Edit Ps Final

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BYPASS/BRIDGE (MAGSAYSAY
AVENUE TO RIMANDO-AMBIONG ROAD) TO TRAFFIC

CONGESTION IN THE MAIN ROAD
A Project Presented to the Faculty of the
Department of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering and Architecture
University of the Cordilleras
In Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
By
LOVELY BONIO BAUTISTA
GABRIEL MENDOZA DE GUZMAN
JOJIT CAYETANO MULLES
JOLLY RAYE DUPLAAN SAMSON
KENNY PAGEDPED SAWEG
GABE MARX LOPIT SICCO
April 2020
ii
APPROVAL SHEET
iii
ABSTRACT
The newly built bypass bridge along Magsaysay Avenue was
designed to mitigate traffic congestion along the main road and
to provide an alternate route for motorists traveling from La
Trinidad to Baguio City and vice versa. Therefore, the
researchers investigated how cost-effective is the bypass bridge
when the main road is congested. This illustrative, statistical,
and investigative research focuses on the cost-effectiveness of
the bypass bridge in terms of the cost of fuel consumption. The
researchers used a C.C.T.V to determine the traffic
characteristics of the road and bypass. The gathered data from
the C.C.T.V footage were used for manual counting for traffic
volume of the main road and bypass bridge and for the travel time
delay analysis. The final output of the research shows that the
average travel time during congestion in the main road is 20.73
minutes and the average travel time using the bypass bridge is
10.53 minutes which saved about 0.088L of fuel consumption.
Keywords: Traffic Congestion, Cost-Effectiveness, Fuel
Consumption, Travel Time Analysis

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, praises and thanks to the God, the Almighty,
for His guidance, wisdom and blessings.
The researchers would like to express their gratitude to the
following:
To Honorable Mayor Romeo K. Salda and his office for
allowing us to install a CCTV camera along Km3 La Trinidad for
gathering data along the bypass bridge and Magsaysay Avenue.
To the La Trinidad MPS Km3 COMPAC Police Station for looking
after the equipment during the gathering process.
To Engr. Joshua Ricablanca for sharing his thoughts and
resources.
To Noven Busoy for accompanying us and lending his car for
gathering additional data using moving observer/vehicle method.
To Ariel J. Cernardo for letting us rent his C.C.T.V
equipment and for helping us install.
To Engr. Jan Nicholas S. Baldo for challenging and guiding
the researchers improve this study.
Thank you very much.
L.B.B.
G.M.D.G.
J.C.M.
J.R.D
v
K.P.S.
G.M.L.S.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
TITLE PAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
APPROVAL SHEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xviii
CHAPTER
1 THE PROBLEM
Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 1
Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks . . . 4
Research Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . 12
Scope, Limitation and Delimitation . . . . . 13
Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . 14
Operational Definition of Terms . . . . . . 16
2 DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Methodology . . . . . . 20
Population and Locale of the Study . . . . . 20
Data Gathering Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Data Gathering Procedure . . . . . . . . . . 22
Treatment of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
vii
Page
3 RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION
Traffic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Characteristics and Volume of Vehicles . . . . 24
Average Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Fuel Consumption for each Type of Vehicle . . . 70
Moving Vehicle Method . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Fuel Consumed for each Route . . . . . . . . . 106
4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
APPENDICES
A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
CURRICULUM VITAE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

viii
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
Table 1. Ecological Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 2: Volume of traffic on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

17th of July 2020

18th of July 2020

19th of July 2020

20th of July 2020

21st of July 2020

22nd of July 2020

23rd of July 2020

24th of July 2020

25th of July 2020

26th of July 2020

27th of July 2020

28th of July 2020

29th of July 2020

30th of July 2020
ix
Page

31st of July 2020

4th of November 2020













x
Page














xi
Page
Table 45: The average speed of 10 cars

in meter per second (mps) for . . . . . . . . . . 69
each hour in 14 day
Table 46: Data for fuel consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

for vehicle 1 (PUV)
Table 47: Statistics for vehicle 1 (PUV) . . . . . . . . . . 71

for vehicle 2 (PUV)
Table 49: Statistics for vehicle 2 (PUV) . . . . . . . . . . 72
Table 50: Data for fuel consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

for vehicle 3 (PUV)
Table 51: Statistics for vehicle 3 (PUV). . . . . . . . . . . 73

for vehicle 4 (PUV)

for vehicle 5 (PUV)

for vehicle 1(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)
Table 57: Statistics for vehicle 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)

for vehicle 2 (SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)
xii
Page

(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)


(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)


(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)


(SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)

for vehicle 1(Motorcycle)

(Motorcycle)

for vehicle 2 (Motorcycle)

(Motorcycle)


(Motorcycle)
xiii
Page


(Motorcycle)

for vehicle 5 (Motorcycle)

(Motorcycle)

for vehicle 1 (Bus)
Table 77: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Bus) . . . . . . . . . . 86

for vehicle 2 (Bus)

for vehicle 3 (Bus)

for vehicle 4 (Bus)

for vehicle 5 (Bus)

xiv
Page

for vehicle 1 (Van)
Table 87: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Van) . . . . . . . . . . 91

for vehicle 2 (Van)

for vehicle 3 (Van)

for vehicle 4 (Van)

for vehicle 5 (Van)

for vehicle 1 (Truck)
Table 97: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Truck) . . . . . . . . . 96

Table 99: Statistics for vehicle 2 (Truck) . . . . . . . . . 97

Table 101: Statistics for vehicle 3 (Truck) . . . . . . . . 98

xvi
Page


Table 106: Summary for each type of vehicle . . . . . . . . 101
Table 107: Data for Moving Vehicle Method from

Baguio City to La Trinidad (Eastward) . . . . . . 101
using Bypass bridge.
Table 108: Data for Moving Vehicle Method

from La Trinidad to Baguio City . . . . . . . . . 102
(Westward)using Bypass bridge.
Table 109: Result of Moving Vehicle Method . . . . . . . . . 102

using Bypass bridge.

from Baguio City to La Trinidad . . . . . . . . . 103
(Eastward)using Magsaysay Avenue.

from La Trinidad to Baguio City . . . . . . . . . 104
(Westward) using Magsaysay Avenue
Table 112: Result of Moving Vehicle Method

using Magsaysay Avenue on clear . . . . . . . . . 104
traffic.

Baguio City to La Trinidad (Eastward) . . . . . . 105
using Magsaysay Avenue during congested.
xvii
Page

La Trinidad to Baguio City (Westward) . . . . . . 106
using Magsaysay Avenue during congested.
Table 115: Result of Moving Vehicle Method

using Magsaysay Avenue during . . . . . . . . . 106
congestion.
Table 116: Fuel Consumed for each Route . . . . . . . . . . 107

xviii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Traffic Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 3. Theoretical Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 4. Research Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 5. Magsaysay Avenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

The Problem
1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM
Background of the Study
Traffic congestion has always been a major problem to the
public especially when the supposed transportation system in the
area is designed to meet the needs of the community either for
social or economic purposes.
Traffic congestion occurs when the capacity of a road does
not satisfy the traffic demand. It results to numerous negative
effects of it in terms of economy, mobility, safety and many
other aspects. It causes more fuel consumption leading to more
pollution. And sometimes traffic congestion causes road
accidents. This mostly occurs in highly urbanized cities like Los
Angeles, United States of America that is facing a hard time
dealing with traffic and where commuters, on the average, spend
59 hours a year sitting in traffic as opposed to times when
roadways are clear (Gorzelany, 2013).
Baguio City is one of the most congested cities in the
Philippines especially during peak seasons and holidays. This is
because most of the businesspersons, employees, students,
tourists coming in the city prefer to use private transportation
for their convenience. One of the main roads in the city is
Magsaysay Avenue, which connects Baguio City and La Trinidad,
where commuters often experience traffic congestion. In order to

The Problem
2
lessen their inconvenience, a bypass or an alternate route was
built alongside the boundary of La Trinidad and Baguio City.
Bypass is normally defined as a road passing around a town
or its center to provide an alternative route for through
traffic. The construction of highway bypasses has resulted in
many economic benefits both for intercity motorists as well as
the residents of towns with bypasses. It promotes local economic
development of industries whose sales are primarily to customers
located outside of town (Babcock, Davalos, 2004).
One of the principal reasons for the construction of bypass
road in towns is the removal of through-traffic from the center
of a town or city to the periphery, for the purpose of improving
the flow of traffic, reducing travel times, and reducing road
accidents (Elias, et al., 2006). Bypasses also help in reducing
noise and transportation cost of goods leading to increase of
sales.
Figure 1 shows the traffic condition of vehicles coming from
La Trinidad during peak hour on March 5, 2020 around 7am to 8am
at regular weekday. Traffic condition along this road is worse
during holidays and weekends.

