improving commuter experience in public transport
TRANSCRIPT
IMPROVING COMMUTER EXPERIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT TERMINALS THROUGH PLACEMAKING IN
MAKATI CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (MCBD), MAKATI CITY, PHILIPPINES
by
Mea Karla C. Dalumpines
©2017 Mea Karla C. Dalumpines
A demonstration of professional competence submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Urban Placemaking and Management
School of Architecture Pratt Institute
December 2017
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 6
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 7
LITERATURE REVIEW 8
METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS 9
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Commuting in Metro Manila 10
Makati Central Business District 12
Pedestrianization and Placemaking in MCBD 14
The MCBD Commuting Experience 16
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 20
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Framework 23
Case Study Recommendations 25
NEXT STEPS AND CONCLUSIONS 34
BIBLIOGRAPHY 36
ADDENDUM
Addendum #1: Survey Questionnaire 38
Addendum #2: Key Survey Results 41
3
INTRODUCTION
Metro Manila, the Philippines’ center of administrative and financial activity, is one of the densest cities in the world. The megacity composes of 16 cities and municipalities and has a total land area of 620 square kilometers or 239 square miles. In the most recent study by the United Nations, Metro Manila is 18th of the most populated megacities in the world with a total population of 13,131,000 in 2016 and is expected to grow by another 3,000,000 by 2030. As the center of economic growth in the country, surrounding provinces from the northern and southern parts of the island of Luzon congregate in key growth centers such as the Makati Central Business District, Bonifacio Global City and Ortigas Center. Like most Asian cities, Metro Manila is at the peak of the real estate boom, with developments sprouting here and there, creating a web of new townships that link to the principal growth centers in and out of the metropolis. This network of development is expanding to the nearby provinces, where industrial parks, commercial developments and mostly residential enclaves are being built.
The sixteen cities and municipalities of the metropolis is principally connected by a main thoroughfare, Epifanio De Los Santos Avenue or EDSA, a ten-lane highway that also follows MRT 3, the heavily used light rail system that connects to two other light rail lines, LRT 1 and LRT 2. New rail lines serving Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces are also in the government’s transportation project pipeline, for implementation beginning this year. However, the development of these plans, along with the improvements and building of new roads are not easily realized due to game-changing political events such as the EDSA Revolution in 1986 and the changing administrations with different sets of priorities and plans for mass transit. The lack of an efficient mass transit system has led residents within and outside the metropolis to use different modes of private and public ground transportation, increasing the number of vehicles competing for limited road space.
While Metro Manila dawdled in its public infrastructure amidst the metropolis’ continuous exponential growth, the current mobility crisis worsened beyond the critical zone. Metro Manila’s traffic crisis did not happen overnight. It is rooted from lack of urban planning, good governance and political will resulting to infrastructure deficiency, inadequate publicly-managed and well-maintained mass transit system that could have been avoided by building the city’s planned transport infrastructure in time since the 80s. This is further escalated by
Image 1. Satellite image of Metro Manila (source: Google Earth)
4
the increase in motor vehicles competing for limited road space, as a result of inadequate public transportation infrastructure.
Image 2. Morning traffic along Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA), Metro Manila (Source: Inquirer.net)
An estimated total of 18 million trips are made daily, 70% of which are made by public transport (39% by jeepneys, 14% by bus and 9% by rail) and 30% by private cars taking over an inadequate road network that averages a vehicle density of 3,677 per square kilometer, higher than Singapore’s (1,360), Tokyo’s (967) and New York City’s (2,504).1 This makes the average daily commute 90-150 minutes, taking up 20% of a person’s typical 12-hour day. This doesn’t include the wait time one person spends waiting for public transport, whether it’s by bus, jeepney or rail.
The transportation issue in Metro Manila is an urban planning problem that will need a long-term solution that will not fully take effect in 15-20 years. For now, Metro Manila residents must cope with the problem by having to get used to the hassles of daily commute. Commuting is a huge part of daily life in Metro Manila, making transit facilities such as light rail stations and garage terminals as important public spaces in Manila’s urban life. In these places, people spend an inordinate amount of time in different types of situations, climates and seasons.
1 Santiago, Rene. “Easing Metro Manila Traffic Congestion.” Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 10, 2016.
5
The commuting experience in the metro starts and ends from the time one leaves his home, workplace or school. Based on interviews and observations, a commuter in Metro Manila will wait an average of 15-30 minutes for transportation to arrive, but during monsoon season and the holiday rush from November to December, wait time can be as long as 60 to 90 minutes depending on the destination. During peak hours, commuters try to cope by squeezing in last minute errands or by overstaying in their workplaces and in shopping malls until the rush hour has waned. For some office workers who work the typical daily 8-hour shift, commuting, including the time spent at terminals, averages around one to two hours.
The commuting experience in transport terminals vary. Some have the necessary amenities while others do not have. Others have limited capacity that makes the experience grueling for the commuter. Ownership of public spaces is also a concern, especially in terms of terminal maintenance and management. Aside from the rail stations, transport terminals aren’t publicly owned. Most are privately owned either by the transportation company or are part of a privately-owned development. Because of this nature, there is an underlying equity issue that hinders the provision of a full serviced experience for both commuters and drivers.
Terminals are one of the mostly used public spaces in Metro Manila. The situation within these places greatly affects the everyday lives of the people, even if they just stayed there for one or two hours. Unlike other public spaces like parks and plazas, terminals are mostly utilitarian that the idea of an enjoyable transit terminal is new especially to commuters. However, with the amount of time spent in these places, it is only right to make commuting an enjoyable experience for passengers and drivers alike, amidst terrible traffic and road conditions that are waiting for them outside. Terminals, like any other public spaces, should be able to uplift the experience of its users and improve the quality of their everyday lives.
6
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Metro Manila is a large city that is experiencing exponential growth. Due to lack of efficient mass transit system, inefficient building of infrastructure brought about by political events and changes in government administration, the current transportation infrastructure is not enough to cover the growth of the city. This is causing immense traffic, conditions that are aggravated by increase of motor vehicles in the city. And this creates a snowball effect, with the traffic situation affecting the commuting experience, experience from the moment you leave your place of origin to the moment you arrive in your destination, including the wait time in terminals.
For growth centers and central business districts where thousands of Metro Manila residents flock to everyday, public transport terminals are important parts of their daily lives. And despite the current mobility crisis that the city is experiencing right now, new developments are still very much transit-oriented rather than commuter and pedestrian-centered, including public transport terminals. This creates a very stressful environment in terminals, which impacts the public’s daily life immensely. With this, there is a need to revisit the current situation of public transport terminals especially in growth centers and central business districts, important urban hubs of commerce, culture and socialization. A thorough review of the existing terminal situation is needed in order to identify the needs for improvement of its amenities, management, maintenance and programming.
7
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of this study is to identify the issues and areas for improvement of public transport terminals in Metro Manila, with Makati Central Business District (MCBD), one of the country’s most important financial districts, as the primary case study area. The following are the key objectives of the study:
1. Identify placemaking strategies to improve commuter experience in transit terminals
The study aims to identify placemaking strategies that will uplift the commuting experience in transport terminals through facility improvements, management and stakeholder involvement strategies and programming. These strategies will be established from the neighborhood context of MCBD and Metro Manila’s current policies and infrastructure situation. Ultimately, these recommendations could be replicated in other growth centers, districts and neighborhoods in the city.
2. Utilize existing infrastructure to improve connectivity and public use
Metro Manila’s growth centers have a number of the public spaces that are underutilized for a number of reasons such as maintenance, prejudiced rules and regulations and lack of programming. The study aims to identify opportunities to utilize untapped public spaces as links and expansion areas for transit terminals. Not only will this provide adequate space for transit terminals, this will also create opportunities for other uses that can provide opportunities to the neighborhood’s economic growth, social dynamics and physical infrastructure.
3. Reimagine transit terminals as places for community and economic building
The transformation of transit terminals into commuter-driven and people-centered places will open opportunities for community collaborations and opportunities for neighborhood economic development. By tapping local businesses and institutions for programming strategies, building partnerships and promoting good commuter habits, ripple effects will be established to slowly address the mobility issues in the country. The city’s commuting culture will be elevated, underlying equity issues in transportation and mobility will be addressed and put to the forefront of national discourse which will pave the way for nation building.
8
LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to fully understand the commuting situation and user experience in MCBD, the following reference materials are reviewed in addition to the data gathering exercises made in the study area.
1. The Makati City Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP).
As MCBD’s primary administrative body, Makati City’s CLUP identifies the city’s growth trajectories for the various urban growth centers in the municipality. Permitted land uses were reviewed as well as zoning regulations which will affect the revisioning exercise for the transit terminals.
2. Makati Central Business District Masterplan
Analysis of MCBD’s pedestrian, transit and growth masterplans paved the way to understand strengths, opportunities and weaknesses of the district’s existing infrastructure.
3. “Preferences of Amenities in Public Transport Terminals Desired by Makati CBD Workers” by Konstantine Koh, Primitivo Cal and Crispin Emmanuel Diaz
A study made last 2011 about amenity preferences in MCBD transit terminals gave insight to the evolution of user preferences from six years ago to the current context. The study also served as reference for survey questions, specifically for the amenity preferences.
4. “Passenger Satisfaction and Mental Adaptation under Adverse Conditions: Case Study in Manila” by Andra Charis Mijares, Mio Suzuki and Tetsuo Yai
Previous studies on passenger satisfaction in Metro Manila served as primary reference in understanding how passengers cope with the daily stresses of commuting established in observations and data gathering.
9
METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS
After analyzing the data of existing terminals and its surrounding neighborhood and existing literature about commuting in Metro Manila and MCBD, a series of data-collecting exercises were initiated in four key terminal types in MCBD: light rail concourse, garage-type terminal, parking lot-type terminal and bus stop or off-street type terminal. Observations, behavioral analysis and activity mapping were accomplished in the study areas in order to understand terminal behavior and current conditions. Surveys were also accomplished by a total of 73 respondents.
Data was gathered between the months of August to early October only, a key seasonal transition in the Philippines from dry to wet season. Based on observations and personal experience, the monsoon season is where commuter experience is at its worst due to consistently heavy traffic during rainy days. Analysis of the surrounding development is limited to the boundaries of the CBD. Limitations were also revealed in the data gathering. Commuting experience were only observed within terminals in the CBD and did not observe the traffic and commuting situation in other growth centers and portions of EDSA outside the CBD boundaries. Volunteers were also enlisted for on-site data verification and collection.
10
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Commuting in Metro Manila
Public transportation in Metro Manila is a combination of light rail, rapid transit, jeepney, bus, taxicabs and ride-share. These major modes of transport connect Metro Manila and its adjacent towns and provinces, augmented by neighborhood public transport services such as auto rickshaws or tricycles and pedicabs for short distances. Due to the demand for more convenient and fast public transport, shuttle vans that work as express point-to-point shuttles are also popular especially in business districts and growth centers. Ride-sharing also became an alternative mode of transportation in the past year.
Image 3. Different modes of public transportation in Metro Manila and surrounding provinces (Source: “Integrating TOD in Urban Development” by Joselito N. Luna, 2015)
Metro Manila is connected by two rapid transit rail systems, the Light Rail Transit
System and Manila Light Rail Transit System which consists of three interconnected lines (LRT 1, LRT 2 and MRT 3). MRT 3 traverses EDSA and is the busiest of the train lines, connecting the city’s main growth centers and financial districts such as the study area of this research, Makati City Business District. Built in 1999 for a capacity of 360,000, its current ridership has increased to 500,000-600,000 passengers daily. It is way above its original capacity and the lack of investment for infrastructure improvement has led for a series of experimental strategies to keep things operational. The strain of its daily operations and the lack of improvements has already caused it to be so problematic for the city, with its almost daily breakdowns. Despite this poor performance and questionable reliability, it is still being patronized because it is the fastest way of travelling to and from different parts of the city.
11
The jeepney is one of the country’s cultural icons and the most popular form of mass transit in the Philippines. Originated from surplus military jeeps from World War II, they were stripped down, decorated and used as a cheap means of transport after the war. The government regulated its use and since then, it is still the most preferred mass transit option because of its cheap and regulated fares. It has a capacity of 16 to 20 passengers, depending on the size and length of the vehicle, and plies through the streets of Metro Manila without regulated stops.
Today, there are a lot of threats to the survival of the jeepneys in the city’s urban mass transit scene. According to a study by Blacksmith Institute and Clean Air Asia Center, the jeepney’s fuel consumption is as much as an average city bus. Last year, the government started to phase-out jeepneys that are 15 years and older as a precursor to an inevitable jeepney modernization project, opposed by a jeepney drivers and operators. A modernization project without much thought will only create job displacements, fare hikes and question the equitable distribution of mass transit in the city.
Despite the number of public transit modes in the city, 75% of vehicles in Metro Manila roads are still private cars.2 People who have the means to buy their own vehicles will still prefer to drive instead of using public transit due to the unreliability of infrastructure and the stressful commute. While the average travel time using the MRT 3 for a 19-kilometer or 11.8-mile distance is only 41 minutes compared to an hour and a half travel by car, the stressful situations in public transit terminals and light rail stations discourage people from choosing this option. Some people would rather brave the terrible traffic conditions inside their own cars than subject themselves to an hour of queueing exposed to the elements while waiting for a train car or a bus.
For the people who have no choice but to use public transport, commuters learned to cope with the situation. In a study by Tokyo Institute of Technology on passenger satisfaction at the MRT 3, actual conditions such as waiting time, risk perception, air quality perception, fare levels and in-vehicle travel time were used to assess the surveys and observations made to the passengers.3 The study concluded mental adaptation increased passenger satisfaction and that is why Metro Manila residents still patronize the MRT 3 system despite its shortcomings. This lowers the expectations for improvement of infrastructure and transit facilities, keeping the commuters complacent that they do not demand better services.4 The study also shows that eliminating the waiting time doubles the passenger satisfaction.
The improvement of commuting experience in Metro Manila is linked to the general improvement of the public transportation, including the elimination of traffic and improved mass transit systems. This entails political will to implement traffic rules on the street, invest in infrastructure and good governance. To solve the issue of public transportation in Metro
2 Villas-Alvaren, Anna Liza. “MMDA Faces greatest challenge: managing 2.5-M vehicles in MM.” Manila Bulletin, December 24, 2016. 3 Mijares, Andra Charis, Mio Suzuki and Tetsuo Yai. “Passenger Satisfaction and Mental Adaptation under Adverse Conditions: Case Study in Manila.” Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2016, pp. 1. 4 Ibid, 157.
