Liveability and the Township

Last night, Township of Langley Council heard from Urban Development Institute about development in the Township. One of the items brought up was that it can cost double to develop in the Township as opposed to other neighbouring municipalities. They identified that it is because the Township requires developer to pay for things like trails, bike lanes, parks, and amenities. They suggested that the Township reduce these developments costs. I actually think it’s a good idea that the Township maintains its development policy; charging higher fees to provide a better urban fabric. Also, Urban Development Institute noted the disconnection between transportation planning and Metro Vancouver’s regional plan. On that note, Township Council approved a report from Township Staff on Metro Vancouver’s updated Liveability Region Strategy. Since I last blogged about this topic, the latest draft of the plan designates the Carvolth area (200th and the Freeway) as industrial and mixed employment center. The Township would like to see the following and I would strong encourage Metro Vancouver to allow this:

The significant potential of the Township’s Carvolth area, which is strategically located around the 200 Street/Highway #1 Interchange, must be recognized in the regional plan. With the completion of the Golden Ears Bridge and TranLink’s plan to develop a major bus exchange and park and ride in the area, Carvolth is set to become a major centre for mixed use and transit-oriented development. It will offer residential, commercial, and office uses, and provide opportunities for different types of employment.

The Township still has some issues with the proposed Urban Containment Boundaries, Future Growth in Fernridge, and Sewer Servicing which you can read about on their website.

One of the major issues that needs to be addressed is the disconnect between our region’s growth plans and transportation plans. It is completely obvious that it is hard to build a mixed-use, transit friendly neighbourhood without transit, yet this is what we are being told to do currently. Maybe as part of TransLink 3.0, there should be a requirement to build transit service with mixed-use, transit friendly community as identified by our region…