Penang board chides council for appealing against condo project, orders it to pay RM35,000

GEORGE TOWN, April 13 — The Penang Appeals Board ordered the Penang Island City Council (MBPP) today to pay RM35,000 in total costs after telling it off for appealing against the board’s stay order over a high rise project in Tanjung Pinang off Tanjung Tokong.

The board chairman Datuk Yeo Yang Poh ordered MBPP to pay costs of RM20,000 to the appellants and RM15,000 to the planning applicant.

“The board has powers to grant stay orders as provided under Section 23(3) and Section 36(10)(g) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976,” he said as he rejected MBPP’s submissions that the board did not have the power to order a stay.

The board had granted the appellants, consisting of residents of Seri Tanjung Pinang, a stay order on the planning permission for the project, City Of Dreams, which is made of two 39-storey condominium blocks.

MBPP, in its appeal against the stay order, submitted that the board did not have the power to grant stay orders.

It also argued that the board did not need to take public interest into account when making such decisions.

Yeo labelled the council’s submission that the board do not need to take public interest into account as “absurd”.

“It defies common sense as matters of public interest is certainly relevant in the function of the board,” he said.

He said all aspects of the planning law was in the interest of the public and that it was the board’s responsibility to take into account public interest.

He pointed out that the issue of the board not having the power to grant stay orders based on public interest has never been raised since its formation in 1989.

“I am surprised that the respondent as a public authority could take up such an issue and present such points without putting enough work in it,” he said.

Yeo criticised MPPP’s arguments, saying the council did not appear to have made any effort to understand the case before submitting an appeal against the stay order.

“It is worrying that the respondent doesn’t seem to understand what transpired in this case,” he said.

He said the council’s pursuit of the case does not sit well with its role as a public authority especially when it has a duty to safeguard public interest.

Yeo later extended the stay order against the planning permission until the next decision date to be fixed later.

The planning applicant, Ewein Zenith Sdn Bhd, is only allowed to do piling works and works necessary for piling for the project.

It had initially obtained planning approval for the project in March 2015 before the board granted the appellants a stay order against the project late last year.

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/penang-board-chides-council-for-appealing-against-condo-project-orders-it-t

Penang High Court rejects ‘Botak Hill’ defamation suit against DAP rep

DAP's Teh Yee Chew (right) shaking hands with his lawyer, Cheah Eng Soon, after the defamation suit against him was thrown out by the Penang high court, April 11, 2016. — Picture by KE Ooi

Published: April 11, 2016 10:08 AM GMT+8

Published: April 11, 2016 10:08 AM GMT+8

GEORGE TOWN, April 11 — The Penang High Court today dismissed a private firm’s defamation suit against DAP’s Teh Yee Cheu over his remarks on the illegal hill clearing of the so-called “Botak Hill” here.

Justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail ruled that Teh’s remarks on the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau by General Accomplishments Sdn Bhd (GASB) was not defamatory.

“I find that the published suggestions by Teh that provisions under the National Forestry Act 1984 and the Environmental Quality Act 1974 be looked at in the case against GASB is not defamatory against the plaintiff,” she said when delivering her judgement today.

She then dismissed GASB’s defamation suit against Teh and ordered GASB to pay costs of RM30,000 to Teh.

GASB and Tan Sri Tan Kok Ping had jointly filed a writ of summons against Teh for allegedly issuing slanderous statements to the press during his “hair shaving ceremony” on January 1, 2014.

In the suit filed in May 2014, they contended that Teh had maliciously issued statements that “inextricably imputed a disparaging, irreparably and falsified general perception of GASB”.

Today, Hadhariah also ruled that statements Teh had made against GASB and the hill clearing that was published by various media including The Malaysian Insider and Nanyang Siang Pau were not defamatory.

Teh’s counsel, Cheah Eng Soon, said the court has also agreed with his submissions that Teh’s remarks advising Tan to adhere to existing laws on hill clearing were not defamatory in nature.

On January 1, 2014, Teh shaved his head bald as a symbolic “protest” to what he deemed as insufficient action taken against GASB over the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau.

GASB was fined RM30,000 by the Penang Sessions Court in 2013 for failing to submit earthworks plan as required by Section 70A of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 but Teh felt this was not enough.

Teh held the head-shaving ceremony to push for more actions to be taken against GASB and also to push the firm to start rehabilitation works on the hill immediately.

He had called on the Forestry Department, the Department of Environment (DOE) and also the Drainage and Irrigation Department (DID) to visit the site and to also take legal action against the landowner in accordance to their respective acts.

http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/penang-high-court-rejects-botak-hill-defamation-suit-against-dap-rep

GEORGE TOWN, April 11 — The Penang High Court today dismissed a private firm’s defamation suit against DAP’s Teh Yee Cheu over his remarks on the illegal hill clearing of the so-called “Botak Hill” here.
Justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail ruled that Teh’s remarks on the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau by General Accomplishments Sdn Bhd (GASB) was not defamatory.
“I find that the published suggestions by Teh that provisions under the National Forestry Act 1984 and the Environmental Quality Act 1974 be looked at in the case against GASB is not defamatory against the plaintiff,” she said when delivering her judgement today.
She then dismissed GASB’s defamation suit against Teh and ordered GASB to pay costs of RM30,000 to Teh.
GASB and Tan Sri Tan Kok Ping had jointly filed a writ of summons against Teh for allegedly issuing slanderous statements to the press during his “hair shaving ceremony” on January 1, 2014.
In the suit filed in May 2014, they contended that Teh had maliciously issued statements that “inextricably imputed a disparaging, irreparably and falsified general perception of GASB”.

