|
Email
exchange with Sentosa
on viewing of the EIA
Possibilities of a truly integrated development?
After spending the morning low tide documenting the reclamation
on Sentosa's shores, I went to view the Marine Environment Report for
Resorts World on the reclamation project for the Sentosa IR (referred
to as EIA or Environment Impact Assessment here.)
I'm not an expert, so here is a very layman take on the document.
Aspects covered
The report covered impact to currents and conditions for operations at
Cruise Bay, quality of water at the intake to Underwater World, erosion
and other impact on Sentosa Gateway Bridge and Pulau Brani, impact to
nearby habitats including the reefs on Sentosa's Tanjung Rimau, at Labrador
Nature Reserve and mangroves at Belayar Creek.
During the dredging and reclamation process, a limit will be set on the
production of 'spill' (which is what makes the water murky).
The report concludes there won't be much serious impact on all these elements.
Surveys of the affected area conducted over two days at subtidal depth
(highest depth was 2.8m) suggested low coral cover ranging from 20-8%
and 2 species of seagrasses (Halophila minor and Enhalus acoroides).
The survey found that most corals there were 10-50cm in diameter, with
some specimens exceeding 50cm. Data was provided suggesting the live hard
coral cover at the site was lower than average, and that the size of the
site was a tiny proportion of all our reefs.
The impact to reefs and seagrasses are compensated by relocation of appropriate
portions of the existing reef to another suitable location. Details of
these are pretty much what has been
reported in the media.
The relocated portions will be monitored for a year, looking at state
of health, mortality rates, water quality and siltation at the new site.
There will be reports provided on this monitoring. In addition, a portion
of corals on the Sentosa shore will monitored during the dredging and
reclamation for impact.
While there was a mention (in a tabulation) of the cultural heritage value
of the reef, this was not touched upon in the conclusion.
Aspects not covered
I couldn't find mention of an intertidal survey.
Biodiversity list
There was a long list of hard corals and of a few other marine life found
at the affected sites. Including some genera I didn't see on the intertidal.
What is the reclaimed land going to be used for?
From the Resorts
World at Sentosa website
My thoughts
I am not an expert on EIAs and thus can't competently comment on the technical
issues. I can't say whether proposals were adequate or have been properly
implemented according to industry standards.
If an EIA is primarily intended to show proof that there was mindful development,
my layman impression is that some key issues were addressed in the EIA.
It is certainly commendable to attempt to avoid mindlessly destructive
development.
But further thoughts occurred to me after reading the EIA ...
Beyond Damage Control: Exploring all possibilities for our city
Instead of just mitigating the damage, why not plan to integrate existing
natural heritage into the project?
This would benefit Resorts World, Sentosa, Singapore and the ordinary
Singaporean.
How so?
Resorts World and Sentosa would have natural features that are uniquely
Singapore. Living reefs just across from major shopping and commercial
districts -- minutes from the city centre! Natural shores with natural
seasonal changes provide continuous attraction year round.
Resorts World and Sentosa would save money. Upkeep of natural shores would
be far less than keeping specimens alive in a tank. Not to mention the
cost and damage in obtaining the tank specimens from the wild.
Singapore would gain know-how about integrating existing natural features
into first-world facilities. This was an opportunity to prove Singapore's
capability for sustainable city development with our own natural heritage.
A capability that can be exported.
Ordinary Singaporeans would continue to enjoy our natural heritage. At
lower cost than in a man-made facility. We will enjoy fresh air, real
sand, and truly Singaporean marine life. Instead of exotic animals from
elsewhere, and put behind glass. We can be proud that we can develop without
losing what nature has granted in our care. Or taking from the reefs of
other countries.
Instead of breaking up the reef and relocating small pieces elsewhere,
why not adjust the design to integrate the natural shore? After all, there
are plans for a marine theme to the development.
And Resorts World at Sentosa's tagline is "Where Imagination Lives". A
little imagination might have gone some way to for a truly integrated
development.
The EIA viewing process
Prior to this, I had a nearly 2-week email exchange with Sentosa about
viewing the EIA. Full email exchange below.
I wanted to know if I could take notes on my laptop and post my views
about the EIA online I was told that Sentosa "regret to inform that any
electronic devices capable of recording and editing such as digital cameras,
handphones, laptops, personal digital assistants (PDAs)..etc, are not
allowed in the viewing room."
"We do not object to your posting of personal views on the internet. However,
you will not be allowed to quote extracts from the report due to proprietary
reasons."
I found this rather puzzling as the Government Gazette stated that the
EIA was for "public viewing".
Regarding the issue of "proprietary reasons", I asked if the copyright
vests in the government and not the consultants, and since the government
isn't planning to publish and sell this, and wants the public to provide
feedback what's the harm to the government if its contents are circulated
for non-commercial purposes to facilitate public feedback?
I also asked, how would Sentosa proposed that I express personal views
without stating the contents of the document? If I rephrase the contents
to the point that they are no longer direct quotes, wouldn't then this
be unfair representation of the document?
Sentosa's response was "We encourage interested parties to inspect the
report personally, rather than obtain the information through 3rd party
channels so as to avoid misrepresentation of its findings through 3rd
party sources."
The most effective way to achieve this would surely be to post the EIA
online! I suggested this.
This contrasts with their current arrangement of prohibiting recording
devices which essentially means I was reduced to copying the EIA by hand.
In the final response, Sentosa said "On your suggestions to online viewing,
we regret to inform that it will not be made available for this disclosure
exercise."
When I arrived to read the EIA, I was told not to deface the documents
and made to sign to agree to abide by the "proprietary" nature of the
documents. Handphone and all other stuff was removed from the room; besides
my notebook (the kind made from dead trees), ballpoint pen and my personal
notes.
Nicole was nice and I gave her the Guidesheet
to the Southern Shores to show her our reefs. The kind lady at the
front desk of Sentosa Office shared that she grew up on Pulau Saking and
remembers fondly her time at low tide exploring the reefs there with her
father.
My comment on the EIA viewing process
The current process doesn't allow for thoughtful comment based on careful
checks of independent data and reference to resources. It makes discussion
difficult, among stakeholders and with independent experts.
The EIA was also released for public viewing AFTER reclamation was already
well underway.
The entire situation makes it difficult to provide objective, useful feedback.
It is hard to avoid the conclusion that feedback is not genuinely sought.
I find this puzzling. Elsewhere, much effort is made to encourage active
citizenry and to gather feedback from stakeholders through road shows
and focus groups. In fact, a major initiative was recently announced to
gather e-feedback on environmental issues as well as other issues.
Too late for Sentosa, but not too late for our other wild places?
It might be too late for the magnificently large
and old corals on Sentosa that were buried in the reclamation.
But I believe it is never too late to learn so that we can do better the
next time.
To be mindful when considering replacing genuine uniquely Singaporean
features for artificial features that can be found in any other metropolis.
To encourage a more creative approach and early consultation among stakeholders.
Surely this will contribute to a better home for all? Where together,
we explore ALL the possibilities for our city.
Sentosa has just announced plans to develop the wooded foothills of Mount
Faber:"Mount Faber was being tapped because the 500-ha Sentosa island
was 'quickly running out of room'"
Here is another opportunity to explore all possibilities!
The url for this post has been forward to the following
Nicole Tan nicole_tan@sentosa.com.sg
REACH reach@reach.gov.sg
and also posted to the wildfilms
blog (see some of the informative comments there)
REACH response dd 18 Sep 07
On 9/18/07, REACH wrote:
Dear Ria,
Thank you for your patience while we ascertained which agency would be
able > to respond to your feedback.
The Ministry of National Development has provided the following reply,
which we are forwarding to you on their behalf:
MND's reply
"We note your feedback on the public consultation process and will advise
developing agencies to take this into consideration for future projects.
We would also like to highlight that the Resorts World had informed us
that the activities being carried out during the EIA disclosure period
were demolition works to the ferry terminal structures, not reclamation
works.
To prevent and minimize water pollution, temporary sand bunds were built
to contain any fallen debris from the demolition of the two ferry terminals.
Thank you."
Please feel free to contact us again should you have any further feedback
on this or other issues.
Email exchange with Sentosa
on viewing of the EIA
From: "ria tan"
To: nicole_tan@sentosa.com.sg
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:45 PM
Subject: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Dear Nicole Tan,
I refer to the notice in the Government Gazette on the above document
http://www.egazette.com.sg/Document/gg/2007/075412.pdf
I would like to make arrangements to view the document.
Before I do so, may I clarify the following?
(a) May I make notes on my laptop while viewing the document?
(b) May I post my notes and comments on the document to the following
internet sites?
wildsingapore website http://www.wildsingapore.com/
wildfilms blog http://wildfilms.blogspot.com/
Thanks!
Ria Tan
From: Nicole Tan
To ria tan
Sent: Jul 26, 2007 5:51
Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the reclamation
project for the Sentosa IR
Dear Ms Tan,
Thank you for your email.
We regret to inform that any electronic devices capable of recording and
editing such as digital cameras, handphones, laptops, personal digital assistants
(PDAs)..etc, are not allowed in the viewing room.
We do not object to your posting of personal views on the internet.
However, you will not be allowed to quote extracts from the report due to
proprietary reasons.
Kindly let us know your preferred date and time of viewing so that I can
check the availability and make a booking for your visit.
Regards,
Nicole Tan
From: "ria tan"
To: "Nicole Tan"
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Thank you for your reply.
I'm rather confused and hope you can clarify a few points.
The gazette states "The marine environmental report is available for "public
viewing". If the contents can't be made public, then what does "public viewing"
mean?
Could you also clarify your comment on "proprietary reasons"?
If the copyright vests in the government and not the consultants, and since
the government isn't planning to publish and sell this, and wants the public
to provide feedback what's the harm to the government if its contents are
circulated for non-commercial purposes to facilitate public feedback?
Also, how would you propose that I express personal views without stating
the contents of the document? If I rephrase the contents to the point that
they are no longer direct quotes, wouldn't then this be unfair representation
of the document?
Looking forward to your clarifications.
Ria.
From: Nicole Tan
To: ria tan
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 5:44 PM
Subject: Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Dear Ms Tan, Thank you for your email.
We are still considering your feedback and will get back to you as soon
as possible.
Regards,
Nicole Tan
From: Nicole Tan
To ria tan
Sent: Aug 6, 2007 7:13 PM
Subject Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Dear Ms Tan,
I refer to your email dated 26 July 07.
The public viewing process allows members of the public to view the report(s)
at Sentosa Development Corporation's (SDC) office and provide feedback.
We encourage interested parties to inspect the report personally, rather
than obtain the information through 3rd party channels so as to avoid misrepresentation
of its findings through 3rd party sources.
We seek your kind understanding on this issue and at the same time, we would
like to reassure you that we will address your feedback or concerns, if
any arising the report.
Once again, do let me know your time and date of viewing so that I would
be able to reserve the session for you.
Regards,
Nicole Tan
From: "ria tan"
To: "Nicole Tan"
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Thank you Nicole, for your reply.
I'm glad to know that individuals are encouraged to obtain the information
directly from the primary source instead of through third party channels.
An effective way to achieve this would be to post the EIA online. So that
all interested parties can get direct access to the primary source. And
spend time to examine the primary information carefully. Check issues and
compare data. To come up with considered and thoughtful responses and feedback.
In contrast to online publication, your arrangement for viewing the EIA
(as indicated in your earlier email) would be in the absence of "any electronic
devices capable of recording and editing such as digital cameras, handphones,
laptops, personal digital assistants (PDAs)..etc", which "are not allowed
in the viewing room".
This essentially means I would be reduced to copying the EIA by hand for
further consideration and reference. Will I be allowed to take such notes
out of the viewing room? Or I am expected to come up with feedback and views
on the spot?
Putting the EIA online would surely more effectively meet the main aim of
"allowing members of the public to view the report..and provide feedback"?
I'm glad that feedback and concerns will be addressed.
However, there was no mention in your latest email of my concern about expressing
my views on the internet without stating the contents of the EIA?
Or has the position changed on this issue? That I will not be permitted
express my views about the EIA on the internet?
I would be grateful for clarifications.
Ria
From: Nicole Tan
To: to ria tan
Sent: Aug 13, 2007 7:14 PM
Subject Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
Dear Ms Tan,
Thank you for your email.
On your suggestions to online viewing, we regret to inform that it will
not be made available for this disclosure exercise.
Feedbacks and views can be provided after the viewing but should be made
before the end of the disclosure period which falls on 17 Aug 07. You may
also remove notes that you have made during the viewing session. With regards
to expression of views, we have no objections to you presenting your own
views on the internet.
As the public disclosure ends on 17 Aug 07, kindly let us know your preferred
date of viewing for our arrangements.
Regards,
Nicole Tan
From: ria tan
Date: Aug 13, 2007 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: Viewing of Marine Environment Report for Resorts World on the
reclamation project for the Sentosa IR
To: Nicole Tan
Thank you for your reply.
I will be available to read the report on 15 Aug (Wed) morning from 0830hrs
until 12noon. Do advise time and venue.
links
- Doomed
Sentosa shore on the wildsingapore website with links to flickr
photos, blog entries and more.
Media reports
Blog entries
Related articles on Southern
Islands development plans |