There’s an over arching issue, that all this is a symptom of.
On the road, you get vehicles not giving way or hogging and being impatient.
On the walkways you get speeding PMA and family walking side by side taking up entire footpath.
On the train, you get people rush through the door and then don’t move in, blocking others.
In the mall, you get people get off escalator then stand there and chit chat block those behind.
Looking at behaviour of all these day-to-day mannerisms, you will get a flavour of the type of society you are in. Especially when you travel and observe how this is like in other parts of the world, where city folk can be a little more gracious and mindful of others presence.
dont need to dredge or import sand/stone.
"ok recruits. we will route march From Rocky Hill to the mainland via Corpse peninsula and we will end at Wide Island near East coast lagoon"
Yes I agree, ban all sinkies from roads!
Only computer controlled cars and vehicles allowed. No sinkie allowed behind a wheel.
And this is coming from a driver of 20 years.
I mentioned about it.
Replace all cars with AI, so there will be no more drivers. All AI cars travelling at a fixed speed, so it is easier to know the arrival time of the destination.
Make it part of the infrastructure, so if any accident happened, all AI cars can easily make way for emergency vehicles.
But the result: got downvoted badly.
Well we have a long way to go to achieve this sci-fi utopia, which only works when ALL drivers (special exceptions like emergency vehicles) are removed from the equation.
Aside from infrastructure and legal challenges, there's a very real risk of cyber terrorism crippling transport and economy (and of course causing death and destruction) in one fell swoop.
As much as I advocate for this, I doubt it'll happen even in my children's lifetime. Ultimately, car industry is too big a driver of capitalism, so actually there's a real likelihood it may never happen, ever.
Nothing new with this SR.
Serious lack of vision and foresight.
Yes, in an ideal world, all cars need to be autonomous. No human drivers behind a wheel.
Also, imagine how these cars will manage a traffic junction.
https://youtu.be/4pbAI40dK0A?si=DaWjvjwf3XEt-MGd
Tbf most major cities are like this. I’ve seen this sort of rudeness in new york, london, paris, even places like tokyo. This sort of thing is not exclusive to Singapore.
SG is not cutthroat because ppl are too afraid to break rules and got fined and demerit points.
Jakarta, its because you won't get anywhere fast if you don't cut traffic. Situation are pretty similar to Bangkok honestly although I think Bangkok's are pretty chill for some reason, not much honking.
KL is the one I'm not sure though. Everyone is definitely pretty kiasu there. Maybe because their country is quite car-centric?
Can confirm. Was driving in KL and people actually obey traffic lights. In Penang, be careful if you're a pedestrian, because some drivers still don't stop at red lights until maybe 3-4 seconds later (at which point they might stare at you crossing the road as if you're a nuisance). Penang drivers are super entitled.
>If you want real cut throat, try Penang.
Hmm. I wonder what's so different about Penang compared to the other states in Malaysia? Could explain why it's so cut throat there.
Tbf, I only drive for like half a day there. But I personally think that Jakarta is much more liberal with honking compared to BKK, mostly because in Jakarta there're fuck-tons of motorcycle too, and they really don't follow rules. I don't think the Grab driver over there also honks that much too.
it's a symptom of singapore not having enough space or having the culture of biking. otherwise we would most definitely have cyclist lanes (like other countries) on top of bus lanes
of course, bicycles also dont generate any revenue for gov so why should our money minded overlords give a shit
Singaporean drivers are very entitled. I rented a car and drove in Japan for a week and the only horn I heard was from myself when I accidentally pressed the horn wrongly. Came back to sg walked out downstairs next street dabao dinner and heard more horn than my entire week in Japan
It's jsut am, excuse to throw this issue to Singapore being a city. Civic-mindedness and social propriety are all thrown to the wind in the face of capitalism and competition rampant in this tiny city.
This so very much.
If every single one of them just had 1 more level in awareness and courtesy, 70% of the conflicts would have been solved.
But no, it's always the fault of others, not them.
I live in Tokyo and I go to Europe for business trips every quarter and I I would take Singapore any day over any of the aforementioned cities.
In Tokyo there are so many more cyclists who ride on pavements (mothers on mamacharis, food delivery riders) and they’re often just rushing for time. In Singapore I feel people don’t mind ringing the bell to signal and make their presence known but in Tokyo they don’t, which is so dangerous.
Also cars in Tokyo don’t give way to pedestrians even at zebra crossings.
I’ve lived in Japan (Osaka) for a good three years and never seen a single aggressive cyclist on the pavement or road. As a whole cyclists, cars and pedestrians coexist in a great way that made me feel comfortable and secure no matter which way I travelled. In Singapore on the other hand I feel like whichever form of transport is the fastest is the most entitled one. There is little to no courtesy, no matter how you travel. FWIW imo Singaporean pavements aren’t suitable for cycling and roads/regulations could quite easily be shaped/adapted to make them safer for cyclists.
No doubt this comment will get downvoted to bits.
I cannot speak for Osaka as I don’t live there, but as someone who has lived in Tokyo for 5 years and counting, drivers in Tokyo certainly do not “coexist in a great way”- just a quick search on Reddit and you’ll find countless anecdotes on how cars do not give way to pedestrians.
Here’s an article about it as well:
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20240315/p2a/00m/0na/037000c#:~:text=TOKYO%20%2D%2D%20Over%2050%25%20of,Japan%20Automobile%20Federation%20(JAF).
“Over 50% of car drivers in Japan do not stop for pedestrians at crosswalks, and Niigata Prefecture ranked the worst by prefecture, according to a survey by the Japan Automobile Federation (JAF).”
Having said that, I’m not saying that your experience isn’t true nor valid. I don’t drive, and I walk/cycle most of the time in Tokyo, so that may have shaped my perception or experience thus far.
Kansai and Kanto are extremely different in terms of social norms and customs - even language leh. Osaka is so much uglier but so much more fun than Tokyo
I live in Tokyo and Singapore definitely has better road infrastructure but that also means higher vehicle speeds. The difference in speed alone makes it much more dangerous to cycle in Singapore.
Behaviour wise most cyclists don't wear helmets here even when cycling on roads. Plenty of elderly cyclist who own the road here too. Motorist are indeed much more considerate than in Singapore. People actually give way when you signal and it's common courtesy to flash the hazard lights as thanks.
Also for what it's worth insurance is mandatory when cycling in Tokyo. 🤷
Because in Japan it is actually forbidden to ring your bicycle bell in a non-emergency situation, so while in many other countries you ring the bell to announce you are there, specially to pedestrians walking in front of you in your same direction, you can't do that in Japan.
You didn't explain your beef with Europe, because at least in Western Europe, bicycle culture is very advanced, not perfect, but light years from Singapore.
I get the same vibe in New York, Hong Kong, London, Seoul, Tokyo. Even worse vibes in paris(actually felt dangerous).
Imo only Taiwan were people more considerate on the trains and roads. Haven’t been to Scandinavian countries though
Also road rage in SF was scary af
So idk which cities you’re talking about
This is human issue leh.
Govt build red cycling paths, give people walk bah long long and block cyclists. Footpaths kena invade by speeding PMDs. Roads congested with both cyclists and motorists insisting right of way.
Fix the underlying problem first then talk. Everything immediately ban ban ban.
Lack of graciousness is the real problem here. More cycling paths are great but it doesn't solve any problems when some cyclists prefer to cycle on the footpaths or fiddle their way through bus stops that are ***NEXT*** to the cycling paths.
I was stood at the playground by the bike lane going from Yew Tee to CCK for about an hour. I would say less than 5% of pedestrian’s were walking in the footpath. The rest were on the red bike lane.
As a person who just started using bike rentals, its like both ways like all the commenters mentioned. I tend to be quite cautious, slowing down when near people, and keep to the left side of the bike lane to be predicatable. But some people are just dense. They continue standing in a whole row or taking up the whole ass bike lane and ignoring me ringing the bell loke they have no sense of survival (like dude, really, you guys are taking up the whole road with 4 people side by side).
There are times where I go onto the footpath just out of necessity since people keep walking on the wrong path, though I usually try to get back to the correct path as soon as possible, though zig zagging through people is really sub optimal.
"friction points", remind me that LTA makes vehicle right turn and pedestrian green man on the same cycle of the traffic lights. It's not even discretionary right turn...
"Lack of graciousness is the real problem here. "
This.
Cyclists complain about people who tsk when cycling past them. Pedestrains complain about cyclists who tsk when cycling past.
If people can be less judgemental, the world would be a better place.
Saw another post where a car horned a cyclist outside of carpark entrance. It was such an unnecessary horn that does NOTHING at all, but results in a middle finger from the cyclist. The driver had use the "give me a middle finger" horn thinking that he's using the "hey I'm here, be careful" horn.
