Bangkok Administration To Demolish Saphan Taksin Station, Put In Moving Walkways

[webfact]

BMA to demolish Saphan Taksin Station, put in moving walkways
Patinya Iamtan
The Nation



BANGKOK: -- To relieve the problematic bottleneck on the Skytrain's Silom Line, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) plans to demolish Saphan Taksin Station and install additional tracks.

BMA Deputy Governor Amorn Kijchawengkul said yesterday that moving walkways would be installed from Surasak Station to the river, and the area underneath Taksin station would be turned into a public park and multipurpose area.

Executives of the BMA and Bangkok Mass Transit System (BTSC) have agreed they would install the additional track on the area used by the Saphan Taksin station platforms. They would also build a 700-metre skywalk with moving walkways to connect Surasak Station to the Chao Phraya River piers.

The Skytrain's Silom Line constricts to one track at Saphan Taksin station, a bottleneck that causes frequent delays.

Amorn said officials would look into the concession contract regulations to see if station demolition was allowed or if they had to amend the regulations before demolition.

In related news, the BMA and the Metropolitan Police Bureau have reminded street vendors to strictly obey BMA regulations that prohibit sales on Mondays to ease traffic problems as schools reopen. Authorities will survey suitable areas for vendors to trade and consider whether they can increase or decrease the number of the trading areas on Friday after doing the survey.


-- The Nation 2013-05-08

[Bobobirdiebuddy]

Boondoggle, Thai style. As I was once told by a denizen of a Soi 4 drinking establishment "Money fly away." Utter nonsense.

[doctorproc156]

Haahaa I hope that this was their plan all along so someone makes more money. Other wise the people were behind this must be so incredibly misguided and have no idea what they are doing and should not be doing this on the first place...

Edited May 8, 2013 by anantha92

[DGS1244]

Ten years ago they agreed that this would have to happen, now they state 'Amorn said officials would look into the concession contract regulations to see if station demolition was allowed or if they had to amend the regulations before demolition.' as usual TIT.

[HerbalEd]

Boondoggle, Thai style. As I was once told by a denizen of a Soi 4 drinking establishment "Money fly away." Utter nonsense.

Why do you automatically assume this is a scam. Do you actually have proof of such ... or do you assume the worst every time?

[konfuzed]

i like the amend the regulations idea... if its not in the current contract and concessions, no worries, we will retroactively introduce a law to give the government the right to do what it wants...

[PETERTHEEATER]

I'm having trouble understanding this!

After the proposed changes are made, passengers who previously got off at Taksin Station will now be expected to travel 700 meters on moving walkways? Shades of Suwanabhumi!

[lee b]

What happens when i get taken to bangkok court again then???

[metisdead]

Another post by same member using all caps has been removed. Turn off your Caps Lock button when posting. Nobody is posting using all caps, there is no need to shout.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

I'm having trouble understanding this!

After the proposed changes are made, passengers who previously got off at Taksin Station will now be expected to travel 700 meters on moving walkways? Shades of Suwanabhumi!

Yep, you got the idea correct!!!

The only thing I want to know is... will the BMA alllow T-shirt vendors, som tam carts and fake prescription drug tables along the moving walkways section -- just like they allow everywhere else in the city.

Or maybe instead, they can move the CP river closer to Surasak by 700 meter???

But seriously, don't know why they can't rebuilt-remodel the existing ST station to be wider and accommodate the added track line they need to install there. The added track section is needed to make the Silom line run efficiently, after they expanded the line to include service on the other side of the river and no longer had ST as the terminal station.

Edited May 8, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[kotsak]

I'm having trouble understanding this!

After the proposed changes are made, passengers who previously got off at Taksin Station will now be expected to travel 700 meters on moving walkways? Shades of Suwanabhumi!

Yep, you got the idea correct!!!

