Living wages

Esquimalt Council recently endorsed a living wage policy that will advance the municipality forward to esnure that city workers and contractors are paid enough to live in Victoria.  It's been spearhead by Councillor Randall Garrison.  It's slow going but it's a good idea. 

We need to find ways to provide more income equity in Canada and market forces are unsufficient to achieve that objective.  That said, a very strong supporter of free markets in this country, the Canada West Foundation, has even published recently on the issue of civil servant pay and the performance of governments and economies.  Holding onto skilled workers requires paying them a decent living and it is not cost effective to try and suppress wages or salaries in pursuit of illusory tax savings.  Governments, like any business in the private sector, are delivering a product or a service, and key to provide value for money is having that skilled, experienced workforce.  Losing staff or having to rehire, train up etc. is a costly strategy for any organization.

As living wage discussions take centre stage, some of the other discussions around compensation are worth looking at.  Here's the Canada West piece; good reading on the subject:  http://cwf.ca/_webapp_1198328/Cutting_Civil_Servants_Pay_a_Bad_Idea

Evolving Douglas Street

Douglas Street is the right corridor for rapid transit in Victoria and Saanich.  It ranked high in evaluations conducted by BC Transit analysts.  Certainly those in the community who understand how transit works also support Douglas for the new project.

There is some resistance, however, from those in the community who believe that any project that proposes to diminish capacity for vehicle travel or storage (parking), will ruin downtown.

I expect to work my blog, Facebook updates and my Flickr page to counter some of the myths over the next few weeks as we work towards a decision at the Regional Transit Commission, where I also sit as a member.  We need to be mindful of the concerns of our business community but we do need to build a more effective and responsive transit system.

One flaw in the argument about how traffic works on Douglas (or throughout most of the system in fact), is that the demand for vehicle travel and parking is constant and overwhelming.  It's not supported by the facts, and for many retailers, their most important market is the 17 shopping days leading up to Christmas.  Traffic congestion and the demand for parking is high and it is the formula that drives the design of shopping mall parking lots.  Street design can't provide for that small slice of the travel market only to leave streets underutilized and parking spaces empty for the rest of the year.

That's a bit simplistic.  Traffic on Douglas does bunch up in morning and afternoon rush hours when workforces are commuting to and fro, but transit improvements would sure help to relieve the pressure and make it easier for those who must or choose to drive to get into or out of downtown.  For shoppers, who may not always be traveling at commute times, that congestion is irrelevant - Douglas St. is not overburdened at other hours of the day.

More to come but here's a glimpse of Douglas during the day.  There's no lack of space for shoppers coming downtown by car here:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5375349509/

Green Buildings and Transportation

The Chicago Tribune lately posted an article by Julie Wernau on the disconnect between the green building movement and the transportation impacts of development.  More and more, however, the development industry, local governments and other public agenicies and private sector players are recognizing that a key element of the carbon footprint of any building is related moreso to how people get to and from their workplace or other destinations than it is to the energy efficiency of the building itself.

A "green building" or neighbourhood in the middle of nowhere, far from services, transit, or in a transportation environment hostile to biking and walking, is no benefit to the environment.  It is important to build to new standards that require energy efficiency and minimize emissions from building energy use for heat, light, water use etc. More importantly though, a building houses people or workplaces, and how those people travel is more critical to the carbon footprint of our built environment.

Recently I sent in comments to the latest revisions on green building standards, mostly related to providing a more supportive cycling and walking environment.  The Tribune article goes one further to talk about location, location, location - the classic real estate mantra.  We need to locate buildings within or near to services and other destinations serving people (recreation, health services, entertainment etc.) so that they can walk or bike more often.  We need to connect residential density, commercial and workplace developments with transit services so people don't need to drive everywhere.  We also need to stop building on "greenfields" - cheap, undeveloped land distant from urban areas where the services and transportation network are already in place.

Read more at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-1227-outlook-energy-index-20101227,0,202383.story

Following Transit

As debate starts to heat up around Victoria's regional rapid transit plans, looking back at the experience and coverage of transit issues in other cities will be useful to inform the discussion.

The Tyee covered the choices between rail and bus rapid transit systems in Vancouver, noting the performance of streetcars during the Vancouver Winter Olympics last February.

Victoria and Saanich councils have both endorsed rail based, light rapid transit systems as the preferred option, and the story helps to explain some of the reasons why what makes sense elsewhere is a good model for us to follow at home.

You can read the story here:
http://thetyee.ca/News/2010/10/01/Streetcars/?utm_source=mondayheadlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=041010

Green Buildings, Cycling and Transit

Just finished up making comments to the U.S. Green Building Council LEED for Neighbourhood Design. Sent my ideas for better defining their bicycle parking standards, contributions to cycling networks and quality of transit services serving developments. Hope it adds some value to their public comment process.

