Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Feature - Callaghan Valley

Is the Callaghan Whistler’s key to sustainability?
callaghan_valley

A long-term look at what the community needs and what opportunities exist

I am stirred awake by my husband’s clunking ski boots. It seems that the weather forecast must have been right. He catches my bleary eye. "We had 20 cm of new again, I am off to take a small tour up Brandywine with Mikey. I will be back in the office at 10." I look at the clock it is still dark, just 6:45 a.m. I am still contemplating catching another hour of sleep, before I hop on the train for a noon meeting in Vancouver when my teenage daughter hollers, "Coach is letting us try the 90 metre Mom, wish me luck." I cringe; I still have a hard time watching her launch off the jumps at Olympic Park. But the facility is just up the road and has been tempting her since she was 10 and watched the Canadian favourite capture gold. The door slams shut as my worry meter start to rise. The phone rings – "Hey Mom guess what?" The cheery and particularly loud voice is that of my 20 year old son. He goes to college every day just five minutes away, but chooses to live near the village, closer to his part time job and the action. "I have a second interview for an apprenticeship in town. If I get the job I won’t have to leave the trails and the powdies." After providing the expected enthusiastic proud parental response, I pause to think how I never would have predicted 15 years ago that I would still be raising my family in Whistler, where we can all earn a decent living, have a modest home, and where our kids may actually be part of Whistler’s second and third generations.

By Caroline Lamont

In the early 1970s a group of visionary spirits attempted to bring Whistler into the spotlight as the host for the 1976 Olympic Winter Games. It was the expectation that the Olympics would provide the needed planning and infrastructure for the development of a mountain destination resort. Garry Watson, a long time local who was involved with the effort remembers that "Whistler had the best technical bid but was unsuccessful due to Montreal winning the Summer Games." But the bid was worth it as it contributed to interest in Whistler as a winter ski resort, leading to the incorporation of the Resort Municipality and construction of a pedestrian oriented village. The first Olympic bid although not triumphant, provided the planning and the process to ensure that Whistler Village could be a lasting legacy.

Almost 30 years later there are a new group of enthusiasts who also want to bring the Winter Olympics to Whistler (and Vancouver). Organizers, in accordance with the 2010 Bid Web site, believe that the winter road show will increase the exposure of Whistler/Vancouver on the world stage, give an economic boost to the region, provide exposure for winter athletes, increase community pride and fast track certain infrastructure improvements.

The idea does have its critics, as a number of members of the Whistler community appear cautious with their support. The community while captivated by the thought of hosting the world’s finest athletes and drawn into the international celebration, feels uninformed and troubled by the potential negative impacts of the Games. This uncertainty may be due to the lack of a clear community and resort implementation strategy for the next five, 10 or 25 years that recognizes the prospect of holding the Olympics. Such a strategy would allow local stakeholders to understand the impact of the Olympic Games and determine lasting legacies for the bid and the Games.

The Resort Municipality of Whistler is now addressing this need as they have recently committed to developing a new long range plan for Whistler. The planning document is intended to work towards ensuring that Whistler is environmentally, economically and socially sustainable. At this time the project is known as the Comprehensive Sustainability Plan (CSP). In accordance with the municipality’s Request for Expression of Interest, the CSP will consolidate and supercede earlier strategic planning documents and inform changes to the Official Community Plan. If all goes well the document will prepare an implementation strategy for the motherhood statements contained within the Vision 2002 document.

The CSP document and the Olympic bid will need to confront all the major issues that will arise in the next 10 years, including: buildout, further lift and ski area expansion, a growing demand for recreation from Vancouver; increased property values and taxes; First Nations’ land claims; the Natural Step and Environmental Strategy; designation of Protected Area Networks; keeping a unique resort product; retaining and housing workers; and most of all balancing the success of the resort with the community need for a healthy and fulfilled volunteer and employed citizenry.

