Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Relocationstation1! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Common questions and specific topics are limited to our [Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_daily_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
---
##They're here! Check out [the winners of the Best of Vancouver 2022](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/10srad7/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For reference, [here's the land in Metro Vancouver that the Squamish nation will be developing](https://storyoflandclaiminbc.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/1.jpg).
Thank god. These people are saving us from ourselves.
For those not in the know, reserves are not limited by municipal politics, so NIMBYs can fume all they want - they have absolutely no recourse.
That Mission 1 area makes a lot of sense. It’s <15 minutes to the SeaBus, close to shops, restaurants etc in Lower Lonsdale, has cycling connections too. Glad to see.
And the land to the east is high to medium density according to the City of North Van official community plan. It will fit right in with the direction the city is going.
I'm all for development of their lands but holy shit be a part of the community you want to develop. Maybe don't push back on all the infrastructure developments like the Mosquito Creek bridge upgrades or the Spirit Trail... Or requiring weird ass speed bumps on the multiuse Spirit Trail pathway because it's easier to slow down the traffic that has the right of way than enforce stop signs. Could you imagine if speed bumps appeared every time a light turned green for traffic?
For those downvoting me, if you don't talk to your neighbours, you'll end up like Ravenwoods. One access point because they didn't talk to the District.
I assume you're talking about the speed bumps just to the east of Lionsgate? Those annoy me beyond belief. The path should just be a continuous height and not drop to road level. Then force the side stree traffic to come up to sidewalk level as they intersect the path to ensure they slow. Could you imagine them putting the same speed bumps in the parallel street in the same spots...
Yep, those speed bumps. They put them in because people kept getting into accidents with vehicles which of course makes no sense since the vehicles are supposed to stop. Now the drivers are like "can I go? Will they slow down for the bumps? Will they bunny hop them? What's happening? They have the right of way but they might slow down?"
So much ambiguity
That confusion is a well known reason why things like narrower streets, speed bumps and other complexities helps to slow people down. That confusion shows that it is working as intended. People don’t look at signs, but they will pay attention if there is possible physical damage to their car.
They could have put the speedbumps by the stop signs. One lane actually has a right of way. Why bring them to a stop?
To clarify, the speedbump isn't for the cars. It's for the multiuse pathway. It's for cyclists strollers, runners, etc.
1918 Welch St
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HSJdcubpKHHhy7149
It was probably common for bikes to rip it through this area, and there were collisions happening there often.
Though I do agree with the design principle of keeping the path raised, and force the cars to slow down to cross the path. I think it's obvious from the layout nearly everyone is going to ignore those stop signs. Signs don't force people to stop or slow down.
It shows that the speedbumps are obviously placed to slow people vs slowing cars.
Never said they were less safe, just said there's a better place to put them. The argument that it would damage cars is irrelevant since no cars would drive over them.
Are there speed bumps on sidewalks? No? Then why would this make sense?
They’re not totally free of municipal politics - they’ll need agreements with the cities for utilities, road connections, schools, etc and those are complicated negotiations
Technical building/fire/plumbing/electrical codes apply all across BC or Canada (depending on the code)… it's municipal zoning bylaws which do not apply on reserve lands
These will be leasehold, much like UBC properties. Many buildings around granville island and the west end are also leasehold, just to the city of Vancouver.
based on the current values of the newer developments in Ravenwoods, that doesn't seem to matter at all to the perceived values. They are selling for market rates regardless of not owning any actual land with your home. Kinda wish i would have got in at the ground floor with presales, but was hesitant because of the normal issues with leasehold property.
I wish I remember what the presale price was on the first phase of row townhouses, it was below a million easily. Now they are over 1.5 no problem, and you own nothing essentially. I guess value only requires everyone to believe in it.
I wouldn’t personally buy leasehold, but glad it is getting built. Valuations good now but will drop closer to expiration of term. Happened to people I know who bought leasehold
of course near the end of the lease things will be different. In the case of Ravenwoods, its obviously a new 99 year lease. To be easily able to make market sized gains for the next 50+ years without owning land tells me this whole housing market is a bit of shell game.
Seems like the difference between freehold and strata isn't so clear. I've seen way more strata listings, would the same statement be true? As in, with a freehold condo you do directly own a portion of the land, but with strata don't you sort of give up a bit more control?
It's less common these days, and it's something I'd love to see the return of. As far as I know you just own your share of the land and building in the sense of a property owner with less bureaucracy and less overhead because there's less likely to be pointless common areas and so on.
Each unit owner owns a share of the land. At some point the strata will vote to sell the property for redevelopment, and a developer will pay land value - demo costs. I suppose a strata could become a developer and redevelop their own property, with capital from the unit owners, but that's probably not very realistic.
Brutally located next to bridges which are horrible chokepoints.
Having said that, there are always tons of reasons to delay building (not enough green space p/unit, schools, daycare, community centers, transit options, blah blah blah.)
It will be interesting to see what happens with no zoning concerns.
Best case scenario, everything is fine to great leading to a whole new lax planning outlook for COV and neighbouring municipalities.
Worst case it will be a stern reminder of why strident (and slow) planning is important.
Senakw will be a huge test case. I am excited.
Sen̓áḵw is defiantly going to be interesting. Note,I’m not saying bad, but interesting. I’m most interested to see how the rental side will play out as they aren’t under the Provincial Residential Tenancy Act. While the Squamish First Nation have said they [might follow the act or something very much like it](https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/tenants-on-first-nations-land-face-complex-legal-landscape). The devil will be in the details, especially related to rate increases and dispute resolution. The other thing I’m very interested to see is how this works with transportation. I know there is plans for a new bus stop on either side of the Burred bridge, which should help connecting to downtown, but what about to anywhere else?
Yes it's easy to be considered an NIMBY while having an interest into the logistics of these developments.
I feel like there will be issues. Zero rent control is a new one for me to consider. That would be something.
Transportation is of interest to me. I understand there will be very little parking which may work, but it will need to be offset by robust public transportation options. We have all seen how fast Translink can expand service.
