Home » Traffic Congestion (Page 16)
Category Archives: Traffic Congestion
Some thoughts on the issues on bus bans and terminals in Metro Manila
I had originally wanted to use “Clarifying issues on bus bans and terminals in Metro Manila” as the title for this post. However, I felt it was too strong a title, and one that would be more appropriate for a government agency like the MMDA or DOTC, or an LGU like Manila. More than fault-finding and criticizing government agencies and local governments, I believe we should take a closer and more objective look at the issues (or non issues?) pertaining to the Manila bus ban and the opening of the southwest provincial bus terminal for Cavite-bound buses. Following are my comments on issues raised the past weeks about the two initiatives.
Issue 1: There were no or few announcements about the implementation of the bus ban in Manila and the southwest terminal in Cavite.
Comments: While the bus ban in Manila came as a surprise to many, the move was actually a consequence of a Manila City Council resolution. Normally, such resolutions would take time to implement and would entail announcements for stakeholders. Though we will probably never know the truth or who is saying the truth about the resolution and its implementation, it is likely that bus operators already knew about the implications but decided to call Manila’s bluff and play the media and public appeal cards rather than comply with Manila’s requirements for franchised buses and terminals as they have done before in other issues like fuel prices and fare hikes.
I find it difficult to believe that the MMDA did not do its part in announcing the opening of the southwest terminal. Perhaps people thought the announcement was over a very short period? Or maybe people didn’t mind the announcement and are also at fault for paying no or little attention to the announcement? If so, then the public is also partly to blame for disregarding the announcement from the MMDA, assuming the agency won’t push through with its initiatives to implement central terminals for buses. Next up will be another southern terminal at Alabang and a northern one near Trinoma.
Issue 2: Poor transfer facilities and services including a lack of pedestrian facilities between the bus terminal and transfer point, and lack of public transport like jeepneys to ferry passengers to their destinations.
Comments: I think it’s quite clear that the MMDA and LGUs are at fault here. Despite the construction and scheduled opening of the southwest terminal, there have been limited effort in improving pedestrian facilities. Such facilities needed to be in place prior to or upon the opening of the southwest terminal and requiring all provincial buses to terminate at the facility instead of continuing to Metro Manila. People-friendly facilities could have helped people in adjusting to the new policy though walking from 100 to 200 meters is certainly not for all, especially during this rainy season. Senior citizens and persons with disabilities (PWDs) would have specific needs that could have been addressed from day one of operation of the terminal. One approach to “bridge the gap” between the terminal and where people could take city bus and jeepney rides could have been to modify some city bus and jeepney routes to make these closer to the terminal. Ideally, the terminal could have been an intermodal facility providing efficient, seamless transfers between modes of transport.
In the case of Manila, the jeepneys were already there with routes overlapping with buses but their numbers and capacity could not cope with the demand from the buses. Since the main objective of Manila was to weed out colorum buses, it could have coordinated with the LTFRB to check the registration and franchises of buses rather than generalizing among all buses. Perhaps Manila just wanted to make a big statement? But then this was at the expense of the riding public, which obviously got the attention of many including the media. Coordination among agencies and LGUs, however, has not been a strong suit for these agencies, and this thought leads us to the next issue.
Issue 3: Lack of coordination among LGUs and agencies in implementing transport schemes.
Comments: This issue is an enduring one and has been the topic of discussions, arguments and various fora for as long as we can remember. On one hand, the DOTC and the LTFRB should provide guidelines and guidance to local governments on transport planning and services. The agencies should be proactive in their engagement of LGUs in order to optimize transport services under the jurisdiction of national agencies and local governments. On the other hand, LGUs must accept the fact that most if not all of them are ill equipped or do not have the capacity nor capability to do transport planning much less addressing issues regarding public transport. Citing the Local Government Code and its devolution of local transport to LGUs everytime there’s a transport issue certainly won’t help LGUs solve their problems.
Issue 4: Terminals required for city buses in Manila.
Comments: There should be a terminal for city buses in Manila but not a terminal for each company. There should only be one or maybe two terminals where buses can make stops prior to making the turnaround for the return trip. There is actually a terminal in Manila, which the city can start with for city buses. This is the one just beside the Metropolitan Theater and near City Hall, which can be utilized by city buses. It is also close to the LRT Line 1 Central Station so the facility can be developed as a good intermodal terminal for land transport.
Issue 5: Colorum or illegal public transport vehicles in Manila
Comments: This is actually a problem not just for Manila but for the rest of Metropolitan Manila and the rest of the country. The colorum problem is there for both conventional and paratransit services as there are illegal buses, jeepneys, UV express, multicabs, taxis, tricycles and pedicabs everywhere. Many of these are allegedly being tolerated by national agencies and local governments with many allegedly being fielded or owned by public transport operators themselves.
–
In most cases, the best time to evaluate a traffic policy or scheme is NOT during its first days or weeks of implementation but after a significant time, say at least a month, after it was implemented. This is because the stakeholders, the people involved would take some time to adjust to any scheme or policy being implemented. This adjustment period will vary according to the magnitude or scope of the scheme/policy and can be quite “painful” to many who have gotten used to the old ways. Usually, a lot of comments and criticisms are quite emotional but it is clear that the collective sentiment is the result years or decades of poor transport services and fumbling by government agencies. Transport in Metro Manila is already quite complicated with routes overlapping and services competing with each other for the same passengers. Perhaps it is time to simplify transport while also in the process of optimizing and rationalizing services. I have written about this in this previous post.
More transport issues in Manila will come about should the city train its attention on other modes of transport including jeepneys, UV express vehicles, tricycles, pedicabs and kuligligs. If the city is really intent on reforming transport services within its jurisdiction, it should consider the needs of all stakeholders and especially and particularly the riding public. Transport should be inclusive, people-friendly as well as environment-friendly and there are many good practices in other cities that Manila could refer to and study for adaption and adoption for the city. If it is successful in improving transport, then perhaps Manila could be the country’s model for transformation from being the “Gates of Hell” to being a “Portal to Heaven” to residents and visitors alike.
–
More pedestrian facilities please!
I took a couple of photos one late afternoon on a weekday on my way home. I wanted to have a picture of typical jeepney overloading during the afternoon peak. Typically, jeepneys would allow “sabit” or passengers hanging from behind the jeepney. This practice is actually prohibited and carries a fine if jeepney drivers are apprehended. And that is usually a big “if” considering enforcers turn a blind eye to the practice especially during peak periods when it is difficult to get a ride.
Jeepney full of sabit or hangers-on in heavy traffic along the eastbound side of a major highway
I also happened upon an opportunity to take a photo of the overloaded jeepney together with pedestrians walking along the walkway at the roadside. Though the photo was not so clear, it captured the image I wanted with people opting to walk while others took a risky ride on a jeepney. The cyclists in the photos were just bonuses and added to the visual of alternatives for mobility.
Pedestrians and a cyclist along the widened walkway/bikeway along Marcos Highway
Walking remains as the mode of transport with the highest share when all modes, motorized or non-motorized, are compared. While there is a strong clamor from cyclists for bikeways and for cycling to be taken up by more people as an option for commuting, the reality is that cycling is not really for everyone. It is a viable and healthy mode but should also fit in a hierarchy of modes. Most people walk and walking should be encouraged over distances where it is most suitable. Facilities for walking need to be provided and properly designed so that people can walk safely and most efficiently like the example in the following photo taken during another weekday late afternoon.
People walking along Marcos Highway
Local governments help promote walking by making sure sidewalks are provided and clear of obstructions. Perhaps walkability can be used as an indicator or parameter for a city to be qualified as livable and true to the advocacy of sustainable transport. Walking should be encouraged to promote healthy living as it incorporates exercise in our daily routines. More people walking should also increase awareness for the advocacy for clean air and help initiatives to improve air quality, particularly efforts to reduce harmful emissions by motorized vehicles. Thus, it is not difficult to understand how investing in pedestrian facilities and promoting walking is not a smart move and a beneficial one for any politician’s constituency.
–
Construction and congestion along the Manggahan East Bank Road
The East Bank Road along the Manggahan Floodway stretches from Pasig City through Cainta and Taytay in Rizal Province. It provides an alternate route for people traveling to/from the Rizal towns of Cainta, Taytay, Binangonan and the City of Antipolo from/to Metro Manila. The East Bank Road is directly connected to Amang Rodriguez Ave. and Ortigas Ave. while local roads connect it with C-6 and the Manila East Road. It is also an alternate route for people living in the residential areas of Pasig, Cainta and Taytay that are accessible via the many local streets connecting to the East Bank Road. After the Manggahan Bridge along Ortigas Ave Extension, there are two more bridges that travelers can use to cross the floodway. These are the Javier Bridge, which people can use to get to Raymundo Ave. or Sixto Antonio Ave. to eventually get to C-5, and the Barkadahan Bridge, which connects Highway 2000 in Taytay to Ejercito Ave. in Pasig in an area that’s contested by 3 LGUS (Pasig, Taytay and Cainta).
Sections of the East Bank Road are currently being rehabilitated. However, the contractors have started by working on the middle lane of a carriageway that’s 3 to 4 lanes wide with significant on-street parking on both sides of the road. There were minimal or no semblance at all of any traffic management on the side of the contractor, the MMDA or the LGUs involved in the project and so congestion occurs as it’s practically every driver/rider for him/herself along the road. I managed to take a few photos of the road and traffic conditions as we traveled towards Taytay and the Barkadahan Bridge from Ortigas Ave. and I can’t imagine how traffic is during the peak periods. I leave that up to the imagination of my readers.
Middle lane undergoing pavement rehabilitation
Construction and waste materials and equipment
–
Flash floods and traffic congestion
Traffic last night along most of Metro Manila’s roads were a nightmare. It took many people hours before they could reach their homes from their offices and schools. The main reason cited for the horrendous traffic jams was the weather. It has been raining almost every afternoon in Metro Manila and its surrounding areas due to the combination of a tropical depression east of the island of Luzon and the intensified monsoon rains (Habagat). Rainfall intensity combined with a high percentage of the water translating into runoff contributed to flash floods all around Metro Manila including some that were waist-high, rendering the road impassable to most vehicles. However, while a lot of motorists and commuters were simmering along many roads last night, I couldn’t help but notice that most vehicles in the photos circulating in social media sites and news footage are private vehicles. Buses along EDSA occupied only the outermost lane for most stretches of the road. Meanwhile, conspicuous is the space in the middle of EDSA, which is the ROW for the MRT-3 tracks.
One lesson we learned last night was something we already knew all along and have failed miserably to address – we need better public transport in Metro Manila. Could there have been less cars on the roads affected by flash floods brought about by the heavy rains yesterday? Could commuters have had an easier way of traveling between their offices or schools and their homes? The answer is yes, that is, we could have built the necessary public transport infrastructure years ago. While there is a need to be transparent and have a corruption-free (is there such a thing?) process for planning, funding, designing, and constructing public transport infrastructure, we must realize that these are all systems that we should have had long ago, and further delay only dooms mobility and accessibility in our cities. Our leaders seem to be too engrossed with processes and making sure they won’t get entangled in controversies or lawsuits that they forget that time is ticking and all other people are caught in the mess that is the traffic congestion we experience every day. I wonder if at least some of our decision-makers for transport and traffic were caught in the monstrous jams last night? Maybe getting caught in one would change their perspectives and give them a sense of urgency for the task at hand? Or maybe, and likely, they were sitting behind their cars and burning time on their notebooks or tablets while their drivers were trying to maneuver in traffic? Frankly, we deserve better transport than what we have but then we don’t get to decide what gets built and when such infrastructure will be built, if at all. We could, however, do our part in lobbying (or demanding) for better transport.
