Preparatory Survey For Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (Vi) in The Republic of The Philippines

THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS
PREPARATORY SURVEY FOR

METRO MANILA INTERCHANGE
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT (VI)
IN THE REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES
FINAL REPORT
SUMMARY
NOVEMBER 2012
JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY

KATAHIRA & ENGINEERS INTERNATIONAL
ORIENTAL CONSULTANTS CO., LTD.
EI
NIPPON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS CO., LTD.
CR(3)
12-214
Exchange Rate
Date: Nov. 2012
PHP 1 = JPY 1.87

USD 1 = JPY 78.20
USD 1 = PHP 41.70
LOCATION MAP
Preparatory Survey for Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (VI)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LOCATION MAP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... i
2. CONFIRMATION OF VALIDITY ....................................................................................... ii
3. TRAFFIC FLOW ANALYSIS AND DEMAND FORECAST .............................................. iii
4. STUDY OF INTERCHANGE ................................................................................................. v
5. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ....................................................................................... xi
6. EVALUATION OF PROJECT FECTIVENESS ........................................................... xv
7. STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................... xvi
8. C-3 MISSING LINK ........................................................................................................... xviii
9. THE CONCEPTUAL STUDY FOR THE TRAFFIC
CAPACITY EXPANSION ALONG EDSA ........................................................................ xxii
10. SEMINAR ON LATEST JAPANESE ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
TECHNOLOGY .................................................................................................................. xxv
SUMMARY
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ..................................................................................... 1
1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................... 1
1.3 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................ 2
1.5 SCHEDULE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................ 3
CHAPTER 2
CONFIRMATION OF VALIDITY AND NECESSITY OF THE PROJECT........................................ 4
2.1 TRAFFIC RELATED PROJECTS IN METRO MANILA ..................................................... 4
2.2 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY ON TRAFFIC PLANS BY OTHER AGENCIES . 5
2.3 CONFIRMATION OF NECESSITY AND PRIORITY OF THE PROPOSED FLYOVER
Table of Contents 1
PROJECT ................................................................................................................................. 5
2.4 LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS SIMILAR PROJECTS AND PROPOSED

COUNTERMEASURES ......................................................................................................... 5
2.5 CONFIRMATION OF PRESENT CONDITION AND FUTURE INVESTMENT PLAN

FOR HIGHWAY SECTOR ..................................................................................................... 6
2.6 CONFIRMATION OF ORGANIZATION, ANNUAL BUDGET AND TECHNICAL

LEVEL OF THE DPWH MANDATE, FUNCTIONS, VISION AND MISSION.................. 6
2.6.1 Authority, Function, Vision and Mission of DPWH ........................................................ 6
2.6.2 Annual Budget .................................................................................................................. 6
2.6.3 Technical Level for Construction and Maintenance of Flyover of the DPWH ................ 6
2.7 CIRCUMSTANCES OF SUPPORT TO THE TRANSPORT SECTOR BY OTHER

DONORS ................................................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER 3
TRAFFIC FLOW ANALYSIS AND DEMAND FORECAST .............................................................. 8
3.1 TRAFFIC SURVEY ................................................................................................................ 8

3.1.1 Type and Location of Traffic Survey ............................................................................... 8
3.1.2 Result of Intersection Directional Traffic Volume Survey ............................................. 10
3.2 CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITION OF EACH INTERSECTION ..................................... 14
3.3 TRAFFIC DEMAND FORECAST ....................................................................................... 16

3.3.1 The Methodology of the Demand Forecast .................................................................... 16
3.3.2 Result of Traffic Demand Forecast by Micro-simulation ............................................... 17
CHAPTER 4
STUDY OF EACH INTERCHANGE .................................................................................................. 20
4.1 DESIGN STANDARD FOR HIGHWAY AND FLYOVER ................................................ 20
4.2 C-3/E. RODRIGUEZ AVENUE ............................................................................................ 20

4.2.1 Review of Previous Detailed Design .............................................................................. 20
4.2.2 Preliminary Design of Interchange ................................................................................. 21
4.3 EDSA–ROOSEVELT AVENUE/CONGRESSIONAL AVENUE ....................................... 24

4.4 EDSA / NORTH AVENUE/ WEST AVENUE/ MINDANAO AVENUE ........................... 27

4.4.2 Preliminary Design (EDSA/North/West Interchange) ................................................... 28
4.4.3 Preliminary Design (North/Mindanao Interchange) ....................................................... 29
Table of Contents 2
4.5 C-5/KALAYAAN AVENUE ................................................................................................. 31

4.5.2 Advice on Technical Issue and Design Option ............................................................... 32
4.6 C-5–GREEN MEADOWS AVENUE.................................................................................... 37

CHAPTER 5
PREPARATION OF IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ................................................................... 40
5.1 STUDY OF CONTRACT PACKAGE ARRANGEMENT................................................... 40
5.2 STUDY OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES .......................................................................... 40
5.3 PREPARATION OF PROJECT COST INCLUDING RROW COST .................................. 40
5.4 PREPARATION OF THE TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE CONSIDERING

THE PERIOD OF ECC AND RAP APPROVAL AND THE PROCESSING IN NEDA .... 42
5.5 IDEA AND BASIC CONCEPT FOR STEP SCHEME ........................................................ 43

5.5.1 Possibility of Adoption of STEP Scheme ....................................................................... 43
5.5.2 Advanced Technology and Know-How of Japanese Firms ............................................ 53
5.5.3 Outline of STEP Scheme ................................................................................................ 58
5.5.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................ 60
5.5.5 Draft Estimated Cost for the Consultancy Services for Detailed Engineering Design and
Construction Supervision ............................................................................................... 61
5.5.6 Proposed Implementation Plan (STEP Scheme & General Loan Scheme) .................... 62
5.5.7 Proposed Implementation Schedule for Each Interchange ............................................. 63
5.5.8 Summary of Comparison between STEP Loan and Regular Yen Loan ......................... 67
CHAPTER 6
EVALUATION OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................. 68
6.1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS ...................................... 68

6.1.1 Analytical Methodology ................................................................................................. 68
6.1.2 Results ............................................................................................................................ 76
6.1.3 Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................................................................ 79
6.1.4 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 79
6.2 EIRR Analysis under STEP Loan Scheme............................................................................. 80

6.2.1 Analytical Methodology ................................................................................................. 80
6.2.2 Results ............................................................................................................................ 87
6.2.3 Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................................................................ 90
6.2.4 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 90
Table of Contents 3
6.3 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS......................................... 91
6.4 OPERATION AND EFFECT INDICATORS ....................................................................... 91
6.5 SURVEY ON BENEFIT FOR JAPANESE COMPANIES IN THE PHILIPPINES ............ 95

6.5.1 Purpose of the Survey ..................................................................................................... 95
6.5.2 Survey Method ............................................................................................................... 95
6.5.3 Companies Interviewed .................................................................................................. 95
6.5.4 Result of Survey ............................................................................................................. 95
6.5.5 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 97
CHAPTER 7
STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................................... 98
7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY .................................................... 98
7.2 LAND ACQUISITION AND RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN (RAP) ........................ 100
7.3 SUPPORT DPWH TO HOLD PUBLIC CONSULTATION MEETINGS ......................... 100
CHAPTER 8
C-3 MISSING LINK ........................................................................................................................... 101
8.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY ON THE C-3 MISSING LINK .................................. 101
8.2 PROJECT SETTING ........................................................................................................... 101

8.2.1 Administration, Population and Land Use .................................................................... 101
8.2.2 Topography and Geology of Project Area .................................................................... 101
8.2.3 River Systems ............................................................................................................... 101
8.3 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS AND DPWH COMPARATIVE STUDY ..................... 102

8.3.1 Alternative Alignments ................................................................................................. 102
8.3.2 DPWH Comparative Study........................................................................................... 104
8.3.3 Review of DPWH Comparative Study ......................................................................... 104
8.4 UPDATED STUDY ............................................................................................................. 104

8.4.1 Geometric Design Standards ........................................................................................ 104
8.4.2 Typical Sections ........................................................................................................... 104
8.4.3 Scope of Work of Each Alignment ............................................................................... 105
8.4.4 Project Affected Buildings and Project Affected People .............................................. 106
8.4.5 Environmental Issues .................................................................................................... 106
8.4.6 Rough Cost Estimate .................................................................................................... 106
8.4.7 Comparative Study ....................................................................................................... 107
8.4.8 Effect on the Project Interchanges due to Construction of the Missing Link ............... 109
8.4.9 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 111
8.4.10 Related Proposed Projects in Metro Manila ................................................................. 111
Table of Contents 4
CHAPTER 9
THE CONCEPTUAL STUDY FOR THE TRAFFIC CAPACITY EXPANSION ALONG EDSA .. 114
9.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................. 114
9.2 OBJECTIVES AND CONCEPT OF CONCEPTUAL STUDY .......................................... 114
9.3 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND

PRESENT TRAFFIC PLANS IN THE METRO MANILA ............................................... 114
9.4 CONFIRMATION OF OPEN SPACES FOR TUNNEL PLAN AND VIADUCT PLAN . 114
9.5 CONFIRMATION OF HINDRANCE STRUCTURES ...................................................... 114
9.6 EDSA GENERAL CONDITION ......................................................................................... 115
9.7 VIADUCT SCHEME ........................................................................................................... 116

9.7.1 Proposed Viaduct Plan and Profile ............................................................................... 116
9.7.2 Proposed Location of Ramps ........................................................................................ 117
9.7.3 Description of Five High Critical Hindrance Structures/Sections ................................ 117
9.7.4 Find Space for Proposed Viaduct ................................................................................. 119
9.7.5 Cost Estimate ................................................................................................................ 119
9.8 TUNNEL SCHEME ............................................................................................................. 120

9.8.1 Proposed Plan and Typical Cross Sections of Tunnel .................................................. 120
9.8.2 Standard Earth Covering of Tunnel .............................................................................. 121
9.8.3 Ramp (Entrance and Exit) ............................................................................................ 121
9.8.4 Ventilation System ....................................................................................................... 121
9.8.5 Shield Shaft................................................................................................................... 122
9.8.6 Required Tunnel Facilities ............................................................................................ 123
9.8.7 Construction Schedule .................................................................................................. 123
9.8.8 Cost Estimate ................................................................................................................ 125
CHAPTER 10
SEMINAR ON LATEST JAPANESE ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY ....
.................................................................................................................................. 127
10.1 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................... 127
10.2 SEMINAR PROGRAM ....................................................................................................... 127
10.3 ATTENDANCE ................................................................................................................... 129
10.4 QUESTION AND ANSWER RESULTS ............................................................................ 129
10.5 SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................... 130
10.6 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 130
Table of Contents 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.5-1 Study Schedule ....................................................................................................... 3

Table 3.1-1 Type and Location of Traffic Surveys ................................................................... 8
Table 3.1-2 Intersection Traffic Volume (AADT) (1/3) ......................................................... 11
Table 3.2-1 Summary of Current Condition of Intersections .................................................. 14
Table 3.3-1 Average Traffic Growth Rate for the Project ....................................................... 16
Table 3.3-2 Traffic Growth Ratio at Each Intersection ........................................................... 17
Table 3.3-3 Daily Vehicle-Km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed
(C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection) ........................................................................... 18
Table 3.3-4 Daily Vehicle-km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed
(EDSA /Roosevelt/ Congressional Intersection) .................................................. 18
(EDSA /North/West/Mindanao Intersection) ....................................................... 19
Table 3.3-6 Daily Vehicle-m, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed
(C-5 Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria) ................................................ 19
Table 4.2-1 Scheme Comparative Table of C-3/E. Rodriguez ................................................ 23
Table 4.3-1 Scheme Comparison Table of EDSA-Roosevelt/Congressional Interchange ...... 26
Table 4.4-1 Scheme Comparison Table of EDSA/West/North Interchange ........................... 29
Table 4.4-2 Scheme Comparison of North Ave./Mindanao Ave. Interchange........................ 30
Table 4.5-1 Proposed Options and Findings ........................................................................... 33
Table 4.5-2 Scheme Comparison Without U-turn Flyover ..................................................... 35
Table 4.6-1 Scheme Comparison Table of C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/
Calle Industria Interchange .................................................................................. 39
Table 5.3-1 Summary of Project Cost ..................................................................................... 41
Table 5.3-2 Breakdown of Project Cost .................................................................................. 41
Table 5.4-1 Draft Implementation Schedule of MMICP ......................................................... 42
Table 5.5-1 Implementation Schedule of Original Plan (C-5/Green Meadows) ..................... 44
Table 5.5-2 Implementation Schedule of Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge for
C5/Green Meadows Interchange .......................................................................... 47
Table 5.5-3 Comparison between Original Plan and Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge .......... 50
Table 5.5-4 Procurement Amount from Japan for the Project................................................. 53
Table 5.5-5 Summary of Project Cost (STEP Loan) ............................................................... 60
Table 5.5-6 Breakdown of Project Cost (STEP Loan) ............................................................ 60
Table 5.5-7 Recapitulation of Draft Estimated Cost for the Consultancy Services
for Pre-Construction and Construction Supervision ............................................ 61
Table of Contents 6
Table 5.5-8 Proposed Implementation Plan (STEP Scheme & General Loan Scheme) ......... 62
Table 5.5-9 Proposed Implementation Schedule for EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional ........... 63
Table 5.5-10 Proposed Implementation Schedule for EDSA/North/West ................................ 64
Table 5.5-11 Proposed Implementation Schedule for West/Mindanao ..................................... 66
Table 5.5-12 Proposed Implementation Schedule for C5-Green Meadows/Acropolis/
Calle Industria ...................................................................................................... 67
Table 6.1-1 Model Configuration ............................................................................................ 69
Table 6.1-2 Economic Benefit - DPWH BVOC Table (PhP) ................................................. 69
Table 6.1-3 Annual Investment Schedule (%)......................................................................... 69
Table 6.1-4 Financial and Economic Costs of C-3/E. Rodriguez (PhP million) ..................... 70
Table 6.1-5 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of C-3/ E. Rodriguez (PhP million, 2018-37) .. 70
Table 6.1-6 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
(PhP million) ........................................................................................................ 71
Table 6.1-7 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
(PhP million, 2018-37) ......................................................................................... 71
Table 6.1-8 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/North/West (PhP million) ................... 72
Table 6.1-9 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/North/West (PhP million, 2018-37) . 72
Table 6.1-10 Financial and Economic Costs of North/Mindanao (PhP million)....................... 73
Table 6.1-11 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of North/Mindanao (PhP million, 2018-37) .... 73
Table 6.1-12 Financial and Economic Costs of C-5/Green Meadows (PhP million) ................ 74
Table 6.1-13 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of C-5/Green Meadows
(PhP million, 2018-37) ......................................................................................... 74
Table 6.1-14 Financial and Economic Costs: Aggregate (PhP million) .................................... 75
Table 6.1-15 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved (PhP million, 2018-37) .................................... 75
Table 6.1-16 EIRR and ENPV by Intersection.......................................................................... 76
Table 6.1-17 Sensitivity Analysis.............................................................................................. 79
Table 6.1-18 EIRR and Attributes of Scarce Resource (2018-37) ............................................ 80
Table 6.2-1 Model Configuration (STEP Loan) ...................................................................... 81
Table 6.2-2 Annual Investment Schedule (%)......................................................................... 81
(STEP Loan, PhP million) ................................................................................... 82
(STEP Loan, PhP million, 2018-37) .................................................................... 82
Table 6.2-5 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/North/West (PhP million) ................... 83
Table 6.2-6 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/North/West
Table 6.2-7 Financial and Economic Costs of North/Mindanao (PhP million)....................... 84
Table of Contents 7
Table 6.2-8 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of North/Mindanao

Table 6.2-9 Financial and Economic Costs of C-5/Green Meadows
Table 6.2-11 Financial and Economic Costs (STEP Loan, PhP million) .................................. 86
Table 6.2-12 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved (STEP Loan, PhP million, 2018-37) ................ 86
Table 6.2-13 EIRR and ENPV by Intersection (STEP Loan) ................................................... 87
Table 6.2-14 Sensitivity Analysis (STEP Loan) ....................................................................... 90
Table 6.4-1 Monitoring Plan Operation and Effect Indicators ................................................ 92
Table 6.5-1 Japanese Affiliated Firms Selected for Interview Survey .................................... 96
Table 6.5-2 Summary of Findings from Interviews to Japanese Firms ................................... 97
Table 7.1-1 Results of Scoping - Adverse Environmental Impacts Land Acquisition ............ 98
Table 7.2-1 Land Acquisition, Involuntary Resettlement and Affected Structure
for MMICP ......................................................................................................... 100
Table 8.4-1 Scope of Work of the Alternative Alignments, C-3 Missing Link .................... 105
Table 8.4-2 Cost Estimate ..................................................................................................... 107
Table 8.4-3 Comparative Study of the Alternative Alignment, C-3 Missing Link ............... 108
Table 9.7-1 Summary of Estimated Project Cost .................................................................. 120
Table 9.8-1 Rough Estimated Construction Schedule ........................................................... 124
Table 9.8-2 Summary of Rough Estimate Cost of Each Schemes ........................................ 126
Table of Contents 8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1-1 Traffic Survey Location at C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection .................................... 8

Figure 3.1-2 Traffic Survey Location at EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Ave. ........................ 9
Figure 3.1-3 Traffic Survey Location at EDSA/North/West/Mindanao Ave. ............................ 9
Figure 3.1-4 Traffic Survey Location at C-5/Kalayaan Ave. ................................................... 10
Figure 3.1-5 Traffic Survey Location at C-5/Green Meadows ................................................. 10
Figure 4.5-1 Summarized Intersection Flow Graphic Summary (AADT) ............................... 33
Figure 4.5-2 Traffic Flow by Schemes ..................................................................................... 35
Figure 5.5-1 Special Type of Frame Support............................................................................ 44
Figure 5.5-2 General View of Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge............................................... 46
Figure 5.5-3 Elevation Plan (1/2) ............................................................................................. 48
Figure 5.5-4 Elevation Plan (2/2) ............................................................................................. 49
Figure 5.5-5 Investigation Report ............................................................................................. 52
Figure 6.1-1 Economic Benefits by Value of C-3/E. Rodriguez (2018-2037) ......................... 70
Figure 6.1-2 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional (2018-2037) .. 71
Figure 6.1-3 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/North/West (2018-2037) ....................... 72
Figure 6.1-4 Economic Benefits by Value of North/Mindanao (2018-2037) ........................... 73
Figure 6.1-5 Economic Benefits by Value of C-5/Green Meadows (2018-2037) .................... 74
Figure 6.1-6 Economic Benefits by Value (2018-2037) ........................................................... 75
Figure 6.1-7 Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (C-3/E. Rodriguez) ................................... 76
Figure 6.1-8 Economic Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR
(EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional)........................................................................ 77
Figure 6.1-9 Economic Cost and Export Parity Benefit, and EIRR
(EDSA/North/West/Mindanao)............................................................................ 77
Figure 6.1-10 Economic Cost and Export Parity Benefit, and EIRR (North/Mindanao) ........... 78
Figure 6.1-11 Economic Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (C-5/Green Meadows) ............. 78
Figure 6.1-12 Cost and Benefit Streams and EIRR .................................................................... 79
Figure 6.2-1 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
(STEP Loan, 2018-2037) ..................................................................................... 82
Figure 6.2-2 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/North/West (2018-2037) ....................... 83
Figure 6.2-3 Economic Benefits by Value of North/Mindanao (2018-2037) ........................... 84
Figure 6.2-4 Economic Benefits by Value of C-5/Green Meadows ......................................... 85
Figure 6.2-5 Economic Benefits by Value (STEP Loan, 2018-2037) ...................................... 86
(EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional, STEP Loan) ................................................... 87
(EDSA/North/West, STEP Loan) ........................................................................ 88
Table of Contents 9
(North/ Mindanao, STEP Loan) ........................................................................... 88
(C-5/Green Meadows, STEP Loan) ..................................................................... 89
Figure 6.2-10 Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (STEP Loan) ............................................. 90
Figure 6.4-1 Monitoring Location for Traffic Volume Count and Travel Speed (EDSA/
Roosevelt/Congressional Ave. Intersection: Along EDSA – Cubao Side) ............... 93
Figure 6.4-2 Monitoring Location for Traffic Volume Count and Travel Speed
(EDSA/North Ave./West Ave. Intersection: Along EDSA – Cubao Side) .......... 93
(North Ave. /Mindanao Ave. Intersection: Along North Avenue – EDSA/SM Side) ..
...................................................................................................................................... 94
(C-5/Greean Meadows/Acropolis/Galle Industria – Pasig City Side).................. 94
Figure 8.3-1 Alternative Alignments – DPWH Study ............................................................ 103
Figure 8.4-1 Effect on Traffic Volume for the Project Interchanges due to Construction
of the C-3 Missing Link ..................................................................................... 110
Figure 8.4-2 Related Projects in Metro Manila ...................................................................... 113
Figure 9.5-1 Locations of Flyover/Underpass and MRT/LRT STATIONS ........................... 115
Figure 9.7-1 Steel Viaduct Piers ............................................................................................. 117
Figure 9.7-2 Location of the Five Most Difficult Construction Site ...................................... 118
Figure 9.8-1 Typical Tunnel Section of 3-Types Tunnel ....................................................... 120
Figure 9.8-2 Tunnel Layout (Plan and Profile) ....................................................................... 121
Figure 9.8-3 General Concept of Ventilation System ............................................................. 122
Figure 9.8-4 General Concept of Vertical Shaft ..................................................................... 123
Table of Contents 10
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AADT : Annual Average Daily Traffic

AASHTO : American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ADB : Asian Development Bank
AP : Affected Person
ASEP : Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines
ARPA : Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan
BOD : Biological Oxygen Demand
BOM : Bureau of Maintenance
BOT : Build Operate Transfer
BRT : Build Rapid Transit
BTMC : Basic Technology and Management Corporation
C-3 : Circumferential Road-3
C-4 : Circumferential Road-4 (EDSA)
C-5 : Circumferential Road-5
CBD : Central Business District
CDO : Cease and Desist Order
CER : Compliance Evaluation Report
CMMTC : Citra Metro Manila Tollways Corporation.
CMR : Compliance Monitoring Report
CMVR : Compliance Monitoring and Validation Report
CNC : Certificate of Non-Coverage
CS : Construction Supervision
DD : Detailed Design
DE : Design Engineer
DENR : Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DFR : Final Report
DO : Dissolved Oxygen
DOH : Department of Health
DOTC : Department of Transportation and Communication
DPWH : Department of Public Works and Highways
DWT : Dead Weight Tonnage
ECAs : Environmentally Critical Areas
ECC : Environmental Compliance Certificate
ECPs : Environmentally Critical Projects
EDSA : Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (C-3)
EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment
EIS : Environmental Impact Statement

EIRR : Economic Internal Rate of Return
EMA : External Monitoring Agent
EMB : Environmental Management Bureau
EMK : Equivalent Maintenance Kilometer
EMP : Environmental Management Plan
ENPV : Economy Net Present Value
ESSO : Environmental and Social Services Office
FTI : Food Terminal Inc.
GAA : General Appropriations Act
GDP : Gross Domestic Product
GOP : Government of Philippines
HIV/AIDS : Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome
ICC : Indigenous Cultural Community
IEC : Information, Education and Communication
IEE : Initial Environmental Examination
IEER : Initial Environmental Examination Report
IEEC : Initial Environmental Examination Checklist
IMA : Internal Monitoring Agent
IMP : Impacts Management Plan
IP : Indigenous People
IPAP : Indigenous People’s Action Plan
IPRA : Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act
IRA : Independent Land Appraiser
IROW : Infrastructure Right of Way
IUCN : International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
JBIC : Japanese Bank International for Cooperation
JICA : Japan International Cooperation Agency
KEDCF : Korean Economic Development Cooperation Fund.
KOICA : Korea International Cooperation Agency
LAPRAP : Land Acquisition Plan and Resettlement Action Plan
LARRIPP : Land Acquisition, Resettlement, Rehabilitation and
Indigenous Peoples’ Policy
LGU : Local Government Unit
LRT : Light Rail Transit
MARIPAS : Marikina, Rizal, Pasig
MBA : Maintenance Work by Administration
MBC : Maintenance Work by Contract

MCC : Millennium Challenge Corporation
MMDA : Metro Manila Development Authority
MMICP : Metro Manila Interchange Project (VI)
MMT : Multi-partite Monitoring Team
MMPIBAS : Mega Manila Provincial Integrated Bus Axis System
MMURTRIP : Metro Manila Urban Transport Integration Project
MMUTIS : Metro Manila Urban Transport Integration Study
MNTC : Metro Manila Tollway Corporation
MOOE : Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses
MRIC : Municipal/City Resettlement Implementation Committee
MRT : Mass Rail Transit
MVUC : Motor Vehicle User Change
MWSS : Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System
NAIA : Ninoy Aquino International Airport
NBP : New Bilibid Prison
NCR : National Capital Region
NCIP : National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
NECA : Non-Environmentally Critical Areas
NECP : Non-Environmentally Critical Project
NEDA : National Economic Development Authority
NEPC : National Environmental Protection Council
NHA : National Housing Authority
NIPAS : National Integrated Projected Areas System
NLEX : North Luzon Expressway
NPCC : National Pollution Control Commission
NSO : National Statistics Office
OBR : Organized Bus Route
ODA : Official Development Assistance
OD : Origin Destination
OECF : Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
PAF : Project Affected Family
PAPs : Project Affected Persons
PCU : Passenger Car Units
PDR : Project Description Report
PEISS : Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System
PERT/CPM : Program Evaluation Review Technique/Critical Path Method
PMO : Project Management Office
PNCC : Philippine National Construction Corporation

PNR : Philippine National Railways
PPP : Public-Private Partnership
PROC : People’s Republic of China
PRRC : Pasig River Rehabilitation Commission
PRRP : Pasig River Rehabilitation Programs
PUB : Public Utility Bus
PUV : Public Utility Vehicle
QMC : Quezon Memorial Circle
RA : Republic Act
RAP : Resettlement Action Plan
RIC : Resettlement Implementation Committee
ROW : Right of Way
SC : Supervising Consultant
SLEX : South Luzon Expressway
SMC : San Miguel Corporation
SMR : Self-Monitoring Report
SPM : Suspended Particulate Matter
STRADA : System for Traffic Demand Analysis
URPO : Urban Roads and Project Office
UV : Utility Vehicle
UVVRS : Uniform Vehicular Volume Reduction Scheme
UWRS : Uniform Volume Reduction Scheme
WB : World Bank
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
on previous detailed design and other

1. INTRODUCTION
related studies.
1.1 Background of the Project
(2) Conduct a review and study for the
Metro Manila has a strategic foothold in the preliminary engineering study on the
socio-economic activities of the Philippines construction of the Circumferential
that attracts 13% of the population and Road-3 (C-3) missing link includes of
generates 37% of the total GDP of the impact to the proposed flyover.
country. Metro Manila has been (3) Conduct preliminary engineering study on
continuously developing and improving its traffic capacity expansion of
transport sector infrastructure and traffic Circumferential Road-4 (C-4) includes of
network. Manila is currently still faced with find space for proposed viaduct
the problems of heavy traffic congestion and structures.
increased travel times. Such a situation
1.3 Scope of the Study
creates a bottleneck for the distribution of
(1) Study of construction of interchanges
goods and hampers the movement of people,
- Feasibility Study for four (4) interchanges
resulting in huge economic losses. At the
・ C-3/E. Rodriguez
same time, chronic traffic congestion causes ・ EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
increase in air pollution and noise. ・ EDSA/North/West/Mindanao
・ C-5/Green Meadows/
In view of the above, the DPWH has
Calle Industria/Eastwood
requested the JICA to evaluate the
- Scheme study and preparation of design
possibility of financing the construction of
options for C-5/Kalayaan
the highly prioritized grade separated
(2) Study of the C-3 missing link includes of
interchange projects in Metro Manila. JICA
impact to the proposed flyover.
responded favorably to this DPWH request
- Review of six (6) alignments established
and has selected the consultants to undertake
by DPWH
the Preparatory Survey for Metro Manila
- Establish evaluation criteria and undertake
Interchange Construction Project (VI).
evaluation of alternative alignments
1.2 Objectives of the Study (3) Study on C-4 traffic capacity expansion
(1) The objective of the Study is to conduct includes of find space for proposed
screening of the proposed improvements viaduct structures.
as Japanese ODA Loan Project, focusing - Review of present and proposed projects
in the study area
on the items such as the purpose of the
- Study on traffic capacity expansion for the
project, scope of works, project cost, construction of viaduct and tunnel
project implementation organization, schemes.
operation and maintenance organization
and social environmental aspects based
i Executive Summary
2. CONFIRMATION OF VALIDITY Billion excluding consultancy services.

AND NECESSITY OF THE PROJECT 2.3 Lessons Learned from Previous Similar
2.1 Confirmation of Consistency on Traffic Projects and Proposed
Plans by Other Agencies Countermeasures
This Project is consistent with the traffic plans The ex-post evaluation study for Metro Manila
of other agencies such as MMDA and DOTC. Interchange Construction Project (IV) dated
There is no conflict with the traffic plans of June 2008 was undertaken jointly by JBIC
other agencies; it is supportive of the traffic Consultants and the National Economic and
plans of the LGUs and other agencies. However, Development Authority (NEDA). The Report
the following issues need to be noted: identified the following three lessons and the
MRT Line 7 Construction recommended actions that need to be taken into
The proposed intersection scheme for account in future project implementation:
EDSA/West/North/Mindanao Avenues has Lesson-1: Lack of in-depth investigation
during detailed design
been confirmed and approved by the project Lesson-2: Delay in land acquisition and
proponent of MRT 7 and DOTC. However, a resettlement
reconfirmation has to be made during the Lesson-3: Absence of pragmatic project
scheduling
Detailed Design Stage to ensure that there has
Recommendation: Sufficient maintenance
been no change in the scheme that has been funds should be secured
originally approved. The Consolidated Report in January 2011 for
Skyway Stage 3 the Metro Manila Urban Transport Integration
The project is a 14.5km six-lane elevated Project (MMURTRIP) financed by World Bank
viaduct that will connect the north and south identified that bureaucratic processes, changes
expressways via C-3, and has been approved as in administration, and ensuing changes in
a priority project by the government last development policies are the main causes of
August 2012. Correspondingly, implementation delay in project implementation.
of the C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange has been 2.4 Technical Level for Construction and
deferred by DPWH due to a conflict of its Maintenance of Flyover of the DPWH
alignment with that of the project.
The PMO-URPO is in charge of flyover
2.2 Confirmation of Necessity and Priority construction and its maintenance is undertaken
of the Proposed Flyover Project by NCR Regional Office. Technical level of
The five interchange under this proposal are both agencies is fairly high and capable enough
included in the list of priority projects for NCR to construct and maintain flyovers, but there is
under DPWH’s Public Investment Plan some room for improvement in the following
2011-2016. Proposed budget for the Metro processes:
Manila Interchange Construction Project is 1. Bureaucratic procurement process
about P7.36 Billion. The construction of five 2. Prolonged relocation process
3. Casual maintenance approach rather
interchanges has a total allocation of P5.17 than preventive
ii Executive Summary
3. TRAFFIC FLOW ANALYSIS AND DEMAND FORECAST
3.1 Traffic Survey

The traffic surveys shown in Table 3-1 were conducted to grasp the present traffic flow
characteristics of the project sites.
Table 3-1 Type and Location of Traffic Surveys
Type of Survey Purpose of the Survey Location
1. Intersection Directional - Assessment of present service level of the
Traffic Volume intersections 1. C-3/E. Rodriguez
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011) - Formulation of interchange schemes 2. EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
- Benefit calculation 3. EDSA/North/West/Mindanao
2. Number Plate Vehicle - Formulation of present Origin Destination 4. C-5/Kalayaan
Movement Survey (OD) matrix for traffic analyses 5. C-5/Green Meadows/Acroplis
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011) /Calle Industria
3. Intersection Queue Length - Verification of current service level of the Note: C-5/Kalayaan is not included
Survey intersections in the Number Plate Survey
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011)
4. Travel Speed Survey - Basic information for assessment of effect 8 major streets passing/crossing
(Nov. 22~Dec.8 2011) and impact of interchange construction project intersections
Source: JICA Study Team
Note: Survey of above 1, 2 and 3 of C-5/Kalayaan was conducted March 13 and 14 2012
3.1.1 Result of Traffic Demand Forecast by Micro-simulation
Daily vehicle-km, daily-vehicle hour and average travel speed of each interchange are shown in Tables
3-2 to 3-5.
Table 3-2 Daily Vehicle-Km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed
(C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection)
2018 (Daily) 2028 (Daily)
Vehicle 2011
Indicator 2018 2018 With - 2028 2028 With -
Category (Daily)
(With) (Without) Without (With) (Without) Without
Car 90,049 174,597 175,989 -1,392 111,650 112,375 -724
Jeepney 9,346 18,453 18,432 20 30,503 30,529 -26
UtilityVehicle 9,618 18,353 18,574 -222 11,950 12,071 -121
Vehicle Km Bus 449 836 805 32 559 536 23
Truck 2,881 5,531 5,624 -93 3,517 3,541 -23
Motorcycle 41,595 86,428 81,010 5,418 139,866 130,296 9,570
Total 153,938 304,197 300,433 3,764 298,046 289,347 8,699
Car 3,293 5,842 7,326 -1,483 3,627 4,603 -977
Jeepney 340 610 767 -158 985 1,190 -205
UtilityVehicle 356 605 778 -173 382 511 -129
Vehicle Hour Bus 16 27 34 -6 18 21 -3
Truck 106 164 230 -67 101 143 -42
Motorcycle 1,518 2,541 3,270 -730 4,050 5,900 -1,850
Total 5,629 9,788 12,405 -2,617 9,162 12,369 -3,206
Car 67,712 132,486 132,376 111 84,621 84,692 -71
Jeepney 7,379 14,518 14,529 -11 23,964 24,062 -98
UtilityVehicle 6,917 13,393 13,417 -24 8,687 8,717 -30
Traffic Volume Bus 352 632 628 4 421 421 0
Truck 2,001 3,890 3,903 -14 2,460 2,443 16
Motorcycle 28,668 55,779 55,808 -28 90,305 89,762 542
Total 113,029 220,698 220,660 38 210,458 210,098 360
Car 27.3 29.9 24.0 5.9 30.8 24.4 6.4
Jeepney 27.5 30.3 24.0 6.2 31.0 25.6 5.3
UtilityVehicle 27.0 30.4 23.9 6.5 31.3 23.6 7.7
Average Travel Speed
Bus 27.5 30.8 24.0 6.9 31.9 25.7 6.2
（Km/Hour）
Truck 27.2 33.8 24.4 9.4 34.8 24.7 10.1
Motorcycle 27.4 34.0 24.8 9.2 34.5 22.1 12.4
Average 27.3 31.1 24.2 6.9 32.5 23.4 9.1
iii Executive Summary

Table 3-3 Daily Vehicle-km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed

(EDSA /Roosevelt/ Congressional Intersection)
Vehicle 2011
Category (Daily)
Car 118,775 144,485 150,012 -5,527 134,665 139,990 -5,325
Jeepney 20,782 22,329 26,650 -4,321 29,268 35,042 -5,774
UtilityVehicle 18,410 22,402 23,286 -884 20,734 21,591 -857
Vehicle Km Bus 15,196 18,316 19,392 -1,076 16,966 17,962 -996
Truck 14,081 17,072 17,669 -597 15,885 16,530 -646
Motorcycle 21,078 25,264 26,579 -1,315 32,937 34,900 -1,963
Total 208,323 249,869 263,588 -13,720 250,454 266,016 -15,561
Car 3,915 4,770 5,116 -347 4,444 4,810 -366
Jeepney 710 703 945 -242 926 1,252 -326
UtilityVehicle 610 749 799 -50 691 743 -51
Vehicle Hour Bus 510 543 675 -132 503 629 -127
Truck 469 569 612 -43 527 577 -50
Motorcycle 701 904 916 -12 1,183 1,210 -27
Total 6,914 8,237 9,063 -826 8,274 9,221 -947
Car 78,477 99,454 99,193 261 92,615 92,521 94
Jeepney 9,664 12,419 12,338 82 16,302 16,266 37
UtilityVehicle 11,131 14,190 14,178 12 13,159 13,182 -24
Traffic Volume Bus 10,550 13,480 13,427 53 12,468 12,475 -7
Truck 8,484 10,934 10,997 -63 10,148 10,266 -118
Motorcycle 13,641 17,250 17,239 10 22,662 22,662 0
Total 131,948 167,726 167,372 355 167,353 167,372 -18
Car 30.3 30.3 29.3 1.0 30.3 29.1 1.2
Jeepney 29.3 31.8 28.2 3.6 31.6 28.0 3.6
UtilityVehicle 30.2 29.9 29.2 0.8 30.0 29.1 0.9
Bus 29.8 33.7 28.7 5.0 33.8 28.5 5.2
（Km/Hour）
Truck 30.0 30.0 28.9 1.2 30.2 28.7 1.5
Motorcycle 30.1 27.9 29.0 -1.1 27.8 28.8 -1.0
Average 30.1 30.3 29.1 1.3 30.3 28.8 1.4
Table 3-4 Daily Vehicle-km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed

(EDSA /North/West/Mindanao Intersection)
Vehicle 2011
Category Daily
Car 257,061 308,345 317,028 -8,683 289,377 297,381 -8,004
Jeepney 22,322 23,009 26,265 -3,256 27,499 31,912 -4,413
UtilityVehicle 26,357 30,795 32,449 -1,654 28,887 30,528 -1,641
Vehicle Km Bus 14,382 18,139 18,292 -154 16,835 16,960 -125
Truck 23,232 28,545 29,065 -520 26,755 27,198 -443
Motorcycle 40,702 50,013 50,930 -917 65,028 66,657 -1,629
Total 384,056 458,845 474,029 -15,184 454,382 470,635 -16,254
Car 9,191 10,754 13,360 -2,606 9,753 12,072 -2,319
Jeepney 834 939 1,079 -141 1,114 1,293 -179
UtilityVehicle 972 1,135 1,377 -242 1,030 1,284 -254
Vehicle Hour Bus 460 506 636 -130 466 567 -102
Truck 895 1,015 1,349 -334 919 1,223 -303
Motorcycle 1,544 1,723 2,603 -880 2,198 3,293 -1,095
Total 13,895 16,072 20,405 -4,332 15,481 19,732 -4,252
Car 167,998 206,255 205,934 321 193,438 193,023 415
Jeepney 10,459 11,455 11,489 -34 12,837 12,828 8
UtilityVehicle 16,403 19,929 19,937 -9 18,690 18,755 -65
Truck 16,154 20,309 20,233 77 18,959 18,945 14
Motorcycle 26,130 32,745 32,588 156 42,425 42,358 67
Total 247,526 303,890 303375.1 515.0 298,592 298,156 436
Car 28.0 28.7 23.7 4.9 29.7 24.6 5.0
Jeepney 26.8 24.5 24.3 0.2 24.7 24.7 0.0
UtilityVehicle 27.1 27.1 23.6 3.6 28.1 23.8 4.3
Bus 31.3 35.8 28.7 7.1 36.2 29.9 6.3
（Km/Hour）
Truck 26.0 28.1 21.5 6.6 29.1 22.2 6.9
Motorcycle 26.4 29.0 19.6 9.5 29.6 20.2 9.3
Total 27.6 28.5 23.2 5.3 29.4 23.9 5.5
iv Executive Summary
Table 3-5 Daily Vehicle-m, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed

(C-5 Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria)
Vehicle 2011
Category (Daily)
Car 324,251 367,398 373,519 -6,121 543,481 552,795 -9,314
Jeepney 13,173 15,185 15,213 -28 22,715 22,867 -152
UtilityVehicle 54,476 62,176 62,507 -331 92,139 92,672 -533
Vehicle Km Bus 772 858 865 -8 1,302 1,299 2
Truck 34,601 39,742 39,905 -163 58,850 59,115 -265
Motorcycle 90,496 103,721 104,143 -423 152,917 153,418 -501
Total 517,769 589,078 596,153 -7,074 871,404 882,166 -10,763
Car 10,309 10,885 11,936 -1,051 17,874 19,823 -1,949
Jeepney 419 419 487 -67 702 854 -153
UtilityVehicle 1,736 1,783 2,003 -220 2,971 3,531 -560
Vehicle Hour Bus 25 23 28 -4 39 48 -8
Truck 1,102 1,108 1,278 -170 1,822 2,182 -360
Motorcycle 2,878 3,008 3,329 -321 4,928 5,534 -606
Total 16,468 17,227 19,061 -1,834 28,336 31,972 -3,635
Car 114,767 132,136 132,178 -42 195,412 195,166 246
Jeepney 4,360 5,054 5,051 3 7,574 7,591 -17
UtilityVehicle 18,281 20,971 20,974 -3 30,992 30,992 0
Truck 11,526 13,255 13,286 -31 19,582 19,606 -24
Motorcycle 30,917 35,590 35,667 -77 52,532 52,401 132
Total 180,108 207,294 207,444 -151 306,520 306,183 337
Car 31.5 33.8 31.3 2.5 30.4 27.9 2.5
Jeepney 31.4 36.2 31.3 4.9 32.4 26.8 5.6
UtilityVehicle 31.4 34.9 31.2 3.7 31.0 26.2 4.8
Bus 31.5 36.7 31.2 5.5 33.2 27.3 5.9
（Km/Hour）
Truck 31.4 35.9 31.2 4.7 32.3 27.1 5.2
Motorcycle 31.4 34.5 31.3 3.2 31.0 27.7 3.3
Total 31.4 34.2 31.3 2.9 30.8 27.6 3.2
4. STUDY OF EACH INTERCHANGE The road has 827m long and four lanes with a
total width of 20.0m and highest embankment
4.1 Design Standard for Highway and
height of 1.55m.
Flyover
Identified Problems
Design standards for Highway and Flyovers
There has been no study yet of the possible
adopt DPWH design standards except for
impacts of flooding on the people living within
seismic acceleration coefficient which was
the vicinity of the project area and also no
increased from 0.4g to 0.5g due to scheduled
documents showing public acceptance on the
change in the ASEP design code.
proposed raising of the current road elevation.
4.2 C-3/E. Rodriguez Avenue Recommendations
4.2.1 Review of Previous Detailed Design The most appropriate countermeasure(s)
against flood, i.e. in case to raise present road
Along C-3
elevations further, etc. should be thoroughly
The total length of the project section along this
studied.
road segment is 2,105m, consisting of 275m of
4-lanes flyover, 205m of approach roads and 4.2.2 Preliminary Design of Interchange
1,625m of embankment roads. The highest (1) Study and Countermeasure against
embankment height is 2.50m. Flood
Along E. Rodriguez Avenue The construction of an elevated highway should
v Executive Summary
be provided proper counter measure to the flyover are 729m and 502m, respectively.
fundamental problem of floods and should be Southbound
properly addressed by a flood control Total length of the project section and flyover
management project. are 729m and 500m, respectively.
(2) Comparative Study Identified Problems
The following three (3) alternatives are Total re-planning and redesign will be required
proposed as the most suitable schemes for due to the constructed MRT-3 and Muñoz
comparison: Station and the Pedestrian Bridges at the
Scheme-1 : 275.0m long flyover and 630m intersection.
long 6 lanes additional approach road Recommendations
(Original Design). A careful study of the vertical and horizontal
Scheme-2 : 280.0m long flyover clearances against the constructed Muñoz
Scheme-3 : 280.0m long flyover and 598m Station and MRT-3 viaduct structures should be
long 4 lanes additional approach with undertaken.
RCBC.
4.3.2 Preliminary Design of Interchange
Among the three (3) schemes, scheme-3 was
(1) Comparative Study
selected though it was more expensive than
The following three (3) alternatives are
scheme-2 by approximately 22%. This is due to
proposed as the most suitable schemes for
the 598m extent of elevated road to alleviate
comparison.
effects of flood and provide 2-lanes per
Scheme-1 : Flyover with 422m long and 3
direction of service roads at the at-grade section
lanes per direction. (Maintain of all
which will be deemed sufficient to support the
pedestrian bridges )
activities of people along this road section.
Scheme-2 : Flyover with 366m long and 3
Implementation of the C-3/E. Rodriguez
lanes per direction. (No pedestrian bridges
Interchange was cancelled by the DPWH to
near Muñoz Station)
give priority to the construction of Skyway
Scheme-3 : Flyover with 719m (NB) and
Stage 3, second level, along C-3 under BOT
880m (SB) long. (Maintaining all pedestrian
scheme.
bridges and improving at grade intersection)
(3) Cost Estimate and Construction
Among the three (3) alternatives, scheme-2 was
Duration
selected having the cheapest construction cost,
Estimated cost and construction duration are
shorter construction duration and superior
PhP 492M and 17 months, respectively.
vertical grade against the other schemes.
4.3 EDSA–Roosevelt Ave. / Congressional
(2) Cost Estimate and Construction
Avenue
Duration
4.3.1 Review of Previous Detailed Design Estimated cost and construction duration is PhP
Northbound 630M and 22 months, respectively.
The total length of the project section and the
vi Executive Summary
4.4 EDSA/ North Avenue/ West Avenue/ The necessary data and information on the
Mindanao Avenue MRT-3 and LRT Line-1 extension and detailed
design of the Common Station and MRT 7
4.4.1 Review of Previous Detailed Design
should be obtained for Preliminary Design.
EDSA Southbound
4.4.2 Preliminary Design (EDSA/North/
The total length of the project section and the
flyover are 854m and 361m, respectively. The West Interchange)
length of the left turn flyover (EDSA–North (1) Comparative study
Avenue) which is located above the EDSA The following two (2) alternatives are
northbound flyover is 286m. proposed as the most suitable for
EDSA Northbound comparison:
The total length of the project section and the Scheme-1 : Flyover with 342m long
flyover are 569m and 343m, respectively. north bound and 319m long south
EDSA–North Avenue Left Turn Flyover bound.
 North Avenue Straight Scheme-2 : Cut and cover tunnel with
Total length of project section = 1,228m; 231m long north bound and 131m long
Length of flyover = 1,011m south bound.
 North Avenue–Mindanao Avenue Between the two (2) schemes, the flyover
Total length of project section = 306m; scheme was selected due to cheaper
Length of flyover = 180m construction cost, no ROW acquisition,
West Avenue–North Avenue Flyover shorter construction duration and no
The flyover has two lanes and horizontal specific O & M.
alignment of 80m radius right curve at the
4.4.3 Preliminary Design (North/Mindanao
intersection which merges with EDSA–North
Interchange)
Avenue Left Turn Flyover after the curve. The
(1) Comparative study
lengths of the project section and flyover are
The following two (2) alternatives are
483m and 392m, respectively.
proposed as the most suitable for
Identified Problems
comparison:
(a) Requires total re-planning and redesign
Scheme-1 : Left turn flyover from North
due to the planned construction of the
Ave to Mindanao Ave (3rd level) and left
Common Station along LRT-1 in front of
turn flyover from Mindanao Ave to
SM North, and MRT-7 which will pass
North Ave (2nd level)
along North Avenue.
Scheme-2 : Left turn cut and cover
(b) The construction of a Left Turn Flyover
tunnel from North Ave to Mindanao Ave
from EDSA to North Avenue will not be
(under pass) and left turn flyover from
possible with the planned construction of
Mindanao Ave to North Ave (2nd level).
the Common Station.
Between two (2) schemes, scheme-2 was
Recommendations
vii Executive Summary

selected due to cheaper construction cost b) Subtle curve alignments along C5 for
and better environmental and traffic thru traffic in both directions were
conditions. observed around the U-turn flyover.
(2) Cost Estimate and Construction c) Traffic survey data shows that passing
Duration vehicles along U-turn flyover at south
Estimated cost and construction duration side and north side are 25,132
for the above two interchanges are P1,166 vehiclesper day and 18,600 vehicles per
M and 24 months, respectively. day, respectively. Summarized actual
4.5 C-5/Kalayaan Avenue traffic intersection flow graphic are
shown as follows:
Identified Problems
The U-Turn Flyovers constructed at both sides
of the intersection along C-5 are considered to
be substandard structures under the design code.
Recommendations
A more comprehensive study of actual traffic
flow and volume at the intersection needs to be
undertaken to identify the cause of traffic jam
and to study proper counter measures. Source: JICA Study Team
4.5.2 Advice for Technical Issue and Design (2) Technical study maintaining existing
Option U-turn flyover
(1) Site Condition and Traffic survey Maintaining existing U-turn flyover and
Three (3) issues were identified: from above traffic data, the following five
a) Carriageway width of C5 thru traffic is (5) schemes were studied:
substandard.
Reduced Conflict No.

Option AADT Findings
(Present conflict is 5)
Require ROW acquisition but
Construct left turn flyover from
Scheme -1 13,955 Tibagan elementary is located -2
Kalayaan Ave. to C5 north bound
along C5 north bound.
Comparatively traffic volume is
Construct left turn flyover from -1
Scheme -2 7, 309 small and requires ROW
Pateros to C5 north bound
acquisition
Construct straight flyover along
Scheme -3 6,053 Traffic volume is small -1
Kalayaan Ave.
Scheme -4 6,789 Not enough transition length -1
C5 south bound to Pateros
Scheme -5 9,627 Not enough transition length 0
C5 north bound to EDSA
viii Executive Summary

Among the above five (5) schemes, the most New intersection plans provide for three (3)
effective option is to construct left turn flyover lanes in each direction with underpass
from Kalayaan Ave. to C5 north direction but it scheme along C5 for thru traffic. Based on
should be noted that the Tibagan elementary the traffic volume and traffic flow at the
school is located just beside of road along C5 intersection, four (4) schemes as new
north direction. intersection plans can be considered as
(3) Technical study with demolition of shown in the comparison table hereunder.
existing U-turn flyover
(4) Overall evaluation

With existing U-turn flyover ・ Construct underpass 3-lanes in each
・ Existing substandard carriageway widths direction along C5.
and subtle curve alignments are the cause ・ Construction of left turn flyovers from
of unsmooth traffic around both sides of kalayaan Ave. to C5 in both directions
the U-turn flyover and that becomes the will be the most effective scheme
bottlenecks for C5 thru traffic and there considering that almost 50% of traffic will
are no remedial measures without be free flow
demolishing the existing u-turn flyover. ・ Estimated cost are as follows:
Most optimum option is the construction Construction of 2-lanes Flyover
of a left turn flyover from Kalayaan Ave (total length 740m) = P 444M
to C5 in both directions, but ROW Construction of 6-lanes Underpass
problem is existence (Tibagan elementary structure (490m) = P 520M
school is located at just beside of north Demolition of existing U-turn flyover
bound of C5). =P 64M
Without existing U-turn flyover Total = P 1,028M
ix Executive Summary
(5) Recommendation 4.6.2 Preliminary Design of Interchange

With U-turn flyover
(1) Study of White Plains Creek
- To find a solution for the ROW problem
The proposed inverted siphon cannot be
(Tibagan elementary school) for
adopted for the following reasons:
improvement of intersection with present
(a) The calculation result of the loss of head
condition of U-turn flyover.
of inverted siphon is 1.3 m. Therefore, at
Without U-turn flyover
the time of freshet, the water level will
- To construct 6-lanes underpass for C5 thru
rise 1.3m higher than the present
traffic and 2-lanes left turn flyover from
condition at the upstream side.
Kalayaan Ave. to C5 in both directions.
(b) It is expected that much garbage will
Total Recommendation
flow at the time of freshet because the
Implementation of the above without a
creek is flowing through a residential
U-turn flyover is recommended because the
area.
study shows that there is no ultimate
solution that could fully address the
The following three (3) alternatives are
expected yealy increase traffic without
proposed as the most suitable for
demolition of the existing U-turn flyover.
comparison:
4.6 C-5–Green Meadows Avenue Scheme-1 : 1098m long flyover

 Scheme-2 : 808m long Cut and cover
tunnel
(1) Design Plan  Scheme-3 : 432m long flyover and 80m
The 925m long and four (4) lanes cut and long cut and cover tunnel
cover tunnel was initially designed. Among the three (3) schemes, scheme-1 was
Identified Problems selected due to: Construction cost is cheapest,
There is no study on the complicated no ROW acquisition, and much easier
construction procedure for a tunnel construction, can provide four (4) lanes in each
underneath the existing creek. direction at the total stretch of area underneath
Recommendations the viaduct and will not require specific O&M.
Based on the problems identified, the (3) Cost Estimate and Construction Duration
proposed improvement should be carefully Estimated cost and construction duration are
and thoroughly studied. MP1.098 and 24 months, respectively.
x Executive Summary
5. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 5.2 Study of Consultancy services
5.1 Study of Contract Package Consultancy services are required at Detailed

Arrangement Design Stage (12 months), Tender Assistance
Stage (12 months) and Construction
Proposed contract packages were decided
Supervision Stage (26 months). Total amount
considering the size of contract and location of
of proposed consultancy cost is 342,9 MP
each flyover as follows:
(651.6MY) including 5% contingency.
Package-1: EDSA/North/West/Mindanao:
5.3 Project Cost Estimate
1,133million pesos
Package-2: C5/Green Meadows: Total project cost is 3,266.51 million Pesos and
1,066million pesos loan amount is 5,336.75 million Yen, equity of
Package-3: EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Government of the Philippines is 412.64 million
612 million pesos Pesos.
C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange was canceled Summary of the project cost is shown in Table
due to conflict with on-going project of 5-1.
Skyway Stage-3.
Table 5-1 Summary of Project Cost
Unit: Million Pesos
Item Total GOP ODA Remarks
1. Total Cvil Work Cost 2,811.17 301.20 2,509.97

Civil Work Cost 2,756.05
Physical Contingency (2%) 55.12
Package-1 EDSA/North/West and North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 1,132.59 121.35 1,011.24
Package-2 C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1066.33 114.25 952.08
Civil Work Cost 1045.42
Package-3 EDSA/Roosevelt IC 612.25 65.60 546.65
2. ROW Acquisition Cost 4.00 4.00
3. Detailed Engineering Design (DED) Cost Total 116.81 3.43 113.38

Detailed Engineering Design Cost 114.52
4. Construction Supervision Cost Total 238.07 7.55 230.52
Construction Supervision Cost 233.40
Physical Contingency
Source:(2%)
JICA Study Team 4.67
5. Project Administrative Cost Total 96.46 96.46
Detailed Design Stage, Construction Supervision Stage (3.5%) 96.46
Grand Total in Pesos 3,266.51 412.64 2,853.88

Grand Total in Yen 6,108.38 771.63 5,336.75
xi Executive Summary
5.4 Total proposed implementation schedule is presented as follows:

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE OF MMICP
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
DESCRIPTION
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 87
12 months
1. Preparatory Study
2 months
2. Review and Evaluation of EIA/RAP in DENR EMB
3. Issuance of Environmental Compliance Certificate
6 months
4. Processing in NEDA for Approval
5 months
5. Loan Negotiation
6. Loan Agreement
12 months
7. Selection of Consultant (D/D)
12 months
8. Detailed Design
12 months
9. Selection of Consultant (C/S)
10. 1st Contract Package
(EDSA/WEST/NORTH/MINDANAO)
12 months
- Bidding
3 months
- Preparation and Approval of Contract Documents
24 months
- Implementation
11. 2nd Contract Package (C5/GREENMEADOWS)
12 months
- Bidding
3 months
24 months
- Implementation
12. 3rd Contract Package

(EDSA/ROOSEVELT/C3/E. RODRIGUEZ)
12 months
- Bidding
3 months
22 months
- Implementation
15 months
13. R.O.W. Acquisition
5.5 IDEA AND BASIC CONCEPT FOR Procurement Amount from Japan for the
STEP SCHEME Project
(Unit: Pesos)
Proposed use of steel bridge, with steel box No. Description Amount %
girder, steel slab deck and steel piers utilizing 1. Cement (Material Only) 82,631,608 2.61
Reinforcing Steel Bar
Japanese technology, as shown in Figure, will 2.
(Material Only)
414,488,550 13.08
remove the risks of the original detailed design 3.

Procurement of structural steel
16,017,322 0.51
members (Material Only)
plan mentioned above and minimize traffic Structural Steel (Material
4. 603,502,451 19.05
congestion during the construction of Only)
5. ERMSE Wall (Material Only) 36,226,866 1.14
superstructure. 6. Service of Japanese Contractor 228,729,600 7.22
TOTAL 1,381,596,397 43.61
The total amount of Japanese content, at 2,155

million yen, is 36.39% of the total 5,572
million yen construction cost under STEP
scheme. Furthermore, procurement ratio
becomes 43.61% once the 7.22% of overhead
of the Japanese contractor is added. The
Japanese content proposed above therefore is
adequate to satisfy the required 30%
procurement ratio under STEP scheme
condition.
xii Executive Summary

Summary of Project Cost (STEP Loan)

Unit: Million Pesos

1. EDSA/North/West IC Civil Work Cost 640.94 68.67 572.27
2. North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 592.77 63.51 529.26
3. C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1296.54 138.91 1,157.62
4. EDSA/Roosevelt IC Civil Work Cost 701.11 75.12 625.99


Implementation Schedule of MMICP (STEP Loan)
xiii Executive Summary

5.6 Summary of Comparison between STEP Loan and Regular Yen Loan
The characteristics and advantages of both types of loans are shown in the table below.
Description STEP Loan Regular Yen Loan Remarks

PC Voided Slab Bridge +
1. Bridge Type Steel Box and Steel PC Voided Slab Bridge
Deck-Slab Bridge
Cost is PHP 420 M or 14.9%
2. Total Construction Cost PHP 3,231 M PHP 2,811 M
higher under STEP
EDSA/North/West 37.4 68.0
North/Mindanao 15.7 23.6
3. EIRR
EDSA/ Roosevelt 22.5 35.9
(%)
C-5/Greenmeadows 16.4 25.1
4. Construction Duration
22~23 months 23~24 months Reduce 1 month
(per Flyover)
5. Period of Traffic Control at
10 days 270 days
Intersection
Estimated Detailed Design Cost
6. Detailed Design Under JICA Grant Under Loan
is PHP 92 M
7. Interest Rate of Loan 0.2% p.a. 1.4% p.a.
8. Grace Period and Repayment

10 years and 40 years 7 years and 30 years
Duration
Initial investment is high under STEP loan and, correspondingly, low EIRR, but it has the
following advantages:
(a) Relatively shorter duration of construction per flyover;
(b) Traffic control at intersection is much shorter;
(c) PHP 92 M estimated cost of detailed design will be undertaken under JICA Grant;
(d) Very low and fixed interest rate (0.2%) and long-term repayment period.
xiv Executive Summary

In the STEP loan case, the economic cost for

6. EVALUATION OF PROJECT
each intersection was PhP 661.12 million, PhP
EFFECTIVENESS
625.97 million, PhP 597.44 million, PhP
Economic analysis of the Metro Manila
1,225.41 million, and total PhP 3,036.55
intersections, namely, C-3/E. Rodriguez,
million.
EDSA-Roosevelt, EDSA-North/ West,
Furthermore, the annual investment rate over
North-Mindanao, C-5/Green Meadows and
the six year construction period is assumed to
these aggregate were undertaken with EIRR and
be 1.68%, 42.37%, 39.12%, 6.89%, 9.94% and
ENPV as efficiency measurement indicators,
0.0%.
for the Middle Income Countries General
Note that the implementation of the C-3/E.
Condition (GC) loan and the STEP loan.
Rodriguez was cancelled by the DPWH to give
Conversion factors to estimate economic costs
priority to the construction of Skyway Stage 3
and unit prices of Vehicle Operation Cost
along C-3 under BOT scheme.
(VOC-Running and Time costs, DPWH 2008)
were updated to 2012 price level.
Passenger Car Jeepney Utility Vehicle Bus Truck Motorcycle
Running Cost (V-km) 8.6 7.1 7.5 23.1 31.6 1.5
Time Cost (V-Hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9
Analytical results and sensitivity analysis for commencement of the project at an early stage
the STEP loan are summarized hereunder, with of time would be recommendable by securing
EIRRs profoundly revealing the worthiness of Japan’s ODA financing loan facilities as an
MMICP to the national economy. As such, the option.
STEP loan
C-5/Green
EDSA/Roosevelt EDSA/North/West North/Mindanao Aggregate
Meadows
EIRR (%) 22.5 37.4 15.7 16.4 23.2
ENPV (PhP mill) 303.01 1,102.31 20.44 104.02 1,573.71
Cost 15% Up 20.2 34.4 15.7 14.7 20.9
Benefit 15% Down 19.9 33.9 13.8 14.4 20.6
C-B Combination 17.8 31.1 13.5 12.8 18.5
Qualitative benefits include, among others, an
improved business operations environmental
ambiancy with lesser CO2 emission and noise,
road safety and reduction of traffic accidents.
Improvement in the institutional capability of
the DPWH in newer technologies such as
tunneling and quick-construction techniques,
through the MMICP will help increase
efficiency of public service in the future.
Table 6-1 shows proposed monitoring plan for
operation and effect indicators of the
project.
xv Executive Summary
Table 6-1 Monitoring Plan for Operation and Effect Indicators

Base Year Target Year* Monitoring
Indicators Vehicle Type
(2011) (2019) Location
Car 65,107 69,126
Jeepney 2,302 8,925
Utility Vehicle 8,064 6,524
EDSA/Roosevelt/
Along EDSA:
Congressional Intersection Bus 10,134 12,415
Cubao Side
Truck 7,035 2,968
Bicycle 7,171 18,210
Total 99,813 118,167
Car 129,372 130,786
Jeepney 2,119 0
EDSA/West/North Utility Vehicle 5,080 6,691
Along EDSA:
Intersection Bus 10,432 13,593
Cubao Side
Truck 8,119 4,211
Traffic Bicycle 11,259 23,703
Volume Total 166,381 178,985
(veh/day) Car 43,406 44,645
Jeepney 12,209 10,963
North/Mindanao Utility Vehicle 4,240 5,733
Along North Ave.:
Intersection Bus 58 0
EDSA Side
Truck 2,089 1,435
Bicycle 7,390 13,818
Total 69,392 76,593
Car 77,269 112,519
Jeepney 3,727 5,820
C-5/Green Meadows/ Utility Vehicle 14,679 18,539
Along C-5:
Acropolis/Calle Industria Bus 215 524
Intersection Pasig City Side
Truck 9,765 6,244
Bicycle 24,785 34,904
Total 129,440 178,551
EDSA/Roosevelt/ Along EDSA:
16.2 62.2
Congressional Intersection Northbound Flyover
Average EDSA/West/North Along EDSA:
19.9 33.6
Intersection Northbound Flyover
Travel
Speed in PM Along North Ave.:
North/Mindanao
9.8 50.3 EDSA Side bound to
Peak Intersection
Quezon Circle
(km/h)
C-5/Green Meadows/
Along C-5:
Acropolis/Calle Industria 29.3 51.0
* Target Year is two years after the completion of the Project, which is defined as the time when the Project is open to traffic.
zero option (without-the-project) case were

7. STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND
analyzed and scoping was conducted. The
SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
results of scoping show that there are no
Environmental Impact Assessment Study
significant adverse impacts on natural
 In accordance with the “JICA Guidelines for
environment and socio-economic conditions.
Environmental and Social Considerations
According to the criteria of PEISS, DPWH
(2002 April)” (hereafter referred to as JICA
will submit the Initial Environmental
Guidelines), alternative schemes including a
Examination (IEE) reports to DENR EMB in
xvi Executive Summary

order to apply the Environmental Compliance residential zones. Trees should be planted in
Certificate (ECC). central reserves and sidewalks to improve the
 Noise, air pollutants and CO2 emissions local aesthetic views and mitigate the noise
emitted from vehicles are predicted based on and air pollutants emitted from vehicles.
the projected traffic in 2018. The results of  In order to ensure the effectiveness of
prediction show that the noise levels may mitigation measures and monitor the
exceed the Philippine maximum permissible unexpected impacts, the Environmental
levels due to the increase of traffic volume. Management Plans for the construction and
Because of the increase of average travel operation phases should be drawn up. After
speeds and the decrease of vehicle hours, the opening of the interchanges, replanted
emissions of air pollutants and CO2 will be trees, ambient air quality, and noise and
reduced by approximately 10 - 20% vibration should be regularly monitored.
compared with the zero option case. Air Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan
pollutant concentrations might not exceed the (RAP)
maximum permissible levels of the Philippine  The results of the census survey and inventory
Clean Air Act of 1999. (assets and land) survey are shown in Table
 Technically feasible mitigation measures 7.1. No involuntary resettlement is anticipated.
during the construction and operation phases The JICA Study Team supported the DPWH
are drawn up and proposed for the four in preparing the Abbreviated Resettlement
interchange projects. After opening, the Action Plan in line with DPWH’s Land
interchange, noise levels should be regularly Acquisition, Resettlement, Rehabilitation and
monitored. Installation of noise barriers shall Indigenous Peoples’ Policy and JICA
be considered where the noise levels Guidelines/World Bank Operational Policies.
significantly exceed the permissible levels in
Interchange Land Acquisition Resettlement Affected Structure
C-3/E. Rodriguez None None None
EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional None None 5 stalls (marginal*1)
Additional ROW for
EDSA/North/West/Mindanao None 25 stalls (marginal*1)
sump pit (100 sq.m)
C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/
None None None
Calle Industria
Table 7-1 Land Acquisition, Involuntary Resettlement and Affected Structure for MMICP
Note : the impact is only partial and the remaining portion of the property or asset is still viable for continued use.
Support DPWH to hold Public Consultation comments on the implementation of the
Meetings Traffic Management Plan during
 DPWH assisted the JICA Study Team with construction, noise mitigation measures and
the Public Consultation Meetings at four restoration of cut trees. DPWH will draw up
interchange project sites. The stakeholders the proper countermeasures in the planning
favored the interchange projects to ease the stage of the interchange projects against
present traffic congestion. There were the these issues raised by stakeholders.
xvii Executive Summary

8. C-3 MISSING LINK 8.3 Alternative Alignments and DPWH

Comparative Study
8.1 Background to the Study on the C-3
Missing Link 8.3.1 Alternative Alignments
The southern segment (hereafter referred to as The six (6) alternative alignments for the C-3
the C-3 Missing Link) of C-3 has not yet been Missing Link together with a comparative study
implemented to date. The circumferential road was prepared by DPWH URPO. These
network serving south-central Metro Manila is alignments are presented below.
therefore not effectively functioning resulting
in heavily congested traffic conditions on
EDSA. The construction of the C-3 Missing
Link is expected to have a substantial impact
on improving the circumferential road network
in Metro Manila and on decongesting EDSA.
The study involved review of the C-3 missing
link construction project report and also study
of influence to the proposed flyovers by the
captioned project.
8.2 River Systems
(1) Pasig River
The average width of Pasig River is 91m and
average depth is 4m with the deepest sections
being 6m. Flow volume can be as low as
12cum/sec in the dry season whereas during the
rainy season flow can increase to 275 cum/sec. 8.3.2 DPWH Comparative Study
The Ayala Bridge is the lowest bridge, with a
The 6 alternatives were presented considering
vertical clearance of only 3.5m above high
the following items: length of each alternatives,
water level.
number of lanes, structural type, cost of RROW,
(2) San Juan River
construction cost and total cost.
The width of the river in the project area is
The report also presented advantages and
typically 40m-50m. The river is flood prone
disadvantages for all alternatives but there was
over most of its length with wide areas of
no mention of which alternative was superior
floodwater breakout, including within the
or even did not make comparative rankings
project area.
among the alternatives.
The San Juan River is not navigable and is
outside of the mandate of the Philippine Coast 8.3.3 Review of DPWH Comparative Study
Guard. The Study Team conducted a review of the
DPWH comparative study and established the
xviii Executive Summary

following evaluation criteria: 1) Proposed road.

Scope of Work, 2) Construction Issue, 3) A road bridge over inland waterways must have
R.O.W. Acquisition, 4) Resettlement Issue, 5) a minimum vertical clearance of 3.75m from the
Environmental Issue, 6) Navigation Issue in highest water level, while the San Juan River is
Pasig River and 7) Construction Cost. not navigable.
8.4 Updated Study Based on the above conditions, five (5) types of
typical cross sections were prepared, namely: 1)
8.4.1 Geometric Design Standards
at grade section, 2) viaduct on ground, 3) double
Design conditions of the project adopted the deck viaduct on ground, 4) along Pasig River,
design criteria of the DPWH. and 5) along San Juan River.
8.4.2 Typical Cross Sections 8.4.3 Scope of Work of Each Alignment
The number of lanes assumed for the alternative The scope of work for each alignment is
alignments is taken to be the same as the presented in table below:
existing C-3 Northern Segment, a 6 lane divided
Elevated Single Elevated Double R.O.W.
At Grade Total
Deck Deck Acquisition
Alternative-1 1.05km 0.80km 3.95km 5.8km 102,000m2
(1) Viaduct Configuration Lambingan Bridge is already posing
Single level viaduct structures are proposed as navigational problems for the larger vessels
a preferred configuration. However, where plying the river. Any obstructions in the river
available ROW is limited, double deck reducing the navigable width will further
viaducts have been proposed. Long span exacerbate the already difficult situation.
bridges, at a range of 50m to 100m or so, will
(4) San Juan River Issues
be necessary to cross the Pasig River, and the
San Juan River is not navigable and therefore
San Juan River.
not subject to consideration of vessel
(2) Interconnectivity with Local Roads
navigation and ship collision forces.
The interconnectivity of the proposed
alternative alignments with local roads is a key 8.4.4 Project Affected Buildings and
aspect in promoting the functionality of each Project Affected People
route. 2- ramps are planned for each alternative, The numbers of affected buildings and people
namely: Boni. Ave. and New Panaderos in the
have been identified from open source satellite
south side and Shaw Blvd. in the north side.
images. Informal settlements are located beside
(3) Navigation Issues in Pasig River SM City Sta. Mesa near C-3 road side.
The section of Pasig River just upstream of
xix Executive Summary

8.4.5 Environmental Issues minor influence.
The conducted environmental study for all 8.4.6 Rough Cost Estimate
proposed alignments considered road side air
The estimate of construction cost and cost of
pollution and noise impact, sun light easement
R.R.O.W. acquisition were calculated based on
and water quality deterioration.
similar completed and on-going projects data.
All of these items are conditions judged having
Estimated cost is as follows:
Alignment Construction Cost ROW Acquisition/ Land Total

