201012 transit's proposal for greater kl's public transport master plan

8/8/2019 201012 TRANSIT's Proposal for Greater KL's Public Transport Master Plan

1/80

PROPOSAL BY TRANSIT TO SPAD(The Association for the Improvement ofMass-Transit)11 May 2011

M Zulkarnain HamzahTRANSIT Klang Valley


2/80

The Association for the Improvement ofMass-Transit (TRANSIT), Klang Valley

A united voice for diverse public transport

users Our Goal

To ensure the voice of the passenger is heard inpublic transport planning, regulation, and

operations To increase awareness about what public transport

can bring to our communities


3/80

PROBLEM STATEMENT COORDINATION

TRANSIT & LAND USE CONCEPTS

PRESENT REALITIES IN GREATER KL SOLUTIONS FOR GREATER KL

PROPOSED ALIGNMENTS IN GREATER KL


4/80

TRIP

(Mass) transit journey is too tiring

ROUTE

Transit routes are very complicated

PLATFORM

Transit points are not accessible

cant arrive there on time and in one piece

dont know how to get there

dont want to go through all the hassle


5/80

LONG WAIT

No fix schedule;operators modifyschedule to reapmaximum occupancy out

of their fixed routesBADLY DESIGNED ROUTES

Intercity lines choose time-consuming routes and locallines zigzag and loop excessively in the suburban areas


6/80

TRAVEL DISCOMFORT

Overcrowding of entrances,exits and gangways

Restricted commuter flowand door failure cause

delays Sardine-packed conditions

for very long duration


7/80

DIFFERING FEE STRUCTURE AND NO INFO

Unfair distribution of fee pricing across commutersfrom differing places where a short trip involvingmultiple routes can cost more than a long, singleroute trip

No integrated transit information across differentoperators, service lines and transit points

Info not user friendly, confusing and hard to obtain


8/80

HARD TO SINGLE OUT

TARGETED VEHICLE

Too many different lines sharethe same clogged routes

Bus signs hard to be identified

Commuters have to be over-alertand venture onto the trafficspace so as not to miss the fastapproaching targeted vehicle


9/80

NO FIRST & LAST MILE CONNECTIVITY Available infrastructure not friendly to

pedestrians

Distance between halts are inconsistent with

population distribution around halts


10/80

BAD TRANSIT PILE-UP

Transit flow blocked by idlingand parked public and privatevehicles

Haphazard loitering of vehicleswith no proper platforms, signsand spaces to facilitatepassenger pick-up and drop-off


11/80

BAD TRANSIT CONNECTIONS

Neighboring communities are divided by limitedaccess Tolled Highways and congested Freeways,limiting direct transit interconnection possibilities

Paths from hubs to highway exits are very complex,congested and time-consuming


12/80

Who does what in public transport

Collective movement of people

Servicing common corridor with greaterefficiency

Facilitated by pooled resources (stations,street signals, dedicated lanes etc)

This highly systemic and strategic task should be entrusted toanOrganizing Authoritywith access to a high-level of

legislative and enforcement powers

This operational task is typically taken by private / quasi-governmentoperatorsserving an Organizing Authority

Pooled resources refer to commonly shared infrastructures funded by taxpayers.

bylocal and regional level authoritiesis a must.


13/80

Current & past systems did not workbecause:

Collective movement of people

Servicing common corridor with greaterefficiency

Facilitated by pooled resources (stations,street signals, dedicated lanes etc)

1. We did not fund the common infrastructure necessary tosupport public transport in the same way as we fund

infrastructure for private cars.

2. Operators pitted against each other will take everycost savings they can get away with in absence of anyreasonable standards, regulations and enforcement

3. Mass transit vehicles SHARE travel space with private vehicles

Operators maximize whatever they can squeeze from any loophole in publicinfrastructure (i.e. loitering of parked buses, unruly road hogging and speeding)

4. We have introduced government-linked

services in competition with privateoperators


14/80

TRIPTransit journey

is too tiring

Make trip fast

and comfy

ROUTERoutes are too

complicated

Make moving

around simpler

PLATFORMTransit points

are inaccessible

Make transfers

hassle-free


15/80

The question is, how to move a whole lot ofpeople fast and easy?

PRIORITY NUMBER ONE: integrate all supportsystems for mass rapid transit, and have all ofit properly coordinated


16/80

Cabinet

Committee

Ministry of FinanceCVLB(Licensing,

Routes)

EPU(Planning)

TransportMinistry

PrivateOperators(Metrobus, SJ, KGN-

HIN, Milan, Red, etc.)

PublicFeedback

(Insignificant)

Traffic

Police

Government

Operators(RapidKL, RapidPenang)

Prasarana

LocalGovernments(Insignificant)

MECD(Permits, Fares)

PublicWorksDeptRTD

(JPJ)(Puspakom)

Ministry ofHousing and

LocalGovernment


17/80

Road ExpendituresFederalGovernme

nt

RapidKL

KTM

ERL

STAKEHOLDE

RS

Private

operators

RapidPenang

Multiple HighwayConcessionaire Holders

Funds andcompensation

TOLL FEES

Transit-Oriented Mobility

LocalCouncils


18/80

Structured level of authorities for government agencies to provide holistic direction

Highest Chamber of Legislature(Parliamentary Committee on

Public Transport)

National Public TransportStatutory Authority (SPAD)

State Transport Council(State Assembly) Local Public Transport

Authorities (LTPAs)

Metropolitan Public TransportAuthorities

(clusters of large cities)

Rural Transport Authority(sparse district and villages)

Federal AgenciesEconomic Planning UnitMinistry of TransportMinistry of Housing & Local GovtMinistry of FinanceLembaga Lebuhraya MalaysiaJKR, JKJR, JPBD

JPJ, PDRMIKRAM, MIROS

State AgenciesLocal GovernmentsBureau of Motor VehiclesState Board of AccountsPublic Amenities CouncilTown Planning DepartmentHousing Development Office


19/80

ParliamentaryCommittee

LPTA

IRDA(Oversight)

LPTA

Greater KL(Oversight)

LPTA

NCER(Oversight)

LPTA

ECER(Oversight)

LPTA

Kinta V(Oversight)

SPAD(Vision & Standards)

Finance

Ministry(Funding)

PublicFeedback

Bus and Rail Operators are under contract (time limited) to each LPTA.

The Ministry of Finance would buy buses and provide capital funding

where needed. LPTAs would own the buses and routes and maintain local

oversight and provide direct operations subsidy where needed.

