A PROPOSED PUBLIC UTILITY VEHICLE TERMINAL IN LINGAYEN,

PANGASINAN

RELATED LITERATURE
LOCAL LITERATURE

CEBU BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT

The concept of a bus rapid transit system existed since 1960s (Yap, 2015). Until today,
BRT systems of some cities around the world are still running well. Notable BRT
systems are found in Bogota (Colombia), Guangzhou (China), Quito (Ecuador), New
Delhi (India) and Curitiba (Brazil). The Curitiba BRT system of Brazil is the best example
of a successful bus rapid transit (p.6). Curitiba is the cradle of the BRT concept with the
opening of bus ways and feeder services in the 1970s and the Integrated Transit
Network (RIT) in the 1980s, including large buses with multiple doors (Lindau, 2010).
Based on a single urban development indicative plan (Curitiba’s Urban Master Plan,
approved in 1966), this endeavor led to a highly refined system with ranging services
for metropolitan coverage (Ardila, 2004). A place of more than a million people, the city
came up with a remarkable plan, in which the central lane of primary streets has two
lanes of traffic that can move smoothly, with minimal interruption. The Curitiba BRT
Case Study shows tube-like stations placed every 500 meters along primary routes. The
city law states that no resident may reside more than 500 meters from a bus stop, so
the primary and collector routes cover the entire residential area. Passengers pay when
they enter the station, avoiding delay when entering the bus (Leventhal, 2010).
The remarkable BRT system of Curitiba paved way to its neighboring countries to
implement the system, which also inspired the Cebu Bus Rapid Transit, the would-be
first bus rapid transit system in the country (Yap, 2015). Peñalosa (2013), mayor of
Bogota in Colombia, has given a nod to this project, as shown from his statement
during the inauguration of the Bogota BRT system that “an advanced city is not one
where even the poor use cars, but rather one where even the rich use public transport.”
He said that the use of public transportation is an attractive alternative for private car
owners to transfer to public transport. Hidalgo (2014) also believed that BRTs are the
solution to worsening traffic. Ozan (2013), in his case study on the Curitiba BRT, stated
that through this project, “many people can have the access of good public
transportation because we cannot fully understand a city without using its public
transportation.”
Aside from the modernization the system gives in terms of structure, it also regards the
dignity of travel. This principle refers to the ability of people to travel using safe,
reliable, convenient, and affordable means without being judged by others (Montalbo,
2015). It denotes the passengers or commuters’ level of satisfaction and rights to a
safer and more convenient travel in public transport (Yap, 2015). Since private cars
contribute much in the traffic congestion, the convenience brought by the BRT is said to
attract them to transfer in the public transport (Montalbo, 2015).
Despite these positive feedbacks, some reports and journals stressed its disapproval to
the system. According to World Bank, in the context outside the country, buses are the
most common form of urban transit. Even in the developing world, they are often seen
as inefficient and polluting. In the context of Cebu City, instituting a BRT system may
decrease carbon emission belched from vehicles but it will affect physical road
structures. Yap (2015) emphasized that re-blocking is necessary for the BRT to be
established. Re-blocking means that some residents would lose part of their homes. The
city’s narrow roads are the best indicator for the BRT ineffectiveness (p. 6). In addition,
the Japan International Cooperation Agency feasibility study (2013) said that the BRT
may not be able to serve all the passengers, especially on N. Bacalso Ave. In the study,
JICA noted more than six jeepneys every minute on N. Bacalso Ave. This would
translate to 5,400 passengers every hour. He stressed that even in the opening year,
the BRT “may not serve all the passengers to be shifted from public utility vehicles on
N. Bacalso Avenue.” While the BRT is designed to cater to 4,500 to 5,400 passengers,
JICA state that based on the experiences of other cities with the BRT, only about 3,000
passengers per hour will be serviced.
Just like Metro Manila, Cebu City traffic managers have focused only on volume control
and engineering-based solutions to congestion. Brown (2012), Metro Manila law
enforcement officer, believe that this is an incorrect approach. He asserts that although
the number of vehicles on the roadway is the major contributor to congestion, it is also
the one factor that cannot be countered significantly. He added that it is not realistic to
either reduce the number of vehicles in the city or to increase the amount of road space
(i.e. wider roads, elevated roads, etc) in order to have a lasting impact on
congestion. Brown, in his case study in Metro Manila traffic, emphasized the science of
traffic management. In such theory, there is a phenomenon called ‘triple convergence‘,
which essentially means that the volume of traffic will always expand to meet the
available capacity. The theory explains that while additional road capacity may produce
temporary improvement in flow rate, congestion will still return to the previous levels
within a few years.
To address this, Yap (2015) assures that they can add more buses or can lessen the
headway between buses. The abovementioned notions from different literatures view
the BRT project in varied perspectives and outlooks, whether based on the physical
aspect of the project or the level of satisfaction with regards to the passengers.
TRAVELING BY BUS IN THE PHILIPPINES
The Philippines depend on bus service to link cities with each other. Only on Luzon
