Garibaldi at Squamish Development - SkiMap.org · Garibaldi at Squamish Development Project...

Garibaldi at Squamish Development

Project Application

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd.

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

List of Appendices

Executive Summary

● The Vision● Site Location● Project Overview: Garibaldi At Squamish

● Howe Sound Looking Southwest from Mt. Garibaldi● Outdoor Recreation, Adventure Tourism & Technology● Product Variety & International Destination Appeal● The Local & Regional Market● Partnership with the Community● Public Consultation & Information Program● First Nations Discussions● Socio-Economic Impact● First Nations Land Claims● District of Squamish● Environmental Management And Ongoing Analysis● Economic Viability & Financing● The Development Company: Garibaldi Aspen Resorts

Reading List

Section 1 - Project Applicant

● 1.1 Introduction● 1.2 Proponent Name, Representative and Address

❍ 1.3.1 Corporate Background❍ 1.3.2 Share Structure❍ 1.3.3 Development Financing

■ 1.3.3.1 Economic Viability, Financing and Provincial Policy■ 1.3.3.2 Existing & Future Financing Strategy

❍ 1.3.4 Board of Directors and Officers❍ 1.3.5 Advisory Board❍ 1.3.6 Corporate Organization

■ 1.3.6.1 Planning and Approvals Division❍ 1.3.7 Administration & Project Development Division❍ 1.3.8 Construction Division

■ 1.3.8.1 Schedule Management and Construction Policy❍ 1.3.8 Operations Division❍ 1.3.8 Consulting Team

Section 2 - Project Description

● 2.0 Introduction● 2.1 Project History

❍ 2.1.1 Early Years (1978-1986)

❍ 2.1.2 Further Reconnaissance, Analysis, and Formal Proposal (1986-1992)❍ 2.1.3 Local, Regional, Provincial Tourism Development Initiatives (1992-1995)❍ 2.1.4 Exclusive Proponent Status (1995-1997)

● 2.2 Project Rationale❍ 2.2.1 Vision❍ 2.2.2 Marketing and Development Program Outline❍ 2.2.3 Visitor and User Projections

● 2.3 Project Overview❍ 2.3.1 Existing Conditions❍ 2.3.2 Design Parameters and Philosophy❍ 2.3.3 Meeting CASP and GASAD Requirements❍ 2.3.4 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Concept❍ 2.3.5 Village Design Concept

● 2.4 Mountain Facilities❍ 2.4.1 Resort CCC Calculation❍ 2.4.2 Rider Pods❍ 2.4.3 Lift Systems❍ 2.4.4 Snowmaking❍ 2.4.5 Mountain Maintenance Facilities

● 2.5 Base Area and Village Facilities❍ 2.5.1 Commercial and Recreational Services❍ 2.5.2 Golf Training Centre and Golf❍ 2.5.3 Mountain Biking and Hiking❍ 2.5.4 The Spa at Garibaldi❍ 2.5.5 Squamish Recovery Centre❍ 2.5.6 Overnight Accommodations as Part of the Residential Component❍ 2.5.7 Single and Multi-Family Development as Part of the Residential Component❍ 2.5.8 Employee Housing❍ 2.5.9 Resort Parking❍ 2.5.10 Schools❍ 2.5.11 Helicopter Base Location (Heli-Park)❍ 2.5.12 Heli Pad❍ 2.5.13 On-Mountain Environmental Education Institute Yosemite National Institute

● 2.6 On-Site Infrastructure❍ 2.6.1 Roadway Systems and Traffic

■ 2.6.1.1 Highway 99 Intersection■ 2.6.1.2 Road Design■ 2.6.1.3 Traffic Flows

❍ 2.6.2 Power Supply■ 2.6.2.1 B. C. Hydro Preferred Alternative■ 2.6.2.2 Ballard Power Systems Alternative 2■ 2.6.2.3 Small Run-of-the-River Hydroelectric Power Alternative 3■ 2.6.2.4 Wind Energy Alternative 4

■ 2.6.2.5 Solar Energy Alternative 5■ 2.6.2.6 Ground Source Heat Pumps Alternative 6

❍ 2.6.3 Gas Service❍ 2.6.4 Water Supply and Water Storage Facilities

■ 2.6.4.1 Background■ 2.6.4.2 Water Supply Options for GARIBALDI■ 2.6.4.3 Water Demand■ 2.6.4.4 Water Storage Requirements

❍ 2.6.5 Solid and Liquid Waste Treatment Facilities■ 2.6.5.1 Solid Waste Treatment Facilities■ 2.6.5.2 Sanitary Sewer (Liquid) Waste Treatment Facilities

❍ 2.6.6 Utility Corridors● 2.7 Off-Site Infrastructure● 2.8 Operation Safety Management

❍ 2.8.1 Search and Rescue❍ 2.8.2 Evacuation Procedures❍ 2.8.3 RCMP Facilities❍ 2.8.4 Fire Protection❍ 2.8.5 Air Traffic Control (Helicopter Path Flights)❍ 2.8.6 Avalanche

■ 2.8.6.1 Potential■ 2.8.6.2 Control

❍ 2.8.7 Safety Signage❍ 2.8.8 Medical Facilities

● 2.9 Project Phasing/Planning/Construction Schedule❍ 2.9.1. Phasing❍ 2.9.2 Planning and Public Approval❍ 2.9.3 Construction Schedule

Section 3 - Existing Conditions

● 3.1 Aquatic Resources❍ 3.1.1 Fish Populations and Habitat

■ 3.1.1.1 Squamish River■ 3.1.1.2 Cheakamus River■ 3.1.1.3 Brohm River■ 3.1.1.4 Cheekye River■ 3.1.1.5 Culliton Creek■ 3.1.1.6 Swift Creek

❍ 3.1.2 Water Quality❍ 3.1.3 Hydrology

■ 3.1.3.1 Stream Flows■ 3.1.3.2 Drainage Patterns

❍ 3.1.4 Water Resources■ 3.1.4.1 Surface Water Licenses■ 3.1.4.2 Groundwater Wells

● 3.2 Terrestrial Resources❍ 3.2.1 Wildlife Resources

■ 3.2.1.1 Mammals■ 3.2.1.2 Birds■ 3.2.1.3 Amphibians■ 3.2.1.4 Reptiles■ 3.2.1.5 Red-listed, Blue-listed and Regionally Important Species

❍ 3.2.2 Vegetation Resources■ 3.2.2.1 Bio-Geoclimatic Zones■ 3.2.2.2 Ecosystem Unit■ 3.2.2.3 Rare or Unique Plants/Plant Communities

❍ 3.2.3 Geotechnical Assessment■ 3.2.3.1 Scope of Study■ 3.2.3.2 Geology and Soils■ 3.2.3.3 Seismology■ 3.2.3.4 Geomorphology■ 3.2.3.5 Terrain Stability■ 3.2.3.6 Snow Avalanche Assessment

❍ 3.2.4 Climate■ 3.2.4.1 Wind Speed and Direction■ 3.2.4.2 Humidity■ 3.2.4.3 Temperature and Freezing Level■ 3.2.4.4 Snow Pack■ 3.2.4.5 Visibility■ 3.2.4.6 Solar Aspects■ 3.2.4.7 Air Quality

❍ 3.2.5 Heritage Resources■ 3.2.5.1 Previous Studies

● 3.3 Land Use Issues❍ 3.3.1 Visual Aesthetics

■ 3.3.1.1 Sea to Sky Corridor■ 3.3.1.2 Garibaldi Provincial Park

❍ 3.3.2 Garibaldi Provincial Park■ 3.3.2.1 Wilderness Areas■ 3.3.2.2 Recreational Use of Parklands■ 3.3.2.3 Garibaldi Provincial Park User Profiles■ 3.3.2.4 Commercial Guiding In Garibaldi Provincial Park■ 3.3.2.5 Access To Recreational Lands Around The Resort Complex

❍ 3.3.3 Forest Management Issues■ 3.3.3.1 Harvestable Timber

■ 3.3.3.2 Forest Land Reserve❍ 3.3.4 Land Users

■ 3.3.4.1 Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness Tourism■ 3.3.4.2 Mineral Resources■ 3.3.4.3 Agriculture Resources■ 3.3.4.4 Traditional Fish and Wildlife Recreation■ 3.3.4.5 Guides and Outfitters■ 3.3.4.6 Snowmobiling Activities■ 3.3.4.7 Day-Hiking Activities■ 3.3.4.8 Ski Touring■ 3.3.4.9 Backcountry Hiking Activities

Section 4 - Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Strategies

● 4.1 Issues Identified By Government Agencies, First Nations and the Public● 4.2 Aquatic Resources

❍ 4.2.1 Fisheries and Water Quality■ 4.2.1.1 Sedimentation Impacts■ 4.2.1.2 Direct Loss of Instream or Riparian Habitat■ 4.2.1.3 Water Quality Impacts■ 4.2.1.4 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

❍ 4.2.2 Hydrology■ 4.2.2.1 Potential Impacts■ 4.2.2.2 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

● 4.3 Wildlife Resources❍ 4.3.1 Wildlife Populations and Habitat

■ 4.3.1.1 Impacts from Utility and Access Corridors■ 4.3.1.2 Potential Human Conflicts With Wildlife■ 4.3.1.3 Threatened and Endangered Wildlife■ 4.3.1.4 Direct Loss of Habitat from Developed Areas■ 4.3.1.5 Indirect Loss of Habitat Adjacent to Developed Areas■ 4.3.1.6 Impacts from Additional Hunting Pressure■ 4.3.1.7 Population Impacts from Summer Recreational Activities■ 4.3.1.8 Cumulative Impacts to Wildlife from Development■ 4.3.1.9 Impacts from Avalanche Control Methods■ 4.3.1.10 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

● 4.4 Vegetation Resources❍ 4.4.1 Impacts to Sensitive Alpine Vegetation❍ 4.4.2 Loss of Old-Growth Forests❍ 4.4.3 Loss or Disturbance to Rare or Unique Vegetation❍ 4.4.4 Direct Loss of Vegetation in Developed Areas❍ 4.4.5 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

● 4.5 Climate and Air Quality

❍ 4.5.1 Potential Impacts❍ 4.5.2 Mitigation

● 4.6 Heritage Resources❍ 4.6.1 Loss of Heritage Sites❍ 4.6.2 Mitigation

● 4.7 Recreational Users❍ 4.7.1 Potential Impacts❍ 4.7.2 Mitigation

● 4.8 Community, Economic & Infrastructure❍ 4.8.1 Potential Impacts❍ 4.8.2 Mitigation

Section 5 - Market Analysis

● 5.1 INTRODUCTION● 5.2 Changes in the Squamish Economic Base● 5.3 PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS

❍ 5.3.1 Project Concept and Vision❍ 5.3.2 Marketing and Development Program Outline❍ 5.3.3 Visitor/User Projections❍ 5.3.4 Lift Pricing Parameters❍ 5.3.5 Real Estate Development Parameters and Projections

● 5.4 EVOLUTION OF THE MARKET❍ 5.4.1 General Market Growth❍ 5.4.2 Mountain Resorts - Transition to Year-Round Business❍ 5.4.3 Regional Market Considerations❍ 5.4.4 Real Estate

Section 6 - Financial Analysis

Section 7 - Socio-Economic Impact Analysis

● 7.0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS● 7.1 STUDY AREA SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE

❍ 7.1.1 Population Trends❍ 7.1.2 Age Structure❍ 7.1.3 Ethnic Origin❍ 7.1.4 First Nations Demography❍ 7.1.5 Income❍ 7.1.6 Housing❍ 7.1.7 Community Services❍ 7.1.8 Economic Overview

❍ 7.1.9 Labor Force● 7.2 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

❍ 7.2.1 Construction and Operations Employment and Income Impacts❍ 7.2.2 Tourism Spending Employment and Income Impacts❍ 7.2.3 Government Revenue Impacts

● 7.3 SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS❍ 7.3.1 Population Impacts

■ 7.3.1.1 Resident Population Impacts■ 7.3.1.2 Visitor Population Impacts

❍ 7.3.2 Accommodation (Housing) Impacts❍ 7.3.3 Public Safety and Emergency Management

■ 7.3.3.1 Police■ 7.3.3.2 Squamish Fire Rescue■ 7.3.3.3Search and Rescue■ 7.3.3.4 Hospital

❍ 7.3.5 Social Service Impacts❍ 7.3.6 Lifestyle and Recreation Impacts

■ 7.3.6.1 Lifestyle Impacts■ 7.3.6.2 Recreation Impacts

● 7.4 MONITORING SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS● 7.5 Summary

Section 8 - Public Consultation

● 8.1 Introduction❍ 8.1.1 Goals and Principles❍ 8.1.2 Commitment❍ 8.1.3. Public Consultation Tools❍ 8.1.4 Issues Identification and Proponent Responses

■ 8.1.4.1 Government Issues/Concerns and Proponent Responses■ 8.1.4.2 Non-Government Stakeholder Group Issues/Concerns and Proponent

Responses● 8.2 Regulatory Requirements

❍ 8.2.2 Public Review Period❍ 8.2.3 Regional Repositories

● 8.3 Public Consultation Program Elements❍ 8.3.1 Goals and Objectives❍ 8.3.2 Roles and Responsibilities❍ 8.3.3 Public Communication Materials❍ 8.3.4 Open Houses❍ 8.3.5 Invited Presentations to Stakeholder Groups❍ 8.3.6 Site Tours❍ 8.3.7 Local Project Office

❍ 8.3.8 Media Briefings❍ 8.3.9 Internet

● 8.4 Public Consultation Reports

Section 9 - First Nations Consultation

● 9.1 Introduction❍ 9.1.1 Aboriginal Rights❍ 9.1.2 Environmental Assessment Act

● 9.2 Land Claims● 9.3 Native Bands Within or Near the Proposed Resort Development

❍ 9.3.1 Squamish Nation■ 9.3.1.1 History■ 9.3.1.2 Community Services■ 9.3.1.3 Programs■ 9.3.1.4 Economic Activity■ 9.3.1.5 Local Government■ 9.3.1.6 Services■ 9.3.1.7 Squamish Nation Traditional Territory■ 9.3.1.8 Resources of Squamish Nation Territory■ 9.3.1.9 Treaty Negotiations

❍ 9.3.2 Burrard Band❍ 9.3.3 Mount Currie Band

● 9.4 Native Bands Outside the Proposed Project❍ 9.4.1 Musqueam Band❍ 9.4.2 Skookum Chuck❍ 9.4.3 Sechelt Indian Band❍ 9.4.4 Katzie Band

● 9.5 Traditional Uses and Studies● 9.6 Consultation to Date

❍ 9.6.1 Correspondence and Meetings❍ 9.6.2 Issues and proponent responses

● 9.7 Further Communication

Section 10 - Approvals and Governance

● 10.1 GOVERNMENT APPROVALS❍ 10.1.1 Provincial Environmental Assessment Act

■ 10.1.1.1 Introduction■ 10.1.1.2 Why An Environmental Assessment Act?■ 10.1.1.3 What Is The Purpose Of The Act?■ 10.1.1.4 Key Features

■ 10.1.1.5 Who Makes The Final Decision?■ 10.1.1.6 How Long Does The Review Process Take?■ 10.1.1.7 Roles and Responsibilities

❍ 10.1.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act❍ 10.1.3 Commercial Alpine Ski Policy (CASP)❍ 10.1.4 Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia

● 10.2 GOVERNANCE❍ 10.2.1 Public Service Requirements and Associated Cost Implications❍ 10.2.2 Servicing Cost Recovery Options❍ 10.2.3 Governance Options

■ 10.2.3.1 Remain Within the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District■ 10.2.3.2. Annexation into the District of Squamish■ 10.2.3.3 Mountain Resort Improvement Districts■ 10.2.3.4 Mountain Resort Municipalities

❍ 10.2.4 Governance and Provision of Public Service Process● 10.3 Draft Official Community Plan (OCP) for the District of Squamish

❍ 10.3.1 Permits and Licences■ 10.3.1.1 Fisheries Act■ 10.3.1.2 Forest Act■ 10.3.1.3 Heritage Conservation Act■ 10.3.1.4 Highway Act■ 10.3.1.5 Mining Right of Way Act■ 10.3.1.6 Park Act■ 10.3.1.7 Waste Management Act■ 10.3.1.8 Utilities Commission Act■ 10.3.1.9 Water Act■ 10.3.1.10 Land Act■ 10.3.1.11 Municipal Act■ 10.3.1.12 Protected Areas

Section 11 - Environmental Management

● 11.1 Stormwater Management Plan● 11.2 Sediment and Erosion Control Plan● 11.3 Water Management Plan● 11.4 Wildlife Management Plan

❍ 11.4.1 Problem Animals❍ 11.4.2 Buffer Zones❍ 11.4.3 Bird Nesting Program❍ 11.4.4 Garbage Control❍ 11.4.5 Access Prevention Measures❍ 11.4.6 Vegetation Management

● 11.5 Fisheries Management Plan

❍ 11.5.1 Minimum Flows❍ 11.5.2 Leave Strips❍ 11.5.3 Stream Crossings

● 11.6 Natural Hazard Management❍ 11.6.1 Snow Avalanche Prevention and Control❍ 11.6.2 Mass Wasting Prevention and Control❍ 11.6.3 Access Control

● 11.7 Solid and Liquid Waste Management❍ 11.7.1 Solid Waste❍ 11.7.2 Liquid Waste❍ 11.7.3 Special Waste Facilities❍ 11.7.4 Fuel Storage Facilities❍ 11.7.5 Above Ground Storage Tanks❍ 11.7.6 Underground Storage Tanks

● 11.8 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN

Section 12 - Future and on-going Studies

● 12.1 Aquatic Resources/Fisheries❍ 12.1.1 Fisheries❍ 12.1.2 Water Quality Sampling❍ 12.1.3 Minimum Instream Flow Studies

● 12.2 Wildlife Resources● 12.3 Vegetation Resources● 12.4 Terrain● 12.5 Water Management● 12.6 Solid & Liquid Waste Treatment● 12.7 Climate● 12.8 Air Quality● 12.9 Heritage● 12.10 Noise● 12.11 Traffic● 12.12 Land Use● 12.13 Public Consultation● 12.14 First Nations Consultations● 12.15 Tourism● 12.16 Commercial & Non-Commercial Fish and Wildlife Recreation● 12.17 Socio-Economic Analysis● 12.18 Infrastructure and Services● 12.19 Resort Ownership, Management & Governance

List of Tables

Table 2-1 Overnight Accommodation TotalsTable 2-2 Balance Calculations for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISHTable 2-3 Project Resort CCC and Pod CapacityTable 2-4 Planning ParametersTable 2-5 Industry Standard Trail Widths by Skill LevelTable 2-6 Lift Type, Phasing and CapacityTable 2-7 Snowmaking CoverageTable 2-8 Skier Services and Base Lodge CapacitiesTable 2-9 Calculation of Allowable Bed Units for a Destination ResortTable 2-10 Employee Housing CalculationsTable 2-11 Day User Parking RequirementsTable 2-12 Destination Parking RequirementsTable 2-13 Traffic Assumptions Peak Hour Flow - Garibaldi Access RoadTable 2-14 30th Peak Hour Traffic Determination (Garibaldi Access Road)Table 2-15 Expected Diversion Rates

Table 3-2 Fish SamplingTable 3-3 Estimated Juvenile Steelhead Trout Populations In The Squamish RiverTable 3-4 Brohm River IFIM Transect DescriptionTable 3-5 Background Water Quality For Cheakamus River At The Cheekye RiverTable 3-6 Water Quality Data For Cheakamus, Cheekye, Brohm, Culliton & Swift Creeks

The above table is currently unavailable. Please see Satellite Repositories to view this item.

Table 3-7 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3-8 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3-9 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3.10 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3-11 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3-12 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly DischargeTable 3-13 Surface Water Licenses Near The Proposed Resort DevelopmentTable 3-14 Registered Groundwater Wells DownstreamTable 3-15 Terrestrial Mammals Which May Occur In The Resort Study RegionTable 3-16 Birds Which May Occur In The Resort Study RegionTable 3-17 Amphibians Which May Occur In Resort Study RegionTable 3-18 Reptiles Which May Occur In The Resort Study RegionTable 3-19 Vertebrate Species of Conservation Interest In The Squamish Forest District and Their Probability of Occurrence in the Resort Development Area.Table 3-20 Biogeoclimatic Zonation in the Resort Development Area.


Table 3-21 B.C. Conservation Data Centre:Table 3-22 Snow Pack Data In The Vicinity Of The Proposed Resort Development.Table 3-23 Background Air Quality For The Squamish Area.Table 3-24 Origin Of Visitors To Garibaldi Provincial Park (1990)Table 3-25 Planned Length Of Stay In The Backcountry AreaTable 3-26 Activities Planned In Garibaldi Provincial Park

Table 4-1 Estimated Gross Timber Volume By SpeciesTable 4-2 Estimated Gross Timber Volume By SpeciesTable 4-3 Market Value for the Estimated Timber Volume

Table 5-1 Scheduled Project Development Visitor Facilities and Community AmenitiesTable 5-1a Ski Participation RatesTable 5-2 Vancouver Ski Area Downhill Skier Visits 1991/92 1996/97Table 5-3 Skier Visits Data For B.C. Blackcomb, Whistler and Vancouver 3 Area MountainsTable 5-4 Lift User Projections by Season

Table 5-5 Comparison of Ski Areas - GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Competitive Market Area


Table 5-6 Estimated Spending Totals ($) - Current B.C. Ski Area Resort VisitorsTable 5-7 Retail Space Absorption - Operation Year TotalsTable 5-8 Visitor-Serving Accommodations - Hotel Type FacilitiesTable 5-9 Real Estate Absorption - Summary by Product TypeTable 5-10 Population Growth Summary - 1991-1996Table 5-11 Estimated Resort Visitor Totals - Whistler ResortTable 5-12 Room Nights by Season - Whistler ResortTable 5-13 Average Room Rates By Season - Whistler ResortTable 5-14 Whistler Resort Room Nights by OriginTable 5-15 Demographic Summary By Season - Whistler Resort VisitorsTable 5-16 Whistler Accommodation Inventory - As Of December 1996Table 5-17 Whistler Real Estate - Volume And Average Prices 1992-1997Table 5-18 Average Home Prices - Sea To Sky Corridor Community AreasTable 5-19 Selected Recent Mountain Resort Real Estate Price & Size RangesTable 5-20 Estimate of Potential Local Skier Visit MarketTable 5-21 Market Origin of Year Round Visitors to Greater Vancouver

Table 7-1 Population ProjectionsTable 7-2 Proportion Of The SLRD Population By Age Group

Table 7-3 Major Languages By Mother Tongue: Squamish And B.C.Table 7-4 Squamish Nation Reserves: PopulationTable 7-5 Sources of Income Squamish (Revenue Canada 1995 Taxation Statistics)Table 7-6 Individual Income by Income ClassTable 7-7 Squamish Vacancy Rates (Percent)Table 7-8 Squamish Rental RatesTable 7-9 1991 Income Dependency Ratios Applied To 1995 Community IncomeTable 7-10 Percent of Working Age Population Receiving EI or SATable 7-11 Number and Proportion of Howe Sound Residents Collecting EI and SATable 7-12 Construction-Related Employment Insurance Claims - Squamish (1993-1997)Table 7-13 Tourism-Related Employment Insurance Claims - Squamish (1993-1997)Table 7-14 Direct and Indirect/Induced Construction and Operations Employment ImpactsTable 7-15 Direct* Construction and Operations Income ImpactsTable 7-16 Spending on Construction MaterialTable 7-17 Tourism Spending ImpactsTable 7-18 Projected Visitor Spending Labor Income and Employment ImpactsTable 7-19 Year One To Year Ten Property Tax ImpactsTable 7-20 Property Tax Distribution - Year FiveTable 7-21 Crown Land Sales RevenueTable 7-22 Resort Construction Population Impact EstimatesTable 7-23 Skier Visit ProjectionsTable 7-24 Summary of Added Overnight AccommodationsTable 7-25 Ski Season Visitor Accommodation Demand EstimatesTable 7-26 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH - Summary of Economic and Social Impacts

Table 8-1 Correspondence, (CASP) June 1980 to April 1992Table 8-2 Correspondence, Transition Period April 1992 August 1994Table 8-3 Correspondence, Present Submission (CASP) from 1994-PresentTable 8-4 Meetings, Prior Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1978-1992Table 8-5 Meetings, Transition Period 1991 - 1995Table 8-6 Meetings, Present Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1995-PresentTable 8-8 Public Notification RequirementsTable 8-9 Stakeholder Groups

Table 9-1 First Nation's Statement Of Intent To Negotiate A Land Claim And Stage In the B.C. Treaty ProcessTable 9-1 Correspondence and Meetings Held With First Nations From 1992 - 1997

Table 10-1 Governance OptionsTable 10-2 Permits And Licences Which May Be Issued Concurrently With A Project Approval Certificate

List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Garibaldi Alpen Resort (1996) Ltd. Corporate OrganizationFigure 1-2 Current Corporate Organization And Functions Chart

Photograph Howe Sound

Exhibit 2-1 Site Location

Development Phase Schedule

Exhibit 2.3 Existing Conditions Map

Exhibit 2.4 Vegetation Analysis Map

Exhibit 2.5 Slope Analysis Map

Exhibit 2.6 Elevation Map

Exhibit 2.7 Geology Map

Exhibit 2.8 Concept Plan

Exhibit 2.10 Mt. Garibaldi Looking from the Top of Lift A

Exhibit 2.11 Fall Line Analysis Map

Exhibit 2.12 View Looking Southeast

Exhibit 2.13 View Looking East

Exhibit 2.14 View Looking North

Exhibit 2.15 Master Utility Plan

Exhibit 2.17 Natural Hazard Analysis Map

Exhibit 2.18 Phase I Plan Years 0-1

Exhibit 2.19 Phase II Plan Years 2-3

Exhibit 2.20 Phase III Plan Years 4-5

Exhibit 2.21 Phase IV Plan Years 6-7

Exhibit 2.22 Phase V Plan Years 8-9

Exhibit 2.23 Phase VI Plan Years 10

Exhibit 2.24 Summer Oriented Activities

Exhibit 3-1 Fish Sampling And Habitat Assessment Sites

Exhibit 3-2 - Water Quality Sites

Exhibit 3-3 Regional Stream Flow And Drainage Divides

Exhibit 3-4 Surface Water Licenses and Groundwater Wells

Exhibit 3-5 Mountain Goat Ranges In The General Vicinity

Exhibit 3-6 Mountain Goat Winter Ranges Within And Near

Exhibit 3-7 Bio-Geoclimatic Zones Within The Proposed Resort Development Area

Exhibit 3-8. Descriptive Terrain Features Within The Proposed Resort Development Area

Exhibit 3-9 Estimate Of Seasonal Progression Of Snowpack At 1,020 M Elevation

Exhibit 3-10 Estimated Cumulative Snowfall and Snowdepth at 1,100 m Elevation

Exhibit 3-11 Squamish Landscape Inventory

Exhibit 3-12 Garibaldi Provincial Park Zoning

Exhibit 3-13 Recreational Features of Garibaldi Provincial Park

Exhibit 3-14 Ministry Of Forest Harvest Plan 1996-2004

Exhibit 3-15 Locations Of Mineral Claims

Exhibit 5-1 History Of British Columbia Skier Market

Exhibit 5-2 Growth In Skier Visits Whistler Resort

Exhibit 5-3 Year 1 Winter Visitors


Exhibit 5-5 GVRD Year Round Visitors By Country

Exhibit 5-6 Occupancy By Month Whistler Commercial Accommodations

Cash Flow Projections

Assumptions and Hypothesis

Notes 1 through 7

The above three figures are currently unavailable. Please see Satellite Repositories to view these items.

Exhibit 7-1 Direct Construction and Operations Employment Impacts

Exhibit 7-2 Direct Construction and Operation Income Impacts

Exhibit 9-1 First Nation Land Claims in the Vicinity of the Project Area

Exhibit 9-2 Reserves In The Squamish Regional Area

Exhibit 9-3 Squamish Territories (First Nations' Communities & Sites)

Exhibit 10-1 Flow Chart Of The Environmental Assessment Process

Exhibit 10-2 District Of Squamish

Appendices

APPENDIX 1 - PROJECT APPLICANT

APPENDIX 2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION

● Comfortable Carrying Capacity Summary● Run Capacity Calculations BY POD● Total Lift Capacity Per Pod● Total Lift/Rider VTM/HOUR Comparison By Pod● Ski Area Balance Calculations● Weighted Verticag: Who Needs It and What It Costs● Garibaldi Highwa● l Demand/Carrying Capacity● Employee Housin● y Plan and Profile Design Drawings● Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Solid Waste Management Plan (EXCERPTS)● Infrastructure and Ski Area Preliminary Analysis of Probable Construction Costs● Water Demand Calculations – Potable● Yosemite National Institutes Correspondence, November 6, 1997● Yosemite National Institutes Core Education Documents

APPENDIX 3 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

● Land Development Guidelines for the protection of Aquatic Habitat (EXCERPTS)● Master Plan for Garibaldi Provincial Park (EXCERPTS)● Sea to Sky Local Resource Use Plan (EXCERPTS)● GARIBALDI ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS TO DATE

APPENDIX 4 - POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGIES

APPENDIX 5 - MARKET ANALYSIS

APPENDIX 6 - FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

● Correspondence to Jardine Rolfe Ltd., August 4, 1995 .● Dawson Construction Limited letter regarding access road and main sewer line financing,

November 27, 1997

APPENDIX 7 - SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

APPENDIX 8 - PUBLIC CONSULTATION

● District of Squamish Tourism Development Plan (EXCERPTS)

APPENDIX 9 - FIRST NATIONS CONSULTATION

● Squamish Nation Profile and Cultural Awareness● Correspondence of April 23, 1996 from Roy H. Vickers● Squamish Nation Introductory Meeting #1 Draft Minutes, September 2, 1997● Correspondence of September 11, 1997 to Squamish Nation● Correspondence of October 20, 1997 to Squamish Nation● Correspondence of November 17, 1997 to Burrard Indian Band● Correspondence of November 17, 1997 to Mt. Currie Band

APPENDIX 10 - APPROVALS AND GOVERNANCE

● Whistler Community and Resort Profile● Whistler 1996 Annual Community and Resort Monitoring Program Report

Both above sections of Appendix 10 are unavailable. A copy of either of these two documents can be obtained by contacting Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd.

● A Guide to British Columbia's Mountain Resort Associations Act● Interim Agreement between the Province of British Columbia and Garibaldi● Squamish Official Community Plan Draft (EXCERPTS)● District of Squamish Committee Of The Whole Meeting Draft Minutes, June 10, 1997

APPENDIX 11 - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

APPENDIX 12 - FUTURE AND ON-GOING STUDIES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE VISION

GARIBALDI at Squamish is proposed as an environmentally sustainable all season multi-recreational mountain community for development on the slopes of Mount Garibaldi at the gateway to Sea to Sky Country.

It is envisioned that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will become an outdoor eco-arena developed with sensitivity for the natural beauty of the site and region. The development philosophy will be to work with the amenities of nature, not against them, in order to offer new lifestyle opportunities for people who wish to enjoy the essence that is Southwestern British Columbia, the ocean, the rivers and the mountains.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will exhibit a strong sense of place. This will be based on the rich heritage of the region and will strive to provide a bridge between the aboriginal people who settled alongside its magnificent rivers and a modern but real community diversifying its resource-based economy.

Environmental education is a priority of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Increasing awareness of societal impact on the environment is an essential for global citizens of today and tomorrow. The Squamish and Howe Sound "Sea to Sky" region is a rich source of environmental education and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has plans to support the development of an on-mountain "Garibaldi Institute" in association with the Yosemite National Institutes established in California and Washington State during the past three decades.

Consciously designed to be in harmony with the breathtaking natural surroundings of Squamish and Howe Sound, GARIBALDI will add diversity to the outdoor recreation and wilderness tourism opportunities along the Vancouver-to- Whistler corridor and meet the demand for year-round mountain recreation and living in Sea to Sky Country.

Exhibit E1 (Site Location)

PROJECT OVERVIEW: GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH

GARIBALDI has been proposed for development as a new 21st Century mountain community designed to add variety to the tourism product mix for the international destination market attracted to Sea to Sky Country.

A key ingredient in the design and development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be active community involvement in all aspects of the resort.

Architecturally, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will showcase local history and the traditional imagery of Pacific Northwest Coast aboriginal culture.

The mountain resort's village centre will be situated, slopeside, on a southwest facing plateau at an elevation of 1,100 metres. Access will be via a newly constructed 10-kilometre mountain highway which will connect to the Sea to Sky Highway approximately 13 kilometres north of downtown Squamish. The top of the highest proposed lift will be at 1,875 metres elevation. The vertical drop of the mountain recreation area will be 945 metres.

As proposed, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain resort community will consist of 2,580 hectares of Crown Land within a 3,500-hectare parent parcel; 1,670 hectares will be developed as the all seasons recreation area, including approximately 150 ski, snowboard and graviety-fueled activity trails and 20 lifts. According to industry standards this terrain has been estimated to support a Comfortable Carrying Capacity (CCC) of 19,437 skiers/riders at one time.

The base of the mountain recreation area and main village site will be developed on 910 hectares of land and designed to include 6,500 square metres of commercial space. Additional commercial space will be provided in the base lodges, hotel lobbies, the health spa and wellness centre, a proposed golf training facility and other four-season amenities throughout the mountain community. This will ultimately include approximately 500 single family homes, 1,850 multi-family units and 1,500 hotel rooms.

1,100 metres = 3,600 feet

2,580 hectares = 6,373 acres

10 kilometres = 6 miles


13 kilometres = 8 miles


1,875 metres = 6,152 feet

6,500 square metres = 70,000 square feet

945 metres = 3,100 feet

910 hectares = 2,250 acres

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be both affordable as a recreation facility, as well as a quality mountain resort destination. This will be accomplished by creating both the amenities and atmosphere required of a true destination resort, as well as specific recreation programs to accommodate the Squamish and Lower Mainland Vancouver markets, including incentives which emphasize convenience and affordability.

The 21st Century design for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain recreation area will be similar to the configuration of other alpine winter sports facilities. However, where other "ski" areas have had to retrofit their slopes to accommodate new trends and all seasons activities, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has the opportunity of designing for a more compatible integration of uses during all seasons.

Where appropriate, these facilities will also provide specialized facilities, such as integrated trails or facilities for snowboarding and skiing, mountain biking and hiking, and even equestrian activities. Attention will also be given in the design of facilities to attract major competitive sport and recreation activities, such as alpine skiing, snowboarding, extreme games, cross country skiing, snowshoeing and

mountain biking.

The proposed selected activities by season for GARIBALDI at SQUAMISH are:

WINTER SEASON:

● Downhill Skiing ● Cross-country skiing ● Alpine ski touring ● Snowshoeing● Snowboarding● Ice skating ● Sledding● Sleigh riding ● Snowmobiling

SUMMER & SHOULDER SEASONS:

● Hiking● Climbing● Mountain Biking ● In-line skating ● Camping● Golf● Tennis● Whitewater rafting ● Kayaking● Hang gliding

Photograph of Howe Sound

OUTDOOR RECREATION, ADVENTURE TOURISM & TECHNOLOGY

The significance of developing GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH as "A Resort for All Seasons" cannot be underestimated in terms of further enhancing British Columbia's global reputation as a world-class destination centre of "soft adventure".

Soft adventure (skiing/snowboarding, mountain biking, golf, hiking, bird watching, mountain climbing, golf) and eco-tourism are two of the fastest growing segments of the tourism industry. They are also the major thrusts of the Canada Tourism Commission's marketing campaign for 1998-1999. The marketing programs of Tourism Vancouver and the Whistler Resort Association, in conjunction with Tourism B.C., have managed to successfully position the Sea to Sky region of Southwestern British Columbia in the

global market as a major tourism destination. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH stands poised to ride this wave of awareness and popularity.

The concept of a "mountain adventure" in relation to development of GARIBALDI at SQUAMISH would open up new opportunities for people to extend their alpine knowledge and re-establish the sense of enjoyment and adventure that formed the foundations of mountain sports from the very beginning.

In addition to its unique setting and distinctive architectural theme, the heart of the mountain resort attraction will be the variety and quality of activities GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will offer to visitors. Modern mountain resorts recognize the critical importance of providing a multitude of recreation opportunities and activities for all weather and all seasons. There is also an increasing demand for non-traditional activities to occupy the time of residents and their guests, while others remain more disposed towards the traditional mountain resort pursuits such as skiing, snowboarding, hiking and climbing.

Despite the focus on the development of an all-season, all-weather resort, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH also stands to benefit throughout the winter and spring from the gravity-fueled sports industry which continues to prosper evolving from what was traditionally known as skiing, to where snowboarding is now rapidly broadening its appeal beyond its initial core of young people and new winter sports are being added every season.

At some resorts, snowboarding now accounts for as much as 40 % of total lift tickets sold. Snowboarders tend to start earlier in the season and ride later, and overall, they ride more frequently than do skiers.

In traditional alpine downhill skiing, shaped skis and a new activity called "free skiing," are part of the renaissance which is bringing back new excitement to alpine winter sports. "Free skiing" employs snowboard-oriented features, such as halfpipes and terrain parks, allowing skiers to have as much fun as that which seemed to be the monopoly of snowboarders.

Although introduced to the market only a few years ago, virtually all alpine skis sold in the current season will be some variant of the shaped ski concept. These new skis make carving simple, lessen the energy required to turn and increase user enjoyment. As a result of this technological advance in ski design, the length of time spent skiing on a given day can increase, especially for aging baby boomers.

In addition to alpine skiing and snowboarding, visitors to major mountain resorts now increasingly also partake in such diverse activities as cross country skiing, snowshoeing, dog sledding, sleigh riding, snowmobiling, indoor and outdoor ice skating, tennis, swimming, shopping and spas.

In the summer, the range of activities becomes even more diverse, including road and mountain biking, in-line skating, camping, golf, tennis, bird watching and rock climbing. Activities such as fishing, kayaking, river rafting and rock climbing are available off-site and will also expand the summer visitor base of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

With the aging baby boomer market, spa devotees will increasingly be drawn to the resort's world-class spa which has been proposed for development adjacent to the resort's first hotel by SLK Total Spa Concepts in affiliation with Stolle Services and Dorint Hotels of Germany. This facility will be centrally located near the village core and, with other amenities, provide an "indoor wellness centre" accompaniment to the physical activities and amenities outside.

Although suitable flat land is limited within the slopeside mountain community, golfers will be able to practice their game in a state-of-the-art training facility nearby the junction of GARIBALDI's mountain highway and the Sea to Sky Highway.

Meanwhile, on the mountain, hikers, mountain bikers, trekkers and campers will be transported to the high country by using the resort's high-speed lifts and trail system throughout the mountain recreation area.

A year-round schedule of concerts, conferences and seminars, festivals, sport competitions and special cultural events will provide summer and winter visitors with additional reasons to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Aggressively marketed, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will come on stream within the context of Soft Adventure & Eco-tourism, two of the most powerful and attractive segments of the global tourism industry today. With a targeted marketing strategy and a consistent, dynamic message, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will become a new beacon in British Columbia's growing portfolio of destination resorts and make a significant contribution to the economic sustainability of British Columbia.

PRODUCT VARIETY & INTERNATIONAL DESTINATION APPEAL

To expand the mountain resort's business beyond the existing local and destination customer base, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH marketing programs will be aimed at attracting the international market.

According to Whistler Resort Association, 56.7% and 36.9% of the commercial room nights of last winter and summer seasons were to visitors from outside Canada. Industry reports also indicate a record 250,000 foreigners visited U.S. winter resorts last season, and the numbers are growing. These new visitors to North America include Australians and New Zealanders, the Dutch coming in January who patronize Breckenridge and Winter Park in Colorado, and Brazilians, Argentineans and Mexicans, who may spend thousands of dollars on new equipment alone during their visits.

With the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships at Vail and the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, global interest in North America will become supercharged around the time GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH enters the market. As British Columbia has among the most sought after natural assets for the development of winter and mountain recreation in North America, these two events combined with GARIBALDI's opening, could provide an excellent opportunity to expand B.C.'s share of the world market.

Foreign visitors will be induced to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH through alliances with airlines and tour operators. Many of these operators have had great success with programs in areas such as Mammoth Mountain, the Lake Tahoe region, Jackson Hole, Steamboat, Whistler Resort and the American Skiing Company's New England resorts. Preliminary discussions with selected international tour operators indicate that they would be interested in expanding their programs to encompass GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH as well. Finally, a strategic alliance with one of the major ski resort conglomerates could provide mutual benefits in terms of accessing the international market.

THE LOCAL & REGIONAL MARKET

Although it will be developed from the beginning with sufficient critical mass, variety of amenities and quality to support the demands of the destination visitor, in its early years, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will also focus on attracting local and regional visitors. GARIBALDI will both capture a share of this local market, as well as create a new all-season visitor market from throughout Pacific Northwest region and other specifically targeted destination markets.

Local market growth is expected to average approximately 3.5 to 4.5 per cent per year, based on population growth and winter sports participation projections. In addition, broader awareness of GARIBALDI in the regional and destination marketplace, and growth in the resort's bed base to accommodate an increasing proportion of visitors, will provide the impetus for increased visits from non-local tourists throughout the year.

Inevitably, curiosity about GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH may cause some short-term effect on visitor numbers at competing local area winter resorts in the initial year of operation. However, the growth of Squamish and the Lower Mainland, as well as increasing penetration of the regional and destination markets, will keep the number of visits taken from the existing resorts and ski areas to a small number.

The primary source from which GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will derive additional customers will be incremental growth in the winter and summer sports marketplace. This will come as a result of a combination of the following factors:

(a) Clustering

The positive effects of the "clustering" of mountain resorts, such as Summit County, Colorado, the Park City area of Utah and the Lake Tahoe region on the California/Nevada border, demonstrate that clustering builds the destination visitor potential of an area because of the enhanced opportunities to experience more than one resort. Having more than one resort to choose from also broadens the region's appeal beyond the traditional customer base of a single resort, no matter how large.

(b) Amenities

The quality and array of amenities provided by GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will result in positive word-of-mouth and perpetuate focus by national and international media on Whistler/Blackcomb and Sea to Sky Country by providing new "news" and creating a desire by new and repeat visitors to travel to Southwestern British Columbia again and again.

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is dedicated to working in partnership with Squamish and will add to a brighter economic future for this community. Squamish is in the process of developing a reputation as a world-class outdoor recreation centre with a myriad of available natural assets. As identified by the Squamish Tourism Development Plan, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has an opportunity of now embellishing these assets with mountain and winter tourism amenities to help secure the community's economic stability and prosperity.

The GARIBALDI team has also demonstrated an on-going commitment to working with the Squamish Nation and to include this community in all aspects of the development and operation of the proposed mountain resort.

Programs and events will be developed at the resort to augment the facilities and resources of Squamish and managed in such a way that the mountain resort and these communities are viewed by the visitor and recreational homeowner as one.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION & INFORMATION PROGRAM

In concert with its commitment to work in partnership with these communities, GARIBALDI has been actively soliciting the involvement of the public in all aspects of the master planning and public approval of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and is prepared to incorporate into its plan input from the community and District of Squamish, the Squamish Nation and other First Nations.

In accordance with the public consultation requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act, the following objectives serve as a framework for the on-going public information and consultation program of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH:

● To ensure that members of the public have a meaningful opportunity to learn about the proposed resort development

● To seek input regarding the Project Application from members of the public and identified interest groups

● To respond to all public comments.

To help accomplish the above goals, Open Houses will be held throughout the region encouraging people to obtain information about the proposed resort development and to ask questions. These Open Houses will consist of display presentations complemented by hand-out materials and the presence of

GARIBALDI representatives to answer questions on a one-on-one basis.

Representatives of the Environmental Assessment Office will also be attending these public information sessions to help describe the goals and objectives of the Environmental Assessment process.

FIRST NATIONS DISCUSSIONS

In accordance with the Environmental Assessment Act requirements, GARIBALDI at SQUAMISH is undertaking discussions with First Nations groups whose aboriginal rights may be affected by the proposed project.

Native bands within or near the proposed development include the Squamish Nation, the Burrard Band and the Mount Currie Band. Native bands outside the proposed development, but within the region, include the Musqueam Band, the Skookum Chuck Band, the Sechelt Band and the Katzie Band. The Squamish Nation through the current land claims process has claimed the proposed development area as an area of traditional use.

GARIBALDI will continue to work closely in cooperation with affected First Nations, the Environmental Assessment Office, and other Provincial Government Ministries to establish traditional use patterns at the site of the proposed resort development.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT

Throughout the 10-year build-out of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, GARIBALDI has the potential of providing economic benefits of approximately 8,450 person-years of direct and 1,105 person-years of indirect employment for the community of Squamish, the Sea to Sky region, and the Province of British Columbia. Initially, a higher proportion of these new jobs will be in planning and construction, with operations and service jobs increasing as the resort develops.

Throughout the development of this mountain resort, GARIBALDI will continue to draw on the vast array of talent and expertise of the Squamish community. The additional employment and income benefits of the development will contribute to the maintenance of community stability and living standards by offering viable employment alternatives for area residents, including high school graduates, displaced forestry workers, and social assistance recipients.

Exhibit E2 (First Nations Land Claims)

Exhibit E3 (District of Squamish)

If such employment alternatives were not created, projected economic adjustments could result in increased out-migration rates which, in turn, could negatively affect community stability and living

● Municipal Service Centre and site employee offices ● An appropriate amount of land for a school site ● Employee housing units based on projected resort Comfortable Carrying Capacity ● First aid and medical treatment centre for initial care ● Fire Hall facility and four-wheel drive fire rescue vehicle, and fire clothing for fifteen volunteers ● Heliport off lower resort access highway and upper heli-pad site to service the Base Village ● Snow removal operation and maintenance services within the village and residential areas of the

resort and access road to the junction of Highway 99.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND ONGOING ANALYSIS

Baseline conditions have been compiled from existing government files, consultant reports, maps, aerial photography and fish and wildlife field studies conducted by Enkon Environmental Ltd. and D. Blood & Associates.

Information included in the Project Application describes the baseline environmental and land-use conditions within and adjacent to the development site. This information includes the following:

● Fish populations habitat ● Water quality ● Hydrology● Wildlife● Vegetation● Geotechnical assessment ● Climate● Heritage● Visual aesthetics ● Parkland and wilderness issues ● Forest management issues ● Land users ● Permits, licences and approvals.

GARIBALDI is assessing the potential impacts of the proposed resort and will propose mitigation strategies. Environmental management plans will ensure that these impacts will be manageable and minimized, mitigated or avoided.

GARIBALDI is preparing the following management plans to minimize potential impacts to the aquatic environment in the vicinity of the project site:

● Stormwater Management Plan targeted to design the post-development flows similar to pre-development flows as much as possible

● Sediment and Erosion Control Plan to minimize the potential for sediments entering the

streams/creeks draining the development site ● Water Management Plan to make sure that any withdrawal of surface waters for domestic use

ensures that minimum instream flows are established to protect downstream fish populations, particularly in Brohm River

● Solid Waste Management Plan to exceed the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District's Solid Waste Management principles of a 50% reduction in solid waste disposal

● Liquid Waste Management Plan which fits into the existing Mamquam Treatment Plant or develops a new tertiary treatment plant which meets or exceeds provincial effluent criteria

● Wildlife Management Plan which protects critical wildlife habitat and manages wildlife habitat and populations during the construction and operation of the development

● Natural Hazard Management Plan which controls avalanche, wildfire and debris hazards by protecting fish and wildlife habitat while providing safety for resort users

● Spill Contingency Plan which will provide practical solutions to avoid contamination of surface waters during construction and operation of the proposed development

● Vegetation Management Plan which emphasizes tree and viewscape retention and important wildlife habitat

● Soils Management Plan - which conserves soils and prevents development in areas of unstable soils

● Access Management Plan by working with Garibaldi Provincial Park to manage access into the park

● Monitoring Plans to monitor the social, environmental and economic impacts of the proposed development on the Sea to Sky corridor.

Although there will be areas of the development site which will continue to be impacted from timber harvesting, the following mitigation measures will provide for a more planned and managed approach. This will also minimize the impact on the forest resources of the site:

● Adherence to the Forest Practices Code of British Columbia ● Preparation of a Vegetation Management Plan which emphasizes tree/rare plant viewscape

retention and preservation of important fish (riparian) and wildlife (wildlife trees) habitat o Incorporation of different silviculture systems into site development

● Preparation of a Soil Management Plan to conserve soils and protect unstable soil areas ● Work with the Ministry of Forests to develop timber harvesting and wildfire prevention programs.

The existing Ministry of Forests Visual Quality Objectives, which include preservation, retention, partial retention, modification, maximum modification and excessive modification, will be utilized during the development of the site.

The proposed mitigation of potential impacts to air quality will include the monitoring of background air quality prior to site development, the Go Green policy for vehicular traffic, including the use of state-of-the art powered shuttle buses for Squamish residents, employees and recreational users from Squamish to the resort, and "employee incentives" for car pooling vehicles.

GARIBALDI is preparing to conduct an Archaeological Impact Assessment in which any important heritage sites will be identified and managed according to the requirements of the Heritage Conservation Branch.

The proposed mitigation for potential impacts to the existing user groups of Garibaldi Provincial Park include the development of a Trail and Access Management Plan throughout the development site. This plan will adhere to the Garibaldi Provincial Park Master Plan. This management plan, created in 1990, provides an extensive data base regarding the backcountry recreation opportunities and existing management challenges to one of the Lower Mainland's most important wilderness resources.

ECONOMIC VIABILITY & FINANCING

GARIBALDI will be securing financing for the development in tandem with the approvals process as risk associated with the project is mitigated. In February 1997 GARIBALDI signed an Interim Agreement with the Province of British Columbia for the proposed project. Per this agreement, evidence of project financing is required within three years of the signing of the Master Development Agreement.

Capital expenditures over the 11-year build-out period are expected to be approximately $214,000,000. This includes the master planning phase, environmental permitting and all infrastructure, recreational facilities and mountain winter/summer recreation area development. Total net cash flows from operations and land development are expected to be $ 68,000,000 over the same period. The operations are projected to have positive cash flow in Year 2 and break even cash flow in Year 7.

THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: GARIBALDI ALPEN RESORTS

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. was incorporated in British Columbia in March 1996. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. and is the entity financing the master planning and construction of the GARIBALDI at Squamish development.

The management and operations of GARIBALDI will be administered by the Board of Directors. The current officers of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. are as follows:

Wolfgang H. Richter, Chairman

David Jay Flood, President

Janice M. Scott, VP

Thomas Y. McKeachie, VP

Rick Stolle, Director

Gogol Lobmayr, Director

In addition to the Board of Directors GARIBALDI is in the process of assembling an Advisory Board which will combine the best in international expertise and local talent, with a development team of professionals and industry leaders specializing in every aspect of mountain resort and community development.

Reading List

CATEGORIES:

ARCHITECTURE/LANDSCAPING

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL

FIRST NATIONS

FUTURE & TRENDS

GARIBALDI DOCUMENTS

GARIBALDI IN ACADEMIA

GARIBALDI IN THE MEDIA

GOLF

GOVERNMENTDOCUMENTS

LIFTS

OTHER RECREATION

OTHER PROPOSED RESORTS

OTHER RESORTS: REVIEWS, NEWS

POWER SYSTEMS

REAL ESTATE

SKI INDUSTRY: STATISTICS, MARKETING AND INFORMATION

SKI RESORT PLANNING

SKI SCHOOLS & SKI RACING

SQUAMISH: COMMUNITY AND DISTRICT

TOURISM & RECREATION

WHISTLER / BLACKCOMB

Architecture / Landscaping

Decision Support System for Ski Area Design: Microcomputer support of decision processes for ski area design explained, Journal of Systems Management, March 1982.

Architecture: The Swinging Pendulum Swings On: Trends of the past followed popular styles. Trends of the future may be more influenced by the needs and desires of people, Henrik Bull, FAIA, President, Bull Volkmann Stockwell, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, September 1986.

National Forest Landscape Management: Ski Areas: Landscape management and planning procedures for developing winter sports complexes, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1984.

Contemplating the Garibaldi Resort - Notes, David Jay Flood, Architect, Santa Monica, California, 1990.

Bests, Gold Key Awards for Excellence in Hospitality Design, Robert Janjijian, Executive Editor, Hospitality Design magazine, Bell Publishing, November 1994.

Sincerely Yours: Guests want to believe the Wilderness Lodge has been hosting them at Disney World. Lake Buena Vista, Florida for generations, owing to a design by Urban Design Group and Wilson & Associates, Roger Yee, Contract Design, The Magazine of Commercial Interior Design & Architecture, Miller Freeman, Inc., San Francisco, California, May 1995.

Lodge: The Frontier of Fantasy and Reality, IDENTITY Magazine, January/February 1996.

For Sustainability, the Lower Mainland has it all: A plan for a complete community / housing that exists in harmony with its environment, Susan Balcom, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., January 25, 1997.

Design for Mountain Communities, A Landscape and Architectural Guide, Sherry Dorward, Van Nostrand Reinhold, ISBN 0-442-22095-21.

Business Management

Public Funds and the Private Sector, I. William Berry, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1976.

Defusing Development: Jonathan Brownwell suggest a process for win-win negotiations between all parties, Kevin Kennedy, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, March 1987.

Understand People, Be Willing To Listen, Mammoth Mountain’s Dave McCoy Applies His Techniques from Coaching Ski Racers to Build a Superbly Motivated Group of Managers - and the Biggest Volume

in the Ski Industry, John Fry, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1987.

Joust of the Half Brothers: Two super-rich Tokoyo entrepreneurs chase each other’s success, Timemagazine, January 23, 1989.

Ski School Track to CEO: Many resorts are being run by former ski instructors. Is this accidental or is the ski school the best source for future managers ?, Stu Campbell, Vice-President, Skier Services, Heavenly Ski Resort, California, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodland, CT, November 1993.

Mosaic Newsletter”Your Forum for Diverse Expression”, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human Rights, Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., Spring 1995.

Quakes in Cupertino, The CEO is out, and a turnaround artist is in. Does this mean that Apple is again trying to survive solo?, John Greenwald and David S. Jackson, Time magazine, February 12, 1996.

Taking the Mission Statement Down From the Wall: Business Strategies, RHR International Company, Drake Business Review magazine, Volume 7, Number 1, Drake International Inc., Toronto, Ontario, 1996.

What Every Executive Should Know About Team Effectiveness: The Path to Team Effectiveness, RHRInternational Company, Drake Business Review magazine, Volume 7, Number 1, Drake International Inc., Toronto, Ontario, 1996.

Asia-Pacific forum organizers set to show off city to the world: Apec ‘97 Vancouver: Canada to take lead in promoting trade, Edward Alden, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, January 29, 1997.

Ski Jumps: Gary Raymond, president of resort development, Intrawest Corp. quoted regarding keys to success for companies, Staff, Globe and Mail newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., June 16, 1997.

Environmental

Tree Management At Ski Area: Care of the Slopes is one thing; but what about the uncut forest that remains ?, Donn Cahill, Carroll McAninch and Bob Miller, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1974.

When Ski Trails are Cut Through Forest Land, What Happens to Streamflow ?, Comparing the effect of watershed experimental cuttings with ski trail construction offers some workable solutions, JamesHornbeck and Gordon Stuart, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ski Area Management

magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1976.

Cloud Seeding, Charlie Meyers, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1977.

Cathedral Grove, The centuries-old Douglas fir trees on Vancouver Island testify to the durability of British Columbia’s - and Canada’s - most important resource. But the forest-products industry is at the mercy of forces that pose an unprecedented threat to Canada’s economic identity, Eric R. Green, Saturday Night magazine, June 1983.

National Forest Landscape Management, Ski Areas, Volume 2, Chapter 7, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook Number 617, June 1984.

Canada’s Vanishing Forests, Clearcut logging in British Columbia: waste mismanagement and a shortsighted attitude have ravaged Canada’s forests, Janet O’Hara, Maclean’s magazine, Maclean Hunter Publishing Limited, Toronto, Ontario, January 14, 1985.

Metamorphosis: Stages in a Life, David Suzuki, Stoddart Publishing Co. Limited, Toronto, Ontario, 1987.

Temperature and Precipitation Charts for the Squamish-Lillooett Area, Environment Canada, 1981 - 1988.

Green with Anger: David Suzuki’s theme is survival, but his message is doom, will he preach the same sermon too long ?, Dave Watson, Vancouver magazine, Telemedia Publishing Inc., Vancouver, B.C., May 1990.

It’s a Matter of Survival, Anita Gordon & David Suzuki, Stoddart Publishing Co. Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, 1990.

Sierra Now: A Vision for the Future: Conference Summary, Environment Now, Malibu, California, August 1992.

Environmental Citizenship: Water - Nature’s Magician: Freshwater Series A-1, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, November 1992.

Ours to Enjoy. Not to Destroy: A special feature of the Squamish Estuary Conservation Society, TheSquamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., November 3, 1992.

Forestry: Miller’s branching out with new advisory panel, Gordon Hamilton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, January 23, 1993.

“Discover Boundary Bay”: A Teachers’ Resource Guide: To help students develop a sense of stewardship toward their local environment, Developed by Teachers, Friends of Boundary Bay / Fraser (River) for Life Society, Delta, B.C., August 1993.

Heritage includes estuary, Ron Enns, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., August 11, 1993.

Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., and Fisheries and Oceans, The Federal Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, September 1993.

Estuary Deal: Estuary plan’s bell about to toll, Ron Enns, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., September 14, 1993.

Recyclers’ Revenge: They laughed when Grand Targhee embarked on a major program of environmental responsibility. But it paid off in good cost savings and good PR, Michael Commins, Ski Area Management, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1993.

Olympic, The Story Behind the Scenery, Henry C. Warren, KC Publications, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1993.

Environmental Citizenship: From the Mountains to the Sea: A Journey in Environmental Citizenship, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 1993.

Improved forestry will create, not destroy, jobs, Paula M. Khan, Times-Colonist newspaper, Thomson Newspapers Company Limited, Victoria, B.C., February 1, 1994.

Progress on the Environmental Challenge: A Survey of Corporate America’s Environmental Accounting & Management, Price Waterhouse LLP, New York, New York, 1994.

Planet Quake: Time to Change, Dr. David Suzuki, Luncheon address to the Canada California Chamber of Commerce, Beverly Hills, California, April 14, 1994.

Silviculture Systems Wildlife Habitat Research and Extension: Can we log and maintain Caribou habitat in the ich? The Robson Valley partial cutting project: Research Update, Sisam Stevenson, Bryce Bancroft and Michael Jull, B.C. Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch and Habitat Protection Branch, and the Ministry of Forests, Silviculture Branch, April 1995.

Ceres Principles and Ceres Principles Endorsing Companies, Ceres organization, April 1995.

Environgram Newsletter, Canadian Council of Ministeries of the Environment, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Summer 1995.

Not seeing the forest for the greed: Author claims conspiracy between government, private interests, charities in ‘green’ movement: Book Review, Sue Sutton, The Financial Post newspaper, Toronto, Ontario, July 15, 1995.

Friends of Boundary Bay / Fraser for Life Society: Environmental Handbook for Elementary Grade Schools, Friends of Boundary Bay, Fraser (River) for Life Society, Delta, B.C., May 1996.

Greater Los Angeles Green Pages: The Local Handbook For Planet Maintenance, A Project of Environmental Now & Green Media Group, Malibu, California, 1994.

Time to Change, Essays, David Suzuki, Stoddart Publishing, Toronto, Ontario.

Will Environmental Constraints Pass Into Oblivion? Congress appears to be ready to deregulate everything - including many environmental policies that affect ski areas. Will this remove the constraints that hamper expansion ?, David S. Neslin and Harris D. Sherman, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Environment is Topic at Industry Week, Rick Kahl, Editor-in-Chief, Skiing Magazine, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Guidelines from Victoria Architects for Malahat Development

Saanich Inlet Study: Synthesis Report: Technical Version, Province of British Columbia, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, B.C., April 1996.

Snow Survey Bulletins, Hydrology Branch, Department of Land and Water Management, B.C. Environment, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., March 1977 - June 1996.

Protected Areas Strategy Update: Additions and Upgrades: May 1992 - September 1996, Land Use Co-ordination Office, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1996.

Future bear management at the landfill, Michael Allen, Black Bear Researcher, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 8, 1997.

Standing Tall: Canadian Forest Practices, Claudia Beck, Advertising Supplement ot California Journal, no date on copy.

Ecology: A Workbook for Students and Teachers, Ministry of Environment, Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., no date on publication.

First Nations

Profits for People: For native Indian businesses the bottom line is the well-being of band members, JohnFriesen and Steve Mitchell, B.C. Business magazine, Vancouver, B.C., June 1985.

Squamish people run their band like a business, Karen Gram, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., July 26, 1989.

Squamish chief firm on aboriginal title, Martin Dunphy, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, August 17, 1990.

Squamish natives refuse to back down on sea dock: Crown Lands, Matthew Plumtree, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, November 23, 1991.

Aboriginal Peoples, Self-Government, and Constitutional Reform, The Special Joint Committee on a Renewed Canada and the Native Council of Canada Constitutional Review Commission, Federal Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 1991.

Annual Report 1989 - 1990 and 1990 - 1991: Ministry of Native Affairs, Andrew Petter, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C.

Harcourt dangles native bait to Europeans, The Canadian Press, Time-Colonist newspaper, Victoria, B.C., January 30, 1992.

Natives mean business: Commercial enterprises spring up across B.C., Ken Bell, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., March 29, 1992.

$40 - $50m in investments: Entrepreneurial spirit reawakes with new vigor, Tony Wanless, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., April 5, 1992.

Natives bank on their own: Trust succeeds where others fear to tread, Tony Wanless, The Province newspaper, April 5, 1992.

Ottawa funding natives’ booster: Main lender to fledgling businesses opens up previously closed doors, Tony Wanless, The Province newspaper, April 5, 1992.

Non-natives won’t be sent to ‘where they came from’, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., September 30, 1992.

Native chiefs raring to wield new powers, Don Hauka, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., September 30, 1992.

Wisdom of the Elders, Peter Knudtson & David Suzuki, Stoddart Publishing Co. Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, 1992.

Annual Report 1991- 1992: Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, Andrew Petter, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C.

New Advisory Council boosts Natives in Forestry, Times-Colonist newspaper, Victoria, B.C., January 22, 1993.

Native Sites in Western Canada, Pat Kramer, Altitude Publishing Canada Ltd., Banff/Canmore, Alberta, 1994.

B.C. Treaty Commission & Native Land Claims, Sea to Sky Business Report, “Mountain Monitor” Noon Hour Open Line Show transcript, Mountain FM radio station, John French, Scott Roberts & Jeff Poulton, commentators, Mayor Ted Nebbling, Whistler, guest, Squamish-Whistler, B.C., February 8, 1994.

Time for Whistler residents to communicate views on Squamish Nation negotiations, David Mitchell, MLA, West Vancouver-Garibaldi, MLA Report newsletter, West Vancouver, B.C., Spring 1995.

Native Power: This isn’t right, Environment policy means they’re having their say on projects at eight levels before the rest of us get a look in, Brian Keiran, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., September 20, 1995.

Roy Henry Vickers: Tsimshian Artist, Eagle’s Moon Gallery, Victoria, B.C., 1996.

The Healing Journey: Visionquest Project gets Huge Support from all Sectors, John Copley, Western Native News, June 1997.

Native land claim ‘giant’ awakens: Supreme Court hears case today, Ross Roward, The Globe and Mail newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., June 16, 1997.

Building Within The System: Gerard Peters and the In-SHUCK-ch N’Quat’qua seek a future for their children on their own land, within Canada, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 29, 1997.

Peoples of the Coast, The Indians of the Pacific Northwest, George Woodcock, Hurtig Publishers, Edmonton, Alberta.

Squamish Nation: Cultural Awareness, Squamish Nation, North Vancouver, B.C.

Future & Trends

In the Year 2001, Stephen J. Bradley, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Winter 1978.

The Future of Skiing, National Ski Areas Association Newsletter, West Hartford, Connecticut, Winter 1978.

Towards a Successful 21st Century Mountain Resort: Resort professionals gathered at Whistler to ponder the challengers - such as the unconscionably rich pushing out the filthy rich, Michel Beaudry, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1990.

Skiing 2000 - A Global Perspective, Paul E. Mathews, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, March 1993.

Trends at Play: Five things to watch for as our recreation habits change: We’ll seek action, and exercise on demand, Dawn Hanna, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., December 29, 1995.

Freeway to Frustration: As the Trans-Canada highway becomes a parking lot for commuters, there are no easy answers on how to get out of the jam: Traffic by the Numbers, Glen Bohn and Scott Simpson, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., May 20, 1995.

Population to hit 30 million in ‘96: Mixed with the nationalist pride are some sobering truths that magnify issues such as racism and the birth rate: Milestone masks other issues, Alanna Mitchell, The Globe and Mail newspaper, January 10, 1996.

A New Look at the “Ski Resort of the Future”: Four prominent ski industry figures comment and look ahead to the next 30 years, Editors, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Musings on the Future of Skiing, David Rowan, Editor and Publisher, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Skiing’s Demographic Future: The Massive Baby-Boom Generation Set a Growth Pace That We Won’t See for Another Dozen Years. Meantime, Skiing has to Look to Different Groups for Growth, BradEdmondson, Editor-In-Chief, American Demographics, Ski Area Management Magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Reflections in a Crystal Ball, Jim Hume, Times-Colonist newspaper, Victoria, B.C., June 8, 1997.

Merger Mania ! Who just bought your favorite resort, and what it means to you: The New Mountain Moguls, Ken Castle, SKI Magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1997.

Mountains of Opportunity: Riding into the Future of Western Canada’s Ski Resorts, Patrick Walsh, Ski Business Class, a supplement to The Financial Post Magazine, Publimedia, Vancouver, B.C.

Garibaldi in Academia

The District of Squamish and Its Future, Dean Nucich, paper for Geography 260, T.A. Natalie Jamieson, 1992.

Growth Management Options for Tourism-Led Community Development in Squamish: The Case of Brohm Ridge Ski Resort, Douglas Hainsworth, A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Graduate Studies, School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., December 1996.

Garibaldi Ski & Mountain Resort Development, Environmental Impact Assessment, Michael Kan, Andrew Lau, Harry Leung, Vincent Mak, Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. D. Mavinic, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., May 14, 1997.

Garibaldi Documents

What’s Up There? Condition of Buildings and Facilities on Old “Garibaldi Glacier Resort Development” Site, Henry Roethel, Sunset Productions Ltd., Victoria, B.C., May 9, 1978.

Engineering cost data: Brohm Ridge Alpen Village, Results Management Inc., 1981.

Conceptual Village Engineering - Services: Garibaldi Alpen Resort, Willis, Cunliffe, Tait / DeLCan Consulting Engineers and Planners, Victoria, B.C., May 1981.

Economic Analysis & Cost/Revenue Projections: Garibaldi Alpen Resort, Henry Roethel Ltd., 1982.

Summary Cost / Revenue Analysis: Engineering cost data: Garibaldi Alpen Resort 1982.

Community Concept: Garibaldi Alpen Resort, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts, Squamish, B.C., 1988.

License of Occupation, Agreement between Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. and the Ministry of Crown Lands, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., June 1, 1989.

Formal Proposal: Garibaldi: A Proposed Mountain Resort Development: Executive Summary, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., March 1990.

Garibaldi Alpen Proposal Review, D.R. Mathews and Associates Inc. (“DRM”) for Ministry of Lands & Parks, The Province of British Columbia, May 6, 1990.

Technical and Environmental Assessment: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain Resort Development, JackJohnson Company, Park City, Utah, 1990.

Climate Analysis: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain Resort Development, Pacific Meteorology, Inc., Richmond, B.C., 1990.

Governance Assessment: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain Resort Development, Swinton & Company, Barristers and Solicitors, Vancouver, B.C., 1990.

Traffic Impact Assessment: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain Resort Development, Ward Consulting Group, Vancouver, B.C., 1990.

Ownership, Management and Financial Capability: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain Resort Development, Swinton & Company, Barristers and Solicitors, Vancouver, B.C., and David Jay Flood Architect, Santa Monica, California, May 1990.

Garibaldi Alpen Ski Resort: Review of Submission, Sno-e Canada, Ltd. The Resort Planners, Whistler, B.C., October 1991.

Chronology of Events, Proposal Review: March 1990 to March 1992, Garibaldi Ski Resort Development Proposal, March 1992.

Expression of Interest: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain & Winter Resort Development, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., Squamish, B.C., February 1995.

Expanded Expression of Interest: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain & Winter Resort Development, , Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., Squamish, B.C., August 1995.

Formal Proposal: Garibaldi, A Proposed Mountain & Winter Resort Development, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., Squamish, B.C., April 1996.

Review of Formal Proposal, Concept B - Garibaldi Alpen, Brohm Ridge Resort Development, Golder

Associates Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., 1996.

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts: Formal Proposal Slide Presentation, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., Squamish, B.C., March 31, 1996.

Garibaldi In The Media

Garibaldi Resort Backers Pay Visit: Local Recreation Will Round Out New Resort, Chief Designer Says, Shari Bishop, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 23, 1990.

Squamish may annex Garibaldi ski development: District urged to ‘speak up’, Matthew Plumtree, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 21, 1991.

NDP Rejects Ski Hill Plan at Garibaldi: Alderman Blasts Decision for Killing up to 1000 Jobs, DavidSmith, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, April 2, 1992.

Garibaldi Door Open, Minister Maintains, David Smith, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., April 4, 1992.

Second wind for Brohm Ridge plan, Peter Busch, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., April 14, 1992.

Squamish: So Much Potential Yet Such a Dump, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, April 18, 1992.

Province says Brohm report is secret, Matthew Plumtree, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 5, 1992.

Alpen decision to be discussed, Lindsay Elliot, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 5, 1992.

Ski developers appeal to town: Garibaldi Alpen asks district to annex land, Shari Bishop, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 19, 1992.

‘Annex Brohm’ developer pleads: “We would work with you as partners”, Matthew Plumtree, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., May 19, 1992.

$80M resort proposal to get another look, John Pifer, North Shore News newspaper, North Vancouver, B.C., May 19, 1992.

Garibaldi: A Blighted Dream: Were Developers Snowed Under?, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, June 30, 1992.

Garibaldi Alpen: Dreams of Ski Centre Shattered: Secrecy Surrounded Review by B.C. government Officials, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, July 2, 1992.

Garibaldi: Ski Project Went Schuss, Boom - Then Bah, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, July 3, 1992.

Annexation cost considered, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., July 21, 1992.

Victoria ducks, Council jumps, Peter Busch, Editorial, The Squamish Chief newspaper, August 18, 1992.

Letter to the Editor: Richter objects to label, Wolfgang Richter, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., August 1992.

Annexation considered: Independent consultant best for study: Council, Shari Bishop, The Squamish Times newspaper, Squamish, B.C., August 18, 1992.

Ski resort still possible: ‘Stanley Park’ being felled: “This is our Stanley Park”, Ron Enns, The Squamish Chief newspaper, October 27, 1992.

Should old growth forest on Brohm Ridge be logged?: ‘Man on the street’ interviews, The Squamish Chief newspaper, October 27, 1992.

Squamish council increases involvement with Garibaldi Alpen, Ron Enns, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., September 13, 1994.

Gondolas in the Mist: 5 proposed B.C. resorts muck along the murky development trail, Powdermagazine, January 1995.

B.C. requests proposals for Brohm resort, Canadian Press, Victoria, B.C., October 12, 1995.

Ski resort process moves along: Update on the process, and progress, regarding the proposed ski resort on Brohm Ridge, Ron Enns, The Whistler Question newspaper, Whistler, B.C., June 1996.

Garibaldi Dreaming: Will Highway 99 welcome another ski resort soon? It’s in the right neighbourhood, Kevin Damaskie, Ski Canada magazine, Solstice Publishing Inc., Toronto, Ontario, January 1997.

Brohm ridge ski hill developer expects good news, David Sands, The Squamish Chief newspaper,

Squamish, B.C., February 18, 199_.

Garibaldi Alpen signs Interim Development Agreement, News Release, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd., Squamish, B.C., March 17, 1997.

Garibaldi at Squamish offers employment, all-season outdoor recreation opportunities, Marcia Martin, Directions supplement to The Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., August 26, 1997.

Garibaldi Open House: Fascinating Nature Film Debut preceded by a Garibaldi at Squamish Open House, Al Price, The Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., October 7, 1997.

Garibaldi at Squamish kicks off, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., October 10, 1997.

Open House combined with North American debut of nature film, TheChief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., October 14, 1997.

Find out more about proposed plans to develop a mountain resort for all seasons at Brohm Ridge, TheChief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., October 21, 1997.

Boom in British Columbia: There’s a lot more happening in the mountain resort business than just Whistler, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., November 21, 1997.

Administrator Joins Garibaldi, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., November 28, 1997

Golf

Trends in Canadian Clubs in Town & Country: Country Clubs, including maintenance costs for 1982-1984, Pannell Kerr & Forster, 1985.

Clubs in Town & Country, U.S.: Including table of golf course maintenance costs for 1987, Pannell Kerr & Forster, 1987.

How Do You Do: Golfing in British Columbia: List of public and private golf courses in B.C., organized by tourism regions, Ministry of Recreation & Culture, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1988.

Report on the residential / golf resort development potential for a location on Vancouver Island: Analysis of current market demand for golfing facilities in B.C., Price Waterhouse, Vancouver, B.C., 1988.

Green Dreams: Chain ownership promises to shake up Canada’s golf courses, Tom Fennell, Maclean’s magazine, Maclean Hunter Publishing Limited, Toronto, Ontario, July 14, 1997.

Steam Horse Golf & Recreation Resort: Development Opportunity, Steam Horse Land Developments Inc., MacDonald Realtors, Vancouver, B.C.

Government Documents

A Report on Mount Garibaldi Alpine Recreation Area Ski Operations, 1971.

Squamish-Lillooett Regional District Financial Statements, December 31, 1978.

Ski Area Guidelines: Draft, Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., September 15, 1980.

Commercial-Alpine Ski Policy 4.193: Lands and Housing: Series II Volume I: Land Administration, Director, Land Programs, Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., Effective date of policy: September 5, 1980.

Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy and Application, Land Use Programs, Commercial Land Use General Commercial, B.C. Lands, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., File 12165-000, Effective Date 82.08.18, Amendment 1/94.03.01.

Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (“CASP”), Section 3.4.0200, Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing, The Province of British Columbia,Victoria, B.C., Effective Date 82.08.18, Amendment 1/86.02.14.

Community Statistical (demographic) Profiles for Lillooett Village, Pemberton Village, Squamish Municipality & Whistler Municipality, Ministry of Finance, Central Statistics Bureau, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1987.

An Economic Development Strategy for the Howe Sound Corridor: Communities of Britiannia Beach, Squamish, Whistler, Pemberton, Mount Currie and D’Arcy, Sea to Sky Economic Development Commission, Squamish, B.C., June 1988.

Garibaldi Park Management Plan, Draft, Phase 2, Mel Turner, Manager of Planning, B.C. Parks, The Province of British Columbia, North Vancouver, B.C., October 1988.

Master Plan for Garibaldi Provincial Park, B.C. Parks, South Coast Region, The Province of British Columbia, North Vancouver, B.C., September 1990.

B.C. Government to Push Ski Development Initiatives, Tim Gallagher, Communications Manager, Lorne Sivertson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Employment and Investment, B.C. Provincial Government, Victoria, B.C., May 30, 1994.

Environmental Assessment Act: Bill 29 - 1994, Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human Rights, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., July 7, 1994.

Guide to the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Process, Environmental Assessment Office, Crown Publications, Victoria, B.C., 1995.

Overview: An Update on the Environmental Assessment Process, Environmental Assessment Office, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., July 1995.

Growth Strategies Act Draft Legislation: Updating British Columbia’s Planning System, Darlene Mazari, Minister, Ministry of Municipal Affairs, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., January 1995.

Mountain Resort Associations Act, Bill 10 -1995, Minister of Employment and Investment, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., May 1995.

Environmental Assessment Act (Bill 29): Proposed Bamberton Town Development: Project Report Specifications, Bamberton Project Committee, Province of British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, October 23, 1995.

Cat Lake Recreation Site Management Plan,Prepared for the Squamish Forest District by Neufeldt Reeve & Associates, Vancouver, B.C., March 1996.

A Guide to British Columbia’s Mountain Resort Associations Act, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., June 1996.

British Columbia Municipal Act: RSBC 1996, Chapter 323, Queen’s Printer for British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1996.

Lifts

Coming to Grips with Grips - The start of a continuing study of grip technology, Howard Anderson, P.E., Western Ski Insurance Program, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1977.

Lift Grip Study Update, Howard R. Anderson, P. E., Western Ski Insurance Program, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Winter 1978.

Skier Transportation 1999: Profound Impacts From New Technology: MHR will literally fly the market to the ski area and deliver access to new ski terrain, Sam Bonasso, President, Alpha Associates Inc., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, September 1986.

Spirit Mountain Goes Detachable, Profile of a new Borvig/Leitner Lift, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1987.

Impacts of Detachables, Planners must develop new thinking about skier densities and activity patterns, Beat vonAllmen, P.E., President Alpentech, Inc., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1987.

Blackcomb’s Expansion: Three Doppelmayr detachable quads are the centerpiece of a bold decision to go “World Class”, Dennis Hansen and Warren Sparks, P.E., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1988.

12-Passenger Gondolas Arrive: Stratton and Whistler are the first North American resorts to install these high-capacity Poma units, Kevin B. Andrew, P.E., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1988.

Quadrophenia, Will the trend to detachable quads continue ?, Al Greenberg, Skiing magazine, Time Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, New York, February, 1989.

Other Recreation

U.S. Forest Service Winter Sports Administration Training REC-3, 1966.

What Mixes With Skiing ?: Report on Two Winter Activities that are Proving Worthwhile Investments, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1974.

Wedding X-Country and Alpine, Here’s how a few ski areas are making this combination work for profit, Bob Woodward, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1978.

Hotsprings of Western Canada: A Complete Guide, Jim McDonald, Waterwheel, Vancouver, B.C., 1991.

Western Adventures: On Water or Land, Canada’s West offers a Vast Range of Summer Delights, Windsurfing the West, near Squamish B.C., Ski Canada Sun Sports, Solstice Publishing Inc., 1992.

West Coast Ice unleashes secret: Front-pointing your way from Vancouver to Lillooet, Ron Enns, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., December 21, 1993.

Exploring the Coast Mountains on Skis: A Guide to Mountain Ski Touring in Southwest British Columbia, John Baldwin, John Baldwin Publishing, Vancouver, B.C., 1995.

Breaking the Ice: Intrepid climbers pray for a big chill on a steep hill, Dawn Hanna, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., February 3, 1995.

Take a Hike: Spring is on the way, but there’s time for walking in a winter wonderland, Dawn Hanna, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., February 3, 1995.

B.C.’s Heartland: B.C.’s winter resorts have undergone a quiet revolution when it comes to servicing cross-country skiers: Superb track-setting, lighted trails, good rental / wax shops, reasonable trail fees and warming huts are now features of several of B.C.’s trendier downhill resorts, Steven Threndyle, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, November 1996.

XC Skiers Are Smarter: Canadian Ski Council releases its 1996 facts and stats on Canadian skiers, Canadian Ski Council, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, December 1996.

Woodstock Touring Center: It is true that cross-country skiers like a bit of adventure, but secretly, they all crave fine food and great accommodation as much as anyone - as long as they can stride or skate their way out of any guilt they might generate, Stuart Craig, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, December, 1996.

Squamish Whistler Mountainbike Trail Guide, Rob Cocquyt and Dave Kelly, Elaho Publishing Corporation, Squamish, B.C., 1997.

A Ride to the Top: A guide to the best fat-tire clinics from Vermont to California, Beth Livermore, Snow Country magazine, New York Times Company Magazine Group, Trumbull, Connecticut, Summer 1997.

All Day and All of the Night: 24 Hours of Adrenalin, Dave Norona, Coast Magazine, Glissade Publishing Ltd., Vancouver, B.C., September 1997.

Other Proposed Resorts

Preliminary Engineering Feasibility: Powder Mountain, Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ltd., 1972.

Proposal to Assess Ski Resort Viability in the Powder Mountain Reserve, Price Waterhouse MCS report, Vancouver, B.C., 1984.

Mountain has seen 20 years of plans, Powder Mountain, William Boei and Tom Barrett, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., November 18, 1987.

Skiing eyed at Powder Mountain, Tom Barrett, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., November 18, 1987.

Master Plan for the Proposed Development of Callaghan Lake Resort (Powder Mountain), September1988.

Council not impressed by Callaghan plan, The Whistler Question newspaper, Whistler, B.C., November 10, 1988.

Apex Mountain Resort, (Apex Alpine Ski - Apex Golf/Tennis), Canarim Investment Corporation, Vancouver, B.C., 1989.

Melvin Creek (Cayoosh Proposal): Victoria Stymied Resort Project, Raines Claim, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, September 15, 1993.

Fate of Callaghan in Cabinet’s hands, Cris Prystay, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., October 31, 1995.

Whistler Pioneers Nancy Greene and Al Raine want to do it all again: Ski development, B.C. Business magazine, Vancouver, B.C., October 1995.

Gondolas in the Mist: 5 proposed B.C. resorts muck along the murky development trail, Powdermagazine, January 1995.

Cypress plans don’t open a window on us and nature, Trevor Summers, Opinion, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., December 7, 1995.

Interim Agreement (Cayoosh Ski Development) Between Her Majesty the Queen In Right of the Province of British Columbia and NGR Resort Consultants Inc., Fraser & Beatty Barristers and Solicitors, Vancouver, B.C., April 27, 1996.

Raine Ready To Shelve Plans For Cayoosh: Says Government Bureaucracy, System Prohibitive To Ski Area Development In B.C., Bob Barnett, PIQUE NEWSmagazine, Pique Publishing Inc., Whistler, B.C., July 18, 1997.

Raine discouraged by process, but will wait and see: Coast Guard now part of review of proposed Cayoosh ski area, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Cayoosh Resort proposal provides example for Richter, Brigitte Petersen, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., August 5, 1997.

Cayoosh Creek resort proposal now stalled, Shawn Hall, The Whistler Question newspaper, Whistler, B.C., August 18, 1997.

Other Resorts: Reviews, News

“Wunderbar”: Whirlwind Tour of the West by 46 European Ski Resort Owners, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1978.

Whither Whiteface ?: Will the allure of the Olympics alter the public’s feelings ? Can skiers learn to love this big mountain ? Is it affordable ?, Janet Nelson, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1978.

Hyatt Lake Tahoe Resort Hotel and Casino, National Ski Areas Association Newsletter, West Hartford, Connecticut, Spring 1978.

The Little Resort that Could, Loveland Valley and Loveland Basin, Charlie Meyers, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1978.

Bill Killebrew Taking Charge at Heavenly Valley, How did it go the First Year, Dick Dorworth, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1978.

Gstaad Welcomes ‘Just Folks’ to Ski: Stars in the Town: Most Spectacular Runs, Dan Ehrlich, Los Angeles Times newspaper, Los Angeles, California, January 1, 1984.

St. Moritz: Where The Elite Meet to Ski, Michael Jackson, Los Angeles Times newspaper, Los Angeles, California, January 1, 1984.

Summit County: The Light at the End of the Tunnel: At four high-altitude resorts on the western side of Eisenhower Tunnel, the living is easy; the lift tickets, interchangeable, and the skiing, any way you want

it ..., Linda Harbine Martin, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, October 1985.

La Dolce Utah, It’s called Deer Valley, folks, and its sculpted powder slopes ... drawing the well-heeled to the Wasatch, George S. Bush, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1985.

The Tahoe Good Life, The year-round population has doubled in 10 years and will probably grow another 50 percent by the turn of the century, Ken Castle, Ski magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1985.

Utah Light and Dry: A picture-perfect tale of face-shot days and crisp, cool nights in the powder pig’s promised land ..., Chaco Mohler, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, September 1986.

Una Fantasia Italiana, Madonna di Campiglio, rife with spectacular Alpine scenery, crazy contradictions, and skiing for the intermediate - or the truly adventurous ..., Lito Tejada-Flores, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, September 1986.

The Squaw Valley Challenge: Go there to discover your limits - and to push beyond, Lito Tejada-Flores, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1987.

Skiing the Creek: An untrammeled taste of the good life in the Vail Valley, Daniel Ford, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1987.

Snowmass, Dick Needham, Ski magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1987.

Revolution Through Convolution: In the finest example of tail-first expansion, it has taken Breckenridge, Colorado, 27 years to become an overnight sensation, Charlie Meyers, Ski magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1987.

On Skis in L’Espace Killy: A voyage to a “lift-served white planet” - Val d’Isere, Al Greenberg, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1987.

Civilized Snowmass: Of the Aspen quartet of areas, Snowmass is the most finely-tuned - with a few untamed exceptions, Rick Kahl, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, January 1988.

Skiing British Columbia: There was no snow in California last winter ... That’s when we first heard about B.C., Phyllis and Robert White, L.A. West magazine, Los Angeles, California, February 1988.

Vail Gets a Silver, John Henry Auran, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, February, 1988.

Park City Bright Lights: Claire Walter, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, Spring 1988.

The Unparalleled Skiing Vacation, A skier’s paradise - from novice to expert - is also one of the world’s hottest resorts, Deer Valley, Utah, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, September 1988.

Skiing in the Alps: ‘89 Travel Guide, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, October 1988.

Kingdom of Cruise, Keystone’s main course is smooth and easy skiing, but North Peak and nearby Arapahoe are there for added spice, Allan Pospisil, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1988.

Skiing Free at Mt. Snow, at play in the land of Pony rides, Dream Pools, and Teddy Bear dropouts, RickKahl, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1988.

Knee-Deep in the Monashees, Two powder-rich Canadian areas that just might be the sleepers of the decade, Bob Woodward, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1988.

A Place in the Sun, Mountain High is quintessential Southern California Skiing, Burt Sims, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1988.

Mrs. Fields and Mt. Dangerfield: Park City’s ‘I don’t get no respect’ mountain shows there’s more behind the scenes - and on the hill - than meets the eye, Ski magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1988.

Taos, the powder-perfect valley where skiing’s sun never sets, Nicholas Howe, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, February, 1989.

Valley High!; In April, up top at Chamonix, an Olympic racer chases spring corn, Christin Cooper, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, Spring 1989.

Oregon’s Delectable Alp: Mt. Bachelor, where exciting open snowfields above lead to savory tree-lined runs below, Daniel Ford, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, Spring 1989.

Park City’s Parent Company Reports Solid Financial Growth, Ski Run newspaper, Southern California Edition, Daman-Nelson Travel, Inc. Los Angelos, California, December/January 1990.

The Parsen: Skiing the Ultimate, Ski Run newspaper, Southern California Edition, Daman-Nelson Travel, Inc. Los Angelos, California, December/January 1990.

Two Little Areas That Could: Both Black Mountain, Maine, and the ski hill at Lake City, Colorado, would have closed down if the citizens and the ski industry had given up. They didn’t, Linda Goodspeed, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1991.

Whitetail - Born to Succeed: Take a pinch of Killington, a splash of Sunday River, a sprinkle of Wachusett; put it in a scenic valley just 90 minutes from a hot, growing metro ski market, and presto, a resort designed for the fast lane of success, Paul Janoff, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1991.

50 Things To Do In Aspen, A Summer Guide, Jay Cowan, Ski Magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc., New York, May/June 1993.

Now, at Steamboat: Mt. Paperwork, Snow Country magazine, May / June, 1993.

Sky’s The Limit: The Rocky Mountain home of cowboys and lumberjacks has become a magnet for lone-eagle telecommuters and Range Rover-driving yuppies, Jordan Bonfante, Denver, Time magazine, September 6, 1993.

Interior Designs: Now that Whistler has become internationally known as a ski resort, will success spread over the Coastal Mountains and into B.C.’s Interior?, George Koch, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., March 24, 1995.

High and Mighty: The addition of Extreme Dream to Panorama last season helped to dispel its reputation as a family-only resort, Steven Threndyle, Ski Canada magazine, Soltice Publishing Inc., November 1996.

Woodstock Touring Center: It is true that cross-country skiers like a bit of adventure, but secretly, they all crave fine food and great accommodation as much as anyone - as long as they can stride or skate their way out of any guilt they might generate, Stuart Craig, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, December, 1996.

Riding Hood: You can windsurf in the Columbia River Gorge and snowboard on Mt. Hood’s glacier all in one day, Michael Bane, Snow Country magazine, The New York Times Company Magazine Group, Trumbull, Connecticut, Summer, 1997.

ASC acquires Steamboat, Heavenly mountain resorts: Maine-based company tops in skier visits, at least for now, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 8, 1997.

Like, number one again, dude: Park City, the only resort to take the bold step of advertising in a boarding magazine, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 22, 1997.

Vail sells off A-Basin but critics not satisfied with buyer, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 5, 1997.

The New Mountain Moguls: Four companies have emerged at the forefront of a mad dash to consolidate ski resorts under corporate banners, Ken Castle, SKI Magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, November 1997.

Power Systems

Update on Energy, S. Locke Bogart, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1977.

Environmentally Clean Power For Stationary and Transportation Systems, Ballard Annual Report ‘93, Ballard Power Systems Inc., North Vancouver, B.C., 1993.

Celling the Future: It’s full steam ahead for Ballard marketing plan, How it works, Four main fuel cells, William Boei, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., May 13, 1995.

Real Estate

The Appraisal of Ski Areas: Discussion of physical site characteristics, ASA Valuation, October - November, 1976.

Appraising Appraisals, Sellers as well as buyers need to know what to expect from appraisals, and how to work with the appraiser to their advantage, James Branch, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Winter 1978.

Sweet Deals in Summit County, Sally Russell, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, September 1986.

Mondo Condo, Al Greenberg, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, October 1987.

Sweet Mountain Home, the real estate market in some of the major Western ski resorts, Bill Grout, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December, 1987.

Ski Country Real Estate, More news from major U.S. ski resort markets, Kim Brizzolara, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1988.

Condomania in ski country, Iain MacMillen, Editor, Ski Canada magazine, Solstice Publishing Inc., Toronto, Ontario, November 1996.

Boomers Return to Ski Slopes - to Nest: Eager to Buy Homes, Stefan Fatis, The Wall Street Journal, January 17, 1997.

Subdivision plans supported, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Timeshare is Reborn: To deal with timeshare’s bad reputation, many ski resorts have given the concept a new face, a new figure and difference hype - with great success, Claire Walter, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Ski Industry Statistics, Information & Marketing

Attendance Forecasting: Ski area attendance forecasting study, William B. McDowell & Associates, Boulder, Colorado, 1968.

Package It!, The trend is to packages - of all sizes and varieties, Abby Rand, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1975.

The 1974 - 75 Economic Study, well managed, properly conceived ski areas can produce profits commensurate with the risks involved, Ted Farwell, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Winter 1976.

The Haskell Hearings, The Ski Industry is Jolted into the 1970’s, Pam Conklin, P.R. Director for Vail, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Winter 1976.

International Ski Resort Marketplace, The Business Round-up, James Branch, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1977.

A Ski Area Index, A review of a survey of ski areas, regarding inflation and coping, Ted Farwell, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1977.

Pricing for Survival, How to price your lift tickets - an important, basic look at a basic problem, TedFarwell, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1978.

At 14 million We’re Bigger Than We Thought, A report on an industry study, Al Greenberg, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Summer 1978.

White Paper on Skiing, Jeff Palmer, Ski Industries America, McLean, Virginia, September 1982.

Selected Service Industries in Canada: 1985 data related to the ski market in Canada, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

Demand Research Revisited, Ted Farwell, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, September 1986.

Ski Trains a-Comin’: The use of trains to reach ski resorts is increasing, this marketing tool to attract skiers needs to be exploited, Lew Culer, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1986.

Where Do the Trails Lead: A Focus on the Canadian Ski Market: Review of statistics and market research on Canada’s ski industry, National Ski Industries Association, 1986.

Ski Industry Perspective: Price Discounting or Choice ?, Detachable Quads: What To Do?, Retailer Prices, Debts Up, Racer Development: Will it Happen?, John Fry, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, May 1987.

The Colorado Ski Industry: Highlights of the 1986-87 Season: Skier count market share statistics for Colorado ski areas, Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Colorado, 1987.

20th Annual Interbourse ‘88, Aspen-Snowmass: The Dow Jones is not all that goes up and down, EricHanson, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1987.

The Vanishing Mountains: The Shrinking World of Skiing: What happens to your ski experience when multi-mountain megaresorts end their feeding frenzy ?, Charlie Meyers, Ski magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, December 1987.

Ski Area Marketing: A survey of NSAA U.S. Ski Area Marketing Departments: 1985-86 Season, GraduateSchool of Business Adminstration, University of Colorado, 1987.

Ski Market Study: Review of current ski market in B.C. and the competitive relationship with other Pacific Northwest ski areas, Canada Regional Industrial Expansion and Ministry of Tourism, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1987.

Canada West Ski Areas Association Economic Analysis 1987/88: Financial data from 14 ski areas in B.C. and 9 ski areas in Alberta, Canada West Ski Areas Association, 1988.

B.C.’s Mountain Resorts: 1987/88 Ski Season Review: Skier count statistics, George McKay, Ministry of Tourism, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1988.

Cross Country Ski Area Study: Identifies the existing and potential market in B.C. for cross country skiing, Canada Regional Industrial Expansion and Ministry of Tourism, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., 1988.

NSAA National Business Survey: Analysis of skier visits, ski area operations and snow conditions in the U.S., 1988.

Skier Count Statistics for 1969-1987 for Oregon ski areas, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Portland, Oregon, 1988.

Boom Times on the Slopes: Current ski market in Canada, Macleans magazine, Maclean Hunter Publishing Limited, Toronto, Ontario, 1988.

Snow Country: An Analysis of Ancillary Growth, Part 11, New York Times Sports/Leisure Magazines, Research Resource Centre, New York, May 1993.

Resort Development In The Pacific Northwest: Tourism leaders contemplate the past, present and future of resort planning and development: Established resorts making up for poor planning: Marketing the key to success: Programming mix a must for resorts, Don Anderson, The Whistler Question newspaper, Whistler, B.C., September 16, 1993.

Economic Analysis of North American Ski Areas 1976 - 93: A unique 17-season review of the North American ski industry, Business Research Division, Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Colorado at Boulder and National Ski Areas Association, Boulder, Colorado, 1994.

Skating Comes to the Slopes: Skate technique cross-country skiing is quickly replacing the centuries-old traditional ‘Classic’ technique, Stewart Bell, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., February 3, 1995.

Mountain resorts grapple with growth: Next step in evolution of towns like Whistler requires as much energy as building resort from scratch: “Each resort is a lab, a Petri dish. You watch it grow and try to decide, is it penicillin or malignant”, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 1, 1995.

What do Mothers Want? Attracting mother (and their offspring) may require a different approach and new thinking, Dinah B. Witchel, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Slicing and Dicing the Market, Linda Goodspeed, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

Consolidation: Analysis and Direction: What are the deals and why are they being made? What is critical mass and when do you get it? Are smaller independents at risk, or are they the beneficiaries?, Staff Analysis, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1996.

Consolidation: Analysis and Direction, What are the Deals and Why are they being Made?, StaffAnalysis, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1996.

Anatomy of the Deal: Fascinating Details, Human and Financial of the Purchase of S-K-I as Revealed in an Interview with the Man Who Did the Deal, Les Otten, David Rowan, Editor, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1996.

Back in Business: George Gillett, His Climb from Bankruptcy & His Re-Entry into the Industry He Loves, Allen Best, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1996.

Consolidation Gets Mixed Reviews: Market Synergy: True or False?, Linda Goodspeed, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp.,Woodbury, Connecticut, November 1996.

Ski B.C. at a Glance: Table of facts on all ski resorts in B.C., Coast Magazine, Glissade Publishing Ltd., Vancouver, B.C., November 1996.

XC Skiers Are Smarter: Canadian Ski Council releases its 1996 facts and stats on Canadian skiers, Canadian Ski Council, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, December 1996.

MERGER MANIA: Consolidation Has Changed The Mountain Resort Ownership, But Is Competition Among Ski Resorts ?, PIQUE NEWSmagazine, Pique Publishing Inc., Whistler, B.C., January 24, 1997.

Warren Miller: In the Role of a Maverick, David Rowan, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut.

New Tools Are Needed to Survey Customers, Arthur E. Heimbach, Ph.D., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Crazy for Demo Centers: Demo Centers came in with shaped-ski technology, but they have taken on a life of their own - and ski areas are getting a piece of the action, Iseult Devlin, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Boom in British Columbia: There’s a lot more happening in the mountain resort business than just Whistler, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., November 21, 1997.

Ski Resort Planning

Beyond The Bulldozer - Planning Removals, Henrik Bull, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Spring 1975.

A Naked Look at Year-Round Resorts, A residential planner sees the emperor without his clothes at Aspen, Jackson Hole, Mazama, McCall, Sun Valley and Vail, Raymond S. Rodgers, Ph.D., Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1976.

Designing a Better Place to Eat, Charlie M. Ewers, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Summer 1976.

