Pre. Medan Trip

Yeah ! Finally we r going oversea for a trip. When i 1st join USM doing Urban & Regional Planning, i was expecting tonnes of trips to places that i had never been before to see and observe how other people plans there environment, planning standards and guidelines. But how wrong was I, all i got was location that i have to go and do assignment, and yet it was no fun at all.

For my final year, our studio has finally organized a trip to foreign country which is Medan, Indonesia. We are all going on 23/3/2009-27/3/2009, boarding airasia flight.

We r going to places like Danau Toba (Lake Tobe, largest lake in Indonesia with an island that is the size of Singapore), Siposo poso waterfall, Berastagi, Active Volcano at both MT. sibayak and MT. Sinabung and local markets that sell anything from daily groceries to anything u can imagine.

Ok lah, go already come back only tell u all how lah !

All packed and ready to go.

So wish me a good and happy trip ! I will blog about this trip when i come back, till then i will be offline !

Ciao !!

Chief Minister of Penang defends tiger park idea

GEORGE TOWN: Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has defended his proposal to start a tiger park in Relau, saying that the state needed a new eco-tourism project.

“Some people have suggested a zoo but it is not economical to have one presently. The people, especially children, are generally interested in big animals. The ‘wow’ factor is there,” he said when asked to elaborate on his idea. Lim had announced that the state government planned to create a tiger park on a 40ha plot owned by the Penang Municipal Council (MPPP) known as the Pondok Durian Cap Kaki.

He said Penang, in its pursuit to become an international city, should have such a park as most international cities had zoos. The park could have a few other animals but it would mainly feature tigers which symbolised bravery and dynamism, he added. “It will be a private-driven project and a tender will be called if the state government goes ahead with the plan.

“Currently the state is collecting public feedback. Those who want to contribute ideas or suggestions can write to the state government in Komtar or the MPPP,” he added.

The project, he said, would also help the state government and the MPPP tackle illegal farming activities at the proposed site. It was reported earlier that the proposal had received negative feedback from the public and several non-governmental organisations like the Malaysian Nature Society Penang branch. They are concerned about the safety issues and felt that the state should concentrate on promoting Penang’s heritage, culture and arts.

Meanwhile, Penang National Park and Wildlife Department director Noor Alif Wira Osman said the state government and private parties involved in the project would have to iron out legal problems if the plan goes ahead. He said it was not like setting up a bird park. “The location for the park must be suitable. The safety around the tiger enclosures and surrounding areas is also a main priority,” he said, adding that the care for the tigers would also be subjected to close monitoring by the department. “There are strict guidelines to follow to get the permit,” he said.

By LOOI SUE-CHERN, The Star.


From the above article, we can see that Penang's Chief Minister has included public participation within a very environmental sensitive development. The MPPP has gotten various feedback from the the public regarding what they think about the project.

Based on the feedback that were given by the public and NGOs, it is not a positive reaction from the public, althought this might sound bad to the state government or the chief himself, but bare in mind that the public had voiced there concern and that the government has to take in consideration of what the public in order to fully tackle the urban planning problem, this also shows that penangites are very active in urban planning participation.

But i really wish that MPPP could had set up a Public Participation online portal whereby everyone can post there comments online, this way we can all see the comments and further addon it and the speed and quality of communication between the public and administrative could be better. They could also upload plans and 3D image of the park and it's surrounding so that penangites can have a better picture of what is happening.

For my personal oppinion, i really think that the idea of a tiger park is kind of "out of the box" because it is so not Penang to me. And is it the only way to tackle illegal farming, don't we have government officers to do that? What R they doing? If we r going to have a development to stop this illegal farming why don't we have a casino, this way MPPP can make revenue out of the TAX and still stop illegal farming. Therefore, to the people digging their brains for this tiger park idea, please u all can do better.

What we need to focus on is the G.Town area, to improve and conserve the heritage and cultural elements of G.Town, Relau is no where near as important as G.Town to Penang Island, focus on those that are really broken. but if MPPP want to have a circus display like Malacca i hope that they know that Penangites aren't sitting ducks.

Something bad happened in Studio today

Today something bad happened at studio. We were having having this talk by Mdm Lim which is a registered QS (Quantity Surveyor) on the topic of project/development costing. One of the jobscope of a QS is to come out with an BQ (Bill of Quantity) to see whether the project is financially feasible or not. It was rather interesting letting us know that not all development can have mega rich people funding it.

The Palm Jumeriah.
Perfect example of money no object spending on development.

Therefore we must have financial control for all RATIONAL development.

Then the talk reach the Q&A session like always. I, with my jinx mouth asked a very sensitive yet important question, which is whether maintainence fees of an development, are included into the account of consideration (cause we all knew that Malaysia is famous for development projects that are Utopian and yet our maintainence are full of BS !).

Just hope that PutraJaya's Maintainence is not BS like always !

Mdm Lim told us that maintainence for a particular project are not included into the BQ (QS quote me if i am wrong here k). Then climax of the day came along, straight after she finish answering my question, dirty sewage water started pouring down from the ceiling directly above me.

How good timing can that be ! U tell me lah.

Everyone in the studio rushes out, to avoid getting soaked by sewage water.

More and more sewage water keep gashing in.

Then the water started to sip out from the studio and into the walkway.

there was so much water, even the staircase has become a makeshift waterfall.

I was able to escape the sewage water thanks to my perfectly tone, agile, strong, flexible and fast reacting body. If not i will become the laughing stock for the rest of my USM's life.

just like i told u, perfectly tone, agile, strong, flexible and fast reacting body.

After the incident, this is how my studio look like.

A total mess.

Everything is wet, soaking and my place is full of sewage water.
God knows what the heck is in that water.

U might think that the School of Housing, Building and Planning could had the best quality buildings in USM, and this is what happened. How bloody hell embarrassing is that. But just maybe HBP's teaching method is totally different from other institutions, they teaches their student what not to do by having it at your doorstep or should i say on top of your head.

Can someone call MAINTAINENCE please.

Usage Of ICT in Public Participation

The traditional method of public participation involves the use of public meetings. These are regarded by most as an inefficient, unfair, and are nearly always held in a fixed place or location and at a fixed time, often when people are at work or in the evening when other commitments mean people cannot attend meetings (The meetings are quite often confrontational, they can be dominated by vocal minority groups, it is often difficult for the layperson to understand, and the whole process quite often involves highly technical and legal ‘jargon’. Members of the public who attend these meetings also often experience difficulty understanding the spatial relationships portrayed on 2-D maps and plans, their frustration often leading to miscommunication and mistrust of planners.)

The importance of the public’s participation in the process is tantamount in avoiding further conflict and objection once a development has been undertaken. “The picture is worth a thousand words and direct involvement in most endeavors results in a greater understanding of the experience” (Howard, 1998). Unfortunately the wisdom of this phrase has not fully been understood by the planning world as yet. The message here is clear, greater involvement in the planning process leads to greater understanding and acceptance of plans and proposals. Therefore any process which will improve the relationship between planners and the community they serve will inevitably result in a more fair and efficient planning system.

(Shiffer, 1996) writes, "Information is only powerful when it is effectively comprehended by those who use it. IT (Information Technology) can help people to comprehend information, (thereby delivering knowledge)." Nearly all planning information possesses a spatial orientation that is essential to acquiring the knowledge necessary for effective planning participation. (Shiffer, 1995a) and others (Hundt 1997, Krygier 1998, Pieplow 1998) have demonstrated that geographically related technology, including:

GIS Concept

Digital Aerial Photography

geographic information systems (GIS); digital aerial photography and photographs; digital simulation and animation; and even audio/video recordings of public meetings where land use issues are discussed can be employed during participatory activities to provide that geographic orientation.

(Dandekar, 1982) suggests that involvement of the public to stimulate good ideas and build a consensus amongst a diverse community requires three modes of communication: presentation of information to the public; receipt of information from the public; and exchange of ideas and opinions that build upon shared information as the ideas evolve. The importance of information exchange between the public and the local planning authorities, ICT infrastructure can play a major role in stimulating this process.

(Kaj, 2002) said that electronic tools can overcome many traditional obstacles in the aspect of reaching out to the public with the information. Among the traditional obstacles that can be overcome are,

i. Preparation of information in the form of electronic data can reduce the cost on hardcopy printing materials (reduced usage on paper).

ii. The public will be able to reach out to certain information or documents through the internet, at their own preference time without disturbing their normal day routine.

iii. There will be no need for the public to go the authorities office to gather the information that they need, in fact this can be done anywhere with internet connection

iv. The electronic information usage in different from the traditional information usage, although both convey the same information but the electronic information has the advantage that enable the public to do information search electronically, Cut and Paste of the information, alteration and correction on the information can be done much easier.

Potentials of ICT for public participation

The internet is no longer an exotic space.

Internet

There are more than 160 countries in this world and Malaysian is the 17th highest global online population. United States, a country with 295 millions population rank number 1 as the highest global online population country with 62.74% populations or 185 millions having access to internet following by China, top population country with 1310 millions populations but with only 99.8 millions internet users. Is closely followed by Japan with 78.05 millions internet users.

Malaysia, a country even though have only 24 millions population have a high ranking on global online population based on its high percentage of population which is around 41.83% population having internet access.

