Remapping provincial bus routes entering Metro Manila #71
Comments
|
For monitoring purposes (due to existing PITX - Provincial Destinations), pre-ECQ:
|
|
@govvin @maning @seav kindly tag @DP24PH and @TagaSanPedroAko as assignees. Thank you very much. |
|
@DP24PH I Also don't forget to list routes ending at Araneta City (from your travels pre-ECQ), just for monitoring. |
|
@TagaSanPedroAko | If I have remember something, most ALPS Buses got redirected to Araneta City previously due to ALPS EDSA-Cubao Bus Terminal strike (illegal protest and lockdown) whereas their operation got paralysed until relocated. Here are the following destinations (pre-ECQ): BATANGAS
Meanwhile, the existing mapped routes (pre-ECQ) from ALPS, Ceres, DLTBCo, et.al. are identified as follows: LUZON
VISAYAS
P.S. Kindly sort out the routes by Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao destinations for PITX, SRITT. Thank you very much. |
|
@TagaSanPedroAko | MISSING Mindanao Provincial Bus Route: PITX - Surigao City |
|
They're not on the LTFRB MC, but we can assume they'll also be moving with other routes with terminal at EDSA-Malibay. |
|
ALERT for SRITT to Northern Luzon: Sooner or later, if the Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 and/or NLEx Segment 11 (Connector) got fully operational, it will be automatically diverted there. |
|
Would think the new routing will be via Skyway, considering NLEX-SLEX is behind schedule, and remainder of Stage 3 is complete (except sections being rebuilt due to fire damage). |
TagaSanPedroAko
changed the title
|
ALERT | LTFRB, on the late-night newscast State of the Nation with Jessica Soho, has mentioned that all Provincial Buses will be softly allowed to ply the #NewNormal routing (until designated terminals only) starting 30 September 2020 as the LTFRB Chair Martin Delgra have confirmed this. However, all operators concerned will be into meeting with the LTFRB for the and operational guidelines. For Cavite-Batangas Provincial Buses, all bus stops that could cause conflicts with the existing Mega Manila City Buses will be dropped as well (unless it is a major interchange like Walter Mart Dasmarinas, Robinsons Dasmarinas; redirected completely thru Manila-Cavite-Laguna* Expressway system to PITX; or divert elsewhere to Carmona for PITX like DLTBCo's case). NOTE: Currently, Cavite-Laguna Expressway (Cavite segment) is under construction |
|
ALERT | The following Provincial Commuter Bus Routes will be resumed beginning 30 September 2020 under the LTFRB Memorandum Circular 2020-051:
Likewise, Visayas and Mindanao origin/destinations will be automatically diverted to SRITT while Southern Luzon origin/destinations will be PITX via E2-E6 (SLEx-NAIAx). With the exception for P2P Buses, Northern Luzon regions (CAR, R1, R2) will automatically divert to NLET, and only Central Luzon region (R3) will be either NLET (Bulacan)[2] or VGC (NCR), all via E1 (NLEx-SCTEx-TPLEx). Note 1: New branding since 25 September 2019, requires further validation |
|
(Whew, had a long break from this. ) Have read the whole MC, and to be clear, the actual scheme will be:
For the other terminals not mentioned in the MC, their possible state will be:
With that latest announcement, I will be rewriting the very, very long list above. Will also list the first modified routes to be activated. |
There's an erratum for the branding: Araneta City (as stated above the note 1) Likewise, Mindanao to SRITT (requires revision) |
|
@DP24PH That's not an issue, if people continue to stick on the old name until some time (or nowhere in time). It's not uncommon for rebranded/renamed places to be referred to by their old name many years after. No need to rename the routes regardless (markings would still say the same). It's not the first time you've attempted to rename things against what people or signs say. It's OK to call "Araneta City" with the present name as posted, but for the bus routes, it's another story (replacing "Center" in "City" would be pedantic). It again reminds me of the Governor's Drive/Remulla Road thing. For SRITT, I've already mentioned Mindanao. |
You have mentioned already, but might as well rename those routes as stated above:
|
|
ALERT | Upon the latest LTFRB Memorandum Circular 2020-051A, SRITT-Davao City (Philtranco) and Dau-Araneta City has been added. Hence, the initial Davao -> SRITT has been reactivated for the time being. |
|
COMPLETED | SRITT - Davao City |
|
PRIORITY | Eastern Visayas-based Provincial Bus Routes from SRITT to the following cities or municipalities as per LTFRB MC 2020-051B: SAMAR ISLAND
LEYTE ISLAND
|
|
@DP24PH Araneta Center - Mabalacat now complete (just need route master). Currently working with remainder of PITX-Batangas City routes, and schedule info needed. Also adding reservation:covid19= tags. |
|
ALERT | Western Visayas-based Provincial Long-haul Buses to/from SRITT got resumed as per latest LTFRB MC 2020-051C - may cause dizziness due to rotation issues. Hence, here are the priority routes listed below to split into
|
This ticket is intended for monitoring of mapping/remapping of provincial bus routes following route revisions due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of a new bus terminal scheme.