Guide for Preparing Resort Development Plans, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1977.

Winter Sports Site Base Area Study: space allocation guidelines, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1975.

Recreation Site Development Planning Handbook: Chapter 30: Winter Sports Complex Planning, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1980.

The Capacity of a Ski Area: Overview of the methods used to estimate the capacity of ski areas, paperpresented at the Northern Region Winter Sports Seminar, Whitefish, Montana, 1985.

Beach-Front Planning For Slope-Side Developments; Circulation is the key to putting skiers next to skiing, Terry R. Barnhart, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, March 1987.

Road-building authority hits a financial pothole, Vaughn Palmer, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., February 3, 1995.

The Jack Johnson Company: Recreation, Residential, and Resort Specialists: Land Planning, Architecture, Civil Engineering, Jack J. Johnson, P.E., Park City, Utah, 1995.

The Kootenays in the 21st Century: Managing for a Successful Future: Demographic Trends, Urban Land Value and Land Use, Rural Land Use Challenges, Transportation, Economic Development,

Tourism, Sustainable Growth, UBC School of Community and Regional Planning, The Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia, B.C. Ministry of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, B.C. Transportation Financing Authority, City of Nelson, Regional District of Central Kootenay, October, 1996.

Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, Province of British Columbia, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, B.C., June 1996.

Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, Sno-e Canada, Ltd. The Resort Planners, Whistler, B.C., 1996.

Even the best laid plans eventually expire, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine newspaper, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 29, 1997.

A Heavenly Master Plan: Seven years in the making, Heavenly’s new master plan is a triumph of persistence and co-operation, Stan Hansen, Vice-President, Heavenly Ski Resort and Andrew Strain Sr. Planner, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Terrain Made for Teaching: To make learning to ski more inviting and more fun, many ski area managers are redesigning beginner slopes. Here’s how three areas are meeting terrain demands, BrianFairbank, Jiminy Peak, Richard Wiseman, Camelback, Scott Bender, Seven Springs, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Ski Schools & Ski Racing

The Young Granddaddy of Ski School Design, At $710,000. gross sales, Vail’s ski school has recorded phenomenal growth. The formula: Jerry Muth, Janet Nelson, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, October 1971.

White Circus: A Skiing Life with the Crazy Canucks, Ken Read with Matthew Fisher, Ken Porter Books Limited, Toronto, Ontario, 1987.

By George !: A talk with Vail’s George Gillett on the eve of the ‘89 World Championships, Al Greenberg, Skiing magazine, Time Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, New York, January 1989.

Right on the Edge of Crazy: On Tour With the U.S. Downhill Ski Team, Mike Wilson, Times Books, Random House, Inc., New York, New York, 1993.

Ski School Track to CEO: Many resorts are being run by former ski instructors. Is this accidental or is the ski school the best source for future managers ?, Stu Campbell, Vice-President, Skier Services, Heavenly Ski Resort, California, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodland, CT, November 1993.

Squamish

Squamish-Lillooett Outdoor Recreation Study: Summary & Recommendations: For the development of regional recreational opportunities, B.C. Parks Branch, Planning Division, Squamish, B.C., 1976.

On the Wall, Towering over Howe Sound, the Chief Beckons “Free” Climbers ... , Michel Beaudry, Photos by Kevin McLane, Vancouver Magazine, July 1987.

Up Against The Chief, Kevin McLane, Beautiful British Columbia magazine, Fall 1987.

Broke on Brohm: 20 years ago Adie Bauer saw another Whistler, transplanted south on Brohm Ridge, high above Squamish, the ruins stand today as testimony to a vision that never quite crystallized, LarryMcCallum, The Whistler Question, April 21, 1988.

Squamish, B.C.: Information Kit: Industrial Park Development Data, District of Squamish, Squamish, B.C., 1988.

The Squamish Official Community Plan, District of Squamish, Squamish, B.C., June 1989.

Squamish is bullish on development: Major projects could bring big changes to a small town, JimMcDowell, British Columbia Report magazine, Vancouver, B.C., May 14, 1990.

Squamish Economic Development Strategy Plan, Draft Report, Lauga & Associates Consulting Ltd. November 1990.

The Corridor Plan: Draft 1, The Official Community Plan for the Corridor Portion of Electoral Area “D” Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, Urbans Systems Ltd., May 27, 1991.

Highway 99 proposal to recommend expressway: An alternate route through Indian Arm is recommended in the future, Matthew Plumtree, The Squamish Chief newspaper, September 24, 1991.

Squamish: So Much Potential Yet Such a Dump, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, April 18, 1992.

Squamish Citizens Tourism Committee: Vision Statement: Elements of the Vision Statement, SquamishCitizens Tourism Committee, Squamish, B.C., May 1993.

Squamish: The Shining Valley, Kevin McLane, Merlin Productions Inc., Squamish, B.C., 1994.

Squamish Tourism Master Plan, Sea to Sky Business Report, John French & Scott Roberts, commentators, Skip McCarthy, Eileen Kelly & Susan Bell, guests, “Mountain Monitor” Noon Hour Open Line Show transcript, Mountain FM radio station, Squamish, B.C., May 13, 1994.

Tourism Development Plan for the District of Squamish, Citizen’s Advisory Committee and Howe Sound Community Futures Society, District of Squamish, Squamish, B.C., December 1994.

Sea to Sky Corridor Facts and Figures - 1994, Sea to Sky Economic Development Commission, Squamish, B.C., 1995.

Businesses encouraged to join film industry registry, Andy Stonehouse, The Squamish Chief, Squamish, B.C., January 9, 1996.

Squamish Booming With Opportunity, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, February 22, 1997.

The Squamish Official Community Plan, Draft, District of Squamish, Squamish, B.C., July 1997.

Film festival opens September 11 in Squamish: Begin’s new movie to debut at fund-raiser, PiqueNewsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 5, 1997.

Festival to celebrate films of all styles, Brigitte Peterson, The Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., September 9, 1997.

Economic Development Committee Minutes, T. Craddock, Committee Chairperson, R.A. Miles, Clerk-Administrator, District of Squamish, Squamish, B.C., August 31, 1994.

Tourism & Recreation

The Vacation Skier Studied, Market Research, Bill Niles, Research Director, Ski Magazine, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, Fall 1976.

Program Guidelines: Canada-British Columbia Subsidiary Agreement on Tourist Industry Development, Draft, Ministry of Economic Development, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., January 1, 1987.

Vancouver Arts and Culture: The New Tourism Attraction: The Cultural Tourism project has received close to $1.3 million from the Department of Communications, both the federal and provincial Ministeries of Tourism, the Vancouver and Victoria municipal governments and the private sector, Cultural Tourism Project, BC Business magazine, Vancouver, B.C., January 1987.

Travel: Making the Most of Europe: Europe is where they invented tourism, Nicholas Howe, Skiing magazine, Time Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, New York, December 1988.

British Columbia: A Picture Book to Remember Her By, Colour Library Books Ltd., Surrey, B.C., 1988.

British Columbia Recreational Vehicle Campground / Resort Study, Ministry of Tourism and Ministry Responsible for Culture, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., November 1989.

U.S. Product Market Match Survey, Ministry of Tourism and Ministry Responsible for Culture, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., February 1991.

An Investment Opportunity in British Columbia Tourism, Ministry of Tourism and Ministry Responsible for Culture, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., March 1991.

Canadians spent more elsewhere, figures say, Eric Beauchesne, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, November 29, 1991.

Competition: The sky-high battle for tourists: From Toronto, it can cost less to fly to Jamaica than to Montreal, and even higher domestic fares are on the way. But still, Canada can be a magnet for foreign travellers, Sam Blyth, The Globe and Mail, December 17, 1991.

The Promised Land ? Why People Are Moving To British Columbia’s Huge Mountains and Hidden Valleys, Snow Country Magazine, July/August 1992.

TOURISM HIGHLIGHTS 1991, Ministry of Tourism and Ministry Responsible for Culture, The Province of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., March 1993.

Squamish Citizens Tourism Committee: Vision Statement: Elements of the Vision Statement, SquamishCitizens Tourism Committee, Squamish, B.C., May 1993.

Boom Time In The Rockies: More Jobs and Fewer Hassles Have Americans Heading For the Hills: Sky’s The Limit, Jordan BonFante, The Last Safe Place, William Kittredge, Geared to the Max, John Skow, Time Magazine, September 6, 1993.

Chemainus switched to tourism after industry went: Island town that fought back now model for world, Alan Daniels, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, August 31, 1994.

This Coast: How the islands got their names, Marianne B. Scott, Passage magazine, B.C. Ferries, Victoria, B.C., Winter 1994.

Tourism Looks Good: B.C. remains one of most-favoured tourist destinations, Tony Wanless, The Province newspaper, December 17, 1995.

Tourism getting new respect in B.C.: Canada’s fastest-growing province has always looked to resource extraction for its riches, but now visitors have become a major factor, Craig McInnes, British Columbia Bureau Victoria, The Globe and Mail newspaper, Thursday, January 4, 1996.

Four Season Recreation: Mammoth: A resort that offers year-round outdoor activities, SuzanneNottingham, Global Skate magazine, Westminster, California, April/May 1996.

B.C.’s Heartland: B.C.’s winter resorts have undergone a quiet revolution when it comes to servicing cross-country skiers: Superb track-setting, lighted trails, good rental / wax shops, reasonable trail fees and warming huts are now features of several of B.C.’s trendier downhill resorts, Steven Threndyle, SkiTrax magazine, Toronto, Ontario, November 1996.

What do Mothers Want? Attracting mother (and their offspring) may require a different approach and new thinking, Dinah B. Witchel, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corp., Woodbury, Connecticut, January 1996.

In Summer ‘97, Flights Again: Frankfurt - Canada,Stumbock Club Journal, Germany, February, 7, 1997.

Glaciers, Forests and One Bear, Stumbock Club Journal, Germany, February, 7, 1997.

Wonderful Slopes and Disco in the Snow, Stumbock Club Journal, Germany, February, 7, 1997.

Canmore Feels Its Growth, Mathew Ingram, Business West, The Globe and Mail, Vancouver, B.C., June 16, 1997.

Capilano College to offer tourism management degree program, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Industrial Tourism: Forest Service currently views recreation the way it looks at the numbers of trees harvested, minerals extracted, and cattle grazing on its public lands ..., Scott Condon and Bob Schultz, Ski Area Management magazine, Beardsley Publishing Corporation, Woodbury, CT, September 1997.

Vancouver still plays a significant role in Whistler, Bob Barnett, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 5, 1997.

Revised Riverside Campground wins unanimous approval: Scaled down project gets third reading, should be ready by next summer, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 12, 1997.

Whistler / Blackcomb

Whistler Resort Association Member Guide: Organizational Structure, Members, WRA Bylaws, RMOW Act Chapter 67, Questions & Answers, Resort Municipality of Whistler, B.C., May 1977.

Whistler, Development of a Resort: A Description of the Development of the Whistler Resort in British Columbia, Canada, Economic Planning Group of Canada, Victoria, B.C., 1984.

Whistler: Development of a Resort: Description of Whistler’s development history, Peter Maundrell,Canada Department of Regional Industrial Expansion, 1984.

When Push Comes to Shove, Terry Redmond took a loser and made it a winner, An American marketing whiz is turning the resort of Whistler around, Kevin C. Griffin, B.C. Business, Canada Wide Magazines, Burnaby, B.C., February, 1986.

Blackcomb Reaches New Heights, Skiing magazine, Times Mirror Magazines, Inc, New York, Spring 1986.

Whistler Village Expansion: Analysis of potential for hotel and commercial development, ResortMunicipality of Whistler, Whistler, B.C., 1986.

Whistler Local Resource Use Plan: Response to public concerns about logging, road building and recreational uses of land in and near the municipality, Resort Municipality of Whistler, Whistler, B.C., 1986.

The Whistler Gold Rush: Current economicconditions in the Whistler area: This summer alone, an estimated $200 million in construction is underway, Michel Beaudry, Vancouver’s Business Report, Vancouver, B.C., September 1988.

Mountain Inn Hotel & Retail Complex: Description of business and assets of the complex at Whistler, Draft information memorandum, Lancaster Financial Inc., October 1988.

Statistical Information on Whistler Resort: Data on hotel occupancies, visitor origins, skier counts and accommodation room rates, Whistler Resort Association, 1988.

New Development For Whistler Creek, Ski Run newspaper, Southern California Edition, Daman-Nelson Travel, Inc. Los Angelos, California, December/January 1990.

Intrawest Development Corporation, Preliminary Prospectus, Initial Public Offering, Intrawest,Vancouver, B.C., January 25, 1990.

Whistler Resort Under Capacity, Nicole Parton, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, July 3, 1992.

Whistler tops Vail for title of No. 1: September issue of Snow Country magazine rates Whistler best ski resort in North America: Rating brings pressure to stay on top, The Whistler Question newspaper, Whistler, B.C., August 6, 1992.

Whistler Community & Resort Profile, Department of Planning & Development, Resort Municipality of Whistler, B.C., October 1993.

Whistler celebrates 20th birthday facing same old issues, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 1, 1995.

Warming Up to Whistler: Resort will be like Banff or Lake Louise, hotels vice-president says, AlanDaniels, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, September 16, 1995.

Whistler tops with mags: Editors at Skiing finally bump Vail, Clare Ogilvie, The Province newspaper, Vancouver, B.C., August 22, 1996.

Whistler to the Max, Cover Story, Dianne Rinehart, The Vancouver Sun newspaper, December 7, 1996.

Blackcomb-Whistler merger draws favorable response, Al Price, The Squamish Chief newspaper, Squamish, B.C., December 31, 1996.

1996 Annual Community and Resort Monitoring Program Report, Resort Municipality of Whistler, B.C., 1996.

Resort Municipality of Whister Act, Chapter 407, Resort Municipality of Whistler, B.C., 1996.

Campground proposal gets mixed reviews: AWARE opposes location, but Riverside’s is only proposal under review (Whistler, B.C.), Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Whistler Water Works: It’s taken for Granted, but Whistler’s drinking water is a product of choreographing the best that nature has to offer, G. D. Maxwell, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Village North: The Vision Becomes the Reality!, WLC Developments Ltd, Whistler and Vancouver, B.C., insert in Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., August 1, 1997.

Whistler’s Mother is Europe, British Columbian ski resort exudes the Continent, Aurora Mackey, Daily News newspaper.

Revised Riverside Campground wins unanimous approval: Scaled down project gets third reading, should be ready by next summer, Pique Newsmagazine, Pique Publishing, Whistler, B.C., September 12, 1997.

SECTION 1 PROJECT APPLICANT

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The following report represents the application of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. under the provincial Environmental Assessment Act to acquire a Project Approval Certificate to develop a ski & mountain resort, referred to as "GARIBALDI" or "GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH". The proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development is located approximately 13 kilometres (8.1 miles) northeast of Squamish, British Columbia.

This "Project Application" satisfies Part 2, Division - 2, Section 7 (Application) of the provincial Environmental Assessment Act by providing an overview of the proposed project including, but not limited to:

● Purpose and major components of the project ● Existing information pertaining to environmental, economic, social, cultural, heritage, health

characteristics and conditions in the vicinity of the project ● On and off-site facilities of or associated with the project ● Construction plan and timetable for completion of the project ● Any new or expanded public works required because of the project ● Potential effects of the project and measures that are proposed in order to prevent or mitigate

adverse effects ● Relevant plans pertaining to land use and to related resource issues in the area of the project ● Public information distribution and consultation activities undertaken or proposed ● First Nation information distribution and consultation activities undertaken or proposed ● Discussions and issues identified with local, regional and provincial government agencies

regarding the effects of the project

The Project Application is organized as follows:

● Introduction: Executive Summary

● SECTION 1: Project Applicant● SECTION 2: Project Description ● SECTION 3: Existing Conditions ● SECTION 4: Potential Impacts & Proposed Mitigation Strategies ● SECTION 5: Market Analysis ● SECTION 6: Financial Analysis ● SECTION 7: Socio-Economic Impact Analysis ● SECTION 8: Public Consultation ● SECTION 9: First Nations Consultation ● SECTION 10: Approvals and Governance ● SECTION 11: Environmental Management ● SECTION 12: Future and On-Going Studies ● Reading List ● Appendices

In addition to the review of the project under the provincial Environmental Assessment Act, it is anticipated that the proposed project will enter into a more detailed stage of review under the master planning process of Commercial Alpine Ski Policy and the District of Squamish Official Community Plan (OCP). These more detailed reviews will be initiated during the following months and are expected to occur simultaneously with the Environmental Assessment Act review process.

The Proponent is committed to working with the Squamish Lillooett Regional District (SLRD), the District of Squamish, the local community and First Nations in decision making throughout the design of the proposed project, to ensure that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH becomes an integral part of the vision and development of the community.

1.2 PROPONENT NAME, REPRESENTATIVE AND ADDRESS

The Proponent for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development is:

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. Mountain View Centre #205 - 38012 - 2nd Avenue SS 2 Squamish, British Columbia Canada V0N 3G0

The primary contact for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is Wolfgang Richter. Mr. Richter should be contacted for any corporate, market or financial information. He can be reached at (604) 892-5539, by facsimile at (604) 892-5589 or by e-mail at [email protected]. Any questions or comments regarding technical information within this document should be directed to Glenn Stewart of Enkon Environmental Limited at telephone (604) 536-2947, by facsimile at (604) 536-2948 or e-mail at [email protected]

1.3.1 Corporate Background

Two companies, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd., and Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd, control the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development.

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. was initially formed during the mid-1980's to take the proposed project through the planning and approvals phase of the provincial Commercial Alpine Ski Policy (CASP).

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. has since been formed to take the proposed project through the planning and approvals stage of the recently enacted provincial Environmental Assessment Act and ultimately through construction and operation of the project.

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. controls Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd.

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. and Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. are both incorporated under the Company Act of British Columbia with registered and records offices at 1000-840 Howe Street, Vancouver, B.C.

Both companies have their head office in Squamish, British Columbia.

1.3.2 Share Structure

The current share structure of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. is as follows:

Authorized Share Capitalization 110,000,000 shares

Voting Common Shares 100,000,000 shares

Non-voting Preferred Shares 10,000,000 shares

The current shareholders of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. are:

Wolfgang Richter (Victoria, B.C.) 1 share

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. 5,100,000 shares

391143 BC Limited (Vancouver, B.C.) 166,000 shares

Stolle Services Ltd. (Victoria, B.C.) 595,773 shares

Gogol Lobmayr (Munich, Germany) 720,000 shares

The share structure of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1987) Ltd. is as follows:

Authorized share capitalization 1,000,000 shares

Class A voting shares 500,000 shares

Class B voting shares 500,000 shares

Class A shares issued to date for Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. are one (1) voting share to Wolfgang Richter.

1.3.3 Development Financing

During the Expression of Interest and Formal Proposal phase of the Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. submissions, several major corporations and financial sources expressed interest in providing the necessary financing. These interests were typically subject to obtaining project approval from the Province and pending market conditions continued to warrant the economic viability of the project.

Once Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. received the exclusive Proponent Status by B.C. Lands on August 31, 1996, additional development companies and sources of financing have expressed an interest in participating in the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. .

The Interim Agreement with the Province requires that Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. maintain control of the development throughout the master planning and public approvals phase. To maximize both the capital share value for shareholders and comply with this agreement, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. delayed finalizing any negotiations to secure a financing partner until the Interim Agreement was signed.

As a result of the successful completion of negotiations with government regarding the Interim Agreement, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. was able to secure a commitment contract with the Vancouver offices of Price Waterhouse to assist in development of its long-range business strategy and financing plans.

1.3.3.1 Economic Viability, Financing and Provincial Policy

The Province's Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (CASP) is a well established document designed to encourage the expansion of the mountain resort industry of British Columbia. The CASP does this by making available suitable crown land for resort real estate development to mountain resort developers at the appraised cost of undeveloped land in exchange for providing the necessary services (lifts, roads, infrastructure, etc.) to create a viable mountain resort operation.

The amount of land allocated is provided in accordance with a variety of criteria (i.e., four seasons, destination potential and is allocated in a ratio of beds to skier capacity depending on the proposed mountain resort rates according to these criteria).

1.3.3.2 Existing & Future Financing Strategy

The following three stages of financing are envisioned for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project.

Stage 1

At this stage, equity investment has been secured from sophisticated shareholders who understand that the risk and the ultimate goal of being able to actually purchase land and start physical development and construction success at this stage remains contingent on a myriad of bureaucratic, political, and market circumstances before the land may actually be purchased. One can expect to receive the necessary permits to start construction to recover the funds invested.

The total funds required for the first stage is estimated to be in excess of $7,000,000. These funds are required for such items as architectural fees, engineering fees, legal, accounting, studies (environmental, etc.) travelling and simple management / office overhead expenses such as printing, phones, faxes, rent, etc.

Over half of the estimated funds have been spent and funding is in place for funding for the remaining equity required without any loss of control for Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd.

Stage II

This stage is where land is acquired and the services and mountain recreation operations are developed on the land in order for one to be able to either market the serviced land to developers or develop the land in-house. This stage is estimated as being in excess of $100,000,000 and will be realized as follows:

A) Equity (shareholders) $25,000,000

B) Mortgage debt 25,000,000

C) Bank debt 20,000,000

D) Pre-sales 25,000,000

E) Promotional tie-ins 5,000,000

The actual percentage of equity required to complete this stage of funding will be dependent on the

economic viability of the project. The more the perceived risk the project has (cost overruns, uncertainty and potential delays for permits, etc.), the more equity will be required.

At this stage it is still difficult to secure firm financial commitments from conventional institutions (banks, mortgage companies). This is because no land is yet owned by the developer, final costs cannot yet be determined as the development costs cannot be fixed until all the final conditions for issuance of the permits are known. Most financing commitments require a non-refundable deposit and, until permits are issued, such commitments are considered unwise.

Accordingly, while 'expressions of interest' are readily obtained at this stage of financing such expressions of interest typically come with the caveat "…if the land is purchased, if the project deemed economically viable - after all the figures and requirements are in - then we are willing to provide the necessary financing".

Stage III

This is where the land is fully serviced and zoned and ready to be built on, with all the amenities either in place or in the process of being completed. Funds are needed to physically construct the hotels, or homes, or commercial retail stores.

These funds are normally provided as conventional first mortgages by banks or mortgage companies. The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development will sell parcels of land to developers under conditions that the construction must start within, say, 18 months or they risk forfeiting the land. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will develop as many of the parcels as they can reasonably handle.

It is expected that the buyers/developers of the land will come from the following areas:

A) B.C. residents 50%

B) Rest of Canada 10%

C) U.S. 10%

D) Europe 10%

E) South East Asia 20%

1.3.4 Board of Directors and Officers

Figure 1-1 Garibaldi Alpen Resort (1996) Ltd. Corporate Organization

The Board of Directors is composed of individuals with expertise in business, community development as well as marketing and design in the tourism and resort development industry.

The Board will provide direction, set policy and provide fiscal management during all phases of the resort development.

The directors and officers of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. are as follows:

Wolfgang H. Richter Founder, Chairman & CEO

David Jay Flood President & Director of Design

Janice M. Scott Director VP Marketing & Public Relations

Thomas Y. McKeachie Director VP Communications, Technology & Education

Fritz Ulrich Stolle Director

Gogol Lobmayr Director

Wolfgang Richter

GARIBALDI - Founder, Chairman & CEO

Wolfgang Richter began skiing at an early age in the mountains of Bavaria before the Richter family moved to Victoria, B.C. in 1952.

On Vancouver Island, he and his father even skied on Mount Douglas on occasion and then, with the SnowBird Ski Club at Mt. Brenton and eventually Green Mountain. While attending the University of Victoria, Mr. Richter became president of the UVIC Ski Club in 1966 and, that November, made his first trip to Whistler Mountain. Throughout the late-Sixties, the UVIC Ski Club (& Ski Team) became the most popular club on Campus, including several memorable ski trips to U.S. and Canadian resorts during the Christmas Holiday.

After graduation, Mr. Richter's varied talents have supported his professional career in the fields of education, media and film production. In 1977, Mr. Richter served as British Columbia's first Film Commissioner, pioneering the creation of the provincial government's film location promotion office, an office that today generates over $500,000,000 worth of production locations in British Columbia annually.

In 1980, the film industry took Mr. Richter to California where he became involved in the creative

development of literary properties for feature film production. But it was the siren song of EXPO'86, "Something's Happening Here..." and his lifelong passion for skiing which brought Mr. Richter back home to British Columbia to focus his business energies on a major project he had been instrumental in spearheading in 1978; a ski resort on the slopes of Mt. Garibaldi.

Mr. Richter resides in Squamish and has family in Victoria. A former Director of the Squamish Arts Council, he is a Director of the Squamish & Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce and has been nominated as a candidate for the Chamber's "1997 Businessman of the Year" award. He is also a longtime Director of the Los Angeles/Vancouver Sister Cities Association and a Past-President of the Canada California Chamber of Commerce.

David Jay Flood, FAIA

GARIBALDI - President & Director of Development

David Jay Flood is president of Santa Monica-based David Jay Flood Architects and has extensive experience in the design and development of mountain resorts.

Since establishing his own company in 1967, Mr. Flood's firm has developed a widespread reputation in all-season resort planning and design, with a special focus on economic feasibility, architectural design, government approval processing and project coordination. Mr. Flood and his associates have been involved in the development of more than 30 existing and new facilities, including such resorts as Stowe, Lake Tahoe, Mammoth Lakes, Big Sky and Keystone - where he closed the legendary deal where Ralston Purina financed the development, an acquisition they only recently relinquished to InterWest.

As Director of Development for the California-based Janss family who owned Sun Valley, he continued on with them when they built Snowmass at Aspen. In 1980 Mr. Flood joined Peter Ueberroth to help create the success of the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee, ultimately serving as Sports Commissioner for all aquatic events for the 1984 Summer Olympic Games.

As a member of the Executive Board of the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), he was responsible for planning Olympic Training Centres in Lake Placid, Colorado Springs and San Diego. He is also past Chairman of the USOC Hall of Fame Committee and Board Member of the 1991 L.A. Olympic Festival Committee.

For more than two decades, Mr. Flood has served as a Director and past Chairman of the Board of the Yosemite National Institutes (YNI). YNI is a non-profit education corporation whose focus is on educating teachers and students about nature and sustainable development in nature's classroom. YNI campuses are located in Yosemite National Park, the Headland Institute in San Francisco, and Olympic National Park, Washington.

Mr. Flood resides in Maui and Los Angeles, California, and has served as President of Garibaldi Alpen

Resorts since 1989.

Janice M. Scott

GARIBALDI - Director, V. P. Marketing & Public Relations

Janice Scott is a third generation Squamish resident with over 15 years of marketing and tourism experience in the ski and resort industry. Ms. Scott began in 1980 as Marketing and Sales Coordinator with the Whistler Resort Association at a time when Whistler was initially being established as Canada's premier destination resort.

In 1983, Ms. Scott became the National Recreation Program Director for the United States Ski Association (USSA) at their headquarters in Colorado Springs. During her three year tenure with USSA, she was responsible for the national recreation program and membership benefits for the USSA, including the organization of two USSA National Ski Week events held in Jackson Hole, Wyoming and Snowmass at Aspen.

Ms. Scott's industry experience also includes work with the Kananaskis Resort Association in Alberta, where she assisted in establishing post-Olympic occupancies prior to the Winter Olympics at Nakiska in 1988, as well as tour packaging and industry representation for Big White and several accommodations facilities in the Okanagan. More recently she held the position of Director of Marketing for the Furry Creek Golf & Country Club.

Ms. Scott has spent the past four years using her extensive ski industry background and resort experience, combined with her commitment to the community of Squamish, toward making the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project a reality. This included serving as a member of the community on various committees which determined the Citizens Tourism Advisory Process (CTAP) resulting in the 1994 Council endorsed Squamish Tourism Development Plan.

As past-Director of the Squamish Estuary Conservation Society, her duties at GARIBALDI now include working with representatives of Yosemite National Institutes to establish an environmental education institute in the Howe Sound Region.

Ms. Scott and her family reside in Squamish.

Thomas Y. McKeachie

GARIBALDI - Director, VP Communications, Technology & Education

Tom McKeachie's involvement with the GARIBALDI project goes back 20 years to when he built the first scale model of the mountain terrain, cutting out half inch Styrofoam - representing 50 foot contour

lines - with a jig saw in Mr. Richter's basement.

Mr. McKeachie became known as a highly innovative school teacher in the Gulf Islands of British Columbia where his work pioneering the Saanich & the Islands School District computer education program established him as a leader in his field throughout the province.

Mr. McKeachie is also recognized for promoting environmental education in the classroom, in the field and through provincial and national curricula such as the Salmonid Enhancement program, Project Wild and the Green School programs.

Along with in-house and education duties for the corporation, Mr. McKeachie will be involved in spearheading the marketing and communications strategy, with a focus on creating the modeling and 3-D computer renderings of the mountain terrain and development plan.

Mr. McKeachie is currently working with Ms. Scott and representatives of Yosemite National Institutes to explore the establishment an environmental education institute in the Howe Sound region.

Mr. McKeachie and his family reside on Saltspring Island, British Columbia.

Rick Stolle

GARIBALDI - Director

Rick Stolle is President of Stolle Services, a hotel management company based in Victoria B.C. The principals, Rick and Kathryn Stolle, have developed and operated 19 hotels for Dorint Hotels, a hotel chain which now includes up to 70 hotels and is the third largest chain in Germany.

Mr. and Mrs. Stolle developed the Ocean Point Resort Hotel & Spa in Victoria B.C., which they operated until 1997. Ocean Point Resort Hotel & Spa became a member of Preferred Hotels and Resorts Worldwide in 1996 and was voted one of Conde Nast Traveler's "Gold List of Top 500 Hotels, Resorts, Spas and Cruiselines Worldwide" in January 1997.

SLK Total Spa Concepts, an associated company of Stolle Services Ltd., offers a wealth of hands on experience, market research, and motivation providing clients with professional planning, design, staff and operations information to achieve a successful and profitable spa facility.

Together Rick and Kathryn Stolle bring to the GARIBALDI at SQUAMISH project a wealth of knowledge in very distinct and key areas of resort development. They reside in Victoria, B.C.

Gogol Lobmayr

Director

Gogol Lobmayr is a Munich-based nature film producer of award-winning tourism and nature films.

Trained as an architect, Mr. Lobmayr has a longtime-involvement in the ski industry, both as a professional ski instructor and a producer of ski films promoting North American ski resorts throughout Europe.

Among his many awards and successes, he recently received the prestigious 1997 Kodak Photobook Award of Excellence for the coffee-table photo book he published of his most recent film, "Fascinating Nature", a ninety-minute documentary which has enjoyed an unprecedented two year theatrical release in Germany.

Mr. Lobmayr was appointed to the Board of Directors of GARIBALDI in 1997 and brings to the project valuable insight regarding the European adventure travel and skier/slider market, not to mention the benefits of his artistic insight for capturing viewscapes, landscape architecture and filmmaking.

Mr. Lobmayr and his daughter live in Munich, Germany, when not on location in some of the most fascinating and mysterious places of nature in the world.

The directors and officers of Garibaldi Alpine Resorts (1987) Ltd. are as follows:

Wolfgang H. Richter Chairman

David Jay Flood President

Thomas Y. McKeachie Vice President

Janice M. Scott Secretary

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. would take the lead role during the planning, approvals, and development of the project.

1.3.5 Advisory Board

In addition to the Board of Directors, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will receive guidance and direction from an Advisory Board providing a range of international expertise and local talent in the following areas:

● Corporate Finance ● Marketing, Promotional Tie-Ins & Merchandising

● Mountain Resort Design, Operations & Development ● Resort Real estate Development ● Hospitality & Spas, both European & Japanese Natural Hot Springs ● Community Program Development & Implementation ● Aboriginal Community Issues: Heritage, Healing, Jobs, Traditions & Culture.

During the initial phase of master planning and design of the resort, the Garibaldi Board of Directors would receive advice in the areas of corporate and investment finance, marketing and sales, real estate development community programs development, and resort planning and design from an Advisory Board. This Board is comprised of local and international professionals with specialized expertise in all areas of resort planning and design.

The current & proposed members of the Advisory Board as follows:

John Creel

George Bauer

Jack Johnson

Warren Miller Entertainment

Olaf Falkenhagen

Tom Chambers

Roy Henry Vickers

Owen Carney

Squamish Nation Representative - David Smith

Preston Leete Smith

Ian Dawson

1.3.6 Corporate Organization

In order to plan, design, construct and operate an all-season mountain resort project such as Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH expertise and professional input from a broad range of disciplines is required. A variety of teams, organized into four divisions, will work with the Board of Directors, the Chairman/CEO and the

President to implement the design and approval, construction and operations of the proposed development.

Government relations and coordination of the ongoing response to the requirements of the Project Application is and will remain the responsibility of executive management.

These divisions are organized as follows:

● Planning & Approvals ● Administration & Project Development ● Construction● Operations

Supporting all four divisions will be legal counsel Hans Swinton of Swinton & Co., who will work directly with the Chairman .

Project Accounting, managed by G. Stewart Kerr Associates and reporting directly to the VP of Administration & Project Development, is responsible to support all operations coordinated across all divisions.

At the completion of the master planning / public approvals phase of the project, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. will manage the planning of the project with local architectural and engineering firms. Engineering and architectural design services will include detailed drawings of buildings, infrastructure, lifts, roads, electrical, water, sewer, and communications services. These firms will also be responsible for securing the approvals and permitting of the project from municipal and regional authorities and inspectors.

1.3.6.1 Planning and Approvals Division

This division is made up of three teams:

● Facilities Design and Master Planning ● Marketing and Public Relations ● Communications, Education and Technology

Facilities Design and Master Planning Team

Jay Flood the President and Director of Design and, with Jack Johnson, will establish the resort signature. The Director of Design will establish the direction of the architectural design and design guidelines for the resort facilities, structures and real estate development. Special themes, to celebrate the events of the resort, integrated with streetscape elements and landscape architecture, will provide an environment unique to the Sea to Sky Corridor and mountain resorts in the Pacific Northwest.

Figure 1-2 Current Corporate Organization And Functions Chart

As well as master planning, architecture and design, engineering, environmental permitting and mitigation will fall under the Director of Design.

Marketing & Public Relations Team

Janice Scott, VP Marketing & Public Relations, will coordinate a team of marketing professionals in the positioning of the overall resort development in the local, regional and international tourism markets. Development of marketing plans, scheduling and timing of implementation and coordination of collateral materials and distribution are all key to the ultimate and timely success in attracting the resort guest. As a spokesperson for the project, Janice will be coordinating the public information and consultation process during the Project Application phase, as well as establish ongoing community participation programs.

Communications, Technology & Education Team

Tom McKeachie, VP Communications, Technology & Education will head up the Education and Technical team and explore the mountain resort as a giant classroom for environmental studies. The position will provide for development of database and information systems, educational program development, community scholarship programs, field studies in environmental education, and web site technology. Additional aspects of the position will include internal training and professional development programs, creation of models, both 3-D and computer generated for development of design and assistance in marketing of the resort information.

1.3.7 Administration & Project Development Division

The Administration & Project Development Division would provide expertise in the following areas: accounting and financial reporting, legal, project scheduling, contract administration, project status reports, government approvals, human resources, day to day operations, risk management, security, polices and procedures and action plans.

Bob Miles, the current Administrator with the District of Squamish will be joining the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team as VP of Administration & Project Development, January 1, 1998. The position will monitor the Environmental Assessment process and will help ensure that there is a timely review of the reports submitted and response to issues raised by the project committee. The position will also be in charge of assisting in the administration of the rapidly growing company and with executive staff monitor the work of consultants.

Bob Miles

VP, Administration & Project Development

Bob Miles, District of Squamish Administrator for the past 6 ½ years, will join Garibaldi at Squamish on January 1, 1998. He will apply his extensive administrative experience to the development of the all-season mountain resort just north of Squamish.

Mr. Miles has 24 years of local government and development experience in British Columbia. In the mid-1980's he managed a $ 26-million community infrastructure, facilities and residential development at Elkford, B.C.

Mr. Miles has witnessed the rapid growth of Squamish during the 1990's. He coordinated the staff resources in five municipal departments with a staff of over 100 employees, and worked closely with three different Councils and government officials during this exciting time in Squamish's history.

Mr. Miles and his family reside in Squamish.

Ron Enns

Director, Communications & Field Coordination

Ron Enns was attracted to the mountains at an early age when his family made regular trips to the Canadian Rockies from their Winnipeg home.

Mr. Enns worked at Sunshine Village Ski Resort in Banff, Alberta in the early Eighties. He went on to obtain a Bachelor of Recreation Studies degree from the University of Manitoba.

After a decade of working as a journalist at various newspapers, including the Squamish CHIEF, Mr. Enns joined the Garibaldi at Squamish team in 1996.

Mr. Enns is a member of Squamish Search and Rescue and the Squamish Off-Road Cycling Association. He and his family live in Squamish.

Aenea Cameron

Marketing Assistant

Aenea Cameron brings to GARIBALDI a diverse background in sales, marketing and corporate event sponsorship.

Ms. Cameron is an active participant in endurance off-road biking, trail running, skiing and multi-sports

events. Her background in marketing and sales includes tourism product such as Mike Wiegele Helicopter Skiing, as well as the Food Service Industry.

In 1997, Ms. Cameron met the GARIBALDI team while in the process of coordinating corporate sponsorships for the Squamish Test of Metal endurance off-road mountain biking competition - doubling the sponsorship in the second year of this event. Due to the overwhelming success of the '97 event, the Squamish Test of Metal event has now been nationally sanctioned.

Ms. Cameron resides in Squamish.

Jeannine Bradshaw

Executive Assistant

As Executive Assistant, Jeannine Bradshaw verifies that the daily operations of the Squamish headquarters of GARIBALDI are current and accurate in dealing with development timelines, policy and regulations from relevant corporate and government administrations.

Ms. Bradshaw has a rich and varied corporate background gained from her tenure in the Management Consulting Division of KPMG; one of the world's largest international advisory firms, and her expertise adds a solid structure to the master planning/public approvals process.

An active outdoors enthusiast and skier for 20 years, Ms. Bradshaw resides in Squamish.

1.3.8 Construction Division

A VP of Construction will be hired when the project is in construction stage. The position will be responsible for the supervision of construction of infrastructure, facilities, lifts and company real estate development. This position will be filed by an industry-recognized professional, experienced in local building methods, applicable building codes, subdivision standards, equipment requirements and will have a high level of organizational ability and knowledge of construction.

Management of on-site construction activities such as specifications for tender documents, contract tendering materials sourcing and procurement, contract negotiations, supervision and labour hiring will be supervised by the VP of Construction with the assistance of local construction and contract professionals.

Varied approaches to contracting will be used as part of the fast track approach for Phase 1, confirming the position demands for a highly motivated individual.

1.3.8.1 Schedule Management and Construction Policy

Schedule management will be provided by Rowan Associates Ltd, which includes the development of a schedule against which all progress is measured. The schedule reports will give management the current status of the project, projecting completion dates for work activities and identifying areas which have the potential to be delayed so management can take appropriate action.

Coordination and planning the approval process, design and engineering, construction and operations of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will require a detailed and continually monitored schedule management. This will initiate the use of Critical Path, layering of multiple calendars with sophisticated coding structures to manage all analysis and report requirements.

The critical path analysis will identify the amount of time required to complete a project by sequencing related activities.

A master schedule will be developed to include all consultants' and contractors' schedules with frequent monitoring of work performed within a report cycle. Identification of activities which are behind schedule, or which have the potential to impact schedule dates will be identified in advance so management can make the necessary decisions.

Tender documents for construction and vendor supply will include schedule specifications for submittals, which will be part of the contract. This data will be incorporated into the master schedule against which all performance will be measured.

Commitment to achieving scope within the defined phase is required from all team members and the schedule will be used to coordinate areas of responsibilities as well as observing all schedule progress reporting to management for action as necessary.

Contractors and vendors will play a significant role in the construction of the project while maintaining quality control and meeting schedule milestones.

The management will make every effort to utilize local building materials and trades giving employment opportunities to a large number. As part of the contracting process, a system of training may be developed to encourage untrained personnel to participate in the construction industry.

A process of pre-qualification will be introduced for well-recognized contractors. Once qualified, contracts for construction and supply of equipment will be by competitive process as recognized within the province of British Columbia maintaining only the highest standards for tender and award of contracts. Contracting procedures will comply with all regulations established within the construction industry maximizing local resources wherever possible.

1.3.8 Operations Division

A VP of Operations will be recruited to be responsible for resort operations and operations design.

As an all-season resort operation, an experienced and well-organized professional management group will provide the structure and leadership necessary for the start-up of the operation. The mission statement will be to provide the guest with maximum enjoyment while enjoying a safe and rewarding experience at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Operations management is being introduced early into the planning process allowing operational requirements to be integrated into the design. As part of the operations planning, experienced personnel will be contracted to review the design documentation. Experts for key areas, such as lift operations, risk management and security, will also be brought into the design and planning process.

As part of anticipated operational demands, personnel will be introduced to the project early in the construction and contracting process as well as performing administrative and financial functions. As personnel become familiar with operational policies and procedures they will naturally assume a role of leadership so the mass efforts to recruit and train operating personnel will be a more gradual learning curve.

On-going operation of the resort will continue combining proven experience and capabilities with state of the art technology, methods and guest expectations. The opportunity to present GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH as the premier resort destination will be part of each action plan.

Resort Operations, managed by the successful candidate, will play an integral role in the planning and design process as well as in the operations of the facility on opening. Areas of responsibility include:

● Safety Management ● Guest Management Services ● Security and Cash control ● Admissions● Maintenance and Physical plant ● Lift Operations ● Trails and Road Maintenance, Grooming and Snow Making ● Human Resources Operations and Training ● Technology, Communications & Information Systems ● Diagnostic and Treatment Centre Management ● Ski School Services ● Food and Beverage Services ● Retail and Commercial Operations ● Accommodation and Employee Housing Services ● Golf and Tennis Operations

1.3.8 Consulting Team

David Jay Flood Architect

Resort Master Planning

David Jay Flood Architect was founded in 1967 with a practice focused on the programming, master planning, and architectural design of winter resort areas throughout North America.

David Jay Flood Architect is located in Santa Monica, California and offers extensive experience in the concept, design, and master planning of resort projects. Throughout the past three decades, it has provided expertise and services to ski and mountain resort developers, including such projects as Sun Valley, Stowe, Snowmass, Keystone, Big Sky, Lake Tahoe and Mammoth Lakes.

In 1980, the principal of the company, David Jay Flood, joined the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee and became Sports Commissioner for aquatic events for the highly successful 1984 Summer Olympics. As a member of the Executive Board of the U.S. Olympic Committee, he was responsible for planning the Olympic Training Centres in Lake Placid, Colorado Springs and San Diego. He is also a past Chairman of the USOC Hall of Fame Committee and a Director of the Board for 1991 L.A. Olympic Festival Committee.

For more than two decades, Mr. Flood has served as a Director and past Chairman of the Board of the Yosemite National Institutes (YNI). YNI is a non-profit education corporation whose focus is on educating teachers and students about nature and sustainable development in nature's classroom. YNI campuses are located in Yosemite National Park, the Headland Institute in San Francisco, and Olympic National Park, Washington. Mr. Flood has served as President of Garibaldi Alpen Resorts since 1989.

David Jay Flood Architect has won over 25 national and regional architectural awards, including the prestigious "Professional Management Award" for its construction document management system.

David Jay Flood, F.A.I.A., President and Director of Design

Robert Rotman, Vice-President & Senior Planner

The Jack Johnson Company

Resort Master Planning

The Jack Johnson Company is a multi-disciplinary engineering & design firm providing land planning, feasibility analysis, landscape architecture, civil and environmental engineering, environmental assessment, governmental processing and construction administration services for recreational communities.

Located in Park City, Utah, the Jack Johnson Company has more than two decades of experience in creative land planning of recreational resorts. Jack Johnson assembled a team of land planners, engineers and architects to see Deer Valley, Utah through to its successful opening in 1981. The company has the understanding of what makes sports and recreation enjoyable and has the knowledge of the intricacies of design and implementation required to develop a resort tailored to the expanded expectations of people seeking outdoor recreation and wilderness tourism experiences.

The mountain resort's recreation master plan will be provided by The Jack Johnson Company of Park City, Utah, including the phasing and development of the lift systems and related ski pods, snow making systems, mountain biking and hiking trails, cross country skiing, ice skating, tennis, golf and snow shoeing. To meet the construction milestones, access road construction and ski lift engineering will follow the design-build process.

Design and engineering, as developed by the various disciplines, will be responsible for the completion of the working drawings and specifications in preparation for tending construction contracts. The master planning will interface with operations in order to accommodate the operational requirements into the design and development.

Jack J. Johnson, P.E., President

Brad E. Johnson, Senior Planner - Residential and Recreational Development

Jeff Graham, AICP, Project Manager - Recreational Development

Doyle Pergande, PE, AICP - Director of Engineering and Construction

ENKON Environmental Ltd.

Regulatory Approvals/Permitting, Environmental Impact Assessment

ENKON Environmental consultants will continue to address all aspects of the environmental and socio economic review, including the existing environment, First Nations Requirements and potential land claims, the future plans of the resort and their potential environmental impacts, as well as operational guidelines for the best use of products and technical operation.

Enkon Environmental Limited provides environmental consulting services and has extensive experience in permitting and regulatory approvals. Relevant projects include the proposed Jumbo Glacier Alpine Resort in the Kootenays, Golden Peaks Ski Resort near Golden, Burke Mountain Ski Resort, Cypress Park Ski Area Environmental Assessment Westwood Plateau Residential and Golf Course Development, Western Pacific Powergen Upper Mamquam Small Hydro Project, Simon Fraser University Residential and Park Development, City of Burnaby Deer and Burnaby Lake Environmental Studies, Ministry of

Transportation & Highways Environmental Assessment of the Sea to Sky Highway from Squamish to Whistler.

Glenn Stewart, B.Sc., Principal

Niko Zorkin, Ph.D., Principal

Le Groups EQUUS

Marketing, Design & Engineering

With a total commitment to electronic technology combined with advanced techniques, the EQUUS group of companies includes providing service in marketing and design, market research, advanced concept imaging, animation, product design and engineering - the creation of virtual products which will help the "imagineering" of the Garibaldi development as it evolves from concept to reality throughout the next phases of proposal and development. Mr. John Creel, President of Le Groups EQUUS established and managed one of the largest design facilities in North America, with 57 artists in Montreal and 34 in Toronto, (his organization also included six other successful communication companies, with over 300 employees), he also sold these highly successful companies in 1984 and returned home to Southern California. In 1993, Mr. Creel formed LeGroupe EQUUS to reflect the evolution of his company's focus as it became a truly integrated marketing, product design and engineering organization.

John Creel, Chairman

Robert N. Reicher, Economist & Market Analyst

Dennis Holt, Western International Media

Garry Warwick

Warwick Productions Ltd. Marketing & Advertising Creative Strategies

Garry Warwick has worked for the past 20 years in association with Equus Marketing in the concept, writing and design of ski and outdoor adventure industry advertising. Accounts have included Head Sports, Kastle Ski Equipment, Salomon Sports, Seagear, Ski Data Inc, Smith Optical, Swix Wax and Tyrolia Ski Equipment.

Mr. Warwick, in the past 10 years, has worked with Tourism Vancouver and Team BC destination promotion of British Columbia to the world creating award winning video/film presentations.

Mr. Warwick and his family reside in West Vancouver, British Columbia.

Roy Henry Vickers

Eagle Dancer Enterprises Ltd.

Roy Henry Vickers is one of Canada's premier artists. His paintings are held in museums and private collections here and abroad and his work is admired and owned by some of the world's most powerful people: Queen Elizabeth ll, President Bill Clinton and former Soviet leader Boris Yeltsin have been presented with Vickers' artworks. Roy's artwork is bold, innovative, unique, and magical. Mr. Vickers has joined the Garibaldi at Squamish team to assist in the creation of all graphic images and any artistic endeavours associated with the Garibaldi at Squamish project. Roy Henry Vickers brings to the Garibaldi at Squamish project leadership in honouring our First Nations in whatever we do and the possibility of bridging cultural canyons. As the founder of The Vision Quest Recovery Society, which has been formed to build a National Recovery Centre here in B.C. The First Nations Recovery Centre envisioned as part of Garibaldi at Squamish would be patterned after The Meadows in Wickenberg, Arizona.

Roy Henry Vickers

Architectura

Architecture & Design Concepts

Architectura's planners and designers are internally recognized for their achievements in large-scale land-use planning. Our experience encompasses the master planning and design development of new towns, residential communities, mixed-use projects, major entertainment centres and world-class destination resorts. Every planning project is considered unique in terms of economics, environmental and site constraints, transportation issues, market forces and the requirements to serve the needs of both the developer and community.

Steve Sewall specializes in residential, retail, hotel and resort projects. He is a highly experienced contributor to every project stage, drawing on his knowledge of market trends and approval processes, as well as his strength in design and project management. Steve creates high-quality, commercially successful projects on behalf of his clients.

Allan Waisman has played a direct role in the planning, design and management of a large number of prize-winning projects. This work includes feasiblity studies, programming, conceptual and designs development throughout Canada and the United States.

Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.

Civil Engineering

Kerr Wood Leidal Associates (KNL) is a civil engineering firm that specializes in working for municipalities, regional districts, First Nations and senior government agencies. The Company's expertise encompasses civil, electrical and process engineering applied to the fields of municipal infrastructure, fisheries, mining, water resources, water and wastewater treatment, solid waste, stormwater control and urban development.

Kerr Wood Leidal provides engineering and fiscal management planning, computer modeling, pre-design through detailed design and project implementation services. KWL has provided over 20 years of consulting expertise for both the Whistler Village Resort Development and Whistler Village North.

Ken Kerr, P. Eng., Principal

McElhanney Consulting Services Ltd.

Road Engineering & Design

McElhanney Consulting Services Ltd. has over 300 employees in offices throughout British Columbia and Alberta as well as in Africa and Southeast Asia. The company offers a wide range of engineering services with specialists in the fields of mapping, surveying, land use planning, remote access roads, highways, bridges, hydrology, fish habitat, pipelines, traffic/parking, water supply, sewerage and land development.

McElhanney has played a role in many of British Columbia's major infrastructure projects, including the Alcan Expansion in Kitimat, the Duke Point Ferry Terminal in Nanaimo, the SkyTrain ALRT Project in Vancouver, the Vancouver Island Highway, the Coquihalla Highway and the Roberts Bank Port Expansion. Typically each year McElhanney completes the design and construction supervision for at least 100 kilometres (62 miles) of resource/forestry/resort access road, and 20 kilometres (12 miles) of highway.

Chris Newcomb, P.Eng., Principal

David McElhanney, P.Eng., Project Manager

Dan Tresa, Mapping Project Manager

Thurber Engineering Ltd.

Geotechnical Engineering

Thurber Engineering Ltd. offers consulting services in geotechnical and geological engineering, including investigation, design and construction supervision from offices located in Vancouver, Victoria, Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto. Relevant projects include the Furry Creek Development, the Gondola Village Townsite, Whistler Mountain & Blackcomb Mountain facilities expansion, the Tod Mountain Ski Area, the Panorama Ridge Ski, the Whistler Recreational Area, the Kananaskis Wilderness Resort, Alberta, and Marmot Basin Ski Area near Jasper, Alberta.

David Smith, P.Eng., Geotechnical Engineer

Oldrich Hungr, Ph.D., P.Eng., Geotechnical Engineer

Simon Cullum-Kenyon, B.Sc., M.Sc., Engineering Geologist

Chris Stethem & Associates

Snow Safety Engineering

Chris Stethem & Associates specializes in snow safety services, including terrain analysis, avalanche hazard mapping, snow climate studies, assessment of avalanche hazard, risk analysis and feasibility of avalanche control, design of avalanche protection systems and preparation of operational snow safety plans, explosive avalanche control contracting, training courses in avalanche protection, operations facilitation in the mountain environment, and general mountain safety operations in alpine terrain.

Chris Stethem, President

Peter Schaerer, P. Eng.

Scott Flavelle, UIAGM

Spearhead Guiding Ltd.

Bernard Protsch, A.C.M.G.

Spearhead Guiding Ltd. specializes in snow safety management and daily on-mountain operations including avalanche control and medical attention to guests. Safety specialists who provide for planning and management of the resort area including coordination with RCMP, Doctor's Association, and recruiting and technical training of staff including evacuation, coordination with Search and Rescue agencies, and coordination with legal counsel and insurance authorities as part of incident analyses.

Bernard Protsch, ACMG

Blackcomb Helicopters Limited

Resort & Helicopter Services

Blackcomb Helicopters Ltd. was started in 1989 by Steve Flynn, and currently operates 4 helicopters out of Whistler and Squamish. Blackcomb provides flight-seeing tours as well as being the designated helicopter supplier for both Whistler and Blackcomb Mountains for medivac, avalanche control, lift construction, maintenance and administration flights. Blackcomb also maintains close relationships with the Pemberton, Squamish and Whistler Search and Rescue teams and currently hold the BC Parks helicopter contract for Garibaldi Park.

A Heli-park at Garibaldi at Squamish would provide for both resort and municipal helicopter needs. With the Municipality of Squamish placing a local helicopter operator away from the controversial Squamish airport into a low impact area this would provide a win-win situation.

Steve Flynn, President

Laurence Perry, Squamish Base Manager

Art Demers Company

Hydroelectric Power Engineering

Art Demers has more than 45 years experience conducting reconnaissance and feasibility studies, design, engineering and construction management for small and large hydroelectric projects across Canada and internationally. One of Mr. Demers on-going projects is as an advisor for the Three Gorges Hydroelectric Project in China (44,000 megawatts). When completed, Three Gorges will have more than four times the installed capacity of B.C. Hydro's existing 10,000 megawatts hydroelectric capacity within British Columbia. Mr. Demers has designed and managed the construction of the Churchill Falls Hydroelectric Project in Newfoundland, a variety of small hydro projects throughout Canada and conducted feasibility studies for small hydro projects in Ashlu, High Falls and Sigurd Creeks near Squamish.

Art Demers, Principal

Nevin, Sadlier-Brown, Goodbrand, Ltd.

Consulting Geologists

Nevin Sadlier-Brown Goodbrand Ltd. is a Vancouver, B.C. based firm of consulting geologists incorporated in 1971. Since that time NSBG has been providing geological consulting and exploration contracting services to energy and mineral resource developers and researchers throughout western North America and in Central America, Brazil and East Africa. Mr. Tim Sadlier-Brown, P. Geo. recently was introduced to the Garibaldi at Squamish project through Mr. Mike Sato of World Canada Company, who is currently engaged in geothermal exploration for development of a Japanese Mineral Hot Springs. Research will continue in the Garibaldi at Squamish study area to determine what opportunities may exists for a World Canada Company mineral hot springs project.

Tim Sadlier-Brown, P.Geo., President

David A. Hughes & Associates Ltd.

Certified Management Consultant

Mr. Hughes professional career in management consulting and chartered accountancy has provided him with extensive experience in financial analysis and projections, market and feasibility studies, market position appraisals, organizational and operational analyses, budgeting and strategic planning, economic impact analyses, proposal calls and acquisition/divestiture studies, government project assistance and evaluation programs.

For over 20 years Mr. Hughes has worked extensively with the tourism, hospitality, recreation and sport industries both in Canada and in the United States. He has worked in many areas of these industries including assignments for the federal and provincial governments, industry and sport associations, major hotel chains and smaller hotel companies, restaurant and neighbourhood pub operators, real estate developers, resort and ski companies.

Stolle Services Ltd.

SLK Total Spa Concepts

Stolle Services Ltd. is a hotel management company based in Victoria, B.C. The principals, Rick and Kathryn Stolle, have developed and operated 19 hotels for Dorint Hotels, the third-largest hotel chain in Germany. Mr. and Mrs. Stolle developed the Ocean Point Resort Hotel & Spa in Victoria, B.C., which they operated until 1997. Ocean Point Resort Hotel & Spa became a member of Preferred Hotels and Resorts Worldwide in 1996 and was voted one of Conde Nast Traveler's "Gold List of Top 500 Hotels, Resorts, Spas and Cruiselines Worldwide" (and one of only 15 in Canada) in January 1997.

SLK Total Spa Concepts provides a wealth of hands-on experience, market research, and motivation providing clients with professional planning, design, staff and operations information to achieve a

successful and profitable spa facility. Kathryn Stolle, President, was selected as one of six of Victoria's "Women in Business" by the Victoria News Group in 1997 and in 1996 was selected as "Businesswoman of the Year" by the Victoria Business and Professional Women's Club.

Together Rick and Kathryn Stolle bring to the Garibaldi at Squamish project a wealth of knowledge in very distinct and key areas of resort development.

F. Ulrich (Rick) Stolle, President, Stolle Services Ltd.

Kathryn Stolle, President, SLK Total Spa Concepts

Stumbock Club International

International Tour

Peter Stumbock created The Stumbock Club in 1989 as an independent German tour operator focusing on winter sports destinations in Western Canada, primarily Banff and Whistler.

The Stumbock Club has grown into the largest German and European tour operator promoting skiing in Banff, Whistler and Sun Peaks, now generating 5,000 destination skiers annually.

In 1995, The Stumbock Club built a 40+ room hotel in Sun Peaks and is committed to build a $12-18 million hotel for the opening of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Peter Stumbock, President

Gogol Lobmayr

Film Production Gogol Lobmayr

Gogol Lobmayr is a Munich based filmmaker who has just recently received the prestigious 1997 Kodak Photobook Award for Excellence in the making and publishing of his photographic documentary book, "Fascinating Nature". In 1982 Mr. Lobmayr founded his own production company, for which he made more than 25 travel documentaries over the following years. Fascinating Nature is Gogol's first full-length feature film, and for five years, this well-known German cinematographer travelled with a team of renowned photographers across the world's continents to show us, in breathtaking images, some of the most beautiful landscapes on earth. Mr. Lobmayr has recently been appointed to the Board of Directors of Garibaldi at Squamish and brings to the project a vision for viewscapes, landscape architecture, creative filmmaking, film industry development opportunities, and creative insight.

Gogol Lobmayr, President

Swinton & Company

Legal & Corporate Affairs

Swinton & Company is a well-established Vancouver law firm founded in 1951 with the partnership of A. H. Swinton and the late Honourable Mr. Justice Douglas E. Andrews of the British Columbia Supreme Court. Over the past forty-five years, the firm has grown into a full-service law firm with comprehensive and well-recognized solicitor's and litigation practices representing both individuals and corporate clients.

Swinton & Company have served the Garibaldi at Squamish project since 1989.

A. Hans Swinton, Senior Partner

G. Stewart Kerr Ltd.

Chartered Accounting

Stewart Kerr provides Garibaldi at Squamish with all aspects of corporate finance including preparation of all tax and financial records. In 1986, Mr. Kerr obtained a Bachelor of Business Administration at Simon Fraser University and went on to become a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia. As a C.A. employed by firms such as Deloitte Haskins & Sells and Ellis Foster, Mr. Kerr began his own firm, G. Stewart Kerr Ltd. in 1990 which has shown significant growth and services a wide range of clients in the Sea to Sky corridor.

Stewart brings to the Garibaldi at Squamish project a solid background in all aspects of corporate finance and loyalty and commitment to the corporate goals and objectives of the development project.

G. Stewart Kerr, President

Zubyk & Associates

Government Relations, Strategic Counsel, Media Relations

Zubyk & Associates is a full service Government Relations, Communications and Public Affairs Company based in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Founded in 1993, the company specializes in issues relating to forestry, mining, energy, agriculture, health care, technology, communications, sports and entertainment. The mandate of Zubyk and Associates is to provide specific solutions and information in their dealings with the Provincial Government.

Brad Zubyk, President

Robert Buchan, Senior Partner

Jim Beattie, Senior Government Relations Consultant

Ian Jessop, Senior Government Relations Consultant

Greg Spievak, Senior Government Relations Consultant

Russ Clifford, Managing Director & Government Relations Consultant

Pacific Meteorology, Inc.

Climate Analysis

Pacific Meteorology, Inc. specializes in providing information and research of climatological and meteorological data to a wide variety of users in forestry, air pollution, oceanography, hydrometeorology, and environmental assessment.

Stephen Nikleva, President

Price Waterhouse

Management Consultants & Chartered Accountants

Price Waterhouse is a firm of Management Consultants and Chartered Accountants with 23 offices across Canada, affiliated with the Price Waterhouse World Firm.

Tom Chambers, Senior Partner, British Columbia

Peter Scott, Senior Vice-President, Corporate Finance Division

Heather Nicolaas, Senior Manager, Tourism Practices Group

Germyn Brooks, Senior Partner, Europe

Rowan Associates Limited

Critical Path Scheduling

Rowan Associates Limited is responsible as a master scheduler to establish the Critical Path network for the Garibaldi at Squamish project in development phase; in preliminary, design and engineering phase; and in construction phase from contract award to tenant fitout and occupancy.

The Garibaldi at Squamish project is a unique, one-time endeavor with a specific start and end, and a strict budget. Planning the project means thinking about and documenting what needs to be done - defining and coordinating specific activities and work tasks. Controlling the project means staying on course - measuring performance, and suggesting corrective action when needed. Managing means communicating as accurately as possible with the project team, the client, to motivate the team to do its best.

Carol Rowan, Critical Path Scheduler, brings to the Garibaldi project a level of professionalism developed over many years of experience with clients such as Universal Studios Florida, Universal Studios Hollywood, Expo '86 Vancouver, Phillips Barratt Kaiser, Government of Canada, Vancouver International Airport Expansion.

Carol Rowan, President

Dawson Construction Ltd.

Road & Infrastructure Construction

Celebrating its 75th anniversary in 1997, Dawson Construction is one of British Columbia's most well established firms involved in heavy construction and civil engineering. Its fleet of modern equipment, paving and crushing plants and a staff of experienced personnel enable it to undertake industrial construction projects, road and airport construction, dams, dikes and other water regulation projects as well as the building of bridges and sewers of any scope and magnitude in any geographical location.

Relevant recent projects include the Burrard Street bridge Upper Levels and Coquihalla Highway and the Vancouver Island Highway, which is nearing completion.

Ian Dawson, President

John Heinan, Project Director

Stan Burton, Operations Manager

R. DesJardins Contracting

Road Building, Site Excavation & Infrastructure Servicing

Rob DesJardins is a local, community based contractor with over 18 years experience in construction and excavation of on-mountain roads, bridge installation, ski runs, lift and snowmaking installation and reservoir construction. Rob has provided construction and excavation expertise for the Whistler/Blackcomb resort development including on-mountain infrastructure services; sewer, water, hydro, telephone and gas and village base area site excavations and parking lot construction. A long time resident of both the Squamish and Whistler communities, Rob has worked extensively with a range of contractors and consultants in the Sea to Sky corridor.

Rob DesJardins, Owner

Salasan Associates Inc.

Land Use Consultation

Colin Hunter, of Salasan Associates Inc. is experienced in backcountry user groups and snowmobile user consultation, and the establishment of working relationships. Mr. Hunters experience includes over 7 years as a seasonal Park Ranger with the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and an additional 4 years as a self-employed snowmobile guide and instructor. Mr. Hunter is a member of the Nelson Snowmobile Club and was successful while providing arbitration services to resolve a conflict between a local snowcat Operator and an existing snowmobiler user group.

Mr. Hunter has a diploma in Wildland Recreation, and an Advance Certificate in Renewable Resources, from Selkirk College, B.C.

Colin Hunter

Thornley Consulting Group

Construction Cost Consultants

The Thornley Consulting Group provides to the Garibaldi at Squamish project services critical in maintaining positive financial control of construction costs. As Construction Cost and Value Management Consultants, they recognize that the goal of Garibaldi at Squamish and our design and development team is to obtain the best possible project, on time and within budget. Thornley provides continuous and timely budget and cost planning; cost benefit analysis and advice; and project scheduling, during all phases of the project.

The Thornley Consulting Group has provided all building and site related construction costs presented in

the Garibaldi at Squamish EA Application Report.

Christopher Baker, PQS

David Slik

Information Technology Consulting, DS Technologies Inc.

DS Technologies provides information technology infrastructure consulting to growing companies, helping them decide what technologies and producers will allow them to best leverage computer technology in their business. Specializing in networking, workflow and security,

Mr. Slik has worked with numerous companies to develop and implement policies, network growth plans, and information management systems. Mr. Slik is a Squamish resident who is currently studying at the University of Victoria.

Ronnenberger Computing Inc.

Ski Resort Information Processing Environments

Since 1978 Ronnenberger Computing Inc. have been creating and enhancing a powerful information processing environment: "PRO$IT" - Progressive Real-time Operations Systems Implementation Tools. The staff of Ronnenberger computing Inc. in Brighton, Ontario and Squamish, British Columbia combine the computing technology expertise for the planning, design and operation of the information processing system needs of destination ski resorts.

Ronnenberger Computing Inc. has a commitment to deliver a superior, totally integrated management solution that empowers ski resort customers to provide their guests the desired experiences that enrich, enlighten and excite according to its own character and its own magic. This includes the implementation and support of all voice and data communications systems, the electronic processing capabilities of all resort wide guest services and all other resort business processes. PRO$IT is designed to:

● improve application development productivity and quality by simplifying and accelerating the creation, deployment and maintenance of computer systems solutions;

● provide unsurpassed capabilities for accelerating the development of high performance business applications that are robust, scalable real time and reconfigurable across a broad range of Internet, intranet, extranet, client/server and host-terminal computing environments;

● help insulate users from the complexities of the technical computing environments by offering intuitive job specific interfaces;

● protect the organization's technology investment, in order to meet changing business objectives.

Squamish Off Road Cycling Association (SORCA)

Community and Off-Road Trail Building

Cliff Miller, Founder and President of SORCA has been actively involved in development and construction of mountain bike trails throughout the community of Squamish for over 5 years. The trails built and maintained by SORCA are used by mountain bikers and hikers of all ages. Cliff Miller and fellow SORCA member Rob Cocquyt, share a common vision in the creation of an integrated community trail system for riders, hikers, and cross-country skiers of all ages and abilities. Garibaldi at Squamish and SORCA jointly support an extended vision to link the planned mountain resort trail system to the existing community trail system. The net results would offer users an extensive, integrated, multi-use trail network providing both a valley and on-mountain experience.

Cliff Miller, Founder and President

Rob Cocquyt, Trail Builder/Author, Squamish Whistler Mountainbike Trail Guide

SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0 INTRODUCTION

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is proposed as an all season mountain community for development on the slopes of Mount Garibaldi.

The planning philosophy will be to develop GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH with respect for the natural beauty of the site and work with the amenities of nature, not against them.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will exhibit a sense of place based on the heritage of the region and add diversity to the outdoor recreation and wilderness tourism product mix for the international destination market attracted to Sea to Sky Country.

The design and development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will involve the community in all aspects of the planning, approval, construction and operation of the resort.

Architecturally and graphically, GARIBALDI will showcase the natural wonders of the area, as well as local history and the traditional imagery of the Pacific Northwest Coast culture.

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH village will be situated on a plateau at an elevation of 1,100 metres. Access will be via a 10-kilometre mountain highway. The top of the highest proposed lift will be at 1,875 metres elevation and the vertical drop of the mountain recreation area will be 945 metres.

The mountain community will consist of 2,580 hectares of Crown Land within a 3,500-hectare parent parcel. 1,670 hectares will be developed as a mountain recreation area, with approximately 150 winter activity trails and 20 lifts. This terrain has been estimated to support a Comfortable Carrying Capacity (CCC) of 19,437 skiers/riders at one time. The base village of the mountain recreation area will be developed on 910 hectares and will include 6,500 square metres of commercial space and approximately 500 single family homes, 1,850 multi-family units and 1,500 hotel rooms.

The 21st Century design for the mountain recreation area will be similar to other alpine winter sports facilities. However, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has the opportunity of designing for a more compatible integration of uses during all seasons. Attention will also be given in the design of facilities to attract major competitive sport and recreation activities.


2.1 Project History

2.1.1 Early Years (1978-1986)

The concept of GARIBALDI as a winter-oriented recreational resort had its beginnings nearly thirty years ago when the company’s current principal, Wolfgang Richter, became interested in the skiing potential of the area (Exhibit 2.1 – Location Map). In March of 1978, he and the late Henry Roethel were encouraged by senior provincial government officials to analyze the feasibility of resuscitating the failed Mt. Garibaldi Glacier Resorts ski development on Brohm Ridge of the late 1960s.

During the next three years, Mr. Richter and his associates invested substantial time and capital in reconnaissance, analysis and planning. As a result of this work, they determined a new development concept for a mid-mountain resort community. Located slopeside on a plateau at approximately 1,100 metres (3,609 feet), the resort was above the critical snow level and would be made accessible by a mountain highway to be privately financed and locally built.

In response to a March 1980 Public Proposal Call, the proponents were invited to make a presentation to the Cabinet Committee on Economic Development (CCED) and encouraged to proceed with further planning of the resort. However, the recession of the early 1980s and the development of Blackcomb Mountain and Whistler Village caused the project to be “shelved” until 1986 when the economy and market conditions had improved.

2.1.2 Further Reconnaissance, Analysis, and Formal Proposal (1986-1992)

By 1986, as a result of the Province’s experience with ski resort development at Whistler, the government proposal and approval process became codified in government policy called the Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (CASP). Initiated in August 1982, CASP was simplified and amended in February of 1986

and again in April of 1994.

Stimulated by the international success of Expo ’86, Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (GAR) approached the provincial government in July 1986 to secure the exclusive right to proceed to the Formal Proposal stage. B.C. Lands validated the past work and compliance with policy. They waived the public proposal call and expression of interest requirements of CASP and invited GAR to proceed directly to Section 3.5 of the policy. Section 3.5 of CASP deals with the Formal Proposal requirements for proponents who have been awarded the right to propose development of a ski resort in the Province of British Columbia. It lists the Lands Ministry’s responsibility to conduct an Interagency Review of the proposal.


Following further reconnaissance, analysis and planning work conducted in 1987 and the subsequent submittal of a Project Description in 1988, GAR prepared and presented a Formal Proposal to B.C. Lands in March of 1990. Despite a 25-month Provincial review period, the project did not advance to the master planning/public approvals phase due to political circumstances and market conditions (i.e. the pending sale of development parcels at Whistler North by WLC Development).

2.1.3 Local, Regional, Provincial Tourism Development Initiatives (1992-1995)

The rejection of GAR’s 1990 proposal drew criticism from representatives of the District of Squamish, a community increasingly suffering from cutbacks in the forestry sector. In response to an invitation from the Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks, the District established a community-based planning strategy initiative for the development of a four-season tourism industry in Squamish.

Following two years of grassroots strategy development, this initiative resulted in the Squamish Tourism Development Plan. This plan was adopted in principle by the District of Squamish Council in December of 1994. Central to this plan was the community determination that the development of a strong, winter component would be essential for the economic viability of a healthy four-season tourism industry in Squamish.

During this strategy development period, the nearby Whistler/Blackcomb Resort enjoyed international success to a degree that saw the growth of an impressive critical mass at the resort in a relatively short time. Having approximately 40,000 beds and an annual growth rate of 14%, the Resort Municipality of Whistler held its first annual general meeting in 1994 to shift the community’s focus from expansion to monitoring the impacts of growth on the quality of life in the Municipality.

Consequently, the development of GARIBALDI began to appear more and more appealing to Squamish and to Whistler as an option to divert some of the growth pressure. Simultaneously, senior government leaders in the Province began to recognize skiing as a “sustainable industry with a pivotal role…in diversifying [the] economy, particularly in rural communities.” In 1994, the Hon. Glen Clark, Minister of Employment and Investment, was given a mandate by the British Columbia Investment Office (BCIO) to

streamline the ski policy and its guidelines and to assist proponents as a point of government access for review of ski resort proposals.

2.1.4 Exclusive Proponent Status (1995-1997)

As a result of the District of Squamish endorsement of the Tourism Development Plan, GAR submitted a new Expression of Interest to the Lands Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks in February 1992, in accordance with Section 3.1 of CASP. As a result of this Expression of Interest, a steering committee was established to provide equal representation from the District of Squamish, the Ministry of Employment and Investment, the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District and B.C. Lands.

In June of 1996, an international advertisement led to the submission of two additional Expressions of Interest, one from Grand Adex Resorts, an affiliate of Concord Pacific. Concord Pacific developed Expo Lands in Downtown Vancouver. The second was from the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club. Of the three potential proponents, only GAR and Grand Adex were permitted to proceed to the Formal Proposal stage.

Formal Proposals were submitted by the two remaining proponents in April 1996, with oral presentations to the Steering Committee and its technical experts in May 1996. In August of 1996, GAR was granted the exclusive Proponent status together with the right to proceed to the master planning/public approvals phase of development. A draft contract outlining the terms of reference of the master planning/public approvals phase was sent to GAR on November 27, 1996. The Interim Development Agreement was signed on February 28, 1997.

2.2 Project Rationale

2.2.1 Vision

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be an affordable, quality destination resort for all seasons catering to the local, regional and international market. Along with amenities and atmosphere to make Garibaldi a true destination resort as prescribed in the Guidelines for Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia (GASAD), there will be programs and incentives to attract and serve the Squamish and Lower Mainland/Vancouver markets, emphasizing convenience, affordability, recreation and entertainment value.

The natural beauty of the site will be preserved and incorporated into all aspects of the project and its planning process.

Designs for the resort’s mountain amenities will include traditional alpine skiing configurations, integration of snowboarding trails and facilities for the new sport of free ride skiing, which is a cross between snowboarding and alpine skiing. Special attention will be given to design of all facilities in order to attract major events and races in such categories as alpine skiing, snowboarding, extreme games, Nordic skiing, snowshoeing and mountain biking. Mountain facilities will be designed to accommodate

all amenities in every season, integrating uses and types of users where appropriate and providing separate, specialized facilities where such are indicated. As an example, trails that adapt to both snowboarding and skiing in the winter will also be designed to handle mountain biking, hiking and equestrian activity on separate paths in the summer.

During the development process, as well as in the construction and operation periods, the Squamish community will be fully involved, both in facilities development and programmatically. In addition, the natural amenities and resources of the Sea to Sky region will play a key part in the evolution of the resort and its many programming elements.

A summary of the amenities proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is as follows:

Winter-oriented amenities include:

● Downhill (alpine) skiing ● Cross-country (Nordic) skiing ● Alpine ski touring ● Snowshoeing● Snowboarding● Ice skating ● Sledding● Sleigh riding ● Dog sledding

Summer-oriented activities at or near the resort include:

● Hiking● Climbing● Fishing● Mountain biking ● Mountaineering● Whitewater rafting ● Kayaking● Camping● Golf (training facility on-site, local courses) ● Tennis● Hot air ballooning ● Concerts● Hang gliding

Shoulder-season activities include:

● Conferences, seminars and workshops ● Sightseeing● Eagle and bird watching

2.2.2 Marketing and Development Program Outline

Enhancing its unique setting and distinctive architectural appearance, the heart of the resort’s attraction will be the variety and quality of activities offered to resort visitors. Many of these activities are targeted to specific niche markets, which will be reached and served through a combination of strategic alliances with experienced operators, as well as an umbrella promotional campaign coordinated by the resort’s marketing staff.

● For those attuned to action and adventure sports, the resort will provide skiing, snowboarding, and dog sledding excursions in the winter; mountain biking, hot air ballooning, and mountaineering will be offered in the summer

● Spa devotees will be drawn to the resort’s world class spa facility, centrally located near the village core and other project amenities, providing a “wellness center” accompaniment to the many physical activities available just outside its doors

● Golfers will be able to fine tune their golf games in a state-of-the-art training facility, and—through cooperative arrangements with the area’s nearby under-utilized golf courses—practice their newly-improved golfing skills

● Outdoors-oriented hikers, trekkers and campers will be transported to the high country and have summer access to back country gateways by using the resort’s high-speed lifts

● A year-round schedule of concerts, lectures, festivals, unique spectator sport competitions, special events and cultural exhibits will provide summer and winter visitors with additional reasons to visit and stay at the resort.

As development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH proceeds through the master-planning phase, preliminary discussions have already begun with such major corporations as Bombardier, Ski Data/Swatch and Apple Computer with a view to ultimately forming a series of strategic alliances. These alliances will lead to utilization of leading-edge technology in all areas of resort development and operation, from ticketing and access control through communications, grooming, integrated access and payment systems, management information systems and unique promotional opportunities in a wide range of venues and media.

A key element of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be the full integration of the Squamish community into the development process as well in the implementation phases. Programs and events will be created at the resort to augment the facilities and resources of the District of Squamish. In turn, the District’s programs and events will augment the facilities and resources of the resort.

Concepts to be developed for the community include:

● Incentives for Squamish area school students—grades three through high school—to attain higher grades, in the form of free lift passes for achieving certain defined levels of success. In addition, the “most improved” child in each grade level (one per school) will receive a special pass.

● Membership on the resort’s ski team, including free season passes, for high school students maintaining B-plus or higher grade point averages.

● Classes at the resort to prepare attendees of all ages for job opportunities in the resort’s winter and summer activities, including retail, mountain management, and the hospitality industry.

To expand the resort’s business base beyond already-existing local and destination customers, proactive marketing programs will be initiated to reach potential visitors who live in areas outside of North America, where 80 percent of the world’s skiers reside. With the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships at Vail, Colorado, and the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, international interest in North America will become supercharged at about the time GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH enters the market.

According to recent industry reports, a record 250,000 foreigners visited United States resorts last season, and the numbers are growing. Included in the numbers are Australians and New Zealanders, coming in January (the peak of their summer season; Dutch who patronize Breckenridge and Winter Park in Colorado; and Brazilians, Argentineans and Mexicans who may purchase thousands of dollars on new equipment alone during their visits.

Foreign visitors will be induced to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH through a combination of strategic alliances with airlines and tour operators. Many of these operators have had great success with such programs in areas as diverse as Mammoth Mountain, the Lake Tahoe region, Jackson Hole, Steamboat, Whistler Resort and American Skiing Company’s New England and Rocky Mountain resorts. Preliminary discussions with selected international tour operators indicate that they would be interested in expanding their programs to encompass GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, as well.

2.2.3 Visitor and User Projections

Although it will be developed from the beginning with sufficient mass and amenities to support the destination-type visitor, in its early years GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will rely to a significant extent on regional area-based visitors (Vancouver or Victoria and Seattle) in both winter and summer seasons. Using a methodology incorporating such factors as recent skier volumes at regional areas, as well as the sources and types of skiers currently served, David A. Hughes & Associates has estimated that the potential local skier market in 1999/2000 (the projected opening year for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH) will total 2,243,000 visits. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will capture a share of this market, and will add to it by developing new business from other sources that may not already be coming to the region.

2.3 Project Overview

2.3.1 Existing Conditions

As currently proposed, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain resort consists of 2,580 hectares (6,373 acres) of Crown Land within a 3,500 hectare (8,645 acre) parent parcel located on Brohm Ridge. The project site is approximately 13 kilometres (8 miles) north of Squamish city center and 80 kilometres north of Vancouver, British Columbia (Exhibit 2.3 – Existing Conditions Map).

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH site is bounded on the northeast and east by Garibaldi Provincial Park, with undeveloped forestland lying to the south and northwest. The Sea to Sky Highway (Highway 99) forms the site’s western border with undeveloped forestland existing west of the highway.

An old chalet used by snowmobilers is located on the south side of Brohm Ridge, with the remaining terrain currently undeveloped. Historically the site and surrounding lands have been used as hiking, mountain biking, climbing, hunting, fishing, off-road four-wheel driving, dirt biking and snowmobiling.

Areas of the property at lower elevations are covered in dense coniferous forest. As elevations increase, there is scattered coniferous forest with alpine tundra at the highest elevations (Exhibit 2.4 – Vegetation Analysis). Portions of the proposed development site have been logged and reforested.

The terrain within the proposed development area is characterized by primarily northwest facing slopes with gradients ranging from 5% to 80%. Slope gradients across the area proposed for the base and village core development range from 5% to 30% with the majority of the site falling within the 8% to 15% range. Gradients over the mountain top development (hotel and lodge) range from 0% to 25% with the majority of the hotel site in the 8% to 12% range and the mountain top lodge site in the 15% to 20% range. Some grading will be required in the base village and mountain top areas to accommodate development (Exhibit 2.5 – Slope Analysis Map).

Elevations across the property range from 310 metres (1,017 feet) along the lower access road to 1,910 metres (6,266 feet) at the top of the highest proposed lift (Exhibit 2.6 – Elevation Map).

The property has been mapped as to talus slopes, late glacial lava flows, rock outcrops and specific rock formations (Exhibit 2.7 – Geology Map). The area identified as late glacial lava flow lies north of the proposed Village Center. Several development parcels are located along this flat ridge line. The lava flows interrupted by glacial contact are characterized by steeper slopes and loose rock along the contact line. No major constraints to development are anticipated in this area. Initial investigation reveals no significant fractures or faults within the project site.

2.3.2 Design Parameters and Philosophy

As a supporter of recreational development within the Province of British Columbia, the Ministry of Lands, Environment and Parks adopted and subsequently amended the Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy(CASP). CASP is intended to “provide for orderly, rational development and use of Crown land for commercial alpine ski purposes.” CASP sets forth the procedure a proponent or prospective applicant must follow to receive approval from the Ministry to proceed in the development of a recreational resort

on Crown land. The policy is further supported by Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia (GASAD), a document that details acceptable standards for designing and balancing recreational and resort functions in a winter-oriented resort community.

As initially stated, the intent is to create a year-round destination recreational resort community on Brohm Ridge near Mount Garibaldi to be known as GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Throughout the process, the proponent’s design team has and continues to use the Province’s CASP document and associated Guidelines, together with aesthetic and environmentally sensitive design philosophies, in creating and testing the concepts, master plans and infrastructure designs prepared for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. The calculations and subsequent numbers contained in this document are derived from the planning parameters provided in the Ministry’s Policy and Guidelines.

2.3.3 Meeting CASP and GASAD Requirements

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain resort meets the criteria for a Destination Resort as defined in the CASP and GASAD, Section I.7.5, documents as follows:

1) GARIBALDI is intended to serve local, regional and destination skiers with emphasis on catering to destination needs and services through its range of year-round recreational opportunities, visitor amenities and accommodations;

2) GARIBALDI will offer a unique and truly special skiing experience, not only because of the majesty of its natural terrain, but also because the Proponent intends to provide more uphill capacity and higher lift speeds than would be necessary to accommodate the resort’s Comfortable Carrying Capacity (CCC) in order to offer guests the optimum recreational experience (short lift lines, fast lift trips). At the same time GARIBALDI will be at the forefront of the industry in lift and trail management.

3) GARIBALDI is proposing a CCC of 19,437. GASAD indicates that a destination resort requires a CCC of “+/- 5,000 to 12,000 plus skiers per day” as stated in Section I.7.5. Hence the proposed GARIBALDI CCC is above the requirement for a destination resort.

4) GARIBALDI is proposing to install lifts ranging from fixed grip double chairs to high-speed detachable quads, 6 and 8-passenger detachable gondolas, representing the full range of lift types suggested for a destination resort.

5) The area proposed to encompass the skiing/snowboarding terrain covers 1,670 hectares within a parent parcel totaling 3,500 hectares as stipulated in the guidelines (Section I.7.5).

6) Total vertical drop from the top of Lift H (highest elevation) to the base of Lift A is 865 metres (2,837 feet), which is within the range suggested in the guidelines (“+/- 700 to 1,500 metres plus,” Section I.7.5).

7) GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is approximately one hour from Vancouver, British Columbia, and approximately fours hours from Seattle, Washington, which puts the resort well within the suggested driving distances from its user markets. (The GASAD, Section I.7.5 indicates a driving time from the market for destination resorts of from 2 to 6 hours.)

8) Vancouver International Airport is an hour and a half from GARIBALDI, and consequently, well within the CASP/GASAD guidelines (2 to 3 hours as indicated in GASAD, Section I.7.5).

9) During the first ten years of development, GARIBALDI will construct accommodations totaling 12,250 bed units. Additional development between 13,400 – 21,380 bed units is possible thereafter as dictated by market demands. Details of the total bed units will be finalized in the master planning process.

2.3.4 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Concept

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is designed to encompass a land base of approximately 2,580 hectares (6,373 acres). Of the total, 1,670 hectares (4,125 acres) will be ski and snowboarding terrain (including approximately 150 trails and 20 lifts). The Base area village, upper hotel area and adjacent residential communities will include 6,500 square meters (70,000 square feet) of commercial space in addition to the commercial space provided in the hotel lobbies, golf training center, Spa and day lodges; 650 single family homes; 1,625 multi-family units; and 1,500 hotel rooms/units with parking and support amenities will be developed on the remaining 910 hectares (2,250 acres). Table 2-1 illustrates the total number of overnight guests and community residents that can be accommodated under the densities defined through Year 10 and beyond.

Table 2-1 Overnight Accommodation Totals

Unit Type Persons/Unit Units to Year 10

Year 10 Bed Unit Totals

Units - Year 10+ Year 10+ Bed Unit Totals

Hotel Rooms 2 1,450 units 2,900 1,500 3,000

Multi-Family 4 1,400 units 5,600 1,625 6,500

Single-Family 6 625 lots 3,750 650 3,900

TOTAL 3,475 12,250 3,7751 13,4001

1 Additional development between 13,400 – 21,380 bed units is possible thereafter as dictated by market demands. Details of the total bed units will be finalized in the master planning process.

Complementing the snow rider (ski and snowboard) recreation, the mountain resort community amenities proposed to augment the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH formula in the summer season and year-round include racquet sports, spa wellness facilities, shopping, restaurants, nightclubs and rider support services in a village resort atmosphere (Exhibit 2.8 – Concept Plan). The project site includes ideal terrain for a village and staging area for winter recreation on an existing plateau at the 1,100 metre (3,600 foot) elevation near the northwest boundary of the property. As well, summer activities, such as hiking, mountain biking and mountaineering can be marshaled from the base village.

Access to the proposed resort will be from Highway 99 via a new mountain road of approximately 10.2 kilometres (6.3 miles). From the intersection with Highway 99 to the village, the main road has been designed at primarily 8% grades with short sections not exceeding 10%. A further 8.7 kilometres (5.4 miles) of road will be constructed to access the upper village area. This upper road will have grades ranging from 6% to 8%, with short stretches of maximum 10% grade.

Automobile and bus parking will be available within the resort development for day riders, non-rider additional guests, employees and residents with no direct mountain access. It is planned that a shuttle bus system will be established from Squamish up to GARIBALDI, to reduce impacts from traffic travelling along Highway 99 and up to the resort from Squamish.

Build-out for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is intended in seven phases spread over a 20-year period with an initial opening date of December 1999 (Year 1) to mark and celebrate the millenium. Aggressive development will continue through Year 5 (2004) with the majority of the improvements completed by Year 10 (2009).

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will add diversity to the outdoor recreation and mountain tourism opportunities between Vancouver and Whistler and will meet the growing demand for year-round mountain living in Sea to Sky Country. Combined with the Whistler/Blackcomb Ski Resort, located 30 kilometres north along Highway 99, GARIBALDI will offer local and destination visitors a variety of recreational opportunities.

The goal of the developers of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is to create an all-season recreational resort in British Columbia that will serve existing and future local, regional and international market needs. It is intended that the resort will also complement existing area resorts, be financially viable and add economic diversity to the local community and region.

2.3.5 Village Design Concept

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH base village, at approximately 1,100 metres (3,600 feet) above sea level, is proposed for a south-facing sloping site with spectacular views toward Howe Sound and the

Tantalus Mountains. The linear plan of the village will follow the natural contours of the site on essentially an east-west axis. Buildings will be designed and sited to step down the hillside and take best advantage of the magnificent views.

Bound on the west end by facilities for day visitor parking and on the east end by the base lodge for the mountain’s main rider lifts, the visitor will travel through the village via a pedestrian plaza passing the retail establishments. Boutique shops, kiosks, outdoor cafes, restaurants, and hotels are connected by a series of spaces both wide and narrow, paved and landscaped.

As the focal point for one end of the pedestrian plaza, the day lodge will dramatically open up to the mountain staging area for three lifts. The resort village is planned as a pedestrian environment for strolling, dining, and people-watching. From the pedestrian plaza within the village, all hotels, shops, and restaurants as well as the spa and convention centre, can be reached on foot. Amenities midway up and at the top of the mountain are accessible via the lifts.

Landscaping has been given careful consideration. Existing trees will be saved, where suitable. Fountains, street furniture, kiosks, and outdoor eating facilities will all enliven the village experience. During summer and shoulder seasons, the carefully designed paving patterns, ground cover, and planters will add color and texture. At night, lighting of the streets, plazas, shops, restaurants, hotels, and the rider trails will create a festive ambiance.

Designs for the village and the adjacent residential developments follow the natural terrain formations. Because the staggered elevations of each hotel site, all the hotels offer spectacular views of the surrounding area. Corridor windows will face uphill with northern orientation. Southern sunshine and magnificent views toward Howe Sound and the Tantalus Mountain Range will be secured for all hotel guests. On the northern facades, facing the village plaza, the buildings will appear as having only three stories, in keeping with the scale of the village environment.

The architectural style proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is a contemporary abstraction of traditional hilltown and village. A sense of comfort and coziness shall prevail, coupled with a sense of luxury associated with first-class hotel accommodations. The intent is to create an architecture unique to Garibaldi. The view orientations created by the south-facing village, the clustering of the development and the pedestrian plaza suggest a design direction that will result in a one-of-a-kind image. The massive natural terrain of the project site provides the opportunity to feature large, long-sloping roofs that follow terrain contours—roofs capable of sustaining deep overhouse roof materials and colored tiles that pull the village core together when viewed from a distance.

Indigenous materials found in abundance on site, in particular stone for walls and retaining structures, logs for beams and supporting columns, will enhance the unique sense of place. Site features and special design elements will further enhance the sense of place. These features and elements include:

● Waterfalls running through the village

● Multi-leveled structures creeping up the mountain slope ● Covered pedestrian side-streets connecting to village perimeter streets and dividing the various

developments● Bridges over streets ● Occasional glass-covered roof areas ● Visual gaps in the village core plan to allow the south sun and views of Howe Sound

The careful use of fountains, graphics, natural and indigenous art, patterns and varying pavement colors, shaded rest areas around sculpture and existing landscape elements will further enhance the village experience.

It is the intention of the proponent, consultants and design team to conduct design workshop sessions to create a detailed village core master plan and architectural response to these village design concepts. Strict design guidelines will be developed as a part of this process to ensure the continuing visual quality and ambiance of the environment within GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

2.4 Mountain Facilities

2.4.1 Resort CCC Calculation

The “rider” facilities proposed for winter recreation at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will include downhill, touring, free riding and Nordic skiing, as well as snowboarding. In the process leading to submittal of the Formal Proposal, numerous studies, analyses and evaluations were conducted to determine an appropriate “Comfortable Carrying Capacity” (CCC) for the resort. Over the ten to fifteen year period, these figures varied dramatically from a low of 8,000 CCC to a high of 22,000 CCC. The resort area design contained in the formal document submitted in April 1996 was prepared using topography at 15 meter contour intervals, resulting in an CCC figure of approximately 16,000. During the Provincial review of this proposal, it was proposed and agreed that the CCC be reduced to 13,000, because detailed mapping was unavailable at the time.

The CCC for a resort is determined by evaluating each aspect of the winter resort operation as to its maximum number of skiers at one time that can be safely accommodated in any one resort function including the lift and trail system, base area services and amenities, and parking, while still providing a quality experience for each resort guest and user ability level. The figures used in the proponent’s Formal Proposal and in this Application Report are derived from an evaluation of all of those functions. The “Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia,” designates the methodology for calculating resort CCC as a function of multiplying the vertical meters of the lift times the hourly capacity of the lift, times the hours of operation of the lift, times the lift loading efficiency, divided by the weighted vertical demand of the ski trails associated with the lift (see GASAD, Section III.9.9). Using this methodology, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH would have a CCC of 30,090 when using the lift systems as proposed for the resort (see the Appendix 2 for details of this calculation). This CCC figure is extreme because of the utilization of high speed lift systems being proposed for GARIBALDI in order to

meet the resort’s objective of providing an optimum resort experience and staying in line with market trends.

An alternative evaluation was conducted to determine the CCC for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH when balancing the lift capacity with the run capacities. Lower capacity lift systems in Pods A, B, C, F, H, M, Q and R were used for this analysis. The resulting CCC is 24,000.

Because the proponent’s vision for the resort encompasses providing the best possible experience for the GARIBALDI resort guest, state-of-the-art lifts, short lift lines, low trail densities, and less crowding in lodges, parking lots and public transportation are essential elements. It is the proponent’s belief that a lower CCC is instrumental in providing an optimum skiing experience for the resort guests. Recently mapped topography at 5-meter contour intervals is now available. Additionally, during the summer months of 1997, the design team accomplished extensive field proofing with on-site evaluations with Beat vonAllmen of Alpentech, a consultant engaged by the Province. With the field proofing information and utilizing the above-described vision for the resort, a CCC of 19,437 has been established for GARIBALDI. Using this lower CCC will result in a comfortable recreational facility that provides the Province and the developer an aesthetic, financially feasible operation. Consequently, this lower number has been used in the further calculations included in this report. A total resort CCC of 19,437 defines the built space capacity including restaurants, restrooms, lodging, overnight housing and infrastructure that will serve the visitor’s needs.

2.4.2 Rider Pods

The philosophy driving the design of the rider recreation area pods originates within the natural configuration of the land. The pods are intended to fit the existing terrain, meet the standards included in Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, and respond to the demands and mix of the snow riders within the Province, the region and abroad (Exhibit 2.9 – Pods A and B Looking East). This mix is typically 15% to 20% beginning/novice level users, 50% to 60% intermediate level users and 25% to 30% advanced/expert level users. Ideal ratios presented in the GASAD together with the proposed ratios for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH are included on Table 2-2.

Table 2-2 Balance Calculations for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH

Beginner Novice Low Int. Intermediate Advanced Expert Totals

Ideal Ratios1 2%-6% 11%-15% 18%-22% 33%-37% 18%-22% 8%-12% 100%

Terrain Hectares 10.1 32.1 64.0 126.2 82.6 63.5 378.5

Resort CCC 1,062 2,889 3,840 6,453 3,474 1,719 19,437

Garibaldi 5% 15% 20% 33% 18% 9% 100%

1 Ideal Ratios are taken from Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, Section III.9.6, Skier Skill Classes, June 1996

Clearly, the terrain and rider level mix provided in the designs for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH fall within the ideal ratios. Additionally, designs minimize the affects of wind and sun to ensure desirable linkages of the lift and trail systems allowing users at every level to return to the base area (Exhibit 2.10 – Mt. Garibaldi Looking from the Top of Lift A).

The proposed layout for the resort includes terrain for snow riders consisting of approximately 378.5 hectares (937 acres) of trails on a total area of 1,670 hectares (4,125 acres). The developed area will consist of 18 rider pods with an estimated total of 150 trails accessed by 20 lifts. There are 26 connector trails within the rider system to allow for ease of access between pods and rider facilities. These trails are used to connect with other trails within the same pod or to access other pods. The skier counts on these connector trails are generally very low. Consequently the connector trails have not been figured into the skier densities.

