MPCFOI2020/01 • All Documentation and Correspondence Relating to the Investigation of Feasibility for the Construction and Delivery of Trackless Trams in the ACT

Home , Trackless train

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST SCHEDULE Please be aware that under the Freedom of Information Act 2016, some of the information provided to you will be released to the public through the ACT Government’s Open Access Scheme. The Open Access release status column of the table below indicates what documents are intended for release online through open access.

Personal information or business affairs information will not be made available under this policy. If you think the content of your request would contain such information, please inform the contact officer immediately.

Information about what is published on open access is available online at: https://www.act.gov.au/majorprojectscanberra/home

FOI Reference Number Request Details

MPCFOI2020/01 • All documentation and correspondence relating to the investigation of feasibility for the construction and delivery of trackless trams in the ACT. Including, but not limited to, any feasibility studies, cost comparisons with light rail, business cases, or any other documentation relating to the costs associated with the undertaking of any such project. • All correspondence between the Minister’s office and the directorate in relation to this matter, including any briefing notes provide by the directorate to the Minister’s office. No. of Reason for non-release or Open Access release Ref No. Description Date Status Folios partial release status

s2.2(a)ii – personal 1. 10 Oct 18 Partial Yes 1 – 1 Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 2. 1 – 1 11 Oct 18 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 3. 1 – 1 9 Nov 18 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 4. 1 – 1 11 Nov 18 Partial Yes Email information s2.2(a)ii – personal 5. 1 – 1 10 Sep 19 Partial Yes Email attachment information s2.2(a)ii – personal 6. 1 – 1 Undated Partial Yes Email attachment information

7. 1 – 1 Email attachment Undated Full N/A Yes s2.2(a)ii – personal 8. 1 – 1 10 Sep 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 9. 1 – 1 24 Dec 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 10. 1 – 1 23 Sep 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 11. 1 – 1 5 Aug 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 12. 1 – 1 5 Dec 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 13. 1 – 1 6 Dec 19 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 14. 1 – 1 Undated Partial Yes Draft ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 15. 1 – 1 Undated Partial Yes Draft ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 16. 1 – 1 27 Aug 2019 Partial Yes Signed ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 17. 1 – 1 Undated Partial Yes Draft ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 18. 1 – 1 15 Jan 20 Partial Yes Signed ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 19. 1 – 1 Undated Partial Yes Draft ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 20. 1 – 1 12 Dec 19 Partial Yes Signed ministerial response information s2.2(a)ii – personal 21. 1 – 1 23 Feb 18 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 22. 1 – 1 29 Jan 20 Partial Yes Email chain information s2.2(a)ii – personal 23. 1 – 1 15 Nov 19 Partial Yes Email chain information Total Number of Documents

2 Harding, Nikki

From: Nelson, Pam Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2018 3:20 PM To: Percival, Tom Subject: FW: Trackless Tram [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Tom

Re: response – can you review the below and see if anything assists the response to the letter?

Concerns re: BRT or trackless seems to be that the urban uplift seen to accompany light rail does not seem the be proved with BRT or trackless trams

Thanks

Pam

From: Nelson, Pam Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2018 1:35 PM To: Edghill, Duncan Cc: Thomas, Emma ; Oldfield, Meghan ; Sturman, Judith Subject: Re: Trackless Tram

Thanks

We aLso have a promise from Auckland to provide their analysis of alternative “tram” technologies.

Should be available soon, I’ll forward when I receive.

Regards

Pam

Sent from my iPhone

On 9 Oct 2018, at 10:13 am, Edghill, Duncan wrote:

1 1 Thought it might be useful to share the below with you - some thoughts for whenever the trackless tram conversations pick up:

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) @monash.edu> Date: 9 October 2018 at 9:32:00 am AEST To: Subject: Re: Trackless Tram

Fantastic considered reply Duncan; yes quite agree; hype is happening for trackless tram. Impacts/benefits would be different according to context and yes; a critical question is will it have the scale to encourage right of way dedication (and land use impacts). Buses have always had the 'too much flexibility' problem; its easy to compromise a quality design with buses when right of way gets hard but little compromise is possible with rail.

