(Final) NEDA 7 Pedestrianization FR - Dec2019 With Appendices

Consulting Services
For The Economic Impact

Of Pedestrianization
Of An Urban Space In Metro Cebu
Final Report
December 2019
Prepared by the Planning and Development Research Foundation Inc. (PLANADES)

for the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Region 7
Consulting Services for the Economic Impact of Pedestrianization of an Urban Space in Metro Cebu
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
MAIN BODY
PLANADES
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table of Contents
List of Appendices ........................................................................................................... iv
List of Figures .....................................................................................................................v
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ xi
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the Study ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Study Area ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3. Objectives of the Study ........................................................................................................ 2
1.4. Scope of Work ...................................................................................................................... 2
1.5. Organization of the Report ................................................................................................... 3
2. Brief Background of the Study Area ................................................................... 4

2.1. Boundaries............................................................................................................................ 4
2.2. Access and road network ..................................................................................................... 4
2.3. Major land uses and landmarks ........................................................................................... 6
2.4. Brief info on historical development .................................................................................. 10
2.5. Highlights ............................................................................................................................ 15
3. Related Studies and Other Literature.............................................................. 17

3.1. Pedestrianization Concept ................................................................................................. 17
3.2. Elements of Effective Pedestrianization Projects ............................................................... 17
3.3. Potential Economic Impacts of Pedestrianization .............................................................. 19
3.4. Synthesis of Findings from the Review of Literature: ........................................................ 23
4. Case Studies of Pedestrianization Projects.................................................... 25

4.1. New York City, New York, USA ........................................................................................... 25
4.2. Historic Quarter in Istanbul, Turkey ................................................................................... 28
4.3. Old Chinatown District in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia ............................................................ 32
4.4. Avenida Pedestrianization, Manila, Philippines ................................................................. 35
4.5. Synthesis of Case Studies of Selected Pedestrianization Projects ..................................... 38
5. Study Approach ....................................................................................................... 40
PLANADES
i
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
5.1. Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................... 40

5.2. Study Process ..................................................................................................................... 41
5.3. Summary of data needs ..................................................................................................... 43
6. Data Collection......................................................................................................... 45
6.1. Focus Group Discussion (FGD)............................................................................................ 45
6.2. Public Transport (PT) Inventory.......................................................................................... 45
6.3. Rapid Land Use Inventory................................................................................................... 46
6.4. Pedestrian Interviews ......................................................................................................... 46
6.5. Establishment Interviews ................................................................................................... 46
6.6. Pedestrian Counts .............................................................................................................. 47
7. Focus Group Discussion Results ........................................................................ 48

7.1. Pedestrianization Concept ................................................................................................. 48
7.2. Possible attraction of pedestrianization ............................................................................ 49
7.3. Areas to be benefitted by pedestrianization...................................................................... 50
7.4. Prioritization to attract more people ................................................................................. 50
7.5. Possible impacts of simple sidewalk improvements .......................................................... 51
7.6. Synthesis of FGD results ..................................................................................................... 51
8. Land Use Inventory Profiling.............................................................................. 53

8.1. Land Use Characteristics .................................................................................................... 53
8.2. Building Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 61
8.3. Sidewalk Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 63
8.4. Highlights/Main Findings .................................................................................................... 73
9. Pedestrian Count Volumes Profiling ................................................................ 74

9.1. Combined volumes per road section ................................................................................. 74
9.2. Summary by street ............................................................................................................. 80
9.3. Highlights/Main Findings .................................................................................................... 81
10. Public Transport Inventory ................................................................................ 82

10.1. Available modes ............................................................................................................. 82
10.2. List of routes ................................................................................................................... 83
10.3. Estimated Public Transport Volumes ............................................................................. 87
10.4. Public Transport Facilities............................................................................................... 91
10.5. Highlights/Main Findings ................................................................................................ 92
11. Pedestrian Interviews Profiling ........................................................................ 93
PLANADES
ii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.1. Summary of samples ...................................................................................................... 93

11.2. General profile of respondents ...................................................................................... 94
11.3. Trip characteristics of respondents ................................................................................ 97
11.4. Incidences of safety and security issues in the area .................................................... 118
11.5. User preferences .......................................................................................................... 119
11.6. Highlights/Main Findings .............................................................................................. 120
12. Establishment Interviews Profiling .............................................................. 122

12.1. General profile of establishments ................................................................................ 122
12.2. Profile of establishment visitors ................................................................................... 124
12.3. Assessment of current conditions ................................................................................ 127
12.4. Ranking of priority areas for improvement .................................................................. 129
12.5. Reaction to improvements ........................................................................................... 138
12.6. Highlights/Main Findings .............................................................................................. 139
13. Evaluating Suitability for Pedestrianization .............................................. 142

13.1. Framework of the Evaluation ....................................................................................... 142
13.2. Manner of Computation............................................................................................... 143
13.3. Elaboration of the Rating System per Sub‐criteria ....................................................... 144
13.4. Results of the Evaluation .............................................................................................. 150
13.5. Final set of recommendations of road sections for pedestrianization ........................ 155
14. Analysis of Potential Impacts of Intervention ........................................... 157

14.1. Potential Impacts of Urban Environment Improvement.............................................. 157
14.2. Potential Impacts to Foot Traffic Pattern ..................................................................... 157
14.3. Potential Impacts to Business Activities ....................................................................... 158
14.4. Potential Impacts to Local Revenues ........................................................................... 159
15. Supporting Transport Plan / Program and Soft Measures ................... 163
15.1. Framework ................................................................................................................... 163
15.2. Infrastructure Improvements ....................................................................................... 164
15.3. Program Improvements ............................................................................................... 175
15.4. Supporting Policies ....................................................................................................... 184
15.5. Manner of implementation .......................................................................................... 185
16. References .............................................................................................................. 188
PLANADES
iii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
List of Appendices
Appendix AA: Lot labeling used for this Study
Appendix AB: ADB Walkability Surveys of 13 Asian Cities
Appendix AC: Street Design Improvements implemented by NYC DOT
Survey Planning Reports
Appendix BA: Focus Group Discussion Report
Appendix BB: Public Transport Inventory Survey Report
Appendix BC: Land Use Inventory Survey Report
Appendix BD: Pax Interviews Survey Report
Appendix BE: Establishment Interviews Survey Report
Appendix BF: Pedestrian Counts Survey Report
Raw Survey Results Reports
Appendix CA: Land Use Inventory Survey Results
Appendix CB: Pedestrian Counts Raw Survey Results
Appendix CC: Pedestrian Interviews Raw Survey Results
Appendix CD: Establishment Interviews Raw Survey Results
PLANADES
iv
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
List of Figures
Figure 1 Map and Legend of the Study Area ........................................................................................ 2
Figure 2 Barangay map of the Study Area ............................................................................................ 4
Figure 3 Old photo showing portion of Magallanes St beside Magellan’s Cross Monument still
opened to vehicular traffic (circa 1970’s) ............................................................................................ 5
Figure 4 Traffic management plan around Basilica de Santo Nino during Sinulog Festival ................. 5
Figure 5 Cropped Cebu City land use map ........................................................................................... 6
Figure 6 Major institutional places within the Downtown area .......................................................... 7
Figure 7 Major commercial centers within the Downtown area ......................................................... 8
Figure 8 Major tourist destinations within the Downtown area ......................................................... 9
Figure 9 Major open spaces within the Downtown area ................................................................... 10
Figure 10 Old site plan of Cebu Downtown Area, circa 1699 ............................................................ 11
Figure 11 Old photograph of Basilica de Santo Nino ......................................................................... 11
Figure 12 Old photograph of Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral .............................................................. 12
Figure 13 Plan of old Downtown area, circa 1873 ............................................................................. 12
Figure 14 Old view of Colon St showing accessorias during late Spanish period .............................. 13
Figure 15 Old view of the Downtown area during the American period, circa 1914 ........................ 13
Figure 16 View of the Vision Theater in 1945 just after World War II ............................................... 14
Figure 17 Old picture of Oriente Theater (background) and Cinema Theater (foreground) ............. 14
Figure 18 Map showing locations of the old theaters within the Downtown area ........................... 15
Figure 19 Protected bikeways along 8th Avenue ............................................................................... 25
Figure 20 Traffic calming and improved parking along 180th St., Bronx ........................................... 26
Figure 21 Expansion of public space in Union Square ........................................................................ 26
Figure 22 Repurposing underutilized parking space as public space on Pearl Street ........................ 26
Figure 23 Improved parking for businesses within Park Slope .......................................................... 27
Figure 24 Distribution of Functions in the Istanbul Historic Peninsula (EMBARQ Turkiye citing Gehl,
2010)................................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 25 Business Type Distributions across the study .................................................................... 30
Figure 26 Method of Travel to Work .................................................................................................. 31
Figure 27 Changes in perception before and after pedestrianization ............................................... 32
Figure 28 Picture of Medan Pasar now .............................................................................................. 33
Figure 29 Medan Pasar over the years showing gradual closure of roads to vehicular traffic .......... 34
Figure 30 View of the Pedestrianized Avenida around 2003 ............................................................. 35
Figure 31 Pedestrianization Conceptual Framework ........................................................................ 40
Figure 32 Study Process ..................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 33 View of the FGD held on May 10, 2019 at Cebu Business Hotel ........................................ 45
Figure 34 Pictures of interviewers conducting at Establishment Interviews ..................................... 47
Figure 35 Pedestrian count surveyors at various stations ................................................................. 47
Figure 36 Overall land use types in the Study Area ........................................................................... 54
Figure 37 Ground floor land use types in the Study Area .................................................................. 56
Figure 38 Picture of building along Colon St between P. Burgos and Jakosalem that looks
unoccupied ......................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 39 Upper floor land use types in the Study Area .................................................................... 58
PLANADES
v
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 40 Picture of multi‐storey building along V. Gullas with partially unoccupied upper floors .. 59
Figure 41 Picture of building at corner of Gullas St and Legaspi St that looks completely unoccupied
............................................................................................................................................................ 60
Figure 42 Occupancy of the lots in the Study Area ............................................................................ 60
Figure 43 Picture of a building in the Downtown area that is in good condition but unclean .......... 61
Figure 44 Physical condition of the buildings in the lots in the Study Area ....................................... 62
Figure 45 Arcaded walkways along Colon St ...................................................................................... 63
Figure 46 Lot with no sidewalk along Gullas St .................................................................................. 63
Figure 47 Types of sidewalks of the lots within the Study Area ........................................................ 64
Figure 48 Section in P. Burgos with very narrow sidewalk ................................................................ 65
Figure 49 Wide arcaded sidewalk in Osmena Blvd ............................................................................ 65
Figure 50 Sidewalk widths of the lots within the Study Area............................................................. 66
Figure 51 Sample of sidewalk with uneven surface along V. Gullas St .............................................. 67
Figure 52 Sidewalk conditions of the lots within the Study Area....................................................... 68
Figure 53 Parked cars (temporary obstructions) along F. Gonzales St .............................................. 69
Figure 54 Utility posts (permanent obstructions) along P. Burgos .................................................... 69
Figure 55 Types of sidewalk obstructions in the lots within the Study Area ..................................... 70
Figure 56 Fixed walls installed by Gaisano Main along V. Gullas ....................................................... 72
Figure 57 Lot in Legaspi St with raised sidewalk ................................................................................ 72
Figure 58 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalk of the lots within the Study Area72
Figure 59 Pedestrian counts combined weekday daily volume summary ......................................... 76
Figure 60 Heavy pedestrian volumes along Colon St in front of Colonnade Mall ............................. 76
Figure 61 Pedestrian counts combined weekend daily volume summary .................................. 77
Figure 62 Weekday daily pedestrian flows by street ........................................................................ 78
Figure 63 Weekend daily pedestrian flows by street ........................................................................ 79
Figure 64 Comparison between weekday and weekend volumes by street ..................................... 80
Figure 65 Formal and informal Public Transport modes available within the Downtown Area ........ 83
Figure 66 Map showing locations of route ends of public transport routes...................................... 86
Figure 67 Passengers congregating along F. Urdaneta St to transfer in between PUJ routes ........... 91
Figure 68 Number of samples obtained per street ............................................................................ 93
Figure 69 Number of samples obtained per lot ................................................................................. 94
Figure 70 Breakdown of occupations of respondents ....................................................................... 95
Figure 71 Breakdown of occupation of respondents per street ........................................................ 95
Figure 72 OD zoning map for Cebu City ............................................................................................. 99
Figure 73 OD zoning map for Cebu province ................................................................................... 100
Figure 74 Zoning of blocks within the Study Area ............................................................................ 101
Figure 75 Distribution of trip origin zones of respondents per Study Area zone ............................ 102
Figure 76 Distribution of destination zone of respondents per block zone ..................................... 103
Figure 77 Breakdown of type of establishment visited by the respondents ................................... 105
Figure 78 Breakdown of zone of establishment visited by the respondents ................................... 105
Figure 79 Trip purpose of respondents at origin zone ................................................................. 106
Figure 80 Trip purpose of respondents at destination zone ............................................................ 106
Figure 81 Trip purpose of respondents at establishment visited .................................................... 107
Figure 82 Access mode of respondents ........................................................................................... 108
PLANADES
vi
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 83 Egress mode of respondents ............................................................................................ 108

Figure 84 Access modes of respondents per trip purpose at establishment ................................... 109
Figure 85 Access mode of respondents per type of establishment visited ..................................... 110
Figure 86 Access mode of respondents per trip origin zone............................................................ 111
Figure 87 Frequency of trip by respondents .................................................................................... 112
Figure 88 Frequency of trip by respondents by occupation ............................................................ 113
Figure 89 Frequency of trip by respondents by street of establishment visited ............................. 114
Figure 90 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by type of establishment visited .... 115
Figure 91 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by trip purpose at establishment
visited ............................................................................................................................................... 116
Figure 92 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by origin zone of respondent ......... 117
Figure 93 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by occupation .............................. 118
Figure 94 Count of 1st to 4th choices of respondents per improvement aspects ............................. 119
Figure 95 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by street of establishment visited ... 120
Figure 96 Assessment of current conditions by the respondents.................................................... 129
Figure 97 Respondent Raw Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement ............................................ 130
Figure 98 Respondent Weighted Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement ................................... 130
Figure 99 Respondents’ rating of acceptability for occasional closure ............................................ 136
Figure 100 Respondents’ rating of acceptability for full closure ..................................................... 137
Figure 101 Respondents’ probable reaction to improvements ....................................................... 139
Figure 102 Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation Framework ..................................................... 142
Figure 103 Process of computation for the Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation Framework .. 143
Figure 104 Framework for determining the type of intervention needed to improve suitability and
economic success of pedestrianization projects .............................................................................. 163
Figure 105 Rerouting of Route 06B and 15 to avoid OS4 road section ............................................ 166
Figure 106 Rerouting of Route 06C, 06D, 06F, 07B, 07D to avoid OS4 road section ....................... 166
Figure 107 Rerouting of Route 02B to avoid MB3 road section ...................................................... 167
Figure 108 Rerouting of Route 08E, 11D to avoid MB3 road section .............................................. 167
Figure 109 Rerouting of Route 09C, 12B, 12M to avoid MB3 road section ..................................... 168
Figure 110 Rerouting of Route 09F to avoid MB3 road section ....................................................... 168
Figure 111 Rerouting of Route 12C to avoid MB3 road section....................................................... 169
Figure 112 Rerouting of Route 12I, 12J to avoid MB3 road section ................................................ 169
Figure 113 Arterial Bus Route 1 (Downtown to Uptown) ................................................................ 170
Figure 114 Arterial Bus Route 2 (Downtown to Mandaue, Airport) ................................................ 171
Figure 115 Proposed arterial routes by Mega Cebu Study .............................................................. 171
Figure 116 Open area behind Senior Citizen’s Park currently used as a parking area ..................... 172
Figure 117 Identified formal Public Transport facilities within the Study Area ............................... 173
Figure 118 Identified potential public parking areas within the Study Area ................................... 174
Figure 119 Pictures of Park Square in Ayala Center, Makati, MM ................................................... 175
Figure 120 Picture of rundown Laperal Apartments before renovation ......................................... 178
Figure 121 Some pictures of the renovated Laperal Apartments in San Miguel, Manila ................ 178
Figure 122 View of row of restaurants opposite Royal Palace in Bangkok, Thailand showing
different types of food establishments ............................................................................................ 179
Figure 123 View of row of souvenir shops along Petaling Street in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia ......... 180
PLANADES
vii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 124 View of Don Sergio Osmena Building at the corner of Osmena Blvd and Jakosalem
showing interesting architectural elements but marred by utility wires......................................... 180
Figure 125 View of abandoned building at the corner of Gullas St and Legaspi St (left) and the
Flatiron Building in New York City (right) ......................................................................................... 181
Figure 126 View of Vision Theater at Colon St marred by commercial signages and utility wires .. 181
Figure 127 View of shophouses along Medan Pasar in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia showing clean and
unobstructed facades ....................................................................................................................... 182
Figure 128 View of old private houses in Georgetown, Penang with preserved old façades as
required by the government ............................................................................................................ 182
Figure 129 View of some of the place markers already installed along Colon St ............................ 183
Figure 130 Sample of heritage walking tour map of Chinatown in Singapore................................. 183
Figure 131 People using Emerald Avenue during Carless Weekend in Ortigas Center, Pasig City, MM
.......................................................................................................................................................... 186
Figure 132 Sample of heritage talk conducted by Grupo Kalinangan Inc. ....................................... 187
PLANADES
viii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
List of Tables
Table 1 Global Walkability Index Parameters .................................................................................... 17
Table 2 Potential economic benefits of improving walkability (Litman, 2003).................................. 19
Table 3 Comparison of Impact of Pedestrian in German Cities ......................................................... 21
Table 4 Proportions of retail hotel and restaurant business report changes in annual turnover ..... 22
Table 5 Proportions of businesses reporting changes in turnover, costs and profit ......................... 22
Table 6 Expected and Observed Changes in Staff Numbers, Annual Income and Number of
Customers .......................................................................................................................................... 31
Table 7 Expect and Observed Changes in Property Values ................................................................ 32
Table 8 List of data requirements and corresponding data collection technique ............................. 43
Table 9 Count of surveyed lots per street .......................................................................................... 53
Table 10 Overall land use type of the lots within the Study Area ...................................................... 54
Table 11 Type of establishments within the lot ................................................................................. 55
Table 12 Ground floor land use type of the lots within the Study Area ............................................ 56
Table 13 Upper floors land use type of the lots within the Study Area ............................................. 57
Table 14 Occupancy types of buildings/lots in the Study Area .......................................................... 59
Table 15 Physical conditions of the buildings/lots in the Study Area ................................................ 61
Table 16 Types of sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area ...................................................... 63
Table 17 Average widths of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area ................................ 65
Table 18 Physical conditions of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area .......................... 67
Table 19 Types of obstructions in the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area....................... 69
Table 20 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
............................................................................................................................................................ 71
Table 21 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume summary ................... 74
Table 22 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume summary by street .... 80
Table 23 List of PUV routes entering and exiting the Study Area ...................................................... 83
Table 24 Count of Downtown roads where the routes traverse ....................................................... 84
Table 25 List of route ends per location vis‐à‐vis Downtown area .................................................... 85
Table 26 Counts of instances of each route end ................................................................................ 86
Table 27 Counts of combination of route end pairs .......................................................................... 87
Table 28 List of PUV routes entering and exiting the Study Area ...................................................... 88
Table 29 Estimated Public Transport Volumes per PT corridor ......................................................... 90
Table 30 Estimated pax volumes for some road sections within Downtown area ............................ 90
Table 31 Macro‐level zoning used for this Study ............................................................................... 97
Table 32 Origin‐destination zone matrix of the respondents .......................................................... 104
Table 33 Count of same origin and destination zones of respondents............................................ 104
Table 34 Type of establishment respondents .................................................................................. 122
Table 35 Average area of establishment .......................................................................................... 123
Table 36 Average daily client visits................................................................................................... 124
Table 37 Average daily client visits per unit area ............................................................................. 125
Table 38 General Origin of Clients.................................................................................................... 126
Table 39 Average expenditure per customer per visit ..................................................................... 127
Table 40 Tabulation of number of answers per score for current conditions assessment.............. 127
PLANADES
ix
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 41 Ranking of improvement features to attract more people .............................................. 131

Table 42 Ranking of sub‐types of features that will attract more people according to respondents’
scores................................................................................................................................................ 135
Table 43 Likelihood of business reaction to improvements ............................................................ 138
Table 44 Grading scale used for the Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation Framework.............. 143
Table 45 Pedestrian Suitability Evaluation Results .......................................................................... 151
Table 46 Road sections in Study Area under strong consideration for pedestrianization ............... 156
Table 47 Other road sections in Study Area under consideration for pedestrianization ................ 156
Table 48 Estimated Visitor Spending in Study Area ......................................................................... 160
Table 49 Estimate of Effect of Improving the Pedestrian Environment, Selected Streets .............. 162
Table 50 Estimate of Effect of Improving the Pedestrian Environment, ......................................... 162
Table 51 Scores of potential pedestrianized street sections requiring transport infrastructure
improvements .................................................................................................................................. 164
Table 52 Scores of street sections per sufficient infrastructure sub‐variable ................................. 164
Table 53 List of PUV routes that may affected by road closure in Osmena Blvd and Mabini St due to
pedestrianization.............................................................................................................................. 165
Table 54 Scores of street sections program interventions .............................................................. 175
Table 55 Scores of street sections for each public need sub‐variable ............................................. 176
PLANADES
x
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Executive Summary
Background of the Study and the Study Area

The Study Area is comprised of 16 streets (with aggregate length of 5.7 km) in the downtown
area of Cebu City including major streets such as Colon, Osmena Blvd. have been identified
areas to consider for potential implementation of a pedestrianization project, in the hopes of
spurring economic activity in the area. Thus, the following objectives have been identified in
the Terms of Reference:
a) To determine the probable economic impact of pedestrianization on stakeholders

based on identified parameters; and
b) To recommend policies, program or project to enhance pedestrianization within the
study area.
The Study Area can be considered as the old city center in Cebu City, dating back to the Spanish
period. It has a rich cultural and historical heritage spanning almost four centuries. Some traces
of that heritage can still be seen from the structures that remain to this day, including some of
the grandest theaters built during the American period.
However, as time progressed, some of these structures became rundown or had already
changed to some other uses. Currently, the Downtown Area is littered with many important
commercial, institutional, cultural and tourist centers, making it an important node in Cebu City.
All of this highlights the unrealized potential of the place, and at the same time, the importance
of a project, such as pedestrianization, to revitalize the area.
Key concepts from previous studies and case studies

Based on the Review of Related Literature and Case Studies, the following key concepts
regarding pedestrianization were picked up:
 While pedestrianization involves giving dedicated spaces to the pedestrians, there are
some variations as to how much dedicated spaces is given (full vs. partial), and when
this is given (permanent vs. occasional). [Chow Ka Ching (2002)] For some of the
successful implementations, gradual phasing over time from occasional to partial to
full pedestrianization was done.
 A pedestrianization project needs to consider multi‐sectoral aspects for it to be
successful and should not be treated as simply a physical intervention only. This
includes commercial, social, technical and institutional considerations. [Litman (2003)]
Thus, physical improvements will need to be complimented by soft measures for it to
be successful.
 Generally, while many studies agreed that pedestrianization has some economic
impacts, some of these are difficult to consistently measure, as these impacts are
hard to be isolated for analysis as to whether they can be directly attributed to
pedestrianization. As such, some of the more successful pedestrianization prorgrams
PLANADES
xi
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
focused instead on practical and simple metrics for evaluation. Increase in foot traffic
and revenues were enumerated as some of these indicators.
 Community involvement is critical for the success of a pedestrianization project,
either in terms of planning (getting their inputs, assistance in data collection) or in
actual implementation (lobbying for support, sustained application).
 Old downtown historical cores show the most promise for economic revitalization
through pedestrianization projects, because of their inherent historical characteristics
that attracts foot traffic from tourists and locals.
Determining areas suitable for pedestrianization

To evaluate objectively a particular road’s suitability for pedestrianization, the framework
shown in the figure below was adopted.
The framework is basically divided into two main sets of criteria: ‘Public need’ aspects and
‘Sufficient infrastructure’ aspects. This basically states that a particular area or road sections’
suitability for pedestrianization should be a combination of both of these aspects. Lacking either
one will make the area unsuitable, hence the expected increase in foot traffic and local revenues
may not be realized, and thus economic vitality may not be realized.
This pedestrianization suitability analysis framework also assumes that basic requirements like
safety/security and environmental management (flooding and waste management) are already
taken care of prior to the implementation any pedestrianization program. Alternatively, these
requirements can be addressed simultaneously with the pedestrianization program.
Suitability for
Pedestrianization
Public Sufficient
Need Infrastructure
Urgent need for Complimentary High heritage/ Supportive Minimal traffic

ped facilities land use tourism road geometry impact
character
High ped High Heritage sites Wide road ROW Non‐national

volumes residential (# of lanes) or provl road
Narrow sidewalk High retail Parks/open Presence of Mid to low

width spaces parallel streets traffic volumes
Poor sidewalk High school Architectural Parking w/in Mid to low PT

condition population features vicinity volumes
Many sidewalk Low or no

obstructions industrial uses
PLANADES
xii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Each of the sub‐criteria in the above evaluation framework is to be applied for each road section
with the Study Area, using a grading scale shown below.
Score Public need (PN) Sufficient infrastructure (SI)

‐3 to ‐1.01 Almost no need Very insufficient
‐1 to 0.99 Very low need Insufficient
1 to 1.99 Low need Low sufficiency
2 to 2.99 Somewhat needed Somewhat sufficient
3 to 3.99 Moderately needed Moderately sufficient
4 to 4.99 Highly needed Highly sufficient
5 Absolutely needed Absolutely sufficient
Based on the above framework, the road sections within the Study Area that is strongly being
considered for pedestrianization because they received the highest scores in terms of public
need, are as follows:
Section Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Need Sufficient
Code Urgent need Complimentar Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Score Infra Score
y Land Use tourism road traffic (average of (average of
character geometry impact a,b,c) d,e)
Btwn 2.8 1.3

OS4 Osmena Jakosalem 3.3 1.3 3.7 2.7 0.0 Somewhat Low
& P. Burgos needed suitability
Btwn V. 2.6 1.0
MB3 Mabini Gullas & P. 2.8 2.8 2.3 0.0 2.0 Somewhat Low
Gomez needed suitability
 The relatively high score of Osmena OS4 for ‘Public Need’ is due to high score for
‘heritage/tourism character’ owing to the presence of Basilica de Santo Nino, and
‘urgent need for ped facilities’, since the Basilica attracts a huge number of people but
at the same time, there is a lack of sidewalks on this side.
 The relatively high score of Mabini MB3 ‘Public Need’ is due to moderate score for
‘urgent need for ped facilities’ owing to poor sidewalk facilities and many obstructions;
and moderate score for ‘complimentary land use’ because of the presence of a school,
a park and a museum.
 Both of these sections have low score on ‘Sufficient Infrastructure’ since these road
sections carry heavy volume of vehicular, as well as public transport routes, and have
insufficient parking within its vicinity.
Aside from this, other road sections are considered because of their relatively high scores for
infrastructure sufficiency and are shown in Table 47 below.
PLANADES
xiii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Secti Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Sufficient
on Urgent need Complimentar Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Need Score Infra Score
Code
Btwn Legaspi
JA4 Jakosalem St & Osmena 1.3 1.3 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.9 2.7
Blvd
Btwn Osmena
JA5 Jakosalem Blvd & 1.3 1.5 0.7 2.3 2.7 1.1 2.5
Magallanes
Btwn P. Gomez
MB4 Burgos & Legaspi St 2.3 1.0 2.3 2.3 2.7 1.9 2.5
Btwn
MB7 Burgos Magallanes & 1.3 0.3 3.7 3.3 2.7 1.8 3.0
MC Briones
 The relatively high score of these sections for ‘Sufficient Infra’ is mainly due to moderate
to low traffic and PT volumes; and the presence of sufficient parallel roads on both sides.
Additionally, for Jakosalem 4 and Mabini 7, there are sufficient parking lots within its
vicinity.
 All of these have low scores on ‘Public Need’ due to the low scores for ‘Complimentary
Land Use’ since there is a lack of residential uses and variety of commercial spaces in
these road sections. At the same time, there is low foot traffic along these areas.
Jakosalem 4 & 5 score lowly also on ‘heritage character’ because there is not that much
significant or prominent heritage sites along these sections.
Determining interventions
Since all of these road sections under consideration did not receive high scores on both criteria
of Public Need and Sufficient Infrastructure, certain interventions need to be introduced to
make them more suitable for pedestrianization, and thus being more likely to achieve success.
Infrastructure interventions
Some of the items enumerated below are not really hard infrastructure, but are services
or programs meant to improve the capacity of the roads.
Rerouting of 17 public transport routes:

 Routes previously passing through Osmena Blvd will now be bypassed to Legaspi St.
 Routes previously passing through P. Burgos/Mabini St will now be bypassed either to
V. Gullas or to Zulueta St.
Introduction of new arterial public transport routes:

 Since it was learned from the Pedestrian Interviews that a good portion of the people
going to the Downtown comes from the Uptown area of Cebu and West of Cebu
PLANADES
xiv
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Centro (Downtown core), it will be more efficient to have arterial bus routes serving
these routes instead of public utility jeepneys which are low capacity modes.
 In addition, because of the (eventual) tourist nature of the Downtown area, it needs
to be connected to other major tourist facilities and transport nodes (e.g. airports, bus
terminals, etc.). Thus, another arterial route going to the airport is proposed.
Setting up of public transport facilities:

 There needs to be a terminal facilitiy that will house the 43 routes terminating in the
Downtown area, which is roughly equivalent to about 3,500 units carrying around
85,000 pax. Otherwise, this will create major traffic impacts.
 Based on the availability of the space in the area and technical considerations, the
most practical location for an integrated terminal is the empty lot behind the Senior
Citizen’s Park adjacent to the SRP Road. It has enough size to accommodate huge
volumes and is also just beside the SRP Road.
 Public Transport stops have also been identified which will allow passengers to access
the revitalized pedestrianized area, as well as the other destinations within the
Downtown area.
Provision of parking facilities:

 There needs to be a network of parking facilities within the Downtown area to increase
the capacity of the limited road space within the Downtown area, and serve the
various commercial and tourist destinations.
 Some of the potential locations are existing open parking lots or parking garages, while
others are existing vacant lots that can be converted to parking buildings. The
proposed location behind Senior Citizen’s Park to be an integrated terminal can be a
combination of terminal on the lower floors and a parking building on the upper floors.
Program interventions
Adjust land uses to be more complimentary to pedestrianization.
 Residential‐type of establishments are needed to provide a base local market for the
retail establishments which will make economic vitality more sustainable. Some of the
old buildings along Jakosalem, P. Burgos and adjacent areas, can be repurposed to
become residential developments, like weekday dormitories for students and
workers and backpacker inns or hostels for tourists or transient visitors.
 If the LGU really intends to make the area more pedestrian‐friendly, in the long run,
there might be a need to restrict the industrial land uses in the area, since industrial
establishments usually require large vehicles that may hinder traffic flow and at the
same time their target clientele is inherently different from that of pedestrianization.
 Although there are some tourists going to the Downtown area, there is a lack of
shops/stalls in the area that can make the tourists stay longer and have them spend
more money in the area. Thus, a variety of retail stores needs to be introduced, like
food & beverage shops offering a wide range of prices and cuisine, and variety of
PLANADES
xv
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
souvenir shops offering wide range of signature local products (e.g. dried mangos,
guitars, etc.).
Improvement of heritage/tourism character

 With some basic physical improvements, some of the old structures in the Downtown
area can potentially become tourist attractions. Among the simple actions that can be
undertaken to improve the heritage/tourism character of the area are: repainting and
cleaning of the facades, hiding and/or organizing the various utility wires and posts
such that they do not block the facades of the buildings.
 Different tourist operators can be encouraged to develop different types of heritage
walking tours highlighting some of the interesting architectural/ heritage
characteristics in the area.
 New programs or events can be introduced to further promote the heritage character
of the Downtown area. For example, a theater night can be organized on one weekend
per month to highlight the cinema culture of the Downtown area during the olden
times.
Supporting policies
New policies must be enacted by the LGU to support the pedestrianization program and
ensure its sustainability over time. These laws will set the solid ground from which the
LGU/project proponent will base their physical planning of the various aspects related to
pedestrianization.
Among the different policy aspects needed to be enacted are:
 Land use policies

 Policies regarding heritage sites
 Policies regarding waste managemnt
 Traffic and parking policies
 Public Transport operations policies
 Policies promoting walking and biking
A more comprehensive legal and institutional review and evaluation of the policies is
needed to check existing legal precedents and the needed legal instruments for
implementation.
PLANADES
xvi
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Manner of implementation
Gradual phasing towards full pedestrianization
Given the apprehensiveness expressed by the respondents regarding full closure of roads
and many uncertainties as to the potential impacts of pedestrianization, the best
approach to be applied is that of gradual phasing.
Basically, the gradual phasing involves the following general steps:
 First fix the important basic infrastructure concerns, with regards to safety/security,
flooding and waste management.
 Introduce simple measures to improve walkability that does not require heavy capital.
(e.g. strict regulation of sidewalk use, which means banning all forms of vendors,
physical obstructions and the like)
 Enact new laws/ordinances to help jumpstart the pedestrianization efforts and
provide legal foothold for implementation.
 Install pedestrianization elements as needed and/or depending on the available
budget.
 Allow for a period of observation, evaluation and tweaking until getting the desired
outcomes, which are increase in foot traffic and increase in local revenues.
 Concurrently with the period of testing, hold various events to promote culture of
walking and biking to slowly get people used to the idea of road closures. This is also
to test various traffic management measures.
 At any time during the period of testing, once noticeable and sustained results of
increase in foot traffic and revenues are observed, consult with the local communities
about the possibility of permanently closing off the particular road sections.
Community involvement
Community needs to be involved at the onset to ensure sustained success. An ad hoc
group can be convened composed of people from various backgrounds to help champion
the cause of improved walkability. Among the matters that this group can discuss are:
 Creation of database on the history of the place and critical lot owners
 Identification of lot owners that can be supportive to the pedestrianization cause, and
try to convince them to implement some simple features to improve
walkability/mobility (e.g. installation of bicycle racks)
 Coming up with events or educational reachout programs to schools, companies
and/or organizations to share information about their advocacy, and garner their
support in some way
PLANADES
xvii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Estimate of Economic Impacts
Assumptions
The key assumption for pedestrianization to produce economic impacts is for the local
government and organizations in the area to address the safety/security issues, flooding
and cleanliness of the area. These are fundamental to making the area more attractive
to visitors.
Estimates on increase in foot traffic

The increase of foot traffic is assumed to correlate with the changes to establishment
visitation. In other words, the rates derived from the establishment interviews and
pedestrian interviews are the basis for the increases in foot traffic and revenue.
Estimates on increase in local revenues

The grand total average client or visitor spending (and therefore local revenue) of the
major roads of the study area is more than 62.50 million per day or more than 1.88 billion
pesos a month. This estimate is conservatively expected to increase by 6.22% (weighted
average, based on a 1‐visit increase within a week) if the pedestrian environment is
improved (including urban environmental issues, but not necessarily involving road
closures).
For a more specific example, the estimate is of impact is 6.02% (rate is different due to
different land use mix) for the Osmena section OS4 (which is next to Sto.Nino Cathedral)
is prepared. From a baseline revenue of 1.91 million pesos daily rising to 2.03 million
pesos after improvement. Note that this does not include changes of land use or
establishment types, which can potentially increase visitation and revenue even further.
Also, the increase in local revenue, sustained over time, may form a substantial part of
the economic justification of improving the pedestrian environment.
PLANADES
xviii
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1. Introduction
1.1. Background of the Study

Pedestrianization is often viewed as non‐infrastructure, “low‐cost” intervention that has social
and economic benefits. It has been implemented in urban areas to minimize motorized traffic
(through closure of road sections), while providing better accessibility and mobility for
pedestrians, reducing their fear of being involved in road crashes. Emphasizing and meeting the
needs of the pedestrians, holds the potential to enhance the volume of foot traffic, and perhaps,
ultimately, shopping and other retail business activities.
However, before its implementation in a particular area, pedestrianization is almost always

perceived by businesses as a something that could lead to a reduction or displacement of business
and economic activities and cause their transfer to other areas, devaluation of properties within
the pedestrianized area, decrease in local taxes, or increase in motorized vehicle traffic in
surrounding areas. These could be some reasons why pedestrianization has not gained a
following among LGUs in the Philippines, despite successful implementations in Europe, North
and South America, and other Asian countries.
It is in this light that NEDA Region 7 had proposed a study to determine the potential economic
benefits and costs of converting some urban roads and space to pedestrianization or non‐
motorized transport zone as a method for revitalizing the economic activity in an urban space of
Metro Cebu.
1.2. Study Area

The cultural, historical and commercial district of Cebu City is identified to be the Study Area,
which is one of the areas identified in the Green Loop Project designed by the University of San
Carlos‐College of Architecture. This consists of cultural and historic areas in downtown Cebu,
including the areas near the Parian, Cathedral, Sto. Niño, Magellan’s Cross and a portion of Colon
St. This is within an urban space that covers 0.35 square kilometers and consists of 16 street
sections. Inside this urban space are commercial buildings, business establishments, banks,
government offices, and cultural and heritage sites, including museums, churches, shrines and
ruins.
PLANADES
1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 1 Map and Legend of the Study Area

(source: p.5 and p.6 of Terms of Reference)
1.3. Objectives of the Study

The Terms of Reference for the study identify the following objectives:
c) To determine the probable economic impact of pedestrianization on stakeholders

based on identified parameters; and
d) To recommend policies, program or project to enhance pedestrianization within the

study area.
1.4. Scope of Work

As set out in the Terms of Reference, this study covers the following work:
a) Define the intended treatment of the roads proposed for pedestrianization in the study
area—i.e., determine which roads would be recommended for permanent, limited or
temporary closure
b) Determine the economic outcomes of pedestrianization within the study area based on
the following parameters:
 Local revenues;
 Business activities;
 Environment; and
 Foot traffic pattern.
c) Recommend a public transport plan to support pedestrianization.
PLANADES
2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
d) Prepare and submit the following deliverables for approval by the Undersecretary of
the National Development Office 1‐Planning and Policy (NDO1‐PP): Inception Report,
Draft and Revised Final Reports, the latter to include the presentation materials.
e) Prepare and submit the following deliverables for review by the NEDA7 Regional Project
Steering Committee: Interim Report, and Monthly Progress Reports.
f) Brief and orient the NEDA7 Regional Project Steering Committee and relevant technical
staff on the reports submitted.
1.5. Organization of the Report

To streamline the discussion of the Study Findings, this Main Body of the Report contains
contents directly related to the major findings and the menu of recommendations. Other detailed
contents have been put in the Appendixes.
The Appendixes are divided as follows:
 Appendix “A” series: other references mentioned in the Main Body

 Appendix “B” series: detailed discussions of the survey preparations
 Appendix “C” series: detailed discussions of the raw survey results
PLANADES
3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
2. Brief Background of the Study Area
2.1. Boundaries
The area is bounded on the north by Colon St, on the east by Mabini and P. Burgos St, on the
south by Quezon Blvd. and on the southwest by Osmena Blvd and F. Gonzalez St. Majority of the
Study Area is located within Brgy. Santo Nino. The other parts are located in barangays Parian,
Kalubihan and San Roque.
Figure 2 Barangay map of the Study Area
2.2. Access and road network

The downtown area is basically made up of a grid network of roads. Some of the roads have been
assigned as one‐way directions as a traffic management measure. The major access road to the
Downtown area from the east is Sergio Osmena Blvd via the Reclamation area. From the north,
it is Osmena Blvd. At the south is CSCR Road which connects to the Cebu South Properties area
and eventually to Talisay City in the west. From the west, it is Colon St and Magallanes St.
Magallanes St was originally a continuous road running along east‐west all the way from
PLANADES
4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Mambaling in the west to MJ Cuenco in the east. However, with the redevelopment of the area
around the Magellan’s Cross monument, the portion of Magallanes St around it was closed off
and has been converted to Plaza Sugbu.
Figure 3 Old photo showing portion of Magallanes St beside Magellan’s Cross Monument
still opened to vehicular traffic (circa 1970’s)
During some major events in the City, portions of the road network are closed off. For example,
during the annual Sinulog festival, the section of Osmena Blvd in front of Basilica de Santo Nino
is closed off to vehicular traffic. Also, the portion of Legaspi St beside Colonnade Mall is closed
off starting around late afternoon for night market.
Figure 4 Traffic management plan around Basilica de Santo Nino during Sinulog Festival
PLANADES
5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
2.3. Major land uses and landmarks
2.3.1. Land use

Based on the land use map made available by the Cebu City LGU to the public, the land use
for the entire Study Area is commercial, with parts of the vicinity area being industrial. There
are a few spots within the Study Area which is institutional.
Figure 5 Cropped Cebu City land use map

(Study Area in black outline)
2.3.2. Major landmarks
2.3.2.1. Institutional
In terms of government buildings, Cebu City Hall is located at the corner of P. Burgos
and MC Briones.
In terms of religious structures, two main churches mark the Downtown area: the
Basilica de Santo Nino and Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral. The Basilica is located at
the corner of Osmena Blvd and P. Burgos, while the Metropolitan Cathedral is located
about two blocks to the north at the corner of Legaspi St and P. Burgos.
PLANADES
6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Basilica de Santo Nino Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral
Cebu City Hall Colegio de Santo Nino
University of the Visayas University of Southern Philippines

Figure 6 Major institutional places within the Downtown area
In terms of schools, the major schools in the Study area are: University of the Visayas
at the corner of Colon St and Jakosalem St., Colegio de Santo Nino just beside the
Basilica de Santo Nino and University of Southern Philippines Foundation (USPF)
along P. Burgos St just to the west of Rajah Humabon Park.
Just outside of the periphery of the Study Area, there are also other major schools.
To the north along N. Bacalso Ave is University of San Carlos (Main Campus). To the
west, along Magallanes St is University of San Jose Recoletos. To the east along MJ
Cuenco is Cebu Technological University.
PLANADES
7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
2.3.2.2. Commercial
The Downtown area is the old commercial center of Cebu City and is considered to
be the “bargain” wholesale center. Some traditional malls/department centers are
scattered around the Downtown area. Four of them are located along Colon St,
namely: Metro Gaisano is located at the corner of Colon St and Osmena Blvd,
Colonnade Mall at the corner of Colon St and Legaspi St, Super Metro is at the corner
of Colon St and Junquera St, and Gaisano Main is at the corner of Colon St and
Jakosalem St. There are also many supermarkets scattered around the Study Area.
Just outside of the Study Area, to the southwest, is Carbon Market, which is the one
of the major ‘bagsakan’ of agricultural products in Cebu City.
Metro Gaisano Gaisano Main
Colonnade Mall Super Metro

Figure 7 Major commercial centers within the Downtown area
(image source: Google Maps Street View)
2.3.2.3. Tourist spots

The main iconic attraction within the Downtown area is Magellan’s Cross at Plaza
Sugbu area, just in front of the Cebu City Hall. The Colon obelisk which marks Colon
St as the first street in the Philippines can be found at the corner of Colon St and P.
Burgos. At the junction of Mabini St and Sikatuna St, the Heritage of Cebu Monument
can also be found.
PLANADES
8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Many museums can be found within the area, like: Archdiocesan Museum at the
corner of P. Burgos and P. Gomez, Halad Museum at the corner of Gullas St and
Jakosalem St., Basilica de Santo Nino’s own museum, and Rizal Museum at the
campus of University of Southern Philippines. Gotiaoco Museum at the corner of MC
Briones and P. Burgos is still currently under renovation.
Magellan’s Cross Monument Colon Obelisk
Heritage of Cebu Monument Archdiocesan Museum
Gotiaoco Museum (under construction) Halad Museum

Figure 8 Major tourist destinations within the Downtown area
(image source: Google Maps Street View)
Aside from these attractions within the Study Area, there are other tourist
destinations just to the periphery. A little further to the west of Cebu City Hall is Fort
San Pedro and Plaza Independencia. A little to the northeast of the Heritage of Cebu
Monument is the Yap Sandiego Ancestral House and Casa Gorordo Museum.
PLANADES
9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
2.3.2.4. Open spaces

One of the major open spaces within the Downtown area is Plaza Sugbu in front of
the Cebu City Hall and is marked by the Magellan’s Cross Monument. At the back of
the Cebu City Hall is the Senior Citizen’s Park. At the corner of P. Burgos and P. Gomez
is Plaza Humabon Park.
Plaza Sugbu
Senior Citizen’s Park Plaza Humabon Park

Figure 9 Major open spaces within the Downtown area
2.4. Brief info on historical development
2.4.1. Early development

The old center of buildings and residential blocks of Cebu City were built in accordance to
the grid layout of Recopilacion de las Islas and bounding this on the north was a long road
(Cañete, 2018) named after Italian explorer Christopher Columbus ‐ Cristobal “Colon” in
Spanish. Bearing the distinction of being the oldest street in the Philippines, Colon Street
existed when Cebu was the first colonial capital from 1565 to 1567, before the capital was
moved to Iloilo, and then Manila. Spanish conquistador Miguel Lopez de Legazpi actually
commissioned its creation in 1565 as part of “Villa de San Miguel (St. Michael’s Town)” that
also had Fort San Pedro as its center.
PLANADES
10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 10 Old site plan of Cebu Downtown Area, circa 1699
It was during the Spanish period that the major iconic Cebu symbol—Basilica de Santo Nino
Church—was built. Considered to be the oldest Roman Catholic church in the country, it is
built on the spot where the image of the Santo Niño de Cebú was found during the
expedition of Miguel López de Legazpi. Not far from the basilica, the Cebu Metropolitan
Cathedral also started to be built, although it would not be completed for many years,
during the American period. The growth of the downtown revolved around these two
centerpieces.
Figure 11 Old photograph of Basilica de Santo Nino
PLANADES
11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 12 Old photograph of Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral
Figure 13 Plan of old Downtown area, circa 1873
Colon served as the people's convenient meeting point as goods from the uplands flowed
into the city through two‐story shop houses known as accessorias, owned and operated by
enterprising Chinese mestizos who intermarried with the Spaniards and indios, who
altogether formed the economic backbone of the city. The accesorias were residential
homes which featured a store, shop, or office on the ground floor and living quarters
upstairs and belonged to prominent families in old Cebuano society like Briones,
Gantuangco, Lu Do, Rallos, Osmeña, Singson, Cuenco, and Martinez, among others. Old
Colon was like a scene from an early Western movie set in the tropics with their shaded
shop fronts of tile and mahogany posts and pedestrian pavements of coral stone faced in
lime plaster.
PLANADES
12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 14 Old view of Colon St showing accessorias during late Spanish period
Figure 15 Old view of the Downtown area during the American period, circa 1914
2.4.2. Development of theaters

Starting during the American regime, many new theaters were built. These cinema houses
evolved from older zarzuwela theaters, to venues which could also house boxing matches.
With the development of sound, Cebuano cinemas became more specialized affairs and
soon cinema theater design would not only closely follow the theaters of Manila, but also
of the continental US: Neoclassicism for the 20s, Art Deco from the 30s to early 50s, and
International Style from the mid‐50s to the early 70s.
In the 1930s, Don Jose Avila bought out and remodeled the old Teatro Junquera at Colon
corner Legazpi Street in the early 1930s (Adelle, n.d.). He then renamed it to “Cinema
Oriente”. He also bought out another cinema house, Empire Theater, from its owners. With
the cinema business booming, Avila would later also put up Vision Theater. The war put a
temporary stop to cinema building, and Oriente was destroyed along with most of the city
during the aerial bombings just before Liberation in March 1945. The Avilas rebuilt Oriente
after the war and successfully reconstructed their cinema empire under Don Jose’s son,
Atty. Jesus “Lindong” Avila.
PLANADES
13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 16 View of the Vision Theater in 1945 just after World War II
The Avilas would operate three cinemas after the war: Oriente, Ideal and Rizal. Aside from
the Avilas, Chinese‐Filipino families were the other major operators of Colon movie houses.
The 1930s was the beginning of the golden age of cinema in the Philippines, especially in
Cebu, where an English‐educated public that still had strong affection for the local Cebuano
and the Spanish spoken by its upper class, flocked to the entertainment strip that was Colon.
Thus, Colon became known as "Calle Teatro" (Theater Street) because of the numerous
theaters lining the streets. These old theaters were Old King Theater, Star Theater, Seven
Arts, Victor Theater, Lane Cinema, Majestic Theater, Venus Theater, Premier, President,
Cinema, Eden, Superama, Cinerama and Ultra Vistarama. Over time, some of these theaters
were converted to other uses like malls or commercial spaces, while others became
abandoned and fell into disrepair.
Figure 17 Old picture of Oriente Theater (background) and Cinema Theater (foreground)
PLANADES
14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 18 Map showing locations of the old theaters within the Downtown area
2.5. Highlights
2.5.1. Regarding road network

 The Downtown area is generally well‐served by arterial roads on all of its peripheries.
 The road network of the Downtown area is mostly laid in a grid‐like pattern, which is
suitable for traffic rerouting that includes one‐way pairing.
 The Downtown area already has some precedent for closing of roads—both
permanently (in the case of Magalles St in Plaza Sugbu) and occasionally (e.g. during
major events like Sinulog Festival).
2.5.2. Regarding land uses

 Many of the major commercial centers are lined up along Colon St.
 Many institutional uses and tourist attractions are located on the eastern side of the
Study Area.
 Around the periphery of the Study Area, there are also many major landmarks, like
schools, tourist spots and commercial centers.
PLANADES
15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
2.5.3. Regarding unique characteristics of the study area

 The Downtown area has a long and rich history dating back to the Spanish period.
 During its heydays, the Downtown area had a culture of theather watching. Some of the
theaters are still existing, albeit some of them have already changed into some other
use, as well as changes to the original architectural character.
 The Downtown area has a rich pool of destinations, ranging from religious sites,
commercial destinations, government offices and tourist attractions, all within walking
distance of one another.
PLANADES
16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
3. Related Studies and Other Literature
3.1. Pedestrianization Concept

Pedestrianization is defined as making spaces for the exclusive use by pedestrians. This puts the
needs of the pedestrian above other concerns, and any pedestrianization scheme will have the
intention of improving the pedestrian environment.
Chow Ka Ching (2002) identifies the following “forms” of pedestrianization:

 Full Pedestrianization ‐ areas prohibiting all vehicles (except for emergency services) and
where pedestrians have “absolute priority” at all time and all days.
 Part‐time Pedestrianization ‐ refers to where the prohibition of vehicles only applies to
certain days of the week and/or certain hours of the day. A similar exception for access to
emergency vehicles is implied. Also, traffic calming measures may also be implemented
in order to slow down the movements of vehicles.
 Partial Pedestrianization ‐ refers to the allowing of certain types of vehicles (while other
types are prohibited). The special treatment may be related to the promotion of certain
types of transport mode (for example, non‐polluting). Traffic calming may also be
implemented as a supporting measure.
 Mixed‐priority Street ‐ allows vehicle access, although these are slowed down using traffic
calming measures. To support this, road laybys are improved while on‐street parking is
minimized.
Based on Chow Ka Ching’s classification, pedestrianization schemes can be mainly defined in

terms of:
 The amount of space that is specifically set aside for the pedestrians; and
 The amount of time that the said space is made available for the pedestrians
 Supporting treatments, such as traffic calming, laybys and the like.
These parameters need to be considered when presenting the elements of a pedestrian concept
to the respondents of the current study.
3.2. Elements of Effective Pedestrianization Projects
3.2.1. Improves walkability