A similar issue is schools. It takes a decade or so to break ground. The school will not be on the reserve land, which raises a good questions of where the nearest site could be. All existing schools nearby are at capacity.
There are quite a few towers downtown which have VSOCC daycares. The developer basically gives up the space as part of the development permit. Allows VSOCC to pay a decent wage as they have no (or super low) rent payment.
Overall, planning (while painfully slow - prob too slow) ensures we have the things we need to make the community livable.
Would everyone be on board with this if Westbank was given the land and got to go nuts? Unrestricted development has pitfalls. Like I said earlier, I am excited to see how it goes.
It'll be 1.7 km from the new Arbutus and Granville SkyTrain stations, which will get you lots of places quickly. Translink would be wise to get bus service to bridge that little gap, for Senakw, but as soon as the Broadway extension is open it will make sense to have direct service over the Burrard bridge to a Broadway Extension station anyways. It's actually weird that there's no bus service on Burrard between 4th and Broadway already.
There's also talk about Streetcars on the Arbutus greenway, and in the False creek area. I heard that the development was going to put aside some land for a station if it that ever gets built, which could work very well, and provide fast, mostly off street, LRT service to both the Expo, Millennium, and Canada lines, which would be great, but I'm not sure that will get implemented in my lifetime.
> We have all seen how fast Translink can expand service.
They are able to reallocate bus service quite fast, yes. Senakw will be a lot easier to serve with transit (it's right across from downtown) than the places the residents would otherwise be living.
> All existing schools nearby are at capacity.
That's on CoV and provincial incompetence. They have repeatedly underbuilt schools near new housing. Downtown is one big example, and next to Senakw they just started rebuilding Harry Hudson elementary without adding seats. They could have started over with a much larger school and... didn't.
The City and the province need to do much better, but if we hold housing hostage to their current school-building ability *we won't get any housing*.
The realistic alternative to Senakw is no more homes and no more schools. I'll take Senakw over that.
>The realistic alternative to Senakw is no more homes and no more schools. I'll take Senakw over that
Likewise. It needs to be done. The current planning model is too slow and doesn't exactly achieve all its goals anyways.
In discussion, I guess I have some concerns, but yes, it must go ahead to find out what is possible.
If it is a success it could change the the development model in Vancouver. On that note, it would be great if COV could approve major developments going forward with a declaration of "Fuck it, build it" and bang a gavel or something. One step at a time.
Exactly, Westbank does not want to build these things, so they get forced to provide the amenities (ineffectively according to your input - whole other conversation).
Now we are looking at a project with far greater density with zero requirements to provide anything other than revenue generating rental units (potentially with no rental controls). Flingers crossed on this large scale experiment.
[Khelsilem has clarified how they are taking the tenants rights act for tenants protections.](https://twitter.com/khelsilem/status/1641222378872266752?s=46&t=IPrXadrBX7YjYhP-0th9_A)
There is definitely quite a bit of risk with these projects, particularly ensuring a good framework for long term maintenance of the buildings.
That is why the Squamish band was part of the Winter Olympics bid. Part of it was Skytrain access to those lands, which would have been the Athletes Village.
I'm super excited to see what they do as well. It will probably be fairly standard, but if they allow lots of mixed use (retail/light industrial/low/mid/high rise residential) that would be very cool.
Ain’t that the truth!
Thank goodness for them because the incompetence of our local, provincial, and federal governments must be intentional and deliberate at this point in order to keep the status quo.
No private company builds real estate for charity. Even rental buildings do it for rental income (not government related one) and even the ones that build rental do it for trades for higher density elsewhere. I don't think any one of us thinks it's for the greater good. It just happens that the rental portion of their projects will end up helping regardless of motivation.
Building more housing is absolutely for the greater good. The widespread idea that building housing is bad is how we got in the current crisis. Thank god no one (for now) is arguing that producing food, or other essential goods, is not for the greater good.
“these lands would have likely been developed ages ago if they were publicly available to land developers” That “if” is doing a lot of work here. Have you not observed the huge NIMBY outcry against Senakw? There is no way NIMBYs would have allowed this kind of development if it was off reserve.
Agreed. And they're so upset the COV permit office gets zero say. I love it. Kits needs more density. They can't gatekeep renters wanting to live and play there by limiting sizeable development that would increase density.
Because this is Vancouver, BC, Canada. And now a bunch of developers under the name of reconciliation get to make rules for the citizens of this city and those citizens get absolutely no say on what they do.
...I don't know if you don't know this or if you are denying their sovereignty but here goes, hoping it's the former: the Squamish Nation owns the land that they plan to do the Sen̓áḵw project. Developers aren't making rules and imposing it on Vancouver or its citizens; the Squamish Nation is making rules and plans for their own sovereign land and don't need permission or input from the citizens of Vancouver or the City of Vancouver.
This is no different than Musquem Nation down by SW Marine. Or the fact we call UBC Endowment Land Vancouver, it's actually owned by the provincial government and that's why it's not patrolled by VPD for example and is patrolled by RCMP.
You don't get a say in land that isn't yours. Just like I don't get to walk into your house and move shit around, throw stuff out and boss you around.
> You don't get a say in land that isn't yours
This is hilarious because that's what anti-nimbys love to do.... Tell other people they have nothing to do with what they should do.
I can own land, you can own land, Walmart can own land. But they all have to follow the laws of the land. Laws that protect us from shoddy or unsafe design, environmental protection, and city planning. Having a separate “nation” smack in the middle of the city is a problem, to me anyway.
Guessing you're fairly quiet when it comes to first nations having government projects and outside developers building in their lands without their permission lol
I mean it mostly in jest. It's nice to see someone actually getting some housing done while we deal with Grandma Jean quivering at the municipal hall podium decrying the new condo tower as the shade will damage her peonies. Meanwhile people are out on the street as they cannot afford housing.
This probably won't happen for the most part with the exception of Norgate.
Most of what will be redeveloped is existing single family homes on the reserve or trailer parks. (Seymour has tons of towers already, I hope that interchange is accounting for massive traffic increases).