(MP) Improvement Cost (MP) (MP)
1 12,000 5,600 17,600
2 14,700 5,700 20,400
3 16,400 2,100 18,500
4 14,600 4,700 19,300
5 9,600 4,100 13,700
6 13,900 4,400 18,300
8.4.7 Updated Comparative Study
The comparative study of the six alignments for the C-3 Missing Link is presented as follows:
Construction Environmental Impact Project
ROW Acquisition
Ref Description Aspects &Pasig River Affected Comment
(excluding ramps)
and Cost Navigation People
Adequate traffic Since the route is Very substantial ROW Maximu Large area of ROW
1 Original management established in the acquisition (102,000 sqm). m acquisition and
during populated residential Requires wholescale estimated largest number of
Alignment construction will area, the impacts of demolition at: Olympia Ville, number of PAPs makes this one
be crucial. emission gases, noise Mandaluyong Cemetery, Core PAPs at of the least favored
(6 Lane, 5.8 km.) and sunlight shading Oil Gas Station, Barangay Hall 4,430. routes.
COST: 17,600MP will be the most Bagong Silang, and residential
significant among the blocks from Valenzuela to N.
alternatives and must be Domingo.
mitigated. Encroachment into Manila
Number of impacts: 8 South Cemetery is avoided
with double deck viaduct along
South Ave.
Adequate traffic Since the route is Greatest ROW acquisition Second Largest area of
2 1STRevised management established in the (105,000 sqm). Requires largest ROW acquisition
during populated residential wholescale demolition at: estimated and very large
Alignment construction will area, the impacts of Olympia Ville, residential number of number of PAPs
be crucial. emission gases, noise blocks at corner of PAPs at makes this one of
(6 Lane, 7.3 km.) and sunlight shading Coronado-San Francisco, along 3,925. the least favored
COST: 20,400MP will be the most Maytunas Creek (partial), and routes.
significant among the residential blocks from
alternatives and must be Valenzuela to N. Domingo.
abated. Encroaching into Manila South
Number of impacts: 8 Cemetery is avoided with
double deck viaduct along
South Ave.
Access along both Piers will be Least ROW acquisition (35,000 Smallest Most favored in
3 2ND Revised waterways will be constructed on the sqm) given that most of estimated terms of limiting
required for riverbeds in Pasig River alignment is in Pasig and San number of area of ROW
Alignment a1 construction. and San Juan River. Juan River. PAPs at acquisition and
Barges could be Installation of piers and There is a requirement to 550. number of PAPs.
(6 Lane, 6.3 km.) used both to untreated storm runoff partially demolish Olympia However
deliver materials may deteriorate river Ville, between Kalayaan construction along
and as a platform water quality. Avenue and J.P. Rizal. sections of Pasig
for construction Ease of navigation Encroachment into Manila River may not be
equipment along along Pasig River will South Cemetery is avoided possible given the
Pasig River. be severely impacted with double deck viaduct along existing critical
Craneways may be especially where the South Ave. navigation problems.
necessary along river narrows and at the
San Juan River point where the rivers
given that the river bends 90 degrees on the
is not navigable. approach to Lambingan.
Number of impacts: 3
COST: 18,500MP
xx Executive Summary
Construction Since the route is Still substantial ROW Second Reasonably favored
4 2ND Revised access along the established in the acquisition (92,000 sqm) given smallest in terms of limiting
river banks can be populated residential the need to acquire ROW along estimated number of PAPs.
Alignment a2 made after the area, noise abatement the river banks of Pasig and number of No adverse impacts
easement has been measures will be San Juan River. Substantial PAPs at on river waterway or
(6 Lane, 6.3 km.) cleared. needed. demolition of industrial and 950. navigation.
No construction Number of impacts: 4 residential properties. However
activities are There is a requirement to construction along
required in the partially demolish Olympia the banks will still
river waterways. Ville, between Kalayaan require substantial
Avenue and J.P. Rizal. ROW acquisition.
COST: 19,300MP Encroachment into Manila
South Cemetery is avoided
with double deck viaduct along
South Ave.
Adequate traffic Since the route is Double deck configuration Estimated Route not favored
5 PIDC-TPLEX management established in the limits ROW acquisition number of since it does not
during commercial and (74,000 sqm). PAPs still extend to Gil Puyat.
Alignment b1 construction will residential area, the However many properties substantia
be crucial. impacts of emission affected including commercial l at 1,765.
(6 Lane, 5.1 km.) gases, noise and buildings especially along New
COST: 13,700MP sunlight shading should Panaderos and F. Bulmentritt.
be mitigated. Curved alignment cuts the
Number of impacts: 6 corner at F. Blumentritt
requiring wholescale
demolition in one section.
Adequate traffic Since the route is Double deck configuration Estimated Route not favored
6 PIDC-TPLEX management established in the limits ROW acquisition number of given the need for
during commercial and (77,000 sqm). PAPs still ROW acquisition
Alignment b2 construction will residential area, the Affected properties same as substantia along commercial
be crucial. impacts of emission above. l at 2,085. strips, despite double
(6 Lane, 6.4 km.) gases, noise and In addition ROW acquisition deck construction,
COST: 18,300MP sunlight shading should along Kalayaan Avenue will be and wholescale
be mitigated. required.Encroachment into demolition in
Number of impacts: 6 Manila South Cemetery is Blumentritt to
avoided with double deck accommodate the
viaduct along South Ave. curved alignment.
8.4.8 Effect on the Project Interchanges (c) EDSA/North/West/Mindanao

due to Construction of the C-3 Traffic on West Avenue will be reduced by
Missing Link about 30% due to traffic diverting to
Roosevelt Avenue. Effects on traffic volume
The effect on the Project interchanges due to
for other roads connecting to the interchange
construction of the Missing Link was analyzed
are minimal.
using MMUTIS’s data.
(d) C-5/Kalayaan
Result of the effects on each of the intersections
C5 is parallel to the Missing Link. Traffic
are so follows:
on Kalayaan Ave. will increase by about 10%.
(a) C-3/E. Rodriguez
And traffic on C5 will decrease by about 10%.
The south side of this intersection directly
(e) C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis
connects to the Missing Link; therefore, the
C5 is parallel to the Missing Link but far from
effect is substantial. Traffic along C-3 will
the Missing Link. The effect on traffic volume
increase by 26-56%.
is minimal.
(b) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
The traffic on Roosevelt Avenue connecting 8.4.9 Recommendations
to the Missing Link will increase by 46%, but The most favored alignments are those that
the effects on traffic volume for other roads follow the Pasig and San Juan Rivers. These
connecting to the interchange are minimal. alignments are favored since both of the number
of affected buildings and PAP’s are minimized
and also the least environmental impacts are
xxi Executive Summary

expected. daily volumes of traffic from early morning to

However, both alternatives have drawbacks: late evening has resulted in severe congestion
navigation problems in Pasig River; obstruction and low traffic speeds. Such situation is severely
of waterway area in San Juan River; and a need hampering the socio-economic development of
for substantial ROW acquisition. Metro Manila and is an impairment to the
It is recommended that the Study on the C-3 environment.
Missing Link should be the subject of a In view of the above critical condition, a ceptual
feasibility study in establishing preliminary Study on Traffic Capacity Expansion along
design, assessing traffic impacts and EDSA has been proposed.
conforming economic viability. 9.2 Objectives and Concept of Conceptual
8.4.10 Related Proposed Projects in Metro Study
Manila The purpose of this conceptual study is to
identify the outline of the possibility of
In addition to the DPWH proposal for a C-3
constructing high level viaduct or tunnel
Missing Link Project, there are several other
solutions that will expand the capacity of EDSA
proposals, from the private sector and other
and the study includes of find space for
government agencies, to provide elevated
proposed viaduct structures.
roadways serving a similar function or
occupying corridors that may intersect with the 9.3 Confirmation of Consistency between
C-3 Missing Link Project. The other proposed the Proposed Project and Present
projects are listed below: Traffic Plans in the Metro Manila
Proposed Project Proponent Some existing plans of trunk roads,
1 C-3 Expressway Ayala Corporation
expressways and railways are related to the
Metro North Tollway
2 NLEX-SLEX Connector
Corp. (MNTC)
proposed study with regards to the share of
3 Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 CITRA/PNCC traffic volume but these should not be affected
4 SKYBRIDGE MMDA or disturbed much in the implementation of the
9. THE CONCEPTUAL STUDY FOR proposed project.
THE TRAFFIC CAPACITY 9.4 Confirmation of Open Spaces for
EXPANSION ALONG EDSA Tunnel Plan and Viaduct Plan
9.1 Background of the Project The study will confirm in outline the availability
The 24 km length of EDSA is the main of open space to accommodate the support
circumferential road of Metro Manila and has structures of high level viaduct solutions and
average traffic of more than 200,000 vehicles tunnel solutions at critical locations along
per section every day. Notwithstanding the EDSA. The basic concept in assessing available
improvements to EDSA brought by the space is to develop outline solutions that will
construction of several interchanges, in addition minimize occupation of width along EDSA and
to the MRT-3 and LRT-1 North Extension, the also minimize ROW acquisition where and if
limited capacity of EDSA to handle the large necessary.
xxii Executive Summary

9.5 Confirmation of Hindrance Structures is imposed except on a specific time window

The following hindrance structures for both which is from 9:00pm to 6:00am daily except
directions on EDSA have been identified: Sundays and Holidays. To further decongest
MRT/LRT Station : 15 stations EDSA, a volume reduction scheme has been
Flyover along/across EDSA: Southbound implemented to reduce daily traffic by twenty
=13 locations, Northbound=14 locations percent (20%) theoretically by prohibiting all
Under pass along/across EDSA :4 locations vehicle types on the basis of its last digit plate
number from 7:00am to 7:00pm.
Pedestrian Bridge : 30 locations
9.7 Viaduct Scheme
Those hindrance structures shown in the
9.7.1 Proposed Viaduct Plan and Profile
figure below:
This concept will require columns and
foundations over the current roadway. This
will diminish the number of at-grade lanes in
each direction from five to four. However,
after the construction of the elevated viaduct,
EDSA will have seven lanes in total in each
direction.
Source: JICA Study Team For site conditions requiring long spans and
Location Map of MRT-3, LRT-1 Stations, high piers, steel box girders supported by
Flyover and Underpass rectangular steel columns are recommended.
9.6 EDSA General Condition 9.7.2 Proposed Location of Ramps

(1) Topology The ramps give access to the major Central
EDSA generally has ten (10) lanes with five Business Districts (CBD) of Makati and
(5) equal lanes per direction. Within the 3.0 m Ortigas, and to the hub of government offices
sidewalks, various utilities including overhead in Quezon City and distance between ramps
cables are located at-grade, underground and are about 5.3km each.
in the air. A median separator exists The estimated additional RROW requirement
throughout EDSA. Both the MRT-3 and for an elevated viaduct and the provided ramps
LRT-1 North Extension fully occupies this on EDSA is roughly about 140,000 sq m.
corridor.
9.7.3 Description of Five High Critical
(2) Traffic Condition
Hindrance Structures/Sections
The traffic volume along EDSA has been
The stretch of EDSA was examined to identify
steadily increasing every year. To ease traffic
the five most difficult locations for viaduct
flow on EDSA, slow moving cargo trucks
construction. A list of the sites assessed
have been prohibited running on the major
against the major hindrance, the most difficult
section between Makati and Quezon City. This
xxiii Executive Summary

construction and their exact locations are 29.6m › 30.0m)

shown in the following figure:  Under river :Two times of diameter of
tunnel (2.0 x diameter of tunnel)
(2 x 14.62= 29.2m › 30.0m)
9.8.3 Ramp (Entrance and Exit)
One-lane ramp tunnel provided at four (4)

locations, as follows:
-Between Skyway and Makati
-Before and after Ortigas Ave.
-Before and after Quezon Ave. and
Location of the Five Most Difficult
-Between Balintawak and Roosevelt Ave.
Construction Sites
Tunnel layout including ramp locations are
9.7.4 Find Space for Proposed Viaduct
shown in the figure below.
Structures
There is a spaces for proposed viaduct Structures

after construction of proposed flyover.
9.7.5 Cost Estimate
Estimate Cost for construction of viaduct at

the section, PhP 170 B will be required.
9.8 Tunnel Scheme
9.8.1 Proposed Plan and Typical Cross Source: JICA Study Team
Sections of Tunnel Tunnel Layout (Plan and Profile)
The beginning and endpoint of the tunnel are 9.8.4 Ventilation System
located Roxas Boulevard, and Monumento
The main function of the tunnel ventilation
Circle and Balintawak, respectively. The main
system is to discharge the vehicle exhausted
tunnel consists of 2-lane tunnels at both sides of
fumes and smoke from fire. Airflow shall be
the entrance and exit while 3-lane tunnels shall
diverted into two (2) sections underneath the
be used for the entire middle section. 1-lane
deck slab of carriageway: one to discharge
ramps shall be provided at four (4) locations.
smoke and the other to take in fresh air which
9.8.2 Standard Earth Covering of Tunnel will also be utilized for people access to
Computation of earth covering underground and evacuation. General concepts of this system
under river are as follows: are shown in the following figure.
 Underground :Same diameter of tunnel (1.0

x diameter of tunnel)
(15m (estimated pile length) + 1.0 x 14.62=
xxiv Executive Summary

completed projects and past experiences in

Japan considering similar site conditions of
EDSA. Estimated cost of 3-lanes and 2-lanes
tunnels in the both directions are PhP 441B
and PhP 331B, respectively.
10. SEMINAR ON LATEST JAPANESE

ROAD AND BRIDGE
CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY
Source: JICA Study Team 10.1 Objectives

General Concept of Ventilation System The objective of the seminar was to introduce
9.8.5 Shield Shaft the latest Japanese technologies of road and
bridge construction for understanding technical
Tunnel excavation will be done by one shield
superior of STEP scheme for the proposed
machine per direction between the departure
flyover project and also Filipino engineers to
vertical shaft and arrival vertical shaft. Shield
apply these to on-going and/or future projects.
tunnel construction works have routine works of
Said technologies are related to tunnel
excavation, assembly of precast concrete
construction, asphalt pavement, rapid
segments and grouting between concrete
construction methods, bridge rehabilitation and
segment and soil.
improvement and quality control systems.
9.8.6 Required Tunnel Facilities
10.2 Seminar Program
Based on “ installation standards of Emergency Venue : H2O Hotel, Manila City
Facilities for Road Tunnel” issued by Japan Date : March 6 and 7, 2012
Road Association, the proposed tunnel can be  Day 1 (6th March)
classified with the highest rank of “AA” which Seminar 1 - Introduction of Japanese
requires the provision of all type of facilities Road Technologies
such as: 1) Emergency call and warning devices, Seminar 2 - Tunneling Construction
2) Fire extinguisher equipment, 3) Evacuation Techniques
facilities, 4) Communication system, and 5) Seminar 3 - Pavement Technology
Water spray system.  DAY2(7 March) th
9.8.7 Construction Schedule Seminar 4 - Rapid Construction

Methods (Concrete Bridge)
Based on the experience of past projects in
Seminar 5 - Rapid Construction
Japan, total implementation of all the sections
Methods (Steel Bridge)
will take about 20 years if it is done in stage by
Seminar 6 - Bridge Rehabilitation
stage continuous base.
and Improvement Technology
9.8.8 Cost Estimate
Seminar 7 - Quality Control System
Rough cost will be estimated based on
Technology
xxv Executive Summary

10.3 Attendance Almost all of the attendees were satisfied

(1) PHILIPPINES with the contents of each topic, imparted
Attendance for the seminar on the first day knowledge of new technology, excellent
was 84 and 80 on the second day, mainly handouts and the the way how to manage
from DPWH personnel with 73% of share the seminar. Some useful comments were
of attendees including the Honorable presented: time of each topic was
Secretary. Others are from other comparatively short, needed to be
Government Agencies, LGU’s, Private explained how the new technology will be
Sectors and the Academies. applied and effective in the Philippines
(2) JAPAN context, and the venue and the number of
There were Fifteen (15) guest speakers for comfort rooms were rather narrow/a little.
the seven sessions and eight (8) Japanese 10.5 Conclusion
officials were attended.
The following items were opined to be the
10.4 Summary and Analysis of main reasons why the Seminar was
Questionnaire satisfactorily conducted:
Thirty nine (39) Questionnaires,
a) All of the topics were interesting
summarized as follows were submitted to
b) Presentation materials of speakers were
the attendees :
interesting and excellent
Q1- In this seminar, which subject interests
you the most? c) Proper arrangements of invitation to all
Tunneling Construction Technology relevant offices concerned with road and
ranked as the first by 17 persons, the bridge construction.
second Pavement Technology, and the
d) Almost all of the top officials of the
third Rapid construction Method (steel DPWH including the Honorable DPWH
bridge).
Secretary attended.
Q2- What subjects would you consider for
e) Issuing a Certificates of Attendance was
future projects or activities, and why?
Good arrangements.
Tunneling Construction Techniques,
f) Invitation letters were issued in the
Pavement Technology ranked as the first
name of the Honorable DPWH
with 10 persons each, the second was
Secretary
Rapid Construction Method (Steel Bridge),
followed by Rapid Construction Method
(Concrete Bridge) as the third in rank.
This answer was similar to question-1
above.
Q3- Please give your comments about the
seminar:
xxvi Executive Summary

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
Metro Manila has a strategic foothold for the economic activities of the Philippines that attracts
13% of the population and generates 37% of the total GDP of the country. 1 Metro Manila has
been developing its transport sector infrastructure and pursuing traffic network improvements
such as construction of circumferential roads, expressways and LRT etc., but still is faced with
the problems of heavy traffic congestion and increased travel times until now. Such a situation
creates a bottleneck in the distribution of goods and hampers the movement of people, resulting in
huge economic losses, and is one of the reasons frequently cited for the deterioration of the
economic competiveness of the country. At the same time, chronic traffic congestion causes in an
increase in air pollution and noise.
The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) has put a high priority in the
construction of grade separated interchanges along with major interchanges intended to solve
such negative issues which are identified as priority concerns in the Public Investment program
(2011~2016) of DPWH. The construction of Circumferential Road 3 (C-3) missing link between
N. Domingo Ave. in San Juan City and S. G. Puyat Ave. in Makati City over 6 km is expected not
only to improve mobility of the residents along the road but also greatly relieve traffic congestion
of EDSA and the metropolis. Furthermore, traffic capacity expansion of C-4 (EDSA), by
construction of either elevated viaduct or underground tunnel, in addition to grade separation of
major intersections and construction of C-3 missing link, is expected to provide fundamental
solution to the chronic traffic congestion of EDSA.
In view of the above, the DPWH has requested the Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA) to evaluate the possibility to finance the said high priority grade separated interchange
construction projects in Metro Manila. The JICA has responded favorably to this DPWH request
and has mobilized consultants to undertake Preparatory Survey for Metro Manila Interchange
Construction Project (VI).
1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The objectives of the study are as follows:
1. The objective of the Study is to conduct screening of the proposed improvement as Japanese
ODA Loan Project focusing on the items such as the purpose of the project, scope of works,
project cost, project implementation organization, operation and maintenance organization
1
National Census in 2007 by National Statistics Office of the Philippines
Final Report (Summary) 1

and social and environmental aspects based on previous detailed design and other related
studies.
2. Conduct review and study for the preliminary engineering study on construction of
Circumferential Road-3 (C-3) missing link includes of impact to the proposed flyover.
3. Conduct preliminary engineering study on traffic capacity expansion of Circumferential

Road-4 (C-4) includes of find space for proposed viaduct structures.
1.3 STUDY AREA
The Study covers Metro Manila of the Philippines.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
In order to achieve the above objectives, the Study covered the following:
(1) Study of construction of interchanges
 Feasibility Study for four (4) interchanges

1) C-3/E. Rodriguez,
2) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional,
3) EDSA/North/West/ Mindanao
4) C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis
 Scheme study and preparation of design options
1) C-5/Kalayaan
(2) Study of the C-3 missing link includes of impact to the proposed flyover.
 Review of six (6) alignments established by DPWH
 Establish evaluation criteria and undertake evaluation of alternative alignments
(3) Study on C-4 traffic capacity expansion includes of find space for proposed viaduct
structures.
 Study on traffic capacity expansion for the construction of viaduct and tunnel schemes.

1.5 SCHEDULE OF THE STUDY
The study commenced in November 2011 and with be completed by end of November 2012 as
shown in Table 1.5-1
Table 1.5-1 Study Schedule
Year/Month 2011 2012
　　Work Item 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Preparatory works in Japan
【ITEM-1】 Confirmation of Necessity and Validity of the Project
【ITEM-2】 Confirmation of Present Detailed design

Confirmation of the Scope of Works and Technical
【ITEM-3】
Examinations
【ITEM-4】 Prepare Implementation Plan of the Project
【ITEM-5】 Evaluation of Effectiveness of the Project
【ITEM-6】 Investigation for Social Environmental Conditions
【ITEM-7】 Comparison Study of C-3 Missing Section

The Conceptual Study for the Traffic Capacity
【ITEM-8】
Expansion along EDSA
Implementation of Seminar and Record and Analysis of
【ITEM-9】
Seminar
【ITEM-10】Preparation of Reports IC/R IT/R DF/R F/R
　Preparatory Work　　　　 Work in the Philippines　　　　　 Work in Japan　　　　 Report / Explanation

IC/R: Inception Report　　IT/R: Interim Report DF/R: Draft Final Report F/R: Final Report
Source: JICA Study team

CHAPTER 2
CONFIRMATION OF VALIDITY AND NECESSITY OF THE PROJECT
2.1 TRAFFIC RELATED PROJECTS IN METRO MANILA
(1) On-going Projects
Major on-going traffic projects in Metro Manila are as follows;
MMDA: 1. Installation of footbridges at five strategic locations in Metro Manila

DPWH: 1. One underpass project is under implementation (C-3/Quezon Ave. )
2. Three flyover projects are under tendering (C-2/R-7 Flyover, C-5/Lanuza-Julia
Vargas Flyover and C-3/A. Bonifacio Flyover)
DOTC: 1. Construction of MRT-7 is under assessment by NEDA
(2) Projects Under Study
Major traffic projects under study in Metro Manila are as follows;

DPWH: 1. Five flyover projects by JICA (C-3/E. Rodriguez, EDSA/North/West/Mindanao,
EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional, C-5/Kalayaan and C-5/Green Meadows)
2. C-3 missing link by JICA
3. Daang Hari – SLEX Link proposed by private sector
4. NAIA Expressway (Phase II) proposed by private sector
5. C-5/FTI/Skyway Connector
6. C-6 Expressway North, South and Extension Section proposed by private sector
7. NLEX-SLEX Link Expressway proposed by private sector
DOTC: 1. LRT Line 2 Extension, East and West Section
2. LRT Line 1 Cavite Extension proposed by private sector
(3) Future Projects
Major future traffic projects in Metro Manila are as follows;

MMDA: 1. Establishment of the Mega Manila Provincial Integrated Bus Axis System
(MM-PIBAS), North PIBAS Terminal, Development of Airport Tram System.
Upgrading of Traffic Signal System and Field facilities, Photo Speed
Enforcement System and Development of Alternative Mode of Transport
2. San Juan River Elevated Expressway
DPWH: 1. C-5 Improvement Project Segment A ~ D
2. R-7 Expressway
3. NLEX East/La Mesa Parkway

2.2 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY ON TRAFFIC PLANS BY OTHER AGENCIES
This Project is consistent with the traffic plans of other agencies such as MMDA and DOTC. There
is no conflict with traffic plan of other agencies; it is supportive of the traffic plans of the LGUs and
other agencies. However, the following issues are to be noted:
MRT Line 7 Construction

The proposed intersection scheme for EDSA/West/North/Mindanao Avenues has been
confirmed and approved by the project proponent of MRT 7 and DOTC. However, a
reconfirmation has to be made during the Detailed Design Stage to ensure that there has been no
change in the scheme that has been originally approved.
Skyway Stage 3
The project is a 14.5km six-lane elevated viaduct that will connect the north and south
expressways via C-3, and has been approved as apriority project by the government.
Correspondingly, implementation of the C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange has been canceled by
DPWH due to a conflict of its alignment with that of the project.
2.3 CONFIRMATION OF NECESSITY AND PRIORITY OF THE PROPOSED FLYOVER

PROJECT
The five interchange locations are included in the list of priority projects for NCR under DPWH’s
Public Investment Program 2011-2016. Proposed budget for the Metro Manila Interchange
Construction Project is about P7.36 Billion. The construction of five interchanges has a total
allocation of P5.17 Billion excluding consultancy services.
2.4 LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS SIMILAR PROJECTS AND PROPOSED

COUNTERMEASURES
The ex-post evaluation study for Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (IV) dated June
2008 was undertaken jointly by JBIC Consultants and the National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA). The Report identified following three lessons and recommended the action to
be taken into account in future project implementation:
Lesson-1: Lack of in-depth investigation during detailed design
Lesson-2: Delay in land acquisition and resettlement
Lesson-3: Absence of pragmatic project scheduling
Recommendation: Sufficient maintenance fund should be secured
Consolidated Report in January 2011 for Metro Manila Urban Transport Integration Project
(MMURTRIP) financed by the World Bank identified that bureaucratic processes, changes in
administration, and ensuing changes in development policy are main causes of delay in project
implementation.

2.5 CONFIRMATION OF PRESENT CONDITION AND FUTURE INVESTMENT PLAN

FOR HIGHWAY SECTOR
The DPWH Public Investment Plan (2011-2016) allocated 84% of the total investment program for
highway sector and gets the biggest share. Of the P 698 Billion total investment requirement, P 586
Billion is earmarked for the highways sector.
2.6 CONFIRMATION OF ORGANIZATION, ANNUAL BUDGET AND TECHNICAL

LEVEL OF THE DPWH MANDATE, FUNCTIONS, VISION AND MISSION
2.6.1 Authority, Function, Vision and Mission of DPWH
Following mottos are stated in the DPWH Public Investment Plan (2011~2016)
Mandate
The DPWH is one of the three government agencies tasked to develop social infrastructures and
specifically mandated to undertake planning, design, construction and maintenance of national
roads and bridges, flood control, water resources projects and other public works,
Functions
As the engineering and construction arm of the Government, the DPWH is tasked to continuously
develop its technology for the purpose of ensuring the safety of all infrastructure facilities and
securing for all public works and highways with the highest efficiency and quality in construction.
Vision
By 2030, DPWH is an effective and efficient government agency, improving the life of every
Filipino through quality infrastructure.
Mission
To provide and manage quality infrastructure facilities and services responsive to the needs of the
Filipino people in the pursuit of national development objectives.
2.6.2 Annual Budget
DPWH budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 is P 99.5 Billion where P 78.1 Billion is allocated (79%)
for highway sector, and P 10.8 Billion (11%) for flood control, respectively.
2.6.3 Technical Level for Construction and Maintenance of Flyover of the DPWH
Flyover construction is undertaken by the PMO-URPO and maintenance is by Regional Office of
NCR. The technical level of both agencies is fairly high and capable of constructing and
maintaining flyovers, but these is room for improvement in the following process.
1. Bureaucratic procurement process

2. Prolonged relocation process
3. Passive instead of preventive maintenance approach

2.7 CIRCUMSTANCES OF SUPPORT TO THE TRANSPORT SECTOR BY OTHER

DONORS
International funding institutions continuously support the Government in the implementation of

transport projects in the form of loan, grant and technical assistance. Local funds are not sufficient
to meet the funding requirements of transport projects.
Among the funding institutions, JICA has the biggest share of financing at 12.44% followed by
France at 2.97%, World Bank at 2.20%, ADB at 1.95% , UK at 1.75%, Saudi Arabia at 0.39%,
KEDCF at 0.76%, MCC at 0.12%, PROC at 0.17%, Kuwait at 0.49%, Spain at 0.49% and Australia
at 0.10%.

CHAPTER 3
TRAFFIC FLOW ANALYSIS AND DEMAND FORECAST
3.1 TRAFFIC SURVEY
3.1.1 Type and Location of Traffic Survey
The traffic surveys shown in Table 3.1-1 were conducted to grasp the present traffic flow
characteristics of the project sites.
Table 3.1-1 Type and Location of Traffic Surveys

Type of Survey Purpose of the Survey Location
1. Intersection Directional - Assessment of present service level of the
Traffic Volume intersections 1. C-3/E. Rodriguez
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011) - Formulation of interchange schemes 2. DSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
- Benefit calculation 3. DSA/North/West/Mindanao
2. Number Plate Vehicle - Formulation of present Origin Destination 4. C-5/Kalayaan
Movement Survey (OD) matrix for traffic analyses 5. C-5/Green Meadows/Acroplis
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011) /Calle Industria
3. Intersection Queue Length - Verification of current service level of the Note: C-5/Kalayaan is not included
Survey intersections in the Number Plate Survey
(Dec. 6~Dec. 21 2011)
4. Travel Speed Survey - Basic information for assessment of effect 8 major streets passing/crossing
(Nov. 22~Dec.8 2011) and impact of interchange construction project intersections
Note: Survey of above 1, 2 and 3 of C-5/Kalayaan was conducted March 13 and 14 2012
Traffic flow direction, OD code, location of queue length survey and number plate survey at each
intersection are shown in Figures 3.1-1 to 3.1-5.
To Sta. Mesa
Figure 3.1-1 Traffic Survey Location at C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection

Seminary Road
L-2
L-4
L-3
L-1

Figure 3.1-2 Traffic Survey Location at EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Ave.

Figure 3.1-3 Traffic Survey Location at EDSA/North/West/Mindanao Ave.

Figure 3.1-4 Traffic Survey Location at C-5/Kalayaan Ave.
Eastwood
Acopolis Calle Industria
Green Meadows

Figure 3.1-5 Traffic Survey Location at C-5/Green Meadows
3.1.2 Result of Intersection Directional Traffic Volume Survey
Result of survey is summarized in Table 3.1-2~3.1-4

Table 3.1-2 Intersection Traffic Volume (AADT) (1/3)

Directional Flow Vehicle Types
Staion Code Flow No Semi-Trailer

Passenger Goods Utility Rigid 2-axle Rigid 3-axle or
From To Passenger Car
Jeepney (Van)
Small Bus Large Bus
Truck more Truck
Truck (3 or Motorcycle Tricycle TOTAL
more axles)
No.1 C-3/E. Rodriguez Itersection

Leg-1: from Sta. Mesa along C-3
ITC-ER1 1 Sta. Mesa Welcome 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ER1 2 Sta. Mesa Sgt. Rivera 22,340 1,092 1,620 10 52 853 492 361 4,881 572 32,272
ITC-ER1 3 Sta. Mesa Cubao 5,013 23 281 4 9 99 10 42 958 63 6,501
Sub-total 27,353 1,115 1,901 13 60 951 502 403 5,839 635 38,773
Leg-2: from Quezon Ave. along C-3
ITC-ER1 4 Quzon Ave. Cubao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ER1 5 Quzon Ave. Sta. Mesa 12,239 1,105 2,310 2 15 966 253 166 6,991 780 24,826
ITC-ER1 6 Quzon Ave. Welcome 2,290 60 231 0 4 48 8 3 547 40 3,233
Sub-total 14,529 1,165 2,541 2 19 1,013 261 169 7,538 820 28,059
Leg-3: from Welcom along E. Rodriguez
ITC-ER1 7 Welcome Sgt. Rivera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ER1 8 Welcome Cubao 13,424 2,837 1,014 1 80 151 4 4 3,393 0 20,908
ITC-ER1 9 Welcome Sta. Mesa 5,243 26 748 2 9 163 42 23 613 40 6,907
Sub-total 18,667 2,863 1,762 2 90 314 46 26 4,006 40 27,815
Leg-4: from Cubao along　E. Rodriguez
ITC-ER1 10 Cubao Sta. Mesa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ER1 11 Cubao Welcome 17,598 2,760 1,445 0 117 347 14 6 3,306 74 25,667
ITC-ER1 12 Cubao Sgt. Rivera 3,318 30 546 4 5 172 48 20 1,055 79 5,276
Sub-total 20,916 2,790 1,991 4 122 519 62 25 4,361 153 30,943
U-Trun Traffic Name of Street Location
UTC-ER1 1 C-3 Sta. Mesa U-Turn 2,483 66 414 3 8 134 23 6 633 157 3,926
UTC-ER1 2 C-3 Sgt. Rivera U-Turn 4,712 91 750 1 7 166 38 11 551 79 6,405
UTC-ER1 3 E. Rodriguez Q.I. U-Turn 2,089 86 196 2 1 48 1 0 192 23 2,636

Jeepney (Van)
Small Bus Large Bus
Truck more Truck
more axles)
No.2 EDSA/Roosevelt/Congrssional Intersection

Leg-1: from Quezon Ave. along Roosvelt Ave.
ITC-ERC1 1 Quezon Ave. Balintawak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 2 Quezon Ave. Mindanao Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 3 Quezon Ave. Cubao 5,278 2,068 1,062 0 4 340 54 0 2,771 18 11,597
Sub-total 5,278 2,068 1,062 0 4 340 54 0 2,771 18 11,597
Leg-2: from Mindanao Ave. along Congressional Ave.
ITC-ERC1 4 Mindanao Ave. Cubao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 5 Mindanao Ave. Quezon Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 6 Mindanao Ave. Balintawak 14,280 2,360 1,376 1 842 984 313 74 3,753 7 23,990
Sub-total 14,280 2,360 1,376 1 842 984 313 74 3,753 7 23,990
Leg-3: from Baintawak along EDSA
ITC-ERC1 7 Balintawak Mindanao Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 8 Balintawak Cubao 33,768 2,495 5,026 1 5,086 2,694 1,235 780 5,456 7 56,550
ITC-ERC1 9 Balintawak Quezon Ave. 4,045 2,136 799 1 3 198 32 27 2,462 0 9,702
Sub-total 37,813 4,631 5,825 2 5,089 2,892 1,267 808 7,919 7 66,252
Leg-4: from Cubao along EDSA
ITC-ERC1 10 Cubao Quezon Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-ERC1 11 Cubao Balintawak 33,340 2,930 3,891 22 4,310 2,352 527 179 4,600 0 52,149
ITC-ERC1 12 Cubao Mindanao Ave. 12,325 2,228 1,692 0 750 601 88 13 3,152 8 20,858
Sub-total 45,665 5,158 5,582 22 5,060 2,953 615 192 7,752 8 73,007
Name of Intersection: EDSA/Seminary Road
ITC-ERC2 1 EDSA Seminary Road 1,425 55 152 0 0 51 4 0 339 33 2,059
ITC-ERC2 2 Seminary Road EDSA 2,218 188 385 0 11 163 10 4 685 2 3,665
Sub-total 3,643 243 537 0 11 214 14 4 1,024 35 5,724
U-Turn Traffic Name of Street Location

Congressional
UTC-ERC1 1 Congressional Ave. 16 970 4 1 0 1 0 0 26 10 1,027
U-Turn
UTC-ERC1 2 Roosevelt Ave. at intersection 177 4 20 2 0 2 0 0 43 1 250
UTC-ERC1 3 EDSA Balintawak U-Turn 7,042 2,591 730 0 955 353 26 0 2,727 0 14,424
In fromt of Inc
UTC-ERC1 4 EDSA 9,802 3,709 1,803 5 15 838 64 12 4,421 0 20,670
U-Turn


No 3A EDSA/North/West Intersection
Leg-1: from Cubao along EDSA
ITC-SM1 1 Cubao Quezon Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 2 Cubao Balintawak 100,058 1,070 2,618 0 6,864 2,993 278 60 4,629 0 118,571
ITC-SM1 3 Cubao Quezon Circle 23,994 3,443 1,897 3 8 615 92 6 3,669 0 33,727
Sub-total 124,052 4,513 4,515 3 6,873 3,608 369 67 8,298 0 152,298
Leg-2: from Balintawak along EDSA
ITC-SM1 4 Balintawak Quezon Circle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 5 Balintawak Cubao 47,524 2,270 5,091 16 5,026 3,360 1,524 1,159 8,637 0 74,607
ITC-SM1 6 Balintawak Quezon Ave. 10,368 2,174 744 11 9 186 12 0 1,360 2 14,864
Sub-total 57,892 4,443 5,835 28 5,035 3,545 1,536 1,159 9,997 2 89,471
Leg-3: from Quezon Ave. along West Ave.
ITC-SM1 7 Quezon Ave. Balintawak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 8 Quezon Ave. Quezon Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 9 Quezon Ave. Cubao 8,913 2,053 616 0 0 0 2 0 1,543 0 13,126
Sub-total 8,913 2,053 616 0 0 0 2 0 1,543 0 13,126
Leg-4: from Quezon Circle along North Ave.
ITC-SM1 10 Quezon Circle Cubao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 11 Quezon Circle Quezon Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-SM1 12 Quezon Circle Balintawak 16,164 2,808 987 0 4 467 174 72 2,639 1 23,316
Sub-total 16,164 2,808 987 0 4 467 174 72 2,639 1 23,316
UTC-SM1 1 EDSA Trinoma U-Turn 16,512 3,210 2,216 1 12 308 85 24 2,822 0 25,190
UTC-SM1 2 EDSA SM Annex U-Turn 16,382 2,100 894 2 14 367 34 5 2,158 2 21,957
UTC-SM1 3 North Avenue SM U-Turn 7,408 2,910 520 3 0 8 2 0 404 11 11,266

Jeepney (Van)
Small Bus Large Bus
Truck more Truck
more axles)
No. 3B North Ave./Mindanao Ave. Intersection

Leg-1: from Trinoma along Mindanao Ave. Ext.
ITC-M1 1 Trinoma EDSA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-M1 2 Trinoma Pagasa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-M1 3 Trinoma Quezon Circle 6,958 0 254 3 1 120 2 0 596 0 7,934
Sub-total 6,958 0 254 3 1 120 2 0 596 0 7,934
Leg-2: from Pagasa along Mindanao Ave.
ITC-M1 4 Pagaasa Quezon Circle 8,229 40 1,373 1 24 1,050 1,548 375 4,480 226 17,344
ITC-M1 5 Pagaasa Trinoma 8,682 0 526 0 1 56 3 0 1,027 0 10,296
ITC-M1 6 Pagaasa EDSA 5,672 3,441 705 1 4 222 6 18 1,336 0 11,404
Sub-total 14,354 3,441 1,232 1 5 278 9 18 2,363 0 21,700
Leg-3: from EDSA along North Ave.
ITC-M1 7 EDSA Pagasa 14,590 4,542 1,400 10 5 410 24 0 1,948 0 22,929
ITC-M1 8 EDSA Quezon Circle 8,601 1,914 1,218 3 13 646 134 28 1,596 0 14,153
ITC-M1 9 EDSA Trinoma 6,257 0 386 0 1 4 0 0 357 0 7,005
Sub-total 14,858 1,914 1,603 3 14 650 134 28 1,953 0 21,158
Leg-4: from Quezon Circle along North Ave.
ITC-M1 10 Quezon Circle Trinoma 3,318 0 79 0 0 12 0 0 229 0 3,637
ITC-M1 11 Quezon Circle EDSA 8,286 2,312 530 1 20 360 171 67 2,153 0 13,901
ITC-M1 12 Quezon Circle Pagasa 6,685 94 799 16 7 995 1,097 627 3,256 266 13,843
Sub-total 14,971 2,405 1,330 17 28 1,355 1,268 694 5,410 266 27,744
U-Turn Traffic Name of Street Location

Mindanao Ave.
UTC-M1 U1 North Ave. 748 412 53 1 1 21 2 2 201 211 1,651
U-Turn
UTC-M1 U2 North Ave. VMMC U-Turn 415 62 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 499



Jeepney (Van)
Small Bus Large Bus
Truck more Truck
more axles)
No. 4 C-5/Kalayaan Intersection

Leg-1: from EDSA along Kalayaan
ITC-K 1 EDSA Global/SLEX 1,116 2,161 130 1 11 71 78 6 636 0 4,209
ITC-K 2 EDSA Elevated U-Turn 11,507 870 1,042 1 8 707 384 82 3,744 0 18,344
Sub-total 12,623 3,031 1,172 1 19 778 461 88 4,379 0 22,552
Leg-2: from Global/SLEX along C-5
ITC-K 3 Global/SLEX Pasig/Quezon City 35,418 2,813 4,800 15 117 3,096 2,450 902 12,762 0 62,372
ITC-K 5 Global/SLEX Pasig/Quezon City 5,615 243 302 2 1 3 29 3 1,157 0 7,354
Sub-total 44,512 3,879 5,549 17 140 3,402 3,048 964 15,164 0 76,674
Leg-3: from Pateros along Kalayaan Ave.
ITC-K 11 Pateros Pasig/Quezon City 4,232 0 259 1 0 216 237 92 2,016 0 7,054
ITC-K 12 Pateros Elevated U-Turn 4,282 820 623 2 10 338 310 166 2,424 0 8,973
Sub-total 8,514 820 882 3 10 554 547 258 4,440 0 16,027
Leg-4: from Pasig/Quezon City along C-5
ITC-K 13 Pasig/Quezon City EDSA 10,171 0 833 3 21 338 223 3 5,013 0 16,604
ITC-K 16 Pasig/Quezon City Global/SLEX 39,255 0 4,268 19 62 3,164 2,257 851 10,382 0 60,257
Sub-total 49,426 0 5,101 22 83 3,502 2,480 854 15,394 0 76,861
U-Turn Viaduct - 1 (South)
ITC-K 9 Elevated U-Turn Pateros 6,765 628 761 0 0 333 391 84 2,225 0 11,187
ITC-K 10 Elevated U-Turn Pasig/Quezon City 7,905 0 1,090 0 6 677 221 431 2,526 0 12,856
Sub-total 14,670 628 1,851 0 6 1,011 611 514 4,751 0 24,043
U-Turn Viaduct - 2 (North)
ITC-K 18 Elevated U-Turn Global/SLEX 4,582 93 306 1 9 301 240 92 2,087 0 7,713
ITC-K 19 Elevated U-Turn EDSA 5,552 3,230 363 5 1 216 158 8 1,758 0 11,291
Sub-total 10,134 3,323 669 6 10 518 398 100 3,845 0 19,004
Under U-Turn Viaduct
ITC-K 6 Global/SLEX Pateros 3,479 823 447 1 23 302 569 60 1,245 0 6,949
ITC-K 4 Global/SLEX Elevated U-Turn 5,893 2,053 112 0 1 197 44 1 1,327 0 9,627
ITC-K 17 Pasig/Quezon City Elevated U-Turn 3,678 0 812 0 1 311 318 81 1,587 0 6,789
No. 5 C-5/Greem Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria Intersections

Leg-1: from Pasig along C-5
ITC-G1 1 Pasig Greem Meadows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-G1 2 Pasig Eastwood 36,880 2,075 9,118 19 72 4,005 1,927 884 13,298 0 68,279
Sub-total 36,880 2,075 9,118 19 72 4,005 1,927 884 13,298 0 68,279
Leg-2: from Cubao along C-5
ITC-G1 3 Calle Industrial Pasig 47,509 2,216 6,020 11 114 3,122 1,750 597 12,696 0 74,035
ITC-G1 4 C5 Greem Meadows 6,903 0 550 0 1 7 12 1 1,319 0 8,792
Sub-total 54,411 2,216 6,570 11 115 3,128 1,761 598 14,015 0 82,826
Leg-3: from Ortigas along Green Meadows
ITC-G1 5 Greem Meadows Eastwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITC-G1 6 Greem Meadows C5 7,355 0 187 6 1 1 4 0 959 0 8,513
Sub-total 7,355 0 187 6 1 1 4 0 959 0 8,513
Leg-4: from Cainta along Calle Industria
ITC-G2 7 C5 Calle Industrial 7,830 308 1,072 5 14 486 168 85 2,929 2 12,900
ITC-G2 8 Calle Industrial C5 6,136 325 1,346 0 11 585 406 179 2,637 2 11,627
Sub-total 13,966 633 2,419 5 25 1,071 575 263 5,566 5 24,527
Leg-5: from Acropolis along Poseidon
ITC-G3 9 C5 Acropolis 1,075 0 81 0 1 11 1 0 186 0 1,355
ITC-G3 10 Acropolis C5 1,066 0 124 0 0 4 0 0 205 0 1,399
Sub-total 2,141 0 205 0 1 15 1 0 391 0 2,754
Leg-6: from Global One along Eastwood Ave.
ITC-G4 11 C5 Eastwood 7,414 0 200 6 16 2 0 0 1,045 0 8,681
ITC-G4 12 Eastwood C5 9,817 0 266 0 2 0 0 0 1,010 0 11,096
Sub-total 17,231 0 466 6 18 2 0 0 2,055 0 19,777

Greem Meadows
UTC-G1 1 Eastwood 8,412 282 823 2 2 87 0 1 1,082 2 10,693
U-Turn
UTC-G2 2 Pasig Eastwood U-Turn 16,424 25 930 0 0 1 0 0 2,105 0 19,486

3.2 CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITION OF EACH INTERSECTION
Current condition of each intersection is summarized in Table 3.2-1.
Table 3.2-1 Summary of Current Condition of Intersections

1. C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection
1.1 Traffic Control
 Traffic flow of the intersection is currently controlled by traffic signal with prohibited left turn
movements from all directions.
 Three U-Turn slots are installed at the intersection; two slots along C-3 and one slot along E. Rodriguez
in front of Quezon Institute.
1.2 Traffic Volume
 Major traffic movements are:;
OD (B⇔D) Cubao ⇔ Welcome with 8,340/6,234 vehicles/6 hours along E. Rodriguez.
OD (F⇔C) Sta. Mesa ⇔ Quezon Avenue with 6,978/6,930 vehicles/6 hours along C-3.
1.3 Traffic Congestion
 Queue length along E. Rodriguez is longer than C-3
 Average travel speed along C-3 and E. Rodriguez that pass through the intersection is approximately
15km/hour during morning, noon time and afternoon peak hours.
2. EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Intersection
2.1 Traffic Control
 There is no traffic signal control at the intersection. Straight and left turn movements along Roosevelt
and Congressional Avenue are prohibited. Left turn movement along EDSA is also prohibited.
 Straight and left turn movements at the intersection will be hampered by pier of LRT viaduct that was
constructed at center of the intersection
2.2 Traffic Volume
 Major traffic movements are;
OD (C⇔E) Cubao ⇔ Balintawak with 10,050/11,743 vehicles/6 hours along EDSA,

OD (B→E) Mindanao Ave. → Balintawak with 5,840 vehicles/6 hours, and
OD (C→B) Cubao → Mindanao Ave. with 5,096 vehicles/6 hours.
 Severe congestion is observed during afternoon peak hours. Queue length along southbound EDSA has
reached 400m.
3. EDSA/North/West/Mindanao Ave. Intersection

3.1 Traffic Control
EDSA/North/West Avenue Intersection
 Traffic of the intersection is not controlled by traffic signal now. Straight and left turn movements
along North Avenue and West Avenue are prohibited. Left turn movement along EDSA is also
prohibited.
North/Mindanao Avenue Intersection
 Traffic of the intersection is not controlled by traffic signal now. Straight and left turn movements
along North Avenue and West Avenue are prohibited. Left turn movement along EDSA is also
prohibited.
3.2 Traffic Volume
EDSA/North/West Avenue Intersection
 In addition to EDSA, traffic volume along North Avenue is also large and construction of additional
viaduct along North Avenue was proposed by previous detailed design
 Construction of simple flyover along EDSA may be the most suitable flyover Scheme for the
intersection.

