Property Malaysia

So, Petaling Jaya is going to be a city next Tuesday.

The media has been vigilant in highlighting a few key issues (and problems) that MPPJ are facing in recent months. So, it would come as no surprise that the celebrations will be muted and less-extravagant, while general folk of PJ are more concerned with the current World Cup.

I remember about 15 years ago when Johor Bahru was declared a city, there was a month-long celebration, with carnivals, performances and what-nots, but Petaling Jaya will definitely be different. Petaling Jaya is a town with heart, that is for sure. Everyone of us here in Property Malaysia has spent a majority of their adult lives at one time or another living and working in this ‘satellite town’ (as our geography books call it).

There was an article in the Star Metro a few days ago, highlighting the issues of the day, like:

• Increase in assessment taxes last November. Residents pro-tested and said the increase was unjustified.

• Calls from resident groups for the detailed accounts to help explain and justify the council’s expenses were ignored.

• MPPJ Sports and Cultural Club selling books produced by MPPJ (which is an offence because no money due to the council can be channelled elsewhere) to billboard advertising revenue that remains unaccounted for.

• unknown persons leaked out council documents to resident leaders. The documents detail an attempt to privatise billboard licensing to Seni Jaya Sdn Bhd and points out that approval was already given despite the councillors not having signed their approval.

There are also other issues that come to mind, like the case of the PJ Exchange, rubbish collection, hawkers and stalls occupying roads, etc.

Chronology of events

Nov 8, 2005 - MPPJ approves increase of assessment by 10% for most properties in PJ for next year.

Jan 16, 2006 - Residents protest increase, citing RM60mil worth of assets still unaccounted for, as reported in the Auditor-General’s report for 1992 and 1995.

Jan 23 - Residents declare increase illegal as no justifiable reason was given beyond MPPJ president Datuk Ahmad Termizi Puteh’s assurance that the increase was necessary.

Jan 26 - Kampung Tunku assemblyman Datuk Dr Wong Sai Hou announces that council accounts will be be revealed to the public.

Feb 14 - Residents formally request for full set of accounts for the years 2000 to 2005 and other relevant documents via a memorandum.

Feb 28 - Termizi rescinds Dr Wong’s offer for the accounts and says residents can look at the Gazette (government publication) for the general accounts.

March 6 - Residents show proof of wastage by pointing to rubbish bins sponsored by MPPJ that purportedly costs RM1,000 each. Four such bins were sent to parts of Damansara Jaya and Taman SEA.

March 8 - Residents produce evidence of impropriety where the MPPJ Sports and Cultural Club issued receipts for a book that was produced by MPPJ.
March 13 - MPPJ holds a briefing to explain to residents why accounts could not be revealed. Residents reject the explanation.

March 23 - Residents reveal that MPPJ does not have a clean bill of accounts as shown in the Auditor General website and the council’s accounts have not been published in the Gazette since 1999.

March 29 - MPPJ finally reveals their summarised accounts to residents for a brief period of two hours and thirty minutes. Photocopies were not allowed. Residents made handwritten copies of the accounts.

March 31 - Residents reveal the facts they gleaned from the accounts, which includes RM38.6mil in arrears that was accrued from 1999 to 2004 (that figure has since increased to RM50,686,417 as of Feb 28 - source: www.mppj.gov.my)

April 11 - Residents issue memorandum to MPPJ to explain account’s findings.

April 26 - MPPJ does not respond to the memorandum. PJ residents give committee mandate to pursue matter. Several outsiders carrying placards in support of MPPJ disrupt the meeting.

May 8 – Star Metro reveals the nature of illegal billboard advertising and the millions that it can cost MPPJ in uncollected licensing revenue.

May 10 - State assemblymen Yong Dai Ying, Dr Wong and Datuk Dr Lim Thuang Seng urge the council to take action against agencies over the illegal billboards.

May 17 - Poly Dimension Sdn Bhd attempts to build a pedestrian bridge in Section 10 PJ, citing approval from the Public Works Department. MPPJ enforcement team, led by MPPJ legal advisor Abd Muttalib Mohd Ali stops the project. MPPJ councillor V. Subramaniam accuses Muttalib of siphoning off money from billboard advertising (Subramaniam has yet to make good on his promise to tell all).

May 20 - Section 10 PJ residents say they do not want the pedestrian bridge and that consent was not sought.