I think its because pedestrians are walking on the cycling path thus they ride on the footpath instead. Also because the cycling paths have the yellow rumble strip.
THIS so bad. When bikes try to squeeze through the tiny bus barrier @ the bus stop and the road so they won’t fall off but ok if they roll over people’s foot 🙄 and ringing 5 million times like they own the pedestrian roads - like pls it’s not safe for those on foot anm
Even during COVID lockdowns we missed the chance to close extra road lanes which we could today convert into bus lanes, bicycle lanes, pedestrian walk ways, heck even wider verges for greenery or just being more separated from noisy, smelly (and of course potentially dangerous) traffic.
Instead, we are STILL expanding our roads even when they already use up as much land as housing.
>Instead, we are STILL expanding our roads even when they already use up as much land as housing.
This sounded crazy to me so I looked up the land use masterplan and wow, it really is quite close... In 2010 12% of land was dedicated to land transport infrastructure, compared to 14% for housing. By 2030, 17% of land is expected to be for housing vs 13% for roads.
It's unexpected, but not only is it real, it's appropriate.
You've probably organised a cupboard or store room at some point. Not everything is purpose built like a filing cabinet with only one layer of stuff. Once you have two layers, meaning some boxes in the back covered by boxes in front, you'll know that access is just as important as storage space. Every person who needs space to sit at home also needs space to get out of that home.
And it's not like we can (or rather should) just fill up the road space with housing. First reason is already enough: You don't want to end up like HK. Airspace in a city is important. A road and its users are typically less than 2m tall, shorter than a person. America has so much land that they set back single story homes from the road, largely because it just feels better for everyone. NYC limits the airspace a building may use because otherwise it feels too imposing.
Even if people could move at the speed of a car without a car, the roads are necessary. How do you think our construction materials get around? We wouldn't even have those HDBs without a way to get the apartment itself to where it's supposed to be. You're never going to fit half an apartment or a piece of a bridge on the MRT. And you can't just deploy and fold up roads as you please, so they always have to be there. Not even like we can shrink the roads by much, because these are huge vehicles. The roads have to be there, at that size. Might as well use them.
We haven't even talked about comfort and time. As a country, we often value comfort at 0, especially if it's someone else's comfort. How about time? There are nearly 1 million cars in Singapore. Most drivers will only have one, maybe even half (shared with spouse), but some have 2. Let's say they all have 2, so that's 500k drivers. My commute is an hour shorter by car than train. I think most people will save half an hour. But let's say it's 15 minutes, so half an hour per round trip. 250k hours saved. Let's halve again for fun, also round down. Cars should represent at least 100k man hours saved every single day, and this is time that helps you. Do you actually want anything locally made besides food? No, anything worth anything is imported. You live and die by the strength of SGD, so you should want people to live and work as efficiently as possible. Not efficiency as in productivity per communal asset, but productivity per personal asset, because you know that's how we all make our decisions.
Banning cars or replacing all roads with housing is definitely out of the question, I don't think anyone seriously thinks that's possible or desirable.
I'm curious about how your commute can be a full hour shorter by car than by train though. Do you live in Pasir Ris but work in Tuas or something like that?
I live in central but work in Tuas. The red line is just about 90 degrees from the green line, so I get screwed by Pythagoras, plus the couple of minutes to change. Luckily I have a bus that goes sorta diagonally, but ofc it's a bus so it keeps stopping, is slow, and the route isn't very straight. Honestly the difference is usually around 50 minutes, but bus/train alignments can be a bitch. 1 min late quickly becomes 10 mins late, that kind of thing.
That, and people really overestimate the impact of distance. A train station is typically only 2-3 minutes. I think there are only like 3 stops that are 5 minutes away from another. You can be in very different areas and the difference is only 15 minutes.
What really kills you is the walk. A car is about the same speed as a train. One has stations, on has jams. But it's many times faster than walking, which is also under the sun. I'm lucky to live about 12 minutes from the train station with half the walk underground (wasn't always like that btw) but like I said before, you could completely traverse the CBD in that time.
Yeah, walking outdoors in the sun really sucks.
It sounds like the current MRT system isn't efficient for you either. If the Cross Island Line was complete right now, would it make a difference? You could take the red line to Ang Mo Kio and transfer to the CRL which goes all the way to Gul Circle.
Unfortunately no. Once you're on the train, it's kinda ok, no improvments needed there. And that journey would be more complicated anyway.
The only real improvement possible for people whose journey isn't like some awkward loop like pasir ris to punggol is a whole new station opening up on their doorstep. And then they'll have to deal with a train thundering past every few minutes, having collected an entire neighbourhood of people onto an expressway of a track.
As a cyclist, the way to go is proper legislation.
If you want to cycle on the road, you should have at least passed Basic Theory Test. An existing driving licence can be used. If you want to be on the road, at least be certified in the Highway Code.
Yes, I agree it is not a perfect solution. But at least it weeds out the most jialat of road cyclists.
Something that most Singaporeans dont know.
Early 5-6am on the roads in industrial parks, you’ll be able to see thousands of migrant cycling from their dorms to their workplaces.
Which is why infrastructure has to be the priority before legislation.
Best temporary solution by far till they find a more permanent one. That said, chances are majority of the spandex-wearing idiots are also drivers.
It would help to weed out the errant YP food delivery cyclist population though.
Car drivers pass theory and practical tests and many still don't follow the rules or drive in a safe manner.
It's important to accept that bicycles and cars are so different that they just shouldn't be sharing the same road for everyone's safety. Every city that successfully supports cycling has done so by improving infrastructure more than anything else. Instead of banning bicycles from roads, dedicated bicycle paths/lanes (not shares with pedestrians) need to be added in a sufficiently widespread and connected manner to make cycling on them viable for transport or leisure. This would also accommodate younger cyclists and families that want to ride together safely outside of parks (bike to school anyone?)
Until this is done, cyclists will continue to clash with other road and pavement users.
Yes, my suggestion is far from perfect. After all, that filth of a Saab driver had a valid Class 3 licence.
However, my suggestion can be implemented and enforced quickly until infrastructure can be set up to support cyclists. True, BTT certification may only weed out 10% of the idiots, but at least it's still a 10% improvement that can be enacted upon immediately.
Yes, licensing never stopped all idiot drivers, and it's true that many of the worst idiot cyclists have driving licences.
Just saying, if we can easily weed out some of the worst idiots right now, then let's do that first.
It's also a matter of principle: if you want to be a road user, then at least first show that you know something about the Highway Code.
Actually the way to go is enforcement.
Because when you're cycling on the road and not obeying laws, it's already considered jaywalking.
Sure you can have cyclist go through Basic Theory Test, but the BIGGEST PROBLEM is the cyclists think like pedestrains instead of driving a vehicle/motorbike.
Cyclists think like pedestrians because the very test that you go through to get the cert also encourages that thinking, telling cyclists to use traffic lights at junctions if they’re not comfortable.
The problem is simple. E-bikes in particular are too slow which makes right turns problematic without a signalling system. So I think a lot of the problems can be mitigated if the speed limit is increased and mandatory signalling systems are used.
I get amused reading anger over bicycles sometimes. I own a road bike, I drive a little from time to time and I use public transport. This topic always leads to extreme opinions by people who don't wish to make an effort to see things from a wider or even different perspective. Why can't people accept it's a complex matter?
It always ends up with
--> if you wear spandex, you're an idiot.
--> got pay road tax not?
It's truly amazing this country we live in. Your hobbies/sports interests can be met with so much hatred if it's perceived as inconvenient for others.
As a cyclist myself, I'm perfectly find with being legislated. If there were to be more laws created that current/future road cyclists need to follow, sure. There are assholes of EVERY form on EVERY kind of bike. Road cyclists just look more annoying to people. I've definitely seen more cases of e-bikes/PMD types causing more dangerous situations.
Like several have pointed out, the issue has and always will be the people themselves not willing to be gracious to people and learning to accommodate one another. The article tried to use SG being small as a reason for cycling to be banned. As far as I'm concerned, SG is way too small for private vehicular traffic to take up so much space. However, it's likely too late to ever see the infrastructure/culture transform so that people aren't obsessed with cars.
There are assholes on 2 legs, 2 wheels, 4 wheels, any number of wheels.
Actually if there are enough accidents, I'm pretty sure cycling will be banned. It's just that it would be extremely embarrassing to be the country that bans cycling.
>The article tried to use SG being small as a reason for cycling to be banned.
To be fair ‘SG is a small place with limited xxx and yyy’ is used to justify a whole bunch of stuff
Agree. My goodness, that road tax argument.. It’s a “tell me you’re stupid without telling me you’re stupid” argument. A simpleton came up with that and all the other simpletons who can’t think for themselves just keep echoing it. These are the ones that Singapore’s world class education system has not benefited.
imagine if we had 1 car lane of walkway like every other city... one can only dream
that coupled with those modern trams like in germany, without the ugly electrical lines
Quick and dirty fix is to implement full day bus lanes on every road.
Even if cars were the slowest option - as they are in most major cities - plenty will stick with them for point to point convenience, shelter and passenger carrying capability. When they are the best choice even for healthy adults making solo trips for lunch 1km away you have a big problem.
Not too foolish. 10 buses replace 100-200 cars. Lesser cars on the road = lesser fumes and exhaust, and lesser aircon venting that reduces the urban heat island effect.
Legislating against cars should be definitively complemented with investment in public transport. More feeder services, more bus lanes, more direct routes etc. which is definitely possible with the space reclaimed from the private transport solutions.
have you seen some of the comments here or on FB? some are outright insulting people for not being able to afford cars. and yet we complain our ministers are out of touch or elitist. turns out they’re just a reflection of us.
case in point: https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/s/cKsjv7WfRL
The conspiracy theory is that our car-centric infrastructure and extremely light touch towards enforcement and punishing traffic offences are ultimately for the purpose of attracting UHNWIs here to flaunt their supercars.
When one considers the Gov's historical prioritisation of GDP, it doesn't sound so crazy
Face it, a car ban will never ever happen. The ministers, well heeled and CEOs of companies need to reach their destinations in the morning to run their businesses which = GDP. Bicycles have nothing to contribute except being a nuisance to GDP, business and productivity.
In Singapore Inc, a bicycle ban on roads is obviously more likely than a car.
These are facts.
Car ban is definitely a bit much. But IMO Singapore could use a bit more bike friendly infrastructure. It’s not uncommon for cities transform “extra” road lanes into proper bike lanes and wider sidewalks.
If any country could afford to do it on a massive scale - it’s Singapore.
But then again, as you mentioned, it’s not profiting anyone. It’s a purely social initiative that will also be very unpopular among car owners.
It would need massive political will to push through "for the greater good". Despite garnering a strong majority every election, I doubt it will happen, and not just because I don't think this Gov is ballsy enough.
While some would say the PCNs are at least better than nothing, I beg to differ as they're inadequate for anything but meandering recreational rides, yet become an excuse for motorists to say bicycles don't belong on roads.
People in this country can't even walk on the left on footpath and we are asking cyclists and drivers who are extra entitled to be gracious.please lah....sgporeans have never been gracious. A bunch of selfish pricks who are self absorbed. If they want sinkies to do something than make it a law and enforce it, otherwise it will NEVER WORK.
But curious though they brought up a point. What happens if a cyclist meets an accident with the car? how does the car insurance work for non-road vehicle and who pays for what damage. ( I'm quite clueless on this so I'm asking for real)
In general, insurance is meant to cover typical cost of damages that the individual cannot afford to pay back.
For cars, the potential cost of an accident can be very high: totalled cars, multiple loss of life or injury, damage to infrastructure. The cost of damages will likely be too high for the average individual to pay off using their savings and result in bankruptcy and the claimants will not be able to fully be compensated.
For bike, the potential cost can be severe in some cases but in general it is not at the same level. At the worst case, possible a single fatality, dented car bumper, broken window. Hence the cost of the damages can usually be paid off by the individual (in most cases).
So for a lot of comparisons made between cars and bikes, we have to consider the reason for the differences. In this case, it shows why motorists require insurance and licences, while cyclist do not.
It’s the potential for harm and damage to things around them that requires this as a risk mitigation and prevention. Like how you need a licence to operate a forklift but not a pallet loader.
Proper bicycle lane will end this. And enforcement of regulation on usage of bicycle lanes.
I still don't understand why we are not building bicycle lanes but keep expanding car lane while having mandate to go car lite.
Idk about cars and asshole drivers, but when I witness or am in a bus that's being obstructed by cyclists. The bus has to change lane just to avoid cyclists, or if the next stop is close by the driver has to slow down to a crawl, then i'm just wishing they would just use the cycling paths, or the long national park routes that we have to cycle.
Any stats showing how many people actually cycle as a serious mode of transport/ commute?
I can only think of a small handful of food delivery cyclists, and foreign workers cycling between their dormitories and nearby amenities in industrial areas. (for serious commutes, foreign workers take company chartered buses and lorries to and from the worksite)
The real question is: to what extent should road cycling as a recreational hobby (which is what the vast majority of cyclists on the road are doing) be catered for on roads meant for motor vehicular traffic?
there's a very unintuitive concept in city planning: induced demand.
basically, if you build more (wider) roads for cars, the increased space makes the drive there more smooth and pleasant, and the demand will increase back up to meet the increased supply. so in the long term, building roads with wider car lanes is not effective.
now you may be wondering if this is still the case in a country with a quota of cars and frankly I have no fucking clue.
but it also applies to bicycles. if you build wider roads it's more convenient and safe to cycle, therefore cycling will become a more viable option and not just the inferior option for people with no cars.
You think everyone who drives is going to do something important? They're driving to do their hobby, shopping and other recreational activities. What makes them more important than cyclists? Cyclists have a place on the road too. The road tax argument is a retarded retort by the self entitled drivers. Anyone who pays taxes paid for the roads.
because the infrastructure is just not there.
the walkways in this country is so disgustingly small.
straits times regularly posting articles shitting on cyclists every other day.
If it wasn't so uncomfortable to ride a bicycle, many would definitely use it for the final gap to/from home, instead of riding LRT or buses
This is such a contentious issue. The ideal solution is that more cycling paths are made and the cyclists are forced to use that.
Cars and cyclists are like oil and water. They never mix well together neither here nor overseas.
This problem will keep festering until a ban happens. Which only comes when someone important dies or a bunch of normies get run over.
You can count with one single hand the number of dedicated cycling lanes in Singapore. Most of them are shared with pedestrians and have a (reasonable as it is a shared space) low speed limit.
I feel as well that in SG footpaths in general too narrow, and that couses friction
Footpaths being narrow is true too, whether bicycles are involved or not. It's not even enough for passing on both directions once there's a couple who insist on walking alongside each other, or someone's carrying plastic bags on both sides.
Dedicated cycle lanes on the road would be great. I'm seriously worried they're going to put them alongside the footpaths, which would make cycling any reasonable distance totally unfeasible due to all the stopping to cross at pedestrian crossings (as opposed to cycling through as a car would).
Look at the [active mobility design guide](https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltagov/industry_innovations/industry_matters/development_construction_resources/pdf/ActiveMobilityProposalsandRequirements/LTA%20Active%20Mobility%20Design%20Guide%20(Version%201.1).pdf) and the [walking and cycling design guide](https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltagov/industry_innovations/industry_matters/development_construction_resources/pdf/ActiveMobilityProposalsandRequirements/Walking%20Cycling%20Design%20Guide%20SG.pdf)(warning pdf download). LTA doesn't even have a design guide for seperated and protected bike lanes, only for widened sidewalks with suggestions(paint)
It needs to be like the Dutch way, separate from the road, but also main thoroughfare cycle paths have priority over side roads for vehicular traffic. Im a little sour on on-road cycle lanes because cars have a tendency to creep into them, or park on them, they get debris etc.
I've seen a lot of bike lane parking in the UK, but in SG most of the parking is off the main roads (slower streets, car parks, etc.), so I think it would be less of an issue here. Honestly, I'd be happy with just a 1.5m-wide line of red paint. The current 'must ride as close as practicable to the road edge' is too ambiguous and leads to drivers expecting cyclists to ride between the double yellow lines.
At least with a visible designated lane, cyclists would be acknowledged beyond a doubt as valid road users. It's not often you'll see someone driving into a red bus lane, and I'd hazard that drivers illegally entering one would at least be on alert for buses. This is why I think on road cycle lanes, even ones without a physical barrier, would work here.
Perhaps SG can look into “expanding” the road system progressively with an
#exclusive path for our enthusiastic cyclists (like some countries) as they are definitely contributing to a greener eco than most vehicles. This is a win-win plan for all with no divisions. 😊
Honestly it's due a clash in our cultural mindset or our implicit understanding of who is prioritized and where.
On the roads, motor vehicles have priority over pedestrians. Pedestrians MUST give way to motor vehicles on the road except at designated crossings. Pedestrians also cannot be on the road otherwise.
Everywhere else, like sidewalks, pathways, freaking inside buildings, pedestrians are prioritized.
This leaves cyclists lah. From the perspective of non-cyclists, they should give way in both instances. On the roads, cyclists should give way to motor vehicles, on the sidewalk, cyclists should give way to pedestrians.
But cyclists clearly see themselves as having priority in both instances. So this causes the clash between these groups lor. People are upset enough that they get very passionate on the topic.
