Light Rail

<html><body>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Major construction for the Parramatta Light Rail has begun on ‘Eat Street’ in the first step towards the revitalisation of the famous dining strip.
Minister for Transport Andrew Constance said the light rail works in Eat Street have started this week. They will include the removal of the existing pavement and road surface, deep excavation and moving or replacing underground utilities including water, gas pipes and telecommunication services.
A micro-tunnelling machine beneath the ground will reduce noise and impact compared to street-level work, moving up to 10 metres a day.
“We know the community is eager to see this light rail built and we will be working hard over the next five months to make the most of this time,” Mr Constance said.
“Our construction timetable together with innovative engineering techniques will see this precinct through to a fantastic new light rail network that will bring passengers into the heart of Parramatta.”
A construction grace period will see works cease on November 1, 2020 until February 1, 2021 and outdoor dining restored over the busy warmer months.
Member for Parramatta Geoff Lee said the precinct, closed to car traffic in February ahead of light rail works, had been impacted by COVID-19 lockdown measures and would benefit from a vibrant program of events and activities planned to celebrate the distinctiveness of the area.
“We’re pleased to give businesses certainty that hoardings will come down at the beginning of November, giving everyone a break from construction,” Mr Lee.
“This is in addition to the many other ways we’re proudly supporting Eat Street.” Further NSW Government support measures will include:
Nearly 2000 metres of colourful shadecloth and hoarding will highlight the array of local retailers and reflect the popular dining area’s rich cultural diversity.
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<ul>
<li>
‘Activate Parramatta’, a new app, will be launched to attract the community, residents and visitors to dine or shop at businesses along the light rail route, as COVID-19 restrictions continue to ease.
</li>
<li>A ‘Dine, Scan, Win’ shop local campaign will give the community a chance to win weekly prizes from participating restaurants, cafes and takeaway shops.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Realise Business, appointed by Transport for NSW to deliver free business support services, continues to provide guidance to businesses affected by light rail construction.</li>
</ul>
The $2.4 billion Parramatta Light Rail will connect Westmead to Carlingford via the Parramatta CBD and Camellia and is expected to open in 2023.
Main Photo: <a href="http://www.turnerstudio.com.au/eat-street-merrylands-urban-design/" target="_blank">TURNER STUDIOS</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

