Skip to content

Potential Hospital Hill development worries some

A “private investor” is seeking to buy residents’ property via a land assembly
asdf
A view of one property in Hospital Hill that received a letter from a private investor hoping to develop the area.

One resident of Hospital Hill says that it’ll only be “over [his] dead body” that a developer will be allowed to come build in his neighbourhood.

It’s one example of what’s becoming an almost cliched theme in Squamish — a disagreement between long-time residents who view development buyouts as an encroachment on community and developers who believe they’re allowing residents the choice to profit off a lucrative market.

Brian Vincent said he received a letter days ago from StoneHaus Realty indicating that a “private investor” is interested in buying up his and his neighbours’ property so medical centres can be built.

Several of his neighbours have received either a letter or a phone call offering up the same proposal, he said.

asdf
A copy of the letter Hospital Hill resident Brian Vincent received from a private investor who is considering turning the area into a site for medical centres. - Submitted

The letter said this would give people the chance to form a land assembly, which could allow them to sell their property collectively for a higher price.

A land assembly, in simple terms, is a group of property owners that has the power to approve or disapprove the sale of their land by a majority vote.

“My fear is now developers are looking at Hospital Hill as an extension of downtown and they want to get this area rezoned for higher density,” Vincent told The Chief.

Vincent lives on the 38100-block of Clarke Drive, which is right next to Hilltop House.

The houses on Vincent’s row range in value from $701,400 to $803,000, according to BC Assessment numbers. That strip also includes an empty lot worth $491,000.

That area is zoned as residential RS-1, so regulations would not permit medical centres to be built in the area. This would imply that if a developer purchased land in that space, it would have to go through municipal council for rezoning before medical centres would be permitted.

However, Vincent speculates that there’s a strong chance the developer would change its mind and instead opt for building condos or other high-density dwellings, given that it would presumably be the more lucrative thing to do.

The area’s RS-1 zoning wouldn’t allow for that, though. Regulations state that only single-unit dwellings would be allowed. Again, that land would have to be rezoned through municipal council to permit condos.

Vincent expressed worries that if some people decide to go ahead with this plan, it would pit fellow neighbours against each other and ultimately force even those uninterested in selling their homes to relocate.

If several residents agree to the proposition and development occurs, it could change the place to make it so undesirable that whoever remains would be forced to leave as well, he said.

“It feels very predatory,” Vincent said.

“Private property rights are not sacrosanct, first of all,” he said. “With private property rights comes community responsibility, and that’s why there are zoning laws, and that’s why there are nuisance laws…. Even though I might legally be able to sell my property to a developer, do I want to do that to my neighbour across the street who’s going to have to look at maybe a big condo complex?”

At least one other nearby resident seemed to agree. Sandie Jackson didn’t receive a letter or call, but lives in the same block.

Jackson said, “We love our peace and tranquility and it would be ruined with all the traffic.”

She said potential development could block out the sun for her garden, as well.

Other residents in the 38100-block of Clarke Drive were called for comment, but no one else replied.

While some residents paint a picture of a neighbourhood losing its sense of community, the real estate agent representing the developer described his queries as a chance to see what people want in the area.

Furthermore, Sean Zubor of StoneHaus Realty said Vincent was impeding people’s right to do with their property as they please.

“I personally feel like a lot of these individuals are almost like they’re acting bully-ish,” said Zubor. “We’ve literally had a conversation with some people… but they’re phoning newspapers, they’re phoning cities, they’re phoning them — they haven’t even let the community decide or come to an opinion.”

“They have every right to do whatever they want to do, but I feel like they don’t have the right to stop other people to do what they want to do,” he added.

He also disagreed with Vincent’s categorization of the development proposal as “predatory.”

“How is it predatory?” said Zubor. “I can’t put a gun to somebody and say, ‘Hey — sell me your property.’ We’re not the mob. All we’re trying to do is build a medical building, and if people don’t want it, then it’s not going to happen.”

Zubor also said the developer had no intention of building anything other than medical centres in the area.

He said that his client thinks it would be a good location for doctors, chiropractors and other healthcare professionals to set up clinics.

No offers have been made to anyone, though there have been preliminary discussions with some residents, Zubor said.

As of now, he added, the letters and calls sent to residents have been just to gauge interest and see who, if anyone, is open to the idea.

Zubor declined to name the developer he was representing.

The District of Squamish said that no developers have approached municipal hall about re-development of the area.

Spokesperson Christina Moore also added that no one from StoneHaus has approached the District either.

There don’t appear to be any municipal regulations that would apply to a land assembly purchase, but consolidating them into a single parcel may require approval from council.

“No level of government has the ability or regulations to stop any individual or company from purchasing groups of individual lots from homeowners,” wrote Moore in an email. “If the new owner then wants to consolidate the lots into a single, large parcel, then the typical local government process, likely an OCP amendment or rezoning, would need to start.”

“Lot assembly — a change to ownership of multiple lots to one owner — does not require any approvals,” she continued.

“Consolidations (whereby property lines are changed) may require the approval of an appointed approving officer who is guided by provincial legislation (who deals with subdivision decisions). We say ‘may’ because there are exceptions to this rule.”

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks