OVER the past few weeks, my Facebook timeline has been flooded by news and reactions stemming from a recent ruling handed down by the Supreme Court, ordering the immediate suspension of the construction of the controversial Torre de Manila development by DMCI Homes in the city of Manila.
Looking at the bigger picture, I feel like the real issue brought about by Torre de Manila goes beyond the various controversies surrounding it, most notable of which was the alleged revision of the original zoning policy that granted DMCI the green light to proceed with the project. More important, what should be worthy of our time and discussion here is the seemingly deliberate lack of foresight and commitment that stakeholders are exerting toward advocating sustainable urban progress.
I remember one of my good friends, renowned urban planner Paulo Alcazaren, posting a random thought on his Facebook page just last week. “More than compromised views of historic monuments and sites [although this is very important]…there is a lack of vision for Manila and the rest of the metropolis that balances commerce with culture, progress with public good, development with delight.”
To which the Heritage Conservation Society added: “The city [Manila] does not have a clear vision of progress that could, as in Singapore, ensure conservation of key sites, clusters and individual buildings, as well as allow for good density and development that could moderate corporate greed and ensure that everyone profits for an evolving Manila.”
We all know Metro Manila cities are evolving and transforming their respective landscapes to accommodate and respond to the demands and preferences of today’s diverse urban population mix.
Like all other prominent groups of cities around the world, Metro Manila is trying very hard to become a relevant advocate of urban progress, and, while we may have been enjoying bits of success in this regard, we cannot deny that there are still tons of work to do if Metro Manila really intends to become the face of the country’s sustainable progress.
Establishing control
“The [Torre de Manila] controversy brings to light the problems of lack of development control and comprehensive land-use management, both at the local government unit and at the Metro/National Capital Region level,” Paulo wrote in another post on his page, still in reaction to the controversial issue.
“Manila and most of the other 15 cities and one town in Metro Manila have limited capacities to absorb additional FARs [floor area ratios] due to already overburdened transport networks and utilities systems on the verge of breakdown [drainage, power, water].”
Control and balance. That’s exactly what local governments need to firmly uphold when faced with the idea of investments and businesses being floated in their faces.
There needs to be some sense of foresight and commitment in promoting the interests of the city, its dwellers and the landscape side-by-side with that of the business community. “Private initiatives outpace public infrastructure, like a hare to a tortoise, and everyone loses in the end,” Alcazaren added.
“The ideal situation is a framework of rational development, where all interests are taken into account—private and public.”
Hard, challenging, but not entirely impossible.
The responsibility of promoting the kind of urban progress, where every entity emerges as a winner, rests on the shoulders of local governments and those from the private sector alike. A genuine commitment toward nurturing this kind of vision will, without a doubt, prove to be a worthy practice that can inspire urban progress.
“Private developers, if you ask them in confidence, would rather have a level playing field, where FARs are strictly enforced and requirements of grease money is not involved [not that anyone will admit what is perceived to be the reality],” Alcazaren noted.
“They and the public would also prefer rational development that prepares infrastructure first before haphazard opportunistic building, where all parameters are negotiable. Buyers of condos will then be assured that they will be able to get to their units without wading through traffic or floods.
Developers will be able to continue their necessary service of providing housing (necessary because of government’s epic failure to provide affordable housing for all) and commercial space that benefits everyone in both the short and long terms.”
Control and balance. These two concepts shall always go hand-in-hand, if we are really committed to furthering the interests of our cities, our fellow Filipinos and the local business sector. The key to real progress does not lie in the kind of projects, initiatives and developments that both local governments and real-estate companies have in mind, but, rather, on how we intend to champion an ecosystem boosted by cooperation, collaboration and a genuine commitment to achieve prosperity.
1 comment
I observed that our metropolis lacks iconic buildings and other architectural delights like other major Asian cities. The high rise towers that SM, Robinsons and DMCI built lacks imagination and looks like boxed rabbit holes. Functional, yes but staid and mediocre not uplifting.!