On environmental aspects, is the present condition sound? With this huge number of smoke-belchers, a cleaner air isn’t possible. This is simple arithmetic. The fewer the engines emitting smoke the cleaner the atmosphere will be. In fact, during their strike, the sky was clearer and the smell was a lot better. Needless to say, with fewer fuel tanks to fill, oil consumption was thousands of liters fewer.
With all these maladies, the need to improve or change the present transport system is necessary. Generally, there could be two alternatives in improving the present set up. The first alternative could be purely systemic coupled with constant education on traffic rules and discipline. The second alternative could be an improvement, not just in the system, but in the infrastructure as well.
The first alternative is less expensive but may not be at all effective considering the present population of Cebu and number of transport units plying the existing routes. The second alternative could be the appropriate prescription to our present traffic woes but may also entail huge cost.
The first alternative may include rerouting schemes and having more one-way streets. This could be effective for a time but has limitations. Chances are that these schemes may also create several choking points.
The fact too, that our jeepneys (our principal mode of public transport) are owned by several operators, there is no way that implementation of these systems improvements will be that easy. Worst, drivers are racing against each other (in total neglect of safety) to bag passengers to meet their daily rental and a few more for their families.
The second alternative may consider the use of mass transport systems. Mass transport system comes in many forms. Among others, these could be in the form of Light Rail Transits (LRTs) or Bus Rapid Transits (BRTs). LRTs (like those used in Metro Manila) are too expensive to build and funding could be a major stumbling block. On the hand, the BRTs will not entail huge investment as against LRTs but will need wider road network to be effective.
By the looks of it therefore, the decision-making process as far as the kind of approaches we may take will be long and tedious. One of the approaches, however, that we may take for the time being is to go down memory lane and take the experiences of some very successful transport systems in the world today.
History will tell us that mass transportation is closely associated to industrialization, urbanization, and the separation of residence from workplace. At the onset of the 20th century, most industrialized and urbanized cities such as, London, New York, Boston and Paris already had mass transport system.
By the 1920s buses were already common. In the United States, for instance, patronage of mass transit grew steadily from 1900 (six billion passengers per year) to 1927 (over 17 billion), but plunged during the Great Depression. It went up again in 1946 at a very high 23 billion passengers.
Some Latin American countries have followed the trend. In fact, Brazil has one of the most successful BRTs. So much so that BRT has become an expression in South America to connote mass transport system through the use of buses. The ultimate goal of which is to at least approach the service quality of rail transit while still enjoying the cost of using a bus transit. These can come in a variety of forms. From dedicated “busways” that have their own rights-of-way to bus services that utilize dedicated freeway lanes to limited stop buses on pre-existing routes. Among others, the most successful BRTs have either or most of the following features.
They have dedicated bus lanes that operate separately from all other transport or traffic modes. In addition to using dedicated bus lanes, BRTs also take advantage of existing road network in the city by using the “bus priority methods”.
This simply means that buses shall be given preferential treatment. Preferential treatment of buses at intersections involved extended green time or actuation of the green light at “traffic signalized” intersections upon detection of an approaching bus. However, it is observed that intersection priority can be particularly helpful only when implemented in conjunction with bus lanes or streets, because general-purpose traffic does not intervene between buses and traffic signals.
In particular, the much talked-about Curitiba’s (Brazil) BRT system is also unique in its own way. Acclaimed as the pioneer in the worldwide rapid bus development through Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT), they have organized and established route plans and used colored buses in the road network. They have large high-capacity buses (or express buses) that have exclusive traffic lanes. They have bright red color schemes and operate with tube stations.
Since passengers pay at the stations, boarding and disembarking are so quick. There are green buses (inter-neighborhood buses) that travel outside the heart of the city. There are silver buses (direct lines or quickie buses) that are designed to be the quickest links between two large distances with few stops. There are orange buses that link one passenger terminal to a neighborhood and feed the express buses and other RIT lines with passengers. There are yellow buses (conventional buses) that operate from the heart of the city and around it. There are white buses that circle the town and link the main city hospitals. Also, there are colorful buses that focus on the city’s attractions for tourists use.
In all their experiences, we can see entirely the advantages of a mass transit system. However, we can also glean from Curitiba’s experience that smaller buses can serve the huge buses by bringing passengers from the neighborhoods to the latter’s stations.
More importantly, since all transport personnel are all paid in salaries by RIT, drivers are not racing like hell to earn a living. Therefore, safety is well addressed. There are fewer drivers too to discipline and can be better trained and strictly supervised.
However, though buses offer a lot of advantages, its use also entails sizeable amount of capital expenditures. To conveniently run them, covered bus stops or stations are necessary and must be constructed. While it is true that it may require huge cash outlay from the government’s treasury, commuters can save some as these stations or bus stops will also help deter pickpockets from victimizing them. As security guards or policemen maybe detailed in these places, holdups might be minimized.
Discipline can also be instilled among commuters. They will certainly realize that unlike jeepneys that will pick them up anywhere as they wish, these buses will only load and unload passengers in bus stops and stations at a designated time.
It is, therefore, very obvious that buses (mass transporter) and jeepneys (feeders) can co-exist. However, like Curitiba’s Rede Integrada de Transporte, the entire system must be managed and controlled by one entity.
For your comments and suggestions, please email to foabalos@yahoo.com.