Proposal for Selangor's Klang Valley Metropolitan Growth and Transport

Coordination Board Cadangan untuk Badan Penyelaras Pembangunan dan Pengangkutan Wilayah

Lembah Klang

Prepared by:

Muhammad Zulkarnain Hamzah Co-founder of TRANSIT (Association for the Improvement of Mass-Transit)

17 August 2015

Problem Statement Urban transportation problems have been plaguing the Klang Valley for decades. Unsurprisingly, the

World Bank, in its June 2015 economic monitoring report outlined urban sprawl, high motorization rates

and inadequate public transport as factors to congestion and low usage of public transport in the Klang

Valley that result in nearly RM7 billion of losses per year. Lack of unified planning is blamed, and

metropolitan-level coordination, sustainable financing tools and car-restraint efforts are suggested.

In countries with active public transport culture, transportation planning has always been the domain of

middle and lower-level governments. The principle of transport and land use feedback cycle (additional

transport improves accessibility, which attracts more land uses, which generates more activities, and

require more transport) necessitates transportation and land use planning to be conducted iteratively

and laterally (instead of leaving the former to central agency). The ball is in the hands of the Selangor

state government to curb the present urban sprawl, which stands as the biggest factor to auto-

dependency, as development and transportation approvals within Klang Valleys suburban

municipalities that surround KL are under the jurisdictions of the state and the local authorities.

High cost of highway-driven sprawl

Selangor is a very urbanized state with 92% of its population living in built-up urban areas (21% of total

gross land area) in 2012. Within 10 years leading to 2012, the total built-up area in the state increased

by about 20% (Appendices 1 and 2). If the sprawling rate continues at this rate, by 2062, half of the

state would have been lost to urbanization, which would not only cause serious transportation and

economic ramifications, but social and environmental tragedies as well.

Imagine the proliferation of crime-ridden ghettos in poor, inaccessible neighbourhoods that suffer from

social immobility caused by inequitable access to KL-centric mass transit which mostly serve high-end

developments. Picture the worsening quality of life due to increasing traffic pollutions, collisions and

deaths, when the present death rate (2014) already on par with the bottom list of 3rd world nations.

Think of what the rampant deforestation of our already shrinking green lungs will do to magnify the heat

island effect, promote insect-borne diseases (due to dearth of natural predators) and ignite water run-

off disasters such as landslide and flash flooding.

Klang Valley should have its own urban growth boundary to avoid new housing developments and

highways from expanding and choking the region. Growth in population, employment and retail

activities should occur within existing corridors earmarked for frequent public transport, through

upward (instead of outward) land use intensification activities. Targets should be firmed up, and

commitments from all local councils must be sought to encourage cooperation for long-term growth

sustainability and discourage competition for short-term development windfalls. The maturing suburbs

already show signs of aging, and dependence on revenues from newer, far-flung growth to cover up

(roads, pipes, drains, sewers etc) maintenance shortfall in older suburbs is never a sustainable solution.

Limited range of movement for non-motorized transport

Limited access highways create limited access neighbourhoods with poor pedestrian and public

transport connectivity. This creates a situation where localities have greater car-oriented access to

regional centers tens of miles away, and weaker non-motorized access to their adjacent neighbouring

areas just a few meters away. Dominance of high-speed highways coupled with proliferation of higher

density developments along the regional highways further distorts regional-to-local public transport

alignments. There is a lack of coherence in local-to-regional development corridors and hierarchies.

Great cities with vibrant places and efficient public transport have one thing in common: they have a

refined grid pattern of road network that supports both walking and transit use. To head northwest, one

would only head north (once) and then west (once). Since post-merdeka motorization era, our

labyrinthine roadways and dead-ends have been constructed to facilitate speed, reduce stop-and-go

motions and promote high-density developments that exude lifestyle exclusivity (Figure 1). One would

have to head south, east, north and finally west (sometimes repeatedly) for the aforementioned trip,

which totally undermines the basic principle of public transport and pedestrian behavior.

