Metro Manila LRT and MRT Lines - Compiled Threads [Archive] - Page 7

dancethingy

November 29th, 2005, 01:30 PM

Gov’t may fund MRT-7
The $1.6-billion Metro Rail Transit 7 (MRT-7) project may finally start rolling following a recommendation that the government use public funds to support the venture.

First raised by Universal LRT Group Ltd. (ULC) in 2000 via an unsolicited proposal, the MRT-7 project has remained mired in the issue of deficit-neutrality. In brief, its approval depended on the state not having to subsidize railway construction and operation in any manner over the planned 25-year concession period.

Last week, however, the Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) said the project should now be deficit neutral on a cumulative basis; in other words, only at the end of the concession period. Previously, the ICC insisted that the MRT-7 remain deficit-free at the end of each year of the concession period.

"The ICC agreed finally that there is no business venture that would have a positive cash flow all throughout concession periods, more so with rails because proponents would be paying off debts at one point. Worldwide, railways - just like airports and seaports - do not make money, that is why governments had to subsidize or extend advances for these projects," a source said.

Given expectations the project would post negative cash flows in the three years of its construction and first 10 years of operation, this means the government will have to fund the railway for over a decade. The MRT-7 operator, however, will have to agree that whatever amount is shelled out by the state would have been returned at the end of the 25-year concession.

Projections on how much the government will have to allocate, or how long it would have to subsidize the project, were not immediately available.

"The only option we could take is to ensure that ... advances ... should be recouped within the concession period. The committee believes that this will still fall within the government’s interpretation of deficit-neutrality," another source said.

The ICC recommendation, incidentally its original position, means the MRT-7 project could be approved when a Cabinet committee deliberates on the fate of the railway by December. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo will preside over the deliberations.

Government sources said ICC studies show MRT-7 will post a positive cash flow of $257 million at the end of the concession period. This cash flow will be divided between the government and ULC under a revenue sharing scheme.

The ICC is the body that advises the Cabinet on the approval of big-ticket government projects. It is composed of top officials from the National Economic and Development Authority, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management, and the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas.

The ICC members are all represented in the Cabinet Committee, which is chaired by the President.

"There were arguments raised from within the ICC that the insistence on a per-year deficit-neutrality on MRT-7 already means that the project is being singled out. Essentially, if we do that, we would be applying a different set of rules on MRT-7 from those applied on MRT-3 or LRT (Light Rail Transit) for instance," the source said.

Deficit-neutrality clauses safeguard the government from incurring massive debt when venturing into large-scale infrastructure projects like railways. A project is said to be deficit-neutral when revenues from operations exceed expenses for maintenance, administration, staffing, and debt servicing.

Strict adherence to deficit-neutrality was put in place by the Arroyo administration in 2003 given the state of public finances.

The MRT-7 project involves a 21-kilometer, 13-station rail transit that would link Tala, Caloocan City to North Avenue, EDSA. It was originally targetted for completion by 2010 and projects ridership numbers of 850,000 daily.

Project proponent ULC has committed to develop a 194-hectare idle estate in Caloocan City near the North Luzon Expressway (NLEX) for some $2 billion to complement railway revenues.

The estate will be developed into a residential and commercial zone by a consortium that includes Henry Sy’s SM Investments Corp., BDO Capital and Investment Group, Yuchencgo-owned EEI Corp., PentaCapital Management Corp.

ULC will also pave a 22-kilometer, eight-lane highway from the NLEX to spur traffic to the MRT-7. -- Kerlyn G. Bautista

richpol

November 29th, 2005, 01:56 PM

here's news from urbanrail.net.. are they currently being built? or are these just plans? i guess GMA's dream of having 10 train lines by 2010 seems impossible

MRT 4 is a 22.6km (20 stations) mostly elevated line running northeast from Doroteo José/Recto in Manila to Quirino Highway in Novaliches (Quezon City) connecting with North Ave. Stn. on line 3 and passing through España, Quezon, Commonwealth and Regalado Avenues. The project will be divided into two phases:
Phase 1: the section Old Bilibid - Batasan (15.1km) passing through España St., Quezon Blvd. and Commonwealth Ave. 14 stations: Old Bilibid, UST, Mendoza, Antipolo, Welcome Rotonda, Araneta, Roosevelt, Timog, Edsa, Quezon City Hall, Philcoa, Tandang Sora, Don Antonio and Batasan.
Phase 2: Batasan - Quirino Highway in Lagro (7.5km). 36 light rail vehicles are proposed to operate, providing a capacity of 550,000 passengers per day.

- MRT 7 is planned on Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City up to Tala in Caloocan City, and the adjoining municipality of San Jose del Monte in Bulacan.
- MRT 8, or East Line, will traverse 48 km with several tunnel sections (7.8 km) from Pililla to Santa Cruz, Laguna. Phase 1 will run for 16.8 km on elevated double-track guideways from Santa Mesa, Manila, to Taytay, Rizal; then from Taytay to Angono, Rizal, serving to decongest Manila, Mandaluyong and Pasig, and the towns of Cainta, Taytay and Angono. It will follow the general alignment of Shaw Boulevard and Ortigas Avenue and entail construction of 14 stations.

driftwood

November 29th, 2005, 02:02 PM

^^ Sounds cool. :okay:

Solblanc

November 29th, 2005, 02:33 PM

ryanr

November 29th, 2005, 07:38 PM

^^ I heard that they are doing the studies for MRT8:D

ramvingar

November 29th, 2005, 08:48 PM

they should build an MRT parallel to SLEX from Alabang too. That will really help de-congest traffic. Meron bang plans yun? And then the stations at Alabang, Sucat and Bicutan will be "park and ride" stations where people can just leave theire cars in secured parking buildings and then take the MRT.

amras

November 29th, 2005, 10:14 PM

that would be the southrail.

ryanr

November 30th, 2005, 12:02 AM

Yeah, southrail...which should be improved to be efficient commuter rail.

And there is also LRT-1 extention that goes down to Las Pinas and Cavite.

bulakenyo

November 30th, 2005, 12:13 AM

I thought MRT7 will run from Marilao, Bulacan. Nabasa ko na sa papers na from Marilao to Caloocan ang MRT7 eh.

JChip

December 1st, 2005, 06:43 AM

So far, only MRT-7 has what passes for progress in this country. MRT-4 consortium is still fixing stuff, and I haven't heard anything about MRT-8

I think there is no need for MRT 7. It's a line that starts from SM City North EDSA goes through Commonwealth Avenue and then ends at San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan. The terminal is planned at SJDM, Bulacan. Right now, this place has very little population. There is no access road to it from NLEX so there's a plan to build a 22-km access road connecting NLEX and SJDM, Bulacan. BTW, the price tag for the gov't is not US$1.2 Billion (PhP64.8 Billion) but US$2+ Billion (PhP108 Billion). This PhP108 Billion price tag is almost 2/3 of the planned infrastructure for the whole country in the 2004-2010 Medium Term Development Plan of NEDA.

I think there are other projects that provide better returns for the taxpayers' money. The completion of the STAR Expressway from Lipa City to Batangas City will probably decongest Metro Manila much better. Batangas has a good deep water port that was just expanded. Now imagine if 30% of all container van traffic in the Metro was reduced because PEZA zone companies now ship through Batangas Port.

Don't count on MRT 4 seeing the light of day. MRT 7 and MRT 4 have overlaps in Commonwealth Avenue. Rumor has it that MRT 7 goes through Commonwealth to kill MRT 4... :eek2:

pau_p1

December 1st, 2005, 06:58 AM

Dvorak

December 1st, 2005, 07:03 AM

uyy sana matuloy yang MRT8.. nang tumaas ang value nang land sa Sta. Cruz, Laguna! pag nangyari yan... pwede na akong mag uwian don sa bahay namin don! hehehe

JChip

December 1st, 2005, 11:12 AM

uhmm.. I guess you are mistaken... people north of Manila is in dire need of this faster mode of transport. Alot of people working in the Quezon City areas and some even in Ortigas and Makati live on that part of the metro. Building MRT7 would benefit a lot of people from Novaliches and North Caloocan. And MRT7 being connected to MRT3 would be a great help for us who lives at the north.

Would you be willing to spend 110 per trip on it? That's the real cost of the trip if MRT 7 operates. The difference between the actual fare and the real cost will be shouldered by all taxpayers not only the riders of this MRT.

As a whole, it will cost the government a total of PhP108 Billion in subsidies. Perhaps there are other ways of spending our taxes...

With that amount of money:
1. I can extend the STAR Tollway all the way to Batangas City
2. I can complete the Subic Clark Tarlac Expressway and extension until Baguio

or 3. I can pour money into developing Mindanao to improve economic conditions there and maybe find a lasting solution to the Moro insurgency

I will also have a lot of spare change to spend on other projects that deserve my hard earned taxes.

akala mo lang na konti ang nakatira sa part ng Tala and San Jose Del Monte but in fact there would be a lot. Bulakenyos who live in San Jose Del Monte, Norzagaray depend mostly on Quirino Hiway to get them into Metro Manila, and there is a town of Rizal behind the La Mesa Dam Reservoir has also access to the same road... and with MRT7, their 3 hour travel would be shortened and would allow them to have quicker access to other parts of Bulacan when the spur highway is built....

With only a population of 316,000 for San Jose Del Monte and 2.2 million for Bulacan according to the 2000 Census, I find it a hard sell to shell out PhP108 billion. There must be better places to park our hard earned taxes...

to add.. building MRT4 would also be a big help since most college students of the north study in the university belt.... eventhough it will overlap MRT7 on some parts, I hope they'd be able to do something with it when and if it would ever be built...

Technically MRT 7 and MRT 4 can run in parallel. However, MRT 4 is dead as far as the DOTC is concerned.

pau_p1

December 1st, 2005, 12:07 PM

well I understand that that may be the cost of building it.... what I'm focusing on is the advantage that it will provide northern NCR dwellers... you are focusing more on the SJDM or Bulacan people.. but aside from them, there are a lot of North Caloocan and Northern Quezon City settlers and even people from Marikina and Montalban,Rizal (due to their proximity to Batasan Hills) shall benefit on this.....

I understand that CALABARZON is growing with all the population down south... but relatively to Manila or Makati.. I think northerners like us are way too far from these centers... do you think that we from the north doesn't deserve to grow like the towns south of NCR?

Also remember that even if the government spends money on STAR Express or SCTEP, we people of the north also share on the burden on shouldering its costs... so I don't think people of the south should bother on sharing the burden for us northerners... :D

Solblanc

December 1st, 2005, 03:55 PM

The MRT-7 is something that is needed for the purposes of urban sprawl. Manila is crowded enough as it is. The new line is going to open up a whole new area as an option for living. We HAVE to spend on infrastructure. We can't keep trying to cope up with urban growth by constructing the necessary infrastructure a decade too late. We have to have some foresight.

dancethingy

December 1st, 2005, 06:45 PM

I agree completely with Solblanc and Pau p1, these northern cities are growing and already carry a substantial population. Money spent on MRT7 will NOT go to waste as it will be used by hundreds and thousands of people. I believe that once MRT7 is built you will see half of the busses and jeepneys disappear from commonwealth, thus contributing to less smog. You will also see more efficient movement of people from point A to point B.

We need to anticipate growth, not wait for it to explode and then build infrastructures to support it. We've already seen the dangers of lack of foresight, just look at the millions of informal settlers in and around Metro Manila, if only the government had kept watch and anticipated an overgrowth of slums in Manila, we wouldn't be facing such a difficult task of relocating, providing, and managing them.

All the proposed lines are essential! In fact we can use even more lines.

ryanr

December 1st, 2005, 08:29 PM

I agree with Paul, Solblanc and dancethingy. Mass transportation is vital for the city's progress. I would much rather see more lines than have the Clark-Subic Expressway extend all the way to Bagiuo, because this is much more important (at least for the time being). If anything, MM needs a lot more MRT lines...and so what if the overlap in some areas? Tokyo's, London's, Paris, NY's subway lines overlap too...and MM's population is just as large if not larger than those other cities. And the good thing about MRT 4 is that it goes all the way to Manila, and MRT 7 does not. Both lines are needed, imo.

dancethingy

December 1st, 2005, 08:37 PM

Just imagine the amount of decongesting a train would do if it went from commonwealth, to Quezon, to Espana. Holy Cow!!!!!

bulakenyo

December 1st, 2005, 08:38 PM

Yeah. I don't think MRT7 will kill MRT4 because Manila has a huge population that travel from one commercial center to the other. Manila needs more of this mass transit projects.

bulakenyo

December 1st, 2005, 08:42 PM

Anyone who can clarify this? I have this MB article that says MRT7 will run from Marilao, Bulacan. Not SJDM.

http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2004/10/10/TOUR2004101020249.html

:? :? :?

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 02:41 AM

Anyone who can clarify this? I have this MB article that says MRT7 will run from Marilao, Bulacan. Not SJDM.

http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2004/10/10/TOUR2004101020249.html

:? :? :?

That may be Phase 2. Current plans are for it to run from SM City North EDSA through Commonwealth Avenue and then to SJDM, Bulacan. I believe the proponent (Universal LRT Corp.) just says that to stop the land prices from increasing... ULC is making a real estate gamble along with the MRT 7... ULC has purchased some land to develop in the terminal area in SJDM. They might be looking to buy more land so they obfuscate things...

stephencua

December 2nd, 2005, 02:54 AM

taken from inq7.net...

Railways next in privatization line
Posted: 1:14 AM | Dec. 02, 2005

Clarissa S. Batino
Inquirer News Service

THE Department of Transportation and Communication (DoTC) is planning on privatizing major railway lines next year to spare the national government from subsidizing mass transport systems to the tune of more than P2.5 billion a year, according to the DoTC official in charge of railways.

