Site Selection

Site SelectionArnuco, Daron RuscerCaasi, Jonica ValerieLoon, Dabie LeeSumang, Razzel KristineNatural, Environmental, Physical FactorsCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageLand Area/Lot Size20Accessibility (Modes of Transportation)10Soil Characteristic & Condition10Accessibility of Utility and Service Needs (Electricity, Water, Communication Service, Waste Management)10Vulnerabilities to Natural Hazards (Flooding, Site Erosion, Seismologic Activity)10Site Drainage5Topography10Climate10Orientation5Existing Vegetation5Future Expansion Plan5TOTAL100Socio-Economic and Cultural FactorCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Criteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Criteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Site Potential20Accessibility to major roads30Must be within urban area20Accessibility to important existing facilities15Pedestrian Access and Circulation15TOTAL100Legal, Institutional, Administrative, and Aesthetic FactorCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageProper Land Use & Zoning20Ease of Ownership25Land Cost35Compatibility with Adjacent Land Use20TOTAL100Evaluation (for Land area Criteria):1 Lot size is inadequate to meet the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national building code2 Lot size is adequate to meet the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national building code3 Lot size exceeds 50% of the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national building code and provides area for another expansion or provision of another adjacent amenities and activities4 Lot size exceeds 75% of the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national building code and provides area for another expansion or provision of another adjacent amenities and activities5 Lot size exceeds more than 100% of the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national building code and provides area for another expansion or provision of another adjacent amenities and activitiesEvaluation (for Accessibility Network Criteria):1 Accessed by taxis and private vehicles2 Accessed by PUVs, taxis and private vehicles3 Accessed by jeepney, PUVs, taxis, and private vehicles4 Accessed by public bus, jeepney, PUVs, taxis, and private vehicles5 Near an airport terminal and accessible through public, buses, jeepneys, PUVs, and private vehiclesEvaluation (for Soil Characteristic and Condition Criteria):1 Soil is unstable all over and soil is mostly consists of made ground or fill 2 Soil is unstable for most parts of site and is mostly consists of peat and organic soil3 Some remote area of the site have unstable soils and is mostly consists of cohesive soils (hard, firm and soft clays)4 Most areas of the site have stable soils and is mostly consists of non-cohesive soils (hard clays, gravel and sand)5 Soils are stable and mostly consists of rocks (igneous, gneissic, limestone, sandstone, schist, slate, mustone)Ratings for Natural, Environmental and Physical FactorsEvaluation (for Accessibility to Utility and Services Criteria):1 No existing utilities and services and has known difficulties of access on site 2 No existing utilities and services but is far from the site 3 No existing utilities and services but is accessible near the site 4 Existing utilities and services are available adjacent to or near the site5 Existing utilities and services are available within the site

Evaluation (for Vulnerabilities to Natural Hazard Criteria):1 Site in proximity to hazards2 Site is in proximity to three or more hazards3 Site is in proximity to two hazards4 Site is in proximity to one hazard5 Site free of any potential damage/injury from natural hazardsEvaluation (for Site Drainage Criteria):1 Site is mostly low and the neighboring areas drain into it 2 Drainage accumulates in some portion of the site3 Drainage accumulates in the neighborhood near the site 4 Site has definite drainage with water coming from adjacent properties but can merely be contained5 Site has definite drainage with no unnecessary water coming from adjacent propertiesEvaluation (for Topography Criteria):1 Site contains major topographic irregularity and cannot hold possible uses2 Site is not even, and can only hold certain possible use3 Site is not even, but can still hold all possible uses4 Site is chiefly even and can hold all possible uses5 Site is relatively flat and can hold all possible use

Ratings for Natural, Environmental and Physical FactorsEvaluation (for Climate Criteria):1 The site has irregular dry and wet season2 Site experiences greater wet season than dry season3 Site experiences greater dry season than wet season4 Site has fair climate and weather condition5 Site has good climate and weather conditionEvaluation (for Orientation Criteria):1 The site does not have good sun and wind orientation2 The site has satisfactory sun and wind orientation3 The site has good sun orientation but satisfactory wind orientation4 The site has both good sun and wind orientation5 The site has both excellent sun and wind orientationEvaluation (for Existing Vegetation Criteria):1 The site has no existing vegetation2 The site has 10% existing vegetation3 The site has 20% existing vegetation4 The site has 30% existing vegetation5 The site has 40% existing vegetationEvaluation (for Future Expansion Plan Criteria):1 The site has no potential for future expansion2 Relevant variances are approved to future expansion3 Some variances are approved to future expansion4 Has enough area for additional amenities for the property development5 Has larger area for additional amenities for the property development

