Car or Bus?: Ride your way to a liveable city...
Why not cars? Because 'a car takes 30 times more space per travelling person than a bus'
Lee Siew Hua, Straits Times 15 Dec 07;
THE story of Singapore is illuminated by its land transport policy.
That daily bus trip may feel wholly unexceptional.
But the cool, smooth ride is a wondrous world away from the patchwork bus systems and the lurking pirate taxis that once peddled erratic mobility in the 1960s.
Though imperfect, today's road-and-rail network makes it possible for the progress- minded island to run as a fast-paced and efficient country and economy.
For the transport system seeks to heighten mobility, so personal lives and the national economy are not crimped by wasted hours, creeping productivity and health hazards.
Land transport also tracks the nation's road to the developed world.
The country was built road by road, and system by technology-rich system - and very much pushed along by powerful political will too.
Electronic Road Pricing is an example.
Leaders elsewhere have danced around this unpopular congestion control.
Singapore - habitually undeterred by political costs after doing the strategic sums - can lay claim to being the first in the world to establish city-wide road pricing and a few other innovations.
But the desire to be world-class also carries the weight of higher expectations. Singaporeans are now discerning and demanding, and expect the best and the fastest.
The middle class, for instance, would like a choice of premier bus and taxi services, unless public transport can truly deliver a seamless commute with top service.
And what about unclogged expressways, and simply more of them?
And the desire of many to own a car?
Transport policy will always be a political and emotional issue, since it touches the wallet and embodies middle-class hopes.
Transport policy is also exciting, transforming a nation's life and economy. It colours the atmosphere, quickens the pace and changes the scenery.
Roads define a nation. America's open road is a picture of its engineering genius and independent spirit.
Singapore's transport system chronicles the solution-seeking spirit of a country that cuts a methodical path through the tangle of clashing agendas that multiply within a diverse population.
Hopefully, it is both a logical and vibrant path.
In 1996, the White Paper on Land Transport drew the road map for a world-class transport system.
A decade-plus later, the ideas will be updated when the Land Transport Review is released next month.
Ahead of the review, it is clear that some issues are unchanged. For starters, in official eyes, the path to free-flowing traffic is clear:
If only people will cool their passion for cars, and hop onto buses and trains.
But it's also a tricky manoeuvre for planners here.
The reality is that the big push to prioritise public transport - and so decongest roads - is a policy in transformation.
For road blocks are still being dismantled and these include: The delayed Circle Line must start running to add fuller MRT connectivity.
The wait for buses should shorten too. And even that stroll to the bus stop or MRT station can be more pleasant.
Question marks remain over whether the bus, MRT and taxi policies are the best.
This is precisely why the Land Transport Review is so timely. It will address transport challenges of the next 10 to 15 years, taking the nation further along its quest to be liveable and world-class.
Transport Minister Raymond Lim is mindful of all the lingering issues, but he is decisive on his cornerstone policy:
Public transport is the key to a liveable city.
'Public transport is the most space-efficient way to transport large numbers of people in a complex city state,' he says in an interview with Insight on the thinking behind transport policy.
'A car takes 30 times more space per travelling person than a bus,' he points out, ready with numbers.
Public transport must be a choice mode, he concludes.
Where's my bus?
PEOPLE call perennially for direct buses. But to spread the transport web island-wide in the least pricey and most beneficial style, a trunk-and-feeder system was chosen.
So, a Sengkang resident with a Jurong job may jump onto a feeder bus outside his flat to access a long-distance trunk bus or the MRT line - then use a feeder again.
With this, people live with the hassle of transfers. The trade-off: higher frequencies.
The alternative of direct buses trying to link all points of the island is deemed too complex and wasteful. This can result in 'a bus timetable as thick as a telephone directory'', says Mr Lim.
'You can't navigate that.'
The thinking is that the trunk-and-feeder will stay - but must change on three principal fronts: waiting time, travel time and overcrowding, say Mr Lim and commentators.
Mr Michael Palmer, MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, agrees with the model, with caveats. The MRT is comfortable and fast, he says. The kink is its interface with buses.
On the ground, his Sengkang folk gripe that they wait 10 to 15 minutes for a feeder bus, which then takes 10 to 15 minutes to get to the MRT.