Pedestrianization is part of the overall concept of making different public spaces more
walkable for the pedestrian. Walkability is hereby defined as a measure of the overall
walking conditions in an area. To help measure “walkability”, a “Global Walkability Index”
was developed by Holly Krambeck for the World Bank which includes a qualitative analysis
of the walking conditions including safety, security, and convenience of the pedestrian
environment. The components and the descriptive variables for the Global Walkability
Index are shown in Table 1 below:
Table 1 Global Walkability Index Parameters
PLANADES
17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Component Variable
Safety and 1 Proportion of road accidents that resulted in pedestrian fatalities (most recent
Security year available)
2 Walking path modal conflict
3 Crossing safety
4 Perception of security from crime
5 Quality of motorist behavior
Convenience 6 Maintenance and cleanliness of walking paths
and 7 Existence and quality of facilities for blind and disabled persons
Attractiveness 8 Amenities (e.g., coverage, benches, public toilets)
9 Permanent and temporary obstacles on walking paths
10 Availability of crossings along major roads
Policy Support 11 Funding and resources devoted to pedestrian planning
12 Presence of relevant urban design guidelines
13 Existence and enforcement of relevant pedestrian safety laws and regulations
14 Degree of public outreach for pedestrian and driving safety and etiquette
Source: Krambeck, 2006
A sample application of these walkability parameters was made to 13 Asian cities and the
results can be found in Appendix AB.
What this list shows is that ‘safety and security’ and ‘convenience and attractiveness’ are
some of the features that improve the walkability of an area. Since pedestrianization is all
about improving walkability to the pedestrians, this can also mean that the two main
features of ‘safety and security’ and ‘convenience and attractiveness’ are also critical
elements for a pedestrianization project to succeed. So, for example, if a pedestrianization
project was to be implemented without addressing these two concerns, then that project
will most probably fail in spurring more foot traffic and thus economic vitality may not be
realized.
3.2.2. Considers multi‐sectoral aspects

Before implementing pedestrianization, it is necessary to define an “effective”
pedestrianization scheme. Following and adapting Chow Ka Ching (2002), the following
guidelines are considered:
 Commercial aspect ‐ Critical mass of users; pedestrian‐oriented shops and services, and
a mix of uses; topic and gimmicks for individual areas (understood as branding);
protection of historical values; allowance for logistical needs of businesses; sufficient
parking space at periphery for passenger and goods; good transportation interaction
and control;
 Social aspect ‐ good access to public transit and parking; artistic, cultural and recreation
amenities; historical and cultural features highlighted; security, cleanness and good
physical standards;
 Technical aspects ‐ sufficient spaces for accommodation; attractive features and street
furniture; emergency vehicle access; preservation of historical and architectural
PLANADES
18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
features; social and community facilities provision, such as noise barriers, facilities for
the disabled;
 Institutional aspects ‐ promotion of walking culture; attracting tourists and promoting
the reputation of the area; government subsidies to preservation of historical and
traditional businesses; coordinating transportation services; effective pedestrian
systems/facilities; provision of sufficient parking.
3.3. Potential Economic Impacts of Pedestrianization
3.3.1. Wide range of effects

Litman (2003) argues that conventional transportation planning practices treat walking as
a minor transport mode and recognize only modest benefits from improved walkability and
increased walking activity, as a result of evaluation practices that undercount non‐
motorized travel and undervalue walking benefits.
He cited several economic impacts of improving walkability. Just as economics refers to

the allocation of valuable resources, the evaluation of economic impacts of improving
walkability may include both market resources (money, labor and land) and nonmarket
resources (safety, clean air, wildlife habitat and aesthetic features). In other words,
economic impacts refer to benefits and costs, that is, an increase or reduction in resource
value as a result of a chose action or intervention. The following table presents economic
benefits that may be considered when evaluating walking and walkability.
Table 2 Potential economic benefits of improving walkability (Litman, 2003)

Impact Description Measurement Technique
Accessibility Degree that walking provides Travel modeling, analysis of travel
mobility options, particularly for options
people who are transportation
disadvantaged.
Consumer cost Degree to which walking provides Consumer expenditure surveys
consumer transportation cost
savings
Public cost savings Degree that walking substitutes for Determine to what degree
(reduced external vehicle travel and reduces negative walking reduces motor vehicle
costs) impacts travel, and the economic savings
that result
Efficient land use Degree that walking helps reduce Identify the full economic, social
the amount of land used for and environmental benefits of
roadway and parking facilities, and more pedestrian‐oriented land
helps create more accessible, use.
clustered land use
Livability Degree that walking improves the Property values, business
local environment activities, consumer preference
surveys
PLANADES
19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Impact Description Measurement Technique

Public fitness and Degree that walking provides Travel and health surveys to
health physical exercise to people who are determine the number of people
otherwise sedentary who benefit from walking
exercise.
Economic Degree to which walking makes Market surveys and property
development commercial areas more attractive assessments. Input‐output table
and analysis.
shifts consumer expenditures to
goods that provide more regional
economic activity and employment
Equity Degree that walkability helps Various indicators of horizontal
achieves various equity objectives. and vertical equity.
It can be seen that the broader sense of “economic” benefits related to improving
walkability are fleshed out by Litman. This also confirms the importance of considering the
walkability improvements’ effect on making commercial areas more attractive to
consumers. To some extent the livability aspect is also covered by the current study. These
benefits track well with most of the parameters mentioned in section 1.4.b of this report.
However, the treatment of environment is only identified, and an actual measurement

technique is not discussed by Litman. Also, studies such as the one undertaken by Pujades‐
Rodríguez et al. are unable to conclude that proximity to traffic pollution on has an effect
on pulmonary health. This is possibly explained by the possibly high levels of background
pollution in their study area, which could have made it difficult to differentiate the level of
exposure. Thus, they suggest further study incorporating life‐time exposure to pollution in
populations with wide variation in exposure.
3.3.2. Effects of pedestrianization on retail
3.3.2.1. External factors

Haas‐Klau (2003) analyzed evidence from Germany and UK, and identified external
factors that are difficult to isolate but which can affect the success of
pedestrianization policies include the following:
(1) trends in the national and local economies;
(2) the overall town‐centre strategy pursued by the local authorities;
(3) the degree of accessibility by public and motor vehicle transport;
(4) the detailed design of the scheme;
(5) the population density within walking distance of the pedestrian area.
3.3.2.1. Changes in pedestrian volumes

Haas‐Klau identified changes in the number of pedestrians as the simplest measure
of whether pedestrianization schemes were popular and successful. The analysis
PLANADES
20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
previous studies which were chosen based on the criteria that the “before” survey
data was within 2 years or less of the pedestrianization. While most of these cases
indicated substantial increases in pedestrian flow (as compared to the earlier count),
the attribution to pedestrianization was weaker.
Table 3 Comparison of Impact of Pedestrian in German Cities

City Impact
Aachen 25% increase in pedestrian flow after 12 years:
Bamberg: 38 ‐ 40% increase in two counts within one year of the change;
Darmstadt 18% growth three years after completion:
Herford 31% growth after one year, and 40% after four years
Nürnberg: 92% and 69% growth in two counts five years after completion;
Osnabrück 26% growth two years after completion
Wiesbaden 20% increase and 3% reduction in two counts following street closure, but before
reconstruction was complete.
München 72,000 pedestrians in one day rose to 175,000 in 9 years
Vienna, The total pedestrian flow for four pedestrianized streets increased by 48% over
Austria these 11 years, while the total pedestrian flow in four non‐pedestrianized streets
decreased by 2.6% for the same period
The results above show mostly a range of 20% to 40% growth in pedestrian flows in
pedestrianized area. However, the retailer representatives were skeptical of these
results and argued that the statistics in pedestrian flow growth may say little about
the spending power of pedestrians, since the concern of retailers would be the
fluctuations in turnover, rent, other costs and profit.
3.3.2.2. Turnover of retail in pedestrianized areas

A retailing study commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Economy
compared the pedestrianized streets of 11 towns with streets that were outside of
the car‐free zones.
PLANADES
21
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 4 Proportions of retail hotel and restaurant business report changes in annual
turnover
Types of Businesses Turnover Total
Increase% Decline % No Change %
Within Pedestrianized areas*
Retailing 83 3 14 100
Hotels 28 8 64 100
Restaurants 63 1 36 100
Outside Pedestrianized area **
Retailing 20 17 63 100
Hotels 20 2 78 100
Restaurants 25 5 70 100
Towns: Augsburg, Gelsenkirchen, Hildesheim, Köln, Nürnberg, Offenbach, Oldenburg, Rheine, Stade, Unna, Wolfenbüttel. Most
pedestrianized areas in these 11 towns opened during 1967‐70. * refers to 1066 businesses; ** refers to 750 businesses
As shown in the table below, to some extent, but not completely, these costs even out the
advantages of carrying on business inside or outside the areas. Even after the increases in
costs, 47% of the enterprises inside the area reported an increase in profits, and 16%
reported a decrease. These results indicate the difference in the results between
pedestrianized and non‐pedestrianized areas, and that those firms trading inside the
pedestrianized areas are consistently favored.
Table 5 Proportions of businesses reporting changes in turnover, costs and profit

Pedestrianized Outside, %
area, %
Turnover
Increase 66 39
Decline 7 15
No change 27 46
Costs
Increase 75 51
Decline 1 4
No change 24 45
Profit
Increase 47 32
Decline 16 19
No change 37 49
Haas‐Klau observed that most of the results discussed above relied on the
measurement of how many enterprises reported increases or reductions in their
PLANADES
22
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
business. The advantage of this measure is that it is relatively easy to obtain,

requiring little effort from the responding enterprises; it does not ask for figures
about which traders can be sensitive. One major disadvantage is that it fails to
distinguish between large and small changes in turnover.
Nevertheless, the majority of enterprises interviewed either experienced an increase

or no change in their profit levels, with the reduction experienced by a minority. This
is further borne out by two pieces of work, one published by a research institute and
sponsored by a government department, and the other published by a major trade
association, had a considerable impact in Germany. After this, opposition by traders
against pedestrianization in any town was made much more difficult to sustain.
3.4. Synthesis of Findings from the Review of Literature:
3.4.1. Regarding definition of pedestrianization:

 While pedestrianization involves giving dedicated spaces to the pedestrians, there are
some variations as to how much dedicated spaces is given (full vs. partial), and when
this is given (permanent vs. occasional).
 A version of partial and occasional pedestrianization is “tactical urbanism” wherein the
use of temporary materials are first used to shape the behavior and movements of
pedestrians. If the desired outcomes are achieved, then implementation of upgrading
using more permanent materials is undertaken.
o Implication to the Study: If full pedestrianization is not feasible under certain
parameters, partial and/or occasional pedestrianization may be considered. Also,
partial and/or occasional (or temporary) pedestrianization may be implemented
at the start as a pilot test.
3.4.2. Regarding effective elements of a pedestrianization project:

 Chow Ka Ching cites that a pedestrianization project needs to consider multi‐sectoral
aspects for it to be successful and should not be treated as simply a physical intervention
only. This includes commercial, social, technical and institutional.
 Studies have cited “safety and security” and “convenience and access” as two important
features to improve walkability, and by extension, to make a pedestrianization project
successful.
o Implication to the Study: The planning and design of the pedestrianization project
elements has to consider both physical and non‐physical aspects when conducting
an evaluation of potential viability.
3.4.3. Regarding economic impacts of pedestrianization:

 Generally, studies agreed that pedestrianization has some economic impacts. Increase
in foot traffic and revenues were enumerated as some of these indicators.
PLANADES
23
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 However, the impacts on revenue or profit are mixed and in all cases there are also
losers among the businesses.
 In addition, while these studies have cited that part of the economic impacts are
improvement of environmental conditions (e.g. health, pollution), they have mentioend
that these are difficult to consistently measure, as they are hard to be isolated for
analysis whether they can be directly attributed to pedestrianization.
o Implication to the Study: The Study will use a more pragmatic approach to assess
economic impact, focusing on indicators that are more measurable and easier for
data to be gathered.
PLANADES
24
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
4. Case Studies of Pedestrianization Projects
4.1. New York City, New York, USA
4.1.1. Background
The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) implemented a broad set of
street design improvements with the goals for safety, serving all users and creating great
public spaces while also maintaining the flow of traffic. The goals can be summarized as:
 Design for safety
 Design for all users of the street
 Design great public spaces
In turn, the following strategies were employed in order to achieve the above goals:
 Designing safer streets, to provide safe and attractive options for all street users
 Building great public spaces to create economic value and neighborhood vitality
 Improving bus service to bring rapid transit beyond the subway
 Reducing delay and speeding to allow for faster, safer travel
 Efficiency in parking and loading to improve access to businesses and neighborhoods
Among the projects that they have implemented are: installing bikeways, traffic calming
measures, converting unutilized spaces for public use, and delineating proper parking spaces.
A more detailed discussion of these projects can be found in Appendix AC.
Figure 19 Protected bikeways along 8th Avenue

(source: Google Maps Street View)
PLANADES
25
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 20 Traffic calming and improved parking along 180th St., Bronx
Figure 21 Expansion of public space in Union Square

Figure 22 Repurposing underutilized parking space as public space on Pearl Street

PLANADES
26
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 23 Improved parking for businesses within Park Slope

NYCDOT’s 2012 report on Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets outlines
some key metrics that they used to evaluate these projects to illustrate how measuring results
can show progress toward safe, sustainable, livable and economically competitive streets.
They are as follows:
 Crashes and injuries for motorists pedestrians and cyclists
 Volume of vehicles, bus passengers, bicycle riders, and users of public space
 Traffic speed, aiming to move traffic not too slowly, but also not too fast
 Economic Vitality, including growth in retail activity
 User satisfaction
 Environmental and public health benefits
4.1.2. Findings/Lessons Learned and Implications to this Study

Clear definition of key metrics
While the report presented show a compelling justification for the expenditure of public
funds, the report does not go into explicit cost‐benefit analysis wherein the economic benefits
are pitted directly against the economic costs. This is perhaps because of the broad range of
metrics used and some of which are correlated with each other (e.g. lower traffic speeds help
to translate to fewer injuries or collisions). Nevertheless, the report does convincingly present
key streams of economic benefits that can be measured and perhaps can be adapted for a
more comprehensive analysis of economic feasibility.
Environmental evaluation requires district‐wide data analysis
With respect to the intervention with evaluated positive environmental and public health
impacts referred to the use of technology to manage a congested business district. This
means that the effect was only felt when it involved the management of the district’s
transport system, rather than a single street.
PLANADES
27
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Temporary treatments to test the impact of interventions
It can be gleaned from the NYCDOT’s efforts that the implementation of these interventions
need not be done with “full capital cost” at the start. There is the option of using “temporary”
treatments and then observing the effects of these to see if it is worthwhile to make the
treatments permanent.
Support for successful pedestrianization project needs community participation
While New York City has implemented a broad scale of interventions over a wide area, the
success of their implementations has relied greatly on the significant role of organized
communities, which is an important feature of pedestrianization in big cities like New York.
The Department of Transportation of New York City specifically recognizes that “any major
pedestrianization projects on the scale of Broadway will likely be led by local business and
community initiatives.” This essentially means that those who are most likely be affected by
the pedestrianization will be the one to push for it.
In the matter of the scale of implementation, New York also provides examples of the “tactical
urbanism” which are low‐cost and small interventions ‐ signs and removable furniture, to
make pop‐up parks and pedestrian plazas—leading to more permanent, positive change. In
fact the design of their urban improvement interventions has this as part of their process
wherein the design is first implemented using temporary materials (NYC DOT, 2013). Then,
evaluation of the impact is made, covering a period of several years. Only after the effect has
been validated and seen to be effective did the New York City implement upgrading, using
more permanent materials.
Important role of good public transport
It should also be noted that New York has very good coverage by public mass transport and a
high level of usage. In 2017, of people who commute to work in New York City, 39% use the
subway, 23% drive alone, 11% take the bus, 9% walk to work, 7% travel by commuter rail, 4%
carpool, 1.6% use a taxi, 1.1% ride their bicycle to work, and 0.4% travel by ferry. Taking
public transport, travel by bicycle and walking together, this totals 67.1% of commuters. This
majority share explains the emphasis on improving the bus services, pedestrian experience
and biking facilities.
4.2. Historic Quarter in Istanbul, Turkey
4.2.1. Background
The Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and Fatih Municipality pedestrianized more than
250 streets between 2010 and 2012 as part of an effort to protect the city’s 8,000‐year‐old
Historic Peninsula. Uncontrolled urban growth had threatened the rich heritage of
Istanbul's world heritage‐listed Historic Peninsula. The 2013 report by EMBARQ Turkiye
aimed to assess completed pedestrianization projects in the Historic Peninsula. While the
report highlighted the methodology of transforming car‐oriented streets into pedestrian
PLANADES
28
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
environments, the same report also recognized the importance of complementation by

improved streetscapes, sufficient public transport options, and availability of car parks.
The report focused on local perception of the benefits.
Figure 24 Distribution of Functions in the Istanbul Historic Peninsula (EMBARQ Turkiye

citing Gehl, 2010)
The pedestrianization project for a subset of the 250+ streets is described as follows:
 Number of pedestrianized streets: 23
 Cost of barriers: 450,000 TRY (1 TRY = 9.47 PhP)
 Cost of renovations: 2,900.000 TRY (for 12 streets renovated by Faith Municipality)
 Total cost: 3,350,000 TRY
 Supporting projects: Sultanahmet Square Pavement Rehabilitation and Landscape
Improvement Project; Partners: İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality, Fatih Municipality,
Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture Agency
 Details of implementation:
o Infrastructures renewals were completed at pedestrianized streets.
o New car parks were built for tourist buses (each with 150‐160 capacity)
o Official vehicles such as vehicles of embassies, the police, postal service, banks, the
fire department, ambulances, and tourist buses are allowed to access the area.
o Parking is not allowed for other regular vehicles.
PLANADES
29
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
o Vehicles will be allowed in the pedestrian‐only zone between 11pm‐8am during the
summer and 9pm to 8am during winter to pick up and deliver merchandise to shops
in the area.

Emphasis on business establishments
The study’s analysis emphasized the effects of pedestrianization on businesses. An

inventory of the business type distribution revealed very few manufacturers. Most
businesses were either retail, wholesale or retail/wholesale. The main implication of these
types is the manner in which customers would interact with these establishments, in terms
of size of the purchase. In other words, business transactions would involve business‐to‐
customer as well as business‐to‐business. Areas with higher retail component would
correspond to higher business‐to‐customer transactions, which those with higher
wholesale component would imply more business‐to‐business transactions.
Figure 25 Business Type Distributions across the study
Public transport holds the majority of mode share
The travel mode of workers in some areas is shown in the following figure. Although, the
survey was conducted only three months after the pedestrianization of these streets were
completed, and did not ask the respondents about their transport modes before project
implementation, it does present a relatively positive picture of public transport usage (at
65%), especially for Eminonu which shows private car usage as the least among these study
areas, where travelers rely on walking and public transport.
PLANADES
30
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 26 Method of Travel to Work
Optimism bias in respondents
The most interesting finding from the Embarq study is the contrast provided between what
impact was expected and what actually occurred, relative to changes in staffing, income
and the number of customers. The table below shows that although the actual changes
were mostly positive, this was less positive that the expectation. In other words, not all
those who expected a positive change actually achieve the change. Also, some (around
3%) of those who did not expect a decrease actually experienced a decrease. This seems
to indicate an optimism bias, even among those expecting a negative effect, regarding the
effects of pedestrianization projects on the business. Therefore, prior perception may not
be a reliable basis for forecasting purposes; or it would be good to temper all projections
with an adjustment for the optimism bias.
Table 6 Expected and Observed Changes in Staff Numbers, Annual Income and Number of
Customers
Increase No Change Decrease
Observed change in staff numbers 6% 85% 8%
Expected change in staff numbers 15% 72% 9%
Observed change in annual income 9% 73% 17%
Expected change in annual income 25% 60% 14%
Observed change in number of customers 29% 54% 17%
Expected change in number of customers 39% 44% 14%
The following figure also appears to indicate that the prior perception (or opinion) of the
project carries into the perception after the implementation. In other words, most of those
who supported the project were pleased with the result, while most of those who were
against it were not pleased with the results. On the other hand, the results do indicate that
some change did occur between the expectation and perception after implementation.
PLANADES
31
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 27 Changes in perception before and after pedestrianization
Table 7 Expect and Observed Changes in Property Values

Increase No Change Decrease
Observed change in rental values 25% 74% 1%
Expected change in rental values 43% 52% 5%
Observed change in property values 27% 71% 2%
Expected change in property values 39% 55% 6%
Results for property values also gave similar results to the business operation variables
(staff number, annual income and customers), wherein the expectation was higher than
the actual observation. Perhaps it should be noted that the appreciation of property values
happens over a longer period of time. Since the study was conducted just 1 or 2 years after
the pedestrianization projects were implemented, it is possible that the full effect may not
have yet been felt.
4.3. Old Chinatown District in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
4.3.1. Background
In 2012, the Kuala Lumpur City Government initiated a project to improve the urban
environment in the Old Chinatown district and make it an attraction for tourists. The area
scope of the project included Medan Pasar (Market Square) and the area surrounding
Central Market. This area is part of the old downtown core of Kuala Lumpur where most of
the businesses were concentrated in the 1900’s.
PLANADES
32
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
One of the major components of the project involved closing off the entire Medan Pasar
and transforming it into a plaza. Some of the side streets were closed off permanently to
vehicular traffic. Other streets had their road widths lessened to make the sidewalks wider
and to provide space for the street furniture and plants. Additional physical improvements
like repainting the facades, installing new lighting, maps and signage were also made.
The new plaza was officially opened to the public in 2013.
After the launch of the project, the area became one of the most‐visited areas by tourists
within Kuala Lumpur. It became one of the main destinations in any tourist’s itinerary,
where the tourists can go on a walking tour, shop for local products and taste the local
cuisine. Because of the influx of tourists, some of the shops in the surrounding areas made
upgrades to their places, with some even changing their land use altogether. All of this
resulted in a more vibrant local economy.
Figure 28 Picture of Medan Pasar now

Old downtown cores show potential for urban renewal through pedestrianization projects
By their nature, old downtown cores contain many old structures that can become heritage
attractions. These heritage attractions are sought by tourists wishing to find something
unique or interesting about the place. With the proper redevelopment and program, these
heritage structures can spur economic activities in the area they are in through the influx
of tourists. New land uses or activities can be introduced that otherwise would not have
possible without these heritage structures.
PLANADES
33
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
In an area where there are many heritage structures present, the best mode of travel is
walking. Thus, for a heritage zone to become successful, good pedestrian infrastructure
needs to be set in place. Without a good walkable environment, tourists would just stay in
one place and not move around. If the tourists are not comfortable to move around, then
there would be a lesser market of walk‐in customers that the neighboring shops and stalls
can tap on.
It goes without saying that the preservation of the existing or original architectural
elements is critical to make it a heritage zone. Considerable efforts should be made to
retain the original features of the area and not just simply replace the old decaying features
with a new or contemporary look. Without this original look, the place loses its appeal and
authenticity as a heritage zone and would look like any typical commercial area.
Full pedestrianization need not happen immediately but can be phased over time
The full closure of Medan Pasar did not happen in one project. Rather, it slowly became
more and more pedestrian‐oriented over the course of many years. As late as the 1980’s,
Medan Pasar was still used primarily as a road space and parking area. In the 1990’s, a
portion of Medan Pasar was closed to vehicular traffic and became a wide sidewalk. It was
only during the redevelopment program in 2012 did Medan Pasar became completely
closed to vehicular traffic.
During the 2010’s, many LRT lines were already available around the old downtown core
and the bus network had been rationalized which make driving a car to the area no longer
a necessity. Thus, roads previously devoted solely to cars could now be repurposed to
improve the overall pedestrian experience. The local economy had also reached a certain
level of maturity so as to make diversification and specialization of businesses possible.
Figure 29 Medan Pasar over the years showing gradual closure of roads to vehicular
traffic
(From top to bottom, left to right: Medan Pasar in the 1950’s, 1970s, 1990’s and now)
PLANADES
34
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Learning from this experience, in the case of the Study Area, a similar phasing strategy can
be explored, if the results of the analysis show that the current infrastructure and economy
is not yet able to support full pedestrianization at the onset. Incremental walkability
improvement projects can be implemented over time, which may lead to full
pedestrianization in the future.
Physical improvements alone will not bring in people; it needs to be complemented with
programs or activities
After the project was implemented, a post‐implementation study was carried out by
various groups. They found that while there has been an increase in foot traffic and
economic activity in the area, these figures fell short of their initial projected estimates.
One reason cited in the study was the lack of constant activities that make use of the
Medan Pasar plaza. Because of the lack of activities, many people do not stay long in the
plaza, which in turn lessens the chances for them to spend.
4.4. Avenida Pedestrianization, Manila, Philippines
4.4.1. Background
Most of the successful pedestrianization projects are from abroad. In the local setting,
there have been little to no pedestrianization projects initiated, much less successful ones.
One of the fairly recent pedestrianization projects that was implemented in the Philippines,
though not a good example at that, is the Avenida Pedestrianization Project in the City of
Manila.
In 2003, the City of Manila under then Mayor Lito Atienza closed off the portion of Rizal
Avenue (Avenida) between CM Recto and Carriedo to vehicular traffic. He then installed
new pavers on top of the roads, as well as provided some street furniture, potted plants
and additional lighting, to simulate a park‐like setting. The idea behind this project was to
revitalize this decaying section of downtown Manila through physical improvements. This
came after the much‐lauded improvements of Rajah Sulayman Park in Malate and Plaza
Miranda in Quiapo, Manila.
Figure 30 View of the Pedestrianized Avenida around 2003
PLANADES
35
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Upon its inauguration, it became a major issue at different levels. On the national level,
DPWH claims that since Avenida is a national road, the LGU does not have any jurisdiction
to close it off or introduce any improvements. On the district level, many drivers just
passing through this section of the City of Manila complained of the increase in travel times
due to the traffic rerouting. On the local level, many local businessmen and residents
complained of the increase in traffic congestion in the local areas since the vehicles
previously passing through Avenida were rerouted to the narrow local streets.
In terms of foot traffic, although it did seem that there was an additional influx of people
in the pedestrianized area, this did not result in the increased economic activities that the
project had hoped for. Very few, if any, new establishments opened. The majority
experienced no change, while some even experienced revenue losses. Apparently, many
of the people going to the Avenida pedestrianized area just loitered and did not shop or
spend money in the area. Furthermore, there were also some people who did not want
to go to the downtown area anymore because of the congestion and overall poor
environment.
In 2007, when Alfredo Lim became mayor again, amidst the backlash from the public
regarding the project, the pedestrianized portion of Avenida was reopened again to
vehicular traffic. The installed pavers were removed, as well as all the street furniture.

Clarity of jurisdiction and coordination with concerned agencies
From a legal standpoint, the Avenida pedestrianization should have not been unilaterally
implemented by the LGU, since Rizal Avenue is a national road under the purview of DPWH.
The City Government should have first coordinated with DPWH. Because of this weak legal
standing, the City did gain support from the various government institutions and made it
unlikely to be sustained for a long period.
Need to consider potential traffic impacts on a metropolitan/district scale
Although only a 500‐meter section of Avenida was closed, its traffic impacts actually cover
a wider scale because of its role as a national road. National roads tend to carry large
volumes of traffic, a great portion of which just passes through the area. Further, by
diverting this large of traffic from a high‐capacity arterial road to local low‐capacity roads,
vehicles passing through the area would naturally experience an increase in travel delays,
travel times and travel costs.
Relating the Avenida pedestrianization experience to current study, there is a need to

understand the various traffic elements on a broader scale, not just on the specific portion
where the pedestrianization intervention will be introduced. Should some road sections
have been selected for closure to vehicular traffic, an assessment of resulting impacts (due
PLANADES
36
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
to the traffic diversion) would then need to be made. There is also a need carefully consider
to which roads should the traffic to be re‐routed to, to make sure that these roads have
sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic. Overall, the potential
increase/decrease in travel delays and travel costs has also to be considered when deciding
the course of action.
Need to consider overall impacts to the local communities
While the intent of the Avenida pedestrianization was to spur urban renewal of the
decaying downtown care, its execution can be deemed as faulty. Not only did urban
renewal not occur, but more problems to the community were created as well.
For one, traffic congestion became significantly worse because the local roads where the
arterial traffic was diverted to did not have the capacity to accommodate the large volumes
of traffic. Some local businesses reported that their customers did not want to go to
downtown Manila anymore due to the congestion, thus incurring revenue losses. The
increase in traffic congestion also meant that pollution and noise levels also increased,
further deteriorating the quality of the environment. It was later discovered that no study
or stakeholder consultation was conducted prior to the implementation, which could have
noted these potential negative effects from the local community.
Relating it to the current Study, prior to the implementation of any pedestrianization or

walkability improvement project, there needs to be a stakeholder consultation with the
local community, since they will be the most impacted by the project. Their concerns have
to be listened to and considered in the overall evaluation of the project. Also, although a
pedestrianization project may be expected to benefit the area where the pedestrianization
occurs, in reality, these areas may experience negative impacts that outweigh the benefits.
Different areas require different types of walkability improvement interventions
Coming off from the success of the Rajah Sulayman and Plaza Miranda improvements as
well as other beautification projects by the City, the project proponents thought that the
typical physical interventions employed in these areas can also be applied to Avenida and
yield the same successful results.
Based on the poor reception by the local community and the project’s eventual
discontinuation, it can be seen that the project was a failure. This can be attributed to the
project proponents’ “off‐the‐rack” approach to beautification projects. They did not take
into account that each area has its own unique needs to be met to make any walkability
improvement project in that area successful. Interventions to a plaza or park may not
necessarily be applicable to interventions to a major thoroughfare.
Physical interventions need to be complemented by soft measures
The Avenida pedestrianization project was a purely beautification project by the City
government. No effort was done to change the zoning or land uses of the surrounding
PLANADES
37
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
buildings to complement the pedestrianization improvement, or to introduce activities

that will not just bring people in but will also make them spend in the area. Most of the
establishments in the area existing at that time just maintained status quo. Thus, no new
economic activity was generated, and no new market was tapped.
Relating it to the current Study, although the main outputs of this Study is focused on the
possible pedestrianization physical interventions, there is a need to discuss possible soft
(institutional, educational) measures that need to be implemented to support these
physical measures.
4.5. Synthesis of Case Studies of Selected Pedestrianization Projects
4.5.1. Having clear objectives and simple metrics of impacts is better for evaluation of a
pedestrianization project both before and after implementation
 A clear set of metrics allows performance to be more objectively measured (as was the
case in New York and in Istanbul). If targets are not met, such as in the New York city
case, then subsequent interventions can be more revised to become responsive to
those specifiic metrics.
 Simple and practical indicators are preferred over large‐scale performance indicators in
consideration of time, budget and ‘statistical accuracy’. Impacts of pedestrianization on
pollution and health are hard to isolate, require extensive resources, and in the end,
these studies do little to push the pedestrianization agenda.
o Implication to the Study: Since this Study is one of the first, if not the first, studies
into the likely effects of a pedestrianization project in the Philippines, many
concepts and/or basic data requirements are not yet firmly established. Thus, this
Study used more pragmatic objectives and metrics to measure potential
economic impacts of the proposed pedestrianization project.
4.5.2. Community involvement is critical for the success of a pedestrianization project.

 Some of these metrics to be used for evaluation needs cooperation from the
stakeholders for the data to be accurately collected.
 The planning and design of the pedestrianization project has to input the concerns of
the local community so as to gain their support in implementation.
o Implication to the Study: The Study Team tried, to the extent possible, to get a
good understanding of the concerns of the local community in the Dowtown area
with regards to a potential pedestrianization project.
4.5.3. Old downtown historical cores show promise for economic revitalization through
pedestrianization projects.
 Well‐preserved historical cores are a natural attraction for tourists and generate lots of
foot traffic, with people walking to and from the various tourist attractions.
PLANADES
38
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 The economic revitalization is realized when there is a good set of soft programs that
compliments the hard aspects of the pedestrianization program.
o Implication to the Study: Given that the Study Area is one of the very first
downtown centers in the Philippines, it can be considered to have an important
historical character that tourists may be interested in. Any pedestrianization
project for the Downtown Core needs to incorporate this historical character into
its program.
4.5.4. Phasing of implementation is preferred over immediate, full implementation.

 Temporary, and therefore low‐cost, initial interventions are useful to test and gauge the
impact of the interventions on pedestrian behavior. If no observable impact is clearly
noticed, then the pedestrianization project need not push through. If there is
observable impact, then full pedestrianization project can be implemented eventually.
 A suitable period for assessment would be at least a year long since it takes time for
people to become aware of changes, then eventually go to the place and create a critical
mass.
o Implication to the Study: As mentioned also in the Review of Related Literature,
other alternative options to full pedestrianization need to be considered for the
Study Area, if shown not to be feasible. This can be partial pedestrianization,
occasional pedestrianization or temporary pedestrianization.
4.5.5. Physical improvements will need to be complimented by soft measures for it to be

successful.
 The successful pedestrianization projects were a combination of responsive planning
and complimentary programs, which includes land use changes, estate management,
and governance support, among others. Soft aspects also includes an community
involvement campaign and data collection activiites. The less successful or unsuccessful
projects focused just on the physical improvements.
 Upon implementation, soft measures are necessary to manage pedestrian behavior, so
that the pedestrianized space is used “appropriately.”
o Implication to the Study: In developing the area’s suitability for pedestrianization,
both hard measures and soft measures aspects need to be taken into
consideration. Focusing only on either one will result in the pedestrianization
program either as a waste of resources or creating more problems in the end.
PLANADES
39
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
5. Study Approach
5.1. Theoretical Framework

Figure 31 below shows the working pedestrianization conceptual framework used in the
conduct of this study. This framework was generated based on the understanding from the
different related literature and case studies, as well as the indicators established by NEDA in
the TOR. It shows the relationships of the different variables under study, particularly those
that impact economic vitality, which is the focus of this study.
PEDESTRIANIZATION CONCEPT
Urban
Security/
environmental Walkability
safety
quality
Pedestrian
Foot Traffic
Characteristics
Land use
Business Activities
types
Individual
Regulatory
Local Revenues business
framework
practices
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Figure 31 Pedestrianization Conceptual Framework
The explanation below of Figure 31 starts from the bottom of the figure, then moves up.
For purposes of this study, one indicator of the economic vitality of an area is local
revenues. The higher the local revenues, the more vibrant the local economy is considered
to be. Local revenue is then directly related to the nature of the business activities found
in the area, including the type and intensity of such activities by local enterprises. The
nature of the business activities is a reflection of the land use type of the property.
Both the types of business activities and amount of local revenues are influenced by the
regulatory framework regarding businesses, as well as the individual business practices of
the establishments. Regulatory framework includes laws regulating business practices,
zoning laws, and tax laws. If these laws create a supportive business atmosphere, then
more and bigger businesses will emerge and also increase revenue collection. Individual
PLANADES
40
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
business practices pertain to the management style or practices of the establishments. The
better or more efficient the establishment is in managing its expenditures, manpower and
resources (e.g. land, assets), the higher their net revenues may be. For this Study, these
two factors are considered to be external factors, and thus are not part of the analysis.
Following the law of supply and demand, the nature of business activity (supply) is dictated
by the needs of the customer (demand). One indicator of the scale of customer demand is
foot traffic. The greater the demand for a product or service, the more people go to a
particular shop to purchase that product or service. Conversely, the higher the number of
people entering an establishment, the higher is the chance that a purchase of goods or
services is made, which increases local revenues, and thus economic vitality. Foot traffic is
then influenced by the pedestrian characteristics, which includes among others, their trip
purpose, frequency and origins.
The scale of foot traffic is then influenced by the type of the pedestrianization. The
pedestrianization project concept should incorporate the aspects of security/safety, urban
environmental quality and walkability for it to be successful. In other words, the
pedestrianization project is expected to address these factors in order to produce or affect
the level of foot traffic, that in turn would influence a change in the business activities.
With changes in the business activities, local revenues are also expected to increase, and
thus economic vitality is achieved.
5.2. Study Process

Figure 32 shows the interrelationship of study activities and processes in order to arrive at
the parameters to be used in the evaluation of pedestrianization options. As shown, the
first major activity is to firm up the components that describe the pedestrianization
concept, which will then be included in the interview questionnaires and be subjected to
inquiry.
Results of the interviews, as well as the inventory and counts, will be used to elicit the
various information needed to develop the proposed pedestrianization project for the
Study Area. This proposed pedestrianization project will then be analyzed as to its potential
impacts on foot traffic and subsequently local revenues. Lastly, a complimentary public
transport and parking plan will be proposed that is supportive of the proposed
pedestrianization project.
PLANADES
41
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Key Informant Review of

Reconnaissance
Interviews Literature
Initial Pedestrianization Project Concept
Land use and Pedestrian Establishment

sidewalk inventory Interviews Interviews
• Land use • Travel/activity • Establishment • Probability for

characteristics characteristics characteristics increase in
• Walkability • Stated preferences on • Stated preferences on foot traffic
• Urban environment walking/activity improvements • Probability for
• Impact of • Impact of increase in
improvements improvements business revenue
on trip making on business
• Sections with
Pedestrian heavy pax Suggested Pedestrianization
Counts volumes Project
Public • Roads with heavy

PT volumes Change in trip generation/trip attraction of the
Transport study area as a result of the pedestrianization
Inventory
Change in the number of visitors/customers/

tourists visiting establishments/tourist spots
Legend:
located within the urban space or study area
Secondary Data
Gathering Task Change in sales revenues of business
establishments within the urban space
Primary
Surveys
Public transport and parking plan to
support pedestrianization
Info from 7
data gathering
Plan Output
Analysis Task
Figure 32 Study Process
The data collected from (a) observational analysis, (b) survey response analysis, (c) foot
traffic analysis will be used, in line with comments on the TOR provided in TPF3, to generate
the estimates of the following:
PLANADES
42
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Environment: The stakeholder surveys will be used in order to assess the preferences
of respondents with respect to the physical improvement, in relation to their propensity
to walk and to visit/travel to the area;
 Foot traffic pattern: Pedestrian counts will be used to establish the spatial distribution
of foot traffic within the study area. Estimates of propensity of pedestrianization
improvements to increase foot traffic will be based on the survey results and supported
by findings from the review of previous studies. Then, the estimates of change in the
number of visitors to establishments located within the study area will be prepared. This
foot traffic pattern will also inform the drafting of public transport related plans that
would support the pedestrianization concept.
 Business activities: The interviews of establishments/enterprises within the study area
covering different types will first be used to gauge the likely effect that improvements
will have on their attractiveness to visitors, as well as on their likelihood to make
changes to their operations (number of employees, change in business type, or other
kinds of investments);
 Local revenues: using the results for foot traffic and the likelihood of each classification
of businesses within the study area to make changes to their activities, an estimation
of likely change in sales/revenues of business establishments will be made.
5.3. Summary of data needs

Based on this study process and the overall theoretical framework, the data requirements
have been identified, along with the matching data collection techniques. These are shown
below in Table 8.
Table 8 List of data requirements and corresponding data collection technique

Data collection
Data needs Purpose to the study
technique
Factors to consider in the  Basis for the pedestrianization  Review of literature
design of pedestrianization concept
General understanding of the  Basis for developing the different  Focus group
current issues and problems survey questionnaires; discussion
faced by the local  Get in touch with the local  Key informant
communities related to community who will become interviews
pedestrian infrastructure important stakeholders during
implementation
Profile of the different  Gain an understanding of current  Road inventory
transport components (e.g. situation  Public transport
roads, routes, traffic volumes)  Provide baseline scenario inventory
 Serves as input to developing a  Pedestrian counts
pedestrian infrastructure plan that  Archival research of
matches with the current demand past traffic studies
and supply characteristics
PLANADES
43
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Data collection
Data needs Purpose to the study
technique
Current land use and building  Gain an understanding of current  Land use inventory
characteristics situation  Archival research at
 Provide baseline scenario assessor’s office
Travel/trip characteristics of  Serves as input to developing a  Pedestrian interviews
the users pedestrian infrastructure plan that  Establishment
matches with the needs of the interviews
users
Stated preferences of the  Serves as input to developing a  Pedestrian interviews
pedestrians regarding pedestrian infrastructure plan that
possible pedestrian matches with the needs of the
infrastructure improvements users
Profile of the selected  Gain an understanding of current  Establishment
establishments situation of the establishments interviews
 Provide baseline scenario
Stated preferences of the  Serves as input to developing a  Establishment
establishment owners pedestrian infrastructure plan that interviews
regarding possible pedestrian matches with the needs of the
infrastructure improvements users
 Basis for projecting future impacts
of pedestrian infrastructure
projects
PLANADES
44
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
6. Data Collection
6.1. Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

A focus group discussion was held at the start of the study to gain a general understanding
of the current issues and problems faced by the local communities related to pedestrian
infrastructure. This would insure that the pedestrianization program to be recommended
would be responsive to the needs of the community. The FGD would also be a good
opportunity to get in touch with the local community who can become important
stakeholders during implementation.
The FGD was held on May 10, 2019 (Friday) from 2:00pm to 5:00 pm at Cebu Business Hotel
along Colon St in Downtown Cebu. Eighteen (18) people participated in the FGD, covering
a variety of backgrounds. The detailed discussion of the planning for the FGD can be found
in Appendix BA.
Figure 33 View of the FGD held on May 10, 2019 at Cebu Business Hotel
6.2. Public Transport (PT) Inventory

The Public Transport (PT) Inventory was conducted to ascertain the scale and coverage of
the public transport services within the Study Area. This would form part of the analysis of
the potential traffic impact of the proposed pedestrianization project, as well as serving
inputs to the traffic management plan during its implementation.
The inventory was conducted during the second week of May 2019. The detailed discussion
of the planning of the inventory can be found in Appendix BB.
PLANADES
45
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
6.3. Rapid Land Use Inventory

The Rapid Land Use Inventory was conducted to determine the current types and
characteristics of the lots within the Study Area. This would form part of the analysis of the
compatibility of the areas with pedestrianization. In addition, the Rapid Land Use Inventory
also involved making notes on the current sidewalk conditions in front of the property. On
one hand, this forms part of the evaluation of current pedestrian facilities conditions in the
Study Area and would serve as a baseline scenario. In addition, with an understanding of
the current conditions, sections which are in urgent or dire need of improvements can be
identified.
The Rapid Land Use Inventory was conducted during May 2019. The detailed discussion of
the planning for the Inventory can be found in Appendix BC.
6.4. Pedestrian Interviews

Pedestrian interviews were conducted to gain an understanding of the basic profile of the
users in the Study Area, as well as their trip patterns. This would serve as inputs to the
preparation of the pedestrianization plan, to try to be able to match the plan with their trip
needs.
The Pedestrian Interviews were conducted for a period of four weeks between May to June
2019. The detailed discussion of the planning of the Pedestrian Interviews can be found in
Appendix BD.
6.5. Establishment Interviews

The Establishment Interviews were conducted to gain detailed understanding of the
property/lot. Additional sections in the questionnaire also asked about the respondent’s
opinions about various issues related to pedestrianization. All of these will serve as inputs
to the preparation of the pedestrianization plan.
The Establishment Interviews were conducted for a period of three weeks from late May
to late July. The detailed discussion of the planning of the Establishment Interviews can be
found in Appendix BE.
PLANADES
46
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 34 Pictures of interviewers conducting at Establishment Interviews
6.6. Pedestrian Counts

The Pedestrian Counts were conducted to ascertain the current scale of pedestrian traffic
at various parts of the Study Area. This would help determine which sections in the Study
Area are most and least suited for pedestrianization given their corresponding pedestrian
volumes.
The Pedestrian Counts were conducted on August 2019. The detailed discussion of the
planning for the counts can be found in Appendix BF.
Figure 35 Pedestrian count surveyors at various stations
PLANADES
47
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
7. Focus Group Discussion Results
Shown in this section is the synthesis of the results of the Focus Group Discussion (FGD). Answers
of similar nature were grouped to come up with a general summary. The actual responses are
discussed/presented in Appendix BA.
7.1. Pedestrianization Concept

Question #1: Are you familiar with pedestrianization/ what does pedestrianization
mean for you?
There were 17 responses to this question.
Out of 17 responses, 6 defined pedestrianization as delineating proper places for

pedestrians to walk (and in relation, where the pathways for the vehicles are). This
definition of ‘delineation of pedestrian space’ does not make specific mention whether to
use the current sidewalks or other parts of the road right‐of‐way. The responses of the
participants also mentioned delineating proper pedestrian crossings.
Delineating spaces (6 responses):

- Putting lines/markings where the public can cross
- Providing spaces for pedestrians
- Making improvements for better pathways for people
- Organizing the streets and providing walkways for people
- There should be clear walkways for women and children and PWDs
- Planning for where pedestrians and where vehicles should be
5 out of the 17 responses took the definition of pedestrianization to a broader scope, by

defining it as an entire system, which includes managing land use aspects. This includes
making the spaces more livable and business friendly.
Entire system (5 responses):

- How we see urbanization and urban spaces and not just see sections but also consider
the whole
- An environment that is livable ‐ not just for walking but also for interacting,
socialization, enjoyment
- Places for people
- Match pedestrians and business type
- Developing socio‐ecological resilience
4 out of the 17 responses took the definition of pedestrianization as limiting or restricting

the use of vehicles on certain sections. This includes making the spaces more livable.
Restriction of vehicle usage in certain sections (4 responses):
PLANADES
48
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
- Giving streets back to the pedestrians

- Excluding or minimizing the vehicles
- Converting existing streets so pedestrians can use them
- Asserting or claiming the rights of pedestrians in the use of the road
2 out of the 17 responses took the definition of pedestrianization as simply improving the
current conditions of the sidewalks.
Improving sidewalk conditions in certain sections (2 responses):

- Cleaning up the sidewalks
- Making sidewalks for pedestrians by removing vendors
7.2. Possible attraction of pedestrianization

Question # 2: Will pedestrianization help to attract more customers/clientele to the
downtown area?
There were a total of 9 responses to this question.
3 out of the 9 responses said that attracting more customers will depend on the overall
urban environmental conditions, which includes flooding hazard and perception of safety
and security. This means that these respondents feel that no matter how good the physical
design of a pedestrianization project is, if the above factors are not adequately addressed,
customers will not be attracted to the downtown area.
Depends on overall urban environment conditions (3 responses):

- Consider security and safety
- Will it help solve the issue of flooding?
- Address flooding first, then security, then physical infrastructure
3 out of the 9 responses said that attracting more customers will depend on the connection
of the pedestrianized space with the surrounding land uses. If there is a good
match/alignment between the pedestrianized space and the surrounding buildings, then
pedestrianization can attract more people. If the connections are poor, then it will not help
to attract more people.
Depends on connection to land uses (2 responses):

- Connection to churches and plaza (e.g. Santo Nino Church, Cathedral, etc.)
- Pedestrianization must be anchored on destination
- Depends on where and what it is
2 out of the 9 responses said that it depends on the users of the place. This includes the
profile or characteristics of the people using the space, and the travel behavior of the
people using the space.
PLANADES
49
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Depends on connection to land uses (2 responses):

- Depends on character of people who use the streets and it changes according to time
of day
- Depends on how pedestrians get to one place from another
Only 1 out of the 9 responses said that the pedestrianization can definitely attract more
people.
7.3. Areas to be benefitted by pedestrianization

Question # 3: Which streets do you think will benefit most from pedestrianization?
The responses of the participants range from generic characteristics of the

areas/establishments that would be benefitted to very specific areas.
2 responses mentioned that those road sections where some semblance of

pedestrianization is already being employed would likely be more benefitted. These are
Osmena Blvd, Legaspi and Pelaez St.
1 response mentioned areas around historical or tourist attractions would likely be more
benefitted. Incidentally, this is consistent with Osmena Blvd mentioned previously where
occasional pedestrianization is already being applied.
On the other hand, one response mentioned areas that would negatively be affected by
pedestrianization. These would be roads with heavy traffic and many public transport
routes (such as Colon St). From this, we can surmise that for this respondent, areas that
would be benefitted are roads with low traffic volumes and few public transport routes.
7.4. Prioritization to attract more people

Question # 4: What do you think are needed in order to attract more customers to the
downtown area? Should these be prioritized over the improvement of the pedestrian
environment?
Although there were 13 respondents who answered, but their answers covered a variety
of aspects. For purposes of summarization, each unique answer was separately
categorized. From here, there were 27 responses to question #4.
6 out of 27 responses mentioned safety/security measures.
5 out of 27 mentioned flood management measures.
5 out of 27 mentioned about physical improvements. (e.g. removing physical obstructions

along pathways, uneven surfaces, etc)
PLANADES
50
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
3 out of 27 mentioned about management/organizational systems. (I.e. having an

organization/group of people to manage the spaces just like a commercial space or during
events)
2 out of 27 mentioned about branding measures. (I.e. creating a well‐defined image for the
downtown area)
2 out of 27 mentioned about traffic improvement measures.
Each one of the following aspects had one mention: business opportunities, land uses
changes, parking provisions and waste management.
Physical improvement of the walking environment only accounted for about one‐fifth of
responses. Other responses like improvement of the security/safety of the area and
flood management were emphasized above physical improvement. Furthermore,
suggested methods for the improvement of the area’s attractiveness through marketing
and organizational approaches. Thus, it is surmised that these are to have equal if not
slightly more priority than the improvement of the pedestrian environment.
7.5. Possible impacts of simple sidewalk improvements

Question # 5: Would ‘simple’ sidewalk improvement have the same level impact on
business in the downtown area as ‘full’ pedestrianization?
There were 4 responses to this question.
2 out of 4 said that there is no need to fully pedestrianize a street (i.e. partial
pedestrianization). Some of their considerations are the effect it may have on some
businesses that rely on vehicle movement.
2 out of 4 said that occasional pedestrianization is more preferred than full

pedestrianization. Among their considerations are it is only during weekends or events that
would require more pedestrian space.
No one responded that full pedestrianization is preferred more than occasional or partial
pedestrianization.
7.6. Synthesis of FGD results
7.6.1. Most of the FGD participants agree that pedestrianization alone does not
guarantee that more people will come to the area.
 For them, it depends more on whether the existing urban environmental conditions in
a particular area/section are appropriately addressed first (e.g. safety/security, flooding,
waste). This is consistent with the concepts cited in the Review of Related Literature
and Case Studies which mentions that the physical improvements should be
complimented with programs and other soft measures.
PLANADES
51
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 There needs to be good physical connectivity between the pedestrianized space and the
adjacent land uses. This comment is consistent with the results of the Case Studies
presented in the prior chapter that showed good connections lead to more successful
pedestrianization projects, while weak connections lead to unsuccessful, and even,
disastrous, results.
o Implication to the Study: When evaluating an area’s suitability for
pedestrianization, both the physical and non‐physical aspects has to be
considered.
7.6.2. Majority of the respondents noted solving safety/security and flooding more
frequently than actual physical improvements to the pedestrian space.
 The respondents mentioned that even if the pedestrianization project was designed
well, but flooding and safety/security issues were not addressed, people may go
frequently.
o Implication to the Study: There is a need to remind the future project proponents
that these two main issues either need to be addressed first before a
pedestrianization project will be implemented, or that these issues will be
addressed concurrently with the project.
7.6.3. All agreed that full pedestrianization may not be necessary for economic
revitalization, and that occasional or partial pedestrianization is more preferable.
 Their main consideration is about the potential negative effects that road closure may
have on businesses that have clientele that rely on vehicular movement.
o Implication to the Study: The respondents’ concern about the potential business
impact reiterates the need for one: to select those areas for pedestrianization that
will. And two, if some of the areas around the pedestrianzed area are not
compatible, there is a need to create a program that would produce
complimentary land uses.
PLANADES
52
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8. Land Use Inventory Profiling
The discussion below highlights the relevant portions of the Land Use Inventory that have direct
relationship with the analysis and recommendations. The other detailed discussion of the
inventory results can be found in Appendix CA.
8.1. Land Use Characteristics
8.1.1. Number of lots

A total of 405 lots were identified within the Study Area. Of these, 35 were inner lots and
were inaccessible to the surveyors, so no information was able to be obtained about them.
From the 405 lots, 355 were along major streets, while 50 are along minor streets. V. Gullas
has the highest number of individual lots with 67, followed by Osmena Blvd with 53.
Table 9 Count of surveyed lots per street

Major Streets Minor Streets
Street Name Lots Street Name Lots
Colon St. 39 Jereza 1
Osmena Blvd. 53 Junquera St. 1
Legaspi St. 41 Lincoln St. 2
V. Gullas 67 Manalili St. 1
P. Burgos 14 MJ Cuenco 2
Mabini St. 22 P. Gomez 8
D. Jakosalem 47 Pelaez St. 1
F. Gonzales 48 Plaridel Ext. 4
MC Briones 19 Plaridel St. 3
Magallanes 5 Quezon Blvd. 21
Sikatuna St. 2
Zamora St. 3
Zulueta St. 1
Subtotal 355 Subtotal 50
TOTAL 405
8.1.2. Overall Land Use Type