12
Manila will entail an urban planning solution that will need the full cooperation of all government agencies, local governments, and the public and private sectors.
Moreover, the transportation situation in Metro Manila does not end with solving traffic and its lack of efficient infrastructure. An underlying equity issue should be addressed, especially in the face of ongoing talks about transportation modernization and jeepney phase-out in the city. Alternative solutions and opportunities for drivers, barkers, passengers and other involved parties in mass transit should be addressed, as well as the ongoing discussion of fare regulations and oil price hikes. Dialogue between transport groups and the national government has always been in talks for years but there should be clear direction about where the city sees itself in the future, a future where 70% of the world’s population is predicted to live in cities.
Makati Central Business District
Makati Central Business District (MCBD) is the leading financial and business district of the Philippines, located in the heart of Makati City in Metro Manila. Originally a farm estate, it evolved into an airfield in the 1930s and eventually as a commercial district in the 1950s. The construction of high-rise buildings in the District, the establishment of the Makati Stock Exchange and the completion of Ayala Avenue, a major thoroughfare that traverses and connects the CBD to EDSA and adjacent cities in the region, established MCBD as an economic hub in the Philippines.
Image 4. Satellite image of Makati Central Business District (MCBD) highlighting major thoroughfares (Source: Google Earth, 2017)
13
Today, MCBD boasts the highest daytime population in the Philippines at 650,000 people.5 Thirty percent of the country’s top 1,000 companies are headquartered in the CBD as well as multinational companies, start-ups and industry leaders.6 It has evolved in use as a purely financial district to a commercial, social and cultural hub, where Filipinos of all walks of life come to live, work and play. MCBD is also a witness to the country’s historical and political upheavals as it became a go-to venue for public demonstrations since the Martial Law years in the 1970s. Its growth and role in shaping the country financially, socially and politically, has made it vulnerable to terror attacks which led to increased security within its public realm.
According to the Makati City zoning ordinance, MCBD is zoned primarily as high density commercial and mixed use (C3) and Central Business District (C4). Currently, the land use is mostly high-rise office buildings and residential condominiums with planned unit developments being developed into mixed-use blocks. Mixed use developments are mostly a combination of residential, office, hotel and retail use, where retail and commercial activity dominate the developments. Retail offerings are a combination of affordable and luxury options, with affordable retail as a significant anchor in its commercial use. There are also a lot of institutional and cultural facilities in the district, such as schools, universities and museums. Ayala Museum, a museum for contemporary Filipino art, is significant in building the art and cultural scene within the CBD.
Image 5. Makati City commercial zoning map (Source: Makati City Planning Department, 2017)
5 Ayala Land Incorporated, 2017. 6 “Estates Overview.” Ayala Land, November 2017, https://www.ayalaland.com.ph/estates/overview
14
MCBD is connected to the entire Metro Manila by various means of public transportation such as jeepneys, local and express buses, shuttle vans and the MRT 3. There are various formal and informal shuttle terminals within the district that serves almost all cities in Metro Manila. The Ayala MRT Station is one of the busiest train stations in the city, serving an estimated 85,000 passengers daily.7 Within the district, jeepneys, taxicabs and ride-share systems serve as the main mode of transport. A proposed BRT line that will connect Ayala Avenue to the city of Manila has been in the drawing board for years.
The governance and management of the CBD is threefold-cooperation between the city government, the original developer of the estate and the estate association. The Makati city government acts as the political arm and support to the CBD and promotes the district to attract investors in the city. Ayala Land Incorporated, the original land owner and developer, leads the planning and design of the CBD and acts as part-time financier for estate projects. Lastly, management is primarily done by Makati Commercial Estate Association (MACEA), an association of lot owners that acts as the main financier and implementing body of all activities in the CBD. This includes traffic management, security, maintenance, marketing, and infrastructure improvement.
Pedestrianization and Placemaking in MCBD
The district also has a healthy amount of pedestrian facilities to promote walking and pedestrianization. In order to address the competition emerging from other growth centers and CBDs, the public perception of a dwindling urban environment and the need for infrastructure to complement the unprecedented economic growth and traffic congestion, MACEA began the improvement of pedestrian infrastructure in the CBD. These includes building walkways, paving sidewalks and other improvements to the current pedestrian infrastructure in order to promote walking, provide an alternative to driving and create a distinct image for MCBD. 8
Today, a network of overhead, underground and on-grade pedestrian walkways serve the entirety of MCBD. They connect all areas of the district, with well-lit, weather protected canopies. Sidewalk fencing and landscaping is also a part of the pedestrian infrastructure improvements made in the district to segregate vehicular traffic from pedestrian activity. Midblock transit stops and pedestrian crossings were also improved. Bus stops have also been improved along Ayala Avenue. Improvements are still ongoing but from data gathered four years after its implementation in 2008, 200,000 people are recorded to use these facilities everyday during the work week, increasing the covered walking distance to 700 meters from 450 meters.9 Amidst aggravating traffic conditions in MCBD brought about by traffic 7 Department of Transportation. “Daily Passenger Traffic per Hour per Station for CY 2014,” December 2017, http://dotr.gov.ph/images/front/Data_Sets/MRT3-DailyPassengerTrafficperHourperStationforCY2014.xlsx 8 Tan, Salvador B. “Makati Central Business District (MCBD) Pedestrian Facilities and Traffic Improvement Projects.” Asian Development Bank presentation, April 27, 2012. 9 Ibid.
15
congestion outside the district, MCBD’s improving pedestrian environment offsets the dense urban conditions of the city.
Image 6. MCBD Walkway Network Map (Source: Ayala Land Incorporated, 2017)
Parks and open spaces have also played a big role in the improvement of urban conditions in the district. The opening of Ayala Triangle Gardens in 2009 sparked the beginning of an appreciation for open spaces and active lifestyle. The 2-hectare (5 acres) garden features public art by local artists, sweeping lawns and landscapes with shading trees and a restaurant strip. Surprisingly, the garden created a culture of jogging around the garden which kickstarted active lifestyle programming in the garden. During Christmas, the Philippines’ biggest event of the year, the garden also becomes a destination with its Christmas light show.
Other parks in MCBD also add interest to the district with its programming, public art and proximity to commercial activity. Greenbelt Park, a lush open space that serves as an amenity to a luxury shopping complex, serves as an equalizer to its high-end surrounding. The public space and the church located in the middle of the park becomes a hub for people of all walks of life. Salcedo Park and Legaspi Park, located in the CBD’s western and eastern section respectively, is a quiet space for relaxation and children playing during the weekdays and a vibrant farmers’ market during the weekend.
16
Aside from that, public art has been a showcase in the CBD, from the pedestrian walkways to the different public and private parks. The CBD also serves as host to an annual art fair which showcases Philippine contemporary visual art and other Southeast Asian artists. Moreover, MCBD also launched “Make It, Makati,” a campaign to promote the district as social and lifestyle destination apart from its reputation as a financial district.
The MCBD Commuting Experience
Image 8. MCBD Terminal Map
As the country’s leading financial district with a daytime population of 600,000 people, MCBD is served by various public transportation options. Office workers from all over Metro Manila reach the CBD via the MRT 3, city buses, express buses, jeepneys and point-to-point shuttle vans. Due to this immense network of transit options, transport terminals serving different modes of transport are scattered around the district. Stops for city buses align the
Image 7. Ayala Triangle Gardens (source: Google Images)
17
stretch of Ayala Avenue. Formal and informal shuttle van terminals located in vacant lots, parking lots and garages are also abundant in the district.
