Earth Hour 2013

WWF initiated Earth Hour 2013 would see millions of people around the globe switching off the lights on 23th March, 8.30pm to 9.30pm. It is a day to raise public awareness on climate change and its impact. It is commonly acknowledged that energy sector contributing the highest carbon emission to our Earth. Hence, finding ways to reduce non renewable energy consumption is the way forward. Electricity generated from coal is major source of carbon emission as 1kwh electricity will be generating 1kg CO2 and equivalent. Reminding people to not consume electricity over and above what needed, hence is essential. The day of Earth Hour will witness many activities of dessiminating information about environmental conservation and protection. This, especially so with many businesses using this to conduct their corporate social responsibility programmes. While holding an awareness programme is commendable, using that as a gimmick to attract people coming all the way from far, some with fossil fuel driven private vehicles might not be appropriate and go against the call for prudent in energy consumption. While switching off the light for an hour is not that difficult, practicing it daily and using electricity sufficiently for basic need remains a big challenge. Do we not putting our electrical appliances on stand by mode? Can we walk to the neighbourhood shops instead of riding on a car? Can we switch off the bathroom lights after using it? We might want to replace malfunction bulbs with the energy saving or LED lamps. Can we procure 5 star energy saving appliances? If you want a vehicle for travelling and if you can afford, why not buying a hybrid or electric car? Can we adjust the temperature of air condition to 26 degrees celcious and only on it when you cannot withstand the heat or humidity? Can we have green building or retrofiting our building towards energy efficiency? Why not generating renewable energy, a feet encourages by the Sustainable Energy Development Authority of Malaysia. Happy Earth Hour 2013

World Water Day 2013

Tomorrow is the 2013 World Water Day. United Nations has designated the 2013 is UN International Year of Water Cooperation with UNESCO taking the lead. The World Water Day held 22nd March each year is a mean to focusing attention to fresh water and advocating the importance of managing fresh water resources sustainably. UNESCO has been chosen due to its significant and long standing roles and on the issue of fresh water conservation. This is timely reminder as many of us have forgotten that this God giving gift for neccessity to sustain human life has been ignored. The importance of water and its value to society has to be reminded and reinstated. For Malaysian, the average consumption of 202 liter water per person per day is much higher compared to the world average of 165 liter per person per day. We, hence become very wasteful and generous on the usage of water. The consumption pattern can be changed if we are willing to change our lifestyle, attitude and value on water usage. Have you done anything in celebrating the World Water Day? You might want to install the rain water harvesting system in your premises. Are you recycling the waste water? Are you using the glass to hold water from tap during teeth brushing time? Have you changed the toilet flushing tank to the capacity of 6 liter or below? Thankful to the Water while celebrating it.

Responsibility of Developers

The High Court recently ruled that responsibility of developers in providing the facilities or in building the infrastructure according to approved plan has no limitation on time frame. It means that developer has to provide as such and finish the job no matter how long the projects have been completed. Very often we witnessed the project proponents run away from their duty in providing the facilities and infrastructure after long period especially for the development in phasing or go without notice. This is more so for parcels of land in a larger scheme that have been sold to individual owners. For the individual owners, they have either no knowledge about the requirement or innocent about the conditions imposed. It will come to a time that the new owners claim of unfairness to them as they are only buying a portion of it. The original owners run away from the responsibility after master layout plan approved and individual parcel of land sold. The rulling is timely that local authority should not be blamed for no infrastructure provision, a task supposedly done by the project proponents.

Complacent

What will you do if you are on the top or peak now? If you are the best at present time and everyone comes to you as role model, will you do something new in order to stay ahead than others? Many might be complacent as the desire to do more or better will be diminishing the soonest if a target has been achieved. Human is born to complete a task and the moment it is completed and no further need to do better or to move into new era, no many will on his own initiative trying to enhance the task he has just acoomplished. This requires determination and at time discipline or sometime the incentives of doing so. Perhaps getting new guy to do it will further reinforce the spirit of improving thing or stay on top. This also applies to the planning and maintenance culture. Many are good in planning and finishing the job but will not bother to maintain it. We use to plan new event and have a great starting, but follow through to ensure the planning works or sustains remains a big challenge. That's why some label we have first class planning, but a third class maintenance culture.

Strata Development

Challenge on planning especially for the highrise strata building development is tougher now. With the issuing of strata title for individual parcels, no further development even for the renovation work with increased of intensity can be allowed. This can only be allowed unless all owners agree to terminate and cancel their individual title for the issuing of new ones. This will become a big challenge for development project with phasing stage and unclear development direction at the initial stage. For example, if a planning permission has been given for a project with 2 phases. After selling of Phase One Strata properties with agreement indicated the accessory parcels and common properties are fixed and located, no further adjustment is allowed unless the the owners or buyers agree collectively. Hence, refining planning at the later stage or even changes made because of market demand might not be possible anymore based on current practice. New set of rules and practices will have to set accommodating this changes. For project proponents, they might need to have clearer idea what they want to develop or to expedite their development for fear of changes later. One of the advantages is protecting the interest of buyers in which the sale of accessory parcels or common properties is more difficult now without their consent. It is good also for the management corporation to control over the common properties, I believe.

