Public Transport Plan

DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION
Mapping out the future for Perths

public transport network.
State of Western Australia

Published by the
Department of Transport
140 William Street
Perth Western Australia 6000
Published July 2011
Internet: www.transport.wa.gov.au
Phone: (08) 6551 6000
Fax: (08) 6551 6001
Chairmans
foreword
We have much to be proud of in
Perths public transport system.
Over the past 25 years successive
Western Australian Governments
have made bold and strategic
decisions to modernise and
significantly extend the passenger
rail network and maintain a fully
integrated system that allows people
to move around the city with ease.
Our public transport system is regarded as
one of the best, newest and most efficient
in the nation. A recent benchmarking
study ranked Perths rail services number
one for average network speed, on-time
running, operating cost per service
kilometre and energy cost per service
kilometre. However, much more needs
to be done to ensure the system has the
capacity and quality of service to meet the
transport needs of a rapidly growing city.
To provide a transit map for the future,
the Minister for Transport set up the
Independent Panel to oversee the
preparation of this public transport
network plan. Our task has been to
identify a mass transit network for
the next 21 years and to propose

projects that will see construction of
infrastructure such as new railways,
transit ways and bus lanes to better
support public transport and improve the
quality ofservices.
We have worked closely with
the Western Australian Planning
Commission. The Directions 2031 and
Beyond spatial framework for Perth
and Peel has informed our planning.
We recognise that an increasing
concentration of housing, employment
and major services in the central and
inner parts of the city will shape the
future public transport system. We also
recognise that our Plan is one of the key
enablers for successfully implementing
Directions 2031 and Beyond. As traffic
congestion, the cost of travel and
environmental issues become more
acute, major centres will require quality,
high capacity public transportservices.
Our Plan envisages Perths public
transport system carrying more than
twice as many people by 2031. Our Vision
for the Plan is to see public transport
become the preferred choice of travel to
Perths strategic centres and through the
growth corridors.
Limited cost-effective options for
building railways between strategic
centres in the Central Sector and the
prohibitive cost of tunnels mean the city
has reached a stage in its development

where another tier of service is needed
an onroad Rapid Transit System.
Without priority for public transport on
roads, the quality and level of service
cannot be achieved and the network
will not be able to meet demand. This
will lead to pressure for wider roads
and increasing congestion on roads in
constrainedenvironments.
A strategic alignment of objectives
between state transport agencies and
local government is needed to find a
balance between travel demands and
community amenity. This needs to start
with a clear realisation that the major
roads in the central areas of the City
will move substantially more people
than now and that public transport is a
key part of the solution, especially for
access to the strategic centres.
Active engagement and collaboration
across the three tiers of government,
business and the community should
form the foundation of successful
implementation of this Plan. Detailed
project planning should involve these
stakeholders to further progress
the initiatives identified, including
master planning, technical feasibility
and opportunities for land use and
transportintegration.
The State Governments acceptance
of this plan will be aided by strong and
clear support from major stakeholders.
I encourage you to lend your support to
this Plan.
Stuart Hicks AO
Chair
Independent Panel
Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031
Decision making
framework
for preparation and implementation of this plan
The strategic land use planning for Perth

indicates where people will be living and
working, and has been used to establish
travel patterns across the city.
Metropolitan Strategic
Land Use Plan
Directions 2031 and Beyond
This Plan identifies the public transport

network needed to support Perths growing
population and links to and between
strategic centres. It also proposes the
preferred type of public transport service
(mode) and the priorities for infrastructure
investment across the network.
Public Transport
Network Plan
WE ARE
HERE
Public Transport for Perth in 2031
Project Planning and Evaluation
Detailed project planning, costing and

evaluation is needed, and will include:
Review of the preferred mode;
PROJECT
PROJECT
PROJECT
PROJECT
Concept and Master Planning;

Technical and financial feasibility;
Land Use and Transport Integration
(LUTI) opportunities;
Alternative financing options.
Budget Decisions
PROJECT
PROJECT
PROJECT
PROJECT
Decisions on funding for specific projects

will be made by the Government
in the annual budget process.
Key findings
The current network will not be
able to cope with the projected
increase in public transport use
and growth of the city.
A significant change in the way
public transport operates will be
needed if it is to play its crucial
role in reducing congestion,
improving accessibility and
reducing the consumption of
fossil fuels.
Over the next 21 years, much of
the investment in public transport
infrastructure and system
improvements is needed within
15km of the Perth central area.
Importance of public
transport for Perth
Good cities need effective public transport.
It plays a vital role in creating competitive
economies, and liveable, inclusive communities.
It also has a role in reducing our reliance on
fossil fuels and our carbon footprint.
Public transport enables people to access
families and friends, jobs, recreation,
education, health care and the many activities
that contribute to individual and community
wellbeing. It provides independence for people
who cannot or do not drive.
Over the past ten years public transport usage
in Perth has increased by 67%, three times the
rate of population growth over the same period.
Some 330,000 trips are made by public
transport every weekday. Two-thirds of public
transport trips are for work and education
Future growth
By 2031, Perth residents will collectively more than double their use of
public transport.
Public transport will account for:
one-in-eight of all motorised trips (currently one-in-fourteen);
one-in-five motorised trips in the morning peak period (currently one-in-eight);
over 30% of peak hour distance travelled (currently around 20%); and
nearly 70% of all trips to the CBD (currently around 47%).
purposes. These are generally made during the

peak period to and from the central city area.
The current network strongly supports the
central city area. However, there are major
differences in the quality of services, with
limited quality mass transit services for
the central northern sector of the Perth
metropolitan area and between major centres
outside of the central area.
Developing a mass
transit system
For the level and quality of public transport
services to continue to improve, there will
need to be real improvements in reliability,
speed of travel, service frequency, safety and
security, and ease of use.
There are limited options to further develop
the rail system in a cost effective way.
Right-of-way reserves do not exist between
many of the strategic centres in the Central
Sector (largely within 15km of the CBD) where
consolidation and higher intensity of activity
is planned. The alternative of constructing
tunnels is very expensive and not feasible for
extending services to new areas.
Most of the new growth corridors can be
served by road-based services, but strategic
decisions need to be made to ensure these
services have substantial priority over general
traffic. Without this priority, the quality and
level of service cannot be achieved.
To provide a quality level of service for more
people, the future transit system will need to
have three integrated types of service train
services, road-based rapid transit services
and buses. A road based rapid transit service
can be either light rail or bus rapid transit.
Rapid Transit Infrastructure

COMBINED STAGE 1 &
STAGE 2 PROJECTS
Two Rocks
Yanchep
Eglinton
Alkimos
Butler
Developing the network
Clarkson
Ellenbrook
The public transport system can be enhanced

by increasing capacity on the existing network,
expanding the network and developing
transformational projects.
Joondalup
Whitfords City
Hillarys
Guildford
The project proposals are grouped into two

categories Stage One or shorter term/before
2020 and Stage Two or medium term/before
2031. The proposed combined network to be
developed by 2031 is shown in the figure on
this page.
Balcatta
Karrinyup
Morley
Mirrabooka
Bassendean
Stirling
Scarborough
Bayswater
Airport West
Glendalough
Mt. Lawley
ECU
Burswood
RT
H
Belmont
Shenton Park
PE
Victoria Park
Oats St
QEII
Esplanade
UWA
The capacity and efficiency of the existing

network will need to be increased by:
Cannington
Claremont
Curtin
Thornlie
Canning Bridge
Booragoon
Riverton
Maddington
Fremantle
Upgrading major bus interchanges and

providing faster bus services to transfer
passengers to rail services;
Murdoch Southlands
Canning Vale
Armadale
Building new train stations;

Providing effective access to the system
including adequate park and ride facilities.
Airport Terminal
Claisebrook
Subiaco
Increasing capacity on the

existing network
Purchasing new trains and buses;
Midland
Warwick
Cockburn Central
Byford
Success / Mandogalup
Mundijong
Rockingham
Rockingham City
Expanding the network
Baldivis
KEY
Warnbro
The network will need to be expanded by:

Providing priority bus lanes along routes
that connect major centres and through
congested intersections;
Adding a rail spur to service the Airport and
the Hills area;
Extending the Armadale line to Byford and
Mundijong in the longer term; and
Extending the Northern Suburbs Railway
to Yanchep and other transformational
projects (detailed below).
These projects are integral to the creation of
Perths long-term public transport network.
However, in themselves, they will not be
enough to meet the expected demand for
public transport.
Transformational projects
A new rapid transit system, with the capacity
to move large volumes of people during peak
hours, is needed for the central northern
Railway Infrastructure at 2031 *

Karnup
Keralup
Nambeelup
Light Rail Infrastructure at 2031

Bus Rapid Transit Infrastructure at 2031
Rapid Transit Infrastructure beyond 2031
Mandurah
Lakelands
Mandurah Station
suburbs. The current rail network cannot

include another line to service these northern
suburbs along Alexander Drive and through
North Perth, without significant cost and
disruption to existing commercial and
residential areas.
The projected volumes for this corridor suggest
that this should be planned as a light rail route.
The significant capacity and fleet needs could
be fully harnessed by extending the route
through the city to Curtin University and UWA/
QEII, creating a network that supports the
spine with contra passenger flows.
Fast tracking the extension of the Northern
Suburbs Railway to Yanchep will transform the
style of outer urban development. However,
this should have a significant involvement and
Please Note:
* Only new train stations and stations linking with the proposed rapid
transit network are shown.
contribution from the Federal Government

and major land owners to support the funding
of the project and to ensure a commitment
to a smart growth sustainable model for
greenfields urban development.
These transformational projects ought to be
conditional on specific criteria, including:
A
contribution to the capital cost of
the projects by the private sector,
based on value transfer from increased
property value;
A
lignment of support from local authorities
to achieve a practical network across
local boundaries;
Minimum development outcomes
being secured.
For light rail, project proposals would need

to demonstrate how they are consistent
with, and can be effectively expanded into,
a broader network, would need to ensure a
consistent use of technology to maximise
operational flexibility and synergies across
the network and would need to be subject to
detailed master planning and a business case.
The investment required

By 2031, it is estimated the total annual
cost to operate and maintain the public
transport system will have risen to $1.2 billion
(compared to $691.2 million in 2009/10).
Funding plan
A detailed funding plan and strategy needs
to be prepared by the Department of
Transport and the Public Transport Authority
in consultation with Treasury and Finance
for consideration by the Government. The
Independent Panel recommends that a
number of new funding sources be examined
for inclusion in the funding plan and that
these be the subject of consultation with
key stakeholders.
Integrating land use

and transit
Western Australia has a suite of policies
focussed on the integration of public transport
with land use planning. The implementation
of Directions 2031 and Beyond, through
growth management strategies, provides
more opportunities to reinforce this
integrated approach.
A
dditional railcars $624 million
(156 additional railcars at $4 million each);
Policy issues
The Activities Centres State Planning Policy

also supports this approach, as does the Transit
Oriented Development (TOD) Development
Control Policy. It is understood that the TOD
policy is under review. This should ensure that
there is a focus on, and investment in, areas
that have genuine development potential and
that can have a positive influence on public
transport use.
A
dditional buses $482 million
(900 additional standard size buses
at $535,000 each);
The development of the Public Transport

Network Plan has identified a number of
important policy issues that are related to
either the development and operation of
public transport or to the broader urban
transport system. These policy issues need
to be addressed to ensure that the urban
transport system can continue to support a
fast growing city with an expanding rapid
transit public transport system.
The transformational projects are a further

opportunity to achieve strong alignment
and integration with land use. Existing
planning policies may need to be enhanced
to secure minimum development outcomes
and contributions to projects from the private
sector. The recent changes to the Planning and
Development Act to provide for Improvement
Schemes provide such a mechanism. A careful
focus on application of those schemes is needed.
Over the next 21 years the total cost for fleet

expansion is estimated to be $1.2 billion. The
major components of the cost are:
New light rail vehicles $131 million

(29 light rail vehicles at $4.5 million each).
Over the next 21 years the estimated cost to
construct the infrastructure recommended in
the public transport plan is $2.9 billion.
The major components of the proposed
infrastructure expenditure are:
The opportunities to adopt alternative or

additional funding sources will change over
time. For that reason, a short term (5 year)
funding plan and a longer term funding plan
will need to be prepared.
Rail system expansion $1.2 billion;

