Here's Those Missing Comments From the Watt Ventures PIM

On Tuesday morning, May 23rd, I sent an email to Twyla Graff, Director of Corporate Administration for the District of Lantzville pointing out a deficiency in the information on the District's website concerning the Public Hearing on Monday, May 29th at 7:00 pm upstairs in the Legion and regarding the Watt Ventures parking lot proposal. Specifically, I wrote: while the minutes of the Public Information Meeting of March 14/05 indicate that my "prepared statement... is attached hereto and forms part of these minutes", it isn't, and therefore, doesn't. Hopefully, this correction can be made quickly and with minimal loss of the residents' ability to be fully informed regarding important issues such as this in their community.
On Wednesday afternoon, having checked whether or not the correction had been made, I attended the District offices and enquired as to when it might actually happen, to which Ms. Graff replied that it was just a matter of finding the time to actually make the change. Now, since Ms. Graff is currently filling all three senior management positions of the District (Chief Administrative Officer, Director of Corporate Services and Director of Financial Services), I can understand that she is busy but, unfortunately, the Public Hearing is now only 3 days away and the public has a right to see all the comments made at the PIM. Therefore, what follows is my prepared statement, along with the essence of any responses which may have given to my questions.

Questions for Watt Ventures
Let me begin by saying that it is great to finally have an opportunity to address the developers of the Jeffs’ property and to be able to ask you some questions about yourselves and your plans. I also want to thank my fellow Lantzville residents for coming out tonight and I know that you will value their input and leave here tonight with no doubt of how we feel about our community and those who would seek to negatively impact our semi-rural lifestyle. As you can see [hold up 2” thick file folders], I have been following this issue with more than a passing interest for some time. Maybe someone should be asking the question as to why a private individual has to go to such lengths just to see to it that due process is followed and the public’s wishes respected.
Just so I, and my fellow Lantvillagers, are clear about how we arrived at this point, I want to paint a picture for you and ask that you comment on any inaccuracies that you perceive when I am finished. Your involvement seems to have begun in early 2002 with a highly biased and inaccurate newspaper article titled, “Vacant parcel caught in land use limbo“, written by Mr. Wyng Chow, who coincidently, had previously written a ‘promotional’ piece for the paper about your exotic Vancouver nightclub, Brandi’s Lounge. Even though Mr. Jeffs already had a real-estate agent, Duncan Watt became a land consultant for him and now you own the land. While Lantzville was studying incorporation, you were talking to various senior government officials about prospects for getting this piece of Lantzville property into the City. However, when your and Mr. Cattrall’s property were quietly excluded from the Referendum boundaries, you raised a “fuss”, since you felt that your property was now in a no-man’s-land (“land use anomalies”, I believe you called them). You then quite disingenuously beseeched the City of Nanaimo to take you in, which they then “pulled out all the stops” to accomplish, possibly motivated by your $100,000 donation.

Duncan Watt responded by saying that they didn't disingenuously do anything. He basically didn't dispute anything else that I had said. While seeming to take offence at my comments, Cam Watt didn't rebut my statement except to say that they hadn't raised a "fuss".

Questions for the District/RDN How was this complex mechanism (easements, cross-easements and covenants) for bypassing the requirement for an Official Community Plan amendment arrived at? Is the term “public use” in the enabling section of our OCP not usually reserved for things like libraries, schools, hospitals, etc.? To your knowledge, has it been used before to refer to a private, commercial parking lot, albeit one where we (the Lantzville public) will supposedly have priority? Who made the determination that this proposal met the intent of the ‘public use’ designation in our OCP?

Robert Lapham, District Planner, responded by saying that he wasn't specifically aware of any other place it had been done but that covenants and easments were used all the time by land use planners. After repeatedly not answering the final question asked and being asked again, he allowed that it was ultimately Council which would have made that decision.