The Township of Langley's proposed University District

The controversial Trinity Western University District which includes the controversially Wall Financial Corporation 67 single-family equestrian community, now student housing, development reared its head at Monday night’s council meeting. Councillor Davis, Sparrow, and Richter seem to be the only ones on council that want to give this whole plan a sober second thought. Since I last posted about the University District, the Township of Langley has consulted with key stakeholders and received correspondence from Metro Vancouver, the City of Langley, Trinity Western University, the Langley School District, the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, and the Agricultural Land Commission.

Proposed University District. Click image to enlarge.

Based on feedback from those parties, the Township has reduced the University District in size from about 180 hectares to 152 hectares. The Township is now moving forward with an Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment to allow the University District to proceed. There are still major concerns. Metro Vancouver still believes that the proposed OCP amendment will violate the old Livable Region Strategic Plan Green Zone provisions and would still require the Township to get approval from Metro Vancouver under the new Regional Growth Strategy. It looks like the Township is still on the path to confrontation with Metro Vancouver.

If the Township gets its way, the University District would become a larger version of Fort Langley on what the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) calls prime farm land. Fort Langley is 120.38 hectares. Do we really need another community that is in the middle of farmland with all the issues that those types of communities create around sustainability and transportation choice?

The Ministry of Agriculture “would prefer the development of a University District in urban areas rather than alienating more farmland for urban uses.” The Ministry also has concerns about how the University District would impact adjacent farmland and lead to more farm practice complaints in the future.

The Agricultural Land Commission submitted a map which shows which parts of the University District they support and which they don’t. The Commission basically only supports the limited growth of Trinity Western University based on what has already been approved. The Commission appears to have no appetite for the removal of more land out of the Agricultural Land Reserve for the full University District that the Township is proposing.

Agricultural Land Commission map outlining which parts of the proposed University District they support. Click image to enlarge.

The City of Langley of Langley has no objection to the plan, the School District supports the district as does Trinity Western University.

With the ALC and Metro Vancouver having strong objections to the full-scale University District, I have to wonder if this plan is dead even as Township Council proceeds with final adoption of the OCP amendment.

I do not support the University District as it currently stands. I believe that Trinity Western University should be allowed to grow their campus to meet their needs, and I support the exclusion of the limited lands west of Glover Road by the ALC to support that objective. But I do not support building the full 152 hectare University District in prime farmland when there is so much development opportunity in other parts of Langley. Trinity Western University is a private Christian university which means that it is not accessible to all members of the community due to financial or religious considerations.

I’m a bit surprised that Township Council is supportive of the University District as it currently stands as the District will continue the slow erosion of farmland and rural living in the community.

Metro Vancouver Board set to sue Township of Langley

My jaw almost drop out of its socket when I heard news that Metro Vancouver was gearing up to start legal proceedings against the Township of Langley over the proposed Trinity Western University District.

Consistency of Township of Langley Regional Context Statement with Official Community Plan Amendments

“That the Board direct staff to proceed with filing of a quashing motion pertaining to the OCP Amendment and Rezoning Application No. 100084 (Trinity Western University/Township of Langley) Bylaw No. 4900 prior to the expiry of the quashing period, subject to the results of the Township of Langley’s special council meeting of May 16, 2012.

That the Board Chair establish a Task Force to provide instructions to counsel with respect to the proceedings regarding the Township of Langley’s proposed amendments to its Official Community Plan.”

Siting of Proposed Trinity Western University District

I have an issue with one of the developments near the proposed Trinity Western University and some other developments in rural parts of Langley, but I haven't taken an exception to the expansion of Trinity Western University itself. The University District was in the Agricultural Land Reserve, but the area was so unsuitable for farming that the Agricultural Land Commission requested that Trinity Western "pursues exclusion of additional lands as they are steep riparian areas not suitable for agricultural use".

This action from Metro Vancouver comes from out of left field as the University District has been on the books for a while now. In fact the land for the University District is part of a special study area in Metro's regional growth strategy meaning any change in land use is considered a "Minor Amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy" and only requires a two-thirds weighted vote and regional public hearing.

With regional politics already strained, actions like this further reinforce the stereotype that Vancouver and the north of the river people don't want to work with the South of Fraser; they just want to impose things on us. If Metro Vancouver's board was looking to further destabilize regional politics, this is certainly the way to do it.

If Metro Vancouver really wanted to work with Langley, it should have sent a letter expressing their concerns about this project when it first landed on Township Council's desk for rezoning in January and worked with the Township to address the concerns instead of passing an 11th hour quashing motion.

The icing on the cake for me is that while all this is going on UBC is allowed to do whatever it wants as it isn't part of Metro Vancouver and SFU has been allowed to cut down half of the top of Burnaby Mountain for a "sustainable" community.

Metro Vancouver sues Township of Langley over University District

Last year I posted that Metro Vancouver was going to sue the Township of Langley over its proposed Trinity Western University District if it was approved by Township Council. Metro Vancouver believed that the University District violated the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) that all member municipalities in the region (included the Township of Langley) signed off on in 2011. Metro Vancouver also believed the University District violated the older Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) as well. The Township has maintained that it is doing nothing wrong, that the decision to approve the University District is legal, and that the University District does not violate the old LRSP (which the Township believes the University District approval falls under.)

Interesting enough, the University District area that the Township has approved for urban development is a Special Study Area in the RGS. As such, it would have only required a simple weighted majority vote to get its land-use changed and would have been considered a minor amendment. If this type of change —from agricultural/rural land-use to urban land-use— was outside a Special Study Area, it would need a two-thirds weighted vote and a regional public hearing. In either case, the land could not be in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).

I think that one of reasons the Township got into hot water with Metro Vancouver is because the municipality decided to enlarge the University District from the 67 single-family housing development on 13.5 acres, and 23.4 acres of land located just west of the current Trinity Western University —which the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) approved for development— to 375.6 acres with land that is still in the ALR. The ALC has stated that it does not currently support the University District beyond what it has already approved.

Metro Vancouver's RGS says the region will "not amend the Agricultural or Rural land use designation of a site if it is still part of the Agricultural Land Reserve, except to change it to an Agricultural land use designation."

The Township of Langley might have avoided this whole mess if it just made the University District the ALC-approved 36.9 acres, and had not moved forward with the inclusion of 338.7 acres of ALR land into the University District.

Now that the Township of Langley has approved the University District, the Vancouver Sun is reporting that Metro Vancouver has filed a petition in BC Supreme Court to quash the Township's enlarged University District.

Metro argues the township is attempting to arbitrarily amend the designated green zone for intensive uses, when it is required to put the proposed changes to the regional board for a vote under the new regional growth strategy.

But Langley Township Mayor Jack Froese maintains his council has a lawful right to rezone the property, which has been earmarked for development for more than two decades and is intended to “provide educational, employment, and residential opportunities for future generations.”

Whatever the outcome of this court action, the results will set a precedent about the authority municipalities and regional districts have when it comes to land-use planning.

Township Council approves TWU University District and 67 suburban houses in the ALR

On Monday night, Township of Langley Council approved the controversial Trinity Western University District which includes the Wall “equestrian community.”

Approved University District. Click image to enlarge.

The University District, as approved by Township Council, encompasses 375.6 acres of land of which about 70% is still within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The Township envisions, where permitted by the Agricultural Land Commission:

1. Residential uses within the context of a University District with links between the academic and residential areas for the mutual benefit of both areas and to reduce the need to travel to and from Trinity Western University, and

2. Commercial uses subject to identification of appropriate location and design guidelines in order to provide convenient day to day services for the existing and future academic and residential population.

For a community that prides itself on the protection of farmland, approving a new community that could be larger than Fort Langley, on land that is yet to be excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve, seems to be at odds with that point of pride.

What will actually be allowed today is the development of 67 single-family houses on 13.5 acres of former farmland, and the development of 23.4 acres of land that is located to the west of the current Trinity Western University campus for university expansion. The first project that is likely to get build will be the 67 single-family houses as that land owner has been trying to build them for the last decade.

Preliminary site plan of Wall Financial Corporation 67 suburban houses within the ALR.

The 9.47 ha (23.4 acres) of land located at 7645 and 7679 Glover Road, and 22423 Labonte Avenue has been rezoned to Residential Institutional.

Last year, Metro Vancouver threatened to sue the Township of Langley as it believed the University District was against the Regional Growth Strategy and Livable Region Strategic Plan. It will be interesting to see what Metro Vancouver will do now that the Township has approved the University District.

I have to question if the University District will meet the Township’s sustainability objectives as it will be difficult to serve with transit and won’t likely be a complete, walkable community. I predict the University District will be an auto-oriented commuter community surrounded by farmland which is not how the Township should be developing.

Lawyer's Letters, Growth Strategies, and the Trinity Western University District

Controversy and legal ambiguity still surround the proposed Trinity Western University District in the Township of Langley. One of the central issues is whether the Township is still under the old Metro Vancouver regional growth strategy or the new regional growth strategy. The Township does not believe it will be under the new regional growth strategy until it adopts new regional context statements which show how the Township’s Official Community Plan aligns with the new regional growth strategy.

The old regional growth strategy had a Green Zone which was meant to protect “Greater Vancouver’s natural assets, including major parks, watersheds, ecologically important areas and resource lands such as farmland. It also establishes a long-term growth boundary.” The Green Zone, while a good idea, had some implementation issues as there were questions around what land was actually in the Green Zone, what land-use would be allowed within the green zone, and how land could be added or removed from the Green Zone. The old regional growth plan also lacked enforcement tools.

The new regional growth strategy shifts to a clearly defined urban containment boundary, has policies about what land-use is allowed within and outside the urban containment boundary, and has a stronger policy and enforcement framework.

Under the new regional growth strategy, the Trinity Western University District would be subject to a regional process and a vote by the Metro Vancouver board to approve the district, so it would make sense that the Township wants to be under the old regional growth strategy (with its ambiguities) to push this plan through.

On November 6th, Andrew Gage of West Coast Environmental Law sent a letter to the Township with his opinion that the Township should interpretation its existing regional context statements under the new region growth strategy. In reply a letter dated December 3rd, Lidstone & Company (Township lawyers) disagree as they believe that the Township is still under the old regional growth strategy.

With all this legal back and forth over the proposed Trinity Western University District, I wonder if the spirit of both the new and old regional growth strategies which are to preserve green space has been lost. The Trinity Western University District will create a new community on former rural land which many would consider sprawl and not the protection of the original green zone.

Did Trinity Western University Kill the Livable Region?

Whether it be the accreditation of teachers and lawyers, and now land-use, the private Christian Trinity Western University seems find itself at the centre of controversy. Trinity Western and the Township of Langley would like to remove 375.6 acres from the Agricultural Land Reserve to allow the university to expand and create housing. So far the Agricultural Land Commission has allowed 23.4 acres to be excluded from the ALR for university expansion, and 13.5 acres of land still within the ALR to be used for 67 single-family houses. The Township of Langley created the University District with a change to its official community plan in 2013.

I should note that this isn’t the first time a university has undermined regional planning. In 2010, UBC had the Province remove them from Metro Vancouver, so the university didn’t have to follow regional land-use plans.

In July 2011, Metro Vancouver adopted a new regional growth strategy to replace the older Liveable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP). Member municipalities had until July 2013 to align their official community plans with the new regional growth strategy.

The Township of Langley updated its official community plan to allow for the University District and also allow residential development on the 4.46 hectare Hendricks Site in North Murrayville (both within the LRSP green zone) before having to adopt the new regional growth strategy. The new regional growth strategy is much more prescriptive than the older LRSP. The University District would not have been allowed under the new regional growth strategy.

Metro Vancouver had a pretty weak case, but decided to take the Township to court over the University District and Hendrick site as it believed that both plans violated the principles of the old LRSP Green Zone. Justice Sharma threw out Metro Vancouver’s claim that the University District and Hendrick site impacted the Green Zone.

While Justice Sharma outlined the technical details about how she thinks a regional growth strategy, municipality’s official community plan, and zoning bylaws fit together, the root issue is a matter of scope. The Local Government Act requires that regional growth strategies and municipal official community plans/land-use align on regional matters. According to the act this “means a matter that involves coordination between or affects more than one municipality, more than one electoral area, or at least one of each, in a regional district.” Metro Vancouver took a very broad interpretation of this as it believed that any impact to the Green Zone impacts the livability of the region as a whole. The justice took a narrower view. She found that Metro Vancouver was micro-managing local land use, which she believed was not a regional concern, and therefor out of the jurisdiction of Metro Vancouver.

While I cannot rule out the possibility that a large scale development could be seen to radically alter the character of the Green Zone, notwithstanding its location wholly within one municipality, those are not the facts before me.

This could mean that a local government could undermine a regional growth strategy with death by 1,000 cuts. While each small land-use decision may not impact the region, the culmination of these decisions over time, will. Regional growth strategies came out of the 1970’s as people were alarmed at the steady destruction of green space in BC due to urban sprawl.

Also interesting to note was Justice Sharma’s view that the Agricultural Land Commission is authoritative when it comes to the viability of farm land. If the ALC believes that removing land from the ALR or allowing urban sprawl in the ALR won’t impact, or may improve agricultural viability, Metro Vancouver can’t make the opposite argument.

Also, Justice Sharma was critical of Metro Vancouver taking the Township of Langley to court and noted that the aberrational process outlined in the Local Government Act is what should be followed when there is a perceived conflict between a regional growth strategy and official community plan.

At the end of the day Justice Sharma basically stated that Metro Vancouver has no intrinsic right under the Local Government Act to overrule local land-use decisions. I would have to agree.

The new regional growth strategy includes regional land-use zoning, an urban growth boundary, and procedures on how this all works. The Local Government Act allows, but does not require, a regional growth strategy to guide decisions on growth, change and development.

This court case was about the old LRSP and not the new, more prescriptive regional growth strategy. The big question for me is if local governments agree to a more prescriptive regional growth strategy, can that more prescriptive strategy’s provisions be enforced? If not, the Agricultural Land Commission really becomes the only authority to keep urban sprawl in check.

The provincial government could strengthen the authority of a regional district in relation to regional growth strategies, but I doubt they will. Between this ruling, the Provincial government’s threat to weaken the Agricultural Land Commission, and the upcoming transit referendum, not since the 1970’s has the livability of Metro Vancouver been so highly threatened.

Township of Langley and Metro Vancouver Update

Earlier this year, the Township of Langley and Metro Vancouver got into a disagreement over the proposed Trinity Western University District which includes the controversial Wall Financial Corporation residential development. Over the summer, the Township of Langley and Metro Vancouver exchanged a few letters. I reviewed the letters and it seems that Metro Vancouver believes that the Township of Langley is under the new Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) which includes the urban growth boundary, while the Township believes it is still under the older and weaker Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP.) The Township believes the University District is consistent with the LRSP while Metro does not believe it is consistent with the LRSP or the RGS. The follow excerpt from an August 27th Metro Vancouver memo sums up Metro’s position on the District:

-The proposed OCP amendment would allow residential, commercial, cultural, and assembly uses that are not consistent with the measures to protect the Green Zone prescribed in the Township’s existing RCS for the proposed lands.
-The area defined as “University District” does not match the area defined as “Special Study Area” in Metro Vancouver’s RGS.
-Except for Trinity Western University’s existing footprint, most of the proposed “University District” is outside the Urban Containment Boundary defined in the RGS.
-The land use permitted in the proposed “University District” would only be appropriate inside the RGS Urban Containment Boundary which in turn could only be achieved by amending the RGS.
-The Township’s existing RCS explicitly refer to minimum lot sizes of 8 ha for rural area lands that are designated “Agriculture/Countryside” and 1.7 ha for lands designated “Small Farms/Country Estate.” The new minimum lot size proposed for a portion of the “University District” is 0.03 ha

Metro Vancouver strongly recommended that the Township of Langley basically get Metro Vancouver Board approval for this project to proceed by essentially amending the RGS. It seems like the University District will be in limbo for the next little while and I wonder if there will be legal action.

This whole hoopla got Township Council upset and they threatened to leave Metro Vancouver. While this is most likely nothing more than hot air, the Township plans to commission a new $40,000 to $60,000 study to see if the Township is receiving a net benefit by being in Metro Vancouver and TransLink. This study was originally done in 2000 and found that the Township was better off in Metro Vancouver with TransLink service and was getting a net benefit.

Courts grant Township of Langley the right to sprawl on former farmland

Trinity Western University (TWU) is certainly no stranger to controversy. Running afoul of regional land-use planning is one of the many controversies surrounding the university.

University District. Click image to enlarge.

The Township of Langley, working with TWU, proposed to remove 152 hectares of land from its agricultural zone to allow urban development around TWU. This was even after the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) only approved the removal of 23.4 acres for TWU expansion. Even with the Township’s zoning change, the vast majority of land still cannot be developed as it is still in the agricultural land reserve.

Agricultural Land Commission map outlining which parts of the University District they support. Click image to enlarge.

Beyond the “University District”, the Township of Langley and the ALC approved the development of 67 single-family houses that was first billed as an “equestrian community” and later “student housing” for TWU.

At the same time, Metro Vancouver was updating its regional growth strategy. The original Livable Regional Strategic Plan, which laid out the vision to preserve farmland and greenspace while building compact people-first urban areas, had little to no enforcement mechanisms. Metro Vancouver’s new regional growth strategy is prescriptive and contains enforcement mechanisms.

