infrastructure australia project submission · infrastructure australia project submission august...

City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor

Infrastructure Australia Project Submission

AuGusT 2012

City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor Infrastructure Australia Project submission i

ContentsExecutive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 51.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 5

1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 A Package Approach ........................................................................................................................ 6

2 About the Project ................................................................................................... 82.1 ProjectObjectives ............................................................................................................................ 8

2.2 Proposed Works ............................................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Transport, Land Use and Pricing Scenarios ...................................................................................... 9

3 Alignment with Government Objectives ................................................................ 153.1 AlignmentbetweenACTandCommonwealthGovernmentObjectives ...................................... 15

3.2 AlignmentwithNationBuildingProgram2 ................................................................................... 17

3.3 NationalCapitalPlan ...................................................................................................................... 17

3.4 ACTGovernmentObjectives .......................................................................................................... 18

4 ProblemIdentification,AssessmentandAnalysis ................................................. 194.1 IdentificationandAssessment ....................................................................................................... 19

4.2 Analysis........................................................................................................................................... 23

5 Assessment of Options ........................................................................................ 255.1 SummaryofOptions ...................................................................................................................... 25

5.3 Demand Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 26

6 Next Steps ........................................................................................................... 306.1 EstablishmentoftheGungahlintoCityProjectOffice .................................................................. 30

6.2 Feasibility and Forward Design Works ........................................................................................... 30

6.3 Funding Requirements ................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix A: Stages 1 – 6 ............................................................................................ 33Stage1–GoalDefinition .......................................................................................................................... 36

Stage2–ProblemIdentification .............................................................................................................. 38

Stage 3 – Problem Assessment ................................................................................................................. 39

Stage5–OptionGeneration .................................................................................................................... 50

Stage6–OptionAssessment ................................................................................................................... 54

Appendix B: Stage 7 Template ...................................................................................... 62AppraisalSummaryTable1:DemandandEconomicModellingAssumptions ....................................... 62

AppraisalSummaryTable2:MonetisedCostBenefitAnalysisResults ................................................... 77

AppraisalSummaryTable3:Benefit-CostRatioSensitivityTesting ......................................................... 85

AppraisalSummaryTable4:Non-MonetisedBenefitsandCosts ............................................................ 86

AppraisalSummaryTable5:InformationSources ................................................................................... 88

ACT Government Environment and sustainable Development Directorate ii

Costs,RisksandFunding ............................................................................................. 89Staging ....................................................................................................................................................... 89

Risk Management ..................................................................................................................................... 89

EnvironmentalRisks .................................................................................................................................. 97

NeedforGovernmentFunding ................................................................................................................. 98

NeedforCommonwealthGovernmentFunding ..................................................................................... 99

DeliveryStrategy ..................................................................................................................................... 100

GovernanceStrategy .............................................................................................................................. 101

Economic Appraisal Table: BRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario ..................................... 102

Economic Appraisal Table: LRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario ..................................... 104

Economic Appraisal Table: LRT under a Higher Density Land Use Scenario .......................................... 108

Footnotes .................................................................................................................... 110

City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor Infrastructure Australia Project submission 1

Executive Summary

Introduction

TheACTGovernmentisconstantlyworkingtowardssupportingamoresustainableCanberra,evidencedbyitscomplementaryACTPlanningStrategyandTransportforCanberrastrategythataresettingastrongframeworkfortheintegrationoftransportandlanduseplanningtodeliveramorecompactandsustainable city and Territory.

InitssubmissiontoInfrastructureAustraliain2011,theACTGovernmentoutlineditsintentionstoinvestigatethefeasibilityofdevelopingrapidtransitintheGungahlintoCitycorridor.TheGungahlintoCity Rapid Transit Corridor Project (the ‘Project’) was commissioned subsequently in late 2011 to assess the prospects of rapid transit.

AsadirectoutputoftheProject,anOutlineBusinessCasewaspreparedfortheACTGovernmentforitsconsiderationinApril2012.Subsequentupdatestothedesign,costsanddemandhavebeenmade,theresults of which are presented in this submission.

About the ProjectThissubmissionseeks$15millioninfundingfromtheNationBuildingProgram2fortheforwarddesign and planning of the City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor. Forward design and planning will include: furtherdemandmodellingandeconomicassessment(includingtriplebottomlineanalyses);feasibilityandpreliminarydesignofDicksonstation,GungahlinterminusandCityconnections;designoftransitorienteddevelopmentoptionsincludingapublictransportnetworkreview;avehicleoptionsfeasibilitystudy;andinfrastructurefeasibilityanddesignwork.

The City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor is a 12.5km rapid transit link between Gungahlin, Canberra’s fastestgrowingdistrict,andtheCity.ThecorridorcomprisesFlemingtonRoadandthenationallysignificantNorthbourneAvenue,andistheprimarytransportcorridorconnectingCanberra’sgrowingnorthern suburbs with the City and the South.

TheGovernmenthasconsideredtheeconomicoutcomesofinvestingineitherbusrapidtransit(BRT)orlightrailtransit(LRT)underabusinessasusuallandusesettingandagainsthigherpopulationandemploymentdensitiesintheProjectCorridor.

ThisProjectgoesbeyondsimplyprovidingatransportbasedsolutiontoatransportproblem.WhileaninvestmentinrapidtransitinfrastructureisacornerstoneofproposedinterventionswithintheProjectCorridor,theProjectfirmlyintegratestransportandlanduseasameanstodriveinvestmentinamorecompact, sustainable Canberra.

Key IssuesThelowresidentialdensitiesandthedispersednatureofactivitycentresandemploymentinCanberradolittletoimprovetheproductivityoftheCanberraeconomy,reducecardependency,sustainpublictransportoperationsorreducegreenhousegasemissions.TheseproblemswillbemagnifiedbyfuturepopulationgrowththatisanticipatedwithintheProjectCorridor.

Growingpopulation: The Gungahlin to City Corridor connects Canberra’s fastest growing district, GungahlinwiththeCityandtheParliamentaryTriangle,Canberra’sfocalpointsforcivicandemploymentactivities.Overthepastdecade,populationlevelswithintheGungahlindistrictgrewatanaveragerateof6.8%perannum.PopulationlevelsinGungahlinunderabusinessasusualcaseareprojectedtocomeclosetodoublingby2031,compoundingcurrentcongestion,socialexclusionandhousingaffordabilityconcernsunderabusinessasusualscenario.

ACT Government Environment and sustainable Development Directorate 2

Growingcongestion:ThekeyroadsformingtheProjectCorridor-FlemingtonRoadandNorthbourneAvenue-arefastapproachingcapacity.AlthoughcapacityonalternativeroutesincludingGungahlinDriveandMajuraParkwaycouldbeexpanded,theseroutesdonotdirectlyservetheCityandtherearefewoptionstoincreaseroadcapacityoutsideofcurrentroadcorridors.

Withoutintervention,futuregrowthwithintheProjectCorridorwillservetoleadtoafurtherdeclineinroadspeeds,increasingtraveltimeimpedingaccesstoemployment,communityfacilities,socialandrecreationalactivities.

Impacts on the broader bus network:Asakeybuscorridor,thedegradationoftravelspeedsalongtheProjectCorridoralsoimpactonthespeed,efficiencyandreliabilityofcross-regionalbusservicesoperatingbeyondtheProjectCorridor,impactingonpassengersacrosstheNorthaswellasthosetravellingtoandfromtheCentralNationalAreaandParliamentaryTriangle.

Unsustainabledevelopmentpatterns:Fromaninternationalstandpoint,Australiancitypopulationdensitiesarelowerthanthatoftheirglobalcounterparts–evenmoresoforCanberra.Lowdensitiesareincreasingcardependency,placingupwardpressureonpercapitacostsforprovidingpublictransportandcommunityservicesoverlargerareasandraisingsocialexclusionandserviceaccessissues.

The Project’s PotentialInvestmentinrapidtransitalongtheProjectCorridorhasthepotentialtounlockanumberofeconomicdevelopmentopportunities:

Increasingthetransportcapacityofexistingcorridors:Therearefewoptionstoincreasecapacityoutsideofexistingroadcorridors.Duringpeakperiods,existingbusservicesoperatingalongNorthbourneAvenuecarrymorepassengersthanallcarscombined.Aninvestmentinrapidtransitalongtheexistingcorridorwillsignificantlyincreaseitscarryingcapacity,providevitalcapacitytocaterforfuturegrowthandoptimisetheuseofexistingassets.

Promotingeconomicproductivity:AnumberofopportunitieshavealreadybeenidentifiedbytheACTGovernmenttoincreaseresidentialandcommercialdensitiesonsignificantlyunderdevelopedsitesalongtheProjectCorridor.Theseincludepublichousingredevelopments,aredevelopmentoftheDicksonGroupCentreandthepotentialredevelopmentoflandcurrentlyoccupiedbytheexhibitioncentreandCanberraRacecourse. As a key landowner and land manager under the Territory’s leasehold system, a unique opportunityexistsfortheACTGovernmenttoencourageurbanrenewalwithintheProjectCorridor,bothdirectlyandindirectly.Providingadditionaltransportcapacityisasignificantenableroffurtherdevelopmentof,andinvestmentin,thesesites,maximisingexistinglandcapacitywithintheProjectCorridor.

Promotinggreatersustainability:AspartoftheProject,theACTGovernmentwillactivelysupportincreasingdensityandastrongmixofactivitiesalongtheProjectCorridortoencouragelocalisedtravelandtrips,whichcouldbeservicedbytherapidtransportsystem.Whereinter-towntravelisrequiredtoconnectwithemploymenthubs,fasterandmorereliablepublictransportservices,facilitatedbyeitherBRT or LRT, will encourage a greater use of public transport.

Part of a broader network: TheProjectCorridoristhebackboneoftheGovernment’s2031StrategicPublic Transport Plan Network that establishes the future public transport network for Canberra. This networkwilldeployRapidandFrequentbusservicesthatwillsignificantlyenhanceservicefrequenciesandlegibilityofpublictransportservices.Thenetworkandcross-regionalservicesmeetingwiththeProject Corridor will originate as far out from Tuggeranong, Fyshwick, Queanbeyan and Molonglo Valley. Whenrealisedinfull,corridorsthatcombineurbanrenewal,redevelopmentsandtransportinvestmentwillbeextendedtoothercorridorssuchasConstitutionAvenueandCommonwealthAvenue.

Supportscross-governmentcity-buildinginitiatives: The Project will support other work being undertakenjointlywiththeCommonwealthGovernment,includinga$42mcommitmenttoredevelopingConstitutionAvenueand$500,000fortheRealisingtheCapitalinaCitymasterplanthatwillfocusonplanningalongCommonwealthAvenue.


A2

Both projects propose new dedicated bus infrastructure, cycle paths and urban amenity treatments to facilitatefutureurbanredevelopment.SimilarmeasuresareproposedalongtheProjectCorridor.

Economicallyefficient:Preliminarycost-benefitanalysesundertakensuggestthat,despitethehighercostofdelivery,rapidtransithasthepotentialtobeeconomicallyviable.RapidtransitmaystillbeviableevenwithoutlanduseandpricingmeasuresbutthesecomplementarymeasuressignificantlyenhancetheprojectedlevelofeconomicreturnsandincreasethelikelihoodoftheProjectachievingitseconomic,socialandenvironmentalaims.

The ACT Government’s commitmentTheACTGovernmentiscommittedtothecontinueddevelopmentoftheProject.Aspartofthe2012–13ACTBudget,theACTGovernmentestablishedtheGungahlintoCityProjectOffice.TheProjectOfficewillensurethattransport,landuseandpublichousingplanninganddevelopmentsareconsideredandimplementedinanintegratedmannerandwillcontinuetomovetheProjecttowardsamoredetailedFeasibility and Forward Design stage.

TherearemanyissuesincludingcostandfinancingthatneedtobeconsideredbytheACTGovernmentand the community before determining which mode is preferred and what circumstances that an investmentmaybemade.Theplanningandfeasibilityworkthatwillbecarriedoutunderagreedfunding from Infrastructure Australia is required for, and will support, either mode.

CommunityconsultationundertakenaspartoftheProjectindicatedastrongcommunitypreferenceforlightrailgivenitsaestheticsaswellasitsgreaterpotentialtofacilitatesignificantmodeshift.TheProjectalsoconsideredbusrapidtransitasitmaydeliveramorecost-effectiveoutcome.Furtherfeasibilityworkhasbeenidentifiedtoinformthesedecisions.

Preliminaryeconomicassessmentsindicatethatundertherightcircumstances,investmentinrapidtransithasthepotentialtobeeconomicallybeneficial.Onthisbasis,thissubmissionproposesthattheCitytoGungahlinTransitCorridorProjectbeconsideredasaprojectwith‘RealPotential’byInfrastructureAustraliaandforfundingfromtheCommonwealthGovernmentona50:50basistoprogress the Project to the detailed Feasibility and Forward Design stage.


1 Introduction

1.1 PurposeTheACTGovernmentisconstantlylookingforwaystoachieveTerritoryandnationalgoalswhich,amongst other things, include encouraging more people to use public transport. Greater public transportusagepotentiallyreducescongestiononroads.Inturn,lowerlevelsofcongestioncanhaveapositiveimpactonaneconomy’sproductivityandcapacity,promotecompetitionandleadtosustainableurbandevelopment.

TheGungahlintoCityCorridor(the‘ProjectCorridor’)hasbeenprioritisedbytheACTGovernmentforrapidtransitinvestment.TheProjectCorridoristheprimarytransportcorridorthatconnectsCanberra’snorthern suburbs with the City and the South, and accordingly is an integral part of the Transport for Canberra’s 2031 Frequent Network.

ServingasCanberra’sfastestgrowingcorridor,theProjectCorridoralreadyexperiencessignificantcongestionissuesduringpeakperiodswhichimpactsadverselyoncarandbustravel.Thissubmissionoutlinestheeconomicpotentialofapackageofmeasuresprimarilyfocusedoninvestmentinrapidtransit with complementary land use and pricing measures to remediate current transport issues that impedetheefficientoperationoftransportandimprovesustainabilityandexpandcapacitytocaterforfuture growth along the Corridor.

Based on the recent feasibility work, this submission proposes that the City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor Project be considered as a project with ‘Real Potential’ and for funding from the CommonwealthGovernmentona50:50basistoprogresstheProjecttoamoredetailedFeasibilityandForward Design stage.

1.2 BackgroundAtitsinception,CanberrawasplannedasapolycentriccitywiththeParliamentaryTriangleandtheCityservingasthecity’sciviccentrewithprovisionfortowncentresatBelconnen,TuggeranongandWoden,GungahlinandWestonCreekastimeprogressed.Parkwaysandrapidtransitlinkswereintendedtobebuilt between each town centre and the City.

WhilsttheparkwaysareingrainedintotheshapeofCanberra,theaspirationofdevelopingtheenvisagedrapidtransitlinkcontinuestothisday.Thissubmissionrepresentsacontemporaryviewoftheviabilityofrapidtransit,buildingonthefindingsofmanystudiesthathavebeenundertakentodateboth within the Corridor and across Canberra.

InitssubmissiontoInfrastructureAustraliain2011,theACTGovernmentoutlineditsintentionstoinvestigatethefeasibilityofdevelopingrapidtransitintheGungahlintoCitycorridor.TheGungahlintoCity Rapid Transit Corridor Project (the ‘Project’) was commissioned subsequently in late 2011 to assess the prospects of rapid transit. As a direct output of the Project, an Outline Business Case was presented totheACTGovernmentforitsconsiderationinApril2012.

UnderliningitscommitmenttodevelopingtheProjectCorridor,theACTGovernmentannouncedinits2012-13Budgettheestablishmentofadedicatedagency,theGungahlintoCityProjectOffice,tofocusonintegratingtheGovernment’spositionontransport,publichousingandlandusepoliciesanddevelopmentswithintheProjectCorridor.

Figure1outlinesthestepsundertakenbytheACTGovernmenttodevelopthematerialtoinformoursubmission to Infrastructure Australia.


Figure 1: Current Project Status

PreviousStudies

Gungahlin to City Rapid Transit Corridor Study

ACTGovernmentOutlineBusiness Case (April 2012)

Establishment of the Gungahlin toCityProjectOffice(June2012)

Submission to Infrastructure Australia (August 2012)

Thissubmissionrepresentsthenextstepinthedevelopmentoftherapidtransitconcept.ThissubmissionbroadlyreflectsthefindingsoftheOutlineBusinessCase,whichidentifiedtheneedforfurtherrefinementstobeundertakenonthedesignoftheschemeandassociatedcostingsandtoadvancethedemandmodelling.Theeconomicbenefitsandcostspresentedinthissubmissionreflectthoserefinements.

1.3 APackageApproachThissubmissiongoesbeyondsimplyprovidingatransportbasedsolutioninanattempttosolveatransport related problem. This submission presents an assessment of packages, whereby transport based measures are combined with complementary land use measures and parking pricing measures. Table 1 details the scope of each measure:

Table 1: Package Components by Measure

Transport Measures

Forthepurposesofthisstudy,transportmeasuresaredifferentiatedonlybytwoformsofrapidtransit – bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail transit (LRT).

AsacomplementtoinvestmentsineitherBRTorLRT,designandcostingsalsoallowforimprovementsinpedestrianandcyclewaypathsthatwillenhancelocalaccessibilityandimprovepublic transport accessibility.

Land Use Measures

LandusemeasuresareprimarilyaimedatinvestigatinghowincreasesinresidentialandcommercialdensitieswithintheProjectCorridorwouldassistinnotonlyincreasingpublictransportpatronagebutalsoplacingdownwardpressureonprivatevehicletravel.Incombinationwithtransportmeasures,changesinlanduseprovideaperspectiveontheoftenneglectedlinkbetweenthetwomeasuresandhighlightingtheimportanceofpolicysettingsanditscontributiontoasustainablelong-termoutcome.

Parking Charge Measures

Parkingchargemeasuresrepresentathirdbutimportantprongtobettermanagedemandandensurethatallbeneficiaries,notjustpublictransportusers,contributetothedevelopmentofadditional(public)transportcapacityandtheimprovedoutcomessuchaninvestmentmaybringto both public transport and car users.

Byconsideringtransportinvestment,changesinlanduseandincreasedparkingcharges,therapidtransitoptionsconsideredinthissubmissionpotentiallyprovideanationalshowcasefortransitorientedlandusechanges,withstrongpotentialtofacilitateurbanrenewalintheresidentialandcommercialmarkets along the Corridor.

AlthoughitistypicalofproponentstopresentapreferredoptiontoInfrastructureAustralia,four‘do-something’optionsarepresentedtoInfrastructureAustralia.Thereexistscleartrade-offsbetweenthelevelofcapitalcost,levelofserviceandamenityandthewillingnessofCanberrans,whetherthroughtaxesorusercharges.Giventhesizeofthetrade-offs,furtherinvestigation,thepartialfundingofwhichisthesubjectofthissubmission,toinformthecommunityandstakeholdersofthistrade-off,isdeemedwarrantedbeforefurtherfilteringisundertaken.


Itispertinenttonotethattheurbanrenewalandtransit-orientateddevelopmentparadigmsrunparalleltotheintentionsofthisProject.Authoritiesworldwideareseekingtodeliverimprovedcommunityoutcomesatalocallevelwhilstprovidingtransportconnectivitybyconsolidatingandco-locatingdifferentactivitiesindistinctlocationsandcorridors.Theactivationoftheseconceptsrequiresaproactiveandintegratedapproachbyauthoritiesthatappropriatelymixinvestmentwithpolicymeasurestoachievewelfareoutcomesbeyondthereturnsthatcanbeachievedthroughinvestmentalone.

Apackagedapproachcanmakemoreeffectiveuseofavailableland,supporteconomicdiversityanddevelopment,andimprovesocialequityandliveability,allofwhichresonatecloselywithInfrastructureAustralia’sstrategicgoalstopromotethesustainabledevelopmentofAustraliancitiesandregions.

However,thereexistsapragmaticrationale:theACTGovernmentrecognisesthatarapidtransitinvestmentanditsbenefitsinCanberrasimplycannotmaterialisewithoutarealisticconsiderationtohowitcouldbefundedandhowitmightcontributetothesustainabledevelopmentofthecity.

Acommonthreadthroughpreviousstudiessuggestsatransportonlyapproachresultsinaconundrum.Smallerscaleinterventionslikebuslanesarelikelytodeliverminimalchangesinsustainability.OntheotherhandrapidtransitmaybeeconomicallybeneficialbutgiventhecostandthesmallsizeoftheACTGovernment’sbudget,cannotbefundedjustbytaxpayers.Acohesive,packagedapproachwherebyhigherdensitiescontributetohigherpublictransportdemandandamajorityoffundingisdrawnfrombeneficiaries,istheonlyrealisticmeansbywhichlargescaletransportprojectshaveachanceofbeingdelivered.

ThisOverviewDocumentprovidesasummaryoftheInfrastructureAustraliasubmission.Thesubmissionoutlines,atapre-feasibilitylevel,thepotentialeconomicoutcomesthatmayarisefromanapproachtoinvestinrapidtransitwithcomplementarylanduseandpricinginterventions.


2 About the Project

2.1 Project ObjectivesThe Project seeks to assess the feasibility of a rapid transit corridor between Gungahlin and the City along FlemingtonRoadandNorthbourneAvenueusingeitherBRT or LRT technologies. It also assesses the impact ofhigherpopulationandemploymentdensities,andhigherparkingchargesontheviabilityofrapidtransitservicesoperatingalongtheProjectCorridor.

TheproposedworksaimtoachievetheProject’sgoals, which include:

• Providegreaterconnectivityandcapacitybetween future growth centres and the City

• Encourage greater use of more sustainable transport modes, such as public transport and activetransport.

• Encouragefurthereconomicdevelopmentwithinthe Gungahlin to CBD corridor.

ThesegoalsweresubsequentlyexpandedintosevenobjectivestoallowforcloseralignmenttoInfrastructureAustralia’s(IA)sevenstrategicgoals:

• Delivering transport capacity by increasing public transport capacity and speeds along theProjectCorridortoservicefastgrowingpopulationlevelsandeconomicactivity

• Supporting Canberra’s corebyimprovingaccessibilityandinturnsupportingCanberra’sroleasthenation’scapitalandpre-eminentfederalpoliticalandadministrativecentre

• Supporting economic diversity and development bypromotinganincreaseinthelevelanddiversityofeconomicactivitybyincreasingthemixandnumberofresidentsandemployment

• Improving equity and liveabilitybyenhancingaccesstokeycentresandcommunityfacilitiesandpromotingabroaderdiversityofhousingandimprovinghomeaffordability

• Maintaining and improving the amenitybyreinforcingthedesignofNorthbourneAvenueconsistentwithBurleyGriffin’soriginalintentionastheprimaryNationalGateway

• Managing road congestionbyincreasingtheattractivenessofnon-carmodestoreducelevelsofcardependencybyprovidinghighqualitypublicandactivetransportinfrastructure

• Creating an environmentally friendly transport systemaimedatreducinglevelsofgreenhousegasemissions,airandnoisepollutionbyreducinglevelsofcardependenceandincreasingthelevelofpublicandactivetransportusage.


2.2 ProposedWorksTheProjectproposesthefollowingcapitalworkswithintheProjectCorridortoachievetheaforementionedobjectives:

• ThedevelopmentofasegregatedrapidtransitcorridorbetweenCityandGungahlinseparatedfromgeneraltraffic

• Supportingoff-roadinfrastructureintheformofbusstationsatCity,DicksonandGungahlintofacilitateinterchangingwiththeexistingACTIONbusnetwork

• WithLRT,LRTspecificinfrastructureincludingrollingstock,signalling,powersupply,substationsanddepots

• Aseparatedoff-roadcyclewayandfootpathsalongthelengthoftheProjectCorridortofacilitateaccessandegressfromthecorridorandtoencouragehigherlevelsofactivetransport.

TheProjectalsoconsiderstheeffectofhigherratesofpopulationandemploymentgrowth,andparkingchargesbasedonlandusepolicysettingswithintheProjectCorridoron:

• Numberofhighdensity,mixeduseresidentialandcommercialdevelopmentsalongNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad

• Encouragegreaterretailandcommercialfrontagesadjacenttothekerbsideinappropriatelocations• Increasing parking charges to encourage public transport use and to ensure that the costs of the Project

aresharedbyallbeneficiaries.

2.3 Transport,LandUseandPricingScenariosTheProjectproposesmorethanjustaninvestmentinpublictransportinfrastructure.AspartoftheProject,arangeofcomplementarypolicymeasuresintheformofmaximisingcurrentlandusepoliciesandtakeupandhigherparkingpricinghavebeenconsideredtocomplementtheproposedtransportinvestmentwhichareaimedatmaximisingtheeconomicandfinancialreturnsoninvestment.

Acomprehensiveapproachthatintegratestransportinvestment,landusechangesandpricingisproposedasapragmaticapproachtoaddresstheACTGovernment’sobjectivestoimproveeconomic,financial,environmentalandsocialsustainability.

Accordingly,anumberoftransport,landuseandpricingscenariosweredevelopedandtestedwitheachother.ScenariosconsideredeitherBRTorLRTagainstabusinessasusualbusbasedsystem,maximisedtakeupofresidentialandcommerciallandwithintheProjectCorridor,andhigherparkingchargestoincentiviseashifttopublicandactivetransportandtoensurethatallbeneficiariescontributetothefunding of transport infrastructure.

Thefinaliterationofscenariodevelopmentprocessfilteredallbutthreetransportscenarios,twolandusescenariosandaparkingchargescenario,whichhavebeenassessedinmoredetailandformthebasis of the analysis for the current submission. These scenarios are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2: Shortlisted Scenarios

Transport Land Use Parking Charges

• Business as usual

• BRT

• LRT


• Higher density

• Increased parking charges in the City as well as other designated Town Centres


Transport ScenariosBusiness as UsualThe‘businessasusual’transportscenarioassumesthat,apartfromcommittedroadandpublictransportinitiatives,includingthegradualimplementationofthe2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan, no further changes to the network are proposed.

ImprovementsinpublictransportwillstillbemadeacrossCanberraunderthebusinessasusualcasealthoughnosignificantchangesareproposedalongtheProjectCorridor.Thebusinessasusualscenarioisbasedonthe2031StrategicPublicTransportPlan,thecornerstoneofwhichwillbetheintroductionofhighfrequencyservicesprovidedalongtheidentifiedFrequentandRapidcorridors.Underthisscenario,thecurrentlimitedstopRedRapidservicethattravelsbetweenGungahlinandFyshwickviatheCitywillcontinuetobetheprimarypublictransportlinkbetweenGungahlinandtheCity.

WhiletheStrategicPublicTransportPlanwillbringaboutabetterleveloflegibilitytothepublictransportnetwork,itshouldbenotedthatbusserviceswouldcontinuetoshareroadspacewithgeneraltrafficalongtheProjectCorridor,whichisexpectedtobecomeincreasinglycongestedovertime.Figure2depictstheexistingalignmentsoftheProjectCorridorunderthebusinessasusualtransportscenario.

Figure 2: Business As Usual Northbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS

Bus Rapid TransitUnlikeconventionalbusservices,BRTsystemstypicallyoperateondedicatedlanesandcorridors,separatedfromotherformsofroadtraffic.TheSouthEastBuswayinBrisbaneisanexampleofaBRTsystem (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: South East Busway in Brisbane


Theseparationofservicesfromgeneraltrafficallowsforhighertravelsspeeds,improvedservicereliabilityandincreasedfrequenciesrelativetoconventionalbusservices.BRTsystemsalsoallowoperationstobeintegratedwithabroaderbusnetworkbyconnectingBRTserviceswithfeederservicesorallowingconventionalbusroutesuseaportionoftheBRTcorridor.

UndertheBRTscenario,newbuslaneswouldbeconstructedinthemedianalongNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad.Inaddition,busbayswouldbeconstructedalongtheCorridortoallowlimitedorexpressservicestobypassotherstoppingbusservices.Itisintendedthatconventionalbusserviceswould also be able to make use of these dedicated bus lanes. Figure 4 depicts the design and alignment ofNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoadunderthisscenario.

Figure 4: Project Corridor Cross Section under BRTNorthbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS

NewstationswouldbeconstructedatGungahlin,DicksonandCivictofacilitateinterchangingwiththeexistingACTIONbusservices.Thecorridorwouldallowfor15stopsbetweenGungahlinandCivicandbeintegratedwiththeexistingNo.200route(knownasRedRapid)fromthereonwards.Itisexpectedthatthisservicewilloperateatfiveminuteintervalsduringpeakperiods.

Forplanningpurposes,constructionisassumedtotakethreeyearsafterthecompletionofforwarddesign and procurement.

Light Rail TransitLRTisanalternativeformofrapidtransit.Ittypicallyhasalowercapacityandspeedthanthatofconventionalheavyrailandmetrorailservicesbuthighercapacityandspeedoftraditionalstreet-runningtramservicesaswellasconventionalbusservices.ThemainbenefitofanLRTsystemisthatitprovideshigherlevelsofamenity,travelspeed,reliabilityandcapacitycomparedtoconventionalbusandtramserviceswithinanurbanenvironmentwithoutthehighcostsassociatedwithconventionalheavyrailsystems.


Thishigherlevelofserviceisachievedbythroughtheuseofdedicatedrailcorridorsseparatedfromothervehiclestraffic,whilestillbeingabletorunon-streettoprovideimprovedaccessibilitythroughmajoractivitycentres.AkeyfeatureofLRTsystemsistheabilitytointegrateLRTinfrastructureandoperationswithinanexistingurbanenvironment,allowingforthepossibilityofpromotingfurtherurbandevelopment.Figure5andFigure6illustrateLRTinAdelaiderunningonbothdedicatedtrackaswellason-street.

Figure 5: Adelaide Metro Light Rail Service Running on Dedicated Track

Figure 6: Adelaide Metro Light Rail Service Running On-Street in Glenelg

The LRT scenario would be based on a similar treatment used with BRT in that the light rail corridor wouldbebuiltinthemedianalongNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad.LightrailtrackswouldbeembeddedintotheroadsurfacealongNorthbourneAvenuetoallowforthesharingbetweenlightrailandbuses.AlongFlemingtonRoad,onlylightrailserviceswouldoperateinthemediantomaximisetherunningspeedoflightrailservices.Figure7depictsthedesignandalignmentofNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoadunderthisscenario.

Figure 7: Project Corridor Cross Section under LRTNorthbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS


NewstationsatGungahlin,DicksonandCivicwouldbedevelopedtosupportinterchangeswithconventionalbusservices.ThenewlightrailservicewouldreplacetheexistingRedRapidservicebetweenGungahlinandCivicandbeintegratedwiththeremainingRedRapidroutefromthereonwards.Itisexpectedtooperateatsevenandhalfminuteheadwaysduringpeakperiods.

Aspartofthisoption,supportingoperatinginfrastructurewouldbedevelopedincludingrollingstock,signalling,powersupply,substationsanddepots.Forplanningpurposes,constructionisassumedtotakethreeyearsafterthecompletionofforwarddesignandprocurement.

Land Use ScenariosShouldtheinvestmentsintransportinfrastructurebesufficientlyattractivetopotentialusers,theinvestmentsthemselvescouldgeneratechangesinlanduse.TheProjectislikelytoimproveaccessibilitythroughreducedtraveltimes,decongestionandimprovedtraveltimereliability.Inturn,improvementsinaccessibilitymaydrivelandusechanges.Peopleandindustriesmaychoosetomovethelocationoftheirresidence,employment,businesscentresandaltertheirlogisticschainstotakeadvantageoffastertraveltimesandimprovedaccessibility.Accordingly,transportinvestments,inparticularlightrailinvestments,mayresultinredevelopmentaroundstations.

Alternatively,evenwithoutsignificantchangestoexistingplanningcontrols,theProjectCorridorhasanumberofpropertiesthatcouldberedevelopedtosupporturbandensification.Forinstance,theACTGovernmentownsthemotorregistryandtouristinformationsiteatDicksonaswellaspublichousingcomplexesalongNorthbourneAvenue.TheeventualredevelopmentofwhichwouldfallwithintheremitofthenewlyestablishedGungahlintoCityProjectOffice.

