Newsletter of the Malaysian Institute of Planners KDN PP 10805/5/2005

November 2005

www.mip.org.myBerita

Assalamualaikum wrm.wbr. and Warm Greetings,

It has been three months since I assumed office asPresident of the Institute and this would be the first timeI am addressing members in the Berita Perancang.First and foremost I would like to take the opportunity tothank everyone who attended the Annual GeneralMeeting last July 2005, especially to the fellow plannerswho had tirelessly supported the institute and came forthe AGM despite their busy schedules. We also sawmany new faces especially new corporate membersand graduate members in which this AGM might betheir first. I hope all of you will continue to make AGM ayearly event not to be missed, as not only do we meetold friends but also AGM is the venue to share planningthoughts, raise concerns and issues on planning.

The Council of 2005-2007 is a good set up where wehave the return of former eminent council members andthe incoming of new members to the council. Togetherthe council will serve and work hard for the institute andits members. The council will focus on several issuesthis two years and ten Standing Committees have beenset up to ensure that the institute and its membersaddress the many issues that are being faced by theprofession and the planning professionals. As I havementioned in the AGM, MIP needs to refocus and settargets on leading the way forward for the professionand I hope all members will respond and support theprogrammes that will be carried out by the Council. TheStanding Committees formed, its committee members,programs and intended activities for the coming yearare outlined in the Bulletin and I hope all members willread and should anyone wish to volunteer, pleasecontact the relevant chairman of the committee.

The Council also acknowledges the need for CapacityBuilding for the institute as well as for its members.Continuing Professional Development (CPD) will beemphasized and efforts to conduct all modes of CPD atmore affordable cost will be the priority. E-CPD shallalso be introduced and the council is makingarrangements with Asia Build On-line to assist thesecretariat in monitoring members CPD Database aswell as provide members with a one-stop centre forsearching CPD activities. Capacity building shall alsobe emphasized on young and future planners; twocommittees have been formed i.e. Young PlannersCommittee which will focus on young graduatemembers and Education Committee which has beenrenamed Education and Students Affairs will focus onfuture planners in all planning schools in the country.Capacity building will also focus on nurturing youngdynamic planners to be active in the institute’sactivities. This will help in identifying future leaders whowill continue the good work of the institute.

I would also like to remind members on the approvedMinimum Scale of Professional Fees by the Board ofTown Planners. I hope members shall use the scale withimmediate effect and without hesitation. The scale offees has been approved by the Minister and is in theprocess of being gazetted as rules in the Town PlannersAct. If all practicing planners strongly adhere to theminimum scale, then we can rid allegations that plannersjust sign plans for a small fee. I do acknowledge thatmany private practice planners are currently affected bythe slow down in property market over the last two yearsand also the reduction of government projects. However,this should not be the reason for such practice and Istrongly believe there is a bright future for planners andthe many rising issues today lead to a strong role thatplanners have to play towards sustainability and socialcohesion. Thus it is our responsibility to uplift theprofession and stop the act of bad practice as we protectour integrity. The minimum scale of fees sets as astandard and adds value to the professional servicesrendered. Thus we must ensure good and honest practiceand not allow others to misuse us.

(Contd. inside)

“We shall be facing a new challenge, where foreign consultants willsoon be competing with us locally. Thus we must be prepared to

compete with them at home ground and more importantly we musttake the opportunity to explore other markets globally.”

~ Norliza HashimPresident, MIP

BERITA PERANCANG

Assoc. Prof. WanMohamed Yusoff b.

Abdullah

Pn. Khairiah bt.Hj. Mohd Talha

Mr. Muhammad Farisb. Abdullah

Mr. Bong Khin Fah

Dr. Mohd ZinMohamed

Pn. JuwairiyahHo bt. Abdullah

Hj. Mokhtar b.Samadi

Siti Nor Azmi Shariah bt Che Lah

Kamaruddin binSelamat Din

Fara Dilla btHaridatul Akhmar

Hurun Ain

AdvisorAssoc. Prof. DrAlias Abdullah

Chief EditorEn. Ishak Ariffin

Members

PresidentNORLIZA HASHIM

Honorary SecretaryAHMAD SUHAIMIISMAIL

Vice-PresidentPROF DR MANSORIBRAHIM

Honorary TreasurerMD NAZRI MOHDNOORDIN

BIPC - (Building IndustryPresidents Council)

President - Norliza Hashim

EAROPH INTERNATIONAL(Eastern Regional Organization

For Planning and Housing)President - Norliza Hashim

EAROPH MALAYSIAPresident - Norliza Hashim

JOBPIC(Joint Building Planning

Committee)President - Norliza Hashim

AAPH - (Asean Association ForPlanning and Housing)

Jason Lee Poh Lee

BIM - Balai Iktisas MalaysiaMr T Mahesan

Ahmad Suhaimi Ismail

COMMONWEALTH ASSOCIATIONOF PLANNERS

Dato’ Mohd Fadzil b Hj Mohd KhirNorliza Hashim

NAPSECNorliza Hashim

Tuan Haji Mohd Nazri JaffarIhsan Zainal Mokhtar

Membership /Education Fund BoardPROF DR MANSORIBRAHIM

Research andPublicationASSOC PROF DR ALIASABDULLAH

ProgrammeMOHD. ZAMRI HUSIN

Education andStudents AffairsASSOC PROF WANMOHAMED YUSOFFABDULLAH

Young PlannersMD. NAZRI MOHDNOORDIN

Corporate Affairs /International AffairsNORLIZA HASHIM

Sustainable Planningand DevelopmentKHAIRIAH TALHA

Special ProjectsJASON LEE POH LEE

Professional PracticeIHSAN ZAINALMOKHTAR

Standing Committees :

CO-OPTED MEMBERS 2005-2007

REPRESENTATION IN COMMITTEES

EDITORIAL BOARD

SECRETARIAT STAFF

2 THE COUNCIL 2005-2007

YB Dato’ Haji Zainol Bin Haji Ayob

• YBhg Datuk Hj Zainuddin HjMuhammad

• Puan Zainab Bin Mohd Ghazali• Mr T Mahesan• Datin Paduka Dr Halimaton

Saadiah

BERITA PERANCANG

EDITORIAL 3

Selamat Hari Raya Aidil Fitri & Happy Deepavali to allour members and I hope everyone arrived home

safely after the week-long break!

Congratulations too to all the newly elected MIP Council members, helmed by the new President, Puan Norliza Hashim. We also have a new team for the Research and Publication Committee headed by Dr Alias Abdullah, and an expanded Editorial team for the 2005/2007 session. Thank you to those who volunteered to help in Berita Perancang.

As we approach the New Year, we also have a newYoung Planners Committee headed by Md Nazri MohdNoordin and a Pro-tem Committee for MIP Sabah set up(see reports in the next issue). The Board of Town Plannersalso has a new line up of members. To round it all up, wehave a new look Berita Perancang but with the same oldChief Editor (unfortunately?).

This issue is also packed with some new columns andarticles which we hope you will enjoy reading. We havesuch an enterprising and hardworking Advisor in Dr Alias.We received so many articles that we had to embargosome of them for the next issue. Thank you to all thecontributors.

This issue commemorates the World Town Planning Day2005 and the National Convention entitled "PlanningTowards Liveable Cities" organised jointly by JPBD,Persatuan Pegawai Perancang Bandar & Desa and MIP.Recipients of the MIP Excellence Awards 2005 will also beannounced during the World Town Planning Day 2005Dinner to be held in conjunction with the NationalConvention.

Lastly, I take this opportunity to also wish Merry Christmasand a Happy New Year to everyone.

~ Ishak Ariffin ~ Chief Editor

Contents• President’s Message

• Editorial / Planning Blogs

• MIP Excellence Awards 2005 : An Overview

• Planning & the Law : Delay and Mala Fide asGrounds for Challenging Land Acquisition

• Balancing Ecology and Development

• Land Use Planning & Environment Protection inMalaysia

• MIP Calendar of Events

• United Nations Human Development Report 2005

• The S-Dev Geneva 05 - International Platform onSustainable Urban Development

• Risk Management in Human Settlements - EAROPHRegional Seminar, Jogjakarta

• Campus News

• What-If Planning Support System in Kuching

Berita PERANCANG is published by the PublicationCommittee of the Malaysian Institute of Planners.All communication should be addressed to:Berita PerancangMalaysian Institute of PlannersNo 51M Jalan SS 21/56B, Damansara Utama,47400 Petaling JayaTel : 03-77287272 Fax : 03-77286545E-mail : beritaperancang@myjaring.net / beritaperancang@gmail.com

Website : http://www.mip.org.myViews expressed in this Newsletter do not necessarily representthose of the Malaysian Institute of Planners

President’s Message (Contd. from Page 1)This is even more important now, with the Government’spressure to commit and open up the urban planningmarkets in line with various commitments made underWorld Trade Organization (WTO), Asean FreeArrangement on Services (AFAS) and bi-lateral tradearrangements made with several identified countries. Weshall be facing a new challenge, where foreign consultantswill soon be competing with us locally. Thus we must beprepared to compete with them at home ground and moreimportantly we must take the opportunity to explore othermarkets globally. We need to export our services and to doso we have to ensure that we are ready and we need toimprove our skills. Thus I hope all of us will continue toimprove our professional development as well as ensurethat we practise according to the regulations. Several roundtables will soon be initiated to deliberate on these issuesand prepare members for globalization. I hope you willattend such meetings when invited as in the past yearsround table dialogues have very little response, where wesee only 10-15 people coming. Many have beenlackadaisical and not treat this as a serious issue. My onlyregret will be when findings and inputs from suchconsultation is not representative of everyone’s view andany decision made by Council based on such inputs arebeing questioned by the other members. Thus I urge all ofyou to participate when invited as the future of your practicedepends on it.

We have much to look for in the coming 1st year, as theCouncil has laid out various programs and activities. Thesewould include Public Lectures, the National PlanningConvention as well as the Planning Excellence AwardDinner in conjunction with World Town Planning Daycelebration, we shall also be organizing a technical tour toJakarta (preferably end 2005/early 2006) and to Vancouverfor the World Planners Congress (June 2006). There willalso be the Bowling, Golf and SUKNA to name a few of thesporting activities and most importantly the launch of MIP’snew office, which will be completed this December.Definitely we will keep you posted, just look out for ourmails and more importantly please participate.

Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity to wish all ourHindu members Happy Deepavali, and to all our Muslimmembers, Selamat Hari Raya. Thank You.

Norliza HashimPresident

BERITA PERANCANG

4

BLOG PERANCANGAN (PLANNING BLOGS) by ePlanner

2/10/05"Katrina" jam on Interstate has ano Q jumpers? Why aah?Did you see the pictures of thevehicles queuing on the freeway inHouston trying to escape hurricaneKatrina? If the scene was from ourNorth-South Expressway, you'd mostlikely see seven lanes of traffic onone side of the carriageway insteadof three. Like it or not, we have toadmit that a lot of Malaysian are self-centred recalcitrant behind thewheel.

30/9/05More ugly neighbours!I think the architect and the owner ofthe house next door are self-centredbigots who like to live on a pedestalin a deserted island. The new ownersbought the semi-D property anddecided to renovate it. Unfortunatelythe architect has no sense ofharmony or continuity or conformityor scale. They are also un-neighbourly. Yes, the ubiquitousgreat wall of the garden also cameup. Shouldn’t a major work like thisrequire planning permission? It isstrange that the plans were approvedby DBKL without consultation withthe immediate neighbours. In the UKI can easily get the Courts to orderthe garden wall be torn down forobstructing my morning sunlight.

29/9/05We (Malaysians) are bad driversLet's admit it - Malaysians are simplyhorrible & irresponsible drivers. Weare simply very rude behind thewheels. Now we have resorted toramming into the policemen who tryto stop us! Two such cases reportedin Subang Jaya and Kelantan lastJuly. No amount of traffic engineering& traffic management can make ourroads safe until we change ourmindset. We are just a bunch ofhypocrites. Period.

15/9/05STP is our future raw water supplyDon't laugh but it won't be longbefore our Sewage Treatment Plant(STP) becomes our main source ofraw water at the rate we are pollutingour rivers and destroying watercatchments. It is now cheaper totreat wastewater discharged fromsewage treatment plant than fromour rivers for our daily waterconsumption. In other words, thewater in our rivers are dirtier than theones discharged by our STP.

12/9/05Kawasan "Kemudahan Awam/Rekreasi/Golf" Is a golf course a public area? I thinkit is erroneous to include golf coursesin a category that include public openspaces. It gives a misleading pictureof the ratio of open spaces topopulation level because golfcourses in this country are notaccessible to persons withoutmembership of the golf club thatoperates the golf courses.

10/9/05BeggingHow much money do you give awayon a Sunday morning trip to themarket? Blind men, agencycollecting fund for Makna/WWF etc.,surau construction fund, orphanageconstruction fund, a man raising fundfor son's university fees (I bumpedinto this one at TTDI market carpark), ...

What is our welfare departmentdoing nowadays? There seem to bea proliferation of 'beggars', bothorganised and individuals.

3/9/05Terraced housing layoutHands up those who honestly thinkthe terraced housing layout is reallyideal? I just cannot figure out why westill think we need service roads thatruns parallel to the main road. Fromresidential areas built in the early

1980s to the present, we still keepthe same layout configurationdespite creating awkward andhazardous junctions, and in extremecases, traffic congestion. A currenttrend is the residents fencing up theirbacklanes, thereby makingbacklanes totally inaccessible andredundant. Isn't it time we do seriousreview of the terrace housing layoutand the planning standards?

1/9/05Did we ever teach our bus and taxidrivers to stop in the lay-by?We should not put poor people inhigh-rise buildings before they learnhow to live in one! It's a sure recipefor disaster. Squatters relocationprogramme should include a "high-rise living" orientation course. Now,do you still wonder why bus and taxidrivers don't stop in the lay-by?

The bus driver that give way..?Why was I surprised when the stagebus driver gave way to let me out ofthe junction at Jalan TAR today? Itwas a the notorious Metrobus ...!!!

20/8/05Highway interchange design -what is the convention?Highway engineers take note:ingress and egress from anyhighways should be from slow laneson the left, not the fast lanes. Period.

