Executive Summary General Santos Vol 1

FINAL REPORT
June 2013
VOLUME 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT:
Pre- Feasibility Study on the Integrated Economic Development for Regional Trade in General Santos City
General Santos City, Region XII (SOCCSKSARGEN / Central Mindanao), Philippines
CDIA
Cities Development Initiative for Asia
FINAL REPORT
Project Title Location Pre-Feasibility Study on Integrated Economic Development for Regional Trade in General Santos City General Santos City, Region XII (SOCCSKSARGEN / Central Mindanao), Philippines Suite 202-203 Hanston Bldg. Emerald Avenue, Ortigas Center Pasig City, 1600, Metro Manila, Cities Development Initiative for Asia Philippines (CDIA) T: +63-2-6312342 F: +63-2-6316158 Local Government of General Santos City Hall Drive City Government of General Santos City 9500 General Santos City City Philippines Consultant Date of Report Phase/Period Individual Consultants April 2013 21 February 2013 - 5 April 2013 Nathaniel Von Einsiedel Lydia O. Martinez Henk Hermans Roy Brockman Joma Lim Julita Lopez George Calderon Noriel Tiglao Team Leader Deputy Team Leader / Agribusiness Supply Chain Expert Infrastructure Specialist Infrastructure Finance / PPP Specialist Environmental Engineer Resettlement and Social Development Specialist Finance Specialist/PPP Specialist Urban Transport Specialist
Client
Report drafted by
Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study
Page 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE .......................................................................................................................................... 8 A. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.0. About the Pre-Feasibility Study .............................................................................................. 9 2.0. General Santos City and Its Food Industry .............................................................................. 9 3.0. Existing Food Trade Facilities ................................................................................................11 4.0. The Projects Objectives ........................................................................................................11 B. PROPOSED INTEGRATED FOOD TERMINAL............................................................................. 12 1.0. Situation Analysis ................................................................................................................. 12 1.1. City Bagsakan Center ........................................................................................................ 12 1.2. City Abattoir ..................................................................................................................... 14 2.0. Project Rationale ...................................................................................................................15 2.1. Need for an Integrated Approach ......................................................................................15 3.0. Project Description ................................................................................................................ 17 3.1. Wholesale Food Market ..................................................................................................... 17 3.2. Food Processing Center .................................................................................................... 20 3.3. Training Center and Demo Plots ....................................................................................... 20 3.4. Development Options....................................................................................................... 21 3.5. Abattoirs ........................................................................................................................... 21 3.6. Environmental Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 23 4.0. Financial Assessment ........................................................................................................... 24 4.1. Cost Estimates and Financing ........................................................................................... 24 4.2. Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 27 4.3. Possible PPP Arrangements.............................................................................................. 29 C. PROPOSED CENTRAL PUBLIC MARKET REDEVELOPMENT ..................................................... 30 1.0. Situation Analysis ................................................................................................................. 30 1.1. General Physical Conditions .............................................................................................. 30 1.2. Social Concerns ................................................................................................................ 30 1.3. Environmental Considerations ......................................................................................... 32 1.4. Traffic .............................................................................................................................. 32 1.5. Critical Issues and Concerns............................................................................................. 32 2.0. Project Rationale ...................................................................................................................33 2.1. Project Justification...........................................................................................................33 2.2. Project Description ........................................................................................................... 34 2.3. Conceptual Design (Site Development and Building Design) ............................................. 37 3.0. Financial Assessment............................................................................................................ 39 3.1. Cost Estimates and Financing ........................................................................................... 39 3.2. Assessment....................................................................................................................... 41 3.3. Possible PPP Arrangements .............................................................................................. 42
Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study Page 3
D. CAPACITY BUILDING ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................... 44 1.0. Overall Approach .................................................................................................................. 44 2.0. Consultants Observations.................................................................................................... 44 3.0.Training Workshops .............................................................................................................. 45 4.0. Capacity Building as a Continuous Program ......................................................................... 45 E. DESIGN AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK ............................................................................... 47 F. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 50 1.0. Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 50 2.0. Recommendations ................................................................................................................51
Page 4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location Map of General Santos City .................................................................................. 9 Figure 2. Location and Plan of Existing City Bagsakan Center ..........................................................13 Figure 3. Images of Existing City Bagsakan Center ...........................................................................13 Figure 4. Images of Existing City Abattoir ....................................................................................... 14 Figure 5. Integrated Food Terminal Schematic Diagram .................................................................. 17 Figure 6. Layout of Wholesale Trading Building .............................................................................. 19 Figure 7. Exterior Perspective of the Wholesale Trading Building.................................................... 20 Figure 8. Entrance alleys of the Central Public Market .....................................................................31 Figure 9. Proposed Central Public Market Redevelopment ............................................................. 34 Figure 10. Proposed Central Public Market Redevelopment............................................................ 36 Figure 11. Option A Aerial Perspective ..........................................................................................37 Figure 12. Option B Exterior Perspective ...................................................................................... 38
Page 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Key Interests of Farmers and Buyers ................................................................................... 16 Table 2. Phases for an Integrated Food Terminal ............................................................................ 21 Table 3. Phases for Abattoirs........................................................................................................... 22 Table 4. Initial Estimate of Abattoir Wastewater............................................................................. 23 Table 5. Integrated Food Terminal Summary Costs and Financing (Million) .................................... 26 Table 6. Revenue Assumptions-General Santos Integrated Food Terminal .................................. 27 Table 7. Summary of Financial Assessment - Integrated Food Terminal ......................................... 28 Table 8. Revenue Assumptions-Central Public Market Redevelopment - Option A ......................... 40 Table 9. Central Public Market Redevelopment Summary Costs and Financing (Million) ................ 40 Table 10. Summary of Financial Assessment - Central Public Market .............................................. 41 Table 11 Design and Monitoring Framework ................................................................................... 47
Page 6
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABR ADB AO BFAR BOD BORDA BNS CBD CDIA CDP CICO COD CPDO CPM CSWD CFTEMCO DENR DEWATS DOH DPWH ECC EIS EMB ESMF ESMP FPIC GOP GSC GSCG GSCWD HRMDO IEE IFT LSI MBR MRF NBC NCV NIA NSO PAGASA PD PES P/O PPP RA RWSA SBR SOCOTECO SPS STP TDS TSD TSS UDHA WCPFC WQMA WWTF Anaerobic Baffles Reactor Asian Development Bank Administrative Order Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Biological Oxygen Demand Bremen Overseas Research and Development Association Basic Needs Services Central Business District Cities Development Initiatives for Asia City Development Plan City Information and Communications Office Chemical Oxygen Demand City Planning and Development Office Central Public Market City Social Welfare Department City Food Terminal Marketing Cooperative Department of Environment and Natural Resources Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Solutions Department of Health Department of Public Works and Highways Environmental Compliance Certificate Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Management Bureau Environmental and Social Management Framework Environmental and Social Management Plan Free and Prior Informed Consent Government of the Philippines General Santos City City Government of General Santos General Santos City Water District Human Resource Management & Development Office Initial Environmental Examination Integrated Food Terminal Latent Semantic Indexing Membrane Bioreactor Materials Recovery Facility Net Borrowing Capacity No Commercial Value National Irrigation Administration National Statistics Office Philippine Atmospheric and Geophysical and Astronomical Services Presidential Decree Performance Evaluation System Permit to Operate Public Private Partnership Republic Act Rural Waterworks and Sanitation Associations Sequencing Batch Reactor South Cotabato II Electric Cooperative, Inc. Safeguards Policy Statement Sewage Treatment Plant Total Dissolved Solids Transport and Disposal Total Suspended Solids Urban Development and Housing Act Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission Water Quality Management Area Wastewater Treatment Facility
Page 7
PREFACE
General Santos City (GSC), with the support of Cities Development Initiatives for Asia (CDIA), is undertaking the project Economic Development for Regional Trade in General Santos City. The development objective of this technical assistance project is to create a network of food market related activities in the city that can serve as an engine for economic development while also expanding access to healthy food for low and moderate income neighborhoods. In particular, the projects goals are: a) improve farmer access to food markets; b) improve the access to affordable healthy food for residents; c) provide opportunities for the incubation of small businesses; d) create jobs in the local community; and e) revitalize the local business economy. The technical assistance project seeks to improve the physical and institutional linkages between various stakeholders along the food chain mainly through the implementation of the following complementary and linked components: a) Integrated Food Terminal (IFT); b) Central Public Market and the redevelopment of its surrounding area including the Queen Tuna Park; c) Support Infrastructure (road transport improvement, transport terminal/station in the vicinity of the IFT, Solid Waste Management and Wastewater Treatment facilities at the IFT and CPM sites; and d) Capacity Building on technical and managerial skills of the City Government of General Santos (GSCG) officers. Over the past few months, the technical assistance project has produced an Inception Report and an Interim (Mid-Term) Report which have presented the findings of the situation analysis and the preliminary recommendations arising from this analysis. The recommendations revolve around two main projects, namely: 1) the Integrated Food Terminal, and 2) the Central Public Market Redevelopment. Both reports were presented to and discussed with the Project Steering Committee as well as other key stakeholder groups to validate the findings and elicit feedback. This Final Report has incorporated such feedback, and presents further refinements on the two main projects including the financial analysis and funding recommendations. The Report is structured into three volumes: 1) the Executive Summary; 2) the Integrated Food Terminal; and 3) the Central Public Market Redevelopment. While Volumes 2 and 3 provide the complete details of the two projects, an Executive Summary is provided in Volume 1.
Page 8
A. BACKGROUND
1.0. About the Pre-Feasibility Study
The Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) on the Integrated Economic Development for Regional Trade in General Santos City was undertaken by the Cities Development Initiative for Asia (CDIA) in response to the request of the City Government of General Santos (CGGS) for technical support in the areas of integrated economic development for regional trade. The CGGS considers these areas as high priority in its development programs, particularly in its needs for infrastructure investment to improve its ability to serve as a regional food trading center. The PFS has been undertaken over a period of about six months from Project commencement. This report contains the studys overall findings and recommendations.
2.0. General Santos City and Its Food Industry

