[This is an EXCERPT: read the whole article here; there are a couple of companion articles as well, one by the same authors and another by Peter Newman. -Ed.]

By Wendy Frew and Linton Besser

The rationale for moving away from large houses on large blocks in far-flung suburbs to inner-city living is cost - both economic and environmental - transport and planning experts say.

In an era of peak oil and climate change, where higher petrol, water and electricity prices will significantly increase the cost of living, we can no longer afford suburban sprawl, they argue.

Research by [Professor Peter Newman of Curtin University, a former NSW Sustainability Commissioner and now a member of the advisory board for Infrastructure Australia] and the planning and infrastructure consultancy Parsons Brinckerhoff found Sydney's suburban sprawl costs the economy and the environment twice as much as inner-city housing. The cost of infrastructure, transport, health and greenhouse gases for new housing built on a city's fringe is worth $653 million for every 1000 new dwellings, compared with $309 million for inner-city development, they say.

For every 1000 housing blocks, the Government could save $85 million on power, water, sewerage, schools and hospitals if it built close to central business districts rather than on the city's fringe, and $250 million in transport costs could be saved in 50 years.

That amounts to an $85 million subsidy to developers on the fringe, Newman says.

Photo credit: Pandiyan V