Cyber Space

I read an article reporting about IT trend for year 2011. The report predicted that in years to come people will carry more gadget with them and communication is so mobile and instant. Basically reading newspaper with conventional means is considered outdated as we are reading yesterday's news today. More people will rely on online news and instant messages for updating themselves.

Presently many will carry their PDA or mobile phone with laptop, but in very near future we might only carry a smart phone incorporating the functions for communication, data keeping, searching of news and information, personal management or even company management. Perhaps the size of smart phone will be getting smaller and smarter, of course cheaper.

So, the question is how does this trend impact on town planning? Once people are on the move all the time, communicating becomes so convenient and easy, transaction of businesses within a split second and with finger tips, then it means requirement for physical space is reducing and occupation ratio per staff is getting smaller. Of course, the requirement for travelling is diminishing as well. So, the provision of commercial floor space will also be affected as we will occupied and used the space effectively and efficiently.

Welcome to the cyber world, sooner or later depending how an individual embraces it.

Land Matter for Social Services

Compatibility of land matter and planning? While planning is moving forward taking the trend and direction of development in line with the vision of a city, the restriction of land procedure has hindered the plan from implementation. For example, in order to allow old folk home to cater for the social need, bungalow house is allowed to be converted for limited use. However, when it comes to land matter, the National Land Code does not allow conversion of land title to non-residential use. It means the planning decision is not complied with the land restriction.

The question is shall we adjust the land restriction in anticipating the planning need. If we are concerned about changes in community development and providing the social services are critical, then land restriction shall be relaxed to allow for such provision. For example, to allow residential unit that fulfill the planning requirement to be converted for kindergarten, nursery or other social community services.

Quality vs Quantity

Between quality and quantity, which one is more important? When it comes to hard work in which labour is required, then quantity is critical. For example, to carry something you need to have more hands. That is the idea for many project proponents when it comes to development. Many project proponents believe that having higher intensity will bring in better return and yield. That's why most of the time they ask for 4 storey of shop house rather than settle for 2 storey or 3 storey of shop building. Is this true?

Look at Bangsar area, a 2 storey shop lot demanded much more higher price compared to a 5 storey shop building in other area like Cheras or Kepong. Some argue that Bangsar can command such high price because of the strategic location and presence of the affluent society there. However, buildings in Hartamas or Mutiara Damansara also command higher price compared to other area indicated that apart from location, concept of development is also playing a major part in determining the price of building.

If this is true, in other word, quantity itself is not the only pricing factor. Quality is more critical as well.

Key to Quality Service Delivery

How to improve the delivery service of local authority? This is the topic for discussion during a gathering of MBPJ councillors and officers last month. The discussion centred on 5 main topics, namely leadership, human capital, ICT, finance as well as publicity and marketing. Many of the important components have been categorised under these five topics. These include bureaucracy, legal provision, competency and capacity, strategic actions, stakeholders relationship and other management issues.


While many of these are not new, most of these have no immediate solution. For example, although state of art technology is available, the capability of staff to handle it is low and become a hindrance for applying the technology to improve quality of service.

At the end of the day, it is competency counted. Capability of human is the key to implementation. We need staff with competency and capability, but also not to forget the commitment and compassion of doing things. It is critical to have dedicated staff for planning, implementing and monitoring programmes. The hope is there for effective service delivery if everyone put their 3"H" together, namely the heart, head and hand.

Retreat

I attended few retreats over the last one month. Generally the retreats meant to discuss achievement for the past year and plan new work programmes for next year. I found that objectives of meeting are easily achievable as all attendees are discussing matters under a relax mood. Everyone is allowed to voice their grievances and opinion openly and received responses in constructive manner. The atmosphere is so cordial.

But at time, if serious matters are discussed then it will turn out to be hotly debated. Perhaps because everyone is in the relax mood and got a shock when a heated debate is started. So, may be it is good to not bring up serious matters for discussion during a retreat.

Implementation Gap

We have discussion about intensity development recently. One reckons that intensity of development is relative to the capacity of infrastructure and level of service on the road network. If capacity of the road can cater for more vehicles or the public transportation system is effective, then it is not a problem for granting higher density or plot ratio for a development project. Everyone agreed to the opinion but nobody knows and convinces that this will happen. Obviously many have no confidence on execution plan. Implementation has always become a major obstacle to planning.

While we can have plans outlining various measures to overcome the problems or to improve existing situation, the implementation will determine how effective the measures.

We always put in a lot of resources to come out a so-called good plan, but never bother to spend equal resources for the implementation or monitoring of the plan implementation. Why is this so?

The problem lies with the segmentation of planners and implementers. Most of the time, bridging gap is a problem. Plans are not filtered down well and implemented properly because the implementers have different priority and at time might not understand what have been planned for.

So, bottom of the problem is the structural arrangement. Better communication is needed. More platform and means of communication for better interaction and understanding will bridge the gap between planners and implementers.

Free Bus Service

I attended a briefing delivered by the State Government of Penang yesterday. One of the interesting innovation they have carried out is the providing of FREE bus service in the CBD of Georgetown. The bus service is provided by Rapid Penang and fully pay by the Municipal Council of Penang. I was told that the Council is paying RM50,000 per month to get the service done. After listening to the briefing, I cannot resist on trying out myself the service provided. It is pretty good covering the major destinations in CBD area, namely the KOMTAR, Padang Kota, Jetty and others.


To say the least, I am impressed with the political will and management commitment of the Council to provide public transportation service. While many have argued that public transportation is under the juridic ion of Federal Government and the local authority can only have minor responsibility, I disagree with the argument. The example of Penang Municipal Council proved that local authorities can have a big role to play in providing public transportation service and not to confine to providing bus stop, bus lane and sign board only, after all everyone is kept talking about having an efficient public transportation service for overcoming the traffic congestion and other road-based traffic problem.


If the local authorities do not take pro-active action in solving the transportation problems, or the least is to complimenting efforts of others to reduce the traffic problems, then it is a problem that forever cannot keep up with the pace of development, i personally think.

Partnership

I attended the Sign Language Training Course jointly organised by MBPJ and the Lions Club District 308B1 on Saturday morning. The course aimed at teaching participants the right way to communicate with deaf people. More than often misunderstanding occurred between the able and disabled people due to the problem of communication. While many have taken for granted that deaf people should be able to "read" what the able person is talking about, it is actually turned out to be "no reading". So, the course is timely and essential especially for the front line people in dealing with deaf people. The organising also saw the partnership between government body and NGO for promoting good cause. I believe, partnership likes this is very much lacking at the moment. Pooling and sharing resources through mutual understanding and cooperation is of great help to inculcate greater result and impact. It is unnecessary to work thing out individually especially if we are talking about targeting the same beneficiaries. often different groups cannot work things out simply because of organisational egoism.

So, get rid of egoism for greater impact should be the first step forward for true partnership.

LA21=1+1+1

I was invited to share my thoughts with stakeholders from Klang on 1st December 2010 regarding the above topic. I am preparing my presentation now. We always talk about 1+1 in referring to the instant coffee bag mixed with either sugar or milk or sometime the ingredients for some household care products.


So, what is 1+1+1 then? My immediate response is to refer to the tripartite partnership between government, community and business or the 3 dimensions of development, namely economy, social and environment. The discourse should have lead the participants to refresh on ways to achieve sustainable development at local level.


Stakeholder partnership and participation is important as without a true collaboration, the planned actions cannot be implemented at all. It is always mistakenly that whatever discussed and agreed upon by all stakeholders will be carried out by the local authority. It is the synptom of "I am telling what should you do" and "Please do it as what we have agreed" and "We are CBO and hence no capacity to do it" and "Please provide me this and that for me to do it". Real spirit of partnership and participation means pooling in and sharing of resources for actions be done. It is a concept of everyone does things that he is good at and collectively to achieve the results, and hence the glory of achieving it. Having said this, I observed that many do not realise the beauty of partnership. Sometime although it is intended of doing things under partnership spirit, it turned out to be another one sided event or equality in partnership was not significant. So 1+1+1 in partnership becomes a big challenge to realise.

Balancing and integrating 3 different dimensions for development is critical and important. Any action will have impacts on different dimensions of development too. Thereby, consider other dimensions when a specific programmes is carried out becomes another big challenge. Presently the structure of mechanisme, governance system and mind set of stakeholders are very segmented and tend to confined to every one's own cocoon. We are not very comfortable to step out from our comfort zone and make changes or step into other territories that we might not familiar with. For example, to ask the businesses to consider environmental conservation as art of their company mission. Similarly to ask NGO to take profit as one of the bottom line in achieving effectiveness of programmes. Likewise asking the Government to account public environmental cost in approving a project. Obviously, we have not crossed the line of integrating these dimensions as ONE. Many time, we provide something with noble objective without realising that this might have affected other dimension. For example, to enhance greater interaction between society and public sector, a big gathering serving plenty of food is held. It is nothing wrong perhaps, becomes an issues only if food wastage is there and unfriendly kitchen utensils are used. Unfortunately it happens almost everyday. So 1+1+1 in the sense of developmental dimension refers to detail and holistic planning to integrate different dimension so that the meaning of sustainable development is realised.

It is easy said than done as nobody would like to step into other unfamiliar territories. However, for the way forwards and the sake of sustainable development or LA21, it is essential and important.

Maximum or Optimum of Development?

When it comes to intensity control of development, some planning authorities allow permissible plot ratio and maximum plot ratio as control measure. It simply means permissible plot ratio is the right entitlement for project proponents to develop their land based on what can be allowed by complying with the set guidelines. Whereas the maximum plot ratio is only allowed if the project proponents have proposed extra measures to qualify them for the extra bonus plot ratio. These include measures to improve public accessibility and connectivity, public enjoyment and comfortably, surrounding area's enhancement of environmental quality or any other matters that will benefit the public at large. In other words, it is not automatically granted and should not be construed as "by right I should have". I think when the planning authority comes out with this system, it is with the purpose of encouraging more CSR gesture from the project proponents and to compensate them for doing good to the environment and community. More importantly, it is stated clearly and transparent in the gazette development plan. The argument of I do not know such incentive or the notion of "if you do not allow me for the maximum plot ratio, then you are depriving the development process or no investor will want to come to your city", to me is unacceptable.

However, if the argument is the plot ratio provided is too low compared to the cost of investment, then the planning authority should have done a review on the plot ratio so that it is at par with the capacity of infrastructure and also the aspiration of the city. The saying that "it is not fair to deprive me to entitle for the maximum..." is an under statement itself, i think. What the planning authorities ask is for the project proponents to justify why should you be entitled for the maximum plot ratio and to me if you have contributed towards that entitltement, then it is nothing wrong or shame to request for.

Parking

I was made to understand that providing a car park lot in a complex will require 350 sq. ft of space. This includes the turning and passage for the car movement. No wonder when the Petaling Jaya City Council increased the requirement for car parking provision on condominium from 2 lot per unit plus 20% for visitor to 2.5 lot per unit plus 30% for visitor, the project proponents objected strongly to the requirement. This means from ratio of 2.4 lot to 2.75 lot, an increment of 0.35 lot per unit of dwelling. They explained that development cost will increase and finally the house purchasers will be paying extra.

The Council has proposed the changes due to heavy traffic congestion along the main road adjacent to condominium area due to insufficient of car parking provision in the condominium compound. It is also known that average car ownership in PJ has reached 2.4 cars per household. The trend is anticipated increasing with affluent society of PJ and inefficiency of public transportation network and infrastructure. People even those who cannot afford or those who prefer to take public transport, have no choice but rely on own transport for commuting. Hence, the request for car parking facilities.

So, what is the solution then? To request the project proponents to provide less car parks but without immediate solution or asking them to provide more car parks that cost will be absorbed by the house buyers? I presume sufficient car parking facilities is required as providing a solution to traffic management is critically needed. However, the requirement should also look into locality and other criteria. For example, if a TOD development is proposed, then less car parking should be required. Perhaps for the development site near to public transportation hub or park and ride facilities, the requirement should be reduced and incentives should be given if the project proponents contribute towards building the facilities.

City of all ages

City of the aged versus city of all ages is vast different. While City of the aged means a city comprising people with old aged, city of all ages is talking about inclusiveness. City of the aged is moving towards maturity in productivity and aging infrastructure in which regeneration and revival is required. For example, urban renewal to bring back new and energetic life to the city centre due to aging society, insufficient of infrastructure and dilapidated facilities. This is critical to not let a city dead due to out migration. City of all ages is talking about preparing facilities for people from different age group. It is a place for everyone to claim ownership and to have sense of belonging.

Each city will come to aging and need revitalisation for not becoming irrelevant and marginalise from the main stream of development. In so doing, we are talking about creating inclusiveness for all, and this is city of all ages. City of all ages is more dynamic, energetic and adaptability because it is able to cater to the need of different group of people. In reciprocal, it can also benefit from the contribution of different ages group. While senior people will come with abundance of experiences and wisdom, the youth will be productive enough to push for economic development.

Innovation and Changes

Innovation comes with a price. Designers are innovative of creating design that will optimise the resources and enhance the quality. In many occasion creativity involves changes to the existing guidelines and requirement. Not many people like to see changes as it will contradict to the norm in which nobody dares to take the risk and responsibility if something bad eventually happens. Thereby, everybody is so comfortable with the existing situation and do not like to make or even to suggest changes. Sometime people who make the suggestion will be asked to do it or worst be reprimanded for opening his/her mouth. If an organisation contemplates with current situation, then creativity and innovative ideas will not be entertained.

Last week I encountered this on two different occasions. The first one was during an NGO meeting in which I suggested that a permanent secretariat with defined roles and sufficient capacity should be established so that administration of the association can be improved. All presence agreed with the suggestion and I was asked to prepare a paper within 3 months.

The second one was a building plan submission for a bungalow house. The applicant in responding to the call for more greenery and sustainable home has suggested to convert the rooftop of car porch into a landscape garden. However, the car porch is built until the boundary line. According to the current building practice, set back of any structure from the boundary line is required. Building set back is required for uniformity, safety and clearance of sight. Greenery is required for having a better quality of living environment. While the proposal will not jeopardise the requirement for set back, more greenery is created.

So, when it comes to deciding which should prevail, what do we prefer? Setback without much impact on surrounding or more greenery with great impact on sustainable environment? You guess is as good as mine. It is matter of are you a change person or a person waiting to be changed.

