2.

13INFRASTRUCTURE

2.13.1Transportation

2.13.1.1 Existing Situation

The transportation network should not be planned independent of the

component cities and municipalities of Metro Cebu but to conduct the planning
of the transportation system on a metropolitan area approach.

Cebu City is a component city of Metro Cebu. The transportation system of

Cebu City forms part of the system of transportation of Metro Cebu as a whole.
Hence, being an integral part, not only Cebu City is considered in the study but
also its inter-relatedness to Metro Cebu in general.

Metro Cebu has a well-integrated transport system, consisting of roads, ports

and airports. Intra-provincial movements are catered for mainly by land
transport and to a lesser extent by water transport. The Mactan International
Airport and Port of Cebu, which are part of the national truckline system,
provide for inter-provincial and even international movements.

This section describes the existing transport system and travel characteristics.
The information provides the basis for the assessment of transport issues.
Emphasis is placed on the land-based transport system, as this is the main
area of concern of this study. The airport has been greatly improved to an
international standard while the port has an on-going rehabilitation.

The transportation sector is about the transportation system of Cebu City and
its linkages to and from other points in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. It
covers the present transport infrastructures and traffic situation, which include
the Road Network, Public transport, the origin-destination data and traffic
characteristics. It involves the different modes of transportation, transport
demand, trip generation and trip distribution, traffic flow analysis, among other
aspects.

The transportation sector is inter-related with the land use sector. Where
planned uses of land are distributed, i.e., residential, commercial, industrial,
institutional, among others alongside with the transportation aspect. It provides
and enhances the movement of people and goods.

Assessment of Performance

Airport

Air travel is served mainly at the Mactan International Airport (MIA), which is
located in Lapulapu City at a distance of around 15 km from Cebu City. MIA is
the second busiest airport in the country in terms of passenger and freight
traffic. Its domestic line is linked to about 80 points in the country through
commercial flight operations.

Philippine Airlines (PAL) and Cebu Pacific Airlines have been maintaining a
dominant share in aircraft, passenger and cargo movements at the MIA.
Others that use the airport include Air Philippines, Asian Spirit, FedEx, Aboitiz
Air, and other private persons.

The 560th Air Base Wing, 220th Heavy Airlift Wing, and the 2nd Air Division of the
Philippines Air Force (PAF) presently utilize MIA as base.
MIA is classified as an alternate international airport and is functioning as such,
serving chartered flights mainly from Hongkong and Japan. International
passenger movements in 1989 were 34,689, which increased to 312,663 in
1998 representing an average annual growth rate of 28.03%. In 1978,
international passenger movements totaled 1,380 only.

The MIA is an all-weather airport. It has concrete runway, taxiways and apron.
The terminal facilities include terminal building, improved air navigation facilities
(ANF’s), and ample car parking area and other amenities. The terminal building
is recently improved and renovated with funding from the Overseas Economic
Cooperation Fund (OECF) of Japan.

The former Lahug Airport is presently converted to commercial, cultural and

recreational center where the Waterfront Hotel is located.

Cebu Ports

The Cebu Port is composed of the Cebu Main Port and the sub-ports of
Mandaue and Mactan; all are in the Cebu Harbor area.

a.Cebu Main Port

The Cebu Main Port has a 3831-meter marginal wharf and three finger piers
with 4 km effective berthing length. It has a back-up area ranging in width
from 25 to 40 meters. Three (3) storage sheds, one at each pier finger, with
a total area of 6264 sq.m. Within the areas bordering the port are
warehouses with a total floor area of about 30,000 sq.m. and two passenger
termini owned by the shipping lines. At full berth occupancy, the main port
is capable of handling an estimated 3.1 million tons of cargo a year.

b.Mandaue, Mactan Ports

The Mandaue sub-port consists of the municipal wharf and four private
wharves, while Mactan sub-port consists of the Lapulapu municipal wharf
and also four private wharves. Also within the Cebu Harbor area are six (6)
ship repair and ship building yards.

The municipal sub-port usually handles small quantities of consumer goods

and general cargoes as well as passenger traffic mostly coming from
neighboring island municipalities of the province and of the region.

c.Private Ports

Private ports handle specialized cargoes like mineral products, petroleum

products, and other commodities. The following are the existing private
ports located within the defined Cebu Harbor area:

o Ludo Wharf

Located 2.5 km southwest of Cebu main port, its facilities include 12 m x

260 m open shed, dock pier, one concrete road, a 200 m diameter pipe
and 86 cm wide conveyor; the port handles coconut oil and copra
pellets mainly for export; and copra, corn, starch, glucose and gluten
feed for domestic trade.

o Ouano Wharf
 Located in Mandaue City 5 km northwest of Cebu City, its facilities
include 448 m wharf and a warehouse; aside from marine products, the
port handles soybeans malt, fertilizers and chemicals; the domestic
cargoes include silica sand, cullets, petroleum oil, chemical products,
copra, lumber and cereal products.

o Sand Miguel Corporation Wharf

Located in Mandaue City 7 km from Cebu City; it has a 268 m marginal

wharf, a 4-bay warehouse with an area of about 9,600 sq.m. and two
ramps; the port mainly handles beer, soft drinks, oxygen-tanks, empty
bottles in sacks and magnolia products. In 1978, it handled around one
million tons of mostly beer cargo.

o Mandaue Timber (MATIMCO) Causeway

Located in Mandaue City 12 km from Cebu City, the port has a 10 m x

250 m rock causeway, an elevated fuel tank, a mobile crane, and water
and lighting facilities; the port is mainly used for handling lumber for
domestic use.

o Petrophil Depot Wharf (PNOC)

Located in Mandaue City about 10 km from Cebu City, its facilities

include a wooden pier, twelve vertical storage tanks, pipelines and four
pile clusters; this port is used for discharging fuel.

o Asian Alcohol Corporation Port

Located in Mandaue City about 12 km from Cebu City, it has four

mooring pile clusters, two storage tanks, and three pipelines molasses
for export and domestic purposes.

o Shell Island Depot

This is located in Shell island, Cebu; facilities include a jetty, wooden

piles and pipe trenches; it handles oil products for domestic
consumption.

o Caltex (Phils) Inc. Wharf

Located in Lapulapu City, the port is provided with three reinforced

concrete piers, two warehouses, pipelines and 17 storage tanks; it is
used in handling chemicals, solvents, and petroleum products.

o General Milling

Located in Lapulapu City, it has a 116 m berthing facility; it handles

animal feeds, cereals, wheat grains, etc.; it can accommodate a
maximum vessel length of 190 m and 8.5 m draft.
o Naga (Apo Cement)

Located in Naga, it has a total berthing capacity of about 340 m and a

crawler mounted crane; it handles logs, coal and gypsum.

The central archipelagic location of Cebu gives the Cebu Port

advantage of being within short and easy access to the other provinces
in the Visayas and the northern and southern parts of the country. Cebu
Port has therefore become a redistribution center for the Visayas and
Mindanao regions since the post war period. This has made Cebu Port
the second busiest port in the country in terms of passenger traffic.

In 1994, the Cebu Main Port served 7.77 million passengers of which
3.94 million were incoming and 3.83 million outgoing. It is observed to
have decreased by 17.9 percent from 1994-1995.

In terms of cargo, a total of 12.2 millions tons were handled in 1994,

86.9 percent of this was domestic. This ranked fourth (4th) to Manila’s,
44.6 million tons, Batangas, 17.3 millions tons and Cagayan 12.8 million
tons.

The Cebu Port Centre is a completely replanned port commercial

project designed to stimulate the business and trade for Cebu City as
well as for the Region. The Port Centre is a component of the Cebu
North Reclamation Area (CNRA), which lies along the foreshore area at
Pier 3 of the Port of Cebu and the Subangdaku River. The CNRA is
roughly rectangular in shape, about 1.9 km long and 0.9 km wide, or an
area of 169.3 hectares.

The port berthing length of 1.9 km is longer than the berthing length of
the existing Port of Cebu (from Pier 3 southwards). By virtue of its
location and accessibility, CNRA is a natural catchbasin for commercial
and trading activities in Cebu City.

The Port area is dedicated exclusively to port-related activities to meet

the growing needs of the Port of Cebu and to help enhance trading
activities in the area. Land use allocation has reinforced its being a
transshipment point and hence capitalize on its expanded requirements
for services such as warehousing. Utilization of the 169.3 hectares is:

Port related activities – 53.3 has.

Warehouses/ back-up – 38.1 has.
Roads / canals – 15.2 has.

As of June 1999, the Cebu Port Authority (CPA) and the Management
Office –5 (MO-5) recorded a total of 3,485 ships,, 916 cargo vessels and
2,569 cargo-passenger vessels.

As to the area of jurisdiction of MO-5, it cover from Pilot House of Berth

28 down to carbon area. It has two private ports, namely, Veco and
Ludo. It has six prime berths from Berth 28 to 33 with a total length of
776 meters and average width of 28 meters. Short-run (motor-bancas)
vessels plying the Cebu and nearby Bohol towns have a designated
berthing area accommodating both passengers and small volume
cargoes.
The Cebu port facilities include an open storage area of 15,244 sq.m.,
which can accommodate 40,059 cu.m. of break bulk and containerized
cargoes at its maximum capacity. It has a working area of 3,880 sq.m.
and a vehicular lane of 5,432 sq.m. In addition, booking offices for
passengers and cargoes, a warehouse at the ground floor of Maritime
Bldg.,, and a concrete quaywall and bollards for safe docking.

MO-5 supervises 5 cargo handling service providers operating under

manual, mechanized, containerized and Roro/palletized mode of cargo
handling operations.
 Our airline industry, both Manila and Cebu have now airports that meet
international standards our ports do not. The modernization of our ports
should be based on international standard as exemplified by our fast
ferry terminals.

Declared autonomous in 1996, CPA was able to implement

development projects quickly and this will produce better-constructed
and managed port facilities in the coming years.

Road Network

a.) Cebu City’s Urban and Rural Roads

As of 1997, Cebu City’s urban and rural roads were classified according to
surface type with their corresponding length, district, and condition. As shown
in Table 34.1.01, Cebu City has a total length of 690,736.52 m of roads
broken down as to surface type: asphalt (58.94%), concrete (6.18%), Dirt/
Gravel/Anapog (25.99%), unclassified (8.89%).