Today, Hadhariah also ruled that statements Teh had made against GASB and the hill clearing that was published by various media including The Malaysian Insider and Nanyang Siang Pau were not defamatory.
Teh’s counsel, Cheah Eng Soon, said the court has also agreed with his submissions that Teh’s remarks advising Tan to adhere to existing laws on hill clearing were not defamatory in nature.
On January 1, 2014, Teh shaved his head bald as a symbolic “protest” to what he deemed as insufficient action taken against GASB over the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau.
GASB was fined RM30,000 by the Penang Sessions Court in 2013 for failing to submit earthworks plan as required by Section 70A of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 but Teh felt this was not enough.
Teh held the head-shaving ceremony to push for more actions to be taken against GASB and also to push the firm to start rehabilitation works on the hill immediately.
He had called on the Forestry Department, the Department of Environment (DOE) and also the Drainage and Irrigation Department (DID) to visit the site and to also take legal action against the landowner in accordance to their respective acts.
- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/penang-high-court-rejects-botak-hill-defamation-suit-against-dap-rep#sthash.WRKK36Cu.dpuf

GEORGE TOWN, April 11 — The Penang High Court today dismissed a private firm’s defamation suit against DAP’s Teh Yee Cheu over his remarks on the illegal hill clearing of the so-called “Botak Hill” here.
Justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail ruled that Teh’s remarks on the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau by General Accomplishments Sdn Bhd (GASB) was not defamatory.
“I find that the published suggestions by Teh that provisions under the National Forestry Act 1984 and the Environmental Quality Act 1974 be looked at in the case against GASB is not defamatory against the plaintiff,” she said when delivering her judgement today.
She then dismissed GASB’s defamation suit against Teh and ordered GASB to pay costs of RM30,000 to Teh.
GASB and Tan Sri Tan Kok Ping had jointly filed a writ of summons against Teh for allegedly issuing slanderous statements to the press during his “hair shaving ceremony” on January 1, 2014.
In the suit filed in May 2014, they contended that Teh had maliciously issued statements that “inextricably imputed a disparaging, irreparably and falsified general perception of GASB”.

Today, Hadhariah also ruled that statements Teh had made against GASB and the hill clearing that was published by various media including The Malaysian Insider and Nanyang Siang Pau were not defamatory.
Teh’s counsel, Cheah Eng Soon, said the court has also agreed with his submissions that Teh’s remarks advising Tan to adhere to existing laws on hill clearing were not defamatory in nature.
On January 1, 2014, Teh shaved his head bald as a symbolic “protest” to what he deemed as insufficient action taken against GASB over the illegal hill clearing of Bukit Relau.
GASB was fined RM30,000 by the Penang Sessions Court in 2013 for failing to submit earthworks plan as required by Section 70A of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 but Teh felt this was not enough.
Teh held the head-shaving ceremony to push for more actions to be taken against GASB and also to push the firm to start rehabilitation works on the hill immediately.
He had called on the Forestry Department, the Department of Environment (DOE) and also the Drainage and Irrigation Department (DID) to visit the site and to also take legal action against the landowner in accordance to their respective acts.
- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/penang-high-court-rejects-botak-hill-defamation-suit-against-dap-rep#sthash.WRKK36Cu.dpuf

Penang need not pay land compensation with appeals board nod, chief says

GEORGE TOWN, March 14 — Penang’s state appeals board chairman Datuk Yeo Yang Poh gave an assurance today the state government is not in danger of forking out billions of ringgit in compensation as a result of disputed land development.

He said the government would be spared so long as the state appeals board agrees to set aside planning permission that had been approved by the city council.

“So if the board sets aside previously approved planning permission, there is no question of compensation at all,” Yeo said in his speech at the opening of an appeals board seminar at Olive Tree Hotel here.

He said there was a misconception that the board’s decision will lead to the state paying compensation to developers, due to Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning Act.

Under Section 25, once the city council granted planning permission to a developer and later revoke it due to public interest, the developer will then be entitled to some compensation.

The decision by the appeals board is separate from Section 25 as any decisions made by the board is part of a statutory scheme.

However, Yeo admitted that the board’s decisions can still be subjected to judicial review, but stressed that the issue of compensation does not arise.

“If our decision is upheld, what compensation can they talk about? If it’s overturned, they can proceed with the project, so either way, the issue of compensation does not arise at all,” Yeo told reporters later when asked to clarify.

He pointed out that these are processes set out in the Act by Parliament so there was no issue of compensation when the process is being carried out and implemented.

When asked about the state government’s insistence that it may still be liable to pay compensation to the developer, Yeo held firmly to his views.

“I hold a different view, I think the confusion may be due to Section 25 but my view is that no issue of compensation can arise at all,” he said.

Recently, the appeals board decided that the Penang Island Municipal Council (MBPP) did not need to approve the development order sought by Sunway Sdn Bhd for their land that is above 76 metres.

