Preserving cultural history amid urban growth

Metro Manila’s urban identity is often associated with its density, skyline, and the relentless churn of new developments. Within this region, the City of Manila, as one of the most populous urban areas in the world, is a bustling hub of trade and commerce, but one inarguably possessed of an old-world soul.

Based on numbers alone, from the data gathered by the City of Manila, the district of Sta. Ana has the most heritage sites in the country with 88, followed by the districts of San Nicolas and Malate with 78 and 55, respectively.

Under the Philippine Registry of Heritage, formerly known as the Philippine Registry of Cultural Property or PRECUP, cultural properties are categorized into several types based on how they are recognized and declared.

Cultural properties included in this registry fall under several formal classifications, each carrying distinct legal protections and historical significance, as determined by national and local cultural agencies.

At the highest level of designation are National Cultural Treasures, which are unique cultural properties found within the Philippines that possess outstanding historical, cultural, artistic, or scientific value. Also of national importance are Important Cultural Properties, which refer to cultural properties recognized for their exceptional cultural, artistic, and historical significance to the country.

Under the purview of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines are additional heritage classifications, including National Historical Shrines, which are hallowed sites revered for their deep historical and often sacred associations; National Historical Landmarks, which are places or structures directly associated with significant historical events or achievements; and National Historical Monuments, which are physical commemorations of important historical figures or moments.

At the international level, UNESCO World Heritage Sites are cultural or natural properties located in the Philippines that have been inscribed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization for their outstanding universal value to humanity.

Apart from formally declared properties, the law also recognizes a broader group known as Presumed Important Cultural Properties. These are cultural assets that have not been officially declared under any of the above categories but possess the essential characteristics of an Important Cultural Property.

Finally, there are Local Important Cultural Properties, which are identified and declared by local government units through their respective Sanggunian via ordinance, executive order, or resolution. These are properties of specific cultural, historical, or symbolic value to the local communities in which they are located, and their recognition plays a crucial role in strengthening local heritage protection and awareness.

Together, these classifications aim to preserve the Philippines’ rich and diverse cultural legacy, ensuring that historical memory and artistic achievement remain embedded within both national consciousness and local identity.

And Manila, a city older than the country itself, plays host to many of them.

Preservation as progress

The Philippines has a robust legal framework for cultural preservation. Republic Act 10066, or the National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009, mandates protection for structures at least 50 years old and classifies them as Important Cultural Properties (ICPs) or Heritage Houses.

Updates to this law, including RA 11961 passed in 2023, introduced a three-tier classification system for cultural properties, allowing tailored conservation standards for Grades I to III.

Despite this, legal protection often lacks teeth. There have been plenty of reports over the years that have pointed out the law’s weak enforcement towards the preservation of Manila’s cultural heritage. Property owners frequently alter or demolish historically significant buildings without proper permits or oversight, such as the Sta. Cruz building in Escolta that was demolished surreptitiously amid the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021, or the demolition of the Sanchez House on Bilibid Viejo Street in Quiapo.

Such events have been the source of countless controversies about Philippine heritage, and yet what’s often missing from the debate is this: heritage need not be an obstacle to urban development. In fact, it can be a catalyst for sustainable growth.

A recent Asia-Pacific study using Manila as a case study found that integrating heritage into urban planning can boost local tourism, community resilience, and economic diversity.

The study, titled “Sustainable Cities in Developing Countries: A Case of Balancing Cultural Heritage Preservation and Tourism in Manila, Philippines” and published in the Asia-Pacific Social Science Review, found that cities that balance conservation with modernization like Kyoto, George Town, or Singapore’s Chinatown demonstrate that “a sustainable urban revitalization program can effectively promote a creative economy that can generate employment opportunities and improve the existing economic conditions, especially for low-income citizens who are part of the city’s humanscape.”

In Manila, this is already happening in pockets. The Goldenberg Mansion in Malacañang complex, a Moorish-revival home built in the 1870s, was recently restored and reopened as a cultural center in 2023. Escolta’s First United Building has been repurposed into a creative hub for local entrepreneurs.

Grassroots movements are also gaining momentum. Organizations like Renacimiento Manila are spearheading public campaigns, walking tours, and digital awareness drives to build civic pride and policy pressure.

Manila today stands at a crossroads between its storied past and its visions of the future. One prioritizes verticality, volume, and economic scale; the other values continuity, character, and cultural capital.

But these visions need not be mutually exclusive. Preserving heritage does not mean freezing the city in amber. The numerous heritage sites in the city prove that Manila is a living vessel of collective memory. And what is a nation but a shared memory?

Source: Business World

F&B tenants drive the next wave of retail development

The Philippine retail sector is on the upswing, with the food and beverage (F&B) sector driving the charge.

At present, revenues from F&B retailers have already exceeded pre-pandemic levels by 11 percent, outperforming other categories and solidifying the sector’s role as a key anchor in retail real estate recovery.

This resurgence is reshaping leasing strategies, guiding mall design, and influencing expansion priorities among both local and international brands.

Surpassing pre-pandemic performance

Based on our latest research, the country’s top three mall operators recorded a 19 percent increase in overall revenues compared to 2019.

Leading that growth is the F&B segment, which has not only bounced back but emerged as a core driver of mall traffic and tenant performance. This growth reflects the return of discretionary consumer spending and the cultural significance of dining out in the Philippines.

As more Filipinos seek out shared experiences in public spaces, F&B concepts have become critical to reactivating foot traffic and increasing dwell time.

Experience-driven demand

Unlike other retail categories that continue to shift toward e-commerce, F&B thrives on in-person experiences.