Lets keep the conversation going.

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 10:18, Edghill, Duncan wrote: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

I thoroughly enjoyed your presentation yesterday. I also saw you quoted in the paper overnight on trackless trams for Newcastle.

There’s one thing floating around about the trackless tram that I think may not be right. You mentioned in passing yesterday that the cost would be to build the stops, while Professor Newman is referenced as saying it would be a tenth the cost. I’ve been reflecting about the Canberra system and think this is wide of the mark - it might be more correct if referring to the retrofitting of an existing dedicated BRT right of way, but seems incorrect if discussing a greenfield project.

In Canberra for instance, the tracks and trackslab are of course an important component of the costs, but they are actually only a relatively small minority of the overall project costs. Even if the project was hypothetically a trackless tram, the following costs would still be incurred to create a like product:

- Demolition / clearing for a median alignment

- Moving utilities from under the alignment (remembering that the key PT driver to moving the utilities is not the protection of the utility itself, but so that your mass transit system isn’t stopped every time a utility needs to access or work on its utility)

- Depot. (There was no material land reclamation needed in Canberra)

- Systems - you’d still need to integrate system signalling into roads signals and obtain like for like tram priority. You’d also still need a heap of other

2 2 systems - communications and emergency, passenger information and so forth

- Stops construction

- In the case of Canberra, the trackslab and rail costs would instead be replaced by ‘road’ costs that would need to be constructed in the median for the trackless tram to run on

- Rolling stock

- Bid costs (not to be underestimated)

- Contingency (also not to be underestimated, noting that risks such as utilities, weather, planning, proximate developments and so forth still exist)

- Landscaping

When all that is taken into account, I suspect that in a Canberra context any costs savings would be comparatively minimal. This is before taking into account challenges with the trackless tram:

- in Canberra, tracks in the median of Northbourne are OK, but there is a real question about whether the NCA would ever have granted planning approval to effectively build another road in the median. This also ties in with broader questions of urban realm outcomes and community acceptance

- the lack of alternative suppliers and untested technology as you pointed out in the article

- if there are any cost savings, it would be interesting to note whether the transport and land uplift benefits would remain the same or be reduced. Even a modest reduction in benefits might be enough to more than offset any cost savings from an economic perspective. I understand another jurisdiction reached this conclusion

- performance of the trackless tram technology ordinarily (acceleration, top speed etc and consequential impacts upon journey time and number of vehicles needed) and in emergency stop conditions. On the latter, the tracks keep the LRVs on the track. It would be interesting to know what happens with the trackless tram under emergency braking conditions.

Per your presentation yesterday, I very much suspect the trackless tram is in its hype phase. That’s not to say it may not have a role in a public transport mix (noting I’m as much bus as I am light rail) - but I think the role may be more nuanced than simply it being a replacement to light rail. If anything, I can more easily see it as a replacement to existing BRT than a replacement to greenfield LRT for reasons listed above.

Happy to discuss - I kept a look out for you this morning but unfortunately missed you.

Kind regards Duncan

3 3

Sent from my iPhone ------This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. ------

-- Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

4 4 Harding, Nikki

From: TCCS_LR LightRailtoWoden Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2018 10:45 AM Schedule To: 2.2(a)(ii) Subject: Rail: YourSay Enquiry [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed

Thank you for your email of 4 October 2018 about alternative public transport technologies.

The ACT Government considered a range of mass‐transit technologies ahead of investing in Light Rail Stage 1. The ‘trackless train’ aligns closely to the category of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) technologies. Like light rail, BRT has also been implemented in many cities across the world and is another technology that is continually evolving. Light rail and BRT have many similar features for such as stops, right‐of‐way, boarding and ticketing, but with differences in running on rails or tyres.