The proposed pod configuration is described below with the Fall Line Analysis illustrated on Exhibit 2.11 – Fall Line Analysis. Actual lift and trail configuration may vary once engineering and master planning designs together with additional extensive field proofing have been completed. As stated, the developed area will be divided into 18 rider pods with the following descriptions:

POD A

● Southwest facing bowl● 8 trails accessing primarily intermediate level terrain ● 4 connectors trails accessing other pods ● Top elevation is 1,585 metres; bottom elevation is 1,045 metres; vertical drop is 540 metres ● Lift is an 8 passenger detachable gondola ● Acts as a transport lift in the morning taking riders out of the base area ● Major route between the upper hotel and the base village ● Transports non-snow riders to the upper village area for day time shopping and entertainment,

night time dining ● Used during the summer by hikers and bikers ● Allows ski-to/ski-away access for some residential units within the pod ● Snowmaking provided on 40% of the trails

POD B

● North/northwest facing bowl● 12 trails accessing novice through expert level terrain ● 2 connectors trails accessing other pods ● Top elevation is 1,740 metres; bottom elevation is 1,040 metres; vertical drop is 700 metres ● Lift is a detachable high speed quad with off-loading midway up the mountain to access expert

terrain below; other users off-load on top to access novice and intermediate terrain on the upper slopes

● Connects the base village with the upper base lodge ● Includes unique waterfalls in the pod terrain ● Top 1/3 is glade skiing; bottom 1/3 is cut blocked with substantial regrowth; middle 1/3 is in

heavy evergreen cover ● Good fall line skiing ● The trail identified as B-13 will require some grading to allow novice level skiing off the top of

the mountain and back into the base ● Snowmaking provided on 40% of the trails

POD C

● Southeast facing pod● 4 trails accessing beginner through low intermediate level terrain ● 2 connectors trails accessing other pods ● Top elevation is 1,160 metres; bottom elevation is 1,060 metres; vertical drop is 100 metres ● Lifts are two fixed grip double chair lifts taking beginning users out of the base ● Pod lies in an existing cut blocked area ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD D

● West/northwest facing pod● 10 trails accessing primarily advanced and expert level terrain ● One connector trail ● Top elevation is 1,480 metres; bottom elevation is 1,115 metres; vertical drop is 365 metres ● Lift is a detachable six-pack ● Top 2/3 is in evergreen forest ● Cut blocks exist on the bottom 1/3 of the pod, but substantial regrowth has occurred ● Views are exceptional from this pod ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD E

● West/southwest facing pod● 3 trails accessing primarily novice terrain ● Top elevation is 1,740 metres; bottom elevation is 1,500 metres; vertical drop is 240 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair ● Pod is primarily glade skiing in open meadows ● Access from Pod E to the base area is provided via trails B-1 and B-13 ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD F

● South/southwest facing bowl● 12 trails accessing low intermediate to expert terrain ● One connector trail ● Top elevation is 1,725 metres; bottom elevation is 1,110 metres; vertical drop is 615 metres ● Lift is a detachable high speed quad ● Top ¼ is above the tree line; the bottom 1/8 is in the cut block area; the middle portion is covered

with evergreens ● This pod includes a band of advanced to expert terrain ¾ of the way down the mountain, which

can be skirted to the south and east by novice to intermediate trails ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD G

● Southeast facing pod● 9 trails accessing expert level terrain ● Top elevation is 1,805 metres; bottom elevation is 1,020 metres; vertical drop is 785 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair ● Top ¼ is glade skiing; bottom is within the trees ● Due to the steepness of the terrain, several avalanche chutes exist from within the pod; these can

be controlled through continuous skiing and normal avalanche prevention programs; any concern about a large avalanche off Mt. Garibaldi is alleviated due to a 110 metre high ridge which protects this pod from any avalanche danger off the face of Mt. Garibaldi

POD H

● North/northwest facing bowl● 13 trails accessing primarily advanced and expert terrain with some intermediate ● Two connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,910 metres; bottom elevation is 1,190 metres; vertical drop is 720 metres ● Lift is a detachable high speed quad ● Top half is above the tree line in an open bowl ● Bottom half is within the evergreen tree cover

● Pod falls into the Culliton river drainage

POD I

● North facing pod● 4 trails accessing expert terrain ● One connector trail ● Top elevation is 1,760 metres; bottom elevation is 1,170 metres; vertical drop is 590 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair; serves as a second access lift up to Brohm Ridge out of the back

bowl● Top half is above the tree line ● Bottom half is heavily covered with evergreens ● Pod falls into the Culliton river drainage

POD J

● North facing pod● 10 trails accessing primarily low intermediate and intermediate terrain ● One connector trail ● Top elevation is 1,760 metres; bottom elevation is 1,035 metres; vertical drop is 365 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair ● Pod is above the tree line in an open bowl

POD K

● North/northwest facing bowl● 10 trails accessing primarily low intermediate to intermediate terrain ● One connector trail ● Top elevation is 1,400 metres; bottom elevation is 1,035 metres; vertical drop is 365 metres ● Lift is a detachable high speed quad ● Rolling terrain that falls into the Culliton River drainage ● Bottom portion of the north half is in the cut blocked area and other portions are heavily treed ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD L

● South/southwest facing pod● 8 trails accessing novice through low intermediate terrain ● 3 connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,760 metres; bottom elevation is 1,610 metres; vertical drop is 150 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip quad ● Glade skiing throughout the pod

● Trails are above the tree line

POD M

● North facing pod● 5 trails accessing intermediate terrain ● 2 connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,740 metres; bottom elevation is 1,480 metres; vertical drop is 260 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip quad ● Bowl skiing above the tree line ● POD N North/northwest facing pod● 6 trails accessing primarily intermediate terrain ● Top elevation is 1,725 metres; bottom elevation is 1,460 metres; vertical drop is 265 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair ● Bowl skiing above the tree line

POD O

● East facing pod● 1 trail accessing beginner terrain ● Top elevation is 1,585 metres; bottom elevation is 1,560 metres; vertical drop is 25 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip double chair ● Provides beginner terrain for the upper hotel area ● Access to and from the lower base lodge is via lift A

POD P

● West/northwest facing pod● 8 trails accessing novice through low intermediate terrain ● 2 connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,485 metres; bottom elevation is 1,290 metres; vertical drop is 195 metres ● Lift is a detachable six-pack ● Area is within the trees ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD Q

● West/southwest facing pod● 6 trails accessing intermediate to advanced intermediate terrain ● 2 connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,400 metres; bottom elevation is 1,125 metres; vertical drop is 275 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip quad

● Pod is in a cut blocked area ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

POD R · West/southwest facing pod

● 10 trails accessing intermediate/advanced intermediate terrain ● 4 connector trails ● Top elevation is 1,560 metres; bottom elevation is 1,130 metres; vertical drop is 430 metres ● Lift is a fixed grip quad ● Bottom half is in cut block ● Top half is in trees ● Exceptional views of Howe Sound ● Snowmaking is provided on 40% of the trails

The rider terrain has been graphically depicted in three-dimensional modeling on Exhibits 2.12 – View Looking Southeast, 2.13 – View Looking East, and 2.14 – View Looking North.

Estimated rider recreation pod capacities are outlined in Table 2-3. This table illustrates the projected capacity of each pod in terms of comfortable carrying capacity and vertical transport metres per hour (VTM/Hour) that can be accommodated therein.

Table 2-3 Project Resort CCC and Pod Capacity

Pod Number Resort CCC Pod VTM/Hour

A 1,296 711,189

B 1,713 721,503

C 945 136,125

D 1,275 1,002,150

E 900 225,000

F 1,686 957,015

G 750 803,250

H 1,872 1,220,058

I 630 408,942

J 573 260,379

K 1,719 725,787

L 855 290,250

M 720 293,976

N 627 283,977

O 189 23,625

P 1,755 544,500

Q 642 331,110

R 1,290 696,114

TOTALS 19,437 9,634,950

Table 2-4 outlines the planning parameters applied to the resort to balance the facilities. The ski trail capacity figures for each skier skill level used in this table come from GASAD, Section III.9.5; the User Demand per day figures are derived from GASAD, Section III.9.7. The table assumes that beginning through novice users spend approximately 6 hours per day on the mountain while advanced intermediate through expert users spend an average of 7 hours per day on the mountain.

Table 2-4 Planning Parameters

User Skill Level Percent of Slope

Users per Hectare Mountain

User Demand VTM/Hr

User Demand VTM/Day

Beginner 8-12 35 125 750

Novice 12-15 30 250 1,500

Low Intermediate 25-30 20 375 2,250

Intermediate 30-40 15 430 3,000

Advanced 40-45 10 785 5,500

Expert 45-80 5 1,070 7,500

Actual trail widths vary due to constraints of the terrain. However, industry standards dictate average trails widths appropriate to user skill levels. These trail width standards are noted in Table 2-5.

Table 2-5 Industry Standard Trail Widths by Skill Level

Skill Level Average Trail

Width (m)

Beginner 60

Novice 38

Low Intermediate 38

Intermediate 38

Advanced 30

Expert 25

2.4.3 Lift Systems

The rider lift system for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has been designed so that lift alignments and locations of upper and lower lift terminals in each pod take advantage of the terrain within that pod yet ensure interconnection of the entire resort area. The lift capacity requirements are a function of the hourly vertical transport metres/feet demanded by the skier skill classes within each pod. The vertical transport metres per hour (VTM/Hr) are based on the average total number of vertical metres each rider skill class can use per hour. The total VTM/hr is calculated using industry standards.

Each pod has been designed for a single lift with the exception of Pods B and C. At present, the lift alignment for Pod B is along a single line, with the intention that riders can disembark at a point midway up the mountain to access the lower more expert terrain or they can continue up the lift to the top, accessing more intermediate terrain. To achieve the two points of disembarkation, it is planned that a single extended detachable quad lift, designed with a mid-station, be used. If this proves to be infeasible, then two detachable quad lifts can be used. Pod C is beginner terrain and designs call for two fixed double chairs to handle the longer loading times needed for beginning riders. Table 2-6 outlines the lift capacity by Pod proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Table 2-6 Lift Type, Phasing and Capacity

Lifts Lift Type Phase Horizontal

Metres

Vertical

Metres

A Detachable Gondola

8 Passenger

I 1,977 517

B1

B2

Detachable Quad (continuous

lift, with midway off-load)

I 2,204 663

C1

C2

Fixed Double

Fixed Double

I

III

375

375

100

100

D Detachable Six-Pack III 1,310 365

E Fixed Grip Double I 1,145 240

F Detachable Quad II 1,670 615

G Fixed Grip Double IV 1,730 785

H Detachable Quad I 2,340 720

I Fixed Grip Double I 1,270 590

J Fixed Grip Double II 1,083 280

K Detachable Quad III 1,470 365

L Fixed Grip Quad II 670 150

M Fixed Grip Quad IV 840 260

N Fixed Grip Double IV 730 265

O Fixed Grip Double II 250 25

P Detachable Six-Pack V 1,090 195

Q Fixed Grip Quad V 870 275

R Fixed Grip Quad V 1,190 430

As a general rule, throughout the resort user system, lifts have been proposed that exceed the trail capacity in order to bring riders quickly and efficiently out of the base area at the beginning of the day, and generally to offer a more pleasant, less crowded overall experience for the resort guest.

2.4.4 Snowmaking

Snowmaking facilities are proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort in order that winter recreation can begin earlier in the fall and continue longer into the spring. Snowmaking is intended to supplement natural snowfall, especially during low precipitation years. As currently designed, Pods A, B, C, D, E, F, K, L, P, Q and R are proposed to include snowmaking lines on 40% to 50% of the trails (see Table 2-7, Snowmaking Coverage. It is intended that the system installed be capable of supplying 50 cm (20 inches) of snow across the serviced trails within 45 days.

Table 2-7 Snowmaking Coverage

Rider Pods Total Hectares Snowmaking1

A 30 15

B 30 15

C 10 5

D 30 10

E 10 5

F 45 20

K 30 10

L 15 5

P 20 10

Q 15 5

R 30 10

TOTAL 265 110

1 Snowmaking area equals approximately 40% of the total

As shown on the previous table, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH proposes to provide snowmaking on approximately 110 hectares of trail area at a snow depth of 0.5 metres (snow depth of 0.5 m ® 0.25 m of water). Running the snowmaking system for 12 hours per day requires a water flow of 140 litres per second equating to 6 mega-litres per day over a 45-day duration.

There are several excellent snowmaking systems available on the market today. Specific details of the selected snowmaking equipment proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be provided as the Master Plan is finalized.

Refer to Section 2.6.4.2 – “Water Supply Options for Garibaldi” for potential snowmaking sources.

2.4.5 Mountain Maintenance Facilities

Near the bottom of Lift F, a central maintenance building and maintenance yard is proposed to house trail grooming, snow removal, snow cats and other mountain maintenance and repair equipment and supplies. Equipment parts for the mountain and resort maintenance vehicles will also be stored in this building. Machinery, equipment and supplies necessary to ensure the timely and efficient operation of summer amenities on site will be kept in this central building as well. The equipment storage area will be screened from view with vegetation.

2.5 Base Area and Village Facilities

2.5.1 Commercial and Recreational Services

At the center of the recreational amenities proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is the base area lodge at the east end of the village pedestrian plaza. This base lodge will house snow rider and summer user support services including lift ticketing, restrooms, lockers, restaurants, bar/lounge, equipment rentals, snow patrol, ski and snowboarder schools, first aid facilities and administrative offices. A second lodge is proposed for the ridge top at mid-mountain and will include restaurant and restroom facilities. See Table 2-8 for base lodge and rider services capacity information based upon the CCC of the area.

The visitor’s experience will be enhanced through the addition of numerous restaurants, shops and boutiques within the village centre. These enterprises will be entrepreneurial and will be located within the commercial core. The commercial core is proposed along the pedestrian spine connecting surface parking and the recreational area base lodge, allowing for continuous visitor traffic exposure opportunities for the commercial tenants. Augmenting the shops and restaurants within the plaza and

down side streets will be other amenities such as delicatessens, liquor and grocery stores, laundry and dry cleaning services, reservation and vacation tourist offices, municipal offices, professional offices and other community services.

Additionally, restaurants and gift shops, and possibly weight rooms or fitness centers will be included in the hotel and base lodge facilities.

Table 2-8 Skier Services and Base Lodge Capacities

Function Industry Standards(1)

(Square metres/rider)

Total Square Metres at Buildout

Food service seating 0.44 6,842

Kitchen and scramble 0.17 2,644

Rest rooms 0.1 1,555

First aid and ski patrol 0.17 2,644

Ski school 0.08 1,244

Retail sales 0.04 622

Equipment rental 0.09 1,400

Public lockers 0.12 1,865

Administration 0.12 1,865

Tickets 0.03 467

Employee lockers 0.01 156

Bar/lounge 0.1 1,555

Nursery 0.05 778

Storage 0.05 778

Circulation/walls/waste 0.03 467

Mechanical/furnace 0.03 467

TOTALS 1.63 25,349

2.5.2 Golf Training Centre and Golf

A golf learning centre is proposed as one of the amenities featured at GARIBALDI. This facility will be a training and instruction centre to include a driving range, from three to five putting greens with associated fairways, sand traps, bunkers and chipping areas. After working out at the learning centre, resort guests will be able to play golf at one of the many local golf courses through a coordinated program between GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and area golf courses.

2.5.3 Mountain Biking and Hiking

With the accessibility of uphill lifts, paved roads and existing dirt roads, many opportunities exist for mountain biking and hiking at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. On a preliminary basis, the design team, in association with Rob Cocquyt and Cliff Miller of SORCA, have reviewed the location of mountain biking and hiking trails. The following potential trails are under evaluation:

● A potential walking, observation path exists along the road connecting the upper hotel and village with the base area village. This potential double trail would have 8% to 10% grade set back from the road to allow for separation of vehicles and pedestrians.

● A potential single track for mountain biking exists on the north side of trail A-1 within the forested area.

● Maintenance roads and pod access cat tracks in and around Pods A, B, D, E, F, and K all have potential to become hiking and biking trails.

● Numerous logging roads exist with minor clearing in the Cheekeye River Drainage. A connection trail from the top of Lift P to these roads/trails would provide excellent access for mountain bikers to Cat Lake and associated biking trails.

● An existing hiking trail along Brohm Ridge provides for superb views into Squamish and Howe

Sound as well as into the Black Tusk region.

2.5.4 The Spa at Garibaldi

The proposed “Spa at Garibaldi” is intended to respond to the explosive growth in this type of facility in a recreational resort setting. The Spa will provide a year-round program of relaxation and learning in a healthy and nurturing environment. As a stand-alone facility, Spa activities will be carefully integrated with those of the surrounding community. Guests will fall into three main categories:

● Residential – Guests participating in packages and a la carte services who stay in hotel accommodations which are partners of the Spa

● Owner/Member – Guests who pay an annual assessment and are members of the Spa Club ● Local – Guests from the area (Vancouver, Squamish, Whistler or Garibaldi) who use the Spa on a

casual basis

Programs will focus on and be adapted to summer, shoulder and winter season guests and activities.

The Spa at Garibaldi will comprise 30,000 square feet on two levels overlooking Squamish and Howe Sound. Functions will include bath and body treatment (sauna, massage, steam) rooms, hair care, meeting rooms, a doctor’s office, restaurant, juice bar, indoor/outdoor swimming pool, racquet sports, fitness and cardio room, aerobics room, yoga and tai chi studio, retail shops and Owner’s Club lounge.

2.5.5 Squamish Recovery Centre

The leaders of Canada’s First Nations people have been talking about healing for years. Education and make-work programs, job creation programs, and drug and alcohol treatment centres have had limited success. Today, when asked what is needed, “healing” is the answer most often given. When addiction in society is examined, it is noted that many highly paid, educated professional people suffer from this malady. Education and occupation are much more meaningful to well-balanced individuals.

The Squamish Recovery Centre will be a place where people can learn the process of change from dysfunction to function, from addiction to sobriety. Recovery deals with the core issues of addiction and provides the tools to rebuild personalities. Recovery is for all people who suffer from dysfunctional family units and addiction.

The Squamish Recovery Centre, as a part of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, will be dedicated to healing the addictive personalities of any First Nations people who express readiness to change their lives.

2.5.6 Overnight Accommodations as Part of the Residential Component

Overnight accommodations proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH include 1,500 hotel and lodge rooms providing typical full-service amenities. The resort will also include condominium hotel units,

many of which will be privately owned but placed in the rental pool with limited owner use. These condominium-hotel units will provide full services for rental guests. Low-density townhouse condominiums (six units per hectare) will have owner and/or rental uses. Most of the single-family residential units will be privately owned for personal recreational use, but some of these may also be included in the rental pool. Rental units will be processed through a central reservation system operated and funded by the Resort Association.

The Resort Association and the development team, upon greater detailed analysis of the market, will establish parameters for public and private overnight accommodations. Careful analysis of the resort marketplace and demand for primary and secondary home real estate for each type of accommodation will take place. The overall goal is to establish warm beds and typical public accommodations to augment both the direct and indirect economic value of a built-in market for the ongoing operation of the resort.

Initial programming for GARIBALDI through Year 10 anticipates development of 12,250 bed units (a total of 2,700 units comprised in a mix of hotel rooms, condo-hotel rooms, condominium units, town homes, and single family residences). However, the figure through buildout (20 years) is 3,775 units (13,400 bed units). Financial projections and absorption rates prepared as part of this Application address programming through Year 10 only.

Table 2-9 outlines the ranking of GARIBALDI in terms of allowable bed units for the resort. This ranking is based on the Bed Unit Calculation Model included in the GASAD.

Table 2-9 Calculation of Allowable Bed Units for a Destination Resort

Factor Ranking Numeric Rank

Ski terrain Close to ideal 3

Skier density per hectare 25-30/ha – 40-45/ha 3

Accessibility > than 3 hours from market 6

Ski area access Reasonable 1

Population within 250 km 500,000 5

Unique qualities National attraction 2

Year round experience within 30 minutes Excellent 4

Potential length of season 130 to 150 days 3

Type of snow Dry 50 to 75% of season 3

Weather conditions 1,500 to 2,000 hours of sun 3

Express lifts Less than 50% of total 1

Need for employee housing 25% beds within 15 minutes 3

TOTAL RANKING 36

According to the CASP guidelines Bed Unit Calculation Model, a ranking of 36 will allow for development of up to 110% of the Comfortable Carrying Capacity for a Destination Resort. This equates to 21,380 bed units. GARIBALDI’s initial development program is to design for bed units at 69% of its CCC, or 13,400 bed units, in order to maintain low densities at the resort, allowing for uncrowded conditions and a quality total resort experience for its visitors and guests. However, as an alternative, the proponent may desire, at a future date, to increase the bed units from the initial development phase of 13,400 to or between the 21,380.

2.5.7 Single and Multi-Family Development as Part of the Residential Component

Although the density, unit types and land area required are purposely being kept low, the design of the residential element of the resort community is a key factor in the overall market appeal and image of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Planning and execution of this element will be important for the project’s ultimate success. Much of the residential development will be sited out of view of the main road and most will have recreational opportunities at their doorsteps. The unit mix is proposed to include approximately 1,625 condominium and town homes as well as 650 single family residences designed to appeal to both primary and second home buyers. All residential development will be governed by Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) prepared by the proponent’s design team and attorneys.

The residential lots planned for the resort will average ¼ acre (0.1 hectare). All lots are proposed to include views and many will enjoy ski-in/ski-away capability. Lots will be fully serviced with water and sanitary sewer, paved road access and public utilities (power, telephone, gas, cable television). Lot purchasers will be required to build within three years of purchase. Owners of single family homes will not be required to make their homes available to the rental pool but may do so if desired.

It is anticipated that residential properties will generally be priced at levels below those at Whistler/Blackcomb, yet at or near the top end of the price spectrum for comparable units in Squamish. In the first phases of the development, emphasis will be on offering units appealing to both recreational permanent residents and second-home purchasers. As GARIBALDI establishes its reputation, development of custom residential properties will become more appropriate. However, it is anticipated that new properties will continue to appeal to both types of buyers. As with other resort amenities, residential properties will be brought to market as overall resort activity levels justify the additional offerings.

2.5.8 Employee Housing

Due to GARIBALDI’s location adjacent to the District of Squamish, it is assumed that a high percentage of local residents and existing homes will provide much of the year-round work force for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH until the resort reaches buildout. Additional rental units within Squamish may be required at the opening of the resort. That number will be more accurately determined once the needs of the resort operation have been determined and the personnel interview process has taken place.

Table 2-10 Employee Housing Calculations

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

CCC 7,356 9,804 10,659 11,934 13,653 14,373 15,750 18,147 19,437

10% Employee Housing Guidelines1 (Cumulative)

736 980 1,066 1,193 1,365 1,437 1,575 1,815 1,944

Employee Housing Commitment by Resort Operator

(Cumulative)

105 210 315 420

Support Operations Employee Housing Commitment

(Cumulative)

- - - 316

__________

1 Taken from CASP as a guideline for new destination resort employee-housing requirements.

The proposed 736 beds through Year 4 as shown in Table 2-10 should satisfy employee housing needs based on anticipated employees in similar four-season resorts and as shown and discussed in the Socio-Economic Impact Analysis section of this document (see Table 6-14). Concurrent with the developer commitment, each hotel, restaurant and retail developer will be encouraged to provide his own employee housing as shown in Table 2-10, either within the hotel (see related article included in the Appendix 2), off-site or by way of a contribution to the employee housing fund matched by the Proponent’s land contribution. Additional employee housing can be encouraged by allowing single-family homes to include caretaker units as part of the single-family component.

After initial resort opening, an employee policy board will be established comprising the Proponent, Squamish District and governance structure utilizing Bill 10 - Mountain Resort Act, to consciously monitor the region’s employee housing.

2.5.9 Resort Parking

In determining a portion of the required surface parking for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, the estimated total number of day visitors at any one time is divided by three persons per automobile. GARIBALDI’s peak day rider use capacity is calculated at 19,437 (CCC) minus 90% of the total bed units (on-site housing capacity for destination riders [13,400 X .90 = 12,060]) equating to 7,377 day riders. About 1,900 of these riders will arrive by bus. An additional 600 cars are projected for non-rider guests and 100 cars are anticipated for employees not residing at the base. At an average of 3 riders per car, calculations suggest that 2,526 parking spaces will need to be provided for day riders, non-rider guests and employees plus 20 bus parking spaces on a peak day.

Additionally, it is anticipated that 10% of the multi-family units and 20% of the single family will require parking at the base to accommodate residences without ski-to/ski-away capability. These figures are 163 and 130 spaces respectively. Employee parking will be provided at the various facilities and housing units throughout the resort. Considering resort-based employee housing and shuttle services from Squamish, it is anticipated that only 100 employees will need parking at the base. See Table 2-11.

Table 2-11 Day User Parking Requirements

DESCRIPTION TOTAL

Total Resort Riders 19,437

90% of Destination Guests -12,060

Day Riders 7,377

Day Riders Arriving by Bus1 -1,900

Day Riders Arriving by Car 5,477

5,477 ¸ 3 Riders per Car 1,826

Non-Rider Guests2 600

Employee Cars @ Base Area 100

Garibaldi Residential Cars with no Ski-to/ Ski-Away 293

Bus Parking (20 spaces equiv. to 7 automobiles) 140

Total 2,959

2,350 Parking Spaces Provided Based on 80% of Peak3

1 Based upon 10% of CCC as per Section III. 10.9 of guidelines.

2 Based on 10% of CCC with 3 persons per car (1,900 ¸ 3 = 600).

3 Total parking spaces required for the base area anticipates a peak day population. The specific design and sizing of parking for a peak day will be considered during the site specific design stage. However, designing for a peak day, when considering aggressive mass transportation techniques and opportunities, is less necessary. Therefore, sufficient space to accommodate 80% of the anticipated peak day parking will be designed.

At peak use, it is assumed that all housing will be fully occupied and that parking for destination visitors is provided as shown on Table 2-12. This parking will be provided in proximity of or at the units.

Table 2-12 Destination Parking Requirements

Unit Type No. of

Units

Parking Spaces per Unit Total Parking Required

Hotel 1,500 1.0 1,500

Multi-Family 1,625 1.5 2,438

Single-Family 650 2.0 1,300

2.5.10 Schools

Responsibility for planning, approving and building schools is with the School District and the Provincial Government, both in terms of timing and selection of appropriate sites. Capital plans are made ten years in advance and updated, submitted and approved annually.

In terms of population demands, when a community has 100 elementary school- aged children, school site approval and final building plan approvals should be obtained. However, planning and programming for this should have been foreseen ten years earlier and included in the capital plans. The maximum elementary school population is 350 children. As an example of the planning lead-time required, the new Whistler High School opened with an attendance of 260 in 1996. Plans began ten years prior and it took until 1996 to plan, approve, fund and build the school.

Appropriate school sites should be level, have solid geotechnical specifications, be in close proximity to housing and range in size between 2 and 4 hectares (5 and 10 acres).

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be responsible for providing an appropriate amount of land for a school site and for anticipating, projecting and planning to meet educational facility needs.

2.5.11 Helicopter Base Location (Heli-Park)

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH in association with the Forest Service will coordinate for a heliport along the Garibaldi Resort Access Highway about 3 kilometres from Highway 99 and 7 kilometres from the Base Village at elevation 530. This elevation is usually above the lower valley fog and below a majority of the cloud cover. There will be five paved landing areas, parking and service aprons for five helicopters, a 400 square metre heli-terminal building (hanger/administration building) and 15 automobile parking spaces. This will cover a total area of about 0.5 hectares. The location of the Heli-park could possibly become the new location for a heliport to replace the current Brackendale Air/Heli-port. Helicopter transportation to and from this location can safely occur via helicopter during most

weather conditions. Full storage for this facility will comply with British Columbia requirements.

2.5.12 Heli Pad

A heli-pad will be graded just west approximately 2 kilometres and over the ridge from the Base Village. The heli-pad site will consist of two 49 square metre paved pads approximately 7 metres apart. The site will also include six automobile parking spaces and a wind sock. This heli-pad will be used as a staging area for charters and transportation/traffic reliever for Garibaldi guests, residents and employees and a terminal for heli-skiing operations.

2.5.13 On-Mountain Environmental Education Institute Yosemite National Institute

Environmental education is a priority for the Board of Directors of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Increasing awareness of societal impact on the environment is an essential component for present and future planetary citizens.

Yosemite National Institutes (YNI) is one of the largest, oldest and most well respected environmental education non-profits in the United States. Their mission is to provide experiential field science programs in “Nature’s Classroom” to inspire a personal connection to the natural world and responsible actions to sustain it. YNI celebrated it’s 25th anniversary in 1996 and now serves over 32,000 participants annually at its three campuses in Yosemite National Park, Olympic National Park and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in the United States. The vast majority of YNI participants are school children aged five to eighteen who, with their teacher and school class, stay at one of our campuses for a week as part of their grade school curriculum.

David J. Flood, is the President and a member of the Board of Directors for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project. Mr. Flood is a current and active member of the Board of Directors of YNI having served the organization for over twenty-five years.

For over four years Janice Scott, member of the Board of Directors of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, and the Squamish Estuary Conservation Society, has worked diligently with the community of Squamish, and representatives of Yosemite National Institutes to develop an interest in establishing an environmental education institute in the Howe Sound region.

Tom McKeachie, member of the Board of Directors of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, is an elementary school educator in the Gulf Islands. Tom promotes environmental education in the classroom, in the field, and through provincial and national curriculum such as SEP (Salmonid Enhancement Program), Project Wild and the Green School programs.

The results of a recent site inspection to the region by key Yosemite National Institutes representatives has resulted in YNI’s interest to conduct a comprehensive study of the critical factors that determine the programmatic and financial success of an environmental education institute in the Howe Sound Region.

Refer to letter dated November 6, 1997 from Mr. Cale Siler, Director of Strategic Ventures, Yosemite National Institutes (see Appendix 2).

The Squamish and Howe Sound region is a rich resource for environmental education and the Board of Directors of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH plan to support the establishment of an on-mountain environmental education institute.

2.6 On-Site Infrastructure

2.6.1 Roadway Systems and Traffic

2.6.1.1 Highway 99 Intersection

The connection with Highway 99 may have to be relocated to provide improved site distance. Our initial review indicates that a location south of the present one may be appropriate. This point is located approximately 500 metres away and is on the outside of a larger radius curve.

The configuration of this connection may be either an at-grade intersection or may be grade-separated. This will be determined following discussions with staff at the Ministry of Transportation and Highways (MOTH) and a review of traffic projections. The proximity of Brohm Creek and other topographic constraints will influence the configuration as well.

For the purpose of the Application Report, two alternatives at Highway 99 have been considered:

● An intersection that includes parallel deceleration and acceleration lanes ● A simple diamond overpass

2.6.1.2 Road Design

Garibaldi roads will be designed to the District of Squamish standards. This is dependent on the governance for the resort. A design speed of 60 kilometres is used where possible on the main road to the Base Area. Preliminary plan and profile drawings have been prepared for the proposed access road from Highway 99 to the Garibaldi Village Core. These are included in the Appendix 2.

The main access road begins at Highway 99 approximately 13 kilometres from Squamish and proceeds from an elevation of 270 metres above sea level to 1,000 metres at the village core. From the village core, the road continues through the residential development area to the upper hotel site at an elevation of 1,700 metres. This road is approximately 18.9 kilometres (11.7 miles) from its intersection with Highway 99 to the mountain top hotel site.

The access road is planned to be a paved two-lane road with passing lanes. The maximum grade of this

road is 10%. The road-side cut and fill slopes will be determined upon receipt of specific geotechnical data. However, it generally appears that rock competent to stand vertically will be encountered over the majority of the route. Fill slopes will be a maximum of 1½ :1 unless retained.

Secondary roads in and though the development areas and within the village core are proposed as paved roads connecting to the main access road. These roads will have a design speed of 40 kilometres per hour. Geometry of the roads will conform to local standards and structural sections will be designed using expected loading together with specific geotechnical data that will be collected.

For costing purposes, a paved lane width of 3.6 metres, 150 millimeters thick on 300 millimetres of gravel base has been used from Highway 99 to the village core. From the village core to the upper hotel site, designs call for a road with two paved lanes and a gravel shoulder. A structural section of 100 millimetres of asphalt over 200 millimetres of gravel is also proposed, but will be re-evaluated when specific geotechnical data is available.

2.6.1.3 Traffic Flows

The MOTH requires that a traffic impact study, in accordance with MOTH Site Impact Analysis Requirements Manual, be completed to evaluate the effects of the GARIBALDI development on Highway 99. Members of the GARIBALDI project team have had one initial meeting with staff at the Howe Sound District Office. Following this meeting, a copy of the general Terms of Reference for the study were forwarded by MOTH.

The first step in the study will be to establish a detailed scope of work for this specific project. Issues such as Highway 99 access location, study area limits and time horizon for analysis, and method for projecting base traffic will be identified through meetings with District officials. Once a detailed scope of work has been reviewed and approved by the District, then the Traffic Impact Study for the Highway 99 development will be carried out. The study will conform to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication Traffic Access and Impact Studies for Site Development (1991).

The most critical elements of this development relating to traffic are the effect of additional traffic on Highway 99, the connection of the access road to Highway 99, and the standard of road design for the main access. Representatives of the GARIBALDI project team will work with MOTH to address each of these elements.

Preliminary traffic generation figures for the GARIBALDI access road were developed. MOTH, in advance of further analysis, will approve the methods for projecting final traffic volumes for it’s impact on Highway 99. The results of further analysis will provide quantitative information that will be used in determining appropriate final configurations and staging for development of the road infrastructure.

Peak traffic flows to and from the resort are expected to be between 9:00 am and 10:00 am and again between 5:00 pm and 6:00 pm. At full buildout, the expected peak traffic flow to the resort should be

around 2,000 vehicles per hour (VPH). It should be noted that a shuttle bus system, planned to operate between the resort and downtown Squamish as well as throughout the Garibaldi Resort, will reduce traffic and vehicle emissions. Assumptions for traffic impacts are included on Table 2-13. Peak Day traffic distribution figures are outlined on Table 2-14.

The 30th peak hour inflow is estimated at about 1,700 vehicles providing a Level of Service “D” taking into account passing lanes for uphill traffic. The 30th peak hour outflow is estimated to be about 1,500 vehicles providing a Level of Service “D” without passing lanes.

The resort is being designed to accommodate the destination guest as well as to serve regional and local visitors. The marketing will be geared to groups, encouraging arrival and departure on buses and other tour packaging transportation systems. GARIBALDI, with assistance from governmental officials and other local resort operators, will encourage alternative transportation methods through the use of financial incentives. These methods may include ferries, trains, and helicopters as alternatives to automobile travel on the Sea to Sky Highway.

Table 2-13 Traffic Assumptions 30th Peak Hour Flow - Garibaldi Access Road

Generator Traffic in Each Direction

Distribution

Inbound

Distribution

Outbound

7,377 day riders ¸ 3 persons/vehicle X 80% of peak1

1,967 VPD with 90% within 2 hours

1,770 vehicles

8:30 am to 10:30 am

1,770 vehicles

4:30 pm to 6:30 pm

13,400 destination persons ¸ 3 X 80% of peak1

3,573 with 1/3 turnover = turnover =

1,191 with 80% within 4 hours

953 vehicles

8:00 am to 12:00 pm

953 vehicles

4:00 pm to 7:30 pm

Other trips – 10% per day trips in and out

316 daily trips with

90% in 2 hours

284 vehicles

8:00 am to 10:00 pm

284 vehicles

5:30 pm to 7:30 pm

Employees @ 10% of CCC = 1,944

50% off-site employees = 972 ¸ 3 persons/vehicle

324 X 60% in 1 hour and 324 X 40%

in 1 hour

194 vehicles

7:00 am to 8:00 am

130 vehicles

3:00 pm – 4:00 pm

194 vehicles

5:00 pm – 6:00 pm

130 vehicles

9:30 pm to 10:30 pm

Delivery services 200 in 10 hours 6:00 am – 4:00 pm

130th Peak Hour is 80% of Peak Traffic.

Table 2-14 30th Peak Hour Traffic Determination (Garibaldi Access Road)

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Day Rider Traffic 442 885 442 98 98 65 295 590 590 295 65 65

Destination 238 238 238 238 119 119 119 238 238 238 238 119 119

Misc Trips 10% 16 71 71 71 71 16 9 43 71 71 71 43 9

Employee - In 178 16 113 16

Employee – Out 56 64 8 178 16

Delivery – In 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Delivery – Out 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total – Inbound 20 214 287 1214 771 427 253 139 20 133 16

Total – Outbound 20 20 76 84 28 20 20 20 20 204 524 1049 915 604 255 227 9

2.6.2 Power Supply

Although the source of energy for GARIBALDI has not been determined to date, a number of options are being considered to provide power to the village, residential, hotels, lodges and the lift motors. The final option(s) for energy supply will be based on the principles of sustainability, cost efficiency and reductions in green house gases.

Some of the options under consideration include:

● BC Hydro ● Ballard Power Systems Inc. Hydrogen Fuel Cells ● Small Run-of-the-River Hydroelectric Power ● Wind Energy ● Solar Energy ● Ground Source Heat Pumps

2.6.2.1 B. C. Hydro – Preferred Alternative

Two powerline easements enter the site at the lower southwest corner. Preliminary discussions with Mr. Barry Swift, Field Operation and Design Manager of the Squamish District office of B.C. Hydro indicate that B.C. Hydro could construct a 25,000 volt 3-phase hydro line from the 60 Kv Cheekye Substation located in Brackendale to the project site.

The construction of the 3-phase hydro line from the Cheekye Substation to the proposed village site at approximately 1,100 metre elevation is estimated to cost approximately $1.2 million. This estimate includes costs for clearing the Hydro line right-of-ways, construction and materials

The first step from B.C. Hydro’s perspective would be to conduct thorough discussions on the costing of the 3-phase line with GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH (costs would be incurred by both B.C. Hydro and the proponent, the exact location, timing and the completion of the project). Mr. Swift estimates that the discussions and negotiations could take 6-12 months based on previous experience with the Furry Creek residential and golf course development. The actual construction, including clearing any right-of-way, could take from 2 to 6 months to complete depending on the engineering and other aspects of the project.

The costs of the project that B.C. Hydro could incur would be covered under their expansion program. Mr. Swift indicated that a Project Coordinator based in the B.C. Hydro regional district office located in Burnaby would likely be assigned to the project. The Project coordinator provides one main contact and ensures that the proposed project would receive the full benefit of the programs such as the Power smart Program that could be extended to the overall resort development.

Once B.C. Hydro completes construction of the feeder line from the Cheekye substation in Brackendale, further construction of the distribution lines on-site could be completed. An estimate of the timing and

costs of the distribution lines on-site could not be provided until more accurate estimates of the site requirements are known.

Typically, B.C. Hydro charges a residential rate of approximately $0.06 per kilowatt hour.

2.6.2.2 Ballard Power Systems – Alternative 2

Ballard Power Systems is focusing on fuel cell technology with four types of power sources under development including:

● Bus Engines ● Stationary Power Plants ● Power for Ships ● Automobiles

Preliminary discussions with Mr. Watkins and Mr. Dunnison, senior personnel at Ballard Power Systems Inc., indicate that Ballard expects to have stationary power plants available by the turn of the century.

Ballard is designing Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) stationary power plants to be clean, reliable, fuel-efficient and cost-effective power sources. Ballard PEM fuel cell power plants are targeted at the distributed power generation market below 1.5 megawatts in size.

The initial Ballard product is a 250-kilowatt power plant fueled with natural gas. This size is suitable for powering commercial buildings, industrial activities, residential subdivisions, small hotels and hospitals. The modular design of Ballard’s power plants will allow the siting of multiple units to supply larger power demands.

The first phase of Ballard’s stationary power effort was a $14.3 million program completed in mid-1994 with the successful demonstration of a 30-kilowatt PEM fuel cell power plant. The Power Plant operated on by-product hydrogen from an adjacent chemical plant and an integrated 10-kilowatt fuel cell power plant operating on natural gas. The 30-kilowatt power plant is operating continuously in an industrial setting at Mohawk Oil in North Vancouver. The plant is also connected to B.C. Hydro’s electrical power grid that allows the fuel cell power plant to maximize its economic return through continuous operation.

The use of natural gas in the 10 kW plant is the world’s first successful use of natural gas fuel in a PEM fuel cell power plant. The natural gas reforming system is capable of converting natural gas to hydrogen, and delivering hydrogen to the fuel cell system upon demand.

Potential environmental impacts of the Ballard power plants include small localized impacts for siting the small units (1.5 m long x 1.5m wide x 2.7 m high), and upstream impacts associated with natural gas exploration, processing and transmission.

2.6.2.3 Small Run-of-the-River Hydroelectric Power – Alternative 3

Approximately 85% of the Province’s electrical needs are met by hydroelectric projects. It has been estimated that there are approximately 600 small hydro sites within reach of the B.C. Hydro grid. The energy potential of these sites would be approximately 1,150 megawatts (MW) compared to the existing, installed hydroelectric capacity of approximately 12,700 MW primarily in the Peace and Columbia Rivers.

Regardless of the size of the hydroelectric generation site, the process of generating electricity is the same. As water flows in a river or stream such as Culliton Creek some water is funneled into a pipe and carried to a powerhouse at a lower level. The powerhouse contains at least one turbine and one electrical generator. The pressure of the falling water turns the turbine that turns the generator and produces electrical energy. The greater the vertical drop, the greater the pressure and the more electricity can be produced.

In British Columbia, small hydroelectric projects are defined as less than 20 megawatts and large projects as over 100 megawatts. Cost for generating electricity from hydroelectric projects typically range from $0.03-$0.05 per kilowatt hour.

Preliminary estimates of the available power and capital costs that could be generated from a small (4.5 MW) run-of-the-river hydroelectric station constructed in the lower-middle section of Culliton Creek between elevations 410 m asl and

260 m asl (approximately 2 km upstream of Highway 99), are estimated as follows:

● Installed Capacity of 4.5 MW; ● Average GWhrs. 25 ● Capital Cost $700,000; ● Design Flow 3.6 cms (1.4 in); and ● Gross Head 150m (492 ft)

The feasibility and cost estimate outlined above was provided by Mr. Art Demers of White Rock, B.C., who has more than 45 years experience conducting reconnaissance and feasibility studies, design, engineering and construction management for small and large hydro-electric projects across Canada and internationally. One of Mr. Demers recent and on-going projects is in an advisory role for the Three Gorges Hydro-Electric Project in China (44,000 MW) which when completed will have more than four times B.C. Hydro’s installed 10,000 MW hydro-electric capacity within British Columbia. Mr. Demers also designed and managed the construction of the Churchill Falls Hyrdo-electric Project in Newfoundland and a variety of small hydro projects throughout Canada.

The proposed small run-of-the-river hydroelectric project would include a weir to divert a portion of the Culliton Creek flows into an approximate 1.5 m (4.9 ft) diameter steel pipe which would run above

ground to a penstock and powerhouse which would be constructed adjacent to Culliton Creek <500 m (1640 ft) upstream of Highway 99. The diversion weir would be <3 m (10 ft) in height while the powerhouse would be about the size of a two-car garage. The only visible sign of the development would be the powerhouse located near Highway 99 and a portion of the transmission line that would be constructed adjacent to the village site.

Potential impacts from a small run-of-the-river project include potential sedimentation from construction of the weir, powerhouse, pipe or penstock, changes in bedload movement, water temperature changes and changes in the productivity of the reach of the river impacted from flow reductions. It is generally felt that run-of-the-river projects can have a positive benefit if they are properly designed and located in high gradient sections of streams where fish may not inhabit.

2.6.2.4 Wind Energy – Alternative 4

Energy from the wind can be captured by using the wind to push against a stationary object setting it in motion. In the past, the energy from wind was used to rotate wind mills. This mechanical energy was mainly used to pump water but some wind mills generated electricity (i.e. the aeromotor). Modern wind turbines are far more sophisticated than windmills of former times.

The use of wind power has a long history, including the use of over 15,000 operational wind turbines connected to the transmission grid in California. In British Columbia, there are numerous successfully operating small (1 kilowatt or less) wind sites in operation.

The energy that can be derived from wind turbines is site specific and depends on the average speed of wind, wind speed variations, wind shear and turbulence. A good site will have average wind speeds in excess of 25 km (16 miles) per hour. Therefore, in order to determine the potential for the proposed site, average wind speed and other characteristics need to be assessed.

A resource assessment conducted in 1987 indicated that there is good wind potential on the west coast of Vancouver Island, on the Queen Charlotte Islands and on the coast of the B.C. mainland. Examples of wind power projects in BC include a 50 kilowatt capacity at Christopher Point and B.C. Tel’s facilities at Calvert and Swindle Islands, each with a capacity of 3 kilowatts.

There are two types of modern wind turbine including the horizontal axis design and the vertical axis design. Wind turbines can provide electricity directly to the site or could be connected to the B.C. Hydro grid and electricity provided to the site by B.C. Hydro. The high cost of wind generated power relative to other sources is the major constraint and depending on the location of the turbines could cost from $0.07 - $0.17 per kilowatt hour. Wind power is generally considered environmentally friendly, as there are no air emissions. However visual impacts, danger to birds and noise impacts are all potential disadvantages of wind turbines.

2.6.2.5 Solar Energy – Alternative 5

The physical world’s energy needs could be met with less than one percent of the solar energy falling on the earth. The rate at which solar energy falls on the surface of the earth per unit of flat area is referred to as insulation, expressed in watts per square metres. The greater the insulation the more the solar energy is available. In British Columbia, four areas have the highest insulation, approximately 145 watts per square metres.

These areas include:

● East Kootenay Regional District ● Continuous area of the Kootenay Boundary, North Okanagan, Central Okanagan, Okanagan-

Similkameen Regional Districts, and the northern half of the Thompson-Nicola Regional District ● Central region of the Cariboo Regional District around Williams Lake ● Cowichan Valley and Capital Regional Districts

Although the GARIBALDI Area was not included in these high insulation areas, solar energy technologies that covert sunlight directly to electricity which are less sensitive to the amount of diffuse sunlight may be required. Solar thermal (heat) collecting technologies may not be as practical and efficient for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Solar energy is electromagnetic energy from the sun. Solar energy can be converted into useful heat or electricity. Solar heating can be accomplished by through active or passive methods. Active heating systems would include roof solar panels that circulate and heat water for a home. A passive solar system involves designing homes that have large south facing windows to allow in more light in the winter when the sun is lower in the horizon. To maximize passive solar heating, builders would be encouraged to include brick or concrete walls, stone fireplaces and floors to absorb heat from the sun during the day. With these features, a home will heat up more slowly during the day and stay warmer longer at night.

Solar energy is converted into electricity either by generating steam to drive a turbine or through direct conversion of sunlight (photovoltaics).

There are three types of solar thermal technologies including central receivers, line focus parabolic troughs and point focus parabolic dishes. There are also two general types of photovoltaic technologies such as flat plate and concentrating photovoltaics.

Although the manufacture of solar energy technologies produces emissions and other wastes, no emissions are produced when the technologies are operating. Environmental impacts of solar technologies include land use, water quality impacts from manufacturing and cleaning fluids used in maintenance and changes to local ecosystems due to human disturbance.

Large solar thermal electric and photovoltaic facilities require large areas to site mirrors and solar cells. A 50 megawatt solar thermal electric generating plant needs approximately 200 hectares. Currently solar thermal electric technologies cost between $0.10-$0.14 per kilowatt hour, while photovoltaic electricity

costs between $0.19-$0.27 per kilowatt hour.

2.6.2.6 Ground Source Heat Pumps – Alternative 6

Geothermal energy is the naturally occurring heat (thermal) energy from the interior of the earth (geo). There are four types of geothermal energy resources including hydrothermal, hot dry rock, geopressured and magmatic.

In British Columbia, there are three areas of good potential for geothermal resources including:

● Squamish-Lillooett Regional District ● Northern section of the Kitimat-Stikine Regional District ● Border region between the Central coast and Mount Waddington Regional Districts

Other areas with significant but lower geothermal energy potential include the Kootenay Region and the foothills in the northeast of the province.

The earth can be used as a very efficient storage medium for heat through the use of ground source heat pumps. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ground source heat pumps are the most energy efficient, environmentally clean and cost effective space conditioning system available. The EPA found geothermal systems 48% more efficient than gas furnaces, 75% more efficient than oil furnaces and 70% more efficient than electrical heating and air conditioning systems.

Locally, there are a number of commercial installations in the Lower Mainland including a Point Grey project that is believed to be the first single family home installation in the Lower Mainland. The ground source heat pumps use 50 m (164 feet) deep vertical bore hole which an anti-freeze mixture is circulated through the pipes picking up heat from the earth. The anti-freeze mixture passes through a heat exchanger in the heat pump and transfers heat to a refrigerant liquid which evaporates. The vapour is compressed absorbing more heat and then passed through a second heat exchanger where it condenses and releases its heat to either the home’s space heating or its water heating system. The liquid refrigerant then returns to the first heat exchanger to pick up heat from the anti-freeze mixture again.

During the summer, the process is reversed and heat that is extracted from indoor air is transferred to the anti-freeze mixture that releases it to the earth. Generally, geothermal electricity generation costs approximately $0.06-$0.08 per kilowatt hour.

Key environmental concerns with geothermal include land use, emissions and water quality impacts. Geothermal generally produces more emissions than solar, wind or hydroelectric. Emissions associated with geothermal facilities are hydrogen-sulfide, a non condensable gas present in most geothermal fluids. The most significant concern with this gas is with regard to human health.

2.6.3 Gas Service

Gas service for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH can be provided by Squamish Gas Company. Squamish Gas is a wholly owned subsidiary of B.C. Gas.

Peter Martin of Squamish Gas has preliminarily indicated that networks for either propane or natural gas service is available for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Further review of the project’s phasing and timing of development will assist in the determination of which gas service is most feasible. It is possible that a propane network and service be initially constructed at the resort’s opening and eventually be converted to natural gas.

Squamish Gas currently has an application into the B.C. Utility Commission to run natural gas service to Brackendale and Garibaldi Highlands Subdivision. There is also a proposal to run a natural gas main to Whistler from Squamish. If either of these two proposals are constructed, a natural gas tie to serve GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is simplified.

2.6.4 Water Supply and Water Storage Facilities

2.6.4.1 Background

The District of Squamish takes its potable water supply from two rivers, the Stawamus and the Mashiter Rivers.

The water intake in the Stawamus River is located within the District of Squamish boundary. The highest inflow rates recorded for the Stawamus River intake are 12.5 million litres (3.3 million gallons) per day with an average inflow rate at 6.4 million litres (1.7 million gallons) per day. The water intake on the Mashiter River inflows at a maximum rate of 2.87 million litres (758,000 gallons) per day and an average of 11,356 litres (3,000 gallons) per day.

The water from both sources is treated with chlorine gas stored in cylinders at the water treatment facilities, located at the intake in the Stawamus River and at the Thunderbird Water Reservoir for the Mashiter River.

There are five reservoirs, four of which are actively serving the District of Squamish while the fifth reservoir is for fire protection.

Discussions with the District of Squamish indicate that water source supplies from the District will not be available for use to serve the needs of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

2.6.4.2 Water Supply Options for GARIBALDI

Water supply to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort will be for culinary and snowmaking requirements and for fire protection. It is possible that an on-site water source or sources can be

developed to meet the demand for the resort.

Options being studied for water supply systems on GARIBALDI include:

● Tapping into the local groundwater supply (preferred option) ● Collecting surface water from the Brohm or Culliton Rivers

Preferred Option

A drilling program within the project site to determine the viability and capacities of tapping into the local groundwater supply will be initiated in the early spring of 1998. It has been demonstrated in the region that groundwater supplies are available. Geologic mapping indicates that the project is in a granite formation and, as such, until the drilling programs have been completed, exact quantities and feasibility of this preferred option will be unknown.

Secondary Option

Hydrologic assessment has been provided on the Brohm and Culliton rivers indicating that potential exists to with draw water from these sources. To meet the peak culinary and snowmaking demands projected for GARIBALDI, up to 60% of the total flow from one branch of the Culliton River at the 1,200-metre elevation point inside the project boundary would be required. Up to 40% of the total flow from the Brohm River at the 900-metre elevation point within the project boundary would be required to meet the same peak demands. These withdrawal flows do not address wildlife and fishery considerations. It should be noted that if water for snow making is excluded, the maximum withdrawals would be less than 30% for Culliton Creek and less than 20% for Brohm River (Appendix 2).

The Ministry of Environment has indicated that there is potential to withdraw water from the Culliton for potable and snowmaking uses. The Brohm River also offers potential for withdrawal of resort demands.

It has been suggested that if this alternative is necessary, a combination of the two river sources should be employed. A water withdrawal management program will be established and will include strict monitoring to maintain specified flows in the rivers throughout the year.

2.6.4.3 Water Demand

A culinary (potable) water demand analysis has been conducted to determine the peak day flows generated by GARIBALDI. The demand analysis takes into consideration all commercial, hotel, town home, single family, base lodge, administration and maintenance facility uses. Calculation considering the use types and industry standard flows for each use indicate that 8,660 cubic metres of water will be necessary to serve the project’s peak day needs. See the Appendix 2 for the Water Demand Chart for a month by month peak average day demand.

2.6.4.4 Water Storage Requirements

Preliminary estimates of flow demand indicate that the fire flow standard is 11,356 litres per minute (3,000 gallons per minute (gpm)) over a three-hour (180-minute) duration. Total storage for fire protection would, therefore, become 2,044,080 litres (540,000 gallons).

The total water storage required to meet a one-day culinary usage combined with a three-hour fire storage supply would be 13,797,000 litres (3,650,000 gallons). The initial thinking concerning the master utility design contemplates four storage tanks on-site to fulfill these storage requirements.

2.6.5 Solid and Liquid Waste Treatment Facilities

2.6.5.1 Solid Waste Treatment Facilities

Background

In 1989, the Provincial government amended the Waste Management Act, requiring Regional Districts to submit a Solid Waste Management Plan by December 31, 1995. In addition, Cabinet endorsed a strategy to reduce the total provincial amount of municipal solid waste requiring disposal by 50% by the year 2000, through the reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery of solid wastes. The Squamish-Lillooett Regional District and its incorporated member municipalities submitted a Solid Waste Management Plan in October 1996 to the provincial government for approval, which was approved in May 1997.

The provincial waste reduction strategy which was endorsed in the SLRD plan has the following principles:

● The consumption of material and energy resources will be at a level which is ecologically and economically sustainable;

● The solid waste stream will be reduced to the greatest extent feasible in accordance with the hierarchy of reduce, reuse, recycle, and consistent with local resources and the nature of the solid waste stream;

● Individuals and firms will be enabled to make environmentally sound choices about consumption or resources and generation of waste through provision of appropriate information, including user pay and market based incentives wherever possible;

● All policy, strategies and facilities will be developed through public consultation acceptable to B.C. Environment and are socially acceptable and cost effective based on full accounting of costs and benefits both monetary and non-monetary;

● The goal of environmental policy is to minimize pollution; and ● To finance the system the goal is to adopt a hybrid user pay system to ensure reduction occurs and

phase in a full user pay system in the long term.

The SLRD has been divided into the North and South Regional District solid waste systems. Squamish,

Whistler, Pemberton and the proposed GARIBALDI project are located within the South District. The expected diversion rates (material not disposed of) for the South District are shown on Table 2-15.

Table 2-15 Expected Diversion Rates

Programs % Diversion

Programs and Education 0%

Reduction and Re-use 8%

Recycling 38%

Centralized Composting 18%

Residual Management 0%

Total 56%

Landfills

Squamish Landfill

The Squamish landfill is located 11km (6.8 miles) north of Squamish on a 5.9 ha (14.6 acre) parcel of leased crown land. The landfill was originally permitted in 1978 and currently serves a population of approximately 14,000 and receives approximately 16,700 tonnes (18,409 tons) of refuse per year. Of the total refuse brought to the site, approximately 24% is incinerated and the remaining 12,300 tonnes (13,558 tons) is deposited in the active face. The existing landfill footprint covers an area of 6.4 ha (15.8 acres) including five areas where refuse and/or excavated soil has transgressed onto adjacent District road allowances and wood lots.

Whistler Landfill

The Whistler landfill is located approximately 8 km (5 miles) west of Whistler on a 34.1 ha (84.3 acre) parcel of Crown land. The municipal landfill was originally permitted in 1977 while a second permit was issued in 1988 for the construction waste site. A third permit was issued for the operation of the liquid waste disposal facility for septage. The septage facility has recently been decommissioned. The landfills

currently serve a small resident population as well as a large number of visitors that combined generate approximately 9,200 tonnes (10,141 tons) of municipal refuse annually. Construction wastes have also contributed approximately 4,427 tonnes (4,880 tons) in the last two years. A small lateral expansion of the facility is planned to fill in the area of the recently decommissioned septage lagoon. The Resort Municipality of Whistler is exploring the extension of their landfill to 10 – 20 years.

Landfill Closures

The Pemberton landfill (PR-7272) is scheduled for closure in the summer of 1997, when grades to allow for the run-off have been completed. A study is currently underway to determine the feasibility of extending the Squamish landfill’s life beyond 1999. The results of the study will be out during the summer of 1998. If the study determines that there is not a problem with Leachfields then the landfill could be extended 3-5 years.

GARIBALDI Project

Based on the proposed 13,400 bed units planned for the GARIBALDI project, a significant volume of solid waste could be generated by the development. As outlined above, the GARIBALDI project will fall under the jurisdiction of the SLRD Solid Waste Management Plan and will follow the principles of a minimum 56% diversion for the South District, which includes Pemberton, Whistler and Squamish.

In order to meet this principle of 56% GARIBALDI will work with the SLRD to implement the following recycle, reuse and reduction programs.

Recycle Program

● Media campaign with advertising on local radio and in newspapers; ● Smart shopper program in the village to advise people on selective purchasing, bulk buying, reuse,

and the environmental sensitivity of various products; ● Volunteer program involving training seminars in recycling and composting for local residents

and commercial/retail merchants; ● A 1-800 Recycling hotline; ● Quarterly On-the-Mountain newsletter describing the 3R’s activities; and ● Preferential purchasing for resident, commercial and retail merchants.

Recyclables will be collected at the curbside (Blue Box/Bag Program) from single family residences and from “Central Recyclable Compartments” specifically built into each multi-family residence and the village commercial, hotel and retail space. The recyclables will be collected (private contractor) and transferred to the SLRD’s transfer stations located within Squamish. The collection of recyclables will include:

● Glass bottles, tin and aluminum cans, newspapers, glossy paper, and certain #2 plastic containers

privately collected and dropped off at the SLRD transfer station; ● Corrugated cardboard collected through a private contractor for commercial, retail and hotel

operators and dropped off at the SLRD transfer stations; ● Specific areas in the village for drop-off of metal and lead acid batteries and privately collected

and dropped off at the SLRD transfer stations; ● A gyproc recycling center in the village for transfer and disposal in the Rabanco Landfill; and ● An area in the village for drop-off of tires to be collected and taken to the SLRD transfer stations

and/or depots.

Reuse and Reduction Program

● Work with the SLRD to develop waste exchange and reuse centers at the landfills, transfer station and/or deposits, plus encouragement for local businesses and industries to list waste materials with the provincial waste exchange; and

● Development of a Technical Assistance Program (TAP) for merchants and hotel operators in the village where they are assisted in carrying out audits to define their wastes and expand or initiate reduction and recycling programs.

In addition to the above diversion programs, household composting will be encouraged through a subsidy program and GARIBALDI will work with the SLRD in developing the proposed centralized composting program.

2.6.5.2 Sanitary Sewer (Liquid) Waste Treatment Facilities

Background

Within the Sea to Sky corridor, the District of Squamish and the Resort Municipality of Whistler operate sewage treatment facilities.

The District of Squamish operates two treatment facilities located within a few kilometres of the Squamish River estuary. The Central Wastewater Treatment Plant is located on Fifth Avenue near downtown Squamish, while the Mamquam River Waste Treatment Plant is located on Government Road on the north side of the Mamquam River. The Mamquam Plant provides conventional activated sludge treatment of wastewater for those areas of the district north of the Industrial Park (Exhibit 2.16 – Mamquam Wastewater Treatment Plant). The Central Plant treats wastewater from the remainder of the district. Both facilities were built in 1972 and discharge treated waste directly into the Squamish River.

The Mamquam Wastewater Treatment Plant is the closest facility to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and assuming the proposed resort is annexed into the District of Squamish, would likely be the plant that would service the resort wastewater. If GARIBALDI is not included within the District of Squamish boundaries, another option would be a contribution to the Municipality for use of the

wastewater facilities. The Mamquam Plant has recently undergone a three-stage upgrade and expansion, replacing old equipment and increasing the plant treatment capacity to accommodate the existing population growth in the north part of the District. The plant was designed for a total population of 17,400 compared to the 1996 population estimated at 10,400. It should be noted that the present upgrade and expansion could include treating wastewater from the proposed resort.

The designed quantity and quality for the upgraded and expanded plant is as follows:

● Wastewater quantities (cubic metres per day)

* Daily average 6,870

● Peak Day 14,600 ● Peak Instantaneous 17,850 ● Wastewater Quality ● 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) 30 mg/l ● Total Suspended Solids 40 mg/l ● Toxicity (LT 50) 96 hours

The Stage One upgrade completed in 1997 included modifications to the influent pump station and headworks, aeration tanks, secondary clarifiers, effluent pump station, and the control building. One of the aeration tanks will operate on a temporary basis as an aerobic digester to process bio-solids. The existing solids de-watering facility will remain in place with disposal of partially de-watered solids at the landfill.

The Stage Two upgrade provides for a new bio-solids processing facility to ensure solids treatment to a high level such that they are suitable for beneficial reuse rather than trucking to the landfill. The Stage Two upgrade is scheduled for 1997-1999 and includes modifications to thickening, digestion, de-watering and the control building. Prior to the detailed design, the Stage Two process is to be reviewed to consider new technologies and the alkaline stabilization process. There is the potential that GARIBALDI can assist in the design and construction costs for this upgrade.

The Stage Three upgrade scheduled beyond 1999, includes the installation of ultraviolet disinfection of the treated wastewater prior to discharge to the river.

Future upgrades and expansions beyond Stage Three include planning for additional capacity with provisions for new aeration tanks, primary and secondary clarifiers, relocation of the influent pump station and new headworks, and process modifications to allow for phosphorous and nitrogen removal.

Proposed Liquid Waste Treatment Facility

Based on the anticipated water use demands (see Appendix 2, Water Demand Calculations), it is expected

that the wastewater flows from the resort on a peak day will be approximately 8,660 cubic metres per day. The wastewater flows shown can be reduced if the resort utilizes various methods to reduce water demand and associated sanitary flows through the re-circulating of grey water and technologies that reduce the volume of water necessary for toilets, showers, faucets and associated appurtenances.

Presently, only municipalities can acquire a wastewater discharge permit. Therefore, there are two options available for treating and disposal of liquid waste from the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Preferred Option – Utilization of the Mamquam Treatment Facility with Annexation into District of Squamish

If the proposed resort is annexed into the District of Squamish, liquid waste would be piped down the mountain (23 kilometres/14 miles) and treated at the Mamquam Sewage Treatment Plant and discharged into the Squamish River. The Mamquam Plant currently has the capacity to treat the additional sewage volume from the resort until approximately Year 5. Based on discussions with the District of Squamish Public Works Department in early January 1997, the District of Squamish is willing to work with GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to provide a solution for liquid waste treatment and disposal. There is the possibility that GARIBALDI may need to fund an upgrade to the Mamquam Plant in its fifth year of operation, depending upon the population growth with the District.

Secondary Option – Utilization of Mamquam Treatment Facility Without Annexing into District of Squamish

In the situation where GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is not annexed into the District of Squamish, the proponent could enter into a development works agreement with the District. In this case if the agreement is accepted by the District, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH could tie into the Mamquam Treatment Plant and contribute towards the treatment plant upgrade and provide usage fees. As authorization under Section 937.1, a development works agreement is a contract between a Council and a developer for the provision of sewer, water, drainage, highway (excluding off-street parking) or parkland improvement works by the local government, the developer or both of them.

The agreements, which must be authorized by bylaw, may provide a formula for imposing all or part of the cost of the works on the owners of property within a specified benefitting area. An authorizing bylaw may not be adopted unless the electors in the benefitting area have assented, have petitioned for the work or have failed to counter-petition. A sufficient petition must be signed by two-thirds of the owners of the affected parcels, representing at least 50% of the total value of those parcels.

The owner’s contributions become payable on the basis established in the bylaw; at the latest, the charge must be paid upon the issuance of a building permit for the benefitting property. The bylaw may provide that no subdivision, strata plan, building permit, development or development variance permit or zoning amendment need be approved until the debt is paid.

If the municipality is to provide a work under the agreement, the bylaw may authorize borrowing for that purpose, subject to the loan authorization rules in Part 12, but without electoral assent.

For a creative developer, a development works agreement offers an opportunity to “partner” with a municipality in a manner which employs the municipality’s resources and credit to provide services which enhance the development. The costs may then be passed on to the developer’s customers (or better yet, to the customers of the developer’s competitors who own adjacent parcels). The administration, collection, and enforcement of the charges is then left to the municipality.

Third Option – On-Site Treatment Facility

If an arrangement with the District is not possible or as a result of financial constraints, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH would construct an on-site liquid waste treatment and disposal system. This option assumes that the proposed GARIBALDI would attain its own municipal status through the Resort Association Act. H. Maxwell from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks has stated that the province prefers ground disposal. In addition to ground disposal, spray irrigation and recycling of grey water to such uses as snowmaking would also be considered.

B. Clark of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks has indicated that levels of phosphorous are presently too high in the Cheakamus River. He further indicated that any discharge of liquid waste from the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH into the Cheakamus River would have to remove all phosphorous concentrations prior to discharge. The effluent discharge would also have to meet the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks effluent discharge would also have to meet the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks effluent quality criteria noted above.

An on-site tertiary treatment facility would be located on the Brohm River corridor either below the base area village or near Highway 99 at the entrance to GARIBALDI.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to abiding by provincial regulations for liquid waste treatment and disposal and will work with the District of Squamish and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks to avoid impacts to the aquatic environment.

2.6.6 Utility Corridors

Utility corridors for such services as potable water supply, sanitary and storm sewers, hydro, telephone and cable television are expected to follow the roads within buried trenches where feasible. It is expected because of cost constraints and areas where off-main road development occurs, some off-road utility corridors will be necessary. These areas will be revegetated to retain the aesthetic appeal and visual aesthetics of the site. Easements will be obtained for all utilities that do not follow roads. It is anticipated that all utilities for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be buried (Exhibit 2.15 – Master Utility Plan).

The utility capacity of the project has been over-designed in anticipation of future growth beyond the 10-

year analysis period. It is anticipated that residential development through Year 10 will comprise a total of 3,475 units (including hotel rooms, town homes, condominiums and single family residences), with a total of 3,775 achieved by Year 20. It is assumed that there will be periodic governmental review of the utility capacity and system efficiency that will consider actual conditions (e.g., bed construction and peak visitor occupancy percentages).

2.7 Off-Site Infrastructure

At this time, the only off-site infrastructure necessary for the opening of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is:

● Mamquam Sewage Treatment Facility – Already expanded to allow sewage flows from the resort for approximately five years into its operation.

● A 23-kilometre trunk line running sewage from the resort to the Mamquam Treatment Plant. ● Intersection of interchange at Highway 99 for the entry into the resort – Most utilities are along

Highway 99 at the entrance to GARIBALDI.

2.8 Operation Safety Management

2.8.1 Search and Rescue

As part of the safety management of the resort, in all seasons, a relationship with local search and rescue will be established. Within defined boundaries of the resort, operational safety management will be utilized. However, should a guest, being a skier, hiker or other, go missing from within the resort boundaries but is feared to have continued into out-of-bounds territory, a cooperative effort occurs with local search and rescue.

Assistance from local search and rescue may be requested by resort safety management should a multiple casualty incident occur within the resort boundaries. Such an incident as avalanche, rock slide or lift accident occur, a coordinated effort will be employed to maintain maximum rescue effort.

As part of coordination with local search and rescue, an integrated Rescue Plan will be developed with trained personnel including community resources such as the fire department, the RCMP, municipal transport and helicopter operations. On-going multiple casualty incident training will be part of the integrated management.

2.8.2 Evacuation Procedures

As part of the safety management of the resort, the objective to save life, or the quality of life, remains primary. A high level of certification with continual training in all conditions and situations is routine. All evacuation procedures strive to meet or exceed industry standards.

As part of the approvals to operate a lift in a resort, certification must be given by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing after all requirements have been met. A detailed lift evacuation plan must be in place supported by a proven demonstration conducted by trained personnel using recognized and adequate equipment. All lift systems will enjoy this level of attention with documentation developed as part of the library for reference as necessary.

Medical evacuation must be requested by a certified patroller holding a current certification in a recognized emergency first aid license. Courses are frequent with hands-on training as well as academic standards to best meet this type of environment. Supporting the professional patroller will be a system of professional doctors licensed to practice in British Columbia who act on a volunteer rotational system. The medical evacuation, once requested by a patroller and assisted by a doctor, is transmitted by radio to dispatch with Health Services, Victoria being contracted. Evacuation may be by helicopter, or by on-site methods of transportation with the destination being a medical facility to best respond to the nature of the injury.

It is critical that alternate procedures for all evacuation possibilities are prepared. Weather conditions, terrain, hours of daylight, extent of injury and resources can impact standard procedures so all potential situations must be planned in advance with inclusive evacuation plans.

2.8.3 RCMP Facilities

A rotational volunteer program with RCMP members will be established as part of the safety management of the resort. Maintaining constant contact by monitoring radio transmissions, assigned RCMP can assist in all emergencies such as assault or theft, medical or other.

2.8.4 Fire Protection

There are two options to provide fire protection services for the resort. The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort community will be designed to provide water storage on site for fire fighting purposes. Ideally, a fast attack fire station could be sited on the property to serve development, precluding the need for emergency vehicles to travel the road between Squamish and the resort. Alternatively, fire protection can also be provided by the Squamish townsite. The proponent intends to a fire truck within the base area village. Staffing will be determined in association with the District of Squamish.

2.8.5 Air Traffic Control (Helicopter Path Flights)

Air traffic control will be the same as currently exists with CATF announced on 122.8 megahertz. A short radio antenna will be set on Brohm Ridge for clear reception throughout the area.

2.8.6 Avalanche

2.8.6.1 Potential

Information concerning the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH terrain relative to avalanche dangers was obtained from contour maps at a scale of 1:5000 and from aerial photographs at a scale of 1:20,000. The location of base facilities, lifts, and trails came from the November 18, 1997 concept plan prepared by Jack Johnson Company.

The snowfall in the area is sufficient to produce avalanches on steep slopes at an elevation of 500 metres above mean sea level. However, snow avalanches will not be a serious problem to the planned resort. The base facilities and the majority of lifts and ski runs are in safe terrain. Safety measures can readily be applied at locations where avalanches may interfere with operations. Below are specific comments concerning areas where avalanche hazard may be greatest (Exhibit 2.17 – Natural Hazard Analysis Map).

● Access Road

Small avalanches are possible at locations with rock outcroppings above the road. Wide ditches can be utilized in such areas. An existing clearcut approximately 1 kilometre south of the base area may allow avalanche snow to cover the road. This can be controlled using explosive charges.

● Base Area

The base lodge, upper hotel and upper base lodge are in safe locations. Buildings and parking area at the base and the upper terminal of Lift “C” should be no closer that 60 metres to the toes of the steep slopes at the west and north sides.

● Lifts A, B, D, F, N

These lifts and the associated trails they serve cross slopes at elevations between 1,300 metres and 1,500 metres where avalanches could start. Lift towers on these slopes and below may need to be designed to resist snow and avalanche forces. The snow on the trails can be stabilized by skiing.

● Lift G

Lift “G” and the adjacent trails at the south side of Brohm Ridge are in avalanche terrain. The steep slopes and the gullies produce numerous avalanches, which can run to the lower terminal of the proposed lift. The lift terminal and towers should be placed on ridges between gullies for protection. As an operational measure, it might be necessary to close the lift and ski runs during hazardous avalanche periods.

● Lifts H and I

The lifts and trails in Pods H and I are on the north and lee side of storm winds from Brohm Ridge.

Avalanches start near the ridge between elevations 1,600 metres and 1,850 metres and could run to the gully at the bottom of the trails. The lower lift terminals and the towers must be located carefully. The trails will need to be controlled with explosive charges and may have to be closed when hazardous avalanche conditions are present.

2.8.6.2 Control

Safety management will be considered during the design phase of the project. Operational safety management will be conducted by an experienced and certified professional. This person will lead an organization of professional personnel supported by a volunteer organization, licensed doctors, RCMP and helicopter personnel, all well trained and managed. Risk management will be a constant objective of the safety management with on-going exposure to training, seminars and dialogue within the industry. Thorough knowledge of all regulations imposed by WCB for employees, for technical equipment performance, emergency strategies will be part of management procedure. All incidents will be investigated promptly and thoroughly to identify the cause making certain there is no re-occurrence.

All leaders in active avalanche control will have met the standards set by the Canadian Avalanche Association Level II avalanche course. All forecasting systems and analysis must comply with the guidelines established by the Canadian Avalanche Association that will act as an information resource as required.

Control of avalanches is a service to the guest to give maximum terrain for enjoyment while minimizing risk. Avalanche control will be managed by a system of detailed weather forecasting of hazards with evaluation assisted by state of the art knowledge of conditions and terrain, by computer models and trending, by historical data and by having a well-developed snow safety plan.

All personnel involved in avalanche control will hold a current blasters permit meeting WCB requirements for explosives handling. Avalanche personnel will also be able to transverse avalanche zones using safe travel methods, will have experience in determining snow stability at varying elevations and temperatures and will be fully experienced with rescue methods in emergency. A relationship with CARDA will be introduced for on-site assistance by trained dogs as necessary.

Handling of all explosives and rescue equipment will be managed to meet all regulations and to give maximum opportunity for resources as required in an emergency. The communication structure support by radios and landlines will interface with emergency resource groups to establish no-fail communication.

Attendance at conventions and workshops with organizations such as the National Ski Areas Association, the ISSW, and Canada Ski Areas West Association as well as international agencies will be part of the continual quest to exceed industry standards to support the avalanche control program.

2.8.7 Safety Signage

Signage, as part of hazard marking for guest information, will be under the responsibility of the safety manager. All trails will be appropriately marked with recognized industry approved signage designating trail skill levels and noting “out of ski area” limits. Areas within each recreational pod where there is avalanche danger, sharp drops, cliffs and rock outcroppings will be cordoned off and clearly marked. All other hazardous areas will also be identified and appropriate signage will be in place. The signage will be unique in design so it is immediately identified as “safety” in nature.

2.8.8 Medical Facilities

Emergency and safety systems located within the resort development will include a first aid office and medical treatment centre for initial care. First aid and emergency response personnel will be on-site to provide interim treatment to accident victims from the mountain. In addition, a helicopter landing pad will be available for the medi-vac helicopters to access as necessary.

2.9 Project Phasing/Planning/Construction Schedule

2.9.1. Phasing

Design and construction phasing for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH are detailed on Table 2-16, PhasingPlan. As noted thereon, aggressive development is intended through Phase V, years zero through nine. In year ten, final expansion of utility systems and further development of real estate and commercial products will continue. Years 11 through 20 (Phase VII) will see utilities completed and the balance of the proposed real estate product in place (Exhibit 2.18 – Phase I Plan; Exhibit 2.19 – Phase II Plan; Exhibit 2.20 – Phase III Plan; Exhibit 2.21 – Phase IV Plan; Exhibit 2.22 – Phase V Plan; and Exhibit 2.23 – Phase VI Plan).

2.9.2 Planning and Public Approval

The Stage I Project Application (this document) will be submitted to the Environmental Assessment Office by 30 November 1997. Project committee meetings, public meetings and consultation with First Nations are planned to continue to the end of January 1998 responding to support the Project report.

In order to obtain permission to commence construction of the development by way of a Master Development Agreement to be based on a Ski resort Master Plan, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH must first secure a Project Approval Certificate

Development Phase Schedule

from the Provincial Assessment office. The goal remains to secure the development rights and construction financing for the proposed mountain resort

development completing the master planning & public approvals phase of the project including necessary Environmental Assessment Certification, master agreements and permits. This report schedules assumes that this will be accomplished by obtaining a project certificate after a Stage One environmental review. The approach is that the Stage One submission will be approved by certification by Cabinet pending the application is complete and there are no environmental or socio-economic issues that cannot be mitigated.

The intent of this Project Application is to satisfy all requirements within the Stage I review process thereby granting the project certificate within a period of six to eight months. The detailed schedule for these activities as they interface with all aspects of the project has been developed with milestone dates and is contained in the master schedule as part of the project management.

Completion of the Master Ski Area Plan in accordance with CASP is scheduled March 1998 to support the Project report scheduled for submission in March 1998, allowing approval of the project so the Project Approval Certificate would be granted by June 1998.

Design and engineering to meet National, Provincial and Municipal building codes is scheduled to begin immediately after submission of the Stage I Project Application, November 1997.

Engineering drawings scheduled for application for development and building permits will be submitted by a Certified Professional requesting timely approval of permits once the Project Approval certificate has been granted.

2.9.3 Construction Schedule

The planned construction schedule for Phase I to X over a 20-year development period is included as Exhibit 2-24. Primary construction of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be schedule in a phased program as outlined below.

Construction Phase I

Scheduled to be complete within twenty months of approval of the Project Certificate, Phase I includes construction of the access roads with bridges and entry from Highway 99, the infrastructure to support Phase I facilities including all water, running of the sewer main to the existing Mamquam Sewer Treatment Plant, fire protection, communication, power and gas utilities for occupancy. The lifts identified as A, B, C1, E, H and I are scheduled to be operational with ski pods developed, trails groomed and snowmaking equipment installed. Facilities to support the ski operation such as a 5,000 square metre base lodge, restaurants, retail, administrative and operational support facilities including parking are scheduled in this phase.

Construction of 200 condominium units, 300 condominium hotel units, 50 single family lots and commercial facilities will occur during this same phase. As Phase I celebrates the opening of this resort,

additional time is scheduled in the commissioning and inspection of the facilities and lifts to satisfy all requirements for occupancy and operation.

Fast track methods for construction are planned with pre-orders of equipment and materials along with design/build contracts to expedite the schedule as much as possible.

Construction Phase II

The scheduled completion of Phase II is by year 3 and will include an additional 2,000 square metres of floor area to the base lodge with support infrastructure. Amenities included in this phase are an amphitheater, a golf training facility, spa/wellness centre and entrance structures. Recreational Pods F, J, L and O with associated lifts, trails and snowmaking are scheduled for installation during this phase. Real estate development will be expanded by 150 hotel rooms, 200 condominium units, 100 additional single family lots and commercial development to support the demand created by development.

Construction Phase III

Construction during Phase III is scheduled for completion in year 5 and includes the lifts, trails and snowmaking within Pods C2, D and K. The 4,000 square metre mountain lodge and another 2,000 square metres of base lodge construction are also planned.

The base road will be expanded to serve the upper hotel area with additional sewer and communications lines as part of the increased infrastructure. A possible up-grade to the Mamquam Sewage Treatment Plant may be necessary in this phase. Additional water wells with a 2.7 mega-litre holding tank will be required as part of this expansion. Real estate development will increase by 400 condominium units, 100 condominium-hotel units, 250 hotel rooms, 100 single family lots and support commercial facilities.

Construction Phase IV

Phase IV scheduled completion in year 7 includes lift, trail and snowmaking facilities as defined in Pods G, M and N. A further 2,000 square metres of expansion to the base lodge is included in this phase. Infrastructure expansion continues with sewer and communication lines. Additional water wells are planned. Real estate construction will include another 200 condominium-hotel units, 200 condominium units, and 150 single-family lots with commercial space as required.

Construction Phase V

Phase V development continues to year 9 with development of Pods P, Q and R lifts, trails and snowmaking. Infrastructure expansion continues with construction of a 1.3 mega-litre water storage tank together with communication and water lines. Entrance facilities will be modified and real estate development increases by another 300 condominium units, 350 condominium-hotel rooms and 150 single-family lots with commercial facilities to suit.

Construction Phase VI

Phase VI scheduled to year 10 reveals expansion to infrastructure systems and roads leading to the southeast community. Accommodations will be expanded by another 100 condominium-hotel units, 100 condominium units and 75 single-family lots with additional commercial facilities.

Construction Phase VII

Phases VII to FUTURE include construction of an access road into the southwest community with infrastructure installed to suit. Further development includes additional condominium units, hotel units and single-family lots.

(1) Industry guidelines indicate that the development must be capable of accommodating 80% of the CCC based on the required square metres. As proposed, resort capacity for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH would be 80% X 19,437 = 15,550.

SECTION 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS

This section on existing conditions and associated issue identification has been compiled from discussions with government agency personnel (BC Environment, Lands and Parks, Department of Fisheries and Oceans etc.); existing government files/reports (i.e. Clark, 1981); consultant reports (Envirowest, 1996; Nelson Environmental Consultants, 1996); 1:20,000 scale TRIM maps; 1:10,000 and 1:20,000 scale colour aerial photography (1996); and fish, hydrology, terrain, vegetation and wildlife field studies conducted by ENKON Environmental Limited, D. Blood & Associates and Cascades Environmental Ltd. in the fall of 1996, and in the spring, summer, and fall of 1997.

In addition, the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (BC Parks Branch) conducted mountain goat winter range surveys within and adjacent to the proposed development area during the winter of 1996/1997.

The government agencies that were solicited for comments regarding existing conditions and issue identification during late 1996 and 1997 included:

● Department of Fisheries and Oceans

- Habitat Enhancement Branch, Squamish

● Environment Canada

- Canadian Wildlife Service, North Vancouver

- Canadian Environmental Assessment Office, Vancouver

● Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks

- Lands Division, Burnaby

- Planning and Assessment, Surrey

- Parks Division, North Vancouver and Squamish

- Environmental Assessment Branch, Victoria

- Environmental Assessment Act Office, Victoria

● Ministry of Forests

- Squamish Forest District, Squamish

● Ministry of Health

- Environmental Health Assessment and Safety Branch, Victoria

Based on discussions with the above noted regional, provincial and federal government agencies during late 1996 and early 1997, the following existing conditions related issues were identified (see Appendix 3 for follow-up correspondence of meetings held):

1. Solid and Liquid Waste Management Issues

● Liquid waste disposal options include working with the District of Squamish regarding further expansion of the existing Mamquam Treatment Plant (if the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project is annexed into the District of Squamish) or assess on-site facilities through state-of-the-art tertiary treatment if the project becomes an independent Mountain Resort Municipality.

Regardless of the option selected, levels of phosphorous in the Cheakamus River should not be increased (B. Clark, pers comm.).

● Presently the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District (SLRD) is responsible for solid waste disposal. Solid waste disposal should be consistent with the overall SLRD waste management plan and should emphasize Reduction, Reuse and Recycling. On-site temporary storage of solid waste should minimize bear/human conflicts.

2. Garibaldi Provincial Park Issues

● New access into the park from the proposed development and the associated additional visitors into the Park, could create potential impacts on the flora and fauna of the Park.

● Perceived visual impacts of the resort development to existing Park users, particularly from the Garibaldi Neve. ● Reduced access for summer recreation users who presently access the Park from the Culliton Creek logging

road.

3. Environmental Issues

● Potential impacts to important fish resources in the lower Brohm River and Cheakamus River system due to potential changes in the quantity and quality of flows (particularly low flows) from resort development.

● Potential impacts to bear populations through bear/human conflicts, to mountain goat movement patterns from project facilities/human disturbance and direct loss of wildlife habitat from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development facilities/footprint.

● Water management and flooding concerns related to increases in stormwater flows and changes in flow patterns (timing, quantity or quality) for streams draining the development site.

4.Water Supply Issues

● Presently, the District of Squamish has difficulty meeting existing water demands for the town of Squamish from surface water intakes located in the Stawamus River and Mashiter Creek. The District is presently exploring groundwater sources to complement its surface water supply. The GARIBALDI at Squamish project will be required to provide its’ own sources of groundwater or surface water for the resort facilities.

● Potential impacts have been identified for important fish resources of lower Brohm River (downstream of Highway 99) in association with potential surface water withdrawals for domestic use, snow making and fire protection.

3.1 Aquatic Resources

3.1.1 Fish Populations and Habitat

Baseline information on the fish populations in the Squamish River system (Watershed code 90-1300), including major tributaries, was provided by the Aquatic Biophysical Map 92G/14, which was made available by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Habitat Enhancement Branch, Habitat Management (D. Hughes and M. Williams), fisheries reports by Nelson Environmental Services (1996) and Envirowest Consultants (1996) and field studies conducted by ENKON Environmental Limited and Cascades Environmental Ltd. in 1996 and 1997.

3.1.1.1 Squamish River

The Squamish River contains chinook, coho, chum, sockeye and pink salmon, and steelhead, rainbow and cutthroat trout. A number of non-sport fish are also present.

● Chinook salmon numbers have ranged from a high of 35,000 fish in the mid-1960’s to a low of 640 fish in 1986 (period of record 1953-1985).

● Chum salmon escapements have ranged from a low of 3,500 in 1965 to a high of 160,000 fish in 1985. ● Coho salmon numbers have ranged from 1,500 fish in 1959 to 75,000 fish in 1974. ● Odd year pink salmon fluctuate from 1,000 fish to 175,000 fish. ● Steelhead trout numbers have ranged from a high of 18,000 fish in 1972 to a low of 500 fish in 1983.

Escapements for salmon and trout in the Squamish River from 1953-1985 have ranged as follows:

Species Lowest Escapement Highest Escapement

Chinook Salmon 640 (1986) 35,000 (1965)

Coho Salmon 1,500 (1956) 75,000 (1974)

Chum Salmon 3,500 (1965) 160,000 (1985)

Pink Salmon 1,000 (1983, 1985) 175,000 (1953)

Sockeye Salmon 0 (numerous years) 300 (1983)

Steelhead Trout 500 (1983) 18,000 (1972)

Major spawning areas for chinook salmon are located above Ashlu Creek in the powerhouse channel, while 65% of the chum salmon spawning areas are concentrated below the Cheakamus River, with the remaining 35% above Ashlu Creek.

Coho salmon are reported to spawn in the Squamish River main channel upstream of the Cheakamus River and in the tributaries. Spawning escapements of coho salmon have been declining in recent years.

Timing of spawning for chinook salmon is from July through October, while chum salmon spawn in November and December. Coho salmon are reported to spawn from September through December.

Steelhead trout production is primarily in the side channels (85%) of the Squamish River and historically in Shovelnose, High Falls and Shop/Camp Creeks.

Steelhead trout enter the Squamish River in December and January and spawn from January through May. Odd year pink salmon typically spawn from August through October.

Fisheries potential and constraints in the Squamish River include:

● Both Reach 1 and 3 produce year-round habitat with a combination of food and cover ● Debris in the main channel creates excellent rearing areas in shear zones ● Estuary sloughs have high silt deposits ● Reach 3 supports 90% of the steelhead trout population within the Squamish River excluding any tributaries ● Historically, 85% of tributary smolt production of steelhead trout is derived from side-channels ● Squamish River is glacial fed and milky in color for most of the year ● Development has eliminated/altered a large part of the estuary in the area of the Mamquam channel.

3.1.1.2 Cheakamus River

The Cheakamus River (Watershed code 90-1300-050) is an important tributary of the Squamish River for spawning salmonids. Fish populations known to occur presently or historically in the Cheakamus River system include chinook salmon, chum salmon, coho salmon, Dolly Varden char, pink salmon, kokanee salmon, sockeye salmon, rainbow trout, steelhead trout and numerous forage, coarse fishes (i.e. Mountain whitefish).

Escapement numbers for salmon and trout in the Cheakamus River have ranged as follows from 1953 to 1985:



Chinook Salmon 100 (1983 & 1985) 3,500 (1957,1958,1961,1962,1965)

Coho Salmon 200 (1979) 15,000 (1964,1974,1975)

Chum Salmon 3,500 (1953,1956,1965) 130,000 (1985)

Pink Salmon 75 (1983) 555,000 (1963)

Sockeye Salmon 25 (1983,1985) 200 (1977)

Steelhead Trout 0 (1984, 1985) 3,500 (1974)

Chinook and pink salmon spawning occurs from late August through early October, while chum and coho salmon spawn from September through December. Chinook salmon spawn primarily from Culliton Creek to a waterfall located approximately 0.4 kilometres (0.3 mile) downstream of the Miller Creek confluence. Since the 1970’s only small numbers of pink salmon have been observed up to these falls.

Chum salmon spawn from the mouth of Cheakamus River upstream to the B.C. Hydro bridge and in the smaller tributaries of the lower Cheakamus River along Paradise Valley. Coho salmon spawn primarily from 3.2 km-11.2 km (2.0 - 7.0 miles) in the Cheakamus River. Few numbers of sockeye salmon have been observed in the Cheakamus River in July and appear to spawn in the smaller tributaries. Kokanee salmon have been observed in Alpha and Nita Lakes and spawn in Alpha Creek.

Steelhead trout spawn from February through June from the Cheekye River upstream to the waterfall. Dolly Varden char and rainbow trout have been observed throughout the lakes in the region.

A number of obstructions to fish migration are located in the Cheakamus River including a series of chutes and cascades located approximately 1.6 kilometres (1.0 miles) downstream of Cheakamus Lake and a series of three falls in a 1.8 kilometre-long (1.1 miles) canyon section. In addition, the falls located 0.7 km (0.4 miles) upstream of Daisy Lake

and the falls located 0.4 km (0.2 miles) downstream of Miller Creek confluence also limit migration of fish populations. Movement of resident fish between Daisy and Cheakamus Lakes may be limited (if any) by canyons, falls and log jams.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans operates a salmon and trout hatchery on the lower Cheakamus River (Tenderfoot Creek Hatchery) between Swift Creek and Cheekye River.

The Cheakamus River fish populations are subject to heavy sports fishery on steelhead trout, Dolly Varden char, chinook and coho salmon. There is also a Native net fishery on the Squamish River prior to upstream migrating fish entering the Cheakamus River.

Heavy algal growth in the Cheakamus River is thought to be caused by the creation of the B.C. Hydro Daisy Dam reservoir and the resultant stabilization of water depth, reduction in turbidity and a decrease in upstream colonization of macro-invertebrate algal grazers. The Whistler Sewage Treatment plant also contributes nutrients (i.e. phosphorous) to the Cheakamus River which also likely contribute to algal growth.

The Cheakamus River is turbid downstream of Culliton Creek due to the heavy silt loads carried by Culliton Creek. Within the proposed development lands, four tributary streams of the Cheakamus River system including the upper reaches of Culliton Creek, Swift Creek, Brohm River and Cheekye River flow through a portion of the site.

ENKON Environmental Limited conducted fish habitat assessments and fish sampling in lower Cheakamus River (Exhibit 3-1). Both Site 1 (site C2) and 2 (site C1) of the Cheakamus River provide suitable habitat for large resident fish and anadromous fish. There are some small areas of gravel patches in fairly shallow water that are suitable spawning habitat for the anadromous salmon species that move up into the system to spawn. No fish were observed spawning here during late October 1997 when several species (including coho and chum salmon) would be in the river prior to spawning. Reach 2 contains some large pools suitable for fish to hold in, and a constructed side-channel suitable for rearing (Table 3-1).

ENKON Environmental Limited identified rainbow trout, chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, coho salmon, chum salmon, and coastrange sculpin when they conducted fish sampling in the Cheakamus River in September and October, 1997 (Table 3-2: Appendix 3).

Exhibit 3-1 Fish Sampling And Habitat Assessment Sites

3.1.1.3 Brohm River

Brohm River (Watershed Code 90-1300-050-101) originates in two branches on Brohm Ridge at approximately 1,600 metres (5,250 feet) above sea level. A number of tributary streams also originate along the slopes of Brohm Ridge and eventually join the Upper Brohm River mainstem at various elevations down the slope.

The upper river is generally steep gradient (5-30%) with numerous waterfalls and cascades throughout the upper 6 kilometres (3.7 miles). A steep gradient cascade section of the river approximately 500 metres (1,641 feet) upstream of Highway 99 is the first of a number of barriers which limit upstream migration by salmon and trout.

Brohm Lake Creek flows out of Brohm Lake just west of Highway 99. Brohm Lake is a relatively shallow lake with abundant aquatic vegetation at the southern end of the lake. Brohm Lake Creek flows approximately 400 metres (1,312 feet) from the outlet of Brohm Lake to join the Brohm River main channel immediately downstream of Highway 99 (flows through a 2,500 mm diameter culvert under Highway 99).

Downstream of Highway 99, Brohm River flows approximately 3.5 kilometres (2.2 miles) in a low gradient (1-3%) section to join the Cheekye. This area is the main spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and trout. Substrate in this section is a combination of gravels, cobbles, boulders and fines.

Sampling of 24 streams within the Squamish River system conducted by Ministry of Environment personnel from 1977-1979 resulted in population estimates of juvenile steelhead trout populations for 14 of the 24 streams. Brohm River, which drains a significant portion of the proposed development lands, was ranked second in juvenile fish numbers primarily due to its extensive area (24,960 m2 / 268,676 ft 2) accessible to fish, while it only ranked fifth in fish per m2. It was noted that a small disturbance would have a greater effect on 35.5 Mile Creek than on Brohm River, while total destruction of Brohm River would have a much larger impact on the watershed’s steelhead trout population (B. Clark, 1981).

Table 3-2 Fish Sampling

Creek Reach Location Date Method Effort FishCaptured

CheakamusRiver

1 C2 Sept 5-6/97

minnow traps 2 for 24 hrs

RB100mm

RB95mm

SK70mm

CheakamusRiver

1 C2 Oct30/97

electrofishing SK 85mm RB66mm

RB68mm

RB60mm

RB58mm

RB66mm

RB68mm

RB50mm

RB62mm

RB65mm

RB58mm

RB56mm

CSC88mm

CSC100mm

CSC93mm

CSC9mm

CheakamusRiver

1 C2 Oct30/97

angling CO CM

CheakamusRiver

2 C1 Sept5/97

electrofishing 104 es no fish caught

CheakamusRiver

2 C1 Sept 5-6/97

minnow traps 2 for 23.5

hrs

CH50mm

CH47mm

SK100mm

CheakamusRiver

2 C1 Oct30/97

electrofishing RB45mm

RB68mm

SK83mm

Cheekye River 2 CH1 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

CH CH

Cheekye River 2 CH1 Sept5/97

electrofishing 107 es RB110mm

RB120mm

Cheekye River 2 CH1 Oct28/97

electrofishing no fish caught









Cheekye River northbranch

CH4 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

no fish caught


CH4 Sept5/97



CH4 Oct29/97


Cheekye River southbranch

CH5 Oct/96 minnow traps 5 for 24 hrs

no fish caught


CH5 Sept5/97



CH5 Oct29/97


Brohm River 1 B2 Oct/96 minnow traps 9 for 24 hrs

RB RB CO

Brohm River 1 B2 Sept6/97


Brohm River 1 B2 Oct28/97


RB127mm

RB132mm

CT98mm

RB100mm

RB120mm

CT97mm



Brohm River 4 B5 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

no fish caught









Brohm River lakeoutlet

B1 Oct/96 minnow traps 5 for 24 hrs

RB CT CT CT CT

CT


B1 Sept6/97

minnow traps 5 for 24 hrs

no fish caught


B1 Oct28/97


Brohm River BrookCreek

B3 Oct/96 minnow traps 5 for 24 hrs

RB RB


B3 Sept6/97

electrofishing 129 es RB150mm

RB145mm


B3 Oct28/97

electrofishing CT145mm

CT102mm

RB200mm

CT135mm

RB165mm

RB158mm

CO53mm

Brohm River tributary B4 Sept6/97


Brohm River tributary B4 Oct28/97






Swift Creek 1 S2 Oct27/97


RB63mm

CO54mm

CO52mm

Swift Creek 5 S1 Sept7/97


Swift Creek 5 S1 Oct28/97


Culliton Creek 1 CU1 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

no fish caught

Culliton Creek 1 CU1 Sept5/97


butseveral

observedthat

escaped

Culliton Creek 1 CU1 Sept5/97

minnow traps 3 for 23.5

hrs

RB100mm

Culliton Creek 1 CU1 Oct27/97


RB125mm

RB100mm

RB120mm

RB160mm

RB122mm

RB110mm

SCS120mm

Culliton Creek 2 CU2 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

no fish caught

Culliton Creek 2 CU2 Oct28/97


Culliton Creek eastbranch

CU3 Oct/96 minnow traps 10 for 24 hrs

no fish caught


CU3 Sept5/97



CU3 Oct27/97


Culliton Creek southbranch


no fish caught


CU4 Sept5/97



CU4 Oct27/97




no fish caught


CU5 Sept5/97



CU5 Oct27/97



CU6 Sept5/97


CH=Chinook CT=Cutthroattrout

CM=Chum RB=Rainbowtrout

CO=Coho SK=Sockeye

CSC=Coastrangesculpin

Creeks supporting total freshwater life-cycles are the most important tributaries because they are independent of environmental changes elsewhere (i.e. ocean survival). These typical Squamish River tributaries such as Shovelnose, Brohm, Shop and Baby Jay Creeks display a wide range of habitat types (B.J. Clark, 1981).

As Shop Creek and Baby Jay Creek are relatively small creeks, it becomes apparent that Shovelnose Creek and Brohm River are extremely important to the Squamish watershed’s juvenile population. Combined, Shovelnose Creek (38%) and Brohm River (27%) produce approximately 65% of the total juvenile steelhead biomass of Squamish River tributaries (excluding the main-stem Cheakamus, Ashlu, Elaho and Mamquam Rivers; Table 3-3). Of the 14 tributary streams sampled, Brohm River (55.8 kg, 123.0 lb.) and Shovelnose Creek (40.1 kg, 88.4 lb.) also had the highest biomass estimates. However, as previously noted, these relatively high biomass estimates generally reflect the significantly greater available rearing areas in both creeks.

Total adult steelhead trout populations for the entire Squamish River system were estimated at approximately 2,000 fish (B.J. Clark, 1981). Run timing/spawning for the steelhead populations of Brohm River are estimated from early March through early June. Maximum recorded escapement for steelhead trout in the Brohm River during the period 1953-1985 was 50 fish.

Brohm River also contains sockeye salmon (historically), coho salmon, chum salmon, cutthroat trout, rainbow trout and

Dolly Varden char (SISS-DFO stream records). Maximum recorded escapements from 1975-1985 for coho salmon have been 150 fish, for pink salmon 75 and for chum salmon 25 fish. Spawning timing for coho salmon is during October, November and December.

During 1972, the Ministry of Environment operated a counting fence in the lower Brohm River, and in 1979/1980 removed a rock barrier below the culvert under Highway 99. A total of 1,500 rainbow trout was also stocked into the Brohm River system during 1985.