TheintertwinednatureoftheissuesfacingtheProjectCorridormeanthatanintegratedtransport-landuseapproachislikelytooptimisetheeconomicoutcomesofinvestmentsintheProjectCorridor.Twolandusescenariosweredevelopedtoreflectpossibleurbanoutcomesfromgovernmentintervention,whetherthroughinvestmentintransportorthroughchangesinlandusescenarios–a‘businessasusual’ outcome or a higher density scenario.

Business as UsualThe‘businessasusual’landusescenarioisbasedoncurrentACTGovernmentpopulationandemploymentprojections,whichareusedforwholeofgovernmentdecisions.CurrentGovernmentprojectionsassumethatthecombinedACT–Queanbeyanpopulationwouldexceed500,000peopleby2031.QueanbeyanpopulationisincludedbecausethetransportnetworkmodelincludesQueanbeyan.

Tocaterforfuturepopulationgrowth,historicdevelopmentpatterns(mainly‘greenfield’developmentinthedistrictsofMolonglo,OuterGungahlinandQueanbeyan)wouldcontinueintothefuture.Underthisscenariothereisnosignificantchangetolandusepoliciesandplanningcontrolsinthestudyarea.

Higher DensityThehigherdensitylandusescenarioassumeshigherresidentialandcommercialdensitiesthroughafasterrealisationoftheProjectCorridor’sdevelopmentpotentialwithoutchangestoexistinglandusecontrols or policies in the Territory Plan. The urban outcomes implied by the scenario may arise through amarketresponsetotransportinvestment,aswellasthroughadjustmentsinlandusesettings,urbanrenewalprogramsorthroughacombinationofthesefactors.

The scenario allows for recent amendments in planning controls for: Dickson, Gungahlin Town Centre, InnerNorthurbanhousingandCityarea(ANUExchangeandGriffinLegacy).Underthehigherdensityscenario,populationandemploymentlevelswouldbe38%and21%higherthanunderthebusinessasusual land use scenario within the Project Corridor by 2031.

TheHigherDensitylandusescenarioassumesthattotalACT-Queanbeyanpopulationandemploymentlevelsremaininlinewiththatofthe‘businessasusual’landusescenarioforconsistency.Accordingly,higherdensitieswithintheProjectCorridorarebasedonaslowerreleaseofgreenfieldlanddevelopments.


Increased Parking ChargesTransportinfrastructuredevelopmentshouldnotonlybeconcernedwiththeprovisionofcapacitybutalsoeffectivemanagementoftransportdemand.

CanberrahasthelowestparkingratesamongstAustraliancapitalcities.ColliersInternationalestimatedthatdailyratesinCanberraat$10.Bycomparison,theaveragerateacrossAustraliancitieswas$39perdaywithSydneyandMelbournehavingthehighestratesat$64and$66respectively1. Low parking fees encouragesprivatevehicleuse,whichimposesarangeofcostsonsocietyandinfrastructure.

Theuseofparkingchargesisonerealisticleverthatwasconsideredtoincentiviseagreateruseofpublictransport.Arevisioninparkingratescouldprovidethefollowingoutcomes:

• EncourageagreateruseofpublicandactivetransportalongtheProjectCorridor

• EnsurethatallbeneficiariescontributetothecostoftheProject• SecureanadditionalfundingsourcefortheProject

ProvidinghigherparkingfeesarecapturedbytheACTGovernmentandhypothecatedtowardsimprovingtransport,thereexistsopportunitiesforpositivedialoguetodiscussthepotentialforabroaderbasedapproachtofundingrapidtransit.Forinstance,thecommunityconsultationprocessfortheACTGovernment’sTimetoTalkCanberra2030revealedthatCanberra’sresidentswerereasonablywellinformedwithrespecttotheneedforwiderpublictransportoptionsandthetrade-offsrequiredtodelivertheseoptions.Surveyparticipantsdiscussedtrade-offstheywouldbewillingtoacceptincludingtheincreaseofparkingchargestomoderateprivatevehicleuse2.


3 Alignment with Government Objectives

3.1 Alignment between ACT and Commonwealth Government ObjectivesThedevelopmentoftheProjecthasgivendueconsiderationtohowtheProjectalignsnotonlywithACTGovernmentstrategicconcernsbutalsohowtheProjectalignswiththeobjectivesofthenation.TheACTGovernmentbelievesthatthereisastrongandsignificantalignmentbetweentheProjectandanumberofobjectives,principlesandstrategiesputforwardbythefollowingnationalandterritorypolicies:

Ofnote,theProjectalignswellwithanumberofInfrastructureAustralia’sStrategicPriorities.ThesesevenStrategicPrioritiesconcernthemselveswith:

• TheexpansionandincreaseofAustralia’sproductivity

• DiversificationofAustralia’seconomiccapabilitiesandthedevelopmentofcitiesandregionstobuildonthenation’sglobalcompetitiveadvantage

• Improvementofsocialequityandqualityofoutcomes,includingthereductionofgreenhouseemissions.

TheseStrategicPrioritiesultimatelyinformedtheneedforstrategiestoencouragebetterplanningandgovernance,andreducingthemultiplicityofrulesandregulationsfromadecisionandpolicymakingperspective.Italsoinformedtheneedtoenhanceinternationaltradethroughimprovingexportcapacityandreducingthelossofproductivityincapitalcitiesduetoageingtransportnetworks.


Table3demonstratesthelinkagesbetweentheobjectivesdefinedfortheProjectwithTerritoryandCommonwealthGovernmentobjectives.

Table 3: Alignment of Project, Territory and National Objectives

IA Objective Territory Objective Project Objective

Expand Australia’s productive capacity

Managing growth responsibly and sustainably by taking a regional approachtourbansettlementaspartofthe ACT Planning Strategy.

Delivering transport capacity TheProjectaimstoincreasestravelspeeds,reliabilityandfrequencyofpublictransportservicesalongtheProjectCorridor,ultimatelyaimedatprovidingcapacityforgrowingactivitycentresandcaterforpopulationgrowth.

Increase Australia’s productivity

ACT’s Planning Strategy aims to improvepeople’smobilityandcreatingmorechoicesintravelbyintegratinginvestmentinCanberra’stransportnetworkswiththelanduseitservicestoenhanceproductivityonexistingassets.

Managing road congestion TheProjectaimstoreducelevelsofcardependencyandincreasepublicandactivetransportmodeshares by increasing the frequency, reliability and speedofpublictransportservicesandthroughtheprovisionofhighqualitywalkingandcyclinginfrastructure.

Diversify Australia’s economic capabilities

The ACT Planning Strategy’sobjectiveonimprovingthemobilityofpeopleandincreasingtravelmodeoptionswillbesupportedthroughanintegrationofinvestmentinCanberra’stransportnetworks with the surrounding land use itservices.

Supporting economic diversity and development TheProjectaimstocontributetothediversificationanddevelopmentofeconomicactivitybyenhancingthe role of town and group centres located along the Project Corridor.

Build on Australia’s global competitive advantage

Creatingamoreprosperousregionbypromotingthestrengthsofaclean,knowledge based economy is part of the ACT Planning Strategy which is alignedwithAustralia’svisionforamoreefficientandsustainableeconomyin the future.

Supporting Canberra’s core TheProjectaimstoimproveaccessibilitytotheCityandtheParliamentaryTrianglebyprovidingfasterandmorefrequentservicestotheCityandimprovingconnectionstoongoingdestinations.

Develop our cities and/or regions

Theimplementationofthe2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan will facilitateincreasesindensitiesinestablished town centres and along key transport corridors. This will support the ACT Planning Strategy’s objectiveof taking a regional approach to urban settlementtopromoteresponsibleandsustainable planning.

Maintaining and improving the amenity of Northbourne Avenue The Project seeks to reinforce the linear alignment ofNorthbourneAvenuebymaintainingtheavenueof trees and adding the permanency of dedicated bus lanes or light rail tracks and retain Northbourne Avenue’sroleastheprimaryNationalGateway.

Reduce greenhouse emissions

Transport for Canberra’s Frequent Network includes a commitment for theintroductionofanenvironmentallyfriendlypublictransportfleettoreduce greenhouse gas emissions and particulates.

Creating an eco-friendly transport system Byreducinglevelsofcardependence,increasinglevelsofpublicandactivetransportusageandchanging the urban form, the Project aims to reduce levelsofgreenhousegasemissions,airandnoisepollution.

Improve social, equity and quality of life in our cities and regions

The ACT Planning Strategy calls for buildingthecapacitytoimprovingthequality of the public realm and access toservicesandinformation.Thiswillprovidemorelifestyleopportunitychoices as it aims to renew town centres as the hub for community life.

Improving equity and liveability The Project aims to enhance access to key centres andcommunityfacilitiesthroughimprovedpublicandactivetransport,relieduponbythelesswelloff,thedisadvantagedandtheelderly.


3.2 Alignment with Nation Building Program 2NationBuildingIIistheCommonwealthGovernment’snextstepindevelopingthenation’sinfrastructurenetwork.NationBuilding2placesasignificantemphasisonimprovingAustralia’sproductivitywithanoverarchingobjectiveisto“liftAustralia’sproductivitythroughnationallysignificantlandtransportinfrastructure”.Beginningin2014–15,NationBuilding2willbuilduponthefirstphasebycontinuingtoprovideasolidfoundationforaddressingAustralia’stransportinfrastructureneedsgoingforward.

NationBuilding2identifiesfourkeyinvestmentthemes,allaimedatimprovingtheproductivityofAustralia’seconomythroughinvestmentininfrastructureandthroughusingassets,bothnewandexisting,better.Thesefourthemes,ofwhichthisProjectdirectlyaddressestwo,are:

1. Connecting peoplebyencouragingreliableandefficientlandtransportinfrastructuretoconnectpeopleacrossthenation

2. Innovationthroughenhancements,plansanddevelopmentstocurrentandfuturelandtransportnetworks

3. Moving freightbysupportingeconomicgrowththroughefficientandconnectionfreightnetworks

4. Safetybyimprovingthesafetyandsustainabilityofnationalrailandroadnetworks

Connecting PeopleTheAustralianGovernmentwantstoensurethatnational,urbanandregionalroadandraillinksaremaintainedinanefficient,productiveandsustainablemanner.The‘ConnectingPeople’themehasthefollowingobjectives:

• Connecting cities–toimprovetheconnectivitybetweencitiesandmajorpopulationcentres

• Urban living –toenhanceurbanliveabilityandaccesstoessentialservices• Pinch points–toincreasecapacityandefficiencyandreducecongestioninurbanareas

TheProjectisdirectlyaimedatimprovingconnectivitybetweenkeycentresandactivitygeneratorsin Canberra including Gungahlin, Mitchell, Dickson and the City by bypassing current and emerging pinchpointsalongtheProjectCorridor.Indirectly,theProjectwillimproveconnectionstoothercentresincludingBarton,Woden,TuggeranongandQueanbeyanbyfacilitatingandexpeditingthemovementofcross-regionalRapidservicesbetweenGungahlinandtheCity.

TheProjectaimstoenhanceurbanlivingbynotonlyimprovingaccessibilitytoemployment,educationcivicactivitiesandotheressentialservicesbutalsobyincreasingthedensityandmixofresidentialandcommercialactivitiesalongtheProjectCorridor.

InnovationAkeyelementoftheProjectistheintegratednatureinwhichlanduseandtransportsettingswillbedelivered.Foreconomicviability,theProjectislikelytorequirethedeliveryofhigherdensitieswithintheProjectCorridoroveralongperiodoftime.Governancestructurestoensureprogresstowardsthisobjectivearesomewhatunique.Asafirststep,therecentlyestablishedGungahlintoCityProjectOfficeiswellpositionednotonlyintegratetransportandlanduseplanningbutalsoensuretherealisationofthe requisite transport and land use outcomes.

3.3 National Capital PlanAlthoughplanningwiththenation’scapitallargelyresideswiththeACTGovernment,theCommonwealthGovernmentstillplaysaroletoensurethatCanberra’simageandpositionasthenation’scapitalisupheld.TheCommonwealthGovernment,throughtheNationalCapitalAuthority,outlinesitsplanningintentionsandcontrolsthroughtheNationalCapitalPlan.


TheNationalCapitalPlanaimstoensurethatCanberraisplannedanddevelopedinaccordancewithitsnationalsignificance.TheNationalCapitalPlanidentifiesNorthbourneAvenueasaMainAvenueandNationalApproachRoute.Assuch,theobjectiveforitsplanninganddevelopmentistoestablishandenhancetheidentityoftheapproachestotheCentralNationalAreaasroadsofnationalsignificanceand,whererelevant,asfrontageroadsforbuildingswhichenhancetheNationalCapitalfunctionandascorridorsforapossiblefutureinter-townpublictransportsystem,improvingpublictransportalongtheCorridor,promotingmorediverseurbandevelopmentandreducingpressureonyettobedevelopedgreenfieldresidentialsites.

3.4 ACT Government ObjectivesTheCitytoGungahlinProjectCorridorresonatesstronglywithcurrentACTGovernmentpolicyandobjectivesontransportandplanning.

Transport for Canberra TransportforCanberraistheACTGovernment’sstrategyforamoreeffectiveandefficienttransportsystemtomeettheneedsofthecommunitywhilereducingtheenvironmentalimpactsoftransport.Itsproposed policies for 2011 to 2031 build on the 2004 Sustainable Transport Plan and are aligned with thedraft2011ACTPlanningStrategy.

Theseincludefurtherreductionintrafficcongestionandgreenhousegasemissionswhilecontinuingtoincreasetheuseofactiveandpublictransportfrom20%in2011to23%in2016and30%in2026.Thestrategyaddressesfourbroadcategoriesofpublictransport,activetravel,managingroadsandvehicles,andmanagingtraveldemand.

The cornerstone of the Transport for Canberra Plan is the establishment a public rapid transit system capableofoperatingservicesat15minute(orbetter)intervalsalldaythroughmaincorridorsbasedonthe 2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan Network.TheProject,shoulditbedeveloped,wouldbepartofthefirststageofawiderrapidtransitsystemidentifiedbyTransportforCanberrathatwillconnectmajoractivitycentressuchas,Belconnen,Barton,andWodenwithCity.Theserapidtransitrouteswillbecriticalinachievingametropolitan-widepublictransportnetworkastheywilllinkwithFrequentLocallinesinmanyoftheseactivitycentrestoformtheplannedFrequentNetwork.

ACT Planning Strategy ThedraftACTPlanningStrategyproposesninestrategiestodeliverthecommunity’s‘desiredfuturescenariofor Canberra’ (through Time to Talk Canberra 2030),whiletakingintoaccountrecentdevelopmentsandevidencearisingfromresearchandimplicationsofchallengesahead,suchasclimatechange.

Thekeytargetofthestrategyistoachieve50%ofnewhousingtobeestablishedwithintheurbanareaofCanberrasoastosupportotherACTGovernmentpolicyoutcomes,includingthelegislatedgreenhouse gas emissions target for 2060.

TheProjectwouldsupportthecreationofopportunitiesforincreaseddensityanddispersedemploymentbyleveragingoffexistingstructuresofactivitycentresandinter-towntransportconnections.ItwouldalsoalleviatemobilityconcernsandcreatemorechoicesfortravelbyintegratinginvestmentinCanberra’stransportnetworkswiththelandusesitservices.

ACT Government Priorities 2011–122011–12governmentprioritiesforimprovingaccesstoanduseofpublictransportincludethedevelopmentofafeasibilityandproposalstudyforNorthbourneAvenuerapidpublictransportoptions,includinglightrail.Thesestudieswerecompletedin2011(NorthbourneAvenueBusPriority,CyclewayFacilityandDicksonBusStationFeasibilityStudyandNorthbourneAvenueTransportCorridorFinalProposalReport).

Thisbusinesscasebuildsonthesestudies,asthenextstepinimplementingthefirststageoftheRapidnetworkenvisagedintheStrategicPublicTransportNetworkPlan.


4 ProblemIdentification,AssessmentandAnalysis

4.1 IdentificationandAssessmentAspartoftheProjectStudy,arangeofunderlyingtrendsandissueshavebeenidentifiedthatarecurrentlyorexpectedtoimpacttheProjectCorridorandthereforeaffecttheattainmentofGovernmentobjectives.ThefollowingsectionprovidesabriefoutlineoftheproblemswithintheProjectCorridor.

Rapid Population GrowthThe districts of Gungahlin and North Canberra, both of which surround the Project Corridor, are home tothefastestandhighestlevelsofpopulationgrowthwithaverageannualgrowthratesoutstrippingtheCityaverage(seeTable4).3

Table 4: Population Growth by District

District (SSD) 2001 2011Average Annual Change

Growth Growth Rate

North Canberra 38,585 49,674 1,109 2.6%

Belconnen 85,601 94,947 935 1.0%

Woden Valley 32,494 34,530 204 0.6%

WestonCreek-Stromlo 23,662 23,760 10 0.0%

Tuggeranong 90,875 88,382 (249) (0.3%)

South Canberra 23,324 26,880 356 1.4%

Gungahlin-Hall 24,398 47,067 2,267 6.8%

ACT 319,317 365,621 4,630 1.4%

Queanbeyan 41,598 52,620 1,102 2.4%Source: ABS Cat. No 3218.0.

ThesehighlevelsofgrowthareexpectedtocontinueandcurrentforecastssuggestthatthepopulationlevelintheGungahlindistrictcouldreach90,000by2031,or91%higherthanin2011.4

ItisnotunreasonabletoconcludethatNorthbourneAvenuewouldcaterforasignificantshareoftheprojectedgrowth.Givencurrentinfrastructure,thelikelyincreaseintrafficvolumesasaresultofthisgrowthwilllikelybelargelydrivenbyprivatevehicles.Apartfromtheresultantcongestion,thisoutcomewouldhaveanegativeimpactonthegovernmentpolicyofachievinghigherpublicandactivetransportmode shares along the Project Corridor.

TheProjectaimstoincreasepublictransportservicesandqualityalongtheCorridor.ThiswouldplayacriticalroleinensuringthattransportsupplyisabletocopewithfastgrowingpopulationlevelsandeconomicactivityinmajoractivitycentresalongtheCitytoGungahlinCorridor.

High Car Dependency and Poor Public Transport UsageJourney-to-Work(JTW)dataindicatesthatCanberrahasahighlevelofcardependency.Privatevehicleasthepreferredmodetoworkhasmaintainedamodesharegreaterthan80%between1976and2006(seeTable5).WhiletheProjectCorridorboaststhesecondhighestlevelofpublictransportinCanberra,onaverage,thisdecreasessignificantlyclosertoGungahlinwherenineoutofevery10tripsismadebycar.5


Table 5: Canberra Journey to Work Mode Share 1976 – 2006

Mode 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006

Cardriver 71.3% 70.9% 72.6% 70.7% 72.7% 73.9% 73.5%

Car passengers 13.8% 12.4% 11.4% 12.1% 10.2% 9.4% 8.7%

Sub-total: private transport 85.1% 83.3% 84.0% 82.8% 82.9% 83.3% 82.2%

Public transport 8.9% 9.9% 9.7% 9.9% 8.3% 6.7% 7.9%

Bicycle only 0.9% 2.1% 2.1% 2% 2.2% 2.3% 2.5%

Walk only 4.6% 4.0% 3.6% 4.0% 4.3% 4.2% 4.9%

Other modes 0.5% 0.6% 0.6% 1.4% 2.3% 3.5% 2.4%Source: ACTPLA (2009)

Byimprovingthequalityofpublictransportservicesandreducingoveralltraveldistancesandtimes,theprojectaimstoincreasetheattractivenessofpublictransport(andactivetransport).ThiswouldcontributetoareductioninthelevelofprivatevehiclerelianceinCanberra.ThroughmoreintensivedevelopmentoftheProjectCorridor,whichwillbeenabledthroughhighertransportcapacity,thereexistsanopportunitytoaccommodatefuturepopulationgrowthandeconomicdevelopmentinamoresustainablemannerandreducerelianceongreenfielddevelopment.

Growing Road CongestionHighpopulationgrowthinconjunctionwithhighlevelsofprivatevehicleswillresultinincreasedtrafficvolumes.Duringpeaktraveltimes,sectionsoftheProjectCorridorparticularlyNorthbourneAvenue,arealreadycongestedoperatingclosetocapacity.Basedoncurrenttrafficconditions,roadcongestionaddsapproximately15minutestoacartripduringpeakperiods.Thisconstraintisevidentbylongqueuesanddelaysthatcurrentlyexistalongthecorridorduringpeakperiods(seeFigure8).

Figure 8: Congestion on Northbourne Avenue during the Morning Peak

Source: ESDD

ESDDestimatewithinvestmentinBRTorLRT,currentdelayscouldbereducedbymorethanhalfasshowninFigure9,abenefitthatcouldbeexpectedtogrowovertimeshouldaninvestmentinrapidtransit be made.


Figure 9: Estimated Peak Period Delays for a Trip between Gungahlin and the City for General Traffic

02468

1012141618

Current with BRT with LRT

Peak

Per

iod

Dela

y (m

in)

Source: ESDD

Trafficcongestionisnotonlyanirritantforresidentsbutitalsoimpactsnegativelyonthecostsofdoingbusinessthroughlongertraveltimesandunreliabilitywhichaffecteconomicactivityandproductivity.Roadcongestionalsoimpactsontheefficiencyandattractivenessofroad-basedpublictransportsystems, of which, Canberra is likely to rely on for the foreseeable future.

WithlimitedbusprioritycurrentlyprovidedwithintheProjectCorridor,roadcongestionimpactsadverselyontheefficiencyofbusoperations.Figure10belowillustratedincreasesinbustraveltimesalongtheProjectCorridorduringpeakperiods.Itshouldbenotedthattimetabledtimesdonotincludeunexpectedtraveltimewhichwouldlikelyincreaseaveragetraveltimesfurther,particularlyduringthepeak.

Figure 10: Red Rapid Route 200 Gungahlin to Civic: Current Timetabled Travel Times

0:00

Departure Time

0:05

0:10

0:20

0:15

0:25

0:30

0:35

0:40

7 AM

Trav

el T

ime

8 AM

9 AM

10 A

M

11 A

M

12 P

M

1 PM

2 PM

3 PM

4 PM

5 PM

6 PM

Source: ACTION Buses (2011)

TheimpactofcongestiononbusesisnotlimitedtoresidentslivingalongtheProjectCorridor.NorthbourneAvenueisakeybuscorridorandactsasatrunkformostbusservicesoriginatinginCanberra’snorthernsuburbsandsouthofLakeBurleyGriffinasfaroutasTuggeranongandFyshwick. As the Transport for Canberra 2031 Strategic Network Plan,whichenvisagedmorecross-regional(Rapid)busservicestooperatealongthecorridorfromdestinationsincludingQueanbeyanandMolongloValley,theimpactsofcongestionintheProjectCorridorwillbroadenovertime.Inshort,congestionintheProjectCorridorhasabroadimpactonmanyresidentsacrossCanberra.

Byincreasingtheattractivenessofnon-carmodesthoughincreasingthefrequency,capacity,reliabilityandspeedofpublictransportservicesandthroughtheprovisionofhighqualitywalkingandcyclinginfrastructure,theProjectcanbeaneffectivefacilitatortomanagingcongestion.


Low Land Productivity Fromaninternationalstandpoint,Australiancitypopulationdensitiesarelowerthanthatoftheirglobalcounterparts–theytendtobemorespreadoutintermsofurbansettlement.ThisisespeciallythecaseforCanberra.Alowerpopulationdensityhasseveraleconomicandsocialimplications.

Onaverage,itwouldtendtoresultinahigherpercapitacostforprovidingpublictransportandcommunityservicesLowerdensitiesincreasetheriskofsocialexclusionasappropriatepublicservicesmaybelessaccessibletoresidents.FortheACTGovernment,lowerdensitiesadverselyimpactthepotentialyieldonpropertybasedcharges,akeyconcernastheACTGovernmentreliesonpropertyrelatedchargesforhalfofitsannualrevenue.

TheProjectwillpromoteanincreaseinthelevelanddiversityofeconomicactivityalongtheProjectCorridorintheCity,alongNorthbourneAvenueandinkeytowncentresincludingDicksonandGungahlinbyincreasingthemixandnumberofresidentsandemploymentpositionsaswellasbyimprovingpublictransportaccessibilityalongtheProjectCorridor.

Employment and Population MismatchAlthoughplanningpoliciesinCanberrahavesoughttoincreaseself-containmenttoreducedemandforlongerdistancetravel,itisapparentthatthespatialdistributionofemploymentissuchthatinmostareasinCanberra,itisdifficulttoachievehighlevelsofself-containment.

MostdistrictsinCanberrahaveinsufficientemploymenttocaterforallworkingageresidentsandmoreover,manyofthesepositionsaretakenbyresidentslivinginotherdistricts.OnlyinNorthCanberra, South Canberra and Woden districts, the centre of Canberra, are there more employment positionsthanresidents.Table6outlinesthenumberofjobsperpersonineachdistrictandtheproportionofjobsprovidedwithineachdistricttakenbydistrictresidents.

Table 6: 2006 Employment Outcomes by District

District Number of Jobs per Person Proportion of District Jobs Taken by District Residents

North Canberra 2.55 23%

South Canberra 3.68 14%

Woden 1.30 23%

Weston 0.36 42%

Belconnen 0.55 61%

Tuggeranong 0.33 73%

Gungahlin 0.39 43%

Queanbeyan 0.56 58%Source: ACTPLA (2009)

Withoutsignificantchangesinhowemploymentisdistributedacrosstheterritory,norealisticlandusescenariocanbeexpectedtoprovidesignificantgrowthinemploymentattowncentres.

Hence,itislikelythatresidentslivingonthenorthernendoftheProjectCorridorwillgenerallyneedtotraveltowardstheCityinordertoseekemploymentfortheforeseeablefuture.Growingcongestiononkey transport links to employment in the City and the Parliamentary Triangle will increasingly inhibit the efficientmovementoflabourtotheseimportantemploymenthubs,decreasingtheproductivecapacityof the city.


High Greenhouse Gas IntensityGreenhousegasemissionsintheACTarerelativelyhigherasaresultoflowresidentialdensitiesandtheassociatedprevalenceofdetacheddwellingsincreasingtheenergyintensityofhouseholds.Furthermore,theACT’shigherlevelofcaruseandresultantlowutilisationofpublicandactivetransportcombinetoincreasecarbonemissionsfromoverallvehicleuse.Withoutintervention,increasingtrafficvolumesandcongestion,arisingfromhighpopulationgrowth,willcombinetoincreasetransport-relatedemissionsevenfurther.

Byreducinglevelsofcardependence,increasinglevelsofalternativetransportusageandinterveningonCanberra’surbanform,theProjectaimstoreducelevelsofgreenhousegasemissions,airandnoisepollution.

Diminishing Corridor AmenityAsoneofthefirstimpressionsfornewvisitorsenteringCanberra,itsdesignandtreatmentsetsthetoneforthecity’scharacter.ItisalsoCanberra’skeycommercialaddressforapartmentsandbusinessesalike,servingavarietyoflanduses.Thereforethequalityofitsurbanenvironmentcanbeconsideredtobeimportant.

AlthoughNorthbourneAvenueprovidessomeformofcapacityforallmodesoftransport,theattractivenessofnon-carmodesissomewhatlimited.Combinedwithahighlevelofcarusageandcongestion,thewalking(andforpublictransportusers,thewaiting)environmentiscompromised,duetoexposuretohighlevelsoftrafficandassociatednoise,accidentsandpollutants.Insuchacardominatedspace,itcanalsobecomequitedifficulttodevelopurbanformsthatencouragethedesiredfuturecharacteroftheAvenueasaplaceofactivityandvibrancy.

TheProjectaimstoimproveaccessibilitytotheCityandtheParliamentaryTrianglebyprovidingfaster,morefrequentserviceswithhigherlevelsofcapacityandinturnsupportingCanberra’sroleasthenation’scapitalandpreeminentfederalpoliticalandadministrativecentreaswellastheCityCentre’srole as the preeminent municipal commercial centre.

4.2 AnalysisThereareamyriadofcurrentandfuturechallengesduetorapidpopulationgrowthanditsassociatedimpacts.Manyoftheissuesexploredinthissubmissioncanbetracedbacktotheplanninganddeliveryof both land releases and transport in Canberra.

Urban PlanningCanberrawasoriginallyplannedasapolycentriccitywhereplannersintendedforresidentstoworkandliveinthesametowncentre,reducingtheneedforlongerdistancetravel.PriortoWWII,muchofCanberra’sdevelopmentwasconfinedtothedistrictsofNorthandSouthCanberralocatedclosetothecity.

Overtime,largequantitiesofaffordablelandwerereleasedonthefringesofthecity.Althoughtheintentionwastolinkoutlyingsuburbstotowncentresthatwouldprovideemployment,shoppingandcommunityservices,employmentdidnotdecentraliseandlittleinvestmentwasmadeinhighcapacitypublictransportlinksthatwouldhaveotherwiseconnectedthesuburbstothetowncentresandtheCity.

Instead, employment agglomerated in the City and Parliamentary Triangle, requiring the workforce totravellongerdistanceseitherbycarorusingbusservices,whichoperatedatlowfrequenciesandstruggletomatchthefasterspeedsofcartravel.

ThisoutcomeisnotanunfamiliaroutcomeinanAustraliancontextalthoughevenbyAustralianstandards,densitiesinCanberraarelow.Lowdensitylivingtendstoleadtolongerjourneysthatarespreadoveragreaterarea.Thesetypesoftripsaremoredifficulttoservethroughpublictransport.

Whiledensityisnottheonlyfactortosupportpublictransport,mixedusedevelopmentsandhigherdensity housing along public transport corridor will mutually support each other.


Integratingthesetwoaspectswiththepublictransportcorridorimprovementwillsignificantlycontributetosustainability,productivityandsocialbenefits.

Road Focused InvestmentsTraditionally,governmentinvestmentintransporthasfavouredasupply-sideapproachforroadinfrastructure.Thisisduetothehighdemandforprivatemotorvehicles,itscost-effectivenessinconnectingnewresidentialestatesandtherelativelimitedrecurrentcostsofdevelopingroadinfrastructuredespitethecongestionandothercostsroadusebrings.

RoadinvestmentinCanberrahasactedasadeterrenttopublictransportuseduetothedevelopmentofhighqualityarterialsallowingforfastertravelspeedsandthereforeloweringtotaljourneytimes.Inparticular,overthepastfewdecades,anumberofinvestmentsweremadeinmotorwaygradeparkwaystojointhevarioustowncentresacrossCanberra.Althoughprovisionhadbeenmadeforrapidtransit,evidentintheprovisionofthewidemediansthatareprovidedalongmanykeyroadcorridorsinCanberra,investmentdidnotmaterialise.

Furthermore,aspublictransportsharestheroadsupplywithgeneraltraffic,anyresultingcongestionwouldalsoservetodeterioratetheperformanceofbusservices.

Current Bus Network DesignThecurrentdesignofthepublictransportnetworkinCanberrasignificantlyaffectsitsattractivenessasamodeoftransportofchoiceforpassengers.Withafocusonprovidingservicecoverage,busroutesarecircuitous,increasingtraveltimesandwaittimesforpassengers.ThefollowingattributesofthebusnetworkservetofurtherreducetheattractivenessofpublictransportinCanberra:

• Thebusnetworkiscurrentlydesignedtomaximiseservicecoverage,requiringmultipleroutesoperatingatlowfrequenciestoserviceaparticularareatoensurethat95%ofresidentsarenofurther than 500m from a route

• TerminationoflocalservicesatthelocaltowncentrewithtravellersrequiredtotransferforonwardtraveltotheCityandotherdestinations

• Significantdifferencesintheroutingandfrequencyofservicesbetweenweekdaypeakperiods,weekdayoff-peakperiodsandonweekends.

