langleywatchdog…. and more!

The following historical account of the Athenry Development issue and subsequent actions spells out in detail how this Council and staff are completely out of control and must be stopped. The Township of Langley LOST in this misdirected and irresponsible appeal to a B.C. Supreme Court Justice regarding a Provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner decision. The Township of Langley’s B.C Supreme Court action named the Commissioner and Jacob de Raadt (a local area resident and consultant) in a Judicial Review action.

(The Langley Times) – The decision – In a 22 page written decision filed in the Vancouver Court Registry on April 15^th – Justice Bruce Cohen ruled the Township rendered the whole matter moot when it handed over different versions of a storm water management plan for the Athenry Development project in Willoughby per the Provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner decision… but there is more!

What makes this an even more relevant and damning decision Justice Cohen goes on to say (which he was not required to do) “he would have ruled in favor of de Raadt and the commissioner”.     

I have written about this travesty four times on this BLOG, on February 4^th, March 11^th, April 24^th and September 26^th 2013. In my opinion the Athenry Development will go down as the biggest injustice done to neighbors of any development that I have had any familiarity with over my many years in local politics. It was and is just wrong. Here is a recap –

First a little history on the Athenry Gate Development – During the week of Nov. 22^nd, 2010, I became aware of an agenda item (for Athenry Developments) scheduled for a “Development Permit” Public Hearing on Monday November 29^th, 2010. This had received 1^st and 2^nd reading, public hearing and 3^rd reading (conditional approval) in June of 2008 prior to my election as Mayor. In doing my due diligence in preparation for the upcoming Public Hearing, I researched this project and its history, through a variety of Staff Reports. I was frankly shocked in finding the project that was proposed and given the appropriate readings, including Public Hearing bore no resemblance, in my opinion, to what was before us at Development Permit Stage and 4^th and final reading.

Changes can only be made after 3^rd reading in Form, Character and Design.

These changes in my opinion did not meet that standard and I stated that in a meeting I had with the CAO prior to the Council Meeting. Staff and legal advice claimed the changes were covered under form, character and design, which I did and still totally disagree with.

The original June 2008 approved project was for one building located roughly in the center of the property while the 2010 version was for three, four story apartment buildings plus a two story office building and a Cultural Center.

The decision of your Municipal Council to bring this reinvented proposal forward for fourth reading and Development Permit from the PREVIOUS elected Council’s first and second reading, public hearing and then third reading was wrong and completely off base given the following –

The Local Government Act – Division 4 – Public Hearings on Bylaws

Provision after a Public Hearing

894(1) After a public hearing, the council or board may, without further notice or hearing.

1. Adopt or defeat the bylaw, or
2. Alter and then adopt the bylaw, provided that the alteration does not

i.      Alter the use,

ii.      Increase the density, or

iii.      Without the owner’s consent, decrease the density of any area from that originally specified in the bylaw.

The approved Athenry development in my opinion breached i. and ii. above. Unfortunately that would require affected citizens to take the Township of Langley to court in what is always a risk and patently unfair. The approval of this development was in my opinion poking residents in the eye with residents only recourse being a lawsuit. The Township of Langley’s deep pockets (taxpayer funded) is nothing more than financial intimidation against well-meaning and affected taxpayers.

Another case – The 2005 Council approved the first controversial phase of the Bedford Landing Condominium development in Fort Langley adding a 4^th floor at final reading and development permit stage, which once again breached the above Local Government Act 894 (1) b ii. (it increased density at final reading which is not permitted)      

Back to Athenry, this change impacted all surrounding private homes severely with a dramatically reduced set back, increased height of buildings and close imposition immediately next to surrounding homes. How high and how close? On the plans there was a large condominium building estimated to be about 50 – 60 feet high, less than twenty feet from their back fence. With these dramatic changes to the project there were a number of serious concerns not the least of which was the issue of drainage given the potential for flooding of surrounding homes.

You made the decision to buy and move into your dream home based on what had been explained to you by the planning department at the hall. How would you like to be made aware of these changes after you moved in?

In my opinion and experience this was and is a travesty that happened to local hard working taxpayers. (NOTE – The affected residents had launched legal action but withdrew without giving up their right for taking action in the future.) Due to their position they have been denied access to speak directly to councilors (They must go through Township lawyers) about ongoing problems with the development that has so dramatically affected their quality of life and home values!

For any residents reading this and wondering what their reaction might be IF they were in the same position? I know of one resident who has sold their dream home that backed onto Athenry; it has cost them about $100,000. This has been verified by local real estate representatives.

So if anyone reading this BLOG Post figures on this being an exaggeration of the impact of this development or the facts of the case, do yourself a favor and drive by the just moved Willoughby Hall and check out the NEW 5 story (4 on top of a ground level parking garage) Condominium building that is just being finished which abuts these homes. Now you tell me that there is nothing wrong with this development and more importantly how it came about? Just put yourself in their shoes?

So to the Langley Times – Where do they get their information? Here are the facts!

Yes, interestingly enough this is the same Jacob de Raadt who was subject to a number of complaints by this council and banishment from Township Council Chambers!

Jacob de Raadt filed a Freedom of Information Request (FOI) with the Township of Langley to obtain copies of all versions of the storm water management plan for the Athenry Development. He was denied that information through FOI, that part is true.

As is his right and that of any other citizen of the Province of British Columbia, he, acting on behalf of his clients filed an appeal request of the FOI denial through to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia as he objected to being denied what he thought were documents he had the right to view. His appeal through the Privacy Commissioner was detailed, thorough and complete. The B.C. Privacy Commissioner took the complaint and passed it on to their adjudicator Elizabeth Barker who took some considerable time to view and consider all of the information provided by both sides and she released her decision dated July 24^th 2013.

The lengthy and detailed decision and the reasons for it are available on the “Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner” web-site her conclusion is –

“For the reasons stated above, and pursuant to s. 58 of FIPPA, I make the following orders:

1. Langley is not authorized by s. 12(3)(a) of FIPPA to refuse to disclose the original and the four subsequent revisions of the storm water management plan.
2. Langley must give the applicant a copy of original and revisions 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the storm water management plan, on or before September 6^th, 2013. I also require Langley to copy me on its cover letter to the applicant, together with a copy of the records.”

So the decision and all of this seems relatively straight forward, correct? NOT in the Township of Langley! The Township of Langley in a letter to Mr. Jacob de Raadt dated August 20^th, 2013 from Township’s Bull Housser lawyer Mr. James Goulden advised, “on behalf of the Township seeking a judicial review of the Order in the near future. In those proceedings, the Township will be asking the court to overturn the Order.”

So the Township being the Township, why stop there (with the Order) let’s spend more money on lawyers which in my view is bad enough. NOW the kicker, where the Langley Times misinformed the public and a couple of intriguing questions to ask yourself:

1. The Township of Langley is seeking to have the order to release the documents overturned? Excuse me! THEY RELEASED THE REQUESTED DOCUMENTS AS ORDERED TO ONE MR. JACOB de RAADT. So, NO Langley Times, they had released the documents as ordered but at the same time appealed their release through the courts. What you say? Only in the Township of Langley. Why spend a few dollars on legal bills when you have an open ended budget using tax payer dollars! (BY THE WAY, THE JUDGE AGREED!)

2. Why was Jacob de Raadt named in this Judicial Review? Yes he sought clarification which surely is anyone’s right in our democracy, BUT it was the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner that investigated, conducted the review and issued the decision and Order. The Township’s argument, IF they had one, was with the others named on the Petition namely The Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia and the Attorney General of British Columbia NOT Jacob de Raadt. This couldn’t have anything to do with their on-going fight and intimidation of Mr. de Raadt could it?

3. A fair question would now be, is this the Township’s new strategy? That is to force anyone who applies for information through an FOI request, is denied and appeals successfully to the Information and Privacy Commissioner to challenge that decision through a Judicial Review? Forcing tax payers (at their expense) into court to defend themselves against what has to be considered their basic democratic rights? Is this another way of saying, to anyone who is attempting to get at the truth, if you try this, the same thing could happen to you? What is happening in the Township? Is this what you want out of your local government?

4. The Langley Times stated the Township of Langley is suing over the FOI request. NO, Langley Times, the Township of Langley is petitioned the Court requesting a Judicial review of the decision and the Order of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. So, Jacob de Raadt is named in the Petition for a Judicial Review of an Information and Privacy Commissioner decision, not his FOI request. All of this because a taxpayer exercised their democratic rights? Shame!

