By
Harold G. LeBoeuf
 |
| Serpentine Locks of Medusa |
The
blatant arrogance of Miceli to the simple request of Howard Weeks asking to be
advised of the content of a report Miceli says was requested by The Heritage
Committee, apparently knows no bounds. Unquestionably, his ego has grown so
large that he honestly believes that he is a member of hegemony and who, like
Mayor Eddie, can force his agenda on any person who comes along and has the
audacity to question him. He states that Weeks is “suggesting that I am denying the public’s right to know”; that Weeks demanded “that
I provide you with a copy of a report that has yet to be made public.” He accuses Weeks in words implying
ignorance on the part of Weeks, and is “alarmed”
that Weeks does “not seem to understand
the severity of such a request…” And
he concludes with. “I ask you to please
summarize what changes you are “alarmed” by at Willistead that were not
addressed in the plan available for public review on the City’s website or what
was discussed at the Public Meeting of the Heritage Committee held on the
January 8th, 2014 whereby you appeared as a delegation?”
In truth, the bully type of ranting
Miceli expressed in his reply constitute nothing more than a pitiful reply of a
person who has been caught with his hands in the cookie jar, and whose only aim
is to spring the plans of himself and Marshall on an unsuspecting public. Well
Miceli, you are indeed denying the public’s right to know, and your
condescending reply to Weeks speaks volumes against your managerial skills and
diplomacy. Your attempts at putting Weeks on the defensive by asking him to
enumerate problems not addressed or discussed at a Heritage Committee meeting
and not having any knowledge of what is contained in your “secret report” only
confirms that you may have something to hide or, at the very least, it is in
your best interests for the public not to know prior to the November meeting of
the Committee (Will you be there? If so, I want to challenge your standing to
address the Committee when you are no longer an employee of, or resident of,
the City of Windsor. Perhaps you should send Clement or Marshall.)
Why do you find such a simple request for information “alarming,” or of a
nature that any member of the public shouldn’t be allowed to ask?
Now I am in a position to discuss the
content of your “secret report” with Weeks, with the other Ward 4 candidates,
and with the concerned members of the public. Miceli, in an earlier reply stated that the report only
dealt with seeking the approval for a pedestrian gate to be installed beside
the main gate on Niagara Street. That is simply not a true
statement and one that is intended to be misleading and put an end to the
simple request. In fact, the “secret report”, while it does request approval
for a new pedestrian gate, also includes approval to construct an “accessible
route to be connected to the new pedestrian gate” and plazas at each of the
other pedestrian gates. It may include, or a request will be withheld for a
future presentation, elements such as benches and lighting for all of the
serpentine locks of Medusa (instead of roadways, we may in the future have
to refer to them as airport runways). Miceli’s henchmen will later have to
request from council additional funding over the $400,000.00 already granted
because, as he states in a report submitted to the Heritage Committee on
January 8th, the effects on the budget cannot be determined at this
time. We can be reasonably satisfied that it
has long ago exceeded the $400,000.00 approved due to the accelerated work to
get the pathways done before Art-in-the-Park and the Beer Tent Festival; the
extra trucks, extra labourers, and, oh yes, all of the rented equipment to get
the job done.
Now
here is where we get down to the nitty-gritty as to what was discussed or not
discussed, and what was obscured from view unless you thoroughly examined the
plan to determine what Miceli and Marshall had in mind (and we have absolutely
no guarantee that the approval being sought at the November Heritage Committee
meeting concludes what is in the Daring Duo’s proposed plans or for what
approval will be sought in the months to come. What were not discussed in
detail were the proposed pedestrian gateway and the accessible route to the manor. Was it included in the
report and plan? – YES. Could those attending the meeting be aware of this if
it wasn’t specifically discussed and if the details of the hidden aspects on
the plan weren’t specifically discussed? – NO. Don’t forget, all of these features
were deferred to a future meeting for discussion and approval. That meeting is
in November; it wasn’t to be discussed on January 8th.
