As the Loggers East Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Plan process comes to a close, residents had their final opportunity to provide input on the big picture vision for the area.
The District of Squamish (DOS) has worked on an Official Community Plan Bylaw Amendment with an outlook for developing the neighbourhood, located east of Loggers Lane and bounded by Raven Drive to the north and Robin Drive to the south, since 2019. Consultation to this point included early engagement at the start of the process and a survey and online open house when the draft plan came out last fall.
The plan allows for the future development of 800 to 1,100 housing units and employment space for approximately 420 jobs.
(All new developments under the plan will require rezoning.)
The last chance for the public to chime in came at council’s special business meeting on Feb. 9 in the form of a public hearing.
Though roughly 40 accounts tuned in to the live stream, only about a quarter of that number took the opportunity to speak.
Many of those who spoke saw varying degrees of positive outcomes in the plan, with only a couple expressing multiple concerns with it. The issues tended to be individualized, as only a handful — namely concerns over blasting as part of hillside developments and FortisBC’s consideration of adding a gas pipeline along its existing Finch Drive right-of-way — came up more than once.
“This is a whole transformation of an existing neighbourhood,” Finch Drive resident Fernanda Martins said while presenting a laundry list of concerns during the public hearing. “It just doesn’t seem [like] a reasonable approach to take.”
Martins added that ongoing blasting during current hillside development has her wary of further building in the area.
“It seems very violent and destructive,” she said. “I’m very concerned about the impact any future hillside development is going to have.”
Another common refrain, however, was confusion over land-use designations applied to subsections of the neighbourhood: rural/low-density multifamily; hillside housing; mixed-use development; general industrial; and conservation. Several residents feared that changes were in store for their individual properties, though council reiterated this was not the case.
“The important thing here is to keep in mind that this is a fairly high-level plan and not a rezoning,” said Coun. Doug Race in recommending third reading, which passed unanimously. “The concerns of a lot of people are concerns that actually might be resolved in the zoning process if their properties ever did re-develop.”
Still, there was some hesitance to accept some of the new designations.
Guillaume Tremblay on Finch Drive inquired about nature of potential industrial developments, for one. While council could only receive information and not answer questions during the hearing, Tremblay expressed existing challenges with living near what is already in place.
“The way things are right now, it’s really hard to be living with these industries around these houses,” he said.
One resident, Constance Wylie, was confused about some details of the agricultural land use, wondering why allowing dog kennels and equestrian uses came under that designation, which was later echoed by Coun. Jenna Stoner.
“What we were trying to do is recognize that these are valuable parts of the rural neighbourhood currently,” DOS planning consultant Susan Stratis said in response. “The types of uses that are supported here are somewhat different from the zoning bylaw definitions to reflect that.”
Ultimately, third reading passed unanimously, with final adoption slated in the weeks to come. Several councillors credited the public with its work guiding the process and finding ways to compromise. While there didn’t seem to be broad top-to-bottom enthusiasm for the end result, the common theme was that most should find something they like.
“As is the case with most complex issues like this one, some people got some of what they were hoping for while also having to accept that some of the things they wanted aren’t in the plan,” Coun. John French said. “While it isn’t exactly what I envisioned for the neighbourhood, I’m happy that the Loggers East Neighbourhood Plan that we have arrived at has specifically identified tiny homes as an acceptable housing form for the area.”
Coun. Chris Pettingill, the lone dissenting vote during second reading on Jan. 19, appreciates the open-mindedness of heavily encouraging active transportation rather than the vehicle-centric status quo.
“Historical development has really often presumed as necessarily the model we want to follow. We are maybe trying a new model and it may struggle for a bit but I think it’s important that we lift it up,” he said.
At the beginning of the meeting, Coun. Armand Hurford recused himself from the discussion, saying that as the owner of Republic Bicycles, he has been approached to bid to provide e-bikes to an affected landowner for a development.
Leading up to the hearing, Mayor Karen Elliott faced pressure to recuse herself from discussions as well, as she previously consulted for one of the developers with land in the area. However, she suspended her consulting business more than a year ago while reasoning that the neighbourhood plan is a District-initiated broad outline and not an application directly from the developer.
