The Design and Construction of the 4C's Building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Haliburton 4C's Food Bank and Thrift Store building, shown in Figure 1, was designed and built in June through August 2005. The structure combines an impressive variety of sustainable design options, while meeting specific functional and financial goals. The vision for the building was for it to serve as a working food bank and thrift store, while being a demonstration of the applicability of various alternative building materials and design options for a public building located in a very “traditional” neighbourhood. The Haliburton 4C's (Christian Concern Community Centre) is a non-profit, charitable collaboration of four Haliburton Churches that work to provide food and second-hand clothing for members of the community who require moderate support. The food bank and the Lily Ann second-hand clothing store are the two main components of the operation, with the clothing store providing funding for the food bank. A partnership was created between the 4C's and the Sustainable Building Design & Construction Program of Sir Sandford Fleming College. The goal was to create a cost-effective and sustainable home for the Haliburton 4C's group. The use of alternative building materials and design techniques has traditionally been limited to private residences, with public use restricted to a small number of projects utilizing only a few of the many sustainable building options available. The reason for this is a general lack of knowledge in the area of sustainable design and construction, and a false belief that sustainable construction leads to a structure that is not aesthetically pleasing, and has limited functionality. One goal of the 4C's project was to showcase sustainable building in a public structure, and thus to dispel the negative perceptions that may exist regarding alternative building. This goal was achieved, in conjunction with the needs of the Haliburton 4C's group, and the requirements of the Sir Sandford Fleming Sustainable Building Design and Construction Program. In this paper, the conceptual design for the building is outlined, with an emphasis on describing the sustainable and unique wall design, which included the use of hemp bale construction, earthen plasters, and an earthbag stacked footing. In order to obtain building code approval, testing of the proposed wall system was required. This was carried out at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario. Further testing was carried out to better understand the structural performance of some of the materials used in the building design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".