Suggestion Box

Input
Your suggestions are welcome! We are looking for input on all aspects of planning and design. Any comments about the history of the site are also appreciated.
Here is what you have told us so far:

January 2, 2017 at 2:28 pm
Comment
I attended the open house from this development and have a few things I would like to address. One of my concerns is with the access to the cul-de sac in the South-West corner of the property. From the plans, it looks like we will have to access that area by going through the town-house complex and crossing over one of the streets in the complex. I would like to ask that there be very large speed bumps on both sides of this crossing and possibly have it made into a crosswalk area. Right now my kids can safely go to that area on the path and the development will make them cross areas with cars. I am also wondering if the chickens at the heritage homes will still be accessible as we and many other families have gone for a walk and visited and fed the chickens there for years. I am also concerned with the parking for the development. I live on a street that leads to Denny Ross Park and I don’t want people to start parking on my street to go to the development. I would also like to see a larger playground be built at Denny Ross Park. Since this development and others in the area are adding to the population, there is a greater need for an improved playground. The toddler playground that is there is very small. Swings or monkey bars or an addition to the playground would be well used by the community.

December 5, 2017 at 11:58 am
CommentParking should be adjacent to the new condo’s behind ball diamond using the ToL road for access. The existing playground needs fixups so it could go close to tennis courts. Lanstone could donate more picnic tables and some commemorative oak trees as well.

December 4, 2017 at 8:41 pm
CommentI do not agree with having a 30 car parking lot taking over part of the Denny Ross memorial park and field. I agree with previous comments that say it isn’t necessary to take away the beautiful green space and put pavement there instead. My family and I love to take our baby and dog on walks through the park and have never seen the school parking lot full. When there is a baseball or soccer game people park on the street. I do think more guest parking should be added into your complex as I know that’s always an issue for residents; I used to live in a townhouse complex and parking for my friends was ridiculous. Most places have only 1 guest spot for every 4 houses (some more/less??). Also, I’d like to see the pathways kept for us who frequently walk through the park. We always go through the cul-de-sac pathway to access the soccer field as we walk through the park. It’s part of my dog’s routine and he loves sniffing all along the back fence.

December 4, 2017 at 9:13 am
CommentThe 30 car parking lot, that the township insists on being provided for the sports fields users, is, as stated by many park users, unnecessary as the street parking on Old Yale Road is adequate to accommodate the demand. For the many years I have walked the dog on my two-a-days, I have not seen more than a few cars in the school parking lot on days the ball diamond or soccer pitch has been in use. And often times, its families on the playground using that lot. The 30 car lot is no more than a standard set by the Township to what it thinks is needed for the amount of active sports facilities on that park. It is not written in stone and can be put aside in a case where adequate parking is available, as is the case here. Street parking has the added benefit of traffic calming the playground zone, posted @ 30 kms per hr, but the speed is far in access of that posted. The neighbourhood has requested traffic calming measures alongside the park, but the request does not meet the exceeding high threshold level of community support set by the Township. Few non-park users living within a 1/2 km radius of the park care about the quality of life of those who do, so are not prepared to slow down if it impacts their quality of life, such as taxing their patience by having to doing the speed limit, so nix any traffic calming measures. That stretch does not even have a painted or raised crosswalk (preferred option) anywhere near the entrances to the park. So the residents and parks users have to put up with the speed and noise, as well as the risk of crossing the street to enter the park. Cars parked on both sides of the street are thus a blessing, at least for the time the drivers on are on the park. This slows traffic down considerably, if only temporarily and not fully as speeders will speed.
If the township is absolutely adamant of providing parking, the only sensible space is in the space between the walkway, tennis courts and the fence-line adjacent Old Yale Road. This space is unused, out of residential home sight lines, and far enough that the few foul balls that might encroach will roll into the lot..whats the big deal? If it becomes a big deal, that is what chain link fences are for, as if fences wheren’t already a feature of that park.
I don’t support a parking lot behind the ball diamond as it would result in the removal of the lone tree on the knoll as well as potentially impact on the washroom facilities which are necessary. That tree is a favourite picnic spot for many a mom and her children on a summer’s day or a great viewing spot for ball games. We lose trees daily in the Township to development and the loss of even one tree unnecessarily is a travesty, especially one that is healthy. Even more trees should be planted behind or to the east of the existing one.

December 4, 2017 at 7:13 am
CommentRe: Parking –   We live on 217B just outside the south easement into the property and have walked through the park area for years, and throughout the seasons.
It is a rare occasion to see cars parked adjacent to the school for sports events (baseball and soccer as a rule).  Cars park along Old Yale Road.  We don’t see the need for any other parking, however, removing the fence along Old Yale (adjacent to the park) and creating angled parking between the existing trees would seem a reasonable alternative.

