52181-001-Rp-En - 11 - Bridge 3 Study

Resettlement Plan
October 2021
Philippines: Metro Manila Bridges Project
Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge

Appendices
Prepared by the Department of Public Works and Highways for the Asian Development Bank.
This is a revised version of the draft originally posted in June 2021 available on
https://www.adb.org/projects/documents/phi-52181-001-rp-1.
This resettlement plan is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not
necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be
preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “terms of use” section of this website.
In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation
of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian
Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any
territory or area.
LIST OF APPENDICES
Volume 1: List of Affected Persons

1. Consolidated Master List of All Affected Persons
2. Parcellary Master List
3. As-Built Master List
Volume 2: Inventory of Affected Structures and other Improvements

1. Cut-off Dates for Eligibility
2. List of Affected Structures (from CAT)
3. Photo Documentation of Structure Tagging (from CAT)
Volume 3: Replacement Cost of Affected Land and Non-Land Assets

1. Valuation Methodology for Affected Land and Structures for Metro Manila
Bridges Project
2. Replacement Cost for Land
3. Replacement Cost for Structures
4. Replacement Cost for Crops and Trees
Volume 4: Documentation of Consultation Meetings and PIB

1. IEC
2. First Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
3. Focus Group Discussion with Vulnerable Sector
4. Focus Group Discussion with Business and other Livelihood Sector
5. Second Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
6. List of Invited APs
7. Public Information Brochure
Volume 5: Others
1. Survey Permit
2. Socio-Economic Survey Instrument
Volume 1
List of Affected Persons
Contents
1. Consolidated Master List of All Affected Persons
2. Parcellary Master List
3. As-Built Master List
CONSOLIDATED MASTER LIST OF AFFECTED PERSONS
Metro Manila Bridges Project

(Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge)
BARANGAY NAME OF PAP LAND OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE STRUCTURE TAG Impact on Structure INTERVIEWS Type of AP Category of AP Impact to AP
OWNERSHIP
AP whose Impact is on
TUMANA STA. LUCIA LAND INC. Landowner NONE N/A N/A NOT INTERVIEWED Company Marginal
Property only
GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT AP whose Impact is on
NANGKA Landowner NONE N/A N/A NOT INTERVIEWED Company Marginal
CORPORATION Property only
NANGKA, CONCEPCION I TQG ENTERPRISES INC. Landowner NO NOT INTERVIEWED AP whose Impact is on
N/A N/A Company Property only Severe
MM3PB-01-06-S001,
NANGKA THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA Landowner YES Marginal and Severe INTERVIEWED GOCC/LGU Institution Severe
MM3PB01-05-S048
MM3PB-01-05-S001, AP whose Impact is on
NANGKA MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. Landowner YES Marginal and Severe NOT INTERVIEWED Company Severe
MM3PB01-06-S033 Property only
MM3PB-01-05-S004, AP whose Impact is on
NANGKA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Landowner YES Marginal and Severe NOT INTERVIEWED GOCC/LGU Severe
5,6,7,14 Property only
MM3PB-01-05-S002,
NANGKA CAASI, ROSITA Landowner YES Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
MM3PB01-05-S003,
NANGKA ICASA, MINDA Landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S004 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA SAMANIEGO, ROSE MARIE Non-landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S005 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA ABO, AMELITA Landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S006 Undetermined INTERVIEWED Private Person Househoold+Business Severe
NANGKA BELO, SALVACION Non-landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S014 Severe NOT INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA JUEGO, ADAM Landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S047 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
MM3PB-01-06-S003,
NANGKA, CONCEPCION I BASILIO, MELIZA Non-landowner YES Severe NOT INTERVIEWED Private Person Househoold+Business Severe
MM3PB01-06-S004
CONCEPCION UNO ROSIMO, JOSELITO Non-landowner YES MM3PB-01-06-S006 Severe NOT INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA ABO, NEIL CHRISTIAN Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S006 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA ABUAG, OLIVE Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S005 Severe NOT INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA ADAM, MARY ROSE Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S005 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA BACUDO, JOHN PAUL Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S004 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
MM3PB-01-05-S002,
NANGKA CAASI, MA. ROSELLE Non-landowner NO Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
MM3PB01-05-S003
NANGKA ICASA, ISABEHENIO Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S004 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Househoold+Business Severe
NANGKA ICASA, JONATHAN Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S004 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
NANGKA ICASA, ISABELO JAMES Non-landowner NO MM3PB-01-05-S004 Severe INTERVIEWED Private Person Household Severe
MARIKINA NORTH SEWAGE TREATMENT

NANGKA Non-landowner YES MM3PB-01-05-S049 Severe INTERVIEWED GOCC/LGU Institution Severe
PLANT
MMBP- BRIDGE 3
as of March 25, 2021
LAND
CITY/ SURVEY PLAN TOTAL AREA
BARANGAY TITLE NUMBER TD NUMBER LOT NUMBER REGISTERED OWNER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE) - ADDRESS AFFECTED REMAINING CLASSIFICATION SOURCE REMARKS
MUNICIPALITY NUMBER (SQ.M.)
(from Tax
MARIKINA TUMANA 009-2020001098 E-0019-240748 20 (RESERVED AREA-1) PCS-00-015952 STA. LUCIA LAND INC. PENTHOUSE BLDG. 3, STA. LUCIA EAST GRAND MALL COR. FELIX AVE & 80,290 10,091.10 70,199 RESIDENTIAL TITLE
B3-001 MARCOS
HIGHWAY, CAINTA RIZAL
MARIKINA NANGKA 254058 E-0006-134881 LOT 1 PCS-13-000367 GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 5548 BAWAN-GUENO COR. CUANGCO ST., MAKATI CITY 227439 4644.03 222794.97 RESIDENTIAL TITLE TOTAL AREA TAKEN BY MARIKINA CHANNEL:
B3-002
1586.76 SQ.M.
MARIKINA NANGKA N-88111 E-0006-234539 66-A-1-A-2-A-3 PSD-13-000597 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4166 D R MAGSASAY BLVD EXT SAMPALOC MANILA 20885 1934.51 18950.49 RESIDENTIAL LDC
B3-003
MARIKINA NANGKA 009-2019007585 E-0006-235860 66-A-1-A-2-A-2 PSD-13-000597 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA SHOE AVE., STA. ELENA, CITY OF MARIKINA 48640 2973 45667 RESIDENTIAL LDC
B3-004
MARIKINA NANGKA 009-2014000078 E-0006-187241 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-11-B PSD-435761 MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. 489 KATIPUNAN ROAD, BALARA, QUEZON CITY 22311 3.59 22307.41 COMMERCIAL TITLE
B3-005
MARIKINA NANGKA 009-2014000077 E-0006-187239 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-11-A PSD-435761 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 2/F MARIKINA CITY HALL SHOE AVE. STA. ELENA, MARIKINA CITY 3213 1155.04 2057.96 RESIDENTIAL TITLE
B3-006
MARIKINA NANGKA 473633 E-0006-130302 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-19 (ROAD PSD-00-071716 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY ST. SAMPALOC MANILA 5057 913.58 4143.42 ROAD LOT SURVEY PLAN/TITLE
B3-007 LOT)
MARIKINA NANGKA 473623 E-0006-130292 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-9 PSD-00-071716 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY ST. SAMPALOC MANILA 787 240.88 546.12 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN/TITLE TOTAL AREA OF AFFECTED ROAD: 129.88 SQ.M.
B3-008
MARIKINA NANGKA E-0006-207405 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-10 PSD-00-071717 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY NHA BUILDING, ELLIPTICAL ROAD, DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY 731 98.34 632.66 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN TOTAL AREA OF AFFECTED ROAD: 22.22 SQ.M.
B3-009
MARIKINA NANGKA LOT 3 PCS-00-011610 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 109 14.86 94.14 SURVEY PLAN
B3-018
MARIKINA NANGKA ROAD LOT NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 254.36 0.78 253.58 TAX MAP
B3-019
MARIKINA NANGKA ROAD LOT 1-A PCS-8259 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 23 0.14 22.86 SURVEY PLAN
B3-020
MARIKINA CONCEPCION I 305560 E-0012-026525 LT 1-D, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 175 41.78 133.22 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN
B3-021
MARIKINA CONCEPCION I 305559 E-0012-026263 LT 1-C, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 100 16.05 83.95 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN
B3-022
MARIKINA CONCEPCION I 305558 E-0012-026246 LT 1-B, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 100 27.22 72.78 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN
B3-023
UPDATED
(03APRIL2021)
UPDATED
(05APRIL2021)
MMBP BRIDGE 2 As-Built Masterlist - as of 22 February 2021
STRUCTURE TAG STRUCTURE OWNER - LAST, FIRST, REGISTERED OWNER - LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE CITY/
NUMBER LOT ID MIDDLE (Based from Land Title) MUNICIPALITY BARANGAY
MM3PB-01-05-S001 B3-005 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S002 B3-009 CAASI, ROSITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S003 B3-009 CAASI, ROSITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S004 B3-009 ICASA, MINDA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S005 B3-009 SAMANIEGO, ROSE MARIE NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S006 B3-009 ABO, AMELITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S014 B3-018 BELO, SALVACION NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S047 B3-009 JUEGO, ADAM NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S048 B3-008 BALUBAD SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-05-S049 B3-005 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-06-S001 B3-006 CITY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC MARKET THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA MARIKINA NANGKA
MM3PB-01-06-S003 B3-006 AND B3-007 BASILIO, MELIZA E CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA AND T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, MARIKINA NANGKA
I
MM3PB-01-06-S004 B3-021 BASILIO, MELIZA TQG ENTERPRISES INC. MARIKINA CONCEPCION UNO
MM3PB-01-06-S006 B3-023 ROSIMO, JOSELITO TQG ENTERPRISES INC. MARIKINA CONCEPCION UNO
MM3PB-01-06-S033 B3-004 AND B3-006 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA MARIKINA CONCEPCION UNO
Volume 2
Inventory of Affected Structures and
Improvements
Contents:
1. Cut-off Date for Eligibility
2. List of Affected Structures
3. Photograph of Tagged Structures
METRO MANILA BRIDGES PROJECT (MMBP)
Cut-Off Date
CUT-OFF DATE
CITY BARANGAY
(First day of Census Tagging)
BRIDGE 1 – MARCOS HIGHWAY-ST. MARY AVENUE BRIDGE
MARIKINA CITY CALUMPANG February 11, 2021
TAÑONG January 29, 2021
JESUS DELA PEÑA January 28, 2021
BRIDGE 2 – HOMEOWNER’S DRIVE-A. BONIFACIO BRIDGE

MARIKINA CITY JESUS DELA PEÑA January 29, 2021
STO. NIÑO February 01, 2021
BRIDGE 3 – KABAYANI STREET-MATANDANG BALARA BRIDGE

MARIKINA CITY NANGKA February 08, 2021
CONCEPCION UNO February 09, 2021
TUMANA February 09, 2021
Project Name/Title: Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP)
Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge
List of Affected Structures
STRUCTURE TAGGING NO. NAME OF STRUCTURE OWNER AFFECTED BY: DATE TAGGED REMARKS
BRGY. NANGKA, MARIKINA CITY (01-05)
MM3PB-01-05-S001 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 08, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S002 ROSITA CAASI BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 09, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S003 ROSITA CAASI BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 09, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S004 MINDA ICASA BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 08, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S005 ROSE MARIE SAMANIEGO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 08, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S006 AMELITA ABO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 08, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S014 SALVACION BELO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 08, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S047 ADAM JUEGO BRIDGE 3 MARCH 19, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S048 BALUBAD SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER BRIDGE 3 MARCH 19, 2021
MM3PB-01-05-S049 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES BRIDGE 3 MARCH 19, 2021
BRGY. CONCEPCION UNO, MARIKINA CITY (01-06)

MM3PB-01-06-S001 CITY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC MARKET BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 10, 2021
MM3PB-01-06-S003 MELIZA BASILIO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 09, 2021
MM3PB-01-06-S004 MELIZA BASILIO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 09, 2021
MM3PB-01-06-S006 JOSELITO ROSIMO BRIDGE 3 FEBRUARY 09, 2021
MM3PB-01-06-S033 MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES BRIDGE 3 MARCH 19, 2021
Page 1
Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP)
Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge
Photo of Affected Structures Barangay Nangka, Marikina City
Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S001

Structure Owner : MANILA WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
Affected By : Bridge 3 - Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge
Location : Brgy. Nangka, Marikina City
Date Tagged : February 08, 2021

Structure Owner : ROSITA CAASI
1|Page

Structure Owner : ROSITA CAASI

Structure Owner : MINDA ICASA
2|Page

Structure Owner : ROSE MARIE SAMANIEGO

Structure Owner : AMELITA ABO
3|Page

Structure Owner : SALVACION BELO

Structure Owner : ADAM JUEGO
Date Tagged : March 19, 2021
4|Page

Structure Owner : BALUBAD SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER

5|Page
Photo of Affected Structures Barangay Concepcion Uno, Marikina City

Structure Owner : CITY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC MARKET
Location : Brgy. Concepcion Uno, Marikina City

Structure Owner : MELIZA BASILIO
1|Page

Structure Owner : MELIZA BASILIO

Structure Owner : JOSELITO ROSIMO
2|Page

Remarks : March 19, 2021
3|Page
Volume 3
Replacement Cost Study Report
Contents:
1. Valuation Methodology for Affected Land and Structures
for Metro Manila Bridges Project
2. Replacement Cost for Land
3. Replacement Cost for Structures
4. Replacement Cost for Crops and Trees
Valuation Methodology for Affected Land and Structures
for Metro Manila Bridges Project
Valuation Methodology1
In any determination of value of fee simple estate for real estate, data are sought in the local
market on such factors as sales and offerings of similar properties, vacant land, current prices
for construction materials and labor, rentals of similar properties and their operating expenses, and
current rates of return on investments and properties. From these data, values may be developed
for the land and the property as a whole.
Three generally acceptable approaches may be used in the development of an opinion of value for
an improved property: the cost approach, the sales comparison or market data approach, and the
income capitalization approach. Briefly, the cost approach considers the cost to reproduce or
replace the property appraised with new assets; from this amount an allowance is deducted for
depreciation arising from physical deterioration or obsolescence, whether from functional or
external causes. The sales comparison approach considers prices recently paid for similar
items of property with adjustments made to the indicated market prices to reflect the condition
and utility of the appraised property relative to market comparatives. In the income capitalization
approach, and estimate is made of the prospective economic benefits of ownership into the future
and these benefits are capitalized into an indication of value. In arriving at a reasonable valuation
of these particular undertaking, the sales comparison or market data approach is used. Income
capitalization approach was not considered in this study.
1. On Land Value.
The Market Data Comparison Approach is used to estimate the value of the land in this approach,
the sales of similar properties in the vicinity are reviewed and compared to the subject. The
comparable sales and listings are then compared on the basis of the following factors:
a. Location of the property with reference to quality of neighborhood and surrounding
improvements, access to community centers, shopping and transportation, and presence
of detrimental influences to value.
b. Size, the lot area in relation to the highest and best use, present use and utilization of
the property.
c. Physical characteristics (Phy. Char.) such as shape, topography, utilities, easements,
road frontage, etc.
d. Haggling and time element, a reasonable discounting factor made against the asking price
of the seller. Also referred to as buyer’s discount, while time element is basically the time
the transaction or the offer was made.
2. On Value of Structures and Other Land Improvements
As required by the Terms of Reference and in compliance with the provisions of RA 10752,
The Right of Way Act, and its implementing rules and regulations, market values of structures
will be determined through Cost Approach and to use the Replacement Cost Method. “In the
Cost Approach, a property is valued based on a comparison with the cost to build a new or a
1
From the Replacement Cost of Affected Land and Structures Report of the North South Commuter Railway Extension Project
Solis-Blumentritt-Calamba Section) – Manila Phase 1, January 2020
1
substitute property” (The Appraisal of Real Estate, Third Canadian Edition). In the International
Valuation Standards 2017 (IVS 2017), “the cost approach provides an indication of value using
the economic principle that a buyer will pay no more for an asset than the cost to obtain an
asset of equal utility XXX.” The international standard requires that all cost that will be incurred
should be considered. Thus, the following costs are included in this exercise:
1. Direct Cost – refers to cost of materials and labor

2. Indirect Cost - refers to professional fees (i.e. design, permit, architectural, legal, etc),
overheads, taxes, finance costs, profit margin or entrepreneurial profit to the creator of
the asset.
Replacement Cost, is a method of Cost Approach that “indicates value by calculating the cost
of similar asset offering equivalent utility. (IVSC 2017). This is defined In the Implementing
Rules and Regulation of RA 10752 as:
“xxx the Replacement Cost of a structure or improvement affected by the ROW shall be based
on the current market prices of materials, equipment's, labour, contractors profit and overhead,
and all other attendant costs associated with the acquisition and installation of a similar asset
in place of the affected asset. If the affected structure has been damaged, then the
Replacement Cost should be based on the pre-damaged condition of that structure, The
Replacement Cost of the structure may be vary from the market value of the existing structure
since the structure that would actually replace it may have a different cost at current market
prices. The replacement structure has to perform the same functions and meet the
performance specifications as the original structure.”
In the determination of the Replacement Cost of affected structures by the project, a survey
of prices of construction materials, labor and profit of contractors (in percentage) was
conducted within the immediate vicinity or where property owners purchased their materials.
Basic plans of the structures are prepared and served as reference for the bill of quantity
(BOQ) of construction materials and finishes.
A Replacement Cost Survey report for structures consists of:
1. This letter with Appraiser Certificate

2. Notes on the Detailed Measurement Surveys
3. A summary of the affected structures
4. Basic Plans of each affected structures
5. Bill of Materials of each affected structures
6. A price list of construction materials as surveyed from hardware stores around the
area.
7. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
2
VALUATION REPORT OF AFFECTED LAND
METRO MANILA BRIDGES PROJECT
BRIDGE 3
Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge
Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana, Marikina City
Metro Manila, Philippines
Prepared for : DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

Dasan B/D, Songi-ro 30-gil,
Songpa-gu, Seoul 05800
South Korea
Valuation Report of Affected Land of the Metro Manila Bridges Project – Bridge 3: Kabayani
Street – Matandang Balara Bridge, Marikina City
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
9 April 2021
DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

South Korea
SUBJECT : Valuation Report of Affected Land of the Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) -
Bridge 3: Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge
Sir:
Pursuant to your instructions, we have made an investigation – physical inspection and valuation of
the affected private lands, the Property, of the project right-of-way1 of the METRO MANILA BRIDGES
PROJECT (MMBP) – BRIDGE 3: Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge, the Project, in three (3)
barangays of Marikina City: Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana. Herewith submits our report.
The investigation and analysis was made for the purpose of expressing an opinion as of February 28,
2021 of the Market Value of the fee simple estate of the Property. We understand that this opinion
of value is to provide a basis to what amount will be realized by the affected landowner to receive in
the event he/she decided to offer the Property for sale in the market.
The scope of the appraisal covers the land only.
We have inspected the said Property, investigated and conducted research on local market conditions
and have given consideration to the following:
 Extent, character and utility of the Property affected;

 Comparable properties which are either being sold or currently offered for
sale, plus asking prices;
 Zoning and current land usage in the locality; and
 Highest and best use of the Property.
Our report consists of:
 This letter with Appraiser Certificate

 A narrative report containing the summary of pertinent facts and conclusion,
a brief description of the property appraised, presentation of valuation
methods, and the conclusion of value
 Notes on Land Impact Assessment (Severe or Marginal)
1
Original reference alignment used is based on the email attachment sent to Datum One Surveys (DOS) last
January 15, 2021. This, however, was subsequently changed during the course of the survey and changes are
adopted on this report.
1
Ref: FIVE_2021_003A_MMBP_ Bridge 3
 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

 Copies of Real Property Tax Declarations
Based on the above investigation and analysis of all as supported by the accompanying narrative
report, it is our opinion that PESOS: ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED SEVEN
THOUSAND FIFTY THREE (PhP 119,807,053.00) represents the Market Value of the Property as of
February 28, 2021 subject to the attached limiting conditions.
We HEREBY CERTIFY that to the best of our knowledge and belief, the statement of fact, upon which
the analyses, opinions, and conclusions expressed in this report are based, are true and correct; that
this report sets forth the limiting conditions affecting the analyses, opinions and conclusions it
contains; that this report has been made in accordance with generally accepted valuation principles
and procedures and in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Ethics applying to the realty
services in the Philippines; and that we have no present nor contemplated future interest in the
Property, nor is the appraisal fee contingent upon the final estimate of value. It is further certified that
appraisal of the Property was done under the supervision of the undersigned.
Respectfully yours,
JIMMY T. RAZON
Licensed Real Estate Appraiser
PRC No. 6448
Licensed Geodetic Engineer
PRC No. 5381
2
NARRATIVE REPORT
Summary of Pertinent Facts and Conclusion
Property Appraised : Land
Property Location : Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana of Marikina

City
Property Rights Appraised: Fee Simple Estate
Appraisal Date : February 28, 2021
Appraisal Purpose : To express an opinion of the Market Value of the property

affected by the project right-of-way of the Metro Manila
Bridges Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street –
Matandang Balara Bridge in Marikina City as reference for the
preparation of entitlement compensation of the Project
Affected Person’s
Market Value : PESOS: ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED

SEVEN THOUSAND FIFTY THREE (PhP 119,807,053.00)
Objectives
To provide the client a reliable estimates of the market value of private properties affected by the
project right-of-way of the Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street –
Matandang Balara Bridge in Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana in Marikina City. This
appraisal was undertaken to express an opinion of the Market Value of the fee simple estate of the
said real properties as of February 28, 2021, as if they were available in the open market.
Market Value is defined as “the sum of money which a person is desirous but not to compelled to buy
and an owner willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price be given and received
therefore.”
1. buyer and seller are typically motivated;

2. both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best
interest;
3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the market;
4. payment is made in terms of cash in Philippine Pesos or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected special or
creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
The Property was valued as if offered in the open market for a reasonable time in which to find a
buyer. It is assumed that the Property will be developed to its highest and best use, free and clear of
all liens and encumbrances.
3
Fee Simple Estate as used herein is defined as an absolute ownership unencumbered by any other
interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation,
eminent domain, police power, and escheat.
Property Description
The Property consists of three (3) sites and divided per barangay. All sites are located in Marikina City
and are near of adjacent to the Marikina River.
MMBP – Bridge 3 Project alignment in Barangays Concepcion Uno, Nangka, and Tumana
Site 1: Barangay Tumana
It consists of one (1) lot with a total affected land area of 10,091.10 sq.m. and an estimated project
land take of approximately 10,091.10 sq.m. The lot is identified as B3-001 with Lot No. 20 (Reserved
Area-1), Pcs -00-015952. It has a total land area of 80,290.00 sq.m. The land is covered by Transfer
Certificate of Title No. 009-2020001098 and Real Property Tax Declaration No. E-0019-240748. The
land is registered to Sta. Lucia Land Inc.
4
5
Site 2: Barangay Nangka
It consists of thirty eleven (11) lots with a total affected land area of 11,659.27 sq.m. and the
Estimated Project Land Take is approximately 12,291.49 sq.m. The lots are identified and
tabulated below.
LAND CLASSIFICATION (from Tax