The developer’s land was labelled as a “special project” and was allowed development of either six units per acre or 15 units per acre by the previous government.

The Appeals Board also stated that MBPP need not pay compensation for rejecting the special project.

Fearing it may be forced to pay billions of ringgit in compensation for these projects approved by the previous administration, the Pakatan Harapan Penang government engaged Universiti Malaya Law Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar and prominent lawyer Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan to assist in handling the court cases.

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/penang-need-not-pay-land-compensation-with-appeals-board-nod-chief-says

Penang Transport Masterplan Review by MalaysiaKini Chinese Edition

Malaysiakini Chinese version published an excellent and critically written set of Q&A on the Penang transport blue plan (https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/333654). Does anyone know of an English or Malay version?

Google Translate just can't get the fine balancing points and the local names, but here's a useful attempt: https://goo.gl/RjteZ1

Also note part of the blue plan is available here: http://goo.gl/igsE4K
Penang Forum- Towards Sustainable Development in Penang

SAM calls attention to clearing works in Teluk Bahang and Batu Ferringhi

By PHUAH KEN LIN - 1 March 2016




GEORGE TOWN: Suspected illegal clearing works in Teluk Bahang and Batu Ferringhi have been spotted by a civil society group.

The issue was highlighted by Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM).

Its president S.M. Mohamed Idris said a bald section was visible on a hill near Titi Kerawang here while an excavator was seen carrying out earthworks to fell trees in Batu Ferringhi.

"We are shocked to find that the hill had been cleared and were surprised how this indiscriminate act can be allowed and the reason for the clearing.

"As for the earthworks, our checks found that the felling of trees in this area was recent with no signboards or notices set up about the project.

"We are concerned by these activities because of the threat to the environment, risk of erosion, flooding downstream and marine pollution affecting the coastal areas of Batu Ferringhi," he said today.

Idris urged the local authorities to stop the activities if they are found to be illegal.

"The findings of the investigation must be immediately publicised as these questions were posed to us during our survey of the affected area," he said.


http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/03/130512/sam-calls-attention-clearing-works-teluk-bahang-and-batu-ferringhi

SAM calls attention to clearing works in Teluk Bahang and Batu Ferringhi

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/03/130512/sam-calls-attention-clearing-works-teluk-bahang-and-batu-ferringhi?d=1

SAM calls attention to clearing works in Teluk Bahang and Batu Ferringhi

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/03/130512/sam-calls-attention-clearing-works-teluk-bahang-and-batu-ferringhi?d=1

Tg Bungah hillslopes stripped for projects

By Audrey Dermawan - 21 February 2016
GEORGE TOWN: At least two hillslopes are being stripped for development projects in Tanjung Bungah.

Signboards put up at the sites revealed that one was for road- works in Jalan Solok Tanjung Bungah while the other was for a 50-storey affordable housing project in Lorong Lembah Permai.

Checks by the New Sunday Times on Friday, accompanied by Tanjung Bungah assemblyman Teh Yee Cheu, showed earthworks were in full swing at the project sites.

Heavy machinery was also spotted.

Teh said although the projects were being carried out at less than 76m above sea level, their steepness raised concerns. Bald patches, not covered by plastic sheets, were visible from a distance.

He said earthworks in Jalan Solok Tanjung Bungah started two months ago while those in Lorong Lembah Permai started four months ago.

“Other than myself, the Tanjung Bunga residents’ association also objected to the projects 10 years ago.

“Following the brouhaha, things went quiet for a while. It looks like the projects are in full swing.

“We hope the authorities will minimise the impact of the construction on the surrounding areas.”

Teh questioned whether there was a guarantee that the earthworks would not affect residents of Chee Seng Garden.

“Have we forgotten how the residents there were affected by mud floods on Sept 6, 2008, after nearby hills were stripped by two developers?

“It was the first time the neighbourhood was flooded in four decades. “Can we be sure that when it rains, mud water from the construction site will not flow downhill and flood the houses at the bottom? The bald patch at the hill is visible.”

Teh lamented how the skyline from Tanjung Bungah to Batu Ferringhi had changed. He said there were no fewer than 50 high-rise buildings in the stretch with nearly 10 projects pending approval.

“I dread to think of what will happen in the event of a downpour, which can lead to a landslide.”

In his statement during the Tanjung Bungah residents’ association’s annual general meeting, which is available online, chairman Datuk Renji Sathiah said the residents of Tanjung Bungah and their neighbouring communities had seen an acceleration in the deterioration of the environment in the past year.

“The main cause of this is that the state government favours developers over the concerns of those whose quality of life is affected by the degradation of the environment.”

Renji said development, illegal constructions, massive land reclamations without environmental impact assessments and the controversial Penang Traffic Master Plan were key issues facing the people of Tanjung Bungah and Penang.

“We must counter these threats to the environment and to our quality of life.

“But to do so, we need your support and commitment.

“Regrettably, here in our neighbourhood and elsewhere in Penang, people seem to react only when faced with a problem on their doorstep.

“This has to change if we are to show solidarity on matters impacting the community.”

http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/02/128633/tg-bungah-hillslopes-stripped-projects

By Audrey Dermawan - 21 February 2016 @ 11:00 AM

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/02/128633/tg-bungah-hillslopes-stripped-projects

By Audrey Dermawan - 21 February 2016 @ 11:00 AM

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/02/128633/tg-bungah-hillslopes-stripped-projects

By Audrey Dermawan - 21 February 2016 @ 11:00 AM

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/02/128633/tg-bungah-hillslopes-stripped-projects

By Audrey Dermawan - 21 February 2016 @ 11:00 AM

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/02/128633/tg-bungah-hillslopes-stripped-projects

Two PKR assemblymen axed from Penang GLCs

GEORGE TOWN: Two Penang PKR assemblymen, who abstained from voting against a land reclamation motion put forward by Umno last November, have had their positions in state government-linked companies (GLCs) terminated.

Penang PKR whip Ong Chin Wen, who is also the Bukit Tengah assemblyman, has been sacked from his director’s posts in Penang Invest and Island Golf Properties Bhd, a subsidiary company of Penang Development Corporation.

Sharing the same fate is Kebun Bunga assemblyman Cheah Kah Peng who has been terminated from his director’s position in Penang Hill Corporation (PHC).

Ong and Cheah were among five PKR backbenchers who had abstained from voting against the motion which had called for public hearings for land reclamation and suspension of all new reclamation plans until oceanic, environmental and social impact studies were carried out.

The three other PKR backbenchers are Dr Norlela Ariffin (Penanti), Dr T. Jayabalan (Batu Uban) and Lee Khai Loon (Machang Bubuk).

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, who heads the two GLCs, has yet to issue an official statement on the sacking of the assemblymen.
Ong, when contacted, said he would issue a statement regarding the matter soon.


PHC general manager Dr Lawrence Khoo has, meanwhile, confirmed Cheah’s sacking.


He said Cheah was terminated from the position during the last board meeting, which was held two weeks ago.

Cheah could not be reached for comment.

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2016/02/20/pkr-reps-sacked-from-glcs/

See TBRA's previous statement for more background:

TBRA Press-Release Hurray for Teh !

 

Chairman's Statement - TBRA AGM 2016

Statement of Dato’ Renji Sathiah, Chairman

Tanjung Bunga Residents Association

2016 TBRA AGM, 13th April, 2016

In the past year the residents of Tanjung Bunga and neighbouring communities, as well as in Penang in general, have witnessed an acceleration in the deterioation of the environment. The main driver of this is the fact that the state government clearly favours developers over the concerns of all those whose quality of life is impacted by the degradation of the environment.

In Tanjung Bungah there were two major threats in 2015. One was the huge project, comprising three high towers off Jalan Sungai Kelian, bordering on the DEE condominium in the heart of Tanjung Bunga. The condominium residents organised a press conference which was well supported and attended. The TBRA joined in this effort and I wrote to the Mayor expressing our deep concern over the development and its ramifications. The Mayor’s response was to ask the developer to lower the height of the building but, regrettably, the density was maintained. The second was the proposal and call for tenders by the Penang Development Council for the reclamation of 20 acres of land and the construction of a marina between the One Tanjung condominium and the Penang Swimming Club. The TBRA organised a demonstration against this proposal, which was well supported, in front of One Tanjung. The TBRA’s objections to the project were also made known to the Mayor in my letter. We have also been trying to work with the Penang Swimming Club, which will be seriously impacted by this project, to work on a joint response. To date there are no indications that the PDC proposal is still being considered. Possibly, in view of the major reclamation works planned for Tanjung Tokong and on the south coast, the state authorities may have decided to withhold this exercise. We will, however, remain vigilant.

We also face a number of other issues: pointless construction of pavements and barriers in different parts of Tanjung Bungah, benefitting contractors and ignoring the protests of affected locals; the growing increase of traffic caused by over-development on the hillsides between Tanjung Bungah and Batu Ferringhi, including heavy construction in Batu Ferringhi itself and massive projects in Jalan Permai; a worsening of security in the neighbourhood and the persisting dengue problem.

The TBRA conducted a survey last year amongst its members and other Tanjung Bungah residents which provided useful insights into residents’ concerns.

The very important issue of the status of Tanjung Bungah as a secondary corridor and not a primary corridor based on a major discrepancy in the second Penang Structure Plan, which had Tanjung Bungah classified as a primary development corridor in a diagram when the text showed it as a secondary corridor, remains unresolved. The developers, it appears, have been given free rein as there is no gazetted Local Plan.

The good news is the revival of the Penang Forum, which took on the issue of illegal hill slope construction in a “Save the Hills” campaign. A public forum was held with about 300 participants, followed by a meeting with the Chief Minister to discuss his claims that the Penang Forum was uninformed and misled by the opposition and the media. It was an exhaustive meeting with the Forum producing compelling evidence that the current state government had approved some of these projects. The Forum argued that the state was not legally obliged to renew earlier applications and could have imposed new conditions on them and that there was no legal basis for compensation as claimed by the state. The Chief Minister has suggested that the Forum’s experts meet with their state counterparts on these issues.

