Friday, January 2, 2009 [ sunstar.com.ph ]
By Jovi T. De Leon
CITY OF SAN FERNANDO -- The legal counsel of a developer pursuing the development of a memorial park in Barangay San Agustin here said last week the project is "perfectly legal and well-documented."
Lawyer Victor Roque, counsel of Neldy's Realty and Development Corporation, developer of the Sanctuario De San Fernandino Memorial Gardens in Ramar Village, told Sun.Star "the memorial park is perfectly legal, including the construction of a two-way bridge and its right-of-way there being pursued now, because it has merited all the necessary permits from authorities necessary for its development."
On December 29, concerned residents of the village, led by one Virgie Santos, trooped to the office of Vice-Governor Roseller "Yeng" Guiao to seek the assistance and intervention of the Provincial Board (PB) regarding the memorial park, which they said "was being continuously developed despite our opposition to it."
The group of about 15 residents said despite their stiff opposition to the park after a public hearing, the City Government and the City Council has approved on October 10, 2008 Ordinance 2007-009, "reclassifying a parcel of land from agricultural to institutional (memorial) use that shall be called Sanctuario De San Fernandino Memorial Gardens and granting thereon preliminary approval and location clearance with development permit covered by TCT 160751-R containing an area of 91,297 square meters located in Barangay San Agustin, City of San Fernando."
The residents also claimed that despite the contrary opinion of the city's legal office headed by lawyer Ramsey Ocampo who opined that the memorial park does not conform with several standards required and called for by government agencies, like proximity to residences, sanitation and its being a health hazard to dwellers there, the proponents of the project ignored their pleas and objections.
The residents alleged that they "were being ignored by city hall officials" on their appeals, prompting them to seek for a temporary restraining order from the court here, and intervention from higher government officials like Guiao and the PB.
For his part, Art Punzalan, Guiao's Executive Assistant, told the residents he would facilitate a meeting between them and Guiao and seek for an audience with the PB on its next session "to see what they could do" although the matter is a "city-level" issue and that the concern was really for the court to resolve since a complaint has already filed by them.
But Roque, shedding light to the residents' allegations, said the project has been well discussed with them, contrary to their claims that they "have been ignored."
He said they have been regularly consulted on this since the very start.
Roque added that the City Council has carefully deliberated the ordinance approving the park's development, including the "memo" of Ocampo to former City Administrator Sonia Soto, and that the City Board has taken into consideration the concerns and worries of the residents there, including the controversial right-of-way which they are contesting.
"The City Council and Mayor Oscar Rodriguez himself signed and approved the ordinance after finding that the project proponents have complied with every detail and requirement mandated by government agencies like the Housing Land Use and Regulatory Board and other local implementing city units," Roque said.
He said it is not true that officials and the proponents are ignoring them, but are just simply awaiting the court's ruling on the complaint the residents filed in court.
"It seems they are shopping around for support from other officials. Why can't they wait until the proper legal forum decides on this?" Roque asked.
He added that it was in fact their (the residents) legal counsels who asked for a postponement of the supposed hearing on December 23 because "they needed more time to prepare."
According to Roque, the hearing has been reset to January 7."But as far as we are concerned, the memorial park is legal and is compliant to city rules and regulations. Still, we would listen and discuss with them their concerns during the proper legal forum."