The only thing I want to know is... will the BMA alllow T-shirt vendors, som tam carts and fake prescription drug tables along the moving walkways section -- just like they allow everywhere else in the city.

Or maybe instead, they can move the CP river closer to Surasak by 700 meter???

But seriously, don't know why they can't rebuilt-remodel the existing ST station to be wider and accommodate the added track line they need to install there. The added track section is needed to make the Silom line run efficiently, after they expanded the line to include service on the other side of the river and no longer had ST as the terminal station.

The current station is built between the two traffic lanes crossing the river.. There is no room unless they rebuild the station much higher than the bridge or on its own bridge.

[richard_smith237]

But seriously, don't know why they can't rebuilt-remodel the existing ST station to be wider and accommodate the added track line they need to install there.

Because there isn't enough space between the lanes of the bridge which straddles the station.

The only solution would be widen the bridge and generate space for 2 tracks and the station, quite an undertaking which would be catastrophic to traffic in the area.

Given the space of the area, I suspect this is the only real viable option.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Thanks for the info... Hadn't thought about that layout... So they're going to use the space now used for the passenger platforms for the added track,

They could just have the trains open their doors there and let people jump out.... But I guess that wouldn't work too well....

Edited May 8, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[whybother]

Thanks for the info... Hadn't thought about that layout... So they're going to use the space now used for the passenger platforms for the added track,

They could just have the trains open their doors there and let people jump out.... But I guess that wouldn't work too well....

They were trialling that at another station a month or so ago weren't they?

[tw25rw]

As I understand it, the station was always temporary. Trouble is, people are used to it being there. As the one platform blocks where one line would run, there's no alternative but to remove the station now that the line no longer terminates there..

[kotsak]

Thanks for the info... Hadn't thought about that layout... So they're going to use the space now used for the passenger platforms for the added track,

They could just have the trains open their doors there and let people jump out.... But I guess that wouldn't work too well....

They were trialling that at another station a month or so ago weren't they?

Yes but noone was willing to get off there..

[Lakegeneve]

kotsak, on 08 May 2013 - 19:11, said:

TallGuyJohninBKK, on 08 May 2013 - 18:54, said:

PETERTHEEATER, on 08 May 2013 - 12:27, said:

I'm having trouble understanding this!

After the proposed changes are made, passengers who previously got off at Taksin Station will now be expected to travel 700 meters on moving walkways? Shades of Suwanabhumi!

Yep, you got the idea correct!!!

The only thing I want to know is... will the BMA alllow T-shirt vendors, som tam carts and fake prescription drug tables along the moving walkways section -- just like they allow everywhere else in the city.

Or maybe instead, they can move the CP river closer to Surasak by 700 meter???

But seriously, don't know why they can't rebuilt-remodel the existing ST station to be wider and accommodate the added track line they need to install there. The added track section is needed to make the Silom line run efficiently, after they expanded the line to include service on the other side of the river and no longer had ST as the terminal station.

The current station is built between the two traffic lanes crossing the river.. There is no room unless they rebuild the station much higher than the bridge or on its own bridge.

Not sure what you mean by the last bit of that sentence as the BTS viaduct does connect with its own bridge just beyond ST station. You stand on the platform and you can see that fact. It was built back in 2001/2.

The building higher is not an option as it would involve rebuilding a higher viaduct for a significant length and a new higher BTS bridge.

These pics should make that clear (and what the issue it for those that are unclear):

Quote

You are correct to point out that ST has been open since the BTS system commenced on 5 Dec 99. However, what are you talking about?? The bottle neck is NOT the bridge, the bridge has two tracks, the bottle neck is at the station which has only one track given that ST is built on the outbound track right of way. These 3 images should make that clear;

(Note: credit for images to Khun gwmss15 on http://2bangkok.com/...-Opened!/page17)

1) Saphan Taksin bridge span taken from the west end of the platform.

2) ST station view. The platform are is built upon the outbound track right of way.

