Surrey City Centre Redevelopment Plans

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I work with someone who recently moved from Vancouver (not Downtown) to Surrey Central and he has been disappointed by rough/sketchy the area still is. There is certainly a lot of development happening, but there is still a way for the area to go.

Agreed. I moved from Mount Pleasant to Surrey City Centre a few years ago to be closer to work, since the sometimes hour long commutes were rough.

What I've noticed is the majority of the development is happening around King George Station, and on the West Side of Surrey Central Station, and very little around Gateway Station. It's definitely an up and coming area that has long been overlooked, and with the large office proposals (Centre Block, Central City 2, Innovation Blvd, ect), educational facilities (SFU with coming expansions, KPU, newly announced UBC Campus) and developers have snatched up the majority of the land along King George Blvd, Whalley Blvd, and University Drive. It's easy to see that there is finally attention being paid to the area to transform it into the second Metro Core of Vancouver.

That being said, the area is still very much still in transition. Whalley has had a bad reputation for decades and it's taken a long time to get to the point we are at today. It's been a low income area for as long as I can remember, with rapid growth under Bob Bose (1988 to 1996) mostly taking place in other areas of Surrey leaving Whalley to decline. Then there was the first coming of Doug McCallum (1996 to 2005) that seemed to focus mainly on policing and not much else (Sound familiar?), with real visible change starting to occur once Dianne Watts came into office (2005 to 2014), which is the period when the current City Centre plan was made and refined.

As for living here today, everything you really need for daily life is here and within walking distance. What it does lack, are cultural amenities like theatres and performance stages, and a nightlife. There isn't much to do around here, but that'll come with time, and higher incomes moving to the area. That being said, there is a diverse selection of restaurants.

TLDR: There is huge investment in the area, things are changing, but it is still an area of transition that is starting to overcome its former bad reputation.

[Abii]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I work with someone who recently moved from Vancouver (not Downtown) to Surrey Central and he has been disappointed by rough/sketchy the area still is. There is certainly a lot of development happening, but there is still a way for the area to go.

Thanks. I need to go there at night and just walk around for a solid half hour.

[Abii]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

Agreed. I moved from Mount Pleasant to Surrey City Centre a few years ago to be closer to work, since the sometimes hour long commutes were rough.

What I've noticed is the majority of the development is happening around King George Station, and on the West Side of Surrey Central Station, and very little around Gateway Station. It's definitely an up and coming area that has long been overlooked, and with the large office proposals (Centre Block, Central City 2, Innovation Blvd, ect), educational facilities (SFU with coming expansions, KPU, newly announced UBC Campus) and developers have snatched up the majority of the land along King George Blvd, Whalley Blvd, and University Drive. It's easy to see that there is finally attention being paid to the area to transform it into the second Metro Core of Vancouver.

That being said, the area is still very much still in transition. Whalley has had a bad reputation for decades and it's taken a long time to get to the point we are at today. It's been a low income area for as long as I can remember, with rapid growth under Bob Bose (1988 to 1996) mostly taking place in other areas of Surrey leaving Whalley to decline. Then there was the first coming of Doug McCallum (1996 to 2005) that seemed to focus mainly on policing and not much else (Sound familiar?), with real visible change starting to occur once Dianne Watts came into office (2005 to 2014), which is the period when the current City Centre plan was made and refined.

As for living here today, everything you really need for daily life is here and within walking distance. What it does lack, are cultural amenities like theatres and performance stages, and a nightlife. There isn't much to do around here, but that'll come with time, and higher incomes moving to the area. That being said, there is a diverse selection of restaurants.

TLDR: There is huge investment in the area, things are changing, but it is still an area of transition that is starting to overcome its former bad reputation.

Thank you. Not having a lot to do is not a problem for me yet. I'm at the starting stage of my career and that means I slave away big time at work. By the time I get home I just want to eat and sleep. My goal is long term growth and because of my budget, I don't want to just buy any random thing in Burnaby or Coquitlam (outside of the happening spots like Metrotown).