The department will push for the sale, or to at least privatize operations, of major railways such as Lines 1 and 2 of Metro Manila's overhead Light Rail Transit (LRT) and existing tracks of Philippine National Railways (PNR), Undersecretary Guiling Mamondiong said.

Inquirer sources in the transport sector said government subsidies to major railway systems -- such as the LRT, the overhead Metro Rail Transit (MRT) and the old, ground-level PNR -- might even amount to more than P5 billion a year.

Before the government can sell the MRT, Mamondiong said, it must first buy out the ownership of the railway from Metro Rail Transit Corp., a consortium led by the property group Fil-Estate.

"Our intention to start privatizing railways is also the reason the buyout plan of MRT was revived this year," Mamondiong said.

An interagency team created to review the buyout proposal has not concluded its evaluation.

In anticipation of the sale, the LRT and MRT maintain mostly contractual employees, Mamondiong said.

He said proceeds of the sale of the transport systems would allow the cash-strapped government to build new mass railway systems.

"We will talk with the business sector to push for the privatization of railways starting next year," he said.

LRT Authority administrator Mel Robles said his agency supported a long-standing plan of the government to sell the railway assets but added that the question was who would be interested in buying them when the railway operators could not increase their fares.

The LRT and MRT operators have been asking Malacañang for a P10 fare increase to recover part of the costs of increased fuel and electricity prices.

Without the fare hike, the government's subsidy to the two major railways continues to mount.

The railways transport over 800,000 passengers a day. The government subsidizes an average of P30 to P40 for every railway passenger.

Robles said that for LRT Line 1 the subsidy amounts to about P24 per commuter and for LRT Line 2, about P40 per passenger.

The government shells out a little less than a billion pesos annually to support LRT operations.

For the MRT, the amount is much bigger because the government pays an annual rental fee and services debts of Metro Rail Transit Corp.

The government also props up the PNR, which has been a financial black hole for decades. With INQ7.net

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 03:04 AM

I believe that before the DOTC builds another MRT line, it should try to fix the current problems of its existing systems... The National Government can't go on building problematic projects. More problematic projects will only end up as more taxes for all of us. We have yet to feel the bite of the eVAT when it will be raised to 12% next year. When we do, remember that we might need more taxes to run our rail systems if we keep on adding projects that aren't self financing (most rail systems are government subsidized). The truth of the matter is that we can only build these MRT systems when we are flush with cash not when we have yearly deficits amounting to over $2 billion for the past five years... It comes down to a choice of either more taxes to run the MRT/LRT and future projects or having more money in taxpayers' hands to do as they please.

BTW, all the LRT/MRT and PNR systems only have a daily ridership of around 800,000 a day. This costs taxpayers a minimum of PhP2.5 billion a year to run. Adding MRT 7 will probably add another PhP2 billion a year to run.

Railways next in privatization line

Clarissa S. Batino
Inquirer News Service

THE Department of Transportation and Communication (DoTC) is planning on privatizing major railway lines next year to spare the national government from subsidizing mass transport systems to the tune of more than P2.5 billion a year, according to the DoTC official in charge of railways.

The department will push for the sale, or to at least privatize operations, of major railways such as Lines 1 and 2 of Metro Manila's overhead Light Rail Transit (LRT) and existing tracks of Philippine National Railways (PNR), Undersecretary Guiling Mamondiong said.

Inquirer sources in the transport sector said government subsidies to major railway systems -- such as the LRT, the overhead Metro Rail Transit (MRT) and the old, ground-level PNR -- might even amount to more than P5 billion a year.

Before the government can sell the MRT, Mamondiong said, it must first buy out the ownership of the railway from Metro Rail Transit Corp., a consortium led by the property group Fil-Estate.

"Our intention to start privatizing railways is also the reason the buyout plan of MRT was revived this year," Mamondiong said.

An interagency team created to review the buyout proposal has not concluded its evaluation.

In anticipation of the sale, the LRT and MRT maintain mostly contractual employees, Mamondiong said.

He said proceeds of the sale of the transport systems would allow the cash-strapped government to build new mass railway systems.

"We will talk with the business sector to push for the privatization of railways starting next year," he said.

LRT Authority administrator Mel Robles said his agency supported a long-standing plan of the government to sell the railway assets but added that the question was who would be interested in buying them when the railway operators could not increase their fares.

The LRT and MRT operators have been asking Malacañang for a P10 fare increase to recover part of the costs of increased fuel and electricity prices.

Without the fare hike, the government's subsidy to the two major railways continues to mount.

The railways transport over 800,000 passengers a day. The government subsidizes an average of P30 to P40 for every railway passenger.

Robles said that for LRT Line 1 the subsidy amounts to about P24 per commuter and for LRT Line 2, about P40 per passenger.

The government shells out a little less than a billion pesos annually to support LRT operations.

For the MRT, the amount is much bigger because the government pays an annual rental fee and services debts of Metro Rail Transit Corp.

The government also props up the PNR, which has been a financial black hole for decades. With INQ7.net

Solblanc

December 2nd, 2005, 03:39 AM

The DOTC is NOT building another MRT line, a private consortium is. LRT-1's ridership is already bursting at the seams, and LRT-2 is still new, so their ridership is still slowly rising. EDSA MRT is private already. And if you're worrying about ridership numbers, these numbers will grow faster if the network was much larger. Remember, MRT-7 will be interconnected with MRT-3 at North Avenue.

And these subsidies do have a purpose. Trains cater to the middle class, too. Whatever the government spends on subsidizing tickets, the rider spends less on gas, toll, parking, and in general, buying a new car. Driving everyday in Manila is not my idea of fun (even though I do). I'd gladly just take the trains to school if only they reached the south, but they don't. So I drive. Anyway, what a person spends less on car expenses, they can spend on something else that would actually boost the economy.

Mass transit has always been officially costly, but its a necessary cost.

The PNR rails are a different story. Half the people in the Metro don't even know that they exist. That's a perfect product of government neglect.

ryanr

December 2nd, 2005, 03:47 AM

I love this thread...really interesting to read all the articles and posts:D

PNR desperately needs to be reformed. I want to see it become an efficient commuter rail. It will surely decongest SLEX, in Southrail's case. And also NLEX - but that is Northrail.

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 04:47 AM

dancethingy

December 2nd, 2005, 05:42 AM

I think privatization may be good, but i always worry about price inflation. They might jack up them prices too high! Japan's transit system is privatized by the way and Chicago is looking to privatize their transit system as well.

tigidig14

December 2nd, 2005, 05:55 AM

^never heard of CTA being privatized, it might just be a thought but thats still very farfetched

Solblanc

December 2nd, 2005, 07:57 AM

@Solblanc,

It's really just a matter of semantics. Even if ULC builds it, taxpayers end up paying for it. DOTC will be there to oversee the construction and operations just like MRT3.

I have no probs with MRT 7 if it didn't require support from the government. Let the private proponent build it without government support.

MRT 7's biggest defect is: it would actually be cheaper had the government decided to build it on its own.

If that were the case, I would have no qualms seeing the government go into the project alone.

We would also like the government to do more, but its hands are tied. If the government decided to undertake such a project on its own, it would start from scratch, and it'll take longer. There is such a thing as opportunity cost, and in this case, time is of the essence. We have a consortium with the resources that is willing to build the line NOW. The government doesn't pay for the series of studies. The government doesn't pay for any part of the construction. And this new twist is interesting. Before, the government granted approval of MRT-7 on the condition that it change its terms so that there will be no cost whatsoever to the government. Now, they're backtracking and are willing to provide appropriate subsidies. What does that tell you?

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 03:48 PM

We would also like the government to do more, but its hands are tied. If the government decided to undertake such a project on its own, it would start from scratch, and it'll take longer. There is such a thing as opportunity cost, and in this case, time is of the essence. We have a consortium with the resources that is willing to build the line NOW.

I know about opportunity cost and the time value of money. There's also an opportunity cost for sinking your money in a large project when you can use the same amount of money in other projects. With the government's terrible financial situation, what's the hurry to build this project?

The government will end up paying for this project anyway so why can't it wait until we can afford it?

Look at it from the point of view of the government. Let's say that you are the head of a large extended family and you don't earn enough to spend for all your family's needs. You have been getting part of your living expenses from loans for the past 5 years. You can't house all your kids properly and some of them are malnourished. You don't even have enough to send all your kids to the public school because of your gargantuan debt.

Now here comes a sales man who sells you a motor bike that you really want to have and he gives it to you on good terms. However, it does not answer your needs now and it only puts you into a deeper debt hole. Would you spend your hard earned cash on this bike?

The government doesn't pay for the series of studies. The government doesn't pay for any part of the construction.

Recent experience with ridership studies on the LRT 2 project were found to be quite overstated. Only 1/3 of the expected ridership materialized. Has the MRT 7 consortium corrected this?

The government will pay for the project's debt and equity later with interest. I've said it before and I will say it again, it's much too expensive a project.

And this new twist is interesting. Before, the government granted approval of MRT-7 on the condition that it change its terms so that there will be no cost whatsoever to the government. Now, they're backtracking and are willing to provide appropriate subsidies. What does that tell you?

It's good that you brought this up. It's either the government has gone weak kneed or the proponent twisted the right arms.

The more I read about MRT 7 the more it reminds me of MRT 3. MRT 3 might be a boon to the riding public but it's a financial black hole. The government subsidizes around PhP50 per head. At an average ridership of 400,000 per day that amounts to around PhP20 million a day or PhP600 million a month or PhP7.2 billion a year. :bash:

For a US$1.2 billion price tag, we should just build cheaper infrastructure such as roads that will benefit more people from various parts of the country. In fact, this amount is 3 times the budget of the Nautical Highway envisioned in the 2004-2010 Medium Term Devlepment Plan.

Solblanc

December 2nd, 2005, 04:43 PM

I know about opportunity cost and the time value of money. There's also an opportunity cost for sinking your money in a large project when you can use the same amount of money in other projects. With the government's terrible financial situation, what's the hurry to build this project?

The government will end up paying for this project anyway so why can't it wait until we can afford it?

Look at it from the point of view of the government. Let's say that you are the head of a large extended family and you don't earn enough to spend for all your family's needs. You have been getting part of your living expenses from loans for the past 5 years. You can't house all your kids properly and some of them are malnourished. You don't even have enough to send all your kids to the public school because of your gargantuan debt.

Now here comes a sales man who sells you a motor bike that you really want to have and he gives it to you on good terms. However, it does not answer your needs now and it only puts you into a deeper debt hole. Would you spend your hard earned cash on this bike?

There is a huge difference between mass transit for a relatively poor and congested city, and a brand new motorbike for a poor family. In the case of MRT-7, it is a necessity. Manila is far too congested. It needs to expand either higher or wider, preferrably both. MRT-7's benefits in stimulating growth cannot be overlooked. It opens up a whole new area for urban settlement, and that in itself can justify the cost. The investments in this new area would prove to be a valuable contribution to our economy.

The more I read about MRT 7 the more it reminds me of MRT 3. MRT 3 might be a boon to the riding public but it's a financial black hole. The government subsidizes around PhP50 per head. At an average ridership of 400,000 per day that amounts to around PhP20 million a day or PhP600 million a month or PhP7.2 billion a year. :bash:

For a US$1.2 billion price tag, we should just build cheaper infrastructure such as roads that will benefit more people from various parts of the country. In fact, this amount is 3 times the budget of the Nautical Highway envisioned in the 2004-2010 Medium Term Devlepment Plan.

More roads aren't the answer to everything. While roads are indeed essential, they have to be complemented with other forms of transport. The mrt-3 may be heavily subsidized, but if you knew that it was going to be financially draining from the start, would you have bothered to construct it? What would EDSA be like without the MRT today? The MRT has become such a necessity to the Metro that stopping operations would result in an economic disaster. The same is true of the LRT, and the LRT-2 will reach that level. The MRT-7 will also prove to be invaluable.

Would a gazillion more roads be able to provide the benefits of a proper mass-transit system? You would need buses and jeepneys to ply these roads to make them accessible to the commuting public. And jeepneys by themselves have the uncanny ability to render most roads impassable.

And if you wish to spread this to the provinces, I don't mean to be pessimistic, but the pace of public works there is hardly encouraging, not to mention the horrid kickbacks. Ther DPWH has a lot of projects that are supposed to be done by now, yet somehow, the accomplishments are only on paper. There are a number of bridges and roads that only exist on DPWH documents, and these are project that the government has paid for. The DPWH has a lot of housecleaning to do before they can be trusted with more funds. This is a far worse black hole than the MRT-3. I'd rather see the cash subsidizing ridership than line someone's pocket.

This is quality infrastructure that we're talking about. Every year, there should be at least one of these going on. We aren't reaching Japan's problem of redundant overlapping infrastructure yet, for obvious reasons.

dancethingy

December 2nd, 2005, 05:01 PM

We don't need more roads for cars, jeepneys and busses to congest. The best cities in the world are the cities that allow its people to get from point A to point B without ever using cars, but through the use of an efficient transit system.

There is no transit system in the world that ever turns out a profit, that's a FACT! But these transport systems become a lifeblood of so many people. I think the hundreds and thousands of people who use MRT 3 would disagree with you if you said it should never have been built, including me because i use it to go everywhere. MRT 3 is actually becoming a fact of life for many people that live around it. It's not just for the massa anymore, i see plenty of foreigners using it as well as people who work in business districts around makati, mandaluyong, and Cubao. LRT 2 will be used a lot more than it is now in the near future. It's a damn good line, i really like it. People just havent discovered that this line brings you all the way to the university belt. The only problem with it is during heavy rains, people have to swim from the station at recto to their schools. Damn!

