Almost There Symptom

In conjunction with the Earth Day celebration, a public lecture entitled "Climate Change: It's relevant to the Local Authorities and Community" was held last Monday. One of the interesting point highlighted by the speaker is "almost there" symptom that failing the low carbon, sustainable development and green programmes. Almost there means something has been done but not completed yet and the unfinished job is becoming the contributing factor for failure or making the intended objectives unattainable. One of the example quoted was our National Administrative Centre, Putrajaya. In encouraging efficiency of green travelling and reducing the private vehicles trip, buses with NGV operated are installed and information on routing are displayed and updated at the bus stop. However, many commuters do not take the bus because it was reported that the buses do not come on time as scheduled. It left the commuters with no choice but travel with private vehicles. This further aggrieved the parking problem in Putrajaya as all buildings have been designed with park and ride concept in mind and hence very few parking lots are provided at the destinated place. As a result, illegal parking is becoming rampant all over the place. This is an example of almost there with little hiccup that dampen the objectives of a programme. Similarly, it is a symptom of almost there if we consume more treated piped water even though a rain water harvesting system was installed. It simply means that we want to conserve rain fall but cannot impact it into reducing our water consumption which should become ultimate aim. This symptom is related to either lack of thorough planning or attitude of the stakeholders. Planning is always failed by the efficiency in execution. While proposals can be very comprehensive to be outlined in the plan, it remains useless unless it is executed as planned schedule. For example, we spoke about TOD (Transit Oriented Development) in which higher intensity of development shall be given for those projects within the vicinity of public transportation hub. This concept was conceived with the assumption that the dwellers or workers there will commute with public transportation such as rail or buses and hence little trip generation using the road space will occur. Ideally this should be the bottom line for such concept to be successfully carried out. However, the concept will not be effectively operationalised unless other supporting factors are in place. For example, the rail line and its area of coverage meet the demand of the travellers. No point of me taking the train reaching the destinated station but have to spend another hour or to take a taxi ride to my work place. Secondly, the public transportation service must be affordable, convenient, efficient, safe, comfortable and connectable. For me, we can have tip top infrastructure and services but program still cannot work if the attitude of the stakeholders is remained third class or unchanged. For example, the nation wide recycling campaign failed to achieve its desired goals after a decade of implementation. We do not see the recycling practice becomes a value and culture amongst the community members. We only witness the primary school pupils bringing the recycable items to school because the school is making it a mandatory activity and for competition purpose. Once the students move up to secondary and college level, the interest of recycling diminishes rapidly. I presume it is a symptom of almost there, temporary or permanently.

Planning at Local First or Later?

It was reported recently that the 330 acres Subang Golf Club (KGNS) at SS7, Petaling Jaya is up to grab for redevelopment. Many prospective developers are aiming the piece of land fronting with Federal Highway. Since 1960s, KGNS has been developed as a private club housing 2 18-holes golf course, club house with F&B, leisure and other sport facilities. Becoming members of the Club is considered as a privilege to most of its members, and also general public because many even though are passing by the course daily might not have entered the compound with grand gate. It is an exclusive enclave for many.

Top of the many concerns the news attracted is the fear of losing green lung means for recreational purpose. It is understood as more than 80% of the area is covered with cow grass and pond. Having said this, it should be highlighted that this recreational space is used for handful of people and it is not a public green space. Secondly, the detrimental effect of pesticide and fertiliser on environment for up keeping the golf course is questionable. Hence, environmentally and for public benefit, the course can be replaced and redeveloped, if need to. Perhaps one of the options is to replace it with a public park similar to the Central Park of New York, US. If economic factor and local traffic situation to be considered, perhaps low rise residential development with more than 40% greenery should be planned, in tandem to the existing bungalow development opposite the Course. However, I am doubt given the strategic location of the site, the sizable piece of land and the prospective parties.

What is the role of the local planning authority then? Can the authority say NO? Obviously the answer is yes if the local planning authority is concerned about the development impact and its effect on the master planning of the City. However, it must be long way to go since the site is currently intended for recreational use and the zoning was gazetted as such. In applying Section 16 of Town and Country Planning Act, 1976 (Act 172) for the process of altering the Local Plan, the people will definitely have a say. It might be good to allow local planning authority and people have their views from the beginning of planning process rather than waiting for everything to be confirmed first or else the traditional confrontation stand between both divide will recur.

Public Lecture on Climate Change

YOU ARE CORDIALLY INVITED TO THE PUBLIC LECTURE ENTITLED: "CLIMATE CHANGE: IT'S RELEVANT TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND COMMUNITY" DELIVERED BY DR GARY WILLIAM THESEIRA OF THE MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT, FOLLOWED BY A PANELIST DISCUSSION FEATURES DR AIZI RAZMAN ISMAIL OF MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT; MR NITHI OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SOCIETY MALAYSIA AND YOUR TRULY. THE DISCUSSION WILL BE CHAIRED BY PROF DR PHANG SIEW NOOI FROM SUNWAY UNIVERSITY. IT IS A PROGRAM TO CELEBRATE THE EARTH DAY 2012.

PLEASE REGISTER. SEE YOU ON 23/4/2012 (MONDAY), 2.45PM AT MBPJ BILIK GERAKAN, JALAN YONG SHOOK LIN, 46675 PETALING JAYA.

Privatised Public Area for Cleanliness

I caught two incidence of uncivilised mind set last Sunday. Early morning, while stopping in front of the traffic light, I noticed a driver opened his door and spit on the floor. Later, I saw a girl throwing her used tissue onto the road before hopping into a waiting car. I just wonder if they will do the same if the car was parked inside their house? I afraid not. They will rather using the rubbish bin or wash basin instead of dirtying their own compound. Everyone is protecting their own interest, and in this case the beauty of their private space. Thus I believe the dirty public place we have is not the doing of others, but rather is the doing of all of us, collectively. For example, it is common for people to sweep the leaf onto the external drain. Similarly, for operator of eating outlets to throw food waste at the rubbish chamber.

This showed that perhaps civilisation can be very personal. On one hand we practice high ethic of keeping our own area clean and green, but on the other hand we can be so careless about dirtying public place. The question is why this happen? Why can't we be consistent to ourselves on practicing same code of ethic regardless of for our own sake or for the benefit of others? Why can't we treat the public place as the private place when it comes to cleanliness and greenery? Perhaps it is good to declare privatisation of public place for raising awareness of the people. This might be worked if all inculcate the sense of ownership over public place, or else enforcement might be the only and last resort, I guess.

Bloody Thief

One of my Neighbourhood Watch Committee Member was met with serious injuries after attacking by the snatch thief yesterday afternoon. He and another member were on alert after spotting a suspect loitering at the SS25 exit of Kelana Jaya LRT Station around 2pm. They contacted the police and together with the patrol car trying to catch the thief on bike. However, while escaping from them, the thief with no consideration at all hitting on my member resulting him with fracture and bloody injuries. He was admitted to emergency ward immediately. Thank you God he is recovering now.

Hearing of the news this morning, I felt entirely exhausted and sad that how can on Earth a criminal so daring to kill others and trying to power over other for few dollars. Why is it so bad crime like this happened during day time. What else for the commoner if crime can occur in front of the nose of the police. I always talk about self help to my neighbours in which we should come forward and safe guard ourselves rather than relying on the security force to protect us. We might need to make team to patrol our area, to get everyone on board to create greater social integration and extending helping hand whenever necessary. However, under this circumstances, with life threatening to two of our most active committee members, Steven and Law, I am not sure others will have the same confidence and interest. Some might have even considering to move out from the neighbourhood area.

