Crime getting worse in Langley? Surprised?

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/213558821.html

Speaking from experience as police officer in the past I must point out that you have to pester these criminals (potential or otherwise) to keep them from getting two comfortable within an area.  ie. walking patrols and in-house security with cameras - no one involving themselves in crime likes to have a camera pointed at them.  If you keep them moving they have a hard time setting up to sell drugs or involve themselves in prostitution.

You can't instigate so called 'programs' and expect crime to go away. You have to roll up your sleeves, actively fight it, and always keep at it.  And you can't be risk adverse for there is much at stake.  Langley isn't a town any more so the same rules don't apply.

Just like invasive weeds you have to dig them out and keep on digging. You have to keep at them or they will take over.  This IS priority one in Langley now for criminals are taking root.

Unfortunately the Langley's have been attracting these sorts of people and word is spreading.  Langley City has a problem, and it will get bigger.  It will be the next downtown east side...

Now is the time to take a hard stand!

Quick Suggestions:

Note to police and local government - think creatively!

- City and Township - hire security guards with communications monitored by police dispatch and give them cameras to point at suspicious people.

- Don't discourage volunteer citizen patrols yet go further and educate them, they are going to do it anyway so you might as well tell what they can and can't do, equip them if you can, and get them to sign disclaimers.  They make great eyes and ears.  Do discourage police from looking down upon them.      
We did look down upon them at Richmond RCMP.  Any help the police can get the better - it's just all about management.

- Two person police cars.  The officers take turns doing foot patrols in parks while the other lights up the area with a spot light.

- Bylaw officers should do foot patrols through our parks and i.d. people involved in low risk crime (again show the flag.)

- Police cary high power flash lights when on foot patrols - criminals don't like that.

- Patrols should be repeated at odd times during the day and night.  A park should not be considered patrolled just once a shift.

- Police should be driving more fuel efficient cars (as it stands I can't imagine the fuel costs for such large cars and SUVs!)  and should use them for more patrols during the night in and around our neighbourhoods shining spotlights.  If the police are moving and lighting up the dark then the criminals will be kept on the move as well and will have less opportunity to commit crime...

- Parks shut down at night.

- There are an unusually large number of pharmacies in Langley, each one is dispensing methadone.  Make a rule that only one of them can dispense methadone each day.  This will cut down on the amount of junkies coming to town and make them work for it a bit more for their suppliers move around.  A lazy junkie is a complacent junkie, a complacent junkie stays a junkie.

- Install direct to police/security wireless call stations that can't be tampered with in parks and problem areas so people can call in suspicious activity.  Maintain them!

- Fake cameras in static areas with motion activated red lights.

- Motion activated strobe lights that light up at night if people linger in problem areas too long.

- Bright short duration sensor lights in problem areas.

- Motion activated camera flashes in problem areas (makes criminals feel like they are having their photos taken.

- Police encouraged to do paperwork in problem areas to 'show the flag.'

- More bike and foot patrols by the same officers so they get to know people.

- Dedicate a Police-Community liaison officer to proactively interface with with business people, property managers, etc.  There should be an informal schedule.  Feedback should be solicited.

- Create incentives for bus drivers, taxi drivers, garbage men, etc. to immediately report suspicious activity.  For as the city grows and they are exposed to more crap the less they will care, unless reminded that it's in their best interests to call stuff-in.

- Make every prostitute caught in Langley go through a medical exam - they don't like doing that, and will avoid Langley in the future (remember dugs and prostitution go everywhere hand in hand.)

- Langley RCMP should have a dedicated rehab cell for druggies - make it nice, and provide a nurse to hold their hands so the human rights people, politicians with no backbone, and news papers won't object.  Paint it pink or a colour that is similar.  It can be a place where they can go through cold turkey withdrawal or at least part way.  The room will get a reputation and people who do drugs will be less likely to come here.

- Form a dedicated vice squad who's primary objective is to effect gorilla investigations, to interdict and pester people involved in drugs and prostitution - not to form charges for that is expensive and time consuming, they are mainly there to form an information database and keep crime from spreading.  Keep them on the move.

- The RCMP should create 'constable apprenticeships' as a more permanent auxiliary member.  1.  After a basic training these people are less expensive than full constable during their training time.  2. They can help out an underpowered organization. 3. They form good people for their future ranks.

- Constant maintenance in the area.  If something gets broken or graffiti is sprayed on things clean it up right away.  Municipal maintenance people shouldn't complain about being proactive about this for they are getting paid well to do it.  Broken window theory...

- Important:  City, Township and police all have to work together on this.  Ask the hard questions and deal concisely with the hard issues.  Do what has to be done and don't blame or point fingers, just keep going and get things in place.  If Langley City needs a hand from Township then give it freely and vise-versa.  Or parts of both Langley's will become cesspools - that is if they haven't already...

- Care more about the the people already here who built this wonderful community and have maintained it instead of those invading it and tearing it apart...

http://www.langleytimes.com/opinion/212842601.html

Langley Township's modern-day alchemy

by  Frank Bucholtz - Langley Times 

posted Jun 24, 2013 at 6:00 PM

Do we still have an Agricultural Land Reserve in this province?
Perhaps it exists in other communities, but Langley Township seems to think it does not apply to land use decisions here.

