[sustran] Re: Asia's 'only-poor-people-ride-transit', KL monorail & isolation

[Lee Schipper]

Both your good poitns can be reinforced by the observation that metros
rairly take existing drivers in congestion from that congestion -- they
allow
others to go under the congestion, while creating totally new trip
patterns. 

What Mayor Penalosa has made clear is that in a sense you MUST be
prepared to give up road, i.e, "car" space, for "BRT" space. That
increases
the number of people per hour you can move, and quite possibly the
average speed. If you have the $$ to build a metro, fine. But do you? 

>>> "Su-Lin Chee" <sulin at vectordesigns.org> 2/8/2006 10:21:59 PM >>>
Mr Fjellstrom,
Wow, your knowledge of KL's public transportation scene is impressive!

Although I can't authoritatively agree with the figures, the main 
facts of what you say are true. Personally however, I would first 
place the main seat of the general public transporation fiasco on the 
political situation and the way big decisions are made, rather 
than "mode problems" as Jain Alok has said.  

For example, although the proven formula seems to be the
private/quasi-
govt sector building and the public sector operating, due to capital 
constraints of the government, one would think that if the government 
were capable of bailing out Putra LRT later, why didn't they just 
steer the whole thing right from the beginning?

One could also say the woeful integration is not just an effect from 
lack of incentive but lack of faith in the entire system of integrated

planning. 

I guess your main contention here is that BRTs would have been much 
cheaper and more efficient. I remember going to a forum of engineers 
where BRTs were presented and there being general skepticism about 
giving up road space. Dedicated bus lanes have been difficult enough 
to implement. KL drivers love their cars and road space too much and 
would perhaps prefer temporary incursions due to rail constructions 
than long-term deprivation of road space. BRTs just seem to be too far

away from the mindsets of KLites, or perhaps too progressive. 

So perhaps you could enlighten me on how BRTs are much better than 
existing buses on priority lanes and in improved conditions (eg 
emissions & cleanliness).


> Dear Su-Lin Che,
> 
> Being the 'second most successful' KL rail transit system - as you 
say the
> monorail is - is not such a glowing accolade. Consider the 
competition...
> 
> PUTRA LRT went bankrupt and was nationalized in Nov 2001 with debts 
of more
> than US$1.4 billion after only 3 years of operation. All the 
contractors,
> designers, vehicle suppliers etc made fat profits and the company 
they set
> up to operate PUTRA only had around 5% equity investment from them, 
so they
> didn't lose much when it folded. 
> 
> STAR, the other main mass transit system, a heavy rail system, was 
better,
> with debts of 'only' a few hundred million US$ after 5 years of 
operation,
> and was also nationalized at the same time, with Ministry of Finance
> completing the takeover in September 2002.
> 
> Quite apart from the financial performance the integration etc of 
these
> systems was woeful, partly because the operator knew from the 
beginning that
> they would never cover the operating cost, so there was not really
an
> incentive to maximize passengers.
> 
> As for the monorail being a fiasco, you are right this is probably a

harsh
> description and you surely know much better than me about the 
system. But
> considering that:
> - it was 8 years under construction
> - a wheel fell off during a trial, striking a journalist, and
> - two years after opening they had achieved only half the projected
> passengers that they had forecast they would have 2 years earlier,
> it's at least arguable that this might qualify as a 'fiasco'. Not to

mention
> that the last monorail station stops short by 200m or so from the 
main
> transit terminal at KL Sentral as you mention.
> 
> The fact that it is 'almost always packed' doesn't really mean 
anything,
> this just reflects the relatively long headways (5 minutes during 
the peak)
> and the very low capacity of the system. At the monorail website
> (http://www.monorail.com.my/monorail-info.htm) they explain that 
even under
> the most optimistic scenario it has a maximum theoretical capacity 
of only
> 5,000 passnegers/hr/direction.
> 
> Karl Fjellstrom
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id at list.jca.apc.org 
> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id at list.jca.apc.org] 
On Behalf
> Of Su-Lin Chee
> Sent: Wednesday, 8 February 2006 10:24 AM
> To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org 
> Subject: [sustran] Asia's 'only-poor-people-ride-transit',KL 
monorail &
> isolation
> 
> As someone working on Kuala Lumpur's public transportation 
information 
> system, I feel behooved to respond to some preceding posts:
> 
> 1. Mr. Bradshaw's sustainable transportation comments: I agree 
> wholeheartedly about the frustration of seeing Asians' "only-poor-
> people-ride-transit bias." That, to me, is the paramount obstacle to

> KL's public transport usage, over and above political and economic 
> issues. It is a class thinking and cars are seen as a class and 
status 
> symbol. Public transport, especially buses, is seen as milling 
around 
> with the masses and the marginals of society. The moment I mention 
the 
> word "buses", it seems as if a mental barrier goes up in most middle

> class and above people - of horror and non-acceptability. What to 
do??
> 
> 2. Mr. Fjellstromn's KL monorail comments: among KL's rail transit 
> systems, the monorail may be deemed the 2nd most successful or maybe

> even the most successful, in terms of customer uptake and perceived 
> relevance of route. It is almost always packed and goes through some

> of the city's most congested and popular parts. The one fiasco is 
how 
> the line doesn't join up with KL's train hub: KL Sentral. 
> 
> 3. Mr Pardo's Le Corbusier comment: Yes! The need to have engineers 
to 
> plan fast cities has resulted in what I feel is a very isolating 
city. 
> On an anecdotal level, many mid-term visitors to KL express feelings

> of alienation and a lack of ground-level community interaction.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Su-Lin Chee
> 
> project manager
> klang valley public transportation information system
> vector designs
> www.vectordesigns.org 
> 54a jalan kemuja
> bangsar utama
> 59000 kuala lumpur
> tel/fax +603.22826363
> mobile +6016.2183363
> 
> 
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing 
countries
> (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main 
focus is
> on urban transport policy in Asia.
> 
> Send instant messages to your online friends 
http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
> 
> 
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, 
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing 
countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, 
the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.
> 
> 

Best wishes,

Su-Lin Chee

project manager
klang valley public transportation information system
vector designs
www.vectordesigns.org 
54a jalan kemuja
bangsar utama
59000 kuala lumpur
tel/fax +603.22826363
mobile +6016.2183363


================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus
is on urban transport policy in Asia.