KUALA LUMPUR

Figure 1: Comparison of street blocks shows the lack of pedestrian-friendliness of KL streets

Figure 2: Importance of maximizing pedestrian circulation coverage around public transport nodes

The effective walking coverage (Figure 2) of many of street intersections in Klang Valley is very

problematic, due to the meandering path pedestrians have to endure to reach local destinations:

1. Road designs that speed up motor vehicles and limit pedestrian movement (e.g. wide street

corners and ramps, lack of sidewalks and crossings)

2. Facilities that lack pedestrian activity and safety (e.g. blank walls, lonely pedestrian bridges)

3. Land uses with footprints that narrow the range of pedestrian circulation (e.g. single access

neighbourhoods, gated communities, exclusive condo developments which deny their adjacent

housing blocks direct access to the nearest public transport node)

4. Placement of regional infrastructure that disrupts synergy with potentially efficient local or

semi-regional bus lines (e.g. state/municipal approval of MRT station placement at mid-blocks

instead of at street intersections where bus lines intersect, approval of highways that blocks

pedestrian connection between separated neighbourhoods, etc.)

The factors that lead to meandering local pedestrian trips to public transport nodes are very local in

context, and hence local council leadership and stewardship in protecting the publics rights of way are

required. Currently, local plans do not touch on local public transport network synergy, which should

actually be a prerequisite to designing a metropolitan-wide network synergy in the Klang Valley. Federal

MRT, LRT and BRT planning to rectify what should be both a regional and local issue is insufficient

without local public transport network planning.

Lack of local-to-regional spatial and transport integration planning

Currently, Selangors structure and local plans do not have a refined view on how an integrated public

transport and urban intensification network should be formed in the Valley, other than conceptual

linkages between the city center (KLs CBD) and the regions suburban gravity centers (subcenters), and

among the regions subcenters (Appendix 3). In reality, other than downtown KL, regional subcenters

are very scatterred, sparsed and sprawled, with weakly observable clusters of office, retail and

commercial buildings that are hard to be distinguished from other sparser clusters of towers and

complexes (Appendix 4).

A successful public transport (transit) network depends on both local and regional public transport

network efficiency, which depends on these three core factors (Figure 3, 4):

1. Effective coverage of pedestrian network on each transit node, which involves placement of

stop nearest to intersection, and the permeability of the surrounding pedestrian network itself

2. Directness and frequency of each transit route, which avoids treating frequent, time-bound

commuters as relaxed and sight-seeing tourists

3. Synergy of the resulting frequent and simplified network, which yields greater overall access to

destinations than the sum of each route

Without meaningful deliniation of regional subcenters and local bus networks, it would be hard for

planners to plan for bus routes at the local level. These routes tend to be mere feeders to the federally-

planned regional rapid transit system. Feeders tend to be excessively meandering, and their objective

tends to fit regional, rather than local goals. These routes do not fit the round-the-clock activities that

local private vehicle modes capture, as feeder buses main job is only to feed to the regional system.

Figure 3: Straight-forward, frequent and focused lines instead of indirect, infrequent and dispersing lines

A catch-22 bad service-low ridership syndrome occurs when buses meander too much to capture riders,

riders avoid arduous bus trips, buses run with longer headway due to low ridership, more riders avoid

infrequent buses, and fewer buses meander even more areas due to revenue shortfall.

Figure 4: Network synergy, emphasizing strategic connections and reduced redundancies

Solutions This proposal recommends the Selangor state government to adopt international best practices in

controlling urban sprawl through iterative transportation and growth planning. An inter-PBT body with

regulatory powers would plan for delineation of urban growth boundary and regional subcenters. The

body would seek conformances of local planning activities to avoid greenfield developments from

encroaching protected agricultural and nature reserves beyond the planned urban growth boundary

(Appendix 1's inset), and direct new, infill and brownfield developments in existing regional subcenters

and along public transport lines that connect these subcenters together (Figure 5).

Facilitator for collaboration between municipalities

The long-term goal is for all municipalities which represent contiguous built-up land developments (the

continuous patch of lights that you can see from an airplane at night) in the Valley to form a cross-

supervisory metropolitan growth and transportation planning board. The inter-PBT board would have

vested powers to release or withhold public transportation subsidies depending on municipal

conformance to agreed growth boundary and growth intensification shares, and would consist of

elected local councilors with decision-making weightage proportionately tied to the municipal

distribution of the Valley's population. Refer to Table 1 for an example of regional growth share targets.