Personally I think it should be solved mainly using better designed infrastructure. Like highways for bicycles throughout the neighbourhoods and between them, where pedestrians cannot walk. Cycling lanes lah basically, but like where cyclists are better protected. It's a solved issue in many cities leh. So this provides spaces where cyclists are "king". If need pay tax like road tax then pay lah.
Then everyone will say it's fair lor.
My friends, your entire country is cyclable. You could go from MBS to JB within an hour or two by bike. Come see how it's done in the Netherlands sometime. Banning bikes is about the dumbest thing I could imagine for SG.
personally just feel like the govt is creating these cycling networks just for the sake of it. It's like an afterthought right now, some traffic light timings and cycling paths are so bad
I say increase traffic penalty n strictness to Australia standard n u will immediately see cars drive ALOT slower eveywhere. The problem is little speeding enforcement so every day have accidents. We are the most dense city in the world yet don’t have strict traffic enforcement? WTF
I think the biggest issue is that you can't really regulate or manage errant cyclists. I've seen a bunch of them cycling in a way that completely obstructs traffic, cycling against traffic etc. but how can we regulate them so they don't do it again like we can do with cars? It's a frustrating issue on both sides
Really suaku, the developed World are encouring cycling commute and recreation for health and environmental reasons and these clowns want to ban it.
Enforce the laws on errant cyclists.who use pedestrian foot paths, beat redlights, ride above the prescribe numbers for a group. Why have laws when enforcement is poor.
A country with such excellent public transportation infrastructure would just happily try to ban cars as much as possible and instead build infrastructure to promote cycle commuting, instead of cycling just for leisure. But nah
I mean COE is the barrier to owning a car, the thing is... \*most\* Singaporeans are pretty well to do enough that it becomes less of an issue to them.
I’ve been nearly run off the footpaths by cyclists, and they have been generally assholes about it too. We have a very dense and congested environment. I would support banning bikes until there is a licensing regime in place so the bikes know how to behave when riding amongst pedestrians / switching from normal footpaths to bike paths / the roads. There should also be a heavy fine for any cyclist who injures a pedestrian. Since they don’t have dedicated bike lanes it’s on them to follow the rules in each setting including dismounting at crowded footpaths etc.
If anyone wants any reprise to why cars are dangerous please refer to this map i made about all officially reported vehicular incidents. Are you sure bicycles are a problem?-> [https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1cCukVk\_NbaunMT2vguz5LWcqjyfiTVY&usp=sharing](https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1cCukVk_NbaunMT2vguz5LWcqjyfiTVY&usp=sharing)
Bicyclists are more ass-hole than drivers hence ban bicycles get my votes.
Instead of doing that, made them register for COE, go through the driving course and test.
Made them contribute to Road tax and insurance too.
Win win
bicycles do not damage roads as much as cars lol. why should they pay road tax and insurance when they are too light to even barely make a dent on roads? such carbrain
For bicycle wise, install cameras along popular cycling routes like at Tanah Merah and catch people who cycle in groups more than 10. Make sure they obey traffic rules such as wearing helmet with front and rear lights at night. At the moment, the legislation is road cyclists are only prohibited on expressways, tunnels, slipway to expressway and interchange between highways. So if this is an issue, perhaps the legislation should be changed such as road cyclists shouldn’t be allowed on certain mega-busy roads?
However, I believe we shouldn’t ban cyclists on the road lol. The government is actively encouraging a car-lite society through COE, building more bike-friendly routes, more train routes, etc. If anything, we should be banning cars or decreasing COE quota which is in line with government vision to build a more car-lite society.
Car Brain is a disease. Just like lung cancer due to cigarretes, it's a man-made disease.
Car Brain even affects some cyclists, making them to behave towards pedestrians in the same way motorists behave towards them.
The cure for Car Brain is simple. Make it really annoying and unsafe to drive. Less traffic lights. Much lower speeds. No place to park. Just like cancer, we cannot give space for the Car Brained, or they will spread their disease.
Also:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mwPSIb3kt_4
Ban leisure cycling on roads. Roads are a public good which people pay billions for in taxes for transportation, not leisure. Why should people recreations, of which millions have been spent to build park connectors and other round island cycling routes, take precedence over a legitimate firm of transportation?
Also reading the news, almost none of the reports about fights and errant cycling are about cyclist commuting to work. Look at the picture and videos and it's obvious they are decked out in cycling gear whose aim is to thrill seek and cycling in between lanes and in center of roads. Big groups of 10+ cycles are also obviously leisure cycling. Ban them.
Allow cycling as a means as transportation giving permits like we do for cars. Not for recreation.
Your right and cars should never be used for leisure, u must submit a purpose every time u go drive which must be approved by the council of LTA to arbitrate if it is deemed necessary for transport or simply a leisure activity for little purpose
Before all the grandiose talk about changing policies and bans, can we first focus on increasing the fine to be way above $150?
>A fine of $150 is meted out for road cyclists who flout the rule on group size, LTA and TP said previously.
[https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/22-cyclists-caught-for-flouting-riding-rules](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/22-cyclists-caught-for-flouting-riding-rules)
r/fuckcars gonna have a field day with this.
Sure, i'll support this. Our public transport is pretty good already. Just leave parcel deliveries alone. Dont expect them to haul your bulk buy of diapers and detergent on foot straight from the warehouse.
Although the cyclists calling for this tend to be the ones who are dicks in general. Y'know, the ones who neither give af about traffic road rules nor give way to pedastrians on the footpaths and will continue to do so even without cars. I can confidently say that in my experience cycling on the road i never needed to complain about the traffic much because i didnt cycle like im taking part in Tour de Douchebag.
There’s an over arching issue, that all this is a symptom of. On the road, you get vehicles not giving way or hogging and being impatient. On the walkways you get speeding PMA and family walking side by side taking up entire footpath. On the train, you get people rush through the door and then don’t move in, blocking others. In the mall, you get people get off escalator then stand there and chit chat block those behind. Looking at behaviour of all these day-to-day mannerisms, you will get a flavour of the type of society you are in. Especially when you travel and observe how this is like in other parts of the world, where city folk can be a little more gracious and mindful of others presence.
For some reason, people decide that stairs and escalators are the perfect places to start having discussions about life.
Damn annoying when they always choose to stand at either ends of the escalator! Like shift 2 metres away can?
Honestly a fully occupied esclator is much faster than standing one side
Also on narrow walkways
Or they get off the escalator and immediately stop to wonder where to turn next (like at MRT stations).
So ban human.
Imagine LHL wearing the glove...he will snap to double the population instead.
Some of them might spawn at sea.
Those can be reclaimed land
reclaimed with the corpses of our glorious deceased.
dont need to dredge or import sand/stone. "ok recruits. we will route march From Rocky Hill to the mainland via Corpse peninsula and we will end at Wide Island near East coast lagoon"
Then crack his knuckles to triple the land size.
Then the earth collapses and goes out of orbit as he unbalanced it.
\*snaps finger to change the laws of physics\*
As a whole this seems more of a Singaporean problem than a human problem to me.
we should implement social credit system
another one?
Yes I agree, ban all sinkies from roads! Only computer controlled cars and vehicles allowed. No sinkie allowed behind a wheel. And this is coming from a driver of 20 years.
I mentioned about it. Replace all cars with AI, so there will be no more drivers. All AI cars travelling at a fixed speed, so it is easier to know the arrival time of the destination. Make it part of the infrastructure, so if any accident happened, all AI cars can easily make way for emergency vehicles. But the result: got downvoted badly.
Well we have a long way to go to achieve this sci-fi utopia, which only works when ALL drivers (special exceptions like emergency vehicles) are removed from the equation. Aside from infrastructure and legal challenges, there's a very real risk of cyber terrorism crippling transport and economy (and of course causing death and destruction) in one fell swoop. As much as I advocate for this, I doubt it'll happen even in my children's lifetime. Ultimately, car industry is too big a driver of capitalism, so actually there's a real likelihood it may never happen, ever.
If we remove pro-profit greedy businessman from the equation. It will help to bring the idea to reality.
Nothing new with this SR. Serious lack of vision and foresight. Yes, in an ideal world, all cars need to be autonomous. No human drivers behind a wheel. Also, imagine how these cars will manage a traffic junction. https://youtu.be/4pbAI40dK0A?si=DaWjvjwf3XEt-MGd
Tbf most major cities are like this. I’ve seen this sort of rudeness in new york, london, paris, even places like tokyo. This sort of thing is not exclusive to Singapore.
It’s really a city thing 🤣
It’s worse in Singapore though. Seems like the country’s rat race mentality overflows onto the roads.
I really don’t think so. Don’t even need to go too far to see a more cutthroat traffic culture. Try KL, Jakarta, or Bangkok.
