Figuring out how much a proposed spiritual centre should donate to Squamish shouldn’t shut the project down, Coun. Patricia Heintzman says.
While the project doesn’t fit neatly into the municipality’s zoning, it shouldn’t prevent the development from moving forward, she noted at a Committee of the Whole meeting on Tuesday (May 13).
The project is slated for the 36,000-square-foot lot on the southwest corner of Cleveland Avenue and Main Street. It includes a 4,000-square-foot community sanctuary, 40 individual adult co-housing units — private apartments supplemented by shared facilities — a vegetarian restaurant and an educational retreat.
The lot is currently zoned for highway commercial uses. The proponent aims to rezone the land for downtown commercial uses. The altered definition would allow the development to increase the building’s height and make way for apartments.
The additional density will impact water and sewer infrastructure, said district planner Elaine Naisby. The district issues development cost charges (DCCs) to cover the cost of the infrastructure upkeep. However, the population bump that accompanies new developments also creates demands for services, such as recreation, transit and emergency operations — costs that aren’t included in DCCs.
As a result, staff works with development applicants to negotiate voluntary Community Amenity Contributions (CACs), Naisby said, adding the zoning change increases the land value. That’s where this project hit a snag.
The project’s proponent, Clasina Van Bemmel, believes the development’s designated social housing units, sanctuary and community-mindedness should be considered as CACs.
The problem is there’s no guarantee those amenities will be built, Mayor Rob Kirkham said, noting. There is no community use agreement in place with the proponent.
Heinztman proposed simplifying the process. She recommended the project make a contribution to the district’s Housing Reserve Fund and Public Art Fund or enter into a community use agreement or one to build social housing. With the exception of Coun. Susan Chapelle, council backed her recommendation.
Chapelle expressed concern that the project, which is on a property that’s currently zoned for a use that would provide many jobs, would not provide sufficient economic development.
“Downtown redevelopment does not just mean building a development on an empty lot,” she said.