The Problem
3
Figure 1. Traffic Condition (Thursday, March 5, 2020)
In this study, the newly built bridge/bypass alongside the
boundary of La Trinidad and Baguio City was investigated for its
impact and effectiveness on the cost of traffic congestion to its
adjacent road networks.
This study will apply a cost-effectiveness approach which
aims to predict congestion level of road segments and thus help
prevent high congestions
Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

The Problem
4
This portion of the study presents the concepts to be use
and the theories to be applied.
Conceptual Framework. This study investigates the economic
impact of the bypass to traffic congestion in its adjacent roads.
Figure 2 shows the concepts to be used in this study.
Recurring Alternate
Traffic Route/
Congestion Bypass
Traffic
Mitigation
Cost -
Effectiveness
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework
The recurring traffic congestion in the main road and the
bypass/bridge along Magsaysay Avenue during peak hours will be
investigated with its travel attributes. The effectiveness of the
bypass in mitigating traffic congestion along the main road will
be determined. Also the economic impact of both roads will be
quantified and compared, specifically, travel time and excess
fuel consumption.
The Problem
5
Theoretical Framework. Figure 3 shows the theoretical
framework of the study which contains the methodologies used for
the estimation of the cost of traffic congestion.
Efficient Traffic
Congestion Mitigation
Descriptive Statistics Trip Generation
Direct Manual Moving Vehicle

Method Method
Traffic Flow
Theory
Fuel Cost Equation
Cost-effectiveness
Figure 3. Theoretical Framework

The Problem
6
Direct Manual Method (Direct Method)
Manual counts are typically used to gather data for
determination of vehicle classification, turning movements,
direction of travel, pedestrian movements, or vehicle occupancy.
Most applications of manual counts require small samples of data
at any given location.
This involves counting all the vehicles passing a selected
location on a road for a pre-determined period of time. The count
records individual vehicles by categories (i.e. a truck or car)
and the direction they are travelling in. This is the reason it
is also called manual classified count.
MS Excel Spreadsheet
Used for data entry, manipulation, presentation but it also
offers a suite of statistical analysis functions and other tools
that can be used to run descriptive statistics and to perform
several different and useful inferential statistical tests.
Traffic Flow Theory
Traffic flow is the study of the movement of individual
drivers and vehicles between two points and intersections they
make with one another. Traffic flow theory refers to the traffic
stream variables of speed and flow. These relationships are
mainly
The Problem
7
concerned with uninterrupted traffic flow, primarily found on
freeways or expressway.
Flow, q
3600 N
q= (Equation 1)
t measured
Where: Flow (q) = the rate at which vehicles pass a fixed point
(vehicles per hour)
tmeasured = Average measured time headway
Time Mean Speed
Time mean speed is the arithmetic mean of speeds for vehicles
passing a point.
N
1
⊽ t= ∑ v n (Equation 2)
N n=1
Moving Vehicle/Observer Method
The moving car method under study here requires the use of a
car, driver, and one or more observers. The number of observers
is dependent upon the details sought. In this study it was used
to determine travel time.
Many attempts have been made in the past to develop sampling
techniques whereby the total volume of traffic could be estimated
by sampling only a relatively small portion of the total traffic
flow. One such technique was recently developed in England by
Wardrop and Charlesworth and reported under “A Method of

The Problem
7
Estimating Speed and Flow of Traffic from a Moving Vehicle.” The
Cook Country
The Problem
8
Highway Department investigated this technique to test its
usefulness in this country, considering only the estimation of
the flow of traffic.
If a large number of sections are to be sampled, with the
idea of estimating the total combined volume of all sections, the
method appears to be very useful, for while in any single section
there may be a sizeable error, these errors appears to cancel out
when sections are combined. If a fixed degree of precision is
required on all sections, the sampling time will vary inversely
with the volume in question.
It appears, at present, that for estimating total traffic
volume flow or total vehicle miles driven, this method is the
fastest and may well be the most economical. Studies are underway
to compare the cost of this method with other known and accepted
methods.
Average travel time
60 ( O w −Pw )
t w =T w − (Equation 3)
Vw
60 ( O e −Pe )
t e =T e− (Equation 4)
Ve
Where:
Te = the time it takes to travel east from X-X to Y-Y, in
minutes.
The Problem
8
Tw = the time it takes to travel west from Y-Y to X-X, in
minutes.
The Problem
9
Ne = the number of vehicles traveling west in the opposite
lane while the test car is traveling east.
Ow = the number of vehicles that overtake the test car while
it is traveling west from Y-Y to X-X, that is traveling in the
westbound direction.
Pw = the number of vehicles that the test car passes while
it is traveling west from Y-Y to X-X, that is traveling in the
westbound direction.
Travel Delay
Using the estimated average peak & off-peak speed and the
accumulated travel trip/ journey as to be called the total
distance from the survey, the average time delay for each mode of
transport can be derived:
Time Delay=Travel Time Delay ∈Units
total distance total distance

Time Delay= − (Equation 5)
ave .time speed ave . design speed
Fuel Cost Equation
The only readily available fuel consumption test method
involves actual on-road driving and calculation of fuel
consumption based on the distance travelled and the volume of
fuel used.
The Problem
10
The following formula is used to calculate fuel consumption
in litres/100kms, the most commonly used measure of fuel
consumption.
Distance
Fuel Consumed = x fuel consumption (Equation 6)
100
fuel price
Fuel Cost =Fuel consumed x (Equation 7)
1 litre
Research Paradigm
Figure 4 shows the paradigm of the study. The researchers
will use the Input, Process, and Output (IPO) method in the
study. The input shows the data needed for analysis and
investigation. The input variables will be processed using data
analysis and engineering methods. Henceforth, the cost-
effectiveness of the bypass road to its adjacent roads will be
identified.
Peak and Off-peak speeds

Traffic volume
INPUT
Average congested speeds

Average freeway speeds
PROCESS Average fuel efficiency
Travel Delay
Excess Fuel Consumption
OUTPUT Bypass Efficiency
Figure 4. Research Paradigm

The Problem
11
The input involves the data gathering from the
records of Direct Manual Counting, Design Speed and
Average Speed of the area using the footages respectively,
field work input and documentation will be done to collect the
data needed. The method is also reliable as it accounts for
different mode of transport separately. Operational Cost Analysis
will denote the Vehicle Fuel Consumption variation with speed as
it describes the relationship between fuel consumption of the
engine and average speed of an automobile. Lastly, Time Delay
Analysis will use the gathered speed and surveyed distance as
this designates for the calculation of operational costs.
With the assessed data from the collected data and analyses
listed above, these will be used in calculating opportunity cost
and vehicle operation cost. In connection with obtaining the
impact, the calculated economic impact (operational costs) from
the recurring traffic congestion is then compared to the
alternate route (Bypass).

The Problem
12
Statement of the Problem
The study aims to compare the quantified cost-effectiveness
of Magsaysay Avenue when the bypass was not yet constructed
compared to its cost effectiveness after the introduction of the
bypass bridge.
Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the volume of vehicles that traverses during
peak hours in:
I. The main road
a. Private vehicles (car and motorcycles)
b. Public utility vehicles (jeepney, taxi and bus)
II. The bypass bridge
a. Private vehicles (car and motorcycles)
b. Public utility vehicles (jeepney, taxi and bus)
2. How efficient is the bypass in mitigating traffic
congestion in the main road?
3. What is the quantified cost-effective value of the
bypass bridge in terms of:
I. Travel Time
II. Operating Cost (Fuel Consumption)