For the purpose of this placemaking study, four major transit terminals will be the case study areas. These terminals serve different modes of transportation in the district: the MRT 3, shuttle vans and jeeps, express buses and city buses.
Image 9. Ayala Center MRT Station (Source: Google images)
In Ayala Center, a planned unit development of mixed-uses including residential towers, shopping centers, office buildings, hotels and parking buildings, transport terminals are big components of the superblock. Adjacent to EDSA, the development is also the location of the Ayala MRT Station, which serves as the anchor for all public transit activities in the district. The station is also connected to the bus terminal going to another growth center, Bonifacio Global City and can be reached from the CBD proper by walking either at grade or through a connection inside a department store. The train concourse also has retail and food options for passengers but the concourse can be very crowded during peak hours. Crowded trains slow down passenger turnover and the concourse can be filled up by long queues, aggravated by slow security inspections before the entrance turnstiles. In worst cases, the queues can be so long that they snake through the entire concourse, down to street level. While there are wayfinding elements in the station, what is missing are train arrival information boards. Moreover, the concourse is owned and developed jointly by the national government (Department of Transportation) and Ayala Land Incorporated, the developer and owner of Ayala Center.
18
One of the main shuttle van terminals in the CBD is Park Square, a parking garage with retail and shuttle van terminals at the ground and second floor. The terminal services 24 shuttle van routes and 3 jeepney routes, to various points in Metro Manila and its adjacent provinces. Retail and food options are available at the ground floor, as well as walkable connections to adjacent retail establishments and shopping centers. Clear wayfinding elements, restrooms, industrial fans and some benches are also provided for the passengers. However, during peak hours, the terminal can be crowded that there is not enough seating. Park Square’s garage and terminal services are all managed by Ayala Center.
Express bus stops are also located within Ayala Center’s sidewalk edges, similar to the situation of bus stops along Ayala Avenue. City bus stops can be very crowded and unorganized without seating or appropriate weather protection. Express bus stops have a semblance of organized queueing but can be very long, depending on the traffic situation outside the CBD and arrival times of buses.
Lastly, the Paseo Center shuttle van terminal is a parking lot toutside Ayala Center. It services nine shuttle van routes to various points in Metro Manila. Since this is a parking lot, there are no proper amenities such as food offerings, restrooms or weather protection.
Image 11. Passenger queueing, Paseo Center Parking Terminal (source; Rolf Ridao, 2017)
For most of these terminals, shuttle van owners and drivers have their own association who coordinates directly with the managers of these parking lots and garages. They pay a fee to be able to park in these facilities and pick-up passengers and sometimes, they are given free passes for parking. However, there is no formalized structure or agreement between drivers and the MCBD estate management.
In a study written in 2011 about preferences of amenities in public transport terminals by MCBD office workers, the top priority for passengers is safety and security. This is followed by amenities related to comfort and convenience such as restrooms, seats and trip
Image 10. Passenger queueing, Park Square Terminal (source: Mark Enriquez, 2017)
19
information boards.10 Moreover, private car passengers are also likely to consider using the public transportation if there are facilities such as park-and-ride amenities. Point-to-point (P2P) express buses provide a similar service by locating their stops in developments where parking options are provided for private car riders. Trip-making and mode connectivity amenities are also preferred by private car passengers and users from higher income groups. Public transport users and users from lower income groups also prefer service oriented facilities. Other amenities such as bike racks, baggage deposit areas, ambient music/TV and aesthetics are recommended amenities but are not top priorities for passengers.
Image 12. Ayala Center P2P bus station
In a way, these preferred amenities are already being provided by some terminals in MCBD. Park Square is providing seats, wayfinding elements and restrooms. The Ayala MRT concourse, despite its shortcomings, is providing passengers with amenities that will augment their wait time through the retail and food options. However, with changing times and the aggravating traffic situation, these basic amenities are not enough to provide comfort and improve the transit experience of MCBD office workers, residents and even public transit drivers. The improvement of the MCBD commuter experience should encompass all elements related to commuting and public transit such as the physical space, the social and organizational dynamic of its users and its economic implications to the district.
10 Cal, Primitivo and Konstatine Koh. “Preferences of Amenities in Public Transport Terminals Desired by Makati CBD Workers,” Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 9, 2011, pp. 1170-1185.
20
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
In the analysis of foot traffic and passenger activity in the four case study areas in MCBD between July to September 2017, most of passenger activity happens in the late afternoon to evening from 5:00 to 11:00pm. This can be attributed to jeeps, buses and shuttle vans dropping off office workers in the morning anywhere in the CBD, from designated bus stops to street corners. Transit terminals are rarely used in the morning, except in the afternoon.
Based on observations, intercept surveys and interviews, most of the passengers work at the CBD and walk to and from transit terminals. For most of the users and respondents, public transport terminals are not social spaces. They go there alone, occasionally meet a friend or an acquaintance in the terminal and choose to not socialize and use their phones to surf the internet while waiting. Some would do a short trip to the mall or to the food kiosks but most passengers would rather queue and wait for transit to arrive. The priority is to get home the quickest way possible, even if it meant standing in line for 30 minutes or more.
From 5:00 to 11:00 in the evening, there is no pattern to the influx of people using the terminal. Wait time varies for each public transport terminal. The longest recorded wait time is 60 to 90 minutes on a rainy Friday, when traffic is heavy and the MRT experiencing breakdowns. The shortest wait time is 10-20 minutes, with an average wait time of 30-40 minutes. The longest wait time occurs from 7:00 to 8:00pm, with 30 to 60 minutes wait time in the MRT concourse, Park Square and bus stops.
Light Rail Concourse (Ayala MRT Station)
Garage Type (Park Square)
Off-Street (Ayala Bus Stop)
Parking Lot Type (Paseo Center)
Time Wait Time Time Wait Time Time Wait Time
Time Wait Time
Monday-Wednesday
5:30pm 20 mins 5:30pm 10 mins 5:30pm 10 mins 5:30pm
10 mins
7:30pm 40 mins 7:30pm 30 mins 7:30pm 20 mins 7:30pm 20 mins
9:30pm 15 mins 9:30pm 10 mins 9:30pm 20 mins 9:30pm 20 mins
Rainy Weather 40-60 mins 30-40 mins 20 mins 40 mins
Thursday-Friday
5:30pm 30 mins 5:30pm 10 mins 5:30pm 20 mins 5:30pm
10 mins
7:30pm 50 mins 7:30pm 30 mins 7:30pm 40 mins 7:30pm 20 mins
9:30pm 15 mins 9:30pm 10 mins 9:30pm 20 mins 9:30pm 20 mins
Rainy Weather 60-90 mins 60 mins 60 mins 40 mins
Table 1. Summary of Passenger Wait Time based on passenger experience data gathered from August to October 2017.
Some terminals feature amenities to improve the passenger’s queueing experience such as food kiosks, restrooms and seating for queues. However, during peak hours when queues can get very long, there is not enough seating for everyone and passengers are forced
21
to wait while standing. Enclosed terminals such as the MRT concourse and Park Square can also get very stuffy despite the provision of industrial fans. There are also separate queues for the senior citizens and the disabled.
MRT Concourse
Garage Type (Park Square)
Off-Street Type (Ayala bus stop, Ayala
Center P2P bus)
Parking Lot Type (Paseo Center)
Food Options Yes Yes No No
Seating No Yes (2 benches per
route) No No
Airconditioning No Yes (industrial fans) N.A. (Outdoor) N.A. (Outdoor) Weather Protection
Yes Yes Yes/No (Canopy only) No
Directions and Wayfinding
Yes (directions only, no train timetable)
Yes (routes) No No
Ticketing System
Yes (Ticket window only)
N.A. N.A. N.A.
Restrooms Yes Yes No No
General Comments
Long, long, long queues that reach ground level; PWD access only through malls, no access outside business hours
Organized queues but not enough seating during peak hours
Unorganized queueing (Ayala Ave)
Organized queues but not very comfortable.
* Non-rail terminals are primarily used from late afternoon to evening (5-11pm). MCBD in-bound public transit drops off passengers anywhere within the District
Table 2. Summary of General Observations based on terminal visits and observations from August to October 2017.
Based from surveys conducted, passengers prefer improvements in the indoor air quality or ventilation, more seating and an organized queueing system. Most survey respondents also preferred transit arrival information or timetables, entertainment and an automated ticketing system for the MRT. Amenities in these public transport terminals were also rated, with restrooms, conditions of seating and general comfort being ranked the lowest. However, despite all these shortcomings, the public still uses these terminals because they provide the most direct routes to their destinations.
Based from observations made in these terminals, surveys and interviews with users, the commuter experience is driven primarily by the waiting and queueing experience. However, the limited space in terminals makes it difficult to create organized lines especially for bus stops and parking lot terminals. In the MRT and Park Square parking garage, formalized queueing systems are being implemented which helps improve the crowded situation.
Unpredictable weather and traffic conditions also mean unpredictable terminal experience. In the Philippines, the rainy season lasts four to six months a year with heavy rains and typhoons with torrential rainfall. And when parts of the city get flooded, traffic can be more terrible that usual. This meant longer wait time for passengers, with most
22
passengers enduring the wasted time to save their spots for early transit arrivals. Others would choose to work overtime or run errands than encounter crowded terminals, bus stops and train stations but most office workers would rather endure the experience in order to arrive home early.
Terminal improvements are also mostly driven by budget. Since terminals in MCBD are mostly privately managed and the profits coming from parking use aren’t that substantial, maintenance and improvements of these terminals are not prioritized. Management of these terminals strives to provide as much as they can for passengers but since terminals technically have no profits, improvements are made on a case to case basis.
Moreover, the public transit experience is also affected by national transportation issues such as fare hikes, oil price hikes and the ongoing plans for public transit modernization. When transport groups announce transit strikes, the entire Metro Manila is affected when public transport groups cease operations. These can last a day or two, affecting all residents of Metro Manila. In this case, terminals should be able to provide assistance to passengers stranded by transit strikes.
23
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Framework
The findings at the Future of Places conference in Stockholm last July 2015 sets the framework for the recommendations of this study. These principles are also adopted in the New Urban Agenda, particularly in its commitment to provide sustainable and equitable public spaces for all. Metro Manila faces challenges that call for fruitful collaboration between the public and private sectors amidst changing development patterns that affects its various diverse communities.
1. A people-centered approach to the design and planning of transit terminals/hubs/developments Whether or not terminals are privately or publicly owned, the design and the provision of amenities should address the people’s immediate needs. Terminal design should consider both commuters’ and drivers’ comfort, convenience, security and accessibility. As important public spaces, terminal design should foster people’s ability to interact with their community, even for a short period of time. Common courtesy, discipline and respect for fellow users should be cultivated in places of transit. The roles of the management and maintenance of the terminals should also be considered, particularly how the shared responsibility between private and public sector should be established.
2. Inclusivity for all Terminals should accommodate all members of the population, including the disabled, the elderly, young people, low-income groups and the marginalized, not just in its design but also in the compliance of their legal privileges to ensure social inclusion in these public spaces. In the Philippines, Republic Act 9994 or the Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2010 and Republic Act 9442 or the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons are laws that protect and give privileges to the elderly and the disabled including discounted fares in public transit. These should also translate in terminal services. There should be a separate ticket counter, queueing, and waiting area for the elderly and the disabled, with terminal personnel assisting them. Lastly, Accessibility Laws must be considered in terminal design as required by the National Building Code of the Philippines.
3. Consideration for human scale and behavior Based on data gathered in this research, the terminal experience is mostly driven by the queueing and waiting experience. Inadequate seating and limited space for queueing are just some of the reasons why the passenger experience is terrible and why terminals should be improved in the study area. Spatial planning for these transport terminals should consider, above everything else, human scale and the added amenities should promote healthy behavior and provide good experiences for
24
all users. Tactical solutions can be accomplished on a short-term basis which could influence the permanent design improvement of these spaces.
4. Responsive web of connectivity and accessibility to the district A healthy city should have public spaces that are within ten-minute walking distance of every resident or office worker. Majority of terminal users walk towards terminals from their places of origin and the moment they leave offices, homes, schools or commercial centers, the commuting experience begins. MCBD has a healthy network of walkable streets and open spaces that are weather protected, well-lit and aesthetically pleasing. However, there is still a need to expand this network to various transit facilities in order to provide proper and humane transit terminals. Transit terminals should be decentralized to another site or two within the CBD to ensure that all workers and residents are within walking distance of these places. Corresponding pedestrian walkways that are safe, protected and aesthetically pleasing are also needed to connect to these new terminal hubs.
5. Profitable terminal spaces and economic productivity to surrounding areas The terminals in the study area are mostly privately owned without government subsidy except for the MRT concourse. Because these terminals only have minimum profitable use, the budget for the maintenance and management of these terminals are also lacking. The public and private sector should create partnerships in order to create revenue generating strategies for the terminals. Terminals also spur and stimulate local economy and can be incubators for local and informal businesses.
6. Equitable access and use of terminals Good design should not be limited to developments targeted for the higher market. For a city as bustling and as important as MCBD, good and healthy design should be prioritized in the development of public spaces and transit terminals. Space planning and all details such as seating facilities and retail options should consider all types of users and activity.
7. Green and resource efficient building system One of the key issues of commuters in MCBD is air quality and pollution. Terminals and bus stops should incorporate sustainable building materials and design strategies such as landscaping, permeable floor materials and passive cooling in order to help mitigate air pollution and improve the indoor air quality especially for structured terminals.
8. Contextual programming of terminal management The design, management and programming of terminals should be rooted to the needs of the community and should address and assist the users in prevalent transit-related issues such as transit modernization, oil price hikes, fare increases, etc. It is also essential for terminals to establish contingency measures such as the provision of shuttles during unforeseen circumstances (transport hikes, flooding, etc) and important transit information for commuters.
25
Case Study Recommendations
The recommendations of this study are based on data gathering, user interviews and surveys accomplished in the four key study areas. Moreover, the data and user preferences were analyzed vis-à-vis the bigger umbrella of transit, mobility and other urban issues MCBD and the entire Metro Manila is facing right now. The strategies aim to address the needs of the commuters at the current urban context including its infrastructure deficiencies, local and regional policies as well as the national government’s future plans for public transportation.The following strategies overlap with each other to address the need for physical improvements of terminals and bus stops; collaborations between stakeholders such as drivers and terminal managers, the local government and property developers; and economic empowerment of transit terminals and the surrounding community it serves.