I feel like for what I want (long term growth), surrey central is the right area. But I want to make sure this isn't just a story and that change will come. With UBC announcing plans, all the developments, Pattullo being replaced etc... I'm pretty much sold for now.

Thanks for the input.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Abii

Thanks. I need to go there at night and just walk around for a solid half hour.

spend some time outside the Walmart it's quite the place in the evenings.

The Esso on 104th is where there is usually a group hanging out on the side near the drive-thru exit, as a driver there are times when going down KGH you have to watch that they don't stumble or fall into the street there. They are often shooting up there or just laying on the ground there.

There are a number of church-run places along KGH between 104 and 108th where you will find them hanging out in scenes similar to main and hastings.

Have walked down KGH from Whalley where I stay at my BF's and its never that bad but always something, you either have to step around people doing their shooting up, passed out, or just randomly scream at you, one guy screamed something at us when he passed us but that was all he did. Anyway now when we walk we just walk along Whalley Blvd till 104 or 102 and avoid most of it now.

The area around Surrey Central station isn't that bad but it's just pretty run down and not a place you want to spend any time.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

As for living here today, everything you really need for daily life is here and within walking distance. What it does lack, are cultural amenities like theatres and performance stages, and a nightlife. There isn't much to do around here, but that'll come with time, and higher incomes moving to the area. That being said, there is a diverse selection of restaurants.

I grew up in N Delta and have family living in Newton and that is soo true. If I wanted to go anywhere for entertainment my choices were a movie theatre or head into downtown Van. Not much has changed in that department.

Originally Posted by Abii

I feel like for what I want (long term growth), surrey central is the right area. But I want to make sure this isn't just a story and that change will come. With UBC announcing plans, all the developments, Pattullo being replaced etc... I'm pretty much sold for now.

If you're planning for the long term then by all means Surrey Central is what you're looking for. It's been catching up on decades of lack development in the last number of years. You should check the area out in person.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Abii

Thanks. I need to go there at night and just walk around for a solid half hour.

I'd walk around during the day. As others have pointed out, Surrey Central is in a transition. It is also a very large area roughly the same size as the Downtown Vancouver peninsula. So you're going to have a different feel depending on the area even at night.

That said, because it is in transition, you have a lot of development areas in between empty fields, bush, and run-down boarded up properties. So at night, moving from area to area can be a bit sketchy if you get off frequently trafficked areas. Also there is a _LOT_ of construction so it can just be challenging to move around.

The closer to Gateway you get, the sketchier it is at night. During the day it is no worse than what you get through most of Downtown Vancouver. There isn't a time I've been downtown where you don't walk a few blocks and see people in sleeping bags camped out next to the Bay or office buildings, or people with carts, or also shooting up. That's just a big city Metro-Vancouver issue Surrey is not immune to but not exclusive to.

And other than the stretch between 104 and 108th at night which today I'd still say avoid at night, you're likely AOK if you're a male. The reality is as a resident, you don't really need to walk around at night as has been mentioned there isn't really any night life, and any area the restaurants are is _ok_ at night and basically next to the residential towers of each area.

I've lived now in Surrey Central area (near King George) for 10 years and have honestly never had to venture anywhere at night on foot. Ever. So if you or your friend is looking at moving, scope it out during the day.

[Abii]

Originally Posted by jhausner

I'd walk around during the day. As others have pointed out, Surrey Central is in a transition. It is also a very large area roughly the same size as the Downtown Vancouver peninsula. So you're going to have a different feel depending on the area even at night.

That said, because it is in transition, you have a lot of development areas in between empty fields, bush, and run-down boarded up properties. So at night, moving from area to area can be a bit sketchy if you get off frequently trafficked areas. Also there is a _LOT_ of construction so it can just be challenging to move around.

The closer to Gateway you get, the sketchier it is at night. During the day it is no worse than what you get through most of Downtown Vancouver. There isn't a time I've been downtown where you don't walk a few blocks and see people in sleeping bags camped out next to the Bay or office buildings, or people with carts, or also shooting up. That's just a big city Metro-Vancouver issue Surrey is not immune to but not exclusive to.