General Santos City (GenSan) is one the most, if not the most rapidly developing regional trading and commercial hubs outside Metro Manila. It exports a large amount of goods to many countries such as the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, China, Korea and other Asian and European countries. It has a diverse set of economic activities, as well as good financial services. It also has an international-standard airport, a good seaport with significant support facilities. Its infrastructure facilities, mineral reserves and rich agricultural resources, however, are not fully utilized due to the lack of resource-based industries and facilities such as processing plants. It also lacks farm-to-market roads and post-harvest facilities, as well as sufficient capital. Another major limitation is the weak links between the citys agriculture and food industry. The city lacks an agribusiness program that would link crop production, industry and services to boost its agriculture and food-related economy. Figure 1. Location Map of General Santos City
Page 9
GenSan is an important agro-industrial area in Soccsksargen (Region XII). The major economic activities in GenSan are anchored in agro-industry and fishing industry. The city produces corn, coconut, pineapple, asparagus, banana and rice, as well as other fruits, vegetables and cutflowers. It is also a major producer and supplier of livestock, such as cattle, swine and poultry. The major exports are fresh/canned pineapples, fresh bananas, coconut/ crude/Cochintype coconut oil, copra pellets, cutflowers, asparagus and okra, and abaca pulp. It is the largest producer of sashimi grade tuna in the Philippines and is the Tuna Capital of the Philippines. Commercial fishing continues to be a major agro-industry of GenSan. It is the largest producer of sashimi grade tuna in the Philippines. GenSan accounts for the second largest daily total catch of fish in the country next to Navotas City. The total daily capacity of GenSan is 750 MT of fish catch. The Fishport Complex has modern facilities that comply with international standards on fish catch landing. Aside from fresh/frozen tuna, GenSan exports canned tuna, produced by 7 canned tuna processors located in the city. Other fishery products exports are frozen octopus and shrimps, and other fish and aquaculture products. Aside from being a major food supplier, GenSan is also the main service hub for exports as well as imports for the Soccsksargen Region. The quantity of exports from the GenSan Seaport ranged from 395,000 MT in 2011 to 504,000 MT in 2009. Export value ranged from US$419 million to US$ 659 million. The quantity declined slightly by an average of 3.5% during five-year period, but value increased by an average of 12%. As the fastest growing metropolitan area in the region, GenSan has become a major trading area for agricultural products from other provinces of the region including North Cotabato, Sarangani, South Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat. In 2011, the city registered 1,365 new medium to large enterprises, valued at PhP 1.202 billion. Hotels and restaurants topped the investments at PhP373 million. The SM City General Santos is the latest addition to the shopping centers built earlier, i.e., KCC Mall of GenSan, Robinsons Place GenSan, Gaisano Mall, and RD Plaza (Fitmart). Another mall by KCC is under construction and is expected to open first quarter of 2013. These malls have food courts and quick serve restaurant outlets/branches of local (city), national and international brands. The malls are said to be enlarging the local retail sector and possibly bring in businesses from other nearby areas as has been the experience in other cities. GenSan is also a major producer of poultry and livestock (especially swine and cattle).The livestock industries of South Cotabato and General Santos City are well integrated from animal breeding, animal raising, feed crops production, slaughter, sale of carcass and/or meat in boxes or processed meat products, in the case of the large producers. The populations of poultry, cattle and carabao in 2010 were about 3% higher than the 2009 count. The number of horses was unchanged, while the goat population declined by 83%. GenSan has emerged to be a major trade hub of the Soccsksargen Region. Inbound shipments of agricultural products for the period 2006 2010 consist of cereals and oilseed (rice, wheat and soya), fruits (mainly mango and fruits imported from China), and vegetables (tomato, carrots, potato, onions and garlic). Inbound shipments originated from Manila, Subic, and Iloilo. Cereal shipments grew by 2.8% annually, but fruits and vegetables was the same. Outbound shipments were mostly to Manila, with some rice shipped to Zamboanga and milled corn to Cebu/Dumaguete. The quantities of all other product groups were unchanged during the period 2006 2010. Shipments of fruits consisted of mango, papaya, banana, pineapple, and fresh coconut. The main vegetable items were cabbage, sayote, squash, and cassava. Aside from horticulture products, live animals are shipped in and out of GenSan in considerable quantity, notably carabao and swine.
Page 10
3.0. Existing Food Trade Facilities

GenSans major food trade facilities consist of the City Bagsakan Center, the City Abattoir, and the Central Public Market. All these facilities have become obsolete over time and inadequate in terms of their capacity to serve the purpose they were originally built for. GenSans growth and development over the years has outpaced the capacity of these facilities. At the same time, these facilities lack of effective maintenance and repairs has resulted in serious environmental problems and health risks. Furthermore, developments surrounding these facilities have brought about conflicts between these facilities operations and their adjoining land uses. The PFS has clearly shown that these existing facilities are no longer capable of effectively supporting Gensans food industry and its role as a major regional food trade hub.
4.0. The Projects Objectives

According to the project Terms of Reference, the development objective of the project is to create a network of food market related activities in GenSan that can serve as an engine for economic development while also expanding access to healthy food for low and moderate income neighborhoods. In particular, the projects specific goals are: a) improve farmer access to food markets; b) improve the access to affordable healthy food for residents; c) provide opportunities for the incubation of small businesses; d) create jobs in the local community; and e) revitalize the local economy. The project specifically seeks to improve the physical and institutional linkages between various stakeholders along the food chain. Based upon these objectives, the project has focused on the following components of GenSans food chain: a) Integrated Food Terminal (IFT); b) Central Public Market (CPM), including the redevelopment of its surrounding area; and c) Support Infrastructure (road transport improvements, transport terminal/station in the area of the IFT, solid waste management and wastewater treatment facilities for the IFT and CPM sites).
Page 11
B. PROPOSED INTEGRATED FOOD TERMINAL

1.0. Situation Analysis
As mentioned earlier, agricultural food production in GenSan has been steadily increasing over the past several years. At the same time, the livestock industries of South Cotabato and GenSan are well integrated from animal breeding, animal raising, feed crops production, slaughter, sale of carcass and/or meat in boxes or processed meat products. Gensan has emerged to be a major trade hub of the Soccsksargen Region, with inbound shipments originating from Manila, Subic, and Iloilo. The City is the acknowledged metropolitan center of Region XII and continues to be the Tuna Capital of the Philippines. With the presence of the international standard port and airport, it is the transshipment hub of the region to other parts of the country and the rest of the world. It has also become the prime business, banking, financial, and services center of the region. In spite of this, however, the citys existing food industry facilities have been overtaken by recent growth and development, and can no longer render efficient service to farmers, traders, and consumers. Thus, the potential socioeconomic benefits from GenSans food industry, which is the prime economic driver of the city, are not being fully optimized. 1.1. City Bagsakan Center The City Bagsakan Center, commonly known as Bagsakan, is one of the two main city market infrastructures (the second being the Central Public Market) owned by the city that serve as a link between the producers in GenSan and other nearby provinces in the Soccsksargen and Southern Mindanao Regions and the food market in Gensan. Located along Alunan Road, Barangay Bula, it occupies a property measuring about 10,000 square meters. The total traded quantity of goods at the Bagsakan is increasing. Agricultural products delivered to the Bagsakan originate from a wide area. This includes not only provinces within the Soccsksargen Region but also Southern Mindanao areas of Davao City and Davao Provinces, and Northern Mindanao, notably Bukidnon and Cagayan de Oro. Buyers during the main trading days come from several nearby areas while the daily buyers are Gensan consumers and either purchasers or suppliers of the supermarkets and restaurants in Gensan malls and satellite markets. CFTEMCO, the multipurpose cooperative managing the Bagsakan under contract with the CGGS, is thinking of supplying fresh fruits as well as processed fruits and vegetables to Manila-based companies. The Bagsakan presently has a trading post (serves as dropping area) and 269 stalls. Most stallholders do both wholesale and retail sales between the trading hours of 9am 2pm and 4pm 10pm daily. CFTEMCO reports that the existing number of stalls are not enough to accommodate all their members, and has proposed the doubling of floor area of the Bagsakan to accommodate its additional members interested in renting stalls. It has 476 members, but only 279 are presently occupying stalls at the Bagsakan. The existing Bagsakan, however, is located in a relatively small, cramped and crowded section of the city. It has no facilities for washing, packaging, and processing. It also has not enough space for expansin unless the city acquires the adjacent properties.
Page 12
Figure 2. Location and Plan of Existing City Bagsakan Center
Figure 3. Images of Existing City Bagsakan Center
Page 13
1.2. City Abattoir The city government operates the City Abattoir constructed in 1978, then classified as Grade AA. Since 2000, the City has undertaken only palliative repairs that were insufficient to comply with the standards for a AA facility. In 2010, the DA National Meat Inspection Service (NMIS) downgraded it from Grade AA to A due to design and operational deficiencies including: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) lack of effective waste water treatment facility; defective hoists and table for scraping and evisceration; corroded walls and floors; large animals are killed on the floor; and clean and dirty sections are not separated.
Following subsequent additional repairs and refurbishing, the City Abattoir was granted the conditional accreditation as AA abattoir. Because its design and structures do not comply with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) and Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) food safety standards, the only alternative is to build a new abattoir. Furthermore, its capacity is only 2,000 heads per month. Residential communities have developed around the abattoir resulting in issues of waste management and pest infestation. The existing abattoir operated by the city does not have any wastewater treatment facility or the necessary discharge permit from the EMB-DENR. The wastewater generated from the abattoir operations and floor cleaning is directly discharged to an adjacent lot of the abattoir. Over the years, solids and sludge have accumulated and filled almost the entire lot. It is apparent that the wastewater is just seeping down to the grounds untreated. During heavy rains, the nearby NIA irrigation canal receives the overflow. Figure 4 Images of Existing City Abattoir
Under the NMIS regulations, livestock and fowls slaughtered in Grade AA or Grade AAA facilities are suitable for sale in any domestic or international market, while livestock and fowls slaughtered in Grade A facilities and processes are suitable for distribution and sale only within the city or municipality where the slaughterhouse is located. The effect of the downgrading is reflected in the sharp decline of the number of animals slaughtered, especially cattle, hogs and carabao. Under these circumstances, meat suppliers who supply markets outside Gensan have to resort to using a private AA abattoir and public slaughterhouses outside the city. The only AAA abattoir, the Matutum Meat Packing Corp., is located in Polomolok, South Cotabato. This entails additional
Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study Page 14
expenses in transport and higher slaughter fees. On the part of the city, this means lost revenues from slaughter and corral fees. The only privately owned abattoir in Gensan (Lisas) has limited capacity and is barely sufficient for its own requirements. The city abattoir is used by backyard and commercial animal raisers alike. The backyard raisers depend on it for slaughter services because of more affordable fees. City records show that as of 2011 there are small animal raisers in 22 barangays in GenSan.
2.0. Project Rationale

2.1. Need for an Integrated Approach General Santos City is expected to continue as the major agriculture products trading hub of the Soccsksargen Region. Market infrastructure investments are needed to carry out necessary improvements in the marketing system. There are pressures for change from external factors as well as within the agriculture and food marketing system. The main external causes for change are: a) demographic factors, including the overall increase in the city population as a result of migration and natural growth, the population shifts within the city, changes in the location and nature of workplaces; b) changes in transportation pattern which will have a significant impact through on increased traffic growth and resulting congestion, shifts in transport mode or the proportion of different types of vehicles, and changes in the capacity and size of delivery and distribution vehicles; c) changes resulting from new public policies, especially, city planning control and zoning regulations, and environmental impact and energy conservation controls; and d) greater public awareness of increasing consumer-protection laws, including new public health, food quality and safety regulations. On the other hand, the internal factors are changes that have occur due to the changing organizational structure of agribusiness: a) increasing volumes of produce to be handled; b) adjustments to commercial practices and trading patterns, such as private sector taking over public-operated distribution systems, or the fast expanding influence of supermarkets on the buyers and consumers to demand clean and better quality produce, hypermarts , market places, and weekend markets; c) operational changes within the market such as introduction of new grading standards or different packaging materials (such as from wooden baskets to plastic crates); and d) changes in user requirements, such as increase in space, that would lead to a modernization, repair, or relocation. Many small farmers, are constrained from selling their products to large consumers, such as hotels, restaurants, caterers, supermarkets, and food processors. Considering the farmers situation, the payment terms are impractical. Delivery costs could be high due to inaccessibility of many farms. In some cases, buyers fail to honor prior agreements on prices. On the side of large buyers/ consumers, the small producers are not the preferred suppliers because of limited range of products, lack of standard quality, unexpected price variations and unreliable delivery.
Page 15
Better relationship between buyers/consumers and producers can be developed with stronger commitment. However, adequate infrastructure, such as markets, are basic requirements to improve trading conditions and level of transactions, including the aspects of fairness, transparency, assurance of product quality and safety. Consumers are now more interested in the way food is produced, processed and marketed and are increasingly demanding better information. Improvements and modernization of food handling, animal slaughtering and marketing have gained more attention with growing consumer awareness of food quality and safety issues. Furthermore food safety is now considered a factor of competitiveness. The City Bagsakan Center provides an important link in integrating the food chain in GenSan and Soccsksargen Region to improve producers access to markets and the consumers access to affordable and healthy food. In its current location and current state of the market structure and lack of modern facilities, the City Bagsakan Center is constrained from increasing its throughput capacity to accommodate more producers and offer better and more efficient system of marketing fresh produce. The GenSan abattoir is an important infrastructure in the livelihood of animal raisers, whether backyard or commercial, as well meat retailers and processors. Consumer welfare is compromised when slaughtering, meat cutting, deboning, and transport are done in an unhygienic manner using substandard slaughter systems that do not comply with international quality and safety standards. According to national agricultural statistics, Soccsksargen Region is the 3rd top commercial producer and the 6th top backyard producer of hogs in the country. As the main exit point of frozen meat, Gensan is in a unique position to support the hog and the animal production industry in the region through increasing the slaughtering capacity of the region using modern systems. Private sector industry leaders are supportive of the Abattoir project. A livestock producers association representative believes that there is a great need for an efficient, modern abattoir that complies with international food quality and safety standards (HACCP and GMP) not only for the Philippine market, but more importantly, for the export markets that have been discussed among the industry stakeholders for quite some time. Table 1 Key Interests of Farmers and Buyers Producers/Farmers/Traders Alternatives for the sale of produce Buyers/Consumers Availability of clean and graded produce Better quality and safe food
Better infrastructure and facilities for produce handling for longer shelf life and quality preservation Better facilities for value adding
Wider selection of products Transparent and more efficient price information system
Transparent and more efficient price information system
As the major trading hub of the Soccsksargen Region, GenSan is the ideal and strategic location for an integrated food terminal that would facilitate assembly of large volumes of produce and meat products to serve larger markets. Moreover segregating wholesale from retail selling would limit related traffic into GenSan to local consumer designation traffic. An integrated food terminal offers the best opportunity to address the key interests of the farmers, livestock producers, and the buyers respectively.
Page 16
3.0. Project Description

The Integrated Food Terminal (IFT) is envisioned to be a strategically located wholesale produce marketing center with a food processing center and abattoir. This will serve to improve the forward and backward linkages between the producers and the users/consumers by providing the infrastructure to streamline the supply chain from the farm to the market and provide value adding services to the supply chain stakeholders. It will be a major market outlet for fresh fruits, vegetables, root crops, and meat products produced in GenSan as well as in the provinces of South Cotabato, Sarangani, Sultan Kudarat and Cotabato. It can also be a secondary wholesale market for several rural assembly markets, e.g., Barangay Food Terminal Markets (BFTM), 32 of which are operational in the nearby provinces of South Cotabato, Sarangani and Sultan Kudarat. Produce from Glan and Malungon are already traded in the City Bagsakan and the new barangay food terminal markets within these municipalities could spur the development or improvement of the supply chain from the additional barangays. The major components of the IFT are: a) Wholesale Food Market; b) Food Processing Center; and c) Abattoirs. The Wholesale Food Market and the Food Processing Plant are proposed to be clustered close to each other in order to maximize their synergies and use of common facilities. Figure 5. Integrated Food Terminal Schematic Diagram
3.1. Wholesale Food Market The Wholesale Food Market is a facility designed to focus on wholesale transactions in order to cater to large and institutional buyers/consumers such as the supermarkets, hotels, restaurants and quick-serve food chains, caterers, food processors, large traders dealing with markets in other metropolitan cities such as Cebu, Davao, and Manila. This arrangement will also avoid or minimize direct competition with the Central Public Market and other satellite markets in GenSan.
Page 17
The basic market facilities are: a) Weighing, sorting, grading and packaging into smaller quantities for retailers; b) Washing; c) Display and selling with market information display; d) Warehousing/fruit ripening; and e) Cold storage (to be acquired under Option (or Phase) 2. The Wholesale Food Market is estimated to have a throughput capacity of 30,000 MT of fresh produce utilizing an area of 14,500 square meters. It will have facilities for transient or walk-in wholesalers who may rent space on a daily basis as needed and wholesalers who will opt for longterm lease of stalls. The wholesalers are expected to handle a wide variety fresh produce including fruits, vegetables, and rootcrops. A study of the current structure and operations of the City Bagsakan Center was conducted. The average annual throughput capacity of the Bagsakan for 2010 2012 was estimated at 20,000 MT per year of assorted fruits, vegetables and rootcrops. Under the current set up, there are 289 stalls, each typicaly measuring 3 meters by 3 meters. Each stall handles 7 - 10 tons of produce. The Wholesale Food Market is projected to handle an additional 10,000 MT of produce for a total of 30,000 MT. The building that will house the Wholesale Food Market is also referred to as the Wholesale Trading Building (see Figure 6 below). Its features are: a) Landing area and produce weighing; b) Common area for sorting, grading, packaging and washing for all wholesalers; c) Common wholesale bazaar area for transient/walk-in wholesalers, four blocks of 320 sq m each which could accommodate 160 wholesalers. The common area will be provided with display tables; d) A wholesale stores block with 380 stores measuring 2.5 meters x 3 meters will be available for long-term lease. The stores may be used for produce display, wholesaling, packaging and and short-term and limited volume storage area; e) Ambient warehouses, ripening rooms and cold storage areas (Phase 2) will be available for rent by all wholesalers as needed; and f) Market information boards strategically located inside the wholesale market. An area for ancillary uses would be provided for: a) Administrative Offices with Meeting/Training Rooms; b) Canteens, Public Toilets and Shower Rooms; c) Agriculture Production Demonstration Plots to showcase new technologies or plant varieties; and d) Parking areas for trucks and cars. The Wholesale Food Market is located near the entrance to the IFT as many users will come with diverse transport methods ranging from public buses to private vans, cars and motor bikes. Even though located within close proximity, the wholesale market building has been separated from the food process buildings to allow more privacy for the individual food processing companies.
Page 18
Figure 6 Layout of Wholesale Trading Building
Page 19
Figure 7. Exterior Perspective of the Wholesale Trading Building
3.2. Food Processing Center Land parcels of approximately 1,000m2 each have been allocated to enhance vegetable products by processing and packaging. These parcels can be leased to entrepreneurs who want to process food bought in the wholesale trading building to provide higher value products to the market. It is proposed for investors to lease land or rent building spaces with shared facilities provided. For land lease, this would include shared utilities such as power back-up and steam as well as wastewater treatment and sold waste collection. For rented building spaces, the shared facilities would also include toilets and changing rooms and possibly shared administrative facilities. The proposed Food Processing Center is a general processing plant primarily intended to provide an alternative market outlet for fruit and vegetable trade surpluses in the Agricultural Food Market and other markets, as well as overall seasonal glut. It will be available for lease by small food processors. The total space requirement for the building to house the Processing Center is 200 square meters. The components of the Food Processing Center are: a) Raw materials receiving and preparation area weighing, sorting, washing; b) Process area with a heavy duty stove peeling, scooping, slicing, blanching and soaking in sugar or sugar syrup, cooking; c) Dryer The recommended dryer is a mechanical dryer. However, a solar tunnel dryer would be appropriate for start-up as it can process a variety of products, requires lower investment and operating costs than commercial mechanical dryers, easy to install/dismantle and maintain, and convenient to use; d) Packaging area finished products; e) Finished product storage; f) Office, toilets, shower rooms, lockers; g) Storage for ingredients; and h) Storage for packaging materials. 3.3. Training Center and Demo Plots The IFT will be a location where farmers will bring their produce to the wholesale market. As such it is an ideal location to facilitate capacity building too. Training can be provided to teach farmers how to enhance yield from the land they work but also how to enhance their products to achieve higher value produce. Seed producers could operate such a training facility with demo plots where they can teach the farmers how best to grow the vegetables, how to manage crops, how to deal with pests and diseases and other aspects of modern farming. The training center may also be used for other training on agricultural technologies such as livestock and poultry raising, postharvest and processing technologies.
Page 20
3.4. Development Options For the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center, two development options are proposed, called Option 1 Basic Minimum, and Option 2 Expanded Scope. Table 2. Phases for an Integrated Food Terminal Phase 1: Basic Minimum Wholesale Food Market a) b) c) d) e) f) a) b) c) d) e) Receiving, sorting/grading Washing and repacking area Selling area for walk-in/transient wholesalers Wholesale stalls Ambient storage area Cold storage area Office Training Room Canteen Public Toilets Information Bulletin Board
Administration Building
Other Facilities
a) Waste materials recovery center b) Compost pit c) Waste water treatment plant Phase 2: Expanded Scope
Food Processing Center
a) Farm demonstration plots b) Facilities for heat processing and drying of fruit and vegetable products
3.5. Abattoirs In the last 10 years, inventory of hogs and goat in South Cotabato grew at an annual rate of 7.8% and 4.17%, respectively. On the other hand, both cattle and carabao inventory declined slightly by 1.11% and 0.24%, respectively. Based on the past 10 years growth performance, the inventory of animals is projected to increase to levels well beyond the projected capacity utilization of the 2 abattoirs for the next 5 years. Industry sources indicated that there is limited slaughter capacity in GenSan. The IFT will have two abattoirs. Building A will be for hogs, while Building B will house the cattle line, and goat and sheep line. This strategy will allow the city to promptly respond in case of demand for Halal meat, particularly in the frequently mentioned Middle Eastern countries markets, becomes a real market opportunity. The proposed capacity of the cattle line is 5 heads per hour for minimum of 8 and maximum of 20 hours of operation. For hogs, the target capacity is 60 70 heads per hour also with minimum 8 hours operation and maximum of 20 hours. The following table shows the components and proposed phasing of the abattoirs.
Page 21
Table 3. Phases for Abattoirs