May 31 - Termizi confirms a newspaper report that the council was mulling the possibility of awarding a single consortium advertising rights for areas under its jurisdiction.

June 8 - PJ residents reveal that unknown persons have leaked out council documents. The documents reveal that approval for a proposed privatisation of outdoor advertising licensing to Seni Jaya Sdn Bhd for 15 years was given to the company, despite the councillors not having signed their approval.

June 9 - PJ residents formally hand over a memorandum demanding answers on all the issues raised to date.

June 13 - MPPJ responds with a two-page letter, but residents dissatisfied with the answers. Residents to file police report tomorrow

At first, we were largely reluctant to write anything about the recent landslide in Kampung Pasir, Ulu Kelang last week. There were no shortage to commentaries in blogs, newspapers and online forums, some very well written, but mostly screaming for blood.

This isn’t the first time it happened in the area. And it most likely wont be the last. On the day after t happened, there was a graphic in a leading newspaper that spoke volumes – it showed the locations of 5 of the most recent biggest landslide occurrences in the area, along with the dates it happened. All 5 locations where within about 2km along the same stretch of Middle Ring Road II:

Dec 11, 1993 – Highland Towers
May 15, 1999 – Athanaeum Tower
Oct 5, 2000 – Bukit Antarabangsa
Nov 20, 2002 – Taman Hillview
May 31, 2006 – Kampung Pasir

Looking at the facts, a few things can be observed. The incidents happened mainly during the monsoon seasons (using at the end of the year) or following the equinox, which typically brings the heaviest rainfall in the West Coast.

Secondly, from a geological viewpoint, the hillslopes are mainly in the same area and also the pretty much from the same formation. the latest landslide, just like the infamous Highland Towers, is due to disturbances to the natural slopes due to development. The natural terrain of the area is very hilly, making it tricky (and costly) to develop properly.

At the moment, there are 3 governing bodies that are involved in studying and approving these projects – the local council, JKR Unit Cerun, and Ikram, which acts as an external consultant. In the case of the Highland Towers, the local council was ruled by the court as absolved of any responsibilities in the tragedy.

It’s been 13 years since the landmark Highland Towers catastrophe. And looking at the list of events above, it would seem that the lessons were not fully learnt. Will it happen again? We can’t say. Most people on the streets are pretty sure it will, judging from the trend.

As KL is getting more and more odeveloped, there is no more sizable land for mid-scale development that is tenable. What is left are the hillslopes, peaty soil, and unfavourable locations like near dumpsites or power lines. Yet people need more and more housing, developers and contractors need to do business. And the local governent is responsible to study and approve each project proposal.

So at the end of the day, who ultimately holds the blame? In the case of the Kampung Pasir landslide, it would seem that investigations are underway. And what happens after this? A witch hunt will follow nonetheless, projects are scrutinized, and a lot of reports and studies are thrown about. But crunch time comes 1 year from now, when the fickle public have relatively forgotten this incident, and when new and ambitious projects are once again submitted. That’s when the cycle starts all over again…

The government has just announced that there will be an increase of electricity tariffs:

The Star
Thursday May 25, 2006

Electricity tariff in the peninsula will go up by 12% from June 1.
However, the increase will not affect the low to medium income group which uses less than 200kWh of electricity per month as the existing rate of 21.8 sen per kWh remains unchanged.
Announcing the Cabinet’s decision yesterday, Energy, Water and Communications Minister Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik said those unaffected by the tariff increase made up 60% or 3.036 million of the 5.1million households in the peninsula.

An associate of ours was complaining about it today. He says that any household with an air-conditioner would definitely see a huge increase in their monthly electricity. According to him, he turns on the air-conditioning for at least 5 to 6 hours every night. He says it’s too hot to sleep without it.

Another associate commented that after the electricity tariff increase, water rates and other utilities will bound to follow soon. We’re not too sure about that, but we understand the concern. As our country get more affluent, there are more and more electrical appliances in our homes as compared to say, ten years ago. Not only, appliances like TV, washing machines, computers and home entertainment systems are consuming more and more electricity without us even realizing it.

The government is also emphasizing that the increase is inevitable due to external forces like the rise in fuel prices, and they are continuing their efforts to negotiate with the IPP in the country. While this is ongoing, the 12% hike on consumers are very likely to stay.