3) Taken from the east ed of ST looking east towards Surasak direction

Edited May 9, 2013 by Lakegeneve

[Lakegeneve]

This yet another typical regurgitated puff article which has slapped together without any context nor reference to previous statements on the matter - so unfortunately common in the thai press. There really is nothing new here from the last Nation article, http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/559468-bangkok-to-close-saphan-taksin-skytrain-station-to-ease-bottleneck/

(Which does give a much greater context and info. Good discussion on that TV thread as well)

Had a decent reporter actually interviewed the Deputy Gov, s/he might have asked what happened to the previous Dec 2012 deadline to demolish the station. May have also asked what happened to the Govs statements that he would seek other solutions or even given some context that the BMA has been in a fight with the Rural Hwys Dept regarding retro-engineering Saphan Taksin to allow ST to stay and be redesigned.

The fact that a solution needs to be found prior to the whole Bang Wah ext opening (originally Dec 2012, 1st two stations by Feb 2013, 3rd and 4th station will open Dec 2013) is not even mentioned.

Most of that info gives some context to this issue. Forget that though, why not write a quick puff piece which bewilders most readers and highlights that journos can't even be bothered to research their own publishers previous stories let alone do a little superficial investigative journalism on the history of a subject.

For those asking why demolish ST station I'll copy my previous post (#78) on the other thread:

My gut says that this announcement is a power play. They ask for permission, were denied - then announce the closure of that station because they can't get co-operation. Two major 5 star hotels, the river boat, and a lot of other interested parties with significant pull/money complain loudly. The issue gets escalated, and they get permission to expand the station.

I think there is some merit in your first sentence. The mooted plan last year was to completely re-engineer the city bound south span of Taksin bridge and essentially extend it 1.5 lanes further south thus creating enough room for a new platform by then taking the air space above and/or demolishing the right lane. It is an expensive plan (a few billion baht) but does provide for a long term solution to keep Saphan Taksin station. (I'll see if I can find the render). The BMA needs Highways Dept to approve and the central govt to fund it.

However, given the ongoing political battels between the BMA and MOT which have recently become more acute since the BMA extended the BTSC's concession, and ongoing spats with the Highways Dept. it would make sense for the BMA to attempt to use public opinion to gain some political and financial traction.

I am of the view that a single city bound platform could be built on the east side of Charoen Krung rd which can be linked to the current station concourse under the viaduct via an extended concourse link. The WWY bound platform could then be extended in length and slightly expanded while the part of the station currently built upon the WWY line could be demolished and the station lengthen and re-engineered with platform barriers for pax safety.

One thing to consider, in the original plans for extending the BTS across the river to WWY (now open) and beyond to Phetkasem road (opening in two stages, late 2012 and 2013) it was originally envisage that there would be 3 stations to WWY with one station immediately on the other side of the river above Charoen Nakhon rd. This was to provide a direct, cross river travel option (until ST was demolished) and to connect with Charoen Nakhon rd . However, due to funding limitations, and partially the opposition of ferry operators, the BMA cut one station and only built two, KrungThonburi & WWY.

IF that cross river station had of been built it would be providing an ongoing river interchange option than what is currently being proposed which is nada expect for a long 1km walk to Surasak.

The Gov made a big statement about finding a solution to this prior to being reelected. I still don't consider it a fait accompli that ST will be demolished but the slow inertia of decision making appears to be heading that way. The walkway plan is really quite ludicrous.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Ahhh.... so it WOULD be possible to rebuild-reengineer ST Station to allow for the added BTS track section... Interesting.

Equally interesting the past notion of building a new/replacement section on the other side of the river.

Someone needs to remind the BMA and the central government of the immortal words of Rodney King:

"Can't we all just get along" ... and do what's best for the people we're supposed to be there to serve.

PS - Also interesting that the prior The Nation article that LG linked to above makes reference to the BMA earlier saying they'd need approval of the Interior Ministry for demolishing the ST station. No mention of that in the OP news report here. But ya, like that's gonna happen...

