Design Details. EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL COLOURS AND FINISHES The following design details must be submitted for approval by Council’s Area Planning Manager prior to the issue of a Stage 4 Construction Certificate:
Design Details. STRUCTURAL INTERVENTIONS INTO HERITAGE LISTED BUILDINGS The following architectural design details of the proposed structural interventions relative to the heritage fabric of the buildings at Nos 000 xx 000 Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, must be submitted for approval by Council’s Area Planning Manager prior to the issue of a Stage 1 Construction Certificate:
Design Details. In addition to the design details required in the various conditions relating to design modifications, the following design details must be submitted to and be approved by Council’s Area Planning Manager prior to the issue of a Stage 1 Construction Certificate:
Design Details. The PAC indicated a desire to incorporate architectural design requirements within the proposed MPS policy amendments regarding the future Phase III buildings fronting Xxxxxx Street so that there is greater certainty that any future building(s) are complementary to the heritage buildings which exist in the area. Although a maximum building height of 60 feet on Xxxxxx Street is specified in the proposed MPS amendment (policy 2.4.2), this policy did not specifically address architectural details and building materials. There are existing policies in the Halifax Waterfront Development Area (HWDA) which deal with the issue of complementary architecture (Policies 5.6, 5.6.1), but it is useful to be more specific in the proposed amendments so that any future development on Xxxxxx Street is complementary to the existing heritage buildings and streetscape. Staff and the developer concur with this approach. Staff have drafted an additional policy to include within the proposed amendments (see Policy 2.4.5, Attachment A to this report). As the building height (60 feet) on Xxxxxx Street and the setback for the proposed Alexander building (65 feet from Xxxxxx Street) are already specified, staff feel there is no further need to address the building height/ scale. HRM by Design: Concerns were raised by the HAC with regard to the timing of the HRM by Design exercise and whether the proposal is in keeping with it's objectives. As indicated in the staff report of April 2, 2008, the HRM by Design process is anticipated to result in changes to the Halifax MPS. Likewise, the Halkirk application proposes amendments to the MPS. Both of these processes were initiated by Council, but neither has received approval to date. Therefore, a decision by Council on the Halkirk proposal cannot be based upon whether it meets HRM by Design, in its entirety or otherwise. Staff anticipate that the public hearing for HRM by Design will not occur before September. The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) dealt with a similar issue with the United Gulf (Texpark) decision in 2007. In that case, the Board had to decide on the relevance of the draft “Barrington Street Revitalization Plan”, which Council had adopted in principle, and the (then proposed) Regional Plan and whether Council should have taken these studies into account in making a decision on the development agreement proposal. The Board determined that these studies were irrelevant because they weren't duly approved policies o...
Design Details. As the Architect progresses with the preparation of the Schematic Design, Design Development and Construction Documents, SitelogIQ shall consult with the Owner and Architect and make recommendations whenever SitelogIQ determines that design details adversely affect constructability, cost or schedules.
Design Details c. The Engineer, or designee, will resolve any discrepancies between these documents. The following order of precedence (highest to lowest) will normally apply:
Design Details. Detailed design intent construction drawings must be submitted at a scale no smaller than 1:20 for the following elements:
