|
ACE has welcomed the publication of the Department for Transport’s Green Light for Light Rail paper. The paper looks at the benefits of light rail and tram projects for the economy and for the environment. It also looks at how costs can be bought down to make more projects viable.
The paper recognises that along with the economic activity created by building new light rail routes in urban areas, existing light rail systems have had significant knock-on effects on the areas they serve. However, it also notes that there are difficulties for local authorities looking to finance such projects.
Andrew Boagey, SYSTRA's business director for Northern Europe, said: "As a railway engineer and transport specialist, Systra welcomes the 'Green Light for Light Rail' paper as a clear statement of support for modes of transport that are increasingly seen as the capital investment of choice for our European neighbours."
We can see the direction in which urban transportation is headed. Congestion in towns and cities increases and yet, in many cases, there is a legacy of unused heavy rail infrastructure. With careful attention to safety and innovative engineering, this can be put into use to serve new passenger markets and bring economic development."
We fully support Norman Baker’s initiative, which gives a clear message that Light Rail and Tram-Train is to be encouraged by the Department for Transport."
As one would expect (with the exception of non-representative underground sections) the data provided in the DFT report shows a correlation between the overall cost of a project and its length. In addition to this the cost per mile reduces marginally as the length of the project increases.
Although the small sample size limits the conclusions that can be drawn, the figures infer that managing costs on smaller projects is crucial and where possible the implementation of light rail in a manner that avoids very small project phases would result in a more optimal outcome.
The new DfT paper also recognises that costs can prove challenging for a range of reasons. It proposes a number of measures to help resolve this that ACE welcomes.
Development of a centre for procurement excellence within UKTram is very welcome. Procurement can prove complex, time consuming and costly for the local authorities and companies involved. There are a number of projects underway in the public sector that seek to improve procurement practices and we hope this measure will focus on intelligence sharing to achieve the best result.
The movement of utilities such as water pipes and electricity cables from where tracks will run can be costly. The government’s plan for a consultation on this issue and how utilities interact with light rail will enable local authorities and business to seek solutions to this problem. There are difficulties for local authorities seeking to fund large scale schemes with limited finances available to them. The proposal to reduce the requirement for local funding to levels in line with other modes of transport is very welcome. This will allow light rail proposals to seek funding on a level playing field to other transport projects.
ACE chief executive Nelson Ogunshakin OBE said: “This is another strong sign that the government and industry agree that infrastructure investment is vital to restoring UK economic growth. Engineers look forward to working with government to help overcome the financial difficulties that can hold good investments up and translating this paper’s good intentions into action on the ground.”
- ENDS -
For media inquiries please contact Gavin Pearson (gpearson@acenet.co.uk) (020 7202 0255)
Notes to editors
Analysis of cost per mile of track figures in Green Light for Green Rail (ACE senior economic analyst Graham Pontin)
With the exception of non-representative underground sections a brief analysis of the data in the DFT report reveals that using all projects in the sample, we find that:
As one would expect there is a correlation between the cost of a project and its length. The intercept value suggests that there is a fixed cost of £83.2 million of a light rail project before any length of track is laid. This would account for project scopes, planning applications, mobilising workforce and machinery etc.
If we then carry out the same analysis but using the cost per mile plotted against the length it is found that whilst there is a weaker correlation, the cost per mile still reduces as the length of the project increase.
Within this there are two potential outliers, projects of very short length (5 miles) and significant cost. Removing these results in increases in the extent to which costs rise with length. It also raises questions as to the extent of the marginal reduction in cost per mile (the removal of these projects results there actually being a very marginal increase per mile).
The size of this sample limits the extent to which these results can be analysed but this would appear to suggest that if light rail projects are being considered there is an optimum minimum length that should be constructed. Beyond this point although there may be some cost reduction by adding additional length but there still should be emphasis on controlling costs.
ACE’s research paper “Infrastructure: a case for funding” can be found here.
ACE’s Barriers to Investment paper can be found here.
Photographs are available on request.
|