'Eat Street' light rail transformation underway

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
A Greenpeace <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=357699401718122" target="_blank">video</a> of me plugging a trackless tram that went viral with 4 million hits has caused a few eyebrows to be raised over whether I think light rail is dead. So let me be clear: light rail remains the gold-standard technology for providing high-quality, rapid, zero-emissions public transport along a street corridor.
There is a strong case for using light rail in many cities with sustained all-day ridership. This includes Sydney, where <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/a-fantastic-milestone-as-first-tram-in-60-years-rolls-along-george-street-20190625-p52192" target="_blank">trials of a newly built light rail system</a> have begun.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fQJ9QMeIoGY?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe> Trials of Sydney’s light rail network began in June.
Light rail also has a clear ability to attract quality urban development.
So why am I <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trackless-trams-are-ready-to-replace-light-rail-103690" target="_blank">promoting trackless trams</a>? My interest is in cities and places that lack the population density or capital funding necessary for light rail (or heavy rail). Just because you live in Hobart, Liverpool or Fremantle doesn’t mean you aren’t entitled to something that is “more than a bus” for your daily commute.
How can we provide those communities with the same quality of public transport as light rail provides? Trackless trams may be an option that can help urbanism flourish around stations along corridors limited until now to cars or buses.
<h2>What sets trackless trams apart?</h2>
This research interest took me to the world’s largest manufacturer of railway stock, <a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Companies/CRRC-Corp.-Ltd" target="_blank">CRRC</a>, in Zhuzhou, China. CRRC has produced Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART), or what <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://m.scirp.org/papers/89661" target="_blank">I call the trackless tram</a>.
The trackless tram seeks to replicate the light rail experience. The differences are that optical guidance systems replace rails, with rubber tyres on railway-type bogeys replacing steel wheels. Many of the track-laying and utility relocation costs of light rail construction can be avoided.
The capital cost of Sydney’s light rail has risen to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sydney-light-rail-cost-blows-out-to-at-least-2-7b-after-settlement-20190603-p51tvc" target="_blank">around A$210 million per kilometre</a>. For a <a href="https://sbenrc.com.au/app/uploads/2018/10/TRACKLESS-TRAMS-MANUAL-GUIDE_email.pdf" target="_blank">fraction of that cost</a>, as little as A$4m/km, trackless trams can be introduced very quickly on a road of acceptable quality. Traffic engineers advise us good-quality road base is sufficient.
Optical guidance delivers very precise ride quality, without the sway of buses. Multiple carriages offer greater capacity – <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Rail_Rapid_Transit" target="_blank">up to 500 passengers</a> – than buses.
The first, four-stop trial <a href="http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201805/09/WS5af2687fa3105cdcf651ce27" target="_blank">began in Zhuzhou</a> in 2017. Trackless trams have since been launched in <a href="http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-07/17/c_138234419.htm" target="_blank">Yongxiu and Yibin</a>.
<h2>Cities around the world are interested</h2>
The trackless tram is <a href="http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-07/17/c_138234419.htm" target="_blank">attracting interest</a> from cities <a href="https://www.lovemoney.com/gallerylist/74915/30-jawdropping-innovations-that-show-why-chinas-leading-the-world" target="_blank">worldwide</a>. <a href="http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201907/16/WS5d2d4057a3105895c2e7dab7" target="_blank">Trials have begun in Qatar</a> in advance of the 2022 FIFA World Cup.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ibjr3KV40wQ?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe> Qatar is the latest site of trackless tram trials.
I am leading a <a href="https://sbenrc.com.au/research-programs/1-62/%5D" target="_blank">team at Curtin University</a> to investigate how various levels of government in Australia (and New Zealand) can support trialling and testing of this technology and, if appropriate, introduce it in a controlled way. We have been approached to help cities in Africa, Europe, Asia, the US, Australia and New Zealand.
Among other things we need to be sure the technology is reliable, provides the promised level of service, doesn’t damage road surfaces and complies with regulations required for safety and sustainability.
We also need to be certain construction and long-term operations can produce the promised cost savings. Not all public transport innovations, such as <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327709647_Why_Do_Some_BRT_Systems_in_the_Global_South_Fail_to_Perform_or_Expand" target="_blank">bus rapid transit</a>, have lived up to their promise.
<h2>Complementing light rail</h2>
Some people are concerned the trackless tram might be a stalking horse for ideological opponents of light rail who wish to reduce investment in public transport.
In my case, I would point to my record in attracting rail investment in Perth. I started the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-03/fremantle-train-protests-turkey-sweat-russian-war-and-angry-mob/10767962" target="_blank">Friends of the Railways 40 years ago</a> to save our train. We now have a system where at the last Western Australian state election money was <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/wa-election-labor-win-stops-roe-8-in-its-tracks-20170313-gux6da" target="_blank">taken from the Roe 8 freeway proposal and put into the MetroNet heavy rail package</a>.
People are also concerned that we risk being left with a poorer public transport service if we replace a proven technology such as light rail with a less proven technology such as the trackless tram. These concerns are fair, which is why I see continued advocacy for light rail as a critical part of the trackless tram story. But the trackless tram might enable us to build the same quality service and a lot more of it.
Both technologies are likely to play complementary roles. In Sydney, for example, light rail makes sense for Parramatta into the city. The trackless tram may stack up for lower-density areas such as connecting Liverpool to the new Western Sydney International Airport.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3jLSRvqWgVo?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe> Parramatta City Council has expressed interest in a local trackless tram system.
In Perth, we certainly need such a service in many inner and middle suburbs, or for connecting major outer suburban centres to the new MetroNet lines.
Smaller and less well-off communities as well as outer suburbs are now in focus for the trackless tram. A lack of public transport means these areas have a reliance on private car use which is now not acceptable.
To avoid <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64" target="_blank">greenwashing</a>, and ensure we remain on a pathway to sustainability, we need a strategy underpinned by a thorough understanding of the technology. The aim is to achieve high-quality, zero-emissions, reliable and affordable public transport that can help reshape our cities.
The tram once ruled our cities as the preferred public transport mode from the 1890s to the 1940s. Through a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy" target="_blank">calculated campaign</a> trams were denigrated in favour of the bus and car. Cities around the world tore up their tram tracks.
 
Not every old tram route can have a new light rail. The trackless tram presents an opportunity to rebuild high-quality public transport along major road corridors and connect suburbs with poor linkages. I would hope for a more sophisticated approach to planning transport networks, recognising that both light rail and trackless trams could play important roles.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125134/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-newman-1858" target="_blank">Peter Newman</a>, Professor of Sustainability, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873" target="_blank">Curtin University</a>
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/trackless-trams-v-light-rail-its-not-a-contest-both-can-improve-our-cities-125134" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Trackless trams v light rail? It’s not a contest – both can improve our cities

<html><body>
Testing of light rail vehicles along George Street is now in full swing, with the first tram travelling the length of the street from Central Station to Circular Quay in daylight hours.
Premier Gladys Berejiklian and Minister for Transport Andrew Constance boarded the first tram to make the journey during the day and travelled from the Martin Place stop to the end of the line at Circular Quay.
“This is an exciting day for Sydney with light rail vehicles making their way down the revitalised George Street,” Ms Berejiklian said.
“This is just the start of daytime testing along the length of the line and we can expect to see a lot more of it ahead of customer services starting before the end of the year.
“The new network will move up to 13,500 commuters an hour during peak time, replacing the conga line of buses which used to sit in traffic on George Street.”
Andrew Constance again reminded the community to be aware of the changed environment in the area as tram testing becomes more frequent. 
“Now trams are in the busy CBD day and night everyone needs to be aware, remove your headphones, get off your phone and remember to look both ways before crossing the road”, Mr Constance said.
“We’re now on the home stretch of this project and in December, Sydney residents and its visitors will benefit from a better connected city and a transformed boulevard.”
New trams hold up to up to 450 passengers, equivalent of up to nine standard buses.
The new light rail network will have the initial capacity to move up to 13,500 commuters per hour during peak times (7am – 7pm).
 
