From ALR to Industrial: Langley Township’s Gloucester, Surrey’s South Campbell Heights, and the Growing Urban Containment Boundary

The central tenet of the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy is to preserve rural, agricultural, conservation, and recreational lands. All municipalities in our region agree to this central tenet. Our region implements this central tenet through the Urban Containment Boundary.

Metro Vancouver Urban Containment Boundary. Select the map to enlarge.

Having an Urban Containment Boundary protects local food production, reduces greenhouse gas emissions and energy use from transportation, help sequesters carbon by maintaining greenspace, and encourages the co-location of housing, jobs, and services in walkable, bikeable, and transit-accessible neighbourhoods. For local governments, it also reduces the cost of providing services, meaning lower property taxes over the long term. The Urban Containment Boundary prevents sprawl.

Because of the importance of the Urban Containment Boundary, if a local government wants to adjust it, it requires the support of a two-thirds weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Regional District Board (made up of representatives from Tsawwassen First Nation and all municipalities.) There are some exceptions.

Our region has an industrial land shortage. Industrial lands are important for our region. Point in case, while industrial land is only four percent of the region’s land base, over 25 percent of jobs are on industrial lands.

Industrial lands are also regionally designated and protected. Changing from industrial land use to another land use requires a 50%+1 weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Regional District Board. This vote is a barrier to converting industrial land to other uses, though the barrier is lower than changing the Urban Containment Boundary.

Interestingly, there is a shortcut for growing the Urban Containment Boundary in the current version of our Regional Growth Strategy and the previous version. You can convert land next to the Urban Containment Boundary to industrial land with only a 50%+1 weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Regional District Board, not a two-thirds weighted vote.

This shortcut is playing out near Gloucester Industrial Park in the Township of Langley, where the Township has an application with the Metro Vancouver Board to change 14.59 hectares of regionally designated agricultural land to industrial land.

Location of Conwest Group lands near Gloucester Industrial Park pending Metro Vancouver Board vote to convert to industrial land. Select the map to enlarge. Source: Township of Langley

Most agricultural land in Metro Vancouver is within the Agricultural Land Reserve, which the provincial Agricultural Land Commission controls. The proposed conversion of this 14.59 hectares of land started with Agricultural Land Commission exclusion requests from 2006, 2010, and 2020. While the Commission denied the 2006 and 2010 requests, the 2020 request for exclusion was successful. This exclusion is what allowed the current regional request.

As noted by regional district staff, this land will help grow the industrial land base constrained in this region. The land is near a major highway and railway corridor.

On the other hand, Gloucester Industrial Park is only accessible by private automobiles and is surrounded by the Agricultural Land Reserve. Expansion of that area will increase vehicle kilometres travelled and greenhouse gas emissions. It will also put pressure to exclude further land from the Agricultural Land Reserve. Converting rural lands to industrial use can encourage sprawl.

In the recent past, this played out with South Campbell Heights in Surrey, with former agricultural land converted to employment lands and growing the Urban Containment Boundary.

Expanding the Urban Containment Boundary at two locations will not degrade regional growth policies in Metro Vancouver when viewed in isolation. Still, the cumulative effects of changing the Urban Growth Boundary over time degrade regional growth policies and objectives.

In this post, I’m not speaking for or against the changes proposed near Gloucester Industrial Park or the change that occurred in South Campbell Heights in Surrey. I want to raise awareness that, as a region, there is now a trend of converting former agricultural and rural lands for employment and industrial uses. If this is the new normal for our region, we may want to consider how we integrate these new employment and industrial areas into the broader regional planning context of Metro Vancouver on how they can still support addressing climate change and creating compact centres connected by high-quality transit.

You Can Help Save the Farmland at the Old Federal Government “Cloverdale Site” on the Langley Border

If you’ve been down 192nd Street between Colebrook Road and 36th Avenue, you would see farmland with Government of Canada and do not trespass signs. This site was a former radio monitoring site for the government, in service until 2018. This radio monitoring required a significant amount of land as some antennas consist of a tall tower and buried cable. This meant that the surface was farmable. The federal government has contracted with a family that actively farms the land for produce since the 1980s. For more information, please check out the site Beautiful Brookswood.

Location of Cloverdale Site. Select map to enlarge.

Since the federal government decommissioned the site, it is now looking to sell it. Unfortunately, because this was federal government land, it could not be included in the Agricultural Land Reserve. Once the federal government sells the site, this active farmland will likely be turned into an office park or industrial area as the land is regionally zoned for “mixed employment” use.

Communication building that was onsite until 2005. Source: Beautiful Brookswood

The Metro Vancouver Regional District’s Agricultural Advisory Committee passed the following motion as they are concerned:

That the Metro Vancouver Agricultural Advisory Committee forward a letter to the Regional Planning Committee expressing: 1) its concern and opposition to the property known as Heppell’s Potato Farm, located between 36 and 42 Avenues and between 192 and 196 Streets in Surrey, currently owned by the Federal Government, being removed from active farming and sold; 2) its support for the property to be preserved as farmland, now and into the future; and 3) that the Agricultural Land Commission be requested to consider its inclusion into the Agricultural Land Reserve.

If you support preserving this site as farmland, please sign this official petition at https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-4128. This petition is sponsored by John Aldag, the MP for Cloverdale-Langley City, so it carries some weight.

To learn more about the site, please site Beautiful Brookswood.

Regulating air emissions from cannabis production in Metro Vancouver

It should come as no surprise to anyone who lives in BC that cannabis is odorous from cultivation, processing, and distribution to final consumption.

The Metro Vancouver regional district is responsible for regulating air quality and emissions in our region which includes the release of volatile organic compound and odours.

Since the recreational use of cannabis was approved by the federal government, regional and municipal governments have been having to play catch-up with laws, bylaws, and regulations.

