Recommendations in a high- level UK report for new light rail projects are being carried out, writes Frank Allen
The UK's National Audit Office (NAO) published a report entitled "Improving public transport in England through light rail" last week.
Seven light rail projects have opened in England since 1980. These schemes have been promoted by municipal authorities and in most cases, designed, built, and operated by private consortiums. The NAO thought it timely to consider whether the schemes have delivered sustainable benefits at the expected cost and, secondly, what steps could be taken to overcome barriers to further development of light rail in the UK.
Not surprisingly, the NAO report received some attention in Ireland although some of the commentary seemed to be based more on people's prior opinion of Luas than a careful reading of the NAO report.
That's a pity as the report is very good and some of its recommendations are relevant for Dublin as we approach the launch of a passenger service on Luas.
British and Irish cities had extensive tramway systems in the early 20th century but with the growth in ownership of private cars, investment in tramways declined and eventually almost all the networks were closed. By contrast, in continental European countries, cities retained and modernised their tram networks and commuting by public transport has remained the norm.
The development of light rail in the UK since 1980 was prompted by unsustainable growth in private car use in urban areas and by the perceived success of light rail on the continent. French and German cities, in particular, see light rail as the backbone of their urban transit networks and believe that trams have contributed to regeneration in city centres and improved land use planning in suburbs.
In many cases, cities are building extensions to their light rail networks in response to high passenger numbers and massive public support.
New light rail schemes in UK cities such as Sheffield, Birmingham and Croydon are thought to have been less successful, so a comprehensive analysis of this phenomenon is welcome. The NAO review of Nottingham Light Rail is more limited as it did not open for passenger service until March. In the UK economists wait until a project is built and operating for a reasonable period before passing final judgment.
The NAO concludes that light rail has improved the quality and choice of public transport in the cities served but that the anticipated benefits had been overestimated or are not yet being exploited fully. Actual passenger numbers have fallen well short of forecasts in some schemes although, interestingly, passenger numbers in Manchester exceed expectations and phase 3 of that scheme is now planned.
In schemes that have been in place for a number of years, the NAO reported good achievement in key objectives such as frequent and reliable journeys; high levels of comfort and safety; and access for mobility-impaired. They went on to make recommendations for development of new schemes, which is the part of the report most relevant to Dublin.
A critical success factor in the attractiveness of light rail to passengers is the degree of integration with other modes of transport, particularly bus services. This includes physical integration at stops, through-ticketing and high-quality passenger information.
In this regard, the Railway Procurement Agency is working with the CIÉ Group companies and with private operators to achieve integration of light rail with other modes of transport. We are managing a separate project to introduce a smart card through-ticketing scheme for travel in the Greater Dublin Area by the end of 2005. More limited integration of services and ticketing will be in place on the launch of Luas services this summer.
The NAO also recommend complementary services such as park and ride and priority for light rail vehicles over road vehicles at key junctions.
Luas will offer some 2,000 park and ride spaces at locations on the two lines with pricing heavily in favour of Luas users. We are also working closely with Dublin City Council, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and South Dublin County Council to ensure that light rail is fully integrated in traffic lights for the Greater Dublin Area.
In considering how the cost of light rail could be reduced, the NAO looked at the difficulties associated with diverting utilities, which adds cost and time to all light rail projects.
They suggest that consideration should be given to not diverting the utilities at all, though this would almost inevitably result in frequent interruption to service later.
They question whether it is fair and reasonable for the light rail promoter to cover the cost of utility diversion, pointing out that in the UK 92.5 per cent of the cost is covered by the light rail promoter while in France, the full cost is borne by the utility companies. It is doubtful that the French approach would be acceptable in the UK or Ireland, but it certainly points to the difficulties in comparing the cost of developing light rail schemes across countries where such large components are included in one case and not in the other.
The NAO recognises that roll-out of new schemes is impeded by reliance on the taxpayer for the capital cost. It wonders why greater use has not been made of local authority powers to raise funds for light rail from the enhanced development potential of property benefiting from the scheme.
Irish planning law also provides for such funding and planning levies are in place to contribute to the cost of the proposed Luas extensions from Sandyford to Cherrywood and from Connolly to the Point Depot.
The Irish Times (April 24th) quoted economist Mr Colm McCarthy of DKM Consultants responding to the NAO report saying that "trams generally cost twice as much, take twice as long and carry half the numbers, and that this has been borne out be experience right across the world". Even allowing for a little hyperbole from a long-time Luas critic, the NAO report, or indeed any other serious analysis, does not support Mr McCarthy's statement.
The National Audit Office review of light rail in the UK calls for schemes to be based on realistic projections of cost and likely benefits. They recognise that light rail has been very successful in continental European cities and has the potential to be more successful in the UK.
Light rail works best where it offers a safe, reliable service, serves centres of social and economic activity and were it is well integrated with other modes of transport. We believe that Luas will do this for Dublin once the service is up and running.
Frank Allen is chief executive of the Railway Procurement Agency