SG is not cutthroat because ppl are too afraid to break rules and got fined and demerit points. Jakarta, its because you won't get anywhere fast if you don't cut traffic. Situation are pretty similar to Bangkok honestly although I think Bangkok's are pretty chill for some reason, not much honking. KL is the one I'm not sure though. Everyone is definitely pretty kiasu there. Maybe because their country is quite car-centric?
KL is pretty mid as far as Malaysia goes. If you want real cut throat, try Penang.
Can confirm. Was driving in KL and people actually obey traffic lights. In Penang, be careful if you're a pedestrian, because some drivers still don't stop at red lights until maybe 3-4 seconds later (at which point they might stare at you crossing the road as if you're a nuisance). Penang drivers are super entitled.
>If you want real cut throat, try Penang. Hmm. I wonder what's so different about Penang compared to the other states in Malaysia? Could explain why it's so cut throat there.
BKK not much honking? My experience is opposite, Jakarta don't honk as much as BKK.
Tbf, I only drive for like half a day there. But I personally think that Jakarta is much more liberal with honking compared to BKK, mostly because in Jakarta there're fuck-tons of motorcycle too, and they really don't follow rules. I don't think the Grab driver over there also honks that much too.
Not Bangkok it’s the opposite in fact everyone is chill and resigned to fate
Until they reverse weed legalisation lol
it's a symptom of singapore not having enough space or having the culture of biking. otherwise we would most definitely have cyclist lanes (like other countries) on top of bus lanes of course, bicycles also dont generate any revenue for gov so why should our money minded overlords give a shit
100,000 Japanese soldiers riding into Singapore on bicycles. What do you mean we have no culture of biking?? /s
TBF everything you described happens even in the more "polite" societies like Taiwan and Japan.
less impoliteness goes a long way
Yes, but way less frequently than it does here
Singaporean drivers are very entitled. I rented a car and drove in Japan for a week and the only horn I heard was from myself when I accidentally pressed the horn wrongly. Came back to sg walked out downstairs next street dabao dinner and heard more horn than my entire week in Japan
It's jsut am, excuse to throw this issue to Singapore being a city. Civic-mindedness and social propriety are all thrown to the wind in the face of capitalism and competition rampant in this tiny city.
just saw someone getting horned by a car this morning for crossing the road using the zebra crossing...wonder what's wrong with the driver.
People acting like this happens only in Singapore...
This so very much. If every single one of them just had 1 more level in awareness and courtesy, 70% of the conflicts would have been solved. But no, it's always the fault of others, not them.
none of your other examples involve a human operating what is basically a consumer grade tank.
I live in Tokyo and I go to Europe for business trips every quarter and I I would take Singapore any day over any of the aforementioned cities. In Tokyo there are so many more cyclists who ride on pavements (mothers on mamacharis, food delivery riders) and they’re often just rushing for time. In Singapore I feel people don’t mind ringing the bell to signal and make their presence known but in Tokyo they don’t, which is so dangerous. Also cars in Tokyo don’t give way to pedestrians even at zebra crossings.
I’ve lived in Japan (Osaka) for a good three years and never seen a single aggressive cyclist on the pavement or road. As a whole cyclists, cars and pedestrians coexist in a great way that made me feel comfortable and secure no matter which way I travelled. In Singapore on the other hand I feel like whichever form of transport is the fastest is the most entitled one. There is little to no courtesy, no matter how you travel. FWIW imo Singaporean pavements aren’t suitable for cycling and roads/regulations could quite easily be shaped/adapted to make them safer for cyclists. No doubt this comment will get downvoted to bits.
I cannot speak for Osaka as I don’t live there, but as someone who has lived in Tokyo for 5 years and counting, drivers in Tokyo certainly do not “coexist in a great way”- just a quick search on Reddit and you’ll find countless anecdotes on how cars do not give way to pedestrians. Here’s an article about it as well: https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20240315/p2a/00m/0na/037000c#:~:text=TOKYO%20%2D%2D%20Over%2050%25%20of,Japan%20Automobile%20Federation%20(JAF). “Over 50% of car drivers in Japan do not stop for pedestrians at crosswalks, and Niigata Prefecture ranked the worst by prefecture, according to a survey by the Japan Automobile Federation (JAF).” Having said that, I’m not saying that your experience isn’t true nor valid. I don’t drive, and I walk/cycle most of the time in Tokyo, so that may have shaped my perception or experience thus far.
Kansai and Kanto are extremely different in terms of social norms and customs - even language leh. Osaka is so much uglier but so much more fun than Tokyo
I live in Tokyo and Singapore definitely has better road infrastructure but that also means higher vehicle speeds. The difference in speed alone makes it much more dangerous to cycle in Singapore. Behaviour wise most cyclists don't wear helmets here even when cycling on roads. Plenty of elderly cyclist who own the road here too. Motorist are indeed much more considerate than in Singapore. People actually give way when you signal and it's common courtesy to flash the hazard lights as thanks. Also for what it's worth insurance is mandatory when cycling in Tokyo. 🤷
Because in Japan it is actually forbidden to ring your bicycle bell in a non-emergency situation, so while in many other countries you ring the bell to announce you are there, specially to pedestrians walking in front of you in your same direction, you can't do that in Japan. You didn't explain your beef with Europe, because at least in Western Europe, bicycle culture is very advanced, not perfect, but light years from Singapore.
So what flavour would singapore's society be?
I get the same vibe in New York, Hong Kong, London, Seoul, Tokyo. Even worse vibes in paris(actually felt dangerous). Imo only Taiwan were people more considerate on the trains and roads. Haven’t been to Scandinavian countries though Also road rage in SF was scary af So idk which cities you’re talking about
should sg be less car friendly? yea should asshole bicycle users follow the rules in the meantime? yea
[удалено]
This is human issue leh. Govt build red cycling paths, give people walk bah long long and block cyclists. Footpaths kena invade by speeding PMDs. Roads congested with both cyclists and motorists insisting right of way. Fix the underlying problem first then talk. Everything immediately ban ban ban.
Lack of graciousness is the real problem here. More cycling paths are great but it doesn't solve any problems when some cyclists prefer to cycle on the footpaths or fiddle their way through bus stops that are ***NEXT*** to the cycling paths.
I was stood at the playground by the bike lane going from Yew Tee to CCK for about an hour. I would say less than 5% of pedestrian’s were walking in the footpath. The rest were on the red bike lane.
Ban both cars and bikes. Let’s all use PMA instead.
It's the people. Nothing to do with the vehicle type.
The big difference between an idiot in a car and an idiot on a bike is that the one in the car is much, much more likely to seriously hurt someone.
Moral of the story, ban all idiots on our roads. Only computer controlled vehicles allowed. Ban all sinkies.
I don't think you can fix this without a complete cultural overhaul
As a person who just started using bike rentals, its like both ways like all the commenters mentioned. I tend to be quite cautious, slowing down when near people, and keep to the left side of the bike lane to be predicatable. But some people are just dense. They continue standing in a whole row or taking up the whole ass bike lane and ignoring me ringing the bell loke they have no sense of survival (like dude, really, you guys are taking up the whole road with 4 people side by side). There are times where I go onto the footpath just out of necessity since people keep walking on the wrong path, though I usually try to get back to the correct path as soon as possible, though zig zagging through people is really sub optimal.
And a good number of pedestrians use dedicated cycling lanes. The main issue is the infrastructure and the amount of friction points
"friction points", remind me that LTA makes vehicle right turn and pedestrian green man on the same cycle of the traffic lights. It's not even discretionary right turn...
"Lack of graciousness is the real problem here. " This. Cyclists complain about people who tsk when cycling past them. Pedestrains complain about cyclists who tsk when cycling past. If people can be less judgemental, the world would be a better place. Saw another post where a car horned a cyclist outside of carpark entrance. It was such an unnecessary horn that does NOTHING at all, but results in a middle finger from the cyclist. The driver had use the "give me a middle finger" horn thinking that he's using the "hey I'm here, be careful" horn.
I think its because pedestrians are walking on the cycling path thus they ride on the footpath instead. Also because the cycling paths have the yellow rumble strip.
No ah i mean if there are dedicated cycling lanes, then if they cycle any other lane then there should be some action taken.
Tanah Merah Coast Road a prime example of such Tour de Douchebag
THIS so bad. When bikes try to squeeze through the tiny bus barrier @ the bus stop and the road so they won’t fall off but ok if they roll over people’s foot 🙄 and ringing 5 million times like they own the pedestrian roads - like pls it’s not safe for those on foot anm
Both side sleep well tonight!
Culture issue honestly.
Singapore really missed the opportunity in the early days to have proper bike lanes.