Light rail $1 billion;
Bus rapid transit and bus priority
infrastructure $343 million;
A
dditional rail, bus and light rail depot and
maintenance facilities $180 million;
T ransit interchanges, including park and
ride $135 million.
Note: All costs and benefits in this plan
are expressed in 2010 dollars.
Contents
CHAIRMANS FOREWORD 3
DECISION MAKING FRAMEWORK 5
KEY FINDINGS 6
INTRODUCTION 10
STRATEGIC CONTEXT 11
WHY IS PUBLIC TRANSPORT IMPORTANT TO PERTH? 12
THE CURRENT PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM 14
TRAVEL DEMANDS FROM A GROWING CITY 16
A VISION FOR A MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM IN PERTH 20
DEVELOPING THE NETWORK 23
DEVELOPING THE NETWORK STAGE ONE PROJECTS 24
DEVELOPING THE NETWORK STAGE TWO PROJECTS 28
RAPID TRANSIT SERVICES CONCEPT 30
VALUING PUBLIC TRANSPORT INVESTMENT 31
FUNDING OPTIONS 35
ACTIVATING AND INTEGRATING 37
POLICY ISSUES 41
Introduction
The State Government asked an Independent Panel to consider the public
transport needs of the Perth and Peel Regions for 2031 supported by a
longer-term vision that considers public transport in a city of 3.5 million.
The Independent Panel comprised members from the private sector with
strategic policy and transport planning expertise, and chief executive
and senior executive staff from a number of government agencies.
Report structure
The Plan provides an overview of Perths
current public transport system along with the
manner in which it has evolved. The strengths
and weaknesses of the system are then
considered along with the opportunities to
develop and enhance the network.
It includes a long term vision for a public
transport network to support a population
of 3.5 million which provides clear guidance
for the medium term network (to 2031).
Short term priorities, along with current
commitments are identified.
An assessment of the value of the investment
in public transport is included, along with the
opportunities for land use transport integration
to make the best of the Governments
infrastructure investment.
The Plan identifies funding issues and
opportunities and emerging policy issues
required to support the strategic role of
public transport.
Independent panel
The Terms of Reference for the Panel were:
Chair:
1. Network
Mr Stuart Hicks AO Transport policy and

strategy expert
Members:
Mr Reece Waldock Director General,
Transport
Mr Eric Lumsden PSM Director General,
Department of Planning
Mr Mark Burgess Managing Director,
Public Transport Authority
Mr Menno Henneveld Managing Director,
Main Roads WA
Mr Anthony Kannis Executive Director,
Infrastructure and Finance, Department of
Treasury and Finance
Mr Neil Smith Bus industry expert
Mr Fred Affleck Rail industry expert
Mr Howard Croxon OAM Transport Industry
10
Taking into account the anticipated growth and structure of the Perth and Peel
Regions to support a population in the order of 2.5 million people, recommend the
future primary public transport network and the most appropriate mode for each
component of the network.
2. Investment
Recommend capital investment proposals that identify and prioritise enhancements to
the primary public transport network, taking into account the costs, including those of
acquiring, constructing and operating the system, as well as the benefits. This should
include railcar and bus fleet requirements to meet required service levels across the
public transport system.
3. Funding
Consider the range of public and private funding mechanisms, involving either
infrastructure or land development, that could support the development of the primary
public transport network.
4. Land use/transport integration
Recommend measures that would maximise the potential for the primary public
transport network to positively influence, or be positively influenced by, future urban
planning and development.
Strategic
context
The Public Transport Network
Plan has been developed in close
consultation with the Western
Australian Planning Commission
(WAPC) and is consistent with
Directions 2031 and Beyond.
The WAPC has released Directions 2031 and
Beyond, which provides a spatial framework
for the growth of the Perth and Peel Regions.
The WAPC has based Directions 2031 and
Beyond on a projected population of 2.2 million
people by 2031. Public transport needs have
been based on this projection.
This Plan is data based it uses modelling
to determine patronage levels for alternative
routes and to look at the overall connectivity
of the proposed network.
The public transport network for 2031
has been designed to be compatible
with a longer-term vision for a city of
3.5 million people and projects included in
the 2031 plan are important building blocks
towards achievement of a longer term
connected network.
Imperatives for action

A long term view on the future of public transport and a commitment to develop the
network and system is essential because:
We need to plan for a continually growing city in the short, medium and long
term. This expectation is clearly identified in the WAPCs Directions 2031 and
Beyond, which envisages a city of 2.2 3.5 million people.
Traffic congestion will be a growing and significant economic cost. In 2009 the
cost of Perths congestion was estimated to be nearly $1 billion. By 2020 this
figure will more than double to $2.1 billion. Steps taken to reduce congestion
will have a significant positive impact on productivity, especially in inner and
central areas.
Access to Federal infrastructure funding will depend on States having

integrated land use and transport plans for the long term development of
their cities.
Transport contributes 14% to Australias total greenhouse gas emissions.

Of this, 90% is generated by private vehicles. Encouraging a greater uptake
of public transport by making a high quality transport system available
to more people will make a significant contribution to the reduction of
greenhouse gases.
The State Government currently spends $691.2 million (2009/2010) on the

public transport system. It is financially prudent to have a plan that guides
the Governments investment in public transport to ensure robust and fit-forpurpose investments are made, and for these investments to maximise the
efficiency of the system.
11
Why is public transport

important to perth?
Creating development
opportunities
An effective public transport system is essential for the long term

health, vitality and sustainability of Perth.
Moving people
Managing congestion
Perth has developed as a linear city. The Perth

Metropolitan Area now stretches 120 kms
from Mandurah in the south to Yanchep in the
north. In area, Perth is one of the largest cities
in the world. Its elongated shape means that
residents travel long distances for work and
other purposes.
Perth is already experiencing increasing levels

of traffic congestion. The dominance of the
central area as a major employment centre
for much of Perths white collar and service
industries, along with a predominance of
private car usage, has resulted in significant
peak period traffic.
Development in Perth, particularly on the

urban fringe, is characterised by low density
residential development, with limited land use
diversity. These suburban tracts have limited
employment opportunities. Most people have
to commute long distances for work with one
in ten workers from the outer metropolitan
areas commuting to the central area.
Public transport has the potential to

significantly reduce the growth of peak
period commuter traffic. Currently the public
transport network is focused on the Perth
CBD, with 76% of trips occurring within
15 kms of the Perth CBD.
This central city area (including Northbridge,

East Perth and West Perth) provides nearly
120,000 jobs. This represents 18% of all jobs
in the metropolitan area. Most of these jobs
are white collar, retail or service industry jobs.
The current public transport network
and services support and reinforce the
concentration of employment, jobs
and commuter activity in the central
area. The figure on this page shows the
dominance of the central city area as an
employment generator.
In addition to moving commuters, public
transport has an important role to play in
improving the mobility of people who may not
have access to any other form of transport
eg. children, young adults, students, older
residents, people with disabilities and those
who cannot afford a car. Public transport
provides access to essential education, health
and social services.
Seventeen percent of distance travelled in

the peak hour is by public transport. It is much
higher to the Perth CBD (over 60%) and along
major transport corridors such as the Mitchell
Freeway (50%). Public transport already
makes a significant contribution to lowering
road congestion in the most congested areas
of Perth. Its contribution to limiting congestion
will increase in the future as the city grows.
Public transport can act as a catalyst for

more intensive and diverse land uses.
Transit oriented development provides a
focus of higher density development around
well-serviced transit nodes. Mixed-use
developments in these areas provide people
with employment opportunities and with
access to goods and services while reducing
car dependence.
Higher residential densities around
transit nodes provide more people with
the opportunity to walk or cycle to public
transport or to access employment within the
core of the development.
As centres develop, land values rise. The cost
to provide parking coupled with finite road
capacity, means that the provision of quality
public transport is essential.
Connecting centres
Not all people want to travel to the central
area. University and school students, people
who work at strategic centres and those
who wish to access goods and services from
other areas of Perth all have public transport
requirements that may not be met adequately
by a radial system.
EMPLOYMENT CENTRES WITH GREATER THAN 5,000 WORKERS

Burswood
Curtin University/Bentley Technology Precinct
O'Connor Industrial Area
Stirling/Innaloo
Belmont Industrial Area
Morley Galleria
Wangara Industrial Area
Midland Central Area
Bayswater/Bassendean Industrial Area
Subi Centro
QE II /UWA
Balcatta Industrial Area
Malaga Industrial Area
Kwinana Industrial Area
Joondalup Central Area (Including Trades Area)
Canning Vale Industrial Area
Fremantle
Osborne Park Industrial
West Perth
East Perth
Welshpool/Kewdale Industrial Areas
Central City (Incuding Northbridge)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
NUMBER OF WORKERS
12
60,000
70,000
80,000
Current Government commitments

The Governments commitment to public transport is demonstrated by a number of
network improvements that have been announced. These include:
A public transport network that provides

east-west as well as north-south connections
will open up opportunities for many
more travellers for work, education and
other purposes.
Environmental and
social benefits
Public transport will play an increasingly
important role in reducing other impacts
associated with a transport system that is
dependent on private vehicles.
Studies such as the Garnaut Climate Change
Review (2008) highlight that Australian cities
are among the most car dependent cities in
the developed world. Transport contributes
some 14% of Australias total greenhouse
gas emissions, of which 90% is generated by
private vehicles.
Wider environmental benefits, including
improved air/water quality and a reduction
in noise pollution can improve the local
environment and help to mitigate the health
impacts experienced within the community
from increasing carbon emissions and other
particulates associated with motorised
transportation.
Public transport also has the added benefit
of promoting more active lifestyles simply by
encouraging individuals to walk or cycle to the
bus stop / train station. Research indicates
that public transport commuters will, on
average, accumulate seven times more
incidental exercise than private motorists
and that each additional hour spent behind
the wheel of a car increases the likelihood of
obesity by 6%. These associated personal
fitness benefits will lead to improvements in
individual health, thereby reducing the burden
on the health system.
Undergrounding of the city end of the Fremantle rail line and the Wellington Street Bus
Station. This project is part of the Perth City Link development project for city centre
land between Wellington Street and Roe Street. One of its major aims is to better link
Northbridge with the Perth CBD. All rail lines between Perth Station and King Street
will be placed underground. A new underground bus station will replace the ageing
Wellington Street Bus Station and enable the construction of inner city development
and public spaces in this prominent central city location. This project has been part
funded by the Federal Government and the City of Perth.
Extension of the Northern Suburbs Railway from Clarkson to Butler by the end of 2014.
This 7.5km rail extension will see a new station constructed in the Butler Town Centre.
The developer of the land surrounding the new rail station will provide high/medium
density mixed use development around the station. A park and ride facility for 1,000
bays and a bus transfer facility are included as part of the project.
A bus bridge across the Fremantle railway and Roe Street, linking the Wellington
Street Bus Station to Fitzgerald Street. This project has enabled the bus level crossing
of the Fremantle railway to be removed and improved bus travel times.
Murdoch Activity Centre Main Street. The construction of the Fiona Stanley Hospital
and other developments in the Murdoch Strategic Centre will include a main street
with public transport priority to link the rail station with the hospital. Planning is
currently underway for the next stage through Murdoch University linking to South
Street, west of the University.
The construction of an additional 3,000 Park and Ride bays at stations on the
Mandurah and Joondalup Lines.
Increase in the railcar fleet. Recent completion of a contract for the purchase of 15
additional three-car train units has increased the number of railcars from 189 to 234
single cars. A further commitment in the 2011/12 budget for an additional 15 three-car
train units will increase the number of railcars to 279 single cars. Delivery is due to
commence in 2013/14.
A 5-year program to increase bus service kilometres by a total of 15.2 million
kilometres (29%) by 2015/16. This includes procuring an additional 158 buses by
2017/18 to facilitate growth in peak period services, in addition to a commitment to a
new 10 year bus replacement contract for Transperth buses, commencing in 2011.
Allocation of $11.3 million over 2011/12 to 2012/13 for transit planning projects,
including future rapid transit infrastructure and integrated transport planning initiatives.
Activating development
The sinking of Subiaco Station and the creation of Subi-Centro provides a model of
how urban redevelopment and transit oriented development can lead to higher public
transport use.
Patronage has increased from 1,600 boardings per day before the development to 3,000
boardings per day in 2010.
Greater use of public transport, and

consequent reductions in car travel, can
have a positive effect on the number of
road fatalities and serious injuries and the
resultant costs of road trauma.
13
The current public

transport system
67%
the increase in public transport

patronage in the last decade.
This has been due to population
increase and an increase in
proportion of people using public
transport
44%
of public transport trips are made

using rail services. This is a
significant increase from 10% of
trips in 1990
56%
of public transport trips are made

using the bus network. Buses
provide the majority of transfers to
rail services
330,000
Perths public transport system has met

growing demand better than any other
Australian capital city. The system is fully
integrated between train, bus and ferry
services and the SmartRider electronic
ticketing system operates for all travel.
The network that supports the City is based
on train lines radiating from the Central Area.
The original train lines (Fremantle, Midland
and Armadale) were built in the 19th Century.
The closely spaced stations were built when
most people walked to public transport
services and development patterns were more
concentrated. The Joondalup line (1993) and
the Mandurah line (2007) are located primarily
in freeway reserves with stations further apart
than those on the other lines. These stations,
which are mainly serviced by feeder buses and
park and ride, generally cater to much larger
catchment areas.
Public transport use has already increased
due to fast, reliable and frequent bus and
train systems with good interchange facilities
providing access to stations by both bus
and car.
Major recent train and bus system
improvements have reversed the declining
proportion of travel on public transport from
the 1960s to the late 1990s. Public transport

patronage in Perth grew 67% from 1999
to 2009, at a time when the population grew
by 22%.
The train network has been expanded from
66 kms in the early 1990s to 173 kms in 2010.
Annual train patronage increased more than
four-fold from 9.7 to 54.7 million passengers
in this same time. As shown below, Perth has
experienced a growth in rail passengers that
is significantly greater than a range of national
and international cities.
Bus patronage increased by 43% between
1999 and 2009. This increase was associated
with a bus system expansion of some 27% (in
terms of service kilometres). During the same
time, the bus fleet grew by 27% from 889 to
1134 buses. This was necessary to provide:
1. improved line-haul services in corridors
where there are no train lines
2. improved feeder bus services to support
the expanded train network
3. new services in outer residential
growth areas
4. better distribution services in, and
between, strategic centres.
public transport journeys per day

