Metro Vancouver has backed off from a push to restrict the size of homes on agricultural land, but directors have renewed a call for B.C. legislation governing where the house can go and limiting the residential footprint.
The move, promoted by Surrey directors and approved by the Metro Vancouver board Friday, was hailed by some as a “middle-ground” approach to protect farmland across the region, while allowing municipalities to dictate land use on farms in their communities. A third of Surrey’s land mass is agricultural.
The decision by the Metro Vancouver board Friday comes about a year after directors raised concerns that homes, some as big as 15,000 square feet on five- and 10-acre lots and often coupled with tennis courts, swimming pools and illegal secondary suites, were being built on farmland and would lead to the loss of valuable agricultural land for future food production.
Surrey director Linda Hepner, a city councillor, said restricting the footprint and setting specific sites for homes on agricultural land would prevent houses being built in the middle of the property. Under provincial guidelines, she said, the residential footprint would be confined to half an acre for the main house and a quarter-acre for a second home.
“Then we’re doing what we intend to do – to protect the farmland,” she said. “If they want to put a tennis court there or a swimming pool or a house, the footprint is the footprint.”
But Delta Mayor Lois Jackson warned directors to be careful. Delta is the only Metro municipality to restrict house sizes on agricultural land, limiting them to 5,000 square feet on 10 acres and 3,200 square feet on five-acre parcels. Richmond also restricts homes to a maximum setback of 50 metres from the road front, but Coun. Harold Steves said his city often turns a blind eye to those rules when they’re faced with developers.
Get breaking National news
Both Steves and Jackson said many homes are being built on agricultural land as “country homes” or leased to modified farmers to get a tax break. “We should be asking the province who these modified farmers are,” Steves said. “A large number of them are not farmers at all.”
Jackson noted the size of the house also affects the size of the sewer system, which also has to be kept on the residential footprint. “We’re trying to save as much land as possible,” she said. “Our position has been to save absolutely every square inch of good soil you’ve got. I know there’s a lot of people who would say they want a bigger house but you can’t always have that.”
North Vancouver City Mayor Darrell Mussatto said if people want to live in big houses, they should buy in the city so Metro can “maintain some of the best farmland in the world.”
But others disagreed. Some argued Metro should not get involved in what they see as a provincial issue, while others said half the municipalities sitting around the Metro board table don’t even have any farmland.
Vancouver Coun. Raymond Louie said the size of the development doesn’t matter as long as it’s constrained on a specific site.
Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan said while many of the municipalities don’t have any farmland, it’s good to have a regional perspective on such issues. “We frequently talk about a lot of things w know nothing about. Pitt Meadows gets to vote on highrises and they don’t have any,” he said.
Comments