SURVEY PLAN AFFECTED AREA REMAINING AREA IMPACT (SEVERE/ ESTIMATED PROJECT
LOT ID TITLE NUMBER TD NUMBER LOT NUMBER REGISTERED OWNER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE) - ADDRESS TOTAL AREA (SQ.M.) Declaration; Residential, SOURCE
NUMBER (SQ.M.) (SQ.M.) MARGINAL) LAND TAKE (SQ.M.)
Commercial, Agricultural)
B3-002 254058 E-0006-134881 LOT 1 PCS-13-000367 GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 5548 BAWAN-GUENO COR. CUANGCO ST., MAKATI CITY 227,439.00 4,644.03 222,794.97 RESIDENTIAL TITLE MARGINAL 3,057.27
B3-003 N-88111 E-0006-234539 66-A-1-A-2-A-3 PSD-13-000597 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4166 D R MAGSASAY BLVD EXT SAMPALOC MANILA 20,885.00 1,934.51 18,950.49 RESIDENTIAL LDC MARGINAL 1,934.51
B3-004 009-2019007585 E-0006-235860 66-A-1-A-2-A-2 PSD-13-000597 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA SHOE AVE., STA. ELENA, CITY OF MARIKINA 48,640.00 2,973.00 45,667.00 RESIDENTIAL LDC MARGINAL 2,740.00
B3-005 009-2014000078 E-0006-187241 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-11-B PSD-435761 MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. 489 KATIPUNAN ROAD, BALARA, QUEZON CITY 22,311.00 3.59 22,307.41 COMMERCIAL TITLE MARGINAL 3.59
B3-006 009-2014000077 E-0006-187239 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-11-A PSD-435761 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 2/F MARIKINA CITY HALL SHOE AVE. STA. ELENA, MARIKINA CITY 3,213.00 1,155.04 2,057.96 RESIDENTIAL TITLE SEVERE 3,213.00
SURVEY
B3-007 473633 E-0006-130302 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-19 (ROAD LOT) PSD-00-071716 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY ST. SAMPALOC MANILA 5,057.00 601.35 4,455.65 ROAD LOT MARGINAL 601.35
PLAN/TITLE
SURVEY
B3-008 473623 E-0006-130292 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-9 PSD-00-071716 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY ST. SAMPALOC MANILA 787.00 240.88 546.12 RESIDENTIAL SEVERE 657.12
PLAN/TITLE
B3-009 E-0006-207405 E-0006-207405 66-A-1-A-2-A-1-B-10 PSD-00-071717 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY NHA BUILDING, ELLIPTICAL ROAD, DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY 731.00 98.34 632.66 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN MARGINAL 76.12
B3-018 LOT 3 PCS-00-011610 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 109.00 3.99 105.01 SURVEY PLAN MARGINAL 3.99
B3-019 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 254.36 3.99 250.37 TAX MAP MARGINAL 3.99
B3-020 ROAD LOT 1-A PCS-8259 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY ELLIPTICAL RD. DILIMAN QUEZON CITY 23.00 0.55 22.45 SURVEY PLAN MARGINAL 0.55
Total 329,449.36 11,659.27 317,790.09 12,291.49
LEGEND
Road Lots
Not affected
Community facility / Parks and Open Space
NOTES
1. Land Impact Assessment is based on general principles on World Bank Operational Manual on Involuntary Resettlement. "Marginal" is defined as less than 20% of the total
productive area, otherwise, "Severe"
2. Estimated project land take is defined as the area to be acquired by the Implementing Agency. 100% of the entire land may be acquired if the land impact assessment is "Severe".
Otherwise, only the affected area will be taken.
3. Land Classification information is based from city zoning / tax declaration
4. Values for lands classified as Residential/Commercial or mixed Residential and Commercial, the value assigned is that of Commercial
6
7
Site 3: Barangay Concepcion Uno
It consists of three (3) lots with a total affected land area of 329.68 sq.m. and the Estimated
Project Land Take is approximately 375.00 sq.m. The lots are identified and tabulated below.
LAND CLASSIFICATION (from Tax

SURVEY PLAN AFFECTED AREA REMAINING AREA IMPACT (SEVERE/ ESTIMATED PROJECT
LOT ID TITLE NUMBER TD NUMBER LOT NUMBER REGISTERED OWNER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE) - ADDRESS TOTAL AREA (SQ.M.) Declaration; Residential, SOURCE
NUMBER (SQ.M.) (SQ.M.) MARGINAL) LAND TAKE (SQ.M.)
Commercial, Agricultural)
B3-021 305560 E-0012-026525 LT 1-D, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 175.00 148.70 26.30 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN SEVERE 175.00
B3-022 305559 E-0012-026263 LT 1-C, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 100.00 81.63 18.37 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN SEVERE 100.00
B3-023 305558 E-0012-026246 LT 1-B, BLK 36 PSD-00-039655 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 4077 R. MAGSAYSAY, SAMPALOK MANILA 100.00 99.35 0.65 RESIDENTIAL SURVEY PLAN SEVERE 100.00
TOTAL 375.00 329.68 45.32 375.00
LEGEND
Road Lots
Not affected
Community facility / Parks and Open Space
NOTES
1. Land Impact Assessment is based on general principles on World Bank Operational Manual on Involuntary Resettlement. "Marginal" is defined as less than 20% of the total
productive area, otherwise, "Severe"
2. Estimated project land take is defined as the area to be acquired by the Implementing Agency. 100% of the entire land may be acquired if the land impact assessment is "Severe".
Otherwise, only the affected area will be taken.
3. Land Classification information is based from city zoning / tax declaration
4. Values for lands classified as Residential/Commercial or mixed Residential and Commercial, the value assigned is that of Commercial
8
9
Neighborhood Data
Marikina River as taken from the northern bank in Barangay Nangka
The proposed Bridge 3 will be an alternative link for Quezon City and Marikina City. Bridge 3 will
decongest the traffic of Bagong Farmers Avenue Bridge, which connects Barangay Tumana of Marikina
City to Katipunan Avenue Extension of Quezon City.
Panoramic photo of Site 1: Barangay Tumana
Site 1 is located in vacant raw land in Tumana. Land developments for residential project of Sta. Lucia
Land, Acropolis Loyola, is ongoing on an adjacent lot of the proposed site. The approach of the
proposed bridge will start at Katipunan Avenue Extension (which is currently ongoing construction).
The site is about a kilometer northeast from Katipunan Avenue Extension and Moscow Street; or
around 3.50 kilometers (road distance) northeast of UP Town Center, which is along Katipunan
Avenue. Total length of affected land strip is about 330 meters.
Site 2 is located in a residential and commercial area of Barangay Nangka. The site can be identified
as location of a sewage treatment facility of Manila Waters Company Inc and Nangka public market.
The site of the approach of the proposed bridge starts from the corners Kabayani Road and Balubad
and/or Camia Streets, around 520 meters northwest of JP Rizal and Kingsway Avenues; and
approximately 550 meters south from Nangka High School.
10
Homeowners Street coming from JP Rizal Avenue in Barangay Sto. Nino
Site 3 is located in residential zone of Barangay Concepcion Uno. The site is adjacent to the Nangka
Public Market. The approach of the proposed bridge begins at the corner of Kabayani Road and Camia
Street of Twinville. The site is about 520 meters corners Kabayani Road and Balubad and Camia
Streets, around 520 meters northwest of JP Rizal and Kingsway Avenues; and approximately 550
meters south from Nangka High School. Total length of affected land strip is about 30 meters.
Key notable landmarks surrounding

the sites are:
Sewage Treatment Faciliy, Manila

Water Company Inc
Nangka Public Market
Nangka High School
Twinville Subdivision Basketball
Court
Fairlane Subdivision
Acropolis Subdivision
Ayala Heights Village
Vista Real Village
Woodridge Village
11
JP Rizal Avenue serve as the major

national road on the Nangka and
Concepcion Uno while Katipunan
Avenue Extension, once completed
construction, on Barangay Tumana
will be the major national road.
Other city roads of Marikina run to
cross with JP Rizal, while private
subdivision roads are on the
Tumana and/or the Quezon City
area, which are not accessible to
Kabayani Road in Barangay Nangka
the general motorists.
The Nangka Public Market is the nearest

community public market for the community
affected by the Bridge 3. Malls, commercial
centers, restaurants, banks are present along
JP Rizal and A. Bonifacio Avenues in Marikina
City and Katipunan Avenue in Quezon City.
Public schools are present in the vicinity of
Nangka and Concepcion Uno while
universities like Ateneo de Manila, Mirriam
Colleges, and University of the Philippines
Diliman Campus are along the Katipunan
Avenue in Quezon City. Places of worships
(Roman Catholic, Iglesia ni Cristo, Seventh
Day Adventist, etc.) are also in the vicinity.
Hospitals are not far from the area.
Nangka Public Market
Motorized tricycles, public utility

jeepneys, taxis and vans are the
main mode of transportation going
to the sites..
Electricity, water and

telecommunication lines are
available on site. Garbage collection
by the local government is also in
place. Police visibility is also
observed around busy areas and
along highway.
JP Rizal Avenue in Barangay Concepcion Uno
12
Manila Water Company Inc Facility in Barangay Nangka.
Affected properties in Barangays Nangka and Concepcion Uno
13
Highest and Best Use
The highest and best use is the use of an asset that maximises its potential and that it is possible, legally
permissible and financially feasible. The highest and best use may be for continuation of an asset’s
existing use or for some alternative use. This is determined by the use that a market participant would
have in mind for the asset when formulating the price that it would be willing to bid. (IVSC 2017)
Land Use Map of Marikina City 2018 to 2027
Based on the land use map of the city, the Project alignment traverses residential, utilities and open
parks/spaces zones in Barangays Nangka and Concepcion Uno. Then, it will cross Marikina River to the
residential zoned area of Barangay Tumana.
Looking ahead, the MMBP – Bridge 3 as an alternate link between Marikina City and Quezon City will
decongest the traffic of Bagong Farmers Avenue Bridge. The construction of this Bridge will attract
developments in the Barangays of Nangka and Concepcion Uno. However, this influence of the project
on property values may not be realized in the current situation. The project as it is will only be using
strips of land. The uses of such will only limited and may not reach its highest potential for any investor.
For the remaining unaffected area, however, its current use or following the City’s comprehensive
land use plan, may continue or may not change. Thus, the highest and best use of the affected lands
will follow the current land use zoning and are tabulated as follows in the next pages.
14
HIGHEST AND BEST

LOT ID CITY/ MUNICIPALITY BARANGAY
USE
B3-001 MARIKINA TUMANA RESIDENTIAL
B3-002 MARIKINA NANGKA RESIDENTIAL
B3-004 MARIKINA NANGKA GP
B3-005 MARIKINA NANGKA COMMERCIAL
B3-006 MARIKINA NANGKA GP
B3-007 MARIKINA NANGKA ROADS
B3-021 MARIKINA CONCEPCION I RESIDENTIAL
LEGEND
Road Lots
With eroded portions by the current Marikina River Channel
Government Property
Valuation Methodology
In any determination of value of fee simple estate for real estate, data are sought in the local market
on such factors as sales and offerings of similar properties, vacant land, current prices for construction
materials and labor, rentals of similar properties and their operating expenses, and current rates of
return on investments and properties. From these data, values may be developed for the land and the
property as a whole.
Three generally acceptable approaches may be used in the development of an opinion of value for an
improved property: the cost approach, the sales comparison or market data approach, and the income
capitalization approach. Briefly, the cost approach considers the cost to reproduce or replace the
property appraised with new assets; from this amount an allowance is deducted for depreciation
arising from physical deterioration or obsolescence, whether from functional or external causes. The
15
sales comparison approach considers prices recently paid for similar items of property with
adjustments made to the indicated market prices to reflect the condition and utility of the appraised
property relative to market comparatives. In the income capitalization approach, and estimate is made
of the prospective economic benefits of ownership into the future and these benefits are capitalized
into an indication of value. In arriving at a reasonable valuation of these particular undertaking, the
sales comparison or market data approach is used. Income capitalization approach was not considered
in this study.
On Land Value.
The Market Data Comparison Approach is used to estimate the value of the land in this approach, the
sales of similar properties in the vicinity are reviewed and compared to the subject. The comparable
sales and listings are then compared on the basis of the following factors:
1. Location of the property with reference to quality of neighborhood and surrounding

improvements, access to community centers, shopping and transportation, and presence of
detrimental influences to value.
2. Size, the lot area in relation to the highest and best use, present use and utilization of the
property.
3. Physical characteristics (Phy. Char.) such as shape, topography, utilities, easements, road
frontage, etc.
4. Haggling and time element, a reasonable discounting factor made against the asking price of
the seller. Also referred to as buyer’s discount, while time element is basically the time the
transaction or the offer was made.
We have gathered information of some transactions and property listings in the area and are listed
below:
Listings
1. Currently, a residential land with an area of 167 sq.m. located along Jasmine Street in Fairlane
Subdivision, Barangay Nangka is posted for sale by a certain Edlyn Aspacio at
www.lamudi.com.ph at an asking price of PhP16,766.47 per sq.m.
2. Currently, a residential land with an area of 240 sq.m. located Buen-mar Street, Greenland
Subdivision is offered for sale by Mikael Manuel and posted at www.lamudi.com.ph at a selling
price of PhP 10,000,000.00 or PhP41,666.67 per sq.m.
3. Currently, a commercial property with a land area of 273 sq.m. located along Del Rosario
Street, Barangay Tumana is offered for sale by a certain Philip Robert Paz at selling price of
PhP 27,000,000.00. (The land component is estimated at PhP67,000.00 per sq.m.) (Contact No.
0906-2691085).
4. Currently, a residential property with a land area of 210 sq.m. and floor area of 160 sq.m.
located inside Twinville Subdivision, Barangay Concepcion Uno, is posted for sale at
https://www.dotproperty.com.ph/ at listed price of PhP8,500,000.00. (The land component is
estimated at PhP24,000.00 per sq.m.)
16
5. Currently, a commercial land located along Gil Fernando Avenue in Barangay San Roque with
a land area of 6,000 sq.m. is offered for sale Vicky Garcia (Contact No. +639055686333) for
PhP60,000.00.
6. Currently, a residential land with area of 223 sq.m. located in Twinville Subdivision, Barangay
Nangka is advertised for sale at facebook page: “Marikina House for Rent / sale” by Ronwell
Bautista Gocon at a price of PhP3,700,000.00.
7. Currently, a residential land with area of 155 sq.m. located at a corner of Camia and Cattleya
Streets in Twinville Subdivision, Barangay Nangka , is offered for sale by a certain Yna Aguilar
for PhP1,900,000.00. The property was posted at facebook page: “Marikina House for Rent /
sale”.
8. Currently, a residential subdivision lots with average land area of 204 sq.m. located in
Woodridge Heights, Barangay Tumana, are offered for sale at PhP 30,000.00 per sq.m.
9. Currently, a residential subdivision lots with average land area of 300 sq.m. located in
Acropolis Loyola, in Brangay Tumana, are offered for sale by Ryan Cabalde at a price of
PhP80,000 per sq.m.
10. Currently, a commercial property with land area of 240 sq.m. and floor area of 279 sq.m.
located along JP Rizal Avenue in Barangay Tumana, is posted for sale at
www.property24.com.ph at an asking price of PhP 25,000,000.00. (The land component is
estimated at PhP79,000.00 per sq.m.)
Upon arriving at an adjusted value from the comparable, a weighted percentage is applied depending
on the degree of comparability with the subject property. Weighted percentage also considers other
relevant data on the comparable such as time element and/or conditions of sale or any other market
condition prevailing at the time of actual sales or at the time the offer to sell was made.
17
Comparable Matrix
In the preparation of the comparable matrix, there are listings that are not used in the analysis.
Site 1: Barangay Tumana (Raw land)2
Factors of Comparison Subject Property Listing No. 1 Listing No. 7 Listing No. 8 Listing 9
Asking Price 17,000.00 12,000.00 30,000.00 80,000.00

Time of Sale or Listing Current Current Current Current
% Weight
-10% -10% -10% -10%
Comparison
Time Adjusted
15,300.00 10,800.00 27,000.00 72,000.00
Value
Jamine St.,
Catleya cor Woodridge
Location of the Fairlane, Acropolis Loyola,
Camia, Twinville, Heights,
property Twinville, Tumana
Nangka Tumana
Nangka
% Weight
25% 25% 50% 60%
Comparison
Size of the property
167 155 204 300
(sq.m.)
% Weight
10% 10% 15% 15%
Comparison
Physical
Characteristics Raw land Regular Regular Regular Regular
(frontage, easements)
% Weight
20% 20% 20% 20%
Comparison
Total Net % Weight

55% 55% 85% 95%
Adjustment
Adjusted Value 6,885.00 4,860.00 4,050.00 3,600.00
Degree of
100% 30% 30% 25% 15%
Comparability
Estimated Value 5,076.00 2,065.50 1,458.00 1,012.50 540.00
Or say, PhP/sq.m. 5,100.00
Raw Land Value: 5000
Notes:
(-) denotes that the comparable is inferior
(+) denotes that the comparable is superior
2
Land Stripping Method is considered to obtain a land value for the affected land in Tumana. Using a raw land
value of PhP12,000 per sq.m. on a 20-meter strip along Katipunan Avenue Extension, the computed average
per sq.m. is PhP5,078.00.
18
Sites 2: Barangay Nangka
A. Residential
Asking Price 17,000.00 0.00 17,000.00 12,000.00

% Weight
-10% -10% -10% -10%
Comparison
Time Adjusted
15,300.00 0.00 15,300.00 10,800.00
Value
Jamine St.,
Buenmar, Catleya cor
Location of the Fairlane, Twinville,
Greenland, Camia, Twinville,
property Twinville, Nangka
Nangka Nangka
Nangka
% Weight
0% 30% 0% 0%
Comparison
167 240 223 155
(sq.m.)
% Weight
0% 0% 0% 0%
Comparison
Physical
Along Ilang
Characteristics Regular Regular Regular Regular
ilang, Twinville
% Weight
0% 0% 0% 0%
Comparison
Total Net % Weight

0% 30% 0% 0%
Adjustment
Adjusted Value 15,300.00 0.00 15,300.00 10,800.00
Degree of
100% 25% 0% 25% 50%
Comparability
Estimated Value 13,050.00 3,825.00 0.00 3,825.00 5,400.00
Notes:
19
B. Commercial
Factors of Comparison Subject Property Listing No. 10 Listing No. 3 Listing No. 5
Asking Price 79,000.00 66,000.00 60,000.00

Time of Sale or Listing Current Current Current
% Weight
-10% -10% -10%
Comparison
Time Adjusted
71,100.00 59,400.00 54,000.00
Value
Location of the JP Rizal Ave., Del Rosario St. Gil Fernando,

property Tumana Tumana San Roque
% Weight
40% 30% 30%
Comparison
544 273 6000
(sq.m.)
% Weight
20% 20% 10%
Comparison
Physical
Characteristics Regular Regular Regular
% Weight
10% 20% 20%
Comparison
Total Net % Weight

70% 70% 60%
Adjustment
Adjusted Value 21,330.00 17,820.00 21,600.00
Degree of
100% 40% 20% 20%
Comparability
Estimated Value 16,416.00 8,532.00 3,564.00 4,320.00
say 16,000.00
Notes:
20
Site 3: Barangay Concepcion Uno (Residential)
Asking Price 17,000.00 42,000.00 17,000.00 12,000.00

% Weight
-10% -10% -10% -10%
Comparison
Time Adjusted
15,300.00 37,800.00 15,300.00 10,800.00
Value
Jamine St.,
Buenmar, Catleya cor
Location of the Fairlane, Twinville,
Greenland, Camia, Twinville,
property Twinville, Nangka
Nangka Nangka
Nangka
% Weight
0% 30% 0% 0%
Comparison
167 240 223 155
(sq.m.)
% Weight
0% 0% 0% 0%
Comparison
Physical
Characteristics Interior Regular Regular Regular Regular
% Weight
0% 0% 0% 0%
Comparison
Total Net % Weight

0% 30% 0% 0%
Adjustment
Adjusted Value 15,300.00 26,460.00 15,300.00 10,800.00
Degree of
100% 25% 0% 25% 50%
Comparability
Estimated Value 13,050.00 3,825.00 0.00 3,825.00 5,400.00
Notes:
Tax Declaration Market Values and BIR Zonal Value Research
Based on Tax Declaration of Real Property of the lots, market values are variable per classification.
21
Market Values Based on Real Property Tax Declarations (PhP/sq.m.)

Sanggunian Panglungsod ng Marikina Ordinance No. 223 series of 2001
Residential Land Commercial Land Industrial Land
Barangay Vicinity
(PhP) (PhP) (PhP)
Tumana Acropolis 6,000.00
Nangka Twinville 1,000.00 1,000.00
Concepcion Uno Twinville 1,500.00
Zonal valuation of properties at present in the vicinity of the subject property was checked with the
Bureau of Internal Revenue on its Marikina BIR Zonal Values per DO No. 028-2017and thus, obtained:
Residential Land Commercial Land

City / Municipality Barangay Vicinity
(PhP) (PhP)
Marikina
Tumana all other streets 2,520.00
Nangka Upper Balubad 3,700.00
Nangka Twinville 3,000.00
Nangka GP
Concepcion Uno Twinville 3,000.00
Concepcion Uno all other streets 5,200.00
After an analysis of the foregoing and considering such factors as location , desirability, neighborhood,
size and shape, and present utility and development, the Market Value of the Land as of February 28,
2021 is estimated at total value PESOS: ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED SEVEN
THOUSAND FIFTY THREE (PhP 119,807,053.00) for the total of 22,757.593 square meter land take
and detailed as follows:
3
The estimated total land take considered those that are privately owned and not used as part of the legal
river easement, roads, or open spaces used by the public.
22
AFFECTED AREA ESTIMATED PROJECT TOTAL BIR ZONAL TOTAL MARKET VALUE
LOT ID REGISTERED OWNER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE) -
(SQ.M.) LAND TAKE (SQ.M.) VALUE (PhP) (PhP)
B3-001 STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 10,091.10 10,091.10 25,429,572.00 50,455,500.00
B3-002 GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4,644.03 3,057.27 9,171,810.00 15,286,350.00
B3-003 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 1,934.51 1,934.51 5,803,530.00 9,672,550.00
B3-004 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 2,973.00 2,740.00 3,425,000.00 13,700,000.00
B3-005 MANILA WATER COMPANY INC. 3.59 3.59 18,668.00 57,440.00
B3-006 THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 1,155.04 3,213.00 4,016,250.00 16,065,000.00
B3-007 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 601.35 601.35
B3-008 T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 240.88 657.12 1,971,360.00 8,608,272.00
B3-009 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 98.34 76.12 228,360.00 997,172.00
B3-018 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 3.99 3.99 11,970.00 52,269.00
B3-019 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 3.99 3.99
B3-020 NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 0.55 0.55
B3-021 TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 148.70 175.00 525,000.00 2,292,500.00
TOTAL 22,080.05 22,757.59 51,201,520.00 119,807,053.00
CONCLUSION OF VALUE
Based on the investigation and premised outline, it is our opinion that as of February 28, 2021, the
market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, assuming to be free and clean of all liens
and encumbrances is represented in the amount of PESOS: ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN MILLION EIGHT
HUNDRED SEVEN THOUSAND FIFTY THREE (PhP 119,807,053.00).
23
NOTES ON DETAILED MEASUREMENT SURVEYS
24
Notes on Detailed Measurement Surveys

Definition
In the TOR there is no specific definition of the Detailed Measurement Surveys (DMS). For this
assignment, a defined objective of the DMS in Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) preparation is
formulated and stated:
To determine the type of assets or interest (land, structures and crops) affected by the
project and to provide thereon a replacement asset (equal value asset or interest) by
doing a measurement of the asset (parcellary survey for land, as-built surveys for both
land and structure, and tree inventory) and the affected portion; and identifying the
components that asset (particular on structures and other land improvements
excluding crops) is made of, i.e. construction materials for structures.
As-Built Surveys
Based from the TOR and as noted above, the as-built survey “will determine exact coordinates,
measurement and affected area of all structures along the Project ROW”. Identifying use, size or
dimension, and materials used for the construction of structure will be obtained from this survey.
These information will be the basis for basic plans and computation of cost, bill of quantities, if a
similar or equal structure is constructed.
Measurement Standard
To have a uniform standard of measurement of the affected structures and applicable for the
preparation of Bill of Quantities, the Sub-Consultant adopted International Property Measurement
Standards’ IPMS 1 (External) which is defined as “the sum of the areas of each floor level of a Building
measured to the perimeter of the external construction features”. This standard “can be used for
planning purposes or the summary costing of development proposals”. In cases, where measurement
is conducted inside the building, the standard requires an estimation of the exterior wall thickness
(about 15 cm for unplastered concrete hollow blocks) and wall partitions (about 10 cm. for
unplastered concrete hollow blocks). www.ipmsc.org
Assessment of Project Impact on Affected Structures: Severe vs Marginal
In deciding the project impact on an affected structure, the World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.12
established guidelines when acquiring lands/properties for the purpose of implementing a
government project reinforced with the existing land acquisition legislation. The Loss of Property, Loss
of Dwelling, and Loss of Income are the three core principles in determining the project impact on
Affected Structures.
In accordance with the World Bank OP 4.12 together with Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA) Guidelines 2010, The Right-of-Way Act (RA No. 10752), International Building Code (IBC) 2003,
The 1977 National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP) (PD No. 1096), and National Structural
Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2015, the Assessor considers the following:
25
1. Percentage of Affected Land and Economic Viability of the Remaining Land. In determining the
severity of impact in terms of the percentage of affected land (and structure), two policies were
taken into consideration namely the Asian Development Bank where it is stated in their Operations
Manual that a loss of ten percent (10%) of a land’s productive assets (income generating) is
determined to be severe whereas the World Bank OP 4.12 has set twenty percent (20%) of an
affected land’s productive assets as an indicator of the severity of land acquisition together with
assessing the remaining land’s economic viability. However, in accordance to the adopted policy of
the JICA Guidelines 2010, the World Bank OP 4.12 standard was considered in the assessment.
As established by the World Bank OP 4.12, a project-affected land (and structure) is assessed based
on the percentage of land (and structure) affected and the economic viability of the remaining land
(and structure). The cutting line of the project determines the affected portion of the land (and
structure) whereas the size of the remaining portion of the land (and structure) determines the
economic viability for which the remaining land holds. Economic viability is regarded as the
capability of the remaining land (and structure) to sustain or develop its current operation which
is determined through socioeconomic factors and research. The following table is used as a guide
to evaluate the project impact on the affected lands (and structures):
I. PRIVATE LAND and ALIENABLE & DISPOSABLE (A&D) PUBLIC LAND

