i

ABSTRACT

The intersection is an important part of the urban road network, connecting to the road

in all directions constituted of the network and where the traffic flow unites, mingle and diverse.

This study aims to know the present traffic volume in the intersection. Also, it aims to know the

problem present in the intersection and provide a solution to this.

Using the information given by the drivers passing through the intersection, the highest

and lowest speed that a vehicle can travel was 59.38kph and 30.03kph respectively. In a 1-hour

interval, by determining the total traffic volume, it has been found that: Route F, route passing

to Tiaong Road, has the greatest number of vehicles passing from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Route

D, the route passing General Luna St., has the greatest number of vehicles passing from 3:00

p.m. to 4:00 p.m. The vehicle that has the greatest average volume per hour is tricycle, followed

by car/ private type jeepney and jeepney.

Traffic congestion became a serious issue and increasing day by day with the increase

of the vehicle population. The performance of intersection is a vital issue to address the

congestion problem. With the data gathered, this study aims reduce the congestion along the

chosen area.

Keyword(s): congestion, intersection, improvement, network

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE i

ABSTRAT ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES iv

INTRODUCTION 1

PROJECT GOALS / OBJECTIVES 2

PROJECT METHODOLOGY 3

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 4

RECOMMENDATION 22

CONCLUSION 25

iii
 LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1. Intersection of D.P. Laygo St. and Lipa-Tiaong Road 4

Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route A 4

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route B 4

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route C 5

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route D 5

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route E 5

Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route F 5

Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route A 6

Figure 2.2 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route B 6

Figure 2.3 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route C 6

Figure 2.4 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route D 7

Figure 2.5 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route E 7

Figure 2.6 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route F 7

Figure 3. Traffic Volume Data in a 1-Hour Interval 8

Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type

of vehicle of Route A 9

Table 2.2 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the typ

of vehicle of Route B 10

Table 2.3 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type

of vehicle of Route C 11

Table 2.4 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type

of vehicle of Route D 12

Table 2.5 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type

of vehicle of Route E 13

Table 2.6 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type

of vehicle of Route F 14

iv
Speed-Density Relations

Figure 4.1 Speed-Density Relations of Route A 15

Figure 4.2 Speed-Density Relations of Route B 15

Figure 4.3 Speed-Density Relations of Route C 15

Figure 4.4 Speed-Density Relations of Route D 16

Figure 4.5 Speed-Density Relations of Route E 16

Figure 4.6 Speed-Density Relations of Route F 16

Computation of Regression Line and qmax

Table 3.1 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route A 17

Table 3.2 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route B 18

Table 3.3 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route C 18

Table 3.4 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route D 19

Table 3.5 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route E 20

Table 3.6 Computation of Regression Line and qmax for Route F 20

Table 4. Levels of Service 21

Table 5. Level of Service for Each Route 22

New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

Table 6.1 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

of Route A 22

Table 6.2 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

of Route B 22

Table 6.3 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

of Route C 23

Table 6.4 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

of Route D 23

Table 6.5 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

of Route E 23

Table 6.6 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

v
of Route F 23

vi
INTRODUCTION

The city of Lipa, which lies approximately 80 kilometers south of Manila, has so much to

offer indeed to local and foreign tourists, investors and even to prospective residents. Its

proximity to Metro Manila easily made it a preferred weekend destination among urbanities who

are in need of a quick break and a breath of fresh air. Lipa City also grows a high number of

population and was placed second to the Batangas City in the province of Batangas. With the

influx of low to high cost subdivisions, multinational companies, international and national shops

and schools, Lipa City is fastly becoming a highly urbanized and important City of

CALABARZON. However, this rapid development with economic growth results in a huge

volume of traffic during the peak hours.

The performance of intersections is a vital issue to address the congestion problem since

research shows that the general obstruction and congestion does not occur on the road. The

congestion phenomenon is the intersection of the main sticking point. City intersection is the

main interchange of people and cars. Because of the traffic flow unite, mingle and diverse at the

intersection, in addition to factors such as non-mixing machines, complex traffic intersection

features make it easy to become confused and sustained traffic accident-prone and reduce the

capacity of the road network, to become the bottlenecks of the city roads.

To carry out the study, the intersection of D.P. Laygo St and Tiaong Road in Lipa City

has been selected as a case study area since this intersection connects the city proper of Lipa

which includes the route going to the public market, the route going to SM Lipa and the route to

Manila.

A traffic study is done through detailed examination and analysis of a transportation

system supported by data collection. The study starts with the identification and definition of a

particular transportation problem, followed by data collection and analysis. A study is typically

performed to explore a specific aspect of, or question about, a transportation system.

