Arts, Faculty of
Geography, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Sanchez, Alexine Maria Mendoza
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
This thesis explores the urban planning process surrounding the 90-acre redevelopment of Jericho Lands, a former site of Jericho Detachment/Garrison in Vancouver, BC. This is one of the more valuable pieces of land in the province. I investigate how the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) First Nations, various neighborhood groups, and the different levels of the government interact in this planning process. To unpack this, I employ mixed methodologies including review of government and secondary documents, interviews from key informants, and participant observation in open-to-public events of Jericho Lands. This inquiry comes at a time when the historically marginalized Lower Mainland First Nations become owners and developers of luxury real estate land in one of the world’s most expensive cities. Together with Canada Lands Company (CLC), a non-agent Crown corporation, the cooperation with the three First Nations, and the City of Vancouver establishes a complex growth coalition that supports the development of Jericho Lands. In here, I find that reconciliation narratives are used as a framework in the policy process to advance the redevelopment. Consequently, the planning process of Jericho Lands as a large-scale development reveals the prevalence of growth-based initiatives alongside conflicting and overlapping interests with other issues and stakeholders in the city. Amidst these interactions and convergent subjectivities, the involvement of MST Development Corporation as the real estate arm of the First Nations represents their participation in the growth machine framework of Harvey Molotch (1979) and later reintroduced with John Logan (1987). Since this study only covers Phase One of Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program, I conclude with questions to consider in further studies of such a complex site.
UNPACKING INSPIRE JERICHO: LUXURY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AND FIRST NATIONS IN VANCOUVER by Alexine Maria Mendoza Sanchez M.A., Korea University, 2017 B.A., Miriam College, 2010 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Geography) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) October 2020 © Alexine Maria Mendoza Sanchez, 2020 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, a thesis entitled: Unpacking Inspire Jericho: luxury real estate development and First Nations in Vancouver submitted by Alexine Maria M. Sanchez in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Geography Examining Committee: Dr. Merje Kuus, Professor, Department of Geography, UBC Supervisor Dr. Elvin Wyly, Professor, Department of Geography, UBC Supervisory Committee Member iii Abstract This thesis explores the urban planning process surrounding the 90-acre redevelopment of Jericho Lands, a former site of Jericho Detachment/Garrison in Vancouver, BC. This is one of the more valuable pieces of land in the province. I investigate how the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) First Nations, various neighborhood groups, and the different levels of the government interact in this planning process. To unpack this, I employ mixed methodologies including review of government and secondary documents, interviews from key informants, and participant observation in open-to-public events of Jericho Lands. This inquiry comes at a time when the historically marginalized Lower Mainland First Nations become owners and developers of luxury real estate land in one of the world’s most expensive cities. Together with Canada Lands Company (CLC), a non-agent Crown corporation, the cooperation with the three First Nations, and the City of Vancouver establishes a complex growth coalition that supports the development of Jericho Lands. In here, I find that reconciliation narratives are used as a framework in the policy process to advance the redevelopment. Consequently, the planning process of Jericho Lands as a large-scale development reveals the prevalence of growth-based initiatives alongside conflicting and overlapping interests with other issues and stakeholders in the city. Amidst these interactions and convergent subjectivities, the involvement of MST Development Corporation as the real estate arm of the First Nations represents their participation in the growth machine framework of Harvey Molotch (1979) and later reintroduced with John Logan (1987). Since this study only covers Phase One of Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program, I conclude with questions to consider in further studies of such a complex site. iv Lay Summary What happens when Indigenous nations own and develop prime real estate land in one of the world’s most expensive cities? Unpacking Inspire Jericho attempts to answer this question by showing the connection of potential luxury development and involvement of First Nations in Vancouver. Jericho Lands, a 90-acre site located in Vancouver’s West Point Grey neighborhood, is now jointly owned by three First Nations: the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) Nations, and Canada Lands Company, a non-agent Crown corporation. The study accentuates the role of MST Development Corporation, a property developer owned by the MST Nations. With its unique structure, reconciliation is identified as a main component of this development which promotes changes in urban planning practices in Vancouver. Ultimately, this research aims to understand the effects of a complicated yet historic property development against the backdrop of worsening issues of housing affordability and housing crisis in the city. v Preface This research project is an original, unpublished, and independent work by Alexine Maria M. Sanchez. Interviews and fieldwork conducted for this research was approved by the University of British Columbia’s Behavioral Research Ethics Board, certificate number H19-01831. vi Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ iii Lay Summary ....................................................................................................................................... iv Preface ................................................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... ix List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. x Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... xi Dedication ........................................................................................................................................... xiii Chapter 1: Setting Up the Puzzle: Luxury Real Estate and First Nations in Vancouver .................... 1 1.1 Research question and objectives ............................................................................................ 4 1.1.1 Empirical context ............................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Scholarly framework............................................................................................................... 7 1.2.1 Urban governance and the urban growth machine ............................................................... 8 1.2.2 Land-use of large-scale developments ............................................................................... 11 1.2.2.1 Principles surrounding land-use and large-scale development ................................... 11 1.2.2.2 Military bases for redevelopment.............................................................................. 13 1.2.3 Indigenous enterprise and ventures ................................................................................... 16 1.3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 21 1.4 Limitations ........................................................................................................................... 28 1.5 Chapter summaries ............................................................................................................... 31 Chapter 2: Urban Tales of Jericho ..................................................................................................... 34 2.1 Early days of the traditional lands of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw .................................................. 35 vii 2.2 Settler history of Jericho: Private and military land-use ......................................................... 37 2.3 History as a precedent ........................................................................................................... 41 Chapter 3: New Era of Jericho ........................................................................................................... 44 3.1 Jericho’s new, complex ownership ........................................................................................ 47 3.1.1 The emergence of MST Development Corporation (MSTDC) ........................................... 48 3.1.2 “Non-agent crown” partnership with Canada Lands Company .......................................... 60 3.2 The million-dollar question of luxury real estate ................................................................... 66 3.2.1 Exclusive neighborhood of West Point Grey ..................................................................... 67 3.2.2 Topographical assets......................................................................................................... 75 3.2.3 Impending city-wide transit development .......................................................................... 78 3.3 Jericho’s multifaceted real estate future ................................................................................. 81 Chapter 4: Jericho and the Growth-driven Market ........................................................................... 85 4.1 Reconciliation as a framework for redevelopment and city building ...................................... 86 4.1.1 Early beginnings and the Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program ..................................... 87 4.1.2 Jericho & MST at the core of intersections and conflict within the city.............................. 96 4.2 Opportunity and caution on the emerging real estate machinery .......................................... 101 4.2.1 First Nations-led urban development model .................................................................... 102 4.2.2 Colonialism and the growth machine conceptual implications ......................................... 107 4.3 Jericho as a trigger for a new growth machine ..................................................................... 109 Chapter 5: Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 112 5.1 Jericho’s theoretical contribution to the growth scholarship ................................................. 113 5.2 Lessons and unexpected events while studying Jericho Lands ............................................. 117 5.3 Further questions ................................................................................................................ 121 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................... 124 viii List of Tables Table 1.1 Open to public engagement of Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program as of August 2020 ..... 23 Table 3.1 Comparative average and median dwelling values in West Point Grey, City of Vancouver, Metro Vancouver and British Columbia, 2006-2016 (with % change value – benchmark West Point Grey).............................................................................................................................................................. 71 Table 3.2 Timeline of the sale of Jericho Lands and events surrounding its policy planning ................... 80 Table 4.1 List of City of Vancouver policies/strategies linked with Jericho Lands .................................. 88 ix List of Figures Figure 1.1 Map of Jericho Lands ............................................................................................................. 6 Figure 1.2 Attendee viewing the event boards of Jericho Lands at the community open house of the Jericho Lands Planning Program, March 2, 2019 ................................................................................... 22 Figure 1.3 Charles Montgomery entertains questions from the audience and concluding the first Inspire Jericho Talks, April 17, 2019 ................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 1.4 Attendees of Jericho Lands Site Walk, May 3, 2019 .............................................................. 25 Figure 1.5 Comment card in Inspire Jericho Talks, April 17, 2019 ......................................................... 27 Figure 3.1 Distance of Top 10 most expensive properties in BC to Jericho Lands................................... 44 Figure 3.2 Average and median values of housing in West Point Grey from 2006 to 2016 (2006 benchmark for % change value) ............................................................................................................. 68 Figure 3.3 Comments on the asset mapping for Jericho Lands, Community open house, March 3, 2019 . 73 Figure 3.4 Real estate advertisement on 4th Ave & Highbury, a block away from Jericho Lands, August 2020. ..................................................................................................................................................... 75 Figure 3.5 View of Jericho Lands from Discovery St. and 8th Ave. (Western parcel) beside Trimble Park, facing Downtown Vancouver and Jericho Beach (English Bay), May 2019. ........................................... 77 Figure 3.6 Margie Ruddick showing an example of how to incorporate slopes and design in a site, Inspire Jericho Talks, June 5, 2019. ................................................................................................................... 77 Figure 4.1 Updated event board for Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program, Inspire Jericho Talks 4, November 12, 2019 ............................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 4.2 Drummers performing at the community open house of Jericho Lands, March 2, 2019 .......... 92 Figure 4.3 Initial Site Considerations ..................................................................................................... 96 Figure 5.1 Screenshot of the WPGRA petition against the proposed 14-store at Alma and Broadway ... 120 x List of Abbreviations CLC Canada Lands Company CLCL Canada Lands Company Limited CMHC Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation CoV City of Vancouver DND Department of National Defence HSL Heather Street Lands JCC Jericho Country Club MST Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh MSTDC Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation RCAF Royal Canadian Armed Forces T1DC Treaty One Development Corporation VGC Vancouver Golf Club WPG West Point Grey WPGRA West Point Grey Residents Association xi Acknowledgements I wonder why nobody has said that writing a thesis takes a village… First and foremost, as an uninvited immigrant settler on this stolen land, I would like to acknowledge that this work was undertaken in the ancestral and unceded territories of the peoples of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. I acknowledge and respect the continued fight for self-determination and tireless efforts to seek just reconciliation of Indigenous Peoples all over the world. I would also like to acknowledge that this thesis would not be possible without the generous and patient mentorship of my supervisor, Dr. Merje Kuus, to whom I am indebted for pitching this thesis topic. Thank you for pushing me to keep going forward and for always reminding me to not shortchange myself. Apart from being a great help in every step of my graduate studies in UBC, I am immensely grateful for your confidence in me. I would also like to thank Dr. Elvin Wyly for taking me under his wing of urban geographers. Your eager mentorship, careful yet intense comments have tremendously helped this work from its early stages as a term paper in GEOG 450. I’m also grateful for Dr. Daniel Hiebert as part of my Spring Review Committee and for his mentorship as my TA supervisor. Thank you for allowing me to take part in your course as a colleague. I also had the privilege of taking classes with Dr. Gerry Pratt, Dr. Jessica Dempsey, Dr. Jamie Peck, and Mr. Michael Gordon, who all have influenced the coming together of this thesis one way or another. Thank you to the five anonymous interviewees who allotted their time to chat with me to substantiate this work. I am also grateful to Dr. Gordon McIvor for allowing me to have a copy of his unpublished study about Canada Lands Company. Thank you to my cohort and Geografriends: Maria, Mel, Vanessa, Chris, Albina, Nick, Peter, Caolan, Daniel, Nancy, Mielle and the other wonderful, bright friends in the department/university. I’m thankful for your friendship and you all inspire me. I’m glad that our paths crossed made my stay here more meaningful. xii To my friends (in BC and around the world): Erika & Gemil, Pia & Marty (and Meshkwee + Leo!!), Jao, Kathleen, Kat, Nisrine, Diana, Kimmy, Meg & Chard and to many other friends; I’m truly lucky to have a great support system through you all despite our odd timezones. Your friendship, within and beyond borders, have kept me sane during this trying journey. Cheers! To my (extended) family, thank you all for being patient with me and supporting this seemingly never-ending endeavor. To Ima (my grandmother), you’re the reason why I got the chance to do this degree. Despite being away for school for six years now, you’ve always been there to cheer me up and always ask how I’m doing. Our 3-hour chikahan have survived me through very tough times. To Dad, Mom, Aleeza & Gino, thanks for putting up with me. To Tita Rosie, Tito Pol, Tito Tey, Anna, Justin & Francis, we might not talk as often, but you know I appreciate you all! To my extended relatives here in BC, you’re all too many to mention—but I appreciate you all for standing by me. To my new family, my in-laws! Mom Rose, Dad Steve & Step-mom Peg, and the rest of the fam; thanks for welcoming me to your family and for supporting Michael & I this past year with all of our shenanigans. Last but not the least, I thank my husband Michael for his humor, love, patience and support. Even if we are literally on both ends of the coast, your untiring encouragement makes me feel like you’re just in the other room; always waiting for me to be done with my work. :P But most importantly, just as how you have always known we would get this far, you also believed in me when I didn’t believe in myself. I cannot be more grateful for your constant voice of confidence, especially when I needed it the most. Marrying you while in grad school is the best decision I made. I also cannot end my thank yous without mentioning our fur babies, Bandit and Ivan. I wish these pets can know how much they helped me despite always distracting me with their cuteness! xiii Dedication Dedication Para kay Ima. 1 Chapter 1: Setting Up the Puzzle: Luxury Real Estate and First Nations in Vancouver “We’ve all said for a long time, ‘Get ready for the First Nations, they’re coming.’ Now they’re here. They hold the rights to so much land. There’s going to be lots of this.” - David Negrin, Former President of Aquilini Development and Construction and current CEO of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation (MSTDC)1 The rise of Vancouver in the circuits of real estate investment highlights the interconnections of between local and global processes in housing and urban planning. In the past few decades, real estate developers and the boom of the housing market transformed Vancouver into its current character: high rises, fewer number of single-family homes, foreign ownership, and high prices. In the midst of this troubling reality on housing and property ownership, a new powerful hybrid actor has been emerging in the urban development sector: the business partnership of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) Nations. As a result of the reconciliation initiatives in the past decade, MST Nations have collectively acquired lands in prime areas and neighborhoods of Metro Vancouver. In the City of Vancouver alone, the consortium of the three Indigenous Nations in the Lower Mainland, together with other developers, currently own four parcels of land: the 90-acre combined parcels of Jericho Lands in West Point Grey, which make up one of the last largest contiguous lands for redevelopment in the city; the 10-acre former Liquor Distribution Site in East Broadway by the boundary of the City of Vancouver and Burnaby (Renfrew); and the 21-acre Heather Street lands in the central neighborhood of South Cambie—adjacent to Queen Elizabeth Park. To anyone who is familiar in Vancouver’s housing landscape, these neighborhoods are considered as prime locations in the city. All of these neighborhoods have higher average residential 1 Mr. Negrin made this remark as the President of Aquilini Development and Construction (Bula, 2014). He commenced his position with MSTDC in December 2016 (Howell, 2016b). 2 property values than the Canadian average: West Point Grey at $ 2.8 million, Renfrew at $1.3 million, and South Cambie at $2.1 million2. Due to Vancouver’s heated housing market, the valuation and assessments of these lands show a hefty price tag. Despite the overall decrease of housing values by approximately 16% that is reported by BC Assessment in 2020 (BC Assessment, 2020b), West Point Grey has the most number of luxury homes in its evaluation of the top valued properties in Lower Mainland. In this report, out of 24 listings located in West Point Grey that made to the list, it has five properties in the top ten (BC Assessment, 2020a). As these skyrocketing prices signaled and drove the metropolitan region into a housing affordability crisis. This also became the rationale behind the partnership between MST Nations and to establish a development corporation: the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation. MSTDC manages the joint proprietary assets of the First Nations consortium, which are now estimated to be over $1 billion (“Current Initiatives,” n.d.)3 . This context therefore brings the study’s attention to the emergence of MSTDC and a centering of MST First Nations’ economic interests with those of real estate developers. This convergence has fundamental impacts on the property development sector and urban governance in Vancouver. Another major component that is explored in this study is the involvement and cooperation of different actors in the redevelopment of Jericho Lands, particularly its complex co-ownership with Canada Lands Company, a non-agent crown corporation. As the official agent that manages the disposal process of surplus properties, CLC is the assumed representative of the federal government in this development project. Focusing on CLC and MST’s unconventional collaboration as the co-owner and co-developer in Jericho Lands (and Heather Street Lands), this thesis explores a unique aspect of stakeholder collaboration in Vancouver. That facet of real estate development will likely grow in Canada due to the growing number 2 These statistics use Average value of owner-occupied private dwelling found at the Housing Market Information Portal of CMHC (“Housing Market Information Portal,” n.d.). 3 In Canadian dollars. All monetary value in dollars in this study use the currency of Canadian dollars unless stated otherwise. 3 of surplus lands in possession of the government and their overlap in Indigenous land claims across the country. Opposing contexts of wealth and poverty are also imbibed in the environment surrounding the motivations and goals of the development of Jericho Lands. The extraordinary monetary value of residential real estate around Jericho Lands also invites the question of whether the 90-acre site will be another luxury development since it is located in West Point Grey, an affluent neighborhood that is currently the second most expensive neighborhood in Vancouver. Consequently, property development and real estate have also reigned over other industries in the province and Metro Vancouver over the years. As of 2017, this industry accounts for approximately 18% of the province’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in Metro Vancouver. Finance, insurance and real estate is considered as the most dominant industry and occupy 31% of the region’s GDP amounting to $41 billion of economic output4 and demonstrates a large gap from other industries (City of Vancouver, 2019b). Putting in context the combination of the industry’s staggering worth and West Point Grey’s high residential value, it is no surprise to find the seven out of the ten most expensive properties in British Columbia to be within a three-kilometer radius from Jericho Lands5 (Zussman, 2019). Until recently, First Nations were at the lower end of this high value housing market. However today, three First Nations own Jericho Lands. The forceful displacement from their ancestral homes and traditional territories contributed to their socio-political and economic marginalization today. In the areas of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations, census statistics of income by populations that identify as First Nations or Aboriginal reveal a median income gap of at least $4,000 to almost $30,000 compared to non-aboriginals (Statistics Canada, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c). This economic disparity between peoples who identify as First Nations and non-Aboriginals is one of the basis of MST Nations’ partnership to make their joint proprietary assets contribute to the economic security of their peoples and communities. 4 Latest data in 2017. 5 List of top ten properties in British Columbia from Zussman’s (2019) article is also visualized in Figure 3.1. 4 This component of the development symbolizes a significant transformation in Vancouver’s massive real estate industry and socio-economic futures of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations through the entrance MSTDC, a new type of a hybrid real estate developer. The emergence of a First Nations-led development corporation in North America’s most unaffordable city (Cox & Pavletich, 2019, p. 11) challenges us to scrutinize intersections of urban planning, local governance, and reconciliation that play out in the case of Jericho Lands’ redevelopment. Consequently, one of the main themes of this study is the turn of the tide for the historically marginalized MST First Nations as the new owners of potentially luxury development parcels of Jericho Lands. In other words, I explore the paradox between the high price of properties in their traditional lands—modern day Vancouver— and its utility of their price tag for the economic security of the First Nations. Within this process, a collaboration between the municipal government, Canada Lands Company, as a co-developer/co-owner, and the MST First Nations persist in the city. It is a cooperation that propagates the narrative of urban growth and competition while they engage in the negotiation of reconciliation in the city. Implications based on this urban economic condition reflect governance practices that are primary in the planning process of Jericho Lands. In this way, the active participation of the First Nations in the development of high-price real estate creates new facets in urban redevelopment in the City of Vancouver. 1.1 Research question and objectives The question that I investigate in this study is: How do the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) First Nations, various neighborhood groups, and the different levels of the Canadian government interact in redevelopment process of Jericho Lands? By posing this research question, this study will demonstrate the cooperation between urban stakeholders within a complex terrain of interests and values. More specifically, I illustrate the complex intersection of market mechanisms in the relationship between the co-owners/co-developers, local community and the municipal government. Conceptually, I illustrate the emergence of a growth coalition 5 (Logan & Molotch, 1987; Molotch, 1976, 1993) that includes a historically marginalized group. This study demonstrates how growth initiatives are now accompanied and enabled by the process of reconciliation. I argue that the early phase of Jericho Lands’ redevelopment signals a transformation in Vancouver’s urban governance practices. The entrance of MST Development Corporation in the real estate sector of Vancouver indicates the emergence of MST First Nations as a land-based elite, an unconventional outcome of the overlap of urban development and reconciliation initiatives. Depicted as a dynamic involvement of MST Nations and the apparent intersection of Indigenous interests and real-estate development projects in Vancouver, the process of planning for the future of Jericho Lands display a novel form of reconciliation initiatives in British Columbia and Canada. While I do not explore Indigenous narratives on the redevelopment process and the potential impact on MST Nations and their communities, I emphasize that narratives of reconciliation are evident throughout the different levels of cooperation with the government and other stakeholders. One of the findings in this study identifies the intended visible manifestation and infusion of reconciliation by the proponents in urban and policy making practices. The redevelopment of Jericho lands is also noteworthy because even though the planning process is in its early phases, it indicates a new urban development regime, particularly in the context of MSTDC’s entrance as a new developer owned by First Nations. This research does not argue for any solution. My goal is rather to highlight the unfolding of the development process to date and to the tensions evidenced around Jericho Lands. 1.1.1 Empirical context The focus of this study emerged from the October 2014 symbolic venture between the MST Nations and the Canada Lands Company (CLC) in purchasing the former federal parcel of Jericho. This western parcel (see Figure 1.1) of the lands, more commonly known as the Jericho Garrison, houses military veterans and sponsored families by the Department of National Defence (DND). Almost two years following the federal lands purchase, the eastern parcel, which was formerly owned by the Province of 6 British Columbia and known for the site of Jericho Hill Centre and West Point Grey Academy, was bought solely by the MST Nations in April 2016. Figure 1.1 Map of Jericho Lands6 Source: UMap In July 2018, the City of Vancouver endorsed the Planning Process for the development of the site. Spearheaded by the City of Vancouver in cooperation with the current owners of Jericho, the four-phase planning process is estimated to take approximately two years from its initiation. At the completion of these phases, Canada Lands Company, MST Nations and the City of Vancouver will forward a Planning Policy that is subject for the approval of the Vancouver City Council. In March 2019, the stakeholders publicly launched the policy planning entitled, Inspire Jericho which embodies the aspirations in a creation of a 6 The same map can also be found at the City of Vancouver’s webpage: https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/jericho-lands.aspx Area in yellow demarcates Jericho Garrison, the formerly DND-owned land, and the area in blue represents Jericho Hill Grounds, the parcel of Jericho lands previously owned by the Province of British Columbia. Today, the former federal lands are owned by CLC and the MST Partnership, and the lands owned by BC are now solely acquired by MST Partnership. 7 neighborhood that addresses “public benefits” (City of Vancouver Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability Department, 2018, p. 12). As of June 2020, the policy planning program is towards the end of the first phase, which focuses on information gathering and initial community engagement7. This study traces the interactions around MST Partnership, and the stakeholder venture between MST, CLC, and the City of Vancouver. I argue that despite the turn of focus on reconciliation due to cooperation between First Nations and settler government bodies, these webs of relationships still operate in the context of the neoliberal market. Rhetorically, the project addresses the historical grievances of the MST Nations. In practice, it demonstrates the dominance of growth perspectives, primarily when property development is fundamentally utilized as a tool to negotiate and execute reconciliation. I demonstrate in this study that the histories of the site over the centuries affirm the tensions that we see today in the redevelopment planning process. Furthermore, the presence of a growth coalition led by three First Nations signify a transformation in the traditional market dynamics and social composition found in Vancouver’s most thriving sector. This emergence of a land-based growth coalition involves a renewed powerful agency of First Nations and represents the intersection of luxury real estate development and First Nations reconciliation. 1.2 Scholarly framework In order to illustrate and examine the cooperation between the stakeholders and emerging involvement of First Nations as an active participant in urban governance, the scholarly context of this research project focuses on three points: 1) urban theories and the urban growth machine, 2) concepts surrounding large-scale real-estate development projects, and 3) Indigenous business ventures and entrepreneurship. Identifying these crossing themes from the urban development literature lays out the unique path of Jericho, and its role in shaping Vancouver and beyond. More specifically, this framing 7 The website of the City of Vancouver on the Jericho Lands includes the most updated timeline and future plans for the project: https://shapeyourcity.ca/jericho-lands. 8 situates Jericho Lands as a unique case of a local machinery of growth based on land and showcasing an innovative case of Indigenous entrepreneurship as an impending mega-project to occur within the city. The literatures emphasize the intersection of processes in the city and highlight the gaps that this study addresses. This section aids in situating emerging and unexplored practices in the city that will be discussed in the following chapters. 1.2.1 Urban governance and the urban growth machine Origins and motivations of economic growth and the analysis of surrounding actors are among the widely engaged issues in the subdiscipline of urban geography, particularly in the context of post-Fordist economic climate in North America. A conceptual development within this vast literature emerged in the context of increased commodification of places and the heightened agency and power of the community as the foundations of (economic) growth in the city, primarily as a political economic issue (Molotch, 1976, p. 309). Harvey Molotch, an American sociologist and urban theorist, introduced the idea of the growth machine in explaining the political economic nature of growth. In here, the growth coalition is formed by land-based elites (property entrepreneurs), local government and other auxiliary actors, such as local media, non-government organizations, universities, utility agencies etc., which create a “hegemonic establishment of the growth ideology” (Farahani, 2017, p. 1 emphasis in original). In this context, growth is portrayed as a context that allows actors/institutions to reconcile even when these entities oppose on different issues and becomes the “overriding commonality” between these actors (Molotch, 1976, p. 310). The city is seen not only as a place but a site of processes that wield a dynamic political force which enables and boosts the agenda of land-based elites. Molotch further explored this argument in the foundational work on Urban Fortunes with John Logan. Growth’s relation to land was highlighted through its commodification and it perceived “places as vital units, not goods on a rack” (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 9 emphasis in original). In this piece, they also provided wider analysis by defining terms, functions, and agencies of specific actors in the growth coalition: the rentiers or the place entrepreneurs (includes investors, real estate agents and 9 financial institutions), neighborhood (including the expansion on “we feeling” that was introduced in Molotch’s earlier work), and other supporting players. Land is considered as a central concept in this theory. Such focus reflects the dual character of land as the very source of growth, but also a site of conflict. Their study illustrates land is the basis where growth can thrive, yet it is also the source of disagreements that we see involved in typical changes related to growth within the city. However, the theory’s claim on tensions brought by land through their heavy economy-based analysis neglects a wider frame of analysis. More specifically, the authors frame local attachment as strongly enforced with the community and claims that a “capitalist’s attachment to place is much weaker overall” (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 22). This highlights the character of land-based elites to be more receptive to change due to the fact that growth-based changes to the locality present more (detrimental) impact on the residents. Consequently, conflicts occur between groups that are interested in local economic development due to local dependence as part of the process of urban growth (Cox & Mair, 1988, pp. 307, 313–315). In general, the growth machine thesis has been applied in major cities (Knapp & Vojnovic, 2013; Light, 2002; Lin, 2008). Its application to the context of Vancouver differs as it has been largely employed in conjunction with spectacle events such as Expo 1986 and the 2010 Winter Olympics (Surborg et al., 2008; Vanwynsberghe et al., 2013) and the urban processes surrounding ethnic enclaves. Instead of the promising resource of land, these global events become the premise for a growth coalition to emerge. Simultaneously, it alters land-use in the city due to the subsequent (re)development initiatives that are attached to the primary spectacle event. Within this line of study, urban developments are identified to be common sites of multiple urban phenomena. Cities are found to be sites of urban regeneration, gentrification, and circumstances that are affected by immigration and diasporic movement; all of which circles back to the dominance of growth. In a more similar fashion to this study, an angle on the collaboration of Four Host First Nations during the 2010 Olympics was also explored by examining its legacies (Kloepper, 2011). A more recent study on the growth coalition also emphasizes the centrality of 10 housing in the growth machine ecology. By looking back at the foundational work of the growth machine thesis, Vancouver is viewed as a case of a prevailing “property-seeking growth coalition” which is orchestrated by high-level political forces in the provincial government and the stronghold of financial and real estate industries that trace links with capital from Asia-Pacific (Ley, 2020, p. 2). In connection with urban growth, the concept of urban regimes typically goes hand-in-hand with discussions in relation to growth coalitions in the city (Rodgers, 2020). It is similar to the growth machine thesis as it emphasizes a pluralistic view of practices, relationships and connections that enable governance outside government functions and through the cooperation of coalitions. However, it addresses the gap of the growth machine thesis that does not put emphasis on the agency of the state in the growth agenda. Clarence Stone (1993) explains this by emphasizing a collective effort by the state to regulate the market through structures where the actors are left in liberty to choose what is best for them. According to this theory, the government provides a structure that prompts private actors to participate in the economic agenda in the city. This push is characterized as a force that propels the capacity to govern, utilizes resources and networks in order to wield power. This study highlights its theoretical contributions to the case study of Jericho’s redevelopment, but it also affirms gaps of the theories, particularly of the growth machine thesis. In this way, this case study does not offer to invalidate the theory but instead offers as a way to potentially expand its reach. For instance, the feminist critique highlights the lack of Logan and Molotch’s regard to an adequate analysis of power relations, which makes women’s experiences in the city invisible (Gilbert, 1999). Although this specific point is not completely related to the experience of MST, it illustrates what the growth machine neglects to highlight: marginalized voices in the city. Thus, by attempting to find connections between the role of MST Nations through their development cooperation in the context of Jericho Lands, this study contributes in enriching and potentially widening the scope of the growth machine thesis and urban regime to incorporate this emerging agency of First Nations as a major player in the city. 11 1.2.2 Land-use of large-scale developments The intersection of urban growth, land-based entities, and stakeholder cooperation is typically seen and negotiated through large-scale developments in the city. It is also viewed as overlapping and/or described as a manifestation and/or a tool of urban governance and the growth in the city. Also known as mega-projects, scholars characterize and identify such developments according to the amount of capital invested, amount of property, and its potential amount in the future, especially now that the world is seeing an overflow of capital (Flyvbjerg, 2014). In a narrower context, this scholarship review explores the different core principles that make up large-scale development, and the connections with the closures and repurposing of former military sites as grounds for growth-inducing development. These aspects of large-scale developments identify some telling components of the impending transformation of Jericho Lands as the biggest parcel to be developed in Vancouver’s most expensive neighborhood. 