The Problem
13
Scope, Limitations and Delimitations
This study focuses mainly on quantifying the direct economic
costs of road traffic congestion along the adjacent roads of
Magsaysay Avenue bypass, specifically on fuel consumption and the
travel time delay costs.
The study is limited to peak hour periods of morning and
afternoon/evening peaks of 6:00a.m to 9:00a.m and 3:00p.m to
6:00p.m respectively. This provides the information concerning
maximum traffic loads imposed upon the road and as such relates
to the capacity analysis and design of future facilities (Salter,
1974; Ogunsanya, 1984).
The researchers will gather data using a CCTV camera to
capture details about individual vehicles and manual counting for
traffic flow data. Questionnaires will also be disseminated for
socio-economic demography.
The Problem
14
Significance of the Study
The study will add to the literature concerning the economic
impact of the connecting road between Baguio City and La
Trinidad. The study on the impact of the bypass is useful since
the effect may vary a great deal from place to place.
This study analyses the economic effects and effectiveness
of the construction of a bypass road using a case study in
Magsaysay Avenue, Baguio City. The study will provide a report on
the difference in cost of travel and delay of travel when the
bypass was not yet introduced to Magsaysay Avenue and when the
bypass is already operational.
The study will greatly benefit the following:
The Researchers
They will greatly develop their communication skills, team
work, surveying skill on the field, analysis of data, critical
thinking, patience and rapport. And to apply the theories and
ideas they learned in the field of engineering.
Local Businesses
The results of the study will provide a calculated amount of
how much income they are losing due to traffic congestion when
the said bypass was not yet introduced to the main road.
The Problem
15
Commuters
They will have a better understanding on traffic-congestion
and bypass construction in Magsaysay avenue, it will also give
them an idea on travel delay time and cost of delay during their
travel in the area of study
Government Units of Baguio City and La Trinidad
They can use the study to also analyze the economic impact
of other bypass that are found in each town. Upon proving that
the bypass is more economical when it was introduced, fare on
public vehicles can be adjusted to benefit all.
Future Engineering Students
They can use the study for future reference on similar
researches or studies so that they can provide a broader and
better understanding to the topic and to present a more
meaningful conclusion.
The Problem
16
Operational Definition of Terms
Alternative Route – Possible routes for that a service will pass
through towards a specific destination.
Cost of fare – a fixed amount to be collected as a
transport fee.
Descriptive Statistics – Data gathering procedure for the
traffic stream characteristics.
Travel Attributes – the travel parameters that involves time,
cost, and purpose of sample population.
Road Capacity – it is the maximum capacity of vehicles or
passengers a road can accommodate in a given period of time.
Traffic Congestion – this refers to a condition where automobiles
queue or block each other due to insufficient motorway space
having reached maximum capacity.
Traffic Density – this refers to vehicular capacity in a specific
stretch of road at a given period. It is measured in vehicles per
kilometers.
Traffic Flow – this is the comparable hourly rate at which
vehicles bypass a particular point on a traffic lane or road and
is calculated by dividing the total number of vehicles by time
interval.
Travel Delay – delay expressed or measured in time per
vehicle and per person.

The Problem
17
Travel Speed – this is average speed calculated as the length of

a road section divided by the average travel time of the vehicles
crossing the section.
Travel time – it refers to the average time that vehicles spend
while passing through a particular road section.

The Problem
18
Review of Related Literature
Economic cost of traffic is one of the most debatable issues
in an economy. It would be safe to assume that economic cost of
traffic congestion has been discussed for a long time and the
problem still exists although massive improvements are underway.
There has been considerable research on the topic of relief route
impacts.
In the field of sustainability management, the definition of
efficiency is well known and measured by the ratio of output to
input. Similarly, the international Transport Forum defines
efficiency as “some combination of reduced costs and/ or
increased benefits to society.” From this view, three specific
definitions are explained: “reducing inputs for the same outputs
or improved quality in return for an increase in resources.” And
effectiveness is defined as a degree of a goal achievement;
however, many studies discuss it as several aspects: goal
attainment, system resource, reputation, and multi-dimensional
model. Cameron, citing his and his colleague’s prior research
said that a principal standard for effectiveness does not exist
because the value is a combination of several preferences of
individuals (Measuring Efficiency and Effectiveness of Highway
Management in Sustainability, 2017).

The Problem
19
Direct Manual Method / Direct Method / Manual Method
In study conducted by El-Badawy, et al. (2018), the study
calculated about 184.5 million EGP was wasted annually due to
traffic congestion on the study path from Gedyla to Mansoura
Unversity. The author made questioners that were answered by road
users (both drivers and passengers) to determine the Value of
Time (VOT) of each road user, delays at the same locations during
congestion delay due to unexpected events, fuel economy of each
type used by vehicles, percentage of drivers committing traffic
offences at peak period, and percentage of injured person during
traffic congestion.
In the study of Muneera, et al., 2018, the traffic volume is
the fundamental measure of traffic on a road system. In finding
the traffic volume, they used the manual method and the
combination of manual and mechanical method in determining the
traffic volume of the area by simply observing the vehicles that
are passing through and they also calculated the average speed
found that among 7 the 39 participating state DOTs 35 of them use
factor method for estimating AADT from the short term traffic
count stations
Design and Methodology
20
Chapter 2
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The different theories and approaches included in this study
were adopted from transportation and highway engineering
principles.
Research Design and Methodology
The types of research method to be used in the study were
analytical and descriptive. Descriptive method will be used with
the normative survey approach to describe the personal and travel
attributes of the road users and the analytical method will be
used to determine the cost of fuel consumption and travel time of
the road users.
The analytical method will be used to quantify the economic
impact of the bypass to traffic congestion on its adjacent road.
Population and Locale of the Study
Baguio is a highly urbanized city in the Cordillera
Administrative Region. Although administratively independent due
to its distinction as highly urbanized city, Baguio is commonly
grouped with the landlocked province of Benguet. The very name
“Benguet” was onced the name of limited area of what is now the
La Trinidad Valley which in the course of time became the name of
the larger territory and what is at present the Benguet Province.
La Trinidad was relatively the most developed

21
settlement in the Benguet area. In a way, it was the gateway from
the southern lowlands into the mountain region.
Table 1 shows the area, population, and number of motorized
vehicles in Baguio City and La Trinidad.
Table 1. Ecological Profile
Category La Trinidad Baguio City

Area (km2) 36.78 57.51
Population 129,133 345,366
Motorized Vehicles 35,000 44,500
Sources: GIS Computed via Google; NSO Population Census, 2015;
Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS), 2017
Figure 5 shows the study area, the major highway that
connects Baguio City and La Trinidad, Magsaysay Avenue. The road
is usually congested during peak hours, weekends, and holidays.
The traffic condition along this road can no longer cope up with
the growth of movement and travel needs of people and activities
brought by urbanization
22
Figure 5. Magsaysay Avenue (Source: Google Map)
Data Gathering Tool
A request letter for installation of CCTV Cameras along the
road for at least 2 weeks before and after the bypass bridge be
accessible will be addressed to the City Mayor and Municipal
Mayor for necessary datas. The researchers will also determine
the actual situation of the location of the study.
Data Gathering Procedure
Data will be gathered through CCTV footages to determine
travel attributes.
23
Initial Site Investigation. The determination of the map,
the land area, and the descriptive statistics of population in
the location will be gathered through mapping applications and
survey sheets.
Destinations and Route. The researchers will take into
account the possible destination such as commercial
establishment, park, and recreational areas. As well as route
were then designated to correspond to the defined areas.
Data Analysis. The results of the gathered data will be used
to answer the objectives of the study.
Treatment of Data
The CCTV footages will be for the volume count, direction of
vehicles, and average speed.
Travel delay from recurrent traffic congestion is estimated
by equations relating vehicle traffic volume per lane and traffic
speed. The amount of delay incurred in the peak period is the
difference between the time to travel at the average speed and
the travel time at the free-flow speed, multiplied by the
distance traveled in the peak period.
The average fuel economy calculation is used to estimate the
fuel consumption of the vehicles running in the congested
condition.
Presentation, Analysis and
Interpretation of Data
24
Chapter 3
RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents, analyzes, and interprets the data
gathered from the installed Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in
Magsaysay Avenue Km 3 La Trinidad, Benguet for determining the
volume and characteristics of passing vehicles through Magsaysay
Avenue, Direct method for identifying the average speed of
passing vehicle and the average fuel consumption for each type to
identify the cost effectiveness of the bypass.
Traffic Data
This part presents the characteristics, volume and speed of
vehicles passing through Magsaysay avenue from the 17th of July
year 2020 to 31st of July year 2020. Data were gathered from the
installed Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) at the Municipal
Police Station, Kilometer 3 La Trinidad, Benguet. It also
contains the average fuel consumption for each type of vehicle.
Characteristics and Volume of Vehicles
The following tables will show the type and volume of
vehicles that had passed Magsaysay avenue every hour from 5
o’clock in the morning until 8 o’clock in the evening for 14
days.
25
I. Volume of Magsaysay Avenue (Bypass Bridge not yet Open)
Table 2: Volume of traffic on the 17th of July 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
26
TIME
05:00-06:00
27
TIME
05:00-06:00
28
TIME
05:00-06:00
29
Table 6: Volume of traffic on the 21st of July 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
30
Table 7: Volume of traffic on the 22nd of July 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
31
Table 8: Volume of traffic on the 23rd of July 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
32
TIME
05:00-06:00
33
TIME
05:00-06:00
34
TIME
05:00-06:00
35
TIME
05:00-06:00
36
TIME
05:00-06:00
37
TIME
05:00-06:00
38
TIME
05:00-06:00
39
Table 16: Volume of traffic on the 31st of July 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
40
II. Volume of Magsaysay Avenue (Bypass Bridge is Open)
Table 17: Volume of traffic on the 4th of November 2020
TIME
05:00-06:00
41
TIME
05:00-06:00
42
TIME
05:00-06:00
43
TIME
05:00-06:00
44
TIME
05:00-06:00
45
TIME
05:00-06:00
46
TIME
05:00-06:00
47
TIME
05:00-06:00
48
TIME
05:00-06:00
49
TIME
05:00-06:00
50
TIME
05:00-06:00
51
TIME
05:00-06:00
52
TIME
05:00-06:00
53
TIME
05:00-06:00
54
III. Volume Entering the Bypass Bridge

TIME
05:00-06:00
55
TIME
05:00-06:00
56
TIME
05:00-06:00
57
TIME
05:00-06:00
58
TIME
05:00-06:00
59
TIME
05:00-06:00
60
TIME
05:00-06:00
61
TIME
05:00-06:00
62
TIME
05:00-06:00
63
TIME
05:00-06:00
64
TIME
05:00-06:00
65
TIME
05:00-06:00
66
TIME
05:00-06:00
67
TIME
05:00-06:00
68
Average Speed
The instantaneous speed of vehicles at Magsaysay avenue by
sampling 10 vehicles (every hour) traversing the highway and
recording the time of each vehicle to travel a distance of 50
meters.
69
Table 45: The average speed of 10 cars in meter per second (mps) for each hour in 14 days
TIME
05:00-06:00
69
70
Fuel Consumption for each Type of Vehicle
The following table will present the data, tabulation and
statistics of the 5 sampled vehicles for each type to determine
the fuel consumed and kilometers travelled.