Metro Vancouver is currently working on a proposed emission regulation framework for cannabis production and processing operations in our region.

While reviewing the proposal, I was surprised to see the level of VOCs that cannabis production creates. VOCs “may contribute to the formation of harmful ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter.” This can have an adverse impact on human health.

Example VOC emissions from some plants grown commercially in Metro Vancouver. Select image to enlarge.

Like other industrial and agricultural production, odour externalities generate a large amount of complaints from people who are exposed to them.

In Langley, with its large agricultural land base, odours from agricultural production has been an ongoing source of tension.

With one of the largest industrial areas, Campbell Heights which is located adjacent to Brookswood and near Langley City, there has been concerns expressed by people in the area about the impacts to air quality by industrial operations.

The cannabis production lifecycle can occur on both agricultural and industrial lands.

Metro Vancouver is exploring the following measures to control emissions from large-scale cannabis production:

• Enclose all cannabis processing in structures, including waste management activities, with systems to prevent air from the inside of structures to be released without filtration to the outside.
• Use activated carbon in possible combination with other filters to treat air inside production facilities, and air being released outside of facilities.
• Prevent uncontrolled release of emissions from production facilities.
• Require producers to provide a comprehensive air emission management plan to Metro Vancouver.
• For outdoor cultivation, use temporary containment during periods of peak VOC emissions.
• Restrict the use of odour masking and neutralizing agents outdoors.
• Locate facilities at least 200 metres away from residential areas, hospitals, schools, daycares, playgrounds and seniors care facilities.

The next step for Metro Vancouver will be to get feedback on the proposed air emission regulatory framework. More information is available from Metro Vancouver’s latest Climate Action Committee agenda.

October 15, 2018 Council Meeting Notes: Old Yale Road Seniors District

Last night was the last council meeting before the general election. The final meeting of the current council will be on October 29th, with the new council’s first meeting being on November 5th. There were several bylaws and development applications that were adopted on Monday which I will cover over the remainder of the week. Today, I will focus on the public hearing and its related matters.

A motion was put forward at the beginning of the public hearing to move it to a date after the election. The motion did not pass, and the public hearing commenced.

Model of proposed development along Old Yale Road. Select image to enlarge.

As I posted about earlier, council gave first and second reading on September 17th for an “Old Yale Road Seniors District” Official Community Plan amendment, and a rezoning bylaw to accommodate two buildings. One building is proposed to contain 28 long-term care units and 169 assisted living units. The other building will contain 95 independent living, seniors-oriented housing units.

At the public hearing, there were several concerns expressed by the public around the protection of the riparian area around Murray Creek. Riparian areas are critical for preserving fish and other wildlife, and both Langley City’s Official Community Plan and provincial government regulations do not permit development within 30 metres of the high-water level of a class “A” watercourse unless a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) determines overwise based on provincial laws and regulations. In the case of Murray Creek, the QEP determined that development could occur within 15.8 metres of the high-water level of Murray Creek.

Langley City also has designated environment sensitive areas where development is not permitted to occur. The proposed development is not within any environmentally sensitive area.

Map of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Langley City. Select map to enlarge.

Development cannot occur in the red area due to it being an Environmentally Sensitive Area and riparian areas. Select map to enlarge.

There were also members of the public who were concerned that the proposed building would get flooded or would cause flooding in other areas of the City. As the proposed development is within the 1 in 200-year floodplain boundary, it will need to comply with the City’s Floodplain Elevation Bylaw. I asked if the proposed project would increase the flooding risk due to its proximity to the floodplain, and was told no.

Light blue is the 1 in 200 year flood area. Select map to enlarge.

Two residents were concerned about privacy as the proposed buildings are near existing single-family housing. Based on feedback from earlier developer-led open houses, units were removed from areas where they might overlook neighbouring houses.

Triple A Seniors Housing requested that 19 independent living units be subsidized for low-income seniors. It is my understanding that there will be no subsidized independent living units as part of this project. I asked earlier in the public hearing about how this project fits in with our recently adopted “Nexus of Community” strategy which calls for policies to be developed to support affordable housing. I was told that it didn’t as this OCP update started before the adoption of the strategy.

The proponent noted that Fraser Health will be subsidizing some of the long-term care and assisted living units though I did not get a number.

As part of the Official Community Plan amendment, feedback was requested from the Township of Langley, Agricultural Land Commission, Metro Vancouver, Kwantlen First Nation, the Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure, TransLink, and Newlands Golf & Country Club. We received feedback from the Township of Langley, Agricultural Land Commission, and TransLink.

As the proposed project is within the region’s urban containment boundary, it does not require the approval of the regional district.

The Agricultural Land Commission did recommend that the proposed buildings be setback 30 metres from the ALR boundary as outlined in the Ministry of Agriculture’s Guide to Edge Planning. The yet to be adopted amendment to the Official Community Plan for the “Old Yale Road Seniors District” requires a development permit to be approved by council before any construction can start. One of the development permit requirements is to “respect existing agricultural land uses to the east.” I stated at the meeting that I would not support issuing a development permit unless the 30-metre setback recommendation is followed.

As part of the development, the proponent will also have to upgrade Old Yale Road to a local road standard, complete with curbs, gutters, drainage, sidewalks, and street lights.

Both the third reading of the Official Community Plan update and the Zoning Bylaw passed narrowly. I voted in favour of both. As is normal, a development permit was not issued last night.

Whether to give final reading of the Official Community Plan update and Zoning Bylaw, and issue a development permit, will be handled by the new council. Due to the many requirements of the projects, it could be several months before final reading as there are many requirements that the proponent must address.

On an aside, Langley City’s current Official Community Plan and Zoning Bylaw are essentially silent when it comes to affordability policies. This is why it is critical to get to work on completely updating these two key documents as noted in “Nexus of Community.” It is extremely difficult to address affordable housing and transportation on a site-specific bases.

