The Soble Tower Transformation: North America’s First EnerPHit Apartment Tower

The Ken Soble Tower Transformation: North Americas First EnerPHit Apartment Tower
Winter 2019 SABMag ConEd Article
GBCI: 0920020327

Overview
The Ken Soble Tower Transformation is a ground- breaking project rehabilitating a post-war apartment tower in Hamilton, Ontario to the Passive House EnerPHit retrofit standard - reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 94% and laying the groundwork for the industry-wide repair and renewal projects which are urgently needed to maintain thousands of apartments across Canada. This article will look at the project in detail, the roles of the different team members, and the challenges in executing this large Passive House retrofit project.

Learning Outcomes
On completion of this learning unit, the reader will be able to:

  1. Describe the roles of the team members in executing the Ken Soble Tower retrofit.
  2. Describe the key systems used in the Ken Soble Tower.
  3. Identify strategies used to meet the EnerPHit standard in the Ken Soble Tower.
  4. Understand the challenges in designing an EnerPHit project.

Assessment
All articles offered by SABMag are GBCI approved. To qualify for continuing education learning hours, practitioners must first read the technical article below, and then proceed to complete the short quiz at the end. You must receive 80% on the quiz to record the activity as part of your continuing education. An email will be sent to you and will act as your certificate of completion once you have successfully completed the requirements.

In order to obtain your CEU Certificate of Completion for this course (1h CE):

STEP 1 : Read the article The Soble Tower Transformation: North America’s First EnerPHit Apartment Tower (PDF format)

STEP 2 : Take the quiz and get a minimum of 8 out of 10 correct answers to receive your Certificate of Completion.

Quiz by: SABMagazine

1. According to the article, the Passive House standard considered the waste water venting on the plumbing system as what?
2. Which of the following was NOT an advantage of working with an existing building for this project?
3. According to the article, which of the following contributed to a significant portion of the building’s heat loss?
4. From the mechanical engineers’ perspective, what statement below is true about the biggest climate differences between Ontario and Germany where the Passive House standard was developed?
5. What best describes the Ken Sobel Tower project?
6. Design solutions were assessed based on what two (2) criteria?
7. What Alternative Solution was submitted and approved by the local building authority?
8. What effective thermal resistance was required for the building envelope?
9. Which of the following was NOT part of the cooling strategy for the building?
10. According to the article, which discipline is less affected by the Passive House considerations?
First and Last Name
Occupation / Business Name
Email Address