It’s hard not to see things that way when so many Langley Township council meetings feature discussions about which areas of the ALR need to be rezoned to allow for housing.
There was the Tuscan Farms development, which council has approved. This will see a former farm become the location of 85 homes, with some farmland remaining.
This is not taking place in an area adjacent to an urban area. It is in the midst of rural Langley, admittedly in an area which features many homes on smaller acreages — developments that predate the ALR.

The Tuscan Farms development is also above the Hopington aquifer, where there has theoretically been a freeze on development. This freeze is meaningless, as many new homes have been built above it. I was very surprised to see, on a drive into an area I rarely get to, a number of huge new homes on what was once a small farm at 240 Street and 62A Crescent.

The Wall farm subdivision is perhaps the most naked assault on the ALR. Touted as part of a “university district,” it is no such thing. It has no physical access and only indirect proximity to the Trinity Western University campus, and in fact is simply the latest in a long series of attempts by the owners of a large farm (located on part of the historic Hudson’s Bay farm) to turn dirt into real estate gold. It’s modern-day alchemy.

The land use they propose is completely at odds with the ALR, official community plans and all planning principles.

Six members of Township council may be aspiring alchemists. They have supported this development through thick and thin. The only reason I can see for such unwavering support, including the surprising support from two council members with strong farm backgrounds, is that the Walls and various companies they are involved in were donors to numerous municipal election campaigns.

I give full credit to Councillors David Davis, Kim Richter and Michelle Sparrow for continuing to point out that this particular emperor has no clothes on. I hope their stance on this is remembered favourably by voters next November.

The latest attempt to pretend that the ALR does not exist is in the proposed redevelopment of 44 acres of farmland on the northwest outskirts of Aldergrove. The land has been fallow for years, likely because it is controlled by Genstar.

The case made by many members of Township council is one that has been made before — Aldergrove needs mure urban land so that it can more fully develop and more services can be provided to residents.

However, that lack of an urban base isn’t stopping council from building a pool, new ice rink and community centre. Nor did it stop the plan to build a new water line to service Aldergrove.

Township looks to revamp its official community plan

Let's hope that they keep butting heads...

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/212842881.html

This IS Agricultural land guys!

The township has NO BUSINESS using our tax money to help ANY developer slice off a part of the Agricultural Land Reserve!!

"At Monday’s afternoon meeting, Township council voted 5-4 to refer Genstar Development Company’s exclusion application to the Agricultural Land Commission. The land, located at 3250  264 St., is in the ALR, but not in Metro Vancouver’s Green Zone."

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/212216881.html

We are paying you with our taxes, so the time you spend helping these guys pick away at the ALR is out of our pockets.

DON'T... do... that!

Council calls for second look at high density development

I love this quote:

“I was born into high density,” McDonald said.
“It sucks.”

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/213183351.html

Abandoned home goes up in flames in Aldergrove (Developer owned)

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/213548541.html

Suspicious fire causes oil slick in Nicomekl River (Developer Owned)

Again, the owner is criminally negligent and should be charged!  Am I wrong??  Is there some reason why the authorities are reluctant to do so??

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/211908941.html

Boarded up home in Langley City goes up in flames (Developer Owned)

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/211061041.html

Langley Welfare Crack-House Shut Down. Let's celebrate! (Developer Owned)

After numerous visits by police, by by-laws, the health department and the fire department the Crack House has been cracked.  FINALY!

The residents have been removed, the house has been boarded-up and keep-out signs posted.  The place is a complete mess with refuse and broken articles strewed all over the property.  Hopefully the place will be torn down or someone will buy it and fix it up for their own honest use.  The place has been the scourge of the surrounding neighbourhood with property crime spiking.  People have had their vehicles and houses broken into and have had their person's robbed while walking on the streets in the area and a crack-head has overdosed at the end of our driveway while waving a crowbar.  Fun eh?  It was a great education for our young kids...

I imagine it would be telling if you could triangulate the recent crime statistics with this house at it's epicentre.  It is good thing it has been shuttered.

The danger is still there though, not only is the place a mess but the boards are only a mild deterrent for squatters and if they end up in there you know it will only be a matter of time before the place goes up in flames.  And being hemmed in by large pine trees a good part of the street could burn.

The lower mainland underbelly now knows the area, and they know that there are other developer and holding company owned abandoned houses around Brookswood were they can live for a time, feed off the local residents and shoot-up.  The above place should be torn down, a lien should be placed upon it and all the police and other service costs that the local tax payers have incurred should be assessed (including wages) and the owner charged.

Wouldn't that be fair considering all the damage this one owner has caused?  The owner should be liable for his negligence, right?  He was the one that didn't screen the residents right??  Or will insult be added to injury and we will just eat the costs as usual as part of our rapidly increasing taxes.  Maybe Langley Township and City should be less circumspect about calculating and litigating these situations especially when they are caused by owner (developer/holding company) neglect and carelessness AND creating a slum as a result.

May then, and only then, will they be forced to care a little about the world around them instead of just thinking about the cash that will line their pockets...