In summary, I am not sure who is running this municipality but IT IS NOT Mayor and Council. However, Mayor and Council are complicit in everything that is going on in the Township of Langley by their actions or more important their inactions in their support of staff decisions! So where are we at, as a community?

Does something have to happen to you personally before you will be responsive and fight back? This Mayor and Council are worse than the Council of Kurt Alberts, IF that is at all possible, they are completely out of control.

I know it is nice that members of Council claim they get along, nothing could be further from the truth. Remember the majority of council’s claims that during my term and the last election campaign that the dysfunction was the fault of the Mayor!

The INCONVENIENT TRUTH – All of the dysfunction that has gone on within our council for the last three years and beyond can be laid squarely at the feet of Richter, Ward, Fox, Dornan, Long, Froese, Ferguson and Sparrow!

In my opinion all of this makes this Council’s decisions suspect!

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

Metro Vancouver is appealing the Judgment of B.C. Supreme Court Justice Neena Sharma in favor of the Township of Langley on a number of points in law! (NOTE: Justice Sharma is a NEWLY appointed judge and this was her first case.) My congratulations and thank you go out to the majority of the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors for their willingness to fight what can only be described as a travesty of justice if one with any knowledge were to review her judgment. This thank you is on behalf of all residents who are so fortunate to be living in the most livable region in the world and who expect a level playing field, not the favors for friends and insiders that exist here in the Township of Langley.

With respect to the news of the appeal, I believe a review of the comments by Mayor Froese in the Langley Times and Advance and those from our MLA Rich Coleman, Premier, and OH sorry Deputy Premier had to say last year on the subject says it all! Now remember, the RGS and actions by Metro Vancouver are spelled out in Provincial legislation

Rich Coleman says / Langley Times – May 17^th 2012 (Natasha Jones)

• “Metro Vancouver has gone too far by meddling in Township business”
• “the board has become too big for its boots”
• “It’s become a behemoth as far as the bureaucracy is concerned”
• “Metro has no business meddling in Township affairs”
• “absolutely supports a move by the municipality to consider breaking away from the regional district and form its own with other local jurisdictions”
• “an unaccountable government unto itself”

Minister Coleman’s comments are so off base they are frankly an absolute embarrassment. That he is publicly displaying such a complete lack of knowledge about how and why Metro Vancouver are in the position they are in under Provincial Legislation, is pathetic, but does tell a significant tale.     

Jack Froese says / Langley Times April 15^th 2014 and Langley Advance April 17^th, 2014 (Matthew Claxton)

• “Unfortunate Decision”
• “It’s disturbing that this much tax dollars are going into a squabble”
• “I’m very confident that they are going to lose again”
• “We can’t just sit down and let Metro Vancouver walk all over us”
• “We were in the right (to approve the district)”
• “It’s the law of the land”
• “I think it is ridiculous”
• “There is nothing to settle we won”
• “The judge was very clear”

So let us see if we can make any sense out of this – a few weeks earlier faced with a very significant loss and finding of wrong doing in court over the Coulter Berry Fort Langley building Mayor Jack Froese was publicly very critical of the B.C. Supreme Court Justice of his decision. The TOL filed an appeal, even though the applicant filed a new application making an appeal meaningless. Now we hear Mayor Froese complaining about an appeal which is part of our legal process. The Township started this mess by being underhanded in their attempt at sliding a series of developments through despite an already agreed upon process. A process all 23 members of Metro previously agreed to unanimously!

Mayor Froese agrees with the Township Appeal but not the Metro Appeal? Sort of says it all doesn’t it!

A further thank you to ALL Metro Vancouver Directors for not capitulating to a few bullies in Victoria – We know who we are talking about don’t we!

I am repeating my Blog Post of last year (following) which provides a recap of this issue, how it came about and what is at stake!

Metro Vancouver is suing the Township of Langley over the Trinity/Wall Development…..

The Township of Langley that is responsible for this complete waste of taxpayers’ dollars!

First of all, let’s be clear, I am not a public defender of Metro Vancouver, I have and still have issues with them as I am sure many cities and municipalities within Metro do; BUT as I have said repeatedly, Metro Vancouver has no choice but to stand up to our Mayor and his gang on Council that can’t shoot straight. What this clearly displays for all to see is Mayor Froese’s complete lack of knowledge of Provincial Legislation as it affects our Regional District.

To listen to our Mayor and others (i.e. Misty van Popta on her Facebook page, you know a candidate in the last election who was being recommended by non-other than Joel Shacter, (friend of Rich Coleman) tell it, the Township of Langley have been innocent victims in this court action initiated by Metro Vancouver as they are being prevented from making their own zoning and development decisions. What absolute crap! The Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) and the rules surrounding the RGS in terms of process and more are entrenched in Provincial Legislation, and have been since the mid-80s! They are being held to account to follow the process that is in place for every member. As much as every Municipality and City will have their own issues with Metro, and trust me there are a number, the RGS has assisted our region to be the most livable in the world.

The Wall Housing Development application has been innocently portrayed by the Township of Langley as housing to support the University District application. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was never part of the University District Application. If Metro gave into this application it would be open season on the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) which would end up being a useless document. The lower mainland, despite a large number of political tugs and pulls has prospered and is recognized as the most livable region in North America, let’s not lose it! As Mayor I was very pleased to play a part!!!

It is interesting that the RGS was an initiative that Township Council supported unanimously as did ALL municipalities and cities in the region; with Mayor Froese leading the way, no experience led by those with ulterior motives we are now fighting a legal battle against 22 other municipalities and cities in the region. What an exercise in cooperation!

Township of Langley University District – Wall Town House Development on Farm Land

Vs Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy – The Facts!

Rich Coleman, Mayor Froese and members of Council are

“Not letting the facts get in the way of a good story”!

It is another land deal, all symptomatic of what is wrong in the Township of Langley!

Ask WHY? WHO REALLY BENEFITS?

The latest NEWS? – May 27^th 2013 Council meeting!

Langley Township council voted through its revised community plan and zoning to create a University district around Trinity University which incorporates a controversial housing development on Prime Agricultural Land just to the South of Trinity. While it is not affiliated in any way with Trinity its builders have promoted it as housing for TWU Staff. This move to incorporate the two must be seen as a blatant attack and affront to the Regional Growth Strategy. It simply IS NOT TRUE!

How or why is this happening? Check out some comments from a few Council members (Langley Advance P12 / Mathew Claxton Tuesday June 4^th, 2013) –

Grant Ward – “This is not spot zoning, it will be housing for staff and students”. How absolutely embarrassing and insulting Ward is to the residents of the Township of Langley, nothing has changed! We are talking 69 Townhouses which will be market housing. This is exactly what it is – Spot Zoning!

Bob Long – “The removal of the portion of the Wall lands to be developed will keep the rest of the property productive farmland in the Agricultural Land Reserve”. Councilor Long, don’t look now BUT without this development the entire property stays in the ALR where it belongs and can be productive IF the owners had the slightest interest in doing so, which they obviously don’t. That is their choice! You as an elected representative for the taxpayers of the Township of Langley are not obligated in any way to support their plan. I would suggest you have an obligation to deny this proposal.

The University District idea within the Township of Langley (TOL) is not new; it has been around for years. Unfortunately, like so many issues within our community, it is sadly lacking in any kind of democratic public process thanks to the control of a few!! This is the same municipal government plus or minus a few changes that seem to get elected time after time after time after time – WHY?

A little history – During my term as Mayor (2008 – 2011) I had regular meetings with Jonathan Raymond President of Trinity University (a very important and valuable corporate citizen to the Township of Langley) and follow up meetings with TOL senior staff on the subject of Trinity issues which included the University District concept. There were a number of conceptual plans for the University District idea that had been somewhat in limbo due to the ALR approval process. Through my initiative, in an effort to find some direction and approval we arranged for members of the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) South Coast Panel of the day (Commissioners Bose, Tomlinson, Pranger and Chair Bullock); to meet and have lunch with Senior Staff of the TOL and Trinity University as well as myself at the university. Through those efforts and subsequent application, it was approved. BUT make no mistake about it, this approval / support was for a very confined and limited area that supports a very valuable educational institution that has been a part of the Township of Langley for decades.