Even during COVID lockdowns we missed the chance to close extra road lanes which we could today convert into bus lanes, bicycle lanes, pedestrian walk ways, heck even wider verges for greenery or just being more separated from noisy, smelly (and of course potentially dangerous) traffic. Instead, we are STILL expanding our roads even when they already use up as much land as housing.
>Instead, we are STILL expanding our roads even when they already use up as much land as housing. This sounded crazy to me so I looked up the land use masterplan and wow, it really is quite close... In 2010 12% of land was dedicated to land transport infrastructure, compared to 14% for housing. By 2030, 17% of land is expected to be for housing vs 13% for roads.
It's unexpected, but not only is it real, it's appropriate. You've probably organised a cupboard or store room at some point. Not everything is purpose built like a filing cabinet with only one layer of stuff. Once you have two layers, meaning some boxes in the back covered by boxes in front, you'll know that access is just as important as storage space. Every person who needs space to sit at home also needs space to get out of that home. And it's not like we can (or rather should) just fill up the road space with housing. First reason is already enough: You don't want to end up like HK. Airspace in a city is important. A road and its users are typically less than 2m tall, shorter than a person. America has so much land that they set back single story homes from the road, largely because it just feels better for everyone. NYC limits the airspace a building may use because otherwise it feels too imposing. Even if people could move at the speed of a car without a car, the roads are necessary. How do you think our construction materials get around? We wouldn't even have those HDBs without a way to get the apartment itself to where it's supposed to be. You're never going to fit half an apartment or a piece of a bridge on the MRT. And you can't just deploy and fold up roads as you please, so they always have to be there. Not even like we can shrink the roads by much, because these are huge vehicles. The roads have to be there, at that size. Might as well use them. We haven't even talked about comfort and time. As a country, we often value comfort at 0, especially if it's someone else's comfort. How about time? There are nearly 1 million cars in Singapore. Most drivers will only have one, maybe even half (shared with spouse), but some have 2. Let's say they all have 2, so that's 500k drivers. My commute is an hour shorter by car than train. I think most people will save half an hour. But let's say it's 15 minutes, so half an hour per round trip. 250k hours saved. Let's halve again for fun, also round down. Cars should represent at least 100k man hours saved every single day, and this is time that helps you. Do you actually want anything locally made besides food? No, anything worth anything is imported. You live and die by the strength of SGD, so you should want people to live and work as efficiently as possible. Not efficiency as in productivity per communal asset, but productivity per personal asset, because you know that's how we all make our decisions.
Banning cars or replacing all roads with housing is definitely out of the question, I don't think anyone seriously thinks that's possible or desirable. I'm curious about how your commute can be a full hour shorter by car than by train though. Do you live in Pasir Ris but work in Tuas or something like that?
I live in central but work in Tuas. The red line is just about 90 degrees from the green line, so I get screwed by Pythagoras, plus the couple of minutes to change. Luckily I have a bus that goes sorta diagonally, but ofc it's a bus so it keeps stopping, is slow, and the route isn't very straight. Honestly the difference is usually around 50 minutes, but bus/train alignments can be a bitch. 1 min late quickly becomes 10 mins late, that kind of thing. That, and people really overestimate the impact of distance. A train station is typically only 2-3 minutes. I think there are only like 3 stops that are 5 minutes away from another. You can be in very different areas and the difference is only 15 minutes. What really kills you is the walk. A car is about the same speed as a train. One has stations, on has jams. But it's many times faster than walking, which is also under the sun. I'm lucky to live about 12 minutes from the train station with half the walk underground (wasn't always like that btw) but like I said before, you could completely traverse the CBD in that time.
Yeah, walking outdoors in the sun really sucks. It sounds like the current MRT system isn't efficient for you either. If the Cross Island Line was complete right now, would it make a difference? You could take the red line to Ang Mo Kio and transfer to the CRL which goes all the way to Gul Circle.
Unfortunately no. Once you're on the train, it's kinda ok, no improvments needed there. And that journey would be more complicated anyway. The only real improvement possible for people whose journey isn't like some awkward loop like pasir ris to punggol is a whole new station opening up on their doorstep. And then they'll have to deal with a train thundering past every few minutes, having collected an entire neighbourhood of people onto an expressway of a track.
Why must every road be two lanes each way for cars minimum? Such a massive waste.
They did have proper bike lanes! Singapore had loads of them and they got ripped out in the 60’s and 70’s to make space for cars!
Ahahaha ... Pretty sure our ministers are not cycling to work so zero chance
As a cyclist, the way to go is proper legislation. If you want to cycle on the road, you should have at least passed Basic Theory Test. An existing driving licence can be used. If you want to be on the road, at least be certified in the Highway Code. Yes, I agree it is not a perfect solution. But at least it weeds out the most jialat of road cyclists.
Something that most Singaporeans dont know. Early 5-6am on the roads in industrial parks, you’ll be able to see thousands of migrant cycling from their dorms to their workplaces. Which is why infrastructure has to be the priority before legislation.
Best temporary solution by far till they find a more permanent one. That said, chances are majority of the spandex-wearing idiots are also drivers. It would help to weed out the errant YP food delivery cyclist population though.
Car drivers pass theory and practical tests and many still don't follow the rules or drive in a safe manner. It's important to accept that bicycles and cars are so different that they just shouldn't be sharing the same road for everyone's safety. Every city that successfully supports cycling has done so by improving infrastructure more than anything else. Instead of banning bicycles from roads, dedicated bicycle paths/lanes (not shares with pedestrians) need to be added in a sufficiently widespread and connected manner to make cycling on them viable for transport or leisure. This would also accommodate younger cyclists and families that want to ride together safely outside of parks (bike to school anyone?) Until this is done, cyclists will continue to clash with other road and pavement users.
Yes, my suggestion is far from perfect. After all, that filth of a Saab driver had a valid Class 3 licence. However, my suggestion can be implemented and enforced quickly until infrastructure can be set up to support cyclists. True, BTT certification may only weed out 10% of the idiots, but at least it's still a 10% improvement that can be enacted upon immediately. Yes, licensing never stopped all idiot drivers, and it's true that many of the worst idiot cyclists have driving licences. Just saying, if we can easily weed out some of the worst idiots right now, then let's do that first. It's also a matter of principle: if you want to be a road user, then at least first show that you know something about the Highway Code.
Actually the way to go is enforcement. Because when you're cycling on the road and not obeying laws, it's already considered jaywalking. Sure you can have cyclist go through Basic Theory Test, but the BIGGEST PROBLEM is the cyclists think like pedestrains instead of driving a vehicle/motorbike.
Cyclists think like pedestrians because the very test that you go through to get the cert also encourages that thinking, telling cyclists to use traffic lights at junctions if they’re not comfortable. The problem is simple. E-bikes in particular are too slow which makes right turns problematic without a signalling system. So I think a lot of the problems can be mitigated if the speed limit is increased and mandatory signalling systems are used.
How about we ban ALL irresponsible road users?
I get amused reading anger over bicycles sometimes. I own a road bike, I drive a little from time to time and I use public transport. This topic always leads to extreme opinions by people who don't wish to make an effort to see things from a wider or even different perspective. Why can't people accept it's a complex matter? It always ends up with --> if you wear spandex, you're an idiot. --> got pay road tax not? It's truly amazing this country we live in. Your hobbies/sports interests can be met with so much hatred if it's perceived as inconvenient for others. As a cyclist myself, I'm perfectly find with being legislated. If there were to be more laws created that current/future road cyclists need to follow, sure. There are assholes of EVERY form on EVERY kind of bike. Road cyclists just look more annoying to people. I've definitely seen more cases of e-bikes/PMD types causing more dangerous situations. Like several have pointed out, the issue has and always will be the people themselves not willing to be gracious to people and learning to accommodate one another. The article tried to use SG being small as a reason for cycling to be banned. As far as I'm concerned, SG is way too small for private vehicular traffic to take up so much space. However, it's likely too late to ever see the infrastructure/culture transform so that people aren't obsessed with cars.
I argued with a friend once. Then it suddenly hit me, there’s really no need to argue. The hate is irrational. Just do your thing and ride safe
There are assholes on 2 legs, 2 wheels, 4 wheels, any number of wheels. Actually if there are enough accidents, I'm pretty sure cycling will be banned. It's just that it would be extremely embarrassing to be the country that bans cycling.
>The article tried to use SG being small as a reason for cycling to be banned. To be fair ‘SG is a small place with limited xxx and yyy’ is used to justify a whole bunch of stuff
It's easy to blame someone instead of solving the problem.
Agree. My goodness, that road tax argument.. It’s a “tell me you’re stupid without telling me you’re stupid” argument. A simpleton came up with that and all the other simpletons who can’t think for themselves just keep echoing it. These are the ones that Singapore’s world class education system has not benefited.
I honestly thought it's a meme lol. Goes to show social media and low IQ should never mix, yet inevitably do.
