Editor’s Note: Major social media companies are diverting advertising revenue from local media. Help keep local news alive. Please support us with a small subscription.
—
Squamish council will vote today on a development permit for a seven-storey, 39-unit rental apartment building at 38026 Second Avenue. The application includes three zoning variances that have drawn criticism from nearby residents.
The developer is seeking to increase the building’s maximum height from 20 metres to 21.9 metres, reduce the required employment space from 20% to 12.59%, and lower required parking stalls from 39 to 28. Only two of the required seven commercial stalls would be built on site. The developer would provide $150,000 in cash-in-lieu for the other five.
District staff is supportive, saying the project will deliver 100% market rental units. Staff say the height variance allows for eight additional rental units and note that the top floor remains below 18 metres above grade, within the limit set by the Squamish Fire Department. Several residents have submitted letters opposing the variances.
“I am writing to formally express my strong opposition to Development Permit DP000590,” wrote Alexandra Duncan. “The proposed increase in height will directly block the light and views of the Chief from my home, significantly impacting both my quality of life and the market value of my condo.”
Duncan also objected to the parking reduction. “Parking in Squamish is already under immense pressure. Allowing a reduction to just 28 stalls—less than half of what is required—will inevitably overflow onto neighboring streets and create further strain on an already maxed-out public parking system.”
She called the $150,000 cash-in-lieu offer “a fraction of the actual value of the space being forfeited. In today’s market, that sum barely covers a fraction of a single residential unit.”
Another resident, Salla Rusanen, also lives across the street from the site. “Why is this request even being considered?” she wrote. “I live with my boyfriend in an apartment with one parking space but we both require our own vehicles because of work and life commitments.”
“Our neighbours are in a similar boat—they have a car because one of them works in Vancouver, and a camper (quintessential to the Squamish lifestyle),” she wrote. “So, where do we all have to park our 2nd vehicles? On the street because there are not enough parking spots in our building!” “Let’s be real,” Rusanen added, “many people in Squamish work in Vancouver or elsewhere in the Lower Mainland, or Whistler, and there is no convenient and reliable transportation options to get people there without having their own cars.”
Marie Lamarche Mc Clure also wrote to council opposing the height variance. “Allowing the building to exceed the 20-metre limit sets a dangerous precedent and directly impacts neighbouring views, livability, and property value,” she wrote. “Squamish has seen enough overdevelopment — we need to start enforcing the rules already in place. This benefits developers, not residents.”
Editor’s Note: Help keep local news alive. Please support us with a small subscription.
Bob stuart says
Everyone is affected by variants , parking on streets is bad enough now , there is 1 way in and out of downtown and congestion is bad enough now . All the variance does is put money into developers pockets . We need more parking spaces not less . More height means uglier look