My thoughts on the Southlands and Agriculture - Carla Marshall
As a volunteer on the Southlands Planning Committee I have heard the question, "Why not farm all of the Southlands?" The Planning Team is charged with envisioning use for this land that would increase the sum of our community's happiness. Would farming the entire Southlands do that? While I cannot speak on the Planning Team's behalf, my opinion is, no. For my family at least, it is easy to be disconnected from the source of the food we eat. We drive by farms, but we don't have the opportunity to participate in our food's production or to know the people who grow our food except in rare cases, when we have had the pleasure of buying certain produce direct from farms in driving distance. How about walking distance? Does our community want to stand outside of a fenced Southlands looking in on farming? Or do we actually want to have some participation in and benefit from development?
The Planning Team has begun researching and envisioning potential models unlike any yet established in this area, which support sustainable agriculture and biodiversity, and provide a centre for our children, seniors, families, and youth to grow in and thrive. We have discussed small-scale, sustainable farms and our own farmers market intersected by hedgerows and greenspaces in which birds and animals thrive, and walking and biking trails which our community members enjoy. Also intermixed could be housing, making the project economically viable, and community ammenities. This new community centre could celebrate sustainability, nature, healthy living, and arts and culture. The model would reduce the need to drive far away from home for both basic and leisure needs. Artists lofts, cafes, community garden allotment plots, a community kitchen, culinary arts programs for students, and a central place for music and art are also amongst ideas envisioned by planning team members.
We have this unprecendented opportunity to do something with this land that brings concrete benefits to our community, particularly at a time when South Deltans are bombarded by so many negative development and infrastructure issues. So, we can tell the owner to stuff his invitation to the community to share in this grassroots planning process. Or we can share the wealth that is the Southlands and transcend some of the limitations of suburban living by bringing our lives-- our food, our social time, our celebrations, and our harvest, home.
Carla Marshall
Tsawwassen
Comments
You live in a farming
You live in a farming community. If you feel disconnected from farmland, maybe that's not something that can be cured by a subdivision. Do you also need to meet the person who made your jeans and your TV? Are you taking your kids on trips to the industrial park? Delta has been farmed continuously since the time of settlement. In that time there have been, of course, countless innovations in farming practice. None of them have come about under the auspices of a property developer and his think-tank. This specific property developer, I might add, has already shown himself to be a poor steward of the land as even a cursory glance over the fields will tell you. I don't think we should remove farmland from the ever-shrinking pool available so that a few people can "transcend some of the limitations of suburban living." I'm sorry our community is not living up to your expectations but I don't think housing development on the Southlands is a reasonable response to your dilemma.
I'm not sure if I live in a farming community - i Would like to!
I appreciate the feedback to my note on farmland. Though there are farms in our community, there is nothing locally in a model we are now envisioning. We have a unique opportunity to create small-scale, sustainable farms in the centre of our community, where we will be able to walk or bike to buy fresh produce, picked that day, and grown in an environment that is sustainable, builds the soil, and supports biodiversity.
Here the whole community can benefit from a large chunk of land that is currently privately owned. Beyond small farms and a local farmer's market, we can provide education, leisure, and more, not just for a few people, but to be used by all of us who live here. There is no value to our community in turning the Southlands into a massive housing subdivision.
The writer also brings up an interesting observation, though incorrect, when he/she asserts that our planning team is a developer’s ‘think tank.’
Here is the reality: Each individual in our planning team, of their own desire to see positive change in the community, comes to the table with his and her own views. We, as volunteers, lead the direction of the vision, but must also ensure that we collaborate with the land owner at the same time. This becomes a very complex, and time- and energy-consuming process. It is a constant tension, a push and pull of the needs of the community, which are great in range and diversity. Anyone who believes we are a ‘think tank for a developer' ought to attend one of our meetings. The healthy tension I described above at times turns into conflict that is not easily
resolved except through tough, transparent and yet respectful conversation such as what we are engaging in right now. There is no one determinate voice, but instead a cacaphony of ideas that will hopefully ensure the best possible outcome for the wider community.
Right now we stand outside of the Southlands looking in. We do not get to benefit from it. This is privately owned property, not public land, and not ALR. In many municipalities in the Lower Mainland developers take this same type of land and run roughshod over the community’s desires and the natural goodness of the land. I lived in Langley, which I left in disgust after seeing farm after farm paved over and massive, hideous housing developments turn up almost overnight. There was not a single developer who entered into collaborative community consultation even remotely as democratic as this.