If
you go to the following website, and I quite strongly urge you to do so because
what I am about to tell will be revealing and even fun, you will see the plan
of the proposed changes to Willistead (Don’t forget, Miceli says this was all
available to the public for almost a year now. Would you know how to navigate
your way around the cryptic website to see this document?):
Here
is where the fun comes in to play. The plan consists of many “layers” on top of
each other until the desired final drawing is completed. To the left of the
colourful plan you will see a legend which sets out the identity of each and
every layer. And, to the left of each layer’s description, there exists a check
box. You can click on any of the layers, the mark will disappear, and that
layer will be “dropped” from the plan. To some of you, like David Hanna, this
is old hat. Here is what you do:
Step 1: Identify the
legend and various layers of the plan;
Step 2: Click to the
left of “tree” and “hatch”. All trees should have disappeared and you will
have a clear view of the broken red line;
Step 3: Click on
“accessible route” and the broken red line will disappear showing what has
been hidden underneath;
Step 4: Click again on
“tree”, “hatch”, and “accessible route”. The plan will once again appear
as when you first saw it.
When
you first open the plan you will see a broken red line which leads from the
proposed new gateway all the way to the parking lot, the manor, the circular
sidewalk at the south end of the parking lot, then in front of the Coach House
to the pathway leading to Chilver Road, and finally out the Chilver Road gate.
What you are looking at is nothing more than a broken red line showing how
people can walk around the park from the proposed gateway. This is the only
view of the drawing available and the one presented to the Committee on January
8th. Believe me when I say that members of the Committee didn’t have
at hand the necessary computers, and certainly persons from the public didn’t
have them, to play around with the legends aspects. And Miceli certainly didn’t
explain what the dashed red line hid. You, almighty sages and seers, are
attributed the ability by Miceli to have x-ray vision to see what’s under the
broken red line and to know what lay in the mind of both he and Marshall. Yet
he dares to tell you and Weeks that it was all presented over a year ago. Was
it?
If
you have done what I described above, then you probably have guessed what I am
going to tell you the “secret report” contains. For those of you who have not
gone to the site, you will now find below three versions of the proposed plan.
The first shows the plan as presented on the website with the dashed red line;
the second shows the plan with all of the trees and obstructions removed; the
third shows the plan with the dashed red line removed.
Plan
as it appears on the website and presented to Committee
Same
plan without the trees and clutter.
Same
plan without the dashed red line.
Voila!
Do you see the pad at the proposed site of the new pedestrian gate? Do you see
what else is being sought approval for – a new asphalt path of similar width to
the others leading from the gateway pad to two of Methuselah’s serpentine
locks; and do you see what appears to be an narrower (don’t count on it because
we have seen in the immediate past how proposed pathways to be between six feet
and ten feet wide became ten feet to twelve feet in width) new walkway to the
east side of the driveway leading to the Manor’s Courtyard? Do you remember any
of this being explained in detail to you at any of the public meetings or at
the January 8th meeting of the Heritage Committee? Of course you
don’t because it wasn’t. It was deferred to a future time (November). And by telling you that all of this was
available then, it is a deliberate attempt on the part of Miceli to direct
attention away from a simple request for information and to keep secret from
the public what is contained in his secret report (By the way, I don’t believe
for one minute that the Heritage Committee ever requested Miceli to prepare
such a report. He had to prepare the report to get approval.).
Do
you see the small flared out sections at the other pedestrian gates? These are
the concrete plazas that no doubt approval is being requested for in the
“secret report.”
Do
you also see the semi-circular bumps in the serpentine locks of Methuselah? No,
they are not warts; I am guessing that these are concrete pads upon which future
benches will be placed. These may or not be included in the report (If you
recall, Miceli has stated that the report only concerns the pedestrian gates.).
But don’t be surprised if they are included.
Miceli
may have also contained a request for approval to replace the main gates on Niagara Street so there is the ability for
them to be securely closed and locked. More public control! And why do I say
that you may ask. Here’s why. Have you ever seen or tried to close and secure
the main gates? I have closed them and the gates cannot be secured; they don’t
even meet in the centre because there is a significant gap between the two
sections of approximately 21.2 feet as I measured it. Take a look below:
Main
entrance gates closed.
If
nothing else, this does give credence to Miceli’s statement that a pedestrian
gate did historically exist and that it was removed when the driveway was
widened. My guess is that the original gates had a gate similar to, and built
into the gates. By the way, see the four pillars. Micelli is on record stating
that these will not be removed or altered in any way.
