Planner Tucker offers answers, clarification re Port Place Mall redevelopment
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Port Place Mall Redevelopment
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:29:20 -0700
From: Frank Murphy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Andrew Tucker <Andrew.Tucker@nanaimo.ca>
CC: Ted Swabey <Ted.Swabey@nanaimo.ca>
Thanks Andrew. These answers and clarifications are helpful. Points of disagreement of course but I do appreciate you helping us better understand the process from the Planning Department’s point of view.
On 18/06/2010 9:25 AM, Andrew Tucker wrote:
I have been asked to respond to the 20 questions raised by J. Olson with regards to the redevelopment of Port Place Mall. I would like to clarify that the Mayor mentioned provincial access requirements and the interconnection from Terminal to Front in the same paragraph. He did not say that it was a provincial requirement that an interconnection be provided. No provincial requirement exists. That deals with the first 13 questions.
The interconnection will be a private road owned by Port Place Mall, much the same as circulation and maneuvering aisles that are owned by the mall owners at malls throughout the City. As a private road, structures can be built over or under the road at the discretion of the mall owners and upon receipt of the approval of the City through the Development Permit process. No application for such structures is currently before the City. The design of the High Street, as it is being called by the mall owners, are contained in the Development Permit drawings (which can be found in the June 21, 2010 Council agenda package on the City’s website) and contain lights and street furniture but not parking meters. The street will be maintained by the mall owners. The redevelopment is taking place on private land at the developers cost.
In closing, I wonder where J. Olson gets the notion that the proposal, with the blessing of the Mayor, destroys public space?
Andrew Tucker MCIP
Director of Planning
City of Nanaimo