Langley Regional Airport

Township of Langley

OFFICE OF DAVID DAVIS BOB LONG THE MAYOR BEV DORNAN KIM RICHTER STEVE FERGUSON MICHELLE SPARROW JACK FROESE CHARLIE FOX GRANT WARD

Est. 1873 January 28, 2013 File No. 8400-01 .1

To: Mayor and Council / Chair and Board Members of:

City of Abbotsford Central Coast Regional District (Bella Coola Airport) City of Campbell River City of Chilliwack Corporation of Delta City of Fort St John City of Grand Forks City of Kamloops City of Nanaimo Cowichan Valley Regional District Village of Pemberton District of Pitt Meadows City of Prince George City of Quesnel Town of Smithers Powell River Regional District

Dear Sirs/Mesdames:

Re: Request for Regulation — Langley Regional Airport

On behalf of the Council of the Township of Langley (the “Township”), I am writing to ask for your written support for the Township’s recent request for an amendment to the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation, B.C. Reg. 171/2002 (the “Regulation”).

The Township’s request for an amendment to the Regulation arises out of its proposal to expand the existing Langley Regional Airport by adding an expansion lot and a park. The expansion is required to increase the airport’s hangar capacity. The land targeted for the expansion is owned by the Township but is located within the Agricultural Land Reserve (“ALR”) and is therefore subject to the provisions of the Agricultural Land Commission Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 36 (the “Act’)and the Regulation. Currently, the only airport or aerodrorne use that is permitted under the Regulation is an ‘unpaved airstrip or helipad’.

.12

20338 - 65 Avenue, Langley, British Columbia, Canada V2Y 3J1 604533.6000 tol.ca Request for Regulation — Langley Regional Airport Page 2...

There are several reasons why the Township is seeking an amendment to the Regulation, rather than the exclusion of its land from the ALRor permission for a non-farm use. These reasons are detailed in our formal Request for Regulation (“RFR”)which is enclosed withthis letter. In part, the Township is aware that there are numerous other airports in the Province including the one withinyour boundaries, which would similarlybe unable to expand their operations because the airports are partly or entirely located withinthe ALR. The requested Regulation would apply to all airports and aerodromes and allow operators of these facilitiesthe flexibilityto respond to emerging market pressures and the opportunity to expand and promote economic development while minimizingthe risk and delay associated with individual applications to the Agricultural Land Commission (noting, for example, the Commission’s recent rejection of a runway extension for Abbotsford Airport).

The Township kindly requests your support by writingto the Honourable Minister Norm Letnick and advising him that you support the Township’s request for an amendment to the Regulation. The amendment that is required is simple and would be in accordance with the Minister’s Service Plan as well as other Provincial objectives. The amendment would also benefit numerous local governments across the Province.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Enclosures copy: Mary Sjostrom, President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities Suite 60, 10551 Shellbridge Way, Richmond, BC V6X 2W9 The Proposed 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. following Drafting Counsel. To Three Request Policy be f. e. d. b. c. a. provided Column Amendment Indication Discussion degree Description regulatory Identification Explanation Brief Summary supports Instructions, for Regulation, history of Policy in the agreement due of of change; and of to of Township proposed Regulation any of of including Review course: the the any Background; the any including: further consultations Agricultural previous Regulation; with legal Request Document; Comments regulation Township of a consultations 171/2002 the draft Langley’s opinions Cabinet proposed for amendment; that 1 Land and of of Regulation (the that Treasury have Request Langley decisions the Reserve that initiative have “Regulation”) issue already are and recommended for Board required; respecting it Use, and Regulation is taken intended Subdivision Staff dissenting place, ATTACHMENT this and the to (“RFR”): matter; Legislative including address; views; proposed and Procedure and the

