The City of Langley recently released a new economic development strategy. The plan's goals are to:
-Create a competitive and vibrant downtown area.
-Be recognized regional destination for new development.
-Renew Infrastructure underground and above ground) that encourages economic activity and contributes to the City’s quality of life.
-Secure strong sector partnerships that facilitate investment activity, job creation and economic diversity.
And it plans to do this by focusing on the following areas:
Infrastructure Renewal, including promoting the expansion of Rapid Transit services to Langley Regional City Centre
Information and research, including providing updates stats on the city, working with the Downtown Langley Business Association (DLBA) on marketing the City, create partnerships with Kwantlen University and Trinity Western , and preparing a Brownfield renewal strategy.
Business development, including working with the DLBA to increase investor and tenant interest in Downtown properties and collaborating with the DLBA and Willowbrook shopping centre on shared recruitment efforts.
Marketing and investment attraction, including working with the Township of Langley to research development opportunities in the Langley Regional City Centre and developing a marketing plan.
One of the big things that the City needs to invest in is infrastructure, but this is a multi-million dollar, multi-year project. The key to renewing Downtown Langley will be to renew infrastructure like power, water, and sewer. This is holding up development today. Another key thing for the City will be to get rapid transit to Downtown. I think that Downtown Langley’s biggest advantage over other parts of Langley will be its access to rapid transit. With the new Park and Ride up in Willoughby, Downtown Langley will have even more challenges.
One of the other interesting focus points is working on attracting film. The only issue is that the film industry in BC hasn’t been doing so hot lately due to things like the scrapping of the HST and other jurisdiction becoming more competitive. The plan also looks at working with higher education providers like TWU and Kwantlen. Wouldn’t it be interesting if there was a university district developed on one of the City’s brownfield site instead of in the ALR?
One of the key things for the City of Langley is to ensure economic vitality, but as the report notes, it looks like good paying industrial jobs are being replaced with low paying retail jobs. It seems like working with the education sector is going to be key if Langley wants to attract good paying jobs to the City and ensure the possibility of a good local job for its citizens.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Sidewalk coming to Langley Bypass
The title of this post may be a little tongue-in-cheek, but there is a proposed new development at the corner of 200th Street and the Langley Bypass that will include a real sidewalk which is a first for the Ministry of Transportation section of the Langley Bypass. The proposed development will include a Cactus Club Restaurant and was the subject of a public hearing at the City of Langley last night.
One of the things about this development that is a positive step in the right direction is that it fronts the Bypass and 200th Street and it isn't setback in a sea of parking. Also, while the building turns it's back to the Bypass, there is glass instead of a blank wall which is interesting considering that another development in Langley in a more pedestrian friendly areas doesn't even follow that rule.
What I did find interesting is that there is an allowance for a 4.78m road dedication along the frontage of the Langley Bypass and a 5.6m road dedication along the frontage of 200th Street. I suppose this is to ensure that in the future we can add more travel lanes or better yet, bike lanes.
The Langley Bypass is one of the worst places to be if you don't have a car. While developments like the proceeding put more thought into other forms of transportation, overall I think this section of town is doomed to be auto-only for the next little while until a plan is developed that will put a priority on providing transportation choice in the area. I do wonder if the Langley Bypass will ever become more urban and more sustainable.
 |
| Site Plan. Click image to enlarge. |
One of the things about this development that is a positive step in the right direction is that it fronts the Bypass and 200th Street and it isn't setback in a sea of parking. Also, while the building turns it's back to the Bypass, there is glass instead of a blank wall which is interesting considering that another development in Langley in a more pedestrian friendly areas doesn't even follow that rule.
 |
| Elevation and rendering of proposed development. Click image to enlarge. |
What I did find interesting is that there is an allowance for a 4.78m road dedication along the frontage of the Langley Bypass and a 5.6m road dedication along the frontage of 200th Street. I suppose this is to ensure that in the future we can add more travel lanes or better yet, bike lanes.
The Langley Bypass is one of the worst places to be if you don't have a car. While developments like the proceeding put more thought into other forms of transportation, overall I think this section of town is doomed to be auto-only for the next little while until a plan is developed that will put a priority on providing transportation choice in the area. I do wonder if the Langley Bypass will ever become more urban and more sustainable.
Monday, March 5, 2012
City of Langley on Moral Crusade
This morning I was reading tonight’s City of Langley council agenda and I came across a proposed bylaw that would see the following uses banned in all zone in the City.
(c) Adult entertainment stores.
(d) Adult theatres.
(e) Adult video stores.
(f) Arcades.
(g) Body rub parlours.
(h) Cheque cashing establishments.
(i) Currency exchanges.
(j) Escort services.
(k) Exotic entertainment.
(l) Money lending establishments.
(m) Pawnbrokers.
(n) The use of any premises for the selling, distributing, trading, cultivating, growing or producing of cannabis (marihuana) except as permitted and authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Canada).
(o) The use of any premises, other than facilities operated by or under the supervision of the Fraser Health Authority, for the dispensing of methadone or heroin for use on the premises.
(p) The use of any premises, other than public and private schools, churches
and community recreation centres, for public dances to which persons
under the age of nineteen.
