Surrey/South Fraser Updates

metroXpress · #1 Posted **Mar 26, 2009, 9:15 PM**

This thread was started for the general updates of the city, Surrey, as we prepare for the upcoming developments in the next decade. I think this would serve like the General Vancouver Updates thread, but exclusively for Surrey.

"Surrey is currently the second largest city in BC and one of the fastest growing in all of Canada. Within the next decade, Surrey is expected to take Vancouver's place as the largest city in the province"

- Tourism Surrey (Official Visitors Guide 2009)

Locked In · #2 Posted **Mar 26, 2009, 9:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allen

Within the next decade, Surrey is expected to take Vancouver's place as the largest city in the province"

- Tourism Surrey (Official Visitors Guide 2009)

Does Tourism Surrey really advertise that? What is that projection based on? Metro Vancouver, in consultation with its member municipalities, has projected that Vancouver and Surrey will be roughly equal in population 30 years from now. In 2021, they won't be close...

metroXpress · #3 Posted **Mar 26, 2009, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked In

Does Tourism Surrey really advertise that? What is that projection based on? Metro Vancouver, in consultation with its member municipalities, has projected that Vancouver and Surrey will be roughly equal in population 30 years from now. In 2021, they won't be close...

They did. I quoted word by word form the guide I picked up today.
I don't think it will happen so soon either and that's why I brought it up here

Pinion · #4 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 3:35 AM**

Damn I can't wait until I can say I live in Metro Surrey.

LotusLand · #5 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 4:33 AM**

So I guess this is the thread where we'll post photos of cul-de-sacs and such

SpongeG · #6 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 5:29 AM**

back in the 90's the projections were higher than now I guess - maybe they scaled them back?

they said Surrey would overtake vancouver within 20 years - that was over 10 years ago

go surrey go

Spork · #7 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 6:48 AM**

Official BCStats models predict that Surrey's population will not surpass Vancouver's in the next 27 years.

In 2036, Vancouver will have a population of 817,166, and Surrey will have a population of 710,191. Unless you consider surpassing to be surpassing a previous amount, in which case, Surrey will surpass Vancouver's 2009 population in 2027.

Whalleyboy · #8 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 8:35 AM**

During the boom time Surrey was growing a lot faster. Thats why there are different times all over the place for when Surrey is set to pass Vancouver. As is stands Surrey is still fastest growing city in BC still so its hard to give true stats on when it could happen. For all we know we could get past this hard times soon an have some good boom again and Surrey could go even fast growth second time around cause after all this it the time for the investors to by the land cheaper.

metroXpress · #9 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 3:26 PM**

? I think 20 years would be a more reasonable answer. Just look at City Centre....still full of one-storey buildings, really old towers....The land own by Surrey is huge and it would take quite a while to shape it up.

nickinacan · #10 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allen

? I think 20 years would be a more reasonable answer. Just look at City Centre....still full of one-storey buildings, really old towers....The land own by Surrey is huge and it would take quite a while to shape it up.

Ah, but that's part of their plan. They have purchased a ton of land, will get it prepped for development, build a new road network and section off the lots as they please and sell it for cheap. This council has been very, very smart. I could see the majority of the development in the area occuring within 10 years as opposed to 20. The more companies, institutional offices and cultural draws that relocate or open up in Surrey, the more people that will want to relocate to Surrey.

djmk · #11 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickinacan

The more companies, institutional offices and cultural draws that relocate or open up in Surrey, the more people that will want to relocate to Surrey.

AND, because surrey is cheaper to live. especially for families.

metroXpress · #12 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 5:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by djmk

AND, because surrey is cheaper to live. especially for families.

Way cheaper than Vancouver/ Richmond/Burnaby and the North Shore

paradigm4 · #13 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickinacan

Ah, but that's part of their plan. They have purchased a ton of land, will get it prepped for development, build a new road network and section off the lots as they please and sell it for cheap. This council has been very, very smart. I could see the majority of the development in the area occuring within 10 years as opposed to 20. The more companies, institutional offices and cultural draws that relocate or open up in Surrey, the more people that will want to relocate to Surrey.

