Pre-feasibility Study of the Guimaras-Iloilo Ferry Terminals System Project

PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY Guimaras‐Iloilo Ferry Terminals System Project AUGUST 2008

Table of Contents Introduction Background Objectives & Scope

4 5

The Existing Situation

6

Technical Description of the Project The Development Approach The Projects The Parola Station Project The Buenavista Station Project The Jordan Station Project Design & General Specifications

7 8 19 22 25

Market Analysis

26

Institutional Proposal

27

Financial Viability

29

Next Steps

32

Annexes

33

CITIES DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE FOR ASIA (CDIA) SUPPORT MIG, PHILIPPINES Project No. 07.2029.2‐001.00 Guimaras‐Iloilo Ferry Terminals System Project Pre‐Feasibility Study

(DRAFT)

Prepared by:

CONSULTANTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC. August 2008 1856 Asuncion St., Santiago Village, Makati City Tel : 895‐1812 ; Fax : 890‐2480 E‐mail : [email protected]

Background This Pre‐Feasibility Study report focuses on the proposed improvement of the three wharfs comprising the Guimaras‐Iloilo Ferry Terminal System (GIFTS), one of the major components of the Cities Development Initiative for Asia (CDIA) Support to Metro Iloilo‐Guimaras, Philippines (Project No. 07.2029.2‐001.00) – or CDIA‐MIG for short. Based upon a request from the Metro Iloilo‐Guimaras Economic Development Council (MIGEDC), the subject project is supported by the CDIA, which is a regional initiative of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the German Development Cooperation (GTZ) system, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). The CDIA is designed to support cities in ADB’s developing member countries in strengthening the links between their urban planning and infrastructure investment programs, and to facilitate that identified projects will be subjected to pre‐feasibility studies, full‐blown feasibility studies, and will be financed and implemented accordingly. It is within this framework that the pre‐feasibility study of the GIFTS project is being undertaken. This project was originally referred to as the Parola Eco Port Project, which was aimed at developing the former Rotary Park in Iloilo City at the mouth of the Iloilo River popularly called “Parola” into a modern ferry terminal. However, midway in the preparation of the pre‐feasibility study for this component, it was decided to expand its scope to include the Buenavista and Jordan wharfs on Guimaras Island which are Parola’s “counterpart” wharfs on the Guimaras side. Thus, the pre‐feasibility study has expanded its coverage to cover the ferry terminals in all the three sites. The pre‐feasibility study (PFS) aims to establish the prima facie case to take the project to feasibility level under standard agreement with a financing institution. The PFS report tries to adhere to a standard acceptable to national and international financing institutions, with particular reference to requirements for possible ADB financing under the GoP/ADB Philippines Basic Urban Services Sector (PBUSS) project, including flagging potential issues requiring in‐depth review in accordance with the various ADB safeguards guidelines at the subsequent feasibility study stage.

Figure 1. Jordan port ticketing station

Figure 2. Jordan Port Ferry Terminal

Guimaras‐Iloilo Ferry Terminals System Project

PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY

Introduction

Figure 3 Parola Eco Port Ferry Terminal.

4

Objectives & Scope The project aims to improve and modernize the Parola, Buenavista, and Jordan wharfs to cater to the needs of an expanding number of daily commuters between Guimaras and Iloilo, and to enhance the tourism industry which is a vital element of the Metro Iloilo‐Guimaras (MIG) region’s economy. In line with this basic objective, the Project’s scope covers the physical improvements of the three wharfs, particularly its passenger terminals, the boat docking facilities, and related service facilities. The Project necessarily also covers the financing of these improvements as well as its implementation strategy and management system. The Project also looks at the modernization of the existing ferry boats which can be undertaken at a future phase.

Figure 4. Hawkers at the Jordan Port.

The Project’s implementation, financing, and management strategy specifically takes into account the fact that there are several major stakeholders involved, including the association of ferry boat owners and operators, possible private investors, and the local governments namely the province of Guimaras, the municipalities of Buenavista and Jordan, and the City of Iloilo. It recognizes the financial constraints of these LGUs and considers the role and possible contribution of the private business sector as well as the ferry boat owners and operators. Figure 5. Buenavista Port Ferry Terminal.



Introduction

An important concern of the Project is the presence of informal settler households in and immediately adjacent to the Parola site, as well as sidewalk vendors in the vicinity of all the three wharfs. While these households and vendors presently contribute to the sanitation and environmental problems of the wharfs, they are also seen as potential service providers. The Project, therefore, considers appropriate measures for the relocation and resettlement of the informal settler families, and the accommodation of the sidewalk vendors in viable commercial facilities that are integral to the ferry terminals.

Figure 6 . Guimaras‐Iloilo Ferry Boat.

5

On the Guimaras side, the two facilities operate out of the municipal ports and have been marginally developed to provide a minimum level of comfort to the commuters with queuing sheds for ticketing and waiting areas. On the Iloilo City side, two informal “ports” evolved from need for landing points to unload and load the commuting public. These are located at Ortiz, a district of the City located on the strait directly facing to Jordan and at Parola which is the lighthouse at the mouth of the Iloilo River. These loading and unloading areas consist of nothing more than the breakwater, where the passengers board and exit the boats from the stern (Ortiz) or by crossing via the middle outrigger plank (Parola). The boats are traditional long wooden boats with a low roof and outriggers. While most passengers have no difficulty boarding during high tide, at low tide, the top of the breakwater can have an elevation difference of over 2‐meters. There are no gangplanks to facilitate the boarding or discharge of passengers. According to the Philippine Ports Authority and Coast Guard officials, the method of loading and unloading is a function of the characteristics of the two sites. At Ortiz, where the breakwater juts out seaward, the tidal current is minimal and the boats can dock perpendicular to the rock‐pile. The strong river current at Parola pulls the boats side‐ways and forces them alongside the rock‐pile. Both landing points have the minimum amenities for ticketing. However, the walkways are congested with vendors and informal settlers. In Ortiz, the settlement structures are built‐up at the edge of the breakwater line on the land side. There is no room for expansion at Ortiz except by reclaiming land by way of extending the rock pile and breakwater.

During the north‐easterly season the operations are suspended at Ortiz due to the large waves which batter the shoreline. The sea becomes turbulent and large waves lash the breakwater. This makes the loading and unloading operations dangerous to the commuters. There have been a number of accidents involving passenger falling into the water while exiting the boat during turbulent seas. As a precaution, when this season sets in, the Coast Guard and Marina allow the outriggers to continue operations at Parola. During this period Parola handles all commuter traffic to and from Guimaras and has traditionally done so. Normally, Parola only handles the movement to and from Buenavista while Ortiz caters to the Jordan traffic. The boat licences to operate specifies the route and the Buenavista and Jordan routes are separate and distinct. The daily commuters moving into Iloilo and out to Guimaras daily is reported at 5,870 for Jordan and 4,800 for Buenavista. Commuters between the two points in Guimaras and Iloilo City number over 4.2 million annually. The growth of commuter traffic indicates a trend toward Guimaras as ‘bedroom’ of Iloilo City. A large number of the population which moves between these points, actually reside on the Guimaras side and work in Iloilo city. This observation is borne out by the peak movement hours. The first three hours in the morning are heavy outgoing from Jordan and Buenavista. Parola and Ortiz experience the peak outgoing traffic between the hours of 4:00 in the afternoon to 7 in the evening. It is expected that the growth trend will continue as more and more residential areas are opened on Guimaras. Another evolving market is also expected to grow in the immediate future, tourism. Local tourists or weekend visitors to the beach resorts on Guimaras also account for an increased number of riders during weekends. It is also expected that the international visitor market will grow at a much higher rate in the immediate term.


The present ferry system essentially consists of local boat service between ‘ports’ in Iloilo City and the ports in the municipalities of Buenavista and Jordan in Guimaras Province. While Parola on the Iloilo City side is the receiving and dispatching counterpart of Buenavista commuters, Ortiz ‘Port’ handles the Jordan traffic.


The Existing Situation

6

The Projects The Development Approach The present ferry system essentially consists of local boat service between ports in Iloilo City and the ports in Buenavista and Jordan in Guimaras Province (see Figure 7). The boats are traditional long wooden boats with a low roof and outriggers. On the Iloilo City side, while they have the minimum amenities for ticketing and boarding, the piers appear as a makeshift docking facility which is congested with vendors and informal settlers. On the Guimaras side, the two facilities provide a minimum level of comfort to the commuters with queuing sheds for ticketing and waiting areas. The number of commuters between the points in Guimaras and Iloilo City now stands at almost 5‐million a year. Addressing the needs of the commuting public and in line with MIGEDCs thrust to promote tourism, a suitable Pier and Sea Transport facility that address the needs of the market for access to the emerging residential areas, beach and idyllic rural places in nearby Guimaras are proposed. More than being just a utilitarian pier for loading and unloading, the pier sites shall be converted into modern Ferry Stations complete with comfortable terminal lobby with ticketing and waiting spaces, shaded and safe loading arcades, public toilets, shops and parking areas. The Architecture and Engineering design idea for the projects are presented in the Figure exhibits. The land use and the building areas therein are deemed as a reasonable guide for the activity flow within the respective sites and the basis of the budget for their construction. The perspective drawings meanwhile are images of how the development could look like in the light of the global objectives of the project.

Figure 7. Location of Parola, Buenavista & Jordan Ports.

Specifically, the new Ferry Station projects are located in: 1) the Iloilo City’s Parola Port along Fort San Pedro Drive by the mouth of the Iloilo River; and 2) in the active Buenavista and Jordan Ports both in Guimaras Province just across the Strait. The old ports shall be redeveloped to the extent that they meet the requirement of the growing market and the tourism objectives of MIGEDC. The advantageous technical features inherent within the existing ports shall be adopted and developed while the undesirable facilities and operational practices shall be reconsidered and upgraded to the extent that they become first class facilities providing optimal benefits for the port sites. The individual projects are further described in the forthcoming pages.



Technical Description of the Project

7

The Projects (cont’d) The Parola Station Project Site Analysis The Parola site is a 1.3 hectare property comprising of the old Rotary Park and the Coast Guard compound, located at the mouth of the Iloilo River beside the port operated by the Philippine Ports Authority. Aside from housing the Coast Guard offices, the site is also occupied by some 25 informal settler families. Immediately outside the fence of the Coast Guard compound is the ticket booth and pier of the ferry boats servicing commuters between Iloilo City and Buenavista in Guimaras. The side of the site fronting the main access road is lined with make‐shift stalls of vendors. The Rotary Park has been turned over to the Iloilo City Government, while the Coast Guard compound is, according to the Coast Guard, under their authority by virtue of a Presidential Proclamation. The Iloilo City Government however, maintains that the property is in the name of the Government of the Philippines and under the jurisdiction of the Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (DENR). Per the Office of the Mayor, the city government has requested the Office of the President to issue a Presidential Order giving Iloilo City jurisdiction over the entire property, and that this Order is expected to be released within the year.

Figure 8. Parola Eco Port Site. PAROLA ECO‐PORT SITE

The site is situated behind the new PPA wharf. The side of the property facing this wharf is water‐logged even during low tide and will require substantial filling if it is to be built upon. The site lacks proper drainage and utilities. The existing pier for the ferry boats is narrow. Entrance to the pier is congested with a mix of vendors, taxis, jeepneys and tricycles. The area is also lacking in proper solid waste management.




