A Langford family who wanted to subdivide their two-acre property and build another single-family home for their children’s grandparents has had the proposal shot down by council.
Jesse and Cindy Harris were asking to build a 3,500-square-foot home on a one-acre parcel on their property on Klahanie Drive in south Langford.
The application to split the property into two one-acre lots, however, required variances to bylaws that say any new subdivisions in Langford are required to hook up to municipal sewer lines.
The properties along Klahanie Drive are on septic fields and are likely to remain that way for more than a decade, according to Langford staff. The city says the high costs of sewer lines demand high-density developments.
The family would have been allowed to build a carriage house of up to 969 square feet or a duplex without subdividing the property, but wanted the variance to build a larger home.
The city’s sustainable development committee approved sending the proposal to council. But the family was shocked Monday night when council voted it down in a narrow 4-3 decision, citing a “significant precedent” that could bring more applications and potential conflicts due to a refresh to the Official Community Plan coming in about a year.
Although councillors were supportive of the family’s plan, councillors Kimberley Guiry and Lillian Szpak, both on the sustainable development committee, as well as Colby Harder and Mary Wagner, voted against the motion.
Mayor Scott Goodmanson and councillors Keith Yacucha and Mark Morely supported it.
“We feel like we’ve been punched in the stomach,” Jesse Harris said in an interview after the decision. “We put in 13 months of work into this, spent $25,000 in costs just to get it here and all we were asking was to [tweak] a bylaw to build a home that brings our family together.”
The Harris family had asked for two things — to rezone the property they purchased in 2021 to allow two lots and, if that wasn’t supported, a variance to increase the maximum gross floor area of a carriage house from 969 square feet to a home covering 3,500 square feet.
The family, whose home is near a new elementary school and commercial and high-density developments already connected to sewer, had signatures of support from all their neighbours.
They noted that they have also repaired the property’s landscaping and registered an apiary with the province.
Their plan was to build a new home with septic field and connect to sewer when it becomes available. They also agreed to pay future sewer-connection fees now.
Guiry, who appeared on video link at the meeting, said there were a lot of aspects of the Harris’ application that she admired, but “as a decision maker I have to look at decisions through a city lens.”
Guiry told council the Harris application posed particular challenges, since the proposed variances “go against long-standing decisions about how we subdivide in Langford, and how that subdivision relates to investments in sewer.”
“I understand that in 25 years, we have never subdivided without sewer.”
Goodmanson, who was clearly in sympathy with the Harris family, asked staff to clarify the bylaw.
Staff said it’s a long-standing provision of the bylaw that sewers be available for any type of subdivision, adding while urban development is the ultimate plan for most of Langford, sewers are not currently economical for that area.
Staff said previous councils had for at least 25 years taken steps to remove automatic subdivision provisions of the Local Government Act that would allow people to subdivide for family members.
Cindy Harris noted that there are previous cases in Langford where septic was supported for new single-family home developments. That includes the home they’re living in on Jenkins Avenue — which they plan to sell when they move into their Klahanie home — and six other homes on subdivided lots, which were all granted permission to use septic while waiting for the sewer connection between mid-Jenkins Avenue and Glen Lake Road to be completed.
The city said, however, that the circumstances at Jenkins Avenue and the variance granted are significantly different than what was proposed for Klahanie. The applicants for the Klahanie property were seeking zoning and subdivision which, if supported by a variance, would have resulted in two lots, each with the same development potential as the parent parcel.
On Jenkins, there was no increase in the already permitted density under the zoning, said a city spokesperson.
The variance granted in 2010 to the property on Jenkins Avenue allowed the owner to develop to the density permitted under the zoning at the time — a two-family residential development in the form of a detached duplex. The variance was granted to Jenkins because it represented development, not subdivision, said the city, and the development of a detached duplex was consistent with the existing zoning and did not require the subdivision of land.
In addition, the sewer in this example was expected to advance to the Jenkins property, in time, from either the east or the west.
“As a mom, my hopes and dreams of having grandparents there for my kids are just crushed,” Cindy Harris said of Langford’s decision for her Klahanie property.
Council was told the family could re-submit their plans after the Official Community Plan is refreshed, but would have to again be on the hook for about $13,000 in costs to the city for applications. That drew jeers from the gallery in council chambers.
The couple have requested a meeting with the mayor and city staff for more clarity and to outline a potential followup.