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

First daytime light rail test to Circular Quay

<html><body>
Sydney's much anticipated light rail is finally in the testing stage, with the next target having the trams open to customers before the end of the year.
They ran the vehicles <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ndvqzedmnzatjek/AAAxdkA2RPyM6MQAdEfofGi7a?dl=0&amp;preview=SH_daytestingV4.mp4" target="_blank">through Surry Hills</a> and <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/d7duz1sxasi8n39/AADLYh4snS04qnfXSAFpQ4c1a?dl=0&amp;preview=20190624+-+SLR_CBD-SOUTH_FIRST+TRAM+NIGHT-TEST_VIDEO+1080+V1(1).mp4" target="_blank">up George Street</a>.
New trams hold up to 450 passengers, the equivalent of up to nine standard buses. 
This means the new light rail network will have the initial capacity to move up to 13,500 commuters per hour during peak times (7am – 7pm).
Premier Gladys Berejikilian and Minister for Transport Andrew Constance recently inspected a new light rail vehicle parked outside Town Hall for the first time.
“It is great to see light rail back on George Street and the progress which is being made on this gamechanging project,” Ms Berejiklian said.
“We can expect to see a lot more light rail vehicles making their way through the CBD from now on.
“Day testing is underway between Randwick and Central. It will be extended to Town Hall soon and the vehicles will reach Circular Quay within months.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2019/7/3/Sydney%20light%20rail%20Surry%20Hills%20testing.jpg" alt="">
“When it opens the line will deliver high capacity services from the heart of the city to Moore Park, Randwick Racecourse and the University of NSW.”
Constance said with testing becoming more frequent the NSW Government has today launched the new “Heads Up, Play it Safe around Light Rail” safety campaign.
“We remind the community to be aware of the changed environment and keep their “Heads Up” around the light rail,” Mr Constance said.
“Trams are quieter than people expect and cannot stop easily or quickly.
“We need pedestrians to look up from their phones and for cyclists and drivers to be aware and remember that tracks are for trams.”
</body></html>