Context
There is ongoing mapping/remapping of the public transportation network in Metro Manila, which is being covered in #64, and in light of the indefinite suspension of provincial bus services throughout the Philippines since the COVID-19 pandemic and the Luzon-wide Enhanced Community Quarantine (ECQ), there is a push to move all provincial buses into new central terminals, which has been planned since 2019 and earlier.
Early in 2019, @DP24PH have remapped numerous bus routes that used to end at EDSA into the three integrated terminals, namely the Valenzuela Gateway Complex (VGC), the Parañaque Integrated Terminal Exchange (PITX) and the Santa Rosa Integrated Transport Exchange (SRITT), but after discussions and on-the-ground observations, it is decided that the routes be remapped/reverted to their existing state per observation. Nonetheless, some operators have gone with moving operations into one of those terminals, especially PITX, which opened in November 2018, and routes with terminals not along EDSA, or on other officially designated terminals (e.g. Starmall Alabang, South Station, Araneta City Bus Port).
While not part of the 2019 plan, one new terminal has been announced: the North Luzon Express Terminal (NLET, inside Ciudad de Victoria at Bocaue), which has been used by buses on certain routes listed in LTFRB Board Resolution 123, series of 2020 two months since Luzon has been placed under General Community Quarantine (GCQ). On September 2020, under LTFRB Memorandum Circular 2020-051, a new terminal scheme in preparation for the "new normal" has been announced, amending the original 2019 plan (under LTFRB Memorandum Circular 2019-031).
As of late September, 11 modified and rationalized provincial commuter bus routes have been announced, with the start of operation on September 31, and more modified routes are being planned. Number of trips are also reduced due to terminal slot restrictions and limited passenger capacity (as requested by local government units/LGUs) and social distancing measures.
Routes
This list originally listed routes per MC 2019-031, but is revised following the publication of BR 123, s. 2020 and MCs 2020-51, 51A and 51B. Newer routes under the Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program (PUVMP) are also listed.
to NLET (for routes listed at BR 123, s. 2020, and routes from Ilocos, Cagayan Valley and the Cordillera)
From Central Luzon (under BR 123, s. 2020)
From Ilocos, Cagayan and the Cordillera:
(more to be listed)
to VGC (long-haul routes from Central Luzon)
to Araneta Center (commuter routes from Central Luzon except those listed on BR 123, s. 2020)
To PITX (routes from southern Luzon)
From CALABARZON (commuter)
From CALABARZON (long-haul) and Bicol:
to SRITT (routes from Visayas and Mindanao with previous terminal at EDSA-Cubao or Manila)
From Visayas:
(Per MC 2020-051B)
(Future routes, )
From Mindanao:
Routes registered to individuals are listed under their trade name instead (due to privacy concerns). See also #73. In addition, some routes registered to individuals have been modified to use name of company (e.g. Raymond routes). This is also due to new requirements for operators, requiring them to adapt a trade name.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: