By Karen Fredericks
Arthur Dent awoke one morning to discover that his house was about to be demolished to make way for a freeway, and his day got worse from there. By mid-morning, clad only his pyjamas and cowering in the hold of an alien spaceship, Arthur (the hero of Douglas Addams' science fiction trilogy A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) witnesses the destruction of planet earth in the cause of intergalactic mobility. Brisbane transport activist David Engwitch has had a similar experience.
"I awoke one day to find a notice in my letterbox announcing a major road proposal through our suburb", he told radio journalist Tony Collins. In an interview for Living For the City, a radio project broadcast on youth radio station Triple J in July last year, and now published as a book, Engwitch describes the process by which he became involved in the campaign against Brisbane's Route 20.
At the outset, he was not opposed to the idea of bigger, "better" roads, but at the first public meeting called to discuss the proposal he began to get an idea of the enormous effects Route 20 would have on his suburb. He also became convinced that apart from the noise, smell and upheaval he and his neighbours would suffer, the construction of a mega-road, part of the Brisbane "ring-road" plan, would not solve traffic problems in the immediate areas, nor in the city as a whole.
So Engwitch and his fellow residents formed Citizens Against Route 20 (CART) and thus began a process which was to turn him, and most of the other active members of the group, into passionate transport activists.
"I guess one of my contributions", Engwitch told Collins, "was to argue very early on that we mustn't be NIMBYs [NIMBY: not in my backyard] and try to push the road into somebody else's backyard, and that we must look for long-term solutions. Very quickly we got sucked into looking at city-wide solutions and the implications of traffic for the entire city.
"We also got drawn very quickly into seeing that what we were fighting was not some future threat but a very serious problem we already had. We found the residents on Route 20 were talking about how their quality of life had been eroded over the past 15 years through the build-up of traffic ...
"No city in the world has solved their congestion problems by building bigger roads. In fact, the cities that have handed over most of their city to road space have the biggest traffic problems. What we're doing all the time is converting living space into road space, which simply spreads our cities further. To reach each destination in Australian cities now requires travelling three times further than our forebears did when they walked or went by public transport; that's simply because cars take up to 30 times more space to move each person than public transport, cycling or walking does."
Today CART stands for Citizen Advocating Responsible Transport, and David Engwitch campaigns, almost full time, against the cult of the private motor vehicle.
The private motor vehicle takes up an inordinate amount of space, and Australian cities have three to four times more road space per capita than European cities and almost nine times more than Asian cities. Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane are among the most car-dependent cities in the world, and car-oriented cities have no option but to spread.
Australia also has the second highest rate of car ownership in the world and the third highest rate of petrol consumption. Roughly a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions in this country come from private motor vehicles. Emissions from vehicle exhausts, even in a small city such as Perth, have contributed to a level of air pollution which is "unhealthy" by World Health Organisation standards.
A report commissioned by the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) in 1991 estimated that between 1990 and 2000, 10,000 people will die in road accidents in NSW, and 14,000 people will be left with permanent brain damage or as paraplegics or quadriplegics. The same RTA report, "Road Transport, Future Directions", predicted that if current trends continue over the next 25 years, traffic congestion in Sydney will increase by 600%, carbon dioxide (greenhouse) emissions will increase by a quarter, air quality will decrease by a third, fuel consumption will increase by 23% and road accident costs will increase by two-thirds.
Despite these predictions, based on conservative population estimates, the RTA persists with its own version of the "ring-road" plan, the Sydney "orbital", and plans for several billion dollar freeway developments are still firmly on the drawing board.
It is difficult to see how this can be justified. But the reasoning of John B. Cox, described by the October 27 Financial Review as a "transport consultant studying the effects of transport investment on the macro-economy", is enlightening on the attitude of business.
In an article entitled "Sydney uphill to pass Olympic transport test", Cox argues that Sydney must act fast to bring its transport facilities up to "best international practice" in time for the 2000 Olympics.
"Urban form and economic activity in cities are now centred on road transport", he writes. "Technology has reduced road-travel costs to less than half of those of 1970 and has caused shifts of passengers and freight from other transport modes to roads. Over 90% of all passenger traffic and almost all freight in cities go by road ...
"Olympic planners should realise that most North American and European visitors are used to 20-40% of their city travel on freeways and may be disappointed in Sydney where this figure is less than 10%."
Cox says that public transport might be seen as a solution by some, but "unfortunately, the trends are against public transport, with the percentage of all trips on public transport falling from about 30% of all trips in Australian capital cities in 1970, to less than 10% today".
