hat tip to Bonnie Fenton

WHAT: Free Climate Change Film Festival and Panel Discussions

WHEN: Friday, May 23^rd (6-10pm) and Saturday, May 24^th (noon-10pm)

WHERE: Vancouver Public Library (Alice MacKay Room), Central Branch, 350 W. Georgia Street

ADMISSION: FREE – OPEN TO ALL

KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Jon Steinman – Deconstructing Dinner (http://www.kootenaycoopradio.com/deconstructingdinner/)

FEATURED FILMS: “Who Killed the Electric Car?” “Kilowatt Ours” and “Garbage” – See attachment for complete list

PANEL DISCUSSIONS: May 24^th from 2-3pm and from 6-7pm.  Featuring (2-3pm): Jon Steinman (Deconstructing Dinner), Tom Rankin (Save Our Rivers), Hannah Askew (Healthy Planet Kitchens) – (6-7pm): Dr. Erica Frank (Food, Health and the Climate), Rob Baxter (Sierra Club – Vancouver Renewable Energy Coop), John Stonier (Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association), Tom Rankin (Save Our Rivers).

MORE DETAILS: Please visit www.sierraclub.bc.ca and follow the links.

CLIMATE CHANGE SOLUTIONS

environmental films with a positive spin

Friday May 23, 2008:

Film #1: Too Hot Not to Handle

Topic: Leading scientists provide a solid explanation of global warming and its effects.

Length: 60 minutes

For more info: http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/toohot/

Film #2: Garbage

Topic: The Story of a Canadian family that agrees to keep their garbage for 3 months.

Length: 75 minutes

For more info: http://www.garbagerevolution.com/

Film # 3: The Nature of Things with David Suzuki: The Weather Report

Topic: The film travels to the Canadian Arctic, Montana, Northern Kenya, China and India, visiting communities and ordinary people whose lives and livelihoods are being impacted by global warming.

Length: 45 minutes

For more info: http://www.cbc.ca/natureofthings/weatherreport.html

Saturday May 24, 2008

Film #1: The Story of Stuff

Topic: An animated explanation of the inherent problems in our production and consumption patterns.

Length: 20 minutes

For more info: http://www.storyofstuff.com/

Film #2: Power Play: the Theft of BC’s Rivers

Topic: The leasing of BC’s rivers to corporations for private hydro-power projects.

Length: 20 minutes

For more info: http://saveourrivers.ca/content/view/98/

Film #3: Wind Over Water

Topic: The debate over an offshore wind farm proposed off the southern coast of Cape Cod, Massachusetts.

Length: 30 minutes

For more info: http://www.windoverwater.org/

Film #4: The Climate of Change

Topic: Demonstrates the environmental impact that a local municipal government can make in the absence of federal leadership

Length: 15 minutes

For more info: http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=800

Film #5: Vineyard Energy Project

Topic: The story of Martha’s Vineyard, an island off the US east coast, and their journey to becoming energy independent through the use of solar and wind energy.

Length: 12 minutes

For more info: http://www.vineyardenergyproject.org/

Film #6: Who Killed the Electric Car

Topic: This film investigates possible suspects in the vanishing of the electric car that was on the road in the early 1990’s.

Length: 120 minutes

For more info: http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/

Film #7: Being Caribou

Topic: For 5 months, a Canadian couple migrates on foot with the 123,000-member porcupine caribou herd from wintering to calving grounds in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. After completing their journey, they head to Washington, DC to tell politicians and activists what they found.

Length: 54 minutes

For more info: http://www.beingcaribou.com/beingcaribou/index.html

Film #8: Kilowatt Ours

Topic: The film moves from the coal mines of West Virginia to the solar panel fields of Florida as the film-maker discovers solutions to America’s energy related problems.

Length: 56 minutes

For more info: http://www.kilowattours.org/

Film #9: Crude Impact

Topic: explores the interconnection between human domination of the planet, and the discovery and use of oil.

Length: 20 minutes

For more info: http://www.crudeimpact.com/show.asp?content_id=9665

Hat tip to Celia Brauer

And don’t forget the Green Film Fest on now.

http://www.projectingchange.ca/schedule.html

He takes credit in his latest Straight piece for predicting $120 a barrel oil when no-one else did, so he continues his contrarian ways with the suggestion that economic recession in western countries brought on by the credit crunch will lower demand enough to be reflected in oil prices. Of course, in the longer term they will soon bounce back - and more.