1.2.2.1 Principles surrounding land-use and large-scale development Land-use of large-scale developments is an integral component of urban growth and growth machine. In simple terms, large-scale developments can be perceived as a tool or aim by an urban growth coalition. While some find this link problematic (Müller, 2015), I explore this section in a narrower context by reviewing studies that analyze land use of large-scale developments that contribute to local economic development. Studies on the development initiatives in the city of Vancouver and its Greater Metropolitan Area typically find foreign capital and ownership as significant influences in the local market through its penetration in the local real estate (Ley, 2017; Lu, 2000). Transnational links in other projects where capital is necessary is also one of the few distinct features of the contemporary urban fabric (Ley, 2020; Olds, 1996, 1998). The bigger metropolitan area of Toronto also experiences the same impacts (Lehrer & Laidley, 2008). This also places large-scale development projects in global cities, as important tools in understanding development trends and find that economic benefits are not the only criteria which put cities in competitive advantage (Siemiatycki, 2013). The actors behind these urban initiatives mostly involve collaboration 12 between the government and the public sector. Consequently, the emergence of public-private partnerships within large-scale developments are shaped distinctly according to its locality but typically and primarily driven by growth and competitive leverage (Fainstein, 2008). Such trend reveals the core focus on growth propagation and fostering urban competition. In relation to this, one of the reasons why mega-projects are also highly coveted in the city is the notion that it is also not impacted by recession (Flyvbjerg, 2014, p. 8). Despite the benefit of large-scale urban projects that strengthen the leverage of cities in comparison to others, localities are also driven by values that are primarily not profit oriented. In the nuances of megaprojects, these concepts are equally incorporated and repurposed as trendsetting or branding standards and symbols which translate growth benefits for their stakeholders that highlight the tremendous gains and risk embodied by development projects (Siemiatycki, 2013, pp. 167–168). Largely attached to the emergence of growth coalitions, these mega-projects are used to promote legacies in the city due to their attribution to equity-related values such as environment sustainability, livability and social inclusion (Bornstein, 2010; Kloepper, 2011; VanWynsberghe et al., 2012; Vanwynsberghe et al., 2013). These studies prompted a more robust examination of the detrimental impacts of mega-projects. Some studies also reveal that the emergence of these values in property development and land-use are curated as a response to global problems. For instance, in response to the global movement to combat global warming and the movement of environmental protection, the incorporation of environmentally sound practices increasingly emerged which subsequently called for sustainability principles adopted in mega-projects (Bingham-Hall, 2016; Brooks & Rich, 2016). Other discussions surrounding urban growth and large-scale developments also incline towards conversations about housing and residential development due to the global phenomenon of housing crisis – a primary urban ill in Vancouver. As a result, some highlight the social consequences of sustainability through the employment of densification as a housing policy strategy, and underscore that gentrification is usually found in areas where there are high levels of sustainability concepts such as walkability, dwelling density, and rapid transit, which reveals densification’s classist dimension (Quastel et al., 2012, p. 1064). In this sense, the context of affordability is often suggested alongside the 13 principles of densification as a result of redevelopment and gentrification in the city to fully reflect goals of equity and sustainability (Lee et al., 2008). This body of literature situates large-scale projects requiring cohesive convergence of various sectors in the city. Similar to the circumstances of Jericho, ideals of socio-political and socio-economic values of reconciliation, affordability, livability and sustainability are deemed widely incorporated due to the varying interests of its stakeholders. The intersection of these social factors to the economic strategies of urban growth also embody addressing urban problems. This finding can therefore be related to the context and behavior of First Nations as an emerging real estate developer in Vancouver. 1.2.2.2 Military bases for redevelopment Military base closures and their subsequent repurposing have profound impacts towards local communities. Once declared surplus, these sites open many options for civilian use. Although base conversion is not the only strategy considered in the aftermath of military facility closure or decommissioning (Lynch, 1970), it fits within the growth agenda in many cities. Typically massive and contiguous parcels of land, military bases provide perfect foundation for large-scale (re)developments. Once transformed into commercial, residential, industrial, public and mixed-use spaces, they can trigger urban regeneration process and growth initiatives (Bagaeen, 2016). For example the US EPA acknowledges the economic impacts of base closure and highlights that such event can revitalize communities (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006). However, this is not the totality of all base closure experiences. Some localities show economic lag after the closure of military installations (Sorenson & Stenberg, 2015). Despite many opportunities for use after its expiration, the effect of closure of military bases vary according to the character of community. Closures of bases in rural areas may experience longer negative economic impacts than urban or suburban sites (Cowan, 2012; Cowan & Webel, 2005). This is comparable to some studies that highlight the uneven economic impacts of active bases, depending on where the sites are located (Parai et al., 1996). Price points of former military sites also reveal a discrepancy in different places. In a 14 case study that examined a former base in Zarqa, Jordan, it was found that compared to the United States that sells surplus military land at a discount, Jordan’s real estate restrictions facilitate the selling of these lands at premium prices (Bagaeen, 2006, p. 348). The economic character of former military sites, while varied, largely remains involved in its post-military use, which involves the state (Bagaeen, 2016). The case of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission in the United States is an example of this. While it emphasizes economic benefits for the localities where base closures would occur, it was critiqued due to the process’ ties to political intricacies. For instance, some politicians are found to use BRAC as a tool to relieve them of the responsibility from the degrading effects of base closures on their communities (Ashley & Touchton, 2016; Goren, 2003), while some avoid BRAC as an overall process by making sure bases in their municipality are “closure-proof” (Sorenson, 2019). Despite these push-and-pull factors, land takes on the characteristic of a profitable asset within the framework of the state facilitating its transformation. This serves as the major gateway for the military industrial complex to have a significant role in growth making activities. Thus, all over the world, many nations have decommissioned military bases for the abovementioned reasons and have done so mostly during and after the Cold War in conjunction with the widening reach of demilitarization. In the United States, repurposing and closure of some of these sites were facilitated through the BRAC Commission (Hansen, 2004). As in other contexts of growth, differing local conditions and processes affect the transition of former military installations when these sites are slated for development. Involvement of different actors are also prevalent. In San Francisco, the conversion of the Presidio highlights the coming together of different interest groups which ultimately resulted in a robust policy planning process that shaped the site’s current state as a public park (Benton-Short, 1998, p. 88). This study on the Presidio identifies similarities with Jericho through the narration of the multi-layered traditional, colonial, growth-based history of the land, particularly the debate on whether the site should be sold to developers and erect potentially expensive development. In another case, the transformation of Vauban in Germany also highlighted the involvement 15 of nearby residents in crafting the optimal use for the base, which best suits their community (Bagaeen, 2006). In addition to the studies of base conversion within continental US, there are many similar processes in other countries such as the Philippines, Germany, and South Korea. Following the idea that military bases represent “centerpieces” of military presence that are particularly felt on overseas posts8, these military installations demonstrate transformation of land-use according to the hegemonic power. For instance, the former US naval base in Subic, Philippines was converted into Subic Bay Freeport Zone (SBFZ) and carries the socio-spatial legacies installed by the United States. As SBFZ became an economic enclave that brings growth to a locality that is economically dependent on military activity, it retained practices that exclude locals primarily by socio-economic status and highlighting preference to foreigners (Reyes, 2015). Several former US bases in Germany, on the other hand, highlight the benefit of increased land supply in urban centers due to increasing demand but also included a range of negotiations over land-use (Cunningham & Klemmer, 1995). South Korea’s experience on the other hand explores a multitude of facets. Yongsan Garrison in central Seoul, the former headquarters of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), sees the future of a national park, which reflects many aspects of urban life, including the perspective of the general public to not convert it to residential housing due to a continuing housing bubble in the metro (Lee, 2019). With the country also experienced numerous rounds of base returns, the process of base closure reveals a string of conflict and attempts, surprisingly, of post-secondary institutions to fill the gap of land-use left by the US military. These developments, however, have not seen the day due to lack of policy support and financial investors, citing that rural and remote areas of some former military sites were not lucrative (Kim, 2018, p. 350). 8 This term was particularly used in literature on US overseas military presence, but I suggest it as applicable to the Canadian experience of domestic military presence due to the negative connotation and Canada being a settler colonial state which wielded similar narratives on Indigenous peoples and first inhabitants (Lutz, 2009; Vine, 2015). 16 In Canada, the Department of National Defence (DND) manages a substantial amount worth of infrastructure portfolio and more than 2.1 million hectares of land and is treated as an investment by the government (“Transfer or Sale of Defence Properties,” 2013). In terms of market-based conversion of these lands, the experience of United States and Canada have similarities but also have fundamental differences (Goren & Lackenbauer, 2000) especially on the history of acquisition to the redevelopment of military facilities. Both countries have seen similar uses of former military installations despite having different processes. Base conversion also occurred relatively around the same time in both countries, yet the United States outstandingly has more cases than Canada. In addition, although bases (particularly of the United States) remain controversial as it manifests imperialism and colonial power, closures and decommissioning of military facilities are shaped by market rules. In Canada’s case, the conversion of the Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Chilliwack in BC into a residential suburb called “Garrison Crossing” and the ongoing demolition in preparation of the development of the former Kapyong Barracks in Winnipeg, Manitoba are stark examples of the incorporation of base conversion immersed with growth narratives and are perhaps the closest parallels to Jericho’s future. What is evident in this literature is that surplus military bases are generally connected to the concept of land and its intrinsic role in the function of growth. The abovementioned connections contribute to framing Jericho Garrison (and ultimately the complete site of Jericho Lands) as a case that demonstrates the intersection of military base conversion and growth narratives. This implies that Jericho’s land-use will have telling redevelopment processes due to its former identity as a military facility, although it has not been as visible as other subjectivities in the current policy planning. 1.2.3 Indigenous enterprise and ventures There is also an emerging scholarship on Indigenous enterprise in the recent decade. As a broad term, this can be defined as any type of business venture where individuals or groups of people who identify as Indigenous create a business: “the creation, management and development of new ventures by 17 Indigenous people for the benefit of Indigenous people” (Hindle & Lansdowne, 2005, p. 132). In its current emerging field, this has expanded according to different themes, subjects, and categories despite having a niche subject matter. In this sense, by identifying the existing literature, this study can demonstrate its relevance and how it can further enrich the field as a strong and unique case study that perhaps has not been tackled previously. Much of the literature on Indigenous entrepreneurship is unpacking and identifying its multiple characteristics and manifestations. Some studies demonstrate the link of social enterprise by looking at Indigenous ventures in conservation and development. It largely reveals that Indigenous entrepreneurship enables communities to reduce poverty by creating jobs, empowering women and upholding sustainability (Berkes & Adhikari, 2006), especially with the use of land as its main tool for development (OECD, 2020b). Similarly, another study follows this argument and suggested that Indigenous entrepreneurship has similarities with social entrepreneurship due to its strong emphasis on objectives that contribute positively to the community (Anderson et al., 2006). A more recent study extends this characterization by defining Indigenous entrepreneurship as a type of “hybrid venture” based on addressing the needs of the community (Colbourne, 2018, p. 114). Different categorizations were developed to enrich the scholarship further. A breakthrough study highlighted broad classifications by distinguishing two major themes: reconciliation of tradition and innovation, and Indigenous worldviews and its impact on their businesses (Hindle & Lansdowne, 2005, p. 133). This study also suggested a methodological design that highlights three elements in determining if a business is considered as an Indigenous venture: 1) heritage positioning index or the degree of indigenous heritage on a business, 2) autonomy-accountability network or the degree of Indigenous autonomy in the business, and 3) twin skills inventory or integration of mainstream and indigenous sensitivity skill sets (Hindle & Lansdowne, 2005, pp. 138–139). In an attempt to conceptually categorize these ventures, another study explored Indigenous entrepreneurship with three typologies: 1) theoretical boundaries of the subfield, 2) studies based on examples without theoretical framing, and 3) mix of both, which essentially placed the 18 field in between mainstream entrepreneurship literature and other social and management sciences (Hindle & Moroz, 2009). In more recent attempts of theorization in the field, another scholar conducted a systematic review which resulted into a typography that classified conduct of business location: urban, rural and remote (Croce, 2017). In terms of its goals, some scholars also highlighted the unique connection of these types of businesses to land and nation (re)building. In here, they articulate the affinity of Indigenous people to land and their desire to rebuild their nations as the context of why they engage in entrepreneurial activities (OECD, 2020a). In this same manner, some studies mentioned above also affirm the importance of land in exercising entrepreneurial activities (Anderson et al., 2006; Berkes & Adhikari, 2006; Colbourne, 2018, p. 99). With this core element, their study also highlighted that Indigenous ventures can be defined in contrast to ethnic entrepreneurship which refers to the creation of businesses by immigrants with the intent to assimilate with the dominant culture and not (re)build their nations in contrast to Indigenous groups which evidently use business as a tool to expand their cultural relevance (Anderson & Giberson, 2004, p. 141). As an apparent impact of businesses, economic sufficiency is also highlighted as a primary goal in some forms of Indigenous entrepreneurship (Lindsay et al., 2006, p. 58). Ultimately, a commonality observed in all of these is that their economic venture represents display of self-determination and nation (re)building (Anderson & Giberson, 2004; Berkes & Adhikari, 2006). Although there is a considerable amount of studies that comprise the literature of Indigenous/Aboriginal business ventures, it remains an underexplored topic. Despite attempts to explore complexity of these processes, structures and evolution over time have yet to be comprehensively examined. To some extent, more recent studies situate a gender perspective (Ratten & Dana, 2017) and capitalism in the conversation; however it only brings the concept as definition by negation. For instance, Dana (2015, p. 165) writes that some Indigenous ventures demonstrate egalitarianism which is an opposing idea of capitalism, yet it does not push the narrative of capitalism’s hegemony in the entrepreneurial activities of Indigenous communities. Perhaps this may be attributed to the primary attachment to the discipline of business where research focuses mainly operational and process encountered in Indigenous 19 entrepreneurship but do not demonstrate the impact of greater structures that overall influence the business conduct where Indigenous nations operate. Consequently, I observed that this set of literature also does not highlight the role of settler colonial systems in this type of venture. Indeed, earlier scholarship refer to the landmark cases that enabled the move for Indigenous communities to perform business activities. However, since there is a lack of contextualization of the impact of hegemonic systems on these enterprises, colonial governments’ influence on the type of entrepreneurial activities that Indigenous peoples engage with are not yet actively explored within this subfield. However, conversations from critical and Indigenous geographies examine layers and depth of the twin hegemonic structures of capitalism and colonialism in many aspects of society. These perspectives may seem to take off from a more political standpoint, but the body of literature already illustrates the political economic connection of Indigenous businesses. In other words, the arms-length relationship of the capacity, agency, motivation, and goals of these ventures with colonialism and capitalism can be examined using such frames. For instance, the rethinking on the application of the politics of recognition have been employed in some studies in the Canadian context to demonstrate how conduct of Indigenous entrepreneurship in the country remains to be tainted and heavily influenced by these overarching frameworks. An example of this is the continuing debate that persists on the issue of property rights of First Nations. The contention on this matter stemmed from the issue of how reserves can be a more effective tool to be utilized by Indigenous nations to support their economic interests. Some scholars suggest the adoption of a First Nations Property Ownership Act (FNPOA) to revamp the current property rights system on reserve lands. They aregue that the current structure and policy do not enable nations to fully own their land due to the disabling lease to the crown, and consequently puts the price of reserve land lesser than regular fee simple lots off-reserve. This argument identifies the current property rights and registry system as paramount and is regarded as a resolution to the enduring woes of inequality on property rights of Indigenous communities (Flanagan, 2011; Flanagan et al., 2010). Several scholars challenged this claim by emphasizing that the move to essentially privatize reserve lands further normalizes oppressive structures of capitalism and colonialism. This particular debate on property rights 20 also hovers on scholarly work rethinking the politics of recognition (Coulthard, 2007, 2014) which examine the renewed entrapment and inferiority assertion of Indigenous nations in the colonial framework. Pushback on the arguments of Flanagan and company suggest that it largely avoids the discussion of its detrimental legacies and overlapping complexities of colonialism by enshrining capitalism as an equalizer for Aboriginal properties on reserve land with the rest of the country (Dempsey et al., 2011). There is also work that points to cautiously weighing both sides. Pasternak offers the perspective of this potential detrimental entanglement of Indigenous subjectivity with both tensions and alliances, which are part of the symphony of shifting and reconstruction within the capitalist ideology (2015, p. 187). In the same manner, the FNPOA is also advanced by its critics as another stark example of how settler colonialism transforms and finds ways to continue discreetly undermining Indigenous agencies and interests (Fabris, 2017). Considering the existing scholarship, this study of the Jericho Lands contributes to fill in some gaps in this literature and hopefully aid in branching out an emerging subtopic of the field on multiple levels. For instance, very little is known about Indigenous business partnership with other Indigenous groups. Since MST Partnership is an example of a land-based/real estate venture, this study can represent a case of a mega-project involving Indigenous nations, proving that this subfield potentially has wider reach than its previous cases. This study then contributes to the literature by emphasizing an emerging characteristic of Indigenous nations and their communities, particularly their role on development projects as its major proponent. This creates an opportunity to branch out from the current literature as well because more often than not, Indigenous nations and peoples typically oppose large-scale developments, as they are viewed to fundamentally incur detrimental and destructive damages to core elements of Indigenous cultures, which is most particularly visible in resource-based industries. In this way, Unpacking Inspire Jericho aims to incorporate a start of critical discussion on the structure that Indigenous venture operates. 21 1.3 Methodology This study employs the case study method by focusing on the site and processes surrounding Jericho Lands in Vancouver, British Columbia. In order to answer the research question and objectives, the empirical data in this project comes from three sources. First, I make extensive use of the news media to understand the redevelopment and planning process of Jericho Lands. I collated news articles about the Jericho Lands development, MST Nations/Partnership and the Development Corporation, and other ventures that are related to the policy planning to seek out what kind of information about the project is perceived by the community. I also used this method to understand the bits of information and how media sources are picking up the redevelopment project. Local and national Canadian media sources such as the Vancouver Courier, The Daily Hive, Business in Vancouver, The Globe and Mail, and The Vancouver Sun to name a few were considered as central sources in this research. Given that the circulation of information today by news outlets have online counterparts, I accessed these journalistic accounts through their websites, mostly with free access. With the exception of some articles from the Globe and Mail which are paywalled, I retrieved these articles through UBC Library’s Factiva access. I also incorporated written materials that are directly related to the site redevelopment policy that have been released until August 2020. This coincides with the release of the most recent community newsletter, public engagement summary, and the commencement of Phase Two, which is the drafting of the guiding principles and site concept development. This time frame allowed me to cover observations for the entirety of Phase One of Jericho Lands Planning Process. I also utilized Google Alerts to keep track of online materials about Jericho Lands and the policy planning process. I used the following keywords to sift online releases that involve the site: Jericho Lands, Jericho Garrison, MST Partnership and MST Nations. While using this tool was not particularly accurate and has included irrelevant searches, it contributed in alerting me on recently published online materials, and was often useful after events hosted by the City that were covered by the local media. 22 Figure 1.2 Attendee viewing the event boards of Jericho Lands at the community open house of the Jericho Lands Planning Program, March 2, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez Figure 1.3 Charles Montgomery entertains questions from the audience and concluding the first Inspire Jericho Talks, April 17, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez Second, I incorporate insight from event open to public, where I also conduct participant observation. It was an opportune timing when I actively pursued this research topic in 2019. This time frame allowed me to see and follow what Jericho Lands Policy Planning Process means on the ground. A 23 few months after the official commencement of this research project, the City of Vancouver launched the Community Open House in March 2019 and I was able to attend most of the open for public events which all occurred in the same year. During Summer 2020, I was also fortunate to move into the neighborhood of West Point Grey. With a home now overlooking towards the western side of the site, I use this opportunity to be more observant in my surroundings in the neighborhood as a resident. As of September 2020, this study includes synthesis from information and participant observation from five public events: the opening ceremony and open house on March 2, 2019 (Figure 1.2), Jericho Lands Site walk on May 3, 2019 (Figure 1.4), and Inspire Jericho Talks attended on April 17 (Happy Cities) (Figure 1.3), May 23 (Connected Communities), and November 12, 2019 (Urban Resilience). These talks are all available for video on demand at the website of Inspire Jericho (link included in footnote, Table 1.1). Table 1.1 Open to public engagement of Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program as of August 20209 Date Event March 2, 2019 Nation Members VIP Launch, Ceremonial Welcome and Celebration, and Jericho Lands Community Open House March 7, 2019 Community Open House April 17, 2019 Inspire Jericho Talks 1: Creating Great Neighbourhoods | Happy Cities by Charles Montgomery May 3-5, 2019 Jericho Lands Site Walk x Jane’s Walk Vancouver May 23, 2019 Inspire Jericho Talks 2: Creating Great Neighbourhoods | Connected Communities by Jeff Speck June 5, 2019 Inspire Jericho Talks 3: Creating Great Neighbourhoods | Respect the Land by Margie Ruddick and Cornelia Hahn Oberlander June – July 2019 Pop-up display of Jericho Lands (Point Grey Fiesta, Greek Day, Khatsalano Street Party, and the Vancouver Folk Music Festival) July and October 2019 Co-Design Artist Workshop (with local community and members of MST Nations) November 12, 2019 Inspire Jericho Talks 4: Creating Great Neighbourhoods | Urban Resilience by Magnus Schon of Kod Arkitekter, Stockholm Spring 2020 ~ Jericho Lands Team moved to online/remote modes of public engagement due COVID-19 9 Consolidated from the list from the Inspire Jericho website: https://inspirejericho.ca/events and the Jericho Lands Phase 1 Public Engagement Summary (City of Vancouver, 2020a, pp. 14–22). 24 At times, policy making and planning appear to be detached from the public eye due to the focus on high-level discussions that occur within the government and among the leaders of the affected sectors. Thus, attending these events highlights the often-hidden processes of public policy that is translated in discourse with the community. Evidently, these events demonstrate the who (attends), what (is being talked about), and how (are issues presented and talked about) of policy making, particularly in its early phases. For instance, the open house event of the planning process allowed me to have a better sense of the audience that is directly impacted by this upcoming redevelopment. In addition, these events discuss the core issues of the redevelopment. What happens in these events, including the comments of the attendees, are often the subject of many, if not all, of the news and media sources about the site. These events also uncover the manner of how these issues are relayed to the public. For example, the Inspire Jericho Talks allow for sensitive issues to be tackled strategically. Essentially lectures that supposedly inform policy outcomes, the talks also have the impression of giving the residents and other interested public an opportunity to get information that is tailored for the redevelopment site and make a decision about what they think is best. In this way, they open conversations and also obtain significant feedback from their intended audience. This method enabled me to document observations, insights and components that are not typically captured by written sources. The ongoing status of the policy planning program also presents an opportunity for an advantageous lens to see the changes and constants within the process as it happens. Following the trail of the urban planning and public policy planning, and capturing insights from this perspective is crucial as it may directly provide information to the main theme sought by this study: the participation and interaction between actors of the development process and their impact on the urban planning in the city. In this sense, having this source and interpreted in the study according to the scholarly context explained in the previous section, translates an understanding of Vancouver’s urban fabric that emerges from the policy planning of Jericho. In this research, on-the-ground policy making of Jericho’s redevelopment is reflected on the analysis in chapters three and four. I use here the information I obtained from the participant 25 observation fieldwork and analyze what these activities and policies mean altogether in the future of Jericho Lands. Figure 1.4 Attendees of Jericho Lands Site Walk, May 3, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez On a personal note, attending events was the most enjoyable aspect of this research. As an international student in Vancouver who was born and raised in the Philippines, this experience did not only allow me to have another way to explore where I currently live but also to have a deeper understanding about another place and what this research truly means. Personally, this made me think about (re)development practices back home. More specifically, I wondered if we in the Philippines have ever done similar planning practices or public consultations like what I have been seeing in West Point Grey, such as the site walks (Figure 1.4) or gathering input from locals and providing knowledge about urban development (Figures 1.3 and 1.5), given that further densification and development projects are also incredibly visible in Metro Manila and much more destructive but is viewed as an inevitable aspect of urban living. I also come from a different discipline of social sciences and this research project has been a process. Prior to attending UBC, my research was specifically on the impacts of military bases to local communities and thus, the main reason why I was drawn and inclined to study Jericho. Little did I know, I was diving 26 into a wider pool of overlapping issues within the city and beyond, not merely exploring the spatiality of (former) military bases. Because of my formal training as an international relations and security studies student, I have also encountered familiar terms yet coming out with more profound understanding such as reconciliation. Although there is an overlap with what I am familiar with from the literature of peace studies, this research project allowed me to perceive reconciliation from the grassroots point of view and how it operates in a non-armed conflict and urban setting. Thus, I found my journey as an interdisciplinary scholar transforming as well while I conduct direct participant observation for this project. In terms of having a specific impact on this research, attendance at these events also helped me understand better whom I can reach out best as potential interview participants. And since the targeted audience and involved people in the policy planning aspect of Jericho is not exactly extensive, it was easy to spot the involved individuals in different capacities since they are typically present in several or most events that are open to the public. Third, I also conducted key informant interviews, particularly with representatives and urban planning experts and/or professionals from various stakeholders to enrich and support the empirical data of the study. This study includes findings from five key informant interviews, with each session lasting from 30 minutes to one hour using semi-structured interview questions. Each participant was asked a unique set of questions, specifically tailored to the background and capacity of the respondent in relation to the study’s main argument. The goal of these interviews is to highlight information not found in other forms of sources. I also employed this method to gain clarification from the journalistic sources and policy documents that are available during the early gathering phase of this research project. Interview participants also have a common expertise in policy making and urban planning alongside their direct involvement or direct knowledge in the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. Noticeably, I did not have many interview participants. Originally, I planned have approximately ten participants, and planned to continue my interviews from March 2020 to get a more comprehensive opinion on the planning process. However, the unexpected pandemic of COVID-19 occurred in March 2020 which made it difficult to reach out to other potential interview participants. 27 Because of this experience, some of my interview findings expectedly intersect with the written material I have consulted. In this sense, findings from these interviews are also primarily stitched through the empirical analysis in chapters three and four. In the same manner, the information gathered through this method uncovers the impetus, gains, and position in the collaboration of different actors for urban growth in a more focused and specified perspective. Ultimately, this method directly aids in answering the research question of this study: how do the MST Nations and the different levels of Canadian government participate in the development process of Jericho Lands? Interestingly, in spite of some difficulties, most of the interviews were not difficult to access. I found that my identity as a UBC graduate student helped in building connections with interview participants. Perhaps this identity presents as a credibility to the interviewees who consented since I share the affiliation as a common connection with most of them. Most participants were an alumnus or have personal connections with the university. It also contributed to the ease of conversations with the participants and made discussions lighter at times. This also influenced how I conducted the interviews and positively contributed to the response by the participants. Although there was a significant use of policy making, urban planning, and urban geography terminology (eg. floor space ratio (FSR), affordable housing, urbanism, (re)development, sustainability, etc.) in the interviews, the background of the participants also contributed to unpack the elements of these terms. In this way, the interviews were considered as Figure 1.5 Comment card in Inspire Jericho Talks, April 17, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez 28 clarification points and complemented the objective of this study, which is to dissect these complex connections in the form of Jericho’s redevelopment. While it was generally easy for me to schedule the interviews, one of the participants took a while (in fact, another one never replied) to get a response. When I was also asking around to where I can redirect my email for this participant, I was also specifically asked if I were writing this project on a journalistic capacity that is connected with the media or as a student. It seemed as though they have an apprehension with the media contacting them, and perhaps that is due to the speculative articles that have been written until that time about Jericho Lands. Fortunately, after a couple months of repeated emails, a recommendation after a successful interview with a previous participant established the connection with a latter participant. Amusingly, this interview that I had difficulty in getting touch with the most was the longest interview of all five participants, and I was able to request a 30-minute follow up to completely answer all questions for this research. In the end, although the pool of interview participants demonstrated limitations (which will be further discussed in the following sub-section), it provides a formidable source of empirical data for this study. 1.4 Limitations While my access to resources for this study has been generally smooth, I also encountered several difficulties in conducting my work. General limitations and difficulties that are materialized in this research are related to conceptual framing, time-based limitations of sources, and the unexpected pandemic of COVID-19 (Coronavirus) since March 2020. Framing this study is undeniably difficult. Conceptually, Unpacking Inspire Jericho intersects with sub-fields of urban geography. Due to the focal point of analysis, which is the joint consortium of the MST Nations and the emergence of MSTDC through the lens of Jericho Lands redevelopment, this study represents an amalgamation of different concepts and perspectives. Evidently, these foster multiple narratives. Recalling the foundational framework that was reviewed in Section 1.2, this study focuses on 29 the urban impacts of MST Nations and thus focus on the urban aspect of the redevelopment through the emergence of MSTDC. However, due to the broad overlap of several disciplines, this thesis does not claim to deliver a comprehensive study about the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. In order to narrow down the reach of this research and keep it within the bounds of urban geography and urban planning, I limited the selection of participants and did not include stakeholders that have political connections with the MST Nations and identify as Indigenous/Aboriginal10 despite some leadership of the Nations influencing the policies in the MSTDC through its Board of Directors. Admittedly, this is one of the critiques that can be applied to my research since the Nations are the co-owners and co-developers of the site, and evidently their identity will have an impact on this development. However, by drawing this line in the qualifications for interview participants, I narrow down the study to only cover the process in the city and West Point Grey as a neighborhood being affected by such development. Therefore, this research does not explore the impact of the development in the communities of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations apart from this project’s impact on their economic security and will not overlap the politics of the Nations in the empirical findings of this study. However, this does not mean that the political agency of MST Nations was not taken into account in this study. One of this study’s assumptions is the widening reach of urban issues into the core ideas related to Indigenous sovereignty such as reconciliation and self-determination. These constitute the context for this study. I consider core Indigenous issues, including political subjectivities, but only as an underlying context and an inevitable part of the discussion; not a point of analysis that is challenged. I incorporate these aspects through the other methods such as media sources, government documents and academic sources. The limitation of the scope of interview participants represents the non-exploration of this study on the impact of this MST business venture on their 10 In this thesis, I use the terms Indigenous and Aboriginal to refer to the First Nations, Metis, and Inuit. Following the recent increased use of Indigenous as a result of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, I also capitalize “Indigenous” to signify respect to the populations. In the Canadian context, “Aboriginal” is also still widely used particularly in legal contexts. The term First Nations is also used to directly refer to Indigenous people in Canada that are not Metis nor Inuit (Animikii, 2017; First Nations & Indigenous Studies, n.d.; United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007). 30 communities and their members. In other words, questions about the allocation of (future) revenue from this redevelopment and similar matters will not be discussed in this study. Apart from the conceptual limitations, this aspect is also not explored due to time-based limitations of a Master’s-level thesis project. As much as the last two years were an opportune timeline to study the topic, timing proved to be a double-edged sword for this study. I was able to follow the beginnings of the Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program from its official public launch in March 2019 which was a tremendous advantage for this research. In some ways, this ongoing timeline presents a restriction in capturing and reflecting comprehensive analysis about the issue. For instance, due to this temporal focus, this study will not be able to cover the full impact and effect of this policy planning process. Another difficulty I encountered in the methodology of this research is the unexpected outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus) pandemic. I effectively shut down my fieldwork in March 2020. This also compelled many public and private institutions to switch to work-from-home arrangements as the government of British Columbia encouraged the public to remain at home to prevent the community transmission of the disease. Similarly, UBC also switched to online learning and closed off the campus facilities before March 2020 ended. This prevented me from accessing research materials such as books (especially materials not available in electronic format) and other resources since all libraries of the Vancouver campus were closed until July 2020. Nevertheless, some updates from March 2020 are included in the concluding chapter as a commentary to the overlap of the issue and depict how it is malleable to temporalities, such as the unexpected coronavirus pandemic which directly affected initial plans of the public engagement since the declaration of the global pandemic. To conclude, this study employed mixed methodologies to maximize the opportune timing of the study. My positionality and identity as an international student and coming from a different social science discipline also contributed to the framing of this study, to which I steer the niche of this research primarily within the field of urban studies. 