EPU(Planning)


20/80

Transit Consultation Model

TRANSPORTAUTHORITIES

Planning and managingtransit operations and

resources

RESIDENTSASSOCIATIONS,

NGOs

Participate in LA21

OPERATORSTime limitedContracts:Private local

GLC-funded localPrivate foreign

LOCAL / STATE GOVTLocal Development PlansTransit Oriented DevelopmentState Oversight

FEDERAL GOVTNational Standards & OversightGovernment-funded Research

REGULATORY OVERSIGHT &ENFORCEMENT

REGULATORY INPUTS& FEEDBACKS

The 4 stakeholders can improve efficiency through specialization

Consultations&Engagements

Info & feedback platforminside transit vehicle


21/80

TRANSPORTAUTHORITIES

STAKEHOLDERS

COMMUTERS

OPERATORSContracted to:Private local

GLC-funded localPrivate foreign

EXTRA FEE FOR VALUE-ADDEDSERVICE

CIVILDUTY

LOCAL / STATE GOVTQuit rent rates depend on proximityto transit connectionsParking tariffs, congestion chargesRevenues from traffic violations

FEDERAL GOVTTax per mileage drivenFuel consumption tax

FUNDING

PENALTY IFKPIs NOT MET

Non-discriminating distribution of tax revenue and fee income to cover entire populati


22/80

KPIs in

Accessibility Availability Reliability Safety Comfort

INPUTSPublic Funds Transit Fare

Infrastructure Technology

Land Use Energy

Route Planning Labor

CONSUMED OUTPUTSTravel Duration Service KPIs:

Cost/Passenger - Safety

CO2/Passenger - Reliability

Infra KPIs - Comfort

PRODUCED OUTPUTSOperational cost/mile

Vehicle seats/mile

Pollution/mile

Journey covered/labor

SERVICEEFFICIENCY

Fair allocation of risks and responsibilities between transit operators and authorities

Used by LPTA toevaluate operators

Used by LPTA to evaluateschedules & routes

Used by Operators to evaluate own performance

Used by SPAD to formsustainable public

funding framework forLPTA

Used by SPAD to formsustainable contracting

framework betweenOperators and LPTA


23/80

Urban Sprawl

High infrastructure cost

Traffic Congestion

Wasted time (Productivity loss)

Wasted fuel

Hospitalization Cost

Urban Sprawl

High carbon footprint Traffic Congestion

Pollution

Green House Emission

Urban Sprawl

Socioeconomic gap betweencommunities

Traffic Congestion Poor quality of life

Right efforts in reducingtangible cost of trafficcongestion in the shortterm will eventuallyreshape the present urbansprawl towards low carbonfootprint and sustainableland use in the long term

Human Dev. index

Carbon footprint per capita Travel time reliability


24/80

KL transit modal share is counted

by factoring in peak hourcommuting across outer and innercity cordon borders. Transit sharewas targeted to be 60%, beforeplummeting to 50%, and finally25% (National Key Result Area).

Amsterdams modal split pattern takes into

account all journeys made hence explainsprogression from walking towards transit and caruse in tandem with increase in distancetravelled.

Traffic modelling in Manhattan, NY churnsout delay costs. Like most cities,congestion costs are highest during peakhours as traffic volume beatsinfrastructure capacity.

Present Method (vague) Mid-Term EconomicSustainabilityLong-Term Overall

Sustainability

For mass transit to beeffective, its delays andassociated costs must bemade lower than that of

private vehicle!


25/80


26/80

trip

plat-

formroute

MASS

RAPID

TRANSIT

TRIP

Collectivemovement ofpeople

ROUTE

Servicingcommon corridorwith greaterefficiency

PLATFORM

Facilitated bypooled resources(stations, street

signals, dedicatedlanes etc)

Sharing is not only

caring, but alsotime/money-saving!Simpler routes mean moreservices over less traveldistances:more frequentand faster service

Make transfers fast &seamless wherever possible!


27/80

By sorting the way wetravel, we can crossgreat distances faster,and access smallerurban blocks easier!Unobstructed accessibilityat origin/destination anduninterrupted mobilityduring in-betweens:more stress-free travel

Regular Line

Bypass Line

Limited Stop Line

Non-StopLine

Trams/Monorail/LRT

MRT/Commuter Train

Maxi-taxi/Minibus Bus Rapid Transit

ERL

Express-

wayRapid

Transit

Direct

Service

Lane/RoadLevel Street Level

BoulevardLevel

ExpresswayLevel


28/80

Public transport is atool to shape futureurban growth, but ourpresent choices arelimited by the mobilityplans made in thepastInvestment in setting up

traffic flow network in thepast affects the present andfuture pattern of urbandevelopment

Traffic infrastructure shapesurban attractions, and hence

traffic volumeTraffic volume increases when the benefitof leaving present point of origin andreaching destination is higher than thecost of overcoming the distances (stress,time, income loss, damage)

Traffic corridors should bedesigned to move people,not cars!

1807 - 2007


29/80

Going outwards, land use shiftsfrom people-based to

logistic-based activities

Transit is a tool for sustainable urban growth!Private vehicle use within areas closest to transit points can besignificantly reduced with commercial districts offeringknowledge and creativity based services, instead of logistics-driven services (furniture centres, hypermarkets, workshopsetc). Through transit proximity-based assessment rate and

parking taxes, density surrounding transit stops can beincreased.

Grid street layout makes spatial and transit planning

less complex. It offers pedestrians greaterconnectivity and permeability.


30/80

Old cities of the developedworld can sustain urban

growth due to its pedestrian-friendly urban forms.

Remember, walking is thebiggest mean to reach public

transport!


31/80

1890s 1990s

Grid street layout in heart

of KL (Chinatown & Little

India) 100 years ago

The need to speed up traffic flow to accommodate motorizedvehicle use increase resulted in a complicated mesh of motorways

and highways for KL and its satellite towns in the past 100 years

KLs urban form has no particular

resemblence in general; in fact, it looksmore like spaghetti


32/80

Emphasis is still onmore exclusive

walkway projectsconnecting transit to

adjacent andselective privatelands, when the

existing ones fail toattract pedestrians.

And exclusive spaces hamper connectivity and permeability, and drains significant resourcesthat should be dedicated towards fixing uninviting sidewalks and pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.

At grade crossingsshould replace

overhead pedestrianbridges along trafficcorridors within highdensity commercial

areas.

Kuala Lumpur needs more inclusive andinviting sidewalks that link places.


33/80

Roads within urban centers must be designed to move people, not cars!

Efforts to create more car-free streets in Copenhagen 1962 - 1996

THE CULPRIT!


34/80

Peak hour commuting corridors are gravitated towards high density urban employment centers.

Pattern seen mostly in NorthAmerica (and Malaysia)

Pattern seen mostly inWestern Europe (and inSeoul, Tokyo, Singapore,Curutiba, Bogota)

Emphasis on car-orientedinfrastructure accommodate

available traffic corridors towardsflow and speed of cars, insteadof moving people. Vicious cycle

continues to createunsustainable urban sprawl.

Seouls highway-turned-river casestudy shows ushow tearing down ahighway canrelieve traffic jams(and save our city)

Car parks dominate scene neardowntown Houston, TX


35/80

Choose the right alignments and centers, and the rest will followWe cant change pre-existing land use, but we can definitely influence its evolution through

strategic commuting choices (designation of transit alignments and employment centers) toorchestrate realistic transition from car-oriented to transit-oriented commuting behavior, and

finally to a more sustainable land use and overall urban environment.

KL City Center-centric alignmentwill it solve the problem?

Congestions along fringes of the city bordershow mobility requirements targeting other

urban centers within Greater KL are also unmet

KL


36/80

Zoning policies in Curutiba, Brazil fosterhigh density TODs to concentrate alongBRT corridors

Transit is most effective when straightalignments can be achieved, hittingtarget TOD nodes.

Straight Transit Line


37/80

Transit is not effective if alignments haveto accommodate detours to hit TODnodes.

Squiggle Transit Line

Alignment dilemma for Washington DC,on the proposed BRT extension to finalShady Grove MRT station on the red line.Blue squiggle line hits urban centers, but long journeytime does not encourage car users who can drive fastervia highways. Yellow straight line promises more rapid

and efficient service, but skips important urban centers!


38/80

TAMAN BFeederbusline B

TAMAN CFeederbusline C

TAMAN AFeederbusline A

Mass

Rapid Transit Line

LEGENDMassRapidTransit StopFeeder BusStopRegular LineBypassLine

Mass RapidTransit Hub

MRTLINE(K

TM)

FEDERALHW

AY

BRTLINE

sec.18-

20min

ibus

kg.pdgjawaminibus

EXPRESSSERVICE

localouter ringservice

(both directions)

localinnerringservice(bothdirections)

ERT via KESAS to Cheras LRT (on MEX)

EXPRESSSERVICE

ERT via NKVE to Sentul LRT (on DUKE)

Pedestrian IslandStreet Median

SUBURBANSECTION 1

SUBURBANSECTION 2

SUBURBANSECTION 3

SUBURBAN

SECTION 4

SUBURBANSECTION 5

SUBURBANSECTION 6

RapidTransit Stop

RAPID TRANSIT LINE

FEEDER TRANSIT LINE

Feeder Stop

0 250 500 750 1000 m

Interchange

Through channelization andtransfers, city-bound rapidtransit lines can be linked tosuburban centers via localcirculators.

Ideal situation VERSUS reality

In Shah Alam, rapidcirculator lines can connectsuburban centers (markedwith yellow) with KL-boundrapid transit stations.

Better than mere feeders, thecirculator lines providelocals intracity travel duringoff peak hours.

Due to straight alignments, local circulatorlines cant accommodate all residential

pockets. Minivans and carpoolers can feed

commuters from deep housing pocketstowards the circulator lines.

G t KL i d i d t


39/80

Greater KL is designed tobe car-oriented from theground up! Low density housing dominates the majority

of the residential areas in Greater KL. Direct access of these housings depend on

existing motorways and tolled highways. Developments within residential districts

are further segregated through cul-de-sacstreet layout by independent landdevelopers

Piece-mealdevelopment of land

parcels affectpermeability and transit

use negatively.

Unless proper land use audit is done to examine barriers to walking

(pedestrian-vehicle conflict, artificial barriers, motorways), the 400m radius

of transit catchment in local plans are unrealistic!


40/80

Selangors Structure

PlanRed line is for metro,and blue line is for

LRT. Plenty of zig-zagging and squigglinglines. So far, resemblesone of the worstintegration of land useand transit planning.

KLs Structure Plan

Mismatch with Selangors Structure Plan.

The circuitous LRT routes, especially theone that hit Sri Hartamas, areunrealistically designed to catch up withnew developments without guaranteeingtravel time reliability.

Prasaranas Proposed Extension

Extending the present LRT lines by more than10 stops each, and terminating both lines at a

very low density area of new Putra Heightssuburb, may be the right strategy tostrengthen urban cores around Bdr BaruPuchong and Subang Jaya, but will neversolve KL-bound commuting needs, and willjeopardize equitable transit funding to otherareas.


41/80

Available railwaynetwork hard to be

extended for straight

alignments due touncontrolled low

density urban sprawl


42/80

TNB Power Lines

River line

Riverline

Do not repeat pastmistake: Ignore universal

approach using inclusive rapidtransit(BRT, trams) & put allbets on few exclusiveones(MRT, LRT, monorail)Commuters will never be ok to averagefare of RM8 (vs current RM1.60)required for Prasarana to recoup LRTand Monorail infra debts.

Bailouts siphoned massive public fundsfrom many with no direct benefit from thelines.Failure of integrating transit with spatialplanning (neither by Prasarana nor KTM)further diminish opportunity to reap valuefrom present TODs.

Majority of the alignments for the RM10 billion Light Rail projects (Ampang line, SriPetaling line, Kelana Jaya line and KL Monorail line) commissioned in the late1990s early 2000s were manoeuvred out of expediency rather than studies on

actual transit demand pattern and corridors. No transit masterplan has ever existed.


43/80

RM43 billion for 3 Rapid Transit lines?When transit fundamentals are all wrong with the past RM10 billion investment


44/80

Other taxpayers want MRTs too


45/80

Concentric density development does not go in

harmony with prevailing low density layoutsExample: Taman Paramount LRT StationTwo high rise buildings (influenced by high land value prospects near LRT)stand like sore thumbs in the midst of very low density housing areaSurrounding residents annoyed by overutilization of local roads to accessthe high rise buildingsRoad alignments not conducive for rapid transfer from LRT to local buslines (feeder or circulator)

Piece-meal high density developmentwithout holistic approach in pedestrianpermeability damages real TOD potentialExample: Setiawangsa LRT Station

Residential barriers (yellow lines) significantly reduces number

of population within walking distance from transit catchmentOne low density luxury housing enclave and another exclusivecondominium project (completed >10yrs after LRT!) completelyblock residents of many high density housing units behind it(mainly low cost) access to LRTRoad alignments not conducive for rapid transfer from LRT tolocal bus lines (feeder or circulator)


46/80

BUS RAPID TRANSIT: 6-lane highway or 1-lane busway?