Shown in Table 10 below is the breakdown of the land use types in the Study Area and is
reflected in map form in Figure 36. The majority of the lots are commercial in nature, with
about 66% of the lots either being purely commercial, or partly commercial. Residential
and industrial uses are the land use with second‐highest share, but very low (7% share
each). The low share of residential uses means that the commercial areas would need to
rely on people from outside the Study Area to drive its foot traffic.About 5% of the lots are
fully unoccupied.
PLANADES
53
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 10 Overall land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Street Name Major Minor Grand %
Streets Streets Total
Commercial 142 16 158 39.0%
Commercial‐Industrial 50 3 53 13.1%
Commercial‐Institutional 5 1 6 1.5%
Commercial‐Residential 41 8 49 12.1%
Residential 25 3 28 6.9%
Industrial + Utility 25 3 28 6.9%
Institutional 13 5 18 4.4%
Open spaces 5 0 5 1.2%
Others 3 0 3 0.7%
Unoccupied 17 3 20 4.9%
No info 29 8 37 9.1%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100%
Figure 36 Overall land use types in the Study Area
The Colon St corridor is dominantly solid red, which means purely commercial in nature.
Very little hues (residential use) can be within the vicinity of the commercial lots, meaning
that the commercial lots do not have ready‐made market around it.
PLANADES
54
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
The eastern side of the Study Area is dominated by institutional land uses and open spaces,
which generate much foot traffic. This suggests that this section may be more compatible
with pedestrianization.
The few industrial uses are mostly concentrated on the south side, which suggest that it is
these areas which may not be suitable for pedestrianization.
8.1.3. Establishment Type

Shown in Table 11 below is the breakdown of the lots according to establishment type.
Majority of the establishment are mixed types (23.7%). In terms of single types, food‐type
establishments have the highest share at 13.6%, followed by general merchandise (8.4%).
It can be noted that despite the presence of many tourist establishments in the Downtown
Area, there are only a few hotels/inns in the area.
Table 11 Type of establishments within the lot

Land Use Type Major Minor Grand %
Construction 13 1 14 3.5%
Electronics 16 2 18 4.4%
Financial 16 16 4.0%
Food 47 8 55 13.6%
General Merchandise 31 3 34 8.4%
Hotels/inns 9 9 2.2%
Industrial 23 4 27 6.7%
Mall 5 2 7 1.7%
Museums/public 2 1 3 0.7%
Offices 6 3 9 2.2%
Open spaces 5 5 1.2%
Personal 4 4 1.0%
Religious 4 1 5 1.2%
Residences 26 2 28 6.9%
Schools 7 2 9 2.2%
Unknown 30 8 38 9.4%
Vacant lots 6 2 8 2.0%
Mixed types 88 8 96 23.7%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100.0%
8.1.4. Ground Floor Land Use Type

Shown in Table 12 below is the land use at the ground floor of the lots and is reflected in
map form in Figure 37. Commercial is the dominant ground floor land use type, comprising
PLANADES
55
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
about 64% of all the lots. Industrial use has the next highest share with 8.9%, followed by
residential use with 6.7%. Unoccupied lots comprise about 5.2%.
Table 12 Ground floor land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Commercial 216 25 241 59.5%
Commercial‐ Institutional 4 4 1.0%
Commercial‐Residential 4 4 1.0%
Others 3 3 0.7%
No info 29 9 38 9.4%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100.0%
Figure 37 Ground floor land use types in the Study Area
8.1.5. Upper Floor Land Use Type

Shown in Table 13 below is the breakdown of the land use at the upper levels of the
buildings within the lots. About 20% of the lots do not have upper floors use since they are
PLANADES
56
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
just one‐storey buildings. The land use with the highest share is still commercial‐related
with a total of about 29% share. Residential use has the next highest share at 16%, followed
by industrial with 12% share. About 9% of the upper floors are unoccupied.
Table 13 Upper floors land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Commercial 94 13 107 26.4%
Commercial‐Industrial 3 3 0.7%
Others 2 2 0.5%
(None) 67 12 79 19.5%
No info 30 4 34 8.4%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100.0%
Figure 38 Picture of building along Colon St between P. Burgos and Jakosalem that looks
unoccupied
PLANADES
57
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 39 Upper floor land use types in the Study Area
Most of the buildings with upper floor land uses are located along the Colon St corridor.
Lots with industrial use on the upper floors are concentrated along the Osmena Blvd and
F. Gonzalez corridor. On the eastern side of Colon St can be a small concentration of
buildings with unoccupied upper floors. This may indicate that it is these areas that can
potentially be converted to other land uses that are compatible to the commercial uses
along Colon St.
PLANADES
58
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.1.6. Occupancy of buildings/lots

Shown in Table 14 below are the occupancy statuses of the lots. Majority of the lots are
occupied with an 86% share. Partially and fully unoccupied lots comprise about 11% in all.
This indicates that there are few opportunities for new construction or developments.
Future developments may rely on renovation of existing structures or land use changes.
Table 14 Occupancy types of buildings/lots in the Study Area

Street Name Occupied Partial Fully Open No info Grand
unoccupied unoccupied spaces Total
Colon St. 33 4 2 39
Osmena Blvd. 44 8 1 53
Legaspi St. 35 2 4 41
V. Gullas 58 3 5 1 67
P. Burgos 12 1 1 14
Mabini St. 19 1 2 22
D. Jakosalem 39 2 3 3 47
F. Gonzales 42 3 3 48
MC Briones 16 3 19
Magallanes 5 5
All minor streets 47 2 49
TOTAL 303 24 21 5 5 405
86.4% 5.9% 5.2% 1.2% 1.2% 100.0%
Figure 40 Picture of multi‐storey building along V. Gullas with partially unoccupied

upper floors
PLANADES
59
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 41 Picture of building at corner of Gullas St and Legaspi St that looks completely
unoccupied
Figure 42 Occupancy of the lots in the Study Area
PLANADES
60
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.2. Building Characteristics

Shown in Table 15 below is the breakdown of the current physical conditions of the
buildings within lots in the Study Area. A graphical representation can be found in Figure
44. Majority of the buildings are in good condition but unclean (46%). Those in good
condition and clean buildings comprise 26% of all the buildings. Dilapidated buildings
comprise 16% of all the lots in the area.
The generally good physical condition of the buildings means that no major demolitions or
new constructions are necessary in case new developments are to be introduced.
Table 15 Physical conditions of the buildings/lots in the Study Area

Street Location Good Good Dilapidated Unfinished/ No info Not Grand
condition condition under applicable Total
and clean but construction
unclean
Colon St. 9 16 10 1 3 39
Osmena Blvd. 13 30 7 4 53
Legaspi St. 9 22 7 1 2 41
V. Gullas 13 33 9 1 10 1 67
P. Burgos 8 4 2 14
Mabini St. 6 6 8 2 22
D. Jakosalem 11 20 7 5 4 47
F. Gonzales 12 23 7 1 5 48
MC Briones 9 9 1 19
Magallanes 3 2 5
All minor streets 11 20 7 3 8 1 50
TOTAL 104 185 64 5 34 13 405
25.7% 45.7% 15.8% 1.2% 8.4% 3.2% 100.0%
Figure 43 Picture of a building in the Downtown area that is in good condition but
unclean
PLANADES
61
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
The unclean buildings are scattered all throughout the Study Area. The clean buildings can
mostly be found at junctions of major roads.
A small concentration of dilapidated buildings (colored orange in the map) can be seen to
along V. Gullas and eastern part of Colon St. Relating this to the previous section about
unoccupied upper floors, this is also the section where there is also a small concentration
of buildings with unoccupied upper floor uses. This then further suggests that it is this part
of the Study Area that is the more likely candidate site for redevelopment of new land uses
that can be compatible to the pedestrianization project.
Figure 44 Physical condition of the buildings in the lots in the Study Area
PLANADES
62
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.3. Sidewalk Characteristics
8.3.1. Sidewalk types

Shown in Table 16 below is the list of the type of sidewalks in the Study Area. Majority of
the sidewalks in the area are arcaded, with about a 45% share. Non‐arcaded sidewalks
comprise about 35%. Lots without any sidewalks comprise about 12% of the lots. This
indicates that as a whole, there is a good presence of walkway facilities for pedestrians
within the Study Area.
Table 16 Types of sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area

Sidewalk type Final Arcaded Non‐ No Not No Info Grand
arcaded sidewalk applicable Total
Colon St. 25 13 1 39
Legaspi St. 22 9 9 1 41
V. Gullas 27 16 14 10 67
P. Burgos 1 12 1 14
F. Gonzales 15 20 6 5 2 48
MC Briones 10 9 19
Magallanes 4 1 5
All minor streets 10 20 12 8 50
TOTAL 180 141 48 34 2 405
44.4% 34.8% 11.9% 8.4% 0.5% 100.0%
Figure 45 Arcaded walkways along Colon Figure 46 Lot with no sidewalk along
St Gullas St
PLANADES
63
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 47 below is the graphical representation of the above table. Looking at the
map, majority of the western portion of the Study Area is colored green (arcaded
sidewalks), while the eastern portion is colored blue (non‐arcaded sidewalks). Since the
western portion is where most of the major commercial centers are, this indicates that the
pedestrians here have sufficient pedestrian facilities.
Those without sidewalks (maroon) are concentrated on the eastern side, around the areas
of the two churches. Knowing that the churches attract a good volume of foot traffic and
that these areas are also major tourist destinations, the lack of sidewalks here can be a
cause for concern and indicates the need for improved pedestrian facilities in these areas.
Figure 47 Types of sidewalks of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES
64
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.3.2. Sidewalk widths

Shown in Table 17 below is the average sidewalk width per street in the Study Area. From
this list, the streets with the widest average sidewalk width are Magallanes and Osmena
Blvd with 4.00 meters. Next is MC Briones with an average of 3.53 meters, while third is
Colon St with a 3.46‐meter average.
The streets with the narrowest average sidewalk width are P. Burgos and Mabini St with a
2.02‐ and 2.2‐meter average respectively. These would suggest that the areas which need
improved pedestrian facilities more are along this corridor.
Table 17 Average widths of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Street Name Ave.
Type width (m)
Major Colon St. 3.46
Osmena Blvd. 4.00
Legaspi St. 2.80
V. Gullas 2.52
P. Burgos 2.02
Mabini St. 2.20
D. Jakosalem 2.81
F. Gonzales 2.82
MC Briones 3.53
Magallanes 4.00
Minor 2.02
Subtotal 2.93
Figure 48 Section in P. Burgos with Figure 49 Wide arcaded sidewalk in Osmena

very narrow sidewalk Blvd
PLANADES
65
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 50 below is the average sidewalk width per street in the Study Area in map
form. As can be gleaned from the map, majority of the lots on the western and northern
sides are colored light blue (3‐4 meters in width) and light green (4 to 5 m). The eastern
side show darker red hues, indicating narrower widths. This indicates that the areas which
need better pedestrian facilities more are on the eastern side.
Figure 50 Sidewalk widths of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES
66
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.3.3. Sidewalk conditions

Shown in Table 18 below is the summary of the physical conditions of the sidewalk in the
Study Area. Based on the table, majority of the sidewalks are well‐paved with about 60%
share. Those with uneven surface are about 20%. This then indicates that the Study Area
generally have good sidewalk conditions.
Table 18 Physical conditions of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Location Well‐ Uneven No No Grand
paved surface sidewalk answer Total
Colon St. 30 8 1 39
Legaspi St. 27 4 9 1 41
V. Gullas 32 11 14 10 67
P. Burgos 12 1 1 14
Mabini St. 10 11 1 22
F. Gonzales 22 13 6 7 48
MC Briones 10 9 19
Magallanes 4 1 5
All Minor Streets 14 16 12 8 50
TOTAL 241 80 48 34 405
% share 59.5% 19.8% 11.9% 8.4% 100.0%
Figure 51 Sample of sidewalk with uneven surface along V. Gullas St
PLANADES
67
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 52 below is the physical condition of the sidewalk in the Study Area in map
form. From a glance of the map, most of the colors seen are colored green, indicating well‐
paved conditions. The areas with uneven surface can be found mostly on the eastern sides
of the Study Area, particularly along V. Gullas and P. Burgos. This would indicate that these
areas need improved pedestrian facilities more.
Figure 52 Sidewalk conditions of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES
68
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.3.4. Sidewalk obstructions

Shown in Table 19 below is the summary of the type of obstructions in the sidewalks,
categorized either as fixed or temporary. Fixed obstructions include utility posts, water
meters, trees or plants. Temporary obstructions include vendor stalls, parked vehicles,
merchandise or furniture by the store, and the like.
From the table, almost half of the lots (50.6%) have some form of obstructions in the
sidewalk. The greater half of the obstructions (26%) are of the temporary kind, with
another 14% of the fixed kind, while the remaining 12% is a combination of fixed and
temporary obstructions.
Table 19 Types of obstructions in the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Location Fixed Fixed & Temp None NA Grand
Temp Total
Colon St. 10 5 12 11 1 39
Osmena Blvd. 2 7 17 23 4 53
Legaspi St. 2 7 12 19 1 41
V. Gullas 6 5 12 34 10 67
P. Burgos 6 2 6 14
Mabini St. 9 6 2 5 22
D. Jakosalem 10 15 17 5 47
F. Gonzales 4 3 15 21 5 48
MC Briones 1 10 8 19
Magallanes 2 3 5
All minor streets 4 9 10 19 8 50
TOTAL 54 46 105 166 34 405
% share 13.3% 11.4% 25.9% 41.0% 8.4% 100.0%
Figure 53 Parked cars (temporary Figure 54 Utility posts (permanent

obstructions) along F. Gonzales St obstructions) along P. Burgos
PLANADES
69
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Combining this information with the previous sections, while majority of the Study Area
have wide enough sidewalk widths and good sidewalk conditions, but because there are a
good portion of sidewalk obstructions, the overall walkability of the Study Area is either
just average or poor. This also means that since the poor walkability is just due to
obstructions and not actual infrastructure, the problem is easily fixed by just removing the
obstructions.
Shown in Figure 55 below is a map representation of the type of obstructions in the Study
Area. The lots with the green line (no obstructions) are mostly concentrated along
northwestern side. This is generally the areas where the major commercial centers are
located, which may suggest that the bigger commercial establishments are able to control
the use of their sidewalks better.
Those with fixed obstructions are found mostly on the eastern side, while those with
temporary obstructions are mostly concentrated on the south and southwestern sides.
This would mean that the expected heavy pedestrian volumes going to these areas would
experience poor walkability. This indicates that these are the areas which need better
pedestrian facilities.
Figure 55 Types of sidewalk obstructions in the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES
70
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.3.5. Flood mitigation measures

Shown in Table 20 below is the summary of the presence of flood mitigation measures in
the Study Area. Fixed wall are low walls about up to knee‐high usually placed at the edge
of the sidewalk near the street. These serve like a dam wall, meant to keep the flood waters
from getting into the sidewalk. Portable walls are similar to the fixed walls, the only
difference that is removable. Raised sidewalks are sidewalks that have been raised higher
than their normal height. There is a noticeable step up from the neighboring sidewalks.
Based on the inventory, about 18.3% of the lots have some form of flood mitigation
measures, with the dominant type being raised sidewalk. Of all the streets in the Study
Area, V. Gullas showed the highest concentration of flood mitigation measures with 25 out
of the 67 lots (38%) have some form of flood mitigating measure, followed by Legaspi with
34% (14 out of 41).
This indicates that if ever portions of V. Gullas and Legaspi Streets will be subject to
pedestrianization, it is paramount that the flooding issues should be addressed.
Table 20 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalks of the properties in the
Study Area
Street Location Fixed Fixed & Fixed Raised Sub None NA Total
wall portable wall & sidewalk total
wall raised
sidewalk
Colon St. 3 2 6 11 27 1 39
Osmena Blvd. 6 1 7 38 8 53
Legaspi St. 4 10 14 21 6 41
V. Gullas 4 1 1 19 25 30 12 67
P. Burgos 1 1 13 14
Mabini St. 1 1 2 20 22
D. Jakosalem 1 8 9 33 5 47
F. Gonzales 3 3 40 5 48
MC Briones 0 19 19
Magallanes 0 5 5
TOTAL 18 1 5 50 74 286 45 405
4.4% 0.2% 1.2% 12.3% 18.3% 70.6% 11.1% 100%
PLANADES
71
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 56 Fixed walls installed by Gaisano Figure 57 Lot in Legaspi St with raised
Main along V. Gullas sidewalk
Shown in Figure 58 below is a map showing the flood mitigating measures used by the lots
within the Study Area.
Figure 58 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalk of the lots within the
Study Area
PLANADES
72
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
8.4. Highlights/Main Findings
8.4.1. Regarding land use

 The Study Area is predominantly commercial in nature, with few residential uses. This
means that the market needed to support the commercial shops in the area need to
come from outside, which then lowers the probability of economic vitality.
 The eastern side is where many institutional uses and tourist attractions can be found.
This would indicate these areas would have the greater need for pedestrian facilities.
 There are only a few areas which are industrial in nature, which indicates that the Study
Area does not require drastic change in land uses to be able to be most compatible for
pedestrianization.
8.4.2. Regarding building condition

 Generally, most of the buildings are in good physical condition, but are just unclean.
This would indicate there need not be major renovations to the existing buildings in
case they need to be made more compatible for pedestrianization.
 A concentration of dilapidated buildings and with unoccupied upper floors can be found
on the eastern side of Colon St, near P. Burgos. This presents an opportunity for
renovation/refurbishment and introduce new land uses that would compliment the
western commercial side of Colon, as well as the institutional and tourist areas along P.
Burgos.
8.4.3. Regarding sidewalk conditions

 Most of the sidewalks are wide and in generally good condition, which indicatetes good
basic pedestrian facilities. But the bigger half have some sort of obstructions, whether
temporary or fixed, which decreases its walkability.
 The road sections which have poor sidewalk conditions are on the eastern side, with
particular note to the areas around the churches. Given that these areas attract a good
deal of pedestrian traffic, this would indicate a more urgent need for better pedestrian
facilities.
 V.Gullas and Legaspi Streets has a high presence of flood mitigation measures, which
would indicate that these areas are prone to flooding. This would mean that any
pedestrianization efforts that will be introduced on these roads should address first or
concurrently the flooding issues.
PLANADES
73
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
9. Pedestrian Count Volumes Profiling
The discussion below highlights the relevant portions of the Pedestrian Counts that have direct
inventory results can be found in Appendix CB.
9.1. Combined volumes per road section

Shown in Table 21 below is the summary of the combined daily volumes (sidewalks on both sides)
for each road section. For the stations indicated below with an asterisk (*), no surveys were done
so the volumes were calculated using the data from the neighboring stations.
Table 21 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume summary
Weekend/
Stn Weekday Weekend
Station Name Road Section weekday
Code Volume Volume
increase
1 Colon 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St 39,828 34,491 ‐13.4%
2 Colon 2 Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St 31,299 44,135 41.0%
3 Colon 3 Btwn Junquera St & Jakosalem St 23,163 19,998 ‐13.7%
4 Colon 4 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 7,247 5,857 ‐19.2%
5 Gullas 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Legaspi St 10,677 9,684 ‐9.3%
6 Gullas 2 Btwn Legaspi St & Jakosalem St 8,773 7,957 ‐9.3%
7 Gullas 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 3,810 3,456 ‐9.3%
8 Osmena 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 11,585 24,851 114.5%
9 Osmena 2 Btwn Gullas St & Plaridel Ext 21,152 28,740 35.9%
10 Osmena 3 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem 18,496 25,131 35.9%
11 Osmena 4 Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos 21,368 23,845 11.6%
12 Osmena 5 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu St 8,833 8,080 ‐8.5%
13 Legaspi 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 15,377 17,059 10.9%
14 Legaspi 2 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem 4,262 3,599 ‐15.6%
15 Legaspi 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 3,610 3,797 5.2%
16 Jakosalem 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 10,827 8,664 ‐20.0%
17 Jakosalem 2 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez 8,993 8,715 ‐3.1%
18 Jakosalem 3 Btwn P. Gomez & Legaspi St 8,857 7,087 ‐20.0%
19 Jakosalem 4 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd 8,720 6,978 ‐20.0%
20 Jakosalem 5 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 5,898 4,720 ‐20.0%
21 Jakosalem 6 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones 6,285 4,978 ‐20.8%
22 Mabini 1 Btwn Zulueta St and Colon St 2,499 2,011 ‐19.5%
23 Mabini 2 Btwn Colon St and Gullas St 5,363 4,316 ‐19.5%
PLANADES
74
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Weekend/
Stn Weekday Weekend
Station Name Road Section weekday
Code Volume Volume
increase
24 Mabini 3 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez 8,227 6,621 ‐19.5%
25 Burgos 4 Btwn P. Gomez & Legaspi St 14,772 11,889 ‐19.5%
26 Burgos 5 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd 7,457 6,619 ‐11.2%
27 Burgos 6 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 11,552 9,297 ‐19.5%
28 Burgos 7 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones 9,240 6,819 ‐26.2%
29 MC Briones 1 Btwn F. Gonzales & Jakosalem 11,587 6,424 ‐44.6%
* MC Briones 2 Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos 17,035 8,800 ‐48.3%
* MC Briones 3 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu 11,308 5,947 ‐47.4%
* MC Briones 4 Btwn Lapu‐lapu & MJ Cuenco 5,580 3,094 ‐44.6%
31 P. Gomez Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos 3,236 2,882 ‐10.9%
32 Gonzalez 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 939 1,105 17.7%
33 Gonzalez 2 Btwn Magallanes & Lincoln 4,083 4,805 17.7%
* Gonzalez 3 Btwn Lincoln & MC Briones 4,083 4,805 17.7%
35 Magallanes 1 Btwn F. Gonzalez & Jakosalem 12,402 9,569 ‐22.8%
36 Magallanes 2 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu 5,973 4,609 ‐22.8%
During the weekday, the station with the highest recorded volume for a 12‐hour period is Colon 1
(between Osmena Blvd and Pelaez St), with 39,828 pax. Second is Colon 2 (Btwn Pelaez St &
Junquera St) with 31,299. Third is Colon 3 (Btwn Junquera St & Jakosalem St) with 23,163. These
high volumes can be due to the presence of the major malls along this corridor, namely Metro
Gaisano, Colonnade Mall, Super Metro and Gaisano Main.
For a sense of comparison on the scale of pax volumes, the average pax volume along the sidewalk
in Ayala Ave in Makati City, Metro Manila, during a typical weekday ranges between 13,000 and
18,000, with some sections having volumes of around 30,000. This would indicate that the
pedestrian volumes along Colon St are comparable to a major Central Business District (CBD).
All in all, there are five stations with more than 20,000 pax recorded, with the top three along
Colon, and the next two along Osmena Blvd. The station with the lowest count is Gonzalez 1 (Btwn
Osmena Blvd & Magallanes) with just 939 pax. This can be mainly due to the nature of this area
as predominantly industrial/warehouse types.
PLANADES
75
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Colon 1 39,828
Colon 2 31,299
Colon 3 23,163
Colon 4 7,247
Gullas 1 10,677
Gullas 2 8,773
Gullas 3 3,810
Osmena 1 11,585
Osmena 2 21,152
Osmena 3 18,496
Osmena 4 21,368
Osmena 5 8,833
Legaspi 1 15,377
Legaspi 2 4,262
Legaspi 3 3,610
Jakosalem 1 10,827
Jakosalem 2 8,993
Jakosalem 3 8,857
Jakosalem 4 8,720
Jakosalem 5 5,898
Jakosalem 6 6,285
Mabini 1 2,499
Mabini 2 5,363
Mabini 3 8,227
Burgos 4 14,772
Burgos 5 7,457
Burgos 6 11,552
Burgos 7 9,240
MC Briones 1 11,587
MC Briones 2 17,035
MC Briones 3 11,308
MC Briones 4 5,580
P. Gomez 3,236
Gonzalez 1 939
Gonzalez 2 4,083
Gonzalez 3 4,083
Magallanes 1 12,402
Magallanes 2 5,973
Figure 59 Pedestrian counts combined weekday daily volume summary
Figure 60 Heavy pedestrian volumes along Colon St in front of Colonnade Mall
PLANADES
76
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
During the weekend, the station with the highest recorded volume for a 12‐hour period is Colon
2 (Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St), with 44,135. Second is Colon 1 (between Osmena Blvd and
Pelaez St) with 34,491. Third is Osmena 2 (Btwn Gullas St and F. Gonzalez St) with 28,740, fourth
is Osmena 3 (btwn F. Gonzalez St and Jakosalem St), fifth is Osmena 1 (Btwn Colon St & Gullas St)
with 24,851 and sixth is Osmena 4 (Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos) with 23,845. The station with the
lowest count is Legaspi 2 (Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem) with just 3,599 pax.
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Colon 1 34,491
Colon 2 44,135
Colon 3 19,998
Colon 4 5,857
Gullas 1 9,684
Gullas 2 7,957
Gullas 3 3,456
Osmena 1 24,851
Osmena 2 28,740
Osmena 3 25,131
Osmena 4 23,845
Osmena 5 8,080
Legaspi 1 17,059
Legaspi 2 3,599
Legaspi 3 3,797
Jakosalem 1 8,664
Jakosalem 2 8,715
Jakosalem 3 7,087
Jakosalem 4 6,978
Jakosalem 5 4,720
Jakosalem 6 4,978
Mabini 1 2,011
Mabini 2 4,316
Mabini 3 6,621
Burgos 4 11,889
Burgos 5 6,619
Burgos 6 9,297
Burgos 7 6,819
MC Briones 1 6,424
MC Briones 2 8,800
MC Briones 3 5,947
MC Briones 4 3,094
P. Gomez 2,882
Gonzalez 1 1,105
Gonzalez 2 4,805
Gonzalez 3 4,805
Magallanes 1 9,569
Magallanes 2 4,609
Figure 61 Pedestrian counts combined weekend daily volume summary
Out of the 38 road sections, 29 experienced a decrease in volumes during the weekends. The
highest recorded decrease is MC Briones 2 with 48.3% (17,035 vs. 8,800) and then MC Briones 3
with 47.4% (11,308 vs. 5,947). This sharp decrease in MC Briones can be attributed to the closure
of offices at Cebu City Hall during the weekends.
On the opposite end, the highest increase is at Osmena 1, with more than double the volume at
114.5% (24,851 vs. 11,585). The next highest increase is at Colon 2, with 41.0% increase. These
two sections are within the junction of Colon St and Osmena Blvd, where major malls are located.
This would indicate there are more people going to the big malls during the weekend.
PLANADES
77
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 62 below shows the weekday volumes in map form. From here, we can see that the heavier
volumes are concentrated on the northwest sections. Moderate volumes can be found around the
Basilica de Santo Nino and City Hall block. The rest have relatively light volumes.
Figure 62 Weekday daily pedestrian flows by street
PLANADES
78
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 63 below shows the pax volumes during the weekend in map form. The heavier volumes
are still concentrated on the northwestern side, and actually showed high increases. The section
of Colon St between Pelaez and Junquera in particular experienced a big jump in pax volumes,
reaching already pax volumes in the 40,000+ range. The entire Osmena Blvd is now colored yellow.
The P. Burgos and MC Briones sides of the City Hall block is now blue in color, indicating very low
volumes.
Figure 63 Weekend daily pedestrian flows by street
PLANADES
79
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
9.2. Summary by street

Shown in Table 22 below is the summary of the combined average daily volumes per street.
Table 22 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume

summary by street
Weekend/
Stn Weekday Weekend
Station Name weekday
Code Volume Volume
increase
1 Colon 25,384 26,120 2.9%
2 Osmena 16,942 23,510 38.8%
3 Gullas 7,753 7,032 ‐9.3%
4 Legaspi 6,224 6,370 2.3%
5 Jakosalem 8,263 6,857 ‐17.0%
6 Mabini/Burgos 8,444 6,796 ‐19.5%
7 Gonzalez 3,035 3,572 17.7%
8 Briones 11,377 6,066 ‐46.7%
The street with the highest average weekday volume is Colon with 25,384, followed by Osmena
Blvd with 16,942, then MC Briones with 11,377. The rest of the streets have volumes of less than
10,000. During the weekends, the street with the highest average weekday volume is also Colon
with 26,120, followed by Osmena Blvd with 23,510. The third highest is Gullas with 7,032. The rest
of the streets have volumes of less than 7,000.
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
Colon 25,384
26,120
Osmena 16,942
23,510
Gullas 7,753
7,032
Legaspi 6,224
6,370
Jakosalem 8,263
6,857
Mabini 8,444
6,796
Gonzalez 3,035
3,572
Briones 11,377
6,066
Figure 64 Comparison between weekday and weekend volumes by street
PLANADES
80
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
In comparing the weekday and weekend volumes, the highest recorded increase among the
surveyed streets was Osmena with a 38.8% increase on the weekend volume compared to the
weekday volume (23,510 vs. 16,942). This high increase can be attributed to two factors: one is
the presence of a major commercial center—Gaisano Metro—at the northern end of Osmena
Blvd, and two is the presence of Basilica de Santo Nino on the southern end. Presumably, people
go to the malls for rest and recreation after going to mass. Thus, foot traffic along this corridor is
high particularly during the weekends.
The highest decrease recorded was MC Briones with a ‐46.7% decrease on the weekend volume
compared to the weekday volume (6,066 vs. 11,377). This can be mainly attributed to the closure
of offices at Cebu City Hall during the weekends.
All in all, four streets had lower average volumes of pedestrians during the weekend compared to
the weekday, namely Gullas, Jakosalem, Mabini/Burgos and MC Briones. Two streets have double‐
digit higher average volume of pedestrians during the weekend, namely Osmena Blvd and
Gonzalez. The remaining two have practically the same volumes (Colon and Legaspi).
9.3.1. About daily pedestrian volumes

 There are high pedestrian volumes along Colon St (ranging between 20,000 to 35,000),
which are comparable to the pedestrian volumes in Makati CBD sidewalks. This is
attributed to the presence of major malls along this street. This emphasizes the need
for good pedestrian facilities, especially along this corridor.
 Pedestrian volumes along the eastern side are low, which means that the different
tourist attractions in this areas are not getting enough foot traffic. Even weekend
volumes along this side, when tourists are expected to flock the attractions, are low.
This can be due to the lack of complimentary land use or establishments.
9.3.2. Difference between weekday and weekend volumes

 Osmena Blvd experienced the highest pedestrian volume increases (relative to the
weekday) during the weekend, possibly due to the interaction between church and mall
during the weekends. This would suggest that closure of vehicular traffic only during the
weekends may be considered, in case full pedestrianization is not feasible.
 MC Briones experienced the highest decreases, mainly due to the closure of offices at
Cebu City Hall during the weekend.
PLANADES
81
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10. Public Transport Inventory
The discussion below highlights the relevant portions of the Public Transport Inventory that have
direct relationship with the analysis and recommendations. The other detailed discussion of the
inventory results can be found in Appendix BB.
10.1. Available modes

The main public transport mode available in the Study Area is the public utility jeepney
(PUJ). The PUJ that is used in Cebu is mostly the multicab type, with an average capacity of
14 to 20 people. A variation of the PUJ—the Beep—has recently been introduced in the
area, which operates like a PUJ but uses a coaster‐like body and has an airconditioned
interior. It also has a high ceiling which then allows for standees and thus total capacity is
around 34 pax. There are no high‐capacity arterial routes operating within the Downtown
area. Buses are found just at the Study Area periphery. This is the MyBus route plying
between Mandaue and Talisay.
Other informal Public Transport modes like habal‐habal, pedicabs (pedal‐powered), and
motorized pedicabs are also available. Some kalesas can also still be found operating within
certain areas of the Downtown area, particularly in the area around Carbon Market. High
presence of informal modes is usually an indication of insufficiency of Public Transport
services.
Aside from these Public Transport modes, taxis are also available. Recently, ride‐hailing
services have been introduced in Cebu City, which includes Grab and Angkas.
Public utility jeepney Beep Habal‐habal
Pedal‐powered pedicab Motorized pedicab Kalesa
PLANADES
82
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 65 Formal and informal Public Transport modes available within the Downtown
Area
10.2. List of routes

Shown in Table 23 below is the list of routes entering the Study Area. Based on the
inventory, a total of 53 routes were identified. All except one are PUJ, with the lone
exception being the route Cebu City Hall – IT Park which is Beep.
Table 23 List of PUV routes entering and exiting the Study Area
Route Code Complete Route Name Mode Route Length
1 01B Sambag ‐ Pier 2 & 3 PUJ (ordinary) 9.0
2 01C Private ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary) 7.7
3 01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall PUJ (ordinary) 11.9
4 02A Sanciangko ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary) 6.9
5 02B SBT ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary) 11.0
6 03A Mabolo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 10.6
7 03G Mabolo ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 8.2
8 03L Mabolo (Luyo) ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 10.9
9 04C Lahug ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 15.6
10 04D Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 17.1
11 04H Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 16.8
12 04I Busay (Plaza Housing) ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 17.3
13 06A Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 13.0
14 06B Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 12.0
15 06C Guadalupe ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 11.9
16 06D Banawa ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 7.0
17 06F Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 11.5
18 07B Banawa ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 10.3
19 07D Banawa ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 10.3
20 08E Pasil ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) na
21 08F SM ‐ Alumnos PUJ (ordinary) 12.4
22 08G Alumnos ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 9.3
23 09C Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 10.7
24 09F Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 11.2
25 09G Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 10.8
26 10C Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 12.5
27 10E Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 13.2
28 10F Bulacao ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 13.4
29 10G Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 13.1
30 10H SM ‐ Pardo PUJ (ordinary) 22.2
31 10K Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 12.6
PLANADES
83
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Route Code Complete Route Name Mode Route Length

32 10M Pardo ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary) 18.9
33 11A Inayawan ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 14.8
34 11D Inayawan ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 15.0
35 12A Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 10.3
36 12B Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 9.1
37 12C Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 8.8
38 12E SM ‐ Labangon PUJ (ordinary) 16.9
39 12F Labangon ‐ Magallanes PUJ (ordinary) 10.5
40 12G Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary) 16.4
41 12I Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary) 19.0
42 12J Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary) 18.9
43 12M Labangon – Colon PUJ (ordinary) 9.9
44 13B Talamban ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 20.6
45 13C Talamban ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 20.2
46 62B Pit‐os ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 19.2
47 62C Talamban ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 20.3
48 14D Ayala ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary) 9.4
49 15 Oppra ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 9.4
50 17B Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 14.8
51 17C Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 16.2
52 17D Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary) 16.2
53 (none) IT Park ‐ City Hall Beep (aircon PUJ) na
^Route length info culled from ‘The Development of Public Transportation Strategic Plan for Metro Cebu’ Study (2011)
MC Briones is the road where majority of the routes traverse (32 out of 53 or 60.4%). The
next most traversed road is Mabini/P. Burgos with 28 (52.8%). Colon and Jakosalem are
the third‐highest with 23 apiece (43.4%).
Table 24 Count of Downtown roads where the routes traverse

Zonal Pairs Counts % of the 53 roads
Colon St 23 43.4%
Osmena Blvd 8 15.1%
V. Gullas St 19 35.8%
Magallanes St 17 32.1%
MC Briones 32 60.4%
P. Burgos/Mabini 28 52.8%
Jakosalem 23 43.4%
Legaspi St 18 34.0%
Junquera St 8 15.1%
Pelaez 6 11.3%
Lincoln St 5 9.4%
PLANADES
84
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Zonal Pairs Counts % of the 53 roads

F. Gonzalez 5 9.4%
Zulueta 5 9.4%
Urdaneta 3 5.7%
To understand the route coverage, the route ends were grouped according to their location
vis‐à‐vis the Downtown area. The grouping is shown in Table 25 with their locations shown
in map form in Figure 66.
Table 25 List of route ends per location vis‐à‐vis Downtown area

Downtown East West Northeast Northwest
Carbon Mabolo Alumnos Apas Banawa
City Hall Park Mall Basak Ayala Guadalupe
Colon Pier Bulacao IT Park Labangon
Magallanes SM (Cebu) Inayawan Lahug Private
Sanciangko Pardo Oppra Sambag
Pasil Pit‐os Urgello
SBT Plaza Housing
Talamban
PLANADES
85
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 66 Map showing locations of route ends of public transport routes

The route end with the highest number of counts is Carbon with 23, followed by Colon with
15. Labangon is third with 9, and SM Cebu is fourth with 8.
Table 26 Counts of instances of each route end

No Route End Zone Counts No Route End Zone Counts
1 Carbon Downtown 23 16 City Hall Downtown 1
2 Colon Downtown 15 17 Magallanes Downtown 1
3 Labangon Northwest 9 18 Park Mall East 1
4 SM (Cebu) East 8 19 Ayala Northeast 1
5 Pardo West 6 20 Bulacao West 1
6 Pier East 4 21 IT Park Northeast 1
7 Guadalupe Northwest 4 22 Lahug Northeast 1
8 Apas Northeast 3 23 Oppra Northeast 1
9 Banawa Northwest 3 24 Pasil West 1
PLANADES
86
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
No Route End Zone Counts No Route End Zone Counts

10 Basak West 3 25 Pit‐os Northeast 1
11 Mabolo East 3 26 Private Northwest 1
12 Plaza Housing Northeast 3 27 Sambag Northwest 1
13 Talamban Northeast 3 28 Sanciangko Downtown 1
14 Alumnos West 2 29 SBT West 1
15 Inayawan West 2
Shown in Table 27 is the count of zonal pairs of the route ends. Based on the list, the most
common zonal pair is Downtown‐Northeast with 17 counts, next is Downtown‐Northwest
with 12, and third is Downtown‐West with 11. There are 12 routes without any one of its
route end in the Downtown area. This basically means that there are 12 routes which just
pass through the Study Area, without doing their turn‐around here. This also means that
there are 41 routes which terminate within the Downtown area.
Table 27 Counts of combination of route end pairs

Zonal Pairs Counts
Downtown‐Northeast 17
Downtown‐Northwest 12
Downtown‐West 11
Northwest‐East 7
West‐East 5
Downtown‐East 1
Grand Total 53
10.3. Estimated Public Transport Volumes

Shown in Table 28 below is the estimated Public Transport volumes for each route. This
information was culled from surveys done for the ‘The Development of Public
Transportation Strategic Plan for Metro Cebu’ Study conducted in 2011.
The route with the greatest number of units is 04C Lahug – Carbon with 298 units, followed
by 13C Talamban – Colon with 280 units, then 01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall with 236 units.
The route with the greatest number of daily trips is 01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall with 850 daily
trips, followed by 08G Alumnos – Colon with 675 trips, then 13C Talamban – Colon with
647 trips.
The route with the highest daily pax is 01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall with 10.336 estimated pax
per day, followed by then 13C Talamban – Colon with 7,188 pax, then 08G Alumnos –
Colon with 6,521 pax.
PLANADES
87
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Daily Ave. Pax Estimated
Route Code Complete Route Name NOU NRT
Trips Load Daily Pax
1 01B Sambag ‐ Pier 2 & 3 82 4.3 350 8.30 2,905
2 01C Private ‐ Pier 88 5.1 449 5.15 2,312
3 01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall 236 3.6 850 12.16 10,336
4 02A Sanciangko ‐ Pier 17 6.9 118 6.41 756
5 02B SBT ‐ Pier 47 6.6 312 7.63 2,381
6 03A Mabolo ‐ Colon 148 2.2 324 7.27 2,355
7 03G Mabolo ‐ Carbon 44 2.0 86 7.17 617
8 03L Mabolo (Luyo) ‐ Carbon 123 2.9 358 7.51 2,689
9 04C Lahug ‐ Carbon 298 2.0 595 5.20 3,094
10 04D Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon 51 2.1 109 10.04 1,094
11 04H Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon 120 2.0 238 8.83 2,102
12 04I Busay (Plaza Housing) ‐ Carbon 6 2.2 13 19.90 259
13 06A Guadalupe ‐ Carbon 74 2.1 158 9.63 1,522
14 06B Guadalupe ‐ Carbon 175 2.2 384 8.42 3,233
15 06C Guadalupe ‐ Colon 139 3.5 488 8.46 4,128
16 06D Banawa ‐ Colon 42 4.7 199 7.66 1,524
17 06F Guadalupe ‐ Carbon 46 2.4 111 8.31 922
18 07B Banawa ‐ Carbon 83 4.6 379 10.21 3,870
19 07D Banawa ‐ Carbon 57 4.5 257 9.55 2,454
20 08E Pasil ‐ Colon NA NA NA NA NA
21 08F SM ‐ Alumnos 49 3.1 153 12.33 1,886
22 08G Alumnos ‐ Colon 156 4.3 675 9.66 6,521
23 09C Basak ‐ Colon 92 3.3 307 9.69 2,975
24 09F Basak ‐ Colon 82 2.9 239 9.77 2,335
25 09G Basak ‐ Colon 62 3.1 194 9.76 1,893
26 10C Pardo ‐ Colon 33 1.8 58 9.68 561
27 10E Pardo ‐ Colon 36 2.4 85 9.32 792
28 10F Bulacao ‐ Colon 156 2.7 416 9.84 4,093
29 10G Pardo ‐ Colon 63 6.1 384 9.71 3,729
30 10H SM ‐ Pardo 129 2.0 261 9.25 2,414
31 10K Pardo ‐ Colon 33 4.8 157 9.04 1,419
32 10M Pardo ‐ SM 53 2.7 142 9.35 1,328
33 11A Inayawan ‐ Colon 173 2.8 477 8.03 3,830
34 11D Inayawan ‐ Colon 54 2.0 109 9.98 1,088
35 12A Labangon ‐ Carbon 23 2.1 48 5.27 253
36 12B Labangon ‐ Carbon 37 3.4 124 6.91 857
37 12C Labangon ‐ Carbon 65 4.0 257 6.33 1,627
38 12E SM ‐ Labangon 16 3.1 49 6.61 324
39 12F Labangon ‐ Magallanes 65 5.3 343 7.52 2,579
PLANADES
88
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Daily Ave. Pax Estimated

Route Code Complete Route Name NOU NRT
Trips Load Daily Pax
40 12G Labangon ‐ SM 58 1.4 82 6.46 530
41 12I Labangon ‐ SM 94 4.1 384 6.51 2,500
42 12J Labangon ‐ SM 32 4.3 136 6.45 877
43 12M Labangon – Colon 9 2.9 26 6.88 179
44 13B Talamban ‐ Colon 46 2.4 109 8.72 950
45 13C Talamban ‐ Colon 289 2.2 647 11.11 7,188
46 62B Pit‐os ‐ Carbon 134 2.2 295 11.31 3,336
47 62C Talamban ‐ Carbon 98 2.9 281 8.98 2,523
48 14D Ayala ‐ Colon 143 4.0 568 7.68 4,362
49 15 Oppra ‐ Carbon 66 4.0 212 8.36 1,772
50 17B Apas ‐ Carbon 188 2.6 492 8.49 4,177
51 17C Apas ‐ Carbon 101 2.0 203 6.38 1,295
52 17D Apas ‐ Carbon 70 2.5 172 6.08 1,046
53 (none) IT Park ‐ City Hall NA NA NA NA NA
Legend: NOU = number of operating units. NRT = number of round trips
Source: ‘The Development of Public Transportation Strategic Plan for Metro Cebu’ Study (2011)
All in all, 3 out of the top 5 highest pax volumes are for routes between Downtown and the
Northeast zone. Thus, routes for the zonal pair Downtown‐Northeast have the highest
combined pax volumes at 33,200. The next highest is Downtown‐Northwest with 23,149.
The total estimated pax volume for all the routes is around 120,000. It should be noted
that these volumes are from the year 2011, and still does not yet include some new routes
(i.e. IT Park – City Hall), so it may be possible current volumes may increase.
PLANADES
89
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 29 Estimated Public Transport Volumes per PT corridor

Zonal Pairs Counts
Downtown‐Northeast 33,200
Downtown‐Northwest 23,149
Downtown‐West 22,716
Northwest‐East 19,784
West‐East 14,530
Downtown‐East 6,417
Grand Total 119,795
Culled also from the same study is the estimated volume per street section. Shown below
in are the estimated PUJ passenger volumes for some of the major streets within the
Downtown area.
Table 30 Estimated pax volumes for some road sections within Downtown area
12‐ 12‐ 12‐ 12‐
Street From To hour hour From To hour hour
PUV Pax PUV Pax
Osmena Sanciangko Colon 3,302 21,414 Colon Sanciangko 2,885 23,922
Colon Osmena Pelaez 3,614 30,833 Pelaez Osmena 2,771 13,277

Pelaez Junquera 3,614 31,845 Junquera Pelaez 3,375 20,389
Junquera Jakosalem 5,231 34,525 Jakosalem Junquera 2,959 17,949
Jakosalem Mabini 4,995 44,739 Mabini Jakosalem 1,019 5,363
Magallanes F. Gonzalez Jakosalem 1,717 10,735 Jakosalem F. Gonzalez 1,082 4,328
MC Briones F. Gonzalez Jakosalem 5,858 34,478

Jakosalem P. Burgos 5,299 24,311
P. Burgos MJ Cuenco 7,192 35,485 MJ Cuenco P. Burgos 118 590
V. Gullas Mabini Jakosalem 3,337 32,645

Jakosalem Legaspi 2,888 30,444
Legaspi Osmena 3,751 27,680
Osmena Magallanes 3,530 19,806

Source: ‘The Development of Public Transportation Strategic Plan for Metro Cebu’ Study (2011)
The road section with the top 3 highest recorded PUV volume is along MC Briones, with
the section of MC Briones between P. Burgos and MJ Cuenco (in front of La Nueva
Supermarket) having the highest volume at 7,192 vehicles. For Colon St, the highest
vehicular volume is between Junquera and Jakosalem with 5,231 vehicles. All in all,
volumes for the road sections in Colon range between 3,600 to 5,200. Comparing the two
PLANADES
90
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
directions along Colon St, the vehicular volumes going east is higher than those going to
the west.
In terms of passenger volumes, the section with the highest pax volume is the section of
Colon St between Jakosalem and Mabini St with around 45,000 estimated pax. All in all,
estimated pax volumes along Colon St range between 31,000 to 45,000 pax. MC Briones
has the second‐highest pax volumes ranging between 24,000 to 36,000 pax.
Based on this information, it can be seen that Colon St and MC Briones carry heavy Public
Transport vehicular and pax volumes. This should be taken into account when deciding
which road sections to close off for pedestrianization.
10.4. Public Transport Facilities

There are no formal off‐street terminals within the Downtown area. The closest off‐street
terminal to the Downtown Area is the Cebu South Bus Terminal along N. Bacalso Road
about 500 meters from the western edge. The South Bus Terminal hosts bus routes going
to the southern part of Cebu province.
All of the Public Transport routes operating within the Downtown Area just use the streets
as their de facto terminal and loading/unloading area. Since a majority the routes do their
turn‐around within the Downtown Area, the passengers often congregate at areas where
the routes overlap to transfer from one route to the other. In addition, some habal‐habal
riders use some street sections as their pick‐up point.
Figure 67 Passengers congregating along F. Urdaneta St to transfer in between PUJ routes
The lack of Public Transport facilities within the Downtown Area is a major issue, given the
Public Transport volumes and the number of routes that operate within the Downtown
Area. The lack of off‐street terminals means that the PUV use the road as their terminal
space, which can cause serious traffic congestion.
PLANADES
91
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10.5.1. Routes and modes

 All of the Public Transport routes within the Downtown area are jeepneys, which are
low capacity modes. As of now, there is no arterial high‐capacity modes serving the
Downtown area.
 The roads where most of the PUV routes traverse are MC Briones (32 routes), P.
Burgos/Mabini (28), Colon St (23) and Jakosalem (23).
 Many informal modes also operate within the Downtown area, which is usually an
indication of insufficiency of Public Transport services.
 MC Briones and P. Burgos have the highest number of routes passing through it.
10.5.2. Passenger Volumes

 Colon St have the highest pax volumes ranging between 31,000 to 45,000 pax, with MC
Briones have the second‐highest, ranging between 24,000 to 36,000 pax.
 Routes running between Downtown and the Northeast area have the highest combined
pax volumes at 33,200 pax, followed by routes between Downtown to the Northwest
with around 23,149 pax.
10.5.3. Public Transport Facilities

 There are no formal off‐street terminals within the Downtown area. Passengers use the
streets as their de facto terminal to transfer to other routes.
PLANADES
92
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11. Pedestrian Interviews Profiling
The discussion below highlights the relevant portions of the Pedestrian Interviews that have direct
inventory results can be found in Appendix CC.
11.1.Summary of samples
A total of 2,008 samples were obtained. The breakdown per street is shown in Figure 68.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Colon 308
Osmena Blvd 249
Legaspi 220
V. Gullas 220
P. Burgos 242
Mabini 30
Jakosalem 210
F. Gonzales 130
MC Briones 99
Magallanes 30
Quezon Blvd. 100
Balintawak 40
Manalili 30
Plaridel Ext. 30
Sikatuna 30
Urdaneta 40
Figure 68 Number of samples obtained per street
PLANADES
93
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 69 Number of samples obtained per lot
11.2. General profile of respondents
11.2.1. Occupation
Most of the interviewed respondents are workers, with 889 out of 1,985 respondents
(44.8%). Next are students (310, or 15.6%), then unemployed (264, 13.3%). Those with
their own business or self‐employed respondents have a combined number of 241 (12.1%).
Generally speaking, unemployed people have lower probabilities to purchase any goods or
services, so the relatively high share of ‘unemployed’ people is something to note.
PLANADES
94
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Worker 889
Own bus. + Self‐employed 241
Part‐time/ OJT 41
Student 310
Unemployed 264
Housewife 198
Others 42
Figure 70 Breakdown of occupations of respondents
Shown in Figure 71 is the share of occupation per street where the respondent was
interviewed.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 43.3% 8.9% 14.1% 19.7% 10.5%
Osmena Blvd 33.6% 11.3% 18.2% 9.3% 22.7%
Legaspi 55.5% 20.0% 10.0% 7.3%

Worker
V. Gullas 54.6% 7.8% 14.2% 16.1%
Own bus. + Self‐employed
P. Burgos 48.9% 10.5% 18.1% 11.0% 6.3%
Part‐time/ OJT
Mabini 21.4% 14.3% 17.9% 10.7% 25.0% Student
Jakosalem 36.4% 4.8% 33.5% 14.4% 6.2% Unemployed
F. Gonzales 37.7% 23.8% 7.7% 18.5% 5.4% Housewife

Others
MC Briones 42.9% 25.5% 4.1% 9.2% 11.2%
Magallanes 43.3% 10.0% 36.7%
All minor… 49.8% 10.3% 13.7% 14.1% 10.6%
All Streets 44.8% 12.1% 15.6% 13.3% 10.0%
Figure 71 Breakdown of occupation of respondents per street
PLANADES
95
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
In terms of breakdown of occupations per street, Legaspi and V. Gullas have the highest share
of workers with 55.5% and 54.6% respectively, followed by P. Burgos at 48.9%.
MC Briones and F. Gonzales, which are both on the southern side of the Study Area, have the
highest shares of self‐employed/own‐business respondents with 25.5% and 23.8%
respectively. These self‐employed/own business respondents are most likely small‐time
vendors who have their own stalls that go to Carbon Market to purchase their goods
wholesale.
Jakosalem have the highest share of students with 33.5%. This is likely because the two major
schools in the Study Area—University of the Visayas and Colegio de Santo Nino—are on the
eastern side of the Study Area and is connected by Jakosalem St. This would indicate that
student‐related businesses can be best located along this corridor. This would include
inexpensive food &beverage shops, office supplies, printing services, and dormitories.
Magallanes have the highest share of housewives with 36.7%, followed by Mabini (25.0%) and
Osmena Blvd (22.7%).
Colon has the highest share of unemployed with 19.7%, followed F. Gonzales with 18.5%.
Since Colon is the main commercial artery in the Study Area, the high incidence of unemployed
respondents in Colon can be an issue in terms of the economic vitality in the area, since
unemployed people are less likely to purchase goods or services.
PLANADES
96
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.Trip characteristics of respondents
11.3.1. Zoning used for this study
11.3.1.1. Macro‐level zoning of Cebu

Shown in Table 31 is the zoning used for this Study. The zoning was based
on similarity of land uses, access roads and general nature of the area.
Table 31 Macro‐level zoning used for this Study

