Squamish Gondola Proposal – What YOU Can Do

[Anders Ourom]

There is a new proposal to build a tourist gondola through the heart of Stawamus Chief and Shannon Falls Provincial Parks (the “Parks”), at Squamish. It is by Ground Effects Developments Inc. The proposal would have substantial impacts on the Parks. It still needs some government approvals, in particular for removing a significant amount of land from the centre of the Parks. Please take a few minutes to learn about the proposal, and express your opinion. There’s still time for you to make a difference.

The reasons that I believe this proposal is not in the public interest, and the interest of the climbing, hiking and conservation communities:

1. Land should not be taken from provincial parks for private development, with rare exceptions. What’s the point of parks, if they’re not truly protected? The Chief and area has outstanding natural, scenic and recreational values. The priority should be protecting those values.

2. There is nothing in the master plan for either of the Parks that would allow such a development. The Parks are well-established, with hundreds of thousands of annual user-days already, and make a huge contribution to the culture and economy of the area.

3. The impacts on the Parks and their users will be substantial, and greater than the developers claim. The benefits will likely be less.

4. There is a superior location nearby. A gondola to Goat Ridge, a few km south, could be based either in the established tourist centre of Britannia, or perhaps off the highway a few km north of Murrin Park. It would have better views, more room, still give access to the upper Shannon Creek basin, offer equal or better recreational opportunities, spread out development in the Squamish area, and not conflict with existing users or values, or the Parks. It may also fit better with the developer’s long-term plans. That location should at least be thoroughly considered before a proposal to cram a gondola into the Parks is considered, let alone granted.

5. If the project proceeds, and fails, who will clean up the mess? What financial guarantees would the developers provide?

This is much more than a local issue, and those who come after us will have to live with the consequences. Now’s the time to say what you think about this. Please write to the governments with your views, and forward this to your friends and associates.

How You Can Help

At this point the most effective thing to do is to write, and to inform everyone you know about what’s happening. You can write to:

• Premier Christy Clark premier@gov.bc.ca or (604) 775-1003
• Terry Lake, Minister of Environment env.minister@gov.bc.ca or (250) 387-1187
• Joan McIntyre, MLA joan.mcintyre.mla@leg.bc.ca or (604) 981-0045
• Chief Ian Campbell, Squamish Nation chief_ian_campbell@squamish.net or (604) 982-8646
• Mayor Rob Kirkham rkirkham@squamish.ca or (604) 892-5217 (see http://www.squamish.ca/city-hall/mayor- ... ouncillors for contact information for councillors)
• Chair Susan Gimse, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District sgimse@telus.net or (604) 894-6371 (see http://www.slrd.bc.ca/siteengine/active ... ?PageID=20 for contact information for councillors)

State your views, the reasons you have them, why you’re interested in this issue, who you are, and where you live. Remind them that government’s job is to protect and manage parks, in the public interest.

You can also write to:

• Vancouver Sun: sunletters@vancouversun.com
• Squamish Chief (newspaper) dburke@squamishchief.com
• Globe & Mail letters@globeandmail.ca
• Georgia Straight letters@straight.com
• Vancouver Province provletters@theprovince.com

Numbers count!

The Proposal

Ground Effects’ website is at http://www.seatoskygondola.com There’s lots of information there about its proposal, naturally presented in as positive a manner as possible. Its owners are from Whistler. The proposed gondola would go from a base at the gravel pit between the Parks, through the middle of the Parks to a knoll in upper Shannon Creek, at about 900 m. For it to go ahead, it has to get a substantial strip of land taken out of the Parks. The only way that can happen is if the provincial government allows it.

Background

The Stawamus Chief (Siyám Smánit) and area was made a provincial park in 1995, after decades of lobbying, and years of study and discussion. It’s a heavily used park, with over 100,000 annual hiker-days, a similar number of climber-days, a popular climbers’ campground, and innumerable viewers and tourist visitors. Shannon Falls Provincial Park, just to the south, was created decades ago, and is primarily a viewing attraction, but offers some climbing. The Parks are contiguous, and both are bounded above and to the east by a line of bluffs and cliffs, below upper Shannon Creek basin. They are iconic natural features of British Columbia and Canada, and the Chief is an international climbing destination.

