City of Dreams nightmare for Seri Tanjung Pinang residents

25
4862
The City of Dreams project site

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?

We are a group of residents of Seri Tanjung Pinang at Denai Endau 7, 9, 11, Lengok Endau and Jalan Bayu who are extremely concerned with the project dubbed as City of Dreams (CoD).

Planning Permission (PP) has been applied by Consortium Zenith BUCG Sdn Bhd (CZBUCG) and granted by MPPP on 17 February 2015 to build this 40-storey project comprising two blocks of serviced apartments both 32 storeys tall on top of a seven-storey car park and wellness facilities which in turn sit upon an underground level, housing electrical and mechanical facilities.

The project will be constructed primarily upon a piece of government reserve land known as Lot 702, Seksyen 1, Bandar Tanjung Pinang, DTL, Penang approximately measuring 3.67 acres which is part of the reclaimed land under Seri Tanjung Pinang (STP) Phase 1. The project as approved will have a total of 572 serviced apartments, which translates into a density of 156 units per acre.

We, the concerned residents who have our homes within a stone’s throw from CoD, strongly oppose this extremely high-density high-rise project immediately adjacent to our neighbourhood, which only comprises three-storey landed houses.

The site on which CoD is to be built is the one and only remaining open space within our neighbourhood – a green field on which we and our children have been playing football and flying kites.

Across the field is the green expanse of the one and only remaining mangrove forest on the northeast coast of the Penang Island. It is a few acres wide and has been formed naturally at the extended estuary of Sungai Balik Batu and is home to a complex ecosystem of flora and fauna and for the migratory birds. But soon we will lose both altogether to some hard cold concrete structures.

Close to a hundred objections were put in by us against the PP of this project. We are disappointed that only 10 of our residents were recognised by MPPP as the affected owners.

We are even more disappointed with what went through during the objection hearing held by MPPP on 10 February 2015 and the MPPP’s decision granting the PP as applied by ignoring totally our grounds of objection. The grant of PP on 17 February 2015 was only communicated by MPPP to us via its letter dated 5 March 2015.

We have filed appeal against the grant of PP on 6 April 2015 in the Appeals Board but until the date of this press conference have not received any notice of case management or hearing. On the other hand the developer, Zenith Ewein Sdn Bhd, has announced its plan to commence work on CoD in the second half of 2015 as reported in The Edge Financial Daily on 13 April 2015.

As at today, preliminary works of hoarding up the site and total clearing of the Penang Outer Ring Road (Porr) reserve land part of which to become access to the site have been carried out.

Through our lawyers, we have sent in our written request dated 9 April 2015 to the Building Department of MBPP to withhold approval of the Building Plan of COD and issuance of the Commencement of Work (CoW) order pending disposal of our appeal but we have not received any reply thus far.

To our surprise, we then discovered that the Building Plan had been put in on 9 March 2015 – before many of us even knew of the grant of PP and efficiently approved by the Building Department of MBPP within a month on 7 April 2015, i.e. the next day after we filed in our appeal and two days before our written request.

The turn of events has left us with no choice but to call for this press conference and pursue all necessary legal actions to preserve the status quo until disposal of our appeal. We urge the MBPP to accede to our request immediately so as not to issue the CoW order until disposal of our appeal in the Appeals Board.

We know that the Penang State Government through its various administrative arms has played a central role in this project as can be confirmed from YB Lim Hock Seng’s response to a written question by YB Yap Soo Huey in the State Assembly last week –

  • from agreeing to give CZBUCG as payment in kind 110 acres of land in Bandar Tanjung Pinang for the construction, feasibility study and detailed design works of a RM6.3bn integrated road transport project via an agreement signed on 6 October 2013
  • to signing as the land proprietor of Lot 702 through the Penang Registrar of Titles in the PP application submitted by CZBUCG in October 2014
  • to approving the PP on 17 February 2015 in a rather extraordinarily efficient fashion.

According to YB Lim Hock Seng, Lot 702 (3.67 acres) worth RM135.08m had already been given to CZBUCG as part of the said payment in kind for the feasibility studies for three proposed roads which were 97 per cent completed.

