Re: 2 Recent Presentations (on Zoning and on Municipal Waters)

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Greetings once again. Google has apparently imposed a new 8.0 megabyte (mb) limit on  attachments, effectively requiring that the 13.0 mb pdf file of the ZONING presentation be reduced to just 45 slides. I will now need to send the 2 presentations separately. For those who may still want to look at the full version of the ZONING presentation (65 slides), the same may be viewed at/downloaded from the Files section of this public Facebook chatgroup - PEPtalk at https://www.facebook.com/groups/470603218142570.

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 7:30 AM EnP. Armando ALLI <planne...@gmail.com> wrote:

Greetings. Please allow me to share here 2 recent presentations that may be of some use in certain physical/land-water use planning efforts, viz:

1)    on ZONING at the Public Hearing on a NCR LGU’s Proposed 2023 LGU Zoning Ordinance (ZO) Amendments i.e. with special focus on hybrid zoning, establishing the actual development potential of lots under current development controls/DCs and the physical manifestation of the public domain at the urban portions of a LGU, delivered 14 December 2022, 2:15pm-3:15pm, face-to-face (F2F), at 61 slides; and

2)    on MUNICIPAL WATERS (Laws, Regulations & Jurisdiction) i.e. since territorial waters at the LGU level are clearly referred to in the 1987 Philippine Constitution as one of 4 physical domains i.e. the others being land, air and subsoil (potentially referring to sub-surfaces under both land and water), delivered 16 December 2022, 10:00am-11:00am on Google Meet (at 35 slides). Thanks.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

x x x and this is the other presentation on MUNICIPAL WATERS at 3.5 mb. Thanks again. Regards to everyone.

x x x x x x x 

[Ana Marie Abante]

Thank you for sharing. Merry Christmans!! 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to piepmembers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2BhwzvBp6y67jz5PBprdZiucYPCvX8yFGQ7xHxh5mQMv-EYQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Thank You, too. EnP Ana. Merry Christmas as well! Warm regards, AAlli

x x x x x x x x. x

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CALN-wJHsfMP54ao06cJ8zptk%2BFg9Y4VtJYKHsng8xEPNxox9Sw%40mail.gmail.com.

[linda hornilla]

Dear Boie,

Thank you for your efforts in keeping us abreast with new developments. Much appreciated.

EnP Linda 

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 3:59 PM, EnP. Armando ALLI

<planne...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to piepmembers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2BhwzvBp6y67jz5PBprdZiucYPCvX8yFGQ7xHxh5mQMv-EYQ%40mail.gmail.com

.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Thank you too. Atty. Linda. Some of our PIEP members already have experiences with LGUs settling their municipal boundaries using provisions under R.A. No. 7160 (1991 LGcode) i.e. it is the LGUs that must actually agree to set their common municipal water boundaries (MWBs), not the DENR-NAMRIA setting it for the LGUs. The agreement of the concerned LGUs should then be forwarded to DENR-NAMRIA for the correction of the NAMRIA MWB maps. These PIEP members can probably share their experiences with us as well since undelineated MWBs may become a source of open conflict in the coming decades (between LGUs and even between barangays). We also hope that the future editions of the NLUA will sufficiently cover MWBs and that the DHSUD could also eventually chime in (through interim MWB guidelines) should the NLUA not become law in the foreseeable future (we have been trying for the last 3 decades). Thanks again. Merry Christmas to all! Regards to everyone. AAlli

x x x x x x x

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/1817462398.884431.1671307208353%40mail.yahoo.com.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

x x x future editions of the NLUA bill/s (that is) x x x x

[Regulo Toring]

assisted an lgu way back 2003 for the preparation of an integrated forest, land and coastal plan, specifically uses of municipal water.  the drawback then for the lgu specifically for a poor lgu affecting coastal water is that municipal waters is not part and is not considered in the computation of IRA. poor lgus cannot afford to implement projects and provide services affecting its entire municipal water. municipal water shall form part in the computation of IRA.

EnP REGULO Y. TORING, Economist, CCREP
Managing Partner, ER&B Associates
LGRI Bldg. cor. Borromeo & Climaco Sts., Cebu City, Philippines
Office: (63)(32)520-6506
Mobile: +639060714403
www.erbassociates.com.ph

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2BhwxBj2pYTUV%3DgEJgPVPC2TOPJzYeYN4gBX_xgdB7RQM6Lw%40mail.gmail.com
.

[linda hornilla]

Yes, it ( municipal waters) is indeed a potential source of misunderstanding, Boie. But we can also seek guidance from the provisions of the Civil Code and the Water Code. 

Have the merriest Christmas!

Via

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:25 PM, EnP. Armando ALLI

<planne...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2BhwzCQbw%3DfWuhR2BTeOm4kLaEpMRrUoceCGaefRMEY1oD5g%40mail.gmail.com.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Thank You, Atty. Linda. Merry Christmas to You as well. Warmest regards, Boie

x x x x x x x x

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/815381256.908771.1671342953121%40mail.yahoo.com.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

New Year Greetings. 

As a ready reference, please find attached the images of five (5) tables showing the Clarified Intent of the P.D. No. 1096 (1977 National Building Code of the PH/NBCP, a national-level development control/DC) 2004 Revised IRR Rule VII Guidelines Table VII.G.1 Reference Table of Floor to Lot Area Ratio (FLAR) Designations/Rights, anent FLAR (i.e. the very same as the Floor Area Ratio/FAR Privileges for Various Zoning Classifications i.e. R-1, R-2 basic & maximum, R-3 basic & maximum, R-4, R-5, SHZ; C-1, C-2, C-3; I-1, I-2, I-3 and UTS; and PUD, at 5 main types), as prepared January 2019 for the Architecture Advocacy International Foundation (AAIF), Inc., the main author of the NCCA-DPWH-AAIF 2016 NBCP:Illustrated Data CD Project (and its 2018 updated edition). Thank You. Regards to everyone. AAlli

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Apologies. I have to re-send yesterday's message under the correct subject line. Thanks again. Regards, AAlli

x x x x x x x x x

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

2019 REVIEWED INTENT OF THE NBCP 2004 RIRR PROVISIONS ON FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) APPLICATION TO HELP DETERMINE THE TRUE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (TDP) OF A RESIDENTIAL (R-1, R-2 Basic & Maximum, R-3 Basic & Maximum), R-4, R-5, SHZ), AND OF A COMMERCIAL (C-1, C-2 & C-3) LOT/PROPERTY.

The official term floor to lot area ratio (FLAR) that appears in the 2004 Revised implementing rules & regulations (RIRR) of P.D. No. 1096, the 1977 National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP), refers to exactly the same international term floor area ratio (FAR), and is only one of several national-level development controls (DCs) to be applied sequentially to determine the true development potential (TDP) of a lot/property i.e. what can actually be built on a lot/property without exceeding the carrying capacity of either the lot or the street.

On the other hand, the Resultant FLAR is derived through the sequential application of several national-level DCs prescribed under the NBCP and its stream of regulations (SoR), not limited to its 2004 RIRR. Presently, the SoR of the NBCP totals some 12,000 pages of laws, rules, regulations, standards, guidelines, procedural manuals, international standards, agreements, treaties, private self-regulation and the like.

However, mainly the DCs prescribed under the NBCP 2004 RIRR matter in the determination of the TDP of a lot/property on Philippine soil.

The above (and the 3 attachments) may be used as ready references in the crafting of Zoning Ordinances (ZOs), noting that ZOs (as local-level DCs) can be more stringent than national-level DCs i.e. IF AND ONLY IF the national-level DCs (such as the NBCP) are declared minimum standards that can be made stricter by duly-crafted/approved LGU ordinances (including special ordinances/SOs) or agency issuances. Thank You. Regards to everyone, AAlli

x x x x x x x x x x x

[Regulo Toring]

FLAR merely based on RROW is not sustainable. per observation, land use density in the country shall consider the street ordinance...a street ordinance that provide, address and regulate the traffic, sidewalks, landscape, drainage, utilities, etc... then density shall follow. absence of such amenities shall be included in the computation of density.

thus, high time to advocate passage of street ordinance.

my 2 cents.

happy new year to all.

EnP REGULO Y. TORING, Economist, CCREP
Managing Partner, ER&B Associates
LGRI Bldg. cor. Borromeo & Climaco Sts., Cebu City, Philippines

Office:(32)503-5414
Mobile: +639060714403
www.erbassociates.com.ph

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to piepmembers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2Bhww0o_hU2UUP5GtZ2%3DbvMcs9H%3DruV-BkZYqjTPEZ_PQT0A%40mail.gmail.com
.

