Do you agree with Surrey council's Hawthorne Park decision?


  • Julia simpson - 5 years ago

    Josh - well said and so true

  • Josh Angston - 5 years ago

    Go road! Will make that drug user stop off safer, get rid of that nasty muddy path area and move it somewhere away from the start of the Bon Accord ditch. Finally light and eyeballs driving by will help to prevent the destruction of the forest by fires and metal thief garbage that fills the bushes and lessen all the pollution from traffic on 104 & 108. If you cared about the park you would have known about this for years, not cry at the last second.

  • vic ingco - 5 years ago

    Postpone talks about Hauthorne Park and LRT. For now, please extend skytrain by just one more station, to the middle of Surrey population, somewhere along fraser hwy and maybe 152nd st. This will make business centers Walmart and Newton happy because they will get a second bus connection from a skytrain station.

  • Danielle Gionet - 5 years ago

    Very disapointing decision from Councel. I am very unclear as to why they are insisting on puting this road through. How is it they say the same year the Province gave us Skytrain (1986) the City also decided to put this road into reduce traffic on 104. I find it hard to believe the city was thinkng about LRT then. In the last 30 years would it have not just made more sence to have been adding 2 or 3 new stations to expo line every 5-10 years. What we really need is a system concistant wit the rest of the lower mainland and bus pull outs along 104 Ave, add in a few more busses and that section will be golden. I have a 5 minute comute to work via car. You will not get me out of my car so I can wait in the rain and walk through the dark streets of Whalley to work until the bus system that suports the Skytrain system is drasticly improved. Where has the money that Surrey has invested in Translink gone in the last 20 years? It has not gone to support Surreys transit system that is for sure. How do we repilate the 2-4000 year old bog that will be destroyed in the creation of the road? What happens if the School Board doesnt cooperate and the road doesnt go all the way through? It is estimated that over 10,000 cars a day will go through that park. Why are the safery inpovements to the park tied to them being able to ram that road through it? Shouldnt you want to make it safe for our kids regardless? I am vert hopeful that Linda will not be relected. I feel we just have to hold them off untill there is an election.

  • Trevor Cox - 5 years ago

    In regards to Hawthorne Park
    A Open Letter from 'Save Hawthorne Park'

    The City Council has approved the removal of the Hawthorne Park Protection Bylaw #5812 est.1979, using the Alternative Approval Process. In which they have the ability to remove the bylaw by setting a period in which 10% of the entire population of Surrey can sign the 30,372 Elector Response Forms required to oppose the decision within the 42 days between August 11th and September 22nd, 2017.

    The 105 Avenue East-West Connector Project( along the north of 104th between Whalley and Guildford. which will not only carve through Hawthorne Park, but Hjorth Elementary School and our Power and Gas Greenway. aswell as cutting alongside the properties of Lady Of Good Council and the Whalley Reservoir Park.

    we believe the cause of this road to be the transit expansion our City Council has approved will be a road level train track using the two existing middle lanes of 104th, the congestion caused by both construction and the fact that 104th will now only be one lane each way will almost make the idea of this road considerable.

    We've been accused of spreading misinformation by our representatives

    READ Mayor Hepner's Letter:

    We understand the argument of more park land will be existing once the properties are integrated systematically under the term.

    We are intending to preserve the heritage of our community's ecosystem which cannot be replaced or recreated

    No mention of the separation and isolation of more than 5 acres south of the park,

    No mention of carving through the home of our peat bog estimated to be older than 5000 years which is home to our communities most sensitive ecosystem carbon sink which captures most of the C02 in our community,

    No mention of, and no reason to believe the park will have any protection from future development or 'park uses' that the city sees fit in implementing regardless of Park Protection Bylaws or public outcry or input..

    March 27th - Official Proposal Published Online
    June 7th Guildford Park Public Consultation
    June 25th - Delegation Request Approved by City Staff
    July 10th - Delegation Request Approved by City Council
    July 24th @ 5pm - Delegation speaks before City Council with petition of over 5000 signatures
    July 24th @ 7pm - City Council Approves Removal of Bylaw #5812 est.1979

    August 11th to September 22nd (42 days total / 18 days after Labour Day)
    to collect

    30,372 Elector Response Forms
    723 Elector Response Forms a day!
    30 Elector Response Forms an hour!
    1 Elector Response Form every 2 minutes!

    Corporate Report
    11,831 ERF's were submitted to the City Clerks at 4pm September 22nd..
    11,161 Elector Response Forms accepted as valid

    On average the residents of the City Of Surrey submitted
    265 Elector Response Forms a day!
    8 Elector Response Forms an hour!
    1 Elector Response Form every 7 minutes!

    the Official Community Plan in effect from 1996-2014 does not show any indication of a 105, 104A, or 106th Avenue Extension

    the Tree Protection Bylaw #16100 est.2006

    Watercourse Sensitivity Classification Fish Streams

    Sensitive Ecosystems Streamside Areas - City Of Surrey Map Online System

    Official Community Plan Bylaw #18020 est. October 20th 2014

    2016 Shade Tree Management Plan -

  • Grant Rice - 5 years ago

    Surrey City council has blinders on. They all voted to remove the park's dedication for a road that may end at 147th Street. Corporate Report 223 states there is no agreement with the school district despite five years of discussion. The city needs to replace Hjorth Road School or the whole 105 Avenue connector is useless. "Should a mutual agreement not occur, the City would complete 147 Street from 104 Avenue to 105 Avenue." If there was an independent member on council, they would have pointed that out last night. October 2018 can't come soon enough!

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars

Submit Comment