Editor,
As Doug Day stated in last week's paper, he pays a lot in property taxes and so do I (at least mine are as a resident, not as a developer). Well Doug, expect your property tax to increase along with everyone else's if we don't find a good tax base in this community to replace Wood Fibre, Interfor and BC Rail.
It's an unfortunate reality but heavy industry is not as sustainable as we would like. It's not just in Squamish, it's throughout North America. Former industrial waterfronts are being cleaned up and converted to people places as heavy industry chases cheaper labor in the global marketplace. These big companies are willing to pay below minimum wage to their industrial employees. It is simply too expensive to pay our high union wages. Why do you think our big three industrial players have already packed up. If we don't stop looking backward and instead look forward into the future we could miss some very innovative, long-term and exciting opportunities. Those towns who have not embraced the future are becoming ghost towns.
I am happy to support a new proposed sustainable community on the waterfront, which may include jobs in light industry, high-technology, education, tourism and marine tourism, retail and professional industries while providing public amenities for the whole community to enjoy.
What is our risk? It states in the MOU that if the Masterplan as presented to council by Qualex and SODC is unacceptable, Council can refuse it. Let your thoughts and dreams be known during the Masterplanning process, then let council know how you feel about what is brought forward. Let's see what Qualex can come up with, they've already brought the Yale University graduate architecture program to do a case study on Squamish.
For 15 years, Nexen tried to get rid of that land to an industrial user, nobody wanted it. Shall we wait another 15 years -or shall we let Qualex and Master Planner Frank Ducotte work with our community to bring something special for future generations to enjoy, something sustainable.
It's also my understanding that Capilano College plans to expand. Quite possibly they could be a part of this new community planned for the waterfront. Professors and students could walk to school from their new home downtown or on the old Nexen lands. Education IS an industry. Canada happens to be one of the best places in the world to get an education. When was the last time you heard of a university or college shutting down and laying off their well-paid employees?
With regards to our under-used port facility (which I've been told by a local long-shoreman is only used to 10% capacity) and only sees a ship about every 3 days, are we really going to wait maybe 30-50 years before we see the shipping demand Squamish MAY receive in the future -who's going to pay the tax on the waterfront land while we leave it vacant and wait for a tenant. If this was such a great port town why is none of the $590 million of Pacific Gateway Strategy funds being spent in Squamish? The Federal Government is not interested in Squamish. Oh my taxes went up again while we wait and the waterfront lands sit vacant.
One large park like Stanley Park -there's an idea Unfortunately there isn't a large stand of old growth trees down there like Lord Stanley had envisioned -IT'S A REMEDIATED CHEMICAL SITE that is mostly man made. It would cost millions upon millions to build a big park on that land. Not to mention the fact that we have a beautiful estuary in Squamish that could really use some attention after 30,000 litres of crude oil washed into it. Last I checked, parks cost money to maintain, that's why there are parking metres at Alice Lake oh my taxes just went up again.
So, a park, an under-used port, and by-the-wayside heavy industry do not seem like a viable method of creating a long-term tax base to me. Let's take Qualex up on their offer, help them with the Masterplanning, see if they can bring some high-technology companies to town while they work with the community to create another LEEDS certified sustainable development - something we can be proud of and showcase to the world. If you read the MOU, we have nothing to lose.
G. Clarke
Garibaldi Highlands
What will the Oceanfront become?
Editor,
Many years from now, the community will look back and wonder how the Oceanfront could be any more wonderful than it has become. You notice the seaside walkways and the variety of parks and open spaces enabling everyone to enjoy the spectacular views. Locals and visitors admire the marinas full of interesting boats from all over the Pacific Coast and beyond. People meander through the shops and galleries and business folks scoot out for a power walk or a coffee at the bistro on the walkway. As you sit with your cappuccino, you will notice those walking and biking throughout the village. Many are heading to the K-9 Park for a daily romp with their pet. In the background, the award winning residences offer views of Howe Sound and the surrounding mountains.
