trade-offs between light rail vs bus rapid transit for sydney

www.monash.edu.au Institute of Transport Studies (Monash) The Australian Research Council Key Centre in Transport Management

NSW Transport Infrastructure Summit

8th August 2013

Sydney Harbour Marriot

Trade-offs between Light

Rail vs Bus Rapid Transit

for Sydney

Professor Graham Currie

Chair of Public Transport, Institute of Transport Studies, Monash University

2 Institute of Transport Studies (Monash) The Australian Research Council Key Centre in Transport Management

Agenda

1. Introduction

2. People Prefer Rail!

3. Beware the Streetcar!

4. The Transfer Problem

5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


This paper aims to inform the Light Rail vs

Bus Rapid Transit debate

• Authorities face difficult decisions in using limited funds

• Much debate is polarised within industry divides – we need ‘facts’ not ‘faith’ upon which to base decisions

• Includes results from many research papers to inform the debate: – Currie G (2005) ‘The Demand Performance of Bus Rapid Transit’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol 8 No 1

– Currie G (2006) ‘Do Melbourne Trams Have a Future?’ ARRB Conf Oct-Nov 2006

– Currie G (2006) ‘Bus Transit Oriented Development – Strengths and Challenges Relative to Rail’ Journal of

Public Transportation Vol. 9, No. 4, 2006

– Currie G and Delbosc A (2013) ‘Exploring Comparative Ridership Drivers of Bus Rapid Transit and Light Rail

Transit Routes’ Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2013 pp47-65

– Currie G and Burke (In Press) ‘Light Rail in Australia – Performance and Prospects’ 36th Australasian

Transport Research Forum, Brisbane Australia 2013

– Currie G and Delbosc A (Under review) ‘Assessing Bus Rapid Transit System Performance in Australasia’

13th International Conference Series on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport (Thredbo

13, Oxford UK Sept 2013


It is structured as follows:

Beware the

Streetcar!

The

Transfer

Problem People

Prefer Rail!

Other

Factors Conclusion


Agenda

1. Introduction




5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


Behavioural research can be used to explore

passenger preference for transit modes

Same:

• Walk Access Time

• Wait Time (Frequency)

• Fare

• Reliability

• In-Vehicle Travel Time

• Walk Egress

• Reliability

How many will use on-street Bus vs Light Rail?


When measured for on-street bus, light rail

and heavy rail interesting results emerge

86

76

76

70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88

Bus (On-Street)

Light Rail

Heavy Rail

Weighted Travel Time (Mins)

Source: Based on Currie G (2005) ‘The Demand Performance of Bus Rapid Transit’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol 8 No 1

Typical Comparison of Weighted Trip Time – On-Street Bus, Light Rail, Heavy Rail

Mo

de

10 Minute Benefit for Rail

OR

A 10 Minute

MODE SPECIFIC FACTOR


The evidence shows much variation by mode but

a general trend to preference for rail

Source: Currie G (2005) ‘The Demand Performance of Bus Rapid Transit’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol 8 No 1

20

0

23

1516

8

4

1

10

18

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

Mancheste

r - C

ar Av

Holland -

High

UK - Car A

vailable

Dublin -

Bus Use

rs

UK - Bus U

sers

Sydney - peak

Ward

man 1

3

Ward

man 1

2B

On Street Bus vs Light Rail

– Mode Specific Factors

City/System

Mode S

pecific

Consta

nt

46

2 3

12

16

7 7

-56

-27

-5

4 4

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

Intn

l. - L

ow

Holla

nd -

High

UK -

Car

Ava

ilable

Dubl

in -

Bus

Use

rs

UK -

Bus Use

rs

Syd

ney -

peak

Ward

man

19B

Ward

man

7B

AVE

RAGE

On Street Bus vs Heavy Rail


City/System

Mode S

pecific

Consta

nt


Why does rail have a perceived benefit over

Bus?

