was time for concrete.

A relatively liquid concrete was poured into the hollows of the ICF walls, which allowed it to easily slide through the webbing and rebar. The crew would walk around the walls and fill it up a few feet, and then continue around to fill it another few feet. Every so often they’d stop and use a large vibrator to ensure all air bubbles were worked out, and the concrete made its way into every crevasse. I definitely have to give some credit to Paul and his team - lugging around the pumping house didn’t look like much fun.

The walls stayed untouched for a few days to allow the concrete to cure, after which the the weeping tile, crushed gravel, sand, and backfill were added. Sand was used because it allows for better drainage, and the weeping tile is basically a plastic, sock-covered tube that wraps around the perimeter of the house. It’s sole purpose is to capture any water that seeps into the ground, and move it away from your foundation. In our case, we have a “soak away” pit in the backyard which will capture most of the rainwater runoff and allow it to dissipate naturally into the ground.

I’m definitely glad we’ve moved past this phase, as there were a few hiccups we encountered along the way which increased the foundation budget by about $2000. In particular, we had a little turbulence between the trades and the structural engineer, but I’ll explain this in another post soon.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Construction + Eco / Green    |    5 Comments »

10K in Rebates? Not exactly.

Well, for those that watch the evening news, you probably just found out that we don’t exactly qualify for the ecoENERGY rebates that we once thought we did.

I’d been contacted by CityTV a number of weeks ago about wanting to come and record the demolition of the house. After it went down, I was interviewed about the project and what we were planning. Of course I spoke about the website and our green plans, but I also mentioned that we qualified for about $9,500 in government rebates. Well, that doesn’t exactly turn out to be true.

As I mentioned earlier, I was originally skeptical if we’d actually qualify for these rebates. Their documentation definitely makes it seem as if we qualified, I mean it clearly says:

If you live in Ontario and own a single family home you are eligible for the Home Energy Retrofit Program.

I suppose that should read:

If you live in Ontario and own a single family home you are eligible for the Home Energy Retrofit Program UNLESS YOU TEAR IT DOWN COMPLETELY.

Before having the energy audit, I had contacted 2 independent sources about the project and had made it quite clear what our intentions were. Both confirmed that we would indeed qualify for the rebates, but only for what we were replacing. For instance, any additional windows or toilets or square footage would NOT be covered. However, they stated that we’d still see a rebate when we replaced our old boiler with a new furnace, etc.

Apparently you don’t qualify for anything if you completely tear down the home.

Now, it’s still a little unclear where the line between “renovation” and “new home” blurs. For instance, we could have maintained our old foundation and a few walls, and it would have been considered a “renovation”. However, EVERYTHING would be new. New insulation, new furnace, new windows, etc. I obviously have to question the logic in this, as we’ve actually taken the extra step (or like ten) and our building envelope will be far superior.

I also have to wonder if I should attempt to contest this, or if I should just let it go?

Regardless, we’re still moving ahead as planned. I hadn’t included the rebates in our budget, as I didn’t exactly want to count my chickens before they hatched. But it’s definitely a little painful to have $9500 dangled in front of you, only to have it taken away.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Eco / Green + Financial    |    11 Comments »

Drain Water Heat Recovery

I’d read very little about drain water heat recovery (DWHR) systems prior to this weekend, but after seeing it referenced in some Energy Star documentation I decided to look into a little further.

Put simply, a DWHR unit captures heat from your waste drain water and redirects it back into system. It’s estimated that it can recycle up to 60% of the wasted heat, save up to 40% on water heating costs, and reduce your home’s overall energy consumption by 5-10%. It would be entirely cliched to say it’s saving money from going down the drain, but that’s more or less what it’s doing.

The technology is actually quite simple, and I must admit that I’m surprised it’s not mandated on all new home construction. A portion of the main-stack drainpipe is removed and replaced with the DWHR unit. The unit itself is simply a large copper drainpipe wrapped with a series of smaller copper tubes. The smaller tubes are connected to the cold-water supply, and the water running through them will see a temperature increase of up to 14°. This decreases fuel consumption simply because it requires less energy to heat the warmer water. Similarly, it works incredibly well with tankless hot water systems, which are known to perform poorly when the groundwater is overly cold.

