AdeLINK Multi-Criteria Analysis Summary Report 1 AdeLINK Multi-Criteria Analysis Summary Report Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Report Structure ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Determining Routes for Assessment ...................................................................................... 8 1.4 Routes Assessed .................................................................................................................... 10 2 Multi-Criteria Analysis ........................................................................................................ 20 2.1 Purpose of the Multi-Criteria Analysis .................................................................................. 20 2.2 How does the Multi-Criteria Analysis Work? ........................................................................ 21 2.3 MCA and AdeLINK Planning Process ..................................................................................... 23 2.4 AdeLINK Themes and Criteria ............................................................................................... 24 3 Context .............................................................................................................................. 25 3.1 Light Rail Networks ............................................................................................................... 25 3.2 Light Rail Corridor Typologies ............................................................................................... 26 3.3 Assumptions .......................................................................................................................... 28 Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 30 Appendix A: MCA Results and Summary Data ............................................................................. 31 Appendix B: MCA Route Option Commentary from Workshops ................................................... 59 © InfraPlan (Aust) Pty Ltd. 2016 The information contained in this document produced by InfraPlan (Aust) Pty Ltd is solely for the use of the Client (The Department of Transport, Planning and Infrastructure) for the purposes for which it has been prepared and InfraPlan (Aust) Pty Ltd undertakes no duty or accepts any responsibility to any third party who may rely on this document. All rights reserved. No sections or elements of this document may be removed from this document, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted in any form without the written permission of InfraPlan (Aust) Pty Ltd. i AdeLINK Multi-Criteria Analysis Summary Report Executive Summary The following analysis was undertaken by InfraPlan Pty Ltd on the request of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. The intent of this report is to provide a multi criteria analysis of several route options for the AdeLINK Tram network, including the routes as per the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan (ITLUP), 2015. MCA processes are often applied by State Government Departments and Treasuries to assess project options. This report does not contain any modelling, or engineering data and as such the AdeLINK routes are only stated as potential options. AdeLINK has the potential to attract investment, boost economic growth and encourage urban renewal and jobs, and bring residents and visitors to the city centre. Providing high quality public transport services will also help drive market demand for residential development in the CBD, inner and middle metropolitan Adelaide. In 2013, the development of the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan (ITLUP) involving 2,500 participants stated they support trams as a first priority (83% of inner and 78% of middle suburban residents). Planning for AdeLINK forms part of the overall electrification of public transport in Adelaide. The study comprises several key steps before concluding with a detailed business case for delivering the AdeLINK tram network (as shown in the diagram below). This is an essential process for establishing the rationale for funding options. The first step, an extensive multi-criteria assessment (MCA) process to assess route options, is now complete and contained in this report. It involved the testing of the original AdeLINK tram network against other potential routes identified in conjunction with Council officers through consultation and workshops. The MCA Summary Report summarises the routes assessed in the MCA, providing guidance as to the route options to be taken forward to the Design Labs and Community Open Days. The results are also presented as standalone studies for each corridor. Criteria are unweighted to comply with Infrastructure Australia requirements. It is important to note that the MCA is one step in the process, and will assist in determining the final preferred routes for AdeLINK. The next phase of the study involves Design Labs, which will explore the integration opportunities between land use, street attributes and tram corridor planning (e.g. station locations) with Council staff and the community. This will provide a framework for more detail planning of the tram lines including stop locations, and identifying constraints and opportunities that will inform the design of each corridor. Following the Design Labs, a number of studies will commence in February 2017 to model the urban development outcomes (patronage demand); develop the operation framework of the tram system, including potential stabling options; assessment of road traffic operations and integration with bus and train services; and potential road and track layouts, including the location and style of tram stops within an urban design framework. 1 AdeLINK Multi-Criteria Analysis Summary Report This ‘Summary Report’ provides an overview of the AdeLINK light rail project, outlines the Multi- Criteria Analysis (MCA) process, a summary of MCA results, as well as some of the project’s contextual framework. Multi-criteria decision making processes have become increasingly prominent in strategic decision making for investment opportunities across a broad range of projects, from environmental preservation, development, infrastructure delivery and so on. It involves a multi-stage process of specifying options to be assessed, defining key objectives/themes and criteria, choosing measures to be scored and choosing the best option to move forward with. For the AdeLINK light rail project, 5 themes, 19 criteria and 43 measures made up the MCA. This process is outlined in Figure 1 below. The original routes identified for the AdeLINK light rail network were prescribed in 2015 by the State Government in their ‘Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan’ (ITLUP) and have been public knowledge since. As a result, these corridors may have already formed a basis for local and state government policy reviews and changes, infrastructure investment and development. Therefore, these routes were each considered as options for their respective AdeLINK corridor MCA. To ascertain additional route options, planning officers and managers from each local government Council through which the ITLUP corridors passed were invited to attend an interactive workshop on 29 June 2016. Facilitated by the Project Team (InfraPlan and SA Government), the goal of the workshop was to come up with route alternatives in addition to the ITLUP route for the MCA. The details of the routes discussed at this workshop are provided in Appendix B of this report. Figure 1: Overview of the AdeLINK MCA process. A number of criteria and measures were developed in consultation with Council officers to assess the options. A subsequent analysis of these route options (provided in more detail in Appendix A and separate detailed reports) has concluded the following unweighted scores. Note: The MCA scores will not be used to inform the staging of the AdeLINK network. Each route score should only be used to compare other route options for that specific Link. 2 AdeLINK Multi-Criteria Analysis Summary Report EastLINK EastLINK Option A: Norwood Parade Option C: Hybrid Option, Option B: Magill Road (via ITLUP Route (via Rundle Road, Norwood Parade and upper Rundle Rd, Beulah Rd, Parade West, Norwood Magill Road (connecting via Sydenham Rd) Parade and Penfolds Road) Glynburn Road or other route) Total score 37 26 38 The score suggests that the Parade (original ITLUP option) is the preferred option west of Portrush Road. However, a hybrid option connecting upper Magill Road has greater merit. While Magill Road option scored the highest for development potential, with transit supportive land uses it has a high volume of competing traffic; more heritage and would impact cyclists. Option C makes the best of the development envelope on both routes; has significantly more development opportunity and therefore uplift than Option A and the highest patronage potential. Option C has a greater number of business along its route and a higher patronage potential (revenue). The Capital Cost of Options A and C are likely to be