TheProject,byimprovingpublictransportservicesandbyencouragingachangeinlandusepatterns,aims to reduce car dependency and increase public transport usage. Changes in transport and land useproposedbytheProjectareoutlinedinthefollowingchapter.Theensuingoptions,basedoncombinationsofthescenarios,aimtoaddresstheidentifiedissuesby:

• Improvingthecompetitivenessofpublictransportservicesbyprovidingpriorityandseparatingsuchservicestoincreasetheirservicespeedsandreliability

• IncorporatinglandusechangesasadriverofincreasingsocialandenvironmentalsustainabilityofCanberrathroughhigherdensitiesandgreatermixedusesandsupporttheeconomicandfinancialsustainabilityofaninvestmentinpublictransport

• Increasetransportcapacitytoenablefurthereconomicdevelopmentwithinanestablishedcorridorinordertoreducerelianceongreenfielddevelopments

• Investigatethemeritsofadjustedparkingpricesasameansofbettermanaginglevelsofcaruseandprovideasecondarysourceoffundingforaninvestmentinrapidtransit


5 Assessment of Options

5.1 Summary of OptionsInordertoaddresstheproblemsidentifiedintheprevioussection,anumberofscenariosfortheProjectStudy,asoutlinedinSection2.2,havebeenidentifiedwhichincludetransport,landuseandparkingchargescenariosFiveoptionsweredeveloped,withfourdo-somethingoptionsoutlinedbelowagainst a base case:

• BRT with business as usual land use and higher parking charges

• LRT with business as usual land use and higher parking charges

• BRT with higher density land use and higher parking charges• LRT with higher density land use and higher parking charges

5.2 Capital Costs

TheoutturncapitalcostsoftheProjecthavebeenprovidedbytheProject’scostestimatorURS.Thefollowingcostdrivershavebeenincludedintheassessmentofthecapitalcosts:

• Directcosts:constructioncostsofworksspecificallycoveringthecostofplant,labour,materialsandspecialist contractors

• Indirectcosts:planning,design,mobilisationandgovernmentcosts.

The concept design used to inform this submission assumed that rapid transit infrastructure would be built inthemedianofNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad.Thewidthofthemedianonbothroadsissufficientlywidetocaterforrapidtransitwithoutalteringthepositionofexistinggeneraltrafficlanes.

Thisconceptdesigninformedacostestimationbasedonunitrates,quantitiesandaveragelengths,allowingforthefollowingsignificantcostcomponents(whereapplicable):

• TheintroductionofsegregatedrapidtransitlanesinthemedianoftheProjectCorridor

• ModificationsandadditionstotwobridgesonFlemingtonRoad

• Belowrailinfrastructure(track,trackbedandcrossovers)

• Newstopsandstations

• Electrificationincludingsub-stations,overheadwiringandsupportsystems

• Signalling

• Rollingstock and depots• Ancillarymodificationsincludingtheintroductionofsegregatedcyclewaysandwideningoffootpaths

Onanundiscountedbasis,theupfrontcapitalcostsfortheBRTandLRTareestimatedtobe$276million,and$614millionrespectively.AdetailedbreakdownofcostsforBRTandLRTisprovidedinTable7:


Table 7: Breakdown of Undiscounted Upfront Capital Costs (2011 Prices in $ million)

Cost ComponentBRT LRT

Cost Prop. Cost Prop.

Preliminaries,designandgovernmentcosts $51 18% $113 18%

Enabling,generalconstructionplanningandmanagement $28 10% $28 5%

Below rail infrastructure - - $102 17%

Bridges $14 5% $14 2%

Separated rapid transit lanes $25 9% $25 4%

Road works and medians $10 4% $10 2%

Utilitiesanddrainage $33 12% $33 5%

Footpaths and cycle paths $4 1% $4 1%

Signalling $10 4% $10 2%

Electrical supply $13 5% $88 14%

Passengerinterfaceandcommunications $29 11% $42 7%

Depots $48 17% $91 15%

Fleet $11 4% $55 9%

Total $276 100% $614 100%Source: URS

5.3 Demand ImpactsThe Canberra Strategic Public Transport Model (CSTM) was used as the basis to assess the demand impactforeachoption,whichismaintainedbyESDD.CSTMisatypicalfour-stepStrategicPublicTransportdemandmodelcoveringtheACTandQueanbeyan.

Thedemandprojectionsforeachprojectscenarioweretestedundertwosetsoflanduse,populationandemploymentassumptions:a‘businessasusual’landusescenarioanda‘higherdensity’landusescenario.

The‘businessasusual’landuseprojectionsarebasedonACTGovernmentChiefMinisterandCabinetDirectoratelanduseprojections.The‘higherdensity’landuseprojectionswerepreparedbyESDDandURS,whichreflectsanassumptionofafasterrealisationoftheProjectCorridor’sdevelopmentpotentialwithoutrelyingonchangestoexistinglandusecontrolsorpoliciesintheTerritoryPlan.Table8outlinesthefirstandfinalmodelyearresultsfor2011and2031andprovideshighleveldemandmodelresultsfor the whole of the ACT transport system.


Table 8: High Level Demand Model Results for whole of ACT transport system

Year 2011 2031

Land Use BAU BAU Higher Density

Mode BAU BAU BRT LRT BRT LRT

Passenger trips

Public transport 16,900 38,400 43,600 43,700 43,700 43,800

Car 239,300 291,300 286,500 286,300 285,600 285,400

Total passenger trips 256,200 329,700 330,100 330,000 329,300 329,200

Average journey time (mins)

Public transport 62.3 57.4 55.7 55.5 53.6 53.5

Car 12.4 12.8 12.5 12.5 11.4 11.4

PT Mode Share 6.6% 11.6% 13.2% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3%

PT Fare Revenue $ 20,100 $ 45,600 $ 51,800 $ 52,100 $ 52,000 $ 52,200

Passenger kilometres travelled


Car(driveronly) 1,870,800 2,072,900 2,032,600 2,030,300 1,959,600 1,957,400

Passenger hours


Car 49,400 62,300 59,500 59,400 54,300 54,200

Total passenger hours 66,900 99,000 99,900 99,800 93,300 93,300

Change in passenger hours

PTpassengerhours-contusers -1,100 -1,200 -800 -800

PTpassengerhours-newusers 6,400 6,600 16,500 16,600

PTpassengerhours-lostusers -1,600 -1,600 -13,400 -13,400

Carpassengerhours-contusers -1,500 -1,500 -3,000 -3,000

Carpassengerhours-newusers 1,700 1,800 18,400 18,300

Carpassengerhours-lostuser -3,000 -3,100 -23,400 -23,400


Table9:ChangeinDemandMetricsforthewholeoftheACTtransportsystem(2031versus2011)

Land Use BAU Higher Density

Mode BAU BRT LRT BRT LRT

Passenger trips

Public transport 127.0% 157.8% 158.9% 158.5% 159.5%

Car 21.7% 19.7% 19.6% 19.3% 19.2%

Total passenger trips 28.7% 28.8% 28.8% 28.5% 28.5%


Public transport -7.7% -10.6% -10.9% -13.9% -14.1%

Car 3.6% 0.7% 0.5% -7.9% -8.1%

PT Mode Share (percentage point change) 5.0% 6.6% 6.7% 6.7% 6.7%

PTFareRevenue 127.0% 157.8% 158.9% 158.5% 159.5%



Car(driveronly) 10.8% 8.6% 8.5% 4.7% 4.6%

Passenger hours


Car 26.1% 20.5% 20.3% 9.9% 9.6%

Total passenger hours 47.9% 49.3% 49.2% 39.4% 39.3%

Economic Appraisal TheeconomicevaluationwasundertakenonanincrementalbasiswhichcomparedtheProjectoptionsagainstawithoutprojectcaseusingadiscountedcashflowtechniqueonthebasisofarealdiscountrateof7%andundertakeninaccordancewithATCandInfrastructureAustraliainvestmentappraisalguidelines.

Allvaluesareexpressedin2011dollars.Thebenefitsoftheprojectwereassessedovera30yearevaluationperiodcommencingafterconstruction.

Thefollowingeconomicbenefitswereassessedaspartoftheeconomicappraisal:

• Changeingeneralisedjourneytimes

• Unperceivedvehicleoperatingcostsavings

• Avoidedenvironmentalexternality

• Avoidedaccidentcosts

• Avoidedroaddamage

• Incrementalfarerevenue• Incrementalparkingrevenue

The following economic costs were assessed as part of the economic appraisal:

• Constructioncosts

• Asset maintenance costs

• Incrementalpublictransportoperatingcosts


Table10outlinestheheadlineeconomicresultsfortheeconomicevaluation.

Table 10: Economic Results for Project Options

Economic IndicatorBRT

with BAU Land Scenario

LRT


BRT

with Higher Density Land Scenario

LRT


Benefitcostratio 1.98 1.02 4.78 2.34

Netpresentvalue($m) $243.3 $10.8 $939.1 $701.1

NPVI $0.68 $0.01 $2.62 $0.87

Internal rate of return 14.6% 7.2% 26.7% 15.7%

Thepre-feasibilityeconomicevaluationresultsshowsthattheallcoreProjectoptionshavethepotentialtogeneratepositiveeconomicreturnsunderthebusinessasusualandhigherdensitylandusesettings.ThismedianoutcomesupportsthenotionthatrapidtransitinvestmentwithintheProjectCorridorhasrealpotentialtodeliverneteconomicbenefits.

Ofthetransportoptions,BRTisprojectedtodeliverhighereconomicreturns.

Ontheotherhand,theeconomicreturnsthatcanbedeliveredthroughLRTinvestmentalonearelikelytobeeconomicallymarginalandtheneteconomicoutcomeforLRTunderevenminoradversecircumstancesislikelytoresultinnegativeeconomicreturns.

Also,itshouldbenotedthatthereisahighunderlyinglevelofsensitivityassociatedtheevaluationoftheincrementalparkingrevenuestream.Shouldthisstreamonlymaterialiseinpart,economicoutcomesmaydifferfromthosepresentedabove.FurtherassessmentduringtheFeasibilityandForwardDesignstageisnecessarytoaffirmtheseestimates.

Theseobservationsunderlinetheneedtoconsidersupportinglandusesettingsincombinationwithtransportimprovements.Shouldtheseoccurcollectively,projectedeconomicoutcomesarelikelytobesignificantlyenhanced.


6 Next Steps

6.1 EstablishmentoftheGungahlintoCityProjectOfficeAsaclearindicationoftheACTGovernment’scommitmenttoprogressingtheProjecttotheFeasibilityandForwardDesignstage,theACTGovernmentestablishedtheGungahlintoCityProjectOfficeinits2012-13Budget.TheProjectOfficerecognisesthelinkbetweentransitandtheredevelopmentofthecorridor.TheProjectOfficewillcoordinatecurrentandfutureprojectsofvariousdirectorateswithinthecorridor,includingtransitcorridorfeasibilityanddesign,redevelopmentofpublichousingandcorridorplanningstudiestoexploredevelopmentscenariostosupporthigherdensitiesandthelike.

6.2 FeasibilityandForwardDesignWorksShould the Project proceed into the Feasibility and Forward Design Stage, further feasibility, design and planningworkwillneedtobecommissionedbytheACTGovernmenttoassesstheProject’sfeasibilityindetail.FullgovernmentfundingforthenextstageoftheProject’sdevelopmentisconsideredappropriate.

Table 11: Proposed Feasibility and Forward Design Works

Development Possible Investigations

Option development

Moredetailedprojectstaginganalysistoassesstheappropriatetimingoftheinvestmenttoensure that enhanced public transport capacity when it is warranted by the growth in demand

FurtherdefinitionofthetransportmodestobeusedFrequentNetworkisrequiredtoensurethatoptionsandtreatmentsappliedalongtheProjectCorridorwillalignwithtreatmentsandinvestmentsappliedacrosstheremainderoftheFrequentNetwork

Detailed design

ProductdefinitionincludingvehicleoptionsandLRT/BRTinfrastructureandoperationalspecifications

DetaileddesignoftheProjectCorridor,DicksonStationandtheGungahlinTerminus

Cost estimation

Refinementofthecapitalcostestimates,whichshouldbebasedonadetaileddesignandincludeanappropriateprojectcontingencyasaresultofaprobabilitybasedprojectriskassessment process

Public transport operations

Rationalisationoftheassumedbusnetworktoensuretheappropriatelevelofbusserviceisprovided,tomaximisethelevelofintegrationofrapidtransitwithinthecurrentnetworkandtoensurethatoperatingcostsandthelevelofoperatingsubsidyforpublictransportservicesareoptimised

Land use Refinedlanduseanalysistoensurethatthepopulationandemploymentdistributionalandgrowthimpactsareassessedindetail,reflectasustainablelevelofgrowthintermsofdemandandsupply,andarereflectedinthedemandassessmentandeconomicbenefitsquantification

Refinedlandvaluecaptureanalysistoensureallofthepotentialrevenuesourcesarecapturedto contribute to the funding of the project

Demand modelling

Detailedstrategicmodellingofthepreferredoptiontoensuretheservicecharacteristicsoftheproposedoptions(BRTorLRToracombinationofthetwo)areappropriatelyreflected.Thismayinvolvethecommissioningofstatedpreferencestudiestobetterassessthewillingnesstopayfor(oralternativelythewillingnesstouse)BRTandLRTservices

Modelvalidationandcalibrationusingupdateddemanddataincluding2011JourneytoWorkdata

Environmental Assessment

ConfirmwhetheranEnvironmentalImpactStatementwillneedtobepreparedfortheProject

Planning approvals

ConfirmwhatplanningapprovalswillberequiredtoprogresstheProject


Development Possible Investigations

Governance ConsiderwhatgovernancearrangementswillberequiredtofacilitatetheintegrateddevelopmentoftheProjectCorridor,withaspecificemphasisontheintegrationoflanduseand transport outcomes

Procurement Developmentofanappropriateprocurementstrategytofullyscopetheoptimumapproachtothefuturedevelopmentoftheproject

FurtherinvestigationisrequiredtoidentifycomponentsoftheProjectthataremostamenableforprivatesectorinvolvementandassessthefinancialattractivenessofprivatesectorinvolvementusingaPublicSectorComparatorapproachtoassessvalueformoney.

6.3 FundingRequirementsTheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageisprojectedtocostanadditional$30millionover2013–14and2014/15.A50:50splitinfundingfortheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageisproposedbetweentheACTandCommonwealthGovernment.A50:50splitinfundingfortheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageissoughtfromtheCommonwealthGovernmentonthebasisthattheProjectis:

• Consistent with National Building 2 objectives:TheProjectdirectlyaddresses3ofNationBuildingIIobjectives:ConnectingPeople,SafetyandInnovation

• Consistent with the objectives of projects funded under the Commonwealth Government’s Liveable Cities Program:TheProjectaimsatexploringopportunitiesforcooperationbetweentheACTGovernmentandtheprivatesectortodirectlyaddressissuesincludingclimatechange,affordablehousing,trafficcongestionandagrowing,ageingpopulation

• Corridor of national significance:NorthbourneAvenue,whichformsalargepartoftheProjectCorridor,hasbeenidentifiedwithintheNationalCapitalPlanasacorridorofnationalsignificance.ProposedinvestmentsaspartoftheProjectareaimedatreinforcingthenationallysignificantceremonialroleoftheAvenue.AnumberofdesignelementsarelikelytoberequiredthatareoverandabovetherequirementsfortypicalrapidtransitprojectsinordertomeettherequirementsoftheNationalCapitalPlan.

• Opportunity to develop an integrated land use-transport governance structure:AnumberofpartiesincludingtheProductivityCommission,InfrastructureAustraliaandCOAGhaveoutlinedtheneedforimprovedgovernanceinrelationtothedevelopmentofAustralia’scities.TheACTGovernment’scommitmenttotheestablishmentoftheGungahlintoCityProjectOffice,aimedatcoordinatingtransport,redevelopmentofpublichousingandlanduseplanning,providesapotentialspecial-purposevehicletopromoteandrealisepotentialtransportandlanduseoutcomesoutlinedwithinthissubmission.

FundingarrangementsfortheProjectfor2012–13werefinalisedaspartofthe2012–13ACTBudget.Thisfundingwillbeallocatedtocommunityconsultationandfurtherfeasibilityanalysis.

ItisintendedthatmatchingACTGovernmentfundingwillbesoughtaspartofthenextBudgetcycle(2013–14).ShouldtheACTGovernmentreceiveaCommonwealthGovernmentcontribution,thesefundsare proposed to be used to accelerate the Feasibility and Forward Design Stage, with a focus on:

• Developinganintegratedlanduse-transportgovernanceframework

• Considerthedevelopmentofaspecial-purposevehicletoassistintherealisationoftheProject’sbenefitsincludingoverseeinggovernancearrangementsinrelationtodevelopmentswithintheCorridor

• Investigatingopportunitiesforprivatesectorfinancing

• Investigatingpricingmechanismstooptimisethelevelofupfrontandrecurrentgovernmentfundingincludinglandvaluecaptureopportunities


Appendix A: Stages 1 – 6 Proposal Summary

Initiative Name: City to Gungahlin Transit Corridor Study

Location (State/Region(or City)/ Locality): Australian Capital Territory

Name of Proponent Entity: ACTEnvironmentandSustainableDevelopmentDirectorate

Contact (Name, Position, phone/e-mail): MsKristinBlume–ProjectDirector,ESDD

Executive summary

About the ProjectTheProjectseekstoassessthefeasibilityofdevelopingarapidtransitcorridorbetweenGungahlinandtheCityalongFlemingtonRoadandNorthbourneAvenue(the‘ProjectCorridor’)usingeitherBRTorLRTtechnologies.Italsoassessestheimpactofhigherpopulationandemploymentdensities,andincreasedparkingchargesontheProject’sviability.

TheoptionsassessedweredevelopedfollowingthedefinitionofProjectgoals,thesegoalsare:

• ProvidegreaterconnectivityandcapacitybetweenfuturegrowthcentresandtheCity

• Encouragegreateruseofmoresustainabletransportmodes,suchaspublictransportandactivetransport.

• EncouragefurthereconomicdevelopmentwithintheGungahlintoCBDcorridor

TheProjectanditsgoalsareconsistentandalignedwithcurrentACTandCommonwealthGovernmentpolicy.Mostnotably,the2012TransportforCanberrapolicyhighlightstheneedforamoreeffectiveandefficienttransportsystem.ThePlanaimstoincreasetheactiveandpublictransportmodeshareto30%by2031from20%in2011.

Outsideoftransportpolicy,theProjectisalsoconsistentwithobjectivessetoutintheACTPlanningStrategy.Thekeytargetofthestrategyistoachieve50%ofnewhousingtobeestablishedwithintheurbanareaofCanberrasoastosupportotherACTGovernmentpolicyoutcomes.

TheProjectwouldsupportthecreationofopportunitiesforincreaseddensityanddispersedemploymentbyleveragingoffexistinglanduseofactivitycentresandinter-towntransportconnections.ItwouldalsoalleviatemobilityconcernsandcreatemorechoicesfortravelbyintegratinginvestmentinCanberra’stransportnetworkswiththelandusesitservices.

The proposed rapid transit system also addresses Infrastructure Australia’s strategic goals through publictransport,betterassetutilisationofexistingtransportinfrastructureandtransformingcitiesthroughintegratedlanduse-transportplanning.ItwillhavebothdirectandindirectbenefitsintermsofenhancingthenationalsignificanceofNorthbourneAvenuebyimprovingpublictransportalongthecorridorandpromotingmorediverseurbandevelopment.

IdentifiedProblemsThe City to Gungahlin Corridor has a range of current and emerging issues that are intertwined and potentiallyrequireinvestmenttoresolve.Theseissuesinclude:

1. Growingroadcongestion

2. Highlevelsofcardependency

3. Afastgrowingpopulation

4. A mismatch between jobs and employment


5. Lowlandproductivity

6. Diminishing corridor amenity

7. High greenhouse gas intensity

Alloftheproblemsoutlinedaboveimpedeonachievinggoalsandobjectivesasoutlinedbygovernment.Problems1to5presenthurdlestodeliveringpublictransportcapacity,managingroadcongestion,supportingCanberra’scoreadvantages,improvingequityandliveability.Problem6hindersonachievingthegoalofmaintainingandimprovingtheamenityoftheProjectCorridor,andProblem7isanimpedimenttowardscreatinganenvironmentallyfriendlytransportsystem.

Itcouldbeexpectedthatwithoutintervention,futuregrowthwithintheProjectCorridorwillservetoleadtoafurtherdeclineinroadspeeds,increasingtraveltimewhichimpedesaccesstoemployment,communityfacilities,socialandrecreationalactivities,hencefurtheraggravatingtheproblemsidentified

Preferred OptionsThesubmissionconsidersacombinationofthetransportandlandusescenarios.Fiveoptionsweredeveloped,withfourdo-somethingoptionsagainstabasecase.Thedosomethingoptionsare:

• BRT with business as usual land use and higher parking charges

• LRT with business as usual land use and higher parking charges

• BRT with higher density land use and higher parking charges• LRT with higher density land use and higher parking charges

Thebasecaseoptionassumesthatchangesinfuturetransportandlandusecontinueonabusinessasusualbasis,inlinewithcurrentGovernmenttransportcommitmentsandplanningstrategies

EvaluationResultsTheeconomicevaluationwasundertakenonanincrementalbasiswhichcomparedtheProjectoptionsagainstawithoutprojectcaseusingadiscountedcashflowtechniqueonthebasisofarealdiscountrateof7%inaccordancewithATCandInfrastructureAustraliainvestmentappraisalguidelines.Projectcapitalexpenditureisassumedtotakeeffectfrom2012andallvaluesareexpressedin2011dollars.Thebenefitsoftheprojectwereassessedovera30yearevaluationperiodcommencingafterconstruction.

The Canberra Strategic Public Transport Model (CSTM) was used as the basis to assess the demand impactforeachoption,andismaintainedbyESDD.TheCSTMisatypicalfour-stepStrategicPublicTransportdemandmodelcoveringtheACTandQueanbeyan.

TheeconomicevaluationresultsshowsthattheallcoreProjectoptionsareprojectedtogenerateapositiveeconomicreturnbasedonbusinessasusualandhigherdensitylanduseprojections.Table12outlinestheheadlineeconomicresultsfortheeconomicevaluation.

Table 12: Economic Results for Project Options

Economic IndicatorBRT


LRT


BRT


LRT


Benefitcostratio 1.98 1.02 4.78 2.34

Netpresentvalue($m) $243.3 $10.8 $939.1 $701.1

NPVI $0.68 $0.01 $2.62 $0.87

Internal rate of return 14.6% 7.2% 26.7% 15.7%


ItshouldbenotedthatbenefitsfortheLRTwitha‘businessasusual’landuseoption,aremarginal.IncrementalbenefitsforallProjectoptionsaredependentonparkingrevenuesandarethereforelikelytobesensitivetoparkingrates,demandandutilisation.Accordingly,furtherinvestigationwouldbeordertorefinetheoptionsshouldtheProjectproceedtothenextstage

Next stepsShould the Project proceed into the Feasibility and Forward Design Stage, further feasibility, design and planningworkwillneedtobecommissionedbytheACTGovernmenttoassesstheProject’sfeasibilityinmoredetail.FullgovernmentfundingforthenextstageisconsideredappropriateastheProjectisproposedtobecategorisedasa‘RealPotential’project.

TheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageisprojectedtocost$30millionover2013/14and2014/15.A50:50splitfundingissoughtfromtheCommonwealthGovernmentonthebasisthattheProjectisconsistentwithobjectivesoutlinedin:

• TheNationBuilding2Program

• TheCommonwealthLiveableCitiesProgram• TheNationalCapitalPlanasacorridorofnationalsignificance

Itcanalsoberegardedasanopportunitytodevelopanintegratedlanduse-transportgovernancestructure. The scope for the proposed Feasibility and Forward Design Stage will include the following:

• Moredetailedoptiondevelopment

• Detailedproductdefinitionanddesign

• Refinedcostestimates

• RationalisationofcurrentbusnetworkwiththeProject

• Refinedlanduseanalysisandvaluecapture

• Further detailed strategic demand modelling

• ConfirmationontheneedforanEnvironmentalImpactStatementandrequiredplanningapprovalsfor the Project to proceed

• Furtherconsiderationwithrespecttoappropriategovernancearrangementsandaprocurementstrategy


Stage1–GoalDefinition

Initiative GoalsThedevelopmentoftheProjectaimsto:

• ProvidegreaterconnectivityandcapacitybetweenGungahlinandtheCity

• Encouragegreateruseofmoresustainabletransportmodes,suchaspublictransportandactivetransport

• EncouragefurthereconomicdevelopmentwithintheGungahlintoCitycorridor• ImprovetheefficiencyoftransportmovementswithintheGungahlintoCitycorridor.

Initiative ObjectivesUponimplementationoftheProject,thefollowingobjectivesareexpectedtoberealised:

• Delivering transport capacity by increasing public transport capacity and speeds along the Project CorridortoservicefastgrowingpopulationlevelsandeconomicactivityalongtheProjectCorridorandatkeyactivitycentres

• Managing road congestionbyincreasingtheattractivenessofnon-carmodesinorderintoreducelevelsofcardependencybyincreasingthefrequency,capacity,reliabilityandspeedofpublictransportservicesandthroughtheprovisionofhighqualitywalkingandcyclinginfrastructure

• Supporting Canberra’s core byimprovingaccessibilitytotheCityandtheParliamentaryTrianglebyprovidingfaster,morefrequentserviceswithhigherlevelsofcapacityandinturn supportingCanberra’sroleasthenation’scapitalandpreeminentfederalpoliticalandadministrativecentreaswell as the City Centre’s role as the preeminent municipal commercial centre

• Supporting economic diversity and development bypromotinganincreaseinthelevelanddiversityofeconomicactivityalongtheProjectCorridorintheCity,alongNorthbourneAvenueandinkeytowncentresincludingDicksonandGungahlinbyincreasingthemixandnumberofresidentsandemploymentpositionsaswellasbyimprovingpublictransportaccessibilityalongtheProjectCorridor

• Creating an environmentally friendly transport systemaimedatreducinglevelsofgreenhousegasemissions,airandnoisepollutionbyreducinglevelsofcardependenceandincreasingthelevelofpublicandactivetransportusageandreducingtraveldistances

• Improving equity and liveabilitybyenhancingaccesstokeycentresandcommunityfacilitiesthroughimprovedpublicandactivetransport,relieduponmorebythelesswelloff,thedisadvantagedandtheelderlyandpromotingabroaderdiversityofhousingandimprovinghomeaffordabilitybyincreasingtheprovisionofhigherdensitydwellings

• Maintaining and improving the amenity of the Project Corridor by reinforcing the linear alignment ofNorthbourneAvenue,maintainingtheavenueoftreesandaddingthepermanencyofdedicatedbuslanesorlightrailtracks,consistentwithBurleyGriffin’soriginalintentionfortheAvenueandNorthbourneAvenue’snationallysignificantroleastheprimaryNationalGateway


Initiative AlignmentTheProjectisconsistentwithpolicyobjectivessetoutbyrelevantCommonwealthGovernmentandACTGovernmentpoliciesandplanslistedinTable13.

Table 13: Relevant Government Policies

Jurisdiction Territory Policies

National Policies

NationalInfrastructurePriorities(IA,2009)

COAGReport:GettingthefundamentalsrightforAustralia’sinfrastructurepriorities(IA,2010)

NationBuildingIIProgram(CommonwealthGovernment,2012)

Inparticular,theProject’sgoalsareconsistentwithInfrastructureAustralia’sthemeof‘TransformingourCities’intermsofimprovingpublictransportnetworks,developmentofintegratedlanduseandinfrastructureplanningandcontributetosustainabilityimprovements.

Territory Policies

Strategic Public Transport Network Plan (MRC, 2009)

CanberraSpatialPlan(ACTPLA,2004)

Sustainable Transport Plan (ACTPLA, 2004)

ACTGovernmentInfrastructurePlan2011-21(ACTCM&CD,2011)

Transport for Canberra (ESDD, 2012)

TheProjectsupportsACTGovernment’sstrategicgoalsofprovidinganintegratedtransportsystem,sustainabletransportandencouragesactivetransport.

Policies in Development DraftACTPlanningStrategy(ESDD,2011)


Stage2–ProblemIdentification

City to Gungahlin CorridorTheProjectCorridorhasbeenidentifiedastheGovernment’sprioritycorridorfornewinfrastructureinvestmentintheshorttomediumterm,withtheviewofdevelopingrapidtransit,withintheGovernment’sTransportforCanberrapolicy.

TheProjectCorridorhasbeenidentifiedasakeycorridorinthe2031StrategicPublicTransportPlanNetwork,whichaimstodeliverpublictransportservicesatahighservicefrequencyacrossthedayontheNetwork.AlthoughtheNetworkhasbeendesignedfortheprovisionofabus-basedsolution,theNetworkhasbeendevelopedtobeadaptabletoandsupportiveofrapidtransitsolutionsaswellaspotentialcity-buildingactivities.

Also,planningworkandinvestmentshavebeenundertakenalongotherstrategiccorridorstoachieveawholeofnetworkimprovement.Forinstance,constructionisduetocommenceontheBelconnentoCity Transitway this year.

CurrentandFutureProblemsThe City to Gungahlin Corridor has a range of current and emerging issues that are intertwined and potentiallyrequireinvestmenttoresolve.Theseissuesinclude:

1. Growingroadcongestion

2. Highlevelsofcardependency

3. Afastgrowingpopulation

4. A mismatch between jobs and employment

5. Lowlandproductivity

6. Diminishing corridor amenity

7. High greenhouse gas intensity.

FurtherevidencetotheproblemsstatedaboveispresentedinStage3.AlloftheproblemsoutlinedaboveimpedeonachievinggoalsandobjectivesasoutlinedinStage1.Problems1to5presenthurdlestodeliveringpublictransportcapacity,managingroadcongestion,supportingCanberra’score,improvingequityandliveability.Problem6hindersachievingthegoalofmaintainingandimprovingtheamenityoftheProjectcorridor,andProblem7isanimpedimenttowardscreatinganenvironmentallyfriendly transport system.

Itcouldbeexpectedthatwithoutintervention,futuregrowthwithintheProjectCorridorwillleadtoafurtherdeclineinroadspeeds,increasingtraveltimewhichimpedesaccesstoemployment,communityfacilities,socialandrecreationalactivities,furtheraggravatingtheproblemsoutlinedabove.


Stage 3 – Problem Assessment

IntroductionThissectionprovidesquantitativeandqualitativeassessmentsoftheproblemsoutlinedinStage2.

RoadCongestionEvenwithcurrentdemand,NorthbourneAvenuealreadyoperatesatorovercapacityduringpeakperiods.Basedoncurrenttrafficconditions,roadcongestionaddsapproximately15minutestoacartripduringpeakperiods.ESDDestimatewithinvestmentinBRTorLRT,currentdelayscouldbereducedbymorethanhalfasshowninFigure11,abenefitthatcouldbeexpectedtogrowovertimeshouldaninvestmentinrapidtransitbemade.

Figure 11: Estimated Peak Period Delays for a Trip between Gungahlin and the City for General Traffic

02468

1012141618

Current with BRT with LRT

Peak

Per

iod

Dela

y (m

in)

Source: ESDD

PrevailingroadcongestionalsoadverselyimpactsontheefficiencyofbusoperationsalongtheProjectCorridor.TimetablesforcurrentlimitedstopRedRapidservicesthattravelalongtheProjectCorridoralreadyadd12minutestoallmorningpeaktripstotheCity.Figure12illustratesthecurrenttimeofdayprofilefortheRedRapidwhichtravelsfromGungahlintoCivic,includingunexpectedtraveltimes.

Figure 12: Red Rapid Route 200 Gungahlin to Civic: Current Timetabled Travel Times

0:00

Departure Time

0:05

0:10

0:20

0:15

0:25

0:30

0:35

0:40

7 AM

Trav

el T

ime

8 AM

9 AM

10 A

M

11 A

M

12 P

M

1 PM

2 PM

3 PM

4 PM

5 PM

6 PM

Source: ACTION Buses (2011)

DuringtheAMandPMpeakhour,traveltimesincreasebyover50%andnearly30%respectively.Under


thecurrentarrangements,publictransportservicesontheProjectCorridorcompetewithgeneraltraffic.Thislimitsthespeedandreliabilityofservices,astheyhavenopriorityorabilitytobypasstrafficdelaysinthecorridororbypassotherbuses,whichcreatesbusbunchingandinturnreducestheefficacyofprovidingahighfrequencyservice.