6/8/05Airpark: a new way to utiliseunder-utilised airports?I don’t know if we have enoughmillionaires with private jets to makethis work but this could be anotherbird-brain idea that someone mighttake up one day. We can give newlease of life to underutilised airportsin Ipoh, Pangkor, Batu Berendamand even Subang. Or give a reasonfor Perlis to have an airport?

28/7/05Have You Tried Using The PutraLine Between 8am & 9am OnWeekdays?Changing your routine could makeyou notice a lot of things, as I did

planning-blogs-by-the-eplanner

BERITA PERANCANG

5

BLOG PERANCANGAN (PLANNING BLOGS) by ePlanner

when attending the CLGF Forumfrom 12 -14 July 2005 at CrownPrincess Hotel. As I usually plan myroute before leaving my Shah Alambase, I had the choice of the NKVEor the Federal Highway or the NPE,and then going through the citycentre, or taking the MRR. All ofthem sounded scary. So, I decidedon the LRT. I thought it could be fun,as well as helping to reduce thetraffic jam in the city.

I had my spouse drop me off at theKerinchi Station to catch Putraline toAmpang Park. As I was approachingthe station I could see a number oftrains passing through the station atshort intervals. My first impressionwas Putra has done a good job tohelp alleviate the publictransportation problem. UnfortunatelyI was wrong - I couldn’t evensqueeze myself into any of theovercrowded trains. Although thetrain arrived every 4 minutes, therewere only two coaches each. So Iwaited for another train, and thenanother, until my patience ran out. Idecided to force myself into the nexttrain, not caring about what the otherpassengers think of me then!

The biggest passenger load camefrom the KL Sentral. The KTMKomuter’s commuters. Mygoodness! The queues were mileslong. At the same time I am proud tosay that Malaysians have acquiredthat civilised culture. Most of thepassengers get off at Masjid Jamek,KLCC and Ampang Park stations.

The experience brought me a bigquestion mark, “Didn’t DBKL or theowner of the Putra Line anticipatethis problem before?”. Probablythey’ll need another LRT line,because during peak hours the solePutra line cannot cope with thecurrent load, what more of thefuture. I must say that I enjoyed

those 3 days of commuting. I felt asthough I’m a Londoner utilising thepark and ride system (but there isplenty of room for improvements).

18/7/05Even the cleaning lady knows!The quality of service provided bydifferent organisations can begauged by how well their securityguards are trained to providecustomer information. But StandardChartered Bank superseded them allwhen even its cleaning lady can helpcustomers to make cheque depositsthrough the ATMs! Compare that tosome agencies where even theirofficers manning the customerservice counters can’t help you.

17/7/05Indiscriminate road closures &diversionsLocal authorities should impose acharge on any party, whether it be aprivate contractor or governmentagency, for closing any road space.We have heard one complaint toomany about this. The worst hadbeen a road rage case in Julybetween a twin cab pick-up and aHonda Accord which caused amultiple collision on Karak Highway.All because of one impatient driverand another equally impatient one,going through the highway which isperpetually under repair in manyparts. We havelaws that we canuse to impose thischarge, otherwisewe have tointroduce newones. If contractorswere charged forthe amount of roadspace they closeper day, l am surethere will be lessclosed road spaceused as storageareas ;-}

10/7/05Pride in the job"Myself and other drivers in Londonhave an important job and we aregoing to continue to do that as bestas we can. We are going to continueour normal lives...", said GeorgePsarabakis, 50, driver of theunfortunate bus #30, StagecoachLondon Bus, a day after his bus wasblown up at Tavistock Square andWoburn Place junction at 9.47am on7/7/05. That’s why the bus service isbetter there.

22/06/05Motorcycles on KL-PJ FederalHighwayWhy are there motorcycles on theFederal Highway Route I in PJ/KLwhen there are motorcycle lanesalongside it? Whatever happened tothe rule restricting motorcycles fromusing the Federal Highway Route Iand Jalan Syed Putra? It seems thatthe rules were relaxed because themotorcycle lanes were obstructedduring the construction of PantaiExpressway and Jalan Klang Lamainterchanges near Mid Valley City.Now that the bike lanes have beenrestored there are still a lot ofmotorcyclists going into the highway.Do we need another human sacrificebefore the relevant authorities takethe appropriate action to restoreorder?

planning-blogs-by-the-eplanner

Guess what building this is?

Tesco Store, Belfast, Northern Ireland.Photo courtesy of Dr Mohd Naim Yunus

BERITA PERANCANG

MIP EXCELLENCE AWARDS6

MIP EXCELLENCEAWARDS 2005 :An Overview

by Ihsan Zainal Mokhtar

This year’s entries for the MIP Excellence Awards are veryexciting as there are entries for all five categories. Theentries are of high quality and the entrants came wellprepared to stake their claim in their presentation. We lookat all the entrants as winners, in a way, as their participationaugurs well for the profession and the industry.

The panel of judges had a tough time deliberating theentries as most of them had met the minimum criteria setfor each category. We also felt that there were some entriesthat would have done better in another category.

The panel of judges represented the public sector,practising planners and academicians. Unfortunately therewere last minute withdrawals by some judges that weended up with a smaller number than we had intendedsince there was no time to find replacements. It was unfairto reschedule the presentations by the entrants toaccommodate the judges’ itinerary as some of them hadcome from as far north as Perlis and as far south as Johor!

A total of 16 entries were received for the five categories,an average of three entries per category. The panel sat fortwo whole days on the 27th and 28th of October 2005,reviewing the presentation. Most of the entrants wererepresented by a complete team (town planner, developerand other supporting professions) but there were caseswhere the town planner was absent. This is ratherdisappointing, as this is an award for Town Planningexcellence! The Town Planner is expected to be fullyinvolved to take charge in presenting the ideas that hasbeen generated by his team. For this we have to give duerecognition to the planners who were present and gave agood account of themselves.

The results shall be officially announced during the WorldTown Planning Day 2005 Dinner and Awards Night on 17thNovember 2005. We shall give a comprehensive summaryof the winning entries in the next issue of Berita Perancang.

For the first category (Planning Scholar Award) there weresome very good ideas presented, setting the right directionin research areas that will enrich the profession in the longterm. However, none of the entries were judged as“outstanding contribution to the understanding of issues inTown Planning“ - a key criteria for this category. Impressivein ideas and have the potential to be winners. However, weare awarding for excellence, not potential.

For the second category (Planning Innovation Award) thewinner must set a new standard for design, practicality andideas, outside the norm and “outside the box”! Challenging

the conventional yet implementable, something whichplanners and developers will adopt for the next decade orso. There were some great ideas but most of them wereunfortunately translated into proposals that contradictplanning principles for walk-ability, public transport, publicspace and access, community interaction, footprints andsustainability, to name a few. There is no winner for thiscategory.

The third category was the most difficult for the panel ofjudges. All the entries had strengths in different areas ofRedevelopment, Conservation and Rehabilitation. But thewinners (yes there are two winners!) were judgedoutstanding and excellent because they persevered againstall odds over a period of time and successfully implementedtheir respective proposals. They proved that commitmentand dedication do make a difference.

The fourth category (Rural Planning) was difficult to judgeas the “current rural planning practice had not been clearlydefined”. It was judged that the entries did not subscribe torural planning theme. The Institute may need to refine itscriteria for Rural Planning. The panel of judges could notagree on a winner for this category.

Finally, the township development award, which comprisestwo sub-categories, yielded only one winner! The judgeswere of the view that the planner had successfully guidedthe developer in a truly professional manner and theemerging township benefited from the translated ideas.This was obvious from the layout design in the first phaseof the project. The panel felt that despite some initialdifficulties faced by the developer, the good layout planningwill create an excellent township.

After two full days reviewing the 16 entries and many morehours of deliberating the submissions, there are someimportant observations made. Firstly, there are many youngplanners who are making excellent strides in theprofession, both in physical design and research. They areinvolved, confident, committed and most importantly, havea good grasp of what is required to push for excellence intown planning. However, there are others who need toshow greater commitment to the job at hand, to improvetheir communication skills, to increase their understandingof the law and the statutory framework they work in. Theyshould learn from their mistakes. The objective of theseawards is to reward excellence; therefore, being good is notgood enough for an excellence award.

Advance congratulations for the winners and I hope you willstrive harder and continue to lead the profession byexample.

May we all strive for excellence!

Ihsan Zainal Mokhtar is the Chairman of MIP ProfessionalPractice Committee and the principal of IZM Consult basedin Shah Alam.

BERITA PERANCANG

NEWS FROM THE MIP SECRETARIAT 7

A matter of interpretation . . . .

Wise SayingsYou must stop assuming that athing which has never been donebefore probably cannot be doneat all - Donald M. Nelson

You can’t solve a problem withthe same kind of thinking thatcreated it - Albert Einstein.

Contributed by FARIS

1. En. Victor Lai Wee Peng 502/20052. En. Ahmed Tariq b. Datuk Aripen503/2005 3. En. Ismail b. Ibrahim 504/2005

1. PC/C-136/05 Focus Architects & UrbanPlanners Sdn. Bhd.

2. PC/C-137/05 Siraz Consult Sdn. Bhd.

MIP Welcomes thefollowing New Members

GRADUATE MEMBERS

CORPORATE MEMBERS

CONSULTANT FIRMS

1. En. Mohd Jonid b. Md. Noor2. En. Arshad b. Razali 3. Cik Yusrina bt. Mohamad Yusof4. En. Mohd Yazid b. Mahmod5. Cik Shuhaidah bt Md. Noor6. En. Misbakhul Hadi b. Zuhri 7. En. Fong Wee Kean 8. Pn. Annie Syazrin bt. Ismail 9. En. Tengku Aris b. Tengku Ab. Aziz10. Cik Fu Swee Yun 11. Cik Tan Sook Fern 12. En. Mohd Zafaruddin bin Razali 13. Cik Atkah Salwa Bt Bahrom

November 200511 MIP 4th Council Meeting17-18 Konvensyen Kebangsaan Sempena Hari Perancangan Bandar

Sedunia 2005 Rennaissance Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, 8:30am17 MIP Planning Excellence Awards & World Town Planning

Day Dinner 2005, 7.30pm21-22 National Planning Seminar 2005: Sustainable Landuse

Development. Shah Alam23 Tea Talk 9 Talk Incentives and Filing Tax Return - organized by

PSDC , 4:00pm24-25 International Seminar on Asset Management. Kuala Lumpur,

www.geocities.com/asset_management_community/28 Malaysia Toray Science Foundation (MTSF)Invitation to MTSF

12th Prize Presentation Ceremony, 10:00am 28 Sambutan Minggu Alam Sekitar Malaysia Peringkat

Kebangasaan di Padang MPK 1, Jln Mahkota, Kuantan, 8:30am28-30 International Symposium on Knowledge Cities. Al-Madina Al-

Munawara.www.araburban.com/AUDI/English/Right_en/01Conferences_en/

December 200502 MIP 5th Council Meeting15-16 Taklimat Pemahaman Perancangan Wilayah Dalam Konteks

Akta 17212-13 International Conference on Construction & Real Estate

Management (ICCREM 2005) - The Challenge of Innovation -organized by School of Housing, Building and Planning, USM

12-13 National Seminar on Land Use & Development, Land Transaction, Laws & Project Management in Malaysia- organized by Asia Land Seminar

January 200612-13 First Asia Pacific Conference for ESRI Users. Hong Kong.

www.esrichina-hk.com/apuc2006

February 200604-06 Delhi Sustainable Development Summit. New Delhi.

www.teriin.org/dsds/2006/index.htm 27-3.3 2006 World Congress. Capetown. www.iclei.org

March 200607-08 2nd National Professional Service Conference 2005, - Marketing :

The Way Forward in Going Global, Legend Hotel, Kuala Lumpur09-10 Asia GIS 2006 International Conference. Skudai.

www.utm.my/asiagis

April 200625-27 2nd International Conference of the Arab Society for Computer

Aided Architectural Design. UAE. www.ascaad.org

May 200615-17 25th Urban Data Management Symposium. Aalborg. www.udms.net18-20 World Forum : Cities and Quality of Life. Geneva.

www.qualitedevie.org/qualite/tiki-index.php

June 200617-20 World Planners Congress 2006. Vancouver. www.wpc2006.com 19-23 World Urban Forum. Vancouver. www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2006/

September 200605-07 Brownfield Asia 2006. Kuala Lumpur. www.iem.org.my/brownfieldasia

BERITA PERANCANG

PLANNING & THE LAW8

If you are the registered owner of a piece of land in thiscountry, the National Land Code 1965 confers on you abundle of rights commonly referred to as “indefeasibility oftitle”.1 In simple terms, what this means is that your rightsto the land are beyond question.2 The extent or scope ofyour rights to the land, however, depends on the express3

and implied4 conditions affecting the land, and anyrestrictions in interest (if any) affecting the land.5

With indefeasibility, you also enjoy the right of exclusiveuse and possession of the air space above your land andthe land below the surface, and the right of support of yourland in its natural state by an adjacent land. These rightsare spelt out in section 44 of the Code.

With indefeasibility also, you enjoy rights to enter into“dealings” - unless these are prevented by restrictions ininterest or encumbrances (like charges or caveats) on yourland. Dealings which are recognized under the Code aretransfers, leases and tenancies, charges and liens andeasements. Apart from these Torrens dealings, you canalso enter into other dealings recognized under customarylaw (such as jual janji) and under Islamic law (such ashibah).

But indefeasibility must not be mistaken as permanency.Your rights to the land will come to abrupt end of thehappening of any of the following circumstances - if you failto pay the annual quit rent, if you are in breach of any ofthe express or implied conditions, if you surrender back theland to the State Authority, or if the State Authoritycompulsorily acquires your land.

In other jurisdictions, compulsory acquisition of privateland is known by different names.6

Article 13 Federal Constitution

Your rights to the land are protected by the FederalConstitution. Under Article 13, it is provided that alienatedland cannot be compulsorily acquired or used unless thereis a specific law authorizing it, and that law must provideadequate compensation.

In Peninsular Malaysia, that specific law is the LandAcquisition Act 1960, in force since October 13, 1960. Asfor adequate compensation, that is guaranteed under theFirst Schedule to the Act, which defines in great detail themeaning of “market value”.

In essence, if any land acquisition proceeding is carried outin contravention of the 1960 Act or the letter and spirit ofArticle 13, it can (and will) be challenged. Over the years,as we read the growing body of case law, we came acrossvarious grounds raised by land owners.