Community consultation

Community consultation is embedded in the democracy process of any governance system for engaging the people in the planning and decision making process. It is important for listening and incorporating the views of grass root people as they are the intended beneficiaries as well as the people who will receive negative impact from any decision made. For example, the property assessment rate, the approval of development project and traffic diversion scheme. Although some might of view that inviting the participation of people from diverse background with different agenda, personal or public will prolong the process of development, it is better of doing so for fear of delay and unrest later. Having said this, a threshold of engaging people must be set up and agreed upon first so that discussion, if any will not be delayed. People need to agree to disagree. Sometime although a meeting has come to a consensus of decision, minority of the people who are objecting to the decision might still voiced out their differences openly and strongly. This is not acceptable and defeat the purpose of having community consultation.

Another interesting thing of community consultation is we are always starting with problem rather than solution. We engage people for discussing a problem and trying to find out an amicable solution. In other words, consultation has always been done due to the presence of a problem and we will not organise any session if such issues are not happened. From the community development point of view, this is not positive simply because it will not enhance the relationship for all. People will have the perception that we are needed only if you need our support for some agenda of development. This might be the root cause of community confrontation.

If we have from time to time to organise community consultation over solution rather than problem, then I presume many of the potential issues can be solved even before these issues evolved. For example, discussion on how to make a safer neighbourhood can lead to the implementation of Safe City Programme or even Traffic Calming Scheme. Thereby, strategic long term community plan is required to gauge the opinion and vision of every residents in a neighbourhood first. The Plan shall be guiding the development of the neighbourhood. Similarly the Strategic Plan of local council should be involving the stakeholders and getting their endorsement. For example, communicating the time frame of property assessment rate review to residents in which everyone will know when a review is expected.

Having said this, more than often session to discuss solution cannot attract participation due to public apathy and people simply do not care about what you are planning if the proposal does not affect them directly. For instance, I will complain actively if you are building a community hall in front of my house but doing nothing or even welcome the proposal if it is built far from my house. This syndrome as some interpreted it showing the selfishness of people. Similarly, the talking of "I pay assessment annually for you to collect the rubbish from my house, so you better clear all rubbish from within my house compound". People have never thought about reducing the rubbish generation is their responsibility as well. By reducing rubbish individually, collectively we can minimise the cost of managing the rubbish, and of course protecting our environment.

Community consultation is a must, but to shift from discussing problem first to the solution will require awareness and capacity improvement of the people, more importantly behavioural change.

Environmental Investment is Luxury

I have a discussion with Mr Anthony Tan, the Executive Director of CETDEM last week about the prospect of sustainable home in Malaysia. We, both agreed that it is the only way forward and brighter the prospect if few conditions are in place. For example, economic incentives such as tax rebate are provided by the Government, voluntarism of individual with enhanced capacity in environmental education and stricter enforcement. However, top of all is the awareness and passion of the people.

No point of providing incentives to people for installing solar panel for Renewable Energy, providing 3 colour bin for them to carry out recycling, providing free water supply, building community centre for greater interaction if the people are not appreciating these or worse do not understand and see the need for doing so. It will definitely not sustainable.

People has always linked return of investment to the environmental protection measures. They always talk about value for money in purchasing energy saving accredited refrigerator and light pulps, saving of electricity bill in installing the solar heater and energy saver, buying the hybrid car for saving fuel and etc. Nothing wrong with this as many of us are cost conscious.

What I really do not understand is people would make renovation work to the back potion of their new house immediately after handing over of key and without asking what is the return of investment. Similarly, we will buy a LCD TV without asking the return of value except with the satisfaction level on quality of visual impact. But, when it comes to environmental protection equipment, we start asking the ROI. Perhaps I presume, people do not understand the need of doing so to the mother earth and hence are not forceful of doing so.

In the long term, perhaps for green movement to filter down to the grassroots level and make it a "basic need" for quality and sustainable lifestyle, we should try to raise awareness of the people first on such necessary expenses.

Entrepreneur-Based Residents Organisations

I have the opportunity to visit 13 neighbourhood in Petaling Jaya over the last two weekend. I saw vast disparity between different neighbourhood area and their residents organisation. Differences on the understanding about meaning of sustainable development, the role of residents organisation and local authority, the administration and management of society, the true sense of partnership and engagement as well as resources planning.

While some organisations have shown their maturity and professionalism in handling the affair of organisation, others need further improvement on knowledge and skill. Some use LCD projector to brief us on their achievement for sustainability, some are still relying on oral presentation. Similarly, some neighbourhood saw big improvement on socio-economic and environmental activities, many are still struggling to improve on civic mindedness and basic cleanliness. I presume this is normal urban phenomenon with residents having different expectation gap, social status and income level.

Having said this, one of the common understanding amongst the neighbourhood is to attend to challenges facing them the most. Some area have identified security and crime as top priority while some area have prioritised social integration as major concern or provision of basic urban services as top of their list. This shows competency in identifying and planning community issue-based analysis, a pre-requisite for Local Agenda 21 Action Planning. The issues will then become basis for strategic actions formulation.

Residents organisations carried out activities tailored to their local need, and rightly so. Although different residents organisation with their own nature of community profile might have thought certain activities are not relevant or important, I am of the opinion that many are actually applicable to all locality with some minor adjustment. For example, in neighbourhood area with strong bonding and closer relationship amongst residents, self-help programme offering micro financial or kind assistance was established. The assistance is provided for the purpose of disaster remedies, new born, wedding, education, welfare or funeral service. While neighbourhood area with well to do residents might not have thought the necessity of having similar fund, the concept of self-help should be adopted for other activities such as for the neighbourhood watch, social gathering, maintaining the green and etc.

With the disparity in organising activities at local level, I think MBPJ as the prime mover of local sustainability should organise capacity building programmes for the organisations. It is of use to share with them the knowledge and skill of running and managing an organisation or programmes. Although the organisations are voluntary base, managing of it with social approach is no more sufficient. Management, marketing and planning of the organisation and its programmes have to be done professionally.

This explain why many social organisations adopting the concept of social entrepreneurship are performing better. For sustainability sake, voluntary-based residents organisations in Petaling Jaya have no choice, but evolve to the entrepreneur-based local social organisations.

Appropriate Approach for Sustainable Development

Encouraging sustainable development can be done through either punitive or incentive measurement. We can either reward someone for doing good or penalise someone for not doing anything or doing wrong.

Recently I acknowledged a different approach by two local banks in encouraging card holders to go for e-statement. Both rationalise the action for environmental conservation purpose. While one bank encourages the card holder to switch to e-statement by giving bonus point, another bank charges card holder RM5 each month for not doing so. The former means no reward for you of not doing anything but also no penalty imposed on you. I think this is right way of doing so as environmental concern is very much a passion at the moment in which individual can choose to do so or not, but more importantly an agreement was signed during the signing up of card in which a monthly statement will be issued. The latter imposing penalty has gone against the mutual agreement and also restricting the choice of card holder. Although it was argued that drastic action is needed to compel card holder to switch to e-statement, the penalty has actually made people think other wise. General public is of opinion that the bank is shortchanging his customers and at the same time making money through saving of printing and postal.

It illustrates that although motive is good, the process is questionable in which ultimate objective will be hard to achieve as stakeholders will not buy in the idea. Thereby, implementing sustainable development will have to look into appropriate context, content and process or else it is tantamount to plan for failure.

Low Carbon Township Planning

I am preparing a paper entitled Low Carbon City Planning - Public Participation. Well, this is topic of the day since our honorable Prime Minister has committed to cut 40% of carbon emission by year 2020. Everyone from all sectors are trying to explore the possibility of contributing to this target. No exception for the housing and property sector. The players are talking about designing and constructing Low Carbon Township. The architect and engineer have taken the lead in introducing and promoting green building index. The Government is offering tax incentive for capital expenditure on the construction of green building. The planner is helping the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water to prepare a framework tool for assessing the sustainable township. The building material manufacturers are doing their best in producing sustainable building material. The list can go on as it is the emerging business opportunities for everyone.


Having said this, I notice incompleteness of the movement. Everyone is talking about providing hard landscape for creating a low carbon township but the views of users have been neglected. The house buyer will be the one enjoying the facilities and at the same time decide what and how to use it. One of the common disturbance is renovation works on the back portion house will begin once a house has been completed. Work to knock down the wall, shift the toilet further back and remove the pipe of wash basin from sewerage connection to direct discharge to the back drain. This is not only a waste of money, but also wasteful of resources. It will be nice if the desire of buyers has been incorporated during the design stage.

Green infrastructure such as common utility tunnel providing space for all utilities avoiding digging of road, construction of recycling centre encouraging 3R practise and installing rain water harvesting tank with the landscaping features and others will help in sustaining low carbon lifestyle in future. People of present day are the lazy lot in which anything providing convenience and time saving will invite participation and acceptance. So, low carbon also means providing accessibility with low cost in speedy manner.

Low carbon township planning is way forward, but the success of it and sustainability is relied on the buyers, residents and local authority. Without sustainable maintenance and lifestyle, it might be another elephant project in the making.

Pedestrian Friendly City

I facilitated a group discussion last week on making Kuala Lumpur a pedestrian friendly city. It is indeed a difficult task of putting pedestrian first rather than the motorist. In Malaysia, many road circulation planning has been done to serve the motor vehicles. None of the planning has started with the people walking behaviour at the centric of development. The planners and engineers has always drew the line of roads starting from major highway to the local collector road, and lastly the pedestrian walkway at the side table of the road reserve.

For planning a pedestrian friendly city, the current practice has to be changed. It must be a bold step of identifying the pedestrian walking behaviour between major focus points first and followed by other traffic infrastructure provision.

Talking about human behaviour, many would like to shorten the distance of walking between the origin and destination, walk under a safer, comfortable, undisturbed and conducive environment. Nobody like to walk under the hot sun. Equally nobody want to be alert attentively for fearing to be robbed. More importantly pedestrian would like to be well respected by other users of the road.

Walking by far is affordable by everyone regardless of their social status and wealth. It is not going to cost any single cent for walking compared to other mode of transportation. Thereby, walking is becoming a basic human right to be enjoyed by all. Providing a conducive, safe, well connected and accessible walkway is essential and critical.

Thereby the discussion summarised that for making Kuala Lumpur a pedestrian friendly city, approaches and mind set of planners and decision makers have to be revamped first in which People ahead of motorist is required.

Ugly Stories @ PJ

Participating in the development process by providing feedback and comments is commendable, but rejecting in total any form of physical development project even though it is justified for bringing in net positive impacts is unacceptable.

However, this is happening on the street everyday.

Sustainable Living

I have an interesting question about individuals take on sustainability.

I noticed that household do not mind to spend thousand dollars to install water filter system in their house as many do not feel safe of using the piped water. Many have no confident on the quality of water supply. They are willing to spend for their own health and safety, and of course sustainability.

I am wondered if similar principle is applied beyond their house compound. For example, spend more time and money disposing their rubbish at source. Buying a composting machine to turn the waste into compost or to create the waste water before discharging into the drain and river. While everyone foresee a problem of keeping own compound dirty and untidy or not to have clean stuff coming in, nobody has actually bothered about dirty things of flowing outside their house. For instance, we never bother about how our rubbish is treated and dumped to. We do not even want to know that waste water or grease flowing out from our kitchen is polluting the river.

So, it is matter of reverting our principle to good use. It is matter of treating the environment in our surrounding to the same treatment that we expect to receive for ourselves in our home. It is about basic right that we would like to enjoy with the condition that others are not affecting from enjoying the same right.

It is about sustainable development.

Sustainable Community - People Centric

Last week I was invited to a forum organised by ASLI to share my thought on the creation of sustainable community through proper town planning under the platform of Local Agenda 21. While I agree that many planners and developers have come out with great idea of developing a township with good living environment, safety measurement, incorporating the natural environment features and of course accessibility and top tip infrastructure provision. To me, essentially these are features for getting premium pricing and first step of creating a sustainable neighbourhood area. A fine environment does not necessary mean a sustainable environment if the carbon footprint, food consumption, waste generation and others are rather high. In other words, we are talking about preparing the hardware for sustainability.

Sustainable community can only be achieved if the stakeholders especially the residents are practicing sustainable lifestyle. No point of providing recycling bin in the neighbourhood if the residents are not practicing 3R principle. Similarly no point of having solar energy supply if the residents do not see the need for saving energy. Ultimately, people at the centric of development is the one to decide whether we are creating a sustainable community or not.

So the question is how to create a sustainable community? To me, first of all, community must have a vision that agreed and shared by all. Followed by a strategic action plan and next of course to DO it. Without a common vision, it is difficult for all stakeholders come together and champion for a common good cause. The business sector might look for profit as bottom line, the residents would like to see more green and harmony rather than business activities. All these differences can only solve with a platform to thrash it out. Local Agenda 21 provides the necessary ingredient. As a platform for partnership, participation to achieve sustainable development, Local Agenda 21 will be able to cater to the need and desires of various stakeholders.

While the players in construction and property sector are providing the hardware for creating sustainable community, it is the PEOPLE who will decide its objectives be met.

Community Self Help

What will you do without resources needed? Will you give up your idea of doing something without the required resources? Will you start implementing your idea only if resources are available? Many people will not do anything unless resources are available. It proved me wrong after visiting few residents groups in conjunction with the PJ Sustainable Community Award evaluation process last week.

Through self help programme, they managed to construct their own community hall and office. Proactively to set up a fund for helping the members in need of financial and kind assistance. All these have been done because they believe it is right thing to do and many of them share the same believe. I think it is lacking in our community development simply because no such common vision was created for a community. I personally witnessed the up and down of a residents group. A residents group was established due to development pressure but dissolved later as the issue was solved. Issue-based community group is very vulnerable compared to vision driven group as the issue is normally required short term solution.

Thereby, for the purpose of sustainability, we should encourage vision-based community groups to establish. For that to happen, a community plan as guidance would be of great help. We should engage every residents to voice their opinion on their neighbourhood and the future that they envision to have for themselves or children. Once they agree to the actions they have identified and agree to undertake, the chances for these actions to realise is greater and, of course to success is better.

Sustainable Community is created over years of trying, adapting and adopting. No short cut is available. It is no harm of being innovative.

Personal Social Responsibility

Social responsibility is about own responsibility towards the surrounding environment. It is the way how an individual treats his living environment, his fellow country man, his family, his work place, his nature, his school, his park, his drains, his house and etc. It is all about treating others like what he expects others to treat him. For example, if we anticipate respect from others, then we should have respected others first. Similarly, if we would like to see a beautiful and clean environment, we ourselves should refrain from creating more rubbish.

However, it is easy said than done. Practicing what we pledge is always a difficult task to do as many claimed. Some time people might think that with money and resources, we can do some damage and then rectify it. For example, Residents always say they made the payment for local authority to engage contractor to collect rubbish and therefore it is all right for them to generate rubbish without any limit. If we observe personal social responsibility in total, then this mentality of "paying others to repay our sin" will go against the principle of sustainability.