North/Mindanao Avenue Intersection

 Left turn traffic between North Avenue and Mindanao Avenue is major traffic flow rather than straight
traffic at this intersection.

 Severe traffic congestion along EDSA northbound during afternoon peak hours is observed. Queue
length along northbound EDSA reaches 400m during afternoon peak hours.
4. C-5/Kalayaan Intersection
4.1 Traffic Control
 There is no traffic signal control at the intersection. Straight and left turn movements along Kalayaan
Avenue are prohibited. Left turn movement from C-5 is also prohibited.
 Three are two U-Turn viaducts along C-5.
4.2 Traffic Volume

 Major traffic movements are straight flow along C-5 (AADT 118,514 from Global/SLEX and AADT
133,317 from/to Pasig/Quezon City).

 Queue length along C-5 reaches 400m along northbound lane in the afternoon peak and 305m along
southbound lane in the morning peak.
 The intersection may be saturated in the near future.
5. C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria

5.1 Traffic Control
 Intersections are not controlled by traffic signal but restriction movements. All left turn movements are
prohibited at each intersection.
5.2 Traffic Volume

 Major traffic movements are through traffic along C-5 and other traffic movements from/to other
streets are marginal.
 The substantial number of traffic may be eliminated from at-grade intersection if through traffic flyover
will be constructed.

 Severe traffic congestion is experienced along C-5 due to merging traffic from side streets. Queue
length at C-5/Green Meadows reaches more than 200m during morning and afternoon peak hours.

3.3 TRAFFIC DEMAND FORECAST
The traffic demand forecast for four intersections, namely C-3/E. Rodriguez, EDSA/ Roosevelt/
Congressional Ave., EDSA/North/West/Mindanao and C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle
Industria have been carried out till 2018, the expected opening year of the interchanges, and till
2028, 10 years after opening the interchanges.
3.3.1 The Methodology of the Demand Forecast
The traffic demand forecast was undertaken by the following two steps:
Step 1: Estimation of traffic volume growth rate considering future road network in Metro
Manila
Traffic growth rate at each intersection was estimated through analysis on overall traffic flow in
Metro Manila considering the future road network development plan proposed by MMUTIS. The
result of the analysis was used to forecast future traffic volume at each intersection.
Step 2: Traffic analysis at the intersections by micro-simulation
Micro-simulation at each intersection was carried out using present traffic count data and the
growth rates derived in the Step 1.
(1) Estimation of Traffic Growth Rate
The estimated traffic growth rate used in traffic analysis is shown in Table 3.3-1.
Table 3.3-1 Average Traffic Growth Rate for the Project

Period Annual Growth Rate
2011-2015 6.4%
2015-2020 4.5% (-1.9%)
2020-2028 3.7% (-0.8%)
(2) Road Network Data
2011 Road Network: The 1996 MMUTIS road network was used for analysis of 2011 traffic
since no major changes of the network was reported.
2018 Road Network: The “C-3 Missing Link” is to be added to the 2011 road network for the
2018 road network.
2028 Road Network: The MMUTIS master plan road network is used as the 2028 road
network.
(3) Traffic Volume Growth Ratio at Each Intersection
Traffic volume growth ratio of each intersection is shown in Table 3.3-2.

Table 3.3-2 Traffic Growth Ratio at Each Intersection

Traffic Volume Growth Ratio
Period C-3/E. EDSA/ EDSA/ C-5/Green Vehicle Type
Rodriguez Roosevelt North/West Meadows
2018/2011 1.96 1.27 1.27 1.15 All Type
2028/2018 1.62 1.31 1.31 1.48 Motor Cycle, Jeepney
2028/2018 0.64 0.93 0.93 1.48 Car, Utility Vehicle, Bus, Truck
(4) Traffic Analysis at Intersections with Micro-simulation
Analysis of intersection improvement is carried out by micro-simulation with the following

procedures.
1. Establishment of OD matrices for the micro-simulation : Current OD matrices for

micro-simulation of intersections are established considering the results of traffic surveys.
OD matrices of AM peak hour, mid noon off peak and PM peak hour. The three hour
traffic volume was expanded to 24 hour by multiplying expansion factors.
2. Formulation of Present Network : Present intersection network is formulated based on the
result of site survey, topographic survey and existing road inventory data.
3. Future OD Matrices : Future OD matrices are established using the growth ratio that was
calculated using a model based on MMUTIS.
4. Future Network : Two future networks were established; one is “without project network”
that is basically same as the current network and “with project network” that incorporates
proposed flyovers.
5. Micro-simulation : Micro-simulation was carried out with the future OD matrices and
networks. The software package for micro-simulation is VISSIM. It is one of the software
packages for Traffic Simulation authorized by the clearing house group managed by Japan
Society of Traffic Engineers.
3.3.2 Result of Traffic Demand Forecast by Micro-simulation
Daily vehicle-km, daily-vehicle hour and average travel speed of each interchange are shown in
Tables 3.3-3 to 3.3-6.

Table 3.3-3 Daily Vehicle-Km, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed

(C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection)
Vehicle 2011
Category (Daily)
Car 90,049 174,597 175,989 -1,392 111,650 112,375 -724
Jeepney 9,346 18,453 18,432 20 30,503 30,529 -26
UtilityVehicle 9,618 18,353 18,574 -222 11,950 12,071 -121
Vehicle Km Bus 449 836 805 32 559 536 23
Truck 2,881 5,531 5,624 -93 3,517 3,541 -23
Motorcycle 41,595 86,428 81,010 5,418 139,866 130,296 9,570
Total 153,938 304,197 300,433 3,764 298,046 289,347 8,699
Car 3,293 5,842 7,326 -1,483 3,627 4,603 -977
Jeepney 340 610 767 -158 985 1,190 -205
UtilityVehicle 356 605 778 -173 382 511 -129
Vehicle Hour Bus 16 27 34 -6 18 21 -3
Truck 106 164 230 -67 101 143 -42
Motorcycle 1,518 2,541 3,270 -730 4,050 5,900 -1,850
Total 5,629 9,788 12,405 -2,617 9,162 12,369 -3,206
Car 67,712 132,486 132,376 111 84,621 84,692 -71
Jeepney 7,379 14,518 14,529 -11 23,964 24,062 -98
UtilityVehicle 6,917 13,393 13,417 -24 8,687 8,717 -30
Truck 2,001 3,890 3,903 -14 2,460 2,443 16
Motorcycle 28,668 55,779 55,808 -28 90,305 89,762 542
Total 113,029 220,698 220,660 38 210,458 210,098 360
Car 27.3 29.9 24.0 5.9 30.8 24.4 6.4
Jeepney 27.5 30.3 24.0 6.2 31.0 25.6 5.3
UtilityVehicle 27.0 30.4 23.9 6.5 31.3 23.6 7.7
Bus 27.5 30.8 24.0 6.9 31.9 25.7 6.2
（Km/Hour）
Truck 27.2 33.8 24.4 9.4 34.8 24.7 10.1
Motorcycle 27.4 34.0 24.8 9.2 34.5 22.1 12.4
Average 27.3 31.1 24.2 6.9 32.5 23.4 9.1
(EDSA /Roosevelt/ Congressional Intersection)
Vehicle 2011
Category (Daily)
Car 118,775 144,485 150,012 -5,527 134,665 139,990 -5,325
Jeepney 20,782 22,329 26,650 -4,321 29,268 35,042 -5,774
UtilityVehicle 18,410 22,402 23,286 -884 20,734 21,591 -857
Vehicle Km Bus 15,196 18,316 19,392 -1,076 16,966 17,962 -996
Truck 14,081 17,072 17,669 -597 15,885 16,530 -646
Motorcycle 21,078 25,264 26,579 -1,315 32,937 34,900 -1,963
Total 208,323 249,869 263,588 -13,720 250,454 266,016 -15,561
Car 3,915 4,770 5,116 -347 4,444 4,810 -366
Jeepney 710 703 945 -242 926 1,252 -326
UtilityVehicle 610 749 799 -50 691 743 -51
Vehicle Hour Bus 510 543 675 -132 503 629 -127
Truck 469 569 612 -43 527 577 -50
Motorcycle 701 904 916 -12 1,183 1,210 -27
Total 6,914 8,237 9,063 -826 8,274 9,221 -947
Car 78,477 99,454 99,193 261 92,615 92,521 94
Jeepney 9,664 12,419 12,338 82 16,302 16,266 37
UtilityVehicle 11,131 14,190 14,178 12 13,159 13,182 -24
Truck 8,484 10,934 10,997 -63 10,148 10,266 -118
Motorcycle 13,641 17,250 17,239 10 22,662 22,662 0
Total 131,948 167,726 167,372 355 167,353 167,372 -18
Car 30.3 30.3 29.3 1.0 30.3 29.1 1.2
Jeepney 29.3 31.8 28.2 3.6 31.6 28.0 3.6
UtilityVehicle 30.2 29.9 29.2 0.8 30.0 29.1 0.9
Bus 29.8 33.7 28.7 5.0 33.8 28.5 5.2
（Km/Hour）
Truck 30.0 30.0 28.9 1.2 30.2 28.7 1.5
Motorcycle 30.1 27.9 29.0 -1.1 27.8 28.8 -1.0
Average 30.1 30.3 29.1 1.3 30.3 28.8 1.4


(EDSA /North/West/Mindanao Intersection)
Vehicle 2011
Category Daily
Car 257,061 308,345 317,028 -8,683 289,377 297,381 -8,004
Jeepney 22,322 23,009 26,265 -3,256 27,499 31,912 -4,413
UtilityVehicle 26,357 30,795 32,449 -1,654 28,887 30,528 -1,641
Vehicle Km Bus 14,382 18,139 18,292 -154 16,835 16,960 -125
Truck 23,232 28,545 29,065 -520 26,755 27,198 -443
Motorcycle 40,702 50,013 50,930 -917 65,028 66,657 -1,629
Total 384,056 458,845 474,029 -15,184 454,382 470,635 -16,254
Car 9,191 10,754 13,360 -2,606 9,753 12,072 -2,319
Jeepney 834 939 1,079 -141 1,114 1,293 -179
UtilityVehicle 972 1,135 1,377 -242 1,030 1,284 -254
Vehicle Hour Bus 460 506 636 -130 466 567 -102
Truck 895 1,015 1,349 -334 919 1,223 -303
Motorcycle 1,544 1,723 2,603 -880 2,198 3,293 -1,095
Total 13,895 16,072 20,405 -4,332 15,481 19,732 -4,252
Car 167,998 206,255 205,934 321 193,438 193,023 415
Jeepney 10,459 11,455 11,489 -34 12,837 12,828 8
UtilityVehicle 16,403 19,929 19,937 -9 18,690 18,755 -65
Truck 16,154 20,309 20,233 77 18,959 18,945 14
Motorcycle 26,130 32,745 32,588 156 42,425 42,358 67
Total 247,526 303,890 303375.1 515.0 298,592 298,156 436
Car 28.0 28.7 23.7 4.9 29.7 24.6 5.0
Jeepney 26.8 24.5 24.3 0.2 24.7 24.7 0.0
UtilityVehicle 27.1 27.1 23.6 3.6 28.1 23.8 4.3
Bus 31.3 35.8 28.7 7.1 36.2 29.9 6.3
（Km/Hour）
Truck 26.0 28.1 21.5 6.6 29.1 22.2 6.9
Motorcycle 26.4 29.0 19.6 9.5 29.6 20.2 9.3
Total 27.6 28.5 23.2 5.3 29.4 23.9 5.5
Table 3.3-6 Daily Vehicle-m, Vehicle-Hour and Average Travel Speed

(C-5 Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria)
Vehicle 2011
Category (Daily)
Car 324,251 367,398 373,519 -6,121 543,481 552,795 -9,314
Jeepney 13,173 15,185 15,213 -28 22,715 22,867 -152
UtilityVehicle 54,476 62,176 62,507 -331 92,139 92,672 -533
Vehicle Km Bus 772 858 865 -8 1,302 1,299 2
Truck 34,601 39,742 39,905 -163 58,850 59,115 -265
Motorcycle 90,496 103,721 104,143 -423 152,917 153,418 -501
Total 517,769 589,078 596,153 -7,074 871,404 882,166 -10,763
Car 10,309 10,885 11,936 -1,051 17,874 19,823 -1,949
Jeepney 419 419 487 -67 702 854 -153
UtilityVehicle 1,736 1,783 2,003 -220 2,971 3,531 -560
Vehicle Hour Bus 25 23 28 -4 39 48 -8
Truck 1,102 1,108 1,278 -170 1,822 2,182 -360
Motorcycle 2,878 3,008 3,329 -321 4,928 5,534 -606
Total 16,468 17,227 19,061 -1,834 28,336 31,972 -3,635
Car 114,767 132,136 132,178 -42 195,412 195,166 246
Jeepney 4,360 5,054 5,051 3 7,574 7,591 -17
UtilityVehicle 18,281 20,971 20,974 -3 30,992 30,992 0
Truck 11,526 13,255 13,286 -31 19,582 19,606 -24
Motorcycle 30,917 35,590 35,667 -77 52,532 52,401 132
Total 180,108 207,294 207,444 -151 306,520 306,183 337
Car 31.5 33.8 31.3 2.5 30.4 27.9 2.5
Jeepney 31.4 36.2 31.3 4.9 32.4 26.8 5.6
UtilityVehicle 31.4 34.9 31.2 3.7 31.0 26.2 4.8
Bus 31.5 36.7 31.2 5.5 33.2 27.3 5.9
（Km/Hour）
Truck 31.4 35.9 31.2 4.7 32.3 27.1 5.2
Motorcycle 31.4 34.5 31.3 3.2 31.0 27.7 3.3
Total 31.4 34.2 31.3 2.9 30.8 27.6 3.2

CHAPTER 4
STUDY OF EACH INTERCHANGE
4.1 DESIGN STANDARD FOR HIGHWAY AND FLYOVER
Design standards for Highway and Flyover adapted prevailing DPWH design standards, except for
seismic acceleration coefficient which was increased from 0.4g to 0.5g due to scheduled change in
the ASEP design code.
4.2 C-3/E. RODRIGUEZ AVENUE
The detailed design of the interchange was prepared by Nippon Engineering Consultant Co., Ltd.
in association with DCCD Engineering Corporation and Pertconsult International in February
2005 (original contract) and July 2006 (Supplemental Contract).
(1) Topographic Condition
There were no significant changes noted in the topographic conditions of the area between the
time of the detailed design to the present.
(2) Geotechnical Conditions
The bearing stratum in the proposed area is tuffaceous rock sequence that underlie, deeper than
2–7m from ground surface.
(3) Hydrological Conditions
Based on interviews with local residents, the flooding area for the 2 years return period is
generally consistent with the flooding area.
(4) Design Standards
DPWH design standards for highway and flyover were adapted.
(5) Road Alignment and Structural Conditions
Along C-3
The total length of the project section along this road segment is 2,105m, consisting of 275m of
4-lanes flyover, 205m of approach roads and 1,625m of embankment roads. The highest
embankment height to Quezon City direction is 2.50m and 1.85m height to Sta. Mesa direction.
Type of Flyover is RC voided slab and PC box girder.
Along E. Rodriguez Avenue
The road is 827m long and four lanes with a total width of 20.0m and highest embankment

height along E. Rodriguez Avenue is 1.55m.
(6) Environmental and Social Conditions
The Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) had been issued by the DENR-EMB in
January 2005. It stated that 94 informal settlers in 2 Barangays will be affected.
(7) Identified Problems and Recommendations
Identified Problems
There has been no study yet on the possible impacts of flooding to the people living within the
vicinity of the project area and also no documents showing public acceptance on the proposed
raising of the current road elevation.
Recommendations
(a) Detailed hydrological study should be conducted
(b) The most appropriate countermeasure(s) against flood, like raising the present road
elevation, should be thoroughly studied.
(1) Study and Countermeasure against Flood
The following two studies took into consideration river channel improvement:
 BTMC (August 1979)

 Highest water elevation = 4.40m (30 years return period)
 Dredging depth = 1.50m
 Widening =0m
 CTI and others (March 2002)
 Highest water elevation = 4.90m (50 years return period)
 Dredging depth = 0.94m
 Widening to = 53.5m (about 9m widening of existing river width)
When the road surface elevations are raised, the following issues will become a major concern:
 The access of the public/residents to the road from the roadside land will be difficult.
 The inundation inside a levee will be increased at the upstream side of the road because
the elevated roads obstruct the surface flow as sort of a dam.
In conclusion, the elevated highway should be provided proper counter measure for the problem
of flooding and the fundamental problem of flood should be properly addressed by a flood
control management project.

The following three (3) alternatives are proposed as the most suitable schemes for comparison
based on the site and traffic conditions:
Scheme-1 : 275.0m long flyover with 2 lanes per direction (PC Box and PC Voided
Slab Bridge) and 630m long 6 lanes additional approach road (Original
Design).
Scheme-2 : 280.0m long (PC Box and RC Voided Slab Bridge) with 2 lanes per
direction.
Scheme-3 : 280.0m long (PC Box and RC Voided Slab Bridge) with 2 lanes per
direction and 690m long 4 lanes additional approach with RCBC
Among three (3) schemes, scheme-3 was selected though it was more expensive than scheme-2
by approximately 22% due specifically to the 690m extent of elevated road that will prevent
flooding during heavy rains and typhoon and this scheme can provide 2-lanes per direction of
service road at-grade section which will be deemed sufficient for any activity of the people along
the road section.
Detailed scheme comparison is shown in Table 4.2-1.

Table 4.2-1 Scheme Comparative Table of C-3/E. Rodriguez

SCHEME-1 ORIGINAL DESIGN
Scheme SHEME - 2 No Additional Approach Scheme-3 4-LANES ADDITIONAL APPROACH
(6-Lane Additional Approach)
4-Lane Flyover: L= 275.0m 4-Lane Flyover: L= 280.0m 4-Lane Flyover : L= 280.0m
Structure PC VOIDED SLAB : [email protected] RC VOIDED SLAB : [email protected]=180.0m RC VOIDED SLAB : [email protected]=180.0m
Schemes PC Box Girder [email protected] + 40.0m PC Box Girder : [email protected]+40.0m=100.0 PC Box Girder : [email protected]+40.0m=100.0
Approach Road : L=630m(6-lane) Approach Road : L=207.7m Approach Road : L=598.0m
Flyover: MP 343.8 (P1,250,000/m) Flyover : MP 350.0 (P1,250,000/m) Flyover: MP 350.0 (P1,250,000/m)
Construction Approach : MP 163.8 (P260,000/m) Approach: MP 37.4 (P180,000/m) Approach: MP 124.4 (P180,000/m)
Cost Others MP 19.0 Others MP 15.0 Others MP 17.5
Total MP 526.6 (130.9%) Total MP 402.4 (P100.0 %) Total MP 491.9 (122.2%)
18 Months 14 Months 17 Months
Construction
Construction method and procedure is standard Construction method and procedure is standard Construction method and procedure is standard
Performance and
Total 6-lanes embankment road construction affects Less impact to traffic during construction due to no Small impact to traffic during construction due to
Duration
to existing traffic during construction additional embankment approach 4-lanes additional approach
Requires R.O.W acquisition near I/C due to No R.O.W acquisition due to improvement I/C No R.O.W acquisition due to improvement
Environmental
improvement of I/C (Demolish 3 building at I/C) is within R.O.W. of I/C is within R.O.W.
and Social
The people on each side of C-3 disconnected from The people on each side of C-3 is still connected from The people on each side of C-3 disconnected from
Condition
each other due to 630m extent of elevated thru road each other as almost same condition as present each other can be prevented due to provide RCBC
No overflow of road during flood No improvement against flood (road overflows No overflow of road during flood
No direct access to elevated road section from during flood) Can provide 2-lanes each side road on both directions
Traffic Condition
side road due to no side road. ( Average unpassable day per year is 2 or 3 days) No direct side road traffic access due to 600m
extent of elevated thru road section
More Expensive than other 2-schemes Cheapest among the schemes Expensive than scheme-2
Requires R.O.W acquisition
No direct access to elevated road section Can provide direct access to road 600m extent of elevated thru road prevents direct
Over all from side road and disconnects the community No R.O.W acquisition side road access
Evaluation Big impact on traffic during construction No traffic improvement during flood (road overflows No R.O.W acquisition
due to 6-lanes additional approach during flood) Can provide 2-lanes each side road on both directions
No flood on thru road permanently (average unpassable day per year is 2 or 3 days) No flood on thru road permanently
LEGEND : c advantage
disadvantage
(3) Preliminary design of Selected Scheme
Preliminary design was conducted based on the conditions previously discussed in the
comparative study.
(4) Construction Plan and Traffic Management during Construction
Construction plan, PERT/CPM and traffic management has been studied. PERT/CPM shows that
construction duration of this flyover is 17 months.
(5) Bill of Quantity and Cost Estimate
The Civil Works cost was estimated based on the following and other factors:
- Unit price of similar GOP and BOT projects implemented or tendered from 2010-2011
was used and but unit price of major item was estimated based on 2011 price.
- Procedures and composition for the derivation of base construction cost referred to and
based on similar projects.
Estimated cost of this flyover is as follows:
Civil work cost PhP 468,206,728
Foreign currency PhP 167,216,689
Local currency PhP 250,825,033
Tax PhP 50,165,006
Implementation of the C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange was cancelled by the DPWH to give
priority to the construction of Skyway Stage 3, second level, along C-3 under BOT scheme.

4.3 EDSA–ROOSEVELT AVENUE/CONGRESSIONAL AVENUE
The detailed design of the project was done by Katahira & Engineers International in association
with Proconsult, Inc. and United Technologies, Inc. in February 2001.
(1) Topographic Conditions
There are no significant changes in the topographic conditions of the area from the time of the
detailed design to the present, except for the construction of MRT-3, Muñoz Station, the bus stop
lanes on both directions and pedestrian bridges at the intersection.
The bearing stratum in the proposed area is tuffaceous rock sequence that underlies 16m deeper
than ground surface.
The San Francisco River crosses the EDSA at 50m Balintawak side from the proposed
intersection. There are no specific issues on the hydrological conditions in the proposed area
since there is no record of flooding.
DPWH design standards for highway and flyover were applied.
Northbound
(a) Horizontal alignment is passing through the right side of MRT-3 with 1,075m radius
curve. Vertical grade at each side of the approach sections is 5.0%.
(b) Total length of the project section is 729m and total length of flyover is 502m with RC
and PC voided slab for superstructures.
Southbound
(a) Horizontal alignment is passing thru the left side of MRT-3 with 1,055m radius curve.
Vertical grade of each side of the approach sections is 5.0%.
(b) Total length of the project section is 729m; total length of flyover is 500m with RC and
PC voided slab for superstructures.
The ECC for EDSA/North Avenue-West Avenue and EDSA/Roosevelt Interchanges Project had
been issued by DENR-EMB in January 2002. Approximately, the total area that will be affected
is around 1,769 sq. m.

(7) Identified Problems and Recommendation
Identified Problems
No problems were identified in the completed plans and detailed design of this interchange, but
total re-planning and redesign will be required due to the constructed MRT-3 and Muñoz Station
and the Pedestrian Bridges at the intersection.
Recommendations
A careful study of the vertical and horizontal clearances against the constructed Muñoz Station
and MRT-3 viaduct structures should be undertaken.
The following three (3) alternatives are proposed as the most suitable schemes for comparison
based on the site traffic conditions.
Scheme-1 : Flyover with 422m long and 3 lanes per direction while maintaining all
pedestrian bridges. Superstructure is PC voided slab
Scheme-2 : Flyover with 366m long and 3 lanes per direction without pedestrian bridges
near Muñoz Station. Superstructure is PC voided slab
Scheme-3 : Flyover with 719m(NB) and 880m(SB) long and 3 lanes per direction while
maintaining all pedestrian bridges and improving at grade intersection.
Superstructure is steel box girder and PC voided slab
Among the three (3) alternatives, scheme-2 was selected due to cheapest construction cost,
shorter construction duration and superior vertical grade against the other schemes.
The detailed scheme comparison is shown in Table 4.3-1

Table 4.3-1 Scheme Comparison Table of EDSA/Roosevelt

/Congressional Interchange
SCHEME-1 FLYOVER SHEME - 2 FLYOVER SHEME - 3 FLYOVER
Schemes
(Maintain all Pedestrian Bridges) (No Pedestrian Bridge near Muñoz Station) (Maintain all Pedestrian Bridges and Improve At-grade Intersection)
3-Lane Flyover : [email protected]+30.0m=422.0m (PC Voided Slab) 3-Lane Flyover : [email protected]+30m=366.0m (PC Voided Slab) 3-Lane Flyover : [email protected]+2@40m+3@45m=719.0m (N.B)
Approach Road : 223.7m Approach Road : 207.5m [email protected][email protected]=880.5 (S.B)
Structure 4-Pedestrian Bridges : 150m 3-Pedestrian Bridges : 95m Approach Road : 291.5m(NB) +261.0m(SB)=552.5m
Same structures between South and North bound Same structures between South and North bound 4-Pedestrian Bridges : 150m
Flyover MP 633.6 (P1,500,000/ m /6 Lane) Flyover MP 549.0 (P1,500,000/ m/6 Lane) Flyover MP 1.439.6 (P900,000/ m/3 Lane)
Approach MP 53.7 (P240,000/ m /6 Lane) Approach MP 49.8 (P240,000/ m/6 Lane) Approach MP 66.3 (P120,000/ m/3 Lane)
Construction
Cost
Pedestrian Bridge MP 15.0 (P100,000/ m ) Pedestrian Bridge MP 9.5 (P100,000/ m ) Pedestrian Bridge MP 15.0 (P100,000/ m )
Others MP 25.0 Others MP 21.7 Others MP 54.0
Total MP 727.3 (115.4%) Total MP 630.0 (100.0%) Total MP 1,574.9 (250.0%)
23 Months 22 Months 30 Months
Construction Construction method and procedure is standard Construction method and procedure is standard Construction method and procedure is standard
Performance and Requires demolition and reconstruction of 4 existing Requires demolition of 4 existing pedestrian bridges but Requires demolition and reconstruction of 4 existing
Duration pedestrian bridges reconstructionis only 3 Pedestrian Bridges. pedestrian bridges
(Can't construct one bridge at near side of Muñoz Station, Too closer construction activities to existing
due to lower vertical grade) Muñoz Station
No additional R.O.W No additional R.O.W No additional R.O.W
Environmental
Lower volume of exhaust fumes than Scheme-3 Low volume of exhaust fumes and noise due to lowest Very high volume of exhaust fumes and noise due
and Social
Condition vertical grade to longer vertical grade
No regular traffic flow alignment at the at-grade I/C No regular traffic flow alignment at the at-grade I/C due to Better traffic flow alignment at grade movement
due to pier of Line 1 was located within I/C but still pier of Line 1 was located within I/C but still manageable compare to other 2 schemes
Traffic Condition manageable by 4 phase-signalization by 4 phase- signalization
at Grade I/C Long route for pedestrian over EDSA given us no
construction of pedestrianbridge at near side of Muñoz
Station but pedestrian can utilize Muñoz Station
Expensive than Scheme -2 Cheapest among the schemes Most expensive among the schemes
Reconstruction of 4 Pedestrian Bridges Shorter construction duration Reconstruct of 4 pedestrian bridges
Over all Higher volume of exhaust fumes and noisier than Reconstruct 3-pedestrian bridges but no construction of Heavily affects traffic during construction of high
Evaluation Scheme - 2 due to higher vertical grade pedestrian bridge at near side of Muñoz Station pier and construction activities are too closer to
Lower vertical grade among the schemes existing Muñoz Sta.
Longer Construction duration
disadvantage
(2) Preliminary Design of Selected Scheme
Preliminary design was conducted based on the conditions which were previously discussed in
the comparative study.
Construction plan, PERT/CPM and traffic management have been studied. PERT/CPM shows
that construction duration of this flyover is 22 months.
Civil Works Cost for EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional IC has been estimated based on similar
conditions of C-3/E. Rodriguez IC.
Civil work cost PhP 600,244,468

Tax PhP 64,311,907

4.4 EDSA/NORTH AVENUE/WEST AVENUE/MINDANAO AVENUE
The detailed design of this proposed interchange was prepared by Katahira & Engineers
International in association with Proconsult, Inc. and United Technologies, Inc. in February 2001.
There are no significant changes in topographic conditions from the time of the detailed design to
present, except for the construction of pedestrian bridges and bus stop lanes at the intersection.
The bearing stratum is tuffaceous rock sequence that underlie, 1-4m deeper than from ground
surface. Foundation type of all of substructures were spread type foundation.
There are no rivers and creeks nearby and elevations are higher than the surroundings. Therefore,
there are no specific issues on the hydrological conditions in the proposed area.
The road alignments and structural conditions have the following characteristics:
EDSA Southbound
The total length of the project section and the flyover are 854m and 361m, respectively. The
length of the left turn flyover (EDSA–North Avenue) which is located above the EDSA
northbound flyover is 286m with RC and PC voided slab type of superstructure.
EDSA Northbound
The total length of the project section and the flyover are 569m and 343m, respectively, and the
type of superstructures are RC and PC voided slab.
EDSA–North Avenue Left Turn Flyover
 North Avenue Straight

Total length of project section = 1,228m; Length of flyover = 1,011m
 North Avenue–Mindanao Avenue
Total length of project section = 306m; Length of flyover = 180m
West Avenue–North Avenue Flyover
The flyover has two lanes and horizontal alignment of 80m radius right curve at the intersection

which merges with EDSA–North Avenue Left Turn Flyover after the curve. The lengths of the
project section and flyover are 483m and 392m, respectively, and type of superstructures are RC
and PC voided slab.
The ECC for EDSA/North Avenue-West Avenue and EDSA/Roosevelt Interchanges Project had
been issued by DENR-EMB in January 2002. Based on the ROW Map 2001, the affected area is
approximately 5,768 sq. m.
Identified Problems
(a) No problems were identified in the completed plans and detailed design of this interchange
but total re-planning and redesign are required due to the planned construction of a new
station, the Common Station along LRT-1 in front of SM North, and of MRT-7 which will
Pass along North Avenue.
(b) The construction of a Left Turn Flyover from EDSA to North Avenue will not be possible
with the planned construction of the Common Station.
Recommendations
Proper coordination and discussions with the DOTC, LRTA and other concerned agencies should
be made and the necessary data and information on the MRT-3 and LRT Line-1 extension and
detailed design of the Common Station and MRT 7 should be obtained for Preliminary Design.
4.4.2 Preliminary Design (EDSA/North/West Interchange)
The following two (2) alternatives are proposed as the most suitable for comparison based on site
and traffic conditions.
Scheme-1 : Flyover with, 342m long north bound and 319m long south bound.
Scheme-2 : Cut and cover tunnel with, 231m long north bound and 131m long south bound.
Between the two (2) schemes of flyover and cut and cover tunnel, the flyover scheme was
selected considering that construction cost is much cheaper, no ROW acquisition required,
construction duration is shorter and specific O & M will not be needed.

Table 4.4-1 Scheme Comparison Table of EDSA/North/West Interchange

Description Scheme-1 Flyover Scheme-Cut and Cover Tunnel
3-lane flyover 3-lane North Bound Tunnel: 231.4m
North Bound : [email protected]+3@ 30.0m (pc voided slab)=342.0m Approach: 523.6m
Structure South Bound: [email protected]+3@ [email protected](pc voided slab)=319.0m 3-lane South Bound Tunnel: 131.3m
Approved Section : North Bound: 226.6m Approach: 535.9m
South Bound: 244.6m
Flyover: MP 528.8 (P800,000/m/3-lane) Tunnel MP 2,214.8 (included approach section)
Approach: MP 56.5 (P120,000/m/3-lane) Sump Pit MP 30.0 (H=10.0m)
Construction Others MP 9.7 R.O.W MP 20.0 (20m x 20m x P50,000/m2)
Cost Total MP 595.0 (100.0%) Total MP 2,264.8 (381.3%)
Requires 4-line tunnel revetment due to North and
South bound has individual alignment
22 months 30 Months
Construction Construction method and procedure is standard Requires to find dumping place for 84,800m3 of excavated soil
Performance Requires special construction method and procedure for construction of
and Duration Provide at least 2-lanes traffic per direction during construction sump pit and cross pipe about 10m deep under ground
Provide 1.5 lane per direction only during construction
No R.O.W acquisition Aesthetic view of area will be preserved

Environmental Traffic noise is severe than scheme-2 but not concentrated Requires about 400m2 R.O.W acquisition for sump pit
and Social Greater Impact on traffic due to longer construction duration
Condition Noise and exhaust funs are concentrated at both entrance
Traffic
Easier traffic management during construction Difficult traffic management during construction
Condition at
Grade I/C
O&M No specific O & M required Requires periodic monitoring and maintenance of sump pit drain water
pump up system and illumination
Much cheaper than scheme-2 More than 3-times expensive than scheme-1
Shorter construction duration and easier to manage existing Longer construction duration and hard to manage existing traffic during
Over all traffic during construction construction
Evaluation No specific O & M required Sump pit requires 400m2 of R.O.W and difficult construction
No R.O.W. acquisition method and sequence
disadvantage

(2) Preliminary Design of Selected Scheme (EDSA/North/West Interchange)
Preliminary design was conducted based on the conditions discussed previously in the
comparative study.
construction duration of this flyover is 22 months.
4.4.3 Preliminary Design (North/Mindanao Interchange)
The following two (2) alternatives are proposed as the most suitable for comparison based on site
and traffic conditions:
Scheme-1 : Left turn flyover from North Ave to Mindanao Ave (3rd level) and left turn
flyover from Mindanao Ave to North Ave (2nd level)
Scheme-2 : Left turn cut and cover tunnel from North Ave to Mindanao Ave (under
pass) and left turn flyover from Mindanao Ave to North Ave (2nd level)
Between two (2) schemes, scheme-2 was selected due to the following reasons:
・Construction cost is cheaper

・Environmental conditions are better (aesthetic, noise and exhaust fumes)

・Traffic conditions are better (ensuring access to The Block SM North EDSA)
Table 4.4-2 Scheme Comparison of North/Mindanao Interchange

Scheme-1 Left Turn Flyover North-Mindanao (3rd Level) Scheme-2 Left Turn North-Mindanao (Underpass)
Description
Left Turn Flyover Mindanao-North (2nd Level) Left Turn Flyover Mindanao-North (2nd Level)
Flyover (N-M) : 495.0m [email protected][email protected] (RC voided and steel box) Tunnel : 95m+open section 363.5m
Approach: 214.5m Flyover (M-N) : 318m, [email protected][email protected] (RC and PC voided slab)
Structure Flyover (M-N): 318m, [email protected][email protected] (RC and PC voided slab) Approach : 205.4m
Approach: 205.4m
Flyover (N-M) : MP 402.3 (P960,000/m Steel, P720,000/m RC) Tunnel : MP 347.9

Flyover (M-N) : MP 190.8 (P600,000/m) Sump Pit : MP 20.0 (height:10m)
ROW : MP 4.0 (10m x 10m x P40,000)
Construction Cost
Approach : MP 25.2 (P60,000/m) Flyover : MP 190.8 (MP 600,000/m)
R.O.W. : MP 6.0 (5m x 30m x P40,000) Approach : MP 12.3 (MP 60,000/m)
Total MP 624.3 (109.0%) Total MP 575.0 (100.0%)
Construction 26 months 24 months
Performance and Construction method is standard but complicated due to double flyovers Construction method is standard but complicated due to 2-layer of structure
Duration Requires steel box girder due to over the 3rd level flyover Requires special construction method and procedure for const. of sump pit
Aesthetic view is worthier than scheme-2 Aesthetic view is better than scheme-1
Environmental and
Requires R.O.W at the entrance of 3rd level flyover along North Ave. Requires R.O.W acquisition for sump pit location
Social Condition
Noise and exhaust fumes are greater than scheme-2 due to long and steep slope Noise an exhaust fumes are smaller than scheme-1
Traffic Condition at Close access to The Block SM Edsa No close access to The Block SM North Edsa
Grade I/C Restrict section is longer than scheme-2 Restict section is shorter than Scheme-1
O&M Requires painting for steel members which is harder due to above road and flyover Requires periodic monitoring and maintenance of water pump up system
Construction cost expensive than scheme-2 Construction cost is cheaper than scheme-1
Constructionof 3rd level steel box girder is complicated
Overall Evaluation Environmental condition is worthier than scheme-2 Requires special construction method and procedure for const. of sump pit
Traffic condition is worthier than scheme-2 Environmental issue is much better than scheme-1
Traffic condition is better than scheme-1
disadvantage
Preliminary design was conducted based on the conditions previously discussed in the
comparative study.
Construction plan, PERT/CPM and traffic management have been studied. PERT/CPM shows
that construction duration of this flyover is 24 months.
Civil Works Cost for EDSA/North/West/Mindanao IC has been estimated based on the similar
conditions of C-3/E. Rodriguez IC.
Civil work cost PhP 1,110,383,339

Tax PhP 118,969,643

4.5 C-5/KALAYAAN AVENUE
The detailed design of the interchange was prepared by Nippon Engineering Consultant Co., Ltd.
in association with DCCD Engineering Corporation and Pertconsult International in March 2003.
There are no significant changes in the topographic conditions of the area between the time of the
detailed design to the present, except for the U-Turn Flyovers constructed on both sides of the
interchange along C-5 and the on-going construction of another flyover from Bonifacio Global
City to C-5 toward Pasig City.
The bearing stratum in this proposed area is tuffaceous rock sequence that underlies 1-3m deeper
than from ground surface. Therefore, type of foundation for all substructures is spread type
foundation.
There is a creek located 250m eastside from the C-5–Kalayaan intersection. However, it is noted
that this area is not prone to flooding because elevations of the proposed area are 5m higher than
the ground elevations near the creek.
A depressed structure was proposed and designed along C-5.
(a) 490m of depressed structure will have a horizontal straight alignment along C-5
(b) The standard section along C-5 has three lanes for each direction at the depressed section
and two lanes for each direction at the ground section.
The ECC for C-5/Lanuza St.-Julia Vargas St. and C-5/Kalayaan Ave. Interchanges Project had
been issued by DENR-EMB in December 2001.
Identified Problems
(a) No problems were identified in the detailed design. However, the U-Turn Flyovers
constructed at both sides of the intersection along C-5 are considered to be substandard
structures under the design code.

(b) Traffic conditions should be studied after completion of the on-going construction of the
flyover from Bonifacio Global City toward Pasig City, which will merge in front of the
southern side U-Turn Flyover.
Recommendations
After completion of the flyover construction, a more comprehensive study of actual traffic at the
intersection might be necessary to ensure that its smooth flow is maintained.
4.5.2 Advice on Technical Issue and Design Option
(1) C-5 improvement plan of DPWH
DPWH will implement the Feasibility Study on the Completion of Metro Manila Circumferential
Road 5 and Other Priority Road/Interchange Projects and Traffic Mitigation Measure Cum
Environmental, Social and Gender Aspects.
These projects are categorized with the following three (3) schemes;
(a) Construction of missing link sections.
(b) Construction of flyovers
(c) Widening of approach section of existing flyover
In view of the above, C-5 improvement projects by the DPWH will not be affected by the
proposed flyover projects.
(2) Site Condition and Traffic survey
Two (2) issues were found during the site investigation and detailed topographic survey which
may cause a bottleneck at the intersection of C-5 thru traffic:.
(a) Carriageway width of C-5 thru traffic is substandard.
(b) Subtle curve alignments along C-5 thru traffic of both directions were observed around
U-turn flyover.
Traffic survey was conducted last March 6 2012.after the opening of the new flyover from global
city to north bound of C-5 road. The traffic survey data shows that vehicle passing along U-turn
flyover at south side and north side are 25,132 vehicles per day and 18,600 vehicles per day,
respectively. The summarized and actual traffic intersection flow graphics are shown in Figure
4.5-1.

Figure 4.5-1 Summarized Intersection Flow Graphic Summary (AADT)
(3) Technical study with maintaining the existing U-turn flyover
Maintaining the existing U-turn flyover and from the above traffic data, a summary of available
options and findings for improving future traffic flows and capacities are shown in Table 4.5-1.
Table 4.5-1 Proposed Options and Findings

Reduced Conflict No.
Option AADT Findings
(Present conflict is 5)
Construct left turn flyover from Require ROW acquisition but
1 Kalayaan Ave. to C-5 north 13,955 Tibagan elementary is located -2
bound along C-5 north bound.
Comparatively traffic volume is
2 7, 309 small and requires ROW -1
Pateros to C-5 north bound
acquisition
Construct straight flyover along
3 6,053 Traffic volume is small -1
Kalayaan Ave.
4 6,789 Not enough transition length -1
C-5 south bound to Pateros
5 9,627 Not enough transition length 0
C-5 north bound to EDSA

In view of the above summary, the most effective option is to construct left turn flyover from
Kalayaan Ave. to C-5 north direction which noting that the Tibagan elementary school is located
just beside the road along C-5 north direction.
(4) Technical study with demolition of existing U-turn flyover
The new intersection plans should provide three (3) lanes in each direction with underpass
scheme along C-5 thru traffic. Based on the traffic volume and traffic flow at the intersection, the
following four (4) schemes can be considered as new potential intersection plans:.
・Scheme-1 : Not provide structures for grade separation

・Scheme-2 : Construct 2- Left turn flyover from Kalayaan Ave. to C-5 both direction.
・Scheme-3 : Construct straight flyover along Kalayaan Ave.
・Scheme-4 : Construct 2- Left turn flyover from both direction of C-5 to Kalayaan Ave
Traffic Flow by Scheme is shown in Figure 4.5-2 and the Scheme Comparison table is presented
in Table 4.5-2.

Figure 4.5-2 Traffic Flow by Schemes

Table 4.5-2 Scheme Comparison Without U-turn Flyover
(5) Overall evaluation
With existing U-turn flyover
・ Existing substandard carriageway widths and subtle curve alignments are the cause of
unsmooth traffic around both sides of the U-turn flyover and a bottleneck for C-5 thru
traffic and that remedial solution to these will require demolishing the existing u-turn
flyover.
・ Most optimum option among the proposed improvement options is the construction of
left turn flyover from Kalayaan Ave to C-5 both directions but the existence of the
ROW problem should be noted: the Tibagan elementary school is located at just beside
of north bound of C-5.
Without existing U-turn flyover
・ Construction of 3-lanes for each directions with underpass along C-5

・ Construction of left turn flyovers from Kalayaan Ave. to C-5 for both directions is the
most effective scheme considering that almost 50% of traffic will be free flow
・ Estimated cost is as follows:
Construction of 2-lanes Flyover (total length 740m) = MP 444
Construction of 6-lanes Underpass structure (490m) = MP 520
Demolition of existing U-turn flyover = MP 64
Total = MP 1,028

(6) Recommendation
With U-turn flyover
・ To find an appropriate solution for ROW problem (Tibagan elementary school) for
improvement of the intersection with present condition of U-turn flyover.
Without U-turn flyover
・ To construct 6-lanes underpass for C-5 thru traffic and 2-lanes left turn flyover from
Kalayaan Ave. to C-5 for both directions. Traffic flow system to resolve problems of
traffic flow conflict, unsmooth thru traffic alignments and substandard carriageway
should also be addressed.
Total Recommendation
・ Implementation of the above without a U-turn flyover is recommended because the

study shows that there is no ultimate solution that could fully address the expected
yearly increase traffic without demolition of the existing U-turn flyover.

4.6 C-5–GREEN MEADOWS AVENUE
The detailed design of the project was prepared by the Japan Overseas Consultants Co., Ltd. in
association with TCGI Engineers in October 2004.
There are no significant changes noted in the topographic conditions of the area between the time
of the detailed design to the present.
In the section from Green Meadows to Calle Industria, the subsoil is distributed until the depth of
0.7-1.0m below ground surface. On the other hand White Plains Creek to end section, the subsoil
(sandy silt and silty sand) is distributed until the depth of 12.0m below ground surface.
No flooding will be experienced in the proposed area because the elevation of the crossing point
with the road is about 5m higher by than the elevation of the confluence with Marikina River.
The 925m long cut and cover tunnel will start in front of Green Meadows Avenue intersection
and terminate after Eastwood Avenue intersection. The tunnel has four lanes, with
two-directionals, and 5.0m vertical clearance.
The detailed design did not cover the environmental aspect of the project.
Identified Problems
(a) 13m height of sump pit to be located under carriageway and sidewalk will make it hard to
arrange or manage traffic during construction.
(b) There is no study yet on the complicated construction procedure of tunnel underneath the
existing creek.
Recommendations
Based on the problems identified above, careful and thorough study should be undertaken for this
improvement option.

(1) Study of White Plains Creek
The proposed inverted siphon cannot be adopted for the following reasons:
(a) Rise in water level at upstream side
The calculation result of the loss of head of inverted siphon is 1.3 m. Therefore, at the time of
freshet, the water level will rise to 1.3m higher than the present condition at the upstream side
of the road and will cause flooding.
(b) Blockage due to garbage
It is expected that much garbage will flow at the time of freshet because the creek is flowing
through a residential area.
The following three (3) alternatives are proposed as the most suitable options for comparison
based on site and traffic condition.
 Scheme-1 : 1098m long flyover and Superstructure is PC and RC voided slab

 Scheme-2 : 808m long Cut and cover tunnel
 Scheme-3 : 432m long flyover and 80m long cut and cover tunnel
Among the three (3) schemes, scheme-1 was selected due to following reasons:
 Construction cost is cheaper than other alternatives

 No ROW acquisition
 Construction is much easier than other schemes
 Provide four (4) lanes for each direction at-grade along the total stretch of under viaduct
 Different from other two (2) schemes, specific O&M are not required.
The details of scheme comparison is shown in Table 4.6-1
Preliminary design was conducted based on the conditions discussed previously in the
comparative study.

Table 4.6-1 Scheme Comparison Table of C-5 / GREENMEADOWS / ACROPOLIS / CALLE

INDUSTRIA INTERCHANGE
Schemes SCHEME -1 FLYOVER SCHEME - 2 CUT AND COVER TUNNEL SCHEME - 3 FLYOVER AND CUT & COVER TUNNEL
4-Lane Flyover : L= 1098m 4-Lane Tunnel : 807.7m 4-Lane Flyover 3@30m+17@18m=432.0m
Structure PC Voided Slab : 6@30m=180.0m Approach Road : 513.3m PC Voided Slab : [email protected]=90.0m, RC Voided Slab [email protected] m=342.0 m
Schemes RC Voided Slab : 51@18m=918.0m 4-Lane Tunnel : 80m + Under Pass Section 559.4m
Approach Road : 276.4m Approach Road : 219.6m
Flyover MP 1.010.2 (P920,000/m) Tunnel MP 2,456.3 (included approach section) Flyover MP 397.4 (P920,000/m)
Approach MP 33.2 (P120,000/m) Ventilation System MP 60.0 (4 Nos.) Tunnel MP 706.4 (included under pass section)
Others MP 43.3 Sump Pit MP 40.0 (H = 16m) Approach MP 35.1 (P160,000/m)
Construction
Total MP 1097.7 (100.0%) R.O.W. MP 20.0 (20m x 20m x P50,000/m2 ) Sump Pit MP 30.0 (H=12m)
Cost
Total MP 2,576.3 (234.7%) ROW MP 20.0 (20 m x 20 m x P50,000/m2 )
Others MP 47.0
Total MP 1,235.9 (112.6%)
24 months 38 months 24 months (Tunnel & Flyover Construction Simultaneously)
No impact on existing creek Requires several construction sequences to maintain No impact on existing creek
Construction Construction method and procedure is standard creek water flow. Requires 2-kind equipments and material for tunnel and flyover construction
Performance and Provide 2-Lanes per each direction during Requires to find dumping place for 199.000 m3 of excavated soil Requires to find dumping place for 62.000m3 of excavated soil
Duration construction Require special method and procedure for construction Require special construction method and procedure for construction
of sump pit and cross pipe about 12 m deep under ground of sump pit and cross pipe about 10 m deep under ground
Provide 1.5 lane per each direction only during construction Provide 1.5 lane per each direction only during construction
No ROW acquisition Aesthetic view of area will be preserved Requires about 400 m2 ROW acquisition for sump pit location
Environmental
and Social Traffic noise is severe than scheme 3 but not Requires about 400 m2 ROW acquisition for sump pit Higher volume of exhaust fumes due to longer and steep
Conditions concentrated. Greater impact on traffic with longer construction duration slope section
Noise and exhaust fumes are concentrated at both entrances Less traffic noise than Scheme-1 but concetrated at both sides of entrances
Provide 4-lanes per each direction at grade Provide 4-lanes per each direction at grade along entire Provide only 2-lanes per each direction at grade tunnel section
Traffic Condition along entire section of under the viaduct section of tunnel Not advisable for steep slope (4.0%) with 400m long vertical alignment
Easiest traffic management during construction Difficult traffic management during construction Very dangerous at the point of change vertical grade between depressed
and elevated
No specific O & M required Requires daily monitoring and maintenance for tunnel Requires periodic monitoring and maintenance
O&M facilities such as ventilation, water supply,water pump system, of water pump up system and illumination
fire detection, traffic safety , etc.
Cheapest among the schemes Most expensive About 12%expensive than scheme-1
No R.O.W. Acquisition Longest Construction duration Sump Pit requires difficult construction method and sequence
Over all Construction is much easier than other 2-schemes Difficult construction activity due to existing creek and sump pit Requires 400 m2 R.O.W. acquisition and periodic monitoring ,
Evaluation maintenance of water pump-up system and illumination
Not require specific O & M compared to other two schemes Requires permanent O & M system Provide only 2-lanes for each direction at-grade tunnel and approach section
Provide 4-lanes at-grade per each direction at grade Provide 4-lanes at grade per each direction Vertical alignment is very much worse than other 2-Schemes
disadvantage
construction duration of this flyover is about 24 months.
Civil Works Cost for C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria Interchange has been
estimated based on the following factors:
- Unit price used for similar GOP and BOT projects implemented or tendered from
2010-2011 and the one for major item was re-estimated based on 2011 prices.
- Procedures and composition for the derivation of base construction cost, were referred to
similar projects.
Civil works cost PhP 1,045,422,196

Tax PhP 112,009,521

CHAPTER 5
PREPARATION OF IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
This Chapter presents the proposed project implementation schedule.
5.1 STUDY OF CONTRACT PACKAGE ARRANGEMENT
The proposed contract packages should be decided considering the size of contract and location of
each flyover as follows:
Package-1: EDSA/North/West/Mindanao Interchange: 1,133 million pesos
Package-2: C-5/Green Meadows Interchange: 1,066 million pesos
Package-3: EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Interchange: 612 million pesos
C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange was canceled due to conflict with on-going project of Skyway
Stage-3.
5.2 STUDY OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES
The consultancy services for MMICP that are required are; Detailed Design Stage (12 months),
Tender Assistance Stage (12 months), and Construction Supervision Stage (26 months). The
proposed man-month is 118 M/M for Foreign Expert, 469 M/M for Local Expert and 450 M/M
for Technical Support staff. Total amount of proposed consultancy cost is 348,475,364 pesos
(651,648,930 Yen) including 2% contingency.
5.3 PREPARATION OF PROJECT COST INCLUDING RROW COST
Total project cost is 3,266.51 million Pesos and loan amount is 5,336.75 million Yen, Government
of the Philippines equity counterpart is about 412.64 million Pesos.
RROW shall be acquired for 100 m2 at the proposed North/Mindanao Interchange and cost is
about 4 million pesos which is already included in the above estimated cost. The summary and
breakdown of the project cost are shown in Tables 5.3-1 and 5.3-2, respectively.

Table 5.3-1 Summary of Project Cost

Unit: Million Pesos

Package-1 EDSA/North/West and North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 1,132.59 121.35 1,011.24
Package-2 C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1066.33 114.25 952.08
Package-3 EDSA/Roosevelt IC 612.25 65.60 546.65
3. Detailed Engineering Design (DED) Cost Total 116.81 3.43 113.38

Detailed Engineering Design Cost 114.52

Table 5.3-2 Breakdown of Project Cost
Unit: Million Pesos
CURRENCY COMPONENT
Item Total
Foreign Local Tax
1. Total Cvil Work Cost 2,811.17 1,003.99 1,505.98 301.20
Civil Work Cost 2,756.05 984.30 1,476.46 295.29
Physical Contingency (2%) 55.12 19.69 29.53 5.91
Package-1 EDSA/North/West and North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 1,132.59 404.50 606.75 121.35
Civil Work Cost 1,110.38 396.57 594.85 118.97
Package-2 C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1,066.33 380.83 571.25 114.25
Civil Work Cost 1,045.42 373.37 560.05 112.01
Package-3 EDSA/Roosevelt IC 612.25 218.66 327.99 65.60
Civil Work Cost 600.24 214.37 321.56 64.31
2. ROW Acquisition Cost 4.00 0.00 4.00 0.00
4.00 4.00
3. Detailed Engineering Design (DED) Cost Total 116.81 64.83 48.55 3.43
Detailed Engineering Design Cost 114.52 63.56 47.60 3.36
4. Construction Supervision Cost Total 238.07 123.57 106.96 7.55
Construction Supervision Cost 233.40 121.14 104.86 7.40
5. Project Administration Cost Total 96.46 96.46
Detailed Design Stage, Construction Supervision Stage (3.5%) 96.46 96.46
Grand Total 3,266.51 1,192.38 1,761.96 312.18

Notes: Implementation of the C-3-E. Rodriguez Interchange was cancelled by the DPWH to give priority
to the construction of Skyway Stage 3, second level, along C-3 under BOT scheme.

5.4
Table 5.4-1 Draft Implementation Schedule of MMICP

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
DESCRIPTION
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 87
12 months
1. Preparatory Study
6 months
2. Review and Evaluation of EIA/RAP in DENR EMB
Final Report (Summary)

3. Issuance of Environmental Compliance Certificate
3 months
4. Processing in NEDA for Approval
4 months
5. Loan Negotiation Agreement
6. Loan Agreement
E/N L/A 12 months
7. Selection of Consultant (D/D)
12 months
8. Detailed Design
12 months
9. Selection of Consultant (CS)
10. 1st Contract Package
(EDSA/WEST/NORTH/MINDANAO)
10 months
- Bidding
2 months
42
24 months
- Implementation
10. 2nd Contract Package (C5/GREENMEADOWS)
10 months
- Bidding
2 months
24 months
- Implementation
11. 3rd Contract Package

Total proposed implementation schedule is shown in Table 5.4-1.
(EDSA/ROOSEVELT/C3/E. RODRIGUEZ)
10 months
- Bidding
2 months
22 months
- Implementation
14 months
12. R.O.W. Acquisition

THE PERIOD OF ECC AND RAP APPROVAL AND THE PROCESSING IN NEDA
PREPARATION OF THE TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE CONSIDERING
5.5 IDEA AND BASIC CONCEPT FOR STEP SCHEME
5.5.1 Possibility of Adoption of STEP Scheme
Taking into account the scheme repayment conditions of ODA loans of both STEP loan schemes
and regular loan condition schemes, the total repayment amount of the loan will become the same
for both schemes when the loan amount of the STEP scheme is 12% more costly than the regular
loan condition scheme. Notwithstanding the above, a project with a lower increase in cost under
STEP scheme when compared to regular loan condition scheme is much appreciated by the
borrower.
In view of the above, the STEP loan scheme requires proper arrangement that should utilize
Japanese technology with lower investment cost as much as possible.
(1) Adoption of Japanese Technologies for This Project
The proposed project is to construct flyovers to mitigate traffic congestion at intersections with
heavy traffic conditions in urban areas. Therefore, the focus is to minimize impact on traffic
during construction and to complete the project within the shortest possible construction duration.
Proposed items to investigate under the project to facilitate a STEP loan scheme are the type of
flyover superstructure at the intersection and type of retaining wall along the approach sections.
(2) Proposal of Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge for the type of superstructure at the
Intersection
(a) Original Detailed Design
The original detailed design proposed PC voided slab type superstructure at the intersection.
This superstructure type is economical type but requires the erection of special type of shoring,
scaffolding, form works and dismantling of those materials following construction. Such
works will very much adversely influence the traffic flow during construction and be the
cause of heavy traffic congestion. (Refer to Figure 5.5-1 special type of frame support).
Enclosed by red line in the Table 5.5-1 is the implementation schedule of such an intersection
which shows that the installation of the special type of shoring/scaffolding requires 11 months
and that there is a need to temporarily close the road to traffic during dismantling of the
shoring/scaffolding. In addition there is high risk of damage to the main body of the structure,
in the event of vehicle collision with the special type of shoring and scaffolding.
Moreover, this type of special shoring/scaffolding is also at risk of collapse from vibration
during the concrete pouring, which will result in serious damage once collapse occurs. (In fact,
the same type of frame support suffered collapse during the concrete pouring for the
construction of an expressway in Japan).

Table 5.5-1 Implementation Schedule of Original Plan (C-5/Green Meadows)

Figure 5.5-1 Special Type of Frame Support

(b) Proposal of steel box and steel deck slab type bridge and steel pier
Proposed use of steel bridge, with steel box girder, steel slab deck and steel piers utilizing
Japanese technology, as shown in Figure 5.5-2, will remove the risks of the original detailed
design plan mentioned above and minimize traffic congestion during the construction of
superstructure.
 Merit of steel box and steel deck slab type bridges
a. 70m long maximum span steel box and slab type bridge, which is much longer than the
30m long maximum span length of PC voided slab bridge, can provide wider available
space for proper arrangement of the at grade intersection.
b. Affect to existing traffic is only from the girder launching operations during night works
given that the steel type structures of the substructure and superstructure are fabricated at
off-site yards (refer to Figure 5.5-3 to 5.5-4). In addition the erection duration for
launching girders is only nine (9) days, indicated by red line in the implementation
schedule of the original plan as shown in Table 5.5-2. Therefore, the impact on traffic
during construction can be minimized.
c. Construction duration at the site can be minimized to 6.5 months instead of the original
plan of 9 months.
d. Steel box and steel deck slab type bridge is superior to PC voided slab with regard to
reduced seismic demand given that steel structures are less heavy.
e. No concrete slab. The steel deck plate construction is overlaid with guss or stone mastic
asphalt as first layer and regular asphalt on top of guss or stone mastick asphalt following
launching of the girders.
f. Allows transfer of Japanese technology.
 Demerit of steel box and steel deck slab type bridge
a. Cannot adopt steel deck form for entire length of flyover given that the steel box and
steel deck slab type bridge is more expensive than PC voided slab type.
Comparison between original plan and steel box and slab type bridge is shown in Table 5.5-3.

Figure 5.5-2 General View of Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge

Table 5.5-2 Implementation Schedule of Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge for C5/Green Meadows Interchange
ERECTION SCHEDULE （C5/GREEN MEADOWS）
Month
Work
Work Item Works Scope 1 2 3 4 Remarks
Days
5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30
Preliminary 3
Concrete curing(21 days)
UAS Installation P11,P12 2 Note
1)Paving & Piling is excluded
Bearing Installation P10,P13 1 2)Downtime of 20% is taken into account
P10-P11 B1 B2 Removal

6
P12-P13 B6 B5
Temporary Props
B3,B4 Removal
P11-P12 3
P10-P11 GE1-J3 J3-J6 J6-J7
10
P12-P13 J16-GE2 J13-J16 J12-J13
Steel Deck Erection
J7-J8 J8-J11
P11-P12 7
J11-J12
Steel Pier Erection P11,P12 1

P10-P11 Removal
15
P12-P13
Scaffolding
Removal
P11-P12 7
HSFG Bolt 10
In Situ Painting 18
Steel Pier Filling &
P11,P12 14
Protection Concrete
47
Vehicle Clash Barrier 18
Site Cleaning 4
Day long
75 Used as Works Area
Arrangement
Temporary Traffic Night time
7 Erection of J8～J11
Arrangement Arrangement①
Night time
2 For Deck Closure
Arrangement②

Figure 5.5-3 Elevation Plan (1/2)


Figure 5.5-4 Elevation Plan (2/2)


Table 5.5-3 Comparison between Original Plan and Steel Box and Slab Type Bridge
Steel box and slab type bridge Original Plan
Maximum Span L=70m Maximum Span L=30m
・70m long maximum span of steel box and slab ・Economical given construction cost is lower
type bridge is much longer than 30m long ・Can be constructed by local regular contractor
maximum span length of PC voided slab which can due to common type of super structure.
provide wider available space for proper
arrangement of at grade intersection.
・Affect to existing traffic is only from launching of
girders during night works given that steel type
structures of substructure and superstructure are
fabricated at off-site yards. In addition the duration
of launching girders is only nine (9) days.
Therefore, impact on existing traffic can be
Merit
minimized.
・Construction duration at site can be minimized to
6.5 months instead of original plan of 9 month.
・Steel box and slab type bridge is superior to PC
voided slab with regard to reduced seismic demand
given that steel structures are less heavy.
・No concrete slab. The steel deck plate
construction is overlaid with guss asphalt as first
layer and regular asphalt on top of guss asphalt
following launching of the girders.
・Allows transfer of Japanese technology.
・Cannot adopt steel deck form for entire length of ・Requires erection and dismantling of special type
flyover given that the steel box and slab type of shoring/scaffolding and formworks for voided
bridge is more expensive than PC voided slab type. slab at the intersection, these activities will affect
the existing traffic and cause heavy traffic
congestion.
・The erected shoring/scaffolding will reduce the
number of available traffic lanes which will cause
heavy traffic congestion until the
Demerit
shoring/scaffolding is dismantled.
・There is a risk of damage or collapse of the
voided slab in the event of passing vehicle
collision with the shoring/scaffolding which will
result in great damage to the structure.
・There is a risk of collapse of the voided slab due
to vibration during the concrete pouring leading to
loss of stability of the shoring/scaffolding.
Construction 24 Month 26 Month
Duration
Construction JPMY 6,319 JPMY 5,498
Cost <1.149> <1.000>
Note: Not included C3-E. Rodrigeuz Flyover for Construction Cost

(3) Proposal for Earthquake Resistant Type Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall (ERMSE) at
the flyover approach section
Earthquake resistant MSE wall at the flyovers approach sections is proposed instead of the
prevailing type MSE wall. This new type MSE wall (ERMSE) provides high seismic resistance
utilizing new wide strips and an improved attachment system between the new wide strip and the
concrete skin wall. The proposed use of ERMSE is also an opportunity for Japanese technology
transfer. The material cost of ERMSE wall is about 5% only of the total Japanese content. The
outline of the proposed ERMSE wall is explained below.
New ERMSE wall provides improved effectiveness of embankment reinforcement
(a) Outline of proposed new ERMSE
To improve the reinforcement mechanism inside the embankment with core technology,
without change to the exterior appearance of the prevailing type, the system:
a. Utilizes new wide strip
b. Utilizes new concrete skin
(b) Difference between new type and prevailing type
a. Improvement of friction resistance and ease of construction. (Prevailing type used 60mm
width of strip with ribs.)
The development of 80mm wide strip with ribs improves friction resistance by approximately
30% in comparison with the prevailing type. Construction will also be easier due to the
reduction in the number of strips to be installed.
b. High efficiency in use of material for embankment reinforcement
The strips that connect to the concrete skin with the prevailing type are fixed in four
configurations of 4, 6, 8 and 12 pieces. However the new type allows seven configurations
with the possibility to also connect 3, 5 and 7 pieces strips. This improves the efficiency of the
design and optimizes use of materials.

c. To improve effectiveness through the combination the above two factors
The proposed ERMSE type provides superior seismic resistance. The effectiveness of this
proposed type (no embankment type) was safely confirmed for a similar application during
the Higashi Nihon earthquake (Japanese intensity level 6~7).
The construction of ERMSE in urbanized areas is especially effective due to high seismic
resistance and attractive appearance. The investigation report shown in Figure 5.5-5 is one
out of 1,423 reports which have confirmed the safety for all of the no embankment type walls.
Place : Iwate Prefecture

Damage level : No damage
Construction date : April 2006, ERMSE(t=14cm)
Higashi Nihon Earthquake :
March 2011, Japanese intensity level 6 plus
Data of ERMSE
Height of wall : 4.8m
Height of embankment : 0m
Length : 36m
Area : 90m2
Source: Japan Terre Armee Association

Figure 5.5-5 Investigation Report
(4) Achievement of 30% Japanese Content
Japanese content in the Philippines
 Cement : Japanese corporate alliance company Taiheiyo Cement Philippine Inc. is in

business in the Philippines.
 Reinforcing steel bar : The Philippines is producing reinforcing steel bars using electric
blast furnace methods. However large scale infrastructure projects rely upon imported
reinforcing steel bars because of local low production capacity and quality. Japanese
Contractor is involved STEP Loan scheme, therefore considering the steel bar to be
imported from Japan.
 Procurement of structural steel members (steel box and slab type bridge elements) from
Japan.Materials for high seismic resistance reinforced type ERMSE wall imported from
Japan.Over head of Japanese contractor (7.22%)

Amount procured from Japan for the Project is shown in Table 5.5-4 in the case of procurement
of all of the above items.
Table 5.5-4 Procurement Amount from Japan for the Project

(Unit: Pesos)
No. Description Amount Percentage (%)
1. Cement (Material Only) 82,631,608 2.61
2. Reinforcing Steel Bar (Material Only) 414,488,550 13.08
3. Procurement of structural steel members (Material Only) 16,017,322 0.51
4. Structural Steel (Material Only) 603,502,451 19.05
5. ERMSE Wall (Material Only) 36,226,866 1.14
6. Service of Japanese Contractor 228,729,600 7.22
TOTAL 1,381,596,397 43.61
The total amount of Japanese content, at 2,155 million yen, is 36.39% of the total 5,572 million
yen construction cost under STEP scheme. Furthermore, procurement ratio becomes 43.61%
once the 7.22% of overhead of the Japanese contractor is added. The Japanese content proposed
above therefore is adequate to satisfy the required 30% procurement ratio under STEP scheme
condition.
5.5.2 Advanced Technology and Know-How of Japanese Firms
(1) Steel box-girder bridge with steel decks for overpasses at intersections (Non concrete
deck slab type)
Conventional method for Original Plan

PC voided slab type viaduct at intersection
 On-site construction work is time consuming as cast-in place concrete is used.
 Maximum Length of Span is 30m.
 Construction duration at site is 9 month at intersection site.
 Required erection and dismantling of special type of shoring/scaffolding and formworks

for superstructure construction at intersection and these activities will be affected the
existing traffic and cause of heavy traffic congestion
 The erected shoring/scaffolding will reduce the number of available traffic lanes which
will cause of heavy traffic congestion until the shoring/scaffolding is dismantled.
 There is a risk of damage or collapse of the voided slab in the event of passing vehicle
collision with the shoring/scaffolding which will result in great damage to the structure.

Conventional Method Temporary Works during Construction
Above cross section and picture is shown for ordinary type of shoring/scaffolding for voided slab.
Traffic Congestion during construction
Above picture is shown for shoring/scaffolding of voided slab during construction for similar project.
Traffic lane become 2 lanes from existing 3 lanes and cause of heavy traffic jam during construction

Proposal method
Rigid-frame box-girder bridge with steel decks and steel Pier at intersection
 Prefabricated steel members mainly used
 No concrete slab and reduction of dead load. The steel deck plate construction is overlaid
with special asphalt such as guss asphalt as first layer and overlaid regular asphalt.
 Improvement of seismic resistance.
 Maximum length of span is 70m.
 Affect existing traffic is only from launching of girders during night time works given that
steel substructure and superstructure are fabricated at off-site yards.
 Duration of launching girders is only 9 days and impact on existing traffic can be
minimized
 On-site construction period is 2.5 months
 No form works and no shoring/scaffolding after launching girders.
 Reduction of number of bearings, resulting in maintenance cost and noise reduction
Proposal Method
Steel Girder
Steel Pier
UAS
Above cress section and prospective drawing are proposed Rigid Frame Box Girder with Steel
Deck and Steel Pire at intersection.

