Something smells fishy at a flood pond

It’s not every day that we see several DAP politicians objecting to a project backed by PKR leaders.

This concerns a flood control pond being sold off (cheaply, allegedly) to a private developer.

The pond is located at Kampung Bohol, on the southwestern tip of Kuala Lumpur, next to Kinrara at Puchong, Selangor.

Such ponds act like giant “sponges” that absorb excess water during torrential rains to prevent flooding – hence the term “flood retention ponds”. The stored water is then slowly released back into rivers after storms.

DAP’s Seputeh MP Teresa Kok reportedly asked why land around the pond is being surrendered when the area is a flood hotspot. The site is in Kok’s constituency but she was kept in the dark about the project.

DAP’s Cheras MP Tan Kok Wai added that there was a government pledge to preserve flood ponds and asked if Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was aware of this.

Why flip-flop?

Anwar should know because just one year ago, his own political secretary Azman Abidin reportedly announced that Putrajaya had stopped a similar Bohol pond project which had been approved by a previous government.

Moreover, the Kuala Lumpur Drainage and Irrigation Department opposed the project as the Bohol pond was part of a RM300 million flood mitigation plan for the Sungai Kuyoh basin (that stretches all the way to Serdang, Selangor).

Minister in the PM’s Department (Federal Territories) Dr Zaliha Mustafa

Yet one year later, the federal Madani government has flip-flopped and now approves development there. The authority for this lies with Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Federal Territories) Dr Zaliha Mustafa, who is from PKR.

The official justification is that the pond will be “upgraded” or deepened by the developer. This is claimed to increase capacity to reduce floods in the area down to “once per 100 years”.

The phrase “once in 100 years” was also used to describe the massive rains that caused the devastating floods at Taman Sri Muda, Shah Alam, in December 2021. It conveniently ignored a similar deluge not a century ago, but in 1995.

The heavy rainfall then was basically being blamed as an “act of God”. But the divine didn't approve housing in the low-lying flood plain of Sri Muda. Poor urban planning was purely human.

With climate change, rainfall is expected to be heavier and more intense. How are we planning for this?

A flood pond cannot be expanded if the land around it is sold off. And, Kok notes, there are limits to how much it can be deepened, especially with condos next door.

Another DAP politician, Ng Sze Han, who is the assemblyperson for the next-door Kinrara area, has also said that the Bohol pond should not be developed.

With three DAP leaders speaking out, perhaps detractors can no longer claim that the party is just “keeping quiet” and turning into “MCA 2.0”?

Many warning signs

A land premium of RM41 million was paid by the developer for the land. But Save Kampung Bohol Pond legal adviser Nasser Yusof reportedly claimed this is just a third or half of market value.

In exchange for deepening the pond, the developer is allowed to build a mix of affordable and luxury high-rises on adjacent land. The crucial question is this – how much does it actually cost to deepen the pond?

Ng See Eng, the coordinator of the Preserve Kampung Bohol Flood Retention Pond Coalition, asked why Putrajaya could not deepen the pond by itself. Why sell land to a developer to do the job?

He added that the area around the pond was officially gazetted as a recreational park under the Kuala Lumpur Local Plan 2020. In addition, any development will violate the KL Structure Plan 2040, which states that such ponds must be preserved.

Residents’ suspicions were further heightened when the public hearing for the project was held only after the land was sold off.

All the warning lights are flashing. This is the kind of issue that PKR, back in its fiery Reformasi days, would probably have slammed the Umno-led government for.

There is a fishy whiff about this Bohol brouhaha. But it’s not from the pond. It’s from the air-conditioned halls of power.

The smell is similar to the Selangor government allowing the Shah Alam Community Forest to be chopped down.

This is not the first time that developers have lusted after flood pond land. When six were alienated for development in KL, then DAP Segambut MP Hannah Yeoh demanded that the MACC investigate it.

Basically, the problem is the high demand for ever scarcer land around Kuala Lumpur. The next step is to turn rundown flats into big, flashy new condominiums, under the new Urban Redevelopment Act.

But Kok points out this raises concerns about heavy traffic on narrow residential roads and the lack of public schools and clinics.

Develop golf courses instead

Tycoons are probably lobbying some leaders for development rights. How influential are they?

But why target limited land at flood ponds or old flats to build high-density condos? When the government has lots of land elsewhere? For example, at the former Sungai Besi airport?

There is also a sprawling 27-hole Civil Service Golf Club (KGPA) in KL. It’s so huge that it straddles two MRT stations near Taman Tun Dr Ismail.

Yet mass rapid transit stations are wasted at a golf course. Have you ever seen golfers carrying their heavy clubs on the train?

KGPA also lies near two highways – Sprint and Kerinchi Link. All this infrastructure is tailor-made for major housing development. In contrast, approving high-rises inside congested housing areas will create traffic bombs.

Moreover, the KGPA land was acquired by the government from a private rubber estate “for public purposes” in 1976. How is a golf course for high-ranked civil servants deemed a “public purpose”? In contrast, a flood pond is of immense public use.

Not a free-access park

A golf course is not a park that the public can freely access. It’s not an eco-friendly green area either. Loads of pesticides, weed killers and chemical fertilisers are used to maintain the grass.

Affordable flats cross-subsidised by more pricey condos are being allowed at the Bohol pond. Why not do this at KGPA instead? Some rezoning will be needed of course.

Auctioning off public land there will raise funds to replenish Putrajaya’s coffers – the very reason given to cut some diesel subsidies.

All praise to the civil servants too, for being so “gracious” to “sacrifice” their old golf club for the greater good.

No worries though. Build a new golf course for civil servants nearer to Putrajaya. Don’t make the poor fellows drive so far to play their beloved game.

If that costs too much, then take over one of over 30 private golf clubs in the Klang Valley. Some of them are struggling anyway.

Most importantly, converting a government golf course into mid-range (and higher-end) housing for the masses makes fantastic politics. Madani can then prove to be more prihatin or caring than Perikatan Nasional!

It’s a bold, proactive step that sure beats struggling to justify diesel price hikes or Blackrock’s involvement in our airports.

So please, politicians should not allow precious flood control ponds to be developed.

If we’re so short of land, let a government golf course be the first to be used for people’s housing. - Mkini

---

ANDREW SIA is a veteran journalist who likes teh tarik khau kurang manis. You are welcome to give him ideas to brew at tehtarik@gmail.com.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.