Ratings for Natural, Environmental and Physical FactorsEvaluation (for Proper Land Use and Zoning Criteria):1 Lands present/future zoning does not allow use for a skyscraper2 Lands current zoning does not allow skyscraper but exemption can be appealed3 Lands current zoning permits skyscraper with provision on the usage4 Land is currently within a C-3 zone and but will probably change5 Land is within a C-3 zoning classification set in the National Building Code or within a Central Business District and present/future zoning permits skyscraper or no zoning restrictions existEvaluation (for Ease of Ownership Criteria):1 The site is divided with many property owners.2 The site is divided with a moderate number of property owners.3 The site is divided with few property owners.4 The site is relatively undivided.Evaluation (for Land Cost Criteria):1 Site is high-priced2 Site is above the reasonable value but is still affordable3 Site is at reasonable value 4 Site is below the reasonable valueEvaluation (for Compatibility with Adjacent Land Use Criteria):1 Incompatible with the adjacent land use and the surrounding context2 Considerable differences with the adjacent land use and surrounding context3 Certain differences with the adjacent land use and surrounding context4 Relatively fit with the adjacent land use and surrounding context5 Perfectly relates with the adjacent land use and surrounding contextLegal, Institutional and Aesthetic FactorsEvaluation (for Site Potential Criteria):1 Site is potential for job opportunities and rationalized residential plan2 Site is potential for local business sectors and agencies, job opportunities and rationalized residential plan3 Site is potential for local and international business sectors and agencies, tourism development, job opportunities and rationalized residential planningEvaluation (for Accessibility to main road Criteria):1 Site is more than 5km away or 1 hour vehicle ride 2 Site is within 4 km away or 1 hour vehicle ride3 Site is within 3km away or 30 minutes vehicle ride4 Site is within 2km away or 10 minutes vehicle ride5 Site is within reasonable walking distance or 1km and lessEvaluation (for Must be within urban area Criteria):1 Site is not within an urban area2 Site is within an urbanizing area3 Site is within an urbanized area4 Site is a progressive urbanized area5 Site is within highly developed urbanized areaEvaluation (for Accessibility to Important Existing Facilities Criteria):1 Necessary existing establishments are within 5km and above2 Necessary existing establishments are within 3-5km from the site3 Necessary existing establishments are within 3km from the site4 Necessary existing establishments are within 1-2km from the site5 Necessary existing establishments are within less than a kilometer from the siteEvaluation (for Pedestrian Access and Circulation Criteria):1 No existing pedestrian access are available that can reasonably be constructed2 Pedestrian access can be constructed, but pathway work is required and traffic control system should be provided3 Pedestrian access can be constructed without major road work 4 Site has existing pedestrian access that is suitable for 1/2 kilometer travel and has existing traffic control system5 Site has existing pedestrian access that is suitable for 1/4 kilometer travel and has existing traffic control systemSocio-Economic and Cultural FactorsSELECTION ELEMENTSSITESNatural, Environmental, Physical FactorsLegal, Institutional, Administrative, and Aesthetic FactorSocio-Economic and Cultural FactorGRAND TOTAL

Proposed Site A :MakatiSITE PROFILELocation: Along Antonio Arnaiz Ave. , Makati CityLand Area: Approx. 1.7 Ha.Site Land Cost: P200,000-250,000/ sq.m.Land Owner:Ayala Land Corporation

AccessibilityModes of TransportationAyala Buses, Jeepneys, Tamaraw FXs/ vans & Taxi CubsRail NetworkThe Philippine National Railways (PNR) (MRT3) Guadalupe, Ayala and Magallanes(LRT1) Sen. Gil PuyatOther Transport FacilitiesMakati City is easily accessible from the domestic and international airport of Metro Manila. It is 8 kilometers away from the city via South Expressway and 6 kilometers through the EDSA-Tramo route. Helicopter service from most of the city's hotels is also available

RoadEDSA, Antonio Arnaiz Avenue

Vicinity Map

Zoning Map

Proximity to existing FacilitiesSchoolMAPUA Institute of Technology MakatiDon Bosco Technical SchoolInformation and Communication Technology Academy

Hospital Makati Medical Center

ChurchGreenbelt ChurchDon Bosco Parish

MallGloriettaSM MakatiRustansLandmark

LandmarksGloriettaDusit Thani

Proposed Site C :OrtigasSITE PROFILELocation: Exchange Road, Cor. Jade Drive, Ortigas Center, Pasig CityLand Area: Approx. 1.8 Ha.Land Cost:P200,000/ sq.m.Land Owner:-Amberland Corporation-Johnson & Johnson- Ayala Land, Inc.

