Over the past several months, 鶹ý staff, faculty, students and neighbours have been sharing a series of conversations on the university/community boundary on South Street — the spaces that connect 鶹ý most directly with its surrounding neighbours. The result is some clear direction to the university and a voice for those who live near the campus.
Sera Thompson from New Leaf Social Innovation facilitated the world café-style workshops. The consulting firm IBI Group led the landscape/boundary discussions, encouraging attendees to think of boundaries like a zipper, “[one] that connects two sides and brings both together.”
The first chance to explore what, exactly, these zippers should look like was on January 31. The topic: the design of the boundary space on the South Street side of the now-under-construction LeMarchant Street Mixed-Use Building.
“When we started to have discussions about landscape design along South Street, it was critical to involve our neighbours in the planning process at the earliest stage,” explains Mary Jane Adams, director of planning with Facilities Management. “Since we have a shared boundary, we felt it was important to develop guiding principles based on our shared concerns and values. It has turned out to be a positive situation for everyone involved.”
Broadening the issues
The feedback from neighbours was the first step in defining clear university guiding principles for landscape design. But neighbours also raised several underlying issues in the university/community relationship that they wanted to see addressed through landscaping: noise, garbage, smoking, loitering, alcohol use. Some of the ideas brought up by neighbours for these ideas included building higher walls and barriers.
These discussions extended into the second session on February 21. It was divided into two parts. The first dealt with Dal’s overall relationship with the community. Floyd Dykeman, 鶹ý vice-president external and chair of the 鶹ý Community Committee, discussed steps 鶹ý has taken in addressing the issues raised, including the designated community police patrol, the placement of additional waste receptacles on the campus perimeter, and the introduction of a student bus pass to provide relief to parking and traffic and surrounding streets.
As well, Marc Braithwaite, assistant vice-president, student affairs, referenced the university’s new restorative justice process that would provide neighbours with an alternative to the traditional court system if they required outside intervention to resolve any issues. Community members were invited to be part of the restorative justice process as volunteer facilitators.
The second part of the meeting focused on boundary ideas, with attendees breaking into small groups to discuss options like gates, shrubs, plants, walkways, seating and benches, stonework, trees and changes to traffic patterns (vehicle and pedestrian).
“It was great to have this opportunity brainstorm with our neighbours,” says Jeff Lamb, assistant vice-president, Facilities Management. “They bring a different perspective. They know what they like and what they don’t like.”
A template for the future
The final community meeting on April 18 was an opportunity to share all of the feedback that was received and present some actual conceptual designs for the boundary. A presentation from Vollick McKee Petersmann & Associates outlined the seven guiding principles that were developed, based on the previous two meetings:
- looking at the entire space
- promoting campus pedestrian circulation and access
- creating campus circulation adjacent to buildings
- using landscape to define space with response to context
- using seat walls to define space
- creating desirable space
- using plant material to create positive spaces
The final recommendations were shared with the group and the feedback was overwhelmingly positive. The presentation, which outlines the guiding principles and conceptual designs that 鶹ý will use going forward in the design process, is available on the .
For more on campus development, visit