Protecting the Agricultural Land Reserve, Local Government’s Role, and Cannabis Production Impacts

The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), which was introduced in the 1970s, has had a profound impact on our province. It has done a reasonable job of preserving food and ranch land from urban and industrial development. In Metro Vancouver, it has also acted as a defacto urban growth boundary that has limited sprawl.

Map of the Agricultural Land Reserve in Metro Vancouver. Source: Metro Vancouver

Over the years, there have been decisions made that have removed productive farmland from being used for agricultural purposes. A classical example was a brief period in the 1980s when golf courses were allowed in the ALR. This was put to an end rather quickly, but many of the golf courses today are a result of that blip. This includes the golf course in Langley City.

In the 2000s, the provincial government was responsible for close to third-quarters of all removal of land from agricultural uses in the South of Fraser, most of which was to accommodate transportation projects.

Even today, we are seeing the conversation of ALR land from food production to cannabis production in communities such as the Township of Langley.

The provincial government launched a review of the Agricultural Land Reserve at the beginning of the year to find ways to strengthen and enhance it; an independent advisory committee was established.

The committee released an interim report at the end of July with several recommendations for immediate action. They also noted what other recommendations will likely be included in the final report.

There are two actions items that require immediate attention according to the committee:

1. Mitigating the impacts of oil and gas activity in the ALR
2. Restricting cannabis production in the ALR

The first recommendation is more targeted for northern BC, but cannabis production is impacting farmland in Metro Vancouver.

The committee is recommending that “an immediate moratorium on all non-soil bound cannabis production and facilities in the ALR pending provincial-level analysis of impacts. Further the committee recommended that specific criteria be establish for cannabis production be establish, including the requirement for a permit from the Agriculture Land Commission (ALC).”

I believe that most cannabis production will be best suited on industrial land.

The committee is also evaluating thirteen other recommendations:

1. Strengthen the Act to prioritize agriculture by better defining the ALR, including the purposes of the ALR, and establishing ‘agriculture-first’ criteria for consideration in all ALC decisions
2. Increase the autonomy, independence and effectiveness of the ALC by ensuring that merit based Commission appointments are made in consultation with the Chair and by increasing the oversight role of the Chair in the selection of both Commission members and the CEO
3. Ensure province-wide decision making that is consistent and fair with an ALC governance structure that is flexible, locally-informed, regionally-representative, and puts ‘agriculture-first’
4. Safeguard agricultural values across the province by reinstating a one-zone ALR decision-making model across B.C.
5. Strengthen ALC compliance and enforcement tools, and capacity, to better protect the ALR
6. Protect the ALR from residential speculation by establishing a maximum total floor area for all primary residences in the ALR (e.g. Minister’s Bylaw Standards) and providing local government flexibility to zone below the maximum. Enable new regulations for residential siting, secondary dwellings, and home plate size
7. End the impact of illegal fill on the agricultural capability of the ALR by redefining and restricting fill throughout the ALR
8. Address speculation through better land use planning by only considering exclusion of ALR land through a joint local government-ALC land use planning process
9. Make the ALR application review process more efficient by prescribing acceptable non-farm use and subdivision applications
10. Improve clarity around the two ALC reconsideration processes
11. Ensure a province-wide agricultural perspective by removing the ALC’s capacity to delegate subdivision and non-farm use decision-making authority to local governments
12. Build better planning and land use decisions for agriculture by requiring all local government bylaws that affects the ALR to be endorsed by ALC resolution
13. Strengthen ALC administration by clarifying and updating the Act and Regulation to improve ALC’s daily operation

Recommendations six and eleven are the most interesting for municipalities in our region as it will place limits on their powers. This is required as local governments have constantly prioritized urban development over the preservation of farmland. I am encouraged that many of the recommendations speak to working in a more collaborative manner with municipalities.

I am looking forward to seeing the final report on how to strengthen and enhance the Agricultural Land Reserve in our province.

Metro Vancouver residents support protecting farmland and preserving industrial land

Two of the tenets of regional land-use policy in Metro Vancouver is to protect farmland and preserve industrial land. There is a healthy tension between municipalities and the regional district when it comes to land-use. Municipalities tend to push towards development with the “highest and best use” at a given point in time, while the regional district tends to look at a longer timeframe when it comes to the best use for land. The regional district is a federation of municipalities in Metro Vancouver; each municipality agreed to be bound by the regional district’s land-use policy.

Metro Vancouver recently polled people who lived in our region, asking them if protecting farmland and preserving industrial land is important. They also asked people under what conditions would they consider allowing farmland or industrial land to be developed for residential or commercial uses.

The poll revealed that people believe^† that agricultural land:

1. Provides a local source of fresh food
2. Offers environment benefits such a providing green space, clean air, flood management, and habitat for wildlife
3. Supports future generations with options for local food production and food security

People in the poll believed^† that industrial land:

1. Supports a significant number of jobs in our region
2. Provides suitable locations to meet the day-to-day needs of the region such as warehousing, repair, and manufacturing
3. Attracts companies to do business here

People in our regional strongly believe in protecting farmland. The only case where the majority of people polled would support converting farmland to other uses would be if the land was not suitable for farming or other agricultural uses. People polled strongly support keeping residential growth within existing urban areas.

When it comes to converting industrial land to other uses, the majority of people polled would only support conversion if industrial land was vacant, not being used for industrial proposes for over half a decade. The majority of people polled also believed that industrial activities should have priority access to certain locations such as rail corridors, waterfronts, and highways.

Industrial uses along the waterfront.

This poll confirms that people support protecting farmland and preserving industrial land. It also confirms that people want to see residential and commercial uses (such as offices and retail) built in current urban areas.

In Langley City, we are doing our part. Current industrial land is protected as is our limited amount of agricultural land in our Official Community Plan.