There is a gravel pit between the Parks, just off Highway 99. In 2004, a Whistler developer proposed building a gondola from the gravel pit to the second summit of the Chief. The Climbers’ Access Society of B.C. helped lead the successful opposition. After our success, and with help from Mountain Equipment Co-op and others, the Land Conservancy of B.C. (“TLC”) bought the gravel pit, for $900,000. We wanted to ensure the Parks could never again be threatened by inappropriate development, such as a gondola. The gravel pit was rented to the highway project, to help pay for it, and the agreement was that the land would either go to the Parks, or possibly to a private buyer for some suitable, low impact purpose. Either way, it would have a restrictive covenant on title, to legally prevent unwanted developments such as gondolas.

That isn’t what happened, and now we have to deal with the consequences.

From what’s known, TLC tried to get Squamish to rezone the land to protect it, without success. BC Parks didn’t have the purchase price for the land. (Chronic underfunding of BC Parks is an ongoing scandal.) TLC put a covenant on the land, which “..prevents a gondola going up the face of the Chief or ending in either provincial park..”, and eventually sold the gravel pit to a buyer who “..proposed a low key commercial use”. The price was $2 million. He resold the land to Ground Effects. There may, of course, be more to the story.

The proposed gondola would avoid the restrictive covenant on a technicality. First, the top station would be outside (above) the Parks. Second, Ground Effects wants a strip of land taken out of centre of the Parks, to connect the gravel pit to the top. (It was quoted as saying a 20 m strip, but it seems likely to be wider.)The gondola would then neither be in, nor end in, either of the Parks. An unfortunate bit of legerdemain, and a nightmare for those who thought we’d dealt with this for once and for all in 2004.

(For more, see http://www.straight.com/article-634541/ ... chief-park)

Perhaps Ground Effects would say that it worked within the letter of the law, and blame (or credit) TLC for the covenant’s inadequate wording. If it is prepared to advance its plans by such tactics, it does not bode well. Complete transparency in these matters is in public interest. Any dealings between the various governments and Ground Effects, and any proposed agreement between it and the provincial government, should be entirely public. Also, just because it’s public, the land isn’t “free”. Ground Effects should pay a fair and public price for it, if it’s allowed to proceed. That’s no compensation for the impacts the development would have, but is the least to be expected.

Hopefully TLC is taking steps to enforce its rights, both legal and moral, against the intermediate buyer and against Ground Effects. It’s the least one would expect it to do. TLC should stand up for the public’s rights, even if it may not succeed. It seems to have made enough money on the sale to pursue the matter, and a court might see things differently.

Required Approvals

The required government approvals are:

• District of Squamish.
• Squamish-Lillooet Regional District.
• B.C. Government.
• Squamish Nation.

Ground Effects plans to obtain the remaining approvals, including possibly legislation to remove land from the Parks, by summer 2012, and then begin construction. Now’s the time to send your comments, especially to Premier Clark and the provincial government. They have an election coming up soon, and apparently haven’t decided yet what they’ll do. They advertise B.C. as “super, natural”, and should live up to that claim.

Impacts

Despite the vague, rosy claims on Ground Effects’ website, the gondola would have substantial impacts on the Parks and existing users.

Visual: Ground Effects claims that “.. our initial analysis shows there will be very little view impact from downtown Squamish, the Sea to Sky Highway or the Stawamus Chief.” What nonsense! The development would be highly visible from the Chief, Squamish, and the highway. The company probably wants it to be – good advertising for it, an ugly intrusion to most. The cleared strip, the trams (no doubt brightly coloured), and development at the upper station will be unmissable. There are photos on their website showing the view from different points, and if the Chief, the highway and Squamish are visible from the gondola, the reverse is also true. Isn’t the view half the point of the thing?