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 06:31 PM

There is a huge difference between mass transit for a relatively poor and congested city, and a brand new motorbike for a poor family. In the case of MRT-7, it is a necessity. Manila is far too congested. It needs to expand either higher or wider, preferrably both. MRT-7's benefits in stimulating growth cannot be overlooked. It opens up a whole new area for urban settlement, and that in itself can justify the cost. The investments in this new area would prove to be a valuable contribution to our economy.

Look here Sol, I'm not just talking about Manila here. The Subic Clark Tarlac Expressway is also an infra project supposed to benefit Northern and Central Luzon. Let's get out of this Manila centric mentality. I'm saying that there are areas outside of Metro Manila and the outlying areas that also need infra. Roads are a good way to go for a lot of the countryside. In fact the reason why our agri goods are so expensive is that our farm to market roads are so bad.

Yes, MRT 7 may bring growth to other areas but the more important question is: IS IT THE BEST WAY TO BRING GROWTH TO THESE AREAS? MRT 7 will only run for 22 km. Looking at 2003 news articles, it was supposed to run all the way up to the Marilao exit. The proponent keeps on changing its plans/press releases with every news article.

What I'm looking for here is BANG FOR THE BUCK.

More roads aren't the answer to everything. While roads are indeed essential, they have to be complemented with other forms of transport. The mrt-3 may be heavily subsidized, but if you knew that it was going to be financially draining from the start, would you have bothered to construct it? What would EDSA be like without the MRT today? The MRT has become such a necessity to the Metro that stopping operations would result in an economic disaster. The same is true of the LRT, and the LRT-2 will reach that level. The MRT-7 will also prove to be invaluable.

So is it so invaluable that you would be willing to pay an additional PhP1,000 a month in taxes to support it? We are sure that the MRT lines cost at least P1 billion each a year to run. The economic benefits are fairly hard to measure and even harder for the government to tax. For sure, the gov't will be paying around PhP1 billion a year for a line that we don't have the funds for.

The government is still in a deficit. If we add another US$2 billion of debt then our debt service and interest payments will increase. The government has shown very little ability in running the present rail systems. I find no comfort in us adding more of these projects if we just end up in the poor house afterwards.

Would a gazillion more roads be able to provide the benefits of a proper mass-transit system? You would need buses and jeepneys to ply these roads to make them accessible to the commuting public. And jeepneys by themselves have the uncanny ability to render most roads impassable.

We have to remember that hardware (roads) are only part of the answer. We also need to reprogram the software (driver discipline/better law enforcement). The funds not used for MRT 7 could very well be used for this purpose to benefit not only people living in Northern Metro Manila but the whole of the Metro.

Here are some alternative roads benefitting Metro Manila:
1. NLEX-SLEX circumferential road - bypasses EDSA and will hopefully decongest it from motorists travelling the North-South route
2. Completion of C-5 all the way to Roxas Boulevard
3. Extend C-5 from its end in Quezon City all the way to NLEX

On the other hand, there are also some unfinished business on the part of the current LRT/MRT systems:
1. Completion of MRT 3 and LRT 1 loop - this will only cost US$200 million. Ridership estimates for this project will be more easily met because it is only an expansion not a totally new project.

And if you wish to spread this to the provinces, I don't mean to be pessimistic, but the pace of public works there is hardly encouraging, not to mention the horrid kickbacks. Ther DPWH has a lot of projects that are supposed to be done by now, yet somehow, the accomplishments are only on paper. There are a number of bridges and roads that only exist on DPWH documents, and these are project that the government has paid for. The DPWH has a lot of housecleaning to do before they can be trusted with more funds. This is a far worse black hole than the MRT-3. I'd rather see the cash subsidizing ridership than line someone's pocket.

The provinces are exactly where the tax money can make the most impact. We have to monitor DPWH's projects properly. This can't be more expensive than building a new MRT... All we need to do are to get private auditors to see if the work gets done. If DPWH does not perform, heads should roll.

The problem with MRT 3 is that it is a big fat bloated way to run a line. There is a DOTC staff and an MRTC staff. The other expenses aren't exactly transparent so who can say that there is no corruption here?

I think that this has the potential to be a milking cow of corrupt officials rather than one time projects that have the funds stop after a few years(road projects).

This is quality infrastructure that we're talking about. Every year, there should be at least one of these going on. We aren't reaching Japan's problem of redundant overlapping infrastructure yet, for obvious reasons.

The country does need quality infrastructure but we also need to learn from the lessons of the past decade. The country had a massive electric generation infrastructure build out after the brownouts in the early 1990s. However, there was an oversupply and the electricity provided was very expensive. Until now we are paying up for it through high electricity bills.

The country needs infrastructure badly but we can't MORTGAGE OUR SOULS just to get what we need. We have to insist on getting the best deals for ourselves. Walking away from expensive deals should always be an option.

JChip

December 2nd, 2005, 07:05 PM

We don't need more roads for cars, jeepneys and busses to congest. The best cities in the world are the cities that allow its people to get from point A to point B without ever using cars, but through the use of an efficient transit system.

It would be better if we had it that way. However, Metro Manila at present is far away from that reality. The gov't doesn't really have the funds to finance more MRT projects. We are still staring at a US$3 billion deficit this year. Where will we get the funding for these projects?

BOT projects will need government support sooner or later so they're not a "free ride." :)

There is no transit system in the world that ever turns out a profit, that's a FACT! But these transport systems become a lifeblood of so many people. I think the hundreds and thousands of people who use MRT 3 would disagree with you if you said it should never have been built, including me because i use it to go everywhere. MRT 3 is actually becoming a fact of life for many people that live around it. It's not just for the massa anymore, i see plenty of foreigners using it as well as people who work in business districts around makati, mandaluyong, and Cubao. LRT 2 will be used a lot more than it is now in the near future. It's a damn good line, i really like it. People just havent discovered that this line brings you all the way to the university belt. The only problem with it is during heavy rains, people have to swim from the station at recto to their schools. Damn!

I understand that most rail systems in the world do not turn a profit. However, the more relevant question for us is CAN WE AFFORD IT AND IS IT THE BEST USE OF SCARCE RESOURCES?

I use the MRT 3 too. How would you feel if you were to pay PhP65 per trip? Taxpayers all over the country pay for the balance of PhP50 for every rider. It is just not fair for taxpayers in Davao to pay for the fare of people riding the MRT. Did you use the MRT 3 when it was still charging PhP40 for the whole trip? Do you remember the ridership?

The fare on the MRT 3 is now too low that taking a bus from North EDSA to Taft Ave. corner EDSA is more expensive.

MRT 3 was never planned to be used by the masa. Very few of them need to go from QC to Makati. It was always a line planned for the white collar workers in Makati.

Line 2 also has a very weird history. It took a decade to build. Then when it got built, only 1/3 of its planned ridership was realized. There are also rumors going around that LRTA bought PhP800 million worth of spares even before a train was running. I smell a rat here.

To recap:
1. I am not against building MRT systems
2. I am against paying through the nose for MRT systems that have fuzzy ridership studies and are banking heavily on government subsidy
3. I find riding the MRT 3 a great convenience.
4. Maybe we should concentrate on improving the management, operations & maintenace of our current LRT/MRT system before we go on building new ones. We have yet to learn from our past experiences of these lines. The structure of the management of these systems are just plain whacked.

I can't explain why LRT 1 and 2 are run by LRTA while MRT 3 is run by MRTC but overseen by DOTC.

dancethingy

December 2nd, 2005, 09:00 PM

I'm not going to go in circles with this issue, because i want them built pronto. I think the point of the mass transit is to provide transit for EVERYONE. So MRT 3 was only meant for white collars? what an assumption to think that the pasosyal people of this country would use mass transit.

I also want to remind you that half the taxes you pay every year really doesn't even go projects you like, they go to finance the projects of politicians and put their damn kids to school or support family abroad. The fact of life in this country my friend is before we start arguing about which projects our tax money pays for, we need to make sure they don't get pocketed first. For example, there is an overpass bridge here at commonwealth that has been underconstruction for two years, A FREAKIN OVERPASS, each time they get the budget for it, they finish a little more of it, then they stop cause the money magically disappears. abra kadabra, poof, gone with the wind is the budget.

bulakenyo

December 2nd, 2005, 09:49 PM

That may be Phase 2. Current plans are for it to run from SM City North EDSA through Commonwealth Avenue and then to SJDM, Bulacan. I believe the proponent (Universal LRT Corp.) just says that to stop the land prices from increasing... ULC is making a real estate gamble along with the MRT 7... ULC has purchased some land to develop in the terminal area in SJDM. They might be looking to buy more land so they obfuscate things...

I see. Salamat po. I'm looking forward to this project. I hope it pushes through. It will definitely spur development in SJDM.

queetz@home

December 3rd, 2005, 02:32 AM

I'm curious. Any chance LRT2 will be extended to the Divisoria Market? I was looking at a map and it seems possible given the direction of its route since it runs along Claro M Recto Avenue. And it makes sense given that it is a major destination landmark. That should more than boost up its ridership.

Below is the map...

http://www.condomillion.com/maps/philippines/manila-detailed-map.JPG

marites4

December 3rd, 2005, 02:49 AM

ang gulo naman ng mga kalsada paikot ikot.

ryanr

December 3rd, 2005, 04:31 AM

2. I am against paying through the nose for MRT systems that have fuzzy ridership studies and are banking heavily on government subsidy

For the record, at least its better to pay for high quality MRTs than for our politician's mansions and BMWs.;)

thomasian

December 3rd, 2005, 06:37 AM

I think it's not just the ridership that they're after because when you talk about the Divisoria crowd, you're talking about people carrying lots of goods from shopping there. And it would probably be a security nightmare for them having to inspect big bags of goods from Divi.

I don't think I've seen much plans to extend LRT2 to Divi but there is this "LRT-2 East Extension" project in the planning.

I'm curious. Any chance LRT2 will be extended to the Divisoria Market? I was looking at a map and it seems possible given the direction of its route since it runs along Claro M Recto Avenue. And it makes sense given that it is a major destination landmark. That should more than boost up its ridership.

Below is the map...

http://www.condomillion.com/maps/philippines/manila-detailed-map.JPG

queetz@home

December 3rd, 2005, 07:14 AM

^ But that is exactly the point. I was under the impression LRT2 is underperforming. If you capture the Divisoria crowd, then ridership, hence revenue, will boost like crazy. The LRT2 trains are big enough that they can easily accomodate people with lots of bags. Also, Divisoria is a major destination not just for the "usual" crowd but for tourists as well who want to experience a one of a kind Philippine market experience. All the better if extended Eastward. So people from Cainta (if that is where the extension is going) can hop on a train to go get bargains at Divisoria. I think its an excellent idea that must be pursued. And its not that far and its sad the only thing that would prevent it is security concerns...

Man! If I had a few billion dollars lying around, I'd buy all three LRT/MRT Lines and do the expansion myself where it makes sense such as the example I mentioned above, as well as connecting LRT1 and MRT3 physically. I suppose the movie, Batman Begins, is kinda inspiring since in the movie, Batman's dad built Gotham City's rapid transit system with his own money... ;)

marites4

December 3rd, 2005, 07:15 AM

tigidig14

December 3rd, 2005, 08:53 AM

^ n yap there mouth and no action

Solblanc

December 3rd, 2005, 12:13 PM

1. I am not against building MRT systems
2. I am against paying through the nose for MRT systems that have fuzzy ridership studies and are banking heavily on government subsidy
3. I find riding the MRT 3 a great convenience.
4. Maybe we should concentrate on improving the management, operations & maintenace of our current LRT/MRT system before we go on building new ones. We have yet to learn from our past experiences of these lines. The structure of the management of these systems are just plain whacked.

I can't explain why LRT 1 and 2 are run by LRTA while MRT 3 is run by MRTC but overseen by DOTC.

And to recap my points:

1. I firmly believe that the rail systems should be prioritized. Each new line adds to the viability of the entire system, and each new line spurs growth.
2. The cost to build such a line will only escalate with time. And the more this project is delayed, the more expensive it is going to get (similar to the MRT-3)
3. The provinces already have their own infrastructure developments. More than half of these developments are only on paper, and until we do something about the DPWH, I don't think throwing more cash at the problem is going to solve anything.
4. The LRTA is actually pretty efficient. Already, they are trying to consolidate the ticketing system. Everything is being sorted out as we speak

We are going to agree on very few points. You can't change my mind, and I can't change yours. Why don't we leave it at that?

pau_p1

December 4th, 2005, 04:15 PM

just took a shot the Shaw station of MRT..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06087.jpg

ryanr

December 4th, 2005, 07:14 PM

^^ Hey, looks like that side (the south side) of Shaw station is renovated to the rendering shown earlier...but the other side, the north side is still the dull design. Are they going to renovate it too?

Answer in a new thread. This one has to be locked.:)

ryanr

December 4th, 2005, 07:16 PM

The Metro Manila MRT Thread IV

Metro Manila MRT/LRT Lines I (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=96027)
Metro Manila MRT/LRT Lines II (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=193651)
Metro Manila MRT/LRT Lines III (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=290046)

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid107/paa9873b22dcae09782e7390d7d06678c/f95f4cc7.jpg

Line 2: Purple Line
http://www.pbase.com/image/25228149.jpg

Line 3: Blue Line
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/Makati/DSC06070.jpg

tigidig14

December 4th, 2005, 07:31 PM

oi new thread 'gleng. Sayang when we mostly needed sinjin to do this :D

ryanr

December 4th, 2005, 07:37 PM

hahaha...well he isnt here right now.

just took a shot the Shaw station of MRT..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06087.jpg

^^ Hey, looks like that side (the south side) of Shaw station is renovated to the rendering shown earlier...but the other side, the north side is still the dull design. Are they going to renovate it too?

Answer in a new thread. This one has to be locked.:)

ryanr

December 4th, 2005, 07:39 PM

And here are Solbanc's and JChip's MRT debates...Which are very interesting.

