October-December 1994 Issue No. 9 "All the ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy." - Alfred E. Smitt, 1933. CARS AND DEMOCRACY OR AUTO AUTOCRACY? Mike Kaulbars It's election time again. Already canvassers go door to door, lawn signs sprout like mushrooms after rain, under-attended all candidates meetings squeeze between fitness classes at local schools and community centres. And we all get a chance to cast our vote for the candidate who is most sympathetic, or least hostile to the issues that are dear to our hearts. Democracy in action, or was that inaction? Democracy implies more than simply picking the lesser of several evils, and even our own warped political process contains some of the vestiges of true democracy. If we hope to see any real change in our society, we are going to have to do more than faithfully troop to the nearest polling station on election night, if it's not raining and there's nothing good on cable. Effective, good government is primarily the result of effective, good citizenship. On one level democracy is about negotiation. If the only information that a politician has is that they got elected, they cannot tell whether their policies are exactly what we want or simply the least despised. It is not enough to choose the "best" candidate. It is necessary to attempt to influence them as well. Every candidate needs to learn what it is you expect of them if they are to get your vote. (cont'd on p. 3) DOES OUR REGIONAL GOVERNMENT REALLY CARE WHAT WE THINK? Ken Toews Picture a meeting room at the Ottawa- Carleton Regional Headquarters with 25 "activists", two community liaison officers, and a lone delegate from the development community. In response to the dissatisfaction expressed by many people who had attended the Region's Ideas Fair and out of her own concern over the lack of genuine public consultation on the review of the Region's Official Plan, regional councillor Nancy Mitchell had organized this meeting with regional staff in an effort to make the rest of the three-year public consultation process more democratic. This assembly of the most concerned had a truly egalitarian format: a chance to introduce ourselves, to speak, to listen, to explain our expectations for the public consultation process. The foresight of this group was truly inspirational and I marvelled at how well laid out our city would be after these consultations. What could I possibly add. I was to be the last person to speak. The fourth from the last to speak had been the developer. Others had spoken passionately on the need to build community, healthy local economies, traffic calming, safe places for children, walking to work, quality of life and living within the natural order. (cont'd on p. 4) ELECT BETTER TRANSPORTATION! Questions for municipal candidates drawn from the Elect Better Transportation Guide. 1. Will you support a Safe Routes to Schools program, which would enforce traffic speeds between 15-30 km/h, and require traffic calming design measures within designated school zones? 2. Will you support the adoption of Transit-Supportive Land Use Planning Guidelines as official policy for your municipality by incorporating them into the Official Plan for the municipality? 3. Will you support a moratorium on all new road building and widening projects? For background information to these questions, see "Car-free Reading" on how to get a copy of the Guide. COMMUNITY-INITIATED CONSULATION PROCESSES In view of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton's unsuccessful attempts at listening to people, some Ottawa-Carleton residents have taken it upon themselves to develop community-led processes for public consultation on the review of the Region's Official Plan. At its meeting of September 28, the Planning Committee approved a recommendation that the review include "an examination of the 'associated process' and any other community-led discussion process be included in the development of the consultation process." For more information about the community-led processes, contact the Planning Department of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton at 560-2053. MEXICO'S PLAN TO CURB DEMOCRACY MEXICO CITY¾The embattled Mexican government has found a novel way to crack down on protesters who staged 1700 demonstrations¾nearly five a day¾in 1993. Citing the need to reduce traffic congestion, city officials have proposed banning protest marches on four main roads. In addition, the rightist Partido de Acción Nacional is demanding that demonstrators pay for all policing and clean-up costs. "If the bureaucrats would start paying attention to our petitions, we wouldn't have to march so often," counters José Santos of the Popular Urban Movement. If city officials were really concerned about pollution says, Bernardo Batiz of the progressive Partido Revolucionario Demócrata, they would ban the city's four million automobiles from the city centre, creating more breathing space for both democracy and the environment. (Earth Island Journal, Winter (Southern Hemisphere) 1994) AUTO-FREE ZONE is published quarterly by Auto-Free Ottawa, Box 57006, 797 Somerset St. W., Ottawa-Rideau Bioregion, ON K1R 1A1, Canada, and is mailed to subscribers or members of Auto-Free Ottawa (see form inside last page). Auto-Free Ottawa is a grassroots group, whose mandate is to draw public attention to the full costs of our car-dominated transporta- tion system, and to point out ecologically sustainable and socially beneficial alternatives. Opinions expressed in AFZ do not necessarily reflect those of Auto-Free Ottawa members. Readers are encouraged to submit articles, announcements, and graphics. Articles should be submitted on diskette (WP 5.1) and limited to 1,000 words. Letters to AFZ must be marked "For publication" (include address and phone number which will not be pub- lished), and are subject to selection and edit- ing. Articles reprinted from other publications are abridged to save space. Reproduction of editorial content is welcome provided that credit is given to the author and issue of publication. Please send a copy of reprinted articles to Auto-Free Ottawa for our files. Editor: Lucy Segatti Thanks to the following for contributing articles (original or borrowed), graphics, ideas or their time: Ann Coffey, Paul Davis, Frank de Jong, Mike Kaulbars, David Paine, RAIN, Ken Toews, Douglas Woodard Thanks to Zippy Print (264 Albert Street) for donating photocopies. AFZ Graphic: Cathy Woodgold Cover graphic: Nancy Shaver Advertising: For information on advertising rates, please contact Auto-Free Ottawa at the address above or at (613) 234-0923. AFZ is printed on unbleached, 100% post- consumer recycled paper. Deadline for next issue: Winter solstice 1994 (December 21). ISSN 1195-1958 AUTO-FREE OTTAWA ACTIVITIES UPDATE Since the last issue of auto-free zone, Volunteer Coordinator Nancy Shaver recruited several new members. As a result, a By Ward Market Committee has been formed, and a new pamphlet is being prepared (thanks to Carolyn Vanneste and Nancy). Nancy Shaver also created a recruitment poster for public libraries and community centres. Auto-Free Ottawa also responded to requests for interviews from CKCU radio (many thanks to Paul Davis) and MCTV in Sudbury. In addition, Auto-Free Ottawa responded to many requests for information or support from various community groups and individuals. AUTOCRACY (cont'd from p.1) To help us all in this, the Better Transportation Coalition has published the "Elect Better Transportation Guide" by Tom Samuels (see Car-free Reading for address). This guide is primarily concerned with transportation issues and has a lot of information specific to that, but its suggestions for participating in the political process are much more generally applicable. As a minimal starting point, I recommend that anyone who is fed up with poor government obtain a copy and start sharing the responsibility of governing our society. But democracy is an interesting word, derived from two Greek words meaning "the commons, the people" and "rule, sway authority". Clearly the people of Canada do not rule, but