Full Class Minutes

When our full class comes together to discuss the direction of the class and the project

Dates of the minutes/contents

February 10

Twiki group shared what we see ourselves as doing
told group what we want from the other groups
What are our goals
-Qs, we should writie things in a google doc

-Not much in terms of plan of action, develop on thursday
-plan for action items and agendas
-at end of meetings have not taker post summary and pictures on FB
-maybe a good practice for everyone?
-Pin the link for the twiki?
-connect with exterior


Should we have group contract that is class wide? from now on these are expectations...
-Talking would take up mroe class time
-make it easy to assess participation
-revisit our previous contract?
-we lacked communication
-try out method of posting on facebook
-discussions on fb
-if someone speaks, replies use a number to determine speaking order.
-go off ^ method over reading week as a trial period
-teacher: class presentations in class -> useful use of class time

February 26

TWiki group gave a short presentation about the TWiki to the class. We talked about the structure of the TWiki itself and how we are going to be structuring it based on the topics instead of categories. We described the backend and the "frontend".

-Talked about how we want people to think about posting things on their TWikis

-Please just get content on the TWiki and then our group can make it look nice and work well.

Minutes of class discussions

March 3
  1. Exterior Group Presentation

    1. Feedback

  • Window installation and insulation costs vary

  • Paul: consider roll roofing - Grace, Ice & Water Shield (brand)

  • Will decide which is the best roofing option via class discussion - probably narrow down to 3 options

  1. Alternatives to Shipping Container (SC)

    1. SC may not be the best option due to our constraints

  • Ian: emailed Prof. John Straugh (sp?) - about insulation in shipping container

    • makes most sense to insulate on the inside, to maintain structural integrity - BUT thus space is lost (8ft to 7ft)

    • Prof says SC is not a cheaper option

      • ext: have to include a roof membrane for it to last 5 years; insulation here would require additional siding

      • suggested to build out of wood framing

  • Thomas: main cost difference between insulation is $300 (due to increased amount of area to cover)

    • outside insulation - need studs to hold the drywall together (use 2 x 2) - cost $130

    • thus outside cost is minimal, but siding cost varies depends on the option we decide

  • Ian: option 1 (interior insulation) - shipping container wall + insulation + drywall

    • option 2 (exterior insulation) - siding + plywood + stud with insulation + container + stud + drywall + inside begins

    • rough estimate for box (20 x 20) + roof + siding - $2000

    • pros for wood - very standard; doesn’t require much specialization beyond getting a structural engineer

    • pros for SC - TWC already has connections, could potentially get discounted costs

  • Paul: shipping container is a bit romanticized - is in agreement for an alternative

  • Dani: re: focus group - discussion revolved around some saying do whatever is the cheapest (likely wood structure), but also some there is some internal support for SC

  • Bryson: SC’s flooring often has pesticides - needs to be removed at some point and rebuilt

    • won’t lose much ground if we switch because most of their previous research related to both options

  • Ian/Hannah: mobility may be an issue with SC

    • houses on wheels? (weld it to a trailer bed)

  • Vanessa: assumed that TWC liked the SC was because it was indestructible

    • need to consider how would we design a mini house with this essential factor in mind

  • general consensus: probably shouldn’t make a decision today; need to talk to TWC

  • Individual check in:

    • Meghan - good for wood structure, worried about the freedom of less constraints - would we overlook potentially better designs if we simply transfer our SC designs to the wood structure?

    • Sarah - why did the TWC choose SC? Is comfortable with wooden structure

    • William - SC seems like more trouble; should ask TWC why they want a SC

    • Thomas - in favour of wood frame; talk with TWC; sometimes it necessary to take a step backwards, especially with our extensive research; transferrable research to wood structure

    • Hannah - concern - wood structure can open up a lot more options since there is more freedom, otherwise in favour of wood structure

    • Ian - check in with TWC; now that we don’t have a space constraint, is there a better design option? Will need to think about this more.

    • Vanessa - there is a strong case for wood structure; presentation of information - will the research tip the TWC more or less in favour of SC?

      • should compare ‘apples to apples’ - use same dimensions, look and feel, and compare costs - suggestion for presenting options

    • Matt - this should go in the twiki!

    • Natasha - should have a page for the ‘apples to apples’ comparison on the twiki

  • Next steps - will discuss this with Nathan in the next few days

  • Vanessa - should use decision trees (maybe for a final deliverable) - will talk about this on Thursday

  • Natasha - consent to publish any email from TWC or anyone else for the twiki

    • Vanessa - doesn’t think the email should go up, but rather a summary of the key points in the email, with personal commentary

  • William - make sure to post on the twiki

    • link ppts to twiki, or upload pdf


  1. Presentation from exterior group: discussed porch, roof & window options

  2. Class discussion for shipping container alternatives - general class opinion is in favour of switching to wood structure (still need a consensus vote), but need to discuss with TWC

See minutes for more detailed information


March 5

  1. Check ins - everyone shared a bit about where they are at
  2. Vanessa brings up the “start stop” feedback about the syllabus.