Property Tax Higher than Inflation!

No government has any right or business raising or fixing yearly property taxes to a level that is higher than inflation.  It is immoral and unkind to do so.

Langley Development Timelapse

This shows the development of Willoughby, Willowbrook and east Cloverdale since 1984.  Note the huge 'compressive housing' development serge that has been allowed to happen by both The City of Surrey and Langley Township over the last decade.  Eye opening isn't it?

It looks like some sort of runaway spreading cancer that eats both land and trees...

Now take a look at Brookswood.  Contrasting right?  

One of the main reasons why we love Brookswood as our community is because of this slow pace - it's because this is the way things should be.  It's reasonable, measured, non consuming, non choking, sustainable and traditionally Canadian.  It's not all about desperate growth, nor about hordes of people, or about a greater tax base.

The land under Brookswoods is not meant to make money for salivating developers, or to provide extra government revenue or balance government budgets, it is a tranquil place for the present residents to live and rest without fear that the world is going to take it all from you or is going to compress and smother you.

Other countries have filled themselves up with humanity, countries like China, Malaysia and India and even large parts of Europe and South America.  This to the tune of, a mind-boggling, 7 Billion people!!

Is this what we are becoming as Canadians?  I know it wasn't that way when I was a kid.  We didn't have rapid growth, and didn't think about filling our country up with people, and bulldozing it all down to do so.

It's like we have adopted a money-worship-sell-out-your-countrymen type attitude where growth is absolute, and are told that we have to make room for more people to accommodate this way of thinking!

It's like the Canadian way and culture has died and we have adopted the ways and cut-throat methods of some other country.

And for Canadians this is not very polite...

Densification = Problems

Brookswood Plan: No Council Envy. By Brad Richert.

http://www.langleytoday.ca/brookswood-plan-no-council-envy/

I disagree with some of what Mr. Richert has to say in the above article.

Much of the situation in Brookswood (and Langley in general) is caused by mass immigration with many people moving to the area from other countries and from migration from other livable parts of the country which are filling up.   Many other areas are considered not as nice to live in due to climate or chocking levels of development, crime or because built-up areas tend to become unkind as they lose their sense of a country-like community - as well as other problems.  Brookswood is a desirable area, mainly because of the large trees, the country like atmosphere and and the rural connectivity that the residents share.  That will be destroyed as the area comes under pressure from development, as the trees are torn down and the roads widened.

Let's face it.  It is all about money.  This excellent community will be torn apart so others can make money.  A community that has been wonderfully 'stagnating' for decades will be wiped-out to become like any other community.  Brookswood is an island in a sea of sprawl, and when the waves of development crash over the spruces and the firs and the hemlocks that grace the area it will become like so much chopped up flotsam that is the rest of the lower mainland.  I know, how poetic, but if you come here and look all around, you will feel the same way - this place, the way it is now = harmony.  It needs protecting.

Am I a NIMBY as Mr. Richert has stated in his article?  Maybe.  I own a big house on a large parcel of land and I have worked extremely hard and have given-up much (you can see me driving around in my 94 Honda Civic) in order to buy it,  keep it and maintain it so it looks nice just like all of my neighbours around me - there is much pride in our community.  My son will probably inherit my house if he can afford it by that point (and the township can control their spending) and I sincerely wish to have the same low population, 'stagnant' and safe community around him by then.  Like Mr. Richert I stand to benefit from densification for I will have one of the few houses in the lower-mainland with land if the rampant development is not kept at-bay - and that is becoming rare.

Even if I stand to benefit I still want to fight to keep Brookswood as-is...

Damn right Brookswood residents will lash-out!!  And why shouldn't we??  People who do not live here want to destroy what we dearly love and they want to cut us in half with 4 lane commuter highways!  They even thought about building a casino here!  That is why so many people showed up for the open houses.  And that is why we will all be angry if we are sold-out like we feel is happening to us.

Yes this is our back yard and we want to protect it.  Wouldn't you do the same thing to protect something you love?


Comments:

AnonymousJuly 11, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Has there been a petition going around? I live in the brookswood area and almost all of my neighbours werent even aware of any changes that will be coming... If i had better resources i would defenitely start a petition to stop the destruction of brookswood.

David M ChambersJuly 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM

As far as I know I'm the only one who is doing something like this. There are many people against changing the Community plan (initiated by a small group of owners in the 'Griffith' neighborhood) but most people who I talk to have a downtrodden belief that nothing they do will matter, or that what ever the Township does it will be written in stone and can't be changed.

It is sad that not many people who we elect to govern us truly care about the people who put them in power, instead they are there for their own motives and agendas - and that mostly to make money for themselves or for their buddies. We seem to be adopting a third world political model I'm afraid.

I can only continue to promote this site, and I hope that people read it and it makes them think. And maybe some will go out and do something about it.

Beyond that we, the masters, are being steam rolled by our in our pay (ha! the employees of the Township who faithfully work for us...) -D

1. AnonymousJuly 15, 2013 at 12:31 PM

   So now what , i have quite a few neighbours now concerned with whats going on and i have their support , i have also spoken with numerous businesses along the 208 & 40 ave , and they have also shown support for a petition. Unfortunately im not sure where to begin...im very passionate about keeping this area the way it is. I was born and raised from richmond and now i dont even recognize my old neighbourhood or most of the city , i just hope brookswoods fate doesnt end up the same. 
   