they arguably are able to sway authority¾at least in theory. That aside, for the moment I am more interested in the concept of "the people" being virtually synonymous with "the commons", as in "the common people". In this case the word "common" does not refer to the fact that there are a lot of us that are similar and can be found everywhere, but rather that we exist "in common", in community, as opposed to in isolation. Democracy is not rule by the "people", but rather rule by the "community". Which leads me to question the entire democratic process in the car culture. All technology is designed to isolate the self from some aspect of the world, and as the snow begins to fly I think it is appropriate to be thankful for the technologies that provide food and shelter and protect us from the extremes of nature. But as with any good thing, one rapidly reaches an optimal point beyond which the isolation from the natural and social world leads increasingly to isolation from the self. Technology no longer facilitates life¾it merely makes existence more convenient. At a fundamental level democracy requires, assumes, cannot exist without dialogue, discourse, discussion - without community. The private automobile is surely one of the acmes of technology and nemeses of community. Encased in our steel and plastic cages we are isolated from one another. Where once we stopped to greet and speak to a neighbour or friend on the street, we now honk the horn (there's a deep and engaging discussion of economic reform for you!) Of course, we could call each other on a cellular phone. I'm sure every reader has seen someone they know in another car on the Queensway and thought "Oh yes, I must call them and discuss the Reform Party's position on social programs". When is the last time you or anyone you know engaged in a conversation of any real substance, depth, or length on the phone, much less yelling at each other from vehicles? We could talk to one another if we wanted. Zipping along Bank Street we could stop at any moment and chat to one of the homeless, talk to a pensioner, or get into a really good discussion with a recent immigrant. But we don't. The impact of the car has extended far beyond the simple synthetic cocoon that entombs us when we climb inside. Expressways isolate neighbourhoods, major streets and huge developments turn short walks into dangerous expeditions, unless you have your own wheeled coffin to get around in. Vast parking lots create wastelands hardly conducive to amiable discussion. The car's emphasis on movement, power and speed has invaded every aspect of our lives. Markets where we once talked to our neighbours have become soulless shopping plazas where a curt "Thank you for shopping at ..." is as informative and genial as it gets. Eating is dominated by fast food where we are expected to McEat and get out¾ preferably just Drive Thru. Traditional meeting places like "public houses" have become "bars", where music loud enough to sterilize iguanas precludes any hope of conversation more profound than "I want another beer! A beer! What? No! I want a beer! Fine, ...gin will be just fine." Even our own homes are dominated by Entertainment Centres that bring the movement and speed of the fast car into our living rooms, and prevent any discussion that is not at least as mindless and shallow as the "action" on the screen. And because we do not talk to one another we rely increasingly on the media for our understanding of the world. Stalled in traffic we listen to the "World At Six" to learn about what's going on, why it's happening, who we should vote for. Fewer and fewer people are able to determine what opinions we hear and what facts we learn, because we have voluntarily isolated ourselves from dissenting voices. At 80 km/h with tonnes of steel protecting us, no welfare recipient is going to scream in our ear that it's all a lie and they really do want a job, any job. Protected from the moment we drive out of our garage to when we take our usual spot in the office parking lot, there is no risk that some Arab, Kurd or Jew might tell us something different about what is happening in the Middle East. We are not yet so far gone that democracy is totally inoperable in our culture, but it's in serious trouble. Democracy demands that we be a community, that we talk to one another at length and in depth. That we take the time to be slow, to stay in one place, to listen and to explain to each other. Democracy demands that we risk understanding and being understood. Noam Chomsky said "Anything you do that brings people together is resistance". Resist, or risk AUTOcracy. Mike Kaulbars is the Director of the Peace and Environment Resource Centre in Ottawa and a co-founder of Auto-Free Ottawa. REGIONAL CONSULTATION (cont'd from p.1 ) The developer brushed it all aside and talked about legal obligations, timeliness, his perceived market realities, and the reality of diminished profits from delays he attributed directly to participation in these mandated public consultations. Mandated public consultations? Then it all fell into place. The public consultation on the Region's Official Plan is a sham. We are being consulted to fulfil a legal requirement. Regional staff really didn't care what the community wanted. It was all just for show. We are here to fulfil the requirements of Schedule A, Regional Official Plan Review, Step 2 - Community Consultation. Since community involvement is the law in Ontario, if planners, developers and others want to foist another squalid development on the community then first they must "consult" with the community. Like in an Orwellian novel, the fact that the planners will ignore the consultation is irrelevant. What is important is that the consultation take place. So what would make a consultation process work? If you want people to be interested in any discussion, they must have a sense of control over the final outcome. No one wants to participate if the final decision is made by someone else. So the answer seemed obvious to me: we need a referendum. The Official Plan should be subjected to a referendum, or better yet, to a series of referenda. I shared my developing ideas with the group. What appeared obvious to me was not obvious to the community liaison staff or the developer. Referenda would be impractical, too complicated, too involved. The senior Regional staffer showed her true contempt for the whole process when she stated flatly that people wouldn't know enough to be able to participate. An interesting observation from the person in charge of public consultation. The review of the regional plan is divided into seven different stages. It starts by defining the region and then identifies key issues. Who is better able to identify the key issues than the residents? The next step is to provide a detailed analysis of issues and options. If these options addressed the key concerns identified by the community, then it would not be difficult to consult the community again to make the final decision. It is not a matter of knowledge, cost or interest. It is a matter of control, and regional and city planners who occupy revolving doors that exit into a developer's office don't want to lose control. If the regional plan were under genuine community control, I suspect the final outcome would be considerably different. The regional plan would reflect the needs, wants, and desires of the community. If we were to proceed through the whole three-year process with four or five referenda at key milestones, an interesting thing would happen. The public would become interested in the Regional Official Plan review. It would be on the front page of the newspaper every day as different ad hoc committees on this or that strategy vied for public opinion. People would be very interested, very informed and capable of making intelligent decisions. Instead, what we have is sham consultations, sham focus groups and public discussion papers that no one will read. We have a community constructed on the dreams and visions of an accountant. This has resulted in youth alienation, regional malls, violence, stabbings and