The results are usually summarized in a report. A traffic study serves to quantify the

extent of transportation problem or provide analysis of a proposed solution. It is commonly

1
undertaken by the jurisdiction responsible for the transportation system. Before doing the study,

one must invoke request from the authority—public official, local resident or jurisdictional staff

member.

Traffic studies should be prepared under the supervision of a qualified and experienced

transportation professional who has specific training in traffic and transportation engineering and

planning. Some jurisdictions require that traffic studies be signed and sealed by a registered

professional engineer.

Reviews should be conducted by properly trained transportation engineers or

transportation planners in agencies that are responsible for operating transportation systems and

planning and implementing transportation improvements.

The following are some conditions that may warrant conducting a traffic study:

• When a new development is proposed and it will generate substantial new traffic;

• When financial assessments are implemented (transportation impact fees);

• When a major roadway improvement or reconstruction project is proposed;

• When existing transportation problems are evident, such as a high crash location or at a

location with complex roadway geometrics;

• When a development is proposed for a sensitive area; and

• At the judgment or discretion of jurisdiction staff based on unusual circumstances.

2
PROJECT GOALS / OBJECTIVES

This study primarily aims to know the present traffic volume in the D.P. Laygo St - Lipa

Tiaong Road Intersection. In this study, the intersection should be observed and all types of

vehicle will be counted.

Specifically, it aims to fulfill the following objectives:

1. To analyze the traffic condition at the intersection of Rizal Avenue and P.Gomez

Street.

2. To know the local traffic ordinances being implemented especially on One-Way

unsignalized traffic streets.

3. To know the maximum and minimum average volume, speed, and density per

route in the intersection.

4. To determine the Level of Service for each route.

5. Establish the use of the road network by vehicles of different categories and

traffic distribution.

6. To check the efficiency of the road network with the level of service or the

calculated capacity.

7. Investigation of various capacity and design problems for the intersection.

8. To provide feasible solutions in terms of the following parameters:

a. Traffic volume

b. Speed-Density Relations

9. To grasp the other factors that leads to traffic congestion at the intersection.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study may provide information about the traffic condition within the area of study.

This study is expected to be of importance to the following:

To the local government, data obtained from this research can serve as an additional

information in improving the traffic situation in the chosen area. New policies and ordinances

3
can also be formulated for faster and safer traffic flow;

To the residents in Lipa City and all commuters near the area, they will benefit from

the continuous flow of traffic.

To the public and private drivers, they will prevent road rage and other negative

circumstances that can happen;

To the researchers, the study will help expose them in the field of Transportation

Engineering; and

To the future researchers, this will serve as a reference to make their study more

informative and substantial.

TARGET BENEFICIARIES

The beneficiaries of the case study are the vehicles, commuters, and the people regularly

crossing in the intersection of D.P. Laygo and Lipa Tiaong Road. Following the right way for

each vehicle, the danger will decrease and using the data gathered, the possible remedies for

the problems encountered by the street like traffic congestion will be determined.

4
PROJECT MILESTONE

The researchers conducted careful planning and scheduling of activities in order to make

this research in progress. The proponents of this study followed a timeline and process to be

able to analyze the traffic condition at the D.P. Laygo St - Lipa Tiaong Road Intersection

Project Milestone’s Plan of Action

Figure1: Plan of Action

RESEARCH DESIGN

This study is descriptive in nature in which the researchers gathered information to

analyze the traffic congestion on the mentioned intersection. This method of research is

concerned with the detailed descriptions of specific situation using recording, analysis and

interpretation of the present nature, composition, or process of phenomena.

SOURCES OF DATA

The data collected by the researchers came from the procedure done – the traffic Manual

counting. By observation, interview and by counting, the researchers obtained the necessary

information.

5
DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE

The researchers use the manual counting as a method of traffic volume count.

 Manual Traffic Counting

Manual traffic counting is one of the measures used that can help a traffic study to be

supplied with enough data. This is done by manually counting the passing vehicle in a specific

point in a transportation system. Data sheets used in manual traffic counting uses images of

different type of vehicle that is common in the location of the point of observation.

Traffic Data Collection is basic requirements for transport planning. Traffic Data forms

an integral part of national economics and such knowledge is essential in drawing up a rational

transport policy for movement of passengers and goods by both government and the private

sectors. Traffic Volume Count is counting of number of vehicles passing through a road over a

period of time. It is usually expressed in terms of Passenger Car Unit (PCU) and measured to

calculate Level of Service of the road and related attributes like congestion, carrying capacity,

V/C Ratio, identification of peak hour or extended peak hour and the like.

 The researcher’s assigned each member to record the number of vehicles passing on a

pre-determined location using tally marks in inventories.

 Raw data from those inventories is then organized for compilation and analysis.

