Prev Page 2 of 2 1 2 Please log in to reply 36 replies to this topic

[planr]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

Currently studying town planning atm, and this city is an example of how NOT to plan a city. Nevertheless, the situation certainly isn't unworkable!

Bangkok's development since the capital moved from the Thon Buri side of the river in the late 1700s has been organic to the extreme. It is not an example of how not to plan, but rather an example of what happens when there are little plans to begin with, and then what happens when plans are in place but enforcement of rules and regulations is lax.

The list you have presented below is full of generally good ideas and shows you've been paying attention in class , but it also shows a lack of local knowledge. I will try to shed some light from the standpoint of someone who has worked on planning issues in BKK for the BMA, MRTA and others.

  

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

Suggestions-

TRAFFIC
-Carpool incentives, including lanes and flyovers/expressways reserved for dual (or more) occupancy cars and buses

The majority of the problematic congestion that occurs is on the surface streets / major arterials of the city, like Ratchadapisek, Silom, Sathorn, Rama IV, Rama IX, Petchaburi, Pahon Yothin, Lat Phrao, Si Ayutthaya etc. It is difficult, if not impossible to reserve dedicated space for automobiles given the current infrastructure. In years past Bangkok had reverse bus lanes (may still have a few?) where buses would run in one lane in the opposite direction of the other 2-4 lanes of traffic, however this scheme is less than ideal.

There is indeed very little congestion on the major expressways, except during peak periods, whereas many of the arterials experience congestion throughout the day and even well on into the evening hours. As all of the urban expressways are tolled, the government could work with operators to better manage tolls (change prices) and manipulate demand during peak periods.

You can see the congestion for yourself by visiting OTP's live traffic feed or by clicking the "Traffic" in a Google Map of BKK where it seems they have incorporated the OTP feed.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Getting more freight onto the railway lines and off Bangkok's streets, possibly through linking all industrial centres/ports etc. with a good cargo rail system

Absolutely. 93% of Thailand's freight (by volume) is carried on the road network while only about 4-5% is via rail. That said, this is really more of a national logistics problem and not something that is specifically relevant in Bangkok. Current schemes to double track the national rail network as well as improve rail infrastructure between Chon Buri, the port at Laem Chabang and BKK will no doubt reduce logistics costs, but I do not think it will have much impact on traffic in BKK.

The number one thing that can be done with respect to freight within the boundaries of Bangkok itself is to introduce and enforce guidelines for freight trucks. Currently, most trucks are very old and have been continuously rebuilt. The engines are typically in poor condition and this leads to inefficient combustion, thereby increasing air pollution. At the same time, the design of the chassis of these trucks means that cargo weight is not properly distributed along each of the axles -- these trucks have abnormally high axle weights which tear up the streets of Bangkok, leading to rougher rides and higher road maintenance costs

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Congestion tax, which will pay for fast tracking extensions to the BTS and MRT

I assume you mean something like the systems in place in London, Stockholm and Singapore. It is certainly a good idea, but as in other cities, the lack of political will and lack of public support will keep this off the table for a long time.

[planr]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Getting rid of the "variable one way" system which just complicates things and causes bottlenecks

This seems like a sweeping generalization... and one not based on experience in Bangkok. My own personal experience suggests that the variable lane is largely irrelevant and that existing traffic patterns are made worse by other factors like the Metropolitan Police exercising manual control over traffic signals at all major intersections.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Express buses that utilise flyovers and expressways to get to destinations faster (for high traffic routes)

These already exist. There are a number of buses, including the airport express buses that utilize the expressway system. Many local routes do utilize flyovers on major arterials where available, however the existence of a flyover hardly means the absence of congestion.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Extending the Khlong Boat service hours and creating more routes by opening/cleaning up more canals

The khlong network is important for a number of reasons, transport is only one. The biggest hurdle here is complete integration of khlong services with other transport in the city. By this I mean coordinated scheduling (at least with buses), integrated fares, construction of piers and stops in some places, etc. I am not sure how feasible "new routes" are as I lack local knowledge about which khlongs are actually navigable, let alone in locations that would serve well as a transport artery.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Better driver training and harsher punishments for "third lane" creators (especially motorbikes!)

