Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Metro looks at tax changes to encourage agriculture, discourage lifestyle farming on ALR land

May 8th, 2016 · 2 Comments

Metro Vancouver is unique among North American cities when it comes to farmland. It has more farm-designated land in its boundaries than any other North American city. And that land, when it is farmed, is very productive.

Metro Vancouver farms have the highest “farmgate” revenue of anywhere in the province, due in part to their proximity to a big pool of people eager to buy at farmers’ markets or from farms directly.

But half of the 6,700-some parcels of ALR land in the region aren’t farmed. A quarter can’t be, because they are golf courses, road allowances or whatever. But the other quarter is sitting unused because the people who own those parcels have decided they make wonderful country estates or other non-farm uses. (The Vancouver Sun’s Kelly Sinoski did a story five years ago about the disturbing trend of mega-manions on farmland.)

Now, Metro planners are trying to come up with some tax changes that might encourage more farming … and discourage people who claim they are farming, but are producing so little revenue that they seem to be in the business mainly for the hefty tax benefits available if their land is classified as agricultural rather than residential. Changes are a ways off. A report Friday outlined some strategies, which I covered in my story here.

There’s more to come in the next few months.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • peakie

    Back in 2011,
    “Richmond doesn’t limit the size of houses but requires they be within 50 metres of the road or property line.

    That’s been problematic, Steves said, because outbuildings and other uses aren’t covered, so secondary houses, garages, pools and the like sometimes cut much deeper into the property.

    Sometimes garages and barns have second floors built with rented secondary suites.

    Richmond had aimed to extend the 50-metre maximum setback to include accessory buildings but ran into community resistance.

    “There’s a tremendous amount of opposition,” Councilor Harold Steves said. “There’s a huge lobby, mainly from realtors.”

    When Richmond’s original bylaw was drafted, Steves said, it never occurred to anyone that farmers would be building swimming pools and tennis courts on their land.

    The problem is that in most cases the owners aren’t serious farmers, but buyers who want an estate lifestyle in the Lower Mainland without having to pay the price to do so on urban residential land.

    Farmland is cheaper than large residential-zoned lots and may offer the potential of a future windfall if the land can someday be pulled out of the ALR and subdivided.”

    In 2015
    “With more urbanites considering buying properties deep into the Fraser Valley — Chilliwack City Council is looking to stop people from building big houses on valuable farm land.

    …City Councillor, Farmer and Realtor Chris Kloot says because of Chilliwack’s relative affordability within the Lower Mainland, more people with more money are moving there and building large homes on agricultural land.
    “Large homes have been built but they’re right in the centre of a 10 or 20 acre parcel with a driveway right down the middle and that obviously limits the actual use of the agricultural land around it and the viability of it…””

    Former Chilliwack mayor Clint Hames encouraged the idea of freezing the ALR use.
    http://www.theprogress.com/opinion/letters/254912391.html

    …As the provincial government looks at the issue, my experience tells me there is really only one solution. Re-assess the land in the reserve to ensure we have it all right, call it an agricultural land reserve and remove any ability to have it released for any other purpose. Re-development will become the new reality, and will accelerate development in areas ready for re-development, like the downtown. Good developers will always make money. Inexperienced developers who require easy-to-develop projects will drop out of the business.
    The impact of freezing the use of all agricultural land will lower the price of farmland which could, hopefully, mean more profitability for crops and products not currently protected by supply management…

  • Kirk

    If we don’t require houses to actually be used for housing, why should we require farms to actually be used for farming? There’s no crazy inflation food shortage or grocery crisis.