Zone Name Sub‐zone name Included barangays/cities/areas
1. DOWNTOWN Downtown Ermita Pari‐an
Kalubihan San Roque
Kamagayan Santo Nino
Pahina Central Tinago
2. West CC West of Downtown Duljo Fatima Suba
(West of Cebu Centro) Pahina San Nicolas San Nicolas Central
Pasil San Nicolas
San Nicolas Proper SRP
Sawang Calero
Pardo Area Basak Pardo Mambaling
Basak San Nicolas Poblacion Pardo
Bulacao Quiot
Cogon Pardo Pardo
Inayawan Alumnos
Kinasang‐an Basak San Nicolas
3. UPTOWN Mabolo Area Capitol Site Kamputhaw Luz
Carreta Mabolo Pier
Hipodromo Pier
Ramos Area Cogon Ramos San Antonio
Day‐as Santa Cruz
Lorega San Miguel T. Padilla
Sambag I Tejero
Sambag II Zapatera
Tisa Area Calamba Punta Princesa
Guadalupe Tisa
Labangon Banawa
Talamban Area Apas Lahug
Banilad Talamban
Kasambagan Oppra
4. UPLANDS NW Cebu City Bonbon Sinsin
Buhisan Sudlon
Buot‐Taop Sudlon I
Pamutan Sudlon II
Sapangdaku Toong
NE Cebu City Adlaon Paril
PLANADES
97
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

Agsungot Pit‐os
Bacayan Pulangbato
Binaliw San Jose
Budlaan Sirao
Busay Taptap
Cambinocot Babag
Guba Kalunasan
Lusaran Pung‐ol Sibugay
Mabini Tabunan
Malubog Tag‐bao
5. CEBU NORTH Metro Cebu North Compostela Consolacion
Danao Mandaue
Liloan
Cebu Province North Tuburan Santa Fe
Bantayan Tabogon
Bogo Tabuelan
Daanbantayan Borbon
Madridejos Carmen
Medellin Catmon
San Remigio Sogod
6. CEBU SOUTH Metro Cebu South Carcar San Fernando
Minglanilla Talisay
Naga
Cebu Province South Sibonga Barili
Alcoy Alcantara
Argao Alegria
Boljoon Badian
Dalaguete Dumanjug
Oslob Ginatilan
Samboan Malabuyoc
Santander Moalboal
Ronda
7. MACTAN ISLAND Mactan Island Cordova Lapu‐Lapu
8. CEBU WEST Cebu West Aloguinsan Pinamungajan
Asturias Toledo
Balamban
9. OTHERS Others Manila Butuan
Bohol Siquijor
Bacolod Lanao
Negros Gen. Santos
Leyte Cagayan
PLANADES
98
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 72 OD zoning map for Cebu City
PLANADES
99
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 73 OD zoning map for Cebu province
PLANADES
100
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.1.2. Zoning of Study Area

Shown in Figure 74 is the zoning used for the Study Area itself. The zoning
was based on geographic location, similarity of land uses and access roads.
The red portion on the north has Colon St as its main artery and is mostly
commercial retail in nature. The yellow portion in the middle has Osmena
Blvd and Legaspi St as its main backbone. Compared to the commercial
retail nature in the red portion, the yellow portion is more commercial
wholesale in nature, and is characterized by the presence of many
industrial‐type businesses (e.g. hardware, electronics). The blue portion on
the east is bounded by Jakosalem on the left side and P. Burgos on the right
side. This area is dominated by institutional uses (e.g. churches, schools,
government buildings). The green portion on the south is dominated by
businesses related to raw agricultural products (e.g. fruits, vegetables).
Figure 74 Zoning of blocks within the Study Area
PLANADES
101
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.2. Trip origins and destinations
11.3.2.1. Origin Zones

The origin zone is the place where the respondents came before arriving
at the downtown area. Shown in Figure 75 below is the breakdown of the
trip origin of the respondents by each downtown (DT) zone.
A good majority of the respondents (39.2%) came from the Uptown areas.
This would include areas like Mabolo, Ramos, Tisa and Talamban, etc. For
each Downtown zone, all areas have Uptown as its highest share of trip
origin. Respondents coming from the Dowtown area itself are significantly
fewer (17.6%). The low share means that a greater majority of the
pedestrians in the Downtown area came from outside. Relating this to the
land use data, this is mainly due to the low shares of residential uses within
Downtown.
Overall, the top three origin zones of the respondents (Uptown,

Downtown, and West CC) are within 8 kilometers from the Study Area,
which is within the normal catchment radius of commercial
establishments.
Of small note is DT South which has the highest shares of Cebu North (17%)
and Cebu South (11%). DT South is where wholesale agricultural products
dealers are located and is the area closest to Carbon Market. This could
mean that the pedestrians in the DT south area are from outside of Cebu
City and go here to buy their goods wholesale.
DT North DT Central DT East DT South All Samples

100%
8.4% 8.0% 6.3% 7.8%
90% 11.1%
9.3% 8.8% 10.6% 10.5% Others
80%
16.9% Cebu West
70% Cebu South
60% Cebu North

35.7%
42.2% 39.8% Mactan Island
42.9%
50%
Uplands
30.0%
40% Uptown
18.0% West CC
30%
17.8% 14.9% 16.5% Downtown
9.7%
20%
10% 23.9%
16.3% 16.6% 17.9% 17.6%
0%
Figure 75 Distribution of trip origin zones of respondents per Study Area zone
PLANADES
102
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.2.2. Destination Zones

Shown in Figure 76 below is the breakdown of the trip destination of the
respondents by each downtown zone. The destination zone is the place
where the respondents will go to after passing by the downtown area.
Overall, the Uptown area has the highest share of destination zones at
39.1%, followed by Downtown (22.5%), then West of Cebu Centro (15.9%).
Among the four downtown zones, DT North has the highest share of
Downtown as its destination with 24.9%.
As with the trip origin zone, DT South has the highest share of Cebu North
and Cebu South. Again, this reinforces the surmise that a good portion of
the pedestrians in the DT South zone are from outside of Cebu City and go
here to buy their goods wholesale.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DT North 24.9% 15.6% 40.3% 7.6% Down town

West CC
DT Central Uptown
19.4% 18.5% 44.0% 6.5%
Uplands
Mactan Island
DT East 22.4% 14.2% 41.7% 9.6%
Cebu North
Cebu South
DT South 22.1% 12.7% 26.0% 15.2% Cebu West
Others
All Zones 22.7% 15.3% 39.9% 8.9%
Figure 76 Distribution of destination zone of respondents per block zone
11.3.2.3. Origin‐Destination Matrix

Shown in Table 32 below is the origin and destination zone matrix of the
respondents. The values in the cells have been normalized to 1,000 for
easier comparison across the cells.
The cell with the highest value is the pair of Uptown‐Uptown (305 over
1000), followed by West CC‐West CC (102 over 1000) and then Downtown‐
Downtown (102 over 1000).
PLANADES
103
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 32 Origin‐destination zone matrix of the respondents

Down West Mactan Cebu Cebu Cebu
Uptown Uplands Others TOTAL
town CC Island North South West
Downtown 102 13 47 2 2 7 2 1 1 175
West CC 23 125 11 1 0 3 2 0 1 164
Uptown 56 12 305 4 3 8 5 0 2 393
Uplands 5 0 4 22 0 0 1 0 0 31
Mactan
5 0 3 2 23 2 1 0 0 34
Island
Cebu North 20 2 11 0 0 69 1 1 2 106
Cebu South 11 6 9 0 1 1 50 0 1 78
Cebu West 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 4 1 9
Others 3 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 5 9
TOTAL 225 157 392 29 29 91 62 5 10 1000
Shown in Table 33 below is the count of respondents who have the same
origin and destination zone. Having the same origin and destination zone
means that the zone where the respondents came from prior to the
Downtown area and where they will proceed after the Downtown area is
the same. The high share of same origin‐destination (1325 out of 2008)
means that the respondents really have a trip purpose within the
Downtown area and do not just use it as a pass‐through or transfer point
to get to other areas.
Table 33 Count of same origin and destination zones of respondents

Same O & D zone? Count
Same 1325
No 683
TOTAL 2008
11.3.1. Establishments visited by the respondents

Show in Figure 77 below is the breakdown of the type of establishments visited by the
respondents. ‘Food’‐type establishments are the most frequented type visited by the
respondents (336 samples), followed by ‘Malls’ (317) and ‘General merchandise’ (264). All
these top three types of establishments can generally be considered to be compatible with
a pedestrianization project (as compared to say construction or industrial types).
PLANADES
104
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0 100 200 300 400
Construction 105
Electronics 116
Financial 139
Food 336
Gen. Merch. 264
Hotels 39
Industrial 75
Logistics 21
Mall 317
Museums/public 61
Offices 201
Personal 73
Religious 74
Residences 19
Schools 41
Others 28
Figure 77 Breakdown of type of establishment visited by the respondents
Shown in Figure 78 is the breakdown of the Downtown zone of the establishment.

Establishments on the eastern side have the highest share of samples (693), followed by
the northern side (659). This would indicate that the areas with heavier pedestrian volumes
are on these two sides.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
North 659
Central 342
East 693
South 206
Figure 78 Breakdown of zone of establishment visited by the respondents
11.3.2. Trip purposes
11.3.2.1. Trip purpose at origin and destination

Shown in Figure 79 and Figure 80 below are the distribution of trip
purposes at the origin and destination zone of the respondents
PLANADES
105
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
respectively. The overwhelming majority of the trip purposes at both zones

is ‘home’, with ‘work’ being a far second.
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500
Home 1494 Home 1366
Work 191 Work 183
Business 27 Business 32
School 71 School 49
Shopping 36 Shopping 104
Food/drinks 14 Food/drinks 22
Errands 68 Errands 93
Health/beauty 2 Health/beauty 2
Accompany/ Fetch 2 Accompany/ Fetch 4
Social 47 Social 79
Rec/Leisure 4 Rec/Leisure 6
Church 39 Church 30
Others 2 Others 4
Figure 79 Trip purpose of respondents at Figure 80 Trip purpose of respondents at

origin zone destination zone
PLANADES
106
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.2.2. Trip purpose at establishment visited

Shown in Figure 81 below is the breakdown of the trip purpose of the
respondents at the establishment that they visited.
In terms of generating consistent foot traffic for the establishments, the

ideal trip purposes should be more regular in nature, like home, work and
school. But based on the responses, the top trip purposes of the
respondents at the establishment visited are non‐regular in nature.
The highest share of the trip purpose (484 out of 1988, or 24.3%) is
‘errands’, with the second‐highest being ‘shopping’ (391 out of 1988, or
19.7%). These top two trip purpose are considered to be non‐regular tasks.
‘Work’ is just ranked third (285 out of 1988, or 14.3%). ‘Home’ is just a
measly 0.8%, which again highlights the lack of residential areas within the
Study Area. This underscores the need to introduce new land uses or
establishments that can establish more regular trip patterns which are
critical to generate consistent foot traffic for the establishments. This may
include introducing residential‐type land uses.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Home 15
Work 285
Business 171
School 41
Shopping 391
Food/drinks 256
Errands 484
Health/beauty 17
Accompany/ Fetch 21
Social 225
Rec/Leisure 32
Church 29
Others 21
Figure 81 Trip purpose of respondents at establishment visited
PLANADES
107
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.3. Access and egress modes
11.3.3.1. Overall access and egress modes

Shown in Figure 82 below is the breakdown of the access mode by the
respondents, while the breakdown of the egress mode going to their
destinations is shown in Figure 83. Quasi‐PT here refers to informal public
transport options that are not currently being regulated by the
government. Examples are habal‐habal, pedicabs and the like.
Based on both of these graphs, it can be clearly seen that the great majority
of the respondents use public transport. This underscores the need for a
public transport plan to compliment the pedestrianization program.
It can also be noted that the NMT counts are very low. NMT is non‐
motorized transport and includes walking and bicycling. Low NMT suggests
that there is very few interactions between the establishments within the
Downtown area.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Private 312
PT 1408
PT, private 13
Quasi‐PT 27
NMT 243
Figure 82 Access mode of respondents
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Private 309
PT 1353
PT, private 30
Quasi‐PT 22
NMT 285
Figure 83 Egress mode of respondents
PLANADES
108
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.3.2. Access and egress modes by trip purpose

Shown in Figure 84 below is the count of the access mode by the
respondents according to the trip purpose at the establishment that they
visited.
As a whole, all except one trip purposes have Public Transport as their main
mode of transport. The lone exception is ‘home’, with NMT as its highest
share. The caveat here is that there were only a few samples of
respondents with ‘home’ as their trip purpose (15 samples).
Individually, the trip purpose with the highest share of private modes is
‘accompany/fetch’ with 28.6%, followed by ‘business’ with 24.0%.
Excluding “home” trips, the trip purpose with the highest share of NMT is
‘food/drinks’ with 26.2%.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Home 40.0% 60.0%
Work 17.9% 71.6% 9.5%
Business 24.0% 65.5% 9.4%
School 95.1% 4.9%
Shopping 16.9% 70.6% 11.3%

Private
Food/drinks 7.4% 63.3% 26.2% PT
Errands 19.2% 68.2% 9.3% PT, private
Health/beauty 11.8% 82.4% 5.9% Quasi‐PT

NMT
Accompany/ Fetch 28.6% 57.1% 14.3%
Social 11.1% 76.9% 9.3%
Rec/Leisure 9.4% 84.4% 6.3%
Church 10.3% 89.7%
Others 14.3% 71.4% 14.3%
ALL PURPOSES 15.7% 70.2% 12.1%
Figure 84 Access modes of respondents per trip purpose at establishment
PLANADES
109
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.3.3. Access and egress modes by type of establishment visited

respondents according to the type of the establishment that they visited.
‘Industrial’ and ‘construction’‐type establishments have the highest share

of private modes among all types (30.7% and 29.5% respectively).
‘Logistics’ and ‘financial’‐type establishments have the next highest shares
(23.8% and 23.0% respectively).
Excluding ‘Residences’, ‘food’ and ‘general merchandise’ have the highest

share of NMT (17.9% and 17.4% respectively).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Construction 29.5% 61.9% 7.6%
Electronics 20.7% 65.5% 13.8%
Financial 23.0% 59.0% 15.1%
Food 9.2% 69.3% 17.9%
Gen. Merch. 14.0% 66.7% 17.4%
Hotels 7.7% 82.1% 7.7%
Industrial 30.7% 54.7% 12.0% Private
Logistics 23.8% 76.2% PT

PT, private
Mall 13.2% 75.7% 9.5%
Quasi‐PT
Museums/public 18.0% 70.5% 9.8% NMT
Offices 16.9% 75.1% 6.5%
Personal 13.7% 74.0% 9.6%
Religious 10.8% 81.1% 8.1%
Residences 10.5% 52.6% 36.8%
Schools 9.8% 85.4% 4.9%
Others 7.1% 92.9%
ALL ESTABLISHMENTS 15.7% 70.2% 12.3%
Figure 85 Access mode of respondents per type of establishment visited
PLANADES
110
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.3.4. Access and egress modes by origin zone

Shown in Figure 86 below is the count of the access mode by trip origin
zone of the respondent.
Mactan Island has the highest share of private modes (29.4%). Cebu North
has the next highest share (19.6%), then Uptown (18.3%) and Cebu South
(18.1%).
Downtown has the highest share of NMT (57.5%). It is also interesting to

note that despite the Downtown area being easily walkable from end to
end, there is still 31.1% of the respondents who chose to use Public
Transport.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Downtown 8.8% 31.1% 57.5%
West CC 11.6% 87.5%
Uptown 18.3% 76.1%

Private
Uplands 11.5% 85.2%
PT
Mactan Island 29.4% 67.6% PT, private
Quasi‐PT
Cebu North 19.6% 76.6%
NMT
Cebu South 18.1% 78.1%
Cebu West 5.3% 94.7%
Others 15.8% 73.7% 10.5%
ALL ZONES 15.6% 70.4%
Figure 86 Access mode of respondents per trip origin zone
PLANADES
111
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4. Frequency of trip
11.3.4.1. Overall trip frequency

Shown in Figure 87 below is the breakdown of frequency of trips to the
establishments by the respondents.
Regular frequency (4‐7x a week) have highest share (644/1995 or 32.3%)
Rare/infrequent have the second‐highest share (422/1995 or 21.2%).

When combined with the ‘1‐3x a month’ and ‘first time’ responses, the
overall share of irregular trips is almost half of the entire respondents.
Having half of the trips as irregular trips is not that ideal to generate
consistent foot traffic for the establishments.
This underscores that the existing land uses within the Downtown Area are
not able to generate high pedestrian traffic on a day‐to‐day basis.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
4‐7x a week 644
1‐3x a week 396
1‐3x a month 405
First time 128
Rare/Infreq. 422
Figure 87 Frequency of trip by respondents
PLANADES
112
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4.2. Trip frequency by occupation

Shown in Figure 88 below is the computed average frequency of trips of
the respondents per month according to occupation.
‘Workers’ have the highest frequency at an average of 12.5 trips per

month, followed by those with ‘own businesses’ and ‘self‐employed’ at
11.9 and 11.3 trips per month respectively.
The ones with the lowest frequency is ‘housewife’ with 4.1 trips per month,
and ‘unemployed’ with 5.2 trips per month.
Interestingly, none of these occupations have frequencies that reach even

half of the month.
0 7 14 21 28
Worker 12.5
Own bus./co. 11.9
Self‐employed 11.3
Part‐time/OJT 8.6
Student 9.0
Unemployed 5.2
Housewife 4.1
Others 6.7
ALL OCCUPATIONS 9.9
Figure 88 Frequency of trip by respondents by occupation
PLANADES
113
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4.3. Trip frequency by street of establishment

Shown in Figure 89 below is the computed average frequency of trips per
month according to the street of the establishment visited by the
respondent.
Respondents who visit the establishments at Legaspi St have the highest

frequency at an average of 14.7 trips per month, followed by V. Gullas
(12.2), Magallanes (11.4) and P. Burgos (11.3).
The ones with the lowest frequency are for Mabini (5.7), F. Gonzalez (6.4)
and Jakosalem (6.9).
0 7 14 21 28
Colon 8.6
Osmena Blvd 9.8
Legaspi 14.7
V. Gullas 12.2
P. Burgos 11.3
Mabini 5.7
Jakosalem 6.9
F. Gonzales 6.4
MC Briones 9.5
Magallanes 11.4
All minor streets 7.8
All Streets 9.8
Figure 89 Frequency of trip by respondents by street of establishment visited
PLANADES
114
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4.4. Trip frequency by type of establishment

month according to the type of the establishment.
Respondents with ‘schools’ as their destination have the highest frequency

at an average of 15.3 trips per month, follow by ‘residences’ at 13.7, then
‘hotels’ at 13.5. As mentioned in the previous sections, trips to/from home,
schools and work are the more regular trips and is reflected by this.
Respondents with ‘museums’ as their destination have the lowest

frequency an average of 4.5 trips per month, for obvious reasons. Next
lowest is ‘general merchandise’ with 8.2, then ‘electronics’ at 8.5. These
latter two can be considered as shopping trips, which can be considered as
semi‐regular trips.
0 7 14 21 28
Construction 11.8
Electronics 8.5
Financial 9.5
Food 9.0
Gen. Merch. 8.2
Hotels 13.5
Industrial 10.4
Logistics 10.9
Mall 10.5
Museums/public 4.5
Offices 9.2
Personal 10.2
Religious 9.4
Residences 13.7
Schools 15.3
Others 8.7
AVERAGE 9.6
Figure 90 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by type of

establishment visited
PLANADES
115
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4.5. Trip frequency by purpose at establishment

month according to the trip purpose at the establishment.
The three trip purposes of ‘home’, ‘work’ and ‘school’ are considered to be
the more regular kind of trips and this is proven with these results as they
have the top three highest average frequencies. ‘Work’ has an average of
21 trips per month, followed by ‘home’ with 17.1, then ‘school’ at 16.3.
The trip purpose with the lowest frequency is ‘health/beauty’ with 2.6 trips
per month, followed by ‘errands’ at 5.8 and ‘shopping’ at 6.0. All of these
are considered to be irregular trips.
0 7 14 21 28
Home 17.1
Work 21.0
Business 14.3
School 16.3
Shopping 6.0
Food/drinks 8.4
Errands 5.8
Health/beauty 2.6
Accompany/ Fetch 6.7
Social 8.1
Rec/Leisure 7.8
Church 6.6
Others 15.8
AVERAGE 9.8
Figure 91 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by trip purpose

at establishment visited
PLANADES
116
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.3.4.6. Trip frequency by trip origin of respondent

month according to the trip origin of the respondent.
Those coming from West of Cebu Centro (West CC) have the highest
average frequency at an average of 11.4 trips per month, followed by
Downtown at 10.3, then Uptown at 9.9.
Those coming from Mactan Island have the lowest average frequencies at
6.7 per month. The long travel time, plus the need to transfer at least one
more ride, between Mactan Island and Downtown prevents people from
making these trips more regular.
0 7 14 21 28
Downtown 10.3
West CC 11.4
Uptown 9.9
Uplands 9.2
Mactan Island 6.7
Cebu North 9.0
Cebu South 8.2
Cebu West 8.2
Others 2.2
AVERAGE 9.8
Figure 92 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by origin zone of

respondent
PLANADES
117
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.4.Incidences of safety and security issues in the area

Shown in Figure 93 below is the breakdown of safety and security incidences by the
respondents according to occupation.
In general, there were about 8% of the respondents who reported experiencing some form
of safety and security issues. This includes, among others, snatching, hold‐up, harassment,
and being side‐swept by vehicles.
Among the different occupations, the ‘self‐employed’ and those with ‘own businesses’
have the highest reported incidences of safety and security (14.7% and 11.5%).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Worker 8.7% 91.3%
Own bus./co. 11.5% 88.5%
Self‐employed 14.7% 85.3%

Yes
Part‐time/OJT 4.9% 95.1%
No
Student 6.5% 93.5%
Unemployed 5.3% 94.7%
Housewife 4.1% 95.9%
Others 100.0%
TOTAL 7.7% 92.3%
Figure 93 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by occupation
PLANADES
118
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.5. User preferences
11.5.1. Preference of priority areas to increase trip frequency to the area

Shown in Figure 94 below is the count of answers per improvement aspect according to
the 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice and 4th choice of the respondents.
‘Safety and security’ overwhelmingly got the most number of 1st choices among the four
priority areas of improvement, with 1092 out of 1976 (55.3%). ‘Urban environment aspects’
got the second‐highest share, with 513 out of 1964 (26.0%). ‘Physical improvements’ got
the third‐highest share, with 304 out of 1963 (15.4%). Last is ‘new shops’, with 67 out of
1964 (3.4%).
These results are consistent with the sentiments expressed by the participants during the
Focus Group Discussion that they are more concerned with ‘safety/security’ and ‘urban
environmental’ issues (e.g. flooding, waste, etc) rather than the actual improvement of the
pedestrian facilities itself.
2000
38 118
270 251
1500 681
570
774
1557
4th choice
1000 3rd choice
657 2nd choice
1st choice
635
500 1092
513 239
304 101
0 67
Safety & Physical Urban Envi New shops
Security Improvements
Figure 94 Count of 1st to 4th choices of respondents per improvement aspects
PLANADES
119
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
The above choices were then assigned scores to reflect the relative weight of each
improvement aspect with one another. The maximum score is four, since there are four
improvement aspect choices. If an improvement aspect was chosen as the first priority, it
got a score of “4”; if second priority, then a score of “3” and so on.
Shown in Figure 95 below is the average weighted score of each improvement aspect
according to the street of the establishment that the respondent visited.
All except one of the streets have ‘safety and security’ as its highest score. The lone
exception is Legaspi St which have ‘urban environment’ as its highest score. Relating this
to the information about Legaspi St from the Land Use Inventory, this may be mainly
because Legaspi St is prone to flooding.
Colon 3.44 2.48 2.69 1.40
Osmena Blvd 3.33 2.19 2.91 1.57
Legaspi 2.98 2.28 3.37 1.39
V. Gullas 3.51 2.39 2.70 1.42
P. Burgos 3.27 2.43 3.05 1.26

Safety & Security
Mabini 3.83 2.10 3.07 1.00 Physical Improvements
Urban Envi
Jakosalem 3.69 2.44 2.57 1.28
New shops
F. Gonzales 3.20 3.02 2.55 1.23
MC Briones 3.23 3.10 2.68 1.03
Magallanes 3.67 2.90 2.27 1.17
All minor streets 3.47 2.77 2.57 1.19
All Streets 3.38 2.51 2.79 1.33
Figure 95 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by street of establishment

visited
11.6.1. General profile

 Most of the interviewed people are workers.
 Respondents have a relatively high share of ‘unemployed’, which is not considered to
have high good purchasing power.
PLANADES
120
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11.6.2. Trip characteristics

 The top trip purposes of the respondents are non‐regular (meaning they do not repeat
regularly) in nature. The highest share of the trip purpose (484 out of 1988, or 24.3%) is
errands, with the second‐highest being shopping (391 out of 1988, or 19.7%). These top
two trip purpose are considered to be non‐regular tasks. Work is just third (285 out of
1988, or 14.3%).
 Those that have high monthly frequencies of trips to the Downtown Area have school
(21.0 trips/month), home (17.1 trips/month) and work (16.3 trips/month) as their main
purpose in the establishment.
 Most of the respondents are public transport users. Respondents with ‘food’ as their
trip purpose have the highest share of NMT as a mode (26.5%).
11.6.3. Origins and destinations

 A majority of the respondents (39.2%) came from the Uptown areas, specifically Mabolo,
Ramos, Tisa and Talamban.
 Respondents coming from the Dowtown area itself are significantly fewer (17.6%). The
low share means that most of the pedestrians found in the Downtown area are from
outside.
 Overall, the top three origin zones of the respondents are within 8 kilometers from the
Study Area, which is within the normal catchment radius of commercial establishments.
 ‘Food’‐type establishments are the most frequented type visited by the respondents
(336 samples), followed by ‘malls’ (317 samples) and ‘general merchandise’ (264
samples). All these three types of establishments are generally considered to be
compatible with a pedestrianization project (as compared to say ‘construction’ or
‘industrial’ types).
 In terms of destination within the Downtown, establishments on the eastern side of
Downtown have the highest share of samples (693), followed by the northern side (659).
This would indicate that the areas with heavier pedestrian volumes are on these two
sides.
11.6.4. Preferences of improvements

 ‘Safety and security’ is the most preferred improvement aspect of the respondents, with
‘urban environment’ being the second. ‘Physical imporovements’ to the sidewalks is just
the thirdmost preferred aspect, with ‘new shops/activities’ being the last.
PLANADES
121
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12. Establishment Interviews Profiling
The discussion below highlights the relevant portions of the Establishment Interviews that have
direct relationship with the analysis and recommendations. The other detailed discussion of the
inventory results can be found in Appendix CD.
12.1. General profile of establishments
12.1.1. Types of establishments interviewed

The respondents were selected based on the street that they were located on as well as
the type of business. The sampling was made to ensure that there is a proportional
distribution across establishment types and different streets as much as possible. A total of
204 samples were obtained. Their breakdown is shown in the Table below.
Table 34 Type of establishment respondents

Type of Number of
Gen. Category Percentage
Establishment Respondents
Construction Heavy industry 16 7.8%
Electronics Heavy industry 20 9.8%
Financial Services 11 5.4%
Food Consumer 20 9.8%
Gen. Merchandise Consumer 13 7.4%
Hotels/inns Hotels 10 4.9%
Industrial Heavy industry 20 9.8%
Logistics Heavy industry 5 2.5%
Mall/dept stores Consumer 7 2.5%
Museums/public Museums 6 2.9%
Offices Offices 30 14.7%
Personal Services 21 10.3%
Religious items Specialty 5 2.5%
Residences Residences 10 4.9%
Schools Schools 5 2.5%
Vacant lots Vacant lots 5 2.5%
Grand Total 204 100.0%
For purposes of analysis, establishments involved in construction products, electronics,

industrial products/services and logistics are categorized together as heavy industry. Food
establishments, general merchandise stores and malls/department stores are categorized
PLANADES
122
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
together as consumer establishments. Financial establishments and shops involved in

personal services are categorized as services establishments.
12.1.2. Average area of establishment

‘Schools’ have the biggest average area at 5,352.9 sqm, followed by ‘Malls’ with 4,021.4
sqm, then ‘Residences’ with 1,454.4 sqm and ‘Museums’ at 1,446.3 sqm. It should be noted
that big area for ‘Residences’ is because some of the residential establishments interviewed
are apartment complex or buildings, and not necessarily single dwelling units. The
establishment type with the lowest area is the ones selling ‘religious items’ with an average
of 86.0 sqm.
The average area of heavy industry establishments range between 139.1 to 280.1 sqm.
Excluding ‘Malls’, consumer goods establishments range between 199.5 to 252.3 sqm.
Service establishments range between 107.0 sqm to 232.2 sqm.
Table 35 Average area of establishment

Type of Ave. area Number of
Gen. Category Rank
Establishment (sqm) Respondents
Construction Heavy industry 280.1 7 16
Electronics Heavy industry 139.1 14 20
Financial Services 232.2 9 11
Food Consumer 252.3 8 20
Gen. Merch. Consumer 199.5 11 13
Hotels/inns Hotels 380.1 6 10
Industrial Heavy industry 203.0 10 20
Logistics Heavy industry 145.4 13 5
Mall/dept stores Consumer 4,021.4 2 7
Museums/public Museums 1,446.3 4 6
Offices Offices 183.9 12 30
Personal Services 107.0 15 21
Religious items Specialty 86.0 16 5
Residences Residences 1,454.4 3 10
Schools Schools 5,352.9 1 5
Vacant lots Vacant lots 490.0 5 5
Grand Total 562.9 204
PLANADES
123
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12.2. Profile of establishment visitors
12.2.1. Average daily number of clients/customers

By their nature as having a big student population, it is not surprising that ‘Schools’ have
the highest average reported daily people visits with an average of 2,720 pax/day. ‘Malls’
have the second‐highest number of visitors at 1,136 pax/day. On the other end, excluding
‘Residences’, ‘Electronics’ establishments have the lowest volume at just 17 pax per day.
Heavy industry‐type establishments, like ‘Construction’, ‘Electronics’, ‘Industrial’ and

‘Logistics’, have low average daily pax visits ranging between just 17 to 67 pax per day. As
expected, establishments involved in consumer goods like ‘Malls’, ‘Food’ and ‘General
merchandise’ reported high visitation. ‘Malls’ have an average of 1,136 pax/day, ‘Food’ an
average of 663 pax/day, and ‘General merchandise’ an average of 274 pax/day.
Table 36 Average daily client visits
Ave. Daily Client

Type of Number of
Gen. Category Visits Rank
(pax/day)
Construction Heavy industry 67 9 16

Electronics Heavy industry 17 14 20
Financial Services 118 5 11
Food Consumer 663 3 20
Gen. Merch. Consumer 274 4 13
Hotels/inns Hotels 77 8 10
Industrial Heavy industry 32 12 20
Logistics Heavy industry 48 11 5
Mall/dept stores Consumer 1,136 2 7
Museums/public Museums 105 6 6
Offices Offices 78 7 30
Personal Services 48 10 21
Religious items Specialty 21 13 5
Residences Residences 5 15 10
Schools Schools 2,720 1 5
Grand Total 238
PLANADES
124
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Combining the data on the average area and the average daily visits, the average pax per
sqm per day can be computed. The results are shown in the Table 37 below.
Based on this computation, ‘Food’ establishments have the highest visit rate per unit area
at 2.63 pax/sqm/day. ‘General merchandise’ establishment is second with 1.37
pax/sqm/day. All the other establishment types have rates of less than 1 pax/sqm/day.
Excluding ‘Residences’, the establishment with the lowest rate is ‘Museums’ with an
average rate of 0.07 pax/sqm/day. Heavy industry‐type establishments have low average
daily pax rates ranging between just 0.12 to 0.33 pax per sqm per day.
Table 37 Average daily client visits per unit area

Ave. Daily Client
Type of Ave. area Ave.
Establishment (sqm) pax/sqm/day
(pax/day)
Construction Heavy industry 67 280.1 0.24 10
Electronics Heavy industry 17 139.1 0.12 13
Financial Services 118 232.2 0.51 4
Food Consumer 663 252.3 2.63 1
Gen. Merch. Consumer 274 199.5 1.37 2
Hotels/inns Hotels 77 380.1 0.20 11
Industrial Heavy industry 32 203.0 0.16 12
Logistics Heavy industry 48 145.4 0.33 7
Mall/dept stores Consumer 1,136 4,021.4 0.28 8
Museums/public Museums 105 1,446.3 0.07 14
Offices Offices 78 183.9 0.42 6
Personal Services 48 107.0 0.45 5
Religious items Specialty 21 86.0 0.24 9
Residences Residences 5 1,454.4 0.004 15
Schools Schools 2,720 5,352.9 0.51 3
Grand Total 237.9 490.0 0.42
PLANADES
125
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12.2.2. General origins of clients/customers

32% of the respondents reported that their clientele are from Cebu City only. If including
those from the other main Metro Cebu areas (Mandaue City and Lapu‐lapu City), the share
increases to 37.3%. The big jump in shares is when the entire Cebu province is included,
making the share increase to 79.1%.
It is worth noting that only 5% explicitly reporting having clientele which includes
foreigners. Given the presence of many tourist attractions in the area, a percentage of only
5% can be considered low. This can mean that there many of the shops in the area are not
able to cater to the needs of the foreign tourists.
Table 38 General Origin of Clients

Respondents
General Origin of Clients
Count Share Cum. Share
Cebu City only 64 31.8% 31.8%
Metro Cebu main (CC, MC, LC) 11 5.5% 37.3%
Metro Cebu 8 4.0% 41.3%
Within Cebu province 76 37.8% 79.1%
Cebu and Vis Min 25 12.4% 91.5%
Locals and foreigners 10 5.0% 96.5%
No Definite Answer 7 3.5 100%
Total 201 100.0%
12.2.3. Average expenditure of clients/customers

The establishment type with the highest average of expenditure per client or customer per
visit is ‘Electronics’ with Php, 2,879. This most probably is because of the cost of even a
single electronic appliance or gadget is quite high.
The establishment type with the second‐highest average customer expenditure is stores
selling ‘Religious’ items with Php 2,450. This is followed by ‘Industrial’ establishments with
Php, 1,919, ‘Logistics’ with Php, 1,500 and ‘Construction’ with 1,129. All four heavy
industry‐type establishments are in the top 5.
Among the consumer establishments, ‘Malls’ have the highest average customer
expenditure at Php 971, followed not that far behind by ‘General merchandise’ at Php 969.
‘Food’ establishments average Php 375 per customer visit.
The establishment type with the lowest reported average customer expenditure is
‘Museums’ with Php 200.
PLANADES
126
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 39 Average expenditure per customer per visit

Average amount
Type of
Gen. Category spend by clients / Rank
Establishment
visit (Php)
Construction Heavy industry 1,129 5
Electronics Heavy industry 2,879 1
Financial Services NA NA
Food Consumer 375 9
Gen. Merch. Consumer 969 7
Hotels/inns Hotels NA NA
Industrial Heavy industry 1,919 3
Logistics Heavy industry 1,500 4
Mall/dept stores Consumer 971 6
Museums Museums 200 10
Offices Offices NA NA
Personal Services 750 8
Religious items Specialty 2,450 2
Residences Residences NA NA
Schools Schools NA NA
Grand Total 1,441
12.3. Assessment of current conditions

Shown in Table 40 below is the tabulation of the total answers for the assessment of
current conditions of the pedestrian facilities per aspect. A ‐5 score indicates very poor
conditions, while +5 indicates very good conditions. A graphical representation is also
shown in Figure 96. The answers were also calculated to arrive at a weighted average per
aspect. The results are shown in the last column of the Table.
Table 40 Tabulation of number of answers per score for current conditions assessment
Aspect Respondents’ Rating
PLANADES
127
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
TO Weighted
‐5 ‐4 ‐3 ‐2 ‐1 0 1 2 3 4 5
TAL Average
Width 7 9 16 6 3 140 1 5 9 5 3 204 ‐0.30
Surface
6 8 21 12 10 106 4 6 11 16 4 204 ‐0.13
quality
Cleanliness 15 13 20 12 14 56 4 14 23 20 12 203 0.08
Physical
10 5 16 24 16 85 3 10 12 10 12 203 ‐0.11
obstacles
Continuity
6 4 12 13 13 111 6 11 15 7 5 203 0.02
of level
Incidences
37 7 19 5 3 27 6 5 33 8 53 203 0.64
of flooding
Ambulant
32 5 12 10 6 41 16 12 30 6 33 203 0.38
vendors
Presence of
17 5 16 6 9 56 14 12 28 5 35 203 0.70
vagrants
Out of the eight aspects, ‘incidences of flooding’ have the most positive scores (105),
followed by ‘ambulant vendors’ (97) and ‘presence of vagrants’ (94). This means that for
these aspects, the respondents felt that there is not much problem regarding these.
On the opposite end, ‘cleanliness’ has the most negative scores (74), followed by ‘physical
obstacles’ and ‘incidences of flooding’ (71 each). These are the aspects that the
respondents felt that had the most problems or issues.
Interestingly, ‘incidences of flooding’ is both in the top 3 of both positive and negative
scores. One explanation for this is that flooding is a site specific problem and is not an area‐
wide problem. For those areas that are consistently flooded, the respondents based here
would naturally answer in the negative, while respondents based in areas where little
flooding occurs would answer in the positive.
Among the eight aspects, ‘presence of vagrants’ has the highest weighted average at 0.70,
followed by ‘incidences of flooding’ at 0.64. These are the aspects that the respondents
felt that currently have “best” conditions. On the opposite end, ‘width’ has the lowest
weighted average at ‐0.30, followed by ‘surface quality’ (‐0.13) then physical obstacles (‐
0.11). These are the aspects that the respondents felt are among the worse aspects.
PLANADES
128
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Width ‐5
‐4
Surface quality ‐3
‐2
Cleanliness ‐1
0
Physical obstacles 1
2
Continuity of level 3
4
Incidences of flooding 5
Ambulant vendors
Presence of vagrants
Figure 96 Assessment of current conditions by the respondents
12.4.Ranking of priority areas for improvement
12.4.1. General aspects

The respondents were asked to rate 7 areas of action to “make the area more attractive to
visitors and clientele” by choosing only their top 3. ‘Security’ (62 1st choices), ‘Flood Control’
(41) and ‘Safety’ (30) had the most number of 1st choices. It is notable that although ‘waste
management’ had low 1st choices counts, it is rated highly as a second or third choice (35
2nd choices).
PLANADES
129
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Physical improvements 18 14 16
Security 62 50 34
1st choice
Safety 30 33 20
2nd choice
Sidewalk regulation 26 22 22 3rd choice
Flood control measures 41 39 46
Waste management 18 35 46
Traffic mgnt 7 12 19
Figure 97 Respondent Raw Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement
The respondents’ choices were given relative weights with the first choice given 3 points,
second choice given 2 points and third choice given 1 point. Based on these weights,
‘Security’, ‘Flood Control’ and ‘Safety’ maintain their relative ranks with 320, 247 and 176
points respectively. ‘Waste management’ is now ranked fourth with a total of 170 points.
‘Sidewalk regulation’ is fifth (144 points), ‘physical improvements’ is a lowly sixth (98
points), and ‘traffic management’ is last (64 points).
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Physical improvements 54 28 16
Security 186 100 34

1st choice
Safety 90 66 20
2nd choice
Sidewalk regulation 78 44 22 3rd choice
Flood control measures 123 78 46
Waste management 54 70 46
Traffic mgnt 21 24 19
Figure 98 Respondent Weighted Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement
12.4.2. Specific features

In order to validate further the responses on general areas for action or improvement, the
respondents were asked to rate particular improvements/interventions in terms of their
likely effect in terms of attracting more people to come to the downtown area, on a scale
where ‐5 means “drives away people”, 0 means “No Impact”, and 5 means “Attract more
people”. Some of these interventions are actual physical translations of the 7 aspects
mentioned in the previous section. The computed answers are shown in Table 41.
PLANADES
130
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 41 Ranking of improvement features to attract more people

Average
Item Rank Sub‐Type
Score
CCTV 4.50 1 Security
Storm drainage 4.46 2 Flood management
Security outposts 4.41 3 Secuity
Cleanliness 4.33 4 Cleanliness
Police visibility 4.08 5 Security
Trash bins 4.04 6 Cleanliness
Car parking facilities 3.88 7 Transport facilities
Signage and maps 3.87 8 Architectural elements
More Public Transport mode options 3.79 9 Public Transport
No water puddles 3.72 10 Flood management
Pedestrian crossings 3.61 11 Safety
PUV stops 3.54 12 Public Transport
Vagrants removal 3.43 13 Regulating sidewalk use
Motorcycle parking 3.41 14 Transport facilities
Traffic enforcers 3.32 15 Traffic Mgmt.
Sidewalk no obstructions 3.29 16 Safety
Footpath pavement quality 3.13 17 Sidewalk improvement
Traffic signal timing 2.98 18 Traffic Mgmt.
Continuity of level 2.95 19 Safety
Architectural features 2.93 20 Architectural elements
Trees/plants 2.74 21 Greenery
Roofs for s‐walks 2.69 22 Sidewalk improvement
Parks/ open spaces 2.69 23 Greenery
Bike parking facilities 2.52 24 Transport facilities
New shops/ activities 2.45 25 Soft measures
Sidewalk vendors removal 2.12 26 Regulating sidewalk use
Activities/events by LGU 1.99 27 Soft measures
Seats/resting areas 1.86 28 Architectural elements
Occasional road closure ‐0.30 29 Road closure
Fulltime road closure ‐1.77 30 Road closure
The results indicate that the respondents feel that ‘security’ aspects would do more to
attract people to come to the Downtown area, with 3 out of the top 5 highest scores being
‘security’ features. This results in an average score of 4.33, ranking it 1st among the various
sub‐types. This is consistent with the ranking of ‘security’ as the top priority from previous
section 12.4.
PLANADES
131
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Average
Score
Security outposts 4.41 3 Security
AVERAGE SCORE/RANK 4.33 3
Rounding up the other two in the top 5 are ‘storm drainage’ (ranked 2) and ‘cleanliness’
(ranked 4). ‘Storm drainage’, together with ‘no water puddles’, is a feature or indicator of
‘flood management’. ‘Flood management’ features have an average score of 4.09, making
it 3rd highest sub‐type, behind ‘cleanliness/waste management’ which has an average score
of 4.18.
Compared to the ranking from the previous section, there is a slight deviation. In the
priority areas for improvement, ‘flood management’ is ranked 2nd, while ‘waste
management’ is ranked 4th. One possible explanation here is that maybe the respondents
associate proper waste management as part of flood management.
Average
Score
Cleanliness 4.33 4 Cleanliness/waste mgmnt
Trash bins 4.04 6 Cleanliness/waste mgmnt
AVERAGE SCORE/RANK 4.18 5.0
Average
Score
The sub‐type which has the 4th highest average score is ‘public transport’ with 3.67. Public
Transport aspects is not listed as part of the priority areas for improvement from the
previous section since it is considered as an external support system independent of the
pedestrianization project. But the mere fact that its features are ranked high underscores
the desire of the respondents for a good Public Transport system to support
pedestrianization.
Average
Score
More public transport mode options 3.79 9 Public transport
PUV stops 3.54 12 Public transport
PLANADES
132
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
‘Safety’ feature is the sub‐type which has the 5th highest average score with 3.28. ‘Safety’
features here refer to measures that prevent accidents from happening to people as they
walk.
Average
Score
No sidewalk obstructions 3.29 16 Safety
The next two categories relates to ‘transportation’ and ‘traffic’. Ranked 6th are various
‘transportation facilities’ with an average score of 3.27, while ranked 7th is ‘traffic
management’.
Average
Score
Average
Score
Traffic enforcers 3.32 15 Traffic management
Traffic signal timing 2.98 18 Traffic management
Many of the actual physical improvements to the sidewalks are ranked in the bottom half.
The highest‐ranked ‘sidewalk improvement’ is ‘footpath pavement quality’ which is at #17.
Altogether, ‘sidewalk physical improvement’ sub‐type is ranked 8th with an average score
of 2.91.
‘Architectural elements’ is ranked 9th with an average score of 2.89, while ‘greenery
features’ is ranked 11th with an average score of 2.71.
Average
Score
Roofs for sidewalks 2.69 22 Sidewalk improvement
PLANADES
133
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Average
Score
Average
Score
Ranked 10th is the category relating to ‘regulating sidewalk use’ with an average score of
2.77.
Average
Score
Vagrants removal in sidewalks 3.43 13 Regulating sidewalk use
Vendors removal in sidewalks 2.12 26 Regulating sidewalk use
‘Soft measures/programs’ is the second‐to‐the‐last ranked category with an average score

of 2.22.
Average
Score
Lastly, the category which has the lowest average ranking is with regards to ‘road closure’.
It is important to note that the respondents did not just give low scores on this, but actually
gave many negative scores, which resulted in negative average score. The negative scores
indicate that the respondents felt that full closure and occasional closure would actually
have the reverse effect—instead of attracting more people into the area, it would instead
drive them away.
Average
Score
AVERAGE SCORE/RANK ‐1.04 29.5
PLANADES
134
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 42 below is the order of the different sub‐types of features as ranked by
the respondents. ‘Security’, ‘cleanliness’ and ‘flood management’ aspects form the top tier.
The 2nd tier is characterized by transport‐specific aspects, namely ‘public transport’,
‘transport facilities’ and ‘traffic management’ and ‘safety’. The 3rd tier relates to physical
improvements and beautification, namely ‘sidewalk improvements’ and 'introduction of
‘architectural elements’. The last tier is a mix of ‘soft measures’ (whether programs or
regulatory measures) and ‘greening measures’.
Comparing this to the ranking from the previous section, we can see that ‘cleanliness/
waste management’ jumped two positions up, including ‘traffic management’, while
'regulation of sidewalk’ use drop two places.
Table 42 Ranking of sub‐types of features that will attract more people according to
respondents’ scores
Rank order
Ave.
Feature Sub‐type in priority in Diff.
Score
Figure 98
1 Security 4.33 1 0
2 Cleanliness/Waste mgmnt 4.18 4 +2
3 Flood management 4.09 2 ‐1
4 Public transport 3.67 NA NA
5 Safety 3.28 3 ‐1
6 Transport facilities 3.27 NA NA
7 Traffic management 3.15 7 +2
8 Sidewalk improvement 2.91 6 0
9 Architectural elements 2.89 NA NA
10 Regulating sidewalk use 2.77 5 ‐2
11 Greenery 2.71 NA NA
12 Soft measures 2.22 NA NA
13 Road closure ‐1.04 NA NA
PLANADES
135
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12.4.3. Opinions on road closures

Generally, the respondents are not that amenable to the concept of road closures. This
may be because they feel that this may lead to making access to their establishments even
harder. To assess whether there are some road sections where some establishments there
are more acceptable to the concept of road closures, detailed answers were extracted
according to location of the streets of the establishments and is shown in Figure 99 and
Figure 100 below.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 99 Respondents’ rating of acceptability for occasional closure
From the chart, it would seem that Mabini is the street where the establishments
interviewed are more amenable to the concept of occasional closure, as the share of
positive answers are more than 80%. Next is Jakosalem and V. Gullas with about 60%. On
the opposite end, Magallanes St has the highest share of negative reaction towards
occasional closure with around 65%.
PLANADES
136
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
With regards to full closure, all of the respondents along Mabini are positive about full
closure. V. Gullas is the next with around 60%, then Legaspi and MC Briones with around
50% each. On the opposite end, Magallanes St has the highest share of negative reaction
at around 80%, followed by Colon St at around 70%.
All in all, more respondents are against full closure than occasional closure (60% vs. 40%).
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 100 Respondents’ rating of acceptability for full closure
What all of this implies is that at the start, the local business community may not be the
entity who will champion the pedestrianization project. Outside entities, like the LGU or an
advocacy group, may need to initiate the program first, then slowly win them over. Also,
prior to implementation, there needs to be thorough information and advocacy campaign
to ease the potential concerns of the stakeholders, so that the project proponent will get
the support of the local community over time.
In terms of implementation, the concept of temporary and occasional pedestrianization

may be a more viable approach so as not to disconcert the local communities too much at
the start. This will also be a good opportunity to test different pedestrianization concepts
first, until getting the desired results that would eventually convince the local stakeholders
for full pedestrianization in the future.
PLANADES
137
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12.5. Reaction to improvements

Shown in Table 43 below is the tabulated scores of the business’ answers regarding
reaction to improvements to the pedestrian environment. The graphical representation is
shown in Figure 101.
Among the five potential reactions of the establishments to the improvements, ‘hiring
more employees’ got the highest score with 0.94 (out of 5), followed by ‘renovate/
refurbish the building’ with 0.73. Interestingly, as the actions become more and more cost‐
intensive and more complicated, the potential reaction of the businesses gets progressively
less likely.
Table 43 Likelihood of business reaction to improvements
Renovate/ Totally
Hire more Totally new
Type refurbish change Sell or JV
employees construction
bldg land use
1 Construction 1.25 1.38 ‐0.50 ‐0.69 ‐0.94
2 Electronics 0.20 0.55 ‐0.55 ‐1.20 ‐1.30
3 Financial 0.40 0.27 ‐0.18 ‐0.45 ‐0.45
4 Food 2.85 1.35 ‐0.05 ‐0.50 ‐0.80
5 Gen. Merch. 1.70 1.75 ‐0.05 0.20 ‐0.55
6 Hotels ‐0.40 ‐1.00 ‐3.10 ‐3.20 ‐3.60
7 Industrial 0.55 0.85 ‐0.90 ‐1.05 ‐1.65
8 Logistics 2.40 1.60 1.60 0.40 ‐0.60
9 Museums 3.33 3.67 ‐2.50 ‐2.33 ‐2.33
10 Offices 0.00 ‐0.20 ‐1.07 ‐1.50 ‐1.87
11 Personal 0.76 0.05 ‐0.57 ‐0.90 ‐0.81
12 Religious 2.80 0.80 ‐0.80 ‐0.60 ‐0.20
13 Residences ‐0.60 ‐0.60 ‐2.10 ‐2.50 ‐1.50
14 Schools 0.80 1.80 ‐1.80 ‐0.40 ‐0.80
15 Vacant lots 1.00 2.20 2.40 ‐1.00 ‐0.40
TOTAL 0.94 0.73 ‐0.71 ‐1.03 ‐1.25
Note: Darker green colors indicate higher positive values, darker red colors indicate higher negatives values
For ‘hiring more employees’, only 2 out of the 15 establishment types answered in the
negative, albeit not that extreme. ‘Museums’ had the highest average probability at 3.33,
followed by ‘Food’ with 2.85, then ‘Religious’ with 2.80.
For ‘renovating/refurbishing the building’, 3 out of the 15 establishment types answered

in the negative, albeit not that extreme. ‘Museums’ still had the highest probability at 3.67,
followed by ‘Vacant lots’ with 2.20.
For ‘totally changing the land use’, all except two establishment types answered in the
negative. The only types that answered in the positive are ‘Vacant lots’ with 2.40 and
‘Logistics’ with 1.60. Logically, this is mainly because of their nature being an idle lot, vacant
lots have the highest potential to change to a new land use. ‘Hotels’ had the highest
PLANADES
138
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
negative score at ‐3.10, followed by ‘Museums’ with ‐2.50. Interestingly, these two
establishment types are considered to be more compatible to pedestrianization, so it
seems logical that they do not want to change their land use.
For ‘Totally new construction’, only ‘Logistics’ answered in the positive with 0.40. ‘Hotels’
is still the establishment type with the highest negative score at ‐3.20, followed by
‘Residences’ at ‐2.50, then ‘Museums’ at ‐2.33.
For ‘Sell or joint venture’, all answered in the negative. This would mean that at the
present, none of the establishments is considering to turn over their lots to other potential
investors or developers who can introduce new developments that will take advantage of
an improved pedestrianization environment.
On one hand, this indicates that they still have not totally given up on the potential of the
neighborhood. But on another hand, if they still have not totally given up, the question is
why they are not willing to invest in refurbishing their lot, new construction, or change the
land use to attract more foot traffic? It is the Study Team’s interpretation that the
establishments still have many apprehensions about the pedestrianization concept so as
to fully commit their resources. There may be other factors that they are considering which
were not tackled in the questionnaire. This should be subjected to further investigation
once the pedestrianization project will be pushed through.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
‐5
Hire more employees ‐4
‐3
‐2
Renovate/refurbish bldg ‐1
0
1
Totally change land use 2
3
4
Totally new construction 5
Sell the property or JV
Figure 101 Respondents’ probable reaction to improvements
12.6.1. Establishment type

 Schools have the biggest average area at 5,352.9 sqm, followed by Malls with 4,021.4
sqm, then residences with 1,454.4 sqm and museums at 1,446.3 sqm.
PLANADES
139
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12.6.2. Profile of visitors

 In general, the majority of the interviewed establishments (79.1%) estimates that the
general origins of their clientele covers most of the Cebu province, and is not just limited
to just Cebu City only.
 Establishments involved in consumer goods like malls, food and general merchandise
reported high average customer visitation rates. (Malls = 1,136 pax/day, food = 663
pax/day, and general merchandise = 274 pax/day)
 In terms of per sqm basis, food establishments have the highest visit rate at 2.63
pax/sqm/day. General merchandise establishment is second with 1.37 pax/sqm/day.
Heavy industry‐type establishments have low average daily pax rates ranging just
between just 0.12 to 0.33 pax per sqm per day.
 All four heavy industry‐type establishments are in the top 5 highest average customer
expenditure per visit, with electronics establishments having the highest average (Php
2,879 per pax per visit). Third is industrial establishments with Php, 1,919, Logistics with
Php, 1,500 and Construction with 1,129.
12.6.3. Assessment of current sidewalk conditions

 Out of the eight aspects of current sidewalk conditions being evaluated, ‘incidences of
flooding’ (105 out of 204), ‘ambulant vendors’ (97) and ‘presence of vagrants’ (94) have
the highest positive scores (105) among the respondents. This means that the
respondents felt that there is not much problem regarding these and are actually in
good conditions.
 On the opposite end, ‘cleanliness’ has the most negative scores (74), followed by
‘physical obstacles’ and ‘incidences of flooding’ (71 each). These are the aspects that
the respondents felt that had the most problems or issues.
 In terms of weighted average of the scores, ‘presence of vagrants’ has the highest
weighted average at 0.70, followed by ‘incidences of flooding’ at 0.64, which indcates
having the “best” conditions as opined by the respondents. On the opposite end, ‘width’
has the lowest weighted average at ‐0.30, followed by ‘surface quality’ (‐0.13) then
‘physical obstacles’ (‐0.11). These are the aspects that the respondents felt are among
the worse.
12.6.4. Preference of priority aspects for improvement and desired features

 ‘Security’ (total score: 320 out of 612), ‘Flood Control’ (247) and ‘Safety’ (176) were
ranked the highest by respondents as priority aspects for improvement. ‘Waste
management’ is rated highly as a second or third choice (total score: 170). ‘Physical
improvements’ to the sidewalks itself were ranked very low priority (total score: 98).
 In terms of actual physical features, ‘Security’ and ‘cleanliness’ aspects were ranked
highly by th respondents as features that would attract more people to go to the
PLANADES
140
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Downtown Area, followed by ‘cleanliness/waste management’, ‘flood management’

and ‘public transport’.
 Respondents are not amenable to road closure, as they felt that it can actually drive
away potential customers, instead of attracting them. Between occcasional closure and
full closure, respondents are more amenable to occasional closure than full cosure (60%
vs. 40%).
12.6.5. Reaction to improvements

 Among the five potential reactions of the establishments to the improvements, ‘hiring
more employees’ got the highest probability score with 0.94 (out of 5), followed by
‘renovate/ refurbish the building’ with 0.73. Interestingly, as the actions become more
and more cost‐intensive and more complicated, the potential reaction of the businesses
gets progressively less likely.
 Even though most of the respondents reacted negatively to the possiblity of selling the
lot to other potential investors who can develop the property better, they themselves
stated that they are not that keen to renovate/refurbish the lot, initiate new
construction or introduce new land uses.
PLANADES
141
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
13. Evaluating Suitability for Pedestrianization
13.1. Framework of the Evaluation

To evaluate objectively a particular road’s suitability for pedestrianization, a framework
was developed by the study team and is shown in Figure 102 below. This framework was
integrates the major concepts culled from the review of related literature and case studies.
The framework is basically divided into two main sets of criteria: ‘Public need’ aspects and
‘Sufficient infrastructure’ aspects. This basically states that a particular area or road
sections’ suitability for pedestrianization is take to require a combination of both of these
aspects to be well justified. Low ratings for either one will make result in the area being
evaluated as unsuitable for pedestrianization.
This framework also assumes that basic requirements like safety/security and
environmental management (flooding and waste management) are already taken care of
prior to the implementation any pedestrianization program. Alternatively, these
requirements can be addressed simultaneously with the pedestrianization program.
Suitability for
Pedestrianization
Public Sufficient
Need Infrastructure
Urgent need for Complimentary High heritage/ Supportive Minimal traffic

ped facilities land use tourism road geometry impact
character
High ped High Heritage sites Wide road ROW Non‐national

volumes residential (# of lanes) or provl road
Narrow sidewalk High retail Parks/open Presence of Mid to low

width spaces parallel streets traffic volumes
Poor sidewalk High school Architectural Parking w/in Mid to low PT

condition population features vicinity volumes
Many sidewalk Low or no

obstructions industrial uses
Figure 102 Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation Framework
The ‘Public need’‐related aspect is further subdivided into ‘Urgent need for pedestrian
facilities’, ‘Complimentary land use’ and ‘High heritage/tourism character’. The ‘Sufficient
infrastructure’‐related aspect is further subdivided into ‘Supportive road geometry’ and
PLANADES
142
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
‘Minimal traffic impact’ criteria. The specific indicators of these criteria are further
elaborated in the succeeding sections.
13.2. Manner of Computation

Each of the sub‐criteria in the above evaluation framework is to be applied for each road
section with the Study Area, using a grading scale shown in Table 44 below.
Table 44 Grading scale used for the Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation Framework
Score Public need (PN) Sufficient infrastructure (SI)
‐3 to ‐1.01 Almost no need Very insufficient
‐1 to 0.99 Very low need Insufficient
1 to 1.99 Low need Low sufficiency
2 to 2.99 Somewhat needed Somewhat sufficient
3 to 3.99 Moderately needed Moderately sufficient
4 to 4.99 Highly needed Highly sufficient
5 Absolutely needed Absolutely sufficient
Shown in Figure 103 below is the process of computation of the different criteria to arrive
at an evaluation of a road section’s suitability for pedestrianization.
Public Need [PN] Sufficient infrastructure [SI]

Criteria (a) Criteria (b) Criteria (c) Criteria (d) Criteria (e)
subcriteria a.1 score subcriteria b.1 score subcriteria c.1 score subcriteria d.1 score subcriteria e.1 score
subcriteria a.4 score subcriteria c.4 score
score of score of score of score of score of
criteria (a) criteria (b) criteria (c) criteria (d) criteria (e)
= average = average = average = average = average
(a.1, a.2, a.3, a.4) (b.1, b.2, b.3) (c.1, c.2, c.3, c.4) (d.1, d.2, d.3) (e.1, e.2, e.3)
Score of PN Score of SI
= average (a, b, c) = average (d, e)
Figure 103 Process of computation for the Pedestrianization Suitability Evaluation

Framework
After each sub‐criteria has been scored, an average for the main criteria will be made. These
main criteria averages will then again be averaged for each overall category (‘Public need’
and ‘Sufficient infrastructure’), and will not be merged. This is done in order to prevent one
criteria from “masking” the effects of the other. Masking basically means that a high score
on one criteria can hide the very low scores of the other, which will then result in possibly
a false assessment of a road section’s suitability.
PLANADES
143
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
By separating ‘Public need’ and ‘Sufficient infrastructure’, masking or distortion will be

avoided and thus a more accurate picture of a road section’s suitability for
pedestrianization can be made. Also, this helps us to identify which particular aspect of the
pedestrianization project may cause the project to fail, and thus subsequent specific
interventions can be identified and introduced to make improve the level of success.
It should also be noted that a high score on both does not automatically mean
pedestrianization should be done. It only is taken to indicate that pedestrianization has a
greater probability to succeed as a method to improve the economic vitality of the area.
On the other hand, a low score on either means that based on current conditions, if
pedestrianization will be implemented without any complimentary interventions,
pedestrianization will not likely spur the economic vitality that it is expected.
13.3. Elaboration of the Rating System per Sub‐criteria
13.3.1. Public Need

The ‘Public need’ rating is computed using an average of the ratings of ‘Urgent need for
pedestrian facilities’, ‘Complimentary land use’ and ‘High heritage/tourism character’. The
corresponding sub‐criteria are explained in the following sections.
a. Urgent need for pedestrian facilities – The more urgent the need for better pedestrian
facilities, the higher the suitability for pedestrianization. This urgent need is reflected
by the following indicators: (a.1) High pedestrian volumes; (a.2) Narrow sidewalk
width; (a.3) Poor sidewalk conditions; and (a.4) Many sidewalk obstructions.
(a.1) High pedestrian volumes – the higher the combined pedestrian volumes, the
greater the need, thus the higher the score.
Daily two‐way pedestrian volumes Score

0 0
2,501 to 5,000 1
5,001 to 10,000 2
10,001 to 15,000 3
15,001 to 20,000 4
Above 20,000 5
(a.2) Narrow sidewalk width – the lower the average sidewalk width, the fewer the
spaces available for the pedestrians, thus the greater the need, so the higher is
the score.
PLANADES
144
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Average Sidewalk width (meters) Score

Less than 2 5
2.01 to 3 4
3.01 to 4 3
4.01 to 5 2
More than 5 1
(a.3) Poor sidewalk conditions – the worse the sidewalk conditions, the greater the
need, thus the higher the score.
Percentage of sidewalks with bad conditions Score

0 to 5% 0
6% to 20% 1
21% to 40% 2
41% to 60% 3
61% to 80% 4
81% to 100% 5
(a.4) Many sidewalk obstructions – the more obstructions there are, the greater the
need, thus the higher the score.
Percentage of sidewalks with obstructions Score

0 to 5% 0
6% to 20% 1
21% to 40% 2
41% to 60% 3
61% to 80% 4
81% to 100% 5
b. Complimentary land use – The more complimentary the land uses are in a road section,
the higher the need for good pedestrian facilities, thus the higher is its suitability for
pedestrianization. This criteria is reflected by the following indicators: (b.1) Percentage
residential lots/establishments fronting the evaluated road section; (b.2) Percentage
retail lots/establishments fronting the evaluated road section; (b.3) The combined
school population along the road section; and (b.4) Low percentage of industrial
lots/establishments fronting the evaluated road section.
(b.1) Percentage of residential lots/establishments along the evaluated road

section – The more residential lots there are along a road section, the more
potential foot traffic there are, thus the more complimentary it is for
pedestrianization, so the higher is the score.
PLANADES
145
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
% of lots with residential use Score

0 – 10 1
10 to 25 2
25 to 50 3
50 to 75 4
75 and above 5
(b.2) Percentage of retail lots/establishments along the evaluated road section –

The more retail lots there are along a road section, the more foot traffic it
attracts, thus the more complimentary it is for pedestrianization, so the higher
is the score.
% of lots with retail use Score

0 – 10 1
10 to 25 2
25 to 50 3
50 to 75 4
75 and above 5
(b.3) Combined school population along a road section – The higher the school
population there are, the more foot traffic that is generated, thus the more
complimentary it is for pedestrianization, so the higher is the score.
Combined School Population Score

0 – 500 1
500 to 1,000 2
1,000 to 2,500 3
2,500 to 5,000 4
5,000 and above 5
(b.4) Percentage industrial lots/establishments along the road section – The fewer
the industrial lots there are along a road section, the more complimentary it is
for pedestrianization, so the higher is the score.
% of lots with industrial use Score

10 to 25 ‐1
25 to 40 ‐2
40 to 65 ‐3
65 to 80 ‐4
Above 80 ‐5
PLANADES
146
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
c. High heritage/tourism character ‐ The higher the heritage/tourism character of a road

section, the more potential tourist foot traffic it generates, thus the greater the need,
the higher is its suitability for pedestrianization. This high heritage/tourism character
is reflected by the following indicators: (c.1) Existence of recognized heritage sites; (c.2)
Combined area of parks and open spaces; and (c.3) Presence of interesting
architectural features that would provide public interest.
(c.1) Existence of recognized heritage sites – Heritage sites here means areas or
structures that have significant historical and cultural character. The more
heritage sites there are, the more tourist destinations there are available for
the public to visit, thus more foot traffic is generated, thus the greater the need
for pedestrianization, so the higher is the score.
Existence of heritage sites Score

None 0
Little significance or very few 1
Somewhat significance or few 2
Moderately significant or 3
Highly significant or many 4
Extremely significant or very 5
(c.2) Combined area of parks and open spaces– The greater the area of open spaces
there are, the more attractive it is for the public to walk through, thus more
traffic is generated, so the higher is the score.
Combined area of parks/ open spaces (in sq.m.) Score

501 to 1000 1
1001 to 1500 2
1501 to 2000 3
2001 to 2500 4
Above 2501 5
(c.3) Presence of interesting architectural features – Interesting architectural

features includes places, structures or physical elements that have significant
aesthetic qualities that the public may appreciate. The more interesting
architectural features there are, the more places there are available for the
public to visit, thus more traffic is generated, thus the greater the need for
PLANADES
147
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Presence of interesting architectural features Score

None 0
Slightly interesting or very few 1
Somewhat interesting or few 2
Moderately interesting or average 3
Highly interesting or many 4
Extremely interesting or very many 5
13.3.2. Sufficient infrastructure

The “Sufficient infrastructure” rating is computed using an average of the ratings of
“Supportive road geometry” and “Minimal traffic impact”. The corresponding sub‐criteria
are explained in the following sections.
d. Supportive Road Geometry – The more supportive the road geometry is for
pedestrianization, the more sufficient the capacity of the infrastructure is considered
to be to accommodate a pedestrianization project, thus the higher the suitability for
pedestrianization. This supportive nature is reflected by the following indicators: (d.1)
Wide road right‐of‐way; (d.2) Presence of parallel streets; and (d.3) Parking availability
w/in vicinity.
(d.1) Wide road right‐of‐way – Wide road right‐of‐way allows for more public space
to be available for pedestrianization. Thus, the wider the road right‐of‐way, the
more supportive it is to a pedestrianization project, thus the higher the score.
If actual road right‐of‐way information is not available, the number of road
lanes can be used as a proxy.
Number of road lanes Score

1 lane only ‐4
2 lanes ‐2
3 lanes 2
4 or more lanes 4
(d.2) Presence of parallel streets – Parallel streets will allow the rerouting of traffic
along an alignment similar to the street being evaluated. Thus, the more
parallel streets there are available, the more supportive it is, thus the higher the
score.
Presence of parallel streets Score

No parallel streets on both directions ‐4
Presence of parallel streets on one direction with less than 2 lanes ‐2
Presence of parallel streets on one direction with 2 or more lanes 2
Presence of parallel streets on both directions with 2 or more lanes 4
PLANADES
148
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
(d.3) Parking availability – Off‐street parking will minimize the on‐street

obstructions while still allowing private vehicle users to ease of access to the
area. Thus, the more off‐street parking spaces there are, the more supportive
it is, thus the higher the score.
Presence of parking facilities (slots) Score

0 to 50 0
51 to 100 1
101 to 150 2
151 to 200 3
201 to 250 4
250 and above 5
e. Minimal Traffic Impact – The lesser the traffic impact that a potential
pedestrianization project on the road section may have on the area, the more sufficient
the infrastructure is considered to be to accommodate a pedestrianization project,
thus the higher the score. Minimal traffic impact is reflected in the following indicators:
(e.1) Road classification; (e.2) Daily average traffic volumes; and (e.3) Public transport
volumes.
(e.1) Road Classification – This refers to the administrative classification, i.e. the
entity who administers and/or owns the road. Roads which are increasingly
under the direct supervision of the local government would be easier to
implement, thus the higher the score.
Administrative road classification Score

National road ‐4
Provincial road ‐2
City road 2
Local road 4
(e.2) Daily average traffic volumes – The higher the traffic volumes are in a road, the
more difficult it is to redirect or reroute to alternative roads, and thus
potentially, it could generate greater negative traffic impact. Thus, the lower
the traffic volumes, the lesser the potential traffic impact, the lesser the strain
it would put on the infrastructure, thus the greater is its suitability for
Daily combined traffic volume Score

more than 5,000 pcu Extremely high ‐4
4,000‐5,000 pcu Very high ‐3
PLANADES
149
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Daily combined traffic volume Score

3,000‐4,000 pcu High ‐1
2,000‐3,000 pcu Average 1
1,000‐2,000 pcu Few 3
Less than 1,000 pcu Very few to none 4
(e.3) Public Transport Volume – The higher Public Transport volumes are in a road,
the more passengers could be potentially be aggravated by potential rerouting.
In addition, it may also require a good portion of the Public Transport modes to
be rerouted to alternative roads which may not have sufficient capacity to
accommodate them. Thus, the lower the Public Transport volumes, the lesser
the potential traffic impact, the lesser the strain it would be put on the
infrastructure, thus the greater is its suitability for pedestrianization, sot he
higher is the score.
Public Transport Volumes Score

0 to 1000 Extremely high 4
1001 to 2000 Very high 3
2001 to 3000 High 1
3001 to 4000 Average ‐1
4001 to 5000 Few ‐3
5001 and above Very few to none ‐4
13.4. Results of the Evaluation

The result of the above computations is shown in Table 45. Detailed explanations for those
sections which have the high scores are discussed after the Table.
PLANADES
150
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 45 Pedestrian Suitability Evaluation Results

Street Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Public need Suffi‐ Sufficient
Code High Land Use Heritage/ Supportive Minimal need Assessment cient Infra
public compa tourism road traffic score infra Assessment
need tibility character geometry impact (a,b,c) Score
(d,e)
Btwn Osmena
CO1 Colon Blvd & Pelaez St
2.3 1.7 2.0 3.7 ‐3.7 2.0 Low need 0.0 Insufficient
Btwn Pelaez St
CO2 Colon & Junquera St 1.8 1.3 2.0 3.7 ‐3.7 1.7 Low need 0.0 Insufficient
Btwn Junquera
CO3 Colon St & Jakosalem 3.3 1.8 0.0 3.7 ‐3.0 1.7 Low need 0.3 Insufficient
St
Btwn Jakosalem
CO4 Colon St & P. Burgos
1.5 1.0 1.0 2.7 ‐1.7 1.2 Low need 0.5 Insufficient
Btwn Osmena
Very low Low
GU1 Gullas Blvd & Legaspi 1.0 1.3 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.8 need 1.3 sufficiency
St
Btwn Legaspi St Somewhat

GU2 Gullas & Jakosalem St
1.5 1.0 1.0 2.7 2.7 1.2 Low need 2.7 sufficient
Btwn Jakosalem Low

GU3 Gullas St & P. Burgos
2.3 2.0 0.0 1.3 2.0 1.4 Low need 1.7 sufficiency
Btwn Colon St Very low

OS1 Osmena & Gullas St 1.0 0.7 0.0 3.7 ‐2.0 0.6 need 0.8 Insufficient
Btwn Gullas St Very low

OS2 Osmena & Plaridel Ext
1.5 1.3 0.0 2.3 ‐1.3 0.9 need
0.5 Insufficient
Btwn Plaridel
Low
OS3 Osmena Ext & 1.8 1.7 0.3 2.3 0.0 1.3 Low need 1.2 sufficiency
Jakosalem
Btwn Jakosalem Somewhat Low

OS4 Osmena & P. Burgos 3.3 1.3 3.7 2.7 0.0 2.8 needed 1.3 sufficiency
Btwn P. Burgos Very low Low

OS5 Osmena & Lapu‐lapu St
0.5 1.0 0.0 2.7 1.0 0.5 need
1.8 sufficiency
Btwn Colon St Somewhat

LE1 Legaspi & Gullas St
Btwn Plaridel
Very low Low
LE2 Legaspi Ext & 1.5 1.3 0.0 0.7 1.3 0.9 need 1.0 sufficiency
Jakosalem
Btwn Jakosalem
LE3 Legaspi St & P. Burgos
2.0 0.7 1.3 0.7 0.7 1.3 Low need 0.7 Insufficient
PLANADES
151
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
(d,e)
Btwn Colon St
JA1 Jakosalem & Gullas St 1.5 1.0 0.7 1.7 0.0 1.1 Low need 0.8 Insufficient
Btwn Gullas St Very low Low

JA2 Jakosalem & P. Gomez 0.5 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.7 0.5 need
1.8 sufficiency
Btwn P. Gomez Very low Somewhat

JA3 Jakosalem & Legaspi St 0.8 1.3 0.0 1.7 2.7 0.7 need 2.2 sufficient
Btwn Legaspi St Very low Somewhat

JA4 Jakosalem & Osmena Blvd 1.3 1.3 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.9 need 2.7 sufficient
Btwn Osmena
Somewhat
JA5 Jakosalem Blvd & 1.3 1.5 0.7 2.3 2.7 1.1 Low need 2.5 sufficient
Magallanes
Btwn
Somewhat Low
JA6 Jakosalem Magallanes & 0.8 1.3 4.0 3.7 0.0 2.0 needed 1.8 sufficiency
MC Briones
Btwn Zulueta St Low

MB1 Mabini and Colon St
Btwn Gullas St Low

MB2 Mabini & P. Gomez 2.5 2.3 0.0 1.3 2.0 1.6 Low need 1.7 sufficiency
Btwn V. Gullas Somewhat Low

MB3 Mabini & P. Gomez
2.8 2.8 2.3 0.0 2.0 2.6 needed 1.0 sufficiency
Btwn P. Gomez Somewhat

MB4 Burgos & Legaspi St
Btwn Legaspi St Very low Somewhat

MB5 Burgos & Osmena Blvd 1.8 ‐0.3 0.0 1.0 3.0 0.5 need 2.0 sufficient
Btwn Osmena
Low
MB6 Burgos Blvd & 2.3 0.7 1.7 0.7 3.0 1.5 Low need 1.8 sufficiency
Magallanes
Btwn
Moderately
MB7 Burgos Magallanes & 1.3 0.3 3.7 3.3 2.7 1.8 Low need 3.0 sufficient
MC Briones
Btwn F.
Very low
BR1 Briones Gonzales & 1.5 1.0 0.0 1.3 ‐1.0 0.8 need 0.2 Insufficient
Jakosalem
Btwn Jakosalem
BR2 Briones & P. Burgos
1.3 0.0 4.0 1.7 ‐2.0 1.8 Low need ‐0.2 Insufficient
Btwn P. Burgos Very low

BR3 Briones & Lapu‐lapu
1.5 0.7 0.0 1.7 ‐1.0 0.7 need
0.3 Insufficient
PLANADES
152
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
(d,e)
Btwn Lapu‐lapu Very low Low

BR4 Briones & MJ Cuenco
1.3 ‐0.3 0.0 1.3 1.7 0.3 need 1.5 sufficiency
Btwn Jakosalem Somewhat

PG1 P. Gomez & P. Burgos 2.3 1.5 0.7 0.7 4.0 1.5 Low need 2.3 sufficient
Btwn Osmena
Very low Somewhat
GO1 Gonzalez Blvd & 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 4.0 0.3 need 2.3 sufficient
Magallanes
Btwn
Very low Somewhat
GO2 Gonzalez Magallanes & 0.5 1.0 0.3 0.7 4.0 0.6 need 2.3 sufficient
MC Briones
Btwn Lincoln St Very low Moderately

GO3 Gonzalez & MC Briones 0.8 ‐0.3 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.1 need
3.0 sufficient
Btwn F.
Very low
MA1 Magallanes Gonzalez & 1.3 0.3 0.7 2.3 ‐0.7 0.8 need 0.8 Insufficient
Jakosalem
Btwn P. Burgos Low

MA2 Magallanes
& Lapu‐lapu
13.4.1. “Public need” assessment

The assessment of “public need” for better pedestrian facilities has the section of Osmena
Blvd between Jakosalem and P. Burgos (OS4) getting the highest score of 2.8, which
translates to “somewhat needed”.
 High score for “High heritage/tourism character” (3.7)
o The high score can be attributed to the presence of Basilica de Santo Nino along
this road section, which attracts tourists all‐year round. It is an important
heritage site in Cebu and has some interesting architectural features.
o There is an open plaza adjacent to the church, although it is not that accessible
and conspicuous, since it is covered on all four sides by walls/fences.
 High score for “Urgent need for pedestrian facilities” (3.3)
o Because the presence of Basilica de Santo Nino, it attracts a great number of
pedestrian volumes.
o But despite this great number, there is no sidewalk on this side of the Basilica.
The pedestrians used the road itself for walking. The presence of obstructions
along the road also makes it difficult for the pedestrians to walk.
o On the other side, the sidewalks are arcaded, but the surface quality and
cleanliness is not the good.
PLANADES
153
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Low score for “Complimentary land use” (1.3)

o The land uses opposite the Basilica are not that compatible to the heritage and
tourist character of the Church. There are few souvenir/gift shops and F&B
options. The commercial establishments along this road here are electronics and
general merchandise shops, which caters more to local people, rather than
tourists.
o The upper floors of the buildings are offices which are not necessarily
compatible with the Basilica.
o There are no hotels and inns for the tourists to stay, or other residential options.
o There are also no schools along this corridor.
The section with the second highest score is Mabini between V. Gullas and P. Gomez
(MB3) with a score of 2.6, which translates to “somewhat needed”.
 Moderate score for “Urgent need for pedestrian facilities” (2.8)
o A good portion of the sidewalks here are either narrow or non‐existent. In some
sections, there are also some obstructions like signage posts, utility posts and
trees. There is also inconsistent sidewalk levels from lot to lot.
o However, currently this section is not that traversed frequently by pedestrians,
as reflected by low pedestrian volumes.
 Moderate score for “Complimentary land use” (2.8)
o On the eastern side of Rajah Humabon Park, there are some residential houses.
o There is also USP along this road section.
o However, there are no commercial establishments along this corridor.
 Moderate score for “High heritage/tourism character” (2.3)
o Rajah Humabon Park is found in this road section. There are also some
heritage/tourist sites found in this section, like Archdiocesan Museum and the
Jose Rizal Museum in USP. However, as of the moment, these heritage/tourist
sites do not attract too much foot traffic. This can be due to lack of information
dissemination, or poor marketing program.
13.4.2. “Sufficient infrastructure” assessment

The assessment of “Sufficient infrastructure” has the section of P. Burgos between
Magallanes and MC Briones (MB7) getting the highest score of 3.0, which translates to
“moderately sufficient”.
 High score for “Supportive road geometry” (3.3)
o This section of P. Burgos has three very wide lanes. In addition, since this road is
made one‐way, the capacity is further increased.
o Parallel streets are available on both the eastern (Lapu‐Lapu St) and western
sides (Jakosalem St).
o About 130 meters away, behind the Senior Citizen’s Park, there is big open space
that is currently being used as a parking lot.
PLANADES
154
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Moderate score for “Minimal traffic impact” (2.7)

o P. Burgos is classified as a city road.
o At present, there are low traffic volumes along this road section.
o Only few Public Transport routes pass by this road section. Most of them use the
parallel streets.
The section of Jakosalem between Legaspi and Osmena Blvd (JA4) has a score of 2.7
 Moderate score for “Minimal traffic impact” (2.7)
o Jakosalem is classified as a city road.
o At present, there very traffic volumes along this road section.
o Only very few Public Transport routes pass by this road section.
 Moderate score for “Supportive road geometry” (2.7)
o Jakosalem has wide enough roads and four traffic lanes.
o There are parallel streets on both sides (F. Gonzalez and P. Burgos).
o On the negative side, there is not enough parking within its vicinity.
F. Gonzalez has a high score of 3.0 for ‘Sufficient infrastructure’, but that road is dominated
by industrial warehouses and fruits/vegetables dealers, so it is not to be considered for
pedestrianization.
13.4.3. Synthesis
Based on these two assessments, we can see that none of the road sections have high
scores on both assessments. Either one has a high score on “Public need” but low score for
“Sufficient infrastructure”, or it has a high score on “Sufficient infrastructure” but low score
for “Public need”. This then means that on the onset it can be evaluated that, if
pedestrianization were to be applied on these road sections, this may not necessarily
generate the foot traffic and therefore not the economic vitality that might be desired.
Some interventions may be needed, either in terms of improving the infrastructure or
introducing complimentary soft measures to generate foot traffic.
13.5. Final set of recommendations of road sections for pedestrianization

Areas to be strongly considered for pilot implementation are shown in Table 46 below
because of their need. These will be the road sections that will be subjected to economic
impact analysis in the next section. Since these are sections have supply related scores
indicate low suitability or somewhat suitable, it is understood that a transport plan would
need to be prepared in order to make pedestrianization successful in achieving its
economic objective of increase the vitality of businesses in the area. This will be discussed
in detail in Chapter 15.
PLANADES
155
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 46 Road sections in Study Area under strong consideration for pedestrianization
Section Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Need Sufficient
Code Urgent need Complimentar Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Score Infra Score
Btwn 2.8 1.3

OS4 Osmena Jakosalem 3.3 1.3 3.7 2.7 0.0 Somewhat Low
& P. Burgos needed suitability
Btwn V. 2.6 1.0
MB3 Mabini Gullas & P. 2.8 2.8 2.3 0.0 2.0 Somewhat Low
Gomez needed suitability
Aside from this, other road sections are considered because of their relatively high scores
for infrastructure sufficiency. They are shown in Table 47 below. The sections of JA5 and
MB4 were added since there are just adjacent to the two other sections under
consideration and have generally the same characteristics.
Because of their low scores for public need, soft measures or interventions may be needed
to increase their score in public need, and thereby making them more viable for
pedestrianization. These interventions are discussed in Chapter 15.
Table 47 Other road sections in Study Area under consideration for pedestrianization
Secti Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Sufficient
on Urgent need Complimentar Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Need Score Infra Score
Code
Btwn Legaspi
Blvd
Btwn Osmena
Magallanes
Btwn P. Gomez
MB4 Burgos & Legaspi St 2.3 1.0 2.3 2.3 2.7 1.9 2.5
Btwn
MC Briones
PLANADES
156
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
14. Analysis of Potential Impacts of Intervention
14.1. Potential Impacts of Urban Environment Improvement
14.1.1. Factors affecting the overall urban environment

Based on the theoretical framework developed by the Study Team which was based on
theories and case studies from previous studies and confirmed during the FGDs, some of
the key physical factors affecting the quality of the urban environment are:
 Incidences of flooding
 Cleanliness
 Traffic congestion
14.1.2. Methodology to evaluate potential impacts

Based the results of the pedestrian and establishment owner interviews, a qualitative
assessment of the impact of urban environment improvement is made. For the purpose
of estimation, the average rating of likelihood to increase visitation is divided by the
maximum score to derive a percentage likelihood. This likelihood estimate will be
multiplied by the aggregate estimate of additional visits for each type, assuming only
these urban environment improvement interventions. Due to the difficulty in exploring
in basic probability for changes in behavior, the study team had to forgo exploring joint
probabilities (probabilities when interventions are combined). Nevertheless, these are
taken to be supportive rather than interfering.
14.2. Potential Impacts to Foot Traffic Pattern
14.2.1. Factors affecting foot traffic volumes and pattern

The physical factors affecting foot traffic volumes that are used in this analysis are:
 Overall quality of the urban environment (safety/security, incidences

of flooding, cleanliness, traffic congestion, etc.)
 Ease of access to the area (availability of Public Transport options,
availability of parking, distance from Public Transport stop to final
establishment destination, etc.)
 Land use type and density (concentration and/or spread of land uses)
PLANADES 157
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

From the results of the pedestrian interviews and establishment interviews, the study
team identified the different variables that will make clients increase their frequency of
visit to the Study Area and the interventions perceived to have the highest probabilities
for increase in visitation according to type of establishments.
From the results of the land use inventory, pedestrian interviews and establishment
interviews, per establishment type trip attraction (visitation) rates are estimated. In
addition, from these surveys, the land use types and combinations that show high levels
of interaction are identified. Through the use of maps, a qualitative assessment of the
current concentration/spread of the high traffic attractors and complimentary land uses
are made.
14.3. Potential Impacts to Business Activities
14.3.1. Likely responses to improvements

Establishments were asked if they would consider (1) hiring more personnel; (2) renovate
or refurbish; (3) totally changing land use/activity; and/or (4) constructing a new building.
These actions were to be considered as a possible response to improvements to the
pedestrian environment, something that would essentially increase foot traffic.
Respondents were asked to rate the likelihood of undertaking any of these actions using
a scale of ‐5 to 5, wherein ‐5 meant “very unlikely”, 0 meant not sure, and 5 meant very
likely.
From Table 43, positive scores are shown in green while negative ratings got orange or
red colors, we can see that generally, “hire more employees” got mostly positive
response based on average scores given. “Renovate” got a slightly less positive response
and “change land use” and “new construction was mostly unlikely. Based on these
responses, the establishments were likely to consider smaller, more scalable investments
to help expand operations, but would give larger investments more thought. Thus, direct
impacts on employment would be expected with the increase in visitation to the area.
But other larger investments would be less likely.

Using a similar scaling approach as in the previous likelihood analysis, the chance of the
establishment undertaking change to business activity is estimated as the likelihood score
divided by the maximum possible score (5). For examples, an average score of 2.85 would
be interpreted as 2.85÷5 = 0.57 or 57 percent change of adopting the change. However,
this part of the analysis cannot go further because the actual amount of change (how
many more employees would be hired) was not elicited. Therefore, this result is only
useful for the direction of change and its relative scale among different establishment
types.
PLANADES 158
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
14.4. Potential Impacts to Local Revenues
14.4.1. Factors affecting local revenues

Based on the conceptual framework developed by the Study Team, local revenue
understood to be directly influenced by the interaction of foot traffic with the various
types of business. However, there are also other factors that also affect local revenues,
namely:
 Management of individual business establishment (e.g. management

of costs, maintenance of property) – which may vary greatly between
enterprises.
 Tax collection policies and management – which varies in amount and
coverage depending on the type and scale of business.
Note however, that the study did not attempt to control for these factors, given the
limited amount of information on the practices of individual enterprises.
14.4.2. Methodology to evaluate potential impacts to local revenue

The basic approach to estimating the effect on local revenues would be based on an
estimate of amount of change of patronage (ΔP), derived from the responses of surveyed
pedestrians and establishments within the study area, based on the indication of
likelihood for certain improvements to increase visitation. The scale of change is based
on the range of likelihood score from the surveys and on observed ranges in other
pedestrianization experiences around the world, adjusted for the assumed improvement
scenario. This rate of change would be applied to the estimated current level of local
enterprise revenues.
In summary, the estimate of the effect on local revenues (ΔR) would be computed as
follows:
𝛥𝑅 𝑅
Where R0 = Baseline local revenues

ΔP = Change in Patronage
P0 = Baseline patronage
The estimate rates of change will replace the whole term and the computation would
be prepared for each type of establishment and then multiplied by the total count of
enterprises (according to the results from the land use/activity inventory) falling into each
category. Summing this all up across types would produce the estimate of total impact
of total improvements for the whole area.
PLANADES 159
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
14.4.3. Estimate of Baseline Revenue

The baseline revenue of establishments in the study area is estimated using the average
visitation rates (from establishment surveys) multiplied by the average expenditure rates
per individual (from establishment surveys) multiplied by the total number of
establishments (from the land use inventory). This computation is prepared per type and
then aggregated.
Table 48 Estimated Visitor Spending in Study Area

Land Use Type Sum of Average floor Average of Average Average Estimated Estimated Daily
Floor Area area / Daily client Client of Client Transactions
establishment Spending Client Spending (PhP)
[sq.m] Php/Client /sqm PhP/Sqm
Mall 28,150.00 4,021.43 1,135.71 971.43 1.54 1,495.51 42,098,492.38
Food 5,045.00 252.25 662.90 375.00 2.84 1,066.71 5,381,528.70
Gen. Merch. 2,593.00 216.08 271.92 800.00 1.45 1,158.89 3,005,007.92
Electronics 2,782.00 146.42 17.37 3,027.78 0.27 806.14 2,242,679.76
Industrial 4,059.00 225.50 33.89 1,846.88 0.28 514.15 2,086,922.35
Logistics 762.00 127.00 69.17 1,500.00 1.61 2,416.59 1,841,443.81
Schools 26,764.63 5,352.93 2,720.00 150.00 0.42 63.36 1,695,731.73
Construction 4,481.50 344.73 71.31 1,345.45 0.28 371.40 1,664,431.87
Financial 2,554.25 232.20 117.55 1,000.00 0.58 579.77 1,480,865.25
Personal 2,146.00 107.30 48.20 500.00 0.55 276.90 594,229.25
Religious 430.00 86.00 20.80 2,450.00 0.36 890.75 383,022.50
Museums/
8,678.00 2,892.67 99.55 50 0.07 3.52 30,541.15
public
Vacant lots 2,450.00 612.50 74.25 DNS 0.52 DNS DNS
Hotels 3,801.00 475.13 85.63 DNS 0.37 DNS DNS
Offices 2,948.00 113.38 6.69 DNS 0.11 DNS DNS
Residences 14,144.00 3,536.00 10.50 DNS 0.07 DNS DNS
Total 62,504,896.67
Note: DNS=Data Not Sufficient
For the establishment types with available visitation and average spend‐per‐visit
estimates, the aggregate spend by type was computed. As shown in Table 48, the grand
total average spend (and therefore revenue) of the study area is more than 62 million per
day or more than 1.88 billion pesos a month.
PLANADES 160
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
14.4.1. Factors affecting growth in visitation

Based on an implementation of various sub‐types of interventions, an average
Estimated Likelihood of achieving additional visitation is taken to be 59% of the
current population will respond to improvement interventions. This is taken to be
a “most likely” or medium outcome (as opposed to optimistic and pessimistic).
Estimated
Intervention / Feature Sub‐type Ave. Score
Likelihood
1 Security 4.33 87%
2 Cleanliness/Waste mgt 4.18 84%
3 Flood management 4.09 82%
4 Public transport 3.67 73%
5 Safety 3.28 66%
6 Transport facilities 3.27 65%
7 Traffic management 3.15 63%
8 Sidewalk improvement 2.91 58%
9 Architectural elements 2.89 58%
10 Regulating sidewalk use 2.77 55%
11 Greenery 2.71 54%
12 Soft measures 2.22 44%
13 Road closure ‐ 1.04 ‐21%
Average 2.96 59%
14.4.2. Estimate of economic impact

A general estimate of the impact for an improvement of the pedestrian environment
of the area is based on the assumption that the improvement project be designed
to address all the concerns of the visitors identified in the previous sections.
An additional visit will not necessarily have the same scale for each type of business
or for each street. So 1 trip divided by their average frequency of visits per month is
computed as percentage change. This is adjusted by the likelihood scale, such that
the estimated likelihood of the 1 additional trip would be 59%. This is used to adjust
the raw effect of 1 additional trip.
PLANADES 161
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 49 Estimate of Effect of Improving the Pedestrian Environment, Selected Streets

F. Jakosale Magallan MC Osmena P.
Colon Gonzales m Legaspi Mabini es Briones Blvd Burgos V. Gullas
Average Monthly
8.61 6.43 6.95 14.69 5.71 11.36 9.54 9.77 11.28 12.22
Visitation/pax
% change due to
11.6% 15.6% 14.4% 6.8% 17.5% 8.8% 10.5% 10.2% 8.9% 8.2%
1 additional trip
Adjustment Factor
0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59
Based on 0.59
Likelihood Estimate
adjusted % change 6.84 9.20 8.50 4.01 10.33 5.19 6.20 6.02 5.25 4.84
in visitor trips
Estimated
Additional 30.64 1.10 23.66 6.72 0.80 0.72 0.56 25.40 7.95 12.17
Visitor expenditure
per month (Million)
A further estimate of impact is prepared for a more specific area that was indicated as suitable from
the viewpoint of pedestrian need (see chapter 13), the section of Osmena between Jakosalem & P.
Burgos (OS4). Based on an analysis by Land Use type classification of establishments or lots, the
following table indicates the likelihood of a total of 115,370 pesos additional daily aggregate
spending by visitors (or local revenue) if the said road section were pedestrianized while addressing
the infrastructure issues. Note that this estimate only considers establishments directly fronting the
OS4 road section. It is expected that other effects would be also felt in immediate vicinity.
Furthermore, this does not include changes of land use or establishment types, which can potentially
increase visitation and revenue even further. All in all, the increase in local revenue, sustained over
time, may form a substantial part of the economic justification of improving the pedestrian
environment.
Table 50 Estimate of Effect of Improving the Pedestrian Environment,

OS4 section on Osmena
Electronics Food Gen. Merch. Mall Mixed types Grand Total
3,028 375 800 971 847 1,449
Ave.PhP/client
Ave.clients per 17 663 272 1,136 286 244

establishment/day
Number of 2 1 1 1 1 6
Establishments
Baseline aggregate 105,175 248,588 217,533 1,103,265 241,885 1,916,446
client expenditure
adjusted % change
6.02% 6.02% 6.02% 6.02% 6.02%
in visitation 1
additional trip
Estimated increase
6,332 14,965 13,096 66,417 14,561 115,370
in daily Local
Revenue
PLANADES 162
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
15. Supporting Transport Plan / Program and Soft Measures
15.1. Framework
Based on the assessment presented in Chapter 13, the areas that have the highest need
for pedestrianization have low scores on sufficient infrastructure. This means some of the
infrastructure and transport system elements in these areas have to be improved so that
it is able to support pedestrianization and minimize the potential traffic impacts. At the
same time, there are road sections which have high scores on the sufficient
infrastructure, but score lowly on the public need, which means that some soft measures
have to be initiated that can potentially bring in additional demand, that will make the
pedestrianization program more economically viable. Discussed in this section are the
interventions in terms of infrastructure and program measures. Shown in Figure 104
below is the framework for determining the type of interventions to be introduced.
Sufficiency
HIGH LOW
VERY GOOD chance GOOD chance of

of economic success economic success
with minimal traffic but with significant
impact traffic impact
HIGH
Can be implemented Address the low‐ranking

immediately without infrastructure to make
Need
much intervention it more sufficient
LOW chance of VERY LOW chance

economic success of economic success
but creates minimal with significant
traffic impact traffic impact
LOW
Introduce land use
changes and/or No
activities to increase pedestrianization
demand should be done
Figure 104 Framework for determining the type of intervention needed to improve
suitability and economic success of pedestrianization projects
The items discussed in this section are those directly related to the pedestrianization
project. It is assumed here that some basic infrastructure and services are already
completed by the LGU prior to any pedestrianization project or will be addressed
simultaneously. As discussed in previous sections, the priority problem areas of basic
infrastructure are with regards to flooding, solid waste management and safety/security.
PLANADES 163
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
15.2. Infrastructure Improvements
15.2.1. Transport system elements needed for improvement

Based on the assessment, the section of Osmena between Jakosalem & P. Burgos (OS4)
and the section of Mabini between V. Gullas & P. Gomez (MB3) have the highest scores
in terms of need (2.8 and 2.6 respectively), but scored very low in terms of infrastructure
sufficiency (1.3 and 1.0 respectively).
Table 51 Scores of potential pedestrianized street sections requiring transport

infrastructure improvements
Street Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Need Sufficient
Code Urgent Complimenta Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Score Infra Score
need ry Land Use tourism road traffic (average of (average of
Btwn
Osmena
OS4 Blvd
Jakosalem & P. 3.3 1.3 3.7 2.7 0.0 2.8 1.3
Burgos
Btwn V. Gullas
MB3 Mabini
& P. Gomez
2.8 2.8 2.3 0.0 2.0 2.6 1.0
Table 52 Scores of street sections per sufficient infrastructure sub‐variable

Street Street Section d.1 d.2 d.3 (d)
Code No. of Presence of Parking Supportive
lanes score parallel score road
streets geometry
score score
Osmena Btwn Jakosalem
OS4 Blvd & P. Burgos
3 4 2 2.7
Btwn V. Gullas &

MB3 Mabini
P. Gomez
‐2 2 0 0.0
Street Street Section e.1 e.2 e.3 (e)

Code Road class Traffic Public Minimal
score volumes Transport traffic
score Volumes impact
score score
Osmena Btwn Jakosalem
OS4 Blvd & P. Burgos
‐4 3 1 0.0
Btwn V. Gullas &

MB3 Mabini
P. Gomez
2 3 1 2.0
For Osmena Blvd, the elements that bring down the score are few availability of parking
within 200 meters, road classification (it being a national road) and moderate Public
Transport volumes. Since the road classification cannot be changed, the focus of the
PLANADES 164
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
improvements will thus concentrate on setting up additional parking areas within a

walkable distance from this road section and Public Transport rerouting.
For Mabini St, the elements that are bringing down the score is narrow road right‐of‐way,
few availability of parking within 200 meters, and moderate Public Transport volumes. So
right‐of‐way is already fixed, the focus of the improvements will thus concentrate on
setting up additional parking areas within a walkable distance from this road section and
Public Transport rerouting.
15.2.2. Public transport system components
15.2.2.1. Re‐routing of Public Transport routes

Shown in Table 53 below are the routes that will be affected by the potential road
closure in Osmena 4 and Mabini 3 due to pedestrianization.
Table 53 List of PUV routes that may affected by road closure in Osmena Blvd and
Mabini St due to pedestrianization
For Osmena 4 For Mabini 3
Route Route
Complete Route Name Complete Route Name
Code Code
06B Guadalupe ‐ Carbon 02B SBT ‐ Pier
06C Guadalupe ‐ Colon 08E Pasil ‐ Colon
06D Banawa ‐ Colon 09C Basak ‐ Colon
06F Guadalupe ‐ Carbon 09F Basak ‐ Colon
07B Banawa ‐ Carbon 11D Inayawan ‐ Colon
07D Banawa ‐ Carbon 12B Labangon ‐ Carbon
15 Oppra ‐ Carbon 12C Labangon – Carbon
12I Labangon ‐ SM
12J Labangon ‐ SM
12M Labangon – Colon
Since there are available parallel roads to these road sections, the rerouting of
these routes is relatively easy. Shown in the following figures is the proposed
rerouting of the aforementioned routes. The gray lines in the figure indicate the
original alignment.
PLANADES 165
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 105 Rerouting of Route 06B and 15 to avoid OS4 road section
Figure 106 Rerouting of Route 06C, 06D, 06F, 07B, 07D to avoid OS4 road section
PLANADES 166
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 107 Rerouting of Route 02B to avoid MB3 road section
Figure 108 Rerouting of Route 08E, 11D to avoid MB3 road section
PLANADES 167
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 109 Rerouting of Route 09C, 12B, 12M to avoid MB3 road section
Figure 110 Rerouting of Route 09F to avoid MB3 road section
PLANADES 168
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 111 Rerouting of Route 12C to avoid MB3 road section
Figure 112 Rerouting of Route 12I, 12J to avoid MB3 road section
PLANADES 169
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
15.2.2.2. Introducing new arterial public transport routes

Arterial routes refer to long‐haul high‐capacity routes that connect two major
nodes or districts. Currently, the arterial routes serving the Downtown area are
handled by the PUJ, which are low‐capacity modes.
Introducing arterial routes to the Downtown Area would improve the accessibility
of the area. If these arterial routes are operated efficiently and reliably, it can
reduce the dependence on private cars over time and thus improve overall traffic
flows in the Downtown area.
Based on the pedestrian interviews, majority of the people going to the Downtown
Area are from the uptown part and western part of Cebu City. This implies the need
for an arterial route from Downtown area to these zones. Aside from this, since the
main attractions of the Downtown area are related to tourism and heritage, there
should be at least one arterial route to connect Downtown to the airport and other
major transport facilities (bus terminals, ports).
Shown in Figure 113 below is one proposed alignment for the arterial route
connecting to the Uptown area, while Figure 114 below shows the proposed
arterial route to connect to the airport via Mandaue, which passes by Cebu North
Bus Terminal and the Pier area. These two proposed arterial bus routes will serve
as complimentary bus routes being planned for the entire Metro Cebu area (see
Figure 115), which address the need for an arterial route going to the west.
Figure 113 Arterial Bus Route 1 (Downtown to Uptown)
PLANADES 170
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 114 Arterial Bus Route 2 (Downtown to Mandaue, Airport)
Figure 115 Proposed arterial routes by Mega Cebu Study
PLANADES 171
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
15.2.2.3. Public Transport facilities

Based on the Public Transport inventory, 43 out of the 53 routes passing through
the Downtown Area have their route ends here. This is roughly equivalent to about
3,500 units carrying around 85,000 pax. But despite this volume, there are no
formal off‐street terminals in the area. All of the PUV’s use the road itself as their
de facto terminal. Without such a facility, road space will be reduced, which can
cause traffic impacts, and eventually incur economic costs.
To mitigate the traffic impact, it is imperative to have an integrated Public

Transport terminal within the Downtown area. Based on the availability of the
space in the area and technical considerations, the most practical location for an
integrated terminal is the empty lot behind the Senior Citizen’s Park adjacent to the
SRP Road.
For one, it has enough size to accommodate the many Public Transport modes and
routes. The area immediately behind Senior Citizen’s Park is around 3,700 sqm. If
the area to its west is included, then an additional 5,400 sqm is available, bringing
total area to 9,100 sqm. In case, space is not available, there is the option to build
a multi‐level terminal.
Another advantage of this location is its proximity to SRP Road, which then
connects the Downtown area to other urban nodes within the Metro Cebu area.
The arterial modes need not enter the narrow roads of Downtown area, thus
minimizing traffic impact. In addition, this area is within walking distance from the
many tourist attractions in the Downtown Area. Tourists can simply take a bus
going to the terminal, then just walk over to the many tourist destinations.
A more thorough feasibility study has to be conducted to evaluate the various

technical, social, financial, economic, environmental and institutional aspects.
Figure 116 Open area behind Senior Citizen’s Park currently used as a parking area
PLANADES 172
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Aside from the terminal, to allow for the orderly boarding and alighting of
passengers within the Downtown area, it is important to assign formal stops.
Otherwise, these Public Transport vehicles will just indiscriminately load and
unload anywhere, causing disruption to the overall traffic flow in the Downtown
area. These stops should be placed as close to the major trip nodes as possible for
the convenience of the commuters.
Shown in Figure 117 below are the identified locations of the proposed Public
Transport facilities in relation to the proposed pedestrianized area.
Figure 117 Identified formal Public Transport facilities within the Study Area
15.2.3. Parking provisions

Currently, the major trip generators surrounding the proposed pedestrianized area are
the Basilica de Santo Nino, Magellan’s Cross, Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral, and
Archdiocesan Museum—all of which are located on the southeastern side of the
Downtown Area.
PLANADES 173
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
As most of these are tourist‐related destinations, it is to be expected that there will be a

good majority of the vehicles going to the area which are related to tourist services, such
as tourist vans, tourist buses or vehicle‐for‐hire. Thus, it is important to allocate an off‐
street area within a walkable distance for parking provisions, so these vehicles do not just
park on the road and disrupt the traffic flow.
Shown in Figure 118 below are some of the identified areas that can potentially be made
into public parking areas. Some of them are existing open parking lots or parking garages,
while others are existing vacant lots that can be converted to parking buildings. The
previously identified lot behind Senior Citizen’s Park to be an integrated terminal can be
a combination of terminal on the lower floors and parking building on the upper floors.
Small commercial shops can also be allocated to help generate income to maintain the
building. An example of this is Park Square in Ayala Center, Makati City, MM. The
Mandaue LGU has also built a similar structure just beside Mandaue City Hall.
When the pedestrianization program is to be implemented, a more detailed parking

feasibility study can be made for the entire Downtown area to ascertain the parking
requirements.
Figure 118 Identified potential public parking areas within the Study Area
PLANADES 174
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 119 Pictures of Park Square in Ayala Center, Makati, MM
15.3. Program Improvements
15.3.1. Program elements needed for improvement

Based on the assessment, the section of Jakosalem between Legaspi & Magallanes
(herein referred to as JA4 and JA5) and the section of P. Burgos between P. Gomez and
Legaspi (herein referred to as MB4) and Magallanes and MC Briones (herein referred to
as MB7) have the highest scores in terms of infrastructure sufficiency, but scored very
low in terms of public need.
Table 54 Scores of street sections program interventions

Street Street Section (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Public Sufficient
Code Urgent need Complimentar Heritage/ Supportive Minimal Need Score Infra Score
Btwn Legaspi
Blvd
Btwn Osmena
Magallanes
Btwn P. Gomez
MB4 Burgos & Legaspi St
2.3 1.0 2.3 2.3 2.7 1.9 2.5
Btwn
MC Briones
PLANADES 175
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 55 below are the detailed scores for the ‘public need’ variable.
Table 55 Scores of street sections for each public need sub‐variable