Haha that's what we all hope would've happened. As it turns out, if you are talking about the Transit Village concept, that's unlikely to occur, at least in the near future. While the City owns a major piece of land to the west of the SkyTrain station (where City Hall is being proposed for construction), all the land to the east is privately owned. The lots range from tiny to huge, some with one owner, many with multiple. And apparently, due to the range in lots and owners, the process of either purchasing or encouraging redevelopment is barely moving at all. Furthermore, the City would never use expropriation as an option, as that would go completely against the development friendly culture they've built.

Which is unfortunate in my mind because the only way we're ever going to get a decent critical mass of infrastructure near Surrey Central is if the land is all bought up, split into decent sized plots in between a walkable road grid, and sold off for development.

nickinacan · #14 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 6:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Haha that's what we all hope would've happened. As it turns out, if you are talking about the Transit Village concept, that's unlikely to occur, at least in the near future. While the City owns a major piece of land to the west of the SkyTrain station (where City Hall is being proposed for construction), all the land to the east is privately owned. The lots range from tiny to huge, some with one owner, many with multiple. And apparently, due to the range in lots and owners, the process of either purchasing or encouraging redevelopment is barely moving at all. Furthermore, the City would never use expropriation as an option, as that would go completely against the development friendly culture they've built.

Which is unfortunate in my mind because the only way we're ever going to get a decent critical mass of infrastructure near Surrey Central is if the land is all bought up, split into decent sized plots in between a walkable road grid, and sold off for development.

Oh I wasn't talking about the Transit Village plan at all. I know that is on life support as we speak, especially since the last renderings of Central City Phase 2 had the civic plaza included where the parking lot currently is, and not east of the Skytrain as originally planned.

As for the mess between the City Parkway and King George, that will only be resolved by utilizing incentives to redevelop. The City is also stalling when it comes to the redistribution of King George to the newly upgraded parallel routes due to the same issues. The City will inevitably have to, for a lack of a better term, piss off a few residents and business owners in order to get the ball rolling. It is something that will have to be done... but when will they get it done? If it doesn't happen, the plan will never succeed.

metroXpress · #15 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 7:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickinacan

As for the mess between the City Parkway and King George, that will only be resolved by utilizing incentives to redevelop. The City is also stalling when it comes to the redistribution of King George to the newly upgraded parallel routes due to the same issues. The City will inevitably have to, for a lack of a better term, piss off a few residents and business owners in order to get the ball rolling. It is something that will have to be done... but when will they get it done? If it doesn't happen, the plan will never succeed.

They do have to piss off some business owners and residents to redevelop the whole area. If they are always acting as a hindrance to the whole project....Surrey City Centre would suck...

metroXpress · #16 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 7:06 PM**

Oh, by the way, the old Chrysler Car Dealership on King George (right next to skytrain station) is now Grace Community Church...

LotusLand · #17 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 9:34 PM**

Why is the population of Surrey such a big deal? It has 3 times the land to work with. So naturally they'll have more people living there.

nickinacan · #18 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 9:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LotusLand

Why is the population of Surrey such a big deal? It has 3 times the land to work with. So naturally they'll have more people living there.

Actually just twice. One third of all the land in Surrey is either part of the ALR or is designated as parkland, or about the size of the city of Vancouver.

LotusLand · #19 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 10:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickinacan

Actually just twice. One third of all the land in Surrey is either part of the ALR or is designated as parkland, or about the size of the city of Vancouver.

Yeah Vancouver has park land as well as does every other city. I guess for development purposes Surrey has twice the land only if you include all land in Vancouver as developable (I know its not a word) and only 2/3 of Surrey.

But then you ignore Vancouvers designated parkland.

vanman · #20 Posted **Mar 28, 2009, 3:49 PM**

^Developable is a word even though spellcheck doesn't agree with it.