Surrey/South Fraser Updates

[Westbased]

Originally Posted by Blease

Not a popular opinion but providing more and more services for the homeless is akin to leaving food for the two raccoons who occasionally run by your house and then acting surprised when sixteen raccoons start visiting your front yard every morning.

Somewhat agree with this.

I used to manage a small truck parking site down by Bridgeview area a couple years back. Usually they had 15-20 trailers parked there and I would go by once in a while to collect rent/make sure it was secure. Every time I would go down there would be a small tent set up at the back of the site with a couple homeless folks living there.

No big deal, but I made sure to get them to clear out every time I went. While they most likely came back after I left, the constant notice to get out of there by me kept the situation in control.

Fast forward to last March, the owner took back management of the lot to save himself some costs. I warned him he needed to make sure the site was secure and to make sure any homeless on site were constantly cleared out etc.

He did not take my suggestion seriously...any way long story short he did not regularly monitor the site and within 2 months there was a full out shanti town operating out of his property. They had generators to provide hot water for showers, you name it they had it.

This obviously destroyed his rental revenue from truck parking, a good $3000 a month. It took him 5 months to get them cleared out of this property at a cost of $5000 along with city fines.

Anyway point of the story, if homeless are allowed to gather, they will gather from far and wide and not stop unless they are physically removed. A similar situation happened on 135A, they were slowly allowed to accumulate and now we have the current situation.

I do hope these temporary units are well secured, constantly maintained and monitored or we will literally have new "downtown core" for the homeless literally a stones throw away from where it is now.

[Ramsay]

Originally Posted by Blease

Not a popular opinion but providing more and more services for the homeless is akin to leaving food for the two raccoons who occasionally run by your house and then acting surprised when sixteen raccoons start visiting your front yard every morning.

Agreed.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Blease

Not a popular opinion but providing more and more services for the homeless is akin to leaving food for the two raccoons who occasionally run by your house and then acting surprised when sixteen raccoons start visiting your front yard every morning.

It is somewhat accurate but misses the greater picture. Collecting the homeless in a place where they can get help and services is not a bad thing if we want to help out and reduce their need and addiction issues.

What is missing is a national strategy. So if we start helping out in Metro Vancouver and nothing is done in say Calgary, Edmonton, or even Toronto, then those people migrate to "where the free drugs and services are" and the weather is better. So you are part correct, but I don't think we should stop helping but rather push for all governments across Canada to come up with a unified strategy once and for all.

[Tetsuo]

Corporate convention centre ‘ideal’ for Sears’ old spot in Surrey

SURREY — The Surrey Board of Trade would like to see a corporate convention centre replace the Sears department store that permanently closed for business at Guildford Town Centre on Monday.

Ivanhoe Cambridge owns the mall and at press time was silent on what the future will hold for the former Sears site.

But Anita Huberman, CEO of the board of trade, said the board would like to see something “very similar to the Vancouver Convention Centre” occupy that spot, at 10355 152nd St.

...

Would prefer seeing something else go in the spot

[Vin]

Originally Posted by jhausner

It is somewhat accurate but misses the greater picture. Collecting the homeless in a place where they can get help and services is not a bad thing if we want to help out and reduce their need and addiction issues.

What is missing is a national strategy. So if we start helping out in Metro Vancouver and nothing is done in say Calgary, Edmonton, or even Toronto, then those people migrate to "where the free drugs and services are" and the weather is better. So you are part correct, but I don't think we should stop helping but rather push for all governments across Canada to come up with a unified strategy once and for all.

You won't be saying that if the "collection of homeless" happens to be just outside your home.

Free drugs isn't the answer IMO, and free services are useless if the addicts are not able to quit their addictions.

[Equinox71]

Originally Posted by Vin

You won't be saying that if the "collection of homeless" happens to be just outside your home.

Free drugs isn't the answer IMO, and free services are useless if the addicts are not able to quit their addictions.

