2006 July issue - Malaysian Institute of Planners

Transcription

Berita
PERANCANG
Symposium On
Knowledge
Cities
Akta Warisan Kebangsaan
2005/National Heritage
Act 2005
KDN PP 10805/5/2005
The much anticipated National
Heritage Act received the Royal
consent on 30 December 2005. It
was 'launched' by Minister of
Culture, Arts & Heritage in a grand
ceremony at Sheraton Imperial
Kuala Lumpur on 30 June 2006.
The symposium organised by
AUDI (Arab Urban Development
Institute. See www.araburban.org
/MDMS/ english/home.html for
details of AUDI) was held on 28 to
30 November 2005 in Al-Madinah
Al-Munawara, Saudi Arabia. There
were more than 25 working papers
presented with the attendance of
more than 350 participants from
various Islamic countries including
Malaysia. The focus of the
conference was on knowledge
cities and information societies. Dr
Alias Abdullah, the MIP Council
Member, attended the conference
and presented a paper on
“Planning and Implementation of a
University’s Wide Property, Asset
and Facility Management System”.
The event saw the Minister briefing
the invited participants, comprising
officers from Federal agencies,
State and local authorities, district
officers, enforcement agencies,
NGOs and the general public. The
newly appointed Commissioner of
Heritage, Prof Dato’ Siti Zuraina
Abdul Majid, the renowned
archaeologist who was formerly
with USM, was also introduced to
the guests. Prof. Zuraina heads
the newly created Jabatan
Warisan Negara. It was then
followed by a briefing session by a
panel of officers from Kementerian
Kebudayaan, Kesenian & Warisan
(KeKKWa or Ministry of Culture,
Arts and Heritage) on the key
elements of the Act.
It is no doubt a very important
milestone for the country, and
specifically for the planning
profession. The Act was arguably
based on the initial draft prepared
by JPBD for Kementerian
Perumahan & Kerajaan Tempatan
(KPKT, Ministry of Housing & Local
Government) as an amendment to
the Town & Country Planning Act.
The main addition to the KPKT
draft is the inclusion of “intangible
heritage”. Heritage as defined by
the Act covers both cultural and
natural
heritage,
including
underwater cultural heritage. In
effect, the new National Heritage
Act amalgamated the provisions in
the Antiquities Act 1976 and the
Treasure Trove Act 1957. The
August 2006
latter two Acts were repealed when
the National Heritage Act came
into force on 1st March 2006 (with
exception to States that do not
adopt Part XI of the new Act).
Heritage conservation is now on
the concurrent list of the Federal
Constitution, thereby giving it a
joint
legislative
jurisdiction
between the Federal and State
Authorities. The National Heritage
Act applies to all the States in
Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and
Sarawak.
The Act created a heritage register
where any member of the public
can propose to the Commissioner
the designation of any site which
has natural or cultural heritage
potential. Literally, you can propose
your neighbour’s property or even
someone else’s property in a
remote jungle in the Titiwangsa
Range to be listed as a heritage
site. The Commissioner can serve
an Interim Protection Order on a
site pending the decision on
whether or not the site will be
designated a heritage site. The
Commissioner will also establish
and maintain a National Heritage
Register containing the list of items
registered under the Act.
The powers of the Commissioner
conferred by the National Heritage
Act seem very wide for the
conservation of heritage. However,
there is a potential weakness in
the enforcement of the Act by the
fact that it will require full cooperation from both the State and
Local Authorities for it to be fully
effective. Consent from the
relevant State Authority is required
before any designation is made.
Written permission from the State
NEWSLETTER OF THE MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS
Authority is also required before
entry to a proposed heritage site.
At the local level, the local
planning authority must take into
account the designated heritage
site in the preparation of any
development plan and in the
consideration
of
planning
applications under the Town &
Country Planning Act and the
relevant State laws in Sabah and
Sarawak.
In summary, the National Heritage
Act requires close co-operation
between the KeKKWa and the
State and local authorities. It is
also closely linked to the Town &
Country Planning Act in its
enforcement. This point was
repeatedly emphasized by the
KeKKWa’s Legal Advisor in his
briefing, thereby, signifying the
significant role of town planners in
the conservation of our heritage.
The onus is on KPKT and JPBD to
initiate the process of amending
the Town & Country Planning Act
to accommodate the relevant
provisions in the National Heritage
BP
Act.
MIP COUNCIL 2005-2007
President
NORLIZA HASHIM
Vice-President
PROF DR MANSOR IBRAHIM
Honorary Secretary
AHMAD SUHAIMI ISMAIL
Honorary Treasurer
MD NAZRI MOHD NOORDIN
The New MIP
Office
MIP has moved to its new office
and it is located just off the
Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong
(LDP) and next to Kelana Jaya
Seafood restaurant. A freehold
property, the Aman Seri office is a
4-storey shop-house building (with
lifts) that was purchased from
Glomac at a price of RM1.44
million (after a 7% discount).
Standing Committees :
Membership / Education
Fund Board
PROF DR MANSOR IBRAHIM
Research and Publication
ASSOC PROF DR ALIAS
ABDULLAH
Programme
MOHD. ZAMRI HUSIN
Education and Students
Affairs
ASSOC PROF WAN MOHAMED
YUSOFF ABDULLAH
Young Planners
MD. NAZRI MOHD NOORDIN
Corporate Affairs /
International Affairs
NORLIZA HASHIM
Sustainable Planning and
Development
KHAIRIAH TALHA
Special Projects
JASON LEE POH LEE
Renovation works is still ongoing
but almost completed; however
operations of the Secretariat are
now from this new office premise,
which most of you would have
been informed through our mails.
Once completed, the MIP office will
be opened to all its members and
hopefully one day be also opened
to the public for Planning Advisory
Services and use of facilities which
includes :1st Floor – MIP Secretariat
2nd Floor - MIP Library and
Resource Centre
3rd Floor - MIP Training Centre
(Ground floor will be rented out to
finance some of our operation cost)
Currently we are in the midst of
filling up the Resource Centre with
books, journals and publications
related
to
Planning
and
Development and we welcome
contributions in terms of books and
other donations that members can
contribute towards making the
centre a comprehensive one-stop
centre for information regarding
town planning and development.
Once completed, all exams, MIP
courses
and
most
CPD
programmes will be held here and
this we hope will make CPD more
affordable to all. 50% of all
proceeds made from this training
centre will be contributed to the
Education Fund Board, which we
hope to strengthen its role and
financial abilities. The office will
also be a centre for students and
new graduates seeking more
information on town planning and
its opportunities and we welcome
everyone to our new office.
Look out for an invitation to our
‘Doa Selamat’ and House Warming
which we hope to do some time
before ‘puasa’ and with this centre,
we hope more will come forward to
not only participate in our
programmes but volunteer in our
sub-committees programmes and
activities.
Professional Practice
IHSAN ZAINAL MOKHTAR
CO-OPTED MEMBERS
2005-2007
• Datin Paduka Dr Halimaton
Saadiah
2
Chief Editor
Ishak Ariffin
Members
• Assoc. Prof. Wan Mohamed
Yusoff b. Abdullah
• Khairiah bt. Hj. Mohd
Talha
• Muhammad Faris b.
Abdullah
• Bong Khin Fah
• Mohd Zin Mohamed
• Juwairiyah Ho bt. Abdullah
• Hj. Mokhtar b. Samadi
Berita
PERANCANG
is
published by the Publication
Committee of the Malaysian
Institute of Planners.
All communication should be
addressed to:
Berita Perancang
Malaysian Institute of
Planners
B-1-02, Jalan SS 7/13B,
Kelana Jaya
47301 Petaling Jaya,
Selangor
Tel : 03-7877 0636
Fax : 03-4877 9636
E-mail :
[email protected] /
[email protected]
Website :
http://www.mip.org.my
Views expressed in this
Newsletter do not necessarily
represent those of the Malaysian
Institute of Planners
Printed by
Swan Marketing Sdn Bhd
28, Jln PBS 14/15, Tmn Perindustrian
Bukit Serdang, Seri Kembangan,
43300 Selangor Darul Ehsan
Siti Nor Azmi
• Datuk Hj Zainuddin Hj
Muhammad
• T Mahesan
Advisor
Assoc. Prof. Dr Alias Abdullah
Secretariat Staff
• Dato’ Hj Zainol Bin Hj Ayob
• Zainab Bin Mohd Ghazali
EDITORIAL BOARD
Address :
MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS
B-1-02, Jalan SS 7/13B, Kelana Jaya
47301 Petaling Jaya, Selangor
Shariah bt
Che Lah
Hurun Ain
President’s Message
President Norliza Hashim addressing the floor at the 34th Annual
General Meeting of MIP on 25th March 2006 at Impiana Hotel, KL
Assalamualaikum wrm.wbr. and
Warm Greetings,
inclusive. Thus the call from the
In the World Planners Congress
held in Vancouver, June 2006,
urban planning issues were
debated and discussed in great
depth and enthusiasm. The
support from various world
community leaders brought about
new strength and spirit for
planners who attended the
conference (who were from all
over the world). Urban planning is
acknowledged as essential in
addressing some of the greatest
challenges facing the global
community and much of the
thinking were focused on issues
of sustainable development and
planning. However, it has not
gone unnoticed that for some
countries, urban planning faced
great challenges and the practice
of planning has not always been
of the vision of planning so as
UN Habitat to address both the
political and professional aspects
to
balance
environmental
sustainability with social and
economic dimensions.
For the Malaysian planning
scenario, the political vision to
attain a developed nation status
by the year 2020 is even more
clearly defined in the Ninth
Malaysia Plan and its National
Mission, which has outlined the
implementation framework and
the country’s priorities for the next
15 years. The Plan is pro-
planning and emphasizes on a
stronger and more value-added
economy, while giving substantial
focus to socio-economic issues
and uplifting the quality of life for
all.
The fourth key thrust of the Ninth
Malaysia Plan calls for
‘Improving the standard and
sustainability of quality of life’.
Malaysia’s commitments towards
sustainability have progressed
since its commitments to the Rio
Summit in 1992. And in its Ninth
Plan, (2006-2010), it has identify
the need for a Malaysian
Sustainable
Development
Indicators (SDI) to measure and
set targets for all sectors to
comply and acknowledges the
need
for
international
environmental initiatives. And for
the first time, it is seen that
sustainability has holistically been
the fundamental factor of the Plan
and these has also been
integrated with its budget
allocations where affordable
housing,
infrastructure
development (to serve the
underserved),
urban
transportation and environmental
enhancement projects has been
given priorities in allocations (RM
46.8 billion – allocated to Ministry
to Natural Resources, Ministry of
Works and Ministry of Transport).
(RM 18 billion for Affordable and
Public Housing and Services).
The Ninth Plan also emphasize
on ‘pro-poor and integrated
planning’, where reducing the
regional and income disparity
between rural and urban areas as
well as between less developed
and more developed regions are
given focused. These are in line
with the policies and strategies of
the National Physical Plan that
promotes regional development
by identifying regional growth
conurbations in Peninsular
Malaysia to rationalized national
spatial planning for economic
and
global
efficiency
competitiveness and to optimize
utilization of land and natural
resources.
In light of all these and more that
has been identified in the Ninth
Plan, Town Planning practice is
very relevant and the role of the
professional town planners to
improve the quality of life of the
Malaysian people is even more
so important. A ‘New Urban
Planning’, which is strategic,
stakeholder responsive and
market-savvy, and linked to
budgets, can guide investments,
both private and public, to where
they are needed most and have
the maximum impact. Let us all
realized the National Mission and
support the initiatives of the
Government and plan towards
achieving a better quality of life
for all.
Thank you
Norliza Hashim
President
Highlights
• Urban Planning in Saudi
Arabia . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
• History of St Peter’s
Church, Malacca . . . .10
• Zurich the Best City to
Live in . . . . . . . . . . . .13
• Predictability in
Planning - A Worthy
Goal? . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
• Technical Visit to
Vancouver . . . . . . . . .20
3
Editorial
I called up an old friend and former
colleague at JPBD the other day.
She just came back from a study
leave so we had some catching up
to do. Naturally the conversation
came to BERITA PERANCANG.
I was surprised to hear the
comment that some planners get
intimidated - oops! sorry! - got
scared away from submitting
articles because of the English
language used in the publication.
I must stress here that it was not
BERITA
intentional
that
PERANCANG has had most of
the articles published in English.
We
just
received
more
submissions, in fact the majority of
materials, in English. We simply
wish that more people would write
in BM. Another reason for my
writngs being in English is namely,