What seems to be missing is any discussion of the instability of many of the places that the world relies on for oil. All it takes is some sabotage in Nigeria or a wave of unrest in some of the former soviet republics and the supply drops rapidly.Similarly, since there is so much dependence on a few very large supplies and a continuing issue with refinery capacity a few hitches - like the damage to Gulf coast installations by Hurricane Katrina - and the present predictions go out of the window.

The rate at which the Chinese and Indians are buying cars will also be a significant replacement for the west finding more efficient ways to get around. I have not worked out the ratio, but I suspect that for every gas guzzler replaced by a Prius or Civic there are several new Chinese cars for households that formerly rode bicycles or scooters. The easing of demand for Chinese products in the US will probably just release capacity for more home consumption or for exports to economies with stronger currencies.

The he returns to the doom and gloom of the impact of climate change - and its effect on political stability in nations at risk. Given that we really ahve not yet tackled the causes of these changes, he is right to do so. There seems still to be a remarkable lack of urgency about effective steps - and the on going saga of BC’s carbon tax seems to be solely about our local issues not the need for tackling the biggest crisis to face mankind.

Vaughan Palmer is getting a bit annoyed about the Liberal legislative process - or rather that he got some press releases from interest groups about the Carbon Tax Bill before it got to the house. Now it happened that one of my pieces yesterday was about this same issue and positive, but I want to assure you that I was not being lined up by Campbell’s spin doctors. It was conincidence. But it was driven by my irritation at the rural and northern mayors who “believe what is consistent with their self-interest, not with the evidence.” Nic Rivers has been doing some research which shows that people who live in small towns in the interior tend to commute shorter distances than those who live in the Lower Mainland. Which is really no surprise at all.

Currently the carbon tax is in for a round of mock indignation and parliamentary show boating. Debates in the leg are not about making the Act better, or discussing issues in the hopes of finding solutions. It is for sound bites and bits in the constituency newsletters. Vaughan Plamer is right to be irritated by the process, but that is how he makes his living. I am certain that more people read his column than read Hansard or watch the leg on tv. And the nitty gritty of parliamentary procedures and details of sub section 95 paragraph 1 c are not exactly gripping stuff.

The Liberal’s Bill is a small start. It is far from perfect of course. But we have to start somewhere. For one thing climate change is producing a shortage of hops. But someone is going to have to tackle the fact that as things stand our school boards are going to be giving back to the province money that should be going to educate our children but will instead be spent on carbon tax. Expect howls from the colleges, universities and hospitals too. And, of course, in a monument to bureaucracy that only Carole Taylor could be proud of, transit will also be hit by both higher fuel costs and carbon taxes, as well as loss of revenue as gas sales fall, at the very time when transit service is more desperately needed than ever.

Guardian

In 2007 Sweden topped the list of countries that did the most to save the planet - for the second year running - according to German environmental group, Germanwatch.  Between 1990 and 2006 Sweden cut its carbon emissions by 9%, largely exceeding the target set by the Kyoto Protocol, while enjoying economic growth of 44% in fixed prices.

It has not even got started here yet, but we are being flooded with tales about how terrible our tiny carbon tax is going to be.

Sweden can lay claim to the world’s first train running solely on biogas.

Photograph: Jeppe Gustafsson/AFP

Well, we can expect some teething troubles, and nowhere does a policy translate directly. Bit I think Canada and Sweden have a bit in common. They just don’t have the space, oil and gas that we do. Which is why they pursued this initiative with such vigour. They realised early on that reliance on imported oil was not a good idea. The ghg reductions were kind of a bonus.

I know a lot of environmentalists - and others - now regard “growth” as a dirty word, but the Swedes have shown you do not necessarily need to trade off the environment against the economy.

Anyway, I thought it was about time for something positive for a change.

On the opinion page this morning Ian Thomson, president of both the B.C. and the Alberta Biodiesel Associations, makes the case for the province’s plan for renewable fuels to comprise five per cent of all diesel and gasoline sold in B.C. by 2010.

He notes that elsewhere governments are having second thoughts about this type of commitment, mainly due to the undeniable crisis in food shortages and high prices. Mr Thompson says that their analysis is “simplistic”

global food price increases are the result of a complex mix of factors, including supply and demand, trade policy, tariffs, political instability, and global energy costs.