Better driver's education is something that every country in Asia that I have visited could benefit from. As for the "third lane" thing, I doubt it will go away any time soon. Even in some US states like California, it is perfectly legal for motorcycles to drive in between cars.

[planr]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Creation of larger carparks at the terminal mass transit stations

The vast majority of the time, car parks and mass transit stations should NOT mix. Encouraging people to drive to the train is defeating the purpose. Small surface car parks at Sukhumvit (NW side of Asoke Montri) and Petchaburi (NE corner of interesection) stations are prime examples.

In the Bangkok case, you have to realize that none of the current termini are actually the end of the line (except maybe National Stadium on the BTS Silom Line). Construction will start on the Blue Line extensions from Hua Lamphong (where are you going to put a car park there anyway?) and Bang Sue in the next year or two, as well as the Purple Line extension to Nonthaburi from Bang Sue. On the BTS lines, the extensions past Onnut and Wong Wian Yai are under development and at some point, somebody will extend the Sukhumvit like north of Mor Chit, it's only a matter of time.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

RUBBISH
-Banning plastic bags (and straws!!!) from being served at retail outlets, as well as more stringent packaging laws

It is pretty difficult to ban plastic bags outright. Few major cities that I know have successfully done so. San Francisco is one of them. What I believe to be more prudent is to charge for them. In Hong Kong, if you want a plastic bag from 7-Eleven, the local department store or whatever, you have to pay $0.50 HKD. Sure it is only 2 baht, but I think that will make quite a few people, especially poorer Thai people in the rural areas think twice.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Creation of a city wide recycling scheme, with A LOT more rubbish bins being created. Could involve a rewards scheme?

This is a two part deal. The lack of rubbish bins in Bangkok almost certainly stems entirely from the New Year's bombings in 2006/2007. The ones you do find are clear so that the contents are readily identifiable. Whether or not this pattern (clear bins, few and far between) will continue into the future is unknown and really of little consequence I think.

In terms of recycling, it would be a HUGE undertaking for the local government. In a city with a registered population of 6 million with probably double that due to unregistered migrants, expats, and other people, it would be ridiculously expensive.

That said, in other parts of the country, the private sector is playing a big role in recycling. The Wongpanit corporation has over 400 recycling centers around the country and much of the stuff that they recycling is brought in by local residents, not provided by government firms. I've visited their main location in Phitsanulok and it is quite an impressive operation.

I am not sure what kind of incentive it would take for local BKK residents to bring their recycling to the plants. In China, especially in big cities like Shenzhen, their are low-income residents who earn a living off of collecting recyclable goods and turning them in. I've seen a few in BKK, but certainly not to the level that I have observed in China.

[planr]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Either creating a drinkable water supply or forcing water companies to have a returns policy on their plastic bottles

The creation of a potable water supply system (e.g. clean tap water from a municipal source via pipes in the ground) is decades off into the future. It amazes how insanely cheap bottled water is in Thailand. I can get 3 litres (two 1.5 litre) bottles for 20 baht any day of the week at 7-Eleven. If buying in bulk at Tesco or Carrefour it is even cheaper! The same amount just about anywhere in the US would be 150 baht or more. It makes me wonder if the government subsidizes bottled water because there is such a big lack of drinkable water naturally.

In any case, water should be more expensive and/or there should be incentive for returning the plastic bottles.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Disposable goods to utilise biodegradable technology

Like what?

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

FLOODING
-A VERY serious problem, they need to get working on higher dykes along waterways as well as reversing the flow of many of the canals/rivers to spill out into flood control networks much like they have in the Netherlands. Also, gutters and drains in this city need a lot of work. Fixing the garbage problem might go a long way toward improving drainage.