we are trying to support the drive
towards improving our command
of English. Naaah. I am lying! I just
write better, actually faster, in
English. I have been doing it for
the last 30 years or so. It is not that
my English is so great but in truth,
my BM is worse! Yes, it’s true. This
son of a BM/Malay literature
teacher had never scored an A for
his BM in school. I admit I am
ashamed of this fact.
In the now global environment, we
need to master at least one of the
major languages of communication
in this world. We also need to
communicate with people in other
parts of the world too. Therefore,
our newsletter, which is available
on-line in pdf format, should at
least be readable by any
interested party outside this
country. We should be able to
stand our own in the company of
people whose common language
of communication is English. We
should not be intimidated (sorry,
that word again) by native English
speakers we call Mat Sallehs
when in a meeting here or
anywhere in the world. It is
surprising to see many planners
retreat into their shells when
confronted with English speaking
Caucasians in meetings, seminars
or social gatherings, merely
because they have no confidence
in their command of English. That
is very sad when it happens.
Let us see more contributions in
BM in the future. We have
redesigned the newsletter format
to enable publication of articles of
any length between 100 and 1,000
words. We already have a G-mail
address (beritaperancang@gmail.
com) that can be easily
remembered. We have only used
up 45MB of the 2,745MB space
we were allocated. So let the
contributions roll in. You can write
on anything, on any subject
matter; as long as it feels good
when you write it, it will feel good
when we read it, irrespective of the
language it was written. I’ll be
checking the mailbox everyday
from now on. Have a nice day!
~ Ishak Ariffin ~
Chief Editor
LEMBAGA
PERANCANG
BANDAR
MALAYSIA
(LBPM)
Cop Ahli LBPM
Semua ahli MIP yang berdaftar
dengan Lembaga Perancang
Bandar
digalakkan
untuk
mengguna pakai cop ahli yang
baru (seperti yang dilaporkan
dalam BP Februari, 2006) dalam
urusan permohonan kebenaran
merancang dan pengesahan
pelan susun atur. Pihak Lembaga
akan membuat pengumuman
rasmi berkenaan penggunaan
cop LPBM ini melalui surat
pekeliling kepada semua ahli
berdaftar tidak lama lagi.
. . Planning Blog . . . . Planning Blog . . . . Planning Blog . . . .
18/7/06 Do you care about your
neighbours?
Woke up this morning and all I see
is Siti Nurhaliza's face on the front
page of the local papers. Before I
went to bed I thought there was a
2m high tsunami that hit our
Javan
neighbour's
West
province... Ah well, so much for
our caring Malaysian, huh?
4
15/7/06 Cineplex safety
I find the exit passages of
cineplexes around KL to be a
potential hazard in case of
emergency. Even the newer state
of the art places such as 1-Utama
new wing do not seem safe.
Patrons leaving 2 cineplexes
simultaneously had to squeeze
through a 10ft wide fire escape. In
other cineplexes you have to wind
through a very long maze in semidarkness, sometimes climbing or
descending staircases before you
re-emerge at another part of the
shopping complex. I dread to think
of the possible consequences
should I ever need to evacuate a
cineplexe with several young
children in tow.
13/7/06 Metrobus again...
When will Metrobus drivers ever
learn to adopt better driving
etiquette? Why do we tolerate bad
bus drivers? I was nearly
sandwiched
between
2
Metrobuses when l was trying to
switch into the right lane on Jalan
TAR at Maju Junction. I had
signalled well ahead but one of
the buses came up from behind
and tried to overtake me in order
to reach the bus stop a short
distance in front, ahead of the
other bus on my left. I wonder if
this situation has ever happened
to any of our Ministers and elected
MPs?
3/7/06 Posh apartments
I can't understand the rational that
we have to build expensive
residential properties on all the
prime land that we have. Who are
we building them for? Well-heeled
foreigners? OTOH, you don't get
similar commitment or enthusiasm
to build affordable or low cost
housing in other areas.
9/6/06 From The Star…
JPS said 29,000sq. km. or 9% of
our land is prone to flooding
incurring RM950m/year of losses.
Among the contributing factors are
over-development and the lack of
proper planning. Most of the
affected areas are in towns. The
rate of run-off is doubled when
40% of the land area is
developed.
30/5/06 Rain = Traffic jam
Why is it that every time it rains
the roads in KL will be clogged
with traffic? One drop of water and
the traffic backs up 10km. Traffic
jams are the biggest waste of
money that we indulge in day in
and day out but no one takes
serious action about it.
25/5/06 A Wish List
1. JPBD take full ownership of the
Local Plan reports during SPC
meetings and not insist on the
consultants to answer all the
queries. The consultants should
be there to help them answer the
questions;
2. University Professors in Town
Planning should not be made to
undergo the 2 year Graduate
Membership of MIP. For goodness
sake, the Professors are training
our town planners. Let's accord
them due respect.
5/5/06 London Tube
The London Underground service
is set to run 1/2 hr later on Friday
& Saturday nights and starts an
hour later on Saturday mornings,
the London Mayor announced...
effective from the middle of next
year. In this country, an
announcement like that usually
take effect midnight tonight. We
never give ‘early warning’.
CREATIVE THINKING is today’s
most prized profit, producing
possession of any individual,
corporation or country. It has
the capacity to change you,
your business and the world.
~ Peter P. Crowford.
Seminar on Gated Communities
President and MIP members with Dato' Mohd Fadzil Mohd Khir,
Director General of Town & Country Planning Malaysia, at the seminar
A one day National Seminar
themed “ Gated Developments
and Sustainable Communities”
was held in conjunction with the
Annual General Meeting, on 24th
February 2006 at the Impiana
Hotel, KLCC. A total of 150
participants were present to listen
to 5 papers and a panel discussion
in which two representatives of a
gated and a non-gated community
also debated on the pros and cons
of gated developments.
The papers ranged from the legal
provisions and enabling acts
governing gated developments, to
a global perspective and
experiences
of
gated
developments and impact on
society and communities, to
planning and development control
issues. One element that was
highlighted was the fact that there
has not been a comprehensive
data collection about gated
developments nor has there ever
been a study on the social
implications
of
gated
Participants at the “Gated
Communities” Seminar
Reports
25.03.06 - MIP 34th AGM
Mohd Noor Bin Ayob, Assoc Prof Dr Alias Abdullah and President
Pn Norliza Hashim enjoying a light moment at the AGM
developments on sustainable
communities.
It was thus
recommended that for the planning
profession to have a stand on
whether gated communities should
or should not be encouraged in lieu
of sustainable communities, it was
recommended
that
a
comprehensive
study
be
undertaken together with the
JPBD.
“New Recruits” initiation ceremony
National Seminar
of “Systemic
Asset
Management” by
EAROPH, 4th and
5th May 2006
A total of 200 participants attended
this seminar which unfortunately
was poorly received by planners.
A total of 7 foreign speakers mainly
from Australia, New Zealand and
Singapore tabled the best and
most effective practices in many
aspects of asset management
such as public buildings and
infrastructure, water and sewerage
facilities, residential buildings and
its related facilities and parks and
gardens. Asset Management is
still currently
very poorly
understood by planners, whereas
the subject is vital to urban and
rural sustainability. Good Asset
Management, if incorporated into
planning layouts, will lead to
greater urban sustainability. For
more information about Good
Asset Management, log on to
www.earoph.net
Reported by Puan Khairiah Talha
Council replying to queries
MIP members at the AGM
Contributed by Muhd Faris
5
Reports
Scale of
Professional Fees
for Town
Planning Services
MIP would like to re-emphasize
and remind all members once
again about the Scale of
Professional Fees for Town
Planning Services to be used by all
Town Planners as per stipulated in
the Board of Town Planners,
Malaysia, Scale of Professional
Fees and General Conditions of
Engagement 2005.
The Board of Town Planners in
meeting no 2/2005 held on the
17th March 2005 has approved the
Scale of Professional Fees drafted
by Malaysian Institute of Planners
and subsequently endorsed by the
Minister of Housing and Local
Government.
This was announced in the 2005
Annual General Meeting held on
the 30th of July 2005 in Sheraton
Hotel, Subang Jaya. This means
that the Scale of Professional Fees
and General Conditions of
Engagement 2005 as approved by
the Board has superseded all other
previous fees drafted by MIP.
Content :PART I - INTRODUCTION
PART II - PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES
PART III - SCALE OF
PROFESSIONAL FEES
Fees Covers The Following Services:1. Preparation Of Development Plans
2. Planning Permission For Change
Of Use of Land
3. Planning Permission For Layout
Plan Approval
4. Planning Permission For Erection
Of Building and Change of Use Of
Building
5. Advocacy Planning Services
6. Urban Design
7. Viability Studies
8. Other Studies
9. Planning Advisory Services
The scale of fees shall be gazetted
soon and shall form part of the
Rules of the Town Planners Act
and this means that all members
must use it as the Minimum Scale
of Professional Fees for Town
Planning services.
6
COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATION OF
PLANNERS (CAP)
New Line-up of Office Bearers 2006-2008
The Executive Business Meeting
of the Commonwealth Association
of Planners was held on the 20th
June 2006 in Westin Bayshore
Hotel, Vancouver, Canada. This is
further to the meeting held in
Kuala Lumpur in July 2004, where
we had played host to the meeting
as well as to the CAP Conference
2004.
The newly elected President ~
Christine Platt
Planning, Planning Aid initiatives
within CAP member countries, the
Mutual Recognition Arrangements
within CAP countries and the
accounting and finance issues.
However the highlight of the event
was the new line of Executive
Committee of CAP. For the first
Outgoing President, Cliff Hague, time in history, there were
and members of the CAP Executive contenders for the President’s
position and with certain ground
Dr Mohamad Thalha Alitamby, the rules set to ensure elections were
Vice President South East Asia carried out smoothly, the result is
region and Madam Norliza a new President for CAP Hashim, the MIP President Christine Platt, the Vice President
represented Malaysia. The of South Africa. Professor Cliff
meeting was well attended with
representatives from United
Kingdom, Canada, Nigeria,
Ghana,
Tanzania,
Kenya,
Barbados, Singapore, Australia,
Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and South
Africa.
There were many issues
deliberated in the meeting which
includes the issues on Women In
Hague steps down as President
but has willingly assumed the
position of Secretary General to
ensure continuity. It was a good
meeting as the room was filled
with warmth and a sense of
comradeship and it is hoped that
MIP can benefit more from this
association of planners within
Commonwealth countries, in light
of globalization and opportunities
for export of services and in the
least friends from all over the
The Business Meeting
world. CAP 2008 will be in
Johannesburg and let us hope
that more planners can join in the
once-in-two-years conference.
Representatives from various planning institutes of the CAP countries
In the News . . . . In the News . . . . In the News . . . .
MPPJ chided for not
doing its homework
(The Malay Mail, April 3rd 2006)
The Petaling Jaya Residents
Association claimed that the
Petaling Jaya Municipal Council
was not fully prepared when
presenting their draft local plan
during a public briefing recently.
To make matters worse, legal
experts present during the session
found that there were legal flaws
in the proposals and some were
allegedly illegal in nature.
69 peratus PBT gagal lahirkan bandar selamat
(Mingguan Malaysia, Feb 26th 2006)
The Minister for Housing and
Local Government said that about
69% of the local authorities have
failed to implement the 23
measures recommended by his
Ministry under the safe city
programme. The local authorities
cited financial difficulties for not
implementing the measures.
However, the Minister said those
authorities who already achieved
municipal or city council status
should not use financial difficulties
as reason for not implementing
the measures as these local
authorities should have sufficient
financial resources available to
them. He also identified four of the
most active local authorities in
implementing the measures,
which are Shah Alam City Council,
Johor Bahru City Council,
Manjong Municipal Council and
Kulai Municipal Council.
News from the Secretariat
MIP Welcomes Fresh Graduate C o n t i n u i n g
Professional
New Members Register
All new graduates in Town D e v e l o p m e n t
Graduate Members
En. Zamri Bin Mohd Saharin
Pn. Muna Binti Sarimin
Pn. Irdayati Bt Abdul Aziz
Mr. Chan Chee Han
Ms. Egna Francis Gitom
Pn. Raja Norashekin Raja
Othman
7. Pn. Suhailawati Binti Bohani
8. En. Abdul Rahman Bin
