District of Squamish council and concerned residents this week had harsh words for municipal planning staff about staff's decision to reduce the scope of the long-anticipated Upper Mamquam Blind Channel (UMBC) study.
Council criticism focussed on the move to limit the scope of the study to issues surrounding the use of district-owned land and not designate land uses for the entire area, as previously discussed. Instead, staff members said they had decided that land use would be discussed in conjunction with the Kingswood application for a mixed-use development next to the Blind Channel.
"As a result of the application, the proposed land use mix, densities and building heights originally included in the study will instead be discussed and tested as part of the [Kingswood] application review process, and informed by the input received as part of the Study consultation program," district planner Jim Charlebois said during his presentation to council on Tuesday (April 26).
Mayor Greg Gardner immediately took the floor when Charlebois finished his presentation.
"I am extremely disturbed by what I am hearing," he said.
"It was never council's intention to limit the study to the public realm just because a developer is filing an application. What I just saw was not what I expected at this point."
He reminded staff that as recently as October, land use was still considered the main focus of the study and that it was, in fact, labelled a land-use study.
During the council meeting on Oct. 5, 2010, a land-use study contract was awarded to Halcrow Consulting, in association with Matthew Roddis Urban Design. Halcrow's bid was within the $25,000 budgeted to come up with a plan and subsequent stakeholder meeting.
"This [land-use study] has been going on for some time," Cameron Chalmers, community services general manager, said at the time. "But before the district can use the land or let others use the land, they need a land-use study."
Councillors raised numerous concerns at Tuesday's meeting.
"Do we intend this study to recommend access to the site?" asked Coun. Doug Race. "I see two very significant issues here - vehicle access and density."
Charlebois said a lot of the previously requested land-use designations weren't needed because the new Official Community Plan designated the land "downtown," which comes with a prescribed range of uses for the area - mixed-use commercial and residential in a form similar to what exists in the current downtown.
Charlebois explained that the budget wouldn't meet the scope of work council was requesting.
"The scope of the study does not equate to the value being put on the study," he said.
"If we wanted to do a detailed land-use study in this area, it would require extensive work."
Given the budget, he said, the best value for the consultant was to focus on the public realm component. He added that land use was part of the consultant's conversation, but not the main point.
Gardner was not placated and continued his criticism.
"There's a resolution on the books that says we won't deal with applications until this is done, but yet we're working with an applicant?" he asked.
The resolution mentioned was made on Dec. 4, 2007. It states that "applicants for development approvals from council (being rezoning and development permit applications) be advised that council prefers to defer formal consideration until the plan is completed."
Planner Chris Bishop said, "District of Squamish practice has always been to focus on the public realm first," a notion staff addressed at the public open house in March.
At that event, staff said that historically, most land-use studies begin by focusing on the public realm because community input is the key factor in designating those principles/uses and that those are the areas the public will enjoy and experience.
According to Chalmers' comments in October, private land cannot be centered solely on community interests, as they might not be in line with feasibility.
"When balancing public uses and private development, we need to ensure there is a balance between the public features and the projects ability to fund those improvements while remaining economically viable," said Chalmers at the time. "This is usually a discussion that focuses on building heights and density similar to the recent oceanfront planning process.
"We need to see what the community wants - but we may find out the market viability and the community's desires are incompatible."
Coun. Corinne Lonsdale said she was extremely annoyed to be told the process had barely moved forward in the past two years, and that the budget wasn't sufficient.
"Why is $25,000 not enough?" she asked Charlebois. "I don't remember us whittling away at the planning budget."
Lonsdale attended the public open house and said land use is a huge issue of public concern.
Charlebois said staff did speak with residents about land use at the open house. He said the scope of the study could be changed to focus more on the land-use component.
Coun. Rob Kirkham said that was absolutely necessary and was "disturbed by the whole process."
"We wanted the Upper Mamquam Blind Channel to be looked at as a unique piece in our community, despite the OCP designation," he said.
"And I have no doubt that that is what council requested from staff."
He added that the budget was only finalized weeks before and if the budget was an issue, planning staff should have come forward and explained why the budget would limit the study's scope.
"This is not the guiding force we wanted for the Upper Mamquam Blind Channel," Kirkham said.
Council instructed staff to come back in a few weeks with a "study altered back to what the original scope was."
Council members were by no means the only ones concerned.
On Wednesday (April 27), Hospital Hill resident Eric Andersen held a citizens' meeting to discuss the Upper Mamquam Blind Channel land-use planning.
A dozen residents and councillors Kirkham, Lonsdale and Paul Lalli attended the meeting and everyone had some form of concern including vehicle access, the land-use planning process, natural habitat, recreational amenities, cultural features, pedestrian trail connections and zoning.
"There is still no satisfactory land-use planning process for the Upper Blind Channel underway, despite long-standing promises," Andersen said.
He saw the delay as another opportunity to collect residents' thoughts and concerns and relay them to staff before they come back to council. One overarching theme from the meeting's attendees was clear -they do not support the Kingswood application's proposed density or "lack of access," a phrase used by a number of residents who attended.
