Monday, March 26, 2012

At the expense of our HERITAGE ?? - Need to ensure smooth project flows in Penang

Home » ourpick

Need to ensure smooth project flows in Penang

Published: 2012/03/26
AS DEVELOPMENT issues continue to take centre stage in Penang and concerns rise over how fast and furious the face of the island state appears to change, a noticeable gap among some stakeholders has become apparent.


In one corner, stands certain public-interest groups who claim that public consultation is wanting where mega projects are presented by the state authorities. 

In the other corner are corporate players - made up mainly of property and infrastructure developers - who have been making a bee-line for a piece of the action in Penang.

Right smack in the middle are the local authorities which, in recent times, have ended up as the punching bag for the public when a heritage building is torn down, or a major project has been approved with what seemingly involves a minimum or lack of public feedback and consultation.

The local council has also been accused more than once, of placing the interest of businessmen ahead of ratepayers' when approving projects.


Property developers have repeatedly found themselves dragged into controversy for supposedly displaying scant respect for heritage structures or disregarding the environment when carrying out a project.

Despite obtaining necessary approvals to tear down sometimes very valuable heritage properties to make way for their project, these companies find themselves incurring the wrath of heritage activists and angry public.

These situations sometimes end up causing endless delays to a project as developers and public interest groups come head-on, and the absence of an effective "referee" - most often state authorities - only ends up in making things worse, instead of being resolved.

When Penang-based property developer Hunza Properties Bhd paid a premium to purchase a piece of land fronting Gurney Drive in Pulau Tikus, the company found itself in a face-off with the Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) which feared for the safety of the historic St Joseph's Noviative, which is located on the land which Hunza had bought.

Hunza kept to its word that it would not destroy the building and proceeded to spend millions in hiring a conservation expert and going to great lengths to ensure that the two-storey building, which also served as home to international school Uplands, stands proud and returned to its somewhat original, albeit "glossy" look.

In recent times, other developers such as Mah Sing Group Bhd have come under scrutiny for reportedly demolishing a colonial-era bungalow in George Town illegally, prior to getting approval from the local council to do so and make way for a high-end project in the area.

The local council took the matter to court after a public outcry and the company was fined RM6,000 by the George Town magistrate's court for demolishing without a permit.

A common thread which appears to be seen when property developers are made into "villains" by the public, is when projects which they consider to be of public interest are "messed" with.

What often begs the question when these issues get the attention of the media and public at large, is whether public interest groups take the trouble to learn more about companies and what their plans are for projects. Since most of these companies are public listed and subject to public disclosure, a lot of information can be gleaned from simply checking their announcements to Bursa Malaysia. 

By getting a "heads-up" of these plans, groups will have more time to express any reservations about projects and not wait till development and building plans are approved, before starting to make noise and sometimes, unreasonable demands.

Meanwhile, developers and firms involved in projects which are to affect the public should engage stakeholders like non-governmental organisations so that both parties can better understand each other before launching into any "attacks".

In ensuring that sustainable development takes priority over other factors, the Penang municipal council can see to it that adequate representation from NGOs can be seen in its Technical Review Panel. The review panel is currently said to be represented more by businessmen than public interest groups.

By doing so, many issues and concerns can be addressed and resolved (if needed) at the onset of a proposed project, instead of having numerous disruptions take centre stage and end up only as time and money-wasters.


Read more: Need to ensure smooth project flows in Penanghttp://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/MONVIEW26/Article/#ixzz1qB5CgbWX

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Hill slope development allowed, judicial review

Court of Appeal rules against Bukit Gasing residents

March 06, 2012

PUTRAJAYA, March 6 — The Court of Appeal here in a majority decision ruled against 108 Bukit Gasing residents' legal action to stop a hill slope project adjacent to their Petaling Jaya neighbourhood, today.

The court was in agreement with a High Court's dismissal of their judicial review application to challenge the issuance of a development order by the Kuala Lumpur mayor, according to Bernama Online.

Court of Appeal judge Datuk Zaharah Ibrahim delivered a 2-1 majority verdict. Justice Datuk Ramly Ali concurred with her while Justice Datuk Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha dissented.

