<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 501-603 unit development in South Langford on tomorrow night&#8217;s docket</title>
	<atom:link href="http://insidelangford.ca/2010/01/24/501-603-unit-development-in-south-langford-on-tomorrow-nights-docket/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://insidelangford.ca/2010/01/24/501-603-unit-development-in-south-langford-on-tomorrow-nights-docket/</link>
	<description>News and views about Langford, British Columbia</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 04:22:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl McLachlan</title>
		<link>http://insidelangford.ca/2010/01/24/501-603-unit-development-in-south-langford-on-tomorrow-nights-docket/#comment-4271</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cheryl McLachlan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insidelangford.ca/?p=2575#comment-4271</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 501 unit Flatman development will be, if approved, according to the presentation made to the Planning &amp; Zoning Committee and audience members present on Mon. Jan. 25th donating 940 Latoria, which is land within the ALR (Agricultural Land Reserve) to the City of Langford and not use that property as the second major access road into the development.  The architect of the development did indicate there would still be a need for a a non-public gated fire/emergency access road that would follow along the existing driveway on the property, which would not need to go before the ALC (Agricultural Land Commission) for approval.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 501 unit Flatman development will be, if approved, according to the presentation made to the Planning &amp; Zoning Committee and audience members present on Mon. Jan. 25th donating 940 Latoria, which is land within the ALR (Agricultural Land Reserve) to the City of Langford and not use that property as the second major access road into the development.  The architect of the development did indicate there would still be a need for a a non-public gated fire/emergency access road that would follow along the existing driveway on the property, which would not need to go before the ALC (Agricultural Land Commission) for approval.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J</title>
		<link>http://insidelangford.ca/2010/01/24/501-603-unit-development-in-south-langford-on-tomorrow-nights-docket/#comment-4255</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 01:35:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insidelangford.ca/?p=2575#comment-4255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice of them to only tell us about the public forum for this 2 hours before hand ...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice of them to only tell us about the public forum for this 2 hours before hand &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: no longer shocked</title>
		<link>http://insidelangford.ca/2010/01/24/501-603-unit-development-in-south-langford-on-tomorrow-nights-docket/#comment-4167</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[no longer shocked]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insidelangford.ca/?p=2575#comment-4167</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wonder why tree retention studies are done after the fact....how can you know what you can build if you don&#039;t know what trees to keep first!!!  
I am also puzzled that Langford is consistently suggesting covenants to protect certain situations, yet encourages developers to ignore existing covenants on properties they want to develop. Always interesting watching the goal posts move in this city.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder why tree retention studies are done after the fact&#8230;.how can you know what you can build if you don&#8217;t know what trees to keep first!!!<br />
I am also puzzled that Langford is consistently suggesting covenants to protect certain situations, yet encourages developers to ignore existing covenants on properties they want to develop. Always interesting watching the goal posts move in this city.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

