Subway the best choice for Jakarta: Expert

Subway the best choice for Jakarta: Expert

JAKARTA JP): Despite its massive cost, building a subway
transportation system is the most viable alternative for Jakarta
to solve its ever growing traffic problems, leading urban
planning expert Eko Budihardjo said.

Eko, a lecturer at the state-run Diponegoro University in
Semarang, said that, in the long run, a subway has a lot of
advantages compared to other alternative mass rapid transit
systems, reported the Antara news agency.

The government appeared ready to endorse the plan to build a
subway system in Jakarta, something which had been shunned in the
past because of its enormous cost. It would also be a formidable
and long undertaking, spanning more than the five years a
governor of the city reigns. This means such a commitment could
not be left entirely in the hands of the governor. The decision
must be taken by the central administration.

The Agency for the Research and Application of Technology,
which has taken on the job of looking into various alternative
modes of public transportation for Jakarta, has given signals
that a subway was preferable to an overhead light train.

The government will have to make its decision soon, as to
which mode of public transportation is most appropriate for
Jakarta, because the city's traffic congestion has become
unbearable and unmanageable.

The inefficient public transport system has simply driven most
of Jakarta's population of nine million to opt for their own cars
and this in turn is adding to the congestion.

Eko, a member of the National Research Council, said he
believed that an underground railway system is technologically
feasible for Jakarta and that Indonesia has engineers who are
qualified to design and build the system.

One of the chief attractions of a subway system, over its
alternatives, is that it will do away with the need to acquire
land for the tracks, he said, underlining that land is a very
complex and sensitive issue in big cities, particularly Jakarta.

The biggest obstacle for the project would be in financing it,
with estimates ranging from two-and-a-half to three times the
cost of the other alternatives, he said.

But given its immense benefits, the actual cost becomes
relatively small, especially given that the subway could become
an efficient and comfortable means of transportation.

A subway system is also relatively easier and cheaper to
maintain, hence its benefits are felt in the long term.

Many of the existing subway systems in the world were built
after lengthy and extensive cost-benefit analysis that weighed
the projects' long term benefits against costs, including the
non-quantitative costs such as congestions and pollution.
Initially, many underground railway projects were run at huge
operational losses or were heavily subsidized.

Eko also argued that the actual cost of an underground railway
project does not necessarily add up to three times the cost of an
above ground system.

The price is still negotiable and the government could make
significant cost cuts in some places.

Jakarta, for example, does not have to opt for the luxury
coaches that Singapore uses in its underground railway, he
pointed out.

Eko said the government should consider an underground railway
system not only for Jakarta but also for other cities in
Indonesia that have a population of more than three million.
(emb)