1. I am not against building MRT systems
2. I am against paying through the nose for MRT systems that have fuzzy ridership studies and are banking heavily on government subsidy
3. I find riding the MRT 3 a great convenience.
4. Maybe we should concentrate on improving the management, operations & maintenace of our current LRT/MRT system before we go on building new ones. We have yet to learn from our past experiences of these lines. The structure of the management of these systems are just plain whacked.

I can't explain why LRT 1 and 2 are run by LRTA while MRT 3 is run by MRTC but overseen by DOTC.

And to recap my points:

1. I firmly believe that the rail systems should be prioritized. Each new line adds to the viability of the entire system, and each new line spurs growth.
2. The cost to build such a line will only escalate with time. And the more this project is delayed, the more expensive it is going to get (similar to the MRT-3)
3. The provinces already have their own infrastructure developments. More than half of these developments are only on paper, and until we do something about the DPWH, I don't think throwing more cash at the problem is going to solve anything.
4. The LRTA is actually pretty efficient. Already, they are trying to consolidate the ticketing system. Everything is being sorted out as we speak

We are going to agree on very few points. You can't change my mind, and I can't change yours. Why don't we leave it at that?

stephencua

December 5th, 2005, 02:46 AM

taken from abs-cbnnews.com.. im pretty concerned with what it says about the government will shoulder some P60.56 a passenger... wow.. if this is the price of progress i dont think its worth it.. is it?

@solblanc - any news on the consolidation of the ticketing? hope its soon..

MRT-7 firm may get approval for its plans

By DARWIN G. AMOJELAR, The Manila Times Reporter

Universal LRT Corp., proponent of the mass rail transit project connecting Quezon and Caloocan cities, may yet secure the consent to push through with its plans, after the government scrapped its criteria of deficit-neutrality for big-ticket infrastructure deals.

In a letter to the transport department, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Augusto B. Santos said that since the fiscal position of the government has improved, as confirmed by a recent International Monetary Fund mission report, the Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) adopted deficit neutrality over the project’s life rather than on an annual basis.

With this development, the National Economic and Development Authority instructed the Department of Transport and Communication to officially endorse the updated financial/fiscal analysis of the project for subsequent review and consideration by the ICC.

The next ICC-technical board and Cabinet committee meetings are scheduled on December 6 and 14, respectively.

The review of the MRT 7 incurred delays owing to the project’s deficit neutrality.

Besides requiring deficit-neutrality in favor of government, rules and regulations also indicate that the project should be excluded from covering any commercial/ridership risk.

The government will also not pay any of the private proponent’s taxes.

Earlier, based on the proponent Universal LRT Corp.’s financial runs presented in a June 9 meeting, it proposed an actual fare for MRT 7 of P20 each passenger and an economic fare of P80.56, meaning that the government will shoulder some P60.56 a passenger.

The proponent claims that the project is deficit neutral in favor of the government because of its indirect and direct tax benefits.

Universal LRT projected that revenues from transfer ridership will amount to between $6.4 million and $12.2 million, while advertising revenues will reach from $1.20 million to $1.60 million. Income on land share is expected to reach $4.4 million to $11.6 million, while land-development revenues are seen amounting to between $31 million and $168 million.

Earlier, the proponent proposed that the government should pay in terms of "capacity fee" over 25 years, instead of a passenger fare subsidy.

Based on a report by The Manila Times, the government will pay some $1.4 billion of P77-billion "capacity fee" payments for over 25 years. For the first 10 years, the government will pay $130 million. From 11 to 15 years, the government will pay some $15 million yearly, and $10 million yearly from 16 to 18 years.

MRT 7 will cost $1.2 billion. It will have a 22-kilometer elevated track, running from Tala, Novaliches, to North Avenue corner EDSA, passing through Lagro, Fairview and Commonwealth Avenue before joining MRT Line 3 in North Avenue.

The project will serve commuters to and from the north of Metro Manila, including Novaliches, Fairview, Caloocan and Bulacan. It involves the construction of a 17-km asphalt private road at the Marilao Exit of the North Luzon Expressway that would end at the intermodal terminal in Tala.

Sinjin P.

December 5th, 2005, 03:10 AM

Oi sayang, me nalang gawa nung Naia Terminal 3 (Part V) ;)

bustero

December 5th, 2005, 04:36 AM

It's reported in Bworld Today that MRT7 is approved in principal. Very similar to stephen's article. Cant upload it because bworld.com.ph is locked for some of it's headlines.

As with Stephens own comments, I do wonder about the BOT part of this at all , as it looks like the government could just do it itself if they're going to subsidize it anyway?
At 1.2 billion for 22 km it's 54million dollars per km. which is not that high but I hope the technology will be modern not like mrt 3's

I'm also curious as to how the alignment issues with lrt4 was fixed. If it's not that would render it obsolete depriving a line connecting Manila to QC along Quezon Ave.

thomasian

December 5th, 2005, 10:21 AM

just took a shot the Shaw station of MRT..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06087.jpg

^^ Hey, looks like that side (the south side) of Shaw station is renovated to the rendering shown earlier...but the other side, the north side is still the dull design. Are they going to renovate it too?

Answer in a new thread. This one has to be locked.:)

The south-side is not actually renovated because that is the original design ever since it was built. The north-side doesn't seem like it will be renovated because no MRT station has ever been renovated.

Sinjin P.

December 5th, 2005, 10:36 AM

I've never ridden on one of the MRT/LRT or any train (except the Festival Supermall Train and SM Cebu's Storyland Train) ever.

BTW, what's the velocity/speed of the MRT/LRT in kph?

pau_p1

December 5th, 2005, 12:27 PM

yeah.. that is the current mall side of the Shaw station... just as the rendering on the old thread... this station looks very dirty now eventhough a few months ago they cleaned it up... the interior has also deteriorated and full of tiangges....

I'm not sure if the north-side would still be converted to a mall... it seems that shops doesn't last long on this station.....

thomasian

December 5th, 2005, 12:39 PM

The station mall is not even fully occupied yet.

bustero

December 5th, 2005, 05:18 PM

Ussually goes to 60kph, though I understand it can peak at 80kph.

dancethingy

December 5th, 2005, 05:51 PM

Thank you for the map GreyX, :)
MRT 4 looks like a dream

pau_p1

December 6th, 2005, 03:13 AM

oh.. regarding that map.. I think MRT7's line is not accurate, coz it should be running through Commonwealth Ave right?.. just as MRT4 would...

ryanr

December 6th, 2005, 06:28 AM

^^ Indeed...its an early editon map, from part I of this thread series:)

tigidig14

December 6th, 2005, 06:36 AM

the picture that was taken by pau seems like it came out of divisoria. whats underneath those tarp.

renell

December 6th, 2005, 08:32 AM

LRT2 stations look eons compared to the prehistoric MRT3 stations, and to think of it both were built around the same times.

pau_p1

December 6th, 2005, 10:05 AM

the picture that was taken by pau seems like it came out of divisoria. whats underneath those tarp.

ohh.. that is the tiangge area of the jeepney terminal beside the Shaw MRT station....

dancethingy

December 7th, 2005, 07:59 PM

Let's all pray hard that this happens and mrt4 and mrt8 and all of them as well!!!!!!!

Government finally gives nod to Metro mass transit system
By Mary Ann Reyes
The Philippine Star 12/08/2005

(First of two parts)
After five years of rigid evaluation and careful scrutiny, the government seems finally set to give its approval to a mass transit system that is expected to ease worsening traffic conditions and decongest Metro Manila.

The government’s approval is not without basis. The number of vehicles plying Metro Manila every day now stands at 1.8 million. As the number of vehicles increases by 8.32 percent every year, traffic on major thoroughfares could reach a total standstill during rush hour by 2012 without another mass transit system.

Road widening is not a viable option given the present infrastructure setting and the huge cost of securing right-of-way.

Also, according to an Asian Development Bank report, the harmful health effects of emissions from vehicles cost Metro Manila $392 million per year.

Decongestion of Metro Manila is urgent. Population density of the National Capital Region has already exceeded 15,617 persons per square kilometer. There are few takers for new housing units unless they are connected via mass transit to major employment centers in the heart of the metropolis.

Existing mass transport systems are already inadequate to serve the needs of the greater Manila area. The country will definitely need more transport infrastructure to sustain its growth.

Traffic conditions are going to worsen if nothing is done. It is estimated that while it currently takes around 48 minutes to drive from Balintawak to Cubao, by the year 2015, this trip could take as much as one hour and 42 minutes. This means nearly one hour of additional time wasted.

The housing backlog is also getting worse. The backlog in Metro Manila is 2.2 million units while the national backlog is 6.5 million. The figure gets bigger and bigger as 336,000 units are added every year to the backlog in Metro Manila and 1.3 million units at the national level.

In Metro Manila alone, there are around 12,000 police officers living as squatters while there are 15,850 military personnel in dire need of homes. There is a big need to create new cities that can provide affordable housing and efficient transportation, connecting people to their place of work.

Earlier, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) gave the final go-signal for the proponents of the $1.2-billion MRT-7 project to sign a deal with the government regarding the construction of an elevated mass transport system.

This, of course, was subject to executive approval (the project is scheduled for NEDA Investment Coordinating Council second pass approval very soon) and a Swiss challenge.

MRT-7 is the single biggest infrastructure project and single biggest investment that does not entail a government guarantee. After several years of planning, its proponent — Universal LRT Corp. (ULC) — was able to meet the 27 conditions set by the government.

As a result, the NEDA council is expected to authorize soon the Department of Transportation and Communications to proceed with the Swiss challenge in which other bidders are allowed to meet the ULC’s proposal. If ULC hurdles this challenge, a contract can be executed early next year.

The consortium behind MRT-7 is composed of respected local and foreign investors. The main proponent is Alstom of France, which is the second biggest transportation provider in the world. Other partners are EL Group of Companies of Hong Kong and Tyco International Group of the US, the world’s largest manufacturer of electrical and electronic components.

They have teamed up with local groups such as the Yuchengco Group of Companies, SM Investments, and TCGI Engineers, among other companies.

So what makes this project unlike other mass transit projects in the country?

Government made sure that MRT-7 will not entail guarantees on its part, unlike its other projects under the build-operate-transfer law.

ULC will also able to hurdle the two most important conditions imposed by the government: namely that the project should be government deficit-neutral; and that the proponent should bear the commercial and ridership risks.

In other words, ULC will not receive any government support should the project not operate or have zero ridership.

Deficit neutrality is achieved by ULC’s commitment to commercially develop 194 hectares of land adjacent to the project site and allocating 20 percent of the land or the profits thereof to the government to enable it to hedge its support of the project.

Along with agreeing to ensure the volume of riders risk, ULC is currently arranging a "credit wrap-up insurance" to cover the risk of government, lenders and investors in the event of zero ridership resulting from force majeure or natural disasters. (To be concluded)

ryanr

December 7th, 2005, 08:06 PM

Thats good:cheer: Hope they release more details in the second part of the article.

bustero

December 8th, 2005, 08:55 AM

Businessworld today reports that the government will begin the $600million LRT1 extension enxt year if someone will pay for the $5million due to former rail contractor SNC-lavalin for their study of the extension.

OK I'm starting a drive and donating one Peso to get it off. Who's with me? :)

queetz@home

December 8th, 2005, 09:05 AM

^ I'm already paying SNC Lavalin a shitload for the RAV Line taxes when I fly to Vancouver so there ya go! :rant:

Solblanc

December 9th, 2005, 03:30 AM

Malacanang authorized MRT-7 already. The DOTC was ordered to prepare a swiss challenge.

Another MRT line, here we go!

dancethingy

December 9th, 2005, 09:25 AM

YAY YAY YAY

kiretoce

December 9th, 2005, 02:59 PM

Malacanang authorized MRT-7 already. The DOTC was ordered to prepare a swiss challenge.

Another MRT line, here we go!

What's the planned route for this line again, and the color designation too? :dunno:

ryanr

December 10th, 2005, 03:43 AM

Malacanang authorized MRT-7 already. The DOTC was ordered to prepare a swiss challenge.

Another MRT line, here we go!

Whoo hoo!:cheer:

Sinjin P.

December 10th, 2005, 04:56 AM

Malacanang authorized MRT-7 already. The DOTC was ordered to prepare a swiss challenge.

Another MRT line, here we go!

Wow, I'm excited! :D

pau_p1

December 12th, 2005, 04:38 AM

Araneta Center Cubao station
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06114.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06115.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06116.jpg

aUen

December 12th, 2005, 04:48 AM

Nice pics. Good looking train, and the station too.

ryanr

December 12th, 2005, 06:18 AM

excellent pics, pau:) Yeah, line 2 is always impressive.

renell

December 12th, 2005, 06:57 AM

it looks monorail-ish without being too small for public transport, and carries a lot of people without looking like a giant waste of space like MRT-3's tracks.

pau_p1

December 12th, 2005, 08:40 AM

queetz@home

December 12th, 2005, 08:47 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v162/pau_p1/DSC06116.jpg

^ DANG!!! This is scary!!! What if there was some massive left and right ground shaking? A train can tip over and come crashing down to the streets below. :eek:

marites4

December 12th, 2005, 09:02 AM

yeah.. pero masungit ang guards grabe!.... after a while that I was taking this picture... a guard blurted that it is not allowed to take pictures of the trains using his megaphone.... so everyone was looking at me... paulit ulit pa... I can imagine how would a foreigner feel specially those Malay looking if the guards do this...
They have to be very careful probably because of terrorists threats and their affinity with bombing trains. I'm glad the secus are doing their job to keep things safe.

renell

December 12th, 2005, 12:35 PM

^ DANG!!! This is scary!!! What if there was some massive left and right ground shaking? A train can tip over and come crashing down to the streets below. :eek:

there would be much more than trains falling if 'massive left and right ground shaking' occured.

if it is sturdy and well maintained only mother nature and make trains to fall. and I'm sure there's a meter barrier, it's just not properly seen in the photo due to the angle

pau_p1

December 13th, 2005, 03:17 AM

yeah.. the rail barrier is high that it covers the surface, rail tracks, wheels upto the trains floor itself... so it would be a very strong nudge before it could be propelled off to the road below..

