The Renaissance of Light Rail Research Paper APRIL 2021 Contents 3 Executive Summary 04 1 Introduction 08 1.1 Context 08 1.2 Scope 09 2 Comparing Typical Transport Modes 11 2.1 Modal Context 12 2.1.1 Bus Rapid Transit 12 2.1.2 Trolleybuses and Electric Bus Rapid Transit 14 2.1.3 Trackless Trams 15 2.1.4 Light Rail 18 3 Light Rail Deep Dive 19 3.1 Benefits 20 Economic 20 Social 22 Environmental 23 3.2 Challenges 26 4 Decision Making Framework 29 4.1 Modal Comparison 30 4.2 Framework 32 4.3 Findings 33 4.4 Applying the framework to recent project proposals 34 4.5 Policy Recommendations 41 Tables Table 1: A Comparison of the Typical Transport Modes 30 Table 2: Case Study – Gold Coast Light Rail 46 Table 3: Case Study – CBD & South East Light Rail 50 Table 4: Case Study – Parramatta Light Rail: PLRS1 percentage uplift analysis 52 Figures Figure 1: Decision Making Framework 06 Figure 2: BRT network in Quito, Ecuador 12 Renaissance of Light Rail Report Figure 3: Brisbane Metro 13 Figure 4: Trackless Tram in the city of Zhuzhou 15 Figure 5: Trams run along George St outside Townhall in the 1950s 18 Figure 6: Light rail vehicle moving north along George Street, Sydney 18 Figure 7: Gold Coast Light Rail Route Alignment Map 46 Figure 8: Sydney CBD and South East Light Rail Route Alignment Map 49 Figure 9: George Street Before and After the CSELR 51 Figure 10: Modelled Percent Uplift from Additional Density (R2, R3 & R4 zones, per Additional Dwellings) 53 Australasian Rail Association / 4 Urban renewal/land value uplift - ability to generate some form of land value 5 and density uplift along the corridor it is servicing Executive Amenity - ability to provide amenity, both at the stop and during the journey (included ride smoothness, accessibility, legibility, real time information, Summary announcements, seating) Stop frequency - total catchment served, with a higher number of stops per kilometre resulting in more of the population being within walking distance of public transport Reliability/proven technology - ability to provide on time services via a proven mode of transport RPS is pleased to partner The review indicated that bus, BRT, and its emerging technology hybrids can be successfully with the Australasian Railway adapted rapidly and flexibly deployed to address Service frequency - ability to increase or decrease service frequency easily Association (ARA) to develop a range of transport challenges around the world. Trackless tram technologies have had limited a research paper reflecting on use globally. The emergent trackless trams being the role light rail has played in considered in the Australian context draw on Australian society. more contemporary high speed rail technology and is currently limited to only two cities in China. It therefore remains a largely unproven mode of The research also identifies that a new appreciation transport. for what light rail delivers has led to a renaissance of light rail projects across the country. The Light rail with in-ground steel guide rail systems combination of urban regeneration, amenity and has comparatively greater land use and reliability has seen light rail return to Australian placemaking potential and provides greater cities to help revitalise CBDs and attract investment. capacity to move passengers than buses. This paper defines a framework to demonstrate Light rail also provides a more flexible solution Flexibility in routes - ability to move or change routes easily the relative benefits and limitations of transport than heavy rail or metro systems which are highly mode choice, outline the role light rail can play and complex, require significant investment and have consider what makes light rail projects successful. lengthy lead times to deliver and commission. We then look at light rail projects currently being proposed and how these align with the framework. Through consolidating the insights gained from the modal comparison, along with a review of several 2. BRT and other protected vehicles are well Light rail has roots deep in Australian history local and international case studies, RPS and ARA Budget considerations have not been suited to corridors with high patronage dating back to 1879 when Sydney had one of the have developed a transport planning decision- accounted for in the framework demand throughout a movement corridor. largest tram networks in the world. Australian cities making framework that uses a Red-Amber-Green as they are unique to each project removed tram systems as the growth in private Renaissance of Light Rail Report (RAG) ranking against key decision-making criteria and should be weighed against the 3. Light Rail is well suited to transport projects Renaissance of Light Rail Report motor vehicle ownership took off in the 1970s and (refer Figure E-1) to help determine the most that seek to help catalyse and coordinate light rail was considered an impediment to the appropriate modal choice depending on a project’s relative benefits and objectives of land use change whilst being capable movement of private vehicles. By the early 2010s as context and the outcomes it is attempting to each project. to meet high patronage demand road congestion worsened, many cities globally have achieve. looked to revaluate its public transport options. The research found that: throughout a movement corridor. A comparison of several contemporary and The framework assesses each mode choice against 4. Heavy Rail is well suited when you need emerging transport technologies including bus the following considerations: 1. Buses and advancing bus technologies rapid transit (BRT), trackless trams and light rail was (such as electric BRTs, trolleybuses and to move high numbers of passengers undertaken to establish the global context, and electrically/optically guided bus systems) across larger distances and catalyse key determine the respective benefits and challenges are well suited to corridors that are employment and residential centres. associated with the use of each mode. experiencing changing travel patterns, Australasian Rail Association / require stop relocation and route flexibility. Australasian Rail Association / 6 7 Below is a summary of the - Recommendation 1.1: Government(s) reform the business case and appraisal performance of each mode approach to better consider land use, Recommendation 2: Develop a Recommendation 3: Reduce delivery against the identified key urban renewal and ‘place’ outcomes co-ordinated funding approach phase risks through an improved risk alongside conventional transport benefits. sharing approach decision making criteria. This includes not only developing While it is clear that light rail is not the solution to consistent approaches to measuring every transport problem, light rail does have an these benefits but also recognising the - Recommendation 2.1: To reduce a project’s - Recommendation 3.1: Where there are important role to play in any integrated transport contribution that transport projects have to overall cost to government(s), earlier potential significant construction related network and has many strengths. Critically, where the urban realm and creation of new public action should be taken to capitalise on risks, a greater level of investigation there are broader land use, amenity and urban places. value-capture opportunities that exist well should be undertaken as part of the regeneration outcomes that are needed throughout before construction commences (i.e. during project development phase to provide a corridor, light rail is well placed to deliver these. - Recommendation 1.2: Optimisation of the light rail network (through signal the planning and development phase). An a more accurate representation of example of this could include coordinated predicted project costs. Furthermore, To further accelerate light rail development and priority) is considered during the business corridor protection activities before a in cases where this is not possible, a support its ongoing success in our cities, the paper case concept design development phase project is announced. collaborative procurement approach poses the following policy recommendations for to establish a more accurate portrayal of where risks are appropriately shared government consideration to support the next wave timetable performance throughout the day - Recommendation 2.2: Government(s) between the contractor and government of light rail investment and delivery. and optimise the service delivery of the network. consider a contribution obligation for should be established (e.g. Alliance model). landowners following rezoning to provide early and adequate funding for land. - Recommendation 3.2: Utilities have - Recommendation 1.3: Stakeholder Recommendation 1: Refine the engagement during the planning Equally government(s) could also consider posed a large risk across multiple light policy framework to assess the and development phases of a light rail the introduction of a transport levy that rail projects. It is recommended that broader benefits light rail projects project transition from best-practice to a provides a balanced approach to fund local this risk is specifically targeted in early deliver government assurance requirement (e.g. as projects using ratepayer contributions. development phases of the project, co-sponsors of a business case). with greater knowledge sharing and - Recommendation 2.3: Where possible, seek transparency between utility providers council stakeholders as sponsors/owners and light rail proponents (including sharing of light rail business