Planning vs Implementation

On my way to Shah Alam via Federal Highway this morning to attend a function, I witnessed perhaps one of the longest and biggest car parking at the opposite direction. It was a big traffic congestion from PJ all the way down to the interchange of Shah Alam Stadium. I was made to understand that this is a common phenomenum on every working day. The volume of private vehicles patronising the roads is getting higher per day even though the car price is higher as well. Why are there less people taking public transport. Is that because of the insufficient of vehicles fleets or due to the problem of connectivity and accessibility? We have been debating the issue of traffic congestion decades ago and we have also suggesting public transport as the solution, but problem is remained even til now. My conclusion is the issue is not about failure of planning but rather the capacity of execution. Execution remains the bigger challenge and, sometime obstacle to the fruition of effective planning. Without execution done with planned schedule, a comprehensive and holistic planning is not going to work. Even though implementation is finally done, it will involve many changes and adaptation. For example, a ramp need to be built for a development but construction was deferred to later date due to financial problem might not be suitable anymore as solution to the traffic management as many motorists patronising the building would have developed other type of driving behaviour then. It is difficult to get them to change later, I presume. Hence, planning and implementation must go hand in hand or else the blame of failure in planning will always remain.

Relevance of Shop House?

It is a sad case that 2 person cannot escape from fire died on the spot. They were contained in the 2nd floor when fire set free on the 1st floor. The back portion of 1st floor and whole of 2nd floor have been converted to hostel for workers. This is a safety issue in the commercial building. While commercial buildings have been approved for business purpose, many especially those floors on higher part are vacant and idle. The floors are later used for residential prupose or many have turned into workers hostel. This bring in the issue of safety and also the question on fulfilling the objective of planning. Planning of commercial floor space is usually decided upon the growth of population in the small town centre and based on economic activities and anticipation of in flow of investors for the bigger commercial town centre. If the space is used for non commerical purpose, then indirectly it indicated that there is either oversupply of commerical floor space or diminish of market demand over the shop office concept. Many big corporates prefer to move into Class A office or those with better facilities and addresses like lift or escalators, car parking facilities and etc. Many do not mind to pay for having a premium address or in the prime commercial area. This bring in the question of suitability of shop office or shop house development in urban area. Or even the storey height is in doubt now. Many convenience and comparison goods activities like retails, services are occupying the ground floor of building due to the movement of pedestrian and visibility. Many do not want to be at 1st floor as potential customers do not want to climb up the stairs if possible. Given the choice, they will patronise other shops offering similar services. The shopping behaviour is changing now. Even some prefer to patronise shopping centre for convenience services rather than visiting the shop house for fear of safety and comfortable reason. In a way, the concept of shop house and its' effective functionality within the scope of urban planning in cities is diminishing. Shall we continue allowing shop house to be developed? While project proponents might want to offer properties easily absorb by the market and without having long term committment, the impact of having shop house in the town centre is left with local authorities to handle. Local authorities have to look after the problem of cleanliness of unattended back lanes and drains, provision of car parking facilities which are often insufficient from the beginning, enforcing on the obstruction of corridors and etc. If these services can be centralised in a complex, then the need to encounter these problems is for sure can be minimised. Taking the case of Bandar Utama, no shop houses are built, but instead a complex in the name of CentrePoint was built with all neighbourhood facilities are provided. The complex becomes a must visit place of all residents for their convenience needs. The area is well maintained and ample parking lots are provided. The neighbourhood area is funactional well. This vindicates that a township development without the existance of shop house is workable and shall be the way forward, if a city wants to be in forefront. For offices and comparison goods, leave it to the tower office, I think.

Pole is Structure

At the recent ruling by High Court on the case of Beta Tegap Sdn Bhd vs Sepang Municipal Council over the issue of AES, the Court ruled that erecting pole is considered a structure for which development is committed. With this interpretation, it means planning permission under Town and Country Planning Act, 1976 and building plan approval under the Street, Drainage and Buildings Act, 1974 are applicable. Anyone intends to put up any structure regardless of the size, side or use is required to obtain permission first. The arguemnt over the need for submiting planning permission application for constructing a detached house or an outdoor signboard or a hoarding or a fencing does not arise any more. It is the obligation of the project proponent to adhere to the requirement of the law. While many might cited the administrative burden and extra load on the submission, this should not become a valid arguement. Submitting application for planning permission will allow local planning authorities to impose conditions they think fit and to suite the need of local circumstances. For example, conditions imposed for building a house in the flat area and a hilly area is definitey varied. The clearance is welcomed.