drive-by shootings. We have four-year-olds and parents alike travelling an average forty minutes out of their community to a school or job that should be within walking distance. Without genuine community control of the regional plan, we will continue to build our city as we have for the past 70 years¾with a total disregard for conservation, sustainability and real human needs. We do have a choice, but unfortunately, this choice will not be given to us freely. Ken Toews is the Coordinator of P.A.A.L.S. (People Against Addicted Lawns) and Policy Coordinator for the Green Party of Canada. DESIRE AND DEMOCRACY IN THE HISTORY OF TRANSPORT Wolfgang Sachs Today's fleet of automobiles is grotesquely overpowered, with acceleration capabilities and top speeds more suitable for racing cars. Quite apart from the wasted energy and materials involved, such top-notch technology offers no protection from the environmental crisis of the second order¾the erosion of nearby spaces that beckon on to a non- motorized lifestyle. If distances grow as it becomes possible to travel faster, why should distances not shrink again once people start travelling more slowly? A low-speed society would suggest the desirability of shorter routes and redistribute goods and services so as to facilitate the development of a lifestyle centred on short journeys. This does not mean that the automobile should be thrown onto the scrap heap of history but that a reformed traffic technology should be developed. Cars should not be speed machines for power mongers, but modest vehicles for relaxed people, with speed governors built into the engines. Roads should not be improved to the point that an arsenal of speed limits, radar traps, and police cars becomes necessary, but should by their design calm and mitigate traffic. Low-speed technology would foster a locally-centred economy that no longer idealized access to the distant, but values the density of nearby exchanges that increase independence¾an economic structure devoted to detail and nuance, rather than long- distance homogeneity. Such a society does not need to rush headlong into the future, for it is not driven by the fear that it will miss something. In a culture of calm composure, aggressive or triumphant drivers make a ridiculous impression, because they betray to watching eyes their feeling of being pursued by a deficit. Nineteenth-century society was driven to haste through its fear of backwardness; a self-confident society of twenty-first century will once again be able to afford slower speeds. (Article drawn from Wolfgang Sachs' For the Love of the Automobile: Looking Back into the History of our Desires, University of California Press, 1992.) (The Ecologist, May/June 94) COOPERATIVE TRANSPORT: BERLIN'S STATTAUTO (INSTEAD OF CARS) Michael LaFond (reprinted with permission from RAIN) It's not easy owning a car. Maintenance, repairs, parking, traffic, break-ins and accidents can be real headaches. Cars devour hard-to-earn cash. And after paying for registration renewals, insurance and permits, it seems you must drive just to get your money's worth. With a car, you make commitments to travel distances you wouldn't otherwise consider. So you're stuck in the thing, unable to get outdoors even though you're apparently outside. Many people live with just their feet, a bike and the bus, but you don't see how you could. For people in search of alternatives, one of the easiest ways out of auto ownership is the car co-op. A carsharing movement, building up in Europe for several years, is now making its way to the New World. In a car co-op, you don't suffer the stress of ownership. When you really need a vehicle, you can find a suitable one in the neighbourhood co-op lot. The less you drive, the less you pay. And, you dramatically reduce the number of cars in your city. In Berlin, carsharing is synonymous with Stattauto. It began as a small initiative in 1988 in the Kreuzberg neighbourhood, where economics student Markus Petersen and a few friends came together to share the expense and guilt of car ownership with each other. They looked for assistance to create a public carsharing project, but the government wasn't interested in their idea. They had to depend on their own vision and a few rusty old cars to get going. For two years, Markus and his brother Carsten, an unemployed philosophy major, experimented with, and organized the project as a kind of test study. Though Stattauto moved slowly in the beginning, after incorporating in 1990 it rapidly developed into a significant transportation alternative. Since December of 1990 it has picked up at least one new member each day. In 1992, the group grew from 500 members to 1,000, and all together there are about 3,000 active carsharers in Deutschland. Car co-ops have spread to as many as 100 cities in a growing number of European countries. Members of Stattauto wishing to use a vehicle simply get on the phone and dial the reservation number. Ninety percent of the time, the callers get the car they want immediately. A variety of automobiles (as well as workbikes, which are free of charge) are distributed around 14 lots throughout Berlin, making for only a short trip to fetch them. Car keys and travel logs are found at the lots in safe-deposit boxes, to which members have magnetic card-keys. Upon returning the vehicles, the well-behaved members fill out travel reports for recordkeeping and accounting. Stattauto bills monthly, for kilometers travelled, hours of use, and the taxi rides that can also be billed to members' cards. The group has a "moonshine rate" for women. Between midnight and 8 a.m., women drive free to their destination and return the car in the morning, avoiding a potentially dangerous walk in the dark. Becoming a Stattauto member involves an investment of $600-900 (returned upon leaving the group), an initiation fee of $75, and monthly dues of $5 to $7.50. The costs are figured to be always just above what it would otherwise cost to use public transit. An organizational bylaw reads "as much with trains and buses, bicycles and feet as possible, and only as much with autos as necessary". Carsharing serves its members and the environment before it thinks about making money. It's one of the few service organizations that discourages the use of its most lucrative service. Another initial rule was that car sharers could not be car owners. About half of the members joining Stattauto have made "painful" separations from their private vehicles. Other members generally either never owned a car, or had given them up long ago. But membership carries a great many benefits. Stattauto's fleet has grown to about 60 motor vehicles of all different types, such as cars, pickups, and buses, along with the workbikes. In addition, bike and luggage racks and child seats can be checked out. The growth in membership pushed the development of car-sharing convenience technologies, such as the "Mobilcard", the magnetic card used to get into those safe-deposit boxes with the car keys. This card has Stattauto information on one side, and the other is a monthly pass for Berlin mass transit. Again, it can also be used for taxi charges. Stattauto is committed to researching and demonstrating alternative and appropriate forms of transportation. Not only does it support the use of workbikes, but together with Atlantis, an environmental technology association, they have developed the first car-sharing lot in Germany with solar-driven electric cars (E-Mobiles). On March 5th, Stattauto celebrated a high-profile opening of the first "solar service station", a set of solar panels on a roof in Kreuzberg, with a "solar pump" below in the courtyard. The panels collect energy in the daytime, which is sold to the city's electric power grid, and in the evening the two Stattauto E-mobiles are recharged for the next day's use. The pump is designed to give E-Mobiles only as much energy as the solar panels generate. Since carsharing is based on short urban trips, it is certain that the use of solar-fed electric cars (whose batteries have a 60-km limit) will take off after these initial experiments