Bangkok will be prone to localized flooding for quite some time and there isn't much that can be done in the near term. However, in terms of a major catastrophe, Bangkok is quite well protected. Read up on the King's Dike.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Immediate freeze of construction of low-lying buildings along "high risk" areas- these should be turned into GREEN AREAS instead (involving natural waterways/grasslands designed to absorb overflowing water)

Not only a freeze in construction, but outright banning. There are mega developments planned in the western suburbs (enough to house 300,000 persons) that lie in a major flood plain. These need to be stopped

Hope that adds a little more value to this thread

[johncitizen]

Some great input and local expertise here guys- I'll be sure to post some questions up here when assignment time comes around
I've read somewhere that one of the best ways to decrease traffic problems is to actually REDUCE the amount of roads, and replacing them with (well planned out) walking roads serviced by mass transport. Case in point would be the Melbourne city centre. Wonder how that would go for some of the more intense parts of town (especially the strip linking Centralworld to Pratunam?)

[jackinthebox]

With 1000 more habitants arriving every day and more than 52,000 new cars every month there is NO WAY to make BKK more liveable. And even if - it would be a vicious circle, because if everything is blooming and going well, the city will attract even more people with even more cars....
More than 5 Mio. people on one place is  IMHO something unnatural, Thailand is in the good condition that the overall population is not growing any more (unlike India or China). So they should try to "support" other places and to develop upcountry "Subcenters" like ChiangMai or HadYai. France is trying to do this under the name of "decentralisation" for decades - since they became aware that Paris is eating up everything.

[cobra]

Jimmu, on 2010-03-04 23:39:58, said:

How about teaching Thais how to drive and make them sit a proper driving test!  How about enforcing traffic laws! Etc etc...

Indeed,
They will never get a handle on traffic until they reel in outlaw taxi and motor cycle operators who go where they want, how they what, whether it's between lanes or up on the side walks.

Of course that would mean actual traffic enforcement instead of the current arbitrary system.

Greening ?, I would hope so, is there one tree left standing anywhere in Bkk besides Benjasiri next to the Emporium,

[planr]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-05 12:33:02, said:

Some great input and local expertise here guys- I'll be sure to post some questions up here when assignment time comes around
I've read somewhere that one of the best ways to decrease traffic problems is to actually REDUCE the amount of roads, and replacing them with (well planned out) walking roads serviced by mass transport. Case in point would be the Melbourne city centre. Wonder how that would go for some of the more intense parts of town (especially the strip linking Centralworld to Pratunam?)

Maybe in very special cases. The fact is that BKK has a very small amount of roadspace compared to the global normal. As a percentage, roads cover roughly 7% of the land in BKK whereas in peer cities in both the developed and developing world the number is more like 10-12%. That is not to say that BKK should have more roads (as that would like only exacerbate the existing problem), just that it has a very small amount to begin with.

jackinthebox, on 2010-03-05 12:52:49, said:

With 1000 more habitants arriving every day and more than 52,000 new cars every month there is NO WAY to make BKK more liveable. And even if - it would be a vicious circle, because if everything is blooming and going well, the city will attract even more people with even more cars....
More than 5 Mio. people on one place is  IMHO something unnatural, Thailand is in the good condition that the overall population is not growing any more (unlike India or China). So they should try to "support" other places and to develop upcountry "Subcenters" like ChiangMai or HadYai. France is trying to do this under the name of "decentralisation" for decades - since they became aware that Paris is eating up everything.

I can't comment on the 1,000 people a day (but it sounds reasonable. The 52,000 new cars a month is a bit misleading. That figure is basically the average number of TOTAL new vehicles (including motorcycles, buses, etc) REGISTERED per month in 2009. Cars, light trucks and minivans make up probably 40-45% while motorcycles are another 45% or so and the remainder is quite random. (The data is easily accessed from the Dept of Land Transport's website provided you can read a little Thai or use Google Translate effectively).

Western planners have tried (and failed) to encourage the Thai government to develop metropolitan subcentres (e.g. in Bangkok and the five surrounding provinces) for a number of years. Whether it is good policy or not remains to be seen.

