-
FINAL REPORT
VOLUME 5: SUBPROJECT APPRAISAL REPORT: LEGAZPI CITY WATER
DISTRICT
Asian Development Bank
LOCAL WATER UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION
WATER DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT SECTOR PROJECT
Project Preparatory Technical Assistance (PPTA) TA No: 7 122 -
PHI PÖYRY IDP CONSULT, INC., PHILIPPINES in association with TEST
Consultants Inc., Philippines PÖYRY Environment GmbH, Germany APRIL
2010
PÖ
YR
Y ID
P C
ON
SU
LT, I
NC
.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
This report consists of 12 volumes:
Volume 1 Main Report
Volume 2 Institutional and Financial Assessment of LWUA
Volume 3 Subproject Appraisal Report: Metro La Union Water
District
Volume 4 Subproject Appraisal Report: Quezon Metro Water
District
Volume 5 Subproject Appraisal Report: Legazpi City Water
District
Volume 6 Subproject Appraisal Report: Leyte Metro Water
District
Volume 7 Subproject Appraisal Report: City of Koronadal Water
District
Volume 8 Report and Recommendation of the President (RRP)
Volume 9 Supplementary Appendices A to G (Technical Aspects)
A Review and Assessment of Water Supply and Sanitation Sector
Outside Metro Manila B Water Sector Laws and Policies C Assessment
of Existing Water Supply Systems in Pilot Water Districts D
Proposed Water Supply Component for Pilot Water Districts E Non
Revenue Water Contract Mechanisms F Sanitation G Health
Volume 10 Supplementary Appendices H to J (Social Aspects)
H Socio-economic Survey I Stakeholder Consultation and
Participation J Indigenous Peoples
Volume 11 Supplementary Appendices K to S (Financial,
Implementation Aspects)
K Financial Management Assessment L Detailed Project Cost and
Financing Plans for Water Districts M Financial Analysis N
Financial History of Water Districts O Economic Analysis P
Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building Q Indicators for
Measuring Development Objectives and Performance R Terms of
Reference for Consultants (Project Implementation Support
Services) S Profiles of Priority Water Districts from
Long-list
Volume 12 Supplementary Appendices T to V (Safeguard
Aspects)
T Initial Environmental Examinations U Resettlement
Framework
V Resettlement Plans
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
i
SUBPROJECT APPRAISAL REPORT: LEGAZPI CITY WATER DISTRICT
List of Contents
Glossary and Acronyms viii Location Map xii
1 Executive Summary
.....................................................................................
1
1.1 Introduction
..............................................................................................
1 1.2 Conclusions of Socio-economic Survey and Stakeholder
Consultations . 1
1.2.1 Summary
..........................................................................................
1 1.2.2 Recommendations
............................................................................
2
1.3 Water Supply
...........................................................................................
3 1.3.1 Rationale
...........................................................................................
3 1.3.2 Existing Water Supply System
.......................................................... 3 1.3.3
Scope of Proposed Water Supply Component
................................. 4 1.3.4 Implementation Schedule
.................................................................
5
1.4 Water District Capability and Subproject Implementation
........................ 7 1.5 Subproject Cost, Financing Plan and
Financial Analysis ......................... 8 1.6 Economic
Analysis
................................................................................
10
1.6.1 Economic Internal Rate of Return and Sensitivity Analysis
............. 10 1.6.2 Subproject Beneficiaries
.................................................................
10 1.6.3 Subproject Sustainability
.................................................................
10 1.6.4 Poverty Impact
................................................................................
11
2 Description of Study Area
.........................................................................
12
2.1 Location
.................................................................................................
12 2.2 PhysicaL Features
.................................................................................
12
2.2.1 Topography
.....................................................................................
12 2.2.2 Vegetation
.......................................................................................
12 2.2.3 Climate
............................................................................................
12
2.3 Population
.............................................................................................
14 2.3.1 Demography
...................................................................................
14 2.3.2 Living Conditions
.............................................................................
15
2.4 Health and Sanitation
............................................................................
16 2.4.1 General Health
................................................................................
16 2.4.2 Water and Health-related Aspects
.................................................. 17 2.4.3
Sanitation Facilities
.........................................................................
18 2.4.4 Education
........................................................................................
19
2.5 Economy
...............................................................................................
20 2.5.1 City Income and Expenditures
........................................................ 20 2.5.2
Employment
....................................................................................
20 2.5.3 Agriculture
.......................................................................................
20 2.5.4 Commerce and Trade
.....................................................................
21 2.5.5 Tourism
...........................................................................................
21
2.6 Social Services
......................................................................................
22 2.6.1 Health and Sanitation
......................................................................
22 2.6.2 Transportation and Communication
................................................ 22 2.6.3 Power
Supply
..................................................................................
23
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
ii
2.6.4 Water Supply
..................................................................................
24 2.7 Development Plans
...............................................................................
24
3 Socio-economic Survey and Stakeholder Consultations
....................... 25
3.1 Socio-economic Survey
.........................................................................
25 3.1.1 Profile of Households in Project Site
............................................... 25 3.1.2 Income and
Expenditure Profile
...................................................... 26 3.1.3
Existing Water Service
....................................................................
26 3.1.4 Sanitation, Health and
Hygiene....................................................... 27
3.1.5 Willingness to Connect/ Willingness to Pay
.................................... 28 3.1.6 Risks and
Vulnerabilities
.................................................................
29 3.1.7 Social Services and
Networks.........................................................
30 3.1.8 Gender Roles, Issues and Concerns
.............................................. 30
3.2 Stakeholder Consultations and Focus Group Discussions
.................... 30 3.2.1 Summary of Consultations
..............................................................
31
3.3 Poverty Analysis, Social Benefits and Recommendations
..................... 35 3.3.1 Poverty Analysis
.............................................................................
35 3.3.2 Social Benefits
................................................................................
35 3.3.3 Gender Analysis
..............................................................................
36 3.3.4 Indigenous People, Ethnic Minorities and other Vulnerable
Groups .. ..... in the Subproject Area
....................................................................
36
3.4 Summary and Recommendations
......................................................... 37 3.4.1
Summary
........................................................................................
37 3.4.2 Recommendations
..........................................................................
37
4 The Water District and its Existing Facilities
........................................... 39
4.1 Historical Background
............................................................................
39 4.2 Description of Waterworks Facilities
...................................................... 40
4.2.1 Water Sources
................................................................................
40 4.2.2 Transmission and Distribution network
........................................... 42 4.2.3 Treatment
.......................................................................................
42 4.2.4 Distribution
......................................................................................
43 4.2.5 Storage Facilities
............................................................................
43 4.2.6 Service Connections
.......................................................................
44
4.3 Service Area Coverage
.........................................................................
44 4.4 Organization and Management
.............................................................
44
4.4.1
Organization....................................................................................
44 4.4.2 Operation
........................................................................................
44 4.4.3 Non-Revenue Water (NRW)
........................................................... 45
4.5 Deficiencies of the Existing System
....................................................... 50 5
Population and Water Demand Projections
............................................. 51
5.1 General
..................................................................................................
51 5.2 Service Area Delineation
.......................................................................
51 5.3 Barangay and Service Area Population Projections
.............................. 51
5.3.1 Past Growth Rates
..........................................................................
51 5.3.2 Future Growth Rates
.......................................................................
53 5.3.3 Population Projections
....................................................................
53 5.3.4 Served Population Projections
........................................................ 53
5.4 Water Demand Projections
....................................................................
54
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
iii
5.4.1 Domestic Water Demand
................................................................ 54
5.4.2 Commercial/Industrial Water Demand
............................................ 54 5.4.3 Institutional
Water Demand
............................................................. 55
5.4.4 Non Revenue Water
(NRW)............................................................
55 5.4.5 Total Water Demand
.......................................................................
55 5.4.6 Number of Service Connections
..................................................... 55 5.4.7
Water Demand Variations
...............................................................
55
6 Water Resources
........................................................................................
57
6.1 Water Resources Inventory
...................................................................
57 6.1.1 Surface Water Inventory
.................................................................
57 6.1.2 Groundwater Resources Inventory
................................................. 58 6.1.3 Water
Quality
..................................................................................
62
6.2 Recommended Potential Sources
......................................................... 63 6.2.1
Surface Water
.................................................................................
63 6.2.2 Groundwater
...................................................................................
63
6.3 Recommended Further Investigations of Potential Sources
.................. 63 6.3.1 Test Well Drilling
.............................................................................
63
7 Analysis of Options and Alternatives
....................................................... 65
7.1 Water Supply
.........................................................................................
65 7.1.1 Water Sources
................................................................................
65 7.1.2 Treatment
.......................................................................................
67 7.1.3 Storage
...........................................................................................
67
7.2 Sanitation
..............................................................................................
68 8 Recopmmnded Plan – Water Supply
........................................................ 70
8.1 Rationale for Subproject
........................................................................