• The cause of the mode

specific factor benefit of rail

is related to comparative

quality of bus vs rail in

relation to:

– Stops/Stations

– Network Knowledge

– Ride Quality

– Expectations of

Reliability

– Expectations of Priority

– Expectations of Speed


Stations have more amenities and are easy

to locate than bus stops

• The cause of the mode

specific factor benefit of

rail is related to

comparative quality of

bus vs rail in relation to:

– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality

– Expectations of Reliability




Rail lines are easy to understand – bus

routes are spaghetti

• The cause of the mode specific factor benefit of rail is related to comparative quality of bus vs rail in relation to:

– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality





A rail ride is comfortable, buses require a

hand hold


– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality





Traffic makes buses more unreliable than

rail


– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality





Rail never waits at traffic signals – bus does


– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality





Rail is perceived as faster – bus in traffic

with on-vehicle fare collection is slow


– Stops/Stations


– Ride Quality





However (limited) evidence also suggests well

designed bus systems can have similar MSC’s


9

12

9

20

12

0

5

10

15

20

25

UK C

ar A

vaila

ble

Dubl

in -

Bus

Use

rs

UK B

us Use

rs

Ade

laide

AVE

RAGE

On Street Bus vs Bus Rapid Transit


City/System

Quality Stops/Stations

Simple Networks

Good Ride Quality

High Reliability

Priority Over Traffic

High Speed


LRT ridership is higher than BRT but so are

service levels

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000

Pa

ssen

ger

s p

er v

ehic

le k

m

Vehicle trips per annum

BRT (Australia)

Light Rail (Australia)

Light Rail (USA)

Light Rail (Europe)

Source: Currie G and Delbosc A (2013) ‘Exploring Comparative Ridership Drivers of Bus Rapid Transit and Light Rail Transit Routes’ JOURNAL OF PUBLIC

TRANSPORTATION Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2013 pp47-65


Contemporary history of Australasian BRT

vs LRT ridership

Bus Rapid Transit System Light Rail Transit

2006 2010 2012 2006 2010 2012

Adelaide Busway(ANEB) 7.0 8.0 8.4 Melbourne 145.3 175.6 191.6

Sydney L-P Transitway(SLPT) 1.9 2.6 2.8 Sydney 2.5 2.8 3.9

Sydney Blacktown-Parklea Busway (SBPT) n/a 0.8 1.1 Adelaide 2.1 2.9 2.9

Sydney Parramatta-Rouse Hill Busway (SPRHT) n/a 2.3 3.3

Brisbane South East (BSEB) 26.0 47.1 46.7

Brisbane Nrthrn (BNB) n/a 13.0 32.4

Brisbane Eastern Busway (BEB) n/a 5.4 25.9

Melbourne SmartBus (MSBN)1 1.7 5.6 19.3

Melbourne DART (MDART) n/a n/a 3.5

Auckland Northern Busway n/a 1.8 5.8

Total 36.6 86.6 149.2 Total 149.9 181.3 198.4

Ridership (Annual (M)) Ridership (Annual (M))

Source:

Currie G and Burke (In Press) ‘Light Rail in Australia – Performance and Prospects’ 36th

Australasian Transport Research Forum, Brisbane Australia 2013

Currie G and Delbosc A (Under review) ‘Assessing Bus Rapid Transit System Performance in

Australasia’ 13th International Conference Series on Competition and Ownership in Land

Passenger Transport (Thredbo 13, Oxford UK Sept 2013


Agenda

1. Introduction




5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


Melbourne is the worlds largest light rail

system


Unfortunately it’s a “streetcar” system


Indeed its THE biggest (western) city

streetcar system

167

66

4944

31

25 24 24 2318

14 13 129 9

1 1 0

17

4 4 3 1

48

41

9 8 7 5 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180 Tram/LRT Track Km in Mixed Traffic with Median Operations

