Singapore moving towards less commuting

[slickshifters]

The recently released Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) Draft Master Plan 2013 is also very much a land transport road map supplementing the and contains a strong two-pronged theme - reclaiming the city from the car, and reducing the need to commute, reported The Straits Times.

Uncool IMO. Another bad move by the govt.

 

 

http://www.sgcarmart.com/news/article.php?AID=9238

[Celicar]

Why is it uncool and a bad move?

Uncool IMO. Another bad move by the govt.

 

 

http://www.sgcarmart.com/news/article.php?AID=9238

 

[Wt_know]

once govt settle the additional buses and more mrt lines open

car prices will shoot even higher than what we see now based on the policy that less car more public transport

those who had car now ... better enjoy till coe expired

 

again coming back to the land scarce argument simi percentage of land use for road ... bla bla bla

car is not just luxury ... car is exclusive ... all good things had to be paid ...

means car = no $1M no talk

Edited November 25, 2013 by Wt_know

[Lurpsexx]

What about all of the golf courses lying around? Reclaim those too and more land will be released for tpt and housing.. then no need clamp down on car usage.. got more land for everybody.. this country is hypocritical... serve a select group first and the rest gets the leftovers.... cars for the rich, and buses for the rest of us.. KNN.. :angry:

[Nzy]

What about all of the golf courses lying around? Reclaim those too and more land will be released for tpt and housing.. then no need clamp down on car usage.. got more land for everybody.. this country is hypocritical... serve a select group first and the rest gets the leftovers.... cars for the rich, and buses for the rest of us.. KNN.. :angry:

 

In Singapore, cars are really for the rich ma. Even if they reclaim all the golf courses also won't help with the traffic.

[Penknife]

Im not sure if having a car is a good yardstick to measure whatever you want to measure

 

Although it's a good idea to have residential in the CBD area, most likely it will be built by private developers, which will push up residential prices.

 

I work in the casino and my house is at woodlands. So it's either they build one in the north or have comparable housing prices in the south.

 

Otherwise people will need to commute due to the gap between the 2.

[AhJason]

singapore roads are beginning to feel narrow.. then certain stretches of CTE cannot be expanded due to the housing constraints by the sides...

[Wt_know]

just using a simple math to ascertain car population over human population

 

10% x 6,900,000 = 690,000 car = spore land can tahan

 

means 1 / 10 can own car

[Fuelsaver]

What about all of the golf courses lying around? Reclaim those too and more land will be released for tpt and housing.. then no need clamp down on car usage.. got more land for everybody.. this country is hypocritical... serve a select group first and the rest gets the leftovers.... cars for the rich, and buses for the rest of us.. KNN.. :angry:

the trend had been such in history, albeit now is being done more diplomatically.

 

Still, I'll prefer a nation whr everyone can afford certain rides. Rich buy premium, avg buy bnb.

[Taipan49]

Based on what the URA has recently reported, cycling is being pushed as one of the transport options. Government has basically realised that building more capacity for cars doesn't really add real benefits as that extra capacity just fills so quickly. And when roads are 12% of the country and housing is 14%, it is time to re-prioritise. Don't think this will change ERP/COE etc as there is still a need to limit car numbers. But with more buses, downtown line coming along soon (with more mrt to come), and now cycling added to mix, going to be lots of options for transport.

[Wt_know]

and one way to make people take up other "options" of transport is to make car very very expensive

there is no easy way to do it

 

priority

 

1. mrt

2. bus

3. taxi

 

cycling (to-and-fro mrt/bus station)

 

walking (200-300 meters to destination)

 

car - exclusive (end-to-end)

 

Based on what the URA has recently reported, cycling is being pushed as one of the transport options. Government has basically realised that building more capacity for cars doesn't really add real benefits as that extra capacity just fills so quickly. And when roads are 12% of the country and housing is 14%, it is time to re-prioritise. Don't think this will change ERP/COE etc as there is still a need to limit car numbers. But with more buses, downtown line coming along soon (with more mrt to come), and now cycling added to mix, going to be lots of options for transport.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Wt_know

[Watwheels]

Dun read too much into it. Gahment agencies and gahment themselves often say contradicting things.

 

COE is such a lucrative concept do you think they will want less ppl to own cars?

[Mgmgphyo]

a person living in Punggol can pedal to work in Tampines in 35 minutes (at a leisurely 15km/h). That compares with 14 minutes by car (excluding parking time) and 59 minutes by public transport, according to estimates quoted by the URA.

 

 

car is a necessity as long as taking public transport need 30 minutes or more than by car.

[Maseratigood]

What about all of the golf courses lying around? Reclaim those too and more land will be released for tpt and housing.. then no need clamp down on car usage.. got more land for everybody.. this country is hypocritical... serve a select group first and the rest gets the leftovers.... cars for the rich, and buses for the rest of us.. KNN.. :angry:

Most places do favour the elites n rich. The difference is the extent of how much tilted the rules are towards them. This group may try to down play its privileges on the surface in public by staying low key eg in the case of UK society, but it enjoys the special treatments nonetheless.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Maseratigood

[Nzy]

Dun read too much into it. Gahment agencies and gahment themselves often say contradicting things.

 

COE is such a lucrative concept do you think they will want less ppl to own cars?

 

I doubt they will earn less even if they reduce the number of COEs available. Cuz when the COEs are reduced, the prices increase ma. So it won't affect them much to reduce the number of cars on the roads.

 

car is a necessity as long as taking public transport need 30 minutes or more than by car.

 

Why is it a necessity? Then you mean those who cannot afford cars cannot travel around Singapore?

[Thedream]

I think many are missing the point. The goal here is for "less commuting", not "which mode of commuting". Decentralising and "put more jobs nearer homes" with the goal of people not needing to take transport at all. If I could walk or cycle 10-15 minutes to work instead of driving 30 minutes or more, I certainly would.

 

This says it all: "is finally gaining traction after being on the drawing board since the 1980s". There was little committment previously, with sparse efforts to decentralise. The key is in realising that it is not the Transport ministry to solve our transport problems, but actually the URA.

 

But they still haven't really got it if they say that "a person living in Punggol can pedal to work in Tampines in 35 minutes". They obviously still haven't got a true belief in decentralisation.

 

True committment will be seen when they realise that it actually makes sense to incentivise businesses and even citizens for staying near their workplace.

just using a simple math to ascertain car population over human population

10% x 6,900,000 = 690,000 car = spore land can tahan

means 1 / 10 can own car

 

The limit on vehicles is a direct result of jams on the roads.

 

With true decentralisation, people don't need to take private nor public transport during the peak hours, and there are no jams. So many many more people can own cars.

[Wt_know]

if more people owning car

sat, sun and ph spore road is a public carpark. everywhere you go, there is no carpark. yes, with decentralisation not all drive to the city during morning and evening but with increase car population, other problem arises

Edited November 26, 2013 by Wt_know

[Lurpsexx]

I think many are missing the point. The goal here is for "less commuting", not "which mode of commuting". Decentralising and "put more jobs nearer homes" with the goal of people not needing to take transport at all. If I could walk or cycle 10-15 minutes to work instead of driving 30 minutes or more, I certainly would.

 

This says it all: "is finally gaining traction after being on the drawing board since the 1980s". There was little committment previously, with sparse efforts to decentralise. The key is in realising that it is not the Transport ministry to solve our transport problems, but actually the URA.

 

But they still haven't really got it if they say that "a person living in Punggol can pedal to work in Tampines in 35 minutes". They obviously still haven't got a true belief in decentralisation.

 

True committment will be seen when they realise that it actually makes sense to incentivise businesses and even citizens for staying near their workplace.

 

With true decentralisation, people don't need to take private nor public transport during the peak hours, and there are no jams. So many many more people can own cars.

True words bro...

 

However, to cycle in Singapore weather is not like cycling in Europe.. here is hot and humid all year long, and the road users disregard the safety of the bicyclists.. so until we have a change in road use mentality or have dedicated bike paths and also shower / changing facilities in our offices, I doubt cycling will take off here.. no one wants to come into office all drenched in sweat and smelly, or after being run over by a car! .. these are the nitty gritty small things the URA or LTA also have to consider to make this idea work, as they can be potential show stoppers too

 

Also, for us to work near our workplaces ( and reduce commuting), is not a given choice to us... we travel to where the offices are and not all offices are near or in the suburbs... e.g. I would not want to stay in Jurong West Extension (bad pollution) just bec my office is in Tuas... I won't change our family lifestyle just bec of my work..

 

All in, the idea is good but there are a lot of small devils in the details that can derail this plan.