Flyover compromise

Not everybody was happy with the results of the traffic impact study done by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) which affirmed its original plan to build a flyover in MJ Cuenco Avenue.

Though it appeared that opposition to the flyover project near the Asilo Milagrosa convinced the powers that be to defer implementation and instead propose construction of an underpass which they said would be more effective in addressing the traffic congestion there.

While it was a nod to active citizens like those in the Movement for Liveable Cebu (MLC) whose cause was elevated by Mayor Michael Rama to Malacañang, the DPWH still insisted that a road structure such as an underpass rather than road widening should be done, an additional burden on taxpayers.

It was no wonder then that the del Mars—former congressman Raul del Mar and his daughter Rep. Rachel del Mar of Cebu City’s north district—considered the study a validation of their insistence in building a network of flyovers in Cebu City that they consider the solution to the urban traffic congestion.

It wasn’t surprising that Mayor Rama considered the DPWH recommendation for an underpass well, since a flyover especially near the Asilo Milagrosa, would not only damage the structure but obscure the skyline view. For him, maybe an underpass was a suitable compromise even if it would cost more.

The problem is that stakeholders like the MLC insist that road widening should be done first and then an evaluation done before deciding whether to build a flyover either in the MJ Cuenco Avenue area or at the church site—a valid argument for those questioning the practicality of building these behemoth structures in the middle of the road rather than the city’s exit and entry points where vehicular congestion is much lighter than in the city proper.

The DPWH traffic impact study was mostly technical — the number of vehicles passing an area from 6 a.m to 10 p.m, the space occupied and so on, but we have yet to hear whether the agency actually did consult with urban planners either in the opposing side or at Cebu City Hall, who had long complained about “Imperial Manila’s” high-handed, parachute methods in determining which projects should be implemented in which city, province or town.

The recommendation for an underpass, while skirting the complaints by flyover opponents, may affirm what Rama said was the agency’s caving in to pressure by flyover proponents like the del Mars and Rep. Tomas Osmeña of Cebu City’s south district.

The DPWH study would still be subject for review at the Palace so flyover opponents still have a chance to muster support for their campaign. It’s also time for city residents to make their voices heard on this landscape-changing project.