The Iloilo City Urban Poor Affairs Office has identified the 25 informal settler families occupying the site, and is preparing a relocation area for them. However, the site inspection revealed that outside but adjacent to the site, are informal settlers who will also need to be relocated.

8

Currently, the facility services only the Buenavista commuters under normal conditions. However, between July to September, and at the height of the typhoon season, the operations of Ortiz from Jordan are moved to Parola. From the average 4,800 daily commuters, the facility has to handle the additional volume of 6,900 passengers from Jordan as well. So traditionally, Parola has the capacity to handle all commuter movement from the two points in Guimaras. Technical Considerations Among other things, the technical problems facing the development of the Parola port are Rotary Park Area: 9,913 sqm Phil. Coast Guard Area: 3,627 sqm

a)

The berthing of larger boats at the river mouth presents a hazard to the channel. The regulatory agencies tolerate the presence of the outrigger boats for lack of other viable alternatives , and

b)

Limitation to its development area boundaries due to the existing PPA industrial wharves established and operating around it.

c)

Fort San Pedro Drive to Parola is a cu‐de‐sac of sorts. Public transport is not allowed through the PPA river port area while private transport is only allowed through until the gates are closed at around 7:00 in the evening. Some arrangements will have to be agreed upon with PPA relative to this situation.

Total Area of Titled Lots: 13,540 sqm

Figure 9. Delineation of lot parcels in Parola.

Site Capacity This lone station that is expected to service all commuters between Iloilo City and Guimaras will obviously contain the most number of ferry traffic. Short of perhaps another station in another location in the future, the Parola Station will be counted on to accommodate all commuter boats coming from, and heading to, both the Buenavista and Jordan ports. While the Parola Port compound is collectively more than a hectare in size, its pier for docking is not that convenient and ideal according to the Coast Guard and PPA, and which situation needs to be rationalized.


The Parola Station Project (cont’d)



9

Because of its original land uses, the Parola land complex earmarked for development under this project is also not free vacant land that can be readily developed. Some 30 informal settlers on the site and along the sidewalk need to be relocated or dismantled prior to development. The interests of the hawkers who crowd the walkway to the loading and unloading as well as some settler families who actually reside on the breakwater need to be addressed. To effectively implement the terminal plan, the existing Coast Guard headquarters would need to be relocated to another area within the site. In line with the City’s objectives, restore the Rotary Park amenities and relocate the informal settlers that have erected shanties there. Additionally, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources has also requested that they be allocated a parcel for the location of their regional office. Any development proposal must take into account these factors. The Iloilo River has historically been the main port. On either side of the river, the Port of Iloilo is operated by the Philippine Ports Authority. The Parola site is the only stretch which does not fall under the supervision of the agency. Parola is a property of the Philippine Government titled under the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The plot is covered by three (3) titles with a total area of 14,600 square meters. The Coast Guard was allowed the use of over 3,000 square meters under an official issuance.

The need for more port space has forced the PPA to develop the land strip along the strait and as recently extended the wharf up to the edge of the river entrance. However, the structure was set‐off roughly 30 meters from the land side, respecting the sea frontage of Parola. This wharf handles both passenger and cargo from large international and inter‐ island vessels. Meanwhile the river facilities continue to operate including the fast craft ferries to other points of Visayas.

Risk Factors

A description of the tidal pattern of the river and the strait was given by a representative of the Coast Guard with the concurrence of the Philippine Ports Authority. The deep channel of the river is mainly at the center and is very tight. The channel has to be continuously dredged to maintain the depth as siltation is a major problem.





The tides and current have a distinct effect on the river traffic. The larger cargo boats and the fast crafts need to go at higher speed at the junction of the river and the strait. It is documented that the river flow is at 18 knots depending on the season while the strait current is at lower rate. Where the two currents meet, there is constant turbulence.

10

When the flow is toward high or low tide, ships entering or leaving the harbor must do so a high speeds or risk running aground on the shallower sides of the river mouth. This high speed maneuver in turn makes large waves which lash the moored boats at Parola. The turbulence also results in damage to the outriggers and complaints from the boat owners. There have been recorded instances where commuter have fall off the outrigger planks as a result of the turbulence. There have also been reports of the commuter outrigger boats not respecting the rules of sea traffic and actually moving into the lane of the fast crafts forcing the larger boat to slow down and risk running aground. As a result of these violations, the outriggers are no longer allowed to moor on the other bank of the river mouth while waiting for passengers. The Development Options

Option 1 This will pose the least disturbance on the non‐port handling activities in the site. This Option will consider the basic provision of the Station requirement independent of the bigger site area that will be called the “Ecopark” of the site. If only to minimize the investment further, the Option will also assume that the Coast facilities will be retained for the most part. Technically, only the commuter transaction, waiting lounge, dining areas and necessary shops could be prioritized for construction. The cost of breakwater rehabilitation (facing the new PPA wharf), the filling of the depressed area by the breakwater, and the Ecopark area landscaping could be an optional investment, or a future activity, in so far as Option 1 is concerned. For purposes of this study though, the development estimate will include the development of the whole site but excluding the larger part of the Coast Guard area with its retained agency operations. See Figures 10 to 14 for details.


Risk Factors (cont’d)



In consideration of the existing situation, a range of development options were deemed suitable options in the light of the project requirement and the deemed optimal approach to the development. These development options for the Parola Station Project are described and illustrated in the following pages.

11

Option 2

Option 3

The land use of the site maximizes the land use of the site and will require the immediate relocation of the Coast Guard headquarters and the illegal settlers and vendors. Since the docking system under Option 2 essentially retains the old way however, further technical studies will be necessary to determine the viability of introducing larger boats in the future for the comfort of tourists. Regarding the depressed water‐logged area inside the old Rotary Park, this will be converted into a recreational pond within the park proper. This is deemed more suitable to do for this naturally low area instead of filling it to acquire more land area which is not needed at the moment. A given in this option is the agreement for the project to relocate the Coast Guard building and to provide a site/lot for the use of DENR as well. See Figures 15 to 19 for details.

This option is is essentially a variation of Option 2. Option 3 however seeks to frontally address the requirement of the prospective tourist trade by providing a convenient man‐ made ‘docking bay’ primarily for them. This feature requires cutting away a substantial portion of the Parola grounds if only to create the special dock for the large boats of the future. This plan tends to ‘bring’ the terminal with its restaurant facilities and transaction center closer to the Ecopark area. As a result, the whole development becomes more integrative and synergistic overall while availing of more impressive area esthetics and vista. A downside is that the land site will be substantially smaller due to the creation of the dock. This new dock shall be designed to mainly accommodate the proposed large safer boats suitable for tourists and some of the commuters. See Figures 20 to 23 for details.


The Development Options (cont’d)



12


Figure 10a . Arial Perspective.

Figure 10a . Terminal and Eco Park.

Parola Eco Port Option 1




Figure 11. Land Use Plan.

13


Figure 12 . Ferry Terminal & Plaza.

Figure 13 . Pier & Waiting Area.





Figure 14 . Commercial & Restaurant Building.

14


Figure 15a . Aerial Perspective.

Figure 15b . Terminal and Eco Park.





Figure 16 . Land Use Plan.

15


Figure 17. Ferry Terminal & Parking.

Figure 18. Commercial Area





Figure 19. Restaurant Building & Pier.

16


Figure 20. Aerial Perspective.

Figure 21. Pier & Waiting Area.






17





Figure 23. Ferry Terminal & Restaurant.


18

The two commuter points on Guimaras operate from their individual municipal ports. Although originally built and operated by the Philippine Ports Authority, the ownership, operations and management of the facilities have been turned over to the respective LGU’s.

The Buenavista Station Project Located along the provincial road off the coast of Buenavista town in Guimaras (directly across the sea from the Parola Port), the Buenavista site is an active commuter port much like the Parola Port. The site has an existing industrial T‐ wharf that is partially roofed. This wharf protrudes out into the ocean and services not only commuters to and from Iloilo City but also industrial and commercial cargo. The town has implemented reclamation work for the port area in the past which includes the site where the PNP outpost is now located. Today, the plan for the Station under this project takes stock of the existing situation and proposes that the best approach is the redevelopment of the existing PNP reclaimed area and the T‐wharf. It is suggested that the land use of the reclaimed area which contains the small PNP outpost be better rationalized by overbuilding on it. The new construction would be a two level building structure that can house the relocated PNP outpost; the Terminal administrative facilities; the public toilets; and shops and restaurants.

Regarding the existing T‐wharf, it is understood that the industrial and commercial activities will be in the traverse dock (the “T”) at the end of it, while the commuter activities will be alongside the long stretch leading to the said traverse dock. Considering that the width of the wharf is nominal and trucks pass it to access the industrial zone, expansion of the wharf width to create a safe and spacious commuter pier with is envisioned. This new strip shall be roofed, equipped with the loading ramps and provided complete with dock furniture and necessary signages. Both sides of the wharf shall be expanded since tidal influences suggest to boat operators which side of the wharf is safer for loading and unloading for that time.


The Projects (cont’d)



19

The Buenavista Station Project (cont’d)





Figure 25. Aerial Perspective.

20

The Buenavista Station Project (cont’d)

Figure 26a. Pier & Waiting Area.

Figure 26b. Another view of the waiting area.




Figure 27. Ferry Terminal & Parking.

21

The Jordan Station Project The existing Jordan port facility is a limited area found at the end of the road by the coast. This port faces a protruding part of the land just across the mouth of the Jordan River. The town had actually diverted the route of the meandering Jordan River by creating a diversion channel outlet of the river more directly to the sea at the other side. This Jordan River bypass will minimize the siltation on the original river path to the open sea beside the dock. It is understood that the town hopes to convert this protruding land (that has now become an ‘island’ of sorts due to the diversion channel outlet to the sea) across the port to become a tourism ecopark area. Jordan is the seat of the Provincial Government. It also serves as the gateway to the adjacent municipalities and resort areas of the province. Jordan operates a municipal port. On either side of the port are a private facility with a port within a protected lagoon and the Philippine Ports Authority Roll On – Roll Off (RORO) facility. The larger ships and the FF Cruz ferry which can carry vehicles and passengers use this RORO as their port of call. There are a limited number of trips made daily by the RORO ferry between Iloilo City and Jordan. Outrigger boats plying between Jordan and Iloilo City use the municipal port.

Jordan commuter terminal also has a covered and fenced walkway for the ticket line but has no roof cover at the loading and unloading area. Entry and egress is through the stern of the boats again mirroring the method at Ortiz on the Iloilo City side. Without passenger handling ramps commuters have difficulty at low tide with the boat resting lower than the top of the breakwater. The presence of existing private commercial establishments and roadways in the dock area allows for very limited expansion land for the port. It is for this reason that the Jordan port officials adopted a reclamation project parallel to the road. Together, the lands of the existing port facilities and the proposed area for reclamation shall be the site for the new Jordan Station. Considering the many technical studies and initiatives by the town already in making the reclamation area a reality, the pier and part of the Terminal is proposed to be built on this proposed reclaimed area. Meanwhile, the tightly grouped existing port facilities shall be cleared and redeveloped as the location for the restaurant and parking facilities of the project. The new restaurant and shop shall have a scenic view of the Strait and which service is expected to be complemented by the other private commercial stores already in the area.


The Projects (cont’d)



The details of the project are shown in the succeeding figures.

22

The Jordan Station Project (cont’d)

Figure 28a. Aerial Perspective.

Figure 28b. Another Aerial Perspective.





