Home » Trip Generation (Page 4)
Category Archives: Trip Generation
School traffic impacts – issues along Ortigas Ave., Part 2
I had written recently about traffic congestion along Ortigas Avenue that is due mainly to traffic generated by a private school in the area. In the previous post, the photos only show vehicles parked on the sidewalks on either side of the road. They did not show the actual traffic congestion experience. The parked vehicles seem more incidental and indirect than concrete evidence of congestion brought about by school traffic generation though they are a definite manifestations of parking generation, which is directly related to traffic generation.
Parked vehicles on the sidewalk are seen as we approached the tail of a very slow moving platoon owing to the congestion generated by an exclusive school.
Traffic jam with road capacity reduced by the parked and standing vehicles along the EDSA-bound side of Ortigas Ave. The trees are witnesses to the chronic traffic jams and help alleviate their impacts by absorbing emissions from the vehicle.
Severe congestion as we approached the school – the overpass downstream in the photo is a reference for where the school is located
The overpass bears the name of the mayor of Mandaluyong City, where this school is located and which has jurisdiction, together with the MMDA, for traffic management in the area. At the time we passed the area though, there were no enforcers in the area despite the severe congestion. Is this because they gave the responsibility (or burden) of managing traffic to the school? Perhaps there was no need to post enforcers here as congestion is a regular thing and people seem to have been conditioned with the almost daily experience.
The area at the foot of the pedestrian overpass actually functions as a pick-up and drop-off area for students of the school. As such, vehicles occupy not just the the sidewalk but also more than a lane of Ortigas Avenue. This effectively constricts traffic along this major road.
Traffic is slow along the San Juan-bound direction of Ortigas as vehicles waiting for their passengers (students of the school) are lined up and occupying the outermost and even the middle lane of the road.
This queue is not entirely attributed to traffic generation by the school but is likely due to traffic management at the EDSA-Ortigas intersection, which is signalized. If the signal setting is not optimized or if the intersection is not cleared of straggler vehicles, traffic is backed up along all the approaches to the intersection. The tall building in the background hosts DOTC’s headquarters. I wonder if our officials are taking in the congestion that occurs almost daily (weekdays) and if they are even crosses their minds how to solve this problem and others like it around the country.
Proof that congestion is along both directions of Ortigas Ave. is seen in the middle of the photo where vehicles are also backed up along the overpass ramp coming from EDSA’s northbound side. For what it’s worth, the DOTC headquarters is right along this road at the building where the 7-Eleven (sign visible in the photo) is located.
Another and even closer look of what is literally bumper-to-bumper traffic along both sides of Ortigas Avenue during the afternoon peak triggered by the exclusive school along its San Juan-bound side. Visible in the photo is the congestion along the overpass from EDSA.
–
School traffic impacts – issues along Ortigas Ave., Part 1
I have written about school traffic generation in this blog and have mentioned about the traffic congestion experiences along major thoroughfares due to the vehicles attracted by private schools. La Salle Greenhills (LSGH) is an exclusive school found along Ortigas Avenue and during the summer months of April and May, people passing through the stretch of the road from EDSA to the Greenhills Shopping Center are relieved that they won’t have to go through traffic jams due to the school-generated traffic. From June to early December and January to March, however, the area is almost always congested in the morning and afternoon. Such congestion is predictable since it occurs during a period when students come to school and when they are dismissed mid-day or in the afternoon.
Heading to a meeting at the DOTC from the University one morning, we decided to take an alternate route. Instead of EDSA or C5, we took East Ave., Tomas Morato Ave., Gilmore Street and then emerged at the westernmost end of Ortigas in San Juan. It was already 9:00 AM when we arrived at the section most affected by the traffic generated by LSGH and so we didn’t to get caught in a jam as we proceeded towards our destination. We were proven right as traffic was almost free-flowing, and I took advantage of the traffic conditions and to take a few photos of the indicators for the potential traffic congestion in the area. The following photos also show a serious parking problem and (sadly) the usurpation of space from pedestrians. For shame!
School service vehicles parked along the sidewalk along Ortigas Avenue – beyond the wall on the right is Wack-wack, a high-end residential subdivision named for the sound of golf clubs swinging at its famous course.
Private vehicles parked along the same sidewalk – noticeable in the photo is the pink line drawn by the MMDA to supposedly demarcate space that should not be obstructed and instead allocated for pedestrian use. It is clear in the photos that pedestrians would have to walk along the edge of the sidewalk or the outer lane of the carriageway itself, increasing the risks for them to get sideswiped by motor vehicles.
More parked vehicles along Ortigas Avenue, mostly private vehicles that are highly likely owned by those studying at LSGH.
It’s actually worse on the other side of Ortigas Ave. as vehicles occupy a lane of the carriageway, effectively reducing capacity along this stretch of the road.
It seems the main purpose of the pedestrian overpass is to allow students to safely cross the street to get from and to their vehicles. I can only imagine the congestion caused by drop-offs and pick-ups along Ortigas Ave., which for certain times of the day functions as a driveway for the school.
–
School traffic generation – Part 3: LSGH and Ortigas
Was at the DOTC for a meeting and couldn’t help but look out the window from the conference room while waiting for the meeting to start. Our meeting was being held at the 16th floor of the building housing the Department and so it gave an excellent vista of the surrounding area. I was particularly interested in a view of Ortigas Avenue know there was no congestion that time of the day mainly because school was still off. The latter observation is important here because La Salle Greenhills, which is just a stone’s throw away from the building, is a major traffic generator with cars and school service vehicles clogging up the stretch of Ortigas Ave. from Galleria to the Greenhills Shopping Center. In fact, one can find vehicles parked or waiting along the road and even on the sidewalks, depraving pedestrians the proper and safe space to walk.
Free-flowing traffic along Ortigas Ave. in front of LSGH on a Friday mid-afternoon.
Main gate and pedestrian overpass at LSGH – there seems enough space for a multi-level parking lot inside the school but perhaps there are other options other than low capacity transport for the students.
Impact area – photo showing LSGH in the foreground and the Greenhills area in the background, including Virra Mall on the upper left and the condominiums around the Greenhills Shopping Center and behind Camp Crame.
Exclusive roads – the photo above seems the same as the previous one. A distinction though is that it shows Holy Cross Street (at right in the photo), which is inside Greenhills East Subdivision, an exclusive residential subdivision. The road and other streets in the subdivision are not open to general traffic and so cannot ease traffic along Ortigas Ave during congested periods.
Greenery – across LSGH is Wack wack, one of the first golf courses in the country and a welcome patch of green in the middle of the metropolis. Trees also line up along Ortigas Ave. but their capacities to absorb the CO2 produced by motor traffic are not enough considering the volume and frequent congestion along the road.
–
School traffic generation – Part 2
It’s been quite sometime since I wrote Part 1 on school traffic generation. I had been unable to get a few photos to describe congestion in another area where school trip generation frequently causes severe traffic congestion. This is along Ortigas Avenue in the Greenhills where another private school generates so many vehicle trips that it is able to clog both sides of the road almost every weekday of the school year. This is the case of La Salle Greenhills (LSGH), which, like Ateneo along Katipunan causes so much negative externalities with respect to traffic along a major thoroughfare.
The problem with La Salle Greenhills is more severe considering it has very limited space in its campus to be able to accommodate parking, unlike Ateneo, which has a sprawling campus (sadly, its being occupied by more cars these days). The result has been cars occupying the curbside lanes along either side of Ortigas Avenue and cars parked on the sidewalks (I have to get photos of these.). This has caused a lot of congestion during the weekdays and has so far been unaddressed by local authorities who seem to be helpless despite the fact that they only need to enforce general traffic rules to rid the streets of parked and standing vehicles. The solution is quite simple but very difficult to implement considering authorities will be up against LSGH. But then, the majority here are not LSGH constituents but the general public who are inconvenienced on a regular basis.
It took us some time to cover less than 400 meters from the EDSA-Ortigas intersection to the median opening to turn left into the DOTC driveway on the other side of Ortigas Ave.
At this point, the three lanes from the intersection narrows to 2 lanes, necessitating some jostling for position among the vehicles.
There are 3 median openings (one after the other) under the San Juan-bound overpass from EDSA-Ortigas. One slot is a U-turn slot for vehicles returning to EDSA-Ortigas, while the second is for vehicles turning back to LSGH or the Greenhills shopping district. Another opening is right after the second slot and is for vehicle turning left towards the DOTC main office.
Yes, that’s right – the DOTC main office is located in the area and LTO officers are regularly in the area due to meetings of their officials. It’s a wonder how these seem to be blind to the congestion on the ground. Perhaps the current Secretary should look into this as a test of his commitment to solving transport problems?
–
On high density development along Katipunan
I saw the tarp below posted along Katipunan Avenue as we drove to UP one Saturday morning. There are actually two signs: one in front of Ateneo Gate 1 and the one below just after Ateneo Gate 2. Both speak out to the Quezon City Council for issuing an exemption to SM Development Corporation (SMDC), part of the SM group of shopping mall fame, for its high-rise condominium development near the corner of Aurora Boulevard and Katipunan Avenue (C5). The development, known as Blue Residences, will not only have residential units but commercial establishments as well. By the name of the project, it is obviously a play on the nearby Ateneo De Manila University, which has blue for its standard color (e.g., Blue Eagles). [Note: For whatever its worth, there is also a Green Residences being developed by SMDC near De La Salle University, which adopts green as its banner color – e.g., Green Archers.]
The questions going in my mind after seeing the signs include the following:
1) Isn’t it too late for this, a campaign against a development that is already under construction and months after a decision has been made to approve the project?
2) What is Ateneo’s and its allies success rate for such? [The high density developments just across the university seem to be concrete evidence and reminders of such actions falling on deaf ears.]
3) Given this seemingly renewed (not new-found, I hope) interest in urban development in the area, wouldn’t it make more sense to also campaign against another development, this time by another real estate giant in Camella/Vista Land that already has set up shop across Ateneo?
4) And, as a follow-up perhaps, has that strip along Katipunan already been ceded to high density development and Ateneo and its allies have already conceded that a long time ago? [There’s SMDC’s Berkeley Residences, Prince David, Burgundy, etc.]
A colleague put forward an opinion that such developments are actually beneficial to Ateneo and its allies. In fact, many of the residents of the high rise condominiums in Katipunan have children studying at Ateneo and Miriam, their addresses being conveniently located minutes away from school. In other cases, units are rented by university students who similarly take advantage of the building’s proximity to their schools. I wouldn’t be surprised if enterprising people have purchased units not for them to reside in but to rent/lease out to students or other wishing to live near the universities or the nearby LRT 2 station (Katipunan Station).
From the traffic perspective, such developments definitely require full-blown transport or traffic impact studies due primarily to their trip generation characteristics. Such studies should clearly show how to address potential transport and traffic problems including who will be responsible (hint: the proponent should not pass on responsibility to the MMDA or local traffic enforcement) for traffic management. I reproduce below excerpts from a report submitted by a stakeholder community in opposition to a proposed high-rise, high density mixed-use (commercial, office, hotel and residential) development at the corner of EDSA and Ortigas Ave. where a huge excavation is still present and can be clearly seen when riding a Makati-bound MRT train:
“The EIS Report failed to consider the traffic impact once the project starts to operate hence necessary measures were likewise not discussed. Many projects will, at first glance, give an impression that a traffic impact study would not be required. The Skycity development, however, immediately gives the layman an impression that it would indeed have a significant and long-term impact on traffic in its direct vicinity. While its influence area can only be clarified via a thorough study of the characteristics of the development, the description and hype alone by the project proponents give us an idea that Skycity will impact people from as far as Rizal province.
In the process of attaining these objectives, this paper will identify the deficiencies and weaknesses pertaining to transportation and traffic and establish the need for detailed traffic studies, specifically the requirement of a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). The TIS will entail traffic impact analysis (TIA) to satisfy the questions or concerns regarding the traffic generated/attracted by the Skycity project and the consequent problems that will be caused by the project from its construction to eventual operation.
A traffic impact assessment (TIA) would be imperative, if truly the effects of the development would be quantified. The TIA would be able to answer the following questions, among others that would crop up in the minds of stakeholders:
- What are the transportation improvements needed to serve the traffic generated by the new development?
- How much will the improvement cost be and who will pay for them?
- Will the new project impact traffic on any existing residential streets and how will those impacts be mitigated?
- Will the new development aggravate any existing safety hazards or create new ones and, if so, how can those hazards be corrected?
- Can the proposed development be served by public transportation and does the design encourage ridesharing?
- Is the design of the development friendly towards bicyclists and pedestrians who need to access the development or who need to pass through or by the development?
- Is the on-site parking sufficient or is there an opportunity to share parking with other adjacent uses?
- How many driveways are needed, what design should each driveway have and is there a long enough throat for each driveway that is clear of parking spaces and other cross aisle traffic?
- If any driveway is proposed to be signalized, is the traffic signal really needed and can on-site circulation handle the traffic that will be queuing to wait for a green light? (
Conduct of TIA will deal with deficiencies in traffic analysis as well as provide a platform for a package of measures to deal with issues: what measures? who will pay? what level of development? Until then, it’s not possible to concretely evaluate the EIS.
Concerning traffic, the GEA letter raised the following points:
- That traffic congestion at EDSA-Ortigas intersection is already a nightmare even without the Skycity on that particular corner;
- That the traffic congestion problem can be attested by key agencies such as the Mandaluyong City Mayor’s Office, the MMDA Traffic Management Group, the Barangay 27 Wack Wack Greenhills East and the nearby DOTC, all of which are helpless in providing solution to the problem;
- That the already grave traffic congestion will even worsen due to obstructions and additional traffic during construction and operation of Skycity;
- That Ortigas Avenue is too narrow to accommodate the high volume of traffic; and
- That provision of several parking floors as presented in the EIS cannot be a solution.
“Manpower requirement will be high during the operations phase. It is estimated that about 12,000 persons will be required to for the operations and maintenance of the Skycity Project. These would include the general administration, manpower for the utilities and security, and employees for the hotel. Man power for the commercial, office establishments and other development use of the project will add a few thousand more jobs.”
The above quotation is from a report submitted as part of the response of stakeholders that scrutinized the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report submitted by the proponents of the project to the DENR-EMB. The latter was presented at a stakeholder conference held as a prerequisite to the approval of the project (i.e., prior to granting an ECC). There are other aspects of the project including drainage, water supply, structure, foundation, environmental, etc. that were discussed with proponents and stakeholders arguing about the pros and cons of the project. However, the most important element here is timing since the discussions occurred prior to the granting of an ECC to the project and after the stakeholders have presented their case before the DENR-EMB’s EIA Review Committee assigned to the project. I am not aware of how SM Blue went about securing the approval for their project including the ECC and if the process was followed according to the guidelines. I am also not aware of whether there was a stakeholder conference held and if Ateneo and its allies were invited and participated in that meeting. Was this organized by the EIA RevCom or was this hosted by the QC Council (because of the zoning issue)? Such matters are important since it would help in establishing whether certain people are at fault and whether certain processes and requirements were indeed followed with regards to the project being questioned.
–
Traffic going bananas
I’ve written about land use and parking along Katipunan Avenue, which is part of Metro Manila’s Circumferential Road 5. Katipunan extends southwards to Blue Ridge, St. Ignatius and White Plains (the latter subdivisions just across the street from Camp Aguinaldo) where there are also many establishments along either side of the road. Most of these establishments are restaurants that attract significant private vehicle traffic. Note that there are no public transport routes along Katipunan/C5 in the Blue Ridge, St. Ignatius and White Plains areas. As such, establishments are more likely to attract people with cars rather than those taking public utility vehicles.
Many of these establishments are on lots formerly occupied by residential buildings (i.e., houses) considering the predominant land use in the areas. These were eventually purchased and converted for commercial use, resulting in layouts that generally do not include adequate parking spaces. The consequence of shortcomings in parking have been the propensity for on-street parking such as shown in the following photo in the Blue Ridge area.
On-street parking for a popular restaurant/cafe along Katipunan/C5 at Blue Ridge.
Such case and many others like it along Katipunan (and other Metro Manila or Philippine cities roads) are the result of both poor planning and lax enforcement of traffic rules and regulations in this country. Being a primary arterial, Katipunan/C5 should be clear of such unnecessary sources of roadside friction that effectively decreases road capacities while also increasing the risk of crashes as vehicles maneuver, or in some cases wrestle, for parking spaces.
Katipunan parking predicament
Developments along Katipunan Avenue in Quezon City are good examples of fragmented land use and transport planning in Philippine cities. The developments, particularly the high rise condominiums have been the subject of much opposition from residents of subdivisions in the area as well as two major institutions of higher learning that have defined the stretch of Katipunan that has been developed in the 15 years. I mention 15 years because this is the period during which most of the high density developments along Katipunan have been constructed, apparently with the blessings of city hall. It is also in the last decade that schemes such as road widening and the U-turns were implemented.
On-street parking along Katipunan at lanes that used to be part of what was a west service road. In many cases, onstreet parking has been the result of a violation of a very basic provision of the National Building Code, which prescribes the minimum number of parking slots for establishments such as restaurants, shops, banks and offices. Despite being quite outdated and disconnected with more progressive parking generation principles, the NBC should have been a basis for the local government to assess whether minimum guidelines are satisfied, and perhaps impose penalties on those who are not able to comply such provisions. This is a fundamental case where individuals (owners of parked vehicles) impose external costs (e.g., congestion and crash risk) upon the general public.
Another look at onstreet parking just beneath the pedestrian overpass across from Ateneo’s Gate 2 – restaurants along Katipunan are major traffic generators and despite the presence of public transport (jeepneys and tricycles) a significant number of trips generated by these establishments use private vehicles including cars, vans and SUVs. Katipunan’s pedestrian facilities are inadequate as there are practically no sidewalks, thereby forcing people to walk along the road. This exposes many and particulrly students to risks like getting sideswiped by vehicles driven by reckless drivers.
Waiting vehicles effectively occupying 2 lanes of Katipunan – many employ drivers who can stay with the vehicles while the occupants eat, shop or transact at establishments. In most cases, standing vehicles are practically parked vehicles as they occupy road space. High-rise residential condominiums along Katipunan may have complied with minimum parking requirements stipulated in the NBC but their trip generation characteristics considering the commercial establishments located at the same buildings surely require many more parking spaces than what are available.
Congestion along Katipunan’s southbound side – may be caused by onstreet parking, standing (waiting), or vehicle maneuvers with respect to the limited parking slots fronting most establishments along the road. One tutorial center located near a U-turn slot, for example, generates significant vehicle traffic that it affects both U-turn and through traffic. Meanwhile, traffic enforcers seem either ineffective or helpless in their efforts to manage traffic, including preventing vehicles from taking 2 lanes of Katipunan.
Standing/waiting vehicles in front of a new development along Katipunan – the new building hosts several establishments including a major bank, a book shop, a popular gym, and several restaurants or cafes. Despite the potential for vehicle attraction, only a few parking spaces were provided, leaving all other vehicles and their drivers on their own to find parking spaces or just occupy road space in front of the building. The footbridge across Ateneo’s Gate 3 has been extended to the building but this obviously has marginal impact in reducing vehicle generation and parking demand.
Another photo showing the parking situation in front of the new building – while traffic is generally a manifestation of economic activity, one opinion is that many developers are irresponsible by designing buildings that have inadequate parking and resulting in the general public bearing the burden of traffic externalities. Add to this local governments that turn a blind eye on such discrepancies in design (who reviewed the design that obviously violated the building code?) only to be on the receiving end of complaints. In some cases, LGUs probably will be forced to shoulder costs of providing solutions that developers should have covered in the first place if they were responsible enough or made responsible for mitigating negative impacts of their projects.
In the end, it is inevitable that we need to address the root of the problem, which pertains to land use planning and the zoning policies LGUs are implementing. Consistency is one thing and being circumspect about established guidelines is another. Sustainable development, after all, does not pertain to continuous transformation from low to high density development but more about balancing elements that would preserve the character of neighborhoods and communities, particularly and most importantly to ensure that quality of life is not compromised.
Still on Katipunan
Katipunan is again the subject of attention thanks to the Sunday newspaper article by Prof. Randy David in his column at the Inquirer. The problem is not really new and I have been familiar with the congestion and its derivatives from the time I first studied in UP Diliman in 1988 and up to now when I continue to pass through the avenue between home and workplace.
I was able to dig up a 2003 study on Katipunan conducted by the National Center for Transportation Studies (NCTS) of UP for a consortium chaired by then DENR Secretary Bebet Gozun. The study was the group’s response to the MMDA’s effort to install their U-turn scheme along Katipunan, encouraged at the time by the scheme’s apparent success along Commonwealth and EDSA while not acknowledging the problems experienced along Quezon Avenue. The photos below were taken during the time when the study was being undertaken and are very much the same picture of Katipunan today during the peak periods.
Figure 1: Morning traffic congestion in 2003 along the northbound direction of Katipunan Avenue in front of the Ateneo De Manila University (notice that there was no U-turn slot near Gate 2 at the time)
Figure 2: Ateneo-bound vehicles blocking through traffic along the service road and the Aurora flyover
The study involved contributions from most if not all stakeholders including Ateneo and Miriam, the private sector and civil society groups, the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines (TSSP), and some government agencies particularly the DENR, who convened the group to formulate an alternative to the MMDA’s initiative that was personally being pushed by its then Chair Bayani Fernando. I reproduce below, word for word, the conclusions and recommendations from that 2003 study:
{Conclusion}
“After a thorough evaluation of the traffic problems along Katipunan as well as the solicited and unsolicited solutions from stakeholders, it becomes clear that the answer to the Katipunan traffic question is not the introduction of the U-turn scheme into the system. Indeed, while the U-turn scheme has met with relative success along major thoroughfares including Marcos Highway and Commonwealth Avenue, it has also contributed if not created congestion along Quezon Avenue. The notion that “success in EDSA and Commonwealth means there is no reason why the scheme won’t work in Katipunan” would not hold water in the light of the requirements for effective implementation of U-turns. Simply said, the traffic volume along Katipunan during the peak periods alone will assure that the U-turn scheme will cause more congestion rather than mitigate it.
{Recommendations}
- Optimization of traffic signals – coordination of signals need to be implemented particularly for the intersection pairs identified in this report. The Traffic Engineering Center (TEC) must be consulted with respect to the operation of the traffic signals along Katipunan.
- Restriction of roadside parking – parking restrictions must be strictly enforced and establishments along Katipunan should adhere to the required parking slots corresponding to the traffic they generate.
- Removal of parts of the islands to improve flow – geometric improvements to ease flow (i.e., increase road capacity) may be explored. Note that this report is not entirely opposed to removal of parts of the islands. However, their outright removal with the trees for the sole purpose of the U-turn scheme is not acceptable to most stakeholders. This must be carefully evaluated.
- Construction of an internal road between Ateneo and Miriam – the internal road will allow common vehicles to circulate within the campuses thereby eliminating traffic that would otherwise make several entries and exits to the campuses via Katipunan.
- Open additional gate at Ateneo – the possibility of opening another gate at Ateneo between the existing Gates 2 and 3 must be explored.
- Encourage carpooling or car-sharing – it is strongly recommended that Ateneo and Miriam consider carpooling or car-sharing schemes. It has been found that traffic along Katipunan is primarily composed of private vehicles will low occupancies bound for the two schools. While the surveys showed high return rates from grade school and high school students, very low returns came from college students. It is these people who account for a majority of the vehicles that clog Katipunan and they should take part in the formulation and implementation of such schemes that would lead to a significant improvement to traffic along Katipunan.