Only six percent are classified as rural roads and about 87 percent are in
good condition.

Cebu City has a total of 29 national bridges, 86 percent of which are concrete
bridges (RCDG) having a total length of 590.16 m, the capacity ranges
between 15 to 20 tons. The lone steel bridge has length of 5.40 m located at
F. Sotto drive particularly the D. Jakosalem Ext. Bridge.

b.) Road Inventory

Table 2.13.1.03 is the existing major road inventory in Metro Cebu. Many of
these roads are narrow and, substandard cross-sections and most of the
major roads are still 2-lane roads and are always congested even before
peak hours. The 4-lane roads do not have center medians and most of the
time the outer lanes of 4-lane roads are utilized for loading, unloading and
sometimes short term parking by vehicles rendering them practically like a 2
lane road.

c.) Status of Cebu City Major Roads

As of 1999, Cebu City 83.2 km of roads are classified by surface type as

follows:
Concrete 16.4 km.
Asphalt 62.0 km.
Gravel 4.8 km.
Road condition in Metro Cebu was found to be generally deficient. The
configuration of the road is inadequate in areas outside the city center.
Large-sized blocks lack secondary and distributor roads while majority of the
roads have insufficient road width to accommodate large volumes of traffic

Table 2.13.1.1
Number & Conditions of Cebu City’s Urban & Rural Roads
As of 1997

District Class Condition

Surface Length Unclas Unclas Unclas Excel
Type - -
 Surface
Type
(meter) North South sified Rural Urba sified sified Bad Fair Good Worse lent
n

Anapog 22 1 15 7
18,564.12 1
Asphalt 2,442 29 180 35
407,097.9 1,668 29 4,110 4 3,635 285
0
Concrete 41 76 81
42,710.88 13 76 54 3 4 42
Dirt 8 1
6,512.55 8 4 3
Gravel 119 117 2 11 72 6
154,415.3 30
8
Unclassifie 599
d 61,435.69
TOTAL 2,483 232 252 3 599 341 41
690,736.5 1,681 4,164 23 3,687 327
2
Source of Basic Data: Cebu City GIS

Table 2.13.1.2
Cebu City List of National Bridges
As of Jue 30, 1999
Length, M Tons
Name of Bridge Location Station Conc. Steel Type Capacit
y
1Guadalupe Bridge N. Bacalso Ave. 2 + 831 18.35 RCDG 20
2Kinalumsan Bridge I -do- 3 + 981 21.00 RCDG 20
3Bulacao Bridge -do- 8 + 535 68.00 RCDG N -20
(2 bridge) 0 + 15
4Colon Bridge Colon Street 2 + 871 27.00 RCDG 20
5Kinalumsan Bridge II C. Padilla St. 4 + 234 25.60 RCDG 15
6Sanciangco Bridge Sanciangco St. 2 + 839 21.00 RCDG 15
7Maxilom Ave. Bridge Cebu North Rd. 1 + 674 11.00 RCDG 15
8Subangdaku Bridge -do- 4 + 285 9.00 RCDG 15
9Camputhaw Bridge N. G. Escario St. 0 + 802 24.00 RCDG 20
10M. Velez Bridge M. Velez St. 0 + 215 29.70 RCDG 15
11B. Rodriquez Bridge B. Rodriquez St. 1 + 278 35.00 RCDG 20
12D. Jakosalem Ext. Bridge F. Sotto Drive 1 + 679 5.40 ARMCO 20
13Mahiga Bridge Cebu Cadre Rd. 5 + 479 10.60 RCDG 20
14San Jose de la Montana San Jose de la 3 + 888 12.00 RCDG 20
Bridge Montana
15Tejero Bridge M. J. Cuenco Ave. 3 + 649 7.85 RCDG 15
16Tabacalera Bridge M. J. Cuenco Ave. 3 + 771 6.20 RCSL 20
17Forbes Bridge Magallanes Tupas 5 + 434 20.90 RFCA 15
18Mc. Arthur-Palma Bridge S. Osmeña Blvd. 4 + 165 6.15 RCDG 20
(former Mc. Arthur
Blvd)
19Tejero-Mc Arthur Bridge -do- 4 + 161 8.40 RCSL 20
20T. Padilla-Mc Arthur Bridge -do- 4+ 328 9.35 RCDG 20
21Arellano Palma Bridge Arellano Blvd. 4 + 258 6.95 RCDG 15
22Tejero-Arellano Bridge Arellano Blvd. 4 +357 11.35 RCDG 15
 23Tiguib Bridge Transcentral Highway 9 + 689 14.90 RCDG 20
24Cabahug Bridge F. Cabahug Ext. 5 +823 15.70 RCDG 20
25Alaska Bridge Unnamed St. near 4 +487 12.00 RCDG 20
Spolarium
26Imus Bridge Imus M. J. Cuenco 1+ 11.56 RCDG 20
86175
27Talamban Bridge M. Cuenco Ave. 8 + 408 45.20 RCDG N&O
-20
28Canduman Bridge Talamban Road 9 + 786 50.00 RCDG 20
29S. Osmena Bridge (CIP) Second Avenue 6 + 279 51.40 RCDG 20
TOTAL 590.16 5.40
Source: Cebu City Engineering District

Table 2.13.1.3
Road Inventory, Cebu City Roads

NATIONAL STREETS/ROADS Existing Existing Propose Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Proposed