A E.3 This Airport This land aerodrome unpaved (the The Agricultural capacity. Commission adding What The • • • • • • • • • 1.. list Agricultural “Regulation”) that Township is Kelowna Kamloops Fort Delta is Grand Chilliwack Abbotsford Campbell Bella a facilities an POLICY does problem airstrip it the The expansion use owns St. Act, Land (Boundary Coola not problem? Forks land John is of or include in within permitted. Land River that SBC Langley DISCUSSION Reserve governs targeted helipad B.C. lot applies 2002, Reserve the Bay) that and many (“ToL”) is (“ALR”), the ALR. for Therefore, a are c permitted to park. 36 aerodromes permitted the Use, a partly AND number (the expansion wishes The Subdivision and “Act”) or ToL by BACKGROUND expansion farm is entirely of the to in subject may municipal expand is and BC Regulation and 2 owned not and that its in non-farm is to the as associated the Procedure required the are by • • • • of • and • • • ALR existing provisions not on right ToL. Texada Prince Pitt Smithers Quesnel Nanaimo Pemberton Langley regional uses ALR certified include: to Meadows expand regulations. However, Regulation, increase Langley on George land, Island aerodromes of ALR as its the no airports. the this Regional airport land. Agricultural other BC airport’s land While Reg or airport operations is airports. Airport 171/2002 within hangar an Land or by into an E3’

Association,

aviation.

Court regulation

certainty

may

capacity.

ALR

aerocirome

Airport

What

not

operators.

solving

airport

applications

The

What

circumstances.

minimizing

Commission

The

airport

regulation

these

regulation

advantage

only

requested

with

specific

necessary.

are

and

the

Canada

facilities

and

effective

reasonable

The

the

and

emerging

problem

aerodrome

2010

also

the

aerodrome

(the

options

required

problem

outcome

ancillary regulation

the

in risk

—

required

disadvantage

SCC

the

“ALC”)

in fact

ALC

way

while

and

particular,

market

certainty

flexibility

uses

needed

operators

would

uses

operators

delay

solve

would

(“COPA”),

replace

avoid

providing

required

order

conditions.

exclude

amend

permitted

associated

and

for

particular

Quebec

the

ALR

apply

require

solved

the

respond

that

turn-around.

problem?

uncertainty

the

and

the

give

land

the

uncertainty,

land

outcome?

(Attorney

even

Regulation.

Furthermore,

non-farm

extent

the

once

why?

Act

all

airport with

operators

from

owned

ability

airports

playing

and

market

and

individual

that

Specifically,

its

General)

by cost

individualized

uses.

the

ALR

aerodrome

they

the

and

associated

The

pressures

field

ToL

expand

given

result

and

flexibility

This

conflict

aerodromes

applications

Regulation

for

risk

permit

recent

order

provides

ToL

their

Canadian

all

operators.

applications and

associated

regulations

with

sizes

applications

requires

non-farm

facilities

case

opportunities

respond

can

and

increase

matters

law

Owners

the

efficient

The airport

would

with

the

may

from

onto

Agricultural

amended uses

quickly

proposed

regarding

its

the

ability

case-specific

allow

the

and and

hangar

while

lands

the

ALC,

approach

inapplicable

specific

ALC

aerodrome

Pilots

and

Supreme

operators

expand

which

add

Land

with

the

would

to E.3 E3

In the COPA case, the provincial legislation in question was similar to the Act and had the effect of prohibiting the use of lots in designated agricultural regions for any purpose other than agriculture, unless prior authorization had been received by Quebec’s equivalent of the Agricultural Land Commission. Similarly in B.C., the Act and Regulation prohibit airport and aerodrome uses of land, other than an unpaved airstrip or helipad for use of aircraft flying non- schedule flights, unless the Commission grants permission to carry out a non-farm use or the land is excluded from the ALR. In COPA, although the Supreme Court of Canada held that the Provincial legislation was valid, a majority of the Court decided that the legislation was inapplicable to the aerodrome in question because of the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity. The majority stated that the location of aerodromes lies at the core of the federal power over aeronautics and Quebec’s Provincial legislation impinged on this core in a way that impaired the federal power.

