City councillors in Richmond, B.C., have voted to maintain the size of houses permitted on protected agricultural land, prompting calls for the provincial government to step in to regulate speculation and development on some of British Columbia’s most fertile areas.
Richmond’s city council voted on two motions that will maintain current sizes for residential buildings on designated farmland at nearly 11,000 square feet, while also allowing for second residential buildings up to about 3,200 sq. ft.
The decision follows months of heated debate about the size of homes on agricultural land in Richmond, where advocates have complained that investors and speculators have used tax breaks aimed at farmers to purchase land and in some cases erect large mansions with no intention of actually farming.
A Globe and Mail investigation in 2016 revealed that investors and speculators exploited tax breaks for farmland by purchasing land designated for farming and using it for development and illegal hotels.Rafal Gerszak/The Globe and Mail
Councillor Harold Steves, a fourth-generation farmer and a vocal proponent on council of limiting house sizes on farmland, said Richmond’s decision could set a precedent for other municipalities in the region.
“What we’ve done is we’ve set the model for every other community in B.C.,” Mr. Steves said.
“We can expect every community now to set the Richmond size limit simply because the land owners are going to demand it. That means all the land from Richmond to Chilliwack, to the Okanagan and southern Vancouver Island, will be financially inaccessible to basic farmers.”
A Globe and Mail investigation in 2016 revealed that investors and speculators exploited tax breaks for farmland by purchasing land designated for farming and using it for development and illegal hotels. B.C. law stipulates that agricultural properties with more than two acres can keep their farm status – and all their tax breaks – as long as they sell just $2,500 worth of farm products a year.
Much of the land in question is part of the Agricultural Land Reserve, or ALR, an allotment of approximately 5 per cent of B.C.’s provincial land designated by the provincial government in the 1970s for long-term food production.
Andrew Weaver, Leader of the provincial Green Party, condemned the Richmond city council vote and called for direct provincial action.
“Mega-mansions on ALR land are imperiling our food security, destroying agricultural land and driving up prices well beyond the reach of young farmers,” Mr. Weaver said in a news release.
Mr. Weaver, whose party is supporting the governing New Democrats in a minority legislature, has previously called on the province to place aggressive restrictions on ALR land, including restrictions on the size of homes and an outright ban on foreign purchases.
B.C.’s Agricultural Minister, Lana Popham, said housing size on agricultural land was one of the biggest concerns brought forward through recent consultation.
She said the province plans to address the issue with legislation in the next year, but she did not have any details to offer about what changes the government might propose.
“It’s time to review [ALR land] and time to figure out how we can make it stronger and have these food-growing lands into the future,” she said.
Ms. Popham said the issue is not specific to Richmond.
“The problem is this land is also in areas that are having huge development [and] there are incredible pressures this land is feeling for uses other than food growing.”
Linda McPhail, a councillor who voted to maintain the current house sizes, also called on the province to intervene.
Ms. McPhail said many of the concerns about speculation and development aren’t within the city’s jurisdiction. She said these problems are widespread across the Vancouver region.
“We’re going to be writing to the provincial government and ask them to look at taxation,” Ms. McPhail said.
“That’s not up to the local government, that’s provincial government – they determine through their own process who qualifies for farm status.”