Construction of rails is only a small part of the costs of a light rail system. Similar to light rail, a ‘trackless train’ system would still require much of the same construction works and costs such as establishing a right‐of‐way, utility works, stops, power systems, establishing a depot, acquiring vehicles, landscaping, communication and signalling systems, and a range of costs for procurement, managing construction and operations.

Light rail has been selected as the most suitable for Canberra based on many factors, including the ability of light rail to attract passengers, positive city‐shaping effect and a greater realisation of benefits across transit corridors. The Light Rail Network is a vital part of the ACT Government’s plan to grow our public transport system. It will boost Canberra’s sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options, settlement patterns and employment opportunities.

Thank you for your interest in the project.

Transport Canberra Light Rail | Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate | ACT Government 496 Northbourne Avenue Dickson ACT | GPO Box 158 Canberra ACT 2601 | www.transport.act.gov.au

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2018 10:51 PM To: TCCS_LR LightRailtoWoden Subject: Light Rail: YourSay Enquiry

Has transport ACT considered using trackless trams rather than spending heaps on tracks that are costly to lay, maintain and reroute? https://metro.co.uk/2017/10/28/new-trackless-train-which-runs-on-virtual-rail-lines-launched-in-china- 7034155/

Sent in binary from an Apple product

1 5 Harding, Nikki

From: TCCS_LR LightRailtoWoden Sent: Friday, 9 November 2018 11:12 AM Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) To: Subject: YourSay Enquiry [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed

Schedule 2.2(a) Dear (ii)

Thank you for your email of 3 November 2018 about alternative public transport technologies.

Thank you for your interest in the project.

Transport Canberra Light Rail | Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate | ACT Government 496 Northbourne Avenue Dickson ACT | GPO Box 158 Canberra ACT 2601 | www.transport.act.gov.au

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Saturday, 3 November 2018 2:07 PM To: TCCS_LR LightRailtoWoden Subject: Light Rail: YourSay Enquiry

Great work on the light rail project!

Could the latest Belgium technology that delivers trackless trams be an alternate solution for Stage 2?

1 6 This uses autonomous rail technology with lane markings and battery power. The cost is much less than traditional rail technology.

https://www.abc.net.au/cm/lb/9990236/data/city-trackless-tram-value-outline-data.docx

Here is the ABC News article that sets out the background details for reference. https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/trams-without-tracks,-poles-or-wires/9990212

Let me know your views.

Regards

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Sent from my iPhone

2 7 Harding, Nikki

From: Evans, Meaghan Sent: Monday, 11 November 2019 1:28 PM To: Cunningham, Lauren Subject: LRS2 Ministerial Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Attachments: ChrisSteel-Letterhead - MIN S2019_2379.docx; MINISTERIAL REQUEST: 'bi- articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus suggestion'

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

UNOFFICIAL

Hey

So this ministerial came through TCCS and went to the office for sign off, but it seems the office want a different response.

Can we please get some input from MPC re:  LRS2 and why we picked LR over buses  Plans for woden interchange

1 8 Harding, Nikki

From: STEEL Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2019 4:33 PM To: TCCS_Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule 2.2(a) Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: (ii) 'bi-articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus suggestion'

Hi MACS,

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Please find attached the details of a TCCS issue raised by a constituent, .

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Kind regards,

Tom McKernan Office Manager to Chris Steel MLA Member for Murrumbidgee Minister for Community Services and Facilities Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Transport and City Services ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020, CANBERRA, ACT 2601 Australia E. [email protected] | T. (02) 6205 1470 www.chrissteel.com.au

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Monday, 9 September 2019 4:44 PM To: STEEL Subject: Van Hool bi‐articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus, in Barcelona

Hi Chris

Just another suggestion from Weston Creek.

During the consultation for the Tram, I wrote to show that ‘bi‐articulated’ buses as seen here in Barcelona, could perform the same as a Tram, but with much less cost. Also note Brisbane is looking to these as well.

Clearly the ACT transport department and I guess the ACT government was only interested in the Tram.

So for equality purposes for south side residents the government must deliver the Tram to Woden.

But in the interim, perhaps you could lease the same number of bi‐articulated buses now to perform the role.

