Malaysia's capital mulls traffic fees to cut congestion - report
09.23.07, 6:30 AM ET

KUALA LUMPUR (Thomson Financial) - Malaysia plans to impose a congestion charge on motorists as part of an ambitious attempt to ease traffic jams which choke the capital's narrow roads, reports said Sunday.

Kuala Lumpur's mayor Abdul Hakim Borhan said 2 million vehicles drove into the city daily and traffic was expected to grow by 10 to 15 percent every year.

'If we can reduce (traffic inflows) to 50 percent, that is good enough,' he was quoted as saying by the New Sunday Times newspaper.

Under the plan, motorists using congested streets in Kuala Lumpur would have to pay a fee, he said but did not give any details on the amount.

Abdul Hakim, who was visiting Stockholm, said a proposal on the plan would be submitted to the government next year based on the system adopted in the Swedish capital.

'The public may object to the proposal initially, but they will accept it after they realise that the system will improve traffic condition in the city,' he was quoted as saying by Bernama news agency.

Under the plan, vehicles using certain streets would have their registration numbers recorded and the drivers would then have to go to a bank to pay the congestion fee. Drivers who fail to pay the fee would be fined.

Cities which have introduced peak hour congestion fees to reduce traffic include Singapore and London.

Malaysia's capital mulls traffic fees to cut congestion - report
09.23.07, 6:30 AM ET

KUALA LUMPUR (Thomson Financial) - Malaysia plans to impose a congestion charge on motorists as part of an ambitious attempt to ease traffic jams which choke the capital's narrow roads, reports said Sunday.

Kuala Lumpur's mayor Abdul Hakim Borhan said 2 million vehicles drove into the city daily and traffic was expected to grow by 10 to 15 percent every year.

'If we can reduce (traffic inflows) to 50 percent, that is good enough,' he was quoted as saying by the New Sunday Times newspaper.

Under the plan, motorists using congested streets in Kuala Lumpur would have to pay a fee, he said but did not give any details on the amount.

Abdul Hakim, who was visiting Stockholm, said a proposal on the plan would be submitted to the government next year based on the system adopted in the Swedish capital.

'The public may object to the proposal initially, but they will accept it after they realise that the system will improve traffic condition in the city,' he was quoted as saying by Bernama news agency.

Under the plan, vehicles using certain streets would have their registration numbers recorded and the drivers would then have to go to a bank to pay the congestion fee. Drivers who fail to pay the fee would be fined.

Cities which have introduced peak hour congestion fees to reduce traffic include Singapore and London.


There must be a better way to charge the fee. Can't they do an automatic deduction from a debit card or credit card? Offer online payment too. Are they going to set up special counters at the banks? Imagine the long lines. They should see how other countries do it and pick the system that's easy for the passengers. They need more manpower to fine people which means loss revenue if people don't pay. Just pay as you enter.

i've been a supporter for this plan for a very long time....and if possible plz make it faster!
no need to deal with rakyat's nasty mouth anymore...

btw, why not using 'smartTAG'? a prepaid....it's time to teach malaysian on using prepaid card...u know how our people willing to queue buying lrt ticket instead of having TnG card in their wallet...

i've been a supporter for this plan for a very long time....and if possible plz make it faster!
no need to deal with rakyat's nasty mouth anymore...

btw, why not using 'smartTAG'? a prepaid....it's time to teach malaysian on using prepaid card...u know how our people willing to queue buying lrt ticket instead of having TnG card in their wallet...agreed, in theory the plan is good, keep cars outside of the city centre, outside of Jalan Tun Razak...and touch n go or smart tag make sense...

but I've got to know what the mayor expects people to do...carpool? park outside the city centre and take public transit in? pay the fee? what would most KL-ites and other Malaysians do?

if these people switch to public transport...disaster...there isnt enough transit to handle all the people....especially during the morning peak periods.

hmmmm...earlier m suggested to Rapid that they have a Jalan Tun Razak bus route, circling around the city centre...this may prove to be necessary in the future...and one day, a circle line...

Cheers, m

but I've got to know what the mayor expects people to do...carpool? park outside the city centre and take public transit in? pay the fee? what would most KL-ites and other Malaysians do?

if these people switch to public transport...disaster...there isnt enough transit to handle all the people....especially during the morning peak periods.


don't worry my friend, u'll see KLites gonna pay on any price charged by DBKL :yes: even the SMART tunnel once got criticised for its rm2, yet people still use it!

and you can see most of the cars entering KL driven by single driver. now it is time to teach them to use other options, if not public transport as u said inefficient,...at least a motobike/scooter can ease the congestion like those in Taipei.

and you can see most of the cars entering KL driven by single driver. now it is time to teach them to use other options, if not public transport as u said inefficient,...at least a motobike/scooter can ease the congestion like those in Taipei.agreed, agreed...but wasn't the DBKL also talking once about reducing motorcycles or banning motorcycles in the city centre? Or was this the previous mayor?

