SUBIC Bay Freeport -- “Through a resolution, the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Board of Directors will declare whether or not the project is environmentally sensitive, or is in compliance with the parameters as determined to be within the acceptable levels of emissions.”
SBMA Chairman Roberto Garcia said SBMA aims to implement stricter standards to safeguard the Subic Bay Freeport from pollution.
The action ensures that all projects, which are to be built inside the freeport zone, particularly environmentally sensitive projects (ESPs), are acceptable to various stakeholders.
ESPs are projects that are determined to emit pollutants, which may have a potential impact on the natural resources, and the health of the people living or working in the area.
These pollutants include emissions, effluents, sound or visual from the proposed project that may deteriorate the health of the people, the forests and the animals living there, the bay waters, creeks, ground water and air, among others.
Under this system, if the proposed project is considered an ESP, the SBMA Ecology Center will independently verify all of the project pollutants, the natural resource impacts, and extent of the proponent’s mitigating measures. All data gathered will be presented to the SBMA Board.
Stakeholder groups, consisting of representatives or officers of housing areas, freeport workers’ associations, and the indigenous people’s tribal council will be invited to public consultations on ESPs where inputs about the results of the verification process will be presented.
Based on the evaluation “of the totality of acceptability ratings from the various stakeholders of the Freeport,” the SBMA Board shall declare whether or not the project is socially acceptable.
In any case where the project is declared not socially acceptable, the proponents will be advised to redesign the project or its mitigating measures to meet a level acceptable to stakeholders.
Meanwhile, its permit to operate will be withheld. - Journal.com.ph by : Mamer Bañez
SBMA board to impose limit on environmentally sensitive projects
“Through a board resolution, the (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority) Board of Directors will declare whether or not the project is environmentally sensitive, or is in compliance within the parameters of acceptable levels of emissions.”
This sums up the decision of the board, SBMA chairman Roberto Garcia said, as SBMA aims to implement stricter standards to safeguard the Subic Bay Freeport from pollution.
The action ensures that all projects, which are to be built inside the free port zone, particularly environmentally sensitive projects (ESPs), are acceptable to various stakeholders.
ESPs are projects that are determined to emit pollutants, which may have a potential impact on the natural resources, and the health of the people living or working in the area.
These pollutants include emissions, effluents, sound or visual from the proposed project that may deteriorate the health of the people, the forests and the animals living there, the bay waters, creeks, ground water, and air, among others.
Under this system, if the proposed project is considered an ESP, the SBMA Ecology Center will independently verify all of the project pollutants, the natural resource impacts, and extent of the proponent’s mitigating measures. All data gathered will be presented to the SBMA Board.
Stakeholder groups, consisting of representatives or officers of housing areas, Freeport workers’ associations, and the indigenous people’s tribal council will be invited to public consultations on ESPs where inputs about the results of the verification process will be presented.
Based on the evaluation “of the totality of acceptability ratings from the various stakeholders of the Freeport,” the SBMA Board shall declare whether or not the project is socially acceptable.
In any case where the project is declared not socially acceptable, the proponents will be advised to redesign the project or its mitigating measures to meet a level acceptable to stakeholders. Meanwhile, its permit to operate will be withheld.
“This way, the stakeholders are given a sense of participation in truly preserving the unique environmental feature of the Freeport, which is one of the major attractions of Subic’s tourism industry,” Garcia said.
The law that created the Freeport and the SBMA mandates the latter to protect, maintain, and develop the virgin forests into a national park by implementing the rules and regulation of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
The issuance of stricter standards, through the implementation of a policy on ESPs, will help the SBMA in realizing its mandates of protecting and preserving the environment.(by Allen M. Villa-PIA 3/SBMA PRD)
Anti-Coal Plant rally to be held 29 August, meets 3pm at Marikit park
Save Subic Bay
our resolve to save subic bay will once again be tested... a coal power plant will be built in subic bay... we need to act and do our darn-est best to stop it! join the planned mass action on Monday 29 August... our heroes day! monitor this page coz we will keep you informed.http://savesubicbay.blogspot.com/
2 minutes ago ·
Alex Corpus Hermoso Mga kasama at kaibigan. Salamat sa initiative. Ang national Press Conference po tungkol sa Subic Coal Power Plant ay maaaring maganap sa August 30 sa Quezon City with Rep. Walden Bello, Chin-chin Gutierrez, Rhiza Hontiveros atbp. na bumubuo sa magaganap na protest caravan. alex hermoso
IPAHAYAG NATIN ANG ATING MARIING PAGTUTOL SA PLANONG PAGTATAYO NG COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT SA SUBIC. MASAMA ITO SA ATING KALUSUGAN, MASAMA SA KALIKASAN, MASAMA PARA SA HENERASYONG SUSUNOD SA ATIN. MALAKING BANTA ITO SA ATING KALIGTASAN. SUMAMA PO SANA TAYO SA GAGAWING MARTSA AT RALI SA DARATING NA ARAW NG MGA BAYANI, AGOSTO 29, LUNES. MAGKITA-KITA PO TAYO SA MARIKIT PARK BANDANG ALAS TRES NG HAPON. MAGMAMARTSA TAYO PATUNGO SA RIZAL TRIANGLE NA KUNG SAAN MAY INIMBITAHAN TAYONG MGA TAGAPAGTAGUYOD NG INANG KALIKASAN UPANG MAGSALITA SA ATING GAGAWING PROGRAMA. BABASAHIN DIN PO ANG ATING IPAAABOT NA LIHAM PARA KAY PRESIDENTE NOY, AT SA MGA TAGAPAMAHALA NG DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, DENR, ABOITIZ, AT MERALCO UPANG HIMUKIN SILA NA ISAALANG-ALANG ANG KAPAKANAN, KALUSUGAN, AT KAPALIGIRAN NG MGA MAMAMAYAN SA LUGAR. MAGSUOT PO NG KULAY BERDENG KASUOTAN AT IPAKITA ANG ATING KABAYANIHAN SA PAMAMAGITAN NG MAKABULUHANG PAGTUTOL SA HALIMAW NA TINATAWAG NA COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT! EDIC PIANO
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT — The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) will impose environmental fees as part of its thrust to protect the ecological balance of this premier Freeport.
SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza said that the imposition of environmental fees is part of the SBMA’s move to ensure that the areas inside this premier Freeport zone are well taken care of.
He added that the price of the environment fees would be added to the admission tickets and rentals of facilities that are found inside the Subic Bay Freeport such as hotel rooms.
The official website of the SBMA, sbma.com, has recently displayed the procedures for the collection of these environment fees such as P10 for each tourists going inside theme parks, beaches, go carts and other establishments wherein fixed entrance fees are charged.
A two percent of the gross purchases for restaurants, wellness or massage centers, duty frees, and other retail establishments will be charged as part of the environment fees.
An environment fee of P100 per person playing at the golf course here will also be charged, along with a P100 environment fee for each room utilized per night for hotels.
Arreza said that the collection and remittance of these environment fees will be done by the locators themselves, adding that the concerned establishments shall remit these fees to the SBMA monthly on or before the fifth of the following month.
“Along with the remittance of the Environment Fee, establishments shall submit to the Finance Group of the SBMA a report of the number of visitors, total gross receipts for each day, number of guests and duration of stay in hotels,” Arreza said.
He said that audits shall be conducted to ensure the accuracy of the report submitted to the SBMA, adding that the establishment concerned shall make available for inspection to an authorized representative of the SBMA their books, journals and records pertaining to the required report. By JONAS REYES -
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT – The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) is slated to celebrate Earth Day with a week-long activity that would focus on the ecological aspects of this premier Freeport, more specifically its rainforests.
“We want everybody at the Subic Bay Freeport to get involved in preserving the ecological balance here. The ecological aspects of Subic are some of the factors which set it apart from other Freeport zones,” SBMA Ecology Manager Ameth Dela Llana said, adding that the event will start on the April 22 and will end on the 25th.
Dela Llana also said that the agency would take part in the Heritage Seed Project wherein old photos from prior Earth Day Celebrations will be sold to fund for the creation of the project.
“The Heritage Seed Project is a non-profit organization which we initially created that will help in the environmental protection and conservation of the Freeport. Right now, we are still looking for members who will be a part of this organization,” Dela Llana said.
The foundation, according to her, will protect the Subic Bay itself along with the rainforests found inside this premier Freeport.
“They will work hand-in-hand with the SBMA in the monitoring of the environment along with the handling of the treatment of water,” Dela Llana said.
The event will start with officially with a flag-raising ceremony in front of the administration building of the SBMA.
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT (dateline Subic)— The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) will host the first Subic Bay Water Summit here on January 28-29 to address concerns on the sustainability of this free port’s number one asset — the waters of Subic Bay.
Experts said the 12,350-hectare body of water, which plays a critical role in the development of the Subic Bay Freeport, had been subjected to various strains brought about by rapid urbanization, as well as development activities.
“If these stresses continue, we are sure to be left with an unsustainable resource,” SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza warned.
“Of course, we don’t want that to happen because Subic Bay is an all-important natural asset,” he added.
Arreza pointed out that Subic Bay, which forms part of the communal waters of Olongapo City and nearby areas in the provinces of Zambales and Bataan, is now considered a threatened resource due to patches of pollution load caused by the disposal of partially-treated sewage, nutrient inflows from changes in land use, and inadequate treatment of industrial wastes.
“Surprisingly, despite the growing industrialization in the Subic Bay Freeport, the major culprit in the observed decline of water quality at this point is waste from domestic households in the surrounding local communities,” Arreza added, citing studies made in 2006 during the preparation of the free port’s Integrated Coastal Management Plan (ICMP).
Experts said that as the primary selling point for Subic’s development into a center for investment, commerce, industry and tourism, the bay is being stressed by several sources. These include reduction of forest cover, inefficient use of fertilizer and pesticides, burning of grasslands, proliferation of fish cages, and increasing sewage and pollution load from domestic wastes produced by neighboring communities.
The same studies also revealed that pressures from commercial and industrial activities in nearby communities, as well as rapid urbanization of surrounding communities have also increased solid waste generation.
These stresses are exacerbated by limited sewer and wastewater treatment facilities, and lack of waste disposal facilities despite increases in local population.
In view of this, Arreza said the SBMA decided to call for a summit to involve stakeholders in the Subic Bay Freeport area and local communities in improving the water quality of Subic Bay, and keeping the natural environment healthy, productive and sustainable.
“Since Subic Bay is a common resource, every stakeholder has the moral obligation to keep this critical resource sustainable and we hope that the summit would address this very vital concern,” Arreza added.
SBMA Ecology Center manager Amethya dela Llana-Koval, whose department is spearheading the two-day event, said the SBMA seeks to define the current status and issues on the quality of the environment in Subic Bay through the water summit.
It also wants to raise environmental awareness among stakeholders and community groups, and provide them with examples of current best practices in environment and water resource management; identify and prioritize key water issues and action plan for the greater Subic Bay area; and generate commitment among stakeholders towards sustainable use and management of land and water resources
“We hope to move on from general concerns to specific commitments,” Koval explained. “After determining the problem areas, we hope to identify concrete solutions, then move on to specific action plans for key issues.”
Among those expected to join the summit are people’s organizations in Olongapo, Zambales and Bataan; environment officials; heads of local government units; and representatives from Subic business locators, schools, and various SBMA departments.
The speakers will include Sec. Edgardo Pamintuan, chairman of the Subic-Clark Alliance for Development Council, who will talk on the impact of human settlements on water resources; Gov. Felipe Nava of Guimaras, who will present best practices in marine conservation; Marikina Mayor Marides Fernando, who will tackle sustainable city planning; World Wide Fund for the Environment vice president Joel Palma, who will make a presentation on marine conservation; and Engr. Cesar dela Cruz, president of the Philippine Institute of Chemical Engineers, who will lecture on sustainable technologies and best practices in industries.
Two members of the SBMA ICMP team, Dr. Hoanh Hoang Nguyen, a soil and water specialist; and Engr. Carlito Rufo an environmental consultant, will also make presentations on land and water use planning, and coastal management, respectively, while Engr. Jaime Garcia, assistant general manager of Subic Water and Sewerage Co., will expound on the firm’s sewerage master plan.
Sen. Richard Gordon, who served as the first SBMA chairman and administrator, has also been invited to deliver his message to participants of the two-day summit.
= = = = =
It can be recalled that the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Olongapo through the initiative of Councilor Ed Piano adopted last October 21, 2009, RESOLUTION NO. 153 entitled A RESOLUTION ENJOINING LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs), SUBIC BAY METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY (SBMA) AND NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs) AROUND SUBIC BAY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CREATION OF SUBIC BAY WATERWAYS COUNCIL AND SUPPORT THE PROJECTS THERETO.
While it is true that domestic waste from surrounding area contribute to the degradation of Subic Bay, establishments in the freeport have a lion's share in this problem. Very few buildings have adequate sewage treatment facility and the existing STF's outflow dumps it straight to the bay, in other places, there is a huge lagoon where you can see the quality of output from STF before it is directed to rivers and bays.
Patience for Progress Passion to Protect Preserve and Prosper
Progress is in our midst, we want it and embrace it because we wanted a better future for our children, thus we must have patience for progress
But we know that progress can destroy our environment if we let it loose and fail to put safetynets to ensure that our resources are guarded, thus our passion to protect our environment must burn constantly.
It is only through proper preservation of our natural resources that we can truly prosper
TIME’S UP The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is set to file charges against 50 cities and municipalities that continue to operate open dumps in defiance of an existing waste management law.
Environment Secretary Joselito Atienza did not identify the erring local government units (LGUs), but added that they would publish their names in major newspapers as part of his department’s shame campaign against violators.
Calling the LGUs “pasaway” (hard-headed) despite a law – Republic Act 9003, or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act – banning open dumps, Atienza said they were ready to file the charges for negligence and non-compliance with the law. “They had two and half years to explain why still maintaining these open dumps,” he added.
When he assumed the position of environment secretary two years ago, one of Atienza’s first acts was to order LGUs to comply with RA 9003 – or face charges.
Apart from banning open dumps, RA 9003 stipulates that all LGUs must operate their own materials recovery facilities (MRF) for recycling and shift to sanitary landfills.
“President Macapagal –Arroyo is bent on enforcing the waste management law. The garbage problem is the biggest issue related to climate change,” Atienza said.
The environment secretary, on the other hand, said he was proud of 48 cities and towns around the country which follow the law by setting up their MRFs and shifting to sanitary landfills.
Atienza said they have offered incentive packages to these LGUs. “If they need technical and material help on carrying out the law, we are always prepared to extend that them,” he added.
DENR CHIEF ORDERS: ‘Check tree poisoning in Korean project’
The Environment Management Bureau has obtained soil samples from a two-hectare tract of land leased to a Korean casino and hotel project at the Subic Bay Freeport to verify reports about the alleged poisoning of more than 300 trees there, Environment Secretary Lito Atienza said on Saturday.
"We found no trees being cut, and as far as allegations that the soil has been poisoned, we instructed our people in the field, the EMB director himself, to test the soil samples we got," Atienza told the Inquirer on the sidelines of the 2009 Asian Waterbird Census here.
Alerts about the poisoning reached the Inquirer through several text messages, some from unregistered senders.
Hefty amounts of salt, the senders said, have been poured on the ground where the trees stood.
Without saying how many samples were taken last week, Atienza said the results of the test would be known shortly.
"We'll find out. If there is poisoning, somebody has to answer for that," he said. The EMB is a bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Reports of tree poisoning surfaced in December after Armand Arreza, administrator of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority, bared the findings of a private environmental consulting firm hired by the Korean company Grand Utopia Inc. that some trees were sick and needed to be cut.
The proposed action contrasted the two early positions of Arreza, according to architect Felino Palafox Jr., who backed out of the project and gave up a $1-million contract when he learned that Grand Utopia planned to cut the trees.
Arreza first issued a no-cutting policy then revised that by allowing the balling and transfer of the trees, Palafox said.
The interventions by Atienza two weeks ago -- his scrapping of the DENR 2006 memorandum of agreement authorizing the SBMA to issue environmental compliance certificates for projects at the free port and his no-tree-cutting policy at the project site -- bolstered Palafox's drive to save the trees.
Atienza has not changed course, saying on Saturday: "Our direction is clear. No tree will be cut in our support for investments there. The mature trees, in particular, must be incorporated in the design and will enhance the design."
In an inspection last week, Atienza said he stressed to SBMA officials that the "developer and investors must see to it that the trees are protected in their efforts to provide a wholesome recreation area."
Grand Utopia, he said, "will have to follow."
"Its commitment is to follow the rule. We welcome and support investments but they must follow our laws and our rules. That is clear to them," he said.
At the Subic Bay Freeport, Arreza denied that the SBMA had fabricated information on Atienza's pronouncements on tree-cutting in the casino-hotel project during his site visit last week.
Atienza reportedly said Palafox should "stick to the truth" regarding the trees, after noting that no trees had been cut.
The secretary also reportedly said that newspaper reports turned out to be "inaccurate and exaggerated." However, he denied making those statements.
A source in the SBMA, who declined to be named because he was not authorized to talk about the issue, said Atienza's statements were on video.
"We also sent his department copies of the interview so they know that he really said that," the SBMA source said.
Palafox said Atienza's supposed statements were part of a "black propaganda campaign" to discredit him.
Arreza denied being part of the campaign against Palafox. "We don't have the capacity to do that," he said. By Tonette Orejas - Inquirer Central Luzon Desk
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT—Reports on the cutting of trees in this free port are exaggerated.
So declared Environment Secretary Lito Atienza when he visited the controversial site of the proposed Ocean 9 hotel-casino project here on Wednesday.
Inspecting the trees at the 2-hectare project site here with officials of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA), officials of project proponent Grand Utopia Inc. and members of the media, Atienza noted that contrary to some published reports, the trees at the project site had remained intact all along.
“We should stick to the truth,” Atienza said.
“They said trees have been cut here, so where are those cut trees?” Atienza wondered aloud during the inspection.
“A lot of reports that came out in the newspapers now turn out to be inaccurate and exaggerated,” he also told the media.
Atienza inspected the project site exactly a week after announcing that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) would now control the issuance of environmental permits in this free port—a task previously delegated to the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) under a memorandum of agreement between the two agencies.
In revoking the agreement, Atienza noted among others that the SBMA has been criticized lately because of the allegations, notably by architect and urban planner Felino Palafox Jr., that some 300 trees would be destroyed to make way for the hotel-casino project.
Some reports also alleged that some “century-old trees” have been cut in the site, which was sometimes described as “old-growth forest.”
But Wednesday’s visit apparently convinced Atienza that the allegations were unfounded.
Atienza said activism for the environment is good. “But, of course, we have to stick to reality and the truth,” he said.
Noting Palafox’s avowed passion for the environment, Atienza told the media that he and Palafox “could work together.”
“At this point, personally, I can see that no trees were cut,” Atienza declared.
“It is very important that the whole country should know that no trees have been cut in SBMA up to now,” he also assured SBMA Chairman Feliciano Salonga and SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza, who joined him in the inspection.
“If there were century-old trees here, we should see them now; but there’s none,” Atienza said. “This is a reclaimed area during the US Navy days, so it’s impossible for century-old trees to be here,” he added.
At the same time, Atienza told officials of Grand Utopia to cooperate with the DENR to resolve the controversy regarding the trees at the project site.
“Let’s work together for a win-win solution,” Atienza told Ocean 9 managing director Louis Joong-Moon Choi.
He said that while Ocean 9 “is a very good project” since it will create some 5,000 jobs once operational, the proponent should also be sensitive to local issues, particularly those environment-related.
Atienza suggested that Grand Utopia should redesign the $120-million project to incorporate ”mature trees” in the project site.
“You can use the [existing] trees to add ambiance to the project,” he said, noting that world-class tourism projects spend millions of dollars to incorporate trees in their design.
He also directed DENR field officers to conduct tests at the project site to determine whether some trees have really been poisoned, as insinuated by Palafox and other critics of the project.
Atienza said that results of the soil tests may be available after a week.
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT – The fate of a Korean casino-hotel project here now lies in the hands of the environment department, after it revoked the power of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority to issue environmental clearances for projects in this free port, an SBMA official said.
SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza said the SBMA was reviewing the application for an environmental compliance certificate of Grand Utopia Inc. for its $120-million casino-hotel.
“The ECC for Grand Utopia is still under review. [On Thursday], we submitted their applications to the [Department of Environment and Natural Resources], the agency that will decide whether to issue the ECC,” Arreza told the Inquirer.
Earlier, architect and urban planner Felino Palafox Jr. revealed that he backed out of the project after he learned that more than 300 trees would be cut to give way to the project.
But Arreza said no tree would be cut in the project site, contrary to Palafox’s revelation. However, a report from a survey team commissioned by Grand Utopia showed that at least 161 trees would have to be replaced.
Arreza said the SBMA is “not concerned about Palafox’s allegations at all.”
“Now that the DENR is part of the process, people will know whether we are correct or not,” he said. By Robert Gonzaga - Inquirer Central Luzon Desk
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT, Philippines—The architect who blew the whistle on plans to destroy a tree patch for a casino-hotel said officials of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority were giving mixed signals to people and investors on the project.
Architect Felino Palafox Jr., who earlier said more than 300 trees would be destroyed for the project, said SBMA officials were involved in a “grand deception” when they told the Korean firm, Grand Utopia Inc., it can develop the site and later announced that no tree would be cut there.
Palafox also said the Department of Environment and Natural Resources had confirmed that trees in the site were big, not small as SBMA officials would want the public to believe.
“While the SBMA was telling us one thing, [some of its officials] were telling another thing to the Koreans,” he said.
“We can’t blame the Koreans [for hoping that the project would go on smoothly] because maybe [the SBMA] was telling that they could cut the trees and proceed with project,” he added.
Religious group support
Palafox was in Olongapo City on Saturday and spoke in a forum organized by religious groups at the Columban College.
At the project site, SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza assured the groups that no tree will be cut for the project.
He told them that the issuance of the ECC for the project now rests with the DENR.
Environment Secretary Joselito Atienza earlier scrapped the 2006 memorandum of agreement (MOA) in which the DENR authorized the SBMA to process and issue ECCs for projects at the Subic freeport.
Arreza said the bulldozers and cranes found at the project site were used for soil testing, and not for destroying any tree.
“There are no century old trees here because this land was reclaimed only in the 1960s,” said Arreza.
“There is a different agenda behind this and I ask you not to participate in that unless there is proof,” he said.
Word of honor
Larry Pangan, representing the group Earth Savers (Zambales), asked: “Can we have your word that no tree will be cut?”
“The President has said that,” Arreza said, referring to an order from President Macapagal-Arroyo during their recent meeting.
“We are not going to cut any tree. We have made that statement several times,” he said.
In a statement on Saturday, Sen. Pia Cayetano said she would keep an eye on how the DENR would rule in the case of the casino-hotel project of Grand Utopia.
She said she has asked the chair of the Senate environment committee, Sen. Jamby Madrigal, to conduct an inquiry on the plan by the firm to cut trees. By Robert Gonzaga, Ansbert Joaquin and Tonette Orejas, Inquirer Central Luzon
Officials of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) should not allow even one tree at the proposed site of the Ocean 9 Casino Resort and Hotel to be cut. They should consider other sites for the project—like the mothballed Grand Legenda Hotel, which has been lying idle for 10 years now, its steel structure collecting rust and posing a hazard to locators nearby. There are also the Cubi and Boton points that offer a full view of the sea, if that’s what the investor wants.
The SBMA should preserve the former mini-golf course and convert it into a park which should balance the rapid commercialization of the Waterfront Road strip. In short, the planner should consider creating an oasis in the midst of a concrete jungle which the strip is fast turning into. No amount of human effort can replace what nature has provided and nurtured for so many decades.
The more than 300 trees said to be at risk, diseased or not, are sacred. The proposed “balling” or “relocation” will not work. These terms are just euphemisms for “cut” and “dispose.” The justification to reforest eight hectares to compensate for the trees sounds too fantastic. Can the SBMA mention a specific reforestation project inside the Subic Bay area, which had been implemented successfully?
The trees that are meant to be sacrificed for a hotel and casino project are already there. Why risk with a reforestation program nobody can guarantee will succeed?
SBMA Chairman Feliciano Salonga and Administrator Armand Arreza will no longer be there to see the reforestation through. And by that time, more trees could be cut in other areas. The $120-million investment of the Korean group is important but it could not pay for the destruction of nature.
The incumbent officials of the SBMA should not exchange the few left of our natural resources for foreign investment. Losing the $120-million investment now is not the end of the world. It could be replaced tomorrow by a $240-million investment or even more. Salonga and Arreza should make a conscientious stand now. They shouldn’t allow the cutting of the trees.
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT — A Japanese investor here has turned over 1,000-square-meter grassland planted to mahogany and narra to the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA).
Nidec Subic Phils., manufacturer of micro-motors and computer peripherals, "adopted" the 1,000-square meter grassland in 2005, planted it to various tree species, and maintained the forest in the past three years under SBMA’s "Adopt-a-Forest" program.
The turnover rites held last Thursday marked the end of Nidec’s "adoption" contract. The trees planted by company’s employees are deemed old enough to be able to survive.
"Three years ago, I was here with my co-workers to plant these trees," recalled Renz Victoria, Nidec plant section manager.
"The time had passed so quickly, and now you can see that the seedlings we planted have grown healthy and strong," he said.
"You can be assured that Nidec will always support and participate in this kind of program that guarantees a better future for our children," Victoria told SBMA Chairman Feliciano Salonga and SBMA Ecology Center Manager Amethy dela Llana-Koval during the turnover ceremonies.
Nidec, which is one of the environment-conscious companies in the Subic Bay Freeport, was among the first investor-companies that joined the "Adopt-a-Forest" program in 2005.
The forest it adopted is located one kilometer from the road going to the Aeta village of Pastolan, which is on the slopes of Mt. Sta. Rita.
In nearby slopes are the reforestation projects being maintained by other Subic locators and groups. They include Subic Power, Subic Bay Press Corp, Wimpy’s, Morong Jeepney, and Vision Air.
Community groups and civic organizations like the Rotary Club of Olongapo City and the Subic Bay Press Corps have also adopted reforestation projects, which are to be turned over soon to the SBMA.
Like the other groups, Nidec planted and maintained the area, using its manpower and resources. It was assisted only by the Pastolan Forest Conservation Group which is composed of Aeta workers of the SBMA Ecology Center.
Some members of the Pastolan group had inter-cropped papaya and banana with trees. This provides additional income to the Subic natives.
During the turnover rites, Chairman Salonga said that the participation of various locators and community groups in the SBMA reforestation program is an example of the environmental commitment of the various stakeholders in the Subic Bay Freeport. By JONAS REYES - Manila Bulletin
The Senate is poised to investigate the plan to cut down trees in a thickly-forested area at the Subic Bay Freeport.
Senator Pia Cayetano said Friday that the committee on environment has agreed with her to initiate an investigation into the $120 million casino-hotel project of a Korean firm inside the free port administered by the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority.
Cayetano said this after obtaining the commitment of the Senator Ma. Ana Consuelo Madrigal to look into the plan to destroy 161 “diseased” trees, including those that would not survive balling and relocation, to clear the way for the construction of the Ocean 9 Casino Resort and Hotel project of Grand Utopia, Inc.
Cayetano said Senator Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, chair of the committee on labor, has also given his consent to join the inquiry.
Madrigal and Estrada will initiate a joint investigation into their respective issues when the Senate resumes sessions on January 19 after a month-long Christmas break, she said.
On Tuesday, Cayetano delivered a privilege speech assailing the casino project which was exposed by architect and urban planner Felino Palafox Jr.