1. Develop a CBD-wide transit masterplan
Image 13. Proposed MCBD Transit Masterplan showing intermodal terminals
Ayala Land, MCBD’s developer and part-time financier for infrastructure improvements, has developed a pedestrian network masterplan in order to promote and strengthen pedestrianization in the CBD. However, this masterplan is focused solely on the development of more overhead walkways, underpasses and crosswalks, and does not include the public transportation strategy for the CBD. With the current need for more public transit terminals that are easily accessible for both office
26
workers and public transport vehicles, formal and informal shuttle and express bus terminals should be consolidated into larger intermodal transit terminals that will serve the entire CBD.
The construction of the new TOD/intermodal transit terminal in Ayala Center opening in 2021, will serve as an example for how these terminals should work. The recommendation is to select two more sites within the CBD for this facility in order to evenly distribute commuting and arriving pubic transit in the CBD. Sites should be at the fringes of the CBD, easily connected to current pedestrian infrastructure and accessible to public transit in order to separate public transit entering and exiting the CBD.
The first recommended site is the commercial lot at the corner of Ayala Avenue and Buendia Avenue, owned by Ayala Land that will be redeveloped into a new mixed-use office facility. Public transit going to the west of Metro Manila to the cities of Pasay, Manila and southern provinces such as Laguna and Batangas, should be located in this site. The second site is at the corner of the Buendia Avenue and Paseo de Roxas, to serve public transit going to the east and north of Metro Manila.
2. Reinvent current terminals as new urban space
a. Revisit existing layouts
The current space layout of terminals prevents the efficient use of space for queueing, seating and other facilities that will aid in improving commuting experience. There is a need to revisit terminal layouts in order to maximize the space that will equitably distribute spaces for both passengers and drivers.
Case Studies: a.1. Park Square Shuttle Terminal
Based on observations, Park Square’s shuttle terminal is one of the most organized in the CBD. Unlike other parking garage terminals, Park Square has a queueing system that attempts to provide comfort and convenience to its passengers and shuttle services. Revisiting the layout and utilizing the second parking level for terminal use will ensure more spaces for queueing and seating. Terminal management should also invest in seating areas, more food kiosks for on-the-go food options and an industrial fan for additional ventilation to upgrade the experience in the terminal. Survey respondents also prefer to entertain themselves by watching videos using their mobile devices or surfing the internet. With this, television and wifi connection should also be provided. Investing in these types of infrastructure will also prepare the terminal for the future when app-based passenger queueing will be used by public transportation. Moreover, transport routes and other wayfinding elements
27
should also be improved. Vehicular circulation should also be reviewed to maximize the space for passengers.
Image 14. Proposed Ground Floor layout of Park Square Shuttle Terminal
Image 15. Proposed Second Floor layout of Park Square Shuttle Terminal
a.2. MRT Concourse
Similar to other MRT stations, Ayala Station’s passenger concourse transforms into a stressful commuter abyss especially during peak hours with its snaking lines and humid air conditions. The future intermodal transport terminal will connect to the existing concourse and will provide a wider concourse for customer queueing and circulation. The new development will also provide more ingress and egress for passengers to and from the CBD and adjacent growth centers such as Bonifacio Global City. However, while the development isn’t completed yet, minor improvements to the MRT passenger system should be in place already, with the investment assisted by
28
private entities and developments such as MCBD. Ticket machines should be revamped and distributed to other parts of Ayala Center in shopping malls and other public spaces. This will eliminate space used for ticket queueing and provide more for passenger entry and security inspection. Queueing should also be reorganized, separating north bound and south bound passengers. Removing some retail kiosks would also give more circulation space. Phasing for the construction and enhancement of the MRT concourse should also begin with ventilation improvement and lighting works.
Image 16. Proposed Ayala MRT Concourse improvement
b. Utilize existing estate infrastructure
MCBD is amassed with unutilized spaces that have played little roles in the urban fabric of the estate. In Ayala Center alone, Glorietta Park, a small patch of green above the shopping center’s basement parking functions as a space for temporary programming for the estate. Its location in the middle of commercial buildings and hotels could’ve made this into a prime public space but the road surrounding this patch of green has marooned it from being easily accessed by the public. Utilizing untapped spaces such as pocket parks as extensions to transit use will encourage more people to use these spaces while providing more space for transit and commuter use.
29
Case Study: b.1. Glorietta Park extension
The sidewalk across Glorietta Park is used as terminal for express buses. During peak hours, lines take over the circulation space and conceal the storefronts of the restaurants along this path. Office Drive, the small stretch of road in between the park and the sidewalk terminal, is a one-way road that can be converted into a terminal plaza that connects to the park across. By doing this, more circulation and queueing space is provided for express bus passengers, as well as new seating areas for the restaurants along the sidewalk line. The new terminal plaza will also accommodate a covered waiting area with seating that can also be used for other programming such as weekend markets and small events. Glorietta Park’s connection to the new terminal plaza will also open opportunities for facilities like a passenger pavilion where passengers can lounge, buy tickets and wait before boarding public transit. A traffic study might be needed to validate the impact of closing Office Drive, but in order to fully realize this proposal, a pedestrian and commuter-driven mindset is needed from all stakeholders.
Image 17. Proposed Glorietta Park improvement and Transit Center
30
c. Build a business model and multifunctional use for terminals
Because terminals are not revenue-generating developments, one of the issues terminal managers encounter is the lack of funds to plan maintenance and improvement works. Creating a business model that will reinvent terminals as a public service development and commercial venture will ensure that terminals will remain financially sustainable in the future. A new terminal business model can take off from simply mixing revenue-generating uses such as retail to terminal and transit use.
Case Study: c.1. Paseo Center shuttle terminal
The shuttle terminal also works as public parking for office workers in this side of the CBD. However, with the number of shuttle vans parking and taking passengers from this terminal, the parking function is not utilized as much as possible. This side of the CBD also has not a lot of affordable food options, except for food cart businesses and fast food restaurants. Converting the parking lot into a terminal and food park will provide more affordable food options for the north side of MCBD and create a destination as well. Existing food cart businesses in the CBD can be tapped instead of new food truck players, to expand local businesses in Makati. Similar to the terminal plaza concept in Ayala Center, a covered waiting and queueing area with seating will be provided for the passengers. Movable seating will also be provided for the dining areas.
Image 18. Proposed Paseo Center Parking Terminal improvement and food park
31
c.2. Park Square shuttle terminal
The upper parking levels of Park Square can be utilized for temporary uses such as art exhibits and other events. This is a model that is already being done in another parking building within the estate, where an annual art fair is being held in three of its parking floors. This creates revenue and makes cultural events accessible to the general public.
Image 19. Art Fair Philippines is annually held at The Link, a car park building in Ayala Center.
3. Develop a commuting campaign While there is a semblance of organized queueing in MCBD’s terminals, a commuting courtesy campaign will strengthen the value of courtesy amidst the mobility crisis that the city is experiencing right now. Major cities all over the world have adopted transit courtesy campaigns that have created major impacts to the transit experience of its residents and visitors. Tying in a campaign targeted to promote commuting courtesy with the existing Make It Makati tourism campaign through physical ads and social media will create bigger impacts not just within Makati but within Metro Manila as well. The need for self-discipline amidst the current mobility crisis that the city is experiencing should be highlighted to public consciousness to drive change within policies and commuter mindsets.
32
Image 20. Sample transit campaign, Chicago.