And other than the stretch between 104 and 108th at night which today I'd still say avoid at night, you're likely AOK if you're a male. The reality is as a resident, you don't really need to walk around at night as has been mentioned there isn't really any night life, and any area the restaurants are is _ok_ at night and basically next to the residential towers of each area.

I've lived now in Surrey Central area (near King George) for 10 years and have honestly never had to venture anywhere at night on foot. Ever. So if you or your friend is looking at moving, scope it out during the day.

Today I went to Surrey on a whim (was planning on doing my trip next week), but I was in Coquitlam so I decided why not. This was the first time I had spent more than 10 minutes in Surrey since we immigrated to Canada in 2000. In total I was in Surrey for 1-1.5 hours today.

Brace yourselves for a post full of "classism" and potential "internalized racism". I'll be honest, a lot of my enthusiasm died today.

The amount of construction was even greater than I thought, which was good to see. However, the degree of general "dumpiness" of Surrey was also FAR greater than I had imagined.

Since I immigrated to Canada as a child, I've lived in West Van, North Van, Downtown Van, Burnaby and Coquitlam. Right now I'm working Coq and living in Burquitlam. I think I have a good sense of the Lower Mainland. I also spent three years in Edmonton.

I will be honest, Surrey was FAR closer to Edmonton than anywhere else I have ever been in the Lower Mainland. I would say it was far worse than Edmonton. The "misery" and poverty was so palpable. Power lines coming down from poles and going directly into the roofs of houses like third world countries. Homes with mattresses in front of them. Strip malls everywhere. Rundown homes.

I then went to the industrial area around Pattullo. God diggity damn. I get it, it's an industrial area. But I lived by industrial areas in North Van at one point. I won't describe it further than this but it was a freaking mess.

Downtown Vancouver is 3.X square km. Downtown Surrey is 5.X square km with a far lower population. On top of that is the general crumminess outside of the Downtown area. Obviously it's a community in transition.

I'm left with one question: can this place be drastically different in 20 years? After visiting it today... I don't know.

I will definitely visit the place again. I think a lot of this reaction is based on the higher expectations I had built in my head based on the pics I've seen here.

My apologies if this sounded overly exaggerated and negative, but it was my genuine observation. It's so weird how once you cross either of those bridges, it's as if you're in a completely different city (I get it, Surrey is a different city, but you don't get that feeling when you go from the North Shore to Vancouver, or from Burnaby to Coquitlam, or from Coquitlam to the NS etc...).

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Abii

I'm left with one question: can this place be drastically different in 20 years? After visiting it today... I don't know.

There does seem to be more interest in development in Surrey's so called downtown area, and lots of plans to develop all those parking lots along KGB, but it has taken a long time for things to happen.

Skytrain has been in Surrey for 27 years now. While a Skytrain usually triggers a huge amount of development around it's stations, as it has in other areas like Metrotown, Brentwood, Lougheed, Coquitlam Centre, etc., Surrey has been slow to grow, relative to how long Skytrain has been there. That could very well continue as we see the Evergreen Line has brought more options away from Surrey. The Evergreen Line has only been around for a few and there is already tonnes of development, and for good reason. These areas are a lot nicer.

If I had to choose a further out there suburb I had to live (equivalent to Surrey Central), I would choose Port Moody and Coquitlam Centre, as they are much nicer, better put together areas.

[rpvan]

Originally Posted by Abii

Power lines coming down from poles and going directly into the roofs of houses like third world countries.

You see this in many older neighbourhoods throughout Metro Vancouver though. Examples being East Van, Central Burnaby and Central Coquitlam.

[SpongeG]

yea that sounds right for Surrey. I am getting used to it as I spend about 90% of my time there these days. It's very dumpy, 108th does have three developments about to start plus Q5. But dotted all over the place are grassy empty lots with garbage and disposed of furniture etc. and then you get some mega house next to some dumpy old single story, it's very polarizing.

