Home » Transport Planning (Page 19)
Category Archives: Transport Planning
Article on housing affordability and sprawl
There is a new article from Todd Litman that discusses the state of housing in the context of affordability and sprawl. While this is mainly based on the experiences in the US and Canada, there are many other cities from other countries involved. I noticed an interesting comment on his Facebook post about the elephant in the room being culture. I would tend to agree with this view and in the case of the Philippines is perhaps also heavily influenced by our being under a repressive Spanish regime that was succeeded by an American-style. I say repressive because although there was a semblance of planning during the Spanish period, the urban form revolved around the plaza where church, government, market and schools were located. Social class defined residential ‘development’ also followed this with the wealthier families having homes closer to the center while those in the lower income classes where farther and perhaps even beyond the reach of the sound of church bells. The Americans changed much of that and introduced a larger middle class and the incentive of becoming home and land owners, which during the Spanish period was practically non-existent except perhaps to the buena familias and ilustrados. Fast forward to the present, being a land owner is still very much a status symbol along with being a car owner. Homes in the urban centers (e.g., Makati CBD, Ortigas CBD, BGC, etc.) are very expensive and people would rather reside in the periphery (thus the sprawl) and do their long commutes.
Here is a link to the article:
Unaffordability is a Problem but Sprawl is a Terrible Solution
[Litman, T. (2017) Unaffordability is a problem but sprawl is a terrible solution, Planetizen, Retrieved from http://www.planetizen.com, February 17.]
What do you think?
–
First call for papers for the TSSP 2017 conference
The first call for papers for the 24th Annual Conference of the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines came out last Wednesday, Feb. 15:
–
Special lectures on transport – February 23, 2017
I just wanted to share the following announcement from the University of the Philippines Diliman about special lectures on transport. The lectures will be delivered at the Melchor Hall theater at the UP Diliman campus and is open to the public.
–
Where exactly will the Line 2 Extension stations be?
A good friend asked me about where the two additional stations of the Line 2 Extension will be. Most articles state that there will be a station at Masinag and at Emerald but since work on the stations has not commenced then many are still speculating on the final locations and how the station will be laid out with respect to the elevated tracks. However, if you look closely, you will see something like a hint to where the stations and their platforms will be laid out. Following are two photos; each showing features of the elevated tracks that taper off at what looks like the start and end points for the stations.
Future Emerald Station in front of Robinsons Metro East?
Future Masinag Station across SM City Masinag
Another observation and particularly at Masinag is how tall the structure seems to be. The platforms appear to be already at the 4th level if you compare the elevated tracks to the pedestrian overpass that represents the 2nd level. It seems that the Masinag Station will be quite a tall one and invites more questions from observers especially prospective and current users of Line 2. Perhaps it will be 4-storey building with commercial spaces for shops and restaurants? How massive will this structure be? Will there be a connection with SM other than via the existing pedestrian overpass? How will the inter-modal needs be addressed by the station design? Will there be more parking or maybe park-and-ride facilities? Hopefully, these questions can be answered soon.
–
Updates on the Line 2 Extension: What’s next?
Marcos Highway is part of my regular commuting route and so I have been able to observe the progress of the construction of the elevated tracks for the extension of Line 2. The contractor, DMCI, is nearing the completion of their part of the project. Unfortunately, the stations and the electrical/power systems for the extension have not been bidded out by the DOTr and so there are not a few doubts whether the extension will be operational by 3rd quarter of 2017, which is the original completion date for the whole project. The construction of the two stations alone are expected to take some time and also will have a big impact on transport and traffic despite the construction sites being more concentrated around the stations at Emerald and Masinag. Here are a couple of photos showing what it looks like along Marcos Highway.
DMCI has almost completed clearing the stretch of Santolan to Masinag of their equipment. The barriers that delineated their work space are mostly gone, freeing up a lane each along either side of Marcos Highway. This has eased traffic along this major thoroughfare connecting Metro Manila to the east.
The pedestrian overpass across Vermont Royale has been retrofitted so the center section passes under the Line 2’s structure.
Timing is of the essence for the two additional stations of Line 2. As I said, the projected completion and start of operations was 3rd quarter of 2017. Of course, the last quarter of this year would still be most welcome but further delays mean more losses on the part of commuters and, overall, the government. Perhaps it was a mistake for the previous administration to have not included the stations in the package that DMCI eventually got and now has almost completed? Maybe the current administration should expedite the remaining parts of the Line 2 extension. This should prove how serious the current government is with its promises for better public transport (i.e., mass transport).
–
Updates and resolution on the common railway station in North-EDSA
The big news today is the agreement among the government and the big corporations involved in the issue of the common station at North Avenue-EDSA where three rail transit lines (Line 1, Line 3 and the future Line 7) will be converging. The key features of the agreement are reproduced here:
“KEY FEATURES OF AGREEMENT
- The Common Station has three components: (a) Area A, where the platform and concourse for LRT-1 and MRT-3 are located; (b) Area B, which consists of two Common Concourses connecting Area A and Area C; and (c) Area C, where the platform and concourse for MRT-7 is located.
- Area A will be financed and built by DOTr. Area B will be financed and built by Ayala and its partners (NTDCC) (this is Ayala’s contribution to the Common Station project). And Area C will be financed and built by San Miguel.
- The portion of Area A for LRT-1 will be operated, maintained, and developed by LRMC. The portion of Area A for MRT-3 will be operated, maintained, and developed by DOTr. Area B will be operated, maintained, and developed by Ayala. And Area C will be operated, maintained, and developed by San Miguel.
- The MOU contains the design parameters for the Common Station, which will be the basis of the Detailed Engineering Designs to be developed after signing of the MOU. The Detailed Engineering Designs will be completed within 240 calendar days from signing date.
