Wednesday, September 10, 2008 Osmeña: Develop SRP accordingly By Antonio V. Osmeña Estatements
THE inhabitants, especially the taxpayers, of Cebu City should be concerned about how their taxes are invested to reclaim a portion the city’s south coastal area.
The taxpayers are concerned about the 2,872,369-square meter South Road Properties (SRP), which is now fully reclaimed and ready for infrastructure development.
Critics of the SRP, who pinpoint what they perceive as the negative management style of Mayor Tom O, should submit a win-win proposal in the development and marketing of the SRP lots. Politics should be left out of the SRP since the people of Cebu City own the project not Mayor Tom Osmeña.
Analysts argue that, instead of criticizing, the people who are concerned about the SRP should contribute win-win ideas and let the public be aware.
The political interference is apparent in the comparison of the 160-hectare North Reclamation Project with the 40 hectare Ayala development. A physical inspection of both areas will disclose a big disparity in infrastructure development and the strict implementation of the Deed of Restrictions in the use of the land.
The late Serging Osmeña Jr., who conceptualized and developed what can be described as a “city within a city,” had imposed certain restrictions that require the lot buyer to construct a building within two years after purchase of the property.
Failure to do so would revert the land to the Cebu Development Corp., which was the developer of the North Reclamation Project (NRP).
But political interference in the North Reclamation Project has made what was a beautiful concept into a speculative venture.
Will history repeat itself with the SRP?
Although a “Marcos decree” is no longer a threat to the SRP, like what happened to the North Reclamation Project, conflicting political ideals could jeopardize opportunities in this P50-billion gold mine (minimum gross income when fully developed).
In the case of the NRP, Marcos cronies—thru a decree—confiscated the project from Serging Osmeña Jr. to financially paralyze his political agenda.
On the other hand, the SRP is many things to the political opposition in Cebu City.
The SRP could be a potential showcase for Cebu, which has been a trading center since the 16th century. But nobody, except Mayor Tom O, knows the development strategy for SRP.
In the SRP case, adequate provisions for commuting to economic nerve centers must be carefully considered if the developing plans are to be successfully concluded. There is a need for the people to know the cost per square meter of raw land (reclaimed land) to be able to determine developing costs or improvement.
What kind of development plans will SRP adopt? Serging Osmeña Jr. intended to subdivide the 160-hectare NRP into 1,000-square meter lots to provide as many people the opportunity to invest. The NRP lots were sold successfully to hundreds of individuals until politics caused panic among lot owners, forcing them to sell at bargain prices to speculators.
In the original plan, the SRP was to be developed into light industry plots.
There is no hurry for Mayor Tom O to sell the raw land at SRP on a piece-meal basis. What is needed immediately is for Mayor Tom to finally decide on the type and kind of improvements at SRP and get a partner to finance the developing costs.
The developing costs will include the water mains, sanitary sewers, street grading and paving, curbs and gutters, cost of raw land and miscellaneous costs – legal, sales and overheads.
Assuming that the SRP will be fully developed two years from now, gross sale from the lots could amount to P50 billion, on the assumption that 30 percent of the gross area will be appropriated for road networks and open space and a net saleable area of 2,010,658 square meters will be left.
A 1,000-square meter plot at the SRP could be sold easily for P25 million.
A simple arithmetic will show critics that Mayor Tom is correct in pursuing the SRP.
I hope we will not violate the economic law of “highest and best land use.” Since the highest and best use is always determined by the present worth of future rights to income or amenities, consideration must be given to the existence of demand for the uses and purposes to which SRP is dedicated in the overall subdivision plan.