12
of trips use more than one public

transport vehicle
Source: Moving People: Solutions for a growing Australia (p.15)
14
MELBOURNE
PERTH
BRISBANE
VIENNA
4
NEW YORK
of trips are for work and education,

largely during the peak periods.
LONDON
2/3
CHICAGO
of all rail passengers go to or pass

through CBD stations
% GROWTH PER ANNUM
82%
10
SYDNEY
35%
PERCENTAGE GROWTH IN RAIL USAGE PER ANNUM 2004-2008
Passenger expectations
The Public Transport Authority carries out
annual customer satisfaction surveys to assess
the views of existing passengers on the quality
of its services. Bus and train users generally
value the same service characteristics. They
want services that are frequent, on time and
affordable; they want to be able to travel quickly
to their destination, and they want to feel safe
and secure.
Whilst people generally express high levels of
satisfaction with public transport, there are
some variations between areas.
Over the past six years, the average level of
satisfaction on the bus network has remained
fairly constant at around 81%. However, the
satisfaction measure for passengers in the
Morley bus contract area has reduced from 92%
to 58%. Overall, bus passengers in the Morley/
Mirrabooka area were the most dissatisfied with
their service. Their level of dissatisfaction rose
from 6% in 2005 to 39% in 2010.
A major factor influencing the result in this
area is that there are virtually no infrastructure
priority measures to improve the effectiveness
of services, particularly in the congested peak
periods. As a result, many people drive to the
train lines for better services.
Overall, passengers accross the public
transport network were most likely to express
dissatisfaction with:
frequency of services;
overcrowded vehicles;
perceptions of personal safety/security;
service punctuality; and
bus/train connections.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics, in its 2008
Social Trends publication, identified a number
of reasons why people did not use public
transport. The main reason was because it was
inconvenient either there was no service or it
did not run at a convenient time.
People also valued the comfort and privacy
offered by their own private vehicle. The length
of travel time on public transport was considered
to be too long by one in five respondents.
2010 Transperth Passenger Satisfaction Monitor Results
93%
Train passengers satisfied or very satisfied with services

Most satisfied Mandurah and Fremantle Lines (94%)
Least satisfied Joondalup Line (91%)
CAT bus passengers satisfied or very satisfied with services
92%
Perth CAT 94%

Fremantle CAT 95%
Joondalup CAT 70%
81%
Bus passengers satisfied or very satisfied with services

Most satisfied Belmont (88%)
Least satisfied Morley (58%)
Strengths and weaknesses of Perths

public transport system
Strengths
The current public transport system has a number of significant strengths:
1. It is fully integrated people can move easily between trains, buses and ferries.
2. Decisions on timetabling and routes are made by a central agency Transperth.
3. The train system provides a fast, reliable service bypassing congestion on parallel
city roads, with service frequencies greater than many other Australiancities.
4. The system has been continuously upgraded and extended providing a safe,
comfortable and reliable service.
Weaknesses
There are some weaknesses that may leave the current public transport system unable
to meet the future challenges that face it. These include:
1. Bus services are vulnerable to delays caused by road congestion.
2. The bus system is less legible than rail services with frequencies generally lower
than trains in Perth and bus systems in other Australian cities.
3. The current focus on the Perth CBD does not support connectivity between the
strategic centres identified in Directions 2031 and Beyond.
4. Some routes are almost at capacity in peak periods and only operating additional
trips is unlikely to provide the capacity and quality of services needed, and may
create congestion problems at stops and with traffic.
15
TRAVEL DEMANDS
FROM A GROWING CITY
Directions 2031 and Beyond
provides a spatial planning
framework for a city with a
population of 2.2 million residents.
Over half a million new residents
will need to be housed in 330,000
new dwellings and travelling to
350,000 new jobs.
The growing city
Directions 2031 and Beyond places an emphasis
on consolidating development around existing
and future public transport infrastructure and
around strategic centres including UWA/
QEII, Curtin, Murdoch, Stirling, Perth Airport
and Midland. These centres are, and will
continue to be, major employment centres
and destinations and there is a need to ensure
that they are well connected into the public
transport network.
In addition the public transport system will
need to be enhanced to service future growth
areas to the north and north east of the
City and to the south between Rockingham
and Mandurah.
Directions 2031 and Beyond identifies the need
for two key strategies for public transport.
These are improving the relationship between
public transport and land use planning and
ensuring ongoing access to public transport.
It also identifies key public transport
connections required to support and service
the strategic centres. This plan builds on
these network connections and includes the
infrastructure and a service model needed to
support this future urban development.
The Public Transport Network Plan
supports the medium and long term
planning direction for the City,
particularly the need for consolidation
and higher levels of activity in the
Central Area.
DIRECTIONS 2031 AND BEYOND STRATEGIC CENTRES AND AREAS OF FUTURE URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
16
In the future it will be difficult to rely on

private vehicles for many trips. Roads will
be congested, petrol prices will be high and
parking will be less available in strategic
centres and/or costly.
As a consequence, by 2031 public transport
will account for:
one-in-eight of all motorised trips
(currently one-in-fourteen);
one-in-five motorised trips in the morning
peak period (currently one-in-eight);
over 30% of peak hour distance
travelled (currently around 20%); and
nearly 70% of all trips to the CBD
(currently around 47%).
Forecast travel activity

The forecast growth of Perths population will
have profound implications for how people
move around the city to jobs, education and to
strategic centres.
The population growth to 2031 will see a 33%
increase in personal travel from 5.8 to 7.7 million
trips per day (ie cars, public transport, walking
and cycling). The longer term city with 3.5 million
people could see a further 59% increase in
passenger travel to 12.25 million trips per day, or
more than double the current level of activity.
Planning strategies to consolidate urban
development and create large mixed use centres
will gradually reduce the current reliance on the
car for many trips. A number
of fundamental transport factors will also play a
critical role in influencing travel behaviour:
There is already significant and worsening
congestion on the major arterial road spines
and the Mitchell/Kwinana freeway system
is unable to be expanded within 10 kms of
the CBD
Our highly car dependent city is vulnerable
to high oil prices, as shown in recent years.
For strategic centres in the central area, the
supply and cost of car parking will impact on
the ability to drive.
Public transport has a critical role to meet travel
demands, especially to major centres and to the
central area.
Assessing public transport

demand
A Strategic Transport Evaluation Model (STEM)
has been used to assess the demand for public
transport and to identify current pressure
points and future corridors of demand. STEM
is a comprehensive analysis tool that predicts
travel demand and patterns using a number
of sub-models (eg. household structures, car
ownership, trip generation, trip distribution,
mode choice and network assignment).
The mathematical functions used in these submodels have been developed and calibrated
using observed travel behaviour from surveys
taken over many years.
While these functions remain valid over time
as a basis for predicting travel patterns,
variables such as demographic data, socioeconomic data, travel cost data and transport
network data will change over time.
Directions 2031 and Beyond has provided
updated demographic and socio-economic data
to predict where people will live and work and
the major centres of activity that will influence
travel patterns. The Independent Panel has
also considered other major influences on
travel behaviour and patterns, such as the
cost of travel, the availability of parking
and investment in the transport network.
Conservative values for these variables were
used in the modelling.
By 2031 it is predicted that Perths 2.2 million
people will make more than twice as many
trips by public transport than they do now, in
the order of 760,000 trips per day. This 120%
increase is an average of 3.85% per annum,
or slightly lower than the average for the past
decade to 2009 due to a lower forecast rate of
population growth. By the time the city grows
to 3.5 million people, nominally by 2050, daily
patronage is likely to be in the order of 1.5-2.0
million trips per day.
Criteria for public transport

priority
The Independent Panel has considered a
rationale and policy context for when priority
for public transport is warranted. Currently,
there are 346 kms of rail lines and 29 kms of

bus priority lanes in Perth. New and extended
commuter railways should always be provided
in a full right-of-way corridor with grade
separation from general traffic. However, the
warrants for public transport priority on roads
will vary depending on the level of service and
patronage, and impacts on land uses.
Queue jump lanes are generally provided
on the approach to a signalised intersection
that is causing significant delay to buses,
and should generally have a daily patronage
of more than 3,000 people.
Bus lanes are necessary where the speed
and reliability of the service is being
adversely impacted on a regular basis, not
only through intersections but along the
length of a road. Services operating along
these corridors should typically average
6,000 passengers or more per day.
In certain locations, such as through some
town centres, bus lanes may be converted
to kerbside parking during off-peak times
to support local businesses. However,
consideration will be given to regional and
local accessibility and the ability to provide
off-street parking as an alternative.
Where a traffic lane has to be converted
to a bus lane, the projected patronage of
the planned facility should exceed 1,200
passengers in the peak hour within 5 years
of opening, which compares to the average
maximum carrying capacity of a single lane
of traffic.
Corridors with significantly higher forecast
patronage, or with large growth potential,
may justify a high capacity rapid transit
system using a combination of conventional
and articulated buses and/or light rail.
These should be provided in a restricted
access corridor with full transit priority
to support the investment and to allow
relatively unimpeded transit movement
without the constraints of congested traffic
or safety issues with turning vehicles.
Initial patronage of 10,000 passengers per
day, or generally 1,500-2,000 passengers in
the peak hour, would be needed.
17
Major public transport corridors
major corridors and there continues to be a

very strong focus of trips to the central area
and the CBD. However, a number of new
corridors are evident, including:
the connections to and between major

centres such as Stirling, Murdoch, Subiaco,
UWA/QE11, Curtin University and Perth
Airport; and
the cross city services to and between the
radial spines.
At present, the five railways are the major

corridors. There are also a number of bus
corridors that carry 3,000 to 10,000 trips or
more per day, mainly to the central area.
the spines through the central northern

suburbs and to the north eastern
urban growth area these areas do
not currently have the same level of
access to rapid transit services as other
corridors;
The picture changes significantly by 2031.

The five existing railways continue to be the
the additional demand from the northwest urban growth areas;
The major public transport corridors in

Perth are shown in the two diagrams below
comparing now with 2031. The diagrams
highlight those corridors that carry 3,000
passengers or more per day.
The demand modelling underpinning these

diagrams provides a strategic overview of
where future demand is greatest, and the
areas that will need rapid transit infrastructure
to address this demand for quality public
transport services.
2008 Base Case
2031 Preferred Scenario
Public Transport Network Exceeding 3,000 Passengers/Day
Public Transport Network Exceeding 3,000 Passengers/Day
2010
PAX/DAY
18
2031
PAX/DAY
50,000+
30-50,000
30-50,000
10-30,000
10-30,000
3-10,000
3-10,000
19
A vision for a MASS transit

system in Perth
The Terms of Reference required that the Independent Panel recommend the future primary public
transport network and the most appropriate mode for each component of the network.
Vision
Public transport will be the preferred
choice of travel to Perths strategic
centres and through growth corridors.
This Plan includes a long-term vision for a
public transport network to support the growth
of Perth over the next 50 years and, nominally,
a population of 3.5 million.
This ultimate vision network, shown on
page 22, provides clear guidance for
investment over the next 21 years.
Public transport will play a very significant role
in meeting Perths travel needs by the time the
Citys population reaches 3.5 million people.
During peak periods the total distance travelled
by public transport passengers is likely to be
close to the total distance travelled by car users.
Developing a mass
transit system
For the level and quality of public transport
services to continue to improve, there will
need to be real improvements in reliability,
speed of travel, service frequency, safety and
security, and ease of use.
There are limited options to further develop
the rail system in a cost effective way.
Right-of-way reserves do not exist between
many of the strategic centres in the Central
Sector (largely within 15km of the CBD) where
consolidation and higher intensity of activity
is planned. The alternative of constructing
tunnels is very expensive and not feasible for
extending services to new areas.
Most of the new growth corridors and
strategic centres can be served by roadbased services, but strategic decisions need
to be made to ensure these services have
substantial priority over general traffic.
Without this priority, the quality and level
of service cannot be achieved and public
20
transport will not be able to meet demand.

