Marie Nellama, DPWH- 7 spokesperson, said traffic management personnel from Manila conducted a 16-hour traffic volume count, intersection analysis and cost benefit ratio for the projects.
“We are confident that a comprehensive traffic study will come up. Our Manila office also talked with the lot owners who will be affected by the road widening,” Nellama told Cebu Daily News.
She said the study was completed last Dec. 1, two days after Rep. Rachel del Mar and Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama met with President Benigno Aquino on the flyover dispute.
Both flyovers were suspended last September following an outcry from the mayor and civil society groups that included heritage advocates, traffic managers, urban planners and Asilo dela Milagrosa nuns.
President Aquino ordered the DPWH to complete a traffic study of both sites by December to help decide whether the projects, both already bidded out at a combined cost of P600 million, will proceed next year.
Nellama said Public Works and Highways Secretary Rogelio Singson gave them until Dec. 15 to submit the report.
She said their central office is spearheading the traffic study while they just assisted in providing the equipment for the traffic study.
Nellama said it would be their central office which will provide copies to stakeholders, including those who oppose the project.
She said they are negotiating with lot owners who will be affected with the road widening in Gorordo and MJ Cuenco.
In their Nov. 28 meeting, Aquino ordered the DPWH-7 to push through with the road widening, while the flyovers are still held in abeyance.
The road widening is considered Phase 1 of the flyover projects.
Nellama said their office is still identifying the lot owners to be affected by the road widening, so they can estimate the cost for the right of way. /Reporter Candeze R. Mongaya
Cebu Resident Opposed to the Fly-over projects
December 8, 2011
for transparency, would it be possible to publish the written results of the traffic volume count, intersection analysis and cost benefit ratio for the projects conducted by DPWH and compared side by side with the results of the study conducted by the Technical Working Group (TWG)?
This should also include the specific time period when the respective data was gathered. This is to ensure that the study credibly reflects an empirical and objective view of the current and existing traffice conditions along the sites where the flyovers are proposed to be built and not based on out dated data.
This concern is raised based on the perception that the study seems overly expedited which in turn raises speculation that perhaps the DPWH merely adopted the prior findings of data collected within a previous time period when the traffic situation was different from what it is currently.
Further, granting the DPWH study results are current, the same is purported to have been conducted within a 16-hour time frame. A mere 16-hour traffic count, upon this writer’s own opinion, is hard put to accurately reflect the traffic volume which could vary on a day to day basis. Thank you.
disclaimer: i am for the opposition to the fly-over projects. thus, the foregoing statements are partial to the opposition.