Now the intriguing pieces of this puzzle – How did this confrontation with Metro come about?

Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) – Metro Vancouver, as required by Provincial Legislation, has had a Regional Growth Strategy in place since the late 80s. This was put in place to control growth by drawing Urban Boundaries within each member Municipality to stop urban sprawl as well as protecting Green Zones and the ALR. As required by that legislation is the need to review and update that RGS every so many years. The RGS must be unanimously adopted by all members of Metro or it goes to arbitration involving the Provincial Minister. Immediately following the 2008 election Metro Vancouver initiated the renewal and review of the RGS. As the Township of Langley Metro Director involved directly in discussions involving that RGS renewal process I served notice to Metro initially that we would probably be their first arbitration case. I, members of Council and staff were very concerned about the process and their ultimate intent. After two and a half years of discussion, negotiation, numerous public and private meetings with Senior Metro Staff, members of our Council and our Senior Staff and much more, recognizing the principle of the RGS and its governing Provincial Legislation, the NEW RGS was adopted unanimously by all members of the Township of Langley Council, all member Municipalities and their Councils as well as the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors.

So to Rich Coleman and his comments (May22/12 Langley Times) “Metro Vancouver Regional District has gone too far by meddling in Township business needs to be reined in”! It is obvious and not surprising that he doesn’t know what he is talking about. Look at YOUR government Rich! The Langley Times Editorial “Local land use decisions should not be in the hands of Metro Vancouver’s Board period”! This editorial reflects the Times (local media) complete lack of due diligence and knowledge about what they are writing about. They (Langley Times) should be embarrassed and are doing a disservice to TOL residents. Maybe the Langley Times should have gone after Coleman and Polak for their governments’ perceived interference directing Metro per THEIR legislation!  – But then again that would be too uncomfortable as it would compromise their pandering to government MLAs!

The Wall Development proposal and its apparent conditional approval by the ALC in 2007 did not come to my attention until the final year of my term. When I first heard of this I frankly couldn’t believe it, even in the Wild Wild West of property deals known as the Township of Langley. I have seen this decision which I might add came about prior to the appointment of the current ALC Chairman Richard Bullock, a man I have great respect for. There are many questions about that decision of 2007! Now let’s be very clear, the Wall proposal, while receiving conditional ALC approval in 2007, (It was rejected on a couple of occasions in the early 2000s by a different ALC panel) was NEVER tied to or discussed with the University District plan in any way shape or form, I was involved in those discussions! Now interestingly enough, the NEW Mayor and his Council are lighting their hair on fire over Metro Vancouver squashing their by-law, in short because they do not fit the terms of the RGS.

HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? The Township of Langley Council has involved lawyers (Don Lidstone, an interesting choice) vs Metro Vancouver and is talking litigation at our expense all over the RGS that members of Township of Langley Council and Staff supported unanimously, a provincial legal requirement. What – Another land deal?

Further, in an effort to try to get around Metro’s legal argument they filed an application with the ALC to increase the original size of the University District to somewhere around four times its original size enjoining the Wall Proposal and much more within its boundaries. It is very interesting that this move embraced the private property of a very well-known Township of Langley family and Liberal Party supporter. I guess we are just to believe that this was an accident? The ALC has since rejected that proposal but the Township has brought back the original boundaries adding on the Wall Townhouse Development as an attachment to the original University District. This was NEVER the case!

This is an outrageous attempt at a private property deal on farmland, but it is in keeping with the Township of Langley’s methods and ways of doing business. Now who is this going to benefit?

Important side-note for the record – the Wall family and/or their owned companies were significant contributors to the Provincial Liberal Party, the leadership campaign of Premier Christy Clark as well as donating to a number of Township of Langley Councilors. Not accusing, just saying!

Going back to the introduction of the FIRST by-laws for the original University District and the Wall Development? By-Laws for 1^st and 2^nd reading were introduced for each project separately at the last Council Meeting before the last election (Last council) – In my opinion it was totally out of line for staffto introduce these by-laws in the last meeting of the old council, prior to the election. Having said that, I voted for both as under a principle I believe strongly in and my voting record supports this, the proponent (owner) has the right to be heard and be considered as does the public have the right to respond. Again remember, for the record, these two proposals came forward as two distinctly different items (by-laws) for consideration. They weren’t attached in any way. Now under the newly elected council, many of the same old faces, after a lengthy Public Hearing (large opposition) 3^rd reading was given on the original University District by-law. The Wall proposal did not come forward for a reading at that time.

As mentioned above, the Township by-law was sent to Metro for approval as required under Provincial Legislation (Rich Coleman please note) and was denied, the by-law was quashed. So where did it go from there? The Township of Langley has since rescinded the original by-laws and has adopted a new singular by-law which covers the original University District plus the Wall Townhouse Development located smack in the middle of one of the finest farm properties in the valley. This proposal has faced considerable opposition (not that that matters with this council).

So once again the Township of Langley, spurred on by its resident Bully MLA Rich Coleman (see Rich Coleman comment) is trying to circumvent a provincially legislated requirement in the RGS, something that every municipality and/or City in Metro Vancouver is required to follow. Whether you or I like the idea of Metro Vancouver dictating that we follow the legislated requirement is immaterial, it is that way due to a provincially legislated mandate. I can tell you from first-hand knowledge, every member of Metro Vancouver has the same or similar problems, if the Township is permitted in this case, every member will be following suit! This attempt is particularly galling given the attempt to meld a legitimate concept (original plan for the University District) in with a well- connected private property deal.

It is yet another example of an outrageous attempt to manipulate or ignore the rules for the sole benefit of a few. IF you are OK or don’t see a problem with this happening I would suggest you would be OK providing special treatment to a very few at taxpayer’s expense. For those that suggest that this is an anti-university position, you are completely wrong, it is about treating everyone with fairness, morally and legally.

I would encourage, based on my years of inside experience in the Township of Langley, for taxpayers when considering issues such as I am presenting, to carry with them a good dose of skepticism. It is human nature not to do so I understand that but whenever you challenge issues such as this there is an old saying; “Connect the dots, follow the money!”

NOTE: There have been some interesting property sales, purchases and swap activity surrounding the proposed University District. This will have to be a topic for another day.

So as it is in life in the Township of Langley! Enjoy what is happening so far? Change is NOT impossible!!!

RG

—————————————————————————————

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents. Check in daily!

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS

Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

Monday night’s decision had been long in coming and was well-orchestrated by the Township of Langley Council. The decisions on the two issues coming on the same evening, allowed for an apparent win for residents of Brookswood Fernridge and an, as expected, loss for the residents of Fort Langley and the Township of Langley by extension. The manipulation and game playing just doesn’t stop, unfortunately it is our residents who continue to pay the price.

As I said above, the results should not surprise anyone who has spent five minutes following the antics of this elected Council. This was a well thought out misdirection play trying to come off as balanced when in fact it was anything but. A bad decision is a bad decision! Did Brookswood Fernridge actually win anything? Actually not but I will explain further below.

What I truly believe happened last Monday night? Read on….

Fort Langley Coulter Berry 2.0 or is that 2.1?

I believe the Coulter Berry (Don’t get too comfortable yet Eric Woodward) is still in some serious trouble and rightfully so. But to start with let’s put this issue and process into its simplest of terms. Remember this is not about one building; it is about one Historical B.C. Village. The village of Fort Langley has very strong Provincial Heritage recognition and legislated protection as well as significant local heritage protection through bylaws, regulation and policy.

