DocumentsCorrespondenceNov 1, 2021Pages 52–63
Correspondence — Peter Howland (Comments on Westhills proposed changes and traffic)
Resident submission with comments on proposed changes to Westhills CD3 zone, traffic recommendations, and concerns about inclusion of Langford Lake in public space calculations.
Key facts
- Author: Peter Howland
- Concerns: potential inclusion of Langford Lake in public space allocation; traffic and safety implications of proposed road connections
- Request: careful consideration of park locations and protection of ecological connections
Correspondence — Peter Howland (Comments on Westhills proposed changes and traffic)
From: Peter Howland
Sent: September 13, 2021 9:47 AM
To: Trina Cruikshank; Langford Planning General Mailbox
Cc: Matthew Baldwin; Leah Stohmann
Subject: RE: Westhills Report
Hello Trina and the Planning Committee,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to the Westhills Comprehensive Development Zone.
I’ve had an opportunity to take a look a the staff report in the Link below. My wife (Mary Jane), my daughter, and have lived in Westhills (on Parkdale Creek Gardens) for the part three years and will likely be directly impacted by some of the proposals included in the staff report.
Below are some of our comments related to the report.
Page 2 of 11, Changes to Area 5, We agree that the construction of a clubhouse at the Jodie Lunn Park is a good idea. The park is great and we have been regular users. However, we don’t agree that the area presently shown as Area 5 “Langford Lake Foreshore” in Appendix B should include allowances for any commercial activities. This could allow for the unintentional development along the lake shore. We (and I expect that most residents of Langford) would be opposed to development between the rail corridor and the lake.
Page 5 of 11, Removal of LEED‐ND compliance. While the removal of the LEED‐ND certification from the MDRA is understood, it is unfortunate that Westhills appears to have strayed from attempting to be leader in more sustainable development, (e.g. district energy). Presently, all new construction appears to be destructive, with little thought to new sustainable options. The District Energy system was built over 12 years ago; did the system work, has it been a benefit to the environment and the community? If yes why is it not being replicated? Has anyone asked the questions? Are there any options being proposed or implemented? e.g. better transit access within Westhills, charging stations for electric cars, parking for car shares?
I would urge the committee to push for Westhills and all development within Langford to strive to higher standards in sustainability. Most new developments in Langford (including Westhills) are all centered on cars and as a result traffic in Langford is often extremely congested.
Page 5 of 11 – Regarding a road connection between Parkdale Road and West Shore Parkway, it is requested that the City ensure that when approving new roads that appropriate traffic calming measures are implemented during the design process, opposed to after the fact.
Efforts along Alouette Dr. are greatly appreciated as they appears to have reduced some of the high speeds and high volumes of traffic, however it’s our understanding that it took years to implement and only after a significant effort on the part of the residents on Alouette. If a new road is to be construct at Parkdale Rd. appropriate measures need to be implemented to ensure the safety of kids accessing Lighthouse School and the trail to Westhills playground.
Page 11 of 11 – Appendix D. It appears that Westhills is including a portion Langford Lake within the proposed public space. It is not clear if Westhills is attempting to include a portion of the Lake within the 40% allocation for Public space. This area should be excluded.
General Traffic Concerns / Recommendations
It’s our understanding that last week a child was struck in the crosswalk on Langford Parkway. Most roads in the area are congested with traffic often travelling at high speeds. There are a number of road infrastructure improvements that we would like the council to consider:
- Traffic calming and/or better signage on West Shore Parkway (Raceway?) for traffic travelling north and entering the 40 km/hr zone at Westhills. That crosswalk can be terrifying as vehicles (often large trucks) travelling at high speeds slam on their brakes while trying and stop for pedestrians.
- Crosswalk (with flashing lights) across Glen Lake Rd. at Glenview for safer access to Glen Lake Park.
- We would recommend installing a guardrail on the road side of the sidewalk at the trail exiting Jordie Lunn Park at Westshore Parkway (parallel to Commander Crt.). Bikes exit the trail up a hill and at a blind corner and may inadvertently go on to the road.
- Remove the restricted parking on Glenview and ShoreView Dr. The “Permit Holders” only parking restrictions are not consistent with nearby areas (i.e. Westhills) where parking is extremely limited. The parking restrictions are a privilege that is not afforded to other Langford residents. Some residents near Glen Lake Park are also installing rocks and traffic cones outside their property limits effectively claiming public road allowances at part of their private property.
