One of the oldest buildings in Whistler could soon be set for demolition.
Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) staff recommended the building—the Gebhart/Hillman cabin located at 5298 Alta Lake Road—be demolished; a recommendation ultimately supported by a majority of council at the Sept. 24 committee of the whole meeting.
According to a staff report and presentation at the meeting, the decision was forced on council due to the cabin’s location at what is an active construction site, with the developer obligated to move the structure under a previous agreement with the municipality, so it can continue with works on a housing project that must have access to the area before January 2025.
The building is currently owned by the developer, but was supposed be transferred to the RMOW and placed in a public park nearby on the same lot to be developed as part of the development agreement.
However, the costs associated with moving the structure to the new site, and then refurbishing it to an acceptable level, were deemed by staff and council to be too high to justify retaining it given its current condition, and what it could be used for at a new park location.
Those costs were determined to be $100,000 to relocate the building and another $250,000 to keep it standing—with those combined costs to be borne by the developer. Another $65,000 was estimated to be required to be spent by the municipality to bring the interior of the building up to code to allow for, at minimum, seasonal use.
The costs add up to $415,000 for the RMOW to take ownership of a building it could only use seasonally, that would still require ongoing maintenance and upkeep.
In its report to council, staff explained there was a large gap between the state of the building today, and a day where it could be used for anything at all.
“If the internal part of the building were to be used for community purposes … the RMOW would be responsible for paying for those internal upgrades. That’s walls, floors, lights, ceiling,” said manager of parks and planning Martin Pardoe.
“The development site … is quite isolated from the rest of the community, there is no vehicle access. Access would be by walking in via the new Valley Trail the developer is obliged to construct.”
Notably, Pardoe said the RMOW would require a long-term plan for the use of any buildings it wanted to plow money into, and there was currently no plan.
Current state, costs, location and access meant the cabin didn’t rank highly in staff estimations.
“We question whether these factors are sufficient enough to not justify expenditures to retain or annually maintain this building going forward,” he said, explaining the RMOW already has several expensive-to-maintain older buildings, and all of them require “potentially significant” investment to maintain.
In giving a high-level assessment of the other buildings, Pardoe touched on those costs, and staff recommended another solution: Take the money from the Gebhart/Hillman cabin relocation and refurbishment, and put it towards new amenities and the upkeep of the other buildings. Those include six structures at The Point, the Old School House at 5528 Old Mill Lane, and three buildings at Alta Lake Station—all of which are in different states of repair, use, and usefulness to Whistler.
Director of planning, Melissa Laidlaw, explained the initial moves to relocate and repair the Gebhart/Hillman cabin were brought up in 2019, but since then a closer analysis of the cabin had revealed its issues, and other opportunities.
As such, staff recommended the RMOW go down a new path: Demolish the Gebhart/Hillman cabin and provide a replacement amenity at the new park where it would have gone, suggested to be reflective of the history of the area. The developer would also take the funds it would have spent, and make a cash contribution to the RMOW’s recreation works and services reserve, with the money to be dedicated to municipal heritage preservation.
That option was preferred by staff, though they also presented two other options: Demolish the cabin and take the money from the developer to be put towards the recreation works and services reserve, or follow through with the initial plan to relocate the structure and get it up to code.
Council ultimately opted to go for the staff recommendation, but it was not unanimous: Councillor Jessie Morden was first to bring up her issue with the plan, and stuck with her objection all the way through discussion, saying the loss of heritage didn’t sit well with her while acknowledging the cost.
“I think this is part of our history, and is important to a lot of people in this community,” she said. Her initial concerns were shared by Coun. Ralph Forsyth, who said “it would be a real loss to lose the building entirely,” suggesting instead the building be preserved like the huts at Rainbow Park.
Coun. Cathy Jewett, who came out of the gate cracking a joke about her age and how the discussion was a trip down memory lane, said while it was important to maintain a connection with the past, she was inclined to agree with staff in that demolishing the building but retaining some heritage value was the best option.
Coun. Arthur De Jong shared those sentiments, saying they were being challenged by the community to find cost-saving opportunities, and this was one.
Coun. Jeff Murl was the most straightforward in his reaction, saying he saw little but a stick-frame cabin.
“I see a lot of inventory of long-term maintenance and problems and not very functional [buildings] … is there anything in this building that is unique and salvageable?” he asked.
“I think the best part we’ve been able to preserve is the location … having a building that’s not functional, that was pieced together quite quickly at the time is not something I’m as interested in.”
Mayor Jack Crompton said he supported staff’s crafted solution.
“We are in a position where we have an asset we’re being told is probably going to be really expensive to maintain, and an opportunity to invest in some sites across the municipality that we can make more accessible and more usable,” he said.
When it came to the final vote, De Jong commended staff and said the solution “embraced our heritage in a way we can afford to,” while Murl repeated he wasn’t interested in acquiring or maintaining buildings that “don’t do anything well.”
Only Morden opposed the motion to support staff's recommendation to demolish the building and replace it with a new amenity that reflected heritage, and accept a cash contribution from the developer or the site.
The decision will come back to a regular council meeting in October, and if supported then, will allow the developer to continue with works at the construction site, which allows for a community park, a new segment of Valley Trail, and 43-unit housing complex.