I don’t believe there are many drawbacks with such a setup, although I’ve read claims that water pressure will drop once the device is installed. Apparently the “second generation” units present no noticeable drop in pressure, and I doubt they’ll have an affect on the PEX manifold system we’re considering.

From what I can gather, there are 3 different models available in Canada:

• Power-Pipe [from RenewABILITY]
• Eco-GFX [from ECOInnovation]
• LC-GFX [from GFXTechnology]

The systems all look more or less the same, although there are a few key differences. The Power-Pipe appears to have more transfer tubes running in parallel, which I believe helps maintain pressure. The LC-GFX site actually scares me a little, and I couldn’t help but notice the conspiracy propaganda that litters it (stolen trade secrets, Energy Star hoaxes, and fraudulent tests?!). That said, it is significantly cheaper… although one has to wonder why (I picture an angry old man, bitter at the world, building these things in his basement).

Prices seems to range from $400 - $1200+, but they qualify for up to $260 in government rebates. To qualify for a rebates, the DWHR unit must be at least 30% efficient (43% for the maximum rebate), and to qualify for the Energy Star certification, it must be a minimum 48″ in length.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Eco / Green + Financial    |    12 Comments »

Demolished

Like a circus trainer guiding an elephant, a truck pulled up in front of our house yesterday with a massive excavator in tow. A crowd formed across the street with passerby’s stopping to watch as the excavator was backed off the trailer, guided up our driveway and set loose on the house.

The excavator stood almost as tall as the house itself, but its scale remained in stark contrast to its delicate operation. I thought for sure it would function in a completely unsophisticated manner… like a child smashing through a sandcastle. However, it was far more elegant and the operator had far more control over it than I ever expected. He tore through the roof in a matter of seconds, but then delicately dismantled a wall brick by brick. He was also slow and methodical, ensuring no damage was done to the neighboring houses.

The demolition was accomplished by only 2 guys — one in the excavator, and the other on foot. The gentleman on the ground sorted the debris into various piles (wood, stone/brick, and metal) while the excavator knocked down walls and compressed the wood into the basement. At first I didn’t understand why he was compressing everything into the basement, but it’s actually quite obvious in retrospect. He piled all of the wood into the void, and eventually built himself a platform to drive on. I thought for sure the mammoth machine would collapse into the hole, but he drove into the living room without hesitation. The bricks and stone were be separated out and eventually hauled away, after which the wood was removed and dropped in the bin. So simple, yet so effective.

Most of the house went down yesterday, the rest came down today, and we’ll start excavating for the new foundation tomorrow. If all goes according to plan, we’ll be forming the footings on Thursday and pouring concrete on Friday.

Of course, I’ve been capturing photos via the webcam and have cut together a quick video of yesterdays events.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Construction    |    7 Comments »

Permission Granted

It took twenty two days longer than we anticipated, but the City of Toronto has finally issued us our building and demolition permits. The house has been sitting vacant for more than a month now, but she’s finally coming down on Monday.

Altius handled the submission of the various applications, which included the construction, engineering, electrical, and geotechnical drawings. However, ten days after our initial application we received word that our permits were temporarily refused until we satisfied the following 3 conditions:

1. A report from a Geotechnical Engineer outlining the methods we’d need to utilize to prevent the collapse of soil and ensure the neighboring foundations would be free of damage during the excavation. Or a signed letter from each of adjacent neighbor stating we had permission to excavate into their property. We opted for the neighbors letter.
2. Certified specifications for the proposed ICF systems.
3. On-site general review by a professional engineer for the constructions / installations of the prefabricated and/or any proprietary products proposed, the possible special foundation/footing design in the case of the angle of repose of the neighboring footing(s) is encroached, and any shoring design deemed necessary.
4. Owner’s Letter of Undertaking & General Review Commitment Certificates.