You can’t write this stuff, here is what happened –

• Eric Woodward starts to build a property portfolio in Fort Langley, now amounting to over 50% of downtown Fort Langley.
• In a wide ranging interview by Frank Bucholtz in the Langley Times over a year ago, Eric Woodward was asked clearly if he was aware of the Heritage Guidelines and everything it entailed in terms of height and façade guidelines within the Heritage Conservation Area. He stated yes he was aware of them, thought they were a great idea and agreed with all of it.
• After buying the old IGA property and the Hardware sight next door, he proceeds with plans for a 3 story building breaking every guideline conceivable led by none other than his consultant Kurt Alberts. You remember the former Mayor who, while in office, put in place strengthened bylaws so this kind of abuse could not happen.
• With the help of Kurt’s friendly Council they approve of the breaking of these rules, regulations, bylaws and approve the building, ultimately ruled by the B.C. Supreme Court to be illegal.
• The majority of Council participates in a sod turning while a Judicial Review is underway and NO Building Permit was issued.
• Township taken to court by citizens group and loses. Construction stops.
• Township states they will appeal the decision, apparently it is currently underway.
• Eric Woodward reapplies under a new process requesting an OCP change and Spot Zoning for his site only on Coulter Berry 2.0 with a virtually unchanged building size and lot coverage.
• Council gives 1^st and 2^nd reading, holds three nights of Public Hearing and gives 3^rd reading last Monday night despite unprecedented opposition from residents of the Township of Langley.
• To add insult to injury – Council Kim Richter brings a Notice of Motion forward to this coming Monday’s Council meeting (April 7^th 2014) calling for a moratorium  on three story buildings in Fort Langley until the Fort Langley OCP is revisited and this is to be placed in a priority position.

NOTE – In typical Township of Langley fashion, a special deal has been made for a friend and insider. A number of residents have built commercial buildings in Fort Langley and have been forced to abide by the rules of the Heritage Conservation Area. So to those members of Council who ignored. Yes Councilor Richter, you ignored the wishes and decades of hard work by so many residents of the Township of Langley and you ignored the fundamental principle of the preservation of the History of Fort Langley. You have just poked the BEAR!

After everything that has happened (read above) Councilor Kim Richter having supported this oversized and out of character building from the start on a prime corner in downtown Fort Langley wishes to place a moratorium on any additional three story buildings until the OCP is revisited? Am I reading this correctly? Richter supports one developer for one building then wants the door slammed shut on anyone else until the Fort Langley OCP is revisited? OH I see, we will once again experience our well used flawed planning processes which will what Councilor Richter – make these building sizes commonplace! NOT! After spending 15 years on Council you offer this insult to residents of Fort Langley and the Township of Langley? What an absolute embarrassment! Kim Richter is showing her true stripes in spades!!!! Do you still believe in her repetitive attempts in getting you to believe in her sincere concern for your community? Just asking? The image is breaking down, reality is showing through!

Stay tuned, I have good reason to believe that there is much more to come.

Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan?

It was on my initiative, driven by many Brookswood Fernridge residents who expressed their interest in revisiting the Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan, that we had staff address this long standing thorn in the side of so many. The key reason behind their concern was the influx of speculators and developers who were buying up property, leaving homes boarded up and vacant, inhabited by drug dealers and more. It was expressed many times that they didn’t like what was happening and that it was very similar to what was happening up in Willoughby. They wanted protection from this happening in their community. That was the start and was the impetus for revisiting the Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan. Funding was an issue raised by staff and they were going to come back with a plan to achieve our needs.

For the record, NO, I did not know anything about ten land owner / developers forming a Corporation with $50K each into a $500,000 Planning fund. I obviously was not aware of this Developer based Advisory Board. I was also not aware that staff went back to their top down planning model of convenience to everyone but residents! As I have said in an earlier post, the first I had heard of this was the local media in recent weeks. This was a flagrant conflict of interest. For Mayor Froese to deny this conflict appeared or was real speaks volumes.

Here is my view of where we have been, where we are and what is possible!

• Make no mistake about it, this Mayor, Jack Froese and this Council took an initiative and completely botched the plan and intent of the plan which was originally set by me to give this community ownership in the development of their Community Plan. By going back to the failed Township planning process that gives you the Willoughby problems they were on track for failure once again. By agreeing to an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) agreement with ten developers in the development of this plan they displayed a terrible case of bad judgment. Who are the developers? What is contained in the MOU?
• After a series of well attended Open Houses, Council gives 1^st and 2^nd reading of the appropriate bylaws, went into a well contested Public Hearing over three nights and after an attempt by Charlie Fox to hold on through a referral motion which was defeated, the plan was rejected at 3^rd reading 7 – 2. Mayor Froese and Councilor Ward, despite unprecedented opposition, still supported this disaster of a Community Plan.
• Jack Froese advised this week of a “Notice of Motion” to be addressed at the April 7^th Council Meeting by Councilor Long which involves holding onto the input of the planning process. My answer would be NO many times over. This is the definition of insanity, following the same failed planning process expecting a different result! It never ceases to amaze me.
• The current Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan was adopted in 1987 showing a population growth over time to 35,000.
• The proposed Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan that was just defeated called for a population growth to about 42,000.
• The Metro Vancouver Regional Growth numbers are projections; they are estimates per community which makes up a global number for the Township. The RGS controls where town centers will be located and curbs urban sprawl which is good for every Municipality and/or City in the lower mainland. It does not preclude communities having a say in what they want for their specific community, which is what has been totally ignored to-date.
• Community planning (OCPs) and neighborhood planning in the Township of Langley is in my opinion top down and fundamentally wrong. It is badly flawed. It is the smoke and mirrors system and method of planning. They hire planners and staff to look after their need. They hold, a one day planning charet inviting a number of residents to play with marking up maps giving them a sense that they are going to listen to what they want to see in their community. They feed everyone, thank them for their input, promise follow up and the next thing you see is an Open House with their view of what they claim they heard you say. Trust me, both do not equate. Their listening is very shallow.
• They followed this process in Brookswood Fernridge, held a couple of Open Houses which were contentious but went forward to 1^st and 2^nd reading, Public Hearing and 3^rd reading. They defeat 3^rd reading despite a number of councilors expressed attempt, led by Charlie Fox, to put lipstick on a pig. It failed.
• What is needed in the Township of Langley is a Community Based Planning Model consisting of an established Community Planning Committee made up of residents and retail business owners with non-voting members from School Board and Council. The Community Planning Committee would elect a chair from their number and would lead the initiative with an assigned professional facilitator / planning support from the Township. We introduced this into the Aldergrove Core Community Plan and was accepted by the community very well. For the most part you get what you ask for!

The Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan Going Forward?

The Brookswood Fernridge Community came together like never before to fight off what was being attempted to be done to them. Did you win? You won the battle but DID NOT win the war! There will now be an attempt by most members of this Council and staff to somehow resurrect the remnants of this failed enterprise for use within what will be suggested as a new process with new community dialogue. Don’t believe it for a second. It will be the same flawed process that created the situation you are in now. It is long past due to blow up the Planning of Convenience Model, used by this Council and staff of the Township of Langley and elect a new Council (except David Davis) who will bring in a NEW level of concern for our citizens.

Don’t be fooled; don’t buy what this Council and staff will be selling!

RG

________________________________________________________________

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

The Monday night Council meeting will be the line in the sand pitting two Township Communities against a Municipal Council majority. The issues:

• Fort Langley (Eric Woodward’s Coulter Berry vs Heritage)
• Brookswood Fernridge Community (DOO Group – Developer Owned and Operated Community Plan vs A Community Plan of interest to residents) is the tip of the iceberg.

Next on the agenda:

• Aldergrove has been forgotten and ignored (development approvals on Township land with a satisfactory Pool / Recreation Center becoming a distant memory)
• Willoughby residents (unprecedented out of control growth following a poor planning process which includes no satisfactory parking for residents).

The readers of this BLOG understand and recognize what has motivated it’s creation. It was created out of pure frustration that the majority of Township of Langley residents were not aware, due to poor local media coverage, about what was really happening in their community. It is clear that more and more residents are being made aware about the facts in local Township governance. Three years in the Mayor’s office provided me with a real understanding of the systemic problems in the Township of Langley.

Today, Sunday, over 600 residents representing all communities of the Township braved the weather to hold a protest rally about what was happening to them in their Brookswood / Fernridge community and Fort Langley who are all strongly united. The majority in Fort Langley are fighting to hold onto Heritage Preservation which is what Fort Langley is all about despite subliminal and some not so subliminal threats and intimidation by those wishing to throw out the rules for one developer.

Fort Langley petition against Coulter Berry over 1,400

Brookswood petition against this proposed plan over 2,200

Brookswood Fernridge Petitions signed against tree cutting today 531

Now tell me there is NO interest, OH I forgot, our Mayor is on record as saying he doesn’t rule by petitions, he has a special power to consider all that didn’t come out to the Public Hearings are in favor? WHAT – You can’t make this stuff up!

It goes on and on and on! I know for a fact, after talking to many residents, that Aldergrove has had enough. Willoughby residents can’t believe what is happening to them, after making the largest purchase of their lives they are now questioning that decision to locate in the Township. All communities are now joining together.