The full poll results can be downloaded from Metro Vancouver’s website.

^†Top three responses.

Metro Vancouver provides feedback to province on preserving farmland in our region

The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) was created by the Dave Barrett NDP government in the 1970s to protect farmland in our province. It was created in response to the rapid urbanization of our limit, high-quality farmland in the province. This urbanization was particularly prevalent in the Lower Mainland, Vancouver Island, and Okanagan.

Farmland in Metro Vancouver. Source: Stephanie Vacher

While most people are aware that ALR exclusions permanently remove land from being farmed again, there are other things that happen within the ALR that also prevent land from being farmed. These non-farm uses can range from highways being built within the ALR, to illegal fill dumping, to people “farming” to take advantage of a lower tax rate for their mini-mansions and country estates.

The current provincial government has launched a review of the ALR with the following goals:

1. Preserve the productive capacity of land in the ALR.
2. Encourage farming of land in the ALR for uses related to agriculture and food production.
3. Strengthen the administration and governance of the ALR and ALC to both increase public confidence and to ensure that land use regulation and land use decisions are preserving agricultural land and encouraging farming and ranching in the ALR.

Farming in an important industry in Metro Vancouver. Our region has the highest gross farm receipts per hectare in Canada. Our region is also home to half the population of BC. This means that farmland is under constant threat of urbanization. The Metro Vancouver Regional District believes that the following key initiatives will help perverse farmland in our region.

• Strengthen the ALC legislative framework to prevent non‐farm activities in the ALR.
• Create financial disincentives for non‐farm uses in the ALR.
• Modernize requirements for the classification of farm for assessment purposes.
• Encourage more agriculture economic development and value‐added enterprises.
• Expand avenues to maintain ecological services on agricultural land.
• Implement policy reform specific to the Metro Vancouver region.

The provincial government will be seeking input from the public and other stakeholders until the end of April. Recommendations resulting from this review will be put forward during Winter 2018/19.

Development proposal to add more land into the Agricultural Land Reserve

When Agricultural Land Reserve and development application are used in the same paragraph, the word exclusion is almost always present. Over the years that I’ve been following the state of the ALR in the South of Fraser, land has been either taken out of the land reserve for urban development, or been used in such a way as to remove the potential for farming. An example of this would be the South Fraser Perimeter Road.

Development proposal located near 0 Avenue and 184th Street. Select image to enlarge.

A proposal by Hazelmere Golf & Tennis Club recently came before the Metro Vancouver Regional Planning Committee. The proposed plan would see the following:

• 41.9 acres of existing ALR land brought into agricultural production
• 3.9 acres of land under BC Hydro Right of Way be included into the ALR
• 20 acres of preserved and enhanced natural habitat and open space
• 3 acres of new parks
• 19.5 acres of existing golf course
• 39.2 acre, 145-lot suburban single-family houses

The single-family housing area would be outside of the ALR, but would still require Surrey to rezone that area from “Agricultural” to “Suburban”. It would also require Metro Vancouver to change the regional zoning from “Rural” to “General Urban” in that area.

An argument could be make that this is essentially sprawl. What really set this proposal apart from other similar proposals —which have been approved in this part of our region in the past— is that ALR land will be expanded, enhanced, and brought into production.

The 41.9 acres of farmland, which is a significant parcel, is proposed to be transformed into a farming co-operative. The proponent is proposing to work with the Young Agrarians and their Land Matching Program to find suitable farmers. For the land that is outside of the ALR, about 30% will be preserved from development.

As development projects occurs at the edge of the ALR in our region, these projects should be required to contribute to making adjacent farmlands viable and productive. This proposed plan may be a good example of how these types of developments should occur.

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.

Tsawwassen Mills and Tsawwassen Commons: The Best Laid Plans

Tsawwassen Mills recently opened in our region. The retail space of this mall is slightly smaller than Guildford Town Centre. Tsawwassen Mills uses more land because it is not multi-story and doesn’t have structured parking like Guildford Town Centre. It also has about 1,000 more parking spaces (6,000 in total) than Guildford Town Centre.

Tsawwassen Commons, a power centre that would feel right at home along the Langley Bypass, will be opening up just north of Tsawwassen Mills shortly.

An artist's drawing of the actual land use of the "mixed-use" area of TFN lands. Select image to enlarge.

Most of the malls in our region were developed on former agricultural land. In Langley City, it was no different. Our power centres and Willowbrook Mall were farmland at one point. When looking at projects like Tsawwassen Mills and Tsawwassen Commons, it is the rapid and massive conversion of farmland to auto-oriented retail that has caused alarm for people. Rapid urbanization of farmland was one of the reasons why the Agricultural Land Reserve was created it in the first place.

Tsawwassen First Nations (TFN) has a land-use plan. It is really interesting to see the original plan for the lands that are now the location of Tsawwassen Mills and Tsawwassen Commons.

TFN Land Use Map. Select map to enlarge.

Under the TFN plan, Tsawwassen Mills and Tsawwassen Commons are in a mixed-use area. According to the land-use plan, this area can include “hotel, retail and business park uses. A mixed use community is planned with single family, town home and apartment style housing”.

This area was to be connected to the surround agricultural lands “through a series of green fingers and blue ways that will penetrate throughout the development. A new stream will link the storm retention ponds and irrigation canals creating an attractive water feature. The streets will be tree lined and contain safe pedestrian and bicycle lanes.”

The plan always included the provision for a “a premium outlet or similar specialty retail mall adjacent to Highway 17.” On the land use plan, this is noted a “specialty retail.”

Now this land use plan likely would have taken decades to fully build out. A project like Tsawwassen Mills took less time to build, meaning it would be delivering economic benefit to the TFN almost immediately. Even in Langley City, development projects have been approved that are questionably in the spirit of our official community plan. Many people believe that having something is better than a brownfield or vacant site.