EXPRESSWAY RAPID TRANSIT: Demand-driven toll rates for cars?

Car use discouraged withhigh peak hour toll fares,smooth flow for all vehicles

Cars stayclear fromthe medianlanes


47/80

Platform names, stop

announcements

Off-vehicleticketing

Stepless floor, highlyaccessibile

Wide doorways and smoothpassenger flow

Proper platforms withstand behind the yellowline rule

Multiple servicelines (regular,limited stops,skip-stops)

High frequency

Right-of-wayinfrastructure


48/80

Reversible bus lane can be implemented for roads that cant be widenedfurther. Suitable for roads which suffer traffic congestion only on one side ofthe road at a time. Unsuitable for arterial roads connecting two urban centers

together, where peak hour congestion can occur on both directions.

Enforcement signs should be accompanied with cameras.In parking-prone stretches, loud speakers can be used towarn offenders. Raising bollards can prevent cars fromentering bus-only road.

Queue jump, priority signals and bus bulb (instead of normal bus bay) ensures buses get a head startcompared to cars.


49/80

Platform docking allows train-like same level

boarding experience

Open design with road humps converted as platforms forrapid transit vehicles such as trams and buses (downtown orlocal lines) allow fast and easy boarding.Costly and complicated infrastructure and barriers can be eliminated with

external ticketing mechanism. No extra lane is required for middle platform.

Check in and check outscanners for contactlesscard readers allow better

management of fare

collection and evasion

(riders charged in full

during check in, refunded

based on distance

travelled during check out)

Entry and exit barriers can

be implemented in

accident-prone stretches


50/80

BRT with at grade crossing within an inclusivepedestrian setup shortens commuting timewithout the stair-climbing and other efforts forother rapid transit modes with exclusiveinfrastructure.

Contraflow BRT prevents other users frombreaching into the bus lanes


51/80

Transit and high speed traffic

High platform shelter withautomatic glass doors protects

commuters from outdoorelements and cross-median

accidents. With bypass lanesfor express services at BRTstops, capacity can exceed

40,000 pax per direction perhour, compared to 2,000 for cars

per lane per hour!


52/80

Consider highspeed, closed

system highwaysas rapid transittracks


53/80

High speed highway infrastructure shouldbe prioritized for rapid transit.Demand-driven toll rate can be easily adapted to closed

system expressways, so that ERT buses can travel rapidlyand smoothly with less headway and greater frequency.

ERT buses should only operate within high speedexpressways. With overhead or side terminals ,buses do not have to negotiate complex entryand exit routes to reach suburban or cityterminals. Sawtooth bus bay design allows max ERTcapacity of >20,000 pax per direction per hour!


54/80


55/80

Opex can be greatly reduced by

using underutilized intercity buses(up to 70pax/bus) during urban peakcommuting hours. Double decks

lower floor can easily adaptwheelchair access.

One-seat one-ride journey allowspassengers to sleep or work onlaptop, compared to unproductiveidling stress and energy drainfaced by standing passengers.Uninterrupted, direct journey addsin towards overall comfort.

Exclusive ERT ramps providebuses direct access to gatewayterminals (transfer to local/cityrapid lines), escaping bottlenecks

at highway interchanges

ERT allows clever load balancing

options

ERT reduces riders aversion to

time-waste

ERT gateway terminals speed up

transfers


56/80

All lines under Rail Arteries slide denote present LRT, Monorail, ERL andKomuter lines. On other slides:

Green line shall denote ERT (unless denoted as BET) with point-to-pointjourneys and gateways (interchanges to KLs LRT and suburbs Local BusLines) plus demand-driven charges for rest of traffic on tolled highways

Pink/Magenta/Purple lines shall denote BRT with either high floor bi-articulated buses or low floor articulated buses

Cyan/Turquoise lines shall denote Local Bus Lines (bus lanes and signals

can be implemented at bottleneck stretches) with low floor single coach(articulated buses for partially-orbital K.Damansara S.Petaling BRT line)

Orange line shall denote KLs Outer Orbital Line (bus lanes can beimplemented at bottleneck stretches) with double-deck 70-seat buses

Dark Red dotted line shall denote extension of present Monorail line toform KLs Inner Orbital Line

Light Red line shall denote catenary-free stepless streetcars (5 coaches@ 350 pax per tram) with contraflow median lanes (made attractive withtracks on top of grass bed) and median/road hump platforms

Grey dotted line shall denote MRT with high density TOD around stations


57/80

Urban cores in Greater KL depends onstructure and local plans, and theseplans need to be aligned with thetransportation masterplan both at

regional and local levels.

Transit modal share of 50% for CBD-bound peak hour travel cant beachieved with corridor-based travelpattern (LRT, BRT etc) alone due to

GKLs car-oriented environment.

For suburbs with cul-de-sac layoutsand orbital travel needs, ERT is

advantageous compared to othertransit modes with corridor-basedtravel pattern. Connection with rapidtransit services at local levels withstage buses running on simplifiedroutes at high frequency canstrengthen existing suburban centers.

Present strength of

urban centers canbe determined bythe intensity ofcolors within thealignment maps

Long Term Plan

Edge-CorridorCity (hybrid)

Edge City (gateway travel pattern)Land-use: Car-oriented urban sprawl

Road layout: Cul-de-sacMode: ERT and BET buses

Travel: Orbital, fringes of KLs CBD

Journey: Direct, skip-stop servicesLast Mile: Transit to Local Bus / Car

Attraction: Ability to take nap onboard,

stress-free commute

Corridor City (hub-and-spoke travelpattern)Land-use: Transit-Oriented

development

Road layout: Grid / Fused Grid

Mode: BRT and Rail TransitTravel: KL CBD-centric

Journey: Regular and limited stops

Last Mile: Transit to Local Bus / Walk

Attraction: Door-to-door journeys time

saving compared to stuck in jam

Densification for areas within 400m

surrounding corridor-based stops: Stops along Local Bus LinesHigher-than-average plot ratio (multistory shoplots, offices, institutions)

Stops along BRT LinesModerate density (plot ratio of >3)

Stops along high-capacity BRT/LRT LinesHigh density (plot ratio of >5)

Stops along very high capacity MRT LineVery high density (plot ratio of >8)