Success varied from case to case, depending on the factsof each case and the ability of the land owners to convincethe courts that relief should be given to them.

Delay in the proceedings

Inordinate delay was quite rampant amongst some StateAuthorities before the Land Acquisition Act 1960 wasrevamped in the 80s. Prior to that amendment in 1984,there was no specific time frame for a compulsory landacquisition proceeding to be completed.7 As a result, therewere several cases of inordinate delay by the relevantauthorities - delay in holding the inquiry, resulting in delayin making the Award, and finally delay in making paymentof the compensation.

In Pemungut Hasil Tanah Daerah Barat Daya PulauPinang v. Ong Gaik Khoo8, there was a delay of 7 yearsbetween the date of the declaration under section 8 of the1960 Act and the holding of the inquiry under section 10.The Federal Court declared the land acquisitionproceeding as null and void. The court remarked that thelonger the delay in making the award the greater theinjustice to the deprived landowner. The effect of the delayin that case was that the owner was awarded in 1981 themarket price of the land prevailing in 1974.

Salleh Abas CJ (Malaya) (as he then was) explained -

“Every exercise of statutory power must not only be inconformity with the express words of the statute butabove all must also comply with certain implied legalrequirements. The court has always viewed its exerciseas an abuse and therefore treats it as illegal where the

DELAY AND MALAFIDE As Grounds forChallengingLand Acquisition

by Salleh Buang

Dr. Salleh Buang is a former Deputy Dean, Faculty of Law,International Islamic University, author of many authoritativeproperty related books and articles including the MalaysianTorren System, Land Acquisition and Law on HousingDevelopers. He has a weekly column in Utusan Malaysia, NewStraits Times and MASSA. He can be contacted atsallehbuang@hotmail.com.

1 Section 340(1).2 Unless there are vitiating circumstances which will render your title defeasible; see section 340(2).3 Section 120.4 Sections 115 (for agricultural land), 116 (for building land) and 117 (for industrial land). 5 See sections 104 and 105. 6 In US, it is referred to as “taking”. In Sarawak, it is referred to as “resumption”; see Part IV of the Sarawak Land Code. 7 After the amendment, land acquisition in Peninsular Malaysia under the Act must be completed within 3 years. 8 [1983] 2 MLJ 35.

BERITA PERANCANG

PLANNING & THE LAW 9

exercise is done for an inadmissible purpose or onirrelevant grounds or without regard to relevantconsideration or with gross unreasonableness . . . It istrue that section 10 of the Act does not prescribe the timewithin which the inquiry into the compensation must beheld but looking at the Act as a whole no one could denythat the proceedings under the Act are meant to be incontinuous motion so that no such interruption or suchundue delay or stoppage as to amount to anabandonment of the acquisition could be regarded aswithin this motion …”(Emphasis added)

Salleh Abas then referred to section 38 of theInterpretation and General Clauses Ordinance 1948which provides that where no time is prescribed orallowed within which anything shall be done, such thingshall be done with all convenient speed and as often asthe prescribed occasion arises. He continued -

“What then is the “convenient speed”? In our view, itmust be “as soon as possible” or “within a reasonabletime”, and not “as late as possible”. Obviously whatamounts to convenient speed must vary from case tocase and in our judgment seven years delay is certainlynot a convenient speed as it is so far outside the normalperiod of time that no reasonable authority could evenregard it as reasonable. That being the case the court isentitled to strike down the impugned acquisitionproceeding as illegal”. (Emphasis added).

Delay in paying compensation

Article 13 of the Federal Constitution categorically statesthat the deprived landowner must be paid “adequatecompensation” if his land has been compulsorily acquired.The Federal Court decision in Ong Gaik Khoo aboveclearly shows that an award made by the authorities in1981, but on the basis of a valuation in 1974, can neveradequately compensate the deprived owner. It is commonknowledge that property prices escalate through the years,never remaining stagnant.

The Federal Court emphasized in that case that theCollector9 must always keep in view the interests of notonly the State Authority but also the interests of thedeprived landowners. Failure to do so, “resulting in thediminution of their interests” will amount to “an abuse ofpower, which entitles the land owners concerned to anorder for certiorari”.10

The Federal Court further held that the delay in holding theenquiry, 7 years after the declaration of acquisition, hadresulted “in an inadequate compensation” for the deprivedlandowner and this “brings the inquiry and the awardoutside the purview and scope of the Act.”

Consequently, the court added - “Such delay tantamounts to an abuse of power andrenders the inquiry and subsequent proceedings null andvoid. We therefore agree with the learned JudicialCommissioner’s conclusion that an order of certiorarishould be issued to quash the acquisition proceedings.”

Three years later, in the subsequent case of PemungutHasil Tanah Daerah Barat Daya Pulau Pinang v. Kam GinPaik & Ors11, where there was a similar delay of 7 yearsbefore the enquiry was held, the Privy Council held, citingwith approval the earlier decision of the Federal Court inOng Gaik Khoo, that the delay “had the effect” of makingthe proceeding “in contravention of the statutoryrequirements and did not constitute a valid exercise ofpower.”12

The Privy Council emphasized that a “valid award was aprerequisite” for the Land Administrator to take possessionof the acquired land. Since there was no valid award in theinstant case, the Privy Council held the Land Administratorwas “not entitled to do so and is therefore under a duty torestore possession” of the land to the land owner.

The Privy Council, however, noted that the GovernmentProceedings Ordinance 1956 precludes such an order torestore possession being made against the Government.What the court could (and should) do was to declare thatthe deprived landowners (the respondents in the case)were entitled as against the Land Administrator (theappellants) to possession of the land.

Mala fide

Mala fide means bad faith. It is the opposite of bona fide,good faith. Mala fide is more than just malice, spite or ill.The following selected cases illustrate the meaning of theterm as well as the difficulty in proving them. Difficult, butnot impossible.

In Syed Omar bin Abdul Rahman Taha Alsagoff & Anor v.The Government of the State of Johore13, the appellants’land, measuring 5,700 acres, had been compulsorilyacquired by the Government of Johor. However,documents later showed that only 2,000 acres wererequired for the Pasir Gudang Port project. The remaining3,700 acres were marked somewhat vaguely as beingrequired for some “special purposes”. The appellantschallenged the validity of the acquisition, alleging malafide.

They failed at the High Court, the Federal Court, as well asat the Privy Council.

Delivering the decision of the Privy Council rejecting theappeal, Viscount Dilhorne said -

9 Collectors of Land Revenue are now called Land Administrators.10 [1983] 2 MLJ 35, at p. 38.11 [1986] 1 MLJ 362.12 [1986] 1 MLJ 362, at p. 365.13 [1979] 1 MLJ 49

BERITA PERANCANG

PLANNING & THE LAW10

“The appellants in this appeal contended that theproceedings were null and void as they say their landswere acquired for purposes other than those for which therespondent was empowered under the Act to acquirethem…

The Act imposes no obligation on the acquiring authorityto produce a plan for inspection which shows how theland to be acquired is to be zoned…

Section 8(3) … provides that the Declaration shall beconclusive evidence that all the scheduled land isneeded for the purpose specified therein. While it may bepossible to treat a Declaration made . . . as a nullity if itbe shown that the acquiring authority has misconstruedits statutory powers . . . or that the purpose stated in theDeclaration does not come within section 3, in theabsence of bad faith, which in the instant case isnegatived by concurrent findings of fact in the courtsbelow, this sub-section renders it not possible tochallenge the validity by asserting that some of the landto which it relates is not needed by the purposes statedor that the land is in fact wanted for purposes other thanthose specified. Consequently, the fact that the landslisted in the Schedule amounted to some 5,700 acreswhen the total area of the State Development Officer’soriginal requirement was 2,000 acres does not help theappellants, nor can it really be contended that thepurposes stated in the Declaration do not come withinsection 3.” (Emphasis added)

Although the Privy Council dismissed the landowner’schallenge, it did acknowledge that an acquisitionproceeding can be successfully challenged if mala fide(bad faith) can be proved.

Syed Omar’s case once again reiterated the principle,established earlier in Yeap Seok Pen v. Government ofKelantan14 that mere suspicion is not enough. In that case,which came from Kelantan, Lord Griffiths held that “badfaith is an exceedingly serious allegation to make and shewho makes it has a heavy burden to discharge the onus ofproving it”.

It is indeed regrettable that in Syed Omar’s case, the PrivyCouncil did not (failed to) refer to its own earlier decision inMunicipal Council of Sydney v. Campbell & Ors15. In thatearlier case from Australia, the appellants wereempowered by law to acquire land for making or extendingstreets as well as for carrying out “improvements in orremodeling any portion of the city”. They had acquired therespondents’ land to extend Martin Place, an importantthoroughfare in the centre of Sydney. The respondentschallenged the acquisition. In the course of the trial, therespondents admitted that “no plan of improvement orremodeling was at any time before the Council…”

In its judgment in favour of the respondents, the Privy

Council noted -

“No plan for improvement or remodeling was at any timedecided upon; and, indeed, no such plan was everconsidered by or proposed by the Council …

Their Lordships think it not reasonably disputed that atthe time of the passing of the resolution in June, theCouncil conceived it to be within its powers to resumelands not needed for the extension itself, but solely forthe purpose of appropriating the betterments arising fromthe extension…

A body such as the Municipal Council of Sydney,authorized to take land compulsorily for specifiedpurposes, will not be permitted to exercise its powers fordifferent purposes, and if it attempts to do so, the Courtswill interfere”.

The Privy Council, however, remarked that “Where theproceedings of the Council are attacked upon this ground,the party impeaching these proceedings must, of course,prove that the Council, though professing to exercise itspowers for the statutory purpose, is in fact employing themin furtherance of some ulterior object”.

Looking back on Syed Omar and the Sydney case, bothdecisions of the Privy Council which are binding onMalaysian courts, the law can be summarized as follows -

(1) A compulsory acquisition proceeding can bechallenged on the grounds of mala fide, providedthere are cogent evidence to prove it. The onus ofproof is on the party alleging mala fide.

(2) The absence of any plan for the acquired land is anindication of bad faith, although whether it issufficient to convince the court is a separate matter.

(3) If the acquiring authority did actually acquire the landfor some other (or improper) purpose, “the Court willinterfere”.

Unconscionable or unmeritorious conduct

In the recent case of Stamford Holdings Sdn Bhd v.Kerajaan Negeri Johor & Ors17, the appellants’ land,measuring 6,600 acres were compulsorily acquired by theGovernment of Johor The appellants challenged theacquisition, claiming it as an unconstitutional means ofdepriving them of their property. They also alleged that theacquisition was outside the ambit of section 3 of the LandAcquisition Act 1960.

The facts of the case, as alleged by the appellants, showedthat various people in high places as well as politically-connected personalities were somehow involved. Theappellants’ statement of claim was, however, struck out bythe High Court on the ground that there was no cause ofaction. Against that decision, the appellants appealed tothe Court of Appeal.

14 [1986] 1 MLJ 44915 [1925] AC 338.

16 [1925] AC 338, at p. 343.17 [1998] 1 MLJ 607.

BERITA PERANCANG

PLANNING & THE LAW 11

What is peculiar about this case is that the respondentsfailed to file their defence to the appellants’ statement ofclaim. It was argued on behalf of the respondents that thedeclaration under section 14 of the 1960 Act cannot bechallenged in any way. Section 14 states that “Every award… shall be final and conclusive evidence of the area of anyscheduled land, of its value … and of the apportionment ofthe compensation awarded …”

In its decision allowing the landowners’ appeal, the Courtof Appeal cited with approval the Privy Council decision inSyed Omar that it is still possible to challenge anacquisition if it can be shown that the acquiring authorityhad “misconstrued its powers” or that it had acted in “badfaith”.

The Court of Appeal accordingly held that “On the strengthof these authorities and in the light of the allegations in thestatement of claim, we have no alternative except to agreewith the learned appellants’ contention that, in thecircumstances of this case, the acquisition proceedingsmay be challenged on the ground of mala fide or bad faith.”

The Court of Appeal also observed that the acquisitionproceedings in this case “had deprived the appellant of itslegitimate expectation of profit from the development of theaforesaid 6,600 acres of land. These proceedings had infact deprived the appellant of its property which could havebeen at least sold with a profit if the property had not beenacquired - even assuming that the first respondent wouldnever have approved their application for development”.

In the concluding part of its judgment, the Court of Appealsaid that -

“The facts as stated in the statement of claim … clearlyshow the unconscionable or unmeritorious conduct ofthe respondents. At least those facts are, in the absenceof any defence filed, assumed true, stand unrebuttedand would constitute a good cause of action against therespondents. As such, the respondents’ applicationshould not have been granted by the High Court.”

Pursuant to the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the casemust go to full trial on the merits of the appellants’ claim.However, it later transpired that the two parties had agreedto an amicable settlement of RM405 million, which wasduly recorded as a consent Judgment in chambers byZainun J.

The lesson we learn from Stamford’s case is that if there isevidence to back up the challenge, a landowner can raiseunconscionable or unmeritorious conduct of the part of theacquiring authority as one of the grounds for rendering theacquisition null and void.

Summary

Based on existing case-law, some of which had beenhighlighted above, a landowner wishing to challenge the

validity of an acquisition proceeding on the grounds ofinordinate delay or mala fide can cite the following –

A. Principles derived from Ong Gaik Khee:(i) inordinate delay, if proved, will make the acquisition

illegal, grossly unreasonable; (ii) inordinate delay, if proved to have caused “diminution of

interests”, will amount to “an abuse of power” and aground for certiorari;

(iii)inordinate delay, if proved to have caused thecompensation to become “inadequate”, will bring theinquiry and the award outside the scope of the law;

(iv)inordinate delay is “an abuse of power”, rendering theacquisition proceedings “null and void”;

B. Principles derived from Kam Gin Paik:(i) inordinate delay had “contravened statutory

requirements”, making the acquisition not a “validexercise of power”;

(ii) if the acquisition is not a valid exercise of power, novalid award had been made; if no valid award had beenmade, no possession can be made; state must “restorepossession”;

C. Principles derived from Syed Omar:(i) mala fide, if it can be proved, will render the acquisition

null and void;(ii) mala fide is difficult (but not impossible) to prove, and

onus of proof is on the party who alleges;

D. Principles derived from Municipal Council of Sydney:(i) the absence of any plan to carry out stated purpose of

acquisition is evidence of mala fide; (ii) if land acquired was used for a different (improper)

purpose, that is evidence of mala fide.

