Home » Public Transport (Page 6)
Category Archives: Public Transport
On the general benefits of public transportation
Here’s another good read that has links to the outcomes of studies pertaining to public transportation’s direct and indirect effects on vehicle miles traveled or VMT (in our case we use vehicle kilometers traveled or VKT):
McCahill, C. (November 12, 2024) “The benefits of transit extend well beyond transit riders,” State Smart Transportation Initiative, https://ssti.us/2024/11/12/the-benefits-of-transit-extend-well-beyond-transit-riders/ [Last accessed: 11/20/2024]
To quote from the article:
“…good transit has a ripple effect on land use and travel behavior. For every mile not driven by transit riders, transit accounts for another six to nine miles not driven among the larger population. “
Note the potential reduction in VKT’s attributed to mass transportation or transit.
–
Is the MMDA’s coding scheme still effective?
That’s actually a title of a paper or article I co-wrote before. At the time, which was over a decade ago, we were revisiting certain travel demand management (TDM) measures being implemented in Metro Manila. We already concluded that the effectiveness of the number coding scheme has been reduced mainly as people bought a second, third or more vehicles to be able to use any vehicle on coding days.
Since then, coding’s effectiveness continued to be eroded by a combination of increasing vehicle ownership (including more vehicles operating as ride hails) and the rapid increase of motorcycles.
More recently, government decided to give push for electric and hybrid vehicles. The MMDA made these coding exempt, which perhaps is an example of instituting a policy with unintended consequences. I say unintended here because the agency seems oblivious to the fact that people will likely get that second, third or more vehicle. And that will be an EV or hybrid. Manufacturers are already marketing these as ‘coding exempt’ and they are making a good sales pitch here.
Maybe it’s time to revisit coding and re formulate it? But then coding wasn’t supposed to be sustained as long as it has. Government should be more aggressive and decisive for public transport in order to retain and increase mode shares that have also been reduced by more private vehicle and motorcycle use.
–
Increase in parking rates at NAIA
A friend shared this notice about the increase in parking rates at NAIA.
Parking at any of the terminals has been quite difficult if not horrendous. Everyone seems to be bringing their car to the airport for pick up and drop offs as well as leaving them for a night or more while traveling abroad or somewhere in the country. And then there are those who park there because the rates are supposed to be cheaper than the hotels and mall around the airport (e.g., the case of Terminal 3). Will the increase in the rates discourage unwanted or unnecessary parking? Perhaps not because people are still quite dependent on cars as their primary mode in and out of NAIA.
Access to the airport remains road-dependent. Granted there are many options like ride hailing, airport bus and taxis, these are all road based. They share the same roads that are often congested. The tollways are not enough to ease traffic in the area, which aside from airport generated trips include those from offices and industries in the area.
Too long has the need for a rail access for the terminals and government has failed to provide it. It would at least have engaged private sector for this provision but it took so long. Perhaps the Metro Manila subway will change that but we have to wait a long while to find out.
–
On ride hailing replacing more sustainable options for transport
We’ve long suspected that ride hailing or ride sharing is not as sustainable as their proponents and companies would project them to be. Here is more evidence showing how ride hailing has diminished other more sustainable transport options.
Kerlin, K. (August 28, 2024) “Half of Uber, Lyft Trips Replace More Sustainable Options,” UC Davis News, https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/half-uber-lyft-trips-replace-more-sustainable-options [Last accessed: 9/8/2024]
Quoting from the article:
“About 47% of the trips replaced a public transit, carpool, walking or cycling trip. An additional 5.8% of trips represented “induced travel,” meaning the person would not have made the trip were an Uber or Lyft unavailable. This suggests ride-hailing often tends to replace most sustainable transportation modes and leads to additional vehicle miles traveled. “
The article and the study by UC Davis is limited to their experiences with Uber and Lyft and perhaps others that employ cars. In our case, we have in addition motorcycle taxis or habal-habal that further takes away passengers from public and active transportation. Motorcycle taxis provide a very attractive alternative to conventional public transport modes as these are perceived to reduce travel times among other advantages they provide to users.
I will share some information later about the current mode shares in Metro Manila and how drastically public transport mode shares have been eroded post pandemic.
–
Technical sessions at the TSSP 2024 Conference
I am sharing here the latest draft of the technical sessions for the 30th Annual Conference of the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines (TSSP). The conference will be held in Iloilo City this coming September 13, 2024.
I will share the draft program for the morning plenary session in the next post.
–
Initial thoughts on driverless cars
The wife is currently in San Francisco in the US. She sent me some photos and videos of the driverless car ahead of booked to get to their office there.
The first thing that came to mind seeing the photos and videos is “It’s cool!” Their creation and operation are indeed wonders from an engineering and technology standpoint. Unfortunately, these are not the solution to our transport problems. These will just replace the cars we already have and causing congestion and other concerns.
–
On transportation and floods
Some people say transport and traffic concerns take a backseat to floods and related concerns, which affect other aspects of our lives aside from our commutes. The heavy rains the past days have rendered many streets impassable to most types of vehicles. That means people cannot go to work, school or come home. Lives are disrupted by floods this way. But even more disruptive and disastrous are the damages brought about by flooding in many communities. Homes are submerged. Properties are damaged, many beyond repair or replacement. There is also the psychological aspect of floods especially for those who will experience them for the first time. These will surely add to the already fragile mental health of people still reeling from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
As I write, the Marikina River has breached and many areas of Metro Manila and surrounding provinces of Bulacan, Rizal, Laguna and Cavite are flooded. The floods are now being mentioned along with those brought about by Ondoy (Ketsana) in 2009.