Light rail testing commences across Sydney

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
I began my life as an activist academic in 1979 when the Western Australian government closed the Fremantle railway, saying buses would be better. Patronage immediately fell by 30% and I ran a four-year campaign to save the railway. We won. I have been writing books and running campaigns ever since on why trains and trams are better than buses. But I have changed my mind. The technology has changed, and I think it will end the need for new light rail.
“Trackless trams” are based on technology created in <a href="https://www.alstom.com/aptis-new-experience-electro-mobility" target="_blank">Europe</a> and <a href="http://www.crrcgc.cc/en/g7389/s13996/t286142.aspx" target="_blank">China</a> by taking innovations from high-speed rail and putting them in a bus.
I went to China to check out the CRRC trackless tram (they call it autonomous rail transit, or ART). I came back convinced it’s a transformative transit technology.
Light rail is a connecting service. It joins up corridors or links heavy rail stations to surrounding areas and sometimes completes shorter corridors that lack rail lines. Buses were filling these functions in most cities but failing on two fronts:
<ul>
<li>buses were not competing with cars so cities were filling with traffic</li>
<li>buses did not enable denser development to be viable so cities were sprawling rather than redeveloping.</li>
</ul>
Light rail had many success stories of competing with cars and attracting denser development, so commentators like me did our best to make them policy-relevant (see, for example, <a href="https://theconversation.com/all-aboard-the-growth-of-global-rail-and-our-future-cities-10377" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-in-the-knitting-urban-rails-growing-significance-13754" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-to-follow-the-us-in-funding-urban-rail-projects-64666" target="_blank">here</a>).
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237648/original/file-20180924-129871-1xcaehy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
The battery-powered trackless tram, or ART, in operation in Zhuzhou, showing the trackless autonomous guidance system. CRRC Zhuzhou Institute, Author provided
So what can the new technology do?
Trackless trams are neither a tram nor a bus, though they have rubber wheels and run on streets. The high-speed rail innovations have transformed a bus into something with all the best features of light rail and none of its worst features.
It replaces the noise and emissions of buses with electric traction from batteries recharged at stations in 30 seconds or at the end of the line in 10 minutes. That could just be an electric bus, but the ART is much more than that. It has all the speed (70kph), capacity and ride quality of light rail with its autonomous optical guidance system, train-like bogies with double axles and special hydraulics and tyres.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bXB87NWHvDg?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
The first trackless tram rolled out for a road test in Zhuzhou, south China’s Hunan Province, on October 23 2017.
It can slide into the station with millimetre accuracy and enable smooth disability access. It passed the ride quality test when I saw kids running up and down while it was going at 70kph – you never see this on a bus due to the sway.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237821/original/file-20180924-85776-6jou1l.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 A child runs along the trackless tram with the author looking on. Author provided
The autonomous features mean it is programmed, optically guided with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System" target="_blank">GPS</a> and <a href="http://www.lidar-uk.com/how-lidar-works/" target="_blank">LIDAR</a> technologies, into moving very precisely along an invisible track. If an accident happens in the right of way a “driver” can override the steering and go around. It can also be driven to a normal bus depot for overnight storage and deep battery recharge.
The standard ART system is three carriages that can carry 300 people, but it can take five carriages and 500 people if needed. In three years of trials no impact on road surfaces has been found.
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/290106133" frameborder="0" width="500" height="281"></iframe>
The author discusses his conclusions after visiting China to assess the operation of trackless trams.
How do trackless trams improve on light rail?
Trackless trams can avoid the worst features of light rail – disruption and cost. It can take years to lay rail tracks, causing major disruption to local economies, as is happening in Sydney.
Similar disruption has happened in the Gold Coast, Canberra and elsewhere, but ultimately light rail systems have been highly successful in attracting patronage and land development. This will happen in Sydney too when the project is complete.
However, the cost has been far beyond original expectations. Sydney is costing over $120 million per kilometre. The Gold Coast was similar. Canberra and Newcastle are over $80 million per kilometre, as was the cancelled light rail in Perth.
The trackless tram costs around $6-$8 million per kilometre. And it can be put into a road system over a weekend.
The big test is whether the trackless tram can attract development around its stations as light rail can. That is the missing link in our cities. How can we unlock urban regeneration and prevent our cities sprawling ever outwards with poorer and poorer suburbs while the well-placed inner and middle suburbs become more and more expensive?
The divided city needs something that can unlock affordable medium- and high-density housing in new urban centres across the city. Following many discussions with the urban development industry, I think the trackless tram can do this. The cost can be afforded as a contribution to any new development and will bring the uplift in land value that unlocks investment.
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/278969345" frameborder="0" width="500" height="281"></iframe>
 Trackless trams could be transformative for a city.
We have developed a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073988591630097X" target="_blank">model</a> that means governments do <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://vimeo.com/278969345" target="_blank">not need to find all or even any of the capital costs</a>. This is how trams were <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2413-8851/2/3/84/htm" target="_blank">first built as real estate projects</a>.
But governments are needed to manage the process and create the land assembly and other urban regeneration processes as well as community engagement. This will help show where best to route such a system and how to manage it as a transit system operating for the public good. Governments can help with risk management on the financing, as in <a href="https://theconversation.com/spills-and-city-deals-what-turnbulls-urban-policy-has-achieved-and-where-we-go-from-here-102184" target="_blank">City Deals</a>. We have produced a <a href="http://sbenrc.com.au/research-programs/1-55/" target="_blank">guide and manual</a> for how to do this.
Australian cities are lining up
Cities across the world are lining up to trial these trackless tram systems. So far, Australian cities moving to use them are Townsville, Hobart, Melbourne (in Fishermans Bend and other sites), Sydney (in Liverpool and perhaps Parramatta Road where the first studies were done) and Perth – where five separate corridors are competing to run the first ART trial.
The table below summarises the main characteristics of buses, light rail and trackless trams, showing the improvements the new technology provides on key criteria.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237660/original/file-20180924-88806-u7yo20.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237660/original/file-20180924-88806-u7yo20.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Others would rate some characteristics higher or lower, but for me the trackless tram looks a winner due to its ride quality, land development potential and cost.
Time will tell if the early demand for ART translates into a real transformative change – a disruptive innovation. It reminds me of the early days of solar and batteries, which are now completely disrupting coal power systems.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103690/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Peter Newman, Professor of Sustainability, Curtin University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trackless-trams-are-ready-to-replace-light-rail-103690" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Why trackless trams are ready to replace light rail: Peter Newman

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

The state government has signalled its $3 million 2018 budget contribution announced on Tuesday for the planning work on the new south-east tram line will lead to the project implementation.

The planning work to be funded will come up with a defined route, station location, determine the benefits as well as the costs and inform a shovels-in-the-ground date.

We're yet to see the strategic context of the project - we can only assume this tram/light rail project has been borne out of a network development plan for the tram network. 

Regardless, given planning work will soon be funded and the very small amount of information that has been released on the project points to a route that remains very much high level.  Included below are some of my thoughts on the decisions that will need to be made.

<h2>Passenger-carrying capacity &amp; scalability</h2>

Is 3000 people per direction per hour enough capacity over the coming years?  E-Class trams have been used as an example of vehicle size by the Minister and why not?  They're the biggest in the existing fleet and they are of a size that is typically used elsewhere on light rail projects, whether in isolation or in a train with two vehicles coupled together.

If we're using the E-class as a baseline and want to think about scalability of the infrastructure that needs to be built then a minimum platform length of 60 metres will be required (E-Class vehicles are 33 metres long, if a vehicle using an E-Class or equivalent vehicle were to be chosen, platforms mightn't need to be 66 metres in length as the drivers cabs at both ends can overhang the platforms).

