There are many active advocates & groups campaigning for light rail. In addition, there is also plenty of light rail supporters who see it as being the solution to every transport problem. The kind of propaganda like this gem from the Wyndham City Council (Werribee area in Victoria)’s report into building a tram network:

“3.6 Bus Alternative
It is acknowledged in the report that Melbournians have a preference for trams compared to
buses: tram lines show where services go, the frequency is higher than bus services, a faster
travel time when operated in their own right-of-way, longer hours of operation.“

What is so rediculous about many of these claims is that they are based on current levels of service provided, as opposed to the capabilities of vehicles. There’s no reason why that a bus cannot run as frequently or to the same operating hours of a tram!

Another argument also used is that passengers allegedly prefer light rail to buses, and therefore that light rail should be built as it will acheive higher patronage. I’m yet to find any credible evidence showing a tram having higher patronage than an equivelent bus service; in all Australian examples trams have replaced a much poorer bus service. For example, the route 732 bus that the Route 75 extension to Vermont South that previously covered the route only operated once every 20 minutes on weekdays with no services at all on Sundays, so it can’t be considered a surprise that the tram gets better ridership.

In any case, the funding available for public transport is limited. Money should be spent on providing the most appropriate mode for each service, not catering to people with an irrational dislike of one form of transport. I wouldn’t object to providing a light rail service to somewhere that buses could suffice for if the level of public subsidy & capital was no higher than for a bus service, but that is unlikely to be the case.

One of the sillier arguments often used in support of country passenger trains, is that people would prefer a train 1-3 times over a frequent a bus service, again never supplied with any proof.

What Light Rail is good for

I may come across as a bus fan based on this post and some of my stances on Railpage, but the truth is that I am far more of a rail enthusiast. In terms of transport planning, I would prefer for the most appropriate mode to be used, putting aside any personal interest in particular modes. Many railfans and some campaigners cannot separate their personal interests from transport planning.

I’d argue that the role of proper light rail is for where buses are not enough, but heavy rail is not justified or appropriate. A modern vehicle such as the C2 class (link to pic) used in Melbourne can carry more than 200 passengers (assuming that most stand), as opposed to a maximum of about 55 for a regular bus, or opposed to more traditional tram cars such as the Z and A classes in Melbourne which only have a seated capacity comparable to a normal bus.

Trams have made a resurgence in recent years in the form of light rail, using more modern vehicle styling (articulated etc), and mainly off-street running. Few ‘proper’ light rail services exist in Australia, the closest being the Metro Light Rail in Sydney, opened in the 1990s using a former railway’s reservation. This service claims to be the only non-subsidised public transport service in Sydney, although it most likely receives concession top-us from the NSW Government.

Adelaide will be getting a Karlsruhe-style arrangement on the inner section of the Outer Harbor Line in the next few years, with heavy rail trains and light rail trams sharing track. The line to Glenelg has been substantially upgraded over the last five years, with the H classes built in the 1920s replaced with modern Bombardier Flexity units, track re-laid and a new extension constructed from Victoria Square to City West. The latter was strongly opposed by some residents and the Adelaide Advertiser but has become a patronage successful and forms the start of future extensions to the NW suburbs.

Street Running

Several Australian cities previously had an extensive system of street tramways, with Sydney boasting one of the world’s largest. Melbourne has been the only city to keep it’s network, which has also been expanded to some destinations which are hardly “inner” suburbia – such as Routes 75 & 86.

There have been some proposals for entirely new street tramways in Melbourne to cure the issue of poor public transport, such as proposed in “The Peoples Plan”. In all of these instances, buses are indequete and can be improved without laying down a rail. Current bus services in Melbourne are generally rubbish (with the odd exception), but as stated previously in this post, that is a flaw of current services, not buses as a form of transport.

I would personally suggest that no new routes sharing right-of-way with cars (minus short sections of a route otherwise with a separate reservation) should not be constructed in any Australian cities, minus a few extensions of existing routes in Melbourne to more logical termini. Few benefits (and the disadvantage of inflexibility) are available over buses in most instances.

Street tramways should only be ever provided as an ‘electric bus’ for short local journeys, not as long-haul trunk services from outer suburbs to the CBD as is done with some Melbourne routes. Hence extending the route 86 tram to South Morang or route 48 to Doncaster would not be a substitute for rail extensions to either of these places. Longer routes would be best with a mid-point destination so that they serve as essentially two routes.

Where full-time clearways are sorely needed in Melbourne such as Sydney Rd (route 19), shop owners complain about the lack of on-street parking putting off customers, and they end up having the final say. That route is also quite long and is essentially serving as a long-haul route due to the extremely poor service level provided on the nearby heavy rail line to Upfield – an ideal solution would be for a metro-style rail service for longer trips, and the tram for local journeys as has been discussed on Phin’s blog previously.

Jist of this post

Heavy rail, light rail/tramways and buses each have useful roles in urban public transport, and no one mode is a solution to everything.