GHG Emissions Down in Metro Vancouver. Air Quality Improving.

Earlier this summer, Metro Vancouver released its annual “Caring for the Air” report based on its extensive network of air quality monitoring stations. This report showed that over the last decade most air pollutants have been decreasing except for ground-level ozone. More information on this report is available in a previous blog post.

Metro Vancouver has now completed another report on air pollution in our region with information that goes back to 1995. This report, used for looking at longer-term trends, is completed every five years using emission inventory data. The good news is our air quality is getting better.

Greenhouse gas emissions are down in our region after peaking in the 1990s. A reduction in industrial activity, power generation (Burrard Thermal), and fuel consumption have helped lower GHG emissions even as the population grows. Even with this decrease, GHG emissions from motor vehicles are increasing.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Lower Fraser Valley Airshed. Select chart to enlarge.

As I posted about previously, fine particulate matter emissions are also down across the region except for residential wood burning. This is why the regional district is looking at introducing regulations to encourage people to stop using wood-burning appliances.

Fine Particulate Matter in the Lower Fraser Valley Airshed. Select chart to enlarge.

Smog forming pollutants are also down over the last 20 years. This is mainly due to improved engine emissions standards and the former AirCare program.

Smog Forming Pollutants in the Lower Fraser Valley Airshed. Select chart to enlarge.

Over the last five years, many of these reductions have slowed. Further action will be required to ensure that air quality and GHG emissions continue to decrease in Metro Vancouver and the Lower Fraser Valley airshed, even as the population and economy continue to grow.

New Study: Rent subsidies a way to make apartments affordable near transit

In May 2016, the Metro Vancouver Regional District adopted a Regional Affordable Housing Strategy. One of the goals in the strategy is to increase the “rental housing supply along the Frequent Transit Network.” The regional district recently released a report called “Analysis of the Financial Viability of New Purpose-Built Rental Housing at Transit-Oriented Locations in Metro Vancouver.”

Map of case study sites used in the report.

This new report looks a several sites along the Frequent Transit Network in Metro Vancouver, comparing the sale price for condos, market rental value, and what the upper limit would be for these units to be affordable. Affordable studio and 1-bedroom units mean that a household making $30,000 would spend a third of their income on rent. Affordable 2-bedroom units mean a household making $50,000 would spend a third of their income on rent. The proceeding graphs show that there is a gap between affordable and market rental rates for both concrete and wood-frame apartments in Metro Vancouver.

Key Numbers in the Development of New Concrete Apartment Units (Strata Titled and Rental). Select chart to enlarge.

Key Numbers in the Development of New Wood Frame Apartment Units (Strata Titled and Rental). Select chart to enlarge.

The reports authors note that units can only be affordable if one or more of the following conditions are met:

• The construction costs are reduced.
• The land must be free or very low value
• The housing developer is content to earn a project management fee and the investor is content to earn a relatively low return on investment, but they are not compensated for risk to the extent the private sector normally expects.
• The rent is topped up by a subsidy

When it comes to building new affordable rental units, the authors of the report note that there are really three approaches that are viable in our current system.

One approach is that affordable rentals are funded by government. This could be done, but this would be a slow and costly process that would take a decade for enough affordable housing units to be built.

The second approach is to allow increased density for projects if a developer builds a certain percent of affordable rental units. This is a tool that is already used today, and is limited in its effectiveness given the severe shortage of affordable housing in our region.

The final option is to provide people a rent subsidy. Providing a rent subsidy for apartments would likely be the most expedient way to make housing affordable in our region. Local governments need to zone areas around the Frequent Transit Network for higher density. Currently, local government cannot zone based on tenure. The province could also consider allowing local governments to have “rental zones” near frequent transit to ensure that affordable housing is build near the Frequent Transit Network.

New safer bike lanes, additional parking, and a loading zoning along 53/51B Avenue

If you’ve walked, cycled, or driven along 53 Avenue/51B Avenue over the last few days, you’ve likely seem some changes along that corridor.

53 Avenue near 204 Street, Before. Select image to enlarge.

53 Avenue near 204 Street, After. Select image to enlarge.

When I first moved to Langley City, I wondered why 53/51B Avenue was so wide, and looked like a highway in some sections. This corridor was originally supposed to be a Langley Bypass-style road, but due to the Langley Bypass, became redundant. Today, this corridor has very low motor vehicle traffic volume, and doesn’t require four lanes.

One of the goals of Langley City is to make our streets multi-modal, making walking and cycling safer and more convenient. Early this year, the City received funding from the provincial government to add bike lanes along the 53 Avenue/51B Avenue corridor.

Comparing the safety, comfort, space, and cost of bike lanes. Select image to enlarge. Source: Global Designing Cities Initiative

With this funding, the City installed buffered bike lanes along much of the corridor. A buffered bike lane is safer than a conventional bike lane, and has the following benefits according to the National Association of City Transportation Officials:

• Provides greater shy distance between motor vehicles and bicyclists.
• Provides space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane.
• Encourages bicyclists to ride outside of the door zone when buffer is between parked cars and bike lane.
• Provides a greater space for bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide that it might be mistaken for a travel lane or a parking lane.
• Appeals to a wider cross-section of bicycle users.
• Encourages bicycling by contributing to the perception of safety among users of the bicycle network.

The safest bike lanes are protected bike lanes, similar to what is along 203 Street.

Besides installing safer bike lanes, the City was able to install 26 on-street parking spots along 51B Avenue near the Seniors Centre, and a new loading zone near 204 Street. Some parking was remove between 203 and 204 Street, but overall there is a net gain in parking along the corridor.

There is still some work to be done including adjusting some of the traffic lights and installing some flexible bollards at intersections.

With the installation of safer cycling infrastructure complete along 203 Street and 53/51B Avenue, Langley City now has a basic connected, usable bike network that can get you to all quadrants of our community.

Municipal election campaign reform coming to BC. What does it mean for self-financed campaigns?

Reforming election financing in British Columbia was a front and centre issue during the last provincial election. At the local level, it has been known for several years that there were changes coming for the 2018 municipal election and beyond.

In the past, candidates running in local elections could receive money from a person, corporation, union or other organization. There were no limits to the amount a candidate could receive or spend for an election campaign. For example, a candidate could receive a $20,000 cheque from a corporation or union with no issue.

The known change was setting campaign spending limits based on the size of a community. In Langley City, a mayoral candidate would have a campaign spending limit of around $20,000, and a council candidate would have a campaign spending limit of around $10,000.

Yesterday, the provincial government announced further limits for who and how much can be donated to a candidate for the 2018 and future local government elections. Campaign donations can only be from “individuals who are residents of British Columbia and who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents.” An individual can donate up to $1,200 per year.

From my perspective, these changes will really only impact people running in large municipalities in our province. Based on my last campaign, I won’t be at risk of hitting any of the limits.

I know many candidates self-finance their campaign. Many do this to ensure that they remain truly independent. What remains unclear to me is if a candidate will also be capped to donating $1,200 per year to their own campaign.

I fully support both limiting the amount of money that a candidate can spend during an election campaign, and ensuring that only British Columbians can donate to a candidate. I am a bit concerned about what it means for people that choose to self-finance their campaign. Over the coming months, I’m hoping the provincial government will add more clarity around self-financing.