70 8.2 Water Supply Recommended
Plan........................................................ 70
8.2.1 Water Source
..................................................................................
70 8.2.2 Storage Facility
...............................................................................
70 8.2.3 Transmission/Distribution Pipelines
................................................ 70 8.2.4 Service
Connections
.......................................................................
72
8.3 Non Revenue Water (NRW)
..................................................................
72 8.3.1 NRW Reduction
..............................................................................
72 8.3.2 NRW Recommended Operational Activity Improvements
............... 75 8.3.3 NRW Capital Investment Requirement
........................................... 76
8.4 Implementation Schedule
......................................................................
78 8.5 Cost Estimates for Improvement and Expansion of System
.................. 78
9 Recommended Plan – Sanitation
............................................................. 82 10
Assessment of Water District Capability
................................................. 83
10.1 Water District History
.............................................................................
83 10.2 Technical and Operational Feasibility
.................................................... 83
10.2.1 Debt Servicing
.................................................................................
83 10.2.2 Performance Parameters
................................................................ 84
10.2.3 “New Technology” Adopted
............................................................ 84
10.2.4 Non Revenue Water Reduction Program
........................................ 84 10.2.5 Service Coverage
...........................................................................
85
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
iv
10.3 Iinstitutional Feasibility
...........................................................................
85 10.3.1 Relationship with LGU
....................................................................
85 10.3.2 Relationship with LWUA
.................................................................
86 10.3.3 Structure and Staff
..........................................................................
86 10.3.4 Systems
..........................................................................................
86
10.4 Subproject Implementation
....................................................................
87 10.4.1 LWUA Proposed Project
.................................................................
87 10.4.2 Proposed Set-up for ADB Subproject Implementation
.................... 87
11 Financial Analysis
......................................................................................
89
11.1 Historical and Existing Financial Performance (2004-2008)
.................. 89 11.1.1 Revenues and Expenses
................................................................ 89
11.1.2 Cash Flow
.......................................................................................
91 11.1.3 Outstanding Obligations
..................................................................
92 11.1.4 Assets
.............................................................................................
92 11.1.5 Accounts Receivable
......................................................................
93 11.1.6 Liabilities
.........................................................................................
93 11.1.7 Financial Ratios
..............................................................................
94
11.2 Financial Feasibility
...............................................................................
94 11.2.1 Introduction
.....................................................................................
94 11.2.2 Cost Analysis
..................................................................................
95 11.2.3 Revenue Forecasts
.........................................................................
97 11.2.4 Project Viability
...............................................................................
98
11.3 Impact of the Proposed Subprojects on the WD’s Future
......................... Financial Operation
...............................................................................
99
12 Economic Analysis
..................................................................................
101
12.1 Overall Approach to Economic Analysis
.............................................. 101 12.2 Economic
rationale
..............................................................................
101 12.3 Before- and After-Project Situations
.................................................... 102 12.4
Economic Benefits
...............................................................................
102 12.5 Willingness to Pay
...............................................................................
103 12.6 Economic Costs
..................................................................................
103 12.7 EIRR and Sensitivity Analysis
............................................................. 104
12.8 Subproject Beneficiaries
......................................................................
105 12.9 Project Sustainability
...........................................................................
105
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
v
Figures
1.1 Schematic of Proposed Water Supply Improvements - LCWD 6 2.1
Location Map of Legazpi City 13 4.1 Existing Water Supply System –
LCWD 41 5.1 Present and Future Service Areas – LCWD 52 8.1
Schematic of Proposed Water Supply Improvements – LCWD 71 10.1
Project Management Organization Structure 88 Tables 1.1 Total
Development Cost (in PhP’000) - LCWD 8 1.2 Financing Plan (in
PhP’000) - LCWD 9 2.1 Land Area and Population Density of
Barangays, Legazpi City, Albay, 2000 and 2007 14 2.2 Leading Causes
of Morbidity, 2008 – Legazpi 17 2.3 Leading Causes of Mortality,
2008 – Legazpi 17 2.4 Sanitation Facilities and Coverage, Legazpi
City, 2000 19 2.5 Albay Electric Cooperative Inc. II (ALECO II),
Legazpi City, Albay 23 3.1 Location of Slums in Legazpi City, 2008
32 3.2 Flood Prone Areas, Legazpi City 32 4.1 Summary of Existing
Well Sources - LCWD 40 4.2 Existing Pipe Sizes and Length - LCWD 42
4.3 Storage Facilities – LCWD 43 4.4 Number and Type of Service
Connections - LCWD 44 4.5 Reported Water Production and Billed
Volume for Year 2008 - LCWD 46 4.6 Components of Revenue and Non
Revenue Water 46 4.7 Estimation of Apparent Losses - LCWD 47 4.8
IWA Water Balance Data for Year 2008 – LCWD 47 4.9 Unavoidable
Annual Real Loss - LCWD 48 4.10 Infrastructure Leakage Index - LCWD
48 5.1 Legazpi City Growth Rates 53 5.2 Population Projections –
Legazpi City 53 5.3 Projected Domestic Connections and Consumption
(Usage) – LCWD 54 5.4 Projected Commercial/Industrial Connections
and Consumption (Usage) – LCWD 54 5.5 Projected Institutional
Connections and Consumption (Usage) – LCWD 55 5.6 Projected Total
Connections and Average Day Demand – LCWD 55 5.7 Water Demand
Variations - LCWD 56 6.1 Nasisi River and Yawa River Flow
Frequencies - LCWD 58 7.1 Additional Water Requirement (2010 to
2025) - LCWD 65 7.2 Additional Water Requirement (2010 to 2025) –
LCWD 66 7.3 Water Requirement for Taysan (2010 to 2025) – LCWD
67
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
vi
Tables (continued) 7.4 Review of Available Septage Treatment
Technologies 69 8.1 Storage Requirement for Expansion Area – LCWD
70 8.2 NRW Capital Investment Requirements – LCWD 74 8.3 Estimated
Distribution Main Line Leaks and Costs – LCWD 75 8.4 Summary of
Proposed NRW Investment Expenditure – LCWD 77 8.5 Detailed NRW Cost
Breakdown – LCWD 78 8.6 Implementation Schedule – LCWD 79 8.7 Total
Capital Cost Estimate – LCWD 80 8.8 Operation and Maintenance Cost
Estimate – LCWD 81 10.1 Summary of Performance Parameters – LCWD 84
10.2 NRW Reduction Activities – LCWD 85 11.1 LCWD Operating
Revenues, 2004-2008 89 11.2 LCWD Water Tariff 89 11.3 LCWD
Operating Expenses 90 11.4 LCWD Net Income, 2004-2008 90 11.5
Income Statement 2004-2008 – LCWD 91 11.6 Cash Flow Statements,
2005-2008 – LCWD 91 11.7 Details of Existing Loans (as of December
2008) – LCWD 92 11.8 Assets and Other Debts, 2004-2008 – LCWD 92
11.9 Aging of Accounts Receivables – LCWD 93 11.10 Liabilities and
Equity, 2004-2008 – LCWD 93 11.11 LCWD Financial Ratios, 2004-2008
94 11.12 Total Development Cost – LCWD 95 11.13 Financing Plan –
LCWD 96 11.14 Proposed Tariff Schedule, 2014 – LCWD 97 11.15 Other
Parameters and Assumptions – LCWD 98 11.16 Weighted Cost of Capital
– LCWD 98 11.17 Summary Result of FIRR – LCWD 99 11.19 Summary of
Financial Ratios – LCWD 100
12.1 Before- and After-Project Situations, Water Supply – LCWD
102 12.2 Values for Quantifying Economic Benefits, Water Supply –
LCWD 103 12.3 Willingness to Pay (WTP) – LCWD 103 12.4 EIRR and
Sensitivity Test Results, Water Supply – LCWD 104 12.5 Subproject
Beneficiaries, Water Supply– LCWD 105 12.6 Project Sustainability,
Water Supply – LCWD 105
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
vii
Appendices 3.1 Socio-economic Survey Results – Legazpi City
Water District 106 3.2 Summary of Stakeholder Consultations – LCWD
- April–August 2009 202 3.3 List of NGOs Serving Urban Poor and
Vulnerable Groups, Legazpi City 216 3.4 Output of Gender Action
Planning Workshop August 6 – 7, 2009 217 3.5 Some Recommendations
on Social Dimensions in Subproject Implementation 220 4 Legazpi
City Water District Organization Chart 224 5.1 Population
Projections 2010-2025 – LCWD 225 5.2 Population Served and Number
of Connections Projections – LCWD 227 5.3 Served Populations and
Water Demand Projections – LCWD 228 A – 2010 B – 2015 C – 2020 D –
2025 5.4 Water Demand Variation – LCWD 237 6.1 Surface Water Data –
LCWD 238 6.2 Groundwater Data – LCWD 246 6.3 Extract from Watcon,
Inc. Geo-Resistivity Report June 2009 – LCWD 289 6.4 Proposed Well
Locations and Designs – LCWD 290 8 Water Supply Infrastructure and
Data - LCWD 291 11 Finanacial Analaysis Tables - LCWD 295 12
Economic Analysis – LCWD 303
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
viii
GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS
ABD Asian Development Bank AIFC average incremental financial
cost A/R accounts receivable AP affected person APIS annual poverty