23

The Jordan Station Project (cont’d)

Figure 30a. Ferry Terminal & Restaurant.

Figure 30b. Another View of the Ferry Terminal & Restaurant.




Figure 31. Pier & Waiting Area.

24

For the said new Ferry Stations in the various locations under the proposed GIFTS system, the efficiency and quality of development shall be the same. In general, the Stations shall contain 1) a pier area with loading ramps; 2) a terminal area for ticketing and ferry administration; 3) public toilets; 4) restaurants and shops; 5) a commercial area with stalls for the vendors as required; 6) a boat queue area out on the pier side. The sizes and amenities of the stations will however vary depending on the given land for development, the available length and configuration of the pier dock, and the passenger capacities to be sustained by the market. The architecture of the structures shall be basic modern. This approach will not only bring the image of the stations up to current global design trends that is attractive to the public, but it should also tend to lower construction cost due to the trends’ minimalist approach to the configuration of structures. The building material finishes shall be low maintenance (high‐ quality) finishes. The sites’ open areas shall be either paved as concrete roads and walks or landscaped with both hardscaping (boardwalks, pavers, etc.) and softscaping (native plant variety) features as required.

The Stations shall be provided with all necessary modern equipment such as area airconditioning, electric generator and water pumps as required especially in enclosed public congregation areas and transaction places. The loading ramps shall be light mechanical devices that drop down from their upright position pier side onto boat decks during loading time. The mechanical ramps shall be standard equipment import unless locally fabricated alternatives that are just as effective are sourced. The project construction and development budgets are summarized as follows: No. 1 1a

Station Parola Option 1

Total Amount P125,519,500

1b

Option 2

153,668,000

1c

Option 3

202,720,000

2

Buenavista

83,000,000

3

Jordan

56,989,000

Remarks Excludes the development of the Coast Guard and DENR sites. Commercial and park areas are maximized. Includes land cut process to effect the new dock. Include expansion of existing pier. Includes reclamation work.


Design & General Specifications



Table 1. Summary of project construction and development budgets.

The details of the above budgets are detailed in Annexes 39 to 43. The costs for A&E and allied services, preparatory activities such as relocation of existing features on the land and necessary demolition and clearing within the site are not part of the estimate. The costing looked took into consideration industry standard unit costs for like works based on today’s prices of labor and materials, imported equipment and current building systems.

25

The recent floods which ravaged the residential neighborhoods across the river from the old central business district of Iloilo City bring home the distinct possibilities of Guimaras as alternative place of residence. The major thrust of national government in the area of tourism is also expected to impact on the sub‐region. Guimaras offers pristine beaches and pastoral agricultural landscape with easy access, a friendly and hospitable people. Coupled with the heritage and cultural assets on the Iloilo side, it is easy to see a coming boom in tourism. For purposes of this study, a low figure for tourist movement between Iloilo City and Guimaras was set at 50,000 visitors. This will normally happen during the Dinagyang Fesitival, the mango festival and other major tourist related activities. It is projected that the volume of visitor arrival will increase dramatically over the next five years to 130,000 arrivals, two and a‐half times its present level. A tapering to a normal 2% ‐ 7% annual growth beyond is further projected.

The fly in the ointment for the growth in tourism is the mode of transportation. While the outriggers present a quaint and unique experience for the visitor, organized tours may not be able to take‐off over the issue of insurance. The small, wooden hull outriggers are not covered by the formal insurance industry. This poses a major threat to the development of the tourism sector especially for Guimaras. Unless alternatives are explored, prospects of a tourism boom may not materialize. To address this issue, an alternative development option is presented which allows the use of larger, wood or steel hull craft which conform to international maritime standards. It is also expected that the boats now plying the strait will evolve over time. As costs to operate become more prohibitive, fuel prices soar, the need to find more cost effective vessels will drive the market. Better boats would mean higher fares which in turn will impact on the individual boat operator finances. A wide disparity in commuter fares and tourist fares will spur the improvement of the boat service. In the future, the improved versions of the vessels will allow higher efficiency at the loading and unloading points.


Notwithstanding tourist arrivals, efficient, safe and convenient terminal facilities for the commuting public, between Guimaras and Iloilo City has long been identified as a need which has not been realized. Over the years the volume of commuter traffic has grown steadily and now tops 4 million passengers each year. The ridership figures were submitted to the project team by the boat operators association. They are based on actual daily ticket sales for the two ports on Guimaras and the two points in Iloilo City. As more and more Iloilo City based workers, employees and population in general consider Guimaras as possible place of residence while conducting their employment or business on the Iloilo City side, the figure will further rise. For purposes of this study, a series of annual increases were projected averaging 2.5%. The resulting figure shows a a very conservative 75% increase over current ridership in 20 years.


Market Analysis

The experience is proven in Boracay . From the small outriggers with less than a dozen load in the early 1980’s to the 30‐50 seaters in the early 2000’s they now have non‐ outrigger, more luxurious vessels plying the route. As the regulatory framework there takes effect (no loading and unloading on the beach) the vessels will be forced to evolve further. One method to influence this evolution process is to charge docking and berthing fees on a per square meter area occupied. The smaller the space the lower will be the fees charged. The outriggers take up large space versus the limited passenger load.

26

Local government units are subject to change, as new leaders are elected. Priorities are modified. Commitments are sidelined. Personalities and personal differences may play a hand in the situation. Cooperation can be lost in the future. Project borrowings and project revenues have to be equitably set among the co‐operators. What happens in the event of default by one party? How will the revenues be shared? What happens in case the operation of one point is financially poor and requires subsidy? These must be squarely addressed. An innovative approach is proposed for the implementation of GIFT. This will be done through the creation of a special purpose corporation to be jointly owned by the four local government units directly impacted by the project. These are Guimaras Province, Iloilo City, Jordan and Buenavista. Please see flowchart in Annex X. Guimaras Province shall contribute cash for one‐half the relocation of the coast guard building at Parola and possibly defray some facilities already committed for the two municipalities (ex. Expansion of Buenavista roofed area, road widening, street lighting etc.)

Iloilo City shall contribute the right to use its vested rights over Parola, undertake the relocation of illegal settler families on the site and contribute the other one‐half of the coast guard building. It shall provide the area with running water, improve the road and street lighting to the area and implement a traffic plan for the public and private transportation to and from the area. Jordan and Buenavista shall in turn contribute the use of portions of their ports together with the current improvements found there. For simplicity, it is proposed that the sharing be on equal basis for all four LGUs. However, an appraisal of the land and improvements may have to be undertaken to establish the basis for the debt to equity ratio which the financial institution may require. To achieve an equal sharing, the differences may be contributed in the form of cash to the corporation. However, the individual LGU may be content with the uneven set‐up then the additional cash contribution will be unnecessary.


The operation of the GIFT must be viewed as one seamless system. Its sphere of influence transcends individual government units, economic benefits impact on the sub‐ region. It is the premise therefore, that the sustainability of the system must be established and assured.



The financial projections should not show net deficits for the operations. Instead, the terminal fee should be sufficient to cover all operating expenses including debt service. It is not advisable to start with a low terminal fee since the public must be made aware that there is a cost attendant to safety, convenience and reliability. There have been several instances where inter‐local cooperation has been achieved, in Cotabato and Bicol.

27

The stability of the system, its falling outside of the purview of political change, the possibility of a highly professional management led by private enterprise is a goal which can be achieved.

FERRY TERMINALS PROJECT METRO ILOILO‐GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL (MIGEDC)

JORDAN, ILOILO CITY, GUIMARAS, BUENAVISTA

• Solely for passenger ferry terminals between Iloilo City and Guimaras • Raises equity, contracts a loan to undertake the project • Repays from revenue stream

PRIVATE INVESTOR

EQUITY (Land or Land Lease, Port Improvement, Buildings or Cash)

LOAN

EQUITY

LENDING AGENCY

CORPORATION

Repays Loan Revenue Flows less Operating Expenses

COMMUTER FERRY TERMINALS PAROLA – JORDAN – BUENAVISTA

The possible corporate setup for implementing the projects are shown in figure 32.

Asian Development Bank Special purpose vehicle loan window can be explored as financing source

May include Boat Assn., Others

kes erta Und oject Pr

There is no prohibition regarding inviting the private sector to participate in the ownership of the corporation. In fact, it may be advisable to invite the boat owners and operators association and potential developer / locators to join the corporation. Management of the company may be through the private sector group /s. Where private ownership is more than 50% it ceases to be a public corporation and moves out of the regulatory requirements for such corporations. (Ex. Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, Camp John Hay Development Corporation)




Revenue sources from land leases, building leases and terminal fees. Expenses for operations and maintenance, debt service.

Figure 32. Ferry Terminals Project Implementation Plan.

28

Passenger

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Commuter

P 7.50

P 9.00

P10.00

a) Starting base for ridership for the commuter passengers is 4.2 million projected to increase to 7.5 million by the 20th year. See Annexes 17 to 22 on fees and ridership projections.

Tourist

P20.00

P20.00

P20.00

b) Assumes that the Parola facility shall be used for both Buenavista and Jordan commuter points. c) The tourist ridership is projected at a base of 50,000 annually and does not differentiate between domestic and international visitors. With the improved facilities for movement and the development of higher quality beach resorts on Guimaras, the traffic volume is expected to increase dramatically by 150% over the next 5‐years. Succeeding years will show a more modest 2% ‐ 5% annual growth. d) Fares were expected to increase at the rate of 5% annually against the average P12.60 per person per trip of year 2008. Should a higher quality boat go into operation, P20.00 was assumed as starting base fare. e) The improved services and facilities would require a terminal fee to be charged above the fare rate. The fares accrue entirely to the boat operators while the terminal fee would be the revenue for the operations, maintenance and debt service of the project.

Schedule of Terminal Fees

Table 2. Schedule of Terminal Fees

2. Other Revenue Sources. Commercial spaces were designed into all the facilities. These will allow restaurants, retail space and convenience stores to operate in the terminal compounds. The spaces will be leased out in commercial rates to chosen locators. Lease rates will range from P500 – P750 per square meter. These specialty structures may be postponed for implementation at a later date or entirely privatized to effectively reduce loan levels and in turn drop the terminal fee rates. 3. Loan. It is assumed that 9%, 20 year money will be available with grace period of 5‐years on principal repayment. The table on Annexes 13 to 14 presents the three options with the corresponding Amortization Table for each option. It is assumed that the loan shall cover the total project cost following each design. Costs are based on the current estimated cost to construct equivalent structure in Metro Manila as of July 2008.


1. Income Projections. Based on the alternative development schemes, three sets of income projections were prepared. Annexes 1 to 6 present the three income scenarios. The following were the relevant assumptions to the projections.


Financial Viability

29

5. A simplified tabulation of Areas and Costs is presented as Annexes 7 to 11. 6. Annex 23 shows the carrying capacity of the improved terminals. Loading and unloading cycles for the three points were projected to occur during a 6‐hour peak period. These would be 3‐hours in the early morning for originating from Guimaras points, a corresponding 3‐hour peak arrivals at Parola and a reverse 3‐ hour peak in late afternoon. Given the volume of commuters, the boats would have between 11‐15 minutes to load or unload. When taken in the context of a 12‐hour operating day, the cycle increases the allowable loading and unloading per boat.

7. Annex 24 is an attempt to relate ridership to potential sales capture rate from the point of view of a retailer. Over 4‐million commuters will pass through the terminals. Assuming a catchment potential of 15% of this volume, at an average purchase of P50, the resulting potential sales would be P32 million annually. Given a 40% gross operating profit on sales (higher for fast‐food outlets), the locators would generate a potential P13 million. If 20% of the amount is used for amortizing a 10 year loan at an interest rate of 12% and Debt/Equity of 60%/40% then a P25 million project can be set up by the private proponent. 8. Annexes 25 to 26 tries to show the revenue stream of the boat operators from the fares generated for the commuting public. Assuming that a larger boat is operated for the tourist trade with a P20 fare and limited trips per day, how would the revenue picture look. This is does not even consider the possibility of charters. The idea is to try to show to the boat owners/operators the logic of upgrading their vessels.


4. Equity. Each station has an existing project site with improvements. For simplification purposes, each participating local government unit will be expected to contribute P50 million in value of land and improvements; relocation expenses or cash. In the actual practice, the same shall have to be identified and valued by average of a number of appraisals for land and improvements. Should it be decided that it be equal sharing, the difference should be contributed in cash. The cash would effectively lower the loan component when taken up against the development cost.


Financial Viability

30

(in P1,000,000)

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Total Project Loan

P 271.5

P 305.2

P 353.3

Total Project Equity

P 200.0

P 200.0

P 200.0

Total Project Cost

P 471.5

P 505.2

P 553.3

Gross Revenue 20 years

P 1,609.9

P 1,849.7

P 2,056.1

Value Added Tax

P 193.1

P 222.0

P 246.7

Net Revenue

P 1,416.7

P 1,627.7

P 1,809.4

Depreciation

P 198.2

P 219.2

P 254.3

Interest

P 290.3

P 333.3

P 406.2

Total Operating Expense

P 806.5

P 935.7

P 1,008.4

Net Profit before Tax

P 610.3

P 692.0

P 801.0

Amortization

P 412.0

P 473.2

P 576.6

Note in Table 3 that the interest and depreciation expenses are more than sufficient to cover the loan amortization total. The same is true on an annual basis which means that the cash flow for the project shall be positive. Considering also that the terminal fees will be collected on a daily basis, the project may be interesting to the private sector to take up as a completely private venture. A sweetener would be the capture rate income discussed in the previous section.


SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS


Financial Viability

Table 3.Summary of Financial Highlights

31

1. There is a distinct need to upgrade the terminal facilities on the Iloilo City side as well as the Guimaras ports. 2. There is a growing demand for the services. 3. Tourism will play a major development role in the sub‐ region in the immediate future. 4. Guimaras can offer a viable alternative for the development of residential communities which are less prone to flooding, easy access at a relatively lower cost.

The next steps will involve the conduct of a Feasibility Study of the project. This will necessarily entail a number of specific actions to provide the basis for the decision to proceed with the project. These actions include: • Validation of the physical design concepts for each of the three ports in consultation with MIGEDC, the LGUs and national agencies concerned as to whether such concepts are consistent with objectives and circumstances which may arise after the submission of this PFS report; • A more detailed market analysis to reconfirm if the design concepts, particularly in terms of the capacity and features of the port facilities, will meet the expected demand; • Based on the two actions above, finalization of the architectural and engineering designs as well as related construction documents, phasing, timeframe, and budgets;


The interesting feature about the ferry terminal system is that there is the distinct possibility that the financial returns may be sufficient to pursue the venture. Given that the land on the Iloilo City side will be available, that the settler families and the hawkers can be organized to put order into the site, there are enough features which make the project feasible.


Next Steps

• Firm up the revenue projections, project costs, cash flows, and repayment terms; • Firm up funding source(s) and/or investors; • Firm up inter‐local arrangements among LGUs concerned and establish the project institutional structure and management systems.

32

EXPENSES MOOE Depreciation Interest Expense Sub‐Total Expenses

EXPENSES MOOE Depreciation Interest Expense Sub‐Total Expenses GROSS OPERATING PROFIT

17,389,125 36,155,605 53,544,730 6,425,368 47,119,363

4 2012 17,389,125 37,447,620 54,836,745 6,580,409 48,256,336

5 2013 17,389,125 38,761,155 56,150,280 6,738,034 49,412,246

2.5% 12,451,000 12,762,275 13,081,332 13,408,365 13,743,574 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 42,286,948 42,598,223 42,917,280 43,244,314 43,579,523

GROSS OPERATING PROFIT

Year GROSS REVENUE Building Leases Terminal Fees Sub‐Total Value Added Taxes NET REVENUE

3 2011

2.5%

12%

2,214,009

3,019,047

4,202,082

5,012,022

11 2019

12 2020

13 2021

14 2022

18,237,375 60,236,572 78,473,947 9,416,874 69,057,073

18,661,500 61,565,891 80,227,391 9,627,287 70,600,104

18,661,500 67,417,239 86,078,739 10,329,449 75,749,291

18,661,500 74,383,533 93,045,033 11,165,404 81,879,629

29,533,327

35,412,313

42,364,682

17,813,250 49,582,191 67,395,441 8,087,453 59,307,988

15 2023 19,085,625 82,080,142 101,165,767 12,139,892 89,025,875

7 2015 17,813,250 50,677,658 68,490,908 8,218,909 60,271,999

8 2016 17,813,250 51,727,550 69,540,800 8,344,896 61,195,904

9 2017 18,237,375 52,799,529 71,036,904 8,524,428 62,512,475

10 2018 18,237,375 53,894,071 72,131,446 8,655,773 63,475,672

14,087,164 14,439,343 14,800,326 15,170,334 15,549,593 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 19,926,765 19,248,082 18,508,317 17,701,973 16,823,058 43,923,112 43,596,608 43,217,826 42,781,491 42,281,835

5,832,723 15,384,876

2.5% 15,938,333 16,336,791 16,745,211 17,163,841 17,592,937 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 15,865,042 14,820,803 13,682,583 12,441,923 11,089,604 41,712,558 41,066,777 40,336,977 39,514,948 38,591,725 27,344,515

6 2014

16 2024 19,085,625 96,829,666 115,915,291 13,909,835 102,005,456

16,675,391

17,978,077

19,730,984

21,193,837

17 2025

18 2026

19 2027

20 2028

19,085,625 98,988,708 118,074,333 14,168,920 103,905,413

19,509,750 101,046,339 120,556,089 14,466,731 106,089,358

19,509,750 103,147,459 122,657,209 14,718,865 107,938,343

19,509,750 105,293,006 124,802,756 14,976,331 109,826,425


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals MIGEDC ‐ Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) Projected Income Statement 1 2 Year 2009 2010 GROSS REVENUE Building Leases 2.5% 16,965,000 16,965,000 Terminal Fees 33,604,270 34,872,807 Sub‐Total 50,569,270 51,837,807 Value Added Taxes 12% 6,068,312 6,220,537 NET REVENUE 44,500,958 45,617,270


Annexes

18,032,760 18,483,579 18,945,669 19,419,311 19,904,793 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,909,183 9,615,577 8,008,886 6,257,594 4,348,685 2,267,974 37,557,520 36,401,649 35,112,446 33,677,179 32,081,951

50,434,151 64,447,936

67,503,764

70,976,912

74,261,164

77,744,474

Annex 1. Income Option 1

Income for Parola Option 1

33

Terminal Operations Light & Power Manpower Water Cleaning Supplies Garbage Collection Charges Repairs and Maintenance Total

Parola 19,000

Jordan 19,000

Buenavista 19,000

TOTAL 57,000

Yearly 684,000 9,295,000 240,000 360,000 360,000 1,512,000 12,451,000

10,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 126,000 91,000 86,000 86,000 263,000

Schedule of Light & Power Power Cost Bulb Replacements Fixtures Replacement Total

Parola 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

Jordan 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

Buenavista 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

TOTAL 45,000 6,000 6,000 57,000

RATE

Manpower Schedule Ticketing Building Security Grounds Security Administrative Cost Total Manpower

Parola 3 4 5 4

Jordan 2 3 5 3

Buenavista 2 3 5 3

TOTAL 7 10 15 10 42

RATE 20,000 15,000 15,000 20,000

Other Expenses Water Consumption Cleaning Supplies Garbage Collection Schedule

Parola 10,000 10,000 10,000

Jordan 5,000 10,000 10,000

Buenavista 5,000 10,000 10,000

TOTAL 20,000 30,000 30,000

RATE

TOTAL 240,000 360,000 360,000

Repairs and Maintenance Toilets Airconditioning Loading Ramps Building Total

Parola 2,000

Jordan 2,000

Buenavista 2,000

RATE

20,000 20,000 42,000

20,000 20,000 42,000

20,000 20,000 42,000

TOTAL 6,000 0 60,000 60,000 126,000

TOTAL 72,000 0 720,000 720,000 1,512,000

Depreciation Schedule Buildings Infrastructure Equipment Total Annual Depreciation

Parola Op‐1 68,635,000 54,784,500 2,100,000

TOTAL 105,335,000 161,273,500 4,800,000

PERIOD 25 30 15

ANNUAL 4,213,400 5,375,783 320,000 9,909,183

Jordan 10,200,000 45,889,000 1,500,000

Buenavista 26,500,000 60,600,000 1,200,000

TOTAL 540,000 72,000 72,000 684,000 TOTAL 1,820,000 1,950,000 2,925,000 2,600,000 9,295,000


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals MIGEDC ‐ Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) Schedule of Operating Expenses


Annexes

Annex 2.Income Option 1

Income for Parola Option 1 (cont’d)

34

3 2011

4 2012

5 2013

6 2014

7 2015

8 2016

9 2017

10 2018

17,389,125 43,041,726 60,430,851 7,251,702 53,179,149

17,389,125 44,505,894 61,895,019 7,427,402 54,467,617

17,389,125 45,995,886 63,385,011 7,606,201 55,778,809

17,813,250 58,806,473 76,619,723 9,194,367 67,425,356

17,813,250 60,086,426 77,899,676 9,347,961 68,551,715

17,813,250 61,324,492 79,137,742 9,496,529 69,641,213

18,237,375 62,588,411 80,825,786 9,699,094 71,126,691

18,237,375 63,878,730 82,116,105 9,853,933 72,262,172


2.5% 15,001,000 10,961,007 22,883,130 48,845,137

15,376,025 10,961,007 22,883,130 49,220,162

15,760,426 10,961,007 22,883,130 49,604,562

16,154,436 10,961,007 22,883,130 49,998,573

16,558,297 10,961,007 22,883,130 50,402,434

16,972,255 10,961,007 22,883,130 50,816,391

17,396,561 10,961,007 22,103,756 50,461,324

17,831,475 10,961,007 21,254,239 50,046,720

18,277,262 10,961,007 20,328,265 49,566,533

18,734,193 10,961,007 19,318,953 49,014,153


1,367,772

2,291,842

3,574,587

4,469,044

5,376,375

16,608,965

18,090,391

19,594,493

21,560,158

23,248,019

11 2019

12 2020

13 2021

14 2022

15 2023

16 2024

17 2025

18 2026

19 2027

20 2028


2.5%

18,237,375 71,453,298 89,690,673 10,762,881 78,927,793

18,661,500 73,006,953 91,668,453 11,000,214 80,668,238

18,661,500 80,002,407 98,663,907 11,839,669 86,824,238

18,661,500 88,227,218 106,888,718 12,826,646 94,062,072

19,085,625 97,308,195 116,393,820 13,967,258 102,426,562

19,085,625 114,712,610 133,798,235 16,055,788 117,742,446

19,085,625 117,229,310 136,314,935 16,357,792 119,957,143

19,509,750 119,651,753 139,161,503 16,699,380 122,462,123

19,509,750 122,124,981 141,634,731 16,996,168 124,638,563

19,509,750 124,650,079 144,159,829 17,299,180 126,860,650


2.5% 19,202,548 10,961,007 18,218,803 48,382,358

19,682,612 10,961,007 17,019,640 47,663,258

20,174,677 10,961,007 15,712,552 46,848,236

20,679,044 10,961,007 14,287,826 45,927,877

21,196,020 10,961,007 12,734,875 44,891,902

21,725,921 10,961,007 11,042,158 43,729,085

22,269,069 10,961,007 9,197,097 42,427,172

22,825,796 10,961,007 7,185,980 40,972,782

23,396,440 10,961,007 4,993,863 39,351,310

23,981,351 10,961,007 2,604,455 37,546,813


30,545,435

33,004,980

39,976,002

48,134,195

57,534,660

74,013,361

77,529,971

81,489,341

85,287,254

89,313,837

12%




Annexes



35


Parola 54,000

Jordan 44,000

Buenavista 44,000

TOTAL 142,000

Yearly 1,704,000 10,465,000 240,000 360,000 360,000 1,872,000 15,001,000

10,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 52,000 52,000 52,000 156,000 136,000 121,000 121,000 378,000


Parola 50,000 2,000 2,000 54,000

Jordan 40,000 2,000 2,000 44,000

Buenavista 40,000 2,000 2,000 44,000

TOTAL 130,000 6,000 6,000 142,000

RATE


Parola 3 5 6 4

Jordan 2 4 6 3

Buenavista 2 4 6 3

TOTAL 7 13 18 10 48

RATE 20,000 15,000 15,000 20,000


Parola 10,000 10,000 10,000

Jordan 5,000 10,000 10,000

Buenavista 5,000 10,000 10,000

TOTAL 20,000 30,000 30,000

RATE

TOTAL 240,000 360,000 360,000


Parola 2,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 52,000

Jordan 2,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 52,000

Buenavista 2,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 52,000

TOTAL 6,000 30,000 60,000 60,000 156,000

RATE

TOTAL 72,000 360,000 720,000 720,000 1,872,000


Parola Op‐2 85,666,000 65,902,000 2,100,000

Jordan 10,200,000 45,889,000 1,500,000

Buenavista 26,500,000 60,600,000 1,200,000

TOTAL 122,366,000 172,391,000 4,800,000

PERIOD 25 30 15

ANNUAL 4,894,640 5,746,367 320,000 10,961,007

TOTAL 1,560,000 72,000 72,000 1,704,000 TOTAL 1,820,000 2,535,000 3,510,000 2,600,000 10,465,000




Annexes



36



5 2013

6 2014

7 2015

8 2016

9 2017

10 2018

17,389,125 49,211,410 66,600,535 7,992,064 58,608,471

17,389,125 50,819,039 68,208,164 8,184,980 60,023,185

17,813,250 64,955,994 82,769,244 9,932,309 72,836,935

17,813,250 66,358,937 84,172,187 10,100,662 74,071,525

17,813,250 67,722,454 85,535,704 10,264,285 75,271,420

18,237,375 69,114,332 87,351,707 10,482,205 76,869,502

18,237,375 70,535,170 88,772,545 10,652,705 78,119,839

13,961,525 12,712,633 27,888,660 54,562,818

14,310,563 12,712,633 27,888,660 54,911,856

14,668,327 12,712,633 27,888,660 55,269,621

15,035,035 12,712,633 27,888,660 55,636,329

15,410,911 12,712,633 27,888,660 56,012,205

15,796,184 12,712,633 26,938,803 55,447,621

16,191,089 12,712,633 25,903,460 54,807,182

16,595,866 12,712,633 24,774,935 54,083,434

17,010,763 12,712,633 23,544,843 53,268,239

(201,417) 879,008

2,307,150

3,338,851

4,386,856

16,824,730

18,623,904

20,464,238

22,786,068

24,851,600

13 2021

14 2022

15 2023

16 2024

17 2025

18 2026

19 2027

20 2028

11 2019 2.5%

4 2012

17,389,125 47,632,474 65,021,599 7,802,592 57,219,007

2.5% 13,621,000 12,712,633 27,888,660 54,222,293


3 2011

12 2020

18,237,375 78,931,116 97,168,491 11,660,219 85,508,272

18,661,500 80,634,327 99,295,827 11,915,499 87,380,328

18,661,500 88,392,519 107,054,019 12,846,482 94,207,536

18,661,500 97,456,340 116,117,840 13,934,141 102,183,700

19,085,625 107,460,230 126,545,855 15,185,503 111,360,353

19,085,625 126,634,572 145,720,197 17,486,424 128,233,773

19,085,625 129,389,712 148,475,337 17,817,040 130,658,296

19,509,750 132,055,363 151,565,113 18,187,814 133,377,299

19,509,750 134,776,663 154,286,413 18,514,370 135,772,043

19,509,750 137,554,795 157,064,545 18,847,745 138,216,799


2.5% 17,436,032 12,712,633 22,204,043 52,352,708

17,871,932 12,712,633 20,742,571 51,327,137

18,318,731 12,712,633 19,149,566 50,180,930

18,776,699 12,712,633 17,413,191 48,902,524

19,246,116 12,712,633 15,520,543 47,479,292

19,727,269 12,712,633 13,457,555 45,897,458

20,220,451 12,712,633 11,208,899 44,141,984

20,725,962 12,712,633 8,757,864 42,196,460

21,244,111 12,712,633 6,086,236 40,042,981

21,775,214 12,712,633 3,174,161 37,662,009


33,155,564

36,053,191

44,026,606

53,281,176

63,881,060

82,336,315

86,516,313

91,180,839

95,729,062

100,554,790

12%




Annexes

Annex 5. Income Option 3


37


Parola 19,000

Jordan 19,000

Buenavista 19,000

TOTAL 57,000

Yearly 684,000 10,465,000 240,000 360,000 360,000 1,512,000 13,621,000

10,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 126,000 91,000 86,000 86,000 263,000


Parola 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

Jordan 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

Buenavista 15,000 2,000 2,000 19,000

TOTAL 45,000 6,000 6,000 57,000

RATE


Parola 3 5 6 4

Jordan 2 4 6 3

Buenavista 2 4 6 3

TOTAL 7 13 18 10

RATE 20,000 15,000 15,000 20,000


Parola 10,000 10,000 10,000

Jordan 5,000 10,000 10,000

Buenavista 5,000 10,000 10,000

TOTAL 20,000 30,000 30,000

RATE

TOTAL 240,000 360,000 360,000


Parola 2,000

Jordan 2,000

Buenavista 2,000

RATE

20,000 20,000 42,000

20,000 20,000 42,000

20,000 20,000 42,000

TOTAL 6,000 0 60,000 60,000 126,000

TOTAL 72,000 0 720,000 720,000 1,512,000


Parola Op‐3 70,325,000 136,860,000 2,100,000

TOTAL 107,025,000 243,349,000 4,800,000

PERIOD 25 30 15

ANNUAL 4,281,000 8,111,633 320,000 12,712,633

Jordan 10,200,000 45,889,000 1,500,000

Buenavista 26,500,000 60,600,000 1,200,000

TOTAL 540,000 72,000 72,000 684,000 TOTAL 1,820,000 2,535,000 3,510,000 2,600,000 10,465,000




Annexes



38

Details

Total 1 Specialty Building Structure a Terminal Area b Pier Arcade

400 sqm 1,590 sqm

10,600,000 27,825,000 38,425,000

570 sqm 570 sqm

15,105,000 15,105,000 30,210,000

Sub‐Total 2 Commercial Building Structure a Ground Floor (Shops/Flea Market) b Second Floor (Restaurant) Sub‐Total 3 Landscaping and Related Site Works a Ecopark lawn area including boardwalks b Ecopark Lagoon c Terminal Site d Commercial Site (Restaurant and Shops) Sub‐Total 4 Roads and Parking

5 Repair/Enhancement of Shore Protection a Pier side b PPA wharf side Sub‐Total 6 Equipment a Number of imported boarding ramps 7 Miscellaneous a Clearing, Grubbing, Demolition Total

5,329 1,047 811 452

sqm sqm sqm sqm

10,658,000 2,617,500 2,433,000 1,356,000 17,064,500

1,400 sqm

6,300,000

260 114

lm lm

20,800,000 9,120,000 29,920,000

7 units

2,100,000

1

1,500,000

lot


PAROLA OPTION 1


Annexes

125,519,500

Annex 7. Areas & Costs

Areas & Costs

39

Details

Total 1 Specialty Building Structure a Terminal Area b Pier Arcade c Coast Guard (Office)

488 sqm 1,460 sqm 200 sqm

12,932,000 25,550,000 4,700,000 43,182,000

552 sqm 1,416 sqm

9,660,000 37,524,000 47,184,000

4,300 1,000 202 354 138

sqm sqm sqm sqm sqm

8,600,000 2,500,000 606,000 1,062,000 414,000 13,182,000

1,220 sqm 1,300 sqm

5,490,000 5,850,000 11,340,000

Sub‐Total 2 Commercial Building Structure a Shops/Flea Market b Restaurant Sub‐Total 3 Landscaping and Related Site Works a Ecopark lawn area including boardwalks b Ecopark Lagoon c Terminal Site d Restaurant e Commercial Area (Flea Market site) Sub‐Total 4 Roads and Parking a Driveway b Parking Sub‐Total 5 Repair/Enhancement of Shore Protection a Pier side b PPA wharf side Sub‐Total 6 Equipment a Number of imported boarding ramps 7 Miscellaneous a Clearing, grubbing, demolition Total

370 116

lm lm

29,600,000 9,280,000 38,880,000

7 units

2,100,000

1

2,500,000

lot


PAROLA OPTION 2


Annexes

158,368,000


Areas & Costs (cont’d)

40

Details Total

1 Specialty Building Structure a Terminal Area b Pier Arcade (Piers 1 and 2) c Coast Guard (Office) Sub‐Total 2 Commercial Building Structure (Flea Market)

3 Landscaping and Related Site Works a Ecopark lawn area including boardwalks b Terminal and Restaurant Site Landscape c Driveway and Parking Landscape d Commercial Site Landscape Sub‐Total 4 Roads and Parking a Driveway b Parking Sub‐Total 5 Repair/Enhancement of Shore Protection a Pier side b PPA wharf side Sub‐Total 6 Land cut for additional harbor a Earthworks (20m depth, for big vessels) b Retaining structure and Shore Protection Sub‐Total 7 Equipment a Number of imported boarding ramps