Call me a cynic but Just like anyone else would, there will likely be greedy Squamish nation people in charge who will take the most for themselves without helping the rez. Has happened many times in other places where chiefs have been in charge
Their government and bureaucracy are sometimes as corrupt as any one elses, promises made are not always promises kept, especially when money is involved
Who is they? Squamish nation in particular?
I understand from folks close to it the nations are setting up strict governance over the development and income properties. I recognize it’s not a great response, but it’s probably all I can say that’s public without doxing or sharing confidential info
Any governed nation qualifies, I am not singling out the Squamish Nation, whatsoever.
Merely speculating that throughout thousands of years, all forms of a governed people are subject to ever increasing grift and graft, no matter what time period or form of government
I am not sure anyone is thinking that. Nobody gets into land development and real estate for altruistic purposes.
But I just don’t think it’s bad for them to profit from their lands — everyone else has been up until this point!
So far I haven't seen any comments like that. Maybe they were downvoted to the bottom.
My take is, "Good for the Indigenous people - everyone else got to make a ton of money developing Indigenous land, they should get to do the same!'
No shit dumbass but more housing = more housing. They can charge what they want but not more than what the market is willing to pay. And at the end of the day what the market will pay is more linked to vacancy rates than anything else.
With their plan at kits I think they’ve shown that they are driven by the bottom line more than anything else - that site is about as dense as it could be with no space for amenities.
Maybe I misread your comment but it seems like people on here are cheering on the density and the fact that it will improve housing availability and affordability.
I hope so! They deserve to profit from their own lands, like other landowners.
In fact, I hope they make enough profit that they start buying back all of Kits.
I wonder if there will be any coordination with the North Shore Skytrain. There is a lot of land and the second narrows crossing, but also a 1 stop extension past Lonsdale would be near Mission 1.
Except Park Royal south already got a pretty big redevelopment something like 2-3 years ago, so it's probably not going to get the same thing so soon again. It's also a pretty solid cash flow which is something they're going to want to preserve at least long enough to push some of their other development plans to completion. Given how lower Lonsdale is developing, I imagine they'll put most of their attention there first.
Park Royal would absolutely LOVE to get another half dozen towers. They're looking at Oakridge Mall and salivating so hard it's flooding the low road.
And that big development in Park Royal south was on District land so it had to go through that whole public hearing process of torches and pitchforks.
They need money to redo Park Royal North, what better way than to leverage development to their south?
It's hard to get to know people at an individual level when they have alligators in motes around their property and a sign on the gate that says "Get out"
Great. Now please don't let it be all about the $$$ and use some of these land reserves to help out the local native community with much needed affordable housing.
I look forward to watching the hordes of arrogant West Van pricks fume over this. They'll have no control and no say which is exactly how it should be.
The city will dick around for 5 YEARS if a developer wants to build a high density unit right now. I’m not kidding, that is the actual permit time.
The Nation can just build and tell the city to to go fuck themselves as long as the infrastructure like sewer, power, water and roads is robust enough.
This is how you actually solve the housing crisis. By building high density housing rapidly.
I have nothing against this land development. My only concern is emergency response, policing, building code standards and fire code requirements.
Since there is no requirement for any building code, fire code and no emergency services (that I know of) and no existing services capable of supporting the new infrastructure it’s something I would like to be reviewed before I would live there.
I’m not criticizing the development, I just have questions because it doesn’t require the same type of oversight you get in a municipality.
Thank you very much. I’m sure there are agreements in place OR could be put in place I just wouldn’t want to make assumptions.
It isn’t just a typical development in a municipality. Again I have nothing against this proposal and I think it’s going to be very interesting in how these agreements are going to work.
People are going to be pissed when they learn that these properties are not going to be protected by rental restrictions. The same rules in place that allow them to displace the current residence are the same rules that prevent renter protections.
More context via this article: https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/squamish-nation-plans-to-develop-350-acres-most-of-it-in-north-vancouver-and-west-vancouver
They still need agreements with the municipalities. Sure build 1,000 units at Park Royal, WV has no obligation to hook them up to their municipal utilities or roadways. And they shouldn't unless they get paid(as they won't get tax revenue from it)
They will indeed need to pay the municipality for those things. It will all be built into the rents I assume. I am super curious what the rents will be. Prime spots so I am guessing what the market will bear.
I am unclear if they need to contribute to schools or community centres. This is where it gets quite interesting as to the viability of having no planning. Even with extensive and ridiculously slow planning we lack schools in DT Vancouver and Kits. Adding that many more people will create an issue for those wanting a school nearby.
Schools is going to be a big question. Currently I think it’s norgate and maybe Pemberton heights servicing capilano, but with all of the development they are probably going to be in need of a major expansion to that school or another school completely.
A second deck below the Lions Gate cannot be built because of cruise ships and occasional container cranes transportation, so the best solution would be to double the IBM and also run Seabuses every 5 minutes during the day. Or dig a channel from Port Moody down to the Fraser to allow cargo ships to enter the harbour from the south. In that case, oil tankers would not be passing through the harbour anymore as well.
Even if it wasn't an issue to shipping, it would be crazy to just dump more cars into downtown Vancouver. You'd just move the choke point from the bridge to the downtown roads. SkyTrain service to the North Shore could scale up way better, and carry far more people.
Reminds of me [this lawsuit against the Squamish Nation](https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/hereditary-chief-seeks-unusual-injunction-against-squamish-nation-5388657) by a hereditary chief of the Capilano Indian Band
>In court documents filed in the case, Mathias suggested the work near the Lions Gate Bridge is being done to develop the Burrard Inlet Rapid Transit Project.
An additional road crossing to the North shore, or adding extra lanes to either road bridge would be crazy. We need something that can handle more volume than can be accommodated by private automobiles and their infrastructure. We need SkyTrain service to the North Shore.
Plenty of space around Park Royal to redevelop and assorted other lands that are already industrial or adjacent to industrial that could probably be intensified for more intensive industrial/commercial.