I won’t go into detail for each, but these conditions were relatively straightforward to satisfy and we faxed back the requested documents in less than 48 hours. However it took another twenty days to receive final approval, which I personally think is entirely unacceptable. I’m sure the City is busy and all, but it shouldn’t take that long for someone to review 4 faxed documents. I suppose I should be happy that we didn’t get denied again… That clearly would have tacked another month of waiting onto the process. Regardless, we finally have our permits and we’re all ready to go. I suspect things are going to get a little crazy from this point on.

This project has been nothing but fantasy up until this point, so it’s a little hard to believe that come Monday, there’ll be nothing but a big hole at 360 Winnett.

Game on… there’s no turning back now.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Construction    |    No Comments »

Construction Drawings

Our construction drawings were submitted to the city a few weeks ago, so we’re in a bit of a holding pattern while we wait for our building permits. This process usually takes around 10 business days, so we’re expecting we’ll receive them this week.

These latest set of drawings are quite comprehensive and illustrate in great detail how we’re planning on building the home. In particular, the cross sections really put things into perspective and give you a decent idea of how the house will look when things are completed (such as the 23′-9″ ceiling height when you enter the house.)

For the most part everything is the same as it was, however we have made a number of refinements since I posted the previous drawings. For instance:

• The length of the clearstory has been reduced significantly to stop it from encroaching into the living room. It now sits flush with the front bedroom, while the en-suite continues to extend about 4′ past it.
• We’ve reintroduced a step down into the living room. This means the ceiling height in the room below will be about a foot shorter, but Altius was insistent that we eliminate the bulkhead that would have resulted from the en-suite bathroom above. I think that’s a fair tradeoff, no?
• Each bedroom now has an updated window arrangement. The master has a larger set to better fill the space, while the others now have windows on adjacent walls for improved cross-ventilation.
• Because of grading restrictions we needed to decrease the pitch of our driveway, which unfortunately has caused a few adverse side effects:
  • The garage now sits slightly lower, which means it will have a generous 10′ 4″ ceiling while the rooms below now stand at a paltry 6′ 11″. I can’t say I’m particularly happy about the lower ceilings, but our options are limited at this point. We’re planning on using INSUL-DECK for the slab floor in the garage (which isn’t illustrated in the latest drawings at the moment). Hopefully that’ll allow us to reclaim a few inches.
  • We also needed to add an additional step into the house at the front door and in the garage door. Again, not exactly ideal but not the end of the world.
  • It looks like we’re going to need a small retaining wall along the north side of our driveway. I assumed it would just be a small block wall, but Altius has illustrated it as a wall + planter instead. Much better, if I do say so myself.

At the moment, the drawings illustrate the use of ICFs for the foundation only, with stick framing and spray foam for the floors above. We really wanted to use ICFs to the roof, but it appears as if it’ll fall outside our budget. Sigh.

As usual, the updated drawings can be found in the documents section for your viewing pleasure.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Architecture & Design + Construction    |    10 Comments »

Movin’ On Up

Lets just cut to the chase here, shall we? I’m not fan of moving. In fact, I’ll go as far as to say I hate it. I know I’ve spoken about wanting more room, but deep down I suspect the real reason we’re building this house is so we won’t ever have to move again. I mean, once the house is complete, I can’t foresee a reason why we’d ever want to leave. Of course, we can’t exactly build it without first moving out, so we’ll have to endure this necessary evil one last time.

At 8:30 am on Friday morning, 2 guys from Rent-a-Son arrived to help us pack. If you’re not familiar with the company, I’m sure the name is self explanatory (that, and they apparently don’t employ women). They were significantly cheaper than hiring actual ‘movers’, but I’d say the end result was just the same. The guys were polite, friendly and didn’t complain when I told them we needed to move a 300lbs TV. What more can I ask for? I suppose the only downside was that we needed to supply all of the packing materials… which was fine, although we really weren’t sure how much we needed, and as we quickly came to realize, boxes don’t come cheap. Of course, we could have hit up the LCBO for some used boxes, but that didn’t seem like a wise move, what with them being stacked on top of each other for the next 8 months.