31 1.5 Chapter summaries Unpacking Inspire Jericho explores a complex web that focuses on the redevelopment of a prime First Nations-owned land. The subsequent chapters are designed to navigate the coming together of multiple subjectivities and concepts on the context of real estate development, growth, and reconciliation. In totality, these discussions provide a perspective on the ongoing redevelopment of Jericho Lands. As a precedent to the empirical discussion on Jericho Lands, theoretical discussion earlier in this chapter situated this research within the intersection of urban planning and the process of reconciliation in the city. The discussion of the three bodies of literature on the growth machine, large-scale developments and Indigenous enterprises demonstrated gaps but also addresses the emergence of MST Nations as a local real estate developer and the process of the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. As a premise of this study, this discussion underscored growth initiatives that persist in the case of the redevelopment of the site that will be discussed in the following chapters. Chapter Two traces the pre-colonial and colonial pasts of the site. This section introduces the spatial evolution and community transformation of Jericho throughout the century. The objective of this chapter is to demonstrate that colonialism is an inherent context of what Jericho is today. Therefore, it becomes inevitable and not surprising that anti-colonialism practices are incorporated in the contemporary reshaping of the site. It is also revealed here that transformations of the site are primarily prompted by the local government and influenced by its residents. Conceptually, the history of the lands also reveals multiple subjectivities that are present and (re)emerging in the current redevelopment policy planning for the site. Representing the past and exploring the historical trajectories, the second chapter allows us to see the conflicts that transpired over time. This is important to note because this illustrates conceptual applications of what the land means. For one, Jericho's history explores how land is contentious and is always a site of conflict. Historical events in the contemporary site of Jericho demonstrate the two-fold land-use conflict prompted by the colonial government. First, examining ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw (Eyalmu)’s Indigenous communities and their displacement, and the evolution of the ancestral neighborhood to Jericho Country 32 Club, highlights the dispute between the First Nations and the settler colonial communities that were empowered by the British crown. Second, the latter attempts of Royal Canadian Air Force to take over the site for the First and Second World Wars, and its roll-over to the pre-redevelopment neighborhood which embraces its natural amenities show the rift between the Canadian government and the long-time residents/local community. Chapter Three revisits the recent past and evaluates current agencies involved with the development of the site. In this chapter, I offer a discussion of the institutional and spatial perspectives on the future of the lands. This section uncovers the inherently complex ownership and political economic characteristic of the site through its owners. The main takeaway in this section is the recent emergence and renewal of First Nations agency in the city. The emergence of MST Nations as a business consortium through the formalization of MST Development Corporation and its collaboration with the non-agent crown corporation, Canada Lands Company, loads the site with multiple layers of motivations and interests. Despite the unlikely partnership of these two entities, this chapter finds that they meet each other in the eye on the issue of real estate development and carry this leverage onto reconciliation initiatives. This chapter also attempts to directly tackle the redevelopment’s most controversial issue: luxury development. I explore the potential of Jericho as a luxury site, which includes the traditional nature of expensive housing and land in West Point Grey, the lucrative and coveted scenic views of the area, and the highly controversial heavy rapid transit extension in Vancouver. I end this chapter by suggesting that Vancouver sees a transformation in urban governance that is prompted by this serendipitous emergence of MST First Nations consortium. As an extension of the evaluation of Jericho’s prospects as luxury development, Chapter Four highlights the present practices and conceptually visualizes the future. In the first part, I discuss the collaboration of MST Nations and Canada Lands with the leadership of the City of Vancouver. This peek at the policy planning process demonstrates Jericho as another symbolism of the urban. In this context, it represents First Nations reconciliation that carries through urban development and governance policy. At the same time, it embodies core intersections and conflict within the city. I also offer another way to 33 visualize Jericho and its impacts in the future by inviting a critical gaze on the urban development model that is spearheaded by the MST Nations. My purpose of exploring caution and contrast of the development’s benefits is to avoid the pitfall of triggering events that exacerbate the urban affordability conundrum that consumes all stakeholders. Ultimately, the symphony of these discussions point to Jericho’s existence of reconciliation as a framework to primarily advance real estate development and city-building, and demonstrates another type of growth coalition in Vancouver. The last chapter rounds out the study by identifying theoretical contributions of Jericho’s case to the traditional growth machine thesis. I reinforce the connections that demonstrate the case that proponents of Jericho’s development are essentially rallying behind the growth narrative with the facade of reconciliation. I suggest this as a contribution of this study by expanding the reach and aligning newer contexts for an established urban theory. Since this research is also a parallel study of an ongoing series of events, I outline here the unexpected events and insights I have encountered throughout the conduct of research. The unprecedented timing of the COVID-19 pandemic had profound impacts on this study. Due to the recommendation to remain at home to curb and slow down the spread of the COVID-19 virus, all in-person events for Jericho’s public engagement have been put on hold. It is unknown how long this will last but from here, this unprecedented event demonstrates how it interrupts the conduct of public engagement for a megaproject, and the consequent pushback of the local activists in the community. Lastly, I further stress that this study is not meant to advance a solution. Instead, this effort hopes to provide context to jumpstart more questions that surround this local phenomenon as we are still far from the finish line. From here, I conclude with further questions to encourage thinking and rethinking about Jericho Lands. 34 Chapter 2: Urban Tales of Jericho Places evolve over time and Jericho Lands is no different. Its changes over the past century involved different communities and functions on its landscape. Land is not only an important asset due to its economic value. Traditionally, the lands were shared between the Coast Salish First Nations of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) and have been taken over by the settlers and have been primarily transformed into tools for city-building. At the same time, land is highlighted as a symbolism that represents the bond and sense of belongingness of communities. This chapter explores how colonialism played a critical role in Jericho’s history, and remains a fundamental aspect of its spatiality. What we know today as West Point Grey has been influenced by the perceived value and function of Jericho Lands over time. These lands embody a rich history of over 100 years where they have their function transition for the different communities which resided on the lands and considered them as their home. By highlighting this complexity, this chapter demonstrates the layers of land-use and function produced and reproduced by different inhabitants of Jericho in different periods of time. My goal is to provide context on how these multiplicities and layers of colonialism, local community and Indigenous territory intersect in its contemporary circumstances. In consideration of pre-colonial history, it maintains here that this complexity is identified as a result of the divergence and undermining of the Indigenous nations in the Lower Mainland, particularly peoples of the Musqueam Indian Band, Squamish Nation, and Tsleil-Waututh Nation, upon the arrival of British settlers. I argue that the contentions brought by colonial land-use is the underlying context in the current discourse of how to move forward in the redevelopment plan for Jericho. In the same manner, colonialism remains a fundamental basis of a spatial narrative that has become embedded among the communities that have relationship with Jericho Lands, both the pre-colonial communities of MST Nations and the long-time settler residents of West Point Grey. 35 2.1 Early days of the traditional lands of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw For the three Coast Salish Nations of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh (MST), Jericho is a place that symbolizes the bond of the peoples of these Nations. Historically known as ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw (Eyalmu) 11 , it was a year-round village for the Lower Mainland Indigenous communities where longhouses extend to several hundred feet which served to receive relatives beyond the Lower Mainland and for communal purposes (Pethick, 1984, p. 7). Culturally, it was also a symbolic place where an ancestor of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh peoples named qiyəplenəxʷ / Ḵiyapelánexw, assembled warriors to protect their communities from northern groups who would attempt to attack the Lower Mainland villages (“The Site,” n.d.)12. With this history of the lands and the traditional way of life dependent on nature, the peoples of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh consider this piece of land part of their “seasonally important resource procurement sites” (Harris, 2017, p. 332). With these cultural functions, it is clear that ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw not only represents a crucial land grabbed from each Nation but also a place which illustrates the enduring interconnectedness of the peoples of the three Coast Salish Nations. The original inhabitants of this land were forced to cease their traditions. The land was taken over and became subject to colonial and commercial land-use practices. The arrival of Spanish explorers at modern-day Point Grey in 1791 represents the first contact between the Indigenous settlement surrounding Jericho Beach and colonial settlers (Pethick, 1984, pp. 14–15). The arrival of Capt. George Vancouver in modern-day English Bay records the British contact with Indigenous inhabitants at the south of the Bay, which Vancouver records as Musqueam Indians (Weicht, 1997, p. 1). Approximately half a century later, the work of the Royal Engineers in British Columbia had a more direct and long-lasting impact on the 11 ʔəy̓alməxʷ is derived from the language of Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh nations while Iy̓álmexw comes from its Squamish counterpart (“The Site,” n.d.). There are many anglicized terms of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw: Eyalmu/E-eyalmu (Eby, 2015; Matthews, 1933, pp. 3, 10), Eyalmox (Hull & Soules, 1974, p. 5)), Eyalmo/E-eyalmo (Matthews, 1933, p. 5), Ee’yullmough (“Community History & WPGCA,” n.d.). 12 This historical information was also reiterated in the site walk (Inspire Jericho: Jane’s Walk) hosted by the City of Vancouver on May 3, 2019. 36 creation of today’s Vancouver and Lower Mainland. In Point Grey, early beginnings of colonization commenced when ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw was designated as one of the military/government reserve lands in March 1863 (Matthews, 1933, p. 10; Weicht, 1997, p. 1). The Royal Engineers designated 110 acres for the military, which was later on used for the purposes of the First and Second World Wars (Pethick, 1984, p. 17). Simultaneously, British subjects, who pledged an oath of allegiance to the British crown, were also given the opportunity to pre-empt lands from 1860. This allowed a lumberman, Jeremiah Rogers, to acquire land in the area. Although the designation of Jericho as a government reserve was reportedly unbeknownst to Rogers (Weicht, 1997, p. 2), he went on to lease the land in 1894. At that time, the sawmill established by Rogers represented one of the early interactions between the settlers and the Indigenous inhabitants. Conversations of the city’s first archivist, J.S. Matthews, provide accounts for this. The stepfather of August Jack Khahtsalhano, Chinalset, who also goes by the name Jericho Charlie, used to log for Rogers at ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw which at that time became known as Jerry’s Cove (Matthews, 1933, p. 10, 1955, p. 12)13. While the intervention of the Royal Engineers also disrupted settler occupation in the land prior to the Second World War, it created the opportunity for the settlers to take over the ancestral land and forced Indigenous communities away into small reserves. It is important to note here that the widespread and total succumb of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw’s land-use to colonial processes undermined traditional and ancestral ownership of MST Nations. Pre-colonial inhabitants were forcefully displaced and resulted in ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw’s transformation according to the utility and needs of the colonizers. As its lingering effect, when the Nations had the opportunity to reclaim their land in the 1990s, they were met with the complex and exhausting legal roadblock on overlapping claims and legalities on ownership that are based on the colonizer’s ways of life. Nevertheless, due to the traditional ownership and significance of the land to the cultures of MST Nations, the ancestral 13 This narrative of the Nations’ history in Jericho Lands is also introduced by MST Elders in Inspire Jericho events. 37 tales of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw signify a central role in the context of the rightful ownership of Jericho Lands today. 2.2 Settler history of Jericho: Private and military land-use While Jericho is more commonly associated with its contemporary military land-use, its earlier colonial roots go back to a logging site owned by a contractor for Hastings Mill Co. named Jeremiah Rogers who moved to the Burrard Inlet in 1864. Rogers acquired a lease from November 1868 to June 1878 (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 4) as his company conducted auxiliary lumber operations for other exporters in the nearby area (Pethick, 1984, p. 59; Porter, 1965). Unknown to many people, the site’s name originated from its owner’s prestige. Rogers was one of the most respected and successful logging contractors in the Lower Mainland. From “Jerry’s Cove” and “Jerry & Co.”, the logging company became Jericho. Towards the complete acquisition of former traditional land, Rogers built his house in the winter of 1871 where the longhouses stood in ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw. This place later on became the first club house of the Jericho Golf Club (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 4). It was also documented that Rogers’ logging camp at Jericho was one of the favored gathering places for the lumbers during the holidays (Matthews, 1933, pp. 212–213; Pethick, 1984, p. 109). This evolution of the site’s name and operation of the lumber mill are only few of the many changes that Jericho will see in the years and decades to come. Upon the death of Rogers sometime in mid to late 1870s14, his business partner Angus Fraser stepped in the operations of the lumber mill and left the property to his son, Lincoln Rogers. In 1886, Lincoln Rogers sold the 7.8 acres to Fraser, which was sold to J.M. Dalgleish (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 5). Near this site, the Vancouver Golf Club (VGC) was formed in 1892 as part of the Jericho Golf Links. However, due to a storm that wiped out the area in 1894, VGC moved to another location and came back to Jericho in 1905 with a bigger parcel and as Jericho Country Club (JCC). As Dalgleish was fond of the golf club, he 14 Sources vary on Rogers’ year of death. One documents 1874 (Kluckner, 1984, p. 176) and another 1879 (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 5). 38 sold the 7.8 acres to Henry O. Bell-Irving and Harry Abbott who turned over the land to Jericho Syndicate Limited—the company which oversaw JCC (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 5; Weicht, 1997, p. 2). Along with this land, another 69 acres from the Admiralty Reserve at Jericho was leased to construct the golf course (Chaldecott, 1935, p. 13). Apart from the golf club, several educational institutions were also housed in this area. In 1905, the Jericho Boy’s Industrial School opened, but moved to Coquitlam in October 1920. Upon the Boys School's transfer, Jericho Hill School took over but was also later displaced by the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) at the start of the Second World War (“Jericho School for the Deaf • Vancouver Heritage Foundation,” n.d.; Kluckner, 1984, p. 177). War efforts also disrupted the flourishing membership of the JCC. Prior to this complete occupancy of the military, the establishment of Jericho Beach Air Station in the 1920s was also met with sour reception from members of the Country Club due to the identified Naval reserve in English Bay connected to the golf club (Weicht, 1997, pp. 2, 10–11). The resistance of the local community to the military takeover of the golf club represents one of the first civilian-military backlash and disagreement on military presence in the neighborhood. This disagreement from the members of JCC did not allow the Air Board to smoothly finish their plans to expand Canadian air power capacity. Without other options, Jericho Country Club’s lease was terminated upon the commencement of Jericho’s military use in 1941. Looking back, this was in conjunction with the identification of the site as a military reserve by the Royal Engineers in 1863 discussed in the previous section. This meant that military involvement in land-use intertwined not only with the Crown and the government’s relations with the First Nations as original and ancestral owners of the land, but also to the civilian use by settlers after efforts of community building and urban growth. Almost simultaneously after the golf course was completed in 1908, the Fourth Avenue tram line opened in 1909 (Kluckner, 1984, p. 175). True to the function of transit until today, it prompted the rise and concentration of urban population in Point Grey (Wynn, 1992). The transit node located near the site put Jericho at the map of Vancouver’s development from its early beginnings; it was found at the center of occupation and industry in the early days of the Lower Mainland and Vancouver. Due to the community of Jericho loggers 39 in the area, there is evidence that from 1901 to 1961 Point Grey witnessed a constant concentration of population growth and transportation accessibility as it evolved from its separate municipality into a major neighborhood in the city of Vancouver (Harris, 1992; Wynn, 1992). The armed involvement of Canada against Germany and its feared threat from Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor during the Second World War prompted the federal government to improve and utilize the Jericho Beach Air Station as part of the Western Air Command. As the war progressed, functions of the Air Station also varied but increasingly became central in tactical and strategic operations. Apart from the Air Force, the Navy and General Staff of the Army were also located at Jericho Beach. With its early beginnings as a base to train pilots and airmen for their subsequent deployments, the Headquarters of the Western Air Command was relocated back to Jericho Beach in January 1943 in conjunction with the establishment of the Joint Service Headquarters. Subsequently, this positioning of Jericho was gradually dismantled when the threat from Japan weakened. It was reduced to its original function as a training base (Kluckner, 1984, p. 176; Weicht, 1997, pp. 53–54, 186). The closing of the Air Station in 1947 was in conjunction with the 1941 city resolution which allowed the DND to lease the land but to be returned and vacated after the war. However, at the height of the war, the original lot of Jeremiah Rogers that was eventually sold to the Jericho Country Club was bought by the DND together with 140 acres of land leased from the province (Weicht, 1997, p. 56,186). After the Second World War, military installations in countries which participated in the war became subject of public scrutiny. Seeing that there is no major use of the military base in Point Grey after the war, local media raised questions about the military presence in West Point Grey. Despite the closing of the Air Station and disbandment of the Western Air Command, the British Columbia Area Command Headquarters was transferred to Jericho beach in 1946 and consequently bought the 140 acres leased from the province, which made the military post permanent (Weicht, 1997, p. 186). A few years later, the BC Militia also announced its relocation to Jericho Beach. Due to this increasing peacetime military presence, the public narrative turned against the RCAF and stirred the conversation on returning military occupied 40 land back to civilian use. The issue of the land-use reached the highest levels of government when Prime Minister Lester Pearson announced in August 1965 that the federal government was ready to transfer the acres of Jericho Beach for free (Weicht, 1997, p. 187). This series of events marked the heightening of an intense conversation on military land conversion in Vancouver. The federal government announced the intent to transfer a parcel of the land to the city government for a public park but continued to be entangled in controversy upon the investigation of a city planner in 1966. They found that the said land was already owned by the provincial government and therefore, commenced the turn of Jericho’s lands to civilian hands (Peloquin, 1966). As with most military bases, sponsored civilian communities such as military families also reside in these posts. Jericho’s civilian population consisted of military dependents and automatically fell in the middle of this political crossfire over land-use where residents were labeled as nuisance to the real estate property values of the neighborhood (Weicht, 1997, p. 190). In order to address the worry of the residents that the properties in the neighborhood would be devalued with construction of the Army’s married quarters, DND erected housing that matched the neighborhood landscape (Toogood, 1965, p. 7). Despite the offered flexibility, the most notable result of this rising issue was the turnover of the federal-owned beach front lands along Fourth Avenue (O’Neil & Robinson, 2014). Under the leadership of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, the federal government transferred their lands to the city government. The City of Vancouver took over the 72 acres and transformed it into what we know today as the Jericho Beach Park (“Jericho Beach Flying Boat Station (Archived),” 2011; Weicht, 1997, p. 190). As part of the reduction of military presence in Jericho, the Jericho Hill School reacquired their original property along with two RCAF buildings and 18 more acres of adjacent land (“Jericho School for the Deaf • Vancouver Heritage Foundation,” n.d.; Kluckner, 1984, p. 177). Today, West Point Grey Academy (WPGA) and the Jericho Hill Centre stand on this former RCAF-occupied parcel of the site. Regarded as an important amenity in the neighborhood, WPGA’s presence during and even after the redevelopment is supported by its residents and students. Despite not knowing what the future holds for the lands, the academy’s administration 41 received confidence from MST Nations for the school to remain in the land beyond 2030 after renewing its lease until June 2030, and to be included in the redevelopment plans for the site (West Point Grey Academy, 2019, pp. 2–3). In addition, lease for the housing of military sponsored families was also recently extended to 2023 after several rounds of extensions since 2015 (Todd, 2020). Although some of the site’s current properties will remain in the foreseeable future, its future remains to be fully visualized until conversations between impacted communities are resolved and reconciled in a future masterplan. 2.3 History as a precedent “The heart of the Native land question in British Columbia lies in two basic stories about land, one about dispossession the other about development.” - Cole Harris (2002, p. 294) Jericho Lands continue to witness the transformation of its locality over time. To show this continuing phenomenon, this chapter illustrated the many layers of the community’s history over the years by tracing its pre-colonial and post-colonial spatial set-up. The findings of this chapter go beyond the complex history, especially in precedence as a wider context of the contemporary development of Jericho which will be discussed in the subsequent chapters. For instance, the prominence of the ancestral history of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw as the backbone of the new face of the lands, demonstrates the comeback of the erased identity of the Nations through the joint partnership of MST Nations as they take the lead in the development. The discussion on the pre, wartime, and post-war land-use also demonstrates the production of communities in West Point Grey, which shaped the character of the neighborhood. As these localities are still visible in the current conversations of Jericho’s contemporary development, this chapter strengthens the tantamount and defining role of spatial narratives in stories of dispossession and creation of a colonial urban fabric (Blomley, 2004, p. 114). 42 Reflected above in Cole Harris’ quote, this complexity and interconnection with the ongoing changes in Jericho also emphasizes the creation and perpetuation of narratives on land dispossession and land development. These point us to the neoliberal and contemporary realities of the site as it is surrounded by the province’s most expensive properties. These narratives, to be detailed in the next chapters, advance a perspective on the wider understanding of the site’s ongoing and intricate development, particularly highlighting questions due to the joint ownership of two (non-traditional) developers and its future as a luxury or high-value real estate site. The declaration Jericho as surplus land by the federal government in 1995 also marked the curtain call for the military presence in the area. With the Canadian military occupying the area for 70 years, Jericho reached its peak at approximately 190 acres (Porter, 1965; Toogood, 1965; Weicht, 1997) as it served the Air Force, Navy, and the Army, which fully encompasses today’s location of the Jericho Beach Park and the 90-acre Jericho Lands. Today, these layers of historical functions brought by different groups of communities in Jericho come together as we see a new chapter unfolding in its history—the attempt through real estate development led by its ancestral owners and a potential model of governance in the city. Post-war tension on military land-use in an increasingly prime neighborhood and urbanized land from the 50s to 70s represents the backlash on militarized landscapes in the city and the need to prioritize and shift to development-oriented socio-economic land-use. Since the odd placement of Jericho in the middle of the city was short-sighted, not planned for the long-term when the Royal Engineers surveyed the land, and based off an obsolete drawing of military reserves, issues regarding its land-use can be deemed inevitable. It was only a matter of what and when these issues will arise. This also situates the neighborhood of West Point Grey similar to other neighborhoods where military posts have also become a part of a city’s landscape and fabric due to the city’s expansion15. This historical context also shows the power of the 15 Although a foreign military base, United States Army Garrison (USAG) Yongsan is located in the district of Yongsan in Seoul, South Korea. This base recently underwent formal closure due to a mix of local backlash on foreign military presence in the country and the question of transforming military alliance between Seoul and 43 community as an impact wielding and formidable voice on issues within the locality. Nevertheless, in the discussion of Jericho’s history, the involvement of the local community of West Point Grey in matters that dictate the community’s character is evident, which is a visible narrative in the ongoing planning to develop Jericho Lands. Ultimately, tracing the histories of Jericho Lands from ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw (Eyalmu) to its post-war boundaries aims to bridge it with the discussion in the succeeding chapters and present as a background to have a better understanding of Jericho’s centrality in contemporary real-estate development in the city. Washington. What is complex in this circumstance is that the shrinking and closing of USAG Yongsan is in conjunction of an expansion of another US military base in South Korea—Camp Humphreys, which is currently considered as the largest Department of Defense (USDOD) project outside of Continental United States (Martin, 2018). 44 Chapter 3: New Era of Jericho Figure 3.1 Distance of Top 10 most expensive properties in BC to Jericho Lands16 West Point Grey (WPG), the neighborhood where Jericho is located, has evolved into one of Vancouver’s most expensive areas. According to the latest data from the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) in 2016, the average value of homes occupied by owners in WPG have reached approximately $2.80 million. This represents a value that is approximately 48% higher than the average value of homes in Metro Vancouver and ranks second among all neighborhoods in the Greater Vancouver Area17. As of October 2019, CMHC Market Rental Survey lists Point Grey with an average monthly rent of $1,757, which is approximately 9% higher than Vancouver’s average rent (Point Grey — Historical Average Rents by Bedroom Type, 2019). Current selling of homes in this neighborhood are also 16 Map rendering from Zussman’s (2019) article. 17 West Point Grey is identified in CMHC’s data as the neighborhood of Point Grey. It includes three Census Tracts (CTs): 0043.01, 0043.02, and 0044.00. The last CT is where both eastern and western parcels of Jericho are included. The data comparing the neighborhood of Point Grey to other neighborhoods in Metro Vancouver can also be navigated in the same source (Vancouver - Average Value of Owner-Occupied Dwellings ($), 2016). 45 skyrocketing. Zolo, a real estate brokerage company that provides information about the current statistics of housing markets in Canada, records Point Grey to have an average value of $2.7 Million for current homes, which fares 55% above the City’s average (“Point Grey (Vancouver) Housing Market Report | November 2019 Real Estate Trends & Stats,” n.d.). Based on these statistics, it is not surprising to find eight out of British Columbia’s top ten properties within walking distance from Jericho Lands (see Figure 3.1)18. Approximately 40% of the dwellings in the West Point Grey are single-family homes, which makes it one of the few remaining areas in the City of Vancouver where this housing structure maintains its pre-eminence (Vancouver - Average Value of Owner-Occupied Dwellings ($), 2016). This is an important aspect of future developments in the city. With changing times, it becomes easier to see that single-family homes are increasingly becoming more obsolete. Throughout the city, major real estate developers also construct more multi-family dwellings in the form of condominiums, and it seems as though there is no stopping it. Across the neighborhoods, some neighboring single-family homes have also been demolished and have been rezoned to redevelop into multi-family dwellings and/or low-rise apartment buildings19. In a way, the current real estate phenomenon in Vancouver also signals the death of the single-family homes, a representation of the “Canadian [housing] dream” (Lauster, 2016). Grant and Scott (2011) reveal that developers attribute the increasing land prices as the main cause of the rise of multi-family dwellings in an area. Following this finding, it comes as no surprise to see other areas in the city become denser and reshaped with higher residential towers and apartment complexes. 18 Manually computed from the list of Top 10 most expensive properties in British Columbia (Zussman, 2019). 19 The definition of low-rise follows the standard of CMHC and Statistics Canada. A classic example of this phenomenon is the redevelopment of a formerly single-family zone area, Norquay Village. To date, this neighborhood is still undergoing densification with upcoming site constructions that cater to multi-family dwellings (Chan, 2019; Jang, 2013; Kimmett, 2007). I have also personally observed this reality since summer of 2019 and around the long stretch of Cambie Street and Broadway, two of the major areas and transit routes in the city. 46 The abovementioned trend in the neighborhoods of Vancouver has become the foundation of an impending change for the Jericho. What we are seeing today is how the real estate hype-turned-crisis and emergence of a new actor shape one another in their form and function. These impending changes warrant significant impact that is yet again about to alter the neighborhood of West Point Grey. Mindful of Jericho's history of urban growth and population change, it becomes more important to unpack what this impending change means for the place, community, city and beyond. At the center of Jericho’s imminent future is the exploration of the emerging aspects of the development: new actors, partnerships, financing, and the question of luxury real estate. Bearing in mind the previously discussed history of the lands, this chapter explores the multiple layers of complexity in the context of how it intersects with the current real estate climate in Vancouver. While the new phase of Jericho is shaped by the backdrop of heated property prices, it also tells the story of a transitioning land-use and more importantly, an evolution of urban actors. The objective of this chapter is to illustrate the complex conditions of the contemporary site of Jericho Lands in two major aspects. Dissecting these conditions aid the main purpose of this study by examining how MST and CLC view and participate in the policy process of Jericho Lands’ development. I explore the agency of the ownership by fleshing out the motivations, rationale and identities of the two unlikely owners of Jericho Lands: the joint consortium of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations, and the Canada Lands Company (CLC), a non-agent crown corporation with the federal government as its shareholder. The expected yet crucial component of financing is also discussed. I highlight this framing as a preliminary angle of the complicated partnership between two unlikely proponents. Understanding that the timing of the study remains in a premature position, I situate this complexity as a one-of-a-kind character of Jericho Lands due to the novelty of emerging governance processes that can potentially shape and influence future real estate development projects in Canada. Second, I outline intersecting issues that influence the policy planning that extends to the discussion in Chapter Four. In this section, I problematize and scrutinize the question of whether Jericho 47 becomes another site with luxury properties by looking at the already-expensive and exclusive neighborhood character of West Point Grey, its topographical assets within and surrounding the 90-acre site, and the upcoming city-wide transit plan in Vancouver. I acknowledge that these three factors are only few of the many aspects of the development. However, as a preliminary evaluation of this redevelopment project, I emphasize these apparent spatial factors as they demonstrate the push and pull on the issues of affordability, voices of and within the community, and local growth. In other words, these factors are significant components to the web of layers that sit underneath the overarching issue of Jericho’s redevelopment. To close this chapter, I emphasize that the upcoming change in Jericho Lands occurs on the premise of the inherent and complex political economic characteristic of its owners and developers. This complex relationship is the foundation of an unchartered path in terms of various overlapping issues in the city and the wider inter-government relations in Canada with the First Nations. To boot, spatial aspects of the neighborhood and the site amplify its future blueprint which enables us to see the gaps and uncertainties that drive the speculation on this ambitious development project. 3.1 Jericho’s new, complex ownership The current ownership structure with its unique mix of owner-developer was enabled by the two rounds of sales in 2014 to 2016. The first sale was from the Federal government in 2014 and the succeeding purchase from the BC Provincial government in 2016. As a result, the (re)acquisition of lands by the MST Nations represents an amalgamation of historical events. On the one hand, their current need to seek redress in a way that can optimize the lands as its renewed assets. On the other, the goal of the reacquisition and redevelopment ultimately boils down to providing economic benefits to the communities of the MST Nations for the purpose of their nation building. In this way, this section shows that the development of Jericho Lands contributes to the future of these Nations just as the site was a significant part of the ancestral culture of these three Coast Salish nations. Concurrently, exploring the functions and character of MST Nations and Canada Lands Company enables a widened understanding of the contributions of this large- 48 scale development to the urban fabric of Vancouver, and beyond. Details about the monetary and other finance-related accommodations also reflect the complicated relationship between MST Nations and Canada Lands as co-owners/developers. The particularities of financing are important but outside the scope of this study because data that supplement this examination such as commercial agreements are not public information. 3.1.1 The emergence of MST Development Corporation (MSTDC) The sale of Jericho Lands occurred in parallel with the transformation of the relationship between the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil Waututh Nations. The coming together of these Nations as joint owners is one of the most prominent events in the aftermath of the declaration of Jericho Lands as a surplus land and its sale. As discussed in the previous chapter, the ties of these three First Nations go back to their origins and ancestral lands in the Greater Vancouver Area and the City of Vancouver. This ancestry is deeply rooted in understanding the formation of this collaboration as it is central to the events that led to the decision of the Nations to partner with one another, which also essentially influenced the establishment of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation (MSTDC) in 2017. The beginnings of the collaboration between the MST Nations stem from the overlapping land claims of the three Coast Salish Nations, an enduring effect of Indigenous displacement by the movement of settlers into the Lower Mainland. The reality for First Nations—as with other Indigenous Nations in Canada—is a long process of land claim settlements and political recognition with the Canadian government. With only four final treaties completed, two in ratification, and a few Agreements in Principle for Indigenous Nations in British Columbia20, this is clearly a contested process. With most Indigenous territories in this region unceded and non-treaty, a way for the government to invite them to the negotiating table is usually under the terms of the Indian Act. The legislation represents the traditional perspective of 20 BC Treaty Commission provides a list of completed and under-negotiation treaties in BC (BC Treaty Commission, n.d.). 