SPAD should establish guidelines for local communities to

decide for their own travel and Transport-Demand-

Management planning needs

LIST OF TRANSIT PLATFORM TYPES


58/80

Walk inNo turnstile required

Platform GatesAt site turnstile for entry and exit

Check in and outEntry and exit scan anywherearound barrier-free platformarea

On board check in

Entry scan on transit entrance

Free boardingNo transit fare required

On board conductorFor barrier-free ticketingsystems, on board officer

checks validity of tickets/passes

On board wifiInternet services free for riders

On board bike rackBicycle racks for off-peak rides

Grade x-ingZebra crossing

Stairs

Pedestrian bridge or tunnel

WalkwayWheelchair friendly movingwalkway

ParkNRide

Garage for cars

BikeNRideBike lanes, and bike racks

Level boardingplatformDocking mechanism allowssame level boarding/exiting

Automatic doorTransparent automaticgates for safety andpollution barrier

LIST OF TRANSIT PRIORITY MEASURES


59/80

Median transit lanesStations and transit lanes onthe median going the sameway of adjacent car lanes

ContraflowTransit lanes going theopposite way of adjacent carlanes

Reversible laneSingle lane on the median to beused as transit lane on eitherdirection, depending on traffic

Transit priority signalPreemptive green light in favor of transit vehicles

Queue jumpTransit queue jump lane at intersections with carqueue

Bus bulbBuses stop in the middle of

road path instead of having topull over the curb

Road hump platformFor tight areas with scarcespace and low speed traffic

Bypass transit laneAdditional lane for passing stationary buses atstations

High Occupancy TollwayExpressway with demand-driven toll rates toguarantee smooth traffic flow

Yield instruction to road usersVisible signs on the road to instruct users to yield tobuses (at lane merges, intersection and bus curbs),and yield to users of sidewalks and bikeways

Rail Arteries D irect ion Ma x P ax H ea dwa y Pa x/ Hou r


60/80

Function: Primary Backbone for KL CBD-centric tripsPresent: Less than 50K per peak hr tripsPotential: 412K per peak hr trips

Enhance signaling, elongate platforms

4-coach KJ Line max up to 64,000 pax/hr8-coach STAR lines max up to 128,000/hr

Upgrade to moving block signalingUpgrade track to standard gaugeExtra track for express serviceRerouting of freight(with Serendah-Alor Gajah freight train bypass)

8-coach Komuter lines max up to 196,000 pax/hr

(2 mins headway possible with trains move in convoyfrom KL Sentral to Putra)

New catchment

KLIA Transit stop at south of PuchongERL EMUs max up to 24,000/hr

Consider double deck EMUs

Kelana Jaya

Sentul

GombakBatu Caves

Sg Buloh

Ampang

Maluri

Sri Petaling

Serdang

Kajang

Putrajaya

Seri Setia

Klang

Direction Max Pax Headway Pax/Hour

Kelana Jaya 800 90 sec 32,000

T. Gombak 800 90 sec 32,000

Rawang 1,600 120 sec 48,000

Seremban 1,600 120 sec 48,000


KL Sentral 800 120 sec 24,000

KLIA 800 120 sec 24,000

D irect ion Ma x Pa x Headw ay Pa x/H ou r

Klang 1,200 120 sec 36,000

Batu Caves 1,200 120 sec 36,000

New ERLstation servingnew highdensitydevelopmentsouth of UPM

Shah Alam - south

D ir ect io n Ma x Pa xH ea dw ay Pa x/H ou r

Sentul 1,600 90 sec 64,000

Sri Petaling 1,600 135 sec 42,667

Ampang 1,600 270 sec 21,333

Kajang station

shifted to citycenter


61/80

TRANSIT CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICEStandard Gauge1,435mm standard gauge offers greater reliability and speed

than current 1,000m meter gauge

Komuter system can be integrated with ERLs Siemensstandard gauge system (greater reliability & speed)

Bypass line removes freight trains, in line with shifting overall

logistics traffic and industries towards outer fringes of GreaterKL and thus reducing congestion

Double-Deck CommuterStanding passengers on lower deck, 50% higher capacity

compared to single-deck

Reclining chairs for both decks, EMUs can be used for

interstate trips during weekends

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTUrban RenewalMore open spaces and access for pedestrian in the CBD will enhanceaccess to jobs and retails, foster compact and denser development, and

strengthen the CBD position as GKLs center of urbanization gravity

High density commercial activities with pedestrian malls between Bank

Negara and Bandaraya, and between Putra and PWTC stations.

Kajang stations relocation to Kajang city center with high density TOD(job and commercial centers)

Suburban RenewalLow density, logistics-based land uses surrounding stations to beconverted to high density, human activity-based TODsAccess to land units enhanced with pedestrian shortcuts and moving

walkways (to increase 10 mins access time to stations, and to enlargeTOD zones effective area), and traffic restraint measures

TOD zones dissected by rapid local bus lines to spread access to lower

density areas; last mile reach with bicycle lanes in deeper areas

Greenfield DevelopmentUnproductive lands near rail stations to be converted to new TODtownshipsBandar Tasik Selatan and Serdang Selatans Supercities recover back

rail infra debts

Mixed Development to allow job and retail centers among high density

residentials (low to medium-high cost) to alleviate urban sprawl pressures

New Serdang Selatan ERL,with road access to SKVE

(east-west), NSE (north-south)

Main Road Arteries (south)


62/80

Function: Primary Backbone for KL CBD-centric tripsPresent: Less than 6K per peak hr SOVtripsPotential: 72K per peak hr BRT trips

Federal Highway corridorHighway expanded to 8 lanes, 2 median lanes for BRT with

1 extra passing lane at stations1 lane for 24K pax/hr = 6 lanes for Single Occupancy

Vehicles (SOV)s on highway

Hits Klang, Shah Alam, Subang Jaya, Seri Setia, Petaling

Jaya and Bricksfield core activity centers

Challenges: Klang CBD Bkt Raja, BRT merging section

at Jln Syed Putra, Roundabout at Menara Tun Sambanthan

to Pasar Seni

Quick Win: Pdg Jawa Universiti LRT station

Jln Klg Lama Jln Puchong LDP corridor

1 lane for 16K pax/hr = 8-16 lanes for SOVsHits Klang Lama, Kinrara and Puchong core activity centersQuick Win: Bdr Baru Puchong-MidValley KTM

Jln Klang Lama Sunway NPE corridor1 lane for 8K pax/hr = 8-16 lanes for SOVs

Hits Subang Jaya and Sunway core activity centers

Quick Win: Subang Jaya-Seri Setia KTM

Klang

Shah Alam - north

Sunway

Seri Setia

USJ

PJ Pandan

Cheras

Kajang

Bdr Tun

Hussein

Onn

Bdr Baru Puchong

KinraraBdr Mahkota

Cheras

OUG

Tmn

Desa

Bdr PuteriPuchong

Bdr TunRazak


Kajang 200 30 sec 24,000


Klang 200 30 sec 24,000

Subang Jaya 200 90 sec 8,000

Puchong Perdana 200 45 sec 16,000

DESTINATION:

Pasar Seni & Maharajalela

TRANSIT CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICEExclusive SystemHigh capacity BRT (>20 000 ppdph) with 30 seconds headway


63/80

High capacity BRT (>20,000 ppdph) with 30 seconds headway

can only be achieved with exclusive BRT system like Curutiba

and Bogota (Transmilenio)

Even without passing lanes, the relatively well-distanced stops

and exclusive right of way all along Federal Highway can allow

frequency of as low as 30 seconds (24,000 ppdph).