indicator survey ARI acute respiratory infection AusAID Australian
Aid barangay village BNA basic needs approach BOT
build-operate-transfer BSP basic sanitation package BWSA Barangay
Water and Sanitation Association CAP community action plan CBO
community-based organization CCF community consultation forum CDA
Cooperatives Development Agency CDD community-driven development
CFR case fatality rate CFT community facilitator team CLTS
community-led total sanitation COA Commission on Audit C&P
consultation and participation CPC certificate of public
convenience CSC community sanitation center CSS city sanitation
strategy CY calendar year DBL design-build-lease DBO
design-build-operate DBM Department of Budget and Management BDP
Development Bank of The Philippines DED detailed engineering design
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DFR draft
final report DHF dengue hemorrhage fever DILG Department of
Interior and Local Government DOF Department of Finance DOH
Department of Health DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
DRA demand responsive approach DSA delineated service area DSCR
debt service coverage ratio EA executing agency (LWUA) EARF
environmental assessment review framework EIA environmental impact
analysis EIRR economic internal rate of return EMP environmental
management plan EO executive order EOCC economic opportunity cost
of capital FGD focus group discussion FMAQ financial management
assessment questionnaire forex foreign exchange FS feasibility
study FY fiscal year (1 January – 31 December)
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
ix
GFI government financial institution GIS geographic information
system GOCC government owned and controlled corporation GOP
Government of the Republic of the Philippines GR (i) government
regulation, (ii) general record (in legal cases) HDI Human
Development Index HH household HRD human resources development IA
implementing agency IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (World Bank) ICC Investment Coordinating Council (NEDA)
ICG internal cash generation IDAP institutional development action
plan IDC interest during construction IDCB institutional
development and capacity building IEC
information-education-communication IEE initial environmental
examination IFS Investment and Financial Services (LWUA) IOL
inventory of losses IPDP indigenous peoples’ development plan IRA
internal revenue allotment IRR implementing rules and regulations
IT information technology IWA International Water Association JICA
Japan International Cooperation Agency KABP
knowledge-attitudes-behavior-practices KFP an adaptation of KAP
(knowledge, attitudes and practices) LCMD Legazpi City Water
District LG local government LGC local government code LGU local
government unit LIDAP local institutional development action plan
LIHH low income household LLI local level institutions LOI letter
of intent lps, l/s liters per second LWUA Local Water Utilities
Administration MDFO Municipal Development Fund Office MDG
Millennium Development Goals M&E monitoring and evaluation MFF
Multitranche Financing Facility (ADB) MIS management information
system MLUWD Metro La Union Water District MOU memorandum of
understanding MPA Methodology for Participatory Assessments MTPDP
Medium Term Philippine Development Plan MTPIP Medium-Term Public
Investment Program MWSS Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System
(Metro Manila) NAMRIA National Mapping and Resources inventory
Authority NAPC National Anti Poverty Commission NEDA National
Economic Development Authority NGA national government agency
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
x
NGO non-government organization NPV net present value NRW
non-revenue water NSCB National Statistical Coordination Board NSO
National Statistics Office NSSMP National Sewerage and Septage
Management Program NWRB National Water Resources Board OCR Ordinary
Capital Resources (ADB) ODA official development assistance OGCC
Office of the Government Corporate Counsel OJT on-the-job training
O&M operation and maintenance PD presidential decree PFI
private funding institution PHAST Participatory Hygiene and
Sanitation Transformation PhP, Php Philippine peso PIU project
implementation unit PMO project management office PMU project
management unit PNSDW Philippine National Standards on Drinking
Water PPMS project performance monitoring system PPTA project
preparation technical assistance PSA poverty and social assessment
psi pounds per square inch PSP private sector participation PWSSR
Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap QC quality control QM
quality management QMWD Quezon Metro Water District RA republic act
RG regional government RIAP revenue improvement action plan RRP
report and recommendation of the president (ADB) RWSA Rural
Waterworks and Sanitation Association SES socioeconomic survey
SHBC
sanitation and health behavioral change
SLA sub-loan agreement SPAR subproject appraisal report SSC
school sanitation centre SCSS simplified community sewerage system
SLA subsidiary loan agreement SWG sanitation working group SWM
solid waste management TA technical assistance TB tubercolosis TOR
terms of reference TOT training-of-trainers UFW unaccounted-for
water UNICEF USAID
United Nations Children Fund United States Agency for
International Development
V variation (contract)
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
xi
VIP ventilated improved pit (latrine) WASCO Water Supply
Coordination Office (NAPC) WD water district WHO World Health
Organization WPEP Water Supply and Sanitation Performance
Enhancement Project WQ water quality WS water supply WSP water
service provider WSP-EAP Water and Sanitation Program – East Asia
Pacific WSS water and sanitation WTP willingness-to-pay WWTP
wastewater treatment plant
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
xii
Location Map
Metro La Union WD
Quezon Metro WD Legazpi
City WD
Leyte Metro WD
City of Koronadal WD
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
1
SUBPROJECT APPRAISAL REPORT: LEGAZPI CITY WATER DISTRICT
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1. Based on an evaluation of candidate water districts (WD) on
criteria such as creditworthiness, interest to participate, and
readiness, during the Inception Phase of the PPTA (March 2009), the
Legazpi City Water District (LCWD) was selected as one of five
pilot WDs to participate in the PPTA for the preparation of
subproject appraisal reports (SPAR).
2. The SPAR is based on data collection field surveys (including
a socio-economic survey), stakeholder consultations and analyses
carried out during April-August 2009. A participatory approach was
adopted, involving close consultation with key stakeholders and
target communities which has enabled subproject design and
formulation to reflect the views and aspirations of the WD, local
government stakeholders and beneficiary communities. The subproject
has been prepared in accordance with relevant national legal
requirements and standards, and ADB requirements, policies, and
guidelines.
3. Through this process, interest was expressed by both LCWD and
the City of Legazpi Local Government Unit (LGU) in cooperating to
develop a pilot sanitation (septage management) component—in
addition to the proposed improvements and expansion of the WD’s
water supply system.
4. Draft outline technical designs, tariff projections and
implementation arrangements were presented and discussed with
national and subproject stakeholders during a workshop on 26-27
August. Adjustments/ refinements to the subproject design and
implementation program resulting from the workshop are incorporated
in the SPAR in the Draft Final Report (DFR) submitted in November
2009.
5. For the preparation of the DFR it was assumed that sanitation
works would be financed under a grant from AusAID, subject to
confirmation. However, during the tripartite meeting for the DFR
held on 16 February 2010, ADB informed that AusAID had changed
their investment priorities, and grant funds were no longer
available for sanitation.
6. On 10-11 March 2010, LCWD were consulted in this new light,
to determine whether they were interested if sanitation was
financed from the loan or from their own funds. The GM consulted
with the Board, and later relayed the Board’s decision: they
decided to just drop the sanitation component from the Project
package. For the Final Report, it was agreed that the sanitation
component for LCWD will be deleted from the proposal; the Final
Report will only cover the water supply component.
7. The format of the SPAR is based on the standard format for
feasibility studies as prepared for the Local Water Utilities
Administration (LWUA), the executing agency for the PPTA.
1.2 CONCLUSIONS OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY AND STAKEHOLDER
CONSULTATIONS
1.2.1 Summary
8. Legazpi City has a relatively high average growth rate of
over 1.6%. As the service center of Region 5, the rise of
subdivisions, resettlement due to calamities and migration of
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
2
the poor to urban centers in search of jobs has put pressure on
basic services such as water and sanitation.
9. Within this context, stakeholder consultations confirmed the
need for the subproject in accordance with the city’s development
plans for southward expansion. Although there were some misgivings
about the bulk water contract of the Water District—and areas for
improvement were suggested relative to water quality and water
rates—on the whole there was a positive response to the proposed
plans for water service improvement and expansion.
10. Specific recommendations and insights were also forwarded
for the implementation of affordable, pro-poor and gender
responsive programs and policies. These called for the subproject
to develop gravity water sources and improve water quality.
Feedback also confirmed participatory and collaborative strategies
to enhance water access by the poor through the pipe system and
through communal water points. In coordination with NGOs, local
governments and other agencies, partnerships were also seen as
important in promoting the role of communities, and in the
improvement of sanitation facilities and hygiene practices that
could maximize benefits from the increased access to safe water. A
Gender Action Plan included community-based initiatives to address
identified gender and poverty issues.
11. Legazpi City is vulnerable to natural calamities; this in
turn highlighted the vulnerability, especially of the poor, to the
loss of water sources, to the increased cost of water delivery and
to the destruction of homes, water and sanitation facilities. While
the city does not manage a designated watershed, the continuing
degradation of water resources coupled with fast population
increase signal a need to help ensure the sustainability of water
sources.
1.2.2 Recommendations
12. The pilot subproject should support strategies to link water
and sanitation to the Project’s overarching goal of poverty
reduction. The proposed elements of a plan for the social
dimensions of the subproject reinforce a public service orientation
and a Corporate Social Responsibility agenda consistent with the
delivery of water and sanitation as a public service with pro-poor
programs.
13. The budget for some specific recommendations is integrated
in the technical components for water and sanitation as
microfinance or pro-poor allocations such as for public faucets,
and in capability building and institutional plans as technical
assistance.
14. Pro-Poor Targeting of Participants. The subproject should
target all households living within the vicinity of the network of
the piped water system. The subproject should also target
disadvantaged groups (e.g. women headed households and poor HHs in
the slum areas) and other unserved/underserved areas for
appropriate water services such as communal water points in
collaboration with the city and barangays. This may also be through
easy installation plans that expand the reach of subproject
benefits while maximizing cost recovery.
15. Households for the sanitation component should be identified
in coordination with the LGU that will undertake a survey of
sanitation facilities. In coordination with the LGU, targets will
also be made to cover a set percentage of sanitation hotspots for
the improvement of septage systems by the end of the subproject
loan implementation period.
16. Micro-finance and Livelihood Options. A micro-finance
facility should be set up to ensure participation in septic tank
installation/improvement of communal facilities for
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
3
interested participants in sanitation hotspots. Part of this
could also be leveraged with the LGU to promote the repair of
substandard individual septic tanks. A cost recovery scheme should
be established to enable others to benefit from the revolving fund.
The WD’s Gender and Development Fund and other sources may be
accessed to support water and sanitation-related livelihood options
of women and urban poor groups.
1.3 WATER SUPPLY
1.3.1 Rationale
17. The present service area of LCWD includes 53 barangays out
of the 70 barangays of Legazpi City. Barangays Taysan, Lamba and
Maslog, located approximately 4 kilometers away from the existing
system, are being proposed by LCWD as its priority area for its
expansion program. Another expansion area being eyed by LCWD for
expansion is Barangay Banquerohan; this barangay is approximately
20 km away from the city center.
18. There is thus a need to increase water production to improve
and expand the water supply system of LCWD in order to meet the
projected water demand for the design year 2025, both in the
existing and proposed service areas. The expansion area will
include people to be relocated away from the hazard area of the
Mayon volcano.
1.3.2 Existing Water Supply System
19. Following the severe damage caused by Typhoon Reming in
2006, at present only six (6) of 10 previous springs are being
utilized to support the water requirement of about 1,000 households
in Barangays Upper Arimbay, Bigaa and Bagong Abre. Well sources are
still in place, including the submersible pumps and the hydraulic
control structures. Although not in operation, these facilities are
still being maintained regularly by LCWD up to the present time.
From November 2006 up to February 2008, LCWD continued the
utilization of these water sources, despite the reduction of the
discharge rate of the spring sources.
20. In March 2007, LCWD entered into a 25-year Bulk Water Supply
contract with Philippine Hydro Inc. for the supply and delivery of
20,000 cubic meters per day of bulk water to the system of LCWD.
The raw water source is the River Yawa.
21. As of May 2009, LCWD has a total of 16,934 metered service
connections, covering 53 barangays.
22. LCWD is aware of the need to maintain control of non-revenue
water (NRW), and is concerned by the increase in NRW that has
occurred since the commissioning of the bulk water supply,
especially given the cost of the bulk water at PhP13.50/cum. The
proactive meter management strategy is a direct result of this
concern. However, other operational measures such as district
metering, leakage management and illegal use management do not
currently appear to be given a high priority—perhaps due to the
upfront investment requirement for metering and leakage management
equipment.
23. LCWD reported production and billed volume figures for 2008
were analyzed to evaluate NRW performance, and show that the
reported NRW for 2008 was 21.2%—with a loss volume of 1.1 million
m3.
24. Deficiencies of the Existing System. The main deficiencies
concern pressure distribution and water quality.
25. Pressure Distribution: The existing transmission and
distribution network was designed and constructed in 1981 in
consideration of the distance and location of the
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
4
previous wells and spring sources. Although the pressure
distribution is quite balanced despite the introduction of bulk
water to the system, it is still necessary to conduct hydraulic
analysis of the pipe network and reconfigure the pipe sizes and
pressure distribution of the existing system in consideration of
future expansion.
26. Water Quality: When bulk water was injected into the system,
several complaints were lodged by consumers regarding poor water
quality. The perception was that the increase of system pressure
has caused old and dilapidated pipes to deteriorate; thus, water
became contaminated. As of July 2009, the complaints on poor water
quality still continue to mount despite the completion of the
program to replace old and dilapidated pipes, and LCWD’s continuous
flushing and maintenance of the system.
27. LCWD has to look into the effectiveness of the water
treatment plant of bulk water by monitoring treated water at
various distribution points.
1.3.3 Scope of Proposed Water Supply Component
28. Water demand. The scope of proposed water supply component
is designed to meet the projected water demand of LCWD for the year
2025. The total average daily demand of the WD is projected to
increase significantly as a result of population growth and the
improvement of the standard of living of the residents in the
service area. The average day water demand is expected to increase
from 19,353 cumd in 2010 to 21,775 cumd in 2015, to 24,457 cumd in
2020, and to 27,046 cumd in 2025.
29. Water resources. The Yawa River could support the year 2025
total water demands. The flow of 848 lps (73,267cumd), which
corresponds to 80 per cent of minimum flow as the limit for
extraction is more than thrice the present abstraction from the
river.
30. The bulk water supplier could also immediately meet
additional demands of 116 lps (10,000 cumd), considering that the
design capacity of the plant is 347 lps (30,000 cumd).
31. The existing wells in the Bogna and Mabinit Wellfields that
produce good water quality can also be used to support the
additional LCWD demands. A total of 103.98 lps (8,984 cumd) is
available from the two (2) wellfields—79.83 lps from the Bogna
Wellfield and 24.14 lps from the Mabinit Wellfield.
32. The absence of wells within the expansion areas of the LCWD
covering Barangay Taysan and Banquerohan makes it necessary to
construct test wells or exploratory wells during the initial stage
of the design phase of the subproject. Test well drilling will
confirm the quantity and quality of available groundwater prior to
finalization of the subproject detailed design.
33. Proposed works. The existing service coverage will
eventually be expanded to include the un-served population within
the existing service area and additional areas, particularly
Barangay Taysan, Lamba, Maslog and Banquerohan.
34. Taking into account the cost of water between the different
alternatives (least-cost analysis), the following works are
proposed:
� Re-commissioning of nine (9) existing wells at Bogna and
Mabinit well fields. For the main system, no additional storage
facility is recommended if the additional water source is tapped
from existing and new well sources at Bogna and Mabinit well
field.
� Well sources for the expansion area of Barangays Taysan,
Maslog, Lamba and Banquerohan (2 new wells).
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
5
� For the main system, reinforcement pipes are recommended at
various sections of the distribution network to accommodate the
2025 flow and minimum pressure requirement within LCWD main service
area.
� The service connection is expected to increase from the
existing 16,934 to 24,929 by the design year 2025. The additional
7,995 service connections will come from the unserved portions
within the main service area and the four (4) barangays in the
proposed expansion areas.
� There is scope for investment in NRW reduction by LCWD in a
limited number of areas.
35. A schematic diagram of the proposed improvements is shown on
Figure 1.1.
1.3.4 Implementation Schedule
36. At the start of subproject physical implementation in 2012,
construction activities shall cover recommissioning of 9 existing
wells at Bogna and Mabinit well fields, and the construction of
deep well, pumping facilities, storage facilities and
transmission/distribution pipelines and service connections at
Barangays Taysan, Lamba, Maslog and Banquerohan.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
6
Figure 1.1: Schematic of Proposed Water Supply Improvements -
LCWD
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
7
1.4 WATER DISTRICT CAPABILITY AND SUBPROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
37. Water district performance. LCWD is performing very well
despite the usual operational problems it faces with the LGU and
some customers. The price arrangements with the bulk water supplier
have driven operating costs significantly, but the WD can now focus
on managing the system—thus improving efficiency in operations.
