Public Hearing Notes: 207th Street Apartment Building, Separation Distance for Spas and Salons, and Increasing Density in Industrial Areas.

On Monday night, Langley City Council held a public hearing for people to provide both written and verbal feedback about three matters.

The first matter was a rezoning bylaw which, if approved by Council, would enable the construction of an 8-storey, 78-unit apartment at 5404, 5406, 5408 and 5414 207 Street. The building will be split between rental and ownership units.

Render of the proposed 8-storey, 78-unit apartment along 207 Street near Douglas Crescent. Select the image to enlarge.

Council received five emails from people about this proposed rezoning. People expressed concerns about the height of the building, the building’s shadow, traffic, and on-street parking.

A person also expressed concern about the safety of the crosswalk on 207th Street and Douglas Crescent.

Another person wanted their property rezoned as part of this project.

Five people at the public hearing provided verbal feedback about the proposed project.

One person mentioned concerns about the capacity of the one-way lane behind the proposed project, as that is where the parkade’s access is from, and the loss of trees. They also wondered if the garbage/recycling area would be secured. The applicant noted the garbage/recycling would be in a secured room. City staff noted that the lane may need upgrading, but it would be the applicant’s responsibility if Council approves the rezoning.

Another person noted that the project could impact their privacy, and another was concerned about the proposed building’s height.

One person expressed the need for more below-market rental units in Langley City. Another person had general questions about land use in the area and how the City works to prevent situations where some lots could not be redeveloped. This situation is sometimes known as “orphan lots.”

A member of Council asked the applicant to consider adding A/C to all the proposed rental units.

As a note, there is around a 15-storey height limit for most parts of Langley City due to the Langley Regional Airport.

The next matter addressed at the public hearing was for a proposed update to our zoning which would place a 400-metre separation distance between future beauty/nail/hair/skincare salons or nonregistered massage establishments and existing businesses of the same type.

Existing business locations would be grandfathered to allow these uses. If a beauty/nail/hair/skincare salon or nonregistered massage establishment closed down, that location could be used for a future business of the same type within six months. Only after six months of beauty/nail/hair/skincare salon or nonregistered massage establishment being closed at a location would the 400-metre separation distance take effect.

Council received five emails about this proposed update to our zoning, and one person spoke at the public hearing.

The person presenting at the public hearing was from the Downtown Langley Business Association and spoke in support. In an email, a person from the Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce noted that the proposed update is “a reasonable response to what we know is an ongoing challenge.”

In an email, one person noted that our community needed more hair salons. They also had questions about business license impacts. Staff noted there would be no impact on current and future licensing for existing business locations that remain in operation.

In another email, an existing spa owner was generally supportive.

Another person in an email opposed the proposed zoning update. A person expressed in their email that they thought the proposed zoning update was overreaching.

The final matter address was for a proposed update to our I1 industrial zone to add accessory office uses, increase height to 30m for industrial buildings, and decrease our parking requirements to one space per 100m2.

One person who attended the public hearing spoke in favour of this proposed update.

Council will now have the opportunity to consider giving third reading to these proposed updates at a future Council meeting.

Council cannot consider any further feedback about these proposed changes to our zoning bylaw per BC law.