Cemeteries and parks

Bencyrus Ellorin

LAST Saturday, friends from upper Macasandig invited me to their picket against a cemetery project in their neighborhood.

I have taken note of this issue earlier when they asked the court to stop the development of the memorial park in upper Macasandig for violating the zoning ordinance, among others.

I did some investigation and found out a funny but really bad palusot allegedly being resorted to in connivance, perhaps, with the developer’s contacts in the local government.

As a rule, cemeteries cannot be established in residential areas. But the City Planning and Development Office (CPDO), in a 2010 document, issued an opinion in favor of the application of the Forest Lake Memorial Park project in upper Macasandig, right in front of Melecia Homes. Across the Macasandig-Taguanao road is already part of Barangay Indahag where the Arroville Subdivision and Molloi Polloi residences are located.

In justifying the development of the cemetery in what is classified as residential area, the CPDO said residential, industrial and commercial areas need to have parks and/or open spaces. This makes sense. Parks and open spaces, especially those with lush vegetation serve as “lungs” of the community where people can breathe fresh air and have a space for recreation. It makes perfect sense.

Lo and behold, in its infinite wisdom, circa 2010, the CPDO said memorial parks are park-like in nature, and therefore can be built in residential, commercial and industrial zones.

But taking this interpretation literally in an insult to common sense and decency. Cemeteries, be it called a memorial park or not, can never substitute for parks and/or open spaces in the purview of law. No explanations needed.

The City Council issued the Preliminary Approval and Location Clearance (Palc) for the project on June 16, 2014. One basis for the approval was the 2010 CPDO opinion that the cemetery project does not violate any law, rules and regulations, among them the Zoning Ordinance.

I think it would be wise for the City Council under Vice Mayor Kikang Uy to revisit the ordinance, which to my understanding, is based on a low blow to the city’s Zoning Ordinance. With the people there now crying foul, it may be prudent for the present City Council to rectify this as leaving this as is would create bad precedence.

Another anomaly the residents decry was the so-called social acceptability certification for the project. Residents said the proponents merely submitted the attendance of the consultation as proof of social acceptability.

Lessons can be learned from this. Next time, if you are asked to sign any sheet of paper, make sure you know what it is for.