71
a. For PUV
Table 46: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (PUV)
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
Odometer Filled Fuel Refill
Date filled Accumulated Consumption of the
(total) volume price cost
? km
L/100k miles/
dd/mm/yyyy km L Php/L km L Php km/L Php/km
m gal
8/15/2020 195342 15.56 35.7 Yes 555.49
8/17/2020 195445 13.68 35.7 Yes 103 13.68 488.38 7.5 13.3 17.7 4.74
8/18/2020 195532 14.62 35.7 Yes 87 14.62 521.93 6.0 16.8 14.0 6.00
8/19/2020 195615 13.86 35.7 Yes 83 13.86 494.8 6.0 16.7 14.1 5.96
8/21/2020 195721 15.75 35.7 Yes 106 15.75 562.28 6.7 14.9 15.8 5.30
8/22/2020 195816 14.51 35.7 Yes 95 14.51 518.01 6.5 15.3 15.4 5.45
Table 47: Statistics for vehicle 1 (PUV)
Statistics unit general

Total Distance km 579
Total Fuel Volume L 101.94
Total Cost Php 3639.258
km/L 6.7
Average Consumption L/100km 15.0
miles/gal 15.8

72
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/15/2020 231322 20.81 35.7 Yes 742.92
8/17/2020 231372 23.15 35.7 Yes 50 23.15 826.46 2.2 46.3 5.1 16.53
8/19/2020 231421 21.64 35.7 Yes 49 21.64 772.55 2.3 44.2 5.3 15.77
8/21/2020 231466 20.14 35.7 Yes 45 20.14 719 2.2 44.8 5.3 15.98
8/22/2020 231508 22.36 35.7 Yes 42 22.36 798.25 1.9 53.2 4.4 19.01
8/24/2020 231556 23.2 35.7 Yes 48 23.2 828.24 2.1 48.3 4.9 17.26

km/L 2.1
miles/gal 5.0

73
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/13/2020 367436 12.31 35.7 Yes 439.47
9/15/2020 367461 13.23 35.7 Yes 25 13.23 472.31 1.9 52.9 4.4 18.89
9/17/2020 367488 13.68 35.7 Yes 27 13.68 488.38 2.0 50.7 4.6 18.09
9/18/2020 367516 12.88 35.7 Yes 28 12.88 459.82 2.2 46.0 5.1 16.42
9/19/2020 367542 13.61 35.7 Yes 26 13.61 485.88 1.9 52.3 4.5 18.69
9/21/2020 367570 13.56 35.7 Yes 28 13.56 484.09 2.1 48.4 4.9 17.29

km/L 2.0
miles/gal 4.8

74
VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/2/2020 321136 16.35 35.7 Yes 583.7
8/3/2020 321171 17.52 35.7 Yes 35 17.52 625.46 2.0 50.1 4.7 17.87
8/4/2020 321207 17.16 35.7 Yes 36 17.16 612.61 2.1 47.7 4.9 17.02
8/5/2020 321242 17.35 35.7 Yes 35 17.35 619.4 2.0 49.6 4.7 17.70
8/6/2020 321278 16.58 35.7 Yes 36 16.58 591.91 2.2 46.1 5.1 16.44
8/7/2020 321312 16.89 35.7 Yes 34 16.89 602.97 2.0 49.7 4.7 17.73

km/L 2.1
miles/gal 4.9
75

VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/12/2020 264618 15.64 35.7 Yes 558.35
9/14/2020 264651 17.35 35.7 Yes 33 17.35 619.4 1.9 52.6 4.5 18.77
9/15/2020 264687 16.56 35.7 Yes 36 16.56 591.19 2.2 46.0 5.1 16.42
9/16/2020 264721 16.87 35.7 Yes 34 16.87 602.26 2.0 49.6 4.7 17.71
9/17/2020 264756 17.12 35.7 Yes 35 17.12 611.18 2.0 48.9 4.8 17.46
9/18/2020 264791 16.54 35.7 Yes 35 16.54 590.48 2.1 47.3 5.0 16.87

km/L 2.0
miles/gal 4.8
76
a) For SUV/AUV/PICK-UP
Table 56: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
6/22/2020 56321 12.5 48.35 Yes 604.38
7/2/2020 56547 18.32 48.35 Yes 226 18.32 885.77 12.3 8.1 29.0 3.92
7/9/2020 56795 20.36 48.35 Yes 248 20.36 984.41 12.2 8.2 28.7 3.97
7/19/2020 57011 19.03 48.35 Yes 216 19.03 920.1 11.4 8.8 26.7 4.26
7/27/2020 57202 18.49 48.35 Yes 191 18.49 893.99 10.3 9.7 24.3 4.68
8/6/2020 57426 16.98 48.35 Yes 224 16.98 820.98 13.2 7.6 31.0 3.67
Table 57: Statistics for vehicle 1 (SUV/AUV/PICK-UP)

km/L 11.6
miles/gal 27.3
Table 58: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 2 (SUV/AUV/PICK-U)

77
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
7/1/2020 223603 6.81 48.35 Yes 329.26
7/4/2020 223767 16.25 48.35 Yes 164 16.25 785.69 10.1 9.9 23.7 4.79
7/6/2020 223901 12.36 48.35 Yes 134 12.36 597.61 10.8 9.2 25.5 4.46
7/9/2020 224055 15.39 48.35 Yes 154 15.39 744.11 10.0 10.0 23.5 4.83
7/12/2020 224220 15.44 48.35 Yes 165 15.44 746.52 10.7 9.4 25.1 4.52
7/16/2020 224410 18.56 48.35 Yes 190 18.56 897.38 10.2 9.8 24.1 4.72

km/L 10.5
miles/gal 24.6

78
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/3/2020 159887 21.65 48.35 Yes 1046.8
8/7/2020 159969 10.42 48.35 Yes 82 10.42 503.81 7.9 12.7 18.5 6.14
8/10/2020 160059 10.59 48.35 Yes 90 10.59 512.03 8.5 11.8 20.0 5.69
8/15/2020 160167 12.95 48.35 Yes 108 12.95 626.13 8.3 12.0 19.6 5.80
8/18/2020 160260 10.36 48.35 Yes 93 10.36 500.91 9.0 11.1 21.1 5.39
8/21/2020 160346 9.97 48.35 Yes 86 9.97 482.05 8.6 11.6 20.3 5.61

km/L 8.4
miles/gal 19.9

79
VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/3/2020 122234 3.58 48.35 Yes 173.09
9/5/2020 122327 6.25 48.35 Yes 93 6.25 302.19 14.9 6.7 35.0 3.25
9/7/2020 122423 6.55 48.35 Yes 96 6.55 316.69 14.7 6.8 34.5 3.30
9/9/2020 122526 7.26 48.35 Yes 103 7.26 351.02 14.2 7.0 33.4 3.41
9/12/2020 122664 9.88 48.35 Yes 138 9.88 477.7 14.0 7.2 32.9 3.46
9/14/2020 122770 7.29 48.35 Yes 106 7.29 352.47 14.5 6.9 34.2 3.33

km/L 14.4
miles/gal 33.8

80
VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/3/2020 300689 3.58 48.35 Yes 173.09
9/6/2020 300875 13.28 48.35 Yes 186 13.28 642.09 14.0 7.1 33.0 3.45
9/9/2020 301026 10.86 48.35 Yes 151 10.86 525.08 13.9 7.2 32.7 3.48
9/12/2020 301155 9.81 48.35 Yes 129 9.81 474.31 13.1 7.6 30.9 3.68
9/15/2020 301305 11.11 48.35 Yes 150 11.11 537.17 13.5 7.4 31.8 3.58
9/18/2020 301454 11.16 48.35 Yes 149 11.16 539.59 13.4 7.5 31.4 3.62

km/L 13.6
miles/gal 32.1
b) Table 66: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (Motorcycle)

81
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/6/2020 150507 2.23 48.35 Yes 107.82
9/14/2020 150578 1.46 48.35 Yes 71 1.46 70.591 48.6 2.1 114.4 0.99
9/20/2020 150642 1.3 48.35 Yes 64 1.3 62.855 49.2 2.0 115.8 0.98
9/27/2020 150715 1.68 48.35 Yes 73 1.68 81.228 43.5 2.3 102.2 1.11
10/1/2020 150775 1.23 48.35 Yes 60 1.23 59.471 48.8 2.1 114.8 0.99
10/11/2020 150856 1.63 48.35 Yes 81 1.63 78.811 49.7 2.0 116.9 0.97
Table 67: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Motorcycle)

km/L 47.9
miles/gal 112.6
Table 68: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 2 (Motorcycle)

82
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/27/2020 9332 6.54 48.35 Yes 316.21
10/1/2020 9583 5.31 48.35 Yes 251 5.31 256.74 47.3 2.1 111.2 1.02
10/7/2020 9838 5.56 48.35 Yes 255 5.56 268.83 45.9 2.2 107.9 1.05
10/15/2020 10204 7.32 48.35 Yes 366 7.32 353.92 50.0 2.0 117.6 0.97
10/21/2020 10495 6.12 48.35 Yes 291 6.12 295.9 47.5 2.1 111.9 1.02
10/28/2020 10803 5.86 48.35 Yes 308 5.86 283.33 52.6 1.9 123.7 0.92

km/L 48.9
miles/gal 115.0

83
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/6/2020 337994 1.32 48.35 Yes 63.822
9/14/2020 338092 1.65 48.35 Yes 98 1.65 79.778 59.4 1.7 139.7 0.81
9/20/2020 338178 1.49 48.35 Yes 86 1.49 72.042 57.7 1.7 135.8 0.84
9/28/2020 338286 1.96 48.35 Yes 108 1.96 94.766 55.1 1.8 129.6 0.88
10/6/2020 338397 2.11 48.35 Yes 111 2.11 102.02 52.6 1.9 123.8 0.92
10/11/2020 338464 1.22 48.35 Yes 67 1.22 58.987 54.9 1.8 129.2 0.88
Statistics
Total Distance
Total Fuel Volume
Total Cost
84

VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/6/2020 179290 2.31 48.35 Yes 111.69
9/14/2020 179411 2.03 48.35 Yes 121 2.03 98.151 59.6 1.7 140.2 0.81
9/20/2020 179517 1.98 48.35 Yes 106 1.98 95.733 53.5 1.9 126.0 0.90
9/27/2020 179627 1.86 48.35 Yes 110 1.86 89.931 59.1 1.7 139.1 0.82
10/4/2020 179730 1.97 48.35 Yes 103 1.97 95.25 52.3 1.9 123.0 0.92
10/12/2020 179839 2.11 48.35 Yes 109 2.11 102.02 51.7 1.9 121.5 0.94

km/L 54.8
miles/gal 129.0

85
VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/3/2020 21865 13.23 48.35 Yes 639.67
8/9/2020 22641 14.57 48.35 Yes 776 14.57 704.46 53.3 1.9 125.3 0.91
8/14/2020 23341 12.64 48.35 Yes 700 12.64 611.14 55.4 1.8 130.3 0.87
8/20/2020 24093 13.56 48.35 Yes 752 13.56 655.63 55.5 1.8 130.5 0.87
8/25/2020 24808 12.16 48.35 Yes 715 12.16 587.94 58.8 1.7 138.3 0.82
8/31/2020 25577 13.85 48.35 Yes 769 13.85 669.65 55.5 1.8 130.6 0.87

km/L 55.1
miles/gal 129.7
c) For Bus
86
Table 76: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (Bus)
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
1/13/2020 561238 54.23 35.7 Yes 1936
1/14/2020 561446 52.14 35.7 Yes 208 52.14 1861.4 4.0 25.1 9.4 8.95
1/16/2020 561647 54.12 35.7 Yes 201 54.12 1932.1 3.7 26.9 8.7 9.61
1/18/2020 561858 55.32 35.7 Yes 211 55.32 1974.9 3.8 26.2 9.0 9.36
1/19/2020 562066 55.63 35.7 Yes 208 55.63 1986 3.7 26.7 8.8 9.55
1/22/2020 562282 54.98 35.7 Yes 216 54.98 1962.8 3.9 25.5 9.2 9.09
Table 77: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Bus)

km/L 3.8
miles/gal 9.0

87
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
1/5/2020 485226 48.57 35.7 Yes 1733.9
1/7/2020 485412 49.23 35.7 Yes 186 49.23 1757.5 3.8 26.5 8.9 9.45
1/9/2020 485594 48.66 35.7 Yes 182 48.66 1737.2 3.7 26.7 8.8 9.54
1/11/2020 485774 47.96 35.7 Yes 180 47.96 1712.2 3.8 26.6 8.8 9.51
1/13/2020 485951 48.61 35.7 Yes 177 48.61 1735.4 3.6 27.5 8.6 9.80
1/15/2020 486132 48.34 35.7 Yes 181 48.34 1725.7 3.7 26.7 8.8 9.53

km/L 3.7
miles/gal 8.8

88
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
5/7/2020 959772 48.63 35.7 Yes 1736.1
5/9/2020 959959 48.72 35.7 Yes 187 48.72 1739.3 3.8 26.1 9.0 9.30
5/11/2020 960143 47.83 35.7 Yes 184 47.83 1707.5 3.8 26.0 9.1 9.28
5/13/2020 960327 48.94 35.7 Yes 184 48.94 1747.2 3.8 26.6 8.8 9.50
5/15/2020 960515 47.96 35.7 Yes 188 47.96 1712.2 3.9 25.5 9.2 9.11
5/17/2020 960699 48.25 35.7 Yes 184 48.25 1722.5 3.8 26.2 9.0 9.36

km/L 3.8
miles/gal 9.0
89

VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
2/2/2020 265725 41.86 35.7 Yes 1494.4
2/3/2020 265886 42.65 35.7 Yes 161 42.65 1522.6 3.8 26.5 8.9 9.46
2/4/2020 266050 43.12 35.7 Yes 164 43.12 1539.4 3.8 26.3 8.9 9.39
2/5/2020 266216 42.61 35.7 Yes 166 42.61 1521.2 3.9 25.7 9.2 9.16
2/6/2020 266382 42.75 35.7 Yes 166 42.75 1526.2 3.9 25.8 9.1 9.19
2/7/2020 266546 43.04 35.7 Yes 164 43.04 1536.5 3.8 26.2 9.0 9.37

km/L 3.9
miles/gal 9.1

90
VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
2/19/2020 388969 56.45 35.7 Yes 2015.3
2/20/2020 389186 55.47 35.7 Yes 217 55.47 1980.3 3.9 25.6 9.2 9.13
2/21/2020 389399 55.24 35.7 Yes 213 55.24 1972.1 3.9 25.9 9.1 9.26
2/22/2020 389611 55.19 35.7 Yes 212 55.19 1970.3 3.8 26.0 9.0 9.29
2/23/2020 389827 56.13 35.7 Yes 216 56.13 2003.8 3.8 26.0 9.1 9.28
2/24/2020 390043 55.86 35.7 Yes 216 55.86 1994.2 3.9 25.9 9.1 9.23

km/L 3.9
miles/gal 9.1
91
d) For Van
Table 86: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (Van)
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/10/2020 458315 41.94 48.35 Yes 2027.8
9/12/2020 458625 40.65 48.35 Yes 310 40.65 1965.4 7.6 13.1 17.9 6.34
9/14/2020 458937 41.34 48.35 Yes 312 41.34 1998.8 7.5 13.3 17.8 6.41
9/16/2020 459242 39.04 48.35 Yes 305 39.04 1887.6 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.19
9/18/2020 459557 39.41 48.35 Yes 315 39.41 1905.5 8.0 12.5 18.8 6.05
9/20/2020 459869 41.66 48.35 Yes 312 41.66 2014.3 7.5 13.4 17.6 6.46
Table 87: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Van)

km/L 7.7
miles/gal 18.0

92
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/12/2020 389445 18.88 48.35 Yes 912.85
8/14/2020 389583 17.8 48.35 Yes 138 17.8 860.63 7.8 12.9 18.2 6.24
8/17/2020 389725 17.32 48.35 Yes 142 17.32 837.42 8.2 12.2 19.3 5.90
8/18/2020 389860 16.61 48.35 Yes 135 16.61 803.09 8.1 12.3 19.1 5.95
8/20/2020 390009 19.07 48.35 Yes 149 19.07 922.03 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.19
8/22/2020 390150 17.48 48.35 Yes 141 17.48 845.16 8.1 12.4 19.0 5.99