Sampling conducted by Envirowest Consultants Ltd. in 1996 from the confluence of Brohm Lake Creek and the Brohm River (immediately downstream of Highway 99) to approximately 6.45 km (4.0 miles) upstream of Highway 99 resulted in the capture of rainbow trout in the lower 2 reaches (0-720 m [0-2,362 feet] upstream of the confluence of Brohm Lake Creek and Brohm River) of Brohm River. No fish were captured in Brohm River within the vicinity of the proposed development. A cascade located 4.8 km (3.0 miles) upstream of the confluence is documented as impassable to all species of salmonids (Envirowest, 1996).

Table 3-3 Estimated Juvenile Steelhead Trout Populations In The Squamish River System (From B. J. Clark, 1981).

CREEK TOTAL

JUVENILES

PERCENT

OF TOTAL

#/m2 / ft 2

Shovelnose Creek 8,967 38.5% 0.55/ 5.92

Brohm River 6,196 26.6% 0.02/ 02.1

Last Creek 2,376 10.2% 0.37/ 3.98

Shop Creek 1,163 5.0% 0.26/ 2.80

July Creek 1,088 4.7% 0.06/ 0.65

High Falls Creek 1,085 4.7% 0.23/ 2.50

Sigurd (North) Creek 1,012 4.3% 0.22/ 2.37

Chuck-Chuck Creek 426 1.8% 0.12/ 1.29

Sigurd (South) Creek 315 1.3% 0.23/ 2.48

Mashiter Creek 269 1.1% 0.04/ 0.43

35.1. Mile 176 0.7% 0.37/ 3.98

Dryden Creek 123 0.5% 0.12/ 1.29

Baby Jay Creek 75 0.3% 0.19/ 2.05

36 Mile Creek 34 0.1% 0.01/ 0.11

TOTAL 23,305 100% NA

ENKON Environmental Limited conducted fish habitat assessments and fish sampling in most reaches and some tributaries of Brohm River in October 1996, September 1997, and October 1997. ENKON captured cutthroat trout, rainbow trout and coho salmon in reach 1 of Brohm River (site B2), rainbow trout and cutthroat trout in Brohm Lake Creek at Hwy. 99 (site B1), and rainbow trout, cutthroat trout, and coho salmon a tributary that joins Brohm River at the Cat Lake bridge (site B3). The lower reach of Brohm River (site B2), the tributary at the Cat Lake bridge (Brook Creek, site B3), and the Brohm Lake outlet have high fish habitat values. Both spawning habitat and rearing habitat are present in reach 1 of Brohm River and rearing habitat is available in reach 1 of Brook Creek. The low gradient and availability of cover and slow water/pools along the sides of Brohm River produce the high quality habitat. The outlet of Brohm Lake (site B1) offers great rearing habitat to salmonids. This area is 1 m deep with plenty of cover and slow moving water.

No fish were captured above the barrier in the upper reaches of the river or in the tributaries to the river including in and around the proposed location of the upper village. In reach 3 (site B10), the channel consists of large pools with steps over bedrock and large boulders. This reach is narrower and steeper than the first reach, and would offer little fish habitat for resident trout or char species. Reach 4 (sites B5, B7) is a low gradient reach with pools, cover, and spawning gravel present. This reach itself contains good fish habitat. Above this reach, however, increased gradients, narrower channel widths, and lack of spawning gravel in the mainstem and tributaries limit the fisheries potential (sites B9, B6, B8; Tables 3-1 and 3-2).

Cascades Environmental Services Inc. (CES) is currently conducting an instream flow study (IFIM) in reach 1 of Brohm River. The IFIM methodology is designed to quantify potential physical habitat available for each life stage of a fish species at various levels of stream discharge. Major components of the IFIM methodology include: (1) study and transect selection, (2) transect weighing, (3) field data collection, (4) a hydraulic simulation to determine the spatial distribution of combinations of depths and velocities with respect to substrate and cover under a variety of discharges, and (5) habitat simulation, using habitat suitability criteria, to generate an index of change in habitat relative to change in discharge. The product of this habitat simulation is expressed as Weighted Useable Area (WUA) for a range of simulated stream discharges.

The method permits discrete examination of the relationship between discharge and a number of hydraulic parameters including wetted perimeter.

The IFIM study area extends from the confluence with the Cheekye River upstream approximately 3 kilometers to the Cat Lake forestry road bridge. Beyond this point the river gradient increases and fish use diminishes.

A complete stream survey of the Brohm River IFIM study reach was conducted on September 9, 1997. Stream flows

were low and clear. Habitat types and channel parameters were described and quantified for the reach.

Based on the stream survey results and known fish use from the Ministry of Environment data base, CES selected ten transects to represent the mix of habitat types and channel types in the study reach. Selection criteria emphasized steelhead spawning and salmonid juvenile rearing habitat (Table 3-4). Transects 1, 2 and 3 are within cascades, pool/chute and glide habitat which is utilized for salmonid rearing and spawning. Transects 4, 5, and 6 are placed on a series of riffles and shallow glides where steelhead spawning has been observed by other biologists. Transects 8 and 9 are located on a side channel where rearing steelhead have been found in abundance by other biologists.

The IFIM requires a series of calibration flows in which depths and velocities are measured across each transect. In addition, slope, water surface elevation, substrate, and stage of zero flow are also required for each transect. These data

Table 3-4 Brohm River IFIM Transect Description

Transect Number Represented Habitat Represented Function

1 Cascade - boulder/large cobble, moderate gradient with rootwad

Salmonid rearing

2 Pool/chute - cobble/gravel with undercut bank and rootwad Salmonid rearing

3 Glide – large gravel/small cobble with log parallel to bank and undercut bank

Anadromous spawning and salmonid rearing

4 Shallow glide/riffle - large gravel/cobble includes patch of small gravel

Anadromous and resident spawning

5 Moderate depth glide - large gravel/small cobble Anadromous spawning

6 Glide – large gravel/small cobble Anadromous spawning

7 Riffle – cobble/small boulder Salmonid rearing

8 Off channel riffle - small boulder/cobble/gravel Salmonid rearing

9 Off channel shallow pool - small boulder/cobble/gravel with rootwad

Salmonid rearing

10 Plunge pool - bedrock controlled with cobble and small boulder

Salmonid rearing

were collected for all transects during October and November 1997. The flows measured were:

● 16.3 cms, very high flow, November 3 1997 ● 5.2 cms, high flow, November 4 1997 ● 1.9 cms, middle flow, November 10 1997 ● 1.1 cms, low flow, October 21 1997

IFIM data will be modeled within the next few months. Photographs and data are available on request. A full report will be presented to the Ministry of Environment and Department of Fisheries and Oceans for review and discussion.

3.1.1.4 Cheekye River

The Cheekye River (Watershed code 90-1300-050-010) originates in two branches at an elevation of approximately 2,600 metres (8,531 feet) in the Cheekye Glacier and at an a elevation of 2,000 metres (6,562 feet) in the Diamond Glacier.

The Cheekye River (Watershed code 90-1300-050-010) originates from several branches in the basin directly west of Mount Garibaldi and south of Brohm Ridge. The northernmost and highest tributary starts at an elevation of about 2,134 metres (7,000 feet) near the Warren Glacier. The southernmost tributaries flow from runoff originating from Diamond Head Ridge, with an elevation of about 2,073 metres (6,800 feet).

The various branches join into a single stream at approximately 580 metres (1,900 feet), with numerous high gradient tributaries flowing into the Cheekye River mainstem through its length. The Cheekye River eventually flows into the Cheakamus River just north of Brackendale.

The upper 7.5 kilometres (4.7 miles) of the Cheekye River is relatively steep gradient (5-30%), with numerous waterfalls and cascades in the upper few km. The creek is a high energy, single channel system as noted by the wide floodplain and significant scouring through its length. The Cheekye fan in the lower 4.5-kilometre (2.8-mile) section of the system near Highway 99 is noted for its flashy nature, high flows and significant debris load.

Fish populations in the Cheekye River system include sockeye salmon (historically in Brohm River), coho salmon, steelhead trout (in Brohm River), cutthroat trout, Dolly Varden char, and rainbow trout.

Due to the turbid, high energy system of the Cheekye River very little is known of the numbers and distribution of fish populations. ENKON Environmental Limited conducted fish habitat assessments and fish sampling in the Cheekye River in October 1996, September 1997, and October 1997 (Exhibit 3-1; Tables 3-1 and 3-2). Chinook salmon and rainbow trout were captured near the confluence with Brohm River at site CH1. No fish were caught further upstream. The river was very turbid in October 1997 during heavy rains, and no fish were captured near Brohm River at this time.

The river has a large floodplain up to the junction of the two branches with a bed material of primarily boulder with some cobble and silt of volcanic origin. The only spawning gravel noted in the river is located in small patches in the first reach (site CH1). The lack of spawning gravel and rearing habitat, and the high energy and turbidity of the system cause the river as a whole to be poor habitat for fish. It is likely that fish use this river to move between the Cheakamus and Brohm rivers, and only spend time in the Cheekye during low flows when the water is clear.

3.1.1.5 Culliton Creek

Culliton Creek originates in three branches at elevations of 2,000 m (6562 ft) in the Warren Glacier at the Garibaldi Neve (South Branch), 1,800 m (5906 ft) near Clinker Peak (North Branch) just southwest of Garibaldi Lake and 1,820

m (5971) near “The Table” (East Branch).

The east branch of Upper Culliton Creek is steep gradient (10-20%), single channel, and generally comprised of large, boulder substrate with numerous cascades.

Waterfalls (>30m {98 ft}) are located on the south branch near the confluence with the east branch. Below the falls (site CU4), the creek is narrower, steeper, and deeper than the lower reaches of Culliton Creek. Sites CU5 and CU6 located above the falls on the south branch of Culliton Creek offer the best fish habitat in the portions of the Culliton system that were assessed. No fish were captured at these sites.

The lower 1.5-2.0 km (.9 - 1.2 miles) of Culliton Creek below Highway 99 is a single channel with sections of canyon, cascades and fast flowing run habitat. The pools and boulders offer some cover for fish, but there is no spawning habitat, and the water is often quite turbid. Culliton Creek flows into the Cheakamus River north of Cheakamus village. A set of 10 m falls located 800 m upstream from the creek mouth (500 m downstream of Highway 99) is a barrier to upstream fish migration. Fish populations likely to occur below the falls include coho salmon, rainbow trout, cutthroat trout, steelhead trout, and Dolly Varden char.

Sampling conducted in the lower 5.8 km (3.6 miles) of Culliton Creek and the lower 6.7 km (4.2 miles) of Conroy Creek, a major tributary to Culliton Creek, in September 1996 by Nelson Environmental Ltd. (1996), resulted in rainbow trout captured in Reach 1 of Culliton Creek and in Reaches 1 and 2 (lower 1.5 km {.9 mile}) of Conroy Creek. No fish were captured in any of the other reaches of Culliton or Conroy Creeks.

Rainbow trout and a coastrange sculpin were caught by ENKON at site CU1 (Exhibit 3-1). No fish were caught at sites CU2, CU3, or CU4 located above the falls. Due to the high energy nature of this stream, scouring of the streambed and the poor quality rearing/spawning habitat in the lower creek, fish utilization is likely relatively low.

3.1.1.6 Swift Creek

Swift Creek originates on the slopes between Culliton Creek and Brohm River at an elevation of approximately 1,160 m (3806 ft). The creek drops approximately 1,000 m (3281 ft) in less than 2.5 km (less than 1.6 miles) and is relatively steep gradient upstream of Highway 99. Downstream of Highway 99, an approximate 100 m (328 ft) waterfall/cascade at the B.C. Rail tracks limits upstream migration of fish populations (approximately 500 m (1640 ft) upstream of the Cheakamus River). Reach 1 (site S2) runs through the Cheakamus valley, where the creek is low gradient with riffles, a few pools and patches of spawning gravel for resident salmonids. However, the creek often runs underground through this reach during low flows, and this habitat is not always available. A golf course development has been partially built immediately below the railway tracks in the Cheakamus valley and appears to be planning to use the lower portion of Swift Creek as an irrigation supply.

Fish populations expected within the lower 500 m (1640 ft) of Swift Creek include cutthroat trout, coho salmon, rainbow trout, steelhead trout and Dolly Varden char. Rainbow trout and coho salmon were captured by ENKON Environmental Limited in reach 1 of Swift Creek when the creek was running in October 1997. This portion of the creek was flowing underground in October 1996, and September 1997. No fish were observed upstream of this reach.

3.1.2 Water Quality

Review of water quality data for the period 1982-1996 for the Cheakamus River at the Cheekye River bridge (Table 3-5) indicates that water quality is generally within accepted ranges for the provincial criteria for the “Protection of Aquatic Life” and the federal criteria for “Drinking Water Standards.”

Water quality data was collected from Brohm River, Cheekye River, Swift Creek or Culliton Creek in May 1997, September 1997, and October 1997 (Exhibit 3-2, Table 3-6).

3.1.3 Hydrology

The following is a preliminary overview of the regional hydrology in the vicinity of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development site.

3.1.3.1 Stream Flows

The following rivers/creeks could potentially be impacted by the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development including:

● Squamish River ● Cheakamus River ● Brohm River ● Cheekye River ● Culliton Creek ● Swift Creek.

Brohm River is a tributary of the Cheekye River while the Cheekye, Swift and Culliton Creeks are all tributaries of the Cheakamus River. The Cheakamus River is a tributary of the Squamish River.

Table 3-5 Background Water Quality For Cheakamus River At The Cheekye River Bridge (1982-1996).

PARAMETER UNIT RANGE FEDERAL OBJECTIVE

Ph 7.8-8.5 6.5-8.5

Temperature (0C) 0-16.8 <15

Filterable Residue (mg/l) 40-314 -

Non-Filterable Residue (mg/l) 1-270 <10 if background is<100; 10% of background if >100

Specific Conductance (us/cm) 25-140 -

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 1.3-16.8 6-11

Turbidity (NTU) 0.5-14 <5 if background is <50; 10% if background is >50

Alkalinity (mg/l) 11-23.8 >20*

Total Organic Carbon (mg/l) 4 -

Total Inorganic Carbon (mg/l) 3 -

Total Hardness (mg/l) 31.8 <500

Total Ammonia (mg/l) 0.01-0.05 <1.90*

Total Nitrate (mg/l) 0.02-0.05 10.0

Dissolved Nitrate (mg/l) 0.02-0.04 -

Total Nitrogen (mg/l) 0.04-0.28 -

Dissolved Orthophosphate (mg/l) 0.003-0.011 -

Total Dissolved Phosphorous (mg/l) 0.005-0.014 -

Total Phosphorous (mg/l) 0.005-0.206 -

Total Coliform (MPN) 7-140 -

Faecal Coliform (MPN/100 ml) 2-90 <200-400 MPN/100 ml

* Denotes provincial criteria for the protection of aquatic life while all other criteria is for federal drinking water standards.

Exhibit 3-2 - Water Quality Sites

Table 3-6 Water Quality Data For Cheakamus, Cheekye And Brohm Rivers And Culliton And Swift Creeks, May, 1997


Squamish River

The Squamish River originates in the Pemberton icefields and flows approximately 120 km (75 miles) primarily south prior to flowing into Howe Sound at the Squamish townsite. The drainage area is approximately 2,330 km2 (900 miles2) with the Cheakamus River, Elaho River and Ashlu Creek forming the largest tributaries of the Squamish River.

The mean monthly flows recorded for the Squamish River near Brackendale range from a high flow of 493 cubic

metres per second (cms) (17,410 ft3 per second) in July to a low flow of 86 cms (3037 ft3 per second) in March (Table 3-7). Maximum daily flow rates can be as high as 2,000 cms (70,629 ft3 per second).

Cheakamus River

The Cheakamus River originates within the McBride Mountain Range of Garibaldi Park and flows approximately 85 kilometres (53 miles) west into Cheakamus Lake, northwest and south into Daisy Lake and south prior to joining the Squamish River near Brackendale.

The drainage area of the Cheakamus River near Brackendale is approximately 1,010 km2 (390 miles2; 43% of the Squamish River drainage area) and near Cheekye is 1,070 km2 (413 miles2; 46% of the Squamish River drainage area). B.C. Hydro controls the flow of the Cheakamus River at a dam located at Daisy Lake which channels flows through tunnels approximately 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) long which eventually flow into a penstock and powerhouse immediately downstream of High Falls Creek on the Squamish River. Excess flows from Daisy Lake are spilled over the dam into the Cheakamus River.

Mean monthly flow rates for the Cheakamus River near Cheekye (1913-1915) and near Brackendale (1957-1990) range from a high of 142 cms (56 in) in July to a low of 17.3 cms 6.8 in) in March for the Cheekye station, to a high mean flow of 108 cms (43 in) in June to a low flow of 17.3 cms (6.8 in) 2 months earlier in January for the Brackendale station (Tables 3-8 and 3-9).

These differences in low flow rates likely reflect the influence of the Cheekye River on the Cheakamus River flows, which has low flows in February and the short period of record for the Cheekye station. Smaller peaks in mean monthly flows for both stations occur in October/November coincident with high fall rains.

Table 3-7 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly Discharge (m3/s)

Squamish River Near Brackendale

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Mean

1925 61.3 81.9 56.2 75.1 415 418 503 406 245 75.7 70.8 183 223

1926 50.6 81.0 82.7 189 216 368 - - - - - - -

1955 - - - - - - - 326 267 194 130 45.3 -

1956 45 29.3 37.3 131 346 439 516 352 310 177 122 84.5 216

1957 29.9 37.1 45.4 105 399 452 364 288 385 157 108 128 209

1958 121 14.3 82.7 124 444 635 489 391 284 303 138 197 280

1959 120 47.5 64.3 164 308 474 527 386 270 219 151 108 238

1960 52 64.7 - - 252 456 528 373 226 274 122 105 -

1961 180 186 111 127 342 608 570 443 253 223 96 71.2 268

1962 95.1 13.8 36.5 168 233 380 439 465 270 297 247 199 248

1963 74 225 95.6 94.5 238 420 458 401 320 333 214 149 252

1964 108 70 52.2 104 252 549 619 415 302 244 155 89.3 247

1965 67 79 79.1 152 263 426 459 144 186 406 237 134 246

1966 75.7 55.2 106 192 291 419 489 421 318 287 149 198 251

1967 83 80.4 69.8 65.6 297 743 535 441 350 456 237 139 292

1968 256 146 173 102 338 508 588 393 322 309 187 80.7 284

1969 58.5 53.2 65.7 173 413 684 459 350 345 199 145 93.2 254

1970 52.1 60.8 56.5 84.2 239 516 436 360 209 160 128 57.6 197

1971 91.8 140 63.7 123 397 480 587 518 306 207 119 56.9 258

1972 - 55.5 195 136 383 552 601 447 200 102 90.7 116 -

1973 95.4 58.1 72.9 89.5 312 394 452 350 224 220 109 107 209

1974 - - 93.6 155 280 520 572 515 352 137 97.9 - -

1975 - - 57.2 86.5 268 473 583 383 236 251 338 136 -

1976 85.9 - - 108 323 421 575 500 402 176 166 156 -

1977 94.4 109 70.1 143 204 420 400 512 235 167 152 93.1 217

1978 - - 116 134 230 478 537 457 324 192 123 31.8 -

1979 22.6 70.5 121 130 301 360 455 414 400 214 91.7 176 231

1980 52.8 90.2 82.7 166 318 421 441 346 293 158 263 361 250

1981 192 - - - 322 340 476 445 279 274 325 - -

1982 - - - - 245 587 469 364 316 312 95.2 - -

1983 122 151 112 125 316 450 498 361 206 183 234 40.7 234

1984 155 104 111 101 173 444 489 396 258 369 109 64.6 232

1985 63.1 60.3 62.1 164 297 420 452 359 148 199 77.8 50.6 197

1986 107 109 170 115 327 521 458 428 211 134 104 93.1 235

1987 147 97.9 164 170 377 539 506 341 255 118 142 95.8 247

1988 49.1 64.7 83.5 182 337 423 476 400 248 192 197 79.8 228

1989 69.3 55.8 69.7 157 293 470 372 364 218 201 217 126 219

1990 82.9 62.5 70 198 273 412 481 413 270 233 377 83.3 247

Mean 90.1 90.4 86.3 134 305 472 493 405 276 225 160 115 238

Table 3-8 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly Discharge (m3/s )

Cheakamus River Near Cheekye

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Mean

1913 --- --- --- --- --- --- 57.3 52.4 55.9 52.8 60.1 60.7 ---

1914 --- --- --- 74.1 120 123 142 90.7 56.9 116 94.5 22.4 ---

1915 17.3 20.5 40.8 97.6 71.6 92.5 122 121 61.6 82.8 --- --- ---

Mean 17.3 20.5 40.8 85.8 95.8 108 107 88.0 58.1 83.9 77.3 41.5 ---

Table 3-9 Historical Stream Flow - Mean Monthly Discharge ( m 3/s )

Cheakamus River Near Brackendale


1957 - - - - - - - - - 21.5 20.7 21.1 -

1958 27.9 31.3 14.0 16.7 97.9 116 77.4 46.8 43.1 67.4 19.4 42.5 50.2

1959 25 12.1 14.4 19.1 50.9 118 115 38.3 24.8 19.7 18.4 15.1 39.4

1960 13.9 12.8 14.8 16 17.7 82.5 78.2 24.6 11.2 29.5 16.6 20.8 28.3

1961 45.2 27.2 14.6 14 36.1 126 82.3 35 25.8 32.4 17 14.7 39.2

1962 15.5 17.7 11.2 17.5 35 111 53 35.6 13.6 22.1 29 38 53.3

1963 17.4 68.9 16.3 17.3 66.5 75.3 51 25.1 18.4 50.3 32.2 27.4 38.6

1964 16.4 15.3 13.2 14.9 20 112 117 40 20.6 23.4 17.3 - -

1965 - 16 12.5 17.2 16.9 515 35.8 24.4 12.4 27.3 40.5 18.6 -

1966 15.1 12.9 16.7 - - 68.3 67 27.4 14.3 25.3 19.2 39.4 -

1967 19.3 16.1 13.6 10.5 24.5 161 80.1 36.5 17 55.3 33.1 28.6 41.3

1968 47.3 27.7 29.2 18.8 36.4 88.9 113 33.5 22.2 - - 22.2 -

1969 17 16.4 20.3 28.3 76.9 132 45.6 17.3 29.3 17.5 16.8 16.8 36.2

1970 11.5 12.8 13.2 15.1 16.7 83.0 26 14.2 14.1 12.9 15.4 14.9 20.8

1971 18.6 20.8 15.3 15.9 50.3 73.8 87.7 52.1 20.8 17.8 - - -

1972 - - - - - 94.6 - - 14.1 11.9 15 20.5 -

1973 20.2 14.4 13.8 12.2 42.2 58.6 51.4 25.8 12.6 24.6 17.4 23.5 26.5

1974 24.4 16.3 23.6 17.9 23.3 - 119 78.2 25.1 12.8 16.6 18.5 -

1975 11.1 9.51 14.5 13.5 17.4 69.4 78.6 22.4 12.8 31.4 60.3 22.6 30.4

1976 14.5 12.7 12.5 14.9 35.2 59.9 102 66.8 34.5 15.7 14.9 17.8 33.5

1977 13.6 15.4 12.9 13.6 12.5 31.8 15.1 25.6 13.1 15 20.1 17.2 17.1

1978 10.4 13.2 17.6 12.7 14.2 56.6 54.6 24.4 36 13.2 14 8.81 23

1979 7.3 12.8 18.9 13.1 24.6 36.9 34.9 17 37.4 - - - -

1980 11.1 17.9 13 20.9 36.7 49.5 35.8 15.2 15.1 12.4 37.9 59.3 27.1

1981 19.5 20.5 13 17.7 29.1 30.8 47.3 30 15.7 38.2 - - -

1982 - - - - - 149 89 - - - - - -

1983 21.6 30.2 24.7 25.7 88.7 105 109 61.8 24 13 47.6 10.4 46.9

1984 24.5 17.8 14.2 10.9 13.5 59.0 60.2 27.6 14.5 79.7 19.1 11.8 29.5

1985 9.12 8.86 9.10 16.9 29.2 58.6 35.6 14.7 9.4 17.7 13.4 9.26 19.3

1986 19.6 18.1 19.6 11 47.7 94.3 43 22.5 12.7 10.6 13.7 15.5 27.4

1987 26.2 14.6 31.9 15.6 45.9 86.9 59.3 17.2 12.7 9.81 13.4 17.4 29.3

1988 12.1 13 13.8 18 39.8 58.6 48.9 21.2 14.2 14.3 32 13 24.9

1989 13.3 10.4 11.9 18.6 18.3 - - - 11.3 17.6 41.7 23.5 -

1990 12.7 12.1 12.2 14.1 13.6 35.7 36.3 - - 28.4 88 16.1 -

Mean 18.7 18.2 16 16.3 35.9 81.8 66.1 31.8 19.4 25.4 26.2 21.6 31.5

Source: Historical Streamflow Summary of British Columbia to 1990.

Brohm River

The Brohm River originates off the slopes of Brohm ridge and from a small wetland located at approximately 1,500 m (4921 ft) near Brohm ridge. The drainage area is approximately 30 km2 (including Brohm Lake and tributaries) with the only named tributary, Brook Creek entering Brohm River immediately upstream of Highway 99. The Brohm River flows approximately 9 km (5.6 miles) west and southwest prior to joining the Cheekye River immediately upstream of Highway 99.

Another tributary to Brohm River enters the mainstem river immediately upstream of Highway 99 and drains Brohm Lake on the west side of Highway 99. The inlet stream to Brohm Lake originates approximately 1.5 km (.9 mile) off the slope on the east side of Highway 99 near Swift Creek. No estimate of flow rate, average annual flow, or maximum recorded flow is available for the Brohm River.

Based on regional flow analysis conducted for estimating flows in the Brohm River and Culliton Creek, mean monthly low flows are 1.2 m3 while mean monthly high flows are approximately 5.2 m3 in May (Table 3-10).

Cheekye River

The Cheekye River originates in two branches including one branch from Warren Glacier and the other branch from Diamond Glacier within Garibaldi Park. The river flows approximately 16 km (9.9 miles) west and southwest into the Cheakamus River near Brackendale. The drainage area of the Cheekye River is approximately 57.5 km2 (22.2 miles2) with Brohm River being its largest tributary which flows into Cheekye River immediately upstream of Highway #99.

Mean monthly flows for the relatively short period of record (1954-1956) range from a high flow of 7.9 cms (3.1 in) in June to a low flow of 2.2 cms (.9 in) in February (Table 3-11). A smaller peak in high flows also occurs in October/November during periods of high rains. Maximum daily discharges of 21.6 cms (8.5 in) have been recorded in Cheekye River near Brackendale.

Culliton Creek

Culliton Creek originates in three branches at an elevation of 2,000 m (6562 ft) in Warren Glacier at the Garibaldi Neve, at an elevation of 1,800 m (5906 ft) near Clinker Peak just southwest of Garibaldi Lake and at 1,820 m (5970 ft) near “The Table”. The river flows west and southwest approximately 16 km (10 miles) prior to entering the Cheakamus River near Swift. The drainage area for Culliton Creek is approximately 82 km2 Conroy Creek, the only named tributary joins Culliton Creek immediately downstream of Highway 99. Mean monthly discharge recorded for the period of record (1954-1957; Table 3-12) indicate that high flows of approximately 10 cms occur in June while low flows of approximately 2 cms occur in February.

Table 3-10 Mean Monthly Discharge Estimates At The Mouth Of Each Project Basin

Month

Brohm River at Mouth

Drainage Area: 29.8 km2

Elevation: 160 m

(m3/s)

Culliton Creek at Mouth

Drainage Area: 81.9 km2

Elevation: 85 m

(m3/s)

Jan 1.887 4.700

Feb 1.862 4.586

Mar 2.263 5.476

Apr 2.508 4.267

May 5.156 7.668

Jun 4.957 10.202

Jul 2.951 6.760

Aug 1.213 2.967

Sep 1.598 2.971

Oct 3.169 5.382

Nov 3.253 5.733

Dec 2.904 7.324

Source: Cascades Environmental Service Hydrological Report, Appendix 3.


Cheekye Creek Near Brackendale


1954 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.85 6.90 4.52 ---

1955 2.02 1.78 1.58 5.23 7.29 5.25 3.88 2.66 5.43 4.73 2.57 ---

1956 2.59 2.56 4.02 4.33 5.95 8.47 4.46 2.71 3.91 --- --- --- ---

Mean 2.31 2.17 2.80 4.33 5.59 7.88 4.86 3.30 3.29 4.14 5.82 3.55 ---


Culliton Creek Near Brackendale


1954 -- 5.75 9.80 4.68 ---

1955 2.66 2.31 1.75 -- 3.72 8.22 9.28 6.49 4.44 7.29 10.1 2.56 ---

1956 2.27 1.79 2.62 4.00 6.90 13.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- ---

1957 -- -- -- -- 9.10 9.02 9.26 6.97 8.28 -- -- -- ---

Mean 2.47 2.05 2.19 4.00 6.57 10.4 9.27 6.73 6.36 6.52 9.95 3.62 ---

Source: Historical Streamflow Summary of British Columbia to 1990.

Swift Creek

Swift Creek originates on the slope between Culliton Creek and Brohm River at an elevation of approximately 1,140 m (3740 ft) and flows approximately 5 km (3 miles) west and southwest prior to joining the Cheakamus River near Brackendale. The drainage area for Swift Creek is approximately 5.7 km2 (2.2 miles2) with no named tributaries flowing into Swift Creek. No flow data was available for Swift Creek, however, the general timing of flows in Swift Creek is likely similar to Brohm River as neither stream has storage nor is glacier fed.

3.1.3.2 Drainage Patterns

All of the site drainage eventually reaches the Cheakamus River and ultimately the Squamish River via Culliton Creek, Swift Creek, Brohm River and the Cheekye River.

Drainage patterns within the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development can be divided into four areas (Exhibit 3-3) including:

● Northwest corner draining toward Swift Creek ● Central north and northeast corner draining toward Culliton Creek ● Central area around Brohm River ● South central and southeast corner draining toward the Cheekye River.

Northwest Corner

Swift Creek flows west and south and drains approximately 2 km2 (.8 miles2) in the northwest corner and along the west boundary of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development.

Central North and Northeast Corner

Culliton Creek flows north and west and drains approximately 3 km2 (1.2 miles2) of the central north area and northeast corner of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development site (all north of Brohm Ridge), Drainage is directed towards two major tributaries, and five minor tributaries of Culliton Creek.

Exhibit 3-3 Regional Stream Flow And Drainage Divides

Central Area

The main branch of the Brohm River extends approximately 6.5 km (4 miles) within the northwest quadrant of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development. This part of the river drains the northwest quadrant with the exception of the area drained by Swift Creek.

A tributary of the Brohm River is located in the central west area of the property. The tributary extends for approximately 3 km (1.9 miles) within the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property, draining the western end of Brohm ridge.

The drainage area of 15 km2 (5.8 miles2) of the main branch and tributary of Brohm drains approximately ¾ of the central area of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development site.

South Central and Southeast Corner

Approximately six minor tributaries to the Cheekye River are located within the resort development, entering the property from the south side, 1.5 to 2.0 km (.9 to 1.2 miles) west of Garibaldi Provincial Park.

A major tributary to the Cheekye River is located in the east third of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort site. It originates on Brohm Ridge and flows south, extending approximately 1 to 1.5 km (.6 to .9 miles) within the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development property. It travels an additional 1 km (.6 mile) south before it meets the main flow of the Cheekye River.

A tributary to the Cheekye River drains the areas south of Brohm Ridge extending from the east property boundary to approximately 4.5 to 5.0 km (2.8 to 3.1 miles) west of the east GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property boundary, and all the way to the south boundary of the property. This area is estimated at 5.5 km2 (2.1 miles2).

3.1.4 Water Resources

3.1.4.1 Surface Water Licenses

Surface water licenses in the vicinity of the project site and upstream of Highway 99 (Exhibit 3-4; Table 3-13) include the following:

● Three licenses for Conroy Creek (a tributary to Culliton Creek) immediately upstream of Highway 99 ● One license for Brohm River immediately upstream of Highway 99

Exhibit 3-4 Surface Water Licenses and Groundwater Wells

Table 3-13 Surface Water Licenses Near The Proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development

LOCATION/ PRIORITY DATE LICENSE # PUC QUANTITY LICENSEE

Swift Creek

19610918 C028360 DOM 500 GD Gordon Ross

19700522 C038659 DOM 500 GD Warren Brubacher

19741118 C045280 PRRES 1.5 CFS Gordon Ross

19810416 C057708 DOM 500 GD Donna Tretheway

19810416 C057708 IRR 7 AF Donna Tretheway

19810416 C057709 PRRES 1.25 CFS Donna Tretheway

Cheekye River

19750915 C046906 DOM 500 GD Harvey Dubeck

Brook Creek

19820827 C061639 PRCOM 2.0 CFS Kevmac Developments

Brohm River

19820827 C061638 DOM 1,000 GD Kevmac Developments

Cheakamus River

19261004 F006047 DOM 500 GD Fulford Lumber Company

19540920 C022284 PRGEN 700,000 AF BC Hydro

19540920 C022285 STOPR 45,000 AF BC Hydro

19621212 FL20209 IRR 4.77 AF School District #4

19890620 C069983 CONUS 15 CFS Fisheries & Oceans

19950829 Z110107 PRGEN 2,295 CFS BC Hydro

19960305 C110783 CONWX 10 CFS Fisheries & Oceans

TABLE 3-13 Surface Water Licenses Near The Proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development (CONTINUED)

LOCATION/

PRIORITY DATE

LICENSE # PUC QUANTITY LICENSEE

Conroy Creek

19650928 C105799 DOM 500 GD Whistlers Mothers Ho

19650928 C105800 PRRES 3 CFS Whistlers Mother Ho

19870123 C055235 BOTTL 22,000 GD Aqua1 Beverage Comp.

Eli Spring

19700320 C108331 DOM 500 GD Elizabeth Hansen

Note: Surface water license information obtained from R. Kreye of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks,

Lower Mainland Region.

Note: CONUS-Conservation purposes

PRRES-Power/residential (non-consumptive)

STOPR-Storage/power

CONWK-Conservation works (consumptive)

PRCOM-Power/commercial (non-consumptive)

DOM-Domestic (consumptive)

BOTTL-Bottling (consumptive)

CFS-Cubic feet per second

AF-Acre feet

GD-Gallons per day

● One license for Brooks Creek, (a tributary of Brohm River) immediately upstream of Highway 99.

The three surface water licenses for Conroy Creek, which flows into Culliton Creek immediately downstream of Highway 99 are issued to Whistlers Mothers Ho (License # C105799) for 500 gallons per day for domestic use, to Whistler Mothers Ho (License # C105800) for 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) for power/residential (non-consumptive) and to Aqua 1 Beverage Company (License # C055235) for 2,200 gallons per day for bottling.

The surface water license for Brooks Creek, which flows into Brohm River immediately upstream of Highway 99 is issued to Kevmac Development (License #C061639) for 2 cfs for power/commercial (non-consumptive). The surface water license for Brohm River immediately upstream of Highway 99 is also issued to Kevmac Developments (License # C061638) for 1,000 gallons per day.

In addition to the above surface water licenses in the vicinity of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development, a number of surface water licenses have been issued downstream of the development site for Swift Creek, Cheekye and Cheakamus Rivers (Table 3-13).

The six surface water licenses for Swift Creek are downstream of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development between Highway 99 and the Cheakamus River. These licenses are for a combination of domestic use (1,500 gallons per day), irrigation (7 acre feet) and power/residential non-consumptive use (2.75 cfs).

The surface water license for Eli Spring which is located near the confluence of the Cheekye and Cheakamus Rivers is issued to Elizabeth Hansen (License # C108331) for 500 gallons per day for domestic use.

The surface water license for the Cheekye River (License # 46906) which is located near Eli Spring downstream of Highway 99, is for 500 gallons per day for domestic use.

Of the seven surface water licenses in the Cheakamus River, water licenses FL 20209 for School District #4 (4.7 acre feet) and water licenses CL 110783 (10 cfs) and CL 69983 (15 cfs) for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans are located along the west bank of the Cheakamus River between the Cheekye River and Swift Creek. The remaining four licenses are located at Daisy Lake (Fulford Lumber and 3 BC Hydro).

3.1.4.2 Groundwater Wells

Although groundwater wells are currently not required to be licensed or reported within B.C., a total of 34 groundwater wells are registered in the vicinity of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development and primarily downstream of Highway 99 (Table 3-14: Exhibit 3-4).

The majority of the wells are located in Paradise Valley adjacent to the Cheakamus River just downstream of Swift Creek, and near the Cheekye and Cheakamus River confluence.

Groundwater wells within the Paradise Valley typically range from a well depth of 9 m to 36 m (30 ft to 118 ft) with flow yields ranging from no flow to approximately 72 gallons per minute (Table 3-14). Soils were generally sand and gravel.

Table 3-14 Registered Groundwater Wells Downstream Of The Proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development

Well Tag # District Lot Well Depth(m) Yield (gpm) Lithology Street Name

05392 7219 76 50 Overburden/rock Hwy. 99 & Alice Lk. Rd.

24388 7219 71 8.5 gravel/boulders Alice Lk. Drive Inn

25768 - 58 480 Gravel Upper Cheakamus

29223 3033 - - - “”

26264 6958 18 25 gravel/sand “”

27179 6958 40 40 gravel/boulders “”

40257 - 32 10 sand/gravel Paradise Valley

19369 1244 36 10 sand/gravel Paradise Valley

17069 - 9 42 gravel/sand “”

17548 3660 18 20 sand/gravel “”

17055 - 11 25 Gravel “”

57467 1244 29 72 sand/gravel “”

29221 1248 13 0 gravel/boulder “”

27165 1246 21 0 gravel/boulder “”

39838 1248 21 20 Boulders/gravel “”

27776 1248 20 20 Boulders/gravel “”

24017 1248 18 20 Gravel “”

35271 1248 20 10 Boulders “”

27164 1247 21 40 sand/gravel “”


54657 1248 16 8 Boulders/gravel Cheakamus Subd.



15215 1817 34 20 sand/gravel -

Table 3-14 Registered Groundwater Wells Downstream Of The Proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development (Continued)

Well Tag # District Lot Well Depth(m) Yield (gpm) Lithology Street Name

16022 1817 19 20 gravel/sand -

17819 1819 52 6 Gravel Fernwood Rd.

27155 1817 46 0 glacial till “”

27156 3186 46 10 glacial till “”

27773 3182 48 30 sand/gravel “”

38712 3186 62 25 Gravel “”

39855 3186 31 20 sand/gravel -

50060 3186 55 20 gravel/boulders Squamish Airp.

52592 3183 14 20 Boulders/gravel Govrnmt. Rd.

52602 3183 42 25 gravel/boulders -

Note: Groundwater well information obtained from R. Kreye of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Lower Mainland Region.

Wells within other areas downstream of the project site along Alice Lake road, upper Cheakamus Road, Fernwood Road and near the Squamish Airport typically ranged between 14 m to 76 m (46 ft to 249 ft) in depth, with flow rates ranging from no flow to 50 gallons per minute. One well (Well Tag # 25768) along the Upper Cheakamus Road yielded approximately 480 gallons per minute. Soils were generally gravel and boulders or sand and gravel.

3.2 Terrestrial Resources

3.2.1 Wildlife Resources

As a result of its varied topographic, vegetative and drainage patterns, the region encompasses a relatively diverse faunal assemblage. Species representing all the major groups of terrestrial vertebrates (mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles) occur within the study area. A detailed species list for the region is presented in Tables 3-15 through 3-18.

3.2.1.1 Mammals

Based on surveys and species lists compiled in the adjacent Garibaldi Provincial Park (Table 3-15) and a review of standard reference material (Cowan and Guiguet, 1965; Nagorsen and Brigham, 1993, and Nagorsen, 1996), up to 52 species of mammals, including 9 hypothetical species, could be expected to

Table 3-15 Terrestrial Mammals Which May Occur In The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region

(Note: H = hypothetical species, may occur in area due to large home range; HP = Historical presence in area; O = observed by D. Blood and Associates 1996/1997)

Family Species

Common Name Latin Name

F. URSIDAE Black Bear O

Grizzly Bear HP

Ursus americanus

Ursus arctos

F. CANIDAE Wolf HP

Coyote O

Red Fox HP

Canis lupus

Canis latrans

Vulpes vulpes

F. FELIDAE Cougar HP

Bobcat HP

Felis concolor

Lynx rufus

F. CERVIDAE Roosevelt ElkH

Columbia Black-Tailed Deer O

Cervus elaphus roosevelti

Odocoileus hemionus columbianus

F. BOUIDAE Mountain Goat O Oreamnos americanus

F. MUSTELIDAE River Otter HP

Mink HP

Marten HP

Short-tailed Weasel HP

Wolverine HP

FisherH

Spotted Skunk HP

Least Weasel HP

Lutra canadensis

Mustela vison

Martes americana

Mustela eminea fallenda

Gulo luscus

Martes pennanti

Spiilogale gracilis

Mustela rixosa

F. CASTORIDAE Beaver HP Castor canadensis

F. PROCYONIDAE Raccoon HP Procyon lotor

F. ERETHIZONTIDAE Porcupine HP Erethizon dorsatum

F. SCIURIDAE Red Squirrel HP

Flying Squirrel O

Hoary Marmot O

Northwestern Chipmunk O

Yellow Pine Chipmunk O

Tamiasciurus hudsonicus

Glaucomys sabrinus oregonensis

Marmota caligata

Eutamias amoenus

Tamias amoenus

F. TALPIDAE Shrew-mole O Neurotrichus gibbsii

F. SORICIDAE Dusky Shrew HP

Vagrant Shrew O

Water Shrew O

Common Shrew HP

Pygmy Shrew HP

Sorex monticolus

Sorex vagrans

Sorex palustrus

Sorex cinereus

Microsorex hoyi

F. CRICETIDAE Muskrat HP

Deer Mouse O

Cascade Deer Mouse HP

Townsend's Vole HP

Bushy-tailed Wood Rat HP

Northern Bog-lemming O

Boreal Redback Vole O

Mountain Heather-vole HP

Richardson VoleH

Long-tailed Vole HP

Ondatra zibethicus

Peromyscus maniculatus dusterus

Peromyscus areas

Microtus townsendii

Neotoma cinerea

Synaptomys borealis wrangeli

Clethrionmys gapperi casendensis

Phenacomys intermedius oramonti

Microtus richardsoni richardsoni s

Microtus longicaudus subspp. Macrurus

Meadow Vole HP

Meadow Jumping Mouse HP

Microtus pennsylvanicus

Zapus hudsonius

Table 3-15 Terrestrial Mammals Which May Occur In GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region (Continued)


Family Species


F. LEPORIDAE Varying Hare O Lepus americanus

F. OCHOTONIDAE Pika O Ochotona princeps

F. VESPERTILIONIDAE California Myotis H

Little Brown Myotis HP

Yuma Myotis H

Long-legged Myotis H

Keen's Long-eared MyotisH

Silver-haired Bat HP

Hoary Bat HP

Townsend's Big-eared Bat H

Western Long-eared Myotis H

Big Brown Bat HP

Myotis californicus

Myotis lucifugus

Myotis yummanensis

Myotis volans

Myotis keenii

Lasionycteris noctivagans

Lasiurus cinereus

Plecotus townsendii townsendii

Myotis evotis

Eptesicus fuscus

Table 3-16 Birds Which May Occur In The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region

(Note: H = hypothetical species, may occur in area due to large home range; HP = Historical presence in area; O =

observed by D. Blood and Associates 1996/1997)

Family Species


RAPTORIAL BIRDS Bald Eagle HP

Golden Eagle HP

Osprey O

Peregrine Falcon HP

Red-tailed Hawk HP

Northern Goshawk H

Merlin HP

Barred OwlH

Sharp-shinned Hawk HP

Cooper's Hawk H

Western Screech Owl H

Northern Pygmy Owl O

Northern Saw-whet Owl H

Spotted Owl H

Great Horned Owl HP

Northern Hawk Owl HP

Haliaeetus leucocephalus

Aquila chrysaetos

Pandion haliaetus

Falco peregrinus

Buteo jamaicensis

Accipiter gentilis laingi

Falco columbarius

Strix varia

Accipter striatus

Accipter cooperii

Otus kennicottii

Glaucidium gnoma

Aegolius acadicus

Strix occidentalis

Bubo virginianus

Surnia ulula

Grouse and Ptarmigan Ruffed Grouse HP

Blue Grouse O

White-tailed Ptarmigan HP

Bonasa umbellus

Dendragapus obscurus

Lagopus leucurus

Table 3-16 Birds Which May Occur In The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region (Continued)


Family Species


Woodpeckers Red-breasted Sapsucker O

Northern Flicker O

Pileated Woodpecker HP

Hairy Woodpecker O

Downy Woodpecker HP

Three-toed Woodpecker HP

Sphyrapicus ruber

Colaptes auratus

Dryocopus pileatus

Picoides villosus

Piciodes pubescens

Piciodes tridactylus

Thrushes American Robin O

Varied Thrush O

Swainson's Thrush O

Hermit Thrush O

Townsend's Solitaire HP

Golden-crowned Kinglet O

Ruby-crowned Kinglet HP

Mountain Bluebird H

Turdus migratorius

Ixoreus naevius

Catharus ustulatus

Catharus guttatus

Myadestes townsendi

Regulus satrapa

Regulus calendula

Sialia currucoides

Corvids Steller's Jay O

Northwestern Crow O

Common Raven O

Gray Jay O

Clark's Nutcracker HP

Cyanocitta stelleri

Corvus caurinus

Corvus corax

Perisoreus canadensis

Nucifraga columbiana

Warblers and Sparrows Orange-crowned Warbler O

Yellow-rumped Warbler HP

Yellow Warbler O

MacGillivray's Warbler O

Wilson's Warbler HP

Common Yellowthroat O

Nashville Warbler HP

Townsend's Warbler O

Rufous-sided Towhee HP

Song Sparrow O

Chipping Sparrow HP

Dark-eyed Junco O

Golden-crowned Sparrow O

White-crowned Sparrow O

Lincoln's Sparrow HP

Fox Sparrow O

Savannah Sparrow O

Vermivora celata

Dendroica coronata

Dendroica petechia

Oporornis tolmiei

Wilsonia pusilla

Geothlypis trichas

Vermivora ruficapilla

Dendroica townsendii

Pipilo erythrophthalmus

Melospiza melodia

Spizella passerina

Junco hyemalis

Zonotrichia atricapilla

Zonotrichia albicolis

Melospiza lincolnii

Passerella iliaca

Passerculus sandwhichensis



Family Species


Finches Purple Finch HP

Red Crossbill HP

White-winged Crossbill HP

Pine Siskin O

Rosy Finch HP

Evening Grosbeak HP

Black-headed Grosbeak O

Pine Grosbeak HP

Carpodacus purpureus

Loxia curvirostra

Loxia leucoptera

Carduelis pinus

Leucosticte arctoa

Coccothraustes vespertinus

Pheucticus melanocephalus

Pinicola enucleator

Flycatchers and Swallows Olive-sided Flycatcher O

Pacific-slope Flycatcher O

Dusky Flycatcher HP

Hammond's Flycatcher O

Willow Flycatcher O

Tree Swallow HP

Violet-green Swallow O

Barn Swallow HP

Vaux's Swift O

Contopus borealis

Empidonax difficilis

Empidonax oberholseri

Empidonax hammondi

Empidonax traillii

Tachycineta bicolor

Tachycineta thalassina

Hirundo rutica

Chaetua vauxi

Other Birds American Pipit HP

Horned Lark O

Brewer's Blackbird HP

Common Nighthawk HP

Rufous Hummingbird O

Chestnut-backed Chickadee O

Mountain Chickadee HP

Red-breasted Nuthatch O

Brown Creeper O

Winter Wren O

Bohemian Waxwing O

Cedar Waxwing HP

European Starling HP

Hutton's Vireo H

Solitary Vireo O

Warbling Vireo HP

Marbled Murrelet H

Anthus spinoletta

Eremophila alpestris

Euphagus cyanocephalus

Chordeiles minor

Selasphorus rufous

Parus rufescens

Parus gambeli

Sitta canadensis

Certhia americana

Troglodytes troglodytes

Bombycilla garrulus

Bombycilla cedrorum

Sturnus vulgarus

Vireo huttoni

Vireo solitarius

Vieo gilvus

Brachyramphus marmoratus



Family Species


Common Loon HP

Horned Grebe HP

Mallard HP

Northern Pintail HP

Barrow's Goldeneye HP

Common Merganser HP

Hooded Merganser HP

Harlequin Duck HP

Great Blue Heron HP

American Bittern H

Common Snipe HP

Spotted Sandpiper HP

Solitary Sandpiper HP

Western Sandpiper HP

Wilson's Phalarope HP

MewGull HP

Gavia immer

Podiceps auritus

Anas platyrhynchos

Anas acuta

Bucephala islandica

Mergus merganser

Lophodytes cucullatus

Histrionicus histrionicus

Ardea herodias

Botaurus lentigenosus

Gallingo gallingo

Actitus macularia

Tringa solitaria

Calidris mauri

Phalaropus tricolor

Laruscanus

Table 3-17 Amphibians Which May Occur In GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region


Family Species


F. AMBYSTOMATIDAE Northwestern Salamander HP

Long-toed Salamander HP

Ambystoma gracile

Ambystoma macrodactylum

F. PLETHODONTIDAE Western Redback Salamander HP

Ensatina HP

Plethodon vehiculum

Ensatina eschscholtzi

F. SALAMANDRIDAE Rough-skin Newt HP Taricha granulosa

F. BUFONIDAE Western Toad HP Bufo boreus

F. ASCAPHIDAE Tailed Frog O Ascaphus truei

F. HYLIDAE Pacific Treefrog HP Hyla regilla

F. RANIDAE Red-legged Frog HP Rana aurora

Table 3-18 Reptiles Which May Occur In The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Study Region


Family Species


F. BOIDAE Rubber BoaH Charina bottae

F. COLUBRIDAE Common Garter Snake HP

Northwest Garter Snake HP

Western Terrestrial Garter Snake HP

Thamnophis sirtalis

Thamnophis ordinoides

Thamnophis elegans

F. ANGUIDAE Northern Alligator Lizard HP Elgaria coerula

occur within the study area. These species are distributed among 15 mammalian families.

The black bear is the most abundant large carnivore in the study area, and the only one whose home range could exist

entirely within the study area. Wide-ranging carnivores such as grizzly bear, cougar, gray wolf, and wolverine likely include parts of the study area within their home ranges, but would occur on an infrequent basis. According to Brian Gates previously with the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks in Victoria, there have been no grizzly bear sightings in the region south of Pemberton, since the early 1970’s.

Only two ungulates occur in the study area, black-tailed deer and mountain goat. Based on track data collected to date, deer could be expected throughout much of the study area below 1,000 m (3280 ft) elevation in winter.

Based on information provided by the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks staff in Squamish (pers. comm. S. Rochetta), there is no deer winter range in the vicinity of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH village site or mountain winter recreation area. However, there are three winter range polygons in the lower Brohm River drainage near Highway #99 that could be impacted by the proposed access road. There is also an environmentally sensitive area for deer in the lower Brohm River drainage that may also be impacted by the proposed access road. Based on field studies conducted in May and June 1997 by D. Blood and Associates, the following general findings for deer were made:

● Key winter ranges are restricted to old growth Douglas fir stands on steep, rocky south to west facing sites below the 700 m elevation

● Due to extensive logging, good winter range is very restricted in occurrence ● Some deer move upward (1,100 m elevation) as the snowline recedes.

Steep, low elevation south facing slopes supporting second growth forest had little evidence of winter use. This is likely due to poor understory development (due to shading) and poor snow interception qualities of the stands.

Mountain goats in the study area are restricted to a few summer and winter ranges in the upper Cheekye River basin. Historically, Stepniewski (1973) reported up to 15 goats on Brohm Ridge during the summer, while Ministry of Environment staff in Squamish (S. Rochetta) observed 15+ goats on or near Brohm Ridge in 1990 and 10 goats in Culliton Creek during 1977. M. Turner of the Parks Branch indicated that Mountain goats are found primarily in the eastern portion of Garibaldi Park, and not near the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development.

During the winter of 1996/1997 (March and April) the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (BC Parks Branch) and the Ministry of Forests identified two areas or polygons used in the winter by Mountain goats near the proposed development site (Exhibit 3-5). The first area or polygon, was identified in the upper Cheekye River between elevations 1,400 ft asl and 8,000 ft (Exhibit 3-6). A total of approximately 27 goats were noted in this polygon primarily between 4,500 ft asl and 5,600 ft asl. Although the area borders on the southern boundary of the proposed development, the most critical area used by goats and the area where goats were observed was outside of the development area near Atwell Peak (J. Roberts pers. comm.). Approximately 50% of the critical area or polygons used by goats during the winter survey were within Garibaldi Park.

Results of a late May, 1997 Mountain goat survey conducted by D. Blood & Associates within the project area were similar to the results of the Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. A total of 26 Mountain goats were observed in the Upper Cheekye River basin near Atwell Peak. Foot reconnaissance along the top of Brohm Ridge in September 1997 produced no evidence of north-south goat movements, nor of any use of the ridge itself as a travel corridor. Limited goat signs in a steep gully near the headwaters of the Cheekye drainage, at the eastern boundary of the project area suggest that a few (i.e. two to three goats) make use of this area.

The second Mountain goat winter area or polygon identified by the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Forests in 1996/1997 was in the Culliton Creek watershed between elevations 2,200 ft asl to approximately 4,400 ft asl. A total of 5 goats were observed during the survey, primarily between 3,300 ft asl and 4,250 ft asl. This polygon is outside of

the proposed development area and is near Clinker Peak. Ministry of Environment staff in Squamish (pers. comm., S. Rochetta) observed 10 goats in Culliton Creek during a 1977 survey.

Exhibit 3-5 Mountain Goat Ranges In The General Vicinity

Exhibit 3-6 Mountain Goat Winter Ranges Within And Near

Forest-dwelling furbearers and other small mammals are also expected to be relatively abundant in the study area. The latter make a significant contribution to mammalian bio-diversity of the area. Wetland and riparian mammals (otter, mink, beaver, muskrat) are uncommon due to a lack of suitable habitat.

D. Blood & Associates set small mammal traplines in five distinct habitat types that occur in the project area during September 1997. Four pitfall traps were also set in a low elevation floodplain. The traplines set in the mid-seral floodplain habitat had the highest capture rate. Traplines set in the second-growth and old-growth coniferous forest also had high capture rates. Of particular note is the discovery of a shrew-mole (Neurotrichus gibbsii), a relatively uncommon small mammal captured in this floodplain. This specimen represents a northern range extension for this species.

Other mammal observations made during the September study include signs of the regionally important Northern bog-lemming (Synaptomys borealis) and the Hoary marmot along Brohm Ridge. Yellow pine chipmunk and Common pika were sighted along the north slopes of the proposed village site and near the existing chalets on the Brohm Ridge access road.

3.2.1.2 Birds

In total, about 100 species of birds may occur in the study area. Twenty-three of these have not been documented within the adjacent Garibaldi Provincial Park, and are considered hypothetical species. Most of the birds listed in Table 3-16 may be placed in one of eight functional groups, as follows: raptors, piscivorous birds, shorebirds, dabbling ducks, bark-gleaners, aerial foragers, seed-eaters, and habitat generalists. Some of these functional groups are well-represented within the study area, while others (e.g. piscivores; shorebirds; ducks) are not.

A total of 54 species of birds has been recorded in the project area by D. Blood & Associates (Table 3-16). Species groups well represented in the area include corvids, flycatchers, thrushes, and woodpeckers.

D. Blood & Associates investigated bird presence within the study area in October 1996, and May, June, September 1997. There were no signs of Spotted owl, Northern goshawk or Marbled murrelet during surveys conducted in May and June 1997. These results are not surprising since there is little old-growth nesting available for these species in the project area. The Spotted owl has not previously been detected in the Squamish-Whistler corridor.

Surveys for breeding songbirds were conducted in May and June 1997. Thirty-four species were recorded in the project area and most of these can be expected to be nesting in the project area.

D. Blood and Associates conducted a study of bird use of the alpine and subalpine regions of the study area. At least twenty species of birds were identified on Brohm Ridge, which is situated in the Alpine-Tundra (AT) Biogeoclimatic Zone.

Other bird species detected in the spring survey include a Turkey vulture (blue listed) observed in the Cheekye River watershed, an active Osprey nest observed near Cat Lake, and a Northern Pygmy owl heard in the southwest corner of

the project area. During the September survey, a noteworthy sighting in the project area included the sighting of a flock of 16 swift and the occurrence of two raptorial birds, the Northern harrier and the American kestrel.

3.2.1.3 Amphibians

In total, seven species of amphibians are expected to occur in the study area (Table 3-17). Distribution records provided in Green and Campbell (1984) suggest that three species of salamander and four species of frog/toad may be found in the region. The seven species are distributed among six amphibian families.

D. Blood and Associates conducted tailed frog surveys at four locations along Brohm River in September, 1997. One tailed frog was found in an old-growth riparian strip within the proposed village site.

3.2.1.4 Reptiles

The reptile assemblage of the study area may include four species of snakes and one lizard (Table 3-18). Occurrence records in Gregory and Campbell (1984) suggest that, in addition to the rubber boa (a hypothetical species), three species of garter snake are likely found in the study area. The Northern alligator lizard is generally sparsely distributed throughout its range, however, it could be expected to occur on forest floors and nearby rock outcrops within the study area.

3.2.1.5 Red-listed, Blue-listed and Regionally Important Species

Table 3-19 summarizes species of conservation interest and their probability of occurrence in the study area. The table is based on the most recent ratings provided by the Provincial Conservation Data Centre (CDC), which maintains tracking lists for each forest district. Red-Listed species are those considered critically imperiled, and are candidates for legal "endangered species" status. Blue-Listed species are those which may be sensitive to human activities. Finally, those species which are of some economic or conservation interest, but are not threatened, are considered "regionally important."

Table 3-19 Vertebrate Species of Conservation Interest In The Squamish Forest District and Their Probability of Occurrence in the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development Area.1

Species Listing Occurrence in the Study AreaFurther Study Recommended

High Moderate Low

MAMMALS

Grizzly Bear Blue X Habitat suitability

Wolverine susp. luscus Blue X Track surveys

Fisher Blue X Track surveys

Marten Reg. Important X Track surveys

Black-tailed Deer

subsp. columbianusReg. Important X Winter range ID

Mountain Goat Reg. Important X Winter range ID

Keen’s long-eared Myotis Red X No

Townsend's Big-eared Bat Blue X No

Hoary Bat Reg. Important X No

Northern Bog-lemming Reg. Important X Live Trapping

BIRDS

Marbled Murrelet Red X "Intensive" surveys

Spotted Owl Red X Call playback surveys (or C.P.S)

Northern pygmy owl Blue X C.P.S.

Western screech owl

subsp. kennicottiReg. Important X C.P.S.

Northern goshawk subsp. atricapillus

Reg. Important X C.P.S.

Peregrine falcon Red X No (shoreline species)

Great blue heron Blue XBreeding Bird Survey (or B.B.S.)

Green-backed heron Blue X B.B.S.

American bittern Blue X B.B.S.

Bald eagle Reg. Important X Nest survey

Sharp-shinned hawk Reg. Important X B.B.S.

Cooper’s hawk Reg. Important X B.B.S.

Barrow’s goldeneye Reg. Important X B.B.S.

Hutton's Vireo Blue X B.B.S.

Pileated woodpecker Reg. Important X B.B.S.

Brown creeper Reg. Important X B.B.S.

Vaux’s swift Reg. Important X B.B.S.

AMPHIBIANS

Tailed Frog Blue X Stream surveys

REPTILES

Rubber Boa Blue X No

Notes

1 ratings based on Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (June 10, 1996).

2 Red-Listed species are considered critically imperilled and are candidates for legal Endangered Species status

3 Blue-Listed species are considered threatened

4 “Regionally Important" species are not considered threatened or endangered, but are of management interest.

Among the mammals which may occur in the area, there is one Red-Listed species (Keen’s long eared myotis), four Blue-listed species (Grizzly bear, wolverine, fisher and Townsend’s Big-eared bat), and five regionally important species (Marten, Black-tailed deer, Mountain goat, Hoary bat, Northern Bog-lemming). Of these species, D. Blood and Associates have identified Black-tailed deer, Mountain goat and Northern Bog-lemming within the study area.

The avian assemblage of the study area may contain three Red-Listed (Marbled murrelet, Spotted owl, Peregrine falcon), five Blue-Listed (Great blue heron, Green backed heron, American bittern, Hutton’s vireo, Northern Pygmy owl), and nine regionally important birds (Western screech owl, Northern goshawk, Bald eagle, Sharp shinned hawk, Cooper’s hawk, Barrow’s goldeneye, Pileated woodpecker, Brown creeper, Vaux’s swift). D. Blood and Associates identified a Northern pygmy owl and a flock of swift in the study area.

The only species of conservation concern among amphibians and reptiles are the Tailed frog and Rubber boa (both are Blue-Listed). D. Blood and Associates captured one Tailed frog in the study area.

Habitat capability/suitability ratings for selected game animals, furbearers, and birds were applied to Ecosystem Units as a component of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping. Methodology for the wildlife capability/suitability rating and mapping program followed the Resources Inventory Committee (May, 1997 Review Draft). Eight species of conservation or management interest were selected for study, based on discussions with personnel from the Lower Mainland Regional Headquarters of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. Species of interest included: Black bear, Cougar, Black-tailed deer, Mountain goat, Marten, Spotted owl, Marbled murrelet, and Tailed frog. At each of the 46 sites visited (one site per polygon within the study area), ratings for capability, suitability, kind of habitat use, and predominant season(s) of use were recorded for each species. The information from these studies are currently being analyzed and will be reported at a later date.

3.2.2 Vegetation Resources

3.2.2.1 Bio-Geoclimatic Zones

The study area is situated entirely within the Southern Pacific Ranges (SPR) Eco-section, which is part of the larger Southern Pacific and Cascade Ranges Ecoregion. The SPR eco-section is characterized by high precipitation and rugged topography. As a result of its proximity to the Pacific Ocean, fluctuations in temperature are considered moderate (Demarchi et al., 1990). Four bio-geoclimatic (BGC) zones occur in the region (Exhibit 3-7; Table 3-20), including

Exhibit 3-7 Bio-Geoclimatic Zones Within The Proposed Resort Development Area

Table 3-20 Biogeoclimatic Zonation in the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development Area.


CWHdm - Dry Maritime Coastal Western Hemlock Subzone

Elevational Range: Sea level to approximately 650 m.

Zonal Vegetation: - Tree layer dominated by Douglas fir (Fd), Western Red-cedar (Cw), Western hemlock (Hw).

● Major understory species: salal, red huckleberry, step moss, Oregon beaked moss, lanky moss, flat moss. ● Minor occurrence of dull Oregon-grape, vine maple, bracken and swordfern in understory.

CWHvm2 - Montane Very Wet Maritime Coastal Western Hemlock Variant

Elevational Range: 650-1000 m (grades into MH zone in upper range).

Zonal Vegetation: - Forests on zonal sites dominated by Western hemlock and amabilis fir (Ba) with lesser occurrence of Western red-cedar, Yellow cedar Yc) and mountain hemlock (Hm).

● Yc and Hm become more common with increasing elevation and soil moisture. ● Major understory species: Alaskan blueberry, five-leaved bramble, step moss, lanky moss, and pipecleaner moss.

MHmm1 - Windward Moist Maritime Mountain Hemlock Variant

Elevational Range: 1000-1350 m (grades into discontinuous parkland at upper elevations).

Zonal Vegetation: - Forests on zonal sites dominated by Ba and Hm and to a lesser extent, Yc.

● Major understory species: Alaskan blueberry, oval-leaved blueberry, and pipecleaner moss. ● Vegetation characteristics strongly influenced by local topography.

ATc - Coastal Alpine-Tundra Zone

Elevational Range: above 1350 m to height-of-land

● Non-forested, vegetation dominated by shrubs, herbs, bryophytes and lichens. ● Interspersed with meadows, rock, ice, and snow. ● Dominant shrubs are white and pink mountain-heathers.

two variants of the Coastal Western Hemlock (CWH) Zone. The Dry Maritime Variant of the CWH Zone (CWHdm) extends from sea level to about 650 m (2,133 ft) elevation.

The tree layer is dominated by Douglas fir, western red cedar, and western hemlock. Major understory species include salal, red huckleberry, and mosses.

The CWHdm zone accounts for approximately 13 % of the 3,200 ha (7,907 acres) parent parcel. The Montane Variant of the CWH Zone (CWHvm2) extends from about 650 m to 1000 m (2,133 ft to 3,280 ft) elevation. The tree layer in this variant is dominated by western hemlock and amabilis fir, however, western red cedar, yellow cedar, and mountain hemlock also form a significant proportion of the forest cover.

Alaskan blueberry, five-leaved bramble, and pipecleaner moss dominate the understory. This variant represents about 16 % of the parent parcel. The Windward Moist Maritime Variant of the Mountain Hemlock Zone (MHmm1) occurs from 1,000 m to about 1,350 m (3,280 ft to 4,429 ft) in elevation, and accounts for about 34 % of the parent parcel. Forest cover is predominantly amabilis fir and mountain hemlock with some yellow cedar, however, forests become increasingly patchy with increasing elevation.

Alaskan blueberry, oval-leaved blueberry, and pipecleaner moss comprise most of the understory. The distribution of the Coastal Alpine-Tundra Zone (ATc) is strongly influenced by aspect, however, it generally is found above 1,350 m (3,280 ft) elevation on the southern coast. Vegetation within this unforested BGC zone is dominated by shrubs (primarily heathers), herbs, bryophytes, and lichens. Rock, ice, and snow frequently interrupt vegetative cover. At about 37 %, this BGC zone accounts for the greatest proportion of the parent parcel.

3.2.2.2 Ecosystem Units

Detailed Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping (TEM) is currently being completed for the study area. TEM utilizes a three-level classification hierarchy of ecological units, including ecoregion units, biogeoclimatic units and ecosystem units. Ecoregion and biogeoclimatic units are derived from provincial maps. Site level polygons describe ecosystem units composed of site series, site modifiers and structural stages. Plant associations, or "site series," are designated on the basis of variations in the moisture and nutrient regimes of each BGC Variant or Subzone. A site series describes the unique aggregation of plants which would be present on a site at climax (i.e. in an old seral stand).

A total of 97 polygons have been defined for the project area. Field studies were conducted from September 29-October 5, 1997 and October 29, 1997 to “ground truth” 50% of the polygons. Terrain, soil, vegetation, and wildlife habitat characteristics were recorded for each polygon.

Information regarding vegetation characteristics that were recorded for each site include dominant species in the tree, tall shrub, low shrub, herb and moss/lichen layers. Also, total cover, crown cover, rare and endangered plants were recorded for each site. Further information was collected for detailed site investigations.

3.2.2.3 Rare or Unique Plants/Plant Communities

Two ferns and sixteen other vascular plants appear on the CDC Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List for the Squamish Forest District (Table 3-21). Few of these are forest species and most appear to be associated with rocky habitats such as those found along streams and avalanche tracks, or with wet lowlands and lake margins.

With respect to rare plant communities, virtually all site series in the CWHdm Variant (in the mature or climax stage) appear on either Red or Blue Lists for the region (including the zonal site series). Presumably, these plant communities have been placed on these lists because extensive logging has removed most valley bottom old-growth. There may be up to 5 Blue-Listed site series occurring within the CWHvm2 Variant, and two others in the MHmm1 Subzone.

3.2.3 Geotechnical Assessment

3.2.3.1 Scope of Study

The original terrain hazard assessment was conducted by Thurber Engineering Consultants, while Pottinger & Gaherty Environmental Consultants updated the assessment from terrain field plots completed as part of the terrestrial ecosystem mapping (TEM) study in September, 1997. The following information was used for the assessments:

● Ministry of Environment (MoE) terrain map (1:50,000) scale NTS Map 92 G/14) ● 1:20,000 TRIM maps ● 1:10,000 and 1:20,000 colour aerial photography (1996) ● Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping (TEM) of 46 field plots ● Thurber Engineering Ltd.’s report Cheekye River Terrain Hazard and Land Use Studyto the B.C. Ministry of

Lands, Parks and Housing dated March 1993 (TEL, 1993).

Table 3-21 B.C. Conservation Data Centre:

Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List

Squamish Forest District (Fd #13) June 10, 1996

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAMEGLOBAL

RANKPROVINCIAL RANK PROVINCIAL LIST

*** FERNS AND ALLIES

Cheilanthes gracillimaLace Fern G4G5 S2S3 Blue

Dryopteris marginalis Marginal Wood Fern

G5 S1 Red

***DICOTS

Arabis lemmonivar.depauperata Lemmon's

RochcressG5T S1 Blue

Arabis murrayi Murray's Rockcress G3 S2S3 Blue

Castilleja rupicola Cliff Paintbrush G2G3 S1 Blue

Cicuta maculata var. maculataSpotted Cowbane G5T5 S1 Blue

Epilobium glabberimum ssp. fastigiatum Smooth Willowhers G5T S2S3 Blue

Gentianella tenella ssp. tenellaSlender Gentian G4G5T4 S1 Blue

Hydrophyllum fendleri var. albifons Fendler's Waterleaf G4G5T S2S3 Blue

Mimulus breweri Brewer's Monkey-flower

G4 S2S3 Blue

Nothochelone nemorosa WoodlandPenstemon

G5 S2S3 Blue

Sidalcea hendersonii Henderson'sChecker-mallow

G3G4 S2S3 Blue

Stellaria obtusa Blunt-sepaledStarwort

G5 S2S3 Blue

***MONOCOTS

Alluim geyeri var. geyeri Geyer's Onion G4G5T4 S2 Red

Carex hystericina Porcupine Sedge G5 S1 Blue

Juncus regelii Regel's Rush G5 S2S3 Blue

Pleuropogon refractus Nodding Semaphore Grass

G4G5 S2S3 Blue

Scirpus olneyi Olney's Bulrush G4 S1 Blue

18 TAXA LISTED

It is important to note that the study area has a variety of geologic hazards including snow avalanche areas, cliffs with rockfall activity, gullies with debris flows (or the potential for debris flows and debris landslides, some of them logging related) and a risk of volcanic eruption from Mount Garibaldi, which last erupted between 9,000 and 23,000 years ago.

3.2.3.2 Geology and Soils

The western slopes of the project area have granitic bedrock at the surface. Most upland areas have volcanic rock which originated in geologically old eruptive phases in the Mount Garibaldi volcanic complex. The volcanic rock is fractured and may have highly variable geotechnical properties.

Overburden comprises a variety of materials including glacial till, colluvium, unconsolidated volcanic ash and glacial outwash sand and gravel.

3.2.3.3 Seismology

There is no record of active geologic faults in the region and no documentation of M5 or greater earthquakes in the area (TEL, 1993). However, the project area is in zone of high seismic risk with the added risk associated with potential volcanism in the Mount Garibaldi area. Strong earthquakes are likely to trigger bedrock and soil landslides and may cause ground surface ruptures.

3.2.3.4 Geomorphology

The geomorphological history of the Brohm Ridge study area is complicated by both the repeated advance and retreat of continental glaciation during the Wisconsin, and coincident early to late Pleistocene volcanism, including formation of the volcanic cone of Mount Garibaldi over the glacial ice (Mathews, 1952, 1958). The resulting geomorphology makes identification and mapping of surficial features and materials that affect terrain stability more complicated than areas outside the volcanic influence. The variable and irregular topography is dominated by a mantle of moraine over bedrock typical of most coastal mountain areas and also includes: glacially over-steepened valley walls with shallow soil on rock; high altitude glaciofluvial terraces; unglaciated, poorly consolidated volcanic tuff breccias; ice contact, dacitic flows; and colluvial and fluvial deposits derived from collapse of the Garibaldi supraglacial volcanic cone (Mathews, 1952).

Bedrock geology comprises a basement of relatively massive grandodiorite intrusive rocks and minor metamorphosed volcanics. These occur from elevations of 300 metres at Brohm Lake to 1,200 metres on the ridge west of Brohm River, and 1,600 metres at the headwaters of the north fork of the Cheekeye River. Draped over these are at least two forms of the Garibaldi Group volcanic rocks (Mathews, 1952). The older and more competent includes dacitic tuffaceous flows exposed along the length of Brohm Ridge to the north and west of the headwaters of Brohm River, and along the spur ridge extending southwest towards the Cheekeye River. These flows extend down to elevations of 800 metres and 500 metres, respectively (Roddick et.al., 1979). Based on their geomorphology and vertical foliation formed along probable chill contacts, they likely formed in partial contact with glaciers occupying the Brohm River, Cheekeye River and Culliton Creek valleys.

More recent deposits of tuff breccia laid down by glowing nuee ardente volcanic avalanches and lesser ash cover much of the Cheekeye River headwaters and partially obscure the older underlying volcanics along much of Brohm Ridge. These deposits are poorly consolidated and easily weathered and eroded. The headwaters of the Cheekeye Ricer, Brohm River, and Culliton Creek are all partially bordered by terraced escarpments, likely formed by late Garibaldi Group volcanic eruptives dammed up against the tributary lobes of the waning valley glaciers.

Evidence of repeated glacial advances and retreats exists in many parts of the study area. Regionally, the continental ice flows covered everything to at least 2,100 metres elevation (Mathews, 1952, 1958). Glaciation rounded the lower ridges, formed U-shaped valleys, and left a thick blanket of moraine in the valley bottoms, locally along valley walls, and on higher elevation ridges. The till hosts cobbles and boulders of intrusive and metamorphic origin, with much lesser volcanic rocks similar to those of the earlier Garibaldi Group rocks. A late glacial advance that was contemporaneous with regional volcanism manifests itself in subsequent deposits of till that host primarily recent volcanic cobbles and boulders , and occur locally in direct contact over earlier tills. Glacial scouring of the older Garibaldi Group volcanics is evident in some places and absent in others.

In addition to moraine materials, isolated ice dammed glaciofluvial deposits are common in many of the draws and stream gullies, notably below 1,200 metre elevation. Till often caps the glaciofluvial deposits.

Colluvial deposits of volcanic material are common in the headwaters of the Cheekeye River, in part the remnants of the collapsed volcanic cone that resulted as valley ice receded. Over-steepened rock faces and associated talus slopes are common over most of the study area, resulting from glacial scour and ice contact formation.

The area has been further modified by deep downcutting of local drainages as a result of isostatic rebound of the area. As a result, V-notch gullies are common, partially modifying the glacially shaped valleys. The combined effect of the collapsing of the Garibaldi volcanic cone and fluvial downcutting during the waning stages of glaciation, resulted in the remobilization of the debris collapsed into the Cheekeye basin into a large terraced alluvial fan over 200 metres thick that now extends from Cat Lake south to Alice Lake (Mathews, 1952).

3.2.3.5 Terrain Stability

Terrain mapping of the Brohm Ridge study area involved the pre-typing of terrain polygons on 1:20,000 scale (approximate) aerial photographs and follow-up field checking of over 45% of the total polygons (more than 60% of the polygons in the main proposed development area). Characterization of polygons was based on a combination of the type and texture of surficial materials present, surface expression, slope gradient, and geomorphological processes observed. Terrain classification for this study was done in accordance with the British Columbia Terrain Classification System (Howes & Kenk, 1997). Assessment of terrain stability hazard was done in accordance with the Forest Practices Code standards outlined in the Mapping and Assessing Terrain Stability Guidebook (MOF & MOE, 1995).

Terrain hazards known to occur in the area are identified in Exhibit 3-8.

Most areas in the Brohm Ridge study area are relatively stable (Class III or less). Past logging has resulted in no identified slope stability problems. Local areas of over-steep terrain exist, but for the most part areas investigated include a veneer to blanket of moraine over low to moderate steep (5· to 30· slopes of glacially modified bedrock. No major terrain hazard areas exist that could restrict the overall development of the area.

Areas with terrain stability risks in the area are dominated by over-steepened slopes of rock and glaciofluvial material which formed in contact with or were scoured by now absent glacial ice. Slope stability hazards or erosion risks were observed or are presumed to exist in seven areas and will require appropriate management and further, more detailed investigation. These areas include:

1. The proposed village site at the headwaters of Brohm River, specifically the rock face exposure immediately north and the terrace faces peripheral to the proposed development to the south

2. The steep lower slopes along the south form of Culliton Creek on the north face of Brohm Ridge 3. The northwest slope of Brohm Ridge east of Swift Creek

4.The steep tributary drainage on the north fork of the Cheekeye River extending down form the summit of Brohm Ridge

5.The valley bottom of the east tributary of Brohm River

6.Local sections of the high elevation, alpine area of Brohm Ridge and

7.Local over-steepened cliff areas throughout the study area.

Exhibit 3-8. Descriptive Terrain Features Within The Proposed Resort Development Area

The proposed village centre site at the headwaters of the Brohm River is situated on stable moraine covered bedrock and glaciofluvial terraces (Class I-II). The glaciofluvial ice-dammed terraces underly the south portion of the area between approximately 1,000 metres to 1,050 metres. The deposits are weakly-bedded, poorly-sorted, and well drained, with lesser horizons of thin-bedded silty clay. Although generally stable, the south face of the terraces are moderately steep (32·), and potentially unstable (Class IV). Locally (notably at the upstream portions to the east) these deposits are predominated by well-bedded, fine-grained materials that are prone to failure where over-steepened by stream gullies (Class IV-V). In addition, the site is situated below a large cliff face to the north of dacite volcanic flows. The rock face is unstable and a constant source of falling rock due to a narrow foliation fabric parallel to the cliff face (Class V). These risks can likely be managed by observing some amount of development setback.

The north face of Brohm Ridge along the south fork of Culliton Creek was observed at its western end where thin soils on glacially over-steepened (greater than 35·) intrusive rocks resulted in local debris flows (Class V). These, combined with the numerous avalanche shoots along the entire length of the drainage, plus the steep cliffs and extensive associated talus slopes in the headwater portion indicate the potential instability of the full extent of this slope (Class IV-V). The headwater section where ski development is proposed is likely of a lower stability hazard (Class III-IV), due to a lower slope angle of 26·, provided the vegetation is not cleared or logged, and the avalanche hazard is well managed.

The upper portions of the south slope of Culliton Creek, just northeast of Swift Creek, exhibit no significant slope hazards (Class III) other than the cliff faces and talus slopes peripheral to the proposed ski development (Class IV-V), due to a lower slope angle of 26·, provided the vegetation is not cleared or logged, and the avalanche hazard is well

managed.

The upper portions of the south slope of Culliton Creek, just northeast of Swift Creek, exhibit no significant slope hazards (Class III) other than the cliff faces and talus slopes peripheral to the proposed ski development (Class IV-V). A series of terraces below the proposed development from 840 metres to 900 metres elevation are comprised of weakly-bedded, poorly-sorted glaciofluvial deposits underlain by lava flows from Clinker Mountain approximately 6 kilometres to the northeast (Class III). The faces of the terraces are steep (greater than 30·), with multiple gullies where small failures and creep are common indicating very poor stability (Class V).

The upper section of a steep tributary drainage of the north fork of the Cheekeye River extending down from the summit of Brohm Ridge is considered unstable (Class V). The drainage is proposed for ski run development. However, the upper portion is underlain by over-steepened cliffs (greater than 45·) of poorly consolidated tuff breccia. Active slope failures, rock fall, tension cracks in overburden materials, and jackstrawed and j-shaped tress are common within the drainage gully.

Small earthflow, or slump failures were observed in over-saturated, clay-rich tills at the base of slope in the east tributary of Brohm River (Class V). No development is proposed for the area that includes the north side of the creek above 1,000 metre elevation.

The dacite flow above the proposed village area, north of the Brohm River headwaters, is unglaciated and stable (Class I-II). However, further east and south in the area of the proposed upper hotel and base lodge, Brohm Ridge is heavily glaciated with thick deposits of till, capped by 0.5 metre to 1.0 metre layer of volcanic ash material. Although generally stable on most slopes to 25· (Class III), the high alpine conditions combined with poor drainage and poor soil development result in these areas being sensitive to vehicles (including trucks, quad-type motorbikes, motorcycles, and snowmobiles) and excessive foot traffic. The result is the surface water transport and deep channelling of exposed materials. Some local areas of solifluction, although not observed on the ground, are indicated in the aerial photographs, notably south of the ridge summit (potential Class V).

Over-steepened cliffs and associated talus slopes exist throughout the study area, covering from 5% to 10% of the area. Most are reasonable stable, with limited rock fall evident. Others, such as the cliff above the proposed village site, the north slope of the minor peak on the southwest extension of Brohm Ridge, are more active (Class V). Except for the headwaters of the south for, of the Cheekeye River, these hazard areas are generally local and less than three hectares in size.

Two additional observations were made in the study area that could affect terrain stability. The first of these involves the windfall of mature perimeter trees adjacent to clear-cuts where soils are thin over bedrock or thick till deposits. Site selection, design, and clearing of ski runs will need to consider this. The second observation includes a potential natural hazard that requires further investigation in the proposed village site area. During periods of high surface water run-off, a large waterfall cascades down the face of the rock cliff above into the talus slope below, entering a buried channel with no obvious outlet and no observed effect. The risks, if any, this subsurface flow poses to the poorly consolidated glaciofluvial terraces below should be assessed prior to development.

3.2.3.6 Snow Avalanche Assessment

The avalanche assessment was conducted by P. Schaerer of C. Stethem & Associates.

The snowfall in the area is sufficient for producing avalanches on steep slopes above the 500 m asl (above sea level) elevation.

Snow avalanches would not be a serious problem to the planned resort. The base facilities and majority of lifts and ski runs are in safe terrain, and safety measures can readily be applied at locations where avalanches might interfere with the operation. Following are comments about locations where the avalanche hazard should be considered.

Access Road

Small avalanches are possible at locations with rock outcrops above the road. Wide ditches should be utilized at such places. At the clearcut approximately 1 kilometre south of the base area, avalanches could cover the road, but they could be controlled with explosive charges.

Base Area

The Base Lodge, Upper Hotel, and Upper Base Lodge are in safe locations. Buildings and parking areas of the base area, and the upper terminal of Lift “C” should not be located closer than 60 metres to the toes of the steep slopes at the west and north sides.

Lifts A, B, D, F, N

These lifts and the ski trails which they serve cross slopes between elevations 1,300 metres and 1,500 metres where avalanches could start. Lift towers on these slopes and below might have to be designed to resist snow and avalanche forces. The snow on the ski runs could be stabilized by skiing.

Lift G

Lift “G” and the adjacent skiruns at the south side of Brohm Ridge are in avalanche terrain. The steep slopes and the gullies produce numerous avalanches which can run to the lower terminal of the proposed lift. The lift terminal and towers should be placed on ridges between gullies for protection. As an operational measure, it might be necessary to close the lift and ski runs during hazardous avalanche periods.

Lifts H and I

The lifts and ski runs are on the north and lee side of storm winds of Brohm Ridge. Avalanches start near the ridge between the elevations 1,600 metres and 1,850 metres and could run to the gully at the bottom of the runs. The lower lift terminals and the towers must be located carefully. The ski runs would have to be controlled with explosive charges and might have to be closed when hazardous avalanche conditions are present.

3.2.4 Climate

Background Climate Trends

Detailed studies of the climate in the vicinity of Brohm Ridge have been prepared by Pacific Meteorology Inc., in 1990 and updated in 1996. In addition, suggestions made in the critique of the formal proposal by Golder & Associates were incorporated into the climate description.

In the Vancouver area, 1960-1991 Climate Normals indicate slight increases or no change in total precipitation at locations such as Vancouver International Airport, Vancouver UBC and Vancouver Capilano.

At Hollyburn Ridge, annual precipitation and snowfall are 2,916 cm and 820 mm respectively (1148 in and 32 in), an insignificant decrease of 38 mm and 30 cm (1.5 in and 12 in) from the 1951-1980 Normals.

At Whistler Roundhouse, mean total precipitation and snowfall data from 1973-1985 were 1,654 mm and 1,187 cm (65 in and 467 in) respectively. For the years 1973-1992, they were 1,621 mm and 1,171 cm (64 in and 461 in). This indicates slight declines which are not significant and are probably a result of the natural variability of annual precipitation.

Climate changes at the Whistler/Alta Lake station are more pronounced. The 1951-1980 normals for total precipitation and snowfall are 1,415 mm and 657 cm (56 in and 259 in), respectively. Compared to this, the means from 1976-1994 for the new Whistler site are 1,194 mm and 388 cm (47 in and 153 in), representing a 16% decrease in total precipitation and 41% decrease in snowfall.

It is not known how much of the 16% decrease in total precipitation may be attributed to the station relocation or to general climatic variability. The decrease in snowfall however is significant and is likely due to warmer temperatures producing an increase in the proportion of rain compared to snow. The growth of the village to a town and the concomitant increases in the number of buildings may account in part for the local temperature rise and a decrease in snowfall.

3.2.4.1 Wind Speed and Direction

Although little wind data is available for the area, wind will be constrained by the Cheakamus and Squamish valleys. Prevailing wind directions in Squamish are northerly with wind speeds reaching up to 88 km/h (55 mph).

The strong southerly winds which are present at Brohm Ridge tend to scour the snow from the southwestern edge of the ridge, potentially limiting snow accumulations at some times.

Wind conditions appear to be comparable to those found at other ski resorts in southwestern B.C.

3.2.4.2 Humidity

The nearest data available for relative humidity is that from the Alta Lake (Whistler townsite) climate monitoring station, with data presented in the Canadian Climatic Norms (Environment Canada, 1990).

For the summer, this data indicates very high relative humidity (i.e. in the range of 75% to 90% in the early morning and late at night). Lower relative humidity readings of 45% to 65% occur in the early and late afternoon.

In the winter months of January through March, and November through December, humidity ranges reach between 75 and 90% throughout the day.

3.2.4.3 Temperature and Freezing Level

Temperature analysis for the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development focused primarily on times when temperatures are below the freezing level of 0oC (32OF).

For the month of November, the average maximum temperature would be 2.7oC (37oF), and the average minimum temperature would be -3.6oC (26oF). The average temperature drops in December to a maximum daily temperature of 00 C (32oF) and a minimum temperature of 4.1oC (39oF). It is estimated that the mean temperatures on two out of

three days would be in the range of -1.0 to -5.0oC (30 to 23oF).

Freezing levels were estimated from the nearest radiosonde station located in Port Hardy, B.C. Based on the data recorded at this station, it was noted that freezing levels in January, February and March were relatively similar, located approximately at a mean elevation of 700 m through 900 m (2297 ft through 2953 ft). Freezing levels in December rose slightly to 1,100 m (3609 ft) and continued to rise in April and November up to 1,500 metres (4921 ft). In May and October, the freezing levels range from 2,000 m to 2,200 m (6562 ft to 7218 ft), and in June and September they peak at 2,600 m to 3,200 m (8530 ft to 10,497 ft).

3.2.4.4 Snow Pack

Snow pack data for the periods of record for stations located within the vicinity and at similar elevations as the proposed GARIBALDI at Squamish project (1,100 m {3,609 ft} at the proposed village site and 1,850 m (6,070 ft: at the top of the highest run), was obtained from the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks Resource Inventory and Data Management Branch.

Information was collected from the following locations:

● Grouse Mountain (1,100 m {3,609 ft}) ● Hollyburn (1,100 m {3,609 ft}) ● Mount Seymour (1,070 m {3,510 ft}) ● Stave Lake (1,210 m {3,670 ft}) ● Diamond Head (1,420 m {4,649 ft}) ● Whistler Mountain (1,450 m {4,757 ft}).

In addition, as per the recommendations of the previous critique of the previous “Formal Proposal” submission (Golder Associates,1996), GARIBALDI has acquired snowpack data from Diamond Head (1977-1996) which has been used to supplement previous comparisons of snowpack made by Pacific Meteorology. The Garibaldi Lake snowpack gradient to the Diamond Head snowcourse (1977-1996) at 1,420 metres has also been used to assess the variability in seasonal snowpack down to the lowest lift at approximately 915 m asl (Exhibit 3-9).

Based on information in Table 3-22, the average monthly snow depth (as measured on the first day of each month) from January 01- June 01 for the periods of record ranges from:

● 112-187 cm (44-74 in) on Whistler Mountain

Exhibit 3-9 Estimate Of Seasonal Progression Of Snowpack At 1,020 M Elevation

Table 3-22 Snow Pack Data In The Vicinity Of The Proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Development.

Station &

Elevation

Period Of

Record

Jan 01 Feb 01 Mar 01 April 01 May 01 June 01 June 15

Whistler Mountain

(1,450 m asl)

1970-1990 49-157

112*

38-216

144*

66-270

171*

89-310

187*

32-259

135*

1-224

NA

0-175

37*

Diamond Head

(1,420 m asl)

1977-1996 ND 101-222 166-405

315*

228-436

354*

170-385

293*

87-231

NA

42-145

NA

Grouse Mountain

(1,100 m asl)

1936-1996 13-223

127*

20-373

200*

39-490

250*

11-721

283*

104-323

NA

208 ND

Hollyburn

(1,100 m asl)

1945-1987 99-268

NA

160-332

NA

57-615

NA

155-630

NA

163 100-230

NA

ND

Mount Seymour

(1,070 m asl)

1960-1989 25-288

197*

30-429

248*

55-579

316*

80-620

353*

0-566

297*

0-498

228*

0-401

144*

Stave Lake

(1,210 m asl)

1967-1996 43-258

NA

56-429

276*

123-554

346*

142-566

379*

472 127-427

NA

371

*Mean

● 293-354 cm (115-139 in) on Diamond Head ● 127-283 cm (50-111 in) on Grouse Mountain ● 197-353 cm (78-139 in) on Mount Seymour ● 276-379 cm (109-149 in) at Stave Lake.

Snow depth generally increases from late November, early December, through April and declines from May-mid June.

It should be noted that the average monthly snow depths (127-353 cm {50-139 in}) measured at the top of Grouse Mountain and Mount Seymour are at an elevation equal to the bottom of the proposed base village site, and approximately 775 m (2543 ft) lower than the top of the proposed highest ski run (Pod H).

The Whistler townsite typically receives less than 100 cm (39 in) on average per winter. The average monthly snow depth (112-354 cm {44-139 in}) information for both Whistler Mountain and Diamond Head are at an elevation (1,420-1,450 m {4659-4757 ft}) equal to mid-mountain at the proposed GARIBALDI at Squamish mountain resort. Diamond Head, which receives up to an average maximum of 436 cm (172 in) of snow by April 1, is less than 5 km (3 miles) from the proposed development.

Pacific Meteorology estimated the mean snow depth at elevation 1,100 m (3609 ft) (village site) for the GARIBALDI at Squamish project and compared these estimates to Diamond Head at 1,420 m (4659 ft), approximately 320 m (1050 ft) higher (Exhibit 3-10).

Snow depth at GARIBALDI and Diamond Head were similar although there was an approximate 320 m (1050 ft) difference in elevation. Total snow accumulations were estimated at the GARIBALDI base village site (elevation 1,100 m {3609 ft}) of 1,335 cm (526 in) and at the upper hotel site (elevation 1,310 m {4298 ft}) at 1,685 cm (663 in). Snow depth of 50 cm (20 in) is reached at Hollyburn and Grouse by the end of November and at Whistler at the end of December. The proposed resort development area is estimated to reach a depth of 50 cm (20 in) by the third week of November.

An evaluation of available data indicates that snow depth at the proposed resort development will be greater than 65 cm (26 in) for 75% of the time by the end of November. These same conditions do not generally apply to Grouse and Hollyburn until the end of December and at the Whistler townsite until the end of January.

Exhibit 3-10 Estimated Cumulative Snowfall and Snowdepth at 1,100 m Elevation

In addition to the analysis conducted by Pacific Meteorology Inc., C. Stethem & Associates (letter dated November 13, 1997) reviewed the conclusions of the Pacific Meteorology assessment and concluded the following:

● The BC Environment snow survey data from Diamond Head is the most relevant information for the assessment of the potential snowpack at the GARIBALDI resort. The terrain at Brohm Ridge is probably subject to very similar snowfall.

● The regional snow survey information does show that Diamond Head tends to have a deeper snowpack than the Whistler area at the same elevation. The blocking effect of Diamond Head as the first mountain barrier to many storms is the probable cause of the greater level of precipitation on that mountain.

● The increased precipitation at Diamond Head also points to the potential for an increased amount of cloud to produce the precipitation and hence a potential for more restricted visibility. Visibility however, can be a very localized phenomenon and on site observation is really the only way to confirm the extent and location of restrictions in visibility.

● The desirable early season snowpack for commencement of operations is closer to 90 cm than 50 cm described above. An early season snowpack of 90 cm will probably compact to 30-40 cm on a ski run. A 50 cm snowpack will compact to 15-20 cm which is less than desirable for a durable ski run.

● In the Whistler valley analysis, the winters of 1951-1980 are compared to the winters of 1976-1994, implying a 41% decrease in snowfall in the latter. This compares the former period which had several above average winters with the latter, which had several below average winters. It remains to be seen if the long term record will support the conclusion that the below average winters are a long term trend.

● The effects of freezing level on snowpack accumulation will be much the same at GARIBALDI as at Diamond Head. Fluctuations in the freezing level above and below the 1,100 m level will probably result in a reduced snowpack at 1,100 m (GARIBALDI village) compared to Diamond Head at 1,400 m. This can only really be confirmed by on site observations.

To this end, GARIBALDI has initiated a winter snow and weather observation study for the 1997/1998 winter. This study combines a network of manual observation sites and chart recording weather stations. A total of 3 snow plots with a total snowpack stake and an interval board have been installed at the base village, upper hotel and treeline sites. In addition, 2 weather stations each with Stevenson Screens containing a set of maximum and minimum thermometers and a hygrothermograph have been installed at the base village and treeline. See Section 12 for more details.

● In terms of commencement of the season, the Whistler ski areas are generally operational at mid-mountain in

mid to late November. This is similar elevation to the upper hotel site at the GARIBALDI site and is reasonable to assume similar start up dates.

● Golder Associates applied the Garibaldi Lake snowpack gradient to the Diamond Head snowcourse at 1,420 m to assess the variability in seasonal snowpack down to the lowest lift at approximately 915 m. The results of their analysis indicated that the years of average or above average snowpack will probably have enough snow to ski to this lower elevation, at least after January. However, in the low snow years the snowpack will likely be thin and late at this lower elevation.

C. Stethem suggests that it should also be noted that both Whistler and Blackcomb now rely on snowmaking to ensure successful early season opening. This is a common trend in modern ski operations.

GARIBALDI has acknowledged this and has included costs for snow making equipment and requirements for water during the November and December period.

3.2.4.5 Visibility

Pacific Meteorology indicates that cloud conditions at the development site are similar to those found at Whistler and more frequent than at Grouse Mountain in North Vancouver. Blowing or heavy snow and fog may also provide lack of visibility at the resort site.

3.2.4.6 Solar Aspects

A solar analysis was completed for the development site. According to the results of the analysis, the following exposures were identified:

Pods Solar Exposure

B, D, H, K, N and P Northeast to northwest facing slopes

A, C, E, F, G, I, J, L, M, O, Q and R Southeast and southwest facing slopes

D North facing slopes

The mountain recreation area has been designed at elevations greater than 1,100 m (3609 ft). This allows snow levels and temperatures that allow snow retention on all the slopes. Those slopes that face southeast and southwest will provide for warmer skiing on colder days. Snow making capabilities will allow for snow making in the early season.

3.2.4.7 Air Quality

Background air quality for the District of Squamish from 1993-1996 is outlined in Table 3-23 (station located at the top of the government building on 2nd Street).

The data indicates that the air quality of the District of Squamish is relatively good compared to provincial air quality objectives. No air quality data was available for the proposed development site.

3.2.5 Heritage Resources

3.2.5.1 Previous Studies

According to the Archaeology Branch (D. Hutchcroft), there are no recorded heritage sites within the proposed development area. However, the potential exists for unrecorded heritage sites to be present in the lower elevations, specifically around the recreational real estate and along watercourses draining the lower portion of the site.

Section 12 Future and On-going Studies describes the proposed archaeological impact assessment that will be completed as part of the continued assessment and development of the site.

The primary objectives of the assessment will include:

● Identify and evaluate archaeological resources within the project area ● Identify and assess all impacts on archaeological resources which might result from the project and ● Recommend viable alternatives for managing unavoidable adverse impacts including a preliminary program for; ● Implementing and scheduling impact management actions and where necessary

- Conducting surveillance and or monitoring

Table 3-23 Background Air Quality For The Squamish Area.

Component Year Count Percentile

(ug/m3) 0th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th 95th 99th 100th Mean Std.Dev.