Find it at:

http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8185

Rapid transit and the evolution of our streets

Council recently endorsed Douglas St. as the preferred corridor a new rapid transit service connecting downtown with Uptown and the Westshore.  Transit will see dramatic improvements while pedestrians and cyclists can also expect some enhancements too.  Not so happy are some of those who believe that the reduction in vehicle lanes and on-street parking will destroy downtown business.  Some business fear that their customers will disappear and other voices decry the "war on the car". 

The development of the transit project has been evolving over the last couple of years, with extensive consultation involving the many stakeholders in the community that will be affected by the change.  Public protest notwithstanding, business has been consulted through surveys and the many open house events, all well advertised, and presenting ample opportunity for business owners and the public to get engaged.

Transit planners and city council are well aware of the concerns and have listened to feedback on the issues facing downtown business and the customers they rely on.  Highway congestion, growing density downtown and a need for more office and commercial space demands new approaches to transportation in the region and the transit plan is an important and positive step forward.

Future blog entries will share more of the research analyzing transit options and the work that has gone into developing this plan.

If there is a "war on the car", we are still losing - vehicle dependence is still growing in the region.  Walking for transportation has been dropping, mostly due to school consolidation.  Bicycle trips have jumped significantly, but still account for less than 10% of commuter trips in the region, though the share of traffic in the urban core is still higher than in any other city in North America.  Transit use is edging upwards, but more and significant investments are needed to attract people out of their cars.  It's not a "war", but we do need to provide people with more and better choices - it's an environmental imperative.  We don't have the space to accommodate more and more cars and the threats posed by climate change demand that we shift our choices to more sustainable modes.

The fear that businesses will lose customers is a more substantive issue than the overblown rhetoric about the attack on poor Hummer drivers.  We do need to be sure to share the thoughtful analysis that has gone into planning for a more transit oriented corridor into downtown.  Space for cars and on-street parking, however, is much less important to consumers than business assumes, and for many of them, the changes coming will be positive, if not profitable.

Let's start with a recent study out of Toronto, where bike lanes have been proposed for Bloor St., one of the city's key commercial arteries.  One of the key features of the new Douglas St. will be more robust bicycle lanes, often a target for some who would sacrifice bike facilities to preserve space for parking or vehicle lanes.  Transit isn't trying to dislodge people off of their bikes, rather we are trying to get people out of their cars, so disenfranchising cyclists would be counterproductive to the objectives of the project.  Besides, cyclists, no less than anyone else, are coming downtown to work, to shop or be entertained, and they are using the same routes and headed for the same destinations that everyone else is.  "Complete streets" that accommodate everyone are essential to a balanced and effective transportation system - preserving priority for vehicles is neither equitable nor sustainable.

The Toronto study is useful in at least challenging some of the misconceptions about business, their customers, and the impacts of changing street design on travel and shopping habits.  It's an interesting read for anyone looking for more background on what the future of Douglas might look like.

Here's a link to the study, and watch for more blog postings on my site:
http://www.cleanairpartnership.org/pdf/bike-lanes-parking.pdf

Failure of credibility

It's probably safe to assume that more people read Focus Magazine than read my blog, so many of those reading here may be familiar with the endless downplaying of seismic risks for our now condemned bridge (by virtue of the referendum vote of just better than 60% giving us the borrwoing authority we need to build a new one).  Their latest issue suggests there is no need to protect our bridge because much of downtown will be rubble anyway.

That's incorrect, since all new construction and many older buildings supported by heritage property tax holidays are being protected to current building code levels, so, as was the case in Chile (Focus must think we are Haiti), damage will be more limited, life safety better protected, and our ability to recover more resilient.

There's lots more fault to find with Focus now, and then (during their long campaign against the new bridge), but for the time being, at least, one interesting read is an article from the Globe and Mail's Report on Business detailing some of the concerns of the insurance industry with respect to how well we are prepared for a major quake, which they also note is likely to hit the west coast sometime in the not too distant future.

An opening note in the article remarks on the need to upgrade critical infrastructure, including bridges,  to withstand a major seismic event.  My research, reported elsewhere on this blog or at my website, covered the issue from a couple of perspectives - bridges are at the top of the priority list of critical infrastructure and investing in protection or mitigation provides net positive benefits are two topics covered in some detail.

Now that the citizens, well enough informed I think, have endorsed the project, we are working towards covering off that one critical link in our own transportation network that will help protect life safety, ensure emergency response and other critical services have access to intact infrastructure, and provide for recovery in the event of an earthquake.

While Focus now suggests that the process and the decision are tainted by a "failure to inform", the real failure here is one of credibility.  There hasn't been much of value there on the issue of what potential threats we face in Victoria from a major earthquake, but just in case you haven't read enough, here's the Globe article:  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canada-not-prepared-for-major-earthquake-insurers-warn/article1823164/