5 ms·

Someone at Westbank is a genius: fund the building of a massive skyscraper project on land that was recently returned to indigenous tribes because of a lawsuit,

Someone at Westbank is a genius: fund the building of a massive skyscraper project on land that was recently returned to indigenous tribes because of a lawsuit, a project that would never be normally approved because of zoning laws. Then, declare any criticism of the project as racist, thus guaranteeing it will be built. I wonder how much of the money the tribe is actually getting out of this?

fckgw 3y ago
What does acceptable use of their own land look like to you? What would meet your specific approval?
- systemstops 3y ago
  It's acceptable to me - none of my business. But it's corporate money building this project, which we should be clear about. It's just built on native land.
  - Seattle3503 3y ago
    I'm not sure why that matters? If others would offer the tribe a better offer, I'm sure they would accept it.
    - systemstops 3y ago
      I guess the point I was trying to make is that the public is being manipulated by the moral framing of this project. The buildings would not be normally allowed in that area, and the proponents of project are using an explicit racial justice narrative to counteract criticism of their violation of norms. I'm agnostic about whether or not the project is good idea, but I think it's generally bad to manipulate people in this way. What I was implying is that the whole thing seems like a really clever scheme by a real estate developer during a time in Canada when indigenous issues are hugely popular. But, maybe I am being too cynical.
      - TulliusCicero 3y ago
        > the proponents of project are using an explicit racial justice narrative to counteract criticism of their violation of norms. Pretty easy to do when some of the criticism indeed sounds kinda racist. Example from the article: > In 2022, Gordon Price, a prominent Vancouver urban planner and a former city councillor, told Gitxsan reporter Angela Sterritt, “When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building.” I'm sorry, but does he expect indigenous people to only build log cabins forever or something? Maybe they should also forgo cars and buses and only use horses?
        systemstops 3y ago
        It seems like he's expressing criticism over the racial narrative that this is an "indigenous way of being" building project instead of another corporate development that happens to be built on indigenous land. Obviously, no one is expecting indigenous people to use ancient building techniques that haven't been used in centuries, but the groups behind the project are making the explicit claim that the project is somehow tied to a racial identity. Criticizing their claim is perfectly reasonable.
        astrange 3y ago
        "Corporations" don't come from nowhere. Anyone can be a corporation, and building a building involves hiring professionals. The idea that developers are all evil space aliens comes from your unconscious memory of 80s kids movies where they were the villains.
        kjkjadksj 3y ago
        White man brought the horse over too.
      - brailsafe 3y ago
        The thing is, you don't need racism to make the adjacent residents seem like the people they are, it's just one more reason to build spite towers. They're standard rich boomers who'll show up to every hearing and persistently move the goal posts until any change is impossible, and they're on record doing so in a way that's beyond embarassing.
  - Tiktaalik 3y ago
    At the end of the day you need to pay someone to swing a hammer. When the City of Vancouver built its own below market city owned apartment at Main and 7th they hired local developer Marcon to build it. Marcon also builds for-profit condos all across the region. "Corporate money" being involved in the creation of housing is pretty unavoidable.
  - guyzero 3y ago
    "Corporate money" builds everything - that's how capitalism works.
- ipaddr 3y ago
  The question is could someone build a similiar structure beside or does zoning prevent this. If so parent has a valid point
  - fckgw 3y ago
    It's not our land, zoning is meaningless. Who cares about a hypothetical if something "could" have been built here
    - ipaddr 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - filoleg 3y ago
        There are still rules in place, indeed, just not for zoning. So I don't see how getting rid of zoning rules there suddenly gives those areas any more power to sign sovereign treaties than it would to any other area in the US that decided to have lax zoning rules. It's not really that complicated of a concept that you can deregulate one specific thing, but keep all regulations outside of that in place.
  - mitthrowaway2 3y ago
    The answer is that no, there is no zoning in that area because that parcel of land is not subject to City of Vancouver zoning laws, being not part of the City of Vancouver. The adjacent properties are part of the City of Vancouver, and therefore are subject to zoning that the City of Vancouver chooses to impose upon them. That zoning could be removed if city hall so chooses, but Kitsilano NIMBYs would oppose it. But city hall cannot define zoning rules for land that is not within their jurisdiction, so the NIMBYs have no voice. Just like, say, UBC is also not subject to City of Vancouver municipal zoning rules. Nor is Nanaimo. Nor Haida Gwaii.
    - brimwats 3y ago
      And hopefully the massive towers push the council to start rezoning those single story residential areas into something more realistic
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
karaterobot 3y ago
You're being downvoted, but people should look at this through the lens of it being a massive real estate deal rather than as a civil rights issue, which it is not. Of course there's shady stuff going on if you scratch the surface, didn't you see the part where real estate developers are involved? Unless we're making the laughable (and patronizing) assumption that massive urban residential real estate deals are vaccinated from corruption if first nation tribal members are involved.
- danem 3y ago
  What corruption are you referring to? Who built the house/apartment you live in? A real estate developer, right?
- brailsafe 3y ago
  > people should look at this through the lens of it being a massive real estate deal rather than as a civil rights issue People can look at it however they please, and each take can have nuance, but the classic "Well you're all dumb if you think someone isn't corrupt here" is not new, not interesting, and not evident, it's just plausible. No matter what the issue is, there's some pissed off person that thinks they've got the often suspiciously nebulous take that nobodies thought about and serves no purpose but to try cast aspersions at an otherwise novel and probably positive thing. "Don't forget about this hypothetical non-specific negative possibility! Someone could be corrupt guys!" It's ok to hold two ideas in your head at the same time. On one hand, no process with huge money involved can be vaccinated from corruption. On the other, there's a brutal amount of displacement and wealth inequality in Vancouver that's particularly intense among indigenous people. We want to see the city evolve in a way that brings people who aren't property boomers or literal billionaires into a viable future, and reasons to be optimistic are scarce. So ya, boring and hollow takes get downvoted.
yardie 3y ago
I mean some of the opponents have been obtusely racist in their criticism. One example is imploring the tribes to use "traditional" indigenous building techniques. As if that is supposed to mean they should be building as if they were in the 19th century.
golergka 3y ago
Race-baiting manipulation against NIMBY zoning laws. Personally, none of the sides provoke any sympathy. However, what's important is the law. If they have proved their right to the land in court, that's the only thing that should really matter. And aside from the PR manipulation, a corporation building residential buildings is obviously a positive thing, providing value for everybody involved: their shareholders, land owners and future residents. The only who suffers are their neighbours who tried to prop up their property values by strangling development.
gwervc 3y ago
> Then, declare any criticism of the project as racist One criticism quoted in the article is this: > "When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building." Which is indeed literally racist. Like White can build towers using concrete but other people should stick with small wood structures or whatever. Spoiler: technology is spreading among people around the world, and Chinese, Arab, Japanese, etc. built skyscrapers despite it not being their traditional way of building.
- defrost 3y ago
  Hilariously: From the Empire State Building to the George Washington Bridge, and the glory that was the World Trade Center—Mohawk people helped build them all. Mohawk ironworkers have built bridges and skyscrapers for more than 100 years. https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/item?id=619 https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/item?id=61...