The best prices we could find were from a place appropriately named Packaging World. Now, I don’t know the guy’s name, but the gentleman who helped us was quite a character. If anything, he reminded me of Tom Smykowski, the disgruntled employee from Office Space. That said, he was very friendly, knowledgeable, and extremely passionate about packing. His recommendations also turned out to be spot on (I think we only had 2 extra boxes), which is hard to poke fun at.

Most of our belongings will be held in storage until the construction is complete, however I wasn’t too enthused about renting a truck, packing everything into the truck, driving to the storage facility, unpacking the truck… and then repeating the process again in 8 months. So to lessen the pain a little, we had the storage container brought to us.

Giant Storage (also appropriately named, hmm…) dropped off a 20′ container, which apparently holds “the contents of a 1600-1800 sq ft, 3 bedroom home with no major appliances.” When it arrived, I was convinced we wouldn’t actually fill it. I mean, come on, it barely fit in our driveway. However, it appears we have a lot of junk or oversized furniture, because our stuff barely fit inside.

The containers are sturdy, ventilated, and stored at a secured storage facility, so everything should survive the 8 month vacation while the house is being built. Should we need something, the facility is nearby, and we’ll have access to the container. I’m not expecting we’ll actually need to get into it, but it’s comforting to know our stuff isn’t entirely out of reach.

So now the house sits empty, patiently awaiting it’s fate. I must admit, saying goodbye was a little saddening… but of course, I cheered up in my own special way:

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Miscellaneous    |    8 Comments »

ICF to the roof?

I’ve already discussed the benefits of using ICFs for our foundation, but we’re now considering using them to construct the entire building envelope. We had originally expected it to be cost probative, but after getting a few quotes it appears to be comparable to traditional stick framing with spray foam insulation, which makes it far more palatable than we anticipated.

As with the foundation, the main benefits are the same: Fire Resistance, Sound Resistance, Durability, Energy Efficiency, etc.

I’m not anticipating we’ll see the benefits of their fire resistance, but it’s comforting to know it won’t exactly burn down in a matter of minutes. I’m also not expecting the home will see many wind storms or earthquakes, but I know it’ll hold its own in the face of mother nature.

Sound dampening is another great byproduct, which really shouldn’t come as a surprise once you think about it. The foam and concrete acts as a sound barrier, which dampens sound vibrations and renders the interior eerily quiet. I can’t say this is something I’d necessarily seek out, but it’s also something I won’t complain about it.

I suppose the most valuable benefit of using ICFs are the inherent energy efficiencies that they provide. The foam alone accounts for an R-22, but if you take into account the thermal mass of the concrete, you end up somewhere around R-40+ (or so they say). Similarly, the continuous application of foam and concrete ensures there will be minimal air leakage, which furthers the structure’s energy efficiency.

From a construction standpoint, we’ll also see a number of additional benefits such labour savings and speed of deployment. But of course, we’ll also see a few drawbacks.

Our design calls for 2 cantilevered overhangs, however the concrete adds a considerable amount of additional weight which hasn’t been taken into account. As a result, we’ll have to reevaluate our structural needs and will probably substitute steel for of the engineered wood beams we’ve accounted for.

Another issue we’re facing is a slight reduction in usable space. If you look at the 1st floor drawings, you’ll see we’re already pretty tight between the kitchen, stairs and garage. It may not seem like much, but the ICFs will consume an additional 4 inches on both sides of the house and we’re a little concerned about loosing those 8 valuable inches. Altius has some ideas, but I think we’ll ultimately need to be a little creative to make it work.

We haven’t made any decisions yet, but we have a meeting this week with our contractor, architect and ICF installer to discuss the realities of this approach.

Posted by Jeremy Bell in: Architecture & Design + Eco / Green    |    12 Comments »