6
 Figure 2. Traffic flow map

This figure shows the flow of traffic at the intersection of Rizal Avenue and P. Gomez

Street.

 One member is assigned for every route. Due to the lack of man power, the researchers

need an additional three people who also has knowledge of manual traffic

counting.

o Location of Counting Site:

Intersection of D.P. Laygo St. and Lipa Tiaong Road.

o Weather Condition:

During the counting a sunny cloudless weather can be observed.

o Duration and Interval of Traffic counts:

Researchers decided to take a one hour interval for this research. Manual counting

starts at 8:00 am - 9:00 am, then proceed to 9:00am - 10:00am. Counting resumes at

2:00pm - 3:00pm and ended at 3:00pm - 4:00pm.

7
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

DATA RESULT AND ANALYSIS

B
D
A
E F

Figure3.
Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

ROUTE A
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 373
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 399
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 683
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 637
4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 789
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 780
Table 1.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route A

ROUTE B
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 205

8
 9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 183
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 430
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 373
4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 469
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 428
Table 1.2 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route B

ROUTE C
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 259
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 279
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 392
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 310
4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 399
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 386
Table 1.3 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route C

ROUTE D
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 610
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 748
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 744
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 782
4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 821
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 793
Table 1.4 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route D

ROUTE E
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 640
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 649
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 786
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 749
4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 793
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 782
Table 1.5 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route E

ROUTE F
Time Number of Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 778
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 834
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 800
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 746

9
 4:00p.m.-5:00p.m. 749
5:00pm – 6:00p.m. 744
Table 1.6 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route F

At 8:00 am to 9:00 am, 9:00 am to 10:00 am and 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm, Route F has the
greatest number of vehicles passing.
At 3:00 am to 4:00 pm and 5:00 pm to 6:00 pm, Route D has the greatest number of
vehicles passing.
At 4:00 am to 5:00 pm, Route E has the greatest number of vehicles passing.

Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

Route A
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m .m .m
0 0 p. p. 0 p 0 p
:0 :0 0 0 :0 :0
:0 :0
.-
9
-1
0
.-
3
.-
4 .-5 –6
m
a.m .
p.
m
p.
m p. pm
a.m 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5:
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route A

10
 Route B
860
840
820
800
780
760
740
720
700
680
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m m .m
p. p. 0 p. p
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0 :0 :00
.-
9
-1
0
.-
3
.-
4 .-5 – 6
.a m . .m .m p .m pm
a.m p p 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5 :
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route B

Route C
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m m .m
p. p. 0 p. p
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0 :0 00
9 0 3 4 .-5 6:
.- . -1 .- .- .m
–
.a m p.
m
p.
m p pm
a.m 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5 :
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route C

11
 Route D
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m m .m
p. p. 0 p. p
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0 :0 :00
.-
9
-1
0
.-
3
.-
4 .-5 – 6
.a m . .m .m p .m pm
a.m p p 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5 :
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route D

Route E
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m m .m
p. p. 0 p. p
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0 :0 00
9 0 3 4 .-5 6:
.- . -1 .- .- .m
–
.a m p.
m
p.
m p pm
a.m 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5 :
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route E

12
 Route F
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
. . . . . .
a.m a.m m m m .m
p. p. 0 p. p
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0
:0
0 :0 :00
.-
9
-1
0
.-
3
.-
4 .-5 – 6
.a m . .m .m p .m pm
a.m p p 00 00
00 00 00 00 4: 5 :
8: 9: 2: 3:

Figure 2.1 Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route F

Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per

A
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 4 3 2 6 3 4 3.67
MOTORCY
72 60 84 112 113 109 91.67
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 78 155 255 207 267 215 196.17
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRICYCLE 184 120 241 219 312 356 238.67
JEEPNEY 65 41 68 73 119 135 83.5
MULTICAB
17 17 28 32 25 29 24.67
& RUSCO
VANS 5 7 18 15 16 15 12.67
STANDAR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 1 0 0 2 1 0.67
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 1 12 15 17 14 17 12.67
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 9 14 40 27 34 27 25.17
TRAILERS 0 3 0 2 3 6 2.34

13
(INCLUDIN
G
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
3 7 0 0 0 1 1.84
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route A

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per

B
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 1 2 2 0 0 0 0.83
MOTORCY
46 36 94 61 75 64 62.67
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 28 26 66 108 134 115 79.5
JEEP
PEDICAB 2 0 0 0 1 0 0.5
TRICYCLE 115 84 234 178 234 215 176.67
JEEPNEY 8 5 20 16 12 8 11.5
MULTICAB
3 2 6 8 5 9 5.5
& RUSCO
VANS 1 2 12 10 14 11 8.33
STANDAR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 1 8 4 0 3 4 3.33
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 8 20 12 8 4 9 10.17
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.17
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS 2 3 0 0 0 0 0.83
(E.G.
AMBULAN
CE,

