Kapyong Barracks Discussion

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by trueviking

that's the only good part....

Why is this good? Because it would life difficult for Winnipeggers?

And you wonder why people think you are such an asshole...

[wardlow]

That concept plan is, how do you say... not very good. It simultaneously manages to not create any kind of quality urban environment *and* makes Kenaston into an inefficient transportation corridor at the same time.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I think only rrskylar had a beef with the very idea of urban reserves... the rest of us are simply critiquing the design concept. Of which there is plenty to criticize.

yeah, wow.

It is absolutely fair to critique the design.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Why is this good? Because it would life difficult for Winnipeggers?

And you wonder why people think you are such an asshole...

ha ha...do they?

I was joking.

but it does make me laugh that so many people look at that and their first reaction is oh my god, I might not be able to get to IKEA as quickly!

'make life difficult' is a hilarious take on it....as if quality of life is only based on driving speed....maybe not ripping a freeway through two mature neighbourhoods and significantly affecting the quality of this development has some value?...or is that an asshole thing to say?

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I think only rrskylar had a beef with the very idea of urban reserves... the rest of us are simply critiquing the design concept. Of which there is plenty to criticize.

The design as in pertaining to the lack of willingness to provide the width to widen Kenaston?

I explained it perfectly as to why that is not in the interest of the First Nations from laws created by the federal government.

Design is easy to fix. Everything with this design "is fluid" according to Chief Meeches.

Since the land designation is unique and Tuxedo residents (at an open house) asked for there not to be undeveloped and overgrown grass on empty lots, the spaced-out buildings provide opportunity for the Treaty 1 First Nations to "grow" into the space.

The populations and demand for the space will quickly be used up in it's current design. However, we know that Canada's fastest natural growing populations are First Nations... we know that more demand will eventually be created.

This design is meant to eventually develop density without impeding on aesthetic requests made by residents.

[trueviking]

Its not just about the lack of density. The basic framework is not one of a walkable infill community.

it is interesting that the first nations have been saying the first priority was to give land back to widen the road...i'm definitely good with them not doing that. Its a project that will likely never happen anyways, so let's make the community as good as possible.

[KellyEdwards]

Just to introduce myself, my name is Kelly Edwards and I pitched a hotel for Kapyong Barracks for work that started in 2013. I participated in two business competitions and placed as first place and a finalist in both.

Today, I live in Los Angeles, California but work in consulting projects for First Nations governments as well as real-estate developments both on-reserve and off-reserve.

My latest project is turning parcels of lands into Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) status on First Nations lands to provide competitive business environments for industrial, manufacturing and technology companies. The project has not yet been announced and is still under works -- probably under wraps for the next year.

The location will not be revealed.

But hey, self-determination for First Nations is something First Nations want and something Canadians want (less taxpayer dollars used).

Considering that First Nations are the 1st nations within Canada (a 2nd nation), First Nations should all receive FTZ status as the sovereignty of their reserve lands provides many benefits similar to US tribes.

By promotion and recognition of sovereignty, the problems within reserves solely become the problems of the First Nations.

However, when you create oppressive federal laws like the Indian Act that prohibit First Nations from drilling wells for water, you create a water crisis that taxpayer's need to pay $3.2 billion to fix.

Section 81 (1) (L) of the Indian Act:

"The council of a band may make by-laws not inconsistent with this Act or with any regulation made by the Governor in Council or the Minister, for any or all of the following purposes, namely, the construction and regulation of the use of public wells, cisterns, reservoirs and other water supplies..."

So, while the responsibility of drinking water for rural farms lies with the farmer by drilling a water well, First Nations, by federal law, are not allowed to do such a thing.

Canada should recognize Indigenous sovereignty and allow First Nations to conduct their own business to build their own water infrastructure. Considering that Canada did recognize that sovereignty when signing the treaties (one nation to another), that sovereignty should be re-affirmed. It would benefit both sides greatly rather than being a paternalistic government.

Considering that First Nations (as separate governments) don't have any rights or say in federal or parliamentary discussions, this paternalism that cost taxpayer's billions is in no way of fault to any First Nations. We never created the Indian Act, it was Canada.