As I see it, this Township of Langley Council has one last chance Monday night, defeat Coulter Berry 2.0, reject the Brookswood Community Plan entirely and introduce a NEW Residential Community based model. There is much more needed, both in Willoughby and Aldergrove to get the Township back on track. More on these communities shortly!

Members of Council, over to you, YOU HAVE A CHOICE, don’t blame the messenger!

Council Meeting PLEASE attend –       Council Decision 7:00 PM Monday March 31^st.

Venue change – Christian Life Assembly for the Council meeting and to observe Council’s decision.

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

I will no longer sit back and watch the local media play fast and loose with the truth at my expense. Today’s feature article by Mathew Claxton is a perfect example of the one sided inference journalism that has been a feature of our local media for years. They are feeding their influential masters, otherwise known as the Township of Langley. So to the truth….

For many years residents (not developers) in Brookswood have been asking for their Community Plan to be updated primarily for reasons of security, wanting to know in advance what was going to become of their community. They wanted their community protected. This was primarily motivated to fend off the speculators that were and still are rampant and threatening in their community. It was pointed out to me frequently at my monthly Mayor’s Forums that it was becoming like Willoughby with empty homes boarded up becoming nothing more than drug dens, something none of us could or would tolerate. Kurt Alberts was on record for years, saying he would not address the Brookswood Fernridge Community UNTIL Willoughby was built out. In my opinion this position was totally unfair to residents of Brookswood Fernridge which if not addressed would exasperate the problems for the community that they face today.

I am on record of initiating and supporting the review of the Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan. A further impetus that was behind this move was the petition that was received although the dates and chronological order of events provided by the Advance are wrong. The next issue, a problem with the funding source for expenses related to revisiting the plan. Staff were going to come forward with a plan for funding consideration by Council.

Now remember I have been off Council for 2 ½ years during which time it appears that all of this was foisted on the Brookswood Fernridge community by the current Council. The first time I have heard of the Griffith Neighborhood Advisory Corporation and the $500K loan to the Township of Langley was recently through the media with respect to the issue/plan currently being considered. It is also the first time I had heard of the Griffiths Neighborhood Advisory Board made up of these same developers. By the way who are these ten developers? Their names should be front and center.

It was also, the first time I heard about it when I read it in the local media, the fact the Township went back to its process of top down planning. For the record, and staff know this only too well, I was, am and always will be adamantly opposed to their method of Community Planning. I am in favor of the Community Planning Committee Model which embraces residents (not developers) in the community driving the planning initiative. I have written extensively on this model. We introduced it in the Aldergrove Core Community Plan and it worked very very well.

 So the Langley Advance says the process was approved by the previous Council – WRONG!!! This is just an effort by this Mayor and Council with the help of senior staff to try to deflect blame for the outrage they are now facing from the community. They have themselves to blame, nobody else!!!!!

Black Ribbon Campaign!

Irene McKaig, one of the people campaigning against the Brookswood plan, says for many residents, the Brookswood and Coulter Berry battles are the same fight, one over preservation of community character.

“It’s not just Brookswood,” McKaig told The Times.

McKaig believes momentum is building against both proposals. “It [the campaign] has taken on a life of its own,” McKaig said. A bulletin being circulated in Brookswood says the call to wear black ribbons was inspired by the green ribbon campaign against the Mufford Overpass, where opponents wore green to “help draw and focus attention upon the imminent destruction of prime farmland.”

The emailed message goes on to say that the proposed new community plan “will further destroy our history and rural essence and forever change the face of the communities in which we live.”

Urgent Reminder!!!

Community Rally PLEASE attend –     Leave Brookswood & Fernridge alone RALLY to Save Your Community – Sunday March 30^th, 12 NOON at Noel Booth Community Park (36^th & 202^nd at the Batting cage). From there we walk to Brookswood Park. Bring your signs! Arrive at Brookswood Park – 1 PM (200^th & 40^th) 

Council Meeting PLEASE attend –       Council Decision 7:00 PM Monday March 31^st.

Venue change – Christian Life Assembly for the Council meeting and to observe Council’s decision.

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

For elected members of Council this is where the rubber hits the road! This is where they will show you their worth as your elected representatives. The intriguing part of this story is their vote, rationale and sleight of hand decisions. I have followed the proceedings very closely on this issue. The community response was outstanding and should be applauded. My thoughts follow and these are based on many years of experience while observing as well as sitting around the table. In an elected capacity I went through the infamous Southlands / Spetifore hearings of 108 hours (Still a Canadian Record) and the Burns Bog Hearings of about 40 hours in length. Do not be fooled, read on….

This Municipal Council has themselves to blame for getting into the position they are in. For far too many years Councils in the Township of Langley have had a free reign to impose their wishes and will on an unsuspecting public. For far too many years our communities and their residents have been apathetic towards the actions of their Municipal Government. I sincerely hope that problem has turned the corner.

In the case of the Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan the Township of Langley continue to abuse the public trust through a widely flawed public process. When you continue to resist a good dose of public involvement, public dialogue and meaningful public input, the community backlash will be severe, or so it should!

As an example, in the case of the Coulter Berry Building in Fort Langley, you have a new interloper in the community that has personal resources and feels he can manipulate elected members of Council. The problem, he has been successful so far!! We shall see?

How is Brookswood Fernridge any different? Here you have a Community Plan funded by 10 landowner / developers (the Griffith Neighborhood Advisory Corporation GNA) to the tune of a $500,000 loan to be paid back once development is complete. They are participating as a Community Advisory Board? What? How can the Township of Langley be serious by allowing this kind of blatant conflict of interest or at the very least perceived conflict? If this Council had the public interest in mind they would never have allowed this to happen. Well there is obviously a good deal more to it, how else can you explain it?

To the residents of Brookswood Fernridge, congratulations! You shocked the hell out of Council. Your turnout was magnificent and exactly what was necessary to catch their attention. However for what it is worth I believe this council will follow a long tried and true political solution and they will punt the ball (refer it to staff for more public consultation), that is until after this year’s election. Warning, they have repeatedly proven that they cannot be trusted and this exercise would be no different.

By what I call punting the ball I mean they will refer the community plan back to the community for more input and dialogue, unfortunately it will be involving the same players and the same flawed process.

The only option worth discussing is that this community plan proposal be totally rejected. It is time for a truly integrated community planning process involving a community based Community Planning Committee (Community residents and local business owners as members) be developed through community consultation. It has to go back to square one, don’t be fooled.

What is Mayor Froese talking about with respect to Metro Vancouver’s RGS (Regional Growth Strategy)? Proof he doesn’t know what he is talking about!

It is interesting how Mayor Froese plays fast and loose with the inconvenient facts. When it comes to building 69 Townhomes in the middle of a large Agricultural area (ALR) for the Wall property owned by friends and insiders and the expanded Trinity University District he fights Metro through the courts. His rationale, Metro doesn’t have the right to tell the Township what to do. Now to Brookswood; he states that we are obligated to this kind of density due to Metro’s Regional Growth Strategy. Well let’s set the record straight, the density numbers in the RGS for the Brookswood Fernridge community is a projection / an estimate going forward. It is not a committed number; it couldn’t be because of so many unknowns. It is still clearly up to the Township of Langley to create Community Plans that speak to resident wishes.

Summary:

As I said earlier, the Brookswood Fernridge Community deserves a ton of credit for their attendance at the Open House and Public Hearing BUT you are not out of the woods! The fight is not over, don’t relax yet!

The proposed Community Plan that is coming up for 3^rd reading should never have been allowed to see the light of day, it is an embarrassment. The community and neighborhood planning process that has been a feature of Township of Langley Planning is an embarrassment and must come to an end. The Township of Langley Planning process coupled with it’s practice of introducing omnibus bylaws featuring OCP amendments and zoning changes in one process displays a complete lack of concern for community and continues to be a feature of this Municipal Government. It is long past time it all comes to an end!!!!

Community Rally PLEASE attend –     Leave Brookswood & Fernridge alone RALLY to Save Your Community – Sunday March 30^th, 12 NOON at Noel Booth Community Park (36^th & 202^nd at the Batting cage). From there we walk to Brookswood Park. Bring your signs! Arrive at Brookswood Park – 1 PM (200^th & 40^th)  

Council Meeting PLEASE attend –       Council Decision 7:00 PM Monday March 31^st. Venue change – Christian Life Assembly for the Council meeting and to observe Council’s decision.

