Light rail was once a distinguishing feature of Sydney’s landscape, and many of our bus routes still follow old tram routes. It was one of the largest systems in the world at its height. EcoTransit Sydney believes that light rail as a mode has a role to play in the future of Sydney’s transport system because of its comparatively low cost, its accessibility and its ability to make use of renewable energy. These three elements will make it a very attractive option as the need to cover as much territory as fast as possible becomes more obvious. At least one academic study has already pointed out that communities in Western Sydney are going to be left high and dry by rising petrol prices, but despite numerous promises to provide these communities with public transport, nothing is being done. When prices get higher, it will be more difficult to justify the tunnelling that goes with big projects like metros – so we’ll be left with doing what costs us the least to get the job done. If we make this decision a bit earlier we can afford to do more. We’re not saying that everything that is currently being done by heavy rail and buses will be done by light rail in the future, but Sydney’s history with trams demonstrates that there is a lot that light rail could achieve in a world that has to live with less petrol and less greenhouse gas emissions.
Light rail proposals
There are a number of proposals for light rail that have been produced over the years. The most recent proposal put forward by EcoTransit Sydney is one that has been around for at least ten years, and involves the repurposing of a heavy rail freight corridor (Rozelle Goods Line) between the terminus of the current light rail service at Lilyfield and the heavy rail station at Dulwich Hill in Sydney’s Inner West. Marrickville Council looked at this in the late 90s, and at the time of the Lilyfield Extension launch, it was expected that a further extension would follow in reasonably short order.
Since then, there has been a proposal to develop the corridor as a Green Way project that incorporates cycling and pedestrian tracks, light rail on the existing heavy rail formation and bush regeneration as part of a wildlife corridor. This project has been progressing since 2002 and has recently resulted in a draft Masterplan.
EcoTransit Sydney has talked about the use of this line as part of a larger network, not all of which would use the goods line. In fact, the first discussion proposed that the line move into the streets as a capacity improvement strategy for public transport services to and from Campsie.
The campaign that EcoTransit Sydney launched in early 2008 incorporates the cycling, pedestrian and bush habitat elements of the GreenWay project and goes some way towards providing some wider network benefits through its connection of the Western and Bankstown Heavy Rail lines at Lewisham and Dulwich Hill. The expansion of light rail to Dulwich Hill also has the advantage that it would be grade separated from the road network. This is a rare opportunity in the Sydney urban context, and the proposal has attracted a large and supportive response from local communities, who would like to see the most cost-effective measures implemented so that the public transport dollar can go further.
Hopefully, the new tender for a light rail study in the Rozelle Goods Line corridor, recently announced by the NSW Government, will reflect the interests of the community that have fought for light rail, cycling, walking trails and wildlife habitat to be put on the agenda for this corridor.
Light rail versus metros
Light rail has many of the same characteristics that a metro does, in the sense that they are designed to move larger groups of people comparatively short distances. They stop often, and each has more doors and less seats than heavy rail vehicles. Neither metro nor light rail are sensible substitutes for heavy rail for long distances (over 8-12 kilometres). The major difference then, between these modes is the size and some of the more complex ‘market characteristics’ of each.
Some of these have already been commented upon – number of doors, number of seats, distances travelled. A comparison of these characteristics will reveal that metros carry more people, slightly further, with fewer stops. However, for a metro to make a decent return on investment (more expensive vehicles, higher energy costs, digging tunnels and creating and running underground stations) it needs to carry a large number of people over comparatively short distances – they are large trains but they need to fill up several times over the course of their journey to make it all worthwhile. Metro has a stopping pattern that reflects the high cost and physical constraints of building underground, for instance it is difficult to put a station closer than 1 kilometre to another station – this reduces its pedestrian catchment (400 metres around a stop, generally). In contrast, light rail is usually a surface mode and costs a great deal less to build because of this fact. It is not constrained by high station building costs, and can increase the number of stops on its route with little effort or expense. Light rail is like metro in its preference for filling up several times over in the course of its journey, but it is not something that will make or break the economic feasibility of the system.
A CBD Light Rail service is seen as a threat to proposals for a CBD Metro because they could start delivering significant benefits, within a couple of years, with a much smaller price tag. The international experience is that light rail services expand very quickly once they are accepted as part of the transport mix.
*EcoTransit Sydney is a not-for profit organisation dedicated to the promotion of EcoTransit development. It advocate’s improving Sydney’s local environment by shifting transport from invasive modes like the private motor car to less polluting public transport modes, and is dedicated to the preservation of Sydney’s natural environment and heritage areas.
For more information visit: www.ecotransit.org.au
 
“
.png){kind=small}
