if anyone does recall the scenery of that stretch of road, there
was more than one angsana tree there. I have a feeling that the
tree that is now left standing was supposed to be chopped as well..
somehow, someone (and I am suspecting NParks) had a last minute
change of mind and wanted to preserve the tree.
for the last few years motorists had to meander their way around
that tree. Those who are familiar with the road scheme, will expect
what's in stall for them, more often then not, those who came close
to accidents are those who are not familiar with the road and the
speed limits in place. The split caused them to have to decide left
or right.. so you put all that together.. that's the accident or
the near misses..
The tree should have been gone in the first place. But consider the
following:
1. If LTA had chosen to cut the tree. Against the wishes of the
green groups and those for preserving the tree.. The costs would
have been saved. But what price does it have for our respect for
greenery and how are we to price such trees and the greenery when
we are branded as a garden city? Bearing in mind, there are going
to be more road widening works and all.. to cater to 6.5m people
and the increased traffic. For those who drive, take a look at how
close the trees are to the roads and expressways.. If we don't try
hard enough to save trees, we would gradually erode our status as a
garden city.
2. So, LTA chose to protect the tree. And in so doing, spent
money.
3. Going forward, if someone really dies due to an accident and
indirectly as a result of that tree and the traffic scheme in
place, how much will his/her life cost with respect the 400,000
spent? Imaging what will be the topic for discussion on this forum
if such a case really hit the news.. a lot of people will be crying
out .. oh.. should have cut the tree yadda yadda..
So.. did LTA regret? Nope.. I dun think so.. why should they
be?
Its never an easy black and white case. the intention set out to
keep the tree was a good one.. but people dun follow rules despite
the signs that have been put in place. If you ask me, i have to
tell you that the motorists who dun follow the rules are the ones
who is now causing the govt to spend the additional amount to cut
the tree. if anyone who has to regret, should be those motorists
who actually dared to complain about the tree being a hazard. They
should have obeyed the traffic signs in place first.
For those who are suggesting to transplant.. please think again and
very hard.. the tree might be in danger and if it fails, are you
going to say "on, they shouldn't have spent the money to
transplant"