Perhaps most Malaysians are immune to these increases in our cost of living, especially in the last few years, like consumable goods, toll prices and subsidized petrol. What most people are more likely to do are to take proactive steps in their daily lives to cut down on usage, like turning off appliances when not in use, or use less, or not at all.

(all images from the Star)

The big news in the papers yesterday was the complaint of the frequent landslides and mudslides in Ketumbar Heights, Taman Cheras Utama, Kuala Lumpur. There are 800 homes in this development, and according to them, the overflow of muddy water from Bukit Sungai Putih (which incidentally, is in Selangor). From the photos shown in the press, there are signs of erosion from the hill slopes.

There was a site visit and press conference held Datuk Ong Tee Keat, Member of Parliament for the Pandan constituency, and officials from Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ), the local municipal council.

According to the papers, the residents said that the landslides have been occurring for 3 years now, and is affecting the foundation of the condominium. Datuk Ong said that City Hall (DBKL) will help in cleaning up the condo compound, including the 0.2m high mud stains.

The issue received front page treatment in the regional pullout of a few dailies.

On another note, the residents are also opposing a proposed development on hill. The forest reserve have been maintained for the last 10 years but has been sold to a developer.

You can read the full story here.

This will be good news for the sluggish property market - the government has announced that the real estate sector of our economy recorded RM56 billion (USD$15.1 billion) in terms of transactions for the year 2005, and they expect the new trends to emerge in 2006.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Bernard Dompok said that the government was aware the property market was undergoing new trends from this year onwards as more Malaysians moved to urban areas.

According to the Edge:

Malaysia had a young population with about 62% living in urban areas while fewer people were in the rural areas, he said at the 17th National Real Estate Convention in Kuala Lumpur on March 21.
“This is the trend the real estate sector is heading towards,” Dompok said, adding there were more mega malls and larger and larger shopping centres.
He also said if Malaysia wanted to be a regional shopping paradise, the sector had to provide better services compared to the other countries in this region.

Further on, Tan Sri Bernard Dompok also adds that

On the real estate investment trusts (REITs), Dompok said the government took cognizance of the REITS on the real estate industry as they provided an avenue for investments.
Dompok said the Employees Provident Fund and other government investment bodies also planned to increase their property investments this year.

However, what is interesting is that the minister noted that the government did not intend to initiate policies and strategies to stabilise the oversupply situation and instead allowed the market to find its own equilibrium.

In our opinion, this is a good move by the government in terms of non-interference, it may be a better to let the market mature by itself and find its own footing. While pockets of over supply may appear in limited areas (we’re thinking luxury condos in certain upmarket areas), by and large the market can stabilize itself, barring any international or regional financial crisis.

For the full report, you can read it here.

SPNB, which is embarking on a project to revive abandoned housing projects in Sarawak, has delivered the first 426 homes for the employees of Bintulu Port Sdn. Bhd.

The homes is set on 70 acres and are of double-storey detached, semi-detached and detached houses. The project was left idle in 2003 when the previous developer ran into some financial difficulties. SPNB was requested by the Ministry of Finance to acquire and revitalise this housing project which was launched in 1997. SPNB is a unit of the Minister of Finance Incorporated (MOF Inc).

According to a report in the Edge:

• SPNB had taken over this 0% to 80%-completed project without any additional costs to the purchasers and at the same time had to absorb the deficit incurred.

• The cost to rehabilitate amounted to more than RM33 million, the works for this project started in January 2004 after SPNB had received consent from the relevant parties.

• The management also pledged to continue to work towards reviving stalled housing projects in Malaysia. To date, SPNB had rehabilitated and delivered 11 abandoned housing projects comprising 3,527 housing units with a total estimated value of RM114 million throughout Malaysia.

• This year, SPNB had targeted to rehabilitate 13 abandoned housing projects worth more than RM196 million.

• Currently, SPNB is revitalising 12 housing projects comprising of 6,026 houses with construction cost of RM207 million, of which nine projects are expected to be delivered before year-end.

• Since the MoF had appointed SPNB as the implementation agent for rehabilitation of abandoned housing projects in 2001, SPNB had been entrusted to undertake and rehabilitate 177 abandoned housing projects comprising 52,271 units of houses with an estimated project value of RM4.3 billion.

In today’s Star, the front page carried the news of the judgement of the Federal Court that the Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) was not liable for losses suffered by 73 residents of two blocks of the Highland Towers condominium who had to evacuate after the collapse of Block One 13 years ago, killing 48 people.