I’m not a fan of auto-orient retail, but I can certainly see why TFN made the decision they did. This is why having a regional growth strategy and the ALR is so important. It creates a tension which balances the social, economic, and environmental priorities of our region as a whole.

Health Authority finds link between healthier communities and local agriculture

How we build our communities —land-use and transport systems— have a profound impact on our health. Walkable communities are healthier communities. Over the last several years, our provincial health authorities have started publishing toolkits and data to encourage governments to build communities that enable people to have positive health outcomes.

While there is a good amount of information available about the link between walking and healthier community, not as much has been said about the link between local agriculture and our health. The Provincial Health Services Authority released a study call “Agriculture’s Connection to Health: A summary of evidence relevant to British Columbia.”

There were around twenty findings in their report including:

• Farmland preservation helps to maintain a level of food production that contributes to food self-sufficiency
• Greater availability of locally produced fruits and vegetables may increase their consumption
• Food self-sufficiency supports healthy eating
• Indigenous foods, foodlands, and waters contribute to healthy eating and physical health and are core parts of culture and identity for Indigenous populations
• The availability of culturally appropriate or traditional fresh fruits and vegetables can be an important part of healthy eating for immigrant populations
• The availability of local food can help people to feel connected with their environment

In the South of Fraser, a large amount of land is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The continued protection of this land is critical not only for food security, but also to support better health outcomes for people in our region.

The Provincial Health Services Authority noted in their study that there is opportunity for further research on the link between local agriculture and human health. I wouldn’t be surprise if on-going research finds even stronger connections between health and local agriculture.

Time to crack down on non-farm uses within the Agricultural Land Reserve

The best farmland in BC is located in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver. These areas are also the most populated (and fastest growing) places in the province. The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) was created in the 1970s to protect this farmland from urbanisation.

The ALR has been successful in protecting farmland even in the face of provincial and local government pressures to develop it. While having land removed from the ALR is hard, people have found other creative ways to exploit the ALR for non-farming purposes.

I did extensive research on how the farming potential of the ALR was reduced between 2000 and 2009. I found that government was responsible for 75% of land removed from the ALR, or land within the ALR being used for transportation purposes. As an example, the South Fraser Perimeter Road removed the potential for 90 hectares of land that is still within the ALR from ever being farmed again.

As I posted about earlier this year, Metro Vancouver commissioned a study called “Farm Tax Class: Income Threshold Investigation.” It found that many people have built large-format estate houses on two to ten acre lots within the ALR. Because of a loophole in our provincial tax regulations, these people only have to produce $2,500 in revenue from “farming” to get a massive break on property tax.

From Metro Vancouver staff presentation on Encouraging Agricultural Production through Farm Property Tax Reform. Select image to enlarge.

These people basically get to build luxury estates and get a tax break which really isn’t in the spirit of the ALR.

The Metro Vancouver Regional Planning Committee at their most recent meeting looked at ways to close some of the loopholes in the property tax regulations to encourage agricultural production with the ALR.

Metro Vancouver staff have recommended the following be considered to encourage agricultural production and limit non-farm use within the ALR.

1. Eliminate the 50% School Tax exemption for properties classed as residential (Class 1) in the ALR. This change would also apply to regional district, hospitals, Transit and other agency fees.
2. Change the income threshold to achieve farm classification to a minimum of $3,500, regardless of farm size for the Metro Vancouver region, and ensure that the threshold is reassessed every five years and adjusted according to the rate of inflation; and
3. Develop a two‐tier farm classification benefits system that allocates only some tax benefits to farms with an income threshold of $3,500, while providing the full package of tax benefits to the more productive farms with an income threshold at $10,000. This would create an incentive for farms to reach the higher income threshold. Determining the appropriate allocation of benefits for a two tier system requires consultation with the agricultural community and the agencies providing secondary benefits to properties with farm class.
4. Adjust the method for valuing agricultural land not used for farming to discourage further non-farm development in the ALR. The adjustment could consider valuing agricultural land not used for farming as if it was located in the applicable zone within the Urban Containment Boundary. Implementing this recommendation requires additional policy analysis and consultation with local governments and must ensure that any reform stipulates that tax policy is not justification for removing land from the ALR.
5. Encourage local governments and the Agricultural Land Commission to develop new protocols to enable BC Assessment to obtain timely information on changes in land use and new commercial business activities in the ALR to ensure an appropriate tax assessment of buildings and improvements.

The provincial government has complete control over the ALR and property tax regulations. While Metro Vancouver staff's recommendations make sense, I’m not confident that the provincial government will take action on these recommendations.

Greater Vancouver Economic Scorecard draws questionable conclusions about transportation and land-use

The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade recently released its Greater Vancouver Economic Scorecard 2016. Their scorecard evaluates Metro Vancouver to other world-class regions based on various economic and social indicators. It is well worth exploring this scorecard as it provides some meaningful insights into the strengths of our region, and where we can improve.

Overall, our region was in the middle of the pack. The biggest takeaway from the scorecard was that there needs to be “greater regional co-ordination among the municipalities that make up Greater Vancouver.” I would tend to agree with that. The scorecard highlights some of the challenges currently facing our region, but some of the challenges as articulated in the scorecard have some questionable content.

The scorecard outlines seven challenges our region faces. The first three identified in the summary report of the scorecard are: lack of investment in public transit and roads, housing affordability, and land scarcity for enabling trade.

The authors of the scorecard suggest that our region build more transit and more roads. While I agree with building more transit, building things like the Massey Tunnel replacement bridge (which the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade supports) shouldn’t be a priority.

Singapore received the top overall score in the scorecard. The city-state also had a higher score than Metro Vancouver when it came to average travel time to work.

