Transportation Planning Casebook/Liverpool Trackless Tram

The Liverpool Trackless Tram project is a part of the larger FAST (Fifteenth Avenue Smart Transit) design network. The main aim of this transit line is to provide fast and regular public transport from the Liverpool CBD to the new Western Sydney International Airport. The project is still under a planning phase with the Liverpool City Council collaborating with Curtin University to develop a driverless, rechargeable electric vehicle system which is guided by GPS. The transit system is planned to operate at a fraction of the cost of light rails and will link the Liverpool City Council to the airport in just 20 minutes. The trackless tram transit system is anticipated to open by 2026.

Trackless tram has distinctive benefits when compared to its nearest competitors, light rail and bus rapid system. A report by the Sustainable Built Environment, National Research Centre outlines the following advantages of trackless trams over other systems. These advantages were observed from the trials in Zhuzhou, China.
 * 1) Trackless trams have the benefit of rubber tyres. This means that elaborate tracks will not have to be laid as is the case with light rail systems. This will cause less disruption in installing trackless trams on any route. Furthermore, there will be limited disruption to adjacent businesses, housing and traffic during initial construction.
 * 2) TT is being planned to be driverless and will be guided by autonomous guidance systems. The trams will be using virtual railways from optical sensing systems based on GPS and LIDAR. Lines will be pained onto the road for drivers and pedestrians to see. Furthermore, the trams will be electric running on lithium ion batteries located on the roof which will be charged by solar power. This ensures minimum impact to the environment and reduces energy costs.
 * 3) The major benefit of trackless trams is the cost savings. Light rails require a heavy investment in constructing the stations and tracks. These costs are not required for trackless trams. For instance, the Sydney light rail $AUD246 million per kilometre and the light rail is predicted to cost $AUD4 million per kilometre.
 * 4) Trackless trams have the potential to provide more comfortable rides. This is partly due to its navigation system as the autonomous system makes it more precise allowing for smoother transition in docking through stations.

Key Points

 * 19 km corridor on the fifteenth avenue connecting Liverpool CBD to the new airport
 * 20–30 minutes trips to and from Liverpool CBD
 * Part of the FAST framework and the Aerotropolis plan
 * Trackless Trams for smoother, cost-effective and sustainable implementation
 * Intended to start operations in 2026.



Justification, need and cost of the service type
Liverpool City Council has yet to put forward a business case demonstrating feasibility and cost of the project. The costs to construct the infrastructure and operate the service are largely unknown with the only known trial service in Zhuzhou, China from 2018. This process is a determining factor to understand the true potential cost savings against conventional LRT systems that it is being compared against.

In Sydney, two recent light rail projects that costs could be compared to would be:
 * Sydney Light Rail project: Final cost $2.96 billion for 12 km of track length ($246M/km).
 * Parramatta Light Rail project: Estimated cost at $2.4 billion for 12 km of track length ($200M/km).

However, the above project costs reflect factors of repurposing land in built-up urban areas such as extensive utilities relocation as was seen with the Sydney Light Rail Project and enabling works to re-route traffic for the Parramatta Light Rail. The Liverpool Trackless Tram project would unlikely experience these complications and challenges being mostly a greenfield project. Therefore, any cost estimate at a per/km rate likely be much lower.

Perceived benefits of ride quality
The ride quality benefits of the service aren't necessarily unique. Ride quality is impacted by factors such as: Existing systems such as bus rapid transit could achieve the same outcome with the right adoption of technologies and bus priority with the right-of-way, such as electric buses within a T-way system designed with smoother gradients and curves.
 * Track gauge
 * Axle loads
 * Alignment geometry, smoother gradients and curves provide better ride quality
 * Pavement quality
 * Vehicle acceleration and deceleration (harsh braking)
 * Level of vehicle priority on right-of-way (such as traffic signals and congestion)
 * Driver training

Public transport network design
The vehicle type limits the service offering to origins and destinations along the specific corridor, reducing the ability for feeder services from other suburbs without the need to interchange. The policy issue that arises is whether the state transport agency would want bus-trackless tram transfers. An alternative would be one-seat services on a bus from many origins that converge on the corridor to move people to the airport.

Technology
The optical guidance and vehicle systems have been developed by the China Railway Construction Company (CRCC). This technology currently remains as proprietary and there are risks that arise when locked-in to a single supplier.

The technology still requires a driver with the optical guidance systems only to provide assistance to the driver in manoeuvring the vehicle in turning, acceleration and deceleration. As such, it cannot be classed as a fully autonomous service.

Narrative of the Case
As part of the City Deal commitment, Liverpool City Council’s goal for development of the FAST corridor to connect the Western Sydney International airport and (at least 70% of its future airport workers) to the Liverpool LGA (Local Government Area) is still in the planning stage. Operation of the corridor before 2026 is still in line with Liverpool City Council’s goals of improved connectivity for suburbs west of Liverpool LGA. Other than the trackless tram, a light rail and autonomous bus system are still considered as possible modes for the rapid transit corridor.

Opinions regarding the installation of a trackless tram for the FAST corridor are generally favourable because of the many benefits it provides. However, the stations for trackless trams will attract development (similar to LRT systems) and encourage urban regeneration. Potential for urban regeneration using trackless tram systems is being realised in Townsville, Hobart, Sydney, Geelong, Sunshine Coast, Perth, Brisbane, and Wyndham, Melbourne. The trackless tram system would also aid visitors and residents of Liverpool to navigate through the CBD. As Liverpool City Council continues its work on the FAST corridor, opportunities of how the Western Sydney Aerotropolis could be linked to the Liverpool CBD with a trackless tram system are being realised.

The trackless tram would provide the Liverpool City Council to reclaim spaces for shared mobility using rapid transit. Indeed, part of the FAST corridor project is the integration of the rapid transit service with an active transport (which includes walking, cycling and micro-mobility) infrastructure. However, this integration is subject to the upgrade of Hoxton Park Road. The Hoxton Park Road is a link between the Liverpool CBD and new airport currently undergoing the design stage. The section design chosen for the road (centre-running or side-running) will affect active transport infrastructure e.g. stop locations for along the FAST corridor and the design of public domain.

Discussion

 * 1) Would airport customers want to use this type of service? Why/why not?
 * 2) Could a “gold standard” bus rapid transit achieve the same outcomes? What differentiates this service from a BRT?
 * 3) Would this service be critical to the success of Western Sydney International Airport from the start? Why/why not?
 * 4) Would this specific service offering be necessary to catalyse development along the corridor? Could development occur regardless of this specific service type?
 * 5) What other ingredients would be required for Liverpool Council’s vision to be realised?
 * 1) Would this specific service offering be necessary to catalyse development along the corridor? Could development occur regardless of this specific service type?
 * 2) What other ingredients would be required for Liverpool Council’s vision to be realised?
 * 1) What other ingredients would be required for Liverpool Council’s vision to be realised?
 * 1) What other ingredients would be required for Liverpool Council’s vision to be realised?

Additional Readings
Fifteenth Avenue Smart Transit Corridor Design Framework. SJB (2020). This document outlines Liverpool City Council’s vision to deliver a place-led transit corridor between Liverpool city centre and the Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport (WSIA). URL: https://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/trim/documents?RecordNumber=057662.2020

Delivering Integrated Transit, Land Development and Finance – a Guide and Manual: with Application to Trackless Trams. Newman P., Mouritz M., Davies-Slate S., Jones E., Hargroves K., Sharma R. & Adams D. (2018). Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre (SBEnrc), Australia. This report shows how transit-land development integration has been happening around the world using funding and finance as the glue to deliver transit, such as a Trackless Tram, with a focus on the Australian context. URL: https://sbenrc.com.au/app/uploads/2018/10/TRACKLESS-TRAMS-MANUAL-GUIDE_email.pdf