Of great significance was the Appeal Board’s judgement on the appeal made by residents in Sungai Ara against a 600 home project on the hillside next to where they lived. The Board ruled that this “Special Project” ( used to justify what would not be normally allowed under law) did not fall under the legal definition i.e that it is only for limited development and in the public interest. Furthermore, the MBPP did not have the authority to approve such projects. This landmark ruling provides grounds for challenges to other such projects.

The TBRA would like to work with other residents associations in Penang to put pressure on the authorities to respond to peoples’ concerns and to support the efforts of the Penang Forum.

Overdevelopment, illegal construction, massive land reclamations without rigorous and credible environmental impact assessments and now a controversial Penang Traffic Master Plan, recently announced by the government, are the key issues facing us in Tanjung Bungah and Penang as a whole. We must counter these threats to the environment and to our quality of life but to do so we need your support and commitment. Regrettably, here in our neighbourhood and elsewhere in Penang, people seem to only react when faced with a problem on their doorstep. This has to change if we are to become truly effective by showing solidarity on matters impacting on the community as a whole.

[This document is also available here in document format: https://goo.gl/qCs9eH]

Recent Photos of Developments Viewed from Infinity

Photos taken by a resident from Infinity apartment:

Behind the market. Before Concord Garden

 https://goo.gl/u5rfyQ

To the right (West) of TAR College and behind Villa Permai and Taman Sri Setia

https://goo.gl/PZHPP0

Leader Garden and Chee Seng Garden in the far background

Behind Chee Seng Garden

https://goo.gl/rZoIuV

Appeals Board decides in favour of Sungai Ara residents

"The Appeals Board this morning decided in favour of the residents of Persiaran Kelicap and Solok Kelicap over a “special project” on hilly land near them.

... The significant proportion of the site was higher than the threshold of 250 feet above sea level with slopes exceeding 25 degrees.

There were flaws in the planning approval: The state planning committee cannot delegate its powers for approving such sensitive hill land development to the MBPP, which has no authority to approve such projects.

The Penang Structure Plan, forbidding development above 250 feet was gazetted in 2007. Planning approval for the site was granted in 2012. So that’s another issue. It must be for planning permission given before the Structure Plan.

... Not a single reporter was present; so this is unlikely to be widely reported in the media. Many of them were up on Botak Hill for a site visit, arranged by the MBPP, which was scheduled for the same time. Penang Forum steering committe members were at both places."

For more details, please read Anil Netto at http://anilnetto.com/economy/development-issues/appeals-board-decides-in-favour-of-sungai-ara-residents/

Notification of Annual General Meeting - 13 February 2016

TANJONG BUNGA RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION

Notification of Annual General Meeting

Dear Members and friends of TBRA,

Our Association will hold its 2016 Annual General Meeting on

Date:    Saturday 13  February 2016

Venue: Meeting Room (Boardroom) Tanjong Bunga Market, 11200 Penang, 1st floor

Time:    3 pm  (if you are not a life member please come at 2:30 to settle annual payment of membership fees. We’ll be there to make it easy !)

Agenda:

The business of the Annual General Meeting shall consist of:

1. To receive the Chairman’s address;

2. To confirm the minutes of the previous General Meeting;

3. To receive and adopt the Annual Report by the Secretary;

4. To receive and adopt the Audited Statement of Accounts by the Treasurer;

5. To consider any resolution of which written notice should be given to the Secretary at least seven (7) clear days prior to the meeting;

6. To discuss matters of general interest;

Please do attend !

Yours sincerely

Peter Boyd

Secretary

For and on behalf of

Tanjong Bunga Residents’ Association                                           07 January 2016

Distribution: All Members

‘Hundreds of millions in compensation’?

Jan 15, 2016 by Anil Netto

In all my years of observing politics, whether local or foreign, I have never before come across an administration that so frequently warns of the possibility of having to pay “(hundreds of) millions in compensation” to developers or landlords. To me, this mantra seems to be a favourite fall-back position (to browbeat critics into silence?).

The latest occasion was when prominent lawyer Agatha Foo presented Penang Forum’s position on ‘special projects’ on hill land during a meeting with the state government in Komtar on 11 January 2016.

In a nutshell:

In 1996, a Development and Control Masterplan was drawn up. This was just a guideline that was never gazetted. Under this guideline, several areas of hill land under conservation were scandalously classified as housing (bungalow lots). No thanks to the BN administration back then.

In 2007, the Penang Structure Plan was gazetted, thus making it a legal document. This forbade development more than 250 feet above sea level and on slopes more than 25 degree gradient. But it made an exception, allowing limited development for ‘special projects’. Unfortunately, it did not provide a definition for special projects.

In 2009, the State Planning Committee came up with a guideline to define special projects, which seemed to widen their scope. It allowed public infrastructure and, for cases where planning permission had been approved before the Structure Plan was adopted, it accepted any change of conditions to housing.

Crucially, the 2009 guideline also accepted the hill land areas that were classified as housing zones in the 1996 masterplan, which was really only a guideline.

Penang Forum’s contention is that these areas should have been rezoned back to their original status, i.e. hill land under the Land Conservation Act 1960, in compliance with the Penang Structure Plan forbidding development above 250 feet.