The mechanism that binds the Township’s land-use plans with the regional growth strategy is called regional context statements. These statement are part of a municipality’s Official Community Plan. The Township of Langley held off adopting the new regional growth strategy until it could pass the “University District”. Passing the “University District” under the new regional growth strategy would have been more difficult.

In an unprecedented move, Metro Vancouver sued the Township of Langley in an attempt to block the “University District” and its ”student housing.” This was not a smart move; it was a weak case.

In March 2014, the BC Supreme Court sided with the Township of Langley. You can read more about this in a post I did earlier this year.

What was alarming is that the Justice stated that regional growth strategies can only deal with matters that are regional in nature that “require coordination or that affect more than one municipality.” The Justice stated that the “University District” and “student housing” were not regional in nature and therefore Metro Vancouver didn’t have jurisdiction in that matter. This ruling put into jeopardy 45 years of regional land-use planning in BC.

Metro Vancouver appealed the decision. On Christmas Eve, the BC Court of Appeal dismissed Metro Vancouver’s case. The Justices looked at whether the “University District” and “student housing”, which required an update to the Township’s Rural Plan and Official Community Plan, invalidated the regional context statements which linked the Township’s land-use plans with the Livable Regional Strategic Plan. The Justices found that they didn’t.

As I said early, the Livable Regional Strategic Plan was weak when it came to enforcing regional gaols.

What is interesting about the BC Court of Appeal decision is that it didn’t speak to the original judgment which stated that essentially regional growth strategies cannot override municipal land-use decisions.

A regional growth strategies in BC is an agreement between member municipalities and the regional district. Regional growth strategies aren’t imposed on a municipality by a regional district.

The provincial government mandates that Metro Vancouver municipalities follow a regional growth strategy. The Local Government Act, which legislates regional districts and their growth strategies, outlines the process that must be followed when a municipality and a regional district don’t agree on a regional growth strategy. The process is very similar to negotiations done during a collective agreement.

With the Metro Vancouver case against the Township dismissed, will the Township of Langley now agree to the new, more prescriptive regional growth strategy?

If a municipality contravenes the land-use zoning as prescribed in Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy, can Metro Vancouver do anything about it?

Township of Langley's Offical Community Plan Update

As I posted about last week, each municipality in Metro Vancouver has until the end of July to update its official community plan (OCP) to conform to Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS). You can read more about the RGS in last week’s post, and can read a primer on regional districts if you want more information about the process. The Township of Langley is no exception to this requirement.

Right now, the Township is pushing through the Trinity Western University District which includes the controversially Wall Financial Corporation 67 single-family “equestrian community” in the Agricultural Land Reserve. It appears that they are pushing this through before the adoption of the proposed new OCP as the Township believes it is still legally under the old Livable Regional Strategic Plan (LRSP). The LRSP is much weaker when it comes to enforcing land-use, and the new RGS would not allow the University District/Wall proposal.

Anyway, the Township is now working on an update to its OCP to bring it in-line with Metro's RGS and the Township's own Sustainability Charter. The Township will be requesting that some regional land-use designations be changed. Some of these changes will require 2/3rds of Metro Vancouver's board to approve as well as a regional public hearing. The biggest change and most controversial change will be around the University District.

It appears that Metro Vancouver believes that the University District proposal violates both the old LRSP and the new RGS. Metro Vancouver even threatened legal action against the Township at one point last year. I guess the Township is hoping that if they push through the University District before officially adopting their new OCP, it will be too late for Metro Vancouver to do anything, and Metro will have no choice but to update the RGS to reflect the reality of the University District.

The Township has made the following map which indicates where it would like to change regional land-use designations.

Differences between Metro Vancouver's RGS and the Township's proposed land-uses in red. Click image to enlarge.

Just like the City of Langley, the Township of Langley also has the new regional mixed-employment land designation for industrial, commercial and other employment related uses. Unlike the City of Langley which is proposing to put big-box retail in their “mixed-employment” zone, the Township is still trying to limit big-box retail to the Willowbrook area. The mixed-employment zone is the regional codification of office parks and sprawl as I haven’t seen any walkable office parks in the region. Let’s hope the Township breaks that trend.

Besides the requirement of conforming its OCP to Metro's RGS, the Township’s proposed OCP has been completely rewritten under the lens of its Sustainability Charter. The OCP is now broken down into the following sub-sections: Social and Cultural Policies, Economic Policies, and Environmental Policies.

University District aside, the proposed new OCP is more inline with 21st Century thought on sustainable, walkable urban design. The OCP spends a lot of time talking about building complete communities and complete streets “that are designed and operated to enable safe, attractive, and comfortable access and travel for users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, cyclists, public transit users, and motorists.” The new OCP also includes a provision for adaptable housing to align with the Township’s new goal of being an “age-friendly” community.

The proposed new OCP is something that Township residences can be proud of. If followed, it will lay the groundwork for a sustainable community and walkable urban cores. Of course, it will take time before the overall goals in the OCP flow down into neighbourhood and area plans (like the rural plan) that actually drive the shape of the community.

TWU University District Update

The controversy continues with the proposed University District around Trinity Western University. The University District itself is basically an expansion of the TWU campus, but it is also bundled with the controversial Wall Financial single-family housing development.

Earlier this month, Township of Langley Mayor Jack Froese sent a letter (page 93 of latest council agenda) to Mayor Corrigan of Burnaby (who is also the chair of the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee at Metro Vancouver) expressing his views on the University District and Metro's involvement.

In the letter, Mayor Froese talked about the letter the Township received in August from Metro that I posted about earlier on the blog. Froese pointed out that Township council will work with Metro Vancouver in a consultation process that may result in either amending, delaying, or not proceeding with the bylaw that would see the creation of the University District. While reading the letter, I saw some subtle jabs at Corrigan's Metro committee for not being directly elected and for “rubber stamping” Metro Vancouver staff reports.

Mayor Froese than goes on to state that the Township in under no legal obligation to change the current University District bylaw as the Township believes that the bylaw and plan is consistent with the old regional growth strategy which the Township believe is still applicable.

