| Lindsay Tanner MP's EWLNA submission 2007 |
|
Sir Rod Eddington East-West Link Needs Assessment C/- Department of Infrastructure Level 49, 80 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000 12 April 2007 Dear Sir Eddington, I write to you in relation to the current East-West Link Needs Assessment. I would urge you to recommend in your final report that future east-west transport development should focus on investment in public transport networks and rail freight links, and reject the proposed tunnel freeway link, based on the following: • There is a lack of necessity for a new east-west freeway link. Only 12% of cars and 25% of trucks on the Eastern freeway travel further west than Royal Parade. Studies have found that peak hour congestion along the Eastern freeway is largely caused by commuter traffic headed to inner Melbourne and the CBD, and that relatively little traffic is crossing from east to west. Hence, an appropriate congestion solution would be to provide adequate public transport options for these commuters, and another east-west road link would fail to improve congestion. • Building more roads will fail to deal with traffic congestion issues. It is a false assumption that increased road space is a solution to traffic congestion. Numerous studies have shown that increasing road capacity (by building more roads) merely increases demand, which re-congests the roads. Congestion serves to discourage people from taking unnecessary trips, encourages the use of public transport or other transport alternatives, or promotes the use of alternative routes. Building new roads generates new traffic during peak times, so the increased capacity is cancelled out by increased usage. Traffic congestion is better dealt with through traffic management plans, such as creating priority lanes, improving signalling efficiency, pricing mechanisms and creating parking policies to prioritise public transport. • Increased road space will negatively impact on Melbourne’s liveability. As discussed above, more road space will generate new traffic. Increased traffic leads to increased accidents, more pollution and other environmental costs, all of which will impact on the amenity of Melbourne’s inner suburbs. Furthermore, new road development would require more on and off ramps – which will create new locales of congestion, and the increased traffic will also increase down stream congestion in inner Melbourne. • Roads development in inner Melbourne will undermine the public transport system. Due to the limited nature of public resources, any investment in roads necessarily reduces the amount of investment available to develop Melbourne’s public transport network. Furthermore, roads compete with public transport for both space and users. Therefore, in order to increase public transport use, east-west links should focus on public transport – such as bus and tram networks – and avoid the construction of further roads. • The growth of the freight traffic requires infrastructure development focusing on rail freight and efficiency measures. The strong growth of the Port of Melbourne as a major freight hub in Southeast Asia means that effective and efficient landside container distribution is crucial to the Victorian economy. The current freight networks are highly inefficient, with 36% of container truck movement involving no containers. This contributes to both road congestion and reduced productivity. Government investment in rail freight networks will reduce congestion by diverting freight traffic off road networks. Road investment risks undermining investment in rail freight networks. Furthermore, an east-west tunnel would increase inefficiency as it would direct freight traffic along the Eastern freeway and away from the desired destination of the South Eastern industrial hub. • The cost of the proposed east-west road link is disproportionate to any potential benefit. One of the transport solutions being mooted in response to this inquiry is an east-west tunnel. The cost of this tunnel is estimated to be up to $10 billion. This would result in a huge misallocation of resources as it is highly unlikely to reduce congestion, as discussed above, and moreover, reduces the resources available for important investments in public transport and traffic management solutions. • The government should pursue transport policies that address the challenges of climate change and peak oil. Private car use is more polluting and creates more emissions than public transport and other alternatives such as walking and bike riding. There is a need for strong government leadership in the shift away from petrol-based modes of transport. Reducing reliance on car based transport is beneficial as we face increasing petrol prices due to sky-rocketing demand for the limited global reserves of oil, and will contribute to our aims to reduce carbon emissions. Building new inner city roads will waste this opportunity to impact on Victorian’s commuting habits. In conclusion, this inquiry is an opportunity to rethink transport solutions and develop a comprehensive strategy to improve Melbourne’s congestion, provide the infrastructure necessary for strong economic growth and promote environmentally sustainable transport models. Good public policy and plain common sense demonstrates that investment in public transport and traffic management solutions is more effective and more economically sound than investing in new roads. I thank you for considering this letter. Yours sincerely, Lindsay Tanner MP Federal Member for Melbourne |