Cox concludes that the "orbital" network currently on the drawing board "will be essential by the time of the Olympics but could run into problems as funds from government and private investors dry up".
"It is hoped", he says, but not telling us by whom, "that the Olympics will focus city, state and federal resources on bringing Sydney's transport infrastructure up to best international practice by 2000".
Clearly Cox, and the interests he represents, are hoping for a massive injection of funds from the taxpayer. "Private investors are thinking twice about investment in road infrastructure", he warns.
Cox observes, rightly, that our cities were not designed with cars in mind. Australian capital cities developed around public transport, particularly heavy rail, but also light rail, or trams. In Living for the City, Tony Collins notes that "dumping public transport in favour of freeway building programs became a worldwide trend during the 1950s". Every capital city in Australia hired North American transport consultants to design freeways. Only Melbourne managed to hang onto its trams.
From the 1950s on, public transport spending was slashed and spending on roads increased. Cox says that the change came, "because of the technology", but technology has also made fast, efficient and relatively inexpensive light-rail eminently possible, and yet both government and private industry remain "reluctant" to invest. Surely there is some force at work other than technology.
Cox points to the trend "against" public transport, citing a drop in usage from 30% in 1970 to less than 10% in 1993, as though the increasing numbers of dwellers on the urban fringe chose not to use the non-existent services to their suburbs. He then uses the sprawl resulting from the freeway explosion to justify further "orbital" road transport development for "suburb to suburb" travel.
Cox assumes that once the trams were gone (in Brisbane they were all burned in a mysterious fire at the depot), any hope for further development of public transit was gone forever. In Toronto, Canada, this process was in fact reversed. Tony Collins' interview with the former mayor of Toronto, Art Eggleton, indicates that Cox's assumption is false.
"About twenty years ago", says Eggleton, "a major decision was made by Toronto to stop a major expressway ... We decided that instead of building that expressway into the heart of the city we would stop it cold in its tracks, some two kilometres into its construction, and instead build a rapid train into the downtown core ...
"Since then we haven't built any major roads or expressways or widened any major roads going to the downtown core. That was a very clear-cut decision to opt for a pro-public transit position and I think we're much the better for it. We've built better subway lines, we even continued to operate streetcars ...
"We have a fully integrated system that works quite well. In fact, most people get into the downtown areas by public transit every morning ..."
Are these the Olympic visitors, to whom John B. Cox refers, who will be so "disappointed" to find so few freeways in Sydney? Or perhaps he means the visitors from LA who will hate to be deprived of the freeways upon which the average speed of traffic is 25 km per hour and upon which complete gridlock sometimes occurs, obliging drivers to leave their cars and walk to work. Or perhaps he is concerned that visitors from Athens will miss the toxic smog from their car exhausts, which is so acrid it is eating away the Acropolis.
According to the editorial in the October edition of Hell on Wheels (published by the Wolli Creek Preservation Society, the Sutherland Shire Environment Centre and the Campbelltown and District Commuters Association), the majority of taxpayers should not be amongst those "hoping" for more freeways by 2000.
"The games decision could herald a new era for Sydney", it agrees. "It could be a catalyst for advances like the AirportRailLink, more rail lines in the western suburbs, a renaissance in light rail transport, sensible urban consolidation, construction of much needed infrastructure and the protection and enhancement of parks and foreshores. In short, a massive program of urban renewal."
"On the other hand", it continues, "the Olympic decision could be used by the State Government as the rationale to ram through the RTA's disastrous expressways — the M2, the M5, the F6 and the Cooks River Valley road. It could trigger another spree of carpark construction. It could mean widening roads and demolishing houses in the inner-west. In short, a massive program of urban blight."
Les Robinson, spokesperson for the Wolli Creek Preservation Society (which has been fighting for five years against the construction of the M5) told Green Left most members of residents' and local environment groups believe the RTA will never give up its beloved "orbital" freeway plan. He told Tony Collins that the 1991 "Future Directions" report, which predicted dire outcomes if the orbital freeways plan was not radically reviewed, was archived by the authority.
"When they found that people were looking at it", he said, "they had it declared a cabinet document so that it couldn't be discovered under freedom of information legislation".
Robinson said that the latest "Integrated Transport Strategy", released on October 21, had a "tremendous intellectual effort" put into it, but because of bureaucratic politics ended up as a "capitulation to the RTA's urban freeway strategy".
