JULY 18 — DBKL today increased the parking rates of the parking bays under its ownership up to 100-200 per cent. While I agree completely that traffic congestion in the cities need to be reduced or risk "stalling” the city, that the public should be encouraged to take public transportation, and the introduction of high parking rates is appropriate for the CBD, the implementation of this hike overall has not been well thought, particularly for the non-CBD areas.

There was insufficient notice to adequate pre-warn Klang Valley residents of such an increase, as significant news of this increase only surfaced earlier this month. How are those earning below their means able to accommodate this sudden jump in cost and make necessary adjustments under such short notice, particularly to a setting where a complete paradigm shift in their travelling patterns needs to occur — a shift that normally may even require a change in occupation.

The rate of fare increase is too steep and drastic to a point it may even significantly deter people from driving to affected areas, depriving businesses of much needed patrons.

DBKL must also be sensitive to the fact that in a working environment where time is money, in some occupations people have no choice but to drive. It is already costly to drive due to petrol cost and car maintenance, alongside other increasing cost of living. The focus should be making it as affordable as possible while at the same time, ensure that drivers do not overstay their welcome.

If the aim is to free up public parking spaces in the city and to encourage people to use public transport or to carpool, there are other ways to do this. It would not even cost drivers a single sen.

Example of a two-hour parking zone in Australia. — Picture courtesy of CPPS

In many developed countries, parking in public bays is typically free (technically tax payers have already paid through road taxes, but that’s a debate for another time), though paid long-term parking lots still exist for those intending to park longer hours or for seasoned-durations, particularly those working in the city.

Drivers can only park for a limited amount of time in these "time zones” for 15-minutes, half an hour, an hour, two-hours, four-hours, etc. The time limits set on parking zones depend on the parking turnover necessary to enable outlets to achieve sustainable business. For instances, in a city centre, parking lots would typically be limited to 15-30 minutes, only to allow workers to conduct brief work-related errands. Too long and businesses would not be able to gain enough patronage volume.

Further out of the city centre and the outskirts, at eateries for example, 30-60 minutes parking zones could be designated to give people a reasonable amount of time for a quick meal whilst not hogging parking spots preventing others from doing the same. A four-hour zone would be typical for places with shopping centres, but even these areas have parking lots limiting drivers to park for a reasonable 30 minutes near supermarkets for the purpose of grocery shopping or other day-to-day errands.

Tyres are chalked by parking attendants to keep track of a car’s arrival.

Upon arrival at a parking bay, tyres are chalked by parking attendants or "meter maids”. This allows attendants to keep track of a car’s arrival and take necessary action if this time is exceeded by issuing summons. Such a time limit will subject drivers to the temporary use of the parking bay and allow others to go about their business. The chalked markings help to encourage compliance as there is something visual for drivers to be mindful about, inducing them to relocate their vehicles — which will crucially open up opportunities for others by shuffling up the pack.

Some drivers are looking to park their vehicles for the whole day, inconveniencing others and is incompatible to the nature of businesses which require a high parking turnover, particularly in shop lot areas. The new parking rates only hurt the little guys who are unable to afford the high cost, ultimately benefiting the rich who do not feel the pinch of the parking rate increases. This only reinforces further elitism as the rich have the means to pay for their stay and it has been made more convenient for them to find parking. That be the case, increasing parking rates in itself may not necessarily reduce congestion, but only increases revenue for the city council. However, credit must be given to DBKL as it is planning a similar initiative with plans to impose a 2-hour limit at CBD areas such as in Bukit Bintang, Imbi and KLCC.

Ultimately, the feasible of any proposal depends on the effectiveness of enforcement overall. More often than not, drivers get away by not paying parking, making it difficult to find available parking bays. Some even parking at unauthorised locations such as bus stops, yellow lines, double-parking and reducing traffic lanes, all adding to further traffic congestion.

DBKL also must realise the prime purpose for these regulations. The issue of reducing traffic congestion is only on the surface. The real problems are the economic cost associate with too many cars driving into the city. In this case, too many cars hogging up parking bays over extended periods of time can be detrimental to business opportunity. Therefore, the primary focus is to stimulate businesses and the economy. If this aim is defeated, then increasing parking fees may not only fail, but risk inflicting further harm than intended.

* Voon Zhen Yi is a research analyst at the Centre for Public Policy Studies.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.