Street Street Section a.1 a.2 a.3 a.4 (a)
Code Ped Sidewalk Bad Many Urgent
Volumes width Sidewalk Obstructi need
Rating Rating Condition ons score
Rating Rating
Btwn Legaspi St &
JA4 Jakosalem
Osmena Blvd
2 0 1 2 1.3
Btwn Osmena Blvd

JA5 Jakosalem
& Magallanes
2 2 1 0 1.3
Btwn P. Gomez &

MB4 Burgos
Legaspi St
3 3 0 3 2.3
Btwn Magallanes &

MB7 Burgos
MC Briones
2 3 0 0 1.3
Street Street Section b.1 b.2 b.3 b.4 (b)

Code Resdl Retail Schools Indl Complimen
Rating Rating Rating Rating tary Land
Use score
Btwn Legaspi St &
JA4 Jakosalem
Osmena Blvd
2 5 ‐3 1.3
Btwn Osmena Blvd
JA5 Jakosalem
& Magallanes
0 3 3 0 1.5
Btwn P. Gomez &
MB4 Burgos
Legaspi St
3 0 0 1.0
Btwn Magallanes &
MB7 Burgos
MC Briones
0 3 ‐2 0.3
Street Street Section c.1 c.2 c.3 (c)

Code Heritage Parks Archl Heritage/
Rating Rating Rating tourism
character
score
Btwn Legaspi St &
JA4 Jakosalem
Osmena Blvd
0 0 0 0.0
Btwn Osmena Blvd

JA5 Jakosalem
& Magallanes
2 0 0 0.7
Btwn P. Gomez &

MB4 Burgos
Legaspi St
4 0 3 2.3
Btwn Magallanes &

MB7 Burgos
MC Briones
4 5 2 3.7
For the Jakosalem segments, the elements that are bringing down the score is the low
share of residential establishments under ‘Complimentary land use’ variable, and the lack
of open spaces and architecturally significant structures under the ‘Heritage character’.
PLANADES 176
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
For Jakosalem 5, there is the presence of industrial type establishments. Therefore, the
focus of the improvements will be on incorporating more residential‐type establishments
in these sections, making the structures more attracting from a tourism perspective, and
suggested changes in the industrial land use.
For the P. Burgos segments, the elements that are bringing down the score are low share
of residential and retail establishments, as well as the presence of some industrial‐type
establishments. Therefore, the focus of the improvements will be on incorporating more
residential and retail establishments in these sections, as well as suggested changes in
the industrial uses.
15.3.2. Land use changes
15.3.2.1. Incorporation of residential‐type establishments

Residential‐type of establishments are needed to provide a base local market for
the retail establishments which will make economic vitality more sustainable. Not
having a local market in the pedestrianized area means relying on external market,
which decreases the chances of walk‐in customers.
To this end, the shophouse‐type of building would be the most ideal, where
commercial uses are on the ground or lower floors, while residences are on the
upper floors. While residences can refer to permanent homes of people, other
related types of residential land uses can be explored, such as:
 Weekday dormitories for students and workers

 Backpacker inns or hostels for tourists or transient visitors
Some of the existing buildings along Jakosalem and P. Burgos, and even the
adjacent streets, can be repurposed to be like these shophouses. The traditional
architectural elements in the building facades can be highlighted to give them their
unique character, with the inside spaces being more modernized or contemporary.
An example of this implementation is the Laperal Apartments in University Belt,

San Miguel, Manila. Fallen into disrepair starting in the 1990s, the Laperal
Apartments had recently been renovated and refurbished to be a student’s
dormitory with commercial spaces on the ground floor.
PLANADES 177
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 120 Picture of rundown Laperal Apartments before renovation
Figure 121 Some pictures of the renovated Laperal Apartments in San Miguel, Manila
15.3.2.2. Rezoning of industrial‐type establishments

Industrial‐type establishments are those that deal with construction, heavy
equipment, manufacturing, warehouse/logistics and the like. These establishments
typically employ bigger vehicles for the delivery of the goods. As such, they are not
that compatible with a pedestrianized environment.
PLANADES 178
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Therefore, if the LGU intends to make the area more pedestrian‐friendly, in the
long run, there might be a need to limit the zoning of certain areas as just
residential or commercial, with no industrial land uses. In terms of legal measures,
the following may be explored by the LGU:
 Update the comprehensive land use plan and zoning ordinance to identify
areas where industrial‐type establishments are not to be allowed. This would
be the areas identified as high potential for pedestrianization and those with
narrow roads.
 If possible, identify also within the Downtown area (or adjacent areas) where a
small industrial section/district can be assigned. Some possible candidates are
the Gonzalez Street section and the nearby Pier area.
 Provide incentive (e.g. tax breaks) to these locators to locate from their current
areas to the identified industrial section/district.
15.3.2.3. Introduction of complimentary retail establishments/commercial

activities
The section of Mabini between Gullas and MC Briones is dotted with many heritage
and tourist attractions, which can attract a good number of tourists on certain
periods of the year/week. However, because of the lack of retail components, many
tourists tend to just stay for a short period of time in the area, just take pictures
and do a quick look‐around, then leave. There is a lack of shops/stalls in the area
that can make the tourists stay longer and have them spend money in the area.
Among the complimentary retail activities that can be introduced into the Mabini
area are:
 Variety of food/beverage establishments offering wide range of prices and
cuisine
 Variety of souvenir shops offering wide range of signature local products (e.g.
dried mangos, guitars, etc.)
 An “incubation” area featuring small stalls where local up‐and‐coming
entrepreneurs can showcase their new products or services
Figure 122 View of row of restaurants opposite Royal Palace in Bangkok, Thailand
showing different types of food establishments
PLANADES 179
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 123 View of row of souvenir shops along Petaling Street in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
15.3.3. Improvement of heritage/tourism character

Although it may look like there are only a few prominent heritage structures in the
Downtown area, it should be noted that the Downtown area in itself as a whole can
be considered as a heritage district since it is one of the first settlements
established during the Spanish period and one of the very first urban centers. A
quick scan of the area shows also some establishments with architectural character
from the Spanish, American and early Republic eras. These actually are potential
attractions for tourists.
Figure 124 View of Don Sergio Osmena Building at the corner of Osmena Blvd and
Jakosalem showing interesting architectural elements but marred by utility wires
But because of their current physical conditions of the structures as well as the
overall “decaying” look of the area, this heritage character is not that obvious or
well‐known. Some structures are in a bad state, others have facades that are dirty
or have their paints already peeled off. Some are even abandoned already.
However, with some basic improvements and programs, these structures can be
revived to become tourist attractions and can be an iconic part of the Downtown
area.
PLANADES 180
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 125 View of abandoned building at the corner of Gullas St and Legaspi St (left)
and the Flatiron Building in New York City (right)
Figure 126 View of Vision Theater at Colon St marred by commercial signages and
utility wires
15.3.3.1. Fixing the building facades

With some basic physical improvements and complimented by some tourist tour
packages, some of the old structures in the Downtown area can potentially become
tourist attractions. Among the simple actions that can be undertaken to improve
the heritage/tourism character of the area are:
 Repainting and cleaning of the facades
 Hiding and/or organizing the various utility wires and posts such that they
do not block the facades of the buildings
PLANADES 181
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 127 View of shophouses along Medan Pasar in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia showing
clean and unobstructed facades
To this end, the LGU can enact ordinances that require establishments of a certain
building age to maintain their original façade. This is what Penang and Malacca did
as part of their heritage campaign, and eventually was recognized by UNESCO as a
World Cultural Heritage Site.
Figure 128 View of old private houses in Georgetown, Penang with preserved old
façades as required by the government
15.3.3.2. Preparing a tourism/heritage tour

Prior to preparing the tour itself, a detailed inventory of the existing buildings in
the area focusing on heritage characteristics should be made. This would be
complimented by archival research as to the history of some of the buildings.
Information from these data gathering activities will serve as the basis for coming
up with a tourism/heritage map of the area. Along Colon St, some sort of inventory
is already present with the placement of some markers.
PLANADES 182
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 129 View of some of the place markers already installed along Colon St
Assuming that the buildings have already been ‘cleaned up’, the Project Proponent
can encourage tourist operators to develop different types of heritage walking
tours highlighting some of the interesting architectural/ heritage characteristics in
the area. A sample of a walking map prepared for Chinatown in Singapore can be
found in Figure 130.
Figure 130 Sample of heritage walking tour map of Chinatown in Singapore
15.3.3.3. Developing new programs and/or events

To further promote the heritage character of the Downtown area, new programs
or events can be introduced. For example, to highlight the cinema culture of old, a
theater night can be organized on one weekend per month. Classical movies can be
PLANADES 183
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
played in all participating theaters. A portion of Colon St can be closed off, so that
the public can easily walk in between the theaters. Street shows featuring old
zarzuwela plays can also be performed to further create that classical theater
atmosphere.
15.4. Supporting Policies

New policies have to be enacted by the LGU to support the pedestrianization program
and ensure its sustainability over time. These laws will set the solid ground from which
the LGU/project proponent will base their physical planning of the various aspects related
to pedestrianization. Without these laws, many aspects of the pedestrianization will be
difficult to carry out.
Some of the relevant policies are discussed below in general terms. It is understood that
some of the items mentioned here already have existing legal precedents. Thus, there
should be a more comprehensive legal and institutional review and evaluation of the
policies needed.
15.4.1. Land use policies

 Redelineating or rezoning the land uses in potential areas to be more
compatible to land uses (e.g. convert to retail, mixed use, etc.)
 Providing incentives for lot owners of incompatible land uses (e.g. industrial
lots) to relocate to other areas pre‐identified by the LGU
 Providing incentives (e.g. tax breaks) to private low owners in predefined
zones or areas for them to do renovation or undergo redevelopment
 Limiting the floor area ratio (FAR) of new developments as a way to limit
the potential traffic impacts
 Revalidation and redelineation of the sidewalk boundaries and the allowed
uses (e.g. commercial activities, parking, etc.)
15.4.2. Policies regarding heritage sites

 Providing well‐defined rules on what constitute as a heritage site and the
official process for verification and certification
 Providing guidelines/rules on the preservation of heritage sites (e.g.
preserve facades, but interiors can be adaptive reused)
 Providing incentives for lot owners of these sites to undergo renovation
15.4.3. Policies regarding waste management

 Defining the proper manner and locations for waste disposal
15.4.4. Traffic and parking policies

 Redefining the allowed traffic movements along roads and intersections
(e.g. no left turn, one way, etc.).
PLANADES 184
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Defining areas or roads within the Downtown Area where heavy vehicles
are prohibited to enter
 Providing additional provisions on top of the building code requirements
regarding minimum parking requirements, especially for major trip
generators
 Defining the roads where on‐street parking is allowed and restricted
 Allocation of LGU funds and resources for the construction of parking
buildings (e.g. possible reallocation of the building permits funds)
 Providing incentives (e.g. tax breaks) for private lot owners to construct
multi‐storey parking buildings
15.4.5. Public Transport operations policies

 Identifying the locations of intermodal terminal facilities within the City
 Defining the official loading and unloading zones
 Defining the roads within the Downtown area that
 Rerationalize all the Public Transport routes going in and out of the
Downtown area
 Defining the use of tricycles, pedicabs, habal‐habal and other informal
modes within the City or Downtown Area
15.4.6. Policies promoting walking and biking

 Providing clear guidelines on the design and use of sidewalks fronting
private lots (e.g. design may include pavement material, height from the
roads, use of flood mitigation measures, etc.)
 Providing enforcement mechanism to maintain the arcaded walkways along
Colon St and Osmena Blvd
 Providing incentives for building lot owners to provide bicycle racks within
their premises
15.5. Manner of implementation
15.5.1. Gradual phasing towards full pedestrianization

Based on the feedbacks by the respondents, many have expressed reservations about
permanent closure of the roads. Some are worried about the possible impacts of lack of
vehicular access to their businesses. Since the concept of pedestrianization is still a bit
fresh in the local setting, there are still many areas of uncertainty, particularly if
pedestrianization can indeed bring in more people that will be willing to spend more in
the area.
Due to all these factors, the best approach to be applied for the Cebu City Downtown
area is that of gradual phasing. The project proponent can start the project by first fixing
the important basic infrastructure concerns, as indicated by the respondents. These are
with regards to safety/security, flooding and waste management. From here, simple
PLANADES 185
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
measures to improve walkability that does not require heavy capital can be initiated. This
could be strict regulation of sidewalk use, which means banning all forms of vendors,
physical obstructions and the like, unless where allowed.
After the above or concurrently with the above, new laws/ordinances can be enacted by
the LGU which can help jumpstart the pedestrianization efforts. With the laws in place,
the LGU/project proponent can select which of the pedestrianization elements they want
to start with. Some of the priority features are enumerated in Chapter 12.4.2. Depending
on the available budget, the LGU can implement them one by one and allow for a period
of observation, evaluation and tweaking until getting the desired outcomes, which are
increase in foot traffic and increase in local revenues.
Every now and then during this period of testing, the LGU/project proponent can hold
events that further promote a culture of walking, wherein some roads have to be closed
off. This is also to slowly get the people used to the concept of road closures, and that
they can slowly learn how to adjust their trip patterns. This can also a good opportunity
to test some of the traffic schemes. The Pasig LGU in Metro Manila initiated such a
program in Ortigas Center where they have ‘Carless Weekend’, closing off Emerald
Avenue during Sunday, to allow people to use the streets freely.
Figure 131 People using Emerald Avenue during Carless Weekend in Ortigas Center,
Pasig City, MM
At any time during the period of testing, once noticeable and sustained results of increase
in foot traffic and revenues are observed, the LGU/project proponent can consult with
the local communities about the possibility of permanently closing off the particular road
sections. It is only when the local community has expressed full support can full
pedestrianization be considered.
15.5.2. Community involvement

A great portion of the success of pedestrianization is in having a local community that will
support the cause. In addition, local communities can be a valuable partner in data
gathering, who will help collect the relevant data needed for analysis and planning.
PLANADES 186
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
To this end, the LGU/project proponent can start by mobilizing an ad hoc group
comprised of local people from different backgrounds that can champion the cause of
improved walkability. This group can meet on a semi‐regular basis to discuss various
matters to push the walkability agenda. Among the items that they can discuss are:
 Data collection on the history of old lots/buildings and of the entire
Downtown area in general
 Creation of a database of critical lot owners
 Identification of lot owners that are receptive or supportive to the
pedestrianization cause, and try to convince them to implement some
simple features to improve walkability/mobility (e.g. installation of bicycle
racks)
 Coming up with events or educational reach‐out programs to schools,
companies and/or organizations to share information about their advocacy,
and garner their support in some way
Figure 132 Sample of heritage talk conducted by Grupo Kalinangan Inc.
PLANADES 187
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
16. References
Adelle, C. COLON STREET: THE OLDEST STREET IN THE PHILIPPINES. Retrieved from Philippine
Traveler: http://www.philippinetraveler.com/colon‐street‐the‐oldest‐street‐in‐the‐
philippines/. (Accessed December 15, 2019) no date.
Cañete, R. R. The movie theaters of Colon Street are fading people’s palaces. Retrieved from
BluPrint: https://bluprint.onemega.com/colon‐street‐movie‐theaters/ (Accessed December 15,
2019) September 11, 2018.
Chow Ka Ching Bernard. Developing an Effective Framework for Pedestrianization Schemes in

Hong Kong. Unpublished Masters Thesis. The University of Hong Kong. 2002
Chuang , Howard Hao‐Chun, Rogelio Oliva and Olga Perdikaki. Traffic‐Based Labor Planning in
Retail Stores. Production and Operations Management 25 (1), 96‐113. January 2016
EMBARQ Türkiye, The Pedestrianization of Istanbul’s Historic Peninsula – Perspectives from

Local Businesses, EMBARQ 2013
Carmen Hass‐Klau, Impact of pedestrianization and traffic calming on retailing ‐ A review of

the evidence from Germany and the UK. Transport Policy 1993
Krambeck, Holly Virginia. The Global Walkability Index. Masters Thesis. Master of City Planning
and Master of Science in Transportation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2006
Leather, James, Herbert Fabian, Sudhir Gota, and Alvin Mejia, Walkability and Pedestrian
Facilities in Asian Cities ‐ State and Issues, ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series,
Asian Development Bank, February 2011
Litman, Todd. Economic Value of Walkability, Transportation Research Record 1828,

Transportation Research Board, pp. 3‐11. 2003
Lydon, M., Garcia, A., & Duany, A., (2015). Tactical Urbanism: Short‐term Action for Long‐term
Change. Washing, DC: Island Press.
New York City Department of Transportation, The Economic Benefits of Sustainable Streets,
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dot‐economic‐benefits‐of‐sustainable‐
streets.pdf (accessed 15 July 2019) December 2013
New York City Department of Transportation, Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st
Century Streets http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2012‐10‐measuring‐the‐
street.pdf (accessed 15 July 2019) December 2012
Perdikaki,Olga, Saravanan Kesavan and Jayashankar M. Swaminathan. Effect of Traffic on

Sales and Conversion Rates of Retail Stores. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
14 (1), 145‐162, 2012
PLANADES 188
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Pujades‐Rodríguez, Mar, Tricia McKeever, Sarah Lewis, Duncan Whyatt, John Britton and
Andrea Venn. Effect of traffic pollution on respiratory and allergic disease in adults: cross‐
sectional and longitudinal analyses. BMC Pulmonary Medicine. Published online 2009 Aug 24.
doi: 10.1186/1471‐2466‐9‐42
PLANADES 189
List of Appendices
Appendix AA: Lot labeling used for this Study
Appendix AB: ADB Walkability Surveys of 13 Asian Cities
Appendix AC: Street Design Improvements implemented by NYC DOT
Survey Planning Reports
Appendix BA: Focus Group Discussion Report
Appendix BB: Public Transport Inventory Survey Report
Appendix BC: Land Use Inventory Survey Report
Appendix BD: Pax Interviews Survey Report
Appendix BE: Establishment Interviews Survey Report
Appendix BF: Pedestrian Counts Survey Report
Raw Survey Results Reports
Appendix CA: Land Use Inventory Survey Results
Appendix CB: Pedestrian Counts Raw Survey Results
Appendix CC: Pedestrian Interviews Raw Survey Results
Appendix CD: Establishment Interviews Raw Survey Results
PLANADES
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix AA
Lot Coding for Rapid Land Use Inventory
PLANADES AA‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES AA‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix AB
ADB Walkwability Surveys of 13 Asian Cities
1.1. Background
An ADB study lead by Leather et al (2011) included Cebu in a set of comparative
walkability surveys, covering 13 Asian cities. The authors note that “due to some field
constraints, only short stretches of roads and/or streets were surveyed as compared to
the suggested minimum length per area, i.e., 4 kilometers (km) for residential and
educational areas, 5 km for commercial areas, and 2 km for public transport terminal
area.”
Table 1 Surveyed Length and Pedestrian Count for the ADB Study (2011)
Source: Leather, et. al , 2011
Figure 1 shows the comparative walkability ratings for residential areas in the 13 cities.
It shows that Cebu is given the second‐lowest rating, just above Jakarta, with a score of
46.53. On the other hand, Figure 2 shows that Cebu does significantly better than the
average, with a score of 64.44 compared to the average of 54.81. Interestingly, for
commercial areas, Figure 3 shows that Cebu has a relatively high score that is pulled up
by a high “security from crime” rating, while being pulled down by low ratings for
“Disability Infrastructure”, and “Amenities”. Figure 4 shows a similar low rating for
“Disability Infrastructure”, and “Amenities” in an area near a public transport terminal,
though Cebu is still rated higher than the average.
PLANADES AB‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 1 Walkability Ratings of Surveyed Residential Areas by Parameter
PLANADES AB‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 2 Walkability Ratings of Surveyed Educational Areas by Parameter
PLANADES AB‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 3 Walkability Ratings of Surveyed Commercial Areas by Parameter
PLANADES AB‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 4 Walkability Rating around Surveyed Public Transport Terminals by Parameter
PLANADES AB‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix AC
Street Design Improvements implemented by NYC DOT
1.1. Background
The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) implemented a broad set of
street design improvements with the goals for safety, serving all users and creating great
public spaces while also maintaining the flow of traffic. NYCDOT’s 2012 report on
Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets outlines the key approaches to
street design projects. The report detailed the metrics that NYCDOT used to evaluate these
projects to illustrate how measuring results can show progress toward safe, sustainable,
livable and economically competitive streets.
It should be noted that not all these projects are pedestrianization projects per se (few of
these projects exclude the cars from these streets), but are founded on gaining a better
balance since the goals of NYCDOT can be summarized as:
 Design for safety
 Design for all users of the street
 Design great public spaces
In turn, the following strategies were employed in order to achieve the above goals:
 Designing safer streets, to provide safe and attractive options for all street users
 Building great public spaces to create economic value and neighborhood vitality
 Improving bus service to bring rapid transit beyond the subway
 Reducing delay and speeding to allow for faster, safer travel
 Efficiency in parking and loading to improve access to businesses and neighborhoods
Finally, the metrics they used to track the success of these projects and to inform the
design of their future projects are as follows:
 Crashes and injuries for motorists pedestrians and cyclists
 Volume of vehicles, bus passengers, bicycle riders, and users of public space
 Traffic speed, aiming to move traffic not too slowly, but also not too fast
 Economic Vitality, including growth in retail activity
 User satisfaction
 Environmental and public health benefits
1.2. Street Redesign Inventory

The NYCDOT (2012) report summarized their redesign approaches per objective in terms
of Key Treatments, and Also Helpful ‐ as follows:
1. Designing safer streets
Key treatments ‐ Simplified intersections; Dedicated left, right, and through lanes;
Pedestrian safety islands; Protected bike lanes; Leading pedestrian intervals and
split phasing;
PLANADES AC‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Also helpful ‐ Turn bans; Mixing zones for bicycles and left‐turning vehicles;
Medians; Wide parking lanes; Speed humps and slow zones
2. Building great public spaces
Key treatments ‐ Create new pedestrian plazas – first using temporary materials,
later as capital projects; Street furniture; Seasonal seating platform in curbside
lane; Striping and planters; Maintenance agreements with local organizations;
Programmed events;
Also helpful ‐ Simplified intersections
3. Improving bus service
Key treatments ‐ Offset bus lanes; Transit Signal Priority; Bus bulbs; Bus lane
enforcement cameras;
Also helpful ‐ Pedestrian safety islands; Turn lanes and turn bans; Delivery
windows
4. Reducing delay and speeding
Key treatments ‐ Adaptive signal control; Signal optimization; Dedicated left, right,
and through lanes; Simplified intersections; Neighborhood Slow Zones;
Also helpful ‐ Protected bicycle lanes; Pedestrian safety islands; Wide parking
lanes;
5. Efficiency in parking and loading
Key treatments ‐ PARK Smart; Commercial Paid Parking; Delivery Windows; Muni
meters;
Also helpful ‐ Offset bus lanes
1.3. Findings/Lessons Learned and Implications to this Study

The reported results of the interventions introduced in 2012 are summarized in the
following table (Table 1). It shows their comparison of “before” and “after” results for the
safety, volume and traffic speed. Economic vitality results are shown with comparisons to
areas which did not get similar treatments, giving a sense of the “with” and “without”
project situations.
PLANADES AC‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 1 Summary of Effects of Street Redesign / Improvement Projects in New York, USA
Project Type Project Crashes Volume Traffic Economic Others
Location and injuries Speed Vitality
First protected 8th and 9th 35% decrease Up to 49%
bicycle lane in Avenues in injuries to increase in
the US (Manhattan) all street retail
users (8th sales (Locally‐
Ave) based
58% decrease businesses on
in injuries to 9th Ave from
all street 23rd to 31st
Users (9th Sts.,
Ave) compared
to 3%
borough‐
wide)
Neighborhood East 180th 67% decrease 29% decrease
traffic calming Street (Bronx) in in eastbound
pedestrian speeding
crashes 32% decrease
in westbound
speeding
Expanding an Union Square Injury crashes Speeding User satisfac‐
iconic space North fell by 26% decreased by tion:
(Manhattan) 16%, while 74% of users
median prefer the
speeds new
increased by configuration
14%
Transforming Pearl Street 172%
an underused (Brooklyn) increase in
parking area retail sales (at
locally‐based
businesses,
compared to
18% borough‐
wide)
Making bus Fordham 10% increase 20% increase 71% increase
routes work Road (Bronx) in bus in bus speeds in retail sales
better: ridership (at locally‐
based
businesses,
compared to
23% borough‐
wide)
Dedicated First and 37% decrease 12% increase 18% increase 47%fewer
lanes for both Second in injury in bus in bus speeds commercial
buses and Avenues crashes ridership vacancies
bikes: (Manhattan) Up to 177% (compared to
increase in 2% more
bicycle borough‐
volumes wide)
Creative traffic Hoyt Avenue 21% decrease 37% increase 51%
engineering for at the RFK in crashes in weekend improvement
wide streets Bridge bicycle in
(Queens) volumes northbound
travel times
PLANADES AC‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Project Type Project Crashes Volume Traffic Economic Others

Location and injuries Speed Vitality
Using 42nd to 60th 10% increase Environment
technology to Street in travel al and public
manage a (Manhattan) speeds health:
congested 9% decrease
business in
district Greenhouse
Gas
emissions in
peak
hours
Improving Park Slope 7% reduction 20% decrease 18% more
parking for (Brooklyn) in traffic in average unique
local volumes (less parking visitors found
businesses cruising for duration parking
parking)
Reducing Church 21% increase
double parking Avenue in travel
on a busy truck (Brooklyn) speeds at
route peak hours
19% increase
in reliability
of travel
speeds
Source: Table prepared using data presented in NYCDOT’s Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets,
2012
PLANADES AC‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BA
Focus Group Discussion Report
1.1. Organizing the FGD

Two weeks prior to the conduct of the FGD on May 10, 2019, invitations were sent to
various organizations/individuals who either had business interests or whose
establishments/offices were located in the study area. Confirmations were followed up
by phone call, email or text messages. During the actual FGD, 14 participants out of the
20 invitees showed up. The FGD was composed of representatives from various sectors,
such as the academe, NGO, private/business/industry and transportation and civic
groups.
The focus group discussion was conducted using the following key questions:
 Are you familiar with pedestrianization? What does pedestrianization mean for you?
 Will pedestrianization help to attract more customers / clientele to the downtown area?
 Which streets do you think will benefit most from pedestrianization?
 What do you think are needed in order to attract more customers to the downtown
area? Should these be prioritized over the improvement of the pedestrian
environment?
 Would “simple” sidewalk improvement have the same level impact on business in the
downtown area as “full” pedestrianization?
For this FGD, the study team has invited representatives for organization and groups as
listed inTable 1. These groups are assumed to have an appreciation of the business
needs of the area, and the FGD will be an opportunity to identify issues and
opportunities in relation to pedestrianization as a method for revitalizing the business
climate of the area.
Table 1 List of Original Invitees to the Focus Group Discussion

Name Position Company/Organization
1. Mr. Jose Soberano President Colon Business Association Inc
2. Mr. Virgilio Espeleta President Cebu Chamber of Commerce
3. Ms. May Elizabeth Ybanez Exec. Director Cebu Chamber of Commerce
4. Mr. Shalimar Hofer Tamano Regional Director Dept. of Tourism‐R7
5. Dir. Asteria Caberte Regional Director Dept. of Trade and Industry‐R7
6. Arch’t. Adeline Lauron Dean, Univ. of the Visayas
College of Engineering and
Architecture
7. Ms. Margret Rosario Chair Univ. of San Carlos
Department of Architecture
PLANADES BA‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Name Position Company/Organization

8. Dr. Jocelyn Gerra Exec. Director Ramon Aboitiz Foundation Inc
Culture and Heritage Unit (RAFI)
(CHU)
9. Mr. Robert Go President Phil Retailers Association‐Cebu
Chapter
President and CEO Prince Retail Group
10. Archt. Yumi Espina Movement for a Livable Cebu
11. Atty. Antonio Oposa Environment Lawyer
12. Mr. Kenneth Cobonpue CEO Kenneth Cobonpue Furniture
Co‐Chair Regional Development Council
(RDC)
13. Jay Garganera TindakBisdak
14. Ryan Yu General Manager CITRASCO
15. VUDTRASCO
16. Tess Banaynal Fernandez Founding Member LihokPilipina
17. Edgar V. Comeros (RDC‐Econ Devt Com member‐ ViCTO National Federation and
) Development Center
18. Andres Muego (RDC‐PSR member; Chair, Proprietor‐Manager, T&M
Environment Committee) Consultancy and Allied Services
Managing Partner, SuGBuTech
(Sustainable and Green Building
Technologies)
While not all the invitees were able to attend, the FGD did get the active participation of
most of these relevant persons.
The study team conducted a Focus Group Discussion, on May 10, 2019 (Friday) 2:00pm
– 5:00 pm at the Pearl Room, Cebu Business Hotel, along Colon St. The representation
of various stakeholders was relatively comprehensive and their perspectives were
discussed.
PLANADES BA‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 1 View of the FGD held on May 10, 2019 at Cebu Business Hotel
1.2. Actual Conduct of the FGD

Not all the original invitees were able to attend or send a representative, which may
have partly been due to the holding of the Cebu Mayoralty debate at the same time.
Despite this, there was a meaningful discussion on the pedestrianization concept. The
actual attendees are listed below.
Table 2 Actual Attendees of the Focus Group Discussion held 10 May 2019
No. Name Office/Agency/ Designation
Company
1. Mr. Edgar Comeros VICTO/RDC Treasurer
2. Ms. Teresa Fernandez LihokPilipina
3. Ar. Nathaniel Hernando University of the Visayas Faculty
4. Ar. Antonio Valenzona University of San Carlos Faculty
5. Ms. Teresa dela Cruz Philippine Retailers Association – Executive Assistant
Cebu Chapter
6. Ar. Joseph Michael Espina Movement for a Livable Cebu
7. Mr. Ryan Yu CITRASCO Chairman
8. Mr. Rene Avila Colon Heritage Corporation Director
9. Ms. Doris Mongaya PR Works CEO/Founder
10. Ms. May Sarmiento Confederation of Philippine Project Manager
Exporters Foundation
11. Mr. Richard Bugarin IService Global Business Solutions CFO
PLANADES BA‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
No. Name Office/Agency/ Designation

Company
12. Mr. Julius Torio IService Global Business Solutions CEO
13. Mr. Francis Gatungay IService Global Business Solutions Cebu Manager
14. Mr. Joachim Michael Espina Espina, Perez‐Espina and Associates Associate Architect
15. Ms. Rathy Jane Estimar Harbour City Dimsum House Business
Development
Manager (OIC)
16. Ms. Angelica Ladrera University of San Carlos Faculty
17. Ms. Ranielle Sable University of the Visayas Student
18. Ms. Lovella Baguin University of the Visayas Student
1.3. Results of the FGD
1.3.1. Pedestrianization Concept

The FGD was guided by key questions. Responses are discussed/presented in the
following sections.
Q1: Are you familiar with pedestrianization/ what does pedestrianization mean for
you?
The participants had various responses, each bullet representing individual sharing:
 Putting lines/markings where the public can cross

 Cleaning up the sidewalks
 Giving streets to pedestrians
 Providing spaces for pedestrians – whether for biking, walking, etc.; small collective
spaces like streets of Barcelona
 Makings sidewalks for pedestrians by removing vendors, like in Paris where people
can walk and coffee shops are outside and very clean
 Making improvements for better pathways for people or to modernize pathways like
have a better traffic system (as to) when pedestrians can cross
 Excluding or minimizing the vehicles; road use is mainly for pedestrians
 Converting existing streets so pedestrians can use them, so no more vehicles and it
will be healthier environment or environment friendly space because there will be
less air and noise pollution
 Organizing the streets and providing walkways for people walking and streets/roads
for vehicles to pass
 Roads are not owned by cars. It is asserting or claiming the rights of pedestrians in
the use of the road. Safety is an issue
PLANADES BA‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 There should be clear walkways for women and children and PWDs especially those
with wheelchairs. Currently, there are no pathways for them.
 An environment that is livable‐ not just for walking but also for interacting,
socialization, enjoyment, that the space is livable.
 Depends on how you define pedestrians ‐ pedestrianization should be perceived in
terms of circulation and safety. Since urban designs (involve) planning for where
pedestrians and where vehicles should be. It is necessary to solve circulation for
pedestrians and for vehicles. It is how we see urbanization and urban spaces and not
just see sections but also consider the whole. So even if we close one section, its
connections to other sections remain or its circulation continues to spread out.
 Concept of pedestrianization should be not limited to one perception just to lead to
these things because we see it as people. We also have to consider all aspects of the
set up.
 When you pedestrianize, you consider business opportunities. You have to fit
pedestrians in relation to what business opportunities to develop in an area. Most
pedestrians in Colon St especially in the evening are people going home from work
and would eat and run and there are business opportunities there. Match
pedestrians and business type.
 Effect of pedestrians is socio ‐ ecological resilience, bringing the community together.
If we can improve the urban area where more people can walk and socialize, social
and ecological resilience is developed. So, if we will be improving physical
infrastructure (it will be for the reason) that more people can socialize.
1.3.2. Possible attraction of pedestrianization

Q2: Will pedestrianization help to attract more customers/clientele to the downtown
area?
Responses are aggregated or grouped according to similarity:
 Yes. It will be good for retail. In planning, we have to consider the business people.
 Pedestrianization should be linked to people who go to churches and the plaza; the
Sto Nino Church, Cathedral Church, RAFI (Ramon Aboitiz Foundation, Inc.) and Jesuit
Museums. Lopez Jaena ‐ Parian ‐ Mabini – Plaza Independencia area is an old
historical area; there are educational institutions, museum, churches, etc.
 There are destinations that will not be necessary to close off the roads.
Pedestrianization must be anchored on destination.
 Pedestrianization also talks about the character of people who use the streets and it
changes according to time of day – daytime are for students and for workers
towards end of day.
 The answer is ‘it depends’. It is not a yes or no answer. It depends on where and
what or how it is related to customers and movement of pedestrians. It’s a question
of how to make travel continuous. The project has to look at how pedestrians get to
one place from another.
PLANADES BA‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Walking along the streets –has to consider security and safety

 Will the pedestrianization project help solve the issue of flooding? Colon and
Manalili Streets and some parts of Carbon are prone to flooding. We have to wait 3 –
5 hrs for floods to subside. Current walkways are unusable during floods. Under
Gaisano main is a river. The river comes from Brgy. Sambag going to South Bus
Terminal then to Colon. As the city kept constructing buildings over that part of the
river along Colon St. , the river got narrower. Gaisano built a tunnel for the river to
pass through and other establishments followed suit. Since the river has narrowed,
floods occur during heavy rains plus the fact that water rise during high tide. A 2‐
hour rain 2 weeks ago caused flooding that took around 2 – 3 hours to subside.
 Suggested prioritization: address flooding first, then security, then physical
infrastructure.
1.3.3. Areas to be benefitted by pedestrianization

Q3: Which streets do you think will benefit most from pedestrianization?
The attendees had the following ideas:
 Existing practice, road that is closed to traffic ‐ Street fronting Sto. Niño (Juan luna
St.), part of Legaspi St, Magallanes St., Magellans’ Cross to Plaza Independencia ,
Burgos St., F. Gonzales St. No flooding in these areas.
 Closing Colon will result to a lot of drawbacks (impact on public transport and traffic).
 Part of Colon and part of Pelaez St. is already pedestrianized at night – no need to
fully close since they’re already pedestrianized.
1.3.4. Prioritization to attract more people

Q4: What do you think are needed in order to attract more customers to the
downtown area? Should these be prioritized over the improvement of the pedestrian
environment?
The participants mentioned the following points:
 Pedestrianized roads should be properly managed like events are managed in a mall
especially on safety and security issues (indicates need for centralized management,
at least of each road)
 Security, flooding, traffic management – includingprovision of parking areas, physical
improvement of facilities;
 Things that need to be done/ elements that need to be considered for
pedestrianization to be successful, all of these have to be addressed:
o Traffic management/ circulation
o Flooding
PLANADES BA‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
o Safety / security
o Pedestrian facility improvement
o Urban greening
o Weather protection
o Management of events and use of space
 You have to put it in the context of objectives. So you have the objective here of to
increase business opportunities along the streets. But there is a perception that it is
not safe to walk along the streets.
 Physical development should come first. Security will be solved if maramingtao. In
the concept of development, it is not necessary to have many policemen. Vendors
themselves will be securing their goods. In the night market, we not heard of
snatching or pickpocket in Colon area unless you go out of the area. The people
there are trying to eke out a living along the streets and they will secure that. The
vendors have an association.
 Who would be walking on sidewalks with embankments, humps and uneven surface
and every now and then, there are floods. So physical infrastructure should be
addressed first.
 Flooding and safety should be addressed first since that’s a real issue. Starting a new
development without resolving the recurring issues first would result recurrence of
the same issues in the future.In terms of change of traffic circulation now, a lot of
businessmen have to walk towards their parking area and we have unsafe walkways
for them. This is causing problems on logistics including parking areas for delivery
vans.Floods have to be addressed because walkways would be unusable when there
are floods. So address flooding first, then security then physical infrastructure
 Address flooding and physical infra together first
 Flood management is not necessarily solved with a physical development solution
because it could be more of a waste management problem. Physical development is
attuned to the requirement of the environment. You have to address the flooding
and part of it is garbage management.
 Events management like Sinulog and GabiisaKabilin when many people would
converge in the downtown area.
 In a perfect world, it would be great to prioritize infrastructure and that would
include flooding and fixing facades. Considering all constraints, downtown area is a
magnet of people because goods are cheap there, although many people also don’t
come because of safety and security. If we improve security first, definitely there
will be an increase of foot traffic. Flooding happens only during rains but it still needs
to be addressed immediately. Infrastructure should be no. 1 but to jumpstart this,
start with security.
 Silicon Valley as the number smart city in the world and the first that was addressed
was rebranding the city. Branding a city is like Colon is synonymous with a product,
for it to be known for people to come here.
 In Singapore, the government there helped the businesses to relocate themselves to
a street that has been branded like a flower street or a guitar street or hardware, etc.
once the people were in there, they started to innovate the way people are coming
PLANADES BA‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
in, the infrastructure inside “smart” cities are addressing their issues not on the
technical side but on the branding side. If you’re rebranding something it is more of
a cultural revolution. People will be going to a place for a particular reason. No
matter how bad a place is but if people love it, they would go to that place.
Regardless of how good a product is, if there’s a good marketing/ branding, people
will buy it. Then you can address in parallel the other issues on environment.
1.3.5. Possible impacts of simple sidewalk improvements

Q5: Would ‘simple’ sidewalk improvement have the same level impact on business in
the downtown area as ‘full’ pedestrianization?
Participants appeared to agree that:
 Full pedestrianization is not needed; while pedestrianization may benefit retail

businesses, it may cause more problems for non‐retail businesses and other
activities that rely on vehicle movement.
 Weekend or occasional closure may help more than full closure by helping to market
the place and make it familiar; but full closure would only benefit a few (the
retailers).
 Events for occasional closure or pedestrianization would be accompanied by overt
management of traffic flow and parking and security of visitors. Similar management
would have to be instituted if a road is fully pedestrianized.
PLANADES BA‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BB
Public Transport Inventory Survey Report
1.1. Developing the survey plan

Prior to the conduct of the PT inventory, an ocular inspection was conducted on May
2019 to first gain a general understanding of how the PT routes enter, exit and go
around the defined Study Area. Available information from previous transport studies
and various reports also served as initial source of information regarding the local
routes.
1.2. Recruitment and briefing

Local surveyors familiar with the local routes were recruited in early May 2019. They
were briefed as to the boundaries of the Study Area, the necessary information to be
obtained and the standard method to get the information. The Study Team also brought
the survey supervisors to a part of the Study Area to demonstrate the various survey
mechanics in actual field conditions. Photocopies of the Study Area were made where
the surveyors are to list down the information obtained during the inventory.
1.3. Conduct of the inventory

The inventory was conducted from May 14 to May 17, 2019. The first part of the
inventory involved the surveyors stationing at each of the road entry/exit points of the
Study Area and listing all the PT routes that go through the roads. From here, a master
list of all the routes going in and out of the Study Area was made. Each surveyor was
then assigned a list of routes to cover.
The second part of the inventory involved the surveyors actually riding the PT routes
one by one. The surveyor will board the PT route a few hundred meters away from
Study Area entry point and ride along until the PUV had already exited the Study Area.
Along the way, the surveyors will mark on the map the path that the PUV took. Upon
alighting the PUV, while the route is still fresh in his memory, the surveyor will then
clear up the sketch that he made, so that it will be legible for the encoder to read. After
this, the surveyor will then ride the next route in his assigned list and repeat the
process. Each route was drawn on one map to avoid clutter and overlapping of lines.
After the inventory, the maps were then passed on to an encoder who then transfers
the map alignment information into a digitized version of the map. A list of the routes
along with their information was also encoded into a spreadsheet program to be used
for analysis later on.
Some problems encountered

Inconsistent appearance for some of the routes: There were some routes which were
observed during the first part of the inventory, but did not appear during the second
PLANADES BB‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
part. Likewise, there were some routes that were not observed during the first part of
the inventory, but showed up during the second part.
Inconsistent names for some of the routes: There were some routes which had the exact
route alignment, but different route names or route codes indicated in their vehicle
body. There were also some PUV which had the same route code in their vehicle body,
but different route name.
Variations in route alignment: There were some PUV which showed the same route
code and route name in their body, but had variations in their actual route alignment.
1.4. Summary of information obtained

A total of 53 unique routes were identified to be entering/exiting the delineated Study
Area. All except one of the routes are ordinary PUJ, with the lone exception being the
new aircon ‘beep’.
Route
Complete Route Name Mode
Code
01B Sambag ‐ Pier 2 & 3 PUJ (ordinary)
01C Private ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary)
01K Urgello ‐ Park Mall PUJ (ordinary)
02A Sanciangko ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary)
02B SBT ‐ Pier PUJ (ordinary)
03A Mabolo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
03G Mabolo ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
03L Mabolo (Luyo) ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
04C Lahug ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
04D Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
04H Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
04I Busay (Plaza Housing) ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
06A Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
06B Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
06C Guadalupe ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
06D Banawa ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
06F Guadalupe ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
07B Banawa ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
07D Banawa ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
08E Pasil ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
08F SM ‐ Alumnos PUJ (ordinary)
08G Alumnos ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
09C Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
09F Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
09G Basak ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
PLANADES BB‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Route
Complete Route Name Mode
Code
10C Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
10E Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
10F Bulacao ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
10G Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
10H SM ‐ Pardo PUJ (ordinary)
10K Pardo ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
10M Pardo ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary)
11A Inayawan ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
11D Inayawan ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
12A Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
12B Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
12C Labangon ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
12E SM ‐ Labangon PUJ (ordinary)
12F Labangon ‐ Magallanes PUJ (ordinary)
12G Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary)
12I Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary)
12J Labangon ‐ SM PUJ (ordinary)
12M Labangon – Colon PUJ (ordinary)
13B Talamban ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
13C Talamban ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
62B Pit‐os ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
62C Talamban ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
14D Ayala ‐ Colon PUJ (ordinary)
15 Oppra ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
17B Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
17C Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
17D Apas ‐ Carbon PUJ (ordinary)
(none) IT Park ‐ City Hall Beep (aircon PUJ)
PLANADES BB‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5. Route Maps of Public Transportation Routes Within the Study Area based
on Public Transport Inventory
01A
Sambag ‐ Pier 2 & 3
PLANADES BB‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
01C
Private – Pier
PLANADES BB‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
01K
Urgello ‐ Park Mall
PLANADES BB‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
02A
Sanciangko ‐ Pier
PLANADES BB‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
02B
SBT ‐ Pier
PLANADES BB‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
03A
Mabolo ‐ Colon
PLANADES BB‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
03B
Mabolo ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
03G
Mabolo ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
03L
Mabolo (Luyo) ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
04C
Lahug ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
04D
Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
04H
Plaza Housing ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
04I
Busay (Plaza Housing) – Carbon
PLANADES BB‐16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
06A
Guadalupe – Carbon
PLANADES BB‐17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
06B
PLANADES BB‐18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
06C
Guadalupe – Colon
PLANADES BB‐19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
06D
Banawa – Colon
PLANADES BB‐20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
06F
PLANADES BB‐21
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
07B
Banawa – Carbon
PLANADES BB‐22
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
07D
Banawa – Carbon
PLANADES BB‐23
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
08E
Pasil – Colon
PLANADES BB‐24
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
08F
SM – Alumnos
PLANADES BB‐25
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
08G
Alumnos – Colon
PLANADES BB‐26
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
09C
Basak – Colon
PLANADES BB‐27
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
09F
Basak – Colon
PLANADES BB‐28
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
09G
Basak – Colon
PLANADES BB‐29
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10C
Pardo – Colon
PLANADES BB‐30
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10E
Pardo – Colon
PLANADES BB‐31
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10F
Bulacao – Colon
PLANADES BB‐32
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10G
Pardo – Colon
PLANADES BB‐33
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10H
SM ‐ Pardo
PLANADES BB‐34
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10K
Pardo – Colon
PLANADES BB‐35
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
10M
Pardo – SM
PLANADES BB‐36
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11A
Inayawan – Colon
PLANADES BB‐37
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
11D
Inayawan – Colon
PLANADES BB‐38
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12A
Labangon ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐39
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12B
Labangon ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐40
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12C
Labangon ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐41
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12E
SM ‐ Labangon
PLANADES BB‐42
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12F
Labangon ‐ Magallanes
PLANADES BB‐43
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12G
Labangon – SM
PLANADES BB‐44
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12I
Labangon – SM
PLANADES BB‐45
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12J
Labangon – SM
PLANADES BB‐46
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
12M
Labangon – Colon
PLANADES BB‐47
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
13B
Talamban ‐ Colon
PLANADES BB‐48
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
13C
Talamban ‐ Colon
PLANADES BB‐49
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
62B
Pit‐os ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐50
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
62C
Talamban ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐51
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
14D
Ayala – Colon
PLANADES BB‐52
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
15
Oppra ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐53
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
17B
Apas ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐54
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
17C
Apas ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐55
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
17D
Apas ‐ Carbon
PLANADES BB‐56
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
IT Park ‐ City Hall
PLANADES BB‐57
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BC
Land Use Inventory Survey Report
1.1. Labeling the study area

The first step done for the Rapid Land Use Inventory was to develop a labeling
nomenclature for all of the lots within the Study Area. Cadastral maps were provided by
the City Assessor’s Office showing the lot cuts for each block. From here, each block was
numbered, followed by the numbering of each of the lots within the block, resulting in a
two‐number unique identification for each lot. Shown in Appendix XA is the compilation
of maps showing the labels used for each block within the Study Area.
Figure 1 Labeling of blocks within the Study Area
PLANADES BC‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 2 Sample labeling of individual lots for a block within the Study Area.
Figure 3 Final block and lot numbering used for the Study Area
PLANADES BC‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.2. Preliminary ocular inspection of the Study Area

A preliminary ocular inspection of the Study Area was done in January 2019 to help the
Study Team have an understanding of the range of the different types of buildings, land
uses and physical conditions present in the Study Area. This served as a basis to develop
the different classifications and categories to be used in the form.
1.3. Developing the questionnaire form

To help design the Land Use Inventory form, a list of the various establishment
attributes required for the analysis was made, followed by a list of the different
classifications and categories for each attribute. Whenever possible, codes were given
to each classification/category to make it quicker for the surveyor to write them down.
From here, a draft survey questionnaire was then formatted and layouted. This draft
was then shown to other experts and concerned personnel for comments. From these
comments, various revisions were made until a final version was accepted. A sample of
the final Land Use Inventory Form is shown below, along with the list of the attributes,
classifications and codes used.
PLANADES BC‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 4 Inventory Form
PLANADES BC‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 5 Lot codes used for the form
PLANADES BC‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.4. Recruitment, briefing and dry run

Local architects and apprentices were tapped to conduct the Land Use Inventory,
because of their familiarity with technical building jargon. This then not only lessens the
probability of misunderstanding or misinterpretation, but also lessens the time to train
neophyte surveyors. At the same time, engaging local architectural practitioners is also
in line with the thrust of the Study to engage the local community and professionals’
right at the start to help develop a sense of ownership of the Study.
A briefing was held in early May 2018 with the Survey Team to explain how the survey is
to be conducted and how the information is to be inputted into the form. A dry run was
also conducted to see if the proposed mechanics are effective and see if there are
improvements needed to be made to the form. The dry run was held the day after the
briefing at the area around Cebu City Hall, Sto. Nino Church and Metropolitan
Cathedral. Based on the dry run, some additional categories/classifications for some
attributes were defined, and adjustments to the survey mechanics were made.
1.5. Conduct of the inventory

The actual conduct of the Land Use Inventory was from May 7 to May 28, 2019. Two
teams of two persons each were deployed with an overall survey coordinator. Each
team was assigned specific blocks to be surveyed. For each team, one is in charge of
observation and measuring, while the other person is in charge of listing down the
observed information into the form. A separate day was used to take pictures of the
different establishments and sidewalk conditions. The target of the inventory was a
100% capture of the Study Area.
1.6. Some problems encountered

Inaccessible lots or upper floors: Some lots were inaccessible because they were interior
lots and no obvious path or access to them was found. Also, for some buildings with
multiple storeys, the upper floors were inaccessible to the surveyors, since either there
was no clear access to them, or the surveyors were not allowed to enter them since
they were outsiders or unauthorized people.
Wide variety of land uses: The Study Area featured a wide variety of land uses, with
some being very unique or having no obvious similarities with other land uses. This
presented the Study Team with a challenge on how to label them in such a way that
they can be aggregated into bigger categories so that it will be useful for analysis.
PLANADES BC‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.7. Summary of samples obtained

A total of 405 lots were identified within the Study Area. Of these, 35 were inner lots
and were inaccessible to the surveyors, so no information was able to be obtained
about them. From the 405 lots, 355 were along major streets, while 50 are along minor
streets. V. Gullas has the highest number of individual lots with 67, followed by Osmena
Blvd with 53.

Sikatuna St. 2
Zamora St. 3
Zulueta St. 1
TOTAL 405
PLANADES BC‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BD
Pax Interviews Survey Report

Since the pedestrian interviews are to be conducted through intercept method, the
questionnaire was designed to be as concise as possible, so that it will be faster to be
administered, and thus decreasing the likelihood of rejection or incompletion. The
maximum time targeted was not more than five minutes per questionnaire.
Based on previous studies and general experience of the consultants, the Study Team
came up with a list of the most relevant pedestrian attributes to be asked. They are
basically divided into general profile, basic trip characteristics and general preference of
improvements that can entice them to visit the Study Area more frequently. Whenever
possible, each of the questions was made as a multiple choice type question, so that it
will be easier and faster for the respondents to answer. The questionnaire was also
translated to the local Bisaya language since not all respondents are fluent in English.
The early drafts of the questionnaire were shown to various key stakeholders for
comments, and then were revised to address some of the points raised. Revised drafts
of the questionnaire were then pre‐tested by the local interviewers to check clarity of
understanding both by the interviewer and by the respondent. From these pretests,
adjustments to the wording, framing of the questions, and multiple choices were made.
The process was repeated until the answers of the respondents closely match the
intended meanings of the questions.
A copy of the final Pedestrian Interview Form used is shown below.
PLANADES BD‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Surveyor: __________________________________________ Time: ____________ No: _______________
Street: ____________________________________ Establishment: ____________________________________
1. Kasarian 3. Unsa imong trabaho ?