Which while true neatly avoids the explanation that demand for some crops, and for more land, to supply the demands for biofuels is one of the big changes recently. The link between corn prices and the demand for ethanol in the US as a fuel additive is directly linked to the high prices of corn products in Mexico. That is an old story. But still true. The wider impacts of the demand for palm oil and clearance of forests has also been around for a while. As has the calculation that some biofuels can take more energy to produce than they provide, and the consequences of current farming practice results in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions.

This is not to say that all biofuels are evil. They could be created from waste products. There is a lot of used frying oil out there that could be recycled this way. A lot of yellow grease that is currently exported as unfit for human consumption here - that probably ends up being eaten by very poor people in third world countries. I do not know if we are doing them any favours with that trade, but somebody is making a lot of money out of our care and other’s neglect of standards of cleanliness. Forest products could probably produce ethanol - but currently it is foodgrains that are used, not switch grass, straw or sawdust.

And even if he is right, which seems to me unlikely but we will let his case stand for the sake of argument, the needs of hungry humans should override those of the automotive business. That means right now we have to back off legislated biofuel mandates until we can get this market stabilised, and concentrate on getting people fed, not SUVs producing a little less ghg.

Because the other feature of biofuels is we are currently treating them as a way to carry on behaving as we have done. Just like the use of hybrid drives on huge trucks that are only single occupant passenger vehicles, and whose only freight hauling role is some bags of groceries, or some 2×4s for a rare home improvement project. We need above all to reduce the number of vehicle kilometres travelled as that is what is driving up the demand for fuel - despite improvements in vehicle efficiency and fuel standards. We keep building freeways and low density, unwalkable suburbs. Poor people around the world should not be expected to pay for our self indulgence or refusal to face facts.

You know you are doing something right when you get three emails, within minutes of each other, suggesting things to blog about.

I am going to pass on the suggestion (sorry, Mr Holden) of the Walmart in town story - it is too close to the “even Walmart” comments at Smart Growth and the thing I did on big boxes on Cambie not so long ago. I am also not going to delve into energy corridors in Wyoming which sound dreadful but also dreadfully complicated.

I recently linked to an article in the Atlantic, so someone there suggested I take a peak at “A steamy solution to global warming” by Lisa Margonelli

Economists like to say that rational markets don’t “leave $100 bills on the ground,” but according to McKinsey’s figures, more than $50 billion floats into the air each year, unclaimed by American businesses. What’s more, the technologies required to save that money are, for the most part, not new or unproven or even particularly expensive. By and large, they’ve been around since the 19th century. The question is: Why aren’t we using them?

Because corporate America doesn’t have to think. It has George W and a hot line to some compliant congressmen and lots of really smart lawyers. As long as there no real reason to do so, why would they think outside the box? Much more comfortable to follow the herd, and buy a table at the next Republican fundraiser. The US government is spending trillions of dollars to ensure that Iraqi oil still flows their way, so why worry about energy efficiency?

Back in 1970 a senior plant manager at ICI told me - quite seriously “There is no money in pollution” - but he was paying my organisation lots of money every year to pull out of the river the guck that his plant was dumping in it further up stream. So that craft serving his plant had enough water under their keels to load efficiently. How do you argue with people like that?

I recently pointed out that we do not in general spend a lot on community energy systems here. Although the City of North Van did and the former Mayor of Vancouver owns a steam distribution business in downtown Vancouver. Because we put what little industry we have left way out in the boonies there are not many ways to connect industry waste heat to places that need heating. But I can think of a few. For instance the cement plants in Richmond and Delta (LaFarge and Tilbury) produce loads of waste heat and they are not so far away from greenhouse country. The last refinery here - Chevron in Burnaby - could send heat to SFU. And then there is the thermal generating station near Ioco. It burns gas to heat water to raise steam to turn the turbines and then dumps warm water into the inlet. And the idea of using more efficient combined cycle gas turbines has been rejected there more than once. Gas turbines also have the advantage of being able (like hydro dams) to meet peak loads very quickly indeed. No, I don’t know why they preferred steam. The reason I mention this location is that it is under review for some major redevelopment by that very smart chap who did SFUniverCity - and I bet he could work a community energy system into his development

Photo by Richard Eriksson

Even post industrial Vancouver can get into the heat recycling business. It just requires a change in mind set. For instance what was once BC Hydro could think about selling energy - not just generating electricity. But of course, here it would have to find a P3 partner to skim off the profits first

People who sell car insurance think it is ok to poke fun at people trying to use bicycles in a country obsessed with cars. Streetsblog does not like this - and does not find it funny. They provide this link to the maker for your feedback.