38. Compared to the industry average, the LCWD was seen to be
performing well in 2007. Its production efficiency improved with a
significant reduction in NRW. Its collection effort deteriorated
slightly but was still well within industry standards. Its level of
profitability decreased significantly due to higher operating costs
but was still higher than the average. Cost control also
deteriorated significantly as a result and suffered in comparison
to the industry standard. Management of personnel was better than
the average Large WDs but the increase in the number of customers
over this 3-year period was still lacklustre considering that LCWD
was able to increase its customer base by only 1,774 or by only
10.0%.
39. The water district is presently undertaking a hydraulic
network modelling project. The impacts of this activity on the WD
are improvements in operating efficiency and NRW reduction as this
will allow WD engineers to create hydraulic zones and district
metering areas. There will be better understanding of water usage
across the network, improved knowledge of the network asset types
and condition, and information acquired will better support
strategic resource planning.
40. The WD realizes that there is a need to reduce its NRW to
acceptable levels given the cost of bulk water supply. It has is to
eliminate illegal connections and has made serious attempts to
repair leaks.
41. As of June 30, 2009, the Water District has a total of
17,060 registered connections and a service coverage of about 55%
of the population. Out of 60 barangays with the City’s boundaries,
53 have already been reached. From 300 connections 27 years ago,
the Water District can be said to be performing satisfactorily.
42. Subproject implementation. A Water District Implementing
Unit (WDIU) within LCWD will act as the central coordinating body
for subproject implementation, and be headed by the Construction
Division Manager or a senior professional within WD ranks.
43. Blank
44. Blank
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
8
1.5 SUBPROJECT COST, FINANCING PLAN AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
45. Development Costs. The total development cost for the water
supply subproject is approximately Php113 million ($2.5 million).
This is based on the costs presented in Chapters 8 and 9 with
additional price contingencies to allow for the timing of
implementation. Table 1.1 presents a summary of the development
cost for the water supply system.
Table 1.1: Total Development Cost (in PhP’000) – LCWD
Civil Works Equipment Land1 Source Development
a. Well Drilling/Development m 1 7,400,000 7,400.0 - - 2,220.0
5,180.0 7,400.0 b. Surface Water / River Intake lot 0 0 - - - - - -
c. Spring Intake & Sump Improvement lot 0 0 - - - - - -
Sub-Total 7,400.0 - - 2,220.0 5,180.0 7,400.0 2 Pumping
Station
a. Pump House including pipings, ls 1 200,000 172.0 28.0 - 48.0
152.0 200.0 production meters, valves, hypochlorinators, etc
b. Electro-mechanical Equipment ls 1 3,600,000 900.0 2,700.0 -
2,448.0 1,152.0 3,600.0 including controls & accessories,riser
pipes, transformers, powerline extension, etc.
c. Gen-set set 0 0 - - - - - - Sub-Total 1,072.0 2,728.0 -
2,496.0 1,304.0 3,800.0
3 Transmission Facilities ls 1 37,000,000 33,300.0 3,700.0 -
14,800.0 22,200.0 37,000.0 4 Storage Facilities ls 1 10,000,000
9,500.0 500.0 - 1,900.0 8,100.0 10,000.0 5 Service Connections no
7,995 1,500 7,195.6 4,797.0 - 3,837.7 8,154.9 11,992.6 6 NRW
Reduction ls 1 12,566,984 7,540.1 5,026.7 - 4,021.3 8,545.5
12,566.8 7 Land Acquisition lot 1 2,000,000 - 2,000.0 - 2,000.0
2,000.0
SUB-TOTAL 66,007.7 16,751.7 2,000.0 29,275.0 55,484.4 84,759.4
DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN 5,462.1 - - 1,638.6 3,823.5 5,462.1
CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION 3,641.4 - - 364.1 3,277.3 3,641.4 PHYSICAL
CONTINGENCIES - - - 1,591.4 6,784.5 8,375.9 PRICE CONTINGENCIES
7,881.7 1,757.8 209.9 795.6 9,932.7 10,728.3
G R A N D T O T A L 82,992.9 18,509.5 2,209.9 33,664.8 79,302.4
112,967.2
Unit CostComponent FEC Local TotalSub-Total
Unit Quantity
46. Financing Plan. The subproject will mainly be financed by
ADB through relending by LWUA to the Water District. ADB loan will
finance Php97.7 million ($2.17 million) of the water supply while
the WD will finance the cost of land acquisition and taxes
amounting to about Php15.3 million. The financing plan is shown in
Table 1.2 .
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
9
Table 1.2: Financing Plan (in PhP’000) – LCWD
2011 2012 2013 TOTAL
FUND APPLICATION
Basic Construction Cost 6,786 38,973 37,001 82,759
Land Acquisition/Resettlement 2,000 - - 2,000
Detailed Engineering Design 5,462 - - 5,462
Physical Contingency 779 3,897 3,700 8,376
Price Contingency 1,003 4,141 5,585 10,728
Supervision 299 1,715 1,628 3,641
TOTAL 16,328 48,726 47,913 112,967
FUND SOURCE
WD Equity 2,214 6,606 6,496 15,316
Sub-Loan 14,115 42,119 41,417 97,651
ADB Sub-Loan 14,115 42,119 41,417 97,651
LWUA Sub-Loan - - -
TOTAL 16,328 48,726 47,913 112,967
47. Water Tariff. LCWD last increased the water tariff in 2008.
It is assumed that even if there is no subproject, the water tariff
will have to be increased in the future to cover increases in its
operational expenses. For purposes of the projection, it is assumed
that water tariffs will have to be increased by 10% every two years
in the future.
48. A two-time tariff increase is proposed--the first increase
in 2011 and the second increase in 2014. A 20% increase in 2011,
even before completion of the subproject, is necessary for the
water district to gain sufficient funds to meet its existing
operations. Another 20% increase is proposed in 2014. From 2016
onwards, it is proposed that water tariff will have to be increased
by 10% every two years. The proposed increases in the tariff are
less than 60% of the previous tariff and not more than 5% of the
family income of the low income group, which are both in accordance
with LWUA’s requirements.
49. Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR). A subproject is
considered financially viable if the resulting FIRR of the proposed
subproject is higher than the weighted average cost of capital
(WACC) that was used in financing the subproject. An FIRR higher
than the WACC implies that the incremental net revenues generated
by the project will be enough to recover the implementation and
operating costs.
50. On the basis of the financing mix and the loan interest of
9.8% and the assumed cost of equity of 12.0% (the economic
opportunity cost of capital), the WACC is 7.04%. Sensitivity
analyses are likewise conducted to determine the effects of adverse
changes on a project such as delay in operation, revenues not
realized as expected or increase in capital and O&M cost. The
FIRR results under the five scenarios evaluated show that the
subproject is viable with FIRR ranging from 13.18% to 18.35%..
51. Affordability of Water Rates. A major consideration in the
development of the tariff schedule is the ability of target
beneficiaries to pay for their monthly water bill. It is a standing
policy of LWUA that the minimum charge for residential connections
should not exceed 5% of the family income of the low income group
among families connected to the system.
52. For Legazpi City, the estimated monthly income for 2014 is
Php12,217. Using the affordability criteria, the minimum monthly
bill (minimum charge) of Php286.00 when the project starts to
operate in 2014 is only 2.34% of the estimated monthly income of
poor families. In all subsequent years the minimum monthly bill is
less than 5% of the estimated
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
10
monthly income. Hence, the proposed level of water tariff is
deemed affordable to the low income or poor families.
53. Impact of the Proposed Subproject on the WD’s Financial
Operation. The Projected Income Statement for the period 2009 to
2041 shows that the Water District will generate net income for all
years of the projection period.
54. Cash Flow Statements are also developed for the same period.
For all years during the evaluation period, the statements show
that annual cash inflows will be sufficient to cover all annual
cash outflows of the Water District.
1.6 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
55. The economic viability of the subproject was determined by
computing the economic internal rate of return (EIRR) and comparing
the result with the economic opportunity cost of capital (EOCC) of
15%.1 An EIRR exceeding the assumed EOCC indicates that the
subproject is economically viable.
1.6.1 Economic Internal Rate of Return and Sensitivity
Analysis
56. With the stream of economic benefits and costs computed over
the assumed 25-year period, the economic internal rate of return
(EIRR) of the water supply investments is 14% which is slightly
lower than the assumed cut-off rate of 15%.
57. Sensitivity test results based on (i) a 10% reduction in
capital costs, and (ii) a 10% reduction in O&M costs show
increases in the EIRR by 1.4 percentage points to 15.4% which are
above the EOCC benchmark. Thus, reducing capital and O&M costs
by a mere 10% makes the investments economically viable. On the
other hand, an increase in resource cost savings and incremental
water had the opposite effect of lowering the base case EIRR to
just about 13.9% and 13.2% respectively. In these two cases, the
EIRR remains below the EOCC benchmark. Of the four key variables
that were considered, the subproject was found to be most sensitive
to change in O&M costs (SI=0.97) followed by decrease in
capital costs (SI=0.94) and increase in incremental water (SI=0.6).