A hydrogen bus slides by taking children up to the library. Supply vehicles bring goods to and from the studios, professional offices, and the outdoor or knowledge based businesses that dot the oceanfront. The marine area is alive with boat related activity and a small cruise ship sounds its horn out in the Sound as it moves toward its dock. You notice many new faces in town for the business learning conference that starts tomorrow at the boutique hotel and you see the work crew taking down the decorations from the recent Squamish Wind Festival. You turn back to your coffee and wonder why there was ever doubt that the Oceanfront would become a world class work, live and recreate extension to the downtown.
The reality is that there is some doubt here in October 2006. This is good. It demonstrates that the community has truly found that it has an oceanfront and that it can have significant value for the social, environmental and financial benefits into the future. But how to do this well and true is the dialogue underway at this time. This is a healthy interchange of ideas.
The Oceanfront Corporation, after a long period of internal debate and consideration has brought into the light of day, a memorandum of understanding with an outstanding Canadian development company, Qualex Landmark, to begin the development of the oceanfront. The MOU is a living document and three different lawyer teams and an international accounting firm all confirm this is a fine deal. The central questions remaining tend to focus on the level of community involvement and how good a deal this is for Squamish. Here are some thoughts on some outstanding issues:
The plan is an exhaustive and costly undertaking. It will be built from the community charrette vision and bring the whole community into the planning process. The developer understands how to do this and to enable all voices to be heard and to be recognized. The Oceanfront Board and Council will have final ok on whether the plan is acceptable or not.
A real estate agent or renovator who has a partnership with you for their services, never owns your home. Similarly, the developer and the Oceanfront Board have development rights to the lands but it will be the final person who buys a business or studio or home that owns the land.
The District has definite requirements for green space, parks and trails in its planning policy. The Oceanfront development will meet and exceed these requirements. Public access to the water is a given. The developer fully understands that properties will be less appealing if there is little green space. Green space is a perfect development asset for the social and environmental agenda. The master plan will embed the final requirements for green space and the community will be part of the master plan.
Certainly, the notion of heavy industry is not part of the development. After 10 years and more of waiting, no significant heavy industry has come forward. The community vision describes 21st Century light industry including the cultural, professional, marine, knowledge based, tourism, outdoor recreation and the service industry. The community supported master plan will kick start such industries.
Yes, residences will be part of the "work, live, recreate" mission of the Oceanfront. Residences will be in many forms, sizes and costs. The affordable housing policy of the District will be part of the development as it unfolds.
this document brings together all the necessary respect for legislation on partnership development - including taxes, environmental, financial and master planning. No document can cover every situation but the culture of working together has been established with the developer and the mechanisms to continue to work in a collaborative way have already been demonstrated.
Soon, the Council has the opportunity to vote on accepting this memorandum. The immediate next step will be harnessing the energy in the community to get on with the master planning while the development agreement is being finalized. Our belief is that the work on the master plan will engage those in the community who are doubtful. Our strong belief is that the majority of the community wants to see this oceanfront development finally get underway to ensure Squamish is a little more ready to greet the world in 2010 and beyond. Let our Councillors know you are ready to get it done.
Please visit the website: www.squamishoceanfront.com or call Destiny Merkl at the office for more details.
Larry Murray
Chair - Squamish Oceanfront Development Corporation
Our AmblesideEditor,
I've been thinking about our waterfront and the plans that seem to be in place for it, so I decided to go down to Ambleside Park in West Vancouver to try and remember what its like to be able to go to "the beach".
Well, I was not disappointed. Ambleside Park is stunning. It has beautiful walkways down on the water with lush grassy areas to picnic on.There areplaygrounds for the littlekids while the older onesfly kites in the field on the other side of the road.There's a beautiful little lake in the middlefor ducks, swans, and other species of waterfowl -Ijust sat for a minute and watched.