    1. we must all agree to change it and it affects the way we are marked at the end of the class

    2. TH. Focusing on other things may be more worthwhile than changing the syllabus

    3. MK. Never felt constrained by syllabus. How would it be changed?

    4. VS. Things that would change would be, relationship between draft deliverable and the benchmark 2 assessment. They have the same deadline.

    5. TH. There is a benchmark 2 and 3. Maybe take away the 2nd benchmark.

    6. IS. draft deliverable as being all the work we have on the TWiki

      1. HI. second that. Having a set date to post on TWiki would be helpful

      2. TH. agrees, should also be everything we have so far until that moment

      3. NJ. priority for TWiki stuff for the “front end” over the history of things

    7. SP. Push the date back for the deliverable, monday after the 19th? Same time as the museum take down and it will be busy for those in museum.

      1. General agreement. Takedown isn’t much work, but all week set up.

    8. VS. make less weight for the deliverable, more weight for the final deliverable

      1. SP. make some weight to encourage people to upload to the TWiki

      2. TH. How would we grade that?

        1. VS. I graded the last final deliverable for each working group. This one I was thinking about doing it as a whole but hadn’t decided yet.

        2. NJ. Likes grades for the feedback, but can get that without grades

      3. NJ. Time for TWiki group to make it look pretty?

        1. Make an internal deadline to upload things before then

      4. VS. Looking at the TWiki from the eyes of the Working Centre

    9. VS. we pushed the deadline for the initial deliverable. Do we also not need to do an assessment after that?

      1. TH. Could get grades for groups and divide amongst themselves.

      2. HI. Group reflection is good, even informal reflection

      3. IS. Assessments don’t change much. SImilar contents over three reflections in a term

        1. NJ. Change the subject matter or structure of the reflection?

      4. VS. Make it a “journal entry”

        1. TH. Class discussion might be just as good?

          1. HI. People won’t like to speak up in class

        2. HI. do both journal and a short discussion

        3. VS. Half-page to a page. Hold yourself to 30 minutes.

    10. VS. We might have another check-in with the syllabus after the reflection.

  3. Decision trees.

    1. VS. How would we use a decision tree? (lecture mode)

      1. Decisions about decisions and our group. Final deliverable

      2. Wood vs. container

      3. choosing what to look at from last term

      4. where to put the pilot structure

        1. Louisa street. Depending on when they build it, the zoning may change and change their decision because different pricing.

      5. it might help us choose stuff

    2. MK. I think it might be useful. Having at the front of a TWiki page. Showing all the decisions we might make.

    3. VS. Having trees in the back end would be good

    4. WT. Pros/cons table would be just as good

    5. MK. Tree is like a table of contents in a way.

  4. TH. Final decision about wood vs. container

      1. HI. decision tree is so that we don’t have to make the decision.

      2. IS. we should have some take-aways so that we can move forward.

      3. TH. There is a lot we need to know based on wood/container

        1. VS. we should definitely constrain the dimensions to those of a container 8x20

      4. There are three different design. Container insulated inside, outside and the wood structure.

      5. MK. We shouldn’t make a design for three simultaneously

      6. IS. it would just be demonstrating our decision making process

      7. TH. useful for TWC at the end.

      8. NJ. Maybe we should map out all three designs bare-bones if we think they are all viable.

      9. MK. Thought last week we already decided on what we were voting on, now it seems we have gone back.

        1. TH. Agreement. We all were sympatico last tuesday about the structure. According to our decision making process, leave two days.

      10. IS. we should keep container on the backburner in case Nathan says we must do container.

      11. TH. we should give Nathan our best opinion. If he wants something, we should explore why and do the research to inform the decisions.

      12. Vote on Wood structure: Unanimous for pursuing wood structure.

      13. VS. Power of final decisions should be with the client. We should keep the dimensions of the shipping container in the wood structure so that things can be easily transferred

    1. BM. But one of the biggest drawbacks of the container is its weird shape.

      1. MK. Give reasons about why different dimensions.

March 12


Ian talked with Nathalie goss from town and says that they will not be looking at garden suites until next year

It's not certain whether they will ne looking at garden suites.

- What is the process?

- How can we get involved?

-We can submit a comment, now up until the review happens. eg. We are interested in you guys looking at garden suites as an amendment

Currently TWC must submit for a zoning change for $10,000 to get a garden suite, can take up to 6 months. If they want these units in next winter, must put in changes in now.

- We could do research for TWC to create a really good comment/argument for a change in the bylaw to allow for garden suite.

IS. How do we want to proceed?

  • We should give them a starting point or draft probably. Not changing our final deliverable, just an extra.
  • We may want to make a dedicatied group for this. Take one member from each current working group? But they could be part of both groups.
  • Take just the last 20 minutes fo rthe dedicated public comment draft group.
  • What's submitted for public comment would be smaller.
-- Main.wnturman - 2015-03-03

Related Topics


WebHome, TableOfContents,

-- Main.wnturman - 2015-02-24

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r5 < r4 < r3 < r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r5 - 2015-03-12 - wnturman
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback