Home » Posts tagged 'transportation planning'
Tag Archives: transportation planning
Some thoughts on bus transportation for Metro Manila and beyond
There are two recent news items about buses in Metro Manila and adjacent areas:
- A proposed study on bus lanes for Quezon Avenue, Ortigas Avenue and C5
- Bus transport supplement for LRT Line 2
Did you know that there was a Pre-Feasibility for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) along several thoroughfares in Metro Manila back in 2007? I am sharing this paper presented at the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines (TSSP) 2014 conference that synthesizes the references including the 2007 Pre-Feasibility Study on Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) for Metro Manila (supported by the USAID) and the 2011 Mega Manila Public Transportation Planning Support System (MMPTPSS) Study funded by the then DOTC. I hope these studies, which are still very relevant though no longer recent, can be utilized. There is no need to reinvent the proverbial wheel.
Sigua, R.G. (2014) “Identification of BRT Corridors in Metro Manila,” Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines, Iloilo City.
LRT Line 2 is an example of government not having the foresight of acquiring new rolling stock (i.e., trains) despite passenger demand steadily increasing over the years. Yet here we are and the old train sets are now deteriorating with some already retired. And then there is the proposal and study by the LTFRB and LRTA about buses supplementing the Line 2 operations. A quick check and there is already a bus service supplementing Line 1 – the Antipolo-Cubao route that is also serviced by jeepneys. This existing route can be tweaked or expanded so there are several lines serving not just Antipolo but also other Rizal towns and the City of Marikina. From Cubao there are already jeepney routes parallel to Line 2. Perhaps instead of just jeepneys, these can be rationalized to buses, which have higher capacities than PUJs? I don’t think you need to have a deep dive on this if you are familiar with public transportation along the Line 2 corridor.
–
Trip purpose, Antipolo City
In the same workshop with Antipolo LGU staff, the following graph was presented showing the purposes of trips made by residents of the city. The data was gathered with the assistance of barangays, which deployed personnel to do a version of the household information surveys (HIS) usually conducted to collect data on transportation and trip making among residents.
It is important to note that most if not all trips eventually end up at home (i.e., coming home from the workplace, school, market, etc.). Thus we can interpret the graph in a way where we can derive the trip purpose other than “to home”. For example, perhaps the real % of work trips is not 21% but 41.0% of trips made other than “going home.” School trips come in second with 29.9% of trips. Third would be shopping trips at 18.8%. These three combine for 89.7% of all trips made by Antipolo City residents. Work and school trips are most likely the most regular or frequent trips. These are the purposes associated with daily commutes whether by public or private transportation. In the next post, I will share data on mode share and try to relate the latter to the trip purpose.
–
AI for Planners Explained: Urban Digital Twins
We begin February 2026 with an article share. The following article (click the link) is about one artificial intelligence (AI) application relevant to the transportation field:
Source: AI for Planners Explained: Urban Digital Twins
To quote from the article:
“UDTs are already being used for development review, infrastructure planning, climate resilience, and operations. They are not speculative technologies. They are becoming part of how cities represent themselves and make decisions.
If planners treat UDTs as purely technical platforms, they risk losing influence over how problems are framed and solutions evaluated. If planners engage early, they can ensure that these systems reflect planning values like equity, transparency, participation, and long-term thinking.
AI will continue to evolve and UDTs offer a preview of how that evolution may shape planning practice. This does not mean by replacing planners, but by changing how planning knowledge is created, tested, and shared.
The question is not whether cities will build UDTs. Many already are. The real question is whether planners will help decide what those twins are for, and how they improve the quality of life.”
-[Note: UDT is urban digital twin]
Good Transit is Fun
Here’s a nice read on how transit or public transportation should be fun. People won’t really use public transportation unless they find utility or value in using it.
Source: Good Transit is Fun
I won’t be quoting from the article this time. I’ll let you read it yourself and digest the content.
Happy Sunday!
Good Transit Is Simple: Lessons in Good Route Design
Here is a quick share of an article on good route design:
Source: Good Transit Is Simple: Lessons in Good Route Design
I won’t be posting a quote from the article as there is really no summary to it. The article identifies the characteristics of a good transit route as well as the “don’t’s” or “no – no’s”.
Article share: On AI as a tool for urban planning
Here is a quick share of an article on AI and its application to urban planning. I haven’t written about artificial intelligence here except maybe mentioning it along the lines of intelligent transport systems (ITS). There were what were termed as Expert Systems but AI now (including its potentials) is much more than the expert systems developed in the past.
Sanchez, T. (June 20, 2025) “In Urban Planning, AI Prompting Could be the New Design Thinking,” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/135418-urban-planning-ai-prompting-could-be-new-design-thinking [Last accessed: 7/17/2025]
To quote from the article:
“Working across disciplines is essential. Collaborating with architects, landscape architects, engineers, artists, and technologists brings in diverse perspectives that can help spark new ideas. AI integrates knowledge and techniques from each of these fields. Contributing to a culture where planners feel free to experiment, where trying something new is encouraged rather than being frowned upon, is key to real innovation. Whether engaging with colleagues or prompting an AI model, creativity thrives in conversation and collaboration…
Cities should be shaped by creative thinking, and today’s challenges demand more of it than ever. Planners are in a unique position to combine deep local knowledge with new technologies, such as AI, to imagine, design, plan, and implement. AI should be seen not as a shortcut, but it has incredible potential as a partner or assistant with encyclopedic knowledge that helps planners stretch their creativity even further. As Wright advises, planners should challenge themselves with constraints to spark creativity: For instance, “What would you do if you had to write an entire zoning ordinance with 10 rules or less to make a sustainable built environment?” Such exercises encourage us to set clearer goals and find better solutions.
By combining traditional tools with emerging technologies, planners can design places that are not only functional but also vibrant, equitable, and resilient.”
What do you think about AI and its applications to urban planning including transportation and traffic?
–
Solutions to transport problems: the combination of congestion pricing and transit infrastructure development
Congestion pricing and transit infrastructure development (e.g., mass transit infrastructure) are often mentioned separately or independently. It is as if they are mutually exclusive alternatives or solutions to our transportation problems. They are not and should be considered together for greater impacts and also to complement each other. While the article below focuses on the experience in the United States, the experience is Singapore as applied to cities should provide a model that can be adopted if not outrightly replicated. Singapore’s version of congestion pricing in the form of its Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) scheme has been very effective in regulating congestion levels while helping fund public transportation in the city-state.
Descant, S. (May 8, 2025) “Congestion Pricing and Transit Are a Necessary Alliance,” Government Technology, https://www.govtech.com/transportation/congestion-pricing-and-transit-are-a-necessary-alliance %5BLast accessed: 11/05/2025]
Quoting from the article:
“In order to move a congestion pricing proposal forward, “you must have serious congestion, and you must have good transit,” said Sam Schwartz, a former New York City traffic commissioner, said during a March 21 panel on the New York City congestion pricing program. The event was organized by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Mobility Initiative. Schwartz is also the CEO of Sam Schwartz Pedestrian Traffic Management Services, a consulting firm.
A recent report by the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University in California concluded roadway tolling — a form of congestion pricing — can serve the dual purpose of reducing traffic congestion and supporting transit options, if the programs are structured properly.”
–
Planning for True Transportation Affordability: Beyond Common Misconceptions
How much do we spend on transportation as part of our budgets? Is it 5% of your monthly budget? Is it 10%? Or is it eating up a substantial part of what you’re earning?
Source: Planning for True Transportation Affordability: Beyond Common Misconceptions
To quote from the article:
“This research indicates that many common policies favor expensive transportation and housing over lower-cost alternatives, which drives the cost of living beyond what is affordable, leaving too little money to purchase other necessities. The result is immiseration: growing stress, unhappiness, and discontent.
The solution is simple: planning should favor affordable over expensive modes and compact development over sprawl. This is not to suggest that automobile travel is bad and should be eliminated. Many people are justifiably proud of being able to afford a nice car, and automobiles are the most efficient option for some trips. However, automobile travel requires far more resources and is far more expensive than other modes, typically by an order of magnitude, so true affordability requires an efficient, multimodal transportation system that allows travelers to choose the options that truly reflect their needs and preferences.
Affordability requires a new economic paradigm; rather than trying to increase incomes or subsidies we need to increase affordability and efficiency so households can satisfy their basic needs consuming fewer resources and spending less money. Our planning should be guided by a new goal: how can we help families be poor but happy.”
I share this article because it provides a more complete narrative and assessment than those just focusing on transport. Home choice locations and affordable housing are part of the equation. Looking at transport alone can be myopic and leads us to think it is the only problem to solve.
–
On transportation and global health – article share
I was supposed to write about the keynote lecture delivered during the 30th Annual Conference of the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines (TSSP). I am sharing instead an article written by Dr. Renzo Guinto who is an Associate Professor at the SingHealth Duke-NUS Global Health Institute based at the National University of Singapore.
Here is the link to his article on the Philippine Daily Inquirer: Health at the center of transport and mobility
I will not quote from the article and leave it to my readers to read and appreciate the articles content.
–
Article share: Planners’ Complicity in Excessive Traffic Deaths
Here is a recent article on safety and the involvement on traffic engineers from Todd Litman:
Source: Planners’ Complicity in Excessive Traffic Deaths
Let me note here about the interchangeability of the terms ‘traffic engineer’, ‘transportation engineer’ and ‘planner’. This is important to contextualize who is actually complicit or involved or responsible particularly in the Philippine setting. Too often and too quickly, traffic engineers or even civil engineers (in general) are blamed for traffic deaths or flaws in road designs. Disregarded is the fact that, as the article mentions, of the two major elements of travel – distance and speed – distance is often determined by the plans and designs of non-engineers. These are planners, or to be accurate land use planners, many of whom are architects by profession. We also want to differentiate between traffic engineers and highway engineers, who in the Philippine setting are actually quite different. One common thing about many of them is that they are slow to adopt progressive ideas or concepts of road planning and design such as complete streets and road diets. The outcome of this stubbornness is the specter of road crashes that lead to fatalities and serious injuries. But then they are not solely to blame or who should take responsibility for the atrocious road safety situation. The ‘distance’ component of travel is very much a product of land use planning and land development as practiced in our country. For many if not most developments, architects and planners are the ones who call the shots for the roads and transportation in the proposals. Traffic engineers are involved later and if not progressive complicates the situation regarding safety. Thankfully, some local government units are becoming progressive and are more mindful of development proposals including implications to road safety. Hopefully, many things will change among those involved so we can improve travel safety.
–