December 2, 2017 at 7:33 pm
CommentI have been following your intent to build townhomes on the site of the old Murrayville school grounds. I attended your open house and appreciated your plans for the homes, the old school and the oak trees. But I do not agree that a parking lot is even needed for Denny Ross Park. I live opposite the park and see that parking for the park is on Old Yale Road and as far as I am aware has not been a problem. Lots of people who live here moved here because of the park and its situation to the homes around it. It would a tragedy to take away any of the park.

November 30, 2017 at 1:54 pm
CommentMy husband and I bought our house here almost 10 yrs ago after living in a townhouse in the Clayton Heights area for 2 years. We had to get out of that area as soon as we could as we could tell where all of that construction was headed. Murrayville was our dream neighborhood with the larger homes, bigger lots, and lots of green space. My first concern involves removal of green space to put in a parking lot? What kind of community does that? I know the parking lot at the Murrayville School would be removed because of construction but not that many people use it and those that do can use the street parking. A new parking lot is NOT needed. To remove trees for a parking lot, is not forward thinking. My second concern involves the removal of the toddler playground. I believe the developer mentioned the complex would have a small play area, but that it would not be available to the public. So once again in this beautiful community of Murrayville the plan is to cut down trees, remove green space, and remove a toddler playground? I don’t think this is a progressive idea. My last concern is if the construction and movement of the Murrayville Schoolhouse goes through, what will the developers and or Langley Township do to ensure that all the rats/mice that are going to be displaced do not head for the surrounding homes? We live in a cul-de-sac west of the schoolhouse, and when the portables were removed years ago every house and car was infested with rats. We had rats chew through the wiring in our car as did a few of our neighbors and the problem lasted multiple years with all of us footing the bill to finally get rid of them. I would like to make sure that a plan is in place here before the relocation of the school.
Reply: Re: Parking Lot – Lanstone Homes has requested that the Township reconsider the requirement to install a parking lot for park users. From the feedback received from many neighbours the need for parking for park users is highly questionable. The parking lot is NOT being required for the proposed townhouses. Re: Toddler Playground The toddler playground is located on Denny Ross park and will remain. Re: Rats Lanstone Homes has committed to engage a rodent expert and will have a rodent control plan in place prior to demolition of any buildings. 

November 29, 2017 at 9:24 am
CommentOur family live directly behind the proposed are of construction for the new Lanstone Homes development. Firstly, we have heard about the township project No.10-31-0170 at Denny Ross Park and are greatly concerned about a couple of key items that will directly impact the quality of our kids’ lives by obstructing their current access to Denny Ross Park.  Currently, our kids, and all the kids of our cul-de-sac and joining cul-de-sacs, access Denny Ross Park via our backyards, circumventing having to go all the way down the street and to go all the way around and back up 48th on a very busy road. When we bought this house and joined the community we had direct access to the park through our backyard where the kids could play basketball at the old school, or soccer at the fields directly behind, or baseball or tennis as they wished…With the proposed development there is no planned thru way or walkway which would allow them to continue to have access.  This is highly problematic, and we would like the Township and Lanstone Homes to take this into account, and to create a walk way/alley space bordering the fences to the various homes. Secondly, due to the planned creation of a new parking lot containing 30 parking stalls directly opposite to the tennis courts, we are losing even more precious park land/resource, not to mention that this will become a place for loiterers, skateboarders and potential thieves to congregate since it will be illuminated by the parking lot.  This is not serving the needs of the greater community, which is primarily concerned with safety of our children, and with the social betterment of our kids via easy access to green space for sports and activities. We would like a direct response to our concerns from both the Township of Langley and Lanstone Homes, to how we might work together to find an amenable solution that works for all of us.

November 28, 2017 at 11:06 am
CommentWe are writing to express our deep concern over the proposed plan to develop a 30 car parking lot in Denny Ross park. We have lived on 218A street backing on to Denny Ross park for 2.5 years. We love the area and love that our three young children can ride their bikes or walk the dog around the park without the need to cross any streets. Last winter the children in the neighborhood enjoyed riding their sleds down the hill by the tennis courts. They often sit at the picnic tables and play under the trees. We find it shocking that in a quiet family neighborhood the township and developer would build a thirty car parking lot in the middle of a quiet park. This will create more traffic to our quiet area.We understand that the townhouse plan, although not our first choice in any way, is on the school property that is now owned by Lanstone Homes. However, Denny Ross belongs to the township and should not be included in this development. This is not a high traffic area that requires a parking lot. There has never been a challenge with street parking. Please reconsider this proposed plan and consult the neighborhood before proceeding. Please let me know any proposed meetings to discuss this with the township so that neighbours in this area may come out and speak out against this plan. When we bought this home we were told that area could potentially one day be a playground for young children after the school shut down. Imagine what a goodwill gesture Lanstone homes could create in the neighborhood if they built more spaces for families instead of destroying what is already there. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