"The RTA has for years been dedicated to the Sydney Orbital", he said. "But as changes have taken place in people's understanding of cities, they have had to develop ever more cunning disguises and incarnations for their plans.
"This latest document says, yes, freeways do encourage more cars onto roads, eventually trapping cities in nightmare scenarios of endlessly increasing traffic congestion and smog. So the RTA now says, 'We're going to go ahead with our major roads, but they're only going to be freight routes'. But the M5 does not, and will not, go in the direction freight goes. Freight needs to go from the container terminal to distribution points, and there are neither feeding into the M5.
"Experience so far with the part of the M5 that's been built is that freight drivers will do almost anything to avoid paying the tolls, so the idea of a tollway being a freight route is incredible.
"The RTA is having to fight defensive battles within the bureaucracy to maintain the plan. Nevertheless, we see no slackening at all in the RTA's determination to proceed with the M5 ... The only thing standing in its way is the fact that they can't find any money for it. So they're trying to build it in conjunction with private investment. However, it appears unlikely that any private investment will be found for the entire $800 million cost. As a result the RTA is going to have to put in quite a lot of taxpayers' funds to subsidise the private tollway operators."
Robinson says the community has also become cynical over so-called public consultation. The current consultation over the M5 is the second time residents have been asked to give their opinion on the freeway. Evidently the first time they didn't give the right answer.
"The first time we were asked about it, two-thirds of us said we were opposed to the freeway and preferred a rail option, and now the RTA is doing it again. Now they're asking absolutely everybody and their dog what they think about freeways. They're holding lovely evening meetings and they're inviting members of churches and sporting groups along, and getting them sandwiches and then sitting them down and saying, 'Now, where would you like to see the freeway go?', when all the time we know the RTA knows exactly where they want the freeway to go.
"They have to be seen to consult. After they consult, they can do whatever they like. It's a farce. You can only have a genuine consultation when there is equal power between the consulting parties."
Robinson says the Wolli Creek Preservation Society, in conjunction with a number of other residents' groups and environmental organisations, has decided on direct action.
"We are seeking volunteers who are prepared to engage in non-violent direct action against the construction process for the M5. We believe that nothing else is capable of stopping the RTA and state government's urban freeway strategy, and nothing else is capable of making Sydney a good place to live", he told Green Left. "This is going to be the biggest environmental confrontation that Sydney has ever seen, the urban Franklin."
Tony Collins also feels the much-touted "integrated strategy" should be treated warily.
"Dramatic statements and plans that make a big point of saying 'We're changing direction' tend to overemphasise the level of change that's involved", he told Green Left, "and when you look at the minutiae of the actual plans, what's happening is really more of the same ...
"Most of the growth that's going to happen in Sydney in the next 20 years is going to happen out on the fringe, and it's going to be served by freeways rather than public transport.
"Those nightmare scenarios about turning into a Los Angeles-style city are still quite capable of coming true, even though transport planners are changing attitude. The NSW government can't ignore the 'Future Directions' report, but we're not seeing huge light rail and heavy rail projects actually being planned and going ahead."
When Collins first suggested the idea of a radio project on Australian cities for the ABC youth network JJJ, he met some resistance. But he found a great deal of interest in the issues he raised among young people he talked to for the show and the book.
"We talked to hundreds and hundreds of young people across the country about what their concerns were, and they're all about public transport. Young people rely on public transport more than older people, because they haven't got cars. They're acutely aware of the need for public transport, and they're great advocates for increasing resources being put into public transport. I think young people are much more environmentally aware than they were 10 or 20 years ago, and there's no question that they think anything that will decrease the amount of air pollution is worthwhile."
Sam Wainright, national coordinator of the Environmental Youth Alliance, agrees that young people see the irrationality of more freeways and the rationality of good public transport.
"If you're not aware of the powerful interests behind keeping us car-dependent ", he told Green Left Weekly, "it's impossible to see what the hold-up is. If ordinary people had any say over the matter, work would begin on light and heavy rail networks for our cities tomorrow, and those freeway plans would be in the shredder.
"But we don't get to make the decisions. It's people like [NSW transport minister] Bruce Baird, who also happens to have been chief lobbyist for Esso before he went into parliament, and the owners and chief executives of companies like BHP and Ford, who really hold the reins.
'An active campaign for public transport is top of our agenda at the moment. Not only do we need it to get to school, to uni and to our jobs, but we also need it if we're going to save the planet." [Living for the City, by Tony Collins, is available at ABC shops throughout Australia.]