While many argue that corporate must practice greater social responsibility and rightly so, every individual should have started first. To me, it is no point of kept asking private sector to contribute more to the society without reciprocal by doing the same as an individual.

Challenge of Facilities Provision in Strata Building

While strata titled buildings are built to optimise the scarcity of land supply, the design should have ease the problem of creating disunity and inconvenience to the cohabitants. For example, the placing of facilities and common properties should have taken into consideration the accessibility, connectivity and social behaviour of the residents.

However, some planning design has overlooked this aspect. I realised this after visiting the low cost house in Desa Mentari last week. Under the development project of Desa Mentari, 8 blocks of residential houses with few hundred units each were built. Each block is equipped with different type of facilities. For example, Block 8 is built with a community hall, Block 7 is to cater for underprivileged people, Block 2 with prayer room and etc. The assumption is every resident is entitled to the facilities, and rightly so. Nevertheless, due to the management of strata titled building and distance as well as socio-cultural background of residents, many of the common facilities have been kept exclusively for the use of residents from that particular block. Other claimed inconvenience or improper to enjoy the facilities.

As a result, different block residents groups are asking to build facilities for their own. For example, community hall, prayer room, children play area and etc. This creates tremendous pressure to the Authority and other agencies.

If this phenomena is not checked properly and to incorporate in the planning design stage, I afraid the same will occur in time to come. Planning for the strata titled project especially the low and medium cost development projects should have considered the provision of common facilities, quantitative and qualitatively.

Ugly Stories @ PJ

Requesting facilities be provided within walking distance from the neighbourhood is commendable, but prefer to have the facilities elsewhere instead of fronting own house is unacceptable.

However, this is happening on the street everyday.

Ugly Stories @ PJ

Enforcing laws and orders strictly without fear and favour is commendable, but keeping an eye closed for own wrong doing is unacceptable. For example, enforcer parks his car at the restricted area; Authority is hanging banner on the trees which is not allowed;

However, this is happening on the street everyday

Sustainable Community

I am in the process preparing of a paper entitled creating a sustainable community through proper town planning and property development under the concept of Local Agenda 21. While researching on the relevant topics, I found that many residential areas with premium pricing share some common features. These include safe environment, freehold land, good infrastructure and facilities, quality maintenance and management, strategic location, connectivity and accessibility as well as greenery. These are extinguished physical aspects that provide good return of investment to the buyers and also creating a quality and fine living environment for the residents.

The question is do we classify them a sustainable community. To me, yes partly but not all. While a fine community can have good and efficient service delivery, it does not necessary qualify the community as a sustainable community. I am saying this as the community might be an over consumption and wastage society. They might have kept the neighbourhood clean and tidy by transferring all rubbish to other area for disposal. They can afford to pay the water bill without considering to save the water consumption or to harvest rain water for gardening. They will enjoy eating foreign fruit stuff rather than sourcing it locally with lower carbon footprint.

In summary, although many planners and developers will like to brand their design and properties as green as they can say it, or at time misquoted as sustainability, the ultimate achievement for sustainable development will fall back to the behaviour of its cohabitants. Until change of consumption pattern, passionate about environment and thankful to the depleted resources is taking place, the objective of creating a sustainable community is yet to achieve.

Accessibility vs Maintenance

For creating a barrier free environment, use of lift for accessibility in a multi storey building is essential. Many office complexes big and small do provide this facility. This, however does not guarantee full accessibility if the lift is not in good condition. For example, if there is only one lift in an office block and unfortunately the lift was out of service and waiting for repair, how are we going to ensure free mobility for the people with disabilities? I do not realise the extend of this possibility until yesterday evening.

We were having a meeting in the second floor of MBPJ HQ and waiting patiently for a disabled member to attend the meeting. We wondered why was he so late knowing that he is always puncture for meeting. We only realised that he was unable to reach us from ground floor as the lift was out of service minutes ago. We cannot do anything to make the lift function again in short period or neither to shift the meeting venue to ground floor. At the end of the day, the disabled member has to leave the meeting before even able to participate in the discussion.

I realise that providing facilities alone is not sufficient if maintenance culture is not upkeep. No point of having wonderful and thoughtful planning without sustaining its usefulness when it is needed the most. In this respect, good maintenance culture is not only about cost saving and keeping good visual, but also to protect the interest of users. And in this case, the basic right of underprivileged group.

Ugly Stories @ PJ

Doing CSR by being responsible to the community and environment is commendable, but on the other hand the same company hanging or nailing signboards onto the trees or public facilities which become an eye sore is unacceptable.

However, this is happening on the street everyday.

Ugly Stories @ PJ

I have seen many instances of ugly action by individual or organisation. While many have spoken of setting a role model and good example, many of the very same people have not done what they breach. This column will try to highlight these instances. It is not to run down anyone, but to share and to rectify it. If you have come across similar encountering, please do not hesitate to share with others.

"Keeping a clean and tidy interior environment for our car is commendable, but for doing so throwing away the cigarette, paper or even plastic beg onto the road is unacceptable."

However, this is happening on the street everyday.

Planning Excellence

Planning excellency means not only innovative and efficiency in allocating and mobilising the scarce resources to its best use, but also bearing the social responsibility. While many developers can be excellent in optimising their land potential, not many actually manage to instill the social value which is very much needed and lacking now in the community created by developers. That explained why neighbourliness amongst members of community is fading and even though those so called high environmental quality living areas are not spared from this. What went wrong?

Urban planning now is concentrating on creating livable environment. An environment that is safe, clean and comfortable for staying or at time for playing and leisure. These hard scapes alone however, do not guarantee the creation of a good community that is sustainable and socially responsible towards the environment, climate change, sustainable lifestyle or even the surrounding neighbourhood. For example, it is none of the business of care towards squatter area next to these area.

Urban planning should have enhanced the nation building by integrating people from different divide and socio-cultural background or even economic status. This is always a desire for town planners, I believe. However, the economic factor of property development has always made this desire difficult to achieve. For example, due to cost factor, it is not feasible at all to build affordable houses on hill slope as engineering construction cost is simply too high. With due respect, state intervention is required. Government policies is needed to narrow the gap between different social groups. This include provision of affordable housing stock with cross subsidy from other type of houses. This, however is not the long term solution if house price is escalating higher and faster than the rate of construction of affordable houses and during the slow down of economic period.

Ultimately, it comes back to the spirit of planning excellence. We plan for a good and quality living environment within the carrying capacity of the Earth. While pursuing materialistic and monetary return is unavoidable with the human nature we have, trying to reduce it and reach optimisation should have become the aim of planning excellence. It is no point of having good houses, but cannot afford by the mass. It is unethical to put in so much resources for less people although the concept of 80:20 is getting real now.

Planning excellence means to strike a balance between social, economy and environment. Without one or neglect either one will result in urban sprawl and social injustice.

PJ Walk

During a workshop discussing the budgetary planning for year 2010 two weeks ago, we spoke about revitalising the city life of Section 52 Town Centre. Yesterday I met an owner of a coffee shop in the State area, he, too spoke about the deteriorating business in the State, which form the core area for Section 52. According to him, business volume is diminishing because people are not coming on day time due to lack of car parking. Fewer people come over on night time because NO activities that attracted them to come. He worried if this trend is continue, he might have to move out from this area. While businesses can come and go, but if the concern came from a man who has been here for the last 40 years, then something should have to be done.

First, we should recognise that State is no more the place that everyone must come unlike previous years. In the past, customers of Hong Kong Bank, UOB Bank, Standard Chartered Bank or even MBSB have to come over as no other branches are available in other parts of PJ. People paying their assessment with MBPJ and quit rent with the Land Office, people taking driving license test with RTD, people applying for passport with the Immigration Department and etc have to come here for their business. Presently, these services are either provided elsewhere or served online in which people need not coming over. So, we have to figure out who are the customer based here and the targeted groups.

Secondly, we should also identify the activities mix in this area. Is the area still offering the important retail activities or moving towards the comparison goods or services? After identifying the availability of services and target groups, then only can we figure out the strength and weaknesses of this area. Upon then only can we further figure out the opportunity and threats for this area.

The normal practice of placing infrastructure first ahead of soft programmes is no more effective. Although building infrastructure is important, many of the time infrastructure alone is not sufficient. Activities that attracted crowd continually are more critical. We saw the popularity of food stall even though it is located in the remote area. We witnessed the big turn out for some concert with popular singers even though it was shown in area with bad transportation connection. In this respect, I am of opinion that Section 52 Town Centre is lacking activities, a unique one rather than infrastructure provision.

While revitalising Menara MBPJ is important, the exercise of doing so cannot be isolated. Any proposal to reactivate the square of Menara MBPJ has to take into consideration of the surrounding and compliment to the area. It is rather dangerous of renovating the square onto some space that compete with the surrounding activities. It is a situation of fish and water. Both cannot afford to go alone.

Last but not least, the exercise of revitalising the area should have incorporated the participation of all stakeholders. It is a plan to fail without the participation of stakeholders and if this happened, then it is tantamount of no plan.

Catch22@PJ:Service Apartment

Apartment is referred to multi storeys building with residential purpose. This concept was mooted to overcome the challenge of land shortage in the urban area as well as the emerging and changing life style of people. People nowadays like to enjoy club-alike facilities that are affordable and convenient within the vicinity of their living environment. Hence, apartment is getting popular days by days, simply because people have no choice due to availability or affordability or life style desire.

The concept of service apartment was further developed to take advantage of the development guidelines for apartment during the era of economic difficulty. In late 1990s, when Malaysia was badly affected by global economic downturn, the property market was equally in bad shape and many on going commercial development projects were stopped because of sudden drop of market demand. While commercial properties were not good, the demand for residential units remained strong. Thereby, in order to taking advantage of the residential market demand and to develop in faster pace, the developers built houses onto the commercial land. That's how service apartment came to play and it explained why the concept of service apartment is different from elsewhere. While service apartment is meant for medium-term of at least 7 days stay with services on offer, these include laundry, house keeping and etc, service apartment built then was meant for owner occupied and never of such services were offered. The owners however, are paying commercial rate for their assessment rate, water tariff and electricity bill and even the maintenance fee.

Not less than 80% of the total unit for a service apartment project should be kept by the developer, but this is never done so in Malaysia. Many of the service apartment units are built for sale and owner occupied. Some buyers who are unable to differential the differences between apartment and service apartment felt short change lately. This explained why lately there are occupiers of service apartment requested the assessment rate be reviewed and services provided to improve.

This is a Catch 22 situation here. While the building of service apartment is fast gaining popularity because of less procedures involved, the potential buyers should have been given more information and let them making an informed decision. If ample of information be given, such as maintenance cost, rate, utilities tariff and etc, I presume many will think twice before deciding on the purchase. If they have decided to do so, then it is illogical for them to complain about services and rate at later stage.

Of course for those prefer to stay within the commercial area, they will continue buying the service apartment. Of course this will change as well, if the Council decided to provide incentives for building more residential units in the city centre for fear of wasting resources during night time in the city centre.

Public and Private

Layman will be able to tell us public area means places or facilities that are commonly owned or used by everyone regardless of their status and background and private area means it is exclusively used or owned by somebody who might have claimed the ownership by way of accreditation by the authority. For example, the house owner by virtue of having the land title to show that he is the rightful owner and hence is exclusively for his own possession. Like wise, public space must be a place or facilities that allowed public access or use by way of authorities declaration or owners' permission. For example, the local authority might have gazette the time for parks to be opened to public subjected that certain rules are observed. The shopping complex management might have allowed public access for visitation provided some code of conducts are followed.

What about five foot corridor in front of the shops? This is privately owned public access. Although it is owned by the building owner and it is his responsibility of maintaining it in good order, he has no right to deny public access simply because the corridor has been declared a public corridor with consent from the owner when he submitted his building plan for authority's approval. This allows the local authorities to enforce order and law against those caused obstruction onto the pathway. If similar analogy applied for the shopping complexes or public park in the vicinity of commercial centres or industrial park, what will happen? Although highly hypothetical, we should not discount the possibility of it will happen eventually. Well, we have to think deep into it.

For landed residential property development in which subdivision of land is required, the local planning authority will normally ask the land for public facilities be surrendered. But the question is why this is not done so for multi storeys residential buildings? Some argue that for this type of development, it is governed by the Strata Titles Act in which management corporation is to be established to look after the maintenance of the common properties within the guarded area. Well, presently the property owners not only paying higher assessment rate but also folk out more money for service charge and sinking fund. If the local planning authority has required that public space be surrendered, then I presume it will reduce the service fee. Some might argue that requesting the developer to surrender the public space in a strata property will affect the viability and marketability of the project. Well, owners might have thought about exclusive use of the facilities, but if the service cost is extremely high, they might have thinking of not maintaining the facilities even though it means of sharing the facilities with others. However, the question of management capacity and competency of local authority will arise. Simply many have no confidence of local authority to impose this condition of surrendering the public space and for their upkeep.

The argument can go on and on and a solution will not on sight the soonest.

Whatever the decision made, my concern is always on principle of fairness and equality. We can set a precedence, but that precedence should be known to the public in advance and further to apply in all qualified projects regardless of area, status and project proponents.

Sustainable City Award

Judges for the Malaysian Sustainable City Award competition visited Petaling Jaya on 24 and 25th June 2010. The purpose was to evaluate the sustainability performance of the Council based on reports and documents submitted. MBPJ together with MPSJ, MP Miri and MB Sibu have been shortlisted this annual award organised by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and Ministry of Housing and Local Government. Apart from briefing, the judges were brought for tour to Beautiful Gates Disabled Centre, SS2 Town Centre, Bukit Gasing Hill, Sungai Way River and SK Sri Kelana, some of the project site under the auspicious of Local Agenda 21 Petaling Jaya initiative.

I believe the judges must be impressed with enthusiasm shown by us as well as our partners in service. One of the significant point to make is the presence and involvement of stakeholders in all projects. I am sure no other areas have seen such dynamism and diverse groups of working together for the betterment of city environment. It is enlightening to see that bottom up rather than top down approach has been widely applied here. The programmes themselves are wide range, from social, neighbourhood, economy to environment at community or city level. Importantly also the sustainability of stakeholders, the most difficult element when it comes to the community development.

New Adventure

Since 17/4/2010, I have been entrusted to oversee the operation of One Stop Secretariat of MBPJ. It is an exciting journey for me in furthering the purpose of town and country planning as well as incorporating the principles of sustainable development in actual physical form with impacts on social and economic development.

For the past 2 months and plus, I have been keeping myself busy in familiarising the rules and regulations as well as the procedures. Surprising me, it took some time to right my frame of thoughts on the existing practice with those provided for. For example, I have thought that with local plan in place, it must be very easy of checking the compliance of planning standard and guidelines, but to my surprise many are still fell back to the old practices of "enquiring" the best deal even though it was stated clearly allowable intensity of development in the local plan.