______1. Male ____1. Worker/Employee ____6. Unemployed
______2. Female ____2. Part‐time employee/OJT (retired, religious, no job, etc.)
2. Edad ____3. Own business/company ____7. OFW
______ ____4. Self‐employed professional ____8. Student
____5. Executive/Manager ____9. Housewife
____10. Specify ________________
4. Diin ka gikan usa ka ni‐anhi? 7. (What is the establishment you 10. Asa ka padung kahuman dinhi?
went to?) (Pinakaulahing destinasyon)
(Brgy + City) (Brgy + City)
5. Nag‐unsa ka sa imong gigikanan? 8. Unsa imo gibuhat dinhi ? 11. Mag‐unsa ka sa destinasyon?
____1. Home ____1. Home ____1. Home

____2. W ork ____2. Work ____2. Work
____3. Business ____3. Business ____3. Business
____4. School ____4. School ____4. School
____5. Errands ____5. Errands ____5. Errands
____5. Social (meet friends, etc) ____5. Social (meet friends, etc) ____5. Social (meet friends, etc)
____6. Mall ____6. Mall ____6. Mall
____7. Food/drinks ____7. Food/drinks ____7. Food/drinks
____8. Specify___________ ____8. Specify___________ ____8. Specify___________
6. Gi‐unsa nimo pag‐anhi gikanpag‐ 9. Unsa imo sakyan padung sa Codes for #6 and #9
anhi gikan sa diri? destinasyon? [A] Aircon jeep; beep
(Refer to code sheet on the leftmost (Refer to code sheet on the leftmost [J] Jeep [C] Car
box. If multiple modes, list mode box. If multiple modes, list mode [U] UV Express [X] Taxi
according to sequence, separated by according to sequence, separated by [B] Bus [S] Shuttle
comma) comma) [P] P2P, Mybus [G] Grab/Micab
Ans: Ans: [W] Walk [M] Motor (private)
[K] T ricycle/Pedicab
[H] Habal‐Habal/Angkas
[F] Ferry
Others, specify ____________
12. Sa usa ka semana, igka‐pila ni 13. Nakasinati na ka nga makawatan 14. Unsa ang pinakaim portante nga
nimo himu‐on nga biyahe diri ? o naa’y kalapasan sa imong himuon aron mas FRE QUENT
seguridad diring dapita? imong pag anhi sa downtown?
Palihug rank gikan 1 hangtud
______1. 4‐7x a week ____1. Yes.
hangtud 4, 1 isip pinaka‐
______2. 1‐3x a week Specify ______________
importante
______3. 1‐3x a month ____2. No
______4. Rare/Infrequent Physical improvement of
______5. First time walkways
(e.g. wider, no obstacles)
______6. Specify _______________
Safety and security
15. Bahin sa imong gipili nga number
Urban environment
1 sa question 13, unsa ang mga
(eg. waste management,
SPECIFIC ASPECTS nga kinahanglan
flooding, traffic)
ayohon.
New shops/activities in
downtown
Figure 1 Pax Interview Form
PLANADES BD‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.2. Conduct of the interviews

A pre‐test for the pedestrian survey was undertaken by two (2) enumerators for two (2)
days to establish the interview duration, the number of respondents that can be
interviewed for a specific period and to have an idea of possible respondent responses.
Prior to the actual implementation of the survey, an orientation was conducted by the
Team Leader and Pedestrian Specialist on May 9, where both pedestrian and
establishment survey tools were introduced. In said orientation, field supervisors and
enumerators were thoroughly familiarized with the questionnaires and were given
instructions on how to select the respondents and conduct the interview.
The actual conduct of the pedestrian survey ran for four (4) weeks, from May 15 to June
30. Nine (9) enumerators were deployed and assigned specific streets, which they were
instructed to maintain to avoid overlapping. The field supervisor drew a map solely for
this purpose. As it was an intercept survey, enumerators were usually stationed outside
to interview a customer coming from a particular establishment. On instances when
the enumerators were allowed by the owner/manager, they would wait in an
unobtrusive section of the establishment. Respondents were selected randomly; as
such, customers who agreed to be respondents were interviewed.

The most common challenge encountered by the enumerators was, not so much the
unwillingness by pedestrians, but their inability to accommodate the interview because
they were in a hurry. Most would offer the excuse that they were running late or in a
rush. Some expressed hesitation to be a respondent and refused to divulge their
contact details, thinking that the interview was a scam. Even when enumerators
showed their ID and the letter from the Cebu City Administrator authorizing the survey,
they were still unconvinced. Enumerators respected the decision of pedestrians that
could not be persuaded to answer the survey. They simply moved on to the next one
who was more receptive and willing to be interviewed.
PLANADES BD‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

All in all, there were 2,011 respondents for the pedestrian survey.
Table 1 Summary of samples for pedestrian interviews per street and survey week
Week Week Week Week Week Week
Name of Street TOTAL
1 2 3 4 5 6
Major Streets Colon 200 102 7 309
Osmena Blvd 144 72 32 2 250
Legaspi 206 7 7 220
V. Gullas 19 190 11 220
P. Burgos 82 160 242
Mabini 4 25 1 30
Jakosalem 15 81 111 3 210
F. Gonzales 89 41 130
Magallanes 30 30
Minor Streets Quezon Blvd. 100 100
Balintawak 40 40
Manalili 30 30
Plaridel Ext. 20 10 30
Sikatuna 30 30
Urdaneta 40 40
Grand Total 15 131 569 607 668 21 2,011
PLANADES BD‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BE
Establishment Interviews Survey Report

Many of the critical analyses regarding potential future impacts to businesses and local
revenues are based on the interviews with the establishment owners. As such, the
Study Team determined for the Establishment Interviews to be a long questionnaire
that will be administered in a sit‐down setting, to make sure that all of the relevant
aspects which are to be used in the analyses were asked properly.
Based on the theoretical framework developed by the Study Team, the Study Team
came up with an initial list of all the possible variables that can potentially affect both
the increase of foot traffic and the decision of the establishment regarding the nature of
their business. The Study Team then discussed which of these variables are deemed
very critical and very relevant, and these were used as an initial set of variables to be
put in the questionnaire. Additionally, the Study Team interviewed a few key informants
to seek their opinions regarding the factors influencing walkability and pedestrian foot
traffic. All of these were inputted into a first draft of the questionnaire.
The early drafts of the questionnaire were shown to key stakeholders for comments,
and then were revised to address some of the points raised. Revised drafts of the
questionnaire were then shown to the local interviewers to check clarity of
understanding by the interviewer. Based on these, adjustments were made to the
questionnaire regarding wording, sequencing of questions, and multiple choices. A draft
final version of the questionnaire was then pre‐tested by the local interviewer in actual
field conditions to check clarity of understanding by the respondent. Based on the
pretest, further adjustments were made, including adding/removing some of the
questions and reframing the questions.
A copy of the final Establishment Interview Form used is found below.
The final version of the questionnaire contains 11 parts:
 Before the main part of the questionnaire, there is an initial portion for the
identification of the establishment and the interviewer.
 Part A is about information about the respondent.
 Part B is basic characterization of establishment. Questions about the age of
the building/establishment, ownership status and number of employees were
asked.
 Part C is about the different usage present in the establishment. Here,
questions regarding the land use type, occupancy rate, area covered and
rental rate were asked.
PLANADES BE‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
 Part D is Characterization of Visitors/Clients. Here, the respondents were

asked about their general understanding as to the volumes of their clientele,
their general trip origins and frequency of visit.
 Part E is asking about the existing conditions of the sidewalk directly in front of
their establishment. This included asking about the presence of sidewalk uses,
their types, and whether these uses were with the consent of the
establishment.
 Part F is the respondent’s assessment of the current conditions of sidewalks /
pedestrian facilities along the block they are in. They were asked to rate a list
of attributes using a likert scale.
 Part G is the respondent’s opinions of priority areas for improvement for the
specific block that the establishment is in. They were asked to select and rank
the most important elements to make that block more attractive to visitors
and clientele.
 Part H is the respondent’s opinions as to which variables would be more
critical to attract more people to come to the general downtown area. Here, a
long list of variables was shown to cover various classifications and the
respondent were asked to rate them using a likert scale ranging from “Drive
Away People” to “Attract More People”.
 Part I is asking about the respondents’ potential reaction to the various
improvements mentioned in Part G and Part H.
 Part J is asking additional opinions and comments on certain aspects not
related to physical improvement, but also deemed critical for improving the
pedestrian infrastructure.
PLANADES BE‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 1 Establishment Interview Form, page 1
PLANADES BE‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Establishment Interview Form, page 2
PLANADES BE‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Establishment Interview Form, page 3
PLANADES BE‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.2. Conduct of the interviews

A one‐day pre‐test was done for the establishment survey by two (2) enumerators for
the same purposes as the pedestrian survey. The explanation of the mechanics and
familiarization of the survey questions were taken up in the same orientation on May 9.
Before the actual implementation of the survey, the field supervisor conducted an
ocular of the major thoroughfares, particularly Sikatuna St., F. Gonzales St., Quezon
Blvd., Balintawak St. and Magallanes St., to map out the establishment types (i.e. retail,
food, industrial, financial services, residential, schools, hotels/inns, general
merchandise) in these areas to guide her in the enumerator’s assignments. This enabled
her to equally distribute the establishment types to six (6) enumerators who were
evenly spread out on the streets covered by the study. Similar to the pedestrian survey,
these enumerators were instructed to keep to their assignments to avoid duplication.
The interview process involved key informant interviews with establishment owners
themselves, or in their absence, the manager or an authorized representative who was
familiar with the operations or is also a decision‐maker within the company/office. The
enumerators were provided with a formal letter signed by the Cebu City Administrator,
informing potential respondents about the purpose of the study and seeking their
permission to carry out the interview.
In most instances, the enumerators were easily granted permission and were able to
conduct the interview on the spot. Apparently, the letter from Cebu City Hall was very
instrumental in this. Establishment owners/managers also appeared interested to
participate because the pedestrianization concept would affect their business and they
wanted to have a say in it.
PLANADES BE‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 2 Pictures of interviewers conducting at Establishment Interviews
While conducting the interview, particularly the portions where the respondents are
asked to assess sidewalk conditions and pedestrian facilities or prioritize areas for
improvement; the enumerator would invite them to read along to the questions, for
easier comprehension.
The establishment survey was conducted in three (3) weeks, from May 27 to June 30.
204 establishments were interviewed over this period. During the first two (2) weeks,
the establishments were chosen randomly. In the last week, when the inventory
showed that certain establishment types already had more than enough samples, the
selection became more purposive and focused on establishment types whose samples
were inadequate

While there were no major drawbacks in the implementation of the survey, mainly due
to the letter from Cebu City Hall, some establishment owners did decline the interview.
Some did not refuse outright but asked the enumerator to come back when they are no
longer busy. In cases like this, the enumerator tried to set the appointment for a
maximum of three call backs. After the third try and the potential respondent were still
unavailable, the enumerator moved on to the next establishment.
There are establishments that were hesitant to share what for them is sensitive
information, such as lease rates, lot area or occupancy. In such instances, the
enumerator simply asks the respondent to provide estimates. If the respondent still
PLANADES BE‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
refuses to do so, the enumerator makes his/her own estimates and proceeds to
confirm/validate them with the respondent.
Other establishments, like fast food chains, were similarly cautious. They reasoned that
since they are only branches or franchises here in Cebu, they have to clear it with their
Head Office in Manila before they can divulge such information. The enumerator thus
employed the same strategy that they did with previous establishments.

All in all, there were 204 respondents for the establishment interviews.
Table 1 Summary of Samples for Establishment Interviews per

Street and Survey Week
Week Week Week Week Week Week
Name of Street TOTAL
1 2 3 4 5 6
Major Streets Colon St 1 1 13 17 14 46
Osmena Blvd 2 8 8 5 19 42
Legaspi 5 2 5 2 14
V. Gullas 4 4 16 7 31
P. Burgos 1 2 2 5
Mabini 1 3 1 5
D. Jakosalem 1 9 2 5 1 18
F. Gonzales 1 1 2
MC Briones 2 1 3
Magallanes 1 3 2 1 7
Minor Streets Junquera 1 2 3 6
Manalili 1 1 2
MJ Cuenco 1 1
P. Gomez 2 2
P. Lopez 1 2 3
Pelaez 3 7 1 11
Plaridel 1 1 2
Plaridel Ext. 1 1
Sikatuna 1 1
Zulueta 1 1 2
Grand Total 8 37 37 60 61 1 204
PLANADES BE‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix BF
Pedestrian Counts Survey Report
1.1. Survey planning and preparations

The first step for the pedestrian counts was identifying the locations where the counts
are to be made. Given the limited budget for the counts, not all road sections within the
Study Area were able to be included in the surveys. Strategic decisions were made,
choosing those road sections which are critical to the overall goal of pedestrianization.
These included major commercial and tourist destinations, as well as corridors where
there are observed heavy pedestrian flows based on the ocular conducted in January
2019. The final list for the pedestrian count stations is shown in Table 1 and Figure 1.
Sketches of each station are shown at the end of this document.
Figure 1 Map of pedestrian count stations
PLANADES BF‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 1 List of pedestrian count stations

Stn
Station Name Road Section Days Covered
Code
1 Colon 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St Weekday + Weekend
2 Colon 2 Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St Weekday + Weekend
3 Colon 3 Btwn Junquera St & Jakosalem St Weekday + Weekend
4 Colon 4 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos Weekday + Weekend
5 Gullas 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Legaspi St Weekday only
6 Gullas 2 Btwn Legaspi St & Jakosalem St Weekday + Weekend
7 Gullas 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos Weekday only
8 Osmena 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St Weekday + Weekend
9 Osmena 2 Btwn Gullas St & Plaridel Ext Weekday only
10 Osmena 3 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem Weekday only
11 Osmena 4 Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos Weekday + Weekend
12 Osmena 5 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu St Weekday + Weekend
13 Legaspi 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St Weekday + Weekend
14 Legaspi 2 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem Weekday + Weekend
15 Legaspi 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos Weekday only
16 Jakosalem 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St Weekday only
17 Jakosalem 2 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez Weekday + Weekend
19 Jakosalem 4 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd Weekday only
20 Jakosalem 5 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes Weekday only
21 Jakosalem 6 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones Weekday + Weekend
22 Mabini 1 Btwn Zulueta St and Colon St Weekday only
24 Mabini 3 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez Weekday only
25 Burgos 4 Btwn P. Gomez & Legaspi St Weekday only
26 Burgos 5 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd Weekday + Weekend
27 Burgos 6 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes Weekday only
28 Burgos 7 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones Weekday + Weekend
29 MC Briones 1 Btwn F. Gonzales & Jakosalem Weekday + Weekend
31 P. Gomez Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos Weekday only
32 Gonzalez 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes Weekday only
33 Gonzalez 2 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones Weekday only
35 Magallanes 1 Btwn F. Gonzalez & Jakosalem Weekday + Weekend
36 Magallanes 2 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu Weekday only
PLANADES BF‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
The Study Team originally targeted to do bi‐directional counts per station to get a sense
of where the waves of people are going to at various times of the day. However, bi‐
directional counts meant double the manpower requirement, as one surveyor was to
count the people going to the left, and another going to the right. So given the limited
budget, the Study Team settled on a combined count, meaning the surveyor is to count
the passing‐through people altogether.
Based on the list of stations, a plan was made, identifying the number of surveyors
required per station and the number of area supervisors. The Study Team contacted a
local survey coordinator to recruit local people to be surveyors and supervisors. Related
to this, a list of all survey materials was prepared, including pencils, forms and counters.
A letter was also sent to the Cebu City Hall to formally request for clearance to conduct
the surveys.
A briefing was held in Jollibee Metro Colon on July 31, the day before the first day of the
survey. Given the small area of the venue, the briefing was divided into three batches.
During the briefing, the Survey Specialist explained the background of the study, the
stations that each team will be assigned to, the actual mechanics of the counts, and
some basic rules to be followed.
Figure 2 Pedestrian counts briefing held at Jollibee Metro Colon on July 31, 2019
1.2. Conduct of the Surveys

The first day of the survey was a weekday count, held on August 1 (Thursday), while the
second day was a weekend count held on August 3 (Saturday). The counts was
conducted from 7am to 7pm. Surveyors were instructed to be at their respective
stations at least 30 minutes before the start of the survey to familiarize with their
assigned areas. A total of 86 people (8 supervisors and 78 surveyors) were deployed on
August 1 (weekday) and 43 people (4 supervisors and 39 surveyors) on August 3
(weekend).
PLANADES BF‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 3 Pedestrian count surveyors at various stations
The pedestrian counts conducted were midblock counts. Surveyors were to position
themselves at the designated spot. They are then to choose an imaginary line from
which to base the count. The imaginary line can be an edge of a tile/pavement, a post
or the boundary between two buildings/lots. Once a person has passed that imaginary
line, whether going right or left, the surveyor is to count that person. Since some
pedestrians opt to use the road to walk and bypass the sidewalk, the surveyors were
also instructed to count those pedestrians as well which were on their side of the road.
All surveyors were given counters for ease of counting.
1.3. Data processing

From the raw survey results that were encoded into spreadsheet templates, additional
attributes were inserted by aggregating similar answers to broader categories. Also,
some attributes were merged to produce a new attribute. From here, summaries of the
attributes were made to see general trends or patterns. Cross‐tabulation of different
attributes was also generated to see if there are any relationships between the
attributes. Supporting charts and graphs were also be generated to help easily visualize
these analyses. Based on the observations of trends, patterns or relationships, some
possible explanations and conclusions were made.
PLANADES BF‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.4. Detailed survey station maps
PLANADES BF‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
PLANADES BF‐20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix CA
Land Use Inventory Survey Results
1.1. Number of lots

A total of 405 lots were identified within the Study Area. Of these, 35 were inner lots
and were inaccessible to the surveyors, so no information was able to be obtained
about them. From the 405 lots, 355 were along major streets, while 50 are along minor
streets. V. Gullas has the highest number of individual lots with 67, followed by Osmena
Blvd with 53.

Sikatuna St. 2
Zamora St. 3
Zulueta St. 1
TOTAL 405
1.2. Number of unique land uses per lot

Many of the properties in the Study Area had multiple uses. These uses could be similar
to one another (e.g. same commercial uses), or could be totally different from one
another (e.g. commercial on one part and residential on another). Given these
conditions, the Study Team developed a common system of labeling to be able to
distinguish the individual land uses and commercial business types, but at the same
time, make it easy to aggregate them to be suitable for analysis.
Shown in Table 2 below is the count of the unique land uses per lot within the Study
Area. Unique land use here is defined as a land use that is not the same type as the
others. For example, a building with a restaurant on the ground floor and offices on the
second floor is considered to be a commercial building with two types, hence not
unique. But a building with a store on the ground floor and an apartment unit on the
upper floors is considered to have two unique land uses.
PLANADES CA‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Table 2 Number of unique land uses per lot within the Study Area.
Street Location Single Double Multiple Unoccupied Unknown Grand
use use uses Total
Colon St. 17 14 6 1 1 39
D. Jakosalem 16 12 10 4 5 47
F. Gonzales 17 18 4 2 7 48
Legaspi St. 14 16 6 4 1 41
Magallanes 2 3 5
MC Briones 9 6 3 1 19
Osmena Blvd. 20 21 6 1 5 53
P. Burgos 5 5 3 1 14
V. Gullas 17 26 8 6 10 67
TOTAL 146 145 54 23 37 405
36.0% 35.8% 13.3% 5.7% 9.1% 100.0%
Based on the inventory, both single use and double use lots are the most common
usage of lots in the Study Area, single use with a count of 146 lots, while double use
with a count of 145 lots. Multiple use buildings number 54 lots. There are 23
unoccupied lots, either the entire lot is an idle, unoccupied lot, or that there is an
existing building, but it is not being inhabited by anyone. There are 37 lots with
unknown land uses, as these are interior lots that can be accessed by the surveyors.
Figure 1 Number of land uses per lot in the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3. Overall Land Use Type

Shown in Table 3 below is the breakdown of the land use types in the Study Area and is
reflected in map form in Figure 2. The majority of the lots are commercial in nature,
with about 66% of the lots either being purely commercial, or partly commercial.
Residential and industrial uses are the land use with second‐highest share, but very low
(7% share each). The low share of residential uses means that the commercial areas
would need to rely on people from outside the Study Area to drive its foot traffic.
About 5% of the lots are fully unoccupied.
Table 3 Overall land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Street Name Major Minor Grand %
Commercial 142 16 158 39.0%
Commercial‐Residential 41 8 49 12.1%
Open spaces 5 0 5 1.2%
Others 3 0 3 0.7%
No info 29 8 37 9.1%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100%
Figure 2 Overall land use types in the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.4. Ground Floor Land Use Type

Shown in Table 4Table 4below is the land use at the ground floor of the lots and is
reflected in map form in Figure 37. Commercial is the dominant ground floor land use
type, comprising about 64% of all the lots. Industrial use has the next highest share with
8.9%, followed by residential use with 6.7%. Unoccupied lots comprise about 5.2%.
Table 4 Ground floor land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Commercial 216 25 241 59.5%
Commercial‐ Institutional 4 4 1.0%
Others 3 3 0.7%
No info 29 9 38 9.4%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5. Upper Floor Land Use Type

Shown in Table 5 below is the breakdown of the land use at the upper levels of the
buildings within the lots. About 20% of the lots do not have upper floors use since they
are just one‐storey buildings. The land use with the highest share is still commercial‐
related with a total of about 29% share. Residential use has the next highest share at
16%, followed by industrial with 12% share. About 9% of the upper floors are
unoccupied.
Table 5 Upper floors land use type of the lots within the Study Area
Commercial 94 13 107 26.4%
Commercial‐Industrial 3 3 0.7%
Others 2 2 0.5%
(None) 67 12 79 19.5%
No info 30 4 34 8.4%
TOTAL 355 50 405 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.6. Occupancy of buildings/lots

Shown in Table 6 below are the occupancy statuses of the lots in the Study Area.
Majority of the lots are occupied with an 87% share. Partially unoccupied and fully
unoccupied lots comprise about 11% in all.
Table 6 Occupancy types of buildings/lots in the Study Area

Street Location Occupied Partial Fully Open No info Grand
unoccupied unoccupied spaces Total
Colon St. 33 4 2 39
D. Jakosalem 44 8 1 53
F. Gonzales 35 2 4 41
Legaspi St. 58 3 5 1 67
Magallanes 19 1 2 22
MC Briones 39 2 3 3 47
Osmena Blvd. 42 3 3 48
P. Burgos 16 3 19
V. Gullas 5 5
All minor streets 47 2 49
TOTAL 303 24 21 5 5 405
86.4% 5.9% 5.2% 1.2% 1.2% 100.0%
Figure 5 Occupancy of the lots in the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.7. Building conditions

Shown in Table 7 below is the breakdown of the current physical conditions of the
buildings within lots in the Study Area. Majority of the buildings are in good condition
but unclean (45.5%). Those in good condition and clean buildings comprise 25.7% of all
the buildings. Dilapidated buildings comprise 15.8% of all the lots in the area.
Table 7 Physical conditions of the buildings/lots in the Study Area

Street Location Good Good Dilapidated Unfinished/ No Not Grand
condition condition under answer applicable Total
and clean but construction
unclean
Colon St. 9 16 10 1 3 39
D. Jakosalem 11 20 7 5 4 47
F. Gonzales 12 23 7 1 6 48
Legaspi St. 9 22 7 1 2 41
Mabini St. 6 6 8 2 22
Magallanes 3 2 5
MC Briones 9 9 1 19
P. Burgos 8 4 2 14
V. Gullas 13 33 9 1 10 1 67
All minor streets 11 20 7 3 8 1 50
TOTAL 104 185 64 5 34 13 405
25.7% 45.7% 15.8% 1.2% 8.4% 3.2% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 6 below is the status of the current physical conditions of the buildings
within lots in the Study Area in map form. The unclean buildings are scattered all
throughout the Study Area. The clean buildings can mostly be found at junctions of
major roads. A significant portion of the dilapidated buildings (colored orange in the
map) can be seen to congregate along V. Gullas and eastern part of Colon St.
Figure 6 Physical condition of the buildings in the lots in the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.8. Number of floors

Shown in Table 8 below is the breakdown of the number of floors of the buildings in the
Study Area. Most of the buildings are between 2‐3 storeys high, comprising about 63.1%
of the lots. 4‐5 storey buildings are the next highest with 15.1%, followed by 1 storey
buildings with 7.7%. Buildings 6 storeys and above comprise about 2% of the entire lots
in the Study Area. All in all, 80% of the lots in the Study Area have buildings 2 storeys
and up.
Table 8 Number of floors of the buildings/lots in the Study Area

Street Location 1 storey 2‐3 4‐5 6 and No bldg No info Grand
storeys storeys above Total
Colon St. 6 22 8 2 1 39
D. Jakosalem 5 26 7 4 5 47
F. Gonzales 1 35 7 5 48
Legaspi St. 1 25 9 3 2 1 41
Mabini St. 4 15 1 2 22
Magallanes 1 4 5
MC Briones 3 10 4 1 1 19
Osmena Blvd. 37 8 3 1 4 53
P. Burgos 3 10 1 14
V. Gullas 4 40 11 1 1 10 67
TOTAL 31 256 61 8 14 35 405
7.7% 63.2% 15.1% 2.0% 3.5% 8.6% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 7 below is the number of floors of buildings in the Study Area in map
form. The 1‐storey buildings are generally found to be concentrated on the eastern side.
The taller buildings (4 storeys and up) are generally found to be concentrated along the
junctions of Colon St, Osmena Blvd and Legaspi Sts.
Figure 7 Number of floors of the buildings within the lots in the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9. Sidewalk Characteristics
1.9.1. Sidewalk types

Shown in Table 9 below is the list of the type of sidewalks in the Study Area. Majority of
the sidewalks in the area are arcaded, with about a 45% share. Non‐arcaded sidewalks
comprise about 35%. Lots without any sidewalks comprise about 12% of the lots.
Table 9 Types of sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area

Sidewalk type Final Arcaded Non‐ No Not No Info Grand
arcaded sidewalk applicable Total
Colon St. 25 13 1 39
F. Gonzales 15 20 6 5 2 48
Legaspi St. 22 9 9 1 41
Magallanes 4 1 5
MC Briones 10 9 19
P. Burgos 1 12 1 14
V. Gullas 27 16 14 10 67
All minor streets 10 20 12 8 50
TOTAL 180 141 48 34 2 404
44.6% 34.9% 11.9% 8.4% 0.5% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 8 below is the type of sidewalks in the Study Area in map form. Looking
at the map, majority of the eastern portion of the Study Area is colored green (arcaded
sidewalks), while the western portion is colored blue (non‐arcaded sidewalks). Majority
of those without sidewalks can be found within the vicinity of Santo Nino and
Metropolitan Cathedral.
Figure 8 Types of sidewalks of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.2. Sidewalk widths

Shown in Table 10 below is the average sidewalk width per street in the Study Area.
From this list, the streets with the widest average sidewalk width are Magallanes and
Osmena Blvd with 4.00 meters. Next is MC Briones with an average of 3.53 meters,
while third is Colon St with a 3.46 meter average. The streets with the narrowest
average sidewalk width are P. Burgos and Mabini St with a 2.02 and 2.2 meter average
respectively.
Table 10 Average widths of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Street Name Ave.
Type width (m)
D. Jakosalem 2.81
F. Gonzales 2.82
Legaspi St. 2.80
Mabini St. 2.20
Magallanes 4.00
MC Briones 3.53
Osmena Blvd. 4.00
P. Burgos 2.02
V. Gullas 2.52
Minor 2.02
Subtotal 2.93
PLANADES CA‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 9 below is the average sidewalk width per street in the Study Area in
map form. As can be gleaned from the map, majority of the lots on the western sides
are colored light blue (3‐4 meters in width). The eastern side show darker colors,
indicating narrower widths. The stretch of Osmena Blvd is mostly colored light green (4‐
5 meters)
Figure 9 Sidewalk widths of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.3. Sidewalk heights

Shown in Table 11 below are the average sidewalk heights of the sidewalks in the Study
Area. Based on the list, the street with the highest average sidewalk height is
Magallanes with a 210 mm average height, followed by V. Gullas with 203.05 mm.
Legaspi St is third with 187.93 mm, while Jakosalem St is fourth with 166.25 mm. The
street with the lowest average sidewalk height is Mabini St with 47.22 mm, with F.
Gonzales being the second lowest with 50 mm.
Table 11 Average heights of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Street Name Ave. height
Type (mm)
D. Jakosalem 166.25
F. Gonzales 50.00
Legaspi St. 187.93
Mabini St. 47.22
Magallanes 210.00
MC Briones 71.05
Osmena Blvd. 98.86
P. Burgos 70.83
V. Gullas 203.05
Minor 155.00
Subtotal 125.00
PLANADES CA‐15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 10 Sidewalk heights of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.4. Sidewalk conditions

Shown in Table 12 below is the summary of the physical conditions of the sidewalk in
the Study Area. Based on the table, majority of the sidewalks are well‐paved with about
60% share. Those with uneven surface are about 20%. Those without sidewalks are
about 12%.
Table 12 Physical conditions of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Location Well‐ Uneven No No Grand
paved surface sidewalk answer Total
Colon St. 30 8 1 39
F. Gonzales 22 13 6 7 48
Legaspi St. 27 4 9 1 41
Mabini St. 10 11 1 22
Magallanes 4 1 5
MC Briones 10 9 19
P. Burgos 12 1 1 14
V. Gullas 32 11 14 10 67
All Minor Streets 14 16 12 8 50
TOTAL 241 80 48 34 405
% share 59.5% 19.8% 11.9% 8.4% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 11 below is the physical condition of the sidewalk in the Study Area in
map form. From a glance of the map, most of the colors seen are colored green,
indicating well‐paved conditions. The areas with uneven surface can be found mostly on
the eastern and southern sides of the Study Area, and eastern portion of Colon.
Figure 11 Sidewalk conditions of the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.5. Sidewalk obstructions

Shown in Table 13 below is the summary of the type of obstructions in the sidewalks,
categorized either as fixed or temporary. Fixed obstructions include utility posts, water
meters, trees or plants. Temporary obstructions include vendor stalls, parked vehicles,
merchandise or furniture by the store, and the like.
From the table, almost half of the lots (50.6%) have some form of obstructions in the
sidewalk. Majority of the obstructions (26%) are of the temporary kind, another 13.4%
is of the fixed kind, while the remaining11.4% is a combination of fixed and temporary
obstructions.
Table 13 Types of obstructions in the sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Street Location Fixed Fixed & Temp None NA Grand
Temp Total
Colon St. 10 5 12 11 1 39
D. Jakosalem 10 15 17 5 47
F. Gonzales 4 3 15 21 5 48
Legaspi St. 2 7 12 19 1 41
Mabini St. 9 6 2 5 22
Magallanes 2 3 5
Osmena Blvd. 2 7 17 23 4 53
P. Burgos 6 2 6 14
V. Gullas 6 5 12 34 10 67
TOTAL 54 46 105 166 34 404
% share 13.4% 11.4% 26.0% 41.1% 8.4% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 12 below is a map representation of the type of obstructions in the

Study Area. The lots with the green line (no obstructions) are mostly concentrated along
northwestern side. Those with fixed obstructions are found mostly on the eastern side,
while those with temporary obstructions are mostly concentrated on the south and
western sides.
Figure 12 Types of sidewalk obstructions in the lots within the Study Area
PLANADES CA‐20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.6. Commercial usage of sidewalks

Shown in Table 14 below is the summary of the presence of commercial usage along the
sidewalks in the Study Area. Commercial usage refers to vendor stalls and/or the shop
itself extending its commercial area unto the sidewalk (e.g. sidewalk canteens, display
of merchandise, etc.).
Based on the table, majority of the lots have some sort of commercial usage in the
sidewalks. 40.3% have partial usage (meaning only a part of the sidewalk is used), with
another 4% having full usage.
Table 14 Presence of commercial use of the sidewalks of the properties in the Study
Area
Street Location Full Partial None No NA Grand
sidewalk Total
Colon St. 25 13 1 39
D. Jakosalem 2 18 21 1 5 47
F. Gonzales 5 18 14 6 5 48
Legaspi St. 2 13 16 9 1 41
Magallanes 1 4 5
P. Burgos 8 5 1 14
V. Gullas 1 6 36 14 10 67
TOTAL 16 163 144 48 34 405
% share 4.0% 40.3% 35.6% 11.9% 8.4% 100.0%
PLANADES CA‐21
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 13 below is a map representation of the presence of commercial

activities in the Study Area. Those with colored green (no commercial usage) are
concentrated in the middle and southeastern portions. The corridor of Colon St,
Osmena Blvd and Legaspi can be seen to lined up with maroon colors (with commercial
usage).
Figure 13 Presence of commercial activities in the sidewalk of the lots within the Study
Area
PLANADES CA‐22
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 15 and Table 16 are cross‐tabulation of sidewalk commercial use with
other attributes to see if there are particular building attributes that are more prone to
sidewalk usage. Table 15 is the cross‐tabulation with the building condition while Table
16 is the cross‐tabulation with sidewalk type.
In terms of building condition, the clean and unclean buildings have the same share of
commercial usage (combined full and partial) at about 54‐55%. For dilapidated
buildings, the share of sidewalks with commercial usage is slightly higher at 60.3%.
In terms of arcade type, arcaded sidewalks have also a slightly higher share of sidewalks
with commercial usage compared to the non‐arcaded sidewalks. Arcaded sidewalks
have about a 60% share, compared to the non‐arcaded sidewalks with a 50% share.
Table 15 Cross‐tabulation of building condition and commercial use of the sidewalks of

the properties in the Study Area
Condition Final Full Partial Full + % None % Grand
Partial Total
Clean 4 46 50 53.8% 43 46.2% 93
Unclean 7 78 85 54.5% 71 45.5% 156
Dilapidated 4 31 35 60.3% 23 39.7% 58
Unfinished/ under construction 1 2 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 4
Not applicable 6 6 50.0% 6 50.0% 12
TOTAL 16 163 179 55.6% 144 44.4% 323
Table 16 Cross‐tabulation of sidewalk type and presence of commercial use of the

sidewalks of the properties in the Study Area
Sidewalk type Full Partial Full + % None % Grand
Partial Total
Arcaded 7 100 107 59.4% 73 40.6% 180
Non‐arcaded 9 62 71 50.4% 70 49.6% 141
TOTAL 16 162 178 55.5% 143 44.5% 321
PLANADES CA‐23
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.10.Flood mitigation measures

Shown in Table 17 below is the summary of the presence of flood mitigation measures
in the Study Area. Fixed wall are low walls about up to knee‐high usually placed at the
edge of the sidewalk near the street. These serve like a dam wall, meant to keep the
flood waters from getting into the sidewalk. Portable walls are similar to the fixed walls,
the only difference that is removable. Raised sidewalks are sidewalks that have been
raised higher than their normal height. There is a noticeable step up from the
neighboring sidewalks.
Based on the inventory, about 18.3% of the lots have some form of flood mitigation
measures, with the dominant type being the raised sidewalk. Of all the streets in the
Study Area, V. Gullas showed the highest concentration of flood mitigation measures
with 25 out of the 66 lots (38%) have some form of flood mitigating measure.
Table 17 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalks of the properties in the
Study Area
Street Location Fixed Fixed & Fixed Raised Sub None NA Total
wall portable wall & sidewalk total
wall raised
sidewalk
Colon St. 3 2 6 11 27 1 39
D. Jakosalem 1 8 9 33 5 47
F. Gonzales 3 3 40 5 48
Legaspi St. 4 10 14 21 6 41
Mabini St. 1 1 2 20 22
Magallanes 0 5 5
MC Briones 0 19 19
Osmena Blvd. 6 1 7 38 8 53
P. Burgos 1 1 13 14
V. Gullas 4 1 1 19 25 30 12 67
TOTAL 18 1 5 50 74 286 45 405
4.4% 0.2% 1.2% 12.3% 18.3% 70.6% 11.1% 100%
PLANADES CA‐24
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 14 below is a map showing the flood mitigating measures used by the
lots within the Study Area.
Figure 14 Presence of flood mitigation measures in the sidewalk of the lots within the
Study Area
PLANADES CA‐25
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix CB
Pedestrian Counts Raw Survey Results
1.1. Daily volumes
1.1.1. Overall Summary
1.1.1.1. Combined sides

Shown in Table 1 below is the summary of the combined daily volumes
(sidewalks on both sides) per station surveyed.
Table 1 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume summary
Stn Weekday Weekend
Station Name Road Section
Code Volume Volume
1 Colon 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St 39,828 34,491
2 Colon 2 Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St 31,299 44,135
3 Colon 3 Btwn Junquera St & Jakosalem St 23,163 19,998
4 Colon 4 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 7,247 5,857
5 Gullas 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Legaspi St 10,677 NA
6 Gullas 2 Btwn Legaspi St & Jakosalem St 8,773 7,957
7 Gullas 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 3,810 NA
8 Osmena 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 11,585 24,851
9 Osmena 2 Btwn Gullas St & Plaridel Ext 21,152 NA
10 Osmena 3 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem 18,496 NA
11 Osmena 4 Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos 21,368 23,845
12 Osmena 5 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu St 8,833 8,080
13 Legaspi 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 15,377 17,059
14 Legaspi 2 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem 4,262 3,599
15 Legaspi 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos 3,610 NA
16 Jakosalem 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St 10,827 NA
17 Jakosalem 2 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez 8,993 8,715
19 Jakosalem 4 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd 8,720 NA
20 Jakosalem 5 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 5,898 NA
21 Jakosalem 6 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones 6,285 4,978
22 Mabini 1 Btwn Zulueta St and Colon St 2,499 NA
24 Mabini 3 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez 8,227 NA
25 Burgos 4 Btwn P. Gomez & Legaspi St 14,772 NA
26 Burgos 5 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd 7,457 6,619
27 Burgos 6 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 11,552 NA
PLANADES CB‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Stn Weekday Weekend

Code Volume Volume
28 Burgos 7 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones 9,240 6,819
29 MC Briones 1 Btwn F. Gonzales & Jakosalem 11,587 6,424
31 P. Gomez Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos 3,236 0
32 Gonzalez 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes 939 NA
33 Gonzalez 2 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones 4,083 NA
35 Magallanes 1 Btwn F. Gonzalez & Jakosalem 12,402 9,569
36 Magallanes 2 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu 5,973 NA
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Colon 1 39,828
Colon 2 31,299
Colon 3 23,163
Colon 4 7,247
Gullas 1 10,677
Gullas 2 8,773
Gullas 3 3,810
Osmena 1 11,585
Osmena 2 21,152
Osmena 3 18,496
Osmena 4 21,368
Osmena 5 8,833
Legaspi 1 15,377
Legaspi 2 4,262
Legaspi 3 3,610
Jakosalem 1 10,827
Jakosalem 2 8,993
Jakosalem 4 8,720
Jakosalem 5 5,898
Jakosalem 6 6,285
Mabini 1 2,499
Mabini 3 8,227
Burgos 4 14,772
Burgos 5 7,457
Burgos 6 11,552
Burgos 7 9,240
MC Briones 1 11,587
P. Gomez 3,236
Gonzalez 1 939
Gonzalez 2 4,083
Magallanes 1 12,402
Magallanes 2 5,973
Figure 1 Pedestrian counts combined weekday daily volume summary
During the weekday, the station with the highest recorded volume for a
12‐hour period is Colon 1 (between Osmena Blvd and Pelaez St), with
39,828 pax for a 12‐hour period. Second is Colon 2 (Btwn Pelaez St &
Junquera St) with 31,299. Third is Colon 3 (Btwn Junquera St &
Jakosalem St) with 23,163. All in all, there are five stations with more
than 20,000 pax recorded, with the top three along Colon, and the next
PLANADES CB‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
two along Osmena Blvd. The station with the lowest count is Gonzalez 1
(Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes) with just 939 pax.
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Colon 1 34,491
Colon 2 44,135
Colon 3 19,998
Colon 4 5,857
Gullas 1 0
Gullas 2 7,957
Gullas 3 0
Osmena 1 24,851
Osmena 2 0
Osmena 3 0
Osmena 4 23,845
Osmena 5 8,080
Legaspi 1 17,059
Legaspi 2 3,599
Legaspi 3 0
Jakosalem 1 0
Jakosalem 2 8,715
Jakosalem 4 0
Jakosalem 5 0
Jakosalem 6 4,978
Mabini 1 0
Mabini 3 0
Burgos 4 0
Burgos 5 6,619
Burgos 6 0
Burgos 7 6,819
MC Briones 1 6,424
P. Gomez 0
Gonzalez 1 0
Gonzalez 2 0
Magallanes 1 9,569
Magallanes 2 0
Figure 2: Pedestrian counts combined weekend daily volume summary
During the weekend, the station with the highest recorded volume for a
12‐hour period is Colon 2 (Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St), with 44,135.
Second is Colon 1 (between Osmena Blvd and Pelaez St) with 34,491.
Third is Osmena 1 (Btwn Colon St & Gullas St) with 24,851 and fourth is
Osmena 4 (Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos) with 23,845. out of the top ten
highest volumes are in 23,845. The station with the lowest count is
Legaspi 2 (Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem) with just 3,599 pax.
As a whole, the weekend volumes are 35.7% fewer than those of the
weekday volumes. For stations which were surveyed on two days, only
four stations showed a higher volume during the weekend than the
weekday. These are Colon 2, Osmena 1, Osmena 4 and Legaspi 1.
PLANADES CB‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
The highest recorded increase was Osmena 1 with a 114.5% increase on

the weekend volume compared to the weekday volume (24,851 vs.
11,585). On the opposite end, the highest decrease recorded was
station MC Briones 1 with a 44.6% decrease on the weekend volume
compared to the weekday volume (6,424 vs. 11,587).
1.1.1.2. Individual sides

Shown in Table 2 below is the summary of the combined daily volumes
(sidewalks on both sides) per station surveyed.
Table 2 Pedestrian counts daily volume summary per individual sides of each station
Stn Side Weekday Weekend
Code Volume Volume
North side 17,482 15,217
1 Colon 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St
South side 22,346 19,274
North side 10,473 16,017
2 Colon 2 Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St
South side 20,826 28,118
North side 9,902 6,462
3 Colon 3 Btwn Junquera St & Jakosalem St
South side 13,261 13,536
4 Colon 4 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos
South side 3,646 3,695
North side 6,233 NA
5 Gullas 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Legaspi St
South side 4,444 NA
6 Gullas 2 Btwn Legaspi St & Jakosalem St
North side 1,700 NA
7 Gullas 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos
South side 2,110 NA
8 Osmena 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St
South side 7,225 15,223
North side 9,367 NA
9 Osmena 2 Btwn Gullas St & Plaridel Ext
South side 11,785 NA
North side 9,979 NA
10 Osmena 3 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem
South side 8,517 NA
North side 6,685 15,971
11 Osmena 4 Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos
South side 14,683 7,874
12 Osmena 5 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu St
North side 10,087 10,317
13 Legaspi 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St
14 Legaspi 2 Btwn Plaridel Ext & Jakosalem
south side 1,777 1,649
PLANADES CB‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Stn Side Weekday Weekend

Code Volume Volume
North side 1,835 NA
15 Legaspi 3 Btwn Jakosalem St & P. Burgos
south side 1,775 NA
West Side 6,136 NA
16 Jakosalem 1 Btwn Colon St & Gullas St
East side 4,691 NA
West side 6,053 5,304
17 Jakosalem 2 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez
East side 2,940 3,411
West side 4,593 NA
19 Jakosalem 4 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd
East side 4,127 NA
West side 2,101 NA
20 Jakosalem 5 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes
East side 3,797 NA
West side 3,590 2,779
21 Jakosalem 6 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones
East side 2,695 2,199
West side 1,165 NA
22 Mabini 1 Btwn Zulueta St and Colon St
East side 1,334 NA
Mabini (USP) 3,764 NA
24 Mabini 3 Btwn Gullas St & P. Gomez
P. Burgos 4,463 NA
West side 7,452 NA
25 Burgos 4 Btwn P. Gomez & Legaspi St
East side 7,320 NA
West side 3,790 4,001
26 Burgos 5 Btwn Legaspi St & Osmena Blvd
East side 3,667 2,618
West side 6,604 NA
27 Burgos 6 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes
East side 4,948 NA
West side 5,018 3,258
28 Burgos 7 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones
East side 4,222 3,561
29 MC Briones 1 Btwn F. Gonzales & Jakosalem
31 P. Gomez Btwn Jakosalem & P. Burgos Combined 3,236 NA
West side 491 NA
532 Gonzalez 1 Btwn Osmena Blvd & Magallanes
East side 448 NA
West side 2,231 NA
33 Gonzalez 2 Btwn Magallanes & MC Briones
East side 1,852 NA
35 Magallanes 1 Btwn F. Gonzalez & Jakosalem
North side 2,796 NA
36 Magallanes 2 Btwn P. Burgos & Lapu‐lapu
South side 3,177 NA
The side with the highest recorded volume during the weekday counts
is the south side of Colon 1 (Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St) with
22,346, followed by the south side of Colon 2 (Btwn Pelaez St &
PLANADES CB‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Junquera St) with 20,826. These are the only sides which recorded
volumes of over 20,000. All in all, there are 11 sides which recorded a
volume of higher than 10,000 pedestrians.
During the weekends, the side with the highest recorded volume is the
south side of Colon 2 (Btwn Pelaez St & Junquera St) with 28,118,
followed by the south side of Colon 1 (Btwn Osmena Blvd & Pelaez St)
with 19,274. All in all, there are 12 sides which recorded a volume of
higher than 10,000 pedestrians.
In comparing the weekday and weekend volumes, there are eleven

sides which have higher volumes during the weekends than on the
weekdays. The highest recorded increase was for the north side of
Osmena 4 with 138.9% (15,971 vs. 6,685), with the second increase
being the north side of Osmena 1 with a 120.8% increase (9,628 vs.
4,360), then third being the south side of Osmena 1 with a 110.7%
increase (15,223 vs. 7,225). On the opposite end, the side which had the
highest decrease is the south side of MC Briones 1 with a 63.4%
decrease (2,311 vs. 6,322).
1.1.2. Summary by street

Shown in Table 3 below is the summary of the combined average daily volumes per
street.
Table 3 Pedestrian counts combined weekday and weekend daily volume summary by
street
Stn Weekday Weekend
Station Name
Code Volume Volume
1 Colon 25,384 26,120
2 Osmena 16,287 18,925
3 Gullas 7,753 7,957
4 Legaspi 7,750 10,329
5 Jakosalem 8,145 6,847
6 Mabini/Burgos 8,958 6,719
7 Gonzalez 2,511 0
In terms of street, the street with the highest average weekday volume is Colon with
25,384, followed by Osmena Blvd with 16,287. The rest of the streets have volumes of
less than 10,000. During the weekends, the street with the highest average weekday
volume is also Colon with 26,120, followed by Osmena Blvd with 18,925. The third‐
highest is Legaspi with 10,329. The rest of the streets have volumes of less than 10,000.
PLANADES CB‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
25,384
Colon Average
26,120
16,287
Osmena Average
18,925
7,753
Gullas Average
7,957
7,750
Legaspi Average
10,329
8,145
Jakosalem Average
6,847
Mabini/ 8,958
P. Burgos Average 6,719
2,511
Gonzalez Average
0
Figure 3 Comparison between weekday and weekend volumes by street
In comparing the weekday and weekend volumes, the highest recorded increase among
the surveyed streets was Legaspi with a 33.3% increase on the weekend volume
compared to the weekday volume (10,329 vs. 7,750). On the opposite end, the highest
decrease recorded was Mabini/P. Burgos with a 44.6% decrease on the weekend
volume compared to the weekday volume (6,424 vs. 11,587). All in all, four streets had
the higher average volume of pedestrians during the weekend compared to the
weekend, while two streets have lower average volume of pedestrians during the
weekend.
PLANADES CB‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 4 Weekday peak hour pedestrian flows by street
Figure 5 Weekday daily pedestrian flows by street
PLANADES CB‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 6 Weekend peak hour pedestrian flows by street
Figure 7 Weekend daily pedestrian flows by street
PLANADES CB‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix CC
Pedestrian Interviews Raw Survey Results
1.1. Summary of samples

From the original 2,011 samples collected, three were deemed invalid due to missing or
ambiguous information. Thus, the final set for analysis was 2,008 samples. The
breakdown per street is shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Colon 308
Osmena Blvd 249
Legaspi 220
V. Gullas 220
P. Burgos 242
Mabini 30
Jakosalem 210
F. Gonzales 130
MC Briones 99
Magallanes 30
Quezon Blvd. 100
Balintawak 40
Manalili 30
Plaridel Ext. 30
Sikatuna 30
Urdaneta 40
Figure 1 Number of samples obtained per street
PLANADES CC‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 2 Number of samples obtained per lot
PLANADES CC‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.2. General profile of respondents
1.2.1. Gender and age

All in all, 43.5% of the respondents are male while 56.5% are female. Most of the major
streets have a greater share of female respondents, including the combined samples of
the minor streets. The only street with a greater share of male respondents is Jakosalem
with 54.8% share for male and 45.2% for female.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 41.9% 58.1%

Osmena Blvd 33.3% 66.7%
Legaspi 45.9% 54.1%
V. Gullas 48.2% 51.8%
P. Burgos 47.5% 52.5%

Male
Mabini 33.3% 66.7%
Female
Jakosalem 54.8% 45.2%
F. Gonzales 49.2% 50.8%

MC Briones 43.4% 56.6%
Magallanes 20.0% 80.0%
All minor streets 37.4% 62.6%
All Streets 43.5% 56.5%
Figure 3 Breakdown of gender of respondents per street
In terms of age, the 26 to 40 years old group has the highest share with 667 out of 1,984
(33.3%), followed closely by the 19 to 25 years old group with 658 (33.2%) share. All in
all, respondents 40 years and below comprise about 70% of the total respondents.
> 60 106
41 to 60 453
26 to 40 667
19 to 25 658
0 to 18 100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Figure 4 Breakdown of age group of respondents
PLANADES CC‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Breaking down the age group by street, each street reveals different trends of age
group shares. Among the notable ones are: MC Briones with a higher share of older
respondents (49.5% are 40 years old and above), which is the highest among all the
streets; Jakosalem with the highest share of young respondents (89.5% of the
respondents are 40 years old and below.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 33.7% 39.9% 19.3%

Osmena Blvd 29.2% 27.6% 32.5%
Legaspi 26.5% 32.4% 30.1%
V. Gullas 45.6% 27.6% 16.1% 0 to 18

P. Burgos 33.6% 37.0% 20.2% 19 to 25
Mabini 40.0% 43.3% 13.3% 26 to 40

41 to 60
Jakosalem 56.5% 23.9% 9.6%
> 60
F. Gonzales 18.9% 44.9% 29.9%
MC Briones 13.1% 34.3% 32.3%
Magallanes 13.3% 43.3% 30.0%
All minor streets 28.6% 34.6% 23.7%
All Streets 33.2% 33.6% 22.8%
Figure 5 Breakdown of age group of respondents per street
1.2.2. Occupation
Most of the interviewed respondents are workers, with 889 out of 1,985 respondents
(44.8%). Next are students with 310, then unemployed (264). Those with their own
business or self‐employed respondents have a combined number of 241.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Worker 889
Own bus. + Self‐employed 241
Part‐time/ OJT 41
Student 310
Unemployed 264
Housewife 198
Others 42
Figure 6 Breakdown of occupations of respondents
PLANADES CC‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
In terms of breakdown per street, Legaspi and V. Gullas have the highest share of workers
with 55.5% and 54.6% respectively. MC Briones and F. Gonzales have the highest shares of
self‐employed/own‐business respondents with 23.8% and 25.5% respectively. Jakosalem
have by far the highest share of students with 33.5%. Colon has the highest share of
unemployed with 19.7%, followed F. Gonzales with 18.5%. Magallanes have the highest
share of housewives with 36.7%, followed by Mabini (25.0%) and Osmena Blvd (22.7%).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 43.3% 8.9% 14.1% 19.7% 10.5%
Osmena Blvd 33.6% 11.3% 18.2% 9.3% 22.7%
Legaspi 55.5% 20.0% 10.0% 7.3%

Worker
V. Gullas 54.6% 7.8% 14.2% 16.1%
Own bus. + Self‐employed
P. Burgos 48.9% 10.5% 18.1% 11.0% 6.3%
Part‐time/ OJT
Mabini 21.4% 14.3% 17.9% 10.7% 25.0% Student
Jakosalem 36.4% 4.8% 33.5% 14.4% 6.2% Unemployed
F. Gonzales 37.7% 23.8% 7.7% 18.5% 5.4% Housewife

Others
MC Briones 42.9% 25.5% 4.1% 9.2% 11.2%
Magallanes 43.3% 10.0% 36.7%
All minor… 49.8% 10.3% 13.7% 14.1% 10.6%
All Streets 44.8% 12.1% 15.6% 13.3% 10.0%
Figure 7 Breakdown of occupation of respondents per street
PLANADES CC‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3. Trip characteristics of respondents
1.3.1. Zoning used for this study
1.3.1.1. General area zoning

Shown in Table 1 is the zoning used for this Study. The zoning was based
on similarity of land uses, access roads and general nature of the area.
Table 1 Zoning used for this Study