In her decision, she disagreed with the residents' submission through their lawyer R. Sivarasa, that the amended Town and Country Planning Act 1976 which stipulated residents should have a right to a public objection hearing extended to the Federal Territory.

She said the Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982 was more applicable to areas falling under the Federal Territory. In this act, a public hearing is possible only if the land is used for other purposes or the proposed move leads to the increase in population density.

Justice Tan in his dissenting decision said Kuala Lumpur City Hall failed procedurally by disallowing the residents a public hearing before issuing the developed order, which falls under the Town and Country Planning Act.

The residents filed the application in 2008 for a judicial review at the Kuala Lumpur High Court to block the Kuala Lumpur mayor's development order for a 15.52ha site in Bukit Gasing — to complete the Sanctuary Ridge Kuala Lumpur City project.

The October 2, 2007 order was issued to Gasing Meridian Sdn Bhd (GMSB) to execute earth works and subdividing the area, before building 70 luxury units. GMSB claims the land was private and not been gazetted as a green lung or natural forest.

The residents claimed in the judicial review application that the mayor had failed to factor them under Common Law and therefore give them due notice and an opportunity to affect the decision-making process.

The High Court rejected their application on September 6, 2010, forcing the residents to raise the matter up to the Court of Appeal.

Bukit Gasing Joint Action Committee member Mohamed Kamar Mohamed said the residents were disappointed.

The residents he said have to meet and decide if they want to appeal their case up to the Federal Court.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Fwd: MPPP Councillor Appraisal: Summary Report



From: sh tan <shtan0202@yahoo.com>
Date: January 12, 2012 13:53:08 GMT+08:00
To: undisclosed recipients: ;
Subject: Fw: MPPP Councillor Appraisal: Summary Report
Reply-To: sh tan <shtan0202@yahoo.com>

To residents' groups: fyi

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: sembang sembang <sembangforum@gmail.com>
To: Sembang forum notification group <sembang-forum-notification-group@googlegroups.com>; msian-ngo <msian-ngo@yahoogroups.com>; pgcivilsociety <pgcivilsociety@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 12 January 2012, 12:19
Subject: [sembang-forum 443] MPPP Councillor Appraisal: Summary Report
 
The following is a summary report of the self appraisals of the MPPP councillors. Attached please also find the detailed responses by the individual MPPP councillors. If anyone has any questions regarding the responses by the councillors, you can call up them directly. Their mobile phone numbers are in the detailed report. A similar exercise is also being carried out for the MPSP councillors. They have been given up till tomorrow, Fri 13 Jan 2012 to send in their responses.
 
regards
SH Tan
 
=============================================================================================
 
Background:
The "Know Your Councillor" campaign was initiated by several civil society members of Penang. The objectives of the campaign are:
-          to raise awareness on local democracy and local election among ratepayers in the State.
-          to enhance good governance, competency, accountability and transparency of councillors and local government.
-          to assist councillors to exercise good governance and  ensuring effective performance of their responsibilities.
-          to help ratepayers understand the roles and functions of councillors.
Questionaires were emailed to all the 23 MPPP councillors on 23 Dec 2011. The councillors were asked 3 questions:
1.      Please list your 3 major accomplishments as a MPPP Councillor for 2011
2.      If you are reappointed as a councillor for 2012, what will be your 3 main goals for the year?
3.      If you agree to be reappointed for 2012, please state why you should be reappointed?
The Councillors were given fourteen days to respond to the questionnaire. They were also informed that their responses to the questionnaire will be made public.
Summary of responses:
A total of 17 responses were received from the 23 questionaires sent out. The breakdown of the respondents by political parties and organizations is shown in the table below:
Party/Organisation
No. of councillors
No. responded
DAP
10
8
PKR
7
6
PAS
2
2
Chambers of Commerce
2
0
NGO
2
1
Total:
23
17
 
The following 17 councillors responded to the questionaire:
DAP
PKR
PAS
NGO
Teh Lai Heng
Mohd. Sabri
Mohd. Yusoff
Dr. Lim Mah Hui
Harvinder Singh
Tan Seng Keat
Iszuree Ibrahim
 