Improving Efficiency in Dealing With Construction Permits

Dealing with construction permits is a big let down in Malaysia according to most of the participants of a public consultation session i attended recently. Starting from the pre construction stage which include the land matter, planning permission, earth work approval, building plan approval and infrastructure to the construction stage and finally vacant possession of property will take 161 days in Malaysia compared to 26 days in Singapore and 67 days in Hong Kong. It is because of the 32 times interface required between Government and the project proponents or consultants whereas in Hong Kong it only involves 6 procedures. This has delayed the construction process and increased the cost of doing business. According to the survey done by World Bank on Doing Business 2011, ranking of Malaysia is 113 out of 183 economies, 2 rank lower than the previous year. This is simply unacceptable as the overall ranking of Malaysia in Ease of doing Business is 18, a rank that must have been improved due to other factors such as ease of getting credit, efforts of protecting the investors' interest and other attributes.

Everyone has been argued that delay in getting approval from the authorities for construction permit is the main contributing factor. While the consultants blamed the authorities of sitting on the application and have taken longer time to process or even to make decision, the authorities complained about the level of competency and compliance of the project proponents for their submission. It was commonly acknowledged that many submissions have been done with proposal goes against the provision with the hope that special consideration will be granted during the processing stage. For practicing the good governance in participatory planning, the Local Authorities allow public to have their views on all development projects. Sometime the need to discuss and explain with technicality and common sentiments took longer time for the authorities to decide what to do next. People want to be part of the planning process and would like their views be considered. Due to the ground sentiment and socio-political consideration, development projects application have to be deferred for thorough evaluation, even though the gazetted development plan has clearly stated the permissible intensity and zoning of development. Having said this, blaming on general public for delaying the process is not a good excuse but rather pushing the major factors of delaying a side. We might want to examine why the gazetted development plan and the impact study reports prepared by the professional are not able to convince the general public. I believe although some might have relayed their personal experiences while arguing the negative impact of a proposed development project, many come with technical input and support must have valid reason to do so.

The Discussion Session also proposed some measurements to shorten the time frame, reduce the procedures and hence cost of doing business. One of them is to enable the self-regulation principle to expand further in the construction sector. While reason of waiting for approval is valid, then perhaps to reduce the requirement of obtaining approval whereby the principle submitting person, himself to "self approve, monitor and verify" the process. The interference and need for interface is kept minimum. This can be started off perhaps first to categories the type of projects based on risk of development. For example, if a simple project of renovating small portion of the house, then perhaps it is good for authority to acknowledge without the requirement of approving. Secondly to be build up the capacity and competence level of all stakeholders. For example, the principle submitting person must possess with high code of ethic and professionalism in order to design the plan with full compliance and to monitor the works without fear and favour.

Another measure is to get rid of unnecessary requirements and procedures. For example, Is that a necessary to submit application to a different department for placement of rubbish bin rather than submit it together to the Building Control Department during the stage of building plan approval. Similarly, is that necessary to obtaining approval of Fire Department before the building plan can be approved? How about request the approval be obtained any time but before the Certificate of Completion and Compliance be issued? Can we approve the building plan first of together with the earth work plan, after all for the construction work to begin, the project proponent has to notify the authority through Form B. The Authority can stop the physical commencement of work if earth work plan has not approved. If this can be so, then definitely it will help shortening the time frame required for pre construction approval.

Finally but not least, the relationship between land matter and planning permission was debated but no solution was forthcoming. It is commonly known that obtaining planning permission first does not mean that you are able to continue with development until the land matter has been settled. As it is now, the land application is taking longer time and could jeopardise the whole process of development. The process for these two matters need to be re-synergies, and if possible for major structural change, I presume.

Catch22: Service Provider vs Regulator

Is the local authority a Service Provider or a Regulator? The answer can be yes or no depending on how you look into it and what role the local authority is playing. For instance, in issuing the license, approving a permit or enforcing the laws, local authority is acting as a regulator. When it comes to collecting the domestic waste, area cleansing, repairing the road and potholes, then the local authority is a service provider. Can the local authority becomes a regulator cum service provider at the same time for the same works? Yes, definitely, but many have not perceived it correctly.

