High housing costs? Metro Vancouver says your commute may matter just as much

A new regional study suggests that when it comes to affordability, what households pay for transportation can rival – and in some cases exceed – what they pay for shelter.

Metro Vancouver’s 2025 Housing and Transportation Cost Burden Study finds that across the region, households spend an average of $41,000 per year on combined housing and transportation costs. Of that, roughly $22,000 goes to housing and $19,000 to transportation.

That’s a gap far narrower than many might expect, according to Mark Seinen, a seniors planner with Metro Vancouver. He presented the study to Port Moody council on Feb. 17, stating the price of travel is “easily overlooked.”

“Most people can’t tell you how much they spend on transportation on a monthly basis,” he said. When we have conversations about housing affordability, we naturally . . . talk about mortgages and rents and so forth, but transportation costs are also a really critical component.”

The study examined how housing costs, transportation expenses and household income interact to shape affordability across Metro Vancouver. Using 2021 census data and transportation modelling based on TransLink trip data, it calculated average annual housing and transportation costs by neighbourhood and municipality, then measured “cost burden” – the share of income spent on both.

It also used statistical analysis to assess how factors such as SkyTrain proximity, vehicle ownership, housing tenure and unit size influence overall affordability.

A Tri-Cities divide

In the Northeast subregion – which includes Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore and Belcarra – the pattern varies significantly by access to rapid transit.

According to the breakdown between municipalities:

• Anmore and Belcarra rank among the highest combined-cost communities in Metro Vancouver, with average annual housing and transportation costs exceeding $50,000 per household.
• Port Moody, Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam fall closer to the regional average, with combined costs generally in the low-to-mid $40,000 range.
• In Port Coquitlam, transportation costs exceed housing costs on average — placing it among a handful of municipalities region-wide where getting around costs more than keeping a roof overhead.

The study identifies a clear “high-cost perimeter” pattern across Metro Vancouver, with more affordable areas loosely tracing the Expo and Millennium SkyTrain lines. 

Properties around Coquitlam Centre stand out as relative pockets of affordability compared to more vehicle dependent areas.

“The highest transportation costs are found around the perimeter of the region,” Seinen said. “People tend to drive more in those areas. They have longer trips. Their jobs are less proximate on average, and they may not have access to the same high quality transit that you’d find elsewhere in the region.”

Transportation costs, he added, are driven overwhelmingly by car ownership. Region-wide, auto expenses account for 98 percent of transportation costs. Households with two or more vehicles spend more than $30,000 per year on transportation on average, compared to about $2,500 for zero-vehicle households.

The study identifies three key determinants of transportation spending: how many vehicles a household owns, how far it commutes, and its access to transit.

SkyTrain effect

One of the most significant findings is the link between rapid transit and lower combined costs.

An analysis found that about 32 percent of the variation in combined housing and transportation costs across the region can be explained by proximity to SkyTrain.

On average, moving 10 percent closer to a SkyTrain station lowers annual combined costs by roughly $117 per household, with the savings increasing sharply within walking distance.

“You’ll notice that there are some pockets of transportation affordability in places like Surrey Centre and Coquitlam Centre,” Seinen said. “What these two places have in common is SkyTrain.”

He acknowledged that transit-oriented areas are often associated with a real estate premium. But when smaller unit sizes, rental tenure and reduced vehicle dependence are factored in, the overall cost picture changes.

“When you incorporate the fact that the units are a little bit smaller, that the tenure is a little bit more likely to be rental, and the fact that you have a good transit system there, there really are opportunities to reduce household costs,” Seinen said. 

Tenure, unit size matter more than density

The study’s statistical modelling found that two factors explain most of the variation in housing costs: tenure and unit size.

According to the analysis, increasing the share of market rental units in a neighbourhood by 10 percentage points reduces combined costs by about $1,854 compared to mortgage-holding ownership units. For non-market rental, the savings exceed $4,000.

In contrast, population density alone had no statistically significant relationship with combined housing and transportation affordability.

“When we’re thinking about provincial housing legislation, for example, which is encouraging greater density – it’s not the density itself that provides greater affordability,” Seinen said. “What the density needs is transit, proximity and rental tenure and ideally smaller units.”

That finding has implications for the Tri-Cities, where provincial transit-oriented area (TOA) legislation is driving higher densities around stations such as Moody Centre, Inlet Centre, Coquitlam Central and Lincoln.