Contents - SPAD

More documents

Recommendations

Info

competing on heavily concentrated radial routes in and out of centre KL but gaps in the network existing elsewhere, and patchy coverage at times of lower demand. Whilst quantity licensing can capably deliver a LPT service, it can often evolve in one of two ways. If operating margins become tighter, it is possible that consolidation of operators within the marketplace may occur and eventually resulting in an effective monopoly. The alternative is that the failure of the state government to regulate adequately may lead to the collapse of the quantity system and potentially lead to an open free-market scenario. The existing regulatory model is unlikely to support achieving the bus transformation needs or address the problems which currently exist within the industry. The process of transformation needs to be managed effectively to ensure than improved planning and integration can take place. This existing model does not currently enable such planning and enforcement to take place, thus compounding issues in relation to low quality, network gaps, heavily concentrated bus routes and ineffective coordination. 2.17) Process of Licensing of Bus Services The current issue of licensing of bus services within GKL/KV provides considerable concern. Current licence data is out of date and even where it may be in compliance with the regulations it fails to provide an adequate basis for a bus services database. At present a comprehensive and reliable database of bus service provision is being developed, but the process of developing this is likely to take some time to establish. Moreover it will be necessary to ensure that once it is set up, this database is kept fully up to date. This is best achieved through the establishment of a process through which operators register service details with <strong>SPAD</strong> in advance of their introduction. The process of reviewing all licensing data is now on-going and the process and timeline is shown in Figure 2.7. The process is moving from an existing process; from route based registration to an Operator and Service based registration. The following diagram (Figure 2.7) outlines the process for licensing moving forward to 2012. This process is currently being rolled out across Malaysia by <strong>SPAD</strong> to ensure appropriate monitoring of licensing. Figure 2.7: The Process for Bus Licensing Jan 11 Dec 11 Jan 12 Dec 12 Jan 13 1. Moratorium of new licenses application 2. Auto-renewal (initial launch) 4. Auto-renewal (updated) No new applications will be processed till 31 Jul 2011 All vehicle licenses expiring within 31 Jan 2011 to 30 Jul 2011 will be auto-renewed to 31 Jul 2011 (applicable to commercial and tourism vehicles) All vehicle licenses expiring within 1 Apr 2011 to 31 Dec 2011 will be auto-renewed for 1 year from date of license expiry 31 Jan – 31 Jul 11 till 31 Jul 31 Jan – 31 Mar Overridden by #4 1 Apr – 31 Dec 11 Re-register if to continue operate * New application +1 year validity +1 year validity 3. Re-registration 5. Operator license issuance All existing vehicle license holders of CVLB and MoTour are required to re-register from 1 Apr 2011 to 30 Sept 2011 Issue operator license to 2011 applicants starting 1 Jan 2012 to 31 Dec 2012 1 Apr – 30 Sept 11 Conversion to operator based license 1 Jan – 31 Dec 12 Page 29
2.18) Service Reliability and Efficiency Maximising the reliability and punctuality of existing bus networks can help enhance both their attractiveness and increase capacity. Each bus service which does not operate undermines the attractiveness of the service and reduces capacity. Indeed often it is the uncertainty of services reliability that deters users more than the actual frequency or journey time. Similarly, poor efficiency will likely to result in poor overall service quality (and potentially volume), the need for higher fares than necessary, as well as worse financial results. It has not been possible to establish clear benchmarks of existing performance of the bus operators, because registered timetable information is either not provided at the route licensing stage or is not published by the operators, and also because the data collection required establishing a robust view of actual operations is a long term task. One focus of the bus plan must be to ensure that