Reading over the letter it seems to me that Township Council is upset at Metro Vancouver for inferring with what it considers local issues, but isn’t ready to challenge Metro in court yet over regional planning. It will be interesting to see how this proceeds and I’ll continue to monitor this saga.

Township of Langley's Official Community Plan and Public Hearing

As I posted about in May, the Township of Langley is updating its Official Community Plan (OCP) in order to: incorporate the Township’s Sustainability Charter “to build a legacy for future generations by leading and committing the community to a lifestyle that is socially, culturally, economically, and environmentally balanced”, and to incorporate regional context statements that explain how the OCP is aligned and compliant with the objectives of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. This must be completed by July 29th as required under the Local Government Act.

Tonight, the Township will be holding a public hearing on the proposed updated OCP.

As part of the process of updating the OCP, the Township solicited and received comments from other governments and agencies. The Township has incorporated the University District and changes in land-use designations in Aldergrove; both of which propose to remove land from the Agricultural Land Reserve for urban development.

Township of Langley proposed land-use map. Click map to enlarge.

The Agricultural Land Commission has allowed for a housing development on the Wall Financial Corporation land within the ALR south of Trinity Western University (TWU), and the exclusion of land that fronts Glover Road from the ALR for TWU expansion. For the remainder of the proposed University District, the Agricultural Land Commission wrote that:

The Commission has previously advised that it consider that the proposal to extend the Urban Contain Boundary [UCB] and General Urban designation over the entire area proposed as a "University district" conflicts with the requirement for consistency with the Agriculture Land Commission Act, the regulation and the orders of the Commission. The Commission therefore endorses the extension of the UCB and General Urban designation within the Special Study area only to those parcels of land directly fronting the northwest side of Glover Road.

When it comes to the proposed expansion of Aldergrove's urban footprint which is in Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy and the Township’s proposed OCP, the Commission said that the Township could designate the areas as urban within the OCP, but the designation will not change the fact that the Agricultural Land Commission still has the final say on land-use, as the land is still within the ALR.

The Township of Langley designated a section of 8th Avenue between 264th Street and Abbotsford as an arterial road and truck route in the proposed OCP. The Agricultural Land Commission noted that it may not allow the widening of this road.

Metro Vancouver also commented on the proposed OCP. One of the general themes seemed to be to requesting that the Township provide more details on how its OCP will align with the Regional Growth Strategy. Metro Vancouver also noted that the Township’s proposed land-uses do not align with the current Regional Growth Strategy. Metro Vancouver noted that any land-uses that do not align with the current Regional Growth Strategy will need the approval of the Metro Vancouver board.

After the public hearing tonight, Township council will likely approve the third reading of the proposed OCP. The OCP will then be forward to Metro Vancouver for possible approval.

As both Metro Vancouver and the Agricultural Land Commission have some concerns about the OCP, and serious concerns about the University District, the Township's proposed OCP is not likely to be the finally OCP. At this point, I would be surprised if the University District will be allowed as it is currently envisioned by the Township.

Surrey and Township of Langley refuse to adopt new regional growth strategy

The Metro Vancouver Regional District has 22 members, which includes Tsawwassen First Nation and 21 municipalities. One of the significant responsibilities of the Regional District is to create a regional growth strategy. The creation of a regional growth strategy is provincially mandated. All members of the Regional District, including Langley City, must follow the regional growth strategy.

Metro Vancouver has some unique challenges when it comes to land use. We are surrounded by mountains, the US border, and the ocean. We have the largest and busiest port in Canada, which means industrial land is at a premium. We have the most fertile farmland in BC, protected mainly by the Agricultural Land Reserve. We also have a growing economy and population, meaning we need to build more housing. People in our region also believe in protecting greenspace, which helps clean our air and water.

Because of this, it is no surprise that each successive regional growth strategy has become more prescriptive.

The happy path for adopting an updated regional growth strategy is for all Metro Vancouver Regional District members to willingly vote in favour of the new policy. Langley City Council voted to adopt the new regional growth strategy, Metro 2050, back in June. In fact, all members of the Regional District except for Surrey and the Township of Langley have adopted the new regional growth strategy.

In Surrey, Council wants to remove the Rural regional land-use designation, changing it to the General Urban regional land-use designation. Rural land in Metro Vancouver has very low-density residential, agricultural, smallscale commercial, smallscale industrial, or institutional uses that do not require the provision of urban services such as sewerage or transit. Surrey sees rural areas as a “land bank” for future development. The regional growth strategy explicitly states, “Rural lands are not intended as future urban development areas and generally will not have access to regional sewerage services.”

Map of land with the regional Rural land-use designation in Metro 2050. Select map to enlarge.

This Rural land-use designation existed in the previous Metro 2040 regional growth strategy, so Surrey Council must get Metro Vancouver Regional District Board approval to convert rural land to urban land even today.

Township of Langley Council and the Regional District have a long-standing dispute focusing on an area around Trinity Western University called the “University District.” The Township of Langley and property owners in the area want to exclude 152 hectares of land from the regional Agricultural land-use designation even though the Agricultural Land Commission has only allowed for the exclusion of 23.4 acres from the Agricultural Land Reserve. While Township of Langley Council has other concerns that I believe the Regional District and its members will be able to address, the biggest challenge will be removing agricultural land for urban use. The challenge is that the majority regional viewpoint is that agricultural land, even if not actively farmed, provides ecological service to the region. In the Township, there is a significant view that land that isn’t Class 1 or 2 agricultural lands should be converted to industrial or urban uses.

Township of Langley’s proposed land use, left. Metro 2050 land use, right. University District. Select map to enlarge.

With the upcoming local government elections, adopting the new regional growth strategy will likely be paused into the new year.

If Surrey, the Township of Langley, and Regional District cannot find a happy path forward, it will become messy and legal.

Sprawl coming to Langley near Trinity Western University

Well, it looks like one of the best examples of suburban sprawl is on its way to becoming reality in the Township of Langley.