The CSP has a huge task particularly in dealing with economic and social sustainability, as Whistler is a difficult study with its unique and dynamic demographic profile. The transient nature of the community, as well as the current real estate market, ensures that it is unlikely the community will be able to remain stable in the future. Whistler’s housing prices compared to U.S. resorts, proximity to Vancouver and baby boomers’ desire to own recreation property will ensure a steady demand for real estate. Combine all of this with a growth moratorium and it is guaranteed that the cost to own a market home will be entirely out of reach of the local workforce.

The Whistler Housing Authority Web site indicates that in September 2000 Whistler’s total winter workforce was 13,500 whereby 79 per cent of these employees lived in Whistler, but less than 25 per cent of the resident workforce lived in employee restricted housing. Furthermore, as Whistler reaches build-out there will be a decrease in the amount of available non-restricted housing (which locally houses almost 60 per cent of the current workforce).

There is also the instability of the current resident property owners who may no longer want to pay the resort’s rising property taxes. If they cash-out it is unlikely that the new purchasers will be local families and individuals in the community.

The Vision 2002 document states, "We will continue to build a thriving resort community that emphasizes quality of life for its residents and respects the diversity of its people." If the current trends continue it will become increasingly difficult to provide businesses and employees with the appropriate housing, goods and services needed for a sustainable resort community.

But could there be a silver bullet that could fulfill Whistler’s vision, and accommodate the Olympics without compromising the economic and environmental necessities to keep Whistler sustainable? Any hope comes from a comprehensive examination of Whistler’s assets in terms of social capital (the people) and natural resources, so as to determine if any new growth can actually benefit the entire resort community.

In the past the impact of development in Whistler has had varied success. Whistler’s community planning directions are a diverse combination of suburban style subdivisions, a compact town centre and more infill growth dictated by an "all but affordable housing" moratorium. As much as the bed unit freeze has helped shape a successful resort, it is a major stumbling block to sustainability.

When the moratorium was first adopted, it was to ensure that growth would be appropriate to fulfill the needs of the aspiring resort. It was later expanded in 1994 to permit new growth for only affordable housing or community-deemed extraordinary circumstances. But after nearly eight years of breathing room, it is clear that it will be impossible to provide all of the needed housing and community services.

The moratorium should be reconsidered, whereby land that could be developed or redeveloped without any major impacts (outside the proposed protected area networks) should be inventoried and designated for uses which will benefit the long term needs of Whistler. Possible sites include the former Rainbow Ski Area between Alpine and Emerald, Whistler Creek Lake Placid Drive, Whistler Golf Course Driving Range and the Shoestring Lodge lands. The review should involve the community, environmental interests, landowners and the decision makers.

But is it likely that the existing developed footprint in Whistler will be able to ensure the social and economic sustainability of Whistler for the next 10-25 years? The CSP process may determine that the resort community’s long term goals include the need for a new neighbourhood. Is there land within the existing municipal boundaries, that would not compromise the natural appeal of Whistler? Could this new neighbourhood ensure the social and economic sustainability of the resort community and at the same time appropriately reflect the small town nature, ecological sensitivity and varied terrain of a mountain town?

It has been the perception in Whistler for the past decade that new growth is not good or desirable. The only exception was the allocation of development rights for affordable housing or environmental preservation. The book Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities (Howe, McMahon and Propst) provides lessons in how to preserve the character and integrity of communities adjacent to public lands. The book indicates "that highly regulated, wealthy enclaves that allow only the most desirable uses… simply export or externalize the less desirable, less manicured land uses to other communities."

If Whistler shuts its door on growth needed to ensure the operation of the resort, will the community be sustainable in a regional context? The extension of the moratorium on any growth will export necessary housing, commercial and industrial uses up or down valley (This may be a bigger issue to the preservation of Pemberton’s rural character given the recently announced Agricultural Land Reserve reorganization).