This will lead to pressure for wider roads and
increased congestion on roads in constrained
environments.
The City has reached a stage in its development
where another type of service is needed onroad rapid transit. This reflects the reality that
the major roads in the central areas of the city
will need to move substantially more people
and that public transport can move many more
people in a road lane than cars.
As a result Perths future transit system will
have three types of integrated service train
services, road-based rapid transit services and
buses. These elements of the future system are
highlighted on the map on page 22.
A road based rapid transit service could be
either light rail or bus rapid transit. These
will operate with dedicated priority within
existing streets, although there could be short
sections where operation in mixed use traffic is
permitted. Similarly there will be areas where
the services need overpasses or tunnels to
bypass areas of major congestion, or will need
to operate in traffic controlled transit malls.
Passenger travel on the future network will
likely be more dependent on transfers between
local bus services and rapid transit services. This
is a normal transition that occurs when a city
develops from a small to a medium sized city.
Perth has already seen the first phase of this
transition, with feeder buses linking to bus and
train stations across the network, particularly on
the Joondalup and Mandurah rail lines. Already
35% of public transport journeys use more than
one vehicle (i.e. bus/bus or bus/train).
High frequency services during peak periods
and timetabled co-ordination of services at
other times, in conjunction with high quality
interchanges, will ensure that transfers are
considered by passengers to be a normal part
of their trip.
The network and

infrastructure
As the City grows, two main issues are likely
to impact on the rapid transit system servicing
the central area:
1. Central city transit facilities will be unable
to handle the number of bus services
accessing the CBD bus stations and the
physical capacity to move rail patrons
through stations with train frequencies of
3 minutes is limited.
2. Development of medium to large scale
transit oriented developments at railway
stations within 10 kms of the City (such
as Stirling, Glendalough, Leederville and
Canning Bridge) will lead to increasing
boardings at these stations.
To address these issues, an inner circle route
is needed in the long term to link Glendalough
on the Joondalup line with Canning Bridge on
the Mandurah line, and Subiaco and UWA/
QE11 before entering the City from the east via
Curtin/Bentley at Victoria Park.
The ultimate network for a city of 3.5 million
people should comprise:
Railway network 220 kms

Future rail expansion will build on the
existing network to meet demand in growth
corridors and to provide efficient access to,
and connectivity between, strategic centres
and central Perth. Future rail network
proposals include:
Within 21 years
extension of the Northern Suburbs Railway
from Butler to Yanchep with stations at
Alkimos, Eglinton and Yanchep (13.8kms)
an eastern suburbs line linking to the
Midland line at Bayswater with a station
at the new consolidated airport terminal
and in the vicinity of the current Domestic
Airport terminal, with a park and ride and
bus interchange to service the hills and
foothills area (7 kms)
In the longer term
Bus services
extension of the Armadale line to Byford

and Mundijong (15kms)
Local bus services will act as feeders to

the train and transit network, connect
local centres and destinations across the
metropolitan area, and provide a local
distribution function. The majority of trips will
still involve a local bus and they will form a
very important part of the network.
extension of the Thornlie line to link

with the Mandurah line with a major
interchange station in the vicinity of
Ranford Road and a station to serve the
Jandakot Airport growth precinct (11.5kms)
Road Rapid Transit network

413 kms
Daily public transport patronage in the Central
Sector is expected to exceed 1.5 million
trips by the time Perths population reaches
3.5 million. This will be driven by continued
high employment and education activity
within the existing area and a projected
increase in resident population of more than
500,000 people.
Most of this network is proposed for the
existing developed Central Sector to provide
connectivity between centres, to link with
train services and to ensure overall system
capacity can keep ahead of demand.
In addition the north west growth area will
have transit services in Alkimos-Eglinton
and Yanchep-Two Rocks and the south west
growth area will have transit services through
Keralup and from Rockingham-Baldivis.
Transit services will be highly interconnected
with the train system. Both trains and transit
services will be served by feeder bus services
where appropriate. The transit services will be
designed to provide a greatly improved level of
access to, and connectivity between, strategic
centres and central Perth.
Bus routes will be designed to maximise

accessibility, whilst maintaining travel speed
and ride comfort. Buses will take advantage
of bus priority infrastructure to move through
congestion and maintain on-time running.
Bus stops will have good levels of information
including destinations, timetables and local
maps. Major stops and stations will be
designed to support fast and efficient transfers
to train and transitway services. Overall,
the bus network will benefit from improved
legibility and frequency.
Ferries
The current ferry service is small in the
context of overall public transport travel. Some
additions to ferry services along and across
the Swan River can be anticipated, perhaps
linking Burswood, East Perth, Perth and
Applecross. Growth beyond this is likely to be
small due to speed constraints for ferries on
the Swan River, parallel road/rail routes with
faster journey times and limited opportunities
for both high density development and transit
interchanges at river nodes.
Over time the routes will be developed to

provide a network with priority for transit
services over other traffic. Journey times will
be faster with fewer, more widely spaced stops
up to 800m apart.
The system should initially be designed around
15 to 20 transit routes. However, the transit
infrastructure will enable additional services
to be introduced as required.
new stations and interchange facilities on

the Mandurah line at Success and Karnup.
21
Two Rocks
Yanchep
Rapid Transit Infrastructure

Ultimate Network for City of 3.5 Million
Eglinton
Alkimos
Butler
Clarkson
Ellenbrook
Joondalup
Whitfords City
Hillarys
Guildford
Midland
Warwick
Balcatta
Karrinyup
Morley
Mirrabooka
Bassendean
Stirling
Scarborough
Bayswater
Airport West
Glendalough
Mt. Lawley
ECU
Burswood
Airport Terminal
Claisebrook
Subiaco
RT
H
Belmont
PE
Shenton Park
Victoria Park
Oats St
QEII
Esplanade
UWA
Cannington
Claremont
Curtin
Thornlie
Canning Bridge
Booragoon
Riverton
Maddington
Fremantle
Murdoch Southlands
Canning Vale
Armadale
Cockburn Central
Mundijong
Rockingham
Rockingham City
Byford
KEY
Baldivis
Warnbro
Railways *
Light Rail
Karnup
Keralup
Bus Rapid Transit**

Light Rail or Ferry
Nambeelup
Mandurah
Lakelands
Mandurah Station
22
Please Note:
** Some of these Bus Rapid Transit routes could be Light Rail in the long term,
subject to further detailed master planning.
Developing
the network
The Terms of Reference required that the Independent Panel
recommend capital investment proposals that identify and
prioritise enhancements to the primary public transport network,
including railcar and bus fleet requirements.
Key investment areas
The development of the network and services in the next 21 years should be based around:
1. Enhancing current capacity, particularly the railways.
2. Transformational projects that will redefine travel and development patterns.
3. Projects that provide strong connections to strategic centres.
4. Projects that support the growth in the Central Sector and the Perth CBD.
STIRLING INTERCHANGE
The projects are grouped into two categories Stage One or shorter term/before 2020 and
Stage Two or medium term/before 2031.
Enhancing capacity
Fleet requirements
As the demand for public transport increases
over time, the number of rail cars and buses
will need to be increased. In addition to growth,
provision has been made in the economic
analysis for replacement of railcars after 35
years and buses after 20 years of service.
Railcars
The demand for railcars is projected to
increase to 390 equivalent one-car units by
2031, an increase of 156 beyond the fleet at
the end of 2010 when delivery of the existing
order is completed. On average the equivalent
of eight one-car units will be required each
year to 2031.
Light railcars
It is estimated that 29 light railcars would be
required to support the 2031 network. These
would replace approximately 65 buses.
Buses
The demand for buses is projected to grow
from the current 1134 buses in 2010 to
approximately 2050 in 2031.
Stations
Canning Bridge Station transit interchange is
at capacity and requires an upgrade to improve
bus connections and pedestrian access. This
project would include introduction of priority
lanes along Canning Highway between
Reynolds Road and Henley Street.
Stirling Station is in need of an upgrade to
improve the bus interchange and pedestrian
access. This is compatible with the Stirling
City Centre project.
CANNING BRIDGE INTERCHANGE
Both of these projects are needed in the next

5 to 10 years.
In order to provide access to the transit
network where growth is occurring within the
vicinity of existing railways, two new stations
are envisaged on the Mandurah Line. A station
at Karnup, near Paganoni Road, would be
constructed to serve the rapidly expanding
population between Warnbro and Mandurah,
as well as the proposed urban development
at Keralup, east of the Kwinana Freeway. This
station will be a transit interchange and needs
to be constructed in the next 5 to 10 years.
Accessibility to the rail network is also required
between Cockburn Central and Anketell Road
to serve the expansion of the urban corridor on
either side of the Freeway. The exact location of
this station is yet to be determined, however it
KARNUP STATION CONCEPT

is necessary for it to perform a significant park
and ride function for the local community. There
is no short-to-medium term need for this station
as Cockburn Central is currently accessible for
the existing urban area.
Other stations are proposed as part of the
expansion of the railway north to Yanchep and
the Airport Rail Link.
23

stage one projects
Projects that can be implemented to provide a
network of rapid transit services across Perth
before 2020 are grouped into:
Transformational projects;
Connections to strategic centres using
onroad priority measures that will
contribute towards a network of rapid
transit services; and
Projects that support the central area.
These projects have the ability to redefine
travel and development patterns.
Northern Suburbs Railway (NSR)
extension
The NSR is committed to extend north to
Butler. Extending north to Yanchep will support
the development of the Yanchep City Centre
with a station precinct at its centre. Future
developments between Butler and Yanchep
will lead to future development of stations,
potentially at Alkimos and Eglinton.
The early development of this line will provide
developers with the certainty required to
develop at a higher density, particularly around
train stations and within walkable catchments
of services. It will support a much more
sustainable form of urban development with
significantly lower levels of car use.
Central Northern Corridor/Curtin/UWA
Light Rail
The Central Northern Corridor connecting
Perth to Mirrabooka and suburbs to the north
has a projected patronage equivalent to
that on the Fremantle, Armadale or Midland
railways. Efficient movement of this number
of people could only be achieved by a railway,
light rail or a Brisbane style busway.
A railway connecting the Perth CBD to
Mirrabooka and beyond through East
Wanneroo to Joondalup was considered, but
it could not be justified based on the projected
scale and density of future development in
East Wanneroo and the cost to construct
tunnels from the City to north of Mirrabooka.
24
Also a railway is less suited to this corridor

due to the need to provide more closely
based stops between Edith Cowan University
and Perth where patronage is projected to
be highest.
A Brisbane style bus rapid transit system
could cater for projected demand, but only
if full segregation from other traffic occurs
and passing lanes are provided at stations.
This would require a dedicated transitway
with a width of 25 metres at stations. In
reality, busways of this nature would not be
feasible along inner city Perth streets such
as Fitzgerald Street and expensive tunnelling
would be required through North Perth from
Aberdeen Street to north of Walcott Street.
In these circumstances the panel received
specialist advice that light rail is the most
feasible rapid transit option to provide
capacity and service from Perth to Mirrabooka.
Bus feeder services from the north could
connect to the light rail service at Mirrabooka.
Park and ride facilities could also be provided
along the light rail route. The light rail service
could be extended through East Wanneroo to
Joondalup in the longer term.
An onroad light rail system has the capacity
to move up to 7,500 persons per hour,
operating at a frequency of about 2 minutes,
if it is provided with priority running along the
route. The light rail service would need to be
introduced at a frequency of about 4 minutes
initially with capacity to move about 3,250
persons per hour in the peak direction and in
excess of 30,000 persons per day two way
at the point of highest demand. As well as
accommodating the projected travel demand
along the corridor, light rail has two other
significant advantages:
T he sense of permanence of light rail
provides certainty and encouragement
for developers to move towards more
consolidated, higher density development
along the route;
The observed phenomenon, often known

as the sparks effect, that applies to rail or
light rail, results in between 10% and 25%
additional patronage when compared with
buses operating at an equivalent frequency.
This is a result of improved comfort,
improved legibility and other factors
relating to passenger preference for rail.
The light rail service between Mirrabooka
and Perth could provide direct throughservices to UWA and Curtin University and
in so doing provide an excellent network of
services through the central area, as well
as providing high capacity links into the city.
This part of the light rail proposal is similar
to the Knowledge Arc proposal advocated
by Curtin University. However, it uses the
high demand for travel along the Mirrabooka
to Perth part of the route during the morning
peak as a counter balance to high demand
from the city to both Curtin and UWA, thus
ensuring high demand along the entire route.
The wishbone light rail service linking
Mirrabooka, Perth and three universities
provides a significant network of light rail.
The proposed light rail network will enable
growth to occur at all of the three universities
and at QEII hospital, without unacceptable
levels of congestion due to high levels of car
traffic that could otherwise be expected. It will
also encourage and facilitate transit oriented
development at various points along the route,
including West Perth, North Perth, East Perth,
Victoria Park and Bentley on the periphery of
Curtin University.
The precise route of the light rail requires
further investigation with full involvement from
local authorities along the route and other key
stakeholders such as universities and hospitals.
It would also require a detailed master plan and
business case.
PROPOSED STAGE 1 PROJECTS FOR