Cheers, m

agreed, agreed...but wasn't the DBKL also talking once about reducing motorcycles or banning motorcycles in the city centre? Or was this the previous mayor?

Cheers, m

nope..i don't think DBKL said that....i believe you heard that from one of our forumer(there's one thread discussing about that), he who did say that....

^ The one before our previous mayor suggested that.

Stupid Idea!

@allurban,

as DBKL will be likely to implement the ERP in KL, there is a call for DBKL to provide an enough numbers of public transport (BUS) to cater the amount of passengers. but then..i was thinking more bus means more CO and CO2 emissions in city centre and then it will definitely effect the whole temperature in KL as it is already being a heat island. right?...so, again i was thinking tram as a good option.

but hey, this is what i found in wikipedia on TRAM, it has more disadvantages than advantages!

so, do you think DBKL would ever consider this..? i don't think so...

Advantages


Multiple entrances allow trams to load faster than suburban coaches, which tend to have a single entrance. This, combined with swifter acceleration and braking, lets trams maintain higher overall speeds than buses, if congestion allows.
Trams can adapt to the number of passengers by adding additional cars during rush hour (as well as removing excess cars during off-peak hours). No additional driver is then required for the trip in comparison to buses.
In general, trams provide a higher capacity service than buses.
Unlike buses, but like trolleybuses, (electric) trams give off no exhaust emissions at point of use. Compared to motorbuses the noise of trams is generally perceived to be less disturbing.
Rights-of-way for trams are narrower than for buses. This saves valuable space in cities with high population densities and/or narrow streets.
Because they are rail-bound, trams command more respect from other road users than buses do, when operating on-road. In heavy traffic conditions, rogue drivers are less likely to hold up trams, for example by blocking intersections or parking on the road. This often leads to fewer delays. As a rule, especially in European cities and Melbourne, trams always have priority.
Passenger comfort is normally superior to buses because of controlled acceleration and braking and curve easement. Rail transport such as used by trams provides a smoother ride than road use by buses.
In most countries, trams don't suffer from the image problem that plagues buses. On the contrary — most people associate trams with a positive image. Unlike buses, trams tend to be popular with a wider spectrum of the public, including better-off people who often shun buses. This high level of customer acceptance means higher ridership and public support for investment in new tram infrastructure.
All transit service involves a tradeoff between speed and frequency of stops. Services that stop frequently have lower overall speed, and are therefore less attractive for longer trips
.

Disadvantages


Tram accident in Amsterdam
The initial cost is higher than for buses, hence the usual preference for the latter in smaller cities
When operated in mixed traffic, trams are more likely to be delayed by disruptions in their lane. Buses, by contrast, can easily maneuver around obstacles. Opinions differ about whether deference that drivers show to trams — a cultural issue that varies by country — is sufficient to counteract this disadvantage.
Tram tracks can be dangerous for cyclists. This and problems with parked cars are lessened by building tracks and platforms in the middle of the road. Cyclists can avoid this by always riding across and never along tramways, as bikes, particularly those with narrow tyres, may get their wheels caught in the track grooves. It is also possible to close the grooves of the tracks on critical sections by rubber profiles. Those profiles are pressed down by the wheelflanges of the passing tram, but cannot be lowered by the weight of a cyclist and tend not to be maintained. So tram tracks are still dangerous for cyclists. Where the tracks run along the road, like they usually do, cyclists have to ride parallel to the tracks. In the wet they are constrained by the slippery rails in their ablility to manouvre to avoid other road hazards.
Tram infrastructure occupies urban space above ground and requires modifications to traffic flow.
Steel wheel trams are noisier than rubber-wheeled trolleybuses when cornering.
Tram drivers can control the switches ahead of them. This caused a major derailment in Geneva, Switzerland. A Wikinews article on the derailment
In urban areas where stops are close together, trams tend to coast between stops potentially being slower than heavy rail which would have stops further apart, although this can be alleviated by not placing stops so tightly together.
Light rail vehicles are often heavier per passenger carried than heavy rail and monorail cars.
The opening of new tram and light rail systems has sometimes been accompanied by a marked increase in car accidents, as a result of drivers' unfamiliarity with the physics and geometry of trolleys. Though such increases may be temporary, long-term conflicts between motorists and light rail operations can be alleviated by segregating their respective rights-of-way and installing appropriate signage and warning systems.
Rail transport can expose neighboring populations to moderate levels of low-frequency noise. However, transportation planners use noise mitigation strategies to minimize these effects. Most of all, the potential for decreased private motor vehicle operations along the trolley's service line due to the service provision could result in lower ambient noise levels than without.