There are so many empty lots with even all the development happening it's going to take a very long time for them to get utilized, so it will be quite spotty just as it is currently. Guildford area is slightly better but it's all strip malls and again lots of empty lots everywhere and too far to walk to Skytrain so a vehicle is required or just use the bus which isn't great late at night.

[Spr0ckets]

Maybe the Skytrain line extension east will help spur along things?

Or perhaps it could change it for the other direction?
(and drive more development and interest past Surrey rather than in it, making it a sort of "flyover" city of sorts)

It is indeed curious how the Skytrain has accelerated development in other municipalities (Brentwood, Coquitlam, Richmond) but hasn't seen the same commensurate expected development one would expect in the second most populated area in the GVA.

Could it really be a case where its reputation (fairly earned or not) is actually a driver and push factor inhibiting the same kind of interest that other areas get?

[SpongeG]

I think Surrey just has too much land available to keep developing SFH. There are so many houses going up in Surrey, the South Surrey, East Surrey and Cloverdale areas are really a non-stop construction zone. Those areas also have nicer shopping, newer schools and a much nicer vibe than Downtown Surrey which right now doesn't have much to offer.

Along the skytrain route down Fraser Hwy in the last few years 100's of townhouse developments have gone up and there are quite a number ready to start.

KGH has many empty spots between Surrey Central and Newton, right now there are a few of those lots finally seeing some action, mainly townhouses and a few apartments. Getting from Whalley to the Costco in Newton can take up to 30 minutes, traffic is just horrible, its just as quick to zip onto Hwy 1 over to Langley or the Burnaby store most days.

[Klazu]

I have nothing against Surrey, but I share the above assessment. It is a very polarizing area with dumpy crack shacks next to new towers. It's definitely improving but even with 20 more towers it will still feel empty, as the area is just so large and development is all over the place around three SkyTrain stations. Improving the streetscape will also be a huge challenge, as the area feels so suburban and bare.

If I would be to move out of Metrotown it would be Lougheed, Brentwood and Coquitlam Centre in that order as my next options.

[brophy87]

The real advantage of Surrey in the condo market right now is you get the most SqFt-age for money while being proximate to rapid transit and brand new infrastructure which won't need to be replaced for several decades. If that Cascadia corridor high-speed rail somehow comes to fruition it'll be a significant catalyst for growth in City Centre. If you zoom out on a map of Metro Vancouver as a region Whalley is fairly central to everything with great highway and bridge infrastructure which makes it a great place for highly mobile people. Will only become a more central location to the region as the Fraser Valley rapidly develops.

[dferch]

Rome wasn't built in a day..

DT Surrey started with like five high-rise towers spread over 10 blocks, and look where it's gone in the past five years. One also needs to separate what developers and the City are saying from what residents say; they'll always hype up Surrey. DT Surrey is definitely not a vibrant urban downtown yet, but an empty lot that's waiting for a development proposal should not be the basis for how we foresee the area looking in twenty years.

DT Surrey stats (UrbanSurrey, 2021).
Under construction: 16 High Rise, 7 Low Rise
Approved: 39 HR, 31 LR
Proposed: 28 HR, 17 LR

https://urbansurrey.com/active-projects-in-surrey-city-centre/

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

Maybe the Skytrain line extension east will help spur along things?

Or perhaps it could change it for the other direction?
(and drive more development and interest past Surrey rather than in it, making it a sort of "flyover" city of sorts)

It is indeed curious how the Skytrain has accelerated development in other municipalities (Brentwood, Coquitlam, Richmond) but hasn't seen the same commensurate expected development one would expect in the second most populated area in the GVA.

Could it really be a case where its reputation (fairly earned or not) is actually a driver and push factor inhibiting the same kind of interest that other areas get?

The key thing people are forgetting is Surrey at its core is rural not urban. The urban has only come recently quite honestly. The vast majority, read that as 95%+ of development every year that goes on in Surrey is nowhere near the core.

