On the one hand, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Land Transport Authority talk enthusiastically about how the government wants the community to play a more active role in driving Singapore towards a car-efficient society. On the other hand, they can't shake the need to maintain control. It is not uncommon for the government to put a stop to the policy of reducing parking. When the Range-Based Car Parking Standard (RCPS) was implemented in 2005, it was intended to provide developers with greater flexibility in the provision of parking spaces to meet parking demands based on operational and commercial considerations. However, the situation has been brought under control since 2012, when a circular was published which now requires developers to consult the LTA in advance before adopting the scheme. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The proposed amendment to the Parking Bill, tabled in Parliament recently, will give LTA the flexibility to specify a range of parking provisions – defined by a lower and/or upper limit. While it is undeniable that this is a positive step towards car-lite, but once again it stopped short of being "bold and simply abolishing" the minimum number of required parking spaces, as rightly pointed out by parking policy expert Dr Paul Barter. Elimination of parking minimums The requirements are not as radical as they seem. In fact, cities like London and Berlin have no parking requirements. This approach does not eliminate the supply of parking, but simply allows developers to decide how many plots to build based on market demand. The site was sold in November 2016, the provision of parking has been limited to 80% of minimum standards: it is the first time that a limit has been imposed. Christine Li, director of research at Cushman & Wakefield, later questioned the limit as “such restrictions could make the development less attractive to office tenants who expect generous parking provision. The question arises whether the requirements of the parking should instead be left to developers Rather than a generic parking requirements table established by the traffic engineering and planning professions, developers should take a market-oriented parking approach and determine the extent of parking based on users. target However, the practice of mandating parking has so far proven resistant to any possible change One obstacle may be that a market-oriented parking policy has provided inadequate guarantees about what would happen to off-street parking. the implementation of the initial reforms. A few cases of developers taking advantage of this laissez-faire policy were the reason for the tightening process in 2005. . This is compounded by the fact that this problem cannot be resolved in a timely manner as parking spaces are inelastic: parking space cannot be created as and when required, especially in Singapore where land is in short supply. With the rapid political reaction of Singapore society, policy makers and policy agencies more than often take cautious measures. Attempts by agencies to engage stakeholders are also often difficult when local businesses and communities do not come together; and a prescriptive approach is often seen as imposed by agencies without good business knowledge. The recent introduction of the Business Improvement District (BID) program may offer a way to,.