Given the similarity between the B.C. legislation and the Quebec legislation that was deemed inapplicable in the circumstances, there is a good possibility that a court would come to the same conclusion in B.C. It is in the Province’s and municipalities’ best interests to avoid the time and cost of testing the applicability in the context of airport uses on ALR land. The proposed legislation would avoid this possibility by solving the problem within the context of provincial regulations.

What legislation should be changed or created to give effect to that outcome? Only a simple amendment to the Regulation is required: the amendment of section 3(1)(o), provided in draft form, below.

How will the proposed policy impact on other legislative schemes both inside and outside the ministry? The proposed amendment is an isolated change to the Regulation, in relation to airport and aerodrome activities only. It will solve the same problem for other airport and aerodrome operators, but does not affect other legislative schemes.

4 2 regulation

potential

The

of More

development

problem

operators,

The

and

What

through

summarized

flexible

facility.

through In

See Nova

institutional)

zones

and

Quebec

can What

well

the

received other

removal

ToL

how

preserve be Scotia

as generally,

highest

impact

and successes non-conforming

for

learned

of than

jurisdictions,

expansion.

local

to in

those including

the there

each has

the

this

the

create

aware

from

above.

will their

priorities

agricultural government

the

will

oniy past

conserved

the

way,

interests introducing

Act

from Quebec’s

Agricultural

benefit

jobs

counterparts

the

competitive

agricultural or

respecting

The

other

local

prohibition

failures

other airport

“grandfathered”

the

are

and

their

proposed for

marsh

same

businesses

might

province

governments,

primary

facing

land.

airport

land

the

stimulate

Agricultural and

Marshland

efficiencies experiences?

the may

body.

Government

zone

use disadvantage

pres

react

aerodrome

now

the

policy

and

restrictions other with

These

regulations, using Quebec,

ervation uses

which

same

local

for

likely in

Conservation

aerodrome to

which

will

legislation

Land

any

in their have

regulations

jurisdictions

the

any

problem

and

rely

of airport

true

operators

just

purpose

changes? restricting agricultural

are

lot

ability

Protection

on regional

supportive

such in

not

stimulate

(whether

interests airport operators

Act, and

typically

air Quebec

similar

now. in

permitted

other in

SNS

B.C.,

transport

aerodrome

have

respond

economies. zoning

land

airport

other

Commission. 2 It 2000,

only

economic residential,

than

inside

who

aerodrome

is there and

had

B.C.’s

the

jurisdictions

a clear expand.

allow bylaws

and

result as

agricultural

agriculture, have

22,

with

changes.

are

and

facility

suppliers

changing

that aerodrome a

but

in growth

naow

designated

experienced

commercial,

similar

outside

land

order

its or

airport/aerodrome the

scheme

management bylaws

activities, are

range

use

unless

COPA

economic

and

policies

much

consumers.

operators

manage, are

requires

agricultural job

specific

government, the

RSQ, authorization

agricultural

implemented

decision

industrial

creation.

same

priorities

and and a

regulate has separate

P-41.l.

One

what

the the

uses

or E.3 E.3

Are there any implications in respect of the government planning context that should be taken into account? • Budget and Fiscal Plan

The proposed amendment to the Regulation will either not impact or will positively impact the

BC Government’s Budget and Fiscal Plan 2011/12 — 2013/14.

• Government Strategic Plan

The proposed amendment to the Regulation will help to further several goals in the BC

Government’s Strategic Plan 2011/12 — 2013/14. The success of Langley Regional Airport and other airports and aerodromes is critical to the development of a diverse, growing economy which is responsive to the changing international market. Airports and aerodromes have the potential to drive regional development and create permanent jobs around the Province.

• Ministry Service Plan

The proposed amendment to the Regulation is in accordance with the Ministry’s Service Plan.

The Ministry of Agriculture 2011/2012 — 2013/14 Service Plan (update May 2011) recognizes the importance of maintaining a positive relationship between local governments and farmers. Objective 3.1 aims to “promote a positive urban/agriculture relationship to facilitate sustainable growth for farms while enhancing the overall quality of life for British Columbians.” The first strategy listed to achieve this goal is to “promote a positive regulatory climate with local government to support the sector across British Columbia.” The proposed amendment will signal to local governments the Ministry’s intent to foster economic development under a positive regulatory environment while still preserving agricultural land and uses. The amendment would keep the airport lands within the ALR.

The proposed amendment also contributes to Objective 1.2: “Strategic growth and development of the agricultural and food sector.” In particular, the amendment supports the Ministry strategies of “support[ting] innovative product and process development, commercialization and adoption”, and “promot[ingj B.C. agri-food products in domestic and international markets.” Encouraging expansion of air transport facilities provides opportunities to invest in innovative process

capita

regional

investment

The

2011)

The

encouraging

develop

economic

Objective

communities

Jobs,

The

Airport

this

promote

1.1

development

proposed

Ministry

potential

proposed

Tourism

introduces

growth

else

and

The

transportation

BC in

“increase

and

development.”

2.3

Delta.

response

stakeholders

in Ministry

than

local

airports

Canada. of

with

distribute

amendment

and

is and

amendment

and

Transportation

the

its

anywhere

trade,

product

investment

economic

access

“create

Innovation

recently

goals

Development

and

Transportation

hubs

changing

and BC

support

Giving to

will

aerodromes,

this

delivery

thriving

else

agri-food

programs

business

opened

competitiveness”,

also

and

way:

encourage

2011/12

facilitating

and

economic

Government’s

local

consistent

job

and

Canada.

transportation

strategies

Infrastructure

and

products

climate

growth.

maintenance

and

air

and

—20

Infrastructure

Fresh

development

transport

services

airport/aerodrome

will

conditions

13/14

with

that

warehouse

Goal

locally

Objective

contribute

well

industries

other

2011

supports

(update

that

facility

safe

collaborates

creating

supports

and

Ministry

support

increasing

and

competitive,

2.1

facility

will

May

—2013/14

small

operators

the

other

reliable

growth.

all

2011)

economic

Service

goal

with

business

located

three

“provide

jurisdictions.

the

jobs

infrastructure

the

other

Service

sector’s

globally

dynamic

per

will

creating

Plans.

flexibility

development”

and

these

ministries,

capita

rural

Boundary

encourage

Plan

Plan’s

competitive.

encourages

capacity

The

local

objectives

regions

than

drives

(update

Ministry

example

Objective

governments

and

anywhere

expand

Bay

jobs

economic

and

May

while

per

and E.3 permitted, plan would permitted ToL the flying Currently, province. Summary continued inter- to amendment From expand The and of The the Cabinet This Summary airport/aerodrome airport use Ministry includes has aerodrome procedure problem draft and non-scheduled our require of is a Operations on ALR plan review ToL extra- costly, and growth section of RFR provides ALR construction and proposed the extension aerodrome for may of land facilities and provincial time-consuming proposed of other of applying 3(1 land. economic apply potential for and supporting airports, operators flights” the )(o) government aviation regulation of then in most of facilities to of airport 2. regulatory competition to BC the the new development as particularly options forwarded the benefits DRAFT across are documentation a Regulation ALC purposes. hangar ALC permitted lot and not located and agencies lines to the for amendment not owned with for among REQUEST address the to facilities a Province in and without and Thus, an on, Cabinet case-specific allows non-farm very issue small to exemption by growth partly subdivision is air 8 develop this airportlaerodrome the few submitted it to and will risk facilities. “unpaved and for is issue, FOR medium federal on, disadvantages. use. at auxiliary intended to approval. address will a the use each or the complete REGULATION we Otherwise, on are contribute with Langley An government. exemption airstrip airport communities time believe ALR is surrounded structures. amendment to the one address an uses RFR land operator. intention or An Regional relating that the airport to helipad or amendment are owned that a A Regulation a removal level As throughout by majority regulatory not is facility can to ALR of these critical Airport for by currently playing the working be use ToL. of lands. uses development presented will wishes of is land to which the of silent airports field the The are apply aircraft with from to not for

on E.3 to

the

pursuant

The

Brief

Making

address

eliminates

the

even

Regulation

changing

Airports

The

delay

the

order

permitted

mechanism

Agricultural

•

ALR

playing

majority

history

and

Kelowna

Kamloops

the Grand

Fort

Delta

Chilliwack

Bella

Abbotsford

Campbell

such

that

economic

the

expense

the

allow

discrete

must

St.

solve

and

regulatory field

Coola

(Boundary

are

expense

Forks

Agricultural

John

the

Land

airports

these

non-permitted

located

the

River

for

its

problem

overcome.

circumstances

Regulation

immediate

ALC,

all

the

Reserve

and

communities

changes

Bay)

air

and

on,

expansion

delay

Land

the

facility

partly

aerodromes

Rather

Use,

air

approach

uses

problem.

should

associated

Commission

facility

and

on,

operators,

Subdivision

plans.

and

than

opportunities

land

not

their

are

However,

use

affect

with

amending

surrounded

airport

this

Act,

provides

face

and

the

ALR

ALR, other

S.B.C.

these

for

regulatory

Procedure

operators

the similar

land.

clarity legislative •

• growth, • • •

• and •

•

individual,

processes

2002,

Regulation

Texada

Smithers

Quesnel

Prince

Pitt Nanaimo

Pemberton

Langley

ALR

situation

and

greater

define

process.

Regulation

Meadows

the

include:

schemes

36.

certainty

George

Island

case-by-case

restrictions

introduce

procedures

ability

with

preferred

was

regard

enacted

unnecessary

the

investors,

imposed

enacted respond

basis

for

changes

expansion.

allows

through

regulate

and

2002

risk,

the

an E.3 E.3

applications to be brought before the ALC. Since then, the regulation has undergone several amendments, the majority of which were enacted through BC Reg. 339/2004. The full list of amendments is found in the table below.

Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation, B.C. Reg. 171/2002 [includes 2008 Bill 43, c. 42 amendments (effective May 29, 2008)]

Historical Changes 2002-2011

Section Change Citation ffective D

1. am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

2. am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

3. am. B.C. Regs. 339/2004; 546/2004

4. am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

5. am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

iLl en. B.C. Reg. 34/2009

112 en. B.C. Reg. 34/2009

am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

121 en. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

12.2 en. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

13. am. B.C. 339/2004

14 am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

am B.C. Reg. 339/2004

am. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

en. B.C. Reg. 339/2004 j..L en. B.C. Reg. 339/2004

also

The

Company

Identification

change

We Explanation 39. 32.

28.

24..

2.3.

are

has ToL

not

drafted

has Law

aware

been

Corporation,

any

preliminary

any

of working am. B.C. am. en. en. en.

en. any en.

am. previous am. am. am. en. en. en.

en. legal B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. Reg. B.C. B.C.

B.C.

with opinions Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg.

Reg. on Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg.

269/2010

amending

Cabinet this

339/2004 Mr. 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/224 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004 339/2004

339/2004

Cabinet

matter.

Don

that

decisions

regulation

Lidstone,

have

decisions

Mr.

Lidstone

recommended

respecting

for

Q.C.

respecting

discussion

has

and

recommended

his this

2010

this

the

municipal

purposes. matter

Oct.

proposed matter.

law

this

regulatory

firm,

approach

Lidstone

and

E.3 &

permitted

for

scheduled

“unpaved

use

Section

identifies

Currently

Current Land

This

Transportation

Counsel.

Indication

Consultation

universal

have

exemption

aerodromes

Informal

Description

agreement

the

use

chart

Reserve

undergone

Regulation

permitted

3(l)(o)

non-farm

aerodrome

The

aircraft

airstrip

there

flights”

consultations

support

provides

with

that

must

Mayor

Use, aviation

any

specifies

and

the

are

flying

that

the

for

further

still

Subdivision

use

Infrastructure

helipad

consultations

application

partly

a provision

and

high

the

proposed

ALR.

use

airport

THREE have non-

proposed

CAO

carried

level

located

consultations

taken

permitted

would

and

policy

initiative

process

airstrips

This

ALR.

permitted

Procedure

aerodrome

the

The

Proposed

Use,

COLUMN

and

out

that

place

amendment.

