mass transit improvement proposal

8/8/2019 Mass Transit Improvement Proposal

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mass-transit-improvement-proposal 1/4

Dear Editor,

The news that our Prime Minister acknowledges the deteriorating state of KTM Komuterand RapidKL LRTs this morning proves that there is still a glimmer of hope that ourmass transit will be improved. No transport minister officials have ever cared to ‘turunpadang’ during rush hours to discover our mass transit problems, and PM’s surprise visitcouldn’t be timelier. I suggest other leaders to follow suit in doing whatever they can tosee firsthand how the caretakers are responding to the people’s need to the extent of doing a surprise ‘turun padang’, the way the great Islamic leader, Caliph Umar did for hisconstituents. If only the PM himself would try the RapidKL buses next time as not allpopulations are served by the existing rail services.

I believe there has to be a greater understanding of how mass transit can improve ourlives before we blurt out quick-fix suggestions to address concerns highlighted by

different stakeholders. Knee-jerk reactions such as the wrongful retraction of subsidy toRapidKL few weeks ago show the lack of understanding among our caretakers on thetrue objective of having an effective and efficient mass transit system.

CERTAIN THINGS ARE BEST TO BE SHARED

Look at the things we use daily around us that we share with others. The streets,boulevards, street lamps, trash, fire and police services are among the things we sharethrough our pooled tax contributions. If we live in a high-rise apartment, we are expectedto be collectively responsible for maintaining the shared lifts because we definitely can'tafford to have individual lifts that stop directly in front of our door bells.

Mass transit, in the same way, behaves in a collective manner. If most of us think weshould get to where we want to be individually, then there will not be enough incentivefor a pooled fund to be set up for the purpose of mass transit.

Most of us have been used to driving our own private vehicles because getting around hasbeen nothing short of affordable to be done individually, until our pursuit for betterlifestyle ends us up in population density boom, widespread urban sprawling, costlypublic road infrastructure build-ups and patching, massive traffic jams, and lately, sky-rocketing fuel prices, ruining our collective productivities and in the end backfires on ourindividualistic pursuit for a more urbane lifestyle.

TIME TO SHARE FOR OUR OWN SAKE

Every single additional road space taken by a new road user will eat out another user'sspace. It is a no-nonsense zero-sum game. If we can pool our resources together to buildsidewalks, streetlamps and city streets, why it is hard for us to get the same allocation tobuild an integrated mass transit system that can utilize the shared sidewalks, streetlampsand city streets more efficiently. We don't have to worry about beating each other for thescarce road space we’ve got.



If we think public transport operators (and hence, users) should privately bear all of thecosts related to mass transit infrastructures, system and operations, then we shouldremind ourselves that a majority of all that costs are as result of our collective lack of

concern towards sharing. Beating the traffic individually means creating more air andsound pollution, more productivity losses, more preventable injuries and fatalities andlesser quality of life for every single user that depends on the same traffic area. Lookslike all these while, the public transport users are the ones who have been subsidizing thesociety by enduring all the hassles so that scarce road spaces can be freed up for privatevehicle users.

If we think mass transit thrives in the presence of competition without governmentalinterference, then remember the single biggest competitor to mass transit is privatetransport (cars, MPVs, SUVs, motorbikes, trucks etc). Private transport monopolizesmost of the government-funded infrastructure that mass transit relies on.

Not just infrastructure, but other types of mass transit support like enforcement, licensing,route rationalization, fare system, feedback management and public information relay atthe local and federal level are currently under complicated and overlapping jurisdictionsof different government agencies (EPU, Transport Ministry, CVLB, MECD, JPJ, CityHall, PDRM, JKR, LLM etc), all working in silo. Without well-coordinated mass transitsupport, there can be no accountability, and without key performance indicators toachieve and no systems to rely on, mass transit operators have no choice other than to cutcorners to survive.

If we think public transport operators and users should privately bear all the costs related

to mass transit infrastructures, systems and operations, then we should remind ourselvesthat our scarce public roads are disproportionately taken up by private vehicles which donot incur the full costs it generates for society: infrastructure, wear and tear, pollution,congestion, accidents and productivity loss.

That is why fare revenues only make up one-third of a typical transit system’s operatingbudget in most well-developed countries. The rest are made up by taxpayers’ money.Academic study in the United States has shown that every $1 invested in publictransportation projects generates from $4 to $9 in local economic activity.

Without sufficient government funding, there is no way the current independent mass

transit operators will be able to take away the lure of motorcycles. MIROS has recentlyanticipated higher road deaths from rapid increase in the number of motorcyclists on theroad since the recent massive petrol price hike. It is imperative for the government toincrease mass transit coverage through full incorporation of bus services as part of thetransportation modes to be listed for improvement in the 2009 Budget. Riding a transitbus is 79 times safer than riding a car, let alone a motorcycle.