And that's because it has so much land. If you want to buy a house, 99% of people in Metro Vancouver could never buy a house in Vancouver, North Van, West Van, Richmond, Coquitlam, Burnaby, heck even New Westminster. If you want to buy a townhouse, many of these cities are also very much out of reach of the vast majority of people living in Metro Vancouver. My wife and I looked at buying a townhouse in Vancouver close to Oakridge 7 years ago and it would have cost us $1.1 million. Instead we bought our townhouse in Surrey Central which we are still in today which is 100 sq. feet larger than the one in Oakridge and actually closer to amenities like shopping, SkyTrain, etc., for $360,000. That is what people are buying in Surrey right now. I could buy 3 x townhouses 7 years ago in Surrey for 1 in Vancouver.

So anyone wanting a house or a townhouse looks to Surrey, Maple Ridge, Langley, and outward. Given Surrey still has large swaths of land, it is more cost effective from a return on investment, for developers to focus nearly entirely on pushing out new townhouse complexes and single family row homes everywhere.

A condo in Surrey takes about 2 to 4 weeks to sell on average. A townhouse/house takes about 2 days. The demand is still just not there for the urban aspect compared to other cities other than maybe Coquitlam which is mad frantically building up Burke mountain and taking down all the trees they can to try and keep both hands in the same pie. The other cities above are just basically out of land so it is all re-development which is not as quick.

The final item that has always hurt Surrey is lower land values in general even in Central Surrey. Up until very recently (when Dianne Watts took over as Mayor), developers could not recover the costs of building a high-rise versus what they could sell units for due to land values. Under DW, land values finally reached a point where now it is more economical and they can actually get an OK return on investment.

It is still not outstanding though which is why it seems every major project in Surrey is phase 1 of 238 to be built over 20 years. That's because developers want to build a bunch of high rises, but they want to build them over a LONG period of time so later phases benefit from increased land value. In certain areas like King George, we're now reaching a decent critical mass so we are seeing an acceleration, and Surrey Central (around SC skytrain) is pretty much at the same point. But most of the rest of Surrey Central (which someone pointed out is fairly large) is not quite at that massive multiple redevelopment all at once stage. And certainly not at the return on investment developers get by buying 5 acres in South Surrey to tear down 5 old houses and build 500 townhouses for a many thousand percentage return on investment.

Not like you get in Coquitlam Center, Brentwood, Oak Ridge, etc., where it is more beneficial to developers to build everything as quickly as possible.

So long story short, Surrey is still an infant and basically what Vancouver was in the 1930s I'd say. We have a long way to go and many of the other regional centers had a lot of legs up against Surrey, its history, its present, and its geography.

Abii you mentioned you spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey. You didn't. You spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey Central which makes up about 5% of the land mass of Surrey. That's what most people that don't live here do. I can guarantee you that a large portion of Surrey itself is not dumpy when you get outside the core, because again the primary focus of development is not in the core. It is increasing but it is not primary. You go to South Surrey and you find houses that put some in West Vancouver to shame with very clean neighborhoods. You go to Clayton and you find brand new row houses everywhere with families, clean streets, and brand new schools and playgrounds. So be careful painting an entire city with the same brush just like I can't judge Richmond as a whole by only visiting Steveston or New Westminster for only visiting Queensborough Landing.

Heck you spend 1 to 1.5 hours around Main and Hastings in Vancouver and you'll get a very different impression of Vancouver compared to if you spent 1 to 1.5 hours at Jericho Beach or Point Grey.

[vanman]

I don't normally spend much time in Surrey, especially off the main roads. Last week I had a few errands to run there and got lost somewhat, and ended up driving all over the place. What I noticed the most was how much wealthier it seems now. Even near Whalley. The new tower areas are starting to become cohesive and the street level animated with shops and townhomes. There are plenty of orphaned dumpy properties remaining but it's clear their days are numbered. So many modern large homes complete with bright exterior lighting, visible chandeliers through the windows etc. This is not the Surrey I'm used to. It's clear land values are increasing rapidly.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by jhausner

The key thing people are forgetting is Surrey at its core is rural not urban. The urban has only come recently quite honestly. The vast majority, read that as 95%+ of development every year that goes on in Surrey is nowhere near the core.