German Cities French Cities UK Cities USA Cities

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA


Mixed Traffic service impedes performance

40

34

32

31

30

30

26

26

25

25

25

22

21

21

21

21

21

20

20

20

20

19

19

19

19

19

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

17

17

17

17

17

17

17

17

17

17

17

16

16

16

16

16

16

16

15

15

15

15

15

15

15

14

14

14

14

14

13

12

12

10

10

9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Skagen,

Guadalajara,

Toulouse,

Washington,

Laon,

Stuttgart ,

Hong Kong,

Strasbourg,

New York,

M annheim,

Los Angeles,

Rotterdam,

Tunis,

Hong Kong,

M ainz,

Heidelberg

M unich,

Riga,

Berlin,

Oslo,

Paris,

Budapest,

Zwickau,

Constanta,

Amsterdam,

Creil,

Vienna,

Zagreb,

Genève

M ELBOURNE

Torino,

Toronto,

Tallinn,

Würzburg,

M ilano,

Lisbon,

Average Speed (KPH) Source: UITP Databank

Average Operating Speeds – World Tram/Light Rail Systems

City/

Syste

m

Melbourne (15/16 kph)

Melbourne Tram Reliability

• 33% of services are

considered to be NOT

running on time

• On time defined as

arriving more than 1 min

early of more than 6

mins late

Source: Track Record


As traffic is growing, trams are getting

slower and more unreliable

20

25

30

35

40

1999 A

ug-S

ept

Oct

Dec

2000 J

an M

ar

Apr

Jun

Jul S

ept

Oct

Dec

2001 J

an M

ar

Apr

Jun

Jul S

ept

Oct

Dec

2002 J

an M

ar

Apr

Jun

Jul S

ept

Oct

Dec

2003 J

an M

ar

Apr

Jun

Jul S

ept

Oct

Dec

Quarter

% T

ram

Se

rvic

es

No

t O

n T

ime

Yarra Trams

Swanston Trams

Source: ITS analysis of ‘Track Record’ Data

Average Operating Speed (Kph) Share of Services NOT ON Time

Source: Department of Infrastructure


In addition its not DDA Accessible and

needs to be by 2032

Despite Low Floor Tram

Not DDA Accessible

Road is Blocked

During Boarding


A good solution are ‘super stops’ – but they

take up road space


Agenda

1. Introduction




5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


Passengers don’t like transferring between

transit modes to complete journeys

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Walk Wait UX Wait IVT Transfer Walk Total

Typical Weighted Bus Travel Time

Travel Time Element

Passenger

Weig

hte

d T

ravel T

ime (

Min

s)

Transfer Issue

• Represents over 30% of total perceived

travel time

• Evidence shows transfer penalties can

vary considerably with quality of the

transfer location :

• Utility of Transfer Includes:

– Walk transfer time (weighted)

– Wait transfer time (weighted)

– PLUS a fixed transfer penalty

Unprotected Area,

Open Air,

Uncoordinated

Transfer, Low

Frequency

32 Minutes

Protected Area,

Covered,

Coordinated Transfer,

High Frequency

4 Minutes

Source: Currie and Willis (98) Australasian Transport Research Forum


Evidence shows transfer ‘penalties’ vary but

are generally significant in size

18

37

2230

6

30

8 10 8

50

5

22

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Chi

cago

- Lo

w

Chi

cago

- Hig

h

Otta

wa

- Low

Otta

wa

- High

Hon

alulu

Taipa

i

Oslo

- Low

Oslo

- Hig

h

Perth

- W

ork

Stock

holm

Edinb

urgh

AVER

AGE

Bus-Bus Transfer Penalties

City/System

Tra

nsfe

r P

enalty (

min

s)

15

28

12

2518 19

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Bosto

n - L

ow

Bosto

n - H

igh

Edmon

ton

- Low

Edmon

ton

- Hig

h

Edmon

ton

AVER

AGE

Bus-LRT Transfer Penalties

City/System

Tra

nsfe

r P

enalty (

min

s)

Bus-Heavy Rail Transfer Penalties

City/System

Tra

nsfe

r P

enalty (

min

s)

Heavy Rail-Heavy Rail Transfer Penalties

City/System

Tra

nsfe

r P

enalty (

min

s)