Abattoirs Phase 1: Basic Minimum Building A: AAA abattoir for hogs only with the following: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m) n) o) p) Receiving and holding pens Kill floor area Carcass pre-chiller and cooler Breaking, boning and fabrication room Cooler and blast freezer (for meat cuts) Maintenance foom Compressor room (refrigeration) Inspectors Office Laboratory Loading dock for carcasses and meat Weighing and selling area Canteen Restooms (Toilets) Administration/Management Office Solid waste disposal system Waste water treatment facilities Carcass
Building B: AA abattoir for cattle and goat/sheep with all the components as building A, except for the breaking, boning and fabrication room and blast freezer for meat cuts. Phase 2: Expanded Building B: Abattoir for cattle a) b) Addition of breaking, boning and fabrication room and cooler and blast freezer for meat cuts Facilities and system upgrading/updating for AAA Grade and Halal certification
In Phase 1, the proposed hog abattoir will be designed, constructed, equipped, manned and operationalized to meet all the requirements for a Class AAA certification to meet the requirements of pork meat exporters. The proposed cattle abattoir will be designed appropriately to meet requirements for Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (GMP/HACCP) Certification standards which would meet the standards for Class AA accreditation. The beef, goat and sheep meet are likely to be sold in the local city markets or malls or other domestic markets. Under the regulations of the NMIS, meat from Class AA abattoir may be sold within the Philippines. Facilities and system upgrading/updating of the cattle and goat/sheep abattoir may be undertaken in Phase 2 should a need arise based on export demand for beef and lamb/mutton. Based on the design, the only facilities to be added are the breaking, boning and fabrication room, and cooler and blast freezer for meat cuts. The laboratory facilities may have to be upgraded as well to have the capability to perform tests required for a AAA abattoir. The layouts of both abattoirs allow for modular building extension options with or without cutting floor. Even cooling rooms could be considered for a later extension although it would be advisable to include them in the first phase already to facilitate the start of a cold chain to the end-customers.
Page 22
3.6. Environmental Infrastructure 3.6.1. Process & Domestic Wastewater Facility for the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center Wastewater from processing facility as well as from domestic sources (toilets, kitchen, and shower rooms) are proposed be treated separately from the abattoir WWTP due to the difference in quality. However, the process wastewater and the domestic wastewater of the Wholesale Food Market and the Food Processing Center may be combined and treated in a single WWTP. Since the initial plan for the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center is only for dehydrating plant, a typical high-rate biological treatment system such as activated sludge system is recommended with pre-treatment for pH adjustment. For the initial capacity of 1,000 kg per day of raw produce (mangoes), only about 5 to 7 m3/day of wastewater will be generated. This volume is relatively small and it is a practical approach to mix this waste stream with the domestic wastewater for treatment. The WWTP would require a minimum area of around 200 m2. Using a unit cost of Php 60,000 per m3 of wastewater, the estimated cost for the WWTP using SBR type activated sludge system is Php 1.8 million which already includes civil and electro-mechanical components. The operating cost is about Php 900 per day or Php 27,000 per month. 3.6.2. Abattoir Wastewater Treatment Facility A combination of chemical-biological treatment system is proposed for abattoirs wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) inside the IFT. The red stream will be mixed with the green stream, which are basically the stockyard washings. The wastewater from the rendering section will be mixed with the streams but this is just minimal addition to the flow. The expected BOD is about 2,000 mg/l. The manure and other solids in the abattoir will be collected and handled separately. Using the average waste generation rates, the estimated volume of the wastewater generated is presented in Table 4. This generation rate shall also be the WWTPs rated capacity. Table 4. Initial Estimate of Abattoir Wastewater
Animal Hog Cattle Sheep/Goat TOTAL Average wastewater 3 per Head, m 0.3 1.0 0.15 Capacity Heads/hour 60 10 30 Operating Hours, hr 12 8 8 Total Volume, m /day 216 80 36 3 332 ~ 350 m /day
3
The treatment plant can be constructed in module so that it can be operated properly even during lean months without affecting the quality of the effluent. At a unit cost of Php 25,000 to Php 30,000 per m3 of wastewater, the WWTP can cost somewhere in between Php 8.75 to 10.5 million pesos. The associated operating cost (power, chemicals, equipment maintenance & personnel) is approximated at Php 2,500 per day or Php 75,000 per month. Since the proposed WWTP is a high-rate system, the entire structure may only require 500 to 800 m2 of lot including the auxiliaries.
Page 23
3.6.3. Solid Waste Management Facility A. Solid Wastes from the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center The solid wastes from the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center may be handled by a separate composting facility and an MRF. The MRF and composting facility will require about 1,000 m2 of lot and may cost about P2 to 5 million. B. Abattoir Solid Wastes Compost Pits The main types of organic solid waste generated in the abattoir are: 1) Manure; 2) Paunch contents; 3) Solids from primary treatment; and 4) Slaughter and boning waste. The carcass composting can be located within the IFT area but must be isolated far from the food processing facilities with restricted access. Reuse the composted materials for another compost pile, or remove large bones and land apply. Make sure site is clean to prevent scavengers, control odor problems, and keeps good neighbor relations. The initial recommendation is to have on-site composting for the organic wastes generated within the abattoir. The space requirement may be somewhere between 1,000 to 2,000 m2. The initial cost required for equipment and facilities is about Php 5 million.
4.0. Financial Assessment

The Integrated Food Terminal (IFT) is proposed as a strategically located wholesale produce marketing center with a food processing center and abattoirs. It will include a wholesale marketing facility for trading, packaging and storing goodsmainly fruit, vegetables and root crops; two modern abattoirsone for hogs, the other for large animals, including cattle, horses and carabao and smaller ones, including sheep and goats; an area for the location of food processing enterprises; land for off-site infrastructure and access; and a reserve area. In total some 20 hectares (ha) is proposed for acquisition. 4.1. Cost Estimates and Financing Under the subproject, the food terminal for trading (which includes the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center) and the two abattoirs are proposed for implementation initially, along with the off-site infrastructure necessary to access and connect the site. Discussions with the city government indicate a preference for three smaller packages for the IFT complex rather than one major contract for all. Accordingly, the consultants have assessed three separate packages: a) the Wholesale Food Market and Food Processing Center (or food terminal itself); b) the hogs abattoir complex; and c) a large/smaller animals (cattle/goats/sheep) abattoir complex. For completeness, the total facility, too, also has been assessed. Table 5 details the cost estimates and financing for each one. The total cost of all components of the IFT in current prices is estimated to be some P825.1 million (US$20.4 million) 1, which includes interest during construction (IDC) of P45.4 million (US$1.1 million), land and land acquisition costs of P1.3 million (US$0.03 million), development costs of P681.7 million (US$16.8 million) and contingencies of some P96.8 million (US$2.4 million). It is estimated that P761.1 million or 92% of the cost will be financed by the private proponent, and the
1 An exchange rate of P40.5 to US$1.0 has been used throughout this section.
Page 24
balance of P63.6 million or 8% by the city governmentmainly the cost of land and land acquisition, and off site infrastructure necessary to connect the IFT to city road and utility networks. The total cost 2 of the food terminal proper in current prices is estimated to be P448.7 million (US$11.1 million), which includes IDC of P24.7 million (US$0.6 million). Financing will be P448.4 million (US$11.1 million) or 99.9% from the private proponent, and P0.27 million (US$0.01 million) or 0.1% from the city government. Separate cost estimates also have been made for the two abattoirs and supporting facilities. The total cost of the abattoir for hogs in current prices is estimated to be P182.2 million (US$4.5 million), which includes IDC of P10.0 million (US$0.25 million). Financing will be P182.1 million (US$4.5 million) or 99.9% from the private proponent, and P0.14 million or 0.1% from the city government. The total cost of the large/smaller animals abattoir in current prices is estimated to be P128.1 million (US$3.2 million), which includes IDC of P7.1 million (US$0.2 million). Financing will be P127.9 million (US$3.2 million) or 99.9% from the private proponent, and P0.14 million or 0.1% from the city government.
2 Excluding interest during construction (IDC) of P24.7 million. Total cost, including IDC is some P448.7 million.
Page 25
Table 5. Integrated Food Terminal Summary Costs and Financing (Million)

All Packages Item Costs: Land and Land Acquisition Development costs Contingencies Sub-total Interest During Construction Total Financing: Private Sector Proponent General Santos City Government Total Peso $ % Food Terminal Peso $ % Hogs Abattoir Peso $ % Cattle Abattoir Peso $ % City Infrastructure Peso $ %
1.26 681.68 96.81 779.75 45.38 825.13
0.03 16.83 2.39 19.25 1.12 20.37
0.2 82.6 11.7 94.5 5.5 100
0.27 370.76 52.98 424.01 24.70 448.71
0.01 9.15 1.31 10.47 0.61 11.08
0.1 82.6 11.8 94.5 5.5 100
0.14 150.86 21.18 172.18 10.03 182.21
0.00 3.72 0.52 4.25 0.25 4.50
0.1 82.8 11.6 94.5 5.5 100
0.14 106.15 14.75 121.03 7.05 128.08
0.00 2.62 0.36 2.99 0.17 3.16
0.1 82.9 11.5 94.5 5.5 100
2.50 52.11 7.50 62.11 62.11
0.06 1.29 0.19 1.53 1.53
4.0 83.9 12.1 100 0.0 100
761.22 63.91 825.13
18.80 1.58 20.37
92.3 7.7 100
448.44 0.27 448.71
11.07 0.01 11.08
99.9 0.1 100
182.07 0.14 182.21
4.50 0.00 4.50
99.9 0.1 100
127.94 0.14 128.08
3.16 0.00 3.16
99.9 0.1 100
62.11 62.11
1.53 1.53
0.0 100 100
Page 26
4.2. Assessment The financial assessment compared projected revenues to estimated costs. Project revenues were estimated on the basis of assumptions made regarding key activities to be undertaken, rentable areas, volumes of produce likely to pass through the facility, and an assumed take up of facilities and their use. Proposed fees and charges were made with reference to typical rates currently in place. Revenues comprised those from animal slaughtering charges, meat chilling, freezing and storage for the abattoirs; and market store rentals, trading, cleaning, chilling, ripening and storage charges for fruit, vegetables and root crops in the food terminal proper. Capital investment costs were those summarised as Table 5, but for the assessment, land and land acquisition costs were excluded since the modelling relates to the investments and operations of the private proponent. Major repair and replacement costs have been assumed every five years. Operations and maintenance costs have been added assuming 1.25% per annum of the capital cost, inflated according the projected cost increases of 5% per annum. The evaluation was undertaken assuming the entire project is implemented under a BOT arrangement where the city government is paid a rent for the use of its land over a 25 year concession period. A return of 7% of the land value has been assumed in 2014, and this has been increased at 2% per annum thereafter. The assets/facilities are assumed to be turned over to the city government at the end of the concession period in good order. Table 6. Revenue Assumptions-General Santos Integrated Food Terminal Wholesale Food Market
Item Peso/day Market stalls number rental fees Trading volume fees Vegetables trading fees Root crops trading fees Fruit trading fees Cleaning volume fees Chilled storage volume fees Ripening room volume fees Ordinary storage fees Annual increase in food terminal charges Food Volumes Cleaning volume Chilled storage volume Ripening room volume Ordinary storage Trading volume per day (Kgs) Vegetables Root crops Fruit Market stalls number Annual (m ) Cumulative (m )
2 2
20.0 P/Kgs/day 0.50 0.35 0.80 0.75 1.00 0.80 0.50 3% % of Volume 10% 5% 5% 10% 2015 22,456 40,375 3,142 2015 200.00 200.00 2016 25,536 41,256 3,339 2016 100.00 300.00 of root crops of fruit and vegetables of fruit of fruit, vegetables and root crops 2017 29,067 42,172 3,561 2017 72.00 372.00 2018 33,114 43,131 3,811 2018 372.00 2019 38,756 44,136 4,094 2019 372.00
Page 27
Table 6 shows the revenue assumptions while Table 7 shows the results of the financial assessment. Projected operational cash flows, income statements, balance sheets, depreciation schedules, sources and applications of funds, operations and maintenance costs, profitability financial ratios, and detailed revenues to 2039the 25 year concession periodare included in Volume Two. The details are attached as Annex 1 thereto. Table 7. Summary of Financial Assessment - Integrated Food Terminal Hogs Abattoir 1 Debt amortization Repayment starts in year: Number of yearly instalments Tenor of debt (years) 2 Debt service coverage ratio Minimum DSCR Average DSCR IRR & NPV for 25 Year 3 Concession Project IRR (post tax) Project NPV@ WACC Pesos million Equity IRR (post tax) Equity NPV@ Cost of Equity 4 Debt Equity 5 Loan coverage ratios Loan Life Coverage Ratio 1/ 2 7 8 1.34 1.81 Cattle (large animals) Abattoir 2 7 8 0.98 1.31 Food Terminal 2 7 8 0 0.69 1.19
All Packages 2 7 8 0 0.83 1.26
17.4% 137.44 22.7% 88.89 70% 30% 0.31
11.7% 25.79 13.6% 9.12 70% 30% - 0.17
11.7% 105.71 13.3% 31.37 70% 30% - 0.33 1.42 7 Yr/7 Ms 14.67% 12.39% 14.41% 17.35% 17.70% 14.92% 11.62% 9.27%
12.1% 211.46 14.0% 80.82 70% 30% - 0.23 1.46 7 Yr/3 Ms 15.30% 12.74% 15.04% 18.32% 18.75% 15.55% 11.90% 9.28%
Project Life Cover Ratio 2/ 2.64 1.31 6 Payback Period 5 Yr/4 Ms 7 Yr/1 Ms 7 Sensitivity Analysis - Pre-tax Project IRRs (for 25-yr concession) Base case 22.27% 15.30% Construction cost +20% 18.69% 12.33% O&M cost +20% 22.03% 15.03% Revenue +20% 26.51% 18.78% Construction cost -20% 27.26% 19.30% O&M cost -20% 22.50% 15.57% Revenue -20% 17.68% 11.37% Costs +20%; revenue -20% 14.31% 8.31% Notes: 1/ Cash flows during loan life / principal + interest payments 2/ Net cash flows / principal +interest payments
Page 28
Most indicators remain positive, especially the rates of return when compared against the weighted average cost of capital estimated to be 9.2%3. Even under the worst case scenario where revenues decrease by 20% and costs increase by the same amount the IRR remains marginally above the WACC, except for the cattle abattoir. In summary the subproject is financially viable for implementation as a PPP.
4.3. Possible PPP Arrangements It is understood that the City does not want to sell the property, once acquired. However, the City is willing to transfer the use and possession of the property for development by the private sector. As a condition for the transfer, the private proponents are expected to finance, design, build, manage, and maintain the two abattoirs. The City is also willing to provide off-site infrastructure and improve access as part of the subproject. The most suitable contractual arrangement for the abattoirs would be build-operate-and-transfer (BOT) arrangements. Under a BOT scheme, the project proponent undertakes the financing, design and construction of the facility. It also operates and maintains the facility over a fixed term during which it is allowed to charge facility users appropriate fees, rentals, and other charges. This enables the proponent to recover its investment and make a reasonable return. At the end of the term, the proponent transfers the facility to the LGU at no extra cost. For the food terminal itself, the most appropriate arrangement may be the design-and-build approach, since it is likely that the city will want the terminal to be operated by the cooperative that currently manages the existing bagsakan in the city.
3 Loan interest was assumed to be 8% per annum, and the cost of equity at 12% per annum. With a debt to equity ratio of 70:30, the WACC was estimated to be 9.2%.
Page 29
C. PROPOSED CENTRAL PUBLIC MARKET REDEVELOPMENT

1.0. Situation Analysis
The Central Public Market (CPM) was historically one of the important activity centres in General Santos City. When tuna and other marine products were still arriving at the Queen Tuna Park beachfront, a natural connection from the sea to the market existed. This provided activity and energy to this part of the town. Since then a few things happened. The fish arrival, trading, processing and packaging were transferred to outside the city centre and with it went the link between the sea and the market. Acharon Boulevard became part of a highway system and dividers between the lanes were installed in an attempt to improve traffic flow. With it the barrier to the sea became stronger and the beach area became inhabited by informal settlers. New air-conditioned malls started providing raw and half products and started direct competition with the public market. Since then the attractiveness of the CPM has waned and the market vendors complain that their incomes have been declining. The market as a whole has become unattractive as a place to buy goods at low prices. The structures are old and show serious signs of deterioration, and the surrounding streets and sidewalks are congested. The overall image is that the market and its surrounding area are messy and unsafe. 1.1. General Physical Conditions The market occupies a 2-hectare lot, bounded by Cagampang Street on the north, Santiago Boulevard on the east, Acharon Boulevard on the south, and Feliciano Alias Street on the west. It is strategically located within the citys central business district. Parking space is available on all sides of the market, but it is not well managed. There are also itinerant vendors actually occupying part of Cagampang Street. The market consists of two separate but adjacent structures (referred to as Phase A and Phase B) separated by a service road for deliveries. This service road is about 60 to 80 centimeters lower than the main market floor. There are some 1,560 registered stalls within the market structure, surrounded by some 240 stalls for Maranao traders selling various dry goods. The stalls occupied by the Maranao vendors completely surround the market on all sides, thus blocking the view of the markets entrances and perimeter stalls. The entrance ways to the interior of the market are narrow and not very well defined, with the goods of the adjoining stalls occupying part of the corridors which are also narrow. There also are illegal vendors occupying the perimeter walkways. The interior of the market (both structures) is dark and hot. The roof skylights seem to either be covered with soot or not sufficient to provide natural lighting. Electric lights appear inadequate, and ventilation is poor, making shopping uncomfortable. The drainage system also appears to need major improvements. 1.2. Social Concerns The central public market of GenSan is a relatively large structure offering a wide range of goods for sale. The 1,560 registered stall vendors are distributed into wet and dry sections within the market building. Outside of the market building facing Santiago Boulevard are 240 small stalls mostly occupied by the Maranao vendors. In addition, transient vendors (called laray) are scattered in the market area with no specific posts on a daily basis thus causing traffic congestion to pedestrians and buyers.
Page 30
The interior layout of the market is not consumer-friendly in terms of appropriate location of goods and services based on their category. The prescribed zoning of stall types is not enforced effectively. The most affected consumers/ buyers are working mothers who have little time to shop and elderly buyers who have to traverse practically the entire market area looking for the goods that they need to buy. Children beggars from conflict areas are prevalent in the market vicinity. They are mostly out- ofschool children who live with their migrant families as informal settlers in the property across the market site. This informal settlement across Acharon Boulevard on the side of the Muslim mosque is generally perceived as a major contributor to the unattractiveness of the market. There have been reports that the area harbors criminal elements who prey on the public market vendors and customers. There are wholesale dry goods stores owned by Taiwanese within the immediate vicinity of the market that also engage in retail selling. The vendors suffer significant loss of income since they cannot compete with these wholesale-retail Taiwanese businesses. There are no storage facilities in the market. The significant number of transient vendors (laray) in the central public market without specific assigned selling areas is a consequence of lack of, or inadequate rules and regulations concerning non-stall holders in the market. Likewise, there is reportedly inadequacy of personnel to monitor the daily activities within and around the public market. The lack of personnel also aggravates the security problem resulting from the presence of beggar children and bad elements in the market that are reportedly coming from the informal settlement across the market. This informal settlement is perceived as a deterrent to the citys redevelopment initiatives, not only of the public market but also of future redevelopment of its immediate surroundings like the Queen Tuna Park and possibly the Mosque and beach areas. Lastly, the socio-economic issue pertaining to the declining patronage of the central public market that results in lower incomes of the vendors therein is not totally correct to blame on the emergence of new shopping malls, existing Taiwanese dry goods wholesale stores that reportedly engage in retail selling, other meat shops and satellite stores in nearby areas. Although the city government may install corrective measures concerning business ordinances that can protect the interests of legitimate market vendors, e.g. business classification and zoning, the bigger task is to improve the general conditions of the market and ensure that the goods sold therein undergo proper and hygienic handling in order to attract customers.
Figure 8. Entrance alleys of the Central Public Market
Page 31
1.3. Environmental Considerations 1.3.1. Public Market Wastewater The fish section of the Central Public Market of GenSan generates considerable amount of highly putrescible wastewater with high organic content. The wastewater comes from fish washing and floor cleaning and is currently received by a network of drainage lines in and around the fish section. The drainage from this section of the market is directed to a sewer line crossing P. Acharon Boulevard and received by a wastewater treatment facility (WWTF). After the construction works, the WWTF was operated only for a period of 3 months. In April 2012, the WWTF became nonoperational and the sewer line from the fish section of the market was directed to the city drainage outfall bypassing the WWTF towards Sarangani Bay. Early this year (2013), the city government had the WWTF repaired and it is now again operational. Residents and passers-by, however, still complain of foul and offensive odor coming from the WWTF from time to time. 1.3.2. Solid Wastes The markets solid wastes, usually vegetable trimmings, fish internal organs, and other food wastes are collected by the citys garbage trucks, twice everyday (one in the morning and another in the afternoon). The biodegradable wastes are collected separately from the non-biodegradable and residuals. These are currently disposed in the citys existing dumpsite. 1.3.3. Sanitary Toilets The public sanitary toilets in the public market are inadequate in number when compared to the standard requirements of the Sanitation Code. The toilets, two sets in Building A and one set in Building B, are provided with water and are served with septic tanks. The septic tanks discharge into the drainage system towards Sarangani Bay. 1.4. Traffic The existing traffic situation in the vicinity of the Central Public Market is far from optimal. As such, conditions during peak-hours are heavily congested. The congestion is mainly due to the poor management of vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the area. Among others, there is an urgent need to address the following traffic management issues: a) Presence of informal vendors lining up the section of Santiago Boulevard on the eastern face of the Central Public Market complex; b) Tricycle and multi-cab units taking up road space along Santiago Boulevard and P. Acharon Boulevard while waiting to pick-up passengers; c) Poor parking management along the frontage roads; d) Lack of pedestrian flow management around the Central Public Market area that leads to high roadside friction; and e) Lack of proper traffic management mechanisms such as signage, barriers, designated crossing, pavement marking, and lighting. 1.5. Critical Issues and Concerns The CGGS is convinced that the principal function of the Central Public Market (CPM) in its present location should be retained, although it needs to be rehabilitated and redeveloped in order for it to
Page 32
be physically attractive and economically viable. In order to achieve this objective, a number of critical issues and concerns need to be addressed. These include the following: a) The economic viability of the CPM. In the face of the competition coming from the private shopping malls, groceries, and meat shops, as well as the new satellite public markets, the CPM needs to find its market niche if it is to compete with the newer shopping centers and be economically viable. If the CPM is to be promoted as an attractive and a cheaper alternative to the existing private markets, it will have to adopt a strategy that will balance its operating expenses and the need to keep stall rental fees low. b) The CPM as a major source of livelihood for the market stall vendors as well as the ambulant vendors (laray). The CPM provides a significant opportunity for jobs and livelihood for a large number of people including the Maranao traders. Many of them are complaining that their incomes have been declining over the past few years. Upgrading the existing market will need to consider their paying capacity and how they can be accommodated in the new structure, as well as where they can temporarily be relocated during construction. c) The effect of the surrounding areas existing conditions on the attractiveness of the CPM. Private business owners and operators in the area claim that aside from the stiff competition by the new shopping malls, the general environment of the CPM has deteriorated over the years and thus has become unattractive to prospective shoppers. The informal settlement across Acharon Boulevard is perceived as a major security issue. They also cited traffic congestion, lack of parking, proliferation of illegal vendors, poor waste management, and fear of criminality as the major reasons shoppers prefer shopping at the malls even if prices are higher. These issues are city management concerns and as such are under the CGGS sphere of responsibility. d) The deteriorated, unattractive and uncomfortable conditions as well as the obsolete and inadequate drainage and sanitation systems of the CPM. Definitely, the CPMs existing structure needs some major repairs and rehabilitation if not total replacement. Building A has a distinctive architectural design which could be conserved, while Building B has no significant architectural value and thus could be replaced with a much better designed structure. But whether it is conservation or replacement, it has to be physically attractive and comfortable, with good lighting, ventilation, drainage, and sanitation facilities. Improving the quality of the building and its support systems will entail substantial financial resources. e) The management of the CPM. There is a general perception that the management of the market needs improvement, evidenced by the laxity in the enforcement of the markets operating rules and regulations. If the CPM is to be attractive to shoppers, it will invariably have to compete with the private shopping malls, grocery stores, and meat shops. This will require a comprehensive, efficient and competitive management system and organization.
2.0. Project Rationale

