Froese:
time to “see that this chapter is closed and we move on.” But move onto
what? What is the true vision of Langley? Tailor-made developer paid
for and directed planning? Overcrowding? Future slums? A future where we
have to pump water from other locals and we can't feed ourselves from
local farms when there are severe droughts in other areas of the world
such as California?
Btw, there is no such thing as "unfarmable" as long as you have good soil, half decently level land, water and sunlight - we aren't in the mountains here.
'Now Money' trumps everything, even politicians.
Btw, there is no such thing as "unfarmable" as long as you have good soil, half decently level land, water and sunlight - we aren't in the mountains here.
'Now Money' trumps everything, even politicians.
21-year saga ends as Murrayville subdivision approved - Langley Times
Councillor
David Davis argued against giving final approval to a project that
permits house construction on agricultural land in return for creating a
buffer between the urban and rural zones.
A
debate over development of an 11-acre Murrayville farm site came to an
end Monday with its final approval by Langley Township council, 21 years
after the owners first applied to build housing on two agricultural
properties near 216 Street and 44 Avenue.
The
matter ended up in court when the regional Metro Vancouver authority
said the proposal, known as the “Hendricks et al” development, violated
regional growth strategy limits and sued the Township.
Metro
also sued Langley over two other housing developments it said were
beyond the power of the municipality to approve; the University District
and the Wall farm projects near Trinity Western.
In March of this year, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Neena Sharma dismissed the Metro lawsuit and upheld the approval of all three projects.
Sharma
said the Metro regional growth strategy, which aims to control urban
growth, was only guidelines expressing policy, not enforceable laws.
That
cleared the way for final approval of the Hendricks development, 21
residential lots with a 15-metre landscape “buffer” to be built between
the new homes and the protected farmland to the south.
The
Hendricks et al properties used to be part of the protected land within
the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), but the provincial agency in
charge of the ALR, the Agricultural Land Commission, approved its
exclusion after several applications by the owners in 1993, 2003 and
2009.
At the Monday evening Township council meeting, there was one last debate before the vote.
Councillors Michelle Sparrow and David Davis were the only voices raised against the proposal.
“This
just sets a precedent, and shows that that if you try hard enough and
ask enough times and spend enough money, that eventually you will be
able to develop your agricultural lands,” Sparrow said.
Davis said the Township could lose “thousands of acres” of farmland if more buffers are allowed.
“Stop cutting farmland out,” Davis said.
Councillor
Charlie Fox was among the majority who voted for the proposal, saying
the land, a former horse training facility, was “unfarmable” in part
because it is located next to an urban residential neighbourhood.
Councillor
Kim Richter said the “agricultural quality of the land is not high” and
pending changes to provincial agricultural laws make buffers
“absolutely critical” to reduce conflict between urban residents and
farmers.
Councillor Bev Dornan said the site was a “perfect spot” for a buffer that would protect both the rural and urban communities.
Councillor Steve Ferguson said he was “looking forward to this thing finally being resolved” after so much time.
Mayor Jack Froese said it was time to “see that this chapter is closed and we move on.”
However, there will be at least one more round of legal wrangling.
In
April, Metro Vancouver applied to the B.C. Court of Appeal to overturn
the Supremo Court decisions on the Hendricks, University District and
Wall developments.
The hearing of the Metro court challenge is scheduled for Dec. 8, 9 and 10 at the Court of Appeal in Vancouver.