611

23

13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Perth

- W

ork

Sydne

y - P

eak

Stock

holm

AVER

AGE

6

158 10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Sydne

y Pea

k

Stock

holm

Edinb

urgh

AVER

AGE



They also vary by mode – quality of the transfer

environment is again the determining factor


22

19

13

109

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

Bus

-Bus

Bus

-LRT

Bus

-Sub

urba

n Rai

l

Sub

urba

n Rai

l-Rai

l

Sub

urba

n Rai

l-Sub

way

Sub

way

-Sub

way

City/System

Average All Mode Transfers

Transfer Penalty


The average transfer penalty for LRT is 19

minutes – a significant deterent


22

19

13

109

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

Bus

-Bus

Bus

-LRT

Bus

-Sub

urba

n Rai

l

Sub

urba

n Rai

l-Rai

l

Sub

urba

n Rai

l-Sub

way

Sub

way

-Sub

way

City/System

Average All Mode Transfers

Transfer Penalty


A major LRT design issue is how to avoid

‘forcing’ transfers from bus networks


Bus services run DIRECTLY (No transfer)

into the CBD


Only Light Rail Running the Full Length of

the Route Would Avoid a ‘Forced’ Transfer

Key Question 1

• Can you afford to convert

every bus route in Sydney to

Light Rail?

• If Not Where (and who) has to

have a ‘forced’ transfer?


Key Question 2

• Do you have CBD Space for

LRT in one corridor PLUS

buses from the rest of

Sydney?

• IF NOT – Most of the Sydney

Bus Network Would have

Forced Transfers


Key Question 3

• Can you build an LRT system

even in one Sydney corridor

to avoid the Streetcar

Problem?


Agenda

1. Introduction




5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


5. Other Factors

a) Cost

b) Capacity and Performance

c) Environment

d) Development Impacts


BRT is cheaper to build than Light Rail…

34.79

13.49

8.97

0.68

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Light Rail Busways Bus on HOV Lanes Bus On Arterial

Transit Systems

Source: US General Accounting Office “Mass Transit – Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise”

Report to Congressional Requesters September 2001

Figure 2 : Capital Costs per Mile – Light Rail and BRT Systems

$US

Millions

per

Mile

US

Evidence


BRT is cheaper to build than Light Rail…

UK

Evidence


..so you can build more mass transit for the

dollar available

• Curitiba’s BRT

investment was 300

times less costly than an

equivalent subway

system (Hensher, 1999)

• Bogota – TransMilenio

busway 100% city wide

transit system for the

same cost as one railway

line covering a small

share of the city (16%)

(Cain et al, 2006)

How much of Australian cities can you

cover for the cost of LRT?


Rouen (France) changed from LRT to BRT

investment for sound financial reasons

• Transit investment:

– 1994 – 2 light rail lines

– 2001 – 3 BRT lines

• Why BRT?

– Construction costs divided by 5

– Operating costs divided by 1.4

– Total construction period halved

– Flexibility of buses vs LRT


5. Other Factors

a) Cost


c) Environment



LRT claims speed and capacity advantages...

32 Kph

16 Kph

48 Kph

64 Kph

80 Kph


LRT claims speed and capacity advantages...

...but look at the EVIDENCE

45,000

Bogota TransMilenio

32 Kph

16 Kph

48 Kph

64 Kph

80 Kph

Adelaide NE Busway

Brisbane SE

Busway

Sources: Currie G (2006) ‘BRT in Australasia: Performance, Lessons Learned and Futures’ Journal of Public Transportation Volume 9,

No. 3, 2006 Special Edition: Bus Rapid Transit

St Kilda Road

Group Melbourne


Sydney Bus Congestion


Is BRT at Volume a Solution?

Brisbane SE Busway

a.m. peak = 294 buses/hr,

20K pax/hr


Is BRT at Volume a Solution?