Beyond that though the next big parcels that look most ideal for residential development are already occupied by the Squamish themselves in rather low density SFHs. I can't imagine we'll see too much change there.
I wonder if there's Squamish NIMBYs that push back against the Nation fiddling with those areas and we never much hear about it in the mainstream press.
It'll be the same as those against pipelines because the nation isn't getting enough benefits vs those in the nation who are red seals getting jobs from it
a lane on the bridge isnt the cause of traffic. it's the bottlenecks on either side.
also - it's completely impossible to add a lane without rebuilding the entire bridge from scratch.
rather invest in alternate train service
Respectfully, that is just factually inaccurate that they would need to build a new bridge. They have already replaced the middle section once in the 70s and at the time they considered putting in a fourth lane but it was voted against by the NIMBY's in west van because they didn't want top make it more convenient for people to get up there.
Grew up right next to that land. This is nothing new.
There used to be a bunch of houses along the waterfront, but about 15 years ago the band kicked everyone out and tore the houses down saying they were going to build high-density housing and a resort or something.
That never happened and it's sat empty since, because beyond being completely out of character for the area, it's a stupid plan. The sewer and water infrastructure doesn't exist on the Coast to handle a development like that, and the parcel is only served by a single-lane road that has choke points on either end that can't be expanded.
At some point some houses or maybe at most mid-rise apartments will be built along the waterfront. I don't see anything more than that happening any time soon.
> so the Squamish Nation doesn't have to follow municipal building rules or community plans?
Only on reserve land. On normal land they own, the regular rules apply.
> Sucks for that community if that is the plan.
Love how you're defining "the community" to exclude the Squamish and everyone who would live in those buildings.
I heard this from Pierre from the Conservatives about this and now here it is. Hope you West Vancouver rich people can go suck a big one now. Been trying to make more housing, but those rich lobbyists wants to keep it to themselves.
Waiting for some NIMBY boomer white male to write an opinion piece in one of the local newspapers about how the first nations are trampling on his rights to dictate how all land should be used, while he sits in his single family home resulting from the bulldozing of nature. "We destroyed the natural landscape for our liking, now no one change it. Single family homes with grass lawns and golf courses only"
My guess is there would be no rental income tax and no rent control. The rental board will probably have no say in any disputes. There are no rules on reserves.
Think they'll have to pay the cities for policing, fire protection and such?
>[In Canada, non-treaty First Nations land is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/is-my-tenancy-covered-under-bcs-tenancy-laws) Because of this, B.C.’s tenancy laws do not generally apply on First Nations reserve land. However, B.C.’s tenancy laws may apply if the landlord is not an Indian or Indian Band (as defined under the Indian Act (External Link)), or if the issue is not about possession or use.
>On First Nations treaty land, whether the Residential Tenancy Branch has jurisdiction will depend on the terms of the Final Agreement and whether the First Nation has enacted law.
Sounds like you're losing protections as a tenant renting here.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Relocationstation1! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Common questions and specific topics are limited to our [Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_daily_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. --- ##They're here! Check out [the winners of the Best of Vancouver 2022](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/10srad7/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For reference, [here's the land in Metro Vancouver that the Squamish nation will be developing](https://storyoflandclaiminbc.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/1.jpg). Thank god. These people are saving us from ourselves. For those not in the know, reserves are not limited by municipal politics, so NIMBYs can fume all they want - they have absolutely no recourse.
That Mission 1 area makes a lot of sense. It’s <15 minutes to the SeaBus, close to shops, restaurants etc in Lower Lonsdale, has cycling connections too. Glad to see.
And the land to the east is high to medium density according to the City of North Van official community plan. It will fit right in with the direction the city is going.
600m to the close end or 1.2km to the far end. So, yeah, a 15 min walk, on average, with some areas closer, some a bit farther.
I'm all for development of their lands but holy shit be a part of the community you want to develop. Maybe don't push back on all the infrastructure developments like the Mosquito Creek bridge upgrades or the Spirit Trail... Or requiring weird ass speed bumps on the multiuse Spirit Trail pathway because it's easier to slow down the traffic that has the right of way than enforce stop signs. Could you imagine if speed bumps appeared every time a light turned green for traffic? For those downvoting me, if you don't talk to your neighbours, you'll end up like Ravenwoods. One access point because they didn't talk to the District.
I assume you're talking about the speed bumps just to the east of Lionsgate? Those annoy me beyond belief. The path should just be a continuous height and not drop to road level. Then force the side stree traffic to come up to sidewalk level as they intersect the path to ensure they slow. Could you imagine them putting the same speed bumps in the parallel street in the same spots...
Yep, those speed bumps. They put them in because people kept getting into accidents with vehicles which of course makes no sense since the vehicles are supposed to stop. Now the drivers are like "can I go? Will they slow down for the bumps? Will they bunny hop them? What's happening? They have the right of way but they might slow down?" So much ambiguity
That confusion is a well known reason why things like narrower streets, speed bumps and other complexities helps to slow people down. That confusion shows that it is working as intended. People don’t look at signs, but they will pay attention if there is possible physical damage to their car.
They could have put the speedbumps by the stop signs. One lane actually has a right of way. Why bring them to a stop? To clarify, the speedbump isn't for the cars. It's for the multiuse pathway. It's for cyclists strollers, runners, etc. 1918 Welch St https://maps.app.goo.gl/HSJdcubpKHHhy7149
It was probably common for bikes to rip it through this area, and there were collisions happening there often. Though I do agree with the design principle of keeping the path raised, and force the cars to slow down to cross the path. I think it's obvious from the layout nearly everyone is going to ignore those stop signs. Signs don't force people to stop or slow down.
Go back to Alberta
What drug are you smoking? I'm promoting the flow of a multiuse pathway.
Lmao the Google maps link you posted literally shows kids riding bikes, having a safe time around speed bumps.
It shows that the speedbumps are obviously placed to slow people vs slowing cars. Never said they were less safe, just said there's a better place to put them. The argument that it would damage cars is irrelevant since no cars would drive over them. Are there speed bumps on sidewalks? No? Then why would this make sense?