fckgw 3y ago

What does acceptable use of their own land look like to you? What would meet your specific approval?

systemstops 3y ago
It's acceptable to me - none of my business. But it's corporate money building this project, which we should be clear about. It's just built on native land.
- Seattle3503 3y ago
  I'm not sure why that matters? If others would offer the tribe a better offer, I'm sure they would accept it.
  - systemstops 3y ago
    I guess the point I was trying to make is that the public is being manipulated by the moral framing of this project. The buildings would not be normally allowed in that area, and the proponents of project are using an explicit racial justice narrative to counteract criticism of their violation of norms. I'm agnostic about whether or not the project is good idea, but I think it's generally bad to manipulate people in this way. What I was implying is that the whole thing seems like a really clever scheme by a real estate developer during a time in Canada when indigenous issues are hugely popular. But, maybe I am being too cynical.
    - TulliusCicero 3y ago
      > the proponents of project are using an explicit racial justice narrative to counteract criticism of their violation of norms. Pretty easy to do when some of the criticism indeed sounds kinda racist. Example from the article: > In 2022, Gordon Price, a prominent Vancouver urban planner and a former city councillor, told Gitxsan reporter Angela Sterritt, “When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building.” I'm sorry, but does he expect indigenous people to only build log cabins forever or something? Maybe they should also forgo cars and buses and only use horses?
      - systemstops 3y ago
        It seems like he's expressing criticism over the racial narrative that this is an "indigenous way of being" building project instead of another corporate development that happens to be built on indigenous land. Obviously, no one is expecting indigenous people to use ancient building techniques that haven't been used in centuries, but the groups behind the project are making the explicit claim that the project is somehow tied to a racial identity. Criticizing their claim is perfectly reasonable.
        astrange 3y ago
        "Corporations" don't come from nowhere. Anyone can be a corporation, and building a building involves hiring professionals. The idea that developers are all evil space aliens comes from your unconscious memory of 80s kids movies where they were the villains.
      - kjkjadksj 3y ago
        White man brought the horse over too.
    - brailsafe 3y ago
      The thing is, you don't need racism to make the adjacent residents seem like the people they are, it's just one more reason to build spite towers. They're standard rich boomers who'll show up to every hearing and persistently move the goal posts until any change is impossible, and they're on record doing so in a way that's beyond embarassing.
- Tiktaalik 3y ago
  At the end of the day you need to pay someone to swing a hammer. When the City of Vancouver built its own below market city owned apartment at Main and 7th they hired local developer Marcon to build it. Marcon also builds for-profit condos all across the region. "Corporate money" being involved in the creation of housing is pretty unavoidable.
- guyzero 3y ago
  "Corporate money" builds everything - that's how capitalism works.
ipaddr 3y ago
The question is could someone build a similiar structure beside or does zoning prevent this. If so parent has a valid point
- fckgw 3y ago
  It's not our land, zoning is meaningless. Who cares about a hypothetical if something "could" have been built here
  - ipaddr 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - filoleg 3y ago
      There are still rules in place, indeed, just not for zoning. So I don't see how getting rid of zoning rules there suddenly gives those areas any more power to sign sovereign treaties than it would to any other area in the US that decided to have lax zoning rules. It's not really that complicated of a concept that you can deregulate one specific thing, but keep all regulations outside of that in place.
- mitthrowaway2 3y ago
  The answer is that no, there is no zoning in that area because that parcel of land is not subject to City of Vancouver zoning laws, being not part of the City of Vancouver. The adjacent properties are part of the City of Vancouver, and therefore are subject to zoning that the City of Vancouver chooses to impose upon them. That zoning could be removed if city hall so chooses, but Kitsilano NIMBYs would oppose it. But city hall cannot define zoning rules for land that is not within their jurisdiction, so the NIMBYs have no voice. Just like, say, UBC is also not subject to City of Vancouver municipal zoning rules. Nor is Nanaimo. Nor Haida Gwaii.
  - brimwats 3y ago
    And hopefully the massive towers push the council to start rezoning those single story residential areas into something more realistic
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

