“We are excited that we will see another million cars on our
roads by 2041, such is the growth our region will experience.”
Yeah, nah. You’re never going to hear a growth booster make
that statement. But it’s true. Or at least highly likely. Another 1.5 million
people, based on the average ratio of cars to people, will mean roughly an
additional 1 million more cars on the roads. Plus more commercial vehicles. Whether
that’s Sydney, Melbourne, or South-east Queensland (where the 1.5 million more people
is the official 2041 forecast) matters little. Each city has been “promised”
very large population gains in a short space of time. With those gains come consequences,
in the same short time frames.
We are assured that public transport – usually in the form
of heavy commuter rail - will “solve” the rising congestion problem. If you
believe that, please share whatever’s in your Kool-Aid, I want some too. Heavy
commuter rail works well for centralised workforces. Jobs in CBDs and near-city
locations are well supported by this type of public transport. But there are a
number of things to keep in mind if you see a bright future in radically expanded
public transport of this type being ‘the solution’ to rising numbers of private
cars.
First, CBD and near city jobs represent only around 10% of a
metro region’s workforce. Heavy commuter rail proponents – including many who
support ‘fast rail’ – envisage outlying exurban areas maybe 50 or even 100
kilometres from CBDs serviced by subsidised fast rail than can transport highly
paid professionals to their CBD offices in under half an hour. Which is fine if
you are among the 5% or fewer of people in outer suburbs with jobs in the inner
city. Most inner-city workers live much closer to their workplace, and are
already well served by existing public transport. Of CBD workers, around half
typically already catch public transport. But of people with suburban work
places – who represent the 90% of jobs – this percentage falls to single
figures.
Second, the fastest growing industries producing the greatest
numbers of jobs are health and education. This is going to continue for the foreseeable
future. These are not CBD white collar office worker jobs – they are typically
suburban. Which means the fastest jobs growth in our metro areas is likely to
continue to be outside the inner cities. And accessing those jobs currently is
most conveniently achieved by private motor vehicle. Public transport networks
servicing suburban home to suburban workplace journeys are notoriously
difficult, (with the exception of buses which can make use of the road network but
which still struggle with volumes).
Then there’s been the whole Covid response with what seems a
semi-permanent move to CBDs as places of work for maybe three days a week, with
white collar professionals using technology to work from home and save themselves
the time, cost and inconvenience of the commute. I still think it’s too early
to call this a permanent change, but what it has done for now is markedly
reduce overall demand for public transport. Cars are in more demand with long
wait lists for new vehicles and very high prices for second hand. Is this a
long term thing or not?
Some public transport advocates can get quite Bolshie when
it comes to private cars. Some suggest they be banned from CBDs altogether and
roads converted to cycle and pedestrian thoroughfares. Others promote suggestions
that private cars are taxed even more heavily (including through road user
charges) to discourage their peak hour use and to support public transport. The
latter could work if public transport was a genuine alternative. But go back to
my first point: only one in ten jobs of a metro wide region is in the sort of
centralised location where PT is a genuine option. And that ratio will likely
shrink as suburban jobs grow faster. Banning or taxing cars may go down well
with the inner urban professional set who are well served by existing PT networks,
or who can ride their $10,000 carbon fibre racing cycles to work on a dedicated
inner city bikeway, but it would impose significant and unnecessary hardship on
the other 90% of workers.
Also, take into account the
changed nature of the journey to work these days. Some years back in the public
transport hey-day, city workers left homes at a regular time, commuted to their
central office via public transport, and left work to return home the same way.
The 9 to 5 commute is no longer. These days the journey to work can mean
leaving at a different time every day, a school drop off en-route to work, then
gym on the way home and maybe a stop for groceries too. Don’t forget the kids
either. That’s very difficult for public transport.
So, what do we do about the
prospect of another million cars on our roads? Promising to solve this with
visions of fast commuter rail is, in my opinion, unrealistic. Witness the new
Moreton Bay rail link in southeast Queensland. Opened in 2018 at a cost of $1.2
billion (over $100m per kilometre), then Treasurer Jackie Trad promised “A project like this … will see 600 new trains go from
the Redcliffe Peninsula to the city CBD every week, (and) is a fantastic
initiative for workers in this area.” Then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
chimed in with “Realistically, someone could jump on a train here in Kippa Ring
and use our public transport network to visit the beaches of Gold Coast or
Sunshine Coast.” The trains are running –
every half hour even – just few commuters are using them, nowhere near
predictions. I caught one last month, from Rothwell to the CBD. Near $10 fare for one way. Lovely carriages,
huge platforms. Just empty. Few people in Redcliffe work in the CBD, and if
they want to visit the beach, I can’t envisage the beach umbrellas, eskies and
other stuff making the trip which involves at least one platform change and a
bus trip and, in all likelihood, a two hour exercise. I mean, were they on
drugs when they made these statements?
