Enhancing UV Express services
Credit to Author: ROBERT SIY| Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 16:20:41 +0000
As the regulator of road-based public transport, LTFRB’s primary duty is to safeguard the interest and welfare of the public transport user. With this paramount objective, LTFRB needs to examine its rules, regulations and directives through the lens of the user of transport services. Will a proposed regulation or policy help or harm the commuter?
Today, one of the most popular means of transportation is the UV Express service. Although the vehicles have a common name and branding, they are not part of a single company or organization. In Metro Manila, for example, there are over 9,000 franchised UV Express vehicles serving more than 200 different routes, mostly owned by small operators each with a few units. However, on each route, they work in a coordinated way, sharing the costs of using a terminal or loading bay and dispatching units in an orderly fashion.
UV Express operates between two designated end points, just like the P2P buses. However, an important distinguishing feature of the UV Express service, since 2009, is that passengers can be picked up and dropped off within a 2-kilometer radius from the origin or destination endpoints. While this feature was not part of the original design of the UV Express service, it provided a valuable extra convenience for passengers by bringing them closer to their destinations.
Today, hundreds of thousands of commuters rely on UV Express to take them to and from work or school. Just observe the queues at any UV Express terminal during rush hour to appreciate the contribution of this mode of transport. Many commuters stand in line, sometimes for more than an hour, to catch a UV Express seat. The obvious problem is that the supply is insufficient—demand has grown, but the number of vehicles authorized by LTFRB for each route has not changed in over 10 years.
LTFRB recently announced it will no longer allow any pick-up and drop off within the 2-kilometer radius (Memorandum Circular No. 2019-25). UV Express will only be allowed to operate on a terminal-to-terminal basis. The announcement added that violators will be fined—P5,000 for the first offence, P10,000 for the second offence; and suspension or cancellation of the franchise for the third offence. The reason offered by LTFRB for revoking the 2-kilometer pick up and drop off rule was that this rule was difficult to enforce, with many drivers loading and unloading passengers even in areas more than 2 kilometers from the route end points.
This change in policy will reduce the attractiveness of the UV Express service because it forces many riders to walk longer distances or to transfer to another vehicle, perhaps a motorcycle, jeepney or tricycle, to get to their final destinations. Those who are not keen to walk the extra distance or to incur the added cost (or to absorb the additional travel time) will shift to another travel mode. Some will choose a private car or motorcycle instead, adding to the traffic congestion on our streets. For some, the absence of any option for an onward journey may mean that they will have to abandon their job or quit school because of worsening mobility.
With its decision to suspend the implementation of LRFRB Memorandum Circular 2019-25 until mid-June 2019, LTFRB has the opportunity to modify the new rules for UV Express in order to minimize any inconvenience to commuters and to improve the quality and comfort of the service. Here are a few suggestions for delivering a more comfortable travel experience for UV Express users:
First, allow a limited number of authorized stops for UV Express at route endpoints. Retain the 2-kilometer rule, but clarify the allowable stops. If private cars with 1 or 2 riders are allowed to pick up and drop off at certain locations, it would be unreasonable to deny such access to a public transport vehicle with many more passengers inside. If there is a problem with uncontrolled loading and unloading of UV Express, the solution lies in identifying acceptable loading and unloading points and indicating these points in the definition of the UV Express route. [It would encourage building and mall owners to designate parking areas or driveways along a route as UV Express stops. To promote compliance with rules on allowable drop-off points, the operations of UV Express vehicles can be monitored with the use of information technology (IT) such as GPS-based vehicle tracking and CCTV cameras that are now standard in newer buses and jeepneys.]
Second, lift number coding of UV Express. The long lines at UV Express terminals during peak hours on almost every route indicate the severe shortage of UV Express capacity. Expanding UV Express capacity can relieve the hardship that many riders face and get them home sooner. It makes no sense to restrict the supply of public transport when there is an obvious shortage. Lifting the number coding restriction on public transport will immediately release 25 percent more capacity. This can provide immediate relief without any capital investment.
Third, the number of LTFRB-authorized units should be increased. The number of LTFRB-authorized vehicles on each route has not changed in more than 10 years. Immediately, LTFRB should allow a 50 percent increase in the number of units permitted in each route. Further increases can be considered if the passengers on the route still endure a queue exceeding 15 minutes during peak hours. With increased capacity and shorter queues, demand will also increase; many more commuters will choose UV Express over a private vehicle or motorcycle. Authorizing more units will also enable many of the existing “colorum” UV Express units to be “regularized” under an amnesty program that can be designed in consultation with existing operators.
Fourth, UV Express services need to graduate to higher capacity vehicles and premium services. For any new or replacement UV Express vehicles, larger vans that can seat at least 18 passengers should be the minimum requirement. Larger vehicles will mean increased capacity on each route. Operators should also be allowed to charge higher fares for premium services with more spacious seating and a higher level of comfort.
Fifth, providing sufficient space and facilities for proper loading and unloading of PUVs. In each destination point, LTFRB and MMDA should work with LGUs and property owners to find the best location for creating acceptable pickup and drop off points. This will allow PUVs to load and unload without disrupting the carriageway traffic flow. Well-designed and strategically located PUV stops will provide commuters with safe shelters and reduce the number of commuters waiting on the road.
To solve traffic, we should encourage a shift from private vehicle use (the least efficient use of road space) to public transport, walking or cycling (the most efficient uses of road space). Any regulation that reduces the attractiveness of using public transport or results in a more difficult travel experience for the commuter, in the end, generates more traffic by pushing people to opt for car use. To improve mobility while easing traffic congestion, one of the best weapons has been the UV Express service. Let us harness the huge potential of this mode of transport rather than undermine its usefulness.
Robert Y. Siy is a development economist, city and regional planner, and public transport advocate. He can be reached at mobilitymatters.ph@yahoo.com or followed on Twitter @RobertRsiy
The post Enhancing UV Express services appeared first on The Manila Times Online.