The ITDP recently came out with a new walkability tool called Pedestrians First. Here’s the link to their site where you can download the tool. The tool was released in the recently concluded World Urban Forum held in Malaysia.
Of course, there are other tools out there including one developed by Clean Air Asia, material on which may be found through the following links:
Our technical staff and my students are currently using the methodology developed by Clean Air Asia and have covered several major thoroughfares in Metro Manila and a highly urbanized city in studies that have been undertaken in the last 6 years. I already asked them to take a look at the new tool and see how this compares with the ones we are using.
I again share an article; this time on transit ridership (or on the passengers using public transportation).
Buchanan, M. (2018) Lessons on Ridership, from the National Literature, transitcenter.org, http://transitcenter.org/2018/01/29/lessons-on-ridership-from-the-national-literature/ [Last accessed 2/21/2018]
Perhaps we can learn from the experiences of other cities in as far as public transport use is concerned? For example, what impacts emerging technologies and the sharing economy (e.g., ridesharing) have on public transport ridership and how to meet these challenges to retain a majority of public transport users over low capacity modes.
The recent news about the groundbreaking for the C-6 expressway led some people to this site and looking for information on C-6. Here are more photos I took last month (January 2018):
The future northbound lanes of C-6 is currently under rehabilitation and are being upgraded to Portland cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP). The new southbound lanes currently serve the two-way traffic.
The sign is an old one and perhaps still in use as a barrier more than for information
You see a lot of people jogging, walking and cycling along the finished road. It shows the demand for spaces for such activities, including recreation, and a similar situation may be observed along C5 before and along the perimeter of Libingan ng mga Bayani where a lot of people do exercises and other activities along road sections that are closed to vehicular traffic.
With one lane completed the second lane is prepared for pouring of concrete. You can see the formworks along the median.
Other sections have yet to be prepared for concreting but have been stripped of the old pavement (Asphalt Concrete pavement or ACP).
What you see here at right is the compacted base/sub-base layer. The forms have not been installed yet.
Backhoe and roller at the worksite.
A grader in action.
I will post more photos later from the next time I pass by the area. From what I’ve hear so far, traffic has eased along the expanded Barkadahan Bridge but there are still bottlenecks to address along this alternative route. There will also be a need to have a higher capacity, less friction connection between C-6 and C-5 as traffic along C-6 increases and it’s become quite obvious that Taguig’s narrow streets cannot handle this increasing travel demand between the two highways. It makes sense to have a higher quality, limited access road for this purpose since Taguig roads are already congested and through traffic poses a safety hazard to the residential areas where vehicles travel through.
Much has been written about the government’s PUV (or jeepney?) modernization program so I wouldn’t really be reposting about these. Instead, I will be featuring some opinions, insights and observations about its implementation.
Following are photos of one e-jeepney model that the government appears to be promoting. This is the e-jeepney produced by Star8 that they claim to be have solar panels for charging while they are on the road. Of course, we know they are not wholly dependent on solar power and have to be charged the conventional way through an adaptor that’s plugged into a regular outlet. These e-jeepneys were supposed to supplement the reduced supply of public transport to mainly UP students, staff and faculty members when the i-ACT (Inter-Agency Committee on Traffic) conducted their “Tanggal Bulok, Tanggal Usok” campaign in the UP Diliman area. First-hand reports revealed otherwise as the e-jeepneys spent more time on stand-by and just charging at one of the buildings on campus.
These are the same e-jeepneys that have been deployed and currently roaming around Tacloban City (promoting themselves?). The intent was for these to be the vehicles plying the new routes approved by the LTFRB/DOTr, which they claim was in response to the request made by Tacloban. The new routes though overlapped with many existing jeepney routes, clearly in violation of the general rule regarding overlapping routes, but allowed nonetheless by the regulating authority.
There are many allegations going around about e-jeepneys being forced upon operators and drivers given what has been regarded by progressive groups as unrealistic (read: unaffordable) financing schemes for the new vehicles. These are certainly not cheap, and double to triple the price of a ‘newer’ conventional jeepney. There are also suspicions about the strong motivation for the phaseout in favour of what are peddled as the successor (or replacement) to the jeepney. That includes a possible collusion among officials and the companies behind these vehicles and allegations (again) of some people likely gaining financially from the set-up. The DOTr and LTFRB PR machine, however, deny this and will gang up on anyone posting about this in their social media page.
Someone shared a post about a traffic scheme they will be implementing along Julia Vargas Avenue in Pasig City. The proposal is for the avenue to have a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane where vehicles with 4 or more occupants are to take one lane and all other vehicles the other. I am not entirely sure about the objective other than to promote high occupancies for vehicles. However, it would be nice to see how travellers will be behaving (e.g., complying) and how Pasig (with MMDA?) will be enforcing this scheme.
This is what a segment of Julia Vargas currently looks like with 2 wide lanes designated for motor vehicles (separated by the solid yellow line) and one narrow lane for cyclists (adjacent to the shoulder):
The intent is good but as a major link the scheme can be quite confusing especially for those who are not necessarily frequent users of this road. I assumed the yellow line was painted by the DPWH but it seems it was by Pasig. Perhaps they should have removed the old markings? Or maybe better if they rationalised the carriageway width to accommodate 3 lanes for motor vehicles and 1 wider lane for bicycles? From the photo above, it appears to me that it is possible to have 2 narrow lanes for general traffic and one wider lane for HOVs (in this case defined as having 4 or more occupants) and public utility vehicles. This configuration maximises the capacity of the road while having a the “best” lanes allocated for HOVs and bicycles.
I wish them success on this social experiment. Perhaps there can be valuable learnings from this including the need for connectivity to other links as well.
My wife sent me this photo prior to taking off from London Heathrow on her way home.
That’s a very long queue of planes waiting to take off!
This reminded me of the articles that came out about a multi-billion peso plan to expand the Ninoy Aquino International Airport with a giant terminal forming out of connecting Terminals 1, 2 and 4. Even with a huge terminal building with a much higher passenger capacity, NAIA still would’t be able to solve its congestion woes with only 2 (intersecting) runways. Take it from the capital city airports in the region including Singapore’s Changi that has multiple parallel runways that allow for almost simultaneous take-offs and landings. Such allows the airport to handle more flights – plain and simple.
I saw this interesting article on cycling/biking that I thought was quite relevant to the situation we have on campus. The University of the Philippines Diliman campus has a bike lane along the inner side of its Academic Oval that has been used by various cyclist types. There are those who use their bikes for commuting or going around campus (e.g., students traveling between buildings for their classes, messengers bringing documents, etc.). There are those biking in a more relaxed manner (i.e., for recreation). And then there are those who bike for fitness including those racing around the oval. It is from the latter that UP Diliman has received complaints about conflicts with joggers, motor vehicles and fellow cyclists. But then UP has maintained that the bike lane is not for racing or taking laps around the oval. It was created to have a segregated (and in the future maybe protected) lane to enhance mobility more than any other purpose.
Babin, T. (2018) “How to ride a bike slowly (and why you would want to),” Medium.com, https://medium.com/shifter/how-to-ride-a-bike-slowly-and-why-you-would-want-to-b544ec869846 [Last accessed: 2/4/2018].
UP Diliman’s Academic Oval now features a bike lane between a jogging/walking lane and the lanes assigned for motorised traffic. The ice cream vendor on a NMT 3-wheeler is running on the bike lane.