   David M Chambers  23, 2013 at 5:36 PM
   
   I would fully promote any petition on this site. Please let people know about it so they can read some of the objections I've written down here. Beyond that it's about what gets the most publicity: Door-to-door written petitions with signatures or on-line petition sites.The biggest thing is to let the township know that this is our community not theirs. They have had their way for most of this process and they have done things the way they see fit - that is they failed to properly and fully notify the residents (using only the minimum methods) and have bent the questions and agenda to what they want by leaving and filling gaps the way they see fit. The sad thing is that we are paying for it out of pocket and eventually through a decline in living conditions due to a large population increase (and attending problems) and the widening of our country streets and roads to 4 lane city standards.
2. And then there is Willoughby...
   
   Word of mouth works well, so does paper and electronic postings wherever you can post. I was thinking about using my banner as a bumper sticker as well.
   
   The unfortunate thing is that with the info age buzzing around everyone's heads not as many people look up from their iPhones and take notice. Governments (Townships) realize this and take advantage by pushing forward their own agendas without much public consultation or even in private sessions.
   
   It is nice that the Townships has consulted with us this much, but I wonder about their process, their motivations, and their alliances. -D

Say goodbye to Brookswood as we know it

http://www.langleytimes.com/opinion/letters/205405631.html

I, along with countless other Brookswood residents, share in the trepidation of the planned four-laning of 40 Avenue.

However, this is just one small component of the much larger and more sinister master plan to destroy Brookswood and Fernridge. The draft land use plan conveniently understates, or in some cases camouflages, the true development intent.

Due to the colour shadings used, at first glance it appears that there is provision for some new quarter-acre and larger lots.

As I recall, Goal 1 listed at the planning workshops was to “preserve existing character.” The reality is that the largest new lots included in this plan are 7,000 square feet. These will likely be few and far between.

So, say goodbye to Brookswood as we know and cherish it. Say goodbye to the large lots, and the large stands of trees.

There is an opportunity to develop something different and unique here, something apart from the same, old, tired densification. It could be different from the type of development that has wreaked havoc on other areas of Langley.

I suspect, however, we will see yet another “clear cut” disaster.

B. Cameron,

Langley

Sooooo, what's up with the questionnaire?

"3. Housing Types
Which of the following statements best represent your interpretation of the types of housing included in the plan? Indicate all that apply.

There should be more emphasis on regular single family lots (4, 6, 8 or 10 upa/10-25 uph, 4-7,000 square foot lots)"

...or 20, 22, or 30...  That is quite the range for what they consider 'regular single family lots'... This process is like some sort of probe that keeps getting more invasive.  Of course if you are in charge of finessing this particular process you can formulate the questions what ever way you want.  It's called manipulation.

"5. Parks and Schools Size and Distribution
What do you think of the park and school sites included in the plan? 
Please note, park and school sites represented on the display board do not reflect exact future sites of schools and parks. These will be determined as development occurs and land acquisition permits (see symbols E, M, and S on the plan). Indicate all that apply."

I predict another mismanagement cluster on this one...  It kind of leaves things wide open to swap more school land with developers doesn't it?  Or worse...

Willoughby schools are close to crisis

http://www.langleytimes.com/opinion/138818834.html

By-the-way the survey will be up until April 30th and can be found here...

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/JKQRBYW

Growth = Money = Planners = Development

Boy!  There wouldn't be much work for planners if there wasn't much growth.  What happens to many of them when things slow down?  Do they still keep their jobs while we continue to support them with our taxes?  What about after they fill every square acre up with development?  Then what are they going to do?

I guess it's hard to be concerned about the existing people in their community when they are protecting and justifying their jobs right?

Remember the leaky condo issue?  Remember all the building envelope consultants that set-up over-night to 'solve the problems' for the stratta councils.  They cost many people allot of money too - and many of those people couldn't afford to spend that money.

I guess when there is a perceived need there will always be a crowd of people ready to jump in and capitalize on it.  This is the way I look upon planners.

Note: Planners are supposed to be the appointed guardians of the communities they serve, not autonomous destroyers.

Brookswood is a beautiful place to live - the way it is now.

Joni Mitchell:  Big Yellow Taxi
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot SPOT
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
'Til it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
Then they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see 'em
Don't it always seem to go,
That you don't know what you've got
'Til it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot...

Ask yourselves: what kind of legacy are you creating?

WHY?

Why do you have to do this at all?  Why can't you just leave it be and let it take it's natural course?  Is it because people who own large parcels of land are hoping to become millionaires?  Is it because developers and land holding companies are hungering to make money off of the area and then move on to devour the next?

Must the entire lower mainland be ravaged this way?  Can there not be some sanctuaries?

Revised Brookswood/Fernridge plan revealed at open house

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/203479371.html

What happened guys?