ThisFire

December 13th, 2005, 07:16 AM

Askal82

December 13th, 2005, 07:59 AM

yeah.. pero masungit ang guards grabe!.... after a while that I was taking this picture... a guard blurted that it is not allowed to take pictures of the trains using his megaphone.... so everyone was looking at me... paulit ulit pa... I can imagine how would a foreigner feel specially those Malay looking if the guards do this...

In New York City, you can be reported for taking pictures of the bridges from below unless youre on a group tour. They might suspect youre a terrorist.

Askal82

December 13th, 2005, 08:02 AM

^ DANG!!! This is scary!!! What if there was some massive left and right ground shaking? A train can tip over and come crashing down to the streets below. :eek:

I rode on these trains when I was back in Manila and they run very smooth and stable compared to the 90th and 76th street 7th train elevated station in New York City that shakes whenever the train approaches.

manileño

December 13th, 2005, 08:31 AM

I rode on these trains when I was back in Manila and they run very smooth and stable compared to the 90th and 76th street 7th train elevated station in New York City that shakes whenever the train approaches.

what about N/W train at Queensboro Plaza? haha that wild curve before you reach the station. and the station also shakes a bit plus it's so high like same level with the queensboro bridge. what a thrill. i miss it.

ishtefh_03

December 13th, 2005, 12:15 PM

my brother have pass for lrt/mrt... libre sya any station...

JChip

December 14th, 2005, 11:30 AM

The Metro Manila MRT Thread IV

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid107/paa9873b22dcae09782e7390d7d06678c/f95f4cc7.jpg

This route map is old. MRT 7 and MRT 4 have an overlap along Commonwealth Avenue. It is MRT 7 that ends at North Avenue. MRT 4 won't pass through North Avenue because it's already the route of MRT 7.

This map only confirms what I said before, MRT 7 passes along the route of MRT 4 to kill it.

bustero

December 14th, 2005, 04:49 PM

This map is not accurate, mrt 4 is supposed to pass through quezon ave all the way to circle then commonwealth to fairview, 7 passes through to sm city .Overlap is along commonwealth. 7 is trying to get the most profitable routes of mrt 4 which is commonwealth to EDSA.

bustero

December 14th, 2005, 04:56 PM

Interesting Article showing how the system progressed.

Japan Railway & Transport Review No. 16 (pp.33–37)

New Urban Transit Systems
The Metro Manila LRT System— A Historical Perspective
Gary L. Satre

Introduction

Long before light rail transit (LRT) vehicles started gliding above Metro Manila road traffic, streetcars were trundling past sidewalks, accompanied by the clip-clop of horses.
Just prior to the arrival of rail in the city, up to the early 1880s, three types of horse-drawn carriages served this distant outpost of the Spanish empire. The carruaje, the most expensive, was four-wheeled and drawn by two horses. The quiles had two wheels and was drawn by one horse so it was cheaper to ride. Its close cousin, the calesa, can still be seen plying the streets of Binondo, one of the oldest parts of the city. The often dilapidated and dirty carromata charged the lowest fare.

Arrival of ,i>tranvia

In 1878, Leon Monssour, an official of the Department of Public Works, submitted a proposal to Madrid for a streetcar system. Apparently inspired by the systems in New York and Paris, Monssour envisioned a five-line network with a central station outside the walls of Intramuros, the fortress-like seat of Spanish power in the Philippines. From Plaza San Gabriel in Binondo, the lines were to run to Intramuros via the Puerte de Espania (today's Jones Bridge), to Malate Church, Malacañang (where the Philippine President now lives and works), and Sampaloc and Tondo, large districts north of the Pasig River today. The proposal found favor with the government, but it had to wait for an entrepreneur's initiative.
That entrepreneur was Jocobo Zobel de Zangroniz. Together with Spanish engineer Luciano M. Bremon and Madrid banker Adolfo Bayo, in 1882, the three formed La Compañia de ,i>tranvias de Filipinas to operate the concession awarded by the government. The Malacañang Line was not built and was replaced by the Malabon Line. These five routes became popular with commuters. The Manila-Malabon Line was the first to be finished, opening for business on 20 October 1888. All five were constructed between 1885 and 1889. The first ,i>tranvias were horse-drawn omnibuses for 12 seated and 8 standing passengers. The system was 16.3-km long—slightly longer than today's only operating LRT line.
While four lines were horse-drawn, the Malabon ran on steam. Some 4 years later, the Manila Railroad Company, the country's first long-distance rail line north to Dagupan, 196 km away, started operation. So strictly speaking, the first steam railroad in the islands was a modest streetcar! Malabon's transfer points were Tondo, Maypajo, a working-class neighborhood in the suburb of Caloocan and Dulu, at the north end of that community.
The long communication line between Madrid and Manila, plus much delayed economic reforms, conspired to slow development of the Philippines, particularly Luzon, the archipelago's largest island. While other countries were in the throes of the Industrial Revolution and the wave of mercantilism, Spain lagged behind. As early as 1842, a study mission headed by Don Sinibaldo de Mas came to the Philippines to find the best way to carry out reforms—reforms later promoted by Filipinos like Dr Jose Rizal and his contemporaries, known collectively as the Propagandists.
The 1890s were turbulent years for the Spanish colony. The clamored-for reforms prompted Rizal to pen two novels, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, required reading in schools today. Though fiction, the stories were too close to the truth for the Spanish to tolerate. Eventually, Rizal was charged with sedition and executed in 1896—four years after the Manila-Dagupan railroad was completed. Less than 18 months later, Filipinos declared their independence from Spain. The revolution to assert that claim soon followed.

Photo: Circa 1890s horse-drawn ,i>tranvia in Manila with San Sebastian Church in background
(Meralco)

New Colonizers

Meanwhile, the Americans were also at war with Spain. After winning the conflict and claiming the Philippines under the Treaty of Paris, US forces soon arrived. Early in 1899, war (some called it an insurrection) between the Filipinos and the Americans broke out. The Spanish imprint was already etched indelibly on the Philippine landscape, and by the turn of the century, an air of uncertainty characterized everyday conversation as Filipinos wondered what life would be like under the new colonizers.

Transition for ,i>tranvia

By 1902, La Compañia had long since stopped expanding or improving its system. An average of only 10 streetcars plied the five lines daily. This was a far cry from the hourly service that provided 14 runs in each direction on the Malabon Line alone.
One year later, Manila city officials blamed slow economic growth and population congestion to ‘the antiquated horse-car system and the poorly constructed, unsatisfactory, and generally undesirable system of public vehicles’, to quote from their official report. These leaders reasoned that with improved transport, the railroad was specifically named, ‘many of those now paying high rents for small and unhealthy quarters will take advantage of this quick transportation and secure comfortable dwellings in better localities’.

Birth of Electric Streetcar

The Philippine Commission on 20 October 1902 passed a law that set into motion franchises to be awarded to bidders for the construction and operation of electric power and transportation networks. Although publicized in newspapers in America and the Philippines as well as in a leading US railway journal, only one bid was submitted. On 24 March 1903, the Municipal Board of Manila passed Ordinance 44, accepting the bid of Charles M. Swift of Detroit. Three days later, a New Jersey company was established which eventually became the Manila Electric Railroad and Light Company—better known as Meralco. Today, Meralco is still in the electric power business in Metro Manila and neighboring provinces. Later, the Philippine Commission allowed Meralco to take over the properties of La Compañia de ,i>tranvias. Meralco paid a small fee for its streetcars to La Compañia's lines.
Swift was now under a deadline. He had 6 months to start building his systems and 20 months to get the job done. Ordinance 44 specified 12 lines. Today's LRT Line 1 closely follows the Meralco route to Pasay south of Manila and the Santa Cruz route (See Fig. 1 on p. 39). LRT Line 2, now under construction, also adheres fairly well to the original lines Meralco laid down. With the exception of the Binondo and Intramuros areas, the network was double-tracked and powered by an overhead catenary of 500 V maximum. The track was standard gauge.
By 1913, Meralco had completed nine of the 12 lines, still called the ,i>tranvia by commuters. Swift under another franchise granted in 1906, was also operating a 9.8-km extension line from Paco to Fort McKinley and Pasig. The operator, the Manila Suburban Railway, later merged in 1919 to form the Manila Electric Company. The extension line was one of the most profitable in the Meralco system.
Meralco's lines crossed the Manila Railroad Company's lines (now the Philippine National Railways (PNR)) at three points. Sometimes, I go to Blumentritt Station on the LRT just to see a PNR commuter train crawl directly under the elevated track as I wait for an LRT train to approach its station of the same name, 5 or so meters above. LRT Line 2 will cross the PNR at Santa Mesa in another repeat of history. The Santa Ana ,i>tranvia crossed not far from today's PNR Paco Station, currently under renovation.
Dr Leonardo Q. Liongson, Engineering Professor at the University of the Philippines, and railroad enthusiast, made an astute observation in a paper he presented last January: ‘It is also interesting to note from the 1913 (route) map that the three principal ,i>tranvia lines (Santa Cruz, Santa Mesa and Santa Ana) led directly to outlying cockpits in suburban La Loma, San Juan and San Pedro de Macati respectively’. Cockfighting was and still is a popular form of gambling. He concluded, ‘From the point of view of city-wide commuter service, commerce and cockfighting, the Manila electric ,i>tranvia was indeed a complete system serving the city by the end of the first decade of the 20th century’.
As the road network improved, Meralco introduced electric- and gasoline-powered bus services in the 1930s. The company also promoted the use of electric appliances such as radios and refrigerators. The ,i>tranvia continued running but stopped expanding.

Photo: Open-sided streetcar on Escolta, Manila's original business and financial district in 1910s
(Squires, Bingham and Co., Manila)
Photo: Circa 1920s enclosed streetcar on Pasay-Rizal Line
(Meralco)

War Takes Its Toll

During WWII, service deteriorated due to poor maintenance and the floods of 1943. The death blow came during the Battle of Manila in February 1945. The destruction to life and property was so horrendous that General Dwight D. Eisenhower observed that the city was the second-most destroyed, after Warsaw in Poland.
At the war's end came the independence promised by the Americans in 1935, and the task of rebuilding the city and nation. Necessity and resourcefulness teamed up to put the ,i>tranvia out of business. Meralco concentrated on restoring electricity to the city. Meanwhile Filipino ingenuity came to the fore. Using what was available, numerous army jeeps were pressed into service, becoming the jeepney transport system that continues to serve large sections of the metropolis. Many of today's jeepney routes in Manila follow the old ,i>tranvia lines. It is said that the jeepney is the most photographed object in Metro Manila. However, today, there are signs that King Jeepney is slowly being replaced by other forms of road transport, among them the Tamaraw FX, Toyota's entry into the Asian utility vehicle market. It is proving to be a more comfortable alternative to the mostly non-air-conditioned jeepneys. ‘Take the FX’ has become part of the commuter lingo of Metro Manila in recent years.

Photo: Workers preparing roof of Santolan Road Station on LRT Line 3
(EDSA MRT Project)

Literally Raising Public Transport to a Higher Level

Construction of the first LRT line got underway in October 1981, just 4 months after I arrived in Quezon City to study at the University of the Philippines. Public transport was nearing its saturation point but was still barely able to meet demand. Hanging on to the back end of a moving jeepney—a common practice today—was not necessary in the early 1980s. This indicates how bad the traffic situation has become.
It is said that the former First Lady Imelda R. Marcos, who happened to be Governor of Metro Manila, wanted her ‘City of Man’ to be on a par with other world capitals. She noted that the National Capital Region lacked an operating rail-based transport network. The end result was the elevated ‘no frills’ basic transport line now known as the LRT, or Metrorail.
The government-owned Construction Development Corporation of the Philippines (now the Philippine National Construction Corp.) was the sole contractor for the project. One reason for choosing the north-south Monumento-Baclaran route was because it is fairly straight for most of its length. Nonetheless, there were obstacles to overcome including a 5-year-old high rise department store and a classroom building at nearby Feati University. Both were torn down to make way for Carriedo Station and the tracks going to the Pasig River bridge, the very last section to be built. The north and south sections were not connected for about 5 months until they were linked on 12 May 1985. After an absence of almost 40 years, the ,i>tranvia was back.
Meralco was also back in the transport business, albeit just for 10 years because the Meralco subsidiary that operated Metrorail is now completely controlled by the Light Rail Transit Authority.

Photo: Looking south from Shaw Boulevard overpass on LRT Line 3 with part of EDSA straddled by station support columns
(EDSA MRT Project)

Too Much of a Good Thing

By 1990, the LRT was showing premature aging due mostly to poor maintenance and overloading. Rush hour tested the Filipinos' legendary patience and resilience. Conditions called for drastic measures. Overcrowding, both on the platforms and trains put a heavy strain on rolling stock, stations and track. For example, at one time, trains actually crept into Central Station to reduce vibration when cracks were discovered in beams and floors. Quick repairs soon brought operations back to normal.
At present, massive rehabilitation is underway. Stations will be expanded, and track work improved. In 1981, an air-conditioned taxi or bus was extremely hard to find. Now, the opposite is true. Forced-air ventilation is not enough to ensure comfort on trains in a tropical climate, but the ‘no frills’ LRT had no air conditioning. Fortunately, second-generation trains with air conditioning will be put into service, making the LRT synonymous with comfort.