Taken by a good friend commuting to his home last night:
From the GMA News website:
–
Traffic congestion and the limits of quick fixes
One time last summer night, it took me 2.5 hours to get to the airport from where I reside when it should only be an hour or 1.5 hours (on a typical bad day). Very early mornings (between 2 to 4 AM), it only takes me 40 minutes between my home an the airport. The route I usually take is mainly along Circumferential Road 5 (C-5); a route that basically has sparse public transport (mostly jeepneys along different sections) but is a truck route. It was summer though and one would have thought that there would be less vehicles along the road with school still out. I was wrong in that assumption and that cost me both time and fuel that night.
Traffic congestion in Metro Manila and other Philippine cities have been issues for such a long time that one tends to assume there’s nothing being done to fix the problem. In Metro Manila, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), in cooperation with the various local governments and national agencies, has implemented various schemes including the number coding, truck ban and a bus dispatch system along EDSA. Yet, congestion persists and only last week, the President got caught in traffic as he traveled from Malacanang Palace in Manila to the DOST Compound in Taguig. The news was filled with a comment that he supposedly made to the MMDA Chair about the delay he and his entourage experienced. The bad news is that this congestion will not go away and will only worsen if there are no steps taken to address the problem. And this happens not only in Metro Manila but in other highly urbanized cities in the country. Quite obviously, quick fixes are no longer enough and we have reached the limits of their applicability.
EDSA during the morning rush hours
EDSA during the afternoon peak, which actually extends to an evening and even nighttime traffic jam
So how do we alleviate traffic congestion? Here’s three things that come to mind as they seem to be quite logical and very obvious:
1. Build the mass transit infrastructure required – these infra include rail and bus rapid transit systems and are urgently needed in Metro Manila, Metro Cebu, Davao and other highly urbanized cities. A shift from private vehicle use to public transport will not happen if people have no attractive options for commuting. In Metro Manila, there is a backlog of mass transit projects with lines that should have been constructed and operational years or even decades ago.
2. Rationalize transport services – the long standing practice is to increase the number of existing modes of transport as the demand increases. This logic is one that is most abused as a doubling of demand is conveniently but incorrectly interpreted as requiring a corresponding doubling of the number of tricycles or jeepneys, for example. What is required is for our cities to “graduate” from low capacity and less efficient modes to higher capacity and more efficient ones. Many cities seem plagued with tricycles as their main modes of transport within their CBDs when these should have been restricted to residential areas and mainly in the periphery rather than allowed to dominate (and clog) urban streets.
3. Build more walkways and cycling facilities – its difficult to encourage people to walk and cycle if there are no space for pedestrians and cyclists to travel safely and efficiently. Most trips are actually short ones and do not require motor vehicles so it makes sense to invest in pedestrian and cycling facilities so people get the clear message of support for such options for travel. Such investment is also one for healthy living as walking and cycling are forms of exercise and it is well established that these modes of transport promote healthier lifestyles and therefore, healthier people in cities.
–
Common causes of traffic congestion along Philippine roads
As a follow-up to a previous post on traffic congestion, I am writing on some of the most basic causes of congestion along Philippine roads. I say most basic because these are the usual situations we see along the road as we commute. And these are also supposed to be easily solved or addressed by the most basic approaches – enforcement. Here are a couple of photos and commentaries on this matter.
Commuters occupying two lanes of the road as they wait for public transport along Marcos Highway in Pasig – PUVs like the jeepney in the photo stop in the middle of the road to load/unload passengers. Were there traffic enforcers/aides in the area? Sometimes. Were they doing their jobs? Definitely not. In many cases, I’ve seen enforcers using the congestion (i.e., slowed traffic) to apprehend number coding violators. Now, number coding is premised on motorists being discouraged from traveling during certain times of the day to reduce congestion from vehicle volume. In the photo above, it’s pretty clear that the problem isn’t number coding violators but the mayhem caused by public transport and commuters. Something that traffic enforcers/aides could have acted on and with regularity and persistence so that they can positively influence jeepney driver and commuters towards orderly conduct.
On-street parking and pedestrian activity along Manila roads – many cities such as Manila are guilty of not having any serious initiatives to address on-street parking. In many cases, its tolerated particularly in commercial areas as local governments don’t like to engage business in what they assume to be the small issue (or non-issue) of parking. In the case of pedestrians, it is a behavioral thing that requires a bit more effort than police or enforcer visibility (or the occasional apprehension). As a result, people will generally cross wherever they want and walk along the carriageway, not minding their safety. Of course, such behavior is encouraged by the absence of space for walking as vehicles, merchandise and other stuff occupy space that’s supposed to be for pedestrians.