TheimpactofcongestiononbusesisnotlimitedtoresidentslivingalongtheProjectCorridor.NorthbourneAvenueisakeybuscorridorandactsasatrunkformostbusservicesoriginatinginCanberra’snorthernsuburbsandsouthofLakeBurleyGriffinasfaroutasFyshwickandTuggeranong. As the Transport for Canberra envisagemorecross-regional(Rapid)busservicestooperatealongthecorridorfromdestinationsincludingQueanbeyanandMolonglo,theimpactsofcongestionintheProjectCorridorwillbroadenovertime.Inshort,congestionintheProjectCorridorhasabroadimpacton many residents across Canberra.

HighLevelsofCarDependencyInCanberra,theJourney-to-Work(JTW)datasetarguablyprovidesthemostreliablesnapshotofpublictransportusage.TheJTWdatasetsuggeststhatcarusagehasremainedpersistentlyhighwithmorethanfourofeveryfivecommutesmadeinaprivatemotorvehicle(asshowninTable14).

Table 14: Canberra Journey to Work Mode Share 1976 – 2006

Mode 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006

Cardriver 71.3% 70.9% 72.6% 70.7% 72.7% 73.9% 73.5%

Car passengers 13.8% 12.4% 11.4% 12.1% 10.2% 9.4% 8.7%

Sub-total: private transport 85.1% 83.3% 84.0% 82.8% 82.9% 83.3% 82.2%

Public transport 8.9% 9.9% 9.7% 9.9% 8.3% 6.7% 7.9%

Bicycle only 0.9% 2.1% 2.1% 2% 2.2% 2.3% 2.5%

Walk only 4.6% 4.0% 3.6% 4.0% 4.3% 4.2% 4.9%

Other modes 0.5% 0.6% 0.6% 1.4% 2.3% 3.5% 2.4%Source: ACTPLA (2009)

AlthoughtheProjectCorridorhasthesecondhighestlevelsofpublictransportpatronageinCanberra,reflectingahighlevelsofpublictransportuseinNorthCanberra,levelsofcardependencyintheGungahlinSSDarehigherwithclosetonineoutoftencommutesweremadeinaprivatevehicle(asshown in Table 15).

Table 15: 2006 Journey to Work Mode Share by District

Statistical subdivision Car driver

Car passenger

Sub-total: private

transport

Public transport

Bicycle Walk Other

Gungahlin – Hall SSD 79.2% 10.1% 89.3% 7.4% 1.1% 1.2% 1.0%

North Canberra SSD 55.0% 7.3% 62.3% 10.1% 8.0% 18.2% 1.5%

Belconnen SSD 76.0% 9.2% 85.2% 8.8% 2.1% 2.9% 1.1%

South Canberra SSD 71.1% 8.1% 79.2% 7.7% 3.3% 8.4% 1.4%

Woden Valley SSD 72.2% 7.8% 80.0% 10.0% 2.2% 6.7% 1.2%

Weston Creek – Stromlo SSD 78.7% 9.0% 87.7% 6.8% 2.3% 2.1% 1.1%

Tuggeranong SSD 81.0 8.9% 89.9% 6.8% 1.0% 1.4% 1.0%

Canberra 73.5 8.7% 82.2% 7.9% 2.5% 4.9% 2.4%


GrowingRoadCongestionIncreasingtrafficcongestionisnotonlyanirritantforresidents,butalsoaddstothecostsofdoingbusiness.Roadcongestionadverselyimpactsontraveloutcomesthroughlongerwaitingtimesandunreliabilityandimposessignificantdirectandindirectcostsoneconomicactivityandproductivity.

IncreasingroadcongestionhasimplicationsontheefficiencyonCanberra’spublictransportnetwork,whichislikelytorelyonabus-basedpublictransportsystemfortheforeseeablefuture.Intheabsenceofbusprioritymeasuresandsegregationofbusoperationsfromgeneraltraffic,roadcongestionwillimpactontheefficiencyandattractivenessofpublictransportoperationsinCanberra.

WhileCanberramaynothavethesamelevelsofcongestionasseeninSydneyandMelbourne,highlevelsofaccessibilityarehighlyvaluedbyCanberransandisviewedasakeypartofCanberra’scompetitiveadvantageintermsofattractingpeopletoliveandworkinACT.InthecontextoftheProject,highlevelsofcongestionalongtheprojectcorridormayservetocompromisetheattractivenessofGungahlinasaplacetolive,adverselyimpactingonthespeedofdevelopmentaroundGungahlin.

Asareflectionofhighlevelsofcardependency,particularlyinthenorthernendoftheProjectCorridor,duringpeaktraveltimes,NorthbourneAvenuealreadyoperatesatorovercapacity.Peakhourlyflowisaround3,000vehiclesperhouroverthethreetrafficlaneswithinterruptionsfromtrafficlights.ArterialroadssimilartoNorthbourneAvenuetypicallyhaveacapacityof1,000vehiclesperlaneperhour,althoughtrafficlightsandintersectionsalongNorthbourneAvenueadverselyimpactonthispotentialthroughput.Anecdotally,NorthbourneAvenue’scapacityconstraintisevidentbythelongqueuesanddelaysthatcurrentlyexistalongthecorridorduringthepeakperiodsasdemonstratedbyFigure13.

Figure 13: Congestion on Northbourne Avenue during the morning peak

Source: ESDD

CongestionandqueuingareexpectedtoworsenalongbothNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoadwithflowduetofuturepopulationgrowthinGungahlin,andinsurroundingareasofNSW.PopulationgrowthinthesurroundingareasofNSWwillseeadditionalcross-bordertrafficusingNorthbourneAvenue.TrafficflowfromNSWintotheACThasincreasedbymorethan15%inthelastfiveyears.


RapidPopulationGrowthOverthepastdecade,thedistrictsofGungahlinandNorthCanberra,whichencompasstheProjectCorridor,haveexperiencedthefastest(andlargest)levelsofpopulationgrowthintheACT.Forthetenyearsto2011,thepopulationsofthesetwodistrictshaveincreasedbyanaverageof6.8%and2.6%perannumrespectively.Bycomparison,theACTpopulationgrewatanaverageof1.4%perannumoverthesameperiod.Table16outlinesthechangesinpopulationbetween2001and2011bydistrict.

Table 16: Population Growth by District

District (SSD) 2001 2011Average Annual Change

Growth Growth Rate

North Canberra 38,585 49,674 1,109 2.6%

Belconnen 85,601 94,947 935 1.0%

Woden Valley 32,494 34,530 204 0.6%

WestonCreek-Stromlo 23,662 23,760 10 0.0%

Tuggeranong 90,875 88,382 (249) (0.3%)

South Canberra 23,324 26,880 356 1.4%

Gungahlin-Hall 24,398 47,067 2,267 6.8%

ACT 319,317 365,621 4,630 1.4%

Queanbeyan 41,598 52,620 1,102 2.4%Source: ABS Cat. No 3218.0. Population estimates for 2011 are provisional and may change with the release of 2011 Census data.

Thesehighlevelsofgrowthareexpectedtocontinue.Basedoncurrentbusinessasusualprojections,thepopulationlevelintheGungahlindistrictisexpectedtoreach73,000by2021,approximately70%higherthanin2011andequivalenttoanaveragegrowthrateof4.8%perannum.6 – When fully developed,Gungahlin’spopulationisexpectedtobe90,000,ordoublethecurrentlevel.

Thepaceandlocationofpopulationgrowthhaslong-termimplicationsforliveabilityandsustainability.Higherlevelsofpopulationgrowthincreasesdemandtoprovideadditionaltransportinfrastructureandservices.WithsignificantconstraintsontheabilitytoexpandroadcapacityinandaroundtheProjectCorridor,investmentintransportinfrastructurewouldberequiredtomitigatefuturecongestiononboththeroadandpublictransportnetworkandtomaintainandenhanceconnectivitybetweenGungahlinandtheCity.

Mismatch in Employment and PopulationAlthoughplanningpoliciesinCanberrahavesoughttoincreaseself-containmenttoreducedemandforlongerdistancetravel,itisapparentthatthespatialdistributionofemploymentpositionsissuchthatindoesnotachievehighlevelsofself-containment.

MostdistrictsinCanberrahaveinsufficientemploymenttocaterforallworkingageresidentsandmoreover,manyofthesepositionsaretakenbyresidentslivinginotherdistricts.OnlyinNorthCanberra, South Canberra and Woden districts, the centre of Canberra, are there more employment positionsthanresidents.Table17outlinesthenumberofjobsperpersonineachdistrictandtheproportionofjobsprovidedwithineachdistricttakenbydistrictresidents.

TheconcentrationofemploymentpositionsandthenatureoftheemploymentpositionsinthecentreofCanberraisintheprovisionofservicesparticularlywithinthepublicadministration,professional/scientific/technicalandeducation/trainingsectors.TheinstitutionsandorganisationsthatdeliverthesetypesofservicesaremostprevalentintheCityandtheParliamentaryTriangle


Table 17: 2006 Employment Outcomes by District

District Number of Jobs per Person Proportion of District Jobs Taken by District Residents

North Canberra 2.55 23%

South Canberra 3.68 14%

Woden 1.30 23%

Weston 0.36 42%

Belconnen 0.55 61%

Tuggeranong 0.33 73%

Gungahlin 0.39 43%

Queanbeyan 0.56 58%Source: ACTPLA (2009)

ItisdifficulttoforeseetheunwindingoftheconcentrationofthesetypesofactivitiesintheCityandParliamentaryTriangle.Totheextentthatplanningconstraintsallow,marketforceswilltendtoencourageeconomicactivitiesofacomplementarynaturetoconsolidatespatially.Furthermore,currentgovernmentlanduseprojectionsexpectemploymentandeconomicactivityinthecentreofCanberrawillcontinuetoincrease.

Hence,employmentintheCityandtheParliamentaryTrianglewillcontinuetobeakeyemploymentattractorfortheforeseeablefuture.Forthesetheseareastoaccessworkersandgoodsefficientlyandeffectively,theprovisionofatransportnetworktoconnectresidentialareasintoemploymenthubswithsufficientcapacity,speedandefficiencyisimperative.

Withoutsignificantchangesinhowemploymentisdistributedacrosstheterritory,norealisticlandusescenariocanbeexpectedtoprovidesignificantgrowthinemploymentattowncentres.Hence,itislikelythatresidentslivingonthenorthernendoftheProjectCorridorwillgenerallyneedtotraveltowardsthe City in order to seek employment for the foreseeable future.

LowLandProductivityByinternationalcomparison,thepopulationdensitiesofAustraliacitiesaremuchlowerthanthatoftheirinternationalcounterparts.AustraliancitiestendtobemorespreadoutintermsofurbansettlementbutevenbyAustralianstandards,Canberra’sdensityisquitelow.Figure14showsthesameblackboxthatcoversCanberra’spopulationofapproximately360,000peopleishometoapproximately1 million people in Sydney:


Figure 15: Spatial Comparison between Sydney and Canberra.

Source: Adapted from Google Maps

Alandusescenarioinfavouroflowdensitydevelopmenthasarangeofeconomicandsocialimplications:

• Higher per capita cost of providing public transport and community services: Lowdensitiesalsoimpactonthecostsofprovidingcommunityservicesonapercapitabasis.Tomaintainaconsistentlevelofservice,inlowdensitiesareasagenciesarecompelledtoputintoplacemoreinfrastructureandservicesinordertomaintaincoverage.Thisphenomenonisperhapsmostobservableintheprovisionofpublictransportservicesbutalsooccurswithprovisionofwater,sewerage,electricity,communications,schoolsandhospitals.

• Risk of social exclusion:Moreoftenthannot,thecostofprovidingcommunityfacilitiesandpublictransportthatishighlyaccessibleinlowdensityareaslimitstheprovisionofsuchsocialinfrastructureandservices.Withsuchinfrastructureandservicesbeinglessaccessible,thosethatdonothavereadyaccesstoacar,whichtendtobethemostvulnerableandinthemostneedforaccesstocommunityservices,canleadtoariskofsocialexclusion.

Diminishing Corridor AmenityAs the main approach route from Sydney or Melbourne and its link to the core of Canberra, the importanceofthequalityoftheurbanenvironmentalongNorthbourneAvenue,isformalisedwithintheNationalCapitalPlan.TheAvenueservesa:

• Nationally significant role: thepresentationoftheAvenueformsthevisitor’sfirstperceptionofthecity’scharacter.ItsroleastheprimaryNationalGatewayelevatesitsimportance,theimportanceofurbandesignandthedecision-makingfortreatmentswithinit

• Commercial role:theAvenueisCanberra’skeycommercialaddressforapartments,professionalandservicebusinesses.TheAvenuecatersforarangeoflandusesforresidential,commercial,recreationalandgovernmentpurposes

• Transport role:TheAvenueisthemajornorth-southroutenorthofLakeBurleyGriffin,providingconnectionsforcarsandpublictransportbetweenthenorthernsuburbsofCanberra,theCityandsouthern Canberra.


However,theAvenue’scurrentdesignandfunctionality,inparticularitsroleasamajorarterialroad,diminishesthequalityoftheurbanenvironmentalongtheAvenue:

• Impact on natural amenity: Theincreaseinformalityisachievedbytheintroductionofalargecentralmedianwhichisfirstplantedwithsporadicclumpsoftreeswhichbecomescontinuoustreeplantingclosertothecitycentre.Thesetreesareplantedrandomlyratherthaninrowstoavoidamissingordyingtreebecomingobvious.Duetosoilandspeciesselectionissues,manyofthetreeshaveandwillcontinuetorequireremoval.TheProjectprovidesanopportunitytoremedythedeterioratinglandscapingandnaturalenvironmentalongtheAvenue

• Impact on urban amenity: AlthoughNorthbourneAvenueprovidessomeformofcapacityforallmodesoftransport,theattractivenessofnon-carmodesissomewhatlimited.Combinedwithahighlevelofcarusageandcongestion,thewalking(andforpublictransportusers,thewaiting)environmentiscompromised,withpedestriansandpassengersexposedtohighlevelsoftrafficandassociatednoise,accidentsandpollutants.Insuchacardominatedspace,itcanbecomequitedifficulttodevelopurbanformsthatencouragethedesiredfuturecharacteroftheAvenueasaplaceofactivityandvibrancy.

High Greenhouse Gas IntensityHighincomelevels,thelowdensitylevelsandlocationcombinetoresultinthelevelofgreenhousegasintensityintheACTtobeabovenationalaverages.GreenhousegasemissionsarerelativelyhighintheACT for the following reasons:

• Low densities:lowresidentialdensitiesandtheassociatedprevalenceofdetacheddwellingsincreasetheenergyintensityofdwellings.Canberra’scoldclimateservestoincreaseenergyconsumptionduringwinter.Lowdensitiesalsoareassociatedwithhighlevelsofcarownershipandusage

• High level of car dependency:highlevelsofcaruseandassociatedlowusageofpublictransportandactivetransportcombinetoincreaseemissionsfromtheburningoffossilfuels.Withoutintervention,increasingtrafficvolumesandcongestionwillcombinetoincreaseemissionsfromtransportfurther

• ThecontinuationofcurrentlandusescenariosarelikelytobeinconsistentwiththeACTClimateChangeStrategyastheywillcontinuetoencouragethedevelopmentofdetacheddwellingsandlimittheefficacyofpublicandactivetransportinvestments.

ThediscussionaboveisbasedonquantitativeanalysisofavailabledataregardingtheProjectCorridoraswellaspreviousworkdonebyprecedentstudies.Forthepurposeofthissection,aqualitativeassessmenthasbeenappliedinlieuofunavailabilityofproject-specificdata.

QualitativeProblemAssessmentFrameworkTheProblemAssessmentFrameworkusesa7-scaleratingtooutlinetheimpactofproblemsontheProjectoutcome.The7ratingsarethoserecommendedbyInfrastructureAustraliawhenundertakingaqualitativeassessment.ThesuggestedrankingsarelistedinTable18.


Table 18: Recommended Assessment Ratings

Rating Level Description Rating

Highly beneficial

Majorpositiveimpactsresultinginsubstantialandlong-termimprovementsorenhancementsoftheexistingenvironment.

Moderately beneficial

Moderatepositiveimpact,possiblyofshort,mediumorlonger-termduration.Positiveoutcomemaybeintermsofnewopportunitiesoroutcomeswhichenhanceorimproveoncurrentconditions.

Slightly beneficial

Minimalpositiveimpact,possiblyonlylastingovertheshort-term.Maybeconfinedto a limited area.

Neutral Neutral—nodiscernibleorpredictedpositiveornegativeimpact. –

Slightly detrimental

Minimalnegativeimpact,probablyshort-term,abletobemanagedormitigated,andwillnotcausesubstantialdetrimentaleffects.Maybeconfinedtoasmallarea.

Moderately detrimental

Moderatenegativeimpact.Impactsmaybeshort,mediumorlong-termandimpactswillmostlikelyrespondtomanagementactions.

Highly detrimental

Majornegativeimpactswithserious,long-termandpossiblyirreversibleeffectsleadingtoseriousdamage,degradationordeteriorationofthephysical,economicorsocialenvironment.Requiresamajorre-scopeofconcept,design,location,justification,orrequiresmajorcommitmenttoextensivemanagementstrategiestomitigatetheeffect.

AssessmentResultsTable19providesabriefoverviewoftheissues,theirimpactonCanberraandtheProject’sobjectives.Table20outlinesthescaleoftheimpactsofeachissueontheProjectobjectivesusingtheaforementioned7-scalerating.


Table 19: Overview of Current Problems Impacting on Project Objectives

Problem Impact Impact on Project objectives

Growing Population

Impactsoncongestion(seeGrowingRoadCongestionbelow)

Increases demand for infrastructure

Increasesdemandforadditionalservices

ImpactsonrevenueraisedbyGovernment

NorthbourneAvenueisexpectedtocaterforasignificantshareoftheprojectedgrowth

ReducedmobilityimpactingonefficienttransportmovementalongtheProjectCorridor

Increasedprivatevehicletraveladverselyimpactsonachievinghigherpublicandactivetransportmode shares along Project Corridor

Low Land Productivity

Increasestraveldistancestoemployment,housing,servicesandleisureactivities

Inhibitsonbenefitsofeconomiesofscale

Opportunity cost of land use developmentforotherpurposes

Decreasedproductivityduetolongertraveltimesmovingin,outandthroughNorthbourneAvenue

Inhibitsonincreasingpublicandactivetransportmodesharesasprivatevehicletravelremainsmoreattractive

Lowdensitypropertydevelopmentimpactsonpropertyvalues–Governmentreliesonpropertyvaluestoraiserevenue

Diminishing Corridor Amenity

Decreasesperceivedcharacterandimageof Canberra

DecreasedperceivedcharacteralongProjectCorridorasanationalapproachroute

Growing Road Congestion

Increasesintraveltime

Increasesinvehicleoperationcosts

Reducedliveability

Poorer air quality

Decreasedproductivity

Decreased capacity

Decreasedregionalcompetitiveness

Increased greenhouse gasses

High Car Dependency and Poor Public Transport Usage

Increasesoperationalcosts/subsidy

Increasesprivatevehicletravel

Increases transport emissions

Decreased public transport mode share

Increasednoiseandairpollution

High Greenhouse Gas Intensity

Poorer air quality

Impactsonlocalenvironment

Increased greenhouse gases

Increasednoiseandairpollution


Table 20: Qualitative Assessment of Current problems and their Impact on Project Objectives

Problem Objective

Growing Population

Low Density

Development

Diminishing Corridor Amenity

Growing Road

Congestion

Poor Usage of Public Transport

High Greenhouse Gas Intensity

Delivering transport efficiently n/a

Managing congestion n/a

Developing a resilient system n/a -

Supporting economic prosperity/employment growth

n/a

Delivering safety and security n/a

Creating a low carbon and environmentally responsible transport system

Ensuring equity and accessibility, and protecting amenity and liveability

Stage 4 – Problem Analysis

Many of the issues presented earlier are the result of a range of underlying causes that can be traced backtothedevelopmentofCanberra,thehistoryofpublicinvestmentintransportalongwiththetravelbehaviourpatternsofthetravelpublicduetocar,fuelandparkingaffordability.Insummarythecausesoftheproblemscanbenarrowedtothefollowingsections.

UrbanPlanningHistoryAtitsinception,CanberrawasplannedasapolycentriccitywiththeParliamentaryTriangleandtheCityservingasthecity’sciviccentrewithtowncentresatBelconnen,TuggeranongandWoden,GungahlinandWestonCreekdevelopedastimeprogressed.Thecitywascarefullyplannedtobeaself-containedcommunitiessurroundedby‘greenbuffers’,containingproportionateareasofresidences,businessesandindustry.Aswithmanypolycentriccities,motorwaystyleparkwaysandrapidtransitlinkswereintended to be built between each town centre and the City.

Plannersintendedthatpeoplewouldliveandworkinthesametowncentre,reducingtheneedforlongerdistancetravel.Withlargequantitiesofavailableandaffordablelandthisresultedin,overtime,lowdensitysettlementpatterns(orurbansprawl)withdetachedhousingstyles.

Whilsttheparkwaylinkshavebeendeveloped,investmentintherapidtransitlinksdidnotmaterialise,withinvestmentflowingintotheexpansionofconventionalbusservicesinstead.

Also,thedecentralisationofemploymentdidnotmanifest;thebenefitsofagglomerationhaveseenemployment centralise in the City and the Parliamentary Triangle.


TheproliferationofprivatevehicleuseinACThasledtotransportlargelyshapinglanduseratherthanthroughintegratedplanningstrategiesasaresultofaccesstolowcostprivatemotoring,highqualityparkwaysandanextensivesupplyoffreeparking.

Whiledensityisnottheonlyfactortosupportpublictransport,mixedusedevelopmentsandhigherdensity housing along public transport mutually support each other.

Thisinturnisimpactingtheregionaleconomicperformancethroughthelossofproductivityduetotimedelaysandincreasingjourneylengthstoplacesofworkandbusiness.Thiseffectisbeingrealisedby,notjustthemovementofpeoplebutthemovementofgoodsaswell–economiccostsassociatedwithgreenhousegasemissionsarealsoawell-knownconsequence.

RoadFocusedSupplySideMeasuresWhilethesuburbanisationhasbeenakeycauseofmanyoftoday’schallenges,governmentinvestmentintransporthasalwaysfavouredasupply-sideapproachthatfavouredroadsgiventhehighlevelofdemandforprivatemotorvehicleuse,thecost-effectivenessofconnectingnewresidentialestateswithroadsandthelimitedrecurrentfinancialimpactofdevelopingroadinfrastructuredespitethecongestionandothercoststhatroadusebrings.

InvestmentsinroadinfrastructureinCanberrahaveservedtoadverselyimpactontheattractivenessofpublictransportrelativetocarsinthefollowingways:

• Thedevelopmentofgrade-separatedparkwaysservedtoincreasetravelspeedsofcars,andloweringcartraveltimes

• Withlimitedseparationfromgeneraltraffic,roadcongestionwouldimpactonthespeedofbusservices,increasingbustraveltimes

• Developmentofloopandcul-de-sacroadnetworkstoreduceratrunningfurtherincreasedtraveltimesforbusesandpassengersaccessingandegressingfromtheseservicesbyforcingbusesandpedestrians to follow circuitous routes.

BusNetworkDesignandOperationsAlthough the Transport for Canberrapolicyenvisagessignificantchangestothecurrentbusnetwork,thefollowingattributesofthebusnetworkservetofurtherreducetheefficiencyofpublictransportin Canberra:

• Thebusnetworkiscurrentlydesignedtomaximiseservicecoverage,requiringmultipleroutesoperatingatlowfrequenciestoserviceaparticularareatoensurethat95%ofresidentsarenofurther than 500m from a route

• TerminationoflocalservicesatthelocaltowncentrewithtravellersrequiredtotransferforonwardtraveltotheCityandotherdestinations

• Significantdifferencesintheroutingandfrequencyofservicesbetweenweekdaypeakperiods,weekdayoff-peakperiodsandonweekends.

GovernanceSinceachievingself-governmentin1989,successiveACTGovernmentshavebeguntomanagetheissueofsustainabilityintheACT.Shiftingdemographics,predictedchangesinclimate,andcostpressureshaveraisedtheneedforthecitytoadaptitsshapeandform–anumberofstudiesandstrategieshaveacknowledgedthatCanberra,initscurrentstate,isnotefficient,sustainableorequitableenoughtocontinuetocaterforadispersedcity,reliantonprivatemotorvehiclesforalltravel.

Toovercomehistoricallegacies,theACTGovernmenthastakenanumberofstepstoimplementbest-practiceapproachestointegratedlanduseandtransportstrategiesbyadoptingsmartlandusegrowthpolicies,alongwithaprioritisedandmulti-modalapproachtotransportinvestment.


Stage 5 – Option GenerationAstrategicapproachwasadoptedbytheProjectSponsorindefiningandfilteringtherangeofoptionsconsideredforeconomicandfinancialassessment.

ThedevelopmentofoptionsfortheProjecthasbeeninformedbytheoutcomesofstudiesthathavebeenpreviouslyundertakenfortheProjectCorridor.

Theoptiondevelopmentandfilteringprocesswasnotdevelopedformallyperse.Feedbackduringstakeholderconsultationsuggeststhataformaloptiondevelopmentprocesstoexploreissuesincludingalternativecross-sectionaltreatments,spatialandtemporalstaging,complementarypolicymeasuresaswell as modal scenarios is warranted.

Thissaid,thestrategichigh-levelapproachtoidentifyandfilteroptionscouldbeconsideredappropriategiventhepre-feasibilitynatureoftheProjectandwouldprovideusefulinputintoaformaloptiondevelopmentprocess.ThefollowingsectionoutlinestheoptionevaluationframeworkusedbytheProjectteamtodeveloptheoptionsconsideredinthisSubmission.

OptionEvaluationFrameworkArangeofinvestmentandreformoptionscouldbeconsideredbytheACTGovernmenttoreducethedependenceonprivatevehicles,increasetheuseofpublicandactivetransportandbettermanageincreasingtraveldemand.Atahighlevel,thereexistfourbroadapproachesfromwhichoptionscouldbedeveloped:

Road focused approach: Theroadfocusedapproachwouldbebasedon“predictandprovide”styletransportplanningfocusedprimarilyonvehiculartraffic.Itentailsmaximuminvestmentinadditionalcapacityforgeneralpurposetrafficuseacrossthenetwork.Itcouldbedescribedasa“buildourwayoutoftrafficcongestion”strategy.Thisincludesnoemphasisonchargingforuseofroadspace.Investmentinpublictransportwouldbeassumedtobesetata‘dominimum’level.

Public transport approach: thepublictransportstrategyfocusentailsconcentrationofinvestmentonenhancedpublictransportinfrastructureandservices.Roadinvestmentbeyondcurrentlycommittedinvestmentswouldbeheavilyrestrictedinfavourofmajorinvestmentinbusandrail.Thiscouldbedescribedasa‘publictransportcansolveit’strategy.

Policy approach: The reform and policy approach uses a range of policy and demand management toolstobettermanagethelevelandtimingofpassengermovements.Suchtoolscanrangefromlandusestrategies,subsidisedfares,parkingchargesandroadpricingaswellassoftermeasureslikeindividualisedtransportmarketing(e.g.TravelSmart)andworkplacetravelplans.Suchpolicieshavenottraditionallybeenafocusgiventheeaseofimplementingsupply-sidesolutionshoweverhasbecomeattractivewiththehighcostsofprovidingadditionalroadandpublictransportsupplyandtomaximisetheuseofexistinginvestments.

Comprehensive approach: Thecomprehensiveapproachassumesthemaximumrangeofinvestmentandpolicyinitiativesareatworkinaddressingthetransportchallenges.Thisincludedaverystrongfocusonshiftingpeopletomoresustainablemodes(publictransportandactivetransport)commencingintheshorttomedium-termthroughacombinationofpolicytoolsandsmallscaleinvestments.Inthemediumterm,majorinvestmentsinthepublictransportnetworkaremadeinconjunctionwithstrongerpolicyinterventions.ThemeritsanddrawbacksofeachapproacharesummarisedinTable21.


Table 21: Merits and Drawbacks of Each Approach

Approach Merits and Drawbacks

Additional road capacity

Whilstthereissomeabilitytoenhanceroadcapacityonexistingroutes,existingplanningandenvironmentalcontrolsplacesignificantrestrictionsindevelopingroadcapacityinnewcorridors.

EarlyplanningforGungahlinincludedprovisionforGungahlinDriveandMonashDrive.GungahlinDrivewascompletedin2008.TogetherwiththesoontobeconstructedexpandedMajuraParkway,thesetwocorridorsmayprovidesomerelief(althoughnotsignificantrelief)onNorthbourneAvenue.

Thesecondarterialroad,MonashDrive,isunlikelytobeconstructedasitsalignmentrunsthroughtheMountMajuraandMountAinslienaturereserveswhichhavewoodlandreservesthatareprotectedundertheFederalEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct.TheACTGovernmenthasremovedthisalignmentfromtheTerritoryPlan.

Furthermore,theprovisionofadditionalroadcapacitywouldruncontrarytoarangeofProjectobjectivestoreducecardependencyandtheNationalCapitalPlanwhichaimstominimisethelevelofcongestioninthevicinityoftheCityandtheParliamentaryTriangle.

Additional public transport capacity

Withtheobjectivesofprovidingadditionalcapacityandtoencourageagreaterlevelofpublic transport usage, the Submission considers a range of possible public transport interventions,whicharediscussedfurtheronthefollowingpage.

However,thecurrentlowcostrecoveryofpublictransportservicessuggeststhatcomplementaryandsupportingpolicymeasuresandlandusescenariosmayberequiredtomaximisetheeconomicandfinancialsustainabilityofpublictransportoperations.

Policy approach Changestopolicyscenariosprovideopportunitiestobettermanagedemandandmakebetteruseofexistinginfrastructure.

AkeyelementofthisSubmissionistheexplorationoftheimpactofchangestocurrentlandusescenariosthatwillencourageahigherlevelofresidentialandcommercialdensitiesoverandabovethatprojectedfortheProjectCorridorinthefuture.

Thereareopportunitiestofurtherincreasetheviabilityoftherapidtransitoptionsconsidered as part of this Submission using policy measures. These measures may include higherparkingchargesandroadpricing.However,itisworthnoting:

• CSTM already makes an allowance for a general increase in parking and fuel costs. Other pricedbasedmeasureswillrequirefurthermodeldevelopmenttoexplore

• Thepoliticalandcommunityacceptabilityofcertainpolicymeasuresmaybeloworunknown

• Itisunlikelythatpolicymeasuresintheirownrightwillcreatesufficientcapacitytocaterfor future demand (although it may delay the need for such capacity)

• Policymeasuresaregenerallyprovidedinacomplementarymannerratherthanasanalternativetoinfrastructuresolutions.Forinstance,roadpricingschemesgenerallyareassociatedwiththeprovisionofmorepublictransportservices.

Policymeasurescouldbeconsideredfurtheraspartoftheoptiondevelopmentstageduringa more detailed feasibility analysis.

Comprehensive approach

Asmentionedpreviously,thisSubmissionconsiderspolicyinterventionsintheformofdifferentlandusescenarios.

Byconsideringthecombinedeffectsofpolicyandinvestments,thecomprehensiveapproachgenerallyleadstoanimprovementintheefficiencyofspendingbydeferringsomespendingand/orreducingtheamountofspendingrequired.

However,developingapackageofmeasurescanbecomplex.Suchanapproachwouldbewarrantedaspartoftheoptiondevelopmentstageduringamoredetailedfeasibilityanalysis.


Considered OptionsInconsideringthemeritsofthefourapproaches,theoptionsconsideredaspartoftheSubmissionareeitherpublictransportbasedoptionsorlanduseoptions(inconjunctionwithtransportinvestment).Noroadoptionswereconsidered.Furthermore,previousworkhasbeenundertakenfornewbusprioritylanes,BRTandLRT.WhilenewbuslanescouldbeconsideredasthemoreconservativeapproachtoaddressidentifiedProjectCorridorissues,previousstudieshaveshownthatnewbuslaneswouldhavelimitedimpactonsurroundingurbandevelopment,aswellastolikelynotprovideanetpositiveeconomic return.