km/L 8.0
miles/gal 18.8

93
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
10/13/2020 641946 9.87 48.35 Yes 477.21
10/15/2020 642032 10.23 48.35 Yes 86 10.23 494.62 8.4 11.9 19.8 5.75
10/17/2020 642113 9.71 48.35 Yes 81 9.71 469.48 8.3 12.0 19.6 5.80
10/19/2020 642192 9.56 48.35 Yes 79 9.56 462.23 8.3 12.1 19.4 5.85
10/21/2020 642276 9.91 48.35 Yes 84 9.91 479.15 8.5 11.8 19.9 5.70
10/23/2020 642358 10.09 48.35 Yes 82 10.09 487.85 8.1 12.3 19.1 5.95

km/L 8.3
miles/gal 19.5
94

VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/24/2020 265531 6.49 48.35 Yes 313.79
9/26/2020 265573 5.36 48.35 Yes 42 5.36 259.16 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.17
9/29/2020 265625 6.65 48.35 Yes 52 6.65 321.53 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.18
10/1/2020 265674 6.25 48.35 Yes 49 6.25 302.19 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.17
10/3/2020 265721 6.2 48.35 Yes 47 6.2 299.77 7.6 13.2 17.8 6.38
10/5/2020 265767 5.89 48.35 Yes 46 5.89 284.78 7.8 12.8 18.4 6.19

km/L 7.8
miles/gal 18.3

95
VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
10/20/2020 365618 11.2 48.35 Yes 541.52
10/22/2020 365709 10.62 48.35 Yes 91 10.62 513.48 8.6 11.7 20.2 5.64
10/24/2020 365791 9.87 48.35 Yes 82 9.87 477.21 8.3 12.0 19.5 5.82
10/26/2020 365881 10.65 48.35 Yes 90 10.65 514.93 8.5 11.8 19.9 5.72
10/28/2020 365967 10.05 48.35 Yes 86 10.05 485.92 8.6 11.7 20.1 5.65
10/30/2020 366063 11.35 48.35 Yes 96 11.35 548.77 8.5 11.8 19.9 5.72

km/L 8.4
miles/gal 19.9
96
e) For Truck
Table 96: Data for fuel consumption for vehicle 1 (Truck)
VEHICLE #1
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
9/26/2020 231475 35.7 Yes 0
9/27/2020 231582 53.31 35.7 Yes 107 53.31 1903.2 2.0 49.8 4.7 17.79
9/28/2020 231686 56.49 35.7 Yes 104 56.49 2016.7 1.8 54.3 4.3 19.39
9/29/2020 231798 52.73 35.7 Yes 112 52.73 1882.5 2.1 47.1 5.0 16.81
9/30/2020 231896 50.64 35.7 Yes 98 50.64 1807.8 1.9 51.7 4.6 18.45
10/1/2020 231998 55.19 35.7 Yes 102 55.19 1970.3 1.8 54.1 4.3 19.32
Table 97: Statistics for vehicle 1 (Truck)

km/L 1.9
miles/gal 4.5

97
VEHICLE #2
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
10/20/2020 266679 16.55 35.7 Yes 590.84
10/22/2020 266712 15.65 35.7 Yes 33 15.65 558.71 2.1 47.4 5.0 16.93
10/24/2020 266747 16.84 35.7 Yes 35 16.84 601.19 2.1 48.1 4.9 17.18
10/26/2020 266781 15.48 35.7 Yes 34 15.48 552.64 2.2 45.5 5.2 16.25
10/28/2020 266823 19.79 35.7 Yes 42 19.79 706.5 2.1 47.1 5.0 16.82
10/30/2020 266859 16.98 35.7 Yes 36 16.98 606.19 2.1 47.2 5.0 16.84

km/L 2.1
miles/gal 5.0

98
VEHICLE #3
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/16/2020 134874 9.84 35.7 Yes 351.29
8/18/2020 134905 12.95 35.7 Yes 31 12.95 462.32 2.4 41.8 5.6 14.91
8/20/2020 134937 13.49 35.7 Yes 32 13.49 481.59 2.4 42.2 5.6 15.05
8/22/2020 134969 13.84 35.7 Yes 32 13.84 494.09 2.3 43.3 5.4 15.44
8/24/2020 135000 12.94 35.7 Yes 31 12.94 461.96 2.4 41.7 5.6 14.90
8/26/2020 135039 16.49 35.7 Yes 39 16.49 588.69 2.4 42.3 5.6 15.09

km/L 2.4
miles/gal 5.6
98
99

VEHICLE #4
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
8/8/2020 278423 6.54 35.7 Yes 233.48
8/10/2020 278474 21.59 35.7 Yes 51 21.59 770.76 2.4 42.3 5.6 15.11
8/13/2020 278529 24.35 35.7 Yes 55 24.35 869.3 2.3 44.3 5.3 15.81
8/16/2020 278588 25.65 35.7 Yes 59 25.65 915.71 2.3 43.5 5.4 15.52
8/18/2020 278642 23.55 35.7 Yes 54 23.55 840.74 2.3 43.6 5.4 15.57
8/21/2020 278697 24.16 35.7 Yes 55 24.16 862.51 2.3 43.9 5.4 15.68

km/L 2.3
miles/gal 5.4

100
VEHICLE #5
100% Cost
? km
L/100k miles/
m gal
10/10/2020 192854 6.54 35.7 Yes 233.48
10/13/2020 192902 18.64 35.7 Yes 48 18.64 665.45 2.6 38.8 6.1 13.86
10/17/2020 192957 19.88 35.7 Yes 55 19.88 709.72 2.8 36.1 6.5 12.90
10/21/2020 193017 22.64 35.7 Yes 60 22.64 808.25 2.7 37.7 6.2 13.47
10/22/2020 193064 17.56 35.7 Yes 47 17.56 626.89 2.7 37.4 6.3 13.34
10/25/2020 193112 19.16 35.7 Yes 48 19.16 684.01 2.5 39.9 5.9 14.25

km/L 2.6
miles/gal 6.2
101
Table 106: Summary for each type of vehicle
AVERAGE CONSUMPTION
Type
Km/L L/100Km Miles/Gal
PUV 2.99 41.95 7.03
SUV/AUV/PICK-UP 11.70 8.89 27.53
MOTORCYCLE 52.51 1.92 123.55
BUS 3.82 26.17 9.00
VAN 8.04 12.47 18.91
TRUCK 2.27 44.50 5.35
Moving Vehicle Method

- Traffic Flow and Travel Time
Table 107: Data for Moving Vehicle Method from Baguio City to La
Trinidad (Eastward) using Bypass bridge.
Baguio City to La Trinidad using Bypass bridge (Eastward)

Vehicle
Vehicle Vehicle
TRIA traveling
Time(minutes) overtaking the passed by
L from opposite
test car the test car
direction
1 10.84 133 12 6
2 12.92 121 6 8
3 11.16 126 9 4
4 11.92 122 11 5
5 12.30 133 13 7
6 10.89 123 6 6
7 11.12 129 10 8
8 12.57 137 7 5
9 11.21 127 12 5
10 12.08 130 14 5
AVE. 11.70 128.10 10.00 5.90
102
Table 108: Data for Moving Vehicle Method from La Trinidad to
Baguio City (Westward) using Bypass bridge.
La Trinidad to Baguio City using Bypass bridge (Westward)

Vehicle
Vehicle
traveling from Vehicle passed
TRIAL Time overtaking the
opposite by the test car
test car
direction
1 10.88 134 6 4
2 10.57 140 12 5
3 10.40 132 15 8
4 11.78 131 15 4
5 10.80 138 8 4
6 12.43 133 13 5
7 11.85 128 5 5
8 11.30 126 8 5
9 12.23 134 14 5
10 12.96 130 7 6
AVE. 11.52 132.60 10.30 5.10
Table 109: Result of Moving Vehicle Method using Bypass bridge.
344.4
Vw
1
353.1
Ve
9
Tw 10.62
Te 11.01
103
Trinidad (Eastward) using Magsaysay Avenue.
Baguio City to La Trinidad using Magsaysay Avenue (Eastward)

clear traffic
Vehicle
Vehicle
test car
direction
1 13.95 134 16 7
2 12.38 124 23 6
3 13.88 122 19 9
4 12.27 129 21 9
5 13.27 138 25 9
6 11.32 133 24 6
7 12.12 138 23 11
8 12.51 140 17 9
9 12.37 123 23 12
10 11.72 120 15 11
AVE. 12.58 130.10 20.60 8.90
Baguio City (Westward) using Magsaysay Avenue

104
La Trinidad to Baguio City using Magsaysay Avenue (Westward)

clear traffic
Vehicle
Vehicle
test car
direction
1 11.41 137 22 7
2 11.02 139 20 8
3 11.41 127 18 7
4 13.21 134 19 6
5 13.28 121 22 8
6 11.96 136 20 9
7 12.81 139 16 9
8 11.25 129 21 8
9 12.38 137 21 8
10 12.29 123 17 7
AVE. 12.10 132.20 19.60 7.70
Table 112: Result of Moving Vehicle Method using Magsaysay Avenue on clear
traffic.
345.2
Vw
1
349.8
Ve
3
Tw 10.03
Te 10.57
Trinidad (Eastward) using Magsaysay Avenue during congested.