And that's because it has so much land. If you want to buy a house, 99% of people in Metro Vancouver could never buy a house in Vancouver, North Van, West Van, Richmond, Coquitlam, Burnaby, heck even New Westminster. If you want to buy a townhouse, many of these cities are also very much out of reach of the vast majority of people living in Metro Vancouver. My wife and I looked at buying a townhouse in Vancouver close to Oakridge 7 years ago and it would have cost us $1.1 million. Instead we bought our townhouse in Surrey Central which we are still in today which is 100 sq. feet larger than the one in Oakridge and actually closer to amenities like shopping, SkyTrain, etc., for $360,000. That is what people are buying in Surrey right now. I could buy 3 x townhouses 7 years ago in Surrey for 1 in Vancouver.

So anyone wanting a house or a townhouse looks to Surrey, Maple Ridge, Langley, and outward. Given Surrey still has large swaths of land, it is more cost effective from a return on investment, for developers to focus nearly entirely on pushing out new townhouse complexes and single family row homes everywhere.

A condo in Surrey takes about 2 to 4 weeks to sell on average. A townhouse/house takes about 2 days. The demand is still just not there for the urban aspect compared to other cities other than maybe Coquitlam which is mad frantically building up Burke mountain and taking down all the trees they can to try and keep both hands in the same pie. The other cities above are just basically out of land so it is all re-development which is not as quick.

The final item that has always hurt Surrey is lower land values in general even in Central Surrey. Up until very recently (when Dianne Watts took over as Mayor), developers could not recover the costs of building a high-rise versus what they could sell units for due to land values. Under DW, land values finally reached a point where now it is more economical and they can actually get an OK return on investment.

It is still not outstanding though which is why it seems every major project in Surrey is phase 1 of 238 to be built over 20 years. That's because developers want to build a bunch of high rises, but they want to build them over a LONG period of time so later phases benefit from increased land value. In certain areas like King George, we're now reaching a decent critical mass so we are seeing an acceleration, and Surrey Central (around SC skytrain) is pretty much at the same point. But most of the rest of Surrey Central (which someone pointed out is fairly large) is not quite at that massive multiple redevelopment all at once stage. And certainly not at the return on investment developers get by buying 5 acres in South Surrey to tear down 5 old houses and build 500 townhouses for a many thousand percentage return on investment.

Not like you get in Coquitlam Center, Brentwood, Oak Ridge, etc., where it is more beneficial to developers to build everything as quickly as possible.

So long story short, Surrey is still an infant and basically what Vancouver was in the 1930s I'd say. We have a long way to go and many of the other regional centers had a lot of legs up against Surrey, its history, its present, and its geography.

Abii you mentioned you spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey. You didn't. You spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey Central which makes up about 5% of the land mass of Surrey. That's what most people that don't live here do. I can guarantee you that a large portion of Surrey itself is not dumpy when you get outside the core, because again the primary focus of development is not in the core. It is increasing but it is not primary. You go to South Surrey and you find houses that put some in West Vancouver to shame with very clean neighborhoods. You go to Clayton and you find brand new row houses everywhere with families, clean streets, and brand new schools and playgrounds. So be careful painting an entire city with the same brush just like I can't judge Richmond as a whole by only visiting Steveston or New Westminster for only visiting Queensborough Landing.

Heck you spend 1 to 1.5 hours around Main and Hastings in Vancouver and you'll get a very different impression of Vancouver compared to if you spent 1 to 1.5 hours at Jericho Beach or Point Grey.

Thanks for the info.

That was very insightful and enlightening.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by vanman

I don't normally spend much time in Surrey, especially off the main roads. Last week I had a few errands to run there and got lost somewhat, and ended up driving all over the place. What I noticed the most was how much wealthier it seems now. Even near Whalley. The new tower areas are starting to become cohesive and the street level animated with shops and townhomes. There are plenty of orphaned dumpy properties remaining but it's clear their days are numbered. So many modern large homes complete with bright exterior lighting, visible chandeliers through the windows etc. This is not the Surrey I'm used to. It's clear land values are increasing rapidly.