Change in resource cost savings has a very small impact on
viability. The switching value for O&M costs is 103% and for
capital costs, 106%.
1.6.2 Subproject Beneficiaries
58. At the end of 2035, a total of 9,188 new water service
connections shall have been added to the existing ones. This will
consist of 7,552 residential connections (82%) and 1,636
non-domestic connections (18%). An estimated overall total of
42,394 residents of Legazpi City will directly benefit from the
investments by having direct connection to the piped water supply
network.
1.6.3 Subproject Sustainability
59. At full economic cost (i.e, capital investments plus
O&M), the average incremental economic cost of water (AIEC), or
the marginal cost of producing each cubic meter of water, was
computed at Php14.2/m3. Considering only capita costs, the AIEC is
Php6.9/m3.
1 The hurdle rate for water supply investments is prescribed
under NEDA-ICC guidelines for project evaluation which also
provides shadow prices for foreign exchange (SER), wage rate for
unskilled (SWR) and other non-tradable components of investment
costs.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
11
60. The average tariff, which was computed by dividing the
present value of revenue by incremental water consumption, is
Php23.8/m3. With an average tariff higher than AIEC, no economic
subsidy will be required. The tariff revenue to be generated by the
subproject during the period could fully recover all costs,
including the full economic cost of the investments which includes
capital and O&M.
1.6.4 Poverty Impact
61. The water supply subproject is expected to generate a total
net economic benefits (NEB)2 of about Php45 million. Approximately
Php42 million will accrue to water consumers. The labour sector
will gain about Php17 million while the economy, because of
distortions in the exchange rate, will lose around Php14 million.
On balance, the economy as a whole will gain the entire NEB of
Php45 million.
62. The poverty impact ratio (PIR) for the investments is 25%
which means that one-quarter of the NEB will directly benefit the
poor in the area.
2 NEB is the difference between the present value of subproject
net economic and financial flows.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
12
2 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
2.1 LOCATION
63. The City of Legazpi is located in the midsection of the
eastern side of the Province of Albay, as well as the Bicol Region
as a whole. It is bounded on the north by the Municipality of Sto.
Domingo, on the east by the Albay Gulf and the Municipality of
Manito, on the west by the Municipality of Daraga, and on the south
by the Municipalities of Pilar and Castilla of the Province of
Sorsogon.
64. The city is approximately at 13º 09´ N latitude and at
123º45´ East longitude and is about 534 kilometers southeast of
Manila via the Philippine-Japan Friendship Highway. It is
centrally-located in the Bicol Region. Figure 2.1 shows the
location map of the City of Legazpi.
2.2 PHYSICAL FEATURES
2.2.1 Topography
65. The City is generally flat at its Central Business District
and the urban area, with slopes ranging from 1% to 7% but with some
areas exceeding 18%. Several barangays have slopes ranging from
23.7% at Dapdap up to 99.8% at Bañadero. The northeastern portion
of the City has an average slope of about 21% with rolling and
undulating areas. The northern barangays have undulating terrain
with an average slope of 11.6% and its southern portion is
characterized by rolling mountains, except for Barangay Bagacay
where its marshlands are below sea level.
2.2.2 Vegetation
66. In 2003, Legazpi City still had a forested area of 864.7
hectares. It also had a large Grassland/Pasture of 4,656 hectares
or 22.8 percent of the City’s land area of 20,420.40 hectares.
About half of the City’s land area (10,411.48 hectares or 50.99%)
was devoted to agriculture, and the built-up area totaled 3,287.19
hectares or about 16.1% of the land area. The remaining 1,100 or so
hectares were used for Special Uses such as mining/quarrying,
National Park, airport, and military.
2.2.3 Climate
67. The climate of the City of Legazpi is classified as Type II
of the Modified Coronas Classification of the Philippine Climate
which is characterized by the absence of a dry season, with a very
pronounced maximum rain period generally in the months of December
and January. There is not a single dry month in this area.
68. On average, 5 to 6 tropical cyclones blow over the area
annually. The average minimum temperature which usually occurs in
January and February is about 24ºC and the average maximum
temperature which usually occurs in May is about 31ºC. It rains
about 250 days a year in Legazpi City with an average total annual
rainfall of about 3,200 mm.
69. As a result of the city’s climate, 41 of its barangays
involving 15,802 households are flood prone. Very heavy rains can
result in mudflows from Mayon Volcano which can adversely affect 2
additional barangays, involving 573 additional families. Of the 41
barangays which are flood-prone, 11 barangays are subject to both
flooding and mudflows.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
13
Table 2.1: Location Map of Legazpi City
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
14
70. Damage to buildings and infrastructure are an always present
danger as shown by the passage of Typhoons Milenyo and Reming.
2.3 POPULATION
2.3.1 Demography
71. The population of Legazpi City according to the NSO Census
of 2007 is 175,843, with 35,290 household. Urban population
accounts for 108,249 which is 61.56% of the total population, while
the rural population accounts for 67,594 which is 38.44% of the
total population. The annual growth rate is 1.63% based on the 2000
and 2007 population data.
72. The study area is composed of 70 barangays covering a total
land area of 20,420.40 hectares which includes a National Park of
857.77 hectares. With the 2007 population of 175,843, the
population density then was about 870 persons per km2. Table 2.1
presents the list of urban and rural barangays showing the land
area and population for 2000 and 2007.
Table 2.1: Land Area and Population Density of Barangays,
Legazpi City, Albay, 2000 and 2007
BARANGAY
LAND AREA (Km²)
POPULATION DENSITY
2000 2007
Urban: 1. EM’s Barrio 0.4367 3680 4183 2. EM’s Barrio South
0.4266 1418 1848 3. EM’s Barrio East 0.1376 1006 833 4. Sagpon
0.1504 1003 1117 5. Sagmin 0.1521 672 633 6. Banadero 0.3756 1127
1195 7. Bano 0.0882 825 886 8. Bagumbayan 0.3657 3456 3436 9.
Pinaric 0.1727 1110 1150 10. Cabugao 0.0859 542 590 11. Maoyod
0.1420 1038 1060 12. Tula-Tula 0.1240 2348 2175 13. Ilawod West
0.0851 712 759 14. Ilawod 0.0893 852 868 15. Ilawod East 0.3581
2108 2292 16. Kawit-East Washington 0.7390 4847 5322 17. Rizal St.,
Ilawod 0.6192 1349 1730 18. Cabagñan West 0.5661 2396 3094 19.
Cabagñan 0.1441 1332 1294 20. Cabagñan East 0.1714 666 727 21.
Binanuahan West 0.0790 862 855 22. Binanuahan East 0.1695 1222 1328
23. Imperial Court Subdivision 0.1176 633 750 24. Rizal St. 0.1334
1893 2190 25. Lapu-Lapu 0.1744 1091 1088 26. Dinagaan 0.1305 711
637 27. Victory Village South 0.1001 1042 1106 28. Victory Village
North 0.1293 2197 2518 29. Sabang 0.1022 1412 1411 30. Pigcale
0.0870 1965 2152 31. Centro-Baybay 0.1911 1216 1279 32. San Roque
0.3825 5219 5338 33. PNR-Penaranda 0.3087 2532 2746 34. Oro
Site-Magallanes 0.0984 1827 2607 35. Tinago 0.0690 737 611 36.
Kapantawan 0.7192 583 4144
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
15
BARANGAY
LAND AREA (Km²)
POPULATION DENSITY
2000 2007
37. Bitano 0.6380 6341 2797 38. Gogon 1.4631 4699 5498 39. Bonot
0.5723 3815 3614 40. Cruzada 1.3977 3837 5349 41. Bogtong 1.3330
3239 3706 42. Rawis 2.2264 7477 8322 43. Arimbay 1.1360 2923 3421
44. Buraguis 2.4368 3341 3996 45. Dap-Dap 0.2625 1728 1956
Sub-Totals 19.8875 Rural: 46. Tamaoyan 0.5314 1112 1440 47. Pawa
5.2252 2896 3049 48. Dita 0.5109 1349 1586 49. San Joaquin 0.5467
1620 1906 50. Bagong Abre 1.3524 1141 1354 51. Bigaa 1.3173 4954
5199 52. Padang 3.8017 2050 1539 53. Buyuan 4.6441 2737 3162 54.
Matanag 4.2172 1364 1618 55. Bogña 5.4693 2928 3257 56. Mabinit
6.7445 1083 1325 57. Estanza 8.3179 3318 4212 58. Taysan 14.6446
7165 10243 59. Puro 2.7547 3670 4084 60. Lamba 2.6739 991 1046 61.