This would allow stops along the route from Civic to Woden to be built now, as well as fixing the unsafe bus infrastructure at Woden interchange.

For your consideration.

1 9 Happy to chat Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w1AIoswbX8s

2 10

Chris Steel MLA

Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Recycling and Waste Reduction Minister for Roads and Active Travel Minister for Transport Member for Murrumbidgee

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule Dear2.2(a)(ii) ,

Thank you for your email of 9 September 2019 regarding your bi-articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus suggestion.

Transport Canberra and City Services (TCCS) began trialling electric and hybrid buses late in 2017. That trial is now complete and the results of the 12-month trial of electric buses in Canberra are in. Please find attached a summary of the trail.

The trial has shown that zero emissions vehicles are a viable alternative for Canberra’s public transport network going forward. Overall the fully-electric buses performed best in relation to environmental emissions, energy efficiency, and whole of life economic costs.

The diesel buses had higher passenger capacity and reliability, with lower capital costs and whole of life financial costs. The performance of the hybrid bus generally fell between the diesel and electric bus for all criteria.

The speed in which the technology has already changed since the trial, means that transit operators can have much greater confidence in newer zero emissions buses that are now emerging on the market. The Government is working on a plan to transition to a zero emission fleet by 2040 at the latest. The plan will inform the future purchase of zero emission buses.

Thank you for raising this matter. I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Steel MLA Minister for Transport

ACT Legislative Assembly London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Phone +61 2 6205 1470 Email [email protected]

@ChrisSteelMLA christeellabor chrissteelmla 11

External Input Request

Requesting Directorate: TCCS

Subject: Bi-articulated buses and Woden Interchange

Reference number: 19/36373

Please address the following issue:

During the consultation for the Tram, I wrote to show that ‘bi-articulated’ buses as seen here in Barcelona, could perform the same as a Tram, but with much less cost. Also note Brisbane is looking to these as well.

This would allow stops along the route from Civic to Woden to be built now, as well as fixing the unsafe bus infrastructure at Woden interchange.

• The ACT Government considered a range of mass-transit technologies ahead of investing in Light Rail Stage 1. A system based on bi-articulated buses aligns to the category of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) technologies. Like light rail, BRT has also been implemented in many cities across the world and is another technology that is continually evolving. Light rail and BRT have many similar features for such as stops, right-of-way, boarding and ticketing, but with differences in running on rails or tyres.

• Construction of rails is only a small part of the costs of a light rail system. Similar to light rail, a bi-articulated bus system would still require much of the same construction works and costs, such as establishing a right-of-way, utility works, stops, power systems, establishing a depot, acquiring vehicles, landscaping, communication and signalling systems, and a range of time requirements and costs for procurement, managing construction and operations.

• Light rail has been selected as the most suitable for Canberra based on many factors, including the ability of light rail to attract passengers, positive city-shaping effect and a greater realisation of benefits across transit corridors. The Light Rail Network is a vital part of the ACT Government’s plan to grow our public transport system. It will boost Canberra’s sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options, settlement patterns and employment opportunities”

• The ACT Government has already commenced planning for a new Woden Bus Interchange that will integrate with light rail.

• The new interchange will feature more comfortable shelters, modern passenger information displays and ticketing machines, accessible footpaths and cycle facilities, security systems and safer transiting between the future light rail and the rapid bus network.

12 1

• There will be further opportunity to provide feedback on the new Woden Interchange as the project progresses. To stay informed about upcoming opportunities for community engagement, I encourage you to visit https://www.yoursay.act.gov.au/light-rail-to-woden/ and subscribe to the project updates.

Action Officer: Tom Percival

13 2

Harding, Nikki

From: STEEL Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2019 4:33 PM To: TCCS_Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule 2.2(a) Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: (ii) 'bi-articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus suggestion'

Hi MACS,

Please find attached the details of a TCCS issue raised by a constituent, Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Kind regards,

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Monday, 9 September 2019 4:44 PM To: STEEL Subject: Van Hool bi‐articulated ExquiCity hybrid bus, in Barcelona

Hi Chris

Just another suggestion from Weston Creek.

Clearly the ACT transport department and I guess the ACT government was only interested in the Tram.

So for equality purposes for south side residents the government must deliver the Tram to Woden.

But in the interim, perhaps you could lease the same number of bi‐articulated buses now to perform the role.

This would allow stops along the route from Civic to Woden to be built now, as well as fixing the unsafe bus infrastructure at Woden interchange.

For your consideration.

1 14 Happy to chat

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w1AIoswbX8s

2 15 Harding, Nikki

From: STEEL Sent: Tuesday, 24 December 2019 11:04 AM To: MPC Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST:2.2(a)(ii) 'Trackless Trams consideration'

Categories: Vilma

Hi MACS,

Please find attached the details of a MPC issue raised by a constituent Schedule . 2.2(a)(ii)

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Kind regards,

Tom McKernan Office Manager to Chris Steel MLA Member for Murrumbidgee Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Recycling and Waste Reduction Minister for Roads and Active Travel Minister for Transport ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020, CANBERRA, ACT 2601 Australia E. [email protected] | T. (02) 6205 1470 www.chrissteel.com.au

From: BARR Reception Sent: Monday, 23 December 2019 9:48 AM To: STEEL Subject: FW: Brisbane Metro ‐ YouTube

One for your office please Tom/Dom

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Saturday, 21 December 2019 7:39 AM To: BARR Reception ; LE COUTEUR ; COE ; Ponton, Ben Subject: Brisbane Metro ‐ YouTube

Why are options for high capacity electric buses,including the trackless tram, not being seriously considered in the ACT?

The ACT is obsessed with expensive and increasingly outdated light rail technology. 1 16

The Brisbane Metro Bus will carry 150 people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cvaukIE6j0

2 17 Harding, Nikki

From: Kennedy, Karen on behalf of TCCS_DLO Sent: Monday, 23 September 2019 11:42 AM To: Major Projects Canberra Ministerial Services; TCCS_Ministerial Subject: FW: FOR NOTING: John L Smith 'Stage 2A Light Rail Article'

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi All,

For noting please.

Thanks KK

Karen Kennedy | Directorate Liaison Officer T ‐ 6205 2790 | E ‐ [email protected] Office of Minister Steel MLA Office of Minister Berry MLA Transport Canberra and City Services I ACT Government GPO Box 158 Canberra ACT 2601|www.act.gov.au

From: STEEL Sent: Monday, 23 September 2019 9:35 AM To: TCCS_DLO Cc: Haas, Damien Subject: FOR NOTING: John L Smith 'Stage 2A Light Rail Article'

Hi KK,

Could the following please be sent to the relevant MPC team for noting – that would be much appreciated.

Kind regards,

From: John L Smith Sent: Friday, 20 September 2019 7:17 PM To: STEEL ; HANSON ; CANDICE

1 18 Subject: Stage 2A Light Rail

Dear Minister and Opposition members

Please read my article on Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART) (Trackless Tram) the Right Option for Canberra at www.canthetram.org before making your decision about Stage 2A of light rail.

Regards

John L Smith

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Email: [email protected]

2 19 Harding, Nikki

From: TCCS_Ministerial Sent: Monday, 5 August 2019 10:30 AM To: Major Projects Canberra Ministerial Services Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule 2.2(a) Subject: FW: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: (ii) 'Trams to Woden' [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

For your action.

