Out the back door
Previously I covered Buona Vista and several LRT stations. What do they all lack?
The LTA knows this. That’s why considerable expense was set aside to construct new exits at Clementi, Queenstown, and Commonwealth stations. And likewise, Tanah Merah station will receive additional exits at its east end on completion of the Tanah Merah Modification Project; just as Jurong East did with the Jurong East Modification Project and how its back entrance sees much use with the opening of JEM mall and the connection to the new bus interchange.
Starting out
Aboveground stations on the Initial System were either generally more compact with everything packed below the platforms as much as possible, or had the benefit of space such that the ticket hall and main circulation areas could be built *alongside* the stations and perhaps some form of through-link laid out below the platform area — space that SMRT was subsequently able to commercialize. This is the approach seen at many stations along the NSL and west of Jurong East.
But sometimes shortcuts have to be built. Boon Lay most notably has pretty much the MRT’s only permanent one-way exit — Exit D, leading straight to Boon Lay Bus Interchange through Jurong Point, presumably to handle large amounts of passengers alighting from the MRT to transfer to buses. This may still be needed until the JRL opens, and perhaps after that too depending on how effectively the JRL is able to reduce bus transfers. Likewise, a short-lived back entrance was built at Choa Chu Kang to connect to the old location of the bus interchange — now to be part of the transfer hall connecting the NSL station with the JRL, with the JRL occupying the old bus interchange site.
During the program to install lifts at older stations, where it was difficult for lifts to be built within existing paid areas, they also received their own separate faregate accesses — as at Expo, Buona Vista, Outram Park, and previously Tanjong Pagar. Tanjong Pagar’s separate lift access was removed with the construction of Tanjong Pagar Centre, and as part of the TEL works the concourse level landing of the existing lift at Outram Park is being brought into the paid area — leaving only Expo and Buona Vista.
In these cases, additional rows of faregates had to be constructed just for these exits — but this will quickly become a trend, as we will see. Most TEL stations also have at least two rows of faregates in different directions, allowing for more direct routes to the platforms from exits that are further out. These present some customer service and security issues, but it’s not like we don’t have the tools to solve them — namely, intercoms for passengers to get help and CCTV cameras for staff to observe what is happening.
And the operating procedures used at unmanned LRT stations can also be employed here, albeit with staff being based out of the main station control office instead of the overall line control room.
Halfway there
But what about stations that don’t have such secondary faregates? There are two categories. The first is where there are passageways nominally inside the station, but with a much less direct route to the platform from these exits. This, fortunately, is a smaller group, and mostly being aboveground, some quick wins could be put in place.
Bukit Batok station is probably one of the better ones already, with additional exits at the back of the station facing Avenue 1. But if you use these exits you need to walk almost all the way around the station, albeit nominally within the station, to the ticket gates on the West Mall side. What thus needs to happen here might be to remove some shops such as the NTUC supermarket, and then provide a secondary line of ticket gates in order to provide a more direct access to the escalators up to the platform from Avenue 1.
At Queenstown and Commonwealth the job may yet be half done. The additional ticket hall at Clementi station has its own escalator and lift access from the station platform. One could argue that this provision at Clementi was a very far-sighted one, as based on current signs of where the CRL station might be, it is entirely possible that one of the exits on that side of the road may face closure during the CRL construction. Forcing passengers to use existing accesses during such a closure could result in overcrowding along the former staff passageways mentioned.
However, at Queenstown and Commonwealth which were presumably expected to be a fair bit quieter, there is a similar story to Bukit Batok, where one must walk down narrow formerly staff-only passages in order to get to a flight of stairs leading up to the platform from the new link bridges. This is probably not a good idea if more passengers are expected to use those link bridges after the completion of the high-rise BTOs in the area, and if possible, perhaps the area can be rejigged to provide a secondary access up to the platform.
The long way around
The same cannot be said about Pasir Ris, Simei and Paya Lebar, where what passes for “side exits” are basically shop-lined walkways around the edge of the station. For Paya Lebar, a back entrance could be built towards PLQ2 and SingPost Centre at the space where a road used to run under the station — now pedestrianized as part of the PLQ development. For Simei, a simple additional set of escalators could do with a general layout similar to Bukit Batok. This new exit could serve the housing blocks along Simei Street 1 as well as anything they might want to build on the empty plot of land next to Eastpoint Mall.
But at Pasir Ris, this is all the worse looking at the location of the bus interchange. That said, the time for this may have come and gone, as new bus interchange facilities will be built as part of the Pasir Ris One development adjacent to the station, putting the interchange in a more convenient location compared to where it used to be. Still, a back entrance directly into the paid area might be useful depending on the size of the new bus interchange, shortening the walk from berths located at the far end, to the passenger concourse.
The two other stations that may need back entrances the most are arguably some of the most complex to add. Braddell and Tiong Bahru stations are underground, and designated as Civil Defense Shelters. Just as these factors torpedoed the originally-planned paid link at Newton station, it may complicate construction of secondary exits and require good forecasts to be provided.