When I moved to Langley in the early 90s my wife and I thought that Langley was such a nice place.  We thought that here was a place that had it together, that this place was not going to be like Surrey, or Richmond with their rapid growth and messed-up sprawl.  We thought that with a city like Surrey just next door, with it's developer pay-offs and bad planning Langley had a glaringly obvious example of what not to do.

You changed for the worse, and are becoming another Surrey.

What happened Langley?

Do all the Township planners live in Langley?

It would be discouraging to see that any one of them may live somewhere else - vested interest and such...

So... how much is this costing again?

Remember, money from public coffers is just free money right?  It's not like it's yours or something? Right??

Whoa! Population spike on a whim!

Quote from latest draft land use plan:

'Population Summary

The population forecast for the area, based on proposed Land Use Designations, is approximately 42,000 people.'


(??!!)


Wow!  That is quite the sudden population increase from 36,000!!  Or 33,600 or even 32,000 as stated in the questionnaire last time...

Yes, yes, it's just an estimate you say.  But if we can't trust you to come up with proper estimates what can we trust you with?  If I was managing you, we would be having a little talk behind closed doors.

It makes one wonder if the planning department really knows what they are doing.  It also shows an offensively disdainful regard for the residents of Langley, the same residents that you milk for votes and tax revenue.

The people of Brookswood were lead-by-the-nose to view a presentation involving 3 options only!  You can't combine or mix, or befuddle, blend, defuse, finesse or slime those carefully manipulated distinct options into any sort of hybrid without us howling blue murder!

Doesn't the planners and politicians understand that we (the present residents and lion share of the property owners, tax payers and voters in Brookswood) Don't want to live in high density.

You did it elsewhere don't do it here!

This gives you the appearance of being money-grubbing, crooked and OBTUSE

I feel a betrayal will be ensured when this thing (which shouldn't have been attempted in the first place) comes down the line...


Oh and by-the-way having almost half of all the undeveloped land mass in Brookswood designated 6 units (houses) per acre is a 150% increase in density compared to what exists presently in Brookswood.

http://www.tol.ca/Portals/0/FileShare/ComDev/2013-04-11_April_open_house_boards_LR.pdf

Report Suspicious Activity!!

If you see people doing something that is suspicious or doesn't feel right call 911 and report it!

I can't emphasize this more.  The only way we can keep the crime (drugs) manageable in Langley is for you to get on your cell phone more and let the police know.  They wont be angry at you (if they are you can complain) and they will be directed to the problems - besides it's your taxes that are paying for them right??

You see the police are reactive, and the only way that a reactive organization can be effective is to have things pointed out to them.  Each call or 'occurrence' creates what is termed a stat or statistic.  These stats are tallied and sent to Ottawa ('A' Division Headquarters). The more stats there are the more likely Ottawa will direct resources to that community and the more likely the community will get more officers to augment its (our) inadequately manned police department.

So next time you see something suspicious CALL 911!  The police expect it and want it!

Langley: The next Skid Row...

Look alive guys!  Transients are moving in!

Having experience in these things I know you can't have a bleeding heart when it comes to this otherwise they will root themselves.  If they reject help you just have to keep pestering them to move on.    You also have to keep at the old apartment building owners to improve their buildings.

Most people moved to Langley because it is a nice place to live, that is changing for the worst due to inadequate precautionary measures, aging unkempt apartments and a somewhat tolerant and segmented population.  High rises in Langley City aren't going to help either - but they won't find that out until they're built.

If the city and the township don't act assertively much of the shady and transient aspect of lower mainland will move in and harm this community making it no longer safe for families.

These people are being pushed out of Vancouver's Downtown East side and Langley is a wonderfully attractive place for them to 'set-up-shop.'  If they are willing to accept help and become productive members of the community then fine they can stay (there are plenty of things they can do to help out) but if not they will have to move on.

Or do nothing and see what happens.

Drive around Langley City and you will see some of what I mean...

Oh, by the way, a little note to the overly sensitive people that bleed for this segment of society.  Try this test...

Approach a vagrant and instead of offering them food and/or money offer to assist them to the many services that are out there to help them.  See if they will accept the help...  If they do good for you, you helped one of them.  If not keep trying.

You see it is the hand outs that cause them to congregate in a particular area and perhaps the drugs - something I have been seeing much of lately in Langley.

Money

Oh by-the-way, with regards to money… how much is this whole process costing the people of Langley?

Further what is a full planning staff doing while they pay a consultant, in all likelihood, a large amount of Langley tax payer money to come up with this new plan?

Lack of Notification

Mr. Tinney wrote the following statement on page 2 of his recent consultation report...

'The Township of Langley has actively sought community involvement for this community planning process. However, it should be noted that public consultation events only generate feedback from a small cross section of the community as not all community members are able to attend these events.'

'actively' eh?  Fail!

Not everyone knows that this process is taking place!  The township has successfully pushed hard to get this whole thing going and has successfully massaged and sculpted a vision that they want by limiting our choices in the matter, but they failed miserably in a major way - they failed to notify people properly.

What they must understand is that this is a legal process with potential legal consequences.  As such you need to appropriately notify everyone in the community involved.  The Township did not go door-to-door and they did not mail notifications to the residents and home owners in Brookswood/Fernridge - ads in the not-always-read local newspapers or on your website aren't enough!