Kind Regards

Connected services for the people of Canberra

From: STEEL Sent: Monday, 5 August 2019 10:28 AM To: TCCS_Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule 2.2(a) Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: (ii) 'Trams to Woden'

Hi MACS,

Please find attached the details of a TCCS issue raised by a constituent,Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: Schedule 2.2(a) (ii)

Kind regards,

Tom McKernan Office Manager to Chris Steel MLA Member for Murrumbidgee Minister for Community Services and Facilities 1 20 Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Transport and City Services ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020, CANBERRA, ACT 2601 Australia E. [email protected] | T. (02) 6205 1470 www.chrissteel.com.au

From: Steel, Chris Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2019 7:54 PM To: STEEL Subject: FW: Stage 2 ‐ Trams to Woden

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Date: Saturday, 13 July 2019 at 12:36 pm To: "Steel, Chris" Subject: Stage 2 ‐ Trams to Woden

Dear Minister

I am writing to in my capacity as a citizen of Canberra and a supporter of your great work! Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

I have spent a lot of time looking at transport issues and have extensive experience living and working in the UK and Europe where trams are a common transport solution. Trams often co‐exist with pedestrian areas, taxis and bicycles eg Amsterdam and Geneva (where I just can back from after a holiday).

My initial training was a land economist and property valuer. So I have always studied urban development and the effect on communities, as that is community engagement that drives value: financial, social and environmental.

In the last couple of years I came across Prof Peter Newman’s work at Curtin University. I have been to some of his presentations on the future of public transport. He is advocating trackless trams as the future of public transport that unlocks development potential.

The trackless tram from City to Woden would not require any change to the bridge infrastructure crossing the lake. Nor would it require Parliamentary consent. It could be deployed almost immediately, and realistically be operating as soon as the carriages are built.

The tram could use existing road infrastructure and coexist with cars until it gets to the dedicated bus lane to Woden. The Woden tram terminus needs to be a design statement with development above and around it. Not a standalone bus stop.

Planning approval would be limited to any changes to existing bus stops on route so that the tram could be recharged in a 30 sec stop using solar technology. The cost per km for deployment is approx. 10% of traditional light rail. The value uplift is almost the same as traditional light rail. The impact on long term employment is greater and quicker, than jobs created in constructing the infrastructure.

Here are some links for your information: http://theconversation.com/why‐trackless‐trams‐are‐ready‐to‐replace‐light‐rail‐103690

2 21 https://www.propertycouncil.com.au/Web/Content/News/National/2018/Are_trackless_trams_a_game_changer_. aspx?WebsiteKey=148a29fb‐5ee5‐48af‐954b‐a02c118dc5fd

https://sbenrc.com.au/app/uploads/2018/10/TRACKLESS‐TRAMS‐MANUAL‐GUIDE_email.pdf

I hope this is helpful and I certainly believe it needs cost/benefit evaluation as a possible alternative to a traditional Schedule light rail option. Anytime you want to have an informal chat, just drop me a line or 2.2(a)(ii) .

Regards

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

3 22 Harding, Nikki

From: Kennedy, Karen on behalf of TCCS_DLO Sent: Thursday, 5 December 2019 3:29 PM To: MPC Ministerial Cc: STEEL Schedule Subject: FW: MINISTERIAL REQUEST:2.2(a)(ii) 'trackless trams'

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Lauren,

This one is for MPC, could a min response please be prepared.

Thanks KK

From: STEEL Sent: Thursday, 5 December 2019 2:26 PM To: TCCS_Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Schedule Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: 2.2(a)(ii) 'trackless trams'

Hi MSU,

Schedule Please find attached the details of a TCCS issue raised by a constituent, 2.2(a)(ii) .

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Kind regards,

1 23 ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020, CANBERRA, ACT 2601 Australia E. [email protected] | T. (02) 6205 1470 www.chrissteel.com.au

From: Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Sent: Thursday, 5 December 2019 1:51 PM To: STEEL Subject: transport to Woden

Hi Chris

Firstly, I was very pleased to hear that CIT will remain in Woden. That is excellent news.

Has the ACT Government given any consideration to trackless trams? If not, why not? They would be much more appropriate for Civic to Woden - please read this link: http://theconversation.com/why-trackless-trams-are-ready-to-replace-light-rail-103690 An efficient and effective bus/car system along Adelaide Avenue already exists and the bus lane could easily be used by a trackless tram. It would be madness to build apartments along Adelaide Avenue as they would not be in walking distance to shops and services.