60 metre trams or 'train or trams' would allow each service to double in passenger carrying capacity - in the realm of 400 passengers per vehicle.  That would translate, assuming a 4 minute frequency of service, into 6000 passengers per direction per hour.

<h2>Rapid transit or a long, local bus-on-rails?</h2>

Is the aim to rapidly connect Chadstone and the Monash NEIC as well as bring rail services to the outer east or to create a standard bus-on-rails tram service with a stop every 500m?  I'd favour rapid over bus-on-rails - if there's no speed advantage, what hope for mode shift is there?  

Suffice it to say, there's a major opportunity to reconfigure the entire bus network in the area so frequent buses (15 minutes or better) can connect the lower-density suburban areas with the major nodes and stations along the route.

As the announcement came out of the blue and had a double-whammy - linking Caulfield rather than a station like Oakleigh of Huntingdale like in the Rowville Rail study - rapid transit seems to be the focus and therefore the number of stations should be informed by this decision.  

<h2>Introduce good quality prioritisation and signalling</h2>

The Melbourne Metro project will roll out a modern signalling system that will stop trains at the precise location to line up with station platform doors; it should be considered that this new light rail/tram line has a similar system, at least in parts where stations will be elevated or otherwise space-constrained.

Introducing this level of automation would allow drivers of the rail vehicles to stop consistently.

As a general rule, the route should be designed to be built in a road's median in appropriate areas to lessen capital costs.  Those appropriate areas would most likely be between the signalised intersections with cross-roads.

Trams should have signal priority as they approach lower-volume crossroad intersections (i.e Darling and Belgrave road) where 100-200m from the intersection, the rail vehicle would trigger signals that control the intersection up ahead by showing a red to all traffic movements that would conflict with the rail services, allowing the rail vehicles to cruise through the intersections without stopping.

<h2>The first and second phase route</h2>

The five strategic outcomes in the <a href="https://vpa-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monash-NEIC-framework-plan_March2017_WEB.pdf">Monash NEIC draft framework plan</a> are:

<ol>
<li>Grow employment and innovation in the health, education and research precinct (Monash University area)</li>
	<li>Boost jobs growth and development attractive employment areas with business town centres (Notting Hill, Mulgrave)</li>
	<li>Transform the transport network to support economic growth of the cluster</li>
	<li>Develop public open space and community infrastructure</li>
	<li>Plan and develop urban renewal and strategic sites.</li>
</ol>
This upcoming study should consider an alternative route from Chadstone to the Monash NEIC (other than the one depicted in the published information thus far). Like Dandenong Road, Ferntree Gully Road has a wide median and a future business town centre has been earmarked on the road within the northern reaches of the Monash NEIC.

The Dandenong Road route shown in public government information thus far would doubtlessly be simpler to implement, however there is a neat route that might work by sending the tram route down Ferntree Gully Road then turning southward through Notting Hill alongside the CSIRO and through the heart of the Monash University campus to Wellington Road.

The primary advantage of this route is that it links three earmarked activity centres that will be a focus for the wider cluster - assuming the two phase build scenario is eventually adopted, in the first phase one business town centre and the Monash University activity centre would be linked from the get-go.  The second business town centre would be linked upon the completion of the second phase out to Rowville.

<h2>Up high, down low or in between?</h2>

An entirely grade separated railway would be ideal as there would be no conflicts with existing or near-future vehicular movements, however in the interests of sweating existing corridor assets more - Infrastructure Victoria recommends we sweat all our assets more - a partial grade separation solution should be chosen.

The Caulfield-Chadstone section would likely need little grade separation - see points above about surface tracks and signal priority at lower vehicular volume crossroads.

In the Chadstone-North Oakleigh area however, the route will need to cross Warrigal Road and deal with high volumes of vehicle movements into and out of the Chadstone precinct - a grade separated route should be chosen in this area. 

As elevated track (and stations) are cheaper to build compared to underground track and stations, I'd suggest an elevated section of track which lifts up over Poath/Chadstone Road and then continues at the higher level all the way to after the Ferntree Gully Road/Dandenong Road section.

Whether a Dandenong Road route or a Ferntree Gully route is chosen, this would be the ideal area to bring the track back down to the surface - it would completely avoid an area with very high volumes of vehicular traffic.  That section measures approximately 2.5 km.

Within the Monash NEIC itself, again, speed should be the focus and employing grade separation would be most ideal.   

If a Dandenong Road route was chosen this would start just north of the Dandenong Road/Wellington Road intersection and continue along Wellington Road to the eastern side of Springvale Road.

If a Ferntree Gully Road route was chosen, Stephensons Road would be at-grade with tram prioritisation and then lift up and remain elevated along Ferntree Gully Road, Howleys road &amp; Scenic boulevard through the university campus (or Blackburn Road if that corridor is deemed a better option) then turning eastward on Wellington Road the elevated track would come back down to the surface east of Springvale Road.  This elevated section would measure almost 5km.