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

What an unmitigated joke, if it wasn’t so serious it would be hilarious! The fix is in. Yours truly has had a number of www.langleywatchdog.com correspondents attend the three days of Coulter Berry Public Hearings, all submitting detailed reports. On what can only be described as an attempted orchestration for a predetermined result to approve. I have a caution to members of Council – You have just poked the bear and he isn’t happy!

With today’s world of Municipal Government, the people, the average taxpayer seemingly has or is perceived to have less and less influence over the actions of their political masters. The never ending moves and actions to orchestrate policy, control the message and/or look after the wishes of friends and insiders is being seen for what it is by many, pathetic and undemocratic. In the case of the Township of Langley it is just way over the top. I would suggest that the practice of true public consultation, communication and involvement in and by our communities doesn’t exist, nor some would say has it ever existed. We are still a throw-back to the Wild Wild West of land deals, speculators and special favors. A Message to members of Council and those who have been comfortable in their self-serving capacity, up to now, as a member of the Township Establishment – Those days of comfort are quickly coming to an end.

Every Municipality and/or City finally reaches its tipping or breaking point because of the actions of its elected representatives. What generally speaking is the pre-cursor to the dramatic change that follows? Greed and arrogance by those in power and we have that in spades!

So to the Public Hearing; managing one and it’s fair and democratic process takes great care and experience. It was interesting that Mayor Froese used the following well known phrase in opening the Public Hearing, “Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.” Well Mayor Froese here is another phrase for you to consider, “Actions speak louder than words” and the actions of this council over 2 ½ years speak for themselves.

#1) Venue for a Public Hearing – First off, our Mayor and Council are responsible for the fair and equitable treatment of citizens from both sides of the debate on any given issue. The Coulter Berry proposal has been easily THE most controversial development seen in the Township of Langley for many years if ever! So if we buy into those two statements being true, which they are, then why would our Council schedule a Public Hearing in a venue that could not possibly hold the capacity needed? Just one week earlier this Council scheduled a Public Hearing for Brookswood Fernridge in their Council Chambers, received an overflow crowd and conveniently rescheduled for the next two nights down at the George Preston facility. That was the right decision, so why the residents of Fort Langley and the Township were seriously inconvenienced by continuing with having this Public Hearing at Municipal Hall and not rescheduled to a larger venue? No parking, No seats, residents packed into outside rooms and hallways. The Mayor stated prior to the start of the Coulter Berry Public Hearing that they could not change the venue as it had already been advertised. What BS! They changed the Brookswood Fernridge Public Hearing without that advertising. It is a disgrace!

Fact, the main Council Chamber Doors were opened about two hours earlier than any other Council meeting and/or Public Hearing ever held in that Council Chamber. Surprise, it was full of those speaking in favor of the project; it would be fair to say there was an aura of convenience for Mr. Woodward and his supporters. Remember when we said “Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.”!!! It is not happening in the Township!

#2) Public Hearing Development Introduction Process – At the start of the Public Hearing traditionally the proponent is given the opportunity to present his/her case to Council and the public. They are also given the opportunity if they wish, to defer to the end and this is important, only to answer questions raised by the public during the Public Hearing. The Mayor did not offer that opportunity to the proponent to present his case before the Public Hearing nor did the Mayor offer the proponent an opportunity to defer to the end.

Now the Township of Langley Planning Department will normally introduce the bylaws that are up for discussion and an executive summary overview on what they are about. The Township should not take on the role and responsibility of the developer at the start of the Public Hearing laying out complete detail of the development.

#3) Public Hearing hours – It is imperative for Mayor and Council to run a Public Hearing giving maximum thought to the convenience of the taxpaying public. This Public Hearing in my opinion was mismanaged from the outset with respect to passing motions to extend hours. There is no question that if you get close to the end (as an example) it is 11:00 PM and you have one or two speakers left, an extension of 15 minutes would be in order, but extending the last day to 12:45 AM in the morning is outrageous, an affront to democracy and an insult to those still wanting to speak. I personally know of a number who wanted to speak but could not possibly stay up that long given work commitments.

#4) Handling of statements by concerned residents – I am privy to a number of comments made by the public that were well within their right to make but denied by the Mayor. I am not talking about brash name calling or anything of that sort because that would not nor should it ever be allowed. If a project comes forward to a Public Hearing for spot zoning which is being marketed and sold to the community based on a variety of benefits as the developer sees them, all of that is fair game for comment. You are not running a sterile environment within a Public Hearing in which the public fear to tread. The Council Chambers and the office you and this Council hold are at the behest of the voting public, nothing more.

#5) Actions of Mayor Froese and Council members – The You Tube Video (link below) says it all. While some of the Woodward supporters are ripping into Councilor Long they are absolutely offside and quite frankly insulting to their cause. Councilor Long and I have had our differences in the past; he has challenged me as well. Never-the-less his challenge of the Mayor in this case allowing Eric Woodward far too much flexibility and time given that he was spending most of it being openly critical of those opposing his development was absolutely correct. This time is allotted to the Developer to answer questions about his project, not to espouse his views of all that oppose it or him. The Mayor was completely wrong in his handling of this Public Hearing.

Councilor Fox’s actions were completely offside and an embarrassment, he should apologize to the public immediately. This was a public Council meeting that clearly outlines what a member of Council can and cannot do and by any measure Councilor Fox’s actions should be publicly censored by Council.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpvkaD6bF1E

#6) The responsibility and ability of this Mayor and Council to fairly decide on these bylaws is seriously in question? –  Mayor and Council are in a quasi-judicial state while going through the Public Hearing leading up to 3^rd reading. They have a fiduciary (legal) responsibility to fairly hear all sides of the question, listen to ALL residents and take into account all petitions.

So consider, this Council (not David Davis) has previously approved this development which was proven to be illegal and the majority of Council members – Mayor Jack Froese, Councillors Kim Richter, Grant Ward, Charlie Fox, Bev Dornan and Michelle Sparrow participated in a well-publicised sod turning of this illegal development prior to a building permit ever being issued. Now we are to believe that this Council will fairly consider ALL input? Remember Mayor Froese “Justice must not only be done it must be seen to be done”. “Actions speak louder than words!”

In summary –

All members of your Municipal Council have a responsibility to all of us as taxpayers and that is to be responsible to all laws and legislation that they are responsible for governing the Local Government Act and the Community Charter. They are not a law unto themselves. It is unfortunate in my mind that the Community Charter as enacted by the Gordon Campbell Government in and around 2003 neutered the old Municipal Act with respect to Municipal oversight. For all intents and purpose it doesn’t exist anymore. The decisions by this Council on March 31^st, 2014 will send a telling message for Election Day later this year. I said decisions because the Brookswood Fernridge Community Plan vote will be held the same day. A post on this proposal later this week. I would encourage all residents in the Township of Langley to attend Christian Life Assembly at 7:00 PM Monday March 31^st for personal observation whether your Council listens or not. So here is a little reminder on how we got to where we are at:

Coulter Berry – A little FACTUAL history!

