Those pesky U-turn flyovers at C5 ...

**ghosthunter** · March 25th, 2009 04:01 PM

Having driven around the area numerous times, I just wonder if those u-turn flyovers is the result of someone's thinking being too narrow?

Why?

How much more would it cost if they would make those u-turn flyovers into true-blue straight overpass flyovers? It would make more sense to make them into something similar to what we have at EDSA/Santolan intersection, right?

So who do we motorists and tax payers behead for this white elephant of a road project?

**cablespy** · March 25th, 2009 04:55 PM

oo nga! bakit di nalang ginawang totoong flyover system yan??

**scharnhorst** · March 25th, 2009 05:01 PM

Straight flyovers would've been more practical, since a lot of the traffic goes to and from SLEX/fort anyway.

This fascination with U-turns is really annoying. For those plying commonwealth avenue regularly, there's another 4-lane-eating, permanent U-turn slot to be constructed at commonwealth, near central. drivers can see the yellow markings where it will be

Considering what the other permanent U-turn slots did to rush hour traffic in commonwealth, this is bound to be another epic failure.

**CVT** · March 25th, 2009 05:04 PM

Ano nga kaya ang resulta ng study ng MM Traffic Engineering dito para nila mai-justify ang elevated u-turn vs. a flyover?.... Mayroon nga kayang MM Traffic Engineering?

7707:band:

**Taurus** · March 25th, 2009 05:36 PM

A straight flyover still needs a traffic light underneath it for vehicles turning left while a pesky U-turn flyover doesn't even need one. All vehicles will be free flowing in all directions.
Para lang syang rotonda but elevated :twak:

**4JGtootsie** · March 25th, 2009 05:46 PM

I already have an opinion on this....
For now i will reserve my judgement until the 2 eleveted U turn is fully functional.

**jmpet626** · March 25th, 2009 06:05 PM

mukang malapit na matapos ung northbound na flyover... kelana kaya to matatapos?

**Altis6453** · March 25th, 2009 06:13 PM

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the elevated U-turns generate more traffic rather than alleviate it.

The problem is that the MMDA insists on doing infrastructure work which is not within its mandate or authority to do. Putting bridges, overpasses, flyovers, etc. are within the ambit of the DPWH.

**meledson** · March 25th, 2009 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by Taurus

A straight flyover still needs a traffic light underneath it for vehicles turning left while a pesky U-turn flyover doesn't even need one. All vehicles will be free flowing in all directions.
Para lang syang rotonda but elevated :twak:

I agree but if heavy volume. the system can get congested.

Originally Posted by 4JGtootsie

I already have an opinion on this....
For now i will reserve my judgement until the 2 eleveted U turn is fully functional.

wait and see muna tayo.

Originally Posted by jmpet626

mukang malapit na matapos ung northbound na flyover... kelana kaya to matatapos?

april 15 ang target date.

Originally Posted by Altis6453

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the elevated U-turns generate more traffic rather than alleviate it.

The problem is that the MMDA insists on doing infrastructure work which is not within its mandate or authority to do. Putting bridges, overpasses, flyovers, etc. are within the ambit of the DPWH.

It helps reduce traffic by totaly eliminating traffic lights.

**Altis6453** · March 25th, 2009 06:30 PM

Originally Posted by meledson

It helps reduce traffic by totaly eliminating traffic lights.

AFAIK, it adds to traffic by reducing the lanes devoted to what is supposed to be a highway parallel to EDSA.

And, I doubt if the traffic lights at the intersection of C5-Kalayaan can be removed.