Saturday 25 February 2017

Stores to (What?) Shores - Phase 2



If you should want to enter the soon to be Prestige & Waterfront Park (now the Dog Walk parking-lot) through a recently approved new entrance inexplicably farther east, you will do so in a complicated and dangerous approach.



Problem 1
Coming down Hall from Front you keep right for your turn into Lakeside. While tall, dense trees block your sightline to the park entrance and oncoming traffic from the mall: you immediately need to somehow get over to the Lakeside-center during this right-turn, what with the park entrance on the Lakeside-left and relatively close.
Without being able to indicate moving left towards it until you actually are on Lakeside proper - too late! - your quick drift to the center by necessity is too sudden too confusing too dangerous. This with airport-to-mall traffic, cars close behind you from Hall, as well as pedestrians out-of-nowhere crossing towards the lake on the new south-north crosswalk - only its far side visible just before you turn. All this needing an even astute driver's fullest attention.



Problem 2
Oddly - Lakeside is to be narrowed here. Therefore, once you align with the park entrance in the middle of the road, those behind you will be stuck while you wait for a break in oncoming traffic.
Plus - there may be a car attempting to leave the entrance/exit-funnel, possibly to turn towards the mall. This can't happen because while you block the exit you also can't back-up to let it. Stuck in a conundrum!



Problem 3
The Prestige Lakeside Resort receives deliveries counter-clockwise via the funnel. So when entering it you may suddenly be face-on with a truck leaving, as because of the exit's S-shape and trees you are not clearly visible to each other.
Meaning: one of you may need to back-up. Problematic for the truck in this S-curve - and you because you can't back into Lakeside traffic.


 WSP/MMM


Problem 4
Tourists driving down Hall for the Stores-to-Shores experience won't know how to get to the shores-part because it's blocked.
In fact - once past the train-tracks they may hardly see the lake behind the Hall Street Waterfront Park (previously the straightforward entrance) and "signage" in it. This needing to be practically billboard-size to inform the ignorant quickly and clearly what/how once they have crossed the tracks.
Expecting these already confused tourists to then suddenly go through the same difficult routine as locals is astonishingly short-sighted of the WSP/MMM Group planning and Council approving this catastrophe-in-the-making.

Particularly perplexing as - under "Preliminary Design Goals" - the planners' Council-approved presentation promises "improving traffic & pedestrian safety".

  
Problem 5
Actually this plan needs Prestige approval before the planners - supposedly - can move on to the next, more detailed design-stage. One expects they will ask more questions than Council.

Here it gets murky, because even if the Prestige should reject the plan-as-is: the WSP/MMM Group gets paid anyway - since Council approved it. And seeing that plans now already are being further developed, based on those approved by Council: the more required changes - the more money! 
It boggles the mind why the Prestige wasn't consulted before this "preliminary design" was put together and presented to/approved by Council.

Who will require/supervise changes, seeing that Council's involvement ostensibly was over after signing-off on the basic concept - as it was with Phase 1. Leaving decision-making then and now to ...? The public was never told with Phase 1.  Will there be a repeat with Phase 2?

This reminds of the Cottonwood Market, where Council threw $82.600 at the Cover Architectural Collaborative for a totally inappropriate design - ultimately quietly rejected some time ago. But the architects were paid regardless and still are with one recent payment of $2.299.50.


  
Solution
In view of expected future development in the area, and with the public so far unimpressed with Stores-to-Shores, Phase 1 - a more conscious approach to Phase 2 would be appropriate. This including the Nelson Police Department for real-time "traffic & pedestrian safety" matters. As well as the Nelson Fire Department for emergency-access to the property.

So why not just somewhat streamline the entrance-as-is-now - but otherwise simply and directly leave it wide-open to the shores. Welcoming!

Save money, too!









City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca

Deb Kozak, Mayor
dkozak@nelson.ca

Pam Mierau, Development Services
pmierau@nelson.ca

John Lebleu, General Manager
Nelson@PrestigeHotels.ca

Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca

Colin McClure, CFO
cmcclure@nelson.ca

Colin Innes, Public Works
cinnes@nelson.ca  

Tuesday 21 February 2017

Seniors' Parking-Pass Increase



In the public-input segment of the Committee of the Whole (COW), 20 Feb, 2017, a senior citizen presents a strong case against the increase. Admonishing Council for supporting it and reminding them that this will not be forgotten by (our substantial numbers of) seniors in the next local election.
Good for them!
Springing this whopping cash-grab on seniors now - regardless of whether-or-not an increase in itself is reasonable - in its suddenness shows a lack of sensitivity towards a large segment of the electorate. A lack of caring.
It is this lack which upsets many much more than the increase.




The manner in which the topic is discussed/passed later in the same COW shows a disconnect between City Hall and this ever-growing segment.
Which is just about all this administration seems to know about local seniors: generally they're increasing. Under what circumstances is another matter of no acknowledged interest here - except from Councillors Adams and Cherbo. Who are to be commended for wanting to consult with seniors.
Mayor Kozak seems to be under the impression that those elderly having bought into Nelson Commons are a conclusive example of "although some seniors live on fixed incomes, others have more money than many young people". This according to the Star: "some" and "others".




Passing a motion - after the fact - to have "management staff" meet with the "Seniors Coordinating Society" is an attempt at damage-control only. This meeting should have taken place before bringing the increase to Council.
Shades of the 'aggressive-panhandling bylaw', while we had few panhandlers - and none aggressive.

This increase-approval once again shows how Council frequently comes to meetings poorly informed/prepared - to then discuss/decide with anecdotal reasoning and info spoon-fed by Staff.

Even though in this case relevant factual information of numbers/levels was made available to City Hall by and is available at the
Nelson & District Seniors Coordinating Society
719 Vernon St (Civic Centre)
250.352.6008
info@nelsonseniors.ca




What with City Hall's need for additional revenue through parking and this pass-increase to fund road-work, the following is worth noting:

There has been free parking (no meters!) for 20 cars, 24/7, over the last 10 months, in the so-called Hall Street Plaza.
The same applies to 21 spaces on Hall, between Baker and Vernon, while there for a somewhat shorter period due to Nelson Commons construction.
Altogether 41 spaces! 
More Stores-to-Shores Phase 1 shenanigans.

This loss of revenue through meterless parking is substantial - do the math! - while a non-issue at City Hall.

Absurdly - just around the corners on Baker metered parking is enforced. 
So, what gives here?

Raising the seniors' pass-price incrementally - while immediately installing 41 parking-meters - is the reasonable and more revenue-creating way to go.




Caras Ionut
favim.com



Deb Kozak, Mayor
dkozak@nelson.ca

Colin McClure, CFO
cmacclure@nelson.ca

Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca

Colin Innes, Public Works
cinnes@nelson.ca