RAPID TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE
Two Rocks
Yanchep
Eglinton
Alkimos
Butler
Clarkson
Ellenbrook
Joondalup
Whitfords City
Hillarys
Guildford
Midland
Warwick
Balcatta
Karrinyup
Morley
Mirrabooka
Bassendean
Stirling
Scarborough
Bayswater
Airport West
Glendalough
Mt. Lawley
ECU
Burswood
Airport Terminal
Claisebrook
Subiaco
RT
H
Belmont
PE
Shenton Park
Victoria Park
Oats St
QEII
Esplanade
UWA
Cannington
Claremont
Curtin
Thornlie
Canning Bridge
Booragoon
Riverton
Maddington
Fremantle
Murdoch Southlands
Canning Vale
Armadale
Cockburn Central
Byford
Mundijong
Rockingham
Rockingham City
KEY
Existing Railway Infrastructure and Committed Extensions at 2010 *
Baldivis
Railway Infrastructure before 2020
Warnbro
Light Rail Infrastructure before 2020

Karnup
Keralup
Existing Bus Rapid Transit Infrastructure at 2010
Nambeelup
Bus Rapid Transit Infrastructure before 2020

Future Rapid Transit Infrastructure
Mandurah
Lakelands
Mandurah Station
Please Note:
25
Connections to strategic
centres
These centres have a large workforce or are
centres of education and/or health. Public
transport to these centres is currently high and
is expected to grow significantly. The projects
listed here are important in providing city-wide
connectivity and transferring large numbers of
passengers to public transport.
Access for Ellenbrook
The Plan supports the development of a
rapid transit service for Ellenbrook, with the
projected numbers of passengers justifying a
road-based rapid transit service for the next 10
to 20 years. An option of running a Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) service between Ellenbrook and
Bassendean and across to Morley is feasible.
This provides quick transfer to the railway
at Bassendean for trips to the central area
and Midland, and access to commercial/
community facilities at Morley. A railway
reservation should be identified and secured,
and a master plan prepared, to provide a long
term rail option for the corridor (It is noted
that the Government has allocated funding in
2012/13 for a Master Plan to be undertaken).
Access to UWA
As well as the light rail system, there is a
need to support effective bus connections
from UWA to the City via priority bus lanes on
Mounts Bay Road. This will provide services
for students to and from the Esplanade Busport
and Train Station.
Access to Curtin University
The ultimate network light rail proposal will
provide major access to Curtin University
from Canning Bridge Station and the City
via Victoria Park. Subject to infrastructure
planning and staging associated with light
rail, the following infrastructure measures are
necessary to support bus services in the short
term to Curtin University:
26
b us priority along Canning Highway,

Henley Street and Jackson Avenue to link
to Canning Bridge Station; and
b us priority along Shepperton Road as
far as Miller Street to improve access to
the city.
Access to Morley
Morley is a major centre for the eastern part
of Perth and the City of Bayswater is currently
undertaking planning for the Morley City
Centre to coordinate its growth. This will
include priority access to the bus station.
Priority lanes are proposed to link Morley
to the City via Beaufort Street through
Inglewood. Initially the priority lanes would
be extended to Walcott Street. Discussions
are currently underway with the City of Perth
and the Town of Vincent with the objective
of installing priority bus lanes into the City
as part of the return to two way traffic along
important streets.
Access to Stirling
The Stirling Alliance is promoting light
rail through the Stirling Strategic Centre
development. Planning for road infrastructure
that would provide priority for light rail
and/or buses in the centre of Stephenson
Boulevard and Scarborough Beach Road
is well advanced. The Alliance is currently
considering timing and staging options for
light rail, designed to encourage higher
density development in the Stirling Strategic
Centre and along Scarborough Beach Road
between Stirling and Glendalough Stations.
The Stirling Alliance is also investigating
funding options that include contributions
from development and parking levies.
Whilst this project is being developed by the
Stirling Alliance to enhance development
opportunities at Stirling, it will be a key
component of a future light rail network that
would be developed by 2031.
Access to Fremantle
Priority access to Fremantle currently consists
of full time bus lanes on Hampton Road,
between Douro Road and South Street.
Priority is required south of Douro Road to
Rockingham Road, and investigations are
underway to look at options between South
Street and Fremantle Station. It is likely that
services south of Fremantle would be bus
rapid transit.
Access to Murdoch
A committed project exists for bus priority
west of Murdoch Station through the Main
Street between Fiona Stanley Hospital and
St John of God Hospital and into Murdoch
University. The final part of this project
connects the western end of Discovery Drive
in Murdoch University back to South Street.
A further project is proposed to extend the
South Street bus lanes east of Vahland Avenue
to the freight railway bridge and to construct
a park and ride facility in Canning Vale to
supplement capacity at Murdoch Station.
Access to Perth Airport and Belmont
Priority bus lanes are proposed for Great
Eastern Highway between the Victoria Park
Bus Interchange and Kooyong Road, and queue
jump lanes at intersections from Kooyong
Road to Tonkin Highway. This will enable
improved access between the Perth CBD and
other centres to the Airport for buses and other
forms of public transport (e.g. taxis and airport
shuttle buses) in the short to medium term.
It will also provide for significantly improved
services to Belmont Forum.
In the next ten years, when consolidation of
the airport terminals is proposed (and prior
to construction of a railway to the Airport),
options to service a consolidated airport
terminal will need to be resolved, but will likely
incorporate either Great Eastern Highway
and/or services via Belmont Forum.
Access to Midland
Supporting the Perth central area
Rail will continue serving a redeveloped town

centre including new health campus and
other commercial activity and Government
facilities, increasing contra-flow patronage.
Investigations are underway for TOD
development, redevelopment of Midland
Station and a separate park and ride facility
for Hills transit users.
Light rail serving the Central Northern Corridor,

UWA/QEII and Curtin University will provide
an excellent network of services through the
Perth CBD, East Perth, West Perth and beyond,
as well as providing high capacity links into
the City.
In the short term, prior to the implementation
of light rail, changes to bus operations need
to be considered for travel through the City
to help reduce congestion and allow for

better coordination of bus services in peak
hours. The system would operate on priority
routes along St Georges and Adelaide
Terrace and William Street. Passengers could
catch buses at superstops, which would
include nostep entry and off-vehicle ticket
validation to improve vehicle loading speeds.
Enhanced passenger information could be
available through real time information on
individual services.
27

stage TWO projects
The following projects are considered to be
required in the period before 2031. They build
on the Stage 1 projects and are all essential
building blocks toward achievement of the long
term (vision) network.
Glendalough/Subiaco/UWA
This route will be required by about 2031 to
relieve pressure on the inner section of the
Northern Suburbs Railway and create an
important connection between the Stirling
Strategic Centre, Subiaco, the Fremantle line
and UWA/QE11 precinct.
It is likely that this route would need to be
serviced by light rail in the longer term,
although the technology would be determined
following master planning closer to the time of
implementation.
Railway to Perth Airport

A railway connection to Perth Airport will be
required by around 2031. The railway will link
to the Midland line to the east of Bayswater
Station. Two rail stations are proposed. Airport
West Station will be an important employment
and business centre and a park and ride and
bus interchange to serve the foothills area to
the east of the Airport. The other station will
serve the consolidated airport terminal and
will provide access for air passengers and
airline and airport employees.
28
Cannington to Fremantle cross

city link via Murdoch
Routes that are likely to require bus priority by

2031 include:
This important east-west link will connect

three strategic centres (Fremantle, Murdoch
and Cannington), connect to three railway
lines and provide access to two major
hospitals (Fiona Stanley and Fremantle) and
two universities (Murdoch and Notre Dame).
Shenton Park to QEII and UWA;

A
irport West and the consolidated airport
terminal to Victoria Park via Belmont
Forum;
It will build on priority infrastructure already

provided along South Street, through Murdoch
University and into Fremantle. The technology
and detailed route planning would need to be
the subject of master planning post 2020.
Completion of the Beaufort Street/Broun

Avenue link to Morley;
Fremantle to Cockburn Central

via Cockburn Coast
Scarborough to Stirling;
Cannington to Curtin University via
Manning Road;
Mirrabooka Avenue from Reid Highway to

Hepburn Avenue;
Oats Street Station to Curtin University;
and
This is likely to be a bus rapid transit facility in

the period leading up to 2031, although a case
for light rail may be made in the longer term.
Completion of Canning Highway bus

priority between Booragoon and the
Causeway.
Fremantle to Rockingham via

Latitude 32 and Kwinana
As well, three rapid transit services are likely to

be warranted in the outer growth areas, being:
A bus rapid transit facility is likely to be

required in the period leading up to 2031 to
provide enhanced access to major employment
centres at Rockingham, Kwinana, Latitude 32
and Fremantle.
Alkimos Eglinton;
Other projects
As bus services are progressively developed
along the proposed transitway network there
will be a need for bus priority along a number
of routes.
Rockingham Baldivis; and

Keralup/Karnup Mandurah.
The rate at which bus priority measures and
enhanced services are introduced over time
will depend on the rate of employment and
population development and will need to be
kept under review. It is possible and indeed
likely that other bus priority measures will be
required by 2031.
PROPOSED STAGE 2 PROJECTS FOR

RAPID TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE
Two Rocks
Yanchep
Eglinton
Alkimos
Butler
Clarkson
Ellenbrook
Joondalup
Whitfords City
Hillarys
Guildford
Midland
Warwick
Balcatta
Karrinyup
Morley
Mirrabooka
Bassendean
Stirling
Scarborough
Bayswater
Airport West
Glendalough
Mt. Lawley
ECU
Burswood
Airport Terminal
Claisebrook
Subiaco
RT
H
Belmont
PE
Shenton Park
Victoria Park
Oats St
QEII
Esplanade
UWA
Cannington
Claremont
Curtin
Thornlie
Canning Bridge
Booragoon
Riverton
Maddington
Fremantle
Murdoch Southlands
Canning Vale
Armadale
Cockburn Central
Rockingham
Rockingham City
KEY
Byford
Mundijong
Existing Railway Infrastructure at 2020 *

Railway Infrastructure before 2031
Baldivis
Light Rail Infrastructure at 2020
Warnbro
Karnup
Light Rail Infrastructure before 2031

Keralup
Existing Bus Rapid Transit Infrastructure at 2020
Nambeelup
Bus Rapid Transit Infrastructure before 2031

Future Rapid Transit Infrastructure
Mandurah
Lakelands
Mandurah Station
Please Note:
* Only new train stations and stations linking with the proposed rapid transit
network are shown.
29
RAPID TRANSIT
SERVICES CONCEPT
Passenger travel on the future network
will likely be more dependent on transfers
between services. This is a normal
transition that occurs when a city develops
from a small to a medium sized city. Perth
has already seen the first phase of this
transition, with feeder buses linking to
bus and train stations across the network,
particularly on the Joondalup and Mandurah
rail lines. This pattern will continue.
As the public transport network develops,
the opportunity to connect between
centres at suburban nodes improves. These
improved connections contribute to greater
coverage, more direct and shorter journeys
and a more efficient public transport system.
Yanchep
Eglinton
A possible service network, as depicted

in the figure below could be based around
15 to 20 core transit services across the
metropolitan area.
Alkimos
Butler
Clarkson
Ellenbrook
Joondalup
This ultimate network is indicative and

would be subject to the roll-out of the
proposed transit network and detailed
services planning.
Whitfords City
Hillarys
Guildford
Midland
Warwick
Balcatta
Karrinyup
Morley
Mirrabooka
Bassendean
Stirling
Scarborough
Bayswater
Glendalough
Airport West
Mt. Lawley
ECU
Burswood
Airport Terminal
Claisebrook
Subiaco
RT
H
Belmont
PE
Shenton Park
Victoria Park
Oats St
QEII
Esplanade
UWA
Cannington
Claremont
Curtin
Thornlie
Canning Bridge
Booragoon
Riverton
Maddington
Fremantle
Southlands
Murdoch
Canning Vale
Armadale
Cockburn Central
Byford
Mundijong
Rockingham
Rockingham City
KEY
Baldivis
Warnbro
Karnup
Railways
On-road rapid transit services
Keralup
Nambeelup
Mandurah
Lakelands
Mandurah Station
30
* Only new train stations and stations linking with the

proposed rapid transit network are shown.
Valuing public
transport investment
The Terms of Reference required that the Independent Panel identify
the costs of capital investment proposals and to operate the system,
and the benefits of the investment.
The investment required
The significant investment in public transport
in Perth will require a funding plan to ensure
certainty in delivery of the benefits. Underfunding or sporadic funding would result in the
system not meeting demand and overcrowding
of public transport infrastructure, including
buses and trains.
The funding required for the public transport
system can be broken down into three major
components:
Annual operating and maintenance costs
F leet expansion and associated depot and
maintenance costs
Infrastructure costs, including expansion of
the rail network, development of light rail
and bus rapid transit, bus priority measures,
expansion and improvement of interchange
facilities, park and ride facilities, and stations.
Annual operating costs