E. Principles derived from Stamford Holding:(i) it is possible to challenge an acquisition proceeding if it

can be shown that the acquiring authority had“misconstrued its powers” or that it had acted in “badfaith”;

(ii) any unconscionable or unmeritorious conduct on thepart of the acquiring authority, if proven, is evidence ofmala fide.

When challenging an acquisition proceeding, landownersusually apply for certiorari. If the challenge is successful,certiorari will be issued by the court to quash theacquisition. Such initial setbacks do not, however, meanthat the State Authority cannot embark on a freshacquisition exercise - except that by this time, the marketprice of the acquired land will be much higher, due to thepassage of time.

Apart from certiorari, deprived landowners also apply for adeclaration. In Kam Gin Paik above, the court explainedthat under the Government Proceedings Ordinance, anorder cannot be made against the State Authority torestore possession to the landowners. In such a case, theappropriate remedy is declaration.

BERITA PERANCANG

FEATURE

I read with great interest the furore overland development on a forest area of1,200 ha on the northern fringe ofTaman Pertanian Bukit Cahaya SeriAlam. There are so many distressingimages of the environmental destructionthat is taking place and the ecologicalencroachment into the park, so much sothat it seems impossible to know how toabsorb or comprehend.

As a lecturer committed to educatinglandscape architectural students inLand Use Ecology and Land Law andImplementation, I discovered that thecurrent issue provides many interestingfacets for discussions as a case study.Besides bridging the theories ofecological studies and the practical realities of humanintervention of the natural system, I realize that this issuehighlights the need for environmental ethics to be anintegral element in good governance practice! In this light,I must acknowledge my appreciation to the media forbringing the issue to the public attention, least not for thebenefits of academic discourse.

This issue has captured the national interest and it hadbeen discussed, debated and deliberated by the land lawexperts, consultants, NGOs and the academicians.However, I will approach the discussion from an ecologicalviewpoint and analyze the inter-relatedness of the issuesas a whole system and not fragmented pieces of a puzzle.

The ecological perspective begins with a view of the wholesystem and understanding various ecosystems interact inpatterns that tend towards balance and persist over time.The most basic premise of understanding ecology is thatthe natural environment including forests, watercatchments, grasslands, wetlands and the water bodiesare connected to one another as one system, which cannotbe treated as separate entities. The cyclic movement ofnutrients and energy flow through the system helps tomaintain a delicate equilibrium to ensure a continuingsustainable environment.

However, human civilization has led a large impact on theenvironment; in our own time, we have reshaped a largepart of earth’s surface with concrete in our cities toaccommodate housing for the urban population. Thesechanges, have, until recently, been relatively trivial factorsin the global ecological system. Indeed, it was always safeto assume that nothing we did or could do would have anylasting effect on the global environment. But, it is preciselythat assumption which has brought about the catastrophethat appears right at our doorstep. It is precisely thatassumption that now must be discarded so that we canthink strategically about our relationship to the environment.We cannot treat the earth and environment as somethingseparate from human civilization; we are part of the wholesystem and looking at it ultimately means also looking at

ourselves. And if we do not see that the human part ofnature has an increasingly powerful influence over thewhole of nature, then we will not be able to see howdangerously we are threatening to push earth out ofbalance.

Senator Al-Gore (never mind his dinner etiquette!) inspiredme through his book, ‘Earth In The Balance’ where he usesthe metaphor of a dysfunctional family to show how humancivilization must heel itself-psychologically and spiritually-before we can heel our ailing environment. Convinced thathuman civilization have brought us to the brink ofcatastrophe, he argues that only a radical rethinking of ourrelationship to nature can save the earth’s ecology forfuture generations.

Ecology sounds so fashionable in the modern world thatwe are living in. Not only limited to the forest or the seabed,ecology is now portrayed to market a certain popularvacuum cleaner product as well as an effective marketingtool for housing themes! I am an optimist and would like tobelieve that it is used responsibly and the propertypromoters really ‘walk their talk’ and not merely as agimmick for promotion. Needless to say, the public is nowembracing the concept of ecology. However, it is the BukitCahaya Seri Alam Park issue that really elevated ecologyto the stardom status.

Viewpoint, New Straits Times

BALANCINGECOLOGYAND DEVELOPMENT

by Nik Hanita Nik Mohamad

Nik Hanita Nik Mohamad is an ecologist who lectures in theDepartment of Landscape Architecture of Universiti TeknologiMara. She can be contacted at nhanita@salam.uitm.edu.my

12

BERITA PERANCANG

BALANCING ECOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT 13

It is worth noting thatthe controversialdevelopment is notthe sole instance ofland ande n v i r o n m e n t a lmismanagement. Itis documented thatalmost one-fourth ofthe protected areasin PeninsularMalaysia have beenlost to development,logging anda g r i c u l t u r a lactivities. The totalprotected areas,consisting of wildlifesanctuaries, Stateparks, wetlands andTaman Negara aregazetted underFederal and Statelaws could haveexceeded onemillion hectares ifthe sites had notbeen disturbed ordegazette by theState governments.It may surprise mostof us to know that asin 2003, only 3 out of80 green lungs inPetaling Jaya havebeen gazetted whilst

the task to preserve Cameron Highlands is prove to betough when there is only 52% of the highlands aregazetted as forest reserve.

The environmental devastation that took place in the 1,200ha area under development in the northern fringe of thepark surpassed other reported cases of landmismanagement by the merit of the scale of the landclearing and the ecological impacts on the environment. Consider this;

1. A portion of land clearance works was carried outwithout the planning permission approval from the localcouncil. This mean felling of many invaluable plantspecies including rare, endangered and heritage trees,which are not uncommonly found, in forest reserve.These invaluable species are protected from beingfelled by unscrupulous developers or individuals byprovisions in Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The Townand Country Planning Act (1976) was amended in 1995to include provisions on protection on existinglandscape including Tree Preservation Order andensuring provisions of open space as part of newdevelopments. Under Tree Preservation Order, thefelling of trees with trunk more than 15cm is prohibitedand requires written approval from the local council.

2. Assuming that the planning permission was obtained bythe other developers on the basis that they havecomplied with the requirements of the planning process,what assurance do the public have that the localcouncils have adhered to the other requirements, forinstance Development Proposal Report stipulatedunder the same Act for all development works largerthan 5 acres. This report requires the neighboring landuses be given serious considerations to ensurecompatibility of land uses and that no encroachment ordisturbances to the neighboring land uses. Bearing inmind that in this case, the neighbor is the StateAgriculture Park envisaged to being the world’s largestagro-forest by 2007!

3. The flattening of hillsThe land clearing activities carried out include hillcutting and hill slopes having a gradient of more than 35degree are not allowed for any types of development, atall cost. Can we seriously believe that ‘officials atIKRAM and the Mineral and Geoscience Departmentare saddled with their own workload and thus, notmuch communication among agencies and the localcouncil’ ?

4. Absence of buffer zones between the area beingcleared and the park. Any landscape architectureundergraduate would attest that a buffer zone need tobe provided for any proposed development on landwhich are subjected to different land use adjacently.The rationale for the buffer zone is to soften or slow theimpacts of development on the adjacent land uses.

The absence of buffer zones further compounded theenvironmental destruction on site and ecologicalencroachment into the park vicinity. The ecological effectswere already well-documented in Utusan Malaysia in itsissue on 6 February 2005 and it can be further categorizedas follows;

1. Destruction of wildlife habitats and significantly reducingthe biodiversity of the flora and fauna. The damage isvisibly seen at the Tropical Fruit Orchard, Orchid farmand Vegetable farm.

2. Surface run-off, loss of invaluable top soil layer andsiltation resulting in declining water quality, eutrophiclakes and loss of fish and other aquatic species. Thepark has episodes of flash floods common to theCulture Village and Sg. Baru dam.

Although ecological encroachment into the park was onlyreported in the past one month, the actual damage to BukitCahaya Seri Alam Agriculture Park had taken place since2003 . The Culture Village was flooded up to 8 metre highwhere water scaled the roof of the model houses.

People outside the ecological fraternity will have a differentunderstanding of the ecological perspective. This isevidenced from the perception that the massive landclearance on the 1,200 ha of land and the adjacent BukitCahaya Seri Alam Agriculture Park are two separateissues altogether and should be viewed and treateddifferently. Instead of being enlightened on the

BERITA PERANCANG

BALANCING ECOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT14

environmental devastation, the public are now taken totask for failing to understand and separate the two issues!

The issue highlighted by the media was on ecologicalencroachment to the park. This was supported by visualsand personal visits to the site. Here, ecologicalencroachment doesn’t equate physical encroachment.There may not be any squatters setting up homes in thepark, however, the ecological encroachment brought on bythe massive land clearance activities adjacent to the parkis testimonial evidence of the ecological destruction takingplace. Although the park and the adjacent 1,200 ha pieceof land are different titles and therefore, belong to differentland owners, however, the basic premise of ecology stillstand and they are all in one system and cannot beconsidered as separate entities.

It has been established that the delicate balance betweenecology and development had been tilted. However, Itmust be acknowledged that there is genuine concern forenvironmental protection and conservation of naturalresources by the Federal government. Malaysia, to itscredit, can boast of its development legislation and policieswhich are highly sensitive to environmental issues.

There was a wave of environmental legislation and policiesfor environmental protection and conservation of naturalresources, even before independence. Land useplanning,, in Peninsular Malaysia is undertaken whollywithin the provision of Town and Country Planning Act(1976), Act 172 and it’s amendments in 1995. Thelegislation provides for a comprehensive framework for theintegrated approach to planning for the use, developmentand conservation of land and related resources.

The Act was further amended in 1995 to take into accountmatters such as the preservation of natural topography,preservation of trees, the creation of open space andprovision for EIA as a tool for development control. Thegovernment has also drawn up guidelines for DevelopmentProposal Report, Tree Preservation Order, Protection ofNatural Topography and Conservation of Historical Areas.

Malaysia’s land policies are environmentally sensitive butimplementation needs to be tightened. Clearly there is adisparity between good intention of the Federal andState governments and bad practice by the variousgovernment agencies and the people with authority.

The question to be asked is how to incorporate theecological framework into the big sphere of politics ofdevelopment? To be able to incorporate ecologicalframework into the existing sphere, we first need tocomprehend the complexities of local politics, the degreeof societal consensus about planning issues, the capacityand commitment of the staff and leadership of localcouncils and other authorities, the interaction andenforcement style between developers and planningagencies and least not, the genuine commitment by thepolicy makers to place ecological considerations as aprime determinant in the development process.

The ecological framework calls for an integration betweenthe built environment disciplines with the natural sciencedisciplines. The built environment professionals such asarchitects, urban planners, landscape architects, landsurveyors and civil engineers; and other alliedprofessionals and the natural scientists like ecologists,botanists, zoologist and geologists should have thecommon intention and share the responsibility to heal theailing environment. They can then merge their intellectualand professional know how into a more holistic approachto development.

The natural science disciplines are especially valuablebecause it explains the carrying and loading capacity orthe limit of each land resources and it provides the builtenvironment professionals with the understanding of thelimit of the land for the proposed uses. They can aid in ourunderstanding of environmental stresses from global tolocal levels and in the selection of land uses mostcompatible with the environment.

The expertise of the natural scientists should be tapped atthe early preliminary stage namely, the technical planningstage of development. This involves environmentalinventories and analysis of the soil types, plantassociations, microclimates, floodplains, land uses, waterfeatures, slopes as well as wetlands, valued habitats, andrare and endangered species. It also includesassessments of impacts that proposed land uses mayhave on the environment by use of quantitative andscientific methods which are more objective and notintuition-based. The ecological sensitivity of land must bemade the prime determinants in evaluating the suitability ofproposed development during decision-making process.

Presently, we do have Environmental Impact Assessmentreport that is used as a planning tool for the authorities toevaluate proposed developments. However there aremany loopholes in the assessment itself whereby detailedand comprehensive ecosystem assessment where thebiotic components including plants, animals andmicroorganisms are lacking. Again the question ofexpertise, resources and commitment has affected theagency’s capacity to implement the policy.

Last but not least, quality of life is maintained andsustained when man can live in perfect harmony with theMother Nature, when he is willing and able to take care ofthe environment, which will in turn take care of him. Seenfrom this perspective, have we maintained our quality oflife and have we taken care of our environment or have webecome Mother Nature’s worst enemy?

Nik Hanita bte Nik MohamadA regular subscriber to New Straits Times and ecologistwho lectures in the Department of Landscape Architecture,Universiti Teknologi MARA. The writer can be contacted atnhanita@salam.uitm.edu.my

BERITA PERANCANG

FEATURE 15

Land planning system was very much influenced byengineering and architectural factors to suit the problemsand meet the demands of the needs of urban planninginitially.1 However, with the progress of the society, thecentral role of the land planning process started to change,as it became more and more complex in nature. This wasperhaps due to the intensity of a certain developmentactivity that required determining issues relating tolocation, size and patterns of land utilisation.2

The Town and Country Planning Act 1976 provides that thelocal planning authority must consider measures for theimprovement of the environment and the management oftraffic.3 The local planning authority is also required to haveregard to the existing policies in respect of environmentalprotection of the state and the nation.4 The publicparticipation avenues in the planning process provideopportunity for the public to ensure incorporation ofenvironmental protection measures.5 This is achieved byensuring that the report of survey undertaken by the localplanning authority is publicised. The local planningauthority is required to consider every representationmade, and incorporate the same into the plan, if theyreflect the aspiration of the community and good planningprinciples. Further, the local planning authority in preparingthe detailed planning schemes or layout plans follow aseries of planning standards and design guidelines suchas public open spaces provision, car parking space, bufferzones and greening of development sites. Thesestandards are aimed at creating a convenient, safe andpleasant urban environment with adequate communityfacilities and public utilities. This shows the extent to whichsound land use planning and the environment is givenpriority by the Malaysian government.

Planning law can assume an important role in deliveringenvironmental protection as it is primarily concerned withthe orderly management of change, which isfundamentally political in nature, providing a frameworkwithin which various issues can be weighed against eachother.6 Since land use planning may undoubtedly touch onnumerous aspects of human life, it goes without sayingthat such control and management of the land would beexpected to reflect not only the socio-economic aspirationsof the community but also to ensure that societal, ethicaland moral aspects of land utilisation are not neglected. Therole of the planning authority is, therefore, to provide a

general, though calculated, framework within whichvarious socio-economic as well as political issues andvalues could be balanced. The local planning authorityupon which the planning powers are vested is an electedbody where ultimate power is with elected members andtherefore, has greater legitimacy in terms of making abalanced policy decision to allow or refuse a development.It must be mentioned at the outset that the planning systemis not and cannot be the only method to protect theenvironment. However, no one can disagree with the factthat the process can assume an important role inpromoting environmental protection wherein informationrelating to environmental impacts of a development can beconsidered in the planning decision making process. Thissystem has contributed significantly to the protection andenhancement of the built environment of all towns andvillages throughout Malaysia.7

An organised land use system also can offer opportunitiesto anticipate and forestall environmental harm by refusingdevelopment consent or by separating incompatible landuses. This necessarily leads us to the fact that the landplanning system is principally a system of anticipatorycontrol of various land use patterns whereby the controllingauthority will not grant any approval for a developmentactivity if adverse impact on the surrounding environmentis envisaged.8 However, the extent to which planningcontrols can be used to intervene further to preventenvironmental harm remain limited as the land planningprocess itself is not always able to assess the impact ofplanning activity on the environment as well as on theprobable victims of such activity since it is mainlyconcerned with location and siting of a developmentproject. This is because planning law is reactive andmanagerial rather than protective.9 Thus, most countries,including Malaysia, have adopted the new perspective oftown planning which encompasses all the disciplinesmentioned above in order to develop a sustainabledevelopment system, which will be able to meet both thedemands for comfortable human habitation as well asenvironmental conservation.10

* Assistant Professor, Public Law Department, Ahmad IbrahimKulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University, Malaysia LL.B(Hons.) (IIUM); Master in Comparative Laws (IIUM); Ph.D (UWA,UK); Advocate and Solicitor, High Court of Malaya.

1 Goh, B.L., "Import of Urban Planning into Malaysia" in UrbanPlanning in Malaysia, History Assumptions and Issues, (PetalingJaya Malaysia, Tempo Publishing,1991) Chapter Three generally.

2 Bell, S.& McGillivray, D., Ball & Bell on Environmental Law,5th.ed.(Great Britain, Blackstone Press Ltd., 2000) p.293; Forgeneral discussion on aspects of the role of the planning law inpromoting environmental protection see McEldowney,J.F.&McEldowney, S.,Environment and the Law, (UK, Longman,1997) p.103; Aspects of Britain - Planning, (London, HMSOPublications Centre, 1992) p.1; Wolf, S. and White, E.,Environmental Law, (Great Britain, Cavendish Publishing Ltd.,1995)

at p.334. Franklin, D., et.al., Pollution in the UK.,(London, Sweetand Maxwell, 1995) p.3.

3 S 8(3)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976.4 S 8(4)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976.5 S 9(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976.6 Ibid.7 Zainuddin Mohammed, “Key Issues in Environmental Planning in

Malaysia,” Federal Department of Town and Country Planning,Ministry of Housing and Local Government, (Unpublished, 1995) p.1.

8 Kadouf, H.A., & Ainul Jaria Maidin, “Theory and Practice in LandUse Planning in Malaysia: An Overview,” paper presented at theNational Seminar on, “The Legal Regime of Sustainable Land Useand Environmental Development: Policies and Trends,” 9th August2003, Banquet Hall International Islamic University, Malaysia.

9 Hughes, D., Environmental Law, (UK, Butterworths, 1996) at p.151. 10 Ibid.

LAND USE PLANNING ANDENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONIN MALAYSIA

by Ainul Jaria Bt. Maidin*

Dr. Ainul Jaria Maidin is an Assistant Professor in Public LawDepartment of Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International

Islamic University and an Advocate & Solicitor, High Court ofMalaya. She can be contacted at ainulj@iiu.edu.my.

BERITA PERANCANG

JUNE 2005

3 Majlis Bandaraya Melaka - Persembahan Kebudayaan SempenaMinggu Kebudayaan Melaka - Jiangsu Venue : Auditorium TamanBudaya. Time : 8.00 mlm

7 JPBD - Mesyuarat Jawantankuasa Peyelarasan Hari PerancanganBandar Sedunia bil 2/2005 Venue : Bilik Mesyrt Tanjung. Time : 9.30 pg

8 BIM - Publication, Information & Comm. Committee Meeting2004/2005 Venue : BIM Board Room. Time : 5.00 pm

10 BIM - Finance Working Committee Meeting (1)/2004/2005 Venue : Board Room BIM. Time : 5.30 pm - 6.30 pm

13 PAM - Design in American Oak Venue : Hilton Kuala Lumpur.

16 JPBD (HQ) - Ceramah Petunjuk Pembagunan Mampan bagiMenyelaras Pelan Pembagunan oleh Emeritus Prof Dr Peter J.Peterson. Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat, Tingkat 18, JPBD Selangor.

21 ISM - Opening Ceremony of the 7th Surveyor’s Congress Venue : Selangor 1 & 2, Sheraton Subang. Time : 9.00 am

22 BIPC - Building Industry President’s Council Meeting Venue REHDA Secretariat. Time : 2.30 pm

22-23 FCIC - International Symposium on Leveraging the Latest ICTTechniques in Enhancing the Competitiveness of Consulting Firms Venue : Putrajaya International Convention Center

23 JPBD - Mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Pakar Kajian Garis PanduanPengangkutan Mapan Dalam Konteks Guna Tanah Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat Tanjung. Time : 2.15 ptg

25 PAM - CPD Seminar 2005, Construction Procument ManagementSystem and the Architects Venue : PAM Southern Chapter.

25 PAM - TAK Projects, A Board Perspective- PAM CPD_Venue : Function Room, PAM Centre. Time : 10 am - 12.30 pm

25 INTAN - INTAN EXECUTIVE TALK- Integrity, Ethics and Morality Venue : Dewan Sri Baiduri. Time 10.00 pg - 12.00 tgh

29 PSDC - Seminar on ‘Presentation Skills for Professionals - ClinchingContracts Via Effective Presentations’ Venue : Function Room 1,Level 4, PNB Darby Park. Time : 8.15 am - 5 pm

29 BIM - Board of Management Meeting Venue : Board Room BIM. Time : 5.30 pm - 7.30 pm

JULY

1 JPBD - Majlis Perasmian Seranta & Bantahan Awam Venue : Dewan Perdana, Hotel Grand Blue Wave. Time 9.30 pagi

2 PAM - Digital Surveillance Today, the Present, the Future and theCapabilities it offers Venue : PAM Centre. Time 9.00 am - 12.30 pm

4 BIM - Meeting for Editorial Board of Professional Bulletin 3rd Quarter 2005 Venue : BIM Secretariat, Meeting Room. Time : 5.00 pm

5-6 REHDA - National Real Estate Convention 2005 Venue Nikko Hotel Kuala Lumpur. Time : 9.00 am

7 Jabatan Alam Sekitar - Penganugerahan ‘Bandar Lestari- AnugerahAlam Sekitar’ 2003/2004’ Venue : Hotel Marriot, Putrajaya.

9 UMNO _ Konvesyen Melayu Bandar Venue : Hotel Grand Blue Wave, Shah Alam. Time : 8.00 pagi

13 JPBD - Mesyuarat Pertandingan Kejohanan Liga Bowling 10 Pin MIP2005 Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat Melati (Ibu Pejabat JPBD). Time 3.00 pm

14 PSDC - Meeting on Goals and Service Tax with Professional Venue : PSDC Board Room.

16 JPBD - Pertandingan Kejohanan Liga Bowling 10 Pin dan Bowling VIPMIP 2005 Venue : Level 3, Golden Ten Pin Bowl. Time : 4.00 ptg

23 BIM - Professional Evening with Dinner Venue : Legend Hotel.BIM - 32nd Annual General Meeting 2004/2005 Venue : Meeting Room, Legend Hotel.

25-30 INTAN - Kursus Kepimpinan dan Pengurusan Organisasi Venue :INTAN Bukit Kiara, Kuala Lumpur. Time : 8.30 am

24-26 JPBD - Mesyuarat Pegawai Kanan JPBD Semenanjung Malaysia Kalike-19 Venue : Pulau Pinang

25 JPBD - Majlis Pelancaran Rancangan Fizikal Negara Venue : Shangri-La Hotel, Pulau Pinang. Time : 9.00 pagi - 1.00 ptg

26 JPBD - Pelaksanaan Tech - In E-Agenda 21 Selangor Venue : MIMOS Berhad. Time : 2.30 ptg - 4.30 ptg

27 INTAN -INTAN Executive Talk (The Malaysian Economy : LookingAhead) Venue : Dewan Bankuet 1. Time : 2.30 ptg - 4.30 ptg

28 PSDC - Tea Talk Credit Insurance - for Export of Professional Services Venue : Bilik Gerakan, Level 6. Time : 3.00 pm - 5.00 pm

30 MIP - 33rd Annual general Meeting Venue : Sheraton Hotel Subang.

27 Veterinary Association M’sia - VAM Annual and 17th Congress Dinner Venue : Palm Garden Hotel, Putrajaya. Time : 7.30 pm

AUGUST

2-3 MDTCA - National Consumer Convention Venue : Istana Hotel.

3 JPBD - Majlis Dialog Draf Rancangan Struktur Negeri Selangor 2020 Venue : Classic Ballroom, Holiday Villa Subang. Time : 9.0 am

9 Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi - Mesy Membincangkan Deraf AlamBina Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat, Aras 4. Time : 2.30 ptg

11 ACEM - Seminar on Special Structures Venue : Equatorial Hotel

11 BIM _ Meeting of the Board of Management Venue : Boardroom, BIM Secretariat. Time : 5.30 pm - 6.30 pm

12 IIUM - Public Lecture “History of Islamic Capital Market” Venue : IIUM. Time : 9.00 am - 12.30 pm

12-13 PAM - The Unparalleled Eye Celebrating the Singular Vision Venue : Nikko Hotel. Time : 8.00 pm

12 MIP - 1st Council Meeting 2005/2007 Venue : MIP Secretariat.

15 JPBD - Mesyuarat JK Penyelarasan Hari Perancangan BandarSedunia Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat Tingkat 20. Time : 2.30pm

17 DBKL - Majlis Penyerahan Jalur Gemilang Venue : Ruang Legar Bangunan DBKL. Time : 8.30 pm

18 UKM - Majlis Syarahan Pemikiran BangiVenue : Bilik Senat, UKM Bangi. Time : 10.30 am

22-23 UPM - National Workshop on Tsunami & Earthquake HazardMitigation Venue : Shangri-La Hotel Penang. Time : 9.00 am

22 MIP - Seminar on Sustainable Development Towards Energy - EfficientTownships Venue : Holiday Villa Subang Time : 9.00 am

23 Jabatan Alam Sekitar - Persidangan Wanita dan Alam Sekitar 2005 Venue : Bangunan Puspanitapuri Time 8.15 am - 5.00 pm

24 - 26 Persatuan Pengurusan Kompleks (PKK) M’sia - Asian Convention ofShopping Centres 2005 Venue : Sunway Lagoon Resort Hotel.

25 - 26 JKPTG - Kajian Berkumpulan Penggubalan Dasar Tanah Negara Venue : Royal Adelphi. Time : 8.30 am

25 PSDC - Seminar on Financial Literacy for Non- Finance Professional Venue PNB Darby Park. Time : 8.30 am - 5.00 pm

29 BIM - Meeting for Publication, Information & Communication Committee 2005/2006 Venue : BIM Secretariat. Time : 5.00 pm

30 Kerajaan M;sia - Perayaan Ambang Merdeka Venue Dataran Merdeka. Time : 9.00 pm

SEPTEMBER

1 BIM _ Meeting of the Board of Management Venue : Secretariat BIM. Time : 530 pm - 7.30 pm

3- PAM - CPD Seminar 2005 (Housing Development Act (Control and Licensing) Venue : PAM Centre. Time 9.00 am - 12.30 pm

3 PAM - Paints, Paints Problems Venue : Sarawak Chamber Crown Plaza Hotel. Time : 9.00 am - 5.30 pm

5-9 UPM - Value Engineering Training Workshop Venue : Shangri-La Hotel Putrajaya

8 DBKL - Pelan Tempatan Kuala Lumpur Venue : Dewan Megapuri.

8 PSDC - Merketing Professional Services Seminar Venue : PWTC.

5 JPBD - Mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Teknikal Venue : Dewan Sri Endah, Putrajaya. Time : 9.00 pg - 5.00 ptg

10 PAM - Commercial Refrigeration Cooling Technology : The Application, Monitoring & Controlling System Venue : PAM Centre.

17 PAM - Historical Building Conservation, Treatment and its Applicationto Current Construction Venue : PAM Sarawak Chapter.

11-14 USM - 8th International Asian Planning School Association (APSA) Venue : Grand Plaza Park Royal. Time : 9.30 pm

12-13 CIBD - Intregrity Forum on Construction Sector Venue : Institute of Integrity, Malaysia

12 BIM - Meeting for Editorial Board of Professional BulletinVenue : BIM Secretariat. Time : 5.00 pm

15 Jabatan Landskap Negara - Prog Menanam Pokok Bunga Raya Venue : Taman Botani, Putrajaya

CALENDAR OF EVENTS16

BERITA PERANCANG

15-16 CIBD - International Construction Conference AnnualDinner Venue ; KL Convention Centre. Time : 9.0 am

16 REHDA - 35th Anniversary Dinner Venue : GrandPutrajaya Ballroom, Putrajaya Marriott Hotel. :7pm

17 PAM - Annual Dinner 2005 Venue : GrandBallroom, KL Convention Centre. Time 7.30 pm

18-22 INTA - 1st Biennialon Urban and RegionalDevelopment, Morocco Venue : Tangiet - Tetuan Morocco

19-20 EAROPH - Earoph Regional Seminar Venue : Jogjakarta, Indonesia

20 PSDC - 1st National Advising Panel Meeting 2005Venue : Bilik Gerakan, Kem Kerja Raya. Time 2.30 pm - 5.00 pm

20-21 UTM - Seminar Kebangsaan Perancangan Bandar & Wilayah ke 23 Venue : UTM Skudai. Time : 9.00 am

22-MIP - One Day Planning Seminar - The Essentials of a Project Manager Venue : Hotel Sri Petaling. Time 9.00 am

22 PSDC - Seminar on Value Management & Value Engineering Venue : Function Room 2, Level 4, PNB Darby Park.

23 REHDA - MAPEX 2005 Venue : Mid Valley Exhibition Centre. Time : 11.00 am

24 MIP (Northern Branch) Seminar ‘Planning Approval’Venue : The Gurney Resort Hotel, Penang. Time 2.30 pm

23-24 Malaysia Crime Prevention Foundation - Persidangan Pencegahan Jenayah Peringkat Kebangsaan Tahun 2005 Venue : Ballroom, Crown Princess Hotel. Time 9.00 am -5.00 pm

26 JPBD - Export Talk (MASMA) Isu Berkaitan Dgn Pengairan & Saliran &Perlaksanaan MASMA Venue : Dewan KR Soma, Wisma Tun Sambanthan. Time 8.00 am - 1.00 pm

28 ACEM - Fidic Contracts Training Seminar Venue : Equatorial Hotel

29- Jabatan Alam Sekitar - Program Hari Bersama Pelanggan Venue : Aras Lobi, Jab Alam Sekitar, Putrajaya.

OCTOBER

1 UMNO - Seminar Minda Merdeka Venue : Dewan Tun Razak PWTC.

3 Earoph - World Habitat Day Conference Venue : Berjaya Times Square Hotel & Convention Centre, K Lumpur

3 PSDC - Tea Talk The Role of Professional Bodies in incalculating GoodCorporate Governance Venue : Board Room, PSDC.

6 PSDC - Meeting on National Professional Services Conference 2005 Venue : Board Room PSDC. Time : 2.30 pm

18 MACRO STRUCTURE - RFN (Taklimat & Perbincangan, Perlaksanaan RFN) Venue : Hotel Sri Petaling. Time: 8.30 am - 1.00 pm

20-21 Asian Strategy & Leadership Institute - National Property & HousingConference 2005 Venue : Sunway Lagoon Resort Hotel. Time : 9.00 am

11 Jabatan Landskap Negara - Mesyuarat Pakar Dasar Landskap Negara Venue : Bilik Gerakan Tingkat 7, KPKT

13 INTAN - Ceramah ‘INTAN Executive Talk’ Negotiation in Global Arena : Lessons from Past Experiences Venue : Dewan Sri Baiduri

19 Kementerian Perumahan & Kerajaan Tempatan - Majlis Berbuka PuasaVenue : Bunga Rooms. Hotel Pan Pacific. Time : 6.30 pm

18 JPBD - Mesy Jawatankuasa Penyelarasan Hari Perancang BandarSedunia Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat Melati. Time : 9.00 am

25 JPBD - Mesy Jawankuasa Peyelarasan Hari Perancang Bandar Venue : Bilik Mesyuarat Perancangan Wilayah Tingkat 22

28 JPBD- Wawancara KP dan Presiden MIPVenue : Bilik Mesyuarat Tingkat 20, PPKL. Time : 9.30 am

12-13 British Council - Education UK 2005 Postgraduate FairVenue : Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre. Time : 1.00 pm - 7.00 pm

15-16 PSDC - National Professional Services Conference 2005Venue : The Legend Hotel, KL

23 PSDC - Tea Talk : Tax Incentives And Filing Tax Returns For Export of Professional Services Venue : Bilik Gerakan, Level 6, Kompleks Kerja Raya. Time : 4.00 pm

28 Jabatan Alam Sekitar - Majlis Pelancaran Sambutan Minggu Alam Sekitar Malaysia 2005 (Peringkat Kebangsaan)Venue : Padang MPK 1, Jalan Mahkota, Pahang. Time : 8.30 am

28 MTSF - 12th Prize Presentation Ceremony Venue : Nikko Hotel.

29-30 Asian Strategy & Leadership - 2nd National Utilities Summit 2005Venue : Carlton Conference Centre, Jalan Imbi, KL

World Town Planning Dayis being celebrated on 8November each year inmany countries, includingMalaysia. Founded in 1949by the late ProfessorCarlos Maria della Paoleraof the University ofBuenos Aires, the WorldTown Planning Daycelebration aims atadvancing public andprofessional interest inplanning, both locally andoverseas.

The celebration of World Town Planning Day in Malaysiabegan in 1988. Each year, the event is being celebratedwith a different theme that reflects the current issues intown planning. This year, the theme is ‘PLANNINGTOWARDS LIVEABLE CITIES’.

In conjunction with World Town Planning Day 2005, anational convention will be held at the Renaissance KualaLumpur Hotel from 17th to 18th of November. Jointlyorganised by the Department of Town and CountryPlanning Peninsular Malaysia, Persatuan PegawaiPerancang Bandar dan Desa Malaysia, and MalaysianInstitute of Planners, the two-day convention includesevents such as presentation of working papers bydistinguished speakers from local and abroad, and a dinnerwith the YB Minister of Housing and Local Government.

For further information on the Convention, contact theSecretariat at the Department of Town and CountryPlanning Peninsular Malaysia.

Tentative Programme16/11/05

2pm-7pm Registration of participants at RenaissanceHotel, KL

17/11/05 (8:45am - 5:00pm)Hari Pertama Konvensyen HPBS 2005 :PLANNING TOWARDS LIVEABLE CITIES

9:00am Arrival of YAB Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi

9.25am Perasmian Sambutan HPBS 2005 by YAB PM Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi

8.00pm Majlis Makan Malam HPBS 2005 bersama YB Menteri Perumahan & Kerajaan Tempatan

18/11/05 (8:30am - 12:30pm)Hari Kedua Konvensyen HPBS 2005 :PLANNING TOWARDS LIVEABLE CITIES

12.20pm Upacara Penutup oleh YB Menteri Perumahan & Kerajaan Tempatan

World TownPlanning Day 2005by Muhammad FarisAbdullah

CALENDAR OF EVENTS 17

BERITA PERANCANG

ROUND-UP18

The Human Development Index – going beyond income

The human development index (HDI) focuses on three measurable dimensions of human development: living a long and healthy life,being educated and having a decent standard of living. Thus it combines measures of life expectancy, school enrolment, literacy andincome to allow a broader view of a country’s development than does income alone.

Although the HDI is a useful starting point, it is important to remember that the concept of human development is much broader and morecomplex than any summary measure can capture, even when supplemented by other indices. The HDI is not a comprehensive measure.It does not include important aspects of human development, notably the ability to participate in the decisions that affect one’s life and toenjoy the respect of others in the community.

It is also important to note that the HDI is constructed using data from international sources. Sometimes more up-to-date data areavailable nationally, and sometimes there are slight differences in definitions between international and national data. For these and otherreasons, discrepancies with national sources may occur.

On 8 September 2005, UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) had launched UNDP’s Human DevelopmentReport 2005: “International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an equal world”. It was attended bymore than 200 invited guests and launched by YB. Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, the Minister in the Prime Minister’sDepartment at Le Meridian Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. Some of the important contents of the report include the release ofhuman development index by states in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur is the highest with 0.861 and followed by Pulau Pinang(0.828), Selangor (0.817), Terengganu (0.807) and Melaka (0.804). The detail report is as follows :

Progress and Challenges of Human Development in Malaysia (by state)Reports on trends and patterns in key dimensions of human development are presented below for eachof Malaysia's 13 states. Each report in graphic format has been prepared by UNDP using officialnational data sources and includes demographic, economic, social, health and environmentalvariables.

Reports are currently available for the nine states of Kedah, Kelantan, Melaka, Perak, Pulau Pinang,Selangor, Terengganu, Johor, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang and Sarawak. Those for other states are beingprepared. For further information, contact registry.my@undp.org

For details visit : www.undp.org.my/Human_development_Malaysia.asp

UNITED NATIONS HUMANDEVELOPMENT REPORT 2005

Country Fact Sheets

MALAYSIA

HDI value2003

HDI rank2003

(177 countries)

GDP per capita rank2003

(177 countries)

GDP per capita (PPPUS$) rank

minusHDI rank*

GDP percapita value(PPP US$)

2003

Malaysia 61 58 -3 9,512 0.796Best performer in East Asia & the Pacific(Hong Kong, China (SAR)) 22 17 -5 27,179 0.916Worst performer in East Asia & the Pacific(Timor-Leste) 140 162 22 .. 0.513

Malaysia is ranked 61st in the 2005 Human Development Report, with an HDI value of 0.796.Hong Kong, China (SAR) ranks first in the region, with a value of 0.916.

* higher means better on HDI

BERITA PERANCANG

ROUND-UP 19

Life expectancy at birth (years)2003

Combined primary, secondaryand tertiary gross enrolment ratio (%)

2002/2003

GDP per capita(PPP US$)

2003

1. Japan (82.0) 2. Hong Kong, China (SAR) (81.6) 3. Iceland (80.7) 55. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (73.6) 56. Syrian Arab Republic (73.3) 57. Tunisia (73.3) 58. Malaysia (73.2) 177. Swaziland (32.5)

1. United Kingdom (123) 2. Australia (116) 3. Belgium (114) 98. Mauritius (71) 99. Georgia (71) 100. Colombia (71) 101. Malaysia (71) 173. Niger (21)

1. Luxembourg (62,298) 2. Ireland (37,738) 3. Norway (37,670) 55. Latvia (10,270) 56. Seychelles (10,232) 57. Costa Rica (9,606) 58. Malaysia (9,512) 170. Sierra Leone (548)

Human poverty in Malaysia : focusing on the most deprived in multiple dimensions of poverty

The HDI measures the average progress of a country in human development. Human Development Report 1997introduced the human poverty index (HPI), which focuses on the proportion of people below a threshold level in basicdimensions of human development - living a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard ofliving, much as the poverty headcount measures the proportion of people below a certain income level. The HPI-1measures human poverty in developing countries.

The HPI-1 value for Malaysia, 8.9%, ranks 16th among 103 developing countries for which the index has been calculated.

HPI-1 rank HP-1value(103 countries) (%)

Malaysia 16 8.9 Best performer in East Asia & the Pacific (Singapore) 6 6.3Worst performer in East Asia & the Pacific (Cambodia) 81 41.3Best performer in the world (Uruguay) 1 3.6Worst performer in the world (Niger) 103 64.4

Building the capabilities of womenGDI rank GDI value HDI rank HDI value

(140 countries) minusGDI rank

Malaysia 50 0.791 0 0.796 Best performer in East Asia & the Pacific (Hong Kong, China (SAR)) 22 0.912 0 0.916 Worst performer in East Asia & the Pacific (Papua New Guinea) 103 0.518 2 0.523 Best performer in the world (Norway) 1 0.960 0 0.963 Worst performer in the world (Niger) 140 0.271 2 0.281

The HDI measures average achievements in a country, but it does not incorporate the degree of gender imbalance inthese achievements. The gender-related development index (GDI), introduced in Human Development Report 1995,measures achievements in the same dimensions using the same indicators as the HDI but captures inequalities inachievement between women and men. It is simply the HDI adjusted downward for gender inequality. The greater thegender disparity in basic human development, the lower is a country's GDI relative to its HDI.• The GDI value for Malaysia ranks 50th, with a value of 0.791. The gender empowerment measure (GEM) reveals whether women take an active part in economic and political life. Itfocuses on gender inequality in key areas of economic and political participation and decision-making. It tracks the shareof seats in parliament held by women; of female legislators, senior officials and managers; and of female professional andtechnical workers- and the gender disparity in earned income, reflecting economic independence. Differing from the GDI,the GEM exposes inequality in opportunities in selected areas. • The GEM value for Malaysia ranks 51st. • Women hold 13.1% of parliamentary seats, and make up 40% of professional and technical workers. 23% ofadministrators and managers are women.

1. Rwanda (45.3) 2. Sweden (45.3) 3. Norway (38.2) 82. Antigua & Barbuda (13.9) 83. Jamaica (13.6) 84. Gambia (13.2) 85. Malaysia (13.1) 162. Yemen (0.3)

1. Philippines (58.1) 2. Fiji (50.6) 3. Tanzania, U. Rep. of (49.1) 62. Mexico (25.3) 63. Swaziland (24.1) 64. Chile (23.8) 65. Malaysia (23.2) 85. Pakistan (2.4)

1. Barbados (71.3) 2. Lithuania (69.7) 3. Estonia (69.2) 63. Costa Rica (40.5) 64. Mexico (40.3) 65. Maldives (40.2) 66. Malaysia (39.8) 86. Saudi Arabia (6.4)

1. Luxembourg (34,890) 2. Norway (32,272) 3. United States (29,017) 48. South Africa (6,505) 49. Bulgaria (6,212) 50. Mauritius (6,084) 51. Malaysia (6,075) 154.Sierra Leone (325)

1. Kenya (0.93) 2. Switzerland (0.90) 3. Cambodia (0.76) 94. Guinea-Bissau (0.49) 95. Korea, Rep. of (0.48) 96. Cape Verde (0.48) 97. Malaysia (0.47) 154.Oman (0.19)

Seats in parliamentheld by women

(% of total)

Female administrators and managers

(% of total)

Female professional and technical workers

(% of total)

Estimated femaleearned income

(PPP US$)

Ratio of femaleearned income to

male earned income

Malaysia in the report Malaysia was mentioned in the report in pages 116, 117, 124, 127, 29, 33, 45, 46, 55, 56, 58 and 59.

BERITA PERANCANG

ROUND-UP20

MIP Council Member, Puan Khairiah Talha, wasinvited to chair one of the eight parallel sessions ofthe first Sustainable Development Conference, in hercapacity as EAROPH Secretary General. The theme“Innovating Cities Across The World” saw 26participating cities from all continents and 26 concretesolutions towards a liveable world being showcasedin the three day deliberations. An exhibition was alsoheld concurrently, in which MPPJ and DBKL alsoparticipated in. The conference was under thepatronage of the United Nations office in Geneva, aswell as produced in collaboration with UN-HABITAT,UNDP, UNEP, ICC, UCLG, WBCSD, WWF and theInternational Congress of Local and RegionalAuthorities of the Council of Europe.

Puan Khairiah chaired the session on SustainableTechnologies focusing on Transport and RegionalPlanning. Four cities, Curitiba, (Brazil), Moscow,(Russia), Zurich (Switzerland) and Kunming (China)shared their cities’ experiences in meetingtransportation issues within their cities, with thecollective aim of making public transportation thepriority in order to achieve sustainable transportationwithin their cities.