Selangor can start initiating this with its own municipalities prior to Wilayah Persekutuan joining. The

polycentric growth and movement patterns of the Valley's suburban city centers (e.g. PJ, SJ, SA, BBB)

proves that the suburban municipalities yield a greater influence than Wilayah Persekutuan in charting

the future metropolitan growth and travel pattern in the Valley. This inter-PBT board would facilitate

transparent and representational inter-PBT consensus-building process of setting up anti-sprawl and

pro-transit targets for the Valley. The board would also create an accountability framework that

monitors alignment of PBT plans with the boards Regional Growth and Transportation Strategy.

Lembah

Klang

Rapid Transit (RT): MRT, LRT, BRT, Komuter

Tempatan

Jaringan Bas Kerap Tempatan (BKT)

Kejiranan

Laluan Basikal Kejiranan

Van/Bas Mini Kejiranan

Rideshare/Kongsi-naik-Kereta (KnK) ke BKT/RT

Jalan Perumah

an

Jaringan jalan mesra pejalan kaki

Table 1: Example of regional housing growth targets in Metro Vancouver, Canada

The role of the board would be to deliver and monitor Klang Valleys Regional Growth and

Transportation Strategy, and this requires intense consensus-building with each local council on:

1. Clear demarcation of regional urban growth boundary and regional subcenters/local centers

2. Alignments and interchanges of frequent local buses with each other, and with regional RT stations,

that best meet the region's public transport network synergy

3. Alignments and interchanges of frequent local buses with feeding minibuses/vans and cycling paths,

that best meet the municipalities' local public transport network synergy

4. Clear demarcation of local subcenters and intensification areas adjacent to the frequent bus lines, and

the strategic designation/placement of these intensification areas should positively impact the resulting

local public transport network synergy (Note that iteration no.2, 3 and 4 can be repeated)

5. Setting up of zoning and development policies in these intensification areas, including requirements for

higher Floor Area Ratio (with harmonious transition to surrounding urban fabric), pedestrian-friendly

retail uses on the ground floor facing the main streets and pedestrian shortcuts, and measures related to

increasing pedestrian network permeability

6. Reconfiguration of streets to reduce travel time for local buses (queue jumps, priority traffic signals, bus-

only turns) and pedestrians (sharper junctions, pedestrian priority crossings, shortcuts)

7. Prioritization of pedestrian-friendly arterials over limited-access highways that best protect the region's

public transport network synergy and pedestrian network permeability

8. Formulation of sustainable and equitable funding strategy that are resilient to temporal and

geographical circumstances

Planning for Growth via Public Transport Network Synergy

Among the best metropolitan growth and transportation integration plan in the Anglophone world is

Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy (MV-RGS). The plan allocates growth intensification shares

to not only (hierarchical) urban centers, but also to areas around rapid transit stations and along lines of

frequent transit (which forms the regional Frequent Transit Network or FTN). Please refer to Figure 5 for

the region's FTN (in orange) and urban centers (in grey).

Buses that run every 15-mins or less on grid-based FTN are considered frequent transit. Transit-oriented

intensification areas along the FTN are called Frequent Transit Development Area (FTDA). Metro

Vancouver region designates areas 400m along the FTN as potential FTDA, and each municipality is

required to specify its detailed FTDA projects every few years (through its detailed plan not dissimilar to

our Rancangan Kawasan Khas or RKK).

Figure 5: Metro Vancouvers frequent transit network with urban centers in grey (LEFT), Surreys local

transit network plan with detailed Frequent Transit Development Area planning in red (RIGHT)

The same concept can be applied. A frequent public transport network can be formed through simplified

and interconnected Frequent Local Bus (Bas Kerap Tempatan or BKT) lines. These lines, when connected

together, should resemble as close as possible to a highly-efficient linearized grid, called the Frequent

Local Bus Network (Jaringan BKT or JBKT). A JBKT must not necessarily be confined within a municipal

boundary, as many urban activities occurring along municipal edges involve trips from neighbouring

municipalities (e.g. Uptown Damansara in Petaling Jaya and Bdr Baru Puchong in Subang Jaya).

Due to Klang Valleys labyrinthine road network, a grid-based JBKT would have to be supplemented with

minibuses (Bas Mini/Van Kejiranan) that serve neighbourhoods with indirect pedestrian access points. A

BKT line would have a frequency of 10-mins or less, and the resulting network would connect regional

subcenters (e.g. PJ New Town) with local subcenters (e.g. PJ Old Town) and MRT/LRT/BRT stations (e.g.

Stesen Tmn Jaya). The targeted intensification areas along these lines would be called Frequent Transit

Intensification Area, or Kawasan Tumpuan Pembangunan berpaksikan Transit Kerap (KTPAT).

Areas around regional RT stations also fall under KTPAT. As regional rapid transit is run by Federally-

owned agencies (Prasarana, MRT Corp), they would be expected to coup as much value from

investments surrounding LRT and MRT stations, but PBTs would still be responsible to ensure these

most likely high-end developments would not limit station access to pedestrians from adjacent areas.

Pedestrian network permeability

Local council is the best agent to implement strategies to expand effective walk shed coverage of bus

stops and RT stations, and shorten walking time and distance among local destinations. Most of the

problems to pedestrian network permeability are due to miscalculations done prior to development

maturity (e.g. approvals for massive development footprints, winding roads without pedestrian

shortcuts), but there are plenty of ways to rectify past miscalculations.

Strategies to expand the range of pedestrian movement or circulation around public transport nodes:

1. Introduction of local traffic system that

encourages stop-and-go motions for

greater pedestrian's 3S (security from

traffic and crime, speed of entire

walking journey, and simplicity of

movement)

2. Provision of sidewalk on both sides of

the street, and pedestrian crossing

opportunities at all corners of the street

junction

3. Provision of hazard-free sidewalk

through evenly laid-out pavement and

ramp, human-scaled trees (with easily-

maintained and non-threatening

branches and roots) and clear line of

sight towards the front and across the

road (without obstructions such as

street furniture, traffic curbs and angled

parking lots)

4. Provision of at-grade pedestrian

crossing opportunities that correspond

to potential pedestrian vibrancy along

distributor and arterial corridors

especially for roads with four lanes or

less

5. Requirement of mid and high-rise

developers to build 'Privately-Owned

Publicly-Accessible Spaces' (POPS) and

promenades that cross over highways

to reconnect separated neighbourhoods

Figure 6: Example of pedestrian permeability

improvement

6. Integration of standalone pedestrian underpasses and

overpasses into large, wheelchair-friendly building complexes, with retail

lots or kiosks along the routes and unrestricted street level entrance at

each road side and junction corner to avoid the feel of being trapped in a

pedestrian 'rat-maze'

7. Enforcement of lower traffic speed that corresponds to potential

pedestrian vibrancy along distributor and arterial corridors, with bold

speed limit signs erected every few hundred meters

8. Introduction of traffic calming measures such as raised crossings,

pedestrian islands, side bollards and formalized 'woenerf' street

designations where roads are treated as communal space

9. Breaking up of larger street blocks into smaller blocks with

inviting land uses and non-blank facades fronting the pedestrian path (e.g.

Figure 6 and 7)

Figure 7: Imagine the potential increased in accessibility and

densification of PJ New Town if Jalan Sultan that connects the center

with Tmn Bhg LRT station is converted into a vibrant pedestrian

throughway

Strategies to reduce threats to pedestrian safety and security:

1. Tightening up angles of street junctions to enforce pedestrian's right-of-way for turning vehicles, and

force drivers to abide to stop signs prior approaching non-signalized intersections

2. Erection of bold yield-to-pedestrian surface marks and sign posts at at-grade crossings, with ancillary

features (mandatory stop sign, display of maximum fine amount, flashing signal) that correspond to risk of

traffic violation

3. Encouragement of formal retail kiosks to flourish and diversify along pedestrian shortcuts, highway

pedestrian bridges or tunnels between bus stop/RT station and housing clusters, in order to beef up

walkway liveliness and security

4. Requirement for gated communities to provide multiple access routes to important destinations through

CCTV or card-only access points (only if the gated area does not block its adjacent land-use clusters from

walking to the nearest PT stop)

5. Requirement for regular patrolling (in cars or bikes) in order to be more responsive to snatch thefts in

neighbourhoods with isolated or lonely pedestrian sidewalks

6. Requirement for all-way stop signs at all critical local street junctions would not only encourage

pedestrian-friendly traffic flow, but also enable residents and patrol cars/bikes to easily spot potentially

escaping and speeding criminals who will most likely beat the stop signs

Revenue stream to fix sprawl-driven housing, transport and social issues

There are multiple ways to increase revenue to fund the implementation of the Klang Valleys Regional

Growth and Transportation Strategy. Popular funding measures implemented around the world are

congestion charges, licensing fees, employer levies, fuel surcharges, carbon taxes, mileage-based fees,

municipal fines, parking fees and property taxes. The last three measures are best suited for the

proposed inter-PBT body, as their spatial specificity and rate scalability make them politically viable.