Proposed Single-Family Housing Development Near Glover Road and Highway 10.

A development application by Wall Financial Corporation to build 67 single-family houses in farmland was somehow approved by the Agricultural Land Commission in what is pretty much the trickiest ALC application I’ve seen and is now at council for rezoning approval. Orginally billed as an "equestrian community" it is now being bundled as "student housing" with the Trinity Western University District Proposal with the provision of the “construction of a trail network linking the site to Trinity Western University (TWU)”. While student housing looks nice on paper, it seems to me like this equestrian-student-housing-community is going to be nothing more then housing for rich people.

There is nothing sustainable about building single-family houses in the middle of farmland and this development will ensure that everyone who lives there will need to drive everywhere to do anything for a very long time. It is this sort of tricky development that makes me loss faith in Langley at times. Wall Financial Corporation basically spent 10 years chipping away to get this development approved and I guess if you chip away long enough you’ll get your way.

While the majority of development in Langley is happening along the 200th Street corridor and is on its way to becoming urban and sustainable, it is applications like this that give our part of the region a bad reputation as people that are ready to pave over farmland for a quick dollar at the expense of future generations.

Response from Township of Langley Mayor over Metro Vancouver Incident

Yesterday, I posted about Metro Vancouver's threatened legal action against the Township of Langley over the proposed Trinity Western University District. The Township has rescinded the fourth reading of the rezoning bylaw to prevent the issue from going to court and work things out with Metro Vancouver.

I have obtained a letter from Mayor Jack Froese's Office that was sent to Metro Vancouver in response and have posted it to the document archive. I invite you to read the email, but the following section from the letter is a key point from the Township's perspective.

The key issues in regard to the relationship between the Township of Langley's official plan amendments and Metro Vancouver regional planning is whether the Council of the Township, acting reasonably, considers that the Official Community Plan amendments are not inconsistent with the Regional Context Statement under the Livable Region Strategic Plan.

I also agree with the following statement from the Mayor:

The appropriate venue for decisions on consistency with regional context statements to be made is not with Metro Vancouver staff, but rather with the Mayor and Council members of each Metro member municipality at the local democratically elected level balancing multiple interest to make reasonable land use decisions.

On yesterday's post I also noted that Metro Vancouver should have been more involved in the University District plan if they had such a large concern. According to the letter, Metro Vancouver only submitted one response during the public hearing before bringing out the big legal guns.

I'm a strong supporter of regional governance and very high-level regional land use, but it I think that legal action should be used as a last resort only. I also have to wonder if any of the people that voted for legal action against the Township have even been to Trinity Western University? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Exclusive: Township’s secret meeting with Agricultural Land Commission to redraw the ALR in Langley

Township of Langley proposed redrawing of the ALR would see around 200 acres of landed added to the reserve if approved by the Agricultural Land Commission. Select map to enlarge.

It is no secret that the Township of Langley has been looking at ways to get certain parcels of land out of the Agricultural Land Reserve for some time.

Going back to when the Agricultural Land Reserve was founded, there are two sections of the Township where land pretty much gets auto-excluded from the ALR: Gloucester Industrial Estates and Salmon River/Upland. The Salmon River/Upland area contained many small lots before the ALR came into effect. It was noted early on by the Agricultural Land Commission that even though the area was within the ALR, the size of the lots were too small for most farm uses.

Beside these two areas, the Township has been looking to remove about 480 acres of land from the ALR around Aldergrove since the mid-1990s. The Township believes that this removal of land from the ALR is required for the long-term viability of the community.

Recently the Township has moved forward with its proposed University District. The University District is similar in size to Fort Langley. While the Township may have won its court case with Metro Vancouver to allow the District, the majority of the land for the District is still within the ALR. As I posted in 2012, the ALC did not support removing this land from the ALR.

Earlier this year, I got wind that Township Council and Staff had a meeting with the Agricultural Land Commission to talk about redrawing the lines of the ALR. I submitted a Freedom of Information request about this meeting. I received the meeting minutes from that meeting and a presentation that the Township delivered. I have posted this to the Document Archive of this blog. I suggest that you check out the presentation.

In the presentation, the Township outlines the history of the ALR within Langley. It also outlines significant plans and exclusion applications within the ALR.

The really interesting slides show what the Township would like to see for the ALR in that community.

The Township of Langley proposed to remove land near Trinity Western University to support the University District. It also proposed to remove land in the Brookswood/Fernridge area to support development in that community.

The Township also proposed to remove the parcel of land that would be automatically excluded anyway in Salmon River/Uplands and in Gloucester. Finally, the Township proposed to remove land from the ALR around Aldergrove.

In exchange the Township would put other parcels of land within the ALR. The Township’s plan would actually see a net increase of 200 acres into the ALR. The Township of Langley would also create a new zone for all land within the ALR and require a minimum lot size of 8 hectares.

The presentation and meeting minutes contain more information.

Recommendations for potential performance arts centre in Langley, includes 142,800 square foot parking lot

For as long as I can remember, there has been a desire to build a community-based performance art centre in the Langley. In fact, Chief Sepass Theatre at Langley Fine Arts School and the Show Theatre at the Cascades Casino are the only purpose-built theatre spaces in Langley. Unfortunately both these facilities have availability and capacity issues. Other facilities in the Township and City also have major shortcoming. This has resulted in many performance arts groups either using more costly venues in other municipalities or simply closing down.

In early 2013, the City of Langley, Township of Langley, School District, Trinity Western University, and Kwantlen Polytechnic University created a task force to study a performance arts centre for Langley. The task force was mandated to recommend the spatial programming of the performance art space, how it should be managed, and estimate the capital and ongoing operation subsidy required.

The task force commissioned B.E. Beck & Associates to develop a feasibility study which has now been released.

Research in the feasibility study confirmed that there is a strong demand for a performance arts centre in Langley from a user group and audience perspective.