High floor buses (with same level boarding platforms at road

median) allow greater capacity (with bi-articulated buses), safer

traffic environment (minimal crash impact to onboardpassengers and waiting commuters on platforms prone to high

speed crashes), greater comfort (greater stability at high speed,

no intrusive wheel wells, zero platform-bus gap/stairs) andcheaper costs (low capex and opex)

Higher FrequencyPassing lanes at stations not only increase capacity, but allow

multiple types of service offered for a particular route (express,

skip stop, limited stop, truncated etc).

Significant time savings for commuters around stations served

with express routes.Pedestrian Under and OverpassMoving walkway increase pedestrian bandwidth andconvenience for OKUs.

Alternative to pedestrian bridges are underground pedestrian

malls with active retail lots that create sense of security

Main Road Arteries (north)


64/80

Function: Primary Backbone for KL CBD-centric tripsPresent: Less than 5K per peak hr SOV tripsPotential: 44K per peak hr BRT trips

Jln Kepong Jln Semarak corridorVia Jln Ipoh and Jln Rj Muda A Aziz (conversion into 2 median lanes for BRT)

One lane for 8K pax/hr = 8 lanes for SOVsHits Kepong, Jinjang, Batu, Sentul activity centers

Challenges: Kepong Interchange @ Jln Ipoh, Chow Kit areaQuick Win: Kepong Batu Village station

Spur Line: Bdr Sri Dmnsra Manjalara Kepong KTM Jinjang BRT

Jln Sentul Jln Pahang corridorOne lane for 8K pax/hr = 6 lanes for SOVs

Hits Gombak, Batu, Setapak & Wangsa Maju activity centers

Challenges: Jln Tun Razak, Bltn Pahang (use tunnel for BRT), Danau Kota area

Jln Ukay Perdana corridorOne lane for 5K pax/hr = 5 lanes for SOVs

Hits Ulu Kelang conurbationBRT-only route for missing link between Jln 1/56 & Jln AU5

Chow Kit

Titiwangsa Setiawangsa

Direction Max Hway Pax/Hr

Jln Ipoh 130 60 sec 7,800

Jln Semarak 130 60 sec 7,800


Jln Sentul 130 60 sec 7,800

Jln Gombak 130 180 sec 2,600

Jln Genting Klang 130 90 sec 5,200


Ukay Perdana 70 60 sec 4,200

TRANSIT CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICEBarrier-Free EnvironmentArticulated buses with low floor access that docks to median


65/80

Articulated buses with low floor access that docks to median

stations accessible thru at grade crossings

Open system eliminates the need of turnstile passengers

obtain flat-fee single usage pass at cash machine or use

frequent RFID-enabled pass, and conductors do spot check on

validity of passes of passengers onboard (honor system)

For busy routes, commuters can use transit pass at check-in

and check-out machines at stations (full charges during check

in, and rebates at check out)For non-busy routes RFID detector at all vehicle

entrances/exits

Scarce Traffic Resource OptimizationReversible bus lanes at tight sections allow CBD-bound BRT

buses to overcome traffic during morning peaks (and suburb-

bound during evening peaks).

Bus priority signals at traffic intersections.

Road humps as platforms (with automatic gates and traffic

lights) for narrow roads with no median space available

Saturation level at stations can be greatly reduced with

convoying of articulated buses (3 articulated buses moving

together can equal to capacity of a 2-coach LRT) at acceptableheadways (synchronized to give buses head start at mixed-

traffic signaling without adversely affect movement of other

traffic vehicles)

Closed Expressway Arteries (southwest)F i Hi h S d T ll d B kb f i i MRR2

Cheras ERT LRT Interchange


66/80

Function: High-Speed Tolled Backbone for trips crossing MRR2Present: 6 lanes bottleneck @ MEX + Sg Besi Hway = slow moving 12K SOVsPotential: Fast point-to-point ERT bus @ all lanes = 50K pax (10 sec headway) + 8K SOVs

BTS Interchange

Kota Kemuning

USJ Summit

Kinrara

Putra Permai

Equine Park

Bdr Br Bangi

Bdr Puteri


KL in/out bound trips

K.Kemuning-Cheras LRT 70 60 sec 4,200USJ Summit-BTS 70 30 sec 8,400

Kinrara-BTS 70 30 sec 8,400

Putra Permai-Cheras

LRT 70 30 sec 8,400

Equine Park-Cheras LRT 70 30 sec 8,400

Bdr Puteri-Cheras LRT 70 60 sec 4,200

BBBangi-BTS 70 30 sec 8,400

Inter-suburban trips (example)

USJ Summit-BBBangi 70 300 sec 840

More terminals in the

southern suburbs


southwestern suburbs

Terminals Bays Dwell T ime Pax/Bus Pax/Hr

BTS 30 300 sec 70 25,200

Cheras LRT 30 300 sec 70 25,200

Closed Expressway Arteries (west)Function: High-Speed Tolled Backbone for trips crossing MRR2


67/80

Function: High Speed Tolled Backbone for trips crossing MRR2Present: 3 lanes bottleneck @ NKVE + DUKE = slow moving 6K SOVsPotential: Fast point-to-point ERT bus @ all 4 lanes = 50K pax (10 sec headway) + fast moving 6K SOVs

Sg Buloh ITT KTM Interchange

Terminal @ Sentul Utara LRT extension

Cheras LRT

BTS

TTDI Jaya Bkt Jelutong

Lembah Subang LRT

Kota Damansara

Bdr Sri

Dmnsra

Segambut KTM


western suburbs

Upgrade to 4 lanes forNKVE stretch fromSubang Sg Buloh

Upgrade to 4 lanes forNKVE-Duta Highway

More terminals in the northern suburbs

Terminals Bays Dwell Time Pax/Bus Pax/Hr

Sentul (U) LRT 30 300 sec 70 25,200

Sg Buloh KTM 30 300 sec 70 25,200

Closed Expressway Arteries (downtown)Function: High-Speed Tolled Backbone for West Damansara-KL and East Ampang-KL corridors


68/80

Function: High Speed Tolled Backbone for West Damansara KL and East Ampang KL corridorsPresent: 6 lanes bottleneck @ Jln Duta/Mahameru + AKLEH = slow moving 12K SOVsPotential: BET 2-deck bus @ all lanes = 36K pax + 12K SOVs(Point-to-point BET for West Damansara, Skip-Stop BET for East Ampang)

AM Tidal Wave

lane for buses only

Extra lane constructionfor BET along

Duta/Mahameru


KL Sentral 10 150 sec 100 24,000

Dang Wangi 5 150 sec 100 12,000

BET lanes for access toeach terminals around

west Damansara


Sri Hartamas 3 150 sec 100 7,200

Penchala 3 150 sec 100 7,200

Damansara Utama 3 150 sec 100 7,200

Mutiara Damansara 3 150 sec 100 7,200

Kota Damansara 3 150 sec 100 7,200

For each terminal, 2 bays for KL Sentral, 1 bay for others

2 BET buses move inconvoy every minute on

median contraflow BETlanes & stations

Potential HighDensity TODin Penchala

Ring Road Arteries (north and east)Function: Backbone for trips along the outer fringes of KL

BET on MRR2


69/80

Function: Backbone for trips along the outer fringes of KLPresent: Congestions along several stretches = slow moving 12K SOVs on 6 lanesPotential: Road pricing at congested stretches, 1 BET/min = fast moving 12K pax + 12K SOVs

Interchanges with other masstransit lines without exitingelevated MRR2 portions


MRR2 Clockwise 100 60 sec 6,000

MRR2 Anticlockwise 100 60 sec 6,000

BRT Line

Ring Road Arteries (west and south)Function: Backbone for trips along the outer fringes of KLPresent Se ere congestions along 14 lanes of NKVE and LDP slo mo ing 28K SOVs


70/80

Present: Severe congestions along 14 lanes of NKVE and LDP = slow moving 28K SOVsPotential: Kota Damansara Sri Petaling BRT (15K pax), ERT along NKVE and KESAS (25K pax)

Lembah Subang LRT

Kota Damansara

USJ Summit Kinrara

BTS

Direction Max Pax Headway Pax/Hr

Kota Damansara 130 60 sec 7,800

Sri Petaling 130 60 sec 7,800

Suburban Arteries (Kota Damansara) [Walking and Cycling Zone]Function: Connecting Kota Damansara residents with local activity centers and highways to other urban centersPresent: Kota Damansaras only access road to LDP is clogged (Persiaran Surian)


71/80

Present: Kota Damansara s only access road to LDP is clogged (Persiaran Surian)Potential: Kota Damansara Local Circulators which connect housing areas with activity centers in the east (Sunway Giza The Curve)and the west (potential RRI land development), and with ERT along NKVE, BET via SPRINT tunnel and K.Damansara-Sri Petaling BRT


K.Damansara Clockwise 70 300 sec 840

K.D'sara AntiClockwise 70 300 sec 840Bike lanes for access todeeper residential areas

Suburban Arteries (PJ)Function: Connecting suburban communitieswith local activity centers in Petaling Jaya


72/80

with local activity centers in Petaling JayaPresent: LDP and SPRINT traffic spills ontolocal roads on adjacent neighborhoodsPotential: 4 local BRT lines serving activitycenters in Bandar Utama, Kelana Jaya and PJ,connection with ERT along NKVE, BET viaSPRINT tunnel, K.Damansara-Sri Petaling BRT,

Fed.Hway & NPE BRTs, KJ LRT and Komuter

Bandar Utama Local CirculatorsHits housing catchments in Sg Penchala, TTDI and

Damansara Utama with Damansara Uptown and

Bandar Utama

Kelana Jaya Local CirculatorsHits housing catchments in SS3 with Commercial

Centers along LDP and links to Tmn Bahagia LRT

Petaling Jaya Local CirculatorsHits PJ housing catchments with activity centers in

SS2 Park, Sea Park and Downtown PJ, and links to

Fed.Hway BRT and Tmn Bahagia & Tmn Jaya LRT

PJ Old Town Local CirculatorsRejuvenates urban activities in PJ Old town, and links

south of PJ with Downtown PJ and Tmn Jaya LRT

Seri Setia Damansara Local LineConnects Sungai Way, Seri Setia and west Taman

Medan with Tmn Bahagia LRT and Damansara

Uptown

Direction Max Pax Headway Pax/Hr

Seri Setia 70 180 sec 1,400

Damansara Uptown 70 180 sec 1,400

Direction Max Pax Hway Pax/Hr

Bdr Utama/TTDI

Clockwise 70

180

sec 1,400

Bdr Utama/TTDI

AntiClockwise 70

180

sec 1,400


Kelana Jaya Clockwise 70 300 sec 840

K.Jaya AntiClockwise 70 300 sec 840

Direction Max Pax Hway Pax/HrP.Jaya Clockwise 70 180 sec 1,400

P.Jaya AntiClockwise 70 180 sec 1,400

Bike lanesfor accessto deeperresidential

areas

Suburban Arteries (Subang Jaya and Shah Alam)Function: Connecting Subang Jaya and Shah Alam residents with local activity centers and highways to other urban centersPresent: Congestion at Subang Jayas Persiaran Tujuan and Kewajipan (only access routes to southern dormitory areas from main


73/80

Direction

Max

Pax

Head

way

Pax/

Hour

S.A. Inner Loop

Clockwise 70

300

sec 840

S.A. Inner Loop

AntiClockwise 70

300

sec 840

S.A. Outer Loop

Clockwise 70

300

sec 840

S.A. Outer Loop

AntiClockwise 70

300

sec 840


TTDI Jaya 70 300 sec 840

iCity 70 300 sec 840


Bukit Jelutong 70 300 sec 840

Kota Kemuning 70 300 sec 840

Direction Max Pax Headway P ax/Hr

USJ16-Taipan-USJ20 70 300 sec 840

USJ20-Taipan-USJ16 70 300 sec 840

Subag Jaya Clockwise 70 180 sec 1,400

S.Jaya AntiClockwise 70 180 sec 1,400

Direction

Max

Pax

Head

way Pax /Hr

PBdrPuchong-

Summit-USJ2 70

300

sec 840

USJ2-Summit-

PBdrPuchong 70

300

sec 840

Present: Congestion at Subang Jaya s Persiaran Tujuan and Kewajipan (only access routes to southern dormitory areas from mainarterials of Fed.Hway, NPE and KESAS), Federal Highway (from Subang Jaya to PJ), NKVE (TTDI Jaya-K.Damansara stretch)Potential: Connects southern Subang Jaya suburbs with Taipan and commercial centers near Subang Jaya KTM, and links to ERT alongKESAS and BRT on NPE. Connects far-fetched suburbs of Bkt Jelutong, Setia Alam and Kota Kemuning with Shah Alam core centers,and open up access to ERT in NKVE and KESAS, BRT on Fed.Hway and Shah Alam KTM.

