We don't want a quick fix on Oceanfront
Editor,
To Mayor Ian Sutherland and your hand-picked Squamish Oceanfront Development Corporation board: please, not another "window dressing" open house where public feedback isn't taken seriously. Don't sell the community short by taking from Paul to give to Peter. Paying SODC's debt of a million and a half dollars, the Squamish Adventure Centre's $7-million deficit and its annual payroll of $350,000 doesn't justify a quick financial fix by Qualex.
Peter Harker
Squamish
A marine development is just the thing
Editor,
I am concerned about the Oceanfront deal. I believe there could be a lot of revenue generated for Squamish with marine development. Deep water ports are scarce in the province. Nexon is our only ocean access yet the District is entering into a deal to build condos on it. Why? And what is the hurry? We took possession of this land less than three years ago, we've just barely started to enjoy ocean access, and as I understand the deal on the table, we will be limited to boardwalk access only. We will get to walk around other people's condos. This is not good enough.
Qualex-Landmark may be an excellent developer but they are not a Marine Developer. This is not the partner I would pick for our Oceanfront project. Let's put the brakes on this deal and keep our Oceanfront for Squamish.
Archie Gilroy
Squamish
This is not just a Squamish issue
Editor,
The following is a copy of a letter I have sent to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, local M.P. Blair Wilson and others:
I would like to bring to your attention an exercise that is taking place in Squamish, B.C.
A large parcel of land is up for development. It is known as the former Nexen lands, and is located on the waterfront at the top end of Howe Sound.
It seems the vision of our town fathers is to have residential housing of various types on this site along with some other commercial and perhaps light industry.
This land should be used for industry that would create good paying jobs such as ship building, ship repair, Squamish yacht building, yacht repairs and a common boat building and repair ways.
As well, a cruise ship berth would be a great enhancement for Squamish and a financial benefit to Squamish as well as all the surrounding areas. There are only three ports of this type on the West Coast: Vancouver, Squamish and Prince Rupert. Therefore, it is or should be of national concern.
I am asking you to investigate this development and have our council and proposed development partner hold off until a proper assessment of this one-of-a-kind property is done.
Bill McEnery
Squamish
Time for SODC to have a say
Editor,
For too long I have read the Letters to the Editor regarding the Oceanfront lands without reply. It's now time to clarify some of the points being raised.
Let's talk about process. The Squamish Oceanfront Development Corporation (SODC) is currently completing a 12-month process to engage a development partner who is willing to pay for the land (at it's current appraised value) plus share 50 per cent of future profits, while assuming all financing and liability risks and picking up all costs along the way, and first agreeing to undergo an extensive community-driven master-planning process (which if the community does not like, SODC and/or Council can turn down).
In the decision to select Qualex-Landmark as our preferred partner, the SODC board has done extensive due diligence on them, including obtaining letters of reference from other communities in which they have developed projects, letters from bankers indicating their financial capability to handle a project of this scope, and other partners they have had on previous developments. All were very positive and encouraging.
In terms of the Astrolabe Marine Group - the SODC Board and District staff welcomed the opportunity to discuss their proposal in writing and in person - but Astrolabe chose to disregard any form of established process. So what is the best course of action? Should we halt the clear process we are in, pre-empt the master-planning process by arbitrarily allocating land to subsidize a business plan that has not undergone any due diligence, with a company that has not previously created employment of the magnitude being discussed in an industry where established competitors are shutting down?
Or, should we encourage them to continue dialogue with the District, with SODC and our preferred development partner to provide feedback into the master-planning process, further develop their business plan, and obtain the financing they require?
Knowing that time may be of essence, we have extended an offer to discuss a temporary lease on the lands until such time as the master-planning is completed and a suitable long-term location for their business can be determined which will add value to the project as a whole. To date we have received no reply.
Regarding ownership of the lands, under the terms of the MOU, the District of Squamish will continue to own the lands until such time as they are developed and sold as completed residential, commercial, marine or light industrial units. It is quite possible that some of the land will never be sold as there are ongoing obligations due to environmental issues which would preclude the District from selling the lands. Those lands would most likely be leased.
Which brings me to the issue of land lease revenues - if we need to count on revenues from leasing the lands to pay for park maintenance we have missed the mark. Construction of the parks will be paid for by the development and maintenance of parks and public spaces will be covered by property taxes derived from the businesses and residences on the adjacent lands, as is the case throughout the community. Revenue from the sale of lands and profit sharing will be put back into the community to pay for many things, which may include public buildings, acquiring commercial property to encourage business development, an affordable housing authority, new recreational infrastructure. The possibilities are endless.