Table22outlinestherangeofoptionsthatwereconsidered,whethertheywereshortlistedandtherationalefortheirinclusionorexclusion:

Table 22: Options Considered

Option Short listed?

Rationale

Conversion of existing lanes to transit lanes

No Theconversionofexistinggeneraltrafficlanestotransitlanesmayprovidesomeshortterm relief for buses.

However,thistreatmentmaycausecongestionassingle-occupantvehiclesareconstrained to fewer lanes.

ThiswillincreasethroughtrafficonnorthCanberrasuburbanroads,negativelyimpactingonresidentialamenityandliveability.

ThesetypesoflanestendtobeineffectiveinanAustraliancontextastheyrequiremanualenforcementandhencesufferfromhighviolationrates.

Furthermore,withsignificantincreasesinbusservicefrequenciesandbusbunchingissues,transitlanesareunlikelytoaddressinfullcurrentorfuturebusoperatingissues.

Conversion of existing lanes to bus lanes

No Theconversionofexistinglanestobuslanesmayprovidesomeshorttermreliefforbusesandmaypresentacost-effectivebusprioritymeasure.

However,previousstudieshavedemonstratedthatthistreatmentwillcausecongestionalongNorthbourneAvenueandresultinrat-runningoncurrentdaydemandlevels.

New bus lanes

No Whilepreviousstudiesagreeontheneedthatshouldbuslanesbedeveloped,thenumberofgeneraltrafficlanesshouldnotbereducedtoavoidcreatingroadcongestion.

Recentassessmentshaveshownthatnewconventionalbuslanesarenoteconomicallyandfinanciallyviable.

ThisSubmissiondoesnotconsidertheviabilityofdedicatedbuslaneswherethenumberofgenerallanesiskeptatcurrentlevels.

BRT Yes PreviousstudieshavenotexploredindetailtheviabilityofBRT.

ThisSubmissionconsiderstheviabilityofdedicatedBRTfacilitiesasacompromisebetween bus lanes and LRT.

LRT Yes PreviousstudieshavenotexploredindetailtheviabilityofLRTconfinedtotheProjectCorridor.

GiventhehighcommunitysupportforLRTandthatLRTisviewedasalongtermtransportsolutionwithintheProjectCorridor,thisSubmissionconsiderstheviabilityofLRT.

Other modes

No Othertransportmodessuchasmonorail,metrorailandheavyrailwerenotconsideredas part of this Submission.


Option Short listed?

Rationale

Increased parking charges

Yes Higher parking charges are considered within the Submission as a mechanism toencouragealternativetransportuseandtosharetheProjectcostsacrossallbeneficiaries.

CSTMisalsounderpinnedwithanimplicitassumptionthatparkingchargesriseovertime.

Road pricing No RoadpricingisnotapartofACTGovernmentpolicy.Shouldroadpricingbeconsideredfurther,optionsfordifferenttypesofroadpricingandanassociatedassessmentofequity,communityandpoliticalacceptabilitywouldneedtobeundertakenbeforeitisconsideredaviableoption.

WhilstCSTMhassomecapacitytomodelroadpricing,furthermodeldevelopmentwould be required to accurately assess the impact of road pricing.

Land use scenarios

Yes LandusescenariosareseenasapivotalelementtoenhancingtheviabilityoftherapidtransitoptionsconsideredinthisSubmission.

ThisSubmissionconsiderstheimpactofhigherdensitiesinconjunctionwithtransportinvestment.


Stage 6 – Option AssessmentBasedontheshortlistingprocess,theProjectteamdevelopedthefollowingsetoftransportandlandusescenarios.Adescriptionofthesescenariosisprovidedasfollows.

Transport ScenariosThree transport scenarios were considered by the Project Team:


• BRT• LRT

Thedetailofeachtransportscenariowasworkshoppedwithstakeholders.Stakeholderconsultationinformedthedesiredcrosssectionofthecorridorforeachofthescenarios.TheplacementoftheLRTor BRT corridor on the kerbside or within the median was assessed against factors including safety, amenity,landuseandlocationofutilities.Communityconsultationindicatedaclearpreferenceforamedianalignment.ThewidemedianofNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoadallowsfortheconstructionofatransitcorridorwithoutdisruptiontoexistingtrafficlanes.

Eachofthetransportscenariosdifferinthedegreeofpriorityandsegregationthatisaffordedtopublictransportservices.Keyfeaturesofeachtransportscenarioaredescribedasfollows:

BusinessasUsualUnderthebusinessasusualtransportoptionshowninFigure15,nochangestothetransportnetworkapartfromcommittedroadandpublictransportprojectsandinitiativesareproposed.BuseswillcontinuetosharecapacitywithgeneraltrafficalongbothNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad(wherenobuspriorityiscurrentlyprovided).

Figure 15: Projects corridor cross section under business as usualNorthbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS


ThehighfrequencyservicesprovidedalongidentifiedFrequentandRapidcorridorsisassumedtobeimplemented.ThecurrentlimitedstopRedRapidservicethattravelsbetweenGungahlinandFyshwickviatheCitywillcontinuetobetheprimarypublictransportlinkbetweenGungahlinandtheCity,augmentedwithlocalallstopbusservices.Figure16showskeybusroutesthatareproposedunderthePlan around the Project Corridor.

Figure 16: 2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan Network around the Project Corridor

Source: ESDD


BRTUnder the BRT scenario shown in Figure 17, a new median busway would be constructed on NorthbourneAvenuebetweenAlingaStreetandFlemingtonRoadandonFlemingtonRoadbetweenNorthbourneAvenueandGungahlinforusebyallbusservicestravellingonNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad.Thecivilengineeringofthebuslaneswillbedesignedinmannertoreadilyallowforaconversiontolightrailshouldtheoptionbeexercised.

ThemediantreatmentwouldutiliseavailablespaceforadualdedicatedbuswayintheNorthbourneAvenuemedian.ThemedianofFlemingtonRoadwouldbedevelopedtoprovideadualdedicatedbuswayforbusoperations.TheBRTscenariomakesallowancefor15stopsbetweenGungahlinandCivicwithstopsclosertoGungahlinandCivicspacedclosertogetherwhilstintermediatestopsspacedfurtherapart.Busbayswouldbeconstructedtoallowlimitedstoporexpressbusestobypassdwellingbuses.

NewstationsatGungahlin,DicksonandCivicwouldbedevelopedtofacilitateinterchangingwithotherbusservices.

AnewBRTservicewouldoperatebetweenGungahlinandCivicandintegratewiththeremainingRedRapidroutebetweenCivicandFyshwickandinthefuturetoQueanbeyan.Thisservicewouldhaveaminimum headway of 5 minutes during peak periods.

The remainder of the public transport network is assumed to be based on the 2031 Strategic Public Transport Network Plan.

Figure17: Project corridor cross section under BRTNorthbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS

Constructionisassumedtocommenceduring2013andconcludein2017.Fulloperationsareassumedto commence in 2018.


LRTUndertheLRTscenarioshowninFigure18,betweenGungahlinandNorthbourneAvenue,adedicatedlightrailcorridorwouldbedevelopedinthemedianofFlemingtonRoadfortheuseoflightrailservices.OnNorthbourneAvenuebetweenFlemingtonRoadandCivic,adedicatedcorridorinthemedianwouldbeprovidedforlightrailbutwouldbedesignedtoallowthededicatedcorridortobesharedbybothbusandlightrailservices.Toachievethis,lightrailtrackswouldbeembeddedintoanasphaltroadsurfacealongNorthbourneAvenue.

NochangeinthenumberofgeneraltrafficlanesonNorthbourneAvenueorFlemingtonRoadisproposed.

Thededicatedlightrapidtransitcorridormakesallowancefor15stopsbetweenGungahlinandCivicwithstopsclosertoGungahlinandCivicspacedclosertogetherwhilstintermediatestopsspacedfurtherapart.

NewinterchangesatGungahlin,DicksonandCivicwouldbedevelopedtofacilitateinterchangeswithotherbusservices.

AnewlightrailservicewouldreplacetheexistingRedRapidservicebetweenGungahlinandCivicandintegratewiththeremainingRedRapidroutebetweenCivicandFyshwickandinthefuturetoQueanbeyan.Theminimumheadwayforthelightrailservicewouldbe7.5minutesduringpeakperiods.

OtherbusestravellingalongFlemingtonRoadorNorthbourneAvenuecouldalsousethededicatedcorridor. The remainder of the public transport network is assumed to be based on the 2031 Strategic Public Transport Network Plan.

Figure18: Project corridor cross section under LRTNorthbourne Avenue

Flemington Road

Source: DCM & URS

Aspartofthisoption,supportingoperatinginfrastructurewouldbedevelopedincludingrollingstock,signalling,powersupply,substationsanddepots.

Constructionisassumedtocommenceduring2013andconcludein2017.Fulloperationsareassumedto commence in 2018.


LandUseScenariosThesubmissionalsoseekstoexploretheeffectofchangesinlanduseontheviabilityofpublictransportservices.TheintertwinednatureoftheissuesfacingtheProjectCorridormeanthatanintegratedtransport-landuseapproachislikelytooptimisetheeconomicoutcomesofinvestmentsintheProjectCorridor.

Duringdevelopmentandconsultationwithstakeholders,thethreelandusescenarioswerecoined‘low’,‘medium’and‘high’scenarios,reflectingtherelativelevelofchangeinpopulationandemploymentintheProjectCorridorundereachscenario.AllscenariosassumedanincreaseindensitiesoverandabovethatalreadyprojectedbycurrentGovernmentlanduseforecastsbuttotalemploymentandpopulationacross the ACT and Queanbeyan was held constant.

Both‘medium’and‘high’scenariosweredeveloped,buthavebeenexcludedfromeconomicassessment.The‘medium’scenarioassumedasignificantlevelofredevelopmentwithintheProjectCorridorbuthasnotbeenpresentedinthissubmissionbecauseithadonlyamarginalimpactontheeconomicresultsabovethelowadditionaldevelopmentscenario.The‘high’scenarioprojectedgrowthintheProjectCorridorthatwouldrequireagrowthintotalACTpopulationoverandabovecurrentprojections,andthereforecouldnotbe compared to business as usual, low or medium scenarios, and was eliminated for this reason.

Hence,thissubmissiontestsonlythelowadditionaldensificationscenario,whichhasbeencoinedasthe ‘higher density’ scenario for the purposes of this submission.

Shouldtheinvestmentsintransportinfrastructurebesufficientlyattractivetopotentialusers,theinvestmentsthemselvescouldgeneratechangesinlanduse.TheProjectislikelytoimproveaccessibilitythroughreducedtraveltimes,decongestionandimprovedtraveltimereliability.Inturn,improvementsinaccessibilitymaydrivelandusechanges.Wheretransportinterventionsprovideasignificantenhancementinaccessibility,peopleandindustriesmaychoosetomovethelocationoftheirresidence,employment,businesscentresandaltertheirlogisticschainstotakeadvantageoffastertraveltimes.Transportinvestments,inparticularlightrailinvestments,mayalsoresultinredevelopmentaroundstations.

Landusesettingsareconsideredanimportantpolicytool.Evenwithoutsignificantchangestoexistingplanningcontrols,theProjectCorridorhasanumberofpropertiesthatcouldbereadilyredevelopedbyGovernmenttosupporturbandensification.Forinstance,theACTGovernmentownsthemotorregistrysiteandtouristinformationsiteaswellaspublichousingcomplexesalongNorthbourneAvenue.TherealsoexistsopportunitiestorezoneunderdevelopedsitesincludingpartsofEPICandCanberraRacecourse.TheGovernmentmayalsoseektomanagethespatialdistributionofdemandforhousingby constraining supply outside the Project Corridor. Finally, as land in the ACT is sold on a leasehold arrangement,theACTGovernmentistheultimateownerofalllandandcouldusethesearrangementstoeffectchangesinlandusepatterns.

However,modellingtherelationshipbetweenlanduseandtransportiscomplex.Althoughthenotioniswellespousedamongstplanners,fewstrategicdemandmodelsattempttomodeltheimpactoftransportinterventionsandaccessibilityonlanduseoutcomesasthereisadualendogeneitybetweenlanduseandtransporti.e.theybothinfluenceeachother,arelationshipwhichischallengingtocontrolinbothdirectionssimultaneously.Also,accessibilityisonlyoneofmanyfactorsthatwouldultimatelyimpact on land use outcomes.

Asanalternateapproach,theProjectteamdevelopedlandusescenariostoreflectpossibleurbanoutcomesfromgovernmentintervention,whetherthroughinvestmentintransportorthroughchangesin land use scenarios.

ThreelandusescenariosweredevelopedbytheProjectteamfortestinginadditiontothe‘businessasusual’landusescenario.ThelanduseprojectionsfocusedonalinearcorridoraroundtheProjectCorridor.Theareaofinvestigationforeachlandusescenario,showninFigure19isassumedtocoveraonekilometrebufferzonealongtheProjectCorridor,extendingfromLakeBurleyGriffininthesouthtotheGungahlinTownCentreinthenorthwithwideningatDicksontoreflectthestrategicimportanceofDicksonasatransporthubwithhigh-frequencytransportrouteconnections.


Figure 19: Area of Investigation

Source: URS

Mostlandusechangeswereassumedtooccurwithinan800mcatchmentofeachstation.Thiscatchment is based on the commonly recognised walkability catchment for public transport.

Thehigherdensitylandusescenarioisnotnecessarilyapolicysetting.Theurbanoutcomesimpliedbythescenariomayarisethroughamarketresponsetotransportinvestment,aswellasthroughadjustmentsinlandusesettings,urbanrenewalprogramsorthroughacombinationofthesefactors.

Abriefdescriptionofthebusinessasusualand‘higherdensity’scenarioisprovidedbelow.


BusinessasUsualThe‘businessasusual’landusescenarioisbasedoncurrentACTGovernmentpopulationandemploymentprojections,whichareusedforwholeofgovernmentdecisions.

CurrentGovernmentprojectionsassumethatthecombinedACT–Queanbeyanpopulationwouldexceed500,000peopleby2031.Tocaterforfuturepopulationgrowth,historicdevelopmentpatterns(mainly‘greenfield’developmentinthedistrictsofMolonglo,GungahlinandQueanbeyan)wouldcontinueintothefuture.Underthisscenariothereisnosignificantchangetolandusepoliciesandplanning controls in the study area.

ThepopulationofQueanbeyanisincludedintheanalysisastheCSTMincludesitforthepurposeofmodelling the transport network.

Figure 20: Northbourne Avenue Cross Section under Existing Conditions

Source: DCM

HigherDensityScenario(LowAdditionalDensification)ThehigherdensitylandusescenarioassumesafasterrealisationoftheProjectCorridor’sdevelopmentpotentialwithoutchangestoexistinglandusecontrolsorpoliciesintheTerritoryPlan.Thescenarioallows for recent amendments in planning controls for:

• Dickson

• Gungahlin Town centre

• Inner North urban housing

• Cityarea(ANUExchangeandGriffinLegacy)

Underthehigherdensityscenario,populationandemploymentlevelswouldbe38%and21%higherthan under the business as usual land use scenario within the Project Corridor by 2031.

ParkingScenarioTransportdevelopmentshouldnotonlybeconcernedwiththeprovisionofsupplybutalsoeffectivemanagementoftransportdemand.Parkingchangescanbeusedasalevertofacilitateamodeshifttopublictransport.Furthermore,theincreaseofparkingratesalongtheProjectCorridorcouldprovideanarrayofbenefitstothecommunity,governmentandroadusers.

CanberrahasthelowestparkingratesamongstAustraliancapitalcities.ColliersInternationalestimatedthatdailyratesinCanberraat$10–theaveragerateacrossAustraliancitieswas$39perdaywithSydneyandMelbournehavingthehighestratesat$64and$66respectively.7

Whilethissuggestsaboontocurrentprivatevehicleroadusers,lowparkingfeesencourageprivatevehicleusewhichimposesarangeofcostsonsocietyandinfrastructure.Anincreaseinparkingratescouldprovidethefollowing:

• Encouragetheuseofpublictransportandotheralternativetransportmode,suchasactivetransport, along the Project Corridor

• EnsurethatthecostoftheProjectaresharedacrossallbeneficiariesalongtheProjectCorridor• PotentiallyprovideanadditionalfundingsourcefortheProject


Intermsofpossibleadversereactionbyasocietythatisheavilycarreliant,communityconsultation(viaTimetoTalkCanberra2030)revealedthatCanberra’sresidentswereinformedwithrespecttotheneedforwiderpublictransportoptions.Surveyparticipantsdiscussedtrade-offstheywouldbewillingtoacceptincludingtheincreaseofparkingchargestodiscourageprivatevehicleuse.8

Shortlisted Options

Asafinalstep,theProjectteamconsideredwhatcombinationofthethreetransportscenarios,twolandusescenariosandaparkingscenariothatwasmostlikelytooccur.Fromtheseconsiderations,theProjectteamdevelopedfiveoptions,withfourdo-somethingoptionsagainstabasecaseoption:

• BRT with business as usual land use and increasing parking charges

• LRT with business as usual land use and increasing parking charges

• BRT with higher density land use and increasing parking charges• LRT with higher density land use and increasing parking charges

Aconventionalbuslanescenariowithbusinessasusualorhigherdensitylandusewasnotconsideredasitwasconsideredunlikelythatlanduseswillchangesignificantlyfromaninvestmentinbuslanesonly.Increasedparkingchargeswereassumedforalloptionsasitwasconsideredakeymechanisminfacilitatingashifttoalternativetransportmodes,remediatecostsforremainingprivatevehicleusersandoptimisefundingfortheProject.

Thebasecaseoptionassumesthatchangesinfuturetransportandlandusecontinueonabusinessasusualbasis,inlinewithcurrentGovernmenttransportcommitmentsandplanningstrategies.


Appendix B: Stage 7 Template

Appraisal Summary Table 1: Demand and Economic Modelling Assumptions

1.DemandModelling,AssumptionsandResultsOutline the key drivers of demandTheCanberraStrategicPublicTransportModel(CSTM)wasusedtoestimatechangesintravelpatterns.CSTMisatypicalfour-stepStrategicPublicTransportdemandmodelcoveringtheACTandQueanbeyan.

Changesintraveldemandandtravelpatternsareprimarilyinfluencedbyeitherchangesinthelevelofpopulationandemployment,thelocationofpeopleandjobs,andgeneralisedtraveltimesbetweenindividualoriginsanddestinations.

Trip Generation

ThenumberoftripsgeneratedineachTrafficAnalysisZoneisestimatedonlanduseinputs.Theleveloftripgenerationisdependentonthetrippurposeaswellastheassumedsocio-economiccharacteristicsofagivenzone.Ratesandadjustmentfactorsareshowninthefollowingtables:

Table 23: Trip Generation Rates

Trip Purpose AM Peak Trip Rate

Home based Work 0.239

Education 0.104

Shopping 0.040

Other 0.085

Non-home based Business appointments etc. 0.107

Other 0.039Source: MRC, Transport Modelling and Analysis 2006/2011, Study Report

Table 24: Trip Rate and Public Transport Usage Adjustment Factors based on Income

Income Level 2006 Trip Rate Adjustment Factors 2006 PT Usage Adjustment Factors

Low (< $25,999 p.a.) 0.593 1.332

Medium ($26,000 to $51,999 p.a.) 1.142 0.959

High (> $52,000 p.a.) 1.327 0.649Source: MRC, Transport Modelling and Analysis 2006/2011, Study Report

Table 25: Trip Rate and Public Transport Usage Adjustment Factors based on Age

Age Level 2006 Trip Rate Adjustment Factors 2006 PT Usage Adjustment Factors

Under 15 years 0.756 0.781

15 to 24 years 0.704 1.537

25 to 44 years 1.316 1.091

45 to 64 years 1.198 0.795

65yearsandabove 0.336 0.705Source: MRC, Transport Modelling and Analysis 2006/2011, Study Report


Generalised Costs

Previoushouseholdtravelsurveysrevealedtrip-makerbehaviourandperceptions,whichservedasthebasisforestimatinggeneralisedcostfunctionparameters,asshowninbelow:

Table 26: Generalised Cost Components

Element Key Factors Base Year (2011) Value

Travel time

Distance,OperatingSpeeds,

Lane CapacityDefinedforeachlink

TrafficVolumes Identifiedthroughnetworkassignments

Operating Cost

FixedVehicleOperatingCost $0.13/km

FuelPrice($/L) $1.03/L

FuelCostperkm($/km) $0.09/km

Value of Time $10/hr

Road User ChargesParking Charges

Definedbyareaandfactored

with the Parking Charge Factor

Public Transport Fares Based on base year faresSource: MRC, Transport Modelling and Analysis 2006/2011, Study Report

Thefollowingequationsillustratethegeneralformofthegeneralisedcostfunctionanditscomponents:

Equation 1: Generalised Cost Equations

Car generalised cost =Travel Time ×Value of Time+ (Fixed VOC per km+Fuel Cost per km)×Distance+Parking Cost

PT generalised cost =(In-vehicle time+1.15 walk time+1.2 wait time+1.1 boarding time)×Value of Time+Fare Cost

Alloutofvehicletraveltimeelementsareweightedtoconverttheseelementsintoanin-vehicletraveltimeequivalent.

Changes in generalised costs, impact primarily upon mode choice within CSTM through the following equations:

Equation 2: Mode Choice Function

PT mode shareij,trip purpose = 1 1 + expλ (GC Car—GCPT )+α

Thefollowingparametersinformtheestimationoftheaboveequation:

Table 27: Mode Choice Parameters

Trip Purpose Spread Parameter (l) Constant (a)

Work -0.27 0.66

Education -0.2 0.2

Other -0.3 3Source: MRC, Transport Modelling and Analysis 2006/2011, Study Report


Describe the situation ‘without’ the initiative, i.e. the base case, including future works and associated capital, maintenance and operating costs

Thebasecaseoptionassumesthatchangesinfuturetransportandlandusecontinueonabusinessasusualbasis,inlinewithcurrentGovernmenttransportcommitmentsandplanningstrategies.

Underthebusinessasusualtransportoption,nochangestothetransportnetworkapartfromcommittedroadandpublictransportprojectsandinitiativesareproposed.BuseswillcontinuetosharecapacitywithgeneraltrafficalongbothNorthbourneAvenueandFlemingtonRoad(wherenobuspriorityiscurrentlyprovided).

The 2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan Network withhighfrequencyservicesprovidedalongidentifiedFrequent and Rapid corridors is assumed to be implemented. The current limited stop Red Rapid servicethattravelsbetweenGungahlinandFyshwickviatheCitywillcontinuetobetheprimarypublictransportlinkbetweenGungahlinandtheCity,augmentedwithlocalallstopbusservices. Figure 22 shows key bus routes that are proposed under the Plan around the Project Corridor.

Figure 22: 2031 Strategic Public Transport Plan Network around the Project Corridor

Source: ESDD


The‘businessasusual’landusescenarioisbasedoncurrentACTGovernmentpopulationandemploymentprojections,whichareusedforwholeofgovernmentdecisions.

CurrentGovernmentprojectionsassumethatthecombinedACT–Queanbeyanpopulationwouldexceed500,000peopleby2031.Tocaterforfuturepopulationgrowth,historicdevelopmentpatterns(mainly‘greenfield’developmentinthedistrictsofMolonglo,GungahlinandQueanbeyan)wouldcontinueintothefuture.Underthisscenariothereisnosignificantchangetolandusepoliciesandplanning controls in the study area.

2.LandUse,PopulationandEmploymentForecastsWhat land use, population and employment forecasts have been used and where have they been sourced from?

Twosetsoflanduseprojectionshavebeenusedfor2011,2021and2031:a‘businessasusual’landusescenarioanda‘higherdensity’landusescenario.ThefollowinglanduseinformationwasusedforestimatinggeneratedtripsataTrafficAnalysisZonelevel:

• Population

• Employment

• Retail space

• School enrolments

Tertiaryenrolments

The‘businessasusual’landuseprojectionsarebasedonACTGovernmentChiefMinisterandCabinetDirectoratepopulationprojections.The‘higherdensity’landuseprojectionswerepreparedbyESDDand URS.

What is the range of projections over the period forecast and used in the economic appraisal? What are the annual employment and residential growth rates implied by these land use forecasts? What are the factors that will affect the likely outcome given the demand drivers identified?

Twosetsoflanduseprojectionshavebeenusedfor2011,2021and2031:a‘businessasusual’landusescenario and a ‘higher density’ land use scenario.

TotalpopulationandemploymentprojectionsacrossthecombinedACT-Queanbeyanregionarecommontobothlandusescenarios.Table28showsprojectedtotalpopulationandemploymentlevelsacrosstheregion,whichshowsthatpopulationlevelsareanticipatedtoexceedhalfamillionpeopleby2031.

Table 28: Projected Total Population and Employment across ACT-Queanbeyan

Metric 2011 2021 2031

Total

Population 397,900 459,100 518,900

Employment 223,500 250,400 277,400

Change

Population 15.4% 13.0%

Employment 12.0% 10.8%

CAGRPopulation 1.4% 1.2%

Employment 1.1% 1.0%


If specific land use forecasts have been undertaken for the proposal what is the difference in terms of number of jobs and residents compared to the base case land use in the last year the forecasts are produced for?

TotalpopulationandemploymentprojectionsacrossthecombinedACT-Queanbeyanregionarecommon to the ‘business as usual’ and ‘higher density’ land use scenarios.

Has there been any redistribution of jobs and residents and if so, what are the assumptions underpinning this redistribution?

Althoughthepopulationandemploymenttotalsarecommontobothlandusescenarios,thedistributionofpopulationandemploymentwithintheregionhasbeenaltered.The‘higherdensity’landusescenarioreflectsanassumptionofafasterrealisationoftheProjectCorridor’sdevelopmentpotentialwithoutrelyingonchangestoexistinglandusecontrolsorpoliciesintheTerritoryPlan.TherealisationofhigherpopulationlevelswithintheProjectCorridorhasbeenassumedtobebasedonaslowerrealisationofproposedgreenfielddevelopmentsites,inparticularwithintheMolongloValleyandQueanbeyan.Underthehigherdensityscenario,populationandemploymentlevelswouldbe38%and21%higherthanunderthebusinessasusuallandusescenariowithintheProjectCorridorby2031.

Table29andTable30showlanduseprojectionsfortheProjectCorridorandotherdistrictsinCanberrafor 2011, 2021 and 2031 under the ‘business as usual’ and ‘higher density’ land use scenarios.

Table 29: Population Projections by District

District 2011 BAU

2021 BAU

2021 Higher Density

2031 BAU

2031 Higher Density

Project Corridor 50,400 62,500 71,900 74,100 102,600

North Canberra Outer 14,100 14,800 21,100 16,300 21,000

Gungahlin Outer 26,500 41,700 36,800 56,800 45,500

Belconnen 91,300 94,000 93,200 93,000 93,000

South Canberra 26,000 28,800 28,000 34,200 33,900

Tuggeranong 89,000 84,500 84,100 83,000 85,700

Woden 57,400 58,100 58,400 57,000 54,600

Molonglo 600 23,900 21,100 46,000 34,000

Majura 200 200 200 200 200

Queanbeyan 41,900 50,000 44,000 57,700 47,900

Jerrabomberra 700 700 700 700 700

Total 397,900 459,100 459,100 518,900 518,900Source: URS & ESDD. BAU estimates based on ACT Government Chief Minister and Cabinet Directorate projections


Table 30: Employment Projections by District

District 2011

BAU

2021

BAU

2021 Higher Density

2031

BAU

2031 Higher Density

Project Corridor 62,100 69,600 81,100 75,800 91,700

North Canberra Outer 14,000 15,900 13,200 17,800 16,400

Gungahlin Outer 2,000 3,700 6,000 4,700 3,600

Belconnen 27,500 29,500 28,100 30,400 29,400

South Canberra 48,400 51,700 48,500 56,200 55,900

Tuggeranong 18,000 20,200 18,000 20,900 18,700

Woden 27,900 29,200 25,300 30,000 30,100

Molonglo 100 2,300 3,500 6,300 5,100

Majura 7,900 10,300 8,700 14,200 10,000

Queanbeyan 10,700 12,500 12,100 13,800 9,500

Jerrabomberra 4,900 5,500 5,800 7,100 6,500

Total 223,500 250,400 250,400 277,400 277,400Source: URS & ESDD. BAU estimates based on ACT Government Chief Minister and Cabinet Directorate projections

3. Demand Modelling OutputsWhat demand model was used to generate the forecasts and who undertook the demand modelling?

The Canberra Strategic Public Transport Model (CSTM) was used as the basis to assess the demand impactforeachoption,whichismaintainedperiodicallybyESDD.CSTMisatypicalfour-stepStrategicPublicTransportdemandmodelcoveringtheACTandQueanbeyan.

SMECwascontractedbyESDDtopreparelanduseandnetworkassumptionsformodelling,runCSTMandprovidedemandoutputs.

What time period was modelled (for example a one hour AM peak on an average weekday, 24 hour period on an average weekday, etc.)

CSTM models a typical 2 hour weekday AM peak between 7am and 9am.

What expansion factor was used to translate the period of the day modelled into a daily observation? What expansion factor was used to translate the daily observation into an annual observation? What sources informed this expansion factor and / or what logic underpins it?

ArangeofexpansionandannualisationfactorsarerequiredtoconvertaverageweekdaypeakestimatesfromCSTMintoannualestimates.Thefollowingtableoutlinestherangeoffactorsused:

Table 31: Adopted Expansion Factors

Item AM Peak to Weekday Factor Weekday to Annual Factor

Public transport demand 4.74 280

Standardbusserviceprovision 5.43 286

Rapidtransitserviceprovision 5.00 336

Privatevehicledemand 4.74 300


What sources informed this expansion factor?

Thefollowingsourceswereusedtoinformtheestimationofexpansionandannualisationfactors.

Item Source

Public transport demand ATC Guidelines

Standardbusserviceprovision ACTIONBusesoperationaldata

Rapidtransitserviceprovision Basedonassumedoperatingpatterns

Privatevehicledemand ATC Guidelines

Servicepatternsforrapidtransit(BRTorLRT)serviceswereassumedtobedifferenttocurrentpublictransportservicepatterns.Bycomparisonwithcurrentservicepatterns,rapidtransitservicesareassumedtooperateathigherfrequencies,particularlyduringtheoff-peakandonweekends,andoperate for more hours of the day.

Does the model calculate new or “generated” trips (as opposed to using a fixed trip matrix)? How does the demand model deal with the issues of induced demand?

Theleveloftripgenerationisbasedonsocio-economicfactorsincludingage,incomeandstatus.TheleveloftripgenerationwithinagiventravelzoneinCSTMisonlydependentonthelevelofpopulationandemploymentaswellastheassumedsocio-economiccharacteristicsofpeopleresidingwithinthetravelzone.TheleveloftripgenerationwithinCSTMisnotdependentongeneralisedcosts,reductionsinwhichmaycreateadditionaltripsandincreasesinwhichmayleadtotripsbeingsuppressed.

4. Economic Model Parameters – Costs First year of construction / Last year of construction

Firstyearofconstruction:2014

Lastyearofconstruction:2017

State real discount rates used (if not 4, 7 and 10%), and the basis for any variation from these standard DRs

Arealdiscountrateof7%perannumwasadoptedwithsensitivityanalysisundertakenat4%and10%.

State appraisal period in years, and basis for its selection

Alleconomiccostsandbenefitswereevaluatedovera30yearoperatingperiod.

Remaining life of the initiative at the end of the appraisal period

BRTandLRToperationswithintheProjectCorridorhavebeenassumedtooperateasagoingconcernaftertheendoftheappraisalperiod.

Assetsofvaryingeconomiclifehavebeenaccountedforwithintheappraisal.Toreflectthelevelofeconomicliferemaininginassetsaftertheappraisalperiod,aresidualvaluehasbeenestimated.

Describe the basis for estimating all capital costs (for both base and project cases). Confidence level: are the construction costs P50, P90, P95?