prove themselves. An expanding European CarSharing network (ECS) is based in Berlin, directed by Carsten Petersen of Stattauto. ECS organizations are found already in Switzerland, Germany, Holland and Austria, and are now starting up in Sweden and England. Berlin Stattauto members presently can use, without any bureaucracy, other carsharing groups' vehicles in about 70 different cities. Members can take the train to these other cities and still have a car or bike to use when they get there. Among the lofty goals of the ECS are reductions in both the number and use of cars, and support for cooperation between carsharing and public transportation. ECS affiliates, such as Stattauto, cannot maintain more than one vehicle for every 10 members, and the rates for car use must be above the costs for similar trips on mass transit. Car co-op members must have the right to participate in organizational decision-making. Carsharing groups set the pricing of their services to cover overhead and are not expected to earn any profit. Although the ECS-affiliated groups have tightly controlled finances, social and ecological objectives must come before economic ones. Within Stattauto a Members' Forum has been active since the beginning. It has the authority to direct spending, among other things. Stattauto, and carsharing in other cities, is organized independently from government and bureaucracy, encouraging the participatory empowerment of the membership. ECS is similarly decentralized: a network of neighbourhood-based groups that reaches across cities and countries. Stattauto organizers are committed to both ecological transportation and ecological forms of organization. It is their goal that the model of carsharing remain comprehensible, easy for others to repeat, and broadly affordable by the public. What are the demographics of the current carsharing public in Berlin? The carsharing pioneers in Kreuzberg were younger, poorer and more idealistic than the average middle-class Stattauto member of today. Today's member is 35, earns $2,000 to $3,000 per month, has a university degree, votes Green, is a teacher, architect or other professional, is idealistic but not avant-garde, and is a former car owner. Stattauto is working to expand its base. Indulging ourselves for a moment, and using some very crude numbers, let's assume that by the year 2000 Berlin is completely converted to carsharing, and has a population of 6,000,000. The city would then have only 600,000 cars parked on the streets instead of 2,000,000. This reduction of 1,400,000 autos represents a fantastic improvement not only in the urban ecology of the city, but a winning back of enough land to plant a million trees, or millions of flowers, fruit and vegetable plants. If the entire German population moved in the direction of carsharing, tens of millions of autos could be scrapped. Carsharing in the US could lead to the recycling of a hundred million autos! The German groups are trying to help out new US groups with their Handbook for Carsharers that will be available next year in English with sections relevant to the American experience. The book is a must read for potential carsharers. (To receive notice of the book's publication, send your name and address to RAIN, PO Box 30097, Eugene, Oregon 97403). According to Carsten Petersen of Stattauto, there are three critical requirements for beginning new groups: 1) there must already exist a public transportation system, as carsharing is only a complement to mass transit, and not a system in itself; 2) it must be expensive, or relatively so, to drive and maintain single-occupancy private cars; and 3) it must be difficult and unattractive to drive and park cars. While the mass transit situation is somewhat embarassing in the US, there's no doubt that private auto use will continue to become both more expensive and less attractive. Despite the overwhelming cultural popularity of the automobile, US cities offer fertile ground for carsharing. And American pioneers, when they're ready, can count on help from the Old World. Michel LaFond is an architect, artist and writer researching sustainability. (Reprinted from RAIN Magazine, Summer 1994. To receive a one-year Canadian subscription (4 issues) send US$28 to: RAIN, PO Box 30097, Eugene, OR 97403, USA) THE EUGENE CAR CO-OP Twenty-seven percent of Eugene, Oregon's population walks, skates, bikes, uses the bus, or carpools to work. The city's wonderful alternative- modes infrastructure makes it a natural candidate for carsharing. Empowered with a RAIN Magazine article about Berlin's carsharing organization, the German version of the Carsharing book, and a list of contacts, a committed group of 7 people (including RAIN's editors) created the Eugene Car Co-op. With faith in each other, we embarked on a great cooperative learning experience. There followed months of ironing out hundreds of little details. Research and networking uncovered a surprising number of previous US carsharing projects. Information from the Movement for a New Society's Life Center project of 30-40 carsharers and STAR (Short-Term Automobile Rental), which served a large San Francisco apartment complex, clarified the reality of day-to-day operation, suggested viable rates, and helped us avoid costly financial and organizational mistakes. Here are some of the things we've learned: 1. Find small groups of committed people to make initial start-up decisions. 2. Gather all the available information and make contacts with other groups at the beginning of the planning stage. 3. Be patient and prepared to work at least 6-12 months from the first meeting until the beginning of the operation. 4. Have most of the details figured out before you buy a car (rates, insurance, initial members, contracts, etc.). 5. Verify that potential members are good credit risks to save you time and energy at monthly bill collection time. 6. When you are ready to buy cars, consider getting used cars or donations to keep start-up costs low. 7. Include bus passes, transit discounts and bike sharing in membership benefits. Make promoting alternative modes an important component of your organization, as well as make reducing the number of cars in your city a primary goal. 8. Connect with local pedestrian, bicycling, and transit advocacy groups and activists. 9. Register the name of your organization with the Secretary of State as soon as you agree on it. Beware of putting any group property (cars, literature, etc.) under another organization's name before your relationship to that organization is legally formalized. Also make sure the other group's Board of Directors is stable and accountable. If you do not legally formalize the relationship, your group could end up losing precious work. 10. Carsharing can start simply. The Berlin group began when a couple of brothers shared a common car while living in separate living spaces. They used an answering machine to coordinate the use of the car. 11. If you're seriously thinking of starting a solid organization, then your group will save a lot of work and money by ordering the Eugene Car Co-op's Carsharing Start-up Kit. The Kit comes both in printed form and on computer disk. It includes sample Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, promotional material, tips on how to approach insurance companies, vehicle information, membership educational material, research material from other US carsharing projects, different car reservation possibilities, order forms for the upcoming US Carsharing Handbook. The Carsharing Start-up Kit is copyrighted and is available for use by cooperative groups seeking to start carsharing for ecological purposes. The kit costs US$50 and can be ordered from RAIN, PO Box 30097, Eugene, OR 97403, USA (503) 683- 1504. The address for the Eugene Car Co-op is PO Box 30092, Eugene, OR 97403 (503) 345-2708. YES VIRGINIA, THERE IS A TECHNOFIX ALTERNATIVE-FUEL SEARCH OVERLOOKS ALTERNATIVES Natural gas and clean diesel technologies are roughly equivalent in emissions, and more polluting than electric trolleybuses even when plant emissions are considered. Hydrogen fuel-cell buses require the artificial production of hydrogen, i.e., either from natural gas or by electrolyzing water. Both processes require fossil fuels or considerable electricity input. Reducing energy use is the only way we can reduce society's adverse effect on the environment. This is best done by improving public transportation and land use. "Clean" fuels for automobiles and transit are a red herring which will only delay the inevitable shift to truly environmentally-sustainable transportation solutions. (Ian Fisher (ifisher@pop.unixg.ubc.ca), President, Transport 2000 BC, Transport Action, 1994: 15(4)). ELECTRIC VEHICLES NOT THE SOLUTION There are many things electric cars will not and cannot do. - Electric cars will not create safety on our streets. While they may be lighter than today's cars, electrics will still overmatch cyclists and pedestrians. Drivers will still kill bikers and walkers, not to mention passengers and drivers themselves. - Neighbourhoods will still be divided by big menacing streets and the noise from tire friction will continue unabated. -Electrics will not reduce wildlife roadkills, a problem which threatens entire species like the Florida panther [or grizzlies in Jasper National Park, etc.]. - Electrics will not provide mobility for senior citizens, children, the poor, and others left out of the car culture, especially in districts not served by convenient public transportation. - Finally, electrics will not dispose of themselves, so we will still need to find someplace to dump millions of chassis, tires, and batteries. (Auto-Free Press, Sept/Oct 94) SMOG BLIMPS OVER LA? USA¾Inventor Dino Gentile has a high-flying solution to LA's dirty air problem: city-sized floating vacuum cleaners. Gentile, whose patented lighter- than-air air-sweeper design took second place in an annual Great Idea Contest, hopes to launch a dozen of these $20-30 million airships, each capable of cleansing 500,000 cubic feet of polluted air per minute. The blimps will be painted with clouds on the sides and be covered with bullet-proof fabric. (Earth Island Journal, Winter (Southern Hemisphere) 1994) FUME FANS IN JAPAN OSAKA¾Highway air pollution is so bad that local officials plan to spend 40 million yen ($381,000) to construct huge fans to vacuum up vehicle emissions. Electric fans will draw the roadside pollution of 20,000 vehicles a day through a 3-metre duct, into an underground tunnel and through a set of cleaning filter, releasing the purified air back onto the highway. (Earth Island Journal, Winter (Southern Hemisphere) 1994) IF CARS ARE HERE TO STAY, THEN HUMANS AREN'T Everybody's doing something to the weather, but nobody's talking about it! WORLD ENVIRONMENT ENDANGERED BY POPULATION, CARS ¾ James McCartney STAVANGER, Norway ¾ Leaders of the world's petroleum industry from some 80 countries met for a long look at the future. What they saw was not exactly reassuring: ¾A tripling of the world's energy consumption in the next 50 years, largely powered by oil. ¾Continuing urbanization of the world's population in what one executive described as "metroplexes of unprecedented size, complexity and population density." All this would be caused by a doubling of the world's population, which appears virtually inevitable now, and a doubling or tripling of world economic activity, as underdeveloped countries grow and economies in developed countries expand. This is a picture that was presented, largely in fragments, by speakers at the 14th World Petroleum Congress, which attracted some 2,500 of the cream of the industry. What this pattern suggests is the world's environment, especially its air quality, is going to be threatened far more seriously in the years ahead than anything we have seen so far. More troubling is that there was no consensus on what to do about it. "We are only at the threshold of circumstances that could easily overwhelm us...," said Klaus Mai, of the United States, the outgoing president of the World Petroleum Congress. "The impact of this growth development on our environment could easily be severe, particularly as concerns urban air quality." The good news [sic] at the huge conference was that the world is not running out of oil -- at least not yet. By all expert projections, supplies are clearly adequate to last well into the next century. The bad news was that the increasing use of oil to power cars and trucks as well as modern economies may well cause drastic problems that the world has yet to face squarely. It is the passenger car, and its unique desirability, that is causing the greatest threat to the environment. There was no question about that. Michael Jefferson, of Great Britain, pointed out that the number of passenger cars in the world has tripled since 1965, and that the upward trend may be expected to continue. There were fewer than 135 million cars in 1965, he said. Today, that number is approximately 400 million. In the United States today, he said, there are about 1.7 people for every car, setting widely envied standards. In Europe there are about 2 or 3 people for every car. By contrast, in China, the world's most populous nation, the figure is 600 people for every car. In India it's 120. In the former Soviet Union, 17. It is predictable, he said, that mighty efforts will be made to close these gaps and the result in air pollution could be disastrous. It would mean, he said, that the world could have four billion cars by the end of the next century. Charles DiBona, president of the American Petroleum Institute, which represents major American oil companies, argued strongly that the oil industry is committed to improving the environment and has already made major strides, spending $10.5 billion on the environment in l992 alone. "More drastic, costly actions -- like forcing major reductions in fuel use -- aren't warranted," DiBona contended. But many others, Americans as well as Europeans here, argued otherwise -- that far more drastic steps to reduce the use of oil are necessary. "Business as usual is not a sustainable option," Jefferson said. "Energy efficiency gains must be accelerated. Emissions from fossil fuel provision and use must be reduced ... There is a need for action now, and recognition that change is unavoidable." Klaus Kohlhase, chairman of British Petroleum, one of the world's oil giants, agreed. The oil industry has got to do better in protecting the environment, he said, adding that in the future, "the overall trend will be to reduce the growth in fossil fuel consumption ..." Charles Masters, a research geologist for the U.S. Geological Survey and an expert on world oil reserves, put the issue in more personal terms. "We're in trouble," he said, "because we're not doing enough to conserve oil and to search for alternatives. And, yes, I'm concerned ... for my children and my grandchildren." He should be. And so should others in the oil industry and top officials of the American government. But it was clear here that it is not a problem that any one company, or any one country, can solve. It is a problem for civilization. And sooner or later we're going to have to deal with it far more effectively than anyone has suggested so far. (Knight-Ridder News Service, 2 June 94) OIL SLICK HITS BEACHES IN NORTHERN PORTUGAL LISBON¾A 20-km oil slick hit the beaches of northern Portugal after a tanker hit rocks and spilled as much as 1,200 tonnes of crude into the sea. (Ottawa Citizen, 3 Oct 94) ANTARCTIC OZONE HOLE WIDER THAN IN 1993 WELLINGTON¾A hole in the ozone layer over the Antarctic has reappeared and it is wider than last year. Scientists estimate that more than half the ozone over the Antarctic has been lost. (Ottawa Citizen, 5 Oct 94) POLICE POWERLESS TO STOP CAR ALARMS TORONTO¾Although there is a law in place governing noise from vehicle devices, it is virtually unenforceable. Ward Earle of the City of Toronto's legal department says the issue can be dealt with by either asking the province to amend the Municipal or Highway Traffic Act, or the City of Toronto Act. In New York State, laws were recently passed limiting car alarms to a duration of three minutes and also banning mega-loud car audio systems. (NOW, 6 July 94) GREENHOUSE POLLUTION RISING IN CANADA - Tom Spears Environment Canada found last year that despite all the measures planned or undertaken by the federal government, we're heading toward a 10% increase in greenhouse pollution this decade. (Ottawa Citizen, 11 Sept 94) GREENHOUSE EFFECT OVERWHELMS COOLING FROM VOLCANIC ERUPTION - John and Mary Gribbin LONDON - The cooling effect of the Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991 has been less than predicted. Climatologists say this is because the Earth is responding to the greenhouse effect more strongly than they had thought and that global average temperatures will rise rapidly over the next few years¾unless there is another Pinatubo-scale eruption. (Ottawa Citizen, 27 Aug 94) GLOBAL TOLL IN AUTO FATALITIES - Hal Kane In countries that are free of war, the largest cause of violent death is usually traffic fatalities. In the European Union, car accidents kill four times as many people as homicides do; in North America, they kill more than twice as many. In some Latin American countries, too, people are far more likely to die by motor vehicle accident than by murder. (World Watch, July/Aug 94) BIG CITIES GROW BY ONE MILLION A WEEK WASHINGTON - A World Bank study found urban populations are growing by 3.8% a year, and by 2020, 3.6 billion people will inhabit urban areas, while about 3 billion will remain in rural areas. (Ottawa Citizen, 20 Sept 94) CITIES CAN BE LIBERATED FROM THE TYRANNY OF CARS Polly Ghazi, London Observer Kathy and John are all set to buy their dream home a new estate. They can just about afford the mortgage¾but there is one major snag. The local authority is demanding that they sign a legal contract not to own a car. An environmentalist's fantasy and outrageous infringement of civil liberties¾or the inevitable shape of things to come? Last month the German city of Bremen became the first in the world to experiment with a car-free residential area. The city council, which built the estate, has persuaded 250 families to forgo private cars, although a shared pool of 30 vehicles will be provided for emergencies. The $2.2 million saved by not using land for parking spaces has meant lower rents and more garden space for residents. Other major cities, including Amsterdam and Berlin, are now planning car-free developments for up to 2,000 people. Car access to town centres has been drastically curbed in many parts of Europe, to cut congestion and improve conditions for shoppers and workers. The traffic is being driven out by a mixture of pedestrianization and hefty parking charges. Despite their much-publicized love of flashy cars, the Italians have banned them, during daytime, from the inner streets of several historic city centres, including Florence and Milan. Drivers entering the Norwegian capital, Oslo, pay a heavy toll; Oxford's park-and-ride system has greatly reduced the jams that blighted its historic city centre; and Amsterdam is soon to ban virtually all daytime traffic from its central streets. Nobody contests the manifest environmental benefits of removing cars from busy streets. In Britain, which lags well behind most wealthy European nations in restricting car use, the problems of failing to do so are all too obvious. Inner-city suburbs are plagued by parking; doctors are increasingly voicing concern that the sufferings of asthmatics are aggravated by exhaust emissions. When pedestrianization schemes were introduced in North America and Europe in the '70s, there were dire warnings from retailers and car manufacturers that the commercial hearts of great cities would collapse. A similar outcry has accompanied the traffic curbs of the late '80s and '90s. Yet all the evidence shows that the opposite has happened. A survey of 105 pedestrianized town centres worldwide by the the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that shopkeepers' sales picked up in half the cities and fell in only two of them. A five-year-old British study of traffic curbs in eight European countries revealed that not only did town- centre shops experience a boom but accident and air pollution levels were cut dramatically and emergency vehicles were able to move around much more quickly. Many retailers [but certainly not in Ottawa!] are recognizing that attraction of car-free streets for shoppers. In London, a scheme to restore the Strand to its former glory has won the backing of the street's traders and hotels, including the Savoy, although car lanes will be cut from four to two. Britain's Civic Trust has commissioned detailed plans to seal off traffic from half of Trafalgar Square. "At the moment it is one of the least civilized squares in any European cities which is ludicrous for the place which sums up London to most tourists," said spokesman Tim Mars. Since York city centre was pedestrianized in 1987, the rateable values of its shops and businesses have risen faster than those in any other British city. (Polly Ghazi is an environmental writer for the Guardian. Ottawa Citizen, 15 Aug 94) "ONE-CAR MORTGAGES" AND "ONE-CAR RENTS" - Making Housing Affordable by Reducing Second-Car Ownership Patrick H. Hare The most common route to affordable housing is a long commute in an old clunker. It usually leads to a neighbourhood where two adults cannot live without a second car and where the walk to shopping and transit is long and dangerous. Under these circumstances, the cost of owning and operating second cars should be considered part of the cost of housing. But almost all households and mortgage lenders fail to factor automobile ownership into the cost of housing. Similarly, few households or mortgage lenders recognize how much is spent on cars. Bureau of Labor Statistics for 1991 show that 16% of all household spending is allocated to the automobile, almost regardless of income group. For low- and middle-income households with two cars, the expenditure on automobiles is probably closer to 20% of total household spending. How much does a second car typically cost? According to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) data, the cost of owning and operating a 7-year-old compact car is $2,900 a year. The American Automobile Association says an American mid-size car owned for years costs about $5,300 a year. Assume that the typical operating and ownership cost for a second car totals $4,300 a year. The household that gives up a second car saves $3,000 a year. This is the net saving after paying for transit at $4 a day for 250 days a year and for car rental at $25 a day for 12 days. Carpoolers and bicycle commuters often save more because their alternatives usually cost less. This is news to most homebuyers¾and to most mortgage lenders as well. Mortgage applications list second cars as assets at book value. They disregard all car costs except car loans. They do not account for maintenance, repair, insurance, depreciation, and fuel costs. Nor do they acknowledge that one-car households have about $3,000 a year more to spend than two-car households. At 1993 mortgage rates, $3,000 will finance more than $34,000 in housing costs. If lenders recognized the savings from not owning a second car, they could increase the buying power on a $100,000 house by 34% of the home's purchase price. The change would affect cities as well as households. When the savings from single-car ownership are ignored, they make development of ex-urban homes look more affordable and city living look less affordable. Failure to factor the savings from single-car ownership shifts mortgage money and young leadership out of urban neighbourhoods and into suburban and exurban areas, thus contributing to decay and sprawl. Mortgage approval practices that ignore the costs of car ownership drain cities and stimulate sprawl, congestion and pollution. In suburban rental housing, the story is similar. The rent payment in most suburban multifamily housing typically includes free parking. In fact, the parking is not free. If the land costs used in an Eno Foundation estimate of surface commercial parking costs are halved, the foundation's data suggest that a residential surface space costs about $50 a month. For a $500 apartment, giving up the parking space for a second car should translate into a $50 or 10% reduction in monthly rent. While requiring a minimum number of parking spaces is almost univeral in suburban housing, some jurisdictions now place a cap on the number of parking spaces that may be provided in office developments. The caps are intended to encourage transit usage, improve air quality, and reduce the amount of pavement. Based on these precedents, as well as the health, safety, and welfare consideration of clean air, a zoning ordinance could require landlords to charge separately for housing and parking. Giving up a second car would then translate into lower rent. Similarly, if mortgage lenders recognized the savings that accrue from not owning a second car, their lending terms could help make homeownership more affordable. In either case, "one-car rents" or "one-car mortgages" would reduce second-car ownership, congestion, and air- pollution¾without any expenditre of tax dollars. People without any cars could benefit even more. At this time, "one-car rents" and "one-car mortgages" are the critical issue for most households. Both sound too good to be practical. In fact, mortgages that increase borrowing capacity for one-car households are a reasonable approach to homeownership finance. Some housing finance agencies (HFAs) would likely be eager to experiment with home loans that simultaneously reduce congestion and pollution. Given that many HFAs do not sell their mortgages to Fannie Mae, they are at liberty to set their own mortgage approval guidelines. Guidelines for one-car mortgages would likely require a household transportation plan and budget as part of the mortgage application. What about the lender's risk if new homebuyers purchase a second car? The question can be answered by considering the lender's current risk. According to today's mortgage practices, a household that barely qualifies for a mortgage is in no way constrained from running up credit card debt, taking out car loans, etc., any time after closing. What about the environmental benefits if new buyers bought a second car? If the economics of second-car ownership are as unfavourable as they appear, few homeowners would be likely to purchase another vehicle unless and until their income increases substantially. The mortgage, the savings, and the acclimatization to living comfortably with one car will discourage purchase of a second car. Other sources for "one-car mortgages" include creating private mortgage insurance for the extra mortgage money advanced, special second mortgages from affordable housing loan funds, and filing public comments under the Community Reinvestment Act to change mortgage approval procedures. The comments would criticize lenders for failing to meet the mortgage needs of low- and moderate-income urban communities where it is easy to live with one car. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should also be asked to amend their mortgage approval procedures. In the case of multifamily housing, it should not be difficult to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zone that requires separate rents for housing and parking. Existing as well as new projects could apply for the zone. Owners of existing apartment buildings would apply for inclusion in the zone, which would also place parking restrictions on adjacent single-family streets. Under the PUD, surplus parking spaces could be allocated to a small town center or general store for residents' use. Owners of existing buildings would apply for the zone because commercial rent will be more profitable than parking spaces. The PUD zone should encourage businesses that reduce automobile dependence: a convenience grocery store, a delicatessen, daycare centres, ATM machines, video rental stores, home office support services, etc. It should also permit car rental agencies so that households have direct access to an automobile at critical times. Ideally, bicycle, stroller and shopping cart rental should also be available. These suggestions only begin to identify a range of incentives for one-car ownership. For those who accept the premise that housing can be made more affordable by reducing second-car ownership, one-car mortgages and one-car rents offer a challenge to change the status quo. Unlike most challenges, however, this one should find support. The past 10 or 15 years have seen the emergence of a powerful alliance of environmentalists and transit planners. Bonds between the transit-environment alliance and housing professionals and advocates could strengthen an already powerful political force. Once transit, environment and housing professionals and advocates in a community understand and endorse one- car rents and mortgages, the community should readily accept these solutions to local affordable housing needs. Many elected officials have long sought ways to provide more affordable housing and reduce congestion. They will find it hard to ignore solutions that help achieve both objectives¾at no public cost¾particularly if the solutions are supported by a strong constituency. Patrick H. Hare is a housing and transportation planner in private practice in Washington, DC. (Land Development, Spring/Summer 1994) HEALTHY CITIES ON A LIVEABLE PLANET TAKING A BREATHER...FROM ITS CAR-IS-KING POLICY Nicholas Hills LONDON¾For almost half a century, the governments of Britain have stuck stubbornly by the postwar promise of cars for every family and clear roads to run them on. Now, finally, the tide has turned against the automobile and the superhighway. The train, in a newly privatized system, the tram, the bus and the bicycle will become the new kings of transportation for the balance of this century, and the decades beyond. Cities are trying to break people's dependency on the car by offering attractive alternatives that will return life to city centres and reduce drastically the crushing number of road commuters. The national government has scrapped 49 projects in its $50 billion road-building program, accepting that the environment and the health of the people who live in it are too seriously threatened for such a road-driven transportation philosophy to continue. Many cities are now deliberately trying to steer new housing, business, shopping and leisure developments into urban areas instead of environmentally destructive greenfield sites. Large supermarkets are being given permission to build outside city cores only if public transportation is available to take consumers to these centers. In Leicester "not cheating on your children" means building a new railway line. [...] The most frightening thing for future generations is that one in seven children now suffer from asthma. Three decades ago, a child with asthma was an oddball at school; now children are expert at comparing the different brands of inhalers. Britain has largely brought this health problem upon itself by ignoring air pollution and the fact that emissions from car exhausts have increased by 73% since 1981. (Sun London via Vancouver Sun, 2 July 94) SINGAPORE TRAFFIC-STOPPER In an effort to reduce air pollution from cars, Singapore has imposed an $80,000 certificate of entitlement on prospective motorists. The cost of an COE is in addition to a car's purchase price, already steep because of heavy duties and taxes intended to discourage car ownership. A new Mercedes C220, for example, costs about $185,000, not include the cost of the new certificate. In Toronto, the same car sells for $41,000, not including taxes. (Globe and Mail, 24 Sept 94) OTTAWA-OUTAOUAIS RAIL LINK REALISTIC, ADVOCATES SAY ¾ Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon Commuter rail advocates hope to get a decision from governments by the spring on a proposed Ottawa-Hull- Gatineau link. It's a realistic goal, they say, based on the positive results of several studies they paid for. A commuter rail service would be less expensive and quicker to implement than other alternatives, the studies suggest. It would also have socio-economic and environmental benefits. Politicians, community groups and business leaders from Ottawa-Carleton and the Outaouais gathered to discuss the proposal, before it was tabled in mid-October. If the proposal is approved by the federal, Ontario and Quebec governments, commuter rail could be up and running in 12 to 18 months. [...] Service could be implemented on two rail lines for an initial capital investment of $46.5 million. This includes constructing and/or upgrading tracks, stations, parking areas and bridges. Capital cost per kilometre for the commuter rail would be $800,000, while other types of public transit can cost up to $30 million per kilometre. (Ottawa Citizen, 2 Oct 94) RAIL TRANSIT RIDERSHIP GROWING SACRAMENTO, Calif.