Gooi Seong Kin
Francis Joseph
 
 
Lim Siew Khim
Felix Ooi
 
 
Tay Leong Seng
Mohd. Taufik
 
 
Prem Anand
Hj. Mohd. Rashid
 
 
Tan Hun Wooi
 
 
 
Ong Ah Teong
 
 
 
 
Responses were not received from the 6 councillors below:
DAP
PKR
Chamber of Commerce
NGO
Zulkifli Mohd. Noor
Ramlah Bee
Tahir Jalaluddin
Mohd. Zahry
Lim Cheng Hoe
 
Sin Kok Siang
 
 
Many of the accomplishments listed by the councillors follow the lines of the key initiatives of the Penang State government, ie. Cleaner, Greener Penang and the Competency, Accountability, Transparency (CAT) mantra. The accomplishments listed by the councillors can generally be categorized under 4 main areas:
1.      Cleaner, Greener Penang and public spaces.
2.      Systems and procedural improvements.
3.      Alleviating traffic congestion.
4.      Projects for the lower income and marginalized groups including the disabled.
Several notable accomplishments reported by the councillors were:
-          Creation and upgrade of recreational areas and parks eg. Taman Manggis, Taman Sunway Tunas and the Rifle Range Linear Park.
-          Installation of pilot solar/LED lighting in public park in Sunway Tunas
-          Installation of a bio-regenerating composting machine in Bayan Baru
-          Enforcement and extension of vehicles clamping and towing to alleviate traffic congestion problems
-          Improving MPPP's budgeting process
-          Improving and reducing approval cycle time of trade license applications
-          Providing checks and balances to MPPP's policy decisions and directions without fear or favor
-          Upgrading and maintaining facilities of low cost housing areas  eg. Taman Tun Sardon, Rifle Range, Paya Terubong.
-          Upgrading infrastructure in several villages in Georgetown eg. Dato Keramat, Perak Road , Air Itam and within the UNESCO Heritage Zone.
-          Improving and upgrading of wet markets
 
Conclusion and recommendations:
It is believed that this "Know Your Councillor" campaign is the first such exercise ever carried out in Penang. The accomplishments listed by the councillors were understandably diverse. This is because they all have diverse backgrounds, skills and competencies. Each councillor has his or her own strengths. While some have experience in planning and strategizing policies, others have strengths in working with grassroots and solving day-to-day problems.
Municipal councillors are seen by ratepayers as the first line of access to the local government. Ratepayers will continue to expect councillors to solve their daily problems like licensing, traffic, garbage, etc.  While some progress has been made in improving the delivery system and participatory process of MPPP, there is still much room for improvement. Councillors are expected to serve the interests of ratepayers. As such, there should be more checks and balances without fear or favor in the decisions of the various committees they sit on.
 
Compiled and prepared by:
Tan Seng Hai
8 Jan 2012.
 
Participating NGOs:
-          SUARAM Penang
-          Sembang Forum
-          Coalition for Good Governance, Penang
-- Visit the Sembang-sembang Forum Blog athttp://sembangsembangforum.blogspot.com _______________________________________________   To post to this group, send email to sembang-forum-notification-group@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sembang-forum-notification-group+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/sembang-forum-notification-group?hl=en?hl=en

Saturday, December 24, 2011

CM Lim Guan Eng on youtube about the demolition of Pudu jail






From: "Lim Cheok Siang Jimmy" <notification+m5jvuid_@facebookmail.com>
Date: December 24, 2011 7:13:53 GMT+08:00
To: "Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) Discussions" <penangheritagetrust@groups.facebook.com>
Subject: Re: [Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) Discussions] New link
Reply-To: Reply to comment <g+42u0wgj000000bseogj002q5r886qr30022zn4z0e201yd46@groups.facebook.com>

