MRT 3 feedback

A public display and feedback exercise is now underway for the Klang Valley's planned MRT3.

Will this circular MRT line suffer the same fate as MRT1 and MRT2, where first/last mile, station integration and accessibility were often afterthoughts?

There are some 'thrusts' and principles listed on the MRT website for the new line.

 

There is no mention of getting ridership, reducing car dependency, or improving health (e.g. reducing stress, encouraging a bit of exercise). 

Some have called Malaysia's first MRT lines vanity projects, and there may be a bit of evidence for that - certain leaders wanted KL to have a fancy, shiny, high spec metro system, but not necessarily for anyone to use it.  So it was more about the prestige of having it than the actual practicality of getting people around the city efficiently.  Let's move on from that.  If we really want people to use it, make it super convenient, easy to get into, going to places where there is lots of stuff within easy reach. 

Here is a small selection of some of the design and planning issues found in the previous MRT (& LRT) lines that can be turned into requirements and principles for MRT3 (amongst many others).

1. Stations in the middle of nowhere and/ or next to highways with no convenient pedestrian/ bicycle/ scooter access. 

2. Stations in the middle of a giant car park.  

3. Fences everywhere.  Don't block access to the station with fences.  If needed, use modal filters to prevent parking in undesirable areas.  But open up the area around the station to ensure easy flow of people (that means walking/ micro-mobility) to the station.

Stations should be well integrated with their surroundings and accessible without cars. Public transport will shift people out of their cars if you let it - but with the stick of poor first/ last mile connectivity and the carrot of lots of cheap parking at the MRT station, the effort will be undermined.

A local integration/ accessibility plan should be produced for each station in consultation with the local council and other major stakeholders.  This should cover a radius of at least 0.6km with the aim of making the station accessible without a car from multiple directions (ideally at least 3).  New pathways should be opened up where needed (if some land acquisition is needed for this, so be it) and covered walkways should be installed along routes with high footfall. 

4. Stations excessively high in the air.  Bring stations closer to the ground where possible.  If it's near a hill, connect the hill to concourse level with a linkbridge.  This is something that seems to be worse on the MRT lines than the LRT.

5. Awkward routes to platform level.  This is especially true in underground stations where there are sometimes excessive level changes too (e.g. LRT Masjid Jamek).  Routes to platform should be obvious, intuitive, direct, and low-effort.   

Solving point #4 first will go a long way to solving point #5.

6. Obscuring sight-lines in the station.  Keep sight-lines clear.  Allow people to see the way ahead - don't design a maze and don't block the view through railings with advertising boards (like at Bangsar LRT station).

Points #4 and #5 go together with accessibility for OKU, which is a fundamental requirement for public transport.

7. Poor wayfinding and signage.  If you have a sign with left and right directions, don't stack them on top of each other.  Split them to the left and to the right.  Display exploded views of the station so people can find their exit easily.  Display the next train times on big clear screens around the station.   There are many great design standards out there for signage and wayfinding - aim for the highest standard for Malaysia's public transport.

8. Having to pay to cross the road.  If the station has a route under or over a road, don't make people pay just to cross the road (e.g. Medan Tuanku Monorail).  Station access routes should be integrated with and form part of the wider city accessibility network. 

9. Lack of bicycle parking, poor quality rack design, or bicycle parking that gets clogged up with motorbikes. Make the bicycle parking inaccessible to motorbikes by putting the parking racks close together or raising it up a few steps.  Also provide good motorcycle parking.

10.  No plan for micro-mobility.  If there are safe convenient pathways, micro-mobility becomes an obvious first/last mile solution, easily widening the range around a station to 2km+.  Provide decent parking for people's own micromobility and provide some space for operators like Beam.  Et voila. 

11. Broken lifts and escalators. Specify high-quality, reliable equipment and undertake 'proactive maintenance' (not just reactive) during the night when stations are closed to the public. Provide well-proportioned steps (see point 4) as an alternative.

12. Lack of integration with the bus network and lack of bus information in the station.  Non-feeder busses can stop at MRT stations too if it's a strategic location.  Next bus information should be displayed clearly on screens as soon as you get out of the MRT gates, with clear signage to the bus stop, which should be nearby and covered.

13.  Poor interchange facilities.  Keep interchange stations compact with quick and easy connections between lines.  Make sure paid-to-paid access is provided.

14. If it's a real TOD, integrated with shopping centres etc, have a plan for micro-mobility access.  How are people going to get to the station from north, east, south and west? (Tip: don't make them park their thing far away and then walk).  Also have a plan for late night access.

15. Open the station until late at night (AFTER the last train has gone) and early in the morning.

These types of points can be added into a Requirements Register and Design Principles Matrix.  The principles can be grouped according to type (e.g., accessibility, safety, maintainability etc.), and ranked if needed.  The planners and designers of the stations will then need to demonstrate how they comply with the requirements and principles through their design documentation.  This is planning.  This is design. It must already be in place for other basic requirements (systems, lighting, PA etc.) but the evidence shows it is lacking in terms of accessibility.   MRT Corp needs to have the expertise to develop these requirements/ principles and enforce them.  The designers will almost certainly include international consultants who are well-versed in this kind of thing and should be able to develop compliant designs.

Stakeholders who can't understand the need to get into the station easily (perhaps they always drive and are suffering from 🚗🧠?) can go on training courses and workshops to develop their planning skills.  And they can start using public transport to get to work too.