100%. I grew up in Newton and all my friends lived in houses built in the 60s and 70s with large front yards and back yards. My wife and I took a drive a few months ago up through my old neighborhood just to see what it looked like today as we're considering buying a house somewhere and just checking every neighborhood out in Surrey, Delta, Langley, and Maple Ridge.

Other than a few streets out of the area around my old high school, the area was completely unrecognizable. Houses that looked like:



growing up now looked like:



Like I said, that's where most of the development has been going in the city. We're seeing acceleration in high rises in Surrey Central for sure over the past 5 years but it is still going to take a long time for it to feel like a real downtown with continuity.

Heck even Metrotown has some discontinuity and it has been urbanizing for 30 years. It just takes time. Ultimately if someone is buying in Surrey under the notion of it being like downtown Vancouver one day, you should not be investing because you'll likely be dead before that happens. Like any real-estate investment, purchase with the notion of making money from your asset. If you're buying to live, evaluate your needs today and in the near term to the reality of the area you are looking.

If you want a vibrant night life now, move downtown.

I have a few friends that sold their apartment in Surrey Central and moved to the West End near Stanley Park when they had their first child, because they wanted to have that lifestyle there. A combination young night-life with a cozy environment for their child hanging out in parks, on the beach, and such before their child was in school. Then 4 years later, they up and moved back to Surrey this time to Clayton Heights area as their child got close to school age so they could be in an established family oriented neighborhood, in a row home, with affordable before and after school care.

Make decisions based on you and your needs and what a specific neighborhood can actually deliver today and in the near term, not on future potential, is my best advise. Also remember to look at neighborhoods, not cities. I know people like to keep it simple and are by nature tribal, but every neighborhood in each city has a different feel, demographic, look, strengths and weaknesses. And that's not exclusive to Surrey. Thus why when my wife and I look around for places to potentially move, I don't necessarily care about the city itself, but rather the neighborhood and our needs. I largely grew up in Surrey, but if a neighborhood in Maple Ridge made more sense for my family and work life, I'd have no issue moving there.

[Abii]

Originally Posted by jhausner

.

Abii you mentioned you spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey. You didn't. You spent 1 to 1.5 hours in Surrey Central which makes up about 5% of the land mass of Surrey. That's what most people that don't live here do. I can guarantee you that a large portion of Surrey itself is not dumpy when you get outside the core, because again the primary focus of development is not in the core. It is increasing but it is not primary. You go to South Surrey and you find houses that put some in West Vancouver to shame with very clean neighborhoods. You go to Clayton and you find brand new row houses everywhere with families, clean streets, and brand new schools and playgrounds. So be careful painting an entire city with the same brush just like I can't judge Richmond as a whole by only visiting Steveston or New Westminster for only visiting Queensborough Landing.

Heck you spend 1 to 1.5 hours around Main and Hastings in Vancouver and you'll get a very different impression of Vancouver compared to if you spent 1 to 1.5 hours at Jericho Beach or Point Grey.

Fair point. However, for anyone not working in Surrey, any area further south of the core might as well be Seattle. Distances can get wild. Also, Hastings and Main is not to Vancouver as a whole what Surrey Central is to the entirety of Surrey. In other words, I pretty much covered the footprint of the entirety of the downtown Vancouver peninsula in my visit to surrey Central and gave my impression. The equivalent of that isn't the one block of east Hastings. The equivalent of that would be the entirety of Downtown Vancouver being like Hastings and then judging Vancouver as a whole based on that. So your analogy is flawed there.

However, fair point overall. Surrey is much bigger than the central area. But apart from the distance issue is the issue of suburban hell. Even if the rest of surrey is clean and spotless, but it's a suburban hellhole that is 1.5-2 hours away from Vancouver itself, then what is the point?