Meanwhile, Deputy Bangkok Governor Theerachon Manomaipiboon said the BMA would inform a BTSC coordination committee of the answer it had received from the Department of Rural Roads and present its plan to close down the Saphan Taksin Station.

"After that, we will seek permission from the interior minister to go ahead with this plan," he said.

Edited May 9, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[whybother]

Ahhh.... so it WOULD be possible to rebuild-reengineer ST Station to allow for the added BTS track section... Interesting.

Equally interesting the past notion of building a new/replacement section on the other side of the river.

Someone needs to remind the BMA and the central government of the immortal words of Rodney King:

"Can't we all just get along" ... and do what's best for the people we're supposed to be there to serve.

PS - Also interesting that the prior The Nation article that LG linked to above makes reference to the BMA earlier saying they'd need approval of the Interior Ministry for demolishing the ST station. No mention of that in the OP news report here. But ya, like that's gonna happen...

Meanwhile, Deputy Bangkok Governor Theerachon Manomaipiboon said the BMA would inform a BTSC coordination committee of the answer it had received from the Department of Rural Roads and present its plan to close down the Saphan Taksin Station.

"After that, we will seek permission from the interior minister to go ahead with this plan," he said.

The road bridge would need to be widened to allow the platform to be moved and a second track to be put in. The same issue of their not being enough space exists on the other side of the river.

[Will2011]

With appropriate computerized timing system platform, I think there wouldn't be any delays that happen right now because of Saphan Taksin bottleneck. Indeed, if trains were on a specific schedule, they could avoid stopping before the bottleneck. Japanese train management would be a valuable source of knowledge, as they are known for their train timing efficiency.

[whybother]

With appropriate computerized timing system platform, I think there wouldn't be any delays that happen right now because of Saphan Taksin bottleneck. Indeed, if trains were on a specific schedule, they could avoid stopping before the bottleneck. Japanese train management would be a valuable source of knowledge, as they are known for their train timing efficiency.

If a train is running every 3-4 minutes, and it physically takes a train 4-5 minutes to get through, computerized timing isn't going to help.

Sent from my Phone.

[Will2011]

With appropriate computerized timing system platform, I think there wouldn't be any delays that happen right now because of Saphan Taksin bottleneck. Indeed, if trains were on a specific schedule, they could avoid stopping before the bottleneck. Japanese train management would be a valuable source of knowledge, as they are known for their train timing efficiency.

If a train is running every 3-4 minutes, and it physically takes a train 4-5 minutes to get through, computerized timing isn't going to help.

Sent from my Phone.

Then, we didn't learn math at the same school! Just like today, the train stopped 3 seconds at the light as the other train was crossing almost at the same time. It doesn't take too much to slow down a bit so that trains don't need to stop at the bottleneck.

[whybother]

With appropriate computerized timing system platform, I think there wouldn't be any delays that happen right now because of Saphan Taksin bottleneck. Indeed, if trains were on a specific schedule, they could avoid stopping before the bottleneck. Japanese train management would be a valuable source of knowledge, as they are known for their train timing efficiency.

If a train is running every 3-4 minutes, and it physically takes a train 4-5 minutes to get through, computerized timing isn't going to help.

Sent from my Phone.

Then, we didn't learn math at the same school! Just like today, the train stopped 3 seconds at the light as the other train was crossing almost at the same time. It doesn't take too much to slow down a bit so that trains don't need to stop at the bottleneck.

If they're not stopping at the bottleneck (ie. the station) then there is no problem if they demolish it.

We might not have gone to the same school, but it seems you haven't actually been at Saphan Taksin station either.

[Will2011]

With appropriate computerized timing system platform, I think there wouldn't be any delays that happen right now because of Saphan Taksin bottleneck. Indeed, if trains were on a specific schedule, they could avoid stopping before the bottleneck. Japanese train management would be a valuable source of knowledge, as they are known for their train timing efficiency.