If he can say all that I cannot imagine that...
Lim Cheok Siang Jimmy 24 December 07:13
If he can say all that I cannot imagine that he would have allowed all the things happening in Penang. It may suggest that most of the things against heritage are done without his know ledge...what say you guys? Agree or not? Immediately I can think of so many Agencies in Penang who may not be doing their job or are misled into believing that their job scope is only very small and limited. This notion is then conveyed to the CM and he being a good and trusting leader acts on their recommendations. (Also first timer CM leh). Unlike Tsu Khoon who had govern Pennag for so long LGE is new and not conversant with how the Local Government is run. So he acts on poor advice and many things related to the heritage matters and environmental issues not properly handled.......like "stop work order" becomes commencement of work, telling a person who has done something wrong to quickly rectify the wrong by submitting plans and rushing them through on a VIP pass? Or a "rebuild Order" has become a wait and see game. How lah CM to run a City and State as beautifula s Penang? Despite most of the GTWH core site is zoned for "Residential, Commercial, Markets, Institutional, Religious" purposes under the Planning Guidelines, why is the Local Authorities allowing "Agriculture and Farming" of sorts to be allowed in the city that is not ZONED for that purpose? Why? IS there a hidden agenda? So that means KFC can tomorrow move their chicken farm to a KOMTAR WALK shoplot, to supply chicken to their outlet at KOMTAR WALK? YB CHow how do you think this would fit in with your scheme of things to improve patronage of Komtar (Everbright)? Our Government should now send a message out to the Government Agencies that they must do their job for the protection and enjoyment of the people living in the city. Reason the people are "hammering" this Government for all the mistakes the agencies created......and this will change once they get re-erected into office as the people are behind the Government but not behind poor workers in Govern Agencies and bad messengers.
Comment history
Lim Cheok Siang Jimmy
Lim Cheok Siang Jimmy24 December 06:46
Can someone tell our CM that we all speak the same language as he did over the Pudu Jail issue. Somehow I think in the translation or transfer of information to the CM by his 'under-links' and abled assistants our intents and message got screwed up and he ends up thinking that we are "against" him big time and he angry with us 'environmentalists and heritage freaks'. BUT LGE SPEAKS SAME language..........so how can be enemy. Maybe many messengers speak different "lingos".....which explains why CM gets confuse information.......like we are told that the 'Cheng Hoo" of Ayer Itam is not LGE. Did his people tell him that? This is bad politics. People may end up erecting a wrong person to Govern the next time. Make hay whilst the sun shine. I extracted some quotes by LGE which could have 1. "Express my regrets at the demolition of the Pudu Jail wall" ….CM Penang

2. "…sad that historic building build in 1895 is torn down to make way for commercial development" ….CM Penang

3. "…remind the Fed Gov. that you cannot buy heritage. Once it is destroyed nothing can return it back" ….CM Penang

4. "…some countries like Singapore ….to make way for sky scrapers……now………..if given an opportunity to do it again, they would retain many of the heritage buildings" ….CM Penang

5. "……remember you can buy a lot of things cannot buy love or time." ….CM Penang

6. "You must have your cultural assets in place. Malaysia wants to become a civil society….to be a civil society you must first be a civilised Nation to be a civilised Nation you must first make sure you are able to take care and protect your cultural assets." ….CM Penang

7. "…..it is still part of our past and heritage" ….CM Penang

8. "…..money is not everything" ….CM Penang

9. "Do they tear down the great wall of Chinas to make way for development? " ….CM Penang

10. "If we as a Nation do not know how to preserve and protect our cultural heritage it does not reflect well on all of us" ….CM Penang

11. "…..Disappointment on the failure of the Gov. and the wrong sense of priority……..where they place the value of money and commercial interests than… protecting the heritage" ….CM Penang

12. "I mean for us if in Penang we can stop the development by not approving the plans unless you conform to heritage requirements…developments can complement each other….development also retain heritage aspect by complementing and supplementing each other. It is not mutually exclusive that you have to destroy one (heritage) to replace with a modern development. I think you can complement and supplement each other" ….CM Penang
been us Chanting......."
Yan Lee
Yan Lee23 December 18:12
we want this man, watch this video
Original post
Citizen Chant
Citizen Chant23 December 16:38
DAP express regret over Pudu Jail
www.youtube.com
DAP MPs, led by Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng today expressed regret that there has been no eff...

View Post on Facebook · Edit email settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.