Singapore is currently investing in public transit to move from its current 63% peak-hour public transit mode share to 75% in 2030. At the same time, they are investing in active transportation like cycling. To drive in Singapore, you have to bid for a Certificate of Entitlement and are subject to road pricing.

Infographic about Singapore's Certificate of Entitlement. Select graphic to enlarge.

Another conclusion that the authors of the scorecard draw is that a “lack of available land for new residential development is another key factor behind rising home prices.” They further concluded that “vacant land suitable for trade and goods movement could be exhausted within 10 years.”

Land spectators, and even the provincial government, have been chipping away at the agricultural land reserve for years. Housing affordability, and to some extent the call for more industrial land, is now being used as a way to try and pave over even more farmland.

Map of protected land in Singapore. Select map to enlarge.

Again, let's look at top-rated Singapore in the scorecard. It is an island city-state that is 719 square kilometres. Metro Vancouver is 2877 square kilometres. Singapore significantly beats Metro Vancouver in the Economic Scorecard when it comes to affordable housing. Both our region and Singapore have large ports and protected areas. Paving over farmland is not the solution.

While the Greater Vancouver Economic Scorecard 2016 is a great document, I have to question some of the conclusions it draws.

Farming for a property tax break

Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley is home to the best farmland in BC, and some of the best farmland in Canada. Our region also has the highest overall population density in the province, and some of the most valuable land.

In order to encourage farming throughout BC, the provincial government provides a reduction of property tax for land that is used for farming. Municipalities can also provide a reduction in property tax.

Examples of differences in property taxes with and without Farm class. Select table to enlarge.

In order to qualify for the farm property classification, certain requirements must be met. One of the requirements that is evaluated is the amount of revenue generated by farming. The evaluation is based on the following formula:

For farms under 2 acres, $10,000 in sales must be generation from farming. For a farm between 2 acres and 10 acres, $2,500 in sales must be generated from farming to qualify for farm status. For farms larger than 10 acres, minimum sales must be $2,500 plus 5% of the farmland value.

In Metro Vancouver, there are people who own large lots with large estate housing that have “hobby farms”. These farms qualify the large lot, large house owners for a massive reduction on their property tax bill. The thought is that these small scale farming operations do not providing the same sociality benefit as larger scale farming operations. In Metro Vancouver, the $2,500 threshold for land between 2 and 10 acres could be too low.

Metro Vancouver recently released a study it commissioned called “Farm Tax Class: Income Threshold Investigation.” Based on their investigation of farming in Metro Vancouver, the authors of the study suggested the following three items for potential action:

1. Increase Farm Income Thresholds, and Set a Single Threshold for all Parcel Sizes in Metro Vancouver: This value should be between $3,700 and $7,500.
2. Consider a Multi-Level Taxation Tool to Further Distinguish between Hobby Farms and Commercial Operations: Commercial and Hobby Farms would be assigned different farm classes, and would quality for different property tax rates and reductions.
3. Expand the Farm Income Threshold Policy Discussion.

While it is great that Metro Vancouver commissioned this report, the provincial government would be the only order of government that could act on these recommendations.

Working towards food security in Metro Vancouver

Metro Vancouver is home to some of the best farmland in Canada. Because of the Agricultural Land Reserve, the viability of farming in our region has been maintained over the years. Due to the changing physical and political climate throughout the world, food security has become a topic of concern recently.

A map of the Agricultural Land Reserve in Metro Vancouver.

Ensuring that people have access, and can afford, safe and nutritious food is critically important. Realizing the unique and luckily state of our region; being a dense urban area with prime farmland, Metro Vancouver developed a Regional Food System Strategy in 2011.

The strategy focused on the following five goals:

1. Increase capacity to produce food close to home
2. Improve the financial viability of the food sector
3. Help people make healthy and sustainable food choices
4. Ensure everyone has access to healthy, culturally diverse and affordable food
5. Support a food system consistent with ecological health

While these broad goals are certainly important to achieve, accomplishing them will take the work of all levels of government.

For local governments in our region, Metro Vancouver has created a detailed action plan. This action plan outlines 160 concrete actions that local governments in our region should take in the next five years.

For example, to increase capacity to produce food close to home, the action plan calls on the City of Surrey to “address truck parking on agricultural land by investigating the feasibility of designated parking area.” It also notes that Delta should “continue to work to minimize and mitigate the recreation/agricultural interface impacts along the Boundary Bay dyke.”

To ensure that everyone has access to healthy, culturally diverse and affordable food it notes that Burnaby and the City of North Vancouver should continue, and New Westminster should, “encourage, via in-kind support, backyard sharing programs that match homeowners with residents looking for gardening space.”

If you want to find out all of the action items proposed, check out the full action plan.

While action plans are a great, they aren’t very effective is they aren't implemented. The Regional Food System Action Plan calls on “each local government to assign a staff person for food system issues to coordinate local government participation in advancing the Action Plan.” This may be easier to do in some municipalities than others due to limited staffing resources.

Metro Vancouver does plan on reviewing the progress of this action plan. I’m hoping that if they find communities or items where action isn’t occurring, they will work collaboratively to ensure the success of this plan.

Metro Vancouver has serious questions about Massey Tunnel replacement project

The provincial government is being aggressive with its timetable to get the Massey Tunnel replacement project under construction. Because the replacement bridge and Highway 99 expansion project is a large, the provincial government needs to seek feedback from people and organizations in the region.

This project will have a profound effect on our region, and Metro Vancouver staff have questions and concerns about the project. The provincial government only gave a little over a month for feedback on the Project Definition Report which forms the justification for whole tunnel replacement/highway expansion program.

Metro Vancouver staff have noted that the public consultation period is short, and have requested that the province extended the comment period to April to allow time to properly review the project planning documents.

Besides the impact the project will have on the region, it will also have a direct impact on the regional district’s assets.