1. DOWNTOWN Downtown Ermita Pari‐an
Kalubihan San Roque
Kamagayan Santo Nino
Pahina Central Tinago
2. West CC West of Downtown Duljo Fatima Suba
(West of Cebu Centro) Pahina San Nicolas San Nicolas Central
Pasil San Nicolas
San Nicolas Proper SRP
Sawang Calero
Pardo Area Basak Pardo Pardo
Basak San Nicolas Poblacion Pardo
Bulacao Quiot
Cogon Pardo Basak
Inayawan Alumnos
Kinasang‐an Basak San Nicolas
Mambaling
3. UPTOWN Mabolo Area Capitol Site Luz
Carreta Mabolo
Hipodromo Pier
Kamputhaw
Ramos Area Cogon Ramos San Antonio
Day‐as Santa Cruz
Lorega San Miguel T. Padilla
Sambag I Tejero
Sambag II Zapatera
Tisa Area Calamba Punta Princesa
Guadalupe Tisa
Labangon Banawa
Talamban Area Apas Lahug
Banilad Talamban
Kasambagan Oppra
4. UPLANDS NW Cebu City Bonbon Sinsin
Buhisan Sudlon
Buot‐Taop Sudlon I
Pamutan Sudlon II
Sapangdaku Toong
PLANADES CC‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

NE Cebu City Adlaon Paril
Agsungot Pit‐os
Bacayan Pulangbato
Binaliw San Jose
Budlaan Sirao
Busay Taptap
Cambinocot Babag
Guba Kalunasan
Lusaran Pung‐ol Sibugay
Mabini Tabunan
Malubog Tag‐bao
5. CEBU NORTH Metro Cebu North Compostela Consolacion
Danao Mandaue
Liloan
Cebu Province North Tuburan Santa Fe
Bantayan Tabogon
Bogo Tabuelan
Daanbantayan Borbon
Madridejos Carmen
Medellin Catmon
San Remigio Sogod
6. CEBU SOUTH Metro Cebu South Carcar San Fernando
Minglanilla Talisay
Naga
Cebu Province South Sibonga Barili
Alcoy Alcantara
Argao Alegria
Boljoon Badian
Dalaguete Dumanjug
Oslob Ginatilan
Samboan Malabuyoc
Santander Moalboal
Ronda
7. MACTAN ISLAND Mactan Island Cordova Lapu‐Lapu
8. CEBU WEST Cebu West Aloguinsan Pinamungajan
Asturias Toledo
Balamban
9. OTHERS Others Manila Butuan
Bohol Siquijor
Bacolod Lanao
Negros Gen. Santos
Leyte Cagayan
PLANADES CC‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 8 OD zoning map for Cebu City
PLANADES CC‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Figure 9 OD zoning map for Cebu province
PLANADES CC‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.1.2. Zoning of Study Area

Shown in Figure 10 is the zoning used for this Study. The zoning was
based on similarity of land uses, access roads and general nature of the
area.
Figure 10 Zoning of blocks within the Study Area
PLANADES CC‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.2. Establishments visited

Show in Figure 11 below is the breakdown of the type of establishments visited by the
respondents and in Figure 12 is the zone of the establishment.
0 100 200 300 400
Construction 105
Electronics 116
Financial 139
Food 336
Gen. Merch. 264
Hotels 39
Industrial 75
Logistics 21
Mall 317
Museums/public 61
Offices 201
Personal 73
Religious 74
Residences 19
Schools 41
Others 28
Figure 11 Breakdown of type of establishment visited by the respondents
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
North 659
Central 342
East 693
South 206
Figure 12 Breakdown of zone of establishment visited by the respondents
PLANADES CC‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.3. Trip origins and destinations
1.3.3.1. Origin Zones

Shown in Figure 13 below is the breakdown of the trip origin of the
respondents.
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Downtown 351
West CC 328
Uptown 778
Uplands 61
Mactan Island 68
Cebu North 209
Cebu South 155
Cebu West 19
Others 19
Figure 13 Distribution of trip origin zones of respondents
Shown in Figure 14 below is the breakdown of the trip origin of the

respondents by each downtown zone.
DT North DT Central DT East DT South All Samples

100%
8.4% 8.0% 6.3% 7.8%
90% 11.1%
9.3% 8.8% 10.6% 10.5%
Others
80%
16.9% Cebu West
70%
Cebu South
60% 35.7% Cebu North
41.0% 42.5% 39.2% Mactan Island
50%
Uplands
30.0%
40% Uptown
18.0% West CC
30%
17.8% 14.9% 16.4%
9.7% Downtown
20%
10% 23.9%
16.3% 16.6% 17.9% 17.6%
0%
Figure 14 Distribution of trip origin zones of respondents per block zone
PLANADES CC‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 15 below is the breakdown of the trip destination of

the respondents by each downtown zone.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DT North 24.9% 15.6% 39.6% 7.6%

Down town
West CC
DT Central 19.4% 18.5% 44.0% 6.5% Uptown
Uplands
Mactan Island
DT East 22.4% 14.2% 41.6% 9.6%
Cebu North
Cebu South
DT South 22.1% 12.7% 26.0% 15.2% Cebu West
Others
All Zones 22.5% 15.9% 39.1% 9.1%
Figure 15 Distribution of destination zone of respondents per block zone
Shown in Table 2 below is the origin and destination zone matrix of the
respondents. The origin zone is the place where the respondents came
before arriving at the downtown area, and the destination zone is the
place where the respondents will go to after passing by the downtown
area.
Table 2 Origin‐destination zone matrix of the respondents

Origin Down West Mactan Cebu Cebu Cebu
Uptown Uplands Others TOTAL
Zone town CC Island North South West
Downtown 200 26 93 3 3 14 3 1 1 344
West CC 45 245 21 1 5 3 1 321
Uptown 109 23 598 7 6 16 10 3 772
Uplands 10 7 43 1 61
Mactan
9 5 3 46 3 1 67
Island
Cebu North 40 4 22 136 2 1 3 208
Cebu South 22 11 17 1 2 99 1 153
Cebu West 2 6 1 7 2 18
Others 5 1 1 2 9 18
TOTAL 442 309 770 57 56 178 121 9 20 1962
PLANADES CC‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 3 below is the count of respondents who have the same
origin and destination zone.
Table 3 Count of same origin and destination zones of respondents

Same O & D zone? Count
Same 1325
No 683
TOTAL 2008
1.3.4. Trip purposes
1.3.4.1. Trip purpose at origin

Shown in Figure 16 below is the distribution of trip purposes at the
origin zone of the respondents. Shown in Error! Reference source not
found.Figure 17 below is the breakdown of trip purpose at the
destination zone. The overwhelming majority of the trip purposes at
both zones is ‘home’, with ‘work’ being a far second.
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500
Home 1494 Home 1366
Work 191 Work 183
Business 27 Business 32
School 71 School 49
Shopping 36 Shopping 104
Food/drinks 14 Food/drinks 22
Errands 68 Errands 93
Health/beauty 2 Health/beauty 2
Accompany/ Fetch 2 Accompany/ Fetch 4
Social 47 Social 79
Rec/Leisure 4 Rec/Leisure 6
Church 39 Church 30
Others 2 Others 4
Figure 16 Trip purpose of respondents at Figure 17 Trip purpose of respondents at

origin zone destination zone
PLANADES CC‐14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 4 below is the count of the same origin and destination
zone by the respondents.
Table 4 Count of same trip purpose of respondents at origin and destination

Same purpose at origin Count
and destination?
Same 1203
No 805
TOTAL 2008
1.3.4.2. Trip purpose at establishment visited

Shown in Figure 18 below is the breakdown of the trip purpose of the
respondents at the establishment that they visited.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Home 15
Work 285
Business 171
School 41
Shopping 391
Food/drinks 256
Errands 484
Health/beauty 17
Accompany/ Fetch 21
Social 225
Rec/Leisure 32
Church 29
Others 21
Figure 18 Trip purpose of respondents at establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.5. Access and egress modes
1.3.5.1. Access modes

Shown in Figure 19 below is the breakdown of the type of access mode
by the respondents. The breakdown of the type of egress mode going to
their destinations is shown in Figure 20.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Private 312
PT 1408
PT, private 13
Quasi‐PT 27
NMT 243
Figure 19 Access mode of respondents
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Private 309
PT 1353
PT, private 30
Quasi‐PT 22
NMT 285
Figure 20 Egress mode of respondents
Shown in Table 5 below is the count of the same access and egress
mode by the respondents.
Table 5 Count of same access and egress modes of respondents

Same access and egress mode? Count
Same 1739
No 269
TOTAL 2008
PLANADES CC‐16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 21 below is the count of the same access and egress
mode by the respondents per street.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 16.9% 70.7% 8.8%
Osmena Blvd 12.4% 74.7% 12.0%
Legaspi 17.9% 65.6% 14.7%
V. Gullas 12.7% 70.5% 14.5%

Private
P. Burgos 19.1% 70.5% 9.1% PT
PT, private
Mabini 30.0% 46.7% 20.0%
Quasi‐PT
Jakosalem 10.0% 73.8% 15.2% NMT
F. Gonzales 22.3% 66.2% 10.8%
MC Briones 23.5% 64.3% 7.1%
Magallanes 13.3% 63.3% 23.3%
All minor streets 11.1% 74.1% 12.6%
Figure 21 Access mode of respondents per street of establishment visited

respondents according to the zone of the establishment that they
visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
North 12.9% 73.8% 11.4%
Central 14.7% 67.4% 16.7% Private

PT
East 17.6% 69.0% 11.4%
PT, private
South 19.7% 67.3% 10.6% Quasi‐PT

NMT
NA 13.8% 72.3% 9.6%
All zones 15.6% 70.3% 12.1%
Figure 22 Access mode of respondents per block of establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

respondents according to the trip purpose at establishment that they
visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Home 40.0% 60.0%
Work 17.9% 71.6% 9.5%
Business 24.0% 65.5% 9.4%
School 95.1% 4.9%
Shopping 16.9% 70.6% 11.3%

Private
Food/drinks 7.4% 63.3% 26.2% PT
PT, private
Errands 19.2% 68.2% 9.3%
Quasi‐PT
Health/beauty 11.8% 82.4% 5.9% NMT
Accompany/ Fetch 28.6% 57.1% 14.3%
Social 11.1% 76.9% 9.3%
Rec/Leisure 9.4% 84.4% 6.3%
Church 10.3% 89.7%
Others 14.3% 71.4% 14.3%
Figure 23 Access mode of respondents per trip purpose at establishment
PLANADES CC‐18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

respondents according to the zone of the establishment that they
visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Construction 29.5% 61.9% 7.6%
Electronics 20.7% 65.5% 13.8%
Financial 23.0% 59.0% 15.1%
Food 9.2% 69.3% 17.9%
Gen. Merch. 14.0% 66.7% 17.4%
Hotels 7.7% 82.1% 7.7%

Private
Industrial 30.7% 54.7% 12.0%
PT
Logistics 23.8% 76.2% PT, private
Mall 13.2% 75.7% 9.5% Quasi‐PT
NMT
Museums/public 18.0% 70.5% 9.8%
Offices 16.9% 75.1% 6.5%
Personal 13.7% 74.0% 9.6%
Religious 10.8% 81.1% 8.1%
Residences 10.5% 52.6% 36.8%
Schools 9.8% 85.4% 4.9%
Others 7.1% 92.9%
Figure 24 Access mode of respondents per type of establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 25 below is the count of the access mode by trip origin
of the respondent.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Downtown 8.8% 31.1% 57.5%
West CC 11.6% 87.5%
Uptown 18.3% 76.1%
Private
Uplands 11.5% 85.2%
PT
PT, private
Mactan Island 29.4% 67.6%
Quasi‐PT
NMT
Cebu West 5.3% 94.7%
Others 15.8% 73.7% 10.5%
Figure 25 Access mode of respondents per trip origin zone
PLANADES CC‐20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 26 below is the count of the egress mode by trip

destination of the respondent.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Downtown 9.2% 39.6% 50.2%
West CC 14.4% 82.4%
Uptown 16.4% 75.9%
Private
Uplands 19.0% 65.5% 8.6%
PT
PT, private
Mactan Island 35.7% 55.4%
Quasi‐PT
NMT
Cebu West 88.9% 11.1%
Others 100.0%
Figure 26. Egress mode of respondents per trip destination zone
PLANADES CC‐21
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.6. Frequency of trip
1.3.6.1. Overall trip frequency

establishments by the respondents.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
4‐7x a week 644
1‐3x a week 396
1‐3x a month 405
First time 128
Rare/Infreq. 422
Figure 27 Frequency of trip by respondents

establishments by the respondents according to gender.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4‐7x a week
Male 35.8% 17.9% 19.1% 6.0% 21.2% 1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
First time
Female 29.5% 21.4% 21.3% 6.8% 21.1%
Rare/Infreq.
Figure 28 Frequency of trip by respondents per gender
PLANADES CC‐22
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

establishments by the respondents according to age group.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0 to 18 34.3% 31.3% 15.2% 14.1%

4‐7x a week
19 to 25 31.7% 22.3% 18.8% 19.8%
1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
26 to 40 34.3% 17.7% 19.7% 20.6%
First time
41 to 60 30.0% 17.1% 25.3% 23.3% Rare/Infreq.
> 60 31.4% 21.9% 16.2% 29.5%
Figure 29 Frequency of trip by respondents per age group

establishments by the respondents according to occupation.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Worker 44.8% 18.1% 15.3% 5.0% 16.8%
Own bus./co. 42.3% 16.2% 26.9% 2.3%12.3%
Self‐employed 40.4% 14.7% 22.9% 5.5% 16.5%

4‐7x a week
1‐3x a week
Part‐time/OJT 24.4% 29.3% 12.2% 9.8% 24.4%
1‐3x a month
First time
Student 27.8% 23.9% 18.4% 8.1% 21.7%
Rare/Infreq.
Unemployed 9.1% 28.9% 26.2% 8.7% 27.0%
Housewife 8.2% 16.0% 37.1% 6.7% 32.0%
Others 22.2% 14.8% 7.4% 18.5% 37.0%
Figure 30 Frequency of trip by respondents by occupation
PLANADES CC‐23
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

establishments by the respondents according to the street of the establishment.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 26.6% 20.8% 25.3% 26.6%
Osmena Blvd 31.9% 22.6% 13.7% 26.6%
Legaspi 57.3% 11.4% 7.3% 23.6%
V. Gullas 39.1% 30.5% 17.3% 10.0%

4‐7x a week
P. Burgos 41.0% 13.4% 20.5% 24.3% 1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
Mabini 17.2% 13.8% 20.7% 27.6% 20.7%
First time
Jakosalem 19.0% 21.4% 29.0% 13.8% 16.7% Rare/Infreq.
F. Gonzales 16.2% 23.1% 30.0% 16.9% 13.8%
MC Briones 30.6% 20.4% 26.5% 20.4%
Magallanes 30.0% 43.3% 26.7%
All minor streets 25.9% 15.2% 19.0% 16.0% 24.0%
Figure 31 Frequency of trip by respondents by street of establishment visited
Shown in Figure 32 below is the computed average monthly frequency of the

respondents according to the street of the establishment that they visited.
0 7 14 21 28
Colon 8.6
Osmena Blvd 9.8
Legaspi 14.7
V. Gullas 12.2
P. Burgos 11.3
Mabini 5.7
Jakosalem 6.9
F. Gonzales 6.4
MC Briones 9.5
Magallanes 11.4
All minor streets 7.8
All Streets 9.8
Figure 32 Monthly frequency of trip by respondents by street of

PLANADES CC‐24
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

establishments by the respondents according to the zone of the establishment.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
North 34.4% 24.9% 18.4% 19.0%

4‐7x a week
Central 24.6% 21.3% 23.7% 19.3%
1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
East 36.1% 13.6% 19.8% 25.5%
First time
South 17.5% 23.8% 24.3% 18.9% Rare/Infreq.
All zones 31.4% 20.0% 20.5% 21.4%
Figure 33 Frequency of trip by respondents by zone of establishment visited

respondents according to the zone of the establishment.
0 7 14 21 28
North 10.7
Central 8.1
East 10.1
South 13.5
All Blocks 9.8
Figure 34 Monthly frequency of trip by respondents by zone of

PLANADES CC‐25
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Figure 35 below is the breakdown of the trip frequency of the

respondent according to the type of establishment that they visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Construction 41.9% 20.0% 8.6% 10.5% 19.0%
Electronics 29.9% 10.3% 27.4% 9.4% 23.1%
Financial 31.9% 18.1% 20.3% 8.7% 21.0%
Food 28.7% 18.8% 28.4% 3.9% 20.3%
Gen. Merch. 25.0% 20.5% 25.0% 6.4% 23.1%
Hotels 52.6% 7.9% 18.4% 7.9% 13.2%

4‐7x a week
Industrial 36.5% 14.9% 24.3% 8.1% 16.2%
1‐3x a week
Logistics 42.9% 4.8% 14.3% 38.1% 1‐3x a month
Mall 29.6% 36.2% 18.6% 14.2% First time
Rare/Infreq.
Museums/public 10.2% 18.6% 20.3% 22.0% 28.8%
Offices 34.7% 8.2% 12.8% 12.2% 32.1%
Personal 32.9% 23.3% 17.8% 5.5% 20.5%
Religious 29.7% 23.0% 17.6% 29.7%
Residences 52.6% 10.5% 15.8% 15.8% 5.3%
Schools 58.5% 17.1% 4.9% 19.5%
Others 28.6% 17.9% 21.4% 10.7% 21.4%
Figure 35 Frequency of trip by type of establishment visited

respondents according to the type of the establishment.
0 7 14 21 28
Construction 11.8
Electronics 8.5
Financial 9.5
Food 9.0
Gen. Merch. 8.2
Hotels 13.5
Industrial 10.4
Logistics 10.9
Mall 10.5
Museums/public 4.5
Offices 9.2
Personal 10.2
Religious 9.4
Residences 13.7
Schools 15.3
Others 8.7
AVERAGE 9.6
Figure 36 Average monthly trip frequency by type of establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐26
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

respondent according to the trip purpose at the establishment that they visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Home 66.7% 6.7% 13.3% 13.3%
Work 86.0% 7.7%
Business 51.5% 21.1% 15.2% 12.3%
School 63.4% 14.6% 17.1%
Shopping 12.8% 27.4% 27.4% 11.5% 20.8%

4‐7x a week
Food/drinks 24.7% 22.7% 30.6% 18.4% 1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
Errands 15.0% 19.4% 25.7% 31.5%
First time
Health/beauty 5.9%5.9% 35.3% 17.6% 35.3% Rare/Infreq.
Accompany/ Fetch 20.0% 20.0% 10.0% 45.0%
Social 24.9% 21.8% 14.7% 33.8%
Rec/Leisure 25.0% 15.6% 28.1% 25.0% 6.3%
Church 13.8% 31.0% 31.0% 24.1%
Others 61.9% 9.5% 19.0% 9.5%
Figure 37 Frequency of trip by respondents by trip purpose at establishment visited

respondents according to the trip purpose at the establishment.
0 7 14 21 28
Home 17.1
Work 21.0
Business 14.3
School 16.3
Shopping 6.0
Food/drinks 8.4
Errands 5.8
Health/beauty 2.6
Accompany/ Fetch 6.7
Social 8.1
Rec/Leisure 7.8
Church 6.6
Others 15.8
AVERAGE 9.8
Figure 38 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by trip purpose

at establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐27
FINAL REPORT
December 2019

respondent according to the trip origin of the respondents.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Downtown 35.1% 18.6% 18.6% 6.9% 20.9%
West CC 39.6% 19.0% 18.7% 6.4% 16.3%
Uptown 32.5% 20.9% 20.8% 5.7% 20.1%
4‐7x a week
Uplands 30.0% 18.3% 26.7% 5.0% 20.0%
1‐3x a week
1‐3x a month
Mactan Island 20.6% 14.7% 25.0% 10.3% 29.4%
First time
Rare/Infreq.
Cebu North 27.8% 23.4% 20.1% 5.3% 23.4%
Cebu South 26.6% 16.9% 21.4% 5.8% 29.2%
Cebu West 21.1% 31.6% 26.3% 10.5% 10.5%
Others 21.1% 15.8% 31.6% 31.6%
Figure 39 Frequency of trip by respondents by origin zone of respondents

respondents according to the trip origin of the respondent.
0 7 14 21 28
Downtown 10.3
West CC 11.4
Uptown 9.9
Uplands 9.2
Mactan Island 6.7
Cebu North 9.0
Cebu South 8.2
Cebu West 8.2
Others 2.2
AVERAGE 9.8
Figure 40 Average monthly frequency of trip by respondents by origin zone

of respondent
PLANADES CC‐28
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Shown in Table 6 below is the computed average monthly frequency of the

respondents for each pair of origin zone and establishment zone.
Table 6 Average monthly frequency of trip per origin‐establishment pair
Origin (Aggre) DT DT DT DT Grand
North Central East South Total
Downtown 13.3 5.3 10.0 10.9 10.0
West CC 11.2 9.9 11.7 8.2 10.9
Uptown 10.3 9.2 10.4 6.8 9.9
Uplands 12.0 10.7 5.4 6.7 8.6
Mactan Island 7.8 5.0 8.6 2.9 6.6
Cebu North 9.5 9.0 10.3 5.2 8.9
Cebu South 8.7 8.0 10.4 3.5 8.2
Cebu West 3.7 8.6 14.0 8.2 8.6
Others 4.3 0.1 1.1 1.0 1.4
TOTAL 10.7 8.1 10.1 6.7 9.6
1.4. Incidences of safety and security issues in the area

1.4.1. According to gender
respondents according to gender.
Male 59 813
Yes
Female 95 1033 No
All 154 1846
Figure 41 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by gender
respondents according to age group.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0 to 18 6.1% 93.9%
19 to 25 6.9% 93.1%
Yes
26 to 40 No
7.1% 92.9%
41 to 60 9.1% 90.9%
> 60 12.4% 87.6%
Figure 42 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by age group
PLANADES CC‐29
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
respondents according to occupation.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Worker 8.7% 91.3%
Own bus./co. 11.5% 88.5%
Self‐employed 14.7% 85.3%

Yes
Part‐time/OJT 4.9% 95.1%
No
Student 6.5% 93.5%
Unemployed 5.3% 94.7%
Housewife 4.1% 95.9%
Others 100.0%
Figure 43 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by occupation
respondents according to trip frequency.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
4‐7x a week 12.9% 87.1%
1‐3x a week 9.1% 90.9%

Yes
1‐3x a month 5.7% No

94.3%
First time 99.2%
Rare/Infreq. 2.4% 97.6%
Figure 44 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by trip frequency
PLANADES CC‐30
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
respondents according to the street of the establishment that they visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Colon 6.5% 93.5%
Osmena Blvd 4.9% 95.1%
Legaspi0.9% 99.1%
V. Gullas 11.8% 88.2%
P. Burgos 6.6% 93.4%

Yes
Mabini 100.0%
No
Jakosalem 9.5% 90.5%
F. Gonzales 9.3% 90.7%
MC Briones 19.2% 80.8%
Magallanes 100.0%
All minor streets 10.1% 89.9%
All Streets 7.7% 92.3%
Figure 45 Incidence of safety issues in Study Area by street of establishment visited
respondents according to the zone of the establishment that they visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
North 8.6% 91.4%
Central 4.7% 95.3%

Yes
East No
7.3% 92.7%
South 10.6% 89.4%
All zones 8.4% 91.6%
Figure 46 Incidence of safety issues in Study Area by zone of establishment visited
PLANADES CC‐31
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
respondents according to the type of the establishment that they visited.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Construction 5.8% 94.2%
Electronics 4.3% 95.7%
Financial 5.0% 95.0%
Food 8.6% 91.4%
Gen. Merch. 9.5% 90.5%
Hotels 13.2% 86.8%
Industrial 13.3% 86.7%
Logistics 100.0% Yes

No
Mall 7.3% 92.7%
Museums/public 13.1% 86.9%
Offices 6.5% 93.5%
Personal 9.6% 90.4%
Religious 4.1% 95.9%
Residences 10.5% 89.5%
Schools 2.5% 97.5%
Others 7.1% 92.9%
Figure 47 Incidence of safety and security issues in Study Area by type of establishment
visited
PLANADES CC‐32
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5. User preferences
1.5.1. Preference of areas of priority to improve frequency to the area

Shown in Figure 48 below is the count of answers per improvement aspect according to
1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice and 4th choice.
2000
38 118
270 251
1500 681
570
774
1557
4th choice
1000 3rd choice
657 2nd choice
1st choice
635
500 1092
513 239
304 101
0 67
Safety & Physical Urban Envi New shops
Security Improvements
Figure 48 Count of 1st to 4th choices of respondents per improvement aspects
according to gender.
Safety & Security

Male 3.35 2.53 2.81 1.32
Physical Improvements
Urban Envi
Female 3.40 2.48 2.78 1.33
New shops
Figure 49 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by gender
PLANADES CC‐33
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
according to age group.
0 to 18 3.28 2.46 2.69 1.52
19 to 25 3.46 2.40 2.74 1.41

Safety & Security
26 to 40 3.40 2.55 2.80 1.26
Urban Envi
New shops
41 to 60 3.28 2.56 2.89 1.28
> 60 3.34 2.68 2.78 1.21
Figure 50 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by age group
according to occupation.
Worker 3.38 2.51 2.82 1.29
Own bus./co. 3.34 2.62 2.78 1.28
Self‐employed 3.19 2.71 2.93 1.19
Safety & Security

Part‐time/OJT 3.39 2.49 2.73 1.39
Urban Envi
Student 3.38 2.39 2.76 1.46
New shops
Unemployed 3.37 2.50 2.73 1.40
Housewife 3.49 2.45 2.79 1.28
Others 3.69 2.56 2.44 1.33
Figure 51 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by occupation
PLANADES CC‐34
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
according to trip frequency.
4‐7x a week 3.33 2.47 2.89 1.31
1‐3x a week 3.37 2.53 2.71 1.37
Safety & Security

1‐3x a month 3.45 2.50 2.79 1.28
Urban Envi
First time 3.47 2.69 2.61 1.23
New shops
Rare/Infreq. 3.36 2.47 2.79 1.38
TOTAL 3.38 2.50 2.80 1.33
Figure 52 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by trip frequency
according to access mode.
Private 3.27 2.55 2.95 1.24
PT 3.39 2.51 2.76 1.35

Safety & Security
PT, private 3.83 2.58 2.50 1.08
Urban Envi
New shops
Quasi‐PT 3.37 2.70 2.52 1.41
NMT 3.44 2.39 2.82 1.32
Figure 53 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by access mode type
PLANADES CC‐35
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
according to street of the establishment that the respondent visited.
Colon 3.44 2.48 2.69 1.40
Osmena Blvd 3.33 2.19 2.91 1.57
Legaspi 2.98 2.28 3.37 1.39
V. Gullas 3.51 2.39 2.70 1.42
P. Burgos 3.27 2.43 3.05 1.26

Safety & Security
Mabini 3.83 2.10 3.07 1.00 Physical Improvements
Urban Envi
Jakosalem 3.69 2.44 2.57 1.28
New shops
F. Gonzales 3.20 3.02 2.55 1.23
MC Briones 3.23 3.10 2.68 1.03
Magallanes 3.67 2.90 2.27 1.17
All minor streets 3.47 2.77 2.57 1.19
All Streets 3.38 2.51 2.79 1.33
Figure 54 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by street of establishment

visited
according to zone of the establishment that the respondent visited.
North 3.37 2.45 2.73 1.47
Central 3.43 2.39 2.91 1.27

Safety & Security
East 3.39 2.49 2.85 1.27
Urban Envi
New shops
South 3.36 2.86 2.61 1.18
All zones 3.39 2.50 2.79 1.33
Figure 55 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by block of establishment

visited
PLANADES CC‐36
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
according to type of the establishment that the respondent visited.
Construction 3.10 2.52 3.21 1.17
Electronics 3.38 2.30 2.96 1.38
Financial 3.27 2.69 2.75 1.26
Food 3.45 2.46 2.71 1.39
Gen. Merch. 3.42 2.54 2.77 1.26
Hotels 3.61 2.22 2.94 1.22
Industrial 3.39 2.51 2.85 1.24

Safety & Security
Logistics 3.62 2.19 2.67 1.52 Physical Improvements
Mall 3.41 2.33 2.75 1.52 Urban Envi

New shops
Museums/public 3.38 2.72 2.57 1.33
Offices 3.46 2.68 2.68 1.19
Personal 3.50 2.61 2.77 1.14
Religious 3.37 2.42 2.84 1.38
Residences 3.00 3.37 2.58 1.05
Schools 3.12 2.27 3.22 1.39
Others 3.14 2.68 2.75 1.43
Figure 56 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by type of establishment

visited
PLANADES CC‐37
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
according to trip purpose of the respondent at the establishment.
Home 3.20 3.07 2.47 1.14
Work 3.27 2.40 2.96 1.39
Business 3.19 2.72 2.92 1.18
School 3.15 2.27 3.17 1.41
Shopping 3.40 2.45 2.80 1.36
Food/drinks 3.45 2.39 2.76 1.40 Safety & Security

Errands 3.45 2.61 2.69 1.25
Urban Envi
Health/beauty 3.53 2.53 2.71 1.24 New shops
Accompany/ Fetch 3.43 2.24 3.19 1.14
Social 3.39 2.51 2.67 1.43
Rec/Leisure 3.50 2.50 2.53 1.47
Church 3.52 2.55 2.72 1.21
Others 3.38 2.38 2.95 1.29
Figure 57 Average weighted score per improvement aspect by trip purpose at

establishment
PLANADES CC‐38
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Appendix CD
Establishment Interviews Raw Survey Results
1.1. Profile/Background of interviewed respondents

A total of 205 establishments were included in the survey. The survey team was tasked
with interviewing someone with decision making capacity with respect to the
operations of the establishment. A person in such a position would be able to represent
the possible future actions of the establishment. Most of those interviewed were the
Manager, followed by the Owner.
Table 1 Position of the Respondent

Position Number % Share
Manager 110 54%
Owner 43 21%
Supervisor 16 8%
OIC 13 6%
Staff 3 1%
Others 20 10%
Grand Total 205 100%
1.2. Profile/Background of the company/establishment

Most of the businesses (35%) were established within the last decade. This is followed
by 19% established within the 2000s, indicating that more than half of all surveyed were
established after the year 2000. By contrast, only 13% were established before 1980.
Table 2 Year when the businesses were established

Era business Number % Share
established
2000s 38 19%
2010s 78 38%
60‐70s 23 11%
80s 14 7%
90s 20 10%
DK 28 14%
Pre‐60s 4 2%
PLANADES CD‐1
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3. General profile of establishments
1.3.1. Types of establishments interviewed

The respondents were selected based on the street that they were located on as well as
the type of business. While 15% of respondents are shown to be offices, representation
of various retail types is reflected as well.
Table 3 Type of Establishment

Type of Establishment Number of Respondents Percentage
Construction 16 8%
Electronics 20 10%
Financial 11 5%
Food 20 10%
Gen. Merch. 20 10%
Hotels 10 5%
Industrial 20 10%
Logistics 6 3%
Museums/public 6 3%
Offices 30 15%
Personal 21 10%
Religious 5 2%
Residences 10 5%
Schools 5 2%
Vacant lots 5 2%
PLANADES CD‐2
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.2. Locations of establishments interviewed

Reflecting the study team’s appreciation of the importance of major roads to commerce
and economic activity in the area, the streets with the greatest number of respondents
was Colon (with 21%) and Osmeña (with 19%) and V. Gullas (with 17%).
Table 4 Distribution of Respondents by Street

Street Location # of Respondents Percentage
Colon 44 21%
Jakosalem 15 7%
Junquera 6 3%
Legaspi 16 8%
Mabini 6 3%
Magallanes 6 3%
MC Briones 2 1%
Osmena Blvd 39 19%
P. Burgos 9 4%
P. Gomez 2 1%
P. Lopez 4 2%
Pelaez 12 6%
Plaridel 3 1%
V. Gullas 35 17%
Zulueta 2 1%
Manalili, MJ Cuenco, F. Gonzales, Plaridel Ext. 1 each 2%
1.3.3. Number of employees

The variation among types is marked. General Merchandise types had an average of
46.8 employees, pulled up sharply by the malls and larger stores like Gaisano. This is
followed by the Food retailers with an average of 38.9 employees. Hotels had the third
largest average of 28.5 followed by Construction with 21.6.
Table 5 Number of Employees
Type Average # of employees
Construction 21.6
Electronics 6.5
Financial 13.9
Food 38.9
Gen. Merch. 46.8
Hotels 28.5
Industrial 8.7
Logistics 3.7
Museums/public 10.8
Offices 5.6
Vacant lots 2.0
PLANADES CD‐3
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.3.4. About the Building

The building within which the respondents are operating was classified according to: (1)
number of floors; (2) Average Occupancy of Floors. Most respondents only had 1 floor.
Occupancies were reportedly all above 89% among respondents of the survey.
Table 6 Number of Floors

Number of Number
Percentage
Floors of Respondents
1 123 60%
2 60 29%
3 16 8%
4 5 2%
8 1 0%
Table 7 Average Occupancy of Floors

Type of Average Occupancy (%)
Establishment Floor 1 Floor 2 Floor 3 Floor 4
Construction 100% 90% 100%
Electronics 96% 86% 100%
Financial 100%
Food 105% 100% 100% 100%
Gen. Merch. 89% 94% 100%
Hotels 95% 100%
Industrial 98% 100% 100% 100%
Logistics 100% 100%
Museums/public 100% 100%
Offices 86% 98% 100% 100%
Personal 100% 77%
Religious 100% 60%
Residences 96% 100%
Schools 100% 100%
Vacant lots 100%
Grand Total 97% 94% 100% 100%
PLANADES CD‐4
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.4. Profile of establishment visitors
1.4.1. Average daily number of clients/customers

The average daily client visits were summarized for the respondents. As expected, retail
establishments like food and general merchandise reported high visitation. Non‐retail
establishments were led by Schools and Museums/Public.
Table 8 Average Daily Client Visits
Ave. Daily Client

Type of Number of
(pax/day)
Construction Heavy industry 67 9 16

Electronics Heavy industry 17 14 20
Financial Services 118 5 11
Food Consumer 663 3 20
Gen. Merch. Consumer 274 4 13
Hotels/inns Hotels 77 8 10
Industrial Heavy industry 32 12 20
Logistics Heavy industry 48 11 5
Mall/dept stores Consumer 1,136 2 7
Museums/public Museums 105 6 6
Offices Offices 78 7 30
Personal Services 48 10 21
Religious items Specialty 21 13 5
Residences Residences 5 15 10
Schools Schools 2,720 1 5
Grand Total 238
1.4.2. General origins of clients/customers

Most respondents reported that their clientele came from Metro Cebu or Cebu
Province. Only 5% reported clientele including foreigners.
Table 9 General Origin of Clients

Respondents
General Origin of Clients
Count Share
Metro Cebu 84 41%
Cebu province 76 37%
Cebu and Vis Min 25 12%
Locals and foreigners 10 5%
No Definite Answer 10 5%
PLANADES CD‐5
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Total 205 100%
1.4.3. Average expenditure of clients/customers

The establishment type with the highest average of expenditure per client or customer
per visit is Electronics with Php, 2,879. Second are stores selling religious items with Php
2,450. This is followed by Industrial with Php, 1,919, Logistics with Php, 1,500 and
Construction with 1,129.
Table 10 Average Expenditure per customer per visit

Average amount
Type of
Gen. Category spend by clients / Rank
Establishment
visit (Php)
Construction Heavy industry 1,129 5

Electronics Heavy industry 2,879 1
Financial Services NA NA
Food Consumer 375 9
Gen. Merch. Consumer 969 7
Hotels/inns Hotels NA NA
Industrial Heavy industry 1,919 3
Logistics Heavy industry 1,500 4
Mall/dept stores Consumer 971 6
Museums Museums 200 10
Offices Offices NA NA
Personal Services 750 8
Religious items Specialty 2,450 2
Residences Residences NA NA
Schools Schools NA NA
Grand Total 1,441
PLANADES CD‐6
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5. Assessment of current conditions
1.5.1. Assessment of Width

The respondents were asked to rate the condition of the walkway width fronting their
establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Too narrow”, 0 means “Just right”, and 5
means “Very wide”. Looking at responses by street, we see that most respondents rate
the width at “just right”. There are exceptions, where F. Gonzales and Plaridel Ext.
walkways are rated at “somewhat narrow” and MJ Cuenco are rated at the opposite
end, with a score indicating “wide”.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 1 Respondent Rating of Width, by Street
PLANADES CD‐7
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.2. Assessment of Surface Quality

The respondents were asked to rate the surface quality of walkways fronting their
establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “State of disrepair”, 0 means “Acceptable”,
and 5 means “Very good condition”. Looking at responses by street, we see that most
respondents rate the surface quality as “Acceptable”. The exceptions were F. Gonzales
and Plaridel Ext.walkways are rated as less than acceptable. MJ Cuenco walkways were
rated at the opposite end, with a score indicating “very good”. There were noticeable
variations in ratings among respondents, indicating differences in conditions fronting
each respondent’s establishment.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 2 Respondent Rating of Surface Quality, by Street
PLANADES CD‐8
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.3. Assessment of Cleanliness

The respondents were asked to rate the cleanliness of the walkway fronting their
establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very dirty ”, 0 means “Clean enough”, and 5
means “Very clean”. Looking at responses by street, we see that some streets have
were rated from clean enough to very clean (eg. P Burgos and P. Gomez). On the other
hand, P. Lopez, Pelaez, Plaridel, and Plaridel Ext. were mostly rated poorly. Other
streets had range from negative to positive ratings, indicating a high variance of
cleanliness along the street.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 3 Respondent Rating of Cleanliness, by Street
PLANADES CD‐9
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.4. Assessment of Physical Obstacles

The respondents were asked to rate the cleanliness of the walkway fronting their
establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Too many”, 0 means “Acceptable”, and 5
means “Few/none”. Responses by street, indicate variance again, with some streets
rated as having few obstacles (F. Gonzales, MJ Cuenco) and others rated by more than
half of respondents per street as having significant obstacles (Plaridel Ext., Pelaez,
Gullas). Variances for remaining streets reflect the distribution of obstacles is not
homogenous.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 4 Respondent Rating of Physical Obstacles, by Street
PLANADES CD‐10
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.5. Assessment of continuity of level

The respondents were asked to rate the continuity of the level of the walkway fronting
their establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very uneven”, 0 means “Acceptable”,
and 5 means “Very even”. Responses by street, indicate variance again, with some
streets rated as having even levels (F. Gonzales, MJ Cuenco). On the opposite end of
the scale, some streets were rated by half or more of respondents per street as having
uneven walkways (Manalili and Pelaez). Variances for remaining streets reflect the
distribution of issues in continuity of level.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 5 Respondent Rating of Continuity of Walkway Level, by Street
PLANADES CD‐11
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.6. Incidences of Flooding

The respondents were asked to rate the incidences of flooding fronting their
establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very many”,‐3 means “many”, 0 means
“Some”, +3 mean “few” and 5 means “None”. Looking at responses by street, we see
that some streets were particularly problematic (Magallanes, Manalili, F Gonzales,
Plaridel Ext., Plaridel, V. Gullas), having more than half of respondents reporting
flooding incidences. Other streets report to a lesser degree or say there were few
problems.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 6 Respondent Rating of Incidences of Flooding, by Street
PLANADES CD‐12
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.7. Assessment of Presence of Ambulant Vendors

The respondents were asked to rate the presence of ambulant vendors of the walkway
fronting their establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very many”,‐3 means “many”,
0 means “Some”, +3 mean “few” and 5 means “None”. Respondents reported on some
streets that ambulant vendors were many (Magallanes, Manalili, F Gonzales, Plaridel,
Junquera and Zulueta), having more than half of respondents reporting many ambulant
vendors. Other streets report to a lesser degree or had more variance among
respondents.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 7 Respondent Rating of Presence Ambulant Vendors, by Street
PLANADES CD‐13
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.5.8. Assessment of Presence of Vagrants

The respondents were asked to rate the presence of vagrants on the walkway fronting
their establishment, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very many”,‐3 means “many”, 0 means
“Some”, +3 mean “few” and 5 means “None”. Magallanes, Manalili, Plaridel and
Zulueta showed half or more of respondents indicating many vagrants present. Other
streets had respondents with varying reportage, but most saying some or very few.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
‐5
Osmena Blvd ‐4
‐3
Legaspi
‐2
V. Gullas ‐1
0
P. Burgos
1
Mabini 2
Jakosalem 3
4
F. Gonzales
5
MC Briones
Magallanes
Minor streets
Figure 8 Respondent Rating of Presence Vagrants, by Street
PLANADES CD‐14
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.6. Ranking of priority areas for improvement
1.6.1. Raw/ Unweighted ranking

The respondents were asked to rate 7 areas of action to “make the area more attractive
to visitors and clientele” by choosing only their top 3. Security, Flood Control and Safety
were ranked the highest. It is notable however, that waste management is rated highly
as a second or third choice.
Figure 9 Respondent Raw Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement
1.6.2. Weighted ranking

The respondents’ choices were given relative weights with the first choice given 3
points, second choice given 2 points and third choice given 1 point. Based on these
weights, Security, Flood Control and Safety maintain their relative ranks. We can now
see Waste Management ranking just slightly below Safety, based on total points.
Figure 10 Respondent Weighted Rating of Priority Areas for Improvement
PLANADES CD‐15
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.7. Respondent’s Opinions on Priority Areas for Improvement

In order to validate further the responses on general areas for action or improvement, the
respondents were asked to rate particular improvements/interventions in terms of their likely
effect in terms of attracting more people to come to the downtown area, on a scale where ‐5
means “drives away people”, 0 means “No Impact”, and 5 means “Attract more people”.
These interventions may be viewed as being sub‐types under then 7 mentioned in the
previous section.
Table 11 Ranking of Improvement Items

Average
Score
Security outposts 4.41 3 Secuity
Cleanliness 4.33 4 Cleanliness
Trash bins 4.04 6 Cleanliness
More Public Transport mode options 3.79 9 PT
PUV stops 3.54 12 PT
Vagrants removal 3.43 13 Regulating sidewalk use
Traffic enforcers 3.32 15 Traffic Mgmt.
Sidewalk no obstructions 3.29 16 Safety
Traffic signal timing 2.98 18 Traffic Mgmt.
Roofs for s‐walks 2.69 22 Sidewalk improvement
Sidewalk vendors removal 2.12 26 Regulating sidewalk use
PLANADES CD‐16
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.8. Reaction to improvements
1.8.1. Hire More Employees

Respondents were asked if government were to make improvements to the urban
environment (implied by the list of actions they thought should be prioritized), how
likely were they to hire more employees on a scale where ‐5 means “Very unlikely”, 0
means “Not sure”, and 5 means “Very likely.” Variation by street is shown in following
figure.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
F. Gonzales ‐5
Jakosalem
‐4
Junquera
‐3
Legaspi
Mabini ‐2
Magallanes ‐1
Manalili 0
MC Briones 1
MJ Cuenco
2
Osmena Blvd
P. Burgos 3
P. Gomez 4
P. Lopez 5
Pelaez
Plaridel
Plaridel Ext.
V. Gullas
Zulueta
Figure 11 Respondent Likelihood to Hire More Employees
PLANADES CD‐17
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.8.2. Likelihood to Renovate/Refurbish Building

Respondents were asked if government were to make improvements to the urban
environment (implied by the list of actions they thought should be prioritized), how
likely were they to renovate or refurbish their building, on a scale where ‐5 means “Very
unlikely”, 0 means “Not sure”, and 5 means “Very likely.” Variation by street is shown
in following figure.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
F. Gonzales ‐5
Jakosalem
‐4
Junquera
‐3
Legaspi
Mabini ‐2
Magallanes ‐1
Manalili 0
MC Briones 1
MJ Cuenco
2
Osmena Blvd
P. Burgos 3
P. Gomez 4
P. Lopez 5
Pelaez
Plaridel
Plaridel Ext.
V. Gullas
Zulueta
Figure 12 Respondent Likelihood to Renovate
PLANADES CD‐18
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.8.3. Likelihood to Change Land Use / Activity

Respondents were asked how likely were they to change their land use or activity, on a
scale where ‐5 means “Very unlikely”, 0 means “Not sure”, and 5 means “Very likely.”
Variation by street is shown in following figure. Compared to previous graphs, it is
shown that their likelihood is significantly less.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
F. Gonzales ‐5
Jakosalem
‐4
Junquera
‐3
Legaspi
Mabini ‐2
Magallanes ‐1
Manalili 0
MC Briones 1
MJ Cuenco
2
Osmena Blvd
P. Burgos 3
P. Gomez 4
P. Lopez 5
Pelaez
Plaridel
Plaridel Ext.
V. Gullas
Zulueta
Figure 13 Respondent Likelihood to Change Land Use
PLANADES CD‐19
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.8.4. Likelihood of New Construction

Respondents were asked to consider if they would undertake totally new construction
(includes demolition of current structure). Variation by street is shown in following
figure. As compared to the first two graphs, it is shown that their likelihood is
significantly less.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Colon
F. Gonzales ‐5
Jakosalem
‐4
Junquera
‐3
Legaspi
Mabini ‐2
Magallanes ‐1
Manalili 0
MC Briones 1
MJ Cuenco
2
Osmena Blvd
P. Burgos 3
P. Gomez 4
P. Lopez 5
Pelaez
Plaridel
Plaridel Ext.
V. Gullas
Zulueta
Figure 14 Respondent Likelihood for New Construction
PLANADES CD‐20
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9. Respondents’ opinions of non‐physical aspects of improvement
1.9.1. Is the LGU currently doing enough to improve walking conditions in the area?
The respondents were asked to rate their agreement to several questions regarding
related, not necessarily physical aspects for improvement. The first question in this
series relates to the effort of the local government in improving the walking conditions
of the area. Respondents rated their agreement on a scale from ‐5 (Very much
disagree) to 0 (No comment, not sure) to +5 (Very much agree). The variance in
responses seems to track the variance in conditions in each street. This makes sense
since the basis of this assessment would likely be the overall perception of quality of
walking facilities in the area, which in turn is a result of efforts (or lack thereof) by the
local government.
Figure 15 Respondent Opinion on LGU effort to improve walking conditions
PLANADES CD‐21
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.2. Should the LGU take a more aggressive approach to curbing illegal usage of the
sidewalks? (e.g. vendors, vagrants)
Respondents rated their agreement to having the LGU adopt a more aggressive
approach on illegal sidewalk usage, on a scale from ‐5 (Very much disagree) to 0 (No
comment, not sure) to +5 (Very much agree). The responses strong agreement on some
roads, and moderate agreement on most roads. There were respondents who did
disagree with the statement. But again, this is within reasonable bounds, considering
the variance in occurrence of vendors or vagrants on the sidewalks .
Figure 16 Respondent Opinion on need for LGU to curb illegal sidewalk usage
PLANADES CD‐22
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.3. Is it necessary for LGU to provide incentives to the establishments for them to
upgrade their properties?
The respondents were mostly not sure of this statement. However, there were more
agreements and disagreements with the statement.
Figure 17 Respondent Opinion on need for incentives from LGU

A follow‐up question queries those who signified agreement, as to the kind of incentive they would
like to have. The most prominent is a general policy on lowering of taxes or fees at the LGU.
Table 12 Incentives mentioned by establishment interview respondents
Suggested Incentives / Policy No. Share
No answer /no specific 147 71.7%
Lower tax 26 12.7%
Cleaning of area 7 3.4%
Parking provision 6 2.9%
Painting of area 4 2.0%
Materials for construction 3 1.5%
Advertisement / promotion of area 2 1.0%
Improve drainage 2 1.0%
Public transport 2 1.0%
Architectural 1 0.5%
Clear policy 1 0.5%
Guidance /navigation 1 0.5%
Keep quiet 1 0.5%
Security CCTV 1 0.5%
Traffic mgmt. 1 0.5%
PLANADES CD‐23
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
1.9.4. Should LGU amend zoning and building requirements so that establishments can
easily upgrade their properties?
The opinions of respondents, for major streets, on average, reflect about 28%
agreement and 19% disagreement (and the rest remaining neutral/unsure). For Minor
streets, the average is 32% disagree and about 15% agree with the statement.
Agreement was strongest on MC Briones, P. Burgos, Magallanes and Mabini.
Disagreement was strongest on V. Gullas, Mabini and Magallanes. Note that
Magallanes and Mabini are strongest both in agreement and disagreement to the above
statement, by their respondents.
Figure 18 Respondent Opinion on need for amending zoning and building requirements
PLANADES CD‐24
FINAL REPORT
December 2019
Only few suggestions were offered by the respondents, with most of them just
reiterating the need for improvement of cleanliness and facilities (falling under Other,
not bldg/zone related). The facilitation of building permitting was cited by most
respondents. Some mentioned the need to relax the building height regulation. Others
suggested general improvement or updating of the building requirements to improve
standards of safety and the like.
Table 13 Additional suggestions by establishment interview respondents

Amendment Number Share
No proposal 172 83.9%
Other (not bldg/zone) 15 7.3%
Faster bldg permit 6 2.9%
Adjustment to bldg height 2 1.0%
Chinatown 2 1.0%
improve bldg reqt 2 1.0%
bldg requirements 1 0.5%
design 1 0.5%
Fire safety 1 0.5%
heritage 1 0.5%
Parks and open space 1 0.5%
Sidewalk law 1 0.5%
Grand Total 205 100.0%
PLANADES CD‐25

(Final) NEDA 7 Pedestrianization FR - Dec2019 With Appendices

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Final) NEDA 7 Pedestrianization FR - Dec2019 With Appendices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consulting Services

For The Economic Impact

Prepared by the Planning and Development Research Foundation Inc. (PLANADES)

2. Brief Background of the Study Area ................................................................... 4

3. Related Studies and Other Literature.............................................................. 17

4. Case Studies of Pedestrianization Projects.................................................... 25

5. Study Approach ....................................................................................................... 40

5.1. Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................... 40

7. Focus Group Discussion Results ........................................................................ 48

8. Land Use Inventory Profiling.............................................................................. 53

9. Pedestrian Count Volumes Profiling ................................................................ 74

10. Public Transport Inventory ................................................................................ 82

11. Pedestrian Interviews Profiling ........................................................................ 93

11.1. Summary of samples ...................................................................................................... 93

12. Establishment Interviews Profiling .............................................................. 122

13. Evaluating Suitability for Pedestrianization .............................................. 142

14. Analysis of Potential Impacts of Intervention ........................................... 157

16. References .............................................................................................................. 188

Appendix AA: Lot labeling used for this Study

Appendix AB: ADB Walkability Surveys of 13 Asian Cities

Appendix AC: Street Design Improvements implemented by NYC DOT

Survey Planning Reports

Appendix BA: Focus Group Discussion Report

Appendix BB: Public Transport Inventory Survey Report

Appendix BC: Land Use Inventory Survey Report

Appendix BD: Pax Interviews Survey Report

Appendix BE: Establishment Interviews Survey Report

Appendix BF: Pedestrian Counts Survey Report

Raw Survey Results Reports

Appendix CA: Land Use Inventory Survey Results

Appendix CB: Pedestrian Counts Raw Survey Results

Appendix CC: Pedestrian Interviews Raw Survey Results

Appendix CD: Establishment Interviews Raw Survey Results

Figure 83 Egress mode of respondents ............................................................................................ 108

Table 41 Ranking of improvement features to attract more people .............................................. 131

Background of the Study and the Study Area

a) To determine the probable economic impact of pedestrianization on stakeholders

Key concepts from previous studies and case studies

Determining areas suitable for pedestrianization

Urgent need for Complimentary High heritage/ Supportive Minimal traffic

High ped High Heritage sites Wide road ROW Non‐national

Narrow sidewalk High retail Parks/open Presence of Mid to low

Poor sidewalk High school Architectural Parking w/in Mid to low PT

Many sidewalk Low or no

Score Public need (PN) Sufficient infrastructure (SI)

Btwn 2.8 1.3

Rerouting of 17 public transport routes:

Introduction of new arterial public transport routes:

Setting up of public transport facilities:

Provision of parking facilities:

Improvement of heritage/tourism character

Among the different policy aspects needed to be enacted are:

 Land use policies

Estimate of Economic Impacts

Estimates on increase in foot traffic

Estimates on increase in local revenues

1.1. Background of the Study

However, before its implementation in a particular area, pedestrianization is almost always

1.2. Study Area

Figure 1 Map and Legend of the Study Area

1.3. Objectives of the Study

c) To determine the probable economic impact of pedestrianization on stakeholders