49 reconciliation and inter-government relations between Aboriginal groups and the Canadian government. Apart from these means, court-based land claim settlements are also considered as approaches for addressing historical grievances. Land grabs are among the central manifestations of colonial rule. Many of the Indigenous groups find claim settlements to be a way to assert their self-determination and enact justice. However, this approach still does not provide a better recourse for the Nations. Furthermore, the colonial and Indigenous perspectives on land diverge in many ways. The colonial definition of land rests on physical boundaries as opposed to its Indigenous notion which refers to borders shaped by relationships of different groups of peoples (Thom, 2009). These opposing definitions illustrate the core problem of why land claims are difficult to settle. In most cases, Indigenous ownership also means that ancestral land is claimed by two or more Indigenous groups. This further complicates the process. Worst, it baits the already-marginalized Indigenous Nations into a web of claims cases amongst themselves. The nations which decide to seek land redress need to settle their land claims first with (an)other group/s in order to advance the compensation with the Canadian government (Thom, 2014). The challenge of overlapping Indigenous land claims is that it radiates as a modern version of the traditional colonial strategy of “divide and conquer” and manifests two different sets of tensions: 1) between the Canadian government and the Indigenous groups, and 2) conflict between groups with overlapping ancestral claims. These persistent pressures entangle and trap the efforts of Indigenous nations from achieving their desired objectives. In addition, the prolonged juridical and political process of this approach puts Indigenous governments in further financial strain. The Musqueam Indian Band, Squamish Nation, and Tsleil-Waututh Nation are themselves no strangers to the complexity of land and treaty negotiations. When the Squamish Nation decided to pursue their claims to the False Creek/Kitsilano Indian Reserve, the federal government blocked their request due to the similar land claims of the Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh Nations (Harris, 2017; Supra Note 8 in Thom, 2014). While this parcel of land was awarded to Squamish Nation in 2002 with a $92.5 million settlement, it does not embody a complete win for the Squamish people, and ultimately the wider 50 community of First Nations (Matas, 2000). All three Nations have experienced the financial burden of negotiating with the Canadian government21. Often, these legal costs incapacitate First Nations and add to the burden experienced by their communities and governments. In a joint statement, the Nations divulged that “The treaty process is expensive to negotiate, and the costs are borne by the nations through a loan process to the government, which then is repaid when a settlement is reached. In many cases the loan is larger than the accommodation that is reached in the treaty process” (Mackin, 2016a). To avoid further constraining expenses of treaty negotiations and divisiveness brought by the overlapping claims, alternative processes to reconciliation emerge in addition to the traditional approach of treaty and land negotiations. In March 2014, the Protocol Agreement was forged among MST Nations as a collective response and attempt to end their dispute to their traditional land claims. This agreement aids the three First Nations to achieve their shared goal of protecting their ancestral homes and economic self-sustainability by entering a partnership which allowed them to acquire lands together through extinguishing land claims and instead become joint and equal owners and “business partners” (Joint Community Notice - Protocol Agreement, 2014; News Release - First Nations Sign Protocol Agreement, Acquire Land, 2014; Lee, 2014). The agreement is considered as a historic merger since it is the first business collaborative effort of its kind between Indigenous nations. This consortium was not only based on common history and culture, but it presents an alternative to the lengthy and burdening traditional dispute resolution where a historical land dispute has been mediated through the rules of the market. In a way, the protocol agreement officially binds the nations as a business. Consequently, they acquired various surplus properties from the Federal and Provincial governments, including Jericho Lands. 21 To date, the Musqueam Indian Band and Tsleil-Waututh Nation are currently at Stage 4 (out of 6) in the negotiation process, while the Squamish Nation is at Stage 3 (BC Treaty Commission, n.d.). 51 In October 2014, the federal parcel of Jericho, more commonly identified as Jericho Garrison, was jointly acquired by the Nations with Canada Lands Company (CLC) for $237 million (Bula, 2014; O’Connor, 2014; O’Neil & Lee, 2014). Located on the eastern side of the lands, this section includes 110 units of housing for the dependents of the Department of National Defence. To complete the current 90-acre development site, the adjacent western parcel of Jericho Hill Grounds, was solely acquired by the partnership of First Nations in April 2016. The area which was formerly owned by the Government of British Columbia was sold for $480 million, which brought the total of the adjoining parcels to $737 million. This western end of the site also houses amenities for the neighborhood of West Point Grey, such as the Jericho Hill Community Centre and West Point Grey Academy. Jericho Lands’ unique ownership is an element that immediately stands out in this development. Contrary to the policy and planning for the site that are jointly managed by Canada Lands and MST, the proprietorship for the eastern and western parcels is different. The eastern parcel of Jericho Garrison is now co-owned by MST Nations and Canada Lands Company. This 50-50 ownership is a result of layered political and commercial processes. The current structure of this ownership is a result of reconciliation initiatives from the federal government, but also illustrates a commercial transaction between the co-owners. Initially, the shareholder percentage of the federal land’s sale was 72% to Canada Lands and 28% to MST Nations. The 28% ownership represents the accommodation of the federal government which also accompanies an $86 million payment to the First Nations. However, to make the MST Partners an equal shareholder with Canada Lands Company, the Nations acquired the 22% by paying Canada Lands the proportionate amount of $68 million. The remaining half of the share which is valued was officially sold to Canada Lands. An interviewee confirmed that the 28% share offered to the MST Nations by the federal government is viewed as an example of several aspects of reconciliation in the context of Jericho’s redevelopment22. This specific reconciliation initiative was founded on landmark Aboriginal cases such as 22 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 52 Haida Nation v. British Columbia and Delgamuukw v. British Columbia. These precipitated the affirmation and recognition of Indigenous rights, and pushed the Canadian government to take on the duty to consult, accommodate (Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), 2004) and compensate (Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, 1997) First Nations on issues of land claims. In this context, the 28% ownership of MST Nations valued at $86 million is remuneration for extinguishing the First Nations’ overlapping claims on Jericho Garrison (Lee, 2014). On the other hand, the western parcel of Jericho Hill Grounds was solely sold to the joint partnership of MST Nations. This transaction demonstrates the provincial government’s duty to accommodate by restricting the bidding only for MST Nations (O’Brien, 2016). Similar to the terms of accommodation payments for the federal lands, the Nations were also compensated by the province for renouncing its overlapping land claims on Jericho Hill Grounds for $96 million, which will be split between the three nations (Bula, 2016a; Mackin, 2016a; Perry, 2016). Additional financial accommodations also have been available for this round of property acquisition. According to a leaked audio of the Squamish Nation townhall in March 2016, a month before the sale of the western parcel of Jericho, officials announced the accommodation of a take back mortgage financing for the Nations. This allows the Nations to defer payments until the sixth and seventh years instead of putting down 50% of the value of the land upfront and paying property taxes as a typical process for developer when they are approved for their bid and acquire a property. According to the Squamish official, no money would be paid at the time of the sale and the Nation would be able to save approximately $60 million until the increase of the value of the land after the site’s rezoning, which would also reportedly ultimately cost between $5 to 6 million (Mackin, 2016b). This arrangement will be applied for the remaining balance of the $480 million that is not applicable for the accommodation payment, which is approximately 70% of the value of the land. Although this is not a complete picture of the financial aspect of the sale, this account illustrates the several kinds of accommodations extended to the Nations that are associated with reconciliation. On such basis, this contiguous site will witness a complex and evolving partnership not just within the three 53 First Nations but also with other institutions that needs to cooperate with different levels of the settler government. With intricate layers of networks and governance in place, MST Nations recognized the need to come together and solidify the partnership as a business entity. In order to fully manage such joint properties and to enact the intersection of Indigenous interests and values with urban development, the Nations sought the formalization of the partnership through the establishment of a development corporation— the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation (MSTDC). MSTDC is a property development company that manages the jointly owned properties of the MST Nations. To date, the corporation has six properties (including the two parcels that make up Jericho Lands) which are valued at approximately $1 billion (“Current Initiatives,” n.d.). In terms of its scope, MSTDC does not cover territories solely owned by each Nation and those which are declared as reserves. These parcels of land are managed by each Nations’ economic development departments, which also have a wider scope in terms of networks, issues, and pertinent decision-making that pertain to the management of solely owned lands by MST Nations23. MSTDC’s structure is also designed to not intervene into the domestic policy of the Nations and only supports the economic and business aspirations of the three Nations through their jointly owned land. Its formal establishment gained public attention in the latter half of 2016 and since then has attracted the interest of urban watchers and the general public. As a property developer, the MST Nations are joined by seasoned real estate development executives such as the current CEO, David Negrin (Bula, 2016b; Howell, 2016b). Mr. Negrin’s experience with Aquilini Development as one of Vancouver’s most known developers and his existing experience with First Nations, complement the entrepreneurial vision of MST Nations. Hiring and teaming up with seasoned development executives also solidify the business structure by having the technical capacities to optimize the company’s assets. One of the interviewees also acknowledged that expertise and experience in the industry provides many advantages to the owners by offering different perspectives on development24 . In effect, such executive component 23 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 24 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 54 becomes a supplemental yet crucial capacity for MST to achieve their visions and goals for their respective nations. In terms of its business structure, it operates as a regular business with a Board of Directors and respective business executives. An interviewee paints this picture in describing the company’s corporate structure and its separation of business and politics: MSTDC is where chiefs and/or tribe councilors “do not wear their political hat.. [but] their business hat”25. This interview finding also resonates with a study conducted by Ian Campbell (former Chief, Squamish Nation) where he examined how the traditional structure of Indigenous governments can be used in a modern context. This study argues that historical and familial ties can be taken advantage in the business venture between the three First Nations by incorporating traditional models of collaboration. Utilizing shared history, tradition, vision and values of each nation present a window of opportunity that allows them to enforce a “renewed sense of cooperation” (Campbell, 2015, p. 23). In another venue, Campbell also expressed in 2015 that a development arm of the Nation is “at a critical point in our development, creating more of a separation of business and politics” (Pynn & Hoekstra, 2015). These functions follow the narrative of MSTDC as a “typical development company” which so “happens to be owned by three First Nations”26. However, it should be noted that the core idea of acquiring the primary asset of the company has been out of the ordinary. Its formal establishment in 2016 was prompted by the series of serendipitous political events in 2014 and 2016 which resulted in taking control of Jericho’s lucrative land assets. In this sense, reconciliation bridges the connection between the business and political characters of MST Nations, primarily seen in the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. Since initiatives on reconciliation essentially pave the way for the advancement of Jericho’s redevelopment, the political nature of MST First nations cannot be discounted and should rightfully be considered in the complexity of this venture. Ultimately, the development corporation is a manifestation of MST Nations’ political economic character through its inherent embeddedness of a business mindset while balancing with its political identity. 25 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 26 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 55 While its politics intends to not meddle in business management of the properties, it is important to not downplay the political connections and relationships behind the establishment of the corporation. This is not to dispute the uniqueness of MSTDC. However, it should be stressed that because of its political core, the corporation is highly atypical. The accommodation agreement between MST Nations in 2014, which is the foundation of MSTDC’s operation today, is a product of a political decision between three First Nations with former overlapping land claims. These are politically charged events that are rooted in the desire to overcome legacies of the colonial government apparatus, particularly of the grievance and dispute settlement mechanism. Therefore, despite the pre-colonial history of the lands belonging to MST Nations, all properties managed by MSTDC are products of the political product of reconciliation. Furthermore, MSTDC’s goal is to provide an economic source for the prosperity and self-sustainability of its peoples. Combining these components of MSTDC’s structure despite its establishment as a private entity demonstrates its inherently complex political character. This multi-layered structure of the development corporation is tied to its operation as an Indigenous business. For instance, the core idea of land (re)acquisition symbolizes an advantage where the Nations can benefit. The purchase of Jericho’s adjoined parcels represents an opportunity to advance the economic goals of the Nations through the acquisition of profitable land from a long-standing burdening crisis that has been incapacitating their institutions. In a way, the venture demonstrates an instance to what a study identifies as the ability of Indigenous entrepreneurs to grab onto opportunities and turn them into profit (Lindsay et al., 2006, p. 62). The establishment of a development corporation also illustrates the capacity of an Indigenous venture to incorporate economic and non-economic targets (Lindsay et al., 2006, pp. 58–59). Such an expansive view about Indigenous entrepreneurship mimics a statement of Dustin Rivers (Khelsilem), a Squamish Council Member and Spokesperson, during the open house of Jericho Lands in March 2018: “When MST Development Corporation does development, we do it like nobody else in the city does.” -Khelsilem, Jericho Lands Open House, March 2, 2019. 56 “For us, in our communities, the return of these lands is monumental and historic. But the next part of this journey and history is to do the next historic thing which is to build a community here that is inclusive and progressive, and achieves all of those values that we have sustained ourselves for those thousands of years around sustainability and community. And really, I think it is a form of economic justice. It’s a form of reconciliation. It’s a form of showing the world what it looks like when Indigenous peoples are taking a place again in the community that we’ve had for thousands of years. … When MST Development Corporation does development, we do it like nobody else in the city does. And we’re very proud of that. We are very excited.”27 Focus on the community building and giving back to their respective nations prove to be the primary aspirations for the land. This goes against the perspective that most developers primarily seek profit and typically sell their property to whom they can gain more margins. Khelsilem’s statement resonates with the remarks of Musqueam Capital Development’s CEO, Steve Lee. He asserted that the company is “not your typical development – get in-get out. It’s how do we provide the social returns, short-, medium- and long-term, to Musqueam” (Hoekstra, 2015). Although MSTDC’s brand of development has yet to be seen and put to the test, Rivers’ statement suggests that MST Nations are not only concerned about the profit and making money off this upcoming development. This means that with First Nations on board as a co-owner and co-developer of the land, MSTDC incorporates response to pressing urban issues such as affordability and sustainability. At the same time, economic gains that this project aims to achieve are for the purpose of marginalized First Nations, all of which are triumphed and marketed as assets for the corporation. From the perspective of opportunity and maximizing contributions to society, Indigenous participation through this unique business partnership is seen as a way of branding that will set apart the joint First Nations partnership from other developers (Campbell, 2015). While this Aboriginal business venture presents the market as a means to attain social justice for a marginalized group of people, it comes with a diverse reception. Current public perception on MST Nations is shaped by their plans on Jericho Lands. Due to this association, some members of the local community express their wariness to the impending changes that will be prompted by the visions of the First Nations. 27 Open House event, March 2, 2019. Video can also be viewed at the website of Jericho Lands. 57 Some declare their support28, whereas others are wary about the partnership and MSTDC, particularly in their plans for the development of Jericho. There are several reasons for this. First, the housing climate in Vancouver being characterized by the skyrocketing prices of housing is negatively attributed to the real estate developers. In addition, new and upcoming housing units brought by development and its consequent densification are viewed as culprits in the potential increase of property taxes for homeowners29. In 2013, the secrecy surrounding the Jericho Lands sale concerned the residents (Hastings, 2013). This fear was primarily stirred when the request for the appraisal document came back highly-redacted for the western parcel of Jericho which was at that time owned by the province (Coriolis Consulting Corporation, 2012). According to David Eby, the representative of West Point Grey to the Legislative Assembly, this appraisal signals the inclination of the province to sell the lands. Eby also stressed that such lack of information also breeds anxiety among residents on the possibility of another developer constructing luxury condominiums in West Point Grey, a trend that has become more typical across denser areas within the city (Howell, 2015). Second, there is also the narrative that is seemingly apprehensive in the leading of a neighborhood change by a First Nations partnership. Intersecting with the ongoing issue of reconciliation in the city, there have been some aspects of racially motivated anxiety and non-confidence about the partnership and MST. This is not surprising and is coming from both native and non-native communities. Due to their tribal history of competition, some members of the MST communities questioned this partnership. In a leaked audio of the Squamish Nation townhall in March 2016, upset members of the community challenged the cooperation with other bands in the land claims over Jericho, one even expressing that “the Musqueam are squatters” on Squamish territory, and another raising an unsettling reality of why they are “buying back their own land”. In response, similar to what the leadership of Musqueam have raised to naysayers in their own 28 Most of the key informant interviews conducted for this research represent proponents of Jericho Lands. 29 Key informant interview, November 8, 2019. 58 community, Squamish leadership maintained that the collaboration represents “breaking the narrative” by questioning the gains of fighting with other bands, as opposed to holding on to old ways of competition (Mackin, 2016b). Despite this, other MST leaders also continue to emphasize the ancestral familial ties that bonded the communities of the three nations. In an interview with the media, Jay Mearns of the Musqueam Capital Development stated that before the Nations are able to sit down and talk about business, it started with “revisit[ing] our familial relationship and understand as Coast Salish people that we all come from one person” (Howell, 2016a). In addition, remarks from other nations’ leadership during the Open House in March 2019 unanimously reiterate these historical ties as a precedent and foundation not only for the partnership but for the planning of Jericho Lands itself. In the same manner, previously commenced and ongoing First Nations development ventures in Vancouver, such as the Musqueam Indian Band’s real estate project on the University Endowment Lands, gained negative traction among the community which has been replicated on the newer venture in West Point Grey and nearby neighborhoods. According to an interview reported in the Vancouver Courier in 2016, a member of the community believed that the Musqueam project on the Endowment Lands was “a disaster for the neighborhood”, and expressed their dissent to the ancestral claim of Musqueam: “Why does anybody give any attention to that? It’s historical, it’s not real, it’s not real time” (Howell, 2016a). In the same leaked audio of the Squamish Nation’s townhall, tensions with the local community were also revealed when the Squamish representative reported on the meeting of MST with the West Point Grey Residents Association. Without giving specifics on the meeting with the WPGRA, the Squamish official explained that “they (WPGRA) seem to think they have a lot of power there as non-native residents. We’re saying that it’s fine, you benefited for 150 years at our expense, it’s now our turn to step in here” (Mackin, 2016b). “Why does anybody give any attention to that? It’s historical, it’s not real, it’s not real time.” -A Vancouver resident on the Musqueam claim in the University Endowment Lands 59 Third, the scale of the development that the partnership and MSTDC administers is the biggest for any developer with an ongoing project in British Columbia. Its 90-acre site as the current largest contiguous development about to occur in Vancouver presents a scale that has the potential to wield change its immediate neighborhood and beyond. In principle, this is perhaps also one of the reasons why developers are highly interested in acquiring these lands. However, its far-reaching size poses a barrier particularly in the context of weighing the conservative disposition of the local community on matters of rezoning and development. With such a sizeable land ripe for development and the fear of residents for density and new properties to drive their assessments and taxes, the scale of Jericho Lands becomes an obstacle for any developer. One interviewee familiar with the policy process stressed that any developer that will take on the site is expected to encounter problems and engage with diverse opinions, simply because it is a massive development project30. In this sense, another proponent said it best: “there are always some that are easy to convince, some that are hard to convince, and some that you may never convince”31. MST Nations’ political economic character in the form of MSTDC, and such associations that has been discussed above reveal a new type of developer in Vancouver. Structurally, one that is owned by First Nations — a group of people that has been stripped of land by the settler government for their colonial visions. Conceptually, the coming together of MST Nations and the emergence of its development corporation embody the manifestation of capitalizing a devasting history, unique cultures, and traditions as a distinctive way to manage a highly coveted land. With this complex agency as a collaboration with socio-political-economic goals, this renewed identity and agency of First Nations in Vancouver asserts itself by forging unique partnerships with other stakeholders. In the long run, it contributes to the empowerment of a First Nations developer and advancing the spirit of reconciliation. 30 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 31 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. Also similar sentiment from interview on October 21, 2019. 60 3.1.2 “Non-agent crown” partnership with Canada Lands Company In 2003, Canada Lands Company (CLC), a non-agent Crown corporation, expressed interest in acquiring Jericho Garrison, the eastern site of Jericho Lands and parcel of land that was formerly owned by the federal government. This intent materialized almost a decade after the federal government declared Jericho Garrison as a surplus property in 1995 (Warson, 2003). Two decades later, this interest has turned into reality in 2014 when the MST Nations and Canada Lands formalized their co-ownership of Jericho Garrison. This first round of purchase for Jericho Lands marks history in several aspects for both the First Nations and Canada Lands. Bearing each institution’s identity and history, the partnership of MST Nations and CLC represents another layer of complexity of the development. I explore in this section the public and private intersection of Canada Lands’ establishment, its symbolism on the dynamics of the development, and its overall partnership with the MST Nations. As a government asset management entity, Canada Lands Company’s involvement in the purchase of the 52-acre eastern portion of Jericho stems from its federal mandate to operate as a self-financing independent commercial developer (Frequently Asked Questions, 2014; McIvor, 2012). True to its non-political status, the corporation is not financed by the federal government, has a separate board that is remote from the political apparatus, and is not influenced by political ties. However, it considers the federal government as its shareholder because it provides its mandate. Its arms-length yet direct connection with the federal government traces back to the mandatory shareholder report to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services every year. Canada Lands’ assessment has generally been considered successful since it has yet to face scrutiny from its shareholder (McIvor, 2012, p. 16). Its relationship to the Crown is traced through their parent company: Canada Lands Company Limited (CLCL) and is one of the three subsidiary non-agent crown companies in this umbrella. Since 2012, Old Port of Montreal Corporation Inc., and Parc Downsview Park Inc. have been integrated under the management of CLCL in the name of streamlining governance practices for government assets (Canada Lands Company, 2012). Similar to the general function of CLC, these two business entities also operate and manage surplus lands that are formerly 61 owned by the federal government but mostly concentrated on the attraction assets within Montreal, Quebec and Toronto, Ontario respectively (Canada Lands Company Limited, 2019b, p. 17 Appendix 1). On the other hand, CLC has been granted to acquire lands that are declared surplus by the federal government across the country, which makes this corporation in charge of the parent company’s majority of real estate assets (“Directive on the Sale or Transfer of Surplus Real Property,” n.d.). With the standing of the Crown as a shareholder, the federal government receives revenue from Canada Lands through dividends, note repayments and income taxes (Canada Lands Company Limited, 2019a, p. 3). In terms of its functional mandate, an interviewee familiar with the corporation explained that CLC has two goals. First, to “provide a financial return to the government”; and second to “deliver benefits to the local community” by “knit[ting] the lands back into the community and providing [infrastructural] connections”32. Canada Lands pledges to “optimize, not maximize” financial returns and assets as they work through these objectives (Canada Lands Company, 2019). To achieve these goals, CLC operates similar to a typical business entity and is subject to zoning, taxes and housing regulations in the area of their development as part of their mandate from the federal government. This equates the corporation to a regular business outside of its crown parent company connection and aligns their development strategies to fulfil their goals without the need of political leverage nor influence (“Agent Status and Crown Corporations,” 2007; McIvor, 2012, p. 15). Essentially, this also makes Canada Lands a “private developer in the public interest” 33 . Such public interest is enforced through the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility. A way where CLC does this is through the balanced scorecard reporting which measures both financial and non-financial performance (McIvor, 2012, p. 31). This measure supports the initiative to have a well-rounded and updated assessment of their projects. In order to cover the constant changes of the economic climate and the needs of the localities in CLC’s investments, these measures have also been continuously updated. For instance, the unexpected emergence of First Nations as landowners in the past 32 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 33 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 62 decade as a result of reconciliation has also been included as part of Canada Lands’ CSR efforts (Canada Lands Company Limited, 2019a, p. 30). This case of the partnership with MST Nations demonstrates the evolution of how CLC adapts to circumstances. Although government asset management companies in the Canadian context have not been examined widely, a study recognized the CSR initiative of Canada Lands as a good practice that may potentially contribute to effective local governance (Kaganova & Telgarsky, 2018, p. 147). Due to this perceived benefit, Canada Lands incorporates this evaluation in the annual reports which tallies the contributions of the company’s projects. This shows the capacity and potential contribution of CLC in the vision of creating best practices in urban development in the upcoming venture in Jericho Lands. Prior to the official involvement of MST Nations, Jericho Detachment/Garrison was previously owned by the Department of National Defence (DND). It was “intended for transfer to CLC under the federal government's "strategic property" disposal process”. However, it was acknowledged that there was an issue with the First Nations’ Comprehensive Land Claim (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2008). This issue paved way for the constant push of reconciliation efforts from Indigenous nations in Canada. As mentioned in earlier discussions, it resulted into the occurrence of creative initiatives to respond to these land claims issue. Although politics is the foundation of the ownership structure of Jericho, the work of Canada Lands and MST Nations on joint owned lands are commercial in nature. As in a business partnership, this collaboration is founded on two unique entities providing benefits to one another. However, in terms of function, CLC is also loosely viewed as a link to the federal government due to their remote ties to the crown and as the source of its mandate. One of the matters where a clear difference between Canada Lands and the federal government lies is on the subject of reconciliation. Evidently, Canada Lands is in the middle of what seems to be the most recent work to tackle reconciliation in the city with their partnership with MST Nations and other Aboriginal groups in the country. Yet in an interview, CLC reveals to be quite detached from suggesting what kind of reconciliation is being painted for Jericho Lands. Canada Lands maintains a neutral stance and stresses that the Government of Canada is responsible 63 for issues with Indigenous groups (McIvor, 2012, p. 34). This leaves CLC as an outsider from the high-level decisions and addresses such matters based on the decisions between First Nations, other Aboriginal groups, and the federal government. Canada Lands instead reveals itself as one of the major auxiliary proponents in advancing initiatives to address these historical grievances through the development projects with MST. A prominent example that is attributed in most of my interviews was the recommendation of the removal of the Fairmont Building of the RCMP on Heather Street Lands as a gesture of reconciliation with MST Nations (Chan, 2018; O’Connor, 2018). Although the two sites have major differences, an interviewee involved in the policy formulation of the venture affirmed that similar accommodation on the site is expected to be applied on Jericho. Notably, the same participant also summarized the novelty in the cooperation between two unconventional partners and reiterated the role of Canada Lands in the reconciliation process: “This agreement was one of the first that said, ‘How are we going to work together for mutual benefit?’ It’s an unprecedented partnership in the history of federal and Indigenous relations, but now it’s a model for several. [There are] several Indigenous partnerships within Canada Lands across the country. Each [of] those [are] different, as you can imagine, because each partner is different and has different needs or projects have different opportunities. But I think it's the beginning of looking at cooperation in a different way-- for benefit. … Not everybody might agree with the outcomes of this, but that is not Canada lands’ [business to resolve the problem]. … [They] don't have agency in that.”34 While Canada Lands has distant connection with the federal government, its political reach should not be discounted. Although limited, the ties with the federal government as a non-agent crown corporation is worth noting, especially in consideration of its operation as a partner of MST. In assessing all MST’s partners in the venture on Jericho Lands, CLC is the only entity with a direct connection with the federal government. As highlighted above, this character is not particularly visible compared to other levels of government, for instance, where municipal leadership directly engages with the partnership through co-hosting the policy planning. In the context of the partnership with MST, Canada Lands emphasizes their 34 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 64 role as a developer rather than a connection to the federal government. This is besides the fact that Government of Canada has profited and received approximate $400 million in revenue for the activities of Canada Lands as of 2012 (Brent, 2011; McIvor, 2012, p. 15). By 2014 to 2019, Canada Lands has generated an additional $270 million in return to the federal government through dividends, promissory notes and income tax payments (Canada Lands Company, 2019, p. 5). Since Jericho Lands is only one of the many future income generating streams of CLC, this financial link is an important component that can be further studied when the development is completed and able to generate revenue. This is a crucial element especially when the federal parcel is shared equally at 50% with MST Nations and when financial compensation has been an aspect in dealing with reconciliation. Apart from reconciliation, Canada Lands and MST Nations also cooperates on the pressing issue of housing affordability in Vancouver. Because of this, housing development in the Greater Vancouver Area cannot just be about density or constructing units. Considering that both MSTDC and CLC offer development strategies that are not purely for-profit, the partnership between Canada Lands and MST Nations (particularly through MST Development Corporation) presents an asset. However, this collaboration should not be viewed as a direct solution to the housing and affordability crisis in the city but as one of the innovative attempts to respond to these urgent issues. By looking at potential strengths, CLC brings another set of technical skills since it has a record of housing projects that address unique local housing issues. A case in point is Garrison Crossing, a 153-acre neighborhood which is located at Chilliwack, British Columbia. Formerly military quarters for the Canadian Forces Base Chilliwack, it was closed down in 1995—the same year when Jericho Garrison was declared surplus. Its conversion into an award-winning development was spearheaded by Canada Lands where it introduced a new housing mix in the area that fit the neighborhood’s demands and updated sustainability strategies such as the LEED-ND and stormwater management (“Garrison Crossing,” n.d.). Due to the similarity with Jericho Garrison as a former military housing establishment, the project is frequently brought up in comparison to Jericho’s development. Referencing this project allows all proponents and the public to assess the potential and 65 capacities of CLC in Jericho’s development. An example of using this project as a reference occurred during the Jericho Site Walk on May 3, 2019. While touring the site, a member of the public asked about what kind of development will potentially transpire in Jericho. As a response, representatives of the city (which hosted the event) invited the public to look at Garrison Crossing as a track record project for Canada Lands. Garrison Crossing was endorsed as a reference (although not necessarily recognized as a similarity) and inspiration to potential facilities and technology that can be included in Jericho. It currently has more than 1,700 units which cater for families as the site has multiple types of housing: from the highly desirable single-family housing, townhouses, and condominium apartments. In this sense, understanding the role and capacity of Canada Lands in Jericho’s development has an impact in the wider process of evolving urban governance, particularly because MST Nations are also partners in other significant projects such as the development of Heather Street Lands (HSL)35. From this standpoint, CLC and MST demonstrate a duality of relationships. This embodies inter-government relationship where CLC is the arms-length representative of the federal government juxtaposed to the involvement of political leaderships of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. The other side shows collaboration between CLC and MSTDC as co-developers, an entity within the private sector, equipped with technical skills to optimize the development of Jericho Lands. CLC’s private sector identity also extends to its relationship with the municipal government when it follows zoning rules of a development project. Therefore, these two partners evidently bring different sets of assets to the negotiation table, which makes it possible to intersect different values and make them relevant in urban development. By exploring this partnership’s dual capacity in the redevelopment of Jericho that extends to both its public and private subjectivities, CLC essentially demonstrates the potential to shape urban planning in a way that can potentially meet the urgent housing need of Vancouverites. 35 Marine Drive Lands in West Vancouver was previously a joint venture between MST Nations and CLC. However, in December 2018, MST Nations were able to acquire sole ownership for this land through an ownership agreement (“Canada Lands Company and MST Partnership Sign an Ownership Agreement for 4195 Marine Drive,” 2018). 66 3.2 The million-dollar question of luxury real estate The attention to Jericho’s 90-acre site speaks volumes about the potential profit that can be accrued to its developers. Despite lucrative and prime real estate conditions, the selling of Jericho parcels only came to fruition towards the last quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2016. I explore in the previous chapter, the federal parcel of Jericho’s itemization as surplus facility in 1995 formally closed the chapter of RCAF presence in Jericho. And in the following year, the Musqueam Indian Band filed a claim to take their land back (Weicht, 1997, p. 2)36. While this event did not prompt immediate process to reacquire their ancestral land, it can be considered momentous as it marks the new era for Jericho and symbolic in the sale of the lands to real estate developers almost two decades later. Forecasting how Jericho Lands would look like in ten years is no easy task. As the community anticipates the sculpting of a potential legacy landmark, it is important to maintain an exchange of ideas on the possibilities and perhaps even speculations on the site. However, there is one question that is difficult to escape from: will Jericho Lands become a luxury real estate development? This is not a new question. In this section, I ponder Jericho as a potential luxury development. I will do so by examining three factors: the already-expensive and exclusive neighborhood of West Point Grey, the topography of the site and the upcoming expansion of transportation in the city. These factors will be situated in the context of the current housing crisis in Vancouver and its inevitable intersections with unaffordability and potential hike of property taxes. In addition, the spatial factors of nature and the future heavy transit in the neighborhood present another layer of contradiction of providing benefits to the local community and the city’s residents but also pose a negative prospect for the expensive house prices and the immediate community in WPG. By doing so, I highlight here the often-portrayed division between renters and homeowners in the city—but in a different manner. The future redevelopment of Jericho becomes a unique space that shows the vulnerability of Vancouver’s most wealthy property owners. While the upcoming redevelopment is framed 36 However, at an earlier document, Jericho Beach and Jericho Hill School are explicitly identified in the Musqueam claim (Musqueam Band Council, 1984). 67 by its proponents as a positive contribution that is hoped to address the ails of the heated housing crisis and lasting impacts of discrimination against First Nations, it is also seen as a menace to a wealthy neighborhood—particularly as a potential driver of already unaffordable property prices. This discussion of Jericho’s future also represents the entrance of unconventional developers in a traditionally single-family zone area. In consideration of the intersection of multiple issues of the city’s housing and economic climate, and interests of the local community, Jericho comes with the collective examination of densification, speculation, and the fear of increasing property taxes by the residents. 