[phetaroi]

planr, on 2010-03-05 12:19:09, said:

Bangkok's development since the capital moved from the Thon Buri side of the river in the late 1700s has been organic to the extreme. It is not an example of how not to plan, but rather an example of what happens when there are little plans to begin with, and then what happens when plans are in place but enforcement of rules and regulations is lax.

The list you have presented below is full of generally good ideas and shows you've been paying attention in class , but it also shows a lack of local knowledge. I will try to shed some light from the standpoint of someone who has worked on planning issues in BKK for the BMA, MRTA and others.

...

The majority of the problematic congestion that occurs is on the surface streets / major arterials of the city...

There is indeed very little congestion on the major expressways, except during peak periods, whereas many of the arterials experience congestion throughout the day and even well on into the evening hours. As all of the urban expressways are tolled, the government could work with operators to better manage tolls (change prices) and manipulate demand during peak periods.

You can see the congestion for yourself by visiting OTP's live traffic feed or by clicking the "Traffic" in a Google Map of BKK where it seems they have incorporated the OTP feed.

...

The number one thing that can be done with respect to freight within the boundaries of Bangkok itself is to introduce and enforce guidelines for freight trucks. Currently, most trucks are very old and have been continuously rebuilt. The engines are typically in poor condition and this leads to inefficient combustion, thereby increasing air pollution.

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

-Congestion tax, which will pay for fast tracking extensions to the BTS and MRT

I assume you mean something like the systems in place in London, Stockholm and Singapore. It is certainly a good idea, but as in other cities, the lack of political will and lack of public support will keep this off the table for a long time.

I'll apologize in advance for a response that is going to be sarcastic.

When you say, "what happens when plans are in place but enforcement of rules and regulations is lax," it seems as if you are basing your vision of what should be on what it is in the West.  Your statement seems to be correct, but since you later talk about "political will and public support," it's that lack of will and public support for what I'll refer to as "Western-style" that is why the whole problem exists to begin with.  Most of us realize that and know that it is part of living in a society that has a different framework of thinking.

"The majority of the problematic congestion that occurs is on the surface streets / major arterials of the city...."  I am sure you're very good at what you do, but please tell me you're not paid big bucks for that type of assessment.

"There is indeed very little congestion on the major expressways, except during peak periods...As all of the urban expressways are tolled, the government could work with operators to better manage tolls (change prices) and manipulate demand during peak periods."  Another idea that would gain little, if any public support, and I doubt that it would do much of anything to improve the overall traffic situation in the city, since some amount of traffic that was once on the expressway would then move back to the arteriels and surface streets...just as many taxi drivers have always done in order to avoid tolls on the expressway.  I am reminded of the problems that exist on I-66 into and out of Washington during rush hour.  Due to local public pressure, the highway has been kept restricted to only a few lanes, far fewer than what would be expected based on the route's prominence leading into and out of the capital city.  As a result, traffic during rush hour is severe not only on I-66, but unusually so on other major streets -- Lee Highway, Wilson Boulevard, Leesburg Pike, and so forth.  It just depends on where you want to have the worst traffic jam.

There are few of us here that haven't personally experienced the rush hour traffic on the expressways or seen it on the on-off ramps at various places in the city.  There's hardly a need to view it on the OTP feed.

[phetaroi]

johncitizen, on 2010-03-04 22:52:49, said:

It is pretty difficult to ban plastic bags outright. Few major cities that I know have successfully done so. San Francisco is one of them. What I believe to be more prudent is to charge for them. In Hong Kong, if you want a plastic bag from 7-Eleven, the local department store or whatever, you have to pay $0.50 HKD. Sure it is only 2 baht, but I think that will make quite a few people, especially poorer Thai people in the rural areas think twice.

...In China, especially in big cities like Shenzhen, their are low-income residents who earn a living off of collecting recyclable goods and turning them in. I've seen a few in BKK, but certainly not to the level that I have observed in China.

I agree with you, and would just add that banning plastic bags is a simplistic "solution".  Most of the people in my somewhat upscale condo -- all non-Thais -- use plastic shopping bags for trash.  If I didn't have those bags, I'd simply go buy larger plastic trash bags in the store.  Even for the locals, they need to carry their purchases.  For those who advocate paper bags, I think in the west where we have new-growth forest designed primarily for manufacture of paper, that is practical.  Here, you would be talking about cutting down mostly natural forests for the increased paper production...for which there is little infrastructure.

