Urban rail systems: Analysis of the factors behind success

Investment in urban rail systems has increased rapidly over the past decades. While there have been some successful systems, a significant number have failed to be as successful as expected in improving public transport and urban environment. These experiences have led to a considerable debate in the literature about the effectiveness of new urban rail systems and whether it is worthwhile investing in them. While these debates continue, political support for metros, and particularly light rail systems, is still strong, and investment in them is very likely to continue. Hence, it is extremely important to understand the factors that make these systems successful. The paper presents the findings of a research aimed at identifying these factors based on the analysis of eight new urban rail systems: four in the USA, three in the UK and one in Canada. The paper presents the results of the performance analysis of the case studies as well as a detailed analysis of the factors that affected the performance of each system. Based on the case study analysis, a comprehensive list of factors that make urban rail systems successful is presented. The analysis also facilitates a comparison between the experiences of the three countries, and focuses on the effects of different operating environments and different planning approaches on the performance of urban rail systems. The paper concludes with a comparison of the findings of this research to those of previous studies.

[1]  J Pucher.  PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENTS: CANADA VS. THE UNITED STATES , 1994 .

[2]  R. L. Knight.  The impact of rail transit on land use: Evidence and a change of perspective , 1980 .

[3]  B J Simpson.  URBAN RAIL TRANSIT- AN APPRAISAL , 1989 .

[4]  Tom Parkinson.  RAIL TRANSIT PERFORMANCE , 1992 .

[5]  A. Black,et al.  The Recent Popularity of Light Rail Transit in North America , 1993 .

[6]  Gordon Mills,et al.  Urban light rail: Intermodal competition or coordination? , 1999 .

[7]  R. Knowles.  Transport impacts of greater Manchester's metrolink light rail system , 1996 .

[8]  Transport Investment and Urban Regeneration in a Provincial City: Sheffield, 1992–96 , 1999 .

[9]  David Byrne,et al.  Tyne and Wear UDC – Turning the uses inside out: Active Deindustrialisation and its Consequences , 1999 .

[10]  D A Walmsley,et al.  The effects of rapid transit on public transport and urban development , 1991 .

[11]  H. Wolman.  The Reagan Urban Policy and its Impacts , 1986 .

[12]  Craig Miller,et al.  ROLE AND FUNCTION OF TRANSIT IN GROWTH MANAGEMENT: CURRENT ISSUES IN FLORIDA , 1989 .

[13]  James A. DunnJr..  COORDINATION OF URBAN TRANSIT SERVICES: THE GERMAN MODEL , 1980 .

[14]  Jonathan E D Richmond.  NEW RAIL TRANSIT INVESTMENTS: A REVIEW: SUMMARY PAPER. , 1998 .

[15]  Roger J Allport,et al.  THE PERFORMANCE AND IMPACT OF RAIL MASS TRANSIT IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES , 1990 .

[16]  R. L. Knight,et al.  Evidence of land use impacts of rapid transit systems , 1977 .

[17]  D. Pickrell.  A Desire Named Streetcar Fantasy and Fact in Rail Transit Planning , 1992 .

[18]  Martin Wachs,et al.  Learning from Los Angeles: transport, urban form, and air quality , 1993 .

[19]  Robert Cervero.  RAIL-ORIENTED OFFICE DEVELOPMENT IN CALIFORNIA: HOW SUCCESSFUL? , 1994 .

[20]  Fred Glick,et al.  LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT AND EFFECTIVE LAND USE PLANNING: PORTLAND, SACRAMENTO, AND SAN DIEGO , 1992 .

[21]  R. Dunphy.  REVIEW OF RECENT AMERICAN LIGHT RAIL EXPERIENCES , 1995 .

[22]  Daniel Sperling,et al.  Politics and Technical Uncertainty in Transportation Investment Analysis , 1987 .

[23]  R. Cervero,et al.  Transit villages for the 21st century , 1996 .

[24]  TRANSPORT INVESTMENT AND REGENERATION. SHEFFIELD: 1992-1997 , 1999 .

[25]  Urban planning and politics , 1997 .

[26]  J. Watson,et al.  The Myth of the North American City: Continentalism Challenged , 1986 .

[27]  C Hass-Klau,et al.  BUS OR LIGHT RAIL: MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICE - A FINANCIAL, OPERATIONAL AND DEMAND COMPARISON OF LIGHT RAIL, GUIDED BUSES, BUSWAYS AND BUS LANES , 2004 .

[28]  R. Haywood.  South Yorkshire Supertram: Its Property Impacts and their Implications for Integrated Land Use-Transportation Planning , 1999 .

[29]  Rob Imrie,et al.  British urban policy : an evaluation of the urban development corporations , 1999 .

[30]  W D Warren,et al.  WHY SUCCESS IN ST. LOUIS , 1995 .

[31]  Roger Mackett,et al.  GUIDELINES FOR PLANNING A NEW URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM. , 1996 .

[32]  Simin Davoudi,et al.  THE LONGER TERM EFFECTS OF THE TYNE AND WEAR METRO , 1993 .

[33]  ISTEA: infrastructure investment and land use , 1995 .

[34]  Donald E. Priest.  Enhancing the developmental impact of rail transit , 1980 .

[35]  David Banister.  Transport Planning: In the Uk, USA and Europe , 1994 .

[36]  Barry J. Simpson,et al.  Urban public transport today , 1993 .

[37]  Great Britain. Office for Standards in Education,et al.  Transport statistics, Great Britain , 1976 .

[38]  Ela Babalik,et al.  Urban rail systems : a planning framework to increase their success , 2000 .

[39]  R. Mackett,et al.  The impact of new urban public transport systems: will the expectations be met? , 1998 .

[40]  D H Pickrell,et al.  URBAN RAIL TRANSIT PROJECTS: FORECAST VERSUS ACTUAL RIDERSHIP AND COSTS. FINAL REPORT , 1989 .

[41]  James A. Jr. Dunn.  Coordination of urban transit services: The german model , 1980 .

[42]  Martyn Leslie Senior,et al.  The short‐term transport impacts of light rail: the evidence of secondary data from greater manchester's metrolink , 1999 .

[43]  John F. Kain,et al.  CHOOSING THE WRONG TECHNOLOGY : OR HOW TO SPEND BILLIONS AND REDUCE TRANSIT USE , 1988 .

[44]  R. Cervero,et al.  TWENTY YEARS OF THE BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS , 1997 .

[45]  J. Gómez-Ibáňez.  A DARK SIDE TO LIGHT RAIL? THE EXPERIENCE OF THREE NEW TRANSIT SYSTEMS , 1985 .

[46]  Roger Mackett,et al.  Enhancing the success of light rail systems , 2001 .