Do you fly on airlines with poor safety records? Ride in ocean liners or ferry boat lines known for over crowding and sinking? Do you avoid taxicabs in poor condition and drivers with massive tatoos? At least you have some choice in the matter.
Would you avoid living in or below subdivisions built on steep hills and in areas with histories of past landslides and poor soils?
Many long time Ma-a residents don't have a convenient individual choice. They are "trapped" by new developments and being exposed to hazards of earth movement, landslide and flash flooding. They cannot avoid it because they already live below “proposed” new subdivisions. Professor of Geology, Sandra Catane of the University of the Philippines in Quezon City has stated that "Residents below are at risk."
The subdivision building activities on Shrine Hill are already much more than merely "proposed." They were both begun without license to build a subdivision, without PALCE, without Development Permit. One city councilor termed this "a minor oversight."
One of the Developers publicly stated they were building a six meter wide, 1,700 meter long, six inch thick concrete road spanning Shrine Hill from top to bottom, across old landslide areas for their own private use and enjoyment. Nothing to do with a subdivision. No, no no. Nothing wrong there, they said. Private land and private use. Perfectly permissible. The laws governing subdivision development do not apply to us.
Regrettably, mismanaged run-off from the new non-absorbent concrete road and other hillside clearing flooded Ma-a road and many areas and residents below. No provision had been made by Developers on how to handle 60 hectares of run-off once it left their private property.
Greeks bearing gifts? Generously, the Developer has since offered the 1,700 meter concrete road and drainage system to the City of Davao for its general public use (and maintenance).
The risk and cost of maintenance and responsibility for landslide would then be transferred to the Taxpayers of Davao.
Likewise, the transfer would likely reduce Developer exposure to hillside remediation costs if the development permit is refused and it is ordered by the Courts to return the hill to its natural state as is required in many countries.
Such an Order may be more likely since the Developer appears to have circumvented the City Council and the law. It has now publicly admitted the road was intended for subdivision use. No surprise there.
There may also be a problem with Presidential Decrees 705, Section 15, the Revised Forestry Code which forbids sale of government land to developers and others where the slope is eighteen percent (10.2 degrees) or greater, due to the risk of perpetuating landslide deaths and destruction of the natural environment.
Whether the law applies in this situation may have to be decided by the courts, but the conditions described clearly indicate the Government’s view of the hazards of landslide, erosion, flooding, and degradation of biodiversity that such hillside developments may present. Shrine Hill side slopes are as much as 40 degrees in places.
And here's an interesting excerpt,
Presidential Decree 957
RIRRs of the Year 2001, Rule 1, Section 1,
“Subdivision projects shall be located within suitable sites for housing and outside hazard prone areas and protection areas as provided for by pertinent laws.
”Critical areas (e.g. areas subject to flooding, landslides and those with unstable soil) must be avoided.
“The site shall be stable enough to accommodate foundation load without excessive earth moving, grading or cutting and filling.”
Upper portions of formally proposed development areas appear to touch unstable areas. They appear to be supported by known unstable areas. In addition, the area is known for sinkholes and hidden limestone caves which may affect home site and hillside stability. In other words, the upper flatter "table lands" may have weak table legs. These are key questions for independent comprehensive Geohazard and Geo-engineering consideration.
Is your life safety subject to Barter and Swap in a deal for other concessions? Does the prior granting of a Preliminary Application for Locational Clearance (PALC) entitle applicant to a Development Permit when new information is found that puts lives in question?
Concessions not adding to the safety of existing residents below a proposed hillside subdivision are irrelevant to the general proceedings.
And, philosophically, should seeming violators of HLURB law and Presidential Decrees, order and public safety be rewarded? Does one "negotiate" to march off deadly cliff or does find another way down?
Will you allow recognized potential hazards to your life and property to be negotiated for you without an independent comprehensive Geohazard and Geo Engineering study and new zoning according to that study?
Keep in mind that the Artica Sports Dome was built without an independent geohazard and a Mines and Geosciences Bureau study. It remains unfinished, reported due to a later discovered geologic fault line that also runs under Shrine Hill.
No comments:
Post a Comment