Suzanne Anton bitch slaps Dianne Watts
Posted on February 28th, 2008 in links, politics, rants, society, surrey, urban planning, vancouver |
There’s a story in The Province today about Surrey continuing it’s so-called “made in Surrey” approach to regional growth, although this time the city has a leg to stand on.
There’s a strong possibility that following the LRSP update, Metro Vancouver will gain stronger powers to enforce cities in the region to play along properly with the regional growth strategy - something Surrey has a reputation for “derailing” due to it’s sprawled development.
One of the current large problems in the region is a growing lack of industrial land. As most should be aware, Vancouver and Burnaby are actually making the situation worse by rezoning industrial land for high density condos. Just take a look downtown: False Creek North and South, Yaletown, Coal Harbour - all former industrial lands. Burnaby is playing a similar game, building condos along the SkyTrain lines, usually on land that is or was industrial.
Now, it’s perfectly debateable whether or not these rezonings were justified and are actually improving quality of life. Certainly, it’s a very complex debate, ranging from the Province building rapid transit along industrial corridors in the first place (in an attempt to avoid NIMBYs), to Vancouver pursuing a word renowed smart growth strategy for the Downtown Penninsula.
The fact remains though, that industrial land is disappearing quickly and cities north of the Fraser are doing nothing to replace the lost plots of industrial lands.
This leaves Surrey is a difficult situation. Jean Lamontagne, General Manager of the City of Surrey’s planning department:
“Many municipalities have converted large areas of industrial land to higher uses, such as residential,” Lamontagne said in a report to council.
“Surrey is now being expected to make up for the shortcomings of others.
“It is expected to provide storage, distribution and truck storage for the region. It is clearly not acceptable . . . as they do little for the tax base of the city,” he said.
In the article, Dianne Watts, Mayor of Surrey, outright dismisses the option that Metro Vancouver will be able to overrule the City’s land use authority:
“The pressure to convert industrial land to residential is very high in Surrey, but we’re saying no,” she said.
“The region is looking at other communities to pick up the slack. It wants to fix mistakes of the past, but one community can’t supply industrial land for the region.”
Then, Vancouver Councillor Suzanne Anton steps in and completely misreads the whole situation with this statement:
“Surrey wants to be able to upgrade industrial land to commercial land [and produce more tax revenue]. Surrey is saying more loudly than others that they don’t want to be told what to do,” said Anton, who sits on the Metro planning committee.
Surrey has never wanted to replace industrial with commercial. Frankly, industrial lands provide better jobs in the long term for residents. In fact, Surrey has pursued a very intense strategy of protecting or expanding industrial lands in the city.
But it gets better. Anton then goes in for the knockout:
She admitted Vancouver recently converted industrial land in Southeast False Creek for a future residential community of 15,000. But she said Surrey shouldn’t point fingers.
“Do we want to get into who shoots up on the Downtown Eastside and where they come from?” she asked.
BAM!
How dare Anton try and claim that all the homeless, mentally ill, and drug addicted in Vancouver are somehow Surrey’s problem?! How dare she reinforce a negative persona on both Surrey as a city and claim to define it’s type of residents?!
That type of verbal attack on a neighbouring community should not be occuring by any mayor or councillor in the region.
In fact, it’s quite debateable, but if it wasn’t for the SkyTrain, Whalley wouldn’t have even gotten half the problems it did in the 90’s. And where do you think those people were coming from - oh, right, VANCOUVER!
Sphere: Related Content

5 Responses
and of course Susan Anton et alia wants to replace the most hardcore industry of all - the port/trains just north of gastown - with a soccer stadium…
Actually, it’s not a replacement, but a vertical use of the land. Keep the tracks, but utilize the airspace above. Which makes sense to me…
The problem with this land substitution (industrial for residential) is that there appears to be some stupid belief that somehow, we just need to ship industries off-shore and keep service-industries here (a process that I’ve called in my research “tertiarization” - because it is a process of transformation from an industrial society (primary) to a services industry (tertiary), but the concept that we don’t need industries anymore is entirely flawed).
Oh, and I’ve moved to WordPress, finally :D
@anon - it WAS above the traintracks. But that proved so complex including the dangers, that Plan B is to fill in the ocean and build there. However, the most recent rumours I’ve heard is that despite pressure from both the City and the Port Authority, the Federal Gov’t is hesitant because of security concerns (ie terrorist strike) and doesn’t want to lose control of the water there.