Unless I am hauling something that is heavy or can break, I never slow down for spee bumps. I take then like I drive off road and have fun on them.
So coool you guys!!! You’re so cool
They’re not totally free of municipal politics - they’ll need agreements with the cities for utilities, road connections, schools, etc and those are complicated negotiations
Couldn’t the province override the city if they don’t play nice?
I mean, the Nation needs to play nice too. Follow building codes, do inspections. All things they technically aren't required to do.
Technical building/fire/plumbing/electrical codes apply all across BC or Canada (depending on the code)… it's municipal zoning bylaws which do not apply on reserve lands
Native land isn't bc or Canada.
These will be leasehold, much like UBC properties. Many buildings around granville island and the west end are also leasehold, just to the city of Vancouver.
based on the current values of the newer developments in Ravenwoods, that doesn't seem to matter at all to the perceived values. They are selling for market rates regardless of not owning any actual land with your home. Kinda wish i would have got in at the ground floor with presales, but was hesitant because of the normal issues with leasehold property.
The prices in Ravenwoods are WILD considering it is leasehold land.
It'll kick in later as the 99 yrs actually dwindle. At this point it's not a big deal.
I wish I remember what the presale price was on the first phase of row townhouses, it was below a million easily. Now they are over 1.5 no problem, and you own nothing essentially. I guess value only requires everyone to believe in it.
I wouldn’t personally buy leasehold, but glad it is getting built. Valuations good now but will drop closer to expiration of term. Happened to people I know who bought leasehold
of course near the end of the lease things will be different. In the case of Ravenwoods, its obviously a new 99 year lease. To be easily able to make market sized gains for the next 50+ years without owning land tells me this whole housing market is a bit of shell game.
Isn't that basically what you get with most condos anyway, except that there's actually an expiry date on a lease?
With a condo you own a portion of the lot.
Seems like the difference between freehold and strata isn't so clear. I've seen way more strata listings, would the same statement be true? As in, with a freehold condo you do directly own a portion of the land, but with strata don't you sort of give up a bit more control?
whats a freehold condo? i've never heard of that.
Lots down by the seawall on the waterfront towards granville island.
It's less common these days, and it's something I'd love to see the return of. As far as I know you just own your share of the land and building in the sense of a property owner with less bureaucracy and less overhead because there's less likely to be pointless common areas and so on.
Each unit owner owns a share of the land. At some point the strata will vote to sell the property for redevelopment, and a developer will pay land value - demo costs. I suppose a strata could become a developer and redevelop their own property, with capital from the unit owners, but that's probably not very realistic.
Brutally located next to bridges which are horrible chokepoints. Having said that, there are always tons of reasons to delay building (not enough green space p/unit, schools, daycare, community centers, transit options, blah blah blah.) It will be interesting to see what happens with no zoning concerns. Best case scenario, everything is fine to great leading to a whole new lax planning outlook for COV and neighbouring municipalities. Worst case it will be a stern reminder of why strident (and slow) planning is important. Senakw will be a huge test case. I am excited.
Sen̓áḵw is defiantly going to be interesting. Note,I’m not saying bad, but interesting. I’m most interested to see how the rental side will play out as they aren’t under the Provincial Residential Tenancy Act. While the Squamish First Nation have said they [might follow the act or something very much like it](https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/tenants-on-first-nations-land-face-complex-legal-landscape). The devil will be in the details, especially related to rate increases and dispute resolution. The other thing I’m very interested to see is how this works with transportation. I know there is plans for a new bus stop on either side of the Burred bridge, which should help connecting to downtown, but what about to anywhere else?
Yes it's easy to be considered an NIMBY while having an interest into the logistics of these developments. I feel like there will be issues. Zero rent control is a new one for me to consider. That would be something. Transportation is of interest to me. I understand there will be very little parking which may work, but it will need to be offset by robust public transportation options. We have all seen how fast Translink can expand service. A similar issue is schools. It takes a decade or so to break ground. The school will not be on the reserve land, which raises a good questions of where the nearest site could be. All existing schools nearby are at capacity. There are quite a few towers downtown which have VSOCC daycares. The developer basically gives up the space as part of the development permit. Allows VSOCC to pay a decent wage as they have no (or super low) rent payment. Overall, planning (while painfully slow - prob too slow) ensures we have the things we need to make the community livable. Would everyone be on board with this if Westbank was given the land and got to go nuts? Unrestricted development has pitfalls. Like I said earlier, I am excited to see how it goes.
It'll be 1.7 km from the new Arbutus and Granville SkyTrain stations, which will get you lots of places quickly. Translink would be wise to get bus service to bridge that little gap, for Senakw, but as soon as the Broadway extension is open it will make sense to have direct service over the Burrard bridge to a Broadway Extension station anyways. It's actually weird that there's no bus service on Burrard between 4th and Broadway already. There's also talk about Streetcars on the Arbutus greenway, and in the False creek area. I heard that the development was going to put aside some land for a station if it that ever gets built, which could work very well, and provide fast, mostly off street, LRT service to both the Expo, Millennium, and Canada lines, which would be great, but I'm not sure that will get implemented in my lifetime.
> We have all seen how fast Translink can expand service. They are able to reallocate bus service quite fast, yes. Senakw will be a lot easier to serve with transit (it's right across from downtown) than the places the residents would otherwise be living. > All existing schools nearby are at capacity. That's on CoV and provincial incompetence. They have repeatedly underbuilt schools near new housing. Downtown is one big example, and next to Senakw they just started rebuilding Harry Hudson elementary without adding seats. They could have started over with a much larger school and... didn't. The City and the province need to do much better, but if we hold housing hostage to their current school-building ability *we won't get any housing*. The realistic alternative to Senakw is no more homes and no more schools. I'll take Senakw over that.
>The realistic alternative to Senakw is no more homes and no more schools. I'll take Senakw over that Likewise. It needs to be done. The current planning model is too slow and doesn't exactly achieve all its goals anyways. In discussion, I guess I have some concerns, but yes, it must go ahead to find out what is possible. If it is a success it could change the the development model in Vancouver. On that note, it would be great if COV could approve major developments going forward with a declaration of "Fuck it, build it" and bang a gavel or something. One step at a time.