Metro Vancouver assets around Massey Tunnel replacement bridge site. Select image to enlarge.

Metro Vancouver staff have identified the following areas to be addressed by the province:

• Change to Regional Transportation Patterns
• How much traffic will be diverted to the Alex Fraser Bridge?
• How will the Tsawwassen First Nations regional shopping centres impact traffic along the Highway 99 corridor?
• What changes will occur with congestion on the Alex Fraser, Oak Street, Knight Street, and Queensborough bridges?
• How will transportation-related greenhouse gas emission change?
• System-wide Transportation Demand Management
• How does this project fit in with the regional growth strategy and Mayors’ Vision for Regional Transportation?
• Will the province update its tolling policy?
• Population and Employment Projections
• What impact will the 10-lane bridge have on the rate of urban development, and pressure to develop agricultural lands.
• Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• What impact will the project have on air quality in the region?
• How will the project reduce the exposure of air pollutants for people walking or cycling across the bridge?
• Climate Change Adaptation
• Are climate change impacts considered in the bridge design and restoration projects?
• Health Analysis
• Will the province consider a Health Impact Assessment to fully account for the health outcome changes that will occur due to this project?
• Agricultural Lands
• How much agricultural land will be needed for this construction of the project?
• What impact will this project have on farming?
• Deas Island Regional Park
• What changes will happen to the Deas Island Park trails, and how will those changes be integrate into a regional trail network?
• What habitat will be created/destroyed/restored as part of the project?
• How will the park's visitor experience change during and after the construction of the bridge?
• Experience the Fraser Concept Plan
• How does the project support the Experience the Fraser Concept Plan?
• Construction and Long-term Maintenance Access
• Will the provincial government be using Deas Island Regional Park for access during and after construction of the new bridge?
• How will Metro Vancouver be able to access the Lulu Island-Delta Main?
• Potential Impacts on Regional Utilities
• How will the project impact the River Road West Main and Lulu Island-Delta Main water lines?

The Massey Tunnel replacement project, and associated highway expansion, will have major impacts on the region. Instead of trying to ram the project through, the province should take the time to understand both the positive and negative changes that will happen in Metro Vancouver as a result of the project.

Sprawling under the radar in Langley

When people think of sprawl, the image of acres of farmland being destroyed to accommodate massive housing development projects likely comes to mind. While Langley has certainly seen projects like this, there is another form of sprawl happening in Langley that is insidious and just as destructive.

Areas around most of the urban edge of the Township of Langley are zoned RU-1. This zoning allows for up to two dwellings per lot. Allowing two dwellings per lot on a farm within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) makes sense as it supports farming, but allowing this on rural land outside of the ALR is a different story.

As I posted about earlier this summer, some people are creating two strata lots out of one fee-simple lot in rural Langley outside of the ALR. This essentially allows people to get away with subdividing a lot, without actually subdividing a lot. This tactic would not be allowed within the ALR.

The end result of this process is the creations of insidious sprawl, and the conversion of rural areas into suburban areas. One option Township of Langley Council could take is to examine if two dwellings on rural lots outside of the ALR should be removed from the current zoning bylaws.

Unfortunately, Township Council has decided to go in the opposite direction in some parts of Langley; they formally allow subdivisions.

For example, Township Council approved the following change to their Rural Plan in April 2014.

“Subdivision in the area immediately adjacent to the eastern boundary of Walnut Grove, south of 88 Avenue and not located in the ALR may be permitted, provided the current permitted density of two dwelling units per fee simple lot is maintained. Rezoning of properties in the area shall be considered provided:

The proposed zoning allows only two lots for each existing fee simple lot and only one single family dwelling per lot;
The lot is serviced by municipal water and sanitary sewer services; and
Access to lots fronting 216 Street and 88 Avenue is provided by new roads connecting to 217A Street or 86A Avenue.”

Not surprisingly, some landowners in the area are taking advantage of this new provision. The most recent example was presented two days ago at a Council meeting.

Area where the Township of Langley's Rural Plan allows subdivision at the border of Walnut Grove. Section image to enlarge.

While this is just one small suburban incursion into rural Langley, this is one of many other small incursions into rural Langley. While it might not cause the same controversy, or a quick change in the landscape, the end result is the same. Areas of rural Langley which are not protected by the Agricultural Land Commission, are being slowly turning into suburban sprawl.

Recent changes to allowed uses within the Agricultural Land Reserve

Last year, the provincial government changed the legislation that protects agricultural land in BC. One of the biggest changes was splitting the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) into two zones.

In Zone 1, which included the South Coast, Vancouver Island, and the Okanagan, the Agricultural Land Commission and its regional panels must preserve agricultural land and work with all levels of government to encourage farm uses on agricultural land.

With land in Zone 2, the rest of the province, in addition to preserving agricultural land for farm uses, the Commissions and its regional panels can also permit uses on agricultural land if there is economic, cultural and social value; it meet regional and community planning objective; or it meets other prescribed considerations.

The introduction of the Zone 2 additional uses created a paradox because those additional uses can only be considered if those uses still result in the preservation of agricultural land for farming. If land within the ALR is not suitable for farming, it really should be excluded from the ALR. Luckily in Metro Vancouver, we are in Zone 1.

When the province changed the legislation last year, they also started a review process to update what uses would be allowed within the ALR that didn’t require the approval of the Commission.

The province recently expanded non-agricultural uses permitted within the ALR, and was considering changing the rules around the subdivision of land within the ALR. The subdivision of farmland can result in fragmentation which reduces the ability of land to be efficiently farmed.

