Cities of the World - bike lanes (Part 3)

The identified purpose of Cebu City's request for a “bike lane” study is “to fulfill its mandate to green the city and ensure sustainable development similar to other cities in the country.”  By other cities the following were specifically identified:  Marikina, Muntinlupa, Manila and Pasig, among others I suppose.  While it is true that the same initiative has been launched in these cities and in many others in the whole country, it is only in Marikina where there have been very significant results and measurable achievements towards the attainment of sustainability.

It is too early to see how the others will fare, but it might be best to revisit first the issue of land use and transport integration before we proceed with simply building bike lanes anywhere.  The use of bicycles as a mode of transportation depends heavily on an area's demography, geography, and land use patterns.  One cannot just say, “if it works in Marikina, it will work in Cebu City.”  The two are entirely different cities, and while bike lanes will work in both and will always be beneficial anywhere, one cannot just copy a system from another.

Look at the demography first.  Cebu City has a population of 800,000 in a land area of 315 sq. km., giving a nominal population density of 2,700/sq. km.  Marikina has a 400,000 population over an area of 21.5 sq. km. or a density of 20,000/sq. km.  Now, before anybody concludes that Marikina is denser than Cebu, remember that the latter has a wide expanse of uplands, which actually is rural in nature with the urban part accounting only for 15 - 20% of the total area while Marikina is mostly built-up.  You can try to compare using Google Earth.

Geographically, Marikina is at the eastern outskirts of Metro Manila and while generally a highly urbanized city in its own right, it is a suburb of the Metro Manila system.  Cebu, on the other hand is the center of Metro Cebu, considered as the main central business district (CBD).  Every morning, the population in the city swells up to more than a million as people congregate in the center.  Marikina also has plenty of industries, shoes mainly, but its function in the metro system makes its daytime population not higher but lower.  But it is served by LRTs that run through the center of MM.  Cebu still has jeepneys.

Looking back on our discussion last Thursday, if we introduce a bike mode to our transport system, it would be in three configuration:  a) as one of the main home-to-work modes; b) to serve other trip purposes other than home-to-work (meaning short distance trips from home; or, as part of, and contributory to, the major home-to-work public transport (trip to the station).  Marikina's system is generally the second one and the third one - they're suggesting their citizens use bikes to the LRT.  What you need are only parking facilities for bikes.

I was in Singapore the last week, and it is significant to note that the little city-state, most often referred to by our countrymen as a role model especially in public transport, do not have dedicated bicycle lanes islandwide.  In a news report last September, Parliamentary Secretary for Transport Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim said that nationwide cycling lanes on roads are not feasible in land-scarce Singapore as most roads “are optimally sized for traffic conditions.”  He added, “Adding a dedicated lane for non-motorised traffic would require additional land or the narrowing of existing vehicle lanes, with (an) attendant adverse impact on traffic.”

They didn't not rule out introducing them in selected areas.  Singapore has made off-road cycling paths a priority, however, and is looking into linking cycling paths between townships.  Here, we're asking DPWH to factor in bike lanes in the design of roads.  As if we're awash with money!  Singapore, with a per capita GDP which is 20 times that of the Philippines, does not even do that, nor do the other presumably more advanced countries in the world, not even the more sustainable ones.  We have to be careful what we ask for.  I am solidly supporting the building of bike lanes, 100%, but in the right way and for the right reasons.