There is a chance now for us to have a say in how this land is used. What if Century decided to sell it? Then the future is really tenuous and uncertain. Let’s imagine a possible scenario in which someone else purchases it and decides to develop it into that ugly subdivision the writer (and many of us) fear. What if it was a developer who was able to, without this type of intensive community consultation, go ahead
and get permits for development? It is happening right now in our community. It could happen again if a developer takes the land over and does not have the integrity, and appreciation for the community that this developer has.
Or, what if we insist 'just farm it all'? Without adequate consultation and community cooperation such as is happening right now, we could very well see farming. What could that look like? The future is wide open: can any of us guarantee it won't be a form of industrialized monoculture? Can we imagine the noise of large machinery, the smells of animal husbandry and massive fertilization, the lighting up of the night sky with greenhouses, the perpetuation of herbicides and pesticides sprayed, right in the centre of our community? If we don’t find a way to support sustainable and small-
scale agriculture we could see either of these scenarios, and by then our chance to be fundamentally involved in forming something good will be gone.
To answer the writer's question about why I need to feel connected to my food: Because it is the lifeblood, along with our air and water, that sustains me and my children, and you and yours. Being disconnected from our food source is not a problem unique to my family. It’s become endemic in our children, who often do not
understand how food grows and do not have the skills to keep farming alive. With small-scale farms at our doorstep we can not only eat the food grown right in our town centre,we can provide hands-on education for people to do sustainable farming that does not destroy the ecosystem on which it depends.
The writer also asks, do I need to meet the people who make my clothes and television? The sad story is that, if I wanted to do that, I would have to remortgage my home to afford it. For most of us regular folks, the the closest thing we get to meeting the source of our purchases is off the back of a container truck at the Port.
Unfortunately, our food is often coming in on that same container, grown in conditions we really don’t want to think about as we put it on our dinner table.
We have a chance to build more farms in Delta. Small-scale,sustainable farms run by various people, who can hopefully make a good livelihood for their families. These farms can be supported by our community in the form of CSAs, and by using a community land trust to make it affordable for farmers to get started; and this land
trust needs to be financially sustainable.
In a world where only 1% of the population is growing food for the remaining 99% of us, I think it’s time we talked about how we can preserve and grow this dwindling treasure that is farmland, teach our children, benefit our community, and preserve biodiversity while we are doing it.
Carla
If the small scale farming
If the small scale farming proposed by the writer is good thing, then it should be done now. No rezoning or committee is required to move such an idea forward.
As for the consequence of not putting housing on the site, that is entirely within the control of the property owner. If he has the integrity and appreciation for community you claim it is improbable that he will visit such terrors upon us.
The Southlands have remained agriculturally zoned because the people have made their voice heard time and again through democratic means. This consultation process is taking place because of the historical difficulty of rezoning the land.
Just as you've seen farmland paved over in Langley so have I in Delta. The loss has been great and it goes on and on. Eventually you have to say enough is enough.
I apologize if my tone is less than respectful, but I think the basic premises stated by the property owner are untrue: that the soil is poor and that there is inadequate water supply.
Finally, I would like to point out that Delta is as much farmland interspersed with housing as it is housing with patches of farms. The Southlands are not separated from other farmlands by any greater distance than the farms of East and West Ladner.
why not all small-scale farms?
Dave,
I do not find your tone disrespectful at all. I think you raise very important points and that you really want to preserve what is good. Your perspectives are valid and important.
I also don't think I can answer every one of your questions/statements above with my limited individual knowledge, but instead have to bring these questions to the planning team and ask them those very things, which I am happy to do, if you wish. As one of 24 members I am a small part of the larger 'pie' and voice my one perspective but not that of the group. Whatever I write comes from me and is not 'the word' of the group, since we do not have a plan in mind but instead are debating and deliberating various perspectives. Mine below is just one of them.
What I can do is tell you that we haven't begun discussing housing in detail and begin so this week.
At this time, what I've seen is a private land-owner agree to a vision to deed to the community, in a form of a Community Trust approximately 1/3 of the Southlands to be used for sustainable agriculture that benefits the community in health and education. He's said he would preserve all of the forest (70 acres). Then there's the other 1/3. He's proposing community ammenities that we could all use, and benefit from. Yet within this 1/3 portion he's also noted that some of it could also be agricultural use. That's 2/3 of what is now private land, hundreds of acres, with the possibility to sustain and to be used by everyone, not just people who live there. And a huge portion is to be 'owned' by a community land trust, in perpetuity. Right now, we have a chance to determine and control what chunk of that could be used for sustainable farming and community gardening/growing plots.
Were you able to get to the open house? In the ideas the agricultural committee envisioned, you would probably see that there would be a bill attached to creating something that could be used so comprehensively by the community and still support both wildlife/biodiversity and small-scale farmers, while also possibly providing agricultural educational programs for our students and community members, with ammenities such as walking/biking trails, a community kitchen, etc. included. With 2/3 overall going towards community use, we need to fund it. I personally would like to explore a model that is financially sustainable so that we, the community, are not paying for it, in perpetuity...
