Three concerns regarding Urban Renewal Act

 

The recently proposed Urban Renewal Act (URA) by the government has raised concerns among members of the public.

They say this new law, aimed at revitalising and modernising areas which are deemed as “urban decay” with “ageing infrastructure”, will backfire and instead be harmful to residents, especially those who are in vulnerable groups.

Any policy, regardless of how well-intentioned it is, should also take into account the overall feedback of the affected residents, and steps should be taken to address their concerns.

From our research and reviews, we have determined three main problems regarding the URA.

ADS

1. Consent thresholds

According to the URA draft, as long as a certain percentage of consent is reached, the private developer will be allowed to proceed with their redevelopment plans, therefore ignoring the voices from the minority.

While some may claim that the majority has the right, others may see it as the minority being denied their rights.

This is especially true in older communities, where most of the residents may be senior citizens or hail from low-income groups.

The concern arising is that private developers will approach larger households only to gain their consent, thus ignoring the minorities, and therefore “forcing” them to accept unfair compensation. This goes against the government’s concept of “One Family, One House”.

2. Will it see the exclusion of low- and middle-income groups?

While urban renewal aims to bring a higher quality of life and better living environment, at the same time there is the fear that this new standard of living will incur high costs, thus denying the original residents, who are from low- and middle-income groups, from returning to their old homes.

Thus, the government is urged to ensure that a mechanism is implemented to allow these former residents to return to their homes, or that proper resettlement and compensation are given to them.

3. Ecological and cultural considerations

While we welcome modernisation and redevelopment, we cannot forget what is termed as “the soul of the city”. Cities are more than buildings and highways. They also comprise their people who live, work and make memories in it.

Thus, old neighbourhoods are often intrinsically tied to their communities. Any move to demolish these buildings will cause not just a change in physical structure, but also the memories of the community.

As such, steps must be taken to preserve urban culture and heritage, so as to prevent the city from losing its “soul”.

ADS

For example, in medical care, the aim is not merely to prolong one’s life, but rather to enhance the quality of life. This also rings true for urban development.

The government should do more than build new infrastructure. Urban renewal must also take into account the community and its people’s way of life.

As such, it is hoped that the government will review these issues that we have raised, and take the necessary steps to allay the fears of the people. - Mkini

---

DR MAH HANG SOON is MCA deputy resident.

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