From Springvale Road the Rowville Rail Study should inform the route choice and whether to elevate (or send track underground) - Waverley Park station at Jells Road was originally going to be sunk underground, this might work just as well for light rail as the station would be located at the top of a relatively steep hill.

Eastlink should be a grade-separated intersection and likewise if the terminus of the line is to be at Stud Park shopping centre, the tram line should also lift up over the Wellington &amp; Stud Road intersection and travel along a short section of elevated track to the terminus at Stud Park.

<h2>Stations</h2>

If speed is the favoured focus then stations should be limited to the major nodes and areas where planning schemes can be altered to develop the surrounding land intensively.

As you see in the map below, there are only stations marked at Caulfield, Chadstone, North Oakleigh, Ferntree Gully Road, Monash University, Westall Road, Waverley Park, Rowville and Stud Park.

The Station at Rowville, right near the Eastlink interchange with Wellington Road is an ideal park and ride location if that is a focus of the new line.  Ditto Stud Park.

The Station at North Oakleigh is already in an area zoned for more intensive development with projects already being marketed.

Westall Road, and its eventual extension to the Monash Freeway, is right next to the second business town centre in the VPA's draft framework.

The Monash University station is located on the 'SE3' car park - there's an opportunity to consolidate the existing bus terminal underneath the light rail station.

The Chadstone station location represents an opportunity for the centre owner to expand and connect directly with the new light rail station.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="500" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/embed?mid=1U5ZsF3koHC8ximdWNHW5zqXM5IRC4SWs" width="100%"></iframe>
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

The new tram to the south-east - what we'd like to see

<html><body>
Other cities around the world are looking to building more advanced light rail systems as I discussed in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/light-rail-might-already-be-popular-but-some-cities-are-taking-it-to-the-next-level">this article</a>.  In the absence, still, of any transport plan for people who don't need to travel to the CBD for work and in the context of the inevitable growth of Melbourne's already decentralised employment centres which at present have minimal non-road public transport access, I'm going to highlight some areas of the city where where cheaper grade-separated light rail might start addressing those needs.

As I outlined in the earlier piece, Dublin has announced early plans to build a new 26km metro line using light rail vehicles in its own right of way with two major underground sections.  Toronto's been building a similar system along it's Eglington Avenue corridor since the start of the decade which is expected to be open by 2021.

They both have the same maximum passenger capacity - 15,000 passengers per direction per hour - and in Toronto's case, the estimate is that by 2031 it will carry 5400 passengers per direction per hour and 60-70% of its operating costs will be covered by fares - (compared to Melbourne's overall system recovering only 20-30% of costs through fares according to a January 2017 report in the AFR).

So what might an underground light rail system, one of a similar length as Dublin or Toronto, look like in Melbourne? 

The world really is our oyster and should the focus of public transport planning ever shift to moving people around the city (literally) or connecting them to jobs in the suburbs, rather than just moving people to and from the centre of the city, corridors like these might just get a look in.

<h2>Inner City Orbital</h2>

The line shown in the map below measures about the same as the Dublin system and has about the same amount of stations.  Did you know that if you work in Richmond/Abbotsford and live somewhere such as Brunswick or Moonee Ponds, your journey on public transport could take almost the same amount of time as someone commuting to the Ringwood, Watergardens, Cheltenham or Dandenong to the city by train?

What's more, a journey around the inner city forces you onto the same services as those people commuting from longer distance for at least one leg of the journey.  Some might sneer or roll their eyes about inner-city dwellers complaining about commutes but is it right that people who live in or near the inner city and don't work in the CBD itself are forced to travel via the CBD? 

The inner city orbital route below would connect with every radial rail route and the majority of the tram network as well as connecting established or emerging inner-city non-CBD job centres like Fishermans Bend, South Melbourne, Cremorne, Abbotsford with the growing and more predominantly residential inner-north.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1SwNd1WK6x45JzU9tJx0xB_-Z6jmYy3ym" width="100%"></iframe>

<h2>The northern cross-town</h2>

The route on this map is about 5km shorter than the orbital route above but seeks to serve the employment centres in the west and north.  I've only come up with 16 potential sites for stations which includes the terminus and possible location of the maintenance and storage depot in Sunshine, Highpoint, Moonee Ponds, Brunswick, Eastern Thornbury/Preston and Heidelberg.

Much of this route would need to be underground.  There is one exception, depending on local tolerances - the Ballarat Road and Hampshire Road corridors are wide and [obviously cheaper] elevated structures might suffice in this area (remember the aim is to not build more in-street tram lines).

UM commenters have previously made mention this broad corridor (which has featured in articles like this in the past on Urban.com.au) would solve a medium-long term problem of people trying to get across the Maribyrnong River, and hence I'm rehashing it somewhat and keeping it anchored firmly in the Sunshine-Highpoint-Moonee Ponds corridor.

