Eye on slope safety

Loss of natural heritage is one of the reasons for the concerns voiced by residents and NGOs in past weeks on Penang’s hillside development.

And this is a legitimate concern – natural heritage sites contribute greatly to the aesthetics and identity of a city. They are what makes a city interesting and unique; in short, they give the city its character.

This is needed given our country’s penchant for new urban cityscapes that may become generic and amorphous in the name of being “modern” – if not careful, the cityscape of a conurbation in Malaysia could look much like another in, say, North America.

Aside from the heritage and aesthetic aspects, the sense of being close to nature and having a green haven close to home adds to one’s quality of life.

There is another facet to the quality of life criteria – the sense of security and safety in one’s own home. Residents worry about the stability of the slope next to them, but this should not be the case. Public safety is a right that is articulated in Local Agenda 21, a programme run by the United Nations to encourage sustainable development.

This leads to the question of how safe Penang’s slopes are. The Penang hillside guidelines serve as the main reference when considering planning approval for hillside development applications.

It does this by viewing slope activities in three stages: design, construction, and maintenance. And running throughout all three stages is another important activity: communication, which seems to be limited to engineers and approving parties, but should include the communities as eventually they will become the slopes’ end users.

In the first stage, design errors could arise due to inadequate ground investigation or a lack of understanding of engineering analysis and design. The guidelines ensure that such errors do not arise by making sure that only professional engineers with years of geotechnical experience are vested with the responsibility of slope design.

Another safeguard measure is the requirement of an independent checker – a third party that reviews the design proposed by the project’s geotechnical engineer.

The independent checker and geotechnical engineer cannot be from the same firm to safeguard against conflict of interest. This is good, as there will be another set of “eyes” to make sure that all considerations are taken to ensure slope safety.

The second stage – construction – is enforced through the requirement of conducting regular site inspections. This is critical, as measures that sound good on paper in environmental impact assessments (EIAs) or erosion and sediment control plans (ESCPs) sadly do not get adequately carried through in implementation. This gives rise to a plethora of problems outside the boundaries of the project site, such as excessive sedimentation running off into nearby water resources such as streams or rivers, or run-off of chemicals and other compounds from the construction site polluting the surrounding area.

Everything in nature is connected, so that activities within the confines of a slope construction project can affect the surrounding ecosystem around it.

Maintenance is also important but is woefully neglected by many of us. To avoid slopes that are beautifully designed and constructed from falling into conditions of derelict neglect over time, the guidelines require that new slopes come with maintenance manuals that tell you important features and facts, how to inspect the slopes, and any special features that the slope owner should be aware of. It’s just like the medical record that your doctor keeps on you so that he knows your history.

But perhaps more importantly, there must be good communication with the residents who will live with the consequences of the slope being built for years to come, as well as the general public.

We know that developers and communities can come to an amicable understanding: a couple of years ago, there was a massive slope project involving three developers and an existing community of 5,000 condominium residents in the Klang Valley.

Initially, there was an uproar over the perceived “less than transparent” manner of communication by the developers. It resulted in petitions and hearings at the local authority over a span of months.

When the developers realised that all the people wanted was to be informed of what was happening near their homes, they took a consultative approach which included residents in discussions regarding subsequent steps of the development as it progressed.

However, not all approaches towards public participation can be the same, as the extenuating circumstances are different, certainly in the case of Penang Island.

The existence of a set of guidelines alone may not put a stop to bad slopes. Good implementation and making sure that measures are carried out is half the challenge, if not more.

Whatever the outcome of hillside development decisions, it is hoped that the good residents of Penang can have that peace of mind if both good planning and execution are achieved in hillside development.

> The writer is the programme director for SlopeWatch, a community programme that advises residents on the signs of landslides and safety measures they can take. The programme began after the 2008 Bukit Antarabangsa landslide when it was discovered that many landslides show signs before they happen. - The Star