So speedier connections really matter. Punctuality too.
'In Switzerland and Germany, you can actually set your watch by the time the bus comes,' he remembers.
Mr Lim recognises that the trunk-and-feeder is 'not doing as good a job as it should'.
The good news is that commuters are actively surveyed, and policy is indeed forming to uplift the daily commute.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is reviewing the integration of buses and rail to minimise transfers. It will quicken frequency of basic buses from 15 to 10 minutes.
Hopes of merger
HERE, the SMRT and SBS Transit each run segments of the rail and bus systems.
Despite the hoped-for benefits of competition, a 2006 Public Transport Council survey showed that bus riders were still 'fairly dissatisfied' with waiting and travel time, and overcrowding.
Corporate competition has also sent very odd signals.
SMRT decided in 2004 to give away a Nissan March car to reward its bus and train commuters.
'What company has marketing where you are promoting your competition?' wonders transport policy expert Paul Barter of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
'Their competition is not SBS. Their competition is the car,' he asserts.
This irony or anomaly seems to flow from flawed competition and a lack of imaginative links between the big listed transport providers, and this is an unsettled issue.
Introducing contracts for the transport providers may improve service. The threat of a new entrant entering the sector through competitive bidding can keep SMRT and SBS Transit focused on efficiency.
Another idea is merger. Former transport minister Yeo Cheow Tong still hopes the two firms will seek a way to integrate one day, as those in Hong Kong did. Its two major train operators merged, and lowered fares this month despite global fuel increases.
Integration can result in economies of scale. It will end duplication of routes, technical expertise, and more. It can grow the transport pie for all.
Mr Yeo sounded out both players, especially when the North-East Line began running, and all the inefficiencies were starkly clear.
'They all realised that hey, there are benefits, but the devil's in the details, how to value each one, how to balance the benefits,' he says.
'I hope they continue exploring, find a way forward to eventually integrate.'
Circle Line's moment
ONE more road block will be overcome when the Circle Line starts running in 2010. Then, more people will not need to travel to the city interchanges, but can change trains at the periphery of the city.
That will free up capacity and relieve the overcrowding.
The MRT network is now close to two-thirds of its final size, at 138.2 km.
The Circle Line, Downtown Line and Boon Lay Extension will in future push the total rail length to 215.3km.
Earlier, planners had debated the moment to launch the critical Circle Line. 'You launch it too early, it's a $5 billion asset, hardly used, and it's a huge loss,' Mr Yeo says.
'But if you launch it too late, then the current lines will be overcrowded.'
It's a judgment call, with so much public cash involved.
He's still wistful that the 2004 Nicoll Highway collapse set back the Circle Line by possibly two years - but hopeful about the new lines ahead.
Vexing, vibrant taxis
ONE more sector to fix: Cabs.
Both the possibilities and the perennial complaints are greatly fascinating.
First, why the protests?
These run the gamut from touting to cab unavailability, from dour drivers to a surfeit of surcharges.
Just to highlight two issues:
Cabs are treated not as a premier service here, but as a fairly cheap alternative to buses and trains.
Another factor is that the taxi industry is deregulated - fares in 1998, supply in 2003.
A free market lets taxi companies set prices.
One question is whether operators have enough incentive to adjust fares to match inflated demand, given that their revenue flows from vehicle rentals rather than fares.
It is toughest to find a cab in the evening inside the Central Business District (CBD). The new city surcharge plus peak fare - announced by ComfortDelGro - may help normalise this situation.
The LTA thinks this is the right direction. Cabs must be priced at a level matching their 'door-to-door chauffeured services', says Mr Jeremy Yap, LTA's acting group director of vehicle and transit licensing.
He also presents the brighter side of deregulation.
The industry is now 'more vibrant' with seven innovative players - up from two major firms of which ComfortDelGro has been dominant.
'So customers can avail themselves of more options, differentiated services.' Choices include MPV taxis, and soon LPG-powered cabs.
The fleet has ballooned 25 per cent from 2003. This is a rise from 19,000 to 23,800.
'Of course, it's not perfect,' says Mr Yap, but the LTA engages with a spectrum of stakeholders to improve taxis, puts 'mystery customers' in cabs for audits, pores over monthly surveys.