Kamaruddin
9. Cik Wan Yusnini Binti Wan
Ahmad
10.Mr.Yeong Siew Yan
11. En. Reduan Bin Idris
12.Cik Norazlizai Binti Aziz
13.En. Yusrihan Bin Jusak
14.En. Mohd Redzuan Bin Ribot
15.En. Wan Andery Bin Wan
Mahmood
16.En. Arshad Bin Ahmad
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Corporate Members
1. 512/06 - Mr. Oliver Ling Hoon
Leh
2. 513/06 - Pn. Khatijah A.O Mohd
Shafie
3. 514/06 - En. Ab. Hamid Abd
Majid
4. 515/06 - Pn. Alimah Binti Suri
5. 516/06 - Mohd Ali Bin Abu
Bakar
6. 517/06 - Dr. Dolbani Bin Mijan
7. 518/06 - Cik Rokibah Binti
Abdul Latiff
Planning who are members of the
MIP are reminded to enrol
themselves on the Fresh
Graduate Register (FGR). The
purpose of the FGR is to assist the
new graduates with job placement
and to facilitate the design of
training programmes for young
planners. Please contact Siti at
the MIP Secretariat for further
details.
G r a d u a t e
Training Scheme
The MIP seeks town planning
firms registered with the Institute
to participate in the Graduate
Training Scheme for young and
new graduates in town planning.
The scheme will be similar to the
Federal Government’s SKS
programme and placement of
potential trainees shall be
administered by the Young
Planners Committee. Planning
firms interested to participate in
this programme should contact
Md Nazri Noordin, Chairman of
Young Planners Committee at
+603-4105 4417 or 4105 4418.
Consultant Firm
1. PC/B-147/2006 - GCA Planning
Consultants
(CPD) -
First Reminder
The
Professional
Practice
Committee has issued the First
Reminder to all Corporate
Members of the Institute to submit
their CPD Plan and Records. All
Members are required to fulfil the
CPD requirements of accumulating
20 CPD points over each two-year
period. New members are
required to maintain records from
the date of admission to
Corporate Membership. CPD
Guidelines and forms for CPD
Plan and Records can be
downloaded from the MIP
website : www.mip.org.my.
Berita Perancang
Jemputan
Berita Perancang menjemput
semua
ahli
MIP
untuk
menyumbangkan artikel, pendapat,
ulasan atau maklum balas kepada
Berita Perancang. Kami menerima
tulisan sama ada dalam Bahasa
Malaysia atau Bahasa Inggeris.
Setiap sumbangan dihadkan
kepada 1,000 perkataan sahaja.
Hantarkan sumbangan anda
melalui fax kepada Secretariat
MIP atau melalui email kepada :
[email protected].
70 peratus
kawasan hijau
(Berita Harian,
May 1st 2006)
Kuala Lumpur City Hall decided to
gazette only 48% of Bukit Gasing
area under their jurisdiction as
green area despite previously
agreed to gazette the whole area,
said Friends of Bukit Gasing
Association. Bukit Gasing falls
under the administration of two
local authorities, Kuala Lumpur
City Hall and Petaling Jaya
Municipal Council. The latter had
gazetted all the 34 hectares of
Bukit Gasing area under their
jurisdiction as green belt reserve
in 1961. The other 110 hectares
under the Kuala Lumpur City Hall
is yet to be gazetted. Now, Kuala
Lumpur City Hall said they are
proposing 48% (54 hectares) of
the Bukit Gasing area for
development of housing and
public facilities. Friends of Bukit
Gasing Association said they are
frustrated by the decision but hope
the City Hall can at least preserve
70% of the area as green area, if
not all.
SENARAI ANGGOTA LEMBAGA PERANCANG BANDAR MALAYSIA (30 JUN 2006)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Jawatan
Nama
Pengerusi
Presiden MIP
(Wakil MIP-Swasta)
Presiden PPPB
& DSM
Wakil MIP (Awam)
Wakil MIP (Awam)
Wakil MIP (Awam)
Wakil MIP (Swasta)
Wakil MIP (Swasta)
Wakil MIP (Swasta)
Wakil MIP (IPTA)
Wakil LAM
Wakil LJM
Wakil LJTSM
Pendaftar
Dato' Mohd. Fadzil bin Hj. Mohd. Khir
Norliza bt. Hashim
Dr. Dolbani bin Mijan
[email protected]
Kosong
Dato’ Yaacob bin Nordin
Dato’ Jebasingam Issace John
Mahesan a/l Thilliampalam
Lawrence Chan Kek Tong
Kosong
Prof. Madya Dr. Alias Abdullah
Ar. Prof. Madya Dr. Asiah Abdul Rahim
Ir. P.E. Chong
En. Mohammad Azmi bin Mohd. Zin
Tn. Haji Mohd Azam bin Mohd Abid
Tarikh Mula
Lantikan
01.03.06
31.7.05
(01.07.05)
2005
Tarikh Tamat
Lantikan
28.2.09
*
(30.06.08)
*
Pertama
Pertama
(Kedua)
Pertama
01.07.05
1.7.05
01.07.05
01.07.05
30.6.08
30.6.08
30.6.08
30.06.08
Pertama
Pertama
Kedua
Pertama
01.07.05
12.01.06
01.04.06
13.10.03
28.05.05
Sessi
30.6.08
Ketiga
30.09.2007 Pertama
*
Pertama
*
Pertama
* hingga ada perlantikan baru
Contributed by Muhammad Faris
7
Report
Kontinjen MIP Ke SUKNA XIII JPBD 2006 Di Johor
Bahru Melakar Sejarah Sekali Lagi . . . MIP Johan
Bolasepak Kali Kedua Berturut-Turut
Kejohanan Sukan Dwi-Tahunan
Jabatan Perancangan Bandar &
Desa Semenanjung Malaysia
(JPBD) atau lebih dikenali dengan
nama barunya SUKNA JPBD kali
yang ke-13 telah diadakan sekali
lagi bertempat di Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) yang
telah berlangsung selama lima (5)
hari bermula pada 13hb. Mei 2006
hingga 17hb. Mei 2006 dengan
JPBD Negeri Johor yang mewakili
Zon Selatan selaku Penganjur
SUKNA ke 13. Acara Pembukaan
Kejohanan SUKNA JPBD 2006
telah diadakan di Dewan Canselor
UTM dan telah dirasmikan oleh
Menteri Perumahan & Kerajaan
Tempatan, YAB Dato’ Seri Ong Ka
Ting, turut serta ialah Exco
Kerajaan Negeri Johor iaitu YB.
Dato’ Halimah Mohd Sadique yang
turut hadir memeriahkan majlis
tersebut.
Kejohanan SUKNA ini telah
disertai oleh enam (6) zon yang
mana terdiri dari Kontinjen Zon
Utara (JPBD & Pejabat Projek
Perlis, Kedah, Pulau Pinang dan
Perak), Kontinjen Zon Tengah
(JPBD Ibupejabat, Selangor dan
Pejabat Projek Kuala Lumpur),
Kontinjen Zon Selatan (JPBD &
Pejabat Projek Negeri Sembilan,
Melaka dan Johor), Kontinjen Zon
Timur (JPBD & Pejabat Projek
Kelantan,
Terengganu
dan
Pahang), Kontinjen Zon Sabah
(Jabatan Perancangan Bandar &
Wilayah Sabah) dan Zon MIP
(Pertubuhan
Perancang
Malaysia).
Pertubuhan Perancang Malaysia
(MIP) telah diberi penghormatan
oleh JPBD Malaysia kerana telah
sudi menjemput sekali lagi dan
MIP juga telah memberikan
komitmen untuk mengambil
bahagian dalam SUKNA ke 13
dengan memberikan mandat
kepada MIP Cawangan Johor
yang dipengerusikan oleh Tuan Hj.
Fadzil dan En. Abdul Halim bin Ali
Hassan (dilantik sebagai Ketua
Kontinjen MIP) untuk membentuk
8
Kontinjen MIP yang terdiri dari
gabungan firma-firma perunding
yang mengamal atau praktis di
negeri Johor dan Melaka. Namun
begitu, gabungan firma perunding
di Lembah Kelang juga turut serta
dengan misi untuk mengekalkan
kejuaraan Bolasepak Sukna yang
telah dimenangi 2 tahun lepas di
Kota Bharu, Kelantan. Penyertaan
MIP pada Sukna kali ini adalah
yang terbesar dengan penyertaan
seramai 70 orang termasuk
pegawai sukan dengan hampir
semua acara telah disertai iaitu
Bolasepak dan Futsal, Bola Jaring,
Badminton, Bowling, Sepaktakraw,
Ping Pong, Karom dan Golf
(terbuka dan tidak ambilkira dalam
pungutan mata SUKNA).
Kontinjen SUKNA MIP
bergambar kenangan bersama
Presiden MIP, Pn. Norliza Hashim
Dalam pada itu, Mesyuarat Ahli
juga
telah
Majlis
MIP
mempersetujui penglibatan MIP
dalam sukan tersebut dengan
melancarkan kutipan derma
sumbangan dari semua pihak
termasuk dari syarikat-syarikat
perunding yang berdaftar dengan
MIP dan dengan sumbangan
tersebut juga Kontinjen SUKNAMIP telah dibentuk yang terdiri
dari:1. Pn. Norliza Hashim - Penaung
dan Penasihat Kontinjen Sukna MIP
2. Tuan Hj. Fadzil Abdul Rahman Chef-de-Mission,
(MNF
&
Associates)
3. En. Abdul Halim Ali Hassan Ketua/Pengurus Kontinjen &
Futsal (Perunding UEP)
4. Pn. Rohani Jusoh - Bendahari
/Pengurus Bolajaring (RJ Planning
Consultant)
5. En Mohd Zamri Husin Pengurus Pasukan Bolasepak
(Citiplan Networks)
6. Pn. Hadibah Abu Bakar Pengurus Bowlling
7. En. Mohd Anuar Hj. A. Wahab Pengurus Badminton & Karom
8. Dr. Amran Hamzah - Pengurus
Bolatampar & Dart
9. En. Norhisham Hussain Pengurus Sepaktakraw
Sekalung TAHNIAH kepada
semua
Ahli
Jawatankuasa
SUKNA-MIP 2006 kerana telah
bertungkus lumus serta berjaya
membentuk sebuah Kontinjen MIP
yang berjumlah tujuh puluh (70)
orang yang terdiri dari pelbagai
peringkat umur dari sektor
perundingan
dan
pemaju
perumahan
Disepanjang kejohanan Sukna
2006 ini iaitu bermula dari 13hb.
Mei hingga 17hb. Mei 2006,
prestasi kontinjen MIP adalah
agak
memberansangkan
berbanding kejohanan lalu di
mana beberapa acara diungguli
oleh kontinjen MIP sepertimana
ditunjukkan dalam keputusan
penuh acara-acara yang disertai
seperti berikut :
KEPUTUSAN
BIL ACARA
1 Futsal
Naib Johan
Peringkat Kumpulan
2 Ping Pong
3 Sepak Takraw
(Berpasukan)
Peringkat Kumpulan
4 Sepak Takraw
(Antara Regu) Naib Johan
5 Bowling
(Berpasukan)
Peringkat Kumpulan
6 Bowling
(Individu Masters) Johan
Keempat
7 Bola Jaring
8 Bola Tampar
Keempat
9 Badminton
(Beregu Lelaki) Ketiga
10 Badminton
(Berpasukan)
Peringkat Kumpulan
11 Dart
Keempat
Peringkat Kumpulan
12 Karom
Johan
13 Bolasepak
. . . Sekalung Tahniah!!! dari MIP
untuk pasukan-pasukan yang
telah menunjukkan perlawanan
yang bermutu dan bersih (fair-
play) serta berjaya menjadi
pemenang terutama sekali kepada
pasukan Bolasepak MIP (berjaya
mengalahkan Zon Timur) yang
telah berjaya mempertahankan
kejuaraan buat kali kedua berturutturut dan kepada pasukan yang
tidak berjaya, cuba lagi di Sukna 2
tahun lagi di mana JPBD Selangor
(mewakili Zon Tengah) akan
menjadi tuan rumah Sukna 2008.
Di samping itu, tidak dilupakan
kepada
semua
perundingperunding (di Johor Bahru dan
seluruh Malaysia), pemaju-pemaju
perumahan, kontraktor dan
sebagainya
yang
telah
memberikan sokong moral dalam
bentuk kewangan dan peralatan
sukan....Terimakasih diucapkan ...
‘PROFESIONAL DAN SUKAN
BERSAMA DIJAYAKAN’ . . . . .
. . . .JUMPA LAGI DI SUKNA 2008
- SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN’
Pasukan Bola Jaring MIP
Pasukan Bolasepak MIP
Pasukan Futsal MIP
Oleh :Mohd Zamri Husin, Julai 2006
Urban Planning in Saudi Arabia
INTRODUCTION
The goal of spatial planning in
Saudi Arabia is to promote
balanced regional development
based upon equity and efficiency
and to improve the environmental
conditions of the urban centres
through the formulation and
application of rational policies,
strategies, plans at the national,
regional and local levels.
LEGAL STRUCTURE
Saudi Arabia is a monarchy with
the Holy Qur’an as the
constitution. The main institutions
of the system are: the King, the
Council of Ministers and the
Consultative council (Majlis Al
Shura). The King is the supreme
authority in the Kingdom.
Independent judicial system
interprets the laws and makes
decisions in all sorts of cases.
The Council of Ministers is the
formal policy making body with
executive and legislative powers. It
is chaired by the King and is
responsible for the formulation of
policies. However, the King
approves all laws, treaties,
concessions, national budget and
these are promulgated through
royal decrees. These laws and
decrees form the basis of planning
legislation in the Kingdom. In
addition, other royal orders, Crown
Prince Resolutions, and Council of
Minister’s directives issued to
tackle
particular
problems
supplement and support the
planning legislation. The second
level of decision making is the
ministries which are authorised to
interpret the laws formulated by
the higher institutions and issue
directives,
resolutions
and
ordinances to implement them.
These are enforced through
circulars, even though these
circulars may not have direct legal
sanctions.
Organisation and administration
of planning
Saudi Arabia has a centralised
system of government whereby
the central government plays a
strong role but the other two levels
S. Al-Hathloul & M. Aslam Mughal
are also performing the assigned
functions. At present the three
levels carry out the following
duties:
1. At central government level,
there are 21 ministries.
However, in relation to spatial
planning, two are directly
concerned. Ministry of Planning
(MOP) prepares the economic
and sectoral framework for the
country through the 5-Year
Development Plans. Ministry of
Municipal and Rural Affairs
(MOMRA) is the primary
agency in the Kingdom
responsible for spatial planning
and the provision and
management of infrastructure
in all the settlements.
2. At the regional level, all the
ministries are represented
through their regional offices
which
carry
out
the
implementation of projects.
MOMRA’s representation is
through the Directorate General
or Regional Municipality which
deal with spatial planning. The
co-ordination
of
the
development activities in the
region is the responsibility of
the Provincial Council chaired
by the Governor.
3. At local level, the municipality is
the centre of the existing spatial
planning legislation. The
municipalities are organised
according to the population size
and their importance. The
largest five are known as
Amanats and the rest are
graded as A, B, C, and D
according to their population
sizes. There are also 62 village
cluster centres. All Amanats,
municipalities and village
cluster centres are headed by
mayors appointed by the
central government with
administrative control exercised
by MOMRA. Funds are
allocated by the Ministry of
Finance
on
the
recommendation of MOMRA.
As most of the municipalities do
not have adequate planning
staff, the Deputy Minister of
Town Planning, MOMRA
initiates and undertakes plan
preparation in collaboration
with
the
municipalities.
Sometimes Amanats hire
planning consultants to prepare
spatial plans of varied nature.
Level
Central
Regional/Provincial
Local
Responsibility
• Legislation
• Goals and policies
• National spatial strategy
• Regulations and procedures
• Spatial plans (for regions and municipalities
without technical capabilities to prepare the plans)