November 27, 2017 at 8:53 pm
CommentI recently became aware of a parking issue at the Denny Ross Memorial Park.  It is my understanding that this issue has become part of an overall larger project involving development of the former Murrayville School Site. Unfortunately, I was not aware of the Public Information Session held last week relating to this overall matter.  However, I would like to have the opportunity to voice my concerns and views regarding this issue of parking at the Denny Ross Memorial Park. I was advised that an area at the extreme east end of the grass area has been tentatively set aside for parking of up to thirty (30) vehicles as users of the Park regularly park on both sides of Old Yale Road.    I drove by the site on Sunday and note that this proposed new parking area has been marked off with yellow caution tape. In my opinion, there appears to be other more practical alternatives to finding a solution to the parking issue than removing a portion of the grass area at the east end of the park and developing this area into a parking lot.   There is an area in close proximity to the Tennis Courts that is under utilized and seems a far more practical alternative than developing the east end of the Park into a parking lot.   I was told that a Township staff member was not in favour of an area closer to the ball diamond as it would be susceptible to ‘ foul balls ‘  and potentially damage cars parked in this area.  I think this conclusion is a weak argument as the existing metal fencing could be greatly improved to eliminate this potential damage threat.  I am quite sure that neighbours in the immediate vicinity of the Denny Ross Memorial Park are NOT in favour of removing part of the grass area for purposes of a parking lot when other areas are more practical and underutilized. I trust you are going to encourage further and ongoing input on this matter before making a final decision.   As a matter of information, I have lodged onto the Murrayville School Development page as a user to stay abreast of future discussions, meetings and decisions as they relate to development of the Murrayville School Site.

November 26, 2017 at 9:16 pm
Comment: Re: Preserving Oak Trees on 48th, This is great to hear! They are such beautiful trees.

November 26, 2017 at 5:58 pm
Comment: I am writing this letter to address my concern to the proposed development of a thirty stall parking lot on the east end of Denny Ross Memorial Park. I am appalled that because of new development that there is a chance we may lose part of our beautiful greenery.
Myself and my family have enjoyed many afternoons relaxing and picnicking in the grassy knoll that it currently east of the tennis courts. As I have grown older and my family has grown, the children in our family now enjoy playing in this area. Denny Ross park has been a gathering space for our family. Bringing us together, the trees and low areas have provided us a retreat from our everyday busy lives.
In my time of being a resident I have both participated and watched sports at Denny Ross. During this time myself and our team members have always used the street parking on 48th. Very rarely was Murrayville school parking lot used. I feel that the street provides a sufficient amount of parking for the community activities that take place in Denny Ross. In addition other parks in Langley do not have parking lots and still seem to manage well. If the township and the developer both feel that this parking is necessary maybe it can be explored for 30 stall parking lot be placed within the 5 acres that will be developed.
I hope that the township will listen to the voices of the citizens that currently reside and use this beautiful area, and stand up to preserve the entirety of the park for our community, for our families and for our children.
I SAY NO TO THIS PROPOSAL

November 26, 2017 at 12:25 pm
CommentPlease accept this letter as a complaint and request to dismiss Township Project No. 10-31-0170 Denny Ross Park, plan to install a parking lot containing 30 parking stalls and lighting in what is now the park. Denny Ross Park is the hub of the Murrayville Community and is utilized by families on a daily basis.  With the removal of the Murrayville Schoolhouse green space the community is already suffering a large loss of playing area. With the currently listed project to turn even more of the greenspace into parking this sadly leaves little space for families.  That area is used for families when games take over the field and access is limited.  In addition, that area currently absorbs a lot of rainfall, and with the current water situation around the tennis court, even in the summer months, this will cause an even larger flooding issue as there will be no water absorption from a parking lot. Murrayville has lost a lot of greenspace to real estate, and while I respect that communities change, there is no reason to take Township land and pave it over. If you are thinking that people park in the Murrayville School area, you are incorrect.  The current street parking handles the load very well.  If you are thinking that parking is required for the new build, that is up to the Business Developer to building parking into their plans.  If parking within their build cannot sustain the amount of owners and visitors, that plan should be revised. Thank you for accepting this as a request to dismiss the build and a complaint about the build.

November 26, 2017 at 12:21 pm
Comment: We have just been made aware of the proposed positioning of the 30 car parking lot at Denny Ross Park, and would like to add our voices to the many who have raised objections to the location. It is the only green space in this area and every day there are people walking, playing or otherwise using this space. Every available space in this area has been built on over the past 5 yrs and parking has started to become an issue, and is an important consideration, but we would suggest that more thought be given to its location, as this park MUST be preserved for this area and it’s residents.
Would angled parking be an option to increase space?