Everything could be considered useless for those most disenfranchised unless housing is available. Take a nice look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs if you want a refresher. Without stability (i.e. housing and security), the ensuing chaos fuels the cycle of addiction. I worked for years with Vancouver Coastal Health's addiction services both in the DTES and community health centres in affluent areas such as Kerrisdale. The hallmarks of addiction in Kerrisdale are the same as anywhere else except the recovery rates were higher because most clients did not have the instability of homelessness and hunger. I love seeing the container housing by the Main Street skytrain station and will be equally happy to see this by Gateway. There are also plans for a shelter of sorts to be built close to the RCMP HQ in Green Timbers a few blocks from my home. While many in my area are not happy about this, I am. Why? Because *news flash* the homeless and addicted are among us anyways. They discretely couch surf or openly sleep in the hidden corners of various townhouse complexes or backyards. Hmmm - would I rather see the remnants of a dilapidated tent in the Quibble Creek greenway or container housing? To me its a no brainer and kind of like the ongoing drama about the new recovery centre proposed in an unused hockey arena in Winnipeg. Everyone goes "I don't want any addicts near me!" while the affluent next door neighbour continues to see his or her life fall apart due to an unhealthy relationship with Crown Royal. We just want it out of sight even though its all around us anyways. Ever set foot in a high school? University campus? Bankers' convention? Family gathering? Neighbourhood pub? Addiction is all around us so let's be real and start a dialogue based on fact. The housing first model is based on science and fact and not some antiquated morality model based on armchair quarterbacks who have not taken the time to review the science. The less we start judging and the sooner we start building, the better off we ALL will be. The "free drugs" programming for opiate dependancy works wonders in some areas like the UK where those deemed medically suitable receive the minimal amount to stave off withdrawal symptoms and with other supports, are able to transition to healthy and stable lives, often thriving. To that end, I'd be happy to overlook a container housing project every twenty blocks across the Metro-Vancouver region in all enclaves because it would not contain anything that I don't see on the streets and in backyards around me everyday, in Surrey or Kerrisdale. While we're at it, the small cost of opiates for those that need them are FAR less than the costs associated with instability (i.e. policing, vandalism, emergency visits, etc). The cost analysis alone should have each and every taxpayer *demanding* transitional housing on their block and accessible pharmacotherapy treatments. The collection of homeless and the grim faces of addiction are ubiquitous around us already - I say better it be in a stable context than not because stability is the first rung out of the downward spiral. If anybody wants to really explore this issue in a non-emotive and non-reactionary way and instead review the science, check out any of the many Dr. Gabor Mate evidence-based videos on Youtube - he is Vancouver's gift to the world on this very subject. Or...just bury your head in the sand and say "Not near me, please!" and continue to fund inefficient bare minimal so-called remedial measures - up to you.

*steps off soapbox*

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

Would prefer seeing something else go in the spot

Like what? Saks off 5th? Provide an opinion at least. A convention center is indeed needed for Surrey, but I agree one that replaces the old Sears location is not the only choice.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Like what? Saks off 5th? Provide an opinion at least. A convention center is indeed needed for Surrey, but I agree one that replaces the old Sears location is not the only choice.

I wouldn't mind seeing some version of towers with podiums (like Georgetown) on the Sears Guildford site.

It's probably slated for towers, but I'd like to see a convention center north of 104th at City Parkway (I rem that building was a Sears at some point in the past).

[EhJay]

City announced 3 modular housing places with 160 units and the mayor said she can't see why anyone would want to live in a tent once it's done.
Modular Housing

[MovieBuff]

Corporate convention centre ‘ideal’ for Sears’ old spot in Surrey
Surrey Board of Trade says former location in Guildford is great spot for ‘first-class’ facility

https://www.surreynowleader.com/news...pot-in-surrey/

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by MovieBuff

Corporate convention centre ‘ideal’ for Sears’ old spot in Surrey
Surrey Board of Trade says former location in Guildford is great spot for ‘first-class’ facility

https://www.surreynowleader.com/news...pot-in-surrey/

Anita Huberman (CEO of the board of trade) is wishing out loud and hoping it comes true...

Surrey Mayor Linda Hepner maintains that “with the LRT (light rail transit) going through there any of those business opportunities represent a good location.

“I would not have any comment over that location over any others that may come to mind relative to a location,” Hepner told the Now-Leader. “I think certainly the time is right for the city to have some conference space and that’s as good as any given that the transportation option is there.”

...

Riordan McCarthy, retail leasing director for Guildford Town Centre, told the Now-Leader on Wednesday that he couldn’t say who the site’s next occupant will be.

“No further update at the moment. Nothing that I can report on officially, no,” McCarthy said.

“When we have secured a replacement we would have a more cohesive announcement. Very rarely will we announce independently to one party without sort of announcing to the world.”

Huberman said the board of trade has pitched the idea for a convention centre with the mall owner.

“We met with Ivanhoe Cambridge early last year for the possibility of that site being used as a convention centre because we feel that there was going to be some type of redevelopment around the 104th area, there was an empty parking lot there, lots of land and we thought it would be an opportunity because we’re so starved for that convention centre that we so desperately need — a nice corporate convention centre — and so I know that with the light rail transit it would have been the ideal location around that corridor.

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Like what? Saks off 5th? Provide an opinion at least. A convention center is indeed needed for Surrey, but I agree one that replaces the old Sears location is not the only choice.

Mixed use development, some higher quality new builds with commercial components. Great location, next to a fresh mall and rec centre and good access to HWY 1 (and future rapid transit)

Convention centre around Surrey Central would be more ideal

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Vin

You won't be saying that if the "collection of homeless" happens to be just outside your home.

Perhaps. But these people were in these areas well before the "boom" in development. Whalley was a rough area with homeless and drugs when I was 10 years old back in the 80s. The downtown east side has been rough for decades.