4. Strengthen relationships between drivers’ associations and terminal managers
The relationship between terminal managers and drivers’ associations are one of the most important partnerships that need to be established in the improvement of terminals. Aside from commuters, drivers go through a lot in their daily work weaving through Metro Manila’s congested roads. They also have to deal with national policies that affect their livelihood like transport modernization and unfortunate circumstances such as calamities brought about by torrential rain and strong typhoons.
Terminals should be able to engage drivers to cooperate and support terminal policies. Engaging in constant dialogue to sort out concerns and discuss mutually-beneficial policies should be done regularly. Incentive programs for drivers who use terminals should also be given by terminal managers and developers such as minimal administration fees and benefits such as monthly gift certificates from surrounding commercial establishments. These will encourage drivers to pick up passengers in designated terminals instead of illegally picking up passengers outside terminals.
Terminals should also develop drivers’ assistance programs such as drivers licensing and vehicle registration assistance. In coordination with national technical education and skills development agencies, capacity building workshops such as road safety seminars and auto-mechanic workshops should also be given to drivers.
5. Develop a holistic passenger assistance strategy
Passenger assistance in terminals should go beyond the usual information dissemination and assistance to seniors and the disabled. Strategies should go beyond the extra mile and must address the effects of national issues to commuters. For example, during transit hikes and thunderstorms, there are a lot of passengers that get stranded in the CBD. In coordination with companies and offices in the District, terminals should provide shuttles to stranded office workers. This is part of the
33
service that private entities and the local government should provide to members of the MCBD community.
Moreover, the existing Metro Manila traffic mobile app should be improved to provide accurate and up to date information to commuters and drivers alike. The MRT should also have an app that will provide information about train status reports, arrival times and other information. This is also tied into improving the country’s internet infrastructure which will ultimately create more coordinated public transport information apps. There are a lot of opportunities to collaborate with existing mobility and transit apps such as Waze and Grab.
6. Collaborate with existing businesses, institutions and city-wide events
In order to fully develop an organized public transport and commuter strategy, a strong stakeholder dialogue and partnership is needed to fully realize these recommendations. Creating partnerships with existing local businesses such as Makati’s Jollijeep food cart business and institutions such as museums, universities and local tourism agencies will create stronger programming that will elevate the placemaking strategies for these terminals.
Image 21. JolliJeeps, a food truck business in MCBD, sells affordable lunch options for office workers
7. Creating tax incentive programs for terminal developers and owners
MCBD’s terminals are mostly privately owned and managed, without assistance from the government. Local governments should provide tax incentives to these terminal owners, in order to encourage other private entities to incorporate terminal facilities in their developments.
34
NEXT STEPS AND CONCLUSION
The recommendations discussed above can be implemented in phases, according to the level of prioritization and ease of implementation. Revisiting the space layouts of terminals, multifunctional programming for terminals, launching a mobility and transit campaign and creating a drivers association within terminals can be implemented immediately. Improvement of existing infrastructure such as pedestrian walkways and parks can be done next, as well as capacity building programs for drivers, launching a holistic passenger assistance strategy and collaboration with existing community groups. Lastly, the development of new intermodal transit terminals within MCBD and formalizing a business model and tax incentive program for terminals should be part of long-term plans. Maintenance and improvement works should be done from the beginning of this placemaking strategy.
Short-Term Goals Medium-Term Goals Long-Term Goals
Revisit terminal layouts Utilize existing infrastructure Intermodal Public Transit Terminals in the CBD
Multifunctional uses for terminals Incentive programs and capacity building programs for drivers
Build a new business model for terminals
Commuting campaign Holistic passenger assistance strategy
Tax incentives for terminal developers
Relationship building between drivers association and terminal
management
Collaboration with community groups, institutional facilities,
etc.
Maintenance and improvement works for all terminals, bus stops, train stations
Table 3 Proposed ohasing strategy.
In 2018, Makati Central Business District will continue its ongoing improvement of transportation and pedestrian infrastructure, with certain sites allocated for mixed use development. When developed, these sites will have a transit terminal, the scale of which is still subject to study and analysis. Existing terminals are also scheduled for improvement, with transit oriented mixed-use developments incorporating “armoring” design to buildings. However, improving commuter experience does not end with the improvement of terminals and pedestrian infrastructure. The issue of commuter experience stems from a bigger urban planning problem that was heightened by the lack of coordination by various stakeholders.
Public and private partnerships are important in the development of transit facilities that are equitable and user-centered. The monopoly of private entities over key transit areas has created inequitable distribution of pleasant commuter facilities, not just in MCBD but in the entire city as well. Unorganized coordination with government agencies has also created conflict with other modes of transport such as ride-sharing companies like Uber. The lack of
35
dialogue between jeepney drivers and operators have also created a stalemate in the ongoing discussions about jeepney modernization, which rather than improving public transit options for the people has further aggravated ongoing issues of inequity and social injustice.
Public dialogue, while a foreign concept in the development process in Metro Manila, should be instigated at a local level to familiarize all stakeholders to the process of public engagement. Dialogue between the private developers, land owners, members of the community, residents, office workers, government entities and local businesses will unlock the necessary changes that are needed in the public realm. At the very least, bottom-up planning should be practiced in creating public facilities within privately owned developments such as terminals and parks in mixed-use commercial and residential developments.
While public engagement is critical to the development of safe and engaging public spaces in the country, an overall urban planning strategy is needed to address the mobility issues of the city. We are optimistic in thinking that the current state of transportation and mobility in Metro Manila is temporary and that in the future, with good governance and political will, there will be an urban planning solution to all of the city’s problems including public transportation. But for now, these recommendations aim to address the current issues, cognizant of the current politics’ transgressions, the constant battle for social equity and the urban environment’s deficiencies.
36
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Public Transportation Association. “Why Design Matters for Transit,” March 31, 2011, pp. 1-23.
Cal, Primitivo and Konstatine Koh. “Preferences of Amenities in Public Transport Terminals Desired by Makati CBD Workers,” Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 9, 2011, pp. 1170-1185.
Department of Transportation. “Daily Passenger Traffic per Hour per Station for CY 2014,” December 2017, http://dotr.gov.ph/images/front/Data_Sets/MRT3-DailyPassengerTrafficperHourperStationforCY2014.xlsx
“Estates Overview.” Ayala Land, November 2017, https://www.ayalaland.com.ph/estates/overview
Galingan, Zenaida. “Pedestrian-Friendly Streetscape in a Tropical Business District,” MUHON: A Journal of Architecture, Landscape Architecture and the Designed Environment, University of the Philippines College of Architecture, Issue no. 3, pp. 9-15.
Luna, Joselito. “Integrating TOD in Urban Development.” 2nd Transit Oriented Development Conference, November 2015, Goodwood Park Hotel, Singapore.
Mijares, Andra Charis, Mio Suzuki and Tetsuo Yai. “Equity Analysis of Urban Rail Fare Policy and Passenger Overload Delay: An International Comparison and the Case of Metro Manila MRT-3,” Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 10, 2013, pp. 45-65.
Mijares, Andra Charis, Mio Suzuki and Tetsuo Yai. “Passenger Satisfaction and Mental Adaptation under Adverse Conditions: Case Study in Manila.” Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2016, pp. 144-160.
Tan, Salvador B. Email interview. October 2017.
Tan, Salvador B. “Makati Central Business District (MCBD) Pedestrian Facilities and Traffic Improvement Projects,” Asian Development Bank presentation, April 27, 2012.