If a train is running every 3-4 minutes, and it physically takes a train 4-5 minutes to get through, computerized timing isn't going to help.

Sent from my Phone.

Then, we didn't learn math at the same school! Just like today, the train stopped 3 seconds at the light as the other train was crossing almost at the same time. It doesn't take too much to slow down a bit so that trains don't need to stop at the bottleneck.

If they're not stopping at the bottleneck (ie. the station) then there is no problem if they demolish it.

We might not have gone to the same school, but it seems you haven't actually been at Saphan Taksin station either.

Just to clarify, as I pass by Saphan Taksin EVERY DAY, the trains stop before the station (on the bridge and between Surasak and Saphan) due to the bottleneck. If there was an appropriate computerized system, trains wouldn't need to stop as they wouldn't cross the bottleneck at the same time. As a result, it would avoid demolition and its high costs. The second advantage would be for commuters as they would keep using this relatively requested destination. Not to mention that it appears to be non-cognitive approach to demolish something that just has been built.

I hope it helps understand the concept.

[whybother]

Just to clarify, as I pass by Saphan Taksin EVERY DAY, the trains stop before the station (on the bridge and between Surasak and Saphan) due to the bottleneck. If there was an appropriate computerized system, trains wouldn't need to stop as they wouldn't cross the bottleneck at the same time. As a result, it would avoid demolition and its high costs. The second advantage would be for commuters as they would keep using this relatively requested destination. Not to mention that it appears to be non-cognitive approach to demolish something that just has been built.

I hope it helps understand the concept.

I don't think you have any idea what the problem actually is.

The bottleneck isn't just the single point where the tracks join. It's the whole section of track from where they join on one side, through the platform, to the section where the tracks separate on the other side.

They want to increase the frequency of trains, but since it takes several minutes for a train to go onto the single track, stop at the station to let passengers on and off, and then continue out of the way, it makes it difficult to increase the frequency of trains.

If the trains are running every 4 minutes and it takes more than 4 minutes for a train to pass from one side of the station, stop at the platform, and then pass to the other side of the station, a computerised system can't get rid of the bottleneck. The only thing that can get rid of the bottleneck (on a single track platform) is to spend less time dropping off/picking up passengers.

[bkk_mike]

You either demolish the station and do what they're talking about with walkways from Surasak... (I'd hope they'd build the walkways first - and then quickly demolish the station and lay the required second track)

Or, think of something else...

There isn't the room to have a second track with the station the way it is now, but the tracks are sufficiently far above the roadway so that, wouldn't it be possible to have a passenger platform above the traffic, maybe a little further back from the river (to be sure there's enough of a height gap). Admittedly, the passengers would probably have to get to the platforms using walkways over the traffic because it wouldn't leave a lot of room for steps (at least on one side - I think you could squeeze in regular steps on the side with the existing platform)...

They could make the existing platform narrower, although I think they'd have to move the stairs to do it... - i.e. lay tracks where most of the existing platform is - and extend the platform back a little (so that there's still room for people to stand). This would mean you would only stop at the station when travelling westbound (towards Krung-thonburi). Less convenient for passengers using it than currently, but it avoids getting rid of the station as a whole and still gets rid of the bottleneck. - they could even still build the walkway, but the moving walkways would only be needed in one direction.

[whybother]

You either demolish the station and do what they're talking about with walkways from Surasak... (I'd hope they'd build the walkways first - and then quickly demolish the station and lay the required second track)

Or, think of something else...

There isn't the room to have a second track with the station the way it is now, but the tracks are sufficiently far above the roadway so that, wouldn't it be possible to have a passenger platform above the traffic, maybe a little further back from the river (to be sure there's enough of a height gap). Admittedly, the passengers would probably have to get to the platforms using walkways over the traffic because it wouldn't leave a lot of room for steps (at least on one side - I think you could squeeze in regular steps on the side with the existing platform)...

