It might be repetitive trying to talk about the same things over and over again, but the way the human mind works, oftentimes, that’s the only way many messages get across --by repetition. And one of the more frequent topics people talk about, or maybe bash is the better term, is “traffic”. The more correct term is “traffic congestion” because traffic per se is a neutral term, maybe good or bad, but mostly good in the sense that it serves us. But bad, or “congested” traffic almost always destroys one’s day.
The problem with traffic, or really, “congestion” is that it almost always gets worse and very seldom gets better. How does traffic get better? Well, it’s not traffic which does, but “mobility” --the ability of people to move from one place to another, easily, fast, conveniently, and preferably cheaper. This is done in many manners --having bigger-capacity vehicles, having more vehicles, making trips more frequent, increasing space capacity, while making trips cheaper, too. But traffic congestion is always a main culprit.
In practical terms, how does local government improve mobility over the years? Basically doing a few things --building more roads; building roads on top of one another (overpasses/elevated expressways), or underneath (underpasses/tunnels), fielding higher-capacity public transportation, or reducing private transportation. The last option is very difficult because of people’s love for their cars, and the very fact that almost all or more than 90%, of decision-makers ride cars.
That traffic congestion always tends to increase is an unquestionable practical reality that decision-makers must admit and work on. But who among our local leaders really made any effort to address the issue of mobility of their constituents? By constituents, I mean ALL…everybody, not just those who own cars but especially the majority, almost 70% who don't, and rely on public transportation? Mind you, building more roads does not address mobility. Even expressways, overpasses/underpasses, tunnels, and all kinds of roadways have minimal, almost negligible impact on people’s mobility.
There are also some who talk and talk about trains --LRT’s, MRT’s, monorail, and the like. But these are all talk…for the last three decades. That’s 35 years, since the first public mass transport study in 1989! Countless press releases and news reports and not one inch of public mass transport in operations. Except for the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), which hopefully will start operating this year. At least, it’s a start, and it’s of the best form, or what we call “transport denomination,” too. Among public mass transport modes, the BRT usually offers the highest economic viability.
Will the BRT solve Cebu City’s traffic congestion, then? My prompt answer is no, it won’t. Or maybe it might, but that’s a long shot, something I won’t bet any amount of money on. The BRT is a public mass transport system, NOT a traffic congestion relief. Maybe if a few who drive cars use it instead, but I seriously doubt that. But that’s fine --there are far more people using public transport anyway. Democracy always works for the majority, especially if the minority has the choice, too. Those who have less in life should have more on the road.