all operators are providing as efficient and reliable services as reasonably practicable, and that this information is displayed in the form of registered timetables, which are available to all. In the absence of monitoring and benchmarking information it is impossible to judge whether the operators are providing the best possible services at the best value. The lack of robust monitoring also makes it difficult to put complaints into context. The conclusion is that a system of robust planning, monitoring, benchmarking and reporting needs to be put into place for all bus operations within GKL/KV. A comprehensive timetable notification and variation system needs to be introduced at the earliest opportunity. Then action plans need to be developed to address these weaknesses and to ensure that they are not replicated in the design and planned operation of system enhancements and future bus service. 2.19) Stakeholder Engagement As part of the ongoing study, stakeholder engagement with key agencies has been carried out. This included federal agencies, Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL), Selangor State Unit Perancang Ekonomi Negeri (UPEN), Perbadanan Putrajaya, other district local authorities, and transport operators. Specifically in relation to bus services within the region; principal operators, transportation trade associations and other bodies have been included within the stakeholder engagement process and they have provided valuable input and data to inform the process for change. From this process, the following have been identified : Key concerns and issues Page 30
Page 2 and 3: Contents 1. Background ............
Page 4 and 5: 6.2) Phasing- Developing the Networ
Page 6 and 7: KLCP KLIA KLIFD KPI KTM KTMB LA LCC
Page 8 and 9: Background 1 Page 1
Page 10 and 11: 1.2) Greater KL/Klang Valley region
Page 12 and 13: the collation of existing data sour
Page 14 and 15: future of bus services. Chapter 4 l
Page 16 and 17: 2. Assessment of Current Conditions
Page 18 and 19: 2.3) Existing Bus Services The curr
Page 20 and 21: Indicator Number of Routes Fares Av
Page 22 and 23: should embrace physical and electro
Page 24 and 25: Figure 2.5: White Space Definition
Page 26 and 27: Table 2.3: Existing Fare Structure
Page 28 and 29: 2.8) Journey Times NKRA have set up
Page 30 and 31: Table 2.5: Interchange Facilities i
Page 32 and 33: Table 2.6: Bus Stop Classifications
Page 34 and 35: Closed Circuit Television (CCTV); S
Page 38 and 39: Stakeholder‟s plans and proposals
Page 40 and 41: The shortfalls in planning, monitor
Page 42 and 43: 3. Looking to the Future of Bus 3.1
Page 44 and 45: The population forecasts assume a c
Page 46 and 47: Figure 3.3: Forecast Travel Demands
Page 48 and 49: Figure 3.6: Modelled Perceived Trav
Page 50 and 51: 3.6) Modes LPT covers a wide range
Page 52 and 53: 3.7) Corridor Hierarchy The approac
Page 54 and 55: connectivity. Bus services will als
Page 56 and 57: 3.12) Success Factors for Developin
Page 58 and 59: Developing the Future Bus Network 4
Page 60 and 61: Figure 4.1: Bus within the Hierarch
Page 62 and 63: Figure 4.2: Hierarchy and Scope of
Page 64 and 65: 4.5) Bus Rapid Transit A series of
Page 66 and 67: Dedicated Bus way - this option is
Page 68 and 69: Third stage will be introduction or
Page 70 and 71: Figure 4.8: Conceptual Network Chan
Page 72 and 73: 4.7) Other Initiatives 4.7.1) Impro
Page 74 and 75: 4.7.4) Improving Accessibility - Ne
Page 76 and 77: 4.7.7) Improving Bus Stop infrastru
Page 78 and 79: The Transition of the Bus Network 5
Page 80 and 81: trialling and refining these proces
Page 82 and 83: Table 5.1: Key LPT Policies and Obj
Page 84 and 85: Figure 5.2: Bus Industry Models of
Page 86 and 87:
them to support socially necessary
Page 88 and 89:
Thus the principal benefit of Net C
Page 90 and 91:
Whilst a regime change from the cur
Page 92 and 93:
Whilst the existing regulatory regi
Page 94 and 95:
Phasing and Delivery 6 Page 87
Page 96 and 97:
6.1.1) New Licence Issue Section 2.
Page 98 and 99:
operational. This early phase shoul
Page 100 and 101:
Figure 6.1: Regulatory Timeline 6.2
Page 102 and 103:
Table 6.2: Summary of Benefits Obje
Page 104 and 105:
7. Summary SPAD has developed the N
Page 106 and 107:
The range of primary and secondary
show all

Contents - SPAD

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?