Municipal officials need to make a concerted effort to resolve major concerns with development proposals before they reach the "agreement in principle" stage in their efforts to avoid the pitfalls that have cropped up with a couple of recent proposals, an official said this week.
Cameron Chalmers, District of Squamish (DOS) general manager of community services, made his comments in response to a point raised by Coun. Patricia Heintzman during a public council orientation presentation on Monday (Jan. 9).
During the presentation, which provided new and returning lawmakers with an overview of the land-use and development approval process, Chalmers said council's discretion in seeking changes to a development applications declines with each step in the process. While elected leaders technically have the authority to reject an application at fourth reading -i.e. final approval -doing so after third reading becomes increasingly problematic, he said.
That's because after projects received third reading - i.e. "agreement in principle" - developers can begin marketing their projects and often spend "significant amounts of cash" in that endeavour, Chalmers said.
Heintzman said DOS officials "have gotten into trouble in the past when we've put too many subjects or conditions on at third reading," mentioning both the Red Point and Paradise Trails proposals as examples.
"I couldn't agree more Even though at the time it [attaching major conditions] may seem to help move the project forward," it can lead to problems, Chalmers said, adding, "We will do our best not to do that in the future. We should have those resolved prior to third reading."
Red Point and Paradise Trails have been the two most frequently cited examples of what some developers have argued is an unwieldy and/or unevenly applied development approval process in Squamish. The issue was raised during last fall's municipal election campaign, with questioners pressing candidates for ideas about how to move the process along more quickly and provide greater certainty to applicants.
While he acknowledged those concerns and pledged to improve the process in the future, Chalmers said, "In my opinion, despite what some people have said, we have been pretty consistent in how we deal with the various applications."
Earlier in the meeting, Chalmers said that in the past, DOS officials have treated first and second reading as merely an opportunity to move proposals forward, with little need for council debate until proposals reached third reading. That's changed in the past few years, he said.
"Having a strong debate at first and second reading is a useful tool to engage the public and help seek amendments to the plan," he said.
Kevin Ramsay, DOS chief administrative officer, said a planning and development core services review is set to come to council on Feb. 7. In large measure, its aim is to "ensure greater certainty for investors and builders" by "moving the decision-making process forward so that there's comfort and confidence at all levels," Ramsay said.