I think I agree with them. Click now before it gets taken down and another grovelling apology appears. Did it make you smile?

Gov Parris N Glendening at SFU downtown April 17

The former Gov of Maryland, he is now the President of the Smart Growth Leadership Institute, which he founded.

He opened by remarking that there is a new interest in sustainability: “everyone is talking about it - even Walmart!”. However he acknowledged that it is not happening at the federal level: “Only 10 people do not understand climate change. Unfortunately they are all in the White House.”

He described how the term “Smart Growth” was arrived at. A package of bills were to be resented in Maryland, and it was essential that people did not cherry pick among them. So a term was needed to show that it was a coherent program that needed all of them. The term is in fact interchangeable with a number of others used in other places.

The population of the US is at 300m now, and will be 430m by 2050. This raises the question “Can we continue to grow the same way as we did for last 60 years? He offered Einstein’s definition of insanity: expecting a different outcome from continuing to do the same thing. The status quo does not meet any of the challenges we now face. Even a place like Vancouver is not sustainable. If every city on earth was like Vancouver we would need four planets to support it (source: Brent Toderian). That is, of course better than the Las Vegas or Atalanta models which would require 20 planets.

The problems are multiple - traffic congestion, gas prices. It started with the building of Levittown, the post war suburbs which have given us sprawl, based on the belief that you could always build more roads and keep on expanding. It is inevitable that gas prices will continue to rise and scarcity is likely sooner rather than later until many people will find themselves unwilling and unable to drive long distances every day. We have also seen the health impacts of a lack of physical activity: obesity is directly correlated to sprawl. This is due to a sedentary lifestyle imposed by the urban form that favours cars over walking and biking. In the US cars are used for 75% of trips that are of less than one mile.

It has been established that one way commutes of 12 to 15 miles cancel out the economic advantage of lower priced homes. It is aid that people have to “drive till you qualify”: in other words the size of the mortgage you can support depends on your income so you have to find the house priced at what you can buy.

His commitment to the idea of conservation stemmed from his early experiences while a student seeing the effect of development on the Florida everglade. The loss of natural environment, caused by road widening and subsequent urban expansion has now caused sever problems of water supply and drainage. In Maryland it was the widening of US Highway #1, which made it easier to buy a farm and build on it than redevelop the declining urban areas. Land use and the development pattern needs a regional framework. The conventional land use and transportation planning model is a pattern for disaster. He showed an animation of a series of maps showing development at ten year increments “The Amoeba that Ate Maryland”. As the suburbs aged the development continued to spread out because the development playing field was “tilted to subsidise sprawl” There were a number of interrelated policies - the construction of the interstate highways, the GI loan plan which guaranteed mortgages and the banks use of a “red line” for existing communities where ethnic minorities lived and mortgages would not be granted.

Some states tried an Incentive based approach to change the rules of growth. Washington and Oregon tried regulations. Maryland tried the “carrot and stick” of both. He said that while you need both regulations and subsidies, regulation alone is more efficient bit is not politically doable. In 1977 Maryland designated Smart Growth areas which would have priority for state funding which steered investment to already developed areas. “The State will not pay to subsidize sprawl” and this changed the bottom line for developers. For example, the state would not fund new schools on greenfield sites: if the developer proceeded he would have to pay for the necessary schools. The plan was not against growth - and he noted that many environmentalists are against growth altogether. The policy ensured that over 400,000 acres in Maryland have been preserved as farmland.

The policy allowed for growth and but also promoted preservation. For example there is a tax credit for rehabilitating historic buildings, which can be seen to have worked in Baltimore and its inner harbour. He acknowledged that implementation is difficult. For example, the regents of the University of Maryland wanted to build on a greenfield site outside Hagerstown. The Governor directed them to the centre of the city where the Baldwin House (an old department store) stood empty. The rehabilitation of this building and bringing students and faculty to the centre of the city created an economic stimulus of activity. The state had to rewrite the code for building reuse: like most codes it had assumed that all activity would be new build. The use of this code was tied to a requirement that there must be an increase in density.

“People don’t like sprawl and they don’t like density”

It is essential to intensify development. In cities you can use the parking lots, not green fields. However, not all density is created equal: it must be well designed, walkable, livable and fun. He illustrated this with images from Detroit ( Ugly density) and Boston to show his conviction that “it is all about design.”