I am very grateful that 2/3 of this land could be used to benefit our families, friends and neighbours in our community, from toddlers to seniors, with a solid future plan to preserve agricultural land in perpetuity. I am excited, as are many in our community, about sustainable farms and gardens in which to grow food that our community will enjoy at a farmers market, but that also allows us to learn, grow and be inspired on a personal level. We won't get another chance like this to be in control of what happens to this land. Eventually, something will change. Will we take control over that change?
On another level, there are people sitting around the table who really want to downsize their single-family dwellings and yet live in a community close to nature and that is fitting in with their own values about community, environment, food, etc. They want some housing, and this is what I talk about when I say there are diverse views within our group, who are representative of the diversity of our community's needs-- we come from many different age and family-structure groups, among other diversities.
What I am hoping is that other members either as volunteers of the planning team or from Century itself will also participate in discussing your very good questions and valid concerns. I have seen, in the past, community members not on the committee be invited to our discussions, but I think the protocol is that we request this to the team. If you would like to join one of our discussions and present your viewpoints please let me know and I will send a request to the group.
Carla
I'm looking at a newspaper
I'm looking at a newspaper clipping from 1975. The mayor of Delta, a property developer, has purchased, without discussion in council, a one-year option to purchase the Southlands, then still called the Spetifore farm. The land is priced to sell at 12 million. Instead of greenhouses, the Mayor is threatening the residents with the idea that the provincial government will buy the land and develop it without community input. People testify that the land is not viable, although the land will go on to be farmed successfully for another twenty years. The mayor says the development must go through because seniors and young families need affordable housing in South Delta.
This argument about seniors and young families comes out every time more housing or apartments are to be built. It was used to justify the large increase in density in the core of Tsawwassen, as well as Imperial Village. That it's still being used suggests that it's application in the past has failed. It's just an emotional method used to promote growth.
Thanks for your invitation, but my way of thinking is so contrary to the basic premises of what is being discussed I think it would not be beneficial to anyone.
And that is a beautiful little forest up there. When I was a kid a lot of Tsawwassen was like that.
I'm looking at a newspaper response...
Dave,
I respect your decision not to bring your concerns forward to the group. If you change your mind you are always welcome.
Right now I have two little boys vying with the computer for my attention so I must part with this computer for a while and return to being mom :)
Carla
And I'm supposed to be
And I'm supposed to be studying for my mid-term nursing exams...this whole Southlands thing is taking up an unnatural amount of my mental space.
Have a great day,
Dave
Farming Community?
Tsawwassen is not a farming community. It's a bedroom community that happens to be situated on the outer edge of Delta farmlands with the exception of the Southlands. The "property developer" (land owner) is not a farmer and has no obligation to be a "steward" of the land in a traditional farming sense. It's my understanding that this particular land is far from ideal for "profitable" farming. With this in mind I would have to say that if this area is to be exclusively "farmed" we will be saying "hello" to 534 acres of greenhouses!
It is apparent that this private land owner is interested in keeping a significant portion of this land for niche, organic agriculture use interspersed with other community beneficial aspects (yet to be determined) which is a heck of a lot better than what it's being used for right now.
Change is difficult. We don't all want or need the same things. However we deal with it, deal with it we will because life is change and there's not a damn thing you can do to stop it but you can effect how it happens. I, for one, am very excited and pleased with the changes that have and are occurring here in beautiful Tsawwassen. I feel privileged to live here. There are still things I would like to see improved. I know two people who are involved in the "think tank" (community representatives and volunteers) and it is my opinion that the process they are involved in is genuinely sincere and may well be fruitful in benefitting this community in whatever way we decide. What a concept!
Peggy
Delta is a farming
Delta is a farming community, one of the most productive in Canada. And yes, the property owner can do whatever he wants with his land within its' agricultural zoning. If he chooses to use it as a bargaining chip with the threat of greenhouses lurking in the background, that's fine. The idea of rezoning this land has been decided many times, from Quadrant Holdings in the early seventies to the more recent public hearings. As for the viability of the land, a report posted on this site characterizes the land as "prime agricultural soil for field-based production." Whatever agricultural uses are planned for the future should be put in place right now. Developers have been told repeatedly by the people that they wish the land to remain agricultural, and not by some web poll but by actual civic politics. They cannot accept this and so they await their payday and every ten, fifteen, twenty years we have to have this conversation. Maybe this time will be different, but I hope that isn't so.
civic politics
Yes. This is how positive change may unfold . Does anyone know any politicians that may consider such a novel concept?