The Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) has recently denied the District of Kent’s reconsideration request concerning the Teacup properties on the Agassiz townsite.
Due to the Agricultural Land Commission Amendment Act (ALCA) that came into effect in March 2020, The ALC’s most recent response letter serves as a notice that the ALC cannot consider further consideration requests on the matter.
The ALC’s executive committee refused to exclude the property from the Agricultural Land Reserve last year; the district’s intent was to develop the land into mixed-use single and multi-family residential developments.
RELATED:KAAC won’t back Kent’s Teacup properties plans
The Teacup properties have sparked a debate of development versus agricultural land conservation for decades. In this latest chapter, in May 2020, District councillors voted 4 to 1 to remove 17.2 hectares of prime, high-grade farmland on the border of the Agassiz townsite from the ALR for purposes of development. Coun. Kerstin Schwichtenberg was the lone dissenting vote. The Kent Agricultural Advisory Committee had refused to support the exclusion application a few months prior.
The ALC has ruled against the Teacup properties’ exclusion a number of times, including 2005, 2017, 2018 and 2021.
In the 19-page reconsideration request letter dated Feb. 3, 2022, the district argued that the inclusion of a larger parcel of lesser-grade farmland several times larger than that which would be removed in addition to a multi-million-dollar community contribution from the developer “would fulfill the legislated purposes to enhance the size and integrity of the ALR.”
RELATED: Tensions, opinions run high during Tuesday’s Teacup meeting
Officials further argued that the development would help alleviate the growing pressure of housing needs. District officials and concerned residents alike have acknowledged that addressing growth in the district is a complex, nuanced issue. On one hand, residents felt the preservation of high-quality agricultural land and therefore food security is paramount, particularly in the face of climate change. On the other hand, residents have acknowledged the need for housing as the community grows, but the question of whether to grow up or grow out remains unanswered.
The ALC said that while the district thoroughly articulated their disagreeing viewpoints on the 2021 decision, Section 33 of the ALCA only allows reconsideration of application decisions based on new evidence or if the decision is based on information that is proven incorrect or false.
“The section does not provide for re-argument on the same evidence or the re-weighing of that evidence,” the ALC wrote, saying the district did not put forth new evidence.
@adamEditor18
adam.louis@ ahobserver.com
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.