November 25, 2017 at 11:45 pm
Comment: I have fond memories of attending Murrayville elementary school when I was a kid. I remember at lunch that Mr (Denny) Ross would come out and play soccer with us out in the small back field where the development is proposed. It is sad to see this area leave but it is inevitable. I DO NOT agree with the proposal of parking in the memorial park. This parking should be allotted in the development site if it is needed.
The township should be learning its lesson from the poor planning decisions in willowby that they have made over the years. Lets not do the same here in Murrayville. Back in the early 90’s when there was a major boom in this area, it was well planned and laid out. Lets not cram as much high density as we can in this area!

November 25, 2017 at 9:25 pm
Comment: I have just in the last two days heard of the intentions of the developer to encroach on the Denny Ross Park with a large parking lot for 30 cars.  This is totally unsuitable and undesirable.  I have grandchildren that live adjacent to where this parking is proposed. I have spent many hours with them in this park and have used it many times for my walks. Why would anyone want to encroach on the lovely park that we have? The parking lot would be a place skateboarders, bikers, etc. would ‘hang-out’ and make a racked at night as well as the lighting could be disturbing to those close by. This is a quiet neighborhood and I hate to see that destroyed. I would be very much against this going ahead as well as the proposed development of town houses that the developer is asking for.  This is not what we were lead to believe this property would be used for when the school board sold this property last year.  Town houses in this area of Murrayville would not fit with the single-family dwellings that are here now. Please rethink this whole thing and listen to the people who live here and use this park now! Thank you.

November 25, 2017 at 8:51 pm
Comment: My grandchildren live adjacent to Denny Ross Park and make use of the recreation facilities available.  This is not a place to encroach with a 30 stall parking lot.  Furthermore, I was told by realtors when the school property was For Sale that any development permitted would be maximum single family; six lots per acre.  It sounds to me that overdevelopment of this property with townhouses is going to diminish the park facilities to provide for required townhouse parking.  It is time for people to wake up and say NO9

November 25, 2017 at 8:07 pm
Comment: I am a resident of Murrayville for over 20 years now and I am opposed to the Parks Board Office change to have a 30 stall parking lot installed at the east end of the park, (#2 Location). We are already losing the soccer field that exists behind the Murrayville school to this development and should not be giving up more green space for a parking lot. The existing parking lot that is on the school site is seldom used during soccer and baseball games as the street beside the park is the preferred parking spot and the only time the parking lot was really used was when the school was in use, election day, filming or RCMP Swat team practices. If a parking lot is required by the development, then this should be on the development property, not the townships property. This park was designated Denny Ross Memorial Park as a memorial to Denny Ross and is for the use and enjoyment of the public. I am not opposed to the development, just to the parking lot at the east end of the park proposal. This is the only shaded part of this park with a picnic bench that is well enjoyed during the summer months and in the winter months as has a bit of a hill that kids play on if we happen to have a snowfall.Are there CPTED plans for this project? Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design re: Assess the potential risk this development poses on neighbours (parking lot). Please do not put a parking lot in this location.

November 25, 2017 at 6:26 pm
Comment: I would hereby like to express my extreme disgust at the planned parking lot in the nearby Denny Ross Park. My family and myself use this park extensively and would be very upset if it was ruined with a parking lot or other such developments. It’s a reserved green space and it should remain that way. Please consider for our community and put and end this plan.

November 25, 2017 at 6:05 pm
Comment: Please I beg, do  not put in a parking lot right here next door to us!!  We enjoy the green space and count on it, as our back yard is not big enough to play soccer and frisbee. I live right next to the park and I let my nephews and nieces and their friends play right in that “proposed parking lot pace”. I can check on them easily as they are right there beside me. A parking lot right there is inviting people to come and sit and smoke and hang out. Encouraging  more crime and break-ins!!!  I see so many people just happy and relaxed in that beautiful green spot. Carefree and restful….happy pets,  Gramps & Grans strolling, children on scooters, new parents pushing prams, all in natural habitat. Please listen to us the neighbors and do not take up any more of our precious green space that is left in our beautiful park. ‎ We are losing too much already. Respectfully I do ask for your listening ear and consideration for those of us that live here already.  Please stop destroying the rest of our green space and our family park.