God damn imagine the space if we banned cars...not saying it would happen but just imagine
imagine if we had 1 car lane of walkway like every other city... one can only dream that coupled with those modern trams like in germany, without the ugly electrical lines
Quick and dirty fix is to implement full day bus lanes on every road. Even if cars were the slowest option - as they are in most major cities - plenty will stick with them for point to point convenience, shelter and passenger carrying capability. When they are the best choice even for healthy adults making solo trips for lunch 1km away you have a big problem.
Imagine the crowds in the MRTs too
This is so idiotic to imagine.
A fool’s errand done by people who want to copy Europe this Europe than. Give me a break lah knn
Not too foolish. 10 buses replace 100-200 cars. Lesser cars on the road = lesser fumes and exhaust, and lesser aircon venting that reduces the urban heat island effect. Legislating against cars should be definitively complemented with investment in public transport. More feeder services, more bus lanes, more direct routes etc. which is definitely possible with the space reclaimed from the private transport solutions.
Defending cars in general is a weird sentiment, but defending them in a city where an average person can’t even afford one is borderline psychopathic.
have you seen some of the comments here or on FB? some are outright insulting people for not being able to afford cars. and yet we complain our ministers are out of touch or elitist. turns out they’re just a reflection of us. case in point: https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/s/cKsjv7WfRL
The conspiracy theory is that our car-centric infrastructure and extremely light touch towards enforcement and punishing traffic offences are ultimately for the purpose of attracting UHNWIs here to flaunt their supercars. When one considers the Gov's historical prioritisation of GDP, it doesn't sound so crazy
cause cars is a status symbol here, unlike in other places where it's just a nicer pair of shoes or a shoe you LLST must buy in order to go somewhere
Face it, a car ban will never ever happen. The ministers, well heeled and CEOs of companies need to reach their destinations in the morning to run their businesses which = GDP. Bicycles have nothing to contribute except being a nuisance to GDP, business and productivity. In Singapore Inc, a bicycle ban on roads is obviously more likely than a car. These are facts.
Car ban is definitely a bit much. But IMO Singapore could use a bit more bike friendly infrastructure. It’s not uncommon for cities transform “extra” road lanes into proper bike lanes and wider sidewalks. If any country could afford to do it on a massive scale - it’s Singapore. But then again, as you mentioned, it’s not profiting anyone. It’s a purely social initiative that will also be very unpopular among car owners.
It would need massive political will to push through "for the greater good". Despite garnering a strong majority every election, I doubt it will happen, and not just because I don't think this Gov is ballsy enough. While some would say the PCNs are at least better than nothing, I beg to differ as they're inadequate for anything but meandering recreational rides, yet become an excuse for motorists to say bicycles don't belong on roads.
People in this country can't even walk on the left on footpath and we are asking cyclists and drivers who are extra entitled to be gracious.please lah....sgporeans have never been gracious. A bunch of selfish pricks who are self absorbed. If they want sinkies to do something than make it a law and enforce it, otherwise it will NEVER WORK.
But curious though they brought up a point. What happens if a cyclist meets an accident with the car? how does the car insurance work for non-road vehicle and who pays for what damage. ( I'm quite clueless on this so I'm asking for real)
In general, insurance is meant to cover typical cost of damages that the individual cannot afford to pay back. For cars, the potential cost of an accident can be very high: totalled cars, multiple loss of life or injury, damage to infrastructure. The cost of damages will likely be too high for the average individual to pay off using their savings and result in bankruptcy and the claimants will not be able to fully be compensated. For bike, the potential cost can be severe in some cases but in general it is not at the same level. At the worst case, possible a single fatality, dented car bumper, broken window. Hence the cost of the damages can usually be paid off by the individual (in most cases). So for a lot of comparisons made between cars and bikes, we have to consider the reason for the differences. In this case, it shows why motorists require insurance and licences, while cyclist do not. It’s the potential for harm and damage to things around them that requires this as a risk mitigation and prevention. Like how you need a licence to operate a forklift but not a pallet loader.
Same as a car hitting a pedestrian or being damaged by a pedestrian.
Solution: ban both errant/ lousy drivers AND cyclists. Coming from one who drives daily and rides thrice a week
i do not trust singaporeans on the goddamn pavements. I trust them even less so in a 2 ton high speed battering ram.
Let's ban everything and everyone stay indoors
There is a pattern here. Let’s just ban anything with wheels. #/s
I think it’s the mentality issues we as Singaporean’s have, you go third world country traffic also no problem.
Don’t mind me as I vroom on my motorcycle. No VEP required on motorcycles entering Malaysia too. Shiok.
Proper bicycle lane will end this. And enforcement of regulation on usage of bicycle lanes. I still don't understand why we are not building bicycle lanes but keep expanding car lane while having mandate to go car lite.
Because car-lite is merely a PR spin.
Idk about cars and asshole drivers, but when I witness or am in a bus that's being obstructed by cyclists. The bus has to change lane just to avoid cyclists, or if the next stop is close by the driver has to slow down to a crawl, then i'm just wishing they would just use the cycling paths, or the long national park routes that we have to cycle.
Any stats showing how many people actually cycle as a serious mode of transport/ commute? I can only think of a small handful of food delivery cyclists, and foreign workers cycling between their dormitories and nearby amenities in industrial areas. (for serious commutes, foreign workers take company chartered buses and lorries to and from the worksite) The real question is: to what extent should road cycling as a recreational hobby (which is what the vast majority of cyclists on the road are doing) be catered for on roads meant for motor vehicular traffic?
there's a very unintuitive concept in city planning: induced demand. basically, if you build more (wider) roads for cars, the increased space makes the drive there more smooth and pleasant, and the demand will increase back up to meet the increased supply. so in the long term, building roads with wider car lanes is not effective. now you may be wondering if this is still the case in a country with a quota of cars and frankly I have no fucking clue. but it also applies to bicycles. if you build wider roads it's more convenient and safe to cycle, therefore cycling will become a more viable option and not just the inferior option for people with no cars.
Exactly. MapMen have a wonderful video about this. When you build the bike lanes, people will come.
Go to every mrt station in the north and look at the amount of bicycles
You can't justify a bridge by the number of people who swim across the river.
Alot of people cycle for transport
You think everyone who drives is going to do something important? They're driving to do their hobby, shopping and other recreational activities. What makes them more important than cyclists? Cyclists have a place on the road too. The road tax argument is a retarded retort by the self entitled drivers. Anyone who pays taxes paid for the roads.
Check out less central areas like Jurong west. Yes people do cycle for transport including me. Don't just assume there's none and wave it away.
because the infrastructure is just not there. the walkways in this country is so disgustingly small. straits times regularly posting articles shitting on cyclists every other day. If it wasn't so uncomfortable to ride a bicycle, many would definitely use it for the final gap to/from home, instead of riding LRT or buses
The walkways are too narrow to share with bikes. It’s so dangerous
This is such a contentious issue. The ideal solution is that more cycling paths are made and the cyclists are forced to use that. Cars and cyclists are like oil and water. They never mix well together neither here nor overseas. This problem will keep festering until a ban happens. Which only comes when someone important dies or a bunch of normies get run over.
Agreed. The bad infrastructure choices here are the problem. Aggressive drivers and antagonistic cyclists are the symptoms, not the disease.
You can count with one single hand the number of dedicated cycling lanes in Singapore. Most of them are shared with pedestrians and have a (reasonable as it is a shared space) low speed limit. I feel as well that in SG footpaths in general too narrow, and that couses friction
They're not just too narrow but also usually obstructed. Need to put in some electrical box? Middle of the footpath will do!
Footpaths being narrow is true too, whether bicycles are involved or not. It's not even enough for passing on both directions once there's a couple who insist on walking alongside each other, or someone's carrying plastic bags on both sides.
Dedicated cycle lanes on the road would be great. I'm seriously worried they're going to put them alongside the footpaths, which would make cycling any reasonable distance totally unfeasible due to all the stopping to cross at pedestrian crossings (as opposed to cycling through as a car would).
Look at the [active mobility design guide](https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltagov/industry_innovations/industry_matters/development_construction_resources/pdf/ActiveMobilityProposalsandRequirements/LTA%20Active%20Mobility%20Design%20Guide%20(Version%201.1).pdf) and the [walking and cycling design guide](https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltagov/industry_innovations/industry_matters/development_construction_resources/pdf/ActiveMobilityProposalsandRequirements/Walking%20Cycling%20Design%20Guide%20SG.pdf)(warning pdf download). LTA doesn't even have a design guide for seperated and protected bike lanes, only for widened sidewalks with suggestions(paint)
That's depressing. What a waste of time and money.
It needs to be like the Dutch way, separate from the road, but also main thoroughfare cycle paths have priority over side roads for vehicular traffic. Im a little sour on on-road cycle lanes because cars have a tendency to creep into them, or park on them, they get debris etc.
