The Chamber of Real Estate and Builders’ Associations (CREBA) has opposed the proposed changes in the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) which it said would run in serious conflict with the Pambansang Pabahay para sa Pilipino (4PH)  program. 

“Congress should rethink the entire bill, and instead focus on instituting well-conceived specific measures based on the 4PH implementation paradigm already approved by the President, to ensure the program’s continuity way beyond the current administration’s term,” said Noel Cariño, CREBA president, in a statement. 

Cariño was reacting to House Bill No. 10772, approved by the Lower House recently, which  changes the conditions for compliance with the balanced housing requirement, or social housing quota, imposed on private developers.

HB 10772 requires compliance projects under the UDHA must be within the main project itself, or in the same locality as the main project.  Whereas before, developers have a choice of where to locate the socialized housing component under quota.

Under the 30-year old UDHA, a developer proposing to produce a residential subdivision or condominium is required to develop a socialized housing project equivalent to 15% of the total project cost or area of the subdivision, or 5 percent in the case of a condominium.

According to Carino, the new requirement  is impractical when the main project is in Metro Manila or urbanized areas or peripheries where cheap land is not available.

“How can private developers build socialized housing on high-value lands, and still comply with the required building specifications and mandated price ceilings?,” Carino said.

The bill also provides that instead of actually producing social housing units, developers may instead pay 25 percent of the required compliance cost to the local government unit (LGU)  where the main project is situated.

Carino said the  amount represents a total loss for the developer, as it constitutes a donation or a straight handout to the LGU.

“It would involve millions of pesos per compliance, considering that the main project cost could run into billions. The concerned LGU would be receiving a double windfall.”

 Carino said HB 10772 “appears still grounded on the premise that coercing private developers would resolve the problem of housing the underprivileged.”

“The quota under the UDHA is by itself already onerous, even as it has been proven ineffective; still, the bill prescribes new conditionalities that would be impossible for developers to meet, and severe sanctions for non-compliance,” CREBA said.

These issues are expected to be among the major discussion points at the upcoming national convention of CREBA slated from October 16-18 this year at Hilton Hotel in Clark Freeport Zone, Pampanga where lawmakers, key shelter agency heads, government officials and industry experts will converge in celebration of the country’s national shelter month.