Erection Method
Day Time Night Time Erection
Above picture is shown for day time and night time condition during erection of superstructure
and this erection work is takes only 9 days at intersection.
After Completion

(2) Steel piers and connection of pile foundation for Special Method in Japan
Conventional method
Combination of RC footing and anchor frame as cast-in place concrete is used.
 On-site construction work is time consuming.
 Large work yard is required.
Proposal method
UAS (Uni-Anchor System) (Japanese patent technology)
 UAS is simpler and more compact than the conventional connection system
 The use of a steel shell reduces the amount of on-site construction work required, such as
that involved in form and re-bar assembly
 Reduction of the on-site construction period and the area of the work yard
 Squeeze of construction costs
Structure Comparison of conventional connecting

structures

5.5.3 Outline of STEP Scheme
Scope of the works for four intersections under STEP scheme as follows;
(1) EDSA-Roosevelt Ave./Congressional Ave.
Structural type : 3 lane individual flyover ( south and north directions are same type and same
length)
Span and bridge length : [email protected][email protected]=366.0m
Type of flyovers : PC voided slab and Steel box girder
Approach roads : 3 lane and total 207.5m
Pedestrian Bridge : 3 direction (except near side of Munoz station side), total length 95m
RROW : no ROW acquisition
(2) EDSA-West Ave./North Ave./Mindanao Ave.
Interchange plan for this intersection will be plan to construct individually due to new plan of
MRT-7 station in-front of SM north and new development that Mindanao Ave. direct
connected to North Luzon Expressway.
(a) EDSA-West Ave./North Ave
Structural type : 3 lane individual flyover (south and north directions are same type but
different length)
Span and bridge length : North direction : [email protected][email protected]=342.0m
South direction : [email protected][email protected]=319.0m
Type of flyovers : PC voided slab and Steel box girder
Approach roads : North direction : 3 lane and total 226.6m
South direction : 3 lane and total 244.6m
(b) North Ave.-Mindanao Ave.
Structural type : North to Mindanao : 2 lane under pass
Mindanao to North : 2 lane flyover
Span and bridge length : North to Mindanao : 95m under pass + 363.5m open cut=458.5m
Mindanao to North : [email protected][email protected][email protected]=318.0m
Type of flyovers : North to Mindanao : open cut tunnel
Mindanao to North : RC voided slab and Steel box girder

Approach roads : North to Mindanao : included 363.5m of open cut section
Mindanao to North : 2 lane and total 205.4m
RROW: required 100m2 ROW acquisition at the corner of Veterans Golf Club
(3) C5-Green Meadows Ave./Acropolis St./Calle Industria St.
Structural type : 4 lane divided flyover
Span and bridge length:

[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]=1,098.0m
Type of flyovers : RC voided slab and steel box girder
Approach roads : 4 lane and total 276.4m

5.5.4 Estimated Cost
Estimated costs under STEP scheme are shown in Table 5.5-5 and Table 5.5-6.
Table 5.5-5 Summary of Project Cost (STEP Loan)

Unit: Million Pesos

1. EDSA/North/West IC Civil Work Cost 640.94 68.67 572.27
2. North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 592.77 63.51 529.26
3. C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1296.54 138.91 1,157.62
4. EDSA/Roosevelt IC Civil Work Cost 701.11 75.12 625.99


Table 5.5-6 Breakdown of Project Cost (STEP Loan)
Unit: Million Pesos
CURRENCY COMPONENT
Item Total
Foreign Local Tax
1. Total Cvil Work Cost 3,231.36 1,300.46 1,584.68 346.22
Civil Work Cost 3,168.00 1,274.96 1,553.61 339.43
1. EDSA/North/West IC Civil Work Cost 640.94 228.91 343.36 68.67
Civil Work Cost 628.38 224.42 336.63 67.33
2. North/Mindanao IC Civil Work Cost 592.77 211.70 317.56 63.51
Civil Work Cost 581.15 207.55 311.33 62.27
3. C5/Green Meadows IC Civil Work Cost 1,296.54 564.01 593.61 138.91
Civil Work Cost 1,271.11 552.95 581.97 136.19
4. EDSA/Roosevelt IC Civil Work Cost 701.11 295.84 330.15 75.12
Civil Work Cost 687.36 290.04 323.68 73.65
2. ROW Acquisition Cost 4.00 0.00 4.00 0.00
4.00 4.00
3. Construction Supervision Cost Total 245.37 123.94 113.27 8.16
Construction Supervision Cost 240.56 121.51 111.05 8.00
4. Project Administration Cost Total 110.88 110.88
Detailed Design Stage, Construction Supervision Stage (3.5%) 110.88 110.88
Grand Total 3,591.61 1,424.40 1,812.84 354.38

5.5.5 Draft Estimated Cost for the Consultancy Services for Pre-Construction and
Construction Supervision
Recapitulation of Draft Estimated Cost for the Consultancy Services for Pre-Construction and
Construction Supervision is shown in Table 5.5-7.
Table 5.5-7 Recapitulation of Draft Estimated Cost for the Consultancy Services for
Pre-Construction and Construction Supervision
FOREIGN CURRENCY VAT LOCAL
DESCRIPTION CURRENCY
YEN COMPONENT PESO COMPONENT (PESO)
I. PRE-CONSTRUCTION STAGE
A. Yen Component
A.1 Remuneration Cost ¥ 20,496,000
A.2 Reimbursable Cost ¥ 3,140,000
B. Peso Component
Remuneration Cost P 8,310,000
Reimbursable Cost P 3,220,000
TOTAL ¥ 23,636,000 P 11,530,000 P 997,200
II. CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION STAGE
A. Yen Component
A.1 Remuneration Cost ¥ 179,340,000
A.2 Reimbursable Cost ¥ 24,250,000
B. Peso Component
Remuneration Cost P 58,350,000
Reimbursable Cost P 41,172,000
TOTAL ¥ 203,590,000 P 99,522,000 P 7,002,000
SUB-TOTAL (I + II) ¥ 227,226,000 P 111,052,000 P 7,999,200
VAT ¥ P P 7,999,200
Contingency (2.0%) ¥ 4,544,520 P 2,221,040
¥ P P
231,770,520 113,273,040 7,999,200
TOTAL CONSULTANCY COST 443,591,105

¥
237,214,495
P

5.5.6 Proposed Implementation Plan (STEP Scheme & General Loan Scheme)
Proposed implementation schedules are shown in Table 5.5-8.

Table 5.5-8 Proposed Implementation Plan (STEP Scheme & General Loan Scheme)

Table 5.5-9 Proposed Implementation Schedule for EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
1. GENERAL YEN LOAN
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C4/Roosevelt
1. Preparation Work (Mobilization)
2. Earth Work (MSE Wall)

3. Pavement Work
4. Bored Pile
5. Abutment, Pier & Slab
North Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7)
3) Segment 3 (P8, P9, P10)
4) Segment 4 (P11, P12, A2)
South Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
(1) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7)

3) Segment 3 (P8, P9, P10)
4) Segment 4 (P11, P12, A2)
6. Miscellaneous Work
63
2. STEP LOAN
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C4/Roosevelt
3. Pavement Work
Proposed implementation schedule is shown in Table 5.5-9.
4. Bored Pile
5.5.7 Proposed Implementation Schedule for Each Interchange
5. Steel Fablication
North Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7)
3) Segment 3 (P8, P9, P10)
4) Segment 4 (P11, P12, A2)
South Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7)
3) Segment 3 (P8, P9, P10)
4) Segment 4 (P11, P12, A2)

Table 5.5-10 Proposed Implementation Schedule for EDSA/North/West
1. GENERAL YEN LOAN
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C4/North West
3. Pavement Work

4. Bored Pile
(2) EDSA/North/West
North Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6)
4) Segment 4 (P10, P11, A2)
South Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
4) Segment 4 (P10, P11, A2)
2. STEP LOAN
64
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C4/North West
3. Pavement Work
4. Bored Pile
North Bound
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2)
2) Segment 2 (P3, P4)
4) Segment 4 (P8, P9, A2)
South Bound
4) Segment 4 (P9, A2)

Table 5.5-11 Proposed Implementation Schedule for West/Mindanao
1. GENERAL YEN LOAN
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
North Mindanao
3. Pavement Work

4. Bored Pile
(3) West/Mindanao
5. Tunnel, Abutment, Pier & Slab

Depressed (Tunnel)
1) Bored Pile, Beam & Tunnel
2) Excavation
3) PC Beam
Flyover
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7, P8)
3) Segment 3 (P9, P10, P11, P12)
4) Segment 4 (P13, P14, P15, A2)
2. STEP LOAN
MONTHS
65
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
North Mindanao
3. Pavement Work
4. Bored Pile
6. Tunnel, Abutment, Pier & Slab
A. Depressed (Tunnel)
1) Bored Pile, Beam & Tunnel

2) Excavation
3) PC Beam
B. Flyover
3) Segment 3 (P6, P17, P8)
4) Segment 4 (P9, P10, P11, P12, A2)

Table 5.5-12 Proposed Implementation Schedule for C5-Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria
1. GENERAL YEN LOAN
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C5/Green Meadows
3. Pavement Work

4. Bored Pile
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
2) Segment 2 (P4, P5, P6, P7)
3) Segment 3 (P8, P9, P10, P11, P12)
4) Segment 4 (P12, P13, P14, P15)
5) Segment 5 (P16, P17, P18, P19, 20)
6) Segment 6 (P21, P22, P23, P24)
7) Segment 7 (P25, P26, P27, P28)
8) Segment 8 (P29, P30, P31, P32)
9) Segment 9 (P33, P34, P35, P36)
10) Segment 10 (P37, P38, P39, P40)
11) Segment 11 (P41, P42, P43, P44, P45)
12) Segment 12 (P46, P47, P48, P49, P50)
13) Segment 13 (P51, P52, P53, A2)
66
2. STEP LOAN
(4) C5-Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria.
MONTHS
No. Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
C5/Green Meadows
3. Pavement Work
4. Bored Pile
1) Segment 1 (A1, P1, P2, P3)
3) Segment 3 (P7, P8, P9, P10)
4) Segment 4 (P11, P12)
5) Segment 5 (P13, P14, P15, P16, P17)
6) Segment 6 (P18, P19, P20, P21)
7) Segment 7 (P22, P23, P24, P25, P26)
8) Segment 8 (P27, P28, P29, P30)
9) Segment 9 (P31, P32, P33, P34)
10) Segment 10 (P35, P36, P37, P38)
11) Segment 11 (P39, P40, P41)
12) Segment 12 (P42, P43, P44, P45)
13) Segment 13 (P46, P47, A2)

5.5.8 Summary of Comparison between STEP Loan and Regular Yen Loan
The characteristics and advantages of both types of loans are shown in the table below.
Description STEP Loan Regular Yen Loan Remarks

PC Voided Slab Bridge +
1. Bridge Type Steel Box and Steel PC Voided Slab Bridge
Deck-Slab Bridge
Cost is PHP 420 M or
2. Total Construction Cost PHP 3,231 M PHP 2,811 M
14.9% higher under STEP
EDSA/North/West 37.4 68.0
North/Mindanao 15.7 23.6
3. EIRR
EDSA/ Roosevelt 22.5 35.9
(%)
C-5/Greenmeadows 16.4 25.1
4. Construction Duration
22~23 months 23~24 months Reduce 1 month
(per Flyover)
5. Period of Traffic Control at
10 days 270 days
Intersection
Estimated Detailed Design
6. Detailed Design Under JICA Grant Under Loan
Cost is PHP 92 M
7. Interest Rate of Loan 0.2% p.a. 1.4% p.a.
8. Grace Period and Repayment

10 years and 40 years 7 years and 30 years
Duration
Initial investment is high under STEP loan and, correspondingly, low EIRR, but it has the
following advantages:
(a) Relatively shorter duration of construction per flyover;
(b) Traffic control at intersection is much shorter;
(c) PHP 92 M estimated cost of detailed design will be undertaken under JICA Grant;
(d) Very low and fixed interest rate (0.2%) and long-term repayment period.

CHAPTER 6
EVALUATION OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS
6.1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS
Economic analysis of the 4 intersections (five interchanges), namely, C-3/E. Rodriguez,

EDSA-Roosevelt, EDSA-North/West, North/Mindanao, C-5/Green Meadows, and the aggregate
taken as a whole package have been undertaken with EIRR and ENPV as efficiency measurement
indicators. However, implementation of the C-3/E. Rodriguez was cancelled by the DPWH to give
Therefore, the aggregate analysis was conducted for four interchanges except C-3/E. Rodriguez.
Conversion factors to estimate economic costs and unit prices of vehicle operation cost
(VOC-Running and Time costs, DPWH 2008) have been applied as analytical tools for costs and
benefits (as per 2012 price level). Sensitivity analysis and shadow pricing were also undertaken to
qualitatively assess the allocative efficiency of scarce resources in the economy with the
improvement of the concerned interchanges. Sensitivity analysis for the two types of Japan ODA
loans will follow in Sections 6.1.4 and 6.2.4, respectively.
6.1.1 Analytical Methodology
(1) Overall Model Configuration
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) will be a major index to measure investment
feasibility, while taking in view the following prepositions of (i) “with and without” the
project analysis (incremental analysis), (ii) time discount method converting all of costs and
benefits accrues in the future to the present value, and (iii) cash-flow analysis. Variables and
assumptive parameters applied to the analysis are summarized in the following set of model
configuration presented in Table 6.1-1.

Table 6.1-1 Model Configuration

C-3/E. EDSA/ EDSA/North/ North/Minda C-5/Green
Variables
Rodriguez Roosevelt West nao Meadows
1 Project Life (construction years) 25 (6)
2 Exchange rate (JPY/PhP) 1.87
3 Exchange rate (PhP/EUR) 58.5
4 Physical Contingency (%) 2.0
5 Price Contingency (Foreign, %) 2.1 (Nov. 2012, JICA)
6 Price Contingency (Local, %) 2.6 (Nov. 2012, JICA)
7 OM cost (% of BC + Phy Con) 0.5 (based on past performance)
8 Standard Conversion Factor 0.83 (1/1.2)
9 Economic Feasibility Cut-off Rate 15.0 % (Social Discount Rate)
Sensitivity Analysis
10 Benefits 15 percent Downsizing
11 Costs 15 percent Up
12 Combination of Benefit and Cost 2 variable-simultaneous simulation
(2) Economic Benefits (common to every intersection)
Economic benefit includes (i) Vehicle Operation Cost (VOC): Running cost saving, and (ii)
VOC: Time cost saving All the benefits and costs were adjusted to 2012 price level.
The DPWH Basic Vehicle operation Cost (2008) based on HDM-4 toolkit (The World Bank,
version 2.05 in 2006) was applied to numerate the running and time costs, as guided by DPWH
and NEDA procedures. In doing so, 10 types of vehicles in the DPWH basic Vehicle Operation
Cost table have been realigned to 6 categories in line with the modeling of traffic and demand
analysis in the study. The VOC by vehicle type is given in Table 6.1-2 below.
Table 6.1-2 Economic Benefit - DPWH BVOC Table (PhP)

Passenger Utility
Jeepney Bus Truck Motorcycle
Car Vehicle
Running Cost (V-km) 8.6 7.1 7.5 23.1 31.6 1.5
Time Cost (V-Hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9
Source: DPWH BVOC 2008 and JICA Study Team
The annual investment schedule for all of the intersections had been assumed as shown in Table
6.1-3.
Table 6.1-3 Annual Investment Schedule (%)

1 2 3 4 5 6
0.26 2.92 1.35 28.35 57.22 9.89
Note: 1) Annual investment schedule is made up by allocating the project cost in accordance with the project
implementation schedule

(3) Estimates of Economic Costs and Benefits by Intersection
(a) C-3/ E. Rodriguez
Economic cost and benefit are given in Tables 6.1-4 and 6.1-5 below. Economic Benefit by
value is depicted as Figure 6.1-2.
Table 6.1-4 Financial and Economic Costs of C-3 E. Rodriguez (PhP million)
Financial Cost Economic Cost
FC LC Total FC LC Total
Construction 167.20 250.80 418.00 167.20 209.00 376.20
Land Compensation
Administration cost 16.38 16.38 13.65 13.65
Engineering Fee 25.80 21.60 47.40 25.80 18.00 43.80
Tax and Duties 51.62 51.62
Base Cost 193.00 340.40 533.40 193.00 240.65 433.65
Physical Contingency 3.86 6.81 10.67 3.86 4.81 8.67
BC+PhyC 196.86 347.20 544.06 196.86 245.46 442.32
Price Contingency 20.18 44.50 64.68
Total 217.04 391.70 608.75 196.86 245.46 442.32
Table 6.1-5 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of C-3/ E. Rodriguez (PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Jeepney Bus Truck Motorcycle Total
Car Vehicle
Running Cost Saved (v-km, mil) 9.0 0.0005 1.5 -0.2 0.51 -59.7
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54
Running Cost saving (PhP mil) 77.8 0.004 11.0 -5.3 16.1 -92.0 7.6
Time Saved (v-hr mil 10.4 1.5 1.3 0.04 0.5 10.1 23.7
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9
Time Cost Saving (PhP mil) 4,230.3 656.3 195.0 69.7 50.3 907.5 6,109.0
Total VOC Benefit 4,308.1 656.3 205.9 64.3 66.4 815.5 6,116.6

Figure 6.1-1 Economic Benefits by Value of C-3/E. Rodriguez (2018-2037)

(b) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
Table 6.1-6 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Roosevelt

(PhP million)
Construction 214.37 321.56 535.93 214.37 267.97 482.34
Land Acquisition
Engineering Fee 39.35 32.28 71.62 39.35 26.90 66.24
Tax and Duties 0.00 76.32 76.32
Base Cost 253.72 451.17 704.89 253.72 312.37 566.09
BC+PhyC 258.79 460.19 718.99 258.79 318.62 577.41
Total 285.33 519.18 804.50 258.79 318.62 577.41
Table 6.1-7 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Roosevelt
(PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
Running Cost Saved (v-km, mil) 42.3 38.9 6.8 8.1 4.8 12.6 113.5
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54
Running Cost saving (PhP mil) 364.9 274.7 51.2 186.7 152.3 19.4 1,049.3
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9
Time Cost Saving (PhP mil) 1,130.1 970.6 60.7 1,682.5 39.7 131.1 3,905.6
Total VOC Benefit 1,495.0 1,254.3 118.5 1,869.2 192.0 32.5 4,954.9
350
300
Economic Benefits (PhP Mil)
250
200 Time Cost

Saved
150
100
Running
50 Cost Saved
0
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
Figure 6.1-2 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional (2018-2037)

(c) EDSA/ North/West
Economic cost and benefit are given in Tables 6.1-8 and 6.1-9. Economic Benefit by value is
shown as Figure 6.1-3.
Table 6.1-8 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/ North/West (PhP million)
Construction 200.66 301.00 501.66 200.66 250.83 451.49
Land Acquisition 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Engineering Fee 36.83 30.21 67.04 36.83 25.18 62.01
Base Cost 237.49 422.32 659.81 237.49 292.40 529.89
BC+PhyC 242.24 430.76 673.01 242.24 298.24 540.49
Total 267.13 486.09 753.22 242.24 298.24 540.49
Table 6.1-9 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/North/West (PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility Motorc
Jeepney Bus Truck Total
Car Vehicle ycle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
Running Cost saving (PhP mil) 438.3 162.7 75.5 19.6 92.7 11.7 800.5
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
Total VOC Benefit 6,565.5 592.3 307.3 1,203.1 305.5 547.0 9,520.7
700
600
500
Time Cost
400 Saved
300
200 Running
100 Cost Saved
0
2033
2013
2015
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2035
2037

Figure 6.1-3 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/North/West (2018-2037)

(d) North/ Mindanao
Economic cost and benefit are given in Tables 6.1-10 and 6.1-11. Economic Benefit by value
is shown as Figure 6.1-4.
Table 6.1-10 Financial and Economic Costs of North/ Mindanao (PhP million)
Construction 195.90 293.85 489.75 195.90 244.88 440.78
Engineering Fee 35.96 29.50 65.45 35.96 24.58 60.54
Base Cost 231.86 416.30 648.15 231.86 288.79 520.65
BC+PhyC 236.49 424.62 661.12 236.49 294.57 531.06
Total 260.74 479.05 739.79 236.49 294.57 531.06
Table 6.1-11 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of North/ Mindanao (PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility Motorcy
Jeepney Bus Truck Total
Car Vehicle cle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
180
160
140
120 Time Cost
100 Saved
80
60
Running
40
Cost Saved
20
0
2017
2013
2015
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.1-4 Economic Benefits by Value of North/Mindanao (2018-2037)

(e) C-5/Green Meadows
Economic cost and benefit are given in Tables 6.1-12 and 6.1-13. Economic Benefit by value
is depicted as Figure 6.1-5.
Table 6.1-12 Financial and Economic Costs of Green Meadows (PhP million)
Construction 373.37 560.05 933.41 373.37 466.71 840.07
Land Acquisition
Engineering Fee 68.53 56.22 124.75 68.53 46.85 115.38
Base Cost 441.89 785.79 1,227.68 441.89 544.05 985.94
BC+PhyC 450.73 801.50 1,252.23 450.73 554.93 1,005.66
Total 496.94 904.23 1,401.17 450.73 554.93 1,005.66
Table 6.1-13 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of C-5/Green Meadows (PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
Running Cost Saved (v-km,
60.8 0.7 3.4 0.003 1.7 3.7 70.3
mil)
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
Running Cost (PhP mil) 524.9 4.8 25.6 0.6 53.1 5.7 614.7
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
Time Cost Saving
5,007.4 411.5 510.3 88.0 241.7 341.2 6,600.1
(PhP mil)
VOC Total Benefit 5,532.3 416.2 535.9 88.6 294.9 346.9 7,214.8
450
400
350
300 Time Cost
250 Saved
200
150 Running
100 Cost Saved
50
0
2013
2015
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.1-5 Economic Benefits by Value of C-5/Green Meadows (2018-2037)

(f) Aggregate
However, the aggregate analysis was conducted for five interchanges including C-3/E.
Rodriguez. Aggregate economic costs and benefits are given in Tables 6.1-14 and 6.1-15.
Economic Benefits by value are shown in Figure 6.1-6.
Table 6.1-14 Financial and Economic Costs: Aggregate (PhP million)

Construction 1,151.50 1,727.26 2,878.76 1,151.50 1,439.38 2,590.88
Engineering Fee 206.46 169.81 376.27 206.46 141.51 347.97
Base Cost 1,357.96 2,415.97 3,773.93 1,357.96 1,678.26 3,036.22
BC+PhyC 1,385.12 2,464.29 3,849.41 1,385.12 1,711.82 3,096.94
Total 1,508.95 2,739.55 4,248.49 1,385.12 1,711.82 3,096.94
Table 6.1-15 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved (PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
Running Cost saving (PhP mil) 1,451.8 488.1 173.6 212.5 324.4 40.1 2,690.4
Time Cost Saving (PhP mil) 13,993.9 1,941.9 868.2 3,287.9 554.3 1,040.7 21,686.9
VOC Total Benefit 15,445.7 2,430.0 1,041.8 3,500.4 878.6 1,080.8 24,377.3
1,600
1,400
1,200
Time Cost
1,000
Saved
800
600
Running Cost
400 Saved
200
0
2015
2021
2013
2017
2019
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.1-6 Economic Benefits by Value (2018-2037)

6.1.2 Results
The Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) and Economic Net Present Value (ENPVs) by
intersection are presented in Table 6.1-16, followed by figures depicting cost-benefit streams
(Figures 6.1-7 through 6.1-12). In the estimation of ENPV, a 15 percent social discount rate was
applied, as guided by NEDA procedures.
Table 6.1-16 EIRR and ENPV by Intersection

C-3/ E. EDSA/ EDSA/North/ North/ C-5/Green
Aggregate*1
Rodriguez Roosevelt West Mindanao Meadows
EIRR (%) 52.2 35.9 68.3 23.4 25.1 41.4
ENPV (PhP mill) 732.6 452.8 1,244.2 147.3 416.4 3124.9
Note: 1) Aggregation of three interchanges except C-3/E. Rodriguez.
(1) C-3/ E. Rodriguez
EIRR and ENPV stand at 52.2 percent and PhP 732.6 million, respectively. The chronological
inputs and outputs streams of economic resources are depicted as Figures 6.1-7.
500 60%
400 Time cost saved

Cost and Benefit (PhP Million)
50%
300
40% Running cost
200
saved
EIRR
100 30%
OM
0
20%
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
(100)
Initial Investment
10%
(200)
(300) 0% EIRR

Figure 6.1-7 Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (C-3/E. Rodriguez)
EIRR and ENPV were evaluated at 35.9 percent and PhP 452.8 million, respectively. It would be
noteworthy that the completion of C-3 Expressway (2028) will have little effect on traffic
diversion on the concerned intersection. The chronological inputs and outputs streams of
economic resources are shown in Figures 6.1-8.

350 40%
Time cost saved
35%
250
30%
150 Running cost
25% saved
50
EIRR
20% OM
(50)
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
15%
(150) Initial
10%
Investment
(250) 5%
EIRR
(350) 0%

Figure 6.1-8 Economic Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional)
(3) EDSA/North/West
EIRR and ENPV were evaluated at 68.3 percent and PhP 1244.2 million, respectively. The
chronological inputs and outputs streams of economic resources are shown in Figures 6.1-9.
700 80%
Time cost saved
70%
500
60%
300 Running cost
50% saved
100
EIRR
40% OM
(100)
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
30%
(300) Initial
20%
Investment
(500) 10%
EIRR
(700) 0%

(EDSA/North/West/Mindanao)
(4) North/Mindanao

300 25%
Time cost saved
200

100 20%
0 Running cost
saved
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
(100) 15%
EIRR
(200) OM
(300) 10%
(400)
Initial
(500) 5% Investment
(600)
EIRR
(700) 0%

Figure 6.1-10 Economic Cost and Export Parity Benefit, and EIRR (North/Mindanao)
(5) C-5/Green Meadows
600 30%
Time cost saved
400 25%
200
20% Running cost
saved
0
EIRR
15%
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
OM
(200)
10%
(400)
Initial
5% Investment
(600)
EIRR
(800) 0%

Figure 6.1-11 Economic Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (C-5/Green Meadows)
(6) Aggregate
Therefore, the aggregate analysis was conducted for three interchanges except C-3/E.

Rodriguez.
Aggregate EIRR and ENPV was estimated at 41.4 percent and PhP 3124.9 million, respectively.
The aggregate chronological streams of economic inputs and outputs and EIRR schedule is
shown in Figure 6.1-12.
1,800 45%
1,300 40% Time cost saved

800 35%
30% Running cost
300
saved
25%
EIRR
(200)
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
20% OM
(700)
15%
(1,200) 10% Initial
(1,700) 5% Investment
(2,200) 0% EIRR

Figure 6.1-12 Cost and Benefit Streams and EIRR
6.1.3 Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analysis has been undertaken to indicate resiliency against risks, specifically, (i)
downsizing benefits by 15 percent, (ii) cost increase or overrun by 15 percent, and (iii)
combination of (i) and (ii). The results are presented in Table 6.1-17. The results reveal profoundly
robust viability and resiliency of each of the MMICP against project risks that would take place
during their construction and operation period.
Table 6.1-17 Sensitivity Analysis

Base Case Cost 15% Up Benefit 15% Down Combination
C-3/E. Rodriguez 52.2 47.0 46.2 41.5
EDSA/Roosevelt 35.9 35.9 31.1 27.4
EDSA/North/West 68.3 61.4 60.3 54.0
North/Mindanao 23.4 20.3 19.9 17.1
C-5/Green Meadows 25.1 25.1 22.3 21.9
*1
Aggregate 41.4 37.0 36.3 32.3
6.1.4 Conclusion
From the assessments undertaken by the Study Team, all of the intersection construction projects
are economically feasible, viable, and highly exceed the cut-off rate of allocative-efficiency of 15
percent. Of this, North-West-Mindanao intersections posted extremely high efficiency rates due

largely to (i) large volume of aggregate traffic, (ii) high growth rate of traffic volume2 (2018-27),
and (iii) Low project cost. Major attributes affecting the size of efficiency (EIRR) of each of the
intersections are summarized in Table 6.1-18.
EIRR analysis and sequential sensitivity analysis numerically proved the worthiness of MMICP in
the light of the national economy. As such, the commencement of the project at an early stage of
time would profoundly be recommendable by securing the financing facilities inclusive of the
Japan’s ODA loan as an option.
Table 6.1-18 EIRR and Attributes of Scarce Resource (2018-37)

Traffic
Economic VOC, PhP mil, VOC Share of Total Time
Annual
EIRR Cost 2018 (of which Time Cost Cost Saving
Growth Rate
(PhP mil) passenger car) Saving (V-hr, mil)
(2018-27)
6,116.6
C-3/E. Rodriguez 52.2 4.9 % 442.32 99.9% 23.7
(4,308.2)
4,954.9
EDSA/Roosevelt 35.9 2.7 % 577.41 78.8% 6.9
(Bus:1,869.2)
9,520.7
EDSA/North/West 68.3 2.7 % 540.49 91.6% 26.1
(6,565.5)
2,686.9
North/Mindanao 23.4 2.7 % 531.06 91.6% 7.4
(1,852.9)
7,214.8
C-5/Green Meadows 25.1 4.0% 1,005.66 91.5% 22.5
(5,532.3)
6.2 EIRR Analysis under STEP Loan Scheme
This section deals with economic analysis of the MMICP under the Japan’s STEP loan scheme
with EIRR as efficiency measurement index. Analytical framework and methodology are all
identical to Japan’s Middle Income Countries General Condition Loan (GC) Loan in view. Note
that the EIRR analyses assume different initial investment costs under the two loan schemes of GC
Loan and STEP Loan. In addition, the implementation of the C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange was
cancelled by the DPWH to give priority to the construction of Skyway Stage 3, second level, along
C-3 under BOT scheme.
6.2.1 Analytical Methodology
(1) Overall Model Configuration
As previously noted in Section 6.1.1, prepositions of the analysis include (i) “with and without”
the project analysis (incremental analysis), (ii) time discount method, and (iii) cash-flow
analysis. Variables and assumptive parameters applied to the analysis are summarized in
Table 6.2-1.
2
Current analysis of demand forecast and sequential efficiency analysis assumes an increase (2018) and downsizing (2028) of traffic
volume at each of the intersections taking in view the completion of C-3 missing link construction and C-3 Expressway, respectively.
Note that Green Meadows was assumed to have little influence on the C-3 expressway in the light of traffic volume.

Table 6.2-1 Model Configuration (STEP Loan)

EDSA/ EDSA/North/ North/ C-5/Green
Variables
Roosevelt West Mindanao Meadows
1 Project Life (construction years) 25 (6)
2 Exchange rate (JPY/PhP) 1.87
3 Exchange rate (PhP/EUR) 58.5
4 Physical Contingency (%) 2.0
5 Price Contingency (Foreign, %) 2.1 (Nov. 2012, JICA)
6 Price Contingency (Local, %) 2.6 (Nov. 2012, JICA)
7 OM cost (% of BC + Phy Con) 0.5 (based on past performance)
8 Standard Conversion Factor 0.83 (1/1.2)
10 Economic Feasibility Cut-off Rate 15.0 % (Social Discount Rate)
Sensitivity Analysis
11 Benefits 15 percent Downsizing
12 Costs 15 percent Up
13 Combination of Benefit and Cost 2 variable-simultaneous simulation
The annual investment schedule for all of the intersections had been assumed as shown in Table
6.2-2.
Table 6.2-2 Annual Investment Schedule (%)

1 2 3 4 5 6
1.68 42.37 39.12 6.89 9.94 0.0
Note: 1) Annual investment schedule is made up by allocating the project cost in accordance with the project
implementation schedule
(2) Economic Benefits (common to every intersection)
Economic benefit includes (i) Vehicle Operation Cost (VOC): Running cost saving and (ii)
VOC: Time cost saving. All the benefits and costs are as per 2012 price. The VOC by vehicle
type is given in Table 6.1-2. Meanwhile, the annual investment schedule for all of the
intersections had been assumed as same as Table 6.1-3.
(3) Estimates of Economic Costs and Benefits by Intersection

(a) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional

(STEP Loan, PhP million)
Construction 290.04 323.68 613.71 290.04 269.73 559.77
Land Acquisition
Engineering Fee 41.43 32.29 73.72 41.43 26.91 68.34
Tax and Duties 0.00 85.64 85.64
Base Cost 331.47 465.66 797.13 331.47 316.69 648.15
BC+PhyC 338.10 474.98 813.07 338.10 323.02 661.12
Total 358.50 510.66 869.17 338.10 323.02 661.12
(STEP Loan, PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54
Running Cost saving (PhP mil) 364.9 274.7 51.2 186.7 152.3 19.4 1,049.3
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9
Total VOC Benefit 1,495.0 1,254.3 118.5 1,869.2 192.0 32.5 4,954.9
350
300
250
200 Time Cost

Saved
150
100
Running
50 Cost Saved
0
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
Figure 6.2-1 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional

(STEP Loan, 2018-2037)

(b) EDSA/ North/West
Table 6.2-5 Financial and Economic Costs of EDSA/North/West (STEP Loan, PhP million)
Construction 224.42 392.16 616.58 224.42 326.80 551.22
Land Acquisition
Administration cost
Engineering Fee 37.88 29.52 67.39 37.88 24.60 62.47
Base Cost 262.30 504.13 766.43 262.30 351.40 613.69
BC+PhyC 267.54 514.21 781.76 267.54 358.42 625.97
Total 283.69 552.84 836.54 267.54 358.42 625.97
Table 6.2-6 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of EDSA/North/West

Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
Total VOC Benefit 6,565.5 592.3 307.3 1,203.1 305.5 547.0 9,520.7
700
600
500
Time Cost
400 Saved
300
200 Running
100 Cost Saved
0
2017
2013
2015
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.2-2 Economic Benefits by Value of EDSA/North/West (STEP Loan, 2018-2037)

(c) North/ Mindanao
Table 6.2-7 Financial and Economic Costs of North/Mindanao (STEP Loan, PhP million)
Construction 207.55 364.13 571.68 207.55 303.44 511.00
Engineering Fee 35.03 27.30 62.33 35.03 22.75 57.78
Base Cost 242.58 488.33 730.91 242.58 343.14 585.73
BC+PhyC 247.44 498.09 745.53 247.44 350.00 597.44
Total 262.37 535.51 797.88 247.44 350.00 597.44
Table 6.2-8 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of North/Mindanao

Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
180
160
140
120 Time Cost
100 Saved
80
60
Running
40
Cost Saved
20
0
2017
2013
2015
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.2-3 Economic Benefits by Value of North/Mindanao (STEP Loan, 2018-2037)

(d) C-5/Green Meadows
Table 6.2-9 Financial and Economic Costs of C-5/Green Meadows (STEP Loan, PhP million)
Construction 552.95 581.97 1,134.92 552.95 484.98 1,037.93
Land Acquisition
Engineering Fee 76.62 59.71 136.33 76.62 49.76 126.38
Base Cost 629.57 825.77 1,455.34 629.57 571.81 1,201.38
BC+PhyC 642.16 842.29 1,484.45 642.16 583.25 1,225.41
Total 680.92 905.57 1,586.49 642.16 583.25 1,225.41

Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
BVOC (PhP/v-km) 8.63 7.05 7.54 23.10 31.58 1.54 -
Running Cost (PhP mil) 524.9 4.8 25.6 0.6 53.1 5.7 614.7
BVOC (k-hr) 408.4 446.6 154.2 1,669.2 109.7 89.9 -
VOC Total Benefit 5,532.3 416.2 535.9 88.6 294.9 346.9 7,214.8
450
400
350
300 Time Cost
250 Saved
200
150 Running
100 Cost Saved
50
0
2013
2015
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037

Figure 6.2-4 Economic Benefits by Value of C-5/Green Meadows
(STEP Loan, 2018-37)

(e) Aggregate
Therefore, the following analysis was conducted for aggregation of four interchanges except
C-3/E. Rodriguez. Economic cost and benefit are given in Tables 6.2-11 and 6.2-12 below.
Economic Benefit by value is depicted as Figure 6.2-5.
Table 6.2-11 Financial and Economic Costs (STEP Loan, PhP million)
Construction 1,274.96 1,553.61 2,828.57 1,274.96 1,294.68 2,569.63
Engineering Fee 190.96 148.81 339.77 190.96 124.01 314.97
Base Cost 1,465.92 2,212.83 3,678.75 1,465.92 1,511.09 2,977.01
BC+PhyC 1,495.24 2,257.08 3,752.32 1,495.24 1,541.31 3,036.55
Total 1,585.49 2,426.65 4,012.14 1,495.24 1,541.31 3,036.55
Table 6.2-12 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved (STEP Loan, PhP million, 2018-37)
Passenger Utility
Car Vehicle
Running Cost saving (PhP million) 1,451.8 488.1 173.6 212.4 324.3 40.1 2,690.4
Time Cost Saving
13,993.9 1,933.0 868.2 3,287.9 554.2 1,158.7 21,686.9
(PhP million)
VOC Total Benefit 15,445.7 2,421.1 1,041.8 3,500.3 878.5 1,198.8 24,377.3
Source : JICA Study Team
1,600
1,400
1,200
Time Cost
1,000
Saved
800
600
Running Cost
400 Saved
200
0
2015
2021
2013
2017
2019
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037
Figure 6.2-5 Economic Benefits by Value (STEP Loan, 2018-2037)

6.2.2 Results
The Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) and Economic Net Present Value (ENPV) by
intersection are presented in Table 6.2-13, followed by figures depicting cost-benefit streams
(Figures 6.2-6 through 6.2-10). In the estimation of ENPV, 15 percent of social discount rate was
applied, as guided by NEDA.
Table 6.2-13 EIRR and ENPV by Intersection (STEP Loan)

EDSA/
EDSA/ North/ C-5/Green
Roosevelt/ Aggregate*1
North/West Mindanao meadows
Congressional
EIRR (%) 22.5 37.4 15.7 16.4 23.2
ENPV (PhP mill) 303.01 1,102.31 20.44 104.02 1,573.71
(a) EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional
EIRR and ENPV were figured out at 22.5 percent and PhP 303.01 million, respectively. It
would be noteworthy that the completion of C-3 Expressway (2028) has little effect of traffic
diversion on the concerned intersection. Chronological inputs and outputs of economic
resources are depicted as Figures 6.2-6.
350 25%
Time cost saved
250
20%
150 Running cost
saved
50 15%
EIRR
OM
(50)
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
10%
(150) Initial Investment
5%
(250)
EIRR
(350) 0%

(EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional, STEP Loan)
(b) EDSA/ North/ West
EIRR and ENPV were figured out at 37.4 percent and PhP 1,102.31 million, respectively.
Chronological inputs and outputs of economic resources are depicted as Figures 6.2-7.

700 40%
Time cost saved
35%
500
30%
300 Running cost
25% saved
100
EIRR
20% OM
(100)
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
15%
(300) Initial Investment
10%
(500) 5%
EIRR
(700) 0%
(EDSA/North/West, STEP Loan)
(c) North/ Mindanao
EIRR and ENPV were figured out at 15.7 percent and PhP 20.44 million, respectively.
Chronological inputs and outputs of economic resources are depicted as Figures 6.2-8.
300 18%
Time cost saved
200 16%
100 14%
0 Running cost
12% saved
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
(100)
10%
EIRR
(200) OM
8%
(300)
6%
(400)
Initial
4%
(500) Investment
(600) 2%
EIRR
(700) 0%
(North/ Mindanao, STEP Loan)

(d) C-5/Green Meadows
EIRR and ENPV were figured out at 16.4 percent and PhP 104.02 million, respectively. It
would be noteworthy that the completion of C-3 Expressway (2028) has little effect of traffic
diversion on the concerned intersection. Chronological inputs and outputs of economic
resources are depicted as Figures 6.2-9.
600 18%
16% Time cost saved
400
14%
200
12% Running cost
saved
0 10%
EIRR
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
8% OM
(200)
6%
(400)
4% Initial
Investment
(600)
2%
EIRR
(800) 0%

(C-5/Green Meadows, STEP Loan)
(e) Aggregate
Therefore, the following analysis was conducted for aggregation of three interchanges
except C-3/E. Rodriguez. EIRR and ENPV stood at 23.2 percent and PhP 1,573.7 million,
respectively. Chronological economic input and output with EIRR schedule is depicted as
Figure 6.2-10.

1,800 25%
1,300 Time cost saved

Cost and Benefit (PhP Million) 20%
800
Running cost
300 15% saved
EIRR
(200) 2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
2031
2034
2037
OM
(700) 10%
(1,200)
5% Initial
(1,700) Investment
(2,200) 0% EIRR

Figure 6.2-10 Cost and Benefit Streams, and EIRR (STEP Loan)
6.2.3 Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analysis has taken place to indicate resiliency of the concerned intersections against
risks, specifically, (i) downsizing benefit by 15 percent, (ii) cost overrun by 15 percent, and (iii)
combination of (i) and (ii). The results are given below Table 6.2-14. The results reveal profoundly
robust resiliency of each of the MMICP against project risks that would take place during
construction and operation period.
Table 6.2-14 Sensitivity Analysis (STEP Loan)

Base Case Cost 15% Up Benefit 15% Down Combination
EDSA/Roosevelt 22.5 20.2 19.9 17.8
EDSA/North/West 37.4 34.4 33.9 31.1
North/Mindanao 15.7 15.7 13.8 13.5
C-5/Green Meadows 16.4 14.7 14.4 12.8
*1
Aggregate 23.2 20.9 20.6 18.5
6.2.4 Conclusion
EIRR analysis and sequential sensitivity analysis under the STEP loan scheme also numerically
proved the worthiness of MMICP in the light of the national economy. As such, the
commencement of the project in an early stage of time would profoundly be commendable
under the secure financing scheme inclusive of the Japan’s ODA loan, either General Condition
or STEP loans, as an option.

6.3 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS
Primarily, an improved accessibility of transport infrastructure and services at the congested

intersections in Metropolitan Manila will by and large benefit road users and surrounding
communities. As numerated in the preceding section, road users will benefit directly from reduced
vehicle operation cost, shorter travel time, and improved road safety. Likewise, surrounding
communities and people therein will also benefit from improved environmental condition brought
about by reduction of CO2 emission and noise. As reflected in Chapter 6 (6.4), these economic
benefits will also benefit Japanese companies using traffic networks and intersections in their daily
operation of business.
Besides the quantification of VOC, CO2 emission reduction effects, and improved road safety
through the reduction of traffic accidents at the intersections are likewise envisaged. At three of the
concerned intersection In Quezon City, fatal and non-fatal injuries, and damages to facilities were
recorded at 99, 3,668, and 15,396, in that order3. Conservatively assuming rate of accident of the
four intersections at 5 percent, and further the cost of traffic accident at around PhP 60,000 4, the
social cost saved by the reduction of traffic accidents would be around PhP 57.5 million per year5.
This figure, as well as air quality improvements, remains indicative and hence were not used in the
quantitative analysis undertaken, Nonetheless, MMICP profoundly implies economic benefits of
social cost savings through the reduction of traffic accidents.
Furthermore, with the current management transformation efforts of the DPWH, the project will
generate greater economic benefits coming from enhanced DPWH institutional and human
resources capacity that will bring about lower cost and better quality of construction and
maintenance works for road projects in the future.
6.4 OPERATION AND EFFECT INDICATORS
Operation and effect of the Project will be monitored by measuring traffic volume and average
travel speed as indicators. The targets of the indicators are estimated as of the planned monitoring
timing as shown in Table 6.4-1 conducting monitoring by DPWH in 2019 two years after
completion of the project. Figure 6.4-1 through 6.4-4 show monitoring location of each
intersection.
3
Source: Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Metro Manila Accident Reporting and Analysis System (MMARAS), Traffic
Accident Report January to December 2009
4
The World Bank, The Bank Operation of Project Financing (Japanese), 2007, p. 46, The case of PRC
5
(99+3,668+15,396) x 0.05 x 60,000 = (around) PhP 57.5 million

Table 6.4-1 Monitoring Plan Operation and Effect Indicators

Base Year Target Year* Monitoring
Indicators Vehicle Type
(2011) (2019) Location
Car 65,107 69,126
Jeepney 2,302 8,925
Utility Vehicle 8,064 6,524
EDSA/Roosevelt/
Along EDSA:
Congressional Intersection Bus 10,134 12,415
Cubao Side
Truck 7,035 2,968
Bicycle 7,171 18,210
Total 99,813 118,167
Car 129,372 130,786
Jeepney 2,119 0
EDSA/West/North Utility Vehicle 5,080 6,691
Along EDSA:
Intersection Bus 10,432 13,593
Cubao Side
Truck 8,119 4,211
Traffic Bicycle 11,259 23,703
Volume Total 166,381 178,985
(veh/day) Car 43,406 44,645
Jeepney 12,209 10,963
North/Mindanao Utility Vehicle 4,240 5,733
Along North Ave.:
Intersection Bus 58 0
EDSA Side
Truck 2,089 1,435
Bicycle 7,390 13,818
Total 69,392 76,593
Car 77,269 112,519
Jeepney 3,727 5,820
C-5/Green Meadows/ Utility Vehicle 14,679 18,539
Along C-5:
Acropolis/Calle Industria Bus 215 524
Intersection Pasig City Side
Truck 9,765 6,244
Bicycle 24,785 34,904
Total 129,440 178,551
EDSA/Roosevelt/ Along EDSA:

16.2 62.2
Congressional Intersection Northbound Flyover
Average EDSA/West/North Along EDSA:

19.9 33.6
Travel Intersection Northbound Flyover
Speed in PM Along North Ave.:
North/Mindanao
Peak 9.8 50.3 EDSA Side bound to
Intersection
(km/h) Quezon Circle
C-5/Green Meadows/
Along C-5:
Acropolis/Calle Industria 29.3 51.0
* Target Year is two years after the completion of the Project, which is defined as the time when the Project is open to traffic.

Monitoring Location of
Traffic Volume
Monitoring Location
（Both Flyover and At-grade
of Travel Speed
Traffic at Both Direction）
(Northbound Flyover)
Location of Traffic Volume Count

（Both Flyover and At-grade
Traffic along Both Direction ）
(EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional Ave. Intersection: Along EDSA – Cubao Side)
Monitoring Location of Traffic

Volume （Both Flyover and
At-grade Traffic at Both Direction）
Monitoring Location
of Travel Speed
(EDSA/North Ave./West Ave. Intersection: Along EDSA – Cubao Side)


Volume （Both Tunnel and
To: EDSA/SM
Monitoring Location of Travel Speed

(At-grade Traffic Bound to Quezon Circle)
(North Ave. /Mindanao Ave. Intersection: Along North Avenue – EDSA/SM Side)

Volume （Both Flyover and
Monitoring Location
of Travel Speed
(C-5/Greean Meadows/Acropolis/Galle Industria – Pasig City Side)

6.5 SURVEY ON BENEFIT FOR JAPANESE COMPANIES IN THE PHILIPPINES
6.5.1 Purpose of the Survey
The purpose of the survey is to verify positive impacts and benefits brought about by the project
implementation on Japanese companies that are operating in Metro Manila and adjacent provinces.
Expected benefits are mostly reduction of transportation cost for delivery of goods and services
passing the project interchanges and adjacent roads within influenced area.
6.5.2 Survey Method
The survey was conducted mainly through interview to the selected Japanese firms that may use
project interchanges for their business. Among 600 Japanese firms operating in Metro Manila area
and adjacent provinces, 8 to 10 Japanese representative firms, that have long time business
operation in the Philippines covering wide areas of Metro Manila with fairly large business
transactions, were selected for interview to identify impacts and benefits on their business with the
implementation of the project.
The following items were surveyed;
1) Current status of transportation system of the firm and potential issues and problems
currently facing in the field of transportation.
2) Expected improvements on access between port/factory and clients and vice versa brought
about by implementation of the Project.
3) Expected reduction of transport related costs owing to implementation of the Project.
4) Expected change in distribution pattern and business perspectives due to implementation of
the project, if any.
6.5.3 Companies Interviewed
The eight (8) representative firms shown in Table 6.5-1 are identified for interview.
6.5.4 Result of Survey
The followings are major findings.
(1) Firm that Frequently Use Project Interchanges
Expert oriented firms are not frequent user of project intersections. These firms are find their
business centers free from traffic congestion, therefore they are avoiding travel in Metro Manila.
On the other hand, firms handle products for domestic consumption necessarily use project
intersections since Metro Manila is the biggest market in the country and they have to transport
their products to consumers in Manila through project intersections.

Table 6.5-1 Japanese Affiliated Firms Selected for Interview Survey

Name of Firm Location of Office/Factory Main Field of Business
1. Toyota Motors Philippines Head Office: Ayala Ave., Makati City, MM Passenger car assembly and
Corporation. Factory: Sta Rosa City, Laguna sales
2. EPSON Precision Philippines Inc. Head Office, Factory: Lima Technology Center, Assembly of office equipment
Lipa City, Batangas (mainly printer)
3. Itochu Corporation Manila Head Office: Ayala Ave., Makati City, MM LP gas retailing, Convenient
Branch Factory: Batangas, Pandacan in Manila City, store operation, Bio-ethanol
Pampanga production.
4. Ajinomoto Philippines Head Office: Makati City, MM Food ingredients
Corporation Factory: Guiginto in Bulacan manufacturing
5. Mitsui & Co. (Asia Paficic) PTE. Head Office: Ayala Ave., Makati City, MM General trading
LTD. Manila Branch
6. Nippon Express Philippines Head Office: Pascor Drive, Parannaque City Freight transport
Corporation Warehouse: Calamba in Languna
7. Suzuki Philippines, Incorporated Head Office, Factory: Danny Floro St., Bagong Motorcycle assembly and sales,
Ilog, Pasig City, MM Passenger car sales
8. Honda Philippines Inc. Head Office, Factory:First Philippine Industrial Motorcycle assembly and sales,
Park, Tanauan City, Batangas Generator sales
(2) Commodity Flow between North and South
The most commodity flow has origin and/or destination from/to Metro Manila, few commodities
are directly transported between north area and south area. However, some firms who were
interviewed mentioned that electrical and mechanical parts manufactured in the south are
transported to factories in the north for assembling via C-3, C-4 (EDSA) and C-5. There is a
tendency that assembling factories are located in the north and parts manufacturing factories are
located in the south. Transporting parts from south to the north is becoming bigger every year.
Mitigation of traffic congestion in Metro Manila will help commodity flow between north and
south.
(3) Poor Access between Expressways and Manila Seaport and Airport
Many Japanese firms raise their concern about poor access to expressways from Manila Seaport
and Airport. Cargos arrive at the seaport and airport has to be transported to their factories
through South Luzon and North Luzon expressways via heavily congested city roads. Travel
along congested city roads hampers timely and efficient transport of imported materials to the
respective factories. Furthermore, transport of goods between factories in the north and south is
also hampered due to absence of city expressways that connects south and north expressways.
Improvement of Major circumferential roads including EDSA to the high standard urban road
and/or construction of new urban expressway is expected to promote commodity flow between
north and south.

(4) Restricted Truck Operation
In addition to heavily congested city roads to the expressways, the law enforcement widely
known as “Truck Ban” that restricts travel of trucks along designated roads during designated
time adds another drawback to transport activities of Japanese firms.
Some other findings are summarized in Table 6.5-2.
Table 6.5-2 Summary of Findings from Interviews to Japanese Firms

1. Expected Impacts of the Project
1) If the project will lead to the lift of truck ban, the firm will be greatly benefited (TOYOTA)
2) Very favorable impacts on delivery of LP gas (ITOCHU)
3) Favorable impacts on delivery of products to consumers (AJINOMOTO, SUZUKI and HONDA)
4) Favorable impacts on delivery of imported good to local manufacturers (MITSUI)
2. Expected Change in Business Opportunities by the Project
1) Deduction of transport cost will increase companies profit and more aggressive business plant can be drawn.
(ITOCHU, AJONOMOTO, MITSUI , NITTSU, SUZUKI and HONDA)
3. Proposed Improvements on Transport System in Metro Manila
1) Improvement of access road to Manila Port and Expressways (All firms)

2) Renovation of NAIA Terminal -1 (TOYOTA, EPSON)
3) Construction outer Circumferential Road to bypass Metro Manila (AJINOMOTO, SUZUKI and HONDA)
4) Capacity expansion of Manila Seaport (MITSUI, NITTSU)
5) Comprehensive traffic management plan (NITTSU)
6.5.5 Conclusion
Most firms that engage in delivery of goods and services in Metro Manila express favorable
opinion on interchange construction as quick impact project, but they also desire fundamental
solution to the Metro Manila traffic by introducing modal sift from vehicular transport to rail
transport for passenger movements and introduction of city expressways including construction
elevated expressways along EDSA and city expressway connecting North and South Expressways
for cargo movements.

CHAPTER 7
STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY
 EIA procedure and EIA related Laws and Regulations in the Philippines: The Philippine
Environmental Impact Statement System (PEISS) has been established by the Presidential
Decree No. 1586 (1978), and implemented by the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) Administrative Order No. 30 Series of 2003 (DAO 03-30) and its
Revised Procedural Manual (2007). The review and supervision of PEISS are conducted by
the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) of the DENR.
 Analysis of Alternatives: Alternative schemes including a zero option (without-the-project)

case for each interchange project were comparatively evaluated from the viewpoints of
environmental and social considerations. The recommended schemes have relatively less
impacts on natural environment and human health, as well as no involuntary resettlement.
 Scoping: In accordance with the “JICA Guidelines for Environmental and Social
Considerations (2002 April)” (hereafter referred to as JICA Guidelines), scoping was
conducted with the analysis of alternatives. The results of scoping show that there are no
significant adverse impacts on natural environment and socio-economic conditions. Items
which are expected to have some negative impacts are listed in Table 7.1
Table 7.1-1 Results of Scoping - Adverse Environmental Impacts Land Acquisition

Items Construction Phase Operation Phase
Land Acquisition (no involuntary resettlement), Local economy None
such as employment and livelihood, Existing social
Social
infrastructures and services, Misdistribution of benefit and
Environment
damage, Water Usage, Sanitation, Risk of Infectious diseases
such as HIV/AIDS
Natural Land slide (depressed), Trees, Landscape Landscape
Environment
Pollution Air Pollution, Water Pollution, Soil Contamination, Waste, Air Pollution, Noise and
Control Noise and Vibration, Accidents Vibration
 Prediction and Assessment: Noise and air pollutants (TSP、SO2、NO2) emitted from vehicles
are predicted based on the projected traffic in 2018. The results of prediction show that:
・ Noise level: Due to the increase of traffic volume, the noise levels will be about
79dB(A) during the day (6.00-22.00) and 75-78dB(A) in the night (22.00-6.00), which
are almost the same as the present noise levels . The predicted noise levels at all four

interchanges may exceed the maximum permissible levels (for commercial area) by
10dB(A) during the day and by 20dB(A) in the night.
・ Air Pollutants: Because of the increase of average travel speeds and the decrease of
vehicle hours, TSP and NO2 emissions of the with-project-case will reduce by
approximately 10 - 20% compared with the zero option case. The emissions of SO2 will
increase by the same amount for both with- and without-project cases. Assuming all
other factors being equal to the present conditions, air pollutant concentrations might
not exceed the maximum allowable limits of 24 hours average of the Philippine Clean
Air Act of 1999 because the present concentrations are well below the limits.
・ CO2 emission: Because of the increase of average travel speeds and the decrease of
vehicle hours, the with-project-case will reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 10-
20% compared with the zero option case.
 Mitigation Measures: Technically feasible mitigation measures during the construction and
operation phases are drawn up and proposed for four interchange projects.
・ During construction, pollution control measures should be implemented in order to

prevent any pollutions from operation of heavy vehicles/machines and
civil/construction works.
・ The Traffic Management Plans should be drawn up to mitigate traffic congestion

during construction, and also abate the traffic accidents in cooperation with Barangay
communities.
・ After opening the interchange, noise levels are regularly monitored. Installation of
noise barriers should be considered where the noise levels significantly exceed the
permissible levels in residential zones.
・ In addition to restoring trees during construction, trees should be planted in central

reserves and sidewalks as much as possible. Vegetation may improve the local aesthetic
views, and also mitigate the noise and air pollutants emitted from vehicles.
 Monitoring: In order to ensure the effectiveness of mitigation measures and monitor the
unexpected impacts, the Environmental Monitoring Plans for the construction and operation
phases are drawn up. After opening the interchanges, replanted trees, ambient air quality,
and noise and vibration should be regularly monitored.
 According to the criteria of PEISS, DPWH will submit the Initial Environmental
Examination (IEE) reports to DENR EMB for each interchange project in order to apply the
Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC).

7.2 LAND ACQUISITION AND RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN (RAP)
 In comparison to JICA Guidelines and World Bank Operational Policies, there are no
variances in terms of the objectives of the JICA Guidelines/WB OP 4.01 and the Philippine
laws/regulations and DPWH policy on land acquisition and RAP. The Project Policy on
compensation is based on the full replacement cost.
 The results of the census survey and inventory (assets and land) survey are shown in Table
7.2-1. At the C-3/E. Rodriguez Interchange, 94 informal settlers had been already relocated
to the outside of the ROW by the MMDA’s METRO GWAPO Program.
 The JICA Study Team supported DPWH to prepare the Abbreviated Resettlement Action
Plan (ARPA) in line with DPWH’s Land Acquisition, Resettlement, Rehabilitation and
Indigenous Peoples’ Policy (LARRIPP) and JICA Guidelines.
 The compensation entitlements for each category of PAPs, resettlement implementation

committee for grievance redress, internal and external monitoring agents are drawn up in the
ARAPs.
Table 7.2-1 Land Acquisition, Involuntary Resettlement and Affected Structure for MMICP
Interchange Land Acquisition Resettlement Affected Structure
C-3/E. Rodriguez None None None
EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional None None 5 stalls (marginal*1)
Additional ROW for
EDSA/North/West/Mindanao None 25 stalls (marginal*1)
sump pit (100 sq.m)
C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/
None None None
Calle Industria
Note : the impact is only partial and the remaining portion of the property or asset is still viable for continued use.
7.3 SUPPORT DPWH TO HOLD PUBLIC CONSULTATION MEETINGS
 In accordance with JICA Guidelines, DPWH assisted with JICA Study Team hold Public
Consultation Meetings for Barangays communities and stakeholders at four interchange
project sites.
 The communities and stakeholders favored the interchange projects to ease the present
traffic congestion. There were the comments on the implementation of the Traffic
Management Plan during construction, noise mitigation measures for the flyovers and
restoration of cutting trees due construction. DPWH will draw up the proper
countermeasures in planning of the interchange projects against these issues raised by
stakeholders.

CHAPTER 8
C-3 MISSING LINK
8.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY ON THE C-3 MISSING LINK
The southern segment (hereafter referred to as the C-3 Missing Link) has not yet been
implemented. The circumferential road network serving south-central Metro Manila is, therefore,
still not functioning effectively resulting in heavily congested traffic conditions on EDSA.
Construction of the C-3 missing link, together with the construction of the flyovers proposed
under this preparatory survey, is expected to significantly contribute to the decongestion of heavy
traffic along the circumferential roads. The study involved review of the C-3 missing link
construction report and also study of influence to the proposed flyovers by the captioned project.
8.2 PROJECT SETTING
8.2.1 Administration, Population and Land Use
The proposed alternative alignments run through four (4) cities in the Metropolitan Manila,
namely San Juan City, Mandaluyong City, Manila City and Makati City. All affected cities are
primarily highly urbanized with scattered factory/industrial developments.
Informal settlements are located beside SM City Sta. Mesa near C-3 Road side.
8.2.2 Topography and Geology of Project Area
The topography of Metro Manila can be classified into three zones, namely; (1) the Coastal
Lowland along Manila Bay, (2) the Central Plateau and (3) Marikina Plain. The surface geology
of the Central Plateau consists of deposits of the Guadeloupe Tuff formation. On the other hand,
the Coastal Lowland and the Marikina Plain mainly consist of alluvium deposits.
8.2.3 River Systems
(1) Pasig River
The 27km of Pasig River is technically a tidal estuary, as the flow direction depends upon the
water-level difference between Manila Bay and Laguna de Bay. The average width of Pasig
River is 91m and average depth is 4m with the deepest sections being 6m. Flow volume can be
as low as 12cum/sec in the dry season whereas during the rainy season flow can increase to
275 cum/sec.
The lowest bridge, with a vertical clearance of only 3.5m above high water level, is the Ayala
Bridge that can only be navigated by larger vessels during periods of low tide.
(2) San Juan River
The channel length of San Juan River is 11.0km and the width of the river in the project area is
typically 40m-50m. The river is flood prone over most of its length with wide areas of

floodwater breakout, including those within the project area.
The San Juan River is not navigable and is outside of the mandate of the Philippine Coast
Guard.
8.3 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS AND DPWH COMPARATIVE STUDY
8.3.1 Alternative Alignments
The six (6) alternative alignments for the C-3 Missing Link were presented to the Secretary of
DPWH in July 2011, together with a comparative study prepared by its URPO. These
alignments are presented in Figure 8.3-1.

Source : URPO
Figure 8.3-1 Alternative Alignments – DPWH Study

8.3.2 DPWH Comparative Study
6 alternatives were presented by URPO-DPWH considering following items such as length of each
alternatives, number of lane, structural type, cost of RROW, construction cost and total cost.
The report also presented advantages and disadvantages for all alternatives but there was no
mention which alternative was superior or even did not make ranking among the alternatives.
8.3.3 Review of DPWH Comparative Study
The Study Team established the following evaluation criteria for the review of the DPWH
alignment study. 1) Proposed Scope of Work 2) Construction Issue 3) R.O.W. Acquisition 4)
Resettlement Issue 5) Environmental Issue 6) Navigation Issue in Pasig River and 7) Construction
Cost.
Following conditions were confirmed:
 Number of lanes is 6-lanes under the original plan and the other five alternatives were only
4-lanes.
 Adoption of viaduct section under the original plan is for limited section only while the other
five alternatives were to adopt viaduct into longer sections.
 Regarding double deck type viaduct, under the original plan and alternatives 5 and 6, this
was not mentioned, while alternative 2 discussed the potential of a double deck type viaduct.
On the other hand, alternatives 3 and 4 were planned as single deck type viaduct.
 Regarding RROW, costs of RROW were presented but breakdown and also any descriptions
of affected buildings, houses and number of people were not provided.
 Regarding environmental issues, some reference were made on environmental issues such as
scouring and obstructions in the river.
 Estimated costs for each of the alternatives had no detailed cost breakdown.
8.4 UPDATED STUDY
8.4.1 Geometric Design Standards
The proposed geometric design standards for the C-3 Missing Link are adopted from DPWH
Sstandard Design Criteria.
8.4.2 Typical Sections
The number of lanes assumed for the alternative alignments is the same as the existing C-3
Northern Segment, which is a 6 lane divided road.
Proposed viaduct structure should take into consideration certain distances from existing
structures, noise and fire, which is regulated under the Water Code of the Philippines.
A road bridge over inland waterways must have a minimum vertical clearance of 3.75m from the
highest water level while San Juan River is not navigable.

Based on above conditions, the Study Team prepared five (5) types of typical cross sections,
namely: 1) at grade section, 2) viaduct on ground, 3) double deck viaduct on ground, 4) along Pasig
River and 5) along San Juan River.
8.4.3 Scope of Work of Each Alignment
The scope of work of each alignment is presented in Table as follows:
Table 8.4-1 Scope of Work of the Alternative Alignments, C-3 Missing Link
Elevated Single Elevated Double R.O.W.
At Grade Total
Deck Deck Acquisition

(1) Viaduct Configuration
Single level viaduct structures are proposed as a preferred configuration. However, where
available ROW is limited, double deck viaducts have been proposed for consdiration.
Long span bridges, in the order of 50m to 100m or so, will be necessary to cross the Pasig River,
and the San Juan River.
(2) Interconnectivity with Local Roads
The interconnectivity of the proposed alternative alignments with local roads is a key aspect in
promoting the functionality of each route.
2- ramps were planned to be provided for each of the alternatives, namely Boni. Ave. and New
Panaderos on the south side and Shaw Blvd. on the north side.
(3) Navigation Issues in Pasig River
There are typically between 150 to 200 vessel movements along the river every day.
The section of Pasig River just upstream of Lambingan Bridge is already posing navigational
problems for the larger vessels plying the river. At this location, the river bends 90 degrees to the
right and narrows down from 100m to less than 60m. Any obstructions in the river reducing the
navigable width will further exacerbate the already difficult situation.
(4) San Juan Pasig River Issues
San Juan River is not navigable and therefore not subject to consideration of vessel navigation
and ship collision forces.

San Juan River will have to address hydraulic capacity issues since areas along the river are already
flood prone.
8.4.4 Project Affected Buildings and Project Affected People
Assessment on the numbers of affected buildings and building landmarks have been made from
open source satellite images.
The numbers of Project Affected People (PAPs) have been estimated by assuming that the typical
average number of persons per household is approximately five (5) based on the data of 2007
Census of Population.
8.4.5 Environmental Issues
(1) Roadside air pollution
Among the alternatives, considering that the length of the routes passing through the residential
area of Alignments 1 and 2 are longer than other alternatives, the impacts of emission gases will
be more significant than other alignments.
(2) Roadside noise impact
Since Alignments 1 and 2 are established in the populated residential area, noise impact will be
the most significant among all the alternatives while for Alignments 3 and 4, which are
established along the rivers or on the river banks, noise impact on roadside residences will be
less significant than that of the other alternative alignments.
(3) Sunlight easement (shadow control)
For Alternatives 3 and 4, the elevated viaducts are constructed along the river thus areas in
shadow will be smaller than those of other alternative alignments.
(4) Water quality deterioration
In Alignment 3, piers will be constructed on the riverbeds in Pasig River and San Juan River.
Installation of piers may deteriorate river water quality during the construction and also during
its operation.
8.4.6 Rough Cost Estimate
Estimated construction cost and cost of R.R.O.W. acquisition were calculated based on similar
completed and on-going project data. Estimated cost is shown as follows:

Table 8.4-2 Cost Estimate

2ND Revised
2ND Revised
Original 1STRevised Alignment a2 PIDC-TPLEX PIDC-TPLEX
Alignment a1
Alignment Alignment Alignment (on River Alignment b1 Alignment b2
(in River)
Bank)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Construction
12,000 14,700 16,400 14,600 9,600 13,900
Cost
ROW
Acquisition
and Land 5,600 5,700 2,100 4,700 4,100 4,400
Improvement
Cost
Total Cost 17,600 20,400 18,500 19,300 13,700 18,300
Unit = Millions of Pesos

8.4.7 Comparative Study
The comparative study of the six potential alignments for the C-3 Missing Link is presented in
Table 8.4-3.

Table 8.4-3 Comparative Study of the Alternative Alignment, C-3 Missing Link
Environmental Impact Project

ROW Acquisition
Ref Description Scope and Cost Construction Aspects Road Network Aspects & Affected Comment
(excluding ramps)
Pasig River Navigation People
1 Original Alignment Relatively narrow available width Adequate traffic management Connects to both Boni Avenue and Since the route is established in Very substantial ROW acquisition (102,000 Maximum Large area of ROW acquisition and
along South Ave. (Makati), and during construction will be Shaw Boulevard. the populated residential area, sqm). Requires wholescale demolition at: estimated largest number of PAPs makes this
(6 Lane, 5.8 km.) Shaw Boulevard (Mandaluyong) crucial. Double deck configuration at the impacts of emission gases, Olympia Ville, Mandaluyong Cemetery, Core number of PAPs one of the least favored routes.
to N. Domingo (San Juan), with Shaw and N. Domingo will noise and sunlight shading will Oil Gas Station, Barangay Hall Bagong at 4,430.
substantial commercial and require longer access ramps and be the most significant among Silang, and residential blocks from
institutional developments each greater ROW acquisition. The the alternatives and must be Valenzuela to N. Domingo.
side require the use of a double double deck structure along South mitigated. Encroachment into Manila South Cemetery is
deck viaduct at these locations . Ave. will require ramps onto Gil Number of impacts: 8 avoided with double deck viaduct along
COST: 17,600MP Puyat and Ayala Avenue. South Ave.
2 1STRevised Relatively narrow available width

along South Ave. (Makati), and the
Adequate traffic management
during construction will be
Connects to both Boni Avenue and
Shaw Boulevard.
Since the route is established in
the populated residential area,
Greatest ROW acquisition (105,000 sqm).
Requires wholescale demolition at: Olympia
Second largest
estimated
Largest area of ROW acquisition
and very large number of PAPs
Alignment Maytunas Creek alignment in San crucial. Double deck configuration at the impacts of emission gases, Ville, residential blocks at corner of number of PAPs makes this one of the least favored
(6 Lane, 7.3 km.) Juan requires the use of a double Shaw and N. Domingo will noise and sunlight shading will Coronado-San Francisco, along Maytunas at 3,925. routes.

deck viaduct to limit ROW require longer access ramps and be the most significant among Creek (partial), and residential blocks from
acquisition. greater ROW acquisition. The the alternatives and must be Valenzuela to N. Domingo.
COST: 20,400MP double deck structure along South abated. Encroaching into Manila South Cemetery is
Ave. will require ramps onto Gil Number of impacts: 8 avoided with double deck viaduct along
Puyat and Ayala Avenue. South Ave.
3 2ND Revised Relatively narrow available width

along South Ave. (Makati)
Access along both waterways
will be required for
Connects to both New Panaderos
and Shaw Boulevard.
Piers will be constructed on the
riverbeds in Pasig River and San
Least ROW acquisition (35,000 sqm) given
that most of alignment is in Pasig and San
Smallest
estimated
Most favored in terms of limiting
area of ROW acquisition and
Alignment a1 requires the use of a double deck construction. Barges could be Single level deck will facilitate Juan River. Installation of piers Juan River. number of PAPs number of PAPs.
(6 Lane, 6.3 km.) viaduct at this location. Single used both to deliver materials simpler access ramp layouts. The and untreated storm runoff may There is a requirement to partially demolish at 550. However construction along
deck viaduct can be used and as a platform for double deck structure along South deteriorate river water quality. Olympia Ville, between Kalayaan Avenue sections of Pasig River may not be
elsewhere for elevated sections. construction equipment along Ave. will require ramps onto Gil Ease of navigation along Pasig and J.P. Rizal. possible given the existing critical
Third level >100m long span Pasig River. Craneways may Puyat and Ayala Avenue. River will be severely impacted Encroachment into Manila South Cemetery is navigation problems.
required over Lambingan Bridge. be necessary along San Juan especially where the river avoided with double deck viaduct along
COST: 18,500MP River given that the river is narrows and at the point where South Ave.
not navigable. the rivers bends 90 degrees on
Water craft management, the approach to Lambingan.
108
using a one-direction at a time Number of impacts: 3

ship control system, will be
required in Pasig River.
4 2ND Revised Relatively narrow available width
along South Ave. (Makati)
Construction access along the
river banks can be made after
Connects to both New Panaderos
and Shaw Boulevard.
Since the route is established in
the populated residential area,
Still substantial ROW acquisition (92,000
sqm) given the need to acquire ROW along
Second smallest
estimated
Reasonably favored in terms of
limiting number of PAPs.
Alignment a2 requires the use of a double deck the easement has been cleared. Single level deck will facilitate noise abatement measures will the river banks of Pasig and San Juan River. number of PAPs No adverse impacts on river
(6 Lane, 6.3 km.) viaduct at this location. Single No construction activities are simpler access ramp layouts. The be needed. Substantial demolition of industrial and at 950. waterway or navigation.
deck viaduct can be used required in the river double deck structure along South Number of impacts: 4 residential properties. However construction along the
elsewhere for elevated sections. waterways. Ave. will require ramps onto Gil There is a requirement to partially demolish banks will still require substantial
Third level >100m long span Puyat and Ayala Avenue. Olympia Ville, between Kalayaan Avenue ROW acquisition.
required over Lambingan Bridge. and J.P. Rizal.
Local road access along the river Encroachment into Manila South Cemetery is
bank at grade can be provided avoided with double deck viaduct along
within the width of ROW South Ave.
acquisition.
COST: 19,300MP
5 PIDC-TPLEX The narrow available width along Adequate traffic management Connects to both New Panaderos Since the route is established in Double deck configuration limits ROW Estimated Route not favored since it does not
New Panaderos (Mandaluyong) during construction will be and Shaw Boulevard. the commercial and residential acquisition (74,000 sqm). number of PAPs extend to Gil Puyat.
Alignment b1 and Blumentritt (San Juan) has crucial. Double deck configuration at both area, the impacts of emission However many properties affected including still substantial
(6 Lane, 5.1 km.) dictated the use of a double deck locations will require longer gases, noise and sunlight commercial buildings especially along New at 1,765.
viaduct to limit ROW acquisition. access ramps and greater ROW shading should be mitigated. Panaderos and F. Bulmentritt. Curved
COST: 13,700MP acquisition. Number of impacts: 6 alignment cuts the corner at F. Blumentritt
requiring wholescale demolition in one
section.
6 PIDC-TPLEX The narrow available width along Adequate traffic management Connects to both New Panaderos Since the route is established in Double deck configuration limits ROW Estimated Route not favored given the need
South Ave. and Kalayaan during construction will be and Shaw Boulevard. Double the commercial and residential acquisition (77,000 sqm). number of PAPs for ROW acquisition along
Alignment b2 (Makati), New Panaderos crucial. deck configuration at both area, the impacts of emission Affected properties same as above. still substantial commercial strips, despite double
(6 Lane, 6.4 km.) (Mandaluyong) and Blumentritt locations will require longer gases, noise and sunlight In addition ROW acquisition along Kalayaan at 2,085. deck construction, and wholescale
(San Juan) has dictated the use of access ramps and greater ROW shading should be mitigated. Avenue will be required.Encroachment into demolition in Blumentritt to
double deck viaducts to limit acquisition. The double deck Number of impacts: 6 Manila South Cemetery is avoided with accommodate the curved
ROW acquisition. structure along South Ave. will double deck viaduct along South Ave. alignment.
COST: 18,300MP require ramps onto Gil Puyat and
Ayala Avenue.
8.4.8 Effect on the Project Interchanges due to Construction of the Missing Link
The effect on the Project interchanges due to construction of the Missing Link was analyzed using
MMUTIS6 data.
MMUTIS is the “Metro Manila Urban Transportation Integration Study” undertaken by the JICA in
1998. MMUTIS data is currently the latest available traffic study regarding the whole of Metro
Manila area arterial traffic through the MMUTIS Traffic Demand Forecast Model of the transport
network that covers the entire Manila Metropolitan Area.
MMUTIS covers the transport network in the metropolitan area and includes the project coverage of
the 5 interchanges (C-3/E Rodriguez, EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional, EDSA/North/West/Mindanao,
C-5/Kalayaan, C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria) and the C-3 Missing Link is therefore
deemed suitable for the effect analysis. Effect analysis was done for the C-3 Missing Link assuming
the opening year at 2018.
Figure 8.4-1 shows the traffic volume increase/decrease percentage (with Project/without Project)
for the case of C-3 Missing Link construction in 2018 as its opening year.
Due to C-3’s connection to other roads, much traffic running on other ring roads will divert to C-3
with the Missing Link in place. Therefore, traffic volumes of other ring roads will tend to decrease.
6
MMUTIS - “Metro Manila Urban Transportation Integration Study” done by JICA in 1998.