People choose to move into the areas and the problems don't just go away.

I chose not to buy a place next to 135A just like I won't buy a place around Main and Hastings likely ever because you're right, I don't want that right outside my home, where I live. That said, I've probably spent more time around the Whalley strip donating time and clothing to the shelters there and trying to be a good citizen, than most people on these forums. So just because I choose not to live around those areas doesn't mean I have no empathy.

They shouldn't be around where I live anyway because there are no services here for them, they should be where they can get help.

Free drugs isn't the answer IMO, and free services are useless if the addicts are not able to quit their addictions.

Then what is because what we've been doing for 50 years hasn't worked, it's only gotten worse?

What we're doing today isn't the answer either, society has been "fighting" the drug problem for 50 years now. Definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Sometimes we need to try something new.

I agree though that free drug/services are useless if the addicts aren't able to quit the addictions. Thus my point it needs to be a national strategy that takes the entire process through. If someone is being provided a safe place to live and drug assistance to help them get out of the hands of drug dealers and gangs, then they need to be guaranteed services including drug rehab and support until they are clean and their life has turned around. The services just aren't there for a lot of people.

Look at the recent announcement by the NDP for their expansion at river view. It is adding _11_ net-new beds for mental health. There are thousands of people with mental issues that need help, 11 beds is a complete joke. They can wake me up when they announce 100 beds or more which is what is needed.

People gripe all the time about "why should I pay for them with my taxes??" but the truth is we pay for a lot of services with our taxes that we don't use and for people we don't know. Facts are simple that you get someone off drugs who is a burden on society, takes time away from the Police and court systems, requires social support, may commit crimes to support their habit and you turn them around to be a contributing person in society who is no longer costing us money but contributing in taxes as they are working, it is a win-win situation in my eyes.

It is just my opinion but I feel that not helping costs us far more money in the long run as tax payers than footing the bill to help them get clean, even if it was a "choice" for them to get hooked on drugs in the first place.

[Westbased]

Very very preliminary, but I've heard through the grapevine that the church property across from both the HUB and Avani Centre (King George and Fraser Highway southeast corner) may be partnering up with a developer to build out their land.

Looks to be around 4 acres of land.

[Equinox71]

Originally Posted by Westbased

Very very preliminary, but I've heard through the grapevine that the church property across from both the HUB and Avani Centre (King George and Fraser Highway southeast corner) may be partnering up with a developer to build out their land.

Looks to be around 4 acres of land.

That wouldn't surprise me in the least - makes perfect sense. Wonder if something creative will emerge like at Bosa's University District (albeit that is a much smaller venue now being used by several congregations and the one you speak of is much larger in space and congregants).

[Westbased]

Originally Posted by Equinox71

That wouldn't surprise me in the least - makes perfect sense. Wonder if something creative will emerge like at Bosa's University District (albeit that is a much smaller venue now being used by several congregations and the one you speak of is much larger in space and congregants).

Bosa would definitely be a front runner in my guess, they've partnered with a few churches and their also doing the Italian Cultural Centre...

The property has great potential for a large mixed use development.

Hope we see some market rental units pop up close to King George station as well...

[Shift]

Also on the up and coming list..

I saw renderings this week for the site below at Bolivar & King George just north of Gateway - currently under application.

Will be 3 towers above 6-storey podiums with a very sleek and forward thinking architectural design with exoskeleton-like crowns - unlike anything i've seen in Metro Van. They are intending it to be a 'gateway' project to city centre as you come up the hill. Something to look forward to. Architect is MCM.

[SurreyonTheMap]

Originally Posted by Shift

Also on the up and coming list..

I saw renderings this week for the site below at Bolivar & King George just north of Gateway - currently under application.

Will be 3 towers above 6-storey podiums with a very sleek and forward thinking architectural design with exoskeleton-like crowns - unlike anything i've seen in Metro Van. They are intending it to be a 'gateway' project to city centre as you come up the hill. Something to look forward to. Architect is MCM.

Will this be the same as the posting of the Signature S building that was sent a while back?

[Shift]

^No this is a different site, and an actual in process application.

I've seen plans for the 'S' signature building site too however (SCDC project in the works but no application submitted yet). It will not be the 'S' concept building floated around here. It will be more mid-rise and 'blocky' massing with a gap/corridor through the middle of the site. I believe Revery Architecture (Bing Thom) may be the architect if I remember correctly.

[Westbased]

Originally Posted by Shift

Also on the up and coming list..

I saw renderings this week for the site below at Bolivar & King George just north of Gateway - currently under application.

Will be 3 towers above 6-storey podiums with a very sleek and forward thinking architectural design with exoskeleton-like crowns - unlike anything i've seen in Metro Van. They are intending it to be a 'gateway' project to city centre as you come up the hill. Something to look forward to. Architect is MCM.

I wonder if the city will allow more towers go up around this signature piece.

Are you able to reveal who the developer is for the project?