Green, green grass ... gone

Rate of conversion of green fields to buildings in Sengkang a source of concern
Letter from Ling Seow Kang Today Online 30 Oct 10;

I HAVE been living for the past six years in Sengkang, a new town with ample vacant land plots within it since it was built in the late 1990s.

The green open spaces have enhanced the well-being of the residents. Some of the fields have been used for kite-flying, while others have enabled residents to go on pleasant evening runs.

In recent month, however, there has been a sharp increase in the number of land sales in Sengkang and other towns in response to the demand for housing.

All of a sudden, the open fields around my estate have been boarded up for construction work or have had notices put up to indicate they are on sale.

I am alarmed by the scarcity of our land resources as well as the rate at which we are using them up. While the quality of urban life should be more than made up for by new parks and park connectors, thanks to our excellent urban planning, the rate of conversion of green fields to buildings is still a concern.

Firstly, even with adoption of the best green building features - like green roofs and solar panels, and environmentally-friendly construction - there is still going to be an increase in our carbon footprint due to the new buildings.

Secondly, the green fields might have been from cleared secondary forests or swamps and left idle, often for years, while awaiting development . This means there was already a loss in carbon sequestration potential and wildlife habitat of the original, more dense vegetation.

Thirdly, excavation during construction might mean the loss of top-soil, which could have been used for productive cultivation while the land was awaiting development.

I agree we have no choice in this case, given the needs of our people, and we are already trying to minimise the environmental impact of our development.

However, looking at our past success with the "Garden City" concept, one opportunity for us to do better might be to put the remaining vacant plots to productive interim use to meet important needs - for example, to grow food to raise our food supply resilience.

Or we can look into agriculture within parks or along park connectors as a way to partly compensate for the farmlands which have been lost to development over the years. Another possibility is to accelerate high-yield vertical farming here.

Since our land reserves will continue to dwindle, and environmental pressures will continue to increase, such options to optimise our land use might make good sense for our city-state.