Advertisement

Supportive housing proposal in Cloverdale needs a ‘second look,’ says councillor

Cloverdale Business Improvement Association . Google Maps

The debate over supportive housing for the homeless, proposed for ‘old town’ Cloverdale, is growing.

A city councillor now says the 60-unit project, which includes plans for a supervised injection site, needs a second look.

“We need supportive housing, there’s no question about that, but if this is the type of supportive housing that they’re now recommending then I think we need to take a very sober second look at the locations we are choosing.”

Surrey councillor and mayoral candidate Bruce Hayne said that 176A Street and 58 Avenue, which is close to new townhouses and the downtown core, is the wrong place for the project.

Breaking news from Canada and around the world sent to your email, as it happens.

“I don’t see that as being an appropriate location for this level of supportive housing,” he said.

Story continues below advertisement

“When we talk about safe consumption and those types of words, that’s very concerning to the community, to the residents.”

Fellow councillor Tom Gill, who is also a mayoral candidate, says it’s important that ‘the process continue’ — which includes an open house.

“I don’t want to be in a position that we pre-judge something,” he said.

“I think it’s important we let the process continue. I think that’s the chance for the community and staff to work together at the current stage.”

President of the Cloverdale Community Association, Mike Bola, said push-back from businesses and the community has been overwhelming.

“We’re trying to revitalize downtown and this is not the way we were expecting to do that,” he said.

“There are some sensitivities to this type of housing we can totally appreciate and understand. We think some options should have been given to us before choosing a site — that’s where we are confused and frustrated.”

Story continues below advertisement

The local Business Improvement Association has also voted against the project citing safety concerns.

Sponsored content

AdChoices