Transmilenio, Bogota

a.m. peak = 42K pax/hr


5. Other Factors

a) Cost


c) Environment



Light Rail runs on “clean” electricity while bus runs

on “dirty” diesal


But in Melbourne, there isnt much difference

Co2 Emissions per Passenger Km - Melbourne

Source: ‘Public transport’s role in reducing greenhouse emissions’ Position Paper July 2008 Commissioner

for Environmental Sustainability, Melbourne Australia


5. Other Factors

a) Cost


c) Environment



The positive impact of LRT/rail on transit oriented

development (TID) are well documented


Research aimed to identify TOD pros (and cons)

of bus relative to rail – rail is a clear winner

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Advantage to Rail

Weaknesses

Str

en

gth

s a

nd

Weakn

esses

Advantage to Bus

Permanence, Magnitude, Risk

Newness

Different Markets

Park and Ride

Industry Capabilities

Pedestrian Access

Parking Restraint

Urban Density

Scale Dilution

Noise and Pollution

Frequency/ Speed

Bus Stigmatization

Track Record

Complementarity

Flexibility - Choice

Flexibility - Adaptability

Service Frequency

Transfers

Cost Effectiveness

Strengths

Large Developments Small Developments

?

Strengths and Weakness of LOCAL BUS vs RAIL in Relation to Transit Oriented Development

Source: Currie G (2005) ‘‘Bus Transit Oriented Development – Strengths and Challenges Relative to Rail’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol. 9, No. 4, 2006


The same research indicated well designed bus

systems can (almost) match rail performance

Advantage to Rail

Str

en

gth

s a

nd

Weakn

esses

Advantage to Bus

Strengths and Weakness of BUS RAPID TRANSIT vs RAIL in Relation to Transit Oriented Development

Source: Currie G (2005) ‘‘Bus Transit Oriented Development – Strengths and Challenges Relative to Rail’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol. 9, No. 4, 2006

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Weaknesses


Newness

Different Markets

Park and Ride


Pedestrian Access

Parking Restraint

Urban Density

Scale Dilution

Noise and Pollution

Frequency/ Speed

Bus Stigmatization

Track Record

Complementarity



Service Frequency

Transfers

Cost Effectiveness

Strengths

BRT with New Look Vehicles

?

BRT with Grade Separated

Pedestrian Access

If green fuels and vehicles are

Segregated from pedestrians


Agenda

1. Introduction




5. Other Factors

6. Conclusions


It is a ‘no brainer’ that Australian cities need

quality public transport solutions


Transit with rail like qualities is preferred by

users and has urban development benefits

Source: Currie G (2005) ‘The Demand Performance of Bus Rapid Transit’

Journal of Public Transportation Vol 8 No 1

20

0

23

1516

8

4

1

10

18

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

Mancheste

r - C

ar Av

Holland -

High

UK - Car A

vailable

Dublin -

Bus Use

rs

UK - Bus U

sers

Sydney - peak

Ward

man 1

3

Ward

man 1

2B

On Street Bus vs Light Rail


City/System

Mode S

pecific

Consta

nt

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Advantage to Rail

Weaknesses

Str

en

gth

s a

nd

Weakn

esse

s

Advantage to Bus


Newness

Different Markets

Park and Ride


Pedestrian Access

Parking Restraint

Urban Density

Scale Dilution

Noise and Pollution

Frequency/ Speed

Bus Stigmatization

Track Record

Complementarity



Service Frequency

Transfers

Cost Effectiveness

Strengths

Large DevelopmentsSmall Developments

?

Strengths and Weakness of LOCAL BUS vs RAIL

in Relation to Transit Oriented Development

Source: Currie G (2005) ‘‘Bus Transit Oriented Development – Strengths and Challenges

Relative to Rail’ Journal of Public Transportation Vol 8 No 1


However streetcars should be rejected


Segregated ‘traffic free’ rights of way are

needed


Research indicates the user priorities for an

optimum transit upgrade whatever the mode

Quality Stops/Stations

Simple Networks

Good Ride Quality

High Reliability

Priority Over Traffic

High Speed

Direct Transfer Free Trip


Removing Bus Congestion is a good “rationale” for

LRT BUT what about the transfer problem?


www.worldtransitresearch.info


Join the ITS (Monash) LinkedIn group

to keep informed of our activities

http://www.linkedin.com/search-fe/group_search?pplSearchOrigin=GLHD&keywords=ITS+Monash

trade-offs between light rail vs bus rapid transit for sydney

Business

rail source

transport management

transport management

bus routes

press light rail

currie g

heavy rail interesting

research papers