@allurban,

as DBKL will be likely to implement the ERP in KL, there is a call for DBKL to provide an enough numbers of public transport (BUS) to cater the amount of passengers. but then..i was thinking more bus means more CO and CO2 emissions in city centre and then it will definitely effect the whole temperature in KL as it is already being a heat island. right?...so, again i was thinking tram as a good option.

but hey, this is what i found in wikipedia on TRAM, it has more disadvantages than advantages!

so, do you think DBKL would ever consider this..? i don't think so...you think DBKL wouldnt consider trams? DBKL hasnt even considered public transit...the city shuttle and rapidKL are federal government initiatives. DBKL wont even consider cameras to keep cars and buses from parking in the bus lanes....and you often see that DBKL vehicles are parked illegally in many areas in the city...

One thing I can say about trams...their biggest advantage is flexibility. Put them above or underground in the city centre, then run them at ground level along a major road or along an electricity corridor...

cannot do that with buses or LRT....

Cheers, m

sure you can. Any rail services can be at grade, elevated, and underground. I still think that lrt is a better option as it carries more ppl per hour.

sure you can. Any rail services can be at grade, elevated, and underground. I still think that lrt is a better option as it carries more ppl per hour.Any rail services can be run at grade, above or below, but not along or across a major street....

How to run the Kelana Jaya LRT along Jalan Puchong or Jalan Kepong? With the contact strip between the rails...and how about the electrified 3rd rail which both the Kelana Jaya and Ampang lines have?

LRT may carry more people per hour, but to me if it costs 5 times as much...it better carry at least 5 times more people....

Look at the simplicity of the KTM Komuter...that is the ideal...right now they are building the line from Sentul to Batu Caves and it is happening fast...it will be operating before any LRT gets started....

Fact is, at grade rail is faster and easier and cheaper to build, while LRT is most likely either above or below grade and therefore, slower and more costly....

Cheers, m

ps...make the KTM Komuter a lot shorter and it is not much different from a tram....low floors are not even needed :lol: m

komuter is big. can u imagine if the komuter goes across roads in bukit bintang or klcc?...that's why in the city center, a smaller yet longer tram works better than buses...

komuter only suitable for interconnecting suburb...not within the city...

komuter is big. can u imagine if the komuter goes across roads in bukit bintang or klcc?...that's why in the city center, a smaller yet longer tram works better than buses......I agree but my point is that a tram would be elevated or undergroun in the city centre, and running along the major roads in the suburban areas....

But look carefully...what real difference is there between Komuter and tram? Komuter is a longer, wider, high floor train...tram is shorter, narrower and sometimes low floor...and carrying as many passengers per train as the Kelana Jaya LRT...more passengers than the monorail....

both use overhead wires for power, they are both fast and flexible and effective...

in fact...I wonder if it would be possible to build trams running on 1m gauge lines that would feed into the major Komuter stations...like Subang Jaya, for instance...

komuter only suitable for interconnecting suburb...not within the city...ah, if so, why are they building the Komuter at grade along Jalan Ipoh? Jalan Ipoh is in the city and it is a very busy area...

there are heavy rail lines (like Komuter or even longer) running along major roads or through neighbourhoods in big cities all over the world...

Cheers, m

Just do the Singapore method lah.. the ERP system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Road_Pricing

Just do the Singapore method lah.. the ERP system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Road_Pricing

Singapore's ERP system with gantries is outdated. KL should adopt an ERP system that is based on GPS system.

^^DBKL is said to use the scandinavian method...

Time for more bus lanes to ease traffic flow (http://http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/10/18/focus/19026820&sec=focus)

COMMENT BY V.K.CHIN


Motorists may be prepared to leave their cars at home if, and this is a big if, there is an efficient public transport system. While more buses, for example, are being put on the road, their time-tables have been unworkable because they are caught in traffic snarls.

....

The only option out of this sticky condition is to have more designated bus lanes in the city, especially on major roads leading into the city.

With such lanes, buses should be able to be on time even during peak hours. Traffic may be heavy but with this special lane, buses can still move about easily.

This is the cheapest way of encouraging more people to travel by bus as all City Hall has to do is draw yellow lines on such roads, most of which have two lanes anyway.

Naturally, a single lane for the thousands of private cars is going to create great inconvenience for motorists. Hopefully, this will encourage them to travel into the city by bus rather than drive.

....if it can save time, more people would opt for this mode of travel in the city.

This measure will cause inconvenience to motorists but will be less painful or objectionable than paying a motor tax. It should also be politically less sensitive.

Those moving about in the city will have a more pleasant environment since fewer cars on the road will mean less pollution and cleaner air. Nice to see that he is getting the message and helping to spread it.

Cheers, m