Maslog 8.1519 3412 3757 62. Homapon 8.4016 3560 3822 63. Mariawa
9.2108 1361 1414 64. Bagacay 1.7596 1393 1591 65. Imalnod 4.7950
1497 1964 66. Banquerohan 18.1471 5351 6034 67. Bariis 12.7919 1728
1770 68. San Francisco 12.7976 2019 2233 69. Buenavista 14.7739 936
1048 70. Cagbacong 21.9776 2346 2579 Sub-Totals 175.5588 National
Park 8.5777 Grand Totals 204.0240
Sources: Physico-Socio Economic Profile, 2008 and NSO
Statistics.
2.3.2 Living Conditions
73. The latest available data on housing is in 2000. There were
30,173 housing units occupied by 30,612 households. Less than half
of the households (12,672 or 41.4%) owned or were amortizing their
homes and less than 1/10th (2,408 or 8.0%) were renting. Another
9,829 or 32.1% occupying houses rent-free with the consent of the
owners but 3,988 or 13.0% were occupying houses rent-free without
the consent of the owners.
74. A large majority of these buildings (27,988 or 91.4%) were
single housing units. The remainder was either duplexes or
multi-unit residential buildings. More than half of these housing
units (18,797 or 62.3%) were in good condition. Another 4,872 or
15.9% need major repairs and 264 units were dilapidated or
condemned. Only 4 houses were vacant.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
16
75. Out of the 30,173 housing units, 15,862 or 52.6% had
galvanized iron or aluminum roofs, 1,777 or 6.0% had
tile/concrete/clay tile roofs, and 1,470 or 4.87% had
half-galvanized iron & half concrete roofs. No data are
available for the remaining11,064 housing units.
76. Half of the housing units (15,232 or 50.5%) had
concrete/brick/stone walls. Another 5,694 or 18.87% had walls made
of wood, 4,884 or 16.2% had walls of half concrete/brick/stone and
half wood, and 3,000 or 10% had walls made of
bamboo/sawali/Cogon/Nipa. The remaining units had walls of other
materials like salvaged/improvised materials.
77. The median floor area was about 25 square meters, with an
average occupancy of 5.19 people.
78. In 2008, there were 37,184 households in Legazpi City. Of
these, 26,288 or 70.7% had complete basic sanitation facilities,
with the remaining 10,896 or 29.3% using other means of excreta
disposal. This is a modest improvement over 2006 where 67.5% of
households had sanitary toilets.
2.4 HEALTH AND SANITATION
2.4.1 General Health 1
79. The available data on morbidity and mortality from the City
Health Office are those for 2008. Tables 2.2 and 2.3 present the
ten leading causes of morbidity and mortality, respectively. From
Table 2.2, it can be noted that a potential waterborne disease,
diarrhea (all forms), is the 2nd leading cause of morbidity, with
2,802 reported cases. It was also disturbing to have discovered
that diarrhea was the 5th leading cause of under-five mortality in
the City, with 7 reported cases.
80. Infant Mortality Rate in Legazpi in the past 5 years (2004
–2008) shows an increasing trend. Within this 5 year period, IMR
ranges from 13.26 (2004) to 17.75 (2008). However, it has
significantly improved compared with the NSO national baseline
recorded in 1998 when the mortality rate among infant was at 46 per
1,000 live births. Moreover, the latest figure of 17.78 is very
close to the National Objectives for Health for 2010 target set by
the DOH (at 17 per 1,000 live birth) and the Millennium Development
Goal for child health of at least less than 17 infant deaths per
1,000 live births for the year 2015.
81. Along with the slow progress in attaining these health
goals, Legazpi City has specific health threats that need to be
addressed. These are concerns that pertain to the double burden of
disease. While health problems related to poor development like
infectious diseases, malnutrition, diseases related to water and
sanitation are still not completely controlled, there are
indications that so-called lifestyle and development related
diseases are beginning to rise in prevalence. According to the City
Health Office, while infectious diseases are still considered as
one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality,
cardiovascular diseases and other chronic degenerative diseases are
becoming significant contributors to the increasing numbers of
sickness and deaths in the City.
82. As of the latest official 2007 FHSIS report to the DOH,
Legazpi City public health workers still predominantly rely on the
assistance of volunteer health workers or Barangay Health Workers
(BHWs) in the delivery of basic public health services. There are
about 370 active BHWs in the City as of 2007. Also, traditional
birth attendants (TBAs) still are still considered significant
providers of health services in the city whose numbers are almost
the same as the public health midwives (22 Rural Health Midwives
vs. 29 TBAs)
1 Health data are presented in Supplementary Appendix G.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
17
Table 2.2: Leading Causes of Morbidity, 2008 - Legazpi
CAUSES
Number
Rate
1. Upper Respiratory Tract Infection 22,588 1,236 2. Diarrhea,
All Forms 2,802 153 3. Infected Wound 2,026 111 4. Pneumonia, All
Forms 1,606 88 5. Fever of unknown origin 1,441 79 6. Hypertension
1,273 70 7. Bronchial Asthma 1,257 69 8. TB, All Forms 1,194 65 9.
Skin Disease 1,153 63 10. Intestinal Parasitism 818 45 Source:
Legazpi City Health Office.
Table 2.3: Leading Causes of Mortality, 2008 - Legazpi
CAUSES
Number
Rate
1. Pneumonia 264 14 2. Disease of the Vascular System 195 11 3.
Disease of the Heart 162 9 4. Neoplasms 93 5 5. TB, All Forms 70 4
6. COPD 52 3 7. Septicemia 50 3 8. Accidents 45 2 9. Diabetes
Mellitus 36 2 10. Renal Disease 25 1
Source: Legazpi City Health Office.
83. It is also significant to note that Legazpi City which
belongs to the province of Albay, whose provision of basic services
are still considered inadequate compared with the national average
on health service utilization or coverage indicators like Fully
Immunized Children or FIC (for complete immunization services for
children under 1 year of age), Ante-Natal Care or ANC (for
pre-natal consultation of pregnant women during the entire course
of their pregnancy), Skilled Birth Attendants or SBA (for doctors,
nurses or midwives attending to women during actual delivery),
Facility Based Deliveries or FBD (for access of women to facilities
attended by skilled birth attendants during delivery), and
Contraceptive Prevalence Rate or CPR (for access of women of
reproductive age to modern family planning method of their choice).
For all these indicators, the values for the province are lower
compared to the national average.
2.4.2 Water and Health-related Aspects
84. Incidence of diarrhea among 0-59 months old children (being
the vulnerable population age group) in the localities included in
the appraisal is used to indicate the magnitude of the health
problem related to water and sanitation, and hygiene. In general,
the 5-year trend (2004 – 2008) of diarrhea incidence among children
below 5 years old and below is increasing, starting at about 16
percent in 2004 to about 20 percent in 2008. Aside from diarrhea,
the City Health Office of Legazpi also reported cases of
Soil-Transmitted Helminthiasis, Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever, and
Typhoid/ Parathyphoid in the last five years.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
18
85. Based on the consultation with the City Health Office, there
were claims that public health campaign on sanitation and hygiene
are regularly being conducted by the local health authorities
concerned. These activities range from the conduct of mothers’
class (i.e. bench seminar), food handlers’ class to a more
organized activities conducted yearly such as the DOH-initiated
Garantisadong Pambata where clients (mostly mothers) are given
basic health messages including those that deals with sanitation
and hygiene. The City Health Office also regularly collaborates
with the public elementary schools where lessons on basic
sanitation and hygiene are incorporated in the school curricula
like proper handwashing technique and food preparation. Aside from
information dissemination and educational campaign, the local
health office selectively conducts water chlorination and water
testing using PHC (primary health care) media.
86. The City Health Office also conducts bacteriological water
testing as part of its routine monitoring of water quality. It also
screens food handlers through routine laboratory testing and
issuance of health permits.
87. When it comes to hospital waste management, most of the
hospitals in the City resort to incineration to dispose hospital
wastes despite national policy governing this type of waste. The
City plans to organize a more comprehensive management of hospital
waste.
88. According to the DOH, Legazpi City has not reported any
disease outbreaks due to water contamination or sanitation-related
causes, in the past 5 years. There are only occasional increases in
the incidence of diarrhea but not at epidemic proportion.
2.4.3 Sanitation Facilities
89. The City of Legazpi has no sewerage system. Although PD 198
mandates Water District to handle wastewater through a sewerage
system, this intervention has been neglected for quite some time
due to its prohibitive cost.
90. In the absence of a sewerage system, domestic wastewater,
which includes excreta is collected by septic tanks. However, the
BOD content in septic tanks is only partially removed (about a
maximum of 60%2). Thus, still a significant proportion of BOD is
left untreated.
91. The NSO data of 2000 (Table 2.4) shows that households using
septic tanks are about 57%. It basically means that the remaining
43 % are at risk of disposing excreta in the environment in an
unsafe manner that consequently degrades the quality of bodies of
water and increases the risk of infection.