In summary, Puan Khairiah, as moderator stated thateach city approached their transportation problemsusing their own innovative approaches, which havebeen based on their own natural resources andcapacities. The more financially capable cities usedmore high-tech solutions (Zurich), whereas the citieswith limited financial resources used their ownlimitations by capitalizing on what is available andthen leveraging on these (Curitiba, Moscow). The citywith limited manpower and technical know how(Kunming) formed smart alliances with Zurich in orderto learn through the transfer of technology and adaptto their city’s needs. Whatever the approaches, theseare but one small step towards achieving the goals ofsustainable transportation. Although, in the words ofProf.Perl, from Simon Fraser University, Vancouver,Canada, there has yet to be one true form ofsustainable transportation. However, all cities shouldat least strive towards the goals of achievingsustainable transportation, which Prof. Perl and theResearch Institute on Sustainable Transport, Canadadefined as one that “allows the basic access needs ofindividuals and society to be met safely and in amanner consistent with human and ecosystem health,and with equity within and between generations”.

The proceedings of the S-Dev Conference can beaccessed on www.s-dev.org

THE S-DEV GENEVA 05 - INTERNATIONALPLATFORM ON SUSTAINABLE URBANDEVELOPMENT 11-13 October 2005

Reported by Khairiah Talha from Geneva

UN’s Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDG)

By 2015 all 189 UN Member Stateshave pledged to the following :

1. ERADICATE EXTREME POVERTY ANDHUNGER• Reduce by half the proportion of people living on

less than a dollar a day• Reduce by half the proportion of people who

suffer from hunger2. ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL PRIMARY

EDUCATION• Ensure that all boys and girls complete a full

course of primary schooling3. PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY AND

EMPOWER WOMEN• Eliminate gender disparity in primary and

secondary education preferably by 2005, and at alllevels by 2015

4. REDUCE CHILD MORTALITY• Reduce by two thirds the mortality rate among

children under five5. IMPROVE MATERNAL HEALTH

• Reduce by three quarters the maternal mortalityratio

6. COMBAT HIV/AIDS, MALARIA AND OTHERDISEASES• Halt and begin to reserve the spread of HIV/AIDS• Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria

and other major diseases7. ENSURE ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY• Integrate the principles of sustainable development

into country policies and programmes; reverse lossof environmental resources

• Reduce by half the proportion of people withoutsustainable access to safe drinking water

• Achieve significant improvement in lives of atleast 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020

8. DEVELOP A GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FORDEVELOPMENT

All goals are measured against baseline year, 1990.More information refer to : www.un.org/millenniumgoals

BERITA PERANCANG

ROUND-UP 21

The 38th EAROPH Executive Council Meeting andRegional Seminar was held over two days in beautifulJogjakarta, Indonesia. The theme “Risk Management inHuman Settlements” has been chosen in light of recentworld events that have caused much disruption andcatastrophe to human settlements and to humankind. Thisseminar also supports the Habitat Agenda that clearlyoutlines the link between human settlements developmentand vulnerability to disasters:

“to promote and encourage all parts of society toparticipate in disaster preparedness and in disasterprevention through activities that build a culture ofprevention” (Habitat Agenda 1966)

The theme is also in line with Target 9 of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDG): “to integrate the principlesof sustainable development into country policies andprogrammes, and reverse the loss of environmentalresources”.

Twenty four papers under six sub-themes were presented.The seminar attracted 190 participants from Japan,Thailand, Malaysia, Korea, Australia and Indonesia. The

papers ranged from preventive measures in facing riskssuch as floods, fires, earthquakes, strong winds, tsunamis,etc., to design measures and reconstruction programmes.Rehabilitation of settlements using systemic assetmanagement was also given focus.

Two technical tours were arranged for participants. Theone which I attended showcased how village communitiescan be encouraged and motivated to help themselves insaving their environment. The first village called KampungSungai Code, was a settlement along a river bank, close tothe city. Here, the villagers cleared up the river so as toavoid floods that annually damage their properties, Fromcleaning the river, the villagers were encouraged to beautifytheir homes through the planting of trees and plants inwhatever limited spaces they had. Footpaths throughoutthe village were very clean and devoid of rubbish. Thevillagers built their own communal baths and washingareas, as well as schools and mosques. The governmentassisted by constructing a concrete embankment for theprotection of the villagers.

The second village called Sukunan was an old settlementwith about 300 houses. This village has become exemplaryin managing its own waste and earning income throughwaste recycling programmes. Initiated by a young mannamed Iswanto, who graduated in Biology, the village has,for 5 years, separated all wastes. Organic waste are storedin large clay pots placed in the compound of every home.These are used as fertilizers for the fruit trees andvegetation. Plastic, newspapers and glass were all recycledand the income generated has been put back into thevillage fund to further improve the road system, watersupply and recreational facilities. Used oil drums werecollected and painted by village youths to collect separatedwaste items. These drums are so popular that they aredemanded by other villages. The sale price of the drums is3 times the cost of procuring and producing attractive wasteb i n s .W a s t erecyc l ingh a sbecome ah i g h l ysuccessfula n dluc ra t i vebus inessfor peoplein thisvillage.

“RISK MANAGEMENT INHUMAN SETTLEMENTS” - EAROPH Regional Seminar,Jogjakarta,19th & 20th September 2005

Reported by Khairiah Talha

Three crucial points that underlie the papers weresummarized as follows:

1. THERE MUST BE AN INTEGRATION OF SCIENCEAND LOCAL WISDOM :Science formulates or creates the tools (such as GIS,planning policies - zoning plans, etc.; rubber bearingtechnologies in buildings, Systemic Asset Management),but ALL these must be formulated according to localhabitat and conditions, and especially important is theparticipation of the local people.

2. FOR ANY PROJECTS AND PROGRAMMES ,THERE MUST BE AWARENESS AMONGST ALLINVOLVED, ESPECIALLY AMONGST THE LOCALCOMMUNITY :There must exist the trust between the local people andthe professionals, authorities and all parties involved inpre or post disaster efforts. There must be a commonperception of risks at local and regional levels as it hasbeen found that perceptions of risks differ from localcommunities and experts. The role of universities andresearchers could be maximized as go betweenamongst the authorities, experts and community.

3. COORDINATION IS VITALTeam work and systematic approach is essential in allpre and post disaster works at local, regional andnational levels. This applies to Policies, programs,budgetary allocation, building codes, etc.

MIP COMMITTEES22YOUNG PLANNERS COMMITTEE

Chairman :Md Nazri Mohd Noordin

Committee Members :Zamri HusinProf Madya Wan Muhamad

YusoffIhsan Zainal MokhtarGhazali OthmanFahmi AliasShamsul Jefri

Objectives• To mobilize young planners / members to be

active members of the Institute• To keep an active register of young

planners• To undertake programs and projects to

enhance intellectual discourse amongplanners / members and professionals onissues and matters that are presentlyrelevant and of concern to them

• To act as a platform for young members togrow in the profession

Target Group• Members below the age of 35• New Corporate members

• Final year university students• All Graduate membersTentative Programmes for 2005-2007i Young Planners register - updates of

database on young membersii 1st Young Planners Forum 2006iii We base - Forum group or blogiv University Graduates / Industrial Attachment

programmes / Mentor programmesv Young Planners Networkvi Monthly talks or colloquium

Hope• Those members who fit the above target

group, please feel free to email your details(name, contact number, address, etc) tothe chairman of the committee atiplanner@streamyx.com. Pleasse indicate YOUNG PLANNERS as thesubject of the email.

• For the first six months, the committee isbasically trying to mobilize young membersand most importantly, update thedatabase.

NoteWe do need volunteers to assist the committeeand some of the programmes.

Md Nazri MohdNoordin

BERITA PERANCANG

23MIP COMMITTEES

1. Members :i. Chairman : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Alias

Abdullah(UIAM/MIP 194/88)

ii. Fixed membersa) Membership Committee

ChairmanProfessor Dr. Mansor b. Ibrahim (UIAM/MIP 273/93)

b) Education and Students AffairsChairmanAssoc. Prof. Wan Mohamed Yusoff b. Abdullah (UiTM/MIP 101/82)

c) Sustainable Planning and Development ChairmanPn. Khairiah bt. Hj. Mohd Talha (MIP 184/86)

iii. Other membersa) Mr. Ishak Ariffin (Private/MIP 239/90)b) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ho Chin Siong (UTM/MIP 141/85)c) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lee Lik Meng (USM/MIP 149/85)d) Dr. Mohd Thalha b. Hj. Alithamby (Private/MIP 99/82)e) Professor Dr. Ismawi Hj Zen (UIAM/MIP 421/99)f) Dr. Mohd Zin Mohamed (Brunei/MIP 457/02)g) Mr. Bong Khin Fah (Sarawak/MIP 478/03)h) Pn. Juwairiyah Ho bt. Abdullah (MIP 453/02)i) Hj. Mokhtar b. Samardi (JPBD Terengganu)j) Dr. Jamalunlaili b. Abdullah (UiTM)k) Mr. Muhammad Faris b. Abdullah

2. Objectives:i. To inculcate and promote research culture among

plannersii. To enhance planning knowledge through research and

development agenda; publication activities; integrationof an updated ICT including Planning Support Systems,modelling and techniques, trainings and talks

iii. To disseminate information related to the currentplanning practices, books, journals, periodicals,dissertations, web sites, guidelines, reports, etc. that havebeen produced by JPBD, universities (local and abroad),research institutes related to environment or buildenvironment, individual researchers and so on to all MIPmembers

iv. To identify and communicate with potential researchgrants holders locally and internationally; and to organisetalks, meetings, workshops and/or conferences fornetworking, collaborating (partnership) and matchingpurposes.

v. To seek research grants for improving and enhancingcurrent planning methodologies in order to improvequality of life and environment.

3. Scope of worksi. To promote the Institute through publications,

communications, networking and any other meansii. To produce MIP newsletter on at least a quarterly basisiii. To undertake all necessary actions in producing the MIP

Journal (i.e. PLANNING MALAYSIA), circulations andpromotions

iv. To produce annually a Planning Directory on membersregistered with MIP

v. To produce books on round table discussions,seminars/conferences/talks undertaken by MIP andmatters pertaining to Malaysian planning history,planning practices, planning procedures and guidelines,as well as new planning approaches adopted by theplanners in Malaysia.

4. Tasks and activities :i. “BERITA PERANCANG” Newsletter• 2 or 4 times a year (November 2005, March 2006, June

2006, September 2006, December 2006, March 2007, andJuly 2007)

• Appointment of Chief Editor (proposed Mr. Ishak Ariffin)and it’s Editorial Boards

• Defining new format and contentsii. “PLANNING MALAYSIA” Journal• 1 or 2 times a year (Volume 4 in December 2005, Volume

5 (Special Issues – “Sustainability Planning in ASEAN”) inJune 2006, Volume 6 in December 2006, and Volume 7(Special Issues – “Planning for LiveableEnvironment/Cities”) in July 2007

• Editor-in-Chief (Dr. Alias Abdullah), appointment of Editor-in-Chief for special issues (Proposed Dr. Lee Lik Meng andDr. Ho Chin Siong) and Editorial Boards

iii. Books and proceedings• 2 books

iv. Workshops, discussion and talks to promote researchnetworks

• 1 research workshop titled “Agenda for PlanningResearch”

• 1 research training (topic related to planning researchmethodology and application of SPSS in planninganalysis)

v. Library or resource centre• Establishing list of references, books, etc• Establishing Planning Resource Centre (after moving to

the new premise and propose a donation for establishingthe centre)

vi. Research grants and funding agencies• Listing the sources from internet sites and networking (e.g.

EU, UNESCO, Japan Foundation, Sumitomo grants)• Discussion and meeting with all potential funding

agencies• Organising talks and workshops on the grants• Putting resources and expertise to conduct research

works if funds granted• Publishing the reports and findings

5. Meetings• planning to have an average of 6 times meeting per

session.

6. Editorial Board Members :A) Berita Perancang :i. Advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Alias Abdullahii. Editor-in-Chief:a) Mr. Ishak Ariffiniii. Members: b) Assoc. Prof. Wan Mohamed Yusoff b.

Abdullahc) Pn. Khairiah bt. Hj. Mohd Talhad) Dr. Mohd Zin Mohamede) Mr. Bong Khin Fahf) Pn. Juwairiyah Ho bt. Abdullahg) Hj. Mokhtar b. Samardih) Mr. Muhammad Faris b. Abdullah

B) Planning Malaysia Journal:i. Advisor: Pn. Norliza bt. Hashimii. Editor-in-Chief:a) Assoc. Prof. Dr Alias Abdullahiii. Members: b) Professor Dr. Mansor b. Ibrahim

c) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ho Chin Siongd) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lee Lik Menge) Dr. Mohd Thalha b. Hj. Alithambyf) Professor Dr. Ismawi Hj Zeng) Dr. Jamalunlaili b. Abdullah

RESEARCH AND PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE (RPC)

Assoc. Prof. Dr. AliasAbdullah

CAMPUS NEWS - UiTM24

The Department of Town and Regional Planning atUniversiti Teknologi MARA is one of the ten departments inthe Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying. It isone of the pioneer departments in the Faculty.

The department was established in July 1969 with anenrolment of 16 students offering the Diploma in Town andCountry Planning (later changed to Diploma in Town andRegional Planning). In 1972, a two year Certificate in Townand Country Planning was introduced followed by theAdvanced Diploma in Town and Regional Planning in 1975(later renamed Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning(Honours) ). A Master and Ph.D. research programs werefirst offered in 1996. The department is one of the oldestplanning departments in the country and the only one thatoffers all five level of programs, i.e. Certificate, Diploma,Bachelor, Master and Ph.D. Its Bachelor programs caterfor full and part-time students (Off Campus Program) andaccept students from Diploma levels as well as STPM andMatriculations. The Department created history when itproduced the first Ph.D. of UiTM in 2000 – Dr. DasimahOmar who is also one of the senior Associate Professorsin the department.