road d road
length of right of right of sidewalk one plant strips center sidewalk
island
road (in way (in way (in side (in (in meter) (in meter) classificati
km.) meter) meter) meter) on
1 Abad, Santos J. Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
2 Abellana, Andres Street 1.000 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
3 Acacia Street 0.539 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
4 Adelfa Street 0.500 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
5 Alaura, S. Street 0.167 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
6 Apitong Street 0.180 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
7 Aranas, B. Extension 0.500 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
8 Aranas, B. Street 0.645 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
Paulino R. Sanchez St.)
9 Arcilla, P. Street 0.610 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
10 Avila, Don Jose Street 0.590 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
11 Avocado Street 0.100 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
12 Aznar, M. H. Street 0.280 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
13 Bacalso Street 0.288 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
14 Bacayo, L. Street 0.290 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
15 Bagumbayan Street 0.290 8.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
(Gervacio Lavilles St.)
16 Balagtas Street 0.207 8.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
17 Balintawak Street 0.170 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
18 Ballesteros Street 0.600 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
19 Basa, JM St. (C. Padilla- 0.560 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
Shoreline)
20 Basa, JM St. (C. Padilla-Calamba) 10.00 30.00 5.00 2.00 - OPEN
21 Bataan Street 0.176 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
22 Bayabas Street 0.100 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
23 Binacayan Street 0.141 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
24 Bonifacio, A. Street 0.536 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
25 Borces, S. Street 0.378 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
26 Borces, C. Street 0.270 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
27 Borgonia, M. Street 0.275 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
28 Brezlin Street 0.110 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
29 Bugallon Street (Belgium Street) 0.128 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - ARCADED
30 Cabahug, F. Street 0.780 16.00-18.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
31 Cabahug, S. Street 0.584 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
32 Cabarrubias Street 0.430 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
33 Cabreros Street 0.810 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
34 Caimito Street 0.300 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
35 Camagong Street (Jose Solon 0.750 10.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
Drive)
36 Cavan, T. Street 0.248 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
37 Climaco Street 0.455 7.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
38 Colina, V. Street 0.094 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
39 Concepcion, Dela M. Street 0.375 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
40 Cui, Don Mariano Street 0.790 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
41 Cui, Don Pedro Street 0.345 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
42 Dapdap Extension 0.042 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
43 Dapdap Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
44 Diaz, J. Street 0.214 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
45 Dimasalang Street 0.215 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
46 Duterte, R. Street 0.500 15.00 30.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
47 Echavez Extension 0.180 20.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
48 Echavez Street 0.634 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
49 Edison Street 0.440 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
50 Encarnacion Street 0.350 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
(Tirso Uytengsu Sr. St.)
51 España Street (J. Zamora St.) 0.500 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
52 Espelita Street 0.260 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
53 Eucalyptus Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
54 Figueroa Street 0.330 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
55 Filibusterismo, El Street 0.345 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
56 Flores, L. Street 0.248 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
57 Fulton Street 0.500 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
58 Gabuya, A. Street 1.070 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
59 Garcia, Don Gil Street 0.690 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
60 Garfield Street (Andres Borres 0.326 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
St.)
61 Gines Street 0.800 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
62 Gochan, F. Street 0.270 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
63 Gomez, P. Street - - 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
64 Gudalupe Street 0.762 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
65 Guerillero Street 0.150 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
66 Guibilondo, H. Street - 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
67 Gullas, P. Street 0.160 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
68 Gullas, V. Street 0.610 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
69 Ibarra Street 0.160 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
70 Imus Street 1.140 30.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
71 Ipil-Ipil Street 0.350 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
72 Isagani Street 0.136 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
73 Jaca, F. Street 2.280 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
74 Jasmin Street 0.230 20.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
75 Jereza Street 0.215 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
76 Juaquino, H. Street 0.525 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
77 Junquera Extension 0.450 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
78 Junquera Street 0.850 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
79 Kabajar, F. Street 0.193 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
80 Kamuning Street 0.550 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
(Gov. Manuel Roa ST.)
(Manuel Zoza St.-Ord. No. 974) - OPEN
81 Katipunan Street 3.301 20.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
82 Kawitr Street 0.190 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
83 La Guardia Street 0.390 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
84 La Solidaridad Street (Jereza St.) 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
85 Labucay, E. Street 0.160 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
86 Lakandula Street 0.395 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
87 Lanzones Street 0.150 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
 88 Laurel, J. Street 0.160 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
89 Laurel, S. Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
90 Lemon Street 0.300 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
91 Lim, V. Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
92 Limbong, J. Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
93 Lincoln Street 0.385 8.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
94 Llamas, F. Street 2.120 20.00 - 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
95 Logarta, M. Street 0.360 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
96 Lomboy Street 0.265 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
97 Lopez, A. Street 0.680 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
98 Lopez, Lucio Drive 0.330 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
99 Lopez, P. Street 0.223 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
100 Lorega Street 0.471 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
101 Ma. Cristina Extension 0.440 20.00 - 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
102 Ma. Cristina Street (Nicolas 0.310 15.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
Rafols St.)
103 Macaroni Street 0.170 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
104 Macopa Street 0.450 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
105 Magsaysay Street 0.390 12.00 - 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
106 Manalili Street 0.504 18.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
107 Mangga Street 0.100 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
108 Mariposa Street 0.450 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
109 Mina, C. Street 0.388 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
110 Mina, F. Street 0.179 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
111 Mirasol Street 0.180 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
112 Molave Street 0.645 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
113 Noel M. Cong. Street 0.100 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
114 Noli Me Tangere 0.205 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
115 Orchid Street 0.340 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
116 Osmeña, Juana Street 0.745 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
117 Osmeña, Emilio Street 0.293 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
118 Osmeña, Juana Extension St. 0.600 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
119 Padilla, R. Street 0.460 10.00 25.00 5.00 2.00 - OPEN
120 Padilla, T. Street 10.00 30.00 5.00 2.00 - ARCADED
121 Paez, Magno Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
122 Panganiban Extension Street 0.450 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
123 Panganiban Street 0.420 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
124 Pasteur Street 0.146 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
125 Pelaez Extension Street 0.400 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
126 Pelaez Street 0.725 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
127 Plaridel Extension Street 0.070 20.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
128 Plaridel Street 0.479 10.00 - 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
129 Pond, Arlington Street 0.214 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
130 Pond, Elizabeth Street 0.620 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
(Ramon Aboitiz St.)
131 Pond, Elizabeth Ext. Street 0.480 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
132 President Aguinaldo Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
133 President Magsaysay Street 0.475 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
134 President Quirino Street 0.390 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
135 President Roxas Street 0.740 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
136 President Quezon Street 0.350 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
137 Progresso Stree (Jose Leyson 0.160 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
St.)
138 Queen's Road 0.200 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
139 Rallos, F. Street 0.300 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
140 Ramos, F. Street 0.960 10.00 - 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
141 Ranudo, V. Extension Street 0.180 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
142 Ranudo, V. Street 0.315 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
143 Rodriguez, B. Extension St. 0.245 16.00-18.00 - 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
144 Rodriguez, B. Street 0.842 22.00 - 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
145 Rodriguez, Don Pedro Street 0.350 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
146 Rosario, A. Street 0.140 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
147 Rosario, P. Del Extension 1.081 15.00 24.00 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
148 Rosario, P. Del Street 0.870 20.50-30.00 - 3.00 0.60 - ARCADED
149 Saint Lawrence Street 0.288 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
150 Sal-ing Street 0.110 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
151 Salvador Street 0.612 20.00 - 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
152 Sambag 2nd Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
153 Sambag 3rd Street 0.120 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
154 Sambag 4th Street 0.083 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
155 Sambag 5th Street 0.200 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
156 Sambag 6th Street 0.095 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
157 Sambag 7th Street 0.254 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
158 Sambag 8th Street 0.280 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
159 Sambag 1st Street 0.235 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
160 Sambag, Banawan Street 0.200 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
161 Sambag Road Lot No. 3 0.165 6.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
162 Sampaguita Street (C.Rosal St.) 0.365 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
163 Sampaguita West 0.380 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
164 San Bernardino St. RD. Lot 6 0.100 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
165 San Bernardino St. RD. Lot7 0.350 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
166 San Bernardino St. RD. Lot No. 2 0.060 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
167 San Bernardino St. RD. Lot 5 0.120 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
168 San Bernardino St. RD. Lot 4 0.190 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
169 San Jose Extension Street 0.160 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
170 San Jose Street (Rodolfo 0.585 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
Rahman St.)
171 San Miguel Street 0.455 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
172 San Roque Street 0.195 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
173 Santa Ana Street 0.170 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
174 Santol Street 0.098 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
175 Seloy Street 0.190 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
176 Sepulveda Street 0.550 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
177 Sikatuna Street 1.083 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
178 Sikatuna Extension Street 0.300 10.00 20.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
179 Silang, Diego Street 0.120 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
180 Simoun Street 0.109 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
181 Sitio Kawayan Street 0.156 6.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
182 Sotto, F. Street 0.110 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
183 Spolarium Street 0.586 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
184 Stephenson Street 0.365 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
185 Sudlon Street 0.110 6.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
186 Sun Valley Street 0.480 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
187 Sunrise Street 0.170 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
188 Tabada, Col. Street 0.810 8.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
189 Tabura, I. Street 0.570 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
190 Tabura, J. Street 0.415 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
191 Tambis Sambag Street 0.490 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
192 Tandang Sora Street 0.280 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
193 Tindalo Street 0.570 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
194 Tormis, A. Street 0.330 8.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
195 Tres De Abril St. (A. Lopez- 2.501 10.00 30.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
Llamas)
196 Tres, Padres Street 0.820 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
197 Tudtud, Gil Street 0.382 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
198 Tudtud, L. Street 1.539 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
199 Tuti Street (T. Abella St.) 0.465 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
200 Urdaneta, P. Street 0.175 10.00 15.00 3.00 0.60 - OPEN
201 Urgello, V. Street 0.350 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
202 Urgello, J. Street 0.550 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
203 Valle, A. Street 0.200 6.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
204 Velez, M. Street 0.540 20.00 - 5.00 2.00 2.00 OPEN
205 Veloso, H. Street 0.315 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
206 Victoria Street 0.145 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
207 Villa Abuno Street 0.357 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
208 Villa Gonzalo Street 0.650 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
209 Villa Teresita Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
210 Villa, T. Street 0.250 10.00 - 1.20 - - OPEN
211 Visitacion Street 0.450 8.00 10.00 1.20 - - OPEN
212 Zamora Street 0.085 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN
213 Zulueta Street 0.260 10.00 12.00 2.00 0.60 - OPEN

Table 2.13.1.4
Status of Cebu City Major Roads
As of June 30,1999

Name of Roads Station Limits Asphalt Concrete Gravel Total

Cebu South Road 0.874 - 8.550 7.676 7.676
(Fuente Osmena-P. del Rosario) (0.874 - 2.007) (1.133)
(Cebu South Expressway P. del (2.007-4.762) (2.755)
Rosario Mambaling) (4.762 - 4.762) (2.000)
(Basak-Pardo-Bulacao) (6.762 - 8.550) (1.788)
Osmena Blvd. (Frmr Juan Luna) 2.007 - 3.117 1.110 1.11
(Pdel Rosario-M.J. Cuenco Ave)
Colon Street
(Osmena Blvd.-Mabini St.) 2.362 - 2.992 0.630 1.153
(Osmena Blvd.-C. Padilla St.) 2.362 - 2.885 0.523
R.R. Landon
(Osmena Blvd.-Sports Center) 1.676 - 2.160 0.484 0.987
(Osmena Blvd.-D Jakosalem St.) 1.676 - 2.179 0.503
C. Padilla Street
(Colon St.-Rizal Ave.) 2.885 - 4.455 1.570 1.570
Sanciangco Street 2.195 - 2.918 0.723 0.723
(Osmena Blvd.-Tres de Abril)
Carlock Street 6.306 - 6.978 0.672 0.672
(Tres de Abril-Tupaz St.)
Mabini Street 2.992 - 3.116 0.124 0.124
(Colon St-Mabini St Km 3.116)
Lopez Jaena Street 3.116 - 3.442 0.326 0.326
(Mabini St.-M.J. Cuenco Ave.)
Cebu North Road 0.000 - 4.289 4.289
(Capitol - Gen. Maxilom Ave.) (0.000 - 1.062) 1.062
(Gen. Max. Ave. - Gorordo Ave.) (1.062 - 2.129) 1.129
Gen Max Ave-Gor.-M.J. Cuenco) (2.129 - 2.523) 0.394
(Cuenco Ave-Subangdaku (2.523 - 4.289) 1.766
N.G. Escario Street 1.080
(Capitol-Gorordo Ave.) (0.000 - 1.007) 1.007
(Capitol-Don Gil Garcia) (0.000 - 0.073) 0.073
Civic Center Road I 0.073 - 0.545 0.472 0.472
(N.Escario St. - N.Escario St.)
Civic Center Road II 0.199 - 0.349 0.150 0.150
(Civic Center Rd. I - Civic
Center Road I)
M. Velez Street 0.199 - 0.703 0.504 0.504
(Civic Center Rd. I/II-
V. Rama Ave.)
Cebu Guadalupe Road 0.703 - 2.782 2.079 2.079
(V. Rama Ave.-Guadalupe
Church)
Sub-Total 20.836 2.079 22.915
V. Rama Avenue 0.703 - 2.857 2.154 2.154
(M. Velez/Guadape Road -
Tres de Abril)
Tres de Abril 2.857 - 3.807 0.950 0.950

(V. Rama Ave. - Tupaz St.

