Slashdot Mirror
Singapore To Stop Adding Cars to City From February 2018 (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Singapore, among the world's most expensive places to own a vehicle, will stop increasing the total number of cars on its roads next year. The government will cut the annual growth rate for cars and motorcycles to zero from 0.25 percent starting in February, the transport regulator said on Monday. "In view of land constraints and competing needs, there is limited scope for further expansion of the road network," the Land Transport Authority said in a statement on its website. Roads already account for 12 percent of the city-state's total land area, it said. Smaller than New York City, land in Singapore is a precious commodity and officials want to ensure the most productive use of the remaining space. Its infrastructure is among the world's most efficient and the government is investing $21 billion more on rail and bus transportation over the next five years, the regulator said.
And again everyone refuses to identify the root cause of the problem here, which is overpopulation.
Overpopulation is the root cause of all our environmental problems, only one of which is lack of space.
There are a limited number of private vehicle registrations available. When a registration becomes available (due to someone's registration lapsing, or the number of registrations being increased), they first look at needs-based assignment (e.g. if someone with a disabled family member has made and application), and if it isn't allocated that way they auction it.
Most of the people buying vehicle registrations at auction for ridiculous prices really don't need a car, they just want it as a status symbol. Raising the price just makes it more exclusive. The city's really to small to handle any more private vehicles, it makes sense to stop increasing the number of vehicle registrations available.
Building roads on top of roads isn't a solution - how do you get people on and off these stacked roads at their destinations? How does it do to the properties alongside the stacked roads? Singapore is already at a point where the vast majority of people don't need a car at all.
Big deal. I live in California and I cannot..
- Drink beer on the beach without getting fined.
- Publicly drink without getting fined.
- Hang out after hours without getting harassed by police.
I can do all three in Singapore.
They may have some crazy laws but California takes the cake.
You know, if you are going to copy paste the article anyways, better put the parts people will be asking questions about:
"These changes are not expected to significantly affect the supply of permits since the quota is determined largely by the number of vehicle deregistrations, the regulator said. The limit on vehicle growth rate will be reviewed again in 2020."
Hardly anyone will notice, since they only have 12~14 cars per 100 people in Singapore (different sources give slightly different numbers) and they have a world-class public transit system which makes car ownership more of a hassle than it's worth.
Here in Taipei it's similar, but less so... Overall car ownership in Taiwan is about twice that of Singapore, but that includes a ton of rural area, which Singapore lacks. In a big city with excellent public transit, there's really no need for a car. Hell, I even gave away my scooter a few years ago.
I'd say the bulk of the traffic in Taipei is: a) local "fleet" vehicles like taxis, buses, delivery vans; b) commuters to and from the surrounding 'burbs; c) scooters, motorcycles, bicycles, etc.. Commuters in the 'burbs tend to have a designated parking space at their apartment block, and another designated space at their employer in the city. Commuters who live in the city are far less likely to have a designated parking spot at home*, so they may spend half an hour looking for one when they get home from work. Major PITA.
OTOH, with public transit you can get all the way across town in under 45 minutes for $1~2 USD, or you can cut that time in half (depending on traffic) by taking a taxi for about $8~12 USD.
I do enjoy driving -- growing up in Iowa, I drove all the time, from age 14 -- but living in a city like Taipei, I'm quite happy NOT owning a car, or any motor vehicle, for that matter.
* Due to land availability, a higher percentage of residential housing in Taipei is "old construction" from the days when common folk didn't own cars. Newer construction (say, the last 30 years) tends to always include parking, but there's been more new construction in the open lands outside the city, and since the rent tends to be cheaper, a lot of people live there.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
Whenever I suggest giving people choices might be an option, I inevitably get a "UR FORCING ME TO WALK!" rant, which in all honesty, is similar to your own.
People in general don't understand systems that are outside their own personal experience. I frequently talk to American colleagues and they are all dumbfounded when I tell them that I only ever drive to work, and only because it's 40km. I have never driven my car into my own city, I rarely do the shopping with it even when its belting down rain, and short of driving to another country I also don't take it anywhere, and even I often take a train.
Cities are designed in ways that suit certain modes of transport. My local supermarket is 600m away. The next one (much larger one) is 1.1km in the other direction. I typically go to the much larger one and have the choice of walking (1.3km ~13min) / cycling (1.3km ~5min) or driving (4km ~10min). To get in the city centre I could drive which takes about 35min, or I could cycle which takes about 20min.
This doesn't make sense to most Americans as American cities are designed primarily with the car in mind. Public transport, bike ways, and general city planning to prevent people having to make long trips for basic needs comes a distant second to big roads, highways, and plenty of available parking in every direction.