CapitalcostshavebeendevelopedbytheProjectTeam’sengineeringadvisor,URS.Costestimatesreflectthatthelevelofdesignisatapre-conceptualorconceptscreeningstage.Inthesecircumstances,thetypicalrangeofaccuracyvariesbetweenalowrange(-30%to-15%)toahighrange(+20%to+50%).Basedonthepreliminarynatureoftheanalysisandthelackofadetailedengineeringdesignatthisstageoftheproject,theconfidencelevelassociatedwiththeconstructioncostsarelikelytobeconsistentwithaP50level.


TheestimatesweregenerallyinaccordancewiththeCommonwealthDepartmentofInfrastructure,Transport,Regional,DevelopmentandLocalGovernment–BestPracticeCostEstimationforPubliclyFundedRoadandRailConstruction,19June2008,inparticularAppendix1&6.

The“EstimateClass”approachwasusedbasedonalevelofaccuracyofClass4(StudyorFeasibility).Itisimportanttonotethatthecostsarenotbasecosts,butshouldbeviewedasameancostwithanupper and lower probability, in our case Class 4.

Traditionally,benchmarkingisusedwhereappropriatetoestablisharangeofexpectedcostsandcostratiosforcomparisonpurposes.Inadditionitprovidesappropriatecostdatawherespecificdetailisnotreadilyavailablesuchashighlevelpre-conceptevaluation.ExamplesofbenchmarkingprojectsincludetheConstitutionAvenueUpgradeProject,GoldCoastRapidTransit,andtheMelbourneHoddleStreetPlanning Study.

Wherebenchmarkingrateswerenotused,RawlinsonsConstructionCostGuidewasused.Inestimatingthecoststhefollowingfactorshavebeenincluded:

• Direct Cost-Thedirectcostrepresentstheconstructioncostsoftheworksandspecificallycoversthe costs of plant, labour, materials and specialist subcontractors.

• Indirect Costs -Theindirectcostrepresentsthedesign,mobilisationandgovernmentcosts,whereapplicable.

EstimateshavebeentechnicallyreviewedinternallyatURSbutnotreviewedbyanindependentorganisation.Thisisconsistentwiththeconceptscreeningstageofaprojectandtheclientrequirements.AnindependentreviewofestimateswillberequiredduringtheFeasibilityandForwardDesign phase of the project.

The phase for this project is assumed to be between Project Identification & Project Scoping, with a contingency risk on Base Estimate of +40% to +60% & +25% to +40% respectively

ThiscorrelateswiththeEstimateClassapproachasstatedabove,butnegatesthepossibilitythatthecostsfortheprojectcouldbelessthantheBaseEstimate.Itisimportanttonotethatthecosts,asindicatedinourCostEstimate,areNOTbasecosts,butshouldbeviewedasameancostwithanupperand lower probability, in this case Class 4.

What rate of escalation has been assumed over the construction period?

Unitcostratesareassumedtoremainconstantacrosstheevaluationperiod.

What is the profile of the capital cost spending, for example: year 1 – 10%, year n – X%. Who were the capital cost estimates prepared by? Have they been independently verified?

Table32showsaprofileofcapitalspendingbytimeperiod.AproportionofcapitalspendingisincurredduringYear31–40toreflectthereplacementoflifeexpiredassets(e.g.track,signalling)justpriortothe end of the appraisal period.

Table 32: Breakdown of Capital Costs (Undiscounted)

Period throughout the appraisal period incurred with the replacement of life expired assets and staging costs BRT LRT

Year 1 – 10 77.2% 76.5%

Year 11 – 20 2.0% 1.4%

Year 21 – 30 12.5% 5.0%

Year 31 – 40 8.3% 17.2%

Total 100.0% 100.0%


CostestimateswerepreparedbyURS.Noindependentverificationofthecapitalcostshasbeenundertaken.

Describe the initiative’s out turned costs ($M, nominal, undiscounted)

Table33showsupfrontoutturncostsaswellastotaloutturncosts.Totaloutturncostsreflectcostsincurredwiththereplacementoflifeexpiredassetsduringtheappraisalperiod.

Table 33: Outturn Costs (Undiscounted)

Item BRT LRT

Upfrontoutturncosts $276m $615m

Totaloutturncosts $358m $804m

Economic costs:Describe and justify any adjustments made to the initiative’s out turned costs to generate an economic project cost

Noadjustmentshavebeenmadetotheinitiativesoutturnedcoststogenerateaneconomicprojectcosts.Unitcostratesusedwereexclusiveoftaxesandprofitmargin.

Economic cost - $M, real, undiscounted; and $M, real, discounted (using a real 7.0% discount rate)

Table 34 shows discounted and undiscounted capital costs for BRT and LRT.

Table 34: Undiscounted and Discounted Capital Costs

Item BRT LRT

Undiscounted capital costs $358m $804m

Discounted capital costs $215m $470m

Residual value - State the size of the residual value, economic lives of the assets included in the residual value and the methodology used to generate it (see note above for methodology).

Assumedassetlives,usedtoassessthetimingofrecurrentcapitalexpenditureandresidualvalues,areshown as follows:


Table 35: Assumed Effective Lives

Asset Assumed Asset Life

Planning

Enabling works Nil

Preliminaries and design Nil

Governmentcosts Nil

Other general planning and management Nil

Trafficmanagementandtemporaryworks Nil

Below rail infrastructure

Track work 30

Roadway

Busway 40

Road infrastructure 40

Bridges 100

Segregated Rapid Transport Lanes 40

Road works 40

Drainage 100

Cycle Lanes 60

Footpaths 60

Utilities 50

Electrical

Signalling 15

Powersupply,transformersandsub-stations 40

Other electrical and mechanical systems 15

Passenger interface and communications

Passengerticketing 15

Passengerinformationdisplaysandplatformcontrolsystems 10

Vehicle monitoring systems 10

Bus stops 20

Busandlightrailstations 50

Other buildings and structures 100

Fleet

Busfleet 20

Light rail rolling stock 35 Source: Deloitte assumptions based on ATC (2006d) and ATO (2011)


Forlonglastingcapitalassets,someeconomiclifewillremainfollowingtheevaluationperiod.Thevalueoftheremainingeconomiclifeisderivedona‘straightline’basisusingthefollowingformula:

Residual Value= (EconomicLife–EvaluationPeriod)×CapitalExpenditure (Economic Life)

Resultantdiscountedresidualvalueestimatesareshownasfollows:

Table 36: Residual Value by Option (Discounted)

Option Discounted ($m)

BRT $9

LRT $23

Maintenance costs - Describe the basis for estimating all maintenance costs, including growth rates over time (for both base and project cases). Are the maintenance costs P50, P90, P95? What is the basis for this estimate and who prepared the maintenance cost estimates?

Table37outlinestheassumedassetmaintenanceratesusedintheProjectBusinessCase,whichhavebeenkeptconstantinrealtermsovertheappraisalperiod.

Table 37: Asset Maintenance Cost Rates

Asset Maintenance Component Unit Rate Source

Annual BRT lane maintenance cost $450,000 URS

Annual LRT infrastructure maintenance cost $78,918 per track kilometre Australian Transport Council Guidelines

Light rail maintenance costs were indexed to June 2011 prices using the Road and Construction Cost Index

Replacement - Is there a need to replace or refurbish major components of the infrastructure / rolling stock during the appraisal period? If so, how are these replacement or refurbishment costs captured?

Anumberofassetswereassumedtohaveaneconomiclifeoflessthan30years.Accordingly,theseassets were assumed to be replaced at the end of their economic life at the cost incurred when they werefirstacquired.

Operating costs - Describe the basis for estimating all operating costs, including growth rates over time (for both base and project cases). Who were the operating cost estimates prepared by? Have they been independently verified?

Operatingcostswerebasedonaservicekilometrebasis.PublictransportservicekilometresandhoursestimatedbyCSTMweredisaggregatedbystandardbus,BRTandLRT.

Operatingcostswereinclusiveof:

• Directcosts:driverlabourcosts,fuel,electricityandotherconsumables• Overheads:costsassociatedwithoperationsoverheads(scheduling,rostering,driversupervisionand

depotrelatedcosts),vehiclemaintenanceoverheads(engineeringtechnologyservices),headofficecosts(highermanagementfunctions)andgenerallabourandnon-labouroverheads(informationtechnology, human resources, insurance).

EstimatesofservicekilometreoperatingcostswerebasedontheassumptionsshowninTable38andTable 39, which are broadly based on Australian Transport Council Guidelines.


Table 38: Operating Cost Parameters

Variable Bus BRT LRT

On-vehiclecrewcosts($/hr) $30.00* $30.00* $76.40

Standardvehicleoperatingcosts($/km) $1.03 $1.03 $1.71

Articulatedvehicleoperatingcosts($/km) $1.29 $1.29

Proportionofarticulatedvehicles 5% 5%

Overheads(%onothercosts) 21% 21% 17.5%Vehicle operating costs, overheads and profit margins are based on ATC (2006c). Hourly bus wages are based on ACTION Buses. All values were indexed to June 2011 prices using changes in the Producer Price Index (vehicle operating costs) and Average Weekly Earnings (light rail crew costs). The proportion of articulated vehicles used reflects the current composition of the ACTION Bus fleet (ACTION Bus Wiki 2012).

Table 39: Dead Running and Layover Assumptions


Peak dead running allowance 25% 25% 20%

Off-peakdeadrunningallowance 25% 5% 5%

Layoverallowance 5 min 5 min 5 minPeak dead-running statistics are based on current ACTION Buses levels of dead running whilst LRT levels of dead running are based on ATC (2006d). Off-peak dead-running is assumed to be equal to peak dead running for standard bus services whilst ATC (2006d) estimates have been used for BRT and LRT off-peak dead running. Layover allowances are based on ATC (2006d). Average service speeds are assumptions.

Table40showsthefinaloperatingcostratesusedbymode,whichwerekeptconstantinrealtermsforall years.

Table 40: Operating Cost Rate


OperatingCostRate($/km) $3.98 $3.47 $6.06Operating cost rates were estimated by Deloitte based on ATC Guideline rates.

5.EconomicModelParameters–BenefitsBenefits ramp up - Describe how benefits ramp up over the construction period. What source and/or assumptions inform this ramp up?

Noramp-uphasbeenappliedtothebenefits.Itwouldbeanticipatedthatasanestablishedtransportcorridor(albeitwithsignificantanticipatedpopulationgrowthatthenorthernend),aramp-upperiodwouldlikelytobesmallineffect(>90%ofbenefits)andshortinduration(lessthan2years).

Cost and benefit time streams - Attach an appendix showing the time stream for each benefit and cost component ($M, real, undiscounted)

Costandbenefitstreamsovertheappraisalperiodareprovidedattheendofthistemplate.

Generalised trip cost - has generalised trip cost (GTC) been calculated on an origin – destination (OD) basis within the demand model, or using aggregate outputs from the demand model?

AlltraveltimebasedbenefitshavebeenbaseddirectlyoffdemandandtimeskimsprovidedbySMEC.Traveltimesweredisaggregatedbymodeandtypeofuserusingthesetofequationsshownbelowtofacilitatetheapplicationofthe‘ruleofhalf’.


Equation 3: Assessing Changes in Travel Time for a Given Mode k

Q: number of users C: generalised journey time (composite of IVT, wait, walk, boarding time and transfers) i: origin travel zone j: destination travel zone k: mode

AllotherbenefitsarebasedonaggregateoutputsfromCSTM,whichultimatelyarebasedonchangesindemandandtraveltimebyeachorigin-destinationpair.

Value of travel time: Commuter travel - What is the value of travel time used for this initiative? Does this value differ between modes? Is this value based on resource cost or willingness to pay? Business travel - Has a specific value been applied to business travel? If so, what was this value?

AcommonvalueoftimehasbeenadoptedforallmodelledtrippurposesusingthemethodologyoutlinedbyAustroads(2011).TheAustroadsapproachassumesthatvaluesoftimeareaproportionofaverageearnings,assumingthat:

• Forpersonaltravel,thevalueoftimeis40%oftheaveragehourlywage• Forbusinesstravel,thevalueoftimeforbusinesstravel(excludingcommercialvehicletravel)isvalued

at128%oftheaveragehourlywage.

• UsingtheAustroadsapproachandMay2011totalACTordinaryweeklyearningsforfulltimeadults(seasonallyadjusted)of$1306.90,thevalueoftimewascalculatedtobe$16.78perpassengerhour.

Growth - Has any rate of escalation been applied to these values?

Thevalueoftimehasbeenassumedtoremainconstantinrealtermsovertheappraisalperiod.

Source - What are the sources for the values used and any assumptions incorporated into the value of travel time?

Earnings data has been sourced from the ABS. The following table outlines the approach and assumptionsusedtocalculatetheaveragevalueoftime:

Table 41: Derivation of Value of Time

Variable Value

May2011totalordinaryweeklyearningsforfulltimeadults,seasonallyadjusted $1,306.90

Assumed working hours per week 38

Averagehourlywage $34.39 per hour

Personalvalueoftime(40%ofaveragehourlywage)perpassengerhour $13.76 per hour

Businessvalueoftime(128%ofaveragehourlywage)perpassengerhour $44.02 per hour

Assumedproportionofbusinesstravel 10.0%

Weightedvalueoftimeperpassengerhour $16.78 per hour


Weightings - Describe the weightings which have been used to calculate the generalised trip cost. Wait / Access / Egress - What weighting has been applied to egress time? What is the source for this? Transfer - What transfer penalty has been applied? What is the source of this? Boarding penalty - Has a boarding penalty been applied during the demand modelling and / or economic appraisal? If so, what is the magnitude of this boarding penalty (minutes) and how does it differ between modes?

GeneralisedjourneytimeskimsextractedfromCSTMweightanytransfersaswellasanywalk,waitorboardingtimeincurredwhilsttravellingonpublictransport.Thefollowingtableoutlinestheweightsused within CSTM:

Table 42: CSTM Out-of-Vehicle Time Weights

Time Component Weight relative to IVT

In-vehicletime 1.00

Walkaccesstime 1.15

Waittime 1.20

Boardingtime 1.20

Interchange penalty 7 minutesSource: MRC (2009) – ACT Strategic Public Transport Network Plan

Benefitparameters-Listthevalueandsourceofallbenefitparametersrelevanttotheappraisal.Forexampledecongestion;VehicleOperatingCosts(forallclassesofvehicles);Crashcostsetc.

Thefollowingparametersweresourcedtoassessthefollowingbenefitstreams:

• Traveltimesavings

• Incrementalfarerevenue

• Incremental parking costs

• Unperceivedvehicleoperatingcosts

• Road damage• Environmentalexternalities

Allvaluesarein2011prices.

Table 43: Key Benefit Parameters

Variable Value Source

Value of time $16.78 per passenger hour Austroads (2011)9

Unperceived vehicle operating costs 14.9centspervehiclekm RTA (2009)10

Incremental fare revenue

Incremental fare $1.19 per trip ACTION Buses MyWay data

Incremental parking revenue

2011 Parking Costs

City $0.750pervehicletripperhour MCR (2009)

Other town centres $0.375pervehicletripperhour MCR (2009)

2021 BAU Parking Costs

City $0.980pervehicletripperhour Projectassumption


Variable Value Source

Other town centres $0.490pervehicletripperhour Projectassumption

2021 Do-Something Parking Costs



2031 BAU Parking Costs



2031 Do-Something Parking Costs



Road damage

Car 0.241centspervehiclekm RailCorp (2010)11

Bus 2.830centspervehiclekm RailCorp (2010)

Air Pollution

Car 2.880centspervehiclekm ARRB (2011)12

Bus 32.386centspervehiclekm ARRB (2011)

Light rail 0.394centspervehiclekm ARRB (2011)

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Car 2.269centspervehiclekm ARRB (2011)



Noise Pollution

Car 0.943centspervehiclekm ARRB (2011)



Accident Costs

Car $58,139permillionvehiclekm RTA (2009)

Bus $93,975permillionvehiclekm RTA (2009)

Light rail permillionvehiclekm RailCorp (2010)

Related initiatives - Are the benefits and costs closely related to, dependent upon or potentially influenced by another initiative(s)? If so, explain how that has been accounted for in the BCR.

As part of the Frequent Network, the Project Corridor may form part of a broader network of BRT or LRT servicesinthelongterm.

However,atthetimeoftheappraisaltheimpactofotherpotentialinitiatives(e.g.CitytoBelconnenTransitway)werenotassessedcollectivelywiththeProjectOptions.


AppraisalSummaryTable2:MonetisedCostBenefitAnalysisResultsThefollowingdemandmetricsareprovidedinTable44forthefirstandfinalmodelyears,2011and2031:

• Number of trips by mode

• Averagejourneytimebymode

• PT mode share

• Publictransportfarerevenue

• Numberofkilometrestravelledbymode• Numberofhourstravelledbymode

Table 44: High Level Demand Model Results

Year 2011 2031

Land Use BAU BAU Higher Density

Mode BAU BAU BRT LRT BRT LRT

Passenger trips


Car 239,300 291,300 286,500 286,300 285,600 285,400

Total passenger trips 256,200 329,700 330,100 330,000 329,300 329,200


Public transport 62.3 57.4 55.7 55.5 53.6 53.5

Car 12.4 12.8 12.5 12.5 11.4 11.4

PT Mode Share 6.6% 11.6% 13.2% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3%

PT Fare Revenue $20,100 $45,600 $51,800 $52,100 $52,000 $52,200



Car(driveronly) 1,870,800 2,072,900 2,032,600 2,030,300 1,959,600 1,957,400

Passenger hours


Car 49,400 62,300 59,500 59,400 54,300 54,200

Total passenger hours 66,900 99,000 99,900 99,800 93,300 93,300

Change in passenger hours

PTpassengerhours-contusers -1,100 -1,200 -800 -800

PTpassengerhours-newusers 6,400 6,600 16,500 16,600

PTpassengerhours-lostusers -1,600 -1,600 -13,400 -13,400

Carpassengerhours-contusers -1,500 -1,500 -3,000 -3,000

Carpassengerhours-newusers 1,700 1,800 18,400 18,300

Carpassengerhours-lostusers -3,000 -3,100 -23,400 -23,400Estimates rounded to nearest hundred


Total%agechangesbydemandmetricbetween2011and2031areshownbelow:

Table 45: Change in Demand Metrics (2031 versus 2011)

Land Use BAU Higher Density

Mode BAU BRT LRT BRT LRT

Passenger trips


Car 21.7% 19.7% 19.6% 19.3% 19.2%

Total passenger trips 28.7% 28.8% 28.8% 28.5% 28.5%


Public transport -7.7% -10.6% -10.9% -13.9% -14.1%

Car 3.6% 0.7% 0.5% -7.9% -8.1%

PT Mode Share (percentage point change) 5.0% 6.6% 6.7% 6.7% 6.7%

PT Fare Revenue 127.0% 157.8% 158.9% 158.5% 159.5%



Car(driveronly) 10.8% 8.6% 8.5% 4.7% 4.6%

Passenger hours


Car 26.1% 20.5% 20.3% 9.9% 9.6%

Total passenger hours 47.9% 49.3% 49.2% 39.4% 39.3%

Benefit Cost Analysis Results Table46toTable49provideheadlinebenefit-costanalysisresultsforthefollowingfouroptions:

• BRT under a business as usual land use scenario

• LRT under a business as usual land use scenario

• BRT under a higher density land use scenario• LRT under a higher density land use scenario

Allvaluesarebasedon2011prices.

Table 46: Benefit-Cost Analysis Results (BRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario)

Metric Real Discount Rate

4% 7% 10%

BCR 2.71 1.98 1.48

NPV ($m) $536.2 $243.3 $98.7

NPVI $1.50 $0.68 $0.28

IRR 14.6% 14.6% 14.6%


Table 47: Benefit-Cost Analysis Results (LRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario)


4% 7% 10%

BCR 1.43 1.02 0.75

NPV ($m) $283.2 $10.8 -$110.1

NPVI $0.35 $0.01 -$0.14

IRR 7.2% 7.2% 7.2%

Table 48: Benefit-Cost Analysis Results (BRT under a Higher Density Land Use Scenario)


4% 7% 10%

BCR 6.65 4.78 3.51

NPV ($m) $1,774.4 $939.1 $514.8

NPVI $4.95 $2.62 $1.44

IRR 26.7% 26.7% 26.7%

Table 49: Benefit-Cost Analysis Results (LRT under a Higher Density Land Use Scenario)


4% 7% 10%

BCR 3.31 2.34 1.69

NPV ($m) $1,512.7 $701.1 $302.5

NPVI $1.88 $0.87 $0.38

IRR 15.7% 15.7% 15.7%

Monetised Cost and Benefits

Table50toTable53provideabreakdownofbenefitsandcostsforthefollowingfouroptions:

• BRT under a business as usual land use scenario

• LRT under a business as usual land use scenario

• BRT under a higher density land use scenario• LRT under a higher density land use scenario

Allvaluesarebasedon2011prices.


Table 50: Breakdown of Discounted Costs and Benefits (BRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario)

Cost/Benefit Element Value in $m (Discounted at 7%)

Contribution

Capitalexpenditure 215.3 86.6%

Operatingandmaintenanceexpenditure 33.2 13.4%

Total Costs 248.5 100.0%

Changeingeneralisedjourneytime 133.9 27.2%

Incrementalfarerevenue 52.0 10.6%

Incrementalparkingrevenue 198.3 40.3%

Unperceivedvehicleoperatingcostsavings 57.1 11.6%

Avoidedaccidentcosts 21.7 4.4%

Avoidedairpollution 8.4 1.7%

Avoidedgreenhousegasemissions 7.6 1.5%

Avoidednoisepollution 3.4 0.7%

Avoidedroaddamage 0.7 0.1%

Residualvalue 8.7 1.8%

Total Benefits 491.8 100.0%

Table 51: Breakdown of Discounted Costs and Benefits (LRT under a Business As Usual Land Use Scenario)

Cost/Benefit Element Value in $m

(Discounted at 7%)

Contribution














Total Benefits 534.9 100.0%


Table 52: Breakdown of Discounted Costs and Benefits (BRT under a Higher Density Land Use Scenario)

Cost/Benefit Element Value in $m

(Discounted at 7%)

Contribution














Total Benefits 1,187.6 100.0%

Table 53: Breakdown of Discounted Costs and Benefits (LRT under a Higher Density Land Use Scenario)

Cost/Benefit ElementValue in $m

(Discounted at 7%)Contribution














Total Benefits 1,225.2 100.0%


Detailed Monetised BenefitsTable54detailsrealbutundiscountedbenefitsbyscenariobybenefitstreamfor2021and2031incrementaltothebasecase.Ayear-by-yearbreakdownofbenefitsaswellascostforeachoptionisprovidedattheendofthisdocument.

Table 54: Real Undiscounted Benefits by Scenario for Selected Years ($m)

Benefit StreamBRT (BAU) LRT (BAU) BRT (BAU) LRT (BAU)

2021 2031 2021 2031 2021 2031 2021 2031

Change in generalised time $10.9 $22.3 $12.6 $24.6 $12.6 $24.6 $40.2 $115.3

UnperceivedVOCsavings $5.8 $8.5 $6.1 $9.0 $6.1 $9.0 $20.2 $24.3

Road damage $0.1 $0.1 $0.1 $0.1 $0.1 $0.1 $0.3 $0.4

Incrementalfarerevenueresource cost adjustment $4.9 $8.0 $5.1 $8.3 $5.1 $8.3 $4.8 $8.4

Incremental parking revenueresourcecostadjustment

$26.6 $23.7 $26.6 $23.7 $26.6 $23.7 $25.0 $23.7

Avoidedaccidentcosts $2.2 $3.2 $2.4 $3.5 $2.4 $3.5 $8.0 $9.6

Avoidedairpollution $0.8 $1.3 $1.2 $1.7 $1.2 $1.7 $3.9 $4.7

Avoidedgreenhousegasemissions $0.7 $1.2 $0.9 $1.4 $0.9 $1.4 $3.1 $3.7

Avoidednoisepollution $0.3 $0.5 $0.4 $0.6 $0.4 $0.6 $1.3 $1.5

Residualvalue $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0

Table 55: Derivation of Generalised Journey Time Benefits

ElementBRT under a

BAU Land Use Scenario

LRT under a BAU Land Use

Scenario

BRT under a Higher Density

Land Use Scenario

LRT under a Higher Density Land Use

Scenario

Demand model output Generalisedjourneytimeinin-vehicletraveltimeequivalentterms,disaggregatedbycontinuing,newandlostusersandbymode

Valuationparameterusedand source

Valueofpassengertimeof$16.78 (based on Austroads 2011 methodology and ABS AWE data)

Algorithm used

$M (undiscounted) in 2021 $10.9 $12.6 $12.6 $40.2


Table 56: Derivation of Unperceived Vehicle Operating Cost Benefits

ElementBRT under a



Scenario


Land Use Scenario

LRT under a Higher Density

Land Use Scenario

Demand model output Changesincarvehiclekilometres


$0.149pervehiclekilometre(basedonRTA2009)

Algorithm used ∆UnperceivedVOC=∆CarVKT×$0.149


Table 57: Derivation of Road Damage Benefits

ElementBRT under a



Scenario


Land Use Scenario


Land Use Scenario

Demand model output Changesincarandbusvehiclekilometres


$0.00241 per kilometre for cars and $0.02830 per kilometre for buses (based on RTA 2009)

Algorithm used ∆RoadDamage=∆CarVKT×$0.00241+∆BusVKT×$0.02830


Table 58: Derivation of Incremental Fare Revenue Resource Correction

ElementBRT under a



Scenario


Land Use Scenario


Land Use Scenario

Demand model output Change in public transport patronage


$1.19pertrip(basedonanalysisofMyWaybusfaredataprovidedbyACTIONBuses)

Algorithm used Incrementalfarerevenue=∆publictransporttrips×$1.19



Table 59: Derivation of Environmental Externality (Air Pollution, Greenhouse Gas and Noise Pollution) Benefits

ElementBRT under a



Scenario


Land Use Scenario


Land Use Scenario

Demand model output Changeincar,busandlightrailvehiclekilometres


Valuationsareincentspervehiclekilometre(ARRB2011). Railexternalityrateshavebeenusedforlightrail.

Externalities Car Buses Light RailAirpollution 2.880 32.386 0.394Greenhouse 2.269 13.344 0.031Noise 0.943 2.269 0.166

Algorithm used Externalitybenefit(forcars)=∆VKT×(0.00288+0.00269+0.00943)

Externalitybenefit(forbuses)=∆VKT×(0.32386+0.13344+0.02269)

Externalitybenefit(forlightrail)=∆VKT×(0.00394+0.00031+0.00166)


Table 60: Derivation of Parking Revenue Resource Correction

Element BRT under a BAU Land Use Scenario

LRT under a BAU Land Use Scenario

BRT under a Higher Density Land Use

Scenario

LRT under a Higher Density Land Use

Scenario

Demand model output Changeincartripstoselectedtravelzones(City,BelconnenTownCentre, Woden Town Centre, Tuggeranong Town Centre and Queanbeyan Town Centre)

Valuationparameterused and source

Parking rates are an input into CSTM. The following rates (for a 2 hour period) were assumed for 2021 and 2031:

Town Centre2021 2031

BAU Do-Something Differential BAU Do-

Something Differential

Civic $1.97 $3.75 $1.78 $3.38 $5.70 $2.33Belconnen $0.98 $1.88 $0.89 $1.69 $2.85 $1.16Woden $0.98 $1.88 $0.89 $1.69 $2.85 $1.16Tuggeranong $0.98 $1.88 $0.89 $1.69 $2.85 $1.16Queanbeyan $0.98 $1.88 $0.89 $1.69 $2.85 $1.16

Algorithm used Incrementalparkingrevenue(bycentre)= continuingcartrips×∆price+∆cartrips×price



AppraisalSummaryTable3:Benefit-CostRatioSensitivityTesting

Thefollowingsensitivitytestswereundertaken:

• Lowerdiscountrate(4%)

• Higherdiscountrate(10%)

• Lowerconstructioncosts(30%)

• Higherconstructioncosts(+30%)

• Lowercardemandannualisationfactor(270)

• Highercardemandannualisationfactor(330)

• Longerevaluationperiod(50years)• Nodiscounting

TheresultsofthesensitivitytestsforalloptionsareshowninTable61:

Table 61: Sensitivity Test Results

Sensitivity Test Number

Variation BRT with BAU Land

Use

LRT with BAU Land

Use

BRT under Higher Density

Land Use

LRT under Higher Density

Land Use

Starting result 1.98 1.02 4.78 2.34

1 Lowdiscountrate(4%) 2.71 1.43 6.65 3.31

2 Highdiscountrate(10%) 1.48 0.75 3.51 1.69

3 Lowcapitalcosts(-30%) 2.66 1.38 6.44 3.18

4 Highercapitalcosts(+30%) 1.58 0.81 3.80 1.85

5 Lowcarannualisationfactor(270) 1.80 0.93 4.34 2.13

6 Highcarannualisationfactor(330) 2.16 1.11 5.22 2.55

7 50yearevaluationperiod 2.13 1.08 5.25 2.55

8 No discount rate 4.14 2.26 10.33 5.21

9 Noparkingrevenuebenefits 1.18 0.64 4.00 1.97

10 Lowcostandhighbenefits (Combinationof3&6) 2.90 1.50 7.04 3.47

11 Highcostandlowbenefits (Combinationof4&5) 1.44 0.75 3.45 1.69


AppraisalSummaryTable4:Non-MonetisedBenefitsandCosts

Cost/Benefit Description Rating

Improvedhighwaytraveltimereliability

TheProjectisexpectedtogeneratesomeimprovementinhighwaytraveltimereliabilitybenefitsastheProjectwillgeneratesomemodeshiftfromthehighwaynetworktothepublictransportnetwork.Inturn,theresultantreductioninroadcongestionshouldalsoservetoreducehighwaytraveltimevariability.


Public transport traveltimereliability

Theprovisionofadedicatedrightofwayforpublictransportservicesislikelytoleadtoanimprovementintraveltimereliabilityofservices.Withservicesseparatedfromgeneraltraffic,servicesarelessexposedtoprevailingroadcongestionandincidents,leadingtomoreservicesrunningon-timeandwhereservicesdorunlate,averagedelaysarelikelytobelower.Withimprovedflow,busesarelesslikelytobunchup,improvingtheeffectivenessofprovidingahighservicefrequency.

Overtimeimprovementsintraveltimereliabilitycangeneratespilloverimpacts.Improvementsinreliabilitycanpotentiallyincreasepublictransportpatronageandbringaboutassociatedspilloverbenefitsincludingroaddecongestion,avoidedenvironmentalimpactsandavoidedaccidentcosts.

Overthemediumtolongterm,improvedreliabilitywouldallowACTIONBusestoreducetimetableslackandlayovertimethatwouldotherwisecompensateforunreliability.Inturn,improvedtimetableschedulingandresourcingcouldcontributetoimprovingtheoverallrobustnessandreliabilityofthenetwork,aswellasimprovingtheefficiencyofoperationsbymoreefficientplacementofassetsandmaximisingtheirutilisationthroughbetterallocationandacquisitionoffleet,labour,equipmentandotherresources.

Highly beneficial

Passenger amenity benefits

Relativetoconventionalbusservices,BRTandLRToperationsaregenerallyperceivedbyusersandnon-userstobemoredesirable.Theseamenitybenefitsarisefromimprovementsinserviceattributesoverandabovesavingsingeneralisedjourneytimeincluding:

• Greatervisibility

• Improvednetworklegibility

• Improvedridecomfort

• Widerrangeoffacilitiese.g.security,improvedlighting

Theseamenityimprovementsmaybesufficientlyhightogenerateadditionaldemandabovepredicteddemandlevels.

GiventhepreliminarynatureofthefeasibilityanalysiscommissionedbyESDD,noformalproductdefinitionwaspreparedfromwhichtoquantitativelyassessthelevelofpassengeramenitybenefits.ShouldtheProjectproceedtoamoredetailedfeasibilitystage,aformalproductdefinitionwouldprovideopportunitiestoassessthelevelofpassengeramenitybenefitsfromaninvestmentinBRTorLRT.