He recommended the book “Visualizing Density”from which these two images have been taken.

Regular attenders at these lectures or readers of this blog will be very familiar with the material covered at the end of his talk, which emphasized design paired with density and making the connection between density and climate change. For example he talked about Green Buildings and how significant it is to replace LEED with LEED ND. It is he said, crucial to think beyond emissions for vehicles - as VMT yearly increases negate all the improvement gained by technology.

A useful source (new to me anyway) is Growing Cooler published by ULI

Chart of impact of VMT - Center for Clean Air Policy

Even if every state adopted the California emissions standards for CO2, which would have a limited impact on improving overall fleet economy for the next ten years or so, the increase in VMT more than offsets the improvement. “Why do we have to drive so much anyway?” The important thing is that the places we live in be compact, walkable - and affordable. He then cited a recent NPR program “I just wanted my life back” about a woman who moved to Atlantic Station in Atlanta GA in order to live closer to her job. He said that for most people there is an “undersupply of options” and he spoke approvingly of Sam Sullivan on EcoDensity. He recognized that this would be controversial but found a very powerful quotation.

Discussion

Q - A lady from White Rock wants to replace her house on its present site with 4 townhouses but the City council won’t let her

A - Montgomery County in Maryland had faced the same issue and essentially it comes down to political will. Remember that “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” and they have to “connect the dots” In the long term the only option may be to “toss out the current leadership”.

Q - How have things continued since you left?

A - There have been mixed results. About ¼ of the residential development is outside the designated growth area, so we have still got sprawl but not so much as before. Basically some developers were prepared to pay for schools. His immediate successor was not a supporter, but the new governor is. Maryland’s start has stimulated 27 states which now have got Smart Growth program - even Arizona - which “wrapped it in the water supply issue” - and Wyoming! Local governments must implement the provisions or the state must take stronger action. He noted that Canadian provinces have more power over municipal governments than states do.

Q - The “metropolis expands at the cost of the hinterland” how do you prevent the “loss of farmers from land” We now have the most expensive homes in Canada. How can growth serve the people?

A - Your points are valid - agricultural land is now so expensive, it has become the farmer’s retirement account. In Maryland they transferred the development rights from the farmer to the state. Essentially the state used its windfall from the tobacco court cases to buy out the development rights of farmers but they also imposed the condition that they could not continue to grow tobacco. It is, he said, essential to protect well being of farmers.

Smart Growth can be a gentrification issue: for example in Washington DC one development was for $800,000 homes on what had been a “no go” area. He said the states must aggressively pursue “inclusionary zoning” to provide a range of alternatives: for instance the requirement that 20% of the development be what is now called “workforce housing”.

Q - What is the “mesh of priorities between the state and municipalities”. The questioner was interested in the “conversations between levels of government”

A - This is critical “how do you make this work?” Transportation drives development patterns but transportation plans are rarely linked directly with land use decisions. For example the Washington DC subway system - a very significant investment - had no linkage to land use around stations.The state must be the link between transit and land use and insist on a minimum of mixed use and density - e.g. New Mexico LRT Albuquerque where “stations must have an overlay base in place”. It is a “matter of right” - to have the station there you must have land use plans that are adjusted to reflect the change in accessibility. “If you want a station, you must meet the requirements.”

Q - Affordable housing - displaced families - requests from the community for on site relocation have been ignored (the questioner was referring to Little Mountain in Vancouver)

A - A range of tools are available - the regulatory framework adopted by Montgomery County MD was inclusionary zoning 20% of workforce housing, with the first preference of its allocation to existing residents . In Maine there is a checklist for policies which is tied to state grants: if municipalities want state funding their chances of getting it are better the more boxes on the checklist are ticked. There is no one answer. The recent collapse of the housing market will force more action in future.

Q - public education

A - yes - lots of examples - direct impact on their lives

Q - We wanted to plan for “live, work and play in same place” (LRSP). You seem to be promoting a fascist system - its is elitist like Dubai which has created a slave economy. We must talk about cheap reasonable transportation and free parks. “Everything these days is user pay”. We need development for human beings

A - There is nothing magic about the term “Smart Growth”. We do outline the type of place we want: we do see need for play, space, transit. In the US we don’t pay for roads but we raise the price of transit - that’s wrong. Living, working and playing in a community accessible to everyone is the objective. “I don’t disagree with any of your desires”. The old “projects” were concentrations of poverty, where segregation stigmatized poverty.