AccessibilityPossible Access to the SiteFrom EDSA:- By taking the bus both northbound and southbound buses stop in front of Robinsons Galleria, or the Metro Rail Transit that stops at the Ortigas Station from which Robinsons Galleria is.- From Manila:The Filipino ride known as the jeepney goes the Pasig-Quiapo (and vice versa) route, which travels from the western side of Shaw Boulevard. Modes of Transport-Taxi-Bus-MRT-FX-JeepneyOrtigas is also accessible from the domestic and international airport of Metro Manila. Roads Jade Drive from Doa Julia Vargas Avenue, Exchange Road from ADB Ave. and Meralco Avenue

Vicinity Map

Proximity to existing FacilitiesSchoolUniversity of Asia and the Pacific (approx. 400m)Lourdes School of Mandaluyong (approx.600m)St. Paul College-Pasig (approx. 1km)STI College-Shaw (approx. 1km)Ateneo School of Medicine and Public Health (approx. 1.5 km)Hospital The MedicalCity (approx. 1.4 km)Mary Immaculate Hospital (approx. 2.3km)ChurchSt. Francis of Assisi Church (approx. 700 m)St. Paul Church (approx. 900m)Word Community Church (approx. 1.4km)MallSM Megamall (approx. 500m)Edsa Central Mall (approx. 1.1km)Starmall Edsa-Shaw (approx. 1.3km)LandmarksSM Megamall (approx. 500m)MRT Ortigas (approx. 1.1km)MRT Shaw Boulevard (approx. 1.1km)

Proposed Site C:Taguig CityLocation: Bonifacio Global City, Taguig City, Metro ManilaLand Area: Approx. 2.5 Has.Land Cost:P200,000/ sq.m.Land Owner:Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation

Vicinity Map

ProximitySchoolPhilippine Public Safety CollegeBritish School ManilaManila Japanese SchoolTrace College

Hospital St.Lukes Medical center

ChurchSt. Michael Archangel Church

MallMarket MarketPiazzaSerendraBonifacio High StreetThe Fort Strip

LandmarksSerendraBonifacio High StreetMarket Market

AccessibilityPossible Access to the Site

Modes of Transport-Taxi-Bus-MRT-FX-JeepneyTaguig is also accessible from the domestic and international airport of Metro Manila.

Roads32nd St., 9th Avenue

Natural, Environmental, Physical FactorsCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageLand Area/Lot Size204164.518520Accessibility (Modes of Transportation)10510510510Soil Characteristic & Condition1051048510Accessibility of Utility and Service Needs (Electricity, Water, Communication Service, Waste Management)104848510Vulnerabilities to Natural Hazards (Flooding, Site Erosion, Seismologic Activity)10484848Site Drainage5555555Topography10510510510Climate10510510510Orientation5444455Existing Vegetation5112222Future Expansion Plan5555555TOTAL100878894Socio-Economic and Cultural FactorCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Criteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Criteria RankingAve. per Criteria Ranking x %Site Potential20320320320Accessibility to major roads30530421424Must be within urban area20520520416Accessibility to important existing facilities15412515412Pedestrian Access and Circulation15412412515TOTAL100948887Legal, Institutional, Administrative, and Aesthetic FactorCRITERIA%SITESA MakatiBOrtigasCTaguigCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageCriteria RankingEquivalent PercentageProper Land Use & Zoning20520520520Ease of Ownership25425318.75425Land Cost35217.5321321Compatibility with Adjacent Land Use20416520416TOTAL10078.579.7582SELECTION ELEMENTSSITESNatural, Environmental, Physical Factors878894Legal, Institutional, Administrative, and Aesthetic Factor78.579.7582Socio-Economic and Cultural Factor948887GRAND TOTAL259.5255.75263AVERAGE86.585.2587.67ConclusionThe site selection table shows that points added from the three major factors, summarizes the highest and most suitable site for the proposed project is Site C in Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City.