2.1. Project Justification The Central Public Market plays a major social, economic and cultural role in General Santos Citys growth and development. Its present deteriorated and unattractive conditions, however, have drastically diminished this role particularly as a place to buy food items at low prices, as a center for livelihood and employment, and as a major contributor to city revenues. If this role is to be
Page 33
revitalized and preferably even enhanced, the CPM and its immediately surrounding area need to be redeveloped and upgraded. The main challenge is how to redevelop and revitalize the CPM and its surrounding area such that it will be able to be attractive enough to shoppers in the face of the competition from the private airconditioned shopping malls, grocery stores, and meat shops. This suggests that a renewal of the CPMs same old concept will not suffice; that it is essential to energize the whole district. The CPMs comparative advantage lies in its location, the size of the block it occupies, its historical significance, and its proximity to the sea. These attributes represent the building blocks on which a new and revitalized CPM area can be realized.
Figure 9 Proposed Central Public Market Redevelopment
2.2. Project Description Given the characteristics of the existing CPMs site and its significant nearby facilities, such as the mosque across Acharon Blvd., and the Queen Tuna Park, the proposed revitalization of the CPM area can be anchored on the concept of a traditional marketplace as contrasted to a modern, airconditioned shopping mall. The Marketplace can include the following features: An upgraded and revitalized central public market The market is envisioned to be the anchor of a modern shopping center that has a distinctive section for Muslim products including halal food, a modern fish and seafood section together with a fruit and vegetable section, entertainment facilities for the whole family (eg, childrens amusement area, bowling alley, billiard hall, etc), dry goods section, restaurants (air-conditioned and al fresco), a community events area, and sufficient off-street parking;
Page 34
The Mosque and its immediate vicinity The mosque including its surrounding area is proposed to be improved and enhanced as a cultural amenity as well as a tourist attraction. In order to promote the attractiveness of a shopping center that is near the sea, a pedestrian promenade is proposed in order to provide a visual as well as physical link between the revitalized market and the beach area. The Queen Tuna Park This is proposed to be improved and retrofitted as a family recreation area and as a possible port for ferries to Sarangani province and other nearby destinations, and serving also as the center for the annual Tuna Festival; and Acharon Boulevard This important street is proposed as the main spine of the Marketplace with the portion stretching from the CPM to Queen Tuna Park to be closed to traffic on certain hours of selected days of the week for use as a village street market (Pasar Malam). The concept is to promote the Marketplace not just as another commercial center in General Santos City, but as a memorable experience for both residents and visitors of the city, something unique and different from the existing shopping malls, a civic place where people will want to shop, dine, be entertained, and where retail businesses want to be located in. Because the CPM area comprises of both publicly and privately owned properties, the overall revitalization effort will necessarily involve actions by both the CGGS and the private property owners concerned. The CGGS will be responsible for improvements in the public area such as streets, sidewalks, parks and plazas, while the private sector will be responsible for improvements on their properties, such as building repairs and rehabilitation. For this reason, the upgrading of the area surrounding the CPM is not included in the financial analysis. However, it is recommended that it be pursued in conjunction with the redevelopment of the CPM. The actual redevelopment of the CPM itself is likely to be pursued through a Public-Private Partnership approach. A number of alternative options can be considered in implementing this. These options are described in the following sections.
Page 35
Figure 10 Proposed Central Public Market Redevelopment
Page 36
2.3. Conceptual Design (Site Development and Building Design) 2.3.1. Overall Area Development Option A: Total Redevelopment This option entails the total demolition of the existing CPM structure and its replacement by a new structure. This means both building A and B will be dismantled and the entire 2-hectare site will be redeveloped. A new structure or structures will be constructed with appropriate off-street parking, support infrastructure, and environmental facilities. The new structure(s) is envisioned to accommodate a wet and dry market and a commercial center including appropriate family entertainment facilities.
Figure 11 Option A Aerial Perspective
Option B: Partial Redevelopment with Conservation Because of the unique and significant architectural character of Building A, this option proposes Building As conservation combined with the dismantling of Building B which will be replaced by a new structure. This will involve necessary repairs, restoration, and retrofitting of Building A in order to improve its physical appearance, structural quality, ventilation, toilets, lighting, electrical, plumbing, and drainage systems. A new multi-storey structure is proposed for the site to be vacated by Building B, to accommodate commercial stalls and family entertainment facilities. Off-street parking within the site will be provided, while necessary off-site infrastructure improvements (e.g., loading/unloading areas, public open spaces for outdoor eateries) as well as environmental facilities (e.g., flood control, waste water treatment, solid waste collection areas, materials recovery areas, etc.)
Page 37
Figure 12 Option B Exterior Perspective
Features Common to All Options Establishment of a traffic management system for the streets surrounding the central public market. Upgrading of the area surrounding the mosque to improve environmental conditions and to enhance the connection between the market and the sea. Repair and upgrading of the areas drainage system and waste water treatment facility, as well as improvement of garbage collection and street cleaning. Improvement of the Queen Tuna Park into a family recreation area, center for the annual Tuna Festival, and a possible pier for small boats catering to tourists. Use of a portion of P. Acharon Blvd as a night market (Pasar Malam) for certain hours on one or two days a week. Improvement of the sidewalks and streetscape in front of the private commercial buildings surrounding the market. Establishment of a program for the facelifting and regular repainting of the private commercial buildings.
2.3.2. Overall Infrastructure and Environmental Hardware a) Wastewater from the Redeveloped Central Public Market (CPM) The existing DEWATS may still accommodate the estimated design capacity of 80 m3/day for the upgraded CPM provided some rectifications are done. These include: (1) provision of screens and grease trap; (2) cleaning of anaerobic tanks; and (3) rehabilitate the gravel filters and chlorination. The cost for the upgrading will be minimum (approximated at Php 0.2 to 0.4 million) and may be implemented in short period of time. If the entire CPM will be rehabilitated and additional wastewater flows coming from other market stalls (meat section, food stall, etc) and from the proposed development in Queen Tuna Park are accommodated, the existing WWTP must either be upgraded to a new high-rate system or another
Page 38
one must be constructed. The option to upgrade the existing system into a high-rate system will involve the conversion of the anaerobic tanks into aeration tanks with diffusers and fitted with settlers. There is no need for additional tank construction. The existing tanks will be used and will just be converted to upgraded aeration and settling tanks. The wastewater flow is expected to increase by as much as 100% to 160 m3/day. The upgrading will approximately require about Php 1 to 2 million pesos with the blower and diffuser taking the bulk of the cost. b) Sanitary Toilets for the Central Public Market Adequate number of toilet facilities shall be provided in the upgraded CPM with two compartments, one for men and one for women. The womens toilet should have a minimum of 4 water-closets and 4 wash basins, while the mens toilet should have at least 3 water-closets, 3 urinals, and 4 wash basins. The public toilets may either be served by septic tanks or connected to a centralized sewage treatment plant. It is possible to mix the sewage with the public market wastewater. It is estimated that public toilets from the upgraded CPM will produce approximate 5 m3/day. This can be accommodated by the upgraded WWTP. c) Materials Recovery Facility The market wastes may be segregated on-site where the residual wastes are disposed off to the sanitary landfill. A materials recovery facility may be set-up within the CPM to ensure segregation of wastes is implemented and recyclables are collected. The cost is minimal and estimated somewhere between Php 100,000 to 200,000, which includes office, storage bins and some small equipment.
3.0. Financial Assessment