• Implementation of regional plans/strategies
• Co-ordination of investment
• Land use decisions
• Provision of infrastructure
• Implementation of structure and local plans
• Planning and building control
Who gives consent?
Approval of any national or
regional plans rests with the
Council of Ministers chaired by the
King. Powers are sometimes
delegated to the Minister of
Municipal and Rural Affairs.
Meanwhile, approval of structure
plans and local plans is given by
the Minister of Municipal and Rural
Affairs.
Policies,
regulations
and
procedures relating to spatial
planning and land development
also emanate either from Council
of Ministers or the Minister of
Municipal and Rural Affairs in the
form of decrees, directives and
circulars.
Who can object?
The plans are discussed and
debated at the national, regional
and local levels to incorporate the
views of various agencies but
there is no system of public
hearing/objections as practiced in
the west. Individuals can challenge
any provisions of the plan under
Shari’ah (Islamic Law) which is the
basis of all legislation in the
country. Special courts known as
Diwan-e-Mazalem have been
established to hear complaints
against government decisions and
actions.
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
Saudi Arabia has a strong
centralised system of government
with all revenue generation and
allocation of funds handled by the
centre. The head of state and chief
executive is the King. The King
appoints the Council of Ministers
to help him formulate policies and
implement them. The country is
divided into 13 administrative
regions known as Provinces and
these are headed by governors
appointed by the King.
(Contd. on Page 11)
9
Feature
St. Peter’s Church, Malacca
COMPILED by FERNANDO JORGE, Badan Warisan Member, Lisbon, Portugal.
Article courtesy of Badan Warisan Malaysia
St. Peter’s Church is the oldest
Christian church in use in
Malaysia. It was built in 1710,
during the Dutch occupation of
Malacca by the perseverant
Malaccan Catholic community.
Until 1977, St. Peter’s was the
church of the Portuguese Mission,
under the jurisdiction of Macau.
The Mission’s history and service
to the people of Malacca goes
back unbroken to the first
Portuguese priest to arrive in
Malacca in 1511. Thanks to the
research of Father Manuel Pintado
we know that between 1710 and
1977, 57 missionaries worked in
St. Peter’s Church. To understand
the historical significance of this
site one must look back at the first
encounter, face to face, between
South East Asia and Europe.
FROM 1511 TO 1710 : The birth
of Christianity in Malaysia
The history of this site began in
1511 when the Portuguese
conquered Malacca. Their main
aim was not to seize territory but
rather to challenge Arab
domination of the Indian Ocean,
wresting control of the lucrative
spice trade, and also to promote
the Catholic religion. In fact, if it is
true that every Portuguese in Asia
was as a rule a trader, it is no less
true that all were active or potential
missionaries. As a centre of
Christian radiation, naturally
Malacca became dotted with
numerous churches, chapels,
convents and monasteries, which
served as centres for hundreds of
missionaries who preached in
South East Asia and the Far East.
Some of today’s annual religious
events were first introduced by the
Fathers of these convents. For
example, the way in which Palm
Sunday and Good Friday are
celebrated in St. Peter’s today was
introduced by the Augustinians in
1587.
By 1613, Malacca had a wellestablished Christian community.
According to Manuel Godinho de
Eredia by then there were already
7400 Catholics in Malacca, most of
10
them of Chinese, and chiefly,
Indian origin. To serve this growing
population, Malacca had 8
parishes, 14 churches, 2 hospital
chapels, 4 religious convents and
some hermitages and oratories.
After the Portuguese lost Malacca
to the Dutch in 1641, Catholic
worship was forbidden. The
religious buildings that survived
the siege were destroyed or used
for profane purposes. But the
Portuguese, Eurasians and other
Catholics who decided to stay kept
their faith alive and practised it
underground. There were always
Portuguese priests in disguise in
Dutch Malacca to conduct
masses, baptisms and marriages.
Sometimes they were arrested,
like the Portuguese Jesuit, Antonio
Cardim, made prisoner in 1652.
He questioned the fact that the
Dutch tolerated mosques and
other temples but not Roman
Catholic churches.
The truth was that the cold
Calvinist Church found it difficult to
compete with the emotional appeal
of the Roman Church. On one
occasion, in 1665, the Dutch
discovered that no less than 1500
people had met secretly in a
garden near the town to hear a
Catholic mass. With the help of
soldiers, they dispersed the
Catholics and brought the images
to the Fort where they were
burned. In this context, a religious
association formed by Dominican
Fathers in 1554 - ‘The
Confraternity of the Holy Rosary’ played an important role in
keeping the Catholic faith alive
during the Dutch period. They also
held their devotions secretly in
private homes or up country. But in
spite of the edicts against the
practice of the Catholic faith, the
Dutch generally tolerated the
presence of Portuguese priests in
Malacca. The Dutch regarded the
Portuguese both as fellow
Christians and as potential traitors.
To be Roman Catholic meant
being pro-Portuguese and antiDutch.
The history of the Catholic
community in Malacca was of an
extraordinary survival: in 1669
there were about 2000 Catholics in
Malacca, and by the 1700’s they
still outnumbered the members of
the Dutch Reformed Church by six
to one. In 1702, religious freedom
was proclaimed and in 1710, St.
Peter’s Church, the first
permanent Roman Catholic
Church established after the Dutch
conquest, was built.
FROM 1710 TO ‘2010’ : From a
new church to a heritage
building
In 1702, the Dutch gave the land
where St. Peter’s Church stands
today to Franz Amboer, recorded
in documents as being a Malay
with a Dutch-sounding name. The
lot was located in Bunga Raya, at
the time a suburb of Malacca: in a
1744 map, the road was already
named ‘Weg nach Bongareyen’
(Road to Bunga Raya). Amboer,
who converted to Christianity,
subsequently donated the land to
the Portuguese Fathers for the
construction of a church.
According to the historian F. M.
had
a
Teixeira, Amboer
descendant in Macau, a priest,
who became the Chanter of the
Macau Cathedral.
We do not know the author of the
plans of St. Peter’s Church. Its
architecture has references to the
churches built by the Portuguese
in their colonies around the world.
But we do know that the first priest
of St. Peter’s was Fr. Domingos
Monteiro sent by the Archbishop of
Goa after a request in 1708. So,
naturally the construction of the
church followed certain features of
churches already established in
India. The rectangular plan has a
main nave covered by a round
timber ceiling supported by
cylindrical columns. Two parallel
naves add space, resulting in a
large hall. This solution represents
an adoption of an older typology,
characteristic of Portuguese
churches prior to the 16th century.
From the 16th to 18th centuries the
norm was the single internal
space, known as ‘Igreja Salao’
(Hall Church). Compared with St.
Paul’s Church, which is a perfect
example of the norm, St. Peter’s
Church follows an interesting old
fashioned solution. The adoption
of this model may have stemmed
from its use in some other 16th
century churches in Malacca such
as the Parish Church of St.
Thomas built in 1562 which also
had rows of stone pillars. Nearby
St. Peter’s Church and also
around 1700, the Confraternity of
the Holy Rosary built a new
chapel, the ‘Ermida do Rosario’
which followed exactly the same
model. Today, only ruins remain of
this on the left bank of the Malacca
river at Bunga Raya Road.
The building of St. Peter’s Church
changed over the centuries.
Unfortunately, a proper survey or
research to trace its evolution
since it was first built has never
been carried out. Probably around
the 19th century some renovations
were made, when some elements
were modernized according to the
‘Gothic revival’ style: some of the
windows and doors adopted
Gothic arches. A marble plaque
dated 1918, marking an important
campaign of works, lists donations
made by a great number of
+
St. Peter’s Church, Malacca
(Contd. from Page 10)
prominent local Straits Chinese,
including Tun Tan Cheng Lock. In
1961, further works were carried
out replacing the Indian roof tiles
with the present Marseilles tiles.
Some details that we should look
for when visiting St. Peter’s
Church:
• The main altar is dominated by a
pair of spiral Baroque columns,
very common in Portuguese altars
of the time. At the centre of the
composition is the statue of St.
Peter. The Crucifix deserves
special attention: this ivory
sculpture is a fine example of the
art that developed in Asia under
Portuguese patronage. These
Indo-Portuguese
works,
commissioned to Indian artists in
Goa, were widely appreciated in
Portuguese society from the 16th
to 18th centuries.
• The stained glass windows in a
‘Gothic revival’ style at either side
of the main altar are undated, but
the left panel, depicting ‘S.
Sebastian’, shows the words ‘L. H.
Maumejeanh - Paris - Madrid’.
• A Victorian iron spiral staircase
was added to access the choir
replacing a previous timber one.
• The bell of St. Peter’s Church
was cast in Goa, India by a family
of renowned gun-founders - the
Bocarros. The bell bears this
inscription: “AVE MARIA GRATIA
PLENA DOMINUS TECUM /
BENEDICTA TU IN MULIERIBUS
SANCTA MARIA / PDIS B OES. A.
1608” (Hail Mary, full of grace, the
Lord is with thee, blessed art thou
among women. Holy Mary. Pedro
Dias Bocarro made it in the year
1608). F. M. Teixeira explains that
these are the words of the
Annunciation and therefore the
bell was most probably moulded
for the Church of the Annuciation
in Malacca (St. Paul’s Church).
Taken from a previous Portuguese
Church, it is a true symbol of the
history of St. Peter’s: this almost
400-year old bell exemplifies, as
Father Pintado said, the ‘survival
through Religion’.
A final word about the
‘Confraternity of the Holy Rosary’
established in 1554: although their
chapel, mentioned above, is
reduced to a neglected ruin, the
ancient Confraternity is still alive.
At the end of the 19th century they
merged with St. Peter’s Church.
Because they were a strong and
wealthy organisation, they were
given certain privileges, like to
have the emblem of the rosary on
the façade of St Peter’s, where it
still stands today. The ‘Irmaos de
Igreja’ (Brethen of the Church) as
they are known today, have
throughout the years guarded
many traditions, such as the
organisation of the unique Holy
Week celebrations in Malacca. As
Father Pintado mentioned, they
are perhaps the oldest association
in Malaysia, celebrating 450 years
in 2004. As for St. Peter’s Church,
it will celebrate 300 years of
heritage in 2010.
Selected Bibliography :
Pintado M. Survival Through Human
Values, 1974, Malacca
Weber M. Dutch Malacca, 2001, Malacca
Teixeira F. Portuguese Missions in
Malacca and Singapore (15111958), 1986, Macau
Thomaz L. Early Portuguese Malacca,
1964, Lisbon
April 2003 Piling Works
Urban Planning in Saudi Arabia
EVALUATION & COMMENTARY
The present system of town
planning in the Kingdom has
evolved over the past 60 years.
Even though the process seems to
be fragmented, one could observe
continuity in these developments
and a gradual progression in its
development to address the
rapidly changing development
problems. Starting from the stage
of Municipal and Road Statutes,
the planning process has gone
through the stages of gridiron
pattern during 1940’s, master
planning
during
60’s,
comprehensive urban and regional
planning during 70’s and 80’s,
reaching the stage of National
Spatial Strategy and Structure
Planning in the 90’s. Thus the
entire national space is now
subject to study to promote
balanced development in all the
regions as stipulated in the 5-Year
Development Plans. There
appears to be an effort to integrate
vertically the planning programs at
national, regional and local level
thereby translating the national
goals within spatial context.
Whereas National Spatial Strategy
covers the entire national space
and structure plans cover all the
urban centres and even some
villages, the regional level is not
yet covered comprehensively. All
the previous studies, at this level,
were only partial in their coverage.
Now DMTP, MOMRA is launching
a study to cover this level as has
been done in case of structure
plans. Another level, which is very
significant from the point of view of
implementation, is the detailed
local level. Structure plans provide
the subregional context for the
urban settlements but the issues
of zoning, land uses etc. cannot be
decided without detailed plans.
The preparation of these detailed
plans, in collaboration with the
municipalities, has also been
launched by the DMTP, MOMRA.
Once this exercise is complete,
the country will have an integrated
planning system providing a
comprehensive basis to make land
use decisions at all levels.
However comprehensive planning
legislation is lacking to back the
planning process and its
implementation.
Piecemeal
legislation to cover various
aspects of planning process
cannot ensure effective results.
STATISTICAL DATA
Area
2,250,000 sq. km.
Population
16,900,000 (1992 Census);
19,500,000 (1998 estimated)
Density
7.51 inhabitants sq. km.
Largest Province