As of June 2015, the following changes were made to uses allowed within the ALR in Zone 1 according to a Metro Vancouver staff report:

• Allow the production of marihuana in accordance with federal regulations
• Allow biodiversity conservation, passive recreation, heritage, wildlife and scenery viewing purposes
• Allow aggregate extraction if the total volume of materials removed is less than 500 cubic metres
• Change where products sold at a farm shops can be sourced from
• Change where farm products stored, packed, prepared, or processed can be sourced from
• Allow breweries, distilleries, or meaderies within the ALR if 50% of the farm products used in the creation of beverages are grown on the farm
• Allow the selling of alcoholic beverage, other than ones produced on the farm, in a lounge or for special events
• Allow the leasing of sections of farmland as long as farming is the intended use
• Allow, in addition to one secondary suite in a single family dwelling, either one manufactured home or single level addition to an existing dwelling

Many people were concerned that the province would further weaken the protection of farmland, but the changes in regulation so far have been reasonable.

More changes could still be in the works around “agri-tourism” which is circularly defined as tourist activity on farmland.

KPU researcher studying the future of food security in Metro Vancouver

When you go grocery shopping, the food you buy can come from all parts of the world. If you buy a package of cookies, the ingredients listed could come from multiply continents. Climate change, the cost of transportation, and the degradation of the environment are destabilizing how our current food system functions.

There is a growing recognition that in the near future food production will have to be more localized. This means that food will need to be grown, raised, and processed locally. We will not be able to rely on the availability of affordable Californian lettuce and tomatoes to feed people in Metro Vancouver.

Some regions will be in a better position than others as food production becomes more localized. In Metro Vancouver, we currently have an advantage as we are surrounded by high-quality agricultural land, have milder temperatures, and have access to water. There are, of course, threats to our ability to produce food locally. The biggest threat is from urban development of farmland.

Beyond food security, localized food production will also contribute to a stronger local economy.

Map of the Southwest BC Bio-Region. Select map to enlarge.

To quantify what our future may look like, researchers at Kwantlen Polytechnic University’s Institute for Sustainable Food Systems are in the middle of a three-year research project that is studying what they call the Bio-Region of Southwest BC. The researcher define a Bio-Region as “areas that share similar topography, plant and animal life, and human culture.”

The food system includes all processes and infrastructure involved in feeding a population and includes the following key elements: pre-production, farming and wild harvest, processing and storage, distribution and marketing, consumption and waste management. Select graphic to enlarge.

The objects of the research project are to deliver insight in the following areas:

1. How to increase self-reliance in agricultural production including land, water, and processing facility requirements
2. How to minimize external inputs and optimize soil, water and air quality from agricultural production
3. How to reduce and remove greenhouse gas emission from agricultural production
4. How to increase biodiversity of crops and livestock types as well as how agricultural land can support wildlife habitat
5. How to reduce the ecological footprint of the food system
6. How to strengthen and enhance local farm and ancillary business
7. How local agricultural production contributes to the local economy

The research project’s major funding partners are the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia, R. Howard Webster Foundation, and VanCity. The project has received the support of the Agricultural Land Commission and many local governments. The Township of Langley has contributed $12,000 to the project and the City of Langley has contributed $6,000 to the project for example. The project team is looking for the support of Metro Vancouver as well.

When this project is completed, a policy framework will be produced that can guide all levels of government in supporting local food production in Southwest BC.

New water supply fuels development pressure in Salmon River Uplands

When people think of what enables sprawl, normally large roads come to mind. While roads are certainly required, the availability of water and sewer services are key to enabling urban development.

For years, I have been posting about the potential for massive development in the Salmon River Uplands area. This area is in the geographic centre of the Township of Langley, and is surrounded by the Agricultural Land Reserve. The Township of Langley hasn’t developed a long-term plan for the area, and the area has been allowed to develop in a piecemeal fashion.

Because of concerns with the protection of the Hopington Aquifer, development in the area has been limited. With the recent introduction of Metro Vancouver water service to the are, the floodgates are now open for the development. With no clear plan in place for the area, piecemeal suburban development project approvals may be the order of the day.

Back in the 1980’s, a 81 unit single-family housing development was built around 56th Avenue and 240th Street. The original plan would have seen around 200 units built, but due to opposition, the rest of the project was never completed.

Original 1980's Tall Timbers Development Plan. Select image to enlarge.

With the new East Langley Water System through Salmon River Upland, the completion of this 1980’s plan is now possible. Infinity Properties is now proposing to finish the Tall Timbers project which started in the 1980's.

The Tall Timber lots and the lot size proposed for the completion of Tall Timbers is about 1/3 of an acre. This will create suburban sprawl.

In 1995, Council place a moratorium to prohibit new rezoning and subdivision applications in Salmon River Uplands due to environmental concerns. In 2011, Councillor Kim Richter proposed making this moratorium permanent. Council at the time referred the matter to staff, I haven’t seen the result of this referral.

The only land-use guidance for the Salmon River Uplands area is the Township of Langley’s Rural Plan which states that “The Salmon River Uplands shall be maintained for rural residential and agricultural uses.”

Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy also zones the area as Rural meaning “Rural areas are intended to protect the existing character of rural communities, landscapes and environmental qualities. Land-uses include low density residential development, small scale commercial, industrial, and institutional uses, and agricultural uses that do not require the provision of urban services such as sewer or transit.”

The Township of Langley has not yet fully signed onto the Regional Growth Strategy, so I’m not sure if there is much protection for Salmon River Uplands via the strategy.

If this project comes before Township Council, and if Council approve this project, Salmon River Uplands has the potential to become the most unsustainable area in Langley and Metro Vancouver. Council needs to put a moratorium on major development project in the area until a detailed community plan has been adopted for the area.

The current piecemeal approach that the Township is taking with Salmon River Upland is not good for the environment, rural nature of the community, or land-owners in the area.

For further reading, check out the “Leave Salmon River Uplands Alone” Facebook page and “Threats To The Ecological Health Of The Salmon River Watershed In Langley, B.C. And Suggestions For Improved Local And Provincial Management.”