Back to the Future

Largely due to the LRT's success, coupled with improved economic conditions, the government is coming back to following Meralco's lead earlier in this century. Over the last 10 years, the number of automobiles on Metro Manila's streets has grown by an average of 10.82% annually. Metro Manila has 39.26% of all vehicles nationwide. Thus, the new LRT lines are greatly anticipated. A journey that takes 7 minutes per kilometer by road during commuting hours, should be halved by the new LRT.
Epifanio De los Santos Avenue (EDSA) is without a doubt the Philippines' most expensive thoroughfare. It started as a 12-lane diversion highway around Manila in the 1960s but has been absorbed by the eastward growth. In 1961, the population of Greater Manila was about 2.5 million. Today, the estimates range from 9 to 12 million, about 20% of the total population. The last 12 years have seen the addition of four overpasses, one underpass and the Ortigas Avenue intersection. These connections are now challenges for the builders of LRT Line 3 which follows the old EDSA road.
Started in October 1996 as the first project in 11 years, LRT Line 3 is applying the lessons learned from LRT Line 1. Better public relations are being used this time around, keeping grumbling to a minimum, unlike during the Line 1 construction, when lack of communication added to the chaotic conditions along the already narrow Rizal and Taft Avenues.
Unlike LRT Line 1, which is entirely elevated, LRT Line 3 takes advantage of the EDSA's undulating ground surface. Consequently, there will be elevated, surface and underground sections, helping get the tracks past obstacles. The first phase of the line runs 17.8 km and will have 12 stations. Eventually, all 23 km of EDSA will get train service.
The estimated cost for Phase I is US$655 million. The American firm, Kaiser Engineering International, is the engineering and construction manager. Sumitomo and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries of Japan are the turnkey contractors. Ckd Tatra Ltd/Tradeinvest of the Czech Federal Republic is supplying the rolling stock. Operations are expected to begin in mid 1999.
LRT Line 2 is scheduled for completion in late 2001. Construction started from Katipunan Station in November 1997, the line's only underground stop. It has been much delayed by equipment sourcing and alignment problems. LRT Line 2 has 11 stations over a distance of 13.8 km. It will be almost totally elevated and higher than LRT Line 1 where they cross. It runs east to west following Marcos Highway, Aurora Blvd., Ramon Magsaysay Blvd., Legarda St., and Claro M. Recto St. Work on two other stations in and west of the Cubao, Quezon City shopping district is also underway.
LRT Line 4, another east-west route from Manila to Quezon City, is just over the planning horizon. It will follow España, Quezon Ave., and Commonwealth for 22 km and is planned to have 20 stations.
Metro Manila has had a long experience with rail-based transit, even if it hasn't been continuous or always happy. I have four personal criteria to measure good public transport—it must be safe, comfortable, clean, and reliable. It seems that the public transport arteries in Metro Manila are finally moving towards meeting my four criteria.

dancethingy

December 14th, 2005, 04:59 PM

So is there an estimate as to how many jobs the construction of MRT7 will generate. I'm hoping it will provide plenty of jobs for the public.

Any news on MRT4????? an MRT 4 would spell death to very many jeeps and FX taxis

dancethingy

December 14th, 2005, 05:23 PM

ryanr

December 14th, 2005, 09:51 PM

This route map is old. MRT 7 and MRT 4 have an overlap along Commonwealth Avenue. It is MRT 7 that ends at North Avenue. MRT 4 won't pass through North Avenue because it's already the route of MRT 7.

This map only confirms what I said before, MRT 7 passes along the route of MRT 4 to kill it.

Yes, i already said before that it is an old map...from the first part of this thread series.

JChip

December 15th, 2005, 04:17 PM

December 14 was the schedule of the NEDA-ICC Cabinet Committee meeting regarding MRT 7. I find it quite strange that there's no news about the meeting today. MRT 7 always seems to be in the news but now it's eerily quiet...

Baaahh, vaporware :sleepy:

JChip

December 15th, 2005, 04:24 PM

That was a great read Bustero, thank you very much.
So i'm assuming LRT line 4 is now the planned MRT 4? This line seems more badly needed, FOR NOW, than mrt 7, so where are we in the planning stage of mrt 4.

@dancethingy,

Don't get your hopes up too high for Line 4. The project seems to have run out of steam after DOTC prioritized MRT 7. Last I heard, the Line 4 project proponents have run out of cash. We might see some news about Line 4 if Sen. Mar Roxas delivers the Line 4 and Line 7 inquiry. However, I have my doubts...

I don't get it, why does DOTC prioritize a project that doesn't have an urgent need? Line 4 seems to be a better buy than Line 7.

MRT-LRT are the same thing in the planning stage. The number of the project is really the identifier.

dancethingy

December 15th, 2005, 08:18 PM

Thanks Jchip, sigh, what a world what a world, :(

ryanr

December 16th, 2005, 12:34 AM

I actually think they should make line 4 a priority over line 7, since it connects Manila and QC through Espana and Quezon Ave...a very busy route.

pau_p1

December 16th, 2005, 04:35 AM

I guess the reason they prioritized MRT7 is that... MRT7 upon connecting to MRT3 would provide connection to other lines and could serve Manila.. specially when MRT3 is extended to Monumento.... and I think that there are areas in the north that needs growth or the plan to develop to disperse the congestion out of Manila..

behind the SM Fairview mall is a commercial district area by Sta. Lucia which is waiting to grow... I guess with the MRT7, it would spur growth to that district... some call centers have also opened on the north like Teletech in Robinson's Place Novaliches and Convergys along Commonwealth beside the St. Peter's Church...

bustero

December 16th, 2005, 04:58 AM

I know of 2 reasons why line 7 seems to be prioritized.

1. They found the ridership of the radial lines (from manila center to outward) lower than expected as can be seen in lrt2. This has got to do with demographics. Also as PauP1 has posted the outskirts are unserved by mass transport and there will be if not presently more people there right now commuting. But line 4 also anticipates this at least from the quezn ave to sm fairview section.

2. The other reason is politics. actually line 4 has actually complained (it's in an article here somewhere) that the other line is being prioritized over them while their older proposal has sat down on someone's desk. This also has got to do with who the proponenets are. Eli Levin knows how to work the system having done mrt3 (though most of us are not great fans of the system), their proposal uses real estate as the main way they make money. Line 4 is primarily equipment/construction guys so they are not as pusigido as line 7 group. these kinds of things require great knowledge of the system , it's not all simple corruption. The government can't actually afford to subsidize both lines and line 7 is selling the line that they will have little or no subsidy. While Line 4 is a much simpler proposal requiring the same guarantee requirements for financing from the government.

pau_p1

December 16th, 2005, 07:46 AM

yeah plus I remember last year or so I think that the Manila City Council is against the building of an MRT line on España Blvd except if it will be done underground... they fear that building an overhead rail line would have an economic effect to España just as what happened to Rizal Avenue... and before a subway could be built on España, the flooding problem on this boulevard should first be resolved or the subway would end up sunk...

as of today, the stretch of España is not as lively as it used to...

JChip

December 16th, 2005, 08:48 AM

2. The other reason is politics. actually line 4 has actually complained (it's in an article here somewhere) that the other line is being prioritized over them while their older proposal has sat down on someone's desk. This also has got to do with who the proponenets are. Eli Levin knows how to work the system having done mrt3 (though most of us are not great fans of the system), their proposal uses real estate as the main way they make money. Line 4 is primarily equipment/construction guys so they are not as pusigido as line 7 group. these kinds of things require great knowledge of the system , it's not all simple corruption. The government can't actually afford to subsidize both lines and line 7 is selling the line that they will have little or no subsidy. While Line 4 is a much simpler proposal requiring the same guarantee requirements for financing from the government.

Speaking of Eli Levin, he's responsible for Lines 1 and 3 (2 out of the 3 operational lines today). I personally think he's a shady character. He managed to work his magic during the Marcos and Ramos years. I heard that this guy (an Israeli) finds it easier to do business here in the country rather than in Israel.

The bad thing about his last project was the fact that he sold out immediately after getting approval for Line 3. Robert Sobrepena bought this guy out after Line 3 was approved. Laway lang ang puhunan niya, milyon na ang kapalit. I think he's a person that we can do without...

bustero

December 16th, 2005, 09:03 AM

^^ I also have that impression seems a little bit like a packager/scammer but I must disclose I know very little of the facts to base this comment on intelligently.

Re. Espana I don't remember this controversy so much but it would be really shortsighted for them if this is the reason as a rail line would be better than the urban decay that will happen as the city hollows out. They can start it from the PNR Line at Espana Station if only to connect the Manila Train line (the korean project of southrail) with the other lrt lines.

Askal82

December 16th, 2005, 09:03 AM

You know, laying out trains in the city would be easier if Metro Manila is under one mayor, convert these mini cities into borroughs similar to New York or London

bustero

December 16th, 2005, 09:04 AM

^^ agreed

JChip

December 16th, 2005, 09:36 AM

Oi! People who have an interest in Lines 4 and 7. Eli Levin will be the guest tonight, December 16, at Cito Beltran's Straight Talk on ANC at 11pm tonight. The topic is MRT 7.

Some of my prospective questions:
1. Office space - In a Businessworld news article, you said that you're company is proposing to build 45,000 sqm of office space a year for 20 years. At the end of 20 years, there will be 900,000 sqm of office space combined. This is more space than all the Prime and Grade A office space in Makati.

A. Do you realize that 45,000 sqm a year is more than the annual space that is leased or sold in Fort Bonifacio and Filinvest Alabang combined? What makes you and your partners feel that companies will go to Bulacan?

2. Residential Units - In the same article, you said that the company will build 2,500 residential units per year for 20 years. Do you realize that 2,500 units is around 25% of all the permits to sell in Bulacan this year? What makes your company a real estate superpower from being nothing right now?

3. What is the public's assurance that you will not sell out after the approval of the project just like what you did in MRT 3? Are you willing to set up a bond to pay the government if you sell out before the end of 5 years?

4. It has been written that MRT 7 is an SM line. Have they given a written contract committing themselves to building a mall in the MRT 7 terminal?

5. If this project is so good and the government will earn on its investment, why doesn't the proponent just build this project without government support? If the returns are so good then the government doesn't have to step in...

renell

December 16th, 2005, 09:38 AM

so that map recently quoted is outdated.. what's the newest route for Line 7?

bustero

December 16th, 2005, 09:49 AM

Sige J chip , text in those questions.

actually i know the answer to 4, BDO cap is actually a major investor in the consortium hence they're in from the start plus the whole line starts in sm city but tanong m na rin, let's make it the control question and tingnan natin kung bolero nga.

pau_p1

December 16th, 2005, 10:13 AM

I am just wondering...

@JChip.. you sound (to me) like you don't want any progress to happen in the north.. or maybe in Bulacan.. wala lang po.. kasi first you find it absurd to build MRT7 kasi you don't find it worth it due to ridership and the mini city to be built in SJDM... instead you'd prefer building infrastructure to the south.. then now you question why does the guy think that businessmen would go to Bulacan... why not?...

anyways.. I agree.. 1 mayor or a governor for Metro Manila is a good idea.. so that all developments would be integrated...

about the Manila City council.. I read that in a newspaper before....

pau_p1

December 16th, 2005, 10:19 AM

I searched for the article.. and here it is... dated Jan 27, 2004 from Manila Bulletin (Opinion/Editorial)
http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2004/01/27/OPED20040127691.html

Ride to progress

PHASE 1 of MRT 7, designed to reduce travel time for people in northern Manila, will be considered for final approval by the Cabinet Committee on Transportation and Communications on 28 January. Proponent LRT Corporation estimates that it will be operational by 2006, two years in the term of a new, or renewed, administration.

The Department of Transportation and Communications has also asked LRT Corporation to consider interconnecting to Line 2 to serve commuters on LRT 7 to Quiapo, the University Belt, and Divisoria, a logical move as Line 2 in Kalentong, Marikina, is much cheaper ($150 million) compared to the proposal of MRT 4 ($1 billion).

It will be recalled that Manila Mayor Lito Atienza and the City Council barred the construction of additional elevated mass transport systems in Manila, including MRT 4 because previous experience had shown that elevated rail systems on Taft Avenue and Rizal Avenue "severely affected the business climate in said areas, and has caused the decline of business opportunities along these major thoroughfares.??

MRT 4 would not only have made traffic conditions worse along España would also compete directly with MRT Line 2. As they say, that's not the way to run a railroad. In Mayor Atienza's view, "it would hamper the continued success of our Buhayin ang Maynila program.??

On the other hand, MRT 7 will service the two million commuters in Bulacan and central Quezon City and nearby provinces. It will run from Tala, Caloocan-North to MRT 2 and 3 through the Novaliches and Fairview route, connecting by road to North Luzon Expressway

If things go as planned ? apparently there's no reason why they shouldn't ? Universal LRT Corporation should be able to complete the MRT-LRT loop in Metro Manila, which includes the 5.2 kilometer Line 3 from Monumento to Caloocan City and SM City Edsa.

Stitching the major arteries of the metropolis should beckon big local and foreign investors looking for long-term ventures, as MRT 7 will open satellite cities for business and residential expansion.

Next step probably is the Pasig River as one more transport route.

Askal82

December 16th, 2005, 11:03 AM

"MRT 4 would not only have made traffic conditions worse along España would also compete directly with MRT Line 2. As they say, that's not the way to run a railroad. In Mayor Atienza's view, "it would hamper the continued success of our Buhayin ang Maynila program."