As revealed recently by one of the six parties bidding to be Project Delivery Partner (PDP) in another part of the Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) as reported by The Edge Financial Daily on 31 March 2015, the PDP chosen will be awarded the reclamation rights to the 1,500-acre Middle Bank, similar to the land swap deal with CZBUCG, which had been tasked with building the undersea tunnel and the three roads.

It was also revealed that while waiting for the reclamation of Middle Bank to be completed, the PDP chosen is welcomed by the state government to “scout around” state land and acquire it to help kick-start financing the TMP packages.

That revelation makes us wonder if Lot 702 was also given as a kick-start financing tool for the projects involved and not as payment in kind due for the feasibility studies done (only 97 per cent) for the three proposed roads.

The people and voters of Penang have very high hope and expectation of its current state government. When it comes to performing its duties and exercise of powers under the Town and Country Planning Act 1976, the MBPP must uphold and ensure conformity to established principles and guidelines in order to achieve proper, structured and sustainable development of Penang.

The Selangor state government has recently demonstrated good governance in listening to its people – by saying no to or reducing the damaging portion of some mega projects that tend to only serve certain commercial interests but which would adversely affect the environment and quality of life of many; look at the cancellation of Kidex and the development of the PKNS Sports Complex in Selangor.

Not only that the Penang State Government shall emulate Selangor in listening to its people, it shall also live up to its own slogan of CAT.

We therefore urge the Penang state government, which holds the key to this project, to answer the following questions in a manner compatible with a competent, accountable and transparent state government:

  1. Is Lot 702 specified to be part of the 110 acres as payment in kind in the agreement dated 6 October 2013?
  2. When is/was the payment due for the feasibility studies of the three proposed roads under the agreement?
  3. If Lot 702 has been alienated to CZBUCG, when was it done?
  4. Is the state government willing and ready to provide us a copy of the agreement to us if we are to apply under the Freedom of Information Enactment?
  5. In the Draft Local Plans 2005-2020 of Penang Island, our neighbourhood is zoned as Established Housing Area (“Kawasan Perumahan Tetap”) whilst Lot 702 is zoned for “institution”. Has there been any change to that? If so, when?
  6. What considerations did the State Planning Committee take in coming out with the density of 156 units per acre for CoD? Did they know the site is sandwiched between a neighbourhood of three-storey houses and a plot of mangrove forest currently?
  7. How much green open space was originally provided for in the Master Layout Plan of STP Phase 1? How much is left currently?
  8. Isn’t Lot 702 stated to be for low-density residential development in the DEIA Report on STP Phase 2?
  9. Where will be the permanent access for CoD? When will it come into existence?
  10. The PP as granted provides that part of Lot 721 will be used as temporary access (50 feet wide) to the building site. Does that not infringe the zoning of Lot 721 as open/recreational space (“kawasan lapang/rekreasi”) under the draft Local Plans thereby further depriving us of the very limited green/recreational space we can enjoy?
  11. Will any part of Porr reserve land be used as the permanent access for CoD? If so, will there be any conflict with the state government’s duty to carry out the Porr project as specified under the Penang Structure Plan 2020?
  12. Apart from stipulating in the PP that the conditions for approval (under “Kajian Penilaian Kesan Kepada Alam Sekitar (EIA) Ruj no AS(PP)E04(6)P-2/90(56) dated 7 June 1993) must be fulfilled for this project and stating generally that the project must preserve the quality of environment so that a sustainable development can be achieved, has any EIA study been conducted for this high-rise and high-density project (with an underground level as well) on a part of reclaimed and seaside land as required under the Penang Structure Plan 2020 gazetted on 28 June 2007?

Before everything is too late, we urge the Penang state government to look for an alternative plot of land to build CoD or review the PP granted. It must realise that the project will not be a sustainable development if built on Lot 702 and will not be fulfilling many of the Sectorial Bases (“Dasar-dasar Sektoral”) envisioned in the Penang Structure Plan 2020. It shall not ignore the ABC of planning laws.

