There is a hot controversy on social media about the plan of San Miguel Corporation to build the Pasig River Expressway (PAREX). The project got initial government approval and was reported to have broken ground last week.
Leading the opposition are urban planners who think the idea is a bad one. They claim it will not help alleviate Metro Manila’s traffic congestion and it will destroy the romance that urban rivers have.
I have not seen the details of the plan, nor have I seen a drawing of how it will look. I texted RSA a few days ago and he said he is preparing a presentation so people can better appreciate his plans.
For now, I am keeping an open mind until I get more details. While I can see why RSA is excited about it, I also appreciate many of the points raised by the critics.
But there are false claims about the project, including a drawing that showed the river being totally covered by the expressway. That horrified me.
I recall asking RSA two years ago exactly that and he assured me the expressway will run along the river bank.
My initial reaction to the project was positive. I had long seen the need for an expressway that goes from the east of Metro Manila, where I live, to the west. All the options for going east to west or vice versa are congested.
When I was working for the Chronicle, my daily drive to Port Area was exhausting. Depending on what travel guide you consult from a Google search, they claim road distance is between 10 to 15 kilometers and travel time is anywhere from half an hour to an hour. Totally misleading!
The straight line distance between Ortigas and Intramuros should be less than that and it shouldn’t take my usual two hour drive or more. I was wondering why we didn’t have an east-west road to the Manila Bay area.
Ping de Jesus, a former secretary of public works and later of transportation, sent me an email expressing his support for the project:
“As one who was once involved in infrastructure development and construction, I just wish to add my two-cents worth to the ongoing discussion on the SMC PAREX project.
“The increased accessibility that PAREX will add to its service area (and beyond) will generally spur greater economic activity.
“The PAREX will be a major factor toward solving the ever growing traffic congestion in Manila streets.
“The P95-billion project will be built with cost recovery coming from tolls under the user-pay principle. Hence, people who may never use the toll road will not be paying for the project from the taxes that the government collects from them.
“In addition, dredging the Pasig river will make the river an important waterway for both cargo and passenger traffic. Thus, we gain not only an expressway, but also an ‘expresswaterway’ to serve Manila’s traffic.”
Rizal romanticized the Pasig River in El Filibusterismo. I imagine the river was pretty at that time. I was recently on the Pasig River ferry from Guadalupe to Jones Bridge, and I can tell you it certainly is far from pretty.
Many other cities may value their riverfronts as prime property, but for us, the Pasig River is nothing more than a toilet and garbage dump for those along its banks. There have been many attempts to clean it, but all ended in failures.
That’s one other reason I thought positively of the project. Citing his experience cleaning the Tullahan River, RSA told a group of journalists two years ago that he would spend at least P2 billion to clean up the Pasig River.
But it cannot be a one time cost. SMC must provide a regular budget to keep the river clean.
The expressway project will also mean the government must help San Miguel clean the riverbank of the squatters and all others responsible for polluting the river.
I remember the late Gina Lopez telling me that she was successful in getting most of the industrial companies along the river to put up water treatment plants. Indeed, they were complaining that it pains them to throw almost drinkable water into the filthy river.
The problem, Gina told me, was the domestic waste from riverside settlers. At that point, she said more than 80 percent of river pollution is from domestic sources.
Can a private company with a mandate and self interest to clean the river be more successful than all those government commissions that failed? Perhaps!
But I can see where the urban planners are coming from. Many cities abroad use rivers as centerpieces for greening and humanizing the urban environment. Some cities even remove expressways to recover idyllic river settings.
The Iloilo River walk is a good example of what can be done from the perspective of an urban planner. They have done the same thing in Singapore. The Riverwalk in San Antonio, Texas is a prime tourism destination. Why can’t the Pasig River be similarly developed?
Converting both banks of the river into Iloilo type promenades will cost plenty and it is doubtful any administration will make that a priority.
Maybe San Miguel can incorporate bike lanes and promenades in the project. Walking paths could be created to make historical sites more accessible.
PAREX is not an easy project to do. I frankly think it is a lot more complicated than RSA thinks it will be.
Clearing the riverbank will probably be as difficult as getting ROW for a regular expressway. Those to be displaced have political clout as well to fight San Miguel.
The toll rate at the reported range of P200 to P250 looks stiff and may limit its use only during extremely rush hours.
So, even beyond the concerns of the critics, the project isn’t a slam dunk.
But it is good that objections are aired publicly now while regulatory clearances are being processed. Retrofitting a metro area like ours to satisfy the aesthetic instincts of urban planners isn’t easy. There are also other urgent economic concerns that must be satisfied as well.
Boo Chanco’s email address is bchanco@gmail.com
Follow him on Twitter @boochnco