Total

1,300 1,600 200

sqm sqm sqm

450

sqm

3,800 200 100 240

sqm sqm sqm sqm

7,600,000 600,000 300,000 720,000 9,220,000

800 600

sqm sqm

3,600,000 2,700,000 6,300,000

160 164

lm lm

12,800,000 13,120,000 25,920,000

cum lm

49,920,000 45,500,000 95,420,000

7 units

2,100,000

62,400 130

34,450,000 28,000,000 4,700,000 67,150,000 7,875,000


PAROLA OPTION 3


Annexes

213,985,000



41

Details

Total 1 Specialty Building Structure a Terminal Area b Pier Arcade

75 280

Sub‐Total 2 Commercial Building Structure 125 a Restaurant 3 Landscaping and Related Site Works (inclusive of fencing) a Terminal Area 115 b Pier Area 270 c Restaurant Area 55 d Parking 50 Sub‐Total

sqm sqm

1,987,500 4,900,000

6,887,500 sqm

3,312,500

sqm sqm sqm sqm

345,000 810,000 110,000 100,000 1,365,000

730

sqm

3,285,000

2,989 95

cum lm

2,989,000 33,250,000 36,239,000

6 Repair of existing shore protection 7 Equipment Number of boarding ramps (cable assisted a reaction systems)

30

lm

3,000,000

8 Miscellaneous a Railings b Signages c Chairs, fans, etc. for waiting area

1

4 Roads and Parking 5 Reclamation (dredging, sand piling) a Dredging, sand piling b Retaining structure and shore protection Sub‐Total

Total

5 units

lot

1,500,000


JORDAN


Annexes

2,000,000

57,589,000



42

Details

Total 1 Specialty Building Structure a Terminal Area b Stairway c Toilets d PNP Outpost e 1/F shops f 2/F Restaurant

120 30 40 190 200 420

sqm sqm sqm sqm sqm sqm

3,180,000 795,000 1,060,000 5,035,000 5,300,000 11,130,000 26,500,000

2 Pier Widening (including waiting sheds)

430 sqm

27,950,000

3 Roads and Parking a Parking

500 sqm

2,250,000

Sub‐Total

4 Shore Protection a Repair/enhancement of Existing b New Sub‐Total 5 Equipment a Number of imported boarding ramps

6 Miscellaneous a Railings b Signages c Chairs, fans, etc.

Total

80 105

lm lm

6,400,000 21,000,000 27,400,000

4 units

1,200,000

1

3,000,000

lot


BUENAVISTA


Annexes

88,300,000



43

METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals

Schedule of Loans & Interest 24 July, 2008 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES GUIMARAS PROVINCE (CASH)

LAND, ETC. 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 200,000,000

PAROLA (inclusive of Relocation Action Plan)

JORDAN BUENAVISTA TOTAL TERMINAL SYSTEM FINANCIAL PLAN Equity Debt TOTAL PROJECT COST LOAN TERMS Period (Years) Grace Period (Years) Principal Repayment (Years) Interest (per Year) Annual Amortization at year end

Annex 12. Loan

Loan

47% 53% 100%

20 5 15 9%

OPTION 1 200,000,000 221,408,500 421,408,500

OPTION 1 125,519,500 57,589,000 88,300,000 271,408,500

44% 56% 100%

OPTION 2 158,368,000 57,589,000 88,300,000 304,257,000 OPTION 2 200,000,000 254,257,000 454,257,000

OPTION 3 213,985,000 57,589,000 88,300,000 359,874,000

39% 61% 100%

OPTION 3 200,000,000 309,874,000 509,874,000



Annexes

44

Schedule of Loans & Interest 24 July, 2008 LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 1 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 1 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE

Annex 13. Loan

Loan (cont’d)

1 2 3 4 5 6 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 19,926,765 0 0 0 0 0 27,467,691 0 0 0 0 0 7,540,926 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 221,408,500 213,867,574

7 2015 213,867,574 19,248,082 27,467,691 8,219,609 205,647,964

8 2016 205,647,964 18,508,317 27,467,691 8,959,374 196,688,590

9 2017 196,688,590 17,701,973 27,467,691 9,765,718 186,922,872

10 2018 186,922,872 16,823,058 27,467,691 10,644,633 176,278,239

11 2019 176,278,239 15,865,042 27,467,691 11,602,650 164,675,590

17 2025 88,987,625 8,008,886 27,467,691 19,458,805 69,528,820

18 2026 69,528,820 6,257,594 27,467,691 21,210,097 48,318,723

19 2027 48,318,723 4,348,685 27,467,691 23,119,006 25,199,717

20 2028 25,199,717 2,267,974 27,467,691 25,199,717 0

12 2020 164,675,590 14,820,803 27,467,691 12,646,888 152,028,702

13 2021 152,028,702 13,682,583 27,467,691 13,785,108 138,243,594

14 2022 138,243,594 12,441,923 27,467,691 15,025,768 123,217,826

15 2023 123,217,826 11,089,604 27,467,691 16,378,087 106,839,739

16 2024 106,839,739 9,615,577 27,467,691 17,852,115 88,987,625




Annexes

45

Schedule of Loans & Interest 24 July, 2008 LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 2 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 2 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 3 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE LOAN SCHEDULE OPTION 3 BEGINNING LOAN BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL REPAYMENT ENDING BALANCE

1 2 3 4 5 6 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 22,883,130 22,883,130 22,883,130 22,883,130 22,883,130 22,883,130 0 0 0 0 0 31,542,839 0 0 0 0 0 8,659,709 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 254,257,000 245,597,291

7 2015 245,597,291 22,103,756 31,542,839 9,439,083 236,158,208

8 2016 236,158,208 21,254,239 31,542,839 10,288,601 225,869,607

9 2017 225,869,607 20,328,265 31,542,839 11,214,575 214,655,032

10 2018 214,655,032 19,318,953 31,542,839 12,223,886 202,431,146

11 2019 202,431,146 18,218,803 31,542,839 13,324,036 189,107,110

16 2024 122,690,645 11,042,158 31,542,839 20,500,681 102,189,964

17 2025 102,189,964 9,197,097 31,542,839 22,345,743 79,844,221

18 2026 79,844,221 7,185,980 31,542,839 24,356,859 55,487,361

19 2027 55,487,361 4,993,863 31,542,839 26,548,977 28,938,385

20 2028 28,938,385 2,604,455 31,542,839 28,938,385 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 27,888,660 27,888,660 27,888,660 27,888,660 27,888,660 27,888,660 0 0 0 0 0 38,442,622 0 0 0 0 0 10,553,962 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 309,874,000 299,320,038

7 2015 299,320,038 26,938,803 38,442,622 11,503,819 287,816,219

8 2016 287,816,219 25,903,460 38,442,622 12,539,162 275,277,057

9 2017 275,277,057 24,774,935 38,442,622 13,667,687 261,609,369

10 2018 261,609,369 23,544,843 38,442,622 14,897,779 246,711,590

11 2019 246,711,590 22,204,043 38,442,622 16,238,579 230,473,011

17 2025 124,543,327 11,208,899 38,442,622 27,233,723 97,309,605

18 2026 97,309,605 8,757,864 38,442,622 29,684,758 67,624,847

19 2027 67,624,847 6,086,236 38,442,622 32,356,386 35,268,461

20 2028 35,268,461 3,174,161 38,442,622 35,268,461 0

12 2020 189,107,110 17,019,640 31,542,839 14,523,199 174,583,910

12 2020 230,473,011 20,742,571 38,442,622 17,700,051 212,772,960

13 2021 174,583,910 15,712,552 31,542,839 15,830,287 158,753,623

13 2021 212,772,960 19,149,566 38,442,622 19,293,056 193,479,904

14 2022 158,753,623 14,287,826 31,542,839 17,255,013 141,498,609

14 2022 193,479,904 17,413,191 38,442,622 21,029,431 172,450,474

15 2023 141,498,609 12,734,875 31,542,839 18,807,964 122,690,645

15 2023 172,450,474 15,520,543 38,442,622 22,922,080 149,528,394

16 2024 149,528,394 13,457,555 38,442,622 24,985,067 124,543,327




Annexes

Annex 14. Loan

Loan (cont’d)

46

METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals ASSUMPTIONS Land Appraisal COA Floor

6,000 4% Domestic COMMUTER TRAFFIC* Daily Yearly Buenavista 4,800 1,728,000 Jordan 6,870 2,473,200 TOTAL 11,670 4,201,200 * Source: Buenavista/Jordan Boat Operators Association

Tourist Daily Yearly

139

50,000

PAROLA OPTION 1 Restaurants Flea Market Total on Lease

Land Area 1,022 570

Bldg Area 570 570

Lease Rate 750 500

Month 427,500 285,000 712,500

Year 5,130,000 3,420,000 8,550,000


Land Area 1,110 690

Bldg Area 1,040 450

Lease Rate 750 500

Month 780,000 225,000 1,005,000

Year 9,360,000 2,700,000 12,060,000

JORDAN Restaurants Flea Market Total on Lease

Land Area 180 0

Bldg Area 125 0

Lease Rate 750 500

Month 93,750 0 93,750

Year 1,125,000 0 1,125,000

BUENAVISTA Restaurants Flea Market Total on Lease

Land Area 420 200

Bldg Area 420 200

Lease Rate 750 500

Month 315,000 100,000 415,000

Year 3,780,000 1,200,000 4,980,000


Land Area 1,770 690

Bldg Area 1,416 552

Lease Rate 750 500

Month 1,062,000 276,000 1,338,000

Year 12,744,000 3,312,000 16,056,000



Annexes

Annex 15. Revenue Sources

Revenue Sources

47

METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals TOTAL AREA LEASED Restaurants Flea Market

Parola Op‐1 570 570

Jordan 125 0

Buenav 420 200

BUILDING LEASE INCOME Restaurants, etc. Flea Market Gross Monthly Income Gross Annual Lease Income

Parola Op‐1 427,500 285,000 712,500 8,550,000

Jordan 93,750 0 93,750 1,125,000

Buenav 315,000 0 315,000 3,780,000

TOTAL AREA LEASED Restaurants Flea Market

Parola Op‐2 1,416 552

Jordan 125 0

Buenav 420 200


Parola Op‐2 1,062,000 276,000 1,338,000 16,056,000

Jordan 93,750 0 93,750 1,125,000

Buenav 315,000 100,000 415,000 3,780,000

TOTAL AREA LEASED Restaurants Flea Market

Parola Op‐3 1,040 450

Jordan 125 0

Buenav 420 200


Parola Op‐3 780,000 225,000 1,005,000 12,060,000

Jordan 93,750 0 93,750 1,125,000

Buenav 315,000 0 315,000 3,780,000



Annexes

Total System 1,188,750 225,000 1,413,750 16,965,000

Annex 16.Revenue Sources

Revenue Sources (cont’d)

48

METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals Projected Commuter & Tourist Traffic, 5‐Year Periods BASE YEAR COMPUTATION COMMUTER TRAFFIC* Daily Buenavista 4,800 Jordan 6,870 TOTAL 11,670 * Source: Buenavista/Jordan Boat Operators Association Year Passenger Type Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic Average Fares Annual Fare Increase vs Base Year One Way Fare Total Fares Generation

Yearly 1,728,000 2,473,200 4,201,200

2008 Commuter Tourism 4,201,200 50,000

12.59

2009 Commuter Tourism

7.50




3.0% 4,327,236 12,020

15.0% 57,500 160

3.2% 4,465,708 12,405

20.0% 69,000 192

2.8% 4,590,747 12,752

25.0% 86,250 240

2.5% 4,705,516 13,071

25.0% 107,813 299

2.5% 4,823,154 13,398

20.0% 129,375 359

5%

100% 40.00 2,300,000

5%

0% 40.00 2,760,000

5%

10% 44.00 3,795,000

5%

0% 44.00 4,743,750

5% 16.07 77,492,223

10% 48.40 6,261,750

20.00 13.22 57,197,939

Terminal Fee (Passenger Cost) Total Terminal Fee


20.00

13.88 61,979,687

14.57 66,900,874

15.30 72,002,066

32,454,270 1,150,000 33,492,807 1,380,000 34,430,605 1,725,000 35,291,370 2,156,250 36,173,655 2,587,500 33,604,270 34,872,807 36,155,605 37,447,620 38,761,155