But enough
ridiculing (though it’s tempting with so much material to work with).
One option could
be to centralise everything – jobs and social infrastructure. Schools,
Universities and hospitals included. Outer suburbs become residential dormitories
and their inhabitants are transported daily to their workplaces or for their
needs, via rapid transit networks, to the city centre. This urban model was
well portrayed in the series of movies “The Hunger Games.” ‘The Capitol’ was where
all the high-quality amenity was concentrated – the best jobs, the most wealth,
the finest dining, cultural and other facilities, enjoyed by a highly privileged
elite whose lives were totally removed from those of the ‘Districts’ where
impoverished worker drones lived. Great movies. Like Sim City on ‘roids from a
planning sense. But maybe not something to aspire to (even if Sydney seems to
be heading that way).

What else? We could try slowing
the growth rates. Our rates of projected growth in our three larger cities are,
by world standards, very ambitious. It’s not the quantum, but the speed. Growing
faster than even Beijing or Shanghai ought to ring alarm bells. Realistically, history
and experience shows we are just not very good at it. We have proven more or
less capable of housing a rapidly growing population (though the wheels are
falling off even that cart now) but when it comes to infrastructure like transport,
hospitals, schools – we haven’t much to brag about. Perhaps slowing the
population growth to a safer speed – one we can keep up with - is an idea?

We could also invest as much
energy and thought into the future of work and workplaces. Much regional growth
planning seems fixated on housing, and maybe the provision of schools. But
there could be more discussion about how we support more opportunities for jobs
and industry near where future populations will live. Jobs closer to homes allows
for shorter commutes and potentially reduces congestion caused by lengthy trips,
or trips in one direction. The fast-emerging post Covid economy will be shaped
by tech and new and emerging industries along with high growth industries like
health and education. If we did as much planning for distributed suburban hubs
as we do for inner cities, we might find the investment pays dividends.
More time thinking about the
alleviating benefits of autonomous, electric travel might also be handy. This
technology is already with us, it just hasn’t been widely deployed yet. Instead
of every million people requiring 600,000 to 700,000 cars – most of which sit
in garages for 20 hours of the day going nowhere – the prospect of not owning a
car but having access to an on-demand fleet of hybrid private-public transport
vehicles is something we could be thinking more about?
Buses and hybrids (like Brisbane’s
Metro) could also be worth expanding – on the basis that making use of the existing
road network is a more flexible and much cheaper option than fixed heavy rail tracks,
fixed heavy rail stations and fixed overhead power lines. This
handy video summarises a number of trackless tram initiatives around the
country (though very strangely leaves out Brisbane’s metro which is arguably
far more advanced).
We could also make better use of
existing infrastructure including the heavy commuter rail network. Existing suburban
train stations are commonly viewed as potential high density housing hubs so
that city workers can commute to their city jobs. But what about viewing these
also as potential destination stations, surrounded by higher density employment
zones? Or schools? Or community facilities? Some stations offer ample
surrounding land for this to occur. Moving away from a centralised view of the
economy and transport to one that encourages dispersed employment nodes around
suburban hubs seems critical to maximising the infrastructure opportunities we
already have.
Way over the word limit on this
one, but a big topic that could deserve a lot more thought and open-minded
discussion. For those interested in delving into some of the evidenciary background, the references below are handy.
ABS Census on Journey to Work
(2016 data)
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0.55.001~2016~Main%20Features~Feature%20Article:%20Journey%20to%20Work%20in%20Australia~40
JAN 2022 UPDATE ON AUSTRALIAN
TRANSPORT TRENDS – CHARTING TRANSPORT
https://chartingtransport.com/category/mode-share/
The MIT Mobility Initiative, a
collaboration between the School of Engineering and the School of Architecture
and Planning, is designed as a platform to connect all mobility and
transportation activities at MIT, building an integrated approach for the Institute’s
efforts on research, education, entrepreneurship, and civic engagement related
to transportation systems.
https://dusp.mit.edu/news/global-resource-better-mobility-systems