The provincial Environmental Assessment Office's (EAO) has expressed serious concerns with "inaccuracies" and "inconsistencies" in the latest report on the Garibaldi at Squamish resort compared to past consultant reports.
The information gaps are not typical of projects going forward for provincial consideration, said project assessment director Graeme McLaren.
The GAS report stated four of the proposed five dams -including two previously unmentioned 50-metre structures - would be erected on terrain that consultants had previously deemed too hazardous to build on.
"No explanation has been provided as to why these developments are not subject to the development constraints described in the earlier report," stated the EA working group's Dec. 17 letter to George McKay, GAS's vice president of project approvals.
"This creates considerable uncertainty about the proposed dam locations (and the associated hazard intensity and hazard consequences), particularly since two of these structures are now proposed to be 50 m high and are located upstream from proposed residential and commercial areas."
The working group further points out that a debris slide is actually located in the reservoir above one of the newly-proposed 50-metre dams, not below the dam as the GAS report indicates.
"This indicates the risks/hazards for this reservoir have not been properly assessed," it states.
Another comment indicates that a 2007 consultant report indicated a 75 to 100-metre downstream footprint for a 50-metre high dam, so the 2009 GAS consultant report from Enkon underestimated the dam's footprint and impact on sensitive riparian vegetation sites.
"The footprint of this 50 m dam will likely include all or most of this old growth and this has not been assessed by Enkon."
Since the proponent is declining to provide additional consultation studies, according to McLaren, the questions may go unanswered in the EA's final report and recommendations to the province.
"They may provide updates to studies, so they may provides answers to those questions in that letter," said McLaren. "But the position we're in is we're going to take the information we have, whether it has questions or complete or not, and describe that as fairly and as accurately as we can in our assessment report and take that to the ministers.
McLaren said he is "completely focused" on writing his assessment report, getting it to the working group and getting it to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts the Ministry of the Environment within a matter of months.
"They can issue an EA and that always comes out with conditions and commitments from the proponent. They can choose not to issue an EA certificate. Or they can send it back to us for more assessment to be done."
GAS CEO David Negrin did not respond to requests for an interview; however, GAS opponents issued a press release this week expressing their dismay.
"It really conveys an uneasy feeling about the level of thoroughness and integrity of the plans that GAS puts forth and raises questions of feasibility. When speaking of water - this lack of feasibility puts the whole resort proposal in jeopardy," said Catherine Jackson of Squamish Environment Society.
Jessica Reid of the Save Garibaldi group expressed concerns related to the likelihood that Squamish's future boundaries would be expanded to include the project, which would include development two golf courses, 25 ski lifts, 98 km of new roads, 500,000 sq feet of commercial space and 22,000 bed units.
"If Brohm Ridge lacks sufficient water, it raises the question of whether annexing the GAS proposal area into the District of Squamish creates more risk for Squamish taxpayers? Would we be on the hook for the costs of topping up water deficiencies?"
