While we are getting weekly updates about (this) work in progress from local news-media - images look much the same to the uninitiated: lots of construction of curbs/curves taking disconnected shape. Presumably - it will all coalesce eventually.
The current reality of crossing Vernon/Hall for pedestrians is that you can't. Ever-changing detours getting longer every day. This is understandable - in the grand scheme of things - but where does it all lead? What is the grand scheme of things?
As in: what will Stores to Shores look like when all is said and done?
Definitive design-images of all phases made public would make the current obstacle-course more acceptable to pedestrians, drivers - possibly even businesses whose income has been impacted for some time. Like: It'll be worth it! The proverbial light at the end of the tunnel.
But the MMM Group (M&Ms) from Kelowna - in charge of botoxing Hall - has never produced applicable definitive images of any of these south-of-Baker-to-the-wharf phases. They - in the early days - only showed us a few vague concept-renderings, photos of arbitrary non-local situations and a "master" plan with a one-dimensional line-up of tiny boxes in pretty colors.
If there are definitive design-renderings for creative changes of Hall: the public hasn't seen them. There still were no comprehensive clear images for the 300-block of Hall at the beginning of May.
Curiously - the City has a (not officially or otherwise announced) design review committee for this(?) project, predictably consisting of a member of the Cultural Development Committee (CDC), the Cultural Development Officer, Nelson's Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) and Chief Planner - surprisingly supported by MMM. This according to the CAO, upon my enquiry to the City's Administrative Office, June 29, which also hadn't known. In total this committee is short on exceptional creativity and experience for designs like this. And not all consistently know who is doing what. Thus it is rather perplexing that the M&Ms supposedly play a supporting role. Only.
The 300-block of Hall - by location: Chinatown - would be ideal for giving Nelson what it clearly needs: a colorful focal point, a destination for tourists even - fun and educational - by expanding the Chinatown theme begun with the historio-cultural commemorative rock at Vernon/Hall.
Appropriate treatment of this block is crucial: only its west-side spatially allows for significant change - on all of Hall below Vernon! Which from Lake to Lakefront simply can't accommodate major modifications. If any at all - aside from a sidewalk-upgrade. Neither can the relatively small area immediately west of the Prestige Inn: the airport runway and parking on both sides won't have them.
In answer to my question - right after financial approval of the project by Council - one of the M&Ms told me that they had done no research into the rock's significance to Nelson.
A concept proposed from the outside - via the City's Manager of Development Services - to whoever makes design-decisions: 3 colorful gazebos in traditional Chinese style - 1 sheltering the rock, 2 with seating, all lit in color and connected with typical Chinese flora - was rejected. In favor of exactly what exactly - there are rumors - has not been made public. This concept was presented just before the beginning of May, when no other clearly defined design for the block had been locked-in.
Initially the Hall-project was all about consciously connecting Baker and the lake, making Hall attractive and restful for tourists and locals alike. Keyword: walkable. The project was promoted as having great significance in term's of the City's development - its future.There was an infra-structure component to it - but the big one was its people-aspect well above-ground. In an informal introduction the public was invited to familiarize itself, make suggestions, approve/disapprove. It came in large numbers and approved vague concepts in principle - as did Council later.
And we haven't seen/heard anything since - other than Hall dug-up for rather prosaic infra-structural purposes and traffic-flow adjustments.
Council now needs to become involved in at least active observer-mode. I mean: thinking future - funds approved for what exactly?
The City Councillor serving as liaison between Council and the CDC must - as a matter of course - be informed of any significant design-decisions out there - before they are locked-in! - and report them to Council. As the M&Ms must be invited for progress-reports and steps to be taken - other than those infra-structural. Then Council informs us walkables - basic P.R.
In future projects - similar to this in size and importance - needing City-Hall funding: Council may want to insist on documented phased clarity in intent; periodic definitively documented reports - in words/images - announcing start/finish of phases in the process; and an approved list of those involved in the project. All - logically - coordinated/guided by Development Services.
It could be said: at this point Council has no legal authority for further involvement in the project. But then - neither has an ad hoc design review committee creating itself to possibly do much more than just review.
Individual curiosity and personal interest expressed by Councillors would be a start. With the Councillors' Column in the Star an ideal forum. More constructive too than my first 6 months, Nelson is busy, and I'm so hot, etc.
If the project (at its great financial cost!) really is to be the milestone it aims to be: Stores to Shores can't be left to an unaccountable, self-propelling committee with no collective creative history of its own. To them and support only of this full service construction project management group - the M&Ms: possibly quite efficient in infra-structure projects but seemingly less sensitive to, concerned with creative components.
Even though - unbeknownst to us - there actually may be totally wonderful creative goings-on: any walkable - attentively looking at the Hall-project-as-is - probably comes-up with questions/concerns similar to those presented here. The public is fenced-out and detoured by and sometimes stuck in it. With it? Only.
(Wading into curbs/curves for an observation - be still poor heart: at Baker/Hall (Lordco) a storm-drain is located at the extreme outside of a bulb-out (instead of 2 in the 2 corners, at the "root" of the bulb). This may mean: if water actually does run around the bulb-out towards the drain - it will rush by/onto the crosswalk via its very shallow ramp - possibly from 2 directions. And pedestrians may have to wade through this.
In the Lordco/Baker root-corner of the bulb-out - traditional slush with traditionally nowhere to go - certainly will turn into slush-lakes in this corner and outward from there. Then freeze!
An inspector I spoke with said: high-paid engineers presumably dealt with all this - it obviously would be too late for any changes now. Any problems later - he said - would then have to be handled by City Maintenance.)
Back to the creative part: Who's in charge of actually designing cosmetic changes for Stores to Shores? And getting paid for it.
If this pseudo-official design committee only reviews - and the M&Ms only support: who is what - and what is what?
No comments:
Post a Comment