• Fort Langley British Columbia is a small town full of history which is known widely as the Birth Place of B.C.
• Langley Heritage Society is established in 1979. Hundreds and hundreds of residents over the last 4 decades have worked tirelessly to put in place policy, guidelines and bylaws to protect Fort Langley’s future for future generations.
• Past Municipal Councils have taken affirmative action and put in place Heritage policy and bylaw protection specifically against the kind of Coulter Berry development being proposed.
• Fort Langley Building Facade Guidelines are put in place.
• Heritage Conservation Area established.
• Reinforcing bylaws to protect the height limit (2 storys) in 2004/05. (NOTE – All members of that Council, current and past, are now trying to change what they had put in place. All except David Davis.)
• Eric Woodward arrives on the scene about five years ago and starts to buy up a number of properties (Now owns about 50% of the Commercial area of Fort Langley).
• Eric Woodward all of a sudden becomes the poster boy for what someone wants someone gets? Consider how popular he has become: President of the Fort Langley BIA, Director of the Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce, Township Community Participation Infrastructure & Environment Committee, Township Economic Development Advisory Committee and the Township Heritage Advisory Committee (Last year)
• Eric Woodward buys up the front IGA lot plus the Hardware lot and starts to prepare his plan for a three story building led by none other than his consultant Kurt Alberts, a former Mayor that was instrumental in putting in place the bylaw protection they are now trying to overturn.
• Eric Woodward, with plans under his arm shows up in the Township of Langley Planning department and was rejected twice by staff.
• Then it is off to the Mayor’s office for help, no doubt with consultant Kurt Alberts in tow. You know the same Mayor that has strong connections to the majority of this Council.
• A staff report comes to Council that rejects the proposal. After debate, Councilor Fox moves a motion, seconded by Michelle Sparrow to request a report from Council that would outline a way they could approve this proposal. Passed.
• A staff report comes back to Council with no recommendation by staff but nevertheless it was approved by Council.
• On approval of this report to Council the developer initiates sod turning and excavation of site, despite no building permit and full knowledge of the upcoming Judicial Review application.
• An official application is filed for a Judicial Review of the process used by the Township.
• Judicial Review is successful in B.C. Supreme Court; the Heritage Alteration Permit is set aside. Construction stops.
• Township files an appeal application.
• Eric Woodward files a new application and rezoning request for Coulter Berry 2.0
• Public Hearing Monday March 10^th, 2014
• Council Decision 7:00 PM Monday March 31^st. Hope you can attend Christian Life Assembly for the Council meeting and to observe the decision.

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

The Coulter Berry Building fiasco is a very serious issue within what is broadly considered to be the jewel in the Township of Langley Crown – Fort Langley! Fort Langley’s history and development has been protected for decades by hundreds of hard working, community minded and dedicated individuals, many of them pioneers, who have fought hard for its protection. Coulter Berry is also symptomatic of how business has and is being done in the Township of Langley for many years. Favor to a few friends at the expense of the majority!!!! Well, here is where we are at…..

The Next Chapter in the Coulter Berry Saga

On Monday February 24, our Township Council passed first and second reading for the proposed Coulter Berry 2.0 building. More than 150 people, with the majority opposed to the building and bylaw changes, turned out to hear how this council would vote. The crowd was not surprised by Council’s decision.

The 7 to 2 vote, with Councilors David Davis and Bob Long opposed, pushes the proposed project and re-zoning to a public hearing to be held on March 10 at 7:00 pm at the Township of Langley Council Meeting.

Councilor Bob Long proposed a referral motion that the project should be sent back to staff to work with the developer to trim its height at the corner of Mavis and Glover, where the building is highest. Adding “It’s too big, too tall, and it’s too bulky,” This referral motion was also defeated 7 to 2. For the record the proposed Coulter Berry 2.0 would be higher than the Park Lane Condo Wall in Bedford Landing.

David Davis said he liked the building design, but NOT in Fort Langley and he doesn’t like “tailor-making” the three proposed bylaws. That would enable the site to be re-zoned to allow a three-story 46’10” high building as well as change the Fort Langley Building Façade Design Guidelines to say they are there to “assist but not bind” council. This would be a very dangerous move.

Davis also asked, “Why are we changing three bylaws to suit this one development and ONE developer?”

This is a very good question and one that has finally been asked by a Councilor. We have heard on many past occasions from various Councilors that they do not agree with spot zoning, yet this is exactly what is being presented in a public hearing for consideration by the public and for approval by Council.

I would add, the comment made by Councilor Davis drew spontaneous applause from the gallery. This applause by residents in the audience drew a VERY ANGRY RESPONSE by Mayor Froese saying, “This is a debate among Council, not entertainment for you”. Trust me you can’t make this stuff up!! Mayor Froese, what an absolute disgrace and embarrassment.

The next step in this process is the Public Hearing which will be held in the Township of Langley Municipal Council Chambers on Monday March 10^th, 2014.

Call to Action – There are a few things we are asking of from residents in the Township of Langley and they are important IF you want to stop this type of behavior and development by your council –

1. Sign the Petition against Coulter Berry (Coming by separate email) and submit your names as outlined or drop it by in person. The petition is also available at www.handsonheritage.ca
2. Attend the March 10^th, 2014 Public Hearing (Details below)
3. Sign up to speak at the Public Hearing IF you feel comfortable and/or leave a written submission during the Public Hearing.

At that point, once everyone has had a chance to speak and/or submit petitions and submissions, Council will deliberate for presumably a week and vote at the next Monday night Council Meeting. This vote will presumably and hopefully follow extensive discussion and debate on many of the issues presented by you at Public Hearing. Remember, Council cannot legally receive any further information in relation to these bylaws after the Public Hearing and before their vote at 3^rd reading. This IS your only chance to stop the irresponsible actions shown to date. It is all of our collective and sincere hope that Council will listen.

As mentioned above, Councilors will vote and decide if the bylaws will be changed and if the Coulter Berry 2.0 building will proceed as presented at the next Monday Evening Council meeting. If this project is defeated, our Heritage Conservation Area will stay intact and the developer will have to adhere to the current height and scale requirements. Our goal is to ensure that the many decades of protective Municipal and Provincial Heritage Legislation IS NOT COMPROMISED for and by anybody!

Your participation in speaking, signing the petition and submitting a written opposition is important to send our Councilors the message that we do not agree with spot zoning to suit one developer. By changing the by-laws we will no longer have opportunity to challenge other developments that are this large in our village as the bylaws will allow buildings that are the same height (46’ 10” high). This opens the doors to the rest of Fort Langley being easily developed in the same scale and thereby the corruption of many decades of Heritage Protection.

Everyone is tired of the Coulter Berry Saga!

Let us all please stop wasting tax payer’s money and time. This building should have never been allowed to go through with an application a second time while being so close in design to the original proposal. Please speak out and tell our Councilors once and for all that we do not agree with the fast tracking and spot zoning to suit one developer and we want to preserve the character and Heritage of Fort Langley. This is not just Township heritage it is Provincial Heritage. Fort Langley is widely considered to be the Birthplace of British Columbia!

FAX OR EMAILS PETITIONS TO:

fortlangleyrsd@gmail.com  Fax to 1.866.830.4120

www.handsonheritage.ca       For a copy of the petition!

www.lovefortlangley.com

Please know you can effectively change what is going on, but you have to become active!

This Municipal Council has an abhorrent record of not listening to the public. Nothing will change until all of us make the change for them!!!

A Call to action – Attend this Public Hearing and be heard! Details

• Coulter Berry 2.0 Public Hearing
• Township of Langley Municipal Hall – 20338 65^th Ave.
• Fraser River Presentation Theatre – Council Chambers 4^th Floor
• Monday March 10th 2014 – 7:00 PM

RG

—————————————————————————————

More interesting BLOG Postings coming later this week!

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

What is happening with respect to the Brookswood/Fernridge Community Plan is a disgrace to the community. Despite my direction for change during my term, for the successful Aldergrove Core Community Plan, Township Council and staff could not wait to get back to their old process of manipulation and control. Top-Down Planning! Don’t believe me, take one look at Willoughby and their use and proliferation of “Neighborhood Plans”. In my view this process leaves open a more broader and disgusting use of Spot Zoning!

This process of Community Planning is like nothing I have seen throughout the lower mainland. The key problem issues are 1) Overall Planning Process (proliferation of Neighborhood Plans) 2) OCP and Zoning changes (omnibus process) all in one process and 3) Process of Community input and dialogue. Why is it that way? Very simple, it is much more easily manipulated and controlled by staff and special interests. Just ask yourself who is going to make the money?

An example of what happened close to home – “Aldergrove Core Community Plan”

Leading up to the 2008 election campaign I went after then Mayor Kurt Alberts for his complete lack of willingness to address the lack of an updated Aldergrove Core Community Plan. This was something that was on Aldergrove’s wish list for years. I promised in that campaign that I would advance that as a priority which we did but it wasn’t going to be the same old process!

Early on in my first term, staff, knowing that the Aldergrove Community Plan was a priority in my election platform prepared and brought forward a report to Council outlining their process for developing an Aldergrove Community Plan. I intercepted that report when I was reviewing our Draft Council Agenda on the Wednesday prior to our Council Meeting. I called an immediate meeting with our CAO and Director of Planning to outline my wishes for a new process and I had this item removed immediately from the Agenda and requested a NEW report outlining a NEW process which appeared in a later Council Agenda. (more on that later) Interesting, the new process was adopted by Council, but I am willing to bet they didn’t know what inspired this new process, until now! They didn’t even ask!