People use the internet for online banking, to search for job offers or a new partner, for information and communication (news, emails), to book holidays, to shop online, etc. The internet is not longer an alien instrument. To many, the use of the web is as naturally as reading newspapers or listening to the radio. Therefore, e-participation is timely and, considering the above listed circumstances, it is appropriate to allow residents to participate in planning processes online. (cf. Bräuer, M., Biewendt, T., 2005)

One of the biggest advantages offered by e-Participation is the independence of space and time: the user is free to choose, when and where he will join the project to get himself informed, and to participate in the process. This aspect could widen the range of people already participating in planning processes, because also those people can get involved who, until now, did not have the opportunity to, due to handicaps, inconvenient working times, personal timidity. (The internet is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.)

Therefore, information can be offered, discussion can take place, and participation is possible, regardless of any office hours. It is also a chance to involve groups which may not be reached with traditional participation methods but are typical internet users (young people, technology savvy people and bloggers too). Getting more responds from other people involved will also enhance the input of knowledge. Legal authorities will profit from getting input from different stakeholders and a wide variety of user groups. Planning will not longer be a process of making proposals and let them discuss by the public, but could benefit from the wide range of public knowledge, which could now easily be used to improve planning and decision making processes (cf. Bräuer, M., Biewendt, T. 2005). Another point is the possibility of interactive communication, also, or even with high number of participation. Participants are able to link their comments interactively and time lapsed (asynchrony), different from face-to-face discussion (synchrony) where the comments are directly linked to the earlier statement.

The internet allows representing continuously profound information of all relevant planning data which is accessible to whoever is interested in. But not only common information, like textual and map based input, might be offered via internet. One of the big potentials of the web is the interactivity and the special visualization possibilities. People can look at planning proposals in a 3-Dimensional way, walk through 3D urban- models and change the view-points as they prefer.

3D Modeling for Online Usage

Videos and panorama images are further features to make information and participation more interesting and understandable. New visualization technologies (Google Earth) and discussion structures may help to improve participation and simplify understanding of development contents for non-professional people.

Google Earth Interface

The internet as a networking instrument could help to improve the communication in participation processes: one-way-communication (download, newsletter, and mailing) is possible as well as two ways (e-mail, online forms, e-voting, chat) and multi-way-communication (collective city and residents’ server, internet conference, online mediation, online working, and discussion forum). This is a very important aspect by developing participation as co-operation between partners, not only as top-down involvement of local authorities. Another important issue is the improvement of transparency in planning and participation processes which might come with e-Planning and e-Participation. But there is also the risk of anonymity and quasi participation.

Using the web for participation demands a careful handling of data and input of the participants. Contact persons have to be announced and fast feed-back provided. Also the use of the engagement and the influence of the planning process have to be defined clearly. Results have to be displayed and timelines have to be named. Anyway, if online participation is handled carefully and earnestly, the planning and participation process will become much more transparent. (cf. Märker 2007; Sinning, Selle, Pflüger 2003)

Public Participation in Malaysia

The notion of Malaysian public involvement in planning can be traced to the Town Board Enactment of the Federated Malay States of 1927. It provides for the general town plan to be displayed to the public to make objections and propose recommendation on how to overcome the objections. Later the Town Board Enactment 1930 (which are still applicable in some parts of the country) provides similar arrangements for public involvement. In all these cases, the public was only allowed to participate after a draft plan has been completed.

The Town and Country Planning Act (TCP ACT), 1976 which succeeded the Town Board Enactment was the only significant planning legislation which covers all local authorities in Peninsular Malaysia. The rationale the TCP Act 1976 was basically to replace the Town Board Enactment which was considered extremely physical in approach and too rigid in accommodation changes in socio-economic needs for a country experience rapid development.

The 1976 Act essentially provide for public participation in these stages:

a) while preparing the structure plan policies

b) objection and representation to the structure plan

c) objection to the local plan

According to Kamalruddin (1994), the public participation exercise in Malaysia relied heavily on the following principles:

a) opportunities should be given to the public to involve themselves at the early stage of study;

b) public participation programme should involve all the people in the society;

c) public participation techniques must be suited to the various types of people directed at;

d) public participation could also be considered as an approach to educate the public concerning town planning based on the 1976 Act

Thus far, public participation in Malaysia has been quite successful in informing the public about the development plan of their respective area. However, more significant contribution from the public is desirable to improve the relationship between the authority and the public which would facilitate better development effort for the country.

My final title for my Reseach Proposal

Does incorporating Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) increase level of public participation for Community planning in Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia?

My research proposal has finally has it's title. Now all I need to do is wait for my lecturers to approve to it so I can proceed with the rest of the proposal. And tonnes of journal & literature reading begin now !!

P.S. anyone with articles similar or regarding this topic please send me the link thru the comment box k. Thanks !