Threats to the livability of Metro Vancouver

Since the mid 1970’s, people in Metro Vancouver have recognized the importance of preserving the natural eco-system and protecting farmland in our region. In fact, it was the massive conversion of hillsides and farmland to housing that caused citizens to lobby government for change. This promoted the provincial government of the day to setup a system of regional governance with the mandate “to promote human settlement that is socially, economically and environmentally healthy and that makes efficient use of public facilities and services, land and other resources.” It also prompted the creation of the Agricultural Land Commission with the mandate to preserve agricultural land and to encourage farming on agricultural land.

Over the years, this vision has been refined with increasingly stronger protection put in place to ensure the livable of our region. Metro Vancouver was on a course to become one of the most livable regions in the world with continued protection of farmland, strong regional government to encourage sustainable development, and a world-class transit system that was finally being expanded. All this was put in jeopardy last year.

The provincial government announced no new funding for transit without a referendum. The provincial government also announced it was going to review the agricultural land reserves with the goal of opening it up for development. Metro Vancouver and the Township of Langley also went to court to find out the limits of regional governance. On their own, the regional would have been able to continue on the path to sustainability, but combined, these three things threaten to unravel close to 40 years of work improving the livability of the region.

The transit referendum is still over a year away, and no one really know what’s going on with it.

The recent court ruling between Metro Vancouver and the Township throws into question the purpose and power of a regional growth strategy. You can read more about this on an earlier post this month.

Last week, the provincial government announced proposed changes to the Agricultural Land Commission. With the power of Metro Vancouver to limit urban sprawl now up in the air, I was relieved that the province plans to maintain the integrity of the Agricultural Land Reserve in Metro Vancouver. In fact, the provincial government is actually increasing funding to the Agricultural Land Commission. This will allow the ALC to focus on “pro-active planning, policy development functions and stakeholder engagement.” The ALC will also now focus on application by farmer and ranchers that relate to agricultural and deprioritize applications “from developers, speculators and those who simply wish to do something other than agriculture in the ALR.”

While the protection of the ALR in Metro Vancouver, Vancouver Island, and the Okanagan is increasing, the protection of farmland in the rest of the province will be all but gone. This is alarming considering the recent news that agricultural productive in places like northern BC will increase due to climate change. The province’s decision today to develop farmland in northern BC will impact the food security of BC by 2050.

In Metro Vancouver, it looks like our green space will be protected even with the recent court decision that calls into question the power of Metro Vancouver to regulate land-use. The economic prosperity of our region is tied to having a world-class transit system, and I hope that funding is approved to increase transit service. If it is not, our region will be in trouble.

Embracing accessible design outside of Surrey’s core

While municipalities like Vancouver were built around the streetcar, municipalities like Surrey were built around the auto. Because Surrey was built around the auto, I find it much more interesting to see how the community is starting to become more accessible with new development projects becoming more walking, cycling, and transit-friendly. Of course there is a massive shift taking place in Whalley/Downtown Surrey, but there are also changes happening outside of the core.

While residential development has been compact for decades in Surrey, commercial development has mostly remained auto-oriented. The biggest factor that determines the accessibility of a development is parking. There are a few things you can do with parking to encourage a more accessibility development including reducing/removing on-site surface parking, putting parking underground, or moving parking from the front of a building to the back (so that actual buildings front the street).

Surrey seems to be incrementally pushing for improved accessibility in commercial development. For the last little while, I’ve noticed that new, small strip malls have buildings that front the street, with parking hidden behind. Recently, I’ve started to notice that larger commercial projects are starting to become more accessible as well.

The latest example is in South Surrey around King George Boulevard. The project will contain offices, retail, restaurants, and a banquet hall.

Proposed site plan of 3061 King George Boulevard. Click image to enlarge.

As parking is the largest factor in determining if a project is accessible, I'm happy that half of the required parking is underground while the remaining surface parking is hidden behind the buildings in this proposed project.

Cross section of proposed development fronting King George Boulevard. Click image to enlarge.