Ozone 1995 3,153 0 0 0 18 38 54 64 84 112 23.1 22.4

1996 6,253 0 0 12 32 52 68 74 94 134 33.2 25.5

Total Retractable Sulphur (TRS)

1993

1994

1995

1996

5,743

7,078

8,060

6,102

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

3

0

3

11

13

11

10

0

0.1

0

0.1

0.4

0.7

0.4

0.6

Sulphur Dioxide 1993

1994

1995

1996

3,458

7,877

8,215

6,291

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

16

13

13

45

59

61

48

0.1

0.5

0.3

0.2

1.9

3.2

2.6

2.2

PM10 (24 Hour Average) 1993

1994

1995

1996

44

90

349

258

6

2

2

1

11

5

7

7

16

8

8

10

20

11

13

16

27

17

20

21

36

25

31

28

38

30

36

34

42

36

51

40

43

36

60

42

21.6

13.1

15.9

16.6

9.5

7.6

10.2

8.4

3.3 Land Use Issues

3.3.1 Visual Aesthetics

3.3.1.1 Sea to Sky Corridor

The Sea to Sky Local Resource Use Plan (LRUP; Ministry of Forests, 1991) was prepared to ensure that the visual resources and forest landscapes of the Sea to Sky Corridor were fully recognized and addressed in forest harvesting and management plans along the Highway 99 corridor from Howe Sound to Pemberton.

Of the 90,550 hectares (223,746 acres) of visible forest land in the corridor, 17,440 hectares (43,094 acres) contribute to the Allowable Annual Cut (AAC). The corridor represents 12% of the net operable land base and 7% (2.7 million cubic metres {95, 349,083 cubic feet}) of the net mature timber of the Soo TSA. Approximately 6% (40,000-60,000 cubic metres {1,412,579-2,118,869 cubic feet} per year) of the total harvest from the Soo TSA and the Squamish Forest District is derived from the corridor.

Most of the viewed corridor has been modified to an Existing Visual Condition (EVC) equal or less desirable than the proposed Visual Quality Objectives (VQO’s).

The terms of reference of the Sea to Sky LRUP were to:

● Prepare a landscape inventory and to identify visual sensitivity ● Establish acceptable VQO’s ● Prepare landscape management principles ● Establish a mechanism for implementation of these principles in the preparation, review, approval, and

monitoring of forest management activities ● Consider and recommend secondary corridors in the Soo TSA which require future analysis.

The results of the Sea to Sky LRUP included a landscape inventory in the form of a series of four maps which recorded the visual boundary, prominent views, stopping points and landscape segments differentiated by landscape sensitivity.

In review of Map #2: Squamish Landscape Units # 58 and 59 which includes the proposed development area, the area southwest of Brohm Ridge received the following ratings:

● Landscape Sensitivity Rating (LSR) is an indication of the relative prominence or importance of the area based on its physical characteristics, on viewing conditions (e.g. orientation, distance and duration) and on social concerns.

The moderate rating for both Units #58 and #59 indicates that a moderate amount of alteration would be acceptable from the above noted physical, viewing conditions and social perspectives (Exhibit 3-10).

● Visual Absorption Capability (VAC) which indicates the physical capacity of the landscape to absorb land-use alterations and still maintain its visual integrity.

The rating of “high” for Unit #59 and “moderate” for Unit #58 indicates that a significant amount of land use alteration can occur and still maintain its visual integrity.

● Existing Visual Condition (EVC) which describes the present state of the landscape in terms of visual quality objectives.

Within Unit #58, the present landscape received a rating of “retention” while Unit #59 received a rating of “maximum modification”. The ratings imply for Unit #58 that up to 5% of the viewshed has been altered, while approximately 40% of the viewshed of Unit #59 has been altered.

● Visual Quality Objectives (VQO) are acceptable degrees of change from the natural-appearing landscape caused by land-use alterations.

VQO’s are selected initially based on landscape inventory information. Biological, economic, technical, and social considerations can influence the final VQO which is approved by the Ministry of Forests District Manager.

The VQO ratings for Unit #58 and Unit #59 were “modification” which indicates that up to 25% of the viewsheds could be altered without visually effecting green up and that alterations are easily seen but do not overwhelm the landscape.

The above ratings provide a broad assessment of what condition the landscape is in and the degree of vulnerability the project area has to development. The VQO’s also recognize the importance of the visual resource in the development of integrated resource management plans for the benefit of the proposed project and other resource users.

Exhibit 3-11 Squamish Landscape Inventory

In addition to the VQO’s from the LRUP landscape inventory, portions of the proposed development would be noticeable from the Town of Squamish and a selected few locations along Highway #99. The most noticeable area of the development which may be visible from the Town of Squamish would be Rider Pod G which is located in the upper Cheekye River drainage. Portions of other Rider Pods (i.e., P, Q and R), cuts associated with the access road and portions of the lower elevation single family and multi-family residential units may also be visible from short sections of Highway #99.

3.3.1.2 Garibaldi Provincial Park

Visual impacts from the resort will be notable from the northern end of the Garibaldi Neve (2134 metres [7,000 feet]; on the Warren Glacier north of Mount Garibaldi) and from The Table Mountain (1,875 metres; 6,153 feet) which is located near the south end of Garibaldi Lake.

Visitors in the Diamond Head area will not be able to view the resort from the base, but may be able to view it in the north end from the Saddle, between the Gargoyles and Columnar Peak.

Currently, park visitors can view developed areas such as Howe Sound and Squamish from the Diamond Head area and from parts of the Garibaldi Neve.

3.3.2 Garibaldi Provincial Park

Garibaldi Provincial Park borders the proposed resort development on the north and east. The park consists of 194,000 hectares (479,374 acres). Park user profiles indicate that some 104,000 visitors frequented the park in 1995.

In addition to the human use of the park, the park is home to wildlife such as resident goat herds, black bears, and black-tailed deer. A wolverine was spotted in the park last year (T. Bell pers comm.). Grizzlies are known to exist in areas surrounding the park, but have not been spotted inside the park for several decades, or in the Brohm Ridge region.

Garibaldi Provincial Park developed a working Master Plan with extensive public input which was implemented in September, 1990 (B.C. Parks, 1990). The document was to have been reviewed and officially re-implemented in 1995. However, budget cutbacks and reduced staffing at the Parks branch have meant that the Master Plan has not been reviewed, but is still actively used by staff within Garibaldi Provincial Park.

Garibaldi Provincial Park is currently accessed by the public at five controlled access points including Diamond Head, Garibaldi Lake, Cheakamus Lake, Singing Pass and Wedgemount. Hikers and backcountry skiers tend to travel through the park via three different routes including:

● Entering at Diamond Head, traversing across Garibaldi Neve, through Table Meadows and out towards Garibaldi Lake

● This same route can be traversed in the opposite direction, with visitors entering at Garibaldi Lake and traversing south towards Diamond Head

● Entering the park via logging roads which extend along Culliton Creek and Conroy Creek. These visitors bushwhack through the Table Meadows area and either traverse north to Garibaldi Lake or south over or around Garibaldi Neve to Diamond Head. This area is becoming less accessible each year as the understory has become almost impenetrable.

3.3.2.1 Wilderness Areas

Wilderness areas can be categorized as those within Garibaldi Provincial Park, and those surrounding the park in the vicinity of the proposed resort development (Exhibit 3-12).

Garibaldi Provincial Park is divided into four types of zones:

● Wilderness Conservation Zone ● Natural Environment Zone ● Special Features Zone ● Intensive Recreation Zone.

The Wilderness Conservation Zone occupies 75% of the park by area. The zone is located in the eastern three-quarters of the park (Exhibit 3-12). Created as a result of the new 1990 Master Plan, the Wilderness Conservation Zone “is to protect a remote, undisturbed natural landscape and to provide backcountry recreation opportunities dependent on a pristine environment.” The Wilderness Conservation Zone is characterized by “very low use, no facilities or hunting, non-mechanized access and large natural areas free of any evidence of modern man.”

The remaining part of the park is classified as a Natural Environment Zone which consists of some 49,000 hectares (121,079 acres). This zone allows for the protection of “scenic values” while at the same time providing park users the opportunity to enjoy recreation opportunities within the park boundaries. The area is largely undisturbed and in its natural environment. The Natural Environment Zone receives low to moderate use by visitors to the park. Facilities provided in this area primarily consist of trails, walk-in campsites and shelters.

Exhibit 3-12 Garibaldi Provincial Park Zoning

The wilderness areas within the Natural Environment Zone, and specifically within range of the proposed resort development, consist of the Diamond Head area, Garibaldi Neve, and Garibaldi Lake.

The Diamond Head area is primarily forested. Two small lakes, Elfin Lakes, are located in the southwest corner of the park. Moving north from Diamond Head, one encounters Lava Lake, a small lake on the westernmost side of the park. East of Diamond Head is a larger lake, Mamquam Lake. Lava Lake and Mamquam Lake are located on the southwest and southeast corners of the Garibaldi Neve.

Garibaldi Neve occupies approximately 90% of the area north of Diamond Head, south of Garibaldi Lake, and west of the Wilderness Conservation Area. The Neve is a vast, permanent snowfield, which is basically treeless, with little to no vegetation.

The area of the park which juts out west of the Neve contains a Special Feature Zone known as The Table. The Table is a Special Feature Zone both for its geological significance and table-like formation, and for the alpine flower meadows located here. The remainder of this area consists of brush and forest. Some visitors to the park access this area from logging roads located along Culliton Creek and Conroy Creek.

Garibaldi Lake is located on the central west side of the park. The lake itself occupies approximately one-quarter of this area. The remaining area consists of forested land with visitor trails leading up from the parking lot just off of Highway 99, to the northwest corner of the lake, and branching off up to Black Tusk and along Helm Creek toward Cheakamus Lake.

3.3.2.2 Recreational Use of Parklands

Diamond Head is an Intensive Recreation Zone with 24 kilometres (14.9 miles) of developed hiking trails, 11 kilometres (6.8 miles) of designated backcountry ski trails and 11 kilometres (6.8 miles) of designated mountain bike trails (Exhibit 3-13). The area has been used since the 1930s as an area for climbers and mountaineers to enjoy the wilderness. A chalet was constructed at Diamond Head near Elfin Lakes in 1945, offering overnight accommodations and facilities, including a rope tow, for visitors touring the area year-round.

The chalet, which still exists, was in operation until the mid-1970s when it closed down. A public shelter, which sleeps 45 people, was constructed in the same area in the mid-1970s.

Exhibit 3-13 Recreational Features of Garibaldi Provincial Park

The area around Diamond Head is accessed by a main trail, which begins at a parking lot 16 kilometres (10 miles) east of Squamish. The trail follows Paul Ridge to Elfin Lakes. From the public shelter and ranger station at Elfin Lakes, a trail leads to The Saddle between The Gargoyles and Columnar Peak. Another trail follows to Ring Creek to access Garibaldi Neve. Yet another trail leads to Mamquam Lake.

An unmarked glacier traverse across the Garibaldi Neve links the Diamond Head and Garibaldi Lake areas.

The Garibaldi Lake area is accessed from a main trail leading from the parking area up to the northwest corner of the lake. There are 20 kilometres (12.4 miles) of developed hiking trails in the lake area. In the winter, skiers ski the frozen lake, surrounding slopes and use the area to access the Garibaldi Neve.

There are three shelters located on the south end of the lake. The shelter located at Sphinx Bay was constructed by the Varsity Outdoor Club of the University of British Columbia, which have been active in the area for some time. There are two Environment Canada glaciology shelters at Sentinel Bay.

Four shelters are located on the northwest corner of the lake, and two more along Taylor Creek. Camping is permitted in these areas, but all are accessed by walking only into the sites.

Specific recreational attractions of Garibaldi Lake beyond the lake itself, includes the Black Tusk (a popular steep hike which leads to the Black Tusk alpine flower meadows), The Table, and Panorama Ridge, located on the north and northeast side of the lake.

Outdoor activities within the park boundaries include:

● hiking● camping● mountaineering● backcountry and telemark skiing ● snowshoeing● climbing● guiding● mountain biking ● swimming● canoeing● photography● fishing● wildlife viewing.

Snowmobiling is not permitted within the boundaries of Garibaldi Provincial Park. However, the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club has been operating out of the Brohm Ridge area, using a chalet constructed for the failed development during the 1960s, as a “clubhouse.”

Some snowmobile users of the Brohm Ridge area do spill across the park boundary. However, the area within Garibaldi Provincial Park and on the Garibaldi Neve can be treacherous. There was an accident in the winter of 1996 in which a snowmobile and its operator fell about 30 metres (98 ft) into a crevasse on the neve within the park. Another accident involving a snowmobile occurred in the Culliton Creek drainage during November 1997.

3.3.2.3 Garibaldi Provincial Park User Profiles

According to information contained in the 1990 Garibaldi Provincial Park Master Plan and the Visitor Satisfaction Survey (1990), approximately 50% of the visitor population of the park are aged 18 to 34. More recent discussions with park staff indicate this profile has changed somewhat in the past six years, with the majority of visitors now being park users aged 20 to 45.

The majority of visitors (80%) to Garibaldi Provincial Park are from British Columbia. Visitors from Washington, Oregon and California account for the next most frequent visitors. Of visitors staying overnight, 70% tend to stay two nights or more.

Between 1980 and 1989, an average of 153,000 visitors traveled to Garibaldi Provincial Park. However, use had decreased approximately 19% by the time the 1990 Garibaldi Provincial Park Master Plan was prepared and statistics for 1995 indicate that the total annual park usage was around 104,000 visitors. An especially significant trend has been the increase in day use of approximately 156% since 1983 and the decrease in camping use of 46% since the peak of the decade in 1985.

It should be noted that park usage is accounted for by using counters installed in the parking lots for the park and the counters do not detect visitors who enter the park via other accesses such as logging roads, or from Whistler and Blackcomb.

Table 3-24 outlines the origin of visitors to Garibaldi Provincial Park according to the 1990 Satisfaction Survey.

Table 3-24 Origin Of Visitors To Garibaldi Provincial Park (1990)

Grouped Origin Number Percent of Total

British Columbia 145 75.9

Alberta 1 0.5

Saskatchewan 0 0.0

Rest of Canada 12 6.3

Wash/Ore/California 14 7.3

Rest of U.S.A. 4 2.1

Abroad 15 7.9

Total 191 100.00

No Response 15 7.3

The type of trips taken into the park include:

● day trips from home (33%) ● day trips from holiday accommodation (15.5%)

● weekend camping trip (14.9%) ● multi-day backcountry trip (36.6%).

The length of time visitors stayed in the backcountry area of the park is outlined in Table 3-25.

Table 3-25 Planned Length Of Stay In The Backcountry Area

Number of Nights Number of Groups Percent of Total

1 23 22.5

2 53 52.0

3 17 16.7

4 4 3.9

5 4 3.9

21 1 1.0

TOTAL 102 100.00

no response 104

Table 3-26 provides a breakdown of the various types of activities available in the park.

Table 3-26 Activities Planned In Garibaldi Provincial Park

Activity Number of Groups Percent of Total

Fishing 11 5.3

Hiking 202 98.1

Climbing 37 18.0

Horse Riding 0 0.0

Mountain Biking 3 1.5

Swimming 46 22.3

Camping 99 48.1

Wildlife Viewing 116 56.3

Nature Study 65 31.6

Photography 126 61.2

Canoeing 1 0.5

None of the Above 0 0.0

Other 19 9.2

No Response 1 0.5

% based on 206 cards

Park Use Permits are means to regulate park use. In the past, Park Use Permits have been issued for such activities as heli-skiing, research, geological mapping, ecosystem monitoring, outdoor education, insect collecting, and commercial guiding. In 1996, Park Use Permits were issued to the following companies for the purposes listed:

● B.C. Hydro & Power (access road) ● B.C. Telephone (access road) ● Water Management Branch (snow course) ● Blackcomb Skiing Enterprises (ski access route) ● Outward Bound (recreational guiding) ● Dr. Cindy Prescott (leaf decomposition) ● Whistler Heli-Skiing (heli-skiing) ● Tyax Heli-Skiing Ltd. (heli-skiing) ● Whistler Backroads (commercial guided tours) ● Ministry of Forests ● University of Victoria, Dawn Loewen ● Longacre Expedition ● B.C. Research Building (research) ● Western Wildcat Tour (commercial guiding) ● Hans Gmoser (non-exc. commercial guiding).

3.3.2.4 Commercial Guiding In Garibaldi Provincial Park

Commercial guiding is allowed through a Park Use Permit in Garibaldi Provincial Park. In the past, Park Use Permits have been granted to other park users, as outlined. In 1996, Park Use Permits were issued to the following commercial guiding outfits:

● Federation of Mountain Clubs of B.C. Association of Canadian Mountain Guides ● Outward Bound.

With the exception of the Association of Canadian Mountain Guides, none of the groups use the Garibaldi Neve area of Garibaldi Provincial Park. They are permitted to use the Wilderness Conservation Zone of the park in addition to the more heavily used western flank of the park.

3.3.2.5 Access To Recreational Lands Around The Resort Complex

Access to recreational lands beyond the proposed GARIBALDI at Squamish resort will be limited in different areas for winter than in summer. The Black Tusk Snowmobile Club has a lease until January 1998 to use an abandoned chalet in the Brohm Ridge area as a base from which to travel out into the surrounding area.

Snowmobilers are not permitted within the Park boundaries and one can assume that once the GARIBALDI at Squamish resort is developed, this policy will not change. However, backcountry skiers, snowshoers and mountaineers are permitted and able to traverse beyond the boundaries of the proposed resort complex and into the adjacent park land

The current recreational use of areas beyond the resort complex will likely remain the same. However, because groomed trails will be provided within the resort complex, visitors will be encouraged to remain within the general area of the resort.

Summer activities at the resort complex that could result in recreationists traversing onto lands beyond the resort complex would include hikers, campers, and mountaineers.

Again, a joint management plan for the GARIBALDI resort area in cooperation with government agencies such as B.C. Parks and B.C. Forest Service, could be designed so that trails are developed within the resort boundaries and deter easy access to lands beyond the resort complex. Visitors will also be encouraged to stay within the resort complex. However, adventure tourists who want a more unique or secluded experience would likely traverse beyond the proposed resort boundaries into Garibaldi Provincial Park.

3.3.3 Forest Management Issues

3.3.3.1 Harvestable Timber

The Squamish Forest District is located in the area which extends north from Horseshoe Bay to D’Arcy in the northeast, and northwest to Bridge Peak. It is bordered on the west by the Sunshine Coast Forest District, on the north and east by the Lillooet Forest District, and on the east by the Chilliwack Forest District.

The Squamish Forest District is divided into two areas including the Soo Timber Supply Area (Soo TSA) which occupies 880,000 hectares (2,174,480 acres) and Tree Farm Licence #38 occupying 260,000 hectares (642,460 acres). Harvestable timber in the region includes species such as Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar, Hemlock, Balsam, Spruce

and Pine.

There are currently 25 operators in the Squamish Forest District. International Forest Products, the Small Business Forest Enterprise Program, Terminal Forest Products and Pacific Forest Products have the largest appropriations of harvestable timber. Of the allocations, 21 replaceable licenses are issued and reviewed every 5 years. The replaceable licenses are renewed every 10 to 15 years. There are also approximately 28 non-replaceable licenses issued for fixed periods.

The Soo TSA has many established forest companies operating under forest licences, major timber sale licences, woodlot licences, timber licences and competitive timber sale licences issued under the Small Business Forest Enterprise Program (SBFEP). These operations include the following licences:

(1) Forest Licences

A20541 - Richmond Plywood Ltd.

A19209 - International Forest Products Ltd.

A19213 - Canadian Forest Products Ltd.

A19215 - Terminal Forest Products Ltd.

A19216 - Canadian Pacific Forest Products Ltd.

A19218 - CRB Logging Ltd.

(2) Timber Licences

Furry Creek Timber Corporation

D. Wittaker Logging Ltd.

Western Forest Products Ltd.

MacMillan Bloedel Limited

Canadian Forest Products Ltd.

(3) Woodlot Licences

WL015 - Wim Tewinkle

WL027 - Doug Horth

WL049 - Dave Walker

(4) Small Business Forest Enterprise Program

A20479 - Black Mount Logging Ltd.

A20481 - Halray Logging Ltd.

A20482 - AC & CC Le Blanc Logging Ltd.

As part of the Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) of the Soo TSA or under timber license operations, most of the harvestable timber in the Squamish Forest District is expected to be available for harvest over the next 121+ years. Of the 1.3 million cubic metres (46 million cubic feet) harvested from tenures and private land in the Squamish Forest District in 1989, only about 20,000 cubic metres (706,290 cubic feet) were harvested from tenures between Squamish and Pemberton (in the visible corridor), and about 40,000 cubic metres (1.4 million cubic feet) were harvested between Pemberton and Duffey Lake (Ministry of Forests, 1991).

The most recent data available for the five-year development plan is from the fall of 1996 (Exhibit 3-14). The plan indicates that four timber supply licences are planned for cutting in 1996/1997/1998, two of which (A20479-5 and A42733-C) are planned for cutting within the proposed development area.

Helicopter logging of Timber Supply Licence #A20479-5 was initiated in 1996 for a total volume estimated at 5,005 m3 (176,750 ft3) over a 13.5-hectare (33.4-acre) block. Timber Supply Licence #A42733-C, with a total volume of 6,000 m3 (211,887 ft3) from a 14-hectare (34.6-acre) block, was originally planned for logging in 1996 but was not to be advertised to the Small Business Forest Enterprise Program companies until February 1997. Assuming a successful tendering process, this cutblock will likely be harvested in 1998.

Exhibit 3-14 Ministry Of Forest Harvest Plan 1996-2004

Preliminary discussions between Garibaldi and Squamish Forest District personnel are resulting in a cooperative relationship which will hopefully result in this block being harvested in 1998 using a combination of silviculture techniques, such as group selection, small patch clearcut, single tree selection, and shelterwood, in order to minimize the view corridor and minimize potential negative impact in the resort development.

The other two cutblocks, Timber Supply Licences #A38762 and A54061 are located on the west side of Highway 99 outside of the proposed development area.

3.3.3.2 Forest Land Reserve

Representatives from the Forest Land Reserve Commission office have indicated that there is no land within the property proposed for the GARIBALDI at Squamish development which falls within the Forest Land Reserve.

The next nearest land which is allocated for the Forest Land Reserve is located within the boundaries of Squamish town site, northwest of the proposed resort development area and west of Highway 99.

3.3.4 Land Users

Garibaldi Provincial Park borders the proposed development site on the north and east. Historically, lands within and surrounding the development property have been used for recreational purposes. First Nations has traditionally used the ground for hunting, fishing and food gathering activities. Some areas have been heavily logged.

3.3.4.1 Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness Tourism

Outdoor recreation and wilderness adventure tourism within the proposed resort development includes active use of the area by the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club. Climbers and hikers also traverse in the area.

Most of the non-vehicular recreational use of the area occurs within the boundaries of Garibaldi Provincial Park. As described above in Section 3.3.2.3 “Existing Park User Profiles,” the Park is used by hikers, mountain bikers, mountaineers, campers, bird and wildlife watchers, fishers, photographers, and canoers in the summer months. In the winter months, the park is used for backcountry skiing, mountaineering, snowshoeing and winter camping. Snowmobiling is not permitted within the park boundaries.

3.3.4.2 Mineral Resources

The geology within the proposed GARIBALDI resort development, as indicated on the Mineral Potential Map 92G/NW (1995), indicates stratified rock from the Garibaldi Group, originating in the Tertiary and Quaternary Pliocene to Recent age. The Garibaldi Group consists of basalt to rhyodacite flows and pyroclastics, with minor intercalated sediments.

The Mineral Potential Map indicates areas that have known mineral occurrences, whether they have been developed for mining in the past, are currently in use or are just known to be present from exploration activities.

Prior to 1996, and according to the Mineral Potential Map for the proposed GARIBALDI resort development area, there are no known, or developed (past or present) mineral occurrences within the resort development area (Exhibit 3-15).

Two potential mineral occurrence locations are noted within 15 kilometres (9.3 miles) of the development site. The first occurrence is approximately 3 kilometres (1.9 miles) south of the development area. This occurrence is categorized under Minfile #NW007 (High Hopes) and is noted as a potential mineral occurrence for copper and molybdenum. The mining potential is not currently, nor has it in the past, been knowingly developed.

The second occurrence is approximately 6 kilometres (3.7 miles) north-northwest from the development site and is categorized under Minfile #NW023 (Cheakamus Bridge). This occurrence has a potential for copper and silver and has not been knowingly developed.

However, recently a mineral claim located approximately 1 km west of Alice Lake was cancelled.

The next known geographic locations of a potential mineral occurrence in the area is at least 15 kilometres (9.3 miles) from the development site.

3.3.4.3 Agriculture Resources

Information provided in the 1996 edition of Sea To Sky Facts and Figures, in the Soil Capability for Agriculture Map (92G/NW), and in the 1990 Master Plan for Garibaldi Provincial Park all suggest that the potential for agricultural land use within the proposed resort development area is low.

Exhibit 3-15 Locations Of Mineral Claims

Climatic capability for agriculture (Map 92G/NW) in the lower portion of the development area indicates insufficient accumulation of heat units above 50 C (41oF) during the growing season. There is insufficient climatic capability data

to determine the agricultural capability in the upper portions of the site. However, due to the elevation, it is likely to be severely limited.

The Pemberton Valley and Lillooet region are the nearest agriculturally active areas. Potato crops seem to be the most viable in these two agriculture areas.

3.3.4.4 Traditional Fish and Wildlife Recreation

Fish and wildlife are present within Garibaldi Provincial Park. The Park is home to 52 species of mammals, 100 species of birds, 7 species of amphibians and 4 species of reptiles. However, according to the 1990 Garibaldi Provincial Park Master Plan, the quantity and diversity of fish and wildlife species is limited due to the rugged and barren terrain characteristic of many areas of the Park.

Traditional fish and wildlife recreation in the vicinity of the proposed resort development area includes both fishing and hunting. Studies conducted by Nelson Environmental Consultants (1996), Envirowest (1996) and ENKON (1996) resulted in no fish captured within the proposed development site. This suggests that there is no recreational fishing within the development site. Currently fishing is permitted within Garibaldi Provincial Park. Hunting is not permitted within the park. However, it is likely that hunting occurs in the vicinity of the resort area. Representatives of the Squamish Nation have advised Garibaldi of the existence of an aboriginal trap line within the proposed development area.

The Brohm Ridge area does not have any natural lakes. However, the headwaters of Brohm River, the southern tributary of Culliton Creek and Cheekye River are located within the proposed resort development area.

3.3.4.5 Guides and Outfitters

Guides and outfitters for the proposed resort area must obtain permits from the Wildlife Branch of the Ministry of Environment. According to the Guide Territory Map for the area, Area 2-7, the site is not currently permitted for commercial guiding.

Commercial guides permitted to guide within Garibaldi Provincial Park boundaries have included Outward Bound, the Federation of Mountain Clubs of B.C. and winter-certified guides of the Association of Canadian Mountain Guides.

3.3.4.6 Snowmobiling Activities

The Black Tusk Snowmobile Club has active trails within the development area. The club has a one-year lease with B.C. Lands for the use of a Chalet as a clubhouse.

Riding areas within the region are primarily associated with the Pemberton Icefield and Brohm Ridge. The riding season at Brohm Ridge extends from October-July in comparison to the Pemberton Icefields which are only accessible from December through April.

3.3.4.7 Day-Hiking Activities

Day hikers are predominant within the Garibaldi Provincial Park area. Hikers use trails which are both well established and developed for visitor use, and trails which are “bushwhacked” for use by both Park visitors and people who enter the general area via logging roads. Some of these deactivated logging roads are located along Culliton Creek, north of the resort development, and Conroy Creek, even further north of the proposed development.

Hikers are known to traverse the Brohm Ridge area. The extent of hiker use within the proposed GARIBALDI resort development is not known.

3.3.4.8 Ski Touring

Ski tourers use marked trails within Garibaldi Provincial Park, as well as creating their own routes within the Park. Skiers are known to traverse along the west side of Garibaldi Neve, and along the west boundary of the Park, between the Diamond Head and Garibaldi Lake/Black Tusk areas. Skiers crossing the Neve can travel from the Warren Glacier into proposed GARIBALDI resort development area.

The Garibaldi Neve consists of terrain for expert skiers who have extensive backcountry skiing and glacier travel experience. Hazards include crevasses and avalanches.

3.3.4.9 Backcountry Hiking Activities

Similar to ski touring, backcountry hiking activities in the Sea to Sky Corridor centre around Garibaldi Provincial Park. Hikers in the park commonly use trails in the Diamond Head area at the southwest corner of the Park, or in the Garibaldi Lake/Black Tusk in the central west area of the Park. In addition, hikers may enter the park from the logging roads along Culliton River and Conroy River.

Some hikers may enter the Brohm Ridge area either by traversing west from Garibaldi Neve, or south from the Culliton Creek area. In both cases, however, there are no trails or marked routes.

Hiking will be encouraged on the GARIBALDI resort lands by developing trails.

Section 4 Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Strategies

4.1 Issues Identified By Government Agencies, First Nations and the Public

Based on consultation, interviews and discussions with First Nations, local community groups and regional, provincial and federal government agencies, the following issues/potential impacts have been identified :

1. Solid and Liquid Waste Management Issues

Liquid waste disposal options include working with the District of Squamish regarding further expansion of the existing Mamquam Treatment Plant (if the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project is annexed into the District of Squamish) or assessing on-site facilities through state-of-the-art tertiary treatment if the project becomes an independent Mountain Resort. Regardless of the option selected, levels of phosphorous in the Cheakamus River must not be increased.

Presently the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District (SLRD) is responsible for solid waste disposal. Solid waste disposal should be included in the overall SLRD waste management plan and should emphasize Reduction, Reuse and Recycling. On-site temporary storage of solid waste should minimize bear/human conflicts. (Appendix 11.)

2. Garibaldi Provincial Park Issues

Access into the park from the proposed development and potential impacts the additional visitors may have on the flora and fauna of the park.

Perceived visual impacts to existing park users, particularly from Garibaldi Neve.

Potential impacts to summer recreation users accessing the Park from the Culliton Creek logging road.

3. Environmental Issues

Potential impacts to important fisheries in the lower Brohm River and Cheakamus River system due to changes in the quantity and quality of flows (particularly low flows).

Potential impacts to bear populations through bear/human conflicts, to mountain goat movement patterns from project facilities/human disturbance and direct loss of wildlife habitat from the development facilities/footprint. Water management and flooding concerns related to increases in stormwater flows and changes in flow patterns (timing, quantity or quality) for streams draining the development site.

4. Health Issues

Potential risks to construction and operations workers if suitable safety and emergency facilities (medical, emergency evacuation, potable water and sanitary sewer facilities) are not available on site.

5. Municipal Jurisdiction Issues

● Potential implications on municipal taxes and services pending the governance of the village and residential components.

6. Water Supply Issues

Presently, the District of Squamish has difficulty meeting existing and future water demands from the sources of Stawamus River and Mashiter Creek. The District is presently exploring groundwater sources to complement its surface water sources. The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project will have to find its own sources of groundwater or surface water near the project facilities.

Potential impacts have been identified for important fish resources of lower Brohm River (downstream of Highway 99) in association with surface water withdrawals for domestic use, snow making and fire protection and these impacts will be mitigated.

7. Native Issues

Potential impacts to the Squamish Nation, Burrard and Mount Currie bands traditional use areas such as reserves, spiritual grounds, fishing, hunting and food gathering.

8. Public Issues

Potential impacts to existing snowmobile users associated with the lodges and snowmobile terrain near Brohm Ridge. Potential impacts to views from the Squamish townsite and Highway #99. Potential impacts to the “Quality of Life” from the changes that the proposed development may bring.

9. Forestry Issues

Potential loss of jobs in the forest sector associated with reductions in the Soo Timber Supply Area annual allowable cut from cutblocks that may no longer be available to local forest companies within the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH study area.

10. Highway Issues

Potential impacts to traffic on Highway 99 due to increased traffic to and from the resort development.

Potential cost implications associated with the proposed new intersection at Highway 99 and design standards for the access road to the development site.

Design standards will depend on whether the access road remains the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation & Highways or falls under the jurisdiction of local government, pending the resolution of governance issues.

4.2 Aquatic Resources

4.2.1 Fisheries and Water Quality

4.2.1.1 Sedimentation Impacts

Sedimentation from construction activities, such as tree removal, ground clearing, grubbing, excavation and stockpiling of soil, grading slopes, utility construction and road building could potentially impact the aquatic resources of the streams draining the development site. Suspended sediments can:

● Settle on spawning areas, infill the intragravel voids and smother the eggs/alevins in the gravel ● Settle and infill pools and riffles reducing the availability and quality of rearing habitat for fish ● Clog and abrade fish gills causing suffocation or injury to fish ● Reduce water clarity and visibility in the stream impairing the ability of juvenile fish to find food items ● Settle, smother and displace aquatic organisms (benthic invertebrates) reducing the amount of food items

available to fish ● Displace fish out of prime habitat into less suitable habitat as levels of sediment increase.

As no fish have been found within the higher elevations of Brohm River, Culliton Creek or Cheekye River, harmful direct effects to fish gills are not likely to occur for streams within the development site. However, impacts to the invertebrate community (loss of riffle and pool habitat or displacement) could occur. This could have detrimental effects to food availability for downstream fish populations, particularly in lower Brohm River.

Significant, negative impacts could also occur to fish populations in downstream areas from direct loss or degradation of spawning and rearing habitat due to settling and infilling of sediments, physical abrasion to gills and displacement of fish and fish prey items.

4.2.1.2 Direct Loss of Instream or Riparian Habitat

Potential losses to in-stream and riparian habitat could occur associated with road/pedestrian/ski/snowboard trail stream crossings, infringement of buildings/structures and stormwater discharge pipes into the riparian zones, withdrawal of surface water for domestic use and impoundment of surface water for storage.

Of these potential losses, the withdrawal of surface water for domestic use could have the most significant impact, particularly to the fish resources of the Brohm River. Although we have not found any fish populations in the upper Brohm River, the loss of the productivity of the lower Brohm River, below Highway 99, due to reductions in low flows would be significant to the steelhead trout populations of the Cheakamus River.

In order to minimize any impacts to the fish populations of the Brohm River, minimum instream flows will have to be established in conjunction with the regulatory agencies prior to the issuance of any surface water withdrawal permits. Alternative surface water or groundwater sources could minimize or eliminate any impacts to the fish populations of the Brohm River.

Other potential negative impacts are related to the removal of stream-side vegetation and could include the following:

● Loss of insect drop/food items from trees/shrubs adjacent to streams ● Loss of a source of large organic debris which helps to stabilize stream channels, and provide cover and habitat

for juvenile fish ● Increases in water temperature due to increased light penetration ● Loss of the cleansing effect of the riparian zone filtering function ● Loss of cover from shade produced by streamside vegetation ● Bank instability from the reduction in root networks which help to bind soils.

These losses related to the removal of stream-side vegetation are most likely to occur with road/pedestrian/utility/ski trail stream crossings and infringement of stormwater discharge systems. These losses can likely be mitigated/compensated through the planting of native vegetation in areas already void of streamside vegetation, enhancement of rearing or spawning habitat and through careful planning of stream crossing corridors.

4.2.1.3 Water Quality Impacts

Potential impacts to the water quality of the streams/creeks draining the development site could occur during the construction and operation of the development. This could result in nutrient loading, sedimentation, increases in water temperature and contamination of surface waters.

Assuming the various management plans outlined in Section 4.2.1.4 below are adhered to, the most significant potential impacts to water quality are likely to be associated with sedimentation during construction and contamination of surface waters from parking lots and roads or from accidental fuel spills. However, based on the implementation of Best Management Practices and Environmental Management Plans that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to, these impacts should be manageable and minimized.

Potential impacts from liquid waste disposal will either be mitigated through the use of an expanded District of Squamish Mamquam Treatment Plant or through a new ground disposal or tertiary treatment facility on site which will meet or exceed provincial effluent criteria.

4.2.1.4 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

While the potential for direct loss of habitat is significant, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to using the concept of Best Management Practices to ensure that the fish resources of the streams draining the site are protected, including downstream areas.

As part of this commitment, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH plans to adhere to the following provincial, federal and U.S. guidelines:

● Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat (Chilibeck et al., 1992)● Urban Runoff Quality Control Guidelines for the Province of British Columbia (1992)● Stormwater Management Guidelines for the Protection of Fish Habitat (Department of Fisheries, 1991)● Culvert Guidelines: Recommendations for the Design and Installation of Culverts in British Columbia to Avoid

Conflict with Anadromous Fish (Dane, 1978)● Fish Screening Directive (DFO, 1990)● Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook (Goldman, et al., 1986)● Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (DFO, 1986)● Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual - Volume 3 - Best Management Practices (Urban Drainage and Flood

Control District, 1992)● Vancouver Island Highway Project - Guidelines for Environmental Design of Highway Drainage (KPA

Engineering Ltd., 1992).

In addition to the above noted provincial, federal and U.S. guidelines, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will prepare the following management plans to minimize potential impacts to the aquatic environment in the vicinity of the project site:

● Stormwater Management Plan - targetted to design the post-development flows similar to pre-development flows as much as possible

● Sediment and Erosion Control Plan - to minimize the potential for sediments entering the streams/creeks draining the development site

● Water Management Plan - to ensure that any withdrawal of surface waters for domestic use maintains minimum instream flows to protect downstream fish populations, particularly in Brohm River

● Solid Waste Management Plan - to exceed the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s (SLRD) Solid Waste Management principles of a 50% reduction in solid waste disposal by the year 2000 (Appendix 2)

● Liquid Waste Management Plan - which fits into the existing Mamquam Treatment Plant or develops a new tertiary treatment plant which meets or exceeds provincial effluent criteria

● Wildlife Management Plan - which protects critical wildlife habitat and manages wildlife habitat and populations during the construction and operation of the development

● Natural Hazard Management Plan - which controls avalanche, wildfire and debris hazards by protecting fish and wildlife habitat while providing safety for resort users

● Spill Contingency Plan - which will provide practical solutions to avoid contamination of surface waters during construction and operation of the proposed development

● Vegetation Management Plan - which emphasizes tree and viewscape retention and important wildlife habitat● Soils Management Plan - which conserves soils and prevents development in areas of unstable soils● Access Management Plan - by working with B.C. Parks to manage access into the Garibaldi Provincial Park● Monitoring Plans - to monitor the social, environmental and economic impacts of the proposed development on

the Sea to Sky corridor.

4.2.2 Hydrology

4.2.2.1 Potential Impacts

The potential impacts related to hydrology are associated with changes to drainage patterns and quantity of flows during construction and operation of the proposed development. The potential impacts include flooding, bedload movement, sediment and contaminant transport, debris flows and bank instability and washouts.

The most significant impact would be increases and changes in the timing of peak flows which could result in loss/alterations of fish habitat, displacement of fish populations, loss of or poor survival of eggs/alevins in spawning beds, channelization of existing streams and creation of fish migration barriers. These impacts would be most detrimental to the fish populations of the Brohm River and ultimately the Cheakamus River system.


Hydrology related impacts will be mitigated through the development of water management, sediment and erosion plans during construction and operation of the proposed development.

4.3 Wildlife Resources

4.3.1 Wildlife Populations and Habitat

4.3.1.1 Impacts from Utility and Access Corridors

The proposed development will involve two main access roads and a number of shorter roads linking neighbouring recreation and residential areas. Little incremental impact is anticipated along the main access roads, however, an increase in traffic volume may result in wildlife disturbance or collisions.

While there is potential for new roads to fragment stands of importance to old-growth dependent species, most of the accessible old-growth trees have already been harvested at low-to-middle elevations. All roads have a potential for isolating small mammal and amphibian populations (Fahrig, et al., 1995; Mader, 1984). This potential impact may be more significant at lower elevations than at higher ones.

Presumably, hydro lines would originate from the main transmission lines along Highway 99, and take the most direct route to developed areas. Since the distances involved are relatively short, and most of the area has been logged, this is not likely to result in significant fragmentation of remnant old-growth stands. At lower elevations, the rights-of-way would continue to be used by many species of wildlife presently in the area.

4.3.1.2 Potential Human Conflicts With Wildlife

The potential for human conflicts with wildlife at the proposed resort during the winter would be very low, since most large carnivores are either hibernating or have migrated to lower elevations. Cougars would continue to be active at this time of year, however, they generally avoid areas of high human activity and would only occur at lower elevations where deer are wintering.

The potential for human conflicts with black bears from spring through fall will depend to a large extent on the management of garbage. In his extensive review of bear attacks, Herrero (1985) identified food-conditioned, human-habituated bears as representing a significant hazard to humans.

Poor management of garbage, combined with the likelihood of reduced hunting pressure could result in an increase in the number of problem bears. Landscaping and roadside seeding also has a potential to attract bears recently emerged from hibernation, as grasses are highly sought-after forage items in the early spring. Garbage collection and storage will also need to be addressed in the proposed residential areas, to avoid problems with bears and other forest-dwelling wildlife (i.e. raccoons, canids, and fisher).

Mountain goat winter ranges generally occur on steep, wind-swept ridges unlikely to be frequented by skiers. However, the increased popularity of heli-skiing has been cited as having a significant potential to impact this species in other parts of the province (Jamieson, 1986). It has not been determined to what extent this activity will be accommodated at the resort.

4.3.1.3 Threatened and Endangered Wildlife

Ten mammals of conservation interest may occur in the study area. Of these, one may be considered endangered, and four are threatened. The red-listed(1) bat (Keen's Long-eared myotis) and the blue-listed(2) mustelid (the fisher) appear to have some dependency on old-growth forests for denning, and therefore could be impacted by any removal of these habitats. The other mammals of interest include the grizzly bear and wolverine. These species are wide-ranging, unlikely to occur in the immediate area, and should not be impacted by the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Three red-listed and five blue-listed birds may occur within the study area. Of these, two species require old-growth attributes for at least part of their life-cycle. The red-listed marbled murrelet requires thick mossy pads situated on large diameter limbs for nesting. It may use stands bearing these attributes in the Coastal western hemlock and Mountain hemlock biogeoclimatic zones. In addition to the potential for direct habitat removal through clearing operations, the species may be sensitive to habitat fragmentation and subsequent alteration of microclimate around nesting areas.

The Canadian distribution of the spotted owl is restricted to the southwest corner of the province. Due to the extent of clear-cut logging in the region, much of the spotted owl's range is presently unsuitable. This species forages and nests in low-to-middle elevation old-growth forests.

Studies in western Washington suggest that it may continue to use remnant old-growth patches where a significant degree of habitat fragmentation has occurred (Foreman et al., 1984). Surveys conducted to date, have not identified either the marbled murrelet or spotted owls.

The blue-listed northern pygmy owl requires tree cavities for nesting and roosting. It nests in mixed coniferous forests, often on steep ravines and talus slopes (Campbell et al., 1990). In the winter, pygmy owls migrate to low-elevation riparian areas and could therefore be impacted by residential development near streams.

The red-listed peregrine falcon occupies a variety of habitats, but nesting activity in British Columbia is most strongly associated with precipitous cliffs near concentrations of seabirds. The peregrine falcon is not expected to occur on this site. A number of regionally important raptors may occur in the study area. Most use tall snags for perching/roosting, and could be impacted by removal of these habitat elements.

The proposed development should not have a significant impact on the habitats of either the tailed frog or the rubber boa. The former would benefit from measures to protect riparian vegetation and water quality for resident fish populations. The rubber boa is extremely unlikely to be present.

4.3.1.4 Direct Loss of Habitat from Developed Areas

Potential areas of loss of habitat would include those cleared for residential and commercial buildings, maintenance facilities, ski lifts and runs, road building, and staging areas during construction. The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Master Plan suggests that most clearing would result from residential/commercial developments, followed by the ski runs themselves.

These losses should be more than offset by the cessation of logging activities on other parts of the property, thereby allowing second growth forest to attain old-growth characteristics over time. Many wildlife species will forage in summer on the early seral vegetation that occurs on ski runs.

4.3.1.5 Indirect Loss of Habitat Adjacent to Developed Areas

Indirect loss of habitat adjacent to developed areas should not be significant factor for the majority of species, as many are adapted to forest edges. However, as previously mentioned, marbled murrelet nesting areas, if present, could be impacted indirectly through alteration of microclimate at the nest and an increase in abundance of nest predators (Rodway, 1992).

In addition, nesting northern goshawks, if present, could be sensitive to indirect habitat impacts through interspecific competition for nest sites, particularly with red-tailed hawks (Crocker-Bedford, 1990).

4.3.1.6 Impacts from Additional Hunting Pressure

According to the 1995-1996 Hunting and Trapping Regulations Synopsis (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 1996A), the study area is situated entirely within the Whistler "No Shooting Area." Therefore, no additional impacts are expected to accrue from legal wildlife harvest. The increased resident population resulting from development would likely discourage illegal harvest in the area.

4.3.1.7 Population Impacts from Summer Recreational Activities

In order to provide year-round recreational opportunities, it is expected that a network of summer hiking/cycling trails may be developed within alpine and subalpine ecosystems of the parent parcel. Increased human activity around areas frequented by mountain goats may have a significant impact on this species, which subsists on a marginal range for much of the year and depends heavily on summer weight gain to ensure survival and reproductive success (Jamieson, 1986).

Improperly located trails in the high country have the potential to impact marmot colonies, bear foraging behaviour, and the nesting success of ground-nesting birds such as grouse and ptarmigan. With adequate planning, these potential impacts can be almost entirely prevented.

4.3.1.8 Cumulative Impacts to Wildlife from Development

Assessing cumulative impacts can be a difficult and somewhat subjective process. Computer modeling has been employed for measuring the cumulative impact on individual species (i.e. grizzly bear), but it is unlikely that computer programs could satisfactorily integrate information on a broad range of wildlife values at the regional level. We recommend, therefore, the approach suggested in the Forest Practices Code - Biodiversity Guidebook (Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 1995). This combines coarse filter analysis (landscape-level objectives) with fine filter analysis (species-level objectives).

4.3.1.9 Impacts from Avalanche Control Methods

Methods to control avalanches may be required from time to time during the late fall/winter/spring period of operations. The traditional method involves firing artillery shells or placing explosives into potentially unstable areas, although dropping explosives from helicopters has been used more recently. In either case, two potential impacts to wildlife may result: including stress reactions to the percussion of the explosion and death/injury caused by the subsequent avalanche.

Mountain goats are the species of most concern since they frequent precipitous avalanche-prone areas as part of their strategy to avoid predators. However, the precipitous terrain used by goats in winter is generally unsuitable for skiing and should not be subject to control actions. Surveys conducted during the winter of 1996/1997 indicated that goat winter range is not within any of the ski/snowboard areas. Mapping of winter ranges will ensure that they are not subject to disturbance from avalanche control activities.


A Wildlife Management Plan will be developed with the regulatory agencies to minimize impacts to wildlife habitat and populations.

In the meantime, we can outline some generic mitigative strategies employed on similar projects. Prominent among these are development siting and construction scheduling. Field inventory combined with map analyses will be used to identify key wildlife habitats and corridors so that they can be avoided. Many species of wildlife have a particularly vulnerable period in their life cycle (i.e., the summer molting period for some birds and late winter for ungulates).

Impacts can frequently be avoided or mitigated by timing construction around sensitive periods in the life cycle of species most likely to be impacted. Culvert designs which allow for the passage of small to medium sized wildlife can significantly reduce the impact of roads. In some cases, it may be possible to retain individual high value habitats, such as snags, by modifying the design of roads, buildings or ski runs. Use of high temperature incinerators and "wildlife-proof" garbage containers will be necessary in order to prevent wildlife habituation to wastes.

A long-term strategy should be to allow those second-growth forest stands, which presently occur between the proposed ski runs and other developments, to advance to the mature and old-growth stage. This will be of great benefit to endangered species like the spotted owl (Dunbar and Blackburn, 1994) and many other old-growth species.

4.4 Vegetation Resources

4.4.1 Impacts to Sensitive Alpine Vegetation

Rider Pods B, E, G, H, I, J, L, M, N O and P and the Upper Base Lodge could potentially impact the Coastal Alpine Tundra Zone (higher than 1,350 metres / 4,429 feet) and the associated non-forested vegetation including shrubs, herbs, bryophytes and lichens. The dominant shrubs are white and pink heathers. Typically, alpine vegetation is fragile and sensitive to impacts and takes a relatively long time to recover.

As part of the proposed Vegetation Management Plan, heather and other unique or sensitive alpine vegetation will be mapped and management guidelines established to protect these vegetation communities.

4.4.2 Loss of Old-Growth Forests

Potential impacts to old-growth forests (older than 250 years of age) could occur from timber harvesting in the lower elevations for the proposed access road (elevation 100 metres / 328 feet), the village site, portions of the ski pods, and the single and multi-family residential components. The dominant tree species include Amabilis fir, Western red cedar, Western hemlock and Douglas fir and to a lesser extent Yellow cedar and Mountain hemlock.

Review of forest cover maps indicates that the stands within the development property are predominantly less than 101 years of age. During the development of the site, a tree survey will be conducted to identify key or representative, healthy decadent stands and wildlife trees for preservation.

4.4.3 Loss or Disturbance to Rare or Unique Vegetation

Two ferns and 16 other vascular plants appear on the Conservation Data Centre Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List ofthe Squamish Forest District. Few of these are forest species and are associated with rocky habitats such as those found along streams, avalanche tracks or within wetlands or lake margins. However, rare plant communities appear in virtually all site series in the Dry, Maritime Coastal Western Hemlock zone on either the red or blue-lists for the region.

Since these rare communities only occur below 650 metres (2,133 feet) elevation, potential impacts would only be associated with the lower portion of the access road and utility development. Approximately 13% of the entire study area falls within this biogeoclimatic zone.

There may also be five blue-list site series occurring within the Montane, very wet Maritime Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic zone (elevation 650-1,000 metres/2,133-3281 feet) and two others in the Windward Moist Maritime Mountain Hemlock biogeoclimatic zone (1,000-1,350 metres/3,281-4,429 feet).

The five blue-list plant species could potentially only be impacted by road/utility corridor construction, while the two other blue-list species could potentially be impacted from construction of the village and residential components.

Rare and unique plant community surveys are recommended to determine the potential for impacts and recommendations for preservation or protection of these communities.

4.4.4 Direct Loss of Vegetation in Developed Areas

The majority of the vegetation to be removed from the proposed development, is within the main village site (elevation 1,100 metres/3,609 feet), the ski trails above 1,100 metres (3,609 feet) and the access road. In addition, smaller amounts of vegetation will be removed for the multi-family and single-family residences.

Although the volume, species and age of timber to be removed from the site has not been determined at this stage of planning, the approximate area required for each component of the project is outlined below:

Project Facility Area Required Dominant Vegetation

Village 30 hectares Western hemlock, Amabilis fir, Yellow cedar

Ski Trails 1,666 hectares Western hemlock, Amabilis fir, Yellow cedar, Shrubs, Bryophytes, Lichens

Access Road 31 hectares Western hemlock, Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Amabilis fir

Single and Multi- Family Recreational Residences 850 hectares Western hemlock, Amabilis fir, Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Mountain hemlock,

Total 2,577 hectares Western hemlock, Amabilis fir, Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Mountain hemlock, Yellow cedar, shrubs, byrophytes, lichens

The above totals do not account for previously clear-cut forests which is particularly evident for a significant portion of the village site and which is in an early successional stage of development (6-20 years of growth). In addition, a significant portion of the upper ski trails is above the tree line and in areas of alpine tundra where tree removal would not be required.

The single-family and multi-family recreational developments outside of the village core area will be developed in clusters and with significant amounts of tree retention, as buildings will be situated to minimize tree removal. Prior to development of the residential pockets, tree surveys will be conducted to identify individual and stands of trees for preservation.

Evaluation of Timber Values

JCH Forestry Ltd. has prepared for the proposed resort development area, an estimate of timber volume with approximate log market and Crown stumpage values. It should be noted that based on the proposed development plan, only selected areas will have trees removed and therefore would not be logged as extensively as may be considered by the Ministry of Forests without the development.

The method of determining an estimate of the timber volume and values included the use of the Ministry of Forests forest cover map (92G085 – 20,000 - dated March 5, 1997), overlayed over the proposed development area. The data contains the area (in hectares), for each forest stand in the development area as well as the estimated volume (in cubic meters), for each of the tree species in the stand.

In deriving the timber volume and value, only those stands containing merchantable timber were included.

The following, Table 4-1, shows the estimated gross timber volume by species, in cubic meters, within the proposed development area.

Table 4-1 Estimated Gross Timber Volume By Species

Balsam Hemlock Yellow

Cedar

Douglas Fir Red cedar Red Alder

216,076 148,852 27,284 23,959 7,976 5,846

A major consideration is that the indicated volume of timber that could be developed would not be available all at the same time due to Code requirements. Therefore a likely development schedule may see one third of volume available now, one third available in fifteen or twenty years and the balance in thirty years depending on many factors that could delay some of the volume being developed for harvesting. Another aspect affecting timber volume would be those stands that are not merchantable at this date, that will become merchantable in the future.

The estimated volume of coniferous species is 424,147 cubic meters and deciduous (Red Alder), 5,846 cubic meters.

The resulting gross volume was reduced by 35% to account for constraints that timber development would be subject to under the Forest Practices Code of British Colombia Act. Timber development would be subject to Code requirements such as riparian management reserves and buffers, timber allocated to biodiversity patches, deletions from due to terrain stability issues, visual landscape requirements as well as other environmentally sensitive areas that would require reducing or eliminating timber volume. Buffer strips adjacent to Garibaldi Provincial Park would also affect the available timber volume.

By reducing the volume by 35% results in the timber volume being reduced to the following estimated volume in cubic meters for each species (Table 4-2).

Table 4-2 Estimated Gross Timber Volume By Species


Cedar


151,253 104,196 19,099 16,771 5,583 4,092

The estimated volume of coniferous species is reduced to 296,902 cubic meters while deciduous species (red alder) is reduced to 4,902 cubic meters.

To derive an estimate of the timber values, the Average Market Value (AMV) for October, 1997 were applied to each species. AVM indicates the relative value of the timber on the log market for all grades of logs, of one species.

The following table shows the AMV for each species times the estimated volume for the individual species, resulting in the indicated market value (AMV x volume, 000’s of $).

Table 4-3 Market Value for the Estimated Timber Volume


Cedar


$13, 624 $7,431 $1,468 $2,717 $772 $4

The indicated market value is estimated for the coniferous species at $26,012,527 while the deciduous species are estimated at $4,092.

When the Ministry of Forests sells timber an “upset value” is determined that is based on an appraisal of the market value for the timber less development costs (including profit and risk). The minimum selling price is $0.25 and increases based on location log grades and development costs. For the purposes of this assessment, we have utilized two recent timber sales that are within the same timber supply block as the development area. One sale has an upset of $0.25 while the second has an upset of $7.97. These two prices were averaged to give an upset price of $4.11.

Based on the upset price of $4.11 per cubic meter for the coniferous species the indicated value of the timber is $1,220,267 while the deciduous species are $4,029.

When the Ministry of forests advertise a timber sale the upset price has already been determined. Prospective buyers then bid a bonus on top of the upset price that then becomes the “stumpage payable for the timber on the timber sale (the highest bonus bidder is usually awarded the timber sale). To give some relevance to what the Ministry of forests might expect for the timber in the study area, the bonus for the most recent timber sale in the supply block was used. The bonus was $19.33 per cubic meter. Again using the AMV of $4.11 and a bonus of $19.33 the stumpage would be $23.44. With the stumpage value of $23.44 the Ministry of Forests would therefore estimate a revenue for the coniferous species of $6.959,382 while the deciduous species would be $4,092.

GARIBALDI has initiated discussions with the Ministry of Forests regarding the logging of the development site, and is prepared to work with the Ministry to maximize the return to the forest sector. GARIBALDI is also interested in using different silviculture techniques to minimize the impact to the forested lands of the development site. Although the volume of trees would likely be less than if the entire area was logged, the revenues should remain significant.

4.4.5 Proposed Mitigation Strategies

Although there will be significant areas of the development site which will be impacted from the timber harvesting, the following mitigation measures will provide for a planned and managed approach to minimize the impact on the forest resources of the site:

● Adherence to the Forest Practices Code of British Columbia and associated guide books ● Preparation of a Vegetation Management Plan which emphasizes tree/rare plant/viewscape retention and

preservation of important fish (riparian) and wildlife (wildlife trees) habitat ● Incorporation of different silviculture systems into site development including clear cutting, seed tree,

shelterwood and selection ● Preparation of a Soil Management Plan to conserve soils and protect unstable soil areas ● Work with the Ministry of Forests to develop timber harvesting and wildfire prevention programs.

4.5 Climate and Air Quality

4.5.1 Potential Impacts

Potential changes or impacts to air quality of the District of Squamish are unlikely due to the distance and elevation of the proposed development from the town of Squamish. However, localized changes in the development area could occur from emissions of particulates (PM10) from wood burning fireplaces/stoves, hydrocarbon emissions from vehicles. These potential air impacts could contribute to insignificant increases in greenhouse gases and reductions of the ozone layer of the Earth’s atmosphere.

4.5.2 Mitigation

The proposed mitigation of potential impacts to air quality include the implementation of the Go Green policy for vehicular traffic, including the use of shuttle buses to the resort for people, employees and recreational users from Squamish and instituting “Employee Incentives” for car pooling and use of high occupancy vehicles.

4.6 Heritage Resources

4.6.1 Loss of Heritage Sites

According to D. Hutchcroft of the provincial Heritage Conservation Branch, there are no recorded heritage sites within the development site. However, there may be potential for sites along the lower portions of the streams draining the site and within the areas proposed for single-family and multi-family recreational development.

4.6.2 Mitigation

As part of Section 12 - Future and On-going Studies, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is prepared to conduct an Archeological Impact Assessment. If there are any important heritage sites, they will be identified and managed according to the requirements of the Heritage Conservation Branch.

4.7 Recreational Users


Potential impacts to recreational users, including those using the development site and Garibaldi Provincial Park, could include the following:

● Loss or change of traditional recreational use of the development site and adjacent areas ● Loss of wilderness views from the north end of the Garibaldi Neve ● Impacts to wildlife habitat and rare or unique vegetation as a result of trail development and/or new access.

4.7.2 Mitigation

Traditional recreational use of the development site, including hiking, sightseeing and ski touring, will continue, if not

be enhanced, through the use of trail and access management. Motorized trail bike riding and snowmobiling will be restricted.

The proposed mitigation for the existing snowmobile club which uses Brohm Ridge includes assessing opportunities to re-locate snowmobiling activities by the provincial government. GARIBALDI will work with the provincial government to assist where possible for the re-location.

The existing Ministry of Forests Visual Quality Objectives, which include preservation, retention, partial retention, modification, maximum modification and excessive modification, will be utilized during the development of the site. Although the view from the north portion of the Neve will be changed, the visual quality objectives adopted by GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will minimize the visual impacts.

The proposed mitigation for potential impacts to the existing user groups of Garibaldi Provincial Park include the development of a Trail and Access Management Plan throughout the development site. This plan will adhere to the existing Garibaldi Provincial Park Master Plan of 1990, which provides an extensive data base regarding the backcountry recreation opportunities and the challenges faced by one of the Lower Mainland’s important wilderness resources.

Existing access into the Culliton Creek watershed from Highway 99 will not be impacted.

4.8 Community, Economic & Infrastructure


Potential impacts to the infrastructure of Squamish will be realized whether GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is annexed into the District of Squamish or remains a separate Mountain Resort Community. Assuming GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is not annexed, the following community, economic and infrastructure impacts would occur:

● The population of Squamish would increase by 540 workers and families ● Residential construction will draw an estimated 1,360 permanent residents ● Regional skier visits will increase by 500% ● Additional police resources will be required ● The impact on the demand for housing and community services which may impact “lifestyle”.

If the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH site is annexed into Squamish, the Mamquam Sewage Treatment Plant would need to be expanded, at approximately the fifth year.

4.8.2 Mitigation

Potential negative impacts will be more than compensated by the following positive economic, social and infrastructure impacts, providing an overall net benefit to the community of Squamish:

● 1,139 person years(3) of direct and 428 person years of indirect construction jobs ● 5,675 person years of direct and 342 person years of indirect employment ● $46.8 million in construction employment income and $151 million in operations employment income over ten

years● $12 million in annual construction employment income in the start-up year

● An estimated $14.1 million spent on the purchase of supplies from Squamish suppliers and $23.4 million from regional suppliers

● Property tax revenue will increase from an estimated $420,000 in Year 1 to $5.8 million in Year 10 ● The current economic transition for some displaced forestry workers will ease by the creation of new jobs ● Employment opportunities for high school graduates and Employment Insurance/Social Assistance recipients

will expand ● The proposed resort will contribute to the ongoing diversity of the economy and tourism sector ● The number of residents who commute to Whistler or Vancouver will reduce ● Demand for social services may decline due to increased employment opportunities for employable social

assistance and employment insurance recipients ● The proposed resort will contribute to the maintenance of community stability and living standards by offering

viable employment opportunities for area residents ● Squamish residents will have access to resort recreational amenities.

(1)Red Listed are those considered critically imperiled and are candidates for legal Endangered Species Status

(2)Blue Listed species are those which may be sensitive to human activities and are considered threatened

(3) Person Year: One Person Working For One Year

SECTION 5 MARKET ANALYSIS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will enhance British Columbia's global reputation as a world-class destination centre of soft adventure and eco-tourism. The Sea to Sky region of Southwestern British Columbia has been successfully positioned in the globalmarket as a major tourism destination and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH stands poised to ride this wave of popularity.

The focus of the development will be an all-season, all-weather resort. However, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is also positioned to greatly from gravity-fueled sports traditionally known as skiing, as well as snowboarding which is rapidly broadening its appeal.Shaped skis are also bringing back new excitement to alpine winter sports. Virtually all alpine skis sold in the current season will be some variant of the shaped ski concept. These new skis make carving simple, lessen the energy required to turn and increase userenjoyment.

In the summer, the range of activities will be even more diverse and will expand the summer visitor base and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will come on stream within the context of soft adventure & eco-tourism, two powerful segments of the global tourism industry.

To expand the resort's business beyond local and destination customers, marketing programs will be aimed at attracting the international market British Columbia has the most sought after natural assets for the development of winter and mountain recreation and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will provide an excellent opportunity to expand B.C.'s share of the world market.

Foreign visitors will be induced to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH through alliances with airlines and tour operators and alliances with a major ski resort conglomerate will provide mutual benefits in terms of accessing these markets. Aggressively marketed, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will become a new beacon in British Columbia's portfolio of destination resorts.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will initially focus on attracting local and regional visitors. Local market growth is expected to average approximately 3.5 to 4.5 per cent per year.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will also derive additional customers from incremental growth in the winter and summer sports marketplace as a result of clustering, which builds the destination visitor potential of an area because of the enhanced opportunitiesto experience more than one resort and broadens the region's appeal beyond the traditional customer base of a single resort.

The following pages update previous market studies conducted by GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

In preparation of this report, new information has been gathered and where appropriate earlier information has been updated to reflect new findings. Local market data and mountain resort information and methodology has been supplemented by information from David A. Hughes & Associates of North Vancouver. These inputs have been incorporated into the calculations on which such measures as visitor totals and breakdowns are based and are included in the background information sections of this report. Wherever possible and appropriate, the methodology used in arriving at key conclusions has been summarized and the base data on which those calculations have been made is also shown.

This section provides an overview of the market and discusses a number of the key market areas. A complete market study will be undertaken during the master plan stage. Further, market analysis updates will be prepared periodically during the development ofthe resort.

The following report section provides a summary of numbers derived from the market data in the balance of the report. Specificallyincluded are the following:

● Overall resort concept, including general facility description ● Skier and non-skier visit projections, including breakdown by source and type ● Real estate product, including pricing and absorption projections by product type.

The final section of the report, entitled Evolution of the Market, summarizes changes in the market and related factors that mayhave effects on the planning and operation of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort, particularly in its initial stages of development.

5.2 Changes in the Squamish Economic Base

Agriculture was the original mainstay of the post-Native Squamish economy, starting in the early 1900s when the first white settlershad orchards and dairy farms and cultivated world-famous hops, hay and potatoes.

Logging began at the same time as agriculture, but it did not really thrive until the Pacific Great Eastern Railway laid tracks inSquamish in 1913. The advent of the railway resulted in an economic boom, with skyrocketing land prices and a rapidly-growing rail logging industry. Around the same time, the Woodfibre pulp mill was built south of Squamish on the west side of Howe Sound.

It was not until 1956 that a rail link was established between Squamish and Vancouver. Two years later, the highway linking Squamish with Vancouver was also opened. The railway and highway opened up this previously isolated area at the head of Howe Sound and signaled the start of steady population growth and further industrialization. A sawmill, chemical plant, and deep sea portwere all added to the Squamish economic base in this period.

In the 1960s, the provincial government made recreation a priority at Whistler, located 45 kilometres north of Squamish. Ski liftsopened at Whistler Mountain in 1966. A few years later, a ski resort development began construction on Brohm Ridge, but it was never completed.

At the same time, Squamish was becoming known as a tourism and recreation centre. Rock climbers had been scaling the 700-metre granite monolith of the Stawamus Chief since the late 1950s. The District of Squamish was developing its own recreation infrastructure, which included the Squamish Valley Golf Course, the Brennan Park Leisure Centre including a new Aquatic Centre and playing fields. In 1974, the Royal Hudson steam train began its runs to Squamish, bringing with it a new wave of tourists.

The late 1980s and early 1990s was a time of dramatic transition for Squamish. The CanadianOxy chemical plant closed down and the forest industry suffered major setbacks as the provincial government reduced the volume of timber available for logging in aneffort to work toward harvesting at a sustainable level.

In 1997 the forest industry has suffered a further set back due to decline in international forest markets. Despite these job basesetbacks, the population of Squamish was growing rapidly. Tucked in a picturesque valley, people were attracted to Squamish for its high quality of life, affordable real estate and easy access to the city of Vancouver and the Resort Municipality of Whistler. More service- and tourism-oriented businesses were established in Squamish, and an increasingly diverse demography led to a healthy, diverse economy.

The community began to realize the potential for tourism as a bonafide sector of the Squamish economy, and in 1992 held a Community Tourism Workshop. Following this workshop, a Citizens Tourism Advisory Committee was formed. This group of volunteers, representing a cross-section of the community, came together to develop a Tourism Development Plan as a means to a coordinated, community-based approach to tourism. The Plan's vision was "to build and strengthen a diverse, four-season tourism sector while maintaining our small town character and preserving our heritage." The Plan recommends the community investigate opportunities for an alpine ski development.

In early 1996, the newly formed Tourism Marketing Committee, appointed by the District of Squamish Council and made up of people from Squamish's tourism oriented businesses, began to work together to develop a strategy to market Squamish as a destination area.

Most recently, there has been growth in the adventure tourism sector, with tour companies, guides and individuals coming to Squamish for its rock climbing, windsurfing, white-water rafting, river and sea kayaking, mountaineering, hiking, mountain biking,backcountry skiing and snowshoeing.

Squamish has developed a reputation as a world-class outdoor recreation centre with a myriad of available opportunities. Its naturalassets have always been in place; now is the time to incorporate these assets into the communities continuing drive towards economic prosperity. Opportunities exist in the Squamish downtown core to maximize the beauty of the Mt. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH viewscape through enhanced streetscapes along the Mamquam Blind Channel and Loggers Lane, while the resort will provide an awesome viewscape of the community.

5.3 PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS

5.3.1 Project Concept and Vision

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be an affordable, quality destination mountain resort for all seasons. While the facility will include amenities and atmosphere to make it a true destination resort, there will be programs and incentives to attract and serve the Squamish and Lower Mainland/Vancouver markets as well, emphasizing convenience, affordability and entertainment values in all amenities.

Architecturally and graphically the resort will reflect the Pacific Northwest/British Columbia Aboriginal culture, showcasing thenatural wonders of the area as well as the culture and history of the Squamish Nation. At the same time, the natural beauty of thesite will be preserved and incorporated into all aspects of the project and its planning process.

Area design will focus on the traditional alpine configuration that other areas have retrofitted with separate snowboard halfpipeareas and will also plan for proper integration of snowboard and alpine skiing in addition to the new sport of freeride skiing, whichis a cross between the two sports. Special attention will be given to the design of all facilities in order to attract major events and races in such categories as alpine skiing, snowboarding, extreme games, cross country skiing, snowshoeing and mountain biking.

Mountain facilities will be designed to accommodate all types of uses in all seasons, integrating different uses and types of userswhere appropriate but providing separate, specialized facilities when that is indicated as well. As an example, trails that adapt to both snowboarding and skiing in winter will also be designed to handle mountain biking, hiking and equestrian activities on separate paths during summer months.

During the development process, as well as in the construction and operation periods, the Squamish community will be fully involved, in both facilities and programs. In addition, the natural amenities and resources of the Sea to Sky region will play a key part in the evolution of the resort and its many programming elements.

5.3.2 Marketing and Development Program Outline

In addition to its unique setting and distinctive architectural look, the heart of the resort's attraction will be the variety and quality of activities that it offers to visitors (many of them targeted to specific niche markets). These markets will be reached and servedthrough a combination of strategic alliances with experienced operators, as well as an umbrella promotional campaign coordinatedby resort marketing staff.

● For those attuned to action and adventure sports, the resort will provide such activities as skiing, snowboarding, dog sledding excursions and ice climbing in winter and mountain biking, hot air ballooning, hiking, horseback riding, mountaineering and climbing in summer.

● Spa devotees will be drawn to the resort's world class spa facility, centrally located near the village core and other project amenities providing a "wellness center" accompaniment to the many physical activities available just outside its doors.

● Golfers will be able to fine tune their golf games in a state-of-the-art training facility and through cooperative arrangements with the area's nearby underutilized golf courses they can practice their newly-improved games.

● Hikers, trekkers and campers will be transported to the highcountry and have summer access to backcountry gateways by using the resort's high-speed lifts or via the well designed trail system.

A year-round schedule of concerts, lectures, festivals, unique spectator sport competitions, special events and cultural exhibits will

provide summer and winter visitors with additional reasons to visit and stay at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

As planning for the resort proceeds through the Master Planning phase, preliminary discussions already started with such major corporations as Bombardier, SkiData/Swatch and Apple Computer will be continued and expanded, so that a series of strategic alliances will be formed. These alliances will lead to the utilization of leading-edge technology in all areas of resort developmentand operation: from ticketing and access control through communications, grooming, integrated access and payment systems throughout the resort, management information systems, and unique promotional opportunities in a wide range of venues and media.

Although technically not part of the marketing plan, ongoing development and improvement of facilities throughout the resort (particularly in the area of visitors' amenities) will be crucial to the success of the overall program (Table 5-1). Strategically, it is important to open the resort with a sufficient number of lifts and visitor-serving infrastructure to establish it as a serious recreationaland resort offering, worthy of the attention of both local and non-local area visitors. However, to maintain market interest andexpand the base of customers beyond those who show initial interest, ongoing development and addition of new facilities is an important element of the marketing program.

Another key element of the resort will be the full integration of the Squamish community into the development process, as well asthe executional phases. Programs and events will be developed at the resort to augment the facilities and resources of Squamish andthe District's programs and events will in turn augment the facilities and resources of the resort. The process will be orchestrated so the resort and the community are viewed by the visitor and recreational homeowner as complementary.

TABLE 5-1 Scheduled Project or Resort Development Elements Visitor Facilities and Community Amenities

Operating

Year

Major Lift Facility Expansion (2 or More Lifts) Minor Lift Additions Facility Community amenities

0

1 X Conference centre complex

2 X Spa, Golf training facility

3 X Outdoor amphitheater

4 X

5 X Active Recreation facility

6 X Active Recreation facility

7 X

8 X

9 X Active recreation facility

10

Concepts to be developed for the community include:

● Incentives for Squamish area school students (grade three through high school) to attain higher grades, in the form of free liftpasses for achieving certain defined levels of success. In addition, the "most improved" child in each grade level (at each school) will receive a special pass.

● Membership on the resort's ski team, including free season passes, for high school students maintaining B-plus or higher grade point averages.

● Classes at the resort to prepare attendees of all ages for job opportunities in all of the resort's winter and summer activitiesincluding retail, mountain management and the hospitality industry.

To expand the resort's business base beyond already-existing local and destination customers, proactive marketing programs will beinitiated to reach potential visitors who live in areas outside of North America where 80 percent of the world's skiers are located.With the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships at Vail and the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, international interest in North America will become supercharged at about the time GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH enters the market. British Columbia and the Sea to Sky Corridor have an excellent natural environment for the development of skiing and mountain recreation. These eventsprovide a great opportunity to expand B.C.'s share of the world market.

According to recent industry reports, a record 250,000 foreigners visited U.S. winter resorts last season, and the numbers are growing. Included in the numbers are: Australians and New Zealanders, coming in January (the peak of their summer season), value-minded Dutch who patronize Breckenridge and Winter Park in Colorado and upper-class Brazilians, Argentineans and Mexicans who may spend thousands of dollars on new equipment alone during their visits. Similarly, the Whistler Resort is now attracting significant American and other international visitors. According to Whistler Resort Association 56.7% and 36.9% of this past winterand summer seasons commercial room nights were to visitors from outside Canada.

Foreign visitors will be induced to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH through a combination of alliances with airlines and tour operators. Many of these operators have had great success with such programs in areas as diverse as Mammoth Mountain, the Lake Tahoe region, Jackson Hole, Steamboat, Whistler Resort and American Skiing Company's New England resorts. Preliminary discussions with selected international tour operators indicate that they would be interested in expanding their programs to encompass GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, as well.

The significance of "A Resort for All Seasons" in terms of further enhancing British Columbia's reputation both nationally and internationally as a world-class soft adventure destination, cannot be underestimated. Soft adventure (skiing/snowboarding, golf,hiking, bird watching, mountain climbing, golf, etc.) and eco-tourism are two of the fastest growing segments of the tourism industry and the major thrust of the Canada Tourism Commission's marketing campaign for 1998-1999.

Tourism Vancouver and the Whistler Resort Association, in conjunction with the efforts of Tourism B.C., have already positioned the region in the global market as a major tourism destination by virtue of their highly successful marketing programs. With an aggressive and targeted marketing strategy of its own, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH stands poised to ride this wave of awareness in a number of ways.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort Association

Modeled on the success of the Whistler Resort association, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will have one powerful, credible and coordinated voice so that the "message" is not diluted and remains focused. It will be necessary to start marketing as soon as thenecessary permits to realize the resort project are in place in order to successfully launch the resort once it Is ready for business. The initial focus will be on the regional markets of B.C. and the Pacific Northwest. The national and international markets will takemore time and effort because the resort has to tap into a distribution system (i.e., wholesalers) which is sometimes slow to acceptnew product.

Tourism Alliances

Relationship building with CTC, Tourism B.C., Tourism Vancouver, the Tourism Alliance of Western Canada (TAWNC) and the Council of Tourism Associations (COTA) is of utmost importance. Their experience and knowledge of the marketplace makes them invaluable partners. As part of such existing programs as Discover B.C., SuperNatural B.C. campaigns and the CTC's Partnership Plan. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will achieve "name brand" recognition in a far shorter time than without their support. In fact, all of these associations are keen on projects which expand the credibility and desirability of British Columbia as a soft adventuredestination.

Tourism Trade Shows

Working in tandem with Tourism B.C. and Tourism Vancouver, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will have a major presence at trade fairs and trade shows, such as the World Travel Market in London, the ITB in Berlin, Canada's West Marketplace, Rendezvous, NTA (National Tour Association) in the States, KANATA in Japan and others. Since GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will have so many "saleable" points, such as skiing / snowboarding and other recreational activities, hospitality and the spa, marketing can tieinto the various specialty trade shows and expositions which are related to these segments, as well.

Regional Market Awareness

The "close-in" markets of Vancouver, Seattle and Victoria will be the initial focus, of media advertising campaigns which encompass the four-season theme of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. Again, by advertising concurrently with campaigns undertaken by Tourism B.C., and others. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH can strengthen its message and gain credibility in the marketplace.

Media Relations

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will focus a large amount of time and effort on attracting travel writers and "opinion makers" to the resort, both during construction and after. The "Making of a Mountain" can be a powerful hook to capture the imaginations of theseindividuals who are constantly seeking something new.

As a result of ongoing relationships developed over a 27-year period, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has already received commitments from major mountain-oriented sports media for significant coverage of the resort, once it has been approved to proceed to Master Planning.

Specifically, both editors and publishers for the following publications have expressed willingness to provide pictorials, featurearticles, and editorial mentions of the resort:

● Ski Magazine (USA) - including cover photo ● Skiing (USA) - including cover photo ● Snow Country ● Powder● Transworld Snowboarding ● Snowboarder● Onboard (Europe) ● Snowboard U.K.

In addition to print and other media, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is in the process of securing a commitment from Warren Miller Productions to shoot footage at the resort site for inclusion in the company's 1999 edition of the long-running Warren Miller skifilm series. This additional exposure to worldwide audiences will develop awareness and build excitement for the resort's plannedopening.

In summary, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will come on stream within the context of Soft Adventure and Eco-tourism, two very powerful and attractive segments of the tourism industry. Aggressively marketed, with a consistent and dynamic message, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will become a leader in British Columbia's growing portfolio of destination resorts and make a

significant and positive contribution to the economic growth of our Province.

5.3.3 Visitor/User Projections

Strong B.C. Regional Ski Markets

The demand for downhill skiing has steadily grown over the last 18 years as shown on Exhibit 5-1 and 5-2. Growth slowed in the recessions during the early 1980's and 1900's. The average compound growth rate of 7.5% over the period is strong and shows no signs of changing in the immediate future except when weather is a dominant variable.

The high growth rate in B.C. ski areas can be attributed to several factors including the strong success of the Whistler Blackcombresort area. However, other ski areas in B.C. such as the Okanagan areas have enjoyed strong growth in recent years and this hascontributed significantly to the overall B.C. average. The success of B.C. ski areas is a combination of increasing market recognition of British Columbia's skiing potential, the capital investment in ski resorts, a healthy economy and general populationgrowth.

Exhibit 5-1 History Of British Columbia Skier Market

Exhibit 5-2 Growth In Skier Visits Whistler Resort

The Whistler Resort has also experienced extremely strong growth since the start of the Whistler village. The previous Exhibit 5-2displays a 370% increase in volume since 1980/81 or an average of 23.7% per annum.

Expanding B.C. Resident Ski Market

Greater Vancouver and British Columbia residents are active skiers and compare favourably to key participation rates in Canada and the United States as shown on Table 5-1 British Columbia residents ski more often than the Canadian average and have a higherparticipation rate than in the United States.

Table 5-1a Ski Participation Rates

Skier Visits Pop. (000's) Number of Skiers Avg Times per Year Percentage Participation

Greater Vancouver 2,004 1,774 230,620 8.7 13%

B.C. 4,684 3,712 519,700 9.0 14%

Canada 16,500 29,562 3,547,440 4.7 12%

United States 52,677 260,100 11,872,000 4.4 5%

Local Market Potential

The local market potential demand for downhill skiing and boarding is stronger than is commonly recognized. The three local Vancouver ski areas have experienced widely varying skier/boarder visits depending on local weather and snow conditions. The following Table 5-2 illustrates how much skier visits change between good years 1996/97, 1994/95 and 1992/93 and a poor weather year 1996/96. It should also be noted that there was strong growth between 1996/97 and 1994/95 when ski conditions were not significantly different.

Table 5-2 Vancouver Ski Area Downhill Skier Visits 1991/92 - 1996/97

Total Skier Visits Cypress Bowl, Grouse Mtn. and Seymour Mtn.

1991/92 1992/3 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97

374,300 515,500 417,000 506,000 269,400 615,000

Source: David A. Hughes & Associates

When local ski area skier visits are compared to the Whistler resort it can be concluded that good conditions on the local mountainsusually result in Whistler experiencing increased visits. Similarly a quality ski development at Brohm Ridge should expand the totalmarket.

Table 5-3 Skier Visits Data For B.C. Blackcomb, Whistler and Vancouver 3 Area Mountains

Year BC

Total

BC

B/C & WM

BC

VANC 3 Areas

1996/97 4,481,039 1,746,709 615,000

1995/96 4,182,275 1,655,386 269,415

1994/95 4,684,398 1,716,335 506,000

1993/94 4,129,196 1,456,885 427,010

1992/93 3,969,241 1,360,594 515,522

1991/92 3,551,819 1,330,276 374,294

1990/91 3,391,792 1,324,060

1989/90 3,269,109 1,228,222

1988/89 3,446,613 1,202,758

1987/88 3,295,140 1,065,400

1986/87 2,682,567 812,338

1985/86 2,333,794 707,780

1984/85 2,716,799 775,941

1983/84 2,391,710 665,444

1982/83 2,419,969 704,840

1981/82 2,341,439 640,594

1980/81 1,341,632 372,000

1979/80 1,793,297 462,000

1978/79 1,562,554 280,030

1977/78 1,319,703 414,120

Note: WM = Whistler, BC = Blackcomb

Although GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be developed from the beginning with sufficient mass and amenities to support the destination-type visitor, in its early years the proposed resort will rely (to a significant extent) on local area-based visitors in both winter and summer seasons. Using a methodology incorporating such factors as recent skier volumes at regional areas, as well as the sources and types of skiers currently served, David A. Hughes & Associates has estimated that the potential local skier market in 1999/2000 (the projected opening year for the resort) will total 2,243,000 visits. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will capture a share of this local market as well as developing new business from the Pacific Northwest region and specifically targeted destination markets.

Given the scale and quality of planned first-year facilities and amenities at the resort, approximately 100,000 to 150,000 (4 to 6 percent of the total local market) can be expected to visit GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH on a day-use basis for skiing and other winter lift-based activities. An additional 30,000 to 50,000 will stay in public or private accommodations at the resort, yielding a first year winter activity visitor total of 130,000 to 200,000.

Growth in subsequent years will be generated in part through local market growth (which is expected to average approximately 3.5to 4.5 percent per year) based on population growth and skier participation projections. In addition, broader awareness of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH in the regional and destination marketplace and growth in the resort's bed base to accommodate an increasing proportion of overnight visitors will provide the impetus for increased visits from non-local tourists in both winter and summer months.

Inevitably, there may be some short term effect (at least in the initial year of operation) on visitor numbers at competing local area winter resorts. However local Squamish and Lower Mainland growth, as well penetration of the regional and destination markets, will keep the number of visits taken from the existing ski areas to a small number. The primary source from which GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will derive its additional skiers will be incremental growth in the marketplace, which will come as a result of a combination of these factors:

The positive effects of so-called "clustering" of resorts, as demonstrated in Summit County, Colorado, as well as the Park City areaof Utah and Lake Tahoe on the California/Nevada border. As these successful areas have demonstrated, clustering builds the destination visitor potential of an area because of the enhanced opportunities to experience more than one resort for the price of one airline ticket. Further, having more than one resort in an area broadens the region's appeal beyond the traditional base of supportenjoyed by a single resort, no matter how large it is:

● The quality level and array of amenities and activities provided at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will result in positive visitor experiences. These form the basis for strong word-of-mouth and ultimately, recognition by national and international media so that travelers who might not have considered a British Columbia mountain resort experience before would now be more inclined to do so.

● Destination visitors to Whistler Resort will consider spending one or more of their vacation days at GARIBALDI AT

SQUAMISH, to enhance and broaden their vacation experience. ● On-site amenities, including a world-class spa containing 2,787 square metres (30,000 square feet) a complete

convention/meeting facility and a high-level golf training facility will attract otherwise untapped segments of the market throughout the year.

Based on patterns experienced at Whistler Resort and other B.C. resorts (as well as the nature of the development proposed for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH) the breakdown of winter visitors by type of visit will be as follows (Exhibit 5-3 and Exhibit 5-4):



In summer months, in early years the resort's wide range of seasonal attractions and activities will draw a mix of visitors primarilyfrom the local or regional market, transitioning in later years to a more destination-like mix as is seen in the winter visitor totals. A significant number of summer visitors will utilize lift facilities in support of such activities as mountain biking and hiking and the resort's retail shops, lodging and food/beverage operations will also benefit from summer visitor traffic (Table 5-4).

Table 5-4 Lift User Projections by Season

Operation Year Winter Summer

1 150,000 100,000

2 180,000 130,000

3 220,000 160,000

4 280,000 190,000

5 320,000 215,000

6 370,000 240,000

7 420,000 265,000

8 480,000 290,000

9 520,000 315,000

10 550,000 350,000

5.3.4 Lift Pricing Parameters

In both geographic and overall development concept terms, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be positioned between Whistler Resort to the north and the local mountains of Vancouver and Fraser Valley to the south and the Okanagan to the east. In addition to providing for the needs of day skiers through an extensive network of lifts, trails and day use facilities, the project will providedestination-type amenities that are far beyond what is currently available in the local area day use oriented mountains.

Given this context and the new resort's service concept, lift pricing at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH can be bracketed within the range of rates at the areas to the north, south and southeast. At the top end of the range is Whistler/Blackcomb Resort, where 1996/1997 season adult day use tickets were $51 or $52 (depending on which mountain was chosen Table 5-5). For the coming season at Whistler Resort, only a two-mountain pass will be sold to day visitors and the adult pass will cost $55. In the local Vancouver areas adult lift prices will be in the $20's and $30's (weekday versus weekend pricing). The Okanagon daily adult ratewill be in the low $40's.

● In its opening year, winter lift prices at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH are expected to have a published rate of $49, although discounting (including significant breaks for Squamish area residents) will bring the effective price to approximately $33.

● Summer lift rates (which will play an increasingly important revenue role as the project matures) should be set initially at $15 for a single ride, and lifts will be fitted to accommodate carrying mountain bikes as well as passengers during summer months.

● Lift prices will increase each year at rates that will reflect inflation, competitive pressures and installation of new lifts andother resort facilities.

5.3.5 Real Estate Development Parameters and Projections

Beyond the essential activity-based facilities of the resort (described in detail elsewhere in the submittal document), the resort will include retail, hospitality and residential development components, each targeted to specific users but all integrated to the overalldevelopment concept as described above.

Retail

The village core will include an area incorporating retail shops, restaurants and offices primarily geared to the needs of day andovernight guests of the resort. Retail development will be phased to coincide with and support incremental growth of other resortfacilities including new lifts.

To provide maximum exposure to potential customers, major retail facilities will be located along the walking route between the base of mountain lifts and day-use parking areas. In some areas of the resort, development may include ground floor retail, secondfloor office space and/or visitor accommodations (hotel or hotel condominium) in the same building, while in other areas only a single floor of retail may be offered.

Based on estimates derived from Whistler Resort experience and the 1993-94 B.C. skier survey, day skiers spend an average of $18.50 per skier day, over and above their lift tickets, including approximately $5.50 in retail shops (Table 5-6). Other resortvisitors spend significantly higher amounts, ranging from $65.00 per day for non-skiing members of parties staying in private accommodations to $95.00 per day for destination visitor skiers.

Ultimately, the development will accommodate approximately 6,503 square metres (70,000 square feet) of retail space, including visitor-serving shops, restaurants, bars and limited office space (Table 5-7). This space allocation should be less than 15% of theWhistler total. Annual space rents in the initial phase of development will average $36 per square foot (triple net), somewhat aboveSquamish retail rents but well below rates achieved at Whistler Resort.

Table 5-5 Comparison of Ski Areas - GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Competitive Market Area

NOTE: The above table (table 5-5) is currently unavailable. Please refer to the Satellite Repositories to view this item.

Table 5-6 Estimated Spending Totals ($) - Current B.C. Ski Area Resort Visitors

Private Accommodations Destination Visitors

Day Skiers Skiers

Non-Skiers

Skiers Non-Skiers

Ski Rental/Ski School 5.50 5.50 5.50

Ski Shop 4.50 4.50 4.50

Other Retail 1.00 10.00 10.00 20.00 20.00

Entertainment 2.00 10.00 10.00 15.00 15.00

Groceries 10.00 10.00

Restaurants (F&B) 5.50 35.00 35.00 50.00 50.00

Totals 18.50 75.00 65.00 95.00 85.00


Table 5-7 Retail Space Absorption - Operation Year Totals

Square Feet

1 10,000

2

3

4 30,000

5

6

7

8 30,000

9

10

10-year Total 70,000

Spaces will be built to accommodate tenant needs ranging from approximately 500 square feet (for small service businesses) to asmuch as 5,000 square feet (for restaurants and similar large-scale users). In most cases, space will be pre leased in anticipation of construction completion.

Visitor Accommodations

The resort's visitor bed base will come from a combination of public and private accommodation types, including condominium-style limited-service hotels and full-service hotels, as well as privately-owned townhouse units. Single family homes (which will be developed individually on a custom basis) will not provide a significant number of visitor-serving beds, although some individualowners may choose to build rentable "tenant suites" as part of their homes.

Initial visitor-serving accommodations will consist of beds in condominium hotel units, providing comfortable rooms with limitedcommon area facilities (reception desk, swimming pool, spa and cabana/dressing area, laundry room (Table 5-8). Onsite food service (if available at all) will be limited. Each unit module (from studio to one-bedroom and two bedroom units) will include akitchenette with microwave, sink and refrigerator, primarily to increase its appeal to purchasers of the units (rather than renter users, who may not necessarily need or want those facilities).

Table 5-8 Visitor-Serving Accommodations - Hotel Type Facilities

Operation Year Condominium Hotel Unites Full Service Hotel Rooms

1 300

2 150

3

4 100 250

5

6

7 200

8 350

9

10 100

10-year. Totals 700 750

To broaden the range of accommodation types, 150 full-service hotel rooms are planned for year two of resort operation. Once thedevelopment has established a solid core of overnight visitors (probably within three to five years of initial area opening), additionalfull service hotels of 100 units or more each will be opened. Although a range of operators is expected, the primary emphasis of this part of the development will be on middle to upper-middle market operators with experience in serving families and other broad-based market segments.

Current plans call for sales of fully-serviced parcels to hotel developers, who will be responsible for on-site development and building, as well as operation of the individual properties. Average per-room price for initial hotel parcels will be $30,000.

Residential

Residential development at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be an important element in terms of supporting the overall project concept, as well as being an important factor in the project's ultimate financial performance. Development will be phased and designed to serve primarily local/regional area buyers (many of whom have been frozen out of the opportunities for purchase at Whistler Resort, where price escalation has increased dramatically in the past two years).

In terms of development concepts and pricing, residential properties at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be positioned between high-priced Whistler Resort (where current project prices are usually well above $300 per square foot) and inland resorts, includingSun Peaks ($180 to $285 per square foot), Silver Star ($170 to $235 per square foot) and Big White ($100 to $175 per square foot).

Three basic residential product types will be offered:

Single-Family Detached

Single family lots will be plotted in areas of development along the main access road near the village core, with possible development pods also located above the village area. Nearly all lots will be sited to feature spectacular views to the south towardsHowe Sound and a significant number will have ski-in/ski-out access to lower portions of the ski mountain.

Lots will be sold individually, to be built out on a custom basis by local area builders. Architectural standards will be establishedand overseen by a committee that includes property owners as well as developer representatives.

Average lot sizes will be approximately one-fourth acre (10,000 to 15,000 square feet), with prices averaging $175,000 to $185,000,including premiums for ski-access lots of approximately 25 percent of purchase price.

Attached Units

Townhouses

Moderate density townhouse-style units will be developed on parcels located primarily at the periphery of the lower village corearea. Average density of the units (typically two-story wood frame units of approximately 1,200 square feet each) will be in therange of 12 to 15 units per acre. Parking will be detached from each unit, possibly in a combination of enclosed garages and coveredparking spaces.

Average selling price of the units will be in the range of $210,000 to $230,000 ($175 to $192 per square foot).

Condominiums

Strata-type developments, sold to individuals but rented to visitors in a hotel-like operation, will be established primarily in or adjacent to the village core (Table 5-9). As described earlier in this report, these units will range from studios to two-bedrooms (400

to 800 square feet), and will include kitchenettes as well as dividable sleeping areas.

Table 5-9 Real Estate Absorption - Summary by Product Type

Operation Year Single Family Lots Townhouse Units Condominium Hotel Units(1) Total Residential

1(2) 50 200 300 550

2 50 100 150

3 50 100 150

4 50 300 100 450

5 50 100 150

6 75 100 175

7 75 100 200 375

8 75 200 275

9 75 100 175

10 75 100 100 275

10-year Totals 625 1400 700 2725

(1) Units are also included in visitor accommodation table in preceding section.

(2) Presale of product will commence approximately 18 to 24 months prior first year of operations.

Average modules will be approximately 500 square feet, including common area, with an average sales price of $175,000 ($350 per square foot). Modules will be designed to allow for a combination of units by buyers, if desired.

5.4 EVOLUTION OF THE MARKET

In the nearly two years since the submission of the Formal Proposal, the ski market in general and the market in the area of theproposed resort in particular, have seen significant changes.

5.4.1 General Market Growth

● Greater Vancouver has continued to show impressive increases in population, regularly exceeding growth in the rest of Canada and the Province in percentage terms Table 5-10. The Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (which includes Whistler and Squamish) has grown even faster than the GVRD region.

Table 5-10 Population Growth Summary - 1991-1996

Canada Total British Columbia GVRD Total Fraser Valley Squamish-Lillooet Squamish Whistler Resort

1991 27,296,859 3,282,061 1,602,590 186,163 23,421 11,709 4,459

1996 28,846,761 3,724,500 1,831,665 222,397 29,401 13,994 7,172

91-96 avg. growth/yr. 309,980 88,488 45,815 7,247 1,196 457 543

Compound growth % 1.1% 2.6% 2.7% 3.6% 4.7% 3.6% 10.0%

●

The GVRD area attracts more than 7.6 million visitors over a twelve-month period, nearly 60 percent of them from all parts of Canada. U.S. visitors account for about one-fourth of yearly totals. Although the number of U.S. visitors to GVRD has been increasing, the relative importance of visitors from the neighboring country has been decreasing during the 90s. A detailed breakdown is provided in Exhibit 5-5.

Source: Tourism Vancouver

Exhibit 5-5 GVRD Year Round Visitors By Country

5.4.2 Mountain Resorts - Transition to Year-Round Business

● Mountain resorts now recognize the importance, both in image and revenue terms, of providing all-weather, all-season activity for visitors (many of whom need non-traditional activities to occupy them while others in their party are involved in more traditional mountain resort pursuits Table 5-11). Furthermore, coastal B.C. resorts (including those in the area of the proposed resort) often have days in both summer and winter when indoor-based activities are needed because of prolonged rain, fog, snow or other inclement weather conditions.

● The winter sports industry has evolved significantly, with snowboarding continuing to grow and broaden its appeal beyond its initial (and still present) core of young people. At some resorts, snowboarding accounts for as much as 40 percent of total lift tickets sold. Snowboarders tend to start earlier in the season and ride later; overall they ride more frequently than do pureskiers.

● In alpine skiing, shaped skis and the new activity called "free skiing" (in which skiers utilize snowboard-oriented features, such as halfpipes) have brought back excitement to the sport, allowing skiers to have the fun that snowboarders seemed to have a monopoly on just a few seasons before. Although they were only introduced to the market a few years ago, in the current season virtually all alpine skis sold at retail will be some variant or interpretation of the shaped ski concept, which makes carving simple and lessens the energy required to turn, thereby increasing user enjoyment. As a result of this technological advance in ski design, the length of time spent skiing on a given day can increase, especially for aging baby boomers.

● In winter, in addition to alpine skiing and snowboarding, visitors to major successful mountain resorts now can partake of such diverse activities as cross country skiing, snowshoeing, dog sledding, sleigh rides, snowmobiling, ice skating (indoors and outdoors), swimming, shopping, spas and even tennis (indoors).

● In the summer, the range of activities is even more diversified, including mountain biking and hiking (both of which utilize lifts), as well as such outdoor-based interests as inline skating, camping, fishing, golf, tennis, bird watching, and rock climbing. In addition, such activities as kayaking, river rafting and rock climbing expand the summer visitor base to the area, even if those activities are not available directly on-site.

Table 5-11 Estimated Resort Visitor Totals - Whistler Resort

Summer Winter

1996 702,642 1996/97 659,578

1995 611,690 1995/96 623,271

1. Estimate includes day, private and public accommodation visitors

2. Estimates are for visitors, not visits which are probably more than double

3. Summer lift rides on Blackcomb and Whistler Resort (ski and foot passengers) are now over between 200,000 and 250,000.

Summer day parties based on vehicle counts-1994 (other resorts):

Cypress Bowl 120,344

Mt Seymour 92,021

Manning Park-Lodge Road 116,002

Garibaldi Pk-Diamond Head 5,000

Garibaldi Pk-Garibaldi Lake 10,400

1. Grouse Mountain Summer visitors via Tram greater than 400,000 and many more via hiking trails - especially the Grouse Grind.

2. Cypress Bowl-It is estimated that the downhill and cross country visits represent only half of the total winter visits.


● Shoulder season (primarily just before and after summer, before winter begin) tends to be the slowest period in mountain resorts. In an attempt to counteract this phenomenon, significant attention has been given at successful resorts to providing facilities for conferences, meetings and other activities that do not need the full range of recreation that attracts winter or summer visitors. However, even these shoulder season visitors require a level of facilities, amenities and activities - including golf, tennis, swimming and hiking or nature walks - that is both diverse and interesting.

5.4.3 Regional Market Considerations

● The proposed resort will be entering a regional resort market that has transitioned from a pure skiing orientation to one that is more globally based, both in terms of patronage sources and activity spectrum. In establishing market-based planning parameters, it is just as important to look at the Vancouver area's local and regional mountain resorts (which in recent years have served primarily the local market in winter and a more general tourist base with emphasis still on locals in summer) as it is to look at the world-class facilities at Whistler Resort.