island does exist an anemic rail network linking Manila to the Bicol region, with less
than one train per day. The contrast is quite strong with Java, Indonesia, where Jakarta
and Surabaya have rail service many times per day, and of course with another Asian
archipelagic country, Japan, where people are among the highest users of trains
anywhere in the world. This leaves aviation for long distance travel between the
Philippine islands, and maritime transport on shuttle-type routes crossing inter-island
straits on short cruises, or longer journeys linking for example Manila to Cebu or cities
in Mindanao. For most people not owning a private automobile, the “public utility bus”
(PUB) is the only practical way to travel on medium or long distances, since jeepneys
(PUJ) are usually limited to local routes of at most 20 to 30 kilometers, both in cities
and in rural areas. According to official data, about 33.000 buses ply the roads of the
country and the streets of its cities, particularly in megacity MetroManila. The structure
of the bus industry – making difficult the collection of detailed data on traffic, bus loads,
revenues of bus companies – is characterized by the high number of private bus
companies, some quite large (such as provincial buses companies Victory Liner, more
than 900 units in its fleet, DLTB, Dagupan Lines, Philtranco), but some quite small (a
handful of buses). Bus companies are awarded franchises to run certain routes by a
government agency, LTRFB (Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board,
http://ltfrb.gov.ph/main). Rates per kilometer are determined by public authorities,
therefore limiting competition on price, so that many bus companies try to maximize
their revenues by allowing on board more passengers than there are seats, therefore
people stand in the aisle, a major safety risk at higher speed travel on the highways
than in traffic jams in Manila. Competition is also ferocious for attracting passengers,
with “conductors” on board barking the name of the bus destination to passengers
waiting on the side of the road, and with drivers frequently engaging in agressive
behaviors of cutting off trajectories of competing buses and driving faster than speed
limits or simple common sense would command. Given the high level of competition
between bus companies, and the possibility of hailing an intercity bus (or getting off it)
at any point alongside its troute, even if there are “official” stops where most buses will
make even a short halt, travel by bus is relatively easy and cheap. A 2 to 3 hours ride
from Manila to Santa Cruz (Laguna) or Angeles City (Pampanga), costs only 120-130
pesos (3 US dollars) on board an air-conditioned bus, and about 90 pesos (2 dollars) on
an “ordinary” bus, with no difference in price between operators. With the help of local
interpreters, we conducted a short field survey (in tagalog language) in Pagsanjan,
Laguna, in November 2011, about travel habits of the residents of this small town
(Boquet 2012). If 47% of the 165 surveyed households, most of them working class or
farmers, declared owning a motorcycle and 9% a motorized tricycle, only 5% had a
jeep and 1% a truck. None had a private automobile, and 38% owned no vehicle
whatsoever. To the question: “how often do you travel to Manila ?”, 11% answered
“every week”, 33% “at least once a month”, and 38% “ at least once a year”. Asked
what was the mode of transportation they used to go to Manila and why, 50%
answered “ordinary bus” (cheaper) and 39% “aircon bus” (comfort) for a total of 89%
of the answers. The third popular answer was “by car or private van”, driven by a friend
or relative (8%). Other answers (1 only) were “rented van”, “company truck” or
“jeepney”. The number one motive of travel (67%) was “family visit”, “shopping” (in
Manila megamalls) coming way behind at only 10%, same as “administrative
paperwork”. Only 4% were commuting to Manila.. This gives some indications on the
uses of buses in the Philippines, even if this test survey, first in a bigger series planned
for future research, is limited to one place located about 90 km from Manila. ( Y.
BOQUET, 2012) sObserving people on board buses shows a frequent presence of
families, with 3-4 children, more often with their mother, sometimes the father or
grandparents. They would use the bus for longer distances. However, young adults or
students appear to use the bus for shorter distances – rather than jeepneys – for
instance boarding in large numbers at the UP Los Baños campus in Laguna and getting
off on different points alongside the route towards Santa Cruz. On board the buses,
passengers’ activities fall into a few wide categories. Many just sleep or at least doze
off. Another frequent activity is texting on cell phone. We have observed many bus
travelers texting non-stop for 30, 45 minutes, even longer. A third past-time is chat
between travelers, a few will eat and some will watch the movie broadcast on the TV
monitor on-board the bus, this movie being most of the time an American B-series
action movies including a lot of violence (un-censored even in the presence of many
children on-board). We have not observed anyone reading : the noise generated by the
movie is a powerful deterrent to any serious reading. For longer trips such as from the
Bicol region (SE Luzon) to Manila, lasting 8, 10 hours or more, bus drivers will make
stops every two hours or so, allowing passengers to stretch their legs or relieve
themselves in “comfort rooms” before boarding again, Those pit stops often take place
where food can be purchased, sometimes as roadside restaurants. Different companies
will stop at different places : on the Manila-Daet route, Philtranco buses do not stop in
same spots as Superlines or DLTB buses. ( Y. BOQUET, 2012)

Bus travel offers many opportunities for vendors. Around bus terminals, many sell
different items, mostly food, to impending travelers. Alongside the route, when buses
stop at active boarding spots, such as a freeway exit (Calamba, Laguna), 4 to 6 vendors
also enter the bus, offering water bottles (“tubig ! tubig !”), peanuts (“mane ! mane !”),
other foods, sometimes local specialties (“buko pie”, a coconut cake), on occasions non-
food items. They walk to the back of the bus, then stand in the central aisle of the bus,
waiting for the next stop, at which point they will get off the bus, cross the road, and
wait for the next bus taking them back to the starting point. Many vendors wear
uniforms (usually a colored t-shirt stamped with their name or registration number,
sponsored by a local politician, congressman or mayor). This practice of on-board
vendors is widespread. However, a minority of bus companies have banned it, with a
sign on the bus entry door : “no vendors allowed aboard this bus”. It happens mostly
on long distance buses with the highest level of comfort (aircon, wifi on board,
individual electric outlets), thereby differentiating the “product” (bus service) as higher
quality, the ban on vendors being part of the upgrading of the travel service.
( Y. BOQUET, 2012)

RELATED LITERATURE
FOREIGN LITERATURE

THE DHAKA CITY URBAN TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN BANGLADESH

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT),- Less Costly but Not in the list of Priority Transport Project
In theory, BRT has emerged as an economically self-reliant mass transit system with
significant potential for budget-constrained developing cities. The successful BRT
systems, particularly in Latin American cities, have evolved through broad-based
participation of all the actors and fair distribution of costs, risk and benefits among the
same (Ardilla; Wright 2005). As cities are becoming increasingly overcrowded and
congested, with land prices rising rapidly, greater use of underground space enable us
to meet the increasing demand for more buildings and more extensive transport
systems (Chow, F.) Nevertheless, it is an irony of the fact that even the planning phase
of BRT, the most preferred program of STP, let alone the construction of BRT, has not
started yet even in the year of 2012, which was the most preferred strategy according
to the STP prepared in 2005. On the other hand, construction work of elevated express
way has already started in the city and the Metro-Rail project is expected to be started
within 2012 according to the Communication Minister of the Country which are not the
priority programs according to the STP. However, Dhaka Transport Network
Development Study (DHUTS) – 2009, a study conducted by DTCB reveals that 1 km
BRT lane can be constructed with only mere 5% cost of that of Metro rail and it will
take 50-75 million us dollar to construct 1 km metro rail line whereas only 5 million
dollar will be needed for the BRT lane in the city.

BUS RAPID TRANSIT IN JAKARTA

Suppressing the trend for motorization, especially use of private cars, and providing a
proper public transport service should become the main priority of the government to
stop the degradation of the JMA residents’ quality of life. However, in many cases,
economic reasons and the political will of the government are major obstacles to
implementing a user and environmentally friendly transportation policy in Indonesia.
The most recent break-through policy that was successfully implemented in Indonesia
was a bus rapid system (BRT) in the JMA. This policy was successfully implemented due
to an exceptional strong-will of the head of Jakarta’s city government. Although it has
only been operating since 2004, it is already considered a success in the JMA and a
good example for other cities in Indonesia as well as in other developing countries. In
order to suppress the rapid motorization as well as to reduce severe traffic congestion
and social and environmental impacts, several different policies have been
tried in the Jakarta metropolitan area, from traffic restraint policy (i.e. high occupation
vehicle policy) to oneway traffic policy. However, since the refinement of the public
transport sector has never had enough attention from the government, those policies
did not provide any significant positive outcomes. However, in the last four years, there
has been strong political support from the head of Jakarta’s city government to create a
proper and a cheap public transport system. In the end, they succeeded in
implementing a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in the core area of Jakarta city. BRT is
a form of customer-oriented transit (bus) combining stations, vehicles, planning, and
intelligent transport system elements into an integrated system with a unique
identity18. BRT typically involves bus-way corridors in segregated lanes – either at-
grade or grade separated – and modernized bus technology. There have been various
BRT systems operated throughout the world, e.g. Bradford, Bogotá, Boston, Adelaide,
etc. One of the biggest success examples of BRT system is Bogotá’s TransMilenio
system, which went into operation in January 2001. By December 2001, the existing
two lines already served over 600,000 passenger trips per day18. This system is
considered a suitable system in developing countries, because it can be implemented at
relatively lower cost and with lower technology compared to other mass rapid transit
systems. Moreover, it can also be operated without a massive construction since it can
be operated by using existing road corridors. However, as a consequence, it needs a
dedicated line from the existing road corridors that will suddenly increase the traffic
congestion (which is already present) and attract policy resistant from the road users.
For further explanation about the advantages and disadvantages of the system see
Wright19. In Jakarta, the first BRT corridor was essentially planned and implemented
during the 9-month period from May 2003 until January 200420. A 12.9 km initial
closed-system BRT corridor began operation on January 15, 2004, which started from
Blok M bus terminal and Table ended at Kota Station (from north to south on the main
road corridors) was operated by TransJakarta company (Koridor I in Fig. 6). For
detailed characteristics of the operated bus see Ernst20. In the first year of operation
(2004), 15.9 million passengers traveled by this system (approximately 44,000
passengers per day or 3,600 persons/hour/two directions). The average busway load
factor during the week was 91% and during the weekend was 75%, with the highest
load factor during the evening peak on weekdays, of up to 143%21. The Jakarta city
government provided all the initial construction costs for the infrastructure and the
buses. It is considered a sunk cost because they want to support this new public
transport system. In the first year of this bus-way operation, the comparison between
operation - maintenance cost and the revenue showed that at the end of the first year
revenue had increased more than the costs21. Since the system was just initiated two
years ago and the Jakarta city government is still completing the whole planned BRT
routes, it might be too early to measure the impacts of the BRT system on the transport
network performance and travel quality in Jakarta metropolitan area. However, some
preliminary studies20, 22 reported that the initial performance of the system is very
promising. There has been a significant number of mode shifts from private car to the
BRT, while BRT enables the passenger to travel 10–20 minutes faster than regular bus
users22. Due to the trend of passengers shifting from other modes to the BRT system,
the NOx and PM10 emissions caused by automobiles has decreased by 202kg and 30kg
per day respectively20. Continuing the development of the BRT corridors through 2004,
the local government of Jakarta city constructed the next corridors of the BRT, namely
the Pulo Gadung-Harmoni and Kalideres-Harmoni corridors (corridor 2 and 3). These
corridors allow movement from west to east and will be combined with the Blok M -
Kota corridor which serves the north and south movement, so that a balance of four
axes of movement will be reached. Private companies, under supervision of the city
government, have operated these corridors since January 2006. Besides these
corridors, there will be another 12 corridors and feeder lines that will be developed in
the Jakarta metropolitan area in the near future. (SUSILO,Y., SANTOSA,W.,
JOEWONO,T., PARIKESIT,D., 2007)