No compensation need be payable as the rezoning would only apply to areas where no planning application had been approved and no development work had started (thus distinguishing it from the Boustead case in George Town where piling work had already begun and heritage conditions were later imposed to lower the height). Penang Forum is not asking for the revocation or modification of planning permission or asking that land be taken over for a public purpose; so the question of compensation should not arise.

Penang Forum also noted that planning permissions can only be extended five times; so, planning permissions approved before 2008 could not have been extended beyond 2012; therefore the 22 projects approved since 2012 are deemed new approvals. (The state government, however, claims applications can be submitted anytime.)

Stringent new conditions for hill land can be imposed when extending planning permissions.

If the Structure Plan only allows limited development for special projects, how could 55 high-rise blocks (including a hotel), approved since 2008, be regarded as “limited development”?

To this, the chief minister, after warning that the state government might be liable to pay “millions in compensation” if it did not approve these projects, then invited Agatha to meet his state legal advisors and try and convince them regarding Penang Forum’s position.

[The full text is available at this external link: https://goo.gl/OCg1oq]
... Or you can click here to continue and ...

TBRA Press-Release Hurray for Teh !

Tanjong Bunga’s Residents’ Association pays tribute to ADUN Teh who followed his conscience and voted for a principle.  This was taken by some as supporting the opposition and caused uproar in the Penang Assembly.

On 21 November 2015, a motion on land reclamation was debated by the Penang government’s State Assembly. Teh Yee Cheu (Tanjong Bunga), also known as the bicycle ADUN and long acknowledged as an environmental activist, was the only DAP ADUN who voted in favor of the motion. The 5 PKR ADUNs who abstained certainly conveyed a message that this issue is bigger than Party politics.

The motion asked that all projects or concessions involving reclamation be made public before they are finalised.  It also wanted any new reclamation projects to be suspended until a complete and detailed environmental impact assessment was conducted. The motion had been filed by Muhammad Farid Saad (BN-Pulau Betong).

Short-term Party politics seem to have taken priority over major environmental concerns. Yet, environmental impact assessments (EIA) must be taken seriously. EIAs must be independent and studied in depth. We need to recall how angry many residents were just last year when the EIA for STP2 was hastily approved without considering public opposition and the impact of the project on fisherfolk?

The Penang Forum had been very disappointed with the Penang State government’s determined obsession to reclaim and develop land on the island with little or no vision on sustainability for the future. Later, in a letter to the new Mayor of Penang, Patahiyah Ismail, the Forum wrote eloquently:  “Our hills are being raped; land reclamation is altering our coastlines beyond recognition; there are proposals to eliminate critical sea grass beds; siltation is destroying our beaches; fishing grounds shrink by the day; and our waters are being polluted. There has been little regard for inadequate infrastructure and current residents’ needs and concerns.”

YB Teh Yee Cheu has been consistent in alerting the media and the public about environmental disasters waiting to happen. TBRA remembers how he shaved his head over Botak Hill and how, more recently, he called on the State government to preserve the Penang seagrass bed at the Middle Bank, off the Penang Bridge, as a conservation and heritage area. Closer to home, he has consistently supported TBRA’s calls to turn the so-called “Sore Thumb” into a public park. Yet, this year, PDC, the State owned Development Corporation was allowed to call for tenders on a huge reclamation (up to 20 acres) off that very same site.

So how could Teh be expected to vote against a demand for independent EIAs, public hearings, for feedback, opinions and recommendations to be seriously considered before embarking on reclamation projects?  Recently, the State government has been attacked over lack of planning, over its too friendly relations with developers.

TBRA believes that Teh Yee Cheu was not only right to follow his convictions but also expressed the Penang people’s opposition to reclamations.

Dato’ Renji Sathiah

Chairman
Tanjung Bungah Residents’ Association
Tel: 0172128792    

---

Postscript for information:

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had hoped for a unanimous vote to defeat the motion. He warned all his faithful: “if you stand with UMNO, you will pay the price!”

But the outcome was NOT unanimous. The motion was approved by 10, rejected by 22 while 5 abstained.

During the debate, Farid proposed that any projects which brought negative effects to Penang should be cancelled.

The state government was also urged to carry out a comprehensive and oceanic study, especially on the environmental and social impact caused by already-completed reclamation projects, and to stop all imminent reclamation project plans in the pipeline until this study had been completed.

YB Teh recalled a quote of his former party national chairman, the late Karpal Singh, that “there are no permanent friends or enemies, but there must be permanent principles.”

He later apologised for his “mistake” not to follow the party line. “After discussion, I felt that I have made a mistake to vote yes, in party interest, I hearby apologise to the party and want to return to continue the party’s struggle for the future,” he said.

“I understand there will be a punishment when someone makes mistake. As organising secretary, I will accept the decision by the secretary-general to carry out the punishment,” he added.

Lim said it is not easy for someone to admit making a mistake and apologise for it.

“We will definitely discuss the matter but I would like to state my appreciation to Teh for apologising to the party,” he added.

Asked if Teh was only apologising for his mistake but would withdraw his support from the motion, Lim said “it was already done in the House, you cannot withdraw your support”.

Asked why the party does not allow an assemblyperson to express his support in what he believes in, Lim said “he has already stated his views, we leave it at that”.

City of Dreams nightmare for Seri Tanjung Pinang residents

Comment by Anil Netto: 

This statement by a group of Seri Tanjung Pinang residents hammers home the point as to why land and property development-for-infrastructure swap deals are a bad idea.

