Feasibility study to be conducted for Chiang Mai-Lamphun-Lampang transport system

[webfact]

Feasibility study to be conducted for Chiang Mai-Lamphun-Lampang transport system

CHIANG MAI, 23 April 2015, (NNT) - Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna (RMUTL) and Pinkanakorn Development Agency (Public Organization) joined hands in conducting feasibility study on the construction of Chiang Mai-Lamphun-Lampang public transportation system, preparing for the growing economy in the area.

According to the study, there are 4 possible approaches that can be implemented among the 3 provinces as follows; bus rapid transit system which capable of handling 5,000 - 15,000 passengers, a smaller trolleybus system that can handle 3,000 - 8,000 passengers.

The third option is to build a guided bus or a tram system which has a capacity of carrying 5,000 - 8,000 travelers and finally the last viable option is the tram on 2 rails system which can handle 500 - 15,000 passengers.

Pinkanakorn Development Agency initially plans to implement one or more of the aforementioned systems in 3 routes; International Convention Center - Night Safari, conference hall - Mae Guang intersection, and Chiang Mai zoo - Buakkrok intersection. The project covers 430 square meters, 49 sub-districts, 7 districts in Chiang Mai.


-- NNT 2015-04-23

[khwaibah]

Day late and a baht short. There already building a new highway from CNX to Lampang area.

[Saraphee]

49 sub districts, 7 districts all within 430 square metres - now that's overcrowding.................

[CMMCB]

1. Passengers per vehicle, per day, or per what?

2. None of the terminuses are in Lamphun or Lampang, so why call it a "Chiang Mai-Lamphun-Lampang public transportation system" when it's only CM, as far as I can see?

3. There's already a CM-Lamphun-Lampang transport system - the railway, in addition to a number of roads, including our lovely superhighway. So why would such a system be needed?

4. Saraphee's criticism (above).

5. "joined hands"? so the feasibility study has already been conducted, but no results re costs are reported. But four alternatives are reported, even though the headline says the study is "to be conducted". Past or future, guys?

6. The passenger capacity figures seem totally arbitrary ranges and unrelated to the type of vehicle.

Why do so many journalists whose work is reported on TV seem to not have any idea about what they are writing about or how to present useful or interesting information to readers?

Sorry, rant of ex-jounalism teacher over.

Edited April 25, 2015 by CMMCB