The current (2009/10) annual cost of providing
the public transport system is $499.1 million
in operating costs and $691.2 million in total
costs (including capital and interest charges).
Revenue comes from:
The total estimated funding needs

infrastructure projects but, using a factor of 1.5:1
as the current ratio between total and operating
costs (being the average for the past 5 years),
total costs in 2031 would be in the order of
$1.2billion per annum in 2010 dollars.
Fleet expansion
Annual investment in fleet expansion and
replacement has averaged $79 million per
annum over the last 7 years. Over the next
21 years the total cost for fleet expansion is
estimated to be $1.2 billion in 2010 dollars.
The major components of the cost are:
A
dditional railcars $624 million
(156 additional railcars at $4 million each);
A
dditional buses $482 million
(900 additional standard size buses
at $535,000 each);
New light rail vehicles $131 million
(29 light rail vehicles at $4.5 million each).
This does not include additional costs for
replacement or refurbishment of the existing
bus/railcar fleets.
Network infrastructure costs
Perth Parking licence fee and other service

contributions: $11.9 million
Capital expenditure on public transport has

averaged $270 million per annum over the
last 7 years. Over the next 21 years the
estimated cost to construct the infrastructure
recommended in the public transport plan is
$2.9 billion in 2010 dollars.
Joint ticketing for major events (eg. AFL):

$2.7 million
The major components of the proposed

infrastructure expenditure are:
The remaining cost of $534.9 million,

representing 77% of total costs, is met by the
State Government. This includes the additional
subsidy requirements to provide reduced fares
for concession users.
Rail system expansion $1.2 billion;
Fares: $141.7 million
By 2031, it is estimated that the annual

operating costs for the public transport system
will have risen to $820 million. The total cost in
2031 would be influenced by options to finance
Total estimated funding

needs to 2031
Light rail $1 billion;

Bus rapid transit and bus priority
infrastructure $343 million;
Additional rail, bus and light rail depot and
maintenance facilities $180 million;
T ransit interchanges, including park and
ride $135 million.
to implement the public transport

network plan to 2031 are:
Annual total cost: $1.2 billion per
annum in 2031;
Fleet expansion $1.2 billion; and
Infrastructure capital expenditure:
$2.9 billion.
Valuing public transport

investment with benefitcost analysis
Investment in public transport creates value
for the community over the life of the assets
created. These benefits can be economic,
social or environmental, covering the full range
of triple-bottom-line outcomes.
Investment in transport systems is typically a
continuing process, although with some peaks
where major infrastructure is built. Infrastructure
may have a life of 50 years or more before it
needs to be substantially replaced. Trains have
an operating life of up to 35 years before they
need substantial refurbishment and buses 20
years before replacement.
Where benefits from investments accrue over
a period of time and over different periods
from the costs of the investments, social
benefit-cost analysis (BCA) is a useful tool for
assessing their economic value.
For a typical (15km) peak period work journey
to the Perth CBD, the cost to the community
is currently (2010) nearly $30 per day. If this
journey was made by public transport, most
of these costs, except travel time, would be
saved a net saving of $20 per commuter per
day although there would be some direct
costs incurred to provide the necessary public
transport services.
31
Commuter travel by car to other places and

car trips for other purposes may not impose
obvious car parking costs or such high levels of
congestion cost, but even an off-peak journey
over the same distance by car imposes costs on
the community of around $13.
By 2031, increases in traffic congestion and
in the price of fuel for cars (even allowing
for more efficient car engines) will increase
the daily cost of this travel to nearly $35 in
todays values, of which $25 could be saved by
switching to public transport.
The benefits of getting more people to travel by
public transport will be greatest:
for peak period travel (where congestion is
greatest and car parking is likely to have a
substantial resource cost); and
for new patrons who previously drove a car
for the journey.
Additional journeys on public transport will incur
some additional costs for the community. These
costs (infrastructure capital, vehicle capital
and bus and train operating costs) are both a
pre-requisite for attracting new passengers (ie
better, more frequent, faster, more reliable and
more comfortable services) and a consequence
of carrying those passengers (ie. operating more
buses and trains).
Capital costs will be incurred over a period
of time, not as a single up-front investment.
Benefit-cost analysis deals with a stream of
investment costs over a period of time in the
same way as it does a stream of benefits. The
vehicle capital costs include replacement of
existing vehicles where the evaluation period
is greater than the effective vehicle life.
This evaluation is based on buses having an
effective life of 20 years and trains having an
effective life of 35 years, at which point a major
refurbishment of each train is required at 75%
of the replacement cost.
Comparing benefits
and costs: discounting
the future
The generation of benefits and costs at
different times means that a way of converting
these to a comparable basis is needed. This
32
is done by means of discounting values for

future years at a discount rate that reflects
the communitys preference for having things
now rather than later.
The preferred scenario being evaluated is a

21-year program of investment in vehicles, road
based rapid transit, railways and associated
infrastructure.
In many cases, benefits are largely

proportional to costs (eg. a certain number
of additional public transport trips requires
a given number of additional buses and
generates a predictable level of operating
costs) and the choice of discount rate
might not make a very big difference.
However, when the real cost of something
systematically changes in future years, the
discount rate does make a difference.
For example, the price of petrol and other
oil/gas-based transport fuels is expected
to continue to increase and the congestion
impact of each car that can be removed from
the traffic stream will increase faster than
overall traffic levels.
The evaluation is based on improved bus

and train services only. The evaluation has
not included the light rail proposals for
the Central Northern Corridor and other
parts of the network, as this would require
judgements and major assumptions about
the relative efficiency or cost-effectiveness
of light rail and other benefits in terms of
urban development and economic activity or
increases in patronage.
Although both fuel and congestion costs

will increase over time, they will do so at
different rates and the discount rate used
for evaluation will substantially affect the
impacts of these two on the evaluation
outcome. In all cases, however, the benefit
from congestion reduction (ie. the benefit
to those who continue to drive their cars) is
greater than that from reduced car operating
costs for those who transfer to public
transport after 2031.
In this evaluation, the WA Treasury-specified
discount rate of 7% and an alternate value of
4% for sensitivity testing have been used.
What is being evaluated/

compared?
In this evaluation, the preferred scenario is
compared with a business-as-usual scenario.
The costs and benefits are additional to those
that would accrue with a business-as-usual
approach, which would not involve new or
extended railways or infrastructure priority
for road based transit. This business-asusual scenario would itself substantially
increase the use of public transport simply
as a result of population growth and the
increasing price of motor vehicle fuel.
It is more appropriate to assess proposals

for light rail in the Perth context at a detailed
project level. This would allow for more
accurate analysis of public transport demand,
changes to road traffic congestion and
other efficiency and effectiveness benefits
compared to a bus-based alternative. If that
analysis were to demonstrate that similar
benefits as experienced in other jurisdictions
could be achieved in Perth from light rail, the
benefit-cost outcomes would be enhanced.
To that extent, this (bus and train only based)
evaluation should therefore be regarded
as conservative.
Some assets will only be created towards the
end of the 21-year program. Where an asset
reaches the end of its effective life during
the evaluation period, an additional cost has
been added to allow for replacement. This only
applies to buses in both the 30-year and 40year evaluations, and to trains in the 40-year
evaluation period.
The main estimate for the patronage impacts of
the Plan are for 2031, at the end of the program.
Projects are typically evaluated over 25
to 30 year periods, including the period of
construction or investment, sometimes with
sensitivity assessment for shorter and longer
periods. This is an unusual evaluation, in that
the proposed investment is over a very long
(21-year) period. Evaluation periods of 30 and
40 years have therefore been used, which is
effectively 20 and 30 years, respectively, from
the mid-point of the investment timeframe.
Benefits and costs of improved public transport

In a typical benefit-cost analysis, longer-term
benefits usually do not have a major impact
on the present value of benefits benefits 30
years hence have only 13% of their nominal
value in present value terms when discounted
at 7% per year. In this analysis, however,
longer-term benefits beyond 30 years are very
substantial, even when discounted to the
present day (Figure 1). This is because:
Marginal congestion costs increase very
rapidly as road traffic volume grows into
the future;
Related to congestion, public transport
travel times become increasingly
competitive with car, especially where
traffic congestion is at its worst;
Figure 1 Present value of benefits (left) and costs (right)

PRESENT VALUE OF BENEFITS ($MILLION)
5000
7% Discount rate
4% Discount rate
4000
PRESENT VALUE OF COSTS ($MILLION)

5000
7% Discount rate
4% Discount rate
4000
3000
3000
2000
2000
1000
1000
30 YEARS
The real price of petrol is increasing,

even after vehicle engine efficiency
improvements.
The costs, on the other hand, increase at a
reducing rate with extension of the evaluation
period (Figure 1), as the majority of the costs
are road and rail track capital with an effective
life of over 50 years.
Half of the benefits of the increased use of
public transport accrue through lower levels of
congestion (Figure 2), with substantial benefits
also through:
40 YEARS
EVALUATION PERIOD
reduced road trauma;
30 YEARS
40 YEARS
EVALUATION PERIOD
Figure 2 Composition of benefits (percent of present value; 30 years @7%)
3%
1% 1%
3% 2%
9%
14%
reduced CBD car parking costs freeing

up CBD land for more productive uses;
savings in travel time, especially in the
period after 2031; and
18%
49%
Car parking costs: CBD

Congestion cost
Travel time
Road trauma
Greenhouse and climate change
Air pollution
Noise pollution
Water pollution
Operating costs
reduced environmental impactsl, including

greenhouse gases and air, water and noise
pollution.
90% of the net benefits are derived from lower congestion costs (49%), improved travel time for users (18%), reduced road trauma costs
(14%) and savings in car parking costs (9%).
Reduced carbon emissions is a relevantly small benefit (3% at $75 per tonne of carbon dioxide) so the value of carbon does not critically
impact the evaluation.
33
Benefit-cost outcomes
Figure 3 Benefit-cost outcomes
Figure 4 Internal rate of return
Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) is the relativity

between the present value of benefits and the
present value of costs. BCR can be interpreted
as the value for money to the community of
the proposed investment. The BCR from the
evaluation is 1.8 (for 30 years) and 2.2 (for
40 years). This compares favourably with
Infrastructure Australias minimum BCR of 1.5
and a target BCR of 2.0.
BENEFIT:COST RATIO
4.0
7% Discount rate
3.5
4% Discount rate
INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN

15
The BCR and Net Present Value clearly

demonstrate that investment in public transport
is an investment in the long-term future of
Perth. For every case except the shortest time
period with the higher discount rate, benefits
exceed costs and the extent of the difference
increases with alternatives that are based on
a greater concern with sustainability and the
future (Figure 3).
Internal rate of return

The higher a projects internal rate of return,
the more desirable it is to undertake the
project. For this evaluation, the internal rate
of return increases with the longer evaluation
period, reinforcing the conclusion that
investment in improved public transport should
be viewed as a long-term project for the future
rather than a quick fix for transport problems
(Figure 4).
34
12
3.0
2.5
2.0
6
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
30 YEARS
40 YEARS
EVALUATION PERIOD
30 YEARS
40 YEARS
EVALUATION PERIOD
Benefit Cost Analysis at the strategic level inevitably has to average, or take typical values
for, some outcomes. Where there are heavy concentrations, for example of road traffic and
congestion, evaluation of individual projects is able to reflect the specific circumstances,
including the more severe costs of road traffic congestion in heavy traffic locations.
Because some benefits of public transport are excluded and others can be better assessed
for individual projects, the benefit-cost analysis presented here must be regarded as
conservative. The full benefit-cost outcomes of all projects combined will therefore be
better than the outcomes quantified in this evaluation.
Funding
options
The Terms of Reference required that the Independent Panel consider a
range of public and private funding mechanisms.
Funding principles
Funding plan
Traditionally, public transport in Perth and

other Australian cities has been funded
in the main by State governments and
public transport users. In the future, the
range of public transport funding options
should be expanded to be more aligned
with the beneficiaries of an improved public
transport system.
A detailed funding plan and strategy needs

to be prepared by the Department of
Transport and the Public Transport Authority
in consultation with the Department of
Treasury and Finance for consideration by
the Government. The Independent Panel
recommends that a number of new funding
sources be examined for inclusion in the
funding plan and that these be the subject of
consultation with key stakeholders.
There are a number of beneficiaries of an

efficient public transport system, including
new and existing public transport users, other
road users, land developers and the population
at large, who benefit from reduced congestion
and improved accessibility to jobs, education
and other essential services and activities.
The Independent Panel has developed the
policy principles below for funding of the public
transport plan.
The opportunities to adopt alternative or

additional funding sources will change over
time. For that reason, a short term (5 year)
funding plan and a longer term funding plan
will need to be prepared.
Short term funding plan

In the short term, the State Government and
public transport users are likely to remain
the predominant funders for public transport.