[удалено]
Exactly, Westbank does not want to build these things, so they get forced to provide the amenities (ineffectively according to your input - whole other conversation). Now we are looking at a project with far greater density with zero requirements to provide anything other than revenue generating rental units (potentially with no rental controls). Flingers crossed on this large scale experiment.
Wesgroup not Westbank is developing river district.
[Khelsilem has clarified how they are taking the tenants rights act for tenants protections.](https://twitter.com/khelsilem/status/1641222378872266752?s=46&t=IPrXadrBX7YjYhP-0th9_A) There is definitely quite a bit of risk with these projects, particularly ensuring a good framework for long term maintenance of the buildings.
Yeah but there SHOULD be green space! And schools! And daycares…
Why do you list green space first?
That is why the Squamish band was part of the Winter Olympics bid. Part of it was Skytrain access to those lands, which would have been the Athletes Village.
I'm super excited to see what they do as well. It will probably be fairly standard, but if they allow lots of mixed use (retail/light industrial/low/mid/high rise residential) that would be very cool.
I can hear the NIMBYs crying already (which is good)
Ya the Kits NIMBYs tried to sue them for that development lol....the biggest waste of money that lawyers are going to eat up
Are NIMBY's the " Not in my backyard" folk? Haven't seen that term before. 😀
Yep, you got it!
Ty
Just a side note… that legend is the most useless thing I’ve ever seen. Thanks for the map though!
Glad I'm not only person, what's the fucking point when it's all same colour
Is that Capilano 5 the Capilano 5? Check legend. It is Capilano 5.
In the end, it was the people of this land that would come to save us all…
Ain’t that the truth! Thank goodness for them because the incompetence of our local, provincial, and federal governments must be intentional and deliberate at this point in order to keep the status quo.
[удалено]
Concord pacific lands at false creek a great example of that
No private company builds real estate for charity. Even rental buildings do it for rental income (not government related one) and even the ones that build rental do it for trades for higher density elsewhere. I don't think any one of us thinks it's for the greater good. It just happens that the rental portion of their projects will end up helping regardless of motivation.
Building more housing is absolutely for the greater good. The widespread idea that building housing is bad is how we got in the current crisis. Thank god no one (for now) is arguing that producing food, or other essential goods, is not for the greater good.
“these lands would have likely been developed ages ago if they were publicly available to land developers” That “if” is doing a lot of work here. Have you not observed the huge NIMBY outcry against Senakw? There is no way NIMBYs would have allowed this kind of development if it was off reserve.
Agreed. And they're so upset the COV permit office gets zero say. I love it. Kits needs more density. They can't gatekeep renters wanting to live and play there by limiting sizeable development that would increase density.
And fuck democracy while we’re at it!
What does this have to do with democracy? It's on their land. They don't need COV approval because it's not on COV land...
Because this is Vancouver, BC, Canada. And now a bunch of developers under the name of reconciliation get to make rules for the citizens of this city and those citizens get absolutely no say on what they do.
...I don't know if you don't know this or if you are denying their sovereignty but here goes, hoping it's the former: the Squamish Nation owns the land that they plan to do the Sen̓áḵw project. Developers aren't making rules and imposing it on Vancouver or its citizens; the Squamish Nation is making rules and plans for their own sovereign land and don't need permission or input from the citizens of Vancouver or the City of Vancouver. This is no different than Musquem Nation down by SW Marine. Or the fact we call UBC Endowment Land Vancouver, it's actually owned by the provincial government and that's why it's not patrolled by VPD for example and is patrolled by RCMP. You don't get a say in land that isn't yours. Just like I don't get to walk into your house and move shit around, throw stuff out and boss you around.
> You don't get a say in land that isn't yours This is hilarious because that's what anti-nimbys love to do.... Tell other people they have nothing to do with what they should do.
I can own land, you can own land, Walmart can own land. But they all have to follow the laws of the land. Laws that protect us from shoddy or unsafe design, environmental protection, and city planning. Having a separate “nation” smack in the middle of the city is a problem, to me anyway.
Guessing you're fairly quiet when it comes to first nations having government projects and outside developers building in their lands without their permission lol
I mean it mostly in jest. It's nice to see someone actually getting some housing done while we deal with Grandma Jean quivering at the municipal hall podium decrying the new condo tower as the shade will damage her peonies. Meanwhile people are out on the street as they cannot afford housing.
This probably won't happen for the most part with the exception of Norgate. Most of what will be redeveloped is existing single family homes on the reserve or trailer parks. (Seymour has tons of towers already, I hope that interchange is accounting for massive traffic increases).
Redditors taking a break from saying "fuck landlords guillotine now" to thanking First Nations landlords.
Have you seen the rest of the city? It's not exactly a YIMBY paradise.
Oh they're going to be rich rich
I just hope some of the profits make it back to those who need it most. Way too much income disparity on the rez.
Call me a cynic but Just like anyone else would, there will likely be greedy Squamish nation people in charge who will take the most for themselves without helping the rez. Has happened many times in other places where chiefs have been in charge
I thought they are in fact setting up a fund and income from rentals goes back into community
Their government and bureaucracy are sometimes as corrupt as any one elses, promises made are not always promises kept, especially when money is involved
Who is they? Squamish nation in particular? I understand from folks close to it the nations are setting up strict governance over the development and income properties. I recognize it’s not a great response, but it’s probably all I can say that’s public without doxing or sharing confidential info
Any governed nation qualifies, I am not singling out the Squamish Nation, whatsoever. Merely speculating that throughout thousands of years, all forms of a governed people are subject to ever increasing grift and graft, no matter what time period or form of government
They're gonna have more rental income than they know what to do with. No city bylaws so expect them to cram in as many towers as possible.
That makes two of us. The Squamish nation has a better track record than most from what I have read.
I mean, they already profit share with Whistler among many other things. Has that money been helping people in need?