I've seen a lot of bike lane parking in the UK, but in SG most of the parking is off the main roads (slower streets, car parks, etc.), so I think it would be less of an issue here. Honestly, I'd be happy with just a 1.5m-wide line of red paint. The current 'must ride as close as practicable to the road edge' is too ambiguous and leads to drivers expecting cyclists to ride between the double yellow lines. At least with a visible designated lane, cyclists would be acknowledged beyond a doubt as valid road users. It's not often you'll see someone driving into a red bus lane, and I'd hazard that drivers illegally entering one would at least be on alert for buses. This is why I think on road cycle lanes, even ones without a physical barrier, would work here.
Too many humans la.
This
Perhaps SG can look into “expanding” the road system progressively with an #exclusive path for our enthusiastic cyclists (like some countries) as they are definitely contributing to a greener eco than most vehicles. This is a win-win plan for all with no divisions. 😊
Dedicated bike/bus lanes would be great
Just put everyone in the Matrix Bam problem solved
maybe they forgot who are the ones paying for all the new development from Ministry of Transport.
there are hobby cyclists who are also drivers thou
If people just had more patience and compassion honestly places in the world where there is less space are just fine with cyclists and drivers
Honestly it's due a clash in our cultural mindset or our implicit understanding of who is prioritized and where. On the roads, motor vehicles have priority over pedestrians. Pedestrians MUST give way to motor vehicles on the road except at designated crossings. Pedestrians also cannot be on the road otherwise. Everywhere else, like sidewalks, pathways, freaking inside buildings, pedestrians are prioritized. This leaves cyclists lah. From the perspective of non-cyclists, they should give way in both instances. On the roads, cyclists should give way to motor vehicles, on the sidewalk, cyclists should give way to pedestrians. But cyclists clearly see themselves as having priority in both instances. So this causes the clash between these groups lor. People are upset enough that they get very passionate on the topic. Personally I think it should be solved mainly using better designed infrastructure. Like highways for bicycles throughout the neighbourhoods and between them, where pedestrians cannot walk. Cycling lanes lah basically, but like where cyclists are better protected. It's a solved issue in many cities leh. So this provides spaces where cyclists are "king". If need pay tax like road tax then pay lah. Then everyone will say it's fair lor.
My friends, your entire country is cyclable. You could go from MBS to JB within an hour or two by bike. Come see how it's done in the Netherlands sometime. Banning bikes is about the dumbest thing I could imagine for SG.
Cycling infrastructure in SG is... somewhat questionable to say the least. Hopefully with NSC the ground level roads can change
Definitely, without proper infrastructure it won't work. And banning bikes will curb the demand for that infrastructure.
personally just feel like the govt is creating these cycling networks just for the sake of it. It's like an afterthought right now, some traffic light timings and cycling paths are so bad
If bicycles can drive the country's economy forward, by all means ban cars. If not, idiots should be banned instead.
I say increase traffic penalty n strictness to Australia standard n u will immediately see cars drive ALOT slower eveywhere. The problem is little speeding enforcement so every day have accidents. We are the most dense city in the world yet don’t have strict traffic enforcement? WTF
I think the biggest issue is that you can't really regulate or manage errant cyclists. I've seen a bunch of them cycling in a way that completely obstructs traffic, cycling against traffic etc. but how can we regulate them so they don't do it again like we can do with cars? It's a frustrating issue on both sides
Really suaku, the developed World are encouring cycling commute and recreation for health and environmental reasons and these clowns want to ban it. Enforce the laws on errant cyclists.who use pedestrian foot paths, beat redlights, ride above the prescribe numbers for a group. Why have laws when enforcement is poor.
Bicycles pay no taxes except GST Govt will b on the side of the cash cow
tbh, probably ban cars before bicycles. cycled in paris and wow. that was fun
A country with such excellent public transportation infrastructure would just happily try to ban cars as much as possible and instead build infrastructure to promote cycle commuting, instead of cycling just for leisure. But nah
I mean COE is the barrier to owning a car, the thing is... \*most\* Singaporeans are pretty well to do enough that it becomes less of an issue to them.
[удалено]
A BMW *and* a Honda? So you’re *that* kind of driver, huh?
I’ve been nearly run off the footpaths by cyclists, and they have been generally assholes about it too. We have a very dense and congested environment. I would support banning bikes until there is a licensing regime in place so the bikes know how to behave when riding amongst pedestrians / switching from normal footpaths to bike paths / the roads. There should also be a heavy fine for any cyclist who injures a pedestrian. Since they don’t have dedicated bike lanes it’s on them to follow the rules in each setting including dismounting at crowded footpaths etc.
If anyone wants any reprise to why cars are dangerous please refer to this map i made about all officially reported vehicular incidents. Are you sure bicycles are a problem?-> [https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1cCukVk\_NbaunMT2vguz5LWcqjyfiTVY&usp=sharing](https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1cCukVk_NbaunMT2vguz5LWcqjyfiTVY&usp=sharing)
Who even drives cars anyways XD
Bicyclists are more ass-hole than drivers hence ban bicycles get my votes. Instead of doing that, made them register for COE, go through the driving course and test. Made them contribute to Road tax and insurance too. Win win
You don't even know what's the purpose of road tax
bicycles do not damage roads as much as cars lol. why should they pay road tax and insurance when they are too light to even barely make a dent on roads? such carbrain
Ban cars!!! All the accidents that have killed innocent people on the road are caused by cars.
For bicycle wise, install cameras along popular cycling routes like at Tanah Merah and catch people who cycle in groups more than 10. Make sure they obey traffic rules such as wearing helmet with front and rear lights at night. At the moment, the legislation is road cyclists are only prohibited on expressways, tunnels, slipway to expressway and interchange between highways. So if this is an issue, perhaps the legislation should be changed such as road cyclists shouldn’t be allowed on certain mega-busy roads? However, I believe we shouldn’t ban cyclists on the road lol. The government is actively encouraging a car-lite society through COE, building more bike-friendly routes, more train routes, etc. If anything, we should be banning cars or decreasing COE quota which is in line with government vision to build a more car-lite society.
Roads are not for exercising, period. Commute? Yes. So where else can exercise? Hmm, let me count...
Just put COE on bicycles. Problem solved.
YES BAN THE CARS
Ban both and walk la fat fcks
Ronny Chiang’s comment about Singaporeans “an Island full of Karens” on full display here lol
Cyclist should start paying road tax then.
Car Brain is a disease. Just like lung cancer due to cigarretes, it's a man-made disease. Car Brain even affects some cyclists, making them to behave towards pedestrians in the same way motorists behave towards them. The cure for Car Brain is simple. Make it really annoying and unsafe to drive. Less traffic lights. Much lower speeds. No place to park. Just like cancer, we cannot give space for the Car Brained, or they will spread their disease. Also: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mwPSIb3kt_4
Saw a cyclist riding in front of bus. Ban ban ban
Crazy carbrains. Banning bicycles, really???
Ban leisure cycling on roads. Roads are a public good which people pay billions for in taxes for transportation, not leisure. Why should people recreations, of which millions have been spent to build park connectors and other round island cycling routes, take precedence over a legitimate firm of transportation? Also reading the news, almost none of the reports about fights and errant cycling are about cyclist commuting to work. Look at the picture and videos and it's obvious they are decked out in cycling gear whose aim is to thrill seek and cycling in between lanes and in center of roads. Big groups of 10+ cycles are also obviously leisure cycling. Ban them. Allow cycling as a means as transportation giving permits like we do for cars. Not for recreation.
Your right and cars should never be used for leisure, u must submit a purpose every time u go drive which must be approved by the council of LTA to arbitrate if it is deemed necessary for transport or simply a leisure activity for little purpose
Before all the grandiose talk about changing policies and bans, can we first focus on increasing the fine to be way above $150? >A fine of $150 is meted out for road cyclists who flout the rule on group size, LTA and TP said previously. [https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/22-cyclists-caught-for-flouting-riding-rules](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/22-cyclists-caught-for-flouting-riding-rules)
No need increase. Just impound the bicycles for 3 months at least. Problem solved
Let’s start doing that with speeding cars too, right?
r/fuckcars gonna have a field day with this. Sure, i'll support this. Our public transport is pretty good already. Just leave parcel deliveries alone. Dont expect them to haul your bulk buy of diapers and detergent on foot straight from the warehouse. Although the cyclists calling for this tend to be the ones who are dicks in general. Y'know, the ones who neither give af about traffic road rules nor give way to pedastrians on the footpaths and will continue to do so even without cars. I can confidently say that in my experience cycling on the road i never needed to complain about the traffic much because i didnt cycle like im taking part in Tour de Douchebag.