3.2.1 Exclusive neighborhood of West Point Grey One of the major reasons why it becomes increasingly important for the West Point Grey to address such issues is because it has already been sitting on one of the most expensive lands in Metro Vancouver (and essentially the entirety of Canada). Data from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) between 2006 and 2016 illustrate that average residential values of occupied homes in West Point Grey have increased by approximately 162%, from $1,078,609 in 2006 to $2,830,724 in 2016 (Figure 3.2). In the same period, the average values of single-family homes, which roughly make up 40% of housing structures in the neighborhood, has increased by 163%, from $1,244.526 in 2006 to $3,276,088 in 201637. While these are already stark differences, the gap of median house prices is more astounding in the neighborhood. In 2016, the median value for the general housing in West Point Grey is marked at $2,906,094, a 191% increase from its value of $999,719 in 2006, and $3 million for single-family homes — a spike of 200% from its median price of $1 million ten years ago. Compared to the average and median values of the wider region (the City, Metro Vancouver, and the Province), the price points of West Point Grey also determine a wide ratio. Across the board, the difference of both average and median house prices illustrates a general increasing trend (refer to Table 3.1). For instance, in 2016, WPG has 100% higher 37 Computed from CMHC’s Market Housing Portal data for the neighborhood of Point Grey for 2006, 2011, and 2016 (“Housing Market Information Portal - Point Grey,” n.d.). 68 average home (owned private dwelling) value at $2,830,724 compared to the City of Vancouver at $1,414,191, 182% to Metro Vancouver at $1,004,248, and 297% to British Columbia at only $712,680. Meanwhile for the same year’s median home values, WPG shows a 164% higher price point at $2,906,094 compared to the City of Vancouver at $1,102,843, 263% to Metro Vancouver at $800,120, and 481% to British Columbia at only $500,538. These numbers tell us one thing: the neighborhood of West Point Grey and Jericho’s future are at the forefront of the affordability crisis in the city, especially to those who are in the lower and middle tier of the income bracket. While unsettling, it allows us to tackle the elephant in the room related to Jericho’s redevelopment, and provides an opportunity to navigate and challenge the definitions of the dichotomy of affordability and luxury. Figure 3.2 Average and median values of housing in West Point Grey from 2006 to 2016 (2006 benchmark for % change value) Source: CMHC Housing Market Information Portal38 38 This chart was calculated using the data from CMHC Housing Market Information Portal. I have collated statistics for West Point Grey (Point Grey in the website), City of Vancouver, Metro Vancouver (total of 13 regions including University Endowment Lands, City of Vancouver and surrounding cities), and British Columbia. Percentage change was calculated by using the following formula: [value of year to compute (2011 or 2016)] - (benchmark value – year 2006) / (benchmark value – year 2006) * 100. Calculated percentage changes are referenced to the values of year 2006 (“Housing Market Information Portal,” n.d.). 69 Although it is challenging to anticipate what kind of development Jericho’s future holds, it is easy to assume that the result of the impending plan may be a luxury property site due to the housing value statistics of the neighborhood. However, this is only one of the few scenarios and is not strongly advocated by all interest groups. Nevertheless, because of the gravity of influence of this megaproject in all sectors involved, there is an evident push and pull on the housing speculations and its future build. Noticeably, tensions within the community are typically depicted through the opposing narratives that are delivered in local media sources. In 2010, years prior to the first round of sale of Jericho, some in the community suggested the former DND facility as a possible site for the Kitsilano Daycare which was forced to shut down that year. Jericho was particularly singled out as a potential location due to its abundant green space and since the provincial government was ultimately responsible for the shutting down of the daycare (Ryan, 2010). This type of community amenity is also supported by the long-time residents of West Point Grey. In the result of a 2016-2017 survey to gather information on housing structures that is preferred by the local community, the residents’ top three priorities reveal: family housing with three or more bedrooms, senior independent living, and senior supported housing. This finding was similarly incorporated in the most recent survey of the city for Jericho Lands (City of Vancouver, 2020a, p. 41). On the contrary, special needs assisted homes, rental housing, co-ops, and social housing which would not be priced over the 30% of the income are all at the bottom priority (in order) for West Point Grey (West Point Grey Residents Association, 2019b). These specific results also highlight the unique demographic of WPG. Their chosen housing structure priorities follow the assumptions in relation to the neighborhood’s age profile. The neighborhood’s median age is 44.1, 19% of its population is over 65 years. Because of this older demographic range, the community perspective also caters to amenities suited for older generation and families. It is 63% White and approximately 24% Chinese residents (West Point Grey - Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019, 2019, pp. 10–11, 31). The dominance of White residents in the neighborhood follow the historical growth of settler population outlined in Chapter Two. At the same time, the growing number of Chinese residents can reflect the demographic stereotype of wealthy immigrants 70 from Hong Kong who buy properties as investments in the city. In a way, this observation reinforces the lack of economic diversity in the neighborhood. Considering that the neighborhood also has a median household income of $85,000 (which is third in the City of Vancouver), and approximately 60% of its residents not spending more than 30% of their income on housing, this population profile illustrates an exclusive and expensive neighborhood (West Point Grey - Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019, 2019, p. 40). Thus, this itself sets a precedent to the future pricing of properties that will be constructed on the site. The community’s concern on affordability primarily manifest as increasing property taxes for homeowners while renters experience it in the form of high rent prices due to burden shifting of landlords’ mortgage. In 2018, added school tax has been a widely controversial issue in West Point Grey which rests at the heart of homeownership affordability. Applied on homes that are valued more than $3 million, the approximate median amount of dwellings in West Point Grey will have a surtax of a minimum of 0.2% calculated based on assessed home values (“Additional School Tax Rate,” n.d.; Ratchford, 2018). This burden does not only hit those who own high-value properties. It also has an impact those who are retired and do not have the capacity to pay such hefty annual tax rates or will create a dent on their lifetime savings (Perkins, 2018). It particularly affects the seniors and retiring residents of the neighborhood. Despite this clear statistical advantage of the neighborhood, community representatives argue that “[t]he assessed value of a property has no relationship to an owner’s ability to pay or the equity they may have in the property since it might be highly mortgaged”, and as a result may drive longtime homeowners to sell their property and be “taxed out of their homes” (West Point Grey Residents Association, 2018). 71 Table 3.1 Comparative average and median dwelling values in West Point Grey, City of Vancouver, Metro Vancouver and British Columbia, 2006-2016 (with % change value – benchmark West Point Grey) Source: CMHC Housing Market Information Portal39 39 This table was calculated using the data from CMHC Housing Market Information Portal. I have collated statistics for West Point Grey (Point Grey in the website), City of Vancouver, Metro Vancouver (total of 13 regions including University Endowment Lands, City of Vancouver and surrounding cities), and British Columbia. Percentage change was calculated using: [Region to compute (CoV, MVan or BC)] - (benchmark value – WPG) / (Region to compute) * 100. Calculated percentage changes are referenced to the values of West Point Grey. See data here (“Housing Market Information Portal,” n.d.) West Point Grey City of Vancouver WPG to CoV ▲% Metro Vancouver WPG to MVan ▲% British Columbia WPG to BC ▲% 2006 Average value of occupied owner private dwelling 1,078,609 628,682 72 520,330 107 414,715 160 Average value of single detached house 1,244,526 838,788 48 631,331 97 447,850 178 Median value of occupied owner private dwelling 999,719 537,627 86 325,288 207 349,039 186 Median value of single detached house 1,003,442 699,551 43 350,029 187 379,767 164 2011 Average value of occupied owner private dwelling 1,804,230 929,049 94 690,775 161 538,232 235 Average value of single detached house 2,109,493 1,379,982 53 871,336 142 590,533 257 Median value of occupied owner private dwelling 1,604,162 752,016 113 598,021 168 444,583 261 Median value of single detached house 1,899,891 1,001,891 90 700,143 171 481,039 295 2016 Average value of occupied owner private dwelling 2,830,724 1,414,191 100 1,004,248 182 712,680 297 Average value of single detached house 3,276,088 2,305,880 42 1,367,462 140 787,727 316 Median value of occupied owner private dwelling 2,906,094 1,102,843 164 800,120 263 500,538 481 Median value of single detached house 3,009,037 2,000,827 50 1,003,430 200 550,978 446 72 At the size of 90 acres, Jericho Lands becomes the City of Vancouver’s largest contiguous development. Objections similar to what the residents are clamoring today have in fact been recurring since the sale of the eastern parcel of Jericho in 2014. Its longtime residents have been worried about the towers, densification, transit development and the subsequent change in their neighborhood, which reflects the consequent fear of potentially increasing further their property taxes. The neighborhood’s Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA, representative to the provincial government), David Eby, has voiced similar concerns and particularly stressed the need for affordable housing in order to contribute as a legacy to the pressing housing crisis that the city faces (Gold, 2015; Howell, 2015). Ironically, Eby has become the face of the school tax in the neighborhood as it is spearheaded by the NDP, his political party. In connection to the housing problem and the housing characteristic in West Point Grey, the amount of the parcels also revealed qualms from homeowners in the community. Jericho Lands’ combined value of over $700 Million (Anonymous, 2014; Perry, 2016) raised concerns of non-consultation from the residents in terms of the appraised value and over-speculation (Howell, 2015). This affordability issue likely affects what one of the interviewees acknowledged as the “lucky buyers”. These are the long-time residents of WPG who have become millionaires because they are lucky and not millionaires because they have made smart, strategic decisions40. Due to the massive valuation that transpired for their homes that they bought 25 years ago, these residents have become millionaires just by keeping their homes in the neighborhood. And with housing values already skyrocketing, having new expensive-priced homes will only make these values soar and consequently make homeowners pay higher property taxes. Another concern that has been covered by the local media was from the now-reduced community of DND-sponsored families. Although residents who are members of the military remain in the family quarters of Jericho Garrison, the expiration of their lease was recently extended to 2023 due to the impacts of COVID-19 pandemic (Todd, 2020). This extension was granted after planned terminations in 2015 40 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 73 (O’Neil & Lee, 2014), 2017 (O’Neil & Robinson, 2014), and 2020 (Cheung, 2019; Murray, 2018; O’Connor, 2019a). In the community open house of the policy planning for Jericho Lands in March 2019, the termination seemed to be unpopular. Despite the small representation, this was documented and voiced out in the asset mapping of the event (see lower right column of Figure 3.3) and more visibly reflected on the public engagement summary for the site (City of Vancouver, 2020a). Amidst the persistent concern with house prices and densification, it seems that the current narrative lacks attention for seemingly forgotten longtime residents of the site, which again may represent another group that will be exposed to the precarious realities of Vancouver’s affordability crisis. Figure 3.3 Comments on the asset mapping for Jericho Lands, Community open house, March 3, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez 74 Despite the climate of housing crisis, supporters of the development anticipate that properties in Jericho would have high price tag. However, when asked, an interviewee responded that “there will be product [in Jericho] that is expensive. No question. But it’s not going to be the norm”41. There is also a push coming from the MST leaders in confidently expressing what they want to achieve and visualize in this land. For instance, Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow in 2016 expressed his views on the price of properties on Jericho, “I don’t want our land that we paid prime dollars for to be used as affordable-housing land” despite saying that MST will likely not push for high rises (Bula, 2016a). Chief Sparrow’s specific comment could have changed now, or maybe it was on the context that they are not allowing Jericho to only cater for affordable housing. The advocates of the development are also in unison highlighting the benefits it gives to the wider community of the city. Kent Munro, City of Vancouver Assistant Director of Planning for West Point Grey, emphasized that since “we know about the demands on land in the city, it’s safe to assume this (Jericho) will be a mixed community” (Bula, 2016a). Likewise, asserting in the statement on the sale of the provincial parcel, Andrew Wilkinson, MLA for Vancouver-Quilchena, expressed that “the development could help improve much-needed housing supply in Vancouver” in relation to the city’s supply-driven housing crisis (Perry, 2016). On a more recent community insight, the latest survey from Jericho Lands team show tremendous support for rental, social and market housing in combination with high aspirations for local amenities, access to nature, a robust economic center and relatively agreeable opinion on office space (City of Vancouver, 2020a, pp. 41–42). These two sets of clashing narratives on the future value of Jericho Lands demonstrate the blurring narrative of affordability and expensive. This begs the question of what qualifies as a luxury property. In one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the country when the median price of a single-family house 41 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. “I don’t want our land that we paid prime dollars for to be used as affordable-housing land.” -Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow in 2016 on the price of future properties in Jericho. 75 amounts to approximately $3 million, where do we draw the line of an expensive property to a luxury property? The proponents of the project, including the city government have been quite vague in communicating the distinction between affordable, expensive and luxury. In Vancouver, affordability is reached if the housing cost is less than 30% of household’s income (City of Vancouver; Housing Vancouver, 2018, p. 23). Nevertheless, even with regard to the city’s definition, households at high income levels struggle with affordable housing. Thus, when high-value property owners in West Point Grey protest about their inability to pay property taxes, what does this tell about the City’s definition of affordability? 3.2.2 Topographical assets It is easy to say that you get Vancouver’s best when you are in West Point Grey. Its picturesque and calm landscape of British Columbia’s mountains paired with the proximity of peaceful beach within the reach of a vibrant urban center are few of many but the most noticeable assets of this neighborhood. Such scenery is best viewed from the corner of 8th Avenue and Discovery Street, just beside Trimble Park (Figure 3.5). From here you can see the west side of Downtown Vancouver, facing English Bay and looking over Jericho Beach Park. Its waterfront access and slopes characterize Jericho Lands as a strategic property due to the access to the serene city’s skyline. Since the site itself is blessed with all of these, it is not surprising to see a considerable amount of interest between developers and residents alike. Figure 3.4 Real estate advertisement on 4th Ave & Highbury, a block away from Jericho Lands, August 2020. Photo by Alexine Sanchez 76 These physical characteristics of the land present a tempting and profitable opportunity, especially in maximizing their investments and returns. For the residents, these meant being close to both nature and the city and enjoying a highly livable neighborhood. According to a community survey, residents in WPG have more positive perceptions of their built environment compared to the rest of the city. These perceptions are based on public and communal amenities, walkability, and attractive natural spaces near their dwelling (West Point Grey - Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019, 2019, p. 62). These findings can be examined in conjunction with the high rate of community health indicators such as children’s wellbeing, particularly good or excellent mental health, general health, physical wellness, physical activity and weight based on BMI (West Point Grey - Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019, 2019, pp. 56–57, 60). While these may also be argued to be affected by the demography and income distribution of the city, correlation between attractive built environment and health and wellness are evident (Perdue et al., 2003)42. A Vancouver Coastal Health survey found that residents of neighborhoods with proximate access to nature and green spaces are likely to have 2.7% more chances of having a strong sense of belongingness where they live. In the same manner, people with strong sense of community belongingness have better general health and mental health than those with weak attachment to their immediate residential localities (Vancouver Coastal Health, Fraser Health, and University of British Columbia, 2018). With Jericho Beach and the Park across to the site, waterfront, nature and open spaces will be easily accessible. In terms of livability, these attributes also provide a productive contribution and consequently can be used as profit leverage for properties. 42 The link between public health and built environment through the perspective of urban design and planning have been more pronounced recently (Koohsari et al., 2013; Roof & Oleru, 2008). 77 Figure 3.5 View of Jericho Lands from Discovery St. and 8th Ave. (Western parcel) beside Trimble Park, facing Downtown Vancouver and Jericho Beach (English Bay), May 2019. Photo by Alexine Sanchez Figure 3.6 Margie Ruddick showing an example of how to incorporate slopes and design in a site, Inspire Jericho Talks, June 5, 2019. Screenshot from Inspire Jericho website (“Events,” n.d.). Prior to the purchase of the western parcel in 2016, the MST Partnership has been aware of this opportunity. According to a Squamish Nation official through the report of Vancouver Sun, the Nations are looking to find opportunities using the slopes of the site (Mackin, 2016b). This spatial opportunity was also highlighted [Image removed due to copyright restrictions] This image is a screenshot of Margie Ruddick giving a talk as part of Inspire Jericho Talks on June 5, 2019. On the left side of the photo, Ruddick stands on the podium, pointing to the right side which shows a photo of a building with a noticeable view in slopes. Link of the video: https://vimeo.com/343435017 (1:19:46) 78 in the policy planning consultation. Amidst the initial concerns of the non-native residents of West Point Grey with some aspects of the development, residents met with the owners. According to a survey of the neighborhood in 2016-2017, retaining and following Jericho’s existing topography is one of the strongly supported design aspects: more than 85% of the respondents consider it important (West Point Grey Residents Association, 2019b). The same survey also stressed the need to protect the views from Trimble Park (Figure 3.5) and strongly support the construction of taller buildings on lower elevations. New York-based landscape architect Margie Ruddick also highlighted this in her Inspire Jericho Talks presentation in June 2019. She claimed that elevations are “amazing opportunities” to engage nature and landscapes of the site. As seen in Figure 3.6, the key in effective design of properties, and ultimately neighborhoods, in sites with slopes depend on blending man-made structures and nature. Ruddick also mentioned that this can be utilized to further incorporate the wellness industry due to its growth, for instance spas or places that are “built in the earth” that help the regulation of blood pressure. The public is also aware of the impact of slopes on the site. On the May 3rd Jericho Lands Site Walk, a member of the public asked about the plan of the developers. The Jericho Lands team mentioned that the owners (MST and CLC) have not hired an architect at that time thus, no concrete drawings of the land were available. They were able to highlight however that topographical assets particularly slopes also present an added restriction and may need to be off-set by extra construction and/or planning costs (and time), but ultimately with strategic planning it may result in a unique property that adds value to the neighborhood that would organically draw attention from potential residents. 3.2.3 Impending city-wide transit development Another major component of the future properties in Jericho Lands is the recent move to expand rapid transit in Vancouver. The westward expansion of Skytrain provides another layer of complexity in Jericho’s development, especially given the context of a luxury property developer. Similar to the two previous factors, the incorporation of transit in West Point Grey is perceived differently by different interest 79 groups. In this redevelopment project, these priorities fall on the spectrum of wider city-building goals and the caution on further driving up the housing prices and property taxes in the neighborhood. Accessibility of rapid transit has become a major component of growth strategies in major city centers. In Vancouver, the municipal leadership recognizes this and has moved towards widening rapid transit network in the metropolitan area. For a development project the size of Jericho Lands, the consideration and incorporation of transit in its future is viewed as inclusion of public amenity. The neighborhood’s proximity to the University Endowment Lands which houses UBC is also viewed as a strong factor in pursuing the extension of transit. As expected, supporters of the development view the transportation piece in Jericho as a major issue. An interviewee highlights that the owners perceive this aspect as a priority for the development43. In addition, they also see the incorporation of such public amenity as an asset and contribution to the wider goals of the city. This leap in advocating for heavy rapid transit in the city draws in two subsequent issues: densification through the lens of transit-oriented development, and its potential to increase property taxes and induce gentrification (Quastel et al., 2012). During the community open house of Jericho Lands in March 2019, attendees were highly interested in the transit piece of the redevelopment. Only two months prior the commencement of Jericho Lands’ public consultation, the Vancouver City Council approved the Skytrain extension to Arbutus Street for almost $3 billion. It garnered tremendous attention among the residents of West Point Grey because this expansion is only a few kilometers away from Jericho Lands. The proximity of the site to this recently approved transit project sparked a wider move from the owners. In addition to the future newest extension of the Skytrain to Jericho Lands and taking into consideration the goals of the city, some proponents banded together to advocate for the transit expansion to Jericho (see timeline in Table 3.2). Naturally, the question of transit potentially on or near the site intrigued the residents. 43 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 80 Table 3.2 Timeline of the sale of Jericho Lands and events surrounding its policy planning Date Event 1995 DND declares Jericho Garrison as surplus. 2013 Negotiations between the CA government and First Nations on Jericho Garrison. 2013 June Mayor Gregor Robertson declares “Year of Reconciliation”. 2014 March Protocol Agreement between Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. June City Council acknowledges Vancouver on “unceded Aboriginal territory”. July Vancouver declares “City of Reconciliation”. October CA government sells Jericho Garrison to MST Nations and Canada Lands Company. 2015 April BC confirms talks with MST Nations over Jericho Hill Grounds. 2016 April BC sells Jericho Hill Grounds solely to MST Nations. 2018 May City of Vancouver approves the Heather Street Lands Policy Statement. July Endorses Jericho Lands Policy Planning to the Vancouver City Council. 2019 January Vancouver City Council approves Skytrain extension from Arbutus St. to UBC. March Open house event and launch of the Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program. Inspire Jericho Talks (April to November) Site walks (May) and other policy planning events 2020 January MST, UBC & City of Vancouver signs MOU to secure funding for UBC Skytrain Extension. 2020 Fall Continuation of Policy Planning Program’s Phase 2. 2021 Winter Expected submission of Jericho Lands Policy Statement. The concern of the local community regarding transit is primarily based on its potential influence as a driver of increasing housing prices (and inevitably more expensive property taxes) in the neighborhood. The supporters of Jericho’s development are also aware of this issue. An interviewee explains that as much as there is value for transportation nodes to be connected with the future blueprint of Jericho, property values on site will not drastically shift the existing house prices in the neighborhood, but the arrival of the Skytrain will do so44. This is likely one of the major reasons why some interest groups disapprove of the subway expansion to UBC. 44 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 81 However, this does not deter the advocates of transit-oriented development. As the policy planning process unfolds, it is becoming more evident that the proponents strongly push for transit to be part of Jericho’s planning. More recently, a majority of the stakeholders support the transit line on the site. With this development, MSTDC, City of Vancouver, and UBC in January 2020 joined together to ask the provincial and federal governments funding the $4 billion extension to the university to express their urge to integrate the subway into the site (Howell, 2020). The hefty price tag of the original and proposed projects is also the source of contention for these initiatives. Skeptics, especially resident groups such as the WPGRA and their affiliate, Coalition of Vancouver Neighborhoods, were united in opposing these ventures, claiming that the amount of money could be used more wisely by investing in more cost-effective transit options such as the trams, electric rapid bus or double trolley electric bus (Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods, 2019; West Point Grey Residents Association, 2019a). However, some advocates pointed out that heavy rapid transit is needed because of the expected growth of the city and will likewise benefit the wider Lower Mainland region (“Get It Done: Why Ottawa, B.C. and Vancouver Should Come Together to Build SkyTrain to UBC,” 2020)45. Here, transit manifests as another issue that has a double-edged sword: the subsequent connectivity as an amenity that will draw potential owners to the future properties, but at the same time, an aspect that may drive housing price appreciation46. 3.3 Jericho’s multifaceted real estate future The sale and impending development of Jericho Lands marks a new phase for the site itself, but also for its wider neighborhood and the city. Its scale and timing demonstrate the potential to influence more comprehensive processes within the city and beyond. This chapter identifies the factors that influence the trajectory of the development. These include the political economic character Musqueam, Squamish 45 Key informant interview, October 21, 2019. 46 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. This hypothesis is also explored in an unpublished paper, where it examined the impact of Canada Line’s construction on housing appreciation; results demonstrate an overall appreciation of prices on housing (Bagheri et al., 2012). 82 and Tsleil-Waututh (MST) Nations, and the likely future price tag of the properties on the site. The coming together of MST Nations and MSTDC can be considered as built upon the complex collective history of the Nations and contemporary realities. Exploring the collective identity of MST Nations through MSTDC also reveals the centrality of land in addressing the historical issue with the Canadian settler government and society. I show in this chapter that the three First Nations were able to reframe and use the historical issue to their advantage. They leveraged their assertion of self-determination by pushing for their land claims and occupy the market as real estate developers to transform urban governance and market dynamics in the city. In conjunction with this, Canada Lands Company exhibits an auxiliary and empowering role behind the MST Nations. It also attempts to distinguish the non-agent crown corporation structure from its political foundation: the federal government. This presents a complex relationship that explores the intergovernmental issue of reconciliation between the Canadian government and the Coast Salish First Nations. While it has been established that the MST Nations and Canada Lands Company largely maintain their relationship based on the business and commercial nature of the project, Jericho Lands’ financing and ownership intersect on the political modalities between the First Nations and the federal and provincial governments. Certain aspects of the financial remuneration in the context of Jericho Lands reflect reconciliation initiatives. Hence, this aspect becomes inevitable and crucial in understanding the role of MST Nations and Canada Lands in this redevelopment project. Although not thoroughly discussed in this study, financing terms involved in the partnership of MST and Canada Lands’ relationship merit further research due to their implications for the reconciliation process. By tracing the agency of the entities, this chapter also illustrates the links of real estate and reconciliation in the context of Jericho Lands. MSTDC is not a typical development company. It is a manifestation of inherent political economic character of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations. All corporation property assets that are held by MST Nations today are products of reconciliation, which ties in the redevelopment of Jericho within the wider complexity of reconciliation. In this sense, Jericho Lands has many facets. It is not simply a case of another megaproject in Vancouver. The 83 examination of the agency of its owner-developers combined with the spatial aspects attached to the site demonstrates how the project can also be a model for reconciliation. Canada Lands also has a different dimension of complexity. Although it seems straightforward, its mandate and functions seem to be confusing, conflicting at most, especially if there is an attempt to strictly categorize it according to conventional labels of a commercial corporation. Conceptually, CLC can be likened to a state-owned corporation due to its shareholder relationship with the federal government. Functionally, the company is devoid of any political channels, except in assisting and affirming initiatives of reconciliation that we see in the involvement in the policy process of Heather Street Lands and Jericho Lands. However, it is noteworthy to highlight that reconciliation initiatives here are not one-way processes. Both federal and provincial governments are not the only ones extending their arms to the negotiating table. The three First Nations are also compromising significant interests. Some members of the nations expressed their concern about paying for the site. Because land claims are a major component of reconciliation, the idea that the nations still have to pay to wield influence on their claimed lands and to use it for their benefit has become a major issue with some members. While aware of this issue, the leadership of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations push back this narrative by focusing on the cooperation between the three nations. Evidently, this new era of Jericho laid out in this chapter is only one of the many sides yet to unfold. In exploring this new phase of the commercialization of Jericho lands, the question of luxury real estate was highlighted. In this discussion, intersecting accounts from different stakeholders revealed that there are opposing narratives not only regarding the future of Jericho, but also on the notion of affordability. West Point Grey’s context of affordability demonstrates the dualism of Canadian housing system, and essentially highlights the sense of entitlement of house owners which provides them with benefits than other dwellers such as the renters (Hulchanski, 2004). In addition, these opposing narratives also emphasize the blurring of Jericho’s future as a luxury development. As bleak as it may be, this ambiguity is expected. Ultimately, Jericho’s future is still hard to tell at this moment even though there are leads. Due to many overlapping 84 issues that hover on this megaproject, there is a further need to also examine the specific development strategies of the stakeholders, which fundamentally require exploring plot twists in the tales of contemporary urban development in Vancouver. Complex ownership and the anticipated profitability of Jericho Lands paint a picture that emphasizes economic value. By highlighting and connecting the redevelopment of Jericho with the intricate ownership structure of the MST Nations, the emergence of the development corporation, and the collaboration with Canada Lands, Jericho is framed as an opportunity for economic growth and reconciliation. On the other hand, when the redevelopment of Jericho is examined from the lens of the interests of the local community in West Point Grey, it is rather marked as a trigger for further driving up house prices in the neighborhood. Despite potential benefits, in conjunction with other factors such as the attractive nature and topography of the area, and the upcoming transit development, Jericho represents a potential amplifier to the heated housing market in Vancouver. 85 Chapter 4: Jericho and the Growth-driven Market “The potential sale and transfer of the lands to the First Nations is a further step towards reconciling the First Nations’ interests in respect of rights and title to the traditional territories and confirms the settlement of all of the Nations’ claims to the Jericho lands. Obtaining stewardship of the lands represents a significant economic development opportunity for First Nations and the potential sale of these lands will create construction and ongoing jobs due to redevelopment.” - Amrik Virk, Minister of Technology, Innovation, Citizens’ Services (News Release - First Nations Signal Intent to Buy Jericho Land Parcel, 2016) This chapter adds to the story of urban governance by exploring the intersection of real estate and reconciliation in Vancouver. Here, Jericho Lands not only represents an emerging model for stakeholder cooperation, but also demonstrates the intersection of urban development and reconciliation. The intertwining of these two concepts has implications for urban governance in Vancouver. This chapter first proceeds by examining a variety of city-wide strategies that focus on urban economic growth and livability through the case of Jericho, where reconciliation is emphasized as a major component of the redevelopment and city building. This section also introduces the unique case of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Development Corporation (MSTDC) and its interaction and role in the City’s efforts and relationship with other stakeholders as a core component of Jericho’s redevelopment. Due to the involvement of MSTDC as a representative of the Nations in this venture, I argue that even with a mix of strategies that serve Indigenous and non-Indigenous objectives, Jericho’s redevelopment is still largely shaped and influenced by market processes. In this sense, this discussion resonates with the traditional idea of a growth machine, where the activism and cooperation of stakeholders is framed and enabled by the dominant narratives of growth (Logan & Molotch, 1987). Opportunities and cautions on this impending Indigenous-led development model are also analyzed later on in this chapter. Finally, my concluding section situates the entrance of MSTDC as a new type of real-estate developer and how it demonstrates its identity as a product of MST Nations’ search for an acceptable resolution to 86 historical grievances and its intersection with the current opportunity on real-estate development. From the site’s size and economic value, its prime location, to the complex stakeholder relationship, Jericho’s value to the city is colossal. It fits within the greater interest of the City due to its potential as an asset, particularly proving that it is profitable, marketable, and associated with its values. 4.1 Reconciliation as a framework for redevelopment and city building What sets Jericho apart from other real estate prospects is the growth machinery that is surrounded and is deliberately informed by nuances and practices of reconciliation. In this context, advocates from the government and private sector also resonate these narratives that reconcile with the perspective of MST Nations. Visions of the supporters in the local government are testament to this policy process shift. For instance, Vancouver’s chief city planner, Gil Kelley hopes to see Jericho Lands as “an urban village of the next century”. Similarly, Mayor Kennedy Stewart also emphasized that Jericho is a “place that embodies reconciliation”, which was also echoed by Joyce Murray, MP (representative to the federal government) of Vancouver-Quadra (Cheung, 2019; O’Connor, 2019b). These messages were delivered during the ceremonial welcome and celebration of the community open house in March 2019, which can be considered as the official commencement of Jericho’s policy process to the public. A major finding in this section is that despite the context of an ensuing housing crisis which has been unsettling the city for decades, the accommodation of the Canadian government to MST Nations has become a unique centerpiece of this project. The typically opposite circumstances of reconciliation and real estate development overlap as a core component of Jericho Lands. In highlighting this juncture, I explore the early beginnings of the policy planning program of the City and the web of issues hovering over the redevelopment of Jericho. These interconnections support that the role of City government is crucial in understanding the intersection of reconciliation and real estate development in Vancouver. 87 4.1.1 Early beginnings and the Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program Governments, particularly municipalities and cities, remain at the center of (re)development processes and it is no different in Jericho’s case. Although there are several stakeholders such as the immediate community and its owners that will influence the direction of Jericho, the power to enable its full transformation rests on what is allowed by city regulations. This point is also echoed by an interviewee who emphasizes, “it is up to the City [government] to decide with a neighborhood how much change is going to occur”47. This highlights the capacity of the local government to shape large-scale redevelopment projects. Due to the immense capital and often complex stakeholder relationship involved in these ventures, these pieces of the urban fabric, often, become centerpieces of a city. For instance, the Southeast False Creek Development in Vancouver which converted the athletes’ quarters during the 2010 Winter Olympics (now called the Olympic Village) into a residential neighborhood and developed its immediate surrounding area has become one of the city’s landmark residential areas and centers. While it has been a controversial issue, particularly due to its funding and budget overrun (Smith, 2009), it embeds community benefits and assets that residents of Vancouver enjoy today, particularly the move on sustainability and livability (City of Vancouver, 2014b; Westerhoff, 2016). A similar path is being carved for Jericho Lands. It can be considered a mega-project on the scale of Southeast False Creek, albeit without the spectacle of a global event attached to the residential development. Currently, social equity values such as livability, sustainability, and affordability are triumphed and streamlined in projects in the City of Vancouver, particularly those with magnified reach. Due to its scale, these values are inevitably embedded in Jericho’s guiding principles which are linked to major city plans and strategies (see Table 4.1). 