PROJECT GOALS/ OBJECTIVES

General objective:

The study aims to evaluate the behavior of the traffic flow and the road

condition in the intersection of President J.P Laurel Highway, and Alaminos-Lipa Road.

Specific objectives:

 To determine the fundamental variables of traffic flow in the intersection

 To determine the degree of congestion of the four-leg intersection and to identify their

level of service.

 To investigate the conditions of traffic lights, Countdown Pedestrian Signals (CPS)

and traffic signage within the intersection.

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

TARGET BENEFICIARIES

This study will be a significant endeavor in the improvement of the traffic behavior in

President J.P Laurel Highway, and Alaminos-Lipa Intersection Road and it is expected to be

useful to the following target beneficiaries;

To the traffic management personnel, the study will help them to perceive the current

scenario of the traffic flow in the intersection, and eventually help for the improvement to the

problem that maybe encountered.

1
 To the local government, data obtained from this research can serve as an additional

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

can also be formulated for faster and safer traffic flow;

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

from the continuous flow of traffic.

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

circumstances that can happen;

To the community, the study will help them to be aware in the traffic condition in

their area.

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

Engineering; and

To future researchers, this study will serve as an institution for their future research

about transportation engineering regarding the topic traffic flow.

PROJECT MILESTONE

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

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

to be able to analyze the traffic condition at the Intersection of President J.P Laurel Highway,

and Alaminos-Lipa Road.

2
 PROJECT MILESTONE’S PLAN OF ACTION

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

 Prepare a permission  Degree of Traffic

 Traffic letter signed by the Congestion
Condition office of the Mayor  Other factors
 Traffic and the TDRO. that contribute
Ordinances  Perform the Traffic to traffic
Manual Counting. congestion
 Analyze the data  Solutions and
gathered from traffic recommendation
counting. s

Research Design

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

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

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

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

Sources of Data

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

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

necessary information.

3
Data Gathering Procedures

The study was focused on the traffic condition at the intersection. To determine the

degree of congestion as well as the level of service and factors that affect to traffic

congestion, the researchers performed a method of Manual Traffic Counting. This involves

counting all the vehicles passing a selected location on a road for a pre-determined period of

time. The count can be for any duration, but the researchers performed the study on June 06,

2019- Thursday . The morning count started at exactly 6 am and finished at 8 am. The

second count started at 11 am and completed at 1 pm. The duration of these two counts was

four hours. This was done to be able to determine the most peak period within a day and to

also identify the hourly- average volume of vehicle.

4
PRESENTATION OF DATA, ANALYSIS AND INITERPRETATION OF RESULTS

This presents the analysis and interpretation of the gathered data. The data are

presented in tabular and graphical for easier comprehension.

Figure 2 . Traffic Flow Map

This figure shows the traffic flow at the intersection of President J.P Laurel Highway, And

Alaminos-Lipa Road. This intersection is a three legged intersection. It can be seen that the

intersection have six routes six routes, that is also the factor why it is prone to congestion.

5
 6:00 am - 7:00 am
Time
Route
Vehicle 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Route 6
Bicycle 18 6 12 7 0 3
Motorcycle 120 96 110 98 67 98
Car/Private Type
96 56
Jeepney 69 76 78 79
Pedicab 1 0 2 0 0 0
Tricycle 143 120 179 72 120 92
Jeepney 176 115 125 73 116 122
Multicab/Rusco 17 9 12 6 5 4
Van 18 26 14 5 13 15
Standard Bus 4 6 3 3 0 7
School/ Company/
0 2
Tourist Service 0 3 9 8
Pick-up/Delivery
1 4
Vehicle 4 16 6 2
Trucks 10 13 12 8 4 2
Others 0 1 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 580 487 562 361 422 405

Table 1. Traffic Volume during 6:00 am to 7:00 am

The direction of Route 1 & 4 is to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City

Route 1 + Route 4 = 580 + 361 = 941

941 vehicles are going to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City at 6:00 am – 7:00 am

The direction of Route 5 & 3 is to Alaminos – Lipa Road

Route 5 + Route 3 = 562 + 422 = 984

984 vehicles are going to Alaminos- Lipa Road at 6:00 am – 7:00 am

The direction of Route 2 & 6 is to President JP Laurel Highway

Route 2 + Route 6 = 487 + 405 = 892

892 vehicles are goinig to President JP Laurel Highway at 6:00 am – 7:00 am

6
 7:00 am - 8:00 am
Time
Vehicle
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Route 6
Bicycle 2 5 10 0 0 1
Motorcycle 167 151 144 122 167 125
Car/Private Type
98 123 132 115 98 116
Jeepney
Pedicab 2 1 1 0 0 0
Tricycle 123 132 178 156 154 111
Jeepney 122 114 185 147 167 102
Multicab/Rusco 16 18 32 28 21 19
Van 67 35 34 43 46 12
Standard Bus 4 4 0 3 7 5
School/ Company/
1 2 1 4 0 0
Tourist Service
Pick-up/Delivery
19 17 12 34 14 21
Vehicle
Trucks 26 21 18 11 8 23
Others 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 647 623 747 663 682 535

Table 2. Traffic Volume during 7:00 am to 8:00 am

The direction of Route 1 & 4 is to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City

Route 1 + Route 4 = 647 + 663 = 1310

1310 vehicles are going to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City at 7:00 am to 8:00 am

The direction of Route 5 & 3 is to Alaminos – Lipa Road

Route 5 + Route 3 = 747 + 682 = 1429

1429 vehicles are going to Alaminos- Lipa Road at 7:00 am to 8:00 am

The direction of Route 2 & 6 is to President JP Laurel Highway

Route 2 + Route 6 = 623 + 535 = 1158

1158 vehicles are goinig to President JP Laurel Highway at 7:00 am to 8:00 am

7
 11:00 am - 12: 00 pm
Time
Vehicle
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Route6
Bicycle 1 3 0 0 1 0
Motorcycle 145 189 174 123 113 145
Car/Private Type
122 128 93 115 65 89
Jeepney
Pedicab 1 2 10 0 1 0
Tricycle 213 145 189 123 154 113
Jeepney 207 198 198 178 176 167
Multicab/Rusco 3 31 33 32 21 13
Van 23 89 114 34 23 96
Standard Bus 6 9 0 5 13 3
School/ Company/
1 1 1 2 2 0
Tourist Service
Pick-up/Delivery
7 24 12 17 11 0
Vehicle
Trucks 15 13 4 12 12 11
Others 1 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 745 832 828 641 592 637

Table 3. Traffic Volume during 11:00 am to 12:00 pm

The direction of Route 1 & 4 is to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City

Route 1 + Route 4 = 745 + 641 = 1386

1386 vehicles are going to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City at 11:00 am to 12:00 pm

The direction of Route 5 & 3 is to Alaminos – Lipa Road

Route 5 + Route 3 = 828 + 592 = 1420

1420 vehicles are going to Alaminos- Lipa Road at 11:00 am to 12:00 pm

The direction of Route 2 & 6 is to President JP Laurel Highway

Route 2 + Route 6 = 832 + 637 = 1469

1469 vehicles are goinig to President JP Laurel Highway at 11:00 am to 12:00 pm

8
 12: 00 pm - 1:00 pm
Time
Vehicle
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Route 6
Bicycle 2 1 1 0 0 2
Motorcycle 248 257 192 178 112 123
Car/Private Type
104 125 167 112 113 110
Jeepney
Pedicab 0 0 2 0 0 0
Tricycle 198 210 189 195 187 102
Jeepney 198 225 170 199 121 114
Multicab/Rusco 56 18 39 12 12 12
Van 34 45 43 45 22 100
Standard Bus 9 6 0 0 1 3
School/ Company/
1 3 0 0 1 0
Tourist Service
Pick-up/Delivery
20 23 23 11 13 26
Vehicle
Trucks 25 21 3 11 6 34
Others 0 0 1 0 0 1
Total 895 934 830 763 588 627

Table 4. Traffic Volume during 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm

The direction of Route 1 & 4 is to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City

Route 1 + Route 4 = 895 = 763 = 1658

1658 vehicles are going to Brgy. Marawoy Lipa City at 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm

The direction of Route 5 & 3 is to Alaminos – Lipa Road

Route 5 + Route 3 = 830 + 588 = 1418

1418 vehicles are going to Alaminos- Lipa Road at 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm

The direction of Route 2 & 6 is to President JP Laurel Highway

Route 2 + Route 6 = 934 + 627 = 1561

1561 vehicles are goinig to President JP Laurel Highway at 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm

9
 Traffic Volume Data in a 1-Hour Interval
280

240

200
Number of Vehicles

160

120

80

40

0
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 6
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 6
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 6
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 6
7:00 am - 8: 00 am 11:00 am - 12:00 pm 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm

Bicycle Motorcycle Car/Private Type Jeepney

Pedicab Tricycle Jeepney
Multicab/Rusco Van Standard Bus
School/ Company/ Tourist Service Pick-up/Delivery Vehicle Trucks
Others

Figure 3. Hourly Variation of Traffic Volume According

to the Classification of Vehicle.

10
Average Volume per Hour According to the Classification of Vehicle in Each Roadway

Route 1

6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm - Average volume

7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm per hour

Bicycle 18 2 1 2 5.75

Motorcycle 120 167 145 248 170

Car/Private Type
69 98 122 104 98.25
Jeepney

Pedicab 1 2 1 0 1

Tricycle 143 123 213 198 169.25

Jeepney 176 122 207 198 175.75

Multicab/Rusco 17 16 3 56 23

Van 18 67 23 34 35.5

Standard Bus 4 4 6 9 5.75

School/ Company/
0 1 1 1 0.75
Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery
4 19 7 20 12.5
Vehicle

Trucks 10 26 15 25 19

Others 0 0 1 0 0.25

Total 716.75

Table 5. Average Volume per Hour According to

Classification of Vehicle on Route 1

11
 Route 1
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
200

150

100

50

Figure 4. Average Volume per Hour According to

Vehicle Classification in Route 1

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 1, Jeepney has the highest average

volume per hour having 175. 75 vph. Followed by Motorcycle having an average volume

per hour of 170 vph.

12
 Route 2

6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm - Average volume

7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm per hour

Bicycle 6 5 3 1 3.75

Motorcycle 96 151 189 257 173.25

Car/Private Type
76 123 128 125 113
Jeepney

Pedicab 0 1 2 0 0.75

Tricycle 120 132 145 210 151.75

Jeepney 115 114 198 225 163

Multicab/Rusco 9 18 31 18 19

Van 26 35 89 45 48.75

Standard Bus 6 4 9 6 6.25

School/ Company/
3 2 1 3 2.25
Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery
16 17 24 23 20
Vehicle

Trucks 13 21 13 21 17

Others 1 0 0 0 0.25

Total 719

Table 6: Average Volume per Hour According to

Classification of Vehicle on Route 2

13
 Route 2
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
200

150

100

50

Figure 5: Average Volume per Hour According

to Vehicle Classification in Route 2

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 2, Motorcycle has the highest

average volume per hour having 173.25 vph. Followed by Jeepneys having an average

volume per hour of 163 vph.

14
 Route 3

6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm - Average volume

7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm per hour

Bicycle 12 10 0 1 5.75

Motorcycle 110 144 174 192 155

Car/Private Type 78 132 93 167 117.5

Jeepney
Pedicab 2 1 10 2 3.75

Tricycle 179 178 189 189 183.75

Jeepney 125 185 198 170 169.5

Multicab/Rusco 12 32 33 39 29

Van 14 34 114 43 51.25

Standard Bus 3 0 0 0 0.75

School/ Company/ 9 1 1 0 2.75

Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery 6 12 12 23 13.25
Vehicle
Trucks 12 18 4 3 9.25

Others 0 0 0 1 0.25

Total 741.75

Table 7: Average Volume per Hour According

to Classification of Vehicle on Route 3

15
 Route 3
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

Figure 6: Average Volume per Hour According

to Vehicle Classification in Route 3

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 3 Tricycle has the highest average

volume per hour having 183.75 vph. Followed by Jeepney having an average volume per

hour of 169.5vph.

16
 Route 4

6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm - Average volume

7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm per hour

Bicycle 7 0 0 0 1.75

Motorcycle 98 122 123 178 130.25

Car/Private Type 79 115 115 112 105.25

Jeepney
Pedicab 0 0 0 0 0

Tricycle 72 156 123 195 136.5

Jeepney 73 147 178 199 149.25

Multicab/Rusco 6 28 32 12 19.5

Van 5 43 34 45 31.75

Standard Bus 3 3 5 0 2.75

School/ Company/ 8 4 2 0 3.5

Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery 2 34 17 11 16
Vehicle
Trucks 8 11 12 11 10.5

Others 0 0 0 0 0

Total 607

Table 8: Average Volume per Hour According

to Classification of Vehicle on Route 4

17
 Route 4
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
200

150

100

50

Figure 7: Average Volume per Hour According

to Vehicle Classification in Route 4

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 4 Jeepney has the highest average

volume per hour having 149.25vph. Followed by Tricycle having an average volume per

hour of 136.5vph.

18
 Route 5

6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm - Average volume

7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm per hour

Bicycle 0 0 1 0 0.25

Motorcycle 67 167 113 112 114.75

Car/Private Type 96 98 65 113 93

Jeepney
Pedicab 0 0 1 0 0.25

Tricycle 120 154 154 187 153.75

Jeepney 116 167 176 121 145

Multicab/Rusco 5 21 21 12 14.75

Van 13 46 23 22 26

Standard Bus 0 7 13 1 5.25

School/ Company/ 0 0 2 1 0.75

Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery 1 14 11 13 9.75
Vehicle
Trucks 4 8 12 6 7.5

Others 0 0 0 0 0

Total 571

Table 9: Average Volume per Hour According

to Classification of Vehicle on Route 5

19
 Route 5
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
300

250

200

150

100

50

Figure 8: Average Volume per Hour According

to Vehicle Classification in Route 5

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 5 Tricycle has the highest average

volume per hour having 153.75vph. Followed by Jeepney having an average volume per

hour of 145vph.

20
 Route 6

Average
6:00 am - 7:00 am - 11:00 am - 12:00 pm -
volume per
7:00 am 8:00 am 12:00 pm 1:00 pm
hour

Bicycle 3 1 0 2 1.5

Motorcycle 98 125 145 123 122.75

Car/Private Type 56 116 89 110 92.75

Jeepney
Pedicab 0 0 0 0 0

Tricycle 92 111 113 102 104.5

Jeepney 122 102 167 114 126.25

Multicab/Rusco 4 19 13 12 12

Van 15 12 96 100 55.75

Standard Bus 7 5 3 3 4.5

School/ Company/ 2 0 0 0 0.5

Tourist Service

Pick-up/Delivery 4 21 0 26 12.75
Vehicle
Trucks 2 23 11 34 17.5

Others 0 0 0 1 0.25
Total 551

Table 10: Average Volume per Hour According

to Classification of Vehicle on Route 6

21
 Route 6
Average Volume per Hour
According to Vehicle Classification
200

150

100

50

Figure 9: Average Volume per Hour According

to Vehicle Classification in Route 6

It is represented on the graph above that in Route 6 Jeepney has the highest average

volume per hour having 126.25vph. Followed by Motorcycle having an average volume per

hour of 122.75vph.

22
 Route 1
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)
6:00 am- 7:00 am 580 46.96 12.35
7:00 am- 8:00 am 647 31.74 20.38
11:00 am - 12:00
745 29.54
am 25.22
12:00 pm - 1:00
895 73.54
pm 12.17
Route 2
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)
6:00 am- 7:00 am 487 53.48 9.11
7:00 am- 8:00 am 623 40.43 15.41
11:00 am - 12:00
832 57.98
am 14.35
12:00 pm - 1:00
934 93.40
pm 10
Route 3
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)
6:00 am- 7:00 am 562 49.13 11.44
7:00 am- 8:00 am 747 23.04 32.42
11:00 am - 12:00
828 44.28
am 18.70
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 830 16.52 50.24
Route 4
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)
6:00 am- 7:00 am 361 60.00 6.02
7:00 am- 8:00 am 663 29.56 22.43
11:00 am - 12:00
641 18.90
am 33.91
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 763 20.87 36.56
Route 5
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)
6:00 am- 7:00 am 422 55.65 7.58
7:00 am- 8:00 am 682 27.39 24.90
11:00 am - 12:00
592 13.89
am 42.61
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 588 44.78 13.13
Route 6
Flow rate, q Average Computed
Time
(vph) Speed(u) Density(k)

23
 6:00 am- 7:00 am 405.00 57.83 7.00
7:00 am- 8:00 am 535.00 51.30 10.43
11:00 am - 12:00
637.00 17.65
am 36.09
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 627.00 38.26 16.39

Table 11: Relationship of Flow rate, Speed and Density

For the table presented above, calculations involved are:

Computed Density (k) = flow rate (q) / average speed (us)

Interpolated value for the Average Speed =[ (𝑞−𝑞max ) (𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥− 𝑢min)/ (𝑞𝑚𝑖𝑛− 𝑞max)] +

𝑢min

(Computations for the Average speed are presented on Table 12)

24
 Interpolated
Value of the Flow Rate (vph) Rank
Time average speed
Route 1
6:00 am - 7:00 am 46.96 580 18
7:00 am - 8:00 am 31.74 647 11
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 25.22 745 8
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 12.17 895 2
Route 2
6:00 am - 7:00 am 53.48 487 21
7:00 am - 8:00 am 40.43 623 15
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 14.35 832 3
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 10 934 1
Route 3
6:00 am - 7:00 am 49.13 562 19
7:00 am - 8:00 am 23.04 747 7
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 18.7 828 5
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 16.52 830 4
Route 4
6:00 am - 7:00 am 60.00 361 24
7:00 am - 8:00 am 29.56 663 10
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 33.91 641 12
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 20.87 763 6
Route 5
6:00 am - 7:00 am 55.65 422 22
7:00 am - 8:00 am 27.39 682 9
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 42.61 592 16
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 44.78 588 17
Route 6
6:00 am - 7:00 am 57.83 405 23
7:00 am - 8:00 am 51.30 535 20
11:00 am- 12:00 pm 36.09 637 13
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 38.26 627 14

Table 12: Relationship between the Average speed and Flow rate.

25
 Minimum & Maximum FLOW RATE and SPEED

Flow Rate (vph) Speed (kph)

361 60
934 10

Table 13: Maximum and Minimum Flow rate and Speed

It can be seen from Table 10 that 934 vph is the maximum flow rate and 361 vph is the

minimum flow rate. . Using the information given by the drivers passing through the

intersection, minimum density is 10kph and the maximum density is 60kph, respectively.

By analyzing this data, it can be seen that the larger the number of vehicles per hour,

the slower the speed of each vehicle can be obtained, due to traffic density

26
Regression Line for each Road

Route 1
50
40
Speed, kph
30
20
10
0
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 10: Regression Line for Route 1

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -0.480337109
a 45.33
r -0.561959467

Route 2
60
50
Speed, kph

40
30
20
10
0
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 11: Regression Line for Route 2

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -0.497631702
a 51.45
r -0.740155206

27
 Route 3
60.00
50.00

Speed, kph
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 12: Regression Line for Route 3

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -0.850680866
a 56.28
r -1.09617442

Route 4
80.00

60.00
Speed, kph

40.00

20.00

0.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00
Density veh/km

Figure 13: Regression Line for Route 4

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -1.268030011
a 62.68
r -0.737135857

28
 Route 5
60.00
50.00

Speed, kph
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 14: Regression Line for Route 5

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -1.59476059
a 66.33
r -0.556823637

Route 6
80.00

60.00
Speed, kph

40.00

20.00

0.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
Density, veh/km

Figure 15: Regression Line for Route 6

Regression Line: u = a + bk
b -2.075856314
a 72.58
r -0.582325061

29
 Table 14: Summary for the Regression Analysis

Route 1
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 580 12.35 46.96 152.55 466.70 321.75
7:00 am - 8:00 am 647 20.38 31.74 415.52 184.14 7.38
11:00 am- 12:00
pm 745 29.54 25.22 872.61 19.48 14.46
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 895 73.54 12.17 5408.35 1567.15 284.01
Sum 2867 135.82 116.09 6849.03 2237.48 627.60
Mean 33.95 29.02
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 45.33 + (-0.4803)k
Route 2
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 487 9.11 53.48 82.92 1215.74 571.93
7:00 am - 8:00 am 623 15.41 40.43 237.45 815.92 118.05
11:00 am- 12:00
pm 832 57.98 14.35 3361.58 196.15 231.50
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 934 93.40 10 8723.56 2442.96 382.79
Sum 2876 175.89 118.26 12405.51 4670.77 1304.26
Mean 43.97 29.57
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 51.45 + (-0.4976)k
Route 3
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 562 11.44 49.13 130.85 536.21 496.51
7:00 am - 8:00 am 747 32.42 23.04 1051.18 4.72 14.50
11:00 am- 12:00
pm 828 44.28 18.70 1960.55 93.76 66.38
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 830 50.24 16.52 2524.27 244.82 106.66
Sum 2967 138.38 107.39 5666.85 879.52 684.05
Mean 34.60 26.85
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 56.28 + (-0.8507)k
Route 4
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 361 6.02 60.00 36.20 223.81 571.93
7:00 am - 8:00 am 663 22.43 29.56 503.06 2.11 42.58
11:00 am- 12:00 641 18.90 33.91 357.32 4.30 4.73

30
pm
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 763 36.56 20.87 1336.61 242.82 231.50
Sum 2428 83.91 144.34 2233.19 473.04 850.73
Mean 20.98 36.09
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 62.68 + (-1.268)k
Route 5
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 422 7.58 55.65 57.50 53.20 170.11
7:00 am - 8:00 am 682 24.90 27.39 619.99 100.46 231.57
11:00 am- 12:00
pm 592 13.89 42.61 193.03 0.97 0.00
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 588 13.13 44.78 172.42 3.05 4.72
Sum 2284 59.51 170.43 1042.94 157.67 406.40
Mean 14.88 42.61
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 66.33 + (-1.5948)k
Route 6
Number of Computed Average
Time k^2 (k-k')^2 (u-u')^2
Vehicles Density (k) Speed (u)
6:00 am - 7:00 am 405 7.00 57.83 49.05 34.39 143.04
7:00 am - 8:00 am 535 10.43 51.30 108.76 5.95 29.48
11:00 am- 12:00
pm 637 17.65 36.09 311.53 22.87 95.65
12:00 pm - 1:00
pm 627 16.39 38.26 268.56 12.39 57.91
Sum 2204 51.47 183.48 737.90 75.60 326.09
Mean 12.87 45.87
Regression Line: u = a + bk = 72.58 + (-2.0759)k

Table 14 shows the summary for the regression analysis in each road. The calculations used
are:

31
 This values are close to -1.0, which means that the correlation between the two

variables (a and b) are very high. the regression line are presented below each regression

analysis table.

NOTE:

The negative sign confirms that as density increases, speed decreases.

km
A B Um (kph) qmax (vph)
(veh/km)
-
Route 1 45.33 0.48034 47.1877 22.6660 1069.5548
-
Route 2 51.45 0.49763 51.6925 25.7238 1329.7307
-
Route 3 56.28 0.85068 33.0776 28.1385 930.7561
-
Route4 62.68 1.26803 24.7173 31.3423 774.6963
-
Route 5 66.33 1.59476 20.7970 33.1662 689.7559
-
Route 6 72.58 2.07586 17.4822 36.2906 634.4415

Table 15: Summary for Computed Maximum Density, Speed and Flow Rate

The parameters on Table 15 can be calculated using these equations:

32
 Congestion Level Indicator (V/C Ratio)

Low or No Congestion V/C < 0.5

Moderate Congestion 0.5 ≤ V/C < 0.74

Heavy Congestion 0.75 ≤ V/C < 1.0

Severe Congestion V/C≤1.0

Table 16: Volume Capacity Ratio Indicator

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

Table 17. Levels of Service

33
 Level of Service
Average volume
Route qmax (vph) V/C Ratio Remarks Los
per hour (vph)
Route 1 716.75 1069.5548 0.67 Moderate C
Route 2 719 1329.7307 0.54 Moderate C

Heavy congestion
Route 3 741.75 930.7561 0.80 D

Heavy Congestion
Route 4 607 774.6963 0.78 D

Heavy congestion
Route 5 571 689.7559 0.83 D

Heavy congestion
Route 6 551 634.4415 0.87 E

Table 18: The Level of Service in each Route

VCR = 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟 /𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥

Based on the table it can be seen that Route 1 & 2 has a moderate or level C on

level of service while Route 3,4,5&6 has a heavy congestion with letter D & E on level of

service.

The Level of Service for Route 6 is Los D which shows that Flow is unstable, and

there may be stoppages of momentary condition.

Route 3, 4 and 5 is LOS D which shows that the level of comfort and convenience

provided approaches an unstable flow.

Route 1 & 2 has an LOS C which shows that the level of comfort is still in zone of

stable flow, but speed and maneurability are most closely controlled by higher volumes.

34
Table 19. Service flow rate on each Route

Average Service Flow Rate= 695.625 PCU/hr

35
Average Service Flow Rate= 750.15 PCU/hr

Average Service Flow Rate= 766.825 PCU/hr

36
Average Service Flow Rate= 642 PCU/hr

37
 Average Service Flow Rate= 696.825 PCU/hr

Average Service Flow Rate= 588.15 PCU/hr

38
 Figure 16. Intersection Flow Summary Diagram

The figure above shows the figure summary of traffic volume at the intersection of

President J.P Laurel Highway, And Alaminos-Lipa Road within four hours of traffic

counting.

39
PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY

Due to the worsening effect of traffic congestion, the researchers aim to propose a

feasible solution that may reduce the congestion along the chosen area.

The findings of the study indicate that Route 1, the route going to President Jose P.

Laurel Highway and Alaminos-Lipa Road, has a greater number of vehicles passing and

implies traffic congestion at six to seven in the morning. On the other hand, during eleven to

twelve in the afternoon Route 3, has the greater number of vehicles passing and implies

traffic congestion at that time. The chosen intersection undergoes traffic congestion

specifically Route 1 and Route 3.

Along with Route 4 is a terminal area for a tricycle. This terminal is a possible cause

of the traffic congestion along Route 1 going to Route 4. As a solution, the researchers

propose the relocation of the terminal from Route 4 to Route 2 or 3 since the flow of traffic

on Route 2 or 3 is moderately light it is possible and may not affect the flow of vehicle in

Route 2 or 3.

TRAFFIC SIGNS AND SIGNALS

Traffic signs control traffic flow, making streets and highways safe for drivers,

bicyclists and pedestrians. These signs, which are posted by the Indiana Department of

Transportation and local governments, use colors, shapes, written messages, and symbols to

help drivers quickly understand the information.

Traffic signs warn you of possible dangers and provide information. They tell you

what the rules are and what the road conditions are like.

Traffic signs or road signs are signs erected at the side of or above roads to give

instructions or provide information to road users. The earliest signs were simple wooden or

40
stone milestones. Later, signs with directional arms were introduced, for example,

the fingerposts in the United Kingdom and their wooden counterparts in Saxony.

With traffic volumes increasing since the 1930s, many countries have adopted

pictorial signs or otherwise simplified and standardized their signs to overcome language

barriers, and enhance traffic safety. Such pictorial signs use symbols (often silhouettes) in

place of words and are usually based on international protocols. Such signs were first

developed in Europe, and have been adopted by most countries to varying degrees.

NEW MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Traffic management involves the use of practical applications such as extra lanes at

rush hours and entrance ramp control. Furthermore, the Traffic Centre supervises the traffic

on the motorways and can open extra lanes at rush hours. In the future, technological

innovations in cars could contribute towards a better utilization of the capacity of the roads.

Road traffic management is a field of logistics that concerns the planning and

control of traffic from one location to another. One of the main challenges of road traffic

management is accommodating traffic in a safe and efficient way to reduce or eliminate

accidents.

Most roadways include devices intended for traffic control, most of them involving

direct communication with the road-user, such as signs, signals and pavement markings.

These assist with navigation, assign right-of-way, areas of safe passage, indicate speed limits,

provide instructions, advise of hazards, and so on. Other forms of traffic control

include curbs, rumble strips, median barriers, speed humps, and so on.

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) are advanced applications that

provide services relating to different modes of traffic management and the ‘smarter’ use

of transport networks. They are based on the transfer of information

41
between transport systems to improved safety and performance,

including traffic management systems, information systems, warning systems, vehicle-to-

infrastructure communication and vehicle-to-vehicle communication.

REMOVAL OF UNREGISTERED VEHICLES

Also referred as autonomous cars are typically defined as versions of our current

vehicles that are capable of taking over from the driver under certain circumstances,

whereas driverless cars are even more automated and usually have no registration.

 Without the need for a driver, cars could become mini leisure rooms. Without the need

for controls, there would be more space available inside the vehicle and no need for

passengers to face forwards.

 Traffic could be coordinated more smoothly in urban areas to prevent bottlenecks and

traffic jams at busy times. Commute times could be reduced drastically.

 Speed limits could be safely increased, thereby shortening journey times.

 Difficult maneuvering and parking would be less stressful and require no special skills.

The car could even just drop you off and then go park itself.

 Presumably, with fewer associated risks, insurance premiums for car owners would go

down.

 Efficient travel also means fuel savings, simultaneously cutting costs and making less of

a negative environmental impact.

 Greater efficiency would mean fewer emissions and less pollution from cars in general.

 Reduced need for safety gaps, lanes, and shoulders means that road capacities for

vehicles would be significantly increased.

PEDESTRIAN

42
 Unsignalized pedestrian crossings typically consist of signs and painted road

markings (‘zebra crossings'). Pedestrians are meant to have right of way over vehicles, but in

many regions drivers do not stop for pedestrians. If this happens, unsignalized pedestrian

crossings have few benefits and may actually be a hazard. These crossings are only suitable

in situations with low traffic volumes and speeds.

Unsignalized pedestrian crossings may incorporate a raised feature designed to slow

the speed of approaching vehicles. The presence of such features should be clearly marked

and advance warning provided. Various other safety devices can be included at crossings to

improve safety, including refuge islands, advanced warning signs and pavement

markings, street lighting, and flashing lights.

 Can help to reduce risk for pedestrians attempting to cross the road.

 Provides a clearly defined crossing point where pedestrians are ‘expected'.

 If combined with a raised platform type feature crossings can help to slow approaching

traffic speeds.

 Reduced pedestrian crashes if installed at appropriate locations, and if pedestrian priority is

enforced.

 Disruption to traffic flow is comparatively low.

TRUCK BAN

As traffic congestion continues to worsen in most cities throughout the world,

increasing attention has been directed towards policies designed to improve the operational

efficiency of urban streets. Among the several alternatives available, restricting large trucks

has been one of the most popular in the motoring public’s view. Large trucks are often

perceived as slow moving and occupy a large amount of road space, thus hampering the

smooth flow of traffic, especially during peak-periods. The truck ban scheme in Metro

Manila has become a very feasible form of rationing scarce road space because of the city’s

43
insufficient road capacities. And because Metro Manila relies on road-based public

transport due to the lack of an efficient rail-based public transport system, the

government enforces restraints on large trucks with the intention that buses and other public

transport modes will not have to compete for the limited road space. However, although

large truck restrictions represent a rational solution to the problems of traffic

congestion, such measures may present negative and harmful effects if not fully understood.

Therefore, it is also efficient if this ordinance will be implemented to Lipa city.

44
Figure 17. Three- Dimensional Presentation of the Actual Traffic condition at the

Intersection of President J.P Laurel Highway, and Alaminos-Lipa Road

45
46
CONCLUSION

Based on the result of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. In the intersection of the President Jose P. Laurel Highway and Alaminos Lipa Road,

the Level of Service for each route is computed:

 Route 1 and 2 have the level of service of C which means that the flow in the

two routes is still in the zone of stable flow but speed and manueverability are

most closely controlled by higher volumes.

 Route 3,4 and 5 has the level of Service of D and which means that the flow is

already unstable.

 Route 6 has the level of service of E, wherein the flow is unstable, and there

may be stoppages of momentary condition.

2. The findings of the study indicate that Route 1 has a greater number of vehicles

passing and implies traffic congestion at six to seven in the morning. On the other

hand, during eleven to twelve in the afternoon, Route 3, has the greater number of

vehicles passing and implies traffic congestion at that time.

3. Along with Route 4 is a terminal area for tricycles. This terminal is one of the

possible causes of the traffic congestion along Route 1 going to Route 4.

RECOMMENDATIONS

With the problems present at the intersection, the group has come up with possible

solutions that might help decrease the degree of congestion in the area.

1. The researchers propose the relocation of the terminal of the tricycles from Route 4 to

Route 2 or 3 since the flow of traffic in Route 2 & 3 is moderately light it is possible

and may not affect the flow of vehicle in Route 2 or 3.

47
2. The group found a need to have an unsignalized traffic signs installed on the

intersection.

3. The group recommends a new management program such as using and opening an

extra lane at rush hours and an entrance ramp control.

4. Truck ban must be implemented in the area to lessen traffic congestion caused by

large trucks that require more space or turning.

48
 REFERENCES

 Sigua, R.G. Fundamentals of Traffic Engineering. The University of the Philippines

Press. Diliman, Quezon City.

 Transportation System Performance Measures. (2005) Degree of Road Traffic

Congestion [Table]. Retrieved from Situational Analysis of the Traffic Condition in

Lipa City Public Market.

 Escala, R.D., Lubis, K.B., Mojana, A.M. (2014). Situational Analysis of Traffic

Condition at the City Proper of Batangas. Batangas State University Main Campus II

of Alangilan, Batangas.

 Traffic Count: Kutz, M. (2004). Handbook of Transportation Engineering. New

York: The McGraw Hill Companies Inc.

 Ministry of Communication Roads and Highway Department. Manual Traffic Counts

Instruction Guide. October 2001.

 Wyoming Department of Transportation. Traffic Studies Manual. March 2011

49
 APPENDICES

A. TRAFFIC COUNTING TALLY SHEET

50
B. TRAFFIC FLOW MAP

C. DOCUMENTATION

51