Kind regards Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

2 24 Harding, Nikki

From: Kennedy, Karen on behalf of TCCS_DLO Sent: Friday, 6 December 2019 11:44 AM To: MPC Ministerial Cc: STEEL Subject: FW: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: John Smith 'Trackless Tram'

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Lauren,

Another one for your team to prepare please.

Thanks KK

From: STEEL Sent: Friday, 6 December 2019 10:35 AM To: TCCS_Ministerial Cc: TCCS_DLO Subject: MINISTERIAL REQUEST: John Smith 'Trackless Tram'

Hi MSU,

Please find attached the details of a TCCS issue raised by a constituent, John Smith.

I would appreciate if you could please provide us with a Ministerial response regarding this issue.

Constituent Details: John Smith [email protected]

Kind regards,

Peter Kuschert Office Manager to Chris Steel MLA Member for Murrumbidgee Minister for Transport Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Roads & Active Travel Minister for Recycling & Waste Reduction ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020, CANBERRA, ACT 2601 Australia E. [email protected] | T. (02) 6205 1470 www.chrissteel.com.au

1 25

From: John L Smith Sent: Friday, 6 December 2019 10:03 AM To: STEEL Subject: Trackless Tram is the Right Option for Canberra

Minister Chris Steel GPO Box 1020, Canberra, ACT 2601

Dear Minister Steel

Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART) (Trackless Tram) is the Right Option for Canberra

In November 2019 a delegation formed by the Committee for Geelong and including two transport consultants from the Melbourne group Urbis visited China to investigate CRRC ZhuZhou Institute Co Ltd’s trackless Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART) system. Videos posted while on the visit by one of the consultants (Graham McCabe) showed that the vehicles are in service in the city of Zhuzhou. The versatility of these vehicles was evident in the shared bridge lane being crossed on route by the so‐called "trackless trams".

2 26 3 27 Another video clip posted by McCabe show the bogie used to form the undercarriage. Its design is derived from the company’s high‐speed rail technology and the video shows that it gives a ride similar in comfort to light rail. The bogie houses the electric motors, braking and steering. Each bogie is steered under the control of an optical guidance system that constrains each tram‐car to the virtual track painted on the roadway.

4 28 Attention will now shift to the Geelong City Council and the expected decision to conduct a trial of the trackless tram over a route from downtown Geelong to the Deakin University campus on the outskirts of the city.

5 29 The vehicles have already been trialled outside China, in Qatar, and a study is underway to use the vehicles on a route from Liverpool to Western Sydney Airport that is included among the nation’s high priority infrastructure projects by Infrastructure Australia.

On November 14, 2019 when making the annual report on ACT Transport you said that there "was no really good example of how this is actually working effectively to replace light rail". Backing you up Duncan Edghill, Major Projects Canberra, questioned "what happens to a trackless tram when you slam the brake on." It is clear from the video of the bogie system that Eghill's remarks were flippant. You should not allow Stage 2A of Canberra’s light rail to proceed without an evaluation of the CRRC ART. This technology can provide an elegant and simple engineering solution to the challenges of Stage 2 at a small fraction of the cost of light rail.

As a first step, it would be a simple matter for you to arrange a briefing from the Melbourne‐based transport consultants at Urbis who visited China with the Geelong delegation.

Yours faithfully

John L Smith Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Email: [email protected]

6 30

Chris Steel MLA

Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Recycling and Waste Reduction Minister for Roads and Active Travel Minister for Transport Member for Murrumbidgee

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Dear

Thank you for your email of 21 December 2019 regarding the electric buses and ‘trackless trams’ in the ACT.

The ACT Government considered a range of mass-transit technologies for the ACT before investing in the light rail network, and has not been convinced of the merits of ‘trackless trams’ or similar bus systems as an alternative to light rail.