Thanks Again,
Peter and Mary Jane Howland
From: Trina Cruikshank tcruikshank@langford.ca
Sent: September 10, 2021 2:42 PM
Cc: Matthew Baldwin mbaldwin@langford.ca; Leah Stohmann lstohmann@langford.ca
Subject: Westhills Report
Good afternoon,
You recently requested a copy of the Westhills report. Planning, Zoning, and Affordable Housing Committee Agendas are posted to our website the Friday afternoon prior to the Committee Meeting. The Agenda was just posted and here is the link.
Trina Cruikshank
Assistant Land Development
City of Langford
t 250.478.7882 x4606
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue | Langford, BC V9B 2X8
Langford.ca
Please review our email privacy policy at Langford.ca/privacypolicy
From: Rod Stiebel
Sent: September 13, 2021 3:28 PM
To: Mayor Young mayor@langford.ca; Denise Blackwell dblackwell@langford.ca; Lanny Seaton lseaton@langford.ca; Lillian Szpak lszpak@langford.ca; Matt Sahlstrom msahlstrom@langford.ca; Norma Stewart nstewart@langford.ca; Roger Wade rwade@langford.ca; Marie Watmough mwatmough@langford.ca; Braden Hutchins bhutchins@langford.ca; Darren Kiedyk dkiedyk@langford.ca; langfordvoters@gmail.com
Subject: Changes to Westhills Greenspace designation
To: Mayor and Council,
I am writing about the proposed changes to the Westhills development agreement. Please say no to the proposal to change the 40% greenspace dedication to "open space" dedication. The understanding is that currently only 10% of the required 40% parkland has been dedicated and that the developer is seeking to change the definition so that they can include things like engineered fill slopes, grass (astroturf?) medians and boulevards, and even the YMCA and adjacent Park & Ride parking lot. This is completely unacceptable. The developer should not be allowed to fall short of their original promises. This type of backtracking on commitments seems to be common in Langford where many things are promised like setbacks, greenspace, number of houses/townhouses/apartments, etc. but then later applications take them away. Please send a message to developers that they will be required to keep their promises.
I request that this letter be provided to the planning committee as a late submission and be part of the package forwarded to council. Thank you for your attention
Rod Stiebel
3270 Hazelwood Rd
Langford, BC
(FYI not a $2 million dollar address)
From: Mrs. Elizabeth Mary McInnes (Steffan McInnes)
Sent: September 12, 2021 6:57 PM
To: Langford Planning General Mailbox
Subject: RE: City of Langford Meeting, September 13, 2021 - Resident Statement
Dearest Langford Council members,
As a resident of Kettle Creek Crescent, my husband and I purchased our home because we fell in love with the amount of untouched, natural green
space available right behind our house. When looking around our development there is little to no green space which we all need more of.
The forest of healthy, mature trees adds a level of privacy and opens up the feeling of our small home. We take joy in walking on the trail with our
dog that runs the length of the ridge in this planned development area. We have seen bears, cougars, deer, owls, ravens, squirrels, bats, frogs, and
rabbits regularly call this area home. and are worried that we are about to lose this luxury by the addition of new neighbors looking down upon our property.
Many of the residents on Golden Spike sold the homes when the trees were cut down, and blasting started to make room for the school behind them.
Now residents along Kettle Creek Crescent are starting to look at this as a consideration we will need to make ourselves. It would be nice to see the
trail system and the green space left in tack or enriched for all to enjoy.
We hope the council will make some requirements for the developer to keep as much of our natural green spaces already available for its residents
who enjoy them.
