Planning a new light rail system for success and community acceptance

Light rail (LRT) and tramway projects have experienced a modern renaissance in popularity, with new systems constructed in more than 150 cities in the past thirty years. Successful systems have been cited as having beneficial transport impacts in terms of increased mode share and capacity compared with buses and reduced costs compared with heavy rail. In addition, successful LRT systems have been cited as having significant non-transport benefits, both economic (property uplift and employment agglomeration along the LRT corridor) and social (increased amenity and public activity in LRT corridor). These benefits are generally associated with the idea of “place making” or the ability of LRT to improve the relative attractiveness, connectivity and activity level of the urban corridor in which it is constructed. This paper examines the development of 7 Light Rail systems as case studies. The aim is to identify common success factors or pitfalls for planning and implementing a new LRT system. This dual nature of LRT impacts requires a different planning process for LRT systems compared to conventional transport planning. A conventional engineering planning approach does not guarantee success with LRT planning, as some relative project failures have demonstrated. Detailed planning of land use and urban design elements is required as much as track design and traffic arrangements. Population density and walkability is important in the LRT corridor. Institutional factors are found to be significant for successful LRT operations in the case studies examined. Institutional success factors include the involvement of local government and the bus or public transport operator in LRT planning. Other factors include planning for track and Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) extensions from the start, achieving a segregated track corridor with priority for LRVs at signals, high frequency, and strong community engagement to gain acceptance of traffic restrictions. Critical pitfalls include lack of detailed planning, attempting to retain traffic capacity via shared lanes and low service frequency.

• Record URL:
  • http://railknowledgebank.com/Presto/content/Detail.aspx?ctID=MTk4MTRjNDUtNWQ0My00OTBmLTllYWUtZWFjM2U2OTE0ZDY3&rID=NzAzMg==&sID=MTA=&ph=VHJ1ZQ==&qcf=&rrtc=VHJ1ZQ==&bckToL=VHJ1ZQ==
• Authors:
  • Elaurant S
  • Quinlan J
  • Wood A
• Conference:
  • AusRAIL 2018, Rail for a Better Future, 27-28 November 2018, Canberra, ACT
• Publication Date: 2018

Media Info

• Pagination: 10p. ; PDF
• Monograph Title: AusRAIL 2018, Rail for a better future, 27-28 November 2018, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Cost effectiveness; Light rail transit; Planning; Population density; Public opinion; Scheduling; Trolley cars; Urban areas
• ATRI Terms: Cost effectiveness; Frequency; Light rail transport; Planning; Population density; Public opinion; Tram; Urban area
• Subject Areas: Planning and Forecasting;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 01708023
• Record Type: Publication
• Source Agency: ARRB
• Files: ATRI
• Created Date: Jun 18 2019 4:57PM