If the Township can get dog license canvassers to go door-to-door then they can do the same to notify people about a huge impending community plan.  It follows reason does it not??

This is a post that I received  from a resident on March 15th...

“Thank you David.  I live in Deer Creek and I just received a letter from Maureen Spender and now I’m very concerned.  I didn’t know about any of this.”

Now how many people don’t know that the community plan process is taking place?

If you (the Township of Langley and its planners) don’t fully enlighten residents about these important and life changing events then don't be surprised if you are then tarred with an unseemly association with developers and their money - much like the corrupt developer/city practices that happed in Surrey over the last few decades...

http://www.tol.ca/Portals/0/FileShare/ComDev/2013-03-08_BF_Consultation_Report_OH1_sml.pdf

Most want to live in a big house - really, no kidding??

The township planners should take note of this article.  Maybe this with create a small chink in their thinking...

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Most+Metro+Vancouver+would+choose+house+suburbs+over+luxury+apartment+survey/8153112/story.html

“We were a bit surprised that, despite all the talk about densification and walkability, despite the fact that condos have taken over from houses in many parts of our region, the overwhelming choice was for a large house on a big suburban property,” said Elizabeth Wilson, content editor for REW.

Casino in Langley Township?

Q:  When did casinos become the must have for communities?

A:  When local government started getting a cut of the gambling money.

Have you ever walked through a casino and watched the gambling zombies spend money with glazed eyes and a lost sense of self awareness.  It's sad.

It is also sad that governments have so lost their moral sense of awareness that they think it is a good thing to feed off of these people in order to increase revenue instead of using basic accounting practices to run a township.  In a tizzy of head-screwiness they even thought of putting one in Brookswood!  In a family oriented residential area!  This type of thinking shows how desperate the township is to generate more funds so they can then build more things that will then have to be maintained.

Casinos don't add much to the community.  Most of the money they generate goes elsewhere.  The supporters will say that casinos help pay for charities but they wreck more lives than they help due to individuals losing money to gambling addiction, money they could have used to pay for high taxes and bridge tolls.

Btw, what a marketing deal giving 10% of the yearly proceeds to local government is.

Heroin pushers do something similar to get things started...

Cost of policing...

I never understood why municipalities don't make use of mobile staff security guards.  They can provide a presence, they become the eyes and ears of police (who are spread thin) and can report incidents without getting directly involved.  They are also much less expensive than the police.

There is definitely an undesirable segment of society moving into the Langleys and along with it it's attendant criminal aspect.  When the risk is low security can pester vagrants and film drug dealers (no drug dealer likes flash bubs going off in their direction)  encouraging them to get-out-of-town.

Let's face it, if we aren't proactive and take a stand parts of the Langleys shamefully will become slums.  If you go with the socialist agenda and provide shelters much more of a bedraggled and amoral fringe element will be attracted here and slums will be guaranteed.

The time to act is now, for Langley is an attractive venue for these people and some parts are already becoming seedy with visible (out in the open) drug deals and dumpster-divers.  I know, it is heartless of me, but you wont think so when your kids start finding syringes and condoms around your neighborhoods.

Btw, every business should have a lock on their dumpsters unless they want to keep cleaning up the mess a dumpster-diver makes.  Further you are responsible to clean-up that mess and you can get a hefty fine for littering if you don't do so and Langley bylaws decide they are going to notice...  After all who wants your garbage flying around the town on the wind after some recently entrenched vagrant digs through your dumpster.

http://www.langleyadvance.com/news/Summit+tackles+rising+police+costs/7853325/story.html

Welcome to Brookswood boys!

Make yourselves at home.  Part of the cost of urbanization...

http://www.langleyadvance.com/news/Camera+captures+suspects/7864719/story.html

Brookwood's 'Options'

** Take note that in each of these 'options' the population will be over 30,000 people.  The low density Subdivision option has a very similar planned population level when compared with the other two options.  That should indicate the Township's overriding motive - target tax base for the area. 

They probably started this whole thing with something like this (think: meeting with the smoking man in X Files)...

(Gruff voice) 'We need 35,000 more tax payers in Langley! (pause as cigar smoke dissipates...)

(Young enthusiastic voice) Well Sir., how about Brookswood, we can put them all there??

(Gruff voice) Great idea ____________!  All they have there is trees and they don't vote! (looking appreciatively at his young protégé)  ____________ I knew there was a reason why we brought you on board!  Now let's talk about your commission...'

A man in a shadowed corner from the real estate consulting company silently smiles and his nervous fingers twitch...

Oh the nefarious drama of it all.

 I also find it interesting that the lowest density (Subdivision) option will end up developing the whole darn area!  That is with the exception of that pesky ALR thing.  At least the area will then be developed and done with, for you just know that with the other two options they aren't going to stop with just 'nodes' and 'pockets' - interesting choice of words btw, sounds better than 'clots' and 'cavities'. Oh, it's fun to spin.

And as Mr. Tinney indicated at the October info session: "Development can actually be good for the aquifer."  So all this impending development IS good news!  Yeah!!

