121–130 of 362 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does acceptable use of their own land look like to you? What would meet your specific approval?
The question is could someone build a similiar structure beside or does zoning prevent this. If so parent has a valid point
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure why that matters? If others would offer the tribe a better offer, I'm sure they would accept it.
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…
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?
I say this all as a YIMBY who is very happy to see 20k new units added to vancouver: something feels off about the plans for the Jericho lands but I can't describe it. I feel like when you have these mega developments where 10 condos go up all at once in the space of a few blocks, they end up as "bedroom neighborhoods", where people sleep but don't do anything else. There are a lot of these happening in Canada right…
I say this all as a YIMBY who is very happy to see 20k new units added to vancouver: something feels off about the plans for the Jericho lands but I can't describe it. I feel like when you have these mega developments where 10 condos go up all at once in the space of a few blocks, they end up as "bedroom neighborhoods", where people sleep but don't do anything else. There are a lot of these happening in Canada right…
In other cases, when it happens in a city, like in Burnaby or Oakridge, it ends up displacing in some way or another way more people than is necessary, because they have a grand vision to replace 10 blocks of housing or something.
Let me see if I got this. 1. Settlers colonize indigenous lands, drive indigenous people into small parcels and reservations and try to exterminate their culture. 2. Settlers decide to start refusing to build enough housing for themselves because they don’t want to alter the “character of the neighborhood” after… uhh… very much doing that. 3. Indigenous people build housing on their remaining bits of land for settler…
The Bay Area indigenous land movement is finally starting to see some wins. Shellmound in Berkeley is a big win for the Ohlone tribe. [0] [0] https://www.berkeleyside.org/2024/03/12/berkeley-shellmound-...
I say this all as a YIMBY who is very happy to see 20k new units added to vancouver: something feels off about the plans for the Jericho lands but I can't describe it. I feel like when you have these mega developments where 10 condos go up all at once in the space of a few blocks, they end up as "bedroom neighborhoods", where people sleep but don't do anything else. There are a lot of these happening in Canada right…
If it is discontinuous with the broader urban fabric this is definitely a risk. Look up Ørestad in Copenhagen - a massive master planned area that never gained any of the hoped for vitality you would see elsewhere in the city. A decent video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OMxzXsufq8
It's comforting to see first nations of canada recovering a central role in modern canadian society. However, having lived here for a year a year now, I have observed a concerning aspect of this re-integration, which is mentioned in the article: First nations aren't just propped back up and re-integrated in society, it goes further in that they are given special rights that go beyond what any other class of canadian…
Kind of the point here is that it was happening the other way for a couple hundred years, so just abrogating current inequality still leaves one party as a disadvantage. The hard part is deciding when these catch-up priveleges have run their course. Since first nations metrics along the lines of economic status are still below the national average, it's clear we're not there just yet.
The native nation, Squamish Nation, used to own the entire parcel of land immediately north of the 10 acres land mentioned in this article as a reservation granted by the former-colonial government (a native village stood in Vancouver downtown but the colonial gov forced them to move across the inlet). But thru multiple forced relocations and unceded land take over, the reservation was gradually taken over. >Slowly,…
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.
Building more homes in Vancouver will not result in lower prices because this is not a supply problem it is the financial assetization of home equity that drives higher and higher prices. Blue collar workers turned multi-millionaires rely on the continued rise of home prices to purchase cheap credit which they use to speculate on more homes. When they couldn't find anymore locals they turned to the international mark…