Urban Renewal Act needs hyper-localised approach
'It has to be a very hyper-localised approach depending on the area in question. The government is rightly consulting with all parties, trying to understand the nuances; that's commendable.
'We'll see how...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
21 hours ago
- The Star
Dr Wee asks why consent threshold rates differ under proposed urban renewal law
PETALING JAYA: The government should explain its rationale for setting different consent threshold rates based on the age of properties under the proposed urban renewal law, says Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong. The MCA president expressed concern over the sudden change by the Housing and Local Government Ministry from the original 100% consent requirement. He questioned how the revised thresholds align with fairness and transparency, especially in developments involving existing strata property owners. "I asked the ministry to clarify the justification for setting different consent thresholds under URA (the proposed Urban Renewal Act), particularly when the original requirement was full consent. "I also sought details on engagement sessions to assess the potential impact of rising population density and traffic, as well as mitigation plans," he wrote in a Facebook post on Thursday (July 24). Dr Wee then shared the parliamentary written response he received from the ministry, which explained that the varied threshold rates were determined in consideration of public interest and to meet the strategic goals set under the urban renewal programme. The ministry also further clarified that the original 100% threshold pertains specifically to the requirement for unanimous consent under Section 57 of the Strata Titles Act 1985, which governs the termination of strata titles in stratified buildings or land. Dr Wee's questions come amid growing public interest in how the law would be implemented once passed and its possible long-term implications on urban communities across Malaysia.
Malaysiakini
a day ago
- Malaysiakini
Clearing URA misconceptions on demolition, developer accountability
COMMENT | Recent commentary on the proposed Urban Renewal Act (URA) raises valid concerns but also introduces several misconceptions that merit clarification. At its core, the URA empowers redevelopment, regeneration and revitalisation of buildings that are unsafe, neglected or legally abandoned. 'Abandoned' includes stalled construction projects with no activity for six months, or projects already in receivership or winding up. 'Neglect' covers structures that pose health or safety risks. The URA is therefore a remedy for genuine urban decay rather than a licence for indiscriminate demolition. Claims of forced displacement overlook the consent safeguards. Owners must...
Malaysiakini
2 days ago
- Malaysiakini
URA: Why not prioritise maintenance over demolition?
COMMENT | According to the United Nations, 'to be adequately housed means having secure tenure - not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away'. Yet, this very concern may soon weigh heavily on residents of older buildings with the introduction of the proposed Urban Renewal Act (URA). Overdevelopment, displacement risks The proposed URA guidelines allow redevelopment with just 75 percent owner consent and use a 30-year benchmark to demolish old buildings, which could increase the risks of overdevelopment and residents' displacement. Imagine you bought a home and took out a 35-year mortgage. Years later, your building turns 30 and is suddenly deemed unfit for living by your city hall.
