Letters to the Editor

Township's signature doesn't mean much

Editor: The Township of Langley has become the rogue in the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy (RGS).

Just last summer, the Township signed the Regional Growth Strategy. The RGS is founded on a firm urban containment boundary to preserve the ALR and to direct growth.  Without an urban containment boundary, we no longer have smart growth.

Within a month of signing the document, the Township approved a bizarre proposal to allow 21 houses outside the containment boundary and within the ALR south of Murrayville.  This proposal was appropriately labeled as “bad planning policy” by then-councillor Mel Kositsky.

Now we have the Wall proposal near TWU.  The Wall proposal is even worse.  It not only lies outside the urban containment boundary but it is in the middle of the ALR, with no nearby residential or urban development.  The Wall development is spot zoning of the worst kind.

And what is the Township response to the conflict between these two bizarre proposals and the RGS? Planner Ramin Seifi tells us that Township is going to brazen it out and claim some sort of phantom exemption from the RGS.

Is the Township signature on regional documents totally worthless?  Are we going to see a hodgepodge of spot zoning throughout the ALR?  When will we have proper planning in the Township of Langley?

Doug McFee,


We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Community Events, February 2017

Add an Event