The three-member panel consists of Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Steve Shim Lip Kiong and Federal Court judges Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamed and Datuk Arifin Zakaria.

According to the report:

They said local authorities such as the MPAJ were given full immunity under Section 95 (2) of the Street, Drainage & Building Act 1974 (Act 133) from claims for the pre-collapse period. The court was unanimous in allowing the MPAJ’s appeal to set aside the Court of Appeal’s decision holding the MPAJ 15% responsible for the pre-collapse period.

As for the post-collapse liability, it dismissed with a 2-1 majority the cross-appeal by the 73 residents of Block Two and Three against the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the MPAJ was not liable for losses suffered during the post-collapse period. Justice Shim gave a dissenting judgment.

Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad said that if the local councils were made liable, it would open the floodgates to further claims for economic loss, and this would deplete the council’s resources meant for the provision of basic services and infrastructure.

But what really interested me was the views of the dissenting judge, Justice Shim. He said the MPAJ could not seek shelter in Section 95(2) of the Street, Drainage and Building Act because this was a case of negligence in failing to formulate and implement the master drainage plan so as to ensure the stability and safety of the adjacent Blocks Two and Three.

He said there was an assumption of responsibility by the MPAJ to do what it had promised.

“I do not think it would be in the public interest that a local authority such as the MPAJ should be allowed to disclaim liability for negligence committed beyond the expansive shelter of Section 95(2) or other relevant provisions of the Act nor would it be fair, just and reasonable to deprive the respondents of their rightful claims under the law”

There was also a side bar on reaction by the ex-residents of the Highland Towers. I won’t go into the article, but we suggest you read it here. We it, we could not help feeling the sense of defeat and helplessness the residents felt after 12 long years of struggle and setbacks to achieve some sort of closure for the great loss they had gone through.

It’s been 12 years since it happened, my friends. When it it the news, some of us were still in university. But it still remains of the the biggest tragedy in Malaysian social history, and the longer the members of Property Malaysia work immerse ourselves in this industry, the more feel the impact of this tragedy.

But hopefully, this will finally close the book on the case, and hopefully again, Malaysians will learn from our past mistakes.

Further reading:

This morning, we came across this excellent write up, with some legal case studies on the issue:

Highland Tower Collapse

You can also check out the articles of interest:
Implications of the Highland Towers Judgment in Relation to the Duties of Building Professionals in Malaysia
The Highland Towers Judgment - Civil Suit No. S5-21-174-1996
Highland Tower Episode Closed

The Sunday Star yesterday reported the press conference held by the residents of Bandar Kinrara against the proposed waste transfer station at Kg. Bohol in Jalan Puchong, which is within the 3km radius of areas such as Bandar Kinrara, Mutiara Bukit Jalil, Taman OUG, Taman Tan Yew Lai, Taman Sri Sentosa, Taman Bukit Kuchai, Bukit Jalil Golf Club, Kampung Muhibbah, and Bandar Baru Bukit Jalil.

This issue has been highlighted here in Property Malaysia before, you can read the background story and see the satellite image of its location here.

The press conference was organized by the ‘No Sampah’ pro-tem committee, and also present was the assemblyman Dr. Kow Cheong Wai.

The main aim of the committee is to persuade the government to relocate the waste transfer station. According to them, the station compacts the waste and sends it to the disposal site at Bukit Tagar, Hulu Selangor. In 1992, the same site was proposed as a waste dump, and a waste incinerator in 2002, but both were relocated after protests from nearby residents. According to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project, the station will initial handle 1,000 tonnes of waste daily, and will be serviced by 777 garbage collection vehicles.

Dr. Kow said that he had earlier sent a letter to the office of the Mentri Besar of Selangor.

For more info, you can check the following sites:
The protest site
Sign the petition
No Sampah Website

We’ve been wanting to do this for quite some time, noting down the complete list of local councils for every state in Malaysia for reference. And since Selangor is the most developed state in the country, we will start with them first. Selangor has one city council, MBSA (strangely, its not called a ‘city hall’!), 6 municipal councils and 5 district councils.

The 6 municipal councils are among the largest around, they are Petaling Jaya, Subang Jaya, Ampang Jaya, Klang, Selayang and Kajang. There is talk recently of upgrading Petaling Jaya to a city.