47 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 88 Table 4.1 List of City of Vancouver policies/strategies linked with Jericho Lands Overall, this shows the attempt of the local government to address its urban planning goal: to have “a liveable, sustainable city (“Planning a Liveable, Sustainable City,” n.d.). These links are also heavily publicized in Jericho’s open-to-public planning events and other materials (see example in Figure 4.1). The visibility of the amalgamation of multiple strategies draws attention to how the City contextualizes and sees the contribution of the project to urban concerns that are unique to Vancouver. Thus, mega-projects such as Jericho are primarily framed for the city’s comparative economic advantage and branding, in addition to the added value of benefits for the community and countering pressing economic issues. These aspects of local government action are important for a city coping with a complex housing crisis and increasingly visible issues in urban development. Addressing these issues cannot be single-handedly dealt with by the government and due to the economic nature of the issue, strategies of growth are still mainly advanced. After all, the general consensus on growth is that it provides benefit for the public good (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 33). In order to achieve this, different partnerships between the public and private sectors often constitute such a response, specifically the involvement of real estate developers and their advocates. However, over the years, trust and perspective on developers in Vancouver have been eroding. In a survey by Research Co. published in 2018, 53% of respondents perceive that developers have more influence in the local government than four years ago (Bula, 2018; Canseco, 2018b). This poll is in conjunction with City Plan: Directions for Vancouver (1995) West Point Grey Vision (2010) Green Buildings Policy for Rezonings (2010, updated 2017) Greenest City 2020 Action Plan (2011) Transportation 2040 Plan (2012) Vancouver Park Board Strategic Framework (2012) Heritage Action Plan (2013) City of Vancouver Reconciliation Framework (2014) Urban Forest Strategy (2014) Renewable City Strategy (2015) Rezoning Policy for Sustainable Large Developments (2010, updated 2017) Integrated Rainwater Management Plan and Green Infrastructure Strategy (2016) Healthy City Strategy Action Plan (2016) Zero Emissions Building Plan (2016) Biodiversity Strategy (2016) Housing Vancouver Strategy (2017) Affordable Housing Delivery and Financial Strategy (2018) Making Space for Arts and Culture; Infrastructure Plan Update (2018) Heather Lands Policy Statement (2018) Creative City Strategy (underway) Broadway Corridor Planning (upcoming) Source: Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program and Inspire Jericho website (City of Vancouver Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability Department, 2018, pp. 4–7; “Inspire Jericho,” n.d.) 89 the finding that housing affordability is believed to be worse than four years ago by 90% of Vancouverites, while 58% have negative opinion on the trajectory of managing development and growth in the city. The government has also experienced diminished credence, particularly on housing concerns since its institutions particularly the municipal leadership of Vancouver is believed to be enablers of the housing crisis and how the city reached its condition today. Approximately 59% of the respondents are not satisfied with the actions of the local government in relation to the housing issues in the city (Canseco, 2018a). To sell large-scale development projects to the public and somehow convince them that it will not exacerbate the current situation, developers and the government must find their niche motivation that balances diverse stakeholder interests. Hence, as Southeast False Creek used the Olympics, Jericho utilizes reconciliation as a major driver and negotiation leverage for its development (City of Vancouver Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability Department, 2018, p. 9). To understand the role and framing of reconciliation in the case of Jericho Lands, tracing the efforts of the City leadership is crucial, particularly the circumstances and context prior to the endorsement of the policy planning program in 2018. The City of Vancouver’s efforts to advance reconciliation with First Nations have intensified since 2013. That year, the municipal leadership launched further promotion of the relationship with Indigenous Nations and communities. To demonstrate dedication to address historical grievances and the inequality of Figure 4.1 Updated event board for Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program, Inspire Jericho Talks 4, November 12, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez 90 Indigenous peoples within the city and beyond, the City of Vancouver proclaimed the “Year of Reconciliation” (Proclamation “Year of Reconciliation,” 2013). At this point, the prospect of Jericho Lands being sold to the First Nations was beginning to draw attention. Towards the end of the same year, it was reported that MST Nations and the Federal government started the negotiations on the coveted Jericho Garrison (Hastings, 2013). 2014 was an equally momentous year for the relationship of the First Nations and the City of Vancouver, which began with the forging of the Protocol Agreement. Although this is an agreement between the MST Nations, it represents more than its symbol of extinguishing their overlapping claims. It is a symbolic instrument that allows the three nations to be functional in wider city processes through their business venture, and later on as MSTDC. Vancouver was also designated as a “City of Reconciliation” in June 2014 after a succession of events and actions that collaborate and consult with the Musqueam Indian Band, Squamish Nation, and Tsleil-Waututh Nation (City of Vancouver, 2014a). A month after, as a way to deepen the relations with First Nations, the Vancouver City Council unanimously voted and declared that the city is on the unceded territory of MST Nations (Meiszner, 2014). As a context to the current efforts in Jericho, this is influential to the development in the relations of the city and Indigenous nations. While the city still needs to come a long way, such actions demonstrate willingness to cooperate and accommodate First Nations since this similar depth of efforts has not occurred under the previous municipal leaderships. This declaration also has deeper implications in land-use and development. Now that a branch of the government recognizes that land has never been surrendered and is therefore stolen, this presents impacts on access to opportunities available to First Nations, especially with its ownership on a 90-acre parcel of prime land. This recognition, therefore, sets the tone for future arrangements that are crucial to the core of Indigenous rights, which heavily correlates with their historical claims and ancestral land-use, but also intersects in sectors that directly impact the city’s economy and residents. As discussed in Chapter Three, the purchase of the federal and provincial parcel of Jericho in 2014 by MST Nations and CLC and in 2016 by the MST Nations manifest this reconciliatory collaboration 91 between the First Nations and different levels of Canadian government. Around this time, planning for a similar (but smaller) development project has been undergoing: the redevelopment of Heather Street Lands (HSL). As a predecessor to Jericho, HSL represents the inceptive trial of the collaborative trio of MST Nations, CLC, and the City of Vancouver. The completion and release of the policy statement for its development resulted in various advantages that has not just been realized by the owner-developers but also by the city government. The policy planning process and collaboration that surround HSL is an instrumental antecedent in navigating the unchartered territory of inter-stakeholder relationship48. An evident result of this is the arrangement on the future use of the Fairmont RCMP building. Considering the historical tensions of the First Nations with RCMP due to the dark history of abuse of Indigenous people by the institution, the City recommended the building be relocated in another site as a result of the Fairmont dialogue (Chan, 2018; Heather Lands Policy Statement, 2018, p. 30). This is a momentous occasion which represents the changed perspective and view at the traditional lens on Canadian heritage buildings and instead prioritizing historical symbolisms in celebration of reconciliation. In terms of design, Heather Street Lands also includes efforts for culturally appropriate art using Indigenous names for areas and public places (Heather Lands Policy Statement, 2018, p. 34), which follows the widespread effort of the City with the hiring of an Indigenous Arts and Culture Planner for the wider incorporation of reconciliation initiatives (City of Vancouver, 2019a, p. 8). The most recent update for the site development of Jericho includes the announcement of hiring MST artists alongside Urban Strategies Inc (USI) as part of the design team (City of Vancouver, 2020b, p. 3). To some extent, this is one of the early practices of how a reconciliatory relationship materializes for more conscious and flexible urban policies, regulations and visualizations49. Contrary to other development projects in the city, the roles of the owner-developers also stand out in this venture. MST Nations and Canada Lands largely advance the idea of reconciliation in Jericho’s redevelopment through their primary goals: economic security for MST Nations, and a localized 48 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019 and October 23, 2019. 49 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019 and October 23, 2019. 92 development for Canada Lands. Due to their complex identities and their interest of public good, MST and CLC are both identified as co-hosts of the policy planning program with the City of Vancouver, which was endorsed in July 2018. An interviewee highlights this unconventional collaboration as an opportunity to the owner-developers to have a deeper cooperation with the municipal leadership since it was not extended to the same ownership of MST and CLC in the policy planning of Heather Street Lands50. For MST, this may represent an embodiment of sharing and/or having an equal agency with the local settler government. This also broadly applies to breaking down legal barriers in their reacquisition of their lands through the sale of the lands. In their right of self-determination through business ventures, Indigenous nations do not only seek to achieve rights to ancestral territories but more importantly exercise their special relationship to the land by regaining influence and control (Berkes & Adhikari, 2006, p. 688). In addition, even at the early stages of its policy planning, the capacity of the Jericho Lands team has become recognized by other departments of the municipal government, which confirms that the efforts in the redevelopment of Jericho reaches and correlates with other initiatives of the city51. Figure 4.2 Drummers performing at the community open house of Jericho Lands, March 2, 2019 Photo by Alexine Sanchez 50 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 51 Key informant interview, October 23, 2019. 93 Another indication of the intersection of redevelopment and reconciliation narratives on Jericho is the strategy of the municipal leadership to “mak[e] space for the Nations”52. This aim is materialized in the abovementioned policy planning co-hosting of MST Nations and CLC with the City. In addition, I have observed a rather creative manifestation and more direct conduct of public consultation for Jericho Lands. In the events hosted by the City, members of the MST Nations are involved both symbolically and conceptually in the policy process. Such symbolic efforts are typically imagined by being present at the open-to-public events. As expected, representatives of the three First Nations were always present in all of the events I attended and contributed by providing the historical context for a megaproject in the city. They were able to incorporate this contextualization for the audience by inviting representatives of the community to deliver opening remarks for the events. Providing such space also opens opportunities for the local community and the general public to learn from the nation members themselves. Perhaps this also an embodiment from Heather Lands’ policy statement which highlights an “interpretive strategy” that enables the understanding and learning that is the foundation of reconciliation (Heather Lands Policy Statement, 2018, p. 35). Instead of merely only saying a prayer or a speech, they also share personal anecdotes about their experiences and their connection to the land. Different from the common welcoming that is done at events by a performance from First Nations (see Figure 4.2), at first look, these may seem performative or plainly symbolic, especially if one has only attended a single event. However, this can also be realized as a specific way to put the Nations and make known to the public that they are a vital part of the public consultation through making their experiences and stories known in relation to their nations’ ancestral claims. For instance, in the community open house in March 2019, all MST Nations had all of their representatives speak, and the message was clear: the lands that were robbed from them due to colonialism and forceful displacement are vital to their economic stability as First Nations. Squamish Nation official Dustin Rivers, also known as his traditional name Khelsilem, stressed that “these lands were 52 Key informant interview, October 23, 2019. 94 always ours”. These messages also bore a complicated undertone. It was direct and was intended from a point of view with a renewed agency as an incoming developer in a rich neighborhood, hence unfamiliar to many. Yet the message was also emotional as it draws on the generational personal impacts to these people, to which they see the redevelopment of Jericho as a spark of hope to restore their communities. The message of Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow particularly stood out as he assured a full consultation to the community, but in a rather shielding remark, “If anybody knows here what consultation is, it’s us. We don’t need to be taught what consultation is. So we’re going to be hearing the concerns, hearing exactly what the community is looking for, and using our ears to hear that”. (Sherlock, 2019) In the same event, Tsleil-Waututh council member Maureen Thomas also followed with an apparent vulnerability to the audience, “We are not people you need to be afraid of. We are not people who are going to bring you harm. We’re not people who are going to treat people in a bad way. We’re coming to this area again to be a part of you, and your community. We are open to your feedback, your input. This is an opportunity for you to bring forward your thoughts, your vision to help us make these changes. Changes are inevitable. All you have to do is look at the North Shore and you see the houses going higher and higher up to the mountain. We can’t stop this growth. We have to find a way to embrace it in a good way. And I honestly believe that these lands are going to be able to do that for all of us. Not just for our three communities, but you as well.”53 In other events, I also noticed these openings from MST elders as educational, engaging, and borderline provoking. In one of the Inspire Jericho Talks, Syexwalia (Ann Whonnock), a Squamish Nation elder, stressed that she shares the history of their nation as a way to serve a purpose and encourage people to have an open mind, “because sometimes people, my grandfather said, ‘People are scared of us. And we need to educate them who we are, and where we come from. And then maybe they won’t be scared of us. And we can build a relationship of mutual respect and learn from each other.’”54 53 Transcribed from video recording of the Open House event (“Events,” n.d.). 54 Opening and welcome remarks, Inspire Jericho Talks 2: Connected Communities, May 23, 2019 (“Events,” n.d.). 95 Apart from different city policies that are integrated in Jericho, these remarks also serve as a testimony that prove the intersection of reconciliation and city building in the context of the site’s redevelopment. These messages effectively demonstrate reconciliation as a goal (Sherlock, 2019) and strategy that is taken advantage of with the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. However, what is unique here is the occurrence of these reconciliation practices under the premise of economic growth, not only for the local community as articulated by one of the proponents, but also for MST Nations. These series of efforts and engagement between the City, the MST Nations, and the community highlight an unconventional framework that specifically emphasizes reconciliation with First Nations. Collectively, these demonstrate a stepping back of the City in enforcing its regulations. However, this does not mean that the City gives the owner-developers a free ride to carry out proposed suggestions. Instead, we are seeing flexibility in the development and policy planning process due to bigger issues that are attached to this project, which shapes its urban governance strategy as a result of Jericho’s redevelopment. In fact, some proponents believe that the development of Jericho is important because it represents city building and not merely transformation of a neighborhood and therefore goes beyond conventional approaches by addressing reconciliation and urban issues such as transit development and housing. However, while the City demonstrates momentous efforts to prioritize MST involvement and particularly in the redevelopment of Jericho, proponents argue that it does not take precedence over bigger city projects and it is futile to pursue a faster redevelopment policy process instead of allowing city initiatives to organically unfold, which is particularly the case in the controversial issue of Skytrain’s extension of the Millennium line55. Hence, the framework of reconciliation and its intersection with redevelopment, and local economic growth, reveal the significant impact of community-based relationships and processes that surround Jericho, particularly on different sectors of urban life that might not be apparent to the public. 55 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019, and October 23, 2019. It is also important to note that even in public engagement events, the general public are more interested on how the redevelopment of Jericho Lands will be incorporated in impending transit and affordability strategies of the government. 96 4.1.2 Jericho & MST at the core of intersections and conflict within the city Jericho as a case of a First Nations real estate development venture in the City of Vancouver intersects with other major urban concerns. In the city in particular, it sends a message that cooperation with First Nations is vital to the growth and development of the city. Exploring these intersections in a more minute scale within the scope of Jericho’s redevelopment, it adds another dimension and presents a supplement to the previous discussion on whether the site becomes a luxury development. Ultimately, these issues also bounce back to the bigger picture and point out the different understandings of how growth –and essentially city-building—manifest in the city (see Figure 4.3). Figure 4.3 Initial Site Considerations Image courtesy of Urban Strategies Inc. (with permission) Source: City of Vancouver, 2020b, p. 5 As discussed in the previous chapter, transit routes are important and one of the most prominent issues in the public mind in Vancouver. There is a major need to expand rapid transit due to a high number of population reliant on public transportation not just within the city proper but also within the Metro Vancouver area. In January 2019, right before the official launch of the Jericho Lands policy planning, 97 Vancouver City Council voted and approved the recommendation of the Skytrain station to be extended from Arbutus Street to UBC, following the soon-to-begin construction of the Millenium line from VCC-Clark to Arbutus Street. Due to the timing of the Council’s decision in relation to the public engagement initiative of the site, issues of transit, housing affordability and densification have been the major and recurring themes of public events of the Jericho Lands planning process. The general concern of the increase of property taxes and lack of affordable housing options intersects with the arrival of transit in the area (Little, 2019). These qualms have been echoed by the public since the first and second rounds of Jericho’s purchase. These issues have become the basis of skepticism on the redevelopment56. Advocates of transit argue that its benefits serve a bigger purpose particularly related to preparing Vancouver’s capacity to accommodate more people57 and connecting and revitalizing the neighborhood near Jericho58. In here, we find the incorporation of transit consistent with the growth machine paradigm: “transportation does not just serve growth, it creates it” (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 74). Furthermore, the growth machinery from the perspective of the intersection of transit, urban growth, and the redevelopment venture becomes more pronounced when we observe the collaboration in the city. One of the latest developments in this mega-project in the context of city building is the extended partnership of the City government with the MST Nations and MSTDC, which now includes the University of British Columbia (UBC). With the City and MST’s partnership on Jericho as a base for this new collaboration, these entities banded together to create a consortium that actively supports the extension of the SkyTrain that extends to UBC. The recent signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between these entities in January 2020 solidifies the earlier recommendation to extend the Skytrain all the way to the university by having an active group of advocates to find funding for this major initiative (Chan, 2020a; City, UBC, and MST Development Corporation Sign Historic Agreement to Help Get SkyTrain All the Way to UBC, 2020). Vancouver Mayor 56 Key informant interview, November 8, 2019. 57 Key informant interview, October 21, 2019. 58 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019. 98 Kennedy Stewart’s collective call to raise funding from both the provincial and federal governments affirms the role of the City in forging a productive relationship with the Nations by widening its partnerships. Although the Musqueam Indian Band is already involved as a partner to UBC through their real estate ventures such as Lelam on the University Endowment Lands, the joining together of these bodies echo the advancement of both reconciliation and urban economic growth. An observer however pointed out that the terms of contributing to this promotion to gather financial backing from other levels of government remained vague and that this presents direct interests of MST Nations and MSTDC to include one or two stations of SkyTrain in Jericho Lands (Fumano, 2020). Nevertheless, under the same rationale to address the dense and ever-growing commuting population and highlighting economic connections, this recent agreement tells the continuing story of the City’s making space for the Nations and giving them the agency to influence wider city building initiatives. Initially discussed in the third chapter, opponents of the development mainly rest with the local community in West Point Grey. I bring that discussion here as another perspective on the redevelopment policy of Jericho Lands. Seeing that this project essentially highlights growth objectives to lobby for its development plans, I emphasize the conflicting accounts of two communities that are being affected but intersect in the discussion of economic stability and affordability. As the main beneficiary and highly affected by some policies, communities are important stakeholders in development and therefore highly consulted. Specifically in the case of Jericho, public engagement is highly practiced prior to moving forward with any change in the urban landscape due to the current economic climate and the economic value of the land. In the same manner, communities involved also highlight the different ways of how sentiment towards a neighborhood contributes to the narratives surrounding it (Logan & Molotch, 1987, pp. 20, 99). The two communities which stimulate these feelings are 1) the local community of West Point Grey which is represented by the West Point Grey Residents Association, and 2) the communities of Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations, represented by the MST Nations and MSTDC. Recalling the discussion in Chapter 3.2, WPG residents largely reject densification in the area due to the potential increase 99 to be imposed on their properties. This community faction does not advocate for higher priced property development because the neighborhood is already one of the most expensive in the city. While it reflect the local community’s sentiment, such opposing opinion also reveals a notion of affordability that rests on not being able to pay higher property taxes which elicits their fears of being “taxed out” of their homes. In addition, local growth for them means the revitalization of the local shops and economic centers in the area such as the Point Grey and Jericho Village Shopping Areas, as outlined in a Community Vision that has been approved by the City Council in September 2010 (City of Vancouver, 2010). On the contrary, the MST Nations view this venture as a source of income to provide for their people. Due to the subjugation from colonialism and forced displacement at the arrival of the settlers in Lower Mainland, MST Nations, along with other Indigenous groups, experienced a deterioration of all aspects of their society and systemic discrimination. This resulted in their further economic hardship which can now be overturned by this serendipitous advantage of finally being able to control a part of their ancestral land. In this sense, Jericho’s redevelopment is also an exercise of gaining control of their territory and essentially reclaiming their own space. Jericho’s redevelopment illustrates a tension defining strategies of growth: one keeping the status quo, and the other highly advocating for optimal value of investment and capital. Although these communities represent the opposites of income brackets, they also essentially advocate the opposite notion of affordability. WPG residents have an approximate median income of $85,000 (West Point Grey - Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019, 2019) in contrast to the average median income of MST Nations at only $30,50059, and yet the main narrative of anti-development sentiment in the neighborhood is the affordability piece that may potentially raise property taxes. In this context, even though the MST Nations are represented by the development corporation and as a political entity that boosts growth, it has a dual characteristic by highlighting the practical utility of the land, and neighborhood sentiment prompted 59 Calculated using Statistics Canada Census Profile, using median of total income of MST Nations (Statistics Canada, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c). 100 by its members’ attachment to Jericho as an ancestral land. Because of this identity attached to the main entrepreneur, we can see how land carries multiple identities and functions as a legitimate motivation and ultimately used as a propeller of growth (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 62). Furthermore, despite profound and deep-rooted tensions, the redevelopment of Jericho is still able to highlight some commonalities between different populations. Although coming from distinct perspectives, both communities agree that livability and sustainability are integral components of this project which is represented in the most recent public bulletin for Jericho Lands (City of Vancouver, 2020a, p. 50; Jericho Lands Public Engagement Bulletin, 2019). For West Point Grey residents, these have been documented in a recent survey conducted by the city where site design is desired to be a “world model of livability and sustainability” (West Point Grey Residents Association, 2019b). For MST, these strategies are compatible with their First Nations worldview, specifically to their belief in stewardship of the land. These messages are pronounced by various representatives of MST Nations in open-to-public events and other engagements. For instance, in public events, these values are always highlighted as a major component of their traditional beliefs and advocacies, not just as modern standards. Despite many benefits of incorporating amenities for the wider population, this is also connected to the city’s image and branding. As previously highlighted, the policy process of Jericho is crafted in conjunction with numerous city-wide projects and initiatives. This also follows studies where Indigenous entrepreneurship reconciles traditional values with innovation and wields this perspective on the conduct of their venture (Hindle & Lansdowne, 2005). In addition, it is typical to emphasize both economic and non-economic objectives in indigenous businesses, which allows the flexibility of such venture (Lindsay et al., 2006, pp. 58–59). A crucial factor however here is that these strategies largely point to the bigger picture of urban growth. Such strategies add value to large-scale projects, and therefore bring advantage for the city, which is utilized as a strength for inter-urban competition (Bornstein, 2010). Ultimately, these strategies trap Jericho’s redevelopment in market dynamics and the mechanism of a growth machine, which is demonstrated by the ensemble of pro-growth supporters coming from different sectors. Such commonly agreed strategies benefit the local 101 neighborhood and wider goals of the city and are therefore used as an offset arrangement to deflect the apparent destructive dominance of growth. In the end, this affirms the notion that once growth practices are rooted in the city, it becomes an embedded value where “its disagreements are allowable and do not challenge the belief in growth itself” (Logan & Molotch, 1987, p. 65 emphasis in original). 4.2 Opportunity and caution on the emerging real estate machinery The examination of complex collaboration between MST Nations, local government and the crown corporation reveals Jericho as a case of vast opportunities for these actors. One of the many opportunities that can be reaped from this redevelopment is the emergence of a First Nations-led urban development model: an instance where First Nations have a fundamental influence in sectors that matter in the city. In this sense, the participation of MST Nations as a property developer provides an opportunity for their entry into a large industry in Vancouver and prompts further inclusion in wider practices in the city. Consequently, this collaboration forged on the premise of Jericho Lands provides a blueprint for some initiatives and practices of urban governance. This section identifies the value of the redevelopment as a benchmark for other Indigenous ventures, and its capacity to shape interactions of multiple actors within the city. Apart from traditional representations in the previous sections, I argue that reconciliation also occurs within the practice of making space and flexibility within the city. However, there is also reason to be cautious about this occurrence. In this sense, this section is also advanced as a further exploration of reconciliation occurring but also highlights that such phenomenon remains under the hegemonic structure of capitalism. While evidently advocating economic gains for a marginalized community, I advance this analysis as an initial inquiry to further understand new, unexpected circumstances in the city. My main purpose here is to advance reflexivity and prompt meaningful conversations, not suggest a principal solution nor a one-size-fits-all model for other potential Indigenous entrepreneurs and enterprises. Regardless of its complexity, the context of MSTDC’s case and how reconciliation is being advanced are unique attributes 102 to the specific alignment of stakeholders. It needs to be understood that this kind of complexity may not be found in exactly another context due to the unforeseen convergence of this phenomenon. 4.2.1 First Nations-led urban development model The redevelopment of Jericho Lands is a primary opportunity to improve the economic status of the MST First Nations The economic payout to these nations are significant due to the financial stream’s impact on their institutional capacity to support their members who are largely affected by the continuous societal discrimination and marginalization. Apart from this recognizable financial benefit, the urban machinery which consists of relationships and initiatives crafted surrounding Jericho’s redevelopment also provide an institutional contribution to the conduct of governance in Vancouver. My conversations with advocates and main movers of this venture suggest that Jericho offers a formidable benchmark that may provide a blueprint for some urban development practices in the city and projects that involves other Aboriginal nations in the country. While deemed to be invisible to the public eye, this collaboration that sprung out of the site’s redevelopment can be considered as one of its emerging primary legacies in terms of institutional relationships. For instance, within the city administration, it has been evident that the venture of Jericho Lands (and ultimately the preceding project on Heather Street Lands) contributed to the establishment of a strengthened and renewed municipal and First Nations relationship. According to a source that works closely in facilitating the policy planning program, other departments in the municipal government recognize the capacity and contribution of this project in enriching initiatives of the city from the perspective of the MST First Nations60. The experience of continuing collaboration between the City and MST Nations on Heather Street and Jericho Lands frame city building priorities of the city with deliberate consideration of the agency, capacity and subjectivities of First Nations, which is an initiative that has not been considered at the municipal level by other leaderships in the past. 60 Key informant interview, October 23, 2019. 103 Another dimension of this model is the operation of MST Development Corporation. As the principal actor for the business venture of the First Nations consortium, the company demonstrates Indigenous entrepreneurship. The track record of MSTDC since its establishment in 2017 has a strong portfolio that primarily consists of luxurious real estate acquisitions in prime neighborhoods in Metro Vancouver. An impact of Aboriginal marginalization in the Canadian context is the persisting subordinate image of Indigenous nations that is internalized by racism (Lischke & McNab, 2005). Although Canadian opinion has been changing about Indigenous nations over the years, it remains a heavily contested issue. The majority of Canadians believe that the financial and institutional effort by the Canadian government towards Indigenous issues are ineffective (Hutchins, 2018; “Truths of Reconciliation: Canadians Are Deeply Divided on How Best to Address Indigenous Issues,” 2018). While there is basis for this opinion and is mostly attached to the internalized discrimination towards these populations, it also resonates with the unfortunate reality that shapes the visibility of this group in impoverished sectors. One of these instances is the high visibility and alarming rate of urban Indigenous homelessness in Metro Vancouver, of which 40% who identify as Indigenous or Aboriginal are homeless despite its overall 2.2% population in the region (City of Vancouver, 2018). In this regard, the unusual case of Jericho’s redevelopment and the business influence of the MST Nations represent this stark contradiction from this stereotypical image. Its operation as a real estate developer with holdings on the region’s most lucrative neighborhoods now presents a significant presence in a major industry. This opportunity-based venture resonates with the transformative character of Indigenous enterprises by pursuing meaningful partnerships and strategic opportunities that reframe their role within the business sector and allows to focus on their own communities (The Role of Aboriginal Economic Development Corporations in Canada’s Business Paradigm Shift, 2015). In a way, MSTDC as the operating entity of the First Nations’ business interests embodies a renewed visibility in the city and institutional legacy that influences a shift in the trajectories of urban governance practices and conduct of business through proactive partnerships with each Nation, the City of Vancouver, and the private sector. Moreover, this demonstrates the reversing of the tide for a traditionally marginalized group. MST’s 104 serendipitous acquisition of prime lands becomes a core component of capacity and leverage for the consortium’s development corporation. In the same context, Tsleil-Waututh Chief Leah George-Wilson describes MSTDC as the “the richest landowners in the City of Vancouver” due to the 65-hectare agglomeration of jointly owned land across Metro Vancouver (Penner, 2020). This lucrative spatial asset also displays power that is being regained by these three nations. Squamish Nation’s Khelsilem expresses, “We are without a doubt becoming powerful in our territory once again, and this testament to the power of our people always without a doubt cannot happen without the trail-blazing work that’s done by our previous ancestors” (Penner, 2020). This comment comes after the powerful entrance of MSTDC in most influential lists of Vancouver Magazine’s Power 50, an annual list of influential actors in the city. For three straight years, MST occupied strong placing, starting in its year of official activity in 2017, debuting at 10th place (“The 50 Most Powerful People in Vancouver Right Now,” 2017). In 2018, MSTDC moved down to 15th place in the list but Khelsilem of the Squamish Nation also appeared in 21st place (“The 2018 VanMag Power 50 List,” 2018). In 2019, MSTDC took the top spot (Bula et al., 2019). This is an undeniable vigorous exhibit of reversing the tide after more than one hundred years of systemic discrimination. The legacy of MST’s business conduct on the redevelopment of Jericho Lands also extends beyond the physical boundaries of Metro Vancouver. Although Jericho Lands is not the first real estate megaproject where Indigenous nations have built economic prosperity, it has become the first large-scale project between a non-agent Crown corporation and First Nations. Due to the longstanding tensions brought by settler colonialism and its spillovers, economic partnerships between governments and First Nations, have been rare. Within five years of the sale of this prime federal site in Vancouver, another former military site was (re)acquired by a consortium of seven First Nations. Kapyong Barracks, a 160-acre run-down military installation in Winnipeg, Manitoba, was officially sold to seven Treaty One Nations in August 2019. This was a result of a legal challenge in 2007 by the seven First Nations when the Federal government was adjudicated by Justice Douglas Campbell to have “no intention to grant any meaningful consultation” after it approved the Department of National Defence to transfer the surplus military site to Canada Lands 105 Company (CBC News, 2009). This apparent breach of the government’s duty to consult with First Nations launched the move for the site to be officially acquired by the consortium of Treaty One Nations with 68% (109 acres) of ownership share, which will be managed by Treaty One Development Corporation (T1DC), and 32% (51 acres) sold to Canada Lands as its co-owner (McGuckin, 2019). To some extent, MST and CLC partnership can be linked as a predecessor to Treaty One First Nations’ collaboration with Canada Lands. Evidently, the developments in Jericho Lands and Kapyong Barracks have fundamental differences, particularly on the designation of the latter as a future urban reserve, almost twice as large as Jericho, and its previous infrastructure on the site has started to be demolished (Frew, 2019; Pauls, 2018). However, the success of MST and Canada Lands’ joint venture on Heather Street Lands and the opportunity to continue working together in a bigger project on Jericho can be partly considered as a landmark initiative for successive projects like the former Kapyong Barracks. While there is no attributable direct link of comparison between these two developments from the consortium of First Nations themselves, the significant and distinct contextual similarities of both projects point to this model of multidisciplinary collaboration as effective. The narrative of both First Nations consortia about the developments are also similar. Much of the narrative of MST Nations as a mega-project developer is to send out the message that the public should not be afraid of them. As highlighted in the previous section, the words of Tsleil-Waututh Nation’s Maureen Thomas in the Open House are worth reiterating here: “We are not people you need to be afraid of. We are not people who are going to bring you harm. We’re not people who are going to treat people in a bad way. We’re coming to this area again to be a part of you, and your community. We are open to your feedback, your input.” (page 94) In the same manner, National Chief Perry Bellegarde, when he spoke about the progress of redevelopment plans for Kapyong Barracks, emphasized that change should be embraced by the city and residents as this signals opportunity for growth, citing the success of development in other urban reserves in the country: “We want to show the citizens of Winnipeg that we can be progressive in a good way.” (CBC News, 2018) 106 In other words, I suggest that we would not be seeing this similarity if earlier practices and initiatives were not considered valid and/or promising by the actors. I particularly stress this assumption in consideration of Canada Lands as a major partner by the First Nations consortiums in both projects. Although Canada Lands acts as an auxiliary technical business partner to advance the overarching vision of the First Nations consortiums, CLC can be viewed as a bridge that reinforces the strengthening and widening interactions in Indigenous and non-Indigenous business ventures, especially in crucial industries which are increasingly occupied by Indigenous nations. Despite Treaty One Nations leaning towards the comparisons on other urban development on reserves (also known as Indigenous Economic Development Zones) such as Westbank First Nation in Kelowna, BC and Membertou in Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia (“Former Kapyong Barracks Master Plan,” n.d.), I make the connection with Jericho with similarities on rooting a renewed symbolism of Indigenous peoples at the center of urban life through land-use and redevelopment. Both projects highlight the same interests, goals and motivations that make reconciliation and Indigenous economic development an underlying motivation. I observed that both projects advance benefits for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, and particularly resonate with wider city-building strategies and growth. These continuing, distinct, and future experiences of Jericho Garrison and Kapyong Barracks emphasize on the increasing prevalent success in pressuring the Canadian government to stay true to their duty to consult with Indigenous groups. Moreover, there is also opportunity to reproduce or follow this model due to the number of surplus sites owned by the government that are also entangled in Aboriginal land and overlapping claims. In this sense, I foresee that this urban phenomenon may be replicated in other ventures in the near future. 