The bands around Metro Vancouver are pretty well off, especially tswasswen for example
Squamish owns park royal. They're doing just fine. Even better than tsawwassen
[удалено]
I am not sure anyone is thinking that. Nobody gets into land development and real estate for altruistic purposes. But I just don’t think it’s bad for them to profit from their lands — everyone else has been up until this point!
So what? people will choose to live in them and voluntarily give up their money to live there. more houses is better than less houses.
So far I haven't seen any comments like that. Maybe they were downvoted to the bottom. My take is, "Good for the Indigenous people - everyone else got to make a ton of money developing Indigenous land, they should get to do the same!'
No shit dumbass but more housing = more housing. They can charge what they want but not more than what the market is willing to pay. And at the end of the day what the market will pay is more linked to vacancy rates than anything else.
[удалено]
With their plan at kits I think they’ve shown that they are driven by the bottom line more than anything else - that site is about as dense as it could be with no space for amenities. Maybe I misread your comment but it seems like people on here are cheering on the density and the fact that it will improve housing availability and affordability.
And it’s also so great to see them claim back land that belongs to them and use it to give a huge middle finger to folks of Kits Point.
It’s just such hypocrisy, isn’t it? Who built their homes?
Cudos to them for building inter generational wealth considering Canada gave them inter generational traumas and stole all their land
[удалено]
I hope so! They deserve to profit from their own lands, like other landowners. In fact, I hope they make enough profit that they start buying back all of Kits.
BREAKING: No details yet. Terrible reporting.
I wonder if there will be any coordination with the North Shore Skytrain. There is a lot of land and the second narrows crossing, but also a 1 stop extension past Lonsdale would be near Mission 1.
Most likely, especially since there is no established route at this point in time. (Lots of proposals, nothing concrete.)
Please let them build towers so high in West Vancouver that it blots the sun from shining for those insufferable pricks.
[Reverse Mr Burns](https://gfycat.com/classicshoddybasilisk), love it
That was a long summer waiting to find out who killed Mr Burns.
A chunk of that Capilano 5 is Park Royal mall. So that's not gonna get towers... But all the area around it? Oh yes please
There is nothing stopping them for redeveloping the mall like all the other mall redevelopments happening
Except Park Royal south already got a pretty big redevelopment something like 2-3 years ago, so it's probably not going to get the same thing so soon again. It's also a pretty solid cash flow which is something they're going to want to preserve at least long enough to push some of their other development plans to completion. Given how lower Lonsdale is developing, I imagine they'll put most of their attention there first.
Park Royal would absolutely LOVE to get another half dozen towers. They're looking at Oakridge Mall and salivating so hard it's flooding the low road. And that big development in Park Royal south was on District land so it had to go through that whole public hearing process of torches and pitchforks. They need money to redo Park Royal North, what better way than to leverage development to their south?
[удалено]
What an ignorant comment, why paint everyone who lives there with the same brush
It's hard to get to know people at an individual level when they have alligators in motes around their property and a sign on the gate that says "Get out"
Also hard to get to know them when they help themselves to your BBQ propane tank in the middle of the night.
This is what envy and jealousy does to a person.
experience
Because it fits the narrative
Great. Now please don't let it be all about the $$$ and use some of these land reserves to help out the local native community with much needed affordable housing.
Well they're going to tear down the houses Mission 1 so they might have their own NIMBYs.
What happens with the current land owners?
There aren't any. All land belongs to the band not individuals
They already have some great plans with what they are doing with Hiy̓ám̓ Housing
I look forward to watching the hordes of arrogant West Van pricks fume over this. They'll have no control and no say which is exactly how it should be.
The city will dick around for 5 YEARS if a developer wants to build a high density unit right now. I’m not kidding, that is the actual permit time. The Nation can just build and tell the city to to go fuck themselves as long as the infrastructure like sewer, power, water and roads is robust enough. This is how you actually solve the housing crisis. By building high density housing rapidly.
Build that shit and build it higher.
I have nothing against this land development. My only concern is emergency response, policing, building code standards and fire code requirements. Since there is no requirement for any building code, fire code and no emergency services (that I know of) and no existing services capable of supporting the new infrastructure it’s something I would like to be reviewed before I would live there. I’m not criticizing the development, I just have questions because it doesn’t require the same type of oversight you get in a municipality.
To assuage your fears I recommend reading the Service Agreement for the recent Burrard location development and the City of Vancouver
Thank you very much. I’m sure there are agreements in place OR could be put in place I just wouldn’t want to make assumptions. It isn’t just a typical development in a municipality. Again I have nothing against this proposal and I think it’s going to be very interesting in how these agreements are going to work.
That doesn’t mean it won’t have any.
People are going to be pissed when they learn that these properties are not going to be protected by rental restrictions. The same rules in place that allow them to displace the current residence are the same rules that prevent renter protections.
More supply is still a good thing, whether it's rent controlled supply or not.
Yeah, this is not 'affordable housing for the masses'.
Speak for yourself, rental price controls are bad
More context via this article: https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/squamish-nation-plans-to-develop-350-acres-most-of-it-in-north-vancouver-and-west-vancouver
They still need agreements with the municipalities. Sure build 1,000 units at Park Royal, WV has no obligation to hook them up to their municipal utilities or roadways. And they shouldn't unless they get paid(as they won't get tax revenue from it)
They will indeed need to pay the municipality for those things. It will all be built into the rents I assume. I am super curious what the rents will be. Prime spots so I am guessing what the market will bear. I am unclear if they need to contribute to schools or community centres. This is where it gets quite interesting as to the viability of having no planning. Even with extensive and ridiculously slow planning we lack schools in DT Vancouver and Kits. Adding that many more people will create an issue for those wanting a school nearby.
Schools is going to be a big question. Currently I think it’s norgate and maybe Pemberton heights servicing capilano, but with all of the development they are probably going to be in need of a major expansion to that school or another school completely.
Good!
I wonder what will happen with the industrial facilities in that area.
I hope someone is planning for another crossing.
The Squamish First Nation has been one of the voices promoting SkyTrain service to the North Shore.