B. Rodriguez Street 0.794 - 1.469 0.675 0.675
(Osmena Blvd. V. Rama Ave.)
B. Rodriguez Extension 1.187 - 1.354 0.167 0.167
(B. Rodriguez St. - Dead End)
D. Jakosalem St. 1.612 - 3.986 2.374 2.374
(Gen. Max. Ave.-Quezon Blvd.)
F. Sotto Drive 1.612 - 2.063 0.451 0.451
(Gen. Max. Ave. - Gorordo Ave.)
Gorordo Avenue 2.129 - 4.589 2.460 2.460
(Gen. Max. Ave. - Salinas Drive
Trans Central Highway)
Archbishop Reyes Avenue 2.439 - 3.824 1.385 1.385
(Gorordo Ave. - Juan Luna)
Cebu Cadre Road 3.824 - 5.484 1.660 1.660
(Juan Luna/Salinas-Mahiga Br.)
Old Cadre Road 4.934 - 5.611 0.677 0.677
(Cadre Road-Cadre Road)
Salinas Drive 4.589 - 5.739 1.150 1.150
(Gorordo Ave./TCH-Juan Luna)
Camp Lapu-lapu Rd./Cpd 4.683 - 7.394 2.711 2.711
(Salinas Drive - inside Camp)
Gen. Max. Ave. Ext. 2.523 - 2.845 0.322 0.322
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-
A. Soriano St.)
Fifth Street (Gen. Max. Ext. / 2.845 - 3.485 0.640 0.640
Don A. Soriano-Second Street)
Juan Luna St. 1.594
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-Salinas Dr.) 3.594 5.088 1.494
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-San Jose de 3.594 - 3.694 0.100
la Montaña Bridge)
Eight Street (San Jose de la 3.694 - 4.564 0.870 0.870
Montaña Bridge)
Sub-Total 17.195 3.045 20.24
M.J. Cuenco Ave(Plaza-Carreta 2.523 - 4.552 2.029 2.029
V. Sotto Street 3.707 - 4.214 0.507 0.507
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-Quezon Blvd)
R. Palma Street 3.802 - 4.216 0.414 0.414
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-Quezon Blvd)
Legaspi Extension 4.217 - 4.562 0.345 0.345
(M.J. Cuenco Ave-Quezon Blvd)
Magallanes Tupas St. 4.374 - 6.306 1.932
(M.J. Cuenco Ave - Carlock St) 4.374 - 5.719 1.345
5.719 - 5.819 0.100
5.819 - 6.306 0.487
A. Borromeo Street 4.971 - 5.585 0.614 0.614
(Mag./Manalili-Sanciangko)
F. Gonzales Street 4.878 - 5.206 0.328 0.402
(Osmena Blvd. - M.C. Briones) 4.878 - 4.952 0.074
Lapu-lapu Street 3.020 - 3.269 0.249 0.249
(Osmena Blvd. - Quezon Blvd.)
P. Burgos St. 4.569 - 5.024 0.455 0.455
F. Calderon Street 5.130 - 5.420 0.290 0.290
(Lincoln St. - Quezon Blvd.)
M.c. Briones Street 4.326 - 5.183 0.857
(Mc. Arthur Blvd. - L. Kilat St.) (4.326 - 4.867) 0.541
(4.867 - 5.183) 0.316
Quezon Blvd. I 4.552 - 5.247 0.695 0.695
(M.J. Cuenco Ave. - L. Kilat St.)

Quezon Blvd. II 4.552 - 5.687 1.135 1.135

(M.J. Cuenco ve. - V. Sotto St.)

Quezon Boulevard Ext. 5.687 - 7.725 2.038

(Quezon Blvd. V. Sotto - 8th St.) (5.687 - 7.114) 1.427
(7.114 - 7.725) 0.611
Second Avenue 4.358 - 6.254 1.896 1.896
(T. Padilla/McArthur Blvd
8th St. Plus)
S. Osmena Blvd. 3.947 - 4.358 0.411 1.201
(V. Sotto St. - T. Padilla St.) 3.947 - 4.518 0.571
(V. Sotto St. - M.C. Briones St.) 4.518 - 4.737 0.219
Sub-Total 13.813 0.100 1.146 15.059
Martirez Pier II Road 4.213 - 4.440 0.227 0.227
(McArthur Blvd. - Quezon Blvd.)
Waterfront Road I 4.314 - 4.538 0.224 0.224
(McArthur Blvd. - Quezon Blvd.)
Waterfront Road II 4.384 - 4.486 0.102 0.102
(Arellano Blvd. - Quezon Blvd.)
Arellano Boulevard 1.620
(V. Sotto St. - Legaspi Ext.) 4.082 - 4.633 0.551
(V. Sotto St. - 6th St.) 4.082 - 5.151 1.069
Transcentral Highway 4.589 - 20.189 15.600
(Gorordo Ave Salinas Dr Babag) (4.589 - 6.889) 2.300
(6.889 - 16.489) 9.600
 (16.489 - 20.189) 3.700
F. Cabahug Ext. 4.413 - 5.898 1.485
(SJ dela Montana Cabahug Br) (4.413 - 5.690) 1.277
(5.690 - 5.898) 0.208
Fuente Osmena Road 1.062 - 1.227 0.165 0.165
(Mercury Drug - Rositas)
Unnamed St. near Spolarium 4.454 - 4.527 0.073 0.073
(Alaska Br. - Spolarium St.)
Imus Road (Sikatuna-Gen Max.) 1.606 - 2.523 0.917 0.917
H. Cortez Extension 7.626 - 7.944 0.318 0.318
Gov. Cuenco Avenue 5.484 - 9.811 4.327
Good 5.484 - 6.713 1.229
Fair 6.713 - 7.615 0.902
Good 7.615 - 7.745 0.130
Good 7.745 - 9.811 2.066
Sub-Total 10.191 11.167 3.700 25.058
DISTRICT TOTAL 62.035 16.391 4.846 83.272

Source: Cebu City Engineering District

Table 2.13.1.5
Road Classifications
Classification Length (kms.) Percentage
National Road 159.6 14.0
Provincial Road 112.5 9.9
City Road 171.1 15.0
Municipal Road 66.4 5.8
Barangay Road 630.6 55.3
Total 1,140.2 100.0

Public and Private Transport

a) Type of Transport

Public transport in Metro Cebu is composed mainly of the jeepneys and buses,
the latter serving most of the routes outside Metro Cebu while jeepneys dominate
the route within the area. Taxi service only covers the small proportion of total
person trips.

It was estimated that the total number of person trips in Metro Cebu grew from
1.14 million in 1979 to about 1.5 million a day in 1992 as shown in Table
2.13.1.06. The relatively rapid growth of private vehicle traffic contributes to the
change in road-based traffic situation. The share of public transport has reached
about 90% of the total traffic demand in 1979 but has been gradually declining
since then. The current modal split is estimated to be 20% - 80% for private
versus public transport.

Table 2.13.1.6
Trip Demand By Mode, 1979 and 1992

TRIP TRIP DEMAND Annual 1992/

 1979 1992 Average Trip 1979
Growth (%)
Private Mode 110,500 305,666 13.6% 2.76
Person-trips (9.7%) (20.6%)
Public Mode 1,028,900 1,180,408 1.13% 1.14
Person-trips (90.3%) (79.4%)
TOTAL 1,139,400 1,486,074 2.34% 1.30
(100%) (100%)
Trip Generation 1.10 1.26 - -
(Trips per person/day)

b. Transport and Traffic Surveys

The most comprehensive traffic surveys conducted in Metro Cebu was in

1992 yet although several spot surveys with specific site and limited duration
were conducted since 1992 up to the present. These were:

• Traffic study component for the Feasibility Study of the Mass Transport
System for Cebu, 1992, 1995

• Traffic study component for the Metro Cebu Development Project III
(MCDP 3), 1993

• Traffic Count, The Second Mandaue Mactan Bridge Project, 1995

• The Traffic Management Study for Mandaue City, 2000

The surveys conducted were in the 1992 study is briefly explained in

Table 34.1.07.

The survey included the following: Transit Boarding and Alighting Survey
and Transit Travel Time and Delay Survey.

A boarding and alighting survey was designed to provide factual

information on characteristics of passengers who board and alight at
selected times and location along a study route.

Table 2.13.1.7
Traffic Survey Conducted

Type of Survey Objectives Methodology Coverage

1) Screenline Survey To determine Inter-urban a) vehicular traffic count by 20 stations
traffic characteristics direction for 16 hrs.
b) vehicle occupancy count
by direction for 16 hrs
2) Cordonline Survey To determine Inter-urban a) vehicular traffic count 4 stations
traffic characteristics b) vehicle occupancy count
c) roadside interview for 12
hrs.
3) Intersection/ Road To determine traffic volume a) vehicular traffic count by 10 stations
Sections Count at selected intersections direction for 12 hrs.
Survey and road sections on
major thoroughgfares
 4) Travel Time To determine the length of a) For public transport, the 10 major routes; 5
Survey time required to traverse test car trailed behind a of which are
a specific route or a public mode from origin to representative of
given road section destination recording all public transport
stops. routes and 5
b) For private transport, the routes preferred
test car traveled selected by private
routes during a.m., p.m. motorists
and off peak hours.

A travel time and delay survey was conducted to evaluate the quality of
service along a public transportation route, to determine location, types
and duration of delay to transit vehicles. The efficiency of public transit
service was measured in terms of travel and running speeds. Total travel
and running times were obtained and then converted into the
corresponding speeds. Delay information was recorded when the transit
vehicle wass stopped or greatly impeded. The duration of delay was
measured in seconds along with notations of the location and cause of
delay to operations along the transit route.

It was observed that the problems in the system are aggravated by lack of
discipline by motorists and pedestrians alike, and by deficiencies in
management, particularly in the area of law enforcement. No traffic
management schemes can be successful if citizens continue to flout traffic
rules and regulations.

c. Results of Surveys

Evaluating the level of service of the major road links in Metro Cebu
using the travel time and delay studies conducted under the MCDP III,
considers the following:

Ten (10) routes were selected, five (5) of which representing private
vehicle routes and the other five (5) representing public utility vehicle
routes. The results showed that for private vehicles, the travel speed
ranges from about 6.5 kph to 24.5 kph. A mean travel speed of 15 kph
seems to represent almost all routes during peak hours. For the public
utility vehicles, speed ranges from 12 kph to about 30 kph, higher than
what was observed for the private vehicles and this is because of the
tendency of public vehicle to outrun each other for passengers.

d. Motor Vehicle Registration

Per data gathered from the Land Transportation Office (LTO), motor
vehicles registration in Cebu City tremendously increased from 69.824
vehicles in 1994 to 95, 861 in 1999, a total increase of 26,000 vehicles or
an average annual growth rate of 7.5 percent car registration by type
revealed that private cars dominate at 87.4 % followed by public utility
vehicles at 10.4 % and government registered vehicles 2.2 %. Cebu
Province have a higher annual growth rate of 10.5 %, from 125,000 units
in 1994 to about 140,000 in 1999. Region 7 have a slightly lower annual
growth rate compared to the Province of Cebu registering some 162,000
vehicles in 1994 to about 235,000 in 1997.

Table 2.13.1.8
Number of Motor vehicles Registered By Type and By Classifications, 1999
 AGENCY TYPE OF MOTOR VEHICLE TOTAL %
CARS UTILITY V TRUCKS BUSES MC/TC TRAILERS SHARE

PRIVATE 33,252 62,231 24,331 116 106,587 2,208 228,725 82.96

GOVERNEMNT 249 2,623 820 17 1,928 34 5,671 2.06
DIPLOMATIC 1 - - - - - 1 0.00
FOR HIRE 4,808 11,640 1,841 1,548 21,263 207 41,307 14.98
TOTAL 38,310 76,494 26,993 1,681 129,778 2,449 275,704 100.00
% SHARE OF TOTAL 38.90 27.74 9.79 0.61 47.07 0.89

Factors Influencing Performance

The transportation planning process of Metro Cebu from its inception, study
and formulation of strategic transportation plans for Metro Cebu, which
includes Cebu City was started with the Metro Cebu Land Use and Transport
Study (MCLUTS) in the early eighties.