Recent ideas include proliferating CBD cab-stands for safety, which reduces empty cruising cabs as well.
Call-centre standards (See below) will improve. These are exciting days, he indicates.
Perpetual worriers
PUZZLES remain.
How much will the Circle Line change commuting life, or are expectations too high? Will taxi companies tussle between business decisions and the decongestion mandate?
Is integration of the bus-and-rail providers possible, and rational?
One conundrum is not going away. Says Mr Palmer, the MP: 'Trying to persuade people not to use the car and instead use public transport is not going to go very far, not at the prices we pay for cars.'
Glance at the 1996 White Paper, and there is a sense of deja vu. The wish for quality transport remains, for one. Balance between cab supply and demand is still sought.
What has changed?
The LTA counts the air-conditioned Toa Payoh transport hub and the North-East Line among its milestones.
Since 1996, the transport system is also supporting a 25 per cent surge in population.
Transport Minister Lim urges a little perspective: 'The perennial issues will remain, and in fact, become more complex, as travel demands become more varied over time.'
Even the Land Transport Review will be a work in progress. Importantly, he says, there is a process to continually relook and refine policies to meet travel needs.
Unresolved issues do not detract from the system's strengths, but mean the worrying and strategising do persist.
He says a global panel told him that Singapore has a good system, so the danger is slipping into complacency.
His response: 'Members of the public keep us on our toes. And in any case, we're perpetual worriers.
'We worry what's going to happen next, what we should do, so constantly we're trying to make it better.'
So the journey continues.
...drive your dream car into traffic jams
'It's the congestion that we want to tackle, not really the ownership (of cars).'
Lee Siew Hua, Straits Times 15 Dec 07;
MOTORISTS have labelled car policy here 'pay and pay'.
But the Transport Ministry folks disagree, naturally.
They say that, behind the scenes, there is hard thinking to soften the impact of unpopular rate hikes.
The outcome, as they see it, is less 'pay and pay' than a menu of options from which commuters are free to pick and choose.
As an example, the policymakers cited the changes they made ahead of this August's notice that Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) operating hours would soon expand.
These hours are now stretched on the city-bound Central Expressway (CTE), before the Braddell exit.
New gantries have also risen along the CTE, East Coast Parkway and Bukit Timah Expressway.
But first, the officials tried to get a handle on people's main concern: If they tossed their car keys out in favour of public transport, could they still enter the city in time for work?
In response, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) worked with the Public Transport Council to relax the rules on premium buses.
By the time the ERP changes were flagged in August, 36 premium bus services were ready to offer direct, fast rides into the city from various parts of the island.
At the same time, the peak-hour frequencies of basic bus services were cut from 15 to 10 minutes.
To help bus passengers beat congestion, the operating hours for bus lanes were extended. More full-day bus lanes were rolled out too.
Policy in flux
IN CASH-RICH, land-poor Singapore, cars are dream assets that the Government will neither deny nor encourage.
The story of Singapore-style car ownership and usage is riddled with conflicting demands and calibrated trade-offs.
Transport Minister Raymond Lim pinpoints the central dilemma: 'If you want more cars on the road, and at the same time you want smooth-flowing traffic, then invariably ERP rates will go higher and the coverage will be more extensive.'
Car policy is also a story of the COE and ERP, two sides of the policy coin.
The COE, or certificate of entitlement, is very much a settled policy (See Page S4). It is a solution, unique to Singapore, for fixing car quotas, with the market determining COE prices.
ERP, or Electronic Road Pricing, has an established lineage; it was birthed from the world-first Area Licensing Scheme (ALS) in 1975. So road pricing is familiar to all and younger people were born with it in place, but it remains a policy in flux.
This comes across clearly in the way that planners are still keen to explain the trade-off between having more cars and paying higher ERP rates.
'In fact, we use ERP as a last line,' Transport Minister Lim says. 'We tried traffic engineering possibilities first - expand roads, widen them - before introducing the congestion charge.'
The ERP may be a last line of action, but Singapore is the first country to have it city-wide.
Other cities watched, sceptical, but London and Stockholm have now embraced it.