In terms of the recycling, yes, I've seen that here, also.  Some of the condos here have their staff do it on a regular basis.  I can always tell when I start hearing the crunching of soft drink cans echoing throughout the complex.

Edited by phetaroi, 2010-03-06 07:43:36.

[phetaroi]

jackinthebox, on 2010-03-05 12:52:49, said:

With 1000 more habitants arriving every day and more than 52,000 new cars every month there is NO WAY to make BKK more liveable. And even if - it would be a vicious circle, because if everything is blooming and going well, the city will attract even more people with even more cars....
More than 5 Mio. people on one place is  IMHO something unnatural, Thailand is in the good condition that the overall population is not growing any more (unlike India or China). So they should try to "support" other places and to develop upcountry "Subcenters" like ChiangMai or HadYai. France is trying to do this under the name of "decentralisation" for decades - since they became aware that Paris is eating up everything.

I think you're right.  I think Thailand suffers from "how ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen Par-ee" syndrome.  While in the States there are lots of "big cities" with all the amenities, here there's really just one -- Bangkok...and to some extent Chiang Mai.  Young people here, just like young people in Iowa, want a modern life.  And in Thailand, modern life is Bangkok.

The big question is, how do you make people want to stay in Chiang Mai, Nakhon Ratchasima, Ubon, Udon, and so forth.

[planr]

phetaroi, on 2010-03-05 19:32:34, said:

I'll apologize in advance for a response that is going to be sarcastic.

When you say, "what happens when plans are in place but enforcement of rules and regulations is lax," it seems as if you are basing your vision of what should be on what it is in the West.  Your statement seems to be correct, but since you later talk about "political will and public support," it's that lack of will and public support for what I'll refer to as "Western-style" that is why the whole problem exists to begin with.  Most of us realize that and know that it is part of living in a society that has a different framework of thinking.

The basis for this statement stems from meetings and personal interviews with city planners and relevant bureaucrats in BKK over the last few years. I am well aware that what works in City A does not always work in City B and vice versa.

phetaroi, on 2010-03-05 19:32:34, said:

"The majority of the problematic congestion that occurs is on the surface streets / major arterials of the city...."  I am sure you're very good at what you do, but please tell me you're not paid big bucks for that type of assessment.

This is not an assessment, let alone an assessment that has earned me a single baht. It is purely from observation and experience based on spending 3-4 months a year in BKK since 2007.

phetaroi, on 2010-03-05 19:32:34, said:

"There is indeed very little congestion on the major expressways, except during peak periods...As all of the urban expressways are tolled, the government could work with operators to better manage tolls (change prices) and manipulate demand during peak periods."  

Another idea that would gain little, if any public support, and I doubt that it would do much of anything to improve the overall traffic situation in the city, since some amount of traffic that was once on the expressway would then move back to the arteriels and surface streets...just as many taxi drivers have always done in order to avoid tolls on the expressway.  I am reminded of the problems that exist on I-66 into and out of Washington during rush hour.  Due to local public pressure, the highway has been kept restricted to only a few lanes, far fewer than what would be expected based on the route's prominence leading into and out of the capital city.  As a result, traffic during rush hour is severe not only on I-66, but unusually so on other major streets -- Lee Highway, Wilson Boulevard, Leesburg Pike, and so forth.  It just depends on where you want to have the worst traffic jam.

It does not need ANY public support for change to occur, for better or worse. The recent ridiculous toll hike on the Don Muang tollway is a perfect example. When drastic changes take place (like doubling the toll or more) people can and do vote with their feet... the DMT is a perfect example. Pathon Yothin and Vibhavidi Rangsit roads are now more congested than ever.

However, if changes are incremental and spaced out over time OR variable tolls are used to manage congestion (see State Route 91 in California), it is possible to mitigate some of the congestion