Trams for Kuala Lumpur? Evidently Light Metro Did Not Reduce Congestion!

Interesting news from Kuala Lumpur, transit experts urge that trams be used.

Kuala Lumpur already has an elevated RT line; a ART (SkyTrain) Line and an monorail, now transit authorities urge trams!

The key phrase; “…….the mode of transportation could also reduce vehicles on the road and simultaneously solve traffic congestion in Kuala Lumpur especially in city centres which are areas of focus.“. Interesting because the grade separated, mostly elevated light-metro evidently have not!

Planners in Kuala Lumpur have now found that the only way to reduce congestion is to reduce road space and by using tram or LRT operating at grade, reduces road space with quality transit.

How many billions of dollars must be spent in metro Vancouver before our politicians and planning bureaucrats come to the same conclusion!

The puny Bombardier ART mini-metro just doesn’t have the

right stuff to curb congestion!

Experts back proposed tram service in KL

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 23 ai??i?? Town planning experts have voiced support for the proposed tram service in Kuala Lumpur for which the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) will conduct a feasibility study.

The new mode of transport, they said, would encourage more city folks to use public transportation and help ease congestion in the nationai??i??s capital.

Malaysian Institute of Planners (MIP) vice president Noraida Saludin said tram rails which are built on roads do not use any structure so surrounding areas will not be affected during construction work.

ai???We do not want any more constructions of elevated structures as they interfere with the strength of existing buildings as well as affect the aesthetics of an area,ai??? she told Bernama.

She said with the current sophisticated technology available, trams need not use cables such as the modern trams in Copenhagen, Denmark and Paris, France and are environment-friendly as they had low carbon emissions.

Noraida said the mode of transportation could also reduce vehicles on the road and simultaneously solve traffic congestion in Kuala Lumpur especially in city centres which are areas of focus.

She added, the moderate speed limit of trams is also suitable with the busy city conditions and can lead to more pedestrian facilities.

However, she said a detailed study about it must be conducted by taking into account the technical aspect, ridership, geography, soil conditions, geometric and others.

Echoing Noraidaai??i??s views was Universiti Malayaai??i??s Department of Urban and Regional Planning Programme coordinator Dr Nikmatul Adha Nordin who said that the authorities must have a proper strategy to include trams into the existing city ecosystem.

ai???Factors like safety, accessibility, crowd management, comfort and environmental impact need to be taken into account to ensure the scheme works well in the city,ai??? she said.

Dr Nikmatul said it could also be a strategy to revitalise inner city areas as better connectivity would boost commercial activity in the vicinity of tramlines.

The service should complement existing Light Rail Transit (LRT) and bus services, she said.

SPAD chief executive Mohd Azharuddin Mat Sah said input from other stakeholders such as the Kuala Lumpur City Hall, Road Transport Department and the public would be factored in as the implementation of the tram service would involve several authorities.

According to the Land Public Transport Transformation Journey 2010-2015, the study would be completed next year.

This initiative was stated in the Urban Rail Development Plan, which was a part of the Greater Kuala Lumpur Land Public TransAi??port Master Plan, to enhance travel experience using the rail system. ai??i?? Bernama


One Response to “Trams for Kuala Lumpur? Evidently Light Metro Did Not Reduce Congestion!”
  1. eric chris says:

    Yes, of course, s-train sucks and isn’t suited for urban public transit, Malaysia wakes from its stupor. There are so many good posts this week that it’s hard to choose where to begin. Essentially, s-train (over or below roads) frees up road space and encourages people to drive. It’s a waste of money and does nothing to curb road congestion as Malaysia learned the hard way. Trams as much as you like it or don’t, compete for road space and are an incentive for people to use public transit or at least get the darn toxic soot blowing diesel buses killing people prematurely to transfer passengers to s-train, off the roads. I’ll take trams at a fraction of the cost of s-train used to pour concrete and put more diesel buses on the roads.

    On the topic of directors for TransLink:

    It appears as if TransLink has more directors (with the three new clueless appointees, the dumber the better as it were) than Royal Dutch Shell, but the directors at TransLink are about 10 times dumber than the average person so it balances out; I guess. Will TransLink ever appoint an engineer as director and cut the number down to maybe three directors: one mechanical, one structural and one electrical engineer?

    “There are three new members on the TransLink Board.
    The Mayors’ Council has appointed Janet Austin, Sarah Clark, and Anne Giardini.”

    If TransLink appoints an electrical engineer as CEO one day, maybe we’ll see trams consuming 50% less power than the power pig LIMs used by s-train, one day.

    TransLink claims that s-train can move 26,000 pphpd. It means 130 metre to 150 metre long trains for the 80 metre long stations. How? Right now the Millennium Line extension ($1.4 billion down the loo) functions as a feeder line for the Expo Line. The crappy Millennium Line extension runs small two car trains to replace b-lines (about the same passenger capacity as b-lines). Correction: the puny trains don’t replace the b-lines, the b-lines will still be used to recycle passenger to the two car Millennium Line trains. What did the schmucks at TransLink actually accomplish other than waste more money and pour more concrete?

    Adios, scary TransLink pig-dogs. Boo.

Leave A Comment