Eastern Province (726,059 sq.
km).
Largest Population
Makkah (4,470,000 inhabitants*)
Highest Density
Gizan (52.02 inhabitants sq.
km.*)
*Based on 1992 Census
*Note : This article was summarized by
Muhammad Faris Abdullah. For full
version, refer ISOCARP (1998),
International Manual of Planning Practice
(Third Volume), pp. 132-142; The
International Society of City and Regional
Planners: The Hague.
Putrajaya gets RM1.6b
for projects
(NST, June 21st 2006)
The Government has allocated a
hefty RM1.6b for development
projects in Putrajaya under the
Ninth Malaysia Plan. The
allocation would allow the
previously planned projects under
the Eighth Malaysia Plan which
were shelved due to financial
constraints, as well as new
projects, to be undertaken. These
include the construction of the
steel mosque, housing and
recreational
facilities.
Nevertheless, there is no
allocation for reviving the
monorail project just yet.
11
feature
A long way from Bali
What is it about Bali that tends to
make people equate it to quality
and class in the property market
in this country? It is just a big
hype, a ploy of the sales people
to give an illusion of grandeur and
exclusivity. It is also a skewed
perception of contemporary
consumers
and
hopeless
romantics who believe that tag
line. The sad part is that 'Bali' has
become a brand which many
adopted just in form and not in
function, outside its native island
anyway. However there is more to
Bali than just Balinese garden,
Balinese architecture or Balinese
art. What has been missing from
the adopted pseudo-Balinese
form being copied here is the
Balinese culture and way of life.
What we failed to capture is the
Balinese essence, the soul of
Bali.
No doubt Bali is a very pleasant
place to visit. Intriguing, actually,
it is. I believe it is an equally nice
place to live in. Balinese are
some of the nicest people I have
ever met. Humility is a trait that
most
of
them
share.
Determination is another. Add to
that resilience. See how they
quickly picked up the pieces and
continue with their lives after the
tragic bombing in Kuta a few
years
back. These
are
characteristics, besides the art,
tradition, architecture, rustic
villages, terraced rice fields, miles
of sandy beaches, elaborate
ceremonies and a host of other
things that attract the millions of
visitors to the island every year,
that form the essence of Bali.
This has inspired a lot of people
to attempt to recreate their Bali
experience elsewhere. Everyone
that I know who has experienced
Bali wishes to prolong it. Some go
to the extreme and permanently
relocated themselves there. That
is perhaps the most sensible
thing to do. We try to imitate what
we thought is Bali back home.
Imitation may be the sincerest
form of flattery. Alas, imitation will
always be what it is - an imitation.
12
Ishak Ariffin
The main street through a small town - Tampaksiring
The true Bali cannot be replicated
because the essence of Bali lies
within its people. Let's forget
about imitating Bali elsewhere.
But what we can do as town
planners is to imitate some of the
positive features that can make
our physical environment a better
place.
obstructed by slow moving
vehicles? Equally amazing is that
everyone wait patiently in the
queue. Most of all, despite the
three million population, most of
them living in the regions around
Denpasar, there is only one
expressway - the Ngurah Rai
Bypass - linking Denpasar, the
airport and Nusa Dua. All other
roads are mostly single
carriageways. You’d also be hard
pressed to find anyone begging
along the shop corridors.
Juru Parkir in Denpasar
So we want to model our island
resorts or the new residential
project on the Bali theme? Before
we do that let's ponder on a few
things. Let's ponder why there are
no road humps to be found
anywhere in towns or villages in
Bali. Ask ourselves why there are
hardly any motorcycles parked on
the sidewalks and corridors, or
cars illegally parked along roads
in built up areas. Motorcycles,
there are lots of them, are parked
in their allocated parking lots.
There is no “jaga kereta” either.
Parking fees are paid to Juru
uniformed
parking
Parkir,
attendants found at every corner.
These uniformed personnel also
assist drivers in parking their
cars. Everyone pays immediately
as soon as they step off their
vehicles.
Isn't it amazing that no one honk
aggressively when the traffic is
No parking for cars but
motorcycles are parked on
one side of the road only &
not on the sidewalk
Imitating
form
without
understanding the functions can
be a dangerous thing. Like the
boy racer wannabe who put huge
rear spoilers, oversized tyres and
lowered suspensions on their
Protons. They shod it with a set of
R-rated tyres but then tried to hit
180kph on the expressway. Or
those idiots dressed in green
bomber jackets, straight-leg jeans
and Dr Marten’s boots, calling
themselves “skinheads” and
hanging out in Bukit Bintang.
Don’t they know that the original
skinheads went around bashing
in the faces of people with
coloured skin as their real
purpose in life?
Another thing that the Balinese
did was to make a law that no
buildings shall be higher than the
tallest trees and stuck to it,
although that was after they made
the mistake of letting some hotels
in Sanur go beyond 5-storeys.
The difference is that they stuck
to the new ruling and not change
it there and back every couple of
years, or months, as we do over
here.
Another ingenious thing they did
is to sell residential lots of 10m by
10m in size and let the owners
build right up to the side
boundaries, or at least on one
side. They only painted the front
and back of the house and the
side walls that do not form the lot
boundary. When every one on the
street has erected their houses,
voila! You get a row of terraced
houses! They have applied the
same formula in commercial
areas in Denpasar too. Although
they say there is a law requiring
some set back, but no one pays
attention to it probably. Perhaps
this is what we should try here B.Y.O. houses, Build-Your-Own,
instead of the Build-then-Sell,
linked houses.
I would advice the designers,
developers, architects and
planners who want to sell their
“Gated Bali Enclave” or whatever
schemes, go to Bali first, not just
read the catalogues or the Bali
design books that abounds in
local bookstores. But if you are
going to Bali for ideas, go walk
about, drive around and pay more
attention to the surroundings.
Don’t just spend half your days
exploring the various services in
the Spa. Having the Bali garden,
Bali fountain, Bali bathroom, Bali
gate, Bali teak doors, Bali spa
and Bali doormat does not make
your premises Bali. You are still a
long way from Bali. You should at
least have a Wayan, Made,
Nyoman and Ketut manning your
reception, for a start.
Zurich again named best city in the world to live in
10 April 2006 : The Swiss cities of
Geneva and Zurich offer the best
quality of life according to research
published by Mercer Consulting in
April 2006. Vancouver (Canada) is
placed third, followed by Vienna
(Austria), Auckland (New Zealand)
and Düsseldorf (Germany).
Baghdad, not surprisingly, is the
lowest ranking city in the survey.
EIU
names
Vancouver,
Melbourne and Vienna as 'best'
cities in the world
The analysis is part of Mercer
Consulting's annual 'World-wide
Quality of Living Survey', covering
more than 350 cities. Each city is
based on an evaluation of 39
criteria, including political, social,
economic and environmental
factors, personal safety and health,
education, transport, and other
public services. Cities are ranked
against New York as the base city,
which has an index score of 100.
Europe & Middle East
Almost half the top 30 scoring cities
are in Western Europe. In this
region, Vienna follows Zurich and
Geneva in 4th position with a score
of 107.5. Other highly-rated cities
include
Düsseldorf
(107.2),
Frankfurt (107.0) and Munich
(106.8) in positions 6, 7 and 8
respectively. Athens remains the
lowest scoring city in Western
Europe, scoring 86.8 at position 79.
London is the UK’s highest ranking
city and is stable at position 39
(score 101.2). The two other UK
cities covered in the survey are
Birmingham and Glasgow, which
both score 98.3 and climb one
place to joint 55th position.
Dublin has dropped two places to
24th position, scoring 103.8, mainly
due to increased traffic congestion.
As predicted, cities in Eastern
Europe such as Budapest,
Ljubljana, Prague, Vilnius, Tallinn
and Warsaw continue to benefit
from incremental score increases
and are gradually climbing the
rankings.
“The standard of living in many
Eastern European cities is
A report by Mercer Consulting
Extracted from: http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html
gradually improving, as the
countries that most recently joined
the EU attract greater investment,”
commented Slagin Parakatil,
Senior Researcher at Mercer. “Yet
cities such as Dubai may still offer
a wider variety of facilities
demanded by expatriates - for
example,
well-connected
international airports and better
opportunities for recreation and
leisure activities - compared to
many Eastern European cities.”
Positions for most cities in Europe
and the Middle East are generally
unchanged, with the exception of
Cairo which has tumbled nine
places to position 131 and scores
71.2 due to the political turmoil and
terrorist attacks in the city and
surrounding area.
Baghdad ranks as the least
attractive city for a third consecutive
year, with a score of 14.5.
The Americas
Honolulu, the highest ranking city
in the U.S., drops two positions to
27th with a score of 103.3. San
Francisco remains at 28th position
and scores 103.2. Boston,
Washington, Chicago and Portland
follow in positions 36, 41, 41 and
43 respectively (scores 101.9,
100.4, 100.4 and 100.3) while
Houston remains the lowest
ranking city in the U.S. at position
68 (score 95.4). Overall, U.S. cities
continue to slip slightly or remain
stable in the rankings, except
Chicago which has moved up 11
places due to decreased crime
rates.
“Economies in the developed world
tend to be relatively stable overall.
Fluctuations in the quality of living
in these regions are usually driven
by factors such as increased air
pollution, crime rates and traffic
congestion, or external events like
terrorism, disease outbreaks or
natural disasters,” said Mr.
Parakatil.
In South America, scores vary
considerably due to differences in
economic and political stability.
“Argentina’s steady economic
recovery is likely to push its cities The world's top cities offering the
best quality of life
up in the rankings in the next few (New York
is the base city with a
years,” commented Mr. Parakatil.
score of 100 points)
Asia-Pacific & Africa
Auckland and Wellington have both
moved up the rankings from 8th to
5th and 14th to 12th places
respectively, mainly due to strong
internal stability relative to other
cities, while Sydney remains at
position 9 with a score of 106.5.
In Asia, Singapore ranks 34th (score
102.5) followed by Tokyo, Japan’s
highest scoring city, at position 35
(score 102.3). Hong Kong’s modern
and efficient infrastructure, including
its airport (which is considered one
of best in the world), has pushed it
up from 70th to 68th position with a
score of 95.4.
The top-ranking city in China is
Shanghai in 103rd place (score
80.1). “Beijing and Shanghai are on
the rise and should experience
rapid improvements in quality of
living in the coming years. This is
mainly due to greater international
investment driven by the availability
and lower cost of labour and
manufacturing
expertise,”
explained Mr. Parakatil.
Though cities in India generally
rank lower than their Chinese
counterparts, they are also
showing signs of development in
the region.
“The quality of living in Indian cites
such as Mumbai and Bangalore is
increasing slowly but steadily,
primarily due to India’s improved
political relationships with other
countries,” said Mr. Parakatil.
“Investment from multinationals
setting up operations in India may
prompt further improvements,
boost economic growth and
contribute to economic stability. In
turn, this will encourage the local
authorities to focus on improving
quality of living standards.”
Other low-ranking cities for overall
quality of living include Congo in
Brazzaville (score 30.3) and
Bangui in the Central African
Republic and Khartoum in Sudan
(30.6 and 31.7).
2006 2005 City
Rank Rank
1 Zurich
1
2 Geneva
2
3 Vancouver
3
3 Vienna
4
5
8 Auckland
6
5 Düsseldorf
7
6 Frankfurt
7 Munich
8
9
9 Bern
9 Sydney
9
11 11 Copenhagen
12 14 Wellington
13 12 Amsterdam
14 13 Brussels
15 16 Toronto
16 16 Berlin
17 14 Melbourne
18 18 Luxembourg
18 21 Ottawa
20 19 Stockholm
21 20 Perth
22 22 Montreal
23 22 Nürnberg
24 22 Dublin
25 25 Calgary
26 25 Hamburg
27 25 Honolulu
28 28 San Francisco
29 29 Adelaide
29 29 Helsinki
31 31 Brisbane
31 32 Oslo
33 33 Paris
34 35 Singapore
35 34 Tokyo
36 36 Boston
37 37 Lyon
37 37 Yokohama
39 39 London
40 40 Kobe
41 41 Washington
41 52 Chicago
43 42 Portland
44 43 Barcelona
45 44 Madrid
46 46 New York City
47 46 Seattle
48 47 Lexington
49 48 Winston Salem
51 50 Osaka
51 51 Milan
51 50 Milan
53 52 Lisbon
53 52 Tsukuba
Country
Points
Switzerland 108.2
Switzerland 108.1
Canada
107.7
Austria
107.5
New Zealand 107.3
Germany
107.2
Germany
107.0
Germany
106.8
Switzerland 106.5
Australia
106.5
Denmark
106.2
New Zealand 105.8
Netherlands 105.7
Belgium
105.6
Canada
105.4
Germany
105.1
Australia
105.0
Luxembourg 104.8
Canada
104.8
Sweden
104.7
Australia
104.5
Canada
