Editor's Note: Speak about the devil, ethics, just as in the previous postings to this one! Cllr. Kim Richter was the only one on Langley Township council to vote against this historicaly largest and most destructive ever development to wildlife in the Township's history, EVER. Well done boys - dedicated to the "Good Ole boy's Club " on Township council! What a great addition to have voted in rookie cllrs. Bateman and Fox just 3 years ago to provide a new, non-conformist & distinct voice on council - NOT !!!!!

P.S. As said before tell you neighbours & friends it's very easy who to vote for or especially not in the Nov Township council election, vote out all the dinks (literally, if you get my drift). That makes it real easy when you tell your neighbours who and who NOT to vote for dosn't it?

LFP Editor | 04.13.08 - 12:33 pm | #

Note: This postings 2 pictures are taken in the massive BFW developement area discussed by Cathleen. Look at them now you won't see this pastoral wooded area there again!
LFP Editor | 04.13.08 - 12:54 pm | #

Soon when you drive south on glover road off hwy 1 and look right to the beautifull escarpment (Willoughby escarpment) treed hills you will see only rowhouses just like in coquitlam off the port mann bridge. In Ontario they protec escarpments. In Township we destroy the only one we have.

Edited By Siteowner
Anonymous | 04.13.08 - 1:16 pm | #

Some of us may remember these photos . . .


http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/...s/fade/ fade.htm

Maybe you may have archieve photos that could be done for Langley? Or maybe the readers can send you some.
I am looking in mine to see if I have any. They only go back to 1990 though...
Susan Semonick | 04.14.08 - 8:52 am | #

Besides raping the remaining beauty of the willoughby area, we will have more pressure on the SAME OLD roads from the added population that will move into the area. We will also have an increase in the likelyhood of flash flooding in the flat lands to the east. The township will also experience more demand for fresh water supplies for the area, ergo more strain on our already overworked aquifers. There's more!

More fireman. More policemen. More city maintenance workers. More parkland keepers. Is it any wonder that township residents have already been advised of excessive tax increases in the coming years? I see this as no less than poor planning by our Township Council. Langley Township needs to slow its residential development pace, and get its priorities in order regarding the growing gaps in its infrastructure.

There is no rocket science needed to see that devlopers do their thing, and make a fair profit and move on and do it again...and again. That's fair enough, and understandable, but meanwhile the established residents of the township are called upon to meet the costs of servicing the many areas of new development, because the tax revenues from them do not cover the actual costs to service them. There's something wrong with that picture!

Let's hear from those who might disagree. There may not be much democracy around the council table at township hall these days, but it's open season on all opinions here.
Methinks | 04.14.08 - 11:17 pm | #

Today's Times (Apr 16th) has a few statemente from Langley Township Staff that seem to indicate that the latest version of the Water Management Plan is ready for sale.

Based on a few quotes from township staff members, it still appears that ground water will be the chief source of supply due to the cost of bringing in GVRD water. If that is the true cost today, imagine what it will be when they realize that groundwater can no longer do the job.

There is no way that simply controlling the use of ground water will solve the supply problem. When we add the needed quantity of water to cover the growth rate of the township, we must face the fact that even today we are using groundwater faster than we replace it. Logically that means that we must INCREASE our ability to catch and store rainwater by some means. There is no mention of this though, and the opposite situation is what is occuring.

More and more farm acreage is being clear cut than ever when we look around the township. Among the wreckage of stumps and rubble we can often see the remains of a tiny stream bed that once fed the major creeks of the neighborhood. One of these stares with its naked eye at us right at the corner of 248th Street and Fraser Highway. This is all contributing to the loss of natural water retention and aquifer replentishment, yet somehow it is allowed to continue as though there is no connection to water management!

If there is no change of attitude at Langley Township Hall we will likely face huge tax increases sometime in the future to bring the township up to speed regarding fresh water supply.
Meanwhile Mayor Alberts spends his time with all things that glitter, but does nothing for what is required for basic infrastructure. The Nero of our time perhaps?
Methinks | 04.18.08 - 5:40 pm | #

Dead on Methinks. I think grounwater should be reserved only for rural Langley non GVRD and non sewer people exclusively. We in rural langley do replenish the aquifer unlike non rural residents. We are our own closed loop system on water supply and replenishment.

All other langley residents and businesses on GVRD water with sewers must be forced to use GVRD water exclusively. Sucking up our aguifer water to be mixed with urban sewer water users and then drained through GVRD sewers is sheer folly. Start a movement on this Methinks and sign me up gladly.
Water Folly | 04.18.08 - 8:38 pm | #

Not a bad idea Water Folly, but there is an easier way of getting some sense into the actions of township council. Vote out the whole damn lot of Kurt's faithful drones. A group of free thinking rookies with average intelligence could easily do a much better job.
Methinks | 04.19.08 - 11:28 am | #

Water Folly, I think that your suggestion that only rural Langley should be fed from the local aquifers might be worth further attention. It is probably a fact that the cost of providing water mains to all of rural Langley would be too costly, but if the township continues to use the water underneath the green areas of the township, what will Langley Township be when the aquifers run dry?

A farm of any size or type, can't justify its existance if adequate water is not availabele. Will the designation "Too dry for agriculture" become a new method of rezoning ALR lands?

The present drain on township aquifers is 9.5 million gallons per day on average. When Langley grows half as large again to more than 150,000 residents (as planned), we could be looking at 15 million gallons a day coming out of the groundwater supply if we don't start now to look elsewhere for water. Keep in mind that it is a proven fact that even now we use up the aquifer water faster than it is replentished!

Water management is really only one aspect of where the township could easily continue to go off the rails. The present administration of Langley Township, led by Kurt Alberts, is hell bent on projects that have lots of glitter it seems. By that I mean projects that have a description such as: "BIGGER THAN", "GREATER THAN"' "WILL HOLD MORE THAN", "MAKES US PROUD" and so on, but hang on a minute or two! Where the heck is the meat and potatos of living today, AND in the future? I'm speaking of ample water supplies, safe and servicable roadways, decent public transportation, to name a few.

I suppose glitter can be counted on when stroking the emotions of the electorate, but there can easily be s soboring moment when suddenly that same body of people realise that playing catch-up for tremendously costly services will be a drain on ALL of us. If we wait too long for change, that sobering moment could be upon us and deal us a heavy blow.
Methinks | 04.24.08 - 11:46 am | #