Depending on the outcome of the planning working being undertaken right now for the La Trobe employment cluster - specifically the public transport plan - this route would also draw people who live to the west of La Trobe closer to it if a frequent bus service eventually runs between Heidelberg and the La Trobe precinct.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1D4E7qLzDed6Cie_3nppTF6O6x22cw8Qm" width="100%"></iframe>

<h2>The Eastern cross-town</h2>

Springvale Road has run point on moving people north-south through the eastern suburbs for years, Eastlink now does a lot of the heavy lifting and arterials like Stephensons Road and Blackburn Road also do a lot of heavy lifting - for private vehicles and for smart buses in some cases.

Monash, like La Trobe, is another university-centric cluster that will see a lot of employment growth over time - in fact Monash has the highest concentration of jobs outside of Melbourne's CBD (as one commenter has mentioned before - decentralisation of jobs in Melbourne is already here if you look closely enough).

The cat is out of the bag in Box Hill as we have reported on Urban.com.au on many occasions and this cross-town route would bring not one, not two, but three stations to the station-less Manningham LGA (the only council area in metropolitan Melbourne without a rail station or service).

Westall hosts the southern terminus rather than Clayton or Springvale for two reasons:

<ol>
<li>a maintenance and storage facility would require property acquisition no matter where it would be placed on this line, Westall already has one maintenance facility for metro, this might be a good place to expand and/or adapt the facility for the cross-town line</li>
	<li>Westall will likely be the first 'short-stop' on the new Pakenham/Cranbourne metro line - it seems logical to put an interchange here as between Westall and the city is where the highest frequency of metro services will likely run plus from Westall, the cross-town line alignment traverses the greatest amount of land in the Monash cluster.</li>
</ol>
<iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1ooHW3ZjMIN1nI_83Sr_drhC0MonHS8OP" width="100%"></iframe>
</body></html>

Pondering where underground light rail might suit Melbourne

<html><body>
News from abroad this week surfaced that the Irish capital had elected to use light rail vehicles to operate its new <a href="http://www.metrolink.ie">Metrolink</a> project that would run north-south via Dublin's airport and city centre.

The international rail journal <a href="http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/metros/ireland-reveals-route-for-dublin-metro-line">reports</a> the Dublin project will be 26km in length, have 25 stations (of which 15 are brand new) and include two underground sections.

A consultation round is now underway and the reported price tag - presumably only capital costs - is €3 billion or around $4.85 billion Australian Dollars.

Perhaps the most impressive stat in the various reports in both the Irish and Rail media is that by 2030 the system is expected to be carrying 15,000 passengers per direction per hour with rail vehicles measuring approximately 60m long and running on 2-minute frequencies.

To put that into context, the 96 tram route between St Kilda Beach and East Brunswick operates about 10 trams per hour in peak with each E-Class tram able to carry 210 people, that's about 2,100 passengers per direction per hour.

The real difference when you compare the Dublin proposal to the light rail systems that have popped up in Sydney and the Gold Coast as well as any number of US cities over the past decade is that this Dublin metro will almost entirely be separated from road traffic.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/ttc_subway_map_2023.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Map of existing and proposed/under construction light and heavy rail lines in Toronto. Image: wikipedia"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="385" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ttc_subway_map_2023.png?itok=bBoGoFpF" title="Map of existing and proposed/under construction light and heavy rail lines in Toronto. Image: wikipedia" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Map of existing and proposed/under construction light and heavy rail lines in Toronto. Image: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_5_Eglinton">Wikipedia</a></figcaption></figure>Another city which has gone down this path, to a certain extent, is Toronto with its Eglinton cross-town project.  

It was kicked off in 2010 and encompasses a straight east-west cross-town line that links with three of Toronto's existing (heavy-rail) subway lines over 19km.  The route includes a 10km tunnel and the remainder of the line is on the surface but in its own right of way that has minimal interaction with the existing road network (i.e. level crossings).

In total the project will cost $9.1 billion Canadian Dollars ($9.2 billion Australian Dollars)  - and this is where Canadians just get it right, the public has far better access to cost breakdowns - it's $5.3 billion in capital/construction costs and the remaining portion, $3.8 billion, is what it will cost to operate and maintain the system over a 30 year period.

The Toronto Star <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2015/11/03/91b-crosstown-lrt-mega-contract-comes-in-under-estimates">reported</a> and further broke down the capital costs to show the 10km underground section's 15 new underground stations will cost between $80 million and $100 million each.  Surface stations cost very little in comparison with the Toronto Star reporting it will cost between $3 million and $5 million per stop.

Over a 30-year timeframe, that $3.8 billion cost averages out to be approximately $126 million per year and after fares and other revenue streams are taken into account, the <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/10/31/report-outlines-steep-costs-of-running-new-toronto-transit-lines">required subsidy from the public purse</a> to operate the line is expected to come in at $39 million per year.  

In other words, somewhere between 60 and 70 percent of the forecast cost to operate the line will be paid for from the farebox.  For comparison's sake, a report in the Australian Financial Review in January 2017 sets Melbourne's current cost recovery from fares at between 20 and 30 percent.