Palafox Jr. had said that more than 300 trees would be cut for the project. The SBMA ecology center counted 366 trees at the two-hectare project site in August.
The senator noted that this tree-cutting spree was promptly denied by SBMA, claiming that a no-tree-cutting policy was being enforced in the former American military base.
Cayetano, former chair of the Senate committee on environment, conducted an on-site hearing in April in Subic Bay, but on a separate issue. She wanted to ascertain possible environmental violations in the construction of two high-rise buildings by Hanjin Heavy Industries in the middle of the Subic forest.
"In the draft committee report, we found that SBMA was negligent in ensuring that the environment is preserved and that our laws are observed. By virtue of a memorandum of agreement, those responsibilities were relegated to SBMA by DENR," said Cayetano.
On Wednesday, a team that conducted an environmental survey of the area confirmed that at least 161 trees will have to be cut at the site.
Pastor Malabrigo of Kanlungan Development Association of Innovators said most of the trees were diseased and his firm had recommended to Grand Utopia Inc. that it reforest eight hectares in a forest preserve in place of the trees that would be cut.
He said their assessment showed that 161 trees at the site had butt-basal and center rot, and these were no longer normal. He said there were only 282 trees at the site.
Kanlungan was hired by Grand Utopia to conduct the initial environmental examination, a requirement before an environmental compliance certificate for the casino-hotel project can be secured.
“Inasmuch as we want to save all the trees in the area, relocation will eventually cause the death of most of the trees which are diseased. Replacement and reforestation is therefore the better option,” Malabrigo said.
He said Kanlungan proposed that for every tree cut at the project site, 50 saplings be planted in the reforestation area, for a total of 8,050 new trees.
“Most of the [sick trees] are mature trees, saplings and poles. These are very common species. The primary basis of our recommendation is the health of the individual [trees]. Balling is very expensive and the survival rate of unhealthy trees is very low,” he said.
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. also supported the joint committee inquiry, but he suggested slashing the budget and subsidies being provided by the national government to the SBMA.
This will force the SBMA “to be more aware of its responsibilities in overseeing labor standards and environmental laws within its jurisdiction,” he said. By Michael Lim Ubac - Philippine Daily Inquirer
Subic Proxy War
“Not all Filipinos are for sale,” said one of our sources, describing the decision of Palafox and Associates—owned by renowned architect and urban planner Jun Palafox—to turn down $1 million in fees that was offered to it by a Korean client.
The scuttled deal called for the architecture and planning firm to recommended the “clearing” of a two-hectare urban forest in the Subic Bay Freeport, a former American naval base northwest of Manila, to allow its client to build a casino resort. That would have called for the cutting down of 366 trees, including 37 that were over a hundred years old, according to the pro-Palafox camp, which added that the deal supposedly has the backing of “powerful officials” within the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) and the government casino franchise firm Pagcor.
Not so, says SBMA chief Armand Arreza, who believes that the latest controversy to hit the free port is yet another iteration of the lingering and festering fight between Senator Dick Gordon, a former SBMA chairman, and his successor and longtime nemesis Tong Payumo.
Palafox, Arreza said, has allowed himself to be used in a “local political fight” between the two rivals.
In addition, Arreza (who, like his ally Gordon, is a product of the Ateneo de Manila University) said there was no way the trees in question could be “centuries-old,” as they are planted on land reclaimed by Americans from the sea after the Korean War.
If this is, indeed, a proxy war between the Gordons and the Payumos, expect it to turn nastier in the coming weeks. Daxim L. Lucas - BIZ BUZZ - Philippine Daily Inquirer
===
Renowned architect is a Payumo lackey? by FELICITO C. PAYUMO - Philippine Daily Inquirer
Daxim Lucas quoted Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) Administrator Armand Arreza as saying that the latest controversy involving the cutting of 366 trees for a hotel-casino complex in the Subic Bay Freeport and a demand by an SBMA official for an 18-percent commission in another SBMA development master plan project is nothing but an “iteration of the lingering and festering fight between Sen. Dick Gordon and longtime nemesis Tong Payumo.” (Big Buzz, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 12/3/08)
I don’t know what Arreza is to Gordon, but Jun Palafox is certainly no lackey to me. Say things at my bidding? Why, the guy has more international stature than I have. That’s an insult for which he can sue for libel.
Levity aside, I learned from Palafox that Arreza threatens to file legal action if Palafox does not identify the person whom the Philippine Daily Inquirer editorial called an “official extortionist.” Then Palafox can demand that Arreza poise the same threat as well at SBMA chairman Fil Salonga who should also be asked to name the SBMA official or officials in an earlier extortion attempt that was reported to him by the representative of Win’s Way, an investor in an oil depot project. (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 12/6/08; read story)
Why Palafox made this exposé, he alone can answer. He was the guest speaker at a meeting of the Rotary Club of Manila and he talked of the new trend in urban planning — away from the sprawling model typified by wide boulevards and by the residents’ need to commute daily to work to a “bikable” and “walkable” neighborhood where “people live upstairs and go downstairs where they shop, take coffee, browse in bookstores and sit in parks, etc.” It was then that he talked of the threat to the only tree park in the CBD (commercial business district) of the Subic Freeport. No one prodded him to talk about it.
Arreza claims that there are no century-old trees on the site. Maybe he is correct. The term “century-old” has been loosely used for old growth, mature trees. But will it matter if the trees are 80-, 60-, or even 50-year-old? He says that they will not be cut but balled and transferred elsewhere. Palafox seriously doubts if this is possible to do with full-grown trees. But the more important question is, why relocate the trees and not the project? There are other areas in the CBD. Why take out the only tree park described by the Ecology Center as “urban forest” because the site is densely stocked?
Palafox enjoys a high reputation for his integrity. The Rotary Club of Manila is supportive of this one Rotarian who was thrust into a controversy but in a positive light. Rather than affix his name to a project that would cut or remove 366 trees, including 37 endangered species listed by the SBMA Ecology Center, he declined a $1-million architectural engagement enough to pay his payroll for six months. Now, his reputation is under savage attack for blowing the whistle not only on the threat to the tree park but also on an extort attempt in a different project. Will Salonga be subjected to the same attack?
Subic tree row: Group says reforestation a better option
SUBIC BAY FREE PORT—A nongovernment organization that recently completed an environmental study of the project site for the proposed $120-million Ocean 9 hotel-casino project here has concluded that replacing affected trees in the area would be a “wiser option” than relocating them elsewhere.
Pastor Malabrigo, a professor at the University of the Philippines in Los Baños (UPLB) and team leader of the environmental consultancy group Kanlungan Development Association of Innovators Inc., said the trees in the area are “mostly diseased.”
In this instance, he said, reforestation and other environment-protection activities should be undertaken by the project proponent Grand Utopia Inc., instead of spending too much for tree-balling and relocation.
Kanlungan, which was tapped by Grand Utopia to undertake the Initial Environmental Examination Report (IEER) for the hotel-casino project, is composed mostly of professors and experts from UP and holds office on the UPLB campus.
The group’s report, which was completed after a three-week study of the project site, debunked most of the arguments made by critics of the project, who said the development would sacrifice more than 300 trees.
Among the more significant findings by Kanlungan is the need to replace 161 “diseased trees,” even as the group recommended that 70 healthy trees be relocated, and 51 others be retained at the 1.9-hectare project site.
“People should look at the prospects of an 8-hectare reforested land versus the pitiful condition of the mostly defective trees in the project site,” Malabrigo said, as he argued for the reforestation option on Wednesday.
He said the project site, which served as a minigolf course during the US Navy days, is unsuitable for tree growth, with the concrete paving for the golf links causing the development of “very disturbed root systems.”
As a result, Malabrigo explained, trees in the area eventually developed various diseases such as rotting.
He added that most of the trees in the area “are very common species” like atis, langka and guava, among others. These “can be easily replaced with prime, even endangered, trees,” he said.
Malabrigo also stressed that his group did not recommend extensive tree-balling because this would cost from P100,000 to P200,000 per tree, depending on its size.
The better alternative would be reforestation, which costs around P70,000 per hectare per year, he said.
Moreover, “the very tedious process of balling and transplanting will subject the trees to a lot of stress,” Malabrigo pointed out.
“Unhealthy trees won’t be able to withstand this.”
“Rather than spending too much for relocation of trees whose survival is really uncertain, the SBMA [Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority] Ecology Center might as well ask the proponent to allocate resources for other environmental restoration and restoration activities,” he concluded.
In the course of its environmental examination, Kanlungan also said it has identified 235 trees and 47 palms in the project site, as opposed to 336 trees (including palm species) as inventoried by the SBMA Ecology Center.
Malabrigo said the discrepancy was due to the fact that the SBMA inventory individually counted each sprouting pole of the palm specie Palmera tree, when they should have been counted as individual clusters.
“Palms are not trees, and should be differentiated as such,” Malabrigo pointed out.
He said of the 48 tree species found in the area, only two—ipil and narra—are classified as “endangered.” The Manila Palm is also considered endangered.
Malabrigo, however, clarified that the term “endangered” means the population is threatened “in the wilds only” and does not necessarily mean that the species is on the brink of extinction.
This is true in the case of Manila palm, that is scarce in the wilds, but is commonly used in gardens and man-made landscapes.
For the Ocena 9 hotel-casino project, Malabrigo said the two ipil trees at the project site will not be affected by the project design and will be retained, along with five of the 18 Manila palms.
Among the 13 narra trees, which are found mostly at the periphery of the lot parcel, only one of these will have to be transplanted.
The rest, he said, “will find their way into urban landscaping” for the hotel-casino project.
He also clarified that the description of the project site as “densely stocked with trees” was inaccurate, since it has a tree density of less than three trees per 200 square meters.
This ratio falls short of the standard of one tree per two square meters, Malabrigo said.
To compensate for the trees that would have to be removed, Malabrigo said Grand Utopia would have to come up with replacement trees totaling 8,050, or 50 seedlings per one tree that will be replaced.
He said this ratio would be enough to reforest an 8-hectare area with the recommended spacing of three meters by three meters.
He added that the SBMA Ecology Center has already identified the Pastolan area at the east side of the Subic Bay Free Port as a viable reforestation area.
As to the contention by project critics that several trees in the area are “century-old,” Malabrigo said this cannot be ascertained without cutting the trees down and counting the annual rings.
But he noted that most of the trees in the area are saplings and poles with girths less than 10 centimeters in diameter.
The SBMA also said earlier that the project site, as confirmed by geological surveys, was reclaimed by the US Navy from swampland sometime in late 1950s or early 1960s. This, SBMA officials said, precludes the possibility that century-old trees could be found in the area. Written by Henry Empeño / Budiness Mirror Correspondent
Our country’s reputation has suffered another black eye, this time, because our kababayan, world renowned architect Jun Palafox, is being persecuted, not by foreigners but by some of his own countrymen.
After pulling out of an architectural design project in Subic, Palafox is reportedly at the receiving end of a smear campaign initiated by people who resent the noted architect’s criticisms about alleged violations of local laws by both the project proponent and the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA).
Palafox is no doubt one of the world’s best and most sought after architect and urban/environmental planner and definitely a pride of the Philippines. He has been credited for the masterplanning of Ayala Heights, Greenbelt, SM Malls, Robinson’s and Rockwell – including Clark and Subic., with over 10 billion square meters of building area developed by his firm. Inspite of this, some fellow Filipinos are out to punish him for speaking his mind out about the Subic controversy.
The controversy involves a Korean hotel and casino project inside the Freeport zone in Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority which is threatening the existence of about 366 trees, mostly a century old and 30 of which are classified as endangered.
Palafox, who was hired by developer Grand Utopia and Korean architectural firmYamasaki to put the final touches on the project’s design, decided to back out when he found out that management intended to cut the trees.
He says he thought all along that his firm can participate in the design but it turned out that the foreign architect was asked to design the project and that Palafox will just attach his name. He says there was simply no way to go about the project without uprooting these trees. Palafox said no to a $1-million architectural fee and this was when his nightmare began.
Concerned SBMA employees are saying that SBMA management and the Ecology Center are ante-dating reports to show that previous projects of Palafox in Subic, in particular the Lighthouse Marina Hotel and Resort and the Moonbay Marina, were built in areas classified as forest parks. But Palafox insists that the alleged violations are not true, claiming that these areas used to be dump sites and that these projects had all the government clearances.
There are also reports that SBMA has allowed the Korean casino developer, which has reportedly convinced another Filipino architect to stamp his seal of approval to the project, to uproot, ball, and transfer the more than 366 old trees. According to experts, this process has a high tree mortality rate. These century-old trees are part of our heritage, not to mention their huge environmental value.
The latest about the controversy is that a new report from the SBMA and Ecology Center has reduced the number of trees to be affected by the project from 366 to around 80 and that none of these are old and endangered. The people at Subic’s Ecology Center have a lot of explaining to do if such a report actually exists. How is it possible that 286 old trees can disappear just like that?
===
Quicksand of greed
Philippine Daily Inquirer Editorial
Administrator Armand Arreza of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority responded to urban planner Felino Palafox’s allegations of official extortion in the SBMA with the tried-and-tested lines so much favored by today’s government officials: Where is your proof? Bring it to the proper forum. Resorting to “technical legalism,” as Ferdinand Marcos liked to call it, is the favorite response of beleaguered officials from top to bottom to citizens harassed by, and outraged over, the locust-like hunger for money of politicians and bureaucrats.
As our nation sinks in a quicksand of un-moderated greed, the citizen who has had enough really has two choices, which are not choices at all. The first is to be subjected to an official inquisition in which the burden of proof falls on him—an unfair burden because everyone knows the corrupt reality of our government where the powerful will all gang up on the powerless citizen. The second is that even among the citizenry, apathy and defeatism have conspired to make many more adapt to the corrupt nature of our institutions instead of rejecting corruption and actively fighting it.
To be sure, Arreza had a point in asking Palafox, who informed Arreza of the 18 percent commission demanded by an unnamed official to permit Palafox’s firm to get on the short list of bidders for an updating of the SBMA’s master plan, to name the erring official, either privately or publicly. Palafox has declined, although in disclosing more details about the alleged extortion, he has exculpated Arreza himself. We cannot presume to figure out why Palafox would hold back such information, but we can surmise the troubling realities anyone in Palafox’s shoes would be facing under similar circumstances.
The problem is that corruption is so widespread that identifying one erring official would only subject the accuser to harassment by the legion of corrupt officials throughout the government. And it would subject all the employees of any firm that dares to blow the whistle to harassment as well. Meanwhile, as what passes for our justice system grinds slowly on the case, the whistleblower will be out of business, and be persecuted socially and politically, besides.
The amazing thing is that Palafox spoke out at all, never mind how long it took him to do so. In a sense he can do this because his firm is large and notable—and international in scope—enough for him to take such risks. But his allegations are only the tip of the iceberg so to speak, as anyone engaged in real estate development, including planning, is subjected to a horde of local and national extortion facilitated by red tape.
The string of technicalities that end up strangling any effort at reform can be seen in all sorts of things besides rigged bidding processes and problems arising from applications for permits as well as those related to policies. The SBMA itself has been hounded by the insanity of one of its prime assets—the healthy ecology of the area—slowly being eroded by new projects that are bungled, so that the environment is degraded and Filipino workers are treated so badly that hostility to investments is fostered.
Think of the trees cut down for corporate housing, or the more recent question of even more trees being felled for a Korean casino development. Think of Filipino workers dying due to hazardous working conditions. A more proactive, fairer and more genuinely discriminating bureaucracy in the SBMA or anywhere else could have avoided such problems from the start, by weeding out irresponsible investors and sticking to a plan that conserves the environment to begin with.
We are being told by officialdom to focus on the economy, particularly at a time of global crisis. Anything that questions business-as-usual among the extortionists in government is pronounced unpatriotic because it is destabilizing. But it is precisely because everyone wants good, long-lasting jobs, and development that lasts that more people should reveal in public what everyone seems to know in private. They should expose who the crooks are, and show how their crookedness is squandering our opportunities for growth.
No ‘development vs environment’ case in Subic resort project–SBMA
SUBIC BAY FREE PORT—The classic dilemma of development versus environment will not be the case in the now controversial $120-million hotel-casino resort project of a Korean company here, a top official of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) clarified over the weekend.
Disputing claims that over 300 trees will be destroyed in building the Ocean 9 Casino and Hotel Resort in Subic, SBMA administrator Armand Arreza said the issue raised by architect and urban planner Felino Palafox Jr. was way off-mark.
“He’s barking up the wrong tree,” Arreza said, in a statement, issued over the weekend. “This story about cutting century-old trees is simply a non-issue because it isn’t true,” he added, pointing out that developer of Grand Utopia has already applied for a permit to ball trees for relocation.
Arreza reiterated that the SBMA will not allow the cutting of trees in the two-hectare project site, and has directed Grand Utopia to exhaust all means possible to save the trees.
“The SBMA directive to Grand Utopia is clear—either they incorporate the trees in their development plan, or ball them and relocate them to another place,” he said.
“And as far as we can tell they’re complying, because they have applied for a permit to ball the trees,” Arreza also said.
“So I don’t know why some quarters are bitching about this supposed issue, when not one twig has been cut off and the trees are still there,” he added.
In several media reports, Palafox has said more than 300 trees would be destroyed by the hotel-casino project. He also claimed recently that 37 of the affected trees are centuries-old. The architect also claimed he broke ties with Grand Utopia, which he said had initially tapped him to design the project.
He also said he would have been paid $1 million for the design, but he learned later that the developer had tapped a Japanese designer and that he will simply be asked “to sign on other people’s work.”
The resort project, proponents said, will employ more than 5,000 once completed, and open up Subic to more international tourists, including those on cruises and junkets.
Arreza said, however, the issue about Palafox’s aborted deal with Grand Utopia “should be treated separately from the yarn about cutting trees in Subic.”
He added that the SBMA has inventoried a total of 366 live trees in the area, which are mostly clustered in a now abandoned mini golf course built by the US Navy. The inventory indicated that only seven trees in the area had a diameter of more than one meter. The rest have girths ranging from one to 95 centimeters.
A total of 36 trees, meanwhile, fall under the classification “endangered” and “critically endangered” species. These are 21 Manila palms, which are considered endangered; two ipil trees, also endangered; and 13 narra trees, which are critically endangered.
“The narra trees, which are found along the perimeter of the area will be retained, while the Manila palms can easily be balled and transferred,” Arreza said.
Arreza clarified, however, that while the project site is densely stocked with trees in the golf course area, the SBMA master plan dated October 1996 has classified the same as designated for resort development.
He added that experts from the University of the Philippines in Los Baños doubted whether there are century-old trees in the area, because geological studies of the project site indicated that the area was reclaimed by the US Navy.
“That being the case, the UP group said that the so-called urban jungle in the project site couldn’t be a natural-growth forest. Ergo, the possibility that there are century-old trees present is quite nil,” Arreza explained.
Meanwhile, an SBMA official who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak on the matter, commented that Palafox “should not hide behind the skirt of environmentalism when his issue is really about his failed consultancy (with Grand Utopia).”
The official recalled that Palafox himself had allowed the paving of a turtle-nesting site in this free port when he designed a hotel and entertainment district along Subic’s waterfront in 2004.
“That was the first time when the SBMA Ecology Center issued a cease and desist order against a project because of environmental concerns,” the official said.
The official added that the sprawling entertainment complex that Palafox designed eventually resulted in the cutting down of more than 100 camachile trees in the project site. Written by Henry Empeño / Business Mirror Correspondent
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT, Philippines—For his belief in protecting the environment, architect and urban planner Felino Palafox Jr. lost what could have been six months of payroll worth $1 million (P48.8 million).
Palafox said he had broken ties with a Korean-backed project in this free port after he learned that more than 300 trees would be destroyed to give way to a casino and hotel resort.
“There are 366 trees there, and 37 of them are century-old, so they are heritage trees already. The reason why I broke with that group (Grand Utopia Inc.) is because I refuse to compromise myself and the environment,” Palafox told the Inquirer by interview on Friday.
“I would have gotten $1 million—six months worth of payroll. But that’s rape of the environment,” he said.
“Frankly, in Korea, a project like this will never be allowed. Their government and people will not allow it. But here, government officials let it happen and we are treated like second class citizens,” he said.
Not his work
Palafox said a foreign architectural firm tapped him to design Grand Utopia’s casino hotel but in the end, he noted, it all amounted to being asked to sign on other people’s work.
“They wanted my name and license, asked me to put my name on the work of others. They have to be investigated for that. No foreign architect can practice in another country without a license,” he said.
Palafox said the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority is “trying to get away from the issue.”
“They said in their letter to Eric Park of Grand Utopia that the area was classified as an urban jungle zone. How can they build several levels of basement garages there if they won’t get rid of the trees?” he asked.
SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza, however, said the agency would protect trees inside the free port and would exert all efforts to save these amid the development of the $120-million Ocean 9 Casino and Hotel Resort.
SBMA promise
“We won’t stand for the cutting of trees. Definitely, we won’t allow it,” said Arreza.
Amethya dela Llana-Koval, head of the SBMA Ecology Center, said the project site is within the central business district of the free port zone that is not classified as a protected area.
“We only characterized that area as an urban jungle because it was densely populated by trees. But the zoning of that area is commercial, so there should really be no objection to establishments being built there,” Koval said.
‘Green spaces’
She said no trees would be cut in that area, a former mini golf course established by the United States Navy here.
“No trees will be cut. That’s our policy. What we’re going to do is ball the trees, nurture them, and place them in ’green spaces’ within the free port. Some of them will even be left in the area, around the perimeter of the proposed establishment,” she said.
The relocated trees, Koval said, would be taken to the “green spaces” or areas where no or minimal development are allowed.
She said the SBMA has given Grand Utopia a demolition permit and a temporary fencing permit. The firm does not have any authority to touch any of the trees in the area, she said.
“They have applied for permits to ball (transplant) the trees, but they have yet to submit the balling plan. The relocation areas are already identified and by the time the environmental compliance certificate has been issued to Grand Utopia—probably by December this year if they comply with all requirements —then the relocation of the trees can begin,” she said.
Koval said the casino and hotel resort project is considered by the SBMA as “non-critical,” which means that the ecology center can issue an ECC to Grand Utopia without the need of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to approve it.
“It is within the jurisdiction of the SBMA, but we will coordinate with the DENR,” she said. By Robert Gonzaga - Inquirer Central Luzon Desk
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT, Philippines - The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) will not allow the cutting of trees to make way for a multi-million hotel-casino project here, officials said on Wednesday.
SBMA Administrator Armand Arreza said the agency has told project proponent Grand Utopia, Inc. that the trees should be saved and incorporated in the development plan, which will be subject to SBMA review.
"We won't stand for the cutting of trees. Definitely, we won't allow it," Arreza said in a statement sent to media organizations.
He said a news report saying that the project would destroy some 300 trees in the two-hectare site is speculative.
The report quoted architect Jun Palafox, who said that he was initially tapped to design the project but backed out when he found out that the management "intended to cut the trees."
Arreza said, however, that he did not know why the deal between Palafox and Grand Utopia fell through.
"But the trees are still there, because all that the developer has done at this time was to fence in the area and inventory the number of trees preparatory to balling, which was the procedure we have recommended," Arreza said.
"It's pure speculation that 300 trees will be destroyed because, in fact, Grand Utopia has already applied for a permit to ball the trees," he added.
Arreza said the area, which previously contained a mini-golf course built during the US Navy days, has been classified under SBMA zoning regulations as a commercial area.
"It's true that because of the density of the trees at the mini-golf course, our Ecology Center has classified that part of the site as an urban jungle. But it's still within the commercial zone where development is allowed," he explained.
"This is why the recommendation from Ecology was to incorporate the trees in the development plan, or if that won't be possible, to ball the trees and transfer them to a new location," Arreza said.
The SBMA Ecology Center said that several mature trees affected by development projects in the Subic Bay Freeport have been successfully transferred.
Technicians at the Center said balling is "relatively a simple procedure" although the recovery stage for relocated trees "would be the hard part."
"But we've been doing it," they added.
The Center also said the SBMA has required developers to provide replacements on a ratio ranging from 10 to 50 saplings for each affected tree. On top of this, developers pay a considerable amount for the maintenance of saplings.
Arreza said the Grand Utopia project, which will be known as the Ocean 9 Casino and Hotel Resort, is considered to be a critical infrastructure in Subic's bid to attract more foreign tourists to the growing number of holiday destinations in this free port.
The hotel will be located near Subic's Alava Pier, which is being developed by another firm as a passenger terminal for cruise ships.
The casino-hotel resort is expected to employ more than 5,000 workers once operational. The project is scheduled for completion within two years. - GMANews.TV
Hotel project in Subic to destroy 300 trees - report
A Korean hotel and casino project inside the Freeport zone in Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority threaten the existence of about 300 trees, a television report said Tuesday.
Reporter Kara David said on GMA news 24 Oras that the 300 trees (30 of these are classified as endangered species) would cut off to clear the two hectares area where the Grand Utopia hotel and casino project is supposed to rise.
The report said a local architect Jun Palafox, who was first hired by the Grand Utopia Inc to design the project, decided to back out when he found out that management intended to cut the trees.
“We found out only last October that there was a September confirmation by the Ecology Center of SBMA that the existing usage (of the area) is urban forest. I could also put some building in the urban forest, but you can design it in such a way you can preserved those trees," Palafox said.
The report added that Grand Utopia hired Yamasaki architect, an international firm to design the hotel and casino project, which is said to give employment to 1,000 workers.
“We thought we can be able participate in the design and what’s happening there’s wrong with the procedure. A foreign architect was asked to design the project and for me just to attach my name," according to Palafox.
The management of Grand Utopia admitted getting the service of Yamasaki architect, but denied that the tree would be cut.
“We are not going to cut trees in Subic. We are going to transfer them two blocks away. We are a development not a destroyer," said Eric Park, project proponent.
Park assured that they would replace 15 trees in each tree that they would not be able to save.
“If it is technically impossible to ball out the tress, we will replace each tree with 15 more trees," Park assured.
GMA News has been able to get a copy of a document from the Ecology Center of SMBA indicating that the area where Grand Utopia will be constructed is classified as urban forest.
But SBMA chief Arman Areza defended the project and stressed that the area is identified as commercial zone.
“The existing master plan for that area allows for resort, hotel, entertainment…basta no cutting, transferring we will allow," Areza said.
Construction in the area has not started as the Grand Utopia has not secured yet the environmental compliance certificate of ECC from the Environment department. But the ground breaking ceremony took place recently to which by local officials of Olongapo City attended. - Fidel Jimenez, GMANews.TV
"Bagumbayan is not a place or a name. It is character, attitude, values and principle. It is a solution to the ills of
society
and a vision of a great
country."
"What this country needs is not a change OF men but a change IN men" Dick Gordon
Send email and attach photos/images to:
olongapo.subic.post@gmail.com for posting to Olongapo-SubicBayNews
This is a joint private blog of volunteers from Subic Bay.
It is being maintained primarily to collate articles that may be of importance to decision making related to the future of
Subic Bay and as a source of
reference material to construct the history of Subic Bay.
The articles herein posted remains the sole property of original authors and publications which has full credits to the
articles.
Disclaimer: Readers should conduct their own research and due diligence before using any article herein posted for whatever
intended purpose it may be. This private web log will not be liable for any loss or damage caused by a reader's reliance on
information obtained from volunteers of this private blog.
www.subicbay.ph, http://olongapo-subic.com, http://sangunian.com, http://olongapo-ph.com, http://oictv.com,
http://brgy-ph.com, http://subicbay-news.com, http://batanggapo.com
16 January 2012
