[Blueboard] Balance pedestrian and motorist needs
Ari Dy, SJ
aristotl at admu.edu.ph
Wed Apr 14 17:24:18 PHT 2004
Dr. Saloma Akpedonu's ideas on the culture of walking, public structures,
and a sense of urbanity in Metro Manila are enlightening, but I have to
disagree with the way she applies the ideas to the situation in Gate 3.
The pedestrians who "insist" on crossing at Gate 3 are walking. That's
precisely the point; we are walking instead of riding. But now we are the
ones with an attitude problem? We are penalized by the new demand that we
walk over to the Gate 2 side and cross the footbridge there. And for what?
So that people with cars/vehicles can do away with stoplights and traffic
flow can be continuous. The "comfort and convenience" of motorists are
prioritized over that of pedestrians.
I know someone who lives along B. Gonzalez in Loyola Heights and who walks
across Gate 3 everyday to his office at the Institute of Social Order. Now
he has to walk farther down the road to the footbridge and go to the ISO in
a roundabout way. Is it fair to ask him to do that under the summer heat so
that motorists do not have to put up with stoplights? Shouldn't there be a
balance between smoother traffic flow and pedestrian safety?
In other countries, walking and commuting are easier and more convenient
than riding a vehicle because there is limited space for parking, etc. What
we have along Katipunan is the reverse. It is now preferable to ride rather
than walk because walking has become hazardous.
Remember that there are not enough sidewalks along Katipunan.
Most of the time I am in support of the MMDA. I appreciate their political
will, but in this case I don't think it is inappropriate for Ateneo to ask
for a footbridge near Gate 3.
Ari Dy, SJ
Loyola House of Studies
More information about the Blueboard