For example, One Stop Centre of Local Authority is entrusted to receive application for development projects. The Centre will check submitted documents and received it for further processing and approval. The Centre is providing service to the applicant in which efficiency, effectiveness and friendly are to be ensured although it is for planning regulation. Checking on the compliance of application and making sure that every thing is in order fulfilling the requirement of law and guidelines is the scope of work for regulator. If similar argument is applied, then all scope for regulation of local authority are service oriented. Enforcement, for example is a service to ensure peace and order. Health inspection is carried out to improve the service quality of food outlets.

I believe the public servants have to understand that we are providing services to the public, be it general service or regulating the laws. After all, after office hour we are part of the community, the opposite site that we are serving during office hour.

Installing LED Lighting at the Back Lane

MBPJ launched the Program for Installing LED Lighting at the Back Lane recently. The Program is a partnership initiative in which the local authority will bear the cost of installation and equipment while the house owners will pay for the monthly electricity bill. RM100,000 has been allocated in which approximately 400 houses will be benefited from this scheme. This is part of the Safe City and Low Carbon Green City Program of Petaling Jaya.

Under the 23 steps of Safe City Programme, Step 21 suggested that lighting should be installed at the lane, frontage of houses or any dark spot. It is believed that a bright place will reduce the possibility of crime incidence. Hence, relationship between lighting and crime is established. This is logical as many of us do not want to reach out to dark place with the fear of untoward things happen. We perceive that places not visible by ourselves or others is not safe to visit. We tend to walk on the street with full lighting and with huge crowd rather than venturing ourselves to the quiet place. However, from the web search of 120,000 sites found that no concrete studies or definite conclusions have been made on the correlation between more lighting will reduce crime incidence.

Having said this, general public still believe that lighting up their house compound and passage way will reduce the possibility of crime from happen. They believe that even though thief might still want to break in unnoticed by them during wee hour, the light will hopefully bright enough for the neighbours to alert what happening next door. I think rightly so.

Using LED Lighting on the other hand will help reduce the emission of carbon dioxside with electricity saving. LED light with same intensity of brightness is consuming 60% less of eletricity compared to the conventional bulb. The use of LED lighting for combating crime is a project killing two birds with one stone. It is a project for sustainable development, with the integration of environment, economy and social components. It is a showcase of environmentally friendly can be profitable.

Problem Without Notice

I took LRT to my office this morning. While the service is accessible and convenience for me to commute from house to work place, under adnormal circumstances or small hindrance will make the trip unpleasant one. This morning saw the rain spoiled the day of most people because it is inconvenience to hold the umbrella, if you have one or else you are exposed yourselves to the wet situation. For people have to carry something with one of their hand, obviously hodling an umbrella is troublesome. I hold my umbrella with one hand and my beg with another to walk to the LRT station and as such unable to answer the mobile which was ringing unstopped. While this is all right since picking up the phone later is bearable, I encountered a problem of passing through a small gate from the LRT Station at Taman Jaya towards the Town Centre of Section 52. The Station is fenced up with a gate openned for passage by. The metal chain link gate, however was only half open in which letting the umbrella to pass through is bit difficult. Further that, the supposedly barrier free pedestrian walkway was disconnected in front of the newly completed Court Building. I presume with the construction of new building and new entrance, the ramp and connectivity of the walk way was displaced. Then moving further, I was forced to divert from the walkway into the carriageway as part of the walkway was water logged and hence cannot passed through. All these small encounterings have making my walking trip under wet circumstances a not so pleasant one.

I believe for the service providers, these are insignificance gestures that they should look into as well instead of the macro event or happenings. No point of providing infrastructure and facilities but fail by the small undone improvement.