107 4.2.2 Colonialism and the growth machine conceptual implications Although the gains from this historic venture to the larger community of MST First Nations are real, it is crucial to understand that decisions which contributed to the current shape of the redevelopment initiative are not all successes. I reiterate that reconciliation in the redevelopment of Jericho is a two-way process and not only consists of conciliatory measures that the First Nations demand from non-Indigenous actors. Collaborations on this redevelopment embody compromise and engagement between all parties. In this sense, although local community opposition in Jericho Lands indicates a certain NIMBYism of the long-term residents, it also speaks as a warning that not all progressive and creative ventures fix past issues. In other words, as there is immense capacity and power integrated in this new-found asset, there is still room for concern. I clarify that this indication of caution does not seek to negate the benefits that the nations get from this First Nations-led urban development model. However, I raise the point that the basis of the structural foundation of this model is still the status quo that continue to marginalize and subjugate these nations and their peoples. Since the main overlap of this phenomenon is the redevelopment and its intersection with reconciliation, I invite the rethinking of colonial patterns in the current political economic system by assessing implications of colonialism in this emerging growth coalition surrounding Jericho’s redevelopment. In the context of the redevelopment of this 90-acre site, the overlap of the hegemonic structure of colonialism reflect on land-use and property. I explore this juncture by connecting Jericho’s case from the point of view of the controversial property rights issues of First Nations and politics of recognition. Although the discussion is largely situated on the cases of privatization on First Nations reserves (Dempsey et al., 2011; Fabris, 2017; Pasternak, 2015), I find it worthwhile to bridge the current circumstances of Jericho Lands with the rethinking of politics of recognition (Coulthard, 2014). With this consideration, the redevelopment of the site and the partnerships, motivations and goals surrounding it must be examined closely in the context of the legacy of colonialism. It must be remembered that colonialism as a framework works hand-in-hand with capitalism and therefore has a dispossessive capacity (Harris, 2004). Situating the 108 renewed agency of MST Nations as a real estate developer in Vancouver, one may ask that such transformation indicates propagation of colonial and capitalist structures. Amidst the complexity of the character and identities of MST Nations, the last thing they would want to transform into is to be the trigger that pushes Vancouver further into unaffordability and exacerbates the current housing crisis. Thus, in order for the First Nations to somehow break the cycle of colonialism with capitalism (Pasternak, 2015), MST must be sensitive to the legacies of colonialism. The redevelopment also specifically draws this potential entrapment when the Nations accepted the Vendor Take Back (VTB) mortgage agreement. This financing arrangement was part of the accommodation given to the nations when they (re)acquired the land where they can start repaying the amount on the sixth and seventh year from the commencement of the agreement. In addition, it was offered to the nations as a no-deposit loan as part of the duty of the government to accommodate First Nations (Mackin, 2016b). In a regular business venture, this financing scheme illustrates a generous accommodation. However, if the context of colonialism was considered, the bigger question for this arrangement is, “why are First Nations supposedly paying for their ancestral lands?” This question prompts the notion that the successful redevelopment of Jericho Lands does not guarantee the halt of colonialism’s negative effects on their nations. Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow speaks of the push and pull on the impact of colonialism on their communities on the context of reacquiring their lands: “We are not happy with [having to pay $480-million, for the Jericho Hills parcel]. We still believe those Crown-held lands were taken from us. But we have to move forward as a community.” (Bula, 2016a) This statement therefore demonstrates that reconciliation is a two-way process. In the case of the decision of MST Nations to move forward with its redevelopment, it manifests that although the nations seem to have won the fight, they remain to cut their losses by agreeing to less ideal terms. 109 4.3 Jericho as a trigger for a new growth machine Contextualizing the development of Jericho with city-wide issues is not a coincidence and can be viewed as a strategy of city building. As of August 2020, the city-led policy planning process is in phase two which is the development of site plan and guiding principles after almost a year of formally starting the public engagement61. Although admittedly still years away from concrete drawings and visions for the site, emerging themes and inspirations to its planning have transpired through active engagement that is both enabled and assisted by the City leadership. This chapter demonstrates the role and impact of reconciliation in the redevelopment of Jericho Lands. Through largely forging collaborations in the city with this site in mind, real estate emerged as a vehicle of reconciliation with the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations. This chapter also shows that the redevelopment proponents, MST Nations and MSTDC, CLC, and the City of Vancouver, demonstrate deepening networks and relationship through this development. With this relationship regarded as an uncharted territory, the discussion visualizes how it has transformed from just being stakeholders of a local development project into a partnership that addresses common goals and intersecting issues of the city and beyond by incorporating ways to make space for the insight and agency of MST Nations. I argue that this is the foundation of an underlying transformation in Vancouver’s urban governance. Therefore, Jericho is a tool that essentially has a two-prong impact on its stakeholders: to enhance Vancouver’s city building, and to advance reconciliation between the MST First Nations and the settler colonial subjects. Although Jericho’s redevelopment is not entirely unique as First Nations in other parts of the country have been developing property off their reserves, Jericho takes the spotlight due to its geography and the volatile urban political climate in Vancouver. As opposed to other developments in second-tier cities, the future of Jericho Lands is positioned in the global property market due to its prime location in Vancouver. 61 See the updated timeline in the City of Vancouver Jericho Lands webpage https://shapeyourcity.ca/jericho-lands. 110 Connected with the convergence of urban development and reconciliation is the emergence of MSTDC as a new type of real estate developer that facilitates the transformation of Jericho. This conceptual connection is materialized and framed on the premise that (economic) growth occurs in the city by profit-based development projects as its integral component. Since this growth-centered phenomenon also overlaps over the concept of reconciliation, this chapter uncovers that it does not completely follow the traditional framework and assumptions of a growth coalition since the identity of MST Nations does not follow the normal circumstances of the main proponents according to the theory. Although it is difficult to predict the course and behavior of the growth coalition attached to this redevelopment project, early efforts in this creation of urban machinery is undeniable. From the practices discussed in this chapter, the redevelopment of Jericho lands represents a manifestation of the old and new aspects of a growth machine. Old, as it remains to center a land-based elite. New, in the sense that the identity of the land-based elite is more diverse. Furthermore, the complex political economic identity of MST Nations through the MSTDC and their partnership with Canada Lands represents this renewed face of the growth coalition. Seeing that the planning process of Jericho Lands garners significant confidence from different sectors these questions are important and reach beyond the spatial boundaries of Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver region. There is a potential for this type of model to inspire and/or be expanded in other equally intricate contexts. Demonstrated by the connections with the recent redevelopment of the former Kapyong Barracks in Winnipeg, Jericho as a mega-project that is spearheaded by three First Nations evidently provides a contextual connection, particularly with Canada Lands as a co-developer of both First Nations consortium. First Nations-led urban development projects, such as Jericho Lands show the capacity to have a symbolic representation for other Indigenous groups that are trapped in overlapping and agonizing legal claims with the crown. If this site proves to be a successful redevelopment in the near future, Jericho may become the landmark option for more First Nations to take the urban development route as a means to reconcile, considering that many of them have claims on land that is ripe for development and that are in urban or urbanizing areas. 111 On an extended note, I also challenge that non-Indigenous stakeholders are the only ones driving for compromise in Jericho’s redevelopment. Indeed, the development’s potential contribution to the alleviation of housing affordability and directly addressing historical grievances to the First Nations peoples of Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations are the main and crucial advantages in advancing this Indigenous venture by the MST Partners. These benefits provide a sense of security to the stakeholders, particularly to the MST Nations. However, bearing the brunt of harsh impacts of colonialism, their communities endured (and will continue to endure) discrimination and neglect by sociopolitical institutions. For them, this venture is a fortuitous moment that will provide relief and enable these self-governing First Nations to rebuild their nations and system. Yet by no means, the successful redevelopment of Jericho Lands, even with the driving force of reconciliation, will automatically shift the marginalization of these communities. This affirms the enduring claim of MST leaders and their advocates: the consistent negative impact of colonialism. While this venture provides an opportune event to empower the nations and their peoples, this does not correct the longstanding issue of racism and other socio-cultural impacts that they have endured over the past century. 112 Chapter 5: Conclusion The redevelopment of Jericho Lands in Vancouver represents the changing reality for the three First Nations in the Lower Mainland. Through examining the events and actors surrounding the first phase of Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program, this study delineates the process of urban governance that transpires between the major stakeholders of the development: MST Nations and MST Development Corporation, Canada Lands Company, the City of Vancouver, and the local community in West Point Grey. The behavior of these actors in relation to the redevelopment of Jericho underscores the transformation of urban governance in Vancouver. MSTDC, which is the official development representative of the joint business venture of the MST Nations, emerges not only as a new developer, but one with immense economic capacity and influence that is now a main source of the Nations’ economic stability. The advent of MSTDC represents an innovative way to demonstrate the potential power of First Nations and other Indigenous groups in Canada. While its rise came about with the serendipitous (re)acquisition of ancestral lands that happen to be sitting on one of the most expensive parcels of land in North America, the local economic climate is mired in a housing affordability crisis. Moreover, real estate development also stood out as the primary tool to address and embody reconciliation between the MST First Nations and the Canadian settler government. Due to this unlikely overlap, the ongoing venture faces tensions from different stakeholders, and continues to be challenged by different sets of communities. As a closing chapter, this section highlights the study’s contribution to the growth machine thesis and the literature on large-scale development. The empirical components of this research fit with some assumptions across the literature. At the same time, the novelty of Jericho Lands as a new form of urban development case also presents its distinct characteristics where the current literature and scholarly conversations can benefit from. I also include some of the latest updates and lessons I encountered in completing this study. This section discusses some of the impacts of the unexpected outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, to reiterate the main purpose of this study, I end my analysis with further questions and recommendations for the trajectory of this topic. 113 5.1 Jericho’s theoretical contribution to the growth scholarship As a major large-scale development project in Vancouver, the redevelopment of Jericho Lands has the capacity to uncover interconnections between different political actors in the city. In conjunction with the combined discussion of Chapters Two to Four, the literatures of growth machine, urban regime, large-scale developments, and Indigenous entrepreneurship come together in this section to explain core connections and elements of urban governance in the context of Jericho Lands. Since the policy planning has recently started phase two, the picture of the policy process depicted in this study remains limited. However, it has been telling and its early initiatives illustrate an already distinct character of urban development. In illustrating the bridging of theory and empirics, I highlight three points that read through findings across the chapters: 1) land as a central element of growth within the city, 2) tension between the actors which primarily commodify the land (developers) and the community who intend to use the land (residents), and 3) dominance of growth narratives within the city. As one of the most discernible observations, the first point of contribution of this study to urban geography and related fields concerns the centrality of land which puts MST Development Corporation as a hybrid land-based entrepreneur. The agency of MST Nations through MSTDC which was discussed in Chapter Three.1 highlights its unique character that is essentially unprecedented. In this same section, the events and behavior of the MST Nations point to Logan and Molotch’s use of the term “land-based elite”62. By definition, it refers to an actor that effectively utilizes land in order to generate revenue for the locality (Logan & Molotch, 1987; Molotch, 1976, 1993). This is an important concept to highlight as it not only brings out the multiple facets of land for each actor but aids in identifying a major finding of this study: the emergence of MST Nations as a land-based elite. As seen mostly in Chapter Three and Four, the concept of land-based elite and the growth machine was explored and applied to examine the role and behavior of MST Nations as a collective particularly in their agency through MSTDC as an emerging commercial 62 First surfaced in Molotch’s introductory piece on the growth machine thesis (Molotch, 1976). 114 developer in the city. To better understand how it intersects in the theoretical application, I suggest that MSTDC is a mix of two of three typologies of Logan and Molotch’s social entrepreneurs. The authors identified two distinct business entities: 1) serendipitous entrepreneurs, which inherit assets from another entity or through a fortuitous chance, and 2) active entrepreneurs, which strategize their future investments by gaining strategic locations (Logan & Molotch, 1987, pp. 29–30). This combination character of a land-based elite underscores the consequential and opportune circumstance of acquiring their most crucial asset: land. In the context of Jericho, the series of political events that eventually enabled the Nations to acquire the lands represent their foundation as a serendipitous entrepreneur. However, Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow also spoke of the First Nations’ alluding to the active entrepreneur narrative: “Any Crownheld land we keep an eye on – that’s what we rely on” (Hoekstra, 2015)63. This comment reflects the calculation and strategizing the business partnership and joint ownership with the three nations. This prioritization of land as a resource also suggest the high inclination of Indigenous entrepreneurs to recognize opportunity, and simultaneously secure this opportunity by becoming more competitive and innovative (Lindsay et al., 2006, p. 70). In MSTDC’s case, safeguarding this opportunity can also been in the form of formal establishment of MSTDC in 2017, aided by the technical expertise of former Aquilini Executives which is regarded as one of the closest non-Indigenous partners of the MST. Second, Jericho’s case enriches the literature by uncovering the tensions between opposing factions involved in the redevelopment. In Logan and Molotch’s words, this conflict highlights the disagreement between the advocates of “exchange value” which promote the commodification and profiting from land and its development (eg. developers, boosterism advocates, local government), and the proponents of “use value” which are entities that utilize land for their daily life (eg. residents, community members) (1987, p. 63 While this statement was made on behalf of Musqueam Nation and prior to the MST Partnership, it follows the growth proponent behavior of the joint consortium. 115 2). This is typically demonstrated by the dispute between commercial developers (and complicit government institutions) and residents as a result of property development ventures. In this study, this tension is imagined between MSTDC as the hybrid place entrepreneur, and the neighborhood of West Point Grey as the immediate community that resists excess profiting of land in their locality. Through examining these tensions, the feelings of the community towards the place reflect their sense of belongingness or what the growth machine literature identifies as “we feelings” (Molotch, 1976). However, in Chapter Three and Four, there are not one but multiple communities which evoke their “we feelings” about development of land and perspectives on urban growth. The communities of MST Nations also evoke this collective sense of belonging, which drives their land claims and the reconciliation initiatives that are applied on this redevelopment. These meanings of sense of spatial belongingness in Jericho’s case expose the important function of land as an economic asset and an important symbol for the community. It is easy to see the economic value of the land since the location is one of most expensive neighborhoods in Vancouver. Its symbolism, however, is perceived intangibly and only shows through certain behavior of community members. History therefore plays an important aspect in contextualizing the importance of these lands to the MST Nations, and long-time members of the community, including the minority of Department of Defence sponsored residents. Thus, the discussion in Chapter Two does not only trace the neoliberal transformation of the neighborhood. It also follows that the creation of communities that have strong affinity with Jericho covers multitude of histories. This links to the presence of different facets of community narrative—all of which come full circle and become entangled in today’s urban set-up. This highlighted community narrative also provides a glimpse of the origins of the strong public sentiment from all communities involved, which makes the case of Jericho also a vibrant example of showing public input and perspectives in redeveloping prime land. The wider context of colonialism can also be connected to the theoretical discussion of community narrative. The resurfacing narrative of ʔəy̓alməxʷ / Iy̓álmexw (Eyalmu) as the ancestral character of MST Nations can be perceived as a response from the erasure of MST identity on Jericho as an impact 116 of colonialism. Reclaiming this prime urban land is then demonstrated as a way to negotiate their land claims and their self-determination by applying such subjectivity to the future of the site. In a way, this expands the theoretical application of community feelings in the context of growth by providing the depth that links a case of large-scale development to the edges of colonialism. I also suggest that this connection is the foundation of the discussion in Chapter 4.2. Exercising caution in the urban development model largely stems from the seeming combination of colonial practices with decolonial initiatives. Lastly, Jericho demonstrates yet another case of function of the city as the “growth machine”. As discussed in Chapter Four, this means that growth as a concept dominates as an overarching ideology in the urban and penetrates in different sectors of the locality particularly to the goals of powerful actors which is to achieve urban growth. Through the growth machine thesis, Jericho demonstrates how these local land-based elites, motivated by their interest in the locality, influence processes, relationships, and connections in order to achieve growth that is beneficial to them and the locality. Included in their drive to advance local economic development is the mechanism of various actors to cooperate despite their differences. This is telling of the collaborations forged between MST Nations, Canada Lands Company, and the City of Vancouver. Although the higher levels of government and First Nations have explored agreements and resource-based cooperation in other contexts, the collaboration of Canada Lands and MST signals a new wave of subjectivities that have opened up from the novel case of Jericho Lands. It also highlights the function of the (local) government in the effective making of growth through its direct influence in regulations and practices of the market. In combining these concepts, Molotch argues that “this organized effort to affect the outcome of growth distribution is the essence of local government as a dynamic political force” (1976, p. 313). In a way, the urban process that Molotch, and later on together with Logan, underscores can be connected to the entrepreneurialism in the city that David Harvey (1989) draws attention to. This emphasizes the transformation of the state as a proponent of growth, and consequently drives inter-urban competition, which carries implications for the practices of urban development. In the case of Vancouver, the entrepreneurial role of the local government may place Jericho as a site that is implicated 117 in the transnational and global circuits of capital. From this perspective, the impact of large-scale development projects such as the future Jericho Lands are perceived as a case to uncover and make sense of the complex intersectoral and inter-scalar collaborations and processes within the city. 5.2 Lessons and unexpected events while studying Jericho Lands Embarking on a study that is relatively new with not a lot of consolidated information is difficult. This research project on Jericho Lands while relatively accessible since I reside in the same city, proved to be more complex than I initially imagined. At the same time, this project being affected by COVID-19 highlights the new normal for public engagement and urban governance. Since the beginning of this study, I found myself having immense difficulty in asking questions about reconciliation. In a way, I realize that I have brought it upon to this study when I deliberately put a boundary to the capacity and positions of the participants I interviewed, who are all non-Indigenous. When brought up as a question directly, the participants are always quick to withdraw from answering questions and admit that it is a sensitive issue64. This proves that reconciliation is a visibly ongoing work in Vancouver despite the progressive and innovative practices that we are seeing today, and will continue in the near and farther future. My interviews confirm, however, that commenting on reconciliation in general is intended to carve space for the Nations. In this sense, as much as reconciliation is a part of this study, I did not foresee this pattern in my methodology beforehand and therefore, empirical findings from interviews have room for improvement, especially if the goal is to provide a first-hand comprehensive picture of the early phases of Jericho’s redevelopment. In addition, this sensitivity played out primarily when non-Indigenous interviewees were questioned about the connection between reconciliation and financing. Of all the questions I prepared for the three proponents that have direct impact on the outcomes of the planning process, these are the only 64 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019; September 24, 2019; and October 23, 2019. 118 ones that were left unanswered. For instance, financial accommodations were provided by both federal and provincial governments through payments and in-kind financing schemes. One of these is the vendor take-back financing which allows the Nations to delay the payments for their share of the fair market value of the lands they acquired. However, when I attempted to connect financing schemes as an aspect of reconciliation, these proponents declined to comment, citing that Nations will only be able to articulate this connection65. Despite not answering the question, one participant redirected the question to highlight the split of ownership between CLC and MST for the eastern parcel of Jericho as one of many representations of accommodation in this project. Still largely linked to the financing terms, the interviewee referred the terms of the agreement where 28% of the ownership (including the fair market share value, which became the amount for the computation of the payment attributed to the government’s duty to accommodate) was transferred to the joint partnership of MST as an example of accommodation that has been extended to the First Nations66. While this is in itself is telling about the sensitivity of reconciliation as a topic, it also underscores a gap in the relationship between the stakeholders. From this example, the lack of articulation of reconciliation can be viewed as one of the uncharted issues that may have yet to be comprehensively pondered upon. At this early stage of the redevelopment, not even with a visual concept, many aspects remain vague. Perhaps the full negotiation and practices of reconciliation efforts are some of the issues that the actors have yet to comprehensively unpack. Even within financing, although some terms have been set, the real score of its role would fully reflect on the redevelopment and the relationships of the stakeholders when the site is producing revenue. Therefore, this aspect of the collaboration within the growth coalition also demonstrates an evolution by phases according to the planning process. 65 Key informant interview, September 24, 2019, and October 23, 2019. 66 Key informant interview, September 20, 2019. 119 As mentioned in Chapter One, this study of Jericho Lands has had a fortunate timing in terms of field work. However, the unexpected outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic also had a profound impact on this research. Due to the social distancing protocols in Canada, my plans of further seeking out key informant interviews with other experts and representatives of stakeholders was also abruptly halted. The uncertainty of the new normal put a halt on some aspect of this study. As many industries including academia moved to working from home and online, the City of Vancouver followed suit and all in-person events for Jericho Lands’ public engagement have been indefinitely postponed (City of Vancouver, 2020b, p. 4). However, despite the shifting of adoption of social distancing measures, the City proposed the acceleration of some aspects of housing projects as a response to the “new normal” as a result of the pandemic. According to the report, Gil Kelley, Vancouver’s Chief planner, anticipates to fill in the gaps in housing and living spaces that have been exacerbated by the global health public emergency (Chan, 2020b). With not many details, this report highlights changes on the potential of adding more density in rental housing in Jericho Lands to accommodate the reframed housing plan. However, seeing from this study that transit is a focal point in the development of Jericho, the seven-month delay in reviewing the Broadway Plan and delaying other planning agenda that is not considered emergency, will likely have an impact on the timeline of the policy statement. In spite of this anticipated delay, the Jericho Lands planning team released a series of updates both offline and online by early July 2020. In March 2020, the summary of the public engagement was released and followed up by the sending of community newsletters to West Point Grey residents, and its latest publication of the process update which contains information about the commencement of the site’s visualization (City of Vancouver, 2020a, 2020b). Regardless of this progress, observers expect that the policy planning will face delay due to the new normal (Todd, 2020). Due to the halting of public engagement in accordance to encourage the slowing down of Coronavirus, community players such as the West Point Grey Residents Association have also been impacted by the pandemic. However, their advocacy seemed to be more active despite the lack of in-person activities. While I was not able to interview an official representative of the group, the association has been 120 active online for the majority of 2020. At the same time, they had also been responsive to the updates of the municipal leadership in the context of COVID-19. The abovementioned update from the City which alludes to housing rezoning related to the public health emergency received a backlash from several community groups. This was more pronounced when the City endorsed the rezoning of a 14-storey development in Alma and Broadway, a site that is one block away from the eastern boundary of Jericho Lands. WPGRA argues that this is an unacceptable decision as it does not follow the West Point Grey Vision that was approved by the city council, and that allowing this site with a higher density of 5.3 floor space ratio is uncharacteristic of the neighborhood (West Point Grey Residents Association, 2020a). WPGRA alongside with the Coalition of Vancouver Neighborhoods have also been quick to renounce these zoning and urban planning updates during the pandemic. They maintain that these efforts should not be undertaken while the province remains under the state of emergency and that expedited initiatives should only be related for the health emergency of COVID-19 (Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods, 2020a, 2020b; West Point Grey Residents Association, 2020b). The continued resistance of West Point Grey residents also resulted into efforts for an online petition for the rejection of the proposed rezoning, which currently has almost 3,000 signatures (see Figure 5.1). Figure 5.1 Screenshot of the WPGRA petition against the proposed 14-store at Alma and Broadway67 67 The petition can be accessed here: https://www.change.org/p/city-of-vancouver-officials-no-tower-alma-broadway-8a0720b9-c539-4a06-9f05-012b581f259d 121 5.3 Further questions The study opens up several lines of inquiry. Just as when I have started in late 2018, the current timing and period in studying the redevelopment of Jericho Lands on the ground still proves to be fitting. Perhaps even until the next five or even closer to ten years, undertaking a closer look on any aspect of Jericho Lands is timely. The first question that requires more research concerns the effect of reconciliation on the urban fabric. I suggest to also consider exploring the formation of reconciliation narratives from the perspective of MST Nations and their communities. The following phases of the site’s redevelopment present more opportunity to scrutinize the planning process from this perspective. For instance, the most recent updates of the City of Vancouver contain artist renderings and other spatial conceptualizations that evidently involve and highlight the visibility of MST Nations’ heritage combined with modern technologies and community amenities for all ages (City of Vancouver, 2020b, 2020a). These images alone can serve as windows to newer approaches to rethink and analyze this project. The second point of inquiry rests on the conceptual proximity of Jericho as a case study with critical Indigenous geography. Given that the core of this venture treads on political, economic and social implications of First Nations' recognition, self-determination, economic security and self-sufficiency, a critical discussion utilizing Indigenous lens contributes in crafting a comprehensive understanding of the wider impacts of this venture. This study can therefore act as one of the many sources of initial inquiry, particularly from the urban perspective. This approach of inquiry aims to fill the gap of what we do not know about the potential of Jericho's redevelopment, particularly coming from the voices of nation members themselves. The widening of perspectives scrutinizes further, particularly the long-term and more encompassing implications of these collaborations that have become the basis of transformation of city processes in Vancouver. I also recommend the expansion and continued inquiry on Jericho; each phase of the planning process and the future phases of its development will render new subjectivities and interactions. 122 The third avenue of further work concerns MSTDC as an emerging institution. Keeping in mind that MSTDC has several joint holdings, not only in Vancouver but other cities within Metro Vancouver, taking a closer look and analyzing how their practices are different or similar would help in getting more information from this type of non-traditional yet political economic business entity. This also highlights the need to understand other instances of stakeholder collaboration, which involves other municipal governments such as West Vancouver and Burnaby. I highlight in this study that stakeholders are treading unchartered territories as they move forward with the site development. In this context, I speculate that the relationship between municipalities in Metro Vancouver would follow the same trajectory of growth, which may become grounds for inter-urban competition in the region. Studies that probe on inter-municipal exchanges on the context of this First Nations-led development and in connection to other holdings of MSTDC would enrich the broader understanding of current engagements in Heather Street and Jericho Lands. Since MSTDC manages strategic sites in the region, its holdings can be further examined whether it can also be a potential tool for regional cooperation or will widen the gap between neighboring cities and induce inter-urban competition. Nevertheless, such an angle is a worthwhile endeavor to be explored in order to understand the evolution of city processes in the wider Metro Vancouver region. “Settler colonialism is both creative and destructive, and the challenge of the Native Land question is to devise means to repair as much of the destruction as possible without unduly weakening the creation, and to do so in ways that have some chance of being politically acceptable.” - Cole Harris (2002, p. 320) As a way of concluding this study, I reiterate that my findings here only provide context to a current, ongoing phenomenon. I do not advance economic reconciliation, as depicted here, as a silver bullet. By exploring the junction on the redevelopment, city-processes and reconciliation, this study’s goal is to 123 advance an elevated query that will expand current knowledge. Thus, I leave few questions that will hopefully allow us to investigate further as it directly takes a jab at the discussions presented in this study. The discussion of negotiation of reconciliation proves to be a heavy subject that needs to be further discussed and warrants the context of the cautions that was outlined in Chapter 4.2. In particular, the notion of the First Nations-led urban development and its perhaps unconscious intertwining with the status quo capitalist narratives. With the model that is asserted through MSTDC, its structural framework still rests with the hegemonic capitalism. In this way, does the emergence of MST’s development corporation enable the legacy of colonialism or neoliberal development of unceded land? Furthermore, I also leave another question that hopefully gets one curious about the impact of the current state of cooperation: how does the stakeholder collaboration affect the future of reconciliation between the Indigenous nations and the settler state? By asking these questions, Unpacking Inspire Jericho does not discount the benefits that First Nations (potentially) get but to enhance an alternative understanding of complex urban occurrences within our reach. Guided by Cole Harris’ quote, the reach of settler colonialism in our society today is not as blunt and direct as before. Thus, if we do not look behind the face value of the monetary benefits, these attempts that intend to end systemic discrimination, may fall short of their intended objectives. 124 Bibliography Additional School Tax Rate. (n.d.). Retrieved February 4, 2020, from Province of British Columbia website: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/annual-property-tax/school-tax/additional-school-tax-rate Agent status and Crown corporations [Guidance - legislative]. (2007, May 31). Retrieved January 30, 2020, from Government of Canada website: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/guidance-crown-corporations/agent-status-crown-corporations.html Anderson, R. B., Dana, L. P., & Dana, T. E. (2006). Indigenous land rights, entrepreneurship, and economic development in Canada: “Opting-in” to the global economy. Journal of World Business, 41, 45–55. Anderson, R., & Giberson, R. (2004). Aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development in Canada: Thoughts on current theory and Practice. In Ethnic Entrepreneurship: Structure and Process (pp. 141–167). Animikii. (2017, May 31). Why we say “Indigenous” instead of “Aboriginal.” Retrieved October 7, 2020, from https://www.animikii.com/news/why-we-say-indigenous-instead-of-aboriginal Anonymous. (2014). Jericho Lands Sold. Novae Res Urbis : Vancouver Edition; Toronto, 4, 5. Ashley, A. J., & Touchton, M. (2016). Reconceiving Military Base Redevelopment: Land Use on Mothballed U.S. Bases. Urban Affairs Review, 52, 391–420. Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, & Mount Allison University (Eds.). (1995). A primer on military base reuse in Canada. Saint John, N. B.: Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency = Agence de promotion économique du Canada atlantique. Bagaeen, S. G. (2006). Redeveloping former military sites: Competitiveness, urban sustainability and public participation. Cities, 23, 339–352. Bagaeen, S. G. (2016). Framing military brownfields as a catalyst for urban regeneration. In S. Bagaeen & C. Clark (Eds.), Sustainable Regeneration of Former Military Sites (1st ed., pp. 1–18). London: Routledge. Bagheri, M., Chan, C., Lasocha, A., & Sommerfeld, K. (2012). Price Appreciation Patterns around Transit Stations. Unpublished. Retrieved from https://www.nathanschiff.com/webdocs/c407_Winner_2012.pdf BC Assessment. (2020a). Lower Mainland 2020 Top 100 Valued Homes. BC Assessment. BC Assessment. (2020b, January 2). Lower Mainland 2020 Property Assessments in the Mail. Retrieved October 8, 2020, from BC Assessment website: https://info.bcassessment.ca/news/Pages/Lower-Mainland-2020-Property-Assessments-in-the-Mail.aspx BC Treaty Commission. (n.d.). Negotiation Update [Government]. Retrieved January 23, 2020, from BC Treaty Commission website: http://www.bctreaty.ca/negotiation-update Benton-Short, L. (1998). The Presidio: From Army Post to National Park. Massachusetts: UPNE. Berkes, F., & Adhikari, T. (2006). Development and conservation: Indigenous businesses and the UNDP Equator Initiative. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 3, 671. 125 Bingham-Hall, P. (2016). Garden city mega city: Rethinking cities for the age of global warming (First edition). Oxford: Pesaro Publishing. Blomley, N. (2004). Unsettling the City: Urban Land and the Politics of Property. New York: Routledge. Blomley, N. (2017). Foreword: How Property Matters. In M. H. Bruun, P. J. Cockburn, B. S. Risager, & M. Thorup (Eds.), Contested Property Claims: What Disagreement Tells Us About Ownership (pp. xiii–xvi). London: Routledge. Bornstein, L. (2010). Mega-projects, city-building and community benefits. City, Culture and Society, 1, 199–206. Brent, P. (2011, October 24). Canada Lands Corporation has its most successful year in a decade. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from Real Estate News Exchange website: https://renx.ca/canada-lands-corporation-has-its-most-successful-year-in-a-decade/ Brooks, A., & Rich, H. (2016). Sustainable construction and socio-technical transitions in London’s mega-projects. The Geographical Journal, 182, 395–405. Bula, F. (2014, October 5). Land development deal with B.C. First Nations launches new era. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/land-development-deal-with-bc-first-nations-launches-new-era/article20939100/ Bula, F. (2016a, April 8). First Nations bands to pay millions for provincial portion of Jericho Lands. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/first-nations-bands-to-pay-millions-for-provincial-portion-of-jericho-lands/article29578206/ Bula, F. (2016b, October 16). Top Vancouver executive to guide development of First Nations land. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/top-vancouver-executive-to-guide-development-of-first-nations-land/article32385162/ Bula, F. (2018, July 22). Anti-developer rhetoric shaping campaigns ahead of Vancouver election. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-anti-developer-rhetoric-shaping-campaigns-ahead-of-vancouver-election/ Bula, F., Caddell, N., Mclachlan, S., McLennan, N., O’Grady, M., & Quin, A. (2019, November 5). VanMag’s 2019 Power 50 List. Retrieved June 12, 2020, from Vancouver Magazine website: https://www.vanmag.com/Power-50-2019 Campbell, I. (2015). Traditional Knowledge In A Modern Context: Squamish, Musqueam, And Tsleil-Waututh Collaboration In Land Development (Simon Fraser University). Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC. Canada Lands Company. (2012, November 29). Amalgamation of Parc Downsview Park Inc. And Old Port of Montreal Corporation Inc. Retrieved August 1, 2020, from Canada Lands Company website: https://en.clc.ca/post/66 Canada Lands Company. (2019). 2018/19 Annual Report. Toronto, ON: Canada Lands Company Limited. Canada Lands Company and MST Partnership sign an ownership agreement for 4195 Marine Drive. (2018, December 14). Retrieved January 30, 2020, from Canada Lands Company website: https://en.clc.ca/post/632 126 Canada Lands Company Limited. (2019a). 2018/19 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Toronto, ON: Canada Lands Company Limited. Canada Lands Company Limited. (2019b). 2019/2020 To 2023/2024 Corporate Plan Summary. Toronto, ON: Canada Lands Company Limited. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. (2008, July 7). Archived—The Transfer of Legal Title of Surplus Lands at CFB Chilliwack Detachment Jericho from the Department of National Defence to Canada Lands Company. Retrieved January 31, 2020, from Government of Canada website: https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/052/details-eng.cfm?pid=3332 Canseco, M. (2018a, July 19). Sim and Stewart Nearly Tied, Many Still Undecided in Vancouver. Retrieved June 11, 2020, from Research Co. website: https://researchco.ca/2018/07/19/vancouver-july2018/ Canseco, M. (2018b, October 19). Mixed Reviews for Departing City Halls in Vancouver and Surrey. Retrieved June 11, 2020, from Research Co. website: https://researchco.ca/2018/10/19/vancouver-surrey/ CBC News. (2009, September 30). Kapyong transfer invalid, court rules. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from CBC website: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/kapyong-transfer-invalid-court-rules-1.829081 CBC News. (2018, April 11). Few details in Kapyong deal between federal government, Treaty 1 First Nations. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from CBC website: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/kapyong-barracks-agreement-1.4614478 Chaldecott, F. M. (1935). Jericho and golf in the early days in Vancouver, 1892-1905. Vancouver. Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0377570#p0z-5r0f: Chan, K. (2018, March 21). Massive 1920s-built Fairmont Building in Vancouver could be moved to another site. Retrieved February 1, 2020, from Daily Hive website: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/fairmont-building-heather-street-lands-old-rcmp-headquarters-vancouver Chan, K. (2019, July 24). 219 homes proposed for Kingsway in Vancouver’s Norquay Village. Retrieved February 4, 2020, from Daily Hive website: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2725-2751-kingsway-vancouver Chan, K. (2020a, January 29). Jericho Lands’ First Nations developers sign agreement to support UBC SkyTrain. Retrieved February 2, 2020, from Daily Hive website: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/ubc-skytrain-vancouver-first-nations-agreement Chan, K. (2020b, May 1). City of Vancouver seeking to fast track housing projects due to coronavirus impact. Retrieved June 12, 2020, from Daily Hive website: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-housing-strategy-coronavirus Cheung, C. (2019, May 29). Here’s What We Know about Vancouver’s Huge New West Side Development. City of Vancouver. (2010). West Point Grey Community Vision. Vancouver, BC. City of Vancouver. (2014a). Framework for City of Reconciliation. Vancouver, BC. City of Vancouver. (2014b). Olympic Village Chronology of Events and Community Benefits. Vancouver, BC. City of Vancouver. (2018). 2018 Aboriginal Homeless Count in Metro Vancouver. Vancouver, BC. 127 City of Vancouver. (2019a). City of Reconciliation Update (RTS No. 12959). Vancouver, BC. City of Vancouver. (2019b). Economic Structure of Vancouver: GDP of Metro Vancouver [Employment Lands & Economy Review]. Vancouver, BC: City of Vancouver. City of Vancouver. (2020a). Phase 1 Public Engagement Summary. Vancouver, BC: City of Vancouver. City of Vancouver. (2020b). The Jericho Lands Planning Program: Process Update. Vancouver, BC: City of Vancouver. City of Vancouver; Housing Vancouver. (2018). Housing Vancouver Strategy. Vancouver, BC. City of Vancouver Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability Department. (2018). Jericho Lands Policy Planning Program (Administrative Report No. 12688). Vancouver, BC. City, UBC, and MST Development Corporation sign historic agreement to help get SkyTrain all the way to UBC. (2020, January 29). City of Vancouver. Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods. (2019, January 25). Rapid Transit from Arbutus Street to UBC: Coalition does not support staff recommendations, requests Council ‘receive’ reports, not adopt as policy (meeting 30-Jan-2019). Retrieved June 7, 2020, from Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods website: http://coalitionvan.org/posts/rapid-transit-arbutus-to-ubc/ Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods. (2020a, April 6). Re: Electronic Council Meetings and Public Hearings during COVID-19 Emergency. Retrieved from https://coalitionvan.org/posts/cvn-letter-5-april-2020/ Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods. (2020b, April 13). Re: Remote Public Hearings during COVID-19 Emergency. Retrieved from https://coalitionvan.org/posts/democracy-and-remote-public-hearings/ Cockburn, P. J., Bruun, M. H., Risager, B. S., & Thorup, M. (2017). Introduction: Disagreement as a window onto property. In M. H. Bruun, P. J. Cockburn, B. S. Risager, & M. Thorup (Eds.), Contested Property Claims: What Disagreement Tells Us About Ownership (pp. 1–19). London: Routledge. Colbourne, R. (2018). Indigenous Entrepreneurship. In A. C. Corbett & J. A. Katz (Eds.), Hybrid Ventures: Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth (Vol. 19, pp. 93–143). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. Community History & WPGCA. (n.d.). Retrieved November 13, 2019, from West Point Grey website: http://westpointgrey.org/about-wpgcc/history/community-history-wpgca/ Coriolis Consulting Corporation. (2012). Evaluation of the Development Potential of the Provincial Jericho Lands [Draft]. Vancouver, BC. Coulthard, G. S. (2007). Subjects of Empire: Indigenous Peoples and the ‘Politics of Recognition’ in Canada. Contemporary Political Theory, 6, 437–460. Coulthard, G. S. (2014). Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition. Minneapolis: Univ Of Minnesota Press. Cowan, T. (2012). Military Base Closures: Socioeconomic Impacts. Congressional Research Service. Cowan, T., & Webel, B. (2005). Military Base Closure: Socioeconomic Impacts (No. CRS-RS22147). Ft Belvoir, VA: Defense Acquisition University. Cox, K. R. (2017). Revisiting ‘the city as a growth machine.’ Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 10, 391–405. 128 Cox, K. R., & Mair, A. (1988). Locality and Community in the Politics of Local Economic Development. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 78, 307–325. Cox, W., & Pavletich, H. (2019). Fifteenth Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey. St. Louis, MO and Christchurch: Demographia and Performance Urban Planning. Croce, F. (2017). Contextualized indigenous entrepreneurial models: A systematic review of indigenous entrepreneurship literature. Journal of Management and Organization; Lyndfield, 23, 886–906. Cunningham, K., & Klemmer, A. (1995). Restructuring the US Military Bases in Germany: Scope, Impacts, and Opportunities (No. 4). Bonn International Center for Conversion. Current Initiatives. (n.d.). Retrieved January 27, 2020, from MST Development Corporation website: http://mstdevelopment.ca/current-initiatives/ Curry, J., Donker, H., & Krehbiel, R. (2014). Land claim and treaty negotiations in British Columbia, Canada: Implications for First Nations land and self-governance. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe Canadien, 58, 291–304. Dana, L. P. (2015). Indigenous entrepreneurship: An emerging field of research. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 14, 158. Delgamuukw v. British Columbia. , 3 SCR 1010 (Supreme Court of Canada 1997). Dempsey, J., Gould, K., & Sundberg, J. (2011). Changing Land Tenure, Defining Subjects: Neo-liberalism and property regimes on Native reserves. In A. Kobayashi, L. Cameron, & A. Baldwin (Eds.), Rethinking the Great White North: Race, nature, and the historical geographies of whiteness in Canada (pp. 233–255). Vancouver: UBC Press. Directive on the Sale or Transfer of Surplus Real Property. (n.d.). Retrieved January 31, 2020, from Government of Canada website: https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12043&section=html Eby, D. (2015, April 22). The Jericho Lands and the Future of Point Grey. Events. (n.d.). Retrieved June 5, 2020, from Inspire Jericho website: https://inspirejericho.ca/events Fabris, M. (2017). Decolonizing neoliberalism?: First Nations reserves, private property rights, and the legislation of Indigenous dispossession in Canada. In M. H. Bruun, P. J. Cockburn, B. S. Risager, & M. Thorup (Eds.), Contested Property Claims: What Disagreement Tells Us About Ownership (pp. 185–204). Routledge. Fainstein, S. S. (2008). Mega-projects in New York, London and Amsterdam. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32, 768–785. Farahani, A. (2017). Urban Growth Machine. In The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory (pp. 1–4). American Cancer Society. First Nations & Indigenous Studies. (n.d.). Terminology. Retrieved October 7, 2020, from First Nations & Indigenous Studies UBC website: https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/terminology/ Flanagan, T. (2011, December 16). How first nations can own their future. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/how-first-nations-can-own-their-future/article554842/ Flanagan, T., Alcantara, C., & Dressay, A. L. (2010). Beyond the Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights. Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press. 129 Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview. Project Management Journal, 45, 6–19. Former Kapyong Barracks Master Plan. (n.d.). Retrieved September 22, 2020, from Treaty One Development Corporation website: https://www.treaty1.ca/kapyong/ Frequently Asked Questions. (2014, October). Canada Lands Company. Frew, N. (2019, December 23). Demolition of Kapyong Barracks site delayed, now expected to finish in fall 2021. Retrieved June 12, 2020, from CBC website: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/kapyong-barracks-development-delayed-demolition-complete-2021-1.5407512 Fumano, D. (2020, January 31). Dan Fumano: First Nations, city, UBC pushing to go farther, together. Retrieved February 2, 2020, from Vancouver Sun website: https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/dan-fumano-first-nations-city-ubc-pushing-to-go-farther-together Garrison Crossing [Canada Lands Company]. (n.d.). Retrieved May 21, 2019, from https://en.clc.ca/featured-property/13 Geller, M. (2014, July 22). Opinion: The land of Jericho poses an opportunity. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from Vancouver Courier website: https://www.vancourier.com/news/opinion-the-land-of-jericho-poses-an-opportunity-1.1256087 Get it done: Why Ottawa, B.C. and Vancouver should come together to build SkyTrain to UBC. (2020, February 2). The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-get-it-done-why-ottawa-bc-and-vancouver-should-come-together-to/ Gilbert, M. (1999). Place, politics, and the production of urban space: A feminist critique of the growth machine thesis. In Urban Growth Machine, The: Critical Perspectives, Two Decades Later (pp. 95–108). New York: SUNY Press. Gold, K. (2015, May 18). In Vancouver, debate swirls over Jericho Lands. The Globe and Mail. Goldberg, M. A. (2004). Local Property Markets and Effective Flexible Martket Institutions. In W. Seabrooke, P. S. Kent, & H. H. H. How (Eds.), International real estate: An institutional approach (pp. 96–125). Oxford, UK ; Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. Goren, L. J. (2003). The Politics of Military Base Closings: Not in My District. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Goren, L. J., & Lackenbauer, P. W. (2000). The Comparative Politics of Military Base Closures. Orono, ME: Canadian-American Center, University of Maine. Grant, J. L., & Scott, D. E. (2011, December 30). Redefining the Canadian Dream? Household life cycles, housing costs, and aspirations for suburban housing. School of Planning, Dalhousie University. Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests). , 3 SCR 511 (Supreme Court of Canada 2004). Hansen, K. N. (2004). The Greening of Pentagon Brownfields: Using Environmental Discourse to Redevelop Former Military Bases. Lexington Books. Harris, C. (1992). The Lower Mainland, 1820–81. In G. Wynn & T. R. Oke (Eds.), Vancouver and Its Region (pp. 38–68). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. 130 Harris, C. (1997). The Making of the Lower Mainland. In The Resettlement of British Columbia: Essays on Colonialism and Geographical Change (pp. 68–102). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Harris, C. (2002). Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Harris, C. (2004). How Did Colonialism Dispossess? Comments from an Edge of Empire. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94, 165–182. Harris, D. (2017). Property and sovereignty: An Indian reserve and a Canadian city. University of British Columbia Law Review, 50, 321–390. LegalTrac. Harvey, D. (1989). From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 71, 3–17. Hastings, G. (2013, August 15). What will happen to the lucrative and highly-desired Jericho Lands? Retrieved April 3, 2019, from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/783854/what-will-happen-to-the-lucrative-and-highly-desired-jericho-lands/ Heather Lands Policy Statement. (2018). City of Vancouver. Hiebert, D., & Mendez, P. (2008). Settling In: Newcomers in the Canadian Housing Market, 2001-2005 (Research Report: External Research Program No. Socio-economic series 09-002). Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Hindle, K., & Lansdowne, M. (2005). Brave Spirits on New Paths: Toward a Globally Relevant Paradigm of Indigenous Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 18, 131–141. Hindle, K., & Moroz, P. (2009). Indigenous entrepreneurship as a research field: Developing a definitional framework from the emerging canon. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6, 357–385. Hoekstra, G. (2015, June 5). First Nations series: Musqueam’s claim on urban land an economic engine (with video). Retrieved from Vancouver Sun website: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/first+nations+series+musqueam+claim+urban+land+economic+engine+with+video/11101577/story.html Housing Market Information Portal. (n.d.). Retrieved from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation website: https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en#Profile/2410/3/Vancouver Housing Market Information Portal—Point Grey. (n.d.). Retrieved February 5, 2020, from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation website: https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en#Profile/2410120/6/Point%20Grey Howell, M. (2015, September 10). B.C. government mum on Jericho Lands. Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/news/b-c-government-mum-on-jericho-lands-1.2055225 Howell, M. (2016a, September 21). Part 2: Land development big part of Musqueam’s economic future. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/truth-transformation/part-2-land-development-big-part-of-musqueam-s-economic-future-1.2348330 131 Howell, M. (2016b, October 14). Aquilini president to steer development of First Nations’ lands. Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/truth-transformation/aquilini-president-to-steer-development-of-first-nations-lands-1.2365483 Howell, M. (2020, January 29). First Nations, UBC join Vancouver mayor in plea for $4-billion SkyTrain extension. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from Vancouver Courier website: https://www.vancourier.com/news/first-nations-ubc-join-vancouver-mayor-in-plea-for-4-billion-skytrain-extension-1.24064387 Hulchanski, J. D. (2004). What Factors Shape Canadian Housing Policy—The Intergovernmental Role. In R. Young & C. Leuprecht (Eds.), The State of Federation: Municipal-Federal-Provincial Relations in Canada (pp. 221–247). Montreal and Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations. Hull, R., & Soules, G. (1974). Vancouver’s past (First Edition edition). Vancouver: Gordon Soules Economic and Marketing Research. Hutchins, A. (2018, June 7). Trudeau’s rhetoric on First Nations not matched by Canadian attitudes: Poll. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from Maclean’s website: https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/on-first-nations-issues-theres-a-giant-gap-between-trudeaus-rhetoric-and-what-canadians-really-think/ Inspire Jericho. (n.d.). Retrieved from Inspire Jericho website: https://inspirejericho.ca/ Jang, B. (2013, February 5). Norquay rezoning a glimpse of the future—The Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/norquay-rezoning-a-glimpse-of-the-future/article8282868/ Jericho Beach Flying Boat Station (Archived). (2011, July 6). Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20110706184233/http://www.bcyuk.legion.ca/node/745 Jericho Lands Public Engagement Bulletin. (2019, September 6). City of Vancouver. Jericho School for the Deaf • Vancouver Heritage Foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved November 13, 2019, from Vancouver Heritage Foundation website: https://www.vancouverheritagefoundation.org/place-that-matters/jericho-school-for-the-deaf/ Joint Community Notice—Protocol Agreement. (2014, March 21). Musqueam, Squamish and Tsuleil-Waututh Nations. Jonas, A. E. G., & Wilson, D. (Eds.). (1999). Urban Growth Machine, The: Critical Perspectives, Two Decades Later. SUNY Press. Kaganova, O., & Telgarsky, J. (2018). Management of capital assets by local governments: An assessment and benchmarking survey. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 22, 143–156. Kim, C. J. (2018). Bases That Leave: Consequences of US Base Closures and Realignments in South Korea. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 48, 339–357. Kimmett, C. (2007, September 21). Birth of EcoDensity Backlash. Retrieved February 4, 2020, from The Tyee website: http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/09/21/EcoDensity/ Kirkpatrick, L. O., & Smith, M. P. (2011). The Infrastructural Limits to Growth: Rethinking the Urban Growth Machine in Times of Fiscal Crisis. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35, 477–503. Kloepper, K. (2011). Understanding the Legacies of the 2010 Vancouver/Whistler Olympics for the Four Host First Nations (Master’s Thesis, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg and 132 the University of KwaZulu-Natal). Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg and the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Kluckner, M. (1984). Vancouver the way it was (1st edition). North Vancouver, B.C: Whitecap Books. Knapp, A., & Vojnovic, I. (2013). Rethinking the Growth Machine: How to Erase a Chinatown from the Urban Core. Urban Geography, 34, 53–85. Koohsari, M. J., Badland, H., & Giles-Corti, B. (2013). (Re)Designing the built environment to support physical activity: Bringing public health back into urban design and planning. Cities, 35, 294–298. Korzinski, D. (2018, August 27). Banking on a burst bubble: Even half of Metro Vancouver home owners want housing prices to fall. Retrieved from Angus Reid Institute website: http://angusreid.org/metro-vancouver-housing-prices-policy/ Lauermann, J. (2018). Municipal statecraft: Revisiting the geographies of the entrepreneurial city. Progress in Human Geography, 42, 205–224. Lauster, N. (2016). The Death and Life of the Single-Family House: Lessons from Vancouver on Building a Livable City. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Lee, J. (2014, March 29). First Nations co-operate on land deals; Purchases reconcile overlapping land claims, could set example for others. Vancouver Sun. Lee, K. (2019, July 2). Park or bust: Yongsan community discusses US garrison’s future. Retrieved June 3, 2020, from Koreatimes website: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2020/06/177_271248.html Lee, M., Villagomez, E., Eby, D., & Wyly, E. (2008). Making Affordable Housing a Core Principle of Vancouver’s EcoDensity Charter (p. 14). Vancouver, BC: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives BC Office. Lehrer, U., & Laidley, J. (2008). Old Mega-Projects Newly Packaged? Waterfront Redevelopment in Toronto. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32, 786–803. Leo, C., & Anderson, K. (2006). Being Realistic about Urban Growth. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28, 169–189. Ley, D. (2017). Global China and the making of Vancouver’s residential property market. International Journal of Housing Policy, 17, 15–34. Ley, D. (2020). A regional growth ecology, a great wall of capital and a metropolitan housing market. Urban Studies, 1-19. Ley, D., Hiebert, D., & Pratt, G. (1992). Time to grow up? From urban village to world city 1966-91. In G. Wynn & T. R. Oke (Eds.), Vancouver and Its Region (pp. 234–266). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Light, I. (2002). Immigrant Place Entrepreneurs in Los Angeles, 1970–99. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 26, 215–228. Lin, J. (2008). Los Angeles Chinatown: Tourism, Gentrification, and the Rise of an Ethnic Growth Machine. Amerasia Journal, 34, 110–125. Lindsay, N. J., Lindsay, W. A., Jordaan, A., & Hindle, K. (2006). Opportunity recognition attitudes of nascent indigenous entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 3, 56. 133 Lischke, U., & McNab, D. (2005). Introduction. In D. McNab & U. Lischke (Eds.), Walking a tightrope: Aboriginal people and their representations (pp. 1–17). Waterloo, Ont: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Little, S. (2019, January 30). Vancouver city council votes to support future SkyTrain extension to UBC. Retrieved February 1, 2020, from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/4908759/vancouver-ubc-skytrain-extension/ Logan, J. R., & Molotch, H. (1987). Urban fortunes: The political economy of place (20th Anniversary Edition). Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Lu, D. (2000). The Changing Landscape of Hybridity: A Reading of Ethnic Identity and Urban Form in Vancouver. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review, 11, 19–28. JSTOR. Lutz, C. (Ed.). (2009). The Bases of Empire: The Global Struggle Against U.S. Military Posts. London: Pluto Press. Lynch, J. E. (1970). Local economic development after military base closures. New York: Praeger. Mackin, B. (2016a, April 26). B.C. government paying three First Nations $96m in Jericho Lands deal. Retrieved from Business in Vancouver website: https://biv.com/article/2016/04/bc-government-paying-three-first-nations-96m-jeric?fbclid=IwAR2OsI7PgwXcUPp93ArLjmxSrVdzKPLdvKKHpu53m5hMhmoQtUrWnMHNNdc Mackin, B. (2016b, April 27). EXCLUSIVE: Leaked audio says towers part of First Nations’ Jericho Lands vision. Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/news/exclusive-leaked-audio-says-towers-part-of-first-nations-jericho-lands-vision-1.2240837 Margies, N. (2017). Serving the private good through legal manoeuvrings. Urban mega-projects and state-mediated dispossession in Madrid. Articulo - Journal of Urban Research. Martin, B. (2018). From Camp Town to International City: Us Military Base Expansion and Local Development in Pyeongtaek, South Korea. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 42, 967–985. Matas, R. (2000, July 25). Squamish band settles claim for $92.5-million. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/squamish-band-settles-claim-for-925-million/article1041312/ Matthews, J. S. (1933). Early Vancouver (Vol. 2). Vancouver, BC: Brock Webber Printing Co. Ltd. Matthews, J. S. (1955). Conversations with Khahtsahlano, 1932-1954. Vancouver, BC: City Hall. McDonald, R. A. J. (1979). City-Building in the Canadian West: A Case Study of Economic Growth in Early Vancouver, 1886-1893. BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly, 3–28. McDonald, R. A. J. (1996). Making Vancouver: Class, status, and social boundaries, 1863-1913. Vancouver, B.C: UBC Press. McGuckin, A. (2019, August 30). Settlement reached in Kapyong Barracks land. Retrieved September 21, 2020, from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/5836402/settlement-reached-in-kapyong-barracks-land/ McIvor, G. K. (2012). Urban Land Development and the Monetization of Land Assets in Cities Canada Lands Company: A Canadian Success Story. 134 Meiszner, P. (2014, June 25). City of Vancouver formally declares city is on unceded Aboriginal territory [News]. Retrieved January 31, 2020, from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/1416321/city-of-vancouver-formally-declares-city-is-on-unceded-aborginal-territory/ Molotch, H. (1976). The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 309–332. Molotch, H. (1993). The Political Economy of Growth Machines. Journal of Urban Affairs, 15, 29–53. Mossberger, K., & Stoker, G. (2001). The Evolution of Urban Regime Theory: The Challenge of Conceptualization. Urban Affairs Review, 36, 810–835. Müller, M. (2015). The Mega-Event Syndrome: Why So Much Goes Wrong in Mega-Event Planning and What to Do About It. Journal of the American Planning Association, 81, 6–17. Murray, J. (2018, February 10). Joyce Murray: Canada Lands Corporation is committed to coherent planning process for Jericho Lands. Retrieved from The Georgia Straight website: https://www.straight.com/news/1031496/joyce-murray-canada-lands-corporation-committed-coherent-planning-process-jericho-lands Musqueam Band Council. (1984). Musqueam Comprehensive Land Claim: Preliminary Report on Musqueam Land Use and Occupancy. News Release—First Nations sign Protocol Agreement, acquire land. (2014, March 27). Province of British Columbia. News Release—First Nations signal intent to buy Jericho land parcel. (2016, February 12). City of Vancouver. Nicol, E. (1978). Vancouver. Toronto, ON: Doubleday Canada. O’Brien, F. (2016, February 25). First Nations only bidder allowed on Jericho lands. Retrieved from Business in Vancouver website: https://biv.com/article/2016/02/first-nations-only-bidder-allowed-jericho-lands O’Connor, N. (2013, April 18). West Point Grey: The neighbourhood at a glance. Retrieved August 26, 2020, from Vancouver Courier website: https://www.vancourier.com/community/vancouver-special/west-point-grey/west-point-grey-the-neighbourhood-at-a-glance-1.380242 O’Connor, N. (2014, October 1). Consultation promised in wake of mammoth Vancouver land deals. Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: https://www.vancourier.com/news/consultation-promised-in-wake-of-mammoth-vancouver-land-deals-1.1410832 O’Connor, N. (2018, March 19). Moving historic Fairmont building recommended ‘as a measure of Reconciliation.’ Retrieved June 7, 2020, from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/moving-historic-fairmont-building-recommended-as-a-measure-of-reconciliation-1.23206141 O’Connor, N. (2019a, February 26). Future of 90-acre Jericho Lands subject of upcoming open houses. Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: https://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/future-of-90-acre-jericho-lands-subject-of-upcoming-open-houses-1.23646758 O’Connor, N. (2019b, March 3). Jericho Lands development launches with assurances of “full consultation.” Retrieved from Vancouver Courier website: 135 https://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/jericho-lands-development-launches-with-assurances-of-full-consultation-1.23651467 OECD. (2020a). Linking Indigenous Communities with Regional Development in Canada. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2020b). The importance of land for Indigenous economic development. Paris: OECD Publishing. Olds, K. (1996, January). Globalization and the Production of New Urban Spaces: Pacific Rim mega-projects in the late 20th century. Center for Human Settlements. Olds, K. (1998). Globalization and Urban Change: Tales from Vancouver Via Hong Kong. Urban Geography, 19, 360–385. O’Neil, P., & Lee, J. (2014, October 6). Huge land deal opens big tracts of Vancouver to development. Retrieved from Vancouver Sun website: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/commercial-real-estate/Huge+land+deal+opens+tracts+Vancouver+development/10252565/story.html O’Neil, P., & Robinson, M. (2014, February 1). The $3-billion debate over Vancouver’s Jericho Lands. Retrieved from Vancouver Sun website: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/billion+debate+over+Vancouver+Jericho+Lands/9456829/story.html Owens, C. (2009). Challenges in Evaluating Livability in Vancouver, Canada. Parai, L., Solomon, B., & Wait, T. (1996). Assessing the socio‐economic impacts of military installations on their host communities. Defence and Peace Economics, 7, 7–19. Pasternak, S. (2015). How Capitalism Will Save Colonialism: The Privatization of Reserve Lands in Canada. Antipode, 47, 179–196. Pauls, K. (2018, June 8). Demolition of abandoned Winnipeg military base paves way for urban reserve. Retrieved June 12, 2020, from CBC website: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/demolition-of-abandoned-winnipeg-military-base-paves-way-for-urban-reserve-1.4695729 Peck, J. (2014). Entrepreneurial urbanism: Between uncommon sense and dull compulsion. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 96, 396–401. Peck, J., Siemiatycki, E., & Wyly, E. (2014). Vancouver’s suburban involution. City, 18, 386–415. Peloquin, G. (1966, October 18). Jericho Land Owned by B.C. The Sun. Penner, D. (2020, February 4). MST helps make First Nations ‘powerful in our territories once again.’ Retrieved February 4, 2020, from Vancouver Sun website: https://vancouversun.com/news/mst-development-corp-is-about-first-nations-becoming-powerful-in-our-territories-once-again Perdue, W. C., Stone, L. A., & Gostin, L. O. (2003). The Built Environment and Its Relationship to the Public’s Health: The Legal Framework. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1390–1394. Perkins, M. (2018, May 3). House rich, tax poor: How a Point Grey couple is struggling to pay school surtax. Retrieved February 4, 2020, from Vancouver Courier website: http://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/house-rich-tax-poor-how-a-point-grey-couple-is-struggling-to-pay-school-surtax-1.23290979 136 Perry, J. (2016, April 8). Province sells Jericho Lands for $480 million. Retrieved from BCBusiness website: https://www.bcbusiness.ca/province-sells-jericho-lands-for-480-million Pethick, D. (1984). Vancouver, the Pioneer Years, 1774-1886 (First Printing. edition). Langley, B.C: Sunfire Publications. Planning a liveable, sustainable city. (n.d.). Retrieved June 11, 2020, from City of Vancouver website: https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/urban-planning.aspx Point Grey (Vancouver) Housing Market Report | November 2019 Real Estate Trends & Stats. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2019, from Zolo website: https://www.zolo.ca/vancouver-real-estate/point-grey/trends Point Grey—Historical Average Rents by Bedroom Type. (2019, October). Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Porter, B. (1965, August 27). History of Jericho: First Bushwhackers, Now Come the Bikinis. The Sun. Proclamation “Year of Reconciliation.” (2013, June 21). City of Vancouver. Pynn, L., & Hoekstra, G. (2015, June 5). First Nations series: Staking claims in the B.C. economy. Retrieved from Vancouver Sun website: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/first+nations+series+staking+winning+their+claims/11096173/story.html Quastel, N., Moos, M., & Lynch, N. (2012). Sustainability-As-Density and the Return of the Social: The Case of Vancouver, British Columbia. Urban Geography, 33, 1055–1084. Ratchford, P. (2018, September 22). The B.C. “school tax” is, in reality, a failed land-value tax experiment. Retrieved February 4, 2020, from The Georgia Straight website: https://www.straight.com/news/1140266/paul-ratchford-bc-school-tax-reality-failed-land-value-tax-experiment Ratten, V., & Dana, L.-P. (2017). Gendered perspective of indigenous entrepreneurship. Small Enterprise Research, 24, 62–72. Reyes, V. (2015). Legacies of Place and Power: From Military Base to Freeport Zone. City & Community, 14, 1–26. Rodgers, S. (2020). Urban Growth Machine. In A. Kobayashi (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Human Geography (Second Edition) (pp. 59–64). Oxford: Elsevier. Roof, K., & Oleru, N. (2008). Public Health: Seattle and King County’s Push for the Built Environment. Journal of Environmental Health, 71, 24–27. JSTOR. Ryan, D. (2010, June). Lack of location forces Kitsilano Daycare to shut down. Vancouver Sun. Sherlock, T. (2019, March 6). First Nations, partners launch consultation for development of Vancouver’s Jericho Lands [News, Commentary]. Retrieved June 6, 2020, from National Observer website: https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/03/06/features/first-nations-partners-launch-consultation-development-vancouvers-jericho-lands Siemiatycki, M. (2013). Riding the wave: Explaining cycles in urban mega-project development. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 16, 160–178. Silver, J. J., Meletis, Z. A., & Vadi, P. (2012). Complex context: Aboriginal participation in hosting the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. Leisure Studies, 31, 291–308. 137 Simons, R. A., & Pai, S. H. (2008). Indigenous Land Claims in Canada: A Retrospective Analysis. In R. A. Simons, R. M. Malmgren, & G. Small (Eds.), Indigenous Peoples and Real Estate Valuation. New York, NY: Springer. Smith, C. (2009, June 24). Vancouver’s Olympic Village costs escalate. Retrieved June 8, 2020, from The Georgia Straight website: https://www.straight.com/article-236560/olympic-costs-escalate Smith, S. J. (2015). Owner occupation: At home in a spatial, financial paradox. International Journal of Housing Policy, 15, 61–83. Sorenson, D. S. (2019). More military base closure? Considering the alternatives. Defense & Security Analysis, 35, 23–39. Sorenson, D., & Stenberg, P. (2015). The Effect of Military Base Closures on Rural County Economies: An Evaluation of the 1988-1995 Rounds of Cuts. International Advances in Economic Research; Edwardsville, 21, 167–187. Sparke, M. (1998). A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 88, 463–495. St. Denis, J. (2018, May 15). Vancouver’s Heather Street Lands move closer to redevelopment. Retrieved from The Star website: https://www.thestar.com/vancouver/2018/05/15/vancouvers-heather-street-lands-move-closer-to-redevelopment.html Statistics Canada. (2018a). Musqueam Nation [First Nation/Indian band or Tribal Council area], British Columbia (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2016 Census (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. No. 98-510-X2016001). Ottawa. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/abpopprof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=AB&Code1=2016C1005493&Data=Count&SearchText=Musqueam%20Nation&SearchType=Begins&B1=Income&C1=All&SEX_ID=1&AGE_ID=1&RESGEO_ID=1 Statistics Canada. (2018b). Squamish [First Nation/Indian band or Tribal Council area], British Columbia (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2016 Census (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. No. 98-510-X2016001). Ottawa. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/abpopprof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=AB&Code1=2016C1005498&Data=Count&SearchText=Squamish&SearchType=Begins&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoCode=2016C1005498&SEX_ID=1&AGE_ID=1&RESGEO_ID=1 Statistics Canada. (2018c). Tsleil-Waututh Nation [First Nation/Indian band or Tribal Council area], British Columbia (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2016 Census (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. No. 98-510-X2016001). Ottawa. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/abpopprof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=AB&Code1=2016C1005492&Data=Count&SearchText=Tsleil%2DWaututh%20Nation&SearchType=Begins&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoCode=2016C1005492&SEX_ID=1&AGE_ID=1&RESGEO_ID=1 Stoker, G., & Mossberger, K. (1994). Urban Regime Theory in Comparative Perspective. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 12, 195–212. Stone, C. N. (1993). Urban Regimes and the Capacity to Govern: A Political Economy Approach. Journal of Urban Affairs, 15, 1–28. 138 Surborg, B., VanWynsberghe, R., & Wyly, E. (2008). Mapping the Olympic growth machine. City, 12, 341–355. The 50 Most Powerful People in Vancouver Right Now. (2017, November 20). Retrieved June 12, 2020, from Vancouver Magazine website: https://www.vanmag.com/vancouver-magazine-2017-power-50-list The 2018 VanMag Power 50 List: Meet the Most Powerful People in the City Right Now. (2018, November 5). Retrieved June 12, 2020, from Vancouver Magazine website: https://www.vanmag.com/the-2018-vanmag-power-50-list-meet-the-most-powerful-people-in-the-city-right-now The Role of Aboriginal Economic Development Corporations in Canada’s Business Paradigm Shift. (2015, November 10). Canadian Council for Aboriginal Business. The Site. (n.d.). Retrieved from Inspire Jericho website: https://inspirejericho.ca/site Thom, B. (2009). The paradox of boundaries in Coast Salish territories. Cultural Geographies, 16, 179–205. Thom, B. (2014). Reframing Indigenous Territories: Private Property, Human Rights and Overlapping Claims. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 38, 3–28. Todd, D. (2020, September 21). Jericho Lands planning proceeds slowly, especially with pandemic. Retrieved September 21, 2020, from Vancouver Sun website: https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-jericho-lands-planning-proceeds-slowly-especially-with-pandemic Todd, R. (2008). Aboriginal Peoples and the Land: Ownership, Understanding and Development. British Journal of Canadian Studies; Liverpool, 21, 105-128,152. Toogood, J. R. (1965). A Study to Determine the Feasibility of Converting the Jericho Beach Army Establishment to a Tract Primarily of Single Family Dwellings. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. Transfer or sale of Defence properties [Education and awareness]. (2013, March 19). Retrieved May 18, 2020, from Government of Canada website: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/services/transfer-sale-defence-properties.html Truths of reconciliation: Canadians are deeply divided on how best to address Indigenous issues. (2018, June 7). Retrieved September 22, 2020, from Angus Reid Research website: http://angusreid.org/indigenous-canada/ Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes and Values. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Turner, C., & Fondahl, G. (2015). “Overlapping claims” to territory confronting treaty-making in British Columbia: Causes and implications. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe Canadien, 59, 474–488. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. , Pub. L. No. A/RES/61/295 (2007). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Turning Bases Into Great Places: New Life for Closed Military Facilities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Vancouver Coastal Health, Fraser Health, and University of British Columbia. (2018). My Health, My Community: Social Connection and Health. British. Vancouver—Average Value of Owner-occupied Dwellings ($). (2016). Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 139 VanWynsberghe, R., Derom, I., & Maurer, E. (2012). Social leveraging of the 2010 Olympic Games: ‘Sustainability’ in a City of Vancouver initiative. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 4, 185–205. Vanwynsberghe, R., Surborg, B., & Wyly, E. (2013). When the Games Come to Town: Neoliberalism, Mega-Events and Social Inclusion in the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37, 2074–2093. Vine, D. (2015). Base Nation: How U.S. Military Bases Abroad Harm America and the World. Metropolitan Books. Warson, A. (2003, March 18). Bases bring in a “peace dividend.” The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/bases-bring-in-a-peace-dividend/article22499317/ Weicht, C. (1997). Jericho Beach and the West Coast Flying Boat Stations. Chemainus, B.C: MCW Enterprises. West Point Grey Academy. (2019). WPGA Annual Report 2017-2018. Vancouver, BC. West Point Grey Residents Association. (2018, March 27). Re: Proposed BC Property Tax School Surcharge. Retrieved from http://wpgra.ca/ West Point Grey Residents Association. (2019a, January 27). RE: Rapid Transit from Arbutus Street to UBC. Retrieved from https://wogra.wordpress.com West Point Grey Residents Association. (2019b, April). West Point Grey Residents Association Community Meeting. Presented at the Vancouver, BC. Vancouver, BC. Retrieved from https://wpgra.wordpress.com/2019/04/16/april-11-2019-wpgra-meeting-on-jericho-lands-and-ubc-transit/ West Point Grey Residents Association. (2020a, February 16). Re: Open House—Rezoning Application—3701-3743 W. Broadway, at Alma St. Retrieved from https://wpgra.files.wordpress.com/2020/02/wpgra-rezoning-broadway-alma-feb.16-2020.pdf West Point Grey Residents Association. (2020b, June 24). Re: Public Hearing—1. Regulation Redesign—Amendments to Zoning & Development and Parking By-laws. Retrieved from http://wpgra.ca/ West Point Grey—Neighborhood Social Indicators Profile 2019. (2019, November). City of Vancouver. Westerhoff, L. M. (2016). Emerging Narratives of a Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood: The Case of Vancouver’s Olympic Village. Articulo - Journal of Urban Research. Wetzstein, S. (2017). The global urban housing affordability crisis. Urban Studies, 54, 3159–3177. WI Staff. (2019, October 17). First Nations call the shots in real estate negotiations. Retrieved July 10, 2020, from Western Investor website: http://www.westerninvestor.com/news/british-columbia/first-nations-call-the-shots-in-real-estate-negotiations-1.23952957 Wynn, G. (1992). The rise of Vancouver. In G. Wynn & T. R. Oke (Eds.), Vancouver and Its Region (pp. 69–87). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Zussman, R. (2019, January 1). British Columbia’s most expensive homes took a value hit in 2018. Retrieved from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/4806516/british-columbia-expensive-homes-property-values-2018/
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Geography
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Unpacking Inspire Jericho : luxury real estate development and First Nations in Vancouver
Text