Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

macleans.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 362 posts

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#81

Post by faeriechangling »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #21
lisper wrote: post #3

I think this is terrific. It's high time the indigenous people reclaimed their sovereignty. The idea that "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" is just ridiculous. Who the fuck are you, white man, to say what is and is not consistent with an "Indigenous way of building"? You aren't living the same lifestyle and building the sa…

I think I missed the meaning of the quote. Skyscrapers are not an indigenous lifestyle. I suppose that's not okay to bring up in this context? If someone put skyscrapers on the last Hawaiian island I'd be pretty upset about it. The entire population of the Earth should be. Can't we leave one thing undeveloped? But okay, maybe there is plenty of land to go around in Canada that looks the same as this land, so I could…

Sure skyscrapers are an indigenous lifestyle. They build them, invest in them, live in them. Do you think indigenous people in 2024 are going to all go fish for salmon and live in teepee’s?

I remember on TV once this older indigenous guy promoting natural resource development he thought would create indigenous jobs going on about “Back in the old times, my people hunted the buffalo. Now my people hunt a new buffalo, called the loonie”

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#82

Post by faeriechangling »

freitzkriesler2 wrote: post #59

The fact that the PNW is as expensive as the Bay area or even SoCal is a travesty. At least the first nation people figured out how to break the planning commission nonsense and took charge in their own communities. So long as they keep out the foreign hot funny money that made the regular cities too expensive they'll do just fine.

I wouldn’t be so optimistic about this not getting bankrolled by foreign investors, especially if you consider Canadians foreign investors, but they’ll do fine regardless.

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#83

Post by kjkjadksj »

lwansbrough wrote: post #5

Land back policy could be a very interesting win-win loophole for allocating new land for the purposes of redevelopment without consulting NIMBYs. A sort of accidentally leftist eminent domain. Of course, thats a bit insensitive and would be asking indigenous groups to fall on our sword for our political gain. In exchange for billions of dollars of land. And that would be bad? Unless..?

In some cities in the west like Palm Springs the reservation already owns like half the city in a sort of checkerboard pattern. Despite the fact this is expensive palm springs you still see the same old “reservation” style development of a casino and couple story hotel rather than big huge towers of hotels and condos like in miami beach. Maybe there really is no market for something like that in palm springs, or, there are larger forced that put a thumb on what these reservations are allowed to do with the land under their domain.

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#84

Post by itishappy »

coldtea wrote: post #39
badcppdev wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could take the word fuck out of the original comment and it would still have the clear reasoning that Gordon Price as a white person should not be telling an indigenous group that what they want to do is not the "Indigenous way". White person should not define "Indigenous way". How else can we misinterpret this argument?

> White person should not define "Indigenous way" Any person, white, black, asian, whatever, can however assess whether this development is in line with the indigenous tradition or something that might distort or endanger it. Or do you think the same discussion doensn't happen within the indigenous community as well?

Why is tradition relevant here? The indigenous community is a present day community, not a historical preservation society.

I disagree that we're all equal when it comes to defining what is and isn't "indigenous way."

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#85

Post by api »

onlypassingthru wrote: post #57
api wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shh. Make sure the tribe’s leadership knows to stay quiet for a while until they can pick up a few more parcels before unveiling their plans to exceed the height of the Burj Khalifa. I’m obviously half joking here. No intent to be insensitive. Even if they don’t build anything it’s better than a parking lot.

When they rip up the asphalt and find no significant bones or artifacts in the marsh underneath, any plans for a cultural interpretive center are going to turn into a mural and some bronze sculptures in the middle of newly designed Ohlone Towers.

Maybe the tallest free standing inhabited structure in the world would be a great monument to the ancestors?

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#86

Post by soupbowl »

skywhopper wrote: post #49
stavros wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a woman, actually. Your point is valid, I just don't like how "white man" has become a slur.

I wouldn’t call it a slur. To the extent it’s an effective insult, it’s due to centuries of behavior by white men. If someone uses “white man” to call out certain behavior, it might be worth their target considering why they got called out. Maybe sometimes it’s unfair to the white man to be called out, but often it isn’t. For folks who find it troublesome or disturbing to not receive the benefit of the doubt about th…

I wouldn’t call it a slur. To the extent it’s an effective insult, it’s due to centuries of behavior by black men. If someone uses “black man” to call out certain behavior, it might be worth their target considering why they got called out. Maybe sometimes it’s unfair to the black man to be called out, but often it isn’t. For folks who find it troublesome or disturbing to not receive the benefit of the doubt about their intentions as a black man, consider how much benefit of the doubt is given in everyday contexts to pretty much any individual who is not a black man.

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#87

Post by mthoms »

Yizahi wrote: post #66

Moderately dense development - good High rise developments enclosed in glass - bad Plants on the skyscraper terraces - sheer stupidity and bullshit, used only for pretty marketing 3D art If they made those high rises a 5-6 floor buildings instead, with no b/s trees on the balconies but instead planted them in the ground, that would be much more boring, cheaper and much more comfortable to live there.

What's wrong with plants on the terraces and balconies? How would their presence make it less comfortable to live there? And high rise developments "enclosed in glass"? As the article mentions, that's sort of what Vancouver is known for.

Is it the material you object to or the building height?

I genuinely don't understand your comment. Particularly as a Vancouverite (who can't afford a home).

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#88

Post by inkcapmushroom »

faeriechangling wrote: post #79
dangus wrote: post #71

The critics of this project seem to be outright racist. I don’t think that’s an overstatement. They’re basically saying that Indigenous people aren’t allowed to participate in the modern world. You’re not allowed to be urbanist if you were “less advanced than the white people” three hundred years ago. And they’re butthurt about the development not having the need to comply with Vancouver development rules. Yeah, well…

You might think so but nimby’s hatred of tall buildings is not at all limited to the ones the Squamish nation is building, as evidenced by the lack of buildings this tall. It’d be more racist for them to make an exception to their usual moaning about tall buildings just because it was the Squamish doing the building.

>as evidenced by the lack of buildings this tall

The third picture shows the development projected onto a wider picture of the city. You can see plenty of other skyscapers, some looking similar height or nearly as tall. Just not any on the side of the river the Squamish are planning on building.

I do agree though that NIMBY's will generally whine regardless of the person doing the building. I wouldn't say "[all] the critics of the project are racist" because I don't know all the criticisms, but certainly some of the criticisms in the article had a pretty racist slant to them.

Re: Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and Indigenous

#90

Post by camg55 »

Think this is great for Vancouver which needs more housing. The zoning is broken, and far too conservative. Glad to see the Squamish addressing a need that will likely benefit all, and hopefully this encourages the city of Vancouver to do the same on their own accord.
Post reply on HN