The need for the state government to fulfil its contractual financial obligation for some other proposed public works shall not be taken as the paramount reason to have approved the project of CoD on Lot 702.

We would also like to seek information and clarification from MPPP the role played by SPC (if any) in the approval process and why the PP for CoD departed materially from the established guidelines and principles laid down and applicable to all planning approvals.

We sincerely believe the established guidelines which are within public knowledge are fundamental to a certain, predictable and transparent planning approval process to ensure Penang remains a highly liveable city and should be applied consistently throughout.

Finally, we wish to also record our gratitude to YB Yap Soo Huey, our State Assembly representative, YB Teh Yee Cheu and YB Zairil Khir Johari, who have voiced their concerns and stated their objections against CoD to the authorities concerned. We hope they will continue to do their best to support us in this cause.

References:

List of Reference Materials
1. Notice from MPPP dated 5 March 2015 and Borang B under Section 22(6) Town and Country Planning Act 1976
2. Grounds of Appeal to the Appeals Board
3. Plan contained in EIA Report of STP Phase 2 referring to Lot 702 as low density residential development
4. The Edge Financial Daily, 31 March 2015 pg 4
5. The Edge Financial Daily, 1 April 2015 pg 2
6. The Edge Financial Daily, 13 April 2015 pg 4
7. The Edge Financial Daily, 17 April 2015 pg 4
8. Relevant portions of Draft Local Plans of Penang Island 2005-2020 (“Intensiti”, “Pengezonan” and “Peta Cadangan”)
9. Google Maps satellite images of the area
10. Letter of objection against CoD from YB Teh Yee Cheu to Penang Rural and Urban Planning Department (“Jabatan Perancang Bandar dan Desa Negeri Pulau Pinang”) (JPBD) dated 12 August 2014 and to MPPP One Stop Centre (OSC) dated 16 November 2014
11. Letter of objection against CoD from YB Zairil Khir Johari to JPBD 26 November 2014
12. Letter of objection against CoD from YB Yap Soo Huey to JPBD dated 14 January 2015
13. Sin Chew mykampung online report, 12 May 2015
14. The Malaysian Insider report, 13 May 2015
15. The Star Online report, 16 May 2015
16. Article by Goh Ban Lee, as a senior research fellow at the Penang Institute, in Penang Monthly dated 13 August 2011 – “Clarifying the role of politicians in development control”

Please help to support this blog if you can.

Read the commenting guidlelines for this blog.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

25 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Penangkia

If you dont like DAP government, vote for BN lah

James

Hi It is the same thing happened to me in the area of Terrace house (Beside of Mosque) where opposite of Taman Perkaka. It was really unacceptable from the experince by terrace owner .. my experience was, i parked my car along the road in opposite of their unit, the road suppose to be own by public, someone damaged my rear wiper, do you see that how selfish the attitude is, the owner expect that the road is also part of their property as i can tell that this kind of weath people is useless and selfish in our society.… Read more »

LGE tak boleh

Agree that land and property development-for-infrastructure swap deals are a bad idea. More so when a proper public transport system is not in place and penang is going to run out of water resources by 2020 (see: http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2015/06/01/Penang-might-tap-seawater-by-2020-Criticial-water-shortage-by-2025-says-PBAHB-man/)

Before these issues have been addressed, why the Penang State Government is bulldozing with high density development in the island

eskay

WoW..RM135.08 millions for the feasibility study ? The state government has to be very transparent in this very costly FS. We also need to know how much stamp duty was paid by the developer when Lot 702 was transferred to them. Any special discount and term of payment ?

Komtar officer

Stamp duty stamped with Cat’s paw is converted to ‘affordable’ and AOK, no question asked in state assembly. For other developer-friendly terms and conditions, go to 28th floor Komtar for secret answers.

calvinsankaran

Our CM claims that Penang has limited land and cannot afford to house refugees. Yet he freely swaps the remaining lands for houses for the super rich and vanity projects that serve no one. Even cowherds in Batu Kawan are chased away for building more luxury homes.