Those who criticize the project should take the time to get informed, call the SODC office, come to one of the open houses, visit the website or speak to any one of the community based Board members who have devoted thousands of hours to creating a lasting legacy for Squamish.
Rob MacLeod
SODC Vice-Chair
Parks not just for well heeled
Editor,
Environment Minister Barry Penner says government needs to put roofed accommodations in BC parks because "parks are for people." The truth shows that it's really all about money and catering to "well-heeled" tourists.
If it were really about providing better access for B.C. families and seniors, Penner would immediately remove the parking meters that have deterred millions of visitors to 41 parks across the province. He would increase the operational budget for BC Parks, reinstate rangers, re-establish park interpretive programs, and make sure that trails are properly maintained.
Instead, his government says parks do not contribute enough to provincial coffers and that privatization is needed to fill the gap. In fact, the BC government's own studies consistently show that BC Parks return $7-$10 to adjacent communities for each tax dollar invested.
Lodges for wealthy tourists do have a place in B.C. - in the 87 per cent of the province that is already wide open for development. With lodges in parks come helicopter traffic; more roads and parking lots; sewage, garbage, and power infrastructure; staff accommodation, and a for-profit imperative that risks damaging the natural experience parks provide.
Government says commercialization is a way to increase park visitors, but since 2001, visits to BC parks have dropped by a whopping 25 per cent a decline not seen in any other jurisdiction in Canada.
In their panic, government now points to the decline in visitor numbers as the "problem" that needs fixing. But if a comparatively little commercialization, like parking meters, contributed to the problem, why should a lot of commercialization fix things?
The roofed accommodation strategy envisioned by BC's government has structural conflicts of interest that imperil the future wellbeing of our provincial parks. It must be scrapped.
The public, and our parks, deserve better. Lodges and resorts are more appropriately situated outside of protected areas. Put them in gateway communities where they will not erode the ecological integrity of parks or compete with local businesses.
British Columbians deserve a park system that lives up to the intentions embodied in the Park Act. Parks are for people, not corporate shareholders, but parks are also about protecting nature. They should preserve the best examples of representative landscapes and ecosystems, provide sanctuary for threatened species, comfort and inspire park visitors, and remind future generations of the importance of wild places.
Gwen Barlee
Western Canada Wilderness Committee
Erv Newcombe
retired senior ranger
Vacation homes are important
Editor,
With regards to Bryan Raiser's editorial on vacation home owners (, Sept. 15): He states they are of no benefit to the community. Yet vacation home owners pay property taxes like the rest of us.
They have no children in our schools, contrary to his opinion volunteer locally, put very little strain on resources and bring in much needed outside capital. The only solution he offers in a contribution full of empty rhetoric is to increase the tax for absentee homeowners.
Bryan either didn't take into account, or failed to mention, they do pay an increased tax by not qualifying for a homeowners grant like the majority of us do.
Scott McQuade
Squamish
Make BC Hydro like it was
Editor,
MLA Joan McIntyre shows no awareness of the fact that since 1962, when Premier W.A.C. Bennett created BC Hydro, it was never in need of assistance to develop the electricity needs of the province - until her government, in 2002, began to restrict its generating activities and steal them, and our water, for their friends. In her response to me, Ms. McIntyre made no mention of this.
But for Campbell's legislation, BC Hydro could have continued to develop new sites for generating electricity.
She says that "BC Hydro remains in the hands of the public and so does our water." But BC Hydro is being chopped up stage by stage to fail. Financial and billing services are now in the hands of a private company, Accenture of Bermuda. The next stage in the collapse has been the transfer of the transmission of power to the B.C. Transmission Corporation.
BC Hydro in its truncated form will, as Ms. McIntyre wrote, probably remain in public hands, but as the cash cow from which Accenture and Ledcor will milk our monthly electricity bills. We taxpayers are obliged by law to support it by paying our utility bills.
Campbell's Liberals have forced BC Hydro to make Independent Power Producers rich. At the end of their purchase agreements with BC Hydro they will be free to sell to the highest bidder. As we all know, that will be to U.S. corporations who call themselves power producers. So then our water will be considered theirs and no longer ours.
In the interests of the people of B.C. and of our future children, we should immediately retrieve the prior status of BC Hydro as a fully integrated public company which generates, transmits and distributed electricity, as it was and should still be.
Hamish Nichol
Pemberton
Local football thanks BC Lions
Editor,
Squamish Football would like to say THANK YOU to Lui Passaglia and the BC Lions for another great evening. All the Squamish players had a great time. It was an honor to have the BC Lions come to Squamish & work with our players.
Ricky Foley, Lyle Green, Paris Jackson, Buck Pierce and Dean Valli were the BC Lions players who attended this year.
We would also like to thank the following sponsors for their efforts and donations towards the practice with the BC Lions: Squamish Valley Golf Club, Coastline Development Group Ltd, A & B Gen Jewellers, Mountain FM, Squamish Chief, Martin P. Thorne, Panago Pizza, White Spot, Guardian Engraving, and Starbucks Garibaldi Highlands.
Rob Ryan
Squamish Co-ordinator, GSL Football League
Thanks to local vets
Editor,
We would like to thank Dr. Honey and Dr. Dirdala - Without their incredible kindness and generosity we would not have been able to achieve the level of care for our cat Princess and her four beautiful kittens that they deserve. We are amazed and so thankful for their heartfelt and genuine compassion, for both people and animals.
You see beyond the animals - you care for to the family that surrounds them.
Tamara, Cheyenne and Deliah Maxim
Squamish
Lashing out makes one wonder
Editor,
Re: "Chamber 'getting too political' on Oceanfront, says Mayor" in last week's : It is more than disturbing that the Mayor of Squamish publicly criticizes the president of an organization representing the business community. Professional courtesy dictates that there are many avenues of communication rather than making statements directly to the press that malign the integrity and reputation of a person well respected within this community.
Mr. Sutherland's habit of lashing out publicly at groups or individuals who do not agree with him cannot but make one wonder what information he is afraid will be brought to light.
In my opinion, the Mayor owes the Chamber of Commerce, Ron Anderson and the citizens of Squamish a public apology.
Hilda Rizun
Squamish
We demand higher standards
Editor,
In her column on trails Sept. 8, Jane Emerick touches on one aspect of what happens when the pressures to develop our valley overwhelm our ability to protect the values of the people that call Squamish home.
If you thought that the outdoor recreation capital had environmental protection regulations at least as strong as Surrey, Burnaby, or North Vancouver, you would be wrong. We hear a lot about principles of sustainability and Smart Growth but the only bylaw or guideline in place is a neutered site alteration bylaw that the last council put together in haste to show that they had actually done something (right before the election).
Squamish Council is going to be adopting watercourse protection regulations, not because they all of a sudden got all warm and fuzzy about the environment. This got tossed into their lap when the Provincial government downloaded still more of the business of enforcement onto municipal governments. Now if I have it worked out, a choice will be made to either stick with our current green-space protection allowances and to clean up the red tape around it, or to cut the amount of land protected around streams, creeks and wetlands by approximately 65 per cent to allow developers more useable land.
If Squamish has 20 kilometres of watercourse that would fall under this regulation, that would mean a loss of habitat for birds and other critters of about 80 hectares, as well as severely degraded fish habitat and no community amenities like trails near any of the creeks and streams. Just for scale, a soccer field is about half of a hectare in size so this is about the same area as 160 fields.
When an issue like this occur, the development community puts a lot of time and money into selling their choice to staff and council, and if you can live with their choice, sit back and relax; I believe that we must demand higher standards because the wrong choice now will change Squamish forever.
Spencer Fitschen
Brackendale
No protection from Highway 99
Editor,
Mayday! The second southbound lane of the Sea to Sky highway from Garibaldi Way to the bridge is planned to be ONE metre from the business, school and residential properties. The plan is to protect the people from behind the fences by installing a SIX-INCH curb. We can't let this happen.
We need a wall or a barrier. If we don't protest, the proposed plan will be put into place, in which case the bleachers should be erected under the hydro line on the east side of the highway.
Jack and Shirley PurdIe
Squamish
Cheakamus gratitude
Editor,
I would just like to take the time to thank a few folks who were incredibly helpful in the staging of this years' Cheakamus Challenge. These are the people who look after our Highway Transportation in the corridor.
Firstly, I would like to thank Holly Adems who is in charge of helping Race Organizers and Film crews while working on our highways. She went above and beyond the call of duty making sure that we could run the event during the intense construction between Godfrey's Lookout and Chance Creek. Safety first is the mantra and I truly feel that this was paramount in the execution of this years race. The second person I would like to thank is Minister Kevin Falcon who was very helpful and understanding to the importance of this event.
The next person I would like to thank is Area Manager Jim Symington of the Ministry who provided input and guidance in executing and planning the event.
Finally, I would like to thank Scott Aitken of the Ministry for being hands on and helping our crew in making sure the riders got to race and the cars got to drive.
We couldn't have done it without the contractor Peter Kiewit and Sons who pitched in with their staff and made it happen, or the professional help of the RCMP.
Grant Lamont
Cheakamus Challenge Fall Classic
