Group meeting

...don't do it, being an artist would have been a much better idea

So...3 days of work left before the presentation, by then we should have finished;

• the powerpoint presentation and the narrative
• the document for client hand-over
• the design of the boards for the ARCH exhibition, and
• time to eat and sleep

As a group we went through a draft document, noting points of concern as we went along whilst providing a more precise structure to the document. Issues that were raised during todays discussion were,

1. Li would attend the lecture tomorrow instead of Gris
2. Gris and Sarah would head the university presentation with all group members responding to questions baed on their input in the questions topic
3. All work would be given to Tim for Carolyn's review by Tuesday morning (at the very latest)
4. All revised work from Carolyn's meeting would be sent to Tim on Wednesday, by 1pm to allows the group to discuss the presentation and its narrative along with the production of the boards
5. We would print and bind the final booklet on Friday
6. We would print the boards and mount them on Friday

Unresolved issues;

1. Who attends Sundays presentation at All Hallows
2. Who are the speakers at this presentation

Document revision

A revision of the document will be sent out for review before tomorrows meeting. If all could look through it and send through their draft information before the meeting that would beneficial to the discussion.

Group meeting

The meeting today with Carolyn today and subsequent group meeting provided some further confirmation of specific roles for the university presentation and handover criteria along with the a series of future dates for these events. We have confirmed that the handover to the client will be a table meeting with the PCC, talking about the processes involved in attaining the information and the reasoning for the design choices that have been made, this meeting will last for approximately 1hour and the size of group that will attend has not yet been discussed.

Consensus has been achieved on the document style, it formatting and that it will be a singular document, conceived as a narrative of the progression of the design process.

ROLES CONFIRMED

Gris - Uploading of information to the universities website (attendance of lecture on Monday)

Tim - Production, printing and binding of document for hand-over

Question time

It would be great if everyone could email questions they wish to be asked or points they require clarification on to their relevant group representatives (Sarah, Qi and Vas). This is obviously the last chance that we will get to speak to Steve and any members of the PCC before the final handover and accordingly is of importance.

Along with this it would be good if, at the group meeting on Thursday that people could come along with ideas for the university presentation, its format, the areas of focus that were considered in relation to the amount of time we have to present, what should be presented and who / how this will be done. Everybody should be thinking of this!

KEY DATES

• Thursday 28th - at 4pm in the studio to discuss the document, its legibility and coherence
• Sunday 31st - at 10am at the IC building in a meeting room which has still to be confirmed
• Thursday 4th November - University presentation
• Sunday 7th November - PCC Handover date
• Saturday 12th November - ARCH exhibition

Group meeting

Donations? Fixed fees?

Interesting meeting (...at times) in the studio today. A lot was covered, it is now time to generate the work for Mondays revision and amalgamation of the results. Discussion was had on the a series of issues relating to the interconnectivity of each groups work and the a critique session ensued.

Wall

From this, we decided that the storage wall will take a different form on the inside of the church hall to its face upon the corridor, it will provide a series of functions (to be determined from necessity and requirements from the research the community group is doing) and will have different profile throughout the building, encapsulating the entranceway so the occupant enters through the thickened wall. For this to be done it was discussed that an itinerary of existing furniture was required to move forward.

Chapel

Further investigation was required on the chapel with attempts to make the space more flexible, multi-functional, tactile, atmospheric etc. with an understanding of the intentions behind the proposals produced. This could be investigated through the making of a 1:20 model

Site proposals

Investigation in to the ways of ascending the topography (from the back of the church) was required.

A more fluid and less formal landscaping strategy for the back of the church was discussed along with alternative suggestions for the front landscaping (including making the space more temporal, less formal, having an intimate space within the memorial garden and extending the memorial garden)

A window strategy was unresolved for the rear of the church

If you feel something is missing, please edit the post.

Group meeting

Secret passageways

We went through our progress so far with Carolyn today, discussing the intentions behind our each groups proposals, leading to conversations around the longevity of the certain interventions and the possibilities of using the existing skills base of the church to direct viable and achievable interventions. Also suggesting that we become more ambitious in our long term proposals.

Along with this we thought of producing an open ended business plan for the church which would based on the NCVO's Sustainable Sun Needs Analysis Tool. Thus providing the church with a tool to comprehend their sustainability status and also providing them with possible paths of progression and a possible educational resource.

Group meeting

10 DAYS TO DRAFT DOCUMENT SUBMISSION

28th October

The general outcome of the meeting today was that, all of the work done so far has been useful, but requires categorisation and its importance considered in relation to its position within the final funding document. Therefore, for Thursday each group should have a comprehensive contents list for their specific section and a general understanding of a graphical layout.

For the finding document we need to consider a standard requirement criteria, which seems to encompass recording statistical evidence of engagement; examples of this would be documenting :

• how many people took part in the activity
• the age group of the participants
• the ethnicity of the participants
• the people who passively saw the activity occur
• the people who actively engaged with the activity

The next group meeting with Carolyn will be on Thursday at 2pm where we will present some preliminary images (to confirm a graphical style) and a comprehensive contents list to confirm the necessity of all the information in creating a coherent document for client hand-over.