104.3
Germany
104.1
Ireland
103.8
Canada
103.6
Germany
103.4
USA
103.3
USA
103.2
Australia
103.1
Finland
103.1
Australia
102.8
Norway
102.8
France
102.7
Singapore 102.5
Japan
102.3
USA
101.9
France
101.6
Japan
101.6
UK
101.2
Japan
101.0
USA
100.4
USA
100.4
USA
100.3
Spain
100.2
Spain
100.1
USA
100.0
USA
99.9
USA
99.8
USA
99.7
Japan
99.6
Italy
99.6
Italy
98
Portugal
97.5
Japan
97.5
Survey methodology
Data was collected largely between September
and November 2005 and was updated regularly
to take account of changing circumstances. In
particular, the assessments will be revised in the
case of any new developments. Only 215 cities
have been considered in the Quality of Living
2006 rankings.
The overall quality of living ranking is based on an
evaluation of 39 criteria. New York has been used
as the base score for quality of living, which has
a total index equal to 100.
Mercer’s study is based on detailed assessments
and evaluations of 39 key quality of living
determinants, grouped in the following
categories:
• Political and social environment (political
stability, crime, law enforcement, etc.)
• Economic environment (currency exchange
regulations, banking services, etc.)
• Socio-cultural environment (censorship,
limitations on personal freedom, etc.)
• Medical and health considerations (medical
supplies and services, infectious diseases,
sewage, waste disposal, air pollution, etc.)
• Schools and education (standard and
availability of schools, etc.)
• Public services and transportation (electricity,
water, public transport, traffic congestion, etc.)
• Recreation (restaurants, theatres, cinemas,
sports and leisure, etc.)
• Consumer goods (availability of food/daily
consumption items, cars, etc.)
• Housing (housing, household appliances,
furniture, maintenance services, etc.)
• Natural environment (climate, record of natural
disasters)
13
Calendar of Events
MIP CALENDAR OF EVENTS
MARCH 2006
07 IEM : The International
Conference & Exhibition On
Tunneling & Trenchless
Technology. Venue : Selangor
Ballroom, Sheraton Subang
Hote & Towers
08 Pejabat SUK N.Selangor :
Mesy
Jawatankuasa
Pertubuhan Bukan Kerajaan
(NGO’s) Bil 1/2006. Venue :
Blk Gerakan, SSAAS
09 PSDC : Majlis Kesyukuran
Sempena Perpindahan Ke
Ruang Pejabat Baru PSDC Di
Kompleks Kerja Raya
09 UTM : Seminar Antarabangsa
Asia GIS. Venue : IBNU SINA,
UTM Skudai.
09 PSDC : Advisory Panel
Meeting 01/2006. Venue :
Bilik Gerakan, Kompleks
Kerja Raya
15 MIP/CPD Programme : Feng
Shui In Town Planning.
Venue: The Saujana KL
17 Lembaga Perancang Bandar
M’sia : Kunjung Hormat PSDC
Ke LPBM. Venue : Blk Mesy.
Tanjung, JPBD
18 BIM : Invt To BIM Young
Professional Group. Venue :
Board Room, BIM
18 EAROPH : APIGAM Core
Group Capacity Building .
Venue : Asia Pacific
Development Centre, KL
20-21JKPTG
:
Kajian
Berkumpulan Kali Ke2
Penggubalan Dasar Tanah
Negara. Venue : Corus
Paradise Resort, PD
21 PSDC : Chairman Meeting
President
Of
With
Professional Institutions And
Board. Venue : Bilik Mesy.
KSU
22 IIUM : Invt As An External
Assessor For The Student
Portfolio For The Dept Of
Urban & Regional Planning,
KAED. Venue : Briefing
Room, KAED
22 EAROPH
:
EAROPH
Secretariat Meeting No 3
2004/2006. Venue : EAROPH
14
22-23
JPBB Melaka & MIP
Southern Chapter : Bengkel
Penggubalan Strategi &
Konsep Pembangunan Dlm
Rancangan
Penyediaan
Pemajuan.
23 CIDB
:
Mesyuarat
Jawatankuasa
Teknikal
Amalan Pemuliharaan Alam
Sekitar
Dlm
Industri
Pembinaan . Venue : Grand
Season Avenue
24 MIP : Seminar On Gated
Community Developments
And
Sustainable
Communities.
Venue
:
Impiana Hotel, KL
25 MIP : 34th Annual General
Meeting, Venue : Impiana
Hotel, KL
25-26
UTM
:
Majlis
Konvokesyen Ke 36. Venue :
Dewan Sultan Iskandar, UTM
27 EAROPH
:
EAROPH
Secretariat Meeting No 3
2004/2006. Venue : EAROPH
Secretariat Office
APRIL 2006
JPBD Sem. M’sia :
12-13
Kajian Dasar Perbandaraan
Negara (DPN)
01 EAROPH : APIGAM Core
Group Capacity Building .
Venue : AISA Pacific
Development Centre
CIDB : Invt To Roundtable
Consultative Forum For
Captains Of Industry . Venue :
Bilik Kuala Lumpur, PWTC
18-20
Uni-Link Smart Venture
Sdn Bhd : Invt To Participate
At
National
Property
Development Conference
(NPDC 2006). Venue :
Holiday Villa Subang
12-13
JPBD Sem. M’sia :
Kajian Dasar Perbandaran
Negara (DPN). Venue :
Awana Genting Highlands
Golf & Country Resort
20 MIER : 11th Corporate
Economic Briefing. Venue :
Grand Plaza Parkroyal Hotel
14 MATRADE : Mesy. Liberalisasi
Sektor Perkhidmatan Di
Bawah Malaysia - USA FTA.
Venue Tgk 16, MITI
20 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Mesy.
Bersama Perunding. Venue :
Crown Princess Hotel, KL
24 PSDC : Proposal For Budget
Dialogue 2007. Venue :
PSDC
22 IEM : The 47th Annual Dinner
And Award Night. Venue :
Palace Of Golden Horses
24 PSDC : Working Group On
Directory For Professional
Services - Meeting 2 /2006.
Venue : PSDC
24-25
ACEM : Seminar &
Exhibition On Clean Agent
Fire Suppression Systems.
Venue : The Pan Pacific, KL
06 BIM : Invitation To Be A
Briefing : SME Professional A
Product
For
The
Professionals. Venue : Board
Room, BIM
20 PSDC : Tea Talk - How Trade
Missions Can Help The
Professional
Services
Providers. Venue : M’sian
Export Exhibition Centre
24 PSDC : Directory
Professional Services
For
MAY 2006
02 ISM : Meeting On Ism
Excellence Award 2006Master Study. Venue :
Bangunan Jurukur
04 UITM : Pusat Warisan Seni
Melayu, Seminar On Selected
Malaysian Heritage Issues.
Venue : Bangunan Inovasi,
UITM Shah Alam
4-5 EAROPH
:
National
Conference On Systemic
Asset Management. Venue :
Sheraton Subang Hotel &
Towers
05 BIM : Executive Committee
Meeting Exco. BIM Building
05 MIP : 8th Council Meeting
2005/2007. Venue : AJM
Planning
:
Meeting
Of
09 BIM
Professionally
Driven
Development For The 9th
Malaysia Plan. BIM Building
14 Sukan
Nasional
JPBD
(SUKNA) Ke Xiii 2006. Venue:
Johor Bahru
17 PSDC
:
International
Committee Meeting No. 3.
Venue PSDC
18 PSDC : Tea Talk : Financial
Products For Proffessional
Services Provider By SME
Bank. Venue : MEEC
18 BIM : Notice Of Organizing
Committee Meeting, Annual
Dinner 2006. Venue : BIM
Building
20 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Publisiti
Awal Rancangan Tempatan
Daerah
Gombak
&
Sebahagian Daerah Hulu
Langat. Venue : Flamingo
Hotel, Ampang
20 ISM : Meeting On The
Technical
Panel
For
Outstanding
Contribution
Towards Sustainability .
Venue : Bangunan Jurukur
22 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Bengkel
Terjemahan
Dasar
Perancangan Fizikal Negara
(RFN) Kpd Pelan Tindakan.
Venue : Hotel Vistana,
Pahang
22 MP ALOR GAJAH : Fgd :
Peringkat Penyediaan Asas
Rujukan
Rancangan
Tempatan Daerah Alor Gajah.
Venue : Hotel Puteri Resort,
Ayer Keroh
22 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Kajian
Rancangan Tempatan Daerah
Kuala Langat. Venue Institut
Latihan Perindustrian
22-24
The National Chamber
Of Commerce & Industry Of
M’sia : 13th G15 Federation
Chambers Of Commerce,
Industry & Services (FCCIS).
Venue : Hotel Istana, KL
24-25
JPBD Sem. M’sia : Fgd
: Kajian Rancangan Tempatan
Daerah Besut. Venue :
Kluang Beach Resort
26 BPB Malaysia Gypsum Sdn
Bhd : The Official Launch Of
BPB’s State Of The Art
Manufacturing Plan. Venue :
BPB M’sia Gypsum Sdn Bhd
Calendar of Events
26-28
CIDB
:
Jemputan
Menghadiri Workshop On
Aligning R & D Priority Area To
Construction Industry Master
Plan CIMP 2006-2015. Venue :
Guoman Port Dickson Resort
27- MIP Northern Branch : Annual
General Meeting 2006. Venue :
Gurney Hotel, Penang
27-28
CIDB
:
Bengkel
Jawatankuasa Teknikal Amalan
Pemuliharaan Alam Sekitar
Dalam Industri Pembinaan.
Venue : Awana Genting
Highlands Golf & Country
Resort
30 PSDC : Tea Talk : Effective
Professional
Services
Contracts. Venue : Meec
JUNE 2006
01 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Publisiti
Awal Rancangan Tempatan
Daerah Gombak & Sebahagian
Daerah Hulu Langat. Venue :
Kompleks Sukan, Dewan Sri
Siantan
02 INTAN : Ceramah INTAN
Executive Talk . Venue : Intan
05 BIPC : 13th Meeting Of
Building Industry Presidents
Council . Venue : MBAM Conf.
Room
06 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Rancangan
Tempatan Daerah Kuala Muda
:. Venue : MP Sg Petani
09 EAROPH : Secretariat Meeting
No 4-2004/2006. Venue :
EAROPH
09 Malaysia Dental Association :
1st ICCDE /63rd MDA AGM
Joint Scientific Convention And
Trade Exhibition. Venue : Hotel
Istana
10 MPPJ : Jemputan Ke Seminar
Bersempena Pengisytiharan
Bandaraya Petaling Jaya
Bertemakan ‘Bandaraya Untuk
Semua. Venue : Crystal
Ballroom, Hilton Pj
13 PAM : PAM Golf 2006. Venue :
Tropicana Golf & Country Club
13-15
UITM : FSPU :
International Conference In
The Built Environment In The
21st Century (ICIBE). Venue :
Renaissance Hotel
13 BIM : Notice Of Meeting Of The
Board Of Management : BOM
(4) 2005/2006. Venue : BIM
Building
14-15
ISM : 8th Surveyors
Congress. Venue : Hotel Istana
:
Mesyuarat
15 CIDB
Jawatankuasa Teknikal Amalan
Pemuliharaan Alam Sekitar
Dalam Industri Pembinaan
(TEQ). Venue : Grand Season
Avenue
16 ISM : 45th Anniversary Dinner
of The Institution Of Surveyors.
Venue : Hotel Istana
17-27
MIP : Technical Visit To
Vancouver, Canada
19-23
World
Planners
Congress 2006, Vancouver,
Canada
19-23
World Urban Forum,
Vancouver, Canada
20 PSDC : Consultative Panel
Meeting 02/2006. Venue :
Kompleks Kerja Raya
20 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Bengkel
Fgd : Kajian Rancangan
Tempatan Daerah Seremban.
Venue : Allson Kelana Resort,
Seremban
20-23
INTAN
:
Kursus
Penguatkuasaan
Dan
Perundangan Alam Sekitar.
Venue : INTAN
21-24
Jabatan
Kerajaan
Tempatan : Jemputan Sbg Ahli
Panel Mesyuarat Perunding
Ahli Majlis Wanita Pbt Seluruh
Malaysia . Venue : Hotel City
Bayview, Langkawi
26-27
IIUM : KAED : Seminar
Innovative
Approaches
Towards
Better
Living
Environments. Venue : IIUM,
KAED
27 INTAN : INTAN Executive Talk.
Venue : INTAN
27 BIM : Notice Of Committee
Meeting & Finance Committee
2005/2006. Venue : BIM
Building
JULY 2006
04 BIPC : 13th Meetiing Of
Building Industry Presidents
Council . Venue : MBAM
Conference Room 2.30pm
06-16
National
Landscape
Dept, Ministry Of Housing &
Local Government Malaysia :
The Malaysian International
Lancscape & Garden Festival .
Venue : Perdana Lake Garden
07 INTAN : INTAN Executive Talk :
Branding Malaysia From Local
To Global . Venue : Dewan Sri
Baiduri, INTAN. 9am - 11am
08 PAM : Building Industry Annual
Dinner 2006. Venue : KL
Convention Center. 7.30pm
10 PAM : Opening Ceremony Of
PAM Annual Architecture
Students Works Exhibition
2006. Venue : One Utama
Shopping Complex
21-23
IIUM - KAED : Planning
Student Assembly (PSA) 2006.
Venue : KAED, IIUM.
06-09
PAM : Official Opening
Of Dex06 & Architex 06. Venue:
KL
Convention
Centre.
11.30am
05 JPBD Sem. M’sia : Fgd Bagi
Kajian Rancangan Tempatan
Batang Padang
14 MIP : 9th Council Meeting
2005/2007. Venue : MIP
Secretariat Office, Kelana Jaya
11-13
ILAM : International
Landscape
Architecture
Conference 2006. Venue :
Renaissance Hotel, KL
13 MOF : Mesyuarat Rafid
Appraisal Workshop : Kajian
Mempertingkatkan
Sistem
Penyampaian Perkhidmatan
Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan
(PBT) Di Malaysia. Venue :
Crystal Crown Hotel, PJ. 9am5pm
Upcoming
Events
AUGUST 2006
09 Seminar Cum Workshop :
The Need For Energy
Efficiency & Sustainability In
Urban Homes Venue: Armada
Hotel, PJ
10 PSDC : Appointment Of PSDC
Consultative Panel Members.
Venue : PSDC Board Room
14-16
EAROPH
:
20th
EAROPH World Congress On
Planning & Housing, City Of
Miri, Sarawak
28-29
PSDC : 2nd National
Conference On Professional
Services
Addressing
Challenges
Towards
I n t e r n a t i o n a l
Competitiveness. Venue :
Legend Hotel, Kl
SEPTEMBER 2006
05-07 Brownfield Asia 2006,
Kuala Lumpur
14-15 JPBD Sem. M’sia :
Mesyuarat
Pegawai
Perancang Bandar & Desa
Kali Pertama. Venue : The
Legend Resort, Cherating
Kuantan
NOVEMBER 2006
14 PSDC : Appointment Of
PSDC Consultative Panel
Members. Venue : PSDC
Board Room
DECEMBER 2006
12-14 REHDA : Seminar On
Trends & Property Market
Outlook 2007
Road Signs
from India
19 ACEM : Presentation Of Fidic
Tool. Venue : Eastin Hotel , PJ.
8.30am -11.30am
22 BIM : 33rd Annual General
Meeting (2005/2006). Venue :
Istana Hotel, KL
26 BIM : Professional Evening
With Annual Dinner. Venue :
Istana Hotel, 7.30pm
The Editor
15
In the News
RTPJ1
The recent controversies and ongoing debate between the resident
representatives and the local
authority of Petaling Jaya over the
draft PJ1 Local Plan (RTPJ1) is an
interesting test case for our Town
and Country Planning Act 1976,
with regard to the provisions
related to “Local Plans”. The
resident groups are challenging
not just the contents of the draft
Plan but the process of the Plan
preparation, base upon their
interpretation of the Act. As it is,
the provisions for the preparation
of Development Plans in our Town
Planning Act has never been
interpreted by the Court of Law,
and thus leaving us with many
ambiguities in their execution.
Therefore, the Petaling Jaya case
will make for an interesting case
study and may have implications
on future Local Plans.
BP
Putrajaya
Another landmark (literally and
figuratively) is the new Federal
Government
Administrative
Centre. The Star (15 November,
2005) commented that residents
and visitors of Putrajaya “should
not grapple” with the various
inconveniences that they are
facing “because Putrajaya is
supposed to be a planned city”. It
is arguably the most intensely
planned township. It is touted as a
model township for the rest of the
country. It was planned to almost
perfection. But then, there lies its