November 25, 2017 at 6:04 pm
Comment I have been made aware of a plan, with your participation, to construct a ‘Parking Lot‘ on Park land adjoining my property. While I was given information about the Murrayville School land development, I am quite sure no mention was made of this project including the use/development of any park land whatsoever. Please know, I will fight his proposal to ensure it never happens and, because of your omission of this information in your original correspondence to me, I will be vigilant throughout your entire Residential project to ensure there are no more ‘surprises’ that will affect the enjoyment of my community, and personal property. You have set the tone very early, it was your choice to do so. Make no mistake, the residents of Murrayville will never sit quietly by while piece by piece, what makes this a wonderful place to live and raise families, is taken by narrow minded development projects. I bought the land, and built my home 23 yrs ago, by personal choice, it was a good one and have a commitment to my family and neighbors to ensure it remains the Murrayville we built. This (Denny Ross Park) has been a corner stone of our small community for close to twenty years and has been enjoyed in many ways by it’s local users, I don’t believe during that time, there were any significant shortcoming to the nature of it’s development, parking has never been an issue even though the school parking was rarely, if ever, available for park users on any regular basis, for this to be considered necessary now, would indicate that further study into your plans would reveal a need to include a parking area within our park. The plan I am aware of, indicates no change in vehicular traffic accessing the area to use the park facilities. In summary, there are other options available that would not impact the current residents of this area, be a better use of land, and promote a better general acceptance of you intent to develop our community for the better of all involved, now and in the future. There is an extremely diverse group of residents in Murrayville, we are well acquainted with the methods available to have what is right, done.

November 25, 2017 at 5:36 pm
Comment: My husband and I are homeowners adjacent to Denny Ross Memorial Park and we have concerns about the location of the proposed 30-car parking lot. It is our understanding that the grassy area east of the tennis court is Memorial land. This green space is highly used by community and should not be paved and poses a security risk. Please don’t be short-sighted! With the addition of high-density housing, secure parking is essential!  Adding 30 more spots (within your development) should be easy and security will be better.  One picnic table has been added to the east end of the park and the arson in the park this Halloween night was epic!

November 25, 2017 at 5:14 pm
Comment: We moved to Murrayville last year.We left Willoughby because we thought it was becoming over-built and lacking green areas and I believe everyone can agree with that…   We moved to Murrayville especially because there is plenty of green, a nice community and we loved the Dennis Ross Park, which is in front of our house. We wanted our kids to grow up in this nice environment. Now we have been notified that you are going to destroy the nicest part of the park to build a 30 stall parking lot.
Why?
The streets are 90% of the time empty. Just occasionally in Summer Time there are games going on and you can see few cars parking on the street. Nobody complains about that. Where is the necessity for additional 30 car parking stalls? We, as a family, cannot understand such a decision! It seems a pure nonsense and an entirely wicked decision to destroy this park for parking stalls. Additionally these stalls are in the wrong part of the park: they would be
– far from the new townhouse development > more than 500 m away
– unnecessary as there is abundance of space on the street.
The new tenants won’t find it convenient to park so far from their new townhouses.
Please rest assure that we are NOT opposing the town house new project, but we do oppose the destruction of the park and we deem not only evil, but totally unnecessary.

November 25, 2017 at 4:55 pm
Comment: I’ve lived in Murrayville for 7 years. I live in across the street where you’re building these townhouses. I was informed that you are thinking of tearing up the other side of Denny Ross Memorial Park to put a parking lot for the park.
I use that entire Denny Ross Memorial Park everyday along with many other people in the neighbourhood to walk our dogs.
Please find an alternate place for a  parking lot. Like in behind and all along the Old Yale Road.

November 25, 2017 at 4:11 pm
Comment: The #2 location that you are considering for 30 parking stalls is not in my opinion a good location.  It is my understanding that Denny Ross is designated Memorial park space so why are you able to put a parking lot on it?  My family just moved to the area in August and one of the reasons we moved was the proximity to Denny Ross park.  We already have used the park on many occasions with the kids and dogs and now what seems like overnight a good portion cold be taken away by parking stalls. Please reconsider relocating for example to the already proposed development area — which is already taking green space away.

November 25, 2017 at 3:51 pm
Comment: I live on the adjacent street to this development and utilize Denny Ross Park frequently with my family, dogs and children. I love Langley and have lived here my whole life. One of the reasons we bought our house in Murrayville was the lack of development and the availability of parks and green spaces like Denny Ross. We love this space. The proposed development that’s is planned for development the parking lot location is not desireable for this neighbourhood. The more suitable location for this parking lot would be on the developers land. Please kindly reconsider this plan for the project.