14
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route B

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per

C
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 1 0 4 6 4 8 2.75
MOTORCY
59 38 80 56 80 59 58.25
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 61 59 84 44 78 69 62
JEEP
PEDICAB 2 0 0 0 0 0 0.5
TRICYCLE 118 155 182 176 202 212 157.75
JEEPNEY 9 10 6 10 6 9 8.75
MULTICAB
3 4 14 4 14 19 6.25
& RUSCO
VANS 2 4 2 4 2 7 3
STANDAR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 1 5 7 2 7 5 3.75
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 1 1 6 2 8 4 2.5
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
2 3 7 6 4 3 4.5
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route C

15
 8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per
D
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 13 17 10 11 13 11 12.75
MOTORCY
152 188 130 182 175 189 163
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 180 213 272 192 219 216 214.25
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
TRICYCLE 214 245 225 299 306 276 245.75
JEEPNEY 62 60 47 58 32 27 56.75
MULTICAB
21 24 34 37 34 31 29
& RUSCO
VANS 11 15 12 18 16 13 14
STANDAR
3 4 2 0 4 4 2.25
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 1 2 1 2 1 1
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 2 10 17 10 13 14 9.75
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 8 21 26 24 24 24 19.75
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 3 7 14 6 15 13 7.5
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
3 3 0 2 0 1 2
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route D

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per

E
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 18 13 2 4 11 11 9.25
MOTORCY
173 136 194 160 189 182 165.75
CLE

16
 CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 154 163 242 235 216 192 198.5
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRICYCLE 184 274 262 263 276 299 245.75
JEEPNEY 74 109 72 74 27 58 82.25
MULTICAB
14 27 38 32 31 37 27.75
& RUSCO
VANS 16 11 18 27 13 18 18
STANDAR
17 3 0 1 4 0 5.25
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
36 0 0 0 1 1 9
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 14 11 14 16 14 10 13.75
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 11 7 13 6 24 24 9.25
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 0 0 0 0 13 6 0
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
3 4 3 5 1 2 3.75
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route E

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- Average Volume per

F
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 Hour
BICYCLE 16 10 0 3 4 10 7.25
MOTORCY
198 197 178 167 160 130 185
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 154 182 205 204 235 272 186.25
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRICYCLE 283 294 267 225 263 225 267.25

17
 JEEPNEY 78 98 67 73 74 47 79
MULTICAB
19 24 39 28 32 34 27.5
& RUSCO
VANS 15 16 23 28 27 12 20.5
STANDAR
0 0 0 0 1 2 0
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 0 0 0 0 2 0
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 7 6 12 9 16 17 8.5
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 2 2 6 9 6 26 4.75
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 0 0 0 0 0 14 0
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
6 5 3 0 5 0 3.5
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour according to the type of vehicle of Route F

For all routes, tricycle has the largest average volume per hour followed by car/ private
type jeepney and Jeepney.

PCU CONVERSION

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOTA FACT

A PCU
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 L OR
BICYCLE 4 3 2 6 3 4 15 0.2 3
MOTORCY
72 60 84 112 113 109 418 0.5 209
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 78 155 255 207 267 215 944 1 944
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0
TRICYCLE 184 120 241 219 312 356 1128 0.8 902.4
JEEPNEY 65 41 68 73 119 135 395 1 395

18
MULTICAB
17 17 28 32 25 29 114 2.2 250.8
& RUSCO
VANS 5 7 18 15 16 15 64 1 64
STANDAR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.6 0
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 1 0 0 2 1 3 1 3
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 1 12 15 17 14 17 63 3.5 220.5
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 9 14 40 27 34 27 128 3.5 448
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
G 0 3 0 2 3 6 11 3.5 38.5
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
3 7 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
CE,
FIRETRUC
K, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route A

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOTA FACTO

B
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 L R PCU
BICYCLE 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 0.2 0.4
MOTORCYCL
46 36 94 61 75 64 294 0.5 147
E
CAR/PRIVAT
28 26 66 108 134 115 423 1 423
E TYPE JEEP
PEDICAB 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.8 0.8
688.
TRICYCLE 115 84 234 178 234 215 861 0.8
8
JEEPNEY 8 5 20 16 12 8 56 1 56
MULTICAB
3 2 6 8 5 9 28 2.2 61.6
& RUSCO
VANS 1 2 12 10 14 11 47 1 47
STANDARD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.6 0
BUS