This may be easier to justify at Tiong Bahru. The current exit on the north side of the road is integrated with Tiong Bahru Plaza. And URA has designated some of the empty land around the station as a future location for a bus interchange; this is a site with a 4.9 plot ratio and is zoned for residential — which means residential development above the bus interchange. And across Lower Delta Road, there is a new BTO project with 1660 flats, on a site with a 4.4 plot ratio.
Looking at the extents of exits connecting to TEL stations, a back entrance connecting some of these developments with the MRT station downstairs would probably be welcome — especially since the development might already have to accommodate the existing MRT ventilation shafts in the area.
In the same vein, a back entrance to Braddell station potentially near Block 121 may be a good idea if there’s ever any interest in upzoning within the Toa Payoh area in the foreseeable future, but this is probably less linkely to happen.
This is awkward…
Newer stations may not be exempt from this either. Only with the TEL did they realize the value of additional exits across different parts of the station, but projects implemented before that don’t exactly have such features.
One can’t help but wonder whether an exit down to the opposite side of Tuas West Road, from Tuas West Road station, might help with shuttle bus transfers and thus the local ridership situation. After all, Tuas West Road proper is in a far more convenient location for corporate shuttle buses, who can take the appropriate AYE exit and travel directly down Tuas West Road to Tuas South; calling at the MRT station along the way — a direct back entrance providing a quick route from the drop off bays to the station proper. This may be a preferable alternative to a large detour along the whole TWE route, to call at existing station bus stops along Pioneer Road.
It may not be so bad on the 3-car lines, but it was actually pointed out to me that had they seen fit to build Bukit Panjang station as a double-ended station, it might have been possible to construct a paid link to the LRT station, in a similar vein to TEL Woodlands station. They dug up a lot of the area anyway, in order to construct the cut and cover tunnels around the station, and the subsequent road flyover above; that long walkway to Exit C would probably be shorter if the station main entrance had been nearer to the junction.
Likewise, the empty land around Bedok North station seems to indicate that there could be a back entrance to the station to serve some of the new developments. Alas, the new development is a hospital, so the existing exits may do fine and perhaps just be rebuilt as part of a major entrance to the hospital compound. At Bedok Reservoir, a back entrance serving block 723 could also help with closing the gap for both residents of those estates as well as the surrounding condos — after all, they’re within the designated 400m radius anyway.
Let the heavens pour
We can provide exits, but the exits built will only succeed if this question is answered— why don’t people walk to transit? It is a proven axiom that people are more willing to walk to faster transport modes. Revisiting the Compassvale Link example from a previous blog post, this should mean that both groups of residents highlighted may prefer to walk further to Buangkok MRT, instead of to the LRT station, though it’s a tossup if going to Compass One.
I suspect that a key reason why one sees so much elevated and underground walkways in Singapore, as seen in the CBD and in Jurong, is weather. A Singapore summer can have anything between torrential rain and the burning hot sun. Providing at least shade, if not climate protection and control, may be critical for walkability efforts.
In this vein it’s a bit odd that the LTA only provides covered walkways across roads at pedestrian crossings across smaller roads. With a sheltered way to cross Compassvale Link, it may then be reasonable for our Block 269B resident to walk out to Buangkok station in most weather conditions, instead of taking the sheltered route to the LRT and then Sengkang MRT station on a rainy day.
The same cannot be said for wider roads, at least right now based on observation. Here’s the situation right outside Redhill MRT station — this is definitely within a 400m radius. The route also involves crossing a road, but the covered linkway is somewhat “broken” in that it doesn’t cover the road crossing and the traffic island. One would have to, in inclement weather, run under the rain when crossing the road. Likewise, the junction further down also doesn’t provide a sheltered way to cross the road. As a matter of policy, it could be changing, but I’m not jumping to too many conclusions here.
Within less busy neighbourhood estates, doing something about this could be useful. But in the central area and perhaps in Jurong, one begins to understand why using grade-separated pedestrian networks may well be better, with a “pedestrian street” being implemented along these underground or elevated networks and connecting to various MRT stations. They may yet be more pleasant places for that — the elevated J-Walk is used by many as a walking route to IMM.
I’d also perhaps draw comparisons to Toronto, Montreal and maybe even Helsinki. Canadian or Finnish weather can be harsh especially in winter, so the underground connections are more useful to pedestrians in such weather conditions, ensuring all-weather connections to most public transport. Could the same thing apply during a monsoon rainstorm or increasing temperatures in Singapore? Or maybe the bigger question is, resources willing, should streets be reserved for wheeled vehicles and pedestrians sent elsewhere? URA’s policy moves seem to point to the latter in general, and at least the LTA seems to be keeping pace with TEL stations being integrated into CBD underground networks.
But it cannot forget connectivity improvements that should be made to existing stations in order to make rail public transport a more compelling option.