So what is wrong with the process they (staff) are obviously so enamored with?

In short their plan is very arbitrary at the outset. They (staff) arbitrarily decide what area will be covered for either a Neighborhood or Community Plan. There is no public debate on that issue just “it is what it is!” After developing some material to support their cause they call a One Day Community Planning Charet. They invite members of the community to attend, they set up teams at tables around the room, they provide maps, throw out discussion points and provide some food and beverage; and at the end of the day they wrap up all the maps with drawings and suggestions from those that attended and thank everyone for attending with a message, we will get back to you in six, eight to twelve months. In due course you see a plan that is put together with no further oversight or public input. This process only leads to poor planning, no REAL community input and a product our communities cannot be happy with. Don’t believe me, look to Willoughby! It is still not too late to correct Willoughby’s problems by the way BUT IT IS getting late in the mission.

In short – A Planning Process that involves the community is the way to go!

In Aldergrove we set up a Community Planning Committee with I believe eleven members consisting of residents, active business owners, an absentee property owner, local community association representative plus two non-voting positions, one from Council and one School Trustee. This group was provided professional planning assistance to work with by the Township of Langley, They were charged with the responsibility, with help from a facilitator, to elect a Chair and run a series of community meetings designed to reach a conclusion of their desires for their community. The long and the short of that process is, we established a Core Community Plan, established bylaws, provided readings, held a Public Hearing and approved the NEW plan, all with virtually NO opposition.

Back to Brookswood/Fernridge –

During the 2008 election campaign and before then Mayor Kurt Alberts had publicly decreed a number of times in the media that he wouldn’t address an update to the Brookswood / Fernridge Community Plan until Willoughby was built out. This was a position I was firmly opposed to. In my monthly drop-in Mayor’s Forums I was inundated with residents wondering about what is going to happen with Brookswood/Fernridge. They were challenged by land speculators, empty houses turning into drug dens and much much more. As many said, it was similar to what was happening up in Willoughby.

It was and is my position that residents in our various communities deserve to have input into their community plans. I don’t mean lip service as before but real active and meaningful input. They deserve to know what to expect in the near to mid-term in their communities.

It is imperative to fight the existing process with all of the energy you can muster. I implore everyone to not be lulled into a sense of complacency. That position would work for this Council because they are happy with apathy.

Please know you can effectively change what is going on, but you have to become active.

1. Sign the petition!
2. Attend the Public Hearing!
3. Speak at the Public Hearing if at all possible! (Not everyone is comfortable with Public Speaking but if you can brave it out, please do)

This Municipal Council has an abhorrent record of listening to the public. Nothing will change until all of us make the change for them!!!

For more info  http://leavebrookswoodalone.blogspot.ca/

A Call to action – Attend this Public Hearing and be heard! Details

• Brookswood / Fernridge Public Hearing
• Township of Langley Municipal Hall – 20338 65^th Ave.
• Fraser River Presentation Theatre – Council Chambers 4^th Floor
• Monday March 3^rd 2014 – 7:00 PM

RG

—————————————————————————————

More interesting BLOG Postings coming later this week!

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

If not, you will get the government you deserve!!!! What is happening now in Fort Langley is an injustice to all Township of Langley residents. This Council is perpetrating a breach of a trust given to it by residents who voted for them in the last election to protect their community. Do you remember the promises made by all of your members of Council during the last election? What do you think of them now?

Fort Langley is the birthplace of British Columbia. Council is directly threatening the Fort Langley Official Community Plan, our Heritage and the long protected Heritage Conservation Area in Fort Langley. This by all appearances is just the start of more to come. It is the tip of the iceberg and is about more than one building. Don’t let them take this action without a hell of a fight, don’t let them change your community forever!!!!!

This BLOG, www.langleywatchdog.com was created after one year of experience with this Council and it’s actions. Now happily in retirement I can assure you I have more than enough to occupy my time than spend many hours of every day writing Posts for this BLOG. Unfortunately the actions of this Council challenged me directly to speak up and do my part to tell the real story, thereby the launch of langleywatchdog.com. I can’t sit back and watch this happen!

Now, I have heard it said before, “this happens in ALL cities and Municipalities”. Well, I can say emphatically in 35 years of personal political experience, I have never witnessed the degree of political incompetence and willful disregard for the public as is the case in the Township of Langley. The creative wherewithal that senior staff can garner to suit their purpose is beyond the pale. Even IF the saying (above) was true, which it isn’t, are you prepared to sit back and be walked all over by your government? What if it directly affected you? (and it could at any time) As I said earlier – you will get the government you deserve!!! Now is the time to react, here is why!

The Township of Langley Council has wasted NO TIME in looking after their friend and insider Mr. Eric Woodward at your expense. Immediately following Mr. Woodward’s love in / Open House on Thursday night in Fort Langley MC’d by none other than Eric’s consultant, former Mayor Kurt Alberts (good friend of the Jack Froese slate on Council), Friday morning’s posting of next Monday’s Council Agenda is further proof that they can’t ram this through fast enough! This is the worst case of spot zoning imaginable!

Surprise, surprise, Monday night’s Council Meeting will feature First and Second Reading of Bylaws:

No. 5063           Bylaw No. 5063 amends the Fort Langley Community Plan by clarifying the informative purpose of the Fort Langley Building Façade Design Guidelines, namely to assist but not bind Council in implementing the Fort Langley Community Plan.

No. 5064           Bylaw 2014 No. 5064 rezones property located at 9220 Glover Road from Community Commercial Zone C-2 to Comprehensive Development Zone CD-100 to permit development of a three storey, mixed use development.

No. 5068           Bylaw 2014 No. 5068 amends the Township of Langley Sign Bylaw to ensure consistency with the informative intent of the Fort Langley Community Plan and specifically the building design guidelines.

I will say the Township of Langley is consistent. By introducing a convoluted set of three bylaws at one time, (an omnibus Bylaw process) they limit public consultation and input. Please note the wording in Bylaw No. 5063 – “namely to assist but not bind Council in implementing the Fort Langley Community Plan”. Not firm, just if THEY (Council) wish to enforce, you know if you are a friend or part your hair the right way! What an absolute insult to our community and it’s planning. This is a whole you could drive a truck through.

The Size of Coulter Berry 2.0 is completely and totally out of character with the long standing heritage policies, heritage Guidelines and Heritage Conservation Area. Now, take into account Mr. Woodward now owns over 50% of the Commercial Area of Fort Langley. Question – How long do you think it will be for Mr. Woodward, an obvious close friend of members of Council, (why else would they be going through this) will it take to redevelop a number of other properties whereby he will be seeking similar spot zoning approvals ? WE will have lost the character of Fort Langley forever. Please take a stand against this kind of out of control Municipal Government.

“If we don’t stand for something we will stand for anything”

and we have stood for anything far too long !!!!!

Call to Action – WE NEED YOUR HELP – Please attend:

Hello All,

It appears the Township of Langley is planning a fast track ramming through of the spot zoning to accommodate the Coulter Berry Development. They also intend to implement OCP amendments which will likely open the door to many more Coulter Berry type developments being proposed and approved in the Fort .The only chance we will have short of another long and expensive court battle is for them to see that there is huge public opposition to their attempts.

This February 24^th at 7 pm at the Township of Langley council meeting we need to get as many like-minded individuals to come out and wear their Yellow hand, Heritage Button etc. and sit respectfully and quietly and have our presence show the mayor and council we will not be allowing them a free pass on this. They are considering the first and second reading of the spot zoning and OCP amendments.

We will have people at the entrance to the 4^th floor council meeting room ready with yellow hands to hand out. I hope as many of you as possible will take the time to show up. We will also need even more to show up for the future public hearing that will be held before the Township’s final decision. This will likely be March 10^th by all indication, we will keep you posted!

Please share this notice with everyone you know who you believe cares about Fort Langley as we do. We need to get the word out and garner support as quickly as possible. I look forward to a sea of yellow hands on Monday and even more at the public hearing.

Thanks Harold

Council Meeting will be held at:

Township of Langley Municipal Hall

20338-65^th Avenue

Langley B.C.

7:00 PM Monday February 24^th, 2014

4^th Floor – Fraser River Presentation Theatre

RG

—————————————————————————————

More interesting BLOG Postings coming later this week!

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.