Clearcut: The clearcut strip would likely be 60 - 80 m wide or more (not 20), through the middle of the Parks. The area is bluffy, but heavily treed. The trees are up 30 to 40 m high. Squamish is a windy place, and trees often fall – especially at the edge of clearcuts. It is standard practice to clear a strip on both sides of such developments at least equal to twice the height of the adjacent trees. Just look at any gondola or powerline. The result? An 80 m (or more) wide clearcut. Instead of the claimed two hectares, probably closer to eight or ten. “Only” 8 - 10 hectares out of 517, but in a key location.

Noise: There would be much increased noise at both Parks, due to vehicle traffic, base operations, and an overhead gondola. Visit the base of an existing gondola, to hear for yourself. The noise would probably most affect the Chief campground, the lower part of the backside trail, and Shannon Falls. The base area is within a few hundred m of the campground, and the gondola would pass near the campground, and the start of the trail.

Facilities: Ground Effects makes vague statements about what will happen at the upper terminal. What would it actually build, when? It talks about a “first phase” – what’s the “next phase(s)”? Does it know that there’s a band of cliffs and bluffs below the proposed top station, making suggested hiking and mountain bike trails linking up with those at the Chief improbable?
Benefits to the Parks: None. You’d think that Ground Effects would at least promise that it would contribute to badly-needed trail work at the Chief, or something of the sort, whether or not it meant it. The Parks don’t need any more development – there’s already more than enough happening there. Why cram more in?

Precedent: The provincial government has a long history of allowing commercial and industrial development in parks, and of land withdrawals from parks for the benefit of developers. It is rarely of any benefit to the parks, or the public. Perhaps the most conspicuous example of this is Garibaldi Park. Allowing this proposal to go ahead would be an appalling precedent. The government needs to show some backbone when faced with these proposals.

A Better Alternative – Goat Ridge

Luckily, there is a superior alternative location for a tourist gondola, close by. (Assuming, that is, that a tourist gondola makes sense anywhere in the area.) That location would be from a base at Britannia Beach to an upper station on Goat Ridge, between the Parks and Britannia. (An alternative base would be off Highway 99, a few km north of Murrin Park, with the same upper terminal.) The advantages include:

• Existing room, tourist infrastructure and traffic at Britannia – parking, B.C. Museum of Mines, restaurants, gift shops, etc. Parking and a base area at the second ‘level’ of Britannia may be most workable. A tourist gondola might even kickstart redevelopment at Britannia.

• The gondola would be on mostly undeveloped private land, owned by the successor to the Anaconda Company and sitting for decades, or provincial government forest land.

• The gondola and upper station would have much better views. The terminus would be 2 -3 km south of the proposed location, at about 900 m on an open shoulder of Goat Ridge, instead of in a valley with dense second growth forest.

• A Goat Ridge gondola could still link into a trail network in upper Shannon Creek, and there’s lots of room for a hiking and mountain bike trail network west and south on Goat Ridge, in the Petgill Lake area. It’s less bluffy, and Goat Ridge is more open than upper Shannon Creek.

• The gondola and facilities would be less visible from Squamish and area.

• No impacts on the Parks, and no need for cutting the heart out of them. A respectful separation would promote respect, and neighbourliness.

• Few conflicts with other users – there are trails to Petgill Lake (popular) and Goat Ridge (not often hiked), perhaps some mountain bike trails in upper Shannon Creek basin, possibly traditional uses by the Squamish Nation, but that’s all.

•Spreading out recreation and tourist development in the Squamish area in a reasonable manner – not everything has to be crammed into the same place.

• Good will, for being reasonable.

• Lots of room to expand, if it’s ever desired. (The history of private developments within parks is often messy, as they grow and increase their demands.)