MRT2? or LRT2? Atienza doesn't know what he is saying. He even used the word 'compete' instead of decongest. It just shows that he lacks foresight that Metro Manila will be more congested in the future and its better to plan a well-laid out metro rail network now to anticipate increased riderships. In cities like NY, there are two or even as much as 4 lines travelling from where your nearest station is going to your destination. You can also choose to take either local (many stops) or express (few stops) running on the same route.

ishtefh_03

December 16th, 2005, 11:48 AM

my brother is working on eei conctruction and he is a junior planner, they are the one who is doing these railways... i ask him some details that i can post here...

dancethingy

December 16th, 2005, 01:32 PM

thanks ishtefh, you go do that

So I thought the city of manila only had one mayor, Lito Atienza?????? I am so in the dark with how local governments function here in Metro Manila. I need a local government 101 class.

SO how would an mrt 4 line hamper business on espana, i'd think it would add because SMART people should gravitate towards areas near major transit stations so they could save money. Maybe they could constructe the Line on another street running paralled and not too far from espana???

bustero

December 16th, 2005, 02:24 PM

oh yes , manila city has only one mayor but the lrt lines ussully run through several cities that's why you need to coordinate with several cities/mayors.

i think they refer to the experience of sta cruz with lrt1, what used to be a vibrant place started to die since the place became really dark and of course the traffic patterns had changed. That really would not be the case with Espana/Quezon Blvd as its a much wider avenue. Plus the reasons why sta cruz decayed is only partly caused by the lrt but some other key demographic changes. The ironic part is that if that will become their attitude this will be self fulfilling as manila will not grow to much and the center in terms of dynamism and the like will move eastward and south as they follow the rail lines.

kennethologist

December 16th, 2005, 05:58 PM

Askal82

December 16th, 2005, 06:21 PM

dancethingy

December 16th, 2005, 06:53 PM

HONG KONG apartments???? yuck, blech, are they serious????
they need to think harder.

Askal82

December 16th, 2005, 07:44 PM

Can't they just simply think out of the box. I dont want manila to look like hk just by the look of apartments.

Edmundtanso

December 16th, 2005, 10:57 PM

MRT2? or LRT2? Atienza doesn't know what he is saying. He even used the word 'compete' instead of decongest. It just shows that he lacks foresight that Metro Manila will be more congested in the future and its better to plan a well-laid out metro rail network now to anticipate increased riderships. In cities like NY, there are two or even as much as 4 lines travelling from where your nearest station is going to your destination. You can also choose to take either local (many stops) or express (few stops) running on the same route.[/QUOTE]

Atienza dont know anything..... he only do projects that woudl benefit him (money wise).....

Askal82

December 17th, 2005, 04:21 AM

Atienza dont know anything..... he only do projects that woudl benefit him (money wise).....

Perhaps, the word 'compete' should be taken in the context of his personal interest. What a good job by a typical trapo.

kennethologist

December 17th, 2005, 03:21 PM

HONG KONG apartments???? yuck, blech, are they serious????
they need to think harder.

they are developing daw a city at the end of the line... anyways... it's not all that bad because they are planning to put the train mostly underground

renell

December 18th, 2005, 04:21 AM

Can't they just simply think out of the box. I dont want manila to look like hk just by the look of apartments.

that's true that it will look horrendously wrong.. however on the other side of it with a rail line connecting it to the city it will be one of the ways to solve our housing problems... but perhaps a design contest would help ease the ugliness.

kennethologist

December 18th, 2005, 08:08 AM

that's true that it will look horrendously wrong.. however on the other side of it with a rail line connecting it to the city it will be one of the ways to solve our housing problems... but perhaps a design contest would help ease the ugliness.

i think nung sinabing hk style doesnt mean theyre not gonna do boxy structures... baka ung system of living ung gusto nilang gayahin...

they also said na the line will be finished in 3 years...

renell

December 18th, 2005, 12:56 PM

...okay then. but usually a series of continious buildings for mass housing often means boxes doesn't it?

c0kelitr0

December 18th, 2005, 02:12 PM

hongkong style apartments are still better than slums.

tigidig14

December 18th, 2005, 02:24 PM

^or those barong barong underneath the bridges

stephencua

December 19th, 2005, 02:48 AM

taken from inq7.net..

NORTH EDSA TO MONUMENTO
MRT expansion to cost $191M
Posted: 3:24 AM | Dec. 19, 2005

Elizabeth L. Sanchez
Inquirer
METRO RAIL TRANSIT CORP., A consortium led by Fil-Estate Corp. of the Sobrepeñas, has expressed interest in bidding for the $191-million expansion of the Metro Rail Transit from North Triangle to Monumento.

Fil-Estate chair Robert John Sobrepeña said the government was still drafting the terms of reference for the expansion of MRT III Phase 2, a 5.1-kilometer transit system that will add three new stations from North Triangle station in Quezon City to Monumento. The three stations will cross Roosevelt, Balintawak and Monumento.

The project cost is MRTC's own estimate. Sobrepeña said the MRTC consortium, which also includes the Ayala Group, Anglophil and United Laboratories, has proposed a project cost of $191 million to the Department of Transportation and Communication. He said this could be be raised from a mix of debt ($153 million) and equity ($38 million).

"We have a project proposal of $191 million [with government] and in an effort to reduce that cost, the government wants the project to be bid out to reduce the cost. We would not object to that or resist that move for so long as it is a publicly held bidding. If it is a negotiated bidding and the costs are above $191 million, then we feel that is where our right should be exercised," Sobrepeña said.

Phase II is seen to generate revenues of roughly $300 million by 2030 combined with Phase I and cut government subsidies by $300 million or roughly P16.8 billion on its 12th year of operation.

Phase II will also allow those living in Caloocan, Malabon, Navotas and Valenzuela (Camanava) and Bulacan access to the central business districts in Manila via Edsa once Phase II has been completed.

Separately, Sobrepeña said MRTC was proposing to buy 48 more trains to address growing ridership of the MRT. The MRT system has 73 trains capable of carrying 350,000 passengers a day. It is estimated that the purchase of additional trains would cost another $98 million to $100 million.

Additional trains would increase ridership to 450,000 passengers a day. "Our design capacity is 350,000 a day, and we are beyond capacity," Sobrepeña said.

Fil-Estate currently holds roughly 30 percent in the MRT project, the 17-kilometer light rail system traversing Edsa.

dancethingy

December 19th, 2005, 03:18 AM

True coke, but if you have the chance to make something better aesthetically and environmentally, then why not do it?

tigidig14

December 19th, 2005, 03:23 AM

^what you just said can be a motto in true coke

c0kelitr0

December 19th, 2005, 05:08 AM

True coke, but if you have the chance to make something better aesthetically and environmentally, then why not do it?

problem is, the philippines doesn't have much dough...so imo, anything better than shanties is good enough.

bustero

December 19th, 2005, 05:12 AM

The two of you have good points, the challenge will be reconciling the two and having a good balance between affordability and good design aesthetics.

pau_p1

December 19th, 2005, 05:58 AM

they are developing daw a city at the end of the line... anyways... it's not all that bad because they are planning to put the train mostly underground

wow.. the line would be mostly underground.. hmmm.. that would mean.. that subway stations could be very big.. specially on Commonwealth Ave... hmmm.. that's nice... and of course the line must be underground as it reaches the Quezon Memorial Circle.... nice!..

wow.. making a new city with HongKOng style buidings would look nice... aba.. and if this would provide cheap living... ganda ng view nila since mapuno pa ang area ng Tala, Caloocan City.... and tahimik pa...

OtAkAw

December 19th, 2005, 09:42 AM

If Manila was as rich or richer than Dubai, Oh my goodness we would build artificila carabao shaped islands for the below-poverty people but then if we were as rich as Dubai, no person would live in poverty,

Sometimes I wonder kung san kinukuha ng Dubai ang pera nya, mind you their projects are BILLION DOLLARS WORTH and the proposed MRT Line is only $191 M!
MGM Grand Hotel, Resort and Casino in Las Vegas costed around $1.2B, see the difference?

ewh1

December 19th, 2005, 10:32 AM

Wow. has anyone seen the new Line 1 Trains for their capacity expansion project? man.. do they look good

http://www.lrta.gov.ph/press_release/press_release_051212_OsakaInspection.htm

Matteo

December 19th, 2005, 10:57 AM

hey ewh1, tigidig had a question for you in the album thread.
he wants to know if youre a boy or a girl cause they were having a debate about your photo

pau_p1

December 19th, 2005, 10:57 AM

JAMAICUS

December 19th, 2005, 02:51 PM

Wow. has anyone seen the new Line 1 Trains for their capacity expansion project? man.. do they look good

http://www.lrta.gov.ph/press_release/press_release_051212_OsakaInspection.htm

Wow, that look so MODERN :eek2:

bustero

December 20th, 2005, 05:37 AM

don't you guys think it looks like mrt3?

bustero

December 20th, 2005, 05:52 AM

don't you guys think it looks like mrt3 or lrt1! I only see the front kasi. Maybe the sides look different.

(btw did you see the front page of the lrt site. they're celebrating the fact that someone gave birth in the lrt ! Ok ha - hehe)

bulakenyo

December 20th, 2005, 10:23 PM

Natawa ako sa report ng TV Patrol world kagabi. Tungkol dun sa mga nau-unsiyaming suicide attempts sa LRT stations. Kasi nga daw the LRT took some measures to prevent suicides in LRT stations. Yung bago mag-approach at lumabas ng stations ang mga trains biglang babagal. Yung mga naga-attempt na magpakamatay hindi namamatay kasi mabagal yung takbo ng train near the stations. Funny! :)

kiretoce

December 20th, 2005, 10:41 PM

^^ :lol: Ha..ha..ha! Those attempting suicides would "die" from embarassment! :D

bulakenyo

December 20th, 2005, 10:47 PM

^^ Hahahahah!! Oo nga no? Or they would really try their best to kill themselves somewhere else because of the embarassment they had to endure in the LRT. hahaahhahh!!

kiretoce

December 20th, 2005, 10:49 PM

How about jumping off the station onto the street below?

bulakenyo

December 20th, 2005, 11:30 PM

Puwede din! Naku tigilan na natin ang suggestions! Baka may ma-depress na SSC member mabasa pa tong mga posts natin. hahaahhah!!

kiretoce

December 20th, 2005, 11:37 PM

If one is really committed to ending it all, he/she will find ways to succeed no matter what we post here. But let's get back to the topic on hand before we both get reprimanded by the powers that be. :colgate:

bulakenyo

December 20th, 2005, 11:47 PM

You're right. I saw the new trains which will soon be traversing the LRT line and I must say they look really nice. I hope they have better airconditioning units though.

stephencua

December 21st, 2005, 02:46 AM

taken from abs-cbnnews.com...

Govt to pursue BOT for LRT 1 extension

The government will offer the construction of the Light Rail Transit 1 extension project to private firms next year after completing its remaining obligations to a Canadian construction firm, an official of the Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA) said.

Melquiades Robles, LRTA administrator, told reporters that the decision to shift to a build-operate-and-transfer (BOT) contract will ensure transparency in the expansion project.

"Right now, the board has agreed to pay SNC-Lavalin, the Canadian proponent, the balance of the developmental cost. Initially, it was a joint venture but it was converted into BOT for more transparency," Robles said.

Based on the amended and restated settlement agreement, the LRTA has to pay the Canadian proponent half of the developmental cost of the $20 million, or $10 million.

From there, Robles said the project could solicit proposal and invite bidders to construct the LRT extension up to Bacoor under a BOT agreement.

He said both the bidding process and the construction can be started next year. He foresees the project to be operational three year after construction.

The extension is expected to serve around 800,000 passengers a day and make traveling time from Bacoor to Monumento less than an hour or about 50 to 55 minutes.

The LRT 1 extension project costs at least $841.486b million. Of this, electro-mechanical works amounts to $442.118 million; civil works, $371.368 million and land acquisition, about $38 million.

The Metro Manila Urban Transportation Integration Study has identified the project, which will run through southern Metro Manila to Cavite, as an integral part of the Rail Transit Network. The LRT 1 extension is a flagship project of the Office of the President and a priority project of the Department of Transportation and Communications and LRTA.

The project will expand the existing LRT 1 service southward to the cities of Parañaque and Las Piñas and the municipalities of Bacoor, Imus and Dasmariñas, Cavite. Darwin G. Amojelar

tigidig14

December 21st, 2005, 03:00 AM

^this is the extension that will connect the lrt to Naia, right

renell

December 21st, 2005, 05:15 AM

hmm.. not directly, but I think they plan to have one of the stations to have some kind of bus or shuttle transport from NAIA to the LRT/MRT system.

so will those LRT1 extension trains also ply through the old stations? it basically looks like the modern version of the current trains, more shinier and hopefully can accomodate more.

bustero

December 21st, 2005, 05:44 AM

It's one track that goes nearly 50 km when it's done from tagaytay to calookan!

One thing pala that kinda disturbed me fromt he eli levin interview was when he described the track route, he said they were passing through the quezon memorial circle then to philcoa all the way to sm city in fairview. If this istrue they For all intents and purpose this is the original line 4 alignment, looks like di na matutuloy ang line 4 and these guys have won the battle for that route and their project.

richard24

December 27th, 2005, 05:14 PM

d na nga ma22loi ang line 4 coz of manila's ban on elevated trains... papayag lang daw ang manila na magkaroon ng train kung subway ito,. (arte>?) jowk.. :)

tanong ko, ma22loi pa ba ung pagextend ng lrt2 mula santolan to masinag? i read dati na ung idadagdag na stations ay ang sta.lucia, samson vill. and masinag... ma22loi pa ba i2... sana nga. para mas malapit na samin. :)

thomasian

January 3rd, 2006, 11:29 AM

What's up on this one?