I'll take the blue pill please Morpheus

The group meeting today was to clarify a organisational schedule for the upcoming visit and design workshop within All Hallows. The agenda is as follows;

Saturday

• 8:30am Meet at Sheffield Station
• 10am - 12pm Participation activities (community group) and setting up of events by other groups (site and building)
• 12pm - 1 pm Lunch
• 1pm - 5pm Design development, filling in the matrix (2hour idea documentation + short break + 2hour strategy documentation)
• 5pm - 6pm Dinner
• 6pm - 10pm Design development, developing the possible design strategies from the previous matrix documentation

Sunday

• 10:30am All Hallows Church service
• 12pm - 1pm Conversation, participation, coffee and tea with the worshipping community
• 1pm - ?pm Participation activities, packaging and clear up of resources
• ?pm Train back to Sheffield Station

The meeting also involved discussions on the types participation activities that will be undertaken and whereabouts these will be. Ranging from the wearing of interactive t-shirts to the placement of inquisitive questions within the urban environment.

Resolution was made upon how the project will be guided, through the development of a matrix to provide a focus on certain key issues. This matrix will be a tool to aid the PCC in understanding possible avenues of development as a result of funding and business model choices.

Post client meeting

From the discussion with Carolyn this morning, we considered creating a portfolio of ideas and strategies for the client, providing them with a timeline / matrix of possibilities for organisational development through the alteration / formation of a projective business plan. This document will then form the basis of a visual presentation to be conjoined with the ARCH exhibition on the 12th November.

Pre client meeting

Although an edgy meeting with Carolyn today we did awake to the realities of the urgency of work to be done for the client meeting tomorrow. Our focus today is on creating a creating a visual and substantial powerpoint presentation documenting the processes through which our work has been carried out to provide the client with an understanding of how the project will develop and give an understanding of the considered deliverables.We will use the upcoming client meeting to be a fact finding mission whilst presenting a snippet of our work so far.

Group meeting

Today we met to consider proposals for passive, active and provocative participation techniques to encourage social engagement and interaction with the building and the existing community networks. The techniques involve considering participation as both an on going process through client meetings and the attending of activities within the community centre to stimulative participation that will highlight the centres presence within the varying communities. These events will take place at various locations within the ward to provide a spectrum of responses from these divergent communities.

As a group we discussed the manifestation of these techniques within the urban realm and decided that they will carried out within three distinct boundaries:

1. inside the premises
2. within the site boundary
3. within the community

this, created a matrix of activities that could happen at each scale and what the purpose of each event would be, either to gain information, to gather information or to highlight the churches presence.

It was then discussed that the group would continue with its current subgrouping of environmental, physical and social to address the issues which the church require resolution on; green issues, storage and community interactions respectively along with each team considering the technical issues involved within their respective category.

Group meeting

A decision was made to travel to the site on Friday and partake of the morning, afternoon and evening activities along with the continuation of the mapping process, concentrating on the local scale along with possibility to undergo a 2-3 day workshop either in the location of the church or along a community node or at several locations within the ward providing different activities to encourage community participation with the building whilst making the community aware of the facilities and functions that All Hallow's Church provides.

Group meeting

We met as a group this morning to discuss the outcomes of the research and mapping exercise. Later, we met Carolyn to discuss how we felt the project would progress and the requirements involved with this, recognising that the first client meeting was based on a very pragmatic premise, wishing for the resolution of the two types of heating systems, the fixing of a leaking roof and reconfiguration of the external amenity spaces, although all parties found this to be of concern we felt that an emotional reading of the building was required from the resident artists, Trish and Simon and it would be at this stage that the participatory response with the community would take place.

Democratic resolution was made on the hand-in criteria which would comprise of a document stating grant and funding possibilities based upon a funding timeline of 5, 10, 20 years. We also felt it necessary to produce a series of posters to coincide with the churches art exhibition on the 12th November.

Some other outcomes were that we would arrange to attend all the activities within the community centre to provide ourselves with a more comprehensive understanding to the buildings functioning and each user groups emotional and physical attachment to the building.

Post client meeting

Today we met as a group to discuss our interpretation of the client meeting, its outcomes, the questions it poses and the ways in which we should prepare for the subsequent meetings.

During the discussion we stated that the church required more interaction within the local residential community, community centres and the reconfiguration of peoples impressions of the building as it currently seems to have no presence within the mindset of the locale. We wished not to frivolously make comments without a factual basis so decided to divide the group into three subgroups focussing on the documentation and analysis of the existing and historical - environmental - physical - social issues at the scale of the city and the parish boundary for group discussion and sharing of knowledge. The mapping process begins.

Group meeting

The first group meeting was a chance to get to know each other, our personal skills, architectural and personal backgrounds, proving astoundingly eclectic. After pleasantries we gradually turned our minds to the live project and the impending client meeting and discussed with Carolyn the issues surrounding the project and the reasons as to why we are now involved with All Hallows Church. From this discussion, we have ascertained that;

1. the project should not be considered as an individual intervention, but rather one which may form a national precedent for the future reconfiguration of community centres
2. the client wishes to form new connections with the local community inside the parish boundary
3. we have been asked to bring fresh ideas and new ways of approaching the community, possibly participatory events, publications or branding