[Group 1] Technical Writing - Draft 1

Background

When licensed companies started selling LTA-approved Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs), this can potentially increase the amount of users travelling on shared paths and footpaths and are permitted to bring it onto public transport. It created jobs for delivery riders and brings convenience to users. However, with an increased amount of PMDs, risks of an accident are bound to happen regarding to safety. Safety accidents are mainly collisions and battery explosions. Collisions do happen regardless of any speed that users are proceeding with, without good situation awareness and proper usage of the machine then it has a chance for an accident to happen. Battery explosions are mostly electrical issues with the circuitry or batteries. These could be manufacturing defects or improper PMD usage such as overcharging of batteries or usage of unsuitable charger or battery. Causes of these accidents may be due to recklessness or complacency. In the worst case scenario, these could lead to deaths to the user or road users. The ideal situation would be for PMD users and pedestrians to coexist with one another.

Current Situation

PMDs were introduced in Singapore in 2013 and only in 2017 then it started to get popular among the citizens as an alternative mode of transport to work. Since 2017, there were 213 reported cases and from that 213 cases, 152 were on roads and 46 in public spaces. From this rise in accidents, the government has implemented laws such as the Active Mobility Act in aims to improve the cohesiveness of pedestrians and PMD users sharing the same footpaths. The Singapore government has been under a lot of stress as the citizens are questioning their safety on footpaths after a steep increase in accidents caused by PMD users. Many of the accidents were caused by teenagers or young adults which is a huge problem to the public because of their recklessness. A part of young riders were observed to be riding modified electric vehicles which surpass the requirements of an approved electric vehicle. Modifications done are mainly on the rear wheel with stronger motor which increases the speed of the vehicle. Regardless of whether a PMD is modified or not, safe speed also does not determine zero-incident. PMD users are also seen not wearing safety gear when riding and are very reluctant to wear because of many factors like the hot weather or the ugly features of the gears. Another problem which highlight safety issue is non-certified UL2272 PMDs. The UL2272 standard was adopted by LTA as it covers the electrical system of the whole device to reduce the risk of PMD fires. Many PMDs today in Singapore are still non-UL2272 certified, and are still allowed on the roads until June 30, 2020, after which it will automatically be de-registered and not allowed to be used on public paths. Battery fires has also been a problem today because of over-charging of PMDs or using unsuitable chargers and LTA has already implemented a volunteering disposal of non-UL2272 certified PMDs with an incentive for early birds who disposes their vehicles before November 30, 2019. The volunteering program encourages non-UL2272 PMD users to surrender their vehicle and certified vehicles does not determine no fire risks. After many recommendations and solutions implemented, there has not been much improvement to the situation. 

Context of the Problem

As mentioned above in the current situation, over the years, accidents involving PMDs have increased in great numbers. Concerned citizens are constantly worrying over their safety while walking on footpaths and shared paths around their neighbourhood. The debate over whether this mobility device should be banned in Singapore is still an issue as many believe that there are other possible methods to solve this problem. 

Main Stakeholders

The main stakeholders that are impacted by this would be the government agencies and PMD-related businesses.

For licensed PMD retailers, the impact would be on their business profitability. With newly revised rules and regulations by LTA and Active Mobility Act (AMA), these retailers often suffer a loss in sales in order to comply with restrictions. From the article “New laws throttle back PMD sales” by Lim (2018), Chew Boon Hur, Mobot’s General Manager mentioned that there was up to 40 per cent drop in sales as potential customers are hesitant of purchasing the PMD due to new rules that they have yet to become familiar with.

Government agencies such as LTA bears a great responsibility when it comes to PMD-related issues. They are the ones that govern the law to ensure safety compliance is met when one purchase, sells and uses PMDs. Not only that, LTA often becomes the source of blame whenever a serious issue pertaining to PMDs arises. 

Although they are not part of the main stakeholders, the general public is also greatly impacted in terms of their safety. The general public would include pedestrians and PMD users. Due to recent accidents, there has been a bad light shone over PMD users. There are reckless riders, however, there are a majority of those such as the disabled and deliverymen who uses the PMD for mobility and livelihood. Although PMDs bring convenience into our lives, it may also harm our safety when it is under the control of complacent riders. Ensuring that the pedestrians feel safe travelling and sharing the same footpath with PMD riders should be a top priority, hence, the impact would be on the safety of their lives.

Importance of the Situation 

Government agencies such as LTA are implementing new rules for PMDs on the ground. LTA are the ones that can rectify the current situation with PMDs to prevent any conflict with the community and PMD users. It is important to take note of how the PMD-related businesses are impacted by the current situation as without people buying or illegally modifying their PMDs, such businesses would be facing a huge loss on their products. With the new laws and regulations on PMDs, there has been a decreasing amount of sales on PMDs. 

