Talk:University Endowment Lands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This article is primarily related to the district of the University Endowment Lands

Vancouver Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Vancouver, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and the surrounding metropolitan area. To participate, edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.


Contents

[edit] Revisions to the table

Hmmm... not sure about adding all the Island municipalities (and bodies of water) to the table. It's a lot cleaner, and more useful, if we keep it to neighbouring municipalities IMHO. (The centre colour is a nice touch, though!) --Ckatz 19:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UEL in zone 1

I was thinking of replacing the article's last sentence in the first paragraph with: "While not within Vancouver city limits and not controlled by the City of Vancouver, it is commonly referred to as part of Vancouver in casual conversation. For example, Canada Post uses Vancouver for UEL addresses. Additionally, the UEL is part of Zone 1 (the most inner-city zone) in TransLink’s zone fare system." to emphasize how for all practical purposes UEL is part of Vancouver. Any second opinions?

I think that's more appropriate for TransLink's fares article (it's already on that article). -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 23:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ARTICLE

The sole purpose of this article is to cover the UEL, is it not?

1.The many references to the UBC lands make the article confusing and misleading.

2.UBC and the UEL are different entities. For example a resident of Hampton Place lives on land owned by the University (99 year lease). Whereas a resident of the UEl is not subjected to such a lease. http://www.ubc.ca/about/campus.html

3.The map covering both the UEL and UBC is also misleading. SEE http://uel.ceiarchitecture.com/uelmap.asp


-I recommend the establishment of a separate UBC lands article.

-The current article would only make sense in the event of an amalgamation between the UEl and UBC.

-In the meantime I'll head this article under UEL/UBC

!!!MASSIVE CLEAN-UP IS NEEDED!!!

However, most (if not all) maps out there put UBC as within the UEL, but separately owned. (I have NEVER seen a mapbook that separates UBC within the UEL via anything more than an institutional border, which exists for many other entities within other cities as well.) That's the difference -- there is the same difference with SFU and Burnaby. This article talks a lot about UBC because ultimately, the history and development of the UEL is dependent on the university (I suggest a re-reading of the history section of the article). Without such an emphasis, there is really nothing truly noteworthy about the UEL at all. And as for the residents living at Hampton Place, they are ultimately living on university property, which is separately owned. It's not a question of whether UBC is within the UEL (because it is) but rather a question of land ownership. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 09:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


Why not establish a separate UBC Campus article?--24.80.25.172 00:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

If a referendum was to be held (in the UEL) to determine the status of the UEL proper, someone in Hampton place would not be allowed to vote.

The campus is not apart of the UEL, "The University Endowment Lands community (also known as University Hill) is situated adjacent to the campus to the east..."

The acronym "UEL" has simply lost meaning.

The stats you used are from the statcan website are they not, the heading of that article is University Endowment Area, not UEL

For more information please contact the UEL lands office

5495 Chancellor Blvd

Tel. 604-660-1810

I will certainly check it out, but please do remember that people also say that Burnaby is adjacent to SFU, so just because it says that doesn't make it so. Also, the quote says "The University Endowment Lands community", so I think there's a strong chance you're misinterpreting that line -- the community of the UEL is different from the UEL itself, like how SFU is not really part of the community of Burnaby but next to it. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:COA-BC-Large.jpg

Image:COA-BC-Large.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Land Claims?

What a huge sleight on the Musqueam community. This article gives absolutely no mention of the land claims history in UEL, nor does it include Musqueam among groups to be consulted in the event that UEL be developed or changed. Musqueam has not signed any treaty or consented to the extinguishment of its title, and to this date, maintains a title claim to its traditional territories, which include the UEL. The Province recognizes this and therefore will be engaging in treaty negotiations with Musqueam. The facts are easily accesible for those who care: the Province has been trying to shuffle sections of the UEL off to "third party" groups as a means to prevent traditional territories from being included in the treaty process -- any Crown land handed off to a third party is considered beyond the treaty process. In 2005, the Supreme court ruled against the province for surreptitiously shuffling land (the UBC Golf course) onto a third party (UBC). The same tactic was tried, with more success, 20 years ago, when the province forced Pacific Spirit Park on the GVRD. the GVRD finally accepted the transfer on condition that it "not prejudice future aboriginal claims to the land". Recenlty, UEL residents reacted with anger when they found out that the Golf Course may be transferred to Musqueam as a result of negotiations. Their anger of course stems from a total lack of understanding vis-a-vis the history. This wiki article is only one example of the manipulated history that informs UEL residents in their own politics.

Before tossing around claims of "manipulated history", I'd suggest you take the time to go through the article's edit history. I'd be surprised if you can find any suggestion of a conscious effort to avoid the land claims issue. Indeed, I suspect it is more likely that the regulars who tend this page just aren't up on the particulars of the situation. You'll find that you can get a lot farther by asking politely, and providing verifiable facts and useful links, rather than by making unsubstantiated accusations. --Ckatzchatspy 09:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I actually might not have presumed anything about the author, had I not read the section about consultations: "Development, in large part, is very limited -- for any proposed developments in the UEL by the Greater Vancouver Regional District or the University of British Columbia, the following groups must be consulted beforehand: university students, university staff, university faculty, environmental groups, businesses, residents and the general public." The writer seems to deliberately leave out that if the Province wants to develop or sell the land, it is actually legally bound to consult Musqueam -- and in fact, legally speaking, that obligation is far more serious than the obligations of the GVRD and UBC to the "university students, university staff, university faculty, environmental groups, businesses, residents and the general public". For example, I myself am a student at the university who has only been "consulted" on a small fraction of development projects in the UEL, especially on South Campus, where the University conducts no consultations whatever. There have been no legal repercussions for the university, in contrast to the court's 2005 decision to order a reversal of the Province's bad-faith sale of the Golf Course to UBC in 2003. Anyways, the person who wrote this article cites other articles that discuss Musqueam. Actually, anybody who researches the UEL for an article, especially an article as comprehensive as the one here, will come across information on Musqueam. If the author knows nothing about Musqueam, or about the Province's illegal Golf Course transfer, s/he is exceptional among those who know about the UEL. But that is secondary to another question: Why do you care more about my "unsubstantiated accusations" than about the fact that Musqueam have been made invisible in this article?