What I find interesting is that before 1999 Arcades, Adult Entertainment, and Pawnbrokers uses were not allowed in the City and that restriction was previously lifted.
While some of the changes to the zoning make sense, overall it seems like the City is trying to impose morality on people. If you look at the definition of “Adult entertainment store” it includes places that sell “objects other than contraceptive devices that are designed or intended to be used in a sexual act.” There are actually products that you can buy at Pricesmart or Safeway that might not be able to be sold under the proposed changes. I personally don’t find a problem with people purchasing these products and I hold the view that the government should not be in the bedrooms of its citizens.
It appears that section (n) and (o) is a result of the medical marihuana dispensary issue in the City that you can read about on a previous post.
Section (p) is a result of the nothing-but-problems teen night club that was briefly operated in the City, but went out of business though I have to wonder if the bylaw wording will prevent something like a grad dance from happening at a place like the Cascades Casino as they have a ballroom there.
Finally being a bit of a gamer, I find it odd that they are banning “arcades” or Internet Gaming Cafes from the City. It seems sort of odd given that most people have a gaming console or PC anyway. Either way, I’m unsure why “arcades” are bad in the first place. Places like Castle Fun Park are arcades and I’m sure all of us born after 1975 have had a birthday party as a kid at that kind of place.
I’m actually shock that night clubs aren't in the banned use list as I don’t understand how having a night clubs with huge parking lots and no transit is a good idea for public safety
I understand what the City is trying to do, but the proposed zoning changes seems a bit overreaching to me.
(c) Adult entertainment stores.
(d) Adult theatres.
(e) Adult video stores.
(f) Arcades.
(g) Body rub parlours.
(h) Cheque cashing establishments.
(i) Currency exchanges.
(j) Escort services.
(k) Exotic entertainment.
(l) Money lending establishments.
(m) Pawnbrokers.
(n) The use of any premises for the selling, distributing, trading, cultivating, growing or producing of cannabis (marihuana) except as permitted and authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Canada).
(o) The use of any premises, other than facilities operated by or under the supervision of the Fraser Health Authority, for the dispensing of methadone or heroin for use on the premises.
(p) The use of any premises, other than public and private schools, churches
and community recreation centres, for public dances to which persons
under the age of nineteen.
What I find interesting is that before 1999 Arcades, Adult Entertainment, and Pawnbrokers uses were not allowed in the City and that restriction was previously lifted.
While some of the changes to the zoning make sense, overall it seems like the City is trying to impose morality on people. If you look at the definition of “Adult entertainment store” it includes places that sell “objects other than contraceptive devices that are designed or intended to be used in a sexual act.” There are actually products that you can buy at Pricesmart or Safeway that might not be able to be sold under the proposed changes. I personally don’t find a problem with people purchasing these products and I hold the view that the government should not be in the bedrooms of its citizens.
It appears that section (n) and (o) is a result of the medical marihuana dispensary issue in the City that you can read about on a previous post.
Section (p) is a result of the nothing-but-problems teen night club that was briefly operated in the City, but went out of business though I have to wonder if the bylaw wording will prevent something like a grad dance from happening at a place like the Cascades Casino as they have a ballroom there.
Finally being a bit of a gamer, I find it odd that they are banning “arcades” or Internet Gaming Cafes from the City. It seems sort of odd given that most people have a gaming console or PC anyway. Either way, I’m unsure why “arcades” are bad in the first place. Places like Castle Fun Park are arcades and I’m sure all of us born after 1975 have had a birthday party as a kid at that kind of place.
I’m actually shock that night clubs aren't in the banned use list as I don’t understand how having a night clubs with huge parking lots and no transit is a good idea for public safety
I understand what the City is trying to do, but the proposed zoning changes seems a bit overreaching to me.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Budget information hard to find for the Township of Langley
This morning I went to the Township of Langley’s website and spent a good hour trying to find information on the 2012 proposed budget. I was a bit disappointed at the information available online. All I could find was a 5 page summary of the proposed 2012 budget and a PowerPoint presentation of some of the priorities of the engineering department. I couldn’t actually find overall budget spending. To make matters even more difficult, it appears that last year’s financial plan is nowhere to be found on their website. The latest financial plan is from 2010. Compare this to the City of Langley's website where I can look at the 2012 budget and the last three year's finical plans and I have to wonder why information seems more difficult to find online in the Township. Since open government seems to be a priority these days and since I believe that the financials tell you a lot about government, it seems that more effort should be taken to have this information more readily available.
On a side note, I was trying to find out how much money the Township was spending on cycling. I did find that they budgeted $160,000 for commuter cycling infrastructure which is less than the $176,000 they budgeted in 2010. This is higher than the $0 that the City of Langley spends on dedicated cycling infrastructure. In 2010, the Township's transportation budget was $78.7 million dollars. Of course most new road projects include cycling improvements, but that doesn't help in established areas. More on that later.
On a side note, I was trying to find out how much money the Township was spending on cycling. I did find that they budgeted $160,000 for commuter cycling infrastructure which is less than the $176,000 they budgeted in 2010. This is higher than the $0 that the City of Langley spends on dedicated cycling infrastructure. In 2010, the Township's transportation budget was $78.7 million dollars. Of course most new road projects include cycling improvements, but that doesn't help in established areas. More on that later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)