Proposal for Enclosed HDB Deck Space to be Designated Pedestrian-only Paths to Prevent Accidents with PMDs

Mr Speaker, void deck spaces in HDB housing estates are not declared as public paths under the Active Mobility Act. Thus, Town Councils can set and enforce their own rules on the usage of personal mobility devices in such areas, including banning their use.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his answer. I have a few supplementary questions. First is, would he not accept that the Town Councils Act and the regulations thereunder, may not be fit for purpose in relation to deterring PMD users from plying through void deck space near lift lobbies and letter box areas. If he agrees with that view, then, perhaps MOT can take the lead to work with the Town Councils, and then, prescribe these areas as pedestrian-only areas.

I say this because there is a real-life example in Bukit Batok where an elderly lady, after taking out letters from her letter box, collided with a PMD user, and she had to be warded. I think there are similar circumstances in other places as well. So, this is an area of need.

I would like to thank Mr Murali for clarification. In deciding for a public area to be considered as public path, either shared or pedestrian-only paths, or for exemption under the Active Mobility Act, we do consider three key principles. One, which is safety; second, connectivity; and third, clarity of rules. So, in the area of safety, as long as the surface paths are accessible to the public, they will by default be allowed for cycling and PMD use, unless there are safety concerns that cannot be effectively mitigated. The second consideration of connectivity is whether the path is critical for connectivity; for example, if the path links a large cycling path network or connects to key transport nodes and public amenities; and if they are, whether there are alternative paths available to be considered. Thirdly, in implementing these rules, we want to make sure that these areas can be clearly demarcated so that they can be exempted without causing any public confusion.

Bearing in mind these three key considerations, void decks have been exempted from the Active Mobility Act because they have, first of all, multiple blind spots due to the presence of pillars and they are not critical for connectivity since cyclists and PMD users can dismount and push for the last leg of their journey at the void decks. Void decks can be easily demarcated to avoid any confusion. This approach provides the Town Councils with the flexibility to set and enforce their own rules on the usage of active mobility devices, according to their own needs.

So, if the Town Council feels that void decks are areas where potential accidents can happen, then the Town Council can ban the use of PMDs in the void decks.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his clarification. May I respectfully clarify that the focus of my PQ is not on void decks generally, but it is in relation to ground floor lift lobbies and letter box areas. The point is, people in these areas would not be exercising the same caution as crossing roads. So, in those circumstances, would the Ministry consider imposing regulations? Because I think the interest for residents in this area would be paramount and also, there would be no real difference in opinions of all the Town Councils. They all want the ground floor lift lobbies and the letter box areas to be safe for residents.

Yes, I agree with Mr Pillai that we do take safety as the top priority. In the definition of void decks, letter box areas and ground floor lift lobbies, as well as corridors fronting residential flats, are considered as void decks. And as such, Town Councils can exercise the flexibility of imposing a ban of PMD use in those areas.

I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State will MOT consider letting Town Councils take action at the town centres where it can be very crowded. I have brought up this matter many times. Before the Act came in place, Town Councils and the Police had been taking enforcement actions. But since the Active Mobility Act came into place, we could not take action and residents have been complaining about near-miss accidents. I do not want to see anyone injured at my Khatib Centre.

I would like to thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for the supplementary question. Just two points of clarification. If the Town Council were to decide the void deck to be banned from PMD use, then, the Town Council can exercise the enforcement action on PMD users. But in areas outside the void deck which are exempted from the Active Mobility Act, yes, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah is correct to say that Town Council employees are not able to carry out enforcement today. The current Active Mobility Act actually does not allow Town Council employees to be appointed as public path wardens to enforce the Active Mobility Act in the areas that Er Dr Lee Bee Wah had mentioned.

We have taken that into consideration and we are currently discussing with LTA and AGC to see if the law can be amended to allow for Town Council officers to enforce active mobility offences in such areas.

Mr Speaker, following on the question by Mr Pillai, would it not be more compelling for the Active Mobility Act to cover non-use of PMDs at void decks, rather than each individual Town Council having to implement rules for that purpose? Because the force of law then is understood by Singaporeans across the country. To that extent, it is clear that PMDs can be dangerous at void decks, and also when they exit from lift lobbies. We have an elderly population. It is going to grow in the next 10 years. I believe that if the Ministry takes the lead, then, you will have lesser chance of untoward incidents happening.

I would like to thank the Member for the clarification. Like I have mentioned before, I think the configuration of void decks differ from one place to another. Depending on the needs of the Town Council, we allow Town Councils to exercise the flexibility whether to ban or not to ban. But I think at the end of the day, we are cognisant of the fact that safety is paramount. If the Town Council feels that the banning of PMD use at void decks is necessary, it can be done under the Town Council by-laws.