Ideal Situation

The ideal situation would be for PMD users and pedestrians to coexist with one another.

Problem Statement

When licensed PMD retailers started selling LTA-approved Personal Mobility Device(PMDs), it enabled users to purchase and use it as an alternative mode of transport. This increased the number of users travelling on footpaths or shared paths which led to higher risks of accidents which are caused by recklessness and complacency. The ideal situation would be for PMD users and pedestrians to coexist with one another.

Purpose Statement

The objective of this proposal is to suggest strategies that can be implemented by the Land Transport Authority to increase safety awareness about the benefits of using PMDs.

Annotated Summary

According to an article, “PAP town councils could ban personal mobility devices from void desk as they review by-laws” from TODAY online (2019), town councils that are managed by People’s Action Party (PAP) could forbid the use of personal mobility devices (PMDs) at the void decks of public housing blocks. Void decks include lift lobbies, corridors and the area around the letterbox.

Dr. Teo Ho Pin, the overall chairman said that the town councils will re-examine the by-laws to coincide with the Active Mobility Act and will not hesitate to forbid PMDs from void decks. Under the act, it states the rules of the use of PMDs on footpaths and it also states that the speed limit on footpaths is 10km/h. However, these rules do not apply at the void decks of public housing estates.

PAP will continue monitoring the concerns of its residents and will also work closely with the Land Transport Authority on promoting safe riding. There were questions raised to the Parliament to include void decks in the act. However, void decks are excluded as they are not necessary for connectivity. For this reason, town councils can implement their own regulations to forbid the use of PMDs in void decks to further defend their residence.

Speeding PMD riders has been hitting the headlines as online readers submitted their concerns regarding PMD users. They are concerned over food delivery riders for putting children and elderlies at risk as they are always in a hurry to deliver and accept new jobs. And most often, they are speeding along corridors or footpaths.

In conclusion, the PMD situation in Singapore is not as simple as it seems to be. There are many considerations that have to be accountable for and the necessary rules have to be implied and enforced to protect the residence from any mishaps.

References: 

Cheng, K. (2019). PAP town councils could ban personal mobility devices from void decks as they review by-laws. [online] TODAYonline. Available at: https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/pap-town-councils-could-ban-personal-mobility-devices-void-decks-they-review-laws?cid=h3_referral_inarticlelinks_03092019_todayonline [Accessed 15 Oct. 2019].

Summary Reader Response Draft 3: Cross Island Site Investigations

According to an online article, “Nature Group Seeks More Information on Impact of Cross Island Site Investigations” from Today Online (2018), the drilling works in MacRitchie forest for the Cross Island MRT line has led to concerns due to the lack of details that affirm the effectiveness of precautions taken by the Land Transport Authority (LTA). Ms Chloe Tan, project manager of Love Our MacRitchie Forest group has received questions for LTA from nine parties. Camera traps were set up three to six months before and after works to validate measures. The data collected was studied and the project was classified to have a “mainly moderate” impact on wildlife. The harm of the on-site investigation works included drillings of 16 boreholes to study the earth conditions for the Cross Island MRT Line (CRL) to determine a tunnel under MacRitchie forest or to skirt around it. Nonetheless, LTA will be working with the various agencies on the second phase of assessment to forecast the impact of both alignments since that there has been a debate on the after-effects for residents living in the area. Hence, tunnelling works under MacRitchie forest will be more favourable rather than skirting around it.

Going under MacRitchie forest will be more favourable as environmental organisations such as the National Parks Board and other nature groups have been working with LTA for over three years before the site investigation started. LTA was aware of the environmental impact in which, there was a significant reduction of required boreholes from 72 to 16 (LTA as cited in Wong, 2018). There was also a comprehensive plan that instructs workers on how to operate the engine pump to avoid petrol leakage (Wong, 2018). The actions taken by LTA shows that they are taking all the necessary precautions to reduce the impact of the ecosystem.

Additionally, the cost to skirt around MacRitchie reservoir will be an additional $2 billion as compared to going under the MacRitchie reservoir (Toh, 2019). The writer mentions that an additional $2 billion will be needed to skirt around MacRitchie reservoir as there is more work that needs to be done along the alternative route. This created fear for residents living in the area as they might need to relocate due to the government procuring more land for the construction (Lim, 2016). It includes three worksites, a building facility and ventilation shafts to circulate air inside the tunnel (Chong as cited in Lim, 2016).

Adding on, Building the Cross Island line across could save commuters 6 minutes of travelling time as it will be 5km shorter as compared to skirting around MacRitchie reservoir (Toh, 2019). With the reduction in travelling time, commuters travelling across the island will be able to save up to 50 to 70 minutes in travel time (Minister Khaw as cited in Navaratnarajah, 2019). I strongly believe that this new MRT line will reduce the congestion by giving commuters more flexibility in getting to their destination.

In conclusion, tunnelling works under MacRitchie forest will be more functional as compared to skirting around it. Undeniably, this will cause concerns to the public and might potentially impact the environment in Singapore. However, these concerns can be mitigated by LTA doing their part to do all the relevant data collection and precautions needed before deciding which will be the way forward. If LTA is able to reassure the public by sharing their data collected and working closely with the relevant communities, building the Cross Island MRT line underneath MacRitchie forest will be better for Singapore.

References

Wong, D. (2018). MRT soil probe: Steps to ease impact on wildlife working. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/mrt-soil-probe-steps-to-ease-impact-on-wildlife-working

Toh, W (2019). Cross Island Line: Running under nature reserve or skirting it both feasible, says LTA. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/cross-island-line-running-under-nature-reserve-or-skirting-it-both-feasible-says

Lim, A (2016). Cross Island Line sparks residents' fears. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/cross-island-line-sparks-residents-fears

Navaratnarajah, R. (2019). Future Cross Island Line to cut travel time by up to 70 mins. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.propertyguru.com.sg/property-management-news/2019/1/177791/future-cross-island-line-to-cut-travel-time-by-up-to-70-mins

Summary Reader Response Draft 2

According to an online article, “Nature Group Seeks More Information on Impact of Cross Island Site Investigations” from Today Online (2018), the drilling works in MacRitchie forest for the Cross Island MRT line has led to concerns due to the lack of details that affirm the effectiveness of precautions taken by the Land Transport Authority (LTA). Ms Chloe Tan, project manager of Love Our MacRitchie Forest group has received questions for LTA from nine parties. Camera traps were set up three to six months before and after works to validate measures. The data collected was studied and the project was classified to have a “mainly moderate” impact on wildlife. The harm of the on-site investigation works included drillings of 16 boreholes to study the earth conditions for the Cross Island MRT Line (CRL) to determine a tunnel under MacRitchie forest or to skirt around it. Nonetheless, LTA will be working with the various agencies on the second phase of assessment to forecast the impact of both alignments since that there has been a debate on the after-effects for residents living in the area. Hence, tunneling works under MacRitchie forest will be more favourable rather than skirting around it. 

Environmental organisations such as the National Parks Board and other nature groups have been working with LTA for over three years before the site investigation started. LTA was aware of the environmental impact in which, there was a significant reduction of required boreholes from 72 to 16 (LTA as cited in Wong, 2018). There was also a comprehensive plan that instructs workers on how to operate the engine pump to avoid petrol leakage (Wong, 2018). The actions taken by LTA shows that they are taking all the necessary precautions to reduce the impact of the ecosystem. 

Moreover, the cost to skirt around MacRitchie reservoir will be an additional $2 billion as compared to going under the MacRitchie reservoir (Toh, 2019). The writer mentions that an additional $2 billion will be needed to skirt around MacRitchie reservoir as there is more work that needs to be done along the alternative route. This created fear for residents living in the area as they might need to relocate due to the government procuring more land for the construction (Lim, 2016). It includes three worksites, a building facility and ventilation shafts to circulate air inside the tunnel (Chong as cited in Lim, 2016).

Building the Cross Island line across could save commuters 6 minutes of travelling time as it will be 5km shorter as compared to skirting around MacRitchie reservoir (Toh, 2019). With the reduction in travelling time, commuters travelling across the island will be able to save up to 50 to 70 minutes in travel time (Minister Khaw as cited in Navaratnarajah, 2019). I strongly believe that this new MRT line will reduce the congestion by giving commuters more flexibility in getting to their destination. 

In conclusion, the option to go underneath the MacRitchie reservoir will cause concerns to the public and might potentially impact the environment in Singapore. However, these concerns can be mitigated by LTA doing their part to do all the relevant data collection and precautions needed before deciding which will be the way forward. If LTA is able to reassure the public by sharing their data collected and working closely with the relevant communities, building the Cross Island MRT line underneath MacRitchie will be better for Singapore. 

References 

Wong, D. (2018). MRT soil probe: Steps to ease impact on wildlife working. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/mrt-soil-probe-steps-to-ease-impact-on-wildlife-working 

Toh, W (2019). Cross Island Line: Running under nature reserve or skirting it both feasible, says LTA. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/cross-island-line-running-under-nature-reserve-or-skirting-it-both-feasible-says

Lim, A (2016). Cross Island Line sparks residents' fears. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/cross-island-line-sparks-residents-fears 

Navaratnarajah, R. (2019). Future Cross Island Line to cut travel time by up to 70 mins. Retrieved 29 September 2019, from https://www.propertyguru.com.sg/property-management-news/2019/1/177791/future-cross-island-line-to-cut-travel-time-by-up-to-70-mins