92. The PPTA consultation with communities and LGUs revealed
that it is an accepted fact that there are septic tanks in the
subproject area with unsealed bases. This condition definitely
contaminates groundwater.
93. There are private desludgers operating in the area. However,
the disposal sites of septage are unknown. When interviewed by the
PPTA, they expressed interest to participate in the program.
2 Philippine Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid, World Bank,
2006
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
19
Table 2.4: Sanitation Facilities and Coverage, Legazpi City,
2000
Type of Toilet facilities HH
coverage % Water Sealed + Septic Tank 15160 50 Water Sealed +
Septic Tank -Shared 2173 7 Water Sealed + Others 3750 12 Water
Sealed + Others - Shared 1688 6 Closed Pit 3061 10 Open Pit 2174 7
Others 778 3 None 1828 6 Total 30612 100
Source: NSO, 2000. 94. Moreover, households with undesludged
septic tanks for more than 5 years would become inefficient in
treating excreta. The accumulation of sludge lessens the space and
retention time needed for treatment. Untreated effluent would
consequently go out directly from the septic tank and flow to
drainage going to bodies of water. The public’s exposure to
untreated effluent along the drainage as well as in the bodies of
water is a health risk that should be addressed.
95. Much worse is the presence of open defecation or direct
disposal to bodies of water. NSO figures (Table 2.4) reflect that
around 1,828 households in the year 2000 had no toilets at all!
Without addressing this concern, the exposure level to excreta
contamination of vulnerable groups (i.e. poor, children,
marginalized groups) will remain very high.
96. The Water Quality Monitoring Report (2002) reflected in the
2008 Socio Economic Profile of Legazpi City showed that certain
sampling sites along Sumagayon River have below 5 mg/L Dissolved
Oxygen level. These were as follows:
� EM Barrio South (1.8 mg/L) � Dapdap (2.1 mg/L) � Bagumbayan
(3.3 mg/L) � Rizal St. (2.7 mg/L).
97. DAO 34 standards indicate 5 mg/L Dissolved Oxygen as the
minimum limit. Going below the limit would suggest that the water
has excessive organic contents which could come from garbage or
untreated wastewater disposed to the river. The practice of
indiscriminate disposal of wastes to the bodies of water has to be
controlled by the local authorities to avoid its impending impact
to economy, health and environment.
2.4.4 Education
98. During the school year 2006-2007, Legazpi City had a total
of 32 private schools in operation and 45 public schools in
operation at all levels. Three private schools offered only
pre-school education, 5 schools offered only pre-school and
elementary education, 5 schools offered education from pre-school
up to high school only, and 3 schools offered the full course from
pre-school up to tertiary level education. Only 1 school offered
both elementary and high school education only, 2 schools offered
high school education only, 4 schools offered high and college
education only, 6 colleges offered tertiary education only.
99. During this school year, there were 41 public elementary
schools in operation. The government provided secondary education
through 4 high schools and offered tertiary education through only
1 university – the Bicol University.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
20
2.5 ECONOMY
2.5.1 City Income and Expenditures
100. Legazpi City is a 1st class City and is the Capital of
Albay Province. From the 2006 City Accomplishment Report provided
by the City Planning & Development Office, the average annual
revenue of the City over the period of 3 years from 2006 to 2008
was PhP419,686,819.40. Over the same period, it had an average
obligated amount of PhP395,391,055.80 for an annual average surplus
of PhP24,295,763.60. Its largest revenue came from its Internal
Revenue Allotment which averaged PhP246,933,518.70 per year or
59.0% of the City’s annual revenues over this 3-year period.
101. In terms of Obligation by Sector/Services, General Public
Services took the lion’s share of obligated amounts with an annual
average of PhP217,078,610.70 or 55.0% of the annual average amount
obligated. Economic Services, 20% Development Fund, and Health
Services followed a distant 2nd, 3rd, and 4th places,
respectively.
2.5.2 Employment
102. In April 2003, Legazpi City had a labor supply of 106,584,
age 15 years old and over. This was about 60.6% of the total
population. Of this figure, 38,157 or about 35.8% were not in the
labor force, leaving an employable population of 68,427 or 64.2% of
the labor supply. Employed were 57,136 leaving 11,291 unemployed.
However, of the employed population, 13,370 were visibly unemployed
so that those who were fully employed totaled 43,766 or 64.0% of
the Labor Force.
103. From the 2003 Barangay Socio-Economic Survey, service
workers dominate the City’s occupational groupings, with 46% in the
services sector. About 16% were production and related workers,
transport equipment, etc.; 15% comprise the professional, technical
and related workers, clerical workers, administrative, executive,
and management workers; 12% were in sales; and another 12% were in
agriculture, animal husbandry, and family workers.
104. It is also interesting to note that there were 326 Overseas
Contract Workers from this City in 2006.
2.5.3 Agriculture
105. In 2007, agricultural land accounted for about 48.0%
(9,755.14 hectares) of the total land area of the City. In the
urban barangays, there were 115.25 hectares of agriculture land
which was only 5.8% of the urban land area. In the rural barangays,
55.0% (9,639,89 hectares) of the land area was dedicated to
agriculture.
106. About 31.6% of the agricultural land was devoted to crops
such as rice, corn, root crops, vegetables, legumes, fruit trees,
and industrial crops. Rice and corn were planted in 1,231 hectares
of which 708 hectares were irrigated and the remaining 523 hectares
being rain-fed or planted to upland rice. Coconut trees were
planted in 6,747 hectares or 33.0% of the City’s total land area,
national park included. Bananas were planted in almost 300 hectares
and fruit vegetables were planted in 190 hectares of land. Leafy
vegetables were planted in about 100 hectares.
107. Industrial crops include pili (a type of nut), coffee,
cacao, bamboo, anahaw (a type of palm leaf, fan-shaped), nipa, and
sugarcane.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
21
2.5.4 Commerce and Trade
108. In 2006, a total of 2,543 business establishments were
registered in Legazpi City. A total of 2,351 establishments
belonged to the services sector most of which were wholesale and
retail trade. There were 257 hotels and restaurants and 223 health
and social work establishments. In the Industry Sector, of the 166
registered establishments, 96 were into manufacturing and 61 were
into construction.
109. Also in 2006, a total of 29 banks were located in Legazpi
City. There were 11 commercial banks, 2 government banks, 3 rural
banks, 5 savings banks, and 8 unibanks. In addition, there were 95
non-bank financial intermediaries; these were 9 financing
companies, 12 lending investors, 3 savings and loans associations,
47 insurance companies, and 24 pawnshops.
2.5.5 Tourism
110. There are many tourist destinations in the City of Legazpi.
There is, of course, the famous Mayon Volcano with its nearly
perfect cone shape. It stands at 8,189 feet, with a base of about
10 kms radius. The Department of Tourism schedules annual hiking
activity on the slopes of Mayon Volcano.
111. There are two hills which attract tourists, namely the
Kapuntukan Hill and the Ligñon Hill. The Kapuntukan Hill gives a
beautiful vista of Legazpi City at night as well as the neighboring
municipalities of Manito and Rapu-Rapu. Ligñon Hill, on the other
hand, offers a good view of Mayon Volcano and the City as well.
112. The beaches called Puro White Beach, Bagacay Beach, and
Porta Azul offer good facilities, and are good places for swimming,
boating, scuba diving, fishing, and speed boat racing.
113. The Liberty Bell is a bronze bell installed by the American
Forces in 1945 and is located in Peñaranda Park in Rizal Street.
The Jose Ma. Peñaranda Monument was built as a tribute to the late
Jose Ma. Peñaranda who served as the Governor of Albay from 1834 to
1843. The Headless Monument was constructed as a dedication to the
unknown heroes who died during the Japanese occupation of the
City.
114. There is a 40-meter long L-shaped tunnel 7 feet deep used
by the Japanese forces as an arsenal during WWII. It is located at
Barangay EM’s Barrio South. There is also the Legazpi Heroes
Memorial Pylon which is 16-meters high and is located in the
Commercial District of the City.
115. The Fluvial Procession is a colorful activity in Legazpi
City. It is a traditional procession at the Albay Gulf by the
residents of Barangays Sabang and Pigcale. The image of the Patron
Nuestra Señora de Penafrancia is placed on a decorated motorized
banca or kumpit and paraded in a procession.
116. The Ibalong Festival is a week-long celebration designed to
enhance development in the region, specifically to promote tourism
in Legazpi City. The centerpiece of the whole event is a Mardi
Gras-style street presentation featuring the characters of the
Ibalong epic.
-
TA No. 7122-PHI: Water District Development Sector Project PPTA
– FR Vol. 5 – SPAR: LCWD
22
2.6 SOCIAL SERVICES
2.6.1 Health and Sanitation
117. Secondary and tertiary health services are provided by 1
government hospital, 6 private hospitals, 26 government cl