Our Concerns

Environmental Concerns

Nita Lake is a gem in our community and deserves to be held to the highest standards if there is ANY risk of further development. It is up to us and Council to be responsible stewards of this land so that future generations can come to Whistler and appreciate and value what we all are so grateful to have now.  Once it is gone it is gone forever.


THE ISSUES:

  • We do not believe the development meets the OCP guidelines (that states): "The proposed development shall not have unacceptable negative impacts on any environmentally sensitive lands and shall adhere to all development permit guidelines for protection of the natural environment and applicable provincial and federal regulations”.

 

  • This development will lead to clear cutting of a minimum of 5 acres on the west side of Nita Lake, and provide easy access to sensitive Riparian Zones running through the property and on the Lake.

 

  • AT RISK SPECIES (including wildlife, trees, vegetation and riparian areas), have been identified in the Initial Environmental Report (IER).  Included are strict environmental reviews and recommendations that are to be carried out before any approvals can be given to a new proposal.  This development has NOT addressed these guidelines or recommendations for further study of many of the AT RISK SPECIES identified in the (IER).

 

  • Our community depends upon a thriving tourism industry based on Whistler’s outstanding natural environment.  It is clear that tourists come here to enjoy many outdoor activities, as well as the natural beauty that Whistler is known worldwide for - mountains, lakes, and magnificent forests and all of the biodiversity that come with it.  There are very few tourists who would come to a destination to see clear cuts, row housing and over- development, as is proposed for Nita Lake.

 

  • This is a car dependent neighbourhood. Along with other future planned developments along Alta Lake Road, this development will contribute to further congestion along Highway 99 and Alta Lake Road. This will clearly be harmful for CO2 emissions around the Lake and added pollution in our community.  It is only a matter of time before our valley suffers from the brown haze that pollutes other car dependent town and cities worldwide.  WHY DOES MAYOR AND COUNCIL THINK WE ARE IMMUNE TO THIS AND TO THE IMPACTS THEIR DECISIONS MAKE ON CLIMATE CHANGE!

 

BACKGROUND:

The RMOW Planning Department identified a long list of concerns relating to the environment as well in their initial review of Feb. 21, 2019 stating:

  • “The revised development scheme will not be able to maintain the existing treed nature of the site and the concentration of development would require extensive clearing.

  • Staff are very concerned about the considerable manipulation of grade proposed in this concept. The proposal doesn’t seem to respond to the existing grades, but rather intends to build up the terrain (in some cases this change is greater than 5 metres), making the development more visible from other parts of the valley.

  • …proposals for significant new development are required to quantify future GHG emissions and energy consumption impacts (including transportation-based) and incorporate measures to minimize and/or mitigate projected increases, as per CECAP.

  • Staff support the IER. A RAR assessment, Geotechnical Report and Preliminary Field Reconnaissance would be required to proceed. A RAR assessment for Gebhart Creek would also be required.

  • The proposal shows considerable retaining. Any walls should be minimized in height, be sloped rock stack, and include multiple terraces sufficiently sized to accommodate mature native or near native coniferous trees and deciduous understory

  • Trees …should be in some type of protective covenant to ensure their long-term well-being and grow to a mature height.”


THESE CONCERNS HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED.


The new re-zoning bylaw and approval does not seem to be contingent on any further environmental review. How can this be?  The Initial Environmental Report (IRE) list many concerns that have NOT been addressed or investigated.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

The Environmental Report was done by PGL Environmental Consultants with the field review done on May 15, 2018 and the report completed in October 2018.  To date, none of the recommendations have been considered and/or followed through by the developer’s proposal. PGL clearly states, “that the Initial Environment Review was only a broad survey of potential constraints and environmental features”. They recommended a more thorough review be done after this initial assessment.  That has NOT been done. They also stressed the report is for now (2018) and that the conclusions can quickly become dated and the report should not be used after that without PGL review/approval.

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

Examples of recommendations made by PGL Environmental Consultants:

  • Species specific studies would be required to determine the presence of at-risk animals and plants at the Site.

  • Veteran trees (over 250 years old) and danger trees should be surveyed by a professional arborist to determine individuals for preservation and potential hazard trees and map locations

  • A raptor nest survey should be conducted to determine the presence of any raptor nests on Site prior to development.

  • Fish sampling in the pool in Polygon 4 should be conducted to determine the species presence and population of the fish in the pool, and an assessment of the water connection to Nita Lake is recommended to determine sensitivities and constraints to development near the Polygon 4.

  • Steeps, rocky outcrops, and the wetland should be surveyed for rare and endangered plants for the purpose of determining rare plant presence and suitability for salvage and transplant. 

  • A geotechnical survey of the proposed development areas should be conducted by a qualified professional.

  • List of requirements for Mitigation PGL states “Of concern is that “detailed surveys for focal wildlife, plant, and ecosystems of conservation concern (i.e., listed by the CDC and/or protected under the Species at Risk Act) were not included in the scope of this screening-level assessment. Therefore, it is assumed that the listed species and ecosystems that use habitat types provided in or around the Site may potentially occur in this area.”

  • The report lists some very specific guidelines for any clearing of the property. 

THE QUESTIONS ARE:

  • Why is the Municipality not acting on these guidelines?

  • Why have the follow up reviews and assessments not been done?

  • Why has this re-zoning proposal been through so many approval stages without questioning the environmental impact of this development?

  • If there is any clearing of the property – will the developer be held responsible to respect these guidelines?  How will these be enforced?

 

The IER contains several recommendations and conclusions that have NOT been considered by the developer, nor have the recommendations of the Planning Department, yet this project has made it through first and second readings without having further environmental studies, safeguards and conditions placed on the project.

 

FURTHER QUESTIONS

  • How do Whistler residents get a guarantee that before the shovel goes in the ground, the concerns and recommendations in the report have been fully investigated? 

  • Why is Council pushing this project through the approval process? 

  • Why is Council taking a "short-cut" for the environmental process?

  • Why has there been no further dialogue once the report had been released? 

  • What is the responsibility of the developer to protect the environment once building is complete?

  • Is there a long-term tree management plan to replant and maintain the integrity of the trees and protect the views from the lake? It is unknown if any of the trees would survive the site preparation for building, even if not initially taken down during the building phase.

  • How do we ensure that the green spaces and green buffers and the Riparian lands are properly managed and protected under the Development Permit?

  • Should the developer have onerous financial penalties if he does not adhere to the DP?

  • Why is the developer getting a pass on the environment?

 

We believe that the long-term sustainability of Whistler’s environment, wildlife and sensitive ecosystems must be considered in development projects such as this one.  Environment must be our FIRST PRIORITY to ensure the health and well-being of our community, our tourism industry and most importantly, future generations. The environment needs a STRONG voice in any development on Nita Lake.  Environmental impacts MUST be resolved.

 

Please write to Council and demand that our environment comes first

AND that the environmental concerns of this development require further investigation and resolution prior to ANY further approvals are given.