The creation of the Metro Cebu Development Project (MCDP) as a project

management unit had the objective to oversee and manage the
implementation of identified priority infrastructure projects based on the
MCLUTS finding. It had the endorsement of the local officials of Metro Cebu.
Based on actual experience, the following are the observation as the overall
assessment of the MCLUTS-MCDP Projects.

a. Delayed implementation of priority projects

The actual implementation of projects was very much behind schedule

based on the timetable as suggested under the study.

The road construction priorities identified during MCLUTS period and their
scheduled completion dates for the road links in Cebu City, are as follows

Road Link Scope of Work Completion

• Cebu South Road - Road Upgrading , 1990

• V. Rama Avenue - Road Upgrading , 1990
• Guadalupe Road - Road Upgrading , 1990
• Katipunan St. - Road Upgrading , 1990
• Gorordo Avenue - Road Upgrading , 1990
• N. Escario St. - Road Upgrading , 1990
• Arch. Reyes Avenue - Road Upgrading , 1990
• Imus-M.J. Cuenco - New Link , 1986
• F. Cabahug - New Link , 1986
• H. Cortes Extension - New Link , 1986
connecting to North Reclamation

In actuality, the new links were completed only in 1991 and 92 some 5 to
6 years beyond schedule and some of the road upgrading projects are not
even completed until now. These projects were purposely prioritized to
cater for short term travel requirements and alleviate traffic congestion but
because of their non-completion on time, they did not served fully their
purpose.

b. Sourcing of funding is tedious and limited

 Priority projects (i.e., roads, traffic, signals, bus terminals, etc.) need pre-
requisite studies before being funded an implemented. Based on actual
experience, it will take some 3 to 4 years from the study period until the
source funding is identified and approved and another three years when
consultants and contractors are selected until implementation and
completion. Therefore planning and required studies shall be made early
so funding for these projects can also be prioritized for implementeation.

Counterpart funds from the Government are very difficult to secure and
are limited. As a requirement in availing foreign loans from the ADB,
JIBC, World Bank, among other lending institutions, Government
counterpart funds are necessary. And, most of the time, these are
intended for the right-of-way (ROW) acquisition.

Proponent cities and municipalities have to compete with the rest of LGUs
in the Philippines to be able to secure enough counterpart funds to avail
of the foreign funding.

c. Urban projects are complex projects

Delays are often encountered in the execution of urban projects being

complex in nature like those in the MCDP, it involved coordinated efforts
among various agencies concerned namely:

DPWH - for right-of-way (ROW) acquisition

VECO - for relocation of affected electrical posts
PLDT - for relocation of affected telecommunication post
MCWD - for relocation of affected water pipelines
MCDP - as the project management unit in close coordination
with foreign and local consultants
Contractor - as the implementor /builder of projects based on
approved plans
OECF/JIBC - for funding requirements and releasing
City Asses - for assessment of real estate properties affected
sors Office and corresponding land property valuation.

Other agencies/entities involved are RDC and MCDP through their

Boards where regular monitoring and decision-makings are made.

d. Approval of Variation Orders

Even if recommended plans are appropriate, because of funding

constraints, the quality of the project in some cases maybe sacrificed a
little to complete one project. In case of road projects, the required ROW
has to be reduced due to limited funds for acquisition of affected
properties or the concrete pavement originally proposed has to be
changed to asphalt to satisfy the remaining available funds.

Political influence may also affect changes in earlier approved plans. In

case of prioritizing projects for implementation, local officials would
normally tend to favor the immediate implementation of projects within
their turf or area of responsibility. The comprehensive package of projects
to be implemented will be rendered partially ineffective because some of
its components were not included in the actual implementation.
 Ideally, in order to attain satisfactory results of urban projects, it is obvious
that the benefits intended to its beneficiaries should be realized through
quality-completed projects and not sacrificed ones.

Transport Sector Analysis

Traffic Flow Analysis

Intersection counts were obtained from the Traffic Engineering Center (TEC)
through the Metro Cebu Traffic Engineering and Management Project.
These data were analyzed using a computer program developed by the
Consultant. Congestion indices such as intersection delay and degree of
congestion/saturation were computed to evaluate the over-all design of
intersection with respect to geometric design and cycle length.

a) Level of Service

In the absence of a local manual on highway capacity, US Highway

Capacity Manual is used in determining the level of service (LOS) for
signalized intersection. The LOS for signalized intersection is defined in
terms of delay. Specifically, the LOS criteria are stated in terms of the
average stopped delay per vehicle.

i. Level of Service (LOS) Description

LOS A describes operations with very low delay. This occurs when
progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during
the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths
may also contribute to low delay.

LOS B generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle

lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of
average daily.

LOS C describes operations with higher delays, which may result from
fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths.
Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number
of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass
through the intersection without stopping.

LOS D describes operations with delay in the range of 25.1 to 40.0

seconds per vehicle. At LOS D, the influence of congestion becomes
more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle, or high volume capacity ratios.
Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping
declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.

LOS E is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high

delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths,
high volume capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent
occurrences.

LOS F is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This

condition often occurs with over saturation, i.e., when arrival flow rates
exceed the capacity of intersection. It may also occur at high volume
capacity ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor
progression and long cycle lengths may also be the major contributing
causes to such levels.
ii. Level of Service Evaluation

LOS values generally range from B to F with about 75 percent of the

intersections in the C to F range - indicating a high level of congestion
on most intersections.

Table 2.13.1.9
Level of Service Evaluation
Level of Service Stopped Daily
(LOS) Per vehicle (in seconds)
A less than 5.0
B 5.1 to 15.0
C 15.1 to 25
D 25.1 to 40.0
E 40.1 to 60.0
F Greater than 60.0

b) Intersection Analysis

Both morning and afternoon peak hours were analyzed and the
degree of congestion for each period was computed. Normally, a
value of 1.0 or higher is considered over saturated while a value
lower than 1.0 is said to be under saturated. However, for an
intersection controlled by traffic signals to operate well, the maximum
degree of congestion should be about 0.80 with a practical limit of
0.90, beyond which the situation tends to become unstable.

As shown, a number of intersections are almost nearing or exceeding

the practical limit. These computed values are rather on the
conservative side since possible reduction of saturation flow rates that
may be attributed to pedestrian activities or poor condition of the
roadways are not included in the assumptions. These factors may
further increase or worsen the degree of congestion values. Also the
signal controllers are assumed to be operating with optimum signal
settings. In the case of arterials with a series of signalized
intersections, good progression of traffic movement is assumed.
Deviation from such assumptions may still result to higher degree of
congestion values.

Generally, deficiencies in provisions include:

i) Sub-standard cross section

ii) Inadequate intersection design
ii) Lack of intersection control
iii) Poor road surfaces
iv) Inadequate road signing, pavement marking and other facilities
v) Poor roadway lighting

Many roads are too narrow for their task. Some do not have curb
gutter and sidewalks, which leads to the deterioration of the pavement
and intrusion of roadside activities.
 In many areas in Metro Cebu, through and local road pavements are
failing, either due to inadequate sub-grade preparation, drainage or
poor surfacing. They not only cause capacity constraints and delays
but are dangerous to both pedestrians and vehicles. Even more
delays result during repairs.

Travel Demand Analysis

Origin – Destination (OD) tables can be generated by expanding the HIS

data using census and sample counts of population by municipality, by age
group and gender. The tables were developed for four (4) trip purposes,
namely: to home, to work, to school, and to private business.

The total trips for the different purposes on the municipal level were later
expanded for the adopted 52 zoning system, (FS Metro Cebu Transit System:
1992).

The daily trip ends for public and private passengers are:

Mode Total Trips Percentage (%)

Private 231,064 12
Public 1,671,273 88
Total 1,902,337 100

Calibrating the Trip Generation/Attraction Model

Using the 1992 developed OD tables, trip generation/attraction models on

municipal level were calibrated for private and public passenger trips using
multiple regression analysis.

The results are as follows:

a) Private Trips

Production

-139.47 + 3.4E(-2) * Pop + 0.22 * Emp + 0.27 * Enr

(Multiple R = 0.67)

Attraction

159.53 + 4.4E(-2) * Pop + .034 * Emp + 0.57 * Enr

(Multiple R = 0.71)

b) Public Trips

Production

2874.12 – 0.35 * Pop + 1.41 * Emp + 2.71 * Enr

(Multiple R = 0.78)
Attraction

6369.71 – 0.39 * Pop + 0.96 * Emp + 2.67 * Enr

(Multiple R = 0.277)
 where: Pop = day time population
Emp = employment
Enr = enrolment

c) Applying the above equations, the resulting trip ends for the year 2012
are:

Mode Total Trips Percentage (%)

Private 515,.416 17
Public 2,492,066 83
Total 3,007,482 100

Urban Transit Demand

The population and activity patterns of Metro Cebu generate some 1.9
million trips a day in 1992. Based on the Home Interview Survey (HIS)
conducted on the same year, 88 percent were made by public mode
(mass transit), i.e., by jeepney, bus and taxi and 12 percent for private
mode (private cars and trucks).

Using the 1992 OD tables, trip generation/attraction models on municipal

levels were calibrated for private and public passenger trips using multiple
regression methodology. The resulting trip ends for the year 2012 have
private mode increased to 515,416 private trips while public mode has a
total of 2.5 million trips per day or 83 percent. The total trip ends for both
private and public resulted to 3,007,482 trips for the year 2012.

Having an annual average trip growth rate of 13.6 percent for private
person trips and a growth rate of 1.13 percent for public person trips, the
trip demand for the year 2020 are as follows:

The Metro Cebu Trip Demand Projection was based on the 1979
MCLUTS report and the 1992 Home Interview Supplemental Survey
conducted by MCDP for phase 3. The same findings were reflected in the
Metro Cebu Mass transit Study conducted this Consultant.

Metro Cebu Trip Demand Projection

TripDemand
Trip 1979 1992 2012 2020
Private Mode 110,500 305,666 515,416 989,910
(person-trips) (9.7%) (20.6%) (17.1%) (23.4%)
Public Mode 1,028,900 1,180,408 2,492,066 3,229,717
(Person-trips) (90.3%) (79.4%) (82.9%) (76.6%)
Total 1,139,400 1,486,074 3,007,482 4,219,227
(100%) (100%) (100%) (100%)
Trip generation
(trips per person 1.10 1.26 1.54 1.61
per day)

Given the base years of 1979 and 1992 and the projection made by SKI
for year 2012, the trip demand for the year 2020 was estimated based on
the average growth rate both for private (8.5%) and public (3.3%) modes.
 By year 2020, the modal split of private and public mode shifted to 23
percent private and 77 percent public mode. This will realize a total of
4,219,627 person-trips for the whole Metro Cebu area with a trip
generation of 1.61 trips per person per day.
It is anticipated that Cebu City will experience a declining rate of person-
trips since based on the projected population of Cebu City there is also a
decline in the population growth rate. This can be attributed to the
present development pattern of Metro Cebu where the linear dispersed
development with mainland reclamation has transpired. These findings
were confirmed by the Special Assistance For Project Formation
(SAPROF) team of the then Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
(OECF) of Japan and supported by the development projects identified
and implemented by the MCDP.

Although Cebu City will experience a decline on the population growth

rate as projected, Metro Cebu will continue to experience a steady
population growth rate of about 3 percent. The increase in population will
be distributed to the component cities and municipalities of Metro Cebu.

Priority Issues and Concerns

Transport System Deficiencies

The overall traffic congestion in Cebu City in particular and Metro Cebu in general is
going up at an alarming rate. There is a heavy dependence on road-based transport.
Traffic congestion is expected to worsen as transport demand increases due to
vibrant economic activities, the inpouring of investments, the influx of people due to
better work opportunities, and better access to basic social services.

The major transport deficiencies in Metro Cebu can be summarized as follows:

• Sub-standard cross sectional roads

• Primary and secondary road network not functioning as network
• Urban functions are heavily concentrated in the central business districts (CBD)
of Cebu and Mandaue where road network improvement is difficult to introduce.
• Lack of continuity of some road links and poor geometric designs of road links
and intersections aggravating road congestion.
• Unavailability of segregated service roads to major retail centers. On-street
parking minimizes the carrying capacities of most roads.
• Absence of by-pass roads between the north and the south roads thus
necessitating all vehicles to pass through the already congested CBD.

Urban Development Direction

Over the years, transportation has played a pivotal role in the urban growth pattern of
the Metropolis. The planned introduction of a continuous coastal highway from
Compostela in the north to connect to Naga in the south, with the inclusion of the
outer Cebu circumferential road from Liloan in the north to Talisay in the south, in the
proposed development projects, urban development has evolved along a linear
pattern with urban sprawl moving towards the hillside. Land use control and other
forms of restructuring such as squatters resettlement, the grouping of institutional
and government functions will definitely affect the urban form in the future.

2.13.1.2 Development Needs

• With improved transport utilities and infrastructure in Liloan/Consolacion in the

north to Talisay/Minglanilla in the south, movement of population to these areas is
expected.
• High density, medium rise housing development around Mandaue and Cebu
south reclamation areas.

• Depopulation of environmentally critical areas like Mananga watershed and

resettlement of affected communities to employment centers like Cebu south
reclamation.

• Commercial development

Increased commercial activities in Cebu City as recommended in the spatial

framework plan

Urban renewal of existing CBD into a mixed residential/commercial use

Expansion of commercial district to Camputhaw, Lahug, Apas, and Kasambagan

areas.

Development of office, commercial and financial centers in Cebu Business Park

and Cebu North Reclamation area

• Industrial development

Concentration of new industrial area at Cebu South Reclamation and adjacent

areas.

Establishment of a civic center at the former Lahug airport

• Recreational areas, parks and open spaces

Development of mountain resort and luxury housing communities in Pung-ol,

Sibugay, Babag, Malubog, Busay, and Budlaan (outside of the watershed areas)

Development of parks and riverfronts

Development of urban forest parks and parkways along the hillside by-pass road

Development of the green corridor along the main Cebu water bodies

• Transport infrastructure development

Establishment of a generally grid pattern of road network with at least four (4)
arterial roads running north-south and a hillside by-pass road with distributor
roads plus the secondary roads traversing east-west.

Increased port activities in Cebu port with port related industries concentrated in
Cebu north reclamation area.

Sectoral Vision

Cebu City will have safe, smooth and convenient access within, to the neighboring
Metro Cebu towns, the Philippines and the World.

Sectoral Mission

To provide an efficient transportation system by encouraging the development of a

balanced, affordable and efficient mass transportation system.
 Sectoral Objectives

• Provide adequate accessibility to all planned land uses;

• Provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods while preserving,
enhancing, or reclaiming neighborhood livability;
• Minimize the impact of inter-and intra-metropolitan trips on city
neighborhoods, commercial areas, and the city street system by maximizing
the use of metropolitan trafficways and transitways for such trips;
• Reduce reliance on the automobile and per capita vehicle traveled;
• Guide the use of the city street system to control air pollution, traffic, and
livability problems; and
• Maintain the infrastructure in good condition.

2.13.1.3Strategies and Programs

a) Hasten completion of ongoing major transport projects and secure funding

for projects on the detailed planning stage

Several major transportation projects are on going and on the planning stage
that when completed will really ease up the existing congestion of the city
streets especially during school days. The completion of these projects should
be prioritized and closely monitored:

• The Cebu South Coastal Road (MCDP 3 / DPWH, JBIC)

This link should have provided the most direct access from the south
towns of Cebu to the Cebu Business District, the ports and the airport.
Had the project been started as originally scheduled in 1997, Cebu should
have benefited by its completion this year, however, because of politics,
until now the project has not completely taken off the ground.
Considerable re works on the plans and designs have to be done since
1997 due to the realignments, provision of exit ramps and access
problems at LUDO area.

The City should put the completion of this very important link on the
highest priority.

• The Cebu South Road Project (DPWH, JBIC)

This link will connect Carcar to the end of the Cebu South Coastal Road
and will provide the complete access to all the municipalities of southern
Cebu including Barili up to Samboan.

The present political crisis and peace and order problem in Mindanao
suspended the actual implementation of the project. As with the Cebu
South Coastal Road, Cebu City should lobby with the National
Government so actual implementation can immediately start.

• The Cebu Transcentral Highway (DPWH, IBRD)

This particular road link will ultimately connect Western Cebu to the CBD,
the ports and the airports in Metro Cebu. Under the Province of Cebu
Masterplan Study, this is the commercial/tourist route for the Western
seaboard. The project is on its completion stage, although the original
date of completion of this project was two years ago. The city can
 likewise coordinate with the National Government for the final completion
and turnover of this project.

• The Cebu-Toledo Wharf Road (DPWH, GOP)

The last major road link that will complete the connections to Metro Cebu,
all parts of the province and its developing growth centers is this road link.
It has been bidded out but as with the Cebu South Road project, actual
notice to proceed could not be issued because of actual cash problems
suffered by the National Government.

This link is the industrial route for Western seaboard. The City should
likewise help in the start and ultimate completion of this project through
follow-up with the National Government.

• Cebu City Circumferential Road Project (Cebu City)

The only remaining component of MCDP 3 that has not been

implemented to date is the Cebu City Circumferential road. The
alignment, which will start in Tisa will traverse the interior-mountain side of
Cebu City and terminates in SunnyHills subdivision in Banilad. The link
when completed will become the tourist/private route of Cebu City and
shall already be constructed utilizing the recommended cross section with
linear park.

To date, the project maybe implemented through a grant from several

donor countries in Europe and America who had been visiting Cebu City
in the last eighteen months for the assessment and evaluation of the
project. Complimentary to this, the City should pursue the inclusion of the
project as part of the MCDP III uncompleted projects under ODA.

• Construction of Flyovers (DPWH, GOP)

Several flyovers have been planned at selected congested intersections

in the City and one is on its completion stage (Archbishop Reyes-Juan
Luna intersection). The provision of flyovers is actually a temporary
solution to a long-term problem and unless total flyover system is
implemented almost simultaneously, the completion of one structure in
one intersection simply transfers the congestion problem to the next
intersection. It does not totally solve the traffic problem, instead its
construction creates inconveniences and severe traffic jams during the
entire period of its implementation.

Except for the one almost completed, Cebu City should not anymore
pursue the construction of the rest until a complete program (for the whole
city) with complete funding over a reasonable time period to complete is
assured.
• Traffic Signals and Intersection Signages (DOTC, CITOM)

The programmed expansion of the City’s traffic signal system for the other
intersections included in the overall plan of CITOM and DOTC shall be
pursued.

• Mass Transport System (DOTC, Province of Cebu)

The existing pattern of traffic and traffic volume of Cebu City and Metro
Cebu warrants already a mass transport system as revealed by the
project feasibility conducted in 1995 by the Provincial Government.
 Another system looked into by the City some two to three years back is an
urban bus-based mass transport system patterned after the curitibabus
system.

DOTC, recently conducted an update of the feasibility study for a mass

transport system in Cebu and considers specifically a light rail system but
did not look into the combination of the above two as earlier suggested, or
other forms of mass transport such as a monorail and others.

Last June the DOTC Secretary himself commented that the LRT does not
sound like a good investment for Cebu citing that even in thickly
populated cities in other countries, LRT systems have failed to earn (CDN,
June 20, 2000).

While LRT systems do not pollute the environment as buses and jeepneys
do, a closer evaluation have to be done by the City to look at the overall
viability and feasibility of the project before it gives the go signal for its
implementation.

• Cebu Port Complex (CPA)

Cebu is envisioned to become the country’s domestic and international

shipping hub once the proposed PhP 8 Billion port project will be
completed. The Cebu Port Authority is planning to build the Cebu
Container Port Complex project, a facility that will be built on a 60-hectare
area and will have a four kilometer berthing area containing eight berth
each for domestic and foreign vessels plus one berth for the use of luxury
liners.

At present, the masterplan on the development of this project is to be

conducted with a scheduled completion date of about 18 months from
where another year of detailed design can hopefully materialize the
project and start actual implementation in 2007 or 2008. The City should
be involved in the overall planning of the project and should monitor its
progress.

• Fast Ferry Terminal (Cebu City, USAID)

One of the major component of the Cebu Waterfront Development project

of the City is the Proposed Fast Ferry which when completed will provide
direct and shorter access from the Visayan and north Mindanao cities to
Cebu City and Metro Cebu, hence would further strengthen the economic
and trade opportunities of the City.
The City just recently has signed the Memorandum of Agreement with
USAID for the masterplanning and feasibility study of the project. The
same has the support of the Philippine Ports Authority with the
Memorandum of Agreement signed by both. The City therefore should
pursue the project up to its implementation.

• Inter-City Road Widening / Improvement Project

At the barangay level, most of thel projects were identified by the local
officials and constituents. The following were some of the projects
recommended during the series of barangay consultations conducted by
the study team:

i) Road widening in twelve barangays

ii)Upgrading and paving of roads in twenty barangays
 iii)Rerouting and/or opening of new jeepney routes in six barangays.

These projects, most of which are not included under the major projects
have to be considered by the City and detailed planning prioritization and
implementation have to be prepared. The only major problems for most
of the above projects is road right of way of which, two main concerns are
associated with, i.e. funding and actual acquisition.

b. Intergovernmental Coordination

Initiate the formulation of a Metropolitan Transportation System Plan for Metro

Cebu. All transport planning should be coordinated and local governments,
affected regional line agencies, the congressional districts and the private groups
involved in transport and its infrastructure development shall follow the agreed
Metro Cebu Transportation System Plan. All activities including management of
funding and sources for transport and transport infrastructure shall always be
coordinated and monitored. Update the Transportation element of the Master
Plan to be consistent with the recommended Metropolitan Transportation System
Plan.

c. Coordinate Land Use and Transportation Planning

Coordinate land use planning with transportation planning. The Transportation

element of the Master Plan will guide the land use planning and transportation
project development process.

d. Enforce Guidelines on Transport Plans

1. Metropolitan and City Travel Patterns

Major traffic seats, collector roads, and neighborhood collectors should be

designed or managed to serve as alternative routes for metropolitan and
provincial trips. Collectors should serve as the distributor of local traffic to
and from major city traffic streets. Local service traffic streets should not
carry excess traffic from collector streets or experience high traffic volumes or
speed.

2. New Metropolitan Trafficways

Future increases in metropolitan traffic should be accommodated by

improvements to the existing trafficways and by building new corridors for
circumferential freeways within the central area of the city.

3. Neighborhood Collector and Local Service Street Traffic

Management

Manage traffic on neighborhood collectors and local service streets according

to hierarchy. Measures taken by CITOM, within the criteria of both the
collector recovery and neighborhood traffic management programs, to
manage traffic on neighborhood collectors and local service streets should
encourage non-local traffic to use streets with higher traffic classifications and
should not significantly divert traffic to other nearby streets of the same or
lower classification.

5. Urban Form
 Support a city form composed of mixed-use centers served by a multi-modal
transportation system. New development roads should be served by
interconnected public streets to provide safe and convenient pedestrian,
bicycle and vehicle access. Street and pedestrian connections should be
provided to transit routes and within and between new and existing
residential, commercial, and industrial areas and other activity centers.

6. Public Transit

Develop transit as the preferred form of person trips to and from the central
area, all growth centers, and proposed light rail stations. Enhance access to
transit along main streets and transit corridors. Transit shall not be viewed
simply as a method of reducing peak-hour, work-trip congestion on the
automobile network, but shall serve all trip types. Reduce transit travel times
on the primary transit network, in the central area, and in metropolitan and
growth centers, to achieve reasonable travel times and levels of reliability,

7. Rail Corridors

Assign priority to the funding and development of the metropolitan mass

transit system to reduce both the need for new metropolitan traffic facilities
and reliance on the automobile. Decisions on light rail transitway alignments
and their connections to other metropolitan facilities should be based on
individual corridor studies. Metropolitan transitway designations in the
northern and southern corridors represent alternative alignments for future
light rail transitways. The transportation element should be amended to show
the chosen alignment as determined by the Consultant preparing the
feasibility study of light rail transport system. Funding decisions for light rail
transit corridors should be based upon the population being served, the
opportunities for redevelopment, and the traffic congestion problems in the
corridors.

8. Transit-Oriented Development

Reinforce the link between transit and land use by increasing residential
densities on residentially-zoned lands and encouraging transit-oriented
development along major city transit streets and metropolitan transitways, as
well as in activity centers, at existing and planned light rail transit stations,
and at transit centers in with the Master Plan.

Objectives:

•Make the existence or ease of providing transit to office buildings and other
major employment centers a major consideration in approving locations
for these activities.

•Locate all new medium and high-density development in transit-oriented

developments. Require all major developments along transit lines to
orient to the transit line and provide either a transit stop on site or
connection to a transit stop.

•Provide infrastructure needed to support public and private transit-oriented

development. Design transit routes and transit facilities to support transit
use by providing bus stops, pullouts and shelters, pedestrian facilities,
and other similar improvements.
 •The highest priority is the development of effective feeder bus or van pool of
services for metropolitan transit access; the lowest priority is park and ride
lots.

•Consider Park and Ride lot locations where:

•Transit ridership is increased;

•Vehicle kilometers traveled are reduced;
•Surrounding area is not negatively impacted; and
•Transit supportive development is not hampered.

•A monitoring system for tracking park and ride use of public streets should
be initiated by the city in areas near transit stations. The area parking
permit program (APPP) should be used to control on-street park and ride
activity when the APPP criteria are met.

9. Barrier-Free Design

Transportation facilities shall be accessible to all people. All improvements do

the transportation system (traffic, transit, bicycle and pedestrian) in the public
right-of-way shall comply with the standard requirements.

e. Pedestrian Transportation

Plan and complete a pedestrian network that increases the opportunities for
walking to shopping and services, institutional and recreational destinations,
employment, and transit.

Objectives:

• Promote walking as the mode of choice for short trips by giving priority to the
completion of the pedestrian network that serves Pedestrian Districts,
neighborhood shopping, schools, and parks.

• Support walking to transit by giving priority to the completion of the pedestrian

network that serves transit centers, stations, and stops; by providing adequate
crossing opportunities at transit stops; and by planning and designing pedestrian
improvements that allow adequate space for transit stop facilities.

• Improve the quality of the pedestrian environment by implementing pedestrian

design guidelines to ensure that new public and private development meets a
pedestrian quality standard and by developing special design districts for
pedestrian districts and main streets.

• Increase pedestrian safety and convenience by identifying and analyzing high

pedestrian collision locations; by making physical improvements, such as traffic
calming, signal improvements, and crossing improvements in areas of high
pedestrian use; and by supporting changes to adopted statutes and codes that
would enhance pedestrian safety.

• Encourage walking by developing educational programs for both motorists and

walkers and by supporting and participating in encouragement events for
walkers.

• Explore a range of funding options for pedestrian improvements to supplement

reliance on general transportation revenues.
f. Encourage Bicycle Transportation where practically possible

Make the bicycle an integral part of daily life in Cebu City, particularly for trips of
less than five kilometers. This can be achieved by implementing a bikeway
network, providing end-of-trip facilities, improving bicycle/transit integration,
encouraging bicycle use, and making bicycling safer.

Objectives:

• Complete a network of bikeways that serves bicyclists’ needs, especially for

travel to employment centers, commercial districts, transit stations,
institutions, and recreational destinations.

• Provide bikeway facilities that are appropriate to the street classifications,

traffic volume and speed on all rights-of-way.

• Maintain and improve the quality, operation, and integrity of bikeway network
facilities.

Provide short- and/or long-term bicycle parking in commercial districts, along

Main Streets, in employment centers and multifamily developments, at schools
and colleges, in industrial developments, at special events, in recreational areas,
and transit facilities such as light rail stations and park-and-ride lots.

• Provide showers and changing facilities for commuting cyclists. Support

development of such facilities in commercial buildings and at “Bike
Central” locations.

• Increase the number of bicycle-transit trips. Develop and support “Bikes

On Transit” program.

• Develop and implement education and encouragement plans aimed at

youth, adult cyclists, and motorists. Increase public awareness of the
benefits of bicycling and of available resources and facilities.

• Promote bicycling as transportation to and from school.

g. Transportation Demand Management

Require the use of transportation demand management techniques such as

carpooling, ridesharing, flexible work hours, telecommuting, parking
management, and employer-subsidized transit passes to mitigate the impact of
development-generated traffic in land use reviews. Require a percentage of
employee parking spaces to be set aside for preferential carpool/vanpool parking.

h. Parking Management

To achieve environmental and transportation policy objectives, the parking supply

shall be managed to take into account both transportation capacity and parking
demand. Implement measures to reduce parking spaces per capita over the next
20 years. Through the land use process, these measures should include
restrictions on the development of new spaces and the redevelopment of existing
parking spaces for other uses.

1. On-Street Parking Management

 Manage the supply, operations and demand for parking and loading in the
public right-of-way to encourage economic vitality, traffic safety, and livability of
residential neighborhoods. Parking in the right-of-way, in general, should
serve land uses in the immediate area. Maintain existing on-street parking in
older neighborhoods where off-street parking is inadequate. Parking for
individuals, or at specific locations, is not guaranteed by this policy. However,
the City should act to protect parking, first for residents and second for
customers and visitors.

2. Off-Street Parking

Off-street parking will be the primary source of parking supply. The zoning
code shall require private development of adequate, but not excessive, off-
street parking for all land uses placed near existing or future transit service.
The city will not require the private development of off-street parking in these
zones because any growth in access roads is expected to be met primarily by
transit vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians.

3. Institutional Parking

Encourage institutions to regulate parking facilities to first provide short-term

parking for users, and secondly, to use demand management to minimize the
amount of employee parking required. In approving land use changes for
institutions, parking impacts on surrounding residential areas shall be
mitigated.

i. Clean Air and Energy Efficiency

Encourage the use of all modes of travel that contribute to clean air and energy
efficiency.

j. Multimodal

Coordinate the planning, development, and interconnection of all modes of

passenger transportation. Mactan-Cebu International Airport is the hub air
passenger facility; connections for all modes should be provided to the airport.
Existing north and south bus terminals and proposed establishment of pocket
terminals should be made as the hub of the multi-modal transportation center and
should serve as the primary passenger inter-city bus terminal in the metropolitan
area, providing direct connections between passenger proposed light rail
stations, inter-city jeepneys, taxis, and airport bus shuttles.