Thank you for your consideration,
Mrs. Elizabeth Mary McInnes
3137 Kettle Creek Crescent
Victoria, BC
From: Island Designated Drivers (forwarded by Marie Watmough)
Sent: September 13, 2021 1:35 PM
To: Mayor Young mayor@langford.ca; Denise Blackwell dblackwell@langford.ca; Lanny Seaton lseaton@langford.ca; iszpak@langford.ca; Matt Sahlstrom msahlstrom@langford.ca; Norma Stewart nstewart@langford.ca; Roger Wade rwade@langford.ca; Marie Watmough mwatmough@langford.ca; Braden Hutchins bhutchins@langford.ca; Darren Kiedyk dkiedyk@langford.ca; langfordvoter@gmail.com
Subject: PROPOSED CHANGES TO WESTHILLS DEVELOPEMENT AGREEMENT
September 13, 2021
Hello Mayor and Council:
I am writing in regards to the proposed changes to the Westhills development agreement. I am concerned about the attempt to change 40% greenspace dedication to “open space”. From what I understand we still have 30% of the greenspace for dedication. The definition that the developers are proposing to change (greenspace to open space) will really have nothing to do with greenspace. It will give the developers more free reign to do what they want in lieu of greenspace, i.e. engineered filled slopes, plastic grass on boulevards and medians, as well as parking lots. The agreement of 40% greenspace was part of the original agreement and the developers should stick to that “Agreement”. There has already been so much lost due to the development of Westhills such as trees, eco‐systems, lack of well‐planned infrastructure where traffic is being routed through small streets and the safety of residences at risk, peaceful living due to traffic, continual noise, blasting, drilling, dust etc. Also the health of beautiful Langford Lake that is most definitely deteriorating due to lack of vision around the Lake. The list goes on and I am sure this has all been brought to the attention of the Mayor and Council. As usual it appears the Developers are calling the shots for yet another “amendment” which seems to happen on a regular basis and it appears Mayor and Council support and choose the Developers over the citizens of Langford. I urge Mayor and Council to not pass this new proposal and stick to the original Development Agreement and keep greenspace at just that. Please add this letter to the planning committee as a late submissions as I may not be available to speak at tonights council meeting.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Parsons
Goldstream Avenue
From: Sue Harper
Sent: September 10, 2021 6:47 PM
To: Langford Planning General Mailbox
Subject: File Z21-00200 - Submission to Council
Subject: Text to amend to the Comprehensive Development 3 - Westhills (CD3) Zone.
As of 6:45 pm on Friday September 10th - I have not received any actual documentation regarding the proposed changes as promised by Matthew (the Planning Department), as I requested to Planning on September 3rd via email.
I have also checked my spam/junk email and there is nothing.
This is extremely disappointing as I am a resident of Westhills and it is impossible to be able to comment on any 'mystery' changes, by the deadline.
In addition to my complaint, I have heard from many neighbours they only received a 1 page single sided map, with the other side completely blank with no information on what is happening, or how to comment.
I am highly suggesting to the Chair of the Planning Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee that discussion of this Agenda item be delayed until the Planning Department can appropriately communicate those specific changes to ALL Westhills residents in an appropriate manner.
To put it bluntly, communication from the Planning Department has been abysmal and disgraceful at best. To knowingly move forward, without such appropriate communication, and opportunity to comment, would suggest that the Council is not interested in what affected residents actually think, which I hope is not the case.
Sue Harper
1210 Clearwater Place
Victoria, BC
V9B 0J2
From: Tina Clark (forwarded by Marie Watmough)
Sent: September 13, 2021 4:59 PM
To: Braden Hutchins bhutchins@langford.ca; Denise Blackwell dblackwell@langford.ca; Darren Kiedyk dkiedyk@langford.ca; langfordvoters@gmail.com; Lanny Seaton lseaton@langford.ca; Lillian Szpak lszpak@langford.ca; Mayor Young mayor@langford.ca; Matt Sahlstrom msahlstrom@langford.ca; Marie Watmough mwatmough@langford.ca; Norma Stewart nstewart@langford.ca; Roger Wade rwade@langford.ca
Subject: Westhills Land Proposal
To City of Langford Mayor and Council:
I am writing about the proposed changes to the Westhills development agreement. Please say no to the proposal to change the 40% greenspace dedication to "open space" dedication.
We bought in Westhills over ten years ago when the original community plan was to be the first green “walking” community in North America. Initially, we were excited that Langford was supportive this green initiative and we were proud to be part of it. Since that time, we have witnessed the destruction of our natural surroundings, ponds, lakes, mountains and a complete movement away from the Green Community plan.
Westhills has moved away from geothermal energy and brought in gas, something that Westhills insisted would never happen. Westhills was so confident that gas would never be brought in that it actually states this on our house sales contract. This has left a few hundred homes stuck in an energy monopoly situation, paying for the capital costs of a failed “green” energy system and failed business plan.
I am a 49 year old life long resident of Langford and grew up on Langford lake. I was excited to share the beauty of this area and create our own family memories. Now we are forced to drive 30 minutes to find a nice peaceful area with trees, nature and real grass to walk in.
My understanding is that currently only 10% of the required 40% parkland has been dedicated and that the developer is seeking to change the definition so that they can include things like engineered fill slopes, grass (astroturf?) medians and boulevards, and even the YMCA and adjacent Park & Ride parking lot. This is completely unacceptable. The developer should not be allowed to fall short of their original promises.
The entire reason we bought in Westhills was because of the green initiative. The City of Langford has a responsibility to its tax payers and residents to hold developers accountable to their originally proposed community plans.
I respectfu lly request that you turn down Westhills proposal to change from a green built community to a bronze built community.