105
Baguio City to La Trinidad using Magsaysay Avenue (Eastward)

during congested
Vehicle
Vehicle Vehicle passed
traveling from
TRIAL Time overtaking the by the test
opposite
test car car
direction
1 19.04 241 4 5
2 20.35 224 5 6
3 20.75 263 3 7
4 19.72 267 7 6
5 19.09 281 6 7
6 20.26 213 6 5
7 19.58 209 7 7
8 20.09 221 5 8
9 20.35 282 5 6
10 19.29 292 7 6
AVE. 19.85 249.30 5.50 6.30
Baguio City (Westward) using Magsaysay Avenue during congested.

106
La Trinidad to Baguio City using Magsaysay Avenue (Westward)

during congested
Vehicle
Vehicle Vehicle passed
traveling from
TRIAL Time overtaking the by the test
opposite
test car car
direction
1 19.62 239 6 3
2 19.74 264 5 7
3 20.97 245 7 5
4 20.23 213 4 5
5 20.76 229 5 5
6 20.98 288 6 8
7 20.96 249 7 6
8 19.88 201 4 8
9 19.31 251 7 7
10 20.10 293 7 5
AVE. 20.26 247.20 5.80 5.90
Table 115: Result of Moving Vehicle Method using Magsaysay Avenue
during congestion.
372.8
Vw
2
368.6
Ve
3
Tw 20.27
Te 19.98
Fuel Consumed for each Route
The table below shows how much fuel was consumed by taking
Magsaysay Avenue and taking the Bypass Bridge.

107
Note: each trial was for a vehicle to travel the route 10 times
Table 116: Fuel Consumed for each Route

Fuel Consumed (Liter)
Magsaysay Avenue Alternate Route
Trial
Free Congested Free
1 3.05 4.06 3.10
2 2.91 4.03 2.93
3 2.86 3.85 2.99
4 2.97 4.02 2.98
5 2.95 4.10 2.98
6 2.90 3.76 2.95
7 3.28 4.14 3.35
8 3.04 3.96 3.14
9 3.28 3.93 3.39
10 3.02 3.93 3.19
Average 3.03 3.98 3.10
Conclusion and Recommendations
108
Chapter 4
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the conclusion and recommendation of
this research.
Conclusions
1. The introduction of a bypass bridge along Magsaysay Avenue
is a great way to save time and fuel for traveling between
Baguio City and La Trinidad and it is a good way to lessen
traffic congestion along Magsaysay Avenue. It is found out
that from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
are peak hours and the volume traversing during peak hours
are as follows:
I. The Main Road: Private Vehicles and Public
vehicles has the average volume traversing during
peak hours are 1,790 and 1,015, respectively.
II. The Bypass Bridge: Private Vehicles and Public
vehicles has the average volume traversing during
peak hours are 174 and 140, respectively.
2. The average volume with the introduction of the bypass
bridge along Magsaysay is 13,384 and the average volume
entering bypass bridge is 1,317. The average volume of the
traffic is reduced by 9% from the total volume.

109
3. The table below shows the quantified cost-effect when
traversing Magsaysay Avenue when it is clear and congested
and when using the bypass bridge.
Table N: Statistic Table
Route Used Magsaysay Ave. Bypass Bridge

Route Condition Clear Congested Clear
Distace (Km) 2.04 2.42
Average Volume per Day 13384 1317
Average Travel Time (Minutes) 9.85 20.73 10.53
Fuel Consumed (Liters) 0.303 0.398 0.310
In terms of Travel Time traveling Magsaysay Avenue during
congestion it is approximately 20.73 minutes while the
effectiveness compared to the bypass bridge, you only travel
10.53 minutes. Due to traffic congestion in the study area,
traversing Magsaysay Avenue during congestion or peak hours you
lose around 10-11 minutes due to traffic alone.
In terms of Operating cost (Fuel Consumption), continuous
idling of the vehicle during this period, the vehicle will
consume around 0.50-0.60 liters per hour.

110
Recommendation
Based on the findings and the conclusion presented, the
following recommendations are suggested:
 Highways that are highly congested should be connected to an
alternate route going to the same destination to reduce the
volume of vehicles in the main highway to ease traffic.
 Before introducing a bypass structure to a congested
highway, the connecting route should be capable to save time
and fuel than the main road when it is congested.
 Alternate route should be introduced to public and private
drivers to avoid traffic congestion during rush hours.
 One reasons of traffic along Magsaysay avenue are vehicles
dropping and waiting for passengers along the highway and
some vehicles are illegally parked along the highway that’s
why PUV drivers should stop only at designated loading and
unloading area and to avoid waiting too long for passengers.
 Upon improving this research, the future researchers should
gather their data not during a pandemic or calamity to
attain the necessary data for this research.

References
111
REFERENCES
[1] El-Badawy, S. , Gabr, A., & Shoaeb, A. (2018). Economic
Impact of Urban Traffic Congestion on the Main Routes in Mansoura
City, Egypt. International Journal for Traffic and Transport
Engineering, 8(2), 148-165. Retrieved January 18, 2020 from
http://dx.doi.org/10.7708/ijtte.2018.8(2).01.
[2] Dr. Robinson, R. (1999). A new approach to quantifying
economic and social benefits for low-volume roads in developing
countries. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 17:2, 147-
155. Retrieved January 18, 2020 from
https://doi.org/10.3152/147154699781767891
[3] Goldstein, S. (1970, January). Economic and Social Impact
Considerations in Highway Programs. Urban Law Annual; Journal of
Urban and Contemporary Law. Retrieved January 18,2020 from
https://opensholarship.wustl.edu/law_urbanlaw/vol1970/iss1/3
[4] National Center for Transportation Studies (NCTS), University
of the Philippines Diliman (April 5, 2000). Economic Impact of
Traffic Congestion in Metro Manila.
[5] Gannon, M., Leong, D., & Yeh, D.(1998, January). The Economic
Impacts of Highway Bypasses on Communities. A research project by
the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

References
112
[6] Estimation of Direct Economic Costs of Traffic Congestion in
Cairo. Cairo Traffic Congestion Study.
[7] Bandara, Y.M., & Jayasooriya, S.A.C.S. (2017, May). Measuring
the Economic Costs of Traffic Congestion. Conference Paper. DOI:
10.1109/MerCon.2017.7980471.
[8] Miller, J., Thompson, E., & Roenker, J. (2001, June). The
Impact of a New Bypass Route on the Local Economy and Quality of
Life. Kentucky Transportation Center, College of Engineering,
KTC-01-10/SPR219-00-2I.
[9] Laird, J., & Muller, S. G. (2007). International Literature
Review of the Costs of Road Traffic Congestion. Scottish
Executive (www.scotland.gov.uk); at
www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/11/01103351/0.
[10] US Department of Transportation (2012, December).
Methodologies to Measure and Quantify Transportation Management
Center Benefits: Final Synthesis Report (Publication No. FHWA-
HRT-12-054).
[11] Babcock, M. W., & Davalos, J. A. (2003, October). Case
Studies of the Economic Impact of Gighway Bypassesin Kansas.
[12] Handy, S. L., Kockelman, K. M., & Srinivasan, S. (2001,

May). Economic Effects of Highway Relief Routes on Small and
Medium Size Communities. An Econometric Analysis.
Appendices
113
APPENDICES
Appendices
114
APPENDIX N DOCUMENTATION
Figure N. Installation of C.C.T.V
Figure N. Data gathering from C.C.T.V footage

Bautista, Lovely B.
Pinewoods, Km.3 Asin Road,
Baguio City, 2600 Philippines
+639664332365
1223mz.lovely@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE:
To seek a position as a civil engineer that will give me

opportunities to learn, apply my skills and knowledge to enhance
my capabilities.
PERSONAL INFORMATION:
Age: 22
Height: 150cm
Weight: 50kg
Birthday: September 9, 1997
Birthplace: Baguio City
Father’s Name: Roland Bautista
Mother’s Maiden Name: Maria Lilibeth Bautista
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
ORGANIZATIONS:
Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers (PICE)
Member, S.Y. 2019-2020
SKILLS:
Engineering Computer Applications (AutoCAD, Matrix 2D) and

Basic MS Office Applications
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering 2016-Current
City of Baguio, Benguet
Secondary Education 2011-2015

Baguio City National High School
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City
Primary Education 2005-2011

Pacday Quinio Elementary School
Asin Road, Baguio City
CHARACTER REFERENCES:
Engr. Nelson Notarte
Dean, College of Engineering and Architecture
Engr. Jefferson H. Jarapa

Project Manager, SM Baguio Expansion
D.A. ABCEDE and Associates
+639173798392
Arch. Emerald Y. Abuzo

Architect, SM Baguio Expansion
+639475410464
I certify that the above information is true and correct to

the rest of my knowledge.
DE GUZMAN, GABRIEL M.
#125b Alfonso Tabora Brgy.