A ‘trackless tram’ system would still require many of the same construction works and costs as light rail to achieve the same operational outcomes, such as establishing a right-of-way, utility relocations (so that the mass transit system is not disrupted when utility works are required), stops, power systems, establishing a depot, acquiring vehicles, landscaping, communication and signalling systems, and a range of time requirements and costs for procurement, managing construction and operations. The lack of supplier choice available for ‘trackless trams’ would also constrain any potential procurement process. In addition, light rail is proven to attract associated investment in surrounding land.

Alongside planning for the light rail network, the ACT Government has also investigated alternative bus technologies and is currently planning for the introduction of zero emission buses into the Transport Canberra fleet.

In conjunction with a fully integrated bus network, light rail is the most suitable mass transit technology for Canberra because of its ability to attract passengers, positive city-shaping effects and a greater realisation of benefits across transit corridors. The light rail network is a vital part of the ACT Government’s plan to grow our public transport system. It will boost Canberra’s sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options, settlement patterns and employment opportunities.

I encourage you to stay informed about the light rail network as it develops, and get involved in upcoming consultation activities which will be accessible via www.transport.act.gov.au and www.yoursay.act.gov.au .

ACT Legislative Assembly London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Phone +61 2 6205 1470 Email [email protected]

@ChrisSteelMLA christeellabor chrisste elmla 31

Thank you for raising this matter. I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Chris Steel MLA Minister for Transport

Chris Steel MLA

Minister for Community Services and Facilities Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Transport and City Services Member for Murrumbidgee

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Dear

Thank you for your letter of 13 July 2019 regarding the potential use of ‘trackless trams’ from the City to Woden. I apologise for the delay in responding.

The ACT Government is familiar with Professor Newman’s comments regarding ‘trackless trams,’ but is not convinced by its merits as an alternative to light rail.

Light rail is the most suitable technology for Canberra because of the ability to attract passengers, positive city-shaping effects and a greater realisation of benefits across transit corridors. The light rail network is a vital part of the ACT Government’s plan to grow our public transport system. It will boost Canberra’s sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options, settlement patterns and employment opportunities.

Thank you for raising this matter. I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Chris Steel MLA Minister for Transport and City Services

ACT Legislative Assembly London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Phone +61 2 6205 1470 Email [email protected]

@ChrisSteelMLA christeellabor chrissteelmla 33

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a) (ii)

Chris Steel MLA

Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Recycling and Waste Reduction Minister for Roads and Active Travel Minister for Transport Member for Murrumbidgee

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii) Dear

Thank you for your email of 6 December 2019 regarding the potential use of ‘trackless trams’ from the City to Woden.

The government considered a range of mass-transit technologies for the ACT before investing in the light rail network, and is not convinced of the merits of ‘trackless trams’ as an alternative to light rail.

Thank you for raising this matter. I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Chris Steel MLA Minister for Transport

ACT Legislative Assembly London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Phone +61 2 6205 1470 Email [email protected]

@ChrisSteelMLA christeellabor chrissteelmla 35 Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Chris Steel MLA

Minister for City Services Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Recycling and Waste Reduction Minister for Roads and Active Travel Minister for Transport Member for Murrumbidgee

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Dear Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Thank you for your letter of 5 December 2019 regarding the potential use of ‘trackless trams’ from the City to Woden.

The ACT Government is familiar with Professor Newman’s comments regarding ‘trackless trams,’ or guided buses but is not convinced by its merits as an alternative to light rail. Professor Newman recently described light Rail as the ‘gold standard’ when compared to buses.

Light rail is the most suitable mass transit technology for Canberra because of the ability to attract passengers, positive city-shaping effects and a greater realisation of benefits across transit corridors. The light rail network is a vital part of the ACT Government’s plan to grow our public transport system. It will boost Canberra’s sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options, settlement patterns and employment opportunities.

Thank you for raising this matter. I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Chris Steel MLA Minister for Transport

ACT Legislative Assembly London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Phone +61 2 6205 1470 Email [email protected]

@ChrisSteelMLA christeellabor chrissteelmla 37 Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

38 Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

39 40 Schedule 2.2(a) (ii)

41 Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

42 43 Schedule 2.2(a) (ii)

Schedule 2.2(a)(ii)

44 45