Tan, Salvador B. “Redefining Business Districts into Safer, Greener and More Pedestrian-Friendly Cities.” 3rd Mixed Use Development Conference, July 2017, Singapore.
TCRP Report #22: “The Role of Transit in Creating Livable Metropolitan Communities,” Transportation Research Board, 1997.
TCRP Report #33: “Transit-Friendly Streets: Design and Traffic Management Strategies to Support Livable Communities,” Transportation Research Board, 1998.
TCRP Report #40: “Strategies to Attract Auto Users to Public Transportation,” Transportation Research Board, 1998.
37
Toth, Gary. “Building Communities Thru Transportation: Thinking Beyond the Station.” Urban Essex Coalition: Creating Great Places Forum, June 25, 2015,
Santiago, Rene. “Easing Metro Manila Traffic Congestion.” Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 10, 2016.
Villas-Alvaren, Anna Liza. “MMDA Faces greatest challenge: managing 2.5-M vehicles in MM.” Manila Bulletin, December 24, 2016.
38
ADDENDUM #1: Survey Questionnaire
MCBD Terminal/stops User Survey Terminal / Bus Stop Location: ____________ Hi! I am a graduate student at Pratt Institute’s School of Architecture and City/Regional Planning in New York City. I am doing my research on how to improve the user experience in public transportation terminal/stops in Makati Central Business District (MCBD). I hope you can spend a few moments of your time in participating in the survey. Thank you! ****ALL QUESTIONS ARE OPTIONAL, RESPOND TO THE ONES YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH!**** 1) What is your connection to MCBD? ℵ Live in the CBD ℵ Work in the CBD ℵ Go to shopping malls in the CBD ℵ Attend events in the CBD ℵ Go to school in the CBD ℵ Other________________________ 2) Typically, how often do you use this terminal/stop? (check one) ℵ Everyday ℵ Two or three times a week ℵ Two or three times a month ℵ Two or three times a year ℵ Once a year ℵ Never 3) What days do you usually use this terminal/stop? ℵ Weekdays ℵ Saturdays ℵ Sundays ℵ All of the above 4) What time of the day do you usually use this terminal/stop? ℵ Morning ℵ Lunchtime ℵ Afternoon/early evening ℵ Evening/nighttime ℵ For special events only ℵ All 5) How do you usually get to this terminal/stop? ℵ Jeep ℵ Bus ℵ Bike ℵ Taxi / ride share (Uber, Grab, etc.) ℵ Walking 7) How long have you lived/worked in MCBD? ℵ I have lived/worked here for __ years ℵ I don’t work around here, I am visiting from elsewhere
39
8) What route do you take? __________________ 9) Why do you use this terminal/stop? ℵ Most direct route to my destination ℵ Roundabout route to my destination (transfer to another route after) ℵ Proximity to my place of residence/work ℵ Close to establishments 10) What is the least amount of time you spent time in the terminal/stop? ℵ One hour or less ℵ 1-3 hours ℵ 3-6 hours 11) What is the most amount of time you spent in the terminal/stop? ℵ One hour or less ℵ 1-3 hours ℵ 3-6 hours 12) While waiting for public transportation to arrive, what else do you do to pass the time? ℵ Eat ℵ Run errands ℵ Meet someone ℵ Work late ℵ Other _________ 13) Who do you usually come to the terminal/stop with? ℵ Alone ℵ Friends ℵ Family/kids ℵ Co-workers ℵ With my dog ℵ Other _________ 14) In your time spent in the terminal/stop, have you recognized anyone you did NOT plan to meet? ℵ Yes, I recognize people here who I did not plan to meet. ℵ No, I don’t recognize people here who I did not plan to meet. 15) Have you interacted with someone who you did NOT come with? ℵ Yes, I have interacted with people ℵ No (please skip next 2 questions). Why? ____________ 16) Did you know them before you interacted with them? (check all that apply) ℵ Yes, my friend ℵ Yes, a friend of a friend ℵ No, but I recognized them from somewhere ℵ No, I have never seen them before 17) What brought about your interaction? (check all that apply) ℵ I knew the person ℵ Work ℵ Sat/stood in line next to each other ℵ Reserved a spot for this person in line
40
ℵ Asked for information ℵ Random conversation ℵ Other (please write) _____________ 18) Please rate the terminal/stop on the following issues. circle one for each issue (1 is bad, 10 is best): a) General cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5 b) Condition and number of restrooms 1 2 3 4 5 c) Condition and number of benches / seating 1 2 3 4 5 d) Comfort 1 2 3 4 5 e) Signage and information 1 2 3 4 5 f) Attractiveness and aesthetics 1 2 3 4 5 g) Lighting 1 2 3 4 5 h) Safety and Security 1 2 3 4 5 19) What do you like best about this terminal/stop? 20) What improvements would you suggest be made to this terminal/stop? a) ____________________________________ b) ____________________________________ c) ____________________________________ 21) What amenities and/or services would the terminal/stop more enjoyable for you? 22) How do you identify? ℵ Male ℵ Female ℵ prefer not to answer 23) What is your age? ℵ Under 18 ℵ 18-34 ℵ 35-50 ℵ 51-65 ℵ Over 65 24) What is your monthly income range? (Optional) ℵ Under 10k ℵ 10k – 25k ℵ 25k -50k ℵ 50k -75k ℵ 75k – 100k ℵ 100k – 150k ℵ 150k-250K ℵ Above 250K
41
ADDENDUM #2: Key Survey Results
Part I. User profile and user experience
1. What is your connection to MCBD?
2. Typically, how often do you use this terminal/stop?
3. What time of the day do you usually use this terminal/stop?
8%
63%
19%
6% 0% 4%
Live in MCBDWork in MCBDGo shopping in MCBDAttend events in MCBDGo to school in MCBDOthers
76%
13%
11% Weekdays
Weekends
All of theabove
18%
40% 18%
8%
16% Morning (MRT)
Afternoon/Early Evening
Evening/Nighttime
Special Events only
All
42
4. How do you usually get to this terminal/stop?
5. How long do you spend in the terminal/stop?
6. While waiting for public transportation to arrive, what do you do to pass the time?
8%
18%
19%
55%
JeepBusTaxi/ride shareWalking
49%
33%
18%
One hour or less
One to two hours
58%
10%
12%
1% 3%
16% Nothing
Eat
Run errands
Meet someone
43
7. Who do you usually come to the terminal/stop with?
8. In your time spent in the terminal/stop, have you recognized anyone you did NOT plan to meet?
9. Have you interacted with someone who you did NOT come with?
86%
10% 4% Alone
Friends and/or co-workersFamily/Kids
59%
41%
Yes, I recognizepeople here who Idid not plan tomeetNo, I don'trecognize peoplehere who I did notplan to meet
52% 48% Yes, I have interactedwith people.
No.
44
Part II. Rating of Terminal Facilities (1 – lowest, 5 – highest)
1. Cleanliness
2. Conditions and Number of Seating
3. Signage and information
4. Lighting
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1
2
3
4
5
45
5. Conditions of Restrooms
6. Ventilation and Air Quality
7. Aesthetics
8. Safety and Security
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1
2
3
4
5
46
Part III. User Preferences
1. Top Improvements to Terminals Ventilation, More seating, Queueing areas
2. Preferred additional amenities Transit arrival information/timetables Entertainment (TV, wifi) Automated Ticketing (MRT)