Subdivision" would Extend the suburban style of density south, with lots staying roughly around 10,000 square feet. Population would be about 33,650, and parts of southeast-ern Brookswood and Fernridge would retain lower density.

**Note:  10,000 square foot lots are easier to subdivide in the future.

Enhanced Centres" would see pockets of multifamily, including condos and townhouses, at the existing commercial nodes, at 200th Street and 208th Street on 40th Avenue, and at 32nd and 24th Avenues on 200th. This would leave larger areas with low density, with 44 per cent of land with half-acre or larger lots. Population would be about 32,000.

 























Centres and corridors" would use the same style of nodes, but would add higher density along parts of 200th Street heading north-south, and along smaller stretches of 24th and 32nd Avenues. Population would be about 36,000.

It's like you're buying a car or something.  Except in this case the smiling salespeople back at the dealership aren't going to listen when something bad develops....

City Planners always do what they want to do.

That is the way it has always been and they will not change for this town - I guess I shouldn't be calling it a town any more, they have chosen sprawl so it must unfortunately be called a city.  The public consultations are just there for show and as a result Brookswood will never be the same afterwards for there is money to be made and very little land in the region.  If people don't sell they will eventually be pushed out by constant (bigger than wage increase) yearly jumps in taxes - for property tax is not based on the ability to pay or on income, it is based on the house value.  It is also based on the Township's need to pay for extravagant municipal spending on things we don't really need and the resultant cost of maintenance for what is built, for the purchase of new things instead of maintaining what exists, for air conditioned lawn mowers for a region that rarely needs air conditioning.  Eventually the planners and the developers will tear down all the trees and Brookswood will become a place of cement apartment buildings and townhouses.  Those of us who bought here before the big real estate boom will have to leave, even if we wanted to live here all our lives, replaced by others arriving on our soil with much more money than we can possibly make who will constantly push up prices.

There is no fairness, no dignity or morals when it comes to development and the back-scratching business of local government, there is just growth and progress, and of course profit...

Townships lays out its vision for Brookswood

http://www.langleyadvance.com/Townships+lays+vision+Brookswood/7832091/story.html

Brookswood residents eager for plan input

 http://www.langleytimes.com/news/187197081.html

It's not that they are eager, with 300 people showing up I think it has more to do with fear...

What about the fourth question: 'Make no changes to the existing plan'?  I guess they wouldn't want to ask that question would they? That is to say that the residents of Brookswood are being corralled and molded towards a goal, the planners are asking limited questions the way they want to ask them.  They are not really giving people any choice at all.  In the end the Langley Township planners will do things the way they want and they will then point to the public consultation process for justification even though they manipulated the whole process.  I think they know that a large amount of people in the community do not want any further development but they can't have it tallied and written down for that wouldn't lend credence to their case - and that is carte blanche on behalf of the developers.

HEY LANGLEY, STOP BEING LIKE SURREY!

How much of a messy sprawl do you want to create??

Brookswood/Fernridge Community Plan needs input

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/186200051.html

Langley Township Council: Selling our future

I think this shows the way they think.  Screw the long term residents, let's build stuff and get our names on a bronze plaque!

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Save+ecologically+unique+forest+Langley+urged/7636559/story.html

I love this quote:

Jordan urged protection of the site, in part, because Langley’s “unchecked development at the urban/rural interface is creating an increasingly dysfunctional, fragmented ecological patchwork of mixed density residential dwellings interspersed among remaining natural areas.”

Yup, sounds like Surrey all over again...

Not your sandbox.

It's fun to plan and build things, and I'm sure that's why planners chose the career and gained lofty educational levels to do so.  It's fun, you feel like you are making a difference, you feel like you are building a better community and you feel like you can help people.  You and the plans you make have far reaching effects on the community and that makes you feel important.  You will get notoriety and the admiration of your piers for striving for excellence   You may even win some awards.  But there is one fundamental rule that you must adhere to, and that is if the established community you are affecting with your plans reject them then you must stop making those plans.  And no amount of spin or prescribed future benefit will do, after all you have a moral responsibility to the existing community you serve - not to communities that don't live here, not to future communities but to the present tax paying residents (residents being people who own their own homes and who live here).  It is our sandbox so stop stepping in it.

Langley Crackhouse

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=2ececa06-20b9-4bbb-87a1-9f40d2531f78

The above story is similar to what is happening in our back yard and a number of other areas of Brookswood with homes owned by holding companies and developers.  The owner of the house by us (on 42nd Ave. just east of 208th) doesn't seem to care who lives there or about the community his house sits in - it is confirmed that the owner lives in India.  This place is an epicenter for problems, and the police and other officials have been there frequently.  Just last week we had a screaming and bloody druggie overdosing outside our homes on 43a Ave. at 1 am. - he was carrying break-in implements and stolen items in his back-pack.  :)  There has been a sudden influx of property crime in the Fern Ridge area after 20+ years of relative quiet so it is cringe-worthy to think that impending development plans are bringing a dangerous and morally compromised under-society to Brookswood.  It's important to remember that there are many kids walking to and from school along 42nd so there is a serious concern.  The police had a hard time with the druggie who was violent and felt no pain other than his direct personal hell, so it is scary to think about what he could have done to a lone child walking along the street.  Is this the new Brookswood or the new Langley?  Is Whalley moving here?  Are these the type of people who are being encouraged to move to Langley?  What are the two Langleys doing to discourage them from setting-up here?