Such deals compromise the development regulatory process by presenting the land reclamation or property developments projects as done deals – because they are needed to finance the infrastructure projects.

City of Dreams is intricately linked to the land-for-tunnel/highways swap deal.

Better not to have swap deals and instead separate the land reclamation/property development and infrastructure projects. Assess the technical, financial and environmental feasiblity of each project separately.

The residents are claiming the City of Dreams project is going to be 156 units per acre. If true, how is this even possible?

---

Press release by STP residents – 26 May 2015
Click here to

Memorandum for YAB Mr. Lim Guan Eng, Chief Minister of Penang

This memorandum was extensively discussed in a meeting between the Chief Minister and Dato' Renji Sathiah, chairperson of the TBRA and Dato' Leong, former chairperson, on July 21, 2015.

Sustainable Development for Penang and Preparation of a State Agenda 21

Preface

We propose that the Penang Green Council develop a meaningful green agenda for Penang based on Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is universally accepted as an agenda that would guide a state towards sustainable development. To have comprehensive Agenda 21 would make Penang the first state in Malaysia to have a sustainable development plan to make the transition to sustainability.
... Click for the full memo in PDF format: https://goo.gl/hHaaGL

One of the old illustrations from Structure Plan 2005

TBRA Has a Facebook Page!

TBRA now has a Facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/tbra2015

Please "Like" it so that you can be informed of events and new posts.

City of Dreams turning into Tanjung Tokong residents’ nightmare

This project is just outside of Tanjong Bungah and the articles give clues that the Penang government seems to be approving developments without clear plans and transparent procedures.

"The residents are claiming the City of Dreams project is going to be 156 units per acre. If true, how is this even possible?"

See AnilNetto.com for more...

Residents showing their displeasure ... (Source: TheMalaysianInsider.com)

Lim had said that Lot 702 (3.67 acres) worth RM135.08 million had already been given to Consortium Zenith BUCG as part of its said payment in kind for the feasibility studies for three proposed roads which were 97% completed.

Local assemblyman for Tanjung Bungah, Teh Yee Cheu, who was present to support the  residents, said he had objected to the project right from the beginning.

“I objected to the proposal to rezone Lot 702 on August 12, 2014. The Penang Structure Plan is due for a review,” said Teh.

He also noted that the Penang Local Plan was still at the draft stage and had yet to be gazetted by the state government.

“Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning Act, the state can withdraw the approved plan by paying compensation to the developer,” added Teh. – May 25, 2015.

See TheMalaysianInsider.com for more

TBRA Needs You! Application Form for Ordinary and Life Membership

 
Use this application form to join TBRA!  https://goo.gl/3yz8A2  .

Life membership at TBRA costs RM100 - once and for all. This is the recommended option. It saves you and us the hassle of renewing membership every year. (Life membership has been approved in the AGM in 2009 and by the Registrar of Society in 2010).

But if you are applying for ordinary membership, the entrance fee is RM8 and yearly fee is RM12.

Please make check payable to (note the spelling and punctuation marks):

              Tanjong Bunga Residents' Association Penang

Let's keep Tanjong Bunga lively but also lovely!

Anil Netto reports on 1000 residents opposing Komtar-esque towers ...

"Residents of Tanjung Bunga packed a press conference this morning to protest against a Boon Siew Group project that will see two 50-storey buildings, one 49-storey building and one 34-storey building sprouting in the area.The project is located between Jalan Sungai Kelian and Jalan Loh Poh Heng."...

... Click here to see Anil Netto's full article and follow ups.

 .

TBRA 2015 AGM - Chairman’s Report Now Available!

Photo Credit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanjung_Bungah#/
media/File:Tanjung_Bungah.jpg

Tanjong Bunga Residents’ Association has held it's 2015 AGM on 28th March 2015. These links point to The Chairman’s report by Leong Yueh Kwong:

• Microsoft Word: http://goo.gl/vO1A9c
• PDF version: http://goo.gl/jhm1MF

Why you should read and share this report: It is packed with important review and info in a few pages!


Contents -  What's inside the Chairman's report?

1.0 Highlights of 2014/2015

1.1 Submission of TBRA brief to the review of the Penang Structure Plan
1.2 The status of the “sore thumb” as a coastal zone public park
1.3 Status of Bukit Mutiara (Pearl Hill) public open space
1.4 Participation of TBRA on the 2014 Detailed EIA of the second phase of the Tanjung Tokong land reclamation

2.0 Some issues and challenges ahead

2.1 Development without planning

2.1.1 Unresolved status of Tanjung Bungah as a secondary development corridor
2.1.2 Development in north coast without a Local Plan and conflicting Structure Plan
2.1.3 High rise high density development in Jalan Permai and Jalan Sungai Kelian
2.1.4 Moving the Chinese temple to Chee Seng Garden without consultation
2.1.5 High rise high density development on Hong Hong paper factory site
2.1.6 High rise high density development in Straits Quay and Batu Ferringhi

2.2 North coast development corridor

2.2.1 Zoning and development in Batu Ferringhi
2.2.2 What is the carrying capacity of the North Coast of Penang Island?
2.2.3 Appropriate and inappropriate building approvals

2.3 The review of the Penang Structure Plan up to 2020

2.3.1 What is the status and did it follow proper procedures of public participation and consultation?
2.3.2 The status of the Local Plan after the review of the Structure Plan

3.0 Current situation for TBRA as an organization

3.1 Membership and participation of members

3.1.1 One common feature of residents’ associations is that they are active when there is a pressing issue, such as high crime rate or high rise building in low rise area. There is little interest apart of issues that directly affect them.
3.1.2 In TBRA, the number of active members are small and getting a quorum for meetings is a problem.