Restaurants, cafés, dessert shops, and quick-service formats benefit from their ability to create atmosphere, community interaction, and lifestyle value that cannot be replicated online.

This dynamic made F&B tenants essential in newly designed malls and mixed-use developments, which increasingly prioritize open air dining, lifestyle zones, and community integration. The demand for experiential retail has also contributed to higher lease absorption in prime malls and neighborhood retail centers.

Strategic expansion across growth areas

As of the first quarter of 2025, there are 105 new malls under development across the Philippines, many of which include expanded F&B provisions in their design and tenant mix.

While Metro Manila remains a key target for flagship dining brands, developers are actively integrating food-centric zones into new projects in Central Luzon, Calabarzon, Visayas, and Davao.

These regions are witnessing rising population density, improved road infrastructure, and growing consumer demand—all of which support sustained F&B activity. Retailers are responding with aggressive site acquisition strategies in regional malls, townships, and transport-oriented developments.

The demand for experiential retail has also contributed to higher lease absorption in prime malls and neighborhood retail centers.

Leasing implications

F&B’s dominance has altered how developers and landlords approach leasing.

Retail centers now prioritize food clusters, allocate prime frontage to dining concepts, and offer flexible fit-out terms to attract high performing tenants.

This has created competitive leasing conditions, particularly for brands with strong concepts and proven track records. Landlords are becoming more selective, seeking operators who can deliver consistent foot traffic and align with the broader vision of next generation retail environments.

What’s ahead for F&B retail growth

As the Philippine retail sector continues to recover and evolve, F&B will remain a cornerstone of growth. Its ability to combine experience, social interaction, and consumer loyalty makes it one of the most resilient and adaptive segments in the market.

Given the robust mall pipeline and sustained demand for dining experiences, the appetite for F&B real estate is only expected to grow.

For F&B operators planning to expand, working with a knowledgeable property consultant can provide critical support—from identifying high-traffic locations and evaluating mall pipelines to securing lease terms that fit both operational needs and long-term brand strategy.

In a competitive and fast moving retail environment, informed guidance can help businesses grow with confidence.

Source: Inquirer

The unintended ecological effects of roads

Some may take the view that, because of our infrastructure deficit, more is always better — that any new road or bridge adds value. But this is far from the truth. Some roads and bridges bring more harm than good.

Urban planner Nathaniel von Einsidel, explains why. Nathaniel is a fellow emeritus of the Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners and principal urban planner of Concep Inc.

Roads are generally correlated with economic development. As an urban planner, I also see roads as physical manifestations of the economic and political decisions that lead to land use change. What bothers me is that while roads are considered part of the required infrastructure for increasing productivity in a city or region, their physical structure is accepted as a benign necessity in the promotion of progress. It especially bothers me that little attention is being given to the unintended consequences of road networks, or how their expansion affects the landscapes that they bisect, because roads and their concomitant traffic introduce pollutants, fragment populations of plants and wildlife, kill animals and cause behavioral changes both in animals and humans.

Roadways have dramatic effects on ecosystem components, processes and structures. The causes of these effects are as much related to engineering as to land use planning and transportation policy. The most significant ecological impacts of roads are habitat fragmentation, altered hydrology, and increased mortality and disturbance for wildlife. Additionally, new roads tend to catalyze changes in the land use of the areas they traverse, which may also bring about negative ecological consequences.

Roads affect the abiotic components of landscapes including its hydrology, the mechanics of sediment and debris transport, water and air chemistry, microclimate and levels of noise, wind and light adjacent to roadsides. Roads can disrupt natural water flow patterns, affecting drainage and filtration. Culverts and other drainage structures can fragment streams and rivers, hindering the movement of aquatic organisms. Roads also tend to increase erosion and sedimentation, impacting water quality and aquatic habitats.

Roads are also agents of change that have both direct and indirect effects on living organisms. Roads affect animal and plant populations directly by entirely obliterating the ecosystems in their path. Road construction directly destroys habitat, and the associated infrastructure like barriers and fences can isolate animal populations. This fragmentation can disrupt gene flow, leading to inbreeding and reduced genetic diversity in isolated animal populations. Roads also create “edge effects” where conditions near the road, such as increased light, temperature and wind, differ from the interior of the habitat.

For some species, particularly small, slow-moving animals that frequently cross roads, it can be fatal. Roadkill is a significant source of mortality for many animal species. Traffic noise and disturbance also deter animals from using habitats near roads, reducing their available space and potentially affecting breeding success.

While roads have many direct ecological effects on adjacent aquatic and terrestrial systems, as network structures, they also have far-reaching, cumulative effects on landscapes. Some major effects to landscapes that directly relate to roads include the loss of habitat through the transformation of existing land cover to roads, and road-induced land use and land cover change, as well as reduced habitat for wildlife.

Furthermore, vehicle emissions release pollutants like heavy metals and hydrocarbons into the environment, contaminating soil, water and air, impacting plant and animal health. Roads can also introduce pollutants into aquatic ecosystems, affecting water quality and aquatic life. Roads also act as corridors for the spread of invasive species, which can outcompete native plants and animals. Roads also alter temperature, humidity and light levels, creating different microclimates compared to surrounding areas. Roadside soils may have altered nutrient content, pH, and water content due to pollution and changes in drainage.

While roads affect both the biotic and the abiotic components of landscapes, they also catalyze changes in land use including human encroachment in ecologically sensitive areas. It is crucial to analyze and predict the potential ecological effects of alternative transport scenarios by applying transport geography theories and road ecology research methods to advance understanding about the dynamics between road systems and landscapes, and thus help lessen the negative ecological effects of roads on the environment.

Source: Manila Times