- The designs shall ensure that a defined level of service is maintained at all times by all components of the Common Station.
- The designs shall ensure that all components of the Common Station are interconnected, and that SM City North EDSA and Trinoma are interconnected to the Common Station.
- The Common Station is targeted to be completed by 2 April 2019, subject to extension as may be justified under the MRT-7 Agreement with respect to Area C.
- SM’s TRO will be lifted soon after the Detailed Engineering Designs are completed.
- DPWH will build an underpass along EDSA at the area where the Common Station will be constructed. This will be financed and built by DPWH.”
That was a direct copy and paste from the DOTr’s Facebook page.
There is another piece of information that’s gained a popular following and that is the design for the common station that was shared to the public:
Proposed design of the common station
I think the design is basically okay in terms of location. The layout would need to be refined in order to address concerns pertaining to optimum and efficient transfer of passengers between lines. I assume from the drawings that all three lines will be at the same level but with a plaza separating Lines 1 &3 from Line 7. There are also issues pertaining to proposed road grade separation in the area but that seems to have been addressed already by item #9 in the preceding list. We can only hope that the current government and private sector partnership can expedite this project.
–
Commuting and stress
Here is another quick post but on a topic that’s related to health and therefore is something that I think many should be interested in and perhaps take important note of.
Commuting: “The Stress that Doesn’t Pay”
There are many links to various medical articles within the article. At the last part, there is also a list of references that the reader may want to look at. I’m also posting this for future reference. This would contribute to the formulation of topics for research especially the inter-disciplinary or collaborative kind.
–
City coding anyone?
Last December 8, it was a holiday at Taguig City as they celebrated their foundation day. Not surprisingly, many major roads including C-5, Ortigas Avenue and EDSA were relieved of congestion and I was among those who benefited from this as we breezed through Ortigas to get to the hospital for our daughter’s regular check-up. I also saw many posts on Facebook in agreement with this observation as they too had shorter travel times particularly between Quezon City and Taguig.
I jokingly proposed on my social media account that perhaps, instead of tinkering with the number coding scheme, we should have something like coding for cities. I recall recommending something like making a holiday for one major traffic generating city for each of the five working week days. It’s like making Mondays off for Makati City, Tuesdays off for Pasig, Wednesdays for Makati, Thursdays for Taguig, and Fridays for Manila. I got some supportive comments including one that made very good sense about commuters losing the equivalent of a day anyway because of traffic congestion. The 4-day work week is not at all unusual or new since this has been practiced in many offices including government offices. In certain cases, there are offices that allows you to work from home once a week so you only need to be physically in the office for 4 days. It would be nice for an analysis for this proposal be made and supported perhaps by some modelling so we can have metrics for the potential benefits to all of such 4-day work weeks.
–
Mobilizing sustainable transport for development
The United Nations (UN) has recently published a new report on “Mobilizing sustainable transport for development” authored by a High Level Advisory Group on Sustainable Transport formed by the UN. The report and other resources may be found at the following website:
Secretary General’s High Level Advisory Group on Sustainable Transport
This is under the UN’s Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. You can check out the other materials at the website. The UN has many initiatives on sustainable transport and has been very active in promoting or advocating for sustainable transport for a long time now. It is through the UN Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD), for example, that the Philippines and other ASEAN countries were able to formulate their national EST strategies. The new report continues on the UN’s commitment to promote sustainable transport to improve people’s lives around the world.
–
Oversupply of vehicles for ridesharing/carsharing – Part 2
This is a follow-up on the recent post on ridesharing/car sharing where I talked about my observation that there seems to be an oversupply of vehicles being used for what is claimed as ride-sharing or car-sharing. In that post, I mentioned an observation by me and my colleagues that popular ride-sharing/car-sharing companies like Uber and Grab have led to more vehicles on the roads. I add to that the findings of our students that:
- Those shifting to Grab and Uber are mostly those already using taxis (regular users) and those using UV Express, which is a higher capacity vehicle using either vans or AUVs (average passenger capacities between 10 and 18 passengers).
- GrabCar and Uber function more as premium taxis rather than ride-share or car-share modes.
A friend who’s among the first Uber drivers in the country (He was already an Uber driver before the explosion in the service’s popularity.) shared that Uber earlier had been a real car-share/ride-share. My friend’s full time job was as a musician and he thought of becoming an Uber driver only to have some additional income for when he wasn’t busy with his work or didn’t have gigs. He was not roving around Metro Manila to get fares much like what is now being done by many Uber and GrabCar units.
Later, when Uber and Grab began more aggressive marketing; promoting their services as potentially generating much more income than conventional taxis and perhaps even a person’s full-time job, people started purchasing cars not for their use but to use in business in the form of Uber and Grab cars. I can probably understand those who bought cars and drove the cars themselves. To me, these would still qualify as ride-sharing/car-sharing but on the upper limit of what we can really consider “sharing” since they are supposed to be driving during their free times. Arguably, unemployed people have the entire day as free time compared with employed people or those who run businesses other than being Grab or Uber drivers. These include housewives and even “househusbands” who may have a vehicle at home that they can use for Uber or Grab. Employed people can only share their rides during the time they go to their offices or when they travel home later in the day. Others may have more free time as business people would likely have more flexible schedules.
Following is a series of screenshots I took en route to a meeting. It is, I believe, more systematic in terms of trying to determine the availability of vehicles – in this case GrabCars. Again, correct me if I’m wrong about my assumption that the vehicles displayed represent available cars. If they do not then it means the app is misleading people into thinking there are available cars for them to hire.
Grab Cars in the vicinity of UP Diliman
Grab Cars in the vicinity of Eastwood
Grab Cars in the vicinity of Tiendesitas
Grab Cars in the vicinity of Cainta Junction
–
Caught (up) in traffic 