Procedure

Agricultural

proposed

includes

with Subdivision

Ministry

welcome

overview

have

ALR.

with

and

non-farm

that

and

the

non-farm

the

Regulation

and

POLICY

already

helipads,

local

Treasury

unpaved ALC

These

12 dissenting

Regulation.

are

amendment

staff

the

airport

Land

and

required

use.

the governments

opportunity

for

regarding

uses

include

taken

paved

proposed

Reserve

REVIEW

use

adds

exclusion

Board The in

views

response

place,

local

this

and

that

amendment

allow

Land

non-farm

application

operations

authority

aerodromes

operate

and

Reasons

DOCUMENT

meet

proposal.

the government

including

land

operate

allow to

bodies

Office

Commission.

more with

this from

airports

local

use

consultation

without

the

airports

which

certainty

the

expand the .

operators

exemption

the

Legislative Minister

governments

flexibility

ALR

degree

and

Agricultural

manage

requiring

This

their

when or

that

was

will

and

E.3 a 3 171/2002, 1 For ALR. (1) The discussion (o) Agricultural is Agricultural amended (v) (iv) (iii) (ii) (i) aerodrome purposes, Land through cancellation any uses terminal are paved flights; scheduled unpaved by Reserve Land below deleting accessory subdivision, or ancillary runway airport (iv). buildings, airstrip Reserve is 4. flights; Use, hangars runways, such section required a or use, to draft DRAFTING for Subdivision ancillary parcel aerodrome or as the Use, including hangars, amendment. helipad terminal 3(1) and to and use DRAFT Subdivision line accommodate (o) parking 13 accessory to of and for adjustment, or INSTRUCTIONS parking aerodrome aircraft buildings, and airport use substituting areas. Procedure of and uses flying structures, aircraft use; uses or parcel Procedure airport and scheduled referred Regulation, it throughout field also airports infrastructure investments contemplated airport flying with consolidation, and provides uses; for the Regulation to other scheduled expansion and air or following: in the non-scheduled B. facility subparagraphs aerodromes. are buildings C. a to and Province. level made or Reg. support or is significant plan operators non playing in that

This E.3 (i) review We look 5. the TREASURY forward proposal / to and working BOARD to solicit with STAFF their the Treasury comments AND 14 LEGISLATIVE Board on the and RFL the prior Office COUNSEL to of its Legislative submission COMMENTS Counsel to

Cabinet. E.3 to Geosource Map ATTACHMENT B

294.14 0 147.07 294.1 Scale 1: 7720.13 01 Printed4/ti/2012 Enter Map Description The data provided is a compilation of geographic information drawn together from a variety of sources, historic and current, and does not necessarily include everything and anything for a particular purpose; and the person utilizing this information does so entirely at their risk as the Township of Langtey assumes no obligation or liability for the uoe of this information by any person and makes no representations or promises regarding the completeness or accuracy of the information or its titneos for a particular purpose.

DEPUTY

Susan

CERTIFIED

CARRIED

Township’s

Section

That

from

local

That

Lan’d

File

Agricultural

Report

Permitted

The

Council

ADM

following

the

Council

governments

Council

Palmer

Reserve

90(1)

12-07

TOWNSHIP

Mayor

Agricultural

CA8400-01

its

Airport

request

proceed

CORRECT

Land

(e)

Special

Regulation

meet

Property;

certified

that

Land

Reserve

for

Land

CLERK

with

support

Closed

with

have

COPY:

Use

the

amendment

Reserve

correct

(k)

airports;

request

Regulation

for

Council

Chair

Negotiations

THE

the

copy

legislative

TOWNSHIP

regulation

and

meeting

the

whereby

the

Change

the

further

Agricultural

Minister

resolution

regulation.

scheme;

held

amendment

designated

April

Land

Agriculture

LANGLEY

passed

and

23,

airport

Commission

from

2012:

other

for

Langley

lands

British

Agricultural

are

Township

explain

exempt

Columbia the