● The immediate regional market area can be defined as the northwest edge of the U.S., including some Washington resorts, and inland into Fraser Valley and the Okanagan. In that area are 14 mountain resorts that appear to have the necessary mass and general market support to be considered competitive to a resort of the scale proposed at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. They vary in size and concept from world-class (Whistler and Blackcomb, with a combined 7,000-plus skiable hectares and combined annual skier visits in the range of more than 1.7 million) to purely local-serving (including North Vancouver's Grouse, Cypress and Seymour, which had a combined total of around 600,000 skier visits among them last season). In 1996,

adult daily lift ticket prices at the 14 regional resorts ranged from a low of $26 (Seymour) to a high of $52 (Whistler Mountain), with most resorts outside the Vancouver area priced in the $35 to $40 range.

Table 5-12 provides a calculation of the estimated local market. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will attract skiers from both this local market, a northwest region market and the destination market. Provincial skier visits have been growing at over 7.5% since the mid seventies. The local area skier market is expected to grow at between 3.5% to 4.5%. Given this growth rate which is a littlemore than local population growth, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will mainly build its market share from the incremental growth of the market. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH's first year 150,000 total skier visits (local, regional and destination) represent only 6.7% of the total local market of about 2,243,000 skier visits.

● Whistler Resort continues at or near the top of virtually every ski and winter sport magazine's resort rankings, both in North America media and many foreign publications. Both winter and summer visitor growth numbers continue to increase at strong rates. In the 1996/1997 season, nearly 660,000 visitors came to Whistler in winter (an average of almost 11,000 per day, ranging from 4,000 in November to 15,000 in March). In summer 1996 (the latest summer period for which data is available) total Whistler visitors were 703,000 (8,000 per day average, ranging from a low of 4,000 in May to a high of 14,000 in August)

● In all but three seasons since the 1986/1987 period, summer overnight visitor totals to the resort (measured in room nights) have increased at a faster pace than have winter room nights. In the 1996/1997 season, summer room nights accounted for 43 percent of all Whistler Resort room nights for the twelve-month period.

● Whistler Resort has successfully established the region as a true winter and summer destination, drawing visitors from around the world. Hotel occupancies in certain summer months now exceed those in the non-peak periods of the winter, with summer room rates averaging about 60 percent of winter rates (Exhibit 5-6).

Table 5-12 Room Nights by Season - Whistler Resort

Winter Summer Total

86/87 138,337 88,872 227,209

87/88 188,760 101,710 290,470

88/89 212,265 133,230 345,495

89/90 261,240 137,136 398,376

90/91 289,918 165,396 455,314

91/92 293,738 178,125 471,863

92/93 300,163 217,159 517,322

93/94 330,463 232,466 562,929

94/95 349,034 253,014 602,048

95/96 363,963 274,096 638,059

96/97 380,975 290,114 671,089

●

Although Japanese visitors are still a major market segment (15% of winter room nights and 2% of summer), visitors from Europe are growing in importance each year, and actually exceed Japanese overnight visitors in importance to the resort in the summer. In winter, Europeans account for nearly 12% of the Whistler winter room nights sold and 7% of the summer room nights at the resort.

Exhibit 5-6 Occupancy By Month - Whistler Commercial Accommodations

Table 5-13 Average Room Rates By Season - Whistler Resort

Year Summer Season(1) Winter Season(2)

1990 73.81 116.17

1991 85.33 127.78

1992 83.58 133.43

1993 80.30 138.91

1994 87.31 144.11

1995 103.99 163.22

1996 107.15 182.09

1997 113.94 186.57

Source: WRA

(1) May-October

(2) November-April. Indicated year is end of each season.

Table 5-14 Whistler Resort Room Nights by Origin

Summer 1997 Winter 1996/1997

Canada 63.1% 43.3%

United States 26.9% 25.9%

Europe 6.9% 12.2%

Japan 1.6% 15.1%

Other International 1.5% 3.5%

100.0% 100.0%

Source: WRA

● Summer business at Whistler, and by extension the Squamish-Lillooet Region, is significantly different in demographic terms than summer business. Summer visitors are less likely to stay overnight, stay shorter periods when they use overnight accommodations, are more likely to be families with children, are significantly lower in income and are older than their winter counterparts. Furthermore, they are far more likely to be from Canada and, more particularly, Lower Mainland British Columbia.

Table 5-15 Demographic Summary By Season - Whistler Resort Visitors

Summer 1996 Winter 1996/1997

Male 51% 61%

Median Age 39.6 years 36.7 years

Median Household Income $59,000 $79,200

First-time Visitors 42% 43%

Married with Children 46% 29%

Average Nights Stay 3.9 nights 5.8 nights

Overnight Visitors 85% 76%

Source: WRA

● Squamish has begun to develop facilities and an image that attracts and supports summer visitors coming to the area for such activities as windsurfing, golfing, rock climbing, camping, hiking and mountain biking. To date, winter visitation to Squamish has been marginal, despite significant traffic passing through the area on the way to Whistler Resort.

5.4.4 Real Estate

● As Whistler has grown in stature and popularity, real estate at the resort and in the Squamish-Lillooet Region has increased in value and desirability at an even greater pace. Whistler's ultimate bed unit development limits will be reached far sooner than earlier projections, and that component of the resort probably will be nearly fully developed before real estate product at

the proposed project even reaches the market for sale. An exhibit of the Whistler accommodation inventory at December 31, 1996 is provided on the next page. Current construction of commercial public accommodation projects at Whistler should make another 1,515 units available by the Fall of 1998.

● Commercial accommodations (hotels, condo hotels and pensions) currently account for about one-fourth of all bed units at Whistler, while private accommodations (single family, multi-family and duplex units) provide about 70 percent of total bed units as of December 31, 1996.

● At buildout, commercial units will equal about 30 percent of Whistler bed units, with about 60 percent in private accommodations and the balance in employee, R.V. campsite and hostel units. To assure that sufficient affordable housing will be available for area employees, new commercial accommodations at Whistler (including the strata-titled Westin Hotel currently in process) are being required to provide for employee housing as a condition of approval.

Table 5-16 Whistler Accommodation Inventory - As Of December 1996

Type Of Accommodation Developed Balance Available Total

Developed

Developed Balance Available Total

Developed

Hotel 1,890 2,556 4,446 3,846 5,178 9,024

Tourist Accom

(Condo)

2,027 528 2,555 5,592 1,723 7,315

Pension 136 12 148 224 26 250

Sub-Total Comm'l 4,053 3,096 7,149 9,662 6,927 16,589

Multi Family 3,079 968 4,047 11,314 3,976 15,290

Duplex 348 46 394 2,088 276 2,364

Single Family 2,118 548 2,666 12,630 3,288 15,918

Sub-Total Private 5,545 1,562 7,107 26,032 7,540 33,572

Employee 615 368 983 1,705 1,171 2,876

R. V. Campsite 0 242 242 0 416 416

Hostel 231 0 231 124 53 177

Total 10,444 5,268 15,712 37,523 16,107 53,630

Source: Resort Municipality of Whistler Planning Department

● In both unit and dollar terms, Whistler real estate has been selling at a record pace. In 1992, at the end of the last prolonged

general recession, 611 real estate transactions were consummated, at an average value of nearly $216,000. Each subsequent year, both unit sales and average prices have increased, reaching a total in 1996 of 1,319 units (127 completed homes, 158 single family lots and 1,034 condominiums) at an average selling price of over $263,000. Through the first nine months of 1997 (the latest period for which data is available), unit sales appear to have dropped somewhat (414 total units sold), while prices have jumped dramatically, averaging nearly $346,000 for the nine-month period7.

Table 5-17 Whistler Real Estate - Volume And Average Prices 1992-1997

Single Condos Up Village Condos Village & Vn Condos O/S Village Single Family Lots Total

1992

# Units Sold 95 150 20 259 87 611

Average Price $294,309 $264,992 $223,338 $163,826 $160,593 $215,945

1993

# Units Sold 121 210 128 211 66 736

Average Price $326,200 $243,781 $172,382 $171,712 $132,012 $219,545

1994

# Units Sold 147 210 104 264 73 798

Average Price $335,331 $239,313 $174,229 $170,302 $183,869 $227,033

1995

# Units Sold 130 282 215 266 154 1047

Average Price $456,341 $269,242 $195,343 $185,919 $229,247 $260,962

1996

# Units Sold 127 369 336 329 158 1319

Average Price $519,899 $257,215 $215,538 $227,423 $246,274 $263,149

1997 (9 Months)

# Units Sold 57 108 57 168 24 414

Average Price $651,580 $336,311 $248,425 $261,236 $487,683 $345,927

Note

1. Number Of Transactions And Average Prices Are Heavily Influenced By What New Projects Came On The Market In A Given Year.

2. Total Average Prices Are Based On Separate Total Dollars And Number Of Transactions Information.

3. Information Represents Transactions For All Real Estate.

4. Figures for 1997 are for the period ending Sept. 30. They do not represent volume for the full year.

Sources: Whistler Real Estate Co. Ltd. David A. Hughes & Associates

● Outside of Whistler, real estate prices in the Sea to Sky Corridor also have increased, albeit far less dramatically than in theresort municipality. Canada Housing Mortgage Corporation data indicate average 1996 single family home prices in the range of $200,000 in Squamish (up less than one percent over 1995), compared to $600,000 in Whistler (15 percent increase over prior year), while multi-family units averaged $150,000 in Squamish (two percent increase) and $275,000 in Whistler Resort (up by more than 16 percent).

Table 5-18 Average Home Prices - Sea To Sky Corridor Community Areas

1996 1997 Percent Change

Squamish

Single family $199,387 $200,000 0.3

Multi-family $147,503 $150,000 1.7

Whistler

Single family $519,899 $600,000 15.4

Multi-family $235,794 $275,000 0.9

Pemberton

Single family $272,000 $295,000 8.5

Multi-family $126,397 $150,000 18.7

Source: Canada Housing Mortgage Corporation

● In resort areas in the interior (Sun Peaks, Silver Star, Big White), real estate pricing is at significantly lower levels, typicallyless than half the range achieved at Whistler.

Table 5-19 Selected Recent Mountain Resort Real Estate Price & Size Ranges

Sun Peaks Silver Star Big White

Sample Price Range $ $ $

Single Family Lots 90-120,000 125-130,000 60-110,000

Studio 80-130,000

1 Bedroom condo 135-210,000 90- 225,000 65-135,000

2 Bedroom condo 180-260,000 165-260,000 160-225,000

Typical Size Range Single Family Lot Condo Hotel Townhouse

Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft.

Single Family Lots 8-18,000

Studio 400 600

1 Bedroom condo 600 800

2 Bedroom condo 800 1200

Price per sq. ft. $ 180-285 $170-235 $100-175

1. Interior prices ranges are more appropriate for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH comparison. Whistler represents upper end for current B.C. market.

2. Initial prices for projects at these resorts were lower.

3. Deluxe projects can be considerably bigger sq. ft.

4. Prices at Black Tusk and Pinecrest Estates south of Whistler are also a good indicator for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH

5. Condo hotel units tend to be smaller than independent/free standing condo projects and the per sq. ft. price higher.


Table 5-20 Estimate of Potential Local Skier Visit Market

Estimate of total local market that Brohm Ridge could access given good conditions and recent skier visit volumes

Whistler/Blackcomb 1996/1997 skier visits 1,746,709

Day Skiers 20% 349,000

Private 38% 664,000

Accomodations

Public

Accomodations

Greater Vancouver 6% 105,000

Destination 36% 629,000

100% 1,747,000

Less Destination to Whistler 629,000

1,118,000

Add 3 Local ski areas

Cypress Bowl, Grouse & Seymour 565,000

Add Hemlock Valley, Manning Park and

40% of Mt Baker (Wash) 182,000

Sub total 1,865,000

Add 10% of BC skier visits outside local area

BC skier visits 4,700,000

Less Whistler/Blackcomb 1,747,000

Less 5 local areas 665,000 2,412,000

Net BC skier visits 2,288,000

Portion from Greater Vancouver 10%

Sub total 228,800

Estimated Local Market 1996/97 2,093,800

Add growth factor @ 3.5% per year 149,131

2,242,931

Estimated Local Market 1999/2000 2,243,000


Table 5-21 Market Origin of Year Round Visitors to Greater Vancouver

Origin 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

B.C. 2,038 2,085 2,183 2,286 2,392

Other Canada 1,702 1,737 1,821 1,939 2,129

Total Canada 3,740 3,822 4,004 4,225 4,521

Washington 408 412 439 462 467

California 375 383 408 433 456

Other West 348 354 377 400 419

Other U.S. 368 379 402 430 465

Total USA 1,499 1,528 1,626 1,725 1,807

Japan 183 197 216 277 307

Hong Kong 60 60 63 94 117

S. Korea 12 14 29 51 76

Taiwan 24 28 39 69 93

279 299 347 491 593

Australia & NZ 61 61 75 96 102

U.K. 105 114 133 146 168

Germany 77 93 104 119 120

Other 188 203 222 251 308

Total 710 770 881 1,103 1,291

International

Total 5,949 6,120 6,511 7,053 7,619

Sources: Tourism Vancouver and David A. Hughes & Associates

SECTION 6 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Cash Flow Analysis

The financial projections presented are envisioned as a maximum condition developed over the initial 10 year operation. Actual development will be dictated on yearly market conditions, the details which will be presented by the Developer during the projectsMaster Planning phase.

The exhibits included with this Section summarize the results of the financial analysis based on the development plan submitted fora four season resort on Crown Land near Squamish. The financial analysis includes a 10-year operating pro forma cash flow (Year 0is construction) detailing:

● Exhibit A - Cash Flows From Lift Operations ● Exhibit B - Cash Flows From Real Estate ● Exhibit C - Cash Flows From Commercial Leasing ● Exhibit D - Cash Flows From Spa Operations ● Exhibit E - Cash Used During The Master Planning Phase ● Exhibit E - Cash Used To Develop The Infrastructure ● Exhibit E - Cash Used To Develop Amenities ● Exhibit E - Cash Used To Develop The Ski Area ● Exhibit F - Bed Unit Calculations And Land Requirements

The pro forma cash flows are based in 1997 constant Canadian dollars and exclude any potential financing opportunities from outside sources (see Dawson Construction Ltd. letter dated November 27, 1997 which improves cash flow projections). Cash flow analyses also exclude any financing costs (interest and income tax).

Data regarding costs for project infrastructure, mountain development, real estate development, and related cost assumptions regarding the market for real estate and ski area have been provided by the following list of consultants noted on the following page. This list includes the consultants corresponding responsibilities related to the information included in this analysis. Also providedare cost factors for ski operations which are based primarily on ratios and other factors reported in the current Canada West SkiArea Association’s Economic Analysis – seasons are adjusted where appropriate.

Capital Expenditures over the 11- year period (one year construction and 10 years of operations) are expected to be approximately$214,000,000 plus land costs $2,000,000. This includes the master planning phase, environmental permitting, all infrastructure costs(roads, sewer, water, other utilities), recreational facilities (spa, convention facilities, tennis courts & clubhouse, golf practice and

teaching facility) and ski area development (lifts, trails, buildings, grooming, snowmaking). All of these capital expenditures areshown in detail on Exhibit E.

The net cash flows from operations and land development ($284,000,000) are expected to be $68,000,000± in excess of the capital expenditures over the same period. The operations are projected to have positive cash flow in Year 2 and break even cash flow inYear 7. Any project financing obtained will improve cash flow projections in Exhibit E.

CONSULTANTS – GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY

Jack Johnson Ski Lifts/Facilities/PhasesJack Johnson Company Off-site Roads/Utilities/Phases1777 Sun Peak Drive (Need to reference in Section 3)Suite 200 Economic ViabilityPark City Utah

Ian Dawson Road Construction & PrivateDawson Construction FinancingP.O. Box 34Kamloops, B.C.V2C 5K9

Ken Kerr Infrastructure/Water Supply/Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. Utilities139 West 16th StreetNorth Vancouver, B.C.V7M 1T3

McElhanney Consulting Services Ltd. Road/Utilities Costs/Mapping13160 – 88th AvenueVancouver, B.C.V3W 3K3

David Jay Flood Development Cost Formatting1408 Third Street Promenade and DescriptionsThird FloorSanta Monica, CA90401-2380

David A. Hughes Economic Marketing Justification5211 Ranger Avenue North Vancouver, B.C.V7R 3M5

Robert Reicher Economic Marketing JustificationEquus Marketing and Socio-Economic ImpactSuite 400 - 3991 MacArthur BoulevardNewport Beach, CA92660

John Creel MarketingEquus Marketing3991 MacArthur BoulevardSuite 400

Newport Beach, CA92660

Price Waterhouse Economic & Financial Analysis601 West Hastings Street SystemVancouver, B.C.V6B 5A5

Kathryn L. Stolle Spa Program/Income & ExpenseTotal Spa Concepts1632 Rockland AvenueSuite 4Victoria, B.C.V8S 1W7

Chris Baker Development Cost EstimatesThornley Consulting GroupSuite 352 - 409 Granville Street Vancouver, B.C.V6C 1T2

Assumptions regarding construction costs and operations revenue are based on the financial analysis of the proposed project. Property tax rates and fee amounts are based on publicly-available data from the District of Squamish and other jurisdictions, whileapplicable multipliers were taken from published government documents, as available and appropriate. For reference, worksheets including primary assumptions are included as exhibits.

Additional issues that have impacted the analysis are:

● Capital replacement allowances will be provided for either as part of the Developer’s operational income stream (mountain operation, commercial and spa), or by Homeowners’ Association fees (condo hotels, townhouses, single-family subdivision). The Homeowners’ Association fee does not impact the project cash flow.

● Land draw acreage is based on a low-density development concept allowing simple relatively less expensive building construction techniques to be used, resulting in less expensive overall development costs.

● Potential income sources from other Resort operations are not included in the analysis at this time. For example management fees from condo hotel and other condo rental opportunities, or potential percentage over minimum rents for restaurant/bar operations, operated or managed by the Developer.

● Future increase in development costs will be offset by increases in selling costs based on future inflation rates.

SECTION 7 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

7.0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

This chapter documents the economic and social impacts likely to result from the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH located approximately eight kilometers north of the District of Squamish. The economic evaluation provides a quantitative assessment of the employment, income and other economic impacts associated with the project, while the social evaluation sectionprovides a more qualitative assessment of the impacts of the development as they relate to population, housing, community services,and lifestyle and recreation. The geographic scope of this evaluation focuses on the District of Squamish and, where relevant, theSquamish Lillooet Regional District.

7.1 STUDY AREA SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE

In order to provide a basis against which to assess the likely economic and social impacts associated with the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, this section provides a brief profile of existing population, economic and community conditions in the study area. Information for this profile was obtained from a variety of sources including Census Canada, Human Resources Development Canada, Revenue Canada, and B.C. Stats.

7.1.1 Population Trends

The 1996 population of the District of Squamish was 13,994 which represented just under half of the total Squamish Lillooet Regional District (SLRD) population of 29,401. Between 1991 and 1996, the population of Squamish increased by 19.5% or an average of 3.9% per year (compared to 2.7% per year for the province as a whole). Despite this relatively high rate of growth, between 1991 and 1996, the proportion of the SLRD population living in Squamish fell from 50% to 48%, reflecting the concurrent,and even greater growth rate, being experienced by Whistler.

According to information prepared by BC Stats, the SLRD has traditionally experienced net inflows of population. In addition, theregion has experienced a fairly constant and relatively high natural population increase rate. These high natural growth rates, combined with strong growth in the tourism industry and relatively low land costs, are expected to continue to foster strong, steadypopulation growth over the long term. Table 7-1 summarizes population projections for the SLRD as prepared by BC Stats. Because official population projections are not available for the District of Squamish, the last two columns of the table apply projectedpopulation growth rates for the SLRD against the 1996 population figure for Squamish, in order to provide population projections at the District level. (Note: these are estimates only and reflect the assumption that District of Squamish growth rates will be comparable to those of the Regional District and that current boundaries remain unchanged).

Table 7-1 Population Projections

(BC Stats)

Year SLRD Squamish

# % # %

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Average annual projected growth rate 1996 -2008

31,631(1)

34,238

36,618

39,127

41,720

44,375

47,055

--

8.2

7.0

6.8

6.6

6.4

6.0

4.1%/year

13,994(2)

15,190

16,333

17,525

18,763

20,046

21,325

--

8.2

7.0

6.8

6.6

6.4

6.0

4.1%/year

As the numbers indicate, the population of the SLRD is expected to grow by an average of 4.1% annually between 1996 and 2008, increasing from just under 32,000 presently to almost 47,000 by 2008. Applying these same growth rates to current population estimates for Squamish indicates that the municipal population could increase by more than 7,000 persons over the next 12 years,increasing from just under 14,000 currently to more than 21,000 by 2008.

7.1.2 Age Structure

The age structure of the SLRD is quite a bit younger than is typical for the province as a whole. Given current population trends(migration plus birth rates), this difference is expected to continue for the next two decades. Table 7-2 summarizes population agegroup projections (reported as the proportion of the population represented by each age group noted) for the SLRD.

Table 7-2 Proportion Of The SLRD Population By Age Group

(BC Stats)

Year Age (%)

0-14 15-24 25-44 45-64 65+ All Ages

1996

2001

2006

21,9

20.8

19.6

13.0

12.2

11.8

40.8

40.0

38.0

18.1

20.9

24.3

6.2

6.2

6.4

100

100

100

The numbers in the above table indicate that over the next decade, 25 to 44 year olds will represent over one-third of the population,while children under 14 will represent approximately one-fifth of the population and seniors over 65 will comprise only 6% of thepopulation. By comparison, in 1991, the proportion of the B.C. population between the ages of 25 and 44 was 33% while the proportion over 65 was 13%.

Population and growth trends have significant implications for the area’s economy. In addition to providing a large labor pool (e.g.,each year approximately 180 to 200 students graduate from high school in Squamish and begin looking for opportunities to enter the workforce), the sustainability of a young population is very dependent on the availability of employment.

7.1.3 Ethnic Origin

Like the Province of British Columbia, the majority of Squamish residents have English as their mother tongue. The second-most spoken language in Squamish is Punjabi.

Table 7-3 Major Languages By Mother Tongue: Squamish And B.C.

(Statistics Canada, Census 1991)

Language Squamish B.C.

English 84% 79%

French 2% 1%

German 2% 2%

Punjabi 5% 2%

Other 7% 16%

(Note: All other languages are each 1% or less of total, except in B.C. total.)

British Columbia’s ethnic mosaic has been shifting over the last decade. The main reason for the drop in percentage of people ofBritish origin in British Columbia (in 1991, of those British Columbians who reported a single ethnic origin, almost 42% were ofBritish origin, down from the 1986 level of almost 50%) is the increase in numbers of other ethnic groups, especially those withAsian origins (British Columbia’s Changing Ethnic Mosaic, by D. Schrier and F. Ip).

The number of British Columbians who belonged to a single Asian origin increased from 233, 130 in 1986 to 370,835 in 1991, an increase in share from 8.2% of the provincial population to 11.4% (Statistics Canada).

Currently, most immigrants arriving in British Columbia originate from Asia in particular, Hong Kong, China, Philippines, India and Taiwan.

The ethnic Chinese are the second largest ethnic group after the British, and over 92% of the ethnic Chinese are concentrated in the Vancouver area. East Indian ethnic origin is the third most common group in Vancouver, and first in the Squamish area.

A comparison of ethnic groups with respect to age shows that the Chinese ethnic population tends to be younger on average than theBritish ethnic population.

7.1.4 First Nations Demography

Squamish Nation members living within the District of Squamish have been included in demographic figures in this section. However, to better understand Squamish’s ethnic mosaic, separate figures for the Squamish Nation reserves within the District Squamish will also be included.

Indian reserves are counted by Statistics Canada as individual census subdivisions. Within the District of Squamish, there are sixSquamish Nation reserves that are populated (see Table 7-4).

Overall, the proportion of the British Columbia population that belongs to an aboriginal ethnic group has increased from 4.5 percent in 1986 to 5.3 per cent in 1991 (Statistics Canada).

The Aboriginal ethnic group exhibits the youngest age structure of ethnic groups in British Columbia (British Columbia’s Changing Ethnic Mosaic, By Dan Schrier and Frank Ip). About one-half of those reporting a single aboriginal ethnic origin in the 1991 census were under 25 years old. This compares to under one-quarter of those reporting British as their ethnic origin.

Table 7-4 Squamish Nation Reserves: Population

(Statistics Canada)

Indian Reserve 1991 Population 1996 Population Growth Rate

Cheakamus

Kowtain

Seaichem

Stawamus

Waiwakum

Yekwaupsum

35

31

48

71

90

32

48

39

44

21

100

38

37.1%

25.8%

-8.3%

-70.4%

11.1%

18.8%

TOTAL 307 290 -5.5%/year

When using Indian reserve population statistics, it is important to note that not all persons residing on reserves are aboriginalpeoples. In 1991, only 70% of persons living on reserves in B.C. were of aboriginal origin while over 75% of the people reportingaboriginal origin in the 1991 census were not living on Indian reserves.

Forthcoming 1996 census releases scheduled for January 1998 will provide additional information on the social and economic characteristics of the population residing on Indian reserves in the Province.

7.1.5 Income

Table 7-5 indicates that in 1995 (most recent data available), more than 80% of the income of Squamish residents was generated through employment or self-employment earnings, while for B.C. as a whole this figure was 70%. By comparison, pension and investment income accounts for 8.5% of Squamish residents’ income and 15% of B.C. residents’ income.

Table 7-5 Sources of Income – Squamish (Revenue Canada 1995 Taxation Statistics)

Income source Amount

($Millions)

Squamish

%

B.C.

%

Employment

Self Employment

Pension

Investment

Other

Tax Exempt

$143.7

4.8

10.2

6.6

8.9

2.1

81.5%

2.7

5.8

3.7

5.0

1.2

70.3%

5.4

9.8

8.7

5.1

0.8

TOTAL $176.3 99.9% 100.1%

Individual Income By Income Sources

Table 7-6 compares the proportion of Squamish, SLRD and B.C. residents that are represented by each of the noted income classes.The data indicates that the income patterns of these three regions are quite similar with the average income of Squamish residentsbeing somewhat higher than the average income of both SLRD residents and B.C. residents.

Table 7-6 Individual Income by Income Class

(B.C. Stats Based on 1995 Revenue Canada Data)

Income Area

Squamish SLRD B.C.

Less than $10,000

$10 - $19,999

$20 - $29,000

$30 - $39,000

$40 - $49,000

$50,000 +

24.8%

22.3%

14.9%

11.5%

9.5%

16.8%

27.4%

23.0%

15.7%

11.7%

8.1%

14.1%

25.8%

24.8%

15.4%

12.3%

8.3%

13.4%

Average Income $27,829 $26,302 $27,287

Of these three regions, Squamish has the highest proportion of residents earning more than $40,000 (26.3%) and the lowest proportion earning less than $20,000 (47.1%). It is speculated that this profile reflects the current impact of the forestry sector on Squamish’s economy.

7.1.6 Housing

One of the primary appeals of Squamish is the availability and affordability of housing relative to Vancouver and Whistler. Thisfactor is believed to be largely responsible for the recent growth of Squamish and its growing reputation as a bedroom communityof Vancouver. It is estimated that up to 2,200 Squamish residents commute to work in Vancouver while an additional 600 commute to work in Whistler.(3) Combined, these figures represent approximately 38% of the labor force.

This trend has had an impact on area housing sales and development. The number of home sales which took place in 1996 was the highest experienced since 1992. According to an article in a special edition of the Squamish Chief (entitled Directions, August 27, 1996) “…50% of available homes are priced under $200,000…homes are selling for $100,000 less than on the Lower Mainland…Squamish has always been an entry level market for first time buyers…the homes first time buyers purchase enable sellers to take the next step up to the $185,000 to $245,000 price range or higher.”

As a result of the growing housing demand, the area’s construction trades have been quite busy. This trend is expected to continueas numerous housing developments have recently been completed, are under consideration, or under construction. Examples of these include:

● 90 condominium units along Mamquam Blind Channel in downtown Squamish ● 63 condominium/townhouse units for seniors in downtown ● 95 unit development on Government Road ● 30 condominium units near the golf course ● 14 units (duplexes) on Tantalus Road ● 40 single family units north of Garibaldi Estates ● 8 lots on Thunderbird Ridge ● 122 single family units and 87 townhouses southeast of Brennan Park Leisure Centre ● 300 single family units and 600 multi-family units also north of Garibaldi Estates ● 150 lot single family subdivision in Valleycliffe ● Total = 1,449 units

At present the population of Squamish is increasing by approximately 1,200 persons per year. Based on an average household size of 2.9 (1991 Census), planned housing development will meet population housing needs for the next three years (1,449 units x 2.9 = 4,202 residents) given current population growth rates.

During years 1-3 of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development, an additional 400 condominiums and 150 single family units would be constructed which should assist the District of Squamish meet housing needs for the foreseeable future.

Rental Housing

Squamish rental housing vacancy rates have varied fairly significantly over the last few years falling from a high of between 5%and 9% in 1992 and 1993 (the last recession), to lows of 0% for row housing and 0.3% for apartment housing in April 1995 (Table 7-7). Despite this shortage of housing, rental rates remain reasonable, ranging from $433 per month for a bachelor suite to $647 per month for a three bedroom unit (Table 7-8). With the exception of bachelor suites, year to year (1994 to 1996) rental rate increasesranged from 3.4% to 5.8% which is approximately equivalent to the 4% inflation rate experienced by the province over this same two year period.

Table 7-7 Squamish Vacancy Rates (Percent)

(CMHC)

Type 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Apr. Oct. Apr. Oct. Apr. Oct. Apr. Oct. Apr. Oct. Apr. Oct. Oct.

Apartments

Row

0.0

3.0

3.7

7.6

1.8

8.3

5.8

1.7

8.5

3.1

5.5

9.7

1.9

1.6

1.5

0.0

0.4

0.0

0.0

4.8

0.3

0.0

1.9

0.0

1.6

0.0

Table 7-8 Squamish Rental Rates

Type Year

1994 1995 1996 % Change

(94-96)

Bachelor

1 Bedroom

2 Bedrooms

3 Bedrooms

$390

$466

$554

$616

$409

$476

$560

$622

$433

$493

$573

$647

11.0%

5.8%

3.4%

5.0%

Tourist Accommodation

At present, there are 17 fixed roof tourist accommodation facilities in Squamish offering a total of 236 units. These facilities include six hotels, two motels, two lodges and seven Bed & Breakfasts. In addition, plans exist to develop additional commercial accommodation including a proposal for a new hotel in the Squamish industrial park. Although some Squamish accommodation properties have been undergoing renovations, and at least one has discontinued monthly rentals in order to free up more room fortransient visitors, the current number of accommodation units would be inadequate to meet the demand generated by Garibaldi resort and, in general, could limit Squamish’s longer-term tourism development potential.

7.1.7 Community Services(4)

Police Services

Squamish police services are provided by the RCMP. The Squamish Detachment has a total of 22 RCMP officers, 18 auxiliary police and 39 civilian casuals. In addition, there are five provincial Highway Patrol officers responsible for Highway 99 withinSquamish as well as halfway to Whistler and West Vancouver.

Fire Protection

The Squamish Fire Department has seven full-time personnel including a Captain, Deputy Chief, Fire Chief and four career firefighters. In addition, there are 53 paid, on-call firefighters. Firefighters work out of two firehalls (one by the municipal hall and one by the police station) and respond to an average of 320 calls annually. To provide for continuity of command in the volunteerstructure, the Municipality is divided into two Districts, each of which has two Fire Companies. There are 12 to 14 firefights andone pumper truck assigned to each company. Firefighting equipment includes four pumper trucks, one of which has a 75 foot ladder. These pumper trucks are capable of delivering a combined total of 4,200 gallons of water per minute. In addition, there is a reserve pumper truck which has a 1,050 gallon per minute capacity. Other equipment includes a salvage and rescue van for equipment which cannot be carried on a pumper truck and a rescue and extraction vehicle to remove trapped victims from motor vehicle accidents.

Hospital Services

The Squamish General Hospital has 25 acute care, 30 intermediate care, 20 extended care and 10 special care (85 total) beds and serves the Sea to Sky corridor between Furry Creek in the south and Pemberton in the north. Based on historical data, surgical daycare, ambulatory care and extended care utilization rates in the Howe Sound Local Health Area are all below the provincial average.Emergency utilization rates were well above (more than double) the provincial average.

Social Services

As of the first quarter of 1997, there were 563 Squamish residents collecting Social Assistance (SA) who were considered employable. This represents the lowest SA caseload recorded in Squamish for four years. The proposed resort development should further reduce this number of SA recipients due to the number of construction and operation jobs that would be created.

7.1.8 Economic Overview

The two main industries in the SLRD are forestry and tourism. Although an estimated 4,000 people work in the various sub-sectorsof the tourism industry (i.e., retail, accommodation, food services etc.), forestry has long been the main economic force in theregion. At present, there are approximately 85 logging operators and forest manufacturing firms in the SLRD and 26 logging operators in the Squamish Forest District. The direct and spin-off employment provided by these companies has helped contribute to the relatively high standard of living enjoyed by Squamish and area residents.

Table 7-9 applies 1991 income dependency ratios for Squamish(5) against 1995 community (resident) income data (from Table 7-6) to illustrate Squamish’s dependency on various economic sectors and income sources. As the figures indicate, the impact of tourismand forestry (excluding wood products manufacturing) are quite close and contribute an estimated 14% and 15% of annual community income respectively.

Table 7-9 1991 Income Dependency Ratios Applied To 1995 Community Income

Sector Proportion of Income Income ($Millions)

Forestry

Mining, Fishing, Agric.

Tourism

Public Sector (All levels)

Other Basic Industries(6)

Transfer Payments (EI,

SA, OAP etc.)

15%

3%

14%

17%

26%

25%

$26.4

$5.3

$24.7

$30.0

$45.8

$44.1

TOTAL 100% $176.3

Once more current income dependency ratios become available, it is expected that the economic contribution of tourism relative toforestry as illustrated in the above table will have increased somewhat. This is because, as with other regions of the province, the traditional role of forestry in the economy is being challenged by land use planning policies, the Forest Practices Code, plant upgradings, and reductions in the Annual Allowable Cut (e.g., the AAC of the Squamish Forest District fell from 705,000 cubic meters in 1991 to 506,000 cubic meters in 1996).

While these factors are contributing to a decline in the region’s dependence on forestry, the role of the tourism industry is expanding significantly. Although Whistler is the primary destination of most visitors to the region, Squamish also offers a range of high quality outdoor activity opportunities (e.g., rock climbing, windsurfing, mountain biking, golfing, rafting etc.) and is increasingly becoming a destination in its own right.

The shift from forestry to tourism has significant implications for the economy of Squamish. In particular, residents are concernedabout the impact of high paying resource sector jobs being replaced by much lower paying service sector jobs. While there are wellpaying tourism positions, it is unlikely displaced forestry workers will have the skills required for these positions. The continuinggrowth and stability of the population will be quite dependent on the availability of suitable employment both for displaced forestryworkers as well as for high school graduates.

Given this challenge, the timing and nature of the Garibaldi Resort development could be fortuitous for the community. The resortwill help ease the impacts of the current economic transition by providing ongoing, well paying construction employment for localworkers. These employment impacts are discussed in Section 7 .2.

7.1.9 Labor Force

Based on historical Employment Insurance (EI) and Social Assistance (SA) recipient data, it appears that the economic health of theSquamish/Howe Sound area (as measured by employment levels) is generally comparable to that of Vancouver but better than that of the province as a whole. This is illustrated in Table 7-10 which compares the proportion of Howe Sound working age residents receiving EI or SA, with the proportion of Vancouver, Fraser Valley and B.C. residents receiving EI or SA, over the past five years.As the figures indicate, the proportion of study area residents receiving EI or SA reached a low of 7.1% in the first quarter of 1997 compared to 6.8% for Vancouver and 8.5% for B.C. In fact, the figures indicate that employment rates in the Howe Sound area havebeen better than those of the province as a whole for the last four years (since the third quarter of 1993).

Although the proportion of the study area residents depending on EI or SA has been declining steadily for the past two years, theactual number of people collecting benefits varies up and down from quarter to quarter (Table 7-10).

Table 7-10 Percent of Working Age Population Receiving EI or SA By Selected Labor Market Area

Date Location

B.C. Vancouver Fraser Valley Howe Sound

1992:

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1993

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1994

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

10.73

10.14

12.03

12.55

11.25

10.19

11.81

12.06

10.65

9.70

11.82

10.99

9.79

10.37

9.65

9.38

10.47

10.95

10.21

9.49

10.33

10.33

9.51

8.92

10.10

9.35

8.68

8.79

9.44

9.18

10.80

11.42

10.16

9.38

10.95

11.35

9.78

9.17

11.41

10.35

9.13

10.04

12.20

10.09

13.18

12.99

12.92

9.80

11.67

11.66

10.14

7.81

10.32

8.77

8.31

8.81

1995

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1996

Second Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1997:

First Quarter

8.82

n/a

8.52

7.60

n/a

6.81

8.29

n/a

7.92

7.10

n/a

7.11

According to the figures in Table 7-11, there were a total of 1,361 work-ready or employable benefit recipients in the Howe Soundlabor market area in the first quarter of 1997. This is up somewhat from 1996 but still lower than the previous four years (with the exception of the third quarter 1994).(7)

Table 7-11 Number and Proportion of Howe Sound Residents Collecting EI and SA

Date Number and Proportion Collecting EI and SA

Work Ready EI Claimants Employable

SA

Recipients

Total on

Assistance

% Work

Ready

Working

Age

Population

1992:

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1993

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1243

996

1300

1332

1285

959

1140

1122

890

581

529

715

675

731

584

714

746

749

1824

1525

2015

2007

2016

1543

1854

1868

1639

12.20

10.09

13.18

12.99

12.92

9.80

11.67

11.66

10.14

14954

15121

15289

15456

15598

15740

15881

16023

16166

1994

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Third Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1995

First Quarter

Second Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1996

Second Quarter

Fourth Quarter

1997

First Quarter

608

974

811

643

745

618

698

753

666

788

702

803

817

663

n/a

563

1274

1762

1513

1446

1562

1281

n/a

1361

7.81

10.32

8.77

8.31

8.81

7.10

n/a

7.11

16310

17075

17246

17408

17731

18050

n/a

18522

Although the skill mix represented by EI recipients varies depending on economic cycles, Tables 7-12 and 7-13 illustrate trends inthe number of work ready EI recipients in Squamish with skills relevant to the construction and operation of Garibaldi resort (Note:the data does not include SA recipients). The figures in the tables indicate the following:

● There are somewhat more construction and tourism workers without work in the summer than in the winter (due to winter tourism employment opportunities at Whistler).

Table 7-12 Construction-Related Employment Insurance Claims - Squamish (1993-1997)

Occupation 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

July Dec. July Dec. July Dec. July Oct. July Sept.

Electricians

Plumbers

Sheet Metal Workers

Carpenters

Cabinet Makers

Bricklayers

Cement Finishers

Plasterers/Drywallers

Roofers

Insulators

Painters

Heavy Equip. Operators

Construction Helpers

Other Trade Labourers

30

12

2

100

3

4

0

4

5

0

7

51

71

7

19

7

2

65

1

5

0

1

2

0

4

58

78

9

14

17

3

74

0

3

2

3

7

4

8

46

97

4

7

5

2

53

3

2

1

1

5

3

6

44

82

2

20

9

0

55

1

3

1

2

4

4

2

41

82

7

17

12

3

46

2

5

2

1

4

1

6

43

77

7

20

8

8

45

0

1

1

1

7

6

7

28

73

3

9

8

7

29

0

2

1

1

5

1

7

22

56

1

n/a

11

5

31

1

1

0

2

5

1

0

37

n/a

na/

n/a

9

3

30

1

1

0

1

3

0

0

29

n/a

n/a

Table 7-13 Tourism-Related Employment Insurance Claims - Squamish (1993-1997)

Occupation 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

July Dec. July Dec. July Dec. July Oct. July Sept.

Executive Housekeepers

Chefs

Cooks

Retail Sales Clerk

Hotel Desk Clerk

Maitre D’Hotel

Bartenders

Food Servers

2

7

57

75

11

14

26

55

2

10

53

55

8

8

22

55

0

9

39

49

3

4

19

46

0

8

43

27

7

3

14

36

1

4

35

40

9

3

10

38

2

12

44

34

14

3

16

52

0

10

35

57

13

1

6

30

0

8

26

38

6

1

7

20

0

6

33

38

13

2

6

21

0

4

23

26

6

1

5

10

Cashiers

Food Counter Attendants

Kitchen Helpers

Light Duty Cleaners

35

12

20

106

30

7

22

75

23

3

18

104

16

2

16

77

22

1

13

65

17

6

18

59

18

4

17

97

21

3

12

79

8

2

5

112

5

2

4

101

●

For many construction and tourism trades, the number of workers collecting EI has declined over the past four years (e.g., 100 carpenters were collecting EI in July 1993 compared to 31 in July 1997). This is partly due to the current strength of the local economy and partly due to changing EI regulations.

●

The number of work ready EI recipients representing some of the construction trades is quite low (e.g., cement finishers, insulators).

●

Overall, there is a larger number of residents with tourism skills than with construction skills collecting EI (this is likely dueto the seasonal nature of tourism employment).

7.2 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

Construction of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH as envisioned in the concept proposal would occur in seven phases over a 10 year period. This phased approach will generate employment and/or income impacts for construction workers, operations workers, suppliers of construction materials, tourism and hospitality operators, and local and provincial government agencies.

This section uses information provided by GARIBALDI and available through a variety of secondary sources, to document the following project impacts:

● direct and indirect/induced construction and operations employment; ● direct construction and operations employment income; ● construction materials spending; ● tourism spending and employment; and ● municipal and provincial property tax revenue.

For the purposes of this analysis, we have used the construction employment multiplier for Squamish taken from the report BritishColumbia Local Area Economic Dependencies and Impact Ratios prepared by Dr. Garry Horne et. al. of the Ministry of Finance (February 1995), p. 11. Note that this multiplier addresses both indirect employment impacts (resulting from respending of wage income) and induced employment impacts (resulting from the purchase of construction supplies)

7.2.1 Construction and Operations Employment and Income Impacts

Construction and Operations Employment

The construction and operation of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will generate significant employment benefits for the study area. Table 7-14 summarizes direct and indirect/induced construction and operations employment projections for years zero (start-up) toten of the project. These figures indicate the following:

● The project will provide a total of 3,048 person-years (PYs) of construction employment (2,310 PYs of direct and 738 PYs of indirect employment) over ten years.

● Fifty seven percent of direct and indirect construction employment will occur during the start-up year and year one of operations.

Table 7-14 Direct and Indirect/Induced Construction and Operations Employment Impacts

Employment

Impacts

Year

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Direct Construction

Indirect/Induced Construction(8)

Total Construction

553

176

829

767

245

1,012

76

24

100

98

31

129

266

85

351

256

82

338

56

18

74

110

35

145

77

25

102

43

14

57

8

3

11

Direct Operations

Indirect/Induced Operations(9)

Total Operations

0

0

0

240

14

254

270

16

286

310

17

327

520

31

551

560

34

594

610

37

647

660

40

700

930

56

986

970

58

1,028

1,070

64

1,134

Total Direct

Total Indirect

Total

553

176

829

1,007

259

1,266

346

40

186

408

48

456

786

116

902

816

116

932

666

55

721

770

75

845

1,007

81

1,088

1,013

72

1,085

1,078

67

1,145

●

The project will provide a total of 6,507 PYs of operations employment (6,140 PYs of direct and 367 PYs of indirect employment) over ten years.

●

Operations employment will increase gradually rising from 240 PYs of direct employment in year one to 1070 PYs of direct employment in year ten.

●

Combining construction and operations employment figures indicates the project will generate a total of 8,450 PYs of direct employment and 1,105 PYs of indirect employment over ten years. Employment will increase significantly between the start-up year and year one (when major construction activity occurs) and then fluctuate somewhat between years three and ten depending on the level of construction activity.

●

It is estimated that approximately three-quarters (75%) of project employment needs will be met by area residents while one-quarter (25%) will be met by workers hired from outside the region. Given breakdown, 7,166 PYs of total direct and indirect employment is expected to accrue to area residents while 2,389 PYs is expected to accrue to non or temporary residents.

According to data provided by Human Resources Development Canada; (Section 7.1.6), the number of work ready/ employable individuals in the Howe Sound area currently receiving EI or SA is low relative to the recent past. Furthermore, the number of EIclaimants representing some of the construction trades is also quite low. While these observations would appear to suggest that itmay be difficult to meet local hiring objectives for the construction of the resort, a representative of Human Resources DevelopmentCanada indicated that actual unemployment rates in the region are likely higher than reflected in EI claim numbers (e.g., due to

people who are under-employed, living off savings, not eligible for benefits etc.). Overall, the HRDC representative believes it is unlikely there will be a problem securing the workers required for the project.

While EI figures indicate it is possible that some specialty trades may be in short supply, it is likely that the general contractor(s)awarded the project will have a reliable network of sub-contractors. In addition, the construction of the resort could play an important role in the ongoing stability of the regional economy by providing viable employment alternatives for displaced forestryworkers (e.g., well paying lower skilled construction and labor positions). Graduating high school students (180 to 200 per year)would also benefit as the project would provide access to entry level and career oriented employment opportunities in the hospitalitysector.

Construction and Operations Income

Table 7-15 and Exhibit 7-1 and Exhibit 7-2 summarizes construction and operations employment income projections for years zero to ten of the project. These figures indicate the following:

● The project will provide a total of $80.8 million in construction employment income and $156.7 million in operations employment income over ten years.

● In its start-up year, the project will generate $19 million in construction employment income. ● After year three, employment income (construction and operations) will average between $17 million and $28 million

annually.● An estimated 75% of employment income will be earned by local workers while the remaining 25% will be earned by

workers from other parts of the region or B.C. This means that over ten years, the project will generate approximately $178 million in employment income for local workers, and $59 million for non-local workers. After year three, income earned by local workers will average between $13 million and $21 million annually.

Purchase of Construction Supplies

In addition to wage and employment impacts, the study area economy will benefit from the capital construction costs associated with the development of the resort. Table 7-16 summarizes the estimated capital costs of the project from start-up (year 0) to year10. Excluding the ski lifts, materials for the development are projected to cost $80.8 million over ten years. Of this total, anestimated $24.2 million is expected to accrue to Squamish suppliers,(10) while $40.4 million is expected to accrue to regional suppliers, and $16.2 million is expected to accrue to suppliers in other areas of B.C. In turn, the provincial and federal governmentswill each receive 7% of the value of purchased supplies through sales tax and GST revenue.

Table 7-15 Direct* Construction and Operations Income Impacts

Income

Impacts

Year

($’000 - $1997)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ConstructionIncome

OperationsIncome

TotalIncome

19,354.0

0

19,354.0

26,846.5

589.5

32,745.5

2,667.0

6,345.0

9,012.0

3,431.5

6,845.0

10,276.5

9308.5

13,920.0

23,228.5

8,945.5

14,520.0

23,465.5

1948.0

15,270.0

17,218.0

3,846.0

16,020.0

19,866.0

2701.0

25,425.0

28,126.0

1,491.5

26,025.0

27,516.5

271.5

26,475.0

26,746.5

80,811.0

156,740.0

237,551.0

Percentwhich goes to:

Localworkers(75%)

Reg./Prov.workers(25%)

14.515.5

4,838.5

24,559

8,186

6,759

2,253

7,707

2,569

17,421

5,807

17,599

5,866

12,914

4,304

14,900

4,966

21,095

7,031

20,637

6,879

20,060

6,687

178,163

59,388

*Note: Regional employment income multipliers are not available)

Table 7-16 Spending on Construction Material

Materials Cost

(Excluding Lifts)

Year

($’000 - $1997)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Squamish (30%)

Regional (50%)

Other B.C. (20%)

Total (100%)

5,806

9,677

3,871

19,354

8,054

13,424

5,369

26,847

800

1,334

533

2,667

1,030

1,716

686

3,432

2,793

4,654

1,862

9,309

2,684

4,473

1,789

8,946

584

974

390

1,948

1,154

1,923

769

3,846

810

1,351

540

2,701

448

746

298

1,492

82

36

54

272

24,243

40,406

16,162

80,811

Exhibit 7-1 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Direct Construction and Operations Employment Impacts

Exhibit 7-2 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Direct Construction and Operation Income Impacts

7.2.2 Tourism Spending Employment and Income Impacts

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project is expected to have a very positive overall impact on Squamish’s tourism sector as skier dollars will benefit both on and off-mountain accommodation, restaurant, transportation and retail services. The numbers in Table 7-17 summarize the type of revenue and employment impacts which might be expected. These figures reflect a variety of information

sources and are meant to be illustrative only.

Table 7-18 multiplies data on the number of projected day and overnight skier visits for years one, five and ten by estimated perdiems (see table footnotes for an explanation of how per diems were derived) to identify total spending by year resulting from skiervisits. Table 7-18 uses Visitor 89 data, 17 Small Business Profile data and Human Resources Canada data to translate these totalspending figures into jobs. 18

Based on the assumptions in these tables, the resort would generate an estimated $16 million in visitor spending in year one, $39million in year five, and $76 million in year ten (Table 7-18). In turn, this spending will create jobs for accommodation, restaurant,transportation and retail operators.

7.2.3 Government Revenue Impacts

7.2.3.1 Property Tax Revenue

The development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will generate a significant amount of additional property tax revenue. Based on 1996 tax rates for the District of Squamish, 19 the project will contribute approximately $1.2 million in property taxes in Year One. Tax levies will increase as the project expands and, by year ten, are expected to reach close to $6.4 million annually (Table 7-19;Exhibit 7 -3).

In order to illustrate the impact of projected property tax revenue, Table 7-20 applies 1996 District of Squamish tax distributionrates against the Resort’s estimated year five tax levy of $3.4 million. Based on this total, the figures indicate that the District of Squamish

Table 7-17 Tourism Spending Impacts

Tourism Spending Impact Calculation

($1996)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Year Total Skier Visits

# of Day Skiers(11) # of Overnight Skiers

Day Visitors Spending

(x $80 per day visitor)(12)

Overnight Visitors Spending

(x $161 per overnight visitor) (13)

Total Visitor Spending

(Col. 4+5)

1 150,000 (67% of total)

100,500

(33% of total)

49,500

$8.04 million $7.97 million $16.01 million

5 320,000 (49% of total)

156,800

(51% of total)

163,200


10 550,000 (29% of total)

159,500

(71% of total)

390,500


Table 7-18 Projected Visitor Spending Labor Income and Employment Impacts (Year Five Estimates Reported in $1996)

Spending Category % of Visitor Spending

(from Visitor 89)

Amount Spent

($Millions)

% of Spending Which Goes to Wages

(Small Business Profiles)

Wages Due to Skier Visits

($Millions)

Average Wage

(From HRDC)

Number of Direct Jobs

Accommodation 25% $9.70 25% $2.43 $10/hr.

$18,000/yr.

135

Vehicle Transportation 10% $3.88 9.6% $0.37 $12/hr.

$21,600/yr.

17

Other Transportation 13% $5.05 27% $1.36 $12/hr.

$21,600/yr.

63

Restaurants 19% $7.37 30% $2.21 $8.75/hr.

$15,750/yr.

140

Retail (Groceries, Souvenirs, Other)

22% $8.54 15% $1.28 $11/hr.

$19,800/yr.

65

Recreation and Enter. 11% $4.27 23% $0.98 $10/hr.

$18,000/yr.

54

TOTAL 100% $38.81 Million -- $8.63 Million -- 474

Table 7-19 Year One To Year Ten Property Tax Impacts

(Based on 1996 Tax Rates Provided by the District of Squamish)

Year Property Tax Levy

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

$1,244,147

$1,518,745

$1,793,344

$3,130,783

$3,405,387

$3,718,601

$4,409,484

$5,606,018

$5,965,574

$6,428,958

Table 7-20 Property Tax Distribution - Year Five

Agency Percent of Total Amount of Tax Revenue

District of Squamish

Province (Schools)

Other Agencies:

MFA

Regional District

Hospital District

B.C. Assessment Auth.

52.4%

37.2%

Neg.

6.8%

2.3%

1.3%

10.4%

$1,784,423

$1,266,804

$231,566

$78,324

$44,270

$354,160

TOTAL 100% $3,405,387

would receive approximately $1.8 million, the province (schools) would receive approximately $1.3 million, and other government agencies (regional) would receive approximately $354,000.

Room Tax Revenue

In 1994, the Squamish Lillooet Regional District generated $65.8 million in room tax revenue for the provincial government. The Garibaldi development will add approximately 1,450 rooms to the region’s current accommodation inventory by year ten.

Assuming a 60% annual occupancy rate and a daily room tariff of $100, indicates that the development will contribute an additional$1.85 million in room revenue tax to the provincial government (1,450 rooms x 365 days x 50% occupancy x $100 x 7%). Although Squamish accommodation properties do not currently collect the 2% Hotel Tax, it is possible this tax could be levied in the future.Should this occur, the community would be allocated the resulting revenue for tourism marketing purposes.

Crown Land Sales

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH site is crown land and, therefore, subject to the pricing policy of B.C. Lands for commercial alpine ski developments. The policy will result in two streams of revenue for the government. Firstly, the Resort will pay an annualfee of 2% of gross lift revenue for land leased for the ski hill development. Secondly, the Resort will pay to purchase land for the non-ski hill components of the development (e.g., residences, commercial facilities). For years one through ten of the agreement,GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will pay the greater of $5,000 per acre or the appraised land value of unserviced land. For years 11 through 15, they will pay the greater of $5,000 per acre or 5% of the appraised value of land at its intended use, while for years 16 through 20, they will pay the greater of $5,000 per acre or 10% of the appraised value of land at its intended use. Between years one through ten, the purchase of land (assuming a $5,000 per acre construction value) will generate the following revenue flow for theprovincial government (Table 7-21).

Table 7-21 Crown Land Sales Revenue

Year Crown Land Price Levy

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

$350,000

$320,000

$355,000

$390,000

$420,000

$400,000

$445,000

$400,000

$165,000

$155,000

7.3 SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

7.3.1 Population Impacts

It is anticipated that the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will affect both resident and visitor population levels. Projecting these impacts with any degree of certainty is very difficult because of the time lag between this analysis and targetedproject start-up dates. Residential population impacts are particularly difficult to project because they are so dependent on economicfactors and because the area is already experiencing such rapid growth relative to other areas of B.C. Despite these challenges, this

section provides estimates of the possible impact of the project on resident and visitor population levels.

7.3.1.1 Resident Population Impacts

The impacts of the resort on the residential population of the study area will likely vary from year to year and will depend on theproportion of required workers available locally. Resort owners are targeting to hire a minimum of 75% of project workers locally.Assuming this target is achieved, it is estimated that Squamish’s residential population could increase by an estimated 730 persons.(14) This estimate reflects the following assumptions:

● 25% of construction and operations workers hired non-locally ● an average household size of 2.9 ● impacts are incremental to current population projections ● non-resident workers will arrive in year one and opt to stay in the community regardless of project construction cycles (i.e.,

the major population impacts of the project will occur in year one – year one workers will be rehired each year and non rehired workers will find other employment in the community).

The addition of 730 residents (Table 7-22) would have the following incremental impacts on current population projections for theDistrict of Squamish:

Table 7-22 Resort Construction Population Impact Estimates

Year Current Squamish Population (Est.)

% Change Revised Population Estimate

(Add 540 residents)(15)

Revised % Change

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Average annual projected growth rate 1996 –2008

13,994(16)

15,190

16,333

17,525

18,763

20,046

21,325

--

8.2

7.0

6.8

6.6

6.4

6.0

4.1%/year

14,724

15,920

17,063

18,255

19,493

20,776

22,055

--

8.1

7.2

7.0

6.8

6.6

6.2

4.1%/year

In addition to employment related population impacts, the residential development proposed for the resort will also contribute topopulation growth. Although a maximum of 2,025 units can be accommodated (excluding condominium hotel units), the actual number of units constructed will depend on demand. Because of the phased scheduling of this construction, it is not possible to accurately project related population growth. However, in Whistler, only 18% of total available bed units (6,800 of 38,000) are occupied by full-time residents. The Resort Municipality estimates that this might increase to a maximum of 25% by build-out (13,000 out of 52,000 bed units). If we assume that 20% of the residential units developed as part of Garibaldi will be occupied by permanent residents, this indicates that the population could increase by approximately 1,175 over ten years (2,025 units x 20% x2.9 persons per unit), or 117 per year.

7.3.1.2 Visitor Population Impacts

The number of skier visit days generated by Garibaldi Resort is expected to increase annually. Skier visit projections summarized in Table 7-23 indicate that skier visits are expected to increase from 150,000 in year one to 485,000 in year ten (an average of 22%annually). Of these visitors, between 65% and 80% are expected to be drawn from the local/lower mainland market, between 15% and 20% are expected to come from the regional market, and between 5% and 20% are expected to come from outside the region. In addition to skier visits, the resort is expected to accommodate a significant number of summer visits. Over the first ten years of the project, the number of visitors is expected to increase from 100,000 in year one to 350,000 in year ten.

Table 7-23 Skier Visit Projections

Year Total Skier Visits Skier Origin

Local (incl. Lower Mainland) Regional Outside Region

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

150,000

180,000

220,000

280,000

320,000

370,000

420,000

480,000

520,000

550,000

120,000

144,000

176,000

224,000

256,000

259,000

294,000

312,000

338,000

357,000

22,500

27,000

33,000

42,000

48,000

74,000

84,000

72,000

78,000

82,500

7,500

9,000

11,000

14,000

16,000

37,000

42,000

96,000

104,000

110,000

7.3.2 Accommodation (Housing) Impacts

The resident and visitor population impacts of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will have some spin-off impact on the demand for residential and tourism accommodation. As noted in Section 7.3.1, it is difficult to project the population impacts of the project with certainty. As a result, it is also difficult to project the housing impacts of the project. There are two key housing issues associatedwith the development of the resort. The first issue is whether the community can accommodate the families which move to Squamish to assist with the construction or operation of the resort, and whether it can do so without contravening the residentialdevelopment objectives of its OCP. The second issue is whether adequate affordable housing will be available for short-term or contract workers.

Based on the calculations in Table 7-22 (which summarizes population growth projections with and without the resort), Squamish isexpected to grow by just over 1,100 persons between 1998 and 2000 without the resort and by up to 1,700 persons with the resort (based on the assumptions accompanying the table and excluding resort residential development). Given an average household size of 2.9, this suggests the resort development could result in demand for between 380 and 590 housing units over the 10 year study

period (from workers moving to the community). As current community construction activity includes plans for more than 1,400 units, and the resort plans include construction of up to 2,025 housing units (Section 7.1.6), any incremental increase in demand for housing resulting from the development of the resort should be easily absorbed by available housing inventory.

It should be noted, however, that Squamish has recently updated its OCP and, as part of this process, residents were surveyed on a variety of growth related issues. Specifically, they were asked whether they felt the current rate of growth (4%) in Squamish wastoo high, about right or too low. Of the approximately 500 residents who responded, 25% indicated they felt the growth rate was toohigh, 62% indicated it was about right and 3% indicated it was too low (the remainder did not respond). Although the population and housing impacts of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will be modest when viewed over the 10 year study period, the concentration of growth which might occur at project start-up and year one may be viewed with concern by those residents (25%) who believe current growth rates are too high.

Educating the public regarding the limited nature of the impacts and the spin-off benefits of the project (e.g., secure, long-termemployment opportunities for many Squamish residents) could be an effective means of responding to these concerns.

Rental Housing

The developers of the resort recognize the importance of having adequate, affordable housing available for resort employees, especially those which work seasonally or on short-term contracts. Lack of affordable housing has become a significant issue at Whistler with many employees resorting to long distance commuting or to multiple room-mates. In fact, the issue has become so chronic that attendance at this year’s employee recruitment fairs was down an estimated 40%. Fair organizers attribute this declineto the housing issue.

In order to minimize the likelihood that affordable employee housing will become an issue in Squamish, the developers of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH are committed to offering as many positions as possible to Squamish residents. In addition to ensuring that project employment and income impacts benefit the community, this commitment will help minimize employee housing issues. Furthermore, Squamish residents who currently work in Whistler and Vancouver may prefer to work at the resort. This will have the impact of enhancing safety by eliminating the need for some workers to commute long distances to work. (Winter driving conditions on Highway 99 can be treacherous and the route is subject to closures due to rock slides and snowfall.)

Although the majority of project workers will be local residents, some workers (e.g., those with very specialized skills such as lift installers) will likely come from outside the community. It is anticipated that the majority of non-local workers will come fromGreater Vancouver and that many of these workers will choose to commute to Squamish from Vancouver for the duration of their contract.

Workers who do not fit into either of the above categories will need to rely on available rental accommodation in Squamish(17). These units may be supplemented by current development projects which include plans for a number of new townhouse and multi-family structures (although it is unknown how many of these will be rental units). As vacancy rates vary from month to month, theadequacy of available rental accommodation to meet resort worker demand is unknown. However, the resort developers are committed to ensuring appropriately priced housing is not a limiting factor for workers.

Visitor Accommodation

As earlier noted, there are currently an estimated 236 units of visitor accommodation in the Squamish area. As the resort develops,this capacity will be expanded through the construction of proposed on-site hotel and condo/hotel units as illustrated in Table 7-24.

The phasing and scale of the proposed visitor accommodation is based on skier visit and origin projections. It is intended to ensurethat existing operators can benefit from increased demand while also ensuring adequate accommodation capacity is available for resort users.

Table 7-25 provides a rough estimate of possible ski season visitor accommodation demand based on the following assumptions:

● 120 day ski season (note that the length of the ski season could range from a low of 120 days to a high of 160 days)

Table 7-24 Summary of Added Overnight Accommodations

(Garibaldi Alpen Resort)

Year Condo/Hotel Units Hotel Rooms

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

300

--

--

100

--

--

200

--

--

100

--

150

--

250

--

--

--

350

--

--

TOTAL 700 750

Table 7-25 Ski Season Visitor Accommodation Demand Estimates

Year Capacity Skier Visits

In-town

Units

Ski Hill

Units

Total

Units

x 120 day ski season x double occupancy

(= total visitor capacity)

Skier Visits

(From Table 7-20)

Ski Season

Occupancy

Rate

1 236 +300 536 64,320 128,640 54,000 42%

2 236 +150 686 82,320 164,640 64,800 39%

3 36 -- 686 82,320 164,640 79,200 48%

4 236 +350 1,036 124,320 248,640 100,800 41%

5 236 -- 1,036 124,320 248,640 115,200 46%

6 236 -- 1,036 124,320 248,640 162,800 65%

7 236 +200 1,236 148,320 296,640 184,800 62%

8 236 +350 1,586 190,320 380,640 230,400 61%

9 236 -- 1,586 190,320 380,640 249,600 66%

10 236 +100 1,686 202,320 404,640 264,000 65%

●

double occupancy ●

no increase in current in-town capacity(18) ●

the number of non-skier tourism visits remains constant(19) ●

all skiers from the outside the region and from the region, as well as 20% of skiers from the local market (including the lower mainland), will stay overnight (from Table 7-17).

7.3.3 Public Safety and Emergency Management

7.3.3.1 Police

The policing needs of the resort would have to be determined as the development progresses because police staffing requirements are typically assessed according to the number of calls received. An average police to population ratio is 1 to 1,500 (one officer to 1,500 residents). Given proposed resort skier visit levels and residential construction, the RCMP estimate they may require an extrasix to ten officers by year ten of project development. These officers would be necessary for general policing as well as highwaypatrol.

At present, funding for the Squamish RCMP is provided by both the District and the province (the latter covers highway patrol costs). How policing of the resort is funded will depend on whether or not the property is annexed by the District. If the resort is annexed, funding would come from the District. If it is not annexed, funding would come from the province. However, once population levels exceeded 5,000 the resort would be required to enter into a contract for the provision of policing services. Otherthan staffing issues, the RCMP identified no concerns regarding the resort. They also indicated that the development of the resortover ten years will make it easier to address increases in demand for policing services.

7.3.3.2 Squamish Fire Rescue

Squamish Fire Rescue has seven full-time personnel including a Fire Chief, Deputy Chief, Captain and four career firefighters. Inaddition, there are 53 volunteer firefighters on-call who donate their stipend per call back to the Squamish firefighters Society.

Squamish firefighters operate out of two firehalls, one in downtown Squamish by the Municipal Hall and one in Garibaldi Estates inthe same building as the police station. The fire department responds to an average of 320 calls annually. To provide for continuityof command in the volunteer structure, the Municipality is divided into two Districts, each of which has two Fire Companies.

There are 12 to 14 firefighters and one pumper truck assigned to each company. Firefighting equipment includes four pumper trucks, one of which has a 75 foot ladder. These pumper trucks are capable of delivering a combined total of 4,200 gallons of waterper minute. In addition, there is a reserve pumper truck which has a capacity of 1,050 gallons per minute. Other equipment includesa salvage and rescue van for equipment which cannot be carried on a pumper truck and a rescue and extraction vehicle to remove trapped victims from motor vehicle accidents.

The potential impact of the resort on fire protection services will also vary depending on whether or not the resort is annexed by the District of Squamish. Should the resort be annexed, responsibility for provincial fire protection and safety services would fall to the Squamish fire department. If it is not annexed, then the responsibility for fire protection would fall to the Regional District. Should the resort be annexed by Squamish, the Squamish Fire Chief has indicated that resources of the fire department would be taxed. This is because the department would need to increase annual or semi-annual inspections of restaurants, licensed beverage establishments, hotel units, offices, retail stores, etc. Inspections would involve staff travel time to the site (about 25 minutes each way) plus inspection time of from one-half to two hours depending on the complexity of the building.

The fire chief estimates it would take more than 30 minutes before a pumper could arrive at the Resort in response to a call. As a result, residents and visitors would not be adequately protected. In addition, he anticipates requiring an additional pumper, equipment, and volunteers, to compensate for those volunteers/members and equipment responding to a resort call. Although the department currently responds to incidents that take them similar distances from the fire hall, these incidents are infrequent and can be absorbed financially and operationally. The fire chief estimates that in order to provide adequate protection for the Resort theywould require one additional career staff person (to conduct inspections), a satellite hall on with up to 15 volunteers on call, a pumper capable of delivering water for the hazard assessment and equipment for firefighting.

If the Resort is developed as a stand alone entity, any service provided by the Squamish fire department would be by contract andprotection would be limited by distance and available staff. The operating cost to the Resort would be in the order of a minimum of $1,000 for any incident, and approximately $100 for inspections (time and vehicle costs).

GARIBALDI has committed to providing on-site fire hall facilities, a four wheel drive fire rescue vehicle and fire clothing for fifteen volunteers.

7.3.3.3 Search and Rescue

The Squamish Emergency Program is a municipal program operated as part of the Provincial Emergency Program. It is made up of 45 volunteers, including a Municipal Emergency Coordinator and two deputy coordinators. The Squamish Emergency Program consists of three divisions: Search and Rescue, Communications and Emergency Social Services.

Search and Rescue is comprised of 35 volunteers. During emergency operations, Search and Rescue members are assisted by members of the Communications group for radio and telephone communications and by Emergency Social Services members who look after operations support – including food and shelter – when necessary.

The Squamish Emergency Program is called out an average 47 times per year, an average of almost once per week. Peak times for callouts are in the spring and fall. Winters is generally slower, however, winter rescues tend to be more dramatic.

7.3.3.4 Hospital

The Squamish hospital is currently restructuring some of its resources to expand available services (e.g., they will be augmentingtheir medical and surgical capabilities by changing how their existing resources are utilized). According to the Hospital Administrator, the Squamish hospital would have no problem handling additional demand resulting from the development of the resort as its emergency, medical and obstetrics departments are well staffed. The hospital does not have the resources to do majorsurgery and such cases would continue to be referred to Vancouver.

Emergency and safety systems located within the resort development will include a first aid office and medical treatment centre forinitial care. First aid and emergency response personnel will be on-site to provide interim treatment to accident victims from the

mountain. In addition, a helicopter landing pad will be available for the medi-vac helicopters to access as necessary.

7.3.5 Social Service Impacts

As of the first quarter of 1997, there were 563 employable social assistance recipients residing in Squamish. These recipients represent an estimated 3.0% of the area’s working age population, which is the lowest benefit recipient rate experienced in the community for several years.(20) Despite recent decreases in the number of employable SA recipients, it is possible future demandfor SA in Squamish could increase in response to declines in direct and indirect forestry employment.

Regardless of future economic conditions, however, any project which provides employment opportunities for SA recipients will benefit the Ministry of Human Resources by reducing SA caseloads. Because the resort development will create a range of non-skilled and semi-skilled positions (e.g., construction laborers, housekeepers), the employment opportunities for SA recipients areexpected to be greater than might be provided by, for example, an industrial development (which typically requires more specialized job skills).

7.3.6 Lifestyle and Recreation Impacts

7.3.6.1 Lifestyle Impacts

Projecting the lifestyle impacts of the proposed resort development is difficult as such impacts are highly subjective and very dependent on one’s perspective and lifestyle preferences. There is no doubt that a development such as that envisioned for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will impact the community. As noted in previous sections of this analysis, the resort will have some impact on population levels and, as a result on demand for housing and community services. It will also contribute to the currentrestructuring of the regional economy by further enhancing the role of tourism relative to other sectors. Combined, these factorsmay cause apprehension for residents who are concerned about the impact which such changes will have on them or who are uncertain of the ability of the tourism sector to provide viable employment opportunities.

The lifestyle impacts of the project, however, need to be balanced by consideration of the lifestyle benefits of the project. Forexample, the employment and income benefits of the resort will contribute to the maintenance of community stability and living standards by offering viable employment opportunities for area residents (including high school graduates, displaced forestry workers, and EI and SA recipients). If such employment alternatives are not created, projected economic adjustments could result in increased out-migration rates which, in turn, could negatively affect community continuity and living standards.

The project may enhance resident safety by providing employment opportunities for some residents who currently commute to Vancouver or Whistler thereby eliminating the need for them to travel long distances to work. In addition, it may help to minimizecrime rate increases by contributing to strong community employment levels (higher unemployment rates typically contribute to high crime rates).

7.3.6.2 Recreation Impacts

Residents of the Squamish area will benefit from easy access to the recreational amenities available at the resort. In addition, it is anticipated that lift ticket and other resort recreation tariffs will be less than those charged by Whistler (see Section 3 Table 3-5). Despite these recreational benefits, it is anticipated that some current users of Brohm Ridge will be concerned about the development of a ski facility. At present, Brohm Ridge is considered one of the prime snowmobiling areas in the Sea to Sky corridor. The area is documented on snowmobile maps and profiled in snowmobile literature. As a result, it is important that theconcerns of snowmobilers be considered during the project planning and public consultation process and that consideration be givento the viability of a shared use plan(21) or relocation to an acceptable alternative.

7.4 MONITORING SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS

In order to ensure that the majority of the economic benefits of the resort development are accruing to the study area, and that any negative impacts are minimized or mitigated, the community may wish to consider establishing a system for monitoring the impacts

of the development for the 10 year forecast period. This could involve documenting annual project employment, income, supply purchase and government revenue impacts to confirm whether they correspond with projections. It could also involve liaising withaffected community groups and service providers on an ongoing basis to ensure that potential issues are raised and can be addressedbefore they become a concern.

The Resort Municipality of Whistler initiated a comprehensive community and resort monitoring program in 1993. In accordance with policies in the Municipality’s Comprehensive Development Plan, the Community Resort Monitoring Program provides information that allows the community to measure how it is changing, and more importantly to predict how it will change in the future if there is additional population growth, development and visitation. The Comprehensive Development Plan calls for a monitoring process that communicates the results annually in a report and open public meeting. To date, the Municipality has heldfour annual meetings to review the success of the development.

The monitoring program includes the following program initiatives:

● A drinking water quality testing program ● An air quality testing program ● An extensive environmental mapping program ● A fish habitat survey and wildlife habitat inventory ● A trail-users counting program ● A parking lot inventory

In response to community priorities expressed over 1995, the following new initiatives were started in 1996:

● A comprehensive transportation strategy ● An affordable resident housing strategy ● An environmentally sensitive or unique lands acquisition initiative ● A fish habitat enhancement study.

The objectives of the monitoring program are to:

● Measure important changes in the community, the resort and the environment ● Describe the implications of these changes ● Set standards for acceptable ranges for important indicators ● Provide information that will help guide future planning regarding the size and nature of the community and resort ● Provide information that will help refine development regulations and municipal bylaws ● Identify possible needs for changes to Municipal policy or amendments to the Official Community Plan which governs land

use and development ● Provide information that will help the municipality refine the capital budget and ongoing programs and to respond to

changing community needs and priorities ● Help Council decide whether to approve development beyond the existing committed level and if so, under what conditions ● Help other organizations within the community respond to changing needs and priorities.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH embraces the concept of an on-going monitoring program and will look at the Whistler Monitoring Program as a model to help structure the GARIBALDI Monitoring Program. We may also consider expanding the monitoring program to the entire Sea to Sky Corridor to provide a broader base of planning and review.

7.5 summary

A summary of the socio-economic impact is provided in Table 7-26` based on the analysis, it appears that the majority of impactswould be positive.

Table 7-26 GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH - Summary of Economic and Social Impacts

ECONOMIC IMPACTS:

Employment ● 2,310 PYs of direct and 738 PYs of indirect construction employment over 10 years. ● 6,140 PYs of direct and 361 PYs of indirect operations employment over 10 years. ● A total of 8,450 PYs of direct and 1,105 PYs of indirect employment over 10 years. ● An estimated 7,166 Pys of total direct and indirect employment (75%) will accrue to area

residents.

Income ● $80.8 million in construction employment income and $156.7 in operations employment income over 10 years.

● Will generate $19 million in construction employment income in the start-up year. ● An estimated $178 million ($13 to $21 million/year) in employment income will accrue to area

residents over 10 years. ● An estimated $24.2 million will be spent on the purchase of supplies from Squamish suppliers,

$40.4 million from regional suppliers and $16.2 million from suppliers outside the region.

Government Revenue ● Federal and provincial governments will benefit from income tax paid on $238 million employment income over 10 years.

● Federal and provincial governments will benefit from PST and GST paid on more than $81 million in supplies.

● Property tax revenue will increase from an estimated $420,000 in year one to $5.8 million in year 10.

● The province will receive room tax revenue estimated at $1.84 million in year 10.

Other Economic Impacts ● Will ease the current economic transition by providing jobs for some displaced forestry workers. ● Will provide employment opportunities for high school grads and EI/SA recipients. ● Will help contribute to the ongoing diversity of the economy and the tourism sector.

COMMUNITY (SOCIAL) IMPACTS

Population ● As the majority of workers will be hired from the study area, employment related population impacts will be modest and largely confined to the first couple of years. Based on documented assumptions, population impacts are estimated at 540 (workers and families).

● Residential construction will draw an estimated 1,360 permanent residents over ten years. ● The number of non-local skier visits is expected to increase from 30,000 in year one to 192,500 in

year ten.

Housing ● Projected resort employment population impacts could result in a demand for between 380 and 590 housing units over the ten year study period. Current municipal housing plans provide for more than 1,400 units.

● As the majority of workers will be local, demand for rental housing will be minimal. ● Commercial accommodation units proposed for the resort will add 1,200 rooms to the current

tourist room inventory.

Public Safety ● The need for additional police resources will have to be assessed as the project progresses. Typically, manpower needs are estimated at one officer for every 1,500 residents. Between six and ten additional officers will likely be required once the resort reaches build out.

● If the Resort is annexed by Squamish, Fire Department resources will be taxed and an additional staff person, truck and equipment required.

● The Squamish Hospital anticipates no concerns in responding to demand from the resort. ● Limits the number of workers who have to commute to Vancouver and Whistler by providing more

local employment opportunities (lessens the potential for road accidents by commuters, especially during the winter).

Social Services ● Demand for social services may decline due to increased employment opportunities for employable social assistance and employment insurance recipients.

Lifestyle & Recreation ● Will have some impact on demand for housing and community services. ● Will contribute to the maintenance of community stability and living standards by offering viable

employment opportunities for area residents. ● Residents will have access to resort recreational amenities. ● Snowmobiling opportunities on Brohm Ridge could be affected.

(1) Note that this figure includes Census undercount estimates.

(2) Municipal projections for 1998 to 2008 are rough estimates only. They have been determined by applying SLRD growth projection rates to current municipal estimates.

(3)In October 1996, Squamish residents were surveyed as part of the community’s OCP updating process. Of the 482 people who responded, 19% identified Vancouver and 9% identified Whistler as the location of the place of employment.

(4) Information on community police, fire and hospital services was taken directly from the Squamish Official Community Plan Update: Background Report. Oct. 1996. Pages 27 and 36.

(5) Op. Cit. Horne. P. 21.

(6) Includes part of manufacturing (e.g., value-added wood products), transportation and construction.

(7) It should be noted that EI and SA data are not entirely representative of study area labor force conditions. It is believed there are other residents who are not eligible to collect EI (i.e., they may work sporadically or not report work they do) but who are availablefor work.

(8) A multiplier of 1.32 was used to determine indirect and induced construction impacts. This multiplier is the employment construction multiplier for Squamish taken from the report British Columbia Local Area Economic Dependencies and Impact Ratios prepared by Dr. Garry Horne et. al. of the Ministry of Finance (February 1995), p. 11.

(9) Ibid. A multiplier of 1.06 was used to determine indirect and induced operations impacts.

(10) The employment impacts from this spending are accounted for in Table 7-12 as part of induced construction employment impacts.

(11) Estimates for the proportion of day and overnight visitors was obtained from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Financial Analysis.

(12) $80 represents half the average annual daily skier expenditure of $161 reported in a Skier Profile Survey prepared by Simon Fraser University in 1993/94.

(13) Ibid., $161 is the average annual daily skier expenditure reported in the SFU study.

(14) This estimate was calculated as follows: Number of non-local workers hired in year one (25% of 1,007 direct construction andoperations employees) multiplied by 2.9 (average household size). So…1,007 x 25% x 2.9 = 730.

(15) Assumes all 540 new residents live within the boundaries of the District of Squamish.

(16) Municipal projections for 1998 to 2008 are rough estimates only. They have been determined by applying SLRD growth projection rates to current municipal estimates.

(17) In addition, some weekly and monthly rentals are available through tourist accommodation properties.

(18)Despite this assumption, it is recognized that additional in-town visitor accommodation may well be built over the short to mid-term (e.g., the hotel proposed for the industrial part).

(19)Squamish is working to enhance its tourism profile and is experiencing gradual increases in tourism activity. Thus, while wehave assumed a constant visitor figure for the purposes of the calculations in Table 7-23, it is likely that occupancy rates will be higher than those estimated in the final column of the table.

(20) It is unknown the degree to which these lower numbers can be attributed to recent changes in SA application requirements, e.g., the three month residency period.

(21) It is anticipated that this issue may also be addressed as part of the tourism strategy currently being prepared for Squamish and which is due to be completed in the near future.

Section 8 Public Consultation

8.1 Introduction

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is dedicated to working in partnership with Squamish. Squamish is in the process of developing a reputation as a world-class outdoor recreation centre and, as determined by the community in the 1994 Squamish TOURISM DEVELOPMENT PLAN, now has the opportunity of embellishing these assets with mountain and winter/summer tourism amenities to help secure the community's economic stability and prosperity.

The GARIBALDI team has also demonstrated a commitment to working with the Squamish Nation and to include this community in the planning and operation of the proposed mountain resort.

In concert with its commitment to work in partnership with these communities, GARIBALDI has been actively soliciting the involvement of the public in all aspects of the master planning and public approval of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

8.1.1 Goals and Principles

Pursuant to Part 2, Division 2: Sections 7(i) and (j); Division 5: Section 14 and 15 and Division 7: Section 23 of the EnvironmentalAssessment Act , and Appendix 2 of the Guide to the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Process, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to on-going public consultation during the review of the proposed resort development.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH understands that public participation contributes to better decision-making by providing input on

community values, priorities and concerns including information only known to local residents.

The major goals of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH public consultation program are as follows:

● Ensure an open and accountable review process● Provide notification and information to the public from an early stage in the planning of the proposed resort development

which may be of interest or concern to the public● Ensure public input into the identification and resolution of concerns and issues about the proposed resort development and

its potential impacts● Ensure that local information, knowledge and concerns contribute to both the project design process and the decision-making

process of government.

These goals have assisted GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to design and implement the first phase of its’ public consultation program through the following guiding principles:

● Effectively identifying and reaching the public including stakeholders with a desire to be involved in the public review process

● Providing the public with adequate time to respond to information and project materials● Tailoring participation strategies so as to effectively gain meaningful public input during the pre-application process and into

the future stages of the review process (i.e. Ski Area Master Planning Phase)● Two-way communication with stakeholders to promote understanding and problem solving● On-going consultation and follow-up of important issues and concerns identified by the various stakeholders.

8.1.2 Commitment

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH continues to demonstrate its commitment to public consultation and the people of Squamish in the following ways:

● The name of the proposed resort development “GARIBALDI at Squamish”, has embraced the name and community of Squamish, and recognizes the privilege and opportunity to pursue the further planning and design of the project

● The company has been operating from a local office in Squamish for the past year and intends to continue to plan and develop the project from this office. This local presence and “Open Door Policy” of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team has provided a unique opportunity for the people of Squamish to informally (drop-in) acquire information on the project

● This local presence also provides for on-going and frequent communication with local residents which helps the GARIBLADI team to better understand community values and priorities

● The company has hired local residents in senior roles to help administer and plan the proposed resort development. Ms. Janice Scott, Vice President of Communications and Project Coordination is a third generation resident of Squamish while Mr. Ron Enns, Communications and Field Coordination is a long time resident of Squamish. Mr. Bob Miles, current Administrator with the District Municipality of Squamish will be joining the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team as Vice President, Administration and Project Development effective January 1, 1998

● The company’s policy for the ”Supply of Workforce, Supplies and Services” gives a priority to the local workforce and merchants and will provide a direct economic benefit to the residents of Squamish.

In addition to the commitment of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team to the local community of Squamish, it has also demonstrated its commitment to the native community through the involvement of Mr. Roy Vickers, a renowned native artist who has developed the logo (i.e. eagle) for the corporate image . The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team also hopes to involve the Squamish First Nation in the further design, planning and development of the project including the provision for job creation, careerdevelopment, job training, and active participation or partnering.

8.1.3. Public Consultation Tools

To date, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team has implemented the following techniques to distribute information to, and consult with the public (Tables 8-1 through 8-6):

● Quarterly newsletters (initiated in October, 1997) which provide an editorial from the Chairman of GARIBALDI, description of new issues or project features, project update and information on the environmental assessment process

● Brochures which provide information on the project location, project description, history of the project, master planning & public approvals, economic impact and development philosophy. The brochures are handed out to the public which visit the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH office in Squamish or are mailed to individuals who requested information. Brochures have also been distributed to local government, businesses or during community events. The brochures were also available at the public open house held in October, 1997 and various other stakeholder meetings held in 1997.

● In total, approximately 5,100 brochures have been distributed to local businesses, the Chamber of Commerce and the District of Squamish, during events/tradeshows and open houses or mailed directly to individuals requesting information:

Location # of Brochures

- Howe Sound Inn 1,000

- Chamber of Commerce 200

- District Municipality of Squamish 500

- Vancouver Sports and Bicycle Recreation Show 1,000

- Squamish Test of Metal Event 1,320

- Squamish Realtors 200

- Fascinating Nature Open House 100

- Direct Mailing 300

- APEC 500

● Public information open houses (Tables 8-5 and 8-6 ) held in the town of Squamish at the following locations and dates:

- Open House Meeting #1 -Brackendale Art Gallery in May, 1993

- Open House Meeting #2 -Best Western Sea to Sky Hotel in September, 1995

- Open House Meeting #3 -Elks Hall in September, 1996

- Open House Meeting #4 -Squamish Secondary School in October, 1997

The public information open houses were generally advertised in the local Squamish newspaper the “Squamish Chief”, two weeks in advance of the open house. Visual aids used during the open houses included display boards which were easy to read, objectiveand organized by project theme in an orderly fashion around the meeting room. The open houses were attended by knowledgeable company spokespeople and technical staff/consultants as a resource to answer questions and describe the project for the public. Theopen houses were generally scheduled and located to be convenient for the public to attend.

Approximately 75-100 persons attended the first open house at the Brackendale Art Gallery in 1993. The second open house held atthe Best Western Sea to Sky Hotel had approximately 100 persons attend and included presentation materials from the three proponents of BC Lands call for expression of interests. A further 30-40 persons attended the third open house in the Elks Hall in1996. Approximately 175-200 persons attended the fourth open house held at the Squamish Secondary School in 1997.

● Site tours have also been conducted on an on-going basis over the past 5-10 years (total number of persons having attended site tours over the ten year period is approximately 250 per year, or 2,500 persons). From 1994-1997, an annual fall site tour of the proposed resort development has been attended by approximately 30 persons, per tour (total 120 persons; Table 8-6). The tour would typically be advertised on the local Mountain FM radio station 3-5 days prior to the tour. People interested in attending the tour would meet at a pre-determined location (Elks Hall) in the town of Squamish. The Chairman of GARIBALDI would provide a verbal orientation of the project as a way to introduce the project prior to the site tour. Transportation to and from the mountain would be arranged for all participants.

● Event participation was also used as a medium for informing the public about the proposed resort development. At the Vancouver Bicycle and Summer Sports Show, held at Squamish in 1996 the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team operated a booth which showcased display materials about the proposed resort development. Approximately 15,000 participants attended the show and over 1,000 brochures were distributed.

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team also participated as a sponsor of the Squamish Test of Metal Event ’96 held in Squamish during 1996. During this event, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team operated a booth and displayed project information brochures and graphics on display boards. Approximately 3,000 participants (racers and fans) attended the event and approximately1,320 brochures were handed out.

Senior representatives of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH were on hand for both events to answer questions.

● Invited presentations to stakeholder groups were conducted throughout the history of the project, and more recently (Table 8-5 ) to the following stakeholder groups:

● District of Squamish Council: May, 1990

May, 1991

July, 1992

June, 1996

June, 1997

● Squamish-Lillooett Regional District, November, 1991● Squamish and Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce , 1992● Squamish Tourism Advisory Committee, May, 1993● Squamish First Nation September and October, 1997

These presentations were conducted to provide an introduction to the proposed resort development and to answer questions. Seniorrepresentatives of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH head office from Squamish and technical consultants participated in the presentations and responded to questions

● An Internet Web site is presently being developed and should be available in early December, 1997. The Web page will provide information on the proposed resort development, including text and graphics (2D and 3D images) of various aspects of the development. The web page will also have an Internet address to send comments or request information.

In summary, over the past 10 years, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team has provided information on the proposed resort development to more than 10,000 persons. The information has been provided locally in newsletters, brochures, during open houses, event participation, invited presentations to stakeholder groups, and soon to be available within a Website on the Internet.

A summary of public consultation (correspondence and meetings/tours) both within government and non-government stakeholder groups is included in Tables 8-1 through 8-6.

8.1.4 Issues Identification and Proponent Responses

8.1.4.1 Government Issues/Concerns and Proponent Responses

During the past year, a number of meetings initiated by the proponent have been held with various local, regional and provincialgovernment agencies to identify concerns/issues regarding the proposed resort development. In addition to the proponent initiatedmeetings, the Environmental Assessment Office has held two “Pre-Application Meetings” to further identify issues and to provide background on the environmental assessment review process including estimated timelines.

Proponent Initiated Meetings

The government agencies that have met with the proponent and provided comments on issues and concerns included:

● Department of Fisheries and Oceans

- Habitat Enhancement Branch, Squamish

- Habitat Protection Branch, Annacis Island, Vancouver

● District of Squamish● Council● Public Works● Ministry of Employment and Investment● British Columbia Investment Office, Victoria● British Columbia Trade & Investment Office, Victoria● Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks● Lands Division, Burnaby● Planning and Assessment, Surrey● Parks Division, North Vancouver and Squamish● Ministry of Forests

- Squamish Forest District, Squamish

● Ministry of Small Business, Tourism and Culture● Archaeology Branch, Victoria● Tourism Branch, Victoria● Ministry of Transportation and Highways

- Regional Planning and Operations, Squamish/Bowen Island

● Environmental Assessment Office

- Aboriginal Affairs

Based on discussions with the above agencies the following issues (not in order of priority) have been identified. In addition, theproponent responses to these issues is provided in bold below each issue:

(1) Solid and Liquid Waste Management

Liquid waste disposal options should assess on-site facilities through state-of-the-art tertiary treatment or off-site facilities by expansion of the existing Squamish treatment plant. Regardless of the disposal option selected, levels of phosphorous in the Cheakamus River should not be increased. Solid waste disposal should also evaluate on-site versus off-site facilities (regional

landfill operations) and should minimize bear/human conflicts. Any new landfill sites would have to evaluate potential environmental impacts, especially related to water quality.

Liquid waste management depends to a large part on governance of the resort. If the resort is annexed into the District of Squamish, the existing District of Squamish Mamquam Treatment Facility could be expanded and upgraded to provide liquid treatment of liquid waste generated by the project. If Garibaldi at Squamish is not included within the District of Squamish boundaries another option would be a contribution to the municipality for use of the wastewater facility. Another option since the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District does not have the capabilities to provide liquid waste treatment for the resort development, the resort could construct an on-site tertiary treatment plant with either ground disposal or direct discharge of treated effluent into the Squamish River.

Solid waste disposal is presently the responsibility of the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District (SLRD). Since the proposed resort development is within the SLRD boundaries, the resort would be expected to conform to the Waste Management Plan of the SLRD, and would be required to dispose of solid wastes at the existing District of Squamish landfill site, in Brackendale. On-site temporary storage of solid waste would be at centrally located, enclosed facilities to minimize problems from black bears.

There is no intent or need to develop a new landfill operation as a result of the proposed resort development.

Table 8-1 Correspondence, Prior Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) June 1980 to April 1992

Date of Correspondence Correspondence From Correspondence To General Topic

June 1980 Wolfgang Richter George McKay,

(late) Hon. Jim Chabot, Hon. Ray Williston, Hon. Bob McLellend, Hon. Bill Vander Zalm,

Hon. Grace McCarthy

Hon. Leslie Peterson

Hon. Robert Bonner

Hon. William Bennett

Provision of project information

Feb. 16, 1990 David Jay Flood Norm Halvorson

Harnor Logging

Continual erosion of the harvestable forest land base

Feb. 20, 1990 The Jack Johnson Company W.C. (Curly) Crosson

Black Tusk Snowmobile Club

Black Tusk Snowmobile Club facility and potential conflict with the Garibaldi project

Feb. 23, 1990 David Jay Flood Dr. Laverne Kindree

Chair, Sea to Sky Economic Development Commission

Potential annexation of the proposed resort to the District of Squamish

March 2, 1990 Wolfgang Richter BC Crown Lands Submission of the formal proposal in accordance with Section 3.5 of the Province’s Commercial Alpine Skiing policy

March 9, 1990 Dick Roberts, Regional Director, Lower Mainland Region, Ministry of Crown Lands, Burnaby

Wolfgang Richter Acknowledged receipt of GARIBALDI’s Formal Proposal dated March 1, 1990

Table 8-1 Continued

Correspondence, Prior Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) June 1980 to April 1992


April 20, 1990 Brian Clark, Development Officer, Development & Marketing Division at the B.C. Lands Lower Mainland Regional Office in Burnaby

Wolfgang Richter Advised that a Steering Committee had been created to review the submission

May 10, 1990 Brian Clark, B.C. Lands Wolfgang Richter Outlined potential areas of concern to be addressed at the meeting scheduled between Garibaldi and the Interagency/Interministerial Review Committee

Aug. 1, 1990 Oliver Thomae, Resource Planning Officer,

Ministry of Forests

Wolfgang Richter Indication that a cut block being harvested adjacent to the proposed main village site, should not have any adverse visual impacts on the proposed GARIBALDI resort. As well, another cut block planned for 1991 could be redesigned should the GARIBALDI proposal receive approval

Nov. 21, 1990 Wolfgang Richter Brian Clark, B.C. Lands Resubmission of an “Expanded Recreation Area Plan” and additional information requested

Nov. 26, 1990 Frank Edgell ,Deputy Minister, Ministry of Lands

Wolfgang Richter A Ministry review of the “ski policy” was initiated by Assistant, per Directive 90-11-26, File 146-40/002

Jan. 11, 1991 Sandy Boyd of Whistler Wolfgang Richter Acknowledged receipt of Executive Report on Garibaldi project

Jan. 14, 1991 Newly elected Mayor Tobus, Squamish

Wolfgang Richter Introduction to the plans for a four-season ski resort on Brohm Ridge

March 15, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Paul Kuster, District Manager of the Squamish Forest District

Request for a temporary postponement of harvesting plans for two plots of timber strategically important to the proposed village of the resort development

Table 8-1 Continued



April 19, 1991 Paul Kuster , Squamish Forest District

Wolfgang Richter Squamish Forest District intention to proceed with the sale of two cut blocks within the proposed GARIBALDI development area. One cut block is located in the Swift Creek drainage and another is in the Brohm River drainage and they are in the vicinity of the proposed GARIBALDI village site. Both cut blocks are to be logged using the “clear cutting” method.

May 1, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Claude Richmond , Minister of Forests

Request that Paul Kuster, District Manager of the Squamish Forest District, be directed to hold back on the logging of two cut blocks for one year in the area of the proposed GARIBALDI resort

May 9, 1991 Dave Parker, Minister of Lands Wolfgang Richter Clarification that the ski area guidelines are not a formal part of the ski policy but are “an internal working document”

May 15, 1991 Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Rita Johnston, Premier Mayor’s endorsement of the GARIBALDI project will be a significant factor in the government’s review of the proposal

May 16, 1991 Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Graham Bruce, Minister of Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture

District of Squamish would like to explore annexation of the proposed GARIBALDI resort area into the District

June 5, 1991 Dave Parker, Minister of Lands Wolfgang Richter Advised that the proposal is currently under review by the Cabinet Committee of Sustainable Development which will be making a recommendation to Cabinet

June 24, 1991 Graham Bruce, Minister of Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture

Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Expression of support for the proposed mountain resort development and appreciation that the Mayor wished to explore annexation of the development site. The Minister suggested that GARIBALDI will require extensive urban services and should be planned and managed within some form of municipal organization

Table 8-1 Continued



June 27, 1991 Dave Parker, Minister of Lands Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

The Minister acknowledged the Mayor’s letter of May 16, 1991 and his “support in principle for the Garibaldi Alpen resortdevelopment.” Minister Parker acknowledged the District’s input as one of the many key considerations essential to any decision

July 4, 1991 Claude Richmond, Minister of Forests

Wolfgang Richter Minister of Forests granted Garibaldi a temporary delay in the Ministry’s harvesting plans for timber located on the proposed GARIBALDI development site

July 10, 1991 Mayor Egon Tobus, District of Squamish

Howard Dirks, Minister of Tourism, Trade and (Economic) Development

Minister Dirks takes the initiative and put the Mayor in touch with Municipal Affairs Minister Graham Bruce and Lands Minister Dave Parker

July 17, 1991 Brian Clark, B.C. Lands Wolfgang Richter Garibaldi Alpen was informed that the Minister’s letter of June 18, 1991 contained sufficient information regarding the concerns compiled from the Ministry review, including, but not limited to, the staff consultant’s analysis

July 30, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Dave Parker, Minister of Lands Acknowledgement that response will be forthcoming with respect to the Minister’s request of June 18, 1991, to provide additional information to substantiate the viability of the development as a ski resort

Aug. 26, 1991 Mayor Tobus District of Squamish

Wolfgang Richter Explained the nature of GARIBALDI’s evolving relationship with the giant Japanese resort conglomerate, Seibu

Sept. 8, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Project update

Sept. 10, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Advised that he is in contact with his staff and available to meet with them as soon as a review strategy is determined

Sept. 10, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Brian Clark, B.C. Lands Park access issue, confirmed that this terrain only represents 665 skiers (out of a total SAOT of 15,069)

Sept. 12, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Tom Bruusgaard, Squamish Alderman

Project update

Sept. 23, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Brian Clark, B.C. Lands Jack Johnson will be available for site insp. & meet 9/26/91

Table 8-1 Continued



Oct. 1, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Brian Clark, B.C. Lands B.C. Lands staff’s “.level of understanding of the site was significantly advanced” by being there with members of the GARIBALDI development team

Oct. 1, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Acknowledgement of inclusion re: Garibaldi on his agenda at a recent meeting with provincial representatives in Victoria.