Here are some photos from the internet being shared by various social media accounts including the official pages of Rappler and Inquirer:
–
On BRT being the solution to many cities’ public transport problems
Here is a very informative article about the benefits of a bus rapid transit (BRT) to a city:
Renn, A.M. (June 17, 2024) “The Bus Lines That Can Solve a Bunch of Urban Problems,” Governing, https://www.governing.com/transportation/the-bus-lines-that-can-solve-a-bunch-of-urban-problems [Last accessed: 6/25/2024]
To quote from the article:
“One benefit of BRT is that it is much more capital-efficient and faster to implement than light rail. For many years, urban advocates have promoted light rail over bus transit, impressed by the success of light rail systems such as the one in Portland, Ore. But today’s light rail lines are extremely expensive. One proposed in Austin, Texas, for example, is projected to cost $500 million per mile. Also, most of the cities that have desired light rail are low-density cities built around cars and with little history of extensive public transit ridership. Converting them to transit-oriented cities would be a heavy lift.
BRT is much cheaper. The 13-mile Red Line BRT in Indianapolis, opened in 2019, cost less than $100 million — not per mile, but in total. The much lower financial lift required for building bus rapid transit makes it more feasible for cities to raise the required funds.
Because they typically run on city streets, BRT systems also offer the chance to perform badly needed street and sewer repairs during construction. Sidewalks can be rebuilt or added. Traffic signals can be replaced, along with new features such as prioritizing buses over auto traffic and additional pedestrian safety measures. The reduction of traffic lanes itself is sometimes a worthwhile street redesign project.”
It’s been more than a decade (almost 2 decades to be more accurate) since a BRT was proposed in Cebu City and in Metro Manila. So far, there is still none operating in the Philippines. The EDSA Carousel probably wants to be one but is far from being a BRT based on operations and performance. Cebu’s is supposed to be currently in implementation but it seems Davao might just beat them to it with its high priority bus project. The Philippines requires a proof of concept of the BRT in one of its cities that could be the inspiration for similar projects in other cities especially those that are already highly urbanized.
–
On the idea of congestion pricing
I purposely titled this post to include the word ‘idea’ as congestion pricing is still very much like that in the Philippines. It is a reality in some part of the world particularly in Singapore where its Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) has evolved and improved over the years. Its success though seems to be an exceptional case that has not been replicated elsewhere where conditions are not exactly like the city state’s.
Here is an article that recently came out from The Washington Post about the New York Governor’s decision to backtrack on the proposed congestion pricing initiative in New York City:
McArdle, M. (June 12, 2024) “People hate traffic. They also hate this great idea to clear it,” The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/12/congestion-pricing-great-idea-people-hate/ [Last accessed: 6/14/2024]
To quote from the article:
“Roads are a scarce good; you can fit only so many cars on a road at one time, and fewer if you would like those cars to go somewhere. When roads are “free,” we are forced to fall back on a more costly and inefficient strategy: sitting in traffic. This wastes valuable human time and inflicts noise and pollution on everyone nearby. Far better to charge a modest price that inspires some drivers to carpool and others to take public transit or shop nearer to home, until supply and demand are balanced and traffic flows easily…
In political disputes, a discrete group facing highly concentrated costs often defeats a larger public interest that conveys a small individual benefit to everybody — such as being able to move around the city faster when you really need to. This is particularly true in the American system, which is designed to empower angry minorities. And it’s especially true when they’re abetted by status quo bias and a sympathetic majority, as in this case.
Complain all you want about selfish suburban drivers or the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s bloated cost structure or Hochul’s cowardice; the biggest obstacle to congestion pricing is that almost two-thirds of New York City residents have told pollsters they oppose it — in a city where less than half of all households even own a car. A more technocratic, less democratically responsive government might have been able to ram it through, and perhaps in time everyone would have come to like it. But in fractious America, with all its political veto points, congestion pricing is doomed by the reality that people hate slapping prices on things — especially if they have to pay them.”
There is a congestion pricing proposal in Baguio City and we don’t know yet how this will go. I don’t have the details yet except that a private company whose core business is tollways is involved. Will this be a model or a proof of concept? Or will it just go the way of a typical tollway where users are those who are willing to pay and which would eventually congest if most of the current users pay and use it anyway? Will the funds generated be used to develop a more efficient transport system for Baguio, eventually leading and contributing to less congested streets? That would also mean eventually less revenues from the congestion pricing scheme and probably lead to it being unnecessary.
–
Conventional vs. hi tech – the case of train tickets
Here’s an interesting (for me) read on something we usually assume could be improved by means of technology – transit fare collection:
Unseen Japan (May 27, 2024) “Japan Railways tried replacing tickets with tech., It didn’t go well,” Medium.com, https://unseenjapan.medium.com/japan-railways-tried-to-replace-tickets-with-tech-it-didnt-go-well-1e151f9a400f [Last accessed: 6/10/2024]
To quote from the article:
“So what went wrong? Some experts say that JR East’s major fault was forcing a cutover to online and automated systems before those systems were ready for prime time.”
As with others like this that seek to ‘disrupt’ the conventional or status quo, a hastily implemented system will likely face trouble and a barrage of complaints from users. This would be especially true if the current-old system is already efficient and requires only minor tweaking or improvements and an abrupt phase out or scale down of the old is not necessary.
–
Caught (up) in traffic 