–
Traffic congestion along Buendia (Gil Puyat Ave.)
The Makati CBD generates a very high number of trips owing to it being arguably the largest CBD in Metro Manila in terms of offices and workers. There are several other CBDs like Manila, Ortigas, Cubao, Eastwood, Filinvest City, and Bonifacio but they generate less traffic compared to Makati. There are several major roads in the area including four intersecting roads that practically define the CBD. These are Ayala Avenue, Gil Puyat Avenue (formerly but still popularly known as Buendia Avenue), Makati Avenue and Paseo de Roxas. Both Gil Puyat and Ayala Avenue are lined with offices along either side and are often congested due to the vehicle traffic generated by the CBD. Following are a few photos of Buendia Ave.
Traffic congestion along Gil Puyat Ave. as seen from the overpass from Kalayaan Ave. Even the sidewalk on the right side of the road is filled with pedestrians.
One can see many people walking along the narrow sidewalk along Buendia. Some buildings have been renovated and refitted but many remain as they were in the last decade or more. The building in the center of the photo has so many air-conditioning units jutting outside the windows that it is quite obvious the units were an afterthought. Other buildings would likely have centralized or more strategically positioned air-conditioning units.
Another look at the traffic jam along one of Makati’s main roads indicate a lengthy queue from the Buendia Ave.-Paseo De Roxas intersection. The junction is signalized but saturated during peak periods. I am not sure about the optimization of the signal settings but it should be synchronized with at least two other intersections: Buendia Ave.-Makati Ave. and Paseo de Roxas-Makati Ave.
The DPWH is proposing a grade separation project along Buendia that is supposed to alleviate congestion at the intersections with Paseo de Roxas and Makati Avenue. The plan is to have an underpass along the avenue that would allow vehicles to flow through and bypassing the two major intersections. At-grade would still be signalized intersections but minus substantial through traffic along Buendia. The downside of such a project, of course, would be the expected traffic congestion during the construction phase. With very limited alternate routes and restricted space (i.e., unlike the case of the Quezon Ave. underpass at Araneta Ave.), traffic management in the area will surely be a challenge for the combined forces of Makati and MMDA traffic enforcers.
–
Night time congestion along C-5
Traffic congestion along Circumferential Road 5 is experienced practically throughout the day with the worst congestion along the southbound direction during the mornings between the Riverbanks Road in Quezon City and Kalayaan Avenue in Makati City, and the northbound direction between Bonifacio Global City and Eastwood from noon to nighttime. The following photos taken by my wife as I fetched her one night from her office shows the traffic jam along C-5 as we turned from the flyover past Market! Market! towards the highway.
Congestion along the C-5 northbound is a regular thing during the weekdays from the afternoon to late at night. While apps like the MMDA’s Traffic Navigator and Waze allow us to have an idea of how congested C-5 is during such periods, the actual experience is much worse than what many of us can just imagine from the apps.
As far as the eye could see – congestion in the form of the taillights of vehicles along the northbound side of C-5 indicate just how many people are caught in traffic from Taguig all the way to Pasig and beyond. The giant billboards from Kalayaan Avenue to Pasig Boulevard including those seen along the bridge crossing the Pasig River. Most of these people are office workers coming from Makati and Global City and heading home to Quezon City, Pasig, and the towns of Rizal. After 7 PM, trucks add to the traffic
Many people are asking if there is a solution in sight for congestion along C-5. To be frank, there is none in the immediate future. There are proposals to introduce a public transport system along the corridor with one option being a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and another an elevated rail transit line. The BRT line is a recommendation of a Pre-FS for Metro Manila BRT conducted around 6 years ago though there was a proposal for a bus system (Philtrak) along the same corridor back in the late 80’s and pursued for some time during the 90’s. Not much have been done towards realizing any of these proposals. An efficient mass transit system along the corridor could encourage people to shift from private to public transport and help reduce vehicular traffic along C-5 considering that even as I write this post, vehicle ownership is increasing in Metro Manila and its environs and this could only mean more congestion along C-5 and other roads.