I formally request that this letter be provided to the planning committee as a late submission and be part of the package forwarded to council. Thank you for your attention.
Best regards,
Tina Clark
3005 Waterview Close
Victoria BC
V9B0L9
Letter: Bylaw No. 2000; Westhills Remainder Properties
October 23, 2021
Mayor and Council,
City of Langford,
877 Goldstream Avenue,
Victoria, BC V9B 2X8
RE: Bylaw No. 2000; Westhills Remainder Properties
Dear Mayor and Council:
We are residents of Langford, address 3066 Leigh Place, on Langford Lake adjacent to the Westhills Properties.
We support the City’s efforts to develop attractive properties and amenities for the area around Langford Lake. Our concern regards the deteriorating condition of Langford Lake due to poor maintenance of Langford Lake weed harvesting which has resulted in overwhelming choking of the lake with aquatic weeds.
We believe the Westhills Properties developer should share some responsibility for the Langford Lake amenities which are a marketing feature for this development.
Currently the municipality of Langford generously supplies the weed harvester. Unfortunately, labour is not included. Dependence upon volunteers has proven not only ineffective in the past years, but is a serious liability for the City. The lake is currently choked with weeds, particularly near City park amenities and in particular the bay where additional park amenities are planned adjacent to the boardwalk now being replaced.
Although volunteers must sign a waiver it is probable that law suits resulting from injury or death to volunteers would override such a waiver where negligence can be proven. The City is arguably negligent already in not warning volunteers of the dangers as evidenced by several serious harvester overturn accidents in the past. The most recent has sidelined the harvester for a whole year.
So, we recommend:
That the municipality accept its own responsibility to provide annual contracted labour services for the harvester: these workers should be trained in the safe operation of the harvester and covered by Workers Compensation.
That the municipality require the Westhills Properties developer contribute to a fund to mitigate the cost of workers to annually operate the weed harvester. This in exchange for the increased benefits that the developer is requesting for this proposed bylaw change.
Bill and Petra Benbow, 3066 Leigh Place, Langford
From: Mary Wagner
Sent: October 18, 2021 1:58 PM
To: Langford Planning General Mailbox; Langford Parks General Mailbox
Subject: Need to Protect Goldstream Meadows Park and Ed Nixon Trail
There is a Notice of Land Disposition and a Public Hearing about properties adjacent to the Ed Nixon Trail scheduled for Oct. 18th that is of great concern to the value of the Ed Nixon Trail as a nature trail and as a green space. This area near Langford Lake has value for everyone in Langford (and indeed has value to everyone as climate change is a global issue). As more and more of Langford is developed into higher density housing, business parks, roads etc., the need for significant areas of green space is more important than ever, and this area is a great place to expand a natural area, rather than develop right up to the edge of the Ed Nixon and Henson trails.
Particularly in light of the City of Langford’s plans to sell 1365 Goldstream for development, the areas on the Zoning Map https://www.langford.ca/wp‐content/uploads/2020/11/ZONING_300_Map.pdf referred to as 2885 and 2844 and the little triangle beside 2884 that borders with 1365 Goldstream should be protected. It shows these areas as amenity land, but should be converted to a dedicated park.
As shown in Figure 4 from the city’s agenda package for Oct 18th, you can see that there is already a trail known as Henson Trail connecting to the Ed Nixon Trail that would be adversely affected by construction noise and subsequent buildings in view of the trail. In fact, if you walk on the Ed Nixon trail towards the highway, instead of green space, you would see buildings at 1365 Goldstream. This whole area should be a green space in my opinion, but if it is too late to save 1365 Goldstream from development, I urge Langford to save the rest of the area. I have submitted a feedback form to council as well, but the maps did not appear in that format, so I am emailing directly to the planning department and the parks department as well. Please let me know if I should be submitting my concerns in a different way to be included in public hearings or other points of decision making where the public is able to be included.
Figure 4 – Pedestrian Network
Sincerely, Mary Wagner, 104‑2669 Deville Rd., Langford, BC V9B 0C1
From: Thomas Schulz
Sent: October 28, 2021 3:46 PM
To: Langford Planning General Mailbox
Subject: Westhills Rezoning - Public Hearing - November 1st
Hello Langford Council,
My name is Thomas Schulz. I live at 1118 Wychbury Avenue. I write to support this West Hills project that will benefit our community. I particularly like the respect towards the environment and diverse housing options this will provide for families living in Langford. Accordingly I am in full support of this development.
Sincerely,
Thomas Schulz
This message contains confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete it from your system; the use, distribution or copying of any portion of this message is unauthorized. Please consider the environment before printing this email.