Table 2 proposes five streams of revenue to fund the inter-PBT body's implementation activities.

The implementation activities can be tied back to municipal commitments to growth conformances. The

inter-PBT body should issue periodical progress reports of shares of housing, retail and employment

growth that occur within the identified subcenters and KTPAT. Municipalities would risk penalties or

withhold of infrastructure upgrades from the state government if they failed to conform to the agreed

urban growth boundary or the intensification share targets. However, land use indicator is simply not

enough to justify the success of the implementation activities.

Revenue Stream

Purpose Rate Significance Examples

Metropolitan Property Tax

Fund purpose-built non-market rental housing for low-income households within KTPAT (Subsidy rate depends on household income and work disability status)

Steeply progressive rates on cumulative assessment value (in excess of Klang Valley's median assessment value threshold) of all owned residential properties within metropolitan borders

Curbs speculation, promotes social equity, protects affordability and avoids cheaper fringe housing developments

Metro Vancouver taxes residents for regional housing and transit

Metropolitan Land Value Tax (LVT)

Fund road re-configuration projects for permeable pedestrian network

Fund construction and maintenance of bus queue jumps, priority signals

Fixed rate on cumulative land value (in excess of Klang Valley's median land value threshold) of all owned landed property within metropolitan borders

Reduce the amount of public-funded local transportation improvements that is privately captured

LVT is generally applied in Denmark, Hong Kong, Singapore

Community Contribution Charge

Require developers to build lively POPS or retail tunnels over/underneath highways to re-connect neighbourhoods

Entire construction cost of pedestrian connector that cut across highways

Expand effective radius of walkable distance from public transport next to highways

City of Vancouver, City of Toronto

Maintenance Fee on Highway Concessionaire

Direct accountability to highway concessionaires to dismantle pedestrian barriers to public transport

Entire maintenance cost of pedestrian connector that cut across highways

Highway Maintenance Specification in BC, Canada

Revenue Stream

Purpose Rate Significance Examples

Property Tax on Parking (only in KTPAT areas)

Cover shortfall of federal subsidy/fare collection of frequent bus lines (BKT)

Fund bike lanes, smaller van/bas kejiranan

Incentivize rideshare-to-bus stop service for severely isolated neighbourhoods

Fixed rate on total parking surface area; rate tripled for open-sky lots

Reduce traffic demand along routes served by frequent buses, increase real land utilization and productivity

City of Montreal

Municipal Parking (only in KTPAT areas)

On-street parking rate of around 2-to-5cents/min depending on proximity to bus line, prepaid amount payable by SMS

Most transit-friendly cities in Europe and North America

Traffic-related Fines

Fund regular patrolling of local pedestrian network (can be done simultaneously with traffic enforcement)

Heavy penalty for illegal parking and failure to yield to pedestrians, with constant enforcement in KTPAT areas

Encourage walking safety and traffic discipline

>20% of property taxes go to local police in Canadian cities

Table 2: Sustainable funding measures for regional public transport and land use improvements

Travel behavior indicator, especially mode share, would be typically measured by SPAD, and the inter-

PBT body should work with SPAD to determine transportation performance measures that best fit the

local context. Currently, regional modal share is measured for inter-zonal peak hour commute at

selective transport hubs and cordon points. Extensive GIS pinpointing and travel diary-based Origin-

Destination survey, which would require higher sampling and interview costs, can measure round-the-

clock trip behavior at the local level. This gives a richer and relevant data to local councils in measuring

their implementation activities, such as share of bicycling or walking trips under 2km in Shah Alam or

share of bus trips made within 20 minutes to Kajang City Centre.

Appendix 1: Klang Valleys ten years of urban sprawl, and example (INSET) of Urban Growth Boundary

as practiced in Portland, United States

Appendix 2: Committed developments that will lead to even more sprawl

Appendix 3: Conceptual development corridors among conceptual subcenters with resemblance to

neither existing nor potential public transport network

Appendix 4: Scattered retail and commercial activities, implying the lack of prominent subcenters across

Klang Valley