SAVE OUR COMMUNITY FROM UNCARING PEOPLE!



SAVE OUR COMMUNITY FROM UNCARING PEOPLE!
Working hand in hand with developers, Langley Township continue to force a plan that will change the landscape of Brookswood from a community with rural (“Horse capital of BC”) roots to a crowded urban wasteland of row housing and condos just like so many other communities in the Lower Mainland. We believe Langley Township is listening to the wrong people, and we wonder if the planners and “experts” who have devised this plan actually live in this community. It seems the Township doesn't care about keeping our community a beautiful place to live, where people can own larger properties with big trees, they just care about squeezing as many people (and as many tax dollars) out of the land as they possibly can. Don't let them do this to us and our wonderful community, don't let them destroy where we live the same way they did Willoughby! We CAN stop them! Gather together to save our homes and save the brooks and woods in Brookswood. Make your voice heard. Contact the Township of Langley, attend their meetings to find out what they have planned for your neighbourhood, voice your disapproval!

Friday, May 20, 2016

WE DO NOT WANT TENT CITIES IN LANGLEY!!

Capeesh??

You already dropped the ball on meaningful measures against drugs and vagrancy while you 'studied' the issues.

Don't let this get worse.

Saturday, April 9, 2016

Building developers are reactive and megalomaniacal.

"Building developers are reactive and megalomaniacal. Just like Trump."
--- Washinghton Post April 8th by Faroll Hamer
Very interesting article in yesterday's Washington Post.
What do you think?
From my experience most local developers are professional, courteous and very respectful like Quadra Homes as an example. They don't attack community groups or their thought leaders, municipal council decision makers, or the average tax payers at public hearings or on social media. Following are some of the most provocative quotes in this article.
"They view themselves as victims. They see regulations as getting in the way of what’s good for economic development and society as a whole, and believe governments exist to pick on them. Everything they do is for us, because they are building places for us to live, shop or work."
"The scary side is that they sometimes brush aside legal obstacles to what they see as a worthy goal. They know the difference between right and wrong, but often they aren’t particularly worried about the letter of the law."
"While tactically inventive, they are strategically unimaginative. They’re not people who enjoy creative thinking or the big picture; they’ll build the same building over and over, but they are endlessly flexible about achieving each project. It’s all about the next step. In negotiations they’re willing to get only part of what they want because they know they’re going to come back and get another part and another, until before you know it, they have it all. They’re into getting their nose under the tent."
"They have no interest in ideology. They value loyalty over principle — you’re either in the circle or not — and they’re usually generous to loyal friends...."
“...since they identify their projects with the general social welfare, they tend to be a little megalomaniacal. Almost any attention you give them is good. They don’t mind being teased, but pointed criticism is unacceptable.”
“And it’s when a developer encounters political resistance that his sense of victimhood really kicks in. Trump has called himself a “counter-puncher”; once offended, he reacts with little restraint. But Twitter insults are pretty trivial.”

Sunday, April 3, 2016

When are Community 'Improvements' not Improvements...


...when the residents of a community don't want or need them...

'Improvements' such as road widening, intersection upgrades, destruction of parks and Township owned vacant land (that are well used by community kids to play in), and some tax payer funded new and expensive facilities that don't always improve the lives of the community, and have to pay for forever.

In fact road widening (such as proposed for 40th Ave.) for the most part just improve the lives of commuters and residents from other areas while destroying the character of a community that residents love. Also making it harder to get from point A to point B due to new medians, barricades and blockages, and shaving off and fencing off parks and school grounds just so people driving through the area can have a passing lane, when many residents just want some sort of traffic calming through the streets they call home.  You are just destroying communities while you think you're 'improving' them.

Imagine a four lane highway going past YOUR front yard on 52nd with a major intersection at 248th St.  I bet that wouldn't feel good...

I call it Politician 'Bronze Plaque Fever' or 'Surreyfication' - look at what all the sprawling 'Improvements' have done for that city.  You have a good example of what not to do just to the west of us, if only you would stop listening so much to the developers and instead honestly listen to the community residents BEFORE the survey tape goes up.  After all we are people you must respect and not just planning board markers.

You can't call it 'improvement' when you're shoving it down people's throats...

Have too much tax money? Put it towards building sidewalks traffic calming and maintenance, or study what basements do to a community given the probability of illegal suites and the attending stress on utilities, and congestion.  Just a suggestion there.  :)

Better yet, these days while the Township is gorging themselves on property tax, put the windfall into investments so you can actually gives the residents a Tax Break when a recession next kicks in again instead of raising the taxes like you did the last time.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

A Promise for the Protection of Brookswood/Fernridge




The world overpopulating is bad for all of us.



'Pack em in' like they did in Willoughby IS NOT a good policy for Brookswood/Fernridge.



We will always oppose urbanization and maximum population growth (maximum developer profit) in the area.



The developers cannot have their way like they did with Willoughby.



Yes it seems our mayor has been bought, but it doesn't mean he and his buddies can get their way. They will have to be responsible and moderate in their approach.



The developers and builders must reject their base profit making instinct and use a more European, well planned, lower population approach that leaves most of the trees and land untouched instead of the slash-and-dash, English row housing, condos-and-townhouses-everywhere-blocking-out-the-sun approach that is not in keeping with the natural state of the area.



The residents wont stand for anything else.



I cannot believe that we have to deal with the magnitude of crap that is being built in Langley, especially after the poor example that Surrey provided us over the last several decades.

Come on!  You could have done much, much better.   

Poorly done people, poorly done.

Friday, January 22, 2016

Question: Is changing the boundaries of a community without public referendum or consultation legal?


Pocket Politician - Definition

1. Having a political leader at your disposal to help further your own agenda. Usually involves kickbacks, the promise of present or future perks or peddling of influence due to political donations.

2. Buying politicians.

3. To keep a politician 'in your back pocket.'

So they want to push north to 32nd east of 208th. Well that's just pushy.

This is my neighbourhood.  I was going to just watch and encourage responsible development.  But now...

Builders of Harmony


This is excerpt from book I recently read.

'Fighter Pilot: The Memoirs of Legendary Ace Robin Olds'  Olds upon discovering the English countryside:

"I realized that the trees and fields, the buildings and barns, the small villages and narrow winding roads all fit together seamlessly, blended by time into harmony.  No one thing intruded on each other.  Each fit the scene as though a natural process had ordained symmetry."

Kind of sounds like what Brookswood and it's trees have become over time.

This is what I want Developers and Planners to realize.

Development doesn't have to be Progressively Invasive.

You don't have to destroy the character of a community by widening beautiful two lane country roads everywhere.  You don't have to crush and tear things apart to build, and you don't have to bulldoze everything and then leave a few sprigs behind in your wake after replacing every tree on a lot with a 'Unit.'  You can be more than just builders plugging homes and apartments into the earth, you can be sculptors creating something you can be proud of, and finally rid yourselves of that nagging feeling of discontent over what you are slapping together now.

My dad was a builder.  He and his crew made many of the cottages and homes in Ontario's Cottage Country.  Today's builders jokingly say they hate him for it is always much harder to tear apart the places he has built for they were always solid and true, and he guaranteed that not a mouse could squeeze into them.  Looking back at him I can say that he was a craftsman in every sense of the word, he built structures to fit with the land and he maintained that harmony.  He built around, not through.  He could teach much to todays builders, even the ones who THINK they are good builders.

You can either create or destroy communities.  It may eat a little more into your profit margins, and may take more of an effort but I think it's worth it.  Maybe it's time to consider more closely your role in the community...

...and set the bar higher.


Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Shelley Fralic: Heads up, Metro Vancouver mayors: A revolt is brewing

 
 

Shelley Fralic: Heads up, Metro Vancouver mayors: A revolt is brewing

 

That something in the air? It’s anger

 
 
35
 
 

 

Great neighbourhoods are being destroyed, one old home at a time, writes Shelley Fralic.

Does it seem to you, as it does to me, that rarely a day goes by without yet another story of how Metro Vancouver real estate is being bulldozed, foreign-owned, over-priced, over-built, developer-designed and any other term to denote that our little urban world is changing faster than an ordinary taxpaying citizen can keep up with?
Does it also seem to you, as it does to me, although it’s a strictly anecdotal and gut-based observation, that the accelerated pace of demolition and new construction that is so drastically transforming our neighbourhoods has finally awakened the sleeping giant?
No question about it. There is something in the air these days.
Anger.
Civic taxpayers seem to be shaking off voter complacency and replacing it with outrage and outspokenness, filling council chambers and development meetings and all manner of public forums with a unified message: They no longer trust city hall politicians and bureaucrats to listen to their concerns or represent the greater public good in the face of unbridled growth and runaway residential and commercial development in their communities.
Last week, a column I wrote about New Westminster’s upcoming Official Community Plan, and the massive rezoning changes some of its proposed scenarios would foist upon the city, was meant as a wake-up call to residents. Speak up now, I enjoined, or forever hold your peace when your neighbourhood is suddenly unrecognizable.
And the inbox avalanche, from all over the region, began.
We agree, readers said, everyone needs to be involved in change. But there was also this overriding sentiment: We can’t trust our growth-at-any-cost elected representatives; we fear decisions are made well before the public is given a say and thus our input is meaningless. Oh, and we’re sick and tired of developers and consultants deciding how and when, if at all, our neighbourhoods should be rezoned and reimagined in the name of progress.
A sampling of the many comments:
“At what point is enough, enough? Do our leaders envision Los Angeles north? Should we aim to be larger than Toronto? Do residents really want more urban chaos and pollution and fewer tress and open spaces?”
“Developers are salivating and our elected officials have their own agendas.”
“The ‘planners’ of Langley and Langley Township are sorely out of sync with the current population growth and the needs for infrastructure. Decisions are made in the same way as New West. Count on the lack of resident participation and charge forward without consideration of the area’s immediate needs.”
“It may be that this eagerness to permit excessive residential development has its origins in the generous donations by developers that keep elected officials in office. In any case, it is wise not to accept the official rationale for development in your neighbourhood at face value.”
“Density is not destiny. It is a choice. Density does not add one more square inch of parks or roads. In fact, it subtracts at the margins. It is very puzzling that the population has bought into the ‘one million people are coming by 2040’ statement without any significant questioning of the wisdom thereof.”
“Welcome to West Coquitlam. They want suggestions for a new name? I sent in Bosa Town. Our lovely 60-year-plus neighbourhood is going away, house by house. We were told by Major Stewart and his merry band of councillors you have to look at the ‘big picture.’ West Coquitlam was a great place to raise our family. That way of life has now changed to make way for the high rises. Time to head for the hills. Oh wait, no more hills? They’re gone and replaced by multiple dwellings.”
Granted, it’s hardly a scientific sample, but if I were a Metro Vancouver municipal official, I wouldn’t discount the simmering anger that has been building of late among the folks who pay the bills and have a vested interest in what you are doing to their streets.
Your people are mad as hell, and if the sound and fury of their growing discontent is any indication, they are not going to take it any more.


Read more:http://www.vancouversun.com/business/shelley+fralic+heads+metro+vancouver+mayors+revolt+brewing/11660313/story.html#ixzz3xiUnMx9o