1 · How close are FY2027 FMR projects to mapped cropland and existing roads?
Compare each FY2027 FMR’s printed endpoints with the DPWH classified road network and ESA WorldCover 2021 annual-cropland areas. For each layer, distance is measured to the nearer printed endpoint. Baseline: the nearer endpoint is within 500 m of a DPWH national-road centerline and within 50 m of mapped cropland. Flag: only one threshold is met. Double Flag: both thresholds are exceeded. Exact distances remain available; unresolved coverage stays separate. The wider road tolerance allows for endpoint and centerline positional uncertainty; it does not show a road-boundary overlap or verify access. These are proximity screens using dated mapped cropland, not verified FMR alignments or present farm locations. Exemption cues are recorded separately and do not change endpoint classifications. A source-coordinate segment within 50 m of a classified road is marked as a possible loop/shortcut and exempted from endpoint-only gap flags; this is not a Google driving route or verified access.
Loading the mapped-cropland coverage report…
ESA WorldCover 2021 · CC BY 4.0 · Download crop coverage and calculation summary. © ESA WorldCover project 2021 / Contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data (2021) processed by ESA WorldCover consortium.
FMR proximity to mapped cropland and roads
All projects are counted once. Cropland is ESA WorldCover class 40 at 10 m resolution for 2021; it can miss tree crops, small plots and later land-use changes. “Double Flag” means distant from these mapped layers, not proof that a road lacks a farm purpose.
Road and crop cells use the same distance colors. The final cell combines both colors; two red readings produce dark red. Road and crop distances each use the nearer source endpoint and may refer to different ends.
Review · road × cropland distance pairs
Two distance bands for each of two links allow four possible pairs. The Review projects fall into the observed pairs below; choose a pair in the result filter to inspect its projects.
FMR endpoint distance to the DPWH classified road network
Road-only distance counts use the 500 m DPWH-centerline cutoff and are shown below the combined screen.
FMR endpoint distance to mapped annual cropland · 2021
Coverage limit: the local ArcGIS layer represents the DPWH national-road network. For this calculation, unpaved roads are treated as not roads; only roads represented in the classified DPWH layer count. It does not include every local, barangay, farm, or private road, so “no nearby national road” does not mean “no road connection.”
Red coordinate flag: rows with printed endpoints more than 20 km apart are shaded red, and all spatial matching plus Route + distance is suppressed until the coordinates are checked. The separation is a straight-line screening distance, not a road distance.
Exemptions and review flags; all project rows remain listed. Green entries are positive exemptions. Amber Baywalk/ecological entries are negative review flags, not exemptions or findings of harm. Green rows have a separate exemption reason: source route within 50 m of a DPWH classified road while both endpoints are over 1 km away; within 500 m of a mapped school, health/medical, emergency-response or civic/community service; within 100 m of at least two mapped subdivision/village footprints; or within 100 m of more than two mapped visitor venues. One subdivision/village alone does not qualify. Facility and venue points come from OpenStreetMap; proximity does not prove project service or usable access. Every FMR title containing “Baywalk” receives a precautionary ecological review flag for shoreline baseline, habitat, coastal processes, storm-surge design basis, alternatives and clearances; this title screen does not establish damage, motive or protective necessity. Projects without “Baywalk” in the title can receive the same review through a manual red flag.
| FMR project | Endpoint gap (km) | Region | Prioritized road connection / DPWH comparison | Mapped unpaved-road link | Start (m) | End (m) | Mapped cropland (m) | Screen | Exemption / review reason | HGAB allocation |
|---|
Loading FMR project rows…
Sources: FY2027 HGAB FMR source page; archived DPWH Road Classification · National Road Network layer (Primary/Secondary/Tertiary) · offline DPWH shapefiles. Download screening rows · .
Mapped unpaved-road indicator: Offline OpenStreetMap tracks and roads tagged with an unpaved surface are compared with the printed source route. Within 30 m is marked likely connected; 31–100 m is nearby only. Missing mapped roads do not prove no unpaved road exists. When a likely unpaved connection is mapped and no DPWH connection is mapped, the unpaved road is shown as the primary connection; the DPWH distance remains a comparison for the original screen, not a claimed connection.
2 · Remote roads, visitor venues and private properties
Use a 100 m buffer around the budgeted road alignment. Count current mapped resorts, hotels, guest houses, short-stay accommodation (including Airbnb-type venues), and event venues. Exclude residential rentals, government facilities, and public markets. A building footprint alone is not business evidence.
Place inventories are downloaded. Compare these records with the existing road data. City roads and DPWH national roads remain outside the remote-road screen. Municipality location is a provisional proxy; a nearby property is not yet an established road connection.
FMR routes matched to visitor venues
Loading coordinate-backed route matches…
Red coordinate flag: a row is shaded red when its printed start and end coordinates are more than 20 km apart. Road, cropland, facility, venue and property proximity analysis is suppressed until those coordinates are checked.
These matches use coordinate-backed FMR project routes. The road-project list below contains title and allocation records, but the integrated GAA road rows have no usable coordinates or alignments to match to venues. A route is a remote-area candidate only when both source endpoints fall inside DPWH municipality boundaries. The 100 m check uses a straight segment between printed coordinates; it is a proximity lead, not proof of the actual alignment or usable access.
Spatial exemptions: FY2027 rows display the same project-level exemption reasons as Section 1. For other coordinate-backed years, mapped public-service sites within 500 m of the source segment and more than two mapped visitor venues within 100 m qualify as positive exemptions; a single venue match is evidence only. A private-property cue is review evidence, never an exemption by itself. If source endpoints are more than 20 km apart, suppress the distance and all exemption calculations pending coordinate review.
Download matched FMR–venue rows (CSV) · Matched FMR–venue data (JSON)
| Year / source | FMR project route | Mapped venue | Location / type | Distance | Map | Exemption / review | Source evidence |
|---|
FMR routes near mapped private-property cues
Loading route–property proximity matches…
Distances use the mapped property footprint where a usable polygon exists, or the source point otherwise. Restricted-access tags and large footprints are review cues. Verify ownership and an actual entrance before identifying a road connection or beneficiary.
Route–property matches CSV · Route–property matches JSON
| Year / source | FMR project route | Mapped property cue | Location / type | Distance / basis | Map | Exemption / review | Source evidence |
|---|
Visitor venues, subdivisions and private-property evidence
Source place inventory
Loading downloaded place inventories…
Use the existing road alignments with a 100 m buffer to find nearby visitor venues, large residential buildings, residential estates and subdivisions. A mapped villa or large building does not establish its price. Estate/village wording can describe an entire development. Subdivision access needs entrance or road-intersection evidence; proximity alone remains a lead. These source rows have not yet been assigned to budget projects.
Visitor venues CSV · Visitor venues JSON · Schools and public-service sites CSV · Schools and public-service data manifest ↗ · Property / subdivision CSV · Property polygons JSON · Official tourism directory CSV · Unverified venue name cues
| Mapped place / property cue | Location | Source evidence | Mapped footprint / area | Source record |
|---|
© OpenStreetMap contributors · ODbL. Source locations can be node coordinates or bounding-box centers; property polygons are retained where recovered. Public markets, mapped government facilities and closed-use tags are screened out. Personal owner names, contact details and full street addresses are omitted.
Method and limits
- FY2027 HGAB 3rd FMR schedule: 964 project rows, with printed start/end coordinate pairs for route distance screening.
- The road comparator is DPWH’s National Road Network layer, including its Primary, Secondary and Tertiary functional classes. These are classes within the national network, not a separate local-road inventory.
- Distances compare printed route legs with DPWH road centerlines in UTM zone 51N, with both endpoint distances retained for review. A route within 50 m is a possible loop/shortcut connection, not a Google driving route or proof of accessible connection.
- Cropland distances use 2021 ESA WorldCover class 40 pixels around both printed endpoints. Green areas are mapped annual crops, not cadastral parcels. Tree crops and recent land-use changes may be missed. Mapped-cropland proximity uses a 50 m classification cutoff; exact measured distances remain available for inspection.
- For venue review, coordinate-backed DA FMR records are compared with classified visitor venues using a 100 m straight-segment buffer. Route location, operating status and actual access need confirmation.
- Municipality endpoints are a provisional remote-area proxy. City and unresolved routes are not included in the remote venue matches.