–
Daily penance: traffic congestion along C-5
People have been telling me about the traffic congestion along Circumferential Road 5 (C-5) and I am quick to reply that I know the feeling as I’m one of those who have driven or traveled along C-5 and experienced first hand the traffic congestion, which is worst during the mornings (southbound) and late afternoons and evenings (northbound). Midday traffic jams are not uncommon as C-5 is a truck route and large vehicles contribute to clogging especially at bottlenecks like the U-turns slots along the highway and bridge crossing the Pasig River. C-5 has been this way since its opening (or more appropriately the completion of missing links along the main alignment).
It will not get better. It will only get worse. I say so because of the annual increase in vehicle ownership, including motorcycles, in what is now termed as Mega Manila. I dare say so because of the backlog of public transport infrastructure in the metropolis (or megalopolis?). It is well established that efficient public transport infra and services are good incentives for people to commute rather than drive. This means there will be less vehicles on the road and therefore there will be less congestion as basically only those who really need to drive would be using their cars on a regular basis. Of course, it is not as easy at it seems considering trip making and mode choices are in reality complicated matters. But then the availability of viable, acceptable choices for travel, especially in the urban setting allows for people to have better mobility and more equitable use of the transport system than a car-oriented city. Until then, when we do have the public transport system that our cities require, it will be a daily penitensya for many of us traveling and not just along C-5.
Congestion along the southbound side of C-5 approaching the flyover crossing Ortigas Ave. The flyover can be seen in the horizon.
Congestion along C-5 southbound in the Bo. Ugong area approaching the junction with Lanuza Avenue. An overpass was proposed for construction along this section but now it doesn’t look like it will do any good considering the bottleneck is the Pasig Flyover and the bridge across Pasig River.
Congestion along C-5 southbound at the Pasig flyover. The flyover has 2 lanes per direction and vehicle breakdowns or road crashes have resulted in terrible traffic jams.
Congestion along C-5 northbound at the C-5/Kalayaan junction. The north U-turn flyover, one of two in the area, is shown in the photo. An underpass was initially proposed, designed and approved (with budget from a JBIC loan) at the junction. A previous MMDA Chair, however, didn’t agree and successfully maneuvered for the twin U-turn flyovers to be constructed instead.
–
The rains and traffic
Last Friday, the midday downpours resulted in flash floods around Metro Manila. The rains were not really a surprise given that PAGASA and other weather reports already stated the high probability of rain that day. It was the volume of rains that day in most parts of Metro Manila and the surrounding areas that caught a lot of people unprepared as many areas including streets experienced flash floods. Most cases were due to drainage systems unable to take in the rainwater because many were ill-designed or were clogged by debris (e.g., garbage, leaves, soil/dirt, etc.). The rains caused or worsened traffic congestion along many roads including C-5, Quezon Ave., and other flood prone streets in the metropolis. It was reported that some areas had zero visibility and so a lot of motorists were forced to slow down in order to avoid being involved in a road crash. It is good practice for all to turn on their headlights or hazard lights during times of heavy rains. If a driver has difficulty driving under such conditions, it is recommended that the driver pull off from the road and wait until the rains have weakened for safer driving.
Atop the C-5 flyover from the Blue Ridge area and moving towards Eastwood, we couldn’t help but quip about the overpass being transformed into an elevated waterway (aqueduct?) as the drainage couldn’t handle the amount of water pouring in from the skies.
Caught this scene of a boat on a trailer apparently en route for delivery. I thought is was at the same time humorous and ironic as rain was pouring around us and some parts of C-5 was already flooded. Perhaps we’ll need these boats to go around Metro Manila in the future during the wet seasons when heavy rains cause deluges in many areas. My colleague noted that the trailer didn’t have a license plate (Note: Trailers are required to have their own registration with the LTO.) and so wasn’t supposed to be on the road.
–
Caught (up) in traffic 