November 25, 2017 at 2:03 pm
Comment: I’m okay with the development that will inevitably be happening with Murrayville Heritage school. We will be losing that smaller green field to townhouses and I was okay with that thinking we (the community of Murrayville) would still have ALL of Denny Ross park. Unfortunately, I have just learned of the 30 car parking lot plans to happen on the triangle corner in the East. This is upsetting. With losing the smaller field that only leaves the bigger field, on which only one league soccer game can occur/ or only one league slo-pitch game. No one else can use the field when it is in use. So that left that little triangle corner for dog walkers, families with kids, seniors out for a walk, or just anyone to use as a nice green space. There is no need for a parking lot there! It was supposed to be land that was donated to the township and never developed. Not to mention the memorial tree and picnic table. Even if they stay there, surrounding them with a parking lot is disrespectful. I have lived in this community since I was little and love it so much that I purchased my own place here. Denny Ross is my backyard. I walk my dog there 2-4 times a day! I witness all the sporting events, and everyone is able to park on the street. There are maybe tops 7 cars in the school lot!  Plus the added bonus of the busy street forces drivers to slow down! Unfortunately a lot of drivers do 80km/h in the 30 park zone, which is extremely frustrating. As it mostly occurs during the school rush hour causing a great hazard to those walking to school and those of us walking dogs. If the township would step up and make those speed bumps a higher priority…. I digress. I see that there are other parking options in consideration. #1 behind the diamond. Seems reasonable to me. “It’s too close for foul balls”.  No, it’s not. I play fastpitch for Langley and utilize Noel Booth Park, the NW parking is along the field, yes up a small elevation but still close enough that cars can, and are, hit by foul balls. I also refer you to Fleetwood Park on 80th Ave and 156 St in Surrey, the parking is along the fence of the diamond. See attached photos or check it out in person or on google maps. Also, the township could invest in netting to also prevent foul balls from leaving the diamond at Denny Ross and Noel Booth. #2 The lot in question. No thank you. Don’t turn greenery into pavement. That is happening on the other side of the park already. We are a dog and family community, we need open space to play and get fresh air! #3 and 4. Both okay options. #4 being the preferred if it’s parking for YOUR development.  #3 seems reasonable to suit sporting needs. A 30 car lot is not needed! A smaller parking area or NONE AT ALL would be suitable for Denny Ross. The street parking has sufficed for decades already. The only “traffic increase and parking needs increase” would be from your townhouses. You should have to deal with that, not Murrayville! Leave us with green space! The world is too much of a cement jungle already. Kids, teens, adults, pets, wildlife ALL NEED GREENERY.  Please consider these options and how they impact EVERYONE, not just your or the townships financial gain.

November 25, 2017 at 1:33 pm
Comment: I have lived in Murrayville for 23 years. It is already saddening to me that we are taking down such a landmark location and putting up more houses when the surrounding area is not yet equipped to handle the influx of people. It makes me very sad though to hear that someone is willing to tear down part of a park to put up a parking lot. There’s a song about it. It’s sad to see that we are still at the point where we haven’t realized how important parks are or green space is. Denny Ross Park does not need a parking lot. I regularly walk by or participate in sporting events at that Park. I have yet to see people use the parking lot at the school during any of those events. There has been more than enough parking on the street. I am not sure as to why it would be important for the township to give up part of the park to appease a developer. I realize we are in the business of making money but at what cost? Are you planning on putting enough trees back in or grass in order to recoup the losses of the environment? They are already taking down a park to put up at townhouses why are we giving up another Park space to develop a parking lot? It’s really disheartening as a longtime member of this community that we are giving up so much space. I was hoping that Langley Township would realize that we are struggling enough with the development of Willoughby and jamming people into a confined space that we didn’t need more of that in somewhere like Murrayville. I understand that I am just one voice, and one voice is not going to sway your actions. However, I hope that you see the importance of outdoor space and that this community has fostered the love and the use of the outdoors. Nobody needs a parking lot there. If the developer would like a parking lot for the additional visitors of their townhouse development, they should build that on their own land. We’ve given up enough.