In most communities on-site parking is based on peak parking requirements for all uses. I’m encouraged that Surrey is starting to recognize that on-site parking can be reduced. This project will require 333 parking spots because “the applicant is proposing a banquet hall and offices, and because these two uses have different hours of peak demand (banquet hall in the evening and offices in the day), shared parking is permitted. This arrangement is acceptable because the total daytime parking requirements and total evening parking requirements are each being met.” King George Boulevard is a future transit corridor. As more transit service is provided, parking requirement can be further reduced.

Another interesting note is that Building A contains a proposed drive-thru restaurant. While I’m not a fan of drive-thrus, this project accommodates it without breaking up the street wall on King George Boulevard.

While more can be done to make projects even more accessible in Surrey, I’m happy to see that projects are starting becoming more accessible outside of the Whalley area. Because Surrey does not have adequate public transit, driving will still be the dominant mode of travel in most parts of the community. Surrey has to balance the requirement to encourage more accessible development projects that support walking, cycling, and transit while still accommodating the auto.

This is why winning the upcoming transit referendum will be key as building rapid transit throughout the community will push Surrey to fully embrace accessible design.

Langley City Council sends strongly worded letter about doubling of School Site Acquisition Charge

Last week I posted that School District No. 35, which covers both the City and Township of Langley, will be increasing their School Site Acquisition Charge from between $212.00 and $354.00 per new housing unit, to between $443.00 and $737.00 per new housing unit. This fee is used to pay for the new school sites.

The City of Langley sent a letter to the Minister of Education, former City Mayor Peter Fassbender, asking that this fee be reduced in the City of Langley as there will be no new school sites in its jurisdiction. Minster Fassbender didn’t agree with the City, and allowed the application of the new School Site Acquisition Charge in both the City and the Township.

You can read an earlier post about why I think this isn’t fair. City Council had the chance to dispute the decision of the Minster using tools available under the Community Charter, but instead decided to only write a strong worded letter to the Minister. This is disappointing as the School Site Acquisition Charge only further drives up the cost of sustainable redevelop in the City of Langley.

I have obtained a copy of the letter that Council sent to the Minister of Education which can be downloaded from the document archive. Some highlights from the letter include how “City Council expressed their extreme disappointment over the imposition of the new SSAC in spite of significant inequities in cost and benefits to the two municipalities.”

If the City of Langley started the depute resolution process available under the Community Charter, it would have to pay some fees like for a facilitator as an example. It appears that this might have been why some on City Council didn’t want to start the process. Could this be called penny wise, pound foolish?

At the end of the letter, City Council asked the Minister of Education to reconsider his decision, and pay for a facilitator to work with the City and School District to see if the School Site Acquisition Charge could be reduced. The first letter didn't work, will a second? I certainly won’t be holding my breath.

Running for Langley City Council

I’m writing today's post to ask for your support in my campaign for Langley City Council. After time spent with friends and family, who have encouraged and motivated me, I feel that in order to continue advocating for a safer, cleaner and more liveable community, I must embark on this journey. And for that, I need your help.

Over the years in which I have called Langley my home, I have advocated to improve the liveability of the community. I have worked to bring awareness to the importance of building a sustainable, accessible, and inclusive community through various organizations such as South Fraser on Trax and the Greater Langley Cycling Coalition, and by working hard as a member of the City of Langley Parks and Environment Advisory Committee to protect and enhance the Nicomekl flood plain, green spaces, and parks.

Running for City Council is not about the individual, but about a team player working with the larger group to achieve a common goal for a better community.

Running for council means getting the word out. If you are able to help by volunteering your time to attend community events and hit the pavement, and letting people know about my campaign, please let me know.

Like most things, running a campaign also requires money. You can donate online or by mail.

If you wish to talk with me directly, please email me at nathan@nathanpachal.com.

Be sure to check out my election website, sign up on the mailing list, and spread the word on Facebook.

I hope I can count on your support to help me make Langley “The Place to Be!”