Catch22: Need vs Want

When it comes to right thing to do, the entrepreneurs will not think twice but make it happen even under any circumstances such as without legitimate backing. For example, start business first while waiting for license to be approved. This is understood as many can only start renovation and submit application for license after signing the tenancy agreement with landlord. Under normal circumstances, they are given one month rental free to renovate and make neccesary application for approval to operate. What happen if the grace period over and approval yet to obtain? Most businessmen will run their business without license and take full responsibility on any risk of getting fine or enforcement action from the authority. Under their stand point, it is nothing wrong if you need to pay few thousand dollars of rental with no income forthcoming. In the economy sense, it is illogical and waste of resources.

For the local authority envisions to practice good governance and embrace friendly stand towards environment and the stekholders but lack of any concrete legal backing, what is the option available? On one hand their action might be ultra virus and subjected to challenge by others, on the other hand it is something emerging or currently has been done elsewhere and morally need to be done. For example, knowing that due to heavy runoff because of increase in rain intensity, the local authority is making it mandatory for development projects to install the rain water harvesting system. The system is helping to store the rain water during heavy down pour so that the drain system and river will not be over flowing which is the major cause for flash flood. Everybody knows that this is the way forward and shall be done quicker the possible. However, the problem is getting the legislation and rules in place as support. Under such circumstance, are you waiting fo the rules to be passed first before implementation or implementing it regardless of the full legal backing? This is not an easy solution as tussle between interested parties over who's responsibility is the main subject for discussion. By instaling the system, the development project proponent has to folk out extra cost and hence affecting their bottom line. By not asking to do so, the authority might have to upgrade their drainage system by incorporating other measures such as retention pond which is costly. For individual owner, if nothing is to be done at the beginning of developmenet, I afraid many might not even what to do it. More demaging is more owners will cover their little green land in the frontage of their house compound for hard surface and parking purpose which will further reduce the land to absorb water runoff.

This comes back to the question of need and want. It is needed to have the system and logically the authority wants it. For requesting what you want, obviously the other side said you must have legitimate power to ask so. Legally it is a fair request, but morally I am not too sure... Having said so, not all wants shall be requested without any reasonable justification for the good of general public intereste or else it will become a society of "day light robbery".

Confuse

We questioned about the sustainability in our way of life. We concern about our own carbon footprint. We afraid of disturbing others while having our enjoyment. This must be idealism stage in which everyone is so caring and loving towards the nature and built environment as well as the mankind. However the reality is non of the above are real in life. We encounter conflicts every minute between each others. We quarrel due to differences. We are at risk each time traveling outside the house. We do not foresee what will happen ahead of us but rather response to eventuality when it is due. On one hand we hope for the best in life, but always meet with many challenges. We are confused by the reality with scenario.

At time we are so confused and unsure what have we done that impacted the environment surrounding us. For example, while many demonstrated against the haphazard substances or waste produced from mining activities, not all of them understand the need and reasons of doing so. We have done that because others ask us to follow or rather we have done that because others have done so. We are followers to great extend. Perhaps we have three classes of followers, namely the group following the progress of events without doing anything, second class is people eagerly following the progress and having initiatives to act and last group must be the apathy one, knowing and doing nothing. The former and last group must be the confused people.

While confusion is happening at all time, letting confusion to precede other priorities and cause much a problem must be avoided for at all cost and time or else confusion can be deeper and deeper. For example, we might be confused about how a politician spoke differently in different occasions, rather than accepting what they spoke, it is always good to find out first what they have spoken and verified the truth before deciding to spread the news further. Other wise we are part of the group for confusing others.

Some time we tend to confuse people as we are indecisive on what we are trying to say. It is a situation of if I cannot convince you, then it is better to confuse you so that you are at loss and would not be able to question me further. It is a dangerous situation if the opponent you are trying to confuse is more well worth of the subject matter because they are able to tell you directly what on earth they know.

I believe Malaysian are not confused when it comes to the issue of toxic waste and "bull"-"shit".