November 25, 2017 at 11:55 am
Comment: I am writing you today to voice my objection to the 30 stall parking lot proposed at the Wed Nov 22, 2017 meeting. My home backs right onto the park, My gate is right outside where you want to put this 30 stall parking lot. This is our community park, it was dedicated to Denny Ross a teacher and principal in the Langley area. I was one of his students, he was my principal for years. He was a very good man and loved all the kids he looked after and because of his dedication he was honoured with the park in his name sake. It is deplorable that you want to take a park that has been here for 2 decades our greenspace and turn it into a parking lot. This has been zoned as park land and I don’t understand how you can take away enjoyed park land and turn it into a parking lot. Please do NOT put in a ugly unused parking lot. The only time that we have cars on Old Yale Road is when sports are going on and that is only a fraction of the year. This park is used by our community daily. Because I back onto the park I see its daily use, people walking our walking their pet. Dogs briefly let of the leash to chase a toy or ball. In the winter kids making snow men or being pulled on a slay over the grassy nowl. In the summer people on lunch breaks stopping and enjoying the park on the memorial park picnic table (which is there for my nephew Dylan Reichelt who died tragically in a car accident at the age of 18). The parking lot would ruin this reflective retreat for us, on sunny days people sit under the big cedar trees to have some shade. Those trees are very old and have been here longer than anyone. My kids and others play games on that grassy space botchy, frisbee, tag, all kids of uses. I see people bring their chairs and sit out there and just enjoy the tranquility of our park. This park is used by hundreds and hundreds in our community. We don’t feel you have the right to take a memorial park and pave it for a parking lot with 30 stalls for cars. This is so wrong and our community will be outraged as they learn of your plans. Yesterday I made up a package and took it around to our neighbours telling them of the proposed plans. This morning I woke up to see yellow caution tape up where the parking lot would be showing everyone how big it would be and how it will destroy our park. Today I will be putting posters up so everyone can see what is proposed and why there is yellow caution tape up. Our community won’t allow this to happen, it means to much to us not to mention several of us who directly back onto the park will have our property value declined because we would look out to a paved lot rather than a grassy park. You are directly affecting us with this proposal. What we suggest instead is a parking lot close to the baseball diamond and soccer field because this is where people us the park for sports. It should not be at the opposite end of the park not close to those to sports. Because it is the developer Mr. Kurt Alberts who is spearheading this proposal that you Mr. Alberts make space on your development (Murrayville School lot) for a parking space. I have lived in this house for 25 years we have managed just fine without a parking lot and if you must create one then please put it on your property tying it into the townhomes parking. DON’T DESTROY OUR PARK – Please!!!!

November 25, 2017 at 11:46 am
Comment: I do not agree with the proposed 30 stall parking lot at Denny Ross Park.  This park has been a designated park for over 20 years.  I am saying NO to taking away our grassy area that is used by family’s in our neighborhood for picnics and play. We do not want harsh bright lights illuminating.

November 24, 2017 at 9:50 pm
Comment:  It has come to my attention that you wish to develop the Murrayville Elementary school site. I would like to take this opportunity to say that I do not have an issue with the development itself, But I am very much opposed to any parking lot near the tennis courts that takes away green space from the park. This end of the park is used by a great number of people and any parking lot would have a negative effect on the neighbourhood. We feel very strongly that any additional parking should be added as part of the new development and not result in the loss of parkland used by many who live in this area. Denny Ross park as it is now was one of the reasons my wife and I purchased our home.

November 24, 2017 at 6:26 pm
Comment: I would hereby like to express my extreme disgust at the planned parking lot in the nearby Denny Ross Park. My family and myself use this park extensively and would be very upset if it was ruined with a parking lot or other such developments. It’s a reserved green space and it should remain that way.
Please consider our community and put an end this plan.

November 24, 2017 at 6:05pm
Comment: Please I beg, do  not put in a parking lot right here next door to us!!  We enjoy the green space and count on it, as our back yard is not big enough to play soccer and frisbee. I live right next to the park and I let my nephews and nieces and their friends play right in that “proposed parking lot pace”. I can check on them easily as they are right there beside me. A parking lot right there is inviting people to come and sit and smoke and hang out. Encouraging  more crime and break-ins!!! I see so many people just happy and relaxed in that beautiful green spot. Carefree and restful….happy pets,  Gramps & Grans strolling, children on scooters, new parents pushing prams, all in natural habitat. Please listen to us the neighbors and do not take up any more of our precious green space that is left in our beautiful park. ‎ We are losing too much already. Respectfully I do ask for your listening ear and consideration for those of us that live here already. Please stop destroying the rest of our green space and our family park.

November 24, 2017 at 3:59 pm
Comment: I have a few concerns with the proposed parking lotFirst, I think the number allocated is way too much.  I am a very regular user and find the school parking lot is almost always empty.  It gets used a bit during baseball games, but street parking seems to be the choice of the diamond users.  Street parking also seems to act as a traffic calming measure as it really does slow the speeds of cars travelling along Old Yale.  Perhaps a version of street parking can be maintained or even enhanced to help curb traffic speeds (this is an issue), while providing greater park access. Second, the proposed location of the parking lot is bad.  That part of the park is natural, shaded and provides a nice contrast to other parts of the park.  It is used by both picnickers, those seeking shade and even kids for natural play with the hill (summer and winter).  As a user of the park and tennis courts I very much enjoy the way that part of the park is maintained.  Park users even sit on the grass, use the natural contour of the slope and watch the tennis and sporting activities in the summer under shade.  It would be a mistake to disrupt this part of the park for parking. I really think a smaller parking footprint, more aligned with the road (old Yale) and possibly angled or perpendicular to the road would be best.  Perhaps several smaller groupings of street ‘angled or similar’ parking be aligned along old yale allowing more of the trees to be saved, and even act as curb bulges.

