DNV Council Rejects Chemtrade Chlorine Proposal — A Decision That Puts Community Safety First

I was very encouraged to see that District of North Vancouver Council has rejected the Chemtrade proposal to continue producing liquid chlorine past 2030. In a close and highly consequential 4–3 vote, council ultimately chose to prioritize the safety and long-term wellbeing of our community.

This was not a unanimous decision unfortunately, and the split vote reflects that. Councillors Betty Forbes, Catherine Pope, and Lisa Muri, along with Mayor Mike Little voted NO, rejecting the proposal by Chemtrade. Councillors Herman Mah, Jim Hanson, and Jordan Back voted YES, supporting continued operations.

At its core, this issue was about one fundamental question: What level of risk is acceptable for growing communities like ours? With the District of North Vancouver approving thousands of new units in the Lower Lynn, Lynnmour, and Maplewood neighbourhoods over the past decade, a paradigm shift needs to be made in decisions around the acceptable and safe uses of District owned industrial land.

Liquid chlorine is not a benign industrial product. It is a highly hazardous substance that, in sufficient concentrations, can be fatal. Throughout the public consultation process, residents, experts, and stakeholders raised serious concerns, many of them literally describing potential “life-and-death” scenarios in the event of an accident, leak, or natural disaster.

These concerns are not theoretical. The Chemtrade facility is located in close proximity to rapidly growing neighbourhoods like Maplewood, Lynnmour, and Lower Lynn. Neighbourhoods that continue to see increased density, more families, and more infrastructure. As our community grows, so too does the potential impact of any industrial incident.

That’s why this decision matters so much. For me, this was about taking a long-term view. The District of North Vancouver is evolving. We are adding housing, building more complete communities, and working to create safe, livable neighbourhoods for families. Allowing a high-risk industrial operation like liquid chlorine production to continue indefinitely runs counter to that vision.

I want to acknowledge that those who voted in favour of the proposal likely did so with economic considerations in mind. Industrial operations bring jobs and contribute to the local economy. Those are real and important factors. However, when weighed against the potential consequences of a chlorine release, particularly in densely populated areas, the balance shifts. Public safety must come first.

I also want to recognize the strong community engagement on this issue. Residents showed up, spoke out, and made their voices heard. The consultation process may have been contentious, but it highlighted something important: people care deeply about the safety and future of their neighbourhoods.

This vote sends a clear message. As a community, we are not willing to accept unnecessary risk, especially when safer alternatives and long-term transitions are possible.

Looking ahead, this decision should not be the end of the conversation. It should be the beginning of a broader discussion about how we transition away from hazardous industrial uses in populated areas, while supporting workers and maintaining economic stability. Thoughtful planning, collaboration, and leadership will be required.

But for today, I believe council made the right call. Rejecting this proposal was a decision rooted in responsibility, foresight, and a commitment to protecting residents, not just today, but for years to come.