Natural, Environmental, Physical Factors

SITES
A B C
CRITERIA
HERMOSA SAMAL PILAR
CRITERIA RANKING CRITERIA RANKING CRITERIA RANKING
EQUIVALENT PERCENTAGE EQUIVALENT PERCENTAGE

Land Area/Lot Size

Accessibility (Modes of Transportation)
Soil Characteristic & Condition
Accessibility of Utility and Service Needs
(Electricity,
Water, Communication Service, Waste
Management)
Vulnerabilities to Natural Hazards (Flooding,
Site
Erosion, Seismologic Activity)
Site Drainage
Topography
Climate
Orientation
Existing Vegetation
Future Expansion Plan

TOTAL

Legal, Institutional, Administrative, and

Aesthetic Factor
SITES
A B C
CRITERIA % HERMOSA SAMAL PILAR
CRITERIA EQUIVALENT CRITERIA EQUIVALENT CRITERIA EQUIVALENT
RANKING PERCENTAGE RANKING PERCENTAGE RANKING PERCENTAGE

Proper Land Use & Zoning 20

Ease of Ownership 25
Land Cost 35
Compatibility with Adjacent Land 20
Use

TOTAL 100
Socio-Economic and Cultural Factor
SITES
A B C
CRITERIA % HERMOSA SAMAL PILAR
CRITERIA EQUIVALENT CRITERIA EQUIVALENT CRITERIA EQUIVALENT
RANKING PERCENTAGE RANKING PERCENTAGE RANKING PERCENTAGE

Site Potential 20
Accessibility to major roads 30
Must be within urban area 20
Accessibility to important existing 15
facilities
Pedestrian Access and Circulation 15

TOTAL 100

SELECTION ELEMENTS SITES

Natural, Environmental, Physical Factors

Legal, Institutional, Administrative, and

Aesthetic Factor

Socio-Economic and Cultural Factor

GRAND TOTAL
Ratings for Natural, Environmental and Physical Factors

Evaluation (for Land Area Criteria):

1 – Lot size is inadequate to meet the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national
building code
2 – Lot size is adequate to meet the suggested minimum lot size requirement set in the national
building code
3 – 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 activities
4 – 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 activities
5 – 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 activities

Evaluation (for Accessibility Network Criteria):
1 – Accessed by taxis and private vehicles
2 – Accessed by PUVs, taxis and private vehicles
3 – Accessed by jeepney, PUVs, taxis, and private vehicles
4 – Accessed by public bus, jeepney, PUVs, taxis, and private vehicles
5 – Near an airport terminal and accessible through public, buses, jeepneys, PUVs, and private
vehicles

Evaluation (for Soil Characteristic and Condition Criteria):

1 – Soil is unstable all over and soil is mostly made of ground or fill
2 – Soil is unstable for most parts of site and is mostly consists of peat and organic soil
3 – Some remote area of the site has 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, mudstone)
Legal, Institutional and Aesthetic Factors

Evaluation (for Proper Land Use and Zoning Criteria):

1 – Land’s present/future zoning does not allow use for a skyscraper
2 – Land’s current zoning does not allow skyscraper but exemption can be appealed
3 – Land’s current zoning permits skyscraper with provision on the usage
4 – Land is currently within a C-3 zone and but will probably change
5 – 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 exist

Evaluation (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-priced
2 – Site is above the reasonable value but is still affordable
3 – Site is at reasonable value
4 – Site is below the reasonable value

Evaluation (for Compatibility with Adjacent Land Use Criteria):
1 – Incompatible with the adjacent land use and the surrounding context
2 – Considerable differences with the adjacent land use and surrounding context
3 – Certain differences with the adjacent land use and surrounding context
4 – Relatively fit with the adjacent land use and surrounding context
5 – Perfectly relates with the adjacent land use and surrounding context
Socio-Economic and Cultural Factors

Evaluation (for Site Potential Criteria):

1 – Site is potential for job opportunities and rationalized residential plan
2 – Site is potential for local business sectors and agencies, job opportunities and rationalized
residential plan
3 – Site is potential for local and international business sectors and agencies, tourism
development, job opportunities and rationalized residential planning

Evaluation (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 ride
3 – Site is within 3km away or 30 minutes vehicle ride
4 – Site is within 2km away or 10 minutes vehicle ride
5 – Site is within reasonable walking distance or 1km and less

Evaluation (for Must be within urban area Criteria):
1 – Site is not within an urban area
2 – Site is within an urbanizing area
3 – Site is within an urbanized area
4 – Site is a progressive urbanized area
5 – Site is within highly developed urbanized area

Evaluation (for Accessibility to Important Existing Facilities Criteria):
1 – Necessary existing establishments are within 5km and above
2 – Necessary existing establishments are within 3-5km from the site
3 – Necessary existing establishments are within 3km from the site
4 – Necessary existing establishments are within 1-2km from the site
5 – Necessary existing establishments are within less than a kilometer from the site

Evaluation (for Pedestrian Access and Circulation Criteria):
1 – No existing pedestrian access are available that can reasonably be constructed
2 – Pedestrian access can be constructed, but pathway work is required and traffic control system
should be provided
3 – 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 system
5 – Site has existing pedestrian access that is suitable for 1/4 kilometer travel and has existing
traffic control system
Proposed Site A : Hermosa, Bataan