Based on consultation done with potential user groups in the community, B.E. Beck & Associates recommended that a new performance arts centre should have:

-A full 600-650 capacity proscenium theatre
-A 200 seat flexible, flat floor studio theatre
-Public space including a lobby, café, gift shop, art gallery, and kitchen
-Seven multi-use studios and meeting rooms
-Support space for performers and for facility operations.

The estimated capital cost of the performance art centre could range from $30 million to $40 million. It would need an ongoing operation subsidy of about $140,000. B.E. Beck & Associates also recommend a governance and operating model which you can read about in the feasibility study.

When it comes to the location of the facility, stakeholders noted that it needs to have good vehicular and public transit access. There is no recommendation for the actual location of the facility.

One of the things that really blew me away was that B.E. Beck & Associates recommended a 142,800 square foot, 420 space surface parking lot. This is for a 40,000 square foot performance arts space. The proposed surface parking lot would not support building an accessible, walkable community.

Performance art centres have different peak parking time then shops, restaurants, and offices. It would make the most sense to locate a performance art centre in a place like Downtown Langley where shared parking would be possible. This would remove the need for such a massive surface parking lot. Downtown Langley has good vehicular and transit access. Putting the performance art centre in a place like Downtown Langley would also promote building an accessible, walkable community. If this centre gets built around a sea of parking, an opportunity to improve our community will have been squandered.

The B.E. Beck & Associates feasibility study is just the first of many steps to getting a performance arts centre built in Langley. It will now be up to City of Langley, Township of Langley, School District, Trinity Western University, and Kwantlen Polytechnic University to figure out the next steps and even if they want to proceed further with investigating building a performance art centre.

Land-use planning in Township of Langley controversial at local and regional level

The Township of Langley has the tensest relationship with Metro Vancouver among all 21 municipalities and the Tsawwassen First Nation. While the Township of Langley has no problem with the conservation, recreation, water, sewer, and waste services that the region provides, the Township of Langley seems to butt heads with Metro Vancouver when it comes to land-use planning.

Beside the whole Trinity Western University district affair, the Township of Langley has the dubious distinction of being the only local government in the region that had its Regional Context Statements rejected. Metro Vancouver and the Township are currently going through a dispute resolution process. Lions Bay is the only other municipality without accepted Regional Context Statements. Lions Bay will be submitting its Regional Context Statements in the fall of this year.

Regional Context Statements are what link a local government’s official community plan to the regional growth strategy. It short, they bind a local government to following the regional growth strategy which includes land-use designations.

South of Fraser regional land-use map. Rural areas in yellow. Select map to enlarge.

If there is one thing I’ve learned about land-use planning in the Township of Langley, it is that it can be very explosive and controversial. Brookswood, Trinity Western, and the upcoming fight over Tall Timbers come to mind. Is it this highly charged atmosphere around local land-use planning that causes spill over controversy at the regional level?

Could it be that many people in the Township just really hate anything with the word Vancouver in it? Do they feel that regional land-use designations are just a way for the Burnaby NDP to punish the Township for being conservative? I know this sounds crazy, but more than one person has told me this is why they don't like regional land-use planning.

Some people might think it is because of the rural and agricultural nature of the community, but that is not the case. Delta, Surrey, Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge, and Richmond all contain rural and agricultural areas, and they seem to be able to work with Metro Vancouver on land-use planning.

Rural Density By Municipality (2014). Select table to enlarge.

The Township of Langley has another dubious distinction. It is the only municipality in the region to see an increase in density in rural areas. People in Salmon River Uplands should hope to goodness that the Township of Langley is brought in line with the regional land-use plan. It will protected their community from massive urban development.

The status of the general urban land-use designation (2014). Shows the remaining land, and land developed between 2011 and 2014. Select map to enlarge.

The Township of Langley contains 32% of Metro Vancouver's urban zoned land that is under or undeveloped. The Township of Langley will continue to be ground zero when it comes to controversy around land-use decisions at the local and regional level.

2014 Annual Report, Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping Our Future

Langley Mayoral Debate

City and Township of Langley Mayoral Candidates.

Last night, I attended the Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce’s Mayoral Debate. The event featured mayoral candidate for both the City and Township of Langley. Running for mayor in the City of Langley are Randy Caine, Ray Lewis, and Ted Schaffer. Running in the Township are Jack Froese, Rick Green, and Serena Oh.

Unfortunately Serena Oh was completely ill informed of the issues. The answers she gave to most of the questions seemed to come from left-field. It really took away from the cadence of the event.

Ray Lewis was concerned about crime in the City of Langley though he didn’t seem to have any practical examples of how he would actually address the issue. He was not up to speed on other issues facing the community.

The questions that the Chamber moderators asked revolved around development, transit, the Township leaving Metro Vancouver, crime in the City, and amalgamation.

The Chamber also asked the mayoral candidates to talk about local government worker’s salaries increasing faster than provincial government worker’s salaries, referencing the highly-flawed report “BC Public Sector Compensation Review.” Most of the candidates noted that due to federal and provincial downloading, local government has had to pick up the slack to deliver much needed services that other levels of government no longer support. They also mentioned that you need to pay people a fair wage to attach high-quality employees.

On amalgamation, I overheard many in the audience say that bring up that topic was like flogging a dead horse. Both Froese and Green were in support of amalgamation. Schaffer was opposed to amalgamation while Caine was in support of amalgamation.

Regarding crime in the City of Langley, Schaffer talked about how the City has the highest ratio of RCMP to residences in Canada; 1 for every 500. Caine said that if we want to address crime, we need to address the root causes: poverty and addiction.

Some people have called on the Township to leave Metro Vancouver due to the lawsuit between Metro and the Township over the Trinity Western University District. Both Froese and Green said that leaving Metro Vancouver would be an expensive and messy process; a road that would have to be gone down with extreme caution. Green was opposed to leaving Metro Vancouver, Froese would only considering leaving Metro Vancouver after commissioning extensive research on the issue which may lead to a referendum on the issue.

