Bridging urbanism

Last Saturday afternoon, I took a trip with the adventurous Howie Severino down the Pasig River. He had earlier kayaked his way across the Laguna de Bai, into the mouth of the Pasig and all the way to the Guadalupe Bridge and where we met, which was a stone’s throw away from the Rockwell Center.

Howie had intended to kayak the whole 25 kilometers or so of the storied Pasig but this was not possible mainly because of the requirements of crossing the stretch in front of the Malacañang Palace. He chucked his orange kayak to ride with me a portion of the way and we chatted away as we drifted lazily down the river.

I had been involved off and on with efforts to raise awareness for the river, and in efforts to improve parts of the riverbanks with the Pasig River Rehabilitation Committee. Public focus on the plight of the river has come and gone in cycles over the last two decades. Right now, public attention has waned. Blame it on politics and celebrity scandals… or celebrity politics… or political scandals.

Issues involving the public good are flushed away with the rising tide. Just like the Pasig’s ebb and flow. Unless of course the flow is blocked, as it still sometimes is by the flotsam and jetsam the metropolis chucks into the river.

Riding down the river towards the Lambingan Bridge, I noticed that garbage is still a problem. Contrary to fears of most Manilans who have not been anywhere close to the river, there is little of the foul smell they imagine. The river smells much like the rest of the metropolis, and actually much better than the smell of EDSA if you’re unlucky enough to ride its length (about the same as the Pasig’s) without air-conditioning.

Bridges spanned major floods that beset us over the centuries.

Another characteristic of the river that I discussed with Howie on our banca ride was the number and state of the bridge across the river. The official stats state that 16 bridges cross the Pasig. I’ve seen all of them and find little aesthetic value in less than and a handful of them.

We have the Second World War to blame for at least the original first three of the bridges from the mouth of the Pasig at Manila Bay. The Jones Bridge, Puente de Sta. Ana and the Quezon Bridge were blown up in the liberation of Manila in 1945. Their rehabilitation after the war made of them much less that the elegant structures they were in the interwar years.

The Jones actually replaced the Puente de España, the Spanish era multi-arched bridge. That bridge was falling apart because of age and the increase in traffic from the Intramuros to the Sta. Ana and Binondo districts, where the city’s commerce and entertainment establishments were.

The Bureau of Public Works had Juan Arellano complete a bridge design started earlier in the 1910s. He put together a much more ornate bridge in the neo-classic style. Arellano reportedly based the design on the bridges across the Seine in Paris.

Contrary to what most people who believe that the Jones Bridge was built over the ruins of the Puente España, the new bridge was actually built beside it. The original Puente was built off Calle Nueva. The new bridge vaulted over from Calle Rosario, a few meters west of the original location.

This colored postcard shows the Pasig River in the 1910s from above the Colgante Bridge and the Quinta Market.

The other little known fact was that the Jones Bridge has a structural steel frame, which then was enveloped in concrete and given all the neo-classic ornamentation that made the bridge beautiful enough to match any of the bridges in Paris. The post-war replacement was a no-nonsense concrete structure that lacked the character of the original.

The Puente de Santa Ana was replaced after the war with the MacArthur Bridge. The replacement also had an exposed steel frame. The capacity of the bridge, like that of the new post-war Jones Bridge, was increased of course, but its aesthetic appeal was reduced.

The Art Deco Quezon Bridge was rebuilt closest to its original design. The fact that it was in a style still in vogue after the war ensured this. The bridge that spanned this section of the river was originally much smaller but was as distinctive as the present bridge.

A pedestrian suspension bridge called the Colgante (Spanish for suspension bridge) connected the Quinta market with the Arroceros district opposite. Arroceros was where rice was originally traded (hence “arrroz”). The bridge looked like a mini Golden Gate Bridge but it was not built of steel. The Colgante’s main cabling used Manila Hemp. The rope we made from our hemp was the strongest and best quality in the world. This was before it was replaced by synthetics from the ’50s onwards.

The Quezon Bridge was completed right before the war. By then the Colgante was demolished and a signature silhouette of pre-war Manila was replaced by the much larger bridge. The loss of the Colgante also marked the changed focus of bridges from then on, from people and mass transport (tranvias) to cars, buses and trucks.

The Jones Bridge was the most elegant bridge built in the Philippines.

As Howie and I reached the Intramuros (where I got off, while he contemplated kayaking into the Manila sunset), we realized that the metropolis was forgetting how much the river did and could do once again, as a major avenue for transport. Howie noted that the river was wider on the average compared to EDSA, but that it carried put a minuscule percentage of modern Manilans.

The thing to do then was to bring back the Pasig as a transport option (the ferry’s had stopped operations). Transport also includes crossing from one side to the other. Several small ferries still operate at point to bring people across in places. These smart commuters then save precious kilometers and number of trip modal changes by crossing Venice style.

Modern metropolises in other cities in other countries like London, Singapore, Philadelphia, Frankfurt or Melbourne, incorporate pedestrian bridges over its rivers. This increases transport options and is of course a sustainable initiative that has been embraced by its inhabitants.

Imagine if we could have pedestrian bridges connecting the Intramuros with Binondo. Jut the tourism benefits alone is enough justification. A pedestrian bridge from Arroceros Forest Park to Quiapo would serve the same function and benefits. A bridge from Mandaluyong to Makati would also benefit condo dwellers in Mandaluyong quick access to the Makati CBD and the Rockwell Urban Center.

The Colgante was the subject of stereoscope postcards — 3D from a hundred years ago.

Bridges can do more than bring cars and trucks across rivers. They can contribute to connecting sections of the metropolis, increasing transport options, reducing travel time… and increasing citizens’ relationship to a historic river that has served the city for hundred of years.

* * *

Feedback is welcome. Please e-mail the writer at paulo.alcazaren@gmail.com.