It also has a building for (clean) public washrooms (now that was a treat!). There are plenty or park benches for those who just want to sit. They also have lots of parking. You need to cross the railroad tracks to get there. It doesn't seem to pose a problem. Not there anyway.The point I am trying to get across is that we could have all that here in Squamish. Ambleside Park isn't huge but it is pleasant.It's right on the water with access to the beach. The railroad tracks are there too, but that is not a problem.
If the district goes through with this plan they are pushing through (very quickly too I might add... what's the rush?) with Qualex, we, the citizens of Squamish, will lose that access to the beach. Forever. It will become a condominium, all right "residential"paradise and THEY will have access to the beach. Do they care if we have a park? Probably not, we apparently can't afford one, not without selling our heart and soul to the developers. We need industry, not more condos!
Citizens of Squamish, I urge you to become involved and informedbefore it's too late.
I wonder if anyone hastold the prospective buyers how windy it is on a nice sunny summer afternoon on the water? I hope they plan on reinforcing these high-rises! Hold on to your hats!
Pennie McNutt
Squamish
A reply to Gardner
Editor,
This letter is directed at Councillor Greg Gardner, following his open letter in last week.
Dear Greg Gardner,
Thank you for taking the time to bring up suitable questions and issues regarding the oceanfront property. We are most grateful for your concern and patronage towards our community. With so much interest in the stewardship of the property, one would think that you should have been involved earlier on. The SODC board is comprised of volunteers, and as with most positions such as this, you should have stepped up to the plate and volunteered your services long ago.
It is always easy to find fault with someone else's plan, our individual human ego usually thinks it could do it better, and if you are a good lawyer, as no doubt you are, then you would know that holes can be picked in almost any argument. No matter what the next step is, I think you should be part of the solution. After all this is the 21st century and we know scientifically and mathematically that win/win is the most profitable in the end.
Seeing as you were not on the SODC board, let's have a look at the integrity, motivation, goodwill and expertise of the board members who did serve. Ten good men/women, are 10 good men/women. Upon scrutiny you would find that they are much like yourself, with similar values, who wish to see this land as legacy for future generations. They have no ulterior/hidden motives, other than stewardship and good will towards our community and the positive creation of an oceanfront gateway that serves both the residents of the community as well as the visitors of the world, as they come to Squamish.
Your suggested approach to the DOS development of the property (Parks, Arts and Culture Site, Seniors Centre, Rink etc.) was the initial thrust behind the community referendum supporting the borrowing of $20+ million necessary to develop such things - it was defeated and without the resources how is it to happen? Partnership you know this. Legacies happen when the public and private sectors work together. And as in any marriage or partnership it is well if due diligence is done to find a partner that shares core values and can see your side of the issues, and is willing to work with you over the long term, so that everyone wins.
Even though the request for submissions time frame was short, there were five very qualified proponents. With all the buzz in the Vancouver press over Squamish, you can believe that all serious developers were aware of the potential from 2003 onward, and they had already cruised the land and the area flushing out potential, and if they are worth their salt, would have easily been able to prepare an expression of interest.
Of the five, our Board determined that Qualex Landmark was the most suitable partner. It is in their best interests to complete a development that looks good on their project portfolio. They do not have a masterplan in place, but have an idea about what numbers work. They have not promised their shareholders a whopping 25 per cent return on the investment, (as some local developers insist upon), but rather a modest 10 per cent.
They are willing to go through the entire public process again. They are willing to look at all options, including waterfront development such as "passenger ferry, hotel/convention center, passenger ferry terminal, artisan or light industrial etc." as per your requests. They have said that they will hire the best consultants in the waterfront development field - what more do you want? What works best for them, will also work best for ourselves, and if we are lucky and smart enough then we will positively anticipate that $20 million of our profits will go towards building the art/culture and other amenities that we want - with luck somewhere on that same piece of property.