19
 SCHOOL/
COMPANY/
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
1 8 4 0 3 4 11 3.5 38.5
(INCLUDING
DELIVERY
JEEP)
115.
TRUCKS 8 20 12 8 4 9 33 3.5
5
TRAILERS
(INCLUDING
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3.5 3.5
CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULANC
2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
E,
FIRETRUCK,
ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route B

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOT FACTO PC

C AL R
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 U
BICYCLE 1 0 4 6 4 8 22 0.2 4.4
MOTORCY 137.
59 38 80 56 80 59 275 0.5
5
CLE
CAR/PRIVA
TE TYPE 61 59 84 44 78 69 275 1 275
JEEP
PEDICAB 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0
617.
TRICYCLE 118 155 182 176 202 212 772 0.8
6
JEEPNEY 9 10 6 10 6 9 31 1 31
MULTICAB 112.
3 4 14 4 14 19 51 2.2
2
& RUSCO
VANS 2 4 2 4 2 7 15 1 15
STANDARD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.6 0
BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
1 5 7 2 7 5 21 3.5 73.5
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN

20
 G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 1 1 6 2 8 4 20 3.5 70
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 0
G CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
2 3 7 6 4 3 20 1 20
CE,
FIRETRUCK
, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route C

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOT FACT PC

D AL OR U
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00
BICYCLE 13 17 10 11 13 11 45 0.2 9
MOTORCY
152 188 130 182 175 189 676 0.5 338
CLE
CAR/PRIV
ATE TYPE 180 213 272 192 219 216 899 1 899
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.8 0.8
884.
TRICYCLE 214 245 225 299 306 276 1106 0.8
8
JEEPNEY 62 60 47 58 32 27 164 1 164
MULTICAB 299.
21 24 34 37 34 31 136 2.2
2
& RUSCO
VANS 11 15 12 18 16 13 59 1 59
STANDAR
3 4 2 0 4 4 10 3.6 36
D BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 1 2 1 2 1 6 1 6
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 2 10 17 10 13 14 54 3.5 189
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
TRUCKS 8 21 26 24 24 24 98 3.5 343

21
 TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
3 7 14 6 15 13 48 3.5 168
G CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
3 3 0 2 0 1 3 1 3
CE,
FIRETRUCK
, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route D

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOT FACTO PC

E
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 AL R U
BICYCLE 18 13 2 4 11 11 28 0.2 5.6
MOTORCY 362.
173 136 194 160 189 182 725 0.5
5
CLE
CAR/PRIVA
TE TYPE 154 163 242 235 216 192 885 1 885
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0
TRICYCLE 184 274 262 263 276 299 1100 0.8 880
JEEPNEY 74 109 72 74 27 58 231 1 231
MULTICAB 303.
14 27 38 32 31 37 138 2.2
6
& RUSCO
VANS 16 11 18 27 13 18 76 1 76
STANDARD
17 3 0 1 4 0 5 3.6 18
BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
36 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 2
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 14 11 14 16 14 10 54 3.5 189
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
234.
TRUCKS 11 7 13 6 24 24 67 3.5
5
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
0 0 0 0 13 6 19 3.5 66.5
G CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS 3 4 3 5 1 2 11 1 11
(E.G.
AMBULAN
CE,

22
FIRETRUCK
, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route E

8:00- 9:00- 2:00- 3:00- 4:00- 5:00- TOT FACT PC

F AL OR
9:00 10:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 U
BICYCLE 16 10 0 3 4 10 17 0.2 3.4
MOTORCY 317.
198 197 178 167 160 130 635 0.5
5
CLE
CAR/PRIVA
TE TYPE 154 182 205 204 235 272 916 1 916
JEEP
PEDICAB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0
TRICYCLE 283 294 267 225 263 225 980 0.8 784
JEEPNEY 78 98 67 73 74 47 261 1 261
MULTICAB 292.
19 24 39 28 32 34 133 2.2
6
& RUSCO
VANS 15 16 23 28 27 12 90 1 90
STANDARD
0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3.6 10.8
BUS
SCHOOL/
COMPANY
0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 2
/ TOURIST
SERVICE
PICK-UP/
DELIVERY
VEHICLE
(INCLUDIN 7 6 12 9 16 17 54 3.5 189
G
DELIVERY
JEEP)
164.
TRUCKS 2 2 6 9 6 26 47 3.5
5
TRAILERS
(INCLUDIN
0 0 0 0 0 14 14 3.5 49
G CAPSULE
VEHICLE)
OTHERS
(E.G.
AMBULAN
6 5 3 0 5 0 8 1 8
CE,
FIRETRUCK
, ETC)

Table 2.1 Average Volume of Vehicles per hour converted to PCU according to the type of vehicle of Route F