Baguio City, Benguet
09101406568
gabgab6568@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE:
To be able to apply all that I have learned in Civil

Engineering for me to be able to evaluate or investigate the
impacts of the new bypass bridge along Magsaysay Avenue to
traffic congestion to its adjacent roads.
Age: 22
Height: 168 cm
Weight: 60 kg
Birth date: June 18, 1997
Birthplace: Camiling, Tarlac
Father’s Name: Freddie V. De Guzman
Mother’s Maiden Name: Gladys Mendoza
Religion: Christian Born Again
ORGANIZATIONS:
Member, S.Y. 2019-2020

SKILLS:
Knowledgeable in:
Engineering Computer Applications (AutoCAD, Sketchup, ETabs,

Matrix 2D) and Basic MS Office Applications (Word, Excel,
PowerPoint)
Tertiary:
BSCE 2014-current
Gov. Pack Rd. Baguio City
Secondary:
Baguio City National High School (2010-2014)
Gov. Pack Rd. Baguio City
Elementary:
Don Mariano Elementary School (2004-2006)
Upper Brookside, Baguio City
Engr. Nelson G. Notarte

Engr. Mark Gregory A. Rimando

Contractor, MGR Builders and Associates
09985566048
Ms. Cheralyn Gacusan

Department Head, Logistics Management Office
09277164815
I certify that the above information is true and correct to the

rest of my knowledge.
Mulles, Jojit C.
41 Tiptop Ambuklao Road

Baguio City
+639562766672
jjitmulles@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE:

impacts of flooding on agricultural crops.
Age: 22
Height: 156cm
Weight: 50kg
Birthday: October 19, 1997
Birthplace: Baguio City
Father’s Name: Anelito Tegio Mulles
Mother’s Maiden Name: Jenny Albano Cayetano
ORGANIZATIONS:
Member, S.Y. 2019-2020

SKILLS:
Engineering Computer Applications (AutoCAD, Sketchup, Staad,

ETabs, Matrix 2D) and Basic MS Office Applications
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering (2014-Current)

Secondary Education (2010-2014)

Rizal National High School
1 Gibraltar, Baguio City
Primary Education (2004-2010)

Dr. Jose P. Rizal Elementary School
1 Gibraltar, Baguio City

Engr. Jefferson H. Jarapa

Project Manager, SM Baguio Expansion
+639175028274
Arch. Emerald Y. Abuzo

Architect, SM Baguio Expansion
+639185080973

Samson, Jolly Raye D.
JD 234, Pico, La Trinidad
Benguet, 2601 Philippines
0907-229-9640
jollypogi71@gmail.cm
OBJECTIVE:
To apply my profession where I can be able to gain more
experience and fully utilize my skills.
Age: 22
Height: 164 cm
Weight: 55 kg
Birthday: April 21, 1998
Birthplace: Pinukpuk, Kalinga
Father’s Name: Ricardo S. Samson, Jr.
Mother’s Maiden Name: Joan T. Duplaan
Religion: Christian
ORGANIZATIONS:
Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers, Inc. (PICE)
Member
Philippine Society of Sanitary Engineers, Inc. (PSSE)
Member
SKILLS:
MS Office proficiency and Engineering Computer Applications
(Etabs,AutoCAD)
Tertiary: University of the Cordilleras (2016-2020)
Bachelor of Science in Environmental and
Sanitary Engineering
University of the Cordilleras (2015-Present)

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Secondary: Laurencio Fianza National High School

Dalupirip, Itogon, Benguet
2010-2014
Elementary: Fianza Elementary School

Dalupirip, Itogon, Benguet
2004-2010
REFERENCES:
OIC- Dean, University of the Cordilleras
0908-209-7161/ngnlennon@yahoo.com
Engr. Tandy L. Paquit, SE,CE,MsCE

Instructor, Department of Environmental and Sanitary
Engineering
Engr. Esther Aguilar

Instructor, Department of Environmental and Sanitary
Engineering
I certify that the above information is true and correct to

the rest of my knowledge.
Saweg, Kenny P.
IC-70 Betag
La Trinidad, Benguet
09500752121
kennypagedpedsaweg@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE:

Age: 26
Height: 173cm
Weight: 75kg
Birthday: March 18, 1993
Birthplace: La Trinidad, Benguet
Father’s Name: Gorge B. Saweg Sr.
Mother’s Maiden Name: Herman M. Pagedped
ORGANIZATIONS:
Member, S.Y. 2019-2020

SKILLS:

ETabs, Matrix 2D)
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

2013-Current
Secondary Education
Magsaysay National High School
New Lucban, Baguio city
Primary Education
Balili Elementary School
Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
ENGR. Nelson G. Notarte

ENGR. Grant Lloyd L. Lawaguey

Project Engineer, Monol
International Educational Institute
0908-896-5886
Garrison B. Guiked
Contractor,GBG Design
Ambiong, La Trinidad Benguet
0919-560-0422

Sicco, Gabe Marx L.
Purok 2, Brgy. Balong

Tabuk City, Kalinga
+639993311000
gabemarxsicco@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE:

Age: 25
Height: 170cm
Weight: 82kg
Birthday: January 2, 1995
Birthplace: Dagupan Centro, Tabuk City, Kalinga
Father’s Name: Rolando D. Sicco Sr.
Mother’s Maiden Name: Ruth B. Lopit
ORGANIZATIONS:
Member, S.Y. 2019-2020

SKILLS:

ETabs, Matrix 2D)
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering (2014-Current)

Secondary Education
Saint Theresista’s School
Dagupan Centro, Tabuk City, Kalinga
Primary Education
Saint Theresista’s School
Dagupan Centro, Tabuk City, Kalinga
ENGR. Nelson G. Notarte

College Dean, College of Engineering and Architecture
ARCH. Forbes D. Mata-ag

Project Manager, MLKC Construction
Brgy. Kias, Itogon, Benguet
+639178032128
ENGR. Bonifacio C. Velasquez III

Project Supervisor, MLKC Construction
Asin Road, Baguio City, Benguet
+639169443027


Edit Ps Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Edit Ps Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BYPASS/BRIDGE (MAGSAYSAY

AVENUE TO RIMANDO-AMBIONG ROAD) TO TRAFFIC

A Project Presented to the Faculty of the

Department of Civil Engineering

College of Engineering and Architecture

University of the Cordilleras

the Requirements for the Degree

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

LOVELY BONIO BAUTISTA

GABRIEL MENDOZA DE GUZMAN

JOJIT CAYETANO MULLES

JOLLY RAYE DUPLAAN SAMSON

KENNY PAGEDPED SAWEG

GABE MARX LOPIT SICCO

The newly built bypass bridge along Magsaysay Avenue was

designed to mitigate traffic congestion along the main road and

to provide an alternate route for motorists traveling from La

Trinidad to Baguio City and vice versa. Therefore, the

researchers investigated how cost-effective is the bypass bridge

when the main road is congested. This illustrative, statistical,

and investigative research focuses on the cost-effectiveness of

the bypass bridge in terms of the cost of fuel consumption. The

researchers used a C.C.T.V to determine the traffic

characteristics of the road and bypass. The gathered data from

average travel time during congestion in the main road is 20.73

10.53 minutes which saved about 0.088L of fuel consumption.

Keywords: Traffic Congestion, Cost-Effectiveness, Fuel

Consumption, Travel Time Analysis

for His guidance, wisdom and blessings.

The researchers would like to express their gratitude to the

To Honorable Mayor Romeo K. Salda and his office for

allowing us to install a CCTV camera along Km3 La Trinidad for

gathering data along the bypass bridge and Magsaysay Avenue.

To the La Trinidad MPS Km3 COMPAC Police Station for looking

after the equipment during the gathering process.

To Engr. Joshua Ricablanca for sharing his thoughts and

To Noven Busoy for accompanying us and lending his car for

gathering additional data using moving observer/vehicle method.

To Ariel J. Cernardo for letting us rent his C.C.T.V

equipment and for helping us install.

To Engr. Jan Nicholas S. Baldo for challenging and guiding

the researchers improve this study.

Thank you very much.

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xviii

Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 1

Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks . . . 4

Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . 12

Scope, Limitation and Delimitation . . . . . 13

Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . 14

Operational Definition of Terms . . . . . . 16

2 DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Research Design and Methodology . . . . . . 20

Population and Locale of the Study . . . . . 20

Data Gathering Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Data Gathering Procedure . . . . . . . . . . 22

3 RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION

Characteristics and Volume of Vehicles . . . . 24

Fuel Consumption for each Type of Vehicle . . . 70

Moving Vehicle Method . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Fuel Consumed for each Route . . . . . . . . . 106

4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

CURRICULUM VITAE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115