Reaction

I must admit that I was surprised that BC is the only province of Canada to have a SmartGrowth chapter. Perhaps that reflects our view that we are not American so we cannot join an organisation called “Smart Growth America”. While much of his talk concerned US governance, there really was not a huge amount of difference in outcomes. For example, Britain did not have guaranteed mortgages, but that did not stop the Wimpey housing estates leaping over the green belts and covering farmer’s fields. The sprawl in Britain may have been railway based but it was still low density.

It is notable that affordable housing may have been renamed, but it is still a state obligation, now imposed on developers, and producing more integrated communities. Canada seems to have completely abandoned the field, and the results in Vancouver are possibly the most apparent anywhere. People may object to the term “workforce housing” - but we do not have any - and that has had and is having a very definite impact on our workforce. One of the reasons transit expansion is slow is that CMBC cannot hire enough operators.

It struck me that the audience were bringing their local issues to air in public rather than seeking knowledge but perhaps that is to be expected. Since I have now attended rather a lot of these, I am beginning to hear the same things repeated both from speakers and audience.

APTA Press Release

I must admit a strong temptation to just cut and paste the whole thing. But that is not a web log is it?

The White House and John McCain are the only ones out of step on this issue. Stopping the growth of emissions by 2025 - by voluntary measures alone - is pathetic as a target, woefully inadequate and probably will not be attained at present rates of progress. Emissions globally have to be cut - and cut drastically. It turns out that the model was wrong. The oceans are not absorbing CO2 as predicted. And Geoffrey Stern (the economist who produced an evaluation of the costs and benefits of tackling climate change eighteen months ago) admits now he was wrong. Climate change is happening faster than he thought then.

Of course the paid flacks of the oil and automobile industry accused him at the time of “scare mongering”. Either he was not scary enough or they were too successful in confounding the decision making process. But then the people who make the most money have already bought themselves patches of higher ground to retreat to as the sea level rises. Just like the hedge funds that did well out of the credit crisis. The strategy appears to be to try and manipulate the markets - because money is made of the change or “spread”. You can make money on the rising cost of  oil and gas as the shortage due to passing the peak gets worse - but deny in public that there is a peak at all - or if there is, it’s a long way off. You can make money by snapping up properties at fire sale prices due to mortgage defaults and repossessions. You can start buying shares in promising technologies - especially if you can persuade governments to give you a tax break or an outright grant. Shares in railroads are a good bet now - airlines not so much. And if the price of change looks a bit high right now, and you cannot raise the wind for some investment, a bit of greenwashing will persuade the customers to continue to come to you.

There are a number of things reported today that fit the brief of this blog. But most do not require much commentary. I have already updated the recent post on truckers as another crackdown, this time in Vancouver, reveals more neglect and danger to us all.

Carol James has an opinion piece on the carbon tax.

there’s a right way and a wrong way to price carbon. The right way is to listen to the people affected, address their concerns and take action. The wrong way is to work in secrecy, ride roughshod over concerns, and lash out when people dare to complain.

But that’s what they do on everything else. The one exception appeared to be health. (And by the way have you tried to watch tv news at 6pm here lately? The CBC is of course given over to hockey, and Campbell is all over Global and their fund raising drive for Children’s hospital. I am quite sure there are some advanced western countries that manage to build an adequate hospital system without resorting to fund raising telethons.)

Kevin Falcon thinks he cannot tell BC Ferries to roll back the huge pay increase for their Board members. Vaughan Palmer disagrees

Spirit of Vancouver Island Active Pass BC 2007.09.09 07:55

Ecodensity is going to get affordable housing added. Well they had better get a move on as the landlords in Vancouver seem to be intent on pulling the same trick that worked so well in Richmond. (A long running story in our local press last year was of an apartment building on Gilbert Road, opposite the hospital, where tenants were evicted and harassed for the same purpose, and there were several successful appeals to the provincial regulator. So far as I can tell these local freebies don’t have on line archives)

A one bedroom apartment in this condo building on West 4th listed yesterday for over $450k. A good example of higher density mixed use development but not exactly affordable. But the coffee is really good in Cornerstone: regular cappuccino $3

And Translink police are going to be added to the Taser enquiry. Of course: they are armed now, and they use their arms, so it is absolutely proper that they be made accountable for their use. The copper they use as a PR flack did not handle this one well. Or at all.

UPDATE 2:06PM There is a much better account in the Globe and Mail

and (4:20pm) more criticism on CBC