Cost/Benefit Description Rating

Park and ride opportunities

TheProjectteamhasidentifiedaneedtomake,subjecttofurtherinvestigation,aprovisionforparkandridesites.Parkandridefacilitiesincreasethe catchment range of a rapid transit system by drawing demand from areas thatmayotherwisebepoorlyservicedbyfeederservices.Itmayalsogeneratedemandfrompassengerswhomaychoosenottousefeederservicestoaccessthe rapid transit network.

Throughimprovementsinaccessibilitytotherapidtransitsystem,parkandridefacilitiesmaygenerateadditionaldemand.Thissaid,furtherinvestigationisrequiredtoensurethattheeconomicbenefitsofprovidingparkandridefacilitiesdoesnotdivertsignificantdemandawayfromfeederservicesandthattheincrementalbenefitsexceedtothecostsofdeveloping,maintainingandoperatingtheparkandridesites.


Improvedwalkand cycling access

TheProjectmakesaprovisionfootpathandcyclepathworkstoimproveactivetransportinfrastructureandimprovewalk/cycleaccessibilitytotherapidtransitcorridor.

Throughimprovementsinaccessibilitytotherapidtransitsystem,improvedwalkingandcyclingfacilitiesmayincreasethepotentiallevelofdemandforBRTandLRTservices.

Slightly beneficial


Appraisal Summary Table 5: Information SourcesACTChiefMinisterandCabinetDirectorate(undated),Planningdatastatistics,accessiblefromhttp://www.actpla.act.gov.au/tools_resources/research_based_planning_for_a_better_city/planning_data

ACTION Bus Wiki, ACTION Fleet Summary, http://www.actbus.net/fleetwiki/index.php?title=ACTION_Fleet_Summary

ARRB(2011),GuidetoProjectEvaluation–Part4:ProjectEvaluationData(UpdateRUEUnitValues),Austroads Project TP1672, August 2011

ATC (2006a), National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia – Volume 1

ATC (2006b), National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia – Volume 2

ATC (2006c), National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia – Volume 3

ATC (2006d), National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia – Volume 4

ATC (2006e), National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia – Volume 5

ATO (2011), Taxation Ruling RT 2011/2 Income tax: effective life of depreciating assets (applicable from 1 July 2011), accessible from http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?rank=find&criteria=AND~Taxation~basic~exact:::AND~Ruling~basic~exact:::AND~TR~basic~exact:::AND~2011%2F2~basic~exact&target=EA&style=java&sdocid=TXR/TR20112/NAT/ATO/00001&recStart=1&PiT=99991231235958&Archived=false&recnum=2&tot=7&pn=ALL:::ALL

Austroads (2011), Updating Austroads RUE Unit Values and Related Methodologies, Austroads PublicationNumberAP–R373/11,February2011

MRC (2009), ACT Strategic Public Transport Network Plan Final Report

RailCorp (2010), A Compendium of CityRail Travel Statistics, SeventhEdition,June2010.

RTA (2009), Economic Analysis Manual: Appendix B – Economic Parameters for 2009.


Costs,RisksandFunding

StagingCan the initiative be staged to reduce risks/improve manageability?

Duringtheoptiondevelopmentprocess,someconsiderationwasgiventostagingwiththeprimaryaimofoptimisingeconomicreturns.

Further work is proposed during the feasibility and forward design stage to consider further staging optionsandtheirimpactsonfeasibility,designandprocurement.

RiskManagementHave risks been formally identified, assessed and addressed through a management strategy? Overview

ApreliminaryRiskManagementStrategywaspreparedaspartofthepreparationofapre-feasibilitybusinesscasetotheACTGovernmentinApril2012.ThepreliminaryRiskManagementStrategyidentifiedpotentialrisksandmitigationstrategies.

AdetailedRiskManagementStrategywillbedevelopedoncetheProjectentersthefeasibilityandforwarddesignstage.ItisenvisagedthattheDetailedRiskManagementStrategywillconsidersrisksassociatedwithprocurementandtransactionalprocesses,withtheentirestrategypeerreviewedwhendeveloped.

Risk Management Governance

AhighlevelprovisionalriskmanagementgovernancestructureforfuturestagesoftheProjectareillustratedinFigure23.ThepreliminaryRiskManagementStrategyoutlinedaprovisionalgovernancearrangementinorderfortheProjectteamtoidentify,manageandmitigaterisksastheProjectprogressestoafeasibilityandforwarddesignstage.TheprovisionalRiskManagementGovernancearrangementscomprisesofthreekeyentitiesinorderofimportance:

• City to Gungahlin Project Office (Project Team):responsibleformanagingandimplementingtheRiskManagement Strategy

• Project Steering Committee:oversightandcertificationoftheRiskManagementStrategyandapotentialhighlevelconduitforkeystakeholderstoprovideinputintothedevelopmentoftheRiskManagement Strategy

• Project Risk Management Group: asecondconduitthroughwhichstakeholderscanprovideinputintothedevelopmentoftheRiskManagementStrategywithmembershipaimedatanofficerlevel

TheprovisionalriskmanagementgovernancestructuremakesprovisionfortheGungahlintoCityProjectOffice,establishedinthe2012-13BudgetbytheLandDevelopmentAgency.TheGungahlintoCityProjectOfficerecognisesthelinkbetweentransitandtheredevelopmentofthecorridor.TheProjectOfficewillcoordinatecurrentandfutureprojectsofvariousdirectorateswithinthecorridor,includingtransitcorridorfeasibilityanddesign,redevelopmentofpublichousingandcorridorplanningstudiestoexploredevelopmentscenariostosupporthigherdensitiesandthelike.


Figure 23: High Level Provisional Risk Management Governance Structure

Minister

Director General - ESDD

Project Steering CommitteeStakeholders

City to Gungahlin Project OfficeProject Risk Management Group

Risk Management Strategy Scope

The preliminary Risk Management Strategy considered:

• IdentificationoftherisksassociatedwitheachfuturestageoftheProject

• Assessment of the impact and likelihood of each of these risks on the Project

• Establishmentofanappropriatemitigationmechanismforeachriskmanagement

• MonitoringandreportingofeachoftheserisksoverthecourseoftheProject• DocumentationofeachriskwithintheassociatedProjectRiskRegister

ThepreliminaryRiskManagementStrategyandtheassociatedRiskRegisterhasbeendevelopedbytheProjectTeam.Itsdevelopmenthasconsidered:

• Typical risks associated with rapid transit projects similar to the Project

• Consultationundertakenwithstakeholders• ProjectspecificissuesknowntotheProjectteam

The Risk Register documents key risks and their consequence, assessed in terms of its impact and likelihood.Thelikelihoodandimpactassessmentprovidedaratingforeachidentifiedriskrangingfrom‘Lowto‘Severe’.Table62andTable63outlinerisksandpotentialmitigationstrategiesidentifiedduringthedevelopmentofthepreliminaryriskregister.


Table 62: Risk Identification and Assessment Table

Risk Political Impact

Impact on Outputs and Service Delivery

Impact on Budget and Costs

Impact on Schedule

Community Acceptance

Risk Probability

Impact on Project

Limited technical expertisetodesign and construct BRT and LRT systems

Significantadversereactiontopoor design and customer experience

Deliveryofinfrastructure assets below expectations

Increased capital andoperatingcosts

Longer design time

Potentialadverseimpacts onservicedelivery,reducing customer experienceand acceptance

Possible Major

Limited operationalexpertisetooperate BRT and LRT

Potentialadversereactionto poor customer experience

Poorservicequality or unrealised improvementsinservicequality

Potentialimpactsonoperatingcosts associated withinefficientpracticesor remedial measures


Possible Moderate

Non-compliant designs

Significantadversereactionfromspecificstakeholders

Higher costs associated with remedial design work to meet higher specification

Increased capital andpotentiallyhigheroperatingand maintenance costs

Longer design time Possible Moderate

Inability to deliveruponprojected growth assumptions

Higher densitieswithin the project corridor may encounter politicalresistance in response to community pressure

Lower than forecast public transport demandand/or higher car usage

Lowerfareboxrevenue,increasing the funding required tofinanceoperatingdeficits

Longer payback period

Higher densitieswithin the project corridor may encounter localised community opposition

Likely Major

Inability to secure upfront financing

Inability to secure financingmay force the abandonment of the Project due to cost

Inability to delivertheproject

Higher costs associated to restart Project should funding becomeavailablelater.

Postponement orindefinitedeferral of Project

Community oppositionassociated with deferral or dropping of Project

Possible Major





Impact on Schedule


Risk Probability

Impact on Project

Poor informationdisseminationamongst stakeholder audiences


Higher costs associated with remedial design work to meet higher specification

Increased capital andpotentiallyhigheroperatingand maintenance costs

Longer design time Unlikely Minor

Poor integrationof BRT and LRTserviceswithexistingservices

Adversereactioninresponse to poor design and customer experience

Higher operationalcosts associated with modifying operatingplan


Possible Minor

Transport Product exceedsbudget

Significantadversereactiondue to cost overruns

Higher costs associated withoverspecification

Higher costs associated withoverspecification

Adversereactioninresponse to costoverruns

Likely Moderate

Changes to project scope orobjectives

Adversereactioninresponse to delays in program

Higher costs associated with resspecification

Longer design time

Adversereactioninresponse to delays in program

Likely Moderate

Project does notdelivercustomer requirements

Significantadversereactiontopoor design and customer experience

Lower than forecast public transport demandand/or higher car usage due to poorservicedeliveryandinfrastructure design

Potentialcostsassociated with remedialserviceor infrastructure treatments


Possible Major

Patronage is substantiallydifferentfromforecast

Significantadversereactioninresponse to lower than expecteddemand forecasts

No impact on costs apart from costs associated with overservicingthecorridor

Adversereactioninresponse to overallocationof resources

Possible Moderate





Impact on Schedule


Risk Probability

Impact on Project

ESDDstaffnotavailableasrequired or in required numbers to provideinputanddirectionto the project execution

Adversereactioninresponse topotentialdelays in program

Potentialcostsassociated with longer program and sourcing of alternativestaffor resources

Potentialdelays in program

Adversereactioninresponse topotentialdelays in program

Possible Major

Stakeholders haveunrealisticexpectationsof the Project and its specifications


Higher costs associated with overspecification

Possible Moderate

Not all risks areidentified

Potentialsignificantadversereactionintheeventofasignificantriskmaterialising

Potentialadverseimpacts onservicedelivery

Potentialadverseimpactson costs

Potentialadverseimpacts on program

Potentialsignificantadversereactionintheeventofasignificantriskmaterialising

Possible Moderate

Table 63: Risk Management Strategy Table

RiskPotential Project

Risk

Risk Management

PriorityRisk Management Strategy

Limited technical expertisetodesign and construct BRT and LRT systems

Major High

• Developmentofarobustprocurementstrategytoidentifypreferred designers, contractors and constructors

• Developmentofapeerreviewprocesstocertifydesignandoperatingplans

• Considerationofashadowoperatormodeltoadviseonkeydesignandoperationalaspects

Limited operationalexpertisetooperate BRT and LRT

Moderate High

• ConsideranopenmarkettendertooperateBRTandLRTservices

• Developmentofarobustprocurementstrategytoidentifyexperiencedoperators

• UpskillingandtrainingofoperationallyfocusedTAMSstafftobenchmarkandmonitoroperationalperformance

• UpskillingandtrainingofACTIONBusesstaff

• Whereinternaltrainingandupskillingareinsufficient,considerexternalrecruitmentorengagementofconsultantstobenchmark performance



Risk

Risk Management


Non-compliantdesign Moderate High

• InvolvekeystakeholdersaspartofthedraftanddetailedconceptdesignstagesthroughtheSteeringCommitteeandaProject Control Group

• DevelopmentofaproductdefinitionreporttospecificallyspecifyProjectattributesandagreeduponbystakeholderstoavoidoverscopingandtoobtainagreementbetweenstakeholdersonkey design parameters

Inability to deliveruponprojected growth assumptions

Major Severe

• Developmentofanintegratedlanduseandtransportstrategywithcommunitysignoff

• Undertakingofextensivecommunityconsultationwithintheproject corridor with respect to planned increases in density

• FormationofaSpecialPurposeAuthoritywithlegislatedpowerto implement land use strategies

• FormationofaSpecialPurposeAuthorityempoweredtoacquireanddeveloplandwithinthecorridor

• Engagecommercialpropertyexpertsearlytoappropriatelyinfluencedesign

• Implementationofplanningreformsandplanningcontrolstoencourageappropriateandtimelydevelopmentaroundstations

Inability to secure upfrontfinancing Major High

• Consideralternativemodesandstagingstrategiestospreadfunding requirements

• Diversifyfundingsourcestoincludefareboxstrategies,parkinglevies,redevelopment

Poorinformationdisseminationamongst stakeholder audiences

Minor Low• Communicationplantoensureinformationdissemination

• Regularmeetingswiththeprojectcontrolandreferencegroups

Poorintegrationof BRT and LRT serviceswithexistingservices

Minor Medium

• Developingandimplementingphysical(e.g.lifts/ramps/escalators)andnon-physicalmeasures(realtimeinfo)tofacilitatetravelandtransfers

• Communicationplantoinvolvethecommunityindesigningroutingandfrequency

• Undertakingon-boardsurveystobetterunderstanddemographicprofileofcurrentbususers

• UndertakinganalysisofMyWayfaredatatobetterunderstandtravelpatterns

Transport Productexceedsbudget

Moderate High

• Engagespecialistinfrastructureadvisorstoensurecapitalcostsareaccuratelypricedandsubjectedtoaprobabilisticriskassessment

• FurtherrefinementandexecutionoftheRiskManagementStrategytomanageidentifiedrisks

• Cost benchmarking referencing comparable projects

• Developmentofsub-optionstoallowforthescalingdownofnon-essentialelementsoftheProduct



Risk

Risk Management


Changes to project scope or objectives

Moderate High

• EnsurealignmentofGovernmentintentionswithcurrentoremerginggovernmentstrategiesandpolicies

• ProductDefinitionincludesanalysisofalternativedesignsandoptionswithindesigns

• Undertakestakeholderandcommunityconsultationonareasonablybroadrangeofdesignsandoptionstomeetcommunity issues

Project does not delivercustomerrequirements

Major High

• Undertakefurthermarketanalysisonexistingdatasets(e.g.MyWay)touncovertravelpatternswithinstudycorridor

• Commissionfocusgroupsandsurveystoinvestigateandinterrogate community preferences and willingness to pay

• Consider engaging a shadow operator to report upon customer preferences

Patronage is substantiallydifferentfromforecast

Moderate High

• Undertakefurthermarketanalysisonexistingdatasets(e.g.MyWay)touncovertravelpatternswithinstudycorridor

• Commissionfocusgroupsandsurveystoinvestigateandinterrogate community preferences, willingness to pay and willingnesstotrade-offbetweencostsandservicequality

• Undertakeapeerreviewofthedemandmodellingprocess

• EnsureconceptdesignscancaterforoptimisticlevelsofdemandESDDstaffnotavailableasrequired or in required numbers to provideinputanddirectiontotheprojectexecution

Major High

• Developaresourcingstrategytoidentifyrequiredskills,thenumberofpersonnelrequiredandstaffthatcouldfillpositions

• Considerupskillingandtrainingforstaff

• Considercontractorsandconsultantstofillpositionsorprovidecontingentcover

Stakeholders haveunrealisticexpectationsofthe Project and itsspecifications

Moderate High

• InvolvekeystakeholdersaspartofthedraftanddetailedconceptdesignstagesthroughtheSteeringCommitteeandaProject Control Group

• DevelopmentofaproductdefinitionreporttospecificallyspecifyProjectattributesandagreeduponbystakeholderstoavoidoverscoping and to obtain agreement between stakeholders on key design parameters

• Undertakefrequentbriefings

Not all risks are identified Moderate High

• FurtherrefineRiskManagementStrategythatdevelopsasystematicapproachtoidentifyingrisks,managingrisks

• Undertakebothinternalandexternalpeerriskreviewsperiodically


Construction Risks

Does the initiative pose any significant construction risks due to its location, geology, design, etc.? Are those risks reflected in the construction cost estimate? Are those risks reflected in the initiative’s cost estimate and cost/benefit analysis?

TheProjectCorridorisanestablishedroadcorridorthroughanareathatisrelativelyflat.

Thekeyconstructionrisksidentifiedtodateincludeimpacttoutilities,thelocalenvironment,andtrafficdelays.Sitesurveys,desktopstudiesandstakeholderconsultationhasbeenundertakentounderstandtheseriskstothelevelofdetailsuitableforapre-feasibilitystudy,assuchsuitablecontingencyhasbeenallowedfortheserisksinthecapitalcostestimate.

Theseriskshavebeenquantifiedwithintheconstructioncostsestimatesthatformthebasisoftheeconomic appraisal.

Allconstructioncostestimateswillberevisedwithamoreaccurateaccountofprojectrisks,informedbymoredetaileddesignandspecificationsduringtheFeasibilityandForwardDesignstage.

Is there sufficient capacity (including relevant skills and expertise) to ensure the delivery of the initiative and realisation of benefits?

TheProjectteamthatwillresponsiblefordeliveringtheProjectwillbeformedinamannertoensuretheappropriateresourcesareselectedthatarecapableofdeliveringthescopeidentifiedtoprovidethebenefitspredictedinthetransportdemandmodellingandeconomicassessment.

FurtherconsiderationtotheresourcingneedsbothwithintheACTGovernmentanditsagenciesaswellastheneedforexternaladvisoryserviceswillbeconsideredduringtheinitialstagesoftheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageoncetheTermsofReferenceandthescopeofthestagehavebeenformalised.

Will delivery require associated works to enable initiative to succeed in practical terms?

Nomajorassociatedworkshavebeenidentified.Allworkshavebeenidentifiedintheplanningworkundertakentodatefordevelopmentasanintegratedpackage.

How will interface risks with the initiative be managed?

TheACTGovernment,asproponent,isestablishingtheGungahlintoCityProjectOfficetomanagethedeliveryoftheproject.ThisdedicatedteamwillliaisewithallrelevantACTGovernmentagenciesaswellasCommonwealthGovernmentagenciesandotherstakeholdersandhaveprimaryresponsibilityforcoordination.

What requirements will need to be satisfied prior to construction of the initiative, including relevant planning and environmental approvals, land acquisition?

ApprovalwillberequiredfromNationalCapitalAuthority(NCA)foranychangestoroadsofnationalsignificance,whichincludesNorthbourneAvenue.

IfimpactavoidanceofCommonwealthlistedspeciesorThreatenedEcologicalCommunities(TEC)arefoundtooccurwithintheareaofproposedworksandimpactswereunavoidable,areferraltotheMinisterundertheEPBCActwouldberequiredtoensureadequateassessmentofimpactsonMattersofNationalEnvironmentalSignificance.

ApprovalwillalsoberequiredfromotherACTAgencies,includingTreasury,ACTPlanningandLandAuthority,RoadsACT,TerritoryandMunicipalServices,ParksandCityServices,andACTIONbuses.PartoftheroleoftheProjectOfficewillbetoensureallrelevantapprovalprocessesarefollowedattheappropriate stages of the project.


EnvironmentalRisksAhighleveldesktopassessmentofpotentialenvironmentalrisksandlikelyfutureenvironmentalassessmentneedswasundertakenaspartofthepreparationofanACTGovernmentBusinessCasepreparedinApril2012.Thedesktopassessmentidentifiedthefollowingenvironmentalrisks:

Heritage

Non-indigenousheritageitemsarelocatedatthesouthernendofNorthbourneAvenueandincludetheSydneyandMelbournebuildingsandinHaigPark.TheProjectislikelytohaveaminimalimpactonthese items.

Land Use and Landscape Character

The character of much of the Project Corridor and its immediate surroundings will not be detrimentally affectedbytheProjectdueastheProject’simpactswillbeconfinedlargelytotheexistingandestablished road corridor.

NorthbourneAvenuebetweenAntillSttoAlingaStwillbeimpactedonbythelossofmedianandsignificanttrees.Thislosswillbeoffsetbyanincreaseinpedestrianvergeandhighqualitylandscapingandtreatments.InvestmentsalongtheAvenueareaimedatimprovingthecharacterofNorthbourneAvenueandwillbenotableandsignificant.

FurtherconsultationwiththeNationalCapitalAuthorityonthedesignofanytransportimprovementswithintheProjectCorridorwillberequiredtoensurethatthedesignisconsistentwiththeNationalCapitalPlan.Inparticular,treatmentsalongNorthbourneAvenuewillneedtobedesignandcompletedtoahighlevelofqualitytoreflecttheceremonialrolebestowedupontheAvenuewithintheNationalCapitalPlan.

Ecology

CommonwealthandACTlistedendangeredspeciesandthreatenedecologicalcommunitieshavebeenrecordedimmediatelyadjacenttotheexistingroadcorridor.

Intermsofecologicalconstraints,onlinedatacovering2kmeithersideoftheexistingProjectCorridorwerereviewedresultingintheidentificationofarangeofrecordedTerritoryandCommonwealthprotectedandthreatenedspeciesandcommunities.Recordsincluded:

• ThreatenedFlora—1threatenedfloraspecies.ThereisthepotentialforsuitablehabitatfornineadditionalthreatenedACT/CommonwealthprotectedfloraspeciestooccurinproximityoftheProject Corridor

• ThreatenedFauna—13threatenedfaunaspecieshavebeenrecordedwithinproximityoftheProjectCorridor.Thereisthepotentialforsuitablehabitatfortwenty-threeadditionalthreatenedACT/CommonwealthprotectedfaunaspeciestooccurinproximityoftheProjectCorridor

• ThreatenedEcologicalCommunities—2ThreatenedEcologicalCommunities(TECs)havebeenrecordedinproximityoftheProjectCorridor.TheseTECsareprotectedunderACTandCommonwealthlegislation

Targetedsitesurveyswillberequiredtoreconfirmtheserecordsandestablishtheenvironmentalimpacts of the project.

Soils, Geology and Groundwater

Theprojectisnotlikelytohaveanysignificantimpactsonsoils,geologyandgroundwater.

Noise, Vibration and Air Quality

TheProjectwillreducethenumberofcarmovementsalongthecorridorbuttheresultingincreaseinbusorlightrailmovementshasthepotentialtogenerateincreasedpeakintermittentnoiseandvibration(inthecaseoflightrail).ThisislikelytonegativelyimpactonpropertiesfrontingNorthbourneAvenue.


ThereductionofvehiclesmovementsalongthecorridorasaresultoftheProjectislikelytoresultinimprovementstolocalisedairquality.

Should the Project proceed to the Feasibility and Forward Design stage, the following assessments will be undertaken:

• Detailedassessmentofenvironmentalrisks

• Landuseandplanningapprovalsrequired,includingtheneedforaformalEnvironmentalImpactStatement

• Associatedcommunityengagementandconsultation

NeedforGovernmentFundingShould the Project proceed into the Feasibility and Forward Design Stage, further feasibility, design and planningworkwillneedtobecommissionedbytheACTGovernmenttoassesstheProject’sfeasibilityindetail.FullgovernmentfundingforthenextstageoftheProject’sdevelopmentisconsideredappropriate. The Feasibility and Forward Design Stage will be aimed at:

Table 64: Proposed Feasibility and Forward Design Works

Development Area

Possible Investigations

Option development

Moredetailedprojectstaginganalysistoassesstheappropriatetimingoftheinvestmenttoensure that enhanced public transport capacity when it is warranted by the growth in demand

FurtherdefinitionofthetransportmodestobeusedFrequentNetworkisrequiredtoensurethatoptionsandtreatmentsappliedalongtheProjectCorridorwillalignwithtreatmentsandinvestmentsappliedacrosstheremainderoftheFrequentNetwork

Detailed design

ProductdefinitionincludingvehicleoptionsandLRT/BRTinfrastructureandoperationalspecifications

DetaileddesignoftheProjectCorridor,DicksonStationandtheGungahlinTerminus

Cost estimation

Refinementofthecapitalcostestimates,whichshouldbebasedonadetaileddesignandincludeanappropriateprojectcontingencyasaresultofaprobabilitybasedprojectriskassessment process

Public transport operations

Rationalisationoftheassumedbusnetworktoensuretheappropriatelevelofbusserviceisprovided,tomaximisethelevelofintegrationofrapidtransitwithinthecurrentnetworkandtoensurethatoperatingcostsandthelevelofoperatingsubsidyforpublictransportservicesareoptimised

Land use Refinedlanduseanalysistoensurethatthepopulationandemploymentdistributionalandgrowthimpactsareassessedindetail,reflectasustainablelevelofgrowthintermsofdemandandsupply,andarereflectedinthedemandassessmentandeconomicbenefitsquantification

Refinedlandvaluecaptureanalysistoensureallofthepotentialrevenuesourcesarecapturedto contribute to the funding of the project

Demand modelling

Detailedstrategicmodellingofthepreferredoptiontoensuretheservicecharacteristicsoftheproposedoptions(BRTorLRToracombinationofthetwo)areappropriatelyreflected.Thismayinvolvethecommissioningofstatedpreferencestudiestobetterassessthewillingnesstopayfor(oralternativelythewillingnesstouse)BRTandLRTservices

Modelvalidationandcalibrationusingupdateddemanddataincluding2011JourneytoWorkdata

Environmental Assessment

ConfirmwhetheranEnvironmentalImpactStatementwillneedtobepreparedfortheProject


Development Area

Possible Investigations

Planning approvals

ConfirmwhatplanningapprovalswillberequiredtoprogresstheProject

Governance ConsiderwhatgovernancearrangementswillberequiredtofacilitatetheintegrateddevelopmentoftheProjectCorridor,withaspecificemphasisontheintegrationoflanduseand transport outcomes

Procurement Developmentofanappropriateprocurementstrategytofullyscopetheoptimumapproachtothefuturedevelopmentoftheproject

FurtherinvestigationisrequiredtoidentifycomponentsoftheProjectthataremostamenableforprivatesectorinvolvementandassessthefinancialattractivenessofprivatesectorinvolvementusingaPublicSectorComparatorapproachtoassessvalueformoney.

TheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageisprojectedtocost$30millionover2013–14and2014–15.

FundingfromtheCommonwealthGovernmentwillenhancetheACTGovernment’sabilitytoacceleratetheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageandinvestigatepotentialmeasuresregardinganintegratedlanduse-transportgovernanceframeworkfortheProject.

NeedforCommonwealthGovernmentFundingPartialfundingfortheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStageissoughtfromtheCommonwealthGovernmentonthebasisthat:

• Consistent with National Building II objectives:TheProjectdirectlyaddressesthreeNationBuildingIIobjectives:ConnectingPeople,SafetyandInnovation

• Consistent with the objectives of projects funded under the Commonwealth Government’s Liveable Cities Program:TheProjectaimsatexploringopportunitiesforcooperationbetweentheACTGovernmentandtheprivatesectortodirectlyaddressissuesincludingclimatechange,affordablehousing,trafficcongestionandagrowing,ageingpopulation

• Corridor of national significance:NorthbourneAvenue,whichformsalargepartoftheProjectCorridor,hasbeenidentifiedwithintheNationalCapitalPlanasacorridorofnationalsignificance.ProposedinvestmentsaspartoftheProjectareaimedatreinforcingthenationallysignificantceremonialroleoftheAvenue.AnumberofdesignelementsarelikelytoberequiredthatareoverandabovetherequirementsfortypicalrapidtransitprojectsinordertomeettherequirementsoftheNationalCapitalPlan.

• Opportunity to develop an integrated land use-transport governance structure: A number of partiesincludingtheProductivityCommission,InfrastructureAustraliaandCOAGhaveoutlinedtheneedforimprovedgovernanceinrelationtothedevelopmentofAustralia’scities.TheACTGovernment’scommitmenttotheestablishmentoftheGungahlintoCityProjectOffice,aimedatcoordinatingtransport,redevelopmentofpublichousingandlanduseplanning,providesapotentialspecial-purposevehicletopromoteandrealisepotentialtransportandlanduseoutcomesoutlinedwithin this submission.


Delivery StrategyThe process currently underway establishes the concept design for the project and its feasibility. The nextstageoftheprojectcycleforwhichfundingisrequiredisFeasibilityandForwardDesign.Furtherdetailed feasibility analysis and detailed design work will be required prior to procurement. Table 65 outlinesaprovisionaltimelinebetweenthedetailedfeasibilityprocessandthecommencementofconstruction.ThetimelinewillberefinedduringtheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStage.

Table 65: Provisional Delivery Program

Key Milestones Potential Timing

FunctionalBriefLodged 1st month

SelectDesign/FeasibilityConsultants 4th month

DesignOptionStudies 7th month

Preliminary Sketch Plan 15th month

ConsultationCompletion 12-15thmonth

Final Sketch Plan 21st month

DA Lodged 21th month

DAApproved 22th month

EIS Required Tobeconfirmed

EIS Complete Tobeconfirmed

Document ready 27th month

TenderingandEvaluation 28-30thmonth

ConstructionContractsSigned 31st month

ConstructionBegins 32nd month

AnumberofassetsandrelatedserviceswillneedtobeprocuredundertheProjecttofirstlydevelopthedesign,constructtheworksandthentooperatethetransportservices.InkeepingwithACTGovernmentprocurementprocesses,thefundamentalprinciplesofthefutureprocurementwillbetoensure that the items procured are:

• Fit for purpose

• RepresentvalueformoneyfortheACTGovernment

• In accordance with ACT procurement guidelines.

TheFeasibilityandForwardDesignStagewillconsiderthenatureandlevelofinvolvementoftheprivatesectortodevelopandfinancetheProject.


Governance StrategyProposedgovernancearrangementstodiscusskeyissuesandProjectdirectionarealreadyinplace.Theprovisionalgovernancearrangementsbroadlyreflectgovernancearrangementtodate,withtheexceptionthattheGungahlintoCityProjectOfficenowtakestheplaceastheleadprojectteam,inlieuofESDD.TheProjectSteeringCommitteewillensureseniorexecutivecommitmenttotheProjectwithdirect input from the Minister for ESDD as well as from key stakeholders. A Project Reference Group willdealwithday-to-dayissuesandtohighlightkeyissuesfortheSteeringCommittee’sconsideration.Figure24outlinesatahighleveltheprovisionalgovernancestructurefortheFeasibilityandForwardDesign stage.

Figure 24: High Level Provisional Governance Structure

Minister

Director General - ESDD

City to Gungahlin Project Office

Project Reference Group

Stakeholders Project Steering Committee

AstheProjectmovestotheFeasibilityandForwardDesignstage,adetailedgovernanceplanwillbedevelopedthatsetsoutindetailthegovernancearrangementsfortheplanningandprocurementoftheprojectandincludestherolesandresponsibilitiesassociatedwithspecificgovernancebodiesinordertoassistintheproject’sdeliveryandachievementofoutcomes.

Specificdetailsonmembershipwillbedependentonthepotentiallevelofprivatesectorinvolvement.Potentialstakeholdersmayinclude:

• EnvironmentandSustainableDevelopmentDirectorate

• TerritoryandMunicipalServicesDirectorate

• Treasury Directorate

• Chief Minister and Cabinet Directorate

• EconomicDevelopmentDirectorate

• CommunityServicesDirectorate• NationalCapitalAuthority

Dependingonthelevelofprivatesectorfunding,alternativegovernancearrangementsmaybeexplored.Forinstance,theGoldCoastLightRailprojectestablishedanauthorityofmultipleagenciesandconsortiumpartners.AssociatedGatewayprocedureswillalsoberevisitedbyTreasuryshouldthisoccur.

ShouldCommonwealthGovernmentfundingbesecured,currentgovernancearrangementswillalsobereviewedtoallowforgreaterinvolvementfromtheCommonwealthGovernment.


EconomicAppraisalTable:BRTunderaBusinessAsUsualLandUseScenarioAllvaluesinJune2011prices.Allvaluationswithrespecttobasecase.Allfiguresinmillions

COSTS BENEFITS UNDISCOUNTED

Disc

ount

fact

or

DISCOUNTED

Capi

tal e

xpen

ditu

re

(Cha

nges

in) b

us

oper

ating

cost

s

Rapi

d tr

ansit

(BRT

or

LRT)

ope

ratin

g co

sts

Asse

t mai

nten

ance

High

way

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Publ

ic tr

ansp

ort

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Savi

ngs i

n ge

nera

lised

tim

e

Unp

erce

ived

VO

C sa

ving

s

Road

dam

age

Incr

emen

tal f

are

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Incr

emen

tal p

arki

ng

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Avoi

ded

acci

dent

co

sts

Avoi

ded

air

pollu

tion

Avoi

ded

gree

nhou

se

gas e

miss

ions

Avoi

ded

noise

po

llutio

n

Resid

ual v

alue

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce C

osts

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce C

osts

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

2011 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 1.000 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.02012 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$5.1 0.935 $4.7 $0.0 $0.0 -$4.72013 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$7.6 0.873 $6.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$6.62014 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$19.9 0.816 $16.2 $0.0 $0.0 -$16.22015 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$58.9 0.763 $45.0 $0.0 $0.0 -$45.02016 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$110.1 0.713 $78.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$78.52017 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$74.8 0.666 $49.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$49.82018 $0.0 $0.0 $2.6 $0.5 $23.0 -$15.4 $7.6 $4.0 $0.0 $3.4 $18.6 $1.5 $0.5 $0.5 $0.2 $0.0 $0.0 $3.1 $36.6 $33.5 0.623 $0.0 $1.9 $22.8 $20.92019 $0.0 $0.0 $3.0 $0.5 $26.3 -$17.6 $8.7 $4.6 $0.1 $3.9 $21.3 $1.7 $0.6 $0.6 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $41.8 $38.4 0.582 $0.0 $2.0 $24.3 $22.32020 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $0.5 $29.6 -$19.8 $9.8 $5.2 $0.1 $4.4 $23.9 $2.0 $0.7 $0.7 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $3.8 $47.0 $43.2 0.544 $0.0 $2.1 $25.6 $23.52021 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $32.8 -$22.0 $10.9 $5.8 $0.1 $4.9 $26.6 $2.2 $0.8 $0.7 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $52.3 $48.1 0.508 $0.0 $2.1 $26.6 $24.42022 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $34.7 -$22.6 $12.0 $6.0 $0.1 $5.2 $26.3 $2.3 $0.8 $0.8 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $53.9 $49.7 0.475 $0.0 $2.0 $25.6 $23.62023 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $36.5 -$23.3 $13.1 $6.3 $0.1 $5.5 $26.0 $2.4 $0.9 $0.8 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $55.6 $51.4 0.444 $0.0 $1.9 $24.7 $22.82024 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $38.3 -$24.0 $14.3 $6.6 $0.1 $5.8 $25.7 $2.5 $0.9 $0.9 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $57.2 $53.1 0.415 $0.0 $1.7 $23.7 $22.02025 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $40.1 -$24.7 $15.4 $6.9 $0.1 $6.2 $25.5 $2.6 $1.0 $0.9 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $58.9 $54.7 0.388 $0.0 $1.6 $22.8 $21.22026 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $41.9 -$25.3 $16.6 $7.1 $0.1 $6.5 $25.2 $2.7 $1.0 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $60.5 $56.4 0.362 $0.0 $1.5 $21.9 $20.42027 $7.3 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $43.7 -$26.0 $17.7 $7.4 $0.1 $6.8 $24.9 $2.8 $1.1 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $7.3 $4.2 $62.2 $50.7 0.339 $2.5 $1.4 $21.1 $17.22028 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $45.5 -$26.7 $18.8 $7.7 $0.1 $7.1 $24.6 $2.9 $1.1 $1.0 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $63.8 $59.7 0.317 $0.0 $1.3 $20.2 $18.92029 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $47.4 -$27.4 $20.0 $7.9 $0.1 $7.4 $24.3 $3.0 $1.2 $1.1 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $65.5 $61.3 0.296 $0.0 $1.2 $19.4 $18.12030 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $49.2 -$28.1 $21.1 $8.2 $0.1 $7.7 $24.0 $3.1 $1.3 $1.1 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $67.2 $63.0 0.277 $0.0 $1.2 $18.6 $17.42031 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.258 $0.0 $1.1 $17.8 $16.72032 $22.5 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $22.5 $4.2 $68.8 $42.1 0.242 $5.4 $1.0 $16.6 $10.22033 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.226 $0.0 $0.9 $15.5 $14.62034 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.211 $0.0 $0.9 $14.5 $13.62035 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.197 $0.0 $0.8 $13.6 $12.72036 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.184 $0.0 $0.8 $12.7 $11.92037 $22.2 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $22.2 $4.2 $68.8 $42.5 0.172 $3.8 $0.7 $11.8 $7.32038 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.161 $0.0 $0.7 $11.1 $10.42039 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.150 $0.0 $0.6 $10.3 $9.72040 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.141 $0.0 $0.6 $9.7 $9.12041 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.131 $0.0 $0.5 $9.0 $8.52042 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.123 $0.0 $0.5 $8.4 $7.92043 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.115 $0.0 $0.5 $7.9 $7.42044 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.107 $0.0 $0.4 $7.4 $6.92045 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.100 $0.0 $0.4 $6.9 $6.52046 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.094 $0.0 $0.4 $6.4 $6.12047 $29.8 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $99.8 $29.8 $4.2 $168.6 $134.6 0.088 $2.6 $0.4 $14.8 $11.8Total $358.2 $0.0 $109.5 $13.5 $1,355.8 -$791.3 $564.5 $227.9 $2.8 $211.3 $720.2 $86.7 $34.2 $30.8 $13.8 $99.8 $358.2 $123.0 $1,992.0 $1,510.8 14.035 $215.3 $33.2 $491.8 $243.3

NPV = $243.3 BCR = 1.98


EconomicAppraisalTable:BRTunderaBusinessAsUsualLandUseScenarioAllvaluesinJune2011prices.Allvaluationswithrespecttobasecase.Allfiguresinmillions


Disc

ount

fact

or

DISCOUNTED

Capi

tal e

xpen

ditu

re

(Cha

nges

in) b

us

oper

ating

cost

s

Rapi

d tr

ansit

(BRT

or

LRT)

ope

ratin

g co

sts

Asse

t mai

nten

ance

High

way

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Publ

ic tr

ansp

ort

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Savi

ngs i

n ge

nera

lised

tim

e

Unp

erce

ived

VO

C sa

ving

s

Road

dam

age

Incr

emen

tal f

are

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Incr

emen

tal p

arki

ng

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Avoi

ded

acci

dent

co

sts

Avoi

ded

air

pollu

tion

Avoi

ded

gree

nhou

se

gas e

miss

ions

Avoi

ded

noise

po

llutio

n

Resid

ual v

alue

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce C

osts

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce C

osts

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

2011 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 1.000 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.02012 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$5.1 0.935 $4.7 $0.0 $0.0 -$4.72013 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$7.6 0.873 $6.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$6.62014 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$19.9 0.816 $16.2 $0.0 $0.0 -$16.22015 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$58.9 0.763 $45.0 $0.0 $0.0 -$45.02016 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$110.1 0.713 $78.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$78.52017 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$74.8 0.666 $49.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$49.82018 $0.0 $0.0 $2.6 $0.5 $23.0 -$15.4 $7.6 $4.0 $0.0 $3.4 $18.6 $1.5 $0.5 $0.5 $0.2 $0.0 $0.0 $3.1 $36.6 $33.5 0.623 $0.0 $1.9 $22.8 $20.92019 $0.0 $0.0 $3.0 $0.5 $26.3 -$17.6 $8.7 $4.6 $0.1 $3.9 $21.3 $1.7 $0.6 $0.6 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $41.8 $38.4 0.582 $0.0 $2.0 $24.3 $22.32020 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $0.5 $29.6 -$19.8 $9.8 $5.2 $0.1 $4.4 $23.9 $2.0 $0.7 $0.7 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $3.8 $47.0 $43.2 0.544 $0.0 $2.1 $25.6 $23.52021 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $32.8 -$22.0 $10.9 $5.8 $0.1 $4.9 $26.6 $2.2 $0.8 $0.7 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $52.3 $48.1 0.508 $0.0 $2.1 $26.6 $24.42022 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $34.7 -$22.6 $12.0 $6.0 $0.1 $5.2 $26.3 $2.3 $0.8 $0.8 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $53.9 $49.7 0.475 $0.0 $2.0 $25.6 $23.62023 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $36.5 -$23.3 $13.1 $6.3 $0.1 $5.5 $26.0 $2.4 $0.9 $0.8 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $55.6 $51.4 0.444 $0.0 $1.9 $24.7 $22.82024 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $38.3 -$24.0 $14.3 $6.6 $0.1 $5.8 $25.7 $2.5 $0.9 $0.9 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $57.2 $53.1 0.415 $0.0 $1.7 $23.7 $22.02025 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $40.1 -$24.7 $15.4 $6.9 $0.1 $6.2 $25.5 $2.6 $1.0 $0.9 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $58.9 $54.7 0.388 $0.0 $1.6 $22.8 $21.22026 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $41.9 -$25.3 $16.6 $7.1 $0.1 $6.5 $25.2 $2.7 $1.0 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $60.5 $56.4 0.362 $0.0 $1.5 $21.9 $20.42027 $7.3 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $43.7 -$26.0 $17.7 $7.4 $0.1 $6.8 $24.9 $2.8 $1.1 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $7.3 $4.2 $62.2 $50.7 0.339 $2.5 $1.4 $21.1 $17.22028 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $45.5 -$26.7 $18.8 $7.7 $0.1 $7.1 $24.6 $2.9 $1.1 $1.0 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $63.8 $59.7 0.317 $0.0 $1.3 $20.2 $18.92029 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $47.4 -$27.4 $20.0 $7.9 $0.1 $7.4 $24.3 $3.0 $1.2 $1.1 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $65.5 $61.3 0.296 $0.0 $1.2 $19.4 $18.12030 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $49.2 -$28.1 $21.1 $8.2 $0.1 $7.7 $24.0 $3.1 $1.3 $1.1 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $67.2 $63.0 0.277 $0.0 $1.2 $18.6 $17.42031 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.258 $0.0 $1.1 $17.8 $16.72032 $22.5 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $22.5 $4.2 $68.8 $42.1 0.242 $5.4 $1.0 $16.6 $10.22033 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.226 $0.0 $0.9 $15.5 $14.62034 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.211 $0.0 $0.9 $14.5 $13.62035 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.197 $0.0 $0.8 $13.6 $12.72036 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.184 $0.0 $0.8 $12.7 $11.92037 $22.2 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $22.2 $4.2 $68.8 $42.5 0.172 $3.8 $0.7 $11.8 $7.32038 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.161 $0.0 $0.7 $11.1 $10.42039 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.150 $0.0 $0.6 $10.3 $9.72040 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.141 $0.0 $0.6 $9.7 $9.12041 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.131 $0.0 $0.5 $9.0 $8.52042 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.123 $0.0 $0.5 $8.4 $7.92043 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.115 $0.0 $0.5 $7.9 $7.42044 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.107 $0.0 $0.4 $7.4 $6.92045 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.100 $0.0 $0.4 $6.9 $6.52046 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $68.8 $64.6 0.094 $0.0 $0.4 $6.4 $6.12047 $29.8 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $51.0 -$28.7 $22.3 $8.5 $0.1 $8.0 $23.7 $3.2 $1.3 $1.2 $0.5 $99.8 $29.8 $4.2 $168.6 $134.6 0.088 $2.6 $0.4 $14.8 $11.8Total $358.2 $0.0 $109.5 $13.5 $1,355.8 -$791.3 $564.5 $227.9 $2.8 $211.3 $720.2 $86.7 $34.2 $30.8 $13.8 $99.8 $358.2 $123.0 $1,992.0 $1,510.8 14.035 $215.3 $33.2 $491.8 $243.3

NPV = $243.3 BCR = 1.98


EconomicAppraisalTable:LRTunderaBusinessAsUsualLandUseScenarioAllvaluesinJune2011prices.Allvaluationswithrespecttobasecase.Allfiguresinmillions.


Disc

ount

fact

or

DISCOUNTED

Capi

tal

expe

nditu

re

(Cha

nges

in) b

us

oper

ating

cost

s

Rapi

d tr

ansit

(BRT

or

LRT)

ope

ratin

g co

sts

Asse

t m

aint

enan

ce

High

way

trav

el

time

savi

ngs

Publ

ic tr

ansp

ort

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Savi

ngs i

n ge

nera

lised

tim

e

Unp

erce

ived

VO

C sa

ving

s

Road

dam

age

Incr

emen

tal f

are

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Incr

emen

tal

park

ing

reve

nue

reso

urce

cost

ad

just

men

t

Avoi

ded

acci

dent

co

sts

Avoi

ded

air

pollu

tion

Avoi

ded

gree

nhou

se g

as

emiss

ions

Avoi

ded

noise

po

llutio

n

Resid

ual v

alue

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

2011 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 1.000 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.02012 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $5.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$5.1 0.935 $4.7 $0.0 $0.0 -$4.72013 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $7.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$7.6 0.873 $6.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$6.62014 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $19.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$19.9 0.816 $16.2 $0.0 $0.0 -$16.22015 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $58.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$58.9 0.763 $45.0 $0.0 $0.0 -$45.02016 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $110.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$110.1 0.713 $78.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$78.52017 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $74.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$74.8 0.666 $49.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$49.82018 $0.0 $0.0 $2.6 $0.5 $42.2 -$14.7 $27.5 $13.9 $0.2 $3.3 $17.5 $5.4 $2.5 $2.0 $0.9 $0.0 $0.0 $3.1 $73.2 $70.1 0.623 $0.0 $1.9 $45.6 $43.72019 $0.0 $0.0 $3.0 $0.5 $48.2 -$16.8 $31.4 $15.9 $0.2 $3.7 $20.0 $6.2 $2.8 $2.3 $1.0 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $83.7 $80.2 0.582 $0.0 $2.0 $48.7 $46.72020 $0.0 $0.0 $3.4 $0.5 $54.2 -$18.9 $35.3 $17.9 $0.3 $4.2 $22.5 $7.0 $3.2 $2.6 $1.1 $0.0 $0.0 $3.8 $94.1 $90.3 0.544 $0.0 $2.1 $51.2 $49.12021 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $60.2 -$21.0 $39.2 $19.9 $0.3 $4.7 $25.0 $7.7 $3.5 $2.9 $1.2 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $104.6 $100.4 0.508 $0.0 $2.1 $53.2 $51.02022 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $67.2 -$20.6 $46.7 $20.3 $0.3 $5.0 $24.9 $7.9 $3.6 $3.0 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $112.9 $108.8 0.475 $0.0 $2.0 $53.7 $51.72023 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $74.2 -$20.2 $54.1 $20.7 $0.3 $5.4 $24.8 $8.0 $3.7 $3.0 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $121.3 $117.1 0.444 $0.0 $1.9 $53.9 $52.02024 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $81.3 -$19.8 $61.5 $21.1 $0.3 $5.7 $24.7 $8.2 $3.8 $3.1 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $129.6 $125.5 0.415 $0.0 $1.7 $53.8 $52.12025 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $88.3 -$19.4 $68.9 $21.5 $0.3 $6.1 $24.5 $8.4 $3.8 $3.2 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $138.0 $133.8 0.388 $0.0 $1.6 $53.5 $51.92026 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $95.3 -$18.9 $76.3 $21.9 $0.3 $6.4 $24.4 $8.5 $3.9 $3.2 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $146.4 $142.2 0.362 $0.0 $1.5 $53.0 $51.52027 $7.3 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $102.3 -$18.5 $83.8 $22.3 $0.3 $6.8 $24.3 $8.7 $4.0 $3.3 $1.4 $0.0 $7.3 $4.2 $154.7 $143.3 0.339 $2.5 $1.4 $52.4 $48.52028 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $109.3 -$18.1 $91.2 $22.7 $0.3 $7.1 $24.1 $8.8 $4.1 $3.3 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $163.1 $158.9 0.317 $0.0 $1.3 $51.6 $50.32029 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $116.3 -$17.7 $98.6 $23.0 $0.3 $7.5 $24.0 $9.0 $4.1 $3.4 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $171.4 $167.2 0.296 $0.0 $1.2 $50.7 $49.52030 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $123.3 -$17.3 $106.0 $23.4 $0.4 $7.8 $23.9 $9.1 $4.2 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $179.8 $175.6 0.277 $0.0 $1.2 $49.7 $48.62031 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.258 $0.0 $1.1 $48.6 $47.52032 $22.5 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $22.5 $4.2 $188.1 $161.4 0.242 $5.4 $1.0 $45.4 $39.02033 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.226 $0.0 $0.9 $42.5 $41.52034 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.211 $0.0 $0.9 $39.7 $38.82035 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.197 $0.0 $0.8 $37.1 $36.32036 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.184 $0.0 $0.8 $34.7 $33.92037 $22.2 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $22.2 $4.2 $188.1 $161.8 0.172 $3.8 $0.7 $32.4 $27.92038 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.161 $0.0 $0.7 $30.3 $29.62039 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.150 $0.0 $0.6 $28.3 $27.72040 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.141 $0.0 $0.6 $26.4 $25.92041 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.131 $0.0 $0.5 $24.7 $24.22042 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.123 $0.0 $0.5 $23.1 $22.62043 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.115 $0.0 $0.5 $21.6 $21.12044 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.107 $0.0 $0.4 $20.2 $19.72045 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.100 $0.0 $0.4 $18.9 $18.42046 $0.0 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $4.2 $188.1 $184.0 0.094 $0.0 $0.4 $17.6 $17.22047 $29.8 $0.0 $3.7 $0.5 $130.4 -$16.9 $113.4 $23.8 $0.4 $8.2 $23.8 $9.3 $4.3 $3.5 $1.5 $99.8 $29.8 $4.2 $287.9 $253.9 0.088 $2.6 $0.4 $25.2 $22.2Total $358.2 $0.0 $109.5 $13.5 $3,278.5 -$529.6 $2,748.9 $669.7 $10.0 $212.7 $708.5 $260.5 $120.2 $98.5 $42.0 $99.8 $358.2 $123.0 $4,970.8 $4,489.6 14.035 $215.3 $33.2 $1,187.6 $939.1

NPV = $939.1 BCR = 4.78


EconomicAppraisalTable:BRTunderaHigherDensityLandUseScenarioAllvaluesinJune2011prices.Allvaluationswithrespecttobasecase.Allfiguresinmillions.


Disc

ount

fact

or

DISCOUNTED

Capi

tal

expe

nditu

re

(Cha

nges

in) b

us

oper

ating

cost

s

Rapi

d tr

ansit

(B

RT o

r LRT

) op

erati

ng co

sts

Asse

t m

aint

enan

ce

High

way

trav

el

time

savi

ngs

Publ

ic tr

ansp

ort

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Savi

ngs i

n ge

nera

lised

tim

e

Unp

erce

ived

VO

C sa

ving

s

Road

dam

age

Incr

emen

tal f

are

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

t

Incr

emen

tal

park

ing

reve

nue

reso

urce

cost

ad

just

men

t

Avoi

ded

acci

dent

co

sts

Avoi

ded

air

pollu

tion

Avoi

ded

gree

nhou

se g

as

emiss

ions

Avoi

ded

noise

po

llutio

n

Resid

ual v

alue

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

2011 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 1.000 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.02012 $11.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $11.3 $0.0 $0.0 -$11.3 0.935 $10.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$10.52013 $16.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $16.0 $0.0 $0.0 -$16.0 0.873 $13.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$13.92014 $36.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $36.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$36.6 0.816 $29.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$29.92015 $129.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $129.3 $0.0 $0.0 -$129.3 0.763 $98.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$98.62016 $248.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $248.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$248.5 0.713 $177.2 $0.0 $0.0 -$177.22017 $172.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $172.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$172.8 0.666 $115.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$115.12018 $0.0 $0.0 $3.0 $2.4 $24.3 -$15.5 $8.8 $4.3 $0.1 $3.6 $18.6 $1.7 $0.8 $0.7 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $5.5 $38.8 $33.4 0.623 $0.0 $3.4 $24.2 $20.82019 $0.0 $0.0 $3.5 $2.4 $27.8 -$17.7 $10.1 $4.9 $0.1 $4.1 $21.3 $1.9 $1.0 $0.8 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $5.9 $44.4 $38.5 0.582 $0.0 $3.4 $25.8 $22.42020 $0.0 $0.0 $3.9 $2.4 $31.2 -$19.9 $11.3 $5.5 $0.1 $4.6 $23.9 $2.2 $1.1 $0.8 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.3 $49.9 $43.6 0.544 $0.0 $3.4 $27.1 $23.72021 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $34.7 -$22.1 $12.6 $6.1 $0.1 $5.1 $26.6 $2.4 $1.2 $0.9 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $55.5 $48.7 0.508 $0.0 $3.4 $28.2 $24.82022 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $36.5 -$22.7 $13.8 $6.4 $0.1 $5.4 $26.3 $2.5 $1.2 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $57.2 $50.4 0.475 $0.0 $3.2 $27.2 $24.02023 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $38.2 -$23.2 $15.0 $6.7 $0.1 $5.8 $26.0 $2.6 $1.3 $1.0 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $58.9 $52.2 0.444 $0.0 $3.0 $26.2 $23.22024 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $40.0 -$23.8 $16.2 $7.0 $0.1 $6.1 $25.7 $2.7 $1.4 $1.1 $0.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $60.7 $53.9 0.415 $0.0 $2.8 $25.2 $22.42025 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $41.8 -$24.4 $17.4 $7.3 $0.1 $6.4 $25.4 $2.9 $1.4 $1.1 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $62.4 $55.7 0.388 $0.0 $2.6 $24.2 $21.62026 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $43.5 -$24.9 $18.6 $7.5 $0.1 $6.7 $25.1 $3.0 $1.5 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $64.2 $57.4 0.362 $0.0 $2.4 $23.3 $20.82027 $10.9 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $45.3 -$25.5 $19.8 $7.8 $0.1 $7.0 $24.9 $3.1 $1.5 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $10.9 $6.8 $65.9 $48.2 0.339 $3.7 $2.3 $22.3 $16.32028 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $47.1 -$26.1 $21.0 $8.1 $0.1 $7.3 $24.6 $3.2 $1.6 $1.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $67.6 $60.9 0.317 $0.0 $2.1 $21.4 $19.32029 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $48.8 -$26.7 $22.2 $8.4 $0.1 $7.7 $24.3 $3.3 $1.6 $1.3 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $69.4 $62.6 0.296 $0.0 $2.0 $20.5 $18.52030 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $50.6 -$27.2 $23.4 $8.7 $0.1 $8.0 $24.0 $3.4 $1.7 $1.3 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $71.1 $64.4 0.277 $0.0 $1.9 $19.7 $17.82031 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.258 $0.0 $1.7 $18.8 $17.12032 $25.3 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $25.3 $6.8 $72.9 $40.8 0.242 $6.1 $1.6 $17.6 $9.92033 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.226 $0.0 $1.5 $16.4 $14.92034 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.211 $0.0 $1.4 $15.4 $13.92035 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.197 $0.0 $1.3 $14.4 $13.02036 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.184 $0.0 $1.2 $13.4 $12.22037 $14.6 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $14.6 $6.8 $72.9 $51.5 0.172 $2.5 $1.2 $12.5 $8.92038 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.161 $0.0 $1.1 $11.7 $10.62039 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.150 $0.0 $1.0 $11.0 $9.92040 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.141 $0.0 $0.9 $10.2 $9.32041 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.131 $0.0 $0.9 $9.6 $8.72042 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.123 $0.0 $0.8 $8.9 $8.12043 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.115 $0.0 $0.8 $8.4 $7.62044 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.107 $0.0 $0.7 $7.8 $7.12045 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.100 $0.0 $0.7 $7.3 $6.62046 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $72.9 $66.1 0.094 $0.0 $0.6 $6.8 $6.22047 $138.2 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $52.3 -$27.8 $24.6 $9.0 $0.1 $8.3 $23.7 $3.5 $1.7 $1.4 $0.6 $262.1 $138.2 $6.8 $335.0 $190.0 0.088 $12.1 $0.6 $29.3 $16.6Total $803.5 $0.0 $127.4 $72.7 $1,399.5 -$772.1 $627.5 $241.0 $3.9 $218.6 $719.6 $94.8 $46.8 $37.0 $15.3 $262.1 $803.5 $200.1 $2,266.6 $1,263.1 14.035 $469.8 $54.3 $534.9 $10.8

NPV = $10.8 BCR = 1.02


EconomicAppraisalTable:LRTunderaHigherDensityLandUseScenarioAllvaluesinJune2011prices.Allvaluationswithrespecttobasecase.Allfiguresinmillions.


Disc

ount

fact

or

DISCOUNTED

Capi

tal

expe

nditu

re

(Cha

nges

in) b

us

oper

ating

cost

s

Rapi

d tr

ansit

(B

RT o

r LRT

) op

erati

ng co

sts

Asse

t m

aint

enan

ce

High

way

trav

el

time

savi

ngs

Publ

ic tr

ansp

ort

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs

Savi

ngs i

n ge

nera

lised

tim

e

Unp

erce

ived

VO

C sa

ving

s

Road

dam

age

Incr

emen

tal f

are

reve

nue

reso

urce

co

st a

djus

tmen

tIn

crem

enta

l pa

rkin

g re

venu

e re

sour

ce co

st

adju

stm

ent

Avoi

ded

acci

dent

co

sts

Avoi

ded

air

pollu

tion

Avoi

ded

gree

nhou

se g

as

emiss

ions

Avoi

ded

noise

po

llutio

n

Resid

ual v

alue

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

Capi

tal c

osts

Ope

ratin

g an

d M

aint

enan

ce

Cost

s

All b

enefi

ts

Net

ben

efit

2011 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 1.000 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.02012 $11.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $11.3 $0.0 $0.0 -$11.3 0.935 $10.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$10.52013 $16.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $16.0 $0.0 $0.0 -$16.0 0.873 $13.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$13.92014 $36.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $36.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$36.6 0.816 $29.9 $0.0 $0.0 -$29.92015 $129.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $129.3 $0.0 $0.0 -$129.3 0.763 $98.6 $0.0 $0.0 -$98.62016 $248.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $248.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$248.5 0.713 $177.2 $0.0 $0.0 -$177.22017 $172.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $172.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$172.8 0.666 $115.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$115.12018 $0.0 $0.0 $3.0 $2.4 $42.7 -$14.6 $28.1 $14.2 $0.2 $3.4 $17.5 $5.6 $2.8 $2.2 $0.9 $0.0 $0.0 $5.5 $74.8 $69.3 0.623 $0.0 $3.4 $46.6 $43.22019 $0.0 $0.0 $3.5 $2.4 $48.8 -$16.6 $32.1 $16.2 $0.3 $3.8 $20.0 $6.4 $3.2 $2.5 $1.0 $0.0 $0.0 $5.9 $85.5 $79.6 0.582 $0.0 $3.4 $49.8 $46.32020 $0.0 $0.0 $3.9 $2.4 $54.9 -$18.7 $36.1 $18.2 $0.3 $4.3 $22.5 $7.2 $3.5 $2.8 $1.2 $0.0 $0.0 $6.3 $96.2 $89.8 0.544 $0.0 $3.4 $52.3 $48.92021 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $61.0 -$20.8 $40.2 $20.2 $0.3 $4.8 $25.0 $8.0 $3.9 $3.1 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $106.9 $100.1 0.508 $0.0 $3.4 $54.3 $50.92022 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $68.1 -$20.5 $47.7 $20.7 $0.3 $5.2 $24.9 $8.1 $4.0 $3.2 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $115.3 $108.6 0.475 $0.0 $3.2 $54.8 $51.62023 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $75.3 -$20.1 $55.2 $21.1 $0.3 $5.5 $24.8 $8.3 $4.1 $3.2 $1.3 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $123.8 $117.1 0.444 $0.0 $3.0 $55.0 $52.02024 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $82.5 -$19.8 $62.7 $21.5 $0.3 $5.9 $24.6 $8.4 $4.2 $3.3 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $132.3 $125.6 0.415 $0.0 $2.8 $54.9 $52.12025 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $89.7 -$19.5 $70.2 $21.9 $0.4 $6.3 $24.5 $8.6 $4.3 $3.4 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $140.8 $134.0 0.388 $0.0 $2.6 $54.6 $52.02026 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $96.9 -$19.1 $77.7 $22.3 $0.4 $6.6 $24.4 $8.8 $4.3 $3.4 $1.4 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $149.3 $142.5 0.362 $0.0 $2.4 $54.1 $51.72027 $10.9 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $104.0 -$18.8 $85.2 $22.7 $0.4 $7.0 $24.2 $8.9 $4.4 $3.5 $1.4 $0.0 $10.9 $6.8 $157.8 $140.1 0.339 $3.7 $2.3 $53.4 $47.42028 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $111.2 -$18.5 $92.7 $23.1 $0.4 $7.4 $24.1 $9.1 $4.5 $3.5 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $166.2 $159.5 0.317 $0.0 $2.1 $52.6 $50.52029 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $118.4 -$18.1 $100.2 $23.5 $0.4 $7.7 $24.0 $9.2 $4.6 $3.6 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $174.7 $168.0 0.296 $0.0 $2.0 $51.7 $49.72030 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $125.6 -$17.8 $107.7 $23.9 $0.4 $8.1 $23.9 $9.4 $4.6 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $183.2 $176.4 0.277 $0.0 $1.9 $50.7 $48.82031 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.258 $0.0 $1.7 $49.5 $47.82032 $25.3 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $25.3 $6.8 $191.7 $159.6 0.242 $6.1 $1.6 $46.3 $38.62033 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.226 $0.0 $1.5 $43.3 $41.72034 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.211 $0.0 $1.4 $40.4 $39.02035 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.197 $0.0 $1.3 $37.8 $36.52036 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.184 $0.0 $1.2 $35.3 $34.12037 $14.6 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $14.6 $6.8 $191.7 $170.4 0.172 $2.5 $1.2 $33.0 $29.32038 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.161 $0.0 $1.1 $30.8 $29.82039 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.150 $0.0 $1.0 $28.8 $27.82040 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.141 $0.0 $0.9 $26.9 $26.02041 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.131 $0.0 $0.9 $25.2 $24.32042 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.123 $0.0 $0.8 $23.5 $22.72043 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.115 $0.0 $0.8 $22.0 $21.22044 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.107 $0.0 $0.7 $20.6 $19.82045 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.100 $0.0 $0.7 $19.2 $18.52046 $0.0 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $0.0 $0.0 $6.8 $191.7 $184.9 0.094 $0.0 $0.6 $18.0 $17.32047 $138.2 $0.0 $4.3 $2.4 $132.7 -$17.5 $115.3 $24.3 $0.4 $8.4 $23.7 $9.6 $4.7 $3.7 $1.5 $262.1 $138.2 $6.8 $453.8 $308.9 0.088 $12.1 $0.6 $39.7 $27.0Total $803.5 $0.0 $127.4 $72.7 $3,335.4 -$540.1 $2,795.3 $682.3 $11.1 $219.5 $707.8 $268.5 $132.8 $104.7 $43.5 $262.1 $803.5 $200.1 $5,227.5 $4,224.0 14.035 $469.8 $54.3 $1,225.2 $701.1

NPV = $701.1 BCR = 2.34


Footnotes

1 ColliersInternational(2011)GlobalCBDParkingRateSurvey

2 ACTGovernment(2010)TimetoTalkCanberra2030

3 ABS(2011)Populationestimatesbasedon2006Census

4 CMCD (undated)

5 ACTPLA (2009)

6 CMD (undated)

7 ColliersInternational(2011)GlobalCBDParkingRateSurvey

8 ACTGovernment(2010)TimetoTalkCanberra2030

9 Austroads(2011),UpdatingAustroadsRUEUnitValuesandRelatedMethodologies,AustroadsPublicationNumberAP–R373/11,February2011

10RTA(2009),EconomicAnalysisManual:AppendixB–EconomicParametersfor2009.

11RailCorp(2010),ACompendiumofCityRailTravelStatistics,SeventhEdition,June2010.

12ARRB(2011),GuidetoProjectEvaluation–Part4:ProjectEvaluationData(UpdateRUEUnitValues),Austroads Project TP1672, August 2011

infrastructure australia project submission · infrastructure australia project submission august...

Documents