Oct. 17, 1990 Dave Parker, Minister of Lands Wolfgang Richter Confirmation that based on supplementary material provided in support of the GARIBALDI proposal on September 5, 1991

Oct. 24, 1991 Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Council was to advise MLA John Reynolds and the appropriate Ministers that the District of Squamish supports the GARIBALDI proposal and that the District would like to explore the possibility of annexing the project area

Nov. 14, 1991 Wolfgang Richter John Cashore, Minister of Environment, Lands & Parks

Introduction to the plans for a four-season ski resort on Brohm Ridge

Nov. 14, 1991 Wolfgang Richter George Ford, Deputy Minister, Office of the Premier

Request for meeting with Mr. Ford and the Premier

Nov. 21, 1991 Wolfgang Richter John Cashore, Minister of Environment, Lands & Parks

Request for meeting to introduce the project to new Minister of Environment, Lands & Parks

Dec. 2, 1991 Squamish-Lillooet Regional District

Wolfgang Richter Invitation to present more information on the proposal at the Board’s December 12, 1991 meeting

Dec. 4, 1991 George Ford, Deputy Minister, Office of the Premier

Wolfgang Richter Indicated he understands Garibaldi is anxious to receive the new Government’s decision regarding the proposed mountain resort

Dec. 17, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Issues raised by the Ski Canada article

Dec. 18, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Nebbeling, Resort Municipality of Whistler

Table 8-1 Continued



Dec. 18, 1991 Wolfgang Richter Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Acknowledged the SLRD Board for the opportunity to appear before it on 11/25/91 and on 12/12/91

Jan. 10, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish Discussion of updates of issues and concerns

Feb. 12, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Dan Miller, Minister of Forests advised the Minister about the two plots of harvestable forest on the proposed development site

Feb. 12, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Dan Miller, Minister of Forests Requested consideration to hold back the logging of two cut blocks located near the main village area of the proposed GARIBALDI resort

Feb. 12, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Paul Kuster, District Manager of the Squamish Forest District

Request to be kept informed of developments and critical dates affecting the forest district’s decisions and actions regarding harvesting plans which would impact the proposed GARIBALDI site

Feb. 12, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Darlene Marzari, Minister of Tourism Informed the Minister of the productive conversations with Ministry officials and emphasis on providing tourism industry opportunities involving B. C. aboriginals

March 11, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Darlene Marzari, Minister of Tourism Provided supplemental information, including the issues of Park access, financing arrangements, market analysis and evolution as a “boutique” destination resort and cost estimates

March 19, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish Provided the District with a 120-page Chronology of Events outlining the 24-month review of Garibaldi ‘s Formal Proposal from March 1990 to March 1992

March 30, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Ray Warner Squamish Resident/Contractor

Project status update

March 31, 1992 Dan Miller, Minister of Forests Wolfgang Richter Concerns in correspondence dated Feb, 12, 1992 and Feb. 28, 1991 will be taken into consideration in due course

April 7, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Proposal review complete. Review results did not support providing approval to proceed to the Master Plan Stage.

Table 8-2 Correspondence, Transition Period April 1992 – August 1994


April 8, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Discussion regarding the possibility of the District of Squamish annexing the proposed GARIBALDI development site and request to meet with Council in the near future/earliest opportunity

May 11, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Dan Miller, Minister of Forests Computability of the project with the region’s forest management and harvesting plans

May 11, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Paul Kuster, District Manager of the Squamish Forest District

Stated that Garibaldi ‘s objective is to design and develop the GARIBALDI resort as a living example of sustainable development and as an “outdoor classroom” and to also become an educational tool demonstrating positive forest management practices and how they can be made to be compatible with ski resort development and operations

June 12, 1992 MLA David Mitchell Wolfgang Richter Attached were the Hansard notes of the exchange between Mitchell and John Cashore, Minister of Environment, Lands & Parks.

June 17, 1992 Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Wolfgang Richter Motion adopted by Council at its June 16, 992 meeting to support Garibaldi development proposal to the Province

July 9, 1992 Wolfgang Richter The Squamish Mayor and Council Planning as a four-season resort to make it economically viable and that the community should obtain the land and then jointly develop the site with Garibaldi providing the indemnification guarantees against any risk to the community with bonding

July 21, 1992 Trudy Coates, Deputy Clerk,District of Squamish

Wolfgang Richter Squamish Council motion resolving that the District request Garibaldi to proceed with a cost-benefit analysis to determine the cost benefit to the District of annexing the Brohm Ridge area and that the municipality approve the terms of reference and the consultant

Table 8-2 Continued

Correspondence, Transition Period April 1992 –August 1994


July 30, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Trudy Coates, Deputy Clerk District of Squamish

Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Deputy Clerk, Trudy Coates, regarding the opportunity to proceed with a jointly funded cost/benefits analysis of Brohm Ridge annexation

August 11, 1992 District of Squamish Wolfgang Richter Confirmation that Squamish Council at it’s August 11, 1992 meeting received a report from Bob Miles, District Clerk-Administrator, providing suggestions for proceeding with a cost-benefit analysis. Council supported Mr. Miles’ comments and passed a Motion to that effect.

Aug. 14, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Proposed logging in the Brohm Ridge area may “not have significant impact on future ski area development in the Brohm Ridge area” it certainly has a major impact on the future ski resort development because the timber stand extends through the middle of the proposed resort village

Aug. 24, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Paul Kuster, District Manager of the Squamish Forest District, has said that the timber sale is scheduled to proceed on September 3, 1992

Sept. 3, 1992 The Jack Johnson Company Mayor Tobus, District of Squamsih

Clear cutting of the proposed cut block on Brohm Ridge can be stopped for the foreseeable future

Oct. 6, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Wilson Parasiuk, B.C. Trade Development Corporation

Provided an update of the B.C. Lands 25-month review process and subsequent rejection of the Garibaldi proposal

Oct. 16, 1992 Wolfgang Richter Mike Harcourt, Premier Overview of the benefits of the proposed GARIBALDI resort

Feb. 18, 1993 Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Economic Dev., Small Business and Trade

Wolfgang Richter Assistant Deputy Minister, Chris Nelson, responded to previous correspondence from Wolfgang Richter providing suggestions that might enable Mr. Richter to proceed to the next level of more detailed planning and approvals

Feb. 22, 1993 Wolfgang Richter MLA David Mitchell Update of the possibility of the British Columbia Investment Office working with Garibaldi on its proposal

Table 8-2 Continued

Correspondence, Transition Period April 1992 - August 1994


March 19, 1993 Wolfgang Richter MLA David Mitchell Update of the status of the partially cut Brohm Ridge old-growth timber sale, which was delayed because of snow

March 29, 1993 Lorne Sivertson, Assistant Deputy Minister, British Columbia Investment Office

Wolfgang Richter GARIBALDI resort proposal has been referred to the British Columbia Investment Office

May 4, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Lorne Sivertson, Assistant Deputy Minister, British Columbia Investment Office

Acknowledged his initiative to solicit the cooperation of Gerry Armstrong, newly appointed Deputy Minister of B.C. Lands

May 4, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Tobus, District of Squamish

Copies of the internal correspondence from Lorne Sivertson to Deputy Lands Minister Gerry Armstrong

May 11, 1993 Wolfgang Richter M.L.A. David Mitchell Updated MLA David Mitchell on the pending review of the GARIBALDI project by the British Columbia Investment Office Advisory Board

May 12, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Lorne Sivertson, Assistant Deputy Minister, British Columbia Investment Office

Acknowledged receipt of Mr. Sivertson’s April 7, 1993 correspondence confirming that the British Columbia Investment Office will be reviewing the Garibaldi project

May 14, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Bob Miles, District of Squamish Administrator

Memorandum to the Advisory Committee of the Squamish Tourism Development Strategy Initiative which provided an overview of the proposed GARIBALDI development to inform committee members prior to scheduled presentation on May 27, 1993

May 14, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Dennis Hansen , Tanac Canada Development Corporation

Indication that the Furry Creek Golf Course will be very compatible with the proposed GARIBALDI resort

May 14, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Chief Philip Joe, Land Administrator

Squamish Nation

Correspondence thanked Chief Philip Joe for introducing, his colleague, Chief Joe Mathias during a recent meeting held in January with Garibaldi

May 17, 1993 MLA David Mitchell Wolfgang Richter Update on matters concerning the Ski Area Safety Act

Table 8-2 Continued

Correspondence, Transition Period April 1992 – August 1994


July 4, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Chief Philip Joe, Land Administrator

Squamish Nation

Update of the project with current goals and objectives

July 22, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Mr. Lorne Sivertson, Assistant Deputy Minister, British Columbia Investment Office

Confirmed Garibaldi disappointment in the British Columbia Investment Office’s decision not to forward Garibaldi ski resort development in its Board’s selection of new investment proposals

Oct. 4, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Art Plant, Squamish; Frank Baumann, Squamish; Perry Beckham, Squamish; Owen Carney, Squamish; Peter Gordon, Squamish

Invitation to attend a public open house at Brackendale Art Gallery hosted by GARIBALDI and the Squamish Tourism Development Committee

Oct. 9, 1993 Wolfgang Richter Paul Kuster, District Forest Office Request that the development of a Local Resource Use Plan take into account the proposed GARIBALDI project.

Aug. 26, 1994 Wolfgang Richter Michael Blomfield, President of the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club

Garibaldi is exploring the possibility of considering integrating snowmobiling with the GARIBALDI resort development, possibly by working in partnership with a major corporate sponsor.

Table 8-3 Correspondence, Present Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1994-Present


Sept. 15, 1994 David Jay Flood, President of Garibaldi

Chief Philip Joe, Land Administrator Squamish Nation

Enclosed Memorandum of Understanding regarding the potential participation of the Squamish Nation in a new Garibaldi submittal to the B.C. Investment Office requesting the right to develop a four-season resort near the District of Squamish

Feb. 1995 Wolfgang Richter Dick Roberts, B.C. Lands Garibaldi submits Expression of Interest outlining the following: list/substance, info. topics covered by Preliminary Expression of Interest

May 19, 1995 Wolfgang Richter Mayor Lonsdale, District of Squamish

New Tourism Act and Mountain Resort Association Act, which could help implement the Squamish Tourism Development Plan as well as furthering the past considerations of annexing the Brohm Ridge/GARIBALDI development site as a special zone inside the District of Squamish’s municipal boundaries

Aug. 1995 Wolfgang Richter Dick Roberts, BC Lands Submission to Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, in response to a new public proposal call to develop a ski resort on Brohm Ridge

Nov. 23, 1995 Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks

Wolfgang Richter Confirmation of meeting between Garibaldi and the Brohm Ridge Steering to discuss a number of concerns regarding the detail and content to be addressed in the Formal Proposals for the potential resort development of Brohm Ridge

April 1996 Wolfgang Richter Dick Roberts, BC Lands Submitted Formal Proposal

February 1997 Ministry of Environment and Parks

Wolfgang Richter Interim Agreement Approved and Signed

Table 8-4 Meetings, Prior Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1978-1992

Meeting Date Meeting With General Topic

1978 Mr. Halvorson, Harnor Logging Initial Community Liaison & Existing Land Use

June 1981 Cabinet Committee on Economic Development Meeting with Provincial Cabinet Committee on Economic Development

June 1986 Bob Flytton, Deputy Minister, B.C. Lands To explore further development

Feb. 1987 B.C Lands Licence Agreement

Dr. Laverne Kindree, Squamish & Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce Consultation regarding concept for a new ski resort on Brohm Ridge

1988 Squamish Nation Communication regarding GARIBALDI at Squamish

1988 Tom Bruusgaard, SLRD Economic Development Representative Introduction and consultation

May 14, 1990 Interagency/Interministerial Review Committee Provide the Garibaldi development team an opportunity to present the project directly to the review committee

May 15, 1990 District of Squamish Council Presentation about the proposed development

Nov. 7, 1990 Dave Parker, Minister of Lands and Deputy Minister Ed Macgreggor To discuss progress with the review of the March 1990 formal proposal

Nov. 14, 1990 Jack Hall, Dick Roberts and Brian Clark of B.C. Lands Regional Staff and Inter-Agency Review Committee Member George McKay, Manager of Ski Resort Development, Ministry of Tourism

B.C. Lands staff listed areas of concern which the proponents should address with additional information, including the mountain carrying capacity, base area development, real estate product, the destination calibre of the resort and project viability. B.C. Lands staff also revealed the existence of certain ski area development “guidelines” alternately described as part of the “ski policy” and as an internal Ministry document

Jan. 24, 1991 Cabinet Committee for Sustainable Development Members of the CCSD were also provided with a summary of the history of the project, the formal proposal and the Expanded Recreation Area Plan submitted in November 1990.

April 8, 1991 Paul Kuster, Ministry of Forests in Squamish To discuss the short and long-term Ministry of Forests harvesting plans pertaining to the proposed GARIBALDI development site

May 14, 1991 District of Squamish Council District of Squamish Council, in a unanimous decision, moved that the District of Squamish supports the GARIBALDI project and would like to explore the annexing of the proposed resort into the District’s municipal boundaries

Table 8-4 Continued

Meetings, Prior Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1978-1992


June 14, 1991 Squamish Downtown Revitalization Group and Whistler Mayor Ted Nebbeling

Opening ceremony of the newly revitalized downtown core and the beautification along Cleveland Avenue. Mayor Ted Nebbeling expressed his understanding and support for GARIBALDI’s objective of adding product variety to the region’s “cluster” tourism infrastructure, ultimately creating a “resort region” in the Sea to Sky Corridor

June 18, 1991 Meeting #2 with Lands Minister Dave Parker MLA John Reynolds arranges a meeting with B.C. Lands Minister Parker. In attendance are Deputy Minister Ed Macgreggor, Vancouver-Howe Sound MLA John Reynolds and Wolfgang Richter of Garibaldi in which Minister Parker hand-delivered correspondence from the Cabinet Committee of Sustainable Development, as well as his own correspondence, dated June 18, 1991

Aug. 15, 1991 Site Visit: Mayor Tobus District of Sqamish Mishio Kobayashi

Wolfgang Richter toured the GARIBALDI site with Squamish Mayor Egon Tobus and Michio Kobyashi, Senior Manager, North America for Seibu/Prince Hotels of Tokyo

August 1991 Intrawest Development Corp. Met at Whistler with Joe Houssein, President, CEO and Chairman of Intrawest Development Corp.

Sept. 5, 1991 Meeting #3 with Dave Parker, Minister of Lands In attendance were Lands Minister Dave Parker, Deputy Minister Ed Macgreggor, MLA John Reynolds and Garibaldi team members Jay Flood, Wolfgang Richter and Jack Johnson. Jack Johnson reviewed the physical terrain analysis and highlighted the important aspects of the additional information presented, including the new mapping requested

Sept. 26, 1991 Joint Site Inspection with B.C. Lands Staff The government was represented by Brian Clark, Don van der Horst, Tom Hamilton and Brent Harley.

Nov. 25, 1991 Presentation, Squamish Lillooet Regional District Board

Presentation by Wolfgang Richter to the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District provided a progress report of the GARIBALDI project

Nov. 27, 1991 Mayor Nebbeling, Resort Municipality of Whistler Updated the Mayor on the project and solicited his ongoing support. Mayor Nebbeling expressed that support with two caveats: that quality is maintained in resort development in the Sea to Sky Corridor and that the GARIBALDI development proved to be economically viable and would not affect the District of Squamish in any adverse way

Table 8-5 Meetings, Transition Period 1991 - 1995


1992 Squamish/Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce Presentation by Wolfgang Richter

July 1992 District of Squamish Council Presentation by Wolfgang Richter and Garibaldi team members to Squamish Council regarding Brohm Ridge annexation issue

1992 Public Consultation Squamish/Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce

Presentation by Wolfgang Richter to the Board of the Squamish/Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce

July/Dec. 1992 Garibaldi Alpen involvement with Squamish Tourism Advisory Committee

Committee meetings. July and Fall re: Tourism Plan. CTAP/CPAC?

Jan. 20, 1993 Garibaldi Alpen participates in Squamish Tourism Workshop

Wolfgang Richter participated in the Squamish Community Tourism Workshop

Jan. 26, 1993 Presentation, District of Squamish Council Wolfgang Richter made a presentation to the District of Squamish Council at its regular meeting requesting the possible formation of the Squamish/Garibaldi Citizens Advisory Committee

Feb/May 1993 Presentation, District of Squamish Bob Miles – proposal/overview made to ??????

May 27, 1993 Presentation to Squamish Citizen’s Tourism Advisory Committee

Wolfgang Richter was invited to make a project overview presentation to the Squamish Citizens Tourism Advisory Committee

Oct.5, 1993 Garibaldi Alpen holds Public Open House Open House at Brackendale Art Gallery, hosted jointly by Garibaldi and the Squamish Citizens Tourism Advisory Committee. The Garibaldi presentation was made by David Jay Flood and Jack Johnson. The meeting was chaired by Paul Pryce.

Oct. 9, 1993 Garibaldi Alpen leads community field trip to Brohm Ridge

John French, Mountain FM News Director; Dennis Hansen, Blackcomb Mountain former Marketing Director; and Mike Blomfield of the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club

Aug. 31, 1994 District of Squamish Economic Development Committee

Met In Camera, with the Economic Development Committee of the District of Squamish regarding developing a strategy to get the GARIBALDI project going again

Table 8-6 Meetings, Present Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1995-Present


September 1995 B.C. Lands holds Public Open House in Squamish regarding Brohm Ridge proposals

Public meeting in Squamish, three proponents

May 1996 Garibaldi /CASP Oral Presentation to Steering Committee Oral Presentation to steering committee

September 1996 Brohm Ridge Tours of development areas Janice Scott, Squamish

Chris Runnals, Squamish

Ken Strang, Whistler

Lynn Wilbur, Squamish

Dawn and Ted Prior, Squamish

Adam Mussolum, Squamish

Dave Haywood, Squamish

Ross and Anne Keeler, Squamish

Doug Fenton, Squamish

Scott Spooner, Squamish

Frances and Lloyd Solar, Squamish

Ole Hansen, Squamish

Joel Pettit, Squamish

Dawn Wright, Squamish

Curly Crosson, Squamish

Barry Groundwater, Squamish

Keith Windross, Vancouver.

Mr. And Mrs. Schmidt, Squamish

Mr. And Mrs. Fenn, Squamish

Mr. And Mrs. Shard, Squamish

Table 8-6 Continued

Meetings, Present Submission To BC Lands Under (CASP) from 1995-Present


September 1996 Brohm Ridge Tours of development areas Kibyoshi Matsu Zaki

Mr. & Mrs. Doehner Morel, N.J.

Ingel Smith, Price Waterhouse

Bill Hayes

Al Waisman, Architectura

Ranny Parker, UBC Realty

Mark Bitterage, UBC Realty

David Cressman, Whitney Cressman

Dieter Mahr, VKG, Germany

Fritz Bohm

Baumstark

Walter, Umberto’s

Werner, Vancouver

Various members of the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club.

Nov. 29, 1996 Garibaldi Public Consultation re: Squamish Forest District

Garibaldi met with Julian Grzybowski of the Squamish Forest District to explore the various options of logging a cut block in an area proposed for ski run development

Dec. 1996 Garibaldi meets with Area Residents Timberpeg representative Kelvin Mooney, Tom and Linda Wilkinson AND

Ray Warner

Dec.96/Jan.97 Garibaldi meets with Squamish Forest District Further meetings with Julian Grzybowski of the Squamish Forest District were held to further refine options for logging of a cut block and to explore possibility of adding to the existing logging road in order to be able to conduct selective logging (as an alternative to clear cutting) in an area proposed for ski run development

Feb. 1997 Garibaldi meets with Squamish Residents Tom and Linda Wilkinson offered to volunteer their services in any way possible

Information on liquid and solid waste management is included in Section 2 .

(2) Garibaldi Park

New access into the park from the proposed development and potential impacts the additional visitors may have on the flora and fauna of the park. Perceived visual impacts to existing park users, particularly from the Neve. Potential impacts to summer recreation users accessing the Park from the Culliton Creek logging road.

Based on advice from representatives of Garibaldi Provincial Park, no new access will be created as a result of the proposed resort development. In addition, due to a physical obstruction called the “Sharkfin” which is located between the upper elevations of the resort development on Brohm Ridge and the park, only experienced hikers could traverse this route into the park.

Portions of the proposed resort development will be visible form the Neve. In order to minimize this visual impact, the architectural design theme of the resort is for low-rise buildings which will in most cases not be any higher than the surrounding trees and will conform to the natural contours of the resort area.

There are no plans to change the existing access into Garibaldi Provincial Park from the Culliton Creek logging road. However, based on a preliminary reconnaissance of this road, access is severely restricted due to a dense growth of alders.

Information on Garibaldi Provincial Park is included in Section 3 .

(3) Environmental Impacts

Potential impacts to important fisheries in the lower Brohm River and Cheakamus River system due to changes in flow regimes. Potential impacts to bear populations through bear/human conflicts, to mountain goat movement patterns from project facilities/human disturbance and direct loss of wildlife habitat from the development facilities/footprint. Water management andflooding concerns related to increases in stormwater flows and changes in flow patterns (timing, quantity or quality) for streamsdraining the development site.

Detailed fish habitat and populations studies has resulted in no fish captured in upper Culliton, Swift, Brohm and Cheekye.

Stormwater management plans will be developed for construction and operation of the resort during the Master Planning Stage to ensure that post development flows are similar to pre-development flows.

In addition, instream flow studies are presently underway in Brohm River to ensure that any withdrawal of surface waters for fire or snow making will not impact downstream fish populations or habitat.

Wildlife management plans are presently being developed to ensure that garbage containers and temporary solid waste storage facilities will not attract bears. Biophysical habitat mapping presently being completed will ensure that important habitat for wildlife will not be significantly impacted.

During the winter of 1996/1997 detailed aerial surveys of mountain goat winter ranges near the proposed resort development were undertaken by the Ministry of Forests, Garibaldi Provincial Park and the proponent. The results of these studies showed that mountain goat winter range exists in the upper Cheekye drainage across from Pod G, and in the upper Culliton Creek across the drainage from Pod H. This information has been mapped to ensure that critical winter habitat is not impacted from the resort development facilities.

Further information on fish and wildlife resource information, potential impacts, and proposed mitigation measures and management plans is included in Sections 3 , 4 and 11 . Future and on-going studies are outlined in Section12 .

(4) Water Supply

Potential impacts to important fish resources of Brohm River in association with surface water withdrawals for domestic use, snowmaking and fire protection.

The preferred option for domestic, fire protection and snow making water supply is from development of on-site groundwater wells.

Should development of groundwater resources not provide sufficient volumes of water required for all or part of the daily water requirements of the resort development, an alternative will be to develop surface water supplies. Based on a preliminary analysis of potential surface water supply, it appears that the upper branch of Culliton Creek at elevation 1,200 meters (which is outside of the park boundary), could provide sufficient volumes of water for domestic, fire protection and snow making. Brohm River also appears to have sufficient flows immediately downstream of the proposed resort development (elevation 900 meters) to supplement Culliton Creek surface water withdrawals for fire protection and/or snow making requirements.

Prior to development of surface water supplies, the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks will be consulted to identify any restrictions on surface water withdrawals.

Further details on the potential for groundwater and surface water withdrawal is included in Section 2 .

(5) Native Issues

Potential impacts to the Squamish Nation, Mount Currie and Burrard bands traditional use areas such as reserves, spiritual grounds,

fishing, hunting and food gathering.

The development team has initiated discussions with the Squamish First Nation to identify any traditional use areas that could beimpacted from the proposed resort development. Should the project facilities create any potential infringement of aboriginal rights,measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects on these rights and on aboriginal communities will be identified.

The Mount Currie and Burrard Bands have been contacted in writing and asked to identify any issues or concerns associated with the proposed resort development.

Further information on Native Consultation is outlined in Section 9 .

(6) Forestry

Potential loss of jobs in the forest sector associated with reductions in the regional allowable cut from cutblocks that may no longerbe available to local forest companies within the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH study area.

The development team has been working with the local Ministry of Forests to continue to provide opportunities for local forest companies to proceed with cutting of timber supply license # A42733-C which is within the proposed resort development study area. Further details on forest management issues are detailed in Section 3 “Existing Conditions”.

(7) Highways

Potential impacts to traffic on Highway #99 due to increased traffic to and from the resort development and potential cost implications associated with the proposed new intersection at Highway 99 and design standards for the access road to the development site. Design standards would depend on whether the road is the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Highways or some other regional or local government. The latter would have less onerous design standards and costs.

In any event, the road will likely be classified as “non-essential” and the owner will be responsible for maintenance of the accessroad.

The development team will continue to meet with the local representatives of the Ministry of Transportation and Highways to determine the design standards for the access road and if necessary, the internal road network of the proposed resort development.

Terms of reference for a traffic study have already been received from the Ministry of Transportation and Highway by the proponent and are included in Section 12 for review and comment.

The proponent has agreed to construct the highway interchange at access road at no cost to the District of Squamish or Regional District.

Environmental Assessment Office Initiated Meetings

In November, 1996 the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team met with Sheila Wynn, Ray Crook and Martyn Glassman of the

Environmental Assessment Office to introduce the proposed resort development concept and to acquire direction for approaching First Nations.

In December 1996 in Victoria, and again in May 1997 in Squamish, the Environmental Assessment Office convened “Pre-Application Meetings” with the proponent and representatives from local, provincial and federal government agencies. The intent ofthe meetings were to introduce the proposed resort development to the agencies and to comprise a preliminary list of issues and concerns.

In addition, during the second meeting held in Squamish, Mr. D. Johns outlined a series of potential timelines for review of theproject under the Environmental Assessment Act process. These timelines suggested a minimum of 6 months or review if approval is received after Stage 1, or a range of 18-20 months if a Stage 2 review is required . The timing of the Stage 2 review assumes that the Project Report is prepared in 3-6 months after receiving the final Project Report specifications.

The additional government agencies to those mentioned above in the ‘Proponent Initiated Meetings” which attended the “Environmental Assessment Office Initiated Meetings” included:

● Environment Canada

- Canadian Wildlife Service, North Vancouver

- Canadian Environmental Assessment Office, Vancouver

● Environmental Assessment Branch, Victoria● Ministry of Health

- Environmental Health Assessment and Safety Branch, Victoria

● Ministry of Municipal Affairs

- Planning Branch, Victoria

Based on the two meetings, the following additional concerns and issues were identified:

(1) Health

Potential risks to construction and operations workers if suitable safety and emergency facilities (medical, emergency evacuation,potable water and sanitary sewer facilities) are not available on site.

The development team recognizes the importance of safety and emergency facilities during the construction and operation of the proposed resort development.

In recognition of the potential health and safety risks, the base area has been designed to include a diagnostic treatment center,emergency treatment and evacuation facilities. In addition, during construction activities, camp facilities will follow standardworkers compensation requirements for ambulance services. Section 2 “Operational Safety Management ” provides further details on health and safety.

(2) Municipal Jurisdictions

Potential implications on municipal taxes and services depending on the governance of the village and residential components.

Section 10 “Approvals and Governance ” discusses the options for governance and supply of public services to the proposed resort development. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has stated that a cost/benefit analysis should be conducted prior to determining if the district of Squamish should consider annexing of the proposed resort development into its’ boundaries.

Section 7 “Socio-Economic Impact Analysis ” provides some insight as to the socio-economic costs and benefits associated with the proposed resort development. Part of that assessment discusses preliminary tax implications to the District of Squamish.

(3) Public Issues

Potential impacts to existing snowmobile users associated with the lodges and snowmobile terrain near Brohm Ridge. Potential impacts to views from the Squamish townsite and Highway #99. Potential impacts to the “Quality of Life” from the changes that theproposed development may bring.

The Black Tusk Snowmobile Club has a License of Occupation #233918 dated January 10, 1988 (BC Lands File No. 0283039) within the southern portion of the study area. The proposed resort development and the use of snowmobiles in the ski and snowboard areas are likely not compatible uses.

Presently, ways to mitigate the potential loss of snowmobile areas on Brohm Ridge for the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club are being investigated by the provincial government. One of these options is to re-locate the Club’s facilities to another location outside of the resort project area.

Section 3 discusses the potential visual impacts from the proposed resort development. The assessment uses Ministry of Forests Visual Quality Objectives to determine the potential and degree of visual impacts. Portions of the proposed development and access road would be visible from selected locations along Highway #99 and from upper elevations in Garibaldi Provincial Park.

Architectural design of the base village area and mountain facilities will viewscapes into the final design of structures and facilities. Buildings will be low rise (less than 4 stories high) and conform to the natural topography.

8.1.4.2 Non-Government Stakeholder Group Issues/Concerns and Proponent Responses

In addition to the government meetings and identification of government issues/concerns, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team has expended significant effort to identify non-government stakeholder group issues and concerns.

This effort was initiated in 1978 in a site meeting with Mr. Halverson of Harnor logging and has continued through to the presentday with formal and informal meetings, site tours, brochure and newsletter information dissemination and invited stakeholder presentations and event participation.

Some of the issues identified to date from non-government stakeholder groups and the proponent responses ( bolded ) to these

issues are noted below:

Base Area Infrastructure and Mountain Facilities

● How will the project dispose of solid waste and is there sufficient water for the resort● Who will be responsible for snow removal in the resort and along the access road● Who will provide fire protection● Will there be a helicopter pad on site● Is there sufficient quantity and quality of snow for the resort development● How will the resort treat sewage and do you need to use Squamish’s sewage treatment facilities● What kind of employee housing will be provided● What is the skier capacity of the mountain● What is the average number of days of precipitation and fog in the resort area● Will there be underground parking like Whistler and will there be a conference center● Will the development be more family oriented than Whistler● The maintenance facility should be at the top of the mountain to minimize the time spent travelling up and down the

mountain by maintenance crews during shift changes. This is a safety issue as well as an economic one which relates to equipment costs of additional ware and tear

● Will the development have mountain bicycle and hiking trails

Section 2 “Project Description ” addresses issues related to liquid and solid waste management, water supply, helicopter base facilities, base area facilities including employee housing, parking and maintenance buildings and mountain facilities including skier capacity and trail development.

Section 10 “Approvals and Governance ” discuss cost implications for snow removal and fire protection.

Climate information is provided in Section 3 “Existing Conditions ”.

Economic

● How do we know that the proponent won’t go broke before the resort is completed, after all look what happened to the previous ski development up there

● Will there be commercial business opportunities in the village site● Will the proponent hire the workforce, and acquire materials and supplies locally● What will be the cost of a single family home● How many jobs will be created● Does the proponent have all of the financing in place● What’s in it for the locals and will they get a price break on lift tickets● How much will lift tickets be● Will the development increase taxes in Squamish

Section 5 and Section 6 “Market Analysis and Financial Analysis” provides information on cash flow projections, and break even analysis associated with the economic viability of the proposed resort development. Lift prices and the cost of single family homes are outlined in this section.

Based on detailed economic forecasts, the resort will be in a positive cash flow during year 7.

Information on business opportunities, workforce hiring and materials purchase are outlined in Section 6 and above in this section.

Land Use

● Will the development impact Garibaldi Park● Will there be additional hikers accessing the park from the development● What compensation will there be for the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club● Are there any plans to re-locate the snowmobile club amenities

Potential impacts to recreation and other land users is outlined in Section 4 “Potential Impacts & Proposed Mitigation Strategies ”.

None of the proposed resort development facilities are within Garibaldi Provincial Park. Although experienced hikers could access the park from the proposed development project, the development team is not planning to develop any new trails into the park. Trail development within the proposed development area will be designed for hikers and mountain bikers and will be strictly controlled.

The potential impacts to and the potential for re-locating the Black Tusk Snowmobile Club is discussed above under government stakeholder issues.

Governance

● Will Squamish have jurisdiction over the development● Why would you want to be annexed into Squamish when they have been so restrictive related to expansion plans in the town● What are the benefits of annexing the project into Squamish’s boundaries

Section 10 “Approvals and Governance ” outlines the various options available to the proposed resort development regarding governance and provision of public services. The preferred option for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the proponent is to be annexed into the District of Squamish. However, prior to finalizing the annexation option, the District of Squamish has requested that a cost/benefit analysis be conducted.

Environmental

● Are there any wolverines in the resort area● How will the project affect migratory habitats of wildlife● Are there any endangered wildlife in the resort area

● Won’t the additional people on the mountain destroy alpine vegetation on Brohm Ridge● What will be done to maintain tree coverage on the site● What are the impacts to fish populations downstream of the site.

Information on environmental resources is outlined in Section 3 “Existing Conditions ”, while potential impacts of the resort development on the fish and wildlife resources of the area are discussed in Section 4 “Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures ”. Environmental management plans are outlined in Section 11 .

Wolverine have not been observed during any of the detailed wildlife surveys conducted to date, however, wide ranging carnivores such as wolverine and cougar likely include parts of the study area within their home ranges but would occur on an infrequent basis.

There are a total of four species of wildlife that are on the provincial red list which are those species considered as candidates for endangered species status. Those four species include Keen’s long eared myotis, marbled murrelet, spotted owl and Peregrine falcon. However, all of these species have a low probability of occurrence in the project study area and none were observed during the detailed wildlife studies conducted during late 1996 and 1997.

There are no impacts anticipated to fish populations within the study area as no fish have been observed or captured during the detailed fish habitat and population surveys conducted in the upper watersheds of the streams draining the study area.

Different silviculture methods will be used for trail development while residential development will minimize tree removal wherever possible by encouraging low density development and retention of trees. Vegetation management plans related to site development are outlined in Section 11 .

Traffic and Road

● What will be the effects of increased traffic on Highway #99● Who pays for the road to the resort

The proponent has stated in Sections 6 that the road will be privately financed and is included in the capital costs outlined in Section 6 .

The increase in vehicles on Highway #99 as a result of the proposed resort development will be assessed in a traffic study of which the Ministry of Transportation and Highways has provided terms of reference for in Section 12, “Future and On-going Studies ”.

During the course of receiving these comments from non-government stakeholder groups, an attempt was made to answer as many of the questions as possible. Some of the responses to the questions from the stakeholder groups were provided in writing at a laterdate.

8.2 Regulatory Requirements

The Environmental Assessment Act provides specific direction and responsibilities for the proponent and Environmental Assessment Office regarding public notification and comment during the environmental assessment review (Table 8-8). Directives will be used in the design of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH public consultation program.

8.2.2 Public Review Period

After the acceptance of the Project Application for review, it is expected that the Environmental Assessment Office, in consultation with GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, will schedule a public consultation period. Based on the complexity of the project, the scope of perceived effects and other factors, the public consultation period will likely be set for a 75 day time period.This public review period commences at least seven days after public notification is advertised.

Environmental Assessment Act .

The Environmental Assessment Office will place the application in the Public Registry to encourage comment.

Table 8-8 Public Notification Requirements

Notice Type Proponent Responsibility EA Office Responsibility

Notice of an Application Notice to be advertised as required by the EA Office as soon as practicable (e.g. a week) after submission of copies of the application. Further notification requirements may be prescribed.

Letter of notice to be sent to parties on distribution list and placed on the Project Registry within seven days after receipt of copies of the application.

Notice of an Amendment to an Application

As required by the Executive Director.

Place on the Project Registry within seven days :

● any request by the proponent to amend the application, and

● the decision made in response to the request.

Notice of Draft Project Report Specifications

Notice to be advertised, letter of notice to be sent to parties on distribution list, and notice to be placed on the Project Registry within seven days after issuing the draft project report specifications.

Notice of a Project Report Notice to be advertised as required by the EA Office as soon as practicable (e.g., a week) after submission of copies of the project report. Further notification requirements may be prescribed.

Notice to be placed on the Project Registry withinseven days after receipt of copies of the project report.

Notice of Draft terms of Reference for Public Hearing

Notice to be placed on the Project Registry and advertised.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will initiate notification procedures based on the guidance provided by the Environmental Assessment Office. The area in which the project is located and/or which will be affected by the project will be targeted throughnewspaper advertisements. The notification program will include details on the locations of the Public Registry, and the deadlineand coordinates for receipt of public comments concerning the Application. In addition to the media advertisements, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will post notices in public buildings and facilities within the nearby communities, and send letters to stakeholdersand special interest groups detailing information about the Application and the process for submitting comments.

8.2.3 Regional Repositories

The Environmental Assessment Office’s Project Registry works closely with provincial public libraries to ensure that residents in the vicinity of a proposed development have access to important project information.

Libraries in the vicinity of the proposed resort development will be contacted directly by representatives of the Project Registry .Copies of the Project Application, minutes of the Project Committee meetings and other relevant materials will be forward by theEnvironmental Assessment Office to these regional libraries.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will ensure that sufficient copies of the Project Application are submitted to the Environmental Assessment Office for distribution to regional libraries. The location of these libraries will also be identified by GARIBALDI ATSQUAMISH in all newspaper advertisements, as per the public notice requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act.

8.3 Public Consultation Program Elements

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will continue to consult with key regulatory agencies, stakeholder groups and First Nations representatives during this public review period. This exchange and collection of information and the identification of issues willaid the Project Committee in evaluation of public comment related to the Application. During this stage, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will maintain documentation of relevant consultation, and at the completion of the public review period will consolidate comments in a public consultation report for submission to the Project Committee.

8.3.1 Goals and Objectives

As is evident from the public involvement in the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project thus far,GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to effective local public consultation regarding the proposed resort development.

The following goals and objectives will continue to serve as a framework for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH public information and consultation program:

● To provide notification and information to the public● To ensure that interested or affected members of the public have a meaningful opportunity to learn about and comment on

the proposed resort development● To seek input and resolution of concerns from stakeholder groups regarding the Project Application● To ensure that input from stakeholder groups is considered in the continued design and planning of the proposed resort

development● To respond accordingly to all public comments.

8.3.2 Roles and Responsibilities

● Janice Scott, VP Marketing & Public Relations, will have primary responsibility for the management of the External

Consultation and Stakeholder Consultation Program● Ron Enns, Communications and Field Coordination, will act as the Project Information Officer under the direction of the VP

Marketing and Public Relations. Ron will act as the “main contact point” within the project team for information requests pertaining to the project

● Direct consultation with the Squamish Nation will be carried out by Wolfgang Richter and the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Development Team.

Ms. Janice Scott and Mr. Ron Enns will work in close coordination with, and under the direction of, Mr. Wolfgang Richter in the following undertakings:

● Identify external contacts and coordinate external communications● Plan and schedule program activities (ie. meetings, open houses, special events)● Develop project information materials (ie. newsletters, ads and notices, news releases, information kits, brochures, etc.)● Develop and maintain a database and hard copy records which document the particulars of communications between project

personnel and interested groups and individuals● Participate, as required, in direct consultations, public meetings, open houses or special events.

The public consultation tools which will be used in the next stage of planning and review will include:

● Newsletters● Brochures● Open Houses● Invited Presentations to Stakeholder Groups● Site Tours● Local Project Office● Media Briefings● Internet Access

8.3.3 Public Communication Materials

Newsletters

Presently, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH publishes a quarterly newsletter which is circulated to persons on a mailing list, handed out at any public presentations or meetings and made available at the local GARIBALDI Squamish office.

The newsletters will continue to be published and circulated during this phase of planning and public input. The Environmental Assessment office will have an opportunity to review the newsletter and provide input for the next publication in January, 1998.

Information Brochure

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH presently has a company brochure that summarizes the proposed resort development including the history of the project, the master planning & public approvals, the economic impact and development philosophy. The brochure alsogives information on the development team and has an area which suggests contacting the local office of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to provide comments or request additional information. The mailing addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and Office are provided to facilitate oral and written inquiries.

The brochures will be made available to the public at all the public information sessions, and selected public libraries to serve as regional repositories. The brochures will also be available at GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH’s office in Squamish.

This brochure will also be modified to indicate that any formal written comments about the proposed development should be directed to the Chair of the Environmental Assessment Project Committee.

8.3.4 Open Houses

Open houses provide an excellent forum to convey exchange information with a larger group of people, allowing them to hear the views and concerns of others in their community.

Public Open Houses will be held throughout the region to encourage people to obtain information about the proposed resort development. These Open Houses will consist of a display presentation, complemented by hand-out materials and the presence of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH staff and representatives to answer any questions on a one-on-one basis. If required, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team will make a formal presentation to the public during the Open House in order to provide answer to questions and obtain feedback.

Representatives of the Environmental Assessment Office will also be requested to attend these public information sessions, be available to describe the Environmental Assessment process and answer process related questions.

It is proposed that these Open Houses be held at convenient locations (i.e. community halls or formal meeting places) in the following communities:

● Pemberton● Whistler● Squamish● West Vancouver (Lions Bay).

Dates, times and locations of all these public information sessions will be advertised in regional newspapers, and on cable televisionstations and community radio broadcasts. Public meetings are presently scheduled in January and February, 1998.

8.3.5 Invited Presentations to Stakeholder Groups

In consultation with the EA Office, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will contact stakeholder groups in the region to inform them about the proposed resort development.

Meetings for a discussion of potential effects of the project will be held as needed throughout the review period. Some of the interest groups which will be contacted are listed in Table 8-9 .

8.3.6 Site Tours

In the past, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has conducted site tours that over time developed into annual fall events. The site tours would typically begin with an informal meeting at a designated location in Squamish followed by a tour to the mountain. Mr. Wolfgang Richter would provide the commentary during the pre-tour meeting and on the mountain. The tours were advertised on the local radio station prior to the day of the event.

Although winter conditions may inhibit the ability to tour portions of the development site, site tours will be made available forinterested stakeholders, as requested.

8.3.7 Local Project Office

As of September 1, 1996, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH operates an office in Squamish. The public is invited to visit (drop-in) the office to acquire information about the project, ask questions or to provide comments.

The opportunity for project information to be obtained informally at the site office will be advertised in all public notices.

8.3.8 Media Briefings

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will establish and adhere to a schedule for media briefings to coincide with project milestones. This media exposure will include, but may not be limited to: press releases; local and provincial media interviews (press, television and radio); and feature articles in provincial, regional or local publications.

8.3.9 Internet

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is planning to establish a web site on the World Wide Web of the Internet. The web site will contain information relevant to the proposed development and will include the names, addresses and phone numbers of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and Environmental Assessment Office contacts for more information.

The Internet site should be available in December, 1997.

8.4 Public Consultation Reports

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will provide the Environmental Assessment Office with a summary report on the consultations undertaken during the public review period. Section 6 is a preliminary report on public consultation which will facilitate the EAOffice’s assessment “of adequacy of measures” taken or proposed relating to the distribution of information and consultation on theproject as outlined in Section 14(1) of the EA Act .

A summary report will be submitted on the public consultation program after the public consultation period. This report will summarize major issues raised by the public and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH response.

The summary report will be accessible to the public at the EA Office’s Project Registry libraries serving as regional repositories for the Project Application.

Table 8-9 Stakeholder Groups

LOCATION AND INTEREST GROUP LOCATION AND INTEREST GROUP

Squamish

● Black Tusk Snowmobile Club● Squamish Estuary Conservation Society● Brackendale Eagle Reserve Society● Squamish Rockclimbers Association● Squamish Off-Road Cycling Association● Test of Metal (mountain bike event)● Sea to Sky Kayak Club● Sea to Sky Kayaking School● Squamish Valley Rod and Gun Club● Rivers and Oceans Rafting● Sunwolf Outdoor Centre (rafting)● River Quest (rafting)● Pacific High Mountain Guides● Slipstream Guiding and Instruction● Squamish Trails Society● Squamish Rock Guides● Sea to Sky Trail Society● Glacier Air Tours● Squamish Snowmobile Inc.● Squamish Windsurfing Society

Resort Municipality of Whistler

● Resort Municipality of Whistler Chamber of Commerce● Alpine Club of Canada● Whistler Centre for Business & the Arts● Whistler Secondary School● Whistler Off-Road Cycling Association● Association of Whistler Area Residents for the

Environment (AWARE)● Whistler Angling Club● Whistler Air Services Ltd.● Wedge Rafting● Whistler Alpine Guides Bureau● Whistler River Adventures● Mountain Heli-Sports● Canadian Snowmobile Adventures● Extreme Whitewater Guide Service● The Whistler Outdoor Experience Co.● Blackcomb Snowmobiling Ltd.● Canadian Snowshoeing● West Coast Cat Skiing Enterprises● Whistler Snowmobile Guided Tours

● West Coast Railway Heritage Park● Squamish Days Loggers Sports Assoc.● Soo Coalition for Sustainable Forests● Squamish & Whistler Car Club● Brackendale Farmers Institute● Brackendale Art Gallery Society● B.C. Forestry Association (Evans Lake Forestry Camp)

● Tyax Heli-Skiing & Heli-Hiking● Whistler Backcountry Adventures● Whistler Air Services● Whistler Backroads Mountain Bike Adventures

Table 8-9 Continued

Stakeholder Groups

LOCATION AND INTEREST GROUP LOCATION AND INTEREST GROUP

● Squamish Yacht Club● Steve’s Fishin Out West● Sports Fishing With Neil McCutcheon● Squamish & Howe Sound Chamber of Commerce● Howe Sound Secondary School● Hotel/Motel Owners of Squamish● Blackcomb Helicopters (operates out of Squamish Airport)

Pemberton Helicopters (operates out of Squamish Airport)

Section 9 First Nations Consultation

9.1 Introduction

9.1.1 Aboriginal Rights

Since 1982, a number of court decisions have changed the relationship between the government and aboriginal peoples.

Based on the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Sparrow , the court recognized that the Musqueam aboriginal peoples have an unextinguished aboriginal right to fish for food for social and ceremonial purposes. These rights are “rights held by a collective … (which) are in keeping with the culture and existence of that group

The British Columbia Supreme Court decision in Delgamuukw , stated that the province has a fiduciary duty towards the Aboriginal people of BC not to arbitrarily or unduly interfere with aboriginal culture and subsistence activities on unoccupied Crown lands. The Chief justice indicated that in order for the Province to fulfill its fiduciary duty something more than public meetings and notification to the affected aboriginal groups concerning the proposed activities would be necessary.

As a result of the Delgamuukw decision and seven other decisions rendered at the same time in 1993, the following legal changes in constitutional aboriginal and treaty rights occurred (Source: Guide to the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Process ):

● Blanket extinguishment of aboriginal rights did not occur prior to 1871 or afterwards. Aboriginal rights continue to exist in British Columbia today.

● The aboriginal people in question have unextinguished non-exclusive aboriginal rights, other than right of ownership, or a property right, in an area of northern British Columbia specifically described by the court of Appeal.

● The aboriginal peoples’ claim to jurisdiction (self-government) was dismissed.● Aboriginal rights relate to those activities which are integral to the distinctive culture of an

aboriginal society. The may vary from context in accordance with distinct patterns of historical occupancy and use of land. The activity must have been in existence prior to 1846 and for a sufficient length of time to become integral to the aboriginal society.

● As of 1982, under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 First Nations rights are protected and hold a priority interest in the outcome of government decisions potentially affecting their constitutional aboriginal and treaty rights. The government may only justify activities which may infringe those aboriginal rights recognized and affirmed under section 35 by meeting the strict constitutional test established by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Sparrow .

9.1.2 Environmental Assessment Act

The Environmental Assessment Office which administers the Environmental Assessment Act , recognizes that First Nations will play a critical role in the decision-making process, and in this context uses the principles of recognition, cooperation and respect to achieve a goal of building more meaningful relationships with the province’s aboriginal people.

The Environmental Assessment Act provides for the implementation of these principles by:

● Invitations to First Nations to be members of the Project Committee if the proposed project is within or in the vicinity of their asserted traditional territory;

● Requirements for project proponents to undertake studies which identify aboriginal rights, any potential infringements of those rights created by the project, and the measures proposed to avoid or minimize adverse effects on such rights and on aboriginal communities;

● Requirements for proponents to notify and consult with first Nations if the proposed project is within or in the vicinity of their asserted traditional territory, and to report on the issues identified by aboriginal people and the proposed actions to address these issues.

In accordance with the provincial Environmental Assessment Act , under Part 2, Division 2-Sections 7(k) and (l), Division 5-Section 14 (3iii) and Section 23 (b), and Division 7 Section 22 (g), the proponent has initiated consultation with First Nations whose traditional territories could be impacted by the proposed resort development (Squamish Nation), or are within the general vicinity of the project (Mount Currie and Burrard Bands).

With a sincere respect for the culture and traditions of aboriginal peoples, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has had ongoing communication and initiated consultation with senior representatives of the Squamish Nation, whose traditional territory includes the area of the proposed ski resort.

In addition, the Mount Currie and Burrard Bands who have traditional territories within the general vicinity of the proposed resort development have been notified and been requested to identify any concerns they may have regarding the proposed development (see letters dated November 17, 1997 in Appendix 9).

Pending the outcome of future negotiations, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH hopes to not only develop job creation, employment and career development programs for aboriginal people, but to create opportunities for cultural bridges within the traditionally natural-resource-based community of Squamish now striving to diversify its economy to enhance recreation opportunities.

9.2 Land Claims

During 1990, the province of British Columbia created a BC Claims Task Force to deal with aboriginal

rights and self governance. As recommended by the Claims Task Force, a six stage treaty negotiation process was created and includes the following:

● Stage 1 -The Statement of Intent● Stage 2 -Preparation of Negotiations● Stage 3 -Negotiation of a Framework Agreement● Stage 4 -Negotiation of an Agreement in Principle● Stage 5 -Negotiation to Finalize a Treaty● Stage 6 -Implementation of the Treaty

The treaty negotiation process is voluntary and available to all First Nations. However, when a First Nations files a Statement of Intent with the Treaty Commission to enter into treaty negotiations, the Statement of Intent must show the boundaries of its’ traditional territory and identify if there are any other First Nations with overlapping or shared territories.

Statements of Intent to negotiate a land claim, the dates of acceptance of the Statements of Intent by the British Columbia Treaty Commission and the stage of negotiations that the First Nations are in with respect to the B.C. treaty process are as follows:

As outlined in Table 9-1 above, 6 Bands/Nations are claiming traditional lands within or near the proposed development. Of those six Bands, only the Squamish Nation have land claims that encompass the entire resort development area, while the Mount Currie and Burrard Bands have land claims less than 5 km to the north and south of the proposed development, respectively (Exhibit 9-1 ).

Table 9-1 First Nation’s Statement Of Intent To Negotiate A Land Claim And Stage In the B.C. Treaty Process

First Nation Date Statement

Of Intent Accepted

Stage in Treaty Process

(as of October 1996)

Squamish Nation

Musqueam Band

Tseil-waututh (Burrard Band)

Skookum Chuck Band

Sechelt Band

Katzie Band

December 16, 1993

December 16, 1993

February 18, 1994

December 16, 1993

July 15, 1994

February 18, 1994

Stage 3

Stage 3

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 4

Stage 2

The Sechelt, Skookum Chuck (In-shuck-Ch/N’Quatqua) and Musqueam Bands have land claims greater than 20 km from the proposed development site, while the Katzie Band is greater than 50 km southeast of the project.

9.3 Native Bands Within or Near the Proposed Resort Development

The following information concerning the First Nations was obtained through the Internet at the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs Worldwide Web Page located at Ahttp://www.aaf.gov.bc.ca/aaf/@ in the B.C. First Nations section, updated in May 1996.

A report entitled “Squamish Nation Cultural Awareness” was also used to provide information of the Squamish First Nation.

9.3.1 Squamish Nation

During consultation with the Squamish Nation in September 1997, a report entitled “Squamish Nation Cultural Awareness” was provided to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team (Appendix 9). This report provided background on the Squamish Nation in the following areas:

● Legacy of the Longhouse● Squamish Nation Profile● Squamish Nation Assertion of Aboriginal Title● Squamish & Tsleil Waututh Articles by Cheryl Coul● Squamish and Regional Area (Map)

Exhibit 9-1 First Nation Land Claims in the Vicinity of the Project Area

Excerpts from this report describing the Squamish Nation are provided below.

The Squamish Nation is comprised of Salish peoples who are descendants of the aboriginal peoples who lived in the present day Greater Vancouver area; Gibson’s Landing and Squamish River watershed. The Squamish have occupied and governed their territory since beyond recorded history.

The Band consists of 23 villages encompassing 6,732 km2 (2,848 hectares). These parcels of land which make up the Band are scattered from North Vancouver, Gibson’s Landing to the area north of Howe Sound. The Band population is scattered among nine communities stretching from North Vancouver to the northern area of Howe Sound (Exhibit 9-2). Membership is determined by marriage and birth right and membership rules are in place. Approximately 1,898 of the 2,844 members live on-reserve.

9.3.1.1 History

After contact with European settlers, 16 Squamish speaking tribes decided to amalgamate to form one unit called the Squamish Band. The amalgamation was signed on July 23, 1923 and was established to guarantee equality to all Squamish and to ensure good government.

The signatories to the amalgamation represented the following Bands:

Ustlawn I.R. #1 (Mission)

Ch’ch’Elxwikw I.R. #1 (Seymour)

Homulchsen I.R. #5 (Capilano)

Senakw I.R. #6

Skowishin I.R. #7

Poyam I.R. #9

Cheakamus I.R. #11

Yookwitz I.R. #12

Poquiosin I.R. #13

Waiwakum I.R. #14 (Brackendale)

Seaichem I.R. #16

Kowtain I.R. #17

Stawamus I.R. #24

Chekwelp I.R. #26

Sxaaltxw I.R. #27 (Shelter Island)

K’ik’elxen I.R. #28 (Port Mellon)

Exhibit 9-2 Reserves In The Squamish Regional Area

9.3.1.2 Community Services:

Community facilities include an administration centre located in North Vancouver, which houses all community programs including, operations, finance and administration, education, social and economic development, other facilities include a community hall, a library, a cultural centre, a resource centre; a traditional long house, a multi-purpose gymnasium, kindergarten school, and a learning centre.

9.3.1.3 Programs

Administration: Membership Services, Public Relations, Inter-governmental Relations

Finance: Accounting

Housing: Construction

Capital: Infrastructure

Education: Pre-school, Primary, Secondary, Post-Secondary, Squamish Language, Occupational Training and Adult Basic Education

Economic Development:

Social Development: Social Assistance, Elders Care, Child Care, Family Development

Recreation: Assistance in youth recreational activities (i.e., - Christmas, Easter, Summer and Halloween gatherings. Sports activities: soccer, lacrosse, softball, basketball, floor hockey and canoeing (war canoe races). Adult activities include arts and crafts, dancing, etc.

Fisheries: Enforce fishery management and protection for habitat.

Public Works: Full range of maintenance service.

Land Registry: Implementation of land registry system which suits community needs. Coordinate subdivision surveys. Register land holdings.

Membership: Implementation of membership registry under the adopted membership rules.

Taxation: -

9.3.1.4 Economic Activity

The main source of revenue for the Squamish Nation is derived from leases and Squamish owned business’ including marina, driving range and gas bar. Some of the Bands’ 70 leases include the Park Royal Shopping Centre, International Plaza, Greater Vancouver Sewage Plant, and Capilano Trailer Park.

9.3.1.5 Local Government

Under the mandate of the membership the Squamish Nation Council works to protect and enhance the quality of life for the membership. The Council administers many programs and services for the membership.

There are currently two hereditary chiefs of the Squamish Nation, Chief Joe Mathias and Chief Philip Joe. In total there are 14 Councillors serving under a customary 4-year election system, with the effective dates of December 5, 1993 through December 5, 1997.

Chief/s: Joe Mathias (Hereditary Chief)

Philip Joe (Hereditary Chief)

Bill Williams (Hereditary Chief: Chairman of Council)

Councillors: Byron Joseph (Co-Chairman of Council)

Alroy Baker

Donna Billy

Linda George

Gwen Harry

Gilbert Jacob

Tewanee Joseph

Dennis Joseph

Randall Lewis

Anthony Moody

Normal Natrall, Sr.

Frank Rivers

Ann Whonnock

Election System: Custom - 4 year term

Effective Date: December 5, 1993 - December 5, 1997

Band Manager: Glen Newman

Election: 2 year term

Effective Date: April 14, 1996 to April, 1998

9.3.1.6 Services

Fire protection for Squamish Nation members is provided by the City of North Vancouver, the City of West Vancouver, and the District of Squamish. Police protection comes from the RCMP detachments in North Vancouver and Squamish and the West Vancouver City Police Department. The Squamish Nation Peacekeepers work with the RCMP as well. Students from the Squamish Nation attend Native, Provincial and Private schools with the breakdown being 24, 370 and 65 students respectively.

Fire Protection: City of North Vancouver / West Vancouver / Squamish

Police Protection: RCMP - North Vancouver & Squamish / West Vancouver City Police

Postal Service: Post office boxes and some door-to-door service

Health/ Hospital in North Vancouver, Squamish, West Vancouver

Nursing Station: Health Representative available

Social Services: Self-administered social development program

Education: Bank / Provincial / Private Schools

Enrollment: 1,048 Students

Nursery: 25

Elementary: 261

Secondary: 177

Private: 76

Post-Secondary: 121

OST: 189

Off-Reserve: 199

Utilities

Hydro: B.C. Hydro

Telephone: B.C. Telephone

Communications: Cable available

The Squamish Nation has 350 dwellings located on reserve land. Water supply for the Band is from 10 wells, and city connection to North Vancouver and West Vancouver. Sewage disposal is from 23 septic tanks.

Water Supply: 10 wells, city connection to North Vancouver and West Vancouver

Sewage Disposal: 23 septic tanks, connection to North Vancouver and West Vancouver

Transportation: Accessible by 7 roads, both gravel and paved

Housing: 363 dwellings

North Shore 287

Squamish Valley76

9.3.1.7 Squamish Nation Traditional Territory

Squamish Nation traditional territory is located in the Lower Mainland region of British Columbia (Exhibit 9-1 and 9-3). Prior to and following the arrival of the Europeans in the later 1700’s, the lands and waters they used and occupied either exclusively, or jointly with Squamish Nation’s First Nation neighbours, were as follows:

● From Point Grey on the south to Roberts Creek on the west;● Then north along the height of land to the Elaho River headwaters including all of the islands in

Howe Sound and the entire Squamish Valley and Howe Sound drainages;● Then southeast to the confluence of the Soo and Green Rivers north from Whistler;● Then south along the height of land to the Port Moody area including the entire Mamquam River

and Indian Arm drainages;● Then west along the height of land to Point Grey.

This territory includes some of the present day cities of Vancouver, Burnaby and New Westminster, all of the cities of North Vancouver and West Vancouver, Port Moody and all of the District of Squamish and the Municipality of Whistler. These boundaries embrace all of Howe Sound, Burrard Inlet and English Bay as well as the rivers and creeks that flow into these bodies of water. In addition, Squamish Nation used and occupied the various islands located in Howe Sound.

Exhibit 9-3 Squamish Territories (First Nations’ Communities & Sites)

Squamish Nation’s historical links to these lands and waters are numerous. Squamish place names exist throughout the territory. In many instances, a location has particular meaning to the Squamish Nation people because of the existence of oral traditions that served to explain that place in the Squamish universe and in their relationships to the land. In addition, the land bears witness to the settlements, resource sites, spiritual and ritual places of Squamish Nation ancestors, including villages, hunting camps, cedar bark gathering areas, rock quarries, clam processing camps, pictographs and cemeteries. Some of these village sites date back 3000 years.

North On Highway 99 / Squamish Highway

Cha-high

Horseshoe Bay, site of the B.C. Ferries terminal, was a camping place for people traveling between present-day Squamish and Burrard Inlet.

Stawamus

At the head of Howe Sound, on Highway 99, 1 km south of the town of Squamish (pop. 14,284 / 160 AB). Here are a small community, satellite offices of Squamish Nation, and the Sta-wa-mus Native Cultural Centre, which may have some carvings and jewellery on display. Long ago, a giant serpent, of much cultural and historic significance to the Squamish peoples, slithered across Howe Sound, then left its track across the steep face of the rock known today as the Stawamus Chief. At 652 m, this is said to be the second largest piece of granite in the world, attracting expert international climbers unaware of the serpent’s passage here.

Cheakamus River

From about 8 km north of Squamish, the highway follows this river named “salmon weir place”. There were once several Squamish villages near the salmon-rich confluence of the Cheakamus and Squamish Rivers, in the vicinity of today’s Brackendale. A century ago, many people went to work at a hop farm owned by the well known Bell-Irving family, and a few still live at nearby Seaichem. Highway viewpoints and events organized at Brackendale offer opportunities to view thousands of eagles that nest here in winter.

Cheekeye

A few kilometres north of Brackendale, at the southeast edge of Garibaldi Provincial Park. The name “dirty place” was given to the muddy Cheekeye River, and the mountain now known as Garibaldi, from which it flows. During the Great Flood, the Squamish people lashed their canoes to this 2,678-m-high peak, which is seldom visible from behind its veil of clouds.

Tak-tak-a-moh-yin-tla-ain-ain-ya-ha-an

Just north of the Cheekeye is “the landing place of the thunderbird”, now called Black Tusk. Trails within Garibaldi Provincial lead to views of the 2,316 m peak.

The Height of Land

Approximately 56 km north of Squamish, Whistler Village marks the divide. Highway #99, paved over

time worn trails, eases between Coast Mountains. Green Lake feeds the Lillooet River system. Just on this side of the pass is a hidden spot where the Transformers came upon some Squamish people camped too close to Lil’wat territories, and turned them into a pile of rocks.

9.3.1.8 Resources of Squamish Nation Territory

That the Squamish Nation use, and continue to use, the resources of Squamish Nation territory is beyond dispute. Prior to contact with the Europeans, they harvested a vast array of resources from the sea. A wide variety of fish, including eulachon, herring, smelt, lingcod, rockfish, sturgeon, perch and flounder, were taken in saltwater while the five species of anadromous salmon, as well as steelhead and char. were caught in freshwater. Sea mammals such as seals, sea lions and porpoises, constituted part of the wealth of Squamish Nation territory. In addition, numerous kinds of waterfowl, including surf scooters, mallards and mergansers were hunted. Beach foods such as sea urchins, crabs, clams, mussels, cockles and scallops were gathered.

Squamish Nation land provided them with deer, elk, black bear, mountain goat, beaver raccoon, muskrat and other animals, as well as many birds, such as ruffed grouse and blue grouse. A variety of plants were harvested at different times of the year for their berries and other fruits, tender green shoots, and edible roots, tubers and bulbs. Other plants were cherished for their medicinal qualities.

The forests in Squamish Nation territory produced many of the non-food necessities of life. Trees, or parts of trees, were felled for the materials necessary in the construction of our longhouses, canoes, furniture, weapons, utensils and ceremonial objects. In other instances, bark was stripped in order to make clothes, towels, mats, mattresses and other products while roots were used in making of baskets. From the soil itself, Squamish Nation extracted the stone required for the making of tools while at higher elevations obsidian was obtained. Squamish Nation resources were both surface and subsurface resources. In essence, because of the bounty of Squamish Nation land their unique relationship to the land, they were economically self-sufficient.

Moreover, Squamish Nation participated in a complex economic system with other First Nations in the region. Trade relations existed with several neighbouring First Nations on the Lower Mainland, on Vancouver Island, and in the Interior. Indeed, the Squamish Nation was at the hub of a major trade route from the coast to the interior of British Columbia. Transportation routes existed on both land and water. An important overland trail ran from the Squamish River area through Whistler to the Pemberton Valley and beyond. After the arrival of the Europeans, Squamish Nation expanded their trade relations by providing the newcomers with fish and other items they required to survive.

The Squamish Nation’s use and occupation of their land has continued uninterrupted since the arrival of the Europeans. Despite the negative impact that the European settlement had on their access to Squamish Nation land and resources, their current relationship to the land is extensive, varied and consistent with the reality of life in the late twentieth century. Squamish Nation continue to occupy their traditional territory as witnessed by the existence of twenty-eight Squamish reserves. Squamish Nation continues to harvest fish and other marine resources from both freshwater and saltwater and continues to take game

from the land. Squamish Nation harvest timber and other resources from the forests. In addition, they have established their place within the modern economic infrastructure by relying on their historic rights. Despite the intense pressure of massive urban development, Squamish Nation has never ceded or surrendered their aboriginal title.

9.3.1.9 Treaty Negotiations

The Squamish Nation will seek a resolution for the long outstanding claim to their traditional territories. Squamish Nation’s Statement of Intent to negotiate was accepted by the British Columbia Treaty Commission December, 1993. This is the first of the six stages of the British Columbia Treaty Commission’s process. Presently, Squamish Nation is in the third stage of the process. (Stage Three: Framework Agreement.)

Based on the foregoing, the Squamish Nation proposes to negotiate treaty arrangements with the Government of Canada and the Government of the Province of British Columbia as representatives for Her Majesty the queen on the following basis (source: Squamish Nation Cultural Awareness report):

1. The purpose of these negotiations is to clarify and define the Squamish Nation’s constitutionally protected aboriginal rights and title, and to provide certainty of all parties;

2. The purpose of these negotiations is not to achieve universal extinguishment of the Squamish Nation’s aboriginal rights and title;

3. Negotiations shall include discussions pertaining to the identification of rights to those lands, waters and resources, both surface and sub-surface, that constitute part of the Squamish traditional territory, and compensation to be paid for the illegal alienation of lands, waters and resources;

4. Negotiations shall also pertain to the nature, form and jurisdictions of the Squamish government and the relationship of the Squamish Nation government to the Federal and Provincial governments, including the provision of services and fiscal relations;

5. Negotiations will pertain to methods of implementation of the treaty and sub-agreements, including the possibility of a dispute resolution mechanism; and

6. The final agreement will be a treaty.

9.3.2 Burrard Band

The Burrard Band is located on Burrard Inlet in North Vancouver on 108 hectares of land, with one reserve (Exhibit 9-1 ). The Burrard Band is part of the Halkomelem linguistic group and Alliance Tribal Council, and has a registered population of 317, with 187 people being on-reserve.

Leonard George is the current Chief, with councillors including Carleen Thomas, Matthew Thomas and Gerald Thomas. The Burrard Band follows the Indian Act for the election system.

Policing of the Band land is under the RCMP detachment of North Vancouver. Education for Band members is provided from Provincial and Private schools. On-site facilities include a Band office, church

and school bus.

9.3.3 Mount Currie Band

The Mount Currie Band is located 10 kilometres south of Pemberton, west of Creeside on 2,929 hectares of land servicing 10 reserves (Exhibit 9-1). The registered population includes 1,515 with 1,053 located on reserves. The Band is part of the Salishan linguistic group and is currently unaffiliated.

There are 276 Band owned dwellings. Water supply is from a community reservoir and well. There are septic tanks located on the reserve with piped collection systems. Garbage removal is contracted out. The reserves are accessible by 21 kilometres of gravel roads.

Allen Stager is the current Chief. He is supported by 12 councillors, all of whom were elected in accordance with the Indian Act.

Fire protection for Band members comes from a volunteer fire crew with two fire trucks and halls. Police services are provided by the RCMP detachment located at Pemberton. Band students attend both Band (201 students) and Provincial (175 students) schools.

While the traditional use area of the Mount Currie Band is presently unknown, a study area has been proposed by the Ministry of Forests for an assessment of traditional use. The Mount Currie Band has not entered the British Columbia Treaty Commission process.

9.4 Native Bands Outside the Proposed Project

The following First Nations have traditional territory outside the proposed resort development, but have land claims within a 50-kilometre radius of the project.

9.4.1 Musqueam Band

The Musqueam Band is located in the Point Grey areas of Vancouver on 254 hectares of land with three reserves (Exhibit 9-1 ). The Band population includes 925 registered with 454 living on-reserve. The Musqueam Band is not affiliated with any tribal councils or alliances.

The current Chief is Gail Sparrow and she is supported by 8 councillors, all of whom were elected in accordance with the Indian Act. Their term of office ends on January 3, 1999.

Fire protection for the Band is through the municipality of Vancouver. Police protection for Band members comes from both the City of Vancouver Police Department and the RCMP detachment for Vancouver. Band students attend Band (8), Provincial (116), Private (14), and local education agreement (42) schooling.

There are 110 dwellings located on-site for Band members. These have piped water and sewage disposal systems connected to the City of Vancouver. Economic activities for the Musqueam Band include the Band-owned Celtic Shipyards which employs 35 to 40 Band members. The Musqueam also own the Fraser Arms Hotel through a holding company.

9.4.2 Skookum Chuck

The Skookum Chuck Band is a member of the In-SHUCK-Ch/N Quatqua Nation, which has filed a Statement of Intent on behalf of all member bands.

The Skookum Chuck Band is located on Douglas Portage on the Lillooet River, with 10 reserves on 676 hectares of land situated between Harrison and the Lower Lillooet Lakes (Exhibit 9-1 ). The Band is part of the Salishan linguistic group and is affiliated with the Coast Mountain Development Council and the In-SHUCK-ch Council. Of the 305 registered to the Skookum Chuck Band, 25 live on-reserve.

Chief Paul Williams and four councillors currently form the local government. They were elected in a custom election system for indefinite terms of office. The Band is supported by a volunteer fire crew and five portable pumps. Police protection information was not available. The Band is connected with limited radio communications, but has no telephone service. Water is supplied through a pipe system. There are 16 septic tanks located on-reserve. The reserve is equipped with it own refuse truck and landfill.

9.4.3 Sechelt Indian Band

The Sechelt Indian Band is located in Sechelt, approximately 50 kilometres north of Vancouver (Exhibit 9-1 ). The Sechelt Indian Band was the first in Canada to be granted authority to manage its own land under the provisions of the Indian Act. The Sechelt are part of the Salishan linguistic group, but are unaffiliated with any other Bands. There are 910 members registered to the Sechelt Indian Band, with 477 living on-reserve. The Sechelt Indian Band consists of 33 reserves on 1,000 hectares of land. An estimated 350 non-Indians lease land from the Sechelt Band.

Chief Garry Feschuck is supported by four councillors who manage the Band affairs. The Sechelt are elected under the Sechelt Constitution Act.

The Band operates its own pre-school which also serves non-Indian children. Unemployment among Band members is below the national average. Many residents work within the community. Some run their own businesses, others are employed in the construction industry and still others are employed for the fish hatchery which the Sechelt operate for the federal government.

9.4.4 Katzie Band

The Katzie Band is located west of Port Hammond (adjacent to Maple Ridge), on five reserves totaling 340 hectares (Exhibit 9-1 ). The Katzie are part of the Salishan linguistic group and have a registered population of 396, with 201 on-reserve. There are 75 on-reserve dwellings. Economic activities include commercial fishing and recreation leases.

The current Chief of the Band is Dianne Bailey. She is supported by four councillors, all of whom were elected under a custom election system. Fire protection for the Band is provided from the municipalities of Maple Ridge and Langley. Police protection is provided by the RCMP detachments in the those same municipalities. There are currently 66 students from the Band attending Provincial (60) and Private (6) schools.

The Band has a water supply agreement with Pitt Meadows, Langley and Surrey. They also have one sewer system connected to Pitt Meadows, and two on-site septic systems.

9.5 Traditional Uses and Studies

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will work in cooperation with affected First Nations, the Environmental Assessment Office and other provincial government ministries to establish traditional use patterns at the site of the proposed resort development.

According to D. Reid, Aboriginal Forestry Advisor, Squamish Forest District, Ministry of Forests, the Squamish Forest District has been working closely with the Squamish Nation to complete an archaeological overview of their traditional use area. Draft information became available in the end of 1996 and field work commenced in spring of 1997 for areas of moderate to high potential.

During consultation with the Squamish Nation in September 23,1997, R. Lewis indicated that the area proposed for the resort development has a number of traditional uses that could be impacted by the project including:

● The “Billy family” has a trap line within the general boundaries of the project area● A number of Squamish First Nation members use the project area for hunting deer● Some areas within the study area have been traditionally used for bathing● Mount Garibaldi has cultural significance, “during the Great Flood, the Squamish people lashed

their canoes to this 2,678 metre high peak, which is seldom visible form behind its veil of clouds”● Members of the Squamish Nation use the Squamish River for fishing● Members of the Squamish Nation collect plants from the general vicinity of the project area for

medicinal purposes and food.

According to A. Parnell, Project Officer, traditional Use Unit, Aboriginal Affairs Branch, Ministry of Forests, Victoria, the Aboriginal Affairs Branch of the Ministry of Forests has also initiated a traditional use study for the Mount Currie Band. The study area is identified on Exhibit 9-1 and the traditional use study is to be completed by late 1997.

9.6 Consultation to Date

9.6.1 Correspondence and Meetings

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH commenced formal discussions with senior representatives of the Squamish Nation in 1992 and has continued discussions regarding their potential involvement in the resort development since that time (Table 9-1 ). These discussions initially focussed on how the proposed resort development might benefit the Squamish Nation in terms of an employment, career development and job training.

Recently, the discussions have evolved in anticipation of the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act regarding First Nations consultation, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has focused its recent consultation with the Squamish Nation in the following areas:

● To identify aboriginal rights, any potential infringements of those rights created by the project and the measures proposed to avoid or minimize adverse effects on the Squamish First Nations’ rights and communities

● To determine if the Squamish First Nation has an interest in participating in the proposed resort development through the creation of native employment, job training, career development, bridging cultural differences and developing healing centers

● To determine if the Squamish First Nation has any interest to secure an equity position in the project or become a partner in the project through some other mechanism.

Discussions with the Squamish First Nation regarding these topics were undertaken in a series of four meetings in September and October, 1997.

Meeting #1—September 2, 1997

An introductory meeting (see Appendix 9 for meeting minutes) was held September 2, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Table 9-1 Correspondence and Meetings Held With First Nations From 1992 - 1997

Date Correspondence/Meetings General Topic

May 11, 1992

Letter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation from

Wolfgang Richter

Advised the Squamish Nation Council of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development and the objectives to treat their traditions with respect and sensitivity including the possibility of reflecting the indigenous culture of the region in the theme of the resort. The letter also mentioned the creation of a potential career development and job program focusing on new employment opportunities for native people throughout the Sea to Sky Corridor.

July 4, 1992

Letter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation from

Wolfgang Richter

Acknowledgement of a recent meeting to discuss the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort project and the proposal to involve the Squamish Nation in the development. In return, Mr. Richter proposed creating, jointly with the District of Squamish Council and Squamish Nation Council, a concept for an innovative job training and career development program designed specifically to meet the needs of the Squamish native community. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is interested in the possibility of creating an opportunity to feature Pacific Northwest Coast native art and culture as an integral part of the resort’s design.

July 4, 1992

Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Les Harry, Chairman of the Council, Squamish Nation

Acknowledgement of a recent phone conversation discussing the potential for the Squamish Nation in the development and interest in representing Pacific Northwest Coast native culture in the aesthetics of the resort. Discussed a plan to create an innovative employment program tailored to the needs of the young people of the Squamish Nation.

July 6, 1992

Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Tony Hunt , Squamish Nation

Request to provide an introduction to Chief Joe Mathias, as well as credence to Mr. Richter’s longstanding admiration and respect for the native culture.

Nov. 6, 1992

Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Inquiry about how the Council of the Squamish Nation received the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH proposal for a job creation and career apprenticeship program involving the Squamish Nation.

Nov. 10, 1992

Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Tony Hunt, Squamish Nation

Request for Chief Hunt to contact Chief Philip Joe and provide a reference for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Table 9-1 Continued

Correspondence and Meetings Held With First Nations From 1992 – 1997

Nov. 26, 1992 Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Correspondence stating that in addition to the native job creation and career development program, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH also hoped to develop pro-active environmental education programs as an integral part of the development. In that regard, Mr. Richter introduced Chief Joe to GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH President, David Jay Flood, Chairman of the Yosemite National Institutes, a California-based organization involved in environmental education for the past three decades.

May 14, 1993 Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Letter of thanks for a meeting in January 1993 and the informal introduction to Chief Joe Mathias. Mr. Richter stated that it would be helpful if the Squamish Nation join in on the B.C.I.O. initiative to endorse the proposed development.

June 1993 Wolfgang Richter meeting with Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Exploration of the possibility of a strategic partnership with the Squamish Nation for the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Oct. 1, 1993 Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Donna Billy, employment Counsellor, Squamish Nation

Advised Ms. Billy of the presentation GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has been invited to make to the District of Squamish Council on October 5, 1993, as well as the Open House GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is having at the Brackendale Art Gallery that same evening. Both of these events are in association with the Squamish Tourism Strategies Development Committee. Mr. Richter also invites Ms. Billy to join a field trip, up to the top of Brohm Ridge, on Saturday, October 9, 1993.

Oct. 5, 1993 Hand-delivered letter to Wolfgang Richter from Randall Lewis, Environmental Representative, Squamish Nation

Mr. Lewis pointed out that the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development lies within the traditional territory of the Squamish Nation, noting that a recent B.C. Supreme Court decision (Delqamuuk v. British Columbia) held that the Province has a fiduciary duty towards aboriginal people not to arbitrarily or unduly interfere with aboriginal culture and subsistence activities on unoccupied Crown lands. Mr. Lewis also stated that Squamish Nation rights may be affected and that the position of the Squamish Nation is that no resource development should proceed in Squamish Nation traditional territory until the settlement of land claims through negotiations.

Table 9-1 Continued


October 7, 1993 Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Randall Lewis, Squamish Nation

On behalf of Jay Flood and himself, Mr. Wolfgang Richter thanked Mr. Lewis, for his correspondence of October 5, 1993 and noted GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH’s past contact with the Squamish Nation and its attorney Harry Slade. Mr. Richter also pointed out GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH’s ongoing commitment to actively involve proposals and the participation of the native community in the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort project, especially in the creation of a structured employment, training and career development program designed for the native community.

Sept. 7, 1993 Meeting with the Squamish Nation, Economic Development Committee

Meeting was held between Chief Philip Joe, as Chair of the Squamish Nation Economic Development Committee, and representatives of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development team, including Wolfgang Richter, David Jay Flood, Jack Johnson, Ken Kerr, Bob Reicher and Tom Donohue.

Sept. 15, 1993 Letter from David Jay Flood, President, GARIBALDI to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Proposes a potential Memorandum of Understanding regarding the participation of the Squamish Nation in a new GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH submittal to the provincial government through the British Columbia Investment Office, a new agency of the Ministry of Employment and Investment, whose mandate includes facilitating the development of the ski industry throughout the province.

Insert date Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Chief Philip Joe was sent a copy of the District of Squamish Tourism Development Plan.

Aug. 17, 1994 Discussion with Chief Joe, Bryan Williams, etc., Squamish Nation

Wolfgang to insert details

Oct. 5, 1994 Letter from Chief Philip Joe of the Squamish Nation to Wolfgang Richter

Letter of thanks for the opportunity to participate in the development of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort (and suggesting that the Squamish Nation Economic Development Committee might meet with GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to discuss the project in more detail).

Table 9-1 Continued


July 14, 1995 Letter from Wolfgang Richter to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

As a follow-up to a meeting between Wolfgang Richter and Chief Joe, in May 1995, Mr. Richter advises that, as discussed, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project is finally beginning to enjoy some renewed progress and that the past years of analysis and community work are being validated by a new government submission process. In accordance with that process, Mr. Richter has submitted a new Expression of Interest (February 1995, attached) in the hope of once again advancing to the formal proposal phase of the process. This letter also reiterates that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH’s desire to include the Squamish Nation as part of the project team, as discussed in the past, in the hope that Chief Joe and his colleagues in the Squamish Nation become instrumental in giving the proposed resort a special sense of place and ambience to make it truly unique.

Feb. 2, 1996 Telephone conversation between Wolfgang Richter and Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Phone call asking if the Squamish Nation would consider backing the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team in their competitive bid against Grand Aldex. Chief Joe suggested they would prefer to stay neutral.

April 23, 1996 Letter to Wolfgang Richter from Native artist Roy Henry Vickers, Eagle Dancer Enterprises, Victoria,

Offer to help GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH bridge the cultural canyons and expressing an interest in becoming involved as an advisor to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH architectural team.

June 13, 1997 Meeting with Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

This meeting updated Chief Joe on the success of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH’s proposal at winning the competitive bid to proceed to the Master Planning / Public Approvals phase of the project. As this process is generated by the Environmental Assessment Act, with specific formal requirements regarding consultation with the native community, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH requested Chief Joe to arrange a meeting with his colleague, Chief Joe Mathias.

June 19, 1997 Letter from Janice Scott, Vice-President and Director of GARIBALDI, to Chief Philip Joe, Squamish Nation

Followed up on the meeting of June 13, 1997 and reiterated the request to meet with Chief Joe Mathias. Ms. Scott also reinforced GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH plans to include a program for First Nations grassroots employment, career development and job creation and confirmed that she would be contacting Donna Billy, to initiate communications for these plans

Table 9-1 Continued


July 15, 1997 Letter from Janice Scott, Vice-President and Director of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, to Chief Joe Mathias, Squamish Nation

Requested a meeting to proceed in exploring any potential impacts concerning aboriginal rights, traditional territories and, working with GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, develop meaningful programs and participation for First Nations. Included with the letter, was a copy of the June 19, 1997 letter to Chief Joe, a recent information brochure about GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and a brief update regarding GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH and the Environmental Assessment Act

September 2, 1997 Meeting #1 between members of Squamish Nation Council and the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development team

Meeting #1 gave the GARIBALDI team an opportunity to provide Squamish Nation an overview of the project and to explain that GARIBALDI is initiating native and public consultation, as required by the Environmental Assessment Act.

The Squamish Nation responded by saying that it is in the process of land claims negotiations with the Province and the federal government and that the Interim Agreement between the Province and GARIBALDI has alienated this land from the Squamish Nation in its treaty negotiations. Chief Joe Mathias said that if the Squamish Nation did own the land in question that perhaps GARIBALDI could develop it along with the Squamish Nation.

GARIBALDI chairman Wolfgang Richter noted that GARIBALDI currently has status with the Province, which claims it owns in the land, and added that GARIBALDI wants to do economic development, provide jobs for native people and provide a higher profile for native people.

Chief Mathias said he thinks the GARIBALDI proposal and vision is excellent and that he has no problem with this. The problem, rather, is with land claims and what is on the table. He once again said that the Province is methodically and clearly alienating Crown land to third parties or to the public interest. He added that if GARIBALDI has no trouble dealing with the Squamish Nation, the Squamish Nation will get the land and GARIBALDI can then deal with the Squamish Nation rather than the Province.

Table 9-1 Continued


September 8, 1997 Correspondence to Bob Osborne, Aboriginal Advisor, British Columbia Assessment Office

A letter from GARIBALDI chairman Wolfgang Richter to Bob Osborne, British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office Aboriginal Advisor, summarizes the September 2, 1997 meeting between GARIBALDI and the Squamish Nation.

In the letter, GARIBALDI requested that the Province and the Squamish Nation work together to resolve the issue of land ownership in an expedient manner so that the Province, the Squamish Nation and GARIBALDI are all in a position to resolve any outstanding concerns regarding the proposed GARIBALDI at Squamish development.

September 11, 1997 Correspondence to the Squamish Nation A letter from GARIBALDI chairman Wolfgang Richter to Chief Joe Mathias and the Squamish Nation Council (see Appendix ?) reiterates that one of the requirements for the Environmental Assessment review is to consult with First Nations who have an interest in the GARIBALDI project and to address their concerns. As the project is situated in the traditional territory of the Squamish Nation, GARIBALDI requires knowing about the concerns of the Squamish nation in order to remedy these concerns.

The letter from GARIBALDI advises the Squamish Nation that, should the

title of the land which is outlined in the Interim Agreement between the Province and GARIBALDI be issued to the Squamish Nation as part of the treaty negotiations between the Squamish Nation and the federal and provincial governments, GARIBALDI will work with the Squamish Nation as its landlord with the understanding that the Squamish Nation will take over the Province's rights and obligations contained in whatever agreements are then in force.

GARIBALDI requested the cooperation and assistance of the Squamish in the Environmental Assessment review process and in the planning of the resort.

Table 9-1 Continued


September 23, 1997 Meeting #2 between members of the Squamish Nation Council and the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development team

A second meeting was held September 23, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Attending from the Squamish Nation were Chief Bill Williams, Councillor Norman Natrall, Councillor Gibby Jacob, Councillor Ann Whonnock, Councillor Randall Lewis, Director of Finance Harold Calla, and David Lane, a Squamish Nation lawyer.

Representing GARIBALDI were Chairman Wolfgang Richter, Vice-President and Director of Community Relations Janice Scott, mountain resort

planner Jeff Graham, environmental consultant Glenn Stewart, engineering consultant Dave McElhanney and lawyer Hans Swinton.

GARIBALDI stressed that it would like the involvement of the Squamish Nation in the GARIBALDI project beyond the requirements for consultation that are part of the Environmental Assessment process.

Councillor Randall Lewis noted that the GARIBALDI proposal boundaries lie within the traditional territory of the Squamish Nation. He added that traditional uses of the area include trapping and hunting and that the area sustains wildlife. He said that ethnobotany and traditional land uses should be studied and that an archeological assessment overview should be done.

Harold Calla said that impacts from the development of GARIBALDI go beyond the Squamish area and that major transportation links have an impact on Squamish Nation lands.

Gibby Jacobs said that expansion of the District of Squamish municipal boundaries to annex the GARIBALDI at Squamish site is of concern because this action would take the land off of the land claims table.

Table 9-1 Continued


October 20, 1997

Correspondence, Background Information and Studies Sent to the Squamish Nation

To assist the Squamish Nation in its preliminary assessment of the proposed GARIBALDI development, GARIBALDI sent to the Squamish Nation four copies of the following documents:

● Tourism Development Plan, District of Squamish (December 1994)

● Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (Amendment, February 23, 1996)

● GARIBALDI Formal Proposal (Submitted to the Province, April 1996)

● Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, June 1996)

● GARIBALDI Project Schedule, Level I Critical Path Analysis (January 1997)

● Interim Agreement, Garibaldi Alpen and Province (February 28, 1997).

October 27, 1997

Meeting #3 A third meeting was held October 27, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Attending from the Squamish Nation were Chief Joe Mathias, Councillor Norman Natrall, Councillor Dennis Joseph, Councillor Ann Whonnock, Director of Finance Harold Calla, and Gary Yavsely, a Squamish Nation lawyer.

Representing GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH were Chairman Wolfgang Richter, Vice-President and Director of Marketing and Public Relations Janice Scott, Director of Communications Ron Enns, mountain resort planners Jack Johnson and Jeff Graham, environmental consultant Glenn Stewart, engineering consultant Dave McElhanney, and lawyer Hans Swinton.

This introductory meeting gave the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team an opportunity to provide Squamish Nation an overview of the project and to explain that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is initiating native and public consultation, as required by the Environmental Assessment Act.

The Squamish Nation responded by saying that it is in the process of land claims negotiations with the Province and the federal government, and that the Interim Agreement between the Province and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has alienated this land from the Squamish Nation in its treaty negotiations. Chief Joe Mathias said that if the Squamish Nation did own the land in question that perhaps

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH could develop it along with the Squamish Nation.

GARIBALDI chairman Wolfgang Richter noted that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH currently has status with the Province, which claims it owns the land, and added that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH wants to do economic development, provide jobs for native people and provide a higher profile for native people.

Chief Mathias said he thinks the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH proposal and vision is excellent. The problem, rather, is with land claims and what is on the table. He once again said that the Province is methodically and clearly alienating Crown land to third parties or to the public interest. He added that if GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has no trouble dealing with the Squamish Nation, the Squamish Nation will get the land through their land claim and GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH can then deal with the Squamish Nation rather than the Province.

The meeting was adjourned so that GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH could consider what had been discussed at the meeting. There was an agreement to meet again.

Meeting #2 — September 23, 1997

A second meeting was held September 23, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Attending from the Squamish Nation were Chief Bill Williams, Councillor Norman Natrall, Councillor Gibby Jacob, Councillor Ann Whonnock, Councillor Randall Lewis, Director of Finance Harold Calla, and David Lane, a Squamish Nation lawyer.

Representing GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH were Chairman Wolfgang Richter, Vice-President and Director of Community Relations Janice Scott, mountain resort planner Jeff Graham, environmental consultant Glenn Stewart, engineering consultant Dave McElhanney and lawyer Hans Swinton.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH stressed that it would like the involvement of the Squamish Nation in the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project beyond the requirements for consultation that are part of the Environmental Assessment process.

Councillor Randall Lewis noted that the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH proposal boundaries lie within the traditional territory of the Squamish Nation. He added that traditional uses of the area include trapping and hunting and that the area sustains wildlife. He said that ethnobotany and traditional land uses should be studied and that an archeological assessment overview should be done.

Harold Calla said that impacts from the development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH go beyond the Squamish area and that major transportation links (i.e. potential loss of development lands due to First and Second Narrows bridge and road network upgrades) have an impact on Squamish Nation lands.

Gibby Jacobs said that expansion of the District of Squamish municipal boundaries to annex the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH site is of concern because this action would take the land off of the land claims table.

Further to the September 23, 1997 in which the Squamish Nation requested additional information on the project, and to assist the Squamish Nation in its preliminary assessment of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH sent to the Squamish Nation four copies of the following documents:

● Tourism Development Plan, District of Squamish (December 1994)● Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (Amendment, February 23, 1996)● GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Formal Proposal (Submitted to the Province, April 1996)● Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia, June 1996)● GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Project Schedule, Level I Critical Path Analysis (January 1997)● Interim Agreement, Garibaldi Alpen and Province (February 28, 1997).

Meeting #3 — October 10, 1997

A third meeting was held October 10, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Attending from the Squamish Nation were Chief Bill Williams, Councillor Gibby Jacob, and Director of Finance Harold Calla.

Representatives of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team and government included Chairman, Mr. Wolfgang Richter, Hans Swinton and George McKay of the Ministry of Employment and Investment.

The intent of the meeting was to explore the threshold of potential equity participation of the Squamish First Nation by using funds generated by the province for the development as a basis for a Trust Fund.

The offer would include using the government funds generated from:

● 2% of the gross lift revenue for leased lands; and● Appraised cost of undeveloped land

First Nations was to consider accepting this transfer of funds from the province without prejudicing further land claims.

In accepting these funds, the Squamish First Nation would endorse the project.

The proposed concept of First Nations participation in the project through transfer of government funds was well received by the Squamish first Nations.

Representatives of the Squamish First Nations suggested that they may be prepared to provide some political pressure to assist in realizing this opportunity.

The conversation progressed by the Squamish First Nation suggesting that in order for their participation to be meaningful, they would also like to secure an equity position in the project.

It was discussed that the Province should support this arrangement of funds transfer to first Nations for the following reasons:

● The project offers a special thematic nature for all participants due to the potential involvement of the native community; and

● It provides a landmark opportunity for employment, career development, job training, healing and bridging cultural differences. It also provides cultural representation for aboriginal people within the international tourism and recreation industry.

As a result of the Squamish First Nation potential interest in the project as both an investor and governing body, the discussion evolved to the point where the Squamish First Nation representatives were asking for more detailed information on the project.

To this end, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team has followed up the meeting by sending the following reports:

● Tourism Development Plan, District of Squamish (December, 1994)● Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (Amendment dated February, 1996)● GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH formal proposal (submitted to the Province April, 1996)● Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia (June, 1996)● Project Schedule-Level 1 Critical Path Analysis (January, 1997)● Interim Agreement, GARIBALDI Alpen & Province (February, 1997).

Meeting #4 — October 27, 1997

The fourth meeting was held on October 27, 1997 at the Squamish Nation administrative offices in North Vancouver.

Attending from the Squamish Nation were Chief Bill Williams, Councillor Anthony Moody, Councillor Gibby Jacob, and Director of Finance Harold Calla, and.

Representing GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH were Chairman Wolfgang Richter; President, Jay Flood; Vice-President and Director of Community Relations Janice Scott, Vice-President of Marketing Tom McCeachie; architect Robert Rotman; mountain resort planner Jack Johnson and Jeff Graham; marketing specialist John Creole; environmental consultant Glenn Stewart; engineering consultant Dave

McElhanney; lawyer Hans Swinton; archeologist Geordie Howe; construction contractor John Heinen, accountant Stewart Kerr and George McKay of the Ministry of Employment and Investment.

The intent of the meeting was to give a formal presentation to the Full Council of the Squamish Nation. However, since the majority of the members did not attend, an informal discussion followed.

Jack Johnson gave a presentation about the planned resort facilities and the rational behind the mountain facilities.

During the course of the presentation and discussions, Councillor Anthony Moody expressed his concern that the project area was a significant part of the Squamish traditional territory and the aboriginal peoples of the First Nation depend on it for their traditional uses. It was pointed out that a resort development such as the one proposed could have an impact on the aboriginal peoples of the Squamish Nation.

In summary, consultation with the Squamish First Nation has occurred since the early 1990’s and continues to the present day.

Recent discussions with the Squamish first Nation have been productive and resulted in a clearer understanding of both the First Nations and developers perspectives.

It is anticipated that further discussions will continue to be productive with the ultimate goal of coming to an agreement with the Squamish First Nation regarding their participation/involvement in the project.

9.6.2 Issues and proponent responses

Based on the consultation efforts made between the proponent of the proposed resort development and the Squamish Nation since 1992, the following issues have been identified. Where appropriate, the proponent responses are bolded immediately below the issue.

During the first meeting on September 2, 1997 Chief Mathias indicated that it was premature for the proponent to be discussing the need for consultation with the Squamish Nation, as there had been no consultation with the Squamish Nation regarding the Environmental Assessment Act process. In addition, until the Squamish Nation land claims are resolved, they are not in a position to deal with the proposed resort development.

In response to the lack of consultation during the creation of the Environmental Assessment Act process and outstanding land claims, the Environmental Assessment Act Office was made aware of the Squamish Nations’ concerns by the proponent. We understand that a meeting was later held in September, 1997 between the Environmental Assessment Act Office and the Squamish Nation to clarify these issues

and determine the roles and responsibilities.

During the second meeting on the September 23,1997 meeting, R. Lewis indicated that the area proposed for the resort development has a number of traditional uses that could be impacted by the project including:

● The “Billy family” has a trap line within the general boundaries of the project area● A number of Squamish First Nation members use the project area for hunting deer● Some areas within the study area have been traditionally used for bathing● Mount Garibaldi has cultural significance, “during the Great Flood, the Squamish people lashed

their canoes to this 2,678 metre high peak, which is seldom visible form behind its veil of clouds”● Members of the Squamish Nation use the Squamish River for fishing● Members of the Squamish Nation collect plants from the general vicinity of the project area for

medicinal purposes and food.

As per the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act the Proponent will continue to work with the Squamish Nation to identify these traditional use areas, determine any potential infringements of those rights created by the project and propose mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects of the project on the Squamish Nation rights and communities.

During the third meeting held on October 10, 1997 the issue revolved around the potential for the Squamish Nation to become involved in the project as an investor/partner. However, prior to this option being realized or pursued further, the Squamish Nation would require more detailed information on the project. During October, as number of documents on the project were sent to the Squamish Nation for review.

Discussions will need to continue between the Squamish Nation, the proponent and the Province to determine if there is a mechanism for the proposed transfer of funds and/or the potential for securing an equity position.

During the fourth meeting, the issues associated with potential impacts to traditional territories re-surfaced. As per the earlier comments, this issue will be dealt with once

the exact locations of these use areas are identified.

9.7 Further Communication

In addition to the demonstrated commitment shown by the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team to work closely with the Squamish First Nation, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH has also initiated discussions with the Burrard Band and the Mount Currie Band to invite them to participate in this initiative (letters dated November 17, 1997 in Appendix 9).

In addition, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH plans to advertise significant events and public meetings in the various newspapers and newsletters of the First Nations, including a Native Journal, @ a national publication published in Edmonton, and Windspeaker, @ monthly publication by the Aboriginal Multi-Media Society of Alberta in Edmonton. Both publications are distributed from the North Vancouver and Squamish band offices of the Squamish Nation.

In order to ensure that aboriginal rights are not infringed upon as a result of the proposed resort development, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH team is committed to the following:

● Continue to meet with First Nations to discuss the potential involvement/partnership of First Nations people in job creation, career development and on-going planning of the proposed resort development

● Continue to meet with First Nations to identify specific traditional uses that could be impacted from the proposed resort development. If necessary, conduct traditional use studies that would identify aboriginal rights and any potential infringements of those rights created by the project

● Continue to meet with first Nations to determine mitigation measures (if required) which would avoid or minimize adverse effects on aboriginal rights and on aboriginal communities

● Continue to involve Mr. Roy Vickers and other native artists in the corporate and architectural artistic design of the proposed resort development. To date, Mr. Vickers has designed the corporate logo for the proposed development and has an on-going role in the further design of the corporate entity

● Report on these aboriginal rights issues identified by aboriginal people and the proposed actions to address these issues.

It is anticipated that based on further discussions and negotiations with the Squamish First Nation, the resort project will proceed whereby mitigation measures will allow no significant infringement of aboriginal rights.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to further consultation with First Nations and is hoping to involve aboriginal peoples in the on-going development and participation in the project.

Section 10 Approvals and Governance

10.1 GOVERNMENT APPROVALS

10.1.1 Provincial Environmental Assessment Act

10.1.1.1 Introduction

On June 30, 1995, B.C.’s new Environmental Assessment Act was proclaimed. This is new legislation that allows all British Columbians to provide input as part of the decision-making process for proposals for major projects and developments. The new Act is designed to mitigate environmental impacts at the same time as ensuring long-term economic and social sustainability for the province.

10.1.1.2 Why An Environmental Assessment Act

The province’s new Environmental Assessment Act establishes a single review process for major projects and activities, including everything from hydro-electric dams and pulp mills to destination ski resorts and waste management facilities. The new Act will help guarantee that any large-scale developments or major modifications to existing projects are environmentally responsible and fit into long-term plans for maintaining the economic and environmental health of British Columbia.

Destination ski resort projects, such as the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Ski & Mountain resort, qualify for review under the Environmental Assessment Act process because they meet the following threshold criteria:

● Greater than 2,000 bed units at the completion of construction - GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH projects 13,400 bed units at the end of Year 10

● Greater than 800 m3 per day of permitted maximum liquid waste discharge - GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH estimates 10.2 million litres 2.7 million gallons per day

● Bigger than 150 hectares (371 acres) of base development - GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH requires 30 hectares for the proposed village site and an additional 880 hectares for residential development/golf training centre. Within the 880 hectares there is substantial green space.