If First Nations were granted the recognition of sovereignty, urban reserves in addition to current lands would be nearly impossible to do. But since it didn't, it's contributing to crises nationwide and allowing for urban reserves to become a reality.

The lack of widening for Kenaston is the price of paternalism and control over First Nations.

CBC: https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/f...idea-1.2506654

Indian Act: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/...e-12.html#h-34

[esquire]

I think Mr. Edwards sees criticism of the design concept and thinks we're all slamming the very idea of urban reserves, indigenous involvement, etc.

Speaking for myself here, I have no issue with those things. I would just like to see higher quality design... mixed uses, walkability, increased density. It will make for a better community that will hopefully increase profitability for the developers.

Count me in among those who are indifferent as to what happens to Kenaston. Expand, keep it the way it is, I don't really care either way. If the FN landowners don't want to sell land for route widening, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Its not just about the lack of density. The basic framework is not one of a walkable infill community.

it is interesting that the first nations have been saying the first priority was to give land back to widen the road...i'm definitely good with them not doing that. Its a project that will likely never happen anyways, so let's make the community as good as possible.

It's unfortunate that governments don't stick to their word, huh.

Since Sagkeeng First Nation is 1 of 7 First Nations not to receive it's Treaty Land Entitlement settlement yet, keeping as much of the land is invaluable.

If the federal government can settle this lawsuit with Sagkeeng, Sagkeeng's ability to create their own urban reserves like Peguis, Swan Lake, Roseau River, Brokenhead and Sandy Bay will definitely constitute a better working relationship.

But since no settlement has been offered to Sagkeeng, the ability to own a piece of the Kapyong Barracks urban reserve while not having a TLE settlement might provide the only economic value for years, if not decades, to come.

Last year, the community posted an $800K operating deficit for fighting land claims including an alleged illegal surrender of Pine Falls that saw the Minister of Indian Affairs sell the lands of the reserve to the mill in an attempt to save the mill right before The Great Depression.

The mill could not keep up with the lease payments to the reserve and thus the lands were sold to keep it from being owned by Sagkeeng First Nation.

These lawsuits (Canada-wide) add up to over $20-billion to cover 589 land claims made by First Nations.

Some of these land claims (like the TLE) are based on the number of existing and alive registered members of the band. So, while settling these lawsuits would've say 1,000 band members receive a settlement of 32 acres per person on a valuation of $500 per acre that equals $16M, today's population of that save reserve can by 6,000 people.

That same lawsuit that could've been settled in the 60's for $16M is now worth $96M based on 5,000 new alive members of the band.

Aside from the financial cost of waiting decades to settle these land claims, it also comes at a cost of something like Kenaston Blvd's widening.

Pushing a First Nation to fight for anything they can get when their suit can easily be settled is a symptom of the dysfunctional relationships in these governments.

I mean, I hate to say it again, but if people were "pro-settlement" rather than decades of resisting these land claims, our cities (especially Kenaston) would look much nicer than they do now. Not only that, but the taxpayer wallet would be $10-billion-dollars lighter.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...-ottawa-preps/

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

I think Mr. Edwards sees criticism of the design concept and thinks we're all slamming the very idea of urban reserves, indigenous involvement, etc.

Speaking for myself here, I have no issue with those things. I would just like to see higher quality design... mixed uses, walkability, increased density. It will make for a better community that will hopefully increase profitability for the developers.

Count me in among those who are indifferent as to what happens to Kenaston. Expand, keep it the way it is, I don't really care either way. If the FN landowners don't want to sell land for route widening, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Well I think the problem is that the city needs to be able to upgrade its infrastructure. I dont think transportation projects should be able to be held hostage like that. Especially considering the inordinate amount of money that has been spent on studies etc.

[Pinus]

Design is terrible. Clearly going for el cheapo version.


And if all sides of the table, being aboriginal, government and local residents, don't find a way to work together and co-operate when it comes to the development of the site, be it widening Kenaston or other concerns, there will be ill will felt by many, and tensions will be felt on all sides. Something I'm sure nobody wants, especially the business owners on the UR who will be counting on local surrounding residents to help fill their pocket books.

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Well I think the problem is that the city needs to be able to upgrade its infrastructure. I dont think transportation projects should be able to be held hostage like that. Especially considering the inordinate amount of money that has been spent on studies etc.

