Craig Walkington, Anne Perry, Bob Downey, Arthur Carter, Irvine Carvery, Alvena Cain, John Fleming, Councillor Sloane

Mia Rankin, Ross Cantwell, Owida Downey

Presentation by George Rogers.

Dan O'Halloran introduced George Rogers. Dan said that both he and Mike Kroger met with George this morning to review the technical aspects of the project. Also, George was informed that tonight's discussion was to focus on the main building, (the box) and not about what is to go on top. The group was told that George has about 35 years experience as an architect.

Following are George Roger's notes:

There is concern about the treatment of the building elevation on the Water Street side on the part of the CLC. Other aspects of the building appear to be generally acceptable.

What to do? How to attack?

A suggested method is to develop criteria for this aspect of the building and then prepare design options for review. Criteria, for example, may include the following:

• the context of the building elevation. The Water Street side is distinctly industrial while the Barrington Street side borders on a residential area. A different set of circumstances therefore exists (scale, building material, use and activity). It is reasonable that the elevation be industrial in nature
• the extent to which landscaping may be used to soften the building and to enhance the environment, notwithstanding the industrial aspect. Can berms and undulating landscape be used to create a more informal atmosphere? Can a mini park be incorporated as a rest area for those on foot?

• articulation of the facade to relieve an otherwise long, unbroken elevation. Can the structural grid be expressed to give a sense of scale? Can canopies be used to identify and weather protect principal attractions? Can building be floodlit at night (also contributes to area security)? Can doors and other openings be grouped for a more organized pattern? If building is brick, can masonry be laid to create subtle variations of patterns and brickwork?
• is Water Street seen as primarily a vehicular corridor, a pedestrian route, or both? Does this have a bearing on the nature of the elevation design? (It is different to see a building when driving at 50 km/hr versus pedestrian speed). Will building be wind tested to determine micro-climate conditions (wind, snow drifting - relating to pedestrian movement)?
• architectural expression of the building. An industrial building (as opposed to disguising it as something it is not).
• scale of entry - civic address - point of arrival.  

Discussion:

It was mentioned that one of the things we don't want for the building is it to look industrial.

George suggested that this would be an excellent opportunity to incorporate brick design in the building. Brick is a plus. It imparts a sense of scale. Brick can be laid in such a way as to create subtle variations, vary colour. An example of this idea can be seen in the former School Board building on the corner of Sackville and Brunswick Streets.

Perhaps false window treatments can be used to make the structure look like more than one building, a false jut of about 6 inches.

Opposite Water Street is a DND building, there are no plan to change its industrial look. The group is concerned about creating an industrial corridor.

The plans for the Cogswell Street Interchange will impact the look of the area. Some of the land could end up in private hands, some of it could become green space.

It was suggested that the group think about the immediate and long-term context and linkages with respect to development/plan for the area.

There may be an opportunity to connect with the Africville trail. Should talk to Peter Bigelow from Parks and Recreation about the plans for this trail.

Final decisions about the box and landscape don't have to be made right away, but they should not be delayed for too long.

Dan suggested that George could write up what he heard tonight and feed it back to the group in a couple of days. He will try to articulate what was discussed so that it can be communicated effectively to HREP. George can then sit down with HREP and go over the groups ideas.

The group agreed. George will send Sharon his write up and Sharon will send it to the group before the next meeting.

Dawn will send Sharon an electronic version of the Cogswell Street Interchange plan.

Dan O'Halloran's company will become the "owner's engineer" when HREP and HRM sign the contract. Dan assisted HRM as a participant on the negotiating team.

Review of August 1st Meeting Notes

Approved.

Newsletter

Sharon will have a mock-up done of what the finished newsletter could look like. It will be ready for the next meeting.

Posters can also be made up and posted throughout the community.

The target date for distribution of the newsletter is the 1 st week of September. A follow-up flyer will be sent out by the 1 st and 2 nd weeks of October. The Churches will be asked to put a message in their bulletins for the 29 th of September and the 6 th of October.

Sharon to contact the Harbour Solutions staff to ask about adding a web-page for the Halifax CLC.

Newsletters, flyers and posters will also be distributed to HRM radio stations, corner stores, Gottingen Street merchants and grocery stores.

Job Descriptions:

Deferred until next meeting. Sharon to contact Ross to ascertain the status of the job descriptions.

Ex Officio:

It was agreed that this would be a non-voting position. HRM Staff can attend CLC meetings by invitation only. The Councillor needs to attend CLC meetings. It is expected that she will be the person to keep HRM Council informed about and updated on the work of the CLC. She will forward CLC requests onto HRM Council. The Council will keep the CLC informed about other plans that may have an impact on the work of the CLC, she will liaise with HRM Council. The Councillor will provide advice and assistance to the CLC when requested to do so.

October 10th Meeting

The agenda for the October 10 th meeting needs to be drafted. Sharon and Anne will develop some process ideas for the October 10th meeting.

Integration Fund:

The Councillor was asked some questions concerning the integration fund. The CLC requested that she get the integration fund amount validated and she was asked to get assurance that the money that was set aside for the South End and North End plants will not be touched until the Halifax CLC plans have been developed. The Halifax CLC has to have some idea how much money will be available. Councillor Sloane informed the group that the Halifax Plant will also treat sewage from the Rockingham area as well.

Next Meeting:  

Thursday August 29 th at 5:30pm - George Dixon Recreation Centre.