One-Way UP Academic Oval
We would like to gather reactions on how the One-Way Acad Oval traffic policy has affected students since its implementation almost a month ago. What can you say about this policy? Do you think converting the inner lane of the oval into a bike lane is beneficial to students? Or the re-routing of the Katipunan and Toki jeepneys?
We have done initial consultations with the organizations of jeepney drivers and operators in UP a few days ago. According to them, the re-routing policy removed the competitive advantage of Katipunan jeepneys, them especially, because instead of their usual clockwise route they are now forced to compete with other jeepney franchises in a counter-clockwise direction. Such competition, among other issues like the saturation of jeepney franchises due to the corrupt tendencies of government offices like the LTFRB (Land Transportation Franchising Regulatory Board), has lead to internal feuds within the ranks of jeepney drivers themselves, among other such difficulties.
Such, in addition to lengthened routes (also because of the re-routing scheme) and high oil prices experienced nationwide, has lead to a substantial decrease in their already-low incomes. Some University Student Council (USC) members add that they view this policy as the beginning of the UP Administration’s plan of phasing out the jeepneys in campus, which in further analysis, can be seen as part of a plan of evicting residential communities accused as squatters and other such eyesores and hindrances to the administration’s twisted vision of a university with “better”, but highly commercialized services.
The UP Administration itself admits that the one-way traffic scheme is indeed part of a broader “UP Traffic Management Plan.”
Dr. Cynthia Grace C. Gregorio, vice chancellor for community affairs, said the one-way scheme was the initial phase in the implementation of the UP Traffic Management Plan.
The plan aims to lessen the number of vehicles passing through the university, subsequently reducing pollution and risks for UP students.
Ultimately, she said, the goal was a “car-less oval,” as recommended by the UP Transport Committee.
Gregorio told the Inquirer that the one-way scheme was a result of a study conducted by the committee. Under the scheme, the university oval was divided into two: an outer lane for motor vehicles and an inner lane designated as a bike way.
from “UP reroutes traffic” Philippine Daily Inquirer. 29 Mar. 2008
So, what can you say about this?
When we approached some offices in UP to request for documents with regards to community issues such as these, we were met with an obviously annoyed query, “Why are you students meddling with this? This is not your issue.”
I say, part of our historic tradition, as the USC, is our active involvement in issues that concern our university’s communities. We have also always recognized the fact that part of our constituents’ holistic formation in campus are the experiences and other services rendered by non-academic sectors of our university. It is through us, the USC, that many members of the university community, from maninindas to janitors to residents of the various residential areas in campus, seek assistance through our representation in policy-making bodies and dialogues where their voices are seldom given prime importance. As such, I, personally, cannot approve of any program or policy purportedly implemented “for the benefit of students” at the wanton disregard of the rights of other integral sectors of the university community whose collective struggles are not dissimilar to the challenges encountered by other sectors of our society nationwide.
Tags: Academic Oval, campus issues, university policy, University Student Council, UP Administration, UP Diliman
Hello.
“Do you think converting the inner lane of the oval into a bike lane is beneficial to students?”
No. I don’t see many bikes for that wide a bike lane. Beneficial to students? No. Do the implementors of this crap (sorry) have any statistics that show how many students use bikes and how many students use cars or other motorized vehicles to go to UP? The bike lane is beneficial to outsiders, who can use it for their exercise and leisure. So there. For the administration, it is more important to make our university more useful for outsiders rather than for us students.
“Or the re-routing of the Katipunan and Toki jeepneys?”
No. I just think that there has to be one route that is opposite of the other routes (in terms of direction). Also, I pity Toki jeepney drivers. Gasoline must be very valuable to any driver (PUV driver or otherwise) and the mush longer route they have right now is so not practical/right.
If it ain’t broke, why fix it, right?
if it ain’t (broken) why fix it? minor typo
it was okay having the two-way academic oval. and the number of joggers did not increase after they made way for the bike/jogger lane.
I personally find the re-routing rather impractical. From what I’ve experienced, it takes a hundredfold years (metaphorically, of course) for jeepneys to reach destinations with the new route. Nakakalito rin sa bahagi ko bilang may mga ruta na akong nakasanayan for the past years sa pagko-commute within the Campus. Bike lanes? I’d be hit by some motor-powered vehicle before I get to my college.
In addition, nawawala rin yung competitive advantage amongst the jeepney operators bilang nag-o-overlap yung ruta nila. Kung pare-pareho lang ang ruta na daraanan ng jeeps, hindi ba kundisyon ‘to para magkaroon lalo ng congested traffic sa Campus lalo na kapag umagang rush hour? At kung talagang out of “pro-environment endeavors” ang pag-implement ng UP Administration sa aforesaid scheme, this is still no alibi para mag-step upon sa pamumuhay ng jeepney operators. Hindi lang naman kasi ito usapin ng mga students, faculty and staff na mahihirapang mag-commute dahil sa bagong ruta ng jeepneys, kundi pati rin ng mismong mga tsuper.
As a fellow council member, I have yet to talk to VC Gregorio personally about that particular policy.
With regards to this:
“When we approached some offices in UP to request for documents with regards to community issues such as these, we were met with an obviously annoyed query, “Why are you students meddling with this? This is not your issue.” ”
I am sure that there are members of the office who are nice, and then there are members who will ask why the students are “meddling”. I think it’s a matter of finding the right people to talk to. If not that, then we have to provide the right reasons for them to talk to us.
I think that rather than accusing the administration of plotting the repercussions that the bike lane brought, we should consult with them as to learn the rationale behind their decision, and THEN figure out the most ideal course of action.
The Jeepney drivers’ voices have been heard. It is only fair and democratic that we hear the side of the OVCCA as well.
If all else fails, we take to the streets.
I am a student who walks and i agree with the one-way acad oval scheme because i find it easier to cross the street aroud the oval, before i have to look at two sides but now i just have to look at one side.