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Thank You very much for Your comment, EnP Regulo. That is most correct. It is not only FAR (FLAR) that must be used as a development control (DC). 

As can be clearly seen in those 2019 tables, the sequential application of an entire array of DCs prescribed under the NBCP is actually what is needed for the proper implementation and interpretation of the NBCP 2004 RIRR intent. 

Those national-level DCs under the NBCP 2004 RIRR were never intended to be used in isolation i.e. the establishment of the total development potential (TDP) of a lot/property cannot hinge on a single DC like the FAR or the RROW width, taken separately. Those NBCP 2004 RIRR DCs must be applied in the correct sequence to arrive at the appropriate (resultant) FAR, and more importantly, to arrive at the total gross floor area (TGFA) for actual construction. 

The sequential application of the DCs were actually intended to address the twin problems of over-building and over-paving in 2004, and to also ensure that the carrying capacities (of both the street and the lots serviced by the street) are not exceeded, particularly in cases of the selective (or improper) use of the array of DCs by regulators (and developers and their consultants, as well). Thanks again. Regards, AAlli

x x x x x x x x x x

On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 2:06 PM 'Regulo Toring' via Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners <piepm...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

FLAR merely based on RROW is not sustainable. per observation, land use density in the country shall consider the street ordinance...a street ordinance that provide, address and regulate the traffic, sidewalks, landscape, drainage, utilities, etc... then density shall follow. absence of such amenities shall be included in the computation of density.

thus, high time to advocate passage of street ordinance.

my 2 cents.

happy new year to all.

EnP REGULO Y. TORING, Economist, CCREP
Managing Partner, ER&B Associates
LGRI Bldg. cor. Borromeo & Climaco Sts., Cebu City, Philippines
Office:(32)503-5414
Mobile: +639060714403
www.erbassociates.com.ph

[EnP. Armando ALLI]

Thank You very much for Your comment, EnP Regulo. That is most correct. It is not only RROW width or FAR (FLAR) that must be used as a development control (DC). 

As can be clearly seen in those 2019 tables, the sequential application of an entire array of DCs prescribed under the NBCP is actually what is needed for the proper implementation and interpretation of the NBCP 2004 RIRR intent. 

Those national-level DCs under the NBCP 2004 RIRR were never intended to be used in isolation i.e. the establishment of the total development potential (TDP) of a lot/property cannot hinge on a single DC like the FAR or the RROW width, taken separately. Those NBCP 2004 RIRR DCs must be applied in the correct sequence to arrive at the appropriate (resultant) FAR, and more importantly, to arrive at the total gross floor area (TGFA) for actual construction. 

The sequential application of the DCs were actually intended to address the twin problems of over-building and over-paving in 2004, and to also ensure that the carrying capacities (of both the street and the lots serviced by the street) are not exceeded, particularly in cases of the selective (or improper) use of the array of DCs by regulators (and developers and their consultants, as well). Thanks again. Regards, AAlli

x x x x x x x x x x

[Ray Bayo]

Hi All!

Sorry to reply on this thread started by EnP Boie with another subject. I don’t know where to start a new thread.

Btw, I would like to ask your suggestion for a mixed use development. Our city has a 15 hectare property and initially developed a rehabilitation center, and the other a soon to be a CDRRMO Center. As you would think, with the existing developments already, this is going to be an institutional zone. 

There’s a remaining 5 hectares more that is undeveloped. I plan to recommend to our LGU for mixed use development to complement existing infrastructures. Can I solicit your advice for other developments? I plan to integrate an open space in the overall site plan, what do you think?

Hope to hear from you. Thanks!

EnP Perfecto Ray D Bayo, Jr.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to piepmembers...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/piepmembers/CAEF%2BhwwWDLXn9Bxb7CEsnAZWWw5MGCowxP3TNziTiJ0DmOVVJw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

EnP Perfecto Ray D. Bayo Jr, dlup, piep

Licensed Urban Planner

PRC Registered: June 25, 2014

Site development planning for: housing, tourism and other spatial planning

Environmental Impact Assessment Preparation

Resource person for Environmental planning concerns, EnP Review and 

     Academic Instructor