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

[Su-Lin Chee]

Karl and everyone else,

I guess Mr. Barter’s comments put a pretty conclusive point to most of 
these discussions. Indeed, a mix of modes according to specific 
conditions sounds wise. Apparently, the powers-that-be are next 
considering building another LRT line through the Western Damansara-
North PJ section of greater KL. For me, anything that is affordable 
and doesn’t take twice the time of driving a car is good -- be it BRT, 
bus or rail. 

Just yesterday, commuters including myself waited for nearly two hours 
for a feeder bus from the Bangsar LRT station, because one of the two 
buses had broken down. Perhaps the other had as well, to warrant such 
a wait. Why is the bus system in such an, as you say, “antiquated, 
neglected and generally decrepit” condition? 

Part of the blame must be put on what I feel is the attitude of routes 
being simple entrepreneurship exercises where buses “fish” for 
passengers. Because of this, you get different operators employing 
most of their resources on cannibalizing each other on established 
money making routes. Of course, this attitude also sits well with bus 
operations being handled by the Ministry of Entrepreneurship 
Development rather than the Ministry of Transport. 

So yes, taking political factors into consideration, getting overall 
guidance and regulation done by a pertinent transportation agency 
rather than the CVLB is a great starting point. And apparently, the 
bill establishing it has already been gazetted in Parliament. So I 
hope all of you will watch that space!


> Su-Lin Che
> 
> I agree with you that the way the big decisions are made is the main 
problem
> rather than any particular mode as such. I'm not saying that BRT 
would have
> been better in Kuala Lumpur, or even that BRT is needed in KL. I 
don't know
> enough about demand and road and traffic conditions there, though 
I'm sure
> that you or others who are familiar with the city (Paul Barter?) 
have some
> suggestions. 
> 
> Yes, it is very difficult now in KL to take away road space from 
cars, but
> maybe Seoul provides a relevant example. Seoul has a much more 
extensive
> metro network, but found that traffic conditions were still 
deteriorating,
> car reliance increasing, etc. So they built and are building a 
network of
> medium capacity (ie. one lane) bus lanes combined with other bus 
system
> improvements which has had impressive results. It integrates very 
well with
> the metro, as in Hong Kong. In Seoul's case a visionary mayor 
deserves much
> of the credit, maybe a similar figure is needed in KL?
> 
> I've always found it striking in KL that such a modern and advanced 
city can
> have such an antiquated, neglected and generally decrepit bus 
system. Maybe
> a first step in KL and other cities in Malaysia is to take bus sector
> regulation out of the hands of the CVLB and give it to the cities?
> 
> Karl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----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: Thursday, 9 February 2006 11:22 AM
> To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport
> Subject: [sustran] Re: Asia's 'only-poor-people-ride-transit',KL 
monorail &
> isolation
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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