Of course TransLink came up last night. Froese and Schaffer talked about how South of Fraser mayors fought hard to get South of Fraser transit needs incorporated into our region’s vision for transit. I was happy that Froese noted that TransLink funds both the Golden Ears Bridge and the Major Road Network. Froese and Schaffer both acknowledge that getting better transit will require more money. Both were opposed to the transit referendum being imposed on the region by the province.

I have to give Schaffer credit for saying that a small regional sale tax would be the most practical way to fund needed transit improvement.

Froese noted that because groups like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and the province have called on TransLink to be more efficient, TransLink has reduced service on some routes in the name of efficiency, leading to even worse transit service in some areas.

Green said that he would not support giving TransLink any extra money until there was more transit service in Langley. Of course without new funding, TransLink can’t afford to provide new service. While this may get Green some political brownie points, it won’t actually get better transit in the Township.

On development in the City, Schaffer noted that the City is indeed redeveloping, noted several multifamily projects under construction. Caine talked about the need to replace aging infrastructure in the City, and the need to redevelop Langley in a sustainable manner.

In the Township, Froese noted that his community has been growing at a steady 2% throughout its history. He said that the Township will have to accommodate more people and that “turning off” development is simply not an option. There was a question about if the Township would stop development until the School District built more schools. Froese said that the School District won’t build new schools until there was new development.

Green said that he won’t “turn off” development, but that he would review every single development plan in the Township. It seemed like he was trying to get more political brownie point as this review would be a costly, decades-long process, and likely wouldn’t accomplish much.

It was interesting to attend the mayors debate thought I didn’t hear anything out of step with what the mayoral candidates have already being talking about publicly.

Township of Langley's and Metro Vancouver's land-use plans coming back together

The Township of Langley and Metro Vancouver had a dispute around the Regional Growth Strategy that focused on the Trinity Western University District. Metro Vancouver ended up taking the Township to court. You can read the full details of this in previous posts on this blog. The short of it is that the courts agreed with the Township of Langley.

Currently, the Township of Langley is the last municipality in the region whose Official Community Plan’s Regional Context Statements haven’t been accepted by the Metro Vancouver Board. Regional Context Statements are what links a municipality’s Official Community Plan to the Regional Growth Strategy. At this Friday’s Metro Vancouver Board meeting, it is likely that the Township’s Regional Context Statements will be accepted.

This is very good news as it will mean that all municipalities in Metro Vancouver will be following the Regional Growth Strategy. Forcing a Regional Growth Strategy on a municipality is never a good idea, and this is essentially what the courts said a well. To have a region where 21 municipalities and one treaty First Nation can come to a consensus on a Regional Growth Strategy that: creates a compact urban area, supports a sustainable economy, protects the environment and responds to climate change impacts, develops complete communities, and supports sustainable transportation choices speaks to the success of BC’s regional district model.

The follow map shows the proposed regional land-use map for the Township of Langley.

New proposed regional land-use designations for the Township of Langley. Select map to enlarge.

This map was the regional land-use map which was the cause of the court case.

Originally proposed regional land-use designations for the Township of Langley. Select map to enlarge.

I look forward to the Metro Vancouver Board accepting the Township’s Regional Context Statements. One of the things to note is that the area marked “1” on the first map will only become general urban subject to the approval of the provincial Agricultural Land Commission. Right now that land is in the Agricultural Land Reserve.

The Future of Metro Vancouver as a Livable Region

The idea of creating a livable region was first put down on paper in the mid-1970s. Since that time, more policies have been progressively put in place that have set Metro Vancouver on the path to being a world leader in livability. We have been successful in preserving farmland, green space, and providing a transportation network that gives people choices with a world-class transit system, an increasingly connected cycling network, and walkable town centres. These walkable town centres also provide a variety of housing options and opportunities for business. All in all, we have been moving towards a region that will not only serve the needs of the current generation, but future generations to come. While things have generally been moving on a positive path towards sustainability, we are actually at a crossroads that could either further move us in the direction of livability, or potentially unravel the more than 35 years of progressive policy.

Yesterday, I was having lunch with a friend and we started talking about how there has never been so many threats to the livability of the region as there is today. In the next few years, we will know the future path of Metro Vancouver.

The first threat to the livability of Metro Vancouver is the conflict between the province and the region over the future of transportation. While the region and local governments are recognizing that future transportation improvements need to focus on walking, cycling, and transit, the province is on a massive freeway building spree. The challenge is that this freeway building program will not help the majority of people in the region get from their homes to work, school, and other activities. Without walking, cycling, and transit options, our local road network will become increasingly congested as there simply is no room for more roads. A further threat lies in the fact that the province is set on holding a referendum on funding for transit. What happens if people vote no? What is plan B? Without transit, the ability of our region to build livable, interconnected town centres will be compromised. We will be locked into a future of highway tolls, auto-oriented sprawl, increasing congestion, and rising transportation costs. But this is not the only threat.

Right now Metro Vancouver and the Township of Langley are heading to court over the Trinity Western University district. This is the first time that the power of a regional district to regulate land-use has been tested in court. Depending on the outcome, the ability of regions throughout BC to regulate land-use will either be confirmed or denied. If denied, municipal governments will be tempted (and likely will) to sprawl into rural areas and develop housing on industrial land. But there is one more threat to the livability of our region.

The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) has protected the best farmland in the province which happens to be in Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley. This protection has ensured the success of a vibrant agricultural sector in the region. It has also acted as a de facto urban growth boundary. The provincial government suggested this summer that they want to examine the role of the Agricultural Land Commission who regulates the ALR. If the power to protect the ALR is weakened or removed, the viability of farming in Metro Vancouver will be threatened as farmland gets converted into auto-oriented sprawl.

In the next few years, we will know the future of Metro Vancouver. We will either stay the course as a livable region that other parts of the world look to as a model, or our policies that protect our region will be unravelled which will result in more congestion and sprawl, while the things that make our region special get paved over.