Given below is the complete list with their address and contacts. Interesting note - only 4 of them have websites…

Majlis Bandaraya Shah Alam (MBSA)
Tingkat 1, Wisma MBSA
Peti Surat 7200
40706 SHAH ALAM, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 55105133
FAX : 03 - 55108010
www.mbsa.gov.my

Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ)
Menara MPAJ, Persiaran MPAJ
Jalan Pandan Utama, Pandan Indah
55100 KUALA LUMPUR
TEL : 03 - 42968000
FAX : 03 - 42968060
www.mpaj.gov.my

Majlis Perbandaran Kajang (MPKj)
43000 KAJANG, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 87377899
FAX : 03 - 87377897

Majlis Perbandaran Klang (MPK)
Jalan Perbandaran
41675 KLANG, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 33716044
FAX : 03 - 33720344

Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya (MPPJ)
Jalan Yong Shook Lin
46675 PETALING JAYA, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 79563544
FAX : 03 - 79586491 / 79575476
www.mppj.gov.my

Majlis Perbandaran Selayang (MPS)
Persiaran 3, Bandar Baru Selayang
KM 15, Jalan Ipoh
68100 BATU CAVES, SELANGOR.
TEL : 03 - 61380001
FAX : 03 - 61388933

Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya (MPSJ)
Persiaran Perpaduan, Jalan USJ5
47610 SUBANG JAYA, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 80263131
FAX : 03 - 56376585
www.mpsj.gov.my

Majlis Daerah Hulu Selangor (MDHS)
Jalan Bukit Kerajaan
44000 HULU SELANGOR, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 60641331
FAX : 03 - 60643991

Majlis Daerah Kuala Langat (MDKL)
Teluk Datok
42700 BANTING, SELANGOR.
TEL : 03 -31872825 / 732
FAX : 03 -31879304

Majlis Daerah Kuala Selangor (MDKS)
45000 KUALA SELANGOR, SELANGOR.
TEL : 03 - 8891439
FAX : 03 - 8891101

Majlis Daerah Sabak Bernam (MDSB)
45300 SUNGAI BESAR, SELANGOR
TEL : 03 - 32241655
FAX : 03 - 32242766

Majlis Daerah Sepang (MDS)
Tingkat 1, Bangunan Tun Aziz
Salak Tinggi
43900 SEPANG, SELANGOR.
TEL : 03 - 87061016 / 87061090
FAX : 03 - 87061971

I got the heads up from Preacher, someone who has been very helpful to this site. Thanks!

Local papers had reported that the authorities are going to build a second waste transfer station on a 9ha facility in Kampung Bohol, and expects that it will be operational by next year. The project, called Southern KL Transfer Station (SKLTS), has been awarded to a private company CyWaste Sdn Bhd, which is part of a larger environmental group, CyEn Group.

This issue has recently been hotly discussed at a local property forum, you can follow it here. THe concerned residents have also set up a website to make their voice heard against this project, you can check it out here. We’ve linked the photo here, I hope they don’t mind… You can see the clearer photo at their site.

A check with the contractor’s website, we found some more info:

Transfer Stations – Southern Kuala Lumpur Transfer Station (SKLTS)

CyEn has been awarded the “Build, Operate and Transfer” (BOT) privatisation of a new solid waste transfer station, known as the “Southern Kuala Lumpur Transfer Station (SKLTS)” at Kampung Bohol, Mukim Petaling, Kuala Lumpur.

Built on a site of approximately 9 ha in size, SKLTS is designed to cater for the management of solid waste for the southern part of Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur (FTKL) and the state of Selangor for the next 30 years.

SKLTS is designed to achieve operational efficiency, with minimal impacts on the surrounding environment during the development and operation of the facility.

According to the DOE website, the department is actually still studying the Detailed EIA (DEIA) report submitted by CyWaste. Members of the public can get a copy of the report for RM1000, details can be obtained here.

As it stands, the DOE has yet to issue any latest reply on this matter, and the residents are organising a petition and have also sought out a meeting together with contractor and their elected parliamentary representatives.

Another point of concern is the recent launch of new developments in the area within a short distance from the proposed site. Many buyers of these middle and high end projects are concerned that whether the developers did or did not know of this project, and if yes, why was it not revealed earlier.

There seems to be a lot of questions to be answered, we’ll update here with any recent news.