Home » Posts tagged 'traffic impacts'
Tag Archives: traffic impacts
The National Building Code (NBC) of the Philippines stipulates the minimum number of parking spaces or slots per type of establishment and intensity of development (i.e., according to area or other parameters). These established provisions are generally called parking minimums. The NBC’s provisions are already archaic by current standards and need to be revised but not in the way it was apparently developed. The NBC needs supporting evidence from studies (are there any dependable ones around?) on parking requirements including those for bicycles and motorcycles. These should clearly not include or impede the requirements of pedestrians. And local government units must be required to enforce these NBC provisions.
Here is an article that discusses the proposal for new limits on parking, particularly in large developments in Boston, Ma. in the US:
The article points to this one:
City of Boston (September 20, 2021) Maximum Parking Ratios, https://www.boston.gov/departments/transportation/maximum-parking-ratios [Last accessed: 10/19/2021]
I must admit that I still have to do a lot of reading on this. There are some who are calling for the abolition of parking minimums but you just can’t do this so abruptly without understanding the context and current set-up. We are not Boston or San Francisco or Hong Kong or Singapore in terms of the transport infrastructure and services and the progressiveness of policies including those governing or covering housing and other factors that come into play with transportation. Sprawl and the resulting pressures (requirements for efficient travel) on the transportation system is not transport’s fault or responsibility alone like what some articles or infographics make it appear to be. It is very much about land use and land development, and the policies and the political economy behind these developments.
I’ve been involved in a number of traffic or transport impact assessment (TIA) projects in the past. In these assessments, not much is usually written about the impacts to pedestrians though we make sure that there is a section discussing their needs (e.g., sidewalks, crossings, footbridges). Unfortunately, even with specific recommendations, there is no assurance that the proponent will revise their designs. The typical TIA in the Philippines is undertaken after there have been architectural plans already prepared if not completed. By completed here, I mean they are practically final from the perspective of the client or proponent. The exception it seems is a big mall chain that seems to constantly revise their plans and for which our recommendations are almost always considered and incorporated in design.
I am sharing this recent article on the development of a new traffic model to predict the impacts of new developments on walkers.
Wilson, K. (April 26, 2021) “New Traffic Model Predicts How New Developments Will Affect Walkers,” StreetsBlog USA, https://usa.streetsblog.org/2021/04/26/new-traffic-model-predicts-how-changes-affect-walkers/ [Last accessed: 5/12/2021]
From the perspective of doing TIAs, I think that there should be a conscious effort of including the needs of pedestrians (walkers) and cyclists in impact assessments. Too often, (and I too am guilty here), there is but a minor mention of their needs and recommendations can be disregarded by both proponents (e.g., little or no change in designs to accommodate pedestrian requirements) and the local government (i.e., no push to make sure pedestrian needs are addressed).
On the tech side, there is a local development that can be used for counting pedestrians and cyclists. The TITAN project funded by the DOST-PCIEERD developed a tool that can count pedestrians and cyclists in aid of studies involving them. Such tools can be useful for data collection regardless of whether there is a new project or a TIA being undertaken.
We start April with a nice article from Cities of the Future. The article explains how traffic patterns will be changing due to Covid-19. They have already changed for most of us who have to deal with quarantines and lockdowns. And we should not expect things to go back to normal. “Normal” here, of course, is “Business As Usual” or was that. It is quite clear that we cannot and should not go back to BAU and it is probably going to be good for most of us. There will definitely be a lot of adjustments and sacrifices especially for commuters who have been dependent on cars for travel. The transport industry, too, will have to deal with the new supply and demand dynamics. And government should be up to the task of engaging and rethinking how policies and regulations should evolve to address issues coming out of the “new normal” in transportation.
Valerio, P. (2020) Traffic patterns are going to drastically be very different, says Micromobility expert , Cities of the Future, https://citiesofthefuture.eu/traffic-patterns-are-going-to-drastically-be-very-different/ [Last accessed: 4/3/2020]
There’s this nice article about a tool for transport/traffic impact assessment (TIA):
Peters, A. (2018) This SimCity-like tool lets urban planners see the potential impact of their ideas, http://www.fastcompany.com, https://www.fastcompany.com/40548501/this-sim-city-like-tool-lets-urban-planners-the-potential-impact-of-their-ideas [Last accessed: 4/12/2018]
I played SimCity before with the early versions of the game. My friends and I thought it had the potential as a tool for transport planning given the visuals and the features for building cities out of scratch. We even tried out some concepts like transit oriented development (TOD) to see how these can be “simulated” in the game. With other tools like Google Earth and Street View, it is possible to create new tools or apps for rapid determination of impact areas. The immediate or primary impact areas of developments are spelled out in the guidelines published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) so these can be incorporated in a tool or app. This can be a good project for development and application locally. Perhaps this can be developed for use by local governments and practitioners preparing TIAs.
There are two malls currently under construction along Ortigas Avenue Extension – SM East Ortigas and Waltermart Taytay. Nearing completion is the SM East Ortigas, which looks like a very big mall. It is the former Ever mall beside Riverside Subdivision and close to one of DMCI Homes’ first developments. It will open on December 2 and there are already a lot of promotional tarps announcing this along major roads including C-5, Felix Avenue and, of course, Ortigas Avenue.
Waltermart is further up towards Tikling Junction. These two are actually from the same mother company SM, which has somewhat diversified its retail business so it now includes the SM malls, Savemore, Waltermart and the newly minted S-Mall. These two are sure to generate a lot of traffic and cause more congestion with the SM East Ortigas already in an area where Ortigas Ave. Extension is regularly congested. I am not aware of any studies conducted with respect to this mall but I assume there is a transport impact study somewhere. Personally, I would ask SM to look into the case of SM Novaliches for something sort of a solution to the traffic problem right in front of the mall. Quirino Highway is widest along the section where SM Novaliches is, with the mall providing a very generous setback to accommodate multiple lanes for traffic to flow smoothly at least in front of the mall. That seems possible with SM East Ortigas especially since there is practically only 2 lanes for the westbound direction of Ortigas Ave. Ext. at this area.
Waltermart is a different thing because it is in an area where there is generally no congestion along Ortigas Ave. Ext. I also assume there is a traffic study somewhere providing traffic management schemes or alleviation measures in case congestion occurs due to the mall and its high density residential development component (it is part of a complex called “The Hive”).
I am speculative about the expansive lot vacated by Mitsubishi Motors beside the Panasonic complex. I wonder if any of the big developers are acquiring it and perhaps developing it into a major mixed use project. There is also the lot where Consolidated Tobacco used to be just across Countryside Subdivision and close to SM East Ortigas. Such future developments require careful study for its transportation impacts and the Municipality of Cainta should take a proactive stance for major developments that will generate a lot of traffic. Ortigas Ave. Ext., even after some widening, remains as a road with high potential and regularity for congestion. Only a mass transit system can probably decongest it but that will take some time to realize.