Here we go again (Squamish Gondola proposal)

[BK]

Dru, I wasn't refering to both logging and gondola / tourism in the shannon creek drainage only. I was speaking more in terms of logging remaining an industry in the greater area. I have no idea how forestry interests in the shannon creek watershed will be negotiated with the gondola proponents. My point was that for the whole community both logging and tourism are needed, but not necessarily coexisting in the same drainage

As a matter of interest, the proponents told me that they need the existing FSR maintained for their operation (post construction) and it would be open to the public. In other words, if you don't want to ride the lift you can drive, which is a better situation than at present.

jstyle, all i can say is the only way i see this thing really impacting any current user group of significance is by whatever happens in the base area . What earning turns has to do with it i'll never know. As an analogy to the issues at play here maybe have a look at Rolf Rybacks post about land use interactions with certain west vancouver residents who figure certain bits of public land are really their private gardens and a handful of toprope anchors and the accompanying influx of rockclimbers will ruin their peace and tranquility. well maybe they would have a point if we were talking about building a motorcross track. In a nutshell, the reasons to say no had better be pretty good and serve more than just an isolated special interest group.

[NateDoggOG]

If this proposal is no good then what ever will be?

Anyone have proposals for what else you'd like to see in that empty lot then?

A Costco? A hotel? Waterslides? More parking?

It's a valuable spot because of the traffic. Eventually something will go in there, keep that in mind.

Waterslides sounds pretty good...... I would be so down for a waterslide ride down a mountain!

[squamish climber]

The proponents have sent out an email announcing a public meeting Wednesday, September 14th from 7:00pm to 9:00pm in the Garibaldi Room at the Howe Sound Inn. 

The evening will begin with a presentation at 7:30pm followed by a question and answer period. We hope that you will come out and show your support and provide input at this important meeting as we embark upon the first stage in the approval process – the  rezoning of the proposed Gondola base terminal.

 
This sounds like a good opportunity for climbers to learn more about the proposal and let them know of any concerns they have at this early stage.

[squamish climber]

Just bumping this up because the meeting is tonight. I won't be able to make it but I'm hoping someone here plans to go. Please post after your meeting with short summary of the meeting and your thoughts on how the meeting went.

FYI: Here is some more information the proponents have posted on their website. It provides some detail on their plans for the base and top station as well as a timeline.

[squamish climber]

Looking for news about last Wednesday's public information meeting, haven't seen anything yet. So did anybody go? What were some of the opinions expressed?

[squamish climber]

Here's a clue as to why the The Land Conservancy may be in a hurry to sell the gravel pit.

Debt, flat donations hit Land Conservancy
Auditor's report notes 'significant doubt' over eco-group's future
Judith Lavoie, timescolonist.com
Published: Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Gloomy figures in The Land Conservancy's annual financial report show the organization is struggling with growing debt, higher wage and benefits costs, and flat donations.

Source: Vancouver Sun

[squamish climber]

The Pique has a story in this week's edition on the public meeting held in Squamish on September 14th.

Sep 21, 2011 4:02pm
Squamish gondola proposal inches forward
Residents, business owners seek clarification
By Susan Hollis

Proponents of a Squamish gondola are meeting with less resistance to the idea than they expected.

"It was a healthy mix of people, there was very little of what I would call negative comments, sentiment and questions," said David Greenfield of Ground Effects referring to last week's public meeting on the proposal.

Is it just me or has interest and perhaps opposition to this proposal fallen off? There's been very little reaction that I can see following the public information meetings at the Brackendale Fall Fair (Sept. 10th) or the Squamish Farmers Market (Sept. 17th). Was anybody at either of these?

[avit]

My guess, except for grumbling from some quarters, it doesn't seem like there's any real strong reason to oppose the idea... Now, mind you it's just an idea at this point. When the plans get more firmed up and we see more specifics about what's being proposed then there might be something more to debate.

[psi4ce]

From what I understand, it's much more than "an idea at this point".

And all "grumbling" (your bias is belied by your choice of terms) aside, what more is there to do? Correct me if I am wrong, but the land is already sold, apparently subject only to a rezoning condition. The developer obviously intends to build, regardless of public approval (although they have done a fine job of marketing the idea to the community). And I can't imagine why rezoning wouldn't be approved.

Also correct me if I am wrong, but the true time for effective debate involving the climbing community and concerned citizens was months ago, before TLC even sold the land.

But there was no such debate. Why?

Well, perhaps as Dave Jones points out above, TLC didn't have much choice but to sell the land.

Welcome to the new world order.

[avit]

Actually I didn't realize it was moving ahead so quickly... I saw their proposal a few months back and I thought they did a fair job of addressing the major concerns (they tried to cover their bases, based on public outcry against other projects like GaS and the Chief '04).

So yeah, good marketing for sure. I haven't heard of any coordinated opposition or strong reasons to stand against it: that's what I would call "grumblings", but I don't mean to dismiss them offhand.

As for "bias", I don't really mind either way to be honest. It's not something that I personally have a strong interest in, so it's not like I'm throwing my support behind it, but I see no reason to oppose it if seems viable and there's value in it for others.

[Anders Ourom]

Can someone provide an update as to this? That is:
1. The stage the proposal is at.
2. What political approvals have been obtained, and need to be obtained.
3. Important background stuff, like what they would actually do, when and how they'd build the thing, finances, and so on.

IIRC, there is a Squamish council meeting on Tuesday night, to vote on rezoning. Should we be there? If so, can the public speak on it?