Our caretakers are the people we elect and trust to channel our pooled contributionstowards things that are better off shared and instead of using taxpayers money for publictransport, our caretakers have been channeling the money for superfluous purposes such



as the recent purchase of Mercedes by Terengganu assemblymen. Scarce available landstrips have been given out to private entities to make profit out of highwayconcessionaires at the expense of those who cannot afford to pay the toll fee whose

traveling paths have been made more time consuming, tedious and complicated due totraffic competition in non-tolled roads.

Tolled expressways zigzag across dense suburban populations, dividing neighboringcommunities and complicating the already complex traveling routes outside of the limitedaccess highway system. This will hamper efforts to create a fast, efficient and effectivemass transit system for all of us.

If the government can be so generous in allowing more expensive roads and highways tobe build to increase societal benefits of connectivity, why can’t it use a portion of itspooled resources to support an economical yet integrated mass transit system, which

include all modes of transport including buses, high speed trains, electronic moving units,monorails and light rail transits, to prevent higher societal costs of congestion?

To illustrate, 30 buses are more than capable to relieve the maximum amount of free flowtraffic that the 1.2 billion ringgit AKLEH (Ampang-KL Elevated Highway) can sustain atany one time. With combined ‘park-n-ride’ capacity of 10,000, the parking bays in ShahAlam and Bukit Jalil Stadiums can render all three KESAS, NKVE and ELITEexpressways empty from any private vehicles. These are possible in existence of anintegrated and effective mass rapid transit system under the full power of exclusivetransit authorities to provide sufficient infrastructural and operational support at bothlocal and federal levels.

*10,000 is the maximum number of fast traveling cars that the combined lanes of the KESAS, NKVE and ELITE expressways cansupport at any one time (780km of highway lanes with smooth 100kph traffic speed) , considering the 100 feet (30m) safe travelingdistance (using the 3 second rule under good road conditions) between cars averaging 5m in length and 40kph in speed. AKLEH has32km of individual traffic lanes, and one double-decker express bus can put 60 cars off r oad.

LRT expansions will not be able to effectively increase Klang Valley’s overall masstransit penetration and acceptance due to its limited coverage and slow inbound andoutbound journeys with too many stops. Furthermore, the current limited lines indowntown areas can’t hold the additional capacity expected by the expansions.

Since we have an excellent network of limited access free flow expressways around

Klang Valley, we can virtually consider these expressways as expressway rapid transit(ERT) ‘tracks’ with ERT buses as ‘trains’. Bus ‘stations’ can be built on top of these‘tracks’ at identified strategic transit points with high suburban population, and busterminals for suburban feeder bus services together with depots and car parks can bebuild inside the suburban area and next to the ERT points so that transit time can be cutshort. Three strategic Kuala Lumpur gateway points for ERT buses can be created at KLSentral/MidValley, Imbi and Sentul Timur with dedicated bus ramps to Jalan Travers-Jalan Duta (heading to NKVE and NPE), KL-Putrajaya, and DUKE expresswaysrespectively. These gateway points should be conveniently linked to Ampang and KelanaJaya LRT Lines, KL Monorail, and high frequency busway rapid transit with limitedroutes and dedicated lanes. Dang Wangi LRT Station can be the main gateway point that



caters ERT from Ampang as it sits strategically at the west end point of the AKLEH. Tofill up demand during rush hours, express bus operators should be allowed to bid forperiodical contract to serve as ERT buses.

In a nutshell, all stakeholders of mass transit must take into consideration of thefollowing in their efforts to improve mass transit in the long term:

Mass transit should not be seen as means of travel for those who can’t affordprivate transport anymore, as the entire population can no longer afford to neglectmass transit

Investment (oftentimes wrongfully implied as subsidy) in mass transitinfrastructure, operations and systems has to be coordinated by transit authoritieswith social, economic and environmental wellbeing as the bigger picture

Mass transit infrastructure needs proper support at the local level as the singlebiggest mean of accessing public transport is walking, and local council has all of the means to ensure accessibility and ease of mobility for all sections of thesociety, including the disabled, senior citizens, pregnant ladies and young children

Instead of the zero-sum game the current private operators, public-fundedcompanies (RapidKL and KTMB) and government agencies are playing with,there must be fair allocation of risks and responsibilities between operators andauthorities, and non-discriminating distribution of tax revenue and fee income toadequately cover urban population’s transport needs

The government must not abandon the principles of transparency, goodgovernance and public participation in moving our mass transit forward.

The longer we choose to ignore the problem, the harder for the problem to be cured in thefuture. We deserve our rights to get around to where we want to be in a truly shared,caring manner. Enough of the wild goose chase. Effective, integrated rapid transit is theanswer we must seek from our caretakers. Hopefully the Prime Minister’s surprise visitindicates a positive sign that the government has the political will to put this country’smass transit on the right track.

M Zulkarnain HamzahAssociation for Improvement of Mass Transit (TRANSIT) Klang Valley

mass transit improvement proposal

Documents