Traffic Problem In Metro Manila (Merged Thread)

[camiar]

Kung 2 days per week kaya ang color coding ng isang sasakyan? Just to reduce vehicle volume plying the roads in any given day. Masyado na talaga marami kotse sa Metro Manila eh.

Naku wag naman.

 

I don't want to have to buy a third car....

[camiar]

Let's adopt Singapore's Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system.

 

People has to bid for the privilege to own a car. The money the government gets from the COE bidding is used to build MRT System, new roads, tunnels and flyovers, river ferry system, etc...

 

If we limit COEs to only 100.000 new cars per year, and the bids go up to PhP 500,000 per COE, the government can raise PhP 50,000,000,000.00 (PhP 50 Billion) per year for transport and road system improvements, over and above the annual budget outlay given to DPWH and DOTC projects.

 

All private cars and jeeps 15 years and older should be decommissioned.

[filibustero]

Let's adopt Singapore's Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system.

 

People has to bid for the privilege to own a car. The money the government gets from the COE bidding is used to build MRT System, new roads, tunnels and flyovers, river ferry system, etc...

 

If we limit COEs to only 100.000 new cars per year, and the bids go up to PhP 500,000 per COE, the government can raise PhP 50,000,000,000.00 (PhP 50 Billion) per year for transport and road system improvements, over and above the annual budget outlay given to DPWH and DOTC projects.

 

All private cars and jeeps 15 years and older should be decommissioned.

 

Naku ako naman ang mapapabili ng bagong kotse dito. More than 15 years na kotse ko eh. Haha.

 

This proposal may be considered anti-"poor", since it favors people who can afford to buy new cars. Singapore (and Japan) can have this policy because they have a larger middle-class base, not so with the Philippines. Maraming mga hampas-lupa na tulad ko na hanggang bulok na 2nd hand lang ang afford.

[filibustero]

The "No garage, no car" policy should be pushed by Congress because it is one of the measures that will ease up traffic. There are a lot of cars parked on secondary roads which can be used as alternate routes and motorists don't really want to pass on these roads because of parked cars which make the roads difficult to pass in.

 

This is true. Or at the very least, identify these main secondary roads and ban parking vehicles there. Parang yung Mabuhay Lanes, identified yung route and bawal dapat mag-park sa kalsada. Mark the roads with a solid red line sa gitna para alam ng tao na no-parking road yun.

[camiar]

The "No garage, no car" policy should be pushed by Congress because it is one of the measures that will ease up traffic. There are a lot of cars parked on secondary roads which can be used as alternate routes and motorists don't really want to pass on these roads because of parked cars which make the roads difficult to pass in.

 

Yeah. Similar to the policies adopted in Tokyo and other major Japanese cities. You can't buy a new car unless you show to the authorities where you intend to park it.

 

Also, all future high rise buildings to be built should have in their building plans a mandatory number of parking slots not just for their own tenants, but for the visitors as well.

[camiar]

 

Naku ako naman ang mapapabili ng bagong kotse dito. More than 15 years na kotse ko eh. Haha.

 

This proposal may be considered anti-"poor", since it favors people who can afford to buy new cars. Singapore (and Japan) can have this policy because they have a larger middle-class base, not so with the Philippines. Maraming mga hampas-lupa na tulad ko na hanggang bulok na 2nd hand lang ang afford.

Hindi naman siya "anti-poor".

 

The poor cannot afford to buy a car anyway.

 

What the system does is to tax the private vehicle buyers, and use the funds to build an efficient public transport system.

 

The effect:

1. de-clogging of roads of delapidated and under-utilized vehicles
2. development of efficient mass transport system

 

This is actually pro-poor.

 

When I was living in Singapore, I didn't have to buy a car because the Bus, Taxi, and MRT systems are very affordable and efficient.

Edited August 8, 2016 by camiar

[filibustero]

Hindi naman siya "anti-poor".

 

The poor cannot afford to buy a car anyway.

 

What the system does is to tax the private vehicle buyers, and use the funds to build an efficient public transport system.

 

The effect:

1. de-clogging of roads of delapidated and under-utilized vehicles
2. development of efficient mass transport system

 

This is actually pro-poor.

 

When I was living in Singapore, I didn't have to buy a car because the Bus, Taxi, and MRT systems are very affordable and efficient.

 

"poor" in the sense that walang pambili ng bagong kotse. Environmentalists are the ones that proposed this here - the older the car, the more pollutive it is. Pero yun nga, paano naman yun mga walang pambili ng bagong kotse? Commute na lang kasi wala naman pera pambili ng bago. Sa Pilipinas pa naman, bansagan lang na anti-poor ang policy, shot down na kagad.

 

As for "affordable" MRT system, if Singapore's MRT system is already "affordable", then we can consider Manila's MRT as practically free. Our MRT and LRT is by far the cheapest train I've taken. Much cheaper than Singapore, Korea, the US, and Europe. And yet Filipinos complain if fares are raised even just by 1 peso. The truth is Filipinos are not paying the actual cost of operations for the trains. And the cost of running these trains are just the same as other countries (it's the same train!) - albeit with higher cost of electricity in the Philippines, which is offset anyway by the lower cost of salary of employees. But those other countries can charge the actual cost of the trains simply because their citizens can afford it - whereas ours cannot. That's why raising the cost of the trains never flies because it is "anti-poor".

[camiar]

The only way that the LTO can check if the cars really have a garage is if they hire inspectors to inspect each and every garage of car owners and the cars that are parked there together with the capacity.

Yes, that's what I've read is what they do is Tokyo. They have inspectors, and the approved carport/garage locations and the corresponding car allotted to them are recorded in a computer database to prevent spurious claim that they have a space where in fact they don't.

[camiar]

 

"poor" in the sense that walang pambili ng bagong kotse. Environmentalists are the ones that proposed this here - the older the car, the more pollutive it is. Pero yun nga, paano naman yun mga walang pambili ng bagong kotse? Commute na lang kasi wala naman pera pambili ng bago. Sa Pilipinas pa naman, bansagan lang na anti-poor ang policy, shot down na kagad.

 

 

 

Kaya nga hindi sya "anti-poor". It is "pro-poor " because you're providing them with an affordable and efficient transport system so they don't have to buy their own private vehicle, and you're getting the funds, not from them but from the "rich" who can afford to buy these private vehicles.

 

As for "affordable" MRT system, if Singapore's MRT system is already "affordable", then we can consider Manila's MRT as practically free. Our MRT and LRT is by far the cheapest train I've taken. Much cheaper than Singapore, Korea, the US, and Europe. And yet Filipinos complain if fares are raised even just by 1 peso. The truth is Filipinos are not paying the actual cost of operations for the trains. And the cost of running these trains are just the same as other countries (it's the same train!) - albeit with higher cost of electricity in the Philippines, which is offset anyway by the lower cost of salary of employees. But those other countries can charge the actual cost of the trains simply because their citizens can afford it - whereas ours cannot. That's why raising the cost of the trains never flies because it is "anti-poor".

People actually pay more per kilometer riding dilapidated and cramped jeepneys, tricycles, and even UV Express.

How much do you pay to ride a tricycle? It is more than what you pay the MRT for equivalent distance.

How much time and money would it cost you to ride a jeepney from Cubao to Espana? The value of time alone lost in congested traffic is more than what you pay if you use the MRT.

How much is the UV Express from Guadalupe to Balintawak? It's probably double what you pay the MRT.

Ordinary people can afford to pay more for MRT, or Taxi, or Double-decker Bus.

It is the politicians who make people think otherwise.

Edited August 8, 2016 by camiar

[circle]

siguro bago tayo mag buo ng bagong policies, implement muna natin ung mga existing traffic rules natin. ang dami sa atin ang di pa din marunong sumunod sa simpleng batas trapiko. sa araw araw ko na pagdadala ng kotse, eto palagi ang nakikita ko na di pinapansin ng mga pulis at laging sinusuway ng mga tao.

 

1. overspeeding

2. illegal counterflow

3. not following traffic lights

4. not using designated areas for loading/unloading

5. using public roads as terminals

6. at madami pa...

 

kagaya nga ginagawa natin ngayon sa "war on drugs", implementation lang yan. maayos naman mga batas natin, madami lang ndi sumusunod. lahat kasi gusto nila mauna sila. lahat iniisip din na sila ang may karapatan o may right of way. walang nagbibigayan. may tatawid na tao o may liliko, di pagbibigyan kahit na trapik naman. ayaw lang kasi magpasingit.

 

di lang yun, dapat din magbago ugali ng tao. kasi karamihan ng di sumusunod, iniisip nila... wala naman nanghuhuli eh. syempre di rin sila titigil. kaya dapat simulan na ang paghuli sa mga di sumusunod. pagtagal makaka ugalian na ng tao na sumunod sa batas.

[azraelmd]

Kung 2 days per week kaya ang color coding ng isang sasakyan? Just to reduce vehicle volume plying the roads in any given day. Masyado na talaga marami kotse sa Metro Manila eh.

E kung odd even scheme nlang? Parang mas ok...sure pang mababawasan ang volume ng sasakyan....

[goldrush]

madami talaga sasakyan ngaykn dumoble kasi population dito sa manila..

[Tres Picos]

improve public transportation and make cities walkable (like Ortigas Greenways, an on-going project)

 

until then I can leave my car at home

 

to solve traffic, government needs to see the problem through the eyes of the commuters

 

1. improve public transpo

2. build more trains, priority link between MOA-LRT- Makati-MRT-BGC-Ortigas

3. enforce discipline among drivers, commuters and pedestrians

4. ban the jeepney boundary system and bus commission system

5. phase out old vehicles except those registered as vintage

6. make cities more walkable, build bus/jeepney stops that protect people from sun a rain

7. install more CCTVs to catch traffic violators and also for crime prevention

8. relocate bus terminals on EDSA (the ITS can do this but at least two more years)

9. transfer licensing of tricycle to a non-political central agency (notice lots of trikes during election season?)

10. no parking on the street, "no garage, no registration"

11. build an east-west skyway probably from Rizal via ORtigas or Shaw to link up with Skyway and connect Makati-BGC and Ortigas CBDs

12. clear the sidewalks of illegal vendors and other obstructions (only saw Bayani did this, others didn't have balls)

 

lots of ideas I have here

 

the MRT capacity will be fixed in about a year when trains ordered under PNoy will be delivered, the Skyway will be finished in two years

the ITS will be finished in two years (except the North ITS).

 

another year or two and traffic on EDSA will be lighter,

another 5 years for other infra to be finished if PDutz/Villar/Tugade work hard

[Shadow Minister]

Thanks for this. This is also what I've been advocating - BRT here in metro manila. This will serve as a very good alternative to MRT which, for most of us, is a very critical public transportation mode dito. Marami nagsa-suggest na magdagdag ng coach, ayusin ang mga tren, which shows marami ang gustong gumamit nito kundi lang palaging sira, because kung wala ito, people will be forced to take the transpo along edsa which are the hellish buses.

 

BRT, because it is a lot simpler than MRT, will be a lot easier to create around MM. Ang kelangan mo lang ay buses, dedicated lanes, kahit makeshift stations for now, and off you go! Di mo kelangan maghukay, maglatag ng riles, maglatag ng katakot-takot na electric lines, pati bulky trains at ang nakakabaliw na maintenance nito. All these logistics will not be needed. Mas marami kang magagawang BRT sa Manila. Sa ngayon iilan lang ang MRT lines natin (3 lang) along major arteries. With BRT we can cover more major arteries dito sa manila, and therefore more network of BRT routes. Mas maikakalat mo ngayon itong mga sumasakay ng MRT among these BRT routes rather than siksikan silang lahat sa MRT lang.

 

Some of you might say, the dedicated lines will be at the expense of private motorist, or public buses, etc. That's the point! You intentionally make it tougher for people to use private vehicles, and easier for them to use public transpo c/o BRT. What do you expect people to do? They will realize that BRT is more beneficial at ito ang kukunin nila! Their behavior has been altered. Kung dati mas gusto nila bili agad kotse, ngayon mas pipiliin nila mag-commute. Yun ang gusto natin, mabawasan ang sasakyan sa kalsada. In the end, para tumakbo ang ekonomiya natin, what we need to move from one place to another are not more cars, but more people. Yun ang principle behind BRT at maging carpooling.

 

But if we want a long-term systemic fix, we must FEDERALIZE the country.

 

Mass Transpo ang solution. And also ung No Garage, No Car Policy sana maipasa.

 

kahit anong scheme pa yan, kahit hi hitler pa gawin mong traffic czar, ang nag iisang solusyon lang is decentralization. ikalat ang business district sa baguio, subic/clark, cebu at davao. tanggalin ang provincial wage rate. siksikan na tayo dito, di na kaya ng metro manila. tingnan mo sa vietnam, mamimili ka kung sa taas (hanoi) o sa baba (Ho Chi Minh) ang gusto momg mag trabaho at mag settle.

 

Economic Federalism is the key. kahit di na political, Economic and Business na lang.

 

 

 

Agree. The more practical solution is to combine these two proposals above. The long-term goal is federalism, decentralization to spread development across the country and not to concentrate it around few cities like MM. This will transfer to the state gov't the responsibility of developing their area. And the state gov't has more incentive and reason to that than the central gov't. However, it will not happen overnight.

 

The mass transpo will help in medium-term to mitigate the traffic here in MM, this will encourage people to lessen use of their cars and rely more on the reformed and more efficient and more effective public transportation. However, if we still don't decentralize and we still keep development here in MM, more and more people will still migrate here, which will eventually overwhelm even the improved public transpo. The two proposals complement each other.

 

Kailangan system solutions. We cannot rely on appealing to individual interests to change their attitudes when it comes to traffic.

The proposals above are still very very valid for solving our traffic woes. System-wide and holistic solutions.

[haroots2]

Connecting MRTs North EDSA station to LRT1 Roosevelt Station will greatly help the traffic.