Speed-Density Relations

23
 Route A
60.00

50.00
f(x) = − 1.26 x + 59.5
40.00 R² = 1
Speed, kph

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00
6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.1 Speed-Density Relations of Route A

Route B
70.00
60.00
f(x) = − 1.99 x + 65.39
50.00 R² = 1
Speed, kph

40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.2 Speed-Density Relations of Route B

Route C
58.00

56.00
f(x) = − 1.91 x + 64.57
54.00 R² = 1
Speed, kph

52.00

50.00

48.00

46.00
4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00 8.50
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.3 Speed-Density Relations of Route C

24
 Route D
45.00
40.00
35.00 f(x) = − 0.86 x + 52.39
R² = 1
30.00
Speed, kph

25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 26.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.4 Speed-Density Relations of Route D

Route E
40.00
35.00 f(x) = − 0.81 x + 51.43
30.00 R² = 1
25.00
Speed, kph

20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 26.00 28.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.5 Speed-Density Relations of Route E

Route F
33.00
32.00 f(x) = − 0.65 x + 47.3
R² = 1
31.00
Speed, kph

30.00
29.00
28.00
27.00
26.00
22.00 23.00 24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00 28.00 29.00 30.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 4.6 Speed-Density Relations of Route F

25
 Figure 2 shows that speed-density relation of every route in the intersection. Using the

information given by the drivers passing through the intersection, the highest and lowest speed

that a vehicle can travel was 59.38 kph and 30.03 kph respectively. The speed of every route per

hour was interpolated by the group by assigning the highest speed to the lowest volume of

vehicles per hour and the lowest speed to the highest volume of vehicles per hour.

After determining the speed, the volume is divided by its corresponding speed to

determine the density. The regression line in the form of u=a+bk is utilized to plot the speed-

density relation of every route. The value of jam density (kj) is determined by setting the speed

(u) at the regression line formula to zero. The value of free flow speed (uf) is determined by

setting the density (k) at the regression line formula to zero. The capacity of the route is

determined by computing the maximum volume (qmax) of the traffic at every route using the

k j uf
formulaq max = × . Table 3 shows the computation of the regression line and qmax for every
2 2

route of the intersection

Computation of Regression Line and qmax

Route A
Number
of Average Computed
Time Vehicles Speed(u) Density(k) k2 (k-k')2 (u-u')2

8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 373 50.34 7.41 54.90 30.10 50.93
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 399 49.10 8.13 66.02 22.76 34.81
368.2
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 683 35.59 19.19 3 39.61 57.95

284.2
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 637 37.78 16.86 7 15.71 29.42
667.0 167.2 160.1
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 789 30.55 25.83 4 1 7
634.0 150.8 149.5
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 780 30.98 25.18 1 8 1
773.4 108.1 173.1
Sum 2092.00 172.82 51.58 2 8 1

Mean   43.21 12.90      

26
 veh
q max =700.419
hr

Route B
Number
of Average Computed (k-
Time Vehicles Speed(u) Density(k) k2 k')2 (u-u')2
203.3
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 205 30.55 6.71 45.03 0.02 9
191.3
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 183 30.98 5.91 34.90 0.44 6
182.9
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 430 58.33 7.37 54.34 0.65 0
212.3
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 373 59.38 6.28 39.46 0.08 1
10.7
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 469 47.63 9.85 96.96 5 7.95
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 428 50.34 8.50 72.28 3.74 30.59
173.7 789.9
Sum 1191.00 179.24 26.27 2 1.18 5
Mean   44.81 6.57      

veh
q max =721.269
hr

Route C
Number
of Average Computed (k- (u-
Time Vehicles Speed(u) Density(k) k2 k')2 u')2
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 259 47.63 5.44 29.57 1.15 0.06
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 279 50.34 5.54 30.72 0.94 6.12
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 392 45.77 8.56 73.34 4.22 4.38
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 310 47.72 6.50 42.19 0.00 0.02
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 399 55.77 7.15 51.19 0.42 62.38
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 386 54.81 7.04 49.59 0.28 48.25
175.8
Sum 1240.00 191.47 26.04 2 6.30 10.58
Mean   47.87 6.51      

veh
q max =727.682
hr

Route D

27
 Number
of Average Computed (k- (u-
Time Vehicles Speed(u) Density(k) k2 k')2 u')2
119.6
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 610 55.77 10.94 5 6.94 5.89
186.2
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 748 54.81 13.65 2 0.01 2.18
226.4
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 744 49.44 15.05 8 2.18 15.22
214.9
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 782 53.34 14.66 4 1.18 0.00
279.5
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 821 49.10 16.72 4 9.90 17.93
254.3
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 793 49.72 15.95 5 5.64 13.07
747.2
Sum 2884.00 213.36 54.29 9 10.31 23.28
Mean   53.34 13.57      

veh
q max =1024.58
hr

Route E
Number
of Average Computed (k-
Time Vehicles Speed(u) Density(k) k2 k')2 (u-u')2
18.3
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 640 49.10 13.03 169.87 1 42.33
18.1
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 649 49.72 13.05 170.36 5 50.76
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 786 39.07 20.12 404.81 7.88 12.48
32.8 101.9
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 749 32.50 23.05 531.13 7 8
48.2
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 793 32.69 24.26 588.45 3 98.17
64.1 137.2
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 782 30.88 25.32 641.20 4 7
1276.1 77.2 207.5
Sum 2824.00 170.39 69.25 7 2 5
Mean   42.60 17.31      

veh
q max =769.026
hr

Route F
Number Average Computed (k- (u-
Time of Speed(u) Density(k) k2 k')2 u')2

28
 Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 778 32.69 23.80 566.40 3.75 3.81
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 834 30.88 27.01 729.31 1.62 0.02
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 800 29.03 27.56 759.59 3.33 2.93
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 746 30.36 24.57 603.81 1.35 0.14
34.0
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. 749 37.64 19.90 396.01 4 47.59
32.9
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. 744 37.21 19.99 399.78 5 41.87
2659.1 10.0
Sum 3158.00 122.96 102.94 1 5 6.90
Mean   30.74 25.73      

veh
q max =876.967
hr

After determining the capacity, the average volume per route is divided by the capacity to

determine the V/C ratio. The V/C ratio is needed to determine the Level of Service of the road.

The Level of Service concept is a qualitative measure that characterizes operational conditions

within a traffic stream and perception of these conditions by motorists and passengers (Sigua,

2008). It has six levels of service defined in Table 4. The Level of Service of each route is

defined in Table 5.

Table 4. Levels of Service

Level of
V/C ratio
Service Description
A less than 0.20 Free flow, with low volume and high speeds.
The level of comfort and convenience provided
B 0.21-0.50
is somewhat less than at LOS A.
Still in zone of stable flow, but speed and
C 0.51-0.70 manueverabilility are most closely controlled by
highe volumes.
     
     
D 0.71-0.85 Approches unstable flow.
E 0.86-1.00 Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of
momentary condition.
F greater that 1.0 Forced or breakdown flow.

Table 5. Level of Service for Each Route

Level of Service

Route Average Volume per hour Qmax V/C Ratio Remarks

29
 Route A 278.336 700.41 0.40 D
Route B 126.568 721.269 0.20 C
Route C 108.496 727.682 0.20 C
Route D 271.904 1024.58 0.30 E
Route E 261.176 769.026 0.40 E
Route F 247.02 876.96 0.30 E

RECOMMENDATIONS

According to the Level of Service of each route obtained from the data gathered,

the intersection poses a still in the zone stable to unstable flow. As a solution for this, the

researchers recommended the following solution:

1. It is recommended to have a number coding for cars/ private type jeepneys and for

tricycles. As the number coding is implemented, it is expected for a decrease of 20% in

volume for the said vehicles in each route. Below will be the new/expected volume of

vehicles per hour:

New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval

ROUTE A
Number of
Time Computed Density Average Speed
Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 320.6 6.07 52.83
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 344 6.65 51.72
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 583.8 14.48 40.31
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 551.8 13.19 41.83
Table 6.1 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route A

ROUTE B
Time Number of Computed Density Average Speed

30
 Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 176.4 2.95 59.70
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 161 2.66 60.43
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 370 7.33 50.48
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 315.8 5.95 53.06
Table 6.2 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route B

ROUTE C
Number of
Time Computed Density Average Speed
Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 223.2 3.88 57.47
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 230.3 4.03 57.13
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 330.4 6.31 52.37
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 261.6 4.70 55.64
Table 6.3 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route C

ROUTE D
Number of
Time Computed Density Average Speed
Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 531.2 12.41 42.81
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 656.4 17.81 36.86
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 644.6 17.23 37.42
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 683.8 19.23 35.55
Table 6.4 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route D

ROUTE E
Number of
Time Computed Density Average Speed
Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 572.4 14.01 40.85
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 545.3 12.94 42.14
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 661 18.04 36.64
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 625.9 16.34 38.31
Table 6.5 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route E

ROUTE F
Time Number of Computed Density Average Speed
31
 Vehicles
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 690.6 19.60 35.23
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 720.6 21.32 33.80
2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. 685.1 19.30 35.49
3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 639.8 16.99 37.65
Table 6.6 New/Expected Total Traffic Volume Data in a 1-hour Interval of Route F

As a result of the change in traffic volume, below is the resulting Level of Service for

each route:

Level of Service
Average

Volume per

Route hour Qmax V/C Ratio Remarks

Route A 450.05 692.011 0.65 C
Route B 255.8 533.735 0.48 B
Route C 261.375 534.42 0.49 B
Route D 629 798.15 0.79 D
Route E 601.15 817.12 0.74 D
Route F 684.025 865.146 0.79 D

From the table above, it can be seen that the proposed solution will lead to comfort and

convenience to approaching unstable flow from a still in the zone stable to unstable flow in the

intersection.

