Build highways for personal mobility devices, bicycles

[I will let the words of this... moron, speak for themselves. I will just highlight the more... ludicrous parts.]

By Su Sicheng

21 July, 2019

You know, it's like one day everything was fine,
and the next there were these fuckin' scooters everywhere.

There has been much talk about errant users of personal mobility devices (PMDs).

While regulations are in place to minimise inconsiderate behaviour, many pedestrians still feel that their sense of space and security is infringed upon when such vehicles pass too close or too fast.

It is too simplistic, however, to only blame users. Talk to PMD or electric-bicycle riders, or cyclists, and they will likely say they are frustrated that they have nowhere to ride freely.

The limited space on footpaths and the pace of pedestrians frustrate them.

PMDs are banned from roads, and most casual cyclists also restrict themselves to pedestrian paths, as those riding on roads must wear helmets.

It is clear there is rising demand by people here for such devices.



In principle, this should be welcomed. These vehicles allow us to bridge the "last mile" better.

They also reduce the need for cars, and increase efficiency and value to consumers (cheap food deliveries are an example).

So, why is this leading only to mounting frustration?

The crux of the problem is simple: Riders are forced to use places that were never designed for them.
These devices typically travel safely at 15 to 30kmh, making them incompatible with spaces for slower-speed pedestrian movements (4 to 7kmh) and higher-speed road vehicles (50 to 70 kmh).

Yet our authorities decided several years ago that Singapore roads had no room for dedicated cycling lanes. Aside from the few park connectors and cycling paths, which tend to be for slower-speed cycling, a comprehensively planned network of paths for such mobility vehicles is non-existent.

The rules have also largely been knee-jerk reactions to the proliferation of these devices, rather than carefully considered steps in a broader strategy to integrate them into our city.

How can things change?

While the Road Traffic Act legitimises the presence of cyclists on roads, many road users do not recognise this.

The authorities should push for greater legitimisation of cyclists on roads by having dedicated bicycle lanes. Cities around the world, including in Europe, have rolled out great systems of bicycle pathways especially when land is scarce — even scarcer than Singapore’s.

If bicycles are given higher priority because they use space more efficiently, then we will conclude that there is not enough space for road lanes because we must have more room for bicycles.

In addition, we could build islandwide networks of cycling highways — uninterrupted stretches of bicycle and PMD paths, either on land or elevated.

Bicycles, for instance, do not need much space (about 3m a lane). Such highways can be built above existing roads and could be sheltered to encourage cycling.

Bicycles should also be explicitly encouraged to use bus lanes. A simple change, such as putting a bicycle sign on a yellow bus lane, will go a long way.

Finally, PMDs should be permitted to use infrastructure that bicycles are explicitly allowed to utilise, subject to speed limits and rules against reckless behaviour.

[The entitlement mentality in this one is great.

Facebook comment:

On newer trains, you can see what I call "trident poles". They are poles (hand holds) that are split into three. Why? Because some people will lean on those poles. Which means for a single pole, only ONE person (leaning on it) can use it and others who might want to hold onto something for safety, cannot. I am sure there was some silly PSA to get people to be more considerate and NOT lean on poles, but these mainly fell on deaf (or headphoned) ears. So the triple poles were implemented. With these poles, even if there is one person leaning on the poles, at most he would "occupy" two of the poles, and the third would be free for others to hold onto. 

Or lean. I haven't seen that, but I'm sure that (two persons leaning on the same pole) will happen. 

The point is, the reason for the triple (trident) poles) was basic inconsideration, selfishness, and crude uncivilised behaviour.  

Same for SOME PMD users. (Or A LOT of them. That's a debate for another time.) 
Footpaths are not designed for PMDs? PMDs were DESIGNED to use footpaths! Where in the world are there "PMD EXPRESSWAYS" waiting for PMDs to be invented? The writer complains that there are NO space in SG where they can use the maximum speed of the PMDs (which may be over 20 km/h). 

By his stupid argument, most SG drivers can also complain that their cars can go 120 km/h but SG roads are limited to 80 km/h. And owners of sports cars here will complain that their Porsche/ Ferrari/Lamborghini can easily do 200 km/h but there are no place in SG that they can.  

So therefore the Govt should build an Autobahn. 

Just because you are a selfish bastard who cannot imagine being considerate and putting safety first doesn't mean you deserve to have your PMD expressway.  

Here's a simpler solution: PMDs should have their speed limited to 5 km/hr. This was we save on the huge infrastructure costs of implementing this silly suggestion. 
And ALL cars sold in SG should also have speed limiting devices.

I am not going to even raise the costs of building "PMD Expressways" because that would dignify this self-serving suggestion.]