Freight Intermodal Facilities and Freight Activity Areas

Develop and maintain a multimodal transportation system for the safe and
efficient movement of goods within the city.

Objectives:

• Coordinate the planning and development of marine-related land use and

aviation facilities with the Port of Cebu as well as other affected agencies,
groups, and individuals.

• Preserve the public and private investment in the freight network.

 • Consider the need for freight movement when conducting multimodal
transportation studies.

k. Right-of-way Opportunities

Preserve existing and abandoned road rights-of-way and examine their potential
for future freight, passenger service, or recreational trail uses. Acquire or control
parcels of land that may be needed in the future for any transportation purpose
when the opportunity arises through sale, donation, or land use action.

l. Market-Based Congestion Management

Advocate a metropolitan, market-based system to price or charge for an auto trip

during the peak hours. The pricing strategies should be set based on the
environmental and social costs of single-occupant commuters.

m. Access Management

The city will work with DOTC and DPWH on a case-by-case basis as they
develop access management agreements for national highways within the city.
Local street connections to arterials from new subdivisions should be designed
with adequate spacing to provide for local access to the arterial, while at the
same time minimizing conflicts with through traffic.

n. Adequacy of Transportation Facilities

Ensure that amendments to the Master Plan or land use regulations which
change allowed land uses, including goal exceptions, map amendments, zone
changes, conditional uses, and sectoral plans, and which significantly affect a
transportation facility, are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and
level of service of the facility.

o. Public Involvement

Carry out a public involvement process that is consistent with proposed

transportation strategies and guidelines and provides information about
transportation issues and processes to citizens, especially to those traditionally
under-served by transportation services/

p. Transportation Education

Publicize activities and the availability of resources and facilities to encourage

use of alternate modes of travel to the automobile. Implement educational
programs that promote transportation choices and safety for all modes of travel
and that recognize the need for developing and maintaining a comprehensive
transportation system that supports freight as well as passenger movements

q. Street Vacations

Allow street vacations only when there is no existing or future need for the right-
of-way, the established city street pattern will not be significantly interrupted, and
the functional purpose of nearby streets will be maintained. Evaluate
opportunities and the need for a bikeway, walkway, or other transportation use
when considering vacation for a street. Where pedestrian and bicycle facilities
are needed, the first preference is to retain public right-of-way for these uses. If
retaining right-of-way is not feasible, a public easement can be required along
with public improvements where they will preserve or enhance circulation needs.
r. Improvement and Maintenance

First priority for the expenditure of general fund revenues on public-rights-of-way

will be to maintain and prevent deterioration of the existing street system.

1. Transit Corridors

High priority will be given to improvements, which promote more effective

public transportation for those streets functioning as transit corridors.

2. Street Improvements

Allow improvements to public rights-of-way only if consistent with the

transportation plan.

3. Local Service Street Improvements

Construct local service streets in accordance with existing and planned

neighborhood land use patterns and accepted engineering standards,
including the provision of sidewalks on most streets. Sidewalks should be on
both sides of the street except where physical or topographic conditions render
it impracticable. Construct local residential streets to minimize pavement width
and total right-of-way width consistent with the operational needs of the facility
and taking into account the needs of both pedestrians and vehicles.

4. Transit Improvements

Construct or modify transit streets to promote more efficient and effective

public transportation and improve access for pedestrians to transit. Construct
transit streets so that transit vehicle movement is not significantly impaired or
made unsafe by street width, turning radii or other physical constraints.

5. Bikeways Improvements

Provide bikeway facilities appropriate to the street classifications, traffic

volume, and speed in the design and construction of all new or reconstructed
streets. Where the appropriate bikeway facility cannot be provided on the
street, provide alternative access for bicycles on parallel streets. Bicyclist
safety should be the highest priority in the design of all bikeway facilities.

s. Other Transport Related Strategies

1. Public Bicycle Parking

Provide for safe short-term and safe, sheltered long-term bicycle parking in
the right-of-way by provision public-owned garages throughout the central
area and in other areas of the city where needed.

2. Pedestrian Improvements on Arterials

Provide for safe pedestrian movement along all new or reconstructed streets
classified as neighborhood collectors or above (other than controlled access
roadways). Develop additional pedestrian walkways where needed for safe,
direct access to schools, parks and other community facilities.

3. Local Improvement Districts

 Encourage the formation of local improvement districts (LIDs), a clusters of
barangays, in currently developed areas to make street improvements,
including sidewalks, drainage, and street trees, where feasible.

4. Expansion/Construction

Require that expansion and construction of new streets is of high quality

structural materials in order to minimize future maintenance costs. Expansion
and construction of new streets should also be supportive of the desired
network and capacity of the transportation system.

5. Building Type Parking Facilities

The building type parking facilities are also recommended for

implementeation in the short-term period. The lack of parking facilities
especially in the central business district is contributing worsening traffic
situation. It is high time for building type parking facilities be realized.

t. Underground Utility Ducts

Utility ducts of infrastructure companies like VECO, PLDT, and Cable Companies
should be constructed underground to cater for the eventual phase out of surface
or elevated utility lines. In this manner, maintenance a repair works will be safer,
faster and will not convenience traffic.

High Occupancy Jeepneys

Jeepneys have to be transformed into a higher capacity to encourage high-density

public transportation. Jeepneys have to be retained in order to ply along historical
and selected routes.

Table 2.13.1.10
Priority Transport Projects Barangay Level

Barangay Transportation Needs/ Problems Solution/

Intervention
Hipodromo • Congested traffic proposed one-way road
• Poor road network
(Hipodromo & interior roads)
San Roque • Unpaved roads pave existing roads
(Mc Arthur Blvd.)
Pari- an • Unpaved roads asphalt existing road
(Espina, Sudlon, Mabini)
Luz • Heavy traffic road widening
(Cabantan, Juan Luna)
Apas • Congested traffic road widening
(whole barangay)
Ermita • Congested traffic renovate Carbon Market relocate
(whole barangay) sidewalk, street vendors
Carreta • Traffic/RROW road widening at the interior sitios
(M.J. Cuenco Ave. interior sitios)
Capitol Site • Congested traffic Recommend re-routing (short
(Escario, Avila, M. Velez) distance bet. corners
Talamban • Traffic (narrow road) road widening
• Informal parking regulate parking
(Nasipit, S. Carlos, Cabancalan)
Tinago Footbridge (Silangan) renovate footbridge
T. Padilla • Inaccessible road (T. villa, F. villa) road widening
• Sidewalk vendor regulate vending and parking
• Improper parking
Cogon Ramos • Heavy traffic (Ramos, Ranudo, widen road traffic enforcement
Jakosalem, Mango, Junquera)
• Narrow road, short distance/ traffic
lights
Camputhaw • Traffic accident prone area proposed fly-over infront of Capitol
(Escario St., reckless drivers) Church number coding of vehicles
to pass by Escario St.
Sambag II • Unpaved roads paved roads road widening
(whole barangay, Urgello)
• Narrow roads
Banilad • Roads subject for repair (main road widening
road)
• Narrow roads
Day-as • Congested traffic (Sikatuna, T. road widening
Padilla) regulates 10 wheeler trucks
• Narrow road not to pass the said street
• Ten wheeler truck pass by
Calubihan • Congested traffic (Colon) enforcement of traffic rules by
• Undisciplined drivers traffic enforcers
Sta. Cruz • Traffic roads need to be asphalted
• Unpaved road
• Double parking
Sto. Niño • Lack of parking spaces (V. Gullas, regulate ambulant vendor
Magallanes, Manalili, Colon) require/provide parking spaces for
• Rampant sidewalk vendor business establishment
• No loading/unloading area at provide loading/unloading area at
Colegio del Sto. Niño Colegio del Sto. Niño
Lorega San • Traffic road widening and improve the
Miguel quality of the road
Lahug • traffic (Salinas drive) road widening
• narrow road
Kasambagan No road access (Sta. Lucia, provide exit of subdivision owners
Fairview Corinthian, Laray)
Mabolo • Traffic (L. Tudtud & road at the road widening
back of Carmelite Monastery)
• Narrow road
Pasil Abuno • Narrow and congested interior widening of interior roads
roads
Bulacao • Road network (Sambag, Tubod, road widening
Laguna, Ciwac and Upper Ciwac)
• Narrow roads
Inayawan Narrow roads (entire barangay) road widening
Basak San Unpaved road (Tabada, Alumnos, asphalt roads
Nicolas Cabreros to Tagunol area)
Cogon Pardo • No transportation route (whole ask assistance from LTFRB for
community) proposed route within Cogon Pardo
• Dispute of boundary between
Barangay Inayawan & Cogon
Pardo
 Duljo Unpaved roads (Solarium St.) regular road repair asphalting
Basak Pardo Narrow roads (whole barangay) proposed access road for Basak
Pardo
Poblacion • Heavy traffic/narrow roads road widening
Pardo Cebu South Roads allocate ideal place for sidewalk
• Encroachment of sidewalk vendors vendors
Kinasang-an • Heavy traffic (Inayawan & provision of traffic light and traffic
Kinasang-an intersection) enforcers
• No traffic light & traffic enforcers
Calamba • No route for PUJ’s proposed road right of way
(A. Lopez) put-up regular route
Mambaling • Heavy traffic road widening
• Unpaved roads reduce no. of vehicles
Natividad road, C. Padilla prohibition of dilapidated vehicles
• Lack of funds along the national roads
Quiot Pardo • Unpaved road (Sabellano St., San asphalt roads
Roque, Granade Go Chan, Green
Ville
• Narrow inner roads
Pahina San • Unpaved roads (waling-waling, B. provision of material for road
Nicolas Aranas & A. Borress) asphalting
• Lack of funds
Punta Princesa • Heavy traffic (Tuburan, Arces, regulate sidewalk vendors
Trinidad, Llamas) regulate vehicles
• Vendors along side walk increase
no. of vehicles
San Nicolas • Narrow interior roads widening of interior roads
Proper
Sawang Calero Unpaved road (Tupas & Carlock) provision of materials for road
asphalting
Suba Pasil • Narrow roads (sitios) provision of appropriate
• Sidewalk vendors place of the sidewalk
(Belgium St. Gen Gines) vendors to transfer
Source: Actual Constitution with Barangays, CCSMPS Study Team, 2000