Similar to the proposed Jumbo Glacier Resort Development in the East Kootenays and the proposed Cayoosh Resort Development near Lillooet, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project exceeds these threshold criteria.

10.1.1.3 What Is The Purpose Of The Act

It has become increasingly important to all British Columbians to protect our beautiful natural environment so that it may continue to be enjoyed by future generations. By striking an appropriate balance between current demands for our resources and the need to preserve for the future, we can

maintain our enviable standard of living and simultaneously guarantee prosperity and quality of life for all British Columbians.

The Environmental Assessment Act ensures that when any big projects are proposed – for instance, the building of a pulp mill – there will be a timely, thorough and integrated review. Aside from assessing the immediate environmental and economic impacts, the review will also take into account any social, cultural, heritage and health effects. The new Act will help guarantee that important issues are fully resolved before projects are approved and implemented. Another key intent of the EnvironmentalAssessment Act is to prevent or mitigate any foreseeable impacts throughout the lifecycle of any potential project. Many projects have distinct phases – such as, design, construction, operation, abandonment – and it is important to anticipate potential impacts in advance for each stage and have a plan in place to prevent them or take appropriate actions as they occur.

The new Environmental Assessment Act provides a neutral and open process for evaluating reviewable projects. The review process encourages input from the public, First Nations and any affected government agency, municipal to federal, including neighbouring jurisdictions. The review process has been designed so that all participants have the opportunity to raise any relevant concerns at the various stages of the review. Project documents are made available for public review, and the process also provides opportunities for participants to engage in dialogue aimed at consensus rather than confrontation. There is a provision for holding independent public hearings should a proposed project raise technical issues that have not been resolved during previous review stages.

10.1.1.4 Key Features

A Single, Consistent Process

The Act has been designed so that it offers a single and consistent process for conducting an assessment, whether it concerns a copper mine or a new destination resort facility. Depending on how complex the project is, the review process can range from one to three stages. Decisions are made at the end of each stage (if more than one stage is required), and public input is encouraged throughout.

Balanced Decision Making

The Act requires joint decision making by the Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks and the Minister responsible for the project. The review process also encourages full participation from government representatives at all levels, First Nations, and the general public. Proponents are required to consult with the public. Opportunities for public participation and comment begin early in the review process and are ongoing throughout. Since the Environmental Assessment Office will function as the central “contact point” for each review, all stakeholders are assured for the opportunity to provide input. A formal public hearing will be called for those projects with technical issues that are difficult to resolve.

Clear Timelines

Specific timelines have been put in place so that the review proceeds in an efficient manner. Clear timelines for every major step of the review process mean that participants will be able to plan efficiently and participate fully. Specified time periods for making comments during the review will help ensure that all projects are treated fairly and comprehensively.

The Act also allows for the simultaneous assessment of related permits and licenses that a prospective proponent will require which enables approved projects to begin more promptly after issuance of the project approval certificate. A Project Committee will be established for each project, consisting of representatives from provincial ministries, federal departments, First Nations and local governments. These committees provide advice, analysis and recommendations on projects under review.

The Review Process

There are three possible stages in any environmental assessment: the application review stage, the project report review stage, and the public hearing stage. Although simple projects can theoretically be approved at the end of the first stage, it is expected that most projects will go on to stage two. Those projects that require a public hearing to assist in the resolution of technical issues will require all three stages.

Stage 1: Application Review

The first step for anyone proposing a reviewable project is to submit a formal application for a project approval certificate to the Environmental Assessment Office. This application should only be submitted after preliminary consultation and data collection have occurred. It is in everyone’s best interests if the applicant is prompt about consulting the Environmental Assessment Office, other government agencies, First Nations, and the public. Pre-application consultation helps to inform the general public and other stakeholders about the project, and it clarifies key issues about any potential effects of the project and how these will be reduced or eliminated.

When the application is complete and accepted for review, the Environmental Assessment Office will establish a Project Committee consisting of representatives from various levels of government and First Nations. Within seven days of receipt of the application, the application is circulated to government agencies and First Nations for comment. A notice of where the application is available is advertised for the general public. The public then has a specified time period (30-75 days) to comment on the application.

The members of the Project Committee normally complete their initial individual reviews of the application during the same 30-75 period. The Project Committee then has up to an additional 40 days to conclude its review and develop a collective committee position on the application, taking account of comments from the public and other interested agencies and parties. Once this is completed, the committee makes a recommendation on whether the project should be referred to both the Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks and the responsible minister for a decision. After a Project Committee’s recommendation has been forwarded to the two ministers, the ministers have a maximum of 30 days to

reach a decision. Reasons for the decision of the ministers are set out in writing.

Some projects will be so straightforward, with all the potential problems identified, analyzed and dealt with, that a final decision can be reached at this point. It is expected, however, that most projects will be complex enough that the Project Committee will request a more detailed project report from the proponent. This means that the project will proceed to the second stage.

Stage 2: Project Report Preparation and Review

If a project report is requested, the requirements and specifications of that report are developed by the Project Committee. Draft project report specifications are made known to the proponent as well as relevant government agencies, First Nations, and the general public. After a public comment period of 15-30 days, the terms of reference for the project report are finalized and given to the proponent. Depending on the complexity of the project, it is expected that the proponent could take from 3-18 months to develop a thorough project report.

Once the completed project report has been submitted to the Environmental Assessment Office, the Project Committee reviews it to decide if it meets the terms that were assigned to it. After a project report has been accepted for review it is circulated to government agencies, First Nations and the public. Following a 45 to 60-day public review period, the Project Committee has 70 days to analyze the project report, taking all public submissions fully into account. The committee then makes a recommendation to the two Ministers responsible for approving or rejecting the project.

The two Ministers have 45 days to review the application and the committee recommendations and to issue or refuse to issue a project approval certificate. Alternatively, if the proposed project has unresolved issues, the Ministers may decide to send the project forward to stage three, a public hearing by the Environmental Assessment Board.

Stage 3: Environmental Assessment Board Hearings

If a project under review requires a public hearing, the two Ministers prepare the draft terms of reference. They will specify what issues need to be addressed and may also require that specific permits and licenses related to the application be considered as part of the hearing. There is a requirement for public comments to be made on the hearing’s draft terms of reference before these are finalized by the Ministers.

There is no pre-set timeline for the public hearing process. Before or during the hearing, a mediator can be appointed to assist with any issues that become difficult to resolve or to assist in narrowing the range of issues to be heard by the board. After the hearing has taken place, the Environmental Assessment Board submits a final report and recommendations to Cabinet. Cabinet then has up to 45 days to reach a decision to approve or reject the project. If approved, the project is now formally authorized to proceed. A project that must proceed through this third stage of review could take anywhere from 18 to 42 months to complete all three stages.

10.1.1.5 Who Makes The Final Decision

For those projects which are only required to go through the first two stages of the environmental assessment process, final project approval decisions are made by two provincial Cabinet Ministers: The Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks and the minister generally responsible for a particular category of reviewable projects (for example, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources is responsible for mining and energy projects). Projects which require a public hearing (Stage 3) are submitted to Cabinet for a final decision to approve or reject the project. Once a project approval certificate has been issued, along with any necessary operational permits and licences, then the project may proceed.

10.1.1.6 How Long Does The Review Process Take

The timelines specified by regulation are intended to accommodate projects of differing scope and complexity. The timelines for public comment have a stipulated range to guarantee that the review process will proceed in an efficient fashion. The time needed for each possible step of a review has been laid out, including timelines for administrative actions, public review, government agency review, and decisions by Ministers and Cabinet.

The specifics of these time frames are summarized in Exhibit 10-1. It is estimated that the simplest form of review could be completed in as little three months, while a complex project that went as far as a public hearing could take up to three-and-a-half years of formal process, and could take longer if the proponent requires more time. In extraordinary circumstances, individual time frames may be extended if that is necessary to ensure that a specific project is assessed fairly and completely.

10.1.1.7 Roles and Responsibilities

Environmental Assessment Office

The Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) is responsible for the overall administration of project reviews. The EAO receives applications and project reports; establishes and chairs Project Committees; ensures that timelines are met and maintains the Project Registry, which houses a complete listing of all documents and records pertinent to each review application.

Project Committee

Every project under review requires a Project Committee. These are made up of representatives of various levels of government, any First Nation whose traditional territory includes the site of the project, and possibly representatives from neighbouring jurisdictions that could be affected by a proposed project. Project Committees are expected to provide recommendations to the two Ministers responsible for making the final decision. Their recommendations must take into account comments by the public and all

other interested parties.

Public Advisory Committee

At the discretion of the Environmental Assessment Office, a Public Advisory Committee may be created to make recommendations on specific applications. These committees would be composed of residents of any affected communities as well as stakeholder groups.

Exhibit 10-1 Flow Chart Of The Environmental Assessment Process

Environmental Assessment Board

The Environmental Assessment Board has up to three permanent members with experience in assessing environmental, economic, social, health, and cultural and heritage impacts. The board can also include temporary members who provide expertise or expert knowledge relevant to a particular application. The board makes its recommendations after overseeing a public hearing.

10.1.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), Part 5 defines when a project is subject to undergoing an environmental assessment. An understanding between the province of B.C., and the federal government has initiated a process whereby if a project is regulated under the provincial EnvironmentalAssessment Act, the federal government allows the province to monitor the project. Based on discussions to date the CEAA will not take a lead role in the review of the process and may only be applied to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development through fish habitat issues.

10.1.3 Commercial Alpine Ski Policy (CASP)

The Commercial Alpine Ski Policy applies to Crown Land use for commercial alpine ski developments including Crown Land within provincial forest reserves, parks and recreation areas.

The strategic goal of the policy is to encourage private sector and community group development of Crown land for alpine ski facilities. The provision of Crown land for such facilities is intended to support the provincial goal of expansion of employment, revenue and recreational opportunities. Accordingly, the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks will provide suitable Crown land for alpine ski development where it is deemed in the public interest and meets the requirements of the provincial agencies.

The operational goal of the policy is to coordinate the ski development process by the agency administering the largest proportion of the proposed area, in accordance with the ski policy. The policy is subject to the Environmental Assessment Act for any “Type 2” ski development entailing base development greater than 150 hectares, or greater than 2,000 bed units or a permitted liquid waste

discharge greater than 800 cubic metres per day. GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH meets the criteria of a Type 2 resort development.

Under the policy, alpine ski developments and associated facilities are disposed of by a combination of direct sale, lease, license of occupation and right-of-way. The expiry date of tenures will not exceed the expiry date of a master development agreement.

Leases are issued for Crown land for day use lodges, day use and public parking areas, lift equipment and maintenance buildings and other facilities and buildings unrelated to accommodation. It is also used for non-ski recreational amenities and where possible a single lease is used to authorize all such developments. The standard terms of leases are 50 years for a Type 2 alpine ski operation.

A license of occupation is normally issued for ski trails/runs, for land occupied by snow making equipment, and for cross-country ski trails within the controlled Recreation Area operated as part of the alpine ski development. A single license document is used to cover all ski trails/runs.

Direct sale dispositions are made on an incremental or phased basis (if necessary) for residential and commercial uses associated with the alpine ski operation (accommodation lodges, hotels, motels, parking lots, condominiums, ski cabins, and commercial facilities such as stores, bars and restaurants). Development capacity for such uses must be indicated in the approved ski area master plan.

Direct sale constitutes permanent disposition of the land.

As per the “Interim Agreement” dated February 28, 1997 between the developer and the Province of British Columbia, Crown owned based development lands will be sold based on the following:

● Years 1-10 for the greater of $5,000 per acre or appraised land value based on unserviced land value as of the commencement of the Master Development Agreement

● Years 11-15, Crown lands will be sold for the greater of $5,000 per acre or 5% of the appraised land value appraised at intended use as of the 10th anniversary of the commencement date of the Master Development Agreement

● Years 16-20 will be $5,000 per acre, or 10% of appraised land value, appraised at intended use as of the 15th anniversary of the commencement date of the Master Development Agreement

● After Year 20, in accordance with the pricing structure established by the Commercial Alpine Ski Policy then in effect.

A right of way document is normally issued to cover lift/tow lines in the development. A legal survey of each lift/tow line is required and all required rights of way are included in a single right of way document where possible. The standard term of a right of way for a Type 2 alpine ski operation is 50 years.

10.1.4 Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia

The Guidelines to Alpine Ski Area Development in British Columbia (Ski Area Guidelines) apply to developers and government personnel in the “process of planning and evaluating new ski area proposals and expansions to existing ski resort developments on Crown Land.”

The Ski Area Guidelines outline the necessity to “maintain a sustained high level of environmental quality while offering a dynamic resort experience, any prospective ski area development site has maximum capacities and absolute limits to growth. These capacities must be calculated and respected.”

To assess the capability to develop a ski resort, the proponent must submit a three staged process under the Commercial Alpine Skiing Policy (CASP). The process includes:

● The Vision (the Expression of Interest) ● The Concept (the Proposal) ● The Master Plan.

In early 1996, Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH submitted an “Expression of Interest” to the BC Lands Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. Within the Expression of Interest, the proponent, Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH, outlined the following information, as recommended in CASP:

● The nature of the applicant’s intentions ● An outline of the project goals and objectives ● Study area map (1:20,000 with 20-meter (66 ft) contour interval) ● Preliminary environmental analysis ● Preliminary site inventory and analysis ● Identification of opportunities and constraints ● Preliminary concept describing the basic size and scope of the envisioned ski area ● Preliminary market analysis ● Preliminary economic analysis ● Provide evidence of the applicant’s financial capability to create the proposed development ● Provide evidence of the applicant’s management capability to carry out the proposed project.

Following a review by B.C. Lands, Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH was permitted to submit a formal proposal to develop the lands surrounding Brohm Ridge for a resort development.

The formal proposal takes the preliminary concepts developed in the Expression of Interest to a higher level of detail. This proposal was selected from two other submissions, and the project was granted an Interim Agreement dated February 1997. Under the Interim Agreement, the Master Planning stage was initiated. The final Master Plan document “will act as the reference point from which the Master Development Agreement and all other approvals, permits and tenure will be based.”

Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH intends to obtain a Master Development Agreement for the proposed development following the issuance of a Project Approval Certificate under the Environmental

Assessment Act.

Ski Area Master Plan

Once the Master Plan has been approved under the Ski Area Guidelines and the CASP, any refinements can be made and revised plans submitted as the basis for the “Master Development Agreement” (MDA). When the MDA and all other applicable permits are in place, the proponent, in this case GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, can begin development.

10.2 GOVERNANCE

The majority of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development lands are within the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (Exhibit 10-2). A relatively small portion adjacent to Highway #99 in the southwestern boundary of the proposed development lands falls within the District of Squamish.

10.2.1 Public Service Requirements and Associated Cost Implications

The proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development requires public services and infrastructure for development of its facilities. These services are a typical requirement of any small community and range from planning, to building inspection, bylaw enforcement, zoning and infrastructure inspection services. Infrastructure services required include sewage collection and treatment, water supply, roads and transportation systems, solid waste collection and disposal, hydro and tele-communications systems. Protection oriented services include fire and policing.

Exhibit 10-2 District Of Squamish

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH recognizes that the provision of public services for the proposed mountain resort can be extremely onerous from a cost and staffing perspective to either the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District or the District of Squamish.

Therefore, the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development is prepared to provide the following on-mountain and off-site infrastructure services at no cost to the local government(s):

● Liquid waste collection systems, trunk lines to the Mamquam Sewage Treatment Plant, and upgrade and expansion of the plant as required. If necessary, the construction of an on-site tertiary treatment facility

● Water supply services including storage tanks, pump stations, collection, treatment and delivery systems

● Base area roads, the access road from Highway #99 to the mountain resort and interchange/overpass development at the junction of the access road and Highway #99

● Walking and bicycle trails within the resort lands and linkages to existing district trail networks ● Solid waste transfer stations ● Facilities for public works, maintenance, fire protection and community policing office(s) ● Municipal Service Centre and site employee office(s) ● An appropriate amount of land for a school site ● First aid and medical treatment centre for initial care ● Fire Hall facility and four wheel drive fire rescue vehicle and fire clothing for fifteen volunteers.

In addition to the infrastructure services outlined above, GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH intends to provide at cost, the following operation and maintenance services for the mountain resort:

● Snow removal services within the village and residential areas of the resort and the access road to the junction of Highway #99.

Costs associated with the above noted infrastructure, operational and maintenance services are outlined in Section 6.1.1 “Capital Costs”, Section 6.1.2 “Operating Costs” and Section 6.1.4. “Pro Forma Operating Projections”.

10.2.2 Servicing Cost Recovery Options

The mechanism for recovering these maintenance (excluding snow removal) and operation costs for the provision of public services has not been finalized and depends to a large part on the governance of the resort.

One option of cost recovery for provision of public services includes the use of “development works agreements” between the developer and the municipality. Under Section 937.1 of the Municipal Act, a development works agreement is a contract between a council and a developer for the provision of sewer, water, drainage, highway (excluding off-street parking) or parkland improvement works by the local government, the developer or both of them.

The agreements must be authorized through bylaw, and may provide a formula for imposing all or part of the cost of the works on the owners of the property within a specified benefiting area. An authorizing bylaw may not be adopted unless the electors in the benefiting area have assented, have petitioned for the work or have failed to counter-petition.

The owners contributions become payable on the basis established in the bylaw. At the latest, the charge must be paid upon issuance of a building permit for the benefiting property. The bylaw may provide that no subdivision, strata plan, building permit, development or development variance permit or zoning amendment need to be approved until the debt is paid.

If the municipality is to provide a work under the agreement, the bylaw may authorize borrowing for that purpose, subject to the loan authorization rules in Part 12, but without electoral consent.

The “development works agreement” offers an opportunity to “partner” with the municipality in a manner which employs the municipality’s resources and credit to provide services which enhance the development. The costs may then be passed on to the developer’s customers or to the customers of the developer’s competitors who own adjacent parcels. The administration, collection and enforcement of the charges is left to the municipality.

Another servicing cost recovery option includes the collection of maintenance fees through the local “Mountain Resort Association”. Under this scenario, the costs of the infrastructure maintenance would be born by the resort association and recovered through fees charged to the local developer/strata owners.

Therefore, the only cost impact to the Regional District or the District of Squamish would be associated with planning (i.e. building and infrastructure inspection, and bylaw enforcement), community policing, public transit and fire protection services.

10.2.3 Governance Options

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housings, the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, the District of Squamish and the owners of the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development must come to an agreement on appropriate local government structures for providing local governance and public services.

There are essentially four alternatives to consider for governance and provision of services for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development including:

● Remain Within the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District ● Annexation into the District of Squamish ● Creation of a Mountain Resort Improvement District ● Creation of a Mountain Resort Municipality

10.2.3.1 Remain Within the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District

Within the Municipal Act, the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District could through a bylaw, establish service areas for local services such as water, sewer and garbage collection that would likely be necessary for GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. All bylaws establishing local services must receive the assent of the electors in the service area through a vote or petition and the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities. Regional District service areas have become the primary means for providing services in rural areas of British Columbia, replacing improvement districts. A Regional Board can, with the assent of the electors, delegate management of a service area or areas to an elected local community commission.

The commission would exercise power over the day-to-day administration of services while the Regional Board would remain responsible for imposition of all taxes necessary to defray the cost of administration,

costs of services and the cost of any debt contracted for by the local community.

The disadvantage to the option of remaining within the Regional District is that the Regional District does not have the capability or possibly the desire to accommodate the proposed development. In discussions between Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. and the Regional District during the early 1990’s, the Regional District advised that they are currently working at full capacity and have no space available for the extra manpower required to administer the project.

In addition, the Regional District is unlikely to be able to provide any of the services required by the resort such as police and fire protection or adequate sewage facilities.

Therefore, the proposed resort would inevitably have to approach the District of Squamish to provide such services even if the resort remained part of the Regional District.

Furthermore, once the Regional District introduces legislative and budgetary initiatives to accommodate the proposed resort, it would likely be unwilling to facilitate any succession from their regime by way of either annexation to Squamish or formation into an autonomous municipality.

10.2.3.2. Annexation into the District of Squamish

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has a preference for annexation to existing municipalities wherever possible, and requires that applicants exhaust the possibility of annexation prior to considering other alternatives.

The Municipal Act makes legislative provisions for Cabinet to recommend boundary extensions of the District of Squamish to include the resort lands for the provision of governance and public services.

The option of extending the boundaries (annexing) of the District of Squamish to enclose the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development has been discussed with the municipal council of the District since the early 1990’s and the mayor of the day Mayor Egon Tobus (see Section 8, correspondence). During this period, the District of Squamish council had publicly supported the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development and indicated a desire to explore the possibility of annexing the resort area into the municipal boundaries.

This commitment is also re-iterated in the District of Squamish Official Community Plan (Draft #2) dated July 1997. Section 4.14.1 of the OCP states that “The District of Squamish supports the development of Brohm Ridge based on its recreation potential subject to resolution of the issues in Policy 4.14.2”. This latter section states that “prior to approval of the Brohm Ridge Recreational Area development by the provincial government, the District of Squamish will require that an independent study be undertaken to examine the impact of a municipal boundary expansion to include this area”.

During a presentation by the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH delegation at the June 10, 1997 District of

Squamish Committee of the Whole meeting, Council members expressed concern regarding tax issues for the province and the municipality and were non-committal regarding the proposed resort development.

The Municipal Advice and Approvals Branch of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has also stated that “although the site is currently outside a municipal boundary, the preferred option is that such a development should occur within the District of Squamish. This would directly link the respective economic interests of the resort and the municipality, provide a framework for municipal services and infrastructure and put the municipality in the lead for the management of the development” (letter dated November 15, 1997 from Ms. E. Brennan).

Under either the District of Squamish or the Squamish–Lillooet Regional District, the local government could support creation of a mountain resort area for the proposed development site where year round recreation facilities exist or are proposed, including overnight accommodation.

Expanded Powers for Existing Municipalities

The municipal council of the District of Squamish, after obtaining the assent of electors, can request that the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing designate all or part of the District of Squamish as a mountain resort area, and that Cabinet amend the municipality's letters patent to enable the option of exercising the following special powers within the mountain resort area:

● Waive the requirement for electoral assent for capital borrowing ● Levy and collect development cost charges from developers for services in addition to those

specified in the Municipal Act for normal municipalities ● Expand the use of development permits to include control of the external appearances and finish of

buildings and structures.

Mountain Resort Association

The Mountain Resort Association Act gives municipalities and regional districts the opportunity to choose different approaches to create organizations for the promotion of the business interests of a mountain resort (Table 10-1).

The Minister may designate land within the mountain resort area as “resort land” and incorporate a group called a ”Mountain Resort Association” to oversee the creation of recreational, residential and commercial facilities on the land.

The Mountain Resort Association which is an incorporated society and modeled after the provisions in the Resort Municipality of Whistler, has some powers similar to those of a local government including the ability to levy and recover charges from its members. Although the government approves the creation of the association and its bylaws, it does not oversee the operation of the association, nor is it involved in collecting the levy. The association operates at arms length from the local government.

Table 10-1 Governance Options

Governance Options Public Services Private Services (Business Promotion)

Remain within SLRD ● Creation of regional district service areas

● Mountain Resort Association ● Mountain Resort Business

Improvement Area

Inclusion within District of Squamish

● Mountain resort area designation with expanded municipal powers

● Specified areas


Improvement Area

Creation of Mountain Resort Improvement District

● Creation of specific service responsibilities


Improvement Area

Creation of Mountain Resort Municipality

- ● Mountain Resort Association ● Mountain Resort Business

Improvement Area

A Mountain Resort Association is responsible only to its members and is autonomous from the Municipality. Such autonomy obviously eliminates the disadvantages associated with a Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area. However, it also deprives the association of the advantages of local government tax collection, channels for community involvement and property owner and tenant promotional funds. The association would have to collect and enforce its own levies. Co-operation with the municipality would require the creation of special committees and lines of communication.

The second approach a municipality or a regional district can take is a more direct role in promoting the business interests of a mountain resort by creating through a bylaw, a “Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area”. Such an area provides a means for supporting a private mountain resort business association, which is an organization that can perform many of the same functions as a Mountain Resort Association except that it is responsible to the local government.

A Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area is an area, designated by the council of the municipality, in which businesses and property owners can use the property tax system to finance effective marketing and promotional programs for the entire area. It is similar to "business improvement areas" which have been established within municipalities. They have a 20-year mandate instead of a five-year mandate, to recognize the length of time it takes to develop a ski resort community. They provide a

more flexible way of levying land owners by allowing the council to determine an assessment rate based on “any factor set out in the by-law.” For example, this could include “bed units” or square footage or commercial space leased. In addition, local government can establish different classes of business and set different levies on each class.

Landowners within the Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area present an annual budget to municipal council, which then levies the charges against the members of the Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area. The members of the business improvement area must account for the money granted to it in a manner specified in the by-law.

10.2.3.3 Mountain Resort Improvement Districts

If the Squamish Lillooett Regional District is not willing or not in a position to service a rural mountain resort community, Cabinet could support the creation of a mountain resort improvement district.

Mountain Resort Improvement Districts are intended to be temporary vehicles during the development period of a resort with the transfer of responsibility going eventually to the Squamish Lillooett Regional District or to the District of Squamish. As a consequence of their role in the development of the resort, Mountain Resort Improvement Districts are not financed in the same way as conventional improvement districts. Specifically, they do not receive operating advances from the provincial government, nor do they have the ability to borrow through the Ministry of Finance.

Before Cabinet will consider creating an improvement district, the Squamish Lillooett Regional District must first give its approval.

10.2.3.4 Mountain Resort Municipalities

The recently enacted Mountain Resort Associations Act provides a range of governance options for mountain resorts such as GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH, which provide year-round recreation facilities, including overnight accommodation and lift operations. As such, the options for governance are very compatible to mountain resort area developments

A Mountain Resort Municipality is incorporated in the same way that normal municipalities are incorporated, following a referendum of the electorate.

A Mountain Resort Municipality has access to expanded “Whistler-type” municipal powers. Specifically, the Letters Patent of the Mountain Resort Municipality may give it the following options:

● To waive the requirement for electoral assent for capital borrowing ● To levy and collect development cost charges from developers for services in addition to those

specified in the Municipal Act for normal municipalities ● To expand the use of development permits to include control of the external appearance and finish

of buildings and structures.

The advantages of an autonomous municipality is that full control would be retained over the development of the resort including zoning, community planning, density, administrative costs, and taxes. However it should be noted that the Minister has an opportunity to ensure that specific conditions are met with regard to the letters of patent incorporating the new municipality. In particular the Minister is concerned about shifting private venture responsibility for servicing and development costs to the public sector by way of capital borrowing or taxing authority.

A Mountain Resort Municipality would likely only be created in exceptional circumstances where the development is large and well removed from existing municipalities. Even here, the Mountain Resort Municipality is intended to be a means for providing local governance and services once a resort is well established, the property ownership structure has diversified, and a permanent year-round population is evident.

10.2.4 GOVERNANCE AND PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES PROCESS

Based on discussions with local governments and policy direction provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, it appears that the preferred option of governance and provision of any required public services for the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain resort development lies within the District of Squamish.

It also appears that local government and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing could support the creation of a “Mountain Resort Area” for the proposed development site that would include a “Mountain Resort Association” or alternatively a “Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area”.

Although the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH mountain resort development is prepared to provide the majority of public services, it is anticipated that the District of Squamish would need to provide planning, building and infrastructure inspection, bylaw enforcement, zoning, community policing, public transit and fire protection services.

However, before the District of Squamish can determine if it is interested in including the proposed resort development within its boundaries, the first step would include confirmation from the proponent on expected service requirements for the resort and an analysis on the impact of expected costs and revenues on the municipality. This would include an impact analysis of new infrastructure and servicing needs for the resort development and on the municipality’s current infrastructure and servicing. The analysis would also include varying development thresholds including staging development as defined by the proponent in conjunction with the local government.

The detailed analysis would include the following:

● Estimated projected annual municipal tax revenues through completion of the project

● Analyze each individual service from the point of view of the cost impact on the District of Squamish

● Describe the staging of local government responsibility for local services provided to the project.

Assuming that the benefits of including the proposed resort development within the District of Squamish outweigh the costs to the District, the first step the District of Squamish should make, is for the municipality to make application for a boundary extension under Section 20 of the Municipal Act to include the proposed resort area within its boundaries. This must occur before the District of Squamish can apply to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to consider supporting the establishment of the “Mountain Resort Area” and the “Mountain Resort Association”, or the “Mountain Resort Business Improvement Area”.

A planning committee should then be established with representatives from the District of Squamish, the Squamish Lilloet Regional District, the local community and the proponent to develop architectural and engineering design criteria for the proposed development. Workshops would be a useful forum to work out these details.

The next step would entail designation of the Mountain Resort Area within the District of Squamish Official Community Plan and zoning designations.

10.3 DRAFT OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN (OCP) FOR THE DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH

At the time of preparation of this document, the District of Squamish had released copies of their draft Official Community Plan Background Report and Public Participation documents (October 1996).

The Official Community Plan (Draft OCP) prepared for the District of Squamish has been prepared for the entire district, as opposed to just certain parts of the district. The District of Squamish boundaries do not currently extend east far enough to incorporate the land proposed for use to develop GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH.

Within Section 4.1.4 of the draft OCP, it states that although the population of Squamish can be easily accommodated within the present municipal boundaries for the next generation, one reason to consider a boundary expansion is if a major mixed use development proceeds in the Brohm Ridge area.

Section 4.1.4 “Future Boundary Expansion” also states that the District of Squamish supports the development of Brohm Ridge based on its recreation potential subject to resolution of the issues in Policy 4.14.2.

Policy 4.14.2 “Study Required Prior to any Municipal Expansion of Brohm Ridge” states that prior to the approval of the Brohm Ridge Recreational Area development by the provincial government, the District

of Squamish will require that an independent study be undertaken to examine the impact of a municipal boundary expansion to include this area. Such a study must consider municipal taxation revenues, municipal capital and operating costs, potential municipal liability and any other relevant factors. Specific attention should be given to the delivery of water, sanitary sewerage, storm drainage, fire, police and recreation services and the fiscal and tax implications to property owners and the District of Squamish.

The development of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH will generate a significant amount of additional property tax revenue. Based on 1996 tax rates for the District of Squamish,(1) the project will contribute approximately $1.2 million in property taxes in Year One. Tax levies will increase as the project expands and, by year ten, are expected to reach close to $6.4 million annually (see Section 7.2.3 for more details).

In order to illustrate the impact of projected property tax revenue, the 1996 District of Squamish tax distribution rates were applied against the Resort’s estimated year five tax levy of $3.4 million. Based on this total, the District of Squamish would receive approximately $1.8 million, the province (schools) would receive approximately $1.3 million, and other government agencies (regional) would receive approximately $354,000.

Garibaldi Alpen Resorts (1996) Ltd. will work closely with the District of Squamish to meet the goals of their draft Official Community Plan, particularly those outlined in:

● Section 3.0 Basic Objectives ● Section 4.1 Growth Management ● Section 4.2 Parks, Recreation and Open Space ● Section 4.3 Environmental Protection ● Section 4.6 Municipal Services ● Section 4.7 Community Services and Social Planning ● Section 4.8 Transportation ● Section 4.9 Institutional ● Section 4.10 Commercial and Tourism Development ● Section 4.1.4 Future Boundary Expansion.

10.3.1 Permits and Licences

The following federal and provincial government permits and licenses will apply to different areas and phases of the proposed project (Table 10-2):

10.3.1.1 Fisheries Act

The Fisheries Act applies to aspects of the project which involve working in and near an aquatic resource or stream, such as Brohm River, Swift Creek, Culliton Creek or Cheekye River. The area of an aquatic resource includes work which takes place in the wetted perimeter of a stream or within the riparian vegetation zone which surrounds a creek or stream. Section 4, and Part 4, Sections 27, 28 and 35 of the

Fisheries Act will be most applicable to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project.

Table 10-2 Permits And Licences Which May Be Issued Concurrently With A Project Approval Certificate

Act Relevant Section Permit/License

Fisheries Act Sec. 13(4.1) License to carry on the business of aquaculture

Forest Act

Provincial Forest Regulation, B.C. Regulation 562/78

Sec. 45

Sec. 47

Sec. 91

Sec. 3

Free Use Permit

Authorization of an agreement in the form of a License to Cut to a person who does not otherwise have the right to harvest Crown timber

Authorization of a Road Permit

Special Use Permit

Heritage Conservation Act Sec. 5 Permit to alter an archaeological site

Highway Act Sec. 57 Permit for access to Controlled Access Highway

Highway (Industrial) Act Sec. 5 Certificate granting leave for an industrial road to cross or join, or be crossed or joined, by a public road or highway

Mines Act Sec. 10 or 11 Permit for work in or about a mine

Mining Right of Way Act Sec. 3

Sec. 4(1)(b)

Consent or permit to take and use private land, or to use Crown land, for a right of way

Written approval described in that provision relating to the taking and using of private land, or the using of Crown land, for a right of way

Park Act Sec. 24 Park Use Permit

Sewage Disposal Regulation, B.C. Regulation 411/85 (Heath Act)

Safe Drinking Water Regulation, B.C. Regulation 230/92 (Health Act)

Sec. 3

Sec. 4

Sec. 2

Authorization for the construction, installation, alteration or repair of a sewage disposal system

Authorization to use, operate or cover a sewage disposal system

Permit for construction, alteration or extension of a water works system

Utilities Commission Act Sec. 24 or 25 Energy Removal Certificate

Waster Management Act Sec. 8

Sec. 9

Permit to introduce waste into the environment, to store special waster or recycle special waste

Approval for the introduction of waste into the environment, the storage of special waste or the treatment or recycling of special waste

Water Act Sec. 7

Sec. 6, 10 or 11

Licence or approval for the diversion, use, or both, of water

Water Licence

The primary focus of Fisheries Act applications will be during the planning and construction phases of the project. During the planning stage, the locations of project facilities will be reviewed to ensure that potential impacts are avoided or minimized. Activities such as road clearing and construction,

construction of bridges and stream crossings, and water resource activities such as storm sewer outfall locations, water intake, and runoff generated from areas under construction will all have relevance under the Fisheries Act.

Part 4 of the Fisheries Act - Fish Protective Devices, outlines regulations which are applicable to anthropogenic activities with particular relevance to a person “who commences the construction of any dam or other hydraulic project that will use, divert, obstruct, impound or change the natural flow or course of any river or stream, or otherwise utilize any of the waters of the Province, shall provide fish passes, fish ladders, fish ways or other fish protective devices as the minister requires for the safe and adequate passage of fish over, around or through the dam or other hydraulic project”.

Proposed mitigation strategies related to aquatic resources, particularly fisheries, are outlined in Sections 4 and 11 of this document. Further guidance towards mitigation methods is provided in both the LandDevelopment Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat (Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks 1992) and in Stream Stewardship - A Guide for Planners and Developers (Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks 1993/94).

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Fisheries Act.

10.3.1.2 Forest Act

The Forest Act, and the associated Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act and Forest Land Reserve Act, govern practices related to the use of forests and forested land in the province. The Forest Act, and its associated Acts will apply to both the construction phases and the end use of the land proposed for the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development.

Part 2 of the Forest Act outlines “Classification and Management of Forests and Forest Land and Regulation of Cutting Rates.” In particular, this section details aspects of a project that may be related to:

● Growing trees continuously ● Providing forest or wilderness oriented recreation ● Producing forage for livestock and wildlife ● Conservation of wilderness ● Accommodating other forest uses.

Of particular relevance to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project are the wilderness oriented recreation activities, conservation of wilderness and accommodating other forest uses.

Part 8 of the Forest Act deals with Roads and Rights of Way, with particular emphasis on using roads located on Crown Land will be applicable to the project as the access roads to the site are constructed. This section deals with permit applications, right-of-ways, and construction aspects.

A “free use permit” will be required for developing the site for its proposed use. Division 8, Sections 45 and 46 outlines requirements for obtaining a free use permit and issuing of the permit.

Part 10 of the Forest Act deals with Forest Protection and will be applied to the project in whole.

Forest Protection Code of British Columbia

The Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act (FPL) is applicable to any logging operations which may take place on-site for construction purposes. It is also applicable where any of the proposed resort is located within a proposed cut block area, or where roads leading into or through the property intercept logging areas or logging roads.

The FPL outlines requirements for operational plans, namely as a “forest development plan” as outlined in Division 1 of Part 3. Part 4, Division 2 outlines activities associated with Road Design, Construction, Maintenance, Use and Deactivation. Particular attention to the positioning of, and construction of, roads through a forested area will be made in conjunction with the design engineers certified drawings.

Forest Land Reserve Act

The Forest Land Reserve Act encompasses:

● Private land designated as forest reserve land under the Act ● Additional private land designated as forest reserve land under the Act ● Crown land that is designated as forest reserve land under the Act.

There is no land within the proposed resort development property which has been designated as part of the Forest Land Reserve (FLR). The nearest land that has been designated under the FLR is located within the boundaries of the townsite in Squamish, and on the northwest side of Highway 99.

Mitigation strategies pertaining to the use of forested land are outlined in Sections 4 and 11 of this document.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Forest Act.

10.3.1.3 Heritage Conservation Act

Any sites designated as “heritage sites” or any objects designated as “heritage objects” under the Heritage Conservation Act are protected by the Act. If any sites or objects are known to exist on the proposed resort development property, the proponent will work together with the Archaeology Branch of the Ministry of Small Business and Tourism to ensure the protection of the site and/or object. A permit may be required to work in the vicinity of a heritage site. If a permit is required, the proponent will obtain one in accordance with Section 5 of the Heritage Act.

Potential impacts and proposed mitigation strategies for heritage sites area outlined in Section 4. Additional studies in regards to heritage sites and/or objects may be warranted. This is discussed in further detail in Section 6.9 of this document.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Heritage Conservation Act.

10.3.1.4 Highway Act

The Highway Act establishes and controls designated highways in the province. In the case of the proposed project, Highway 99 is designated under the Highway Act. Access to the resort site will be via an access road from Highway 99, approximately 13 kilometres (8.1 miles) north of the Squamish townsite.

Part 1 of the Highway Act deals with the Establishment and Control of Highways, and Part 2 deals with Protection of Highways. Both Parts 1 and 2 as well as Parts 3 and 6 of the Highway Act will apply to the project where construction activities are located in the vicinity of Highway 99. Activities such as temporarily closing lanes for construction, disrupting traffic flow in any manner, disrupting the natural flow of water beneath the highway, and any other activities that could otherwise disrupt the structural integrity of the highway or the natural flow of traffic through the area will fall under the Highway Act.

Appropriate permits to work or to construct an access road leading from Highway 99 will be obtained prior to construction activities beginning, as outlined in Section 57 of the Highway Act.

Management issues pertaining to all aspects surrounding road construction in the vicinity of Highway 99 are outlined in Section 11 of this document.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Highway Act.

10.3.1.5 Mining Right of Way Act

The Mining Right of Way Act applies to the expropriation and use of both private and Crown land, and existing roadways on private land, by a recorded holder of a Crown granted 2-post claim, as outlined in Sections 3 and 4 of the Act.

A review of known potential mineral resources within the vicinity of the proposed resort development was provided in Section 3. In brief, there are no known potential mineral occurrences on the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development property.

Two potential mineral occurrence locations are noted within 15 kilometres (9.3 miles) of the development site. The first is approximately 3 kilometres (1.9 miles) south of the development area. The second is approximately 6 kilometres (3.7 miles) north-northwest from the development site. Neither of these two

sites have ever been developed. The next known geographic locations of a potential mineral occurrence in the area are at least 15 kilometres (9.3 miles) from the development site.

The site located 3 kilometres (1.9 miles) from the site would likely be accessed from Highway 99, with an access road leading east from the highway. The second site located 6 kilometres (3.7 miles) north-northwest from the development site would also likely be accessed by a road leading east from the highway.

The Mining Right-of-Way Act is therefore only likely to apply to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development site if the two nearest sites are ever developed, and then it would be unlikely that the most cost effective and efficient direction of road transport would be through the resort site.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Mining Right-of-Way Act.

10.3.1.6 Park Act

The Park Act encompasses the use of lands designated as Provincial Parks under Schedules A, B and C. Garibaldi Provincial Park, bordering the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property on the north and east, and Alice Lake Provincial Park, located approximately 8 kilometres (5.0 miles) south of the proposed resort property, are the nearest provincial parks to the site.

The Park Act basically ensures the following with regards to the use and operation of provincial parks:

● The rights, property and interests of the Crown in right of the province ● Natural resources in and on parks and recreation areas ● Wildlife and its habitats on and in parks and recreation areas ● The preservation, development, use and maintenance of parks and recreation areas and natural

resources on and in them ● Regulation and control of public and private individuals in the parks and recreation areas.

In regards to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development, the Park Act would apply to any visitors, or any activities at the resort site which adversely impact the natural and existing resources in both Garibaldi Provincial Park and Alice Lake Provincial Park, as outlined in Section 24 of the Act.

Section 3 outlines potential land use issues at the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort site that could impact the surrounding parkland and wilderness areas. The primary concern would be the potential for persons using the resort to spill over into Garibaldi Park.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Park Act.

10.3.1.7 Waste Management Act

The Waste Management Act incorporates, among other aspects, municipal waste management (Part 3 under the Act). Municipal waste management at the proposed ski and mountain resort development will be permitted under the Waste Management Act. This includes both domestic sewage, and domestic garbage.

Under Part 2 of the Act, Sections 6, 7 and 8 deal with littering in a public place, discharge of waste from recreational vehicles, and permits to discharge waste to the environment. These aspects of the Act will be enforced in general on the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property. Waste discharge from the resort will be permitted, as outlined above.

The Waste Management Act also incorporates waste defined as Special Waste, and its use and storage on site. This part of the Waste Management Act is not expected to apply to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Waste Management Act.

10.3.1.8 Utilities Commission Act

The Utilities Commission Act governs the use, production and distribution of energy in the province. In regards to the proposed project, Sections 24 and 25 which pertain to removal of energy from the province do not apply to this project. However, Section 28 on supervision of public utilities, Section 33 on electric and other connections, and Section 39 on extending service to other areas of a municipality will likely apply to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project.

The proponent will work in accordance with the Utilities Commission Act to ensure the necessary permits are in place to secure energy utilities at the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort site.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Utilities Commission Act.

10.3.1.9 Water Act

The Water Act governs the use of and flow of water from a stream within the Province. The Act is applicable to the Garibaldi AT SQUAMISH with particular applicability to the development of a potable water supply at the site. Sections 6, 10 and 11 of the Water Act all deal with obtaining a Water License while Section 9 deals with approving “the diversion or use, or both, of water”.

Water supply is proposed to be sourced by groundwater or impounding water on site, collecting surface water from the Brohm River or Culliton Creek, or damming water upstream from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development area. In any case, the proponent will work closely with regulatory agencies in acquiring a Water License and approvals or licenses to divert water as deemed necessary to support the

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development area.

Safe Drinking Water Regulation

Under the provincial Health Act, the Safe Drinking Water Regulation (1992) was incorporated. Under the Safe Drinking Water Regulation, Part 2, the proponent will have to submit an application to construct any extensions to existing waterworks systems. In addition, any “purveyors” of a waterworks system will have to obtain a permit to operate the system under Part 4 of the Regulation. Part 5 of the regulation outlines the requirements for supplying a potable water supply to all users on the system.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Water Act.

10.3.1.10 Land Act

The Land Act incorporates such aspects as:

● The designation of land as a district (Part 1, Section 2) ● Administration of Crown Land (Part 1, Section 4) ● Disposition of Crown Land (Part 2) ● Application procedure for disposition of Crown Land (Part 3).

All aspects of the Act pertaining to the administration and disposition of Crown Land will apply to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development since the development will be constructed on Crown Land. The proponent will work closely with the Ministry of Lands to ensure that all aspects of the Act pertaining to the subject site are closely adhered to.

Part 1, Section 2 of the Land Act would only apply to the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development if the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to be segregated as its own district. At this point, this is not likely an option.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Land Act.

10.3.1.11 Municipal Act

The Municipal Act outlines the requirements of an existing requirement for governing a municipality, including the formation of local government, development of Official Community Plans (OCPs), and elections procedures. The Municipal Act is also used to designate an area as a new municipality, or a part of an existing municipality.

The section of the Municipal Act that may apply to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development would be Part 1 which deals with incorporation of a municipality. At present it is not certain how the resort would fit into the existing structure of the local municipality of Squamish.

GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH is committed to comply with the Municipal Act.

10.3.1.12 Protected Areas

The Ministry of Tourism, Land Use: Inventory Planning and Policy Section in cooperation with B.C. Parks oversees the designation and management of areas designated as “protected areas.” These areas require specific management practices.

According to B.C. Parks, there are no protected areas within the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort development property. The nearest protected areas to the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property are located near Brackendale, the Brackendale Eagle Reserve, and the Tantalus-Lake Lovely Water area. Both are situated some 5 kilometres (3.1 miles) south of the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort property. Another protected area is located at Callaghan Lake, more than 25 kilometres (15.5 miles) northwest of the proposed resort property.

(1) GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH property is located outside the boundaries of the District of Squamish. While this means taxing authority would fall to the provincial Surveyor of Taxes, it is possible the District could choose to annex the resort property (assuming cost-benefit factors favour doing so). In the event that this occurs, resort property tax revenue would accrue to the District. For this reason, we have opted to calculate Resort tax impacts using District of Squamish tax rates.

Section 11 Environmental ManagementThis section describes the principles of the various management plans that would be prepared to minimize potential impacts from the construction and operation of the proposed development. The preparation of these management plans show the commitment of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH to develop an environmentally sound project.

11.1 Stormwater Management Plan

A Storm Water Management Plan will be prepared for the proposed development in accordance with both the Urban Runoff Quality Control Guidelines (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 1992), and the Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat (Chilibeck, et al., 1992). (See Appendix 11.)

In the Storm Water Management Plan, provisions will be made to control sediments both during construction and during resort operations. In general, the plan will outline mitigation methods to ensure that the pre-development and post-development flows in the area rivers remain the same in terms of quality and quantity of flow, and flow timing. The plan will also outline provisions to ensure that there

are no impacts downstream of the proposed resort development.

Some of the areas addressed in the Storm Water Management Plan will be:

● Provision and protection of leave strips adjacent to watercourses ● Control of soil erosion and sediment in runoff water ● Control of rates of water runoff ● Control of instream work, construction and diversions on watercourses ● Maintenance of fish passages in watercourses for all salmonid life stages ● Prevention of the discharge of deleterious substances to watercourses.

In addition to the above measures to be detailed in the Stormwater Management Plan, the Best Practical/Management Technologies will be considered to provide both water quality benefits and runoff control during the construction and operation of the proposed development. Runoff quality benefits are based on contaminant removal mechanisms using biological physical processes, while runoff control is improved through detention and retention of stormwater flows for reductions in peak runoff rates and volume of water:

● Wet detention ponds, with a minimum surface area of 1.5% of the catchment area and which have a permanent pond volume equal to the design storm runoff volume, will be designed with native aquatic vegetation with sufficient water depth and area covered to perform the biological function of treatment effectively

● Infiltration systems will provide retention of highly contaminated initial flows (first flush) ● Wetlands construct to specifically treat stormwater runoff and provide biological and physical

removal mechanisms similar to a wet detention pond. Wetlands provide buffering and retention of runoff flows and fish and wildlife benefits. General design guidelines will include vegetation types and area coverage, water depth and drainage design and have a minimum surface area of 1.5% of the catchment area

● Biofilters, which include filter strips, grassed swales and linear engineered wetlands, provide physical removal of deleterious substances (i.e. particulate contaminants) suitable for sheet flow runoff typical of large linear impervious surfaces such as roadways and parking lots

● Marking of curbside stormwater drains with bright yellow fish symbols has become a standard method in the Lower Mainland to remind people that most drains empty into fish bearing streams

● Oil/water separators are effective for treating hydrocarbons which are common components of parking lot runoff.

11.2 Sediment and Erosion Control Plan

Land development activities associated with land clearing, grading slopes, road building, excavation, grubbing and stockpiling of materials for the development of the project could result in the erosion of soils and input of sediments into nearby streams/creeks. Therefore, to minimize sediment inputs into fish habitat by reducing the potential for erosion by stabilizing disturbed soils and intercepting sediment laden

runoff, the following principles will be used to design a detailed Sediment and Erosion Plan for the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project:

● The development will be sensitive to the existing terrain and site conditions including the development of roads, utilities, and building sites. The particular soil conditions and topography will be taken into account during site development and construction will be confined to the least critical areas

● The development will be scheduled to minimize risk of potential erosion and where possible, construction activities will be planned during the dry months of the year to avoid significant rain events. The development has been staged/phased to allow for green up or re-establishment of vegetation to minimize erosion and construction will be temporarily stopped during periods of heavy rains

● Existing vegetation will be retained wherever possible, and is reflected in the selection of the village site in a relatively flat and previously clear-cut logged area. Clearing of rights-of-way will be minimized and clearing boundaries will be clearly marked

● Denuded areas and bare soils will be revegetated/protected and cut and fill slopes and disturbed areas will be reseeded or revegetated. Temporary stockpiles of soils will be covered with polyethylene and mulches and other organic stabilizers will be used to minimize erosion until vegetation is established. Seeding will be conducted prior to the end of the growing season to allow establishment of germination/roots

● Runoff will be diverted from denuded areas by isolating cleared areas and building sites and avoiding steep slopes. Natural drainage will be maintained wherever possible

● The length and steepness of slopes will be minimized where possible ● Runoff velocities and erosive energy will be minimized by maximizing the length of flow paths,

construction of interceptor ditches and channels, and the use of filter fabric, rock or polyethylene linings in steep interceptor or conveyance ditches

● The development will be designed for increased runoff through the use of stable, engineered, non-erodible ditches and inlet and outlet control structure

● Eroded sediments will be retained on-site with erosion and sediment control structures utilizing sediment traps, silt fences, wetlands and sediment control ponds

● Erosion and sediment control measures will be inspected and maintained and sediment and erosion control materials will be stockpiled on site including filter cloth, hay bales, rip-rap, grass seed, drain rock, culverts, matting, polyethylene, used tires.

11.3 Water Management Plan

The proposed Water Management Plan is intended to prevent or minimize any potential impacts to the aquatic resources of the streams draining the development site. Withdrawal of surface water and release of stormwater into Brohm River could create potential low flow concerns and flooding problems. The proposed Water Management Plan will include:

● Identification of the 200-year flood plain for Brohm River, Culliton Creek, Swift Creek and the

Cheekye River and major tributaries ● Establishment of minimum low flows for Brohm River in conjunction with the regulatory agencies ● Identification and protection/stabilization of unstable banks and natural hazard areas along the

upper sections of each of the streams potentially impacted from development ● Mapping of existing drainage patterns throughout the development area ● Calculation of stormwater runoff volumes and engineered design of all surface water

transportation routes including wetlands, detention/retention ponds, swales, ditches, underground collection systems, catch basins, oil/water separators

● Assessment of groundwater aquifers including depths from surface waters, volumes, depth to bedrock, impacts of withdrawal on surface flows.

11.4 Wildlife Management Plan

11.4.1 Problem Animals

According to Herrero (1985), bears can only be deterred from their attraction to human garbage if their first exposure to humans is strongly negative. Storage containers sturdy enough to hold up to foraging bears would be a necessary first line of defense in residential areas (e.g. similar to those promoted by Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks for use in North Vancouver), however, well-maintained electrified fencing may be effective for longer-term storage facilities. Restaurants and hotels, which produce significant quantities of garbage, should be required to operate a forced-air solid waste incinerator, or arrange for daily removal. Commercial kitchens should have proper exhaust fans installed to filter odorous. At least one individual at the resort should be trained and qualified in the use of 12-guage plastic slugs for deterring bears (Bromely, et al., 1992).

Appropriate signage is recommended for summer users of hiking/cycling trails, making them aware of the potential for bear encounters and precautions to avoid attracting/provoking bears.

11.4.2 Buffer Zones

Buffer zones, extending a minimum 15 metres (49 feet) on each side of stream channels, are recommended for all development occurring near riparian zones. Consideration should be given to widening buffer zones (greater than 30 metres / 98 feet) around lower-elevation areas, as these would receive high levels of use by wildlife in addition to protecting aquatic habitat.

11.4.3 Bird Nesting Program

A bird nesting box program will be developed to replace some of the nesting habitat removed with the development of the site. Areas for installing nest boxes would include edge habitat along each side of the ski/snowboard trails and around and within the perimeter of the village site. Nest boxes for passerines would be isolated from nest boxes for owls or kestrels. Retention of snags and wildlife trees would also

be promoted in conjunction with a registered professional forester (safety issue).

11.4.4 Garbage Control

In addition to the measures outlined under the topic of problem wildlife, it is recommended that garbage collection be co-ordinated in residential areas to minimize the period garbage is present at curbside. In addition, any temporary storage of garbage on the site should be stored inside a building.

11.4.5 Access Prevention Measures

Since the development would be situated within an existing "No Shooting Zone," road access prevention measures should not be necessary. Control over hiking trail access may be required to limit disturbance to wildlife during key times of the year.

11.4.6 Vegetation Management

The main focus of plant management should be the avoidance of sensitive ecosystems. This would require vegetation surveys to be conducted on all areas for which developments are planned. Surveys should involve compilation of a plant species list and a determination of the site series/structural stage. Wherever possible, landscaping should attempt to provide plants with limited palatability to bears, particularly around the resort complex. Hydroseeding mixes for use along roadsides should also be investigated for their palatability to deer and bears. Due to the sensitivity of some alpine and subalpine ecosystems, hiking/cycling trails should be well-marked and signs should be erected to encourage people to stay on trails.

11.5 Fisheries Management Plan

11.5.1 Minimum Flows

As noted above the Water Management Plan, minimum flows would be established in Brohm River to ensure that downstream fish populations and habitat are protected. There may be opportunities during the peak flow seasons (spring snowmelt/rain events and fall rain events) to withdraw surface water for fire protection, snow making, or domestic use which may be a benefit to downstream fish populations (i.e. reduce the potential for flooding and scouring of the streambed). In addition, there may be opportunities to increase base flows through storage facilities or impoundment structures (upper Brohm River) during the low summer-early fall period that would benefit downstream fish populations, particularly to rearing juveniles and migrating adult fish.

However, water withdrawal would not likely be permitted during the late July-mid September period, which is typically the period which limits fish production.

The potential for regulating flows in Brohm River or other streams potentially impacted by the development will be established in conjunction with the regulatory agencies (Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks).

11.5.2 Leave Strips

In order to protect the aquatic resources of the Cheakamus River system, development of the site will follow the recommended fisheries leave strip requirements outlined in the Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Chilibeck et al., 1992). Specifically, the minimum leave strips (no disturbance zones) will include:

Development Minimum Leave Strip (metre/feet)

Single-Family Recreational Residences 15 metre/49 feet from the high-water mark or the top-of-bank, whichever is greatest, plus building setbacks

Retail, Hotel, and Multi-Family Recreational Residences

30 metre/98 feet from the high-water mark or top-of-bank, whichever is greatest, plus building setbacks

Rider Trails and Lifts 30 metre/98 feet from the high-water mark or top-of-bank, whichever is greatest

Roads, Utilities and Maintenance Facilities 30 metre/98 feet from the high-water mark or top-of-bank, whichever is greatest. Bridges used for all crossings of the main stream of Brohm River.

Should the development require intrusion into the riparian zone at select locations, the following provisions will also be adhered to during the planning and construction of the project facilities:

● Streambank characteristics will be taken into account when planning the development activities in and around rivers/streams

● There will be no unauthorized work or disturbance into the fisheries sensitive zones during development of the land.

Where encroachment into a leave strip is required, specific plans will be prepared and submitted to

Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks for approval including:

● Permission to encroach will only be requested for major vehicle or footbridge crossings, utility corridors and stormwater discharges

● Plans for encroachment will include details such as the extent of the work areas required, the control of water discharged from the work area and the timing of work and restoration plans

● Access points to streambanks through riparian zones will minimize the size and duration of disturbance, and preserve streamside vegetation and understory wherever possible

● Machinery and equipment access and direct disturbance to streambank areas will be limited.

Stabilizing Impacted Areas

● Eroding banks will be physically stabilized to promote stability and regeneration of vegetation ● Design and construction of stabilization works will prevent subsequent erosion ● Disturbed, unstable debris will be removed from the riparian zone to prevent it from being swept

away during high flows ● Stable, Large Organic Debris (LOD) which does not impede flows, fish migration or promote bank

erosion will be retained.

Re-vegetating Impacted Areas

● All replanting will follow the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks planting guidelines for plant species, planting timing and density

● Disturbed areas will be revegetated immediately following completion of the work in the riparian zone

● Ground cover to prevent erosion and deeper rooted plants and shrubs will be established to prevent bank erosion

● Cedar, vine maple, alder, cottonwood, willow, salmonberry, and red osier dogwood are common plants that will be used to augment brush and large plant formations

● Large trees will be planted to provide long term sources of Large Organic Debris.

11.5.3 Stream Crossings

In order to minimize impacts to the aquatic resources of the streams/creeks draining the proposed development site, principles of stream crossings that will be adhered to will include:

● All stream crossings will be located to avoid critical fish habitat including critical in-stream spawning and rearing areas and well developed riparian zones

● Wherever possible, road and utility corridors will be designed in the same locations to minimize the number of stream crossings required

● Wherever possible, clear span bridges will be used for all road/pedestrian crossings of streams

● If clear span bridges are not possible, footings and/or support structures for bridges will avoid sensitive fish habitat

● Stream crossing structures will be considered in the following order of priority:

- Bridges (preferable clear span)

- Open bottom culverts

- Box culverts

- Pipe arch culverts

- Stacked culverts

- Round culverts

● Stream crossings for ski trails will be minimized and limited to two crossings per stream ● Culverts will be designed with the following criteria:

- Diameters of all culverts will be greater than 0.45 metres (1.5 feet)

- Average water velocities and slopes will not exceed

~ 1.2 metres/second (3.9 feet/second) and less than 1.0% for culverts less than 24 metres (79 feet) in length unless baffled

~ 0.9 metres/second (3 feet/second) and 0.5% for culverts greater than 24 metres (79 feet) in length unless baffled

~ Less than 5% at all times

- Depth of water will not be less than 0.23 metres (.75 feet)

- Culverts greater than 61 metres (200 feet) will generally not be considered

- All culverts will be designed for the 100-year flood

- Bottom of all culverts will be 0.31 metres (1 foot) below the grade line of the natural stream bed

~ All culverts will be designed with outlet pools and tail water controls

● Wherever possible, stream crossings will be constructed perpendicular to the flow of water.

11.6 Natural Hazard Management

Natural hazards will be avoided rather than directly managed, especially for any proposed residential areas. Where natural hazards cannot be avoided, professional engineering and geoscience advice will be obtained.

11.6.1 Snow Avalanche Prevention and Control

Snow avalanche prevention and control are standard measures for alpine and subalpine ski areas such as the one proposed. Canadian Avalanche Association certified personnel will be used for daily operational control and professional engineering or geoscience advice sought where public safety is involved. We do not anticipate new snow avalanche hazards arising because of the proposed development.

11.6.2 Mass Wasting Prevention and Control

Prevention and control works for mass wasting processes such as landslides, soil erosion and accelerated creek erosion will be tailored to meet site-specific needs. Forest road works and clear cuts in the area have already accelerated these processes. Unlike snow avalanches, new mass wasting hazards may develop during development activity. Hazard occurrences and risks will be prevented or minimized with professional advice.

11.6.3 Access Control

Access control by means of locked gates and road and trail patrols will be implemented, as appropriate, to limit public exposure to geotechnical hazards and risks.

11.7 Solid and Liquid Waste Management

11.7.1 Solid Waste

As part of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD), the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project would be required to be part of the overall SLRD Solid Waste Management Plan which includes reduction of solid waste by at least 50% per capita by the Year 2000 and the closure of all of the SLRD landfills by 1999. The proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development would follow the guiding principles outlined in the SLRD’s Solid Waste Management Plan including:

● Consumption of material and energy resources will be set at a level which is ecologically and

economically sustainable ● Solid waste stream will be reduced to the greatest extent feasible in accordance with the hierarchy

of reduce, reuse, recycle and consistent with local resources and the nature of the solid waste stream

● Individuals and firms will be enabled to make environmentally sound choices about consumption or resources and generation of waste through the provision of appropriate information, including user pay and market based incentives where possible

● All policy strategies and facilities will be developed through public consultation acceptable to BC Environment and are socially acceptable and cost effective based on full accounting of costs and benefits both monetary and non-monetary

● Goal of the environmental policy is to minimize pollution ● Goal to financing the system is to adopt a hybrid user pay system to ensure reduction occurs and

phase in a full user pay system in the long term.

Since the proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project is planned to begin operation by 2000, a period when landfill operations may no longer exist within the SLRD, solid waste management systems within the resort site will be aimed at reducing solid waste disposal by 50% in Year 1 (2000) and the remaining 50% as follows:

Year % Reduction in Solid Waste Disposal

200050%

200145%

200240%

200335%

200430%

200525%

200620%

200715%

200810%

20095%

20100%

11.7.2 Liquid Waste

The GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project has a number of options to dispose of liquid waste depending on whether the resort is annexed into the District of Squamish or is a separate Resort Municipality under the Mountain Resort Associations Act. If the resort is annexed into the District of Squamish, liquid waste treatment and disposal would be the responsibility of the District of Squamish. As such, the Mamquam Sewage Treatment Facility would either have to be expanded or a new facility constructed within the municipal boundaries of Squamish. Effluent quality would have to meet B.C. Environment permit requirements for effluent quality criteria as follows:

● 5-day biological oxygen demand of a maximum of 30 milligrams/litre (.004 ounces/gallon) ● Total suspended solids of 40 milligrams/litre (.005 ounces/gallon) ● Toxicity (LT50) of 96 hours non-toxic ● Orthophosphate as phosphorous of a maximum of 1.75 milligrams/litre (.0002 ounces/gallon) ● Nutrient loading (May 15-September 15) of 36.6 kilogram/month (80.7 pounds/month) maximum

measured as orthophosphate.

If the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project becomes a separate resort municipality under the Mountain Resort Associations Act, (see Section 10) liquid waste treatment and disposal would either be by ground disposal or tertiary treatment to remove phosphorous and nutrient loading. In either case, the effluent quality would have to meet or exceed B.C. Environment permit requirements for effluent quality as stated above.

Whether the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project treats liquid waste on-site or through an expanded facility in Squamish, a grey-water system will be implemented on-site to re-circulate liquid waste as much as possible. This grey-water system will be used in toilets, potentially for snowmaking, fire protection and fertilization of adjacent forested lands or greenhouse operations. The system will significantly reduce the volume of liquid waste required to be treated off-site at the Mamquam treatment plant or through on-site ground disposal or tertiary treatment.

In addition to the above grey-water system to reduce the overall volume of liquid waste requiring disposal at the development, the following innovative technology will be implemented to reduce water demand and overall volumes of liquid waste generated by the development:

● Water Smart water faucets with automatic shut-off valves to conserve water in public toilets ● Water Smart toilets which operate with 4 litres (1 gallon) of water compared to the standard 20

litre (5.3 gallon) toilet in operation today ● Water Smart shower heads which use less water ● Water Smart commercial laundry facilities in the hotels and lodges which require less water at a

lower temperature ● State-of-the-art commercial boilers that are more efficient at heating and storing heated water for

domestic use.

11.7.3 Special Waste Facilities

The Waste Management Act, Special Waste Regulation (1988) specifies what may be defined as a Special Waste as follows:

● Dangerous goods that are no longer used for their original purpose ● PCB wastes ● Wastes containing dioxins ● Waste oil ● Waste asbestos ● Waste pest control product containers and wastes containing pest control products including waste

produced in the production of treated wood products using pest control products ● Leachable toxic waste ● Waste containing tetrachloroethylene ● Waste containing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

The proposed GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort will likely generate waste oil that would be classified as a Special Waste. The waste oil will originate from servicing the lifts and from servicing the maintenance equipment for the village such as snow removal equipment, grooming equipment, and service vehicles.

The waste oil will be stored on-site in drums clearly marked as containing waste oil. The drums will be stored in a locked storage facility that has an impermeable, bermed base. The bermed base will be capable of holding 110% of the total volume of all drums stored in that area. Due to the location of the servicing bays in the village, more than one storage area may be required

A storage permit for waste oil would be required if the storage totalled 10,000 litres or more at any one time. The storage permit would be obtained from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks as required under the Waste Management Act.

Waste oil will be removed from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH resort on a regular basis by a waste removal contractor licenced to transport special waste such as Philip Environmental Services or Laidlaw with the exact contractor to be determined at a later date. The waste will be manifested off-site in accordance with the Waste Management Act.

11.7.4 Fuel Storage Facilities

Fuel storage facilities will be required to store diesel fuel and gasoline required to power the service and maintenance vehicles for the site.

11.7.5 Above Ground Storage Tanks

Where above ground storage tanks are used to store petroleum products, the specifications for the installation of the above ground storage tanks will follow the British Columbia Fire Code (November,1992) and the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment (CCME) Environmental Code of Practice for Above Ground Storage Tank Systems Containing Petroleum Products (August, 1994).

Any above ground storage tanks used at the site will be designed and constructed in accordance with the provincial Fire Code Section 4.3.1 Design, Construction and Use of Storage Tanks. This section specifies the standard to be used for shop fabricated above ground storage tanks (namely CAN4-S601). It also specifies the corrosion protection requirements for above ground storage tanks under Section 4.3.1.5. Installation of the above ground storage tanks is specified under Section 4.3.2 which includes the minimum distance that an above ground storage tank can be located from a building, and Section 4.3.2.2(1) which specifies the spacing between storage tanks.

Sections 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 of the British Columbia Fire Code deal with Supports, Foundations and Anchorage for Above Ground Storage Tanks and Normal and Emergency Venting for Above Ground Storage Tanks. Sections 4.3.5 deals with Vent Piping for Above Ground Storage Tanks. Any above ground storage tanks installed on the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH property will conform to these sections of the British Columbia Fire Code.

Storage areas for above ground storage tanks will be constructed in accordance with Section 4.3.7 of the British Columbia Fire Code which, among other aspects, stipulates that a storage area must be capable of handling 110% of the volume of the above ground storage tanks stored in that area. If more than one storage tank is stored in a specified area, the storage area must be capable of holding 110% of the volume of the largest above ground storage tank in that area plus 10% of the aggregate volume of all the other tanks, or 110% of the volume of the largest above ground storage tank, whichever is greater.

Section 3.5 of the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for above ground storage tanks stipulates installation requirements for above ground storage tanks. Section 3.6 stipulates Corrosion Protection of Steel Above Ground Storage Tank Systems, and Section 3.7 stipulates Secondary Containment Requirements. The Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment requires that a single-walled and single-bottom storage tank be placed entirely within a diked area with an impermeable barrier in the floor of the containment area and in the dike walls.

Section 3.8 addresses Used Oil Tank Systems. This section will be adhered to if an above ground storage tank is selected for storing waste oil, as described under the Special Waste Facilities section of this report.

Any above ground storage tanks installed at the resort will be installed in accordance with the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for above ground storage tanks, and the British Columbia Fire Code. Any proprietors who lease property from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort will be required to construct any above ground storage tanks in accordance with the National Fire Code and the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice.

11.7.6 Underground Storage Tanks

Underground storage tanks, where required, will be installed in accordance with the British Columbia Fire Code (November, 1992) and the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for Underground Storage Tank Systems Containing Petroleum Products and Allied Petroleum Products (1993).

Section 4.3.8 of the provincial Fire Code addresses the Installation of Underground Storage Tanks. Sections 4.3.9 address Corrosion Protection of Underground Steel Storage Tanks and 4.3.10 addresses Vents for Underground Storage Tanks. Section 4.4 addresses Piping and Transfer Systems.

The Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for underground storage tanks, specifies that the owner of a underground storage tank is required to register the underground storage tank with the authority having jurisdiction for that area. In the case of the Squamish area, this would be the local fire department. All underground storage tanks located at the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort will be registered with the local fire department.

If an underground storage tank is used to store waste oil, Section 4.5 of the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for underground storage tanks will be adhered to. For other petroleum products (e.g. diesel or gasoline), Section 4.6 will be adhered to. Design Standards for underground storage tanks are outlined in Section 4.7 of the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice for underground storage tanks. Installation requirements and Corrosion Protection requirements for underground storage tanks are outlined in Sections 4.8 and 4.9 respectively of the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice.

Any underground storage tanks installed at the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort will be installed in accordance with the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice, and the British Columbia Fire Code. In addition, any proprietors who lease property from the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH Resort will be required to construct and install underground storage tanks in accordance with the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Environmental Code of Practice and the British Columbia Fire Code.

11.8 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN

Vegetation removal and slope modifications necessary for construction of roads, utility lines, rider trails and lifts, support facilities and residential development will be carefully designed and administered as part of the construction of GARIBALDI. To this end, a detailed, long-range permanent vegetation removal, erosion control and revegetation plan will be required prior to each construction phase. Management plans will include the following guidelines:

Vegetation Clearing

The initial clearing should be the minimum acceptable for rider trails and rider support facilities, as well as for roads, lifts and real estate development construction. Should it become necessary in the future to clear additional trees, such removal can be accomplished more easily and at less cost than adding trees. The tree and brush edge of all clearing should be carefully designed for the optimum natural blending. The line of the edge should not be straight but rather should flow with the topography and vegetation patterns.

It is proposed that a few of the typical silviculture systems in British Columbia be combined to provide a visually aesthetic and natural clearing appearance for Squamish residents, travelers on the Sea to Sky Highway and future recreationalists of GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. In designing the silvicultural system for rider trails, it is possible to limit tree removal to 55 to 65 percent and still provide adequate trail terrain by using the following methods:

● Clearcut with reserves ● Group seed tree selection ● Single seed tree selection ● Group selection.

The combination of these British Columbia silvicultural systems may be difficult, but will be advantageous in the long term when considering terrain, aesthetic appeal, fish and wildlife impacts and recreational uses available in the area.

Temporary Soil Stabilization

Temporary soil stabilization methods will be used to control erosion during construction or until permanent stabilization methods are installed. Soil stabilization will be required on all disturbed soils. During construction or pending construction of permanent one or more the following soil stabilization techniques will be employed and the improvements shall be maintained, repaired and replaced as necessary to provide protection against loss of soil from the site.

● Hydro-mulching – The application of wood fiber mulch and tacking agent in a slurry with water. The method shall be combined with hydro-seeding as a revegetation method for permanent soil stabilization

● Straw mulch – This method involves the application of staple straw as a protective cover over bark or seeded soil. The method is applicable to slopes, which are physically stable, and either less than 3 metres (10 feet) in total height and less than 30% slope or any height and less than 10% slope

● Jute matting – This application involves the use of a heavy fiber net either alone or over straw or wood fibre mulches. When used over mulches, it is applicable to area with slopes up to 50% provided that runoff is controlled in drainage improvements. When used alone, it is applicable to areas with slopes up to 30% and less than 3 metres (10 feet) in height or larger areas with slopes up to 20%.

Revegetation and Permanent Stabilization

Revegetation is virtually the only long-term means of preventing surface soils from eroding and sifting into surface waters. Revegetation will apply to all disturbed areas within the project site. Revegetation shall be initiated as soon as possible after construction has been completed and slopes are physically stable.

● Planting shall be conducted at the time selected to maximize vegetation survival ● The use of fertilizer for planting and maintenance shall be specified in the revegetation plan ● Seed and plantings shall be from the same or the previous year’s crop or growth cycle.

Section 12 FUTURE AND ON-GOING STUDIESThe intent of this section is to provide an outline of the proposed future and on-going studies to be undertaken (or already underway) by the proponent in anticipation of acquiring a Project Certificate, and approval for the Ski Area Master Plan and Master Development Agreement under CASP. The majority of these studies are already completed or planned for completion during 1998.

It is hoped these proposed studies will help demonstrate GARIBALDI’s commitment to assessing and designing the proposed project in an environmentally sensitive, socially conscious and economically responsible manner.

12.1 Aquatic Resources/Fisheries

Based on a review of available information on fish resources of the Squamish area from the Departmentof Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks, two consultant reports (Nelson, 1996 and Envirowest, 1996) and sampling conducted by ENKON Environmental in 1996 and 1997, the following aquatic resource studies will be completed to fill in any data gaps that may exist:

12.1.1 Fisheries

Fish population sampling and habitat assessments, as per the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parksstandard methods for all accessible reaches and major tributaries of:

● Culliton Creek (e.g. Conroy Creek Tributary) ● Swift Creek ● Brohm Creek (e.g. Brook Creek Tributary) ● Cheekye River

Sampling methods included electro-shocking (between June 15 and September 15), minnow trapping (>40C), and angling.

Sampling was conducted during the fall of 1996, the low flow summer period in 1997 and the early fall of 1997. The final sampling will be conducted in the spring spawning period (May/early June) of 1998.

Fish habitat assessments have included measurement of the following physical parameters:

● Channel & Wetted Width ● Average Depth ● Gradient● Cover Total & Type ● Discharge● Obstructions● Bed Material & Compaction ● Bank Height, Texture & Stability ● Valley Channel Ratio ● Flood Signs ● Water Temperature, pH, Turbidity & Stage.

The above assessments will be used to address the following concerns:

● Assessment of potential impacts on fish habitat and populations for all streams potentially affected by the project facilities or access road. Proposed mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potential impacts will be included and, where necessary, fish habitat compensation for any loss or alteration of habitat will be provided.

● Monitoring plans to ensure that the proposed mitigation/compensation measures are successful and the plans modified as necessary to ensure the long-term success of the measures.

● Conceptual drawings of all stream crossing structures, including culverts, fjords and bridges, and storm water treatment systems (i.e. wetlands, bio-filtration ponds, oil water separators, grasses swales, catch basins, etc.).

Information on fish sampling and habitat assessments are provided in Section 9 of this report. Further sampling in the spring of 1998 will be provided in the spring, 1998.

12.1.2 Water Quality Sampling

Collection of seasonal water quality samples from Culliton Creek, Swift Creek, Brohm River, Cheekye River and the Cheakamus River.

Water quality sampling was conducted in:

● Late May-early June, 1997 (during freshet) ● August - early September, 1997 (low summer low flow) ● Late October, 1997 (fall rising flows).

The final samples will be collected as follows:

● Mid-March, 1998 (winter low flow) ● Early-April, 1998 (prior to freshet, low flow).

Standard analysis includes total metals (ICP metals scan), nutrients, ammonia, total suspended and dissolved solids, total and fecal coliform bacteria, conductance, hardness (EDTA) and alkalinity.

Sample sites included the lower sections of Culliton Creek (immediately upstream of Highway 99), Brohm River, Brook Creek, Swift Creek and Cheekye River. In addition, water quality samples were collected in the Cheakamus River upstream of Culliton Creek and downstream of Cheekye River. The water quality information will be used for the following:

● Identification and documentation of potential water quality impacts associated with the proposed development and access road construction, including sedimentation from disturbed areas, storm drains and proposed mitigation measures to avoid significant deterioration of water quality. The potential impacts will also address any potential introduction or increase in nutrients, particularly phosphorous

● If salt is to be used for road or ski run maintenance, potential impacts to downstream water quality will be assessed.

The water quality information collected to date is provided in Section 9 of this report, while the winter and spring data will be provided in the spring of 1998.

12.1.3 Minimum Instream Flow Studies

Water supply for domestic use, snow making and fire protection may be acquired from either surface

waters (i.e. Culliton Creek or Brohm River) or groundwater. Assuming that some portion of the water supply will be withdrawn from surface waters, minimum instream flow studies are presently being conducted in the areas potentially impacted by the development.

The “wetted perimeter method” will be used for determination of minimum flows. This assumes that trout carrying capacity of the stream is proportional to food production, which in turn is proportional to the wetted perimeter of riffle and other food producing areas. The method requires 3 calibration flows (low, middle and high) in order to describe the relationship between wetted perimeter and discharge. To date, 4 calibration flows have been measured and will be used in the analysis.

Each calibration flow will include measurements of stage, depth and velocity along the cross section. A survey of the cross sectional bottom profile is also required and has been conducted. Data is presently being input to a hydraulic simulation model, which will provide the relationship between wetted perimeter and discharge. In addition to the wetted perimeter, the model used will provide depth and velocity across each cross section at any discharge within the model range.

Ten cross sections have been selected to represent the various configurations of riffles and runs in the project area. If necessary, selected transects will be photographed or video taped and presented to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks.

Calibration flows were taken in September and October, 1997. The Instream Flow Report will document field methods and materials, hydraulic modeling techniques, and will provide tables and graphs of the discharge/wetted perimeter and other channel/discharge relationships.

The instream flow study, in addition to other information, will be used in consultation with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment Lands and Parks to determine appropriate instream flows for fisheries and aquatic resources.

This information will be available during the winter, 1997/1998.

12.2 Wildlife Resources

The Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks, in cooperation with the Ministry of Forests and Garibaldi Provincial Park, has been collecting resource information for deer, mountain goats and biophysical habitat features within Garibaldi Provincial Park and, to a limited degree, within the proposed development area. In addition, D. Blood & Associates, on behalf of Garibaldi Alpen, initiated monthly wildlife surveys in October, 1996.

Monthly field visits have provided useful information regarding wildlife values in the area. However, due to seasonality constraints, little is known about the occurrence/distribution of a number of key species (ie. the marbled murrelet and spotted owl).

The following baseline field studies were completed during 1997 to fill in the data gaps for evaluating the impacts of the proposed project:

● "Intensive" marbled murrelet nesting surveys in old-growth stands between late May and early August

● Playback of recorded calls for spotted owl, northern goshawk, screech owl and other raptorial birds during the Spring breeding season

● Aerial surveys identified critical winter range for mountain goats and black-tailed deer, conducted by the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks. Pellet group counts to aid in delineation of deer winter ranges

● Spring breeding bird surveys in all major habitat types occurring within the study area ● Stream surveys for tailed frog tadpoles in early Summer ● Wetland surveys in late Summer/Fall identified waterfowl use of the area ● Biophysical habitat mapping of the project area, as per the Ministry of Environment, Lands &

Parks standard methodology. The objectives of this mapping for the study area were: ● Terrain units at 1:20,000 scale to provide a basis for the biophysical habitat mapping ● A map of biophysical habitat units (classes) at 1:20,000 scale ● Field data at representative plot locations for soils, vegetation and wildlife ● A plant species list based on field study and previous investigations ● A wildlife species list ● Wildlife species lists for the biophysical habitat classes ● Interpretations of wildlife habitat suitability and capability ● Winter track counts to identify nocturnal/elusive species and determine areas of heavy use by

ungulates● A literature review for potential impacts of development on wildlife populations and habitat,

applying the research to provide a detailed analysis of the potential impacts of the project to wildlife in the area of the proposed development

● An assessment of the potential impacts of the project facilities on wildlife habitat and populations, proposing mitigation measures to minimize or eliminate potential impacts. This assessment will focus on sensitive, threatened or endangered species and the potential for human/bear conflicts

● Habitat compensation enhancement opportunities for loss of critical habitat where potential impacts cannot be avoided

● An assessment of the cumulative impacts on key wildlife of the proposed development, using methods such as road densities and concentrations of existing and planned land use

● Management and monitoring plans to determine the success of the proposed mitigation measures and ensure the flexibility is provided which will allow modification of the measures wherever necessary.

This information has been partially reported in Section 9 of this report while the remainder will be available during the winter, 1997/1998.

12.3 Vegetation Resources

Vegetation studies focused on identification of unique or rare vegetation based on vegetation plots established during the biophysical habitat mapping in September 1997 and review of aerial photography.

Successional stages of plant communities within each habitat polygon will be mapped. Plant species lists will also be compiled based on data collected from the field plots.

This information will be available during the winter of 1997/1998.

12.4 Terrain

Potential terrain and avalanche hazard areas have been provided in this report based on assessments by Thurber Engineering and P. Schaerer of C. Stethem & Associates.

During the Master planning phase, information on terrain and avalanche hazards will be mapped on 1:5,000 scale project layout maps that shows their proximity to the proposed village base area and mountain facilities. The 1:200 year floodplain will also be mapped at 1:5,000 scale.

Conceptual monitoring and mitigation measures provided in an avalanche and terrain management plan to reduce to acceptable levels of risk any avalanche/terrain hazards which could threaten components of the resort development.

12.5 Water Management

Water management studies are associated with water supply and stormwater flows. These studies will be conducted during the Master planning phase and will provide the following:

● Estimates of the resort and mountain facilities water demand for culinary, snow making and fire protection (already provided for culinary, snow making and fire protection in Section 2 of this report)

● An assessment of groundwater supply for domestic use, snow making and fire protection through a groundwater drilling exploration program. Pump tests will determine the quantity and quality of groundwater availability and include assessment of impacts to nearby watercourses by identification of the zone of withdrawal

● Estimates of the mean monthly flows for Culliton Creek and Brohm River to support a “Surface Water License Application” from the Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks (already provided in Section 2 of this report)

● A description and conceptual drawings of the water supply system, including the distribution system, pump stations, surface water intake structures, chlorination and de-chlorination stations, UV treatment systems, storage facilities, impoundment structures and any discharge points (partially provided for in Section 2 of this report)

● A description and conceptual drawings of the grey water re-circulation system, including a filtration system adequate to prevent any possible breakthrough of cysts and a post filtration chlorination system

● An operational monitoring program, acceptable to the Medical Health Officer, outlining regular monitoring of treated water and drinking water

● A storm water management plan based on the general principle of “post development storm flows (quantity & quality) similar to pre-development storm flows.” Storm water discharge points will be identified and the collection, treatment and disposal of storm water/snowmelt run-off for all phases of development will be addressed

● Mapping of all drainage patterns for channel stability and capacity ● Identification and mapping (1:5,000 scale) of the 200 year floodplain for Culliton Creek, Cheekye

River Brohm River and major tributaries ● Identification of all stream crossings which will require upgrading or new structures and

conceptual plans for each crossing ● Documentation of all stream armoring, channeling, or relocation, including an assessment of

potential impacts to fish habitat and proposed fish habitat mitigation and compensation plans ● A non-point source waste discharge control plan, including an inventory of non-point source

contamination at the village site and along the access road, as well as mitigation strategies for each source. This plan will follow the criteria outlined in “Urban Runoff Quality Control Guidelines for B.C. and Storm water Guidelines and Management strategies for B.C.”.

Some of this information has already been provided in Section 2, while the remainder of the information will be made available during the winter/spring of 1998.

12.6 Solid & Liquid Waste Treatment

The demand for solid waste disposal from the resort will include sufficient information to encourage the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District (SLRD), which is responsible for solid waste management in the region, to amend the recently submitted Solid Waste Plan to include the proposed GARIBALDI ATSQUAMISH project.

The information provided in Section 2 of this report on liquid waste will enable the District of Squamish to evaluate the need to expand/upgrade the Mamquam Treatment Plant, pending its decision whether the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project should be included within the municipal boundaries of the District of Squamish. Discussions with Kerr Wood Leidal have indicated that the recent expansion of the Mamquam plant is sufficient for the immediate future (next 5 years) to treat both the volume of liquid waste generated by the resort development and the future growth of the District of Squamish.

Should Squamish choose not to include the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH project within the District boundaries, information will be provided for a new on-site liquid waste treatment facility.

The following plans and principles for liquid waste treatment and solid waste disposal will be followed:

● Plans and policies for the Reducing, Reusing and Recycling of solid wastes and the minimizing of solid waste

● Plans for the storage of solid waste prior to off-site disposal, including identification of measures to minimize public health and safety concerns, and plans to minimize, collect, handle and dispose of household hazardous waste

● A commitment that refuse collection and disposal will not only be compatible with the SLRD Waste Management Plan, but will be conducted in a clean and efficient manner (i.e. will not attract wildlife)

● An update on the status of discussions about solid waste with the SLRD, including the details of any arrangements which have been reached

● The estimated quantity and quality of effluent discharge from all project facilities by phase of development

● A liquid waste management plan which addresses the collection, treatment and disposal of storm water/snowmelt run-off, as well as domestic effluent from all components of the project

● Options for liquid waste treatment including assessing the potential for ground disposal and tertiary treatment facilities, in the event that the District of Squamish ultimately decides not to include the GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH development within its Municipal Boundaries. Further information which will be provided include:

- If ground disposal is considered, provision of information including soil depth, distance to the nearest stream, distance to groundwater, soil hydraulic conductivity, potential for groundwater mounding, soils stability, and depth to bedrock (i.e., hydrogeological/geotechnical assessment)

● If tertiary treatment is considered, provision of conceptual plans of the treatment facility, including the treatment process, details on the quantity and quality of discharge, and the points of discharge

● Provision of an assessment of the potential impacts to fish habitat and populations from sewage disposal

- Identify any special wastes that may be generated by the project, including plans for collection, treatment and disposal, and spill contingencies

- Spill contingency plans for any special wastes that may be transported to the project site. Availability of equipment on site to implement the contingency plan

● Information on locations, amounts and types of fuels to be stored on site, conceptual plans for storage of fuels, and identification of any off-site fuel storage facilities associated with transportation to and from the site.

12.7 Climate

In order to finalize plans for the development of the ski runs and lifts, hotel/lodge locations, village site,

road networks and infrastructure for the development, future climate studies will focus on the following:

● Installation of remote climate stations on the project site (initiated in November, 1997) which will record, air temperature and precipitation

● Collection of monthly snowpack depth and snow surface conditions on Brohm Ridge, mid-mountain, and the village site.

12.8 Air Quality

No significant impacts to air quality are anticipated from the proposed development. However, wood burning fireplaces could contribute particulate matter into the atmosphere and vehicle emissions could contribute to depletion of the ozone layer.

Air quality monitoring program proposed is to establish baseline air quality, as follows:

● An air quality assessment which demonstrates that local air quality in the Brohm Ridge area will not be impacted. Air quality management will address plans to maintain low PM10 levels, including identification of sources of PM10 and ambient air quality objectives

● Installation of PM10 hi-vol samplers and monitoring of levels at the village site throughout 1997 ● An inventory of all potential source emissions, using emission factors available in the literature.

12.9 Heritage

Garibaldi Alpen will commission Arcas Archaeological Consultant to undertake a Heritage Study in accordance with the B.C. Heritage Act. The scope of the study will be discussed with D. Hutchcroft of the provincial Heritage Branch.

12.10 Noise

Noise from the proposed operation of the development is anticipated to be within acceptable levels. During construction, however, noise levels could significantly exceed ambient levels within a limited geographic area.

The following information will be provided in the master planning phase of the project:

● The primary sources of noise, including noise generated during the construction and operation phases of the project

● Sound levels generated by each source of noise in its immediate vicinity and their detectability at a distance from the source will be estimated, taking into account background noise levels at various locations including those attributable to other human origins (i.e. logging, heli-ski operations,

commercial and charter airplane flight paths) ● A map will outline the footprint of the various noise levels anticipated, particularly in high

elevation resort-related activities during day and night and adjacent to the Brohm Lake rest stop on Highway 99

● Mitigation strategies that will minimize noise impacts from the development.

12.11 Traffic

The Ministry of Transportation & Highways has indicated that the proposed development is expected to impact operation of Highway 99, (see letter dated January 13, 1997).

Based on discussion with the Ministry in December 1996 and 1997, a study will be required to assess potential impacts to traffic along the Sea to Sky Corridor, at the proposed interchange at the junction of Highway 99, access road and the internal road system.

The traffic study should evaluate the impact of the ultimate development from Horseshoe Bay to GARIBALDI AT SQUAMISH. The study should also evaluate the best access location from Highway 99 and the most suitable road configuration for that access point.

As discussed with the Ministry of Transportation & Highways in December 1997, the draft terms of reference for the proposed traffic study are as follows:

The purpose of the study is to:

● Evaluate the traffic Impact of the ultimate development on Highway 99 from Horseshoe Bay to the proposed Garibaldi highway access intersection

● Identify a preferred location for the proposed Garibaldi highway access intersection and ● Determine the most suitable road configuration for the proposed Garibaldi highway access

intersection

The scope of the study is to:

Analysis of the proposed Garibaldi highway access intersection and signalized intersections through Squamish will conform to the requirements set out in the Ministry’s Site Impact Analysis Requirements Manual. Analysis of the Highway 99 corridor from horseshoe Bay to the access intersection will consist of a general review with the objective of identifying the incremental change in capacity resulting from additional traffic from proposed developments.

1. Document Existing Conditions & Reports

Review existing reports, including:

● District of Squamish Official Community Plan ● Bunt & Associates 1997 Transportation Study for the District of Squamish ● Reid Crowther 1997 Whistler Transportation study ● Hamilton & Associates Highway Planning and Pre-Design Engineering Study

Document existing highway infrastructure including:

● laning● passing opportunities ● insignalized intersection locations ● network connections ● signalized intersections locations

Conduct intersection counts at two signalized intersections in Squamish (say Cleveland Avenue and Garibaldi Way) during a typical winter Sunday PM peak hour period. Use these volumes to factor weekday PM counts (available in Bunt report) at remaining signalized intersections to winter Sunday PM counts.

Document existing travel patterns and traffic characteristics on highway 99, with emphasis on peak hour operations-particularly the weekday AM and PM peaks and the winter Sunday PM peak. Analysis should include capacity analysis of signalized intersections through Squamish.

1.2. Traffic Demand Forecasting

Consult with stakeholders regarding future development potential along the Highway 99 corridor. Consultation is anticipated with the Resort Municipality of Whistler the District of Squamish the Regional District of Lillooet and BC Rail.

Determine the trip generation of the Garibaldi ski development. Development of trip rates should include justification of travel mode assumptions for rail and air (Squamish airport) arrivals. Trip rates developed for the Garibaldi ski development are to be approved by the Ministry in advance of proceeding with detailed modelling.

Establish the distribution and assignment of traffic from the Garibaldi development on Highway 99.

Establish and document intersection traffic volumes, development volumes and combined volumes at the proposed Garibaldi highway access intersection, all existing signalized intersections and key access locations on Highway 99 within the study area.

Develop a transportation model as a toll to assess the impacts of the development on Highway 99 between horseshoe Bay and the proposed highway access to the Garibaldi ski development. The model is to be

calibrated to reflect existing winter weekday AM & PM and Sunday PM peak hour traffic volume conditions for use in modelling two future horizon periods thus three time horizons are required:

1. Base (existing ) condition

2. Opening day

3. Opening day + 10 years

In addition to the general growth trend, the model should consider in isolation the anticipated development of several specific development areas, including:

● Garibaldi ski development ● Furry Creek (1,000 lots, 3,000 population) ● BC Rail @ Porteau Cove (Indian casino development) ● Whistler area ● Duffey Lake ski development ● Squamish airport

1.3 Capacity Analysis

Divide the highway into several homogeneous segments and evaluate existing and future traffic operations on Highway 99 assuming no significant improvements in highway infrastructure. Analyze existing and future v/c ratios and levels of service of each segment and identify locations having poor capacity characteristics.

Using methods and procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) calculate the volume/capacity (v/c) ratios and level of service at all existing and proposed signalized intersections through Squamish and key access locations on Highway 99 for each time horizon.

Identify all intersections having a v/c ratio exceeding 0.85, or intersection locations with a level of service worse than ‘D’ and identify improvements to maintain a LOS ‘D’.

Develop improvement strategies to mitigate impact of development traffic from all proposed developments along the corridor and compare to improvement strategies excluding Alpen Ski Resort traffic.

1.4 Garibaldi Highway Access Intersection

Identify the best location for the proposed Garibaldi highway access intersection. Analysis should consider decision sight distance sight distance, highway geometrics and environmental considerations. Preferred location to be confirmed in the field with a Ministry representative.

Identify highway access intersection requirements in terms of basic laning, auxillary lanes, and signal warrant. Design should ensure a minimum level of service no worse than ‘D’ to the 10 year time horizon.

12.12 Land Use

The following information on land use will be provided as part of the detailed review of the project:

● A summary of historical and current land use in the vicinity of the project ● A 1:20,000 scale map of the government issued tenures and operating approvals which authorize

the use of the land or resources in the vicinity of the development, including water licences and approvals, waste management permits and approvals, forestry tenures and operating approvals, subsurface resource tenures and operating approvals, recreational land designations, agricultural and/or grazing tenures, guide-outfitting territories, trap-lines, heli-ski tenures and other miscellaneous tenures

● Identification of the generalized forest quality and quantity (ha) data for areas to be affected directly and indirectly including site indices, forest capability, logging and replanting history, species composition and forest harvesting tenures. This will also include reductions in the annual allowable cut, potential losses of jobs in the forest sector, restrictions on forestry related traffic on the access road

● Assessment of the wildfire risk associated with construction and operation of the proposed project and inclusion of a fire protection plan for adjacent forested areas

● Presentation of options for mitigating any impacts which restrict forest management options on lands adjacent to the development.

12.13 Public Consultation

As part of the detailed review of the project, GARIBALDIhasprovided in Section 8 of this report a summary of all public consultations including:

● Dates and locations of meetings and discussions ● The nature of any views expressed by the public and public interest groups ● Measures proposed by to address public concerns, either to reduce adverse effects or to enhance

associated project benefits ● An outline of a public consultation program planned for the review of the Project Report including

open houses, one-on-one sessions with key public interest groups.

12.14 First Nations Consultations

As part of the detailed review of the project, GARIBALDI has provided in Section 9 of this report a

summary of consultations with First Nations including:

● Dates and locations of meetings and discussions ● The nature of any views expressed by First Nations representatives and members of aboriginal

communities● Identification of the potential impacts of the project on the traditional use areas of the Squamish

Nation, Burrard Band and the Mount Currie Band ● Measures proposed to address first Nations concerns either to reduce adverse impacts or to

enhance associated project activities ● The incorporation of local information into project planning ● Employment, career planning and job training and/or and contracting opportunities ● Plans for on-going consultation and identification of potential impacts on aboriginal rights ● A First Nations consultation program to review the Project Report (First Nations representatives

will be consulted to acquire advice in developing the program).

12.15 Tourism

The following data collection for tourism reflects GARIBALDI’s acute awareness of the Resort Municipality of Whistler’s contribution to the economy and reputation of British Columbia throughout North America. Further information to be provided includes:

● Assessment of the implications of the proposed development on the supply and demand of the tourism product including potential tourism/recreation sector benefits, regional marketing plans, compatibility with other tourism products, and impacts to the existing resort tourism.

12.16 Commercial & Non-Commercial Fish and Wildlife Recreation

Since commercial guiding is not permitted in Area 2-7 which encompasses the project site and only one aboriginal trap line exists within the site, the information requirements for commercial and non-commercial fish and wildlife recreation will focus on the identification of other traditional uses for First Nations people, and on recreational hunting.

Recreational fishing is presently confined to the lower sections of each stream draining the property and will not be restricted by the proposed development. Hunting is closed in Area 2-7 so will not be impacted. The following information will be provided during the master planning phase of the project:

● Identification of traditional fishing, hunting, food gathering, spiritual grounds and medicinal plant gathering areas

● Assessment of the anticipated impacts to each of these traditional use areas by first Nations people

● Proposed mitigation or enhancement opportunities to provide continued access to these important traditional areas.

12.17 Socio-Economic Analysis

A preliminary socio-economic assessment of the proposed development on the District of Squamish is provided in Section 6 of this Application Report to provide a background of the community structure, potential social and economic impacts and future monitoring programs.

The only remaining question on socio-economic issues is related to the potential annexation of the proposed development into the District of Squamish. In recognition of the importance of this issue, GARIBALDI is willing to provide financial support for the cost of the study and work with the District of Squamish to finalize the terms of reference for the cost/benefit study.

12.18 Infrastructure and Services

Section 10 - Governance assesses the potential impacts of the proposed development on existing services provided by the District of Squamish and outlines the possible requirements for supplemental health, police, fire and social programs. Additional information on the costs of these supplemental services is to be addressed in the cost/benefit analysis that would be conducted by the District of Squamish.

The provision of an Emergency Response Plan will be required whether the proposed development is part of the District or becomes its own entity per various alternatives provided by the Mountain Resort Association Act and a preliminary plan will be provided which addresses the following public safety-related issues:

● Plans for responding to accidents and to treat injuries ● Plans for providing a search and rescue capability ● Plans for managing and monitoring avalanche and wildfire hazards ● Alternative road plans for traffic access and egress to the resort to mitigate the potential for the

main access road to become blocked or congested with vehicle traffic during a critical time of response

● Plans for evacuating people in the event of a natural disaster (i.e. earthquake) ● An analysis of demands the resort may make on emergency response services currently provided

in Squamish and the Regional District ● Documentation of discussions with representatives of the Squamish Emergency Program and other

relevant safety oriented agencies.

Other issues related to infrastructure to be addressed in the detailed review of the project may include:

● Any expected increase in the use of local and regional infrastructure and the capability and

Garibaldi at Squamish Development - SkiMap.org · Garibaldi at Squamish Development Project...

Documents

Transcript of Garibaldi at Squamish Development - SkiMap.org · Garibaldi at Squamish Development Project...