Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

BRIEFER ON THE LOYOLA HEIGHTS COMMUNITY S OPPOSITION TO THE SM BLUE RESIDENCE PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.

SP-4866 (SERIES OF 2010)  Through Resolution No. SP 4866 (S. 2010), the 17th City Council of the Quezon City Council during its 83rd Regular Session authorized an exemption in favor of SM Development Corporation (SMDC) for the construction of a forty-two (42) storey mixed commercial and residential condominium building with basement and roofdeck with amenities located at Katipunan Avenue corner Aurora Boulevard, Barangay Loyola Heights, Quezon City. The resolution was adopted on March 8, 2010 under suspended rules thus allowing consideration of the measure on the same day without deliberations. The reason given for the exemption is stated in the fifth preambular ( Whereas ) clause: (t)he proposed project will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the appropriate use of the adjoining property. The undertaking will provide and promote livelihood in the community. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 10-223 (Councilors Precious Hipolito Castelo and Alfredo Paolo Vargas III, both of District 2)
 The proposed resolution sees to revoke Res. No. SP 4866. The PR however does not provide a reason or grounds to support the proposed revocation.

GROUNDS IN SUPPORT OF PR NO. 10-223 AND THE REVOCATION OF RES. NO. SP-4866
 The 1987 Constitution, in Article XII (National Economy and Patrimony), sec. 6 provides that (t)he use of property bears a social function, and all economic ag ents shall contribute to the common good. o

Private property and its use may be regulated by the State pursuant to this mandate to ensure that the use of property should be for a social function and should contribute to the common good. The passage of SP-4866 in one day is inconsistent with the scrutiny that the Constitution requires of the State in relation to the use of property.

 SP-4866 was passed arbitrarily (no basis for the exceptions under QC s Zoning Ordinance), with patent bias (the suspension of rules that allowed the passage in one day is justified only when time is of the essence which was not the situation in the SMDC project) and recklessly (the suspension of rules and the disallowance of transparent public consultations prevented the consideration of adverse effects of the proposed 42storey project on the environment, traffic and community welfare and safety). o

As a matter of principle, exceptions are strictly construed against the applicant, i.e., the party seeking the exception has the burden of proving entitlement, failing which, the exception should be denied. By not deliberating on the basis for its conclusion that (t)he proposed project will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the appropriate use of the adjoining property. The undertaking will provide and promote livelihood in the community the 17th City Council effectively placed the burden wrongly on the oppositors, LHC, not on the applicant, SMDC. This is irregular and show prima facie (on its face) favorable treatment to a private entity indicative of graft.

 The grant of the exemption and the manner by which it was granted also will be detrimental to LHC, which is now unfairly burdened with opposing an undue exception. It is also detrimental to the public interest, i.e., the rest of Quezon City, which has an interest in ensuring that the existing zoning ordinance will be enforced strictly and any exceptions be strictly construed against the applicant.