3.2 SWOT analysis and strategic plan?

3.2.1 There have been 2 attempts to develop a strategic plan on how to proceed. Both ended in failure due to the lack of participation of members. There is still a need to build up a shared consensus as to how we want the north coast to be. What should be the strategy that the residents can adopt to make this happen. With no clear and accepted strategy, there will be only ad hoc responses to developers like what is happening now of one neighborhood after another protesting against development proposals. In the end, the neighborhood groups loses.

4.0 The way ahead, from TBRA to North coast’s residents association?

----

Click one of these links to read the full report:

• Microsoft Word: http://goo.gl/vO1A9c
• PDF version: http://goo.gl/jhm1MF

Chee Seng Garden: NO to 40 storeys here

On 6 November, TBRA volunteers put up two banners saying "NO to 40 storeys here". The main intent was to inform as many local residents as possible about the huge tower block intended for construction on the site of the former Hong Hong printers... next morning the banners were gone. 

So this TBRA support to Chee Seng was short-lived. It is believed the banners were removed by people still inside the factory although it has been closed for quite a while. The case should be investigated and if possible the banners retrieved. All TBRA tried to do was inform other residents and alert people to the traffic jams to follow if more hi-rises are allowed to follow in the region. 

Please discuss at the next TBRA meeting on 11 Nov at 8:30 pm at the Straits Regency meeting room.

see below for more details on the site.

Secr. TBRA

Location map.

News article about "HH Residence" in Tanjong Bungah. 

Position Paper by (TBRA on the Inclusion of Tanjong Bunga in the Primary Development Corridor

Review of the Penang Structure Plan 2020

Position Paper

by the

Tanjong Bunga Residents’ Association (TBRA)

on the Inclusion of

Tanjong Bunga in the Primary Development Corridor

Penang, April 2014

Executive Summary

I THE INCLUSION OF TANJONG BUNGA IN THE PRIMARY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR IN THE PENANG STRUCTURE PLAN (2020)

1. The Tanjong Bunga Residents’ Association (TBRA) and many other residents of Tanjong Bunga are of the opinion that, on planning grounds, the inclusion of Tanjong Bunga in the Primary Development Corridor in the current Penang Structure Plan 2020, is flawed.

Tanjong Bunga was clearly placed in the Secondary Development Corridor when the draft Penang Structure Plan was exhibited for public comment in 2006. TBRA and the residents who went for the public hearing raised no objections and accepted that draft. When the Penang Structure Plan was gazetted in 2007, a diagram showed that Tanjong Bunga had been incorrectly placed in the Primary Development Corridor while the text of the Structure Plan still stated that Tanjong Bunga is in the Secondary Corridor. This means that, at some point, the diagram in the Structure Plan was changed without any consultation with the public.

2. This placing of Tanjong Bunga in the Primary Development Corridor is wrong on three counts:

1. Internal contradiction between text and diagram

There is an obvious internal contradiction in the Penang Structure Plan as the text and diagram say different things. In the diagram, Tanjong Bunga has actually disappeared; Tanjong Bunga became part of Tanjong Tokong under the Primary Development Corridor but the text, on the other hand, says that Tanjong Bunga is in the Secondary Development Corridor. The Town and Country Planning Act states when the text and diagram are in contradiction, the text takes precedence over a diagram, since the Structure Plan is a document of policy and guidelines while the diagram’s function is merely to illustrate the text.

2. Lack of due process for changes to the Draft Structure PlanThe proper process for changing the Structure Plan was not followed, as required by the Town and Country Planning Act. Due process under the Act requires any major change has to be exhibited again. The change would be invalid if this were not done.

3. Tanjong Bunga is marked as Tanjong Tokong in the amended diagram

The location of Tanjong Bunga in the changed diagram in the Structure Plan does not follow the gazetted boundary of Tanjong Bunga in the Survey Plan where it starts from Tanjong Bunga Park and extends to Mar Vista Resort. Similarly, the location of Tanjong Tokong also does not follow the gazetted boundary in the Survey Plan. The amended diagram erroneously placed and marked Tanjong Tokong in the location of Tanjong Bunga.

3. TBRA brought up the issue of the change in Corridors to the State government authorities and was told that if it did not agree, it should go to court to ask for an interpretation. TBRA proceeded forthwith to file a case in court for a declaration. It was a straightforward case of trying to set right what appeared to be an "administrative'' error or oversight. However, the case was dismissed because the court accepted the defendant’s (State) allegation that the case was filed too late. As a result, the court has not adjudicated the substantive issues of the case and the merits of the case were not considered and remain unresolved.

See full document in PDF: http://goo.gl/OrdlYg