Lets unnaturalize the swamp This way there might be less breedinggrounds for the west nile virus and money will be freed up for other healthcareneeds.Fill has to be dumped somewhere. This is a central and controled dumpsite. Less trucking good for roads.
Aman | 04.12.06 - 9:05 pm | #

Cathleen,

I'm very familiar with the site and have a number of comments. First, the entire area (not just the lake but the surrounding area up to Noel Booth School, was previously part of a Ministry of Transportation gravel pit. FYI, Noel Booth Park is also an old GVRD gravel pit (which explains why it is so flat, as is the passive park down the road. The only area not completely mined was a small area around Anderson Creek.

The natural grade in that area is about 1-3 m higher than what you see now. The mining of aggregates reduced grade in the area substantially. Those residences near by that are adding fill are actually bringing their properties back up to the natural grade for the area. This will help their drainage as their original drain rock was mined in the days of yore.

The “lake” as you call it, is actually, a case of a gravel pit that was dug too deep. What you are seeing is the Langley-Brookswood aquifer (the one neighbours use to get their water) that has been exposed due to the mining of aggregates in the past. The real aquatic habitat (and one that should be protected) is Anderson Creek (that is the creek you cross over behind Noel Booth Park when you go to the school). Anderson is a Class “A” watercourse and needs to be fully protected.

As for the “lake” (I will call it a pond from here on in) it is potential habitat but has never been hooked into Anderson so it has no native fish population and as a result, DFO has no interest in it. In my walks in the area I haven’t seen any amphibians. If you look more carefully you will see that while some trees have established themselves, as habitats go it is pretty sparse with lots of early colonizers, scotch broom and himalayan blackberry and few native species. Because the topsoil was removed as part of the aggregate mining the native flora really hasn’t had a chance to return around the pond. You will note that as wetlands go there are almost no cattails nor other aquatic plants. In its current condition the pond is too shallow and without the necessary cover of aquatic plants is not great habitat for amphibians (who need shade and protection from predators). As an amateur ecologist I see the pond as a trap for any amphibians because once they migrate to the area they are utterly exposed to predators and as it currently stand the place is probably a net drain on the local amphibian population.

Ultimately, something should be done to the site, either it should be developed or a serious ecosystem restoration project undertaken. Right now the land is fallow and while it serves a thriving small bird and small mammal population little else lives there. With some good work and planning it could be great but right now it is just a place where people dump their old furniture and dogs can go to play in the water.
Blair | 04.13.06 - 8:59 am | #

I cannot comment about the new proposed site which Langley Township is considering to allow a permit to use as a fill site. I can, through my experience, comment about how Langley Township, handled some aspects of the pemitted fill site ajoining my property.( This permit has not been listed on the "properties permitted to receive fill within the Township of Langley" but it does have a permit posted) This site had approximately 700-800 dump truck loads of soil dumped before a letter was circulated to the neighbours that a permit was being applied for at Langley Township. The letter that was received stated "The application indicates that an approximate total of 500 truck loads of material with an average depth of 1.5 metres are to be deposited." I wondered if this meant the neighbour was adding another 500 truck loads in addition to the 700-800 already placed or was correcting the fact there was no permit before the first loads were placed. The soil deposit area sketch which came with the community letter made sense at that time that this deposit should not effect my property which was already at a lower elevation with both properties being on a slope. There was already a ditch in place to collect and drain the water run off from the indicated soil deposit area to the storm sewer at the road. Therefore, I did not write in with any concerns within the 30 day time limit of receiving the notification letter. I felt, what the owner beside us decided to do with his property was his business, as long as it didn't effect us negatively. The sketch of the deposit area and 500 truck loads did not seem to be an issue.

What happended after the permit was issued is a completely different story.

To make a very complex story shorter and more simple to understand I will put some of my experience into point form.

-The dump trucks drove past, about 25-30 feet away from my house, at a rate of average 2 trucks every five minutes day after day.
- The dust created was so thick my family and my livestock were choking in it.
- My 5 year old son, who is extra sensitive to dust, became very, very sick and would cough to a point that he would vomit.
- I had many sleepless nights along with my son suffering with his reaction to the relentless dust.
- I went and spoke directly with the person operating the CAT leveling the soil and told him about the dust problem. He said he would get a dust sweeper to clean their driveway. That sweeper never came!
- The fill site next door filled many areas not designated in the original sketch.
- The noise level from the trucks and heavy equipment all day long was very annoying and but it is allowed from 7:am-7:pm, Monday to Friday, month after month. It ruined much of our spring and summer enjoyment of the outdoors. (we stayed in most of the time because of the dust and noise) The soil deposit has now permanently increased the level of noise from their property to ours. Their vehicle noise reflects off their soil deposit, like a berm, towards our property.
- The CAT driver opened a bucket wide and deep drainage ditch designed to drain onto our property at the back the fill site property. (Where they had not indicated the deposit of soil in their sketch)It was filled back in when I reminded Township this ditch would drain to the creek at the back of our property.
- I informed the person in charge of this site at Township that the letter circulated to neighbours said approx. 500 truck loads would be deposited, and that thousands of truck loads had been deposited.
- I was told that anything over 500 truck loads was between the Township and the fill site operators. They were now going to fill to grade as indicated on the letter to neighbours.(I don't know if these grades have been approved as safe on a slope without a retaining wall)
- Through the winter 05/06 our property and our other neighbours were flooded with rain runoff at numerous times.( This had never happened in the previous few years) Our driveway gravel washed away leaving a 10"-12" gulley to drive over with our vehicles. Landscaping was also damaged and still to date has not been repaired.
- I have found three areas which concentrated runoff is draining or is set up to drain onto our property from soil filled areas.
- I am worried as to the safety of the almost 5000 truck loads which were deposited on the slope above my house and property.
- I saw 4 full semi. sized loads of red ceder dumped which I never saw any removed.
- We are on well water and part of this deposit is only about 30 feet away from it. There was a noticable difference in our drinking water after the deposit was placed. ( I questioned drinking it for the first time)

Many questions come to mind after my negative experience with this fill site. Some of which are:

1.) Where did this soil come from? ( point of origin)
2.) Is the red ceder buried because it didn't appear to get hauled away?
3.) Where is the engineering report?
4.) Why is nobody monitering how many loads are actually being placed?
5.)If a property owner wishes to change the natural surface drainage of their land, then shouldn't that property owner also be responsible to make sure that new "man made" drainage patterns are are dealt with on site? (People should not be allowed to correct their drainage problems by creating drainage problems for ajoining properties)
6.) Once a permit has been issued why can the permit holder change things from what the neibourhood was notified would happen?

To sum up, it appears that Langley Township needs to get rid of soil from all the developing areas. They are looking for places to dump it.

I believe this is the way it works. People are making a lot of money at the soil deposit business. The developers need to pay to get rid of the soil when they scrape and dig out an area for building. The dump truck operators haul it away and need to pay to dump their load. The money is made when a free "fill site" is found to dump these loads. The equipment operators offer property owners fill, labour and equipment to make so called "improvements" to their property in exchange for a place to dump. If the owner gives permission these operators ( with inside knowledge) get all the applications approved. Then for every truck that dumps on that fill site that operator and the township gets paid. The more truck loads they can dump, the more money that is made. If you own the trucking company, equipment and have access to a property to dump on, you save you own dump fees, charge others and place as much fill as you can.(more $$$$)

Brushing off complaints from people that are negatively impacted by fill sites has monetary advantages for some, but at what cost to others and/or the environment?
Lucy | 04.28.06 - 9:37 pm | #