For the redevelopment of the CPM, two options have been developed. Option A: total redevelopmentthe total demolition of the existing CPM structure and its replacement by a new structure. Option B: partial redevelopment with conservationthe conservation of one building with its unique architectural characterrepairs, restoration, and retrofitting, and the dismantling of the other building and its replacement by a new multi-storey structure. Accordingly, the consultants have assessed the two options. 3.1. Cost Estimates and Financing Table 8 shows the revenue assumptions while Table 9 shows the summary of cost and financing.
Page 39
Table 8. Revenue Assumptions-Central Public Market Redevelopment - Option A
Item Shopping Center Rentable space Common area Total Car Park Spaces Public Market Rentable space Common area Total Annual increase in rent Shopping Center Public Market Item Percentage take up/occupancy Shopping centre Public market Car Park Operations & Maintenance Costs Pesos Millions
Area (m ) 20,328 8,712 29,040
% of Total 70.0% 30.0% 100.0% Cars/day/ space 5 % 40.0% 60.0% 100.0%
Rent or Management 2 Fee/ m /month 550 40 Charge per car/day 35 1,600 20
438 6,680 10,020 16,700 3% 3%
Years 2015 60% 75% 0% 2015 41.14 2016 85% 95% 0% 2016 43.20 2017 95% 97% 0% 2017 45.36 2018 97% 97% 0% 2018 47.63 2019 97% 97% 95% 2019 50.01
Table 9. Central Public Market Redevelopment Summary Costs and Financing (Million) Option A Pesos 145.20 1,638.22 233.30 2,016.73 109.09 2,125.82 1,980.62 145.20 2,125.82 Option B Pesos US$ 145.20 962.49 136.00 1,243.69 64.03 1,307.72 1,162.52 145.20 1,307.72 3.59 23.77 3.36 30.71 1.58 32.29 28.70 3.59 32.29
Item Costs: Land and Land Acquisition Development costs Contingencies Sub-total Interest During Construction Total Financing: Private Sector Proponent General Santos City Government Total
US$ 3.59 40.45 5.76 49.80 2.69 52.49 48.90 3.59 52.49
% 6.8% 77.1% 11.0% 94.9% 5.1% 100.0% 93.2% 6.8% 100.0%
% 11.1% 73.6% 10.4% 95.1% 4.9% 100.0% 88.9% 11.1% 100.0%
Page 40
The total cost of redeveloping the CPMOption Ain current prices is estimated to be some P2,125.8 million (US$52.5 million), which includes IDC of P109.1 million (US$2.7 million), and the value of city owned land of P145.2 million (US$3.6 million). It is estimated that P1,980.6 million or 93% of the cost will be financed by the private proponent, and the balance of P145.2 million or 7% by the city governmentmainly the value of its land. The total cost of redeveloping and renovating the CPMOption Bin current prices is shown to be some P1,307.7 million (US$32.3 million), which includes IDC of P64.0 million (US$1.6 million), and the value of city owned land of P145.2 million (US$3.6 million). It is estimated that P1,162.5 million or 89% of the cost will be financed by the private proponent, and the balance of P145.2 million or 11% by the city government. 3.2. Assessment The financial assessment compared projected revenues to estimated costs. Project revenues were estimated on the basis of assumptions made regarding key facilities to be provided, rentable areas available, and an assumed take up of facilities and their use. They comprised those from stall rentals in the public market, rental space in the open market, shop rentals in the retail complex, and a management fee for the maintenance of the common areas. Capital investment costs were those summarised as Table 8 but for the assessment, land and land acquisition costs were excluded since the modelling relates to the investments and operations of the private proponent. Major repair and replacement costs have been assumed every five years. Operations and maintenance costs have been added assuming 2.5% per annum of the capital cost, inflated according to projected cost increases of 5% per annum. The evaluation was undertaken assuming the project is implemented under a BOT arrangement where the city government is paid a rent for the use of its land over a 25 year concession period. A return of 7% of the land value has been assumed in 2014, and this has been increased at 2% per annum thereafter. The assets/facilities are assumed to be turned over to the city government at the end of the concession period in good order. Table 10 shows the results of the financial assessment for both options. Projected operational cash flows, income statements, balance sheets, depreciation schedules, sources and applications of funds, operations and maintenance costs, profitability financial ratios, and detailed revenues to 2039the 25 year concession periodare included in Volume Three. The details are attached as Annex 6 and 7 thereto. Table 10. Summary of Financial Assessment - Central Public Market Option A 1 Debt amortization Repayment starts in year: Number of yearly instalments Tenor of debt (years) 2 Debt service coverage ratio Minimum DSCR Average DSCR 3 IRR & NPV for 25 Year Concession Project IRR (post tax) 2.00 7.00 8 0.82 1.01 10.22% Option B 2.00 7.00 8 0.90 1.11 11.46%
Page 41
Project NPV@ WACC Pesos million Equity IRR (post tax) Equity NPV@ Cost of Equity 4 Debt Equity 5 Loan coverage ratios Loan Life Coverage Ratio 1/
160.51 11.58% - 36.15 70% 30% -0.28
214.37 13.47% 74.69 70% 30% -0.17 1.28 7 Yr/4 Ms 14.48% 11.90% 13.92% 18.03% 18.02% 15.03% 10.51% 7.43%
Project Life Cover Ratio 2/ 1.03 6 Payback Period 8 Yr/0 Ms 7 Sensitivity Analysis - Pre-tax Project IRRs (for 25-yr concession) Base case 12.95% Construction cost +20% 10.54% O&M cost +20% 12.36% Revenue +20% 16.26% Construction cost -20% 16.25% O&M cost -20% 13.54% Revenue -20% 9.21% Costs +20%; revenue -20% Notes: 1/ Cash flows during loan life / principal + interest payments 2/ Net cash flows / principal +interest payments 6.25%
Most indicators remain positive, especially the rates of return when compared against the weighted average cost of capital estimated to be 9.2%4. Only under the worst case scenario where revenues decrease by 20% and costs increase by the same amount is the IRR below the WACC for both options. In summary both options are financially viable for implementation as a PPP.
3.3. Possible PPP Arrangements It is understood that the City does not want to sell the property it currently owns at this time. However, the City is willing to transfer the use and possession of the property for development by the private sector. As a condition for the transfer, the private proponents are expected to finance, design, build, manage, and maintain the public market and shopping complex. The City is also willing to provide off-site infrastructure and improve the surrounding areas as part of the subproject. The most suitable contractual arrangement for the redevelopment of the central public market would be build-operate-and-transfer (BOT) arrangements. Under a BOT scheme, the project proponent undertakes the financing, design and construction of the facility. It also operates and maintains the facility over a fixed term during which it is allowed to charge facility users appropriate fees, rentals, and other charges. This enables the proponent to recover its investment and make a
4 Loan interest was assumed to be 8% per annum, and the cost of equity at 12% per annum. With a debt to equity ratio of 70:30, the WACC was estimated to be 9.2%.
Page 42
reasonable return. At the end of the term, the proponent transfers the facility to the LGU at no extra cost. For the public market itself, one optional arrangement may be for the private proponent to turnover the public market to the City Government after completion of construction, and either have the City manage and operate it themselves or contract out these operations separately to the private sector.
Page 43
D. CAPACITY BUILDING ASSESSMENT

As stated at the beginning of this report, this technical assistance project seeks to improve the physical and institutional linkages between various stakeholders along the food chain in General Santos City mainly through the implementation of the following complementary and linked components: a) Integrated Food Terminal (IFT); b) Central Public Market (CPM) and the redevelopment of its surrounding area including the Queen Tuna Park; c) Support Infrastructure (road transport improvement, transport terminal/ station in the vicinity of the IFT, Solid Waste Management and Wastewater Treatment facilities at the IFT and CPM sites; d) Capacity Building on technical and managerial skills of the GSCG officers. Based on this, a number of capacity building activities have been initiated focused on strengthening the technical and managerial skills of the GSCG officers particularly the members of the project Technical Working Group (TWG). Given the expected outputs of the project as well as its limited timeframe, the capacity building activities are directed at the skills necessary for preparing prefeasibility studies in general.
1.0. Overall Approach

The manner by which the technical assistance project is being undertaken has been designed such that it involves close collaboration between the consultant team and the members of the TWG throughout the entire preparation process of the projects outputs. In effect, the approach is learning-by-doing on the part of the TWG members, with the consultants serving as mentors. Thus, the consultants and TWG members have been working together right from the start of the project activities, particularly in the identification of data and information on existing conditions, in site inspections, in the conduct of focus group discussions, and in stakeholder consultations. At the launch of the project, members of the TWG were grouped into teams corresponding to the identified components of the project, such as the Integrated Food Terminal, Central Public Market, and the support infrastructure to these as well as their social aspects. A directory of all TWG members as well as concerned stakeholder groups was prepared, listing down offices, names, and contact numbers. This has greatly facilitated the gathering of essential data requirements, and has contributed to the TWG members and stakeholder group representatives better understanding and appreciation of not only the social, environmental, infrastructural, and financial factors affecting the project, but also the linkages among these factors. Through these activities, the consultants have imparted their knowledge, insights and ideas to the TWG members, resulting in the production of the Inception Report, Interim Report, and this Final Report.
2.0. Consultants Observations

In the course of the projects activities, a number of observations have been made by the consultants with regard to the capacity building needs of the TWG members. These include the following:
Page 44
The absence of a central data bank with regularly updated information on the citys social, economic, environmental, infrastructural, and financial conditions. Data and information generally available but are scattered among many departments and offices, and are not regularly and/or uniformly updated. Much of the available data are raw and not adequately interpreted for planning and decision-making requirements. The data may be readily available, but what they mean for purposes of development planning and management is lacking. Many of the TWG members are not up-to-date with more recent policies and practices with regards to social and environmental safeguards which are standard requirements in program/project proposals for national government as well as donor agency funding. Some of the senior-level members of the TWG have participated in recent seminars on the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) approach to infrastructure financing. However, the middle- and lower-level members are not familiar with it. Related to this is the lack of knowledge with the process of preparing pre-feasibility and feasibility studies, including their relationship with existing city planning and decisionmaking processes such as the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP), Executive-Legislative Agenda (ELA), and Annual Investment Program (AIP).
3.0.Training Workshops
To address these existing limitations as well as to complement the learning-by-doing activities, a set of more focused training workshops were conducted during the project period. Based on the project objectives as well as the consultants observations, these workshops covered the following topics: Public-Private Partnerships Social and Environmental Safeguards Agri-Business
4.0. Capacity Building as a Continuous Program

