Sengkang resident has a columbarium problem even MP Dr Lam cannot solve

Before you decide to call someone NIMBY, why don't you just don't?

Jonathan Lim| January 07, 08:27 AM

One user on Hardwarezone's Eat Drink Man Woman forum gave an account of his problem that many could identify with since the announcement that a columbarium would be built at Fernvale Link.

It is best you read it for yourself:

HWZ sengkang saga 0

He concluded by saying that "each family has their own set of problems".

Who are we, as bystanders to this situation, to judge Sengkang residents as having the Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) syndrome and find their actions deplorable?

We are not in the shoes of these residents. Even if some of us are living next to a columbarium and are okay with it, it does not give us any special authority to pass judgement on the residents who are voicing their concerns and displeasure.

Their lives would be affected permanently, many times in ways we would never imagine - such as a very displeased wife, perhaps a retirement plan shot to bits or even a debilitating superstition. Who are we to judge?

Another EDMW user, Sofero, puts it aptly:

HWZ sengkang saga

Even if the issue is about property value, user cheong79 gives perspective on why Fernvale Lea residents have their right to speak up:

HWZ sengkang saga 2

User victorian07 makes a good case on why residents should make their own concerns heard:

HWZ sengkang saga 3

 

Frustration from residents generated good outcomes

Had the residents not made a fuss online, would a dialogue session have been held in the first place?

If not for the dialogue session, would we have URA and HDB coming up with a statement to reassure residents that the proposed temple will integrate well with surrounding developments?

Without a dialogue session, would we have plucky Sharon Toh clearing the air that the temple/columbarium hall is being operated by a for-profit organisation?

For-profit companies outbidding religious organisations to secure a "place of worship" land - is that okay?

There are naysayers of Toh who say that finding out who the temple is run by is irrelevant to the residents. While it does not have direct impact on the residents, there are wider implications for religious organisations in Singapore.

Will religious organisations with less resources be squeezed out in Singapore? In this example, the temple operator is a for-profit organisation under a listed company with shareholders which bid almost $1 million more for the site than a religious group.

In fact, Sengkang residents and beyond would like to find out from the authorities whether this ruling will continue.

A "catch-all" clause is used in the fine print

Lastly, to those who criticised the Sengkang residents for not reading the fine print disclaimer from HDB:

"The information contained herein is subject to change at any time without notice and cannot form part of an offer or contract. The proposed facilities and their locations as shown are only estimates. The proposed facilities may include other ancillary uses allowed under URA's prevailing Development Control guidelines. For example, places of worship may also include columbarium as an ancillary use, while community centres may also include childcare centres. The implementation of the facilities is subject to review by the Government or competent authorities While reasonable care has been taken in providing this information, HDB shall not be responsible in any way for any damage or loss suffered by any person whether directly or indirectly as a result of reliance on the said information or as a result of any error or omission therein."

They have focused on the line that was highlighted above. Perhaps before these people online feel too smug that they signed on their BTO papers with eyes wide open, may I draw their attention to this particular sentence in the same disclaimer:

"The information contained herein is subject to change at any time without notice and cannot form part of an offer or contract."

Subject to change without notice and cannot form part of a contract. How do you ever guard yourself against this type of clause? Not buy a BTO forever?

 

Like what you read? Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to stay updated.