Another excitement was the Council decision in allowing views of public been considered by way of public views hearing session rather than shut the door down completely even though it is allowed for areas within the local plan coverage. Although it is not a mandatory requirement for Council to notify and consult adjoining land owners on proposed development within the vicinity if a local plan has been gazetted, The Council decided to hear them out. I think it is Local Agenda 21 in practice.

Yet another interesting turn of event was the decision of Council to declassify the condition of planning permission for a project recently. This must be the first time that a local planning authority in Malaysia has made known to the public the details of planning approval. I believe in the spirit of good governance and freedom of information, this must be a foresight and way forward, and break through for local governance.

Well, I believe more will to come.

True Partnership

At the end of the day, it is about partnership and collaboration. While many individual or organisations have done an excellent job or performed well in discharging their duties, many have not gone beyond their usual routine simply because of lacking capacity or even ideas or complacency. Hence, smart partnership with others might have changed this limitation of breaking through.


Having said this, at time due to egoism and lack of communication, sincere, workable and equal partnership cannot be formed. Two organisations having strong characteristic and opinion in leadership are always having difficulty to sit down and create a consensus even on common and petty issue.


For partnership to forge ahead and bear result, firstly I think both the partners need to open their mind set and go back to the equal footing first. It is no point of influencing others with own opinion without considering other sides, too are having their priority. However, in most cases, this is what happened at the community level. Negotiation and power play are real at the neighbourhood level. Everyone is trying to impose his/her value onto others and if both are strong in their opinion, then conflict might have occurred. Thereby, agreed to disagree is becoming important and critical.

Partnership is a phrase that everyone is trying to use but it is utmost difficult to achieve if equality and equity is taking into consideration. Leadership that embrace equal and smart partnership is likely the one to achieve desire result and, hence the respect from others.

Well, looking nowadays that people are kept accusing others of foul play and dissatisfaction on issues and proposal brought forward, I am wondered that such thing of smart partnership has been achieved.

Community Service

29th April until 2nd May saw the gathering of 1,400 like-minded people at the LIONS Multiple District 308 Convention in Suntec, Singapore. It is an annual event for electing new leadership and charting the programmes for next fiscal year. It is also a fellowship session to chit chat and share experiences with others on serving the community. As the largest service club in the World, LIONS have been known for their tireless and selfless efforts in serving the underprivileged and unfortunates. Thereby, the gathering also saw those excel in works being recognised and rewarded.

Community service especially on voluntary basis is never an easy task. It is not that difficult to extend our helping hand to the needy, either in cash, kind or passion. The most challenging part to me is getting members to continue and to sustain their energy to serve long term programmes. While many have started an activity well, the activity might have only one off effect and short term gain to the beneficiaries. Some social workers have spoken against the one off activity at welfare homes that will disturb the daily routine of the inmates. It is not uncommon for the inmates to return to their normal life after many days because of excitement created during visits by volunteers. Thereby, it is advisable to have long term project with the welfare homes and it is important too to have schedule visits or activities rather than in piece meal during the festive seasons only.

In order to do so, sustainability in terms of energy, capacity and enthusiasm is critical. While many Lions are passionate of serving, many might have difficulty to stay put longer with a project. Many community services failed because lack of sustaining power or continuity. So, it is important to overcome this challenge by deploying better strategies. Perhaps to synergies and to pool different resources from various stakeholders together for a particular project. It is about smart partnership and sharing of resources.

Innovation in Recycling

Since the inception of Recycling Campaign in Malaysia, we have been told about the 3 colours bins for different type of wastes. However, unless we used to recycled or else we always forget about which colour bin for which type of waste. Having said this, this prototype square bin has managed to implant onto mind of every environmental concerned people especially the children. We are so used to seeing these bins around but time goes by, many people has forgotten about the excitement associated to recycling efforts. We take things for granted that the bins should be there but cannot figure out the reason of having them there permanently.

Definitely some innovation should have been created to further enhance the programme. I was excited to see these recycling bins at the Changi Airport last week en route to my Lions Convention. The bins are designed with specific shape and colours. I think it is easy for many to throw their waste without second thought. I am wondering why can't we have the same innovation?

CSR at Work

I learned a lesson about corporate social responsibility last Thursday. While many corporates have carried on with the CSR programmes for PR purpose and to fulfill minimum requirement on good governance, very few have done with thoughtful and thorough planning. AkzoNobel company proved me wrong.

I have discussion with them over the suggestion of partnering in the River Rehabilitation programme. We are thinking of encouraging community based organisations to adopt the drains and rivers fronting their neighbourhood. The Adoption Scheme involves keeping an eye on the drains, preventing pollutants from the drains, cleanliness and beautification and other activities with community participation. One of the interesting activities was painting mural on the surface of monsoon drain. That's why a meeting was set up with representatives from AkzoNobel to discuss their involvement and contribution.

They mentioned to me the many CSR programmes they have done worldwide. One of the principle strike me the most is their pre-evaluation process in deciding project participation. For example, in order for them to help in the drain adoption project, they will have to send in their Safety, Health and Environmental team for further evaluation. And if they decided to participate, it is not only on kind contribution, but engaging the local to work together with their staff. They will dispatch professional painters to guide local on the proper painting works or even to do in entirely on their own. According to them, they have the duty to educate people on colour and methods of sustaining the painting work. I personally impress with this philosophy of educating people by sharing their experience and know how.

Mega Earth Day 2010

The celebration for 2010 Earth Day was held last weekend at Kota Damansara Community Forest Park, Section 10, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya. The fun-filled Carnival featured a night concert, night forest hiking, mountain bike hiking, kayaking, exhibition booths and sale, children activities and talks. The two-days event managed to attract participation of many youth. And more importantly the many young volunteers helping the organisers. I think it is in the right direction of educating environmental voluntarism at young age. Having said this, the participation of other segments of the society is less desirable. I believe better marketing strategy and promotion drive should be done. The event shall be inclusive and no one should be spare from coming to this last remaining urban forest in Petaling Jaya, more significantly the forest was a target of development 2 years ago. It is time to celebrate the conservation of this nature heritage with announcement of the State Government of Selangor recently. One of the important stakeholders missing from the scene was the aboriginal people who has been displaced and relocated to the modern residential area. I believe by recruiting them and bringing them back closer to the forest will, at least helping to resolve many social problems at their place of living now.

While the exhibition featured NGOs displaying their works and selling of products, it is a pity that not many forthcoming to lender their involvement and contribution. I believe much works need to be done to engage people on contributing towards improving the social cause with environmental flavour.

While the program was an effort of partnership amongst various stakeholders and would not be possible without tireless involvement of them, it was however sad to note that their contribution has not been given proper recognition. No highlight about the contribution by various stakeholders. For sustainable development working, recognition and acknowledgement is very critical. People need to be given words of encouragement and motivation for them to move ahead and perform better. Many people lost interest and sudden death of commitment simply because of lack of motivation.

Let's work together having a more meaningful and inclusive event next year.

Environmental Talk

I was invited to deliver a talk to the parents, teachers and students of Choon Wen Primary School last Friday on environmental issues and challenges. It was attended by about 100 people and ended in 2 and half hours. Apart from showing them the slide, I showed them some documentaries on environmental issues and what actions that can be taken individually or through collective actions. The presentation ended with a quiz and I presume many understood what I have tried to disseminate as most, if not all got the answers right.