karaterobot 3y ago

You're being downvoted, but people should look at this through the lens of it being a massive real estate deal rather than as a civil rights issue, which it is not. Of course there's shady stuff going on if you scratch the surface, didn't you see the part where real estate developers are involved? Unless we're making the laughable (and patronizing) assumption that massive urban residential real estate deals are vaccinated from corruption if first nation tribal members are involved.

danem 3y ago
What corruption are you referring to? Who built the house/apartment you live in? A real estate developer, right?
brailsafe 3y ago
> people should look at this through the lens of it being a massive real estate deal rather than as a civil rights issue People can look at it however they please, and each take can have nuance, but the classic "Well you're all dumb if you think someone isn't corrupt here" is not new, not interesting, and not evident, it's just plausible. No matter what the issue is, there's some pissed off person that thinks they've got the often suspiciously nebulous take that nobodies thought about and serves no purpose but to try cast aspersions at an otherwise novel and probably positive thing. "Don't forget about this hypothetical non-specific negative possibility! Someone could be corrupt guys!" It's ok to hold two ideas in your head at the same time. On one hand, no process with huge money involved can be vaccinated from corruption. On the other, there's a brutal amount of displacement and wealth inequality in Vancouver that's particularly intense among indigenous people. We want to see the city evolve in a way that brings people who aren't property boomers or literal billionaires into a viable future, and reasons to be optimistic are scarce. So ya, boring and hollow takes get downvoted.

yardie 3y ago

I mean some of the opponents have been obtusely racist in their criticism. One example is imploring the tribes to use "traditional" indigenous building techniques. As if that is supposed to mean they should be building as if they were in the 19th century.

golergka 3y ago

Race-baiting manipulation against NIMBY zoning laws. Personally, none of the sides provoke any sympathy. However, what's important is the law. If they have proved their right to the land in court, that's the only thing that should really matter. And aside from the PR manipulation, a corporation building residential buildings is obviously a positive thing, providing value for everybody involved: their shareholders, land owners and future residents. The only who suffers are their neighbours who tried to prop up their property values by strangling development.

gwervc 3y ago

> Then, declare any criticism of the project as racist One criticism quoted in the article is this: > "When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building." Which is indeed literally racist. Like White can build towers using concrete but other people should stick with small wood structures or whatever. Spoiler: technology is spreading among people around the world, and Chinese, Arab, Japanese, etc. built skyscrapers despite it not being their traditional way of building.

defrost 3y ago
Hilariously: From the Empire State Building to the George Washington Bridge, and the glory that was the World Trade Center—Mohawk people helped build them all. Mohawk ironworkers have built bridges and skyscrapers for more than 100 years. https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/item?id=619 https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/item?id=61...