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 in this post.)

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 on wildsingapore.

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 the contents is also is permanently online at wildsingapore

Your comments?
I have posted this on the blog so that you can add your comments to it. Sentosa has indicated that "the public disclosure period ends on 17 Aug 07" so do try to post your comments before this time.

More links
Doomed Sentosa shore with links to flickr photos, blog entries and more.
Coral relocation and announcement of EIA various media reports
Sentosa's treasure island of coral By Teh Jen Lee New Paper 25 May 07