Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m sure Penangites will say yes!

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hope to hear from you soon.
Wei Lian

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’d very much love to see a monorail that carries 20,000 passengers per direction per hour. Currently the best that we have in Malaysia is about 5,000 p/dir/hr in the KL Monorail. Sure, it ought to be able to carry about 20,000 p/dir/hr…so why isnt it doing?

Oh, and did you forget that the KL Monorail was built at a cost of about 2/3 that of the LRT. For that much money we should be getting much better transit, shouldnt we?

You point out that trams can carry 15/dir/hr which I take means 15,000. Well, 15,000 p/dir/hr at about 1/4 of the cost? That means that we can save money or build 4 lines instead of 1.

That sounds like a good thing, doesnt it?

People fear the loss of road space so much but they fail to understand that trams have the flexibility that monorail and LRT does not.

With trams we can move people around a city, quickly and comfortably. Instead of wasting precious urban space for parking, we can move people around using trams.

The other advantage of trams is that we can move people in and out of the city, just like LRT and Monorail. There are many tram designs that have capacity that is similar to the existing LRT, and well above the monorail trains.

Cheers, mya

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Would love to exchange views with you.

This goes to all of you here who have expertise in public transport and urban planning.
Please e-mail me!

Thank you
Lee Wei Lian
Writer
The Edge

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_2bd8a63c-cb73c03a-a010ba00-4efb2817

read with huge relief recently that the new Penang state government had indicated that it would prefer a subway over a monorail to ease Georgetown’s traffic woes. When I was in Boston last year for a conference, I had expressed my concerns about building a monorial to former chief minister Tan Sri Koh Tsu Koon but he was non-committal. While I had no chance to speak with new chief minister Lim Guan Eng, fortunately, the new Penang government seems to have realised what I told Koh – that above-ground rail transport will further disrupt the already distressed heritage environment of Georgetown.
Another concern is that a monorail is not suited to rapidly moving large numbers of people in a city environment. Compare for example, the capacity and speed of the monorail in KL, which is a light rail system to, say, the sleek subway system in Singapore or Hong Kong, which are considered heavy rail systems.
The KL Monorail is capable of handling 5,000 passengers per hour per direction with between 158 and 258 passengers per two-car train. The maximum speed is 80kph but the average speed is just 30kph. Hong Kong’s MTR, in contrast, can carry 2,500 passengers per train and 70,000 passengers per hour per direction on the Tsuen Wan Line. Singapore’s North East line is designed to carry 42,000 passengers per hour per direction.
In Bilbao, Spain, which closely resembles Georgetown in size and character, the metro train system is completely underground in the city’s heritage portion. As it does not face any building obstacles in its alignment, it can move in a more linear fashion unlike a monorail or above-ground rail transport, which has to trace a path along road meridiens, riverbanks, sidewalks or whatever limited open spaces are available. The underground stations, which were designed by celebrity architect Norman Foster, are also spacious unlike monorail stations that have to compete with pedestrian walkways for space above ground.
For people who have only moved to KL during the last decade, they may not realise the environmental cost of building the monorail. Many tall and leafy trees were chopped down along Jalan Bukit Bintang and Jalan Sultan Ismail to make way for the monorail, thus depriving this already hot city of much needed shade and greenery.
Subways are also better than monorails or LRTs in cities as huge concrete elevated guideways and pillars are not a pretty sight while partially blocking out the sky and potentially trapping noxious exhaust fumes and dust. Can you imagine civic-conscious cities like Paris or Barcelona slapping an above-ground railway across Champs Elysées or La Rambla? Well, that’s what happened in KL, where the LRT, with its imposing watermark streaked concrete pillars, slashes across heritage areas like Dataran Merdeka and Chinatown district.
Penang also has a valuable opportunity to plan public transport based on what’s best for the public and free it from political and business interference. Witness the commuting tragedy in KL where the monorail line terminates 100 metres from the KL Sentral station. Whenever I pass the area, I cringe at the sight of the commuters from KL Sentral, who usually include tourists and the visually impaired, having to cross a busy road to board the monorail.
Another example of poor planning is the Masjid Jamek interchange where to change from the Kelana Jaya LRT to the Ampang LRT line, one has to exit the underground station and then cross the road to access the Ampang LRT line, depending on where they are heading. It is even worse for commuters wanting to use public transport to go from KLCC to Bukit Bintang. They would have to take the Kelana Jaya LRT line in KLCC in a direction away from Bukit Bintang and then walk about five minutes to the nearest monorail station, which only then takes them to Bukit Bintang.
A more logical alignment would have been for the line to go from Central Market to Chinatown to Bukit Bintang and then KLCC. It could then continue its journey from there to Kampung Baru and onwards to Ampang. An interchange with the Ampang LRT would still be possible at the Hang Tuah or Plaza Rakyat station. Another glaring example of short-sighted planning is the existence of the usually deserted Abdullah Hukum station, which is near to, but inaccessible from, the high traffic Mid Valley commercial centre. Public transport should be centrally planned in a cohesive manner and not parceled out to well-connected companies. Hopefully, this will not be repeated in Penang.
Lastly, I hope Penang, KL and all cities in Malaysia will take the time to study the world’s best public transport systems before making their next move. I’ve tried the four oldest subway systems in the world (London, New York, Paris and Boston), newer ones like Bilbao, Vancouver and Washington DC as well as exemplary ones like Tokyo, Hong Kong and Singapore.
I’ve also taken the monorail in Sydney, Seattle and in theme parks like Sentosa Island, Singapore and Disney World. I still feel Barcelona is the one that has got it closest to perfect. You can go almost anywhere of importance in the city using the subway system without much hassle. The city has a mostly underground heavy rail train system with six lines and 123 stations. An impressive 29 interchanges make it a breeze to switch from one line to another. Each train can carry about 1,000 passengers and the lines can transport up to 60,000 passengers per hour per direction.
They are now building the longest, most advanced metro line in Europe, with 46 stations and a target capacity of 90 million passengers per year. As the system is mostly underground, expansion is not an issue. It was recognised by CityMayors.com, a site that promotes strong cities and good government, as one of the best metro systems in the world. Will we see Malaysia’s metro systems one day being ranked among the best in the world?
Hopefully, Penang will show the way.

Comments: feedback@bizedge.com

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

By the way Transit Expert, who are your clients?

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I do agree Holland may have more bicycles than any other major cities in Europe.But, I don’t think they have more motorbikes per capita. The speed matters very much beside a trams track. As you have mentioned the Europeans have dedicated bicycle lanes for bicycles. This dedicated lanes were one reason bicycles became popular.

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It would make more sense if a tram is used other then using it as a “tourist attraction”. Its better we could ride on that old tram. Scrap the SUBWAY nonsense!! SCRAP THE MONORAIL!

Build the tram! bring it back.. should we start a petition on building a tram?

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Do you know that Holland has more bicycles than people? And they also use trams extensively in Amsterdam. We should learn from the Dutch how to implement a safe cycle route for cyclists, whether with or without tram tracks.

Complain about this comment

Like or Dislike: 0  0