Comparative Examination of New Start Light Rail Transit, Light Railway, and Bus Rapid Transit Services Opened from 2000

Electric light rail transit (LRT) projects (both New Starts and the expansion of existing systems) have long been vulnerable to criticism of high investment cost, project capital budget overruns, and failure to achieve ridership targets. This criticism continues to prompt proposals for modal alternatives, such as non-electrified diesel-multiple-unit (DMU) light railways and particularly for bus rapid transit (BRT) projects, that are presented as supposedly less costly and more reliably implemented technologies that can achieve similar benefits. In considering this issue, this study has attempted to examine three specific questions with respect to such projects in U.S. cities: First, can major differences in capital cost per mile (kilometer) be detected among LRT, DMU light railway, and BRT projects? Second, are there major differences in how closely the final capital costs match the projected and budgeted costs of such projects? Third, are there major differences in how well ridership goals are achieved? To approach the three specific research questions, this analysis has examined selected recent LRT, light railway, and BRT projects serving extended line-haul corridors with respect to performance data relating to the research questions. The study has focused particularly on “New Start” projects (totally new systems, or major extensions to existing new systems) that received New Start funding or oversight from Federal Transit Administration (FTA), although other projects have been examined in cases where data were readily accessible. The results of this study suggest that the capital costs of LRT, BRT, and light railway projects may fall generally within similar ranges—especially in terms of cost per mile or kilometer— although some deployments of BRT seem to be closer to streetcar investment than full LRT. All of these modes seem capable of attracting passengers and producing significant increases in ridership; however, the rail modes seem to offer more documented evidence of generating sizable numbers of riders and fulfilling projected ridership targets.