More than 20% of the total landholding is lost or
NEGOTIATED SALE where less than 20% is lost but the remaining SEVERE
or landholding becomes economically nonviable.
EXPROPRIATION Less than 20% of the total landholding, and the
MARGINAL
remaining land is still economically viable
Loss of subterranean beneficial use but surface
SUBTERRANEAN SEVERE/
land remains economically viable. (Subject to
LAND MARGINAL
Easement Agreement)
II. NATIONAL and LOCAL GOVERNMENT OWNED LAND
Only the affected land will be considered whether or not the total
SEVERE/
landholding lost is more than 20%. In addition, the affected land is not
MARGINAL
included in the total affected area of the project.
III. STRUCTURES and IMPROVEMENTS
More than 20% of the structure is affected or where less than 20% is
affected but the remaining portion can no longer serve its function or SEVERE
if structural integrity is impaired.
Less than 20% of the structure is affected or where the remaining
MARGINAL
portion can still serve its function or if structural integrity is intact.
Source: World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Sourcebook (2004) as cited by JICA Guidelines (2010)
Moreover, in assessing the viability of a remaining land (and structure) for human habitation, the
following table in accordance with Section 806 of the NBCP is used as a guide:
Minimum Horizontal Minimum

Parts of Structure
Dimension (m) Area (m2)
Room/s 2.0 6.0
Kitchen 1.5 3.0
Bath and Toilet 0.9 1.2
26
2. Location of access (stairs/elevator) to upper level/s for structures having 2 or more storeys,
basement and/or cellar. Both stairs and elevators provide means of access from a storey to
another inside a building. They are essential especially in times of hazards and calamities for
immediate evacuation. As stated in the NBCP, stairs should have a minimum design of 75cm in
clear width, and 20cm for both rise and run. Whereas for elevators as specified in NSCP 2015, it
should be designed to carry a load increased by 100% in order to account for the varying loads
specially impact loads it may be subjected to. Moreover, in consideration of persons with disability
(PWD) and in compliance to the Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 or the Accessibility Law of 1983,
structures having multiple storeys must provide elevators that are located not more than 30 meters
from the entrance and must have a minimum dimension of 1.10 by 1.4 meters, and stairs that are
installed with handrails. The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) has provided
guidelines for the installation of elevators for buildings with multiple storeys which is shown in the
table as follows:
Type of Building No. of Storeys Elevator Requirement

Low-Rise 1-5 with or without
Medium-Rise 6-15 at least one
High-Rise 16 and higher multiple
Source: Public Buildings and Other Related Structures Volume 6, DPWH (2015)
3. Location of entrance and/or exit of the structure and its road right-of-way (ROW). According to
Section 214 of the NBCP, a building or structure is deemed as dangerous or structurally unsafe
when not provided with safe modes for egress. This is also to comply with the requirements stated
in the Revised Fire Code of the Philippines of 2008 or R.A. No. 9514 where a building should provide
exit facilities that are directly connected to a public way or safe dispersal area. In relation to this, it
is stated in Section 704 of the NBCP that “No building shall be constructed unless it adjoins or has
direct access to a public space, yard or street on at least one of its sides.” With regards to the
minimum number of exits required for a structure, residential houses occupied by five (5) or less
persons or one-storey buildings are allowed to have one accessible exit given that it does not have
more than one level below the first storey while buildings with multiple storeys should be provided
with sufficient number of exits depending on the occupant load as required by the IBC 2003 and
NBCP which is tabulated as follows:
Occupant Load Minimum Number of Exits

1-500 2
501-1,000 3
More than 1,000 4
The occupant load can be determined through dividing the floor area by the unit area allowed per
occupant (Table 1004.1.2 of the IBC 2003). The occupant load for a certain floor is computed by
getting fifty percent (50%) of the first adjacent storey above (and below, if the storey below exits
through the level being considered) and twenty-five percent (25%) of the storey beyond the first
adjacent storey above (NBCP, 1977). Therefore, structures having their one and only entrance/exit
affected by the project ROW are considered severely affected. Correspondingly, it is considered
severely affected when the road right-of-way of a structure is affected.
27
4. Structure Foundation. As defined by the NBCP, foundation is the lowest part of the structure which
functions to transfer the loads from the structure to the soil. Foundations are commonly built using
masonry, concrete or treated wood. They must be economically designed yet adequate to support
the structure and its loads under any condition, and must be designed appropriate to the type and
condition of the soil where the structure resides as inadequacy in design can cause structural failure
of the building. Minimum requirements for foundations were prescribed by the NSCP (2015) and
is given in the following table:
Depth Below
Number of Floors Thickness of Width of Thickness of
Undisturbed
Supported by the Foundation Wall (mm) Footing Footing
Ground
Foundations (made of concrete or masonry) (mm) (mm)
Surface (mm)
1 150 300 150 300
2 200 375 175 450
3 250 450 200 600
5. Structural Frame. The frame of a structure constitutes the columns, girder, beams, trusses and
spandrels where they are in contact to all other components of the structure that functions to keep
the structure safe and stable (NBCP, 1977). Structural failure happens when a structural element
can no longer support the loads it is carrying where these loads include the permanent and non-
permanent loads. In designing a structural component, it is ensured that a professional has
considered factors of safety and strength designs limits and standards. In assessing an affected
structural frame, it is already subjected to reconstruction or retrofitting in order to support the
remaining existing structure. Moreover, as stated in the IBC 2003, it must be noted that “Additions
or alterations to an existing structure shall not increase the force in any structural element by more
than five percent (5%), unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the
code for new structures, nor shall the strength of any structural element be decreased to less than
that required by this code for new structures.” The severity of impact depends whether the
structure is fit for reconstruction or retrofitting in consideration of the economic life and current
condition of all other elements of the structure.
Setback Requirement
Setbacks serve the purpose of providing adequate ventilation and lighting to a building and in general
guidelines, there should be setback for every side of the lot. In a low-density residential subdivision
project, the developer implements its setback requirements and are indicated in its master deed of
restrictions.
There are instances in the building code where setbacks on the sides and rear will be exempted
especially in built-up areas. If the building fronts a public road, the minimum setback is imposed for
the front side.
28
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
29
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

This report is intended to comply with the purpose and reporting requirements set forth in the Code
of Ethics applying to the Realty Services in the Philippines. As such, it presents comprehensive
discussion of data, reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the
opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning these matters has been retained in our work
papers. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to your needs as the client and for
the intended use stated below.
The term fee simple estate is defined as absolute ownership unencumbered by other interest or
estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent
domain, police power, and escheat.
Our valuation has been made on the assumption that the owner sells the fee simple interest on the
open market as ‘it is’ and without the benefit of deferred-terms contract, leaseback, joint venture,
management agreements or any similar arrangements, which would serve to affect the value of such
property interest.
We have assumed that the appraised property is freely disposable and transferable for its existing or
alternative uses in the open market to both local and overseas purchasers without payment of any
premium to the government.
Land areas and descriptions used in this appraisal were obtained from documents furnished to us.
It is assumed that all applicable zoning and land use regulations and restrictions have been complied
with unless nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. Further,
it is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries of each
property described and that no encroachment or trespass exists unless noted in the report.
No structural surveys for the building and other land improvements have been made by a professional
structural inspector other than the physical inspection of the appraisers, therefore, this study is unable
to report whether the property is free from rot, infestation or other defects other than those that can
be visibly seen. No tests were carried out on any of the services. We have assumed that the said
improved property comply with all statutory and local by-laws and regulations in respect of
construction and occupancy.
No investigation has been made of the legal title or any liabilities attached to the property appraised.
All legal documents disclosed are for reference only and no responsibility is assumed for any legal
matters concerning the legal title to the property interests. Unless otherwise mentioned, we have not
verified the original documents or any amendments to the copies furnished to us. Any responsibility
for our misinterpretation of the legal documents, therefore, cannot be accepted.
We have relied to a considerable extent on information provided by you and have accepted advice
given to us on planning approvals or statutory notices, easements, tenure, lettings, site and floor
areas, and all other relevant matters. Dimensions, measurements and areas included in the valuation
report are based on actual measurement made.
No allowance has been made in our valuation for any charges, mortgages or amounts owing neither
on the properties nor for any expenses or taxation, which may be incurred in effecting a sale. It is
assumed that the properties shall be rendered free from encumbrances, restrictions and outgoings of
any onerous nature, which could affect its value.
30
We are not aware of the content of any environmental audit or other environmental investigation or
soil survey which may have been carried out on the properties, and which may draw attention to any
contamination or the possibility of any such contamination. In undertaking our work, we have been
instructed to assume that no contaminative or potentially contaminative uses have ever been carried
out in the properties. We have not carried out any investigation into past or present uses, either of
the properties or of any neighboring land, to establish whether there is any contamination or potential
for contamination to the subject properties from these uses or sites, and have therefore assumed that
none exists. However, should it be established subsequently that contamination, seepage or pollution
exists at the properties or on any neighboring land, or that the premises have been or are being put
to a contaminative use, this might reduce the values now reported.
We have had no reason to doubt the authenticity and accuracy of the information provided to us. We
have also sought and received confirmation that no material factors have been omitted from the
information supplied. We consider that we have been provided with sufficient information to reach
an informed view, and have had no reason to suspect that any material information has been
withheld.
Finally and in accordance with our standard practice, this report is for the use only of the named client
and no responsibility is accepted from any third party for the whole or any part of its contents. Neither
the whole nor any part of this report nor any reference thereto may be included in any document,
circular or statement without our written approval of the form and context in which it will appear.
31
COPIES OF REAL PROPERTY
TAX DECLARATIONS
32
B3-001
33
B3-002
34
B3-003
35
B3-004
36
B3-005
37
B2-006
38
B2-007
39
B2-008
40
B2-009
41
B2-021
42
B2-022
43
B2-023
44
45
PROJECT REFERENCE ALIGNMENT
46
47
Attachment 1: Alignment Bridge 2.dwg
48
Attachment 2: Plan Bridge 3
49
50
51
52
REPLACEMENT COST STUDY OF AFFECTED
STRUCTURES
BRIDGE 3
Barangays Nangka and Concepcion Uno, Marikina City
Prepared for: DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

South Korea
Replacement Cost Study of Affected Structures of the Metro Manila Bridges Project – Bridge 3:
Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge, Marikina City
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

30 April 2021
DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

South Korea
SUBJECT : Replacement Cost Study of Structures affected by the Metro Manila Bridges
Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge Right-of-
Way
Sir:
Pursuant to your instruction for the replacement cost study of structures to be affected by the
proposed construction of the Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–
Matandang Balara Bridge, the Property, we have made an investigation – physical inspection1 and
valuation study of identified Property in Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana2 in Marikina
City and herewith submits our report.
The investigation and analysis was made for the purpose of expressing an opinion as of March 22,
2021 of the Replacement Cost, New of the identified Property. We understand that this opinion of
value is to provide a basis to what amount will be realized by the owner to receive in the event he/she
decided to offer the Property for sale in the market, as if new.
As required by the Terms of Reference and in compliance with the provisions of RA 10752, The Right
of Way Act, and its implementing rules and regulations, market values of structures will be determined
through Cost Approach and to use the Replacement Cost Method. “In the Cost Approach, a property
is valued based on a comparison with the cost to build a new or a substitute property” (The Appraisal
of Real Estate, Third Canadian Edition). In the International Valuation Standards 2017 (IVS 2017), “the
cost approach provides an indication of value using the economic principle that a buyer will pay no
more for an asset than the cost to obtain an asset of equal utility XXX.” The international standard
requires that all cost that will be incurred should be considered. Thus, the following costs are included
in this exercise:

overheads, taxes, finance costs, profit margin or entrepreneurial profit to the creator of the
asset.
Replacement Cost, is a method of Cost Approach that “indicates value by calculating the cost of similar
asset offering equivalent utility. (IVSC 2017). This is defined In the Implementing Rules and Regulation
of RA 10752 as:
1
Physical inspection is limited only to structures whose owners allowed the subcontractor’s team to conduct
assessment of the identifies structures. However, structures, like perimeter fence, that can be accessed and
assessed without needing entry into the compounds of the affected owners, were also measured.
2
No structure is affected in Barangay Tumana.
Ref: FIVE_2021_003B_MMBP_Bridge 3
“xxx the Replacement Cost of a structure or improvement affected by the ROW shall
be based on the current market prices of materials, equipment's, labour, contractors
profit and overhead, and all other attendant costs associated with the acquisition and
installation of a similar asset in place of the affected asset.
If the affected structure has been damaged, then the Replacement Cost should be
based on the pre-damaged condition of that structure, The Replacement Cost of the
structure may be vary from the market value of the existing structure since the
structure that would actually replace it may have a different cost at current market
prices. The replacement structure has to perform the same functions and meet the
performance specifications as the original structure.”
In the determination of the Replacement Cost of affected structures by the project, a survey of prices
of construction materials, labor and profit of contractors (in percentage) was conducted within the
immediate vicinity or where property owners purchased their materials. Basic plans of the structures
are prepared and served as reference for the bill of material (BOM) of construction materials and
finishes.
Our report consists of:
 This letter with Appraiser Certificate

 A narrative report that includes:
o Basic Plans of each affected structures
o A price list of construction materials as surveyed from hardware
stores around the area.
o Bill of Materials of each affected structures
 Notes on the Detailed Measurement Surveys
 Transmittal e-mail of the MM3PB alignments to Datum One Surveys,
subcontractor for parcellary surveys.
 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
We HEREBY CERTIFY that to the best of our knowledge and belief, the statement of fact, upon which
the analyses, opinions, and conclusions expressed in this report are based, are true and correct; that
this report sets forth the limiting conditions affecting the analyses, opinions and conclusions it
contains; that this report has been made in accordance with generally accepted valuation principles
and procedures and in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Ethics applying to the realty
services in the Philippines; and that we have no present nor contemplated future interest in the
property, nor is the appraisal fee contingent upon the final estimate of value. It is further certified that
appraisal of the property was done under the supervision of the undersigned.
Respectfully yours,
JIMMY T. RAZON
Licensed Appraiser
PRC No. 6448
Licensed Geodetic Engineer
PRC No. 5381
NARRATIVE REPORT
Summary of Pertinent Facts and Conclusion
Property Appraised : Buildings and Other Land Improvements
Property Location : Barangays Nangka and Concepcion Uno, Marikina City
Property Rights Appraised: Fee Simple
Appraisal Date : March 22, 2021
Appraisal Purpose : To express an opinion of the Market Value, Replacement

Cost, New (RCN), of the property affected by the project
right-of-way of the Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) –
Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge as
reference for compensation.
Market Value : PESOS: TWENTY TWO MILLION THIRTY SEVEN THOUSAND

FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY NINE and 66/100 (PhP 22,037,569.66)
Objectives
To provide the client a reliable estimate of the market value of structures, the property, affected by
the project right-of-way of the Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–
Matandang Balara Bridge in Barangays Nangka and Concepcion Uno, Marikina City. This appraisal was
undertaken to express an opinion of the Replacement Cost New of the fee simple estate of the said
property as of March 22, 2021, as if they were available in the open market.
Market Value is defined as “the sum of money which a person is desirous but not to compelled to buy
and an owner willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price be given and received
therefore.”
1. buyer and seller are typically motivated;

2. both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best
interest;
3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the market;
4. payment is made in terms of cash in Philippine Pesos or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected special or
creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
The Property was valued as if offered in the open market for a reasonable time in which to find a
buyer. It is assumed that the Property is newly constructed, ready for use or operation, not exposed
to economic or physical obsolescence, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances.
Fee Simple Estate as used herein is defined as an absolute ownership unencumbered by any other
interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation,
eminent domain, police power, and escheat.
Property Description
The Property are located at two barangays in Marikina City, namely: Nangka and Concepcion Uno.
I. BARANGAY NANGKA
A. LOCATION MAP OF AFFECTED STRUCTURES IN BARANGAY NANGKA
B. STRUCTURE DETAILS, BASIC PLANS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
II. BARANGAY CONCEPCION UNO
A. LOCATION MAP OF AFFECTED STRUCTURES IN BARANGAY CONCEPCION UNO
B. STRUCTURE DETAILS, BASIC PLANS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
In any determination of value, data are sought in the local market on such factors as sales and offerings
of similar properties, current prices for construction materials and labor, rentals of similar properties
and their operating expenses, and current rates of return on investments and properties. From these
data, values may be developed for the property.
Three generally acceptable approaches may be used in the development of an opinion of value for a
property: the cost approach, the sales comparison or market data approach, and the income
capitalization approach. Briefly, the cost approach considers the cost to reproduce or replace the
property appraised with new assets; from this amount an allowance is deducted for depreciation
arising from physical deterioration or obsolescence, whether from functional or external causes. The
sales comparison approach considers prices recently paid for similar items of property with
adjustments made to the indicated market prices to reflect the condition and utility of the appraised
property relative to market comparatives. In the income capitalization approach, and estimate is made
of the prospective economic benefits of ownership into the future and these benefits are capitalized
into an indication of value.
Cost Approach
There are two cost bases for cost approach: reproduction and replacement cost. In the reproduction
cost it requires an exact replica of the property appraised. On the other hand, the replacement cost
would be of a substitute property of similar size and utility as that of the property appraised. In
international valuation standards, the term modern equivalent asset is used to refer to an asset
providing similar function and equivalent utility to the property appraised and constructed using
current materials and methods.
In estimating cost to build or construct the property being valued, RA 10752, The Right of Way Act,
dictates the use of replacement cost. This can be determined by the Government Financial Institution
or an Independent Property Appraiser applying valuation standards adopted by the Professional
Regulatory Bpard of Real Estate Service under the Professional Regulation Commission. However, in
the implementing rules and regulations of RA 10752, if the replacement cost is to be determined by
project implementing agency, guidelines derived from DPWH standards for estimating civil works has
to be followed. Furthermore, the estimated direct cost and estimated indirect cost are to be
considered the computation of the replacement cost.
In arriving at a reasonable valuation of these particular undertaking, the sales comparison or market
data approach, and cost approach are used.
Market Survey
The following tables are survey of construction material cost in and around Marikina City:
To obtain the Replacement Cost New, of the affected structures properties, we used the quantity
survey method and prepared bill of quantities. Following the guidelines set forth in the IRR of RA
10752, the costs below are the components in the computation.

overheads, taxes, finance costs, profit margin or entrepreneurial profit to the creator of the
asset.
The following pages are the bill of quantities used to estimate the Replacement Cost New of each
property.
1. BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR STRUCTURES AFFECTED IN BARANGAY NANGKA
2. BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR STRUCTURES AFFECTED IN BARANGAY CONCEPCION UNO
After an analysis of the foregoing, the Replacement Cost New of the properties as of March 22, 2021
is estimated at total value of PESOS: TWENTY TWO MILLION THIRTY SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE
HUNDRED SIXTY NINE and 66/100 (PhP 22,037,569.66) and summarized as follows:
NOTES ON DETAILED MEASUREMENT SURVEYS
Notes on Detailed Measurement Surveys

Definition
In the TOR there is no specific definition of the Detailed Measurement Surveys (DMS). For this
assignment, a defined objective of the DMS in Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) preparation is
formulated and stated:
To determine the type of assets or interest (land, structures and crops) affected by the
project and to provide thereon a replacement asset (equal value asset or interest) by
doing a measurement of the asset (parcellary survey for land, as-built surveys for both
land and structure, and tree inventory) and the affected portion; and identifying the
components that asset (particular on structures and other land improvements
excluding crops) is made of, i.e. construction materials for structures.
As-Built Surveys
Based from the TOR and as noted above, the as-built survey “will determine exact coordinates,
measurement and affected area of all structures along the Project ROW”. Identifying use, size or
dimension, and materials used for the construction of structure will be obtained from this survey.
These information will be the basis for basic plans and computation of cost, bill of quantities, if a
similar or equal structure is constructed.
Measurement Standard
To have a uniform standard of measurement of the affected structures and applicable for the
preparation of Bill of Quantities, the Sub-Consultant adopted International Property Measurement
Standards’ IPMS 1 (External) which is defined as “the sum of the areas of each floor level of a Building
measured to the perimeter of the external construction features”. This standard “can be used for
planning purposes or the summary costing of development proposals”. In cases, where measurement
is conducted inside the building, the standard requires an estimation of the exterior wall thickness
(about 15 cm for unplastered concrete hollow blocks) and wall partitions (about 10 cm. for
unplastered concrete hollow blocks). www.ipmsc.org
Assessment of Project Impact on Affected Structures: Severe vs Marginal
In deciding the project impact on an affected structure, the World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.12
established guidelines when acquiring lands/properties for the purpose of implementing a
government project reinforced with the existing land acquisition legislation. The Loss of Property, Loss
of Dwelling, and Loss of Income are the three core principles in determining the project impact on
Affected Structures.
In accordance with the World Bank OP 4.12 together with Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA) Guidelines 2010, The Right-of-Way Act (RA No. 10752), International Building Code (IBC) 2003,
The 1977 National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP) (PD No. 1096), and National Structural
Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2015, the Assessor considers the following:
1. Percentage of Affected Land and Economic Viability of the Remaining Land. In determining the
severity of impact in terms of the percentage of affected land (and structure), two policies were
taken into consideration namely the Asian Development Bank where it is stated in their Operations
Manual that a loss of ten percent (10%) of a land’s productive assets (income generating) is
determined to be severe whereas the World Bank OP 4.12 has set twenty percent (20%) of an
affected land’s productive assets as an indicator of the severity of land acquisition together with
assessing the remaining land’s economic viability. However, in accordance to the adopted policy of
the JICA Guidelines 2010, the World Bank OP 4.12 standard was considered in the assessment.
As established by the World Bank OP 4.12, a project-affected land (and structure) is assessed based
on the percentage of land (and structure) affected and the economic viability of the remaining land
(and structure). The cutting line of the project determines the affected portion of the land (and
structure) whereas the size of the remaining portion of the land (and structure) determines the
economic viability for which the remaining land holds. Economic viability is regarded as the
capability of the remaining land (and structure) to sustain or develop its current operation which
is determined through socioeconomic factors and research. The following table is used as a guide
to evaluate the project impact on the affected lands (and structures):
I. PRIVATE LAND and ALIENABLE & DISPOSABLE (A&D) PUBLIC LAND

More than 20% of the total landholding is lost or
NEGOTIATED SALE where less than 20% is lost but the remaining SEVERE
or landholding becomes economically nonviable.
EXPROPRIATION Less than 20% of the total landholding, and the
MARGINAL
remaining land is still economically viable
Loss of subterranean beneficial use but surface
SUBTERRANEAN SEVERE/
land remains economically viable. (Subject to
LAND MARGINAL
Easement Agreement)
II. NATIONAL and LOCAL GOVERNMENT OWNED LAND
Only the affected land will be considered whether or not the total
SEVERE/
landholding lost is more than 20%. In addition, the affected land is not
MARGINAL
included in the total affected area of the project.
III. STRUCTURES and IMPROVEMENTS
More than 20% of the structure is affected or where less than 20% is
affected but the remaining portion can no longer serve its function or SEVERE
if structural integrity is impaired.
Less than 20% of the structure is affected or where the remaining
MARGINAL
portion can still serve its function or if structural integrity is intact.
Source: World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Sourcebook (2004) as cited by JICA Guidelines (2010)
Moreover, in assessing the viability of a remaining land (and structure) for human habitation, the
following table in accordance with Section 806 of the NBCP is used as a guide:
Minimum Horizontal Minimum

