• Ravenstone-advertising-1.jpg
  • WLNG-MAY-1.jpg
  • Shabeen-Ali-Black-Tusk.jpg
  • OPA-Advertisement.jpg
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • Send Story Ideas & Tips
  • Contact
  • News Alerts
The Squamish Reporter

The Squamish Reporter

Follow us

Local News from Squamish and Sea to Sky Region

Saturday October 18, 2025 Your gateway to the Sea to Sky corridor
  • Home
  • Squamish
  • Sea to Sky
  • BC/Canada
  • Life
  • Support Us
  • Squamish-Canyon.png

District still working on second entrance to downtown

Gagandeep Ghuman
January 21, 2021 11:39am

The District of Squamish says it is working on seeking funding for Pemberton Bridge, which will provide a second entrance to Downtown Squamish.

The Pemberton Bridge will provide a connection across the Mamquam Blind Channel between Pemberton Avenue and the future Laurelwood Road, immediately west of the CN rail line.

The need for the second entrance was raised by a 2016 traffic assessment, done as part of the Waterfront Landing project, the new housing subdivision at the former Interfor Mill site.

The assessment concluded that without a new connection to downtown, traffic failures would occur as development gathered pace at the Oceanfront.

The traffic study recommended that the Pemberton Bridge be constructed prior to 2030.

However, it was determined that this would be a district project, and would not be paid for by the developer.

In 2017, the district submitted the assessment to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, whose response was that the bridge should be constructed before the opening day of the new Waterfront Landing development to “accommodate traffic generated by this development, as well as from other developments in the downtown core”.

Later, after meeting with district officials, MOTI revised its stance and asked the district to submit a plan by June 22, 2018.

This plan, MOTI said, should include a new timeline for the bridge, and funding models, and address the ministry’s concerns for a new entrance to downtown.

The district was required to submit this plan by June 22, 2018.

In a response to Squamish Reporter, Danielle Pope, the media relations executive for MOTI, said it was decided that the submission of the plan was not required.

“As a result of additional discussions between the ministry and District of Squamish in 2017, the submission of a plan to the ministry was not required,” Pope said.

Meanwhile, district says it is still planning on building the bridge, but didn’t give any timelines.

“Planning for the future Pemberton Bridge connection remains ongoing as we continue to seek funding opportunities to help advance the project,” said Rachel Boguski, the communications manager.

“The Pemberton Bridge will be included in an updated Development Cost Charges (DCC) Bylaw and therefore District has not submitted a plan for MOTI approval,” she said.

The district expects the amended DCC Bylaw to be adopted in the first quarter of 2021.

Share

Share

[addtoany]

Squamish man recounts terrifying close call on Highway 99

‘This decision shows a lack of leadership’: CUPE reacts after district lockout of workers

Squamish releases 10-Year financial plan for spending, taxes, and infrastructure

https://www.squamishreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Nesters-Sean-Jordan.jpg

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Patricia Marini says

    January 21, 2021 at 1:00 pm

    Why doesn’t the Squamish government get rid of all the unused rail tracks they are just spewing rust into our creek ! I thought we supposed to be an environmentally minded community! If the tracks are all gone the land reverts back to us the tax payers !

    • Sovereign, Murray says

      January 22, 2021 at 1:15 pm

      The tracks belong to BC Rail / CN: if the District unilaterally removed them, that would be theft. And the right-of-way belongs to the railway, regardless of whether there are tracks on it or not. So, while I agree that abandoned rail lines should be cleaned up, and I also agree that those rights-of-way could be put to good use by the community, there’s is nothing the District can do on their own to address either of those concerns.

      • Patricia says

        January 22, 2021 at 2:47 pm

        We have Federal and Provincial MLA’s surely some pressure could be put on them! Aside from me asking them to do something about the terrible eye sores and damage to the environment! Thanks Patricia

  2. Jay Coates says

    January 23, 2021 at 10:42 am

    I feel the obvious route for a new bridge is to cross the Blind channel on the other side over by Howe Sound Brew Pub…connecting with Hwy 99 by Clark Drive. It would allow a more practical truck route and easier access for waterfront development… if you are seeking funding…it should be there.

    • Murray Sovereign says

      January 23, 2021 at 4:29 pm

      I agree that would provide the best traffic flow. The problem is that such a bridge would have to be either a lift span, or much higher clearance, in order to allow transit of sailboats through the Blind Channel. Either of those options would be stratospherically more expensive than a simple flat bridge crossing a narrower portion of the channel, at the head of the navigable waterway. As much as I would love to see a bridge closer to the Brew Pub, I don’t think it’s realistic at this time.

Primary Sidebar

  • Drive-Squamish.png
  • Fried-chicken.png

Footer

  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy
  • Terms & Conditions
Top Copyright ©2020 The Squamish Reporter. All Rights Reserved squamish reporter logo
 

Loading Comments...