Miceli
complains that pedestrians walking on the driveway pose a risk both for them
and motorists. This is how he justifies the addition of the new asphalt walkway
on the east side of the driveway leading towards the Manor.
The
driveway measures twenty-five feet in width at this point and generally except
for where it meets the parking lot which branches out in westerly and southerly
directions (it is twenty-eight feet in width there). By comparison, Chilver Road, Devonshire Road, and Niagara Street, also measure approximately
twenty-five feet in width. Where allowed, the streets have the capacity for a
row of parked cars along a curb and ample room left over for two passing
automobiles. Parking and or “standing” is specifically not permitted on the
Willistead driveway; it is a designated fire route. Now correct me if my
calculations are wrong, but by comparison, the driveway is wide enough for two
automobiles to pass leaving a car’s width free. Couldn’t part of that free
space be delineated for pedestrians such as the city delineates bicycle paths
on roadways instead of constructing a further ugly, black tentacle to the east
of the driveway? Here’s how it looks now:
Southerly
view from the proposed pad at new gateway.
If
you are familiar with the present walkways as I am certain most of you are here
is how the existing walk looks:
View
looking north from Manor Gates.
This
cobbled stone section might have been intended as an area for disembarking from
vehicles and its surface is primarily level with the surface of the parking
lot. There is nothing to suggest that vehicles cannot park on this surface and
there is ample evidence soiling the stones to suggest that it has been done.
There is no reason why parking cannot be prohibited along this section. Also, I
cannot find evidence that Miceli intends to suggest that this cobble stone area
be removed and supplanted with more black gunk. But who knows? See below:
Tour
bus parked on cobble stone path.
This
cobble stone pathway terminates at a point where the driveway meets the parking
lot. See below:
Terminus
of cobble stone path.
In
the unadorned picture of the plan, you will see that there exists a “break” in
the curb line. That may be simply an anomaly in rendering the layer, or it
possibly could indicate change that approval is being sought for. In other
words, does the accessible route from the tentacle directly across from the
Gate House to that “break” represent a further construction of an asphalt
walkway to the point where the cobble stone portion ends, or does the “secret
report” contain other yet to be identified recommendations. Miceli won’t tell
you. He’s keeping that a secret even though he blatantly states that all
proposed changes have been obvious for almost a year now. Sure they have!
Important: From all of the changes that Miceli
states were so patently obvious for the past year or so, where is it that I can
find the requests for, and the approval for all of the electrical facility that
has been added to the park such as the four electrical stanchions strategically
placed around the park, and the 220-240 volt electric outlet installed in the
main east pillar to the main entrance. For what use and purpose do you intend
that? And why was it necessary to unbolt the small section of fence located in
the space between the two pillars on the east side of the driveway? And why
haven’t the bolts been replaced? What does your “secret report” have to say
about that?
I
have covered the proposed new pedestrian gateway, the accessible route and what
you intend to do so that a path extends from the proposed pad at that gateway
to the two tentacles of Methuselah, the concrete plazas to be constructed at the
other pedestrian gates, the semi-circular concrete pads upon which you
eventually (oh, I forgot, you won’t be here will you) intend to place benches,
lighting for the airport runways, the missing section between the main gates
which doesn’t permit the gates to be closed and secured (Giovanni, I have a
feeling that the 220-240 volt electrical circuit and the controlling device
already installed may be intended to control automatic gate closures for when
the main gates are replaced. Is that in your report?), and I previously
discussed the two very large sections of fencing that have not been replaced on
Devonshire
Road and Chilver Road.
Now
what Mr. Miceli was so patently secret about what may be in your report that
you couldn’t have conveyed it to Howard Weeks and the candidates for Ward 4.
Now everybody knows (or do they?).
Miceli,
have I missed anything? Oh yes I have! Where is your recommendation that
someone goes on top of the Gate House to remove the tree growing out of the
chimney (do they still call them smoke stacks?)?
Tree
growing out of chimney flue.
I
wish you God speed to your next job, John. I mean, hurry up and go!
.JPG)
