Friends of Nita Lake

Council’s support of the rezoning proposal was voted The Third Worst Decision Made by Council in 2021 by readers of The Pique.

Background for New Public Hearing

Third Reading of the bylaw authorizing the dramatic rezoning on the west side of Nita Lake (RZ1157) was rescinded by the Council due to a procedural mistake (Zoning Amendment Bylaw [5298 Alta Lake Road] No. 2283, 2020). There will now be a new Public Hearing and a fresh opportunity to let Council know that this proposal does not have the support of the community: April 6 at 5:30pm via Zoom.

New Public Hearing Details: Please visit the RMOW site here to see all new and past materials regarding the Alta Lake Rezoning as well as the Public Hearing Notice with details on how to make oral representations and/or submit written comments.

What happened at the last Public Hearing?

In its Administrative Report to Council on June 15, 2021, RMOW staff summarized the comments from written submission and oral presentations. Of particular interest were:

Zoning Rights

In its recommendations to Council following the Public Hearing, Staff finally corrected the misconception that the rezoning applicant has a right to the density in existing zoning rights (TA17) on this property where there is a change of use. The public was misled prior to and during the public hearing process by the developer and his representative. In fact, Council has discretion to allow any or no density for the new uses according to what is in the public interest. Council remains in the driver’s seat and can ask for much more in exchange for the very valuable rezoning that the developer is asking for. Why is Council selling Nita Lake’s future for short term gain?

Traffic and Parking

Despite the numerous comments and concerns about Traffic and Parking, Staff indicated that the traffic and parking were within acceptable standards. They concluded the traffic generated by this proposal is well below the traffic operation capacity of Nita Lake Drive and Alta Lake Road. In their opinion, no further mitigation improvements are required on the existing road network over and above the improvements already included in the development.

The RMOW has made these conclusions based on a Traffic Study that is now 2 1/2 years old. Municipal staff have admitted that this initial Traffic Study, conducted on a weekday during Shoulder Season, was not valid; Council and staff later requested a new Traffic Study be completed but none was ever been performed and the applicant only provided a “revised report” based on an extrapolation of data. This report does not take into account traffic into the park (which staff claim people will only access by walking and cycling) or the potential traffic from the future WHA parcel. One would have thought that responsible planning would consider the long-term implications of the whole project and plan accordingly. There were very real traffic concerns in Whistler this past summer and winter, especially along Alta Lake Road (with Google re-directing people along Alta Lake Road). The RMOW should insist that the applicant do a new study as requested and not let this important requirement slip through incomplete.

Density

In response to expressed concerns regarding density, staff agreed with the Whistler community and requested that the project team explore the possibility of removing a market unit. The applicant responded that this would only be financially viable with associated removal of multiple employee units. Instead, the applicant proposed a token 5% reduction in the gross floor area of the market units, resulting in only a 210 m2 reduction in market density. Clearly, this is not significant enough to reduce the overall footprint of the development. In the past year, housing prices in Whistler increased by 30%, so the cost to build Employee Housing no longer justifies the huge profits represented by these market townhomes which could now (compare, e.g., Red Sky at Baxter Creek) be valued at $3.4 million each for a total revenue of $74.8 million. Surely, the applicant could now reduce the footprint further or provide more WHA homes for Whistler employees. Zoning for tourist accommodation townhomes adds tremendous value to the rezoning proposal incommensurate with the benefits received. Why is council not insisting on more from this developer?

Effects of View and Screening

Staff never addressed the concerns repeatedly raised regarding the amount of tree removal and clearing that is required for the proposed development. Numerous letters and testimonials at the Public Hearing expressed worries that the project will be highly visible from neighbouring properties as well as from across the valley. Valid concerns remain regarding the loss of forestation on the lake, and the resulting change in character of the area. Many expressed concerns about the loss of valuable green space and the long term cumulative effects of these decisions on the future for Whistler. The density of the tourist-accommodation townhomes remains too great for this sensitive lakeside site. Neither Council nor the developer have ever denied that extensive clearcutting on the lake will be required for this project.