Bike lanesfor accessto deeperresidential

areas

TRANSIT CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICERapid Transit ExpectationLocal bus line services will overcome the publics poor typicalb i ti th h l t f t d d th t


74/80

bus service perception through employment of standards that

invites train-like user experience:

1. Identifiable stop names, directions and service lines

2. Service line is mostly bidirectional with cross-shelter

connectivity (if there is a need for orbital loop service, then

make it reversible/2-way loop: outer and inner loops)

3. Visually legible transit schedules and maps

4. Stand-behind-the-yellow-line rule and same-level boarding5. Vehicle stops at or slows down upon approaching the bus

shelter

6. Quiet cabin ambiance and stop announcements

Traffic Management StrategyQueue jumps and priority signals at traffic intersections and

bottlenecks

Bus bulb for high traffic areas (with normal bus curb, buses will

have problems merging back with traffic)

Yield-to-bus instruction signages for medium traffic areas

Bus stops must be separated from these other functions,

which need exclusive spaces on their own:

1. Residential pick up and drop off2. Car-pool / Hitch-hike-from-house-to-busstop-club zone

3. Taxi pick up and drop off

4. Temporary space for chartered buses to occupy

Active TransportCurrent circuitous local and feeder bus routes can be made

simpler with the availability of bicycle lanes and electric bikes

for folks in many residential areas.

Multimodality can be enhanced with bike racks at all stops.

Traffic calming measures and pedestrian-friendly suburbanroad layouts (that allow greater pedestrian accessibility,

connectivity and convenience), residents in deeper and sparser

neighbourhoods can cycle get to the nearest bus stop

Pedestrian Priority Measures

M t i ti it


75/80

Measures to increase connectivityNMT (Non-Motorized Transport) shortcuts for manmadeand natural obstacles like waterways, motorways andhillsNMT-only short cuts between disconnected street layoutNavigation for pedestrians to estimate location of transit

points and destinations

Measures to reduce conflict pointsSignals differentiated for vehicle class (motor vehicles,buses, bikes, pedestrian)

Exclusive pedestrian and cycling pathwaysTurning and parking restrictions for cars reduce conflicts

Traffic calming measures to reduce car-NMT speeddifference

Measures to integrate bikes and and transitBike racks at bus stops.

Shower rooms, lockers, and other amenities at stations.Bike rentals and sharing programs

At grade crossings to reach transit without complicated barriers, stairs and gates

Non-Motorized Transport


76/80

Density and plot ratio can be increased when traffic planners take into account non-motorized transport as means to get around places. Singapores Land Transport Authorityhas published a guideline on users who would want to join in the Fold it and Ride it crowd.http://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdf

When buses dont have to go deeper into neighborhoods (due to pedestrian and bike

connectivity), services can be made faster, more frequent and more reliable.

But local councils must play a greater role in planning for pedestrians and cyclists,especially in providing traffic speed and parking restraint measures (no one wants to walkor cycle when the perceived danger of being overrun by unexpected motorists is there).

10-mins walking requirement that planners always put to calculate direct catchment ofcommuters around any particular transit nodes (whether bus or rail) can be expanded withbike lanes. Since a leisurely cycling effort can cover as much as three times the distance asfast walking, even non-electric bikes can be the perfect answer to solve the glaring 1st

mile connectivity problem.

There should be a conversion in bylaws that strictly enforce 40km/h on streets classified asaccess roads and secondary collector/distributor roads, and allow/encourage motorized andnon-motorized bicycles to be used on these types of roads.

Barrier-Free Travel

Pedestrian linkages should be made wheelchair accessible. Paratransit services

complement the needs of seniors and the disabled for deeper residential areas noteffectively served by rapid local bus lines.

For greater independence, paratransitvans can still shuttle non-bike users tothe nearest local transit stops wherelow floor vehicles ply (local bus/BRT/LRT)

Main Arteries (Klang)Function: Connecting Klang with surrounding satelite townsPresent: Congestion at downtown due to heavy pass thru traffic from Federal Highway
http://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdfhttp://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdfhttp://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdfhttp://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdfhttp://www.smrt.com.sg/upload/Foldable_Bicycle_Regulations.pdf


77/80

g y p g yPotential: Three BRT lines that merge at downtown, with connection to Klang KTM and Fed.Hway BRT


78/80

Downtown Kuala Lumpur [Walking Zone]Function: The nucleus that acts as gravity center for all activity centers within Greater KLPresent: Congestion. Poor pedestrian permeability and safety. Lots of parking spaces.


79/80

g p p y y p g pPotential: Increase the strength of the downtown core by levying vehicle parking and entry restrictions/charges, motorcycle ban, andcreate more pedestrian and transit malls, where businesses thrive due to higher foot traffic and lesser motor vehicles

KLIFDCochrane

Greenfield Devt

Govt Complexes

Govt andCommercial

Centers

ACCOMMODATEPEDESTRIAN AT THE

EXPENSE OF CARS, NOTVICE VERSA

Pedestrian bridges must bereplaced with at grade

crossings within KLs CBD

Urban

renewal and

densification

along

parallel LRT-

KTM zones

Dispersal to

East KL BRT

Dispersal to

North KL BRT

Potential Devt

UrbanRenewalTOD and

densification

TOD and

densification

1M Tower

Finally Kota Damansara Raja Chulan Desa Pandan MRTFunction: Move 160K pax along the corridorPresent: Straight BRT corridor to Kota Damansara is impossible via SPRINT due to geographical challenges, and extension of direct


80/80

BRT corridor to Pandan dormitory area is impossible due to presence of golf clubPotential: Very high density TOD along the new MRT corridor, especially Tropicana Golf Club, KGPA, Selangor Royal Golf Club andhigher density urban renewal around Masjid Jamek, Bukit Nanas and Imbi.

201012 transit's proposal for greater kl's public transport master plan

Documents