However, within that overall framework, the
following should be considered as part of a
detailed funding plan:
Major capital projects
These projects should be developed utilising a
public partnership approach in the first instance
with potential opportunities for private funding.
The project master plans should demonstrate
how they contribute to an overall public transport
network in accordance with Infrastructure
Australias requirements and should involve
local authorities and major institutions such
as universities in the development of the
master plan, with a view to negotiating funding
contributions. The primary contributors to
funding major capital projects in the short
term will be the State and Commonwealth
Governments, but contributions from other
stakeholders should also be a key consideration.
General principle
There should be a clear link between attributable benefit and the level of funds provided by any
group or source.
Specific principles
1. The operating cost of the public transport system should be met by users and key
beneficiaries.
2. The proportion of fare revenue to system operating costs should be relative to the
externality benefits derived from public transport.
3. User charges should be considered among a range of options to help manage demand for
travel during peak periods.
4. The subsidy provided for the elderly and other concession holders should be treated by
Government as a community services obligation policy and be factored into the cost
recovery model.
5. The allocation of capital funding should be based on an integrated transport funding model,
assessing all costs and benefits to both users and non users and savings in external costs
associated with road trauma, congestion and impacts on the environment.
6. The prioritisation of projects should include the contribution of major stakeholders to
sustainable city development in terms of co-funding, transit and planning outcomes.
7. All levels of Government should participate in funding public transport capital projects as
a means of reducing congestion, reducing environmental impacts, improving public health,
reducing social disadvantage and contributing to city building.
35
Other public transport funding

The Independent Panel makes the following
recommendations for consideration in the short
term funding plan:
1. A re-allocation of funding within the States
transport portfolio budget to increase the
funding share for public transport, reflecting
its role in meeting the transport needs of
Perths growing population.
2. Cash-in-lieu or parking levies in strategic
centres with the net revenue dedicated to
public transport to assist in reducing car
travel and increasing public transport.
3. An independent pricing mechanism be
established to provide recommendations
to Government on the setting of fares.
The objectives should be to improve
transparency and undertake benchmarking
to establish whether changes to fares are
justified over time. This mechanism should
consider issues such as:
D
ifferential charging for peak and nonpeak travel, based on the higher cost to
run the system during peak periods;
36
T he proportion of overall revenue

obtained from users over time;
T he level of concession subsidy that
should apply to different users and
whether this subsidy should be funded
as a Community Service Obligation.
T he charges that apply to park and
rideusers.
Longer term funding options
raise this in discussions with other State

Governments and the Commonwealth
Government through the Council of
Australian Governments (COAG) with a view
to having COAG consider a national strategy
for funding both capital and operating costs
of public transport.
Some options that should be considered in
the longer term are:
A
congestion charge with a specific
proportion of revenue dedicated to
public transport improvements.
In the longer term, there are a number of

funding options that should be considered to
contribute to the higher cost and broader role
of public transport in Perth. A number of these
options will include an increased contribution
from different levels of government and other
stakeholders, all of which should be involved
in development of a long term funding plan for
public transport.
D
eveloper charges in areas where
improved public transport can facilitate
significantly higher density in key
precincts and major centres and provide
more efficient and more equitable public
transport options.
The need for greater funding for public

transport is not unique to Perth. It applies
equally to every capital city in Australia
and growing cities overseas. As such it is
recommended that the State Government
The Independent Panel recognises that

these are complex and challenging issues
that will require extensive involvement and
discussion between Government and key
stakeholders.
Activating
and integrating
The Terms of Reference required that the Independent Panel identify how the public transport network can
influence, or be influenced by, future urban planning and development.
Connectivity and
accessibility
A successful public transport plan should
result in a major improvement in accessibility
to, and connectivity between, centres. To
assess this, the public transport network
identified in this Plan has been analysed using
the Spatial Network Analysis for Multinodal
Urban Transport Systems (SNAMUTS)
developed by Curtis and Scheurer1. The key
findings were:
The proposed network improvements will
roughly double the overall efficiency of
the system whilst only requiring additional
operational improvements (eg. service
frequencies) in the order of 60%.
The basic structure of the existing network
does not alter significantly, with the
exception of the Perth Airport rail link and
to a lesser degree the Central Northern
Corridor rapid transit service.
The ease of movement between centres/
nodes across the network is significantly
enhanced, even though the need to
transfer remains at similar levels in 2031
as in 2010.
The average proportion of residents within
45-minutes travel time of strategic centres
across the network improves significantly,
primarily due to more efficient transfers,
network extensions and improved travel
speeds on existing routes.
The speed competitiveness of public
transport over road travel improves in
2031 over 2010, primarily from less timeconsuming and more efficient transfers
between routes.
The analysis confirms the ongoing

importance of the Perth CBD, Stirling,
Murdoch, Joondalup, Cannington,
Rockingham and Fremantle as the
strategic centre public transport hubs
in 2031. It also highlights the potential
of Canning Bridge, Bull Creek, Warwick,
Whitfords and Bayswater stations to fulfil
similar roles.
Whist the public transport network analysed
performs well, particularly in respect of
connectivity to/between strategic centres, it
should be noted that the SNAMUTS analysis
was based on a bus-based rapid transit
network only. The network proposed by this

Plan has since been revised to include light
rail, which will further improve accessibility
and connectivity. It will also result in further
improvements to the speed competitiveness of
public transport.
Principles to support
integration of public
transport and land use
planning
The six principles below should be reflected
in all land use planning documents to support
land use and transport integration.
Concentrate development in centres particularly designated strategic centres
1
2
3
Develop concentrated centres containing the highest appropriate density housing,

employment, services, retail and public facilities within an acceptable walking distance
(400 1,000 metres) from major public transport nodes such as railway stations and
high frequency bus routes with at least a 15 minute frequency at peak times.
Align centres within corridors
Concentrate high density mixed use, accessible centres along major public transport
corridors within urban areas.
Connect streets
Provide street networks with multiple connections to public transport services and
efficient access for road based public transport.
Improve access
4
5
6
Provide walkable environments and give priority to pedestrians including people with
disabilities. Ensure that pedestrian access to public transport is direct and pleasant
with good lighting and natural surveillance from adjacent uses.
Manage parking supply
Use the location, availability and supply of parking to discourage car use.
Improve road management
Improve transport choice and promote an integrated transport approach by managing
road traffic flow and protect and promote priority public transport routes.
Curtis, C. and Scheurer, J (2009 unpublished) Directions 2031 Perths 20 year public transport plan Spatial Network Analysis for Multimodal Urban Transport Systems (SNAMUTS)
37
Strategic integration
At the highest level of integration it is essential
that there is a strong link between strategic
land use plans and the public transport plans.
This helps to ensure that public transport
supports future growth areas and provides
connections to areas of strategic importance.
This Plan has been developed in close
liaison with the Western Australian Planning
Commission (WAPC) and the Department of
Planning. The Plan reinforces the importance of
connections to strategic centres and areas of
future growth, as identified in Directions 2031
and Beyond.
However, this alone will not generate effective
integration between land use and public
transport. The level of synergy between this
Plan and Directions 2031 and Beyond also
needs to be replicated at all levels of planning
and be expanded to consider the urban
movement network as a whole.
Well-designed and located public transport
can act as a catalyst for revitalisation,
redevelopment and intensification of land
use. This will only occur where there are
land use policies that support more intensive
use around key transport nodes and routes.
Without this level of integration, opportunities

to maximise the usage of public transport
will be lost. However, it is important that
investment is targeted and opportunities that
have the greatest chance of success become
the real focus for integration.
Current policy framework

All of the WAPCs high level planning policies
for the Perth and Peel Region stress the
importance of public transport.
The State Planning Policy Urban Growth
and Settlement (SPP 3.0) emphasises
the importance of good public transport
connections. It outlines the following key
requirements for sustainable communities:
sufficient and suitable serviced land
in the right locations for housing,
employment, commercial, recreational
and other purposes, coordinated with
the efficient and economic provision of
transport, essential infrastructure and
human services;
directing urban expansion into designated
growth areas which are, or will be,
well serviced by employment and
public transport;
supporting higher residential densities in

the most accessible locations, such as,
in and around town and neighbourhood
centres, high frequency public transport
nodes and interchanges, major tertiary
institutions and hospitals, and adjacent
to high amenity areas such as foreshores
and parks;
clustering retail, employment, recreational
and other activities which attract large
numbers of people in existing and
proposed activity centres at major public
transport nodes, so as to reduce the need
to travel, encourage non-car modes and
create attractive, high amenity mixed use
urban centres; and
access for all to employment, health,
education, shops, leisure and community
facilities by locating new development
so as to be accessible by foot, bicycle
or public transport rather than having
to depend on access by car (whilst
recognising the convenience of car travel
for some trips and the limited potential
to provide alternatives in rural and
remote locations).
The Draft State Planning Policy on Activity
Centres for Perth and Peel reinforces the
importance of public transport in centres.
Activity centres should be conveniently
accessible by various transport modes,
including walking, cycling, cars and freight
vehicles, and particularly by public transport.
High trip-generating activities should be
located so as to maximise opportunities to
use public transport and to reduce the overall
need for travel between places of residence,
employment and recreation. The primary
entrance to such activities in an activity
centre of a district level and above should
be within 400m of a high-frequency public
transport service.
WAPC (2009) Draft State Planning Policy Activity Centres for Perth and Peel (p 7-8)
38
Where agreed by the Public Transport

Authority, contributions towards the provision
or improvement of capital works for public
transport facilities may be provided in lieu of a
proportion of the car parking bays that would
otherwise be required by the development.2
In addition, the Development Control Policy

Planning to Support Transit Use and Transit
Oriented Development (DC 1.6) provides
strategic direction for transit oriented
development in the Perth metropolitan area.
It identifies a multitude of potential transit
oriented precincts and corridors based on
800m radial catchments for rail stations,
transit interchanges or major bus terminals and
400m catchments on bus routes with multiple
bus services and 15 minute frequencies. There
is an interdepartmental committee to support
the implementation of TODs.
Application
The current planning system has a range
of planning and policy tools to support and
reinforce the importance of public transport.
The level of integration between this Plan
and these planning tools is relatively high,
given the predominance of Directions 2031
and Beyond and its influence on the location
of future greenfields and infill developments.
As a consequence, four of the six principles
mentioned on page 37 are strongly supported
by the current framework. The fifth and six
principles managing parking supply and
improving road management are not clearly
articulated within the planning system and are
areas that require further policy work (see the
Policy Issues section).
In spite of the number of supporting policies,
there are fewer examples of effective TODs in
the Perth and Peel regions, though a number
of strategic centres such as Stirling, Midland,
Murdoch and Rockingham are in advanced
planning stages and have significant potential.
Subi Centro is frequently held up as an
example of how TODs can work in the Perth
context. Subiaco is successful because of
a number of coexisting conditions. There
was a significant area of under-utilised inner
city land that was undervalued because of
its industrial nature and the fact that it was
separated from the rest of the Subiaco area
by the railway. The decision to underground
the station and the railway was the catalyst
for the revival of this area and for its full
integration with Subiacos central area. The

importance of the Governments involvement
in this project, particularly through the use of a
redevelopment authority model and associated
planning controls, cannot be overestimated.
The lack of TODs throughout the metropolitan
area may be related to:
Lack of suitable available land at a
price where developers will take a risk
with returns;
Lack of appropriate development powers
and controls at a local level;
A general unwillingness of residents
to accept higher density development
regardless of the overall benefits that
can be gained for the community as a
whole;and
No mandated minimum density
requirements for land in transit oriented
development precincts.
An example of some development guidelines
that could be used to facilitate development in
public transport catchment areas are outlined
on page 40.
Opportunities
Three future development projects have the
potential to demonstrate a fully integrated
system. Each has a different set of land
use characteristics, governance structure
and constraints.
The Perth City Link