Parts of Structure
Dimension (m) Area (m2)
Room/s 2.0 6.0
Kitchen 1.5 3.0
Bath and Toilet 0.9 1.2
2. Location of access (stairs/elevator) to upper level/s for structures having 2 or more storeys,
basement and/or cellar. Both stairs and elevators provide means of access from a storey to
another inside a building. They are essential especially in times of hazards and calamities for
immediate evacuation. As stated in the NBCP, stairs should have a minimum design of 75cm in
clear width, and 20cm for both rise and run. Whereas for elevators as specified in NSCP 2015, it
should be designed to carry a load increased by 100% in order to account for the varying loads
specially impact loads it may be subjected to. Moreover, in consideration of persons with disability
(PWD) and in compliance to the Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 or the Accessibility Law of 1983,
structures having multiple storeys must provide elevators that are located not more than 30 meters
from the entrance and must have a minimum dimension of 1.10 by 1.4 meters, and stairs that are
installed with handrails. The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) has provided
guidelines for the installation of elevators for buildings with multiple storeys which is shown in the
table as follows:
Type of Building No. of Storeys Elevator Requirement

Low-Rise 1-5 with or without
Medium-Rise 6-15 at least one
High-Rise 16 and higher multiple
Source: Public Buildings and Other Related Structures Volume 6, DPWH (2015)
3. Location of entrance and/or exit of the structure and its road right-of-way (ROW). According to
Section 214 of the NBCP, a building or structure is deemed as dangerous or structurally unsafe
when not provided with safe modes for egress. This is also to comply with the requirements stated
in the Revised Fire Code of the Philippines of 2008 or R.A. No. 9514 where a building should provide
exit facilities that are directly connected to a public way or safe dispersal area. In relation to this, it
is stated in Section 704 of the NBCP that “No building shall be constructed unless it adjoins or has
direct access to a public space, yard or street on at least one of its sides.” With regards to the
minimum number of exits required for a structure, residential houses occupied by five (5) or less
persons or one-storey buildings are allowed to have one accessible exit given that it does not have
more than one level below the first storey while buildings with multiple storeys should be provided
with sufficient number of exits depending on the occupant load as required by the IBC 2003 and
NBCP which is tabulated as follows:
Occupant Load Minimum Number of Exits

1-500 2
501-1,000 3
More than 1,000 4
The occupant load can be determined through dividing the floor area by the unit area allowed per
occupant (Table 1004.1.2 of the IBC 2003). The occupant load for a certain floor is computed by
getting fifty percent (50%) of the first adjacent storey above (and below, if the storey below exits
through the level being considered) and twenty-five percent (25%) of the storey beyond the first
adjacent storey above (NBCP, 1977). Therefore, structures having their one and only entrance/exit
affected by the project ROW are considered severely affected. Correspondingly, it is considered
severely affected when the road right-of-way of a structure is affected.
4. Structure Foundation. As defined by the NBCP, foundation is the lowest part of the structure which
functions to transfer the loads from the structure to the soil. Foundations are commonly built using
masonry, concrete or treated wood. They must be economically designed yet adequate to support
the structure and its loads under any condition, and must be designed appropriate to the type and
condition of the soil where the structure resides as inadequacy in design can cause structural failure
of the building. Minimum requirements for foundations were prescribed by the NSCP (2015) and
is given in the following table:
Depth Below
Number of Floors Thickness of Width of Thickness of
Undisturbed
Supported by the Foundation Wall (mm) Footing Footing
Ground
Foundations (made of concrete or masonry) (mm) (mm)
Surface (mm)
1 150 300 150 300
2 200 375 175 450
3 250 450 200 600
5. Structural Frame. The frame of a structure constitutes the columns, girder, beams, trusses and
spandrels where they are in contact to all other components of the structure that functions to keep
the structure safe and stable (NBCP, 1977). Structural failure happens when a structural element
can no longer support the loads it is carrying where these loads include the permanent and non-
permanent loads. In designing a structural component, it is ensured that a professional has
considered factors of safety and strength designs limits and standards. In assessing an affected
structural frame, it is already subjected to reconstruction or retrofitting in order to support the
remaining existing structure. Moreover, as stated in the IBC 2003, it must be noted that “Additions
or alterations to an existing structure shall not increase the force in any structural element by more
than five percent (5%), unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the
code for new structures, nor shall the strength of any structural element be decreased to less than
that required by this code for new structures.” The severity of impact depends whether the
structure is fit for reconstruction or retrofitting in consideration of the economic life and current
condition of all other elements of the structure.
Setback Requirement
Setbacks serve the purpose of providing adequate ventilation and lighting to a building and in general
guidelines, there should be setback for every side of the lot. In a low-density residential subdivision
project, the developer implements its setback requirements and are indicated in its master deed of
restrictions.
There are instances in the building code where setbacks on the sides and rear will be exempted
especially in built-up areas. If the building fronts a public road, the minimum setback is imposed for
the front side.
E-MAIL TRANSMITTAL OF THE REFERENCE ALIGNMENT
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

This report is intended to comply with the purpose and reporting requirements of RA 10752, Right of
Way Acquisition Act and further adopt the International Valuation Standards (IVS) as set forth by the
International Valuation Standard Committee (IVSC). As such, it presents comprehensive discussion of
data, reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the opinion of value.
Supporting documentation concerning these matters has been retained in our work papers. The depth
of discussion contained in this report is specific to your needs as the client and for the intended use
stated below.
The term fee simple estate is defined as absolute ownership unencumbered by other interest or
estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent
domain, police power, and escheat.
Our valuation has been made on the assumption that the owner sells the fee simple interest on the
open market as ‘it is’ and without the benefit of deferred-terms contract, leaseback, joint venture,
management agreements or any similar arrangements, which would serve to affect the value of such
property interest.
We have assumed that the appraised property is freely disposable and transferable for its existing or
alternative uses in the open market to both local and overseas purchasers without payment of any
premium to the government.
It is assumed that all applicable zoning and land use regulations and restrictions have been complied
with unless nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. Further,
it is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries of each
property described and that no encroachment or trespass exists unless noted in the report.
No structural surveys for the building and other land improvements have been made by a professional
structural inspector other than the physical inspection of the appraisers, therefore, this study is unable
to report whether the property is free from rot, infestation or other defects other than those that can
be visibly seen. No tests were carried out on any of the services. We have assumed that the said
improved property comply with all statutory and local by-laws and regulations in respect of
construction and occupancy.
No investigation has been made of the legal title or any liabilities attached to the property appraised.
All legal documents disclosed are for reference only and no responsibility is assumed for any legal
matters concerning the legal title to the property interests. Unless otherwise mentioned, we have not
verified the original documents or any amendments to the copies furnished to us. Any responsibility
for our misinterpretation of the legal documents, therefore, cannot be accepted.
We have relied to a considerable extent on information provided by you and have accepted advice
given to us on planning approvals or statutory notices, easements, tenure, lettings, site and floor
areas, and all other relevant matters. Dimensions, measurements and areas included in the valuation
report are based on actual measurement made.
No allowance has been made in our valuation for any charges, mortgages or amounts owing neither
on the properties nor for any expenses or taxation, which may be incurred in effecting a sale. It is
assumed that the properties shall be rendered free from encumbrances, restrictions and outgoings of
any onerous nature, which could affect its value.
We are not aware of the content of any environmental audit or other environmental investigation or
soil survey which may have been carried out on the properties, and which may draw attention to any
contamination or the possibility of any such contamination. In undertaking our work, we have been
instructed to assume that no contaminative or potentially contaminative uses have ever been carried
out in the properties. We have not carried out any investigation into past or present uses, either of
the properties or of any neighboring land, to establish whether there is any contamination or potential
for contamination to the subject properties from these uses or sites, and have therefore assumed that
none exists. However, should it be established subsequently that contamination, seepage or pollution
exists at the properties or on any neighboring land, or that the premises have been or are being put
to a contaminative use, this might reduce the values now reported.
We have had no reason to doubt the authenticity and accuracy of the information provided to us. We
have also sought and received confirmation that no material factors have been omitted from the
information supplied. We consider that we have been provided with sufficient information to reach
an informed view, and have had no reason to suspect that any material information has been
withheld.
Finally and in accordance with our standard practice, this report is for the use only of the named client
and no responsibility is accepted from any third party for the whole or any part of its contents. Neither
the whole nor any part of this report nor any reference thereto may be included in any document,
circular or statement without our written approval of the form and context in which it will appear.
REPLACEMENT COST STUDY OF AFFECTED TREES
and CROPS
BRIDGE 3
Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge
Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana, Marikina City
Prepared for : DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

South Korea
Replacement Cost Study of Affected Trees and Crops of the Metro Manila Bridges Project – Bridge
3: Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge, Marikina City
Objectives
To provide the client a reliable estimates of the market value of the trees affected by the Metro Manila
Bridges Project (MMBP) – Bridge 3: Kabayani Street – Matandang Balara Bridge in its project right of
way in Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana in Marikina City. This appraisal was
undertaken to express an opinion of the Market Value of the crops as of February 28, 2021, as if it
were available in the open market.
Market Value is defined as “the sum of

money which a person is desirous but not
to compelled to buy and an owner willing
but not compelled to sell, would agree on
as a price be given and received
therefore.”
1. buyer and seller are typically

motivated;
2. both parties are well informed or
well advised, and acting in what they
consider their best interest;
3. a reasonable time is allowed for
exposure in the market;
4. payment is made in terms of cash in
Philippine Pesos or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal
consideration for the property sold
unaffected special or creative financing or
sales concessions granted by anyone
associated with the sale.
The trees were valued as if offered in the

open market for a reasonable time in
which to find a buyer.
Tree Inventory
All tree species in the project affected area were inventoried. Tree parameters such as diameter at
breast height (DBH), merchantable height (MH) and total height (TH) were measured. Volume
computation, tree location, tree category and stem quality were also obtained.
Measurement of Diameter at Breast Height (DBH)

The tree diameter at breast height or diameter above buttress (DBH/DAB) was measured and recorded
to the nearest centimeter with the use of a diameter tape. The diameter (DBH) of normal tree (without
buttress) was measured at 1.3 meter above the ground considering the sloping ground where it is to
be measured from the upper portion of the slope. For a tree that is naturally swell-butted/buttressed,
the diameter (DAB) was measured 30 cm above the highest buttress or flange. Occasionally, trees that
1
Ref: FIVE_2021_003C_MMBP_Bridge 3
are to be measured has fork. The DBH of the forked tree that is less than 1.3 meter from the ground
is measured separately at each stem 30 cm above the fork. However, the DBH of a tree having fork
higher than 1.3 meter from the ground was measured like a normal tree. For a tree with abnormalities,
the DBH is measured just above the abnormalities at a point where it forms a normal stem.
Measurement of Merchantable Height

The merchantable height (MH) of the tree was measured from the stump height, 0.50m from the
ground, to the first main branch or fork. However, it could be extended for those trees with a clear
length of at least 2 meters from the first main branch up to the succeeding branch of the trees being
measured. The MH of the tree is measured to the nearest meter.
Tree Volume Computation

The volume of each tree was computed using regional standard formula for Dipterocarp species and
Non-Dipterocarp species. The regional formulas for volume computation are presented as follows:
For Dipterocarp species
For Non-Dipterocarp species
Photo documentation
Photo documentation of the inventory are provided using a device with an SW Map application showing
the location of trees and photos of trees painted with red paint and with the use of a whiteboard for
the clear representation of the tree identification numbers.
Tree Category and Stem Quality

Trees inventoried were categorized and stem quality were also assessed. Planted trees were
categorized as Planted while naturally grown trees were categorized as Natural. For the stem quality,
trees with straight and cylindrical stem without visible defects or damage were classified as Code 1 while
trees with little defects or damage and with several defects or damage were classified as Code 2 and 3,
respectively.
2
TREE INVENTORY FORM
Name of Project: Metro Manila Bridges Project (MMBP) - Bridge 3 Area Inventoried (ha):
Location of the Project: Brgy. Nangka, Marikina City Date of Inventory: March 24, 2021
DBH/DAB 3) Tree Location (GPS reading) Tree Category

Tree No. Species MH (m) TH (m) Volume (m Stem Quality
(cm) Northing Easting Planted/Natural
001 Mangga (Mango) 32 7 9 0.373 14.66614 121.1012 Planted Code 1
002 Mangga (Mango) 21 5 6.5 0.115 14.66622 121.1012 Planted Code 1
003 Duhat 27 5 6.5 0.190 14.66629 121.1012 Planted Code 1
004 Narra 6 2 2.5 0.004 14.66634 121.1012 Planted Code 1
005 Narra 40 10 13 0.833 14.66635 121.1012 Planted Code 1
006 Nangka (Jackfruit) 14 2 3 0.020 14.66637 121.1012 Planted Code 1
007 Kamansi 12 3 4 0.022 14.66618 121.1012 Natural Code 1
008 Santol 15 7 9 0.082 14.66612 121.1012 Planted Code 1
010 Balete 8 2 3 0.007 14.66595 121.1012 Natural Code 1
011 Sampaloc (Tamarind) 12 3 3.5 0.022 14.66594 121.1012 Planted Code 1
012 Avocado 4 2 2.5 0.002 14.66596 121.1012 Planted Code 1
013 Atis 2 0 1.5 0.000 14.66595 121.1012 Planted Code 1
014 Talisai (Umbrella tree) 48 10 12 1.199 14.66587 121.1012 Natural Code 1
015 Acacia 5 2.5 4 0.003 14.66577 121.1012 Planted Code 1
016 Kakauate 7.5 2 3 0.006 14.66578 121.1012 Natural Code 3
017 Kakauate 5 3 4 0.004 14.66584 121.1012 Natural Code 1
018 Acacia 13 4 6 0.035 14.66588 121.1012 Planted Code 1
019 Acacia 13 3 4 0.026 14.66594 121.1012 Planted Code 1
020 Fire tree 13 5 7 0.044 14.66619 121.1012 Planted Code 1
025 Saging (Banana) 35 2 3 0.127 14.66547 121.1012 Planted Code 1
031 Saging (Banana) 17 2 2.5 0.030 14.66554 121.1012 Planted Code 1
033 Ipil-ipil 7 2.5 4 0.006 14.6654 121.1012 Natural Code 1
040 (035) Saging (Banana) 13 2 3 0.018 14.66537 121.098 Natural Code 1
041 (036) Saging (Banana) 22 3 4 0.076 14.66539 121.0979 Natural Code 1
042 (037) Gmelina 16 4 6 0.053 14.6654 121.0979 Natural Code 1
043 (038) Mangga (Mango) 50 5 7 0.651 14.6654 121.0979 Natural Code 1
044 (039) Himbabao 10 2 4 0.010 14.66545 121.0979 Natural Code 1
STEM QUALITY:
Code 1: Straight, cylindrical tree without visible defects or damage Code 2: Tree with little defects or damage Code 3: Tree with several defects or damage
Inventoried by:
Forester Cristine Apple B. Sigua Forester Ruthie A. Mendoza
TREE INVENTORY FORM
Location of the Project: Brgy. Concepcion Uno, Marikina City Date of Inventory: March 24, 2021

001 Niog (Coconut) 25 13 16 0.423 14.66581 121.1017 Planted Code 1
003 Nangka (Jackfruit) 5 3 6 0.004 14.66574 121.1018 Planted Code 1
006 Caimito (Star apple) 34 10 13 0.602 14.66578 121.1018 Planted Code 1
007 Sampaloc (Tamarind) 48 10 12 1.199 14.66578 121.1018 Planted Code 1
009 Santol 35 6 8 0.382 14.66579 121.1019 Planted Code 1
010 Tubang bakod 18 3 5 0.051 14.66574 121.1019 Natural Code 1
STEM QUALITY:
Inventoried by:
TREE INVENTORY FORM
Location of the Project: Brgy. Tumana, Marikina City Date of Inventory: March 27, 2021

001 Saging (Banana) 12 2 3 0.015 14.666 121.0954 Natural Code 1
003 Avocado 34 6 8 0.361 14.66606 121.0953 Natural Code 1
004 Tibig 13 3 4.5 0.026 14.66603 121.0953 Natural Code 1
005 Tibig 14 3 4 0.031 14.66609 121.0954 Natural Code 1
006 African tulip 4 2 2.5 0.002 14.66608 121.0954 Natural Code 1
009 Gmelina 35 6 7.5 0.382 14.66611 121.0955 Natural Code 1
010 Santol 35 3 5 0.191 14.66612 121.0955 Natural Code 1
011 Kawayan (Bamboo) 200 2 3 4.163 14.66612 121.0954 Natural Code 1
012 Mangga (Mango) 50 7 9 0.911 14.66603 121.0956 Natural Code 1
013 Narra 25 5 7 0.163 14.66602 121.0956 Natural Code 1
014 African tulip 40 6 8 0.500 14.66611 121.0956 Natural Code 1
015 Kamias 15 2 4 0.023 14.6661 121.0956 Natural Code 1
016 Gmelina 40 8 10 0.666 14.666 121.0956 Natural Code 1
017 Saging (Banana) 10 1.5 3 0.008 14.66601 121.0956 Natural Code 1
019 Gmelina 42 6 7.5 0.551 14.66604 121.0957 Natural Code 1
020 Sampaloc (Tamarind) 130 10 13 8.795 14.66595 121.0957 Natural Code 1
025 Sampaloc (Tamarind) 34 3.5 5 0.211 14.66572 121.0963 Natural Code 1
027 Duhat 20 2.6 4 0.054 14.66572 121.0964 Natural Code 1

032 Rain tree 55 7 10 1.102 14.66536 121.0977 Natural Code 1
STEM QUALITY:
Inventoried by:
Republic Act 10752 and its implementing rules and regulations guided government implementing
agencies on how to determine market values for land and structures. Land, for example, will be at
current market value observing certain parameters enumerated in the implementing rules. For
structures, it specifically indicates to use Replacement Cost and shall be based on current market prices
of materials, equipment, etc. However, for trees (a biological asset), RA 10752 is quiet on how to
determine the current market value.
There are three acceptable approaches that can
be used in the development of an opinion of value
for the trees: the cost approach, the sales
comparison or market data approach and the
income capitalization approach. Briefly, the cost
approach is to consider the cost to reproduce or
replace the property appraised with new assets.
Moreover, the sales comparison approach
considers prices recently paid for similar items of
property with adjustments made to the indicated
market prices to reflect the condition and utility
of the appraised property relative to market
comparatives. Lastly, in the income approach, an
estimate is made of the prospective economic
benefits of ownership into the future and these
benefits are capitalized into an indication of
value.
Valuation of Trees
In the valuation of trees, the following methods are the guides that we consider to derive a value.
In Market approach
This will be applied to trees that are categorized as premium, furniture/construction and lesser-used/fuelwood.
Acceptable standard of computing tree volume will be applied and referencing it to market prices of logs (per
cubic meter) or lumber (per board foot) from the Department of Natural Resources – Forest Management
Bureau (DENR-FMB) to obtain the value of timber. The data gathered from the tree inventory, like the diameter
at breast height (DBH) 1, can be used to estimate the volume. Please note that there could be no value for some
premium species as there are restrictions in their lumber utilization.
Building (or improvement) residual technique using market approach can also be explored to calculate
the value for trees. However, due to limited sales comparison and the absence of a farm or orchard,
this technique may not be used.
1
Also used to compute for the trunk area in the trunk formula or cross-sectional area in basic formula.
8
In Income Approach (Discounted Cash Flow Analysis)
In the valuation of trees, Discounted Cash Flow, a branch of income approach, is used to estimate the
value of fruit trees. In here, age or maturity of trees, historical cost of agricultural inputs (like fertilizer,
pesticide), land rents, labor cost, average production per year of a certain tree species, historical prices
of commodities, and maintenance cost over the harvesting period are needed to approximate a value
for a tree. These data can be acquired from the DA, DENR, or reports coming from the Philippine
Statistics Authority.
In Cost Approach
The principle of cost approach is to sum up all incurred cost in producing an asset. In applying this
approach to trees, “trunk formula” (or a simplified “basic formula”), replacement cost, cost of repair
and cost of cure are methods to choose. Data required to come-up with a value are: diameter at breast
height, species classification, species condition, species location, cost of the largest transplantable tree2
(not particular if this is of same species), and the cost of the replacement tree including its installation.
Cost of treating and other activities necessary to return a tree to its previous condition are also
considered (Fountain et. al, 2016).
2
Cost of the largest transplantable tree may be available from plant nurseries.
9
DETAILED DESIGN STUDY OF METRO MANILA BRIDGES PROJECT

BRIDGE 3: KABAYANI STREET – MATANDANG BALARA BRIDGE
DETAILED MEASUREMENT SURVEYS and REPLACEMENT COST STUDY
TREE INVENTORY
BRGY. NANGKA, MARIKINA CITY
Stage of Maturity
Common Name of Tree / Unit Cost Replacement
Lot_ID Municipality/City Barangay Registed Owner Tree ID Scientific Name Quantity Remarks
Crop Mature Sapling Seedling (PhP)3 Cost (PhP)4
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 001 Mangga (Mango) Mangifera indica 1 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 003 Duhat Syzygium cumini 1 1 14,875.00 14,875.00
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 004 Narra Pterocarpus indicus 1 1
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 005 Narra Pterocarpus indicus 1 1
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 006 Nangka (Jackfruit) Artocarpus heterophyllus 1 1 7,000.00 7,000.00
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 007 Kamansi Artocarpus altilis 1 1
B3-008 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 008 Santol Sandoricum koetjape 1 1 6,000.00 6,000.00
B3-007 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 010 Balete Ficus benjamina 1 1
B3-009 Marikina Nangka NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 011 Sampaloc (Tamarind) Tamarindus indica 1 1 10,000.00 10,000.00
B3-009 Marikina Nangka NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 012 Avocado Persea americana 1 1 3,600.00 3,600.00
B3-009 Marikina Nangka NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 013 Atis Annona squamosa 1 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
B3-009 Marikina Nangka NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY 014 Talisai (Umbrella tree) Terminalia catappa 1 1
B3-006 Marikina Nangka THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 015 Rain tree Albizia saman 1 1
B3-006 Marikina Nangka THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 016 Kakauate Gliricidia sepium 1 1
B3-006 Marikina Nangka THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 017 Kakauate Gliricidia sepium 1 1
B3-007 Marikina Nangka T.Q.G. ENTERPRISES, INC. 020 Fire tree Delonix regia 1 1
B3-003 Marikina Nangka TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 025 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 12 1 500.00 6,000.00 Cluster
B3-004 Marikina Nangka THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 026 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 6 1 500.00 3,000.00 Cluster
B3-004 Marikina Nangka THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF MARIKINA 028 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 1 1 500.00 500.00
Stage of Maturity
B3-003 Marikina Nangka TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 033 Ipil-ipil Leucaena leucocephala 1 1
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 040 (035) Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 8 1 500.00 4,000.00 Cluster
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 041 (036) Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 6 1 500.00 3,000.00 Cluster
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 042 (037) Gmelina Gmelina arborea 1 1 159.87 159.87
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 043 (038) Mangga (Mango) Mangifera indica 1 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 044 (039) Himbabao Broussonetia luzonica 1 1
TOTAL 319,134.87

TREE INVENTORY
BRGY. CONCEPCION UNO, MARIKINA CITY
Stage of Maturity
Lot_ID Municipality/City Barangay Registered Owner Tree ID Scientific Name Quantity Remarks
B3-021 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 001 Niog (Coconut) Cocos nucifera 1 1 6,400.00 6,400.00
B3-021 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 003 Nangka (Jackfruit) Artocarpus heterophyllus 1 1 7,000.00 7,000.00
B3-021 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 006 Caimito (Star apple) Chrysophyllum cainito 1 1 10,000.00 10,000.00
B3-022 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 007 Sampaloc (Tamarind) Tamarindus indica 1 1 24,000.00 24,000.00
B3-023 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 008 Mangga (Mango) Mangifera indica 1 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
B3-023 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 009 Santol Sandoricum koetjape 1 1 6,000.00 6,000.00
B3-023 Marikina Concepcion Uno TQG ENTERPRISES INC. 010 Tubang bakod Jathropa curcas 1 1
TOTAL 122,600.00
TREE INVENTORY
BRGY. TUMANA, MARIKINA CITY
Stage of Maturity
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 001 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 5 1 500.00 2,500.00 Cluster
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 003 Avocado Persea americana 1 1 8,000.00 8,000.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 004 Tibig Ficus nota 1 1
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 006 African tulip Spathodea campanulata 1 1
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 009 Gmelina Gmelina arborea 1 1 1,147.48 1,147.48
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 010 Santol Sandoricum koetjape 1 1 6,000.00 6,000.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 011 Kawayan (Bamboo) Bambusa vulgaris 50 1 5,000.00 5,000.00 Cluster
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 012 Mangga (Mango) Mangifera indica 1 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 013 Narra Pterocarpus indicus 1 1
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 014 African tulip Spathodea campanulata 1 1
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 015 Kamias Averrhoa bilimbi 1 1 4,524.00 4,524.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 017 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 1 1 500.00 500.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 020 Sampaloc (Tamarind) Tamarindus indica 1 1 24,000.00 24,000.00
Stage of Maturity
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 025 Sampaloc (Tamarind) Tamarindus indica 1 1 24,000.00 24,000.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 027 Duhat Syzygium cumini 1 1 14875 14875
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 029 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 1 1 500.00 500.00
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 031 Gmelina Gmelina arborea 1 1 67.44 67.44
B3-001 Marikina Tumana STA. LUCIA LAND INC. 032 Rain tree Albizia saman 1 1
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 035 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 8 1 500.00 4,000.00 Cluster
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 036 Saging (Banana) Musa sapientum 6 1 500.00 3,000.00 Cluster
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 037 Gmelina Gmelina arborea 1 1 159.87 159.87
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 038 Mangga (Mango) Mangifera indica 1 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
B3-002 Marikina Nangka GOLDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 039 Himbabao Broussonetia luzonica 1 1
TOTAL 335,953.86
Reference Materials in the understanding and development of value formula for trees and crops
Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources and Research Development. Mango
Production Manual. Los Banos, Laguna: PCARRD, 2006. 127 p. – (PCARRD Book Series No. 167-C/ 2006.
Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources and Research Development. The
Philippines Recommends for Citrus 1980. Los Banos, Laguna: PCARRD, 1980.
Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources and Research Development. Banana
Production Manual. Los Banos, Laguna: PCARRD-DOST, 2006. 129 p. – (PCARRD Book Series No. 175-
A/ 2006).
Calma-Abarquez, Florencia C. Plant Industry Production Guide No. 56: Guyabano. Manila: Bureau of
Plant Industry. 1986.
Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unit III, Revised Valuation of Agricultural Crops and Trees as
of August 2008 (no update as of 2019)
https://psa.gov.ph/content/updates-fertilizer-prices-0
Forest Management Bureau, Department of Environment and Natural Resources. FMB Technical
Bulletin No. 3: Measurement Standard and Procedure in the Conduct of Inventory for Standing Trees
(Timber), Quezon City, 2014.
http://forestry.denr.gov.ph/index.php/statistics/designated-statistics. Average FOB Market Price Log:

