Can Urban Redevelopment Act really solve urban slum problem?

• The URA policy for redevelopment on single buildings and its ad hoc planning on piecemeal plot basis is not a holistic approach to address the overall slum neighbourhood problem. In fact, the areas identified for redevelopment may not even necessarily have the inherent characteristics to be categorised as “slums”.

The government has proposed the Urban Redevelopment Act (URA) legislation, saying it is a solution to urban slums. However, the National House Buyers’ Association (HBA) views this as a myth. Instead, the URA is merely scratching the surface rather than addressing the root causes.

(Read: Nga sees 534 potential areas in Peninsular Malaysia for urban redevelopment)

URA focuses on single buildings, not whole neighbourhoods

First and foremost, one should consider the environmental and socio-economic impact from the public interest and urban planning perspective. As it is, the proposed URA is a rather tunnel-vision approach to address the urban/suburban slum issue. Focusing the redevelopment on a single isolated property without any consideration for its surrounding neighbourhood will lead to gentrification and displacement of its community.

While gentrification could attract new residents and businesses, it may also drive up property values, pushing out long-term residents, especially those with lower incomes, which could disrupt communities and change the entire neighbourhood’s social fabric, as well as exacerbate inequality and economic disparity.

Under the proposed URA, various sites for re-development have been identified under PTKL 2040, but they are “single buildings” rather than “neighbourhood slums”. The identified, so-called problematic buildings are dispersed at different locations in isolation on a piecemeal basis, which are independent from each other, while urban slums are supposed to refer to a whole neighbourhood rather than a singular building.

Moreover, the formation of slums is often closely associated with rapid urbanisation and urban sprawl in an uncontrolled and unplanned manner. While rapid development drives economic growth and attracts people to seek work and investment opportunities in urban areas, local governments are often unable to manage the transition process of urbanisation and development. Hence, both the rural-to-urban migrants and immigrant workers are left without affordable places to live in, leading them to dwell in slums or abandoned buildings, thereby creating urban slums.  

Slums sprout and continue to expand on a combination of socio-economic, demographic and political reasons, caused and contributed by economic stagnation, depression, high unemployment, social exclusion and poverty. Low-income rural-to-urban migration and foreign immigrants, coupled with ad hoc poor urban infrastructure planning and insufficient public housing are the main underlying causes attributed to formation and expansion of urban slums.

Differentiating salvageable old buildings from slums

The URA policy for redevelopment on single buildings and its ad hoc planning on piecemeal plot basis is not a holistic approach to address the overall slum neighbourhood problem. In fact, the areas identified for redevelopment may not even necessarily have the inherent characteristics to be categorised as “slums”.

The etymology of the word “slum” originated from “back alley”, where the wealthy live on the high streets and the poor in the service streets behind, within the same district. They are often associated with impoverishment, intensive overcrowding, high crime rate, vice laden activities, substandard/deteriorating living conditions, unsafe building conditions, lack of access to essential services, and unsanitary or uninhabitable conditions causing infectious diseases and epidemic.

A merely run-down old building, which only needs a facade facelift, should not in any way be classified as a “slum”. Therefore, one needs to clearly define a “slum” neighbourhood and distinguish it from an “old or aged building”.

The URA policy does not seem to address the underlying causes of slum. Instead, ironically, it seems to introduce more mass housing with much higher density, which will only lead to further displacement, reduce connectivity, promote social isolation and exclusion and threaten the social environment.

The proposed urban redevelopment approach to at least five fold- to 10-fold density will lead to further deterioration of the urban core. It will only result in the slum problem worsening in the absence of proper, appropriate and adequate infrastructure planning, provision for transportation, as well as lack of essential public amenities, open space, playground, school, hospital, community centre, religious centre, etc to support the higher population density.

The higher density will further intensify traffic congestion and urban flooding problems, rather than create a community-centric public realm and open space to balance the compact living.