problems because the township is
made up of many components.
Not every component can be built
simultaneously although each
depended on the other in order for
the city system to work as it was
planned, for example, its planned
integrated public transportation
system. There is another problem people. We need resident people
to make up a living city. But this is
a chicken and egg issue.
Malaysians have gotten used to
“instant everything” culture, from
Mee Maggi and instant coffee to
16
Pak Man Telo get-rich quick
scheme to instant trees. Now we
expect instant cities. Perhaps the
mistake was to promise too much
at the beginning, leaving a very
high expectation to the pioneering
residents and the visitors. A city
takes time to mature. Shah Alam is
a good case in point. Putrajaya
has perhaps received an
accelerated infrastructure growth
compared to Shah Alam but its
residents and communities will still
have to mature gracefully. This
cannot be expected to happen
instantly. No doubt, Putrajaya is
still a nice place to look at. Given
time, as well as commitment from
the local authority, it will be an
equally nice place to live in. BP
PJ City
Another case of impatient
residents is in the newly crowned
Petaling Jaya City. The months
leading up to its declaration of City
status and those that followed,
never a day passed by without the
local print media highlighting one
or another grouses from the
residents towards the local
authority. Petaling Jaya, or PJ, as
it is affectionately called, is a nice
‘little’ place that has outgrown its
original design as a satellite town.
I just cannot figure what the
residents really want from PJ. I
hope they will learn to focus on the
positive aspects of PJ instead of
merely harping on the bad ones. It
may be a good application of the
spirit of Agenda 21 but sometimes
I think they take it too far. The
residents of PJ have been given
too much authority over
themselves
that
perhaps
sometimes they cross the thin line
between self governance and
anarchy. Only in PJ can you find
so many very well planned and
neatly developed neighbourhoods
turned into ‘army camps’, where
the local residents erect barriers,
employ private guards and decide
who can drive through their street.
BP
EAROPH
20th World
Congress on
Housing and
Planning,
Miri,
Sarawak
The
Eastern
Regional
Organization for Planning and
Housing (EAROPH) will be
holding its 20th World Congress
on Housing and Planning from
14th to 16th August 2006 in Miri
Sarawak.
The theme of
“Sustainable Development of
Human Settlements for a Better
Quality of Life” has five subthemes and a total of 38
international papers will be
tabled on various subjects. The
Congress will be emphasizing
on best practices and successful
programmes that have been
implemented to achieve various
elements of sustainability. The
concurrent Mayor’s caucus has
attracted speakers such as the
U.N. Special Ambassador for
Millennium Development Goals
and the Mayor of Seoul who will
talk on the Greening of Seoul.
Waste Management and Energy
Efficient Buildings are new
subject matters that will have
many papers from specialists
and practitioners and people
from the industry. This will be a
good opportunity to not just learn
new ideas and experiences but
also to network with many varied
people from many countries.
More detailed information can
be
obtained
from
www.earoph.net
TO DEVELOP the human capital, we
want our citizens to be fully
equipped with knowledge, practice
good moral values, have a broad
mind, love the country and possess
KL a better
city to live in
than Seoul
(the Sun, April 17 2006)
Mercer
Human
Resource
Consulting reported that their
latest Worldwide Quality of Living
Survey 2006 shown that KL
maintained its position at number
75, which is higher than many
other Asian cities including Seoul
and Taipei, but lower than
Singapore, Tokyo and Hong Kong.
Johor Bahru came at number 99,
one notch down from last year. 39
criteria were used in the survey
including
political,
social,
economic and environmental
factors, personal safety and
health, education, transport, and
other public services. Zurich
remained as the city with highest
quality of living, while Baghdad
ranked last.
Worldwide quality of living
survey 2006
Rank
City
1
Zurich
2
Geneva
3
Vancouver
34
Singapore
35
Tokyo
75
Kuala Lumpur
Johor Bahru
99
Bangkok
107
Manila
119
Rayong
132
142
Jakarta
148
Ho Chi Minh City
155
Hanoi
170
Vientiane
185
Yangon
215
Baghdad
Source : Mercer Human Resource
Consulting
the physical and spiritual strength.
~ Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi ~
PREDICTABILITY IN PLANNING :
A WORTHY GOAL?
Many years ago, when people
living in Kedah were made aware
that plans were being drawn up by
the State Government to develop
an island within one of the
protected marine parks of the
country, many said that there is no
way the development could
proceed. Their predictions were
wrong. Despite recommendations
by many quarters, including the
Department of Environment, that
the planned development should
not be carried out, it was done.
That island was, of course, Pulau
Payar. And Malaysians generally
know what happened since then.
More than a decade ago, there
was also a proposal to develop the
well-known Gunung Jerai (also in
Kedah) into a mini-Disneyland
theme park. The proponent was a
Kuala Lumpur based company.
The project was warmly welcomed
and supported by the Kedah State
Government. Surprise, surprise.
The local residents in the area
opposed it strongly. They asked
the federal leadership to intervene.
Facing strong opposition from his
own backyard and as well as lack
of support from the federal level,
the then Menteri Besar shelved the
idea. Unlike the Pulau Payar case,
where damage had in fact been
done, the Gunung Jerai was
aborted early. Apart from red faces
and probably a tiny dent in the
developer’s pocket, there was no
environmental damage done to the
place.
Elsewhere in Perak, some time
ago there was a proposal by
private developers to develop part
of Maxwell Hill. The project was
warmly welcomed by the state
government,
ostensibly
to
encourage inbound tourism.
Unfortunately, there was strong
opposition by the local residents
~ Salleh Buang ~
as well as various NGOs. In the
end, the project was aborted.
It was a different story in Johor
Baru. A well-connected Kuala
Lumpur based company wanted to
develop one of the city’s most
scenic spots, not too far away from
the city centre, into an ambitious
mixed development project called
“The Floating City”. It had the
backing of the Johor State
Government. Opposition from the
local residents was strongly
brushed aside. A civil action to
stop the project was filed by a local
resident was dismissed summarily
by the High Court on the grounds
of no locus standi. Arguments put
forward by the applicant that the
project (commercial in nature)
could not be carried out because
the area in question was zoned a
recreational area in the structure
plan was brushed aside by the
court. As all opposition had been
effectively
brushed
aside,
administratively and judicially, the
project went ahead.
Again surprise, surprise. The multimillion ringgit failed miserably. It
later became an eye-sore to the
state as well as a mark of shame
to the nation. Inherited unwillingly
from a previous administration, the
present state government finally
scrapped the project, announcing
plans that it will be converted it into
something
else.
Remedial
measures are now slowly being
taken, but the damage has left its
mark on the landscape.
These stories, and many others
yet publicly untold, bring up the
question on the predictability of
planning. If we are asked the
following question from a
developer “Will my project be
approved?” or “What are the
chances of my project being
approved by the authorities?”, how
certain can we in replying one way
or the other?
Predictability in planning is not an
impossibility, according to Oregon
Governor, John A. Kitzhaber. On
the contrary, he believed it should
be “a process to enhance both
predictability
and
citizen
involvement.” The objective of the
exercise is to provide landowners
with clear expectations as to what
they can do with their land, while
assuring the public that they too
will have adequate opportunities to
participate in those decisions.
Kitzhaber said that the state
administration in Oregon had used
its planning program to enhance
citizen involvement in planning,
whilst at the same time taking
“strong measures to maintain
predictability”.
Asked to elaborate these
measures
to
enhance
predictability, he explained that
they involve many elements,
including (1) Clear Policy Direction;
(2) Protection from conflicts;
(3) Coordination;
(4) One level of review;
(5) Clear and objective approval
standards;
(6) Centralised appeals.
With regard to the first element,
Oregon requires every city and
county in the state to have a
comprehensive plan and the
implementing
measures
necessary to make that plan work.
In addition, these plans and
implementing measures must
meet standards specified by the
state government.
Landowners, developers and
permit applicants get predictability
because all the rules and
standards are clearly set down on
paper, and all these matters are
known long before approval
process begins.
feature
As for the second element, one of
the important objectives of landuse planning is the reduction of
conflicts between land uses. In
Oregon, every square inch of
privately owned land in the state
has been zoned, and the main
purpose of that zoning is to
segregate incompatible land uses.
For example, in the “Exclusive
Farm Use” zones that have been
applied to more than 16 million
acres of private farmland in the
state, intensive development and
urban uses are prohibited.
In our country, Kedah included,
there is no guarantee that a stretch
of padi land today will remain so
next year or the year after that.
As for the third element,
coordination, Kitzhaber said that in
Oregon's planning program, the
term has two distinctive meanings.
One, it means keeping one
community’s plan consistent with
another’s plan. Two, it also means
keeping local, state and federal
agencies pulling together, in a
direction consistent with the stateapproved local plan. This
coordination
enhances
predictability by assuring that one
local government’s land use
decision will not be thwarted by the
actions
of
another
local
government or state agency.
In the Malaysian context, we
should not have any difficulty in
this regard. After all, we have our
National Physical Plan at the
federal level, the structure plan at
the state level, and the local plan
at the local authority level. Unless,
of course, we are not walking the
talk. We say one thing, but we then
do things differently.
(Contd. on Page 19)
17
Campus News
MIP EDUCATION AND STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Committee Members
Chairman
Assoc. Prof. Wan Mohamed
Yusoff bin Abdullah (101/82)
Fixed Members
Encik Ihsan Zainal Mokhtar
(305/94)
Prof. Dr. Mansor Ibrahim
(273/93)
Puan Khairiah Thalha (184/94)
Encik Md Nazri Mohd Noordin
(301/94)
Other Members
Assoc. Prof. Hj. Zakaria Ahmad
(UiTM)
Assoc. Prof. Foziah Johar (UTM)
Encik Shafiee Shuid (UIAM)
Dr. Rahmat Azam Mustafa
(USM)
Dr. Kausar Binti Hj Ali (USM)
Prof. Dr. Che Musa Che Omar
(UIA)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Dasimah Binti
Omar (UiTM)
Objectives:
a. To periodically evaluate and
make recommendation to
Council on the needs of
planning education in the local
Institutes of Higher Learning
(IPTA), so as to generate better
quality of town planners for
future needs.
b. To undertake programmes and
projects to enhance educational
and training requirements of
future town planners, and any
others, that will benefit the
Institute.
c. To advise, monitor and evaluate
on town planning programmes
offered by local planning schools
and related institution.
d. To liaise with government
agencies (such as JPA, LAN,
Jabatan Pendidikan Tinggi,
Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi)
on matters pertaining to
recognition,
accreditation,
programmes, institutions, etc of
Planning education and the
profession.
e. To assist the Board of Town
Planners (fixed member of the
Accreditation Committee of the
Board) on matters pertaining to
planning
education,
examination, courses and
accreditation of local Institutions
of Higher Learning and any
other degrees from abroad.
f. To help administer the Education
Fund according to the rules and
regulations of the Fund, and
carry out programmes that will
benefit the Institute.
Committee Activities :
The first committee meeting was
held on 19 January 2006 to discuss
on the following matters:
a) MIP Roadshows 2006
b) MIP
Planning
Program
Accreditation Review Visit To
IPTA
c) MIP Professional Exam and
Academic Service PTK
Retirements (UiTM lecturers)
• Assoc. Prof Wan Mohamed
Yusoff Abdullah (MIP 101/82) retirement effective 28.03.06.
Contract extended until further
notice
• Assoc Prof Salehaton Hussain
The Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, Kulliyyah of
Architecture and Environmental
Design, IIUM, in collaboration with
the Malaysian Institute of
Planners, will be organising the
Planning Students Assembly 2006
from July 21st until July 23rd. The
venue of the event will be at IIUM,
Gombak Campus.
The Planning Student Assembly
(PSA), an annual event, aims at
bringing together students from
18
Sazally (MIP 200/88) : April 2006.
Contract extended until further
notice.
• Assoc. Prof. Noorhadjar Bux
