Editor's note: The following letter was sent to Squamish's mayor and council. It was copied to The Chief for publication.
As a concerned member of this community, I feel compelled to bring what is occurring behind the scenes at municipal hall to the attention of council and the citizens of our community. This issue affects all of us, whether by loss of employment, loss of tax revenue, or just wasted taxpayer dollars.
A certain development project in Squamish has run across some serious roadblocks. Several years ago the Paradise Trails Equestrian Community Proposal was presented to council in the usual way. It was to be a "green" development and believed to be a model that other developers could aspire to.Second reading was held with the public invited to speak to the proposal. Fifty or more Squamish residents present in Council Chambers for this reading and many spoke. There was overwhelming support of the development. Many were from Paradise Valley itself; some were equestrians, and still others who thought it was the right kind of development for the area.
The planner's (in part) is to advise council; however, the final decision to move to third reading (or not), is with council.The planner cited "urban sprawl" and it was very apparent that he was against the project - in fact, so much so that he invited a planner from Whistler to come and speak (at length) against it. The planner had even done a conceptual rendering of the proposal, which was published in the paper prior to the meeting. Strangely, when questioned about this, the Squamish planner admitted he had never even been to the Paradise Valley site. Only one Squamish resident spoke against the project. Council passed the readings with stipulations noted based on the Squamish planner's concerns. These incidents occurred in April 2008. The stipulations have since been addressed by the developer in order to proceed to fourth reading and adoption.
Since that time, the Paradise Trails Team had beeninstructed by the DOS planning department to have no contact with council members, effectively creating a "fence," so that the developer has no way of knowing if council is aware of what is happening at municipal hall. This includes lengthy delays, roadblocks and most recently, the flood-hazard study requirement (prepared and submitted months ago) has been altered up by planning department from a one-in-2,000-year event to a one-in-10,000 year event! It seems pretty late in the process to be saying, "Oh, but we meant we wanted you to have a one-in-10,000-year flood hazard study!"What is going on here?I can't believe this represents a standard time frame anywhere else in Canada.
Squamish is fast becoming a town that is known for a "we don't want your business here" attitude. What kind of message is the district sending to the world when we change the rules in the middle of the game?If our tax base is not spread out sufficiently, those of us who remain here in Squamish will be looking at higher tax increases for all. There needs to be a balance of green space and development. We need to embrace green projects such as the Paradise Trails proposal, not push them away.
Council, wouldn't it be prudent to implement a policy that if a proponent is encountering too many difficulties from the planning department (as indicated by the number of letters to the editor in addition to the occasional newspaper article), you initiate a follow-up call to ensure that your directives are being followed? Certainly it's time to straighten this out for the sake of efficiency and to save everyone a lot of time and money (including my taxpayer dollars), which at this point I'm sure are being wasted, given the length of time this project has been on the table.
Jeannie Bardach
Paradise Valley