Build communities, not mass houses

Density, mixed-use developments and transit-oriented developments have become components of an urbanist orthodoxy. Such orthodox urban planning only compounds and intensifies the pre-existing urbanisation problem. It is not a long-term solution to address the growing population with pressing needs for quality housing and public amenities. These massive privatised large-scale real estate redevelopments that isolate themselves from the surrounding neighbourhoods will only cause further woes to problems associated with urbanisation.

The privatisation scheme of re-development under the URA proposal will likely lead to higher density and maximisation of land use without commensurate basic essential public amenities and public open spaces. Furthermore, infrastructure upgrading limited to a plot basis will not address the overall city planning issues in terms of connectivity, pedestrianised sidewalks, urban drainage and irrigation system, but will only result in further traffic congestion, flooding as well as other negative social-economic impacts.

Traffic artery flows with on-street parkings have been long-standing causes to the disintegration and destruction of cities as the flood of cars and influx of traffic flow lead to erosion of pedestrianised sidewalks and public open spaces. In fact, metropolitan cities around the world are moving towards small block neighbourhood pocket parks (instead of massive mega-developments) in order to avoid disconnected self-isolated discrete streets  that gradually become urban mega-slums as the development progresses.

Balancing old and new

Besides that, demolishing old buildings erases a city’s history and character. Preservation efforts are essential to maintain cultural heritage and historical value, such as in Melaka, and Kuala Lumpur’s Petaling Street and Brickfields, which have been transformed with facade facelifts, pedestrian-friendly and traffic re-planning without the need to demolish any existing buildings.

Urban renewal does not only encompass redevelopment, but should infuse new potential and putative use, involving building rehabilitation, revitalisation and repurpose, and transformation of multiple usage within the same site. There is a need for diversity and mixed primary use for successful city streets and neighbourhood parks for community benefits. For example, the high-density KL City Centre is anchored by the 88-storey Petronas Twin Towers, Suria KLCC and KLCC Convention Centre, but has a 50-acre urban park at its heart, right at KL’s most prime location.

In developed western nations, old city centres or ancient cities in Europe and modern cities like Singapore with a marina waterfront, development is about the delicate balance of preserving the existing old buildings with heritage and historical values, and the opportunities to develop new buildings that complement and fit into the existing urban fabric.

For instance, Singapore has been redeveloped and transformed from an overcrowded, slum-filled decrepit urban core into a modern world-class financial hub. Singapore has no choice because land is scarce and limited. However, instead of bringing in more roads and cars, causing overcrowding, traffic and flood due to overdevelopment, city centres are pedestrianised with landscaped sidewalks by means of limiting and control of private cars into the city centre.

In another example, the once most dense area on earth with a population density of more than 1.25 million inhabitants per square kilometre was the infamous Kowloon Walled City — the unplanned and unregulated “lawless mega-slum” in Hong Kong. Lack of community facilities, sub-divided flats that were proliferated without proper natural light and ventilation and fire safety, high crime rates, drugs and prostitution rendered the place unliveable and unsafe. It was demolished in the 1990s and converted into a Kowloon Walled City Park, providing an urban sanctuary.

Liveability premised on community benefits

Any legislation must protect and preserve rights and benefits of each owner and the public at large. With higher density, not only will the profit not be shared with the owners, the surrounding community will also be affected. Hence, the proposed URA is foreseen to benefit commercial property developers rather than owners, new buyers and the community at large.

A successful urban renewal policy must promote liveable cities premised on community benefits, and implementation of the legislation with community involvement is crucial. Urban redevelopment must stand on the right footing. Leaving urban city planning to the hands of profit-oriented private developers seems more like a privatisation scheme of redevelopment offered by the government to the developers, which will only lead to irreversible damage and disaster.

This article is written jointly by Ar TPr Ng Guat Yong, Technical Advisor to HBA and Datuk Chang Kim Loong, honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association (HBA).
HBA can be contacted at:
Email: [email protected]

Looking to buy a home? Sign up for EdgeProp START and get exclusive rewards and vouchers for ANY home purchase in Malaysia (primary or subsale)!