[sustran] Special lanes for 'driver only' cars at Singapore-Malaysia causeway

[SUSTRAN Network Secretariat]

To the Editor
The Star newspaper
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia


Dear Editor

I refer to the article in The Star, Thursday, March 2, 2000 "Special lanes
for 'driver only' cars at causeway" which states that the Johor Customs and
Excise Department will open special lanes for "driver only" cars beginning
April 1 in a move to cut queuing time at the causeway. 

I understand that this proposal is made with good intentions but I would
like to point out that it may be an unwise move. Here are my reasons.

1.  This proposal will make travel across the causeway faster for 'driver
only' cars. This will gradually encourage MORE AND MORE people to travel
alone in cars. Therefore this plan can only cause MORE traffic and hence
more congestion, not less, on the causeway. It will also contribute to more
traffic on the streets of Johor Baru and Singapore. I wonder if the Johor
Customs Department has consulted the transport authorities in Johor and
Singapore about their plan? Whatever happened to trying to encourage
'car-pooling'.

2.  'Driver-only' cars are LESS efficient to process not more efficient as
claimed in the article. From the narrow perspective of trying to keep
VEHICLES moving ("easing congestion") this plan SEEMS at first glance to be
a good idea since each 'driver-only' car does indeed take less time to
process than each car with passengers. 

But the PURPOSE of the causeway is to move PEOPLE and GOODS. Getting
vehicles across the causeway is only the method of moving those people and
goods. It would actually be better all around if we could get more people
and goods across by using fewer vehicles. 

If we look at the time taken at the checkpoint PER PERSON then we will
notice that 'Driver-only' cars are LESS efficient than cars with 2 or 3 or
4 or 5 people in them. Imagine 100 people crossing the checkpoint. These
100 people cross in a line of 100 'driver-only' cars would take about the
same time to process as the same 100 people in 20 cars (with 5 people in
each car). The 100 'driver-only' cars would probably take slightly longer
to process because of the extra shuffling forward of all those cars and
extra searches of car boots. The 100 'driver-only' cars also create a much
longer queue than the 20 high-occupancy-vehicles  thus creating more of a
nuisance and more pollution on the road from JB or back along the causeway. 

Conclusion: 'driver-only' cars are an inefficient way to get people across
the causeway - they take more time per person and they occupy more road
space per person. Therefore we should be discouraging 'driver-only' cars
not encouraging them. The proposal to have special lanes for 'driver-only'
cars is not a good idea.


SOME ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
I do not want to be just negative. So here are some alternative suggestions
for improving the efficiency of the causeway and checkpoints.

a.  Have special lanes for HIGH-OCCUPANCY CARS (HOVs - cars with 4 or more
people). This lane should have guaranteed extra staff to be able to clear
people quickly. It should be much faster to cross in an HOV than in a
'driver-only' car. This would give everyone a big incentive to car-pool and
reduce the total number of vehicles. 

b.  Do everything possible to minimise the delays for bus passengers and for
buses at the checkpoints and on the causeway (there must be some things
which have not been tried yet).

c.  Improve conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the causeway.
A surprising number of people already cross by foot or bicycle but more
would do so if the conditions were more attractive. This could include
building shelter from the sun and rain over the walking (and cycling) ways.
It could also include strict
enforcement of anti-smoke-belching laws with a special focus of enforcement
on the causeway approaches. 

d.  Improve the JB bus and taxi system. The problems with public transport
in JB discourage people from using public transport to cross the causeway.

e.  How to pay for the improvements? Here is a money making suggestion. How
about having an "EXPRESS PREMIUM" lane for which motorists must pay an
extra fee. This lane would  tend to have a shorter queue because of the
steep fee... but anyone rich enough and/or in a great hurry could choose
this lane and get through very quickly. The money raised from the Express
Lane could be used to pay for improvements for buses, walkers, bicylists or
to offer EXTRA incentives for high occupancy vehicles (HOVs). 

I hope the authorities in JB will consider these alternative suggestions.

Yours sincerely,

A. Rahman Paul Barter
Kuala Lumpur