- Strict implementation of the zoning laws – this last recommendation points to the inconsistency in the granting of building permits to developers of high-rise condominiums along Katipunan. This is a constant issue and a controversial one since residents in the area and the two major schools (Ateneo and Miriam) have always opposed the “spot zoning” practice along Katipunan.” (NCTS, Study on the Traffic Management of Katipunan Avenue, 2003)
The study recommended alternative solutions in lieu of the U-turn scheme for Katipunan Avenue that was at the time being pushed by the MMDA as the solution for traffic congestion in the area. The recommended measures considered different aspects: traffic management per se, geometric improvements or road construction, travel demand management, land use, and other measures. However, it seems that 8 years after there has been practically no change in conditions along Katipunan Avenue.
The support and commitments of the different stakeholders (academic institutions, residents, business establishments, professional organizations, government agencies, and concerned citizens) are essential for the successful implementation of the recommendations contained herein. It is only through a strong partnership that sustainable and long-term solutions to the traffic problems in Katipunan Avenue can be achieved.
However, it is realized that there should be some sacrifices involved including a dramatic or drastic change in the travel behavior of those mainly responsible for the congestion. The vehicle trip generation of both Ateneo and Miriam are the roots of the problem and their continuing resistance to proposed solutions while not offering any viable countermeasures or proposals will only serve to perpetuate congestion in the area even as the external costs associated with the traffic they generate spread to a larger area. Recent studies at the UP Diliman, which is an open campus, has shown that private vehicle through traffic (i.e., traffic that has nothing to do with UP) has also grown and most of these are Ateneo and Miriam-bound trips.
It seems awkward and even confusing to see that 8 years after what was perhaps the last (maybe even the first?) serious look into Katipunan traffic, conditions have only worsened. This is due to additional developments in the area including high density residential projects that also tend to generate a lot of traffic, and commercial establishments that do not provide sufficient parking spaces. But although these contribute to congestion, their vehicle generation pale in comparison to that of the schools in the area. This is perhaps a case where one is able to see the flaws of others and yet refuses to look in the mirror to see for oneself something that needs critical attention.
School traffic generation – Part 1
One thing I will miss about summers is the relatively light traffic along Katipunan Avenue, which is where I pass through almost everyday between my home and workplace. There is still some congestion during the mid-day and the afternoons but these are typically due to truck traffic as Circumferential Road 5 (C5) is a truck route. During the rest of the year, however, with the exception of most weekends and holidays, severe congestion is experienced along Katipunan during the peak periods, particularly in the mornings between 6:30 AM and 7:30 AM. This is due primarily to the traffic generated by schools along Katipunan Avenue, most notably the Ateneo De Manila University and Miriam College. The following photos show typical traffic conditions along C5 during the peak periods.
Slow-moving vehicles along the northbound side of Katipunan Avenue
Congestion along the northbound direction of Katipunan atop the Aurora Blvd. overpass
Congestion along the Katipunan southbound service road leading to the U-turn slot underneath the Aurora Blvd. overpass
Traffic along the southbound service road leads to a U-turn slot under the overpass where many vehicles turn, heading in the general direction of Ateneo. Most turn here in order to enter the university via its Gate 1, which is the main access to the Grade School. On most times, congestion is caused by these vehicles turning right at Gate 1 as they effectively occupy the two lanes of the northbound service road and block all other traffic. This is shown in the following photo where it is clear that vehicles bound for Ateneo and turning at Gate 1 are the main cause of congestion. Beyond Gate 1, the traffic lanes are practically free of congestion.
Vehicles turning right to Ateneo’s Gate 1 blocking traffic along the Katipunan northbound service road
The afternoon peak is exacerbated by traffic generated by these schools that lead to longer periods of congestion as the number of private vehicle traffic dramatically increases when there are classes between June and April. Meanwhile, there is a noticeable decrease in traffic during the weekends and holidays. Such phenomenon is mostly attributable to the trip generation characteristics of schools, and especially those that tend towards the generation of much private vehicles. Ateneo and Miriam along Katipunan are just two examples. The traffic they generate and the consequential congestion is replicated in other places as well, giving headaches to motorists and commuters passing along major roads affected by these schools. Ortigas Avenue, for example, is usually congested during the weekdays because of traffic generated by LaSalle Greenhills, and ADB Avenue at the Ortigas Center is usually congested due to traffic attributed to Poveda.
Caught (up) in traffic 