¾ Ridership on the nation's rapid transit systems jumped by 72 million boardings last year, the largest increase in rail patronage in five years, according to the American Public Transit Association (APTA). Led by a resurgence of passengers in New York, Philadelphia, Miami, New Jersey and Boston¾and the opening of new systems and extensions in Los Angeles, St. Louis, and Baltimore¾rail transit ridership grew by 2.8 percent between 1992-1993 to 2.7 billion boardings. Ridership increases were consistently strong across the three types of rail transit: heavy rail patronage climbed 2.8 percent, light rail rose 3.1 percent and commuter rail increased 2.5 percent. Meanwhile, some transit systems, principally in the midwest and northeast, recorded drops in rail patronage. And, APTA said, total transit patronage on trains, buses and vans slipped six-tenths of one percent last year. APTA has a major push on to stimulate transit ridership. Led by its Transit Ridership Initiative Task Force, the association has undertaken its largest marketing campaign ever to encourage use of the $60 monthly tax-free commuter benefit law, and its transit system members are emphasizing improvements in customer service to win back riders. (APTA is the international association of operating transit authorities, their suppliers and other advocates of improved public transportation. Contact: cbishop@apta.com) ALASKAN CITIZENS START OWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE The goal of the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition (ACT) is to work for "a well-maintained, economical, efficient and environmentally appropriate transportation system founded on broad public involvement." In addition to working on a life-cycle and full-cost accounting system (contact Eric Larson at aneml@orion.alaska.edu), ACT's campaign objectives include: to have transportation decisions guided by local and regional communities with meaningful public involvement; to work with citizens to build a vision of Alaska's transportation future which gives full consideration to non-highway alternatives; and to give priority to maintaining and improving existing transportation system. (For more info: Citizens Transportation Coalition, c/o AK Center for the Environment, 519 West 8th, Suite 201, Anchorage, AK 99501 907-274-3621) (Transportation Exchange, March 94) RESIDENTS STOP LONG-PLANNED ROAD EXPANSION and GET READY FOR RAIL Despite public hearings that were a sham with no opportunity for public comment or questions, citizen groups Roadblock and No Road fighting a proposal for a four-lane limited access highway at both ends of the Lake Arterial corridor. In addition to causing sprawl and environmental problems, the road would prevent any rail service through southeastern Wisconsin. While local opposition to the road has solidified in the last five years, political corruption keeps the road alive. (For more info: Roadblock 9430 South Nicholson Road, Oak Creek, Wisconsin 53154.) (Transportation Exchange, Jan 94) CAR-FREE READING RAIN Since at least the mid-70s, RAIN has been publishing practical articles on how to revive communities, while redesigning our personal environments using appropriate technology to help us live more sustainably. Not only has RAIN survived decades, but it remains on the cutting edge of alternative solutions that would take "civilization" from imminent self-destruction to a humane society composed of self-reliant communities living in harmony with nature. Recognizing that transportation alternatives are vital to creating sustainable communities, RAIN features a Bike Column and covers auto-free villages, utility bikes and more! RAIN is one of the very few journals that reports in- depth on "existing, successful projects and initiatives of community-scale", along with providing other valuable resources to people wanting to revitalize their own communities, such as book reviews and group contact lists. To receive a one-year Canadian subscription (4 issues) send US$28 (US$56 for two years) to: RAIN, PO Box 30097, Eugene, OR 97403, USA Elect Better Transportation Guide: A user guide for making sustainable transportation a key issue in Ontario's 1994 municipal elections. Copies are available from: Better Transportation Coalition, 517 College St., Ste. 325, Toronto, ON M6G 4A2 416-961-5767, Fax: 961-5850; OR Auto-Free Ottawa 613-234-0923, ab941@freenet.carleton.ca. THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE!!!! Are you tired of not having the option of NOT using a car? Are you horrified by budget cuts to sustainable transportation alternatives such as public transit and rail, while federal and provincial Transport Ministers clamour for more tax dollars for new roads and highways?? Then write your local MP, MPP, with copies to their colleagues, and remind them that they will never get the deficit under control as long as they throw our tax dollars into the black hole of new roads. The following was Auto-Free Ottawa's letter to Transport Canada Minister Doug Young, who met with provincial transport ministers in early October to discuss federal funding for upgrading the Trans-Canada Highway. October 5, 1994 Doug Young, MP Minister of Transport House of Commons Ottawa K1A 1A6 Dear Mr. Young: I am writing to urge you to abandon plans to upgrade the Trans-Canada Highway. What Canada needs instead is to upgrade its rail system. A recent workshop on commuter rail organized by Transport 2000 in Ottawa revealed that the capital cost for commuter rail would be $800,000 per kilometer while other types of transportation can cost up to $30 million per kilometer. Apart from the economic costs, you must be well aware of the environmental and social costs¾euphemistically known as "externalities"¾attached to the building, maintenance and use of roads. For economic and environmental reasons, Canada must abandon its dependence on roads and private vehicles and shift its support to ecologically and socially sustainable means of transportation. While the road and oil lobby, with their eyes on increased profits, will not be prepared to accept this change, as an elected representative, your responsibility is to do what is best for the health of the people, economy and environment of Canada¾today and for generations to come. We urge you to consider all the economic and environmental implications of continuing to maintain roads, and choose instead to provide Canada with a transport system appropriate for the twenty-first century. We hope you will take these comments into account and look forward to your reply. Carlessly, Lucy Segatti Coordinator c.c. Prime Minister Jean Chrétien Paul Martin MP, Minister of Finance Sheila Copps MP, Minister of Environment Art Eggleton MP, Minister of Infrastructure CARS ARE RUINING MY LIFE AND OUR BIOSPHERE! Sign me up, and .......................................................................................send a complimentary copy to: ___ $20.00 individual or family ___ $10.00 unwaged ___ $50.00 corporate/institutional ___ Donation of $ _________ ___________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Name Name _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Address Address Tel: (h)____________________(w)_____________________ (fax)__________________ (e-mail)____________________ AUTO-FREE OTTAWA (613) 234-0923 Box 57006, 797 Somerset St. W., Ottawa-Rideau Bioregion, Ontario K1R 1A1 Canada