Letter from Robin Bond Today Online 21 Mar 12;
It is sad to read of the demise of Bukit Brown. The Minister of State (National Development) has foreclosed discussion of the issue, but given the criticism from several civil society groups, that would be unwise.
It is time to start real discussion, on a matter of long-term importance, way beyond the short-term pressures. Perhaps it is a matter for independent assessment, such as through a public enquiry.
Representations, to date, have concentrated on heritage reasons for Bukit Brown's preservation and have been well made. What has not been aired sufficiently is the character of the area as a natural park.
It retains its original topography, unmodified by bulldozers. There are real valleys and hills, which, even if some survive the development, would not be visible because of the eight-lane bridge and road.
It is quiet. Birdsong is the predominant sound. But that will not be so with eight lanes of traffic whizzing by.
It is parkland, not jungle. The land between the trees has been tended for at least a century and a half. The trees are enormous, spreading beauties and not straight, narrow trunks straining to reach light at the top of the canopy.
Singapore is developing parks for popular use, such as the newly reopened Bishan Park, but nice and popular as it is, it is not "natural".
Trees were felled, allotment gardens were abolished, and above all, a meandering, rock-strewn riverbed has no place in the natural world. It is man-made.
Bukit Brown is natural, beautiful and without equal in Singapore; we will be poorer from its destruction.
In a century's time, when car usage would have decreased due to unsustainability, it would be lamentable if Bukit Brown was no longer there.
Curb car pollution for Singapore to be more sustainable in future
Letter from Mallika Naguran Today Online 22 Mar 12;
WE ARE told that the new road in Bukit Brown will improve traffic flow, which is expected to increase by up to 30 per cent by 2020.
The question we should be asking is: What kind of sustainable Singapore do we want in 2020 and beyond? By building more roads, we continue to encourage private vehicle ownership.
Public transport has been improved, with interconnected Mass Rapid Transit lines and bus networks. So why is our transport system struggling to cope?
The answer is that our planners have a fragmented view of the social, economic, environmental and development aspects of Singapore. Visions and policies do not weave together across these as they should.
Staggered work hours and telecommuting could reduce the stress on public transport during peak hours. This approach was tested 20 years ago in one statutory board but nothing has materialised since.
Flexi-work could start with working from home weekly or monthly, or by changing office hours. The Civil Service, the nation's largest employer, could take the lead.
Buses could be more frequent, with more and varied express bus services to busy areas. Bicycle lanes could be drawn within the bus lanes; half a metre is all that is needed. Melbourne sets a brilliant example of this approach and it works.
Cars are highly polluting, during manufacture, delivery and use. Car ownership here should be given the same treatment as our housing policy. Families of three or more should be allowed to buy a car more easily than singles.
Pollution tax should be incorporated in the cost of cars (besides Electronic Road Pricing). Parking rates should be made uncomfortably high, as is the case in Hong Kong. It is time to wield the stick if we are serious about reducing congestion on roads.