(MIP 244/91)- retirement effective
01.07.06
Planning Gala 2006
Pada 17-19 April 2006 Persatuan
Perancangan
Bandar
dan
Wilayah,
Fakulti
Senibina
Perancangan dan Ukur, (FSPU),
Universiti Teknologi Mara Shah
Alam telah berjaya menganjurkan
satu aktiviti Persatuan iaitu
PlanningGALA2006
yang
“ART
and
bertemakan
SCIENCES”
yang
mana
matlamat utamanya untuk
menjalin perhubungan yang baik
dan harmoni
di samping
menambah isu pengetahuan
berkenaan isu dan perancangan
antara para pelajar Program
Perancangan
Bandar
dan
Wilayah UiTM Shah Alam dengan
staf perancangan bandar dan
wilayah di sektor awam dan
swasta.
Antara Majlis Perbandaran yang
telah mengambil bahagian adalah
seperti Majlis Perbandaran
Petaling Jaya (MPPJ) dan Majlis
Bandaraya Shah Alam (MBSA).
Antara aktiviti yang telah
diadakan adalah forum yang
bertajuk “Art and Sciences in
Town Planning”, acara sukan
seperti futsal, bola sepak, bola
jaring dan sukaneka. Presiden
Pertubuhan Perancang Malaysia
(MIP), Puan Norliza bte Hashim
antara yang telah mengambil
bahagian di dalam program ini
dengan kehadirannya sebagai
Ahli Panel Forum Perancangan
dan beberapa aktiviti yang lain.
Program ini juga telah berjaya
menarik penglibatan alumni
Jabatan Perancangan Bandar
Planning Student Assembly 2006
all planning schools in Malaysia.
The first PSA was organised by the
Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, IIUM in 2000.
Since then, every planning school
in Malaysia have taken turns to
organise the event. This year, the
Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, IIUM will be
organising the event for the
second time.
The objectives of PSA 2006 are,
first and foremost, to foster
relationship and networking
among students in planning
schools in Malaysia. It also seeks
to strengthen the relationship
between the Malaysian Institute of
Planners (MIP) and planning
schools in the country, to discuss
contemporary issues in planning
and to propagate values and
ethics among the future planners.
The theme for PSA 2006 is ‘UNITY
IN DIVERSITY’. This theme was
selected to reflect the diverse
background
of
students
dan Wilayah, FPSU, UiTM dan
juga firma perunding perancang
bandar untuk bersama-sama
menyertai program yang telah
dianjurkan. PlanningGALA2006
telah melabuhkan tirainya dengan
mengadakan MalamGALA2006
yang berlangsung dengan
meriahnya dengan penyampaian
hadiah dan juga aktiviti
persembahan pelajar setiap
semester.
who come from different planning
schools, yet still share the same
goals and responsibilities as future
planners.
A string of actitivities have been
lined up for the event. The focus of
the activities will be on Rural and
Community Planning. Besides
lectures on the subject matter,
participants will also be involved in
various other activities such as
community services at selected
villages around the Gombak area.
MIP Northern Branch
AGM, Annual Dinner
and Seminar
The MIP Northern Branch held its
AGM and its first annual dinner on
27th May 2006 at the Cititel Hotel
in Penang. In conjunction with the
AGM, a one-day seminar entitled
“Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs) on Planning in Penang”
was organized by the branch.
Invited speakers from various
professions which included a
town planner, a land surveyor, a
property
consultant,
a
geotechnical engineer and a
traffic engineer
presented
interesting papers on a wide
range of topics on structure and
local planning, latest property
market trends and development,
“gated’
and
“guarded”
development, problems of “hillland” development, and traffic
issues in planning.
A total of 122 participants
consisting of developers, town
planners, architects, surveyors,
engineers, university students
and NGO’s attended the seminar.
The Northern Branch AGM
held after the seminar. The
President Pn Norliza
Secretary, Encik Suhaimi,
attended the meeting.
The auspicious day ended with
the annual dinner, the first to be
held by the branch. The informal
buffet was graced by the
presence of representatives from
the Penang Real Estate and
Housing Developers Association,
the Penang Branch of the
Malaysian Institute of Architects,
the Malaysian Institute of
Engineers and the Malaysian
Institute of Surveyors, and the
seminar speakers.
Active participation from the floor during the seminar
(Contd. from Back Page)
was
MIP
and
also
The MIP NB Chairman presenting
a token of appreciation to speaker,
Ir. Khoo Koon Tai
The MIP NB Chairman calling the MIPNB AGM to order
with the MIP President on his right, and the MIPNB
secretary and the MIP secretary on his left
Vancouver
Technical Visit
2006
We met many other Malaysians
delegates in Vancouver, who
were there to attend the World
Urban Forum and World
Planners Congress including the
Director General of Town and
Country Planning, Yg Berbahgia
Dato’ Mohd Fadzil b Mohd Khir,
Dr Dolbani, Mr Lim Yau Lee, En
Nazri Jaffar, En Ghaffar (Ministry
of Higher Education), the Majlis
Perbandaran Subang Jaya
group as well as Majlis Daerah
Sepang group.
It was a memorable and
worthwhile trip for me and I
hope it was the same for all who
went. We had very little hiccups
(I think) and even the delay in
departure of flight to KL did not
affect the arrival time at KLIA. I
must thank everyone who came
with MIP for their support,
especially to City Hall Kuala
Lumpur where we had a 12member delegation (thanks to
Puan Hajjah Zainab for
managing to convince the
mayor), and also to Yusri from
KWA Planners (who helped me
a lot to get everyone organized
during the trip). Of course my
thanks to Puan Khairiah who did
most of the ground work before
we left for Vancouver, the MIP
secretariat and Topaz Travel for
the good work done.
Cheers . . . .
. . . . Norliza Hashim
Predictability in
Planning :
A Worthy Goal?
With regard to the fourth element,
one of the most important features
of Oregon’s planning program is its
single tier of planning and permit
administration, all of which are
done at the local level. The stateapproved local land-use plan is the
controlling document for land-use
decisions, and land-use permits
are administered by city and
county officials.
With regard to the fifth element,
Oregon requires clear and
objective review standards to be
used in reviewing permit
applications for controversial land
uses such as multi-family housing,
manufactured homes and quarries.
Under Oregon law, development
officials cannot use vague
standards such as “compatibility
with the neighborhood” to deny an
application for a needed housing
type in an appropriate zone.
Insisting on clear standards
effectively safeguard developers
and permit applicants from
arbitrary
and
inconsistent
decisions and thereby enhances
predictability.
Finally, in regard to the sixth
element, the Oregon Legislature
had created in 1979 a special land
use court, known as the Land Use
Board of Appeals (LUBA). The
result has been a dramatic
decrease in the time needed to
resolve appeals and an increase in
the consistency of decisions.
In Malaysia, not every state has (at
the moment) its Appeal Board. In
Kedah, we had it only since a
couple of years ago. Many other
states have not done so, although
the provisions in the law had been
there for so long.
It is no wonder that we still have
people who tell you they don’t
understand how (on what basis)
their applications were rejected,
and on what basis other applicants
had better luck.
19
Vancouver Technical Visit 2006
It was Saturday 17th June 2006 on
flight CX 720, when a 28-member
group from the Malaysian Institute
of Planners departed from KLIA to
Vancouver to attend the World
Urban Forum. The 16 hours flight
was via Hong Kong and the
economy class journey was not
that comfortable for many who are
used to the comfort of first and
business class traveling. This
however, had not dampened the
spirits of the group, as they looked
enthusiastic and eager to see
Vancouver, which we have all
heard so much off as the Most
Liveable City.
It was the first time to Vancouver
for all the 28 delegates, including
myself who was heading the
delegation and though I got
worried in the beginning of
handling a group to a city I have
not visited before, I actually had
nothing to worry about as almost
everyone were seasoned travelers
and knew the do’s and don’ts and I
just had to make sure our traveling
plans were in order.
On arrival to Vancouver, to prove
the enthusiasm of everyone, we
started by straight away going to
Steveston Village, a unique fishing
village commercial area, not too
far from the airport and where our
hotel was, for lunch and an
introduction to what Vancouver
had to offer. It was indeed a great
beginning; the fishermen wharf
area was quaint with small boats
anchored to the jetty and small
shops and restaurants offering
delicious seafood. I had developed
a cold and a bad sore throat on the
20
plane and the hot clam chowder
soup remarkably helped to whet
my appetite. We checked in later
at the Holiday Inn, Richmond and I
of course went straight to bed and
hoping to get better the next day,
only to later find out that many of
the group were adventurous and
had scouted the area to see what
else is interesting in Richmond.
The next day we arranged a trip for
the delegates to visit Grousse
Mountain and Capilano national
park, two most famous sites within
an hour’s drive from the City of
Vancouver. At Grousse Mountain,
they were able to observe and
experience a tourism development
that is eco friendly and learnt how
simple facilities cater for up to
millions of visitors a year and yet
provide for a friendly and
accessible attraction even for the
disabled. The Capilano National
Park is situated just outside of the
city. Here one can observe the
housing developments around the
park, which takes into cognizance
the natural environment and
terrain such that housing
developments are not intrusive.
Facilities within the park are simple
yet caters to the 3 million visitors
annually. The use of university
students as part time rangers who
know and love the park, is a lesson
to be learnt itself. Although visited
by millions, the emphasis on the
sensitive environment has been
given a major role and which is
what keeps the park a continuous
attraction for many. The group also
had a quick city tour, where we
managed to get a glimpse of the
modern and older parts of the city
of Vancouver. For me, it was the
first day at the World Planners
Congress, where more than 1,500
participants were there and held at
the Westin Bayshore hotel,
Vancouver City.
Day three to day seven were
packed with attending the World
Urban Forum (WUF) for the
delegates and daily we travelled
between Richmond to Vancouver
city where WUF was held in
Canada Place, the Vancouver city
convention centre. More than
9,000 people registered and
attended WUF and just being there
was an experience of its own as I
am sure many had never attended
a convention or conference where
there were so many people from
all over the world. It was one of the
largest WUF ever held and
Vancouver city was a wonderful
host city as the main sponsor of
the event; traveling around the city
was made easy as all participants
were given free traveling multipasses which allowed all of us to
travel free on three modes of
public transport i.e. the sky-train,
the sea-bus and the public buses
or translink as they call it.
Vancouver was the Most Liveable
City for 2005 and I guess that was
why many of us went, as we
wanted to see how truly is the city
liveable. After more than 9 days
there, I can agree why it deserves
the title as the city was not only
beautifully set amongst the hills
and mountains which surrounds
the city but it has been planned,
designed and built with much
consideration for the communities
living in the city.
There are many parks and
gardens in the city and within
Greater Vancouver, there are 190
parks to serve its 2 million
population.
Moving around the city is easy as
they have an efficient public
transportation system and all of us
made good use of our free multipasses as we individually covered
the city and its suburb areas to see
residential, commercial, universities
and as many development areas
that we were recommended to
see. The city of course is a barrier
free city and the many physically
impaired people we see
independently moving around in
the city can easily measure this.
We visited three technical
departments
very
much
responsible for shaping the
development of the city i.e. the
Greater Vancouver Regional
Development Authority, Vancouver
City Council as well as Greater
Vancouver Transportation Authority.
We were warmly received and we
were briefed on their roles and
planning strategies in the
development of the city and at the
Vancouver City Council, we were
also informed of the development
process in Vancouver where
design consultation between city
council and private developers are
done prior to submission and peer
review panels are set to review
design submission and ensure it
meets the needs of the city and
complements developments of its
surrounding areas.
(Contd. on Page 15)

2006 July issue - Malaysian Institute of Planners

Transcription

Similar documents

Citrawarna Malaysia

FHA Update for REALTORS

DPS - Cyberjaya University College of Medical Sciences

Flag Off Ceremony, Malaysia, 10th September 2009

ELECTRIC VIBES FOR CHEMICAL BROTHERS IN MALTA

Koperasi Kastam Diraja Malaysia Berhad (KOSKAM)

Flavours Magazine

Danmarks Eksportråd

magazine - Chloe Silver Design

Teaching and Learning Musical Composition at Universiti Sains

Read this magazine as a PDF