November 24, 2017 at 3:00 pm
Comment: We are very disheartened to hear of your proposal to build a parking lot that will back onto our property on 219A Street.  We are in short supply of green space everywhere and this will greatly depreciate the peacefulness and of our neighbourhood.  We greatly oppose of your proposal and kindly suggest that you reconsider a new site for your parking lot and not destroy our beautiful quiet, green space.

November 24, 2017 at 3:04 pm
Comment: 15 homes of long term Langley residents will be affected either by loss of view, ambient light, increased noise, garbage and traffic. We chose our current homes to take advantage of and enjoy the view of a park, not a parking lot.

November 11, 2017 at 2:01 am
Comment: All of our children went to this school. We know the Porter family, and we have lived in Murrayville for 36 years. We want one of the Townhome units in the Murrayville schoolhouse, period. Please keep us informed    thank you

November 6, 2017 at 8:07 pm
Comment Comment: Hi there i am a former student of Murrayville elementary I drove by the site recently and saw that you have bought the property. I was wondering if it would be possible to look through the old school some time before you start developing it?    Reply: Due to liability concerns it is not possible to allow people to wander through the school. However,  an organized event to allow “one last look” prior to construction is a possibility. Your suggestions are welcome.

October 30, 2017 at 9:26 pm
Comment (The Oak Trees): We are very pleased that you are keeping these majestic trees. Thank you! We are very excited about this.

October 29, 2017 at 2:50 am
Comment: I noted that a number of maple trees to the south of the school have been tagged with numbered yellow tags. I assume this means they will be preserved. Much as I think we should preserve every healthy tree possible in a development, I don’t believe that these trees are healthy as their growth habit and lack of pruning maintenance during their growing years has resulted in weak structures. A strong wind in 2016, which are common during the fall months, broke off a main branch on tree #27 and every one of the marked trees has this weak structure, including embedded bark. Hire a competent arborist who will say the same things about the trees, which will prove to be an inevitable hazard.
Reply: All trees on the property are required to be documented, hence the numbered tags. This does not mean all trees will be preserved, especially, as you have noted those which are unhealthy. However, any trees which are not able to be saved due to condition or site planning must be replaced in accordance with Township tree replacement criteria.

October 7, 2017 at 1:29 am
Comment: We are very excited about this this. My husband grew up in Murrayville and attended Murrayville Elementary so this site is ideal for us. We are a family of 5 and would really like to see single family homes that are geared towards families. Murrayville is a great location for families.

October 5, 2017 at 12:23 am
Comment: I agree with a comment from Sept 26th/17. I also live in Murrayville and would love to stay here. With a large number of people wanting to downsize without giving up everything. Large townhomes with double car garages. Would definitely suit this area!!

October 4, 2017 at 12:18 am
Comment: As the Township advertised the property as single family detached housing site, I assume that continues to be so. Watching with much interest.
Reply: The property was previously owned by the School District and not advertised by the Township of Langley. Cushman & Wakefield advertised the property on behalf of the School District and in their marketing material stated: “Single family lot re-development and potential to achieve Multi-family designation”. However, any change from the current school/institutional designation would require approval by the Township.

October 2, 2017 at 4:33 am
Comment: Completely agree with the comment from Sept 26th about making them larger townhomes similar to Heritage. Side by side garage and air conditioning are amazing additions that go a long way with buyers. Please have at least some (or all in my personal opinion) with the master bedroom on the upper floor; as opposed to master on the main. Very excited to find out more about this development!

October 1, 2017 at 5:39 am
Comment: I would like to suggest that the path at the back of the school field that connects the park and the cul-de-sac on 217 be kept. Also, it would be wonderful if the developer worked with the township to create a proper playground at Denny Ross park as I am assuming there will be many more additional families. I know from talking to the township there is the space there for a proper playground for children in the neighbourhood.

September 30, 2017 at 5:27 pm
Comment: Would love to see new condos at this site!!

September 27, 2017 at 6:58 pm
Comment: what is your plan about keeping the original schoolhouse intact? It is a heritage site and I trust that it will be treated accordingly.
Answer: The original schoolhouse (1911) is intended to be saved and is the subject of a rehabilitation study which includes restoration and relocation on the site to maintain the connection and relationship to other historic buildings on the adjacent municipal property. The rehabilitated historic school is intended to be used for a number of residential units.

September 26, 2017 at 10:42 pm
Comment: Hi: We have lived in Murrayville for 20+ years. Please consider building larger townhomes – similar to the Heritage development by Infinity just at the top of Murrayville Hill off Fraser Hwy. They had master on the main with basements, as well as large 2 car garages. This project was very popular with downsizing Murrayville house owners and sold out very quickly. There are condos, houses and a few townhomes in Murrayville but this type of property development would suit our neighbourhood well. Thanks!

Your comments are welcome. We’d like to hear from you.