Year Passenger Type Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic Average Fares Annual Fare Increase vs Base Year One Way Fare Total Fares Generation

5% 20.08 60.50 98,802,585 8,375,091


46,121,410 3,460,781 47,043,838 3,633,820 47,984,715 3,742,835 48,944,409 3,855,120 49,923,297 3,970,774 49,582,191 50,677,658 51,727,550 52,799,529 53,894,071

2.0% 7.0% 2.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4,919,617 138,431 5,018,009 145,353 5,118,370 149,713 5,220,737 154,205 5,325,152 158,831 13,666 385 13,939 404 14,218 416 14,502 428 14,792 441 5%

5% 25.10 125,973,296

5% 75.63 10,992,306

5% 31.38 160,615,952

5% 94.53 14,152,595

5% 39.23 204,785,339

5% 118.16 18,221,465

5% 49.03 261,101,307



Annexes

5% 147.71 23,460,137

Annex 17.Option 1 Terminal Fees

Parola Option 1 Terminal Fees

49







5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 61.29 184.63 76.61 230.79 95.77 288.49 119.71 360.61 149.63 450.76 301,521,561 25,558,748 384,439,990 33,545,857 528,604,986 43,190,291 726,831,855 62,086,043 999,393,801 89,248,687


56,083,634 4,152,938 57,205,307 4,360,584 62,925,837 4,491,402 69,218,421 5,165,112 76,140,263 5,939,879 60,236,572 61,565,891 67,417,239 74,383,533 82,080,142

2.0% 4,919,617 13,666

7.0% 138,431 385

2.0% 5,018,009 13,939

5.0% 145,353 404

2.0% 5,519,810 15,333

3.0% 149,713 416

2.0% 6,071,791 16,866

3.0% 172,170 478

2.0% 6,678,970 18,553

3.0% 197,996 550

5%







2.0% 6,812,550 18,924

7.0% 211,856 588

2.0% 6,948,801 19,302

5.0% 222,448 618

2.0% 7,087,777 19,688

3.0% 229,122 636

2.0% 7,229,532 20,082

3.0% 235,996 656

2.0% 7,374,123 20,484

3.0% 243,075 675

5% 187.04 1,274,227,097

5% 563.45 119,370,119

5% 233.80 1,624,639,548

5% 704.31 156,673,281

5% 292.25 2,071,415,424

5% 880.39 201,716,850

5% 365.31 2,641,054,665

5% 1,100.49 259,710,444

5% 456.64 3,367,344,698

5% 1,375.61 334,377,197


89,414,717 7,414,949 91,203,011 7,785,696 93,027,072 8,019,267 94,887,613 8,259,845 96,785,365 8,507,641 96,829,666 98,988,708 101,046,339 103,147,459 105,293,006


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals Projected Commuter & Tourist Traffic, 5‐Year Periods


Annexes

Annex 18. Option 1 Terminal Fees

Parola Option 1 Terminal Fees (cont’d)

50


Yearly 1,728,000 2,473,200 4,201,200







3.0% 15.0% 3.2% 20.0% 2.8% 25.0% 2.5% 25.0% 2.5% 20.0% 4,327,236 57,500 4,465,708 69,000 4,590,747 86,250 4,705,516 107,813 4,823,154 129,375 12,020 160 12,405 192 12,752 240 13,071 299 13,398 359 12.59

20.00 5% 13.22 57,197,939


9.00

100% 40.00 2,300,000

5% 13.88 61,979,687

0% 40.00 2,760,000

5% 14.57 66,900,874

10% 44.00 3,795,000

5% 15.30 72,002,066

0% 44.00 4,743,750

5% 16.07 77,492,223

10% 48.40 6,261,750

20.00 38,945,124 1,150,000 40,191,368 1,380,000 41,316,726 1,725,000 42,349,644 2,156,250 43,408,386 2,587,500 40,095,124 41,571,368 43,041,726 44,505,894 45,995,886


5% 20.08 60.50 98,802,585 8,375,091


55,345,692 3,460,781 56,452,605 3,633,820 57,581,658 3,742,835 58,733,291 3,855,120 59,907,956 3,970,774 58,806,473 60,086,426 61,324,492 62,588,411 63,878,730






2.0% 7.0% 2.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4,919,617 138,431 5,018,009 145,353 5,118,370 149,713 5,220,737 154,205 5,325,152 158,831 13,666 385 13,939 404 14,218 416 14,502 428 14,792 441 5%

5% 25.10 125,973,296

5% 75.63 10,992,306

5% 31.38 160,615,952

5% 94.53 14,152,595

5% 39.23 204,785,339

5% 118.16 18,221,465

5% 49.03 261,101,307



Annexes

5% 147.71 23,460,137



51







5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 61.29 184.63 76.61 230.79 95.77 288.49 119.71 360.61 149.63 450.76 301,521,561 25,558,748 384,439,990 33,545,857 528,604,986 43,190,291 726,831,855 62,086,043 999,393,801 89,248,687


67,300,361 4,152,938 68,646,368 4,360,584 75,511,005 4,491,402 83,062,105 5,165,112 91,368,316 5,939,879 71,453,298 73,006,953 80,002,407 88,227,218 97,308,195

2.0% 4,919,617 13,666

7.0% 138,431 385

2.0% 5,018,009 13,939

5.0% 145,353 404

2.0% 5,519,810 15,333

3.0% 149,713 416

2.0% 6,071,791 16,866

3.0% 172,170 478

2.0% 6,678,970 18,553

3.0% 197,996 550

5%







2.0% 6,812,550 18,924

7.0% 211,856 588

2.0% 6,948,801 19,302

5.0% 222,448 618

2.0% 7,087,777 19,688

3.0% 229,122 636

2.0% 7,229,532 20,082

3.0% 235,996 656

2.0% 7,374,123 20,484

3.0% 243,075 675

5% 187.04 1,274,227,097

5% 563.45 119,370,119

5% 233.80 1,624,639,548

5% 704.31 156,673,281

5% 292.25 2,071,415,424

5% 880.39 201,716,850

5% 365.31 2,641,054,665

5% 1,100.49 259,710,444

5% 456.64 3,367,344,698

5% 1,375.61 334,377,197


107,297,661 7,414,949 109,443,614 7,785,696 111,632,486 8,019,267 113,865,136 8,259,845 116,142,439 8,507,641 114,712,610 117,229,310 119,651,753 122,124,981 124,650,079




Annexes



52


Yearly 1,728,000 2,473,200 4,201,200


12.59


10.00




3.0% 4,327,236 12,020

15.0% 57,500 160

3.2% 4,465,708 12,405

20.0% 69,000 192

2.8% 4,590,747 12,752

25.0% 86,250 240

2.5% 4,705,516 13,071

25.0% 107,813 299

2.5% 4,823,154 13,398

20.0% 129,375 359

5%

100% 40.00 2,300,000

5%

0% 40.00 2,760,000

5%

10% 44.00 3,795,000

5%

0% 44.00 4,743,750

5% 16.07 77,492,223

10% 48.40 6,261,750

20.00 13.22 57,197,939



20.00

13.88 61,979,687

14.57 66,900,874

15.30 72,002,066

43,272,360 1,150,000 44,657,076 1,380,000 45,907,474 1,725,000 47,055,160 2,156,250 48,231,539 2,587,500 44,422,360 46,037,076 47,632,474 49,211,410 50,819,039







5% 20.08 60.50 98,802,585 8,375,091


61,495,213 3,460,781 62,725,117 3,633,820 63,979,619 3,742,835 65,259,212 3,855,120 66,564,396 3,970,774 64,955,994 66,358,937 67,722,454 69,114,332 70,535,170

2.0% 7.0% 2.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4,919,617 138,431 5,018,009 145,353 5,118,370 149,713 5,220,737 154,205 5,325,152 158,831 13,666 385 13,939 404 14,218 416 14,502 428 14,792 441 5%

5% 25.10 125,973,296

5% 75.63 10,992,306

5% 31.38 160,615,952

5% 94.53 14,152,595

5% 39.23 204,785,339

5% 118.16 18,221,465

5% 49.03 261,101,307



Annexes

5% 147.71 23,460,137



53







5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 61.29 184.63 76.61 230.79 95.77 288.49 119.71 360.61 149.63 450.76 301,521,561 25,558,748 384,439,990 33,545,857 528,604,986 43,190,291 726,831,855 62,086,043 999,393,801 89,248,687


74,778,179 4,152,938 76,273,742 4,360,584 83,901,117 4,491,402 92,291,228 5,165,112 101,520,351 5,939,879 78,931,116 80,634,327 88,392,519 97,456,340 107,460,230

2.0% 4,919,617 13,666

7.0% 138,431 385

2.0% 5,018,009 13,939

5.0% 145,353 404

2.0% 5,519,810 15,333

3.0% 149,713 416

2.0% 6,071,791 16,866

3.0% 172,170 478

2.0% 6,678,970 18,553

3.0% 197,996 550

5%







2.0% 6,812,550 18,924

7.0% 211,856 588

2.0% 6,948,801 19,302

5.0% 222,448 618

2.0% 7,087,777 19,688

3.0% 229,122 636

2.0% 7,229,532 20,082

3.0% 235,996 656

2.0% 7,374,123 20,484

3.0% 243,075 675

5% 187.04 1,274,227,097

5% 563.45 119,370,119

5% 233.80 1,624,639,548

5% 704.31 156,673,281

5% 292.25 2,071,415,424

5% 880.39 201,716,850

5% 365.31 2,641,054,665

5% 1,100.49 259,710,444

5% 456.64 3,367,344,698

5% 1,375.61 334,377,197


119,219,623 7,414,949 121,604,015 7,785,696 124,036,096 8,019,267 126,516,818 8,259,845 129,047,154 8,507,641 126,634,572 129,389,712 132,055,363 134,776,663 137,554,795




Annexes



54

METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals CARRYING CAPACITY ASSUMPTIONS COMMUTER TRAFFIC* Daily Yearly Buenavista 4,800 1,728,000 Jordan 6,870 2,473,200 TOTAL 11,670 4,201,200 * Source: Buenavista/Jordan Boat Operators Association

CARRYING CAPACITY PAROLA Jordan Buenavista TOTAL Minutes per Boat Docking Bays

ANNUAL ‐ TOTAL COMMUTERS ARRIVAL DEPARTURE SUB‐TOTAL Commuter Tourist Commuter Tourist Commuter Tourist

DAILY ‐ TOTAL COMMUTERS PER DAY(360 days) LOAD Commuter Tourist Commuter Tourist

1,236,600 25,000 864,000 ‐ 2,100,600 25,000

6,870 4,800 11,670

JORDAN Minutes per Boat Docking Bays

1,236,600 25,000

BUENAVISTA Minutes per Boat Docking Bays

864,000 ‐

1,236,600 864,000 2,100,600

1,236,600

864,000

25,000 ‐ 25,000

25,000

‐

2,473,200 1,728,000 4,201,200

2,473,200

1,728,000

50,000 ‐ 50,000

50,000

‐

6,870

4,800

139 0 139

139

0

50 50

50

50

80 80 160

80

80

DAILY ‐ NUMBER OF BOATS BOAT TRIPS / DAY PEAK HOURS DOCKING BAYS Commuter Tourist ARRIVAL DEPARTURE 137 96 233

137

96

2 0 2 7

23 16 39 2 11

23 16 39 2 11

5

23 3 13

23 3 13

4

16 4 15

16 4 15

2

0



Annexes

Annex 23. Carrying Capacity

Carrying Capacity

55

Year Passenger Type Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic Catchment Potential Average purchase


