[sustran] Road Fight

Todd Litman litman at IslandNet.com
Thu Apr 23 04:01:53 JST 1998


The recently announced Transport Master Plan for the Perth region
('Transforming WA') raises several concerns.

It is in opposition to efforts in most developed countries to develop a
more diversified transportation system and encourage more efficient use of
existing capacity. There are many justifications for this trend, it saves
governments and businesses money (reduced road and parking facility costs),
gives consumers better mobility choices, reduces accidents and pollution,
and increases community livability. It tends to increase equity by giving
non-drivers better travel choices. A more diverse transportation system
also enhances regional economic development and employment, since
expenditures on private automobiles tend to provide far fewer regional jobs
than the same money spent on public transit.

It is important to use a comprehensive analysis framework for evaluating
the long-term impacts of roadway capacity increases. Such a framework must
incorporate the effects of generated traffic. It must also include the
incremental parking facility and downstream congestion costs of highway
widening. For example, when comparing highway capacity expansion against a
transit or other TDM alternative for improving access to a downtown area,
it should not just consider the direct facility costs to the government
agency. It should also consider the additional parking facility costs and
increased downtown congestion and surface street road improvements that
will be needed to accommodate the additional cars, costs that are avoided
if the same number of people arrive by transit or rideshare vehicles. The
framework should also account for the vehicle cost savings to households
that result from increased transit use, and the benefits to disadvantaged
populations from increased travel choices. Our research indicates that many
roadway projects that are considered cost effective based on a narrow
analysis framework turn out to be less attractive when a more comprehensive
and accurate analysis framework is used.

It is also important to consider a full range of alternatives. Our
institute has identified more than three dozen travel demand management
strategies that can be implemented, many of which provide multiple
benefits. For example, cashing-out free parking is justified on equity
grounds and can save money for businesses if matched with reduced parking
requirements, as well as reducing traffic congestion and other external
costs. Similarly, distanced-based vehicle insurance is justified for the
sake of equity, but can reduce about 10% of total personal vehicle travel,
while increasing vehicle insurance affordability. The "Win-Win" strategies
we promote are justified in terms of economic benefits, while also
providing significant equity and environmental benefits at not extra cost.

The funding mechanism proposed for the Perth roadway projects is
particularly inappropriate, because it increases fixed rather than variable
vehicle costs. This is both unfair (since vehicle owners must pay
regardless of how much or little they drive), and economically inefficient,
since it fails to "marginalize" costs. This represents a major distortion
of the transportation market which encourages wasteful travel habits. It
would be far more fair and economically efficient, and contribute far more
to increased regional productivity, to raise funds through road pricing, a
kilometer charge, or a fuel tax, which are correlated to vehicle use,
rather than increasing fixed vehicle registration fees.


Sincerely,

Todd Litman, Director
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
1250 Rudlin Street
Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada
Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560
E-mail:      litman at islandnet.com
Website:     www.islandnet.com/~litman

============================================================

References (available from the Victoria Transport Policy Institute):

*  Transportation Cost Analyzer (Software) 
*  Distance-based Vehicle Insurance as a TDM Strategy
*  Defining and Quantifying Public Transit Benefits 
*  Evaluating Transportation Equity
*  Generated Traffic; Implications for Transport Planning
*  Guide to Calculating Transportation Demand Management Benefits
*  Potential Transportation Demand Management Strategies
*  Socially Optimal Road Transport Markets and Prices; Principles,
Strategies and Travel Impacts
*  Transportation Cost Analysis for Sustainability
*  Win-Win Transportation Strategies



>
>PLAN DETAILS
>
>Western Australia's Transport Minister Eric Charlton released his more than
>$1.3 billion (road) Transport Master Plan on Easter Monday, called
>'Transforming WA'.
>
>Total cost of the Master Plan is $1.47 billion ($957 m in Perth, $513 m in
>the regions). Of these amounts, less than $100 m (7%) is being spent on
public
>transport. Putting this in context, WA's State budget is around $7 billion
>per year.
>
>The big costs in the Master Plan are:
>- Widening the Narrows Bridge which currently carries 155,000 vpd ($70 m)
>- - from 8 lanes (6 car lanes, 1 bus lane and 1 shared pedestrian/bike path)
>- - to 11 lanes plus a breakdown lane (8 car lanes, 2 bus lanes and 1
>ped/bike path).
>- Kwinana Freeway improvements ($280 m)
>- Tonkin Highway 25 km extension ($140 m)
>- Future Freeway alignment to Mandurah ($90 m)
>- Roe Highway extension to Kwinana Freeway ($84 m)
>- Cockburn Road realignment ($50 m)
>- Other road projects (all up, including the above, $957 m)
>- road projects in the regions including an Outback Highway to Alice
>Springs (totalling $514 m).
>
>The justifications for the plan are obvious, simplistic, populist,
>unvalidated and wrong:
>- The State Premier, Richard Court called the plan 'crucial for WA's
>economic and social development'.
>- Eric Charlton, the Minister for Transport claims that motorists will save
>money: 'For every dollar the average West Australian spends on the higher
>registration fees will save them $7 through less travelling time, fewer
>accidents and decreased pollution'. It is also claimed that the new roads
>will save fuel.
>- One third of the road projects would be completed just before the next
>election in 2000.
>
>To sell the plan, the government has launched a $400,000 advertising
>campaign, including slick TV advertising and brochures to 1 million
>households to convince a population already addicted to cars of the
>'rightness' of more roads and more cars.
>
>Funding is to come from an increase in the motor vehicle registration fee
>by between $50 and $100 depending on the weight of the car. This will bring
>the government $80 million per year. So the project will be funded by loans
>serviced by this new tax.
>
>Construction is to begin immediately and be finished in 10 years.
>
>Although the Minister claims over the past year that he consulted with
>'everyone' and that therefore the plan is not his but the plan of the
>people, no-one has yet admitted to being consulted. Some, such as the
>premier road organisation, the Royal Automobile Club (RAC), were presented
>with the plan before its release, but they had no opportunity to change it
>(even they say a third of the projects are not justified).
>
>Reactions to the Master Plan include:
>- The opposition (Labor) says the priority should be a rail line to
>Rockingham in the south (a corridor without any rail service) to get people
>out of cars, not widening the Narrows bridge and freeway.
>- Independent Perth MLA Philip Pendal (ex-Liberal) described the decision
>as 'outrageous' and a 1960s traffic planning mentality.
>- Greens (WA) want a train line down the freeway median as a priority.
>- Rockingham's Mayor says the new plan would improve access for Rockingham
>residents to jobs and education facilities. However, he would still rather
>see a train down the freeway to 'get people out of cars'.
>- Mandurah Mayor thinks the freeway should be further extended to Mandurah
>(85 km south of Perth CBD), (it will be), but has always said a rail
>service is a higher priority.
>- Local South Perth Mayor says the new bridge will 'produce more cars on a
>bigger freeway'. He wants more public transport.
>- The very road-orientated car club, the RAC, thinks one-third of the roads
>cannot be justified. They oppose any increase in motor vehicle registration
>fees to pay for the plan (as, according to them, motorists are already
>paying more than their share of transport costs).
>- the WA Council of Social Services condemned the increase in car
>registrations as being a new tax which will hit the lower income groups.
>- every letter published in the newspaper is aghast at the road plan. All
>have called for improvements to public transport. So far there hasn't been
>one letter congratulating the Minister on his foresightedness and many have
>said how other sectors of society such as education and health, which are
>starved of funds should have priority over roads.
>- Both the West Australian and the Sunday Times newspapers have
>editorialised against the roads plan.



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list