Nobody can sustain a reclaimed artificial beach
I refer to the headline title in Daily Express “TAED Fits Development Agenda of Government, Objectors Told “
City Hall (DBKK) Director-General Datuk Joannes Solidau told the public hearing on the Tanjung Aru Eco-Development project at the Kota Kinabalu Community Centre that it was the aspiration of the government to create a sustainable development beneficial to Sabah.
Despite all morning on Tuesday 22 March, 2017 at the KK community centre with so much protestors’ or objectors’ views on TAED, that view is still held by the committee under DBKK.
I would like to lay out my protests with a single page summarising the grounds that TAED is unsustainable as a reclaimed artificial beach with a likely very big failure in the offing.
What was the intention of TAED as the name of the company Tanjung Aru Eco Development Sdn. Bhd.? Simply it was “pollution and erosion” and that an ecological project was to be created. Pollution and erosion are both the neglected factors of DBKK and its predecessors for decades.
The town planning as done and exhibited at DBKK is not ecological but an economical one.
It is less than 30% eco as the dominant golf course and those concrete jungle have nothing ecological about that. Even the proposed forest in Prince Philip Park as expanded would take another 20 years and more to be mature and be functional.
So the proposed draft town planning as proposed is misrepresenting the original idea – eco.
Even the intention in the compulsory acquisition was extension of Tanjung Aru township but the initial offer for that was not on the level of market value of a township giving the impression of “exploitation” of the players.
Where is the feasibility study/paper to support this RM50b project?
Looking at the Annual Reports of TAED SB for a few years, there is no sign of a real business case of company as an agency of the State Government. Would the State Government be the real benefactor of the project? How much would the State Government make from the RM50b project in any projection? Instead it is likely the State Government may end up with debts (given the prevalent new property market decline) and then likely the debts be bailed out by the public and consumers. In a worst scenario, any claims for a failed project for whatever reasons could be in excess of RM50b. So mitigate that by stopping the TAED project.
Where would the money come from for the preliminary features like the artificial beach, reclamation of few hundred acres, the Prince Philip Park and minimal infrastructure which can cost up to RM5b? Only after these features are in place, the investors would come in.
In the name of erosion, pollution and eco, many existing valuable features already destroyed and more may be destroyed as the town planning ignore the possibilities of destruction of the Tanjung Aru township and KKIA for flash floods after reclamation.
Would buildings and properties without sea view on sight command premier prices as proposed? I think the proposed draft town planning could be varied or violated by the developer going back to a new drawing board to build buildings as near as be sea front as we have seen in other similar projects elsewhere to command a much better value. If that happens, it can be helpless for the people to oppose or protest that once TAED is approved.
Lets retain the centuries-old Tanjung Aru Beach as the original Godly icon, the eco treasure for the tourists and local with minimal restoration costs and implement the genuine ecological concept (less concrete and more greenery) under a revised TAED management Board and no realty transactions with a Botanical Garden with much less costs and more chances to generate better revenue of that with much greater participation from the public. The Botanical Garden inclusive of the Prince Philip Park without the golf course would be the enhanced green lung in Kota Kinabalu and beyond.
The money that is saved from TAED can be utilised for critical environment issues like traffic solutions in the MRT/LRT in KK and KK CBD to make KK more liveable as soon as possible and Sabah Environment Expo (SEE Sabah) within the Botanical Garden.
Joshua Y C Kong 24 March, 2017
I refer to the headline title in Daily Express “TAED Fits Development Agenda of Government, Objectors Told “
City Hall (DBKK) Director-General Datuk Joannes Solidau told the public hearing on the Tanjung Aru Eco-Development project at the Kota Kinabalu Community Centre that it was the aspiration of the government to create a sustainable development beneficial to Sabah.
Despite all morning on Tuesday 22 March, 2017 at the KK community centre with so much protestors’ or objectors’ views on TAED, that view is still held by the committee under DBKK.
I would like to lay out my protests with a single page summarising the grounds that TAED is unsustainable as a reclaimed artificial beach with a likely very big failure in the offing.
What was the intention of TAED as the name of the company Tanjung Aru Eco Development Sdn. Bhd.? Simply it was “pollution and erosion” and that an ecological project was to be created. Pollution and erosion are both the neglected factors of DBKK and its predecessors for decades.
The town planning as done and exhibited at DBKK is not ecological but an economical one.
It is less than 30% eco as the dominant golf course and those concrete jungle have nothing ecological about that. Even the proposed forest in Prince Philip Park as expanded would take another 20 years and more to be mature and be functional.
So the proposed draft town planning as proposed is misrepresenting the original idea – eco.
Even the intention in the compulsory acquisition was extension of Tanjung Aru township but the initial offer for that was not on the level of market value of a township giving the impression of “exploitation” of the players.
Where is the feasibility study/paper to support this RM50b project?
Looking at the Annual Reports of TAED SB for a few years, there is no sign of a real business case of company as an agency of the State Government. Would the State Government be the real benefactor of the project? How much would the State Government make from the RM50b project in any projection? Instead it is likely the State Government may end up with debts (given the prevalent new property market decline) and then likely the debts be bailed out by the public and consumers. In a worst scenario, any claims for a failed project for whatever reasons could be in excess of RM50b. So mitigate that by stopping the TAED project.
Where would the money come from for the preliminary features like the artificial beach, reclamation of few hundred acres, the Prince Philip Park and minimal infrastructure which can cost up to RM5b? Only after these features are in place, the investors would come in.
In the name of erosion, pollution and eco, many existing valuable features already destroyed and more may be destroyed as the town planning ignore the possibilities of destruction of the Tanjung Aru township and KKIA for flash floods after reclamation.
Would buildings and properties without sea view on sight command premier prices as proposed? I think the proposed draft town planning could be varied or violated by the developer going back to a new drawing board to build buildings as near as be sea front as we have seen in other similar projects elsewhere to command a much better value. If that happens, it can be helpless for the people to oppose or protest that once TAED is approved.
Lets retain the centuries-old Tanjung Aru Beach as the original Godly icon, the eco treasure for the tourists and local with minimal restoration costs and implement the genuine ecological concept (less concrete and more greenery) under a revised TAED management Board and no realty transactions with a Botanical Garden with much less costs and more chances to generate better revenue of that with much greater participation from the public. The Botanical Garden inclusive of the Prince Philip Park without the golf course would be the enhanced green lung in Kota Kinabalu and beyond.
The money that is saved from TAED can be utilised for critical environment issues like traffic solutions in the MRT/LRT in KK and KK CBD to make KK more liveable as soon as possible and Sabah Environment Expo (SEE Sabah) within the Botanical Garden.
Joshua Y C Kong 24 March, 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment