Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Pique in Your Interest

My two cents

On the idea to convert a portion of the Whistler Golf Course to staff housing:

First of all I’ve got nothing against golf. Some of my best friends are golfers.

This isn’t about golf, however, it’s about finding a sustainable way to keep employees in Whistler. The Callaghan Valley, no matter how handy some people claim it to be, is not Whistler.

This idea is a great one for so many reasons.

First of all, the Whistler Golf Course is operated by Tourism Whistler, and Tourism Whistler is owned by local businesses. Local businesses have said time and time again that they need new places to put their employees, and therefore they would probably support this idea by an overwhelming majority if it were put to a vote.

Secondly, Tourism Whistler would retain a nine hole executive course, something that is needed in the region. There are soon to be eight 18-hole courses in within a 45-minute drive of Whistler, but no nine hole courses. And let’s face it, not everyone has five hours to play a round of golf.

Thirdly, if Tourism Whistler needs the income from the golf course to cover the costs of the conference centre, then maybe this idea will be better for Tourism Whistler in the long run.

A nine-hole executive course would still make money six months a year – probably more than half of what the 18 hole course currently earns.

Tourism Whistler could also become the proxy landlord of all new rental properties on golf course lands. The Whistler Housing Authority would manage those properties, channelling a portion of the profits collected back to Tourism Whistler. That money would come in year-round, rather than spring to fall.

Tourism Whistler could also take control of the lands given to Whistler in the Callaghan and build another world class 18-hole course, possibly surrounded by trophy homes. It wouldn’t require the infrastructure of new community.

With a little vision, it seems to me that Tourism Whistler could almost make more money in the long run.

Tourism Whistler should canvass its members on the idea over the winter, and if there is enough support then they should take the next step and commission a study to find out how financially viable it is.

The idea is now officially outed in Whistler. People are talking about, and writing letters to the editor on the subject. Nobody can pretend they didn’t hear the idea, or shrug it off as one of those hippy paradise concepts that don’t work in real life. It’s not going away.

Failure to take this idea seriously, now that it’s out there, will only ensure that the idea never goes away. It will come up in letters and in open forums for sustainability and the Olympics. It will creep into the Tourism Whistler annual general meeting, and become an issue in the next municipal election. For decades people will be saying "they had a chance to save this town from becoming another Vail, and they blew it to keep the back nine of a golf course."

The only way that people who support or oppose this idea will find any peace is to crunch the numbers. Until somebody can prove that it won’t work, once and for all, the idea will remain a great one.

On the Nita Lake Lodge fiasco:

As a resident of the Creekside area, I know the Nita Lake Lodge spells the end of my neighbourhood. The old homes, rented to staff and owned by some of Whistler’s originals, are coming down, and million dollar DUH’s (Maxwell’s compelling acronym for Dark Unused Homes) are going up.

However, if the Nita Lake Lodge idea was scuttled, once and for all, would that prevent the gentrification and destruction of the area?

Probably not. The Nita Lake Lodge is a symptom of progress in the area, not the cause of it. If anything, the project is just a small part of a plan, already underway, to "revitalize" (a developer word for push out, tear down, build up and resell at a premium) the entire Creekside subdivision.

Yeah, I’m bitter.

The one consolation I had was that the Nita Lake Lodge development comes with staff housing – not enough to off-set what is being lost, but it’s better than nothing. Those old homes are going, no matter what happens. It was also nice to see the community getting something out of it, whether it was $1 million for new health care equipment, or the protection of the Millar Creek wetlands.

Now a lawsuit from a highly biased landowner threatens all the community benefits of this project, including staff housing and land deals, I’m forced to take sides with the developer. It’s an ironic position to be in, rooting for a project that will speed up the sale and reconstruction of the house I currently reside in. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be any third choice or middle ground here, without going back to the drawing board – and nobody wants that.

The municipality seems motivated to win this one and I hope they do.

My only concern now is that the issue of gentrification and the loss of staff homes in the neighbourhood is acknowledged, recorded, and replaced somewhere else. The hemorrhaging of staff housing has to stop.

Hey, I know a good spot between the village and Blueberry Hill…