If you want wide open spaces and parks, well just head out your front door, and go in any direction in our sea to sky region we are already 75 per cent park I'm happy to bike along the seawall in Stanley Park or walk around the trade and convention center in Vancouver, with my children and visitors, and I will be happy to bike around our perimeter walkway, have a picnic on the beach and cruise the shops in our hotel/convention center on our waterfront lands also.
There is no need to throw a cog into a turning wheel - rather throw your hat and heart into the process, and lets get on with it.
Rose-Marie Carreras
Garibaldi Highlands
Why the rush?
Editor,
I have a question: Why the haste bythe Mayor and three particularcouncillorsto push the SODC/Qualex MOU through so quickly and without adequate debate and real consultation in and by the whole community?
This is the largest development that Squamish has ever been involved in - it is larger than a combination ofthe Big Boxes (on which there was a referendum), the Chip Mill (against which the present Mayor spear-headed a public revolt); the Adventure Centre and Police Station (both of which went into major overruns); and the Referendum on an expenditure of $20 million for unspecified facilities or activities (again spearheaded by the present Mayor).
Yet, for a highly complex, complicated "deal" between the District, SODC and the chosen developers, Qualex, the public has been largely excluded from comprehensive, democratic, inclusive discussion. The pre-formed, orchestratedQuestion and Answer presentations were inadequate and did not inform the public, especially about the ramifications of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) - including liabilities arising out of further remediation of the Nexen Lands among other matters.
The only genuine, openpublic discussion was the forum organized by the Chamber of Commerce last week (just two weeks before, onOct. 17,a vote in Council that will determine the ultimate direction Squamish will go in). That warranted a follow-up.
The process to date has been highly undemocratic and it is a shame that those councillors who are pushing for an immediate response are willing to be a party to this undemocratic process and the erosion of the public's (and taxpayers') rightto know what is really going on and hence their democratic rights.
The public should be concerned that a decision of this magnitude is going to be made by just one -- maybe two - votes in Council. Is that really democracy? Is that what the public and taxpayers really want?
The response from those councillors and the mayor will be that if anyone questions the process or the MOU, or any other part of this huge development, then that person is negative, against change, against development, etc. The vilification of people who dare to question what is going on has occurred over and over again, to the point that many in the community are too intimidated to speak out.
Is this good democratic process? The fact is that those who have been questionning the "deal" are NOT just a small "clique" but rather a diverse, wide-ranging number of individuals with expertise, knowledge and experience in law, accounting, development, real estate, community activism and democracy, environment, chemical remediation, health, among other talents. They are NOT against development per se. They are against "bad" development and "bad" deals which do not benefit Squamish and its community for the long term.
They are for visionary development of these amazingly situated lands, to benefit Squamish for the next 100 years. Participants in the two charettes (2004 and 2005), along with the UBC Team, formulated a preliminary design of a community-based vision for the waterfront and downtown Squamish.
As a selected charette member, contrary to what SODC and Qualex say,there appears to me to be little correlation between what the charette teams designed and what SODC/ Qualex are presently proposing. Qualex says that it will seek public inputAFTER the deal is done. Is that really democratic?
If you want to see a better deal for Squamish, you have a last chance to let your council know BEFORE the October 17th vote. So phone, e-mail, fax your elected representativesor physcially turn up at Council Chambers on Oct. 17 and express your concerns.
T. Carroll
Squamish
High-density housing good
Editor,
I am concerned that a large portion of the populous consider high-density housing a problem when, if fact, we need to build high-density housing so that we are not sprawled throughout the entire eco-system. The good news is that the current problem with high-density housing is only a matter of architecture and location. Over the past 30 years architects have grappled successfully with the problems specific to high-density housing - aesthetic value, privacy, sustainability and green space, to name a few. Yes, it costs more to build communities with integrity that honour and elevate the human spirit and the earth; over time the extra cost (30 per cent according to Prince Charles of Britain) is recouped through sustainable energy use and the lesser cost of maintaining a healthier society, ie: policing, drug rehab and education. High-density housing is actually win-win but not without consideration given to location and careful architecture, of which we have seen little.
Julie Malcolm
Squamish
Don't sell out, hold out for more
Editor,
Let's Not 'Sell Out'! Let's 'Hold Out' For Something Really Special on Our Waterfront
I'd like, first of all to publicly thank Greg Gardner for the brilliant letter he published in Friday's ; and for the contributions he has made to this community since he and his family moved here. Much of the beauty, mystique, character and strong sense of community that we take for granted here in Squamish can be traced back to the philanthropy and compassion (not to mention good old fashioned hard work!) of caring, sensible, level-headed business people like Greg Gardner.
I agree with Greg's position re: the waterfront and am strongly opposed to any short-sighted scheme which involves handing our most prized possession, THE JEWEL OF HOWE SOUND - our exquisite waterfront property, over to developers keen on cranking out condos for a quick profit.
I believe our most precious waterfront land should be reserved for something really special: something BIG, BOLD, BEAUTIFUL, and UNIQUELY SQUAMISH, and yes, we should do everything possible to maintain District ownership.
We really should think of how we'd like that property in particular (and Squamish in general) to look in 30 or 50 years. What sort of legacy do we wish to leave our children?
Personally, I'm here in Squamish because it's a wonderful place to raise a family: it's beautiful, quiet and safe and there's plenty of affordable housing. And, of course, as the outdoor recreation capital of BC, there's always something fun to do here! If you look around you can see quite clearly what is important to current and future residents of Squamish: health and fitness, inner-peace and tranquility, sports and recreation, the arts and our cultural heritage, education, employment opportunities, and a strong sense of community.
We should have a development plan that celebrates and amplifies the things we all love the most about Squamish - the things that bring us together as a community, enrich the lives of the people who are already here, and the things that will attract more families to this area (waterslides at Brennan Park would be nice, by the way).
As a struggling single mom trying to re-enter the workforce, I can confirm that what we need in this town are more daycare centres and long-term JOBS - not condos! There is NO shortage of new housing in this town.
We should not be "selling out" right now. We should "hold out" until we receive (or create ourselves) a development proposal that is COMPLETELY congruent with our vision of Squamish in 30+ years.
Personally, on the waterfront and in the downtown core, I'd like to see lots of green space (something similar to Stanley Park), light industrial development, lots of little shops, restaurants and art galleries,a school of fine art (smaller version of the Emily Carr Institute), a nice theatre for our performing artists, a movie studio, glass bottom boat and/or submarine tours, a hotel and conference centre, passenger ferries, and amusement places like Chuck E. Cheese or Gymboree.
I want a waterfront and downtown core which serves as a celebration of the uniqueness of Squamish - something that we can all enjoy and take pride in for many decades - something that we can sustain ourselves.
Please, let's say "NO!" to the current MOU, and "YES!" to a waterfront park, and sustainable businesses that set us apart from Vancouver and Whistler - something that is uniquely Squamish: a celebration of the art, culture and community that we all love so much.
Tammy Richard
Squamish
Why the rush to oppose MOU?
Editor,
In reading the various opinions on the proposed waterfront development over the past few weeks, I marvel at the passion that exists in our community. It's a tremendous asset and one we should all respect regardless of what side we sit on during this latest Squamish debate.The essence of what many of the opponents are now saying is "Why the rush? Why are we racing ahead when we have this precious parcel of land that is the envy of communities our size throughout B.C.?"
To these people, many of whom I consider dear friends, I ask you precisely what you've asked others - Why the rush? Let the process play out. In a few short months we will all know what Qualex Landmark is formally proposing when they wrap up their master planning process and present their formal plans to the community.
If it's not something that works well for Squamish, it won't go anywhere. We can then start all over again and today's opponents may be celebrated as tomorrow's heroes. Believe me, if the end result of all this is a swack of waterfront condos and not much else, you'll have more supporters than you'll know what to do with.