Future development on some MRT Stations:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b358/thomasian/guadalupe.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b358/thomasian/ortigas.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b358/thomasian/kamuning.jpg

pau_p1

January 3rd, 2006, 12:00 PM

hmmm.. so is that why those stations are flat on top?... nice...

bustero

January 3rd, 2006, 12:06 PM

Aaron I think those are really old. Those must be the original Levin MRT Designs when he designed the mrt stations they were 6 stories high so it must be right. I'm not sure the mrt comp. has any mullah for that!

richard, the plan to extend to Masinag is definite the only question is when!

richard24

January 3rd, 2006, 04:43 PM

^can you imagine... seeing those kind of stations sa gitna ng edsa... ang khyooot... weird... really weird. weird. hahaha... ang khyooot talaga... cant stop laughing.... nakakaloka. :eek2:

btw... kuya aaron, san mo poh yan nakuha? astig na sobrang khyooot. grabe... :)

@bustero.: oo nga... kelan? siguro tatapusin muna nila ung line 7 and extension ng line 1... :)

Askal82

January 3rd, 2006, 04:52 PM

@ Thomasian What are they? Don't tell me they're gonna build them on top of those mrt stations? I think this kind of development is :weird:

kennethologist

January 3rd, 2006, 07:16 PM

@ Thomasian What are they? Don't tell me they're gonna build them on top of those mrt stations? I think this kind of development is :weird:

those are really really old... anyways pangit naman kung ganun ang ginawa...

btw,,, i never really liked the layout nung stations ng MRT3... maxadong masikip... ticket lines blocking the entrance to the train docks... everything in one floor... including security... very chaotic pag rush hours...

stephencua

January 4th, 2006, 02:38 AM

i totally agree.. they should do something about the number of turnstiles and ticketing booths.. sheesh.. when will the MRT-3 get new management?

Askal82

January 4th, 2006, 02:40 AM

They should just make the ticket dispensing system computerized like LRT2. Kaso nga lang, ma lay-out yung staff nila though or actually ganito, may certain amount lang matatanggap ng machine.

pau_p1

January 4th, 2006, 04:09 AM

Askal82

January 4th, 2006, 01:26 PM

actually.. they should make use of their vending machines on stations that looks like (to now) furnitures... and yeah many stations need more turnstiles.... and maintenance should be proper because there are cases in Shaw station which has 5 turnstiles, 4 are not working...

They should address the situation right away, lets say they need extra turnstyles to replace them just in case others are not working so they can have the time to repair the damaged ones and put them back just in case the other ones got damaged.

thomasian

January 5th, 2006, 10:10 AM

stephencua

January 11th, 2006, 04:40 AM

taken from philstar.com.. this doesnt sound too good..

MRT 7 proposal going back to NEDA for re-evaluation
By Des Ferriols
The Philippine Star 01/11/2006

The proposed Metro Rail Transit Line 7 will have to go all the way back to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) for a decision on whether or not to increase the profit ceiling for the project proponent.

Universal LRT Corp. (ULC), the consortium planning to take on the MRT 7 line, is asking for a higher rate of return than the 11.9 percent set by the NEDA Investment Coordinating Committee (ICC).

The Department of Finance (DOF) pointed out, however, that a higher rate of return would require a re-appraisal of the entire project and this would have to be taken up by the ICC.

Finance undersecretary Jay Singson said ULC’s proposal could not be decided on just by the Privatization Management Office (PMO) or the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) since the fundamental financial assumptions would be affected by the adjustment.

"The proponent may not find that ceiling feasible but the government might not find that acceptable either," Singson said. "We have to go back to the ICC for something as fundamental as this."

According to ULC, a maximum rate of return of 11.9 percent to the MRT-7 investors is "very restrictive considering the risks that the investors are required to assume."

The proposed MRT 7 was approved by the NEDA-ICC last year under the build-operate-transfer (BOT) scheme. The project was initially estimated to cost $1.4 billion.

When completed, MRT 7 would run along Commonwealth Ave. in Quezon City up to Tala in Caloocan City, and the adjoining municipality of San Jose del Monte in Bulacan.

MRT 7 would likewise involve the construction of a bus-rail transfer hub to be located at the Tala Caloocan-North, connecting the line to the North Luzon Expressway by a private highway. It would also connect to Light Railway Transit Line 1 and 2 through the MRT 7’s elevated railway transit system.

"So far, the rate of return is the only contentious issue," Singson said. "There is no disagreement about the ridership or any other aspects of the project."

According to Singson, the NEDA-ICC will have to re-evaluate the financial details of the project and it would have to be approved by all the agencies sitting in the ICC including the DOF.

Singson said the government’s original position is likely to remain the same, primarily that the project should have no impact on the government’s deficit reduction program and that its contingent liabilities be reduced to the absolute minimum.

Sources said the DBCC is being careful to avoid the pitfalls of the MRT Line 1 project which was undertaken under the government’s build-lease-transfer (BLT) scheme. The government, in effect, pays both debt rental and equity rental.

Government’s debt rental payments are covered by automatic appropriations in the national budget. The equity rental payment was more problematic and has caused conflict between the government and the Fil Estate-led company.

Under the controversial BLT contract for MRT 1, government agreed to guarantee MRTC a 15 percent return on equity, a provision that has been harshly criticized for removing the pressure on MRTC to increase the usage of MRT Line 1 since its return was guaranteed by the government anyway.

The DBCC directive means MRT 7 will not be able to count on huge sovereign guarantees from the government when it goes to the market to raise funds for the project.

ULC said earlier that 75 percent of the project cost would have to be financed with loans and the remaining 25 percent would come from shareholders’ equity. Funding would commence within the next 12 months and the proponents planned to start construction within the next two years.

queetz@home

January 11th, 2006, 05:14 AM

^ What does this mean? Another delay? :sly:

renell

January 12th, 2006, 07:40 AM

yep. Re-evaluation, swiss challenge, squatter resettlement, expired contracts.. etc. etc.

ryanr

January 12th, 2006, 07:43 AM

dont you just love red tape? :no:

bustero

January 12th, 2006, 07:52 AM

Well it was instigated by the proponent. They are the ones asking to make more money.

Askal82

January 12th, 2006, 09:08 AM

yep. Re-evaluation, swiss challenge, squatter resettlement, expired contracts.. etc. etc.

:blahblah: :blahblah: :mad2: Can't they just expedite this?

stephencua

January 13th, 2006, 03:09 AM

taken from philstar.com..

When will the bleeding stop?
BIZLINKS By Rey Gamboa
The Philippine Star 01/13/2006

The metro rails are bleeding the government coffers about P5 billion a year in subsidies. If these rails were all state-owned, it would have been more understandable. But one of our three major rail systems, namely the MRT 3, is a private project, and yet the government is forced to pay for the loans taken to build the tracks. This is so because the Ramos administration agreed to give the consortium led by Fil-Estate and Ayala Corp. a guaranteed 15-percent return on equity.

In addition to the payment of the consortium loans, the government is also shelling out huge sums of money to Metro Rail Transit Corp. as monthly rental of the facility.

The funny thing is that while government makes all of these payouts, it does not get any share on the revenue from all advertisements, whether painted on the trains or posted in any portion of MRT 3 establishment. All revenues accrue to the private consortium.
Decision to subsidize fares
There’s an explanation that’s being offered to account for this bizarre tale. The culprit, according to government planners, is the inadequacy of the MRT 3 fare to cover the rental fee plus other incidental overhead costs owed MRTC.

To cover all costs in constructing and operating the MRT 3 line, the calculated economic fare in 1988 when the project was approved should have been P30 per passenger. The Estrada administration, however, decided that the riding public could only afford between P9 and P15.

Even with the successive crude oil price hikes, which had swelled the cost of power and spare parts, MRT 3 (along with state-owned LRT Lines 1 and 2) was unable to increase fare rates. And when GMA took over from Estrada, her administration also decided to continue subsidizing the metro rail operations. Part of the tax payments of millions of Filipinos now goes to subsidizing the fare of 800,000 people who use the trains daily.
Cheap rates
The government is subsidizing an average of P30 to P40 for every railway passenger. In Line 1, the subsidy is about P24 for each commuter and in Line 2, about P40 each passenger. The subsidy per passenger for MRT 3 is even bigger.

As a result of Malacañang’s political move to continue subsidizing the increasing cost of the metro rail operations, MRT 3 and the LRT lines have become the cheapest mode of transport today, a lot less expensive than jeepney and bus rates considering the trains are air-conditioned and there is no traffic along the tracks.

At least, the public is getting some benefit from state coffers instead of letting corrupt officials dry these wells. But for how long can the government afford to bleed for artificially low metro train fares?
Future projects
Now comes another ambitious mass transport project, the MRT 7. As discussed in my earlier column (Decongesting Metro Manila, Philippine Star, Dec. 12, 2005), this project, as recommended by the Dept. of Transportation and Communication, will link SM City in Quezon City to San Jose, Bulacan. The project proponent is a group called Universal LRT Corp. headed by Israeli businessman Eli Levin.

The $2-billion mass railway project has a real estate component where the consortium is committing to construct 2,500 residential units and 300 office units each a year on its 174-hectare lot in Bulacan. The group also promised to build a 22-kilometer road in Bulacan and a 20-hectare bus and train depot to improve the access to and from MRT 7.

In exchange, the government will subsidize some $108 million each year for the MRT 7’s first 10 years of operations. The project proponents say that the government can easily raise that amount from the taxes that the real estate project will generate.
Learning from past mistakes
The consortium wants the government, in effect, to pay its loans while getting a guaranteed return of 11.9 percent. Is this MRT 3 all over again? Surely, the government cannot afford another MRT 3. Now Levin’s group, according to newspaper reports, is even asking for a higher rate of return than the 11.9 percent that the NEDA-ICC had approved.

MRT 7 proponents are saying that the project’s real estate component will subsidize the recommended P20 fare per passenger, a far cry from the computed economic fare of P80.56 per person. What if the real estate component doesn’t click? Will our cash-strapped Philippine government come to the rescue again?

The consortium line-up though, is quite impressive. Levin claims that the SM Group of Henry Sy owns 60 percent of the real estate arm and 25 percent of the railway project.

Other supposed investors are Siemens, Alstom, China Railway 18, EEI Corp. of the Yuchengcos, Merlin Capital of the Tong family, George Go of Equitable PCI Bank, and exporter Sergio Ortiz-Luis. Levin is also wise to have on board influential economists like Roberto de Ocampo and Romeo Bernardo.
Can’t afford another burden
There are kinks that Levin’s group has to iron out before the project can commence. More than securing the final approval of the Cabinet level NEDA-ICC, they must show that this project will not turn out to be another burden to the Filipino people. If the potential of the project is that good together with the backing of credible industrialists and capitalists, then financing can be generated without government guarantee.

The government has been bled dry by many projects that showed a lot of promise but in the end could not deliver. It is about time, for instance, that the government gets out of the railway business.

It can start by privatizing the LRT lines. It can also try to sell the Philippine National Railways although at this point, no investor in his right mind would want to buy it. The PNR is, perhaps, the best example of why the government is not fit to run mass transport systems

stephencua

January 13th, 2006, 10:21 AM

taken from philstar.com.. im all for raising the fare of the MRT.. but this amount is just ridiculous.. at that rate nobody would be riding the MRT.. geez..

Railway transit chief wants to raise fare to 72 pesos
01/13 12:26:56 PM

Metro Rail Transit 3 is losing heavily but it can survive its financial predicament if it increased the commercial fare to 72 pesos per passenger, according to Metro Rail Transit Corporation General Manager Roberto Lastimoso Friday.

The main problem, however, is that MRTC cannot increase the fare from the present 15 pesos to the “break-even” commercial rate of 72 pesos because this will discourage commuters from riding the MRT, Lastimoso told the House Committee on Railways and Roll On-Roll Off (Ro-Ro) System.

Lawyer Paul Daza of the MRTC explained to the committee chaired by Rep. Augusto Baculio (2nd District, Misamis Oriental) the agency could adjust the rate below the 72 pesos break-even rate. However, the increase will only lessen the shortfall but will not totally remove it, Daza said.

Lastimoso admitted MRT 3 is experiencing income shortfall.

“Our total monthly obligations amount to US$3.3 million while our income is only 130 million pesos,” he said. The national government subsidizes the discrepancy, he added.

Lastimoso attributed the losses to, among others, the US dollar-peso exchange rate, which at the time of the signing of the contract in 1997 was only 27 pesos to US$1. He said this rate has more than doubled to date and is one of the main reasons for the income shortfall being experienced by MRT-3. While the MRTC is earning in pesos, its obligations are paid in dollars, Lastimoso stressed.

Lastimoso and Daza batted for the proposed MRT 3 buyout by the national government from the MRTC as the most ideal solution to the problem of the railway transit.

Congressmen, however, opposed the proposal saying this will only be an additional burden for the country and the people in general.

Rep. Roilo Golez (2nd District, Parañaque City) told the committee if the proposed buyout materialized, each and every Filipino, including the non-users of MRT-3, would have to bear the costs in operating the railway system. The government needs at least US$600 million to be able to takeover MRT 3.

Rep. Jacinto Paras (1st District, Negros Oriental) said the proposed buyout is not a good idea stressing that the very reason for placing MRT 3 under the Build Lease Transfer scheme, a variation of the Build Operate Transfer method provided for under Republic Act 6957 or the BOT Law, was precisely the lack of funds on the part of the government.

He supported an increase in the MRT 3 fare instead to cover the costs of its operation.

The committee was deliberating on House Resolution 973 filed by Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin to determine whether or not the proposed buyout as recommended by the Department of Transportation and Communications will be beneficial to the government and to the general public.

The DOTC’s proposal is meant to relieve the government from paying interest payments to MRTC totaling almost US$2 billion.

Garin said under the DOTC-MRTC contract on the MRT-3 project, the lease rentals to be paid by DOTC to MRTC, representing the total investment and the rate of return, amount to US$2.4 billion over a 25-year period.

Daza said should the government decide to acquire MRT 3’s assets and equity for US$600 million, it stands to earn US$1 million a month subject to increase in the succeeding years.