Capacity building is not skills training alone. Regular skills training are indeed necessary in order to update and upgrade the ability of personnel to perform their jobs. But skills training need to be combined with organizational development which may require the restructuring of departments and/ or offices to be able to efficiently and effectively perform their mandated functions in the face of changing conditions, challenges, and opportunities. However, the capacity building component of this technical assistance project is limited to focus primarily on the technical and managerial skills of GSCG officers necessary to carry out the specific objectives of the project. While this can be achieved through the learning-by-doing activities and training workshops, the projects relatively short timeframe does not allow for a more comprehensive capacity building program.
Page 45
Such a program should ideally be a continuous or regular program of the city government. The most logical department to carry this out is the Human Resource and Development Office, but will require coordination and collaboration with all the other city departments and offices. It is recommended that such a program addressing both individual skills upgrading and organizational efficiency and effectiveness be established as part of the citys regular operations.
Page 46
E. DESIGN AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK

This Design and Monitoring Framework (DMF) is a results-based tool that is intended to assist in the further detailing and subsequent implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the proposed IFT and CPM redevelopment projects. It structures the project planning and implementation process, and helps communicate essential information about the project to stakeholders in an efficient, easy-to-read format. Table 11 Design and Monitoring Framework
Design Summary Performance Targets/ Indicators Data Sources/Reporting Mechanisms Assumptions Risks and
Impact (Goal) Improvement of regional trade on food commodities particularly agricultural crops and livestock.
Design capacity of facilities

attained: o Net increase in volume of crops traded o Net increase in number of animals butchered o Net increases in number of business licenses located at the IFT and redeveloped central public market and CPM surrounding area.
PPP operators
accomplishment Reports LGU reports o Office of City Administrator o Office of City Agriculturist o Office of City Veterinarian o CEMCDO No record of contractual disputes
Successful PPP partnership in local economic development
Smooth LGU-PPP operator

relationship established.
Outcome Development of IFT complex. Redevelopment of CPM. Upgrading of surrounding area of CPM including Queen Tuna Park. Conversion of IFT project site and surrounding area into an industrial zone. Private Sector
Investments in food terminal, abattoirs for hogs and other livestock and IFT common infrastructure. Investments in the redevelopment of CPM. Investments in the upgrading of CPM .surrounding area including Queen Tuna Park. Approval of conversion to industrial zone of project site and surrounding area. Citys CLUP is revised and approved.
LGU reports
Project
completion report
Updated CLUP
PPP center reports LGU-Operator

agreements / contracts
Assumptions: Microeconomic and political stability All risks fully identified & duly allocated to LGU and operators and duly mitigated Broad base stakeholders support Risks: Economic slowdown Cancellation of contract by New LGU administration Non-approval of periodic adjustments in rental & user tariffs by LGU Assumptions: Implementation thruPPP LGU committed to PPPprinciples Support of broad base stakeholders Risks: Delay in LGU acquisition of project site Political and community intervention Incompetent bidders
Page 47
Design Summary
Performance Targets/ Indicators
Data Sources/Reporting Mechanisms
Assumptions Risks
and
Involved Outputs 1. Integrated Food Terminal Complex is constructed as designed and fully operational.
PPP operators engaged.

Food terminal constructed as designed Abattoir for hogs constructed as designed Abattoir for other animals constructed as designed IFT common infrastructure constructed as designed Redeveloped CPM constructed as designed.
Construction delay
and cost over-runs
LGU records
o Project
2. Redevelopment of CPM achieved as designed and fully operational.
management office o City Engineers Office o City Planning and Development Coordinators Office PPP Operators report
3.
Mitigation measures to collect, treat and dispose solid and liquid wastes in IFT complex and redeveloped CPM completed and functional as planned and designed.
Wastewater collection and treatment facilities constructed as designed Solid waste management plan in CPM and surrounding area implemented as designed.
PPP Operators
reports
City Environmental
Office reports
Assumptions: Project site of IFT acquired and land use conversion to industrial zone approved PPP operators has financial, technical and operational capacity to undertake subprojects Design engineers and contractors are competent and responsible in ensuring best work practices and standards Risks: LGU unable to acquire suitable project site Incompetent bidders Delay in tendering / procurement of PPP operators Construction delay and cost overruns LGU fails to muster broadbased support of stakeholders Assumptions: Adequate enforcement of environmental laws and regulations Risks: Facility operators stop or cease operation of treatment facilities to save on operating costs.
Page 48
4.
Vehicular Traffic Management Plan affecting IFT and CPM implemented.
Gensan vehicular traffic management plan revised, approved and enforced.
Random feedback
surveys. Ocular observation at different intervals of the day.
0. Preparatory Activities 0.1 LGU approves project for PPP implementation and allocates funds for project preparation and hiring of PPP Transaction Advisors, procurement of project site and construction of common infrastructure. 0.2 PPP Transaction Advisors hired and engaged 0.3 Detailed development master plan of IFT complex completed and approved 0.4 Land acquisition of project site completed (Year 0) 0.5 Conversion of land to industrial use approved and incorporated in the updated CLUP of the city 0.6 PPP procurement documents finalized and approved 1. PPP Procurement Activities 2. Institutional development and capacity building 3. Design and Construction Activities 4. Project monitoring and evaluation Activities
Assumptions: Broad base community support Risks: LGU fails to conduct city-wide information and education campaign Inputs:
Source: CDIA Consultants.
Page 49
F. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1.0. Conclusions
Based upon the foregoing, the following general conclusions can be made: There is sufficient demand for an upgraded and expanded capacity of Gensans food marketing facilities, particularly for fruits and vegetables as well as for slaughtered meat, in the face of the citys increasing population base and importance as Soccsargens major food trading hub. The citys existing major facilities, specifically the City Bagsakan Center and the City Abattoir, are badly outdated, located in already congested areas, and lacking the possibilities for on-site expansion. There is adequate interest among the citys food chain stakeholders in the establishment as well as in the management of a modern Integrated Food Terminal. The Central Public Market and its surrounding area has deteriorated over the years and has waned in importance as the citys major shopping center for low-priced goods, resulting in lower incomes for the vendors as well as the city government. The upgrading of the Central Public Market, if it is to compete with the newer shopping malls and private groceries, will fail to attract customers if its surrounding area, especially the informal settlement across Acharon Boulevard is not rehabilitated. The news of the proposed redevelopment of the Central Public Market has raised concerns among the market stall holders and other vendors about their being accommodated in the new facility, whether they can afford the new market stall rates, and where they will be temporarily located while the new facility is under construction. Farmers in GenSan as well as in the surrounding areas are major stakeholders in the proposed IFT, and it has been reported that a large number of them include women and are poor Because they are intended to benefit from the development of the IFT, it is critical that their existing conditions, particularly their levels of income, constraints, and other concerns be ascertained in order for appropriate measures be included in the IFT implementation program. A Public-Private Partnership (PPP) arrangement would be the most practical approach to the implementation of both the Integrated Food Terminal and the Central Public Market Redevelopment, although it may be necessary to unbundle their components in order to facilitate an easier procurement process. The proposed Integrated Food Terminal and Central Public Market Redevelopment have been found to be both financially and economically viable.
Page 50
2.0. Recommendations
This pre-feasibility study has the following recommendations: Make a decision on the site of the Integrated Food Terminal in order to proceed with the preparation of a more detailed plan and cost estimates for its construction. Proceed with the preparation of the Feasibility Study (FS) for the Integrated Food Terminal to assist in deciding the phasing of its implementation, as well as its "unbundling" into subcomponents for possible PPP arrangements. Conduct a thorough characterization study of the farmers who constitute one of the major stakeholders in the proposed IFT, to determine their numbers, income levels, main concerns, organizational structure, access to credit and other support programs, etc. Undertake a more thorough socioeconomic survey of the market stall holders and other vendors of the Central Public Market to ascertain their concerns, and to consider these in the further detailing of the redevelopment plans and designs. Given the concern of some market vendors, that they cannot afford higher stall rental rates, it may be necessary to establish a microfinance system which they can access for low-interest loans. Undertake a thorough socioeconomic survey of the occupants of the informal settlement across Acharon Boulevard from the Central Public Market in order to determine the practicality of on-site upgrading or resettlement, and as a necessary preparation for a Resettlement Action Plan should resettlement be adopted. Proceed with the preparation of the Feasibility Study for the redevelopment of the Central Public Market to assist in deciding on the design option to pursue, the delineation of responsibilities between government and the private parties involved, and the details of the PPP arrangement for its implementation. Conduct a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) for both the Integrated Food Terminal and the Central Public Market Redevelopment in conjunction with the preparation of the Feasibility Studies for these two projects.
Page 51

Executive Summary General Santos Vol 1

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Executive Summary General Santos Vol 1

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

FINAL REPORT

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

2.0. General Santos City and Its Food Industry

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

3.0. Existing Food Trade Facilities

4.0. The Projects Objectives

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

B. PROPOSED INTEGRATED FOOD TERMINAL

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Figure 2. Location and Plan of Existing City Bagsakan Center

Figure 3. Images of Existing City Bagsakan Center

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

2.0. Project Rationale

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Transparent and more efficient price information system

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

3.0. Project Description

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Figure 6 Layout of Wholesale Trading Building

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Figure 7. Exterior Perspective of the Wholesale Trading Building

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Food Processing Center

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Table 3. Phases for Abattoirs

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

4.0. Financial Assessment

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Final Report Pre-Feasibility Study

Table 5. Integrated Food Terminal Summary Costs and Financing (Million)

1.26 681.68 96.81 779.75 45.38 825.13

0.03 16.83 2.39 19.25 1.12 20.37

0.2 82.6 11.7 94.5 5.5 100

0.27 370.76 52.98 424.01 24.70 448.71

0.01 9.15 1.31 10.47 0.61 11.08

0.1 82.6 11.8 94.5 5.5 100

0.14 150.86 21.18 172.18 10.03 182.21

0.00 3.72 0.52 4.25 0.25 4.50

0.1 82.8 11.6 94.5 5.5 100

0.14 106.15 14.75 121.03 7.05 128.08

0.00 2.62 0.36 2.99 0.17 3.16

0.1 82.9 11.5 94.5 5.5 100

2.50 52.11 7.50 62.11 62.11

0.06 1.29 0.19 1.53 1.53

4.0 83.9 12.1 100 0.0 100

761.22 63.91 825.13

18.80 1.58 20.37

92.3 7.7 100

448.44 0.27 448.71

11.07 0.01 11.08

99.9 0.1 100

182.07 0.14 182.21

4.50 0.00 4.50

99.9 0.1 100

127.94 0.14 128.08

3.16 0.00 3.16