But unlike the common perception in Whistler, growth does not need to be negative. Rather, if done responsibly growth can achieve community and regional goals. One possible urban growth model is Smart Growth "a common ground where developers, environmentalists, public officials, citizens and financiers can accommodate acceptable levels of growth" (Smart Growth Canada). The method assumes that growth is inevitable and needed while the goal of the model is not to stop growth but rather accommodate it in sensible ways that preserve the integrity of the community, protect the environment and enhance economic vitality.

"Fundamental principles of the Smart Growth movement favour mixed use, walkable communities centred around public transportation, contain a regulatory strategy for limiting urban sprawl with geographical boundaries, promote greater development density and efficiency and preserve open spaces and natural systems" (Smart Growth Canada).

Application of the Smart Growth approach to a new neighbourhood could result in a master-planned community with a local oriented commercial centre (that would be planned and phased not to compete but complement other commercial areas), integrated residential (not tourist accommodation) uses and community facilities. Prior to laying out the infrastructure and development parcels important environmental features and principles would be identified and respected. Land use and phasing programs would reflect the long term needs of Whistler and the region.

If the community supports new directed growth in the Comprehensive Sustainability Plan, planners will then need to determine if there are any areas within or near the municipal boundaries that are suitable. This of course is where Whistler’s long range planning can be interwoven with the Olympic legacy.

When the Resort Municipality commenced drafting of the existing 1994 OCP and Comprehensive Development Plan (1994 CDP), there was a concern that uncontrolled growth would continue to sprawl up to and beyond the municipal boundaries. In an attempt to recognize an area for future growth the CDP stated: "While development interest was formerly confined to a few nodes in the region, there is now widespread interest and several proposals or prospects, including: Furry Creek, Porteau, and Britannia, Brohm Ridge… and … the Callaghan area, which has potential for many different kinds of development, resource and recreation use."

Council adopted this policy in 1994, long before the added issue of the Olympics. As much as the valley is a dream site for the Nordic Olympic events, the lands closest to the highway have incredible development potential, being mostly second growth forest, relatively flat, and only a 15 minute drive to the Whistler Village.

The prospect of considering Callaghan for a future growth area brings forward many major hurdles, including environmental protection, B.C. Assets and Lands, First Nations’ land claims, servicing and transportation. But freezing Whistler’s urban footprint will bring with it more difficult social and economic issues where Whistler becomes only a community for the very wealthy. Community builders will live in outlying communities of Squamish and Pemberton.

In a 10 to 25 year time frame the Callaghan has the potential to retain a significant resident base while providing all of the services and facilities that in the future can not be squeezed into the incorporated land from Function Junction to Emerald Estates. Such services as employee housing (majority of the units could be resident-use restricted), local-oriented businesses and heavy industrial and office space could be part of the mix, while other facilities such as a hospital, college, community and recreation centres, beginners night skiing (which could complement the Nordic Olympic facility) and another school (reverting Spring Creek to a middle school) may be realized. It will also ensure that environmentally sensitive lands within the municipal boundaries, now subject to development pressure, could be purchased and preserved in perpetuity.

As much as Whistler is an innovator as a resort, with a hard working community, it will have a difficult time resisting the market forces. In the meantime, there is a fundamental need not to become a heartless town, where local colour commutes daily from the working communities of Squamish and Pemberton. Competing destination ski resorts have the existing advantage of relying on nearby communities for housing, industrial parks and local commercial needs. Aspen relies on Basalt, El Jebel, and Carbondale; Vail/Beaver Creek relies on Edwards and Eagle; and Breckenridge relies on Dillon, Frisco and Silverthorne.

The bigger issue in Whistler is the long term sustainability of the resort community. If the Olympic Bid Corporation could be the impetus to ensure that the municipality and the Comprehensive Sustainability Plan begins to address both the land use and the social issues, then many in the community may be more receptive to the concept.

The intensification of land use within Whistler and the Callaghan neighbourhood could be a lasting legacy to the community and its future, where Whistler could be both a liveable community and a successful resort.



Comments