Third Mactan, “bridge” or “link?”

I'm talking about the proposed third one of course as we cannot possibly do anything with the existing two ones, except to continue using them.  And when we say “to bridge,” we do not actually mean to build a bridge, literally, but it can be an overhead structure, a tunnel, or a causeway with a RoRo connection at the navigational channel portion.  The term “bridge” in this case means the connecting structure - Manny Rabacal of the RDC-IDC prefer to use the word “link.”  But let's face it, “link” is not as better sounding as the word “bridge.”

The fact of the matter is - bridges have always excited people since time immemorial.  From the time a dead tree accidentally fell across a river or a creek, allowing our ancestors to cross to the other bank, man always stood in awe over such structures which allow a way from one place to another, which would have been previously inaccessible.  Bridges facilitate faster transportation in earlier times, both in times of peace and war.  And while bridges crucial for economic growth, they seem to be more important when nations war against each other.

And they tend to inspire romantic sentiments on people, too.  Countless poems, songs and films, past and present, use them in their titles to ignite people's imaginations.  Remember that popular song, “Bridge over troubled water?”  Or how about the war movies, “A Bridge Too Far,”and “Bridge over the River Kwai.”  Then there's that quaint film called, “The Bridges of Madison County.”  And, without being in the title, bridges usually play important roles in many other films.  Not just as locations but also oftentimes being bombed or demolished.

Of course, it is so appealing to people that it is a common use for political campaigns.  Remember that funny anecdote of a rural politician promising to build a bridge when he/she gets elected?  People reminded him that he can't because there is no river in the area.  To which he/she answered, “Then I will build a river!”  No, I'm not saying this because it's political season.  But come to think of it, bridges always inspire people, to the point that a good number of them are actually tourist attractions in almost all countries in the world.

Manny Rabacal would probably have good reasons why he prefers to call it a third “link” to Mactan.  In the face of a number of divergent opinions on what to build (a bridge, a tunnel, a causeway with a RoRo, or, my own suggestion of not building anything but put a BRT instead), it's really safer to call it a proposed “link.”  But it is not as romantic or sensational as a “bridge” (regardless of the kind of structure).  After all, singing “Link over troubled water,” or watching “The Links of Madison Country,” would probably arouse emotions in people.

I can just imagine the euphoria that Cebuanos felt when the (first) Mandaue-Mactan Bridge was first proposed, and then built.  Imagine, while before we use to cross by barge, banca, or whatever, we can now drive our cars across and enjoy the beaches of Mactan.  Just like the time the Marcelo Fernan Bridge (second bridge) was opened in 1999 - people literally drove their cars across the brand new structure so many times.  I wouldn't be surprised why people want a new third bridge now.  And a fourth one and a fifth one in the future.  Maybe, we will have a movie someday entitled, “The Bridges of Mactan-Cebu.”

Let's get that study done and over with.  Mind you this will not be an architectural or structural design study, that will come later when the feasibility is established, and decision is made to build, and the financing is secured.  That will also come after a full-blown feasibility study is completed.  What is required now is a sort of a pre-feasibility study, and it involves demographics, land use, the characteristics of present and future transport demand and supply, and mobility issues.  What will come out of that study is a definitive established conclusion on whether we need a new bridge (or link, if you may), where it should be built, and when.  When?  Yes, because, transport studies will always show when a new transport link is needed or would be feasible.  In simplest terms, a study might produce this kind of recommendation: yes, a bridge is needed, but not now.  That's why we need the study now.   

Let's discuss the demand and supply criteria of the third bridge (link) on Sunday. (To be continued…)