Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Whistler voices opposition to Squamish ski resort

Concerns abound over scope and size of proposed Garibaldi at Squamish project
1432gasopposition
Speaking out The RMOW lists its concerns and clearly oppposes plans for a four season resort north of Squamish. Photo by Maureen Provencal.

The resort municipality is not mincing its words when it comes to its opposition of a proposed new ski resort on its doorstep.

In a five-page letter to the Environmental Assessment Office, Whistler’s Mayor Ken Melamed outlined his serious concerns regarding the large ski/golf/real estate development proposal just north of Squamish.

“Whistler’s position obviously expresses concern for Whistler’s interests but also for the corridor and for British Columbia,” said the mayor this week. “We don’t think this resort is viable. We think that it’s potentially very risky financially and the worst thing you want to do is create financial challenges in one area which could then spill over into other jurisdictions.”

At issue is a multi-million dollar four season resort development with a ski area similar in size to Big White, two golf courses and more than 5,700 units of housing just outside Squamish’s northern boundary.

The president of Garibaldi at Squamish (GAS) Mike Esler said their studies show the resort is financially viable and takes issue with Whistler’s contention that the project is simply a real estate grab under the auspices of a resort development.

“In my opinion it is financially viable and the provincial government’s privy to our numbers,” Esler said.

“For somebody to suggest at an existing ski resort who has all their infrastructure paid for by government where our resort has to pay for all of its own infrastructure, to suggest it’s a real estate grab is quite frankly… ludicrous and ill-informed. It’s just not the case.”

The company, he added, is building two golf courses, 25 ski lifts and investing roughly $300 million into ski infrastructure.

Among the resort municipality’s list of concerns is the sheer size and scale of the development, the potential impacts it will have on the already challenged occupancy levels in the resort, the fact that the submission does not address mitigation efforts for climate change, and the risk to the billions of dollars already invested in Whistler.

In his letter the mayor writes:

“The scale of the proposed GAS development is shocking. The proposal indicated in excess of 15,000 skiers at one time… as the carrying capacity of the mountains. There is no credible explanation of where GAS intends to get 15,000 additional skiers for every day of the ski season. We are thus left to believe that, if approved, (the) government would be endorsing the notion of new resorts stealing the market share from existing B.C. resorts.”

Esler said information will be made public shortly but essentially GAS believes it can capture the growing segment of the ski industry in B.C., particularly as the provincial government continues to invest in infrastructure as it works to its goal of doubling tourism by 2015.

“Competition creates a better ski experience for the consumer,” Esler added. “Clustering creates an environment where competing ski resorts have to re-invest back in their development. It attracts more skiers to the area because they’ve got more choices so usually everybody benefits from competition.

“But can I say unequivocally that we won’t be biting into Whistler’s market share? I don’t know.”

Squamish Mayor Ian Sutherland was blunt in his criticisms of Whistler weighing in on the project at this time.

In his view, this is a Squamish project because it is that town’s position the resort development should fall under its jurisdiction as part of a boundary expansion. It has made this position clear to the provincial government.

“I’m not quite sure why Whistler’s getting involved with something that’s under our jurisdiction,” said Sutherland. “I’m quite sure that Whistler would be quite concerned if we were getting involved in issues in their jurisdiction.

“Apparently Whistler feels they have the right and the ability to tell the rest of us how to run our communities.

“I think sometimes that Whistler forgets that we have the ability to deal with these issues ourselves.”

He admitted that there are concerns in Squamish, too, about the size and the scope of the project and its potential impacts on Cat Lake and Brohm Lake.

Those issues will be worked out, he said, through the environmental assessment process, which is still in the very early stages.

Mayor Melamed said he is sensitive to Squamish’s position and understands the potential economic opportunity for the district.

“I have a lot of concern that our comments will be taken as fair and honest and open input (and) that the community of Squamish will be able to accept them as they’re given,” said the Whistler mayor. “We’re hoping they don’t see this as being totally Whistler-centric. At the same time we believe we need to stand up for ourselves. I guess at the end of the day we fully support Squamish’s desire to be sustainable as well. We’re suggesting that this is perhaps not maybe one of the best investments of time and energy and infrastructure dollars and putting a lot of hope on a destination resort which we don’t think has a lot of chance of succeeding.”

The public comment period ended on Aug. 5. It is expected there will be another public comment period after the proponent submits more information.

The provincial EAO is a neutral provincial agency that coordinates assessments of the impacts of major development proposals in B.C., including the environmental, economic, social, heritage and health imacts of a particular project. The Minister of Environment, Barry Penner, and the Minister of Tourism, Sport & the Arts, Stan Hagen, will make the final decision on an environmental certificate after weighing the input.