I am very impressed with the enthusiasm shown by attendees especially the school authority and parents. The Headmaster spoke about environmental education and initiatives that the school has taken. These include recycling day once a week, campaign on 3R, handicraft making with recyclable items, greenery and planting and etc. I think they are on the right track for the honour of being sustainable school.

Many have shown great interest in learning how to save energy and water resources. One of the interesting thing is many are so passionate of going green, but quite often do not acquire the knowledge and skills of doing it. For example, many are of the view that it is ok for having remote control for electrical appliances such as TV, decoder and air-con but do not realise that it is energy consuming for putting the appliance into stand by mode. Well, perhaps it is for the purpose of convenience.

I am glad of giving the opportunity to share my thought and experience in environmentalism and I hope to do more in time to come.

New Job

Starting 16/4/2010 or at least for the next 2 years, I will no more take charge of Local Agenda 21 Petaling Jaya initiative. I have been seconded to Ministry of Housing and Local Government as the Head for OSC Unit of MBPJ. Well, physically it is still in MBPJ Office, but the scope of works and responsibilities are different. While, formally due to the nature of LA 21 imitative in PJ, I have most of the time deal with NGO and CBO in the field of sustainable development and environmental or social circle. Now, my clientele will mainly the developers, project proponents and consultants who are talking about project viability, from the financial view point.

Perhaps it is such a big challenge now to inculcate value of sustainability amongst this stakeholders as of how to widen their perspective on sustainability. Perhaps, again to sell them the idea of CSR is the way forward.

Although my new job will not give me much opportunity of partnering the NGO and CBO for community development implementation, I am hoping to keep in touch and to try to be involved. It might be tough of sparing the time, but I will try the best.

4th Organic Day 2010

I saw bigger crowd for the Organic Day at Section 19 Field last Sunday. It was the first time that the carnival was held on Sunday compared to the previous three which were held on Saturday. Perhaps more people have precious time for this outing.

One of the interesting do was the dialogue between organic farmers, NGOs, agencies and consumers. The interactive session was held to clear the doubt of consumers on the true and pure organic produce and the ways of identifying the genuine produce. The session also provided farmers the opportunities to gather market information from the consumers. At the same time, it was also an opportunity for education and experiential learning towards organic friendly lifestyle society.

The Organic Day has also attracted attention from university. Bus loaded of students from the National University of Malaysia were there to mingle around with the crowd. Interestingly enough I met with a fellow planners attached with the Federal Planning Department. He commended our partnership efforts between MBPJ, CETDEM and Residents Association of Section 19. To him, this is truly sustainable development in practice. Such community initiatives should have been taken place at more venue, more frequent and involve more people. Thank you Sir for your commendation. Certainly, the next one on 4th July 2010 will see bigger crowd and presence of more exhibitors and activities.

Open Space

I have an interesting discourse on the issue of open space during a planning meeting recently. Under the National Urbanisation Policy, it is required that 2 hectares of land for every 1000 people should be provided for green open space. This policy was formulated to transform Malaysia into a Garden City and to combat the effects of climate change. Malaysia, as a Tropical Country rich with primary forest and with small population, has no doubt can adopt and achieve the target with ease.


However, when it comes to micro planning in the city level especially for the high rise residential development, it is not achievable physically. In Petaling Jaya for instance, strata titled residential development cannot be developed despite of having land area of 2 acres and above due to the requirement for open space provision. Let's us do a simple calculation as below: -

Land area: 2 acres
Allowable density: 400 person / acre or approximately 80 unit / acre
Plinth area: 50%
Open space requirement: 2 hectares per 1000 people

Now, with 2 acres mean 800 person for this development, hence the required provision for open space is 1.6 hectares or 3.9 acres of land (800 person x 2 / 1000 person)

It is illogical to provide open space that excess the land size. Please also bear in mind that other facilities such as drive way, car parks, nursery, prayer room and etc have not been accounted yet.

I think the Authority and land owners are caught in between if this rule is applied across the board without detail consideration for every development project. While providing greenery is a must for sustainable development, development for improving living quality and environment should not be victimised.

It is a Catch 22 situation here. We have to find a solution. Perhaps contribution in lieu of provision is an option. Under the Act 172, development charge is imposed for land that has enhanced through the planning exercise of local plan. The owners are required to pay premium of the enhancement value due to higher density, plot ratio given or land use change. In this case, by "reducing the responsibility" of owner to provide in-situ open space is an indirect form of enhancing the value of their land. They should be charged for having more units of development by reducing the required space for green. The money collected should be used by authority to improve the quality of existing near by open space or to purchase land at strategic location for the purpose of greenery. It is not a fund for other uses, but green. Having said this, minimum requirement of in-situ open space is a must for the benefit of the residents of a development project. Perhaps a mechanism can be studied to look into this or else it will become an issue for debate.

Another option to consider is the transferring of right or in this case, the responsibility. In many cities for planning flexibility, owners are allowed to obtain higher intensity of development for their land elsewhere or to sell the rights because of the restriction impose for his land in a controlled area. For example a building owner is only allowed 5 storeys for his building instead of the maximum height of 8 storeys because of the height control in a heritage conservation area, then he is permitted to transfer his entitlement of extra 3 storey or space equivalent to other areas for development. Perhaps, similar principle can be applied for the open space provision. Owners are required to source elsewhere for the provision of open space to substitute the shortage.

Alternatively look beyond the individual land, but to city or even regional level. We can maintain the minimum area for green in the neighbourhood level for local daily use, but provide the extra required area at the fringe of city or even share with other municipalities. For example, children play area in the neighbourhood park and football field reachable by residents from a cluster of neighbourhood and town park by city dwellers. This requires strategic and master planning, coordination and cooperation, and of course understanding about spirit of Local Agenda 21.

It is always a tussle between human need and building for the space. A balance is required to fulfill the biological need of people and at the same time to guide a properly done development. Sustaining a green is not only for us, but for the future generation. It is important as a green space gone will signal the total and permanent lost of natural heritage, it is a gesture of no turning back and for sure NO regret.

Meaning of Sustainable Development

Many confused about the definition of sustainable development. To some, they considered the sustainability of a programme is classified as sustainable development. To some, they thought of getting public involvement in any social programme, even with tokenism is considered sustainable development in practice. To very few, sustainable development is talking about programmes benefiting community at large and environment as a whole for the present and future generation. The last one should prevail, but many have not shared the same thought.

I am a bit uneasy after attending a discussion with officers of MBPJ recently on producing a video entitled sustainable development of PJ. Many of them have spoken about preparing a script highlighting the programmes they carried out and scope of functions within their department's purview even though these are not done in accordance to the sustainable development principles and concepts. For example, activities organised by MBPJ for the youth without the participation of youth during planning process. Similarly providing services to the underprivileged without analysing the pressing need of this group is tantamount of "shook sendiri".

I suggested that the video should start with an introduction on sustainable development and its relation to MBPJ, followed by when MBPJ has commenced embracing the term and what we have done in term of policies, mechanism, structure, practice and governance system before going into detail on the respective initiatives. Highlighted initiatives should fulfill the principles of strategic and long term actions, stakeholders' partnership and participation and of course having impacts on the social, environmental and economic dimension of development for Petaling Jaya.

We agreed with the format without much debate, and this worried me. I started wondering if this is a sign of greater understanding on sustainable development or other wise. If the answer is the latter, then it must be more reasons to worry since we are celebrating 10th anniversary of Local Agenda 21 Petaling Jaya this year.