Figure 8.4-1 Effect on Traffic Volume for the Project Interchanges due to Construction of the
C-3 Missing Link
The effects on each of the intersections are as follows:
(1) C-3/E. Rodriguez
The south road connects to the Missing Link; therefore, the effect is substantial. Traffic between
the north and south (Gregorio Araneta Avenue) will increase by 26-56%.
It is located in the north area far from the Missing Link. The traffic on Roosevelt Avenue
connecting to the Missing Link will increase by 46%, but the effects on traffic volume for other
roads connecting to the interchange will be minimal.
(3) EDSA/North/West/Mindanao
It is located in the north area far from the Missing Link. Traffic on West Avenue will divert to
Roosevelt Avenue at EDSA/Roosevelt/Congressional interchange. The traffic volume will be
reduced by about 30%. Roosevelt Avenue is closer to C-3 than West Avenue. Effects on traffic

volume for other roads connecting to the interchange will be minimal.
(4) C-5/Kalayaan
It is on a ring road (Carlos P. Garcia Avenue) parallel to the Missing Link. Traffic on Kalayaan
Ave. will increase by about 10%. Traffic on Carlos P. Garcia Ave. will decrease by about 10%.
(5) C-5/Green Meadows/Acropolis/Calle Industria
It is on a ring road (Eulogio Rodriguez Jr. Avenue) parallel to the Missing Link but it is far from
the Missing Link. The effect on traffic volume will be minimal.
8.4.9 Recommendations
Several alternative alignments for the C-3 missing link have been proposed and studied since the
early 1970s, but the project has not been pursued due to the huge RROW requirement, the large
number of PAPs, the high cost of the project, and the long duration it will take from the study stage
until completion of implementation. Further delay in the construction of said missing link will not
acceptable considering its expected impacts on the present traffic situation in Metro Manila.
The most favored alignments are those that follow the Pasig and San Juan Rivers. These alignments
are favored given that both of the number of affected buildings and PAP’s are minimized and also
the environmental impacts of these alignments are the least.
However, both alternatives have drawbacks: the navigation problems in Pasig River; obstruction of
waterway area in San Juan River for the scheme occupying the waterways, and, a need for
substantial ROW acquisition for the scheme occupying the river banks.
It is recommended that the Study on the C-3 Missing Link should be the subject of a feasibility
study. The scope of the feasibility study should be:
1. Review and confirm the necessity of the Project

2. Establish future traffic demand and existing site conditions based on:
 Outline design of alternatives schemes
 Preliminary design of preferred scheme including cost estimate.
3. Prepare proper construction period and implementation schedule.
4. Formulate a Feasibility Study Report, including calculation of EIRR in accordance with
NEDA protocols and examination of environmental and social considerations.
5. Prepare a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)
6. Identify expected financing scenarios and possibility of using Japanese ODA
8.4.10 Related Proposed Projects in Metro Manila
In addition to the DPWH proposal for a C-3 Missing Link Project, there are several other proposals,
from the private sector and other government agencies, to provide elevated roadways serving a
similar function or occupying corridors that may intersect with the C-3 Missing Link Project.
Refer to Figure 8.4-2 for a location plan of the related proposed projects.

(a) C-3 Expressway (Ayala Corporation)
The C-3 Expressway involves a 16.2 km., 6 lane divided roadway. It will keep the existing
segments of C-3 road as public access roads with grade separation improvements at the major
proposed intersections along the line (E. Rodriguez, Quezon Avenue, Del Monte, A Bonifacio
and 5th Avenue W/Rizal Avenue).
Southern section this proposed project effectively overlaps with the preferred DPWH
alignment for the C-3 Missing Link.
(b) NLEX-SLEX Connector (MNTC)
The 13.3 km NLEX-SLEX Connector is a 4 lane divided elevated tolled roadway that starts at
Skyway Buendia, and the alignment follows PNR tracks up to Caloocan and terminates at the
connection to the NLEx via Segment 10 of the NLEx Phase 2 project at 5th Avenue.
The proposed elevated road will not share any section of the C-3 Missing Link Project
corridor.
(c) Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 (CITRA/PNCC)
The 14.5km Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 is a 6 lane divided elevated tolled roadway that
starts at Skyway Buendia,, turns right on Quirino Avenue, turns left at San Juan Bridge,
follows G Araneta Avenue and then right at A Bonifacio. The proposed roadway terminates at
Balintawak on EDSA, linking to NLEX.
This proposed elevated road will occupy the same corridor as the C-3 Missing Link at the
junction of N. Domingo with G. Araneta.
(d) SKYBRIDGE (MMDA)
The Skybridge will be an 8.3km 6 lane divided elevated roadway following the route of the
preferred DPWH alignment, from JP Rizal Avenue, following the route of the Pasig River and
San Juan River and terminating at the Quezon Avenue.
This proposed project effectively overlaps with the preferred DPWH alignment for the C-3
Missing Link extending the scope of the project to Quezon Avenue.

Project Proponent Length Legend Remarks

(km)
C-3 Missing Link DPWH 6.3 6 lanes - ODA
Skybridge MMDA 8.3 6 lanes - MYDA
Skyway Stage 3 CITRA 14.5 6 lanes - PPP
NLEx-SLEx Connector MNTC 13.3 4 lanes - BOT
C-3 Expressway AYALA 16.2 6 lanes – BOT / PPP
Source: JICA Study Team and proponents of the projects
Figure 8.4-2 Related Projects in Metro Manila

CHAPTER 9
THE CONCEPTUAL STUDY FOR THE TRAFFIC CAPACITY

EXPANSION ALONG EDSA
9.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
The 24 km length of EDSA is the main circumferential road of Metro Manila and more than
200,000 vehicles per section on average passes every day. Notwithstanding the improvements to
EDSA brought by the construction of several interchanges, in addition to the MRT Line-3 and LRT
Line-1 North Extension, the limited capacity of EDSA to handle the large daily volumes of traffic
from early morning to late evening has resulted in severe congestion and low traffic speeds. Such a
situation is severely hampering the socio-economic development of Metro Manila and is an
impairment to the environment.
In view of the above critical condition, a Conceptual Study on Traffic Capacity Expansion along
EDSA has been proposed.
9.2 OBJECTIVES AND CONCEPT OF CONCEPTUAL STUDY
The main objective of the study of the capacity expansion of EDSA is to determine the availability
of space and identify possible problem(s) in the construction of a viaduct/tunnel along EDSA
considering the existing structures and also the proposed flyovers.
9.3 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND

PRESENT TRAFFIC PLANS IN THE METRO MANILA
Some existing plans of trunk roads, expressways and railways are related to the proposed study with
regards to the share of traffic volume but these should not be affected or disturbed much in the
implementation of the proposed project.
9.4 CONFIRMATION OF OPEN SPACES FOR TUNNEL PLAN AND VIADUCT PLAN
The study will confirm in outline the availability of open space to accommodate the support
structures of high level viaduct solutions and tunnel solutions at critical locations along EDSA. The
basic concept in assessing available space is to develop outline solutions that will minimize
occupation of width along EDSA and also minimize ROW acquisition where and if necessary.
9.5 CONFIRMATION OF HINDRANCE STRUCTURES
The following hindrance structures for both directions on EDSA have been identified:
MRT/LRT Station : 15 stations

Flyover along/across EDSA : Southbound=13 locations, Northbound=14 locations
Under pass along/across EDSA : 4 locations
Pedestrian Bridge : 30 locations

There are shown in Figure 9.5-1.
Source: JICA study team
Figure 9.5-1 Locations of Flyover/Underpass and MRT/LRT STATIONS
9.6 EDSA GENERAL CONDITION
(1) Topology
EDSA generally has a 50.0m road right of way (RROW). It commonly has ten (10) lanes with
five (5) equal lanes per direction divided by a median separator. Within the 3.0 m sidewalks,
street lights, various utility posts and other overhead cables are found. Several other utility lines
for water, sewerage, etc., are encased in pipes below ground beneath both sidewalk and the road
itself. A median separator exists throughout EDSA. Both the MRT-3 and LRT-1 North Extension
fully occupies this corridor.
Various commercial buildings (malls, markets, shops, etc.), residential structures (hotels,
condominiums, apartments, houses), government and private office buildings are lined up along
EDSA and there are two military camps also located along EDSA.
(2) Traffic Condition
To ease traffic flow on EDSA slow moving cargo trucks have been prohibited on its major
sections, between Pasong Tamo in Makati and Balintawak in Quezon City/Caloocan City. This is
imposed except on a specific time window which is from 9:00pm to 6:00am daily except Sundays,
and Holidays. To further decongest EDSA, a volume reduction scheme has been implemented to
reduce daily traffic theoretically by twenty percent (20%) by prohibiting all vehicle types on the
basis of its last digit plate number from 7:00am to 7:00pm. On year 2008 the AADT on several
segments of EDSA have already reached more than 200,000 vehicles. For a roadway with
ten-lane capacity this corresponds to a level of service (LOS) F. With the above conditions

prevailing: EDSA at over capacity, prohibitive cost in acquiring additional RROW, and
alternative routes also congested, a capacity expansion scheme via elevated or underground
expressway is seriously being considered.
(3) Hindrance Structures/Sections
As described above, improvement of traffic flow along EDSA especially at major intersections
necessitated construction of several grade level separation structures.
As earlier discussed, there are numerous MRT-3 and LRT-1 stations on EDSA which straddle
over its northbound and southbound lanes. The locations of these grade level separation
structures and stations should be considered.
9.7 VIADUCT SCHEME
9.7.1 Proposed Viaduct Plan and Profile
It is proposed that a 23.36km six (6) lane expressway be erected over EDSA to increase its traffic
capacity. This concept will require columns and foundations, over the current roadway. This will
diminish the number of at-grade lanes per direction from five to four. However after the
construction of the elevated viaduct, EDSA will have seven total lanes per direction.
The viaduct layout over the middle lane is preferred as it requires the least impact on existing
overhead and underground utilities and the least reconstruction of existing drainage structures.
The elevation or height of the viaduct is maintained at second level where possible. It is proposed
that the viaduct generally traverse above all pedestrian footbridges with sufficient vertical
headroom.
For site conditions requiring long spans and high piers, steel box girders supported by rectangular
steel columns are recommended. Although costly these are more effective structurally and faster
and easier to construct.
In case of double deck type, viaduct pier supports a three lane upper thoroughfare on top of another
three lane thoroughfare for the opposing traffic direction at its lower deck. These steel viaduct piers
are shown in Figure 9.7-1

Figure 9.7-1 Steel Viaduct Piers
9.7.2 Proposed Location of Ramps
The ramps give access to the major central business districts (CBD) of Makati and Ortigas, and the
hub of government offices in Quezon City and distance between each ramps are about 5.3km each.
Construction of ramps are absolutely necessary to secure additional RROW either along EDSA or
along the selected secondary roads deemed suitable as proposed ramp location. The estimated
additional RROW requirement for an elevated viaduct scheme on EDSA is roughly140,000 sq m.
9.7.3 Description of Five High Critical Hindrance Structures/Sections
The stretch of EDSA was examined to identify the five most difficult locations for a viaduct
construction. A list ranking first the site assessed with the major hindrance and the most difficult
construction is presented below:
i. Osmeña Highway [Magallanes] Intersection (R3-road crossing EDSA)

ii. Shaw Blvd. Intersection (R-5-road crossing EDSA)
iii. Ortigas Ave. Intersection
iv. Aurora Blvd. [Cubao] Intersection (R-6-road crossing EDSA)
v. Quezon Ave. Intersection (R-7-road crossing EDSA)

The exact locations of these sites are shown in Figure 9.7-2.

Figure 9.7-2 Location of the Five Most Difficult Construction Site
(1) Osmeña Highway (Magallanes) Intersection
The difficulty at this site is the co-existence of several transport facilities (ie., Skyway’s Toll
Expressway, DPWH’s Magallanes Interchange, and DOTC’s Philippine National Railway
(PNR) train tracks, and MRT-3 light rails). Each entity requires vertical and horizontal clearances
to their transport corridor. Thus at this setting, it is more than likely that the viaduct shall have
long spans (45m to 60m) and tall piers (24m to 32m) because of the said restrictions. For this
viaduct configuration steel structures are recommended.
(2) Shaw Blvd. Intersection
At this intersection there are multi-level grade separation structures. An underpass road along
EDSA and a third level flyover across EDSA along Shaw Blvd above the second level viaduct of
the MRT-3. A platform station is also located very near the intersection South of EDSA. The
following malls; Rustan’s Shangrila, Starmall, and EDSA Central occupy the three corner lots of
the intersection.
If the viaduct alignment is confined within EDSA RROW, the necessary viaduct length spanning
the covered segment of EDSA is 130m long with pier height at 24m above level ground. To
reduce the required span length, the alignment is shifted West of EDSA and a double deck steel
viaduct is proposed so that this reduces the superstructure span to 60.0m. But still at this
intersection, acquisition of RROW is required.

(3) Ortigas Ave. Intersection
The interchange at Ortigas intersection has the main flyover on the second level of EDSA. The
left turn flyovers to Pasig and Mandaluyong cross over at the third level. The MRT-3 viaduct also
runs along EDSA at second level above the southbound service lanes and these structures fully
obstruct the passage southbound. The only usable corridor is above the northbound two-lane
service road adjacent to the EDSA National Shrine.
To fit six lanes over two available at-grade lanes and acquire the least RROW, a double deck
viaduct is proposed. For high piers and long spans, steel members are suitable viaduct
components because lighter materials are more manageable to handle and easily erected.
(4) Aurora Blvd. (Cubao) Intersection
MRT-3 is along EDSA at second level, whereas LRT-2 is along Aurora Blvd at third level
crossing EDSA. Both are above the six lane depressed road along the centerline of EDSA.
Therefore, both the northbound and southbound viaducts will have three lanes and are raised
almost at fifth level as they cross Aurora Blvd. The recommended steel viaduct will have tall
piers with heights near 30m and long spans approximately 50m to 60m.
(5) Quezon Ave. Intersection
On EDSA a three-lane flyover on both northbound and southbound directions concurrently with
a four-lane divided underpass, crossing below EDSA along Quezon Avenue, while on the other
hand, the MRT-3 trains run on a viaduct between these flyovers. The construction of proposed
flyovers leave only two traffic lanes on either direction at the outer service lanes.
Therefore, the proposed viaduct will utilize the available space above the service lanes which
will be at third level or 16m above ground. The maximum span will be at approximately 45m to
55m enough to span over Quezon Avenue.
9.7.4 Find Space for Proposed Viaduct
Result of study of five (5) intersections which identified most difficult locations shows that found
spaces for proposed viaduct structures which means that also can be found space for the proposed
flyovers due to difficulty of the proposed flyover are equal or lower than five(5) study conducted
intersections.
9.7.5 Cost Estimate
Estimated Cost is as follows:

Table 9.7-1 Summary of Estimated Project Cost

COST
ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY. Remarks
(MP)
A. Direct Construction Cost 92,592
A.1 Facilities for the Engineer (1% of A.3 – A-7) l.s. 1.0 890
A.2 Other General Requirements (3% of A.3 – A.7) l.s. 1.0 2,671
A.3 At-Grade Road Improvement l.s. 1.0 1,272
A.4 Bridge and Other Structures 84,791
A.5 Miscellaneous Structures l.s. 1.0 848
A.6 Street Lighting l.s. 1.0 1,272
A.7 Traffic Signal Light l.s. 1.0 848
B. Traffic Management (1% of A.3 – A.7) p.s. 1.0 890
C. Utility Relocation (3% of A.3 – A.7) p.s. 1.0 2,671
D. Indirect Construction Cost 26,615

OCM + Profit (14% of A+B+C) 13,461
Vat 12% of A+B+C+ OCM+Profit 13,154
E. Estimated Construction Cost
S UBTOTAL: A + B + C + D 122,769
F. Administrative & Consultancy Cost (10% of E) 12,277
G Contingencies (5% of E+F) p.s. 1.0 6,752
H ROW and Resettlement (Using Zonal Value) l.s. 1.0 28,522
TOTAL COST (E+F+G+H) 170,320
9.8 TUNNEL SCHEME
9.8.1 Proposed Plan and Typical Cross Sections of Tunnel
The beginning and endpoint of the proposed tunnel are located between Roxas Boulevard and Taft
Avenue, and Monumento Circle and Balintawak, respectively. The main tunnel consists of 2-lane
tunnels (inside diameter D=10.1m) at both sides of the entrance and exit while 3-lane tunnels
(inside diameter D=13.3m) shall be used for the entire middle section. 1-lane ramps (inside
diameter D=6.7m) shall be provided at four (4) locations. There are no problems regarding
horizontal alignment of the tunnel since EDSA does not have steep or extreme variations in
alignment. The tunnel should have enough earth covering due to many structures located along
EDSA; such as MRT stations and flyovers, which are supported by foundation piles. Figure 9.8-1
shows the typical cross sections of 3-types of tunnels, and Figure 9.8-2 shows Tunnel Layout (Plan
and Profile).
Figure 9.8-1 Typical Tunnel Section of 3-Types Tunnel


Figure 9.8-2 Tunnel Layout (Plan and Profile)
9.8.2 Standard Earth Covering of Tunnel
To have proper distance of earth covering of tunnel from the hindrance of existing structures.
Computation of earth covering underground and under river are as follows:
Underground : Same diameter of tunnel (1.0 x diameter of tunnel)

(15m (estimated pile length) + 1.0 x 14.62= 29.6m  30.0m)
Under river : Two times of diameter of tunnel (2.0 x diameter of tunnel)
(2 x 14.62= 29.2m 30.0m)
9.8.3 Ramp (Entrance and Exit)
One-lane ramp tunnel provided at four (4) locations as follows;
a) Between Skyway and Makati

b) Before and after Ortigas Ave.
c) Before and after Quezon Ave. and
d) Between Balintawak and Roosevelt Ave. (South Side of Balintawak)
9.8.4 Ventilation System
The main function of the tunnel ventilation system is to discharge the vehicle exhausted fumes and
smoke from fire. Airflow shall be diverted into two (2) sections underneath the deck slab of
carriageway: one to discharge smoke and the other to take in fresh air which will also be utilized for
access of people during an emergency evacuation. Ventilation towers shall be constructed at about

3km intervals because each ventilation tower will not only be used for smoke ventilation but also
for electric supply, water deposit, and access for people. General concepts of this system are shown
in Figure 9.8-3 General Concept of Ventilation System.
Figure 9.8-3 General Concept of Ventilation System
9.8.5 Shield Shaft
Tunnel excavation will be done by one shield machine per direction between departure vertical
shaft and arrival vertical shaft. Shield tunnel construction works are routine works of excavation,
assembly of precast concrete segments and grouting between concrete segment and soil. Process of
shield tunnel is as shown below.
Proper and efficient planning for carrying out and delivery shall be done while also considering
minimizing the influence on existing traffic flow due to the utilization of heavy equipment, such as
trucks and cranes (Please refer to Figure 9.8-4 General Concept of Vertical Shaft).


Figure 9.8-4 General Concept of Vertical Shaft
9.8.6 Required Tunnel Facilities
Based on “installation standards of Emergency Facilities for Road Tunnel” issued by Japan Road
Association, proposed tunnel is classified at the most high rank of “AA” which requires the
provision of all type of facilities such as:
1) Emergency call and warning devices 2) Fire extinguisher equipment 3) Evacuation facilities 4)
Communication system 5) Water spray system, etc.
9.8.7 Construction Schedule
(1) Construction Package
In consideration of budget and traffic management, the 22.8 km total length of tunnel shall be
divided into 3 packages, as follows:
Package 1: Beginning point to Ortigas Avenue: 8.6 km.

Package 2: From Ortigas avenue to Quezon avenue: 6.5 km.
Package 3: From Quezon Avenue to end point: 7.7 km.
(2) Overall Construction Schedule
Based on previous experience of past projects in Japan, the Consultant’s proposed schedule is
shown in Table 9.8-1 Rough Estimated Construction Schedule.
Table 9.8-1 Rough Estimated Construction Schedule

Note: 1) Conditions for preparation of above rough estimated schedule
(a) Excavation by one shield machine is estimated to be 18m/day which does not include period of assembly
and dismantling of shield machine and maintenance and replacement of parts of shield machine.
(b) Maintain 5-lanes per direction at-grade traffic along EDSA.
(c) R.O.W acquisition to be completed before implementation starts.
2) Issues
(a) Need to find disposal area of 7 million cubic meter of excavated soil
(b) Traffic management due to mobilization of big number of trucks, trailer and, concrete mixer trucks, etc.

9.8.8 Cost Estimate
(1) Condition for Cost Estimation
1. Rough cost will be estimated based on completed projects and past experiences in Japan
considering similar site condition of EDSA
2. Exchange rate between peso and yen is 1 peso = 1.90 yen
3. Instead of lease, 10m x 1,000m = 10,000m2 of R.O.W acquisition of ramp will be
considered.
4. Vertical Shaft will be constructed phase by phase to minimize traffic congestion along
EDSA. The present 5-lanes traffic and side walk will be maintained during the construction
with the provision for steel temporary deck plate on the top of vertical shaft. 3,000m2 of
temporary construction yard beside of vertical shaft will be considered as land rental.
5. Land acquisition for ventilation shaft will be considered.
6. 26% is commonly used as indirect cost for general construction projects in the Philippines.
However, 30% will be used as indirect cost considering that this will be the first time to
construct a major tunnel in the Philippines and especially in a major Urban City
environment.
7. Rough Estimate Cost shall consider following five (5) schemes:
Scheme-1 Entire Section of both directions
Main tunnel (3-lane) : 15.5 km x 2-direction
Entrance/exit at both end (2-lane) : 7.3 km x 2-direction
Scheme-2 Package-1 of Scheme-1
Main tunnel (3-lane) : 4.7 km x 2 direction
Entrance/exit (2-lane) : 3.9 km x 2 direction
Scheme-3 Only one (1) direction of scheme-1
Entrance/exit at both end (2-lane) : 7.3 km x 1-direction
Scheme-4 Construct 2-lane for both directions
Maintain tunnel (2-lane) : 22.8 km x 2-direction
Scheme-5 Only one (1) direction of scheme-4
8. Summary of rough estimated cost of each scheme is shown in Table 9.8-2.

Table 9.8-2 Summary of Rough Estimate cost of each Schemes

Sceheme-1 Scheme-2 Scheme-3 Scheme-4 Sceheme-5
Entire Section of both directions Package 1 of Scheme-1 Only (1) Direction of Scheme-1 Construct 2-lane Tunnel both Only (1) Direction of
Description Main Tunnel (3-Lanes) Main Tunnel (3-Lanes) Main Tunnel (3-Lanes) Direction Scheme-4
= 15.5km x 2 directions = 4.7km x 2 directions = 15.5km 1-direction Main Tunnel (2-lanes) Main Tunnel (2-lanes)
Entrance/Exit at both end Entrance/Exit at both end Entrance/Exit at both end = 22.8 km x 2 directions = 22.8 km 1-directions
2-Lanes = 7.3km x 2 directions 2-Lanes = 3.9km x 2 directions 2-Lanes = 7.3km 1-directions
Yen Peso Yen Peso Yen Peso Yen Peso Yen Peso
1. Construction Cost
A. Direct cost 4,549 2,358 1,688 887 2,377 1,251 3,360 1,768 1,743 917
Main tunnel 2,779 1,462 971 511 1,389 731 1,873 986 937 493
Ramp Tunnel 960 505 384 202 480 253 960 505 480 253
Shield shaft 73 4 37 19 37 19 37 19 18 9
Ventilation shaft 480 252 206 108 343 181 312 164 218 115
Facilities 257 135 90 47 128 67 178 94 90 47
B. Genral Cost 90 48 34 18 48 26 68 36 34 18
Traffic Management (1% of A) 45 24 17 9 24 13 34 18 17 9
Utility Relocation (1% of A) 45 24 17 9 24 13 34 18 17 9
C. Indirect cost ( 30% of A+B ) 1,392 722 517 272 728 383 1,028 541 533 281
D. Sub total (A + B +C) 6,031 3,128 2,239 1,177 3,153 1,660 4,456 2,345 2,310 1,216
E. VAT (12% of D) 724 375 269 141 378 199 535 281 277 146
F. Construction cost (D+E) 6,755 3,503 2,508 1,318 3,531 1,859 4,991 2,626 2,587 1,362
G. Consultancy Cost (10% of F) 676 350 251 132 353 186 499 263 259 136
H. Land acquisition including compensation 586 308 214 113 304 162 523 278 277 147
for structures
I. Contingency Cost (5% of F+G) 372 193 138 73 194 102 275 144 142 75
Total Cost (F+G+H+I) 8,389 4,354 3,111 1,636 4,382 2,309 6,288 3,311 3,265 1,720

CHAPTER 10
SEMINAR ON LATEST JAPANESE ROAD AND BRIDGE

CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY
10.1 OBJECTIVES
The objective of the seminar is to introduce the latest Japanese technologies of road and bridge
construction for understanding technical supervision of STEP scheme for the proposed flyover
project and also Filipino engineers to apply these to on-going and/or future projects. Said
technologies are related to tunnel construction, asphalt pavement, rapid construction methods,
bridge rehabilitation and improvement and quality control systems.
10.2 SEMINAR PROGRAM
Venue : H2O Hotel, Manila City Date : March 6 and 7, 2012

th
 Day 1 (6 March)
TIME PROGRAM/TOPICS SUB-TOPICS SPEAKER
8:30 - 9:00 Registration -
DPWH Secretariat / KEI
9:00 - 9:05 Philippine National Anthem -
DPWH Secretary
9:05 - 9:15 Message -
Rogelio L. Singson
Mr.Takahiro SASAKI
9:15 - 9:20 Welcome Address - Chief Representative
JICA PHILIPPINES OFFICE
Road Infrastructure
DPWH Assistant Secretary
9:20 - 9:50 Statement / Briefing Plans for Metro
Maria Catalina E. Cabral
Manila
9:50 - 10:10 Break Time & Photo Session
Mr.Tomohiro HASEGAWA
Introduction of
Director for International Affairs, Road Bureau
10:10 - 10:40 Seminar-1 Japanese Road -
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and
Technologies
Tourism(MLIT)
10:40 - 10:50 Break Time
1. Urban Tunnels Mr.Yutaka HIBIYA
(Harmonica The Overseas Construction Association of Japan,
10:50 - 11:10
Construction, Jacking Inc.
Tunnelling and Shield Methods) (TAISEI CORPORATION)
Seminar-2 Construction Dr.Satoru AMANO
Techniques 2. Mountain Tunnels The Overseas Construction Association of Japan,
11:10 - 11:30
(NATM) Inc.
(OBAYASHI CORPORATION)
11:30 - 11:50 Question / Answer
11:50 - 13:20 Lunch Time
1. Pavement Quality Dr.Tsutomu ISHIGAKI
13:20 - 13:40 Control During The Japan Road Contractors Association
Construction (NIPPO CORPORATION)
2. Porous Asphalt
Dr.Katsura ENDO
Pavement and
13:40 - 14:00 Pavement The Japan Road Contractors Association
Seminar-3 Advanced Pavement
Technology (NIPPON ROAD CO.,LTD.)
Technology
3. Pavement Dr.Keizo KAMIYA
14:00 - 14:20 Management in NIPPON EXPRESSWAY RESEARCH
NEXCO INSTITUTE CO.,LTD.
Mr.Yuuki ARATSU
Deputy Director General,
14:50 - 15:00 Information -
and Group Director for Transportation and ICT
JICA Economic Infrastructure Department

 DAY2(7th March)
TIME PROGRAM/TOPICS SUB-TOPICS SPEAKER TIME PROGRA
8:30 - 9:00 Registration - DPWH Secretariat / KEI 8:30 - 9:00 Regis
1. Rapid Bridge Mr.Hideyuki TAKEDA

Rapid Construction Method The Overseas Construction Association of Japan, 9:00 - 9:20 Rap
9:00 - 9:20 Construction Seminar-4
Seminar-4 Applying Precast Inc.
Methods Segments (KAJIMA CORPORATION) 9:20 - 9:30
(Concrete Bridge)
9:20 - 9:30 Question / Answer 9:30 - 9:40
9:30 - 9:40 Break Time
Mr.Ichiro KITAGAKI 9:40 - 9:50
1. Introduction of the
THE JAPAN BRIDGE ASSOCIATION
9:40 - 9:50 Japan Bridge
Director Chairman of International　Business
Association
Special Committee　(KOMAIHALTEC INC.) 9:50 - 10:10
Mr.Taku HIRAI
2. Viaduct in Urban
9:50 - 10:10 Area and Steel Seminar-5
Rap
International　Business Special Committee
Structures 10:10 - 10:30
(YOKOGAWA BRIDGE CORPORATION)
Rapid
Mr.Hideyuki KAMAI
Construction THE JAPAN BRIDGE ASSOCIATION
Seminar-5
Methods 3. Rapid Construction
10:10 - 10:30 International Business Special Committee 10:30 - 10:50
(Steel bridge) of Steel Bridges
(MITSUI ENGINEERING & SHIPBUILDING
CO.,LTD.)
10:50 - 11:20
4. Chronology of
Mr.Tatsuhiko KASAI 11:20 - 12:50
Seismic Design
10:30 - 10:50 Criteria and Survey
Executive Head of Maintenance Committee
Report of the Great 12:50 - 13:10
(MIYAJI ENGINEERING , INC.)
East Japan Earthquake
Br
10:50 - 11:20 Question / Answer Seminar-6
Im
13:10 - 13:30
11:20 - 12:50 Lunch Time
1. Repair and 13:30 - 13:50
Reinforcement of Mr.Yoshihiko TAIRA
13:50 - 14:00
Concrete Bridge The Overseas Construction Association of Japan,
12:50 - 13:10
Technology & Seismic Inc.
Bridge 14:00 - 14:20
Resistance and (Sumitomo Mitsui Construction Co., Ltd) Seminar-7
Q
Rehabilitation and
Seminar-6 Isolation Technology
Improvement 14:20 - 14:30
2. Maintenance of
Technology
Steel Bridges and Mr.Hiroyuki WADA 14:30 - 14:40 Fill up Qu
13:10 - 13:30
Urban Expressway METROPOLITAN EXPRESSWAY CO.,LTD.
14:40 - 14:50 Wra
Management
13:50 - 14:00 Break Time 14:50 - 15:00 Closing
Mr.Nobuhiro HONDA
1. Quality Control of
Quality Control The Overseas Construction Association of Japan,
14:00 - 14:20 Highway and Bridge
Seminar-7 System Inc.
Construction
Technology (SHIMIZU CORPORATION)
14:30 - 14:40 Fill up Questionnaire - DPWH Secretariat / KEI
Conclusion and DPWH Under Secretary
14:40 - 14:50 Wrap-up
Recommendations Raul C. Asis
Mr.Yuuki ARATSU
Deputy Director General,
14:50 - 15:00 Closing Statement -
and Group Director for Transportation and ICT
JICA Economic Infrastructure Department

10.3 ATTENDANCE
(1) PHILIPPINES
Attendance from DPWH and other Offices are shown in Table below:
Day 1 Day 2
Attendance
(March 6, 2012) (March 7, 2012)
DPWH Secretary Under Secretary Assistant Secretary 8 8
Regional Directors 16 15
Bureau/Service Directors 13 13
Project Management Office 23 24
Government Agencies 4 4
Local Government Units 13 11
Private Institutions and Academe 7 5
Total 84 80
(2) JAPAN
The list of the Guest Speakers is shown in the aforementioned Seminar Program. The other
attendees from Japan are as follows:
 Ministry of Land Infrastructure, and Transport and Tourism : 1 person

 Embassy of Japan in the Philippines : 1 person
 JICA Head Office : 3 persons
 JICA Manila Office : 2 persons
 JICA Expert : 1 person
10.4 QUESTION AND ANSWER RESULTS
Q&A
Seminar – 1 Introduction of Japanese Technologies -

Seminar – 2 Tunneling Construction Techniques 9
Seminar – 3 Pavement Technology 6
Seminar – 4 Rapid Construction Method (Concrete Bridge) 2
Seminar – 5 Rapid Construction Method (Steel Bridge) 6
Seminar – 6 Bridge Rehabilitation and Improvement Technology 5
Seminar – 7 Quality Control System 1

10.5 SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE
The answers given on the questionnaire sheets showed the participants’ high interest on the high
level of technology that was imparted by each topic, as well as their satisfaction on the management
of the Seminar as a whole.
Thirty nine (39) Questionnaire were submitted among the attendees which are summarized
below.
Q1- In this seminar, which subject interests you the most?
Among the seven (7) topics, the most interesting topics discussed during the seminar were on:
Tunneling Construction Technology ranked first with 17 persons, second was Pavement
Technology, followed by Rapid construction Method (steel bridge) as 3 third in rank.
Q2- What subjects would you consider for future projects or activities, and why?
Among the seven (7) topics, what is to be considered for future projects and activities are
Tunneling Construction Techniques, Pavement Technology ranked the first with 10 persons each,
the second was Rapid Construction Method (Steel Bridge), followed by Rapid Construction
Method (Concrete Bridge) as 3 third 4 in rank. This answer was similar to question-1 above.
Q3- Please give your comments about the seminar:
Almost all of the attendants were satisfied with each topic, imparted knowledge of new
technology, excellent handouts and the way how to manage the seminar. Some useful comments
were presented: time given to each topic was relatively short; presenters should further explain
how the new technology will be applied and effective in the Philippines context; its trainings in
Japan should be arranged, and venue and comfort rooms was narrow/a little.
10.6 CONCLUSION
The Seminar was satisfactorily conducted because the Guest Speakers lectured on interesting topics
and a lively exchange of questions and answers took place between the Guest Speakers and the
participants during the lecture.
The following are the likely reasons why the Seminar was satisfactorily conducted:
a) Interesting topics were taken up for discussing
b) Presentation of speakers was given using interesting and excellent materials
c) Arrangement for inviting relevant offices regarding road and bridge construction was
properly done.
d) Almost all of the top officials from DPWH attended, including the Honorable DPWH
Secretary, attended.
e) Issuing Certificates of Attendance was good arrangements

f) Invitation letters were issued in the name of the Honorable DPWH Secretary
The following suggestion for improving the next seminar are from comments on the questionnaire:
a. Should have given more time for each topic (20 minutes presentation is a bit short).
b. Should have considered more applications and knowledge under Philippine setting.
c. Should have provided more comfortable conditions in preparing food and arranging
sufficient number of toilets for the attenders
The following pictures present highlights of attendance of top officials of DPWH, Guest Speaker,
and Japanese experts/resource persons in the Seminar hall.

Preparatory Survey For Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (Vi) in The Republic of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preparatory Survey For Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (Vi) in The Republic of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preparatory Survey For Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project (Vi) in The Republic of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS

PREPARATORY SURVEY FOR

JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY

PHP 1 = JPY 1.87

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ..................................................................................... 1

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................... 1

1.3 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................... 2

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................ 2

1.5 SCHEDULE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................ 3

2.1 TRAFFIC RELATED PROJECTS IN METRO MANILA ..................................................... 4

2.2 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY ON TRAFFIC PLANS BY OTHER AGENCIES . 5

2.3 CONFIRMATION OF NECESSITY AND PRIORITY OF THE PROPOSED FLYOVER

2.4 LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS SIMILAR PROJECTS AND PROPOSED

2.5 CONFIRMATION OF PRESENT CONDITION AND FUTURE INVESTMENT PLAN

2.6 CONFIRMATION OF ORGANIZATION, ANNUAL BUDGET AND TECHNICAL

2.7 CIRCUMSTANCES OF SUPPORT TO THE TRANSPORT SECTOR BY OTHER

3.1 TRAFFIC SURVEY ................................................................................................................ 8

3.2 CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITION OF EACH INTERSECTION ..................................... 14

3.3 TRAFFIC DEMAND FORECAST ....................................................................................... 16

4.1 DESIGN STANDARD FOR HIGHWAY AND FLYOVER ................................................ 20

4.2 C-3/E. RODRIGUEZ AVENUE ............................................................................................ 20

4.3 EDSA–ROOSEVELT AVENUE/CONGRESSIONAL AVENUE ....................................... 24

4.4 EDSA / NORTH AVENUE/ WEST AVENUE/ MINDANAO AVENUE ........................... 27

4.5 C-5/KALAYAAN AVENUE ................................................................................................. 31

4.6 C-5–GREEN MEADOWS AVENUE.................................................................................... 37

5.1 STUDY OF CONTRACT PACKAGE ARRANGEMENT................................................... 40

5.2 STUDY OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES .......................................................................... 40

5.3 PREPARATION OF PROJECT COST INCLUDING RROW COST .................................. 40

5.4 PREPARATION OF THE TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE CONSIDERING

5.5 IDEA AND BASIC CONCEPT FOR STEP SCHEME ........................................................ 43

6.1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS ...................................... 68

6.2 EIRR Analysis under STEP Loan Scheme............................................................................. 80

6.3 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS......................................... 91

6.4 OPERATION AND EFFECT INDICATORS ....................................................................... 91

6.5 SURVEY ON BENEFIT FOR JAPANESE COMPANIES IN THE PHILIPPINES ............ 95

7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY .................................................... 98

7.3 SUPPORT DPWH TO HOLD PUBLIC CONSULTATION MEETINGS ......................... 100

8.2 PROJECT SETTING ........................................................................................................... 101

8.3 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS AND DPWH COMPARATIVE STUDY ..................... 102

8.4 UPDATED STUDY ............................................................................................................. 104

9.1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................. 114

9.2 OBJECTIVES AND CONCEPT OF CONCEPTUAL STUDY .......................................... 114

9.3 CONFIRMATION OF CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND

9.5 CONFIRMATION OF HINDRANCE STRUCTURES ...................................................... 114

9.6 EDSA GENERAL CONDITION ......................................................................................... 115

9.7 VIADUCT SCHEME ........................................................................................................... 116

9.8 TUNNEL SCHEME ............................................................................................................. 120

10.1 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................... 127

10.2 SEMINAR PROGRAM ....................................................................................................... 127

10.3 ATTENDANCE ................................................................................................................... 129

10.4 QUESTION AND ANSWER RESULTS ............................................................................ 129

10.5 SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................... 130

10.6 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 130

Table 1.5-1 Study Schedule ....................................................................................................... 3

Table 6.2-8 Economic Benefit - VOC Saved of North/Mindanao

Figure 3.1-1 Traffic Survey Location at C-3/E. Rodriguez Intersection .................................... 8

AADT : Annual Average Daily Traffic