1st Quarter 2020, Average Domestic Retail Price of Rough Lumber: 1st Quarter 2020, Average Domestic
Retail Price of Wood Panel Products: 1st Quarter 2020.
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/141aGKlIuhQjRgCWVSeq2bbN0I7SoHOAI/view)
http://forestry.denr.gov.ph/index.php/statistics/designated-statistics. Average FOB Market Price Log:

4th Quarter 2019, Average Domestic Retail Price of Rough Lumber: 4th Quarter 2019, Average Domestic
Retail Price of Wood Panel Products: 4th Quarter 2019.
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YiAbpdyQXORBm5dXXeSoR4DmnRZlC9pJ/view)
15
Volume 4
Documentation of Consultation
Meetings and Project Information
Brochure
Contents:
1. IEC with Local Government Units
2. 1st Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
3. Focus Group Discussion with Vulnerable Sector
4. Focus Group Discussion with Business Sector
5. 2nd Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
6. List of Invited APs
7. Public Information Brochure
Highlights of the Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Meetings
SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS
Detailed Engineering Design Study
Online and Onsite Detailed Engineering Design (DD) IEC

Executive Lounge, 15/F High Rise Building Quezon City Hall
Date: 11 January 2021 (Monday)
Time: 2:00 P.M.
Meeting ID: 847 6965 0339
Password: QuezonCity
Open Forum:
Presented in the matrices are the summary of issues, concerns, comments, and suggestions raised
during the Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) Meeting for the Resettlement Plan (RP)
of the Metro Manila Bridges Project. Responses to the queries are also included.
Summary of Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Suggestions Raised during the IEC, DD Stage.
• It was suggested to change the • Clarified that the there has been a change
alignment of the project. The in the alignment.
affected road has a limited space at • Mentioned that the alignment being
only 20m. In addition, it is in an discussed during the Feasibility Study (FS)
intersection and it will cross an open will not be used since the Detailed Design
space. (DD) was realigned to Kabayani St. –
• Raised that there were objections Katipunan Ave. Ext.
and resistance from Homeowners
Association (HOA).
• Suggested to revise the alignment
on the grounds of HOA resistance.
• It was asked if there is already a • Answered that such details are not yet
structural layout and footing of the available it will be included in the project’s
bridge. scope.
• Expresses support that the project may now process.
Highlights of the Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Meetings
SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS
Detailed Design Study
Open Forum:
during the Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) Meeting for the Right-of-Way
Acquisition Plan (DD RAP) of the Metro Manila Bridges Project. Responses to the queries are also
included.
Summary of Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Suggestions Raised during the IEC, DD Stage.
• Mentioned that there is a • The design elevation used for the Bridge 3 is the
proposed river dike project elevation of the flood control structure.
beneath the Bridge3 – • Clarified that the bridge has enough elevation
Marikina (Kabayani St.) - Vista to allow private vehicle to pass through beneath
Real (Katipunan Ave. Extension the structure.
). • Mentioned that the maximum height is 3m to
• Asked for the elevation of the allow private vehicle to pass through.
project to ensure vehicle can • Pointed that the width of the bridge is just
still pass through the river dike enough to accommodate two-lanes.
project in case it pushes • Disclosed that there are possible affected
through. structures in bridge 3 alignment.
• Pointed that the initial
elevation used for the river
dike project exceeds Tumana
Bridge.
• Raised that existing structures • Maintained that some structures might
must be avoided. inevitably be affected by the project.
• Reiterated that the elevation will be maintained
to ensure there would not be an abrupt decline.
Such design must be maintained in
conformance to safety standards.
• Mentioned that the grade is maintained from
the highest elevation which makes the design
longer.
• Asked for the schedule of • Initial survey has been done to identify the
survey activities. center line, alignment, and elevation.
• Mentioned the affected structures will be
identified once the survey activities are
completed.
• Asked for clarification in Bridge • Mentioned that there has been a realignment
2 – JP Rizal St. (Homeowner’s for bridge 2.
Drive) – Lopen Jaena St.
alignment.
• Asked if alignment is possible • Clarified that the alignment being asked was
due to the narrow roads already changed to ensure there will be less
fronting the approach. APs. The latest alignment will have a longer
• Raised that the alignment will design, but it will not affect any subdivision in
also traverse an open space. Quezon City anymore.
• Asked if there is a structural • Answered that there is structural layout as it
layout of the bridge. will be part of the Detailed Design study that
will be undertaken.
Highlights of the Detailed Design Study 1st Stakeholder Consultation Meeting (SCM)
BRIDGE 3: KABAYANI ST. - MATANDANG BALARA BRIDGE
Detailed Engineering Design Study Stage
Online Detailed Engineering Design (DD) 1st SCM

Date: 5 February 2021 (Friday)
Time: 9:00 A.M.
Meeting ID: 881 4406 2225
Password: 293894
Onsite Venue: Nangka Highschool Covered Court, Brgy. Nangka
Open Forum:
during the Detailed Design (DD) Study 1st Stakeholder Consultation Meeting for the Right-of-Way
Acquisition Plan (RP) of Bridge 3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge. Responses to the queries
are also included.
Summary of Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Suggestions Raised during the DD 1st SCM of Bridge 3:
Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge for the Metro Manila Bridges Project, DD Stage
● Asked if her brother must still continue ● Answered that it will be better to settle
paying the remaining amount to the the remaining balance so that the land
National Housing Authority (NHA). There title may be transferred to her brother.
is still a few amount remaining to fully However, even if the property is under
pay the land lot. mortgage, there are other ways to
● Answered that her brother pays 500 facilitate land acquisition. Hence, the AP
pesos monthly. is not rushed to settle the amount.
● Asked if they still have three years to (MS. ANNABELLE HERRERA, RAP Director,
settle the payment. Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
(MS. MARY JANE ABEDES, Representative, Brgy.
Nangka) ● Inquired to the monthly fee paid by her
brother for the lot. Reiterated the
previous point that it will be better to
settle the remaining balance to reduce
the needed documentation. If that would
not be possible, there will be alternative
arrangements in favor of the AP to settle
the balance.
● Clarified that the three years pertain to
the needed time to pay the land lot
considering the 500 pesos monthly
payment. The project is estimated to
commence 2nd quarter of the coming
year. That means the project will take
precedence even before the lot is fully
paid given the monthly payment.
(MR. RODRIGO DELOS REYES, Project Director,
DPWH)
● Pointed that the bridge states Kabayani ● Clarified that there might be some
and that their area should not be part of confusions with regards to the name of
it since their property is in Sto. Niño. Also the bridge. The bridge was named such
raised that they are not against the because the structure’s descent point is
project but would like to clarify the near Kabayani. However, the approach of
nuance. the bridge exceeds Kabayani.
(MS. DEMETRIA JAVIER, Resident, Brgy. Sto. ● Since the exact location of AP is not yet
Niño) determined, the AP is encouraged to
allow the survey team to proceed to
determine the extent of alignment.
● Disclosed that that the final number of
APs can only be determined after the
survey.
DPWH)
● Asked when the civil works will start as ● Answered that the construction is
well as the portion of lot that will be estimated to commence by the middle
affected. part of the next year. As for the affected
● Answered that their structure has already portion, this will be determined after the
been tagged. survey.
● Asked if it would be possible to contact ● Asked if the structure has been tagged.
them so they will not miss out any ● Added that the structure tag represents
information since they are not currently that the structure or property is within
residing in the area. the Project Right-of-Way (ROW).
(MS. CAMILLE DELA ROSA, Resident, Brgy. However, the extent of affected area will
Tañong) only be determined during the survey.
DPWH)
● Raised that the property is mortgaged for ● Answered that there are possible options
fifteen years and that it has only been such as that they may fully pay the
paid for one year. property or they may also be
● Asked if there is a need to send a notice compensated based on how much they
to the bank. have paid the property.
● Disclosed that the title is with the bank ● The remaining balance may be paid by
and the property is under collateral the payee or they may choose the
payment. government to pay on their behalf. If the
● Asked what will happen if the payment is AP chooses the government, the amount
in the bank and if they will still receive will be paid directly to the mortgagee.
compensation. The amount paid to the mortgagee will
● Clarified that the loan was used for house be deducted to the compensation.
repair but they used their property as ● The amount already payed to the
collateral. mortgage will be returned to the payee.
(MS. PERLYNE MATTHEWS, Resident, Brgy. ● Mentioned that the property cannot be
Nangka) transferred to the government unless it is
released from the mortgage. If the
appraisal amount is higher than the
collateral, the remaining amount will be
the compensation.
(MS. ANNABEL LE HERRERA, RAP Director,
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Clarified if the AP was asking if there will

still compensation that will be provided
given the aforementioned context.
● Mentioned that lands under bank
collateral may also incur interest that
must also be settled.
● Disclosed that compensation amount
cannot be presented yet since the loan
collateral amount is still unknown. The
whole property might be under collateral
loan yet only a portion will be affected.
This will only be determined after the
survey activities.
DPWH)
● Inquired about the project’s extent to ● Answered that the exact measurement of
their property. the affected property will only be
● Asked how much of their property will be determined after the survey.
acquired. ● Reiterated that the agenda of the 1st SCM
● Pointed that there must be a project to is to inform the APs with the upcoming
address the flood first before the bridge. survey activities.
● Mentioned that there has been no ● Also mentioned that properties that
consultation for the flood control project. might be affected will be tagged for
● Asked for the project’s timeline. determination.
● Inquired if there will also be a bridge in ● Disclosed that there are actually on-going
Provident Village and if it will be projects to address flooding in Markina
constructed by phase. City.
● Asked if the bridge’s frontage will have ● Asked if there has been consultation with
smaller road underneath, enough to fit a regards to flood control infrastructures in
vehicle is. Also raised concern on their the AP’s area.
access and where they may be able to ● Pointed that they might not have been
park their vehicles. invited to the consultation for the flood
(MR. SAMUEL DELA CRUZ, Resident, Brgy. infrastructure projects because they are
Concepcion Uno) located far from the project site.
● Answered that the civil works is
estimated to begin at middle half of the
next year.
● Concurred that there will also be a bridge
in Provident Village and that there are
actually three bridges. All bridges will be
constructed at the same time.
● Mentioned that the project’s extent to
AP’s properties will be determined in two
months.
● Clarified that there will be a service road
for such function.
DPWH)
● Inquired if they are entitled for a ● Reassured the AP that there are still
resettlement assistance. survey activities that will determine the
● Disclosed that their property is not yet extent of property affected.
fully paid. ● Mentioned that the result of the survey
● Mentioned that they prefer an in-city will determine the status of their
resettlement in consideration with their property. This will also serve as the basis
livelihood. of the action to be undertaken for the
● Disclosed that they have been paying AP’s case.
their land property monthly for PHP (MR. RODRIGO DELOS REYES, Project Director,
1,000 to their association president who DPWH)
then transmits the payment to the bank.
(MS. ADORA MAGANTE, Resident, Brgy. Sto
Nino)
● Asked if it is necessary for their renters to ● Answered that all APs, regardless of land
be invited in the meeting. tenure status, structure ownership, even
● Disclosed that there has been renters must be interviewed.
information passed that only renters will ● Mentioned that entitlements are
be given resettlement assistance and different depending on the AP’s
compensation. designation.
(MS. MARY JANE ABEDES, Representative, Brgy. (MS. ANNABELLE HERRERA, RAP Director,
Sto Nino) Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Asked if there is relocation site for APs. ● Clarified that the relocation is usually
Also expressed concerns that there might provided for informal settler families
be eviction without assurance of a (ISFs). This includes structure owners or
relocation. renters without land title or any
● Inquired that the consultation seemed properties. The survey will reveal if there
too late for the affected communities is a need to provide relocation.
since the project is already being ● As for land and structure owners,
implemented. compensation will be provided as stated
● Asked if there is a possibility to in the law.
discontinue the project on the grounds of ● Reiterated that under the law, the
community’s disinterest. compensation that will be provided for
● Mentioned that if their properties are property owners is based on how much
acquired, they might become informal they will have to pay if they will buy or
settlers since there might be no put up a replacement of the property.
immediate location to relocate. ● Added that the current market value of
● Raised that the timeline is too short for their property must be the basis of how
them to receive the compensation and to much will be the compensation for the
look for another property. property owners.
● Asked for the project’s objective since it ● The replacement cost will not have
might contribute to the traffic congestion depreciation. That means the amount
in other areas. needed to put up the same structure will
(MR. SINCERO ELMA, Land Owner, Brgy. be compensated.
Concepcion Uno) ● Mentioned that the civil works is
targeted to start in the middle of next
year. Also pointed that the agenda of the
1st SCM is to explain the RP activities of
the project.
● Also mentioned that the survey is
necessary to compute the best
approximate for the replacement cost.
● Disclosed that for all infrastructure
projects, technical studies take the
precedence.
● Stated that the project is not dependent
on the AP’s approval since it is impossible
to get consensus. However, AP’s opinions
are taken into consideration.
● Pointed that the project is also part of
the priority projects under the Build Build
Build Program
● Also answered that the project is for
public purpose and for the benefit of the
majority.
(MS. ANNABELLE HERRERA, RAP Director,
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Concurred that among the project’s

objective is to improve traffic flow not
just in the immediate area but for the
rest of Metro Manila.
● Disclosed that there are other projects
that will traverse the Marikina River,
Manggahan Floodway, and Pasig River to
lessen the traffic in Metro Manila.
DPWH)
● Inquired about the size of property that ● Mentioned there is a scheduled

will be acquired from them. environmental sampling and the results
● Asked if both the land property and as well as the impacts will be included in
structure will be compensated. the study and then transmitted to
● Asked if it is possible to just acquire the Department of Environment and Natural
whole property since the structure might Resources (DENR).
not be functional anymore. (MR. JESUS LORENZO, Environmental Consultant,
DASAN JV.)
● Also asked for the project’s social and ● Mentioned that affected properties, both
environmental impact such as on noise- land and structure, will be assessed
level and air pollution. based on the severity of impact.
● Further inquired how the level of severity ● If the structure is severely affected which
is assessed. means continued habitation is not
(MR. CARLOS AMISTOSO, Brgy. Concepcion Uno, permissible, the whole structure will be
Resident) compensated.
● For the affected lands, there will be
options. If there is enough space, only
the affected portions will be
compensated. If the land is not
economically viable or that very little
portion will be left, the whole property
may be acquired.
● Disclosed that the severity of impact for
land is based on economic viability.
● Answered that severity of impact will
only be determined after the field survey.
The information collected in the field
survey will be presented in the 2nd
Stakeholder Consultation Meeting.
● Disclosed that there will be mitigation
measures to address the environmental
impacts.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Inquired how much of their property will ● Raised that the intention of the 1st
be acquired from them. Stakeholder Consultation Meeting (SCM)
● Asked for the project’s extent in their is to obtain permission from the APs that
community, in particular, if it will affect there will be a survey activity.
both Camia St. and Kabayani Rd since ● The survey aims to gather information to
they have been receiving hearsay with APs and their properties. Only then will
regards to the project impact. the extent of the project will be
(MS. MELIZA BASILIO, Resident, Brgy. Concepcion determined.
Uno) ● Mentioned that there will be structure
tagging as well as demarcation lines to
determine the Project Right-of-Way
(PROW).
● Cautioned the AP that the SCM is the
proper venue to address concerns and to
avoid hearsays.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Mentioned that she is living with her ● Reiterated that all APs will receive just
relatives in the area as a renter for more compensation and encouraged them to
or less thirty (30) years. participate in the survey activities.
● Asked if she will also be entitled with a
compensation.
● Mentioned that they were already ● Answered that they are already part of
interviewed. the Master list and that the proper
(MS. WENDY S. EVANGELISTA, Resident, Brgy. entitlements will be studied.
Sto. Niño) ● Encouraged the AP to attend the 2nd SCM
so that will be informed with the proper
entitlements for renters.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Disclosed that they are still paying ● Answered that they must continue
monthly amortization. paying the monthly amortization.
● Asked if they must still proceed with the ● Asked to whom are they paying the
monthly amortization. amortization.
● Answered that they are paying the ● Clarified to the AP that they are part of
amortization to their association. This is Community Mortgage Program (CMP) of
then transmitted to National Homes. the Socialized Housing Finance
● Asked how much of their properties will Corporation (SHFC).
be taken by the project. ● Mentioned that the SHFC beneficiaries
(MS. JENNILYN SECRETO, Resident, Brgy. Sto. are also part of APs.
Niño) ● Reiterated that this will only be
determined after the survey activities.
There will also be a team that will
appraise the properties. Only then will
the project impact to their properties will
be determined.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Asked if the APs can contest the property ● Mentioned that there is a process in
value identified by the appraisers. valuating the property affected and that
● Asked if they need to vacate their the law does not stipulate for a
property as soon as they get the negotiation or a counter-offer from the
compensation even if they have not yet APs. However, it would be helpful if the
identified where to relocate. APs can present documents as proof of
● Raised concern looking for a new the property value.
property is difficult notwithstanding the ● Assured the AP that the appraisers are
cost of buying one. licensed.
● Asked if there are other ways to present ● Mentioned that to expedite the process,
their preferred value without resulting to replacement cost will be paid to the APs.
arbitration. Under the law, such amount is enough
● Further inquired with the process of for a just compensation.
sharing scheme. ● If the AP disagrees with the value, the
(MR. ERIC DELOS REYES, Resident, Brgy. Nangka) case will be transmitted to the court for
expropriation. The AP then may submit
further proof to justify the proper cost of
their property.
● Assured that based on the Asian
Development Bank (ADB) guidelines,
unless compensation is provided, there
will be no forced evacuation.
● Added that for ISF, there will also be no
forced evacuation unless there is a sure
relocation site.
● Mentioned that the stakeholder
engagements are conducted before the
civil works so that APs will have enough
time to relocate.
● Answered that for such case, the AP may
seek assistance with the Right-of-Way
team of DPWH.
● Mentioned that the project sharing
scheme refers to the positive effects and
benefits of the projects to all APs.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Mentioned that the land property has ● Answered that there will be a
been transferred to National Housing coordination with the Marikina
Authority (NHA) and they are yet to pay Settlements Office (MSO) to provide
the dues. clarification with their case.
● Inquired with the payment process if ● Disclosed that so far, the entitlements
they will be displaced from their area. are not yet identified. However, this will
● Mentioned that their association sought be discussed on the 2nd Stakeholder
the assistance of NHA to pay the land Consultation Meeting (SCM)
owner. ● Assured the AP that their sector will be
● Mentioned that they are two separate included to the entitlements.
households on one structure. ● Addressed that this will be settled once
● Asked if she is entitled for a relocation. the context between the transfer from
(MS. MARIA ROSELLE CAASI, Resident, Brgy. private landowner to NHA has been
Nangka) clarified.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Mentioned they are three households ● Inquired if each household have separate
living in one structure. means of preparing their food.
● Asked if each will be entitled for a ● Answered that the entitlements for each
relocation. households will depend on the results of
● Answered that each household have the survey.
separate means of preparing their food. (MS. ANNABELLE HERRERA, RAP Director,
(MS. OLIVE DE GUZMAN, Resident, Brgy. Nangka) Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Asked for the entitlements that might be ● Reiterated that all AP will be interviewed
provided for them as renters. regardless of tenurial status.
(MR. EDUARDO CANDELARIO, Renter, Brgy. Jesus ● Mentioned that the entitlements cannot
dela Peña) be described yet but it will be presented
on the next SCM.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Asked for the measurements of the ● Answered that it will be more proper to
bridge’s two-lanes and pedestrian lane to allow the plan to be realized in ground to
determine the project’s impact to his provide the extent of project’s impact to
property. the property and to identify the limit of
● Inquired if their structure may be the PROW.
compensated wholly if it is going to be ● Mentioned that this will be determined
severely affected. after the survey activities.
● Raised that the 70% for the structure and (MR. RODRIGO DELOS REYES, Project Director,
50% for the land upfront payment may DPWH)
not be enough to seek a new property.
● Asked when they might be able to ● Mentioned that when it comes to land
receive the remaining balance. acquisition, economic viability will be
● Asked where they may receive the studied.
compensation and if it would be possible ● Added that for structures, the structural
to have it transferred via bank. integrity will be the basis for classifying
(MR. RORIE OPONG, Resident, Concepcion Uno) the severity of impact.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Mentioned that the 50% payment for the
lot will be provided once the needed
documentations are gathered. The
remaining 50% will be provided once the
land title has been transferred to the
government.
● Raised that similar method applies for
the structure and that the remaining 30%
will be provided once the structure has
been demolished.
● Mentioned that if the AP is compliant and
proper documentations are provided, the
compensation may be disbursed more or
less in two (2) months’ time.
● Answered that the payment will come in
check and will be distributed in the
DPWH’s Office. However, the possibility
of doing a bank-to-bank transfer will be
reviewed.
DPWH)
● Asked of there will be assistance in ● Answered that there may be assistance
looking for a land property. such as in identifying less flood prone
● Raised if the traffic impact has been areas. However, the task of looking for
studied since some portions of their area new properties is for the landowners.
have narrow roads. ● Mentioned that there will be three (3)
● Asked if the government can provide a bridges for the project which will improve
list of possible areas within Marikina City Marikina City’s traffic flow.
that they may purchase. ● Disclosed that there will be road
(MS. PATRICIA COMSON, Resident, Concepcion widening activities for the narrow roads
Uno) in the bridge’s approach.
● Mentioned the AP may present their
preferred area and the department may
assist in pointing out the flood prone
areas.
DPWH)
● Pointed that there are hazard ● Reiterated that there are three bridges in
assessments for every barangay to the pipeline.
identify flood-prone areas. ● Mentioned that the bridges’ alignment
● Asked why the bridge was decided to be was studied and that that the result
built on their area. showed that this alignment will address
● Raised if it is possible to realign the the traffic in the area. In addition, this
bridge to Everlasting St. alignment has the least number of AP.
● Raised that community members must ● Disclosed that this alignment was
be involved in selecting the bridge presented to the Marikina City LGU.
alignment. ● Raised that the road widening may be
● Asked if all the roads in the bridge’s done in the future but that is not the
approach will undergo road widening. scope of the project.
(MR. CARLOS AMISTOSO, Resident, Brgy. (MR. RODRIGO DELOS REYES, Project Director,
Concepcion Uno) DPWH)
● Asked if it is possible to review the ● Answered that among the goals of the
bridge’s alignment to reduce if not project is to reduce the number of APs.
ensure that there will be no APs. ● Disclosed that less APs is also favorable
● Mentioned that all options must be for the Department.
exhausted. ● Disclosed that the project design to be
(MR. JAYPEE TARUEL, Project Officer, Office of used will have the least number of APs.
Rep. Stella Quimbo) However, it cannot be promised that
there will be no APs.
DPWH)
Attendance:
DPWH:
DIR. RODRIGO I. DELOS REYES, Project Director, BMC-UPMO-DPWH
ENGR. NORIFEL TEDDIE G. CADIANG, Engineer III, BMC-UPMO-DPWH
MR. MICHAEL BERNH O. VILLEGAS, ESSD-DPWH
MR. ERSHAD IBBA, ESSD-DPWH
DASAN JV:
MR. JU HYEOK UM, Sr. Social/Resettlement Experts (International), Dasan
DR. ASHADUL ALAM, Environmental Consultant (International), Dasan
MR. JESUS LORENZO, Environmental Consultant (National), Dasan
ADB:
MS. TERESITA T. VALDERRAMA, ADB
MS. MA. REMEDIOS VILLANUEVA, ADB
DR. ERNESTO DELA CRUZ , ADB
ECOSYSCORP, INC.
MS. ANNABELLE HERRERA, RAP Director, EcosysCorp
MS. NESAH JARIEL, Senior Resettlement Specialist, EcosysCorp
MR. JOSHUA LADIA, Planning and Research Associate, EcosysCorp
MS. JAZEL JOPSON, Technical Support Specialist, EcosysCorp
MR. RJ SALVADOR, Technical Support Specialist, EcosysCorp
LAST NAME FIRST NAME SEX BARANGAY

Leal Randy M Chairman, Brgy. Nangka
Co Ryan M Concepcion Uno
Del Rosario Editha F Concepcion Uno
Te Dexter M Nangka
Dela Rosa Camille Joy F Tañong
Abedes Mary Jane F Nangka
Evaristo Freddie M Nangka
Opong Rourie M Concepcion Uno
Gutierrez Eleuterio M Concepcion Uno
Martinez Jessie M Sto. Niño
Arboleda Clifford M Sto. Niño
Miraflor Eileen F Sto. Niño
Secreto Jennilyn F Sto. Niño
Tamayo Raquel F Nangka
Evaristo Freddie M Nangka
Lazaro Kathlen F Nangka
Buensuceso Angelito M Sto. Niño
Evangelista Wendy F Sto. Niño
Amistoso Pablo M Nangka
Candelario Myra F Jesus dela Peña
Caasi Ma. Roselle F Nangka
Panganiban Leonida F Sto. Niño
Anape Jocelyn F Sto. Niño
de Guzman Jesyry F Sto. Niño
Mathews Perlyne F Nangka
Basilio Meliza F Concepcion Uno
Comson Patricia F Concepcion Uno
Teruel Jaypee M Office of Congresswoman Stella Quimbo
Tamayo Samuel M Nangka
Parungao Rubi F Nangka
Gutierez Arlene F Sajines
Sajines Beth F Nangkaa
Ramos Billy M Calumpang
Amistoso Carlos M Concepcion Uno
Delos Reyes Eric M Nangka
Cruz Gina F Concepcion Uno
Capariño Jesus Jr. M Nangka
- Karlo M -
Te Kathlyn F Concepcion Uno
Llabares Roel M Nagka
Jimenez Yohlee F Concepcion Uno
Dela Cruz Samuel F Concepcion Uno
Javier Demetria F Sto. Niño
Candelario Eduardo M Jesus dela Peña
Magante Adora F Sto. Niño
Belo Josefina F Nangka
Ceredon Carina F Nangka
Villar Riza F Nangka
Samaniego Rosemarie F Nangka
Photos:
Highlights of the Detailed Design Study 1st Stakeholder Consultation Meeting (SCM)
METRO MANILA BRIDGES PROJECY (MMBP)
Online Detailed Engineering Design (DD) 1st SCM

Date: 18 March 2021 (Friday)
Time: 8:00 A.M.
Meeting ID: 870 9433 4279
Password: 736530
Open Forum:
during the Detailed Design (DD) Study 1st Stakeholder Consultation Meeting for the Right-of-Way
Acquisition Plan (RP) of Bridge 3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge. Responses to the queries
are also included.
Summary of Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Suggestions Raised during the DD 1st SCM of Bridge 3:
Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge for the Metro Manila Bridges Project, DD Stage
● Asked what will happen to their property ● Answered that the ground survey will
since only half of the structure might be determine the extent of the project.
affected. ● Mentioned that if the project will affect
the structure’s foundation or if the
(MS. LIZA JUEGO, Resident, Brgy. Nangka) structure is not viable anymore as a living
space, the whole structure will be
acquired instead.

Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
● Inquired the project’s scope as well as its ● Mentioned that that a copy of the project
extent in the company’s property. alignment will be provided to the
(MS. CATZ PUNZALAN, Manila Water Company company.
Inc.) ● Reiterated that the project extent will be
determined after the survey.

DPWH)
● Mentioned that the Census and Tagging will be begin on the following day. This will be
followed by the detailed measurement as well as the parcellary to determine the project
demarcation line.
(MS. NESAH JARIEL, Senior Resettlement Specialist, Ecosyscorp)
● Asked about the project’s timeline. ● Mentioned that the construction is
expected to start on the mid next year,
(MS. CATZ PUNZALAN, Manila Water Company which will run for three (3) years.
Inc.)
DPWH)
● Mentioned that they will provide ● Recognized MWCI’s cooperation with the
assistance during the ground survey project.
activities. ● Mentioned that the ground survey team
● Pointed that contact details will be sent will visit the area and that they will be
and that there are staff in the facility that informed.
are ready to assist. ● Asked for contact details for proper
coordination.
(MR. IAN CALIGAGAN, Manila Water Company (MR. RODRIGO DELOS REYES, Project Director,
Inc.) DPWH)
Attendance:
DPWH:
ENGR. NORIFEL TEDDIE G. CADIANG, Engineer III, BMC-UPMO-DPWH
MR. MICHAEL BERNH O. VILLEGAS, ESSD-DPWH
MR. ERSHAD IBBA, ESSD-DPWH
DASAN JV:
MR. CH LEE, Dasan
MR. YOONHWAN SONG, Dasan
ADB:
DR. ERNESTO DELA CRUZ , ADB
ECOSYSCORP, INC.

Dondon Esperanza F Secretary, Brgy. Concepcion Uno
Loberiano Angelita F Nangka
David Yen F Nangka
Juego Liza F Nangka
Caligagan Ian M MWCI
Punsalan Catz F MWCI
Zapanta Andrea F MWCI
Photos:
Highlights of the Detailed Design Study Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
Online Detailed Engineering Design (DD) FGD – Business Sector

Date: 19 February 2021 (Tuesday)
Time: 1:30 P.M.
Presented in the matrices below are the highlights during the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) for the
Bridge 3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge. Affected Persons (AP) were designated either as
vulnerable or business sector. The session was conducted online through Zoom Application. Before
conducting the session, consent was first gathered from the participants. This session gathered
responses from the Vulnerable Sector.
Responses from Vulnerable Sector

What are your apprehensions/concerns • Their livelihood will be displaced and their
regarding the potential impact of the project on properties will be acquired from them.
your livelihood/business? • The relocation area might be too remote
from their children’s school.
• Once the construction is finished, there will
be less people in their community and that
will have a direct impact with their daily
earnings.
• Their property will be acquired which
means they will lose the space to sell their
products.
• The bridge will bring economic prosperity
in their community.
• There might be troubles in looking for new
areas to sell their products if they will be
resettled.
• They will have to relocate on an area that
might be too far from their work.
• Non-landowners might not be provided
with assistance.
• Once the bridge is finished, there will be a
reduction in the area’s traffic volume.
• Many properties were already demolished
and were asked to vacate their area. They
were resettled in Sta. Rosa City and Biñan
City, Laguna. However, they had to return
as renters due to job mismatch in the
resettlement site.
What support programs or projects do you • There must be assistance in terms of
think are necessary to help you cope with the resettlement.
possible impacts of the project on • Livelihood must be available in the
your livelihood/business? resettlement site.
• There must be assurance that the
resettlement area has high foot traffic so
that their livelihood may be maintained.
• As long as the resettlement area is not too
remote and that there are enough foot
traffic, they can reestablish their livelihood
activities with ease.
• There must be trainings on alternative
livelihood activities.
• A new livelihood opportunity must be
provided as well as a property to relocate.
• The wage rate in the resettlement area
must be equal to Metro Manila wage.
• They may also work as crew in food
establishments.
• The local government unit may also hire
them to work in the City Hall.
What kind of help do you expect from the • If possible, a similar kind of livelihood such
Government in the implementation of these as selling rice cakes must be viable in the
programs and projects? resettlement area.
• Unsure to what kind of alternative
livelihood activities may be accomplished
but is willing to accept any kind of
assistance that the government will
provide.
• Loans with low interest may be provided as
seed money to start or to improve their
• The government may provide assistance in
establishing a business to sustain their daily
needs.
• Financial assistance must be provided so
they may be able to establish a sari-sari
store or ready-to-wear (RTW) shop.
What kind of help do you expect from the • Any assistance that may be provided by the
private sector in the implementation of these private sector will be accepted.
programs and projects? • Usually, the private sector provides relief
assistance especially during disasters.
Are you familiar with a cooperative? What are • Cooperatives may provide livelihood
your thoughts about forming a cooperative? trainings and assistance such as access to
low cost loans for its members.
• Cooperatives may aslo solicit assistance
from the government in behalf of its
members.
Do you have a proposed resettlement site? Can • They may be resettled in Baras and in
you identify which barangay? Antipolo City in Rizal Province.
• They may also be resettled in San Mateo
City, also in Rizal Province but it might be
too remote. Also suggested as a
resettlement site is in Brgy. Fortune within
Marikina City.
• Relocation must be somewhere near
Marikina City, probably in Bulacan since it
will be accessible once MRT7 is completed.
Attendance:
DASAN JV:
ECOSYSCORP, INC.
Last Name First Name Sex Barangay

Abo Amelita F Nangka
De Guzman Olive F Nangka
Caasi Ma. Roselle F Nangka
Villar Clarizza F Nangka
Photos:
Highlights of the Detailed Design Study Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
Online Detailed Engineering Design (DD) FGD – Business Sector

Date: 19 February 2021 (Tuesday)
Time: 9:00 A.M.
Presented in the matrices below are the highlights during the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) for the
Bridge 3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge. Affected Persons (AP) were designated either as
vulnerable or business sector. The session was conducted online through Zoom Application. Before
conducting the session, consent was first gathered from the participants. This session gathered
responses from the Business Sector.
Responses from Business Sector

1. What are your apprehensions/concerns • Their livelihoods will be affected as their
regarding the potential impact of the property will be taken away from them.
project on your livelihood/business? • Suggested for the project to be redesigned
because it seems too long. If possible,
redesign the bridge as a bank-to-bank
structure so that there would be no
Affected Persons (AP).
• Raised concern that they will be displaced
because of the project.
• Mentioned that it will be too early to
identify potential impacts since the initial
measurements only show minimal impact.
• The exact impact to their property is yet to
be determined.
• Once the construction commences, it will
be difficult to identify where to put their
vehicle and this might impede in their
• Once the construction is finished, it might
make their area more commercialized.
• The whole land property will be acquired
and if they are displaced to remote area, it
will be difficult for their children since their
school is in Marikina City.
• They might not be able to acquire land lot
that is as big as what they currently have.
• Access to their job will be difficult if they
are relocated in a remote area.
• Livelihood dislocation is not really a
concern since the nature of their work is
corporate.
• Their planned business, an eatery, will be
put on hold because their property will be
taken from them.
• Pointed that if majority of the lot will be
affected, the whole lot must be acquired
instead.
• If possible, site map must be provided so
that portions of their affected properties
are identified.
2. What support programs or projects do • Relocation must be within Marikina City
you think are necessary to help you and is safe from flooding.
cope with the possible impacts of the • Assistance must be provided in selecting
project on your livelihood/business? viable land to resettle their household.
• The relocation area must have appropriate
environment to put up a business.
• There must be high foot traffic in the
recommended relocation area.
3. What kind of help do you expect from • There must be in-city resettlement to
the Government in the implementation reduce impact to them.
of these programs and projects? • Suggested that a list of possible assistance
may be provided to them so they can
choose which ones are appropriate for
their context.
• Financial assistance must be provided to
put up the business.
• Compensation must be processed on time
so they will be able to purchase the
property they intend to relocate their
household with.
• There must be assistance in expediting the
payment as well as in acquiring
documentation needed so that they will be
able to purchase the land they intend to
resettle.
• There must be constant information with
regards to the processing of compensation.
4. What kind of help do you expect from • Assistance from the private sector is not
the private sector in the expected.
implementation of these programs and
projects?
5. Are you familiar with a cooperative? • Cooperatives may provide financial
What are your thoughts about forming assistance to its members.
a cooperative? • Loans may also be provided by
cooperatives.
• Cooperatives are formed through shared
profit where the government may also
provide assistance. Members with bigger
contribution may receive bigger allocation
from the said profit sharing.
6. Do you have a proposed resettlement • Resettlement areas identified are in Brgy.
site? Can you identify which barangay? Nangka or any areas within Marikina City.
• Brgy. Marikina Heights was also suggested
as a possible resettlement site.
• If resettlement in Marikina City is not
possible, they may also resettle in Antipolo
City, somewhere near Marikina City.
Attendance:
DASAN JV:
ECOSYSCORP, INC.
Last Name First Name Sex Barangay

Amistoso Pablo M Nangka
Sajines Beth F Nangka
Matthews Perlyne F Concepcion Uno
Comson Patricia F Concepcion Uno
Photos:
Highlights of the Feasibility Stage 2nd Stakeholder Consultation Meeting (SCM)
Online Detailed Engineering Design (DD) 2nd SCM

Date: 5 April 2021 (Monday)
Time: 8:00 A.M.
Meeting ID: 955 6037 7476
Password: 647264
Open Forum:
during the Detailed Engineering Design (DD) Study 2nd Stakeholder Consultation Meeting for the
Right-of-Way Acquisition Plan (RP) of Bridge 3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge. Responses to
the queries are also included.
Summary of Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Suggestions Raised during the DD 2nd SCM of Bridge
3: Kabayani St. - Matandang Balara Bridge for the Metro Manila Brides Project, DD Stage
● Asked if there is a list of possible ● Clarified if the AP is a landowner.

relocation areas. ● Mentioned that landowners will be
● Disclosed that the mother of his spouse compensated both in the land property
owns their land property. and structure that will be affected by the
(MR. JOHN PAUL BACUDO, Resident, Brgy. project.
Nangka) ● Pointed that the AP has the freedom to
choose where they wanted to relocate.
Ecosyscorp, Inc.)
Attendance:
DPWH:
ENGR. JUDEE ANN SANTILLAN, Project Manager, BMC-UPMO-DPWH
ENGR. NORIFEL TEDDIE CADIANG, Engineer III, BMC-UPMO-DPWH
DASAN JV:
ADB:
DR. ERNESTO DELA CRUZ, ADB
ECOSYSCORP, INC.
Juego Liza F Nangka
Bacudo John Paul M Nangka
Samaniego Rosemarie F Nangka
Abo Amelita F Nangka
Dayao Zarah F MWCI
Icasa Isabelo Jonathan M Nangka
Photos:
List of Inivited APs 1st SCM 5 Feb 2021
Control Number Name Brgy. Contact Number Prefix Network Classification Date ReceivedPreferred SCMOption Date Time Venue Status Notes 02.03
MM3PB2020-000131 Eric C. Delos Reyes Nangka 09237289544 0923 Sun 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000149 Rose Chua Nangka 09472361117 0947 Smart 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000128 Yasmine Y. Torre Nangka 09389982825 0938 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000142 Percebal Alarcon Nangka 09226773948 0922 Sun 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000123 Rose Caasi Nangka 09077161983 0907 TNT Owner 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000124 Roselle Caasi Nangka 09077161983 0907 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000145 Raquel Tamayo Nangka 09428022828 0942 Sun 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000134 Clarizza Villar Nangka 09190093578/09190093578 0919 Smart 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000141 Valeriano Abubo Nangka 09667686065 0966 Globe/TM 26-Jan-21 Online ONSITE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Brgy. Nangka Confirmed
Higschool Covered Court, Brgy Nangka
MM3PB2020-000138 Roberto Capillan Nangka 09101823044 0910 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000130 Danilo M. Yann, Jr. Nangka 09389982825 0938 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000129 Carlota Cutamora Nangka 09389982825 0938 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000133 Heideliza M. Ruiz Nangka 09122610802 0912 TNT 26-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000135 Lani Reynoso Nangka 09190093578 0919 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000132 Ervin Delos Reyes Nangka 09237289533/ 09237289544 0923 Sun 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed Confirmed online; Rep: Eric Delos Reyes (Father)
MM3PB2020-000144 Louie Tamabo Nangka 09428022828 0942 Sun 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000102 Olive B. De Guzman Nangka 09504521745 0950 TNT 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000101 Rosemarie Samaniego Nangka 09994352587 0999 Smart Owner 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000104 Rodolfo Centeno, Jr. Nangka 09282294153 0928 Smart 26-Jan-21 Onsite ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000107 Edwardo N. Belaro Nangka 09391489287 0939 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000108 Marvyn Kay D. Silverio/Noel David Nangka 09982516735 0998 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONSITE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Brgy. Nangka Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000109 Josefina Belo Nangka 09257750364 0925 Sun 26-Jan-21 ONSITE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Brgy. Nangka Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000110 Samdel Tamayo Nangka 09062916113 0906 Globe/TM 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed Confirmed online
MM3PB2020-000112 Lyka Perez Nangka 09491933448 0949 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000111 Emely Tan/Lyka Perez Nangka 09614368935/09491933448 0961 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000113 N-U D. Laroco Nangka 09178250173/933-5534 0917 Globe/TM Owner 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000114 Angelo Briza Nangka 09392574736 0939 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000117 Freddie Evaristo Nangka 09258481213/8942-7997 0925 Sun 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000118 Porfirio Amistoso Nangka 09989516128 0998 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000160 Ian Caligagatan Nangka 09560145690 0956 Globe/TM Manila Water 27-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000161 Rolly Yebes/Engr. Glen De Lapaz Nangka 09270342995 0927 Globe/TM 27-Jan-21 Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000119 Gina P. Cruz Concepcion Uno
09352708032 0935 Globe/TM 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000121 Jessie John Maalat Concepcion Uno
09335787424 0933 Sun 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000150 Mary Jean Labores Concepcion Uno
09634361804 0963 Globe 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000152 Amando Gerero Concepcion Uno
09084690798 0908 Smart 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000147 Julie Dela Cruz Concepcion Uno
09277902271 0927 Globe/TM 26-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000170 Meliza Banilio Concepcion Uno
09236255821 0923 Sun 27-Jan-21 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000172 Marlon Bernas Concepcion Uno
09307400163/ 09395490889 0930 TNT Marikina LGU (Bagong
27-Jan-21
Sibol Market)
Online ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000067 Marilon De Guzman Sto. Niño 646-56-11/ 09176539701 646- ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000185 BF Corporation - Billy Ramos Calumpang 09098995954/09176539701 0909 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000096 Wendy S. Evangelista Sto. Niño 09631642546 0963 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000300 Sarah Jean M. Wignasin Sto. Niño 09631642546 0963 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000092 Erwin San Diego Sto. Niño 09103320501 0910 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000087 Perlio Galito Sto. Niño 09493286736 0949 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000077 Alex Lagutin (onsite) Sto. Niño 09502327312 0950 ONSITE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Brgy. Nangka Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000020 Myra S. Candelario JDP 09356974750 0935 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000002 Jesus Banyaga JDP 09326791688 0932 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000051 Carina Ceredon Sto. Niño 09126907616 0912 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000050 Rea Gonzales Sto. Niño 09995610172/09615818435 0999 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000004 Camille Joy P. Dela Rosa Tañong 09959684297 0995 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000057 Roselna LLabares Timbol Sto. Niño 09755672263 0975 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MR. DEXTER TE President, Twinville
09227254784
Homeowners Association. 0922 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-0000106 Mary Jane Abedes Nangka 09472458692 0947 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-0000258 PERLYNE TABOR MATHEWS Nangka 09119931594 0911 ONLINE Feb 5, 2021 9AM Zoom Link Confirmed
Invited APs 1st SCM 18 March 2021
Control Number First Name Last Name Number Prefix Network Date Received Brgy Preferred Date Time Venue Status Notes
MM3PB2020-000153 Liza Juego 9298620225 0929 Smart 16-Mar-21 Nangka Online 18-Mar-21 8:00 am Zoom Link Confirmed Link sent
MM3PB2020-000159 Jocelyn Alburo 9619530929 0926 Globe 16-Mar-21 Nangka Online 18-Mar-21 8:00 am Zoom Link Out of coverage Link sent
MM3PB2020-000173 Angelita Loberiano 9213896551 0921 Smart 16-Mar-21 Nangka Online 18-Mar-21 8:00 am Zoom Link Confirmed
Link sent
MM3PB2020-000174 Angelita Loberiano 9213896551 0921 Smart 16-Mar-21 Nangka Online 18-Mar-21 8:00 am Zoom Link Confirmed
MM3PB2020-000160 Ian Caligangan 9274834973 0927 Globe 16-Mar-21 Nangka Online 18-Mar-21 8:00 am Zoom Link Confirmed Link sent
Sino/Ano ang mga potensyal na epekto sa lipunan PAMPUBLIKONG IMPORMASYON
ng proyekto? NG METRO MANILA BRIDGES
Mga mamamayang nakatira malapit sa ilog na pag- PROJECT
tatayuan ng tulay. Maaaring maapektuhan ang kanilang
mga ari-arian gaya ng lupa, istruktura (bahay o tinda- Ano ang proyekto?
han), punong-kahoy, mga pananim at pati na rin pam-
publikong pasilidad (basketball court, outpost, electric Ang Metro Manila Bridges Project ay
post at iba pa). Kasama rin sa mga maaaring kabilang sa Build, Build, Build Program ng
maaapektuhan ang mga negosyo. pamahalaan na naglalayong magdagdag ng
tulay upang maibsan ang problema sa
trapiko sa EDSA at iba pang pangunahing Kabayani Road-Katipunan Ave. Extension Bridge
Ang mga nabanggit na epekto ay kailangan kalsada ng kalakhang Maynila.
mapatunayan at makumpirma gamit ang tamang
pamamaraan ng pagmamapa o “survey” kaugnay sa Tatlong mga tulay ang napapaloob sa proyekto gaya ng
panlipunan at aktwal na kondisyong Kabayani Road-Katipunan Ave. Extension Bridge, J.P.
pisikal. Mayroon ding pangangailangan Rizal-Lopez Jaena Bridge at Marcos Highway-St. Mary
sa pagbibigay ng mahahalagang impor- Ave. Bridge. Ang pagsasakatuparan ng mga ito ay:
masyon tungkol sa iminungkahing
proyekto at makonsulta ang mga ma- Magbibigay ng daanang matibay laban sa baha at iba
mamayan sa mga bagay na naka- pang sakuna at makakatulong maibsan ang masikip
na trapiko sa kamaynilaan.
Sino ang karapat-dapat para sa mga kabayaran ng Makakamit ang inirekomendang kaligtasan sa baha J.P. Rizal– Lopez Jaena Bridge
mga apektadong ari-arian? ng Pasig-Marikina River Basin sa pamamagitan ng
pagkakaroon ng higit na “access” sa ilog para sa
Nagmamay-ari ng lupa. Kailangan ng patunay ng operasyon at pamamahala nito.
pagmamay-ari gaya ng Transfer Certificate of Title Magpapabuti sa kondisyon ng pamumuhay at lilikha
(TCT). ng mas positibong epekto sa ekonomiya.
Nagmamay-ari ng istruktura (bahay at iba pa). Dinisenyo para maging kaaya-aya at simbolo/
Kailangan may Tax Declaration at iba pang patunay ng modelo.
pagmamay-ari.
Nagmamay-ari ng puno at pananim. Ang kabayaran Inaasahan po ang inyong aktibong pakikilahok Saan at ano ang nasasakupan ng proyekto?
ay base sa klase ng puno at pananim. Kailangan ng sa ating projekto.
sertipikasyon ng pagmamay-ari mula sa barangay. Haba ng
Salamat po! Tulay Lokasyon Apektadong Lugar
“Vulnerable”. Ang mga “informal settler families”, Tulay Marcos Highway-St. Mary Ave. Bridge
matatanda, solong babae na tagapaghanapbuhay at Sa pagitan
may kapansanan ay bibigyan ng tulong. Kabayani
ng Tuma- Barangay Sino ang magpapatupad ng proyekto?
na Bridge Matandang Balara ng
Mga nagmamayari ng negosyo o maglalako. Road-
at Batasan Lungsod ng Quezon 175 metro
Apektadong mamamayan na posibleng maantala Katipunan
-San at Barangay Nangka Ang Unified Project Management Office - Bridge Man-
Ave. agement Cluster (UPMO-BMC) ng Kagawaran ng Paga-
pansamantala o permanenteng mawawalan ng han- Mateo ng Lungsod ng
Extension
apbuhay o pagkakakitaan ay bibigyan ng tulong. Bridge
Bridge Marikina waing Pampubliko at mga Lansangan (Department of
J.P. Sa pagitan Public Works and Highways) ang magpapatupad ng
Ano epekto ng proyekto sa kapaligiran? At paano ito Rizal- ng Tuma- Barangay Jesus Dela proyekto. Ito ang tanggapan na responsable sa
Lopez na Bridge Peña at Sto. Niño ng 130 metro pagpaplano, pagdidisenyo, pangan-
mababawasan? Jaena at Mariki- Lungsod ng Marikina
Bridge
gasiwa at iba pang gawain patungkol sa
na Bridge
proyekto.
Sa pagitan
Marcos Barangay Jesus Dela
ng Mariki-
Highway- Peña at Calumpang
na Bridge at 114 metro
St. Mary ng Lungsod ng
Marcos
Ave. Marikina
Bridge
Bridge
Buod ng mga Potensyal na Epekto sa Kapaligiran
Ang halaga ng kabayaran sa apektadong
Kondisyon ng lupa Kalidad ng hangin Hayop pribadong istruktura ay base sa
“replacement cost” na tutukuyin ng Inde-
Þ Pisikal na pagbabago ng lupa Þ Pagkasira ng kalidad ng hangin Þ Pagkagambala ng tirahan ng ibon pendent Property Appraiser (IPA) na
Þ Potensyal na kontaminasyon ng lupa mula sa basura Þ Sobrang ingay na dulot ng paggamit ng kagamitan ikokontrata ng DPWH.
para sa operasyon Iwasan ang pagputol ng mga puno hangga’t maari.
Magpatupad ng mga kontrol para sa erosion at pagguho Ano ang “cut-off date”? Kailan ba ang “cut-off date”?
ng lupa. Gumamit ng saradong sasakyan (closed) para sa mga
Magtalaga ng isang lugar ng imbakan ng basura/spoils. Halamang panlupa Ang “cut-off date” ay ang araw na itinatalaga ng ahensya
materyales.
Itabi ang topsoil para magamit sa ibang pagkakataon. Siguruhin regular ang maintenance ng makinarya at na magpapatupad ng proyekto. Sa proyektong ito, ang
Hangga’t maari, isagawa ang konstruksyon sa tag-araw kagamitan.
Þ Pagkaubos ng mga puno at halaman “cut-off date” ay ang petsa ng pagsisimula ng sensus o
Patibayin ang dike gamit ang mga damo at iba pang Sementuhin/aspaltuhan ang approach roads. “survey” at imbentaryo ng mga maapektuhang ari-arian.
pansuklob sa lupa. Bawasan ang bilang ng mga puno na mahahawan sa
Magdilig ng tubig sa paligid upang maiwasan ang al-
Ipatupad ang RA 9003 (Ecological Solid Waste Manage- ikabok sa panahon ng tag-araw. pamamagitan ng minor geometric alignment. Kung magkakaroon ng problema o reklamo patungkol
ment Act of 2000). Pagsunod sa mga kondisyon ng DENR / LGU CLUP sa proyekto, kanino maaaring lumapit?
Pagsasanay ng mga manggagawa ukol sa kalusugan at (Permit sa Pagputol ng Kahoy, ROW, PCA Permit).
Acoustic ng kapaligiran
kaligtasan at pagpapanatili ng kaayusan ng paligid at Maglagay ng pansamantalang bakod para sa mga hala- May hotline ang DPWH para sa hinaing ng mamamayan
tirahan ng mga manggagawa (housekeeping). man na mananatili sa lugar. at ito ay sa pamamagitan ng Text 2920 o Tawag (02) –
Þ Ingay mula sa mga sasakyan at kagamitan
Itaguyod ang pagpapanumbalik ng nasira o nawasak na 165-02. Magbubuo din ng kinatawan para sa hinaing sa
Kalidad at dami ng tubig mga halaman kung saan posible (hal. pagtatanim ng lebel ng lokal na pamahalaan at ng DPWH para sa
Ang mga kagamitang pang-konstruksiyon at makinarya
puno sa tabi ng kalsada). proyekto upang mangasiwa sa usaping ito at dinggin ang
ay dapat may mga silencer at maayos ang maintenance.
Þ Posibleng pagbabago sa daloy ng ilog at mga drain- Ang mga naaprubahang kagamitan lamang ang dapat Palitan ang mapuputol na puno base sa DENR MC No. mga ikokonsulta ng mga apektadong mamamayan. Ang
age sa panahon ng konstruksyon gamitin para sa konstruksyon. mga pamamaraan para sa karaingan ay isasama sa pinal
2012-02 (Sa bawat puno na mapuputol ay 100 katutu-
Þ Posibleng pagbaba ng kalidad ng tubig sa Ilog Gawin sa gabi ang maingay na operasyong malapit sa na Project Information Booklet (PIB) at Resettle- ment
bong puno ang itatanim bilang kapalit).
Marikina paaralan, sa katapusan ng linggo kung malapit sa mga Plan (RP) na ibabahagi at ipaaalam sa mga apektadong
Þ Potensyal na kontaminasyon ng tubig sa ilalim ng simbahan. Paghiwalayin ang maiingay na operasyon mamamayan.
lupa (groundwater) upang mabawasan ang kabuuang ingay, at kung posible, Hayop at halamang pantubig
papag-ibahin ang daan ng trapiko sa panahon ng Kung mayroon mga tanong at nais ng paglilinaw
Ilog at sapa (Surface water) konstruksyon upang maiwasan ang akumulasyon ng tungkol sa proyekto, sino ang maaring kausapin?
ingay na lampas sa mga pamantayan. Þ Epekto mula sa deposito/latak ng lupa (sediment)
Walang mga sasakyan at gamit pangkonstruksyon ang
dapat na nakaparada, kinukumpuni o kinakargahan ng Kung maingay pa rin, maglagay ng pansamantalang Engr. Norifel Teddie G. Cadiang
krudo, gasolina at langis malapit sa Ilog Marikina. harang sa ingay (noise barrier) sa mga sensitibong lugar Magtayo ng angkop at sapat na sanitary facility.
Engineer III
Magtayo ng mga palikuran o sanitary facility para sa o malapit sa pinagmumulan ng ingay. Mahigpit na atasan ang kontratista at mga manggagawa
nito na sundin ang wastong pagtatapon ng basura at UPMO- BMC, DPWH
mga manggagawa. Pagbabawal ng pagbusina malapit sa mga sensitibong +632 5304 3925
lugar at pagsusuot ng Personal Protective Equipment tamang sanitasyon.
Mahigpit na atasan ang kontratista at mga manggagawa +63919 0956778
nito na sumunod sa wastong pagtatapon ng basura at (PPE). Maghigpit sa pagpapanatili ng wastong paghawak at
wastong kalinisan. pagtatapon ng basura.
Pagtakda ng buffer zone ng konstruksiyon at mga Paglalagay ng buffer zones at containment barriers.
Vibration
containment barriers.
Sundin ang alituntunin sa pagtitipid ng tubig at pagbuti- Þ Abala dala ng vibration Trapiko
hin ang pangangasiwa ng tubig.
Tubig sa ilalim ng lupa (Ground water) Wastong operasyon at maintenance ng lahat ng Þ Epekto sa lebel ng trapiko
Isagawa ang pagmentina ng mga kagamitang pangkon- kagamitan na lilikha ng vibration.
struksyon sa tamang lugar at paraan para maiwasan Iwasan ang magpaandar ng maingay na kagamitan at Maglagay ng angkop na palatandaan pangtrapiko at
ang spills at kontaminasyon sa lupa. mga gawain na lilikha ng vibration sa gabi sa mga lugar babala
Maglagay ng mga interceptor ng langis sa mga sa
ng tirahan. Sa araw naman, iwasan gawin malapit sa
washdown at refueling areas.
Ang mga patapong langis at basahan ay dapat itabi at paaralan at iba pang mga institusyonal na lugar, at sa
itapon alinsunod sa RA 6969. mga simbahan sa oras ng pagsamba.
Volume 5
Survey Permit and
Socio-Economic Survey Instrument
INTERVIEWER ID: _______________
Metro Manila 3 Priority Bridges (MM3PB) Project

SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY INSTRUMENT
Instructions: Please write responses legibly on the space provided. For questions with numbered options, please
circle the number that corresponds to the respondent’s answer. For each question that doesn’t apply to
respondent write “NA” beside the question. For applicable questions without responses, write “NR”. For other
questions, please check the box that corresponds to the respondent’s answer.
Online Survey Telephone Interview Face-to-face Interview
FS DD Bridge 1 Bridge 2 Bridge 3
Main Structure Tag No: ______________________ PAP CONTROL NO: ________________

Associated Structure Tag/s (if any):
______________________________________________________________________
Non-Structure: Land Only Farm/Fish Pen
To be filled up by encoder:
Title No.: ___________________ PIN: ___________ TD No. ____________ Lot ID No. __________
Location/Address of Affected Structure/Land/Farm/Fish Pen
Household Number, if any: ________________________
Unit/Bldg. No.: ______________ Street: ________________ Village/Subdivision: ______________
Barangay: ___________________________ City/Municipality:__________________________
A. PAP’s PROFILE
A1. Name: ____________________, _____________________, __________________, _________

(Family Name) (First Name) (Middle Name) (Suffix)
A2. Contact No.: Mobile: ________________________________ Landline: ____________________

A3. Sex: 1. Male 2. Female A4. Age ____ A5. Birthdate ____________(mm/dd/yyyy)
A6. Civil Status:
1. Single 2. Married [answer A.11] 3. Separated 4. Widow/er 5. Live-in [answer A.11]
A7. Solo Parent with dependents1? 1. Yes 2. No

A8. Ethnicity: 1. Tagalog 2. Ilocano 3. Bicolano 4. Cebuano 5. Aklanon
6. Moro 7. IP _____________________________ 8. Kapampangan
9. Ilonggo 10. Waray 11. Mixed 12. Others: ________________________
A9. Religion
1. Catholic 2. Protestant 3. Born Again 4. Islam 5. INC 6. Others (Specify):___________________
A.10 Type of Project Affected Persons (can be multiple responses)
1. Household, Business, Farm, Landowner (Residing) – [Use unified HH form]
2. Business, Farm, Landowner (Non-Residing) – [Use supplemental HH form]
3. Corporation, Institution, Cooperative, Association – [no HH form]
A.11 Name of Spouse: (Family Name, First Name, Middle Name)
A.12 Birthdate:
1
Dependents are below 18 years old, above 65 years old, and PWD.
1
B. RESPONDENT’S PROFILE (Do not fill this out if the PAP is also the respondent)
B1. Name: ____________________, _____________________, __________________, _________

(Family Name) (First Name) (Middle Name) (Suffix)
B2. If representative, relationship of the respondent to the above PAP
1. Spouse 2. Child 3. Sibling 4. Parent 5. Worker/Employee 6. Caretaker
7. Other Relatives (specify: _______________) 8. Others (specify: ________________)
B3. Contact No.: Mobile: ________________________________ Landline: ____________________

B4. Sex: 1. Male 2. Female B5. Age: ________
C. STRUCTURE TYPE AND USE

C1. Type of Affected Structure
1. Single Detached 2.Duplex 3. Townhouse 4. Rowhouse 5. LRB (2-5 floors) 6. MRB (6-15 floors)
7. HRB (16 floors and up) 8. One level, non-residential building 9. Shanty
10. Other (specify:_____________) 11. No Affected Structure [SKIP to E]
(LRB: Low Rise Building, MRB: Medium Rise Building, HRB: High Rise Building)
C2. Use of Structure
1. Residential 2. Residential / Commercial 3.Residential/Institutional 4. Community Facility
5. Others (Specify______________________)
C3. Material of Main Structure: 1. Concrete 2. Semi-concrete 3. Light material (wood, bamboo, nipa,
palm, etc.) 4. Salvaged material (plastic, tin, cardboard, etc.) 5. Mixed Materials 6. Others (specify: _____)
C4. Status/Condition of Use
1. Occupied 2. Abandoned/Vacant [SKIP to E] 3. Under Construction [SKIP to E]
Is there any associated structure? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to D]
C7. Material of Associated C8. Used for Business
C5. Structure Tag No.* C6. Type of Associated Structure
Structure Purposes?
1.
2.
3.
* Only list down structures 1. Fence with gate 2. Fence 1. Concrete 2. Semi-concrete 1-Yes [ANSWER H]
3. Shed 4. Garage 5. Toilet 3. Light material (wood, bamboo, nipa,
with same structure owners
6. Storage 7.Water tank palm, etc.) 2-No
8. Pig pen/animal cage 4. Salvaged material (plastic, tin,
9. Swimming Pool 10. Playground cardboard, etc.) 5. Mixed Materials
11. Others (specify: ___________) 6. Others (specify: ___________)
D. STRUCTURE OWNERSHIP
D1 Do you own the affected structure? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to D2]
D1.1 If, yes, 1. Only owner 2. Co-owner
D1.2 Structure Owner/Co-Owner Details:
Name ____________________, ____________________, ___________________ Sex: 1. Male 2. Female
(Last) (First) (Middle)
Address: 1- Within Project Area, 2- Other Province Within Phils., 3- Abroad, 4- Unknown, 5- NA (Deceased)
Contact No.______________________________________________________
D1.3 Structure Owner/Co-Owner Details (if more than one):
Name ____________________, ____________________, ___________________ Sex: 1. Male 2. Female
(Last) (First) (Middle)
Address: 1- Within Project Area, 2- Other Province Within Phils., 3- Abroad, 4- Unknown, 5- NA (Deceased)
Contact No.______________________________________________________
D1.4 How did you acquire the structure?
1. Purchase 2. Inherited/Gratuitous Act 3. Self-Built 4. Relocated
5.Others (specify: _____________________________________________________________)
D1.5 Do you rent out the structure? 1. Yes 2. No[SKIP to D1.8]
2
D1.6 Number of renters/tenants, if any ): _______
Name (Last, First, Middle) of renters/tenants Contact No.
1.
2.
D1.7 How much is the average rent per month: Php ______________
D1.8 Is this structure used for business?
1. Yes [ANSWER Section H] 2. No [SKIP to Section E]
D1.9 Do you pay taxes for the structure? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to Section E]
D1.10 If Yes, how much tax (RPT) did you pay last year? Php ________________
For Non structure owner only (D2 - D3.1)
D2. If not the owner, what type of arrangement do you have with structure owner?
1. Tenant/Renter/Lessee [ANSWER D2.1 – D3.1] 2. Rent free occupant 3. Caretaker
4. Sharer [ANSWER D2.1] 5. Occupant without owner’s permission
D2.1 If Renter/Sharer, how much is your rent/share per month? Php_________________
D2.2 What is the size of your rented space? ________________ square meter
D3. What proof do you have to show arrangement with owner?
1. Written contract 2. Verbal arrangement 3. None
D3.1 If written contract, what are the terms? 1. Annual contract 2. Others (Specify) ___________
E. LAND OWNERSHIP
E1. Do you own the land where this structure/farm/fishpond is built/located?
1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to E3]
E1.2. If Yes, what is the tenure status of the parcel 1. Fully owned 2. Co-owned
E1.3 Registered Owner: 1. Husband only 2. Wife only 3. Both husband & wife
4. Female HH Head 5. Male HH Head 6. Female HH member
7. Male HH member 8. Deceased HH member 9. Non-relative
E2. Do you have a valid/ legal document to prove ownership of this land?
1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to E2.3]
E2.1 If yes, what is your proof of Ownership? (Can be multiple responses)
1. 1. Title (OCT/TCT/CLT/CLOA/CADT/CALT) 2. Real Property Tax 3. Deed of Sale 4. Mortgage
5. Contract 6. Lease Purchase Agreement 7. Certificate of Lot Award/Occupancy
2. 8. Others (Specify) ______________ 9. None
3. E2.2 If title, what is the title number? ___________________

E2.3 How did you acquire the land?
1. Purchased 2. Inherited 3. Given 4. Government Program 5. Others (specify: ______________)
E2.4 Do you pay the real estate tax for the land? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to E2.6]
E2.5 If yes, how much per year? Php ___________
E2.6 Do you have tenant/lessees? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to E2.7]

E2.6.1 If yes, please specify the name of tenant/lessees:
Name (Last, First, Middle) Contact No.
1.
2.
E2.6.2 How much is the rent/share? (ask mode of payment, amount of rent) PhP____________
1. Monthly 2. Quarterly 3. Bi-Annual 4. Annually 5. By contract/tranche
E2.7 Is this lot currently on loan or used as mortgage to a bank or private entity? 1. Yes 2. No
3
For Non landowner only (E3 – E3.1.2)
E3. If not the landowner, what is your arrangement with the owner?
1. 1. Renting/Leasing [ANSWER E3.1 – E3.3.1] 2. Occupied with owner’s permission 3. Acquired Right 4. Occupied without
owner’s permission 5. Rent-free 6. Tenant 7. Caretaker 8. Others (Specify) ________________
E3.1 If Renter/Lessee, how much is your rent/lease per month? Php_________________
E3.2 What is the size of your rented area? ________________ square meter
E3.3 What proof do you have to show arrangement with landowner owner?
1. Written contract 2. Verbal arrangement
E3.3.1 If written contract, what are the terms? 1. Annual contract 2. Others (Specify) ___________
F. TYPE AND USE OF AFFECTED LAND

F1. Type of Land: 1. Private 2. Public 3. Right of Way (ROW) 4. Ancestral Domain
F1.1 Type of Ownership: 1. Individual 2. Multiple Owner 3. Corporation
4. Community Ownership (CMP, HOA, Coop) 5. Government
F2. Current Actual Use of Land (Can be multiple responses)
1. Residential [ANSWER Section G] 2. Industrial [ANSWER Section H] 3.Commercial [ANSWER Section H]
4. Institutional [ANSWER Section H] 5. Agriculture [ANSWER Section I] 6. Aquaculture [ANSWER Section I]
7. Vacant/Idle Land [SKIP to J] 8. Others (specify:_____________)
4
G. HOUSEHOLD CENSUS
G1. HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION
G1.1 Composition of Household/Family Members
G1.1.1 Number of Household Members ______________________
No. G1.1.2 Name G1.1.7 G1.1.8

G1.1.6 If ongoing
G1.1.3 G1.1.4 G1.1.5 Relationship to Highest Educational
Sex Age Ethnicity Household Head Attainment education, location
Last Name First Name Middle Name
of School?
1 HH
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.Male 1. Tagalog 1.Head of family 1.Pre-school 1.Within neighborhood or
2.Female 2. IIocano 2.Spouse 2.Elem. Level (Grade 1-6) barangay
3. Bicolano 3.Son/daughter 3. Elementary Graduate 2.Near barangay
4.Cebuano 4.Father/mother 4. High School Level (Grade 3.Other city/ municipality
5. Aklanon 5.Sister/brother 7-12) 4.Overseas
6. Moro 6.Grandchildren 5. High School Graduate 5.Others, please specify
7. IP, Specify 7.Grandparents 6. Vocational/Technical 6. Not Applicable
8. Kapampangan 8.Other relative 7.College Level
9. Ilonggo 9.Non-relative, specify 8. College Graduate
10. Waray 9.Advanced College/
11. Mixed university Degree
12.Other , Specify 10.None
11. SPED, specify level
(If the space is not enough, make a list on a separate paper.)
5
G1. HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION (Continuation… Please list all household members in the same order in the following table.)
No. Name (For Working HH Member Only) G1.3.1 G1.3.2 G1.3.3 G1.3.4 G1.3.5 G1.3.6 G1.3.7 G1.3.8
Income Location If wage- If self-
Main Source Basis of If land-based, If wage-based, based
of Income (Php/Month) Income what type? what is the employed,
Last Name First Name Middle Name what type?
Payment status of (please what type of
employment? specify) occupation?
1 HH
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
G1.3.9 Combined primary family income PHP __________
* Others: Wage-Based 1- Land–Based, 1.Own 1.Daily 1.Crop Production 1.Permanent/Regular 1.Office Work 1. Peddling
2- Wage-Based, residence 2.Weekly 2. Fish Production 2.Contractual/Project 2.Public Official 3. Food processing/
10. Production/Factory Workers, 11. Aviation, 12. Arts, 13. Business 2. Outside Based preparation
3- Enterprise/ 3.Monthly 3. Livestock/poultry 3.Sales/Vendor
(worker receiving salary), 14. Law Enforcement, 15. Media, Business residence but 4.Bi-Monthly production 3. Temporary/ Casual 4.Driver 4. Hair/Nails/Make-
4- Self-employed within PROW 5.Pakyaw or 4. Mix 4. Seasonal/ 5.Househelp up
16. Medical, 17. Service Industry, 18. Teaching, 19. Technology, 5- Remittance- 3.Within Piecemeal 5.Others please Intermittent 5. Transport (e.g.
6. Construction
Based/Pension neighborhood 6.Commission specify 5.Others, please Worker tricycle, pedicab)
20. Animal Career, 21. Military Service, 22. Clergy Profession, or barangay
/Donation 7.Irregular, specify 7.Industry 6. Small scale
23. Sea-based Careers, 24. OFW, 25. Engineering Professionals 6-Others, specify 4.Near Please specify Worker production
barangay (tailoring, crafts
26. Others, specify: ________________________ 8. Farm work
5.Other city making, weaving)
9. Fishing activity
/municipality 7. House/Room
** Others: Self-employed
6.Overseas Rental
*Others, please
13. Online selling 14. Buy and sell/trading 7.No definite 8. Construction
see choices (left)
area 9.Vulcanizing
15. Pisonet 16. Shoemaking, 17. Tattoo/painting 8.Others, 10. Repair services
18. Re-seller (i.e. cosmetic products) 19. Billiards please specify (shoe, umbrella)
11. Scavenging
20. Small scale printing (tarpaulin, Xerox) 21. Piggery/poultry For business 12. Laundry/
22. Others, specify: ________________________ and land based cleaning services
located within
own residence ** Others, please
or PROW, see choices
interview using
BS/AF Form
6
No. Name (For Working HH Member Only) G1.4.1 G1.4.2 G1.4.3 G1.4.4 G1.4.5 G1.4.6 G1.4.7 G1.4.8
Secondary Income Location Basis of If land-based, If wage-based, If wage-based If self-employed,
Source of Income what type? what is the what type? what type of
Income (Php/Mont status of (please specify)
Last Name First Name Middle Name h) Payment occupation?
employment?
1 HH
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
G1.4.11 Total Combined HH Monthly Income
G2.4.9 Combined secondary family income PHP ________ G1.4.10 No. of members contributing ___
PHP ________________ (Sum of G1.3.9 & G1.4.9)
* Others: Wage-Based 1- Land–Based, 1.Own residence 1.Daily 1. Crop Production 1.Permanent/Regul 1.Office Work 1. Peddling
2- Wage-Based, 2. Outside 2.Weekly 2. Fish Production ar 2.Public Official 3. Food processing/
10. Production/Factory Workers, 11. Aviation, 12. Arts, 13. Business
3- Enterprise/ residence but 3.Monthly 3. Livestock/poultry 2.Contractual/Proje 3.Sales preparation
(worker receiving salary), 14. Law Enforcement, 15. Media, Business within PROW 4.Bi-Monthly production ct Based 4.Driver 4. Hair/Nails/Make-up
4- Self-employed 3.Within 5.Pakyaw or 4. Mix 3. Temporary/ 5.Househelp 5. Transport (e.g.
16. Medical, 17. Service Industry, 18. Teaching, 19. Technology, neighborhood or Piecemeal Casual
5- Remittance- 4.Others please 6. Construction tricycle, pedicab)
20. Animal Career, 21. Military Service, 22. Clergy Profession, Based/Pension barangay 6.Commission specify 4. Seasonal/ Worker 6. Small scale
/Donation 4.Near barangay 7.Irregular, Intermittent 7.Industry Worker production (tailoring,
23. Sea-based Careers, 24. OFW, 25. Engineering Professionals 5.Other city 5.Others, please crafts making, weaving)
6-Others, specify please specify 8. Farm work
26. Others, specify: ________________________ /municipality specify 7. House/Room Rental
9. Fishing activity
6.Overseas 8. Construction
** Others: Enterprise-Based
7.No definite 9.Vulcanizing
*Others, please see
13. Online selling 14. Buy and sell/trading area 10. Repair services
choices (left)
8.Others, please (shoe, umbrella)
15. Pisonet 16. Shoemaking, 17. Tattoo/painting specify 11. Scavenging
18. Re-seller (i.e. cosmetic products) 19. Billiards 12. Laundry/ cleaning
services
20. Printing and Reproduction (tarpaulin, Xerox), 21. Piggery/poultry
22. Others, specify: ________________________ ** Others, please see
choices
7
G1.5 Skills, Membership in Organizations and Vulnerability

No. Name G1.5.1 G1.5.2 G1.5.3 G1.5.4 G1.5.5
Current Preferred Skills Location of Vulnerability Who takes care
Last Name First Name Middle Name Skills of vulnerable
Training Organization HH member?
1 HH
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1- Carpentry, 1- Carpentry, 1.Homeowners 1.Baby/Toddler 1- Other family/household
2-Driving, 2-Driving, Association 2.Pregnant member or relatives living
3- Mechanic, 3- Mechanic, 2.Cooperative 3.Elderly independently
4-Practical Electricity, 4-Practical Electricity, 3.Women’s Group 4.Mental Disorder 2- Day Care Center
5-Welding, 5-Welding, 4. Savings Group 5.Needs Assistance 3- Leaving the
6-Industrial Painting, 6-Industrial Painting, 5. Religious Walking/Cannot Walk children/vulnerable in the
Organization 6.Seriously Ill care of neighbors
7-Computer 7-Computer Technician
Technician 6. Senior Citizen 7.Blind 4- Leaving the
8-Dressmaking/
7. Others, please children/vulnerable un-
8-Dressmaking/ Tailoring 8.Mute/Deaf
specify attended
Tailoring 9- Food Processing 9.Others please
8. None 5- Other facilities, please
9- Food Processing 10-Handicrafts Making specify
specify
10-Handicrafts 11-Hair Dressing/ 10. None
6. None
Making Cosmetology 7- Not Applicable
11-Hair Dressing/ 12. Cooking
Cosmetology 13- Others, please
12. Cooking specify
13- Others, please 14-None
specify
14-None
8
G2. BASIC HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION
Applicable only to PAPs with household inside the project area
G2.1 Affected Household? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP TO G3]

G2.2 Type of Residence
1. Primary Residence If primary, do you have a secondary residence? Yes No
2. Secondary Residence If secondary, where is your primary residence located? (Specify) ___________________________
G2.3 Length of stay on current location
1. 0-6 months 2. 7-11 months 3. 1-2 years 4. 3-5 years 5. 6-10 years
6. 11-15 years 7. 16-20 years 8. More than 20 years 9. Since birth [SKIP TO G2.5]
G2.4 Place of Residence prior to current location
1. Same Barangay 2. In City/Municipality 3. Metro Manila (City: _______________________)
4. Other City/Municipality (Specify ______________) 5. Other province (Specify __________)
G2.5 Primary reason for establishing residence on current location (single response only)
1. Proximity to livelihood 2. Rent free / Affordable rental fee 3. Family ties 4. Near school
5. Got married 6. Other (Specify) _____________________
G2.6 Social Safety Net and Financial Support Services (Can be multiple responses)
1. Pag-ibig fund– HDMF 2. GSIS 3. SSS 4. Cooperative (specify name) _________________
5. Phil Health 6. Micro-Finance 7. 4Ps 8. Others (Specify) _________________ 9. None
(HDMF: Home Dev’t Mutual Fund, GSIS: Government Service Insurance System, SSS: Social Security System, 4Ps:Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program)
G3. MONTHLY EXPENDITURE OF HOUSEHOLD (PHP)

G3.2
Estimated
G3.1 Expense Items G3.3 Remarks
Cost
(Php/Month)
1. Rent (land)- E3.1
2.Rent (house/room)- D2.1
3. Housing amortization (rent to own)
4. Car/motorcycle amortization
5. Savings If in bank, under whose name?
________________________
Sex: 1. Male 2. Female 3. Both
6.Tax (Land/Structure)- D1.10, E2.4,
7.Food /Groceries
8.Non-Food Items/ Groceries
9. Light (Electricity)
10. Water
11. Education
12. Communication (landline/mobile phone)
13. Internet Connection
14. Cable Connection
15.Transportation (Fare/Gas)
16. Recreation (Travel, Eat Out, etc.)
17.Health (Check-up, Maintenance Medicine)
18. Cooking (LPG, Gas, Charcoal)
19. Loan Payment/Amortization
(Appliances, Furniture, Personal/Bank Debt, etc.)
20. Financial Support
21. Salary (House help, Driver, Employee, etc)
22.Others (Specify)
TOTAL ( PHP ) *
*Note: G3.2 should not be higher than G.2.4.11
G4. HOUSEHOLD GOODS OWNED
G4.2 Quantity G4.3 Sex of G4.4 Estimated

G4.1 Item Owners Total Value
G.4.2.2. No. (1.Male, 2.Female,
G4.2.1 No. of G4.2.3.Total 3. Both) (Php)
of Non-
Functioning No.
Functioning
1.House (Yes in D1)
2. Car
3.Tricycle/bicycle
4.Motorcycle/E-bike
5. Landline telephone
6. Cell phone
7. Computer
8. TV set/Videoke
9. VCD/DVD
10. Stereo Component
11.Refrigerator/Freezer
12.Washing machine/ Dryer
13.Oven/Range
14.Microwave
15. Bed
16.Sala Set
17.Dining Set
18. Electric Fan
19. Aircon
20. Others, specify
G5. DECISION MAKING: HOUSEHOLD FINANCE

G5 In your family/household, who decides for the following? (Single Response Only)
G5.1 Whether to let children continue school, or send to higher education
1. Husband only 2. Wife only 3. Both husband & wife 4. Household Head
5. Others (Specify) ____________ 6. Not Applicable: no student in the household
G5.2 How income of household/family member is managed for household expenses
1. Both husband and wife pool their income together for household expenses.
2. Husband collects income from wife and other members for household expenses.
3. Husband gives his income to wife and wife manages the fund for household expenses.
4. Other female household member collects income from income earning members and manages fund.
5. Other male household member collects income from income earning members and manages fund.
6. Household Head
7. Others: ___________________________
G5.3 In whose name is any of your property registered? (D1.2, E1.3)
1. Husband only 2. Wife only 3. Both husband & wife 4. Female HH Head 5. Male HH Head
6. Female HH member 7. Male HH member 8. Others (Specify) __________________
9. Not Applicable: no property
G6. RESPONSIBILITY ON DOMESTIC CHORES
G6 In your family/household, who does the following?
G6.1 Supervising and giving discipline to child(ren) (Single Response Only)
6. Female HH member 7. Male HH member 8. Others (Specify) ______________
9. Not Applicable: no child(ren) in the household
G6.2 Taking care of vulnerable member of the household/family (Single Response Only)
6. Female HH member 7. Male HH member 8. Others (Specify) __________________
9. Not Applicable: no vulnerable member
G6.3 Doing household chores-- cleaning and tidying the house and improvement, preparing meals,
disposal of garbage, etc. (Single Response Only)
6. Female HH member 7. Male HH member 8. All HH members 9. Others (Specify) ____________
G7. LIVING CONDITION

G7 Access to Utilities
G7.1 Primary Access to Electricity (single response only)
1. Own electric meter for power connection 2. Shared connection 3. Illegal Connection
4. No connection (gas/kerosene, rechargeable battery, LPG, oil) 5. Others (Specify) ______
G7.2 Primary Access to Water (single response only)
1. Piped/metered connection 2. Shared with neighbor (community faucet) 3. Deep well
4. Shallow well 5. Buy from water vendors 6. Others (Specify) _____________________________
G7.3 Primary Access to Sanitation (single response only)
1. Own water sealed toilets (inside house) 2. Open pit 3. Communal/barangay toilet
4. No toilet 5. Others (Specify)_____________
G7.4 Main Fuel Used for Cooking (single response only)
1. Gas (LPG) 2. Kerosene 3. Charcoal 4. Wood 5. Electricity 6. None 7. Other (Specify) ______
G8. HEALTH CONDITIONS (Can be multiple responses)

G8.1 Morbidity: Health problems experienced in your household/family for the past one year
1. HIV/AIDS 4. Typhoid fever 7. Pneumonia/Tuberculosis 10. Heart problems 13. None
2. Malaria 5. Diarrhea 8. Flu 11. Hypertension 14. Liver Failure
3. Dengue 6. Skin diseases 9. Cancer 12. Diabetes 15. COVID-related
G8.2 Mortality: Observed causes of death in your community
1. HIV/AIDS 4. Typhoid fever 7. Pneumonia/Tuberculosis 10. Heart problems 13. None
2. Malaria 5. Diarrhea 8. Flu 11. Hypertension 14. Liver Failure
3. Dengue 6. Skin diseases 9. Cancer 12. Diabetes 15. COVID-related
G9. COMMUNITY ISSUES (Can be multiple responses)

G9.1 What do you think are the persistent problems in your community?
1. Health 4. Safety/Security 7. Garbage collection
2. Water/Sanitation 5. Illegal Drugs 8. Others (Specify) ___________________
3. Flooding 6. Job/Employment 9. None
G10. PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE ON RELOCATION

G10.1 Have you ever been displaced due to a relocation, demolition or government infrastructure
project? 1. Yes 2. No
G10.2 Have you availed of a government housing program before? 1.Yes 2. No [SKIP to G10.5]
G10.3 What kind of housing project was it?
1. NHA relocation site 2. SHFC CMP 3. Pag-IBIG Housing 4. LGU Housing
5. DSWD 6. Other government agency initiative 7. Others (Specify) ___________
(NHA: National Housing Authority, SHFC CMP: Socialized Housing Finance Corporation , Community Mortgage Program, Pag-IBIG: Pagtutulugan sa Kinabukasan: Ikaw,
Bangko, Industriya, Gobyerno, LGU: Local Government Unit, DSWD: Department of Social Welfare and Development)
G10.4 What did you do in the awarded housing unit/lot? 1. Kept/Maintained 2. Transferred to
children/relatives 3. Abandoned 4. Rented out 5. Sold/Mortgaged 6. Others (specify)___________
G10.5 Did you avail of Balik Probinsya Program? 1. Yes 2. No
G10.6 If previously relocated and have gone back to the area, what made you come back? (Multiple Responses)
1. No work/livelihood opportunities 2. No access to public transportation
3. No access to/provision of utilities (light & water) 4. No available healthcare facilities
5. No near educational facilities 6. Others (Specify) ________________
G10.7 If you will be displaced from your current home, which relocation assistance do you
prefer?
1. Assistance to avail socialized housing/economic housing
2. Assistance to avail Balik Probinsya
3. Assistance to find alternative site to rebuild our home
G10.8 If you will avail socialized housing, where do you prefer to resettle? (Single Response Only)
1 Same barangay 4. Within Metro Manila
2. Within same City/Municipality 5. City/municipality in other province/region
3. City/Municipality within same province
G10. 9 Which housing agency/institution would you prefer?
1. NHA 2. SHFC (CMP) 3. LGU 4. Pag-IBIG 6. NGO (i.e. Gawad Kalinga/Habitat)
G10.10 What type of structure would you prefer?

1. Single detached 2. Duplex 3. Row House 4. LRB 5. MRB 6. Lot only
7. None of the choices
G10.8 What would be your considerations for the relocation site? (choose one)
1. Near work/livelihood opportunities 2. Near schools 3. Near market/malls 4. Near Church
5. Near recreational activities 6. Access to public transportation 7. Others (Specify) _______
G10.9. Do you own land in your province or anywhere in the country? 1. Yes 2. No
G10.9.1 If Yes, where? (Specify) _________________________________________________
G10.10 Will you agree to be relocated in high density housing? 1. Yes 2. No
G10.11 How much are you willing to pay for a housing unit per month (Php)?
1. Above Php 5,000 2. Php 5,000 3. Php 4,000 4. Php 3,000 5. Php 2,000
6. Php 1,500 7. Php 1000 8. Below Php 1,000 7. Php 500 8. Below Php 500
H. CENSUS OF BUSINESS/INSTITUTION
Applicable for PAP with non-dwelling structure inside the project area
H1. PROFILE OF BUSINESS/INSTITUTION

H1 Do you own/operate a business/institution in the affected area? 1. Yes 2. No [SKIP to I]
H1.1 Business/ Institution Name:
____________________________________________________________
H1.2 Type of Business/Institution
1. Trading/Retailing 2. Manufacturing 4. Personal Services (Barber Shop, Laundry

(General Merchandise, 3. Restaurant/Fast Shop, Pump Service, etc)
Paint Shop/Hardware, Food/Eatery 5. Transport
Fruit/Food Stand) 6. Home/Small-scale industry
7. Service Contracting 8. House/Room Rental 10. Barangay/Office/Organization
[Answer H1.5] 9. Commercial Space/Unit 11. Bank/Church/School/Hospital
Rental 12. Resort
13. Machining and 14. Printing, Repro, Art Sign 17. Aquaculture
Fabrication 15. Cockpit ring 18. Poultry/Livestock Raising
16. Farming 19. Warehouse
20. Others (Specify) _____________
H1.3 Type of Business/Institution Ownership
1. Single proprietorship 2. Partnership 3. Corporation 4. Cooperative 5. Association 6. Government (Non-Corp)
7. Government Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC) 8. Others (Specify) ________________
H1.4 How much is your capital/business asset? 1. < 3M 2. > 3M, <15M
3. >15M, <100M 4. Not Applicable [SKIP to H2]
H1.5 Type of Service: 1. Information Technology 2. Education/Training Services 3. Consulting
4. Transportation Services 5. Events 6. Media 7. Financial Services 8. Medicine
8. Professional Services 10. Wellness 11. Production/manufacturing 11. Others __________
H1.6 Length of Business/ Institution in Operation: ________ (No. of years)
H1.7 Start of operation ______ (Specify year)
H1.8 Business License/Registration/Permit (Multiple Response)
1. Registered with DTI 2. Registered with SEC 3. Registered with BIR
4. Barangay Business Permit 5. Mayor’s Permit/LGU Permit 6. Not registered in any
H1.9 Monthly Business Income
H1.9.1 Ave. Gross Monthly Income: PhP _______ H1.9.2 Ave. Net Monthly Income: PhP ________
H2. EMPLOYEE INFORMATION
H2.1 Who help you in your business operation/production?
1. Family Members 2. Relatives 3. Non-relatives 4. Mix of 1, 2 & 3 5. None [Skip to I]
H2.2 Do you have paid employees? 1. Yes 2. No [Skip to I]
H2.3 How many employees do you have? 1. 1-9 2. 10-99 3. 100-199 4. 200 and up
H2.3.2 No of
H2.3.1 Total Number of Employees H2.3.3 Average
Employees by Sex *H2.3.4 Skills
(fill out what’s applicable) Monthly Salary
M F
Management/Executive level
Technical Staff/Skilled workers
Support Staff/Unskilled workers
Total *1. Construction related 2. Food Preparation/Technology
3. Hotel/Restaurant related 4. Automotive related 5. Electronic/Electrical related 6. Computer related 7. Health related 8. Clerical related 9. Sales related
10. Personal Services related 11. Design/Arts related 12. Dressmaking related 13. Agriculture related 14. Aquaculture Related 15. Business/Finance related
H3 SUPPLEMENTAL SURVEY FOR BUSINESS

H3.1 Name of HH Head: , ,
(Family Name) (First Name) (MI)
H3.2 Place of Residence:

Unit/Bldg. No.: ______________ Street: _______________________________________________
Village/Subdivision: _______________________________________________________________
Barangay _______________________________ City/Municipality: _________________________
H3.3 Contact No.: Mobile: Landline:
H3.4 Birth Date:_________________________. (dd/mm/yyyy)

H3.5 Civil Status
1. Single 2. Married 3. Separated 4. Widow/er 5. Live-in 6. Others (Specify)
__________________________
H4. Household Information
H4.1 Composition of Household/Family Members

H4.1.1 Number of Household Members
No. Last Name First Name Middle Name H4.1.2 H4.1.3 H4.1.4 H4.1.5
Sex Age Relationship to Highest H4.1.6
HH Head Educational Vulnerability
Attainment
1 HH Head
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.Male 1. 6 yo or 1.Head of family 1 .Pre-school 1.Income below
2.Female less 2.Spouse 2.Elementary Level poverty threshold
2.7-12yo 3. Elementary Graduate 2.Elderly
3.Son/daughter 3.Mental Disorder
3.13-16yo 4.Father/mother 4. High School Level
4.17-20yo 4.Seriously Ill
5.Sister/brother 5. High School Graduate
5. 21-40yo 5. Single Parent
6.Grandchildren 6.Vocational/Technical
6.41-60yo 7.College Level
7.Grandparents
7.61-above 8. College Graduate NCR: APC 2018
8.Other
9. Advanced College/ P28,862
university Degree Region IV-A: APC 2018
10.None P23,688
14
H4. Household Livelihood Information
H4.1 Combined HH Monthly Income (PhP) (Include all those contributing to the Household income)
No. H4.1Name H4.1.2 From Primary H4.1.3 H4.1.4 From Secondary
H4.1.1
Income Secondary Source of Income
Primary Source of
Income (Php/Month) Income (Php/Month)
1 Head
2 Spouse
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1. Land-based, 1. Land-based,
2. Wage-based, 2. Wage-based,
3. Enterprise-based, 3. Enterprise-based,
4. Remittance-based 4. Remittance-based
5. No Occupation 5. No Occupation
6. Others, Specify 6. Others, Specify
H4.1.5 No. of members contributing
H4.1.6 Total Combined HH Monthly Income Php
15
H4.2. Monthly Expenditure of Household (PhP)
H4.2.1 Expense Items H4.2.2 Estimated Cost

(PhP/Month)
1. Rent (land)
2. Rent (house/room)
3. Savings
4. Tax
5. Food (Groceries)
6. Light
7. Water
8. Education
9. Communication (landline/mobile phone, internet, cable etc.)
10.Transportation
11.Recreation
12.Health
13.Others (Specify)
TOTAL ( Php )
H4.3. Household Assets Owned
H4.3.1 Item H4.3.2 Own? H4.3.1 Item H4.3.2 Own?

1.House 10. Stereo Component
2. Car 11.Refrigerator
3.Tricycle 12.Washing machine
4.Motorcycle 13. Oven/Range
5. Landline telephone 14.Microwave
6. Cell phone 15. Bed
7. Computer 16.Sala Set
8. TV set 17.Dining Set
9.VCR/VCD 18. Others, (Specify)
1 - YES 1 - YES
2 - NO 2 - NO
H5. LIVELIHOOD REHABILITATION MEASURES (may include more than one response)
H5.1 In case you lose your job or in the event of business closure due to the implementation of the
project, what type of livelihood assistance would you need?
1. Job/employment within the current sector 4. Replacement land/business structure
2. Any job/employment 5. Vocational/Skills Training
3. Financial assistance in finding new employment 6. Financial Assistance
7. Others (Specify): _______________________
H5.2 Where is your preferred location for employment or new business?
1. Current barangay 2. Any barangay within current city 3. Any city within same province
4. Near relocation site 5. Other province 6. Abroad/Outside the country
H5.3 What is/are your current skills/expertise?
1. Construction related 2. Food Preparation/Technology 3. Hotel/Restaurant related
4. Automotive related 5. Electronic/Electrical related 6. Computer related
7. Health related 8. Clerical related 9. Sales related
10. Personal Services related 11. Design/Arts related 12. Dressmaking related
13. Agriculture related 14. Aquaculture Related 15. Business/Finance related
H5.4 What is/are your preferred vocational/skills training?
1. Construction related 2. Food Preparation/Technology 3. Hotel/Restaurant related
4. Automotive related 5. Electronic/Electrical related 6. Computer related
7. Health related 8. Clerical related 9. Sales related
10. Personal Services related 11. Design/Arts related 12. Dressmaking related
13. Agriculture related 14. Aquaculture Related 15. Business/Finance related
I. PROJECT AWARENESS
I1. Have you heard about the NSCR-Ex project? 1. Yes 2. No
I2. What benefits do you think can be derived from this project? (Can be multiple responses)
1. Will reduce the traffic jam
2. Will improve comfort and convenience to passengers and car owners
3. project will improve access to social amenities and facilities such as schools, hotels,
recreational facilities, and hospitals
4. will improve access to working place/office
5. value of commercial and residential properties will increase
6. will open up opportunities for work and business
7. others (Specify): __________________
I3. What are your overall issues and concerns about the project? (Can be multiple responses)
1. My house will be demolished/We will be relocated to another area.
2. My fishing activity will be stopped
3. Fishing environment in the area will be disturbed because of bridge construction activities
4. Number of fish species will significantly decrease
5. My business/livelihood will be affected.
6. I will lose income
7. I will lose access to the river
8. Living environment in the area will get worse because of noise and vibration.
9. Flooding will worsen in our community
10. Value of commercial and residential properties will decrease.
11. Others (Specify) ____________________________________________________________
I4. Do you support the proposed project?

1. Yes
2. No (If no, why___________________________________________________________________)
I5. What are your recommendations to address your issues and concerns?
1. Redesign the Project 2. Provision of Compensation 3. Financial Assistance
4. Livelihood Restoration 6. Relocation House/Structure 7. Others:______________________
DATA PRIVACY CONSENT

I understand that the information above is collected for the purpose of the North South Commuter Railway Extension (NSCR-Ex) project
and I express my consent for the EcosysCorp, Inc. and its clients to collect, record, organize, store, retrieve, consult, use, consolidate,
block, erase or destroy my personal data as part of my information. I also agree that my personal data and all privileged information
herein shall be processed only in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 3 of Republic Act No. 10173 of the Philippines,
Data Privacy Act of 2012 and its corresponding Implementing Rules and Regulations, provided further that all information herein shall
be protected and shall not be used for other purposes aside from the above project without my knowledge and consent.
Name Signature Date

Respondent
Interviewer/Agent
Field Supervisor
QC Editor

52181-001-Rp-En - 11 - Bridge 3 Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

52181-001-Rp-En - 11 - Bridge 3 Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Resettlement Plan

Philippines: Metro Manila Bridges Project

Bridge 3: Kabayani Street–Matandang Balara Bridge

Volume 1: List of Affected Persons

Volume 2: Inventory of Affected Structures and other Improvements

Volume 3: Replacement Cost of Affected Land and Non-Land Assets

Volume 4: Documentation of Consultation Meetings and PIB

Metro Manila Bridges Project

MARIKINA NORTH SEWAGE TREATMENT

as of March 25, 2021

MM3PB-01-05-S002 B3-009 CAASI, ROSITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

MM3PB-01-05-S003 B3-009 CAASI, ROSITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

MM3PB-01-05-S004 B3-009 ICASA, MINDA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

MM3PB-01-05-S006 B3-009 ABO, AMELITA NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

MM3PB-01-05-S014 B3-018 BELO, SALVACION NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

MM3PB-01-05-S047 B3-009 JUEGO, ADAM NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY MARIKINA NANGKA

BRIDGE 2 – HOMEOWNER’S DRIVE-A. BONIFACIO BRIDGE

BRIDGE 3 – KABAYANI STREET-MATANDANG BALARA BRIDGE

BRGY. CONCEPCION UNO, MARIKINA CITY (01-06)

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S001

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S002

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S003

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S004

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S005

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S006

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S014

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S047

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S048

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-05-S049

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-06-S001

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-06-S003

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-06-S004

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-06-S006

Structure Tagging No. : MM3PB-01-06-S033

2. On Value of Structures and Other Land Improvements

1. Direct Cost – refers to cost of materials and labor

A Replacement Cost Survey report for structures consists of:

1. This letter with Appraiser Certificate

Prepared for : DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

DASAN CONSULTANTS CO. LTD

The scope of the appraisal covers the land only.

 Extent, character and utility of the Property affected;

Our report consists of:

 This letter with Appraiser Certificate

 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

Summary of Pertinent Facts and Conclusion

Property Appraised : Land

Property Location : Barangays Nangka, Concepcion Uno and Tumana of Marikina

Property Rights Appraised: Fee Simple Estate

Appraisal Date : February 28, 2021

Appraisal Purpose : To express an opinion of the Market Value of the property

Market Value : PESOS: ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED

1. buyer and seller are typically motivated;

Site 1: Barangay Tumana

Site 2: Barangay Nangka

LAND CLASSIFICATION (from Tax

Total 329,449.36 11,659.27 317,790.09 12,291.49

Site 3: Barangay Concepcion Uno

LAND CLASSIFICATION (from Tax

TOTAL 375.00 329.68 45.32 375.00

Marikina River as taken from the northern bank in Barangay Nangka

Panoramic photo of Site 1: Barangay Tumana