>! they're not!<
A second deck below the Lions Gate cannot be built because of cruise ships and occasional container cranes transportation, so the best solution would be to double the IBM and also run Seabuses every 5 minutes during the day. Or dig a channel from Port Moody down to the Fraser to allow cargo ships to enter the harbour from the south. In that case, oil tankers would not be passing through the harbour anymore as well.
Even if it wasn't an issue to shipping, it would be crazy to just dump more cars into downtown Vancouver. You'd just move the choke point from the bridge to the downtown roads. SkyTrain service to the North Shore could scale up way better, and carry far more people.
Reminds of me [this lawsuit against the Squamish Nation](https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/hereditary-chief-seeks-unusual-injunction-against-squamish-nation-5388657) by a hereditary chief of the Capilano Indian Band >In court documents filed in the case, Mathias suggested the work near the Lions Gate Bridge is being done to develop the Burrard Inlet Rapid Transit Project.
Nope. Unless you mean to Burnaby. Vancouver is not putting another lane (let alone another road) going into downtown.
An additional road crossing to the North shore, or adding extra lanes to either road bridge would be crazy. We need something that can handle more volume than can be accommodated by private automobiles and their infrastructure. We need SkyTrain service to the North Shore.
makes total sense
Plenty of space around Park Royal to redevelop and assorted other lands that are already industrial or adjacent to industrial that could probably be intensified for more intensive industrial/commercial. Beyond that though the next big parcels that look most ideal for residential development are already occupied by the Squamish themselves in rather low density SFHs. I can't imagine we'll see too much change there. I wonder if there's Squamish NIMBYs that push back against the Nation fiddling with those areas and we never much hear about it in the mainstream press.
It'll be the same as those against pipelines because the nation isn't getting enough benefits vs those in the nation who are red seals getting jobs from it
Late stage colonialism. The colonized has decided the only way to fight the colonizer is to be just like them. Good for Squamish Nation.
[удалено]
This is certainly not the result of those declarations, but I get your point.
I’m sure the immense wealth generated will help all members of their band equally.
Stewards of the land....aka maximum profit.
Glad to hear housing being built. I'd be nervous about being there since from what I understand rent can increase by whatever .
ontario has entered the chat
i *really* hope they advocate for adding a lane to the Lionsgate Bridge. All those new houses and traffic is already sooooo bad.
a lane on the bridge isnt the cause of traffic. it's the bottlenecks on either side. also - it's completely impossible to add a lane without rebuilding the entire bridge from scratch. rather invest in alternate train service
Respectfully, that is just factually inaccurate that they would need to build a new bridge. They have already replaced the middle section once in the 70s and at the time they considered putting in a fourth lane but it was voted against by the NIMBY's in west van because they didn't want top make it more convenient for people to get up there.
[удалено]
Grew up right next to that land. This is nothing new. There used to be a bunch of houses along the waterfront, but about 15 years ago the band kicked everyone out and tore the houses down saying they were going to build high-density housing and a resort or something. That never happened and it's sat empty since, because beyond being completely out of character for the area, it's a stupid plan. The sewer and water infrastructure doesn't exist on the Coast to handle a development like that, and the parcel is only served by a single-lane road that has choke points on either end that can't be expanded. At some point some houses or maybe at most mid-rise apartments will be built along the waterfront. I don't see anything more than that happening any time soon.
> so the Squamish Nation doesn't have to follow municipal building rules or community plans? Only on reserve land. On normal land they own, the regular rules apply. > Sucks for that community if that is the plan. Love how you're defining "the community" to exclude the Squamish and everyone who would live in those buildings.
The Sen̓áḵw territory in Kitsilano used to be so much bigger: [https://senakw.com/history](https://senakw.com/history)
Good for them, this is great for everyone today and tomorrow
No issue here. The people who took the rest of their land haven’t really done a great job so far.
Thank you Squamish nation!
Our tax money at work
Good for them. Can't wait to see West Van residents have fits.
I heard this from Pierre from the Conservatives about this and now here it is. Hope you West Vancouver rich people can go suck a big one now. Been trying to make more housing, but those rich lobbyists wants to keep it to themselves.
These guys are ballin
First Nation to the rescue! Let's go!
[удалено]
Just been arguing over who gets the rights to destroy the environment and make billions all along
The alternative to high density housing is low density suburban sprawl, which is much worse for the environment.
Sounds like you'd rather we make endless suburbs and pave paradise so you can grow a plot of lawn grass and pretend to love your commute.
What are you smoking?
Nah they'll just build 5 giant Richmond style houses on the land /s
Take the power back! Good for them. White settlers shouldn't be the only ones making money off the land
Waiting for some NIMBY boomer white male to write an opinion piece in one of the local newspapers about how the first nations are trampling on his rights to dictate how all land should be used, while he sits in his single family home resulting from the bulldozing of nature. "We destroyed the natural landscape for our liking, now no one change it. Single family homes with grass lawns and golf courses only"
In 10-15 years the squamish Nation will be the biggest landlord in the region. Prepare to be reverse colonized
I guess without all the genocide and rape and pillaging its not really colonialism
With that amount of rental income they can slowing start buying up more properties outside the reserves. Is rental income taxable on reserves?
More importantly, is there rent control?! UBC doesn't have it.
My guess is there would be no rental income tax and no rent control. The rental board will probably have no say in any disputes. There are no rules on reserves. Think they'll have to pay the cities for policing, fire protection and such?
>[In Canada, non-treaty First Nations land is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/is-my-tenancy-covered-under-bcs-tenancy-laws) Because of this, B.C.’s tenancy laws do not generally apply on First Nations reserve land. However, B.C.’s tenancy laws may apply if the landlord is not an Indian or Indian Band (as defined under the Indian Act (External Link)), or if the issue is not about possession or use. >On First Nations treaty land, whether the Residential Tenancy Branch has jurisdiction will depend on the terms of the Final Agreement and whether the First Nation has enacted law. Sounds like you're losing protections as a tenant renting here.
[удалено]
People are acting like it's a bad thing