Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Council finally weighs in

More than a year and a half after it began, Whistler’s latest great issue was wrestled to the ground by the seven members of council Monday night.
bobbyline

More than a year and a half after it began, Whistler’s latest great issue was wrestled to the ground by the seven members of council Monday night. While London Drugs will not be a part of the Whistler Village, at least in the foreseeable future, the debate exposed several other issues that need to be dealt with, including the state of retail in the village, affordability and the precarious balance between community and visitor needs in a place the size of Whistler.

The passion, and the vitriol, that the London Drugs/Larco rezoning generated in recent weeks was palpable Monday night. Council members were nervous; municipal staff was mindful of what was going on behind their backs and some members of the public looked like they were itching for a fight. And after presentations from staff, Larco representative Jonathan Lazar, London Drugs supporters and others who questioned various aspects of the whole process, council members finally had their say.

As each council member spoke it became apparent that most had thought long and hard about this decision. They had listened. They had read all the letters and all the names and comments on the petitions. With staff’s assistance they had studied the history of the Larco site, including the “found” underground space and the previous rezonings of that space. They considered the state of retail in the village and acknowledged it is not what it should be. They heard residents’ call to address affordability, and they weighed that against visitors’ expectations that the village be something more than a mall. And then, independently one presumes, they came to their decision.

And it was unanimous. Larco’s rezoning application was rejected.

Several council members made the point that the issue was not London Drugs, it was a rezoning application. Some may consider this splitting hairs, or perhaps a vengeful move against an unpopular landlord. It was neither.

As Councillor Nancy Wilhelm-Morden pointed out, Larco let London Drugs do “all the heavy lifting” in this matter. Polls, petitions, ad campaigns and letters to the editor showed many Whistlerites do want London Drugs in town. Several council members acknowledged that and said they would welcome London Drugs, but not at 17,000 square feet in the village.

While the issue for many residents was London Drugs, yes or no, that was not the issue before council. And council was right to recognize this. It’s now time to move on and address other issues that were exposed in this debate.

Affordability is one. Whether or not London Drugs would have made Whistler more affordable is a moot point now. But besides discounted recreation passes, what else is being done to address affordability? Councillor Gord McKeever stated in the context of London Drugs Monday that “… focusing our efforts on resident housing will have a bigger impact on affordability.” Point taken. Make it happen.

The retail study — that is not yet complete and therefore is not a retail strategy — has also been criticized. Because the previous council held off on a decision about the Larco rezoning until the retail study was completed, the two became one issue. The first steps to separate them were taken Monday.

Staff, councillors and London Drugs supporters all acknowledged during the course of the debate that the retail scene in Whistler Village is not what it should be (the Pharmasave and Rexall received specific mention). There are a number of vacant spaces with paper on the windows. “Sale” signs are now visible 12 months of the year. And several of the new shops that have opened in recent years have been discount or outlet stores.

There are many factors that have led to this current state, including external forces such as oversupply and consolidation in the sporting goods industry and the general decline in visitor numbers between 2000 and 2005. But there are measures that can be taken locally that might help inspire struggling retailers who have turned to the tourism staples of T-shirts and maple syrup in order to survive. These things might include landlords adjusting rents and the municipality adjusting commercial taxes.

It was suggested that not permitting any additional retail space was going to drive up rents, perhaps not immediately because there is vacant space in the village now, but eventually the laws of supply and demand will make even higher rents a reality.

But again there are multiple factors to consider, including retail space in areas of Whistler other than the village, the type of goods being sold and the value of sales per square foot of retail space. Zoning may be a blunt tool to deal with these finer points but further dialogue during the next steps of the retail strategy could lead to a better understanding of everyone’s needs, desires and abilities.

And underlying the whole debate was the resort-community teeter-totter, with residents on one end and visitors on the other. On this issue, it would seem, council added its weight to the visitor end. Perhaps that is the source of the anger that has infected this issue; council isn’t seen to be responsive to the demands of residents.

But council was acting in the best interests of all of Whistler.