Message from the Vice-Chair

The South Coast Panel is responsible for the Commission region with the smallest land area but the greatest concentration of agricultural production. Public scrutiny is correspondingly intense, yet one of the greatest threats to farmland in the South Coast region attracts little public scrutiny. Because of the pace of new building in the Lower Mainland (notably the Fraser Valley and Greater Vancouver Regional Districts), vast amounts of soil are excavated and must be taken to disposal sites. Tipping fees are attractive to many landowners, with the result that much of the soil "fill" is spread over prime farmland without any authorization and with potential long-term impacts to the suitability of that land for producing food for our growing population. The South Coast Panel and Commission staff have spent much time with local government staff, who are often frustrated by the fact that fill moves freely across municipal and regional district boundaries. Enforcement is only part of the solution; we must also be proactive in finding places where the deposit of fill can be beneficial, such as in rehabilitation of gravel workings or in providing cover material for sanitary landfills.

The South Coast region is also experiencing a demand for numerous transportation corridors, some of which must cross farmland. We also deal with a broad list of agencies responsible for transportation planning, including local governments, TransLink, the Provincial "Gateway" Program, the BC Ministry of Transportation, the Federal Border Infrastructure Program, and Transport Canada's Roberts Bank Rail Corridor study. Of these, one of the most challenging has been that part of the proposed "South Fraser Perimeter Road" which would pass through farmland in Delta. The Panel has reviewed some preliminary information and Commission staff have had opportunities to raise agricultural issues during the required environmental screening, but the Panel has not yet received a formal application to construct the road through the ALR. The Panel hopes this preliminary work may result in a greater awareness of the issues facing Panel and the ALR.

Map of South Coast Panel Region

Area of Panel Region: 3,591,491 hectares

Area of ALR: 175,319 hectares

Panel Statistics (April 1, 2006 - March 31, 2007)

Applications of Interest

The following selected examples illustrate how the Agricultural Land Commission panels responded to proposals to change the ALR boundary or to requests for subdivision or non-farm use of ALR lands. Applications are considered on the merits of each case at hand in the context of the Commission's mandate and take into account an assessment of factors related to agricultural capability and suitability and impact upon the ALR.

In February 2004 the Barnston Island Majority Land Owners and Resident's Committee (BIMLORC) applied to exclude approximately 441 ha of land from the ALR. Amongst the evidence presented, the applicant argued that there is a need within the Greater Vancouver area for more land to accommodate industrial development.

Following a period of time for assessment, on site viewings and two deferrals of the application, the Panel held a public information meeting on June 19, 2006 to provide interested parties with the opportunity to express their views as they related to the proposal. Approximately 275 people attended. On July 19, 2006 the Panel denied the application believing the lands have agricultural capability, that the lands are suitable for agricultural use, that the community need argument was not applicable and that the proposal was inconsistent with the objective of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to preserve agricultural land.

In September 2006, the Panel considered an application from Canada Lands Company CLC Limited to exclude 55.2 ha from the ALR to facilitate development of a trade and exhibition centre, urban residential and mixed-use development, and major City of Richmond park facilities. The application was submitted following an agreement that had been reached between the City of Richmond, the Musqueam Indian Band, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Canada Lands Company CLC Limited for the future disposition of the subject lands if the land was removed from the ALR. The Panel understood the interests of Musqueam as well as that the mandate of Canada Lands Company CLC Limited is to optimize the financial and community value obtained from strategic properties deemed surplus to federal program purposes.

The application advanced an argument for community need, but only for the park/open space and trade and exhibition centre components. The Panel did not believe the City had conducted the necessary analyses or provided the level of detail that would warrant further consideration of community need. Furthermore, the City asserted that the property was not suitable for agricultural use because it is surrounded by four-lane arterial streets. Contrary to that argument, the Commission believed the existing road network served to enhance agricultural suitability by providing a buffer to adjacent lands.

The Panel found that the land was suitable for agricultural use and that it would be inappropriate to consider excluding land with prime agricultural capability from the ALR.

During 2006/07 the Panel considered a number of applications for placement of fill as a non-farm use of ALR land. While proposals for placement of fill do occur beyond this Panel region, the pressure to place fill on ALR land in the Lower Fraser Valley is significant due to the vibrant construction sector of the economy in and around BC's largest urban based region. The total volume of fill proposed to be placed on ALR land in 17 applications was approximately 390,000 m3. To put this into perspective, this would equate to approximately 65, 000 dump truck loads.

In reviewing fill applications, the Panel has become increasingly concerned about the potential negative impact on the long-term agricultural potential of land. The placement of fill can also have profound impacts on neighbouring lands. For example, fill placed on one property may alter natural drainage patterns resulting in increased water accumulations on adjacent lands. The Panel now seeks to ensure that it has sufficient technical information in order to properly assess an application.

Of the 17 applications considered in 2006/07, the Panel made decisions on 7 proposals of which only 3 were given approval. Ten other applications were deferred pending the receipt of additional technical reports and details.

Issues of Interest

The following selected example illustrates how the integration and coordination of interests regarding land use planning and resource management require ongoing dialogue and collaboration between local governments and the Agricultural Land Commission.

In November 2006, the District of Maple Ridge Council adopted an Official Community Plan (OCP), following a thorough review of its needs, including a model review of the role of agriculture in the community. The OCP identifies the need for a commercial and industrial lands strategy, but the OCP specifically defers that study in order that the first item in the comprehensive strategy will be the development of an Agriculture Plan.

Council has established Maple Ridge's first Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Commission along with the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands will be represented and will assist Maple Ridge with its agricultural planning. From early on, the Commission worked collaboratively with Maple Ridge from the point of view of supporting the development of an OCP that considered agricultural interests and the ALR.