So what might a 26km mostly underground but definitely separated light rail line cover in Melbourne?  I look at that <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/pondering-where-underground-light-rail-might-suit-melbourne">here</a>.
</body></html>

Light Rail might already be popular but some cities are taking it to the next level

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The property Council welcomes the McGowan government’s plans to rethink Perth’s rail infrastructure system to embrace more mixed used developments to create activated precincts at Forrestfield and Bayswater train stations andplans to introduce light rail connecting Curtin University and UWA. 
Integrating new stations such as Forrestfield and the proposed redevelopment of Bayswater station, with more high density residential andbusiness premises will transform these local areas into vibrant social hubs, creating more jobs and boosting local amenities for residents.
The Property Council welcomes Planning Minister Rita Saffioti’s plans to introduce commercial opportunities, such as shops, gyms and child care centres to land surrounding the Forrestfield train station. 
Rethinking land use in that area has the potential to significantly improve the quality of life for those living in the locality and those using Forrestfield trainstation. 
Not only will Forrestfield be better connected to both the airport and the CBD, but on a practical level, the ability for a working parent to drop the kids at the adjacent day care will save precious time and encourage people back to work, while having shops just metres from the train station will encourage local spending and draw people to the area. 
Similarly, plans to connect two of WA’s largest universities, Curtin and UWA with a light - rail line, will improve east  - west connectivity and access to the amenities associated with each of the institutions as well as bring students into the CBD. 
Ultimately, strong communities are built through the integration of practicality, connectivity and vibrancy. These mixed-use developments will significantly add to the local area, making them places people want to live. 
Creating precincts around travel nodes such as train stations will ensure local area thrives, attracting residents and creating long term employment opportunities.
Lino Iacomella is a WA Executive Director at Property Council of Australia and can be contacted <a href="https://www.propertycouncil.com.au/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Government rethink on train stations and light rail welcomed

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65084/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Value capture actually can work when it comes to funding new transport infrastructure.
My research on the Gold Coast light rail provides the figures to demonstrate the size of the gains to nearby land values, which were around 25 percent of the A$1.2 billion capital cost in stage one of the project.
Value capture is the idea that new transport infrastructure can be financed, or at least partly, by increases in land value around the project. It’s something Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has promoted and industry experts have come out in support of, but the proof has so far been elusive.
To shed some light on the potential scale of such property value gains, I studied the changes in Gold Coast land values following the opening of the light rail project in July 2014.
<h2>Why land values?</h2>
The case for this type of “beneficiary pays” view is a moral one more than an economic one. The moral case is that publicly funded transport projects should not be undertaken for the benefit of a select group of landowners.
For example, we know that the planning system is susceptible to favouritism because it gives windfall gains to landowners. The same holds for transport investments. Thus, there is a fairness argument for taxing these “unearned” gains to fund the transport investment that caused them.
A number of recent articles at The Conversation have described some of the options for translating land value gains into a revenue source.
But while we know that transport investments typically increase land values in areas that become more accessible, does a new rail line increase land values by 5%, or 50%? Taken together, what proportion of the transport investment costs can be funded by these gains? Are they 10%, or even perhaps 100%?
<h2>Who benefits, and by how much?</h2>
To answer the question of how large land values gains are, I used the full suite of statutory land valuations data available in the Gold Coast to tease out the land value variation over time at different distances from the light rail stations. By doing this I could see the path of relative land values for properties within 100 metres of the stations, between 100 and 200m, and so forth, up to 2 kilometres.
I found that land within 400m of the stations increased in value by 7% more than land between 400m and 2km from the stations in the year after the light rail began operation. This is in keeping with the results of some previous international studies.
By applying the price deviation to the total value of land in those areas (a little over A$4.2 billion in 2015), I could then estimate that the absolute change in land value was A$300 million. This is the once-off gain to the owners of the 1,324 plots of land within 400m of the light rail stations as a result of this transport investment.
This estimated value gain is net of additional rates and charges that arise automatically from increasing land values. It is also net of the additional charge levied citywide to help fund transport investment in the city.
At a 5 percent market interest rate, those capital gains are equivalent to an annual revenue stream of A$15 million. This is the total possible revenue from a funding system that perfectly captured all land value gains.
However, state governments already levy taxes on land values, though in Queensland there are many exemptions, including for land holdings under A$600,000 in value. After this, the marginal rate is between 1 percent and 1.75 percent.
It is possible to estimate the additional revenue available to the state government from land value gains due to this investment in the hypothetical situation where there are no exemptions. At a 1 percent land value tax rate, this would be an automatic increase of approximately A$2.5 million in annual land tax income from the value gains due to the light rail. At a 1.75 percent rate with no exceptions, the revenue would be A$3.9 million per year.
Overall, the land value gains from the Gold Coast light rail were around 25 percent of the capital cost. One of the simplest ways to capture these land value gains is to expand the existing state land tax system to remove exemptions. That would automatically capture 17-26% of the potential revenue from the value gains.
Cameron Murray is economist, The University of Queensland, and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/cameron-murray-172480" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Light Rail

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Light Rail

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News