Contents - SPAD

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Stakeholder‟s plans and proposals for the future Range of data (land use information, bus network data, traffic counts and journey time data). Table 2.7 identified a number of the key concerns that have been highlighted by bus operators and associations during the stakeholder engagement process. The principal concerns have been grouped by four main categories, with each category containing the key contributing factors for issues within the current industry. Table 2.7: Feedback from Operators and Associations Operations, Regulation & Enforcement Existing regulatory regime is not conducive for an effective network… • enforcement of regulation (e.g. licenses misuse , fare dodgers) • regulating issuance of licenses • exclusivity of bus lanes and route Revenues Competition • Insufficient fare box revenue prevent reinvestment in new fleet • Fare controls impede nonfare box revenue • Unprofitable route particularly rural areas • Business loss • Current private operators is unable to compete with RapidKL (GoM owned) • Smaller operators allege that RapidKL receive financial support from GoM and in direct competition • Operators seek “level playing field” for funding and competition • Rapid KL allege that other operators use “pajak” system and franchise routes illegally • Network rationalisation is needed to remove duplication of routes • Practice of sub-leasing (should not be allowed) Standards • All agreed that standards of service delivery need to be improved • All cited highway conditions, congestion levels, etc as major hindrance to improve service delivery • Insufficient bus stops and priority infrastructure • Room for improvement of terminal facilities to facilitate public and bus movement • Car and parking policies that is competing with bus • Inadequate drivers‟ minimum training standards • Inadequate drivers‟ reimbursement 2.20) Public Concerns Public feedback on bus services have been obtained through examination of recent customer complaints and the latest Pemandu Q3 2010 NKRA Baseline Survey. The survey assessed land LPT users‟ satisfaction levels with the service they received. Figure 2.8 shows 38% of bus users found the service provided satisfactory and a further 46% found it acceptable. Bus users displayed the second lowest satisfaction levels behind KTM users. It is recognised that these figures only represent service users and in order to understand satisfaction levels across the wider population it is important to undertake wider reaching public attitude surveys with both service users and non users. It is likely that a satisfaction measurement which includes non users will therefore be lower meaning that overall satisfaction levels are likely below the current 85% quoted. Figure 2.8: Land Public Transport User Dissatisfaction Levels (Source : Pemandu Q3 2010) Page 31
Key issues identified by the public included: Punctuality Waiting time Travel time Accessibility Bus condition Interchange Bus driver attitude Information Key contributing factors to bus problems faced by the public are: Road congestion (no dedicated lanes) Old or not well maintained vehicles Lack of proper network planning Lack of proper planning of first and last mile travel Key Conclusions It is generally agreed that the current delivery of bus services across the GKL/KV region is lacking in a number of areas. Quality of provision is often poor. Network coverage and availability leaves large gaps in the network and the distribution of land uses and the form of the highway layout militate against effective bus operation. Passenger information, when available, is often low quality, minimal information that compounds the poor service reliability. Priority measures to help improve reliability and journey times are neither widespread nor effectively enforced. There is currently no mechanism for coordinated, integrated planning in the provision of bus services. A consequence of this lack of planning is the need for commercial operators to maximise revenues. This results in heavy concentrations of bus services on key radial routes. The existing service pattern focuses on central KL and is principally concentrated on the main corridors of movement where a high frequency level of service can be found. These tend to be radial routes emanating from KL where operators are likely to experience high ridership and levels of revenues There is very little penetration of residential areas and the analysis indicates that very large numbers of people are not within a reasonable walking distance of a bus service. In addition to the lack of planning, it is also generally agreed that there is a lack of integration both between different bus services and between bus and rail. A better planned and coordinated approach to bus service provision is crucial to successful future development, and in particular to ensure that bus services complement the expanded rail provision. Page 32
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 36 and 37: competing on heavily concentrated r
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?