Scheme needs to be made more attractive to more drivers at more locations
Christopher Tan, Straits Times 27 Sep 09;
Schemes and policies that worked in the past may be of no relevance today. Likewise, those that once failed to take off could have a second lease of life.
An example of the latter is the two-decade-old Park & Ride scheme, and its lesser-known two-wheeled version, the Cycle & Ride scheme.
Introduced in 1990 soon after Singapore's first MRT trains started rolling, the initiative to persuade car owners to park their vehicles in designated Housing Board and Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) carparks and take the train to town on weekdays never took off.
But in recent years, demand has picked up quite a bit, especially in the north. Because of the proliferation of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries, the infamously congested Central Expressway, and increasingly exorbitant city-centre parking charges, drivers from places like Yio Chu Kang, Seletar Hills, Sengkang and Yishun are turning to Park & Ride.
On the 15th of each month, they wait in line to buy limited Park and Ride sets, at $70 apiece, which allow them day-time parking at selected carparks and $40 worth of transit card value.
The Transport Ministry says 4,000 sets are available nationwide each month, but only one-third is taken up.
Demand, it seems, is not evenly distributed.
While Park & Ride carparks in Boon Lay, Chai Chee and Serangoon Sports Hall see few takers, those in Yio Chu Kang Sports Complex, Ghim Moh Road and Mei Ling Street are snapped up.
The monthly queues at Ang Mo Kio MRT station, for instance, speak of an overwhelming response. A line is formed by 7.30am, and sometimes snakes out of the station.
Seletar resident Joan Fong, who is in her 40s, said a second counter was opened at the station about a year ago, 'but the queues are still bad'.
Ms Fong, who works in the financial sector, started taking the train to work just over two years ago and parks her car near the Yio Chu Kang Sports Complex, a short walk from Yio Chu Kang MRT station. But the long queues for Park & Ride sets are putting her off.
'It's crazy to wake up so early to start queueing at 7.30am. We've given up. Now we just tear $3 worth of parking coupons for the car and take the train,' she said.
Other drivers The Sunday Times spoke to also resort to that option, which costs not very much more than $70 a month.
Civil servant Siti Aigah, 25, is one, explaining: 'If I'm just a little late, there will be no more tickets.'
Users are clamouring for improvements to the scheme. Suggestions include making the application paperless, making the application quarterly, and - most crucially - increasing the amount of parking space in the north.
A little over a year ago, the Transport Ministry said the Park & Ride scheme was being reviewed to make it more attractive, but to date there have been no hints of what the improvements, if any, might be.
Asked for an update recently, the Land Transport Authority said the 'study is ongoing'.
The slow and cautious approach is perhaps understandable. After all, the scheme has not been in the least popular for well over a decade.
There is also suspicion among policymakers that some people are abusing the system, with car owners buying the $70 sets as a cheaper alternative to season parking at URA and HDB carparks.
Season parking charges start from $65 a month, while the parking component of the Park & Ride set costs only $30.
Park & Ride schemes elsewhere have had patchy results, too. In Sydney, motorists complain about a dire shortage of parking. In the English city of Worcester, usage of a £6 million (S$13.8 million) scheme has halved in recent years.
In Singapore, a successful Park & Ride scheme is key to balancing the car ownership aspirations of a fast-growing population with demand for finite road space.
It is thus strange that the recently released Land Transport Masterplan did not give it due mention.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak, head of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport, is one advocate for Park & Ride, and believes it can be improved.
He said one straightforward way of preventing drivers from applying for a Park & Ride set as a cheaper alternative to season parking would be to check applicants' addresses.
He also did not see why suggestions for making application more painless cannot be implemented.
Indeed, with the technology available, standing in line for an hour or more - a typical experience among Park & Ride users - is primitive.
For instance, with the new generation of ERP readers that can accept transit cards, and with the proliferation of carparks employing ERP-type charging, it would not be too difficult to issue a Park & Ride card that drivers can use for parking and for MRT rides.
Such a one-card system would be convenient for users as well as make it easy for operators to check for abuse.
Looking ahead, incorporating underground carparks into new MRT stations might be the way to go.
This would ensure a ready supply of parking spaces, which could be cordoned off electronically for Park & Ride users according to demand. So if demand dips - say, during school holidays - spaces can be freed up for other motorists.
For now, Dr Lim says one way to expand parking capacity at popular locations would be to free up nearby HDB carparks. 'These carparks are usually less utilised in the daytime as residents go off to work.'
The bottom line is this: The Park & Ride scheme has to cater to a lot more drivers if it is to have a meaningful impact on curbing congestion.
Because even if all of today's 4,000 sets are taken up every month, that translates to a mere 0.7 per cent of the car population. Having those cars off the road will not make any noticeable difference to average traffic speeds.
Hence it is imperative that the scheme is made more attractive to more drivers at more locations.