My concerns remain the same. That is, unlike the Chief gondola, I'm not opposed in principle to the idea of a gondola from somewhere along the highway between Murrin and Shannon, to upper Shannon Creek. I'd want to know more, particularly about their business plan and budget, before taking a stance. Some of the questions:
1. Squamish Nation - their involvement, and position.
2. B.C. Parks - what is their position on the proposal, how would it be managed to integrate with the park, what about the risk that the tail (gondola) might come to wag the dog (the Park), what risk mitigation strategy would be required, pluses and minuses for the park as it is now.
3. District of Squamish - position.
4. Squamish-Lillooet Regional District - are they involved?
5. The proponent's business plan. Have they looked at alternatives? How would a gondola that may apparently operate only 6 - 8 months/year pay for itself, both operating and capital costs? What will they actually build and do at the upper terminal? What will be the benefits for and impacts on the parks, and what guarantees are they prepared to provide? Are their plans realistic, and careful? (Water supply? Sewage disposal?) Does the thing really make business sense, in context of similar facilities already available in the Vancouver-Squamish-Whistler corridor?

AFAIK, upper Shannon Creek would be marginal cross country skiing. Even if it were permitted (high impacts), there is no apparent route for mountain bikers to descend from the upper terminal - all they could do is ride around up there. A descent would either be well to the north or south. Would there be a network of trails? Restaurant? Bar? Gift shop?

What about the lower terminal? How would it be integrated into the parks, and not adversely affect them? Would (free) parking be allowed there to alleviate already overflow parking at the Chief?

There's lots of questions, and I suspect the developers have plans, but what will really happen may be another thing. And the big question then is that if the thing works out, they'll want to expand it. Where and how? If the thing fails, the public will be left with a hideous mess.

So, what's next?

[Tenn]

Hi Anders,
I'll take a stab at a couple of your questions:

1. I believe that the District of Squamish municipal council is giving third reading to re-zoning the former gravel pit tonight. I expect that 3rd reading to pass which will then allow for such a development on the road-side gravel-pit. There was a public meeting last week that had a lot of public attendance and virtually all who spoke about this proposal supported it. Apparently even the Squamish Access Society supports it which I found a little surprising.

2. I believe that the municipal re-zoning is the only political approval that has been granted thus far. There will be requirements for the proponent to secure land act tenures, licenses to cut, licenses of occupation and other such tenures all through the provincial government. The single biggest challenge for this development to succeed will be the changes required to the Chief and Shannon falls master plans in order to allow construction of the gondola right of way. Both the base and top station are planned to be outside of parks but the gondola is designed to travel through one or both of these parks.

3. I think that they intend to complete construction in 2013 if there are no major hurdles.

My own opinion on this proposed development is that it will take away from the integrity of the Chief and Shannon falls provincial parks. I believe that the gondola will add stress to an already over used resource and that compromising the values for which the park was originally established to allow for commercial development is misdirected. In my opinion, Provincial Parks should preserve natural amenities particularly in areas of high population density. I value these parks as they are and do not support this type of development inside or immediately adjacent them. I also believe that it is time that the CASBC provide an opinion on this matter.

The following is from the Stawamus Chief master plan:

VISION STATEMENT FOR STAWAMUS CHIEF PROVINCIAL PARK
The Management Plan for the Stawamus Chief Provincial Park must ensure a high level of
protection of the granite monoliths, their surrounding features and natural ecosystems. It will
also provide guidance to enhance the infrastructure for the traditional activities of rock
climbing, hiking, viewing and nature appreciation, while respecting the spiritual and cultural
values important to the Squamish First Nation and park visitors.

[staven]

Well said Tenn. This is just the first step in securing the rights to occupy crown and park land, and clear trees to build the proposal. There are significant hurdles yet to cross, many of which depend, at least in part, on public sentiment for the proposal. I liked how Sean Easton chose to speak out against the gondola in the Chief last week, to echo many of our thoughts and counter the "overwhelming support" for the gondola emanating from Squamish. The earlier people hear both sides of the story the better before things get traction. I wonder what the prospective councillors think about the thing? I heard Rob Kirkham's all about it.

[The_SAS_David_Jones]

Hi Anders,
I'll take a stab at a couple of your questions:

1. I believe that the District of Squamish municipal council is giving third reading to re-zoning the former gravel pit tonight. I expect that 3rd reading to pass which will then allow for such a development on the road-side gravel-pit. There was a public meeting last week that had a lot of public attendance and virtually all who spoke about this proposal supported it. Apparently even the Squamish Access Society supports it which I found a little surprising.
....

Just to be clear, SAS as an organization is neither for or against the Gondola, i.e. we have no position as it doesn't not appear to be impacting any climbing areas. We will continue to watch developments from the sideline and if climbing access is threatened (Oslen Creek and/or closure of existing logging roads for accessing Sky Pilot, Haybrich), then we will act accordingly.

David Jones
Co-Director of SAS

[psi4ce]

My own opinion on this proposed development is that it will take away from the integrity of the Chief and Shannon falls provincial parks. I believe that the gondola will add stress to an already over used resource and that compromising the values for which the park was originally established to allow for commercial development is misdirected. In my opinion, Provincial Parks should preserve natural amenities particularly in areas of high population density. I value these parks as they are and do not support this type of development inside or immediately adjacent them. I also believe that it is time that the CASBC provide an opinion on this matter.

Well said!

And yes, in the face of what seems to be more-or-less overwhelming support for the proposal, I completely agree with Tenn.