All Qualex Landmark has done since being asked to consider a substantial investment in our beloved community is play by the rules. Our obligation is to do likewise.Not a single thing can be built on our oceanfront until the master plan is approved by council.If this process is to die, let's give it the decency of a natural death not a hurried, political one. Why the rush?
Jeff Dawson
Garibaldi Highlands
Learn from others' mistakes
Editor,
How can the waterfront lands be so far off track? Having lived in Squamish for most of my life it is evident that change is something that cannot be stopped, but it can be properly directed.
The property belongs to the Municipality so why are we so quickly trying to sell it off to outside interests? This property is also important to Canada; it is one of the few ocean access areas available on the West Coast, but no sense repeating what every person is or should be aware. After 35 years in the business of insuring and owning condo's I certainly feel there is a more responsible type of ownership for our waterfront than the unit owners of a strata complex and that will be who owns part of the waterfront when the dust settles. The profit sharing the district receives from the development is the carrot at the end of the stick. I would think the future may be a little more important. Having served on selected committees since 1999 with some very upstanding community-minded people all volunteering their time to determine potential methods of increasing economic development to Squamish and particularly to the downtown and waterfront, I often wonder what ever became of the multiple reports and conclusions that these groups had so diligently formulated.
In late 2003 then-Economic Development Office Lee Malleau led a group of committee members including councillors Jeff Dawson and Ray Peters. This group traveled to Campbell River, Nanaimo and Victoria to meet with the Harbor Authorities of those growing waterfront communities to be made aware of the shortcomings they have experienced in the past 10 years with respect to attracting waterfront development.
This information was to assist in establishing a mandate for future development of the Squamish waterfront as a CEO was about to be named in mid 2004. The general conclusions by this fact-finding group were: #1. Retain title of waterfront land and lease on the district's terms. #2. Design criteria should come primarily from water operations and not land use in other words do not hire a successful farmer to do your fishing for you. Can we not learn from others' mistakes? Or do we have to re-invent the wheel?
Don R. Patrick
Squamish
Public will embrace product
Editor,
I understand when the MOU is signed that Qualex pays the current debt of approximately $1.6 million, then Qualex pays for the master plan. During the master plan we go back to the community for input which is where this process should be.
Should the public not like the product at that time we can walk away. But I'm very confident the public will embrace the world-class vision which will emerge. There has been an Oceanfront Board working forward for this end for three years.
They have been inclusive in the process and have picked a partner who holds the community values as a priority. Some people now opposed to the project seem to have a political issue which is more pressing than the merits of the project, or more important that they would stop the process instead of following the process and receiving the feedback of the community which is the next step in the process.
Dawn Lecky
Squamish
Need it all in writing first
Editor,
This is a a copy of a letter that has been sent to the Mayor and Council.
On Oct. 17, I urge Council to vote against the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Qualex Landmark.
Why? The fate of our more valuable and beautiful oceanfront land is to be decided. Squamish residents have been invited to have a say. But how can we have a say or agree upon a plan that's not yet in place? Would you sign a contract that was not fully spelled out?
As an active citizen and advocate for the performing arts for the past 30 years, I do my best to understand the issues.
This proposal -- which will change our community forever - is very complicated and difficult to understand. Why is there such a rush?
I'm more than ready to see the Nexen Lands move ahead to the next stage. However, a huge stumbling block is the land-use agreement. The Master Plan needs to spell out what space will be set aside for parks and future amenities. The Master Plan needs to show clearly what themix of business, residential and marine facilities will look like.
And so on. . .
It's crucial to have everything in writing BEFORE Council agrees to a MOU. As it stands, there are too many unanswered questions. Members of Council . . .I respectfully ask you on Oct. 17 to vote NO.
Joanna Schwarz
Garibaldi Highlands
Please see Letters 2 for more Oceanfront Development letters
