Stephen Rees's blog

Thoughts about the relationships between transport and the urban area it serves

Another reason why the province needs to fund transit

with 6 comments

Thanks to Spacing Vancouver‘s mis-transcription of a headline I have come across some very important, Canadian, research. This shows that spending billions of dollars widening a freeway, including the widest  bridge in the world, is going to be costing us huge amounts of public funds long into the future.


This is a screen shot of the day’s headlines – and it was that first story I noticed. Actually the story is titled

An Alarmingly Strong Link Between Lack of Walkability and Diabetes

and I have left that as a headline and made it a clickable link. A new study out of Toronto just published online in the journal Diabetes Care shows that if you live in a place where walking is difficult – like most new subdivisions – you have a much higher risk of developing diabetes.

The study looked at just about everyone in Toronto aged 30-64 – the population experiencing the most rapid rise of diabetes incidence – and singled out those who did not have diabetes as of March 31, 2005. The study followed these people over the next five years: in all, 1,239,262 of them, including 214,882 who appeared to be recent immigrants based on registration in the province’s healthcare plan.

By March of 2010, 58,544 of these people had developed diabetes. And the walkability of the communities in which they lived turned out to be closely linked to that outcome (given the complex factors that affect health, the researchers acknowledge that they can’t definitively say this relationship is directly causal).

Maybe not definitively, but it is well known that the lack of physical activity is directly related to a range of conditions – heart disease, obesity and type 2 diabetes. Moreover, while you can live in a new suburb without sidewalks, drive everywhere and also exercise a lot (join a gym, run with your dog …) most people don’t. Although I do have to say that when you go to places like Buntzen Lake at the weekend and just see the numbers of people who do take exercise seriously,  my hopes increase.

The point I am trying to make here is neatly captured at the end of the Atlantic article

The Toronto study highlights that within urbanized areas, the impact of neighborhoods on public health can vary significantly. And so there’s hope for applying this lesson in the parts of the world that have yet to urbanize, as well as within cities like Toronto as they continue to grow. It’s no coincidence that the least walkable neighborhoods identified in this research were often the most recently developed. Unlike their older counterparts, they had large blocks instead of smaller ones, sprawling development instead of density, separated land uses instead of mixed ones.

The doctors and public health researchers behind this paper noted all of these differences, sounding remarkably like urban planners themselves. Reaching across disciplines, they conclude: “the way we structure and build our cities will play an increasingly greater role in shaping the health of the world’s population.”

Now we know that among the challenges facing the current government is the ever increasing rise in public health care costs. They are always looking to find ways of passing that along – BC being one of the very few Canadian provinces that levy a Medical Services Premium. “Slashing costs” through privatizing jobs like cleaning and looking after people who don’t need hospitals but do need long term care has also been a favourite. Perhaps less well publicized has been a recent shift in the way the government treats its own pensioners. The Public Service Pension Plan used to pay members MSP and Blue Cross premiums. So did the Teachers. Both of those are now borne by members. So much nicer than having a story about pension cuts, don’t you think?

We know for a certainty that widening Highway #1 will both induce more traffic – and encourage the sort of development described in that last block quote –  “large blocks instead of smaller ones, sprawling development instead of density, separated land uses instead of mixed ones.” The people who live in such places will in future be less healthy than those who can walk, cycle or ride transit on a daily basis. I include transit quite deliberately – since every transit ride has some walking at each end (transit takes you from where you are not to not quite where you need to be). Indeed, Weight Watchers has long advocated a simple way to burn more calories – get off the bus a couple of stops too soon. Walk to the next station not the closest one.

I really doubt that Christy Clark or Kevin Falcon actually care very much at all about anyone’s health but their own. But their policies do depend on them being able to rattle on about lower taxes. That’s why they love stories about spending cuts – and why they much prefer that Translink be audited multiple times, rather than deal with the real issue – lack of funding for transit expansion. But what the Toronto health study shows is that their preference for the sort of suburbs that we have been building and occupying since 1945, the sort of places that their paymasters have been selling us and which have been so profitable, are actually one of the causes that public health care costs continue to rise. We have got very good at treating conditions, but we are not very good at all in creating a healthier society. Prevention is always much more efficient than cure – or treatment for the incurable. The greatest health care problem is that caused by a sedentary populace. One that sits all day – in front of a computer screen or in a car to travel any distance at all. We do not have a health system: we have a sickness system. And there is a huge lobby of corporate interests that wishes that system to continue, unchanged. Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome is a good definition of madness – but it is also an accurate description of conservatism. The obsession with resisting change, with refusing to admit that what we did was wrong and that we need to do things differently.

Transit is not a local problem. It is not something that municipalities can or should fund on their own. It is part of a much broader picture. The province cannot continue to pretend that it does not have an immediate and direct concern. Its highway policies – the construction of the wider Sea to Sky Highway, the South Fraser Perimeter Road, the Highway #1 expansion were all driven by property developers. All of them were directly contrary to the precepts of the Livable Region. The people of this region have repeatedly told the political leadership that they valued compact urban development, complete communities, with protection for the green zone and increased transportation choice. Oddly enough it was Gordon Campbell himself who came up with that formulation – when he was Mayor of Vancouver and Chair of the GVRD. And it was his government that chose – carefully and deliberately – to wreck that strategy, for short term political gain. There is no doubt that the widening of the Port Mann Bridge was – and is – very popular. But not only will it not solve the congestion problem (building roads has never cured congestion anywhere) it is also going to create a series of problems long into the future. Increasing public health care cost ought to be one that catches their attention – since all of the others they seem happy to ignore.

Written by Stephen Rees

September 19, 2012 at 10:45 am

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Today’s Globe had an article about transit..”Business groups push for improved transit funding”

    Why are B.C. politicians trying to re-invent the wheel and ending up with a square one? In places that have a long experience of successful transit, the national, regional and municipal governments work TOGETHER to build and fund transit, with municipalities overseeing a transit provider (or many providers working together) whose job is to run transit, funding being left to the various levels of governments.

    Japan has mostly private transit companies but it works because of the unique size and shape of the country and the concentration of the population along a long spine so their experience is hard to emulate.

    I am not entirely convinced about the link between lack of exercise and diabetes. I have known nurses that were on their feet all day long, weren’t fat and yet got adult diabetes…I have also known obese inactive people that never got diabetes (I have known thousands of older people on 2 continents, many with medical problems).
    Traditionally, in many countries, people over 60 took it easy, spending hours a day sitting down and talking. Even younger people, in the villages of the Bordeaux wine growing area, weren’t very active in winter. Yet a good proportion of them lived long. Mind you very few of these people had a car in my youth, so even older people walked or biked at least a few km. a day…
    My maternal grandma, feeling truly bored, started to deliver newspapers in her neighbourhood at the age of 92 (the better to snoop in neighbours’ homes).

    Red frog

    September 19, 2012 at 8:41 pm

  2. Nice upgrade on the website pic, Stephen. I was looking for the big finale in the last paragraph. It seemed to me like you had set the ball for the perfect spike.

    I don’t really think that, “There is no doubt that the widening of the Port Mann Bridge was – and is – very popular.” And as far as ” [policies that] were directly contrary to the precepts of the Livable Region,” I confess that I never really thought the Livable Region plan was all that well crafted.

    Of course, I’m not too sure what the “perfect spike” is. On the one hand, we appear to make do without a rigorous diet of critical thinking. In this sense, we deserve to be driving the “square wheels” that red frog mentions. On the other, I don’t see buy-in at any level of government for a new paradigm in urbanism.

    Since “Transit is not a local problem” we can only benefit from making sharing information, problems and solutions more broadly. The challenges we face here around Burrard inlet are not much different to the ones experience back east around the Bedford Basin. Yet, the mobilization that brought about the freeway construction in the 1950s and 1960s is nowhere to be seen on the flip side of the coin where we need a new kind of infrastructure to be fitted into a new kind of urban form.

    The folks that are commuting into town, and for whom the new bridge is the perfect solution (they have been paying tolls to cross Bedford Basin since their carbon copy of our Lions Gate bridge went up), are the demographic we have to understand and get the new message to.

    Otherwise, our fate is to wait for the economic changes to take place, and rather than see how the landscape has changed, hold our breath and await where the power has been concentrated. Dollars to donuts it will be with those for whom the only calculation is their own self interest, and for whom democracy is a system of laws that clears the way for least number of ‘winners’ possible.

    lewis n. villegas

    September 23, 2012 at 4:58 pm

  3. Why should people in Kamloops finance Vancouver’s (mostly) transit improvements? Can’t the region’s mayors fix this problem just by raising the property tax and other taxes under their control? I thought that was the translink model. Or do they not care about our health? If the region doesn’t want to fund it then end of story. Move on.


    September 24, 2012 at 12:06 pm

  4. For the same reason that people in Vancouver pay for improvements to roads – and hospitals – in Kamloops. The region’s mayors only have property tax under their control: all other taxes/potential funding sources are provincially controlled. The feds contribution ought to be much greater – but that is hardly likely under the present administration. The Translink model so far has been that the Province makes a funding source available, and then refuses to allow Translink to use it (the vehicle levy, parking stall tax) and, at the same time, imposes new, very expensive rapid transit projects over the Mayor’s objections (the Canada Line). The model is broken – and the province was the one who broke it – and it has to be fixed. Municipalities simply do not have the powers or the funding abilities you ascribe to them.

    Stephen Rees

    September 24, 2012 at 12:33 pm

  5. I certainly would be willing to pay higher property taxes for more transit improvements and I think it’s a fair revenue source. Much rather that than raising income taxes.


    September 24, 2012 at 1:15 pm

  6. I think health issues should be the first priority.

    janel raelyn

    October 5, 2012 at 1:21 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: