BANNED - E-scooters to be banned from Singapore's footpaths starting Nov 5

[inlinesix]

10 hours ago, Sosaria said:

They just don't have enough enforcers, plain and simple. There has been manpower issue in all kinds of enforcement, over several agencies. Now this PMD issue is far from settled, because after the enthusiastic 1st day where I saw enforcers on both sides of a road checking PMDs, the enforcement activity seem to have been quietly suspended since then, and I'll bet it was because of the backlash. Today I saw PMDs happily ridden on the footpath and not a single enforcement officer around.

I had said numerous times to use technology for enforcement.

[Twister]

2 hours ago, Ysc3 said:

someone previously mentioned that with the conversion of  PMDs to E-bikes .... how is the public going to be more assured if E-bike presence is safer than PMDs ?

anyone come across anything yet ? any legislation ?

Already many converted to ebike , but still riding on the footpath instead on the road.

Comparing to escooter, ebike are bigger in size, will take up more space along the shared path..

So.. are we solving the problem of escooter on footpath? Simple answer is NO.. we are bringing the ebike on footpath problem out again... Where is the ENFORCEMENT?? Back to square one.. regardless of escooter or ebike..

So why spending $7M, but same same but different problem.. 🤦‍♂️

[Voodooman]

3 hours ago, Mustank said:

I know who secretly happy about ban

moto delivery people, less competition 

now they quiet quiet arm chio 

Some type of F&B business (steakhouse, McD, Domino) are happy, mall owners too. This gig economy will kill retail further. 

[Voodooman]

4 minutes ago, Twister said:

Already many converted to ebike , but still riding on the footpath instead on the road.

Comparing to escooter, ebike are bigger in size, will take up more space along the shared path..

So.. are we solving the problem of escooter on footpath? Simple answer is NO.. we are bringing the ebike on footpath problem out again... Where is the ENFORCEMENT?? Back to square one.. regardless of escooter or ebike..

So why spending $7M, but same same but different problem.. 🤦‍♂️

Exactly what i said earlier, we are just not solving the issue but moving it from one basket to another.  Also, I don’t really want to bang into a reckless YP on the road with his ebikes, these people have issues with authority, they are not going to follow traffic rules and our roads are a lot less forgiving. 
 

 

[inlinesix]

Everyone with bad experience should write to [email protected]. Flood it with respective incidents and facts.

If you don’t do your part, nobody can help you.

[Carbon82]

This article sum all up. Will the writer be fixed?!

Is Singapore serious about going car-lite?

Getting out of a taxi in Beijing the other day, I was almost run over by an e-scooter.

But the delivery rider, whose reflexes had probably been honed from dodging pedestrians, swerved in the nick of time and averted disaster.

In truth, it was my fault. The taxi had stopped beside a bike lane – a well-used artery by Beijing’s many delivery riders – and I swung the door open and stepped out without checking for an oncoming rider.

In this city, these riders are a part of everyday life. Legions of them grease the cogs of the Chinese economy, delivering food for office workers in Beijing and elsewhere.

They are also the backbone of the country’s e-commerce sector, with some delivering as many as 150 parcels in a single day.

In a nod to their importance, a formation of riders rode past Tiananmen Square during the country’s 70th anniversary parade in Beijing last month – alongside tanks, drones and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Looking at them zip up and down Beijing’s streets brings to mind the situation back in Singapore.

Two weeks ago, the Government effectively banned e-scooters from footpaths when it decided to take a tough stand against reckless riders.

It meant that overnight, e-scooters – already banned on the roads – were confined to the 440km of cycling paths islandwide, instead of the 5,500km of footpaths riders could use before.

It caused immediate consternation among riders worried that their means of making a living had gone up in smoke, leading many to petition their MPs.

The Transport Ministry came up with a $7 million grant to help riders replace their e-scooters with e-bikes or bicycles. But coming just days after the initial ban, it felt a bit like putting a plaster on a bullet hole.

More importantly, the ban has also caused some head-scratching among mobility advocates – they ask why the Government would effectively snuff out such a popular alternative to cars if it was truly serious about making Singapore car-lite.

There are about 100,000 registered e-scooters in Singapore, roughly one-sixth the number of cars on the road last year.

That their numbers grew so quickly is a testament to how Singaporeans view their efficiency, and also shows that these devices have a place in a car-lite Singapore.

They are more energy-efficient and less polluting than cars, and take up less space on our land-scarce island.

Singapore is not unique in its concerns over personal mobility devices (PMDs) – in China, these devices have also caused a spate of accidents and fires.

During the five-year period from 2013, PMDs were involved in 56,200 accidents that resulted in injuries or fatalities nationwide.

It prompted the Chinese government to slap limits on the speed, weight and power of these devices, boost enforcement and roll out public education campaigns on safe riding – all measures that Singapore has also taken.

But China has done something else that Singapore has not.

Here in the Chinese capital, bike lanes line almost every public road, serving to separate PMD traffic from pedestrians on the footpaths, and vehicular traffic on the road.

If putting PMDs in the same lane as pedestrians is causing accidents, then we must find another way.

Banning them from footpaths and then suggesting that riders switch to e-bikes or bicycles just transfers the problem elsewhere.

Also, it is one thing to go out for a leisurely bicycle ride on the park connectors, but another thing altogether to have to deliver more than 20 orders a day on a pedal-powered bicycle.

It stands to reason that e-scooters have surged in popularity over the last few years because e-bikes are also not allowed on footpaths; on the roads, riders are at the mercy of traffic.

I am not suggesting that the lives of PMD users are any more valuable than those of pedestrians, but the Government should find a balance where it protects the most number of lives, while still moving Singapore towards its car-lite vision.

Many have asked why the Government still seems to be prioritising road traffic while espousing the virtues of active mobility.

Former Nominated MP Calvin Cheng wrote in a Facebook note last week that the Marina Coastal Expressway was built in five years to ease traffic for cars, “the precise form of transport the Government wants to discourage”.

Although work is under way to build a network of shared paths and park connectors, this will only amount to a fraction of the road network – some 1,300km by 2030.

Included in this network are also shared paths – lanes where foot traffic will still be mixed with bicycles, motorised wheelchairs and other powered devices.

The end result will likely be that a car would still be the most convenient and efficient way of getting from A to B.

The argument against segregated lanes for bicycles and PMDs always seems to lead to the point that ours is an island starved for space. But as many have pointed out, for a land-scarce country, we seem to be able to find a lot of room for roads.

Recovering room from vehicular traffic is neither a new nor radical suggestion.

As early as 2012, outspoken mobility advocate Francis Chu and other cycling enthusiasts had embarked on a project to measure road widths around the island as they tried to figure out if Singapore had room for segregated lanes.

They found that widths varied widely, and in many areas, space could be carved out on the road shoulder for separate lanes – narrower roads also have the added effect of regulating traffic speeds, making the streets safer for all.

This is a solution that does not require copious resources, but significant political will.

Two years ago, before leaving Singapore for China, I was on the transport beat, reporting on the bike-share companies that were just then entering the local market.

There was excitement in the community that the nascent industry would herald a car-lite Singapore.

Two years on, shared bikes have disappeared, choked out by legislation targeting indiscriminate parking.

Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities research fellow Julienne Chen wrote a widely shared commentary for CNA in August, arguing that Singapore should make room for PMDs, which were a chance for a “second bite at the apple” after the failure of shared bikes.

It is a point worth mulling over – is Singapore serious about going car-lite? It’s time to have a long hard think about what that means.

[Volvobrick]

5 minutes ago, Davidtch said:

Everyone with bad experience should write to [email protected]. Flood it with respective incidents and facts.

If you don’t do your part, nobody can help you.

I think emails would just go straight into Trash folder and auto empty.....upon start up. 

[Beregond]

51 minutes ago, Carbon82 said:

 

It is a point worth mulling over – is Singapore serious about going car-lite? It’s time to have a long hard think about what that means.

the ans is we are not serious about it, the ideal of car lite is to entertain those green environmentalist.

score some points with AM etc only😉

[inlinesix]

Govt is serious about car lite with ZERO growth on COE.

On the other hand, they are not proactive in managing consequence of car lite.

There are a lot of places in Singapore faces 1st/last mile connectivity issue.

As car driver, we usually don’t realize this problem.

[Ysc3]

1 hour ago, Voodooman said:

Exactly what i said earlier, we are just not solving the issue but moving it from one basket to another.  Also, I don’t really want to bang into a reckless YP on the road with his ebikes, these people have issues with authority, they are not going to follow traffic rules and our roads are a lot less forgiving. 
 

 

Yup... That's what I understand from the post... But I am waiting for the regulations to come out - before things go bad again. Lta has to upfront about it. 

[Mustank]

Siang hoh grab rider on ebike Cheong Ang hey langah grab food boss then I see whether they want to start making joker ride around with number plate or not

[Ender]

1 hour ago, Carbon82 said:

This article sum all up. Will the writer be fixed?!

Is Singapore serious about going car-lite?

Getting out of a taxi in Beijing the other day, I was almost run over by an e-scooter.

But the delivery rider, whose reflexes had probably been honed from dodging pedestrians, swerved in the nick of time and averted disaster.

In truth, it was my fault. The taxi had stopped beside a bike lane – a well-used artery by Beijing’s many delivery riders – and I swung the door open and stepped out without checking for an oncoming rider.

In this city, these riders are a part of everyday life. Legions of them grease the cogs of the Chinese economy, delivering food for office workers in Beijing and elsewhere.

They are also the backbone of the country’s e-commerce sector, with some delivering as many as 150 parcels in a single day.

In a nod to their importance, a formation of riders rode past Tiananmen Square during the country’s 70th anniversary parade in Beijing last month – alongside tanks, drones and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Looking at them zip up and down Beijing’s streets brings to mind the situation back in Singapore.

Two weeks ago, the Government effectively banned e-scooters from footpaths when it decided to take a tough stand against reckless riders.

It meant that overnight, e-scooters – already banned on the roads – were confined to the 440km of cycling paths islandwide, instead of the 5,500km of footpaths riders could use before.

It caused immediate consternation among riders worried that their means of making a living had gone up in smoke, leading many to petition their MPs.

The Transport Ministry came up with a $7 million grant to help riders replace their e-scooters with e-bikes or bicycles. But coming just days after the initial ban, it felt a bit like putting a plaster on a bullet hole.

More importantly, the ban has also caused some head-scratching among mobility advocates – they ask why the Government would effectively snuff out such a popular alternative to cars if it was truly serious about making Singapore car-lite.

There are about 100,000 registered e-scooters in Singapore, roughly one-sixth the number of cars on the road last year.

That their numbers grew so quickly is a testament to how Singaporeans view their efficiency, and also shows that these devices have a place in a car-lite Singapore.

They are more energy-efficient and less polluting than cars, and take up less space on our land-scarce island.

Singapore is not unique in its concerns over personal mobility devices (PMDs) – in China, these devices have also caused a spate of accidents and fires.

During the five-year period from 2013, PMDs were involved in 56,200 accidents that resulted in injuries or fatalities nationwide.

It prompted the Chinese government to slap limits on the speed, weight and power of these devices, boost enforcement and roll out public education campaigns on safe riding – all measures that Singapore has also taken.

But China has done something else that Singapore has not.

Here in the Chinese capital, bike lanes line almost every public road, serving to separate PMD traffic from pedestrians on the footpaths, and vehicular traffic on the road.

If putting PMDs in the same lane as pedestrians is causing accidents, then we must find another way.

Banning them from footpaths and then suggesting that riders switch to e-bikes or bicycles just transfers the problem elsewhere.

Also, it is one thing to go out for a leisurely bicycle ride on the park connectors, but another thing altogether to have to deliver more than 20 orders a day on a pedal-powered bicycle.

It stands to reason that e-scooters have surged in popularity over the last few years because e-bikes are also not allowed on footpaths; on the roads, riders are at the mercy of traffic.

I am not suggesting that the lives of PMD users are any more valuable than those of pedestrians, but the Government should find a balance where it protects the most number of lives, while still moving Singapore towards its car-lite vision.

Many have asked why the Government still seems to be prioritising road traffic while espousing the virtues of active mobility.

Former Nominated MP Calvin Cheng wrote in a Facebook note last week that the Marina Coastal Expressway was built in five years to ease traffic for cars, “the precise form of transport the Government wants to discourage”.

Although work is under way to build a network of shared paths and park connectors, this will only amount to a fraction of the road network – some 1,300km by 2030.

Included in this network are also shared paths – lanes where foot traffic will still be mixed with bicycles, motorised wheelchairs and other powered devices.

The end result will likely be that a car would still be the most convenient and efficient way of getting from A to B.

The argument against segregated lanes for bicycles and PMDs always seems to lead to the point that ours is an island starved for space. But as many have pointed out, for a land-scarce country, we seem to be able to find a lot of room for roads.

Recovering room from vehicular traffic is neither a new nor radical suggestion.

As early as 2012, outspoken mobility advocate Francis Chu and other cycling enthusiasts had embarked on a project to measure road widths around the island as they tried to figure out if Singapore had room for segregated lanes.

They found that widths varied widely, and in many areas, space could be carved out on the road shoulder for separate lanes – narrower roads also have the added effect of regulating traffic speeds, making the streets safer for all.

This is a solution that does not require copious resources, but significant political will.

Two years ago, before leaving Singapore for China, I was on the transport beat, reporting on the bike-share companies that were just then entering the local market.

There was excitement in the community that the nascent industry would herald a car-lite Singapore.

Two years on, shared bikes have disappeared, choked out by legislation targeting indiscriminate parking.

Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities research fellow Julienne Chen wrote a widely shared commentary for CNA in August, arguing that Singapore should make room for PMDs, which were a chance for a “second bite at the apple” after the failure of shared bikes.

It is a point worth mulling over – is Singapore serious about going car-lite? It’s time to have a long hard think about what that means.

The bike lane we have here cmi. They are just side by side with the foot path. No separation and no strict regulation for pedestrian and cyclist to stay in their lane. Pedestrians will cross over to cycling lane and vice versa. The type of cycling lane needed has to have very clear separation. 

[Vratenza]

1 hour ago, Carbon82 said:

 

As early as 2012, outspoken mobility advocate Francis Chu and other cycling enthusiasts had embarked on a project to measure road widths around the island as they tried to figure out if Singapore had room for segregated lanes.

They found that widths varied widely, and in many areas, space could be carved out on the road shoulder for separate lanes – narrower roads also have the added effect of regulating traffic speeds, making the streets safer for all.

This is a solution that does not require copious resources, but significant political will.

Narrower roads? Ever gave a thought for the sand tucks, container trailers, delivery trucks and most importantly, the motorcycles in between the lanes? 

Already taking out one dedicated lane for the bus lanes are allowing the bus commuters a smoother ride at the expense of the rest of the road users. This I can still tolerate as a car driver because it meant mass public commute is more efficient benefitting many at a time. Social responsibiliy. 

Making the already narrow roads (compared to other countries with huge land resource) narrower just to carve out a dedicated cycling lane benefiting a handful of cyclist at a time for their leisure pursuit/commute?

Let me ask the most pertinent question that the writer has seem to missed:

Is our world class public transport ready or it is still undergoing upgrading to become reliable enough for many of us drivers here consider giving up our cars? 

 

[Voodooman]

2 hours ago, Carbon82 said:

This article sum all up. Will the writer be fixed?!

Is Singapore serious about going car-lite?

Getting out of a taxi in Beijing the other day, I was almost run over by an e-scooter.

But the delivery rider, whose reflexes had probably been honed from dodging pedestrians, swerved in the nick of time and averted disaster.

In truth, it was my fault. The taxi had stopped beside a bike lane – a well-used artery by Beijing’s many delivery riders – and I swung the door open and stepped out without checking for an oncoming rider.

In this city, these riders are a part of everyday life. Legions of them grease the cogs of the Chinese economy, delivering food for office workers in Beijing and elsewhere.

They are also the backbone of the country’s e-commerce sector, with some delivering as many as 150 parcels in a single day.

In a nod to their importance, a formation of riders rode past Tiananmen Square during the country’s 70th anniversary parade in Beijing last month – alongside tanks, drones and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Looking at them zip up and down Beijing’s streets brings to mind the situation back in Singapore.

Two weeks ago, the Government effectively banned e-scooters from footpaths when it decided to take a tough stand against reckless riders.

It meant that overnight, e-scooters – already banned on the roads – were confined to the 440km of cycling paths islandwide, instead of the 5,500km of footpaths riders could use before.

It caused immediate consternation among riders worried that their means of making a living had gone up in smoke, leading many to petition their MPs.

The Transport Ministry came up with a $7 million grant to help riders replace their e-scooters with e-bikes or bicycles. But coming just days after the initial ban, it felt a bit like putting a plaster on a bullet hole.

More importantly, the ban has also caused some head-scratching among mobility advocates – they ask why the Government would effectively snuff out such a popular alternative to cars if it was truly serious about making Singapore car-lite.

There are about 100,000 registered e-scooters in Singapore, roughly one-sixth the number of cars on the road last year.

That their numbers grew so quickly is a testament to how Singaporeans view their efficiency, and also shows that these devices have a place in a car-lite Singapore.

They are more energy-efficient and less polluting than cars, and take up less space on our land-scarce island.

Singapore is not unique in its concerns over personal mobility devices (PMDs) – in China, these devices have also caused a spate of accidents and fires.

During the five-year period from 2013, PMDs were involved in 56,200 accidents that resulted in injuries or fatalities nationwide.

It prompted the Chinese government to slap limits on the speed, weight and power of these devices, boost enforcement and roll out public education campaigns on safe riding – all measures that Singapore has also taken.

But China has done something else that Singapore has not.

Here in the Chinese capital, bike lanes line almost every public road, serving to separate PMD traffic from pedestrians on the footpaths, and vehicular traffic on the road.

If putting PMDs in the same lane as pedestrians is causing accidents, then we must find another way.

Banning them from footpaths and then suggesting that riders switch to e-bikes or bicycles just transfers the problem elsewhere.

Also, it is one thing to go out for a leisurely bicycle ride on the park connectors, but another thing altogether to have to deliver more than 20 orders a day on a pedal-powered bicycle.

It stands to reason that e-scooters have surged in popularity over the last few years because e-bikes are also not allowed on footpaths; on the roads, riders are at the mercy of traffic.

I am not suggesting that the lives of PMD users are any more valuable than those of pedestrians, but the Government should find a balance where it protects the most number of lives, while still moving Singapore towards its car-lite vision.

Many have asked why the Government still seems to be prioritising road traffic while espousing the virtues of active mobility.

Former Nominated MP Calvin Cheng wrote in a Facebook note last week that the Marina Coastal Expressway was built in five years to ease traffic for cars, “the precise form of transport the Government wants to discourage”.

Although work is under way to build a network of shared paths and park connectors, this will only amount to a fraction of the road network – some 1,300km by 2030.

Included in this network are also shared paths – lanes where foot traffic will still be mixed with bicycles, motorised wheelchairs and other powered devices.

The end result will likely be that a car would still be the most convenient and efficient way of getting from A to B.

The argument against segregated lanes for bicycles and PMDs always seems to lead to the point that ours is an island starved for space. But as many have pointed out, for a land-scarce country, we seem to be able to find a lot of room for roads.

Recovering room from vehicular traffic is neither a new nor radical suggestion.

As early as 2012, outspoken mobility advocate Francis Chu and other cycling enthusiasts had embarked on a project to measure road widths around the island as they tried to figure out if Singapore had room for segregated lanes.

They found that widths varied widely, and in many areas, space could be carved out on the road shoulder for separate lanes – narrower roads also have the added effect of regulating traffic speeds, making the streets safer for all.

This is a solution that does not require copious resources, but significant political will.

Two years ago, before leaving Singapore for China, I was on the transport beat, reporting on the bike-share companies that were just then entering the local market.

There was excitement in the community that the nascent industry would herald a car-lite Singapore.

Two years on, shared bikes have disappeared, choked out by legislation targeting indiscriminate parking.

Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities research fellow Julienne Chen wrote a widely shared commentary for CNA in August, arguing that Singapore should make room for PMDs, which were a chance for a “second bite at the apple” after the failure of shared bikes.

It is a point worth mulling over – is Singapore serious about going car-lite? It’s time to have a long hard think about what that means.

Generally very balanced article.

PMD in our weather makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, better to spend the money to build this than more and more roads (this i agree with the writer).  I will be tempted to switch to PMD plus MRT in the future if there is a dedicated lane that keeps everyone safe.  Driverless car is great but will always be more expensive than a personal mobility device that can only get smaller and lighter. 

Edited November 17, 2019 by Voodooman

[Othello]

6 hours ago, Mustank said:

So how? 

 

do wrong still kpkb. Haiz ... 

but the chap in white coveralls also a**hole lah, purposely looking for trouble. If he is so conscientious, how come he bah-bo-doh about the MOTORCYCLE that just zoomed past and the other one parking on the FOOTPATH. 

6 hours ago, Mustank said:

I know who secretly happy about ban

moto delivery people, less competition 

now they quiet quiet arm chio 

see above. They aren't Saints as well. haha. The Holy Trinity -> Motorbikes, PMDs & cyclists 

[Carbon82]

2 hours ago, Beregond said:

the ans is we are not serious about it, the ideal of car lite is to entertain those green environmentalist.

score some points with AM etc only😉

Let me put it bluntly, IF our government can benefit from it (read: additional tax revenue), they WILL do it. But for now, PMD has nothing taxable, yet...

1 hour ago, Ender said:

The bike lane we have here cmi. They are just side by side with the foot path. No separation and no strict regulation for pedestrian and cyclist to stay in their lane. Pedestrians will cross over to cycling lane and vice versa. The type of cycling lane needed has to have very clear separation. 

I concur. The same applies for PCN and those "dedicated" lane at parks and seasides area. Lane demarcation will not work at any crowded space.

1 hour ago, Vratenza said:

Narrower roads? Ever gave a thought for the sand tucks, container trailers, delivery trucks and most importantly, the motorcycles in between the lanes? 

Already taking out one dedicated lane for the bus lanes are allowing the bus commuters a smoother ride at the expense of the rest of the road users. This I can still tolerate as a car driver because it meant mass public commute is more efficient benefitting many at a time. Social responsibiliy. 

Making the already narrow roads (compared to other countries with huge land resource) narrower just to carve out a dedicated cycling lane benefiting a handful of cyclist at a time for their leisure pursuit/commute?

Let me ask the most pertinent question that the writer has seem to missed:

Is our world class public transport ready or it is still undergoing upgrading to become reliable enough for many of us drivers here consider giving up our cars? 

 

I don't disagree with you on your view. But the authority should be looking at a total solution rather the taking a piece meal approach. Example: Silver Zone. For those who have been to estate like Bedok, Hougang, Redhill, Teck Whye, Whampoa, etc., have it ever cross your mind why are we wasting so much usable space for nothing but just to keep the lane narrower so that drivers cannot move any faster? Why convert the usable lane to grass turf, S-course, etc. instead of dedicated PMD lane?

21 minutes ago, Voodooman said:

Generally very balanced article.

PMD in our weather makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, better to spend the money to build this than more and more roads (this i agree with the writer).  I will be tempted to switch to PMD plus MRT in the future if there is a dedicated lane that keeps everyone safe.  Driverless car is great but will always be more expensive than a personal mobility device that can only get smaller and lighter. 

I think a few mentioned here before, while the aim is to go car-lite, it is the motorist that generate a steady stream of income to support infrastructure development, so it is a chicken and egg situation the way I see it.

PMD is only a good alternative if we have:

• safer devices (battery and charging technology - UL2272 is just another BBS, speed limiting and tracking devices, more active & passive safety system)
• proper infrastructure (I am looking at nothing less than what Denmark did for the cyclist, including a highway for bicycle. In our context, a dedicated road NOT lane for PMD)
• better policy, regulation and governance (PMD user, as with other motorists, have to have legal obligation and liability to use their device in public space. And strict enforcement is a MUST)

[Othello]

2 hours ago, Carbon82 said:

 

I don't disagree with you on your view. But the authority should be looking at a total solution rather the taking a piece meal approach. Example: Silver Zone. For those who have been to estate like Bedok, Hougang, Redhill, Teck Whye, Whampoa, etc., have it ever cross your mind why are we wasting so much usable space for nothing but just to keep the lane narrower so that drivers cannot move any faster? Why convert the usable lane to grass turf, S-course, etc. instead of dedicated PMD lane?

 

tell me about it !! These silver zones "works" is nothing more than an exercise to force drivers to slow down becos many old folks can't be bothered. Dun care Red man or Green man, zebra or flamingo. They just GO. In fact, yesterday I came across this old man on PMA. Champion !! ZERO regards to traffic rules, he "zooms" across any road he wants ...... 

[Mustank]

How?

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/sgroadshallofshame/permalink/1506863589461145?sfns=mo