Exactly. So, why hasn't the federal government geared itself to a working relationship rather than one that is brutally enforced by the courts?

"Holding hostage" also means that First Nations are asking for something in return -- which they're not. Nothing is being held hostage. These Chiefs are serving their under-privileged people who have poverty and unemployment rates exceeding The Great Depression.

They are serving what's in the best interests for the communities that could reduce government transfer obligations in the long run. Personally, I think that's in the best interest of all Canadians (rather than just Winnipeggers who complain about traffic).

"You win some, you lose some."

[trueviking]

I'm interested to see how the logistics of the reserve works. Who will own and live in the housing? Who will own businesses there?

[KellyEdwards]

Official press release:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...rint-1.4892587

[Wpg_Guy]

According to the map most of the residential is off reserve, only commercial development is on the reserve portion.

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by trueviking

I'm interested to see how the logistics of the reserve works. Who will own and live in the housing? Who will own businesses there?

Depending on which instrument of governing legislation that is used whether it's the Indian Act or First Nations Land Management Act Regime, anyone can lease a property whether they are Indigenous or non-indigenous.

By law, all residential mortgages are through the Canadian Housing Mortgage Corporation (a federal crown corporation) and you cannot use a bank such as RBC, TD or CIBC as your lender.

So, while you can own your home, you will need to negotiate a land lease. Furthermore, unique "quit claim deeds" are required as a weird form of collateral for CMHC.

By law, all reserve land is owned by Her Majesty (The Queen) for benefit for First Nations. However, the band membership(s) can authorize a lease to themselves for $1 for 99 years that requires federal approval by the Minister of Indigenous Services Canada (Jane Philpott).

From there, sub-leases, sub-sub-leases and rentals can be authorized through a development company created by the band membership(s).

The Minister of Indigenous Services will also need to grant all First Nations Section 60 under the Indian Act to allow First Nations to manage and control their own lands since by law they are not granted permission to.

In fact, because of this law, it's illegal to even erect a fence unless written permission from the Minister in Ottawa grants the fence to be built.

Also, since the long-term land lease is prepaid, it can be used as collateral for investment. So, it's likely that this will not remain common band land and that all the First Nations will lease it to themselves for development.

Whether this results in a "common company" shared by all First Nations on a corporation by-law structure or each parcels are separately leased to each different band will result in answering who's the landlord of each project.

Despite either outcome, anyone is welcome as a resident or business tenant and there are legal avenues to allow security (if provisions and permissions are granted by the Minister -- which it's 2018 and some of these reserves still don't have those powers).

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by Wpg_Guy

According to the map most of the residential is off reserve, only commercial development is on the reserve portion.

If you're referring to the 'Canada Lands' portion, that's actually the 'Canada Lands Corporation' (CLC) which is a Crown company tasked with the sale of the lands to investors.

If your statement was true, the First Nations would not be able to govern the design of the lands.

[esquire]

As far as the housing goes, there is no small degree of risk involved with leasing a residence on reserve land... just ask cottagers at Buffalo Point, Sakimay First Nation or on Rat Portage First Nation who were effectively locked out of what they thought were their properties.

It would be one thing to lease office space for a business or whatever, or even to rent an apartment there. But to tie your house to it strikes me as a pretty dicey proposition... that's a lot of trust you're putting into the bands who own the property.

[CoryB]

Something to keep in mind with urban reserves is there is normally a services agreement between the treaty land and the surrounding municipality to cover things like water, sewer, policing, fire, paramedics, etc. What exactly is included is subject to negotiations. It is also how the Human Rights Museum operates locally as they have a similar services agreement as they are exempt from property taxes.

It is also disappointing the federal government dragged out the process as long as they did as it definitely took away some development opportunities. Say Ikea hadn't picked there site yet perhaps they locate on the urban reserve instead of where they ended up.

And while the "gas station" is a really racist comment to make the reality is there are a lot of residents in Winnipeg that are eligible to buy fuel at the lower treaty prices. I have seen the one Winnipeg station on St Matthews often have really long lineups already so there is definitely more demand out there.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by CoryB

And while the "gas station" is a really racist comment to make