LGE tak boleh

It has been fishy since the beginning. See the blog posting below:

http://www.bursastocktalk.blogspot.com/2014/08/mysteries-in-penang-traffic-dispersal.html

gisselle

Gurney pulau tikus area in future will bar motor vehicles. Residents and tourists have to use shuttle buses.

iSupercally

Yes very very fishy

Bob K.

The fact is if this can happen to STP, it will happen everywhere else. To those who posted the “padan muka” comment, i detect a hint of jealousy of those who live in STP. But the gist is that this happens to EVERYBODY so we need push back, regardless of where this happens: Jelutong, Jesselton, Balik Pulau, STP ….

calvinsankaran

Our CM is very quick on holding press conferences and issuing press statements on international and national issues which of no concern to him. However when it comes to key state issues which requires answers and clarification, he goes AWOL. The fundamental issue here is why there was no consultation with the residents and other key stakeholders before deciding on land swap. I sense a definite change of attitude in LGE after 2010 – he has become arrogant and dictatorial – he just couldn’t care less what people think and goes on making decisions unilaterally and then leave it to… Read more »

Ooi W. Liang

Did this group of residents of STP complain when developer was building their houses back then? Don’t think so..
What goes around, comes around..

tunglang

Why should they complain when they are paying a super-premium price for a super-premium product marketed at super-premium image (perception)?
The developer (may be) liable for (misleading) if it can’t maintain what’s been ‘promised’ to customers as an upmarket lifestyle which is inclusive of an environment of sun, sea view & no high rise condos in the vicinity. Customers are no stupid, my dear marketing illiterates.

YB Loh

Agree agree. They are gating up the public area and beach promenade which is wrong

YB Loh

They are a selfish bunch of people complaining for their own selfish interests in the guise of other reasons. To the State Government, please go ahead and do what is best for the whole state.

rui

If your home is next to this Mega project would you be making such an uncalled for remark????

tunglang

Doing what is best for the whole state??? This is talking nonsense as far as reality of development has shown. I just smell self-interest despite the fact of many who are disgruntled with that Niao Kong gomen.
What vision has ‘it’ to show as far as Penang has transformed under the Cement Associated Transformation (CAT) since 308, the mother of all Bluffs?

rui, I empathise with your understanding of this issue.

YB Loh

A lot of homes are built next to major projects. Until now I don’t see what is the actual issue other than selfish self proclaimed rich people trying to think they own the area….

Michael

Isn’t is interesting how it works…The folks who bought into Sri Tanjung saw their magnificent three storey landed bungalows standing alongside the seashore and amongst green spaces where their children can catch fish and fly their kites and play their soccer. No doubt they paid a lot of money for the privilege. Ten years down the track little did they know that massive high density, high rise apartment blocks would be built over the fence from them…where their children fly their kites…. Don’t worry chaps, you probably have enough money to sell-up and buy another seascape somewhere else on the… Read more »

YB Loh

Totally agree. These folks are snobbish and have their gated area preventing the Tg Tokong kampung folks entering the area which is not right as it is a public road and public promenade. Serves them right, what goes around comes around

gk ong

Techically those landed bungalows owners do not have the exclusive rights to the “seashore and green spaces” other than the land where the properties sit on.

YB Loh

And they don’t have rights to block entrance to public roads too….I wonder why Anil did not highlight these things in his columns……….the Malays living in the kampungs, low cost flats being deprived of the rights to play in the open public playground, access to the public beach…etc.. Why is anilnetto.com silent on these topics?

Yennie

Penang needs more road assessments is of course a fact. But up till todate, what have we seen ? The openning up of assessments are nowhere to be sighted instead the mushrooming of all sorts of high-rises/high densities unabatedly !
It’s also very sceptical: How could the state govt gets very easily alienating land without seeing the proposed works done under the so-called agreements!

iSupercally

For the first time, I shall be voting BN no matter what at next GE as I could now see the deception and worst of the opposition compared to BN

LGEng tak boleh

Especially Air Puteh, if LGE contests there