Listed below are the short term solutions that may reduce traffic congestion:

2. Use of CCTV to monitor road conditions.

Use of CCTV at junctions allows traffic managers to see breakdowns, collisions and

other causes of congestion. Combined with good communication systems, the enforcer and the

major road users can ensure traffic managers to receive advance warning issues that will impact

their network.

3. Ride-sharing and ride-hailing apps

32
 There are some apps through which you can take share rides or you can share your rides

with other people travelling in your direction. With carpooling options, it let two to four people

to travel together and thus reduces the number of vehicles and thus the traffic congestion.

4. Officer at the Road

It has been noticed that people follow the rules with much concern if there were a law

enforcement officer around them.

5. Increase the Penalties of Fines. Be strict on the issuance of license and promoting of

revoking of driver’s license to repeated offenser.

6. Vehicles that are 10years old must be ban from major highways to avoid breakdown.

7. Designate Loading and Unloading Area

Every driver must be aware on the right place where they can load and unload

passengers. It is also the prime responsibility of the commuters to obey the rules and regulations

posted at the intersection. They must be disciplined enough in order to avoid any conflict and

accidents in the intersection. Moreover, through improper loading and unloading, these leads

to a degree of heavy congestion especially on the major road where the most number of vehicles

arrive.

CONCLUSION

Traffic congestion became a serious issue and increasing day by day with the increase

of the vehicle population. The performance of intersection is a vital issue to address the

congestion problem. The research team chose the intersection of D.P. Laygo St. and Lipa Tiaong

33
Road as a case study area. This study aims to suggest a modification on the basis of the present

classified traffic volume count and accommodate traffic safety without much congestion.

Based on the study carried out, it can be concluded that:

 The maximum average volume measured per 1-hour interval are:

o 778 vehicles per hour for Route F during 8:00am – 9:00am

o 834 vehicles per hour for Route F during 9:00am – 10:00am

o 800 vehicles per hour for Route F during 2:00am – 3:00pm

o 782 vehicles per hour for Route D during 3:00pm – 4:00pm

 The minimum average volume measured per 1-hour interval are:

o 205 vehicles per hour for Route B during 8:00am – 9:00am

o 183 vehicles per hour for Route B during 9:00am – 10:00am

o 392 vehicles per hour for Route C during 2:00am – 3:00pm

o 310 vehicles per hour for Route C during 3:00pm – 4:00pm

 The maximum and minimum speed that can travel through the intersection based

on the drivers that pass by are 59.38kph and 30.03kph respectively.

 The maximum average density computed per 1-hour interval are:

o 25.04 vehicles per km for Route F during 6:00am – 7:00am

o 29.36 vehicles per km for Route F during 7:00am – 8:00am

o 26.64 vehicles per km for Route F during 11:00am – 12:00pm

o 25.32 vehicles per km for Route D during 12:00pm – 1:00pm

 The minimum average density computed per 1-hour interval are:

o 3.51 vehicles per km for Route B during 6:00am – 7:00am

o 3.08 vehicles per km for Route B during 7:00am – 8:00am

o 7.93 vehicles per km for Route C during 11:00am – 12:00pm

o 5.81 vehicles per km for Route C during 12:00pm – 1:00pm

 The Level of Safety computed for each route are:

o Route A: LOS D – Approaches unstable flow.

34
 o Route B: LOS C – Still in the zone of stable flow, but speed and

maneuverability are most closely controlled by higher volumes.

o Route C: LOS C – Still in the zone of stable flow, but speed and

maneuverability are most closely controlled by higher volumes.

o Route D: LOS E – Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of

momentary condition

o Route E: LOS E – Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of

momentary condition

o Route F: LOS E – Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of

momentary condition

 The researchers propose a number coding for cars/ private type jeepneys and for

tricycles as their main solution for the worsening traffic congestion. With these,

Level of Service from the six route will lead to comfort and convenience to

approaching unstable flow from a still in the zone stable to unstable flow in the

intersection. Short term solutions such as installing CCTV to monitor road

condition, ride sharing or carpooling, having an officer at the road, increasing

penalties of fines and strict issuance of license for road user and a 10 years old

vehicle ban are also recommended by the researchers.

35
36