Comments:

HC NodroneJanuary 18, 2013 at 6:56 AM

I know this house and I think it just a block or so EAST of 208th, not West. I agree that ownership is important, however, we do need more density near existing infrastructure.

David M ChambersJanuary 18, 2013 at 8:38 AM

Oops, fixed. But what kind of density? I grew up in a welfare town in rural Ontario. They were jealous of the people who had work but would scream up a cloud if they had to do so as well. Most of the people in Brookswood are hard working Canadians or Canadians who have retired after a life of hard work and they love their Country and their community. If we could only have people here that feel the same then yes, but not people who are going to live off the rest of us, or destroy the nice community we have built. It seems that we are not doing enough to prevent community destroyers like some individuals in the house above from coming here.

AnonymousFebruary 8, 2013 at 8:25 AM

My freinds live down the road from that house, they stalk the properties on that street getting ready to strike, they already have jumped people walking past at night and pepper sprayed them, punched and kicked them, looking for cigarettes. They are constantly "tweaking" looking for their next high. That house IS frequented by trhe police, but nothing ever comes of it. Get out Crackheads!

Important to pay attention to what's going on in your back yard

http://www.langleytimes.com/opinion/175678471.html

By Jim McGregor - Langley Times
Published: October 24, 2012 2:00 PM
Updated: October 24, 2012 2:27 PM
 
I don’t always pay attention to what is going on in the community, if it’s not in my back yard. But now something is happening in my back yard up in Brookswood. Maybe I should take a look. It is somewhat reminiscent of 15 years ago in Willoughby, when residents there expressed concern over proposed development.

Back then, while delegations were appearing at council, chainsaws were revving. While public hearings were being organized, bulldozers were being hired and while petitions were being carried door to door, the water and sewer pipe was being stock piled. You see, once the development signs go up, it’s pretty much a done deal.

lf you sit in a municipal budget meeting you will see the department heads presenting their wants and wishes. All valid requests, except you’ll never convince me that a new park is more important than a new fire hall. The requests are totalled up and added to the operating costs, wage increases etc., and that becomes the money they need.

On the other side of the document is the money coming in from taxpayers, grants and funds in reserve. It is never enough to pay for all the stuff they need. If you cut items from the wish lists, staff is unhappy. If you raise taxes, the public is unhappy. The only choice left is to entice more development and increase the tax base. More people, more money.
The next step is the Joni Mitchell plan where ‘You take all the trees, put ’em in a tree museum, and charge the people a dollar and a half just to see ’em.’

The Brookswood development may eventually bring 30,000 more people into the area. Are they going to make 16 Avenue four lanes and funnel them to work in Vancouver that way? Or are they going to choke and squeeze them onto 200 Street? I guess I have to go to a meeting to find out.
Will they tell me I will get sewer and sidewalks after paying my taxes for 20 years, or will those amenities just be for the new folks who have no investment in the community at all? I guess I’d better go ask someone. We do have good people on our council and they will listen and answer. Unfortunately there is also big money talking. Maybe even in a voice louder than yours and mine.
Our problem in Langley is we plan backwards. Our roads and infrastructure should go in first, then bring in people. We need a moratorium on development. We need to disband TransLink, who have no idea that people live south of the Fraser, and clean up the traffic mess the current taxpayers are in. To add more people to a bad situation makes no sense.

You only have to sit in the embarrassing situations on 208 Street, Crush Crescent, Glover Road and Highway 1 to understand we can’t move the people who live here now. With all due respect to my friend the Minister of Transportation, the new Port Mann and all the proposed overpasses should have been in place 10 years ago.

Watch, listen, go to the meetings, and ask questions, no matter where you live. It might not be in your back yard today but it could be tomorrow. At least that’s what McGregor says.
As such, they are 10 years behind and will do nothing for future development south of the Fraser.

Just because there is empty land doesn't mean you have to fill it up.

Density vs. Policing

The problem with increasing density is that the the police can't keep up.  Due to the high cost of policing, cities and townships never seem to provide adequate funds for the police to meet the increased challenges and complexities within a rapidly growing area - part of growing pains.  Unfortunately these growing pains allow more organized and more sophisticated crime to take root.  You have seen this take place over the past decade within Langley and a number of people have died violently because of these activities.  Now people may say that the organized crime and gangs have nothing to do with the rapid influx of development in Langley, then I say: who do you think they feed off of other than the tens of thousands of new people now living here?

Compressive Housing

def. Compressive housing

n.         1.  Planning and constructing as many houses or living spaces possible on a parcel of land therefore increasing the livable density of an area.  This includes townhouses, row housing, condominiums, or any type of multifamily dwelling that is built up or stacked vertically or horizontally with very little or no space between units.   This type of housing is often used to increase the tax base of an area or to maximize a developer’s profits.

2.   Packing as many people as you can into a living space.

3.   Reducing lot sizes to accommodate many multifamily dwellings. 

4.   A  favela.
 

Brazilian Favela...