Bangkok Governor Sukhumbhand Unveils Big Plans For Thai Capital

[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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

-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]

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 March 6, 2010 by phetaroi

[phetaroi]

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]

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.

"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.

"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