It should not take long to properly examine this alternative, and the provincial government should require it. That is, similar studies and planning as were done for the Squamish proposal, and similar discussions. Not a cursory review, but a genuine detailed consideration of a better alternative. Ground Effects, or at least the investors behind it, must be in it for the long term, 20 – 50 years anyway. They say they’ll spend $15 - $20 million, just on the “first phase” – whatever that is. But however much they and others may be emotionally committed to their proposal at the Chief, it’s in their longer-term business interests to carefully look at a real alternative, and how their public and private plans might better work at Goat Ridge. They might also make more money.

As for the gravel pit? It should be bought by the provincial government, as it ought to have been all along, and added to the Parks. It would provide much-needed parking, and possibly room for camping.

Conclusion

Thanks for reading this, and please send in your comments as soon as possible. Your priority should be to write to the governments, asap. Of course, I welcome comments and feedback.

Anders Ourom
Vancouver, B.C.
(604) 228-1798

(I’ve been a member of the B.C. and Squamish climbing communities since 1971, and written and spoken about climbing at Squamish in a wide variety of contexts over the years. I was a member of the public planning team that led to the Stawamus Chief becoming a provincial park, and which developed a master plan and rock climbing strategy for the park. I’ve climbed and hiked extensively in the Parks and area, and contributed to their stewardship. I am a past president and honourary member of the B.C. Mountaineering Club; past president of the Climbers’ Access Society of B.C.; past chair of Mountain Equipment Co-op; and have held other offices in large and small mountain-related organizations, and others. I represent only myself, but believe I am speaking for many, both those who now use and cherish the Parks, and those who will come after us.)

[Tricouni]

I would have no real problem with a gondola if it didn't infringe on the parks. Goat Ridge from Britannia would be fine with me; the Britannia Creek drainage is totally screwed up as it is. The current proposal is not acceptable to me; I'm opposed to anything motorized that infringes on the parks.

I never knew the story of the gravel pit. Very disappointing.

[nO]

Anders - I agree with much of what you say above... would you mind if I cut-and-paste most of what you have written in order to create my own email to send to the Premier etc.?

I will personalize my response a little and add a few of my own comments/observations but it would be easiest if I could plagiarize you since you've already done a good job of writing it out.

I will wait to hear back from you before stealing your words - thanks, Noelle

[AaronRN]

At the risk of sounding unpopular, I for one support the creation of the Gondola. As for the Park issue, I believe it's worth reading the following link. http://www.seatoskygondola.com/updates/ ... ification/ Does a 20m wide right of way and the reclassification of that right of way = a Hydo-line-style clear cut through the middle of the Park? Come on... this is a local buisness attuned to local concern and international expectations on their impacat or percieved impact on the sorounding environment and more importantly the impact or percieved impact on the esthetic integrity of the area.
Aaron Kristiansen.

[Anders Ourom]

Noelle, OK by me if you borrow from what I wrote - although often it's better to put things in your own words, at least for part. Politicians and civil servants get no end of "form letter" style e-mails from partisans, so something personalized may get more attention.

It seems very doubtful that the cleared strip will be only 20 m wide, for reasons discussed in the original post. More like 60 - 80, or more. Also, if it's relevant, it appears that the two principals of the developer live in Whistler, not Squamish - does that make it a local business? (We of course may not know who else may be involved, in terms of investors etc.)

As for the motivation of the developers, it's to make money. Let's not kid ourselves. They can talk all they like about their plans for green operations, minimizing impacts, local employment, access for the disabled, and on and on. Maybe some or all of what they claim would come true - still, promises are easy to make, harder to enforce. But their motive is to make money, using public land, mostly from public parks, from a base area that never should have been available for what they want to do in the first place.

It might be interesting to do an FOI request, for all contacts between the developer and the various governments over say the last four years. Plus all internal government documents relating to this.

[Anders Ourom]

For clarity, and because the forum doesn't allow posts to be edited, at some point the company behind the proposal became Sea to Sky Gondola Corp. It seems likely that the new company is a spin-off of Ground Effects, as the individuals involved seem to be the same. Earlier references to Ground Effects Developments Inc. should be taken to read Sea to Sky Gondola Corp., if it is material.

If you're writing letters, etc, refer to Sea to Sky Gondola Corp.