They could make the existing platform narrower, although I think they'd have to move the stairs to do it... - i.e. lay tracks where most of the existing platform is - and extend the platform back a little (so that there's still room for people to stand). This would mean you would only stop at the station when travelling westbound (towards Krung-thonburi). Less convenient for passengers using it than currently, but it avoids getting rid of the station as a whole and still gets rid of the bottleneck. - they could even still build the walkway, but the moving walkways would only be needed in one direction.

"but the tracks are sufficiently far above the roadway so that, wouldn't it be possible to have a passenger platform above the traffic,"

Have a look at google street view to see how much room there is "above the roadway". The road and the track at basically at the same level.

http://maps.google.com/?ll=13.718959,100.514186&spn=0.001514,0.002642&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=13.718959,100.514186&panoid=9YUzniUYgrrylVabo3SoIg&cbp=12,146.33,,0,11.42

[Lakegeneve]

Thai press today are reporting that the 710m walkway will start construction in July. No tender yet - that I am aware of - so I'll believe that start date when I see it.

[Lakegeneve]

Just to clarify, as I pass by Saphan Taksin EVERY DAY, the trains stop before the station (on the bridge and between Surasak and Saphan) due to the bottleneck. If there was an appropriate computerized system, trains wouldn't need to stop as they wouldn't cross the bottleneck at the same time. As a result, it would avoid demolition and its high costs. The second advantage would be for commuters as they would keep using this relatively requested destination. Not to mention that it appears to be non-cognitive approach to demolish something that just has been built.

I hope it helps understand the concept.

I don't think you have any idea what the problem actually is.

The bottleneck isn't just the single point where the tracks join. It's the whole section of track from where they join on one side, through the platform, to the section where the tracks separate on the other side.

They want to increase the frequency of trains, but since it takes several minutes for a train to go onto the single track, stop at the station to let passengers on and off, and then continue out of the way, it makes it difficult to increase the frequency of trains.

If the trains are running every 4 minutes and it takes more than 4 minutes for a train to pass from one side of the station, stop at the platform, and then pass to the other side of the station, a computerised system can't get rid of the bottleneck. The only thing that can get rid of the bottleneck (on a single track platform) is to spend less time dropping off/picking up passengers.

Prior to the WWY ext opening in May 2009 the peak headway on the Silom line was 2:40. (On Suk line it was 2:20). That allowed sufficient dwell time at S5 for the driver.

In the weeks after the opening even with the split platform modality (west end for WWY, east end for Silom) the BTS quickly discovered that it could not keep anything to schedule - remember this was still pre CNR 4 car trains on the Silom line. A new timetable came out in late June/early July which made the headway 5 mins all day up until 10pm. This gave some flexibility.

It doesn't matter if you have 'Japanese computerised signalling' or 'some new alien signaling technology' - there are physical parameters at play.(Unless you can change the time space continuum!)

You need a dwell time at the station for pax to dismebark and embark. Having 10 door rolling stock could reduce that - as the Yamanote (Circle) line in Tokyo does - as it reduces the dwell time but we are stuck with 4 door rolling stock. The trains can only travel at a low speed in this zone. You also need a safe time-frame for each train to clear the turnout in case of sudden stoppage or delay to avoid potential for accidents. You might be able to shave a few seconds here and there but I doubt that you can reduce the required time significantly.

If you can refer to Japanese computerised technology being used anywhere in the world where a single track platform is used for bi-directional trains you might have some substance to your suggestion. The fact is that I am only aware of one such single track platform being used on a commuter line in Germany. I don't know of any metro example anywhere in the world - historically yes.

As the whole extension will open by the end of the year, and as pax rates increase and rolling stock length increase in years to come this bottleneck will only get worse. Any delay has a domino effect on the whole line.