The LTA's group director of policy and planning, Mr Lew Yii Der, says: 'ERP is the right congestion management tool that every city around the world is beginning to wake up to.'
ERP rates can move up or down by 50 cents every quarter to keep traffic flowing at 45kmh to 65kmh on expressways. On arterial roads, the optimum speed is 20 to 30 kmh.
The LTA uses this measure of speed to apply its judgment on equitable ERP rates.
The LTA says that each time the rates move, its data proves that road speeds generally return to the optimum boundaries.
The link between speed and traffic flow is unique to a city. 'It depends on the road network, our rules and how our motorists behave when they drive,' Mr Lew says.
Along the way, the ERP continues to be fine-tuned. One major adjustment involved the evening ERP.
Evening jam
MR YEO Cheow Tong, who was transport minister from November 2001 to May last year, recalls some of the debate surrounding the evening ERP.
This was prompted by severe evening congestion. The CTE resembled a carpark in stretches.
A couple of years were spent deliberating it, with hints of what was to come appearing around 2000.
Mr Yeo says people were asking: 'Why should you impose evening ERP just to make our travel faster, because we're quite happy, we're not rushing anywhere?'
Within official circles, this point was also debated.
Over time, a consensus formed. Summarising, he says: 'A road is an expensive economic asset.' People need a choice of whether to pay evening ERP for smoother traffic, for instance, if they are rushing for the evening shift.
But the ERP still invites dissension easily.
MP Michael Palmer says: 'You up the prices, it doesn't work. It's still a jam, what's going on?'
Transport Minister Lim is familiar with such sentiments and says the Land Transport Review, expected next month, is tackling the issue after weighing public input.
He, too, lists the litany of public complaints: higher rates simply shift congestion to other roads, hikes work for just a while and so on.
'All these are valid points,' he says. 'As a direct result of this public input, one of the key agenda items of this Land Transport Review is: How do we make the ERP system more effective?'
Road pricing will always be in flux, both by design and otherwise, since external factors such as the economy also affect road use.
First, the ERP was created as a flexible tool. The LTA constantly tracks road use. Most cabs are fitted with the global positioning system (GPS) so data on their movements is tapped as a proxy for average road speeds. Cameras and observers in cars and on roads also pull data for analysis.
Next, many factors change road usage: school holidays, a rip-roaring economy, petrol prices. The opening of the integrated resorts will again reshape road use patterns.
In that sense, the ERP is a tool intended to change in dynamic tandem with what is happening on and off the roads.
The ERP has come into extra prominence since 1998, when planners shifted from a tax regime focused on car ownership to one concentrating on car usage.
The turning point occurred when policymakers decided that a more balanced approach was needed, what with Singaporeans chalking up more intensive mileage than many other nations.
The 1996 White Paper showed that the average mileage of a car here was 18,600 km a year. This trumps usage in the United States, Britain, Japan and France.
Last year, the average car mileage even rose 2.5 per cent to 21,075km per year. That means more congestion to tame.
'It's the congestion that we want to tackle, not really the ownership,' says Mr Lew. 'There's no reason why we want to continually impose very high taxes on people.'
For a driver last year, the cost of owning a car was about 57 per cent of his total bill. His usage costs made up the remaining 43 per cent.
Ownership costs include upfront costs, like the Open Market Value and COE, plus annual fixed costs, such as road tax and insurance.
Usage costs include fuel, parking and ERP.
The shift to usage charges has brought on another big balancing act. Mr Lew adds:
'We realised that we really need a balance of both ownership and usage measures because, once someone owns a car, he wants to use it regardless of the cost of using it.'
The trick is to get the balance right.
No one has easy answers and transport policy expert Paul Barter of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy has flipped sides himself:
'I used to think I knew, and I used to think the answer was usage-based pricing.'
But there must be enough focus on ownership controls, he says. He does some quick mathematics:
'Once people buy a car, they have every incentive to use it a lot. If you leave it at home, the car is depreciating $20 a day, some $10 and $30 a day, depending on the car.' People rationalise that since they have splurged on a car, they will drive it. They'll wonder why they should ride the MRT. 'Unless there is a really strong disincentive, like it's impossible to park or the ERP is huge,' he says.
It's unpopular, but new, clever ways to dissuade people from owning cars and also to drive in moderation are likely to be sought.
One idea that fits these twin objectives may be distance-based COEs, which gives buyers the right to drive a certain number of kilometres. Prof Barter champions this instead of the 10-year COE.
Officials haven't taken their eyes off car ownership either. The 3 per cent annual rise in car population was set in 1990, when vehicle quotas were introduced. The rate will be reviewed next year.
Political capital
BUT the Singapore Government does not waver from unpopular choices. It does consult and does try to sell, but the principle stays: Is the policy sound?
It is prepared to spend its political capital. Mr Lim says:
'We take a long-term view of the problem and not the short-term view that is heavily influenced by the political business. We don't do that.'
He has met US policymakers, who 'applauded' when the ALS was introduced in 1975. 'Transport planners know that this is the way to go: congestion charging. But the political will, they say, was never there,' he says.
'So if you go to Los Angeles, you get yourself caught in a gridlock.'
The trade-off there is freedom of choice. The cost is economic wastage for the individual and the city.
But it is still the onus of planners to offer transport solutions and to sell policies well. In the case of the ERP, selling has ranged from explaining the options in an 'upfront and honest' way, as Mr Lim sees it, to the fun of an e-game where people play at being the transport minister.
One person who played the game recently is Mr Septo Sutedja, 26, an IT worker. He drives and takes public transport on different days.
The Indonesian, who has lived here since 1999, says the game showed him that trade-offs are made all the time and inputs are weighed.
'Making policy is not very simple: close eyes, toss coin,' he says.
On a lighter note, Mr Lim says: 'We hope the game is fun... and hopefully you have a sense of the complexity of issues and the trade-offs.'
He quips: 'Of course, I've always said if anybody wants to do it for more than a day, they're welcome to be Transport Minister.'
From the ground up
In its wide-ranging consultation exercises, the Transport Ministry finds there is no shortage of ideas from commuters, motorists and experts on how the system here can be improved. Here is a look at some of the suggestions
Goh Chin Lian, Straits Times 15 Dec 07;
'Naked' streets, slower speeds
WHEN transport expert Paul Barter walks through some small streets in HDB estates, the scene reminds him of the small towns and villages in Europe.
People on foot and on bicycles are crossing the streets and cars slow down for them.
'There's no shouting. You make eye contact,' says Professor Barter from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
Indeed, the scene reflects a new thinking among European transport planners.
It is called the shared space concept, and he looks forward to it being introduced extensively here.
Essentially, it involves stripping a street bare of traffic lights, road signs and kerbs. People are free to roam or ride bicycles, and for the less mobile elderly, travel in a motorised wheelchair.
In this less predictable surrounding with no clear signs of who has right of way, motorists automatically become more wary and slow down.
This was one outcome when the concept was put into practice in Friesland province in the Netherlands. It has spread to various towns in Britain and other European nations such as Austria and Denmark.
But the greatest benefit is that it can lead to more people taking public transport, says Prof Barter. 'It's so much more attractive to use the bus or the train if you can easily cross the road, and take a pleasant walk to get there.'
Also, when Dutch traffic engineer Hans Monderman, as head of road safety in the 1980s, tested the concept in Friesland, it reduced road accidents and long lines of cars at traffic lights.
Says Prof Barter: 'The key to sharing is speed: If you get the speed low enough, you can actually share.'
He believes Singapore can slow traffic to 30kmh, from the current 50kmh, on streets in HDB estates or smaller roads in the city centre like Killiney Road.
These are streets where motorists start or end their journey, heading to or coming from a road carrying more and faster-moving vehicles.
Another group that will gain from slower speeds is cyclists, who now occupy either footpaths where they risk hitting pedestrians, or roads where they may be hit by cars whizzing by.
Says Prof Barter, a cyclist himself: 'If the traffic is going at 30kmh, we can suddenly fit bicycles in.'
Engaging the public
Public consultation was the cornerstone of the Land Transport Review, with six focus group discussions organised. There were tours to the Kallang-Paya Lebar Expressway tunnel as well. And since April, there's been an e-game on the LTA website that lets you play at being Transport Minister.
Goh Chin Lian, Straits Times 15 Dec 07;
Many avenues to have your say
EVERY other week, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) would gather about 50 people for a two-hour powwow. Their goal: to help find ways to improve Singapore's transport system.
In all, six such focus group discussions were held over three months to let a cross-section of the travelling public have their say.
It was one of two modes of communication LTA transport planners chose to get the pulse of the ground for the Land Transport Review.
The other was the Internet. A website portal was set up for four months to let commuters give their ideas and wish list via e-mail.
By end-June, the LTA received 225 e-mail messages.
Most centred on public transport. Ideas ranged from letting even individuals run feeder services to introducing a taxi service using electric cars on rails. Others included ways to curb the car population, like giving a tax rebate to those who switch from cars to buses and trains.
These views were in addition to those from 300 people who took part in the focus groups that dwelt on three topics: making public transport the preferred choice of people, managing road use and meeting people's diverse needs.
Holding forth at these sessions were commuters, motorists, people with disabilities, interest groups representing cyclists and the elderly as well as representatives of public transport operators and cabby associations.
They suggested, among others, cutting back on parking lots in the city and offering cheaper parking at MRT stations so people can park and ride.
Such efforts to engage people are pivotal in Singapore's approach towards handling its transport issues and policies, says Transport Minister Raymond Lim in an interview.
'You need to get them involved because transport impacts on their lives every day.
'By engaging them, you give the public a better understanding of the wider issues involved, which go beyond their personal interest.
'At the same time, it allows the policymakers to have a better understanding of their concerns. So you create a two-way process.'
Besides lending them an ear, the LTA also believes in giving people a first-hand experience. For instance, residents were invited to visit nearby worksites of infrastructure projects like the Kallang-Paya Lebar Expressway (KPE).
Also, its engineers went door to door to get feedback on, say, dust and noise levels.
Beyond these targeted measures, the LTA also has two ongoing efforts.
One is an online role-playing game, and the other a programme that deploys LTA officers to work with MPs and grassroots leaders on problems raised by residents.
In April, the online game was launched to let a person play the role of the Transport Minister, so that person could get a grasp of the trade-offs involved in each policy decision.
More than 3,000 people have taken on the role, and most said they went away with a better understanding of the complex nature of Singapore's land transport policies.
As for the LTA's liaison officers, MPs such as Mr Michael Palmer find them a big help.
The MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC recalls a resident complaining that a side road was too narrow for school buses to make a U-turn safely.
The LTA officer took over the case and dealt directly with the resident. The authorities later expanded the turning radius for the buses.
Mr Palmer believes these officers make a difference.
'Singaporeans know you can't solve every problem.
'Still, they raise it and appreciate it when the ministries have someone who will listen and give an explanation.
'It's better than sending an e-mail and not getting a reply, or to receive a reply saying, 'Thank you very much for your feedback' and that's it.'
Changes on the way
Straits Times 15 Dec 07;
A WHIFF of change in land transport policy is in the air
The much awaited Land Transport Review, due next month, is still under wraps.
But officials, commentators and a Land Transport Authority (LTA) e-game provide indications of the problem areas and the possible solutions.
Overhaul: Hassle of bus and train transfers.
Options: Integrate bus and train services better. Shorten waiting time for feeder buses.
Publish timetable. Create one season pass for whole bus-and-rail network.
Overhaul: Crowded, slow public transport.
Options: Add premium buses. Raise bus frequency from 15 to 10 minutes. Extend bus-lane hours. More full-day bus lanes.
For the long term, Circle Line will add connections in 2010; build more MRT lines.
Overhaul: Cab availability during peak periods, and within the Central Business District.
Options: Price cab fares appropriately. Enhance public transport, so more people switch to buses and trains.
Overhaul: Empty cruising cabs.
Options: Convert to call bookings. Build more cab-stands. Charge a cruising tax - possibly with GPS-based ERP.
Overhaul: Travel barriers for rising elderly population
Options: Give elderly more time to cross roads, possibly with the aid of technology. More pedestrian-friendly zones with low speed limits.
Barrier-free access in key sites. Overall, focus on human dimension.
To play with more options, and to role-play at being the Transport Minister, visit this LTA website: www.transport2020.gov.sg
Read more!
Posts
visitors since Nov 07