The Perth City Link project has a number of
characteristics that are similar to the Subiaco
situation. It relies on undergrounding the rail
lines and the Wellington Street Bus Station,
which currently act as barrier between
the Perth CBD and Northbridge. This will
create significant development opportunities
(housing, retail and commercial) above the
rail line and bus station for private developers
and provide the opportunity to create
north-south connections and revitalise the
cultural precinct.
This project uses the redevelopment

authority model as the basis for coordinating
development.
Stirling Alliance
This project is focused on development around
the Stirling Strategic Centre with a view to
revitalising this area, creating significant
employment opportunities with 25,000 jobs
within 1,000 metres of the train station. In
addition there will be a focus on residential
development within this catchment.
The Alliance model represents a different
governance structure. It is a temporary project
organisation that is committed to develop and
implement an agreed City Centre Structure
Plan that realises the vision of the community.
It is made up of the WAPC, the Department
of Planning, the Department of Transport,
Main Roads WA, the City of Stirling, the Public
Transport Authority, LandCorp and industry
and community representatives.
Midland
The town centre of Midland, including the
former Midland Railway Workshops and key
adjacent areas are identified as a strategic
centre in Directions 2031 and Beyond. These
areas have benefited from a recent increase in
development intensity and are shaping as an
important centre of population and workforce
growth, with a potential town centre
population capacity of 24,000 by 2031.
A TOD will be integrated with the approved
new 450 bed Midland Health Campus and
other commercial activity and Government
facilities. Investigations into proposed
redevelopment of Midland Station and
development of a potential separate new
park and ride facility for Hills transit users are
also underway. The Redevelopment Authority
model applied in Midland, like that used in
Subiaco, East Perth and as part of the current
Perth City Link project, has been effective
in focussing resources on strategic urban
renewal and economic expansion, developing
an area served by an existing rail corridor.
39
Strategic planning
Example
Two draft urban growth management

strategies are currently being development by
the WAPC the Outer Metropolitan Perth and
Peel Sub-Regional Strategy and the Central
Metropolitan Perth Sub-Regional Strategy.
There is an important opportunity to work
closely with the WAPC and the Department of
Planning in the finalisation of these strategies
to ensure that the level of integration that has
occurred with Directions 2031 and Beyond
is continued.
Improving Transport Choice Guidelines and criterion for planning

and development
It is essential that the Department of Transport

continues its involvement in the development
of a parking policy framework for major
centres. This will reinforce the importance of
Principle 5, outlined on page 37.
The development of an integrated transport
plan for the Perth Metropolitan Area provides
the ideal opportunity to ensure that the last
principle of integrated planning is addressed
and opportunities for collaboration between
planning and transport on this task should
be supported.
Location/land use factor

1.1 Strategic planning
New residential development should be substantially within 5km of an existing or
planned rail station (or equivalent rapid transit node) served at least every 15 minutes
in the peak hour.
1.2 Implementation
Every household should be within 1,000m total walking distance of an existing or
planned rail station (or equivalent rapid transit node) served at least every 15 minutes,
or within 400m walking distance of a bus route (accessing such a node) served at least
every 30 minutes.
Public transport network factor

New residential development should be assessed in terms of the areas trip generation
and impact on the performance of the existing subregional transport network and
service in the area. The strategy for future land releases should also take into account
the commitments in the State Governments transport infrastructure plans. New
residential development should be serviced or have the potential to be serviced
by an existing or planned network of cross-regional transport routes rather than
necessitating the provision of an addition to existing networks.
2.2 Implementation
New residential development should be based on the type of interconnected street
network that (a) minimises the travel distance between two points and (b) in its design
facilitates walking, cycling and going by bus.
Catchment factor
New residential development should accommodate the highest feasible density, in
terms of land capability and market, and either form on its own, or as part of a larger
area, a public transport TOD catchment of 6,000 residents.
3.2 Implementation
Development should be staged in a contiguous manner and with adequate roads to
make the early provision of bus services feasible. Councils should work closely with
Transperth to provide services as early as possible after the first residents move in.
40
Policy
issues
The development of this Plan has identified a number of important
policy issues that relate to either the development and operation of
public transport or to the broader urban transport system. These policy
issues need to be addressed to ensure that the urban transport system
can continue to support a fast growing city with an expanding rapid
transit public transport system.
Public transport policy
issues
Typical Weekday public transport patronage profile
Demand management (peak

period travel)
Public transport in major cities, including
Perth, has to service a very significant peak
period in the morning and afternoon. This has
a significant impact on the cost of developing
and operating the system, particularly for the
rail network. The graph to the right highlights
the concentration of activity in the peak
periods in Perth.
Managing this demand is a complex and
sensitive policy issue and one that most
jurisdictions have struggled to deal with. At
the heart of the matter is the fact that most
commuters and students, who account for
two thirds of all trips, need to arrive at work
or their school/university within a narrow
window of time.
In some overseas cities such as London, a
fares surcharge has been implemented in the
peak period for travel on the rail network in
central city zones. In Melbourne, free travel
was introduced several years ago for trips
completed before 7.00am. There is some merit
in further assessing pricing options to manage
peak period travel in Perth, but this would
need to consider the impact on patronage,
the capacity for passengers to pay and the
options to offer discount fares in the peak
shoulder periods.
There are also other non-transport policy
solutions to deal with peak period travel such
as changes to retail shopping hours and core
business hours for major CBD workforces, and
the start times for university students. These
would perhaps have a more significant effect,
and helped to spread demand more evenly,

thereby making the public transport network
more efficient.
Public transport fares

The level of cost recovery, being the ratio
of fares to the total cost of the Transperth
system, is low in Perth at 22.5%. This
compares with a ratio of 28.5% in Sydney.
The level of cost recovery is impacted by
decisions about the cost of fares, Government
concessions policy and cost pressures on
the Transperth system. Many of these cost
pressures reflect the significant community
expectations for safe travel on public
transport, for flexibility to be able to drive to
public transport stations and for services to
operate throughout the day to service a range
of users. The nature of urban development in
Perth also has a critical bearing on the cost
of developing and operating the network and
this, in-turn, has reflected the aspirations of
the community for a unique suburban lifestyle.
Importantly, the fares policy and cost recovery

target should ideally be based on a robust
economic framework that recognises the
significant benefits of public transport to the
development of the city, to the community and
to other road users (ie. by reduced congestion).
There is merit in fares being set by an
independent tribunal. This would establish
an agreed and consistent basis to assess the
value of benefits to non users (externalities)
and users; to assess the cost of the system
(including operating costs, capital costs and
a return on capital); to provide a clear basis
for comparison with other jurisdictions and to
provide a long term strategy for fares.
Powers to establish transitways

and transit priority
Many of the rapid transit services will operate
on local roads that are the responsibility of
local government authorities. The proposed
network of priority infrastructure also passes
through a number of local government areas.
41
Given the need to further develop public

transport services into rapid transit, it is
important that whole-of-network public
transport infrastructure can be constructed.
Current arrangements for the development of
public transport priority infrastructure requires
negotiation and cooperation between state
agencies and local governments. A particular
issue is the current lack of power for the
state transport agencies to influence local
governments where regional services and
infrastructure networks are involved. Main
Roads WA (MRWA) does not have the powers
to direct the construction of public transport
priority infrastructure on local roads.
Provisions for the State to have an appropriate
level of authority are needed where local
opposition or reluctance could jeopardise the
development of a regional transit project. This
could be in the form of MRWA having the
ability to direct local governments to build and
maintain particular items, allowing MRWA to
construct infrastructure and hand over to local
government for maintenance, or for MRWA
to assume responsibility for roads or lanes as
main roads and have them under their care
and control.
42
Similar provisions have been introduced

in New South Wales. The Transport
Administration Act allows the Roads and
Transport Authority (RTA) to direct local
authorities to undertake particular works on
local roads, including public transport works.
The Transport Administration Act prevails
over the Local Government Act and includes
provisions for Supreme Court proceedings if
necessary. The Act allowed the RTA and the
State Transit Authority to construct the T-Way
network in Sydney.
Light rail transit networks and systems
in most jurisdictions have typically been
introduced partly as a measure to address
urban accessibility and mobility, but also
as a catalyst for urban consolidation and
renewal. In this respect, the feasibility of
many of these projects has been assisted
by financial contributions from the private
sector, which has recognised the increased
value for property development from the
light rail project.
Similarly, the fast tracking of the extension
of the Northern Suburbs Railway to Yanchep
provides a real opportunity to lock in this
extension as a transformational project.

There is the potential for private sector
financial contributions from the small number
of land owners in the corridor and to secure
significantly greater urban densities and town
centre models than has typically been evident
in Perth.
These transformational projects ought to be
conditional on specific criteria, including:
contribution to the capital cost of
A
the projects by the private sector,
based on value transfer from increased
property value;
A
lignment of support from local authorities
to achieve a practical network across
local boundaries;
Minimum density outcomes being secured.
For light rail, project proposals would need
to demonstrate how they are consistent
with, and can be effectively expanded into,
a broader network, would need to ensure a
consistent use of technology to maximise
operational flexibility and synergies across
the network and would need to be subject to
detailed master planning and a business case.
Broader transport
policy issues
Implications of public transport
priority on other road users
The allocation of road space to public transport
vehicles opens up a broader debate about how
the urban transport task will be managed.
This includes the impact of on-road priority for
public transport on other road users, including
light commercial vehicles and heavy vehicle
freight, and whether the dedication of road
space should also be available to other road
users where appropriate.
A broader metropolitan network plan and
strategy is needed to more fully explore this
challenge and define appropriate use of the
network. However, a number of observations
and preliminary conclusions have been drawn
from this project:
eneral Car Travel this project has
G
clearly concluded that it is not practical
or achievable to meet the moving people
demand for a growing city, especially
in the Central sector, by building more
roads to provide for an unmitigated
use of private cars. In practical terms,
motorists will face significantly worsening
congestion, constraints on the availability
of parking in major centres and higher
costs of travel. Road space must be based
on the number of people that can be
moved rather than the number of vehicles,
and transit clearly has the strongest case
for priority use of road space in high
volume corridors.
High Occupancy Passenger Vehicles as
a general rule, high occupancy vehicles
should only be defined as carrying 3 or
more people and should only be allowed
to operate in lower volume bus priority
lanes if the decision is supported by a
strong enforcement regime and a pricing
mechanism to regulate the intensity of
traffic in peak periods.
Light Commercial Vehicles (LCVs)

the need for dedicated priority for road
based public transport has been based
on the case for rapid transit in the peak
period in the morning and the afternoon.
In the main, LCVs do not need to meet
a demand in the peak period and have
a whole-of-day opportunity for delivery
of goods or tradesmen can access work
sites and suppliers outside of the peak
period. As such it is proposed that LCVs
not be specially provided for as part of
the allocation of road space for public
transport vehicles.
Heavy Vehicle Freight the Public
Transport Network Plan has identified
specific road routes for public transport
priority that are mainly local roads and
hence do not overlap or impact on the
strategic metropolitan freight network.
Parking in strategic centres

supply, allocation and pricing
There is a growing recognition and direct
action by a number of major local authorities
and institutional land owners (ie. hospitals
and universities) that unconstrained car
access to strategic centres is unsustainable
and expensive. The response has been
to introduce various measures such as
restricting the supply and allocation of
parking, introducing charges and levies for
parking and to broaden the traditional cashin-lieu model so that funds can be applied
to measures that will support facilities and
infrastructure for public transport.
The Department of Planning and the
Department of Transport have been working
on an over arching parking policy framework to
ensure some consistency is given to how these
measures are applied and to define the role of
the State Government.
43
key2design_32358_06/11
44

Public Transport Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Transport Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Transport Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION

Mapping out the future for Perths

State of Western Australia

the next 21 years and to propose

has reached a stage in its development

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

The strategic land use planning for Perth

This Plan identifies the public transport

Public Transport for Perth in 2031

Project Planning and Evaluation

Detailed project planning, costing and

Concept and Master Planning;

Decisions on funding for specific projects

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

purposes. These are generally made during the

Rapid Transit Infrastructure

Developing the network

The public transport system can be enhanced

The project proposals are grouped into two

The capacity and efficiency of the existing

Upgrading major bus interchanges and

Building new train stations;

Increasing capacity on the

Purchasing new trains and buses;

Expanding the network

The network will need to be expanded by:

Railway Infrastructure at 2031 *

Light Rail Infrastructure at 2031

suburbs. The current rail network cannot

contribution from the Federal Government

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

For light rail, project proposals would need

The investment required

Integrating land use

The Activities Centres State Planning Policy

The development of the Public Transport

The transformational projects are a further

Over the next 21 years the total cost for fleet

New light rail vehicles $131 million

The opportunities to adopt alternative or

Rail system expansion $1.2 billion;

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

The Terms of Reference for the Panel were:

Mr Stuart Hicks AO Transport policy and

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

Imperatives for action

Access to Federal infrastructure funding will depend on States having

Transport contributes 14% to Australias total greenhouse gas emissions.

The State Government currently spends $691.2 million (2009/2010) on the

Department of Transport Public Transport for Perth IN 2031

Why is public transport

An effective public transport system is essential for the long term

Perth has developed as a linear city. The Perth

Perth is already experiencing increasing levels

Development in Perth, particularly on the