15% 100.00

20% 100.00

Total Annual Sales Gross Operating Profit % Gross Operating Profit Loan Retirement Amount Available for Amortization Match Amortization to Available GOP Loan Terms Equity of Project Cost Total Project Cost Potential Year Passenger Type

Interest

Years Pay

12% 40%

10

2014‐2018 Commuter Tourism


2010 Tourism Commuter


3.0% 4,327,236 12,020

15.0% 57,500 160

3.2% 4,465,708 12,405

20.0% 2.8% 69,000 4,590,747 192 12,752

25.0% 86,250 240

2.5% 4,705,516 13,071

25.0% 107,813 299

2.5% 4,823,154 13,398

20.0% 129,375 359

649,085 64,908,540

11,500 1,150,000

669,856 66,985,613

13,800 688,612 1,380,000 68,861,210

17,250 1,725,000

705,827 70,582,741

21,563 2,156,250

723,473 72,347,309

25,875 2,587,500


66,058,540 40% 26,423,416 20% 5,284,683

68,365,613 40% 27,346,245 20% 5,469,249

70,586,210 40% 28,234,484 20% 5,646,897

72,738,991 40% 29,095,596 20% 5,819,119

74,934,809 40% 29,973,924 20% 5,994,785

(2,654,762) 15,000,000 10,000,000 25,000,000

(2,831,747) 16,000,000 10,666,667 26,666,667

(2,920,239) 16,500,000 11,000,000 27,500,000

(3,008,731) 17,000,000 11,333,333 28,333,333

(3,185,715) 18,000,000 12,000,000 30,000,000



2.0% 5,836,016 16,211

2.0% 6,419,618 17,832


Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic

2.0% 5,305,469 14,737

Catchment Potential Average purchase

795,820 34,931 875,402 43,664 962,943 50,214 1,059,237 57,746 79,582,040 3,493,125 87,540,244 4,366,406 96,294,269 5,021,367 105,923,695 5,774,572

7.0% 174,656 485


5.0% 218,320 606

3.0% 2.0% 251,068 7,061,580 697 19,615

3.0% 288,729 802

Total Annual Sales Gross Operating Profit % Gross Operating Profit Loan Retirement Amount Available for Amortization

83,075,165 40% 33,230,066 6,646,013

7,352,532

8,105,251

8,935,861

Match Amortization to Available GOP Loan Terms Equity of Project Cost Total Project Cost Potential

(3,539,683) 20,000,000 13,333,333 33,333,333

(3,982,144) 22,500,000 15,000,000 37,500,000

(4,424,604) 25,000,000 16,666,667 41,666,667

(4,867,065) 27,500,000 18,333,333 45,833,333

101,315,636 40% 40,526,254

91,906,650 40% 36,762,660 20%

111,698,268 40% 44,679,307 20%

20%


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL PAROLA ECO‐PORT PROJECT Projected Commuter & Tourist Traffic, 5‐Year Periods Private Sector


Annexes

20%

Annex 24. Private Sector

Private Sector

56

Year Passenger Type Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic Total Number of Boats Passengers per Boat per Day Load per Trip Trips per Boat Daily Total Boat Trips per Day Average Fares Annual Fare Increase vs Base Year One Way Fare Total Fares Generation

2008 Base Year Commuter Tourism 4,201,200 50,000

100

12.59

Terminal Fee (Passenger Cost) Total Terminal Fee Annual Gross Revenue per Boat Daily Gross Revenue per Boat (360 days)

571,979 1,589 2015 Commuter 2.5% 5,067,326 14,076 100 141 50 2.8 282


2011 Commuter

Tourism




3.0% 15.0% 3.2% 20.0% 2.8% 25.0% 2.5% 25.0% 2.5% 20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 4,327,236 50,000 4,465,708 60,000 4,590,747 75,000 4,705,516 93,750 4,823,154 112,500 4,943,733 135,000 12,020 139 12,405 167 12,752 208 13,071 260 13,398 313 13,733 375 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 2 100 2 100 2 120 139 124 167 128 208 131 130 134 156 137 188 50 80 50 80 50 80 50 80 50 80 50 80 2.4 1.7 2.5 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.6 1.6 2.7 2.0 2.7 2.3 240 2 248 2 255 3 261 3 268 4 275 5 20.00 5% 100% 5% 0% 5% 10% 5% 0% 5% 10% 5% 10% 13.22 40.00 13.88 40.00 14.57 44.00 15.30 44.00 16.07 48.40 16.87 53.24 57,197,939 2,000,000 61,979,687 2,400,000 66,900,874 3,300,000 72,002,066 4,125,000 77,492,223 5,445,000 83,401,006 7,187,400

Annual Gross Revenue per Boat Daily Gross Revenue per Boat (360 days) Year Passenger Type Base Year Data Assumed Annual % Growth Rate Annual Commuter Traffic Daily Commuter Traffic Total Number of Boats Passengers per Boat per Day Load per Trip Trips per Boat Daily Total Boat Trips per Day Average Fares Annual Fare Increase vs Base Year One Way Fare Total Fares Generation


Tourism

2016 Commuter

2,000,000 5,556

Tourism

619,797 1,722 2017 Commuter

2,400,000 6,667

Tourism

669,009 1,858 2018 Commuter

3,300,000 9,167

Tourism

20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 162,000 5,194,009 194,400 5,323,860 233,280 5,456,956 279,936 450 14,428 540 14,788 648 15,158 778 2 100 2 100 2 100 2 225 144 270 148 324 152 389 80 50 80 50 80 50 80 2.8 2.9 3.4 3.0 4.1 3.0 4.9 6 289 7 296 8 303 10

5% 10% 5% 17.71 58.56 18.60 89,760,332 9,487,368 96,604,558

10% 64.42 ########

720,021 2,000 2019 Commuter

2,062,500 5,729

Tourism

774,922 2,153 2020 Commuter

2,722,500 7,563

Tourism

834,010 2,317

3,593,700 9,983


2.5% 20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 2.5% 20.0% 5,593,380 335,923 5,733,214 403,108 5,876,545 483,729 15,537 933 15,926 1,120 16,324 1,344 100 2 100 2 100 2 155 467 159 560 163 672 50 80 50 80 50 80 3.1 5.8 3.2 7.0 3.3 8.4 311 12 319 14 326 17


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals Projected Commuter & Tourist Traffic, 5‐Year Periods Boat Operators


Annexes

5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 19.53 70.86 20.51 77.95 21.53 85.74 22.61 94.32 23.74 103.75 ######### ######### 111,898,417 21,820,643 120,430,672 28,803,249 129,613,511 38,020,288 139,496,541 50,186,780

38,004,946 3,240,000 38,955,070 3,888,000 39,928,946 4,665,600 40,927,170 5,598,720 41,950,349 6,718,464 42,999,108 8,062,157 44,074,086 9,674,588 53,748,674 ########## ########## ########## ########## # ########## # ########## # 897,603 4,743,684 2,493 13,177

966,046 2,683

6,261,663 17,394

1,039,707 2,888

8,265,395 22,959

1,118,984 3,108

10,910,321 30,306

1,204,307 3,345

14,401,624 40,005

1,296,135 3,600

19,010,144 52,806

1,394,965 3,875

25,093,390 69,704

Annex 25. Boat Operators

Boat Operators

57

Year 2022 Passenger Type Commuter Base Year Data Assumed Annual % 2.5% Annual Commuter Tr 6,023,458 Daily Commuter Traf 16,732 Total Number of Boa 100 Passengers per Boat 167 Load per Trip 50 Trips per Boat Daily 3.3 Total Boat Trips per D 335 Average Fares Annual Fare Increase 5% One Way Fare 24.92 Total Fares Generatio 150,133,152

2027

2028

Tourism

2023 Commuter

Tourism

2024 Commuter

Tourism

2025 Commuter

Tourism

2026 Commuter

Tourism

Commuter

Tourism

Commuter

Tourism

20.0% 580,475 1,612 2 806 80 10.1 20

2.5% 6,174,045 17,150 100 172 50 3.4 343

20.0% 696,570 1,935 2 967 80 12.1 24

2.5% 6,328,396 17,579 100 176 50 3.5 352

20.0% 835,884 2,322 2 1,161 80 14.5 29

2.5% 6,486,606 18,018 100 180 50 3.6 360

20.0% 1,003,061 2,786 2 1,393 80 17.4 35

2.5% 6,648,771 18,469 100 185 50 3.7 369

20.0% 1,203,674 3,344 2 1,672 80 20.9 42

2.5% 6,814,990 18,931 100 189 50 3.8 379

20.0% 1,444,408 4,012 2 2,006 80 25.1 50

2.5% 6,985,365 19,404 100 194 50 3.9 388

20.0% 1,733,290 4,815 2 2,407 80 30.1 60

10%

5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 5% 10% 114.12 26.17 125.54 27.48 138.09 28.85 151.90 30.30 167.09 31.81 183.80 33.40 202.18 66,246,550 161,580,805 87,445,446 173,901,341 115,427,988 187,161,318 152,364,945 201,432,369 201,121,727 216,791,587 265,480,680 233,321,946 350,434,497

Terminal Fee (Passen 45,175,938 11,609,506 46,305,336 13,931,407 47,462,970 16,717,688 48,649,544 20,061,226 49,865,782 24,073,471 51,112,427 28,888,165 52,390,238 34,665,799 80,000,592 87,056,036 Total Terminal Fee 56,785,444 60,236,743 64,180,658 68,710,770 73,939,254 Annual Gross Revenu Daily Gross Revenue

1,501,332 4,170

33,123,275 92,009

1,615,808 4,488

Annex 26. Boat Operators

Boat Operators (cont’d)

43,722,723 121,452

1,739,013 4,831

57,713,994 160,317

1,871,613 5,199

76,182,472 211,618

2,014,324 5,595

100,560,864 279,336

2,167,916 6,022

132,740,340 368,723

2,333,219 6,481

175,217,249 486,715


METRO ILOILO ‐ GUIMARAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL MIG Commuter Ferry Terminals Projected Commuter & Tourist Traffic, 5‐Y Boat Operators


Annexes

58

CDIA-MIG Team

Team Leader: DR. NATHANIEL VON EINSIEDEL PRE‐FEASIBILITY Sub‐Team Leader: MR. LEON MAYO Investment Planning Specialist: MR. ELPIDIO DAMASO Costing Engineer: MS. MIRIAM TAMAYO Architectural Designer: MS. DEANNA SANTOS MR. NICASIO ESPINA MR. JULIUS GARRIDO MS. JAYCEE GOPEZ MR. WILFREDO SY INVESTMENT PLANNING Sub‐Team Leader: MR. JOSE ANTONIO LEAGUE Business Development MS. ELIRINE SIWA Specialist: CAPACITY BUILDING Sub‐Team Leader: MS. VICTORIA DE VILLA Local Development Specialist: MS. RASHEL PARDO LOCAL COUNTERPART Business Development Advisor: MR. ANGEL DE LEON

Pre-feasibility Study of the Guimaras-Iloilo Ferry Terminals System Project

Recommend Documents