The Department is the largest planning department inMalaysia boasting of 54 full time academicians and over700 students. 27 of the academic staff are in Shah Alamwhile the rest are in Sri Iskandar. Eight of the lecturers arePh.D. holders while the rest hold Master degrees. Inaddition, eleven staff are fellows of corporate members ofMalaysian Institute of Planners. The academic staffcurrently include Vice Chancelor of UNISEL, UiTM BranchCampus Directors, Deputy Dean, Council member ofMBSA and former head of MITRAN. The academic staffare trained locally as well as in the U.K., U.S., Australia,New Zealand, and Europe. Thus, the department canclaim to have the expertise in the academic andprofessional fields as well as having the exposure innational and international planning.

The mission of the department is to produce competentgraduates in the field of town and regional planning at thetechnician, semi-professional and professional levels whoare creative, innovative and sensitive to the environmentthrough integrated and balanced learning, enriched bycontinuous research and development. Since its inception,

the mission of the department has been to provideprofessional education and training to Bumiputeras in thefield of town and regional planning. Thus, the programsoffered are to provide manpower at the technician, semi-professional and professional levels. The main focus of theprogram has bee to produce graduates with strongtechnical knowledge, practical and analytical skills, andprofessional capability. This include the ability to analyze,synthesize and formulate recommendations and solutionsto overcome not only physical problems but also thoserelated to socio-economic aspects of urban and ruralsettlements in Malaysia.

Cuurently, all Certificate and Diploma in Planningprograms are offered at the Sri Iskandar campus while theBachelor, Master and Ph.D. are offered at the Shah Alamcampus. However, Master and Ph.D. by research can alsobe conducted under the supervision of academic staffs ofSri Iskandar.

The Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning at UiTM hasbeen continuously accredited by the MIP as meeting therequirement of professional program. The current five yearaccreditation was conferred in 2002 and will run through2008. Its syllabus follows the recommendations set byMIP while the department’s external board consists osfprofessional planners from the JPBD, local authorities andthe private sector. While the curriculum is modeled afterthe requirement of MIP, the planning department at UiTMis noted for its strength in physical planning and urbandesign. The department plans to enhance its contributionby offering a one and a half year taught Master of UrbanManagement in June 2006.

Although the department is noted for its teachingexcellence, it is also active in research and consultancy.The department was involved with the JPBD in studies thatproduces various planning guidelines such asGarispanduan PErancangan Golongan Kurang Upaya danGarispanduan Perancangan Sususnatur PerumahanOptima, to name a few. In addition, their academic staffshave published several books on planning and theenvironment. Various other studies have been completedand seminar papers presenter at national and internationalseminars.

For further information please logon at www.uitm.edu.myof call Assoc. Prof. Haji Zakaria Ahmad, Head ofDepartment at 03-55444343

Contributed by Jamalunlaili Abdullah

DEPARTMENT OF TOWN ANDREGIONAL PLANNINGFACULTY OF ARCHITURE,PLANNING AND SURVEYINGUNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA, SHAHALAM AND SRI ISKANDAR, PERAK

BERITA PERANCANG

CAMPUS NEWS 25

The 8th International APSA CongressPenang 2005 was held at Grand PlazaParkRoyal Hotel at Batu Ferringhi, Penangon September 11 - 14, 2005. It wasorganised by the School of Housing, Buildingand Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia.MIP was a co-sponsor with a generousfinancial grant to the organisers.

Twenty countries were represented withover 140 participants including 22 planningstudents from South Australia. More than 70full papers were presented including many high quality papers from local academics and researchers from UTM, UPM, MU, UIA,UiTM, USM as well as the Federal Town and Country Planning Department. The full papers can be accessed viahttp://www.apsa2005.net/.

APSA currently has 24 Full Members and Malaysia is represented by UTM and USM while UIA has expressed interest to join. It ishoped that UiTM will follow suit as the association works to promote the planning profession. Membership benefits include discountedfees for attendance at APSA Congresses, free copies of proceedings and of course opportunities for international networking. APSAis working to further improve the quality of its selected papers series with rigorous review criteria and procedures. Papers presentedat its Congresses are the sole source for selection for the Best Paper from Asia for the Dialogues in Urban and Regional Planningproduced by the Global Planning Education Association Network (GPEAN) through the Routledge publisher. GPEAN is aconglomeration of nine planning associations formed after the 1st World Planning Schools Congress in Shanghai in 2001.

The APSA Congress is held biennially. The next Congress will be held in Sri Lanka in 2007 followed by Ahmedabad, India in 2009.APSA is also one of the co-organisers of the forth-coming 2nd World Planning Schools Congress to be held in Mexico City, Mexicofrom July 11 – 17, 2006.

For more information of APSA visit http://www.apsaweb.org/.By Lee Lik Meng

The APSA Executive Committee Members 2005 - 2007From left : Prof. Anthony Yeh, Secretary-General (University of Hong Kong), Prof. Do Hau,

President (Hanoi Architectural University), Prof. Wu Zhiqiang, Past President (Tongji University,Shanghai), Prof. Yukio Nishimura, Committee Member (Tokyo University),

Plnr K.D. Fernando, Committee Member (University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka) and Assoc. Prof. Lee Lik Meng, Vice-President (Universiti Sains Malaysia).

Not in picture, Prof. Utpal Sharma, Committee Member (CEPT University, Ahmedabad, India).

Students from the DEPARTMENT OF URBAN & REGIONAL PLANNING, KULLIYYAH OF ARCHITECTURE & ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN,INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA, recently went on an educational trip to Sydney and Canberra, Australia for a weekfrom 4th to 10th September, 2005. This trip was part of students planning education under the course AUP 3253 ComparativePlanning System. Aspects of planning included Transport, Tourism, andnational capital development. In the area of tourism, the students alsovisited a homestay and experienced horse-riding as part of theactivities offered by the organizers.

Students also visited the national capital, Canberra and learned themeaning of low-profile development and the Y-Plan currently utilized bythe National Capital Development Authority (NCDA), for their transportsystem.

Highlights of the visit were two briefings at the Sydney Townhall, on thedevelopment of the city of Sydney and the briefing at Regatta Point,Canberra on the planning and development of the city of Canberra.This was a valuable experience for students to make comparison ofour own Putrajaya.

By Mohd Shamsuddin Zahid Sopian Briefing at the Sydney Townhall

BERITA PERANCANG

26

(KUCHING 24-8-05) It is a great honour for MIPSarawak/Sabah Chapter to have invited Prof. Dr. RichardE. Klosterman, a renounced professor in town and countryplanning from University of Akron, Ohio, USA, to visitKuching City, to give a short briefing to the planningcommunity in the cat city.

The brief session was held at Menara Pelita, Petra Jaya,Kuching, with Prof. Dr. Richard E. Klosterman sharing hisvast experiences in urban modelling and gave a previewfor the new version of What-If Planning Support System.There were about twenty five attendees comprise ofplanners from the private sector and planning officers fromvarious departments including Sarawak State PlanningAuthority, Land and Survey Department, Kuching NorthCity Council, Land Custody and Development Authority.

Prior to the event, Prof. Dr. Richard E. Klosterman made acourtesy visit to the Land and Survey Department’sAssistant Director of Planning, Mr. Lai Hua Lee, and actingDirector of Lands and Surveys, Mr. Sudarsono Osman,and attended a luncheon at well known hotel in the citycentre.

Prof. Dr. Richard E. Klosterman is the founder of a state-of-the-art GIS-based Planning Support System (PSS)called “What-If”. “What-if” is a scenario-based, policy-oriented Planning Support System that uses increasinglyavailable geographic information system (GIS) data tosupport collective decision making. It incorporatesprocedures for conducting land suitability analysis,projecting future land use demands, and allocating theprojected demands to the most suitable locations. It allowsusers to create alternative development scenarios anddetermine the likely impacts of alternate public policychoices on future development patterns. It is a useful toolin plan making.

MIP Sarawak/Sabah Chapter would like to thank Prof. Dr.Richard E. Klosterman for his generosity in sharing ideaswith the local planners. The Institute would also like tothank the Land and Survey Department for hosting theevent and to the International Islamic University ofMalaysia (IIUM) for co-organised the event.

(See pictures on Page 27)

After three previous AGMs, wewent back in time to conductour 1st AGM for the MIPNorthern Branch on the 24thSeptember, Saturday 2.37 pmat the Boardroom II, GurveyHotel, Gurney Drive, Penang.Due to an oversight (a very bigone which other aspiringBranches should learn from),

we finally managed to secure the approval of the Registrarof Societies to set up the branch on 31st June 2005(thanks to the effort of the MIP Council). Hence, the entirehistory of the previous 4 years have now been designated“Pro-Tem”.

A few of the Pro-Tem Committee Members did not seek“re-election” to encourage new blood to come forward to

serve MIP and the community. For the new line-up, seeaccompanying group photo.

And interesting thing happened to the MIP Council

Representative (the Honorary Secretary) on the way from

Kuala Lumpur to Penang. He arrived just as the AGM had

concluded and the group photograph was being taken.

Apparently, he run into some car problems in KL and was

held up by the mechanic. Nevertheless, in appreciation of

his sacrifices and MIP Council’s continued support, MIPNB

presented the Council with a token of appreciation.

In the morning prior to the AGM, a free half-day Planning

Approval Seminar was organised by MIPNB. It was well

attended with 41 participants including 17 Corporate MIP

Members and a few graduate members. A few participants

came from as far as Kedah. Limited seats were also

allocated to PAM and REHDA members. Three papers

were presented by Prof. Abdul Ghani Salleh (Pro-Tem

Branch Chairman), Maimunah Mohd Shariff (Director of

Town Planning, MPPP) and T.K. Lim (a developer with a

masters degree in planning).

The Seminar was followed by a buffet lunch hosted by

MIPNB for all MIP members present.

(See pictures on Page 27)

FORMATION OFMIP NORTHERNBRANCH, AGAIN!

Reported by Lee Lik Meng

NEWS FROM NORTHERN BRANCH & SARAWAK

Yes, now weare really,t r u l y ,a b s o l u t e l ylegal!

WHAT-IF PLANNINGSUPPORT SYSTEMIN KUCHINGA short talk on What-If Planning SupportSystem in Kuching

Reported by Bong Khin Fah

BERITA PERANCANG

PICTORIAL 27

Prof. Dr. Klosterman posted with En. Lai Hua Lee,Assistant Director (Planning) of Land and Survey

Department, who is with a copy of the book“Planning Support System” by Brail & Klosterman.

Left: Prof. Dr. KlostermanRight: En. Lai Hua Lee

General Meeting for Formation of MIP Northern Branch,24 Set 2005, Gurney Hotel Penang

The newly elected Office Bearers of MIP Northern Branch(2005 -2007) with MIP members:

Seated from left : Lee Lik Meng (outgoing Pro-Tem BranchSecretary), Maimunah Mohd Shariff (Committee Member),

Tan Thean Siew (Branch Chairman), Abdul Ghani Salleh (outgoingPro-Tem Branch Chairman), Ismail Ibrahim (Branch Vice-Chairman),Ng Bock Tye (Committee Member), Ahmad Suhaimi (MIP Secretary).

Standing 3rd from left, Cheah Lye Aik (Branch Treasurer),4th Choong Lai Chai (Committee Member),

5th Michael Ong (Branch Secretary); and 2nd from right Goh Ching Keng (Committee Member)

Participants at the free half-day Seminar on Planning Approval

Ghani presenting a token of appreciation to MIP CouncilRepresentative (Ahmad Suhaimi). Standing behind are

Tan Thean Siew (Branch Chairman) and Ismail Ibrahim(Branch Vice-Chairman)

Prof. Dr. Klosterman and fellows invitedat the lunch table

From Left to Right : En. Law Hui Ho,En. Vincent Ho, Dr. Nasrudin,

Prof. Dr. Klosterman, En. Affandi Keli,En. Sudarsono Osman

Prof. Dr. Klosterman gave a preview to a pre-releaseversion of What-If application software to the

audience.

Dato’ Mohd. Fadzil Haji Mohd Khirwas born on 26 February 1954 in Telok Air Tawar, Pulau

Pinang. He was brought up in Kulim Kedah, where he

obtained his early education at the Sekolah

Kebangsaan Lelaki Kulim, Kedah. He then continued

his secondary education at Sekolah Tuanku Abdul

Rahman (STAR), Ipoh, Perak.

Dato’ Mohd Fadzil then joined the Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia (UTM) where he obtained his Bachelor of

Urban and Regional Planning (Honours) degree in

1979.

In 1991, he obtained his Certificate in Development

Planning – Urban Land Policy & Management from

the University College London (UCL), United

Kingdom. He completed a Certificate in City

Planning II course from the Japan International

Cooperation Agency (JICA), Tokyo, in 1999.

He started his career with Jabatan Perancangan Bandar & Desa (JPBD) as the Assistant Director in JPBD Negeri

Kedah in 1979, then moving to the Rural Division, subsequently the Spatial Division at JPBD headquarters, before

returning as the Director of JPBD Kedah in 1985. He was made the Director of JPBD Melaka in 1992. He spent

five years in Melaka and then went on to become the JPBD Terengganu Director before being promoted to

Deputy Director General for Administration in 2001. Dato’ Mohd Fadzil was made the Director General of Town

and Country Planning on the 4th of March, 2005.

Dato’ Mohd Fadzil was also an active member of the Kelab Sukan dan Kebajikan, Jabatan Perancangan

Bandar dan Desa, Semenanjung Malaysia. He has held the post of President of Persatuan Pegawai Perancang

Bandar dan Desa Malaysia since 2002. He was a Council Member of the Malaysian Institute of Planners for 2003-

2005 and is presently a Member of the Board of Town Planners, Malaysia.

In honour of Dato’ Mohd. Fadzil’s meritorious services and contributions, he was bestowed with various

Distinguished Order Medals: B.C.K (Bintang Cemerlang Kedah) and the A.M.K (Ahli Mahkota Kedah) by the

Kedah State Government in 1989 and 1992 respectively; B.C.M (Bintang Cemerlang Melaka) by the Melaka

State Government in 1995; A.S.M (Ahli Setia Sultan Mahmud Terengganu) by the Terengganu State

Government in 2002; and D.S.D.K (Dato’ Setia Di Raja Kedah) by the Kedah State Government which carries

the title Dato' in 2005.

BERITA PERANCANG

28 PROFILE

DATO’ MOHD. FADZIL BINHAJI MOHD. KHIRDirector General, FederalDepartment of Town and CountryPlanning Malaysia(JPBD Semenanjung Malaysia)