Rising with the times But there’s much traffic congestion, lament residents

LUSH green hills surround the small town of Paya Terubong, making it a good location for those seeking a scenic place to call home.

The town is also strategically located with links to Bayan Lepas, Relau and Balik Pulau.

Although a small portion of the town is taken up by a cemetery, Paya Terubong is believed to be named after terubong, a type of grass known scientifically as Cyrtococcum oxyphyllum.

The town is poised to be developed as a place for luxury living, with developers believing Paya Terubong has the potential to attract middle to high-income earners to make it their home.

However, with more development and more people coming in to stay, long-time dwellers are lamenting the worsening traffic congestion that occurs during peak hours.

Housewife Sally Tan, 50, finds it a nightmare to be stuck in traffic in Jalan Paya Terubong when taking her kids to school in the morning.

“The jam begins at around 7am when people are going to work or bringing their children to school.

“It gets worse when it rains, if there is an accident or if a tree falls on the road,” she said, adding that she had lived in Paya Terubong for 13 years.

Hawker K.T. Ong, 48, said it takes 45 minutes longer than usual to go to Jalan Masjid Negeri from Paya Terubong if he leaves home at around 6.30pm.

He said his wife has to spend an extra 30 to 45 minutes on the road when fetching their child home from school which is only 10 minutes away.

However, the traffic is seen as a blessing for some such as fruit trader Lai Saw Hee, 61, whose stall is at the Air Itam market.

“More cars means more customers,” he said but added that there were too many cars nowadays causing a bumper-to-bumper jam at the market.

He added that business had improved by 20% in the first two months this year compared to the same period last year.

He said it was due to the additional car park bays provided nearby for visitors to the Kek Lok Si Temple and the 30.2m-high bronze Goddess of Mercy (Kuan Yin) statue.

Ong said he would like to see a proper landed market complex or hawker centre to be set up in the area.

He said a multi-storey building slated to be a market was constructed around five years ago but it was not completed, with the building left in ruins now.

Echoing his request is Eric Guna, 52, who operates a nasi kandar stall in a food court in Paya Terubong.

However, Eric wants a market complex to be built within the area of Jalan Masjid Negeri, where he is staying.

“There is a private market in Jalan Gangsa but the produce sold there is expensive.

“I would normally go to the markets in Jelutong and Taman Tun Sardon,” he said.

On the traffic condition in Jalan Masjid Negeri, Guna said there would be a traffic jam after 6pm but it was better controlled when there were traffic policemen to guide the cars.

However, he said the policemen were only present on weekdays.

One of those taking public transport is factory operator A. Amrapathy, 45, who said Rapid Penang drivers would sometimes refuse to stop at the bus stop to pick up the few passengers waiting there.

He said: “Sometimes, they will make a few rounds before deciding to stop and we have to wait for them to do so.”

Technician M. Surendran, 38, who stays in an apartment in Jalan Bukit Gambier, said there should be more amenities such as a bus stop near the petrol station there.

“The nearest bus stop is in front of Universiti Sains Malaysia (in Jalan Bukit Gambier) and that is quite far away,” he said.

He added that those who parked their cars outside the apartments would sometimes be slapped with a fine for obstruction of traffic.

“But our apartment management allows each household to park only one car in the compound. If only there is a proper parking space outside,” he said.

Luxury condominiums are springing up in Jalan Bukit Gambier.

Surendran believes that the construction of a high-rise building nearby has caused cracks on the ground floor of his apartment block.

“Our home is dusty because of the dirt and sand that are blown towards our direction. We have to sweep the floor every day and close the balcony sliding door when the construction is carried out,” he said.

Resident Tan Mei Choo, 45, who works in Bayan Lepas, urged the state government to resolve the frequent jams along the hilly Jalan Paya Terubong.

“Traffic jams occur when a factory bus breaks down or when there is an accident. I’m late to work at least four or five times a month because of the jams,” she said.

She said the Penang Municipal Council had announced that it was mulling over the possibility of constructing another road linking Paya Terubong to Relau.

“This will definitely reduce the traffic jam along the hilly Jalan Paya Terubong stretch. Alas, nothing is moving on the ground,” she added.

Bandar Baru Air Itam residents who are also caught in traffic jams are hoping that the 4.6km Bandar Baru Air Itam-Lebuhraya Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu bypass project will become a reality.

The Bukit Gelugor parliamentary constituency consists of three state seats – Paya Terubong, Air Itam and Seri Delima. - The Star

首长：高架结构毁古迹形象 国阵轻快铁不适用于槟

（槟城2日讯）槟州首席部长林冠英周六发文告指，160万名槟城人将决定，是否要槟州民联政府进行耗资63亿令吉的4个“两岸三通一槟城”4条高速公路工程以及一个电车系统，以连接槟岛及威省两地，包括全东南亚第一个从关仔角直达峇眼阿占海底隧道。

最近州政府把上述工程合约颁布给由中国北京城建集团与一家本地公司组成的联营公司Consortium Zenith BUCG私人有限公司，北京城建集团涉及的工程计划包括北京奥运使用的中国国家体育场（鸟巢）。

需新替代公路

他说，国阵的轻快铁系统不适用于像槟城这样的世界文化古迹，因为它的高架结构将会毁坏古迹的形象。因此，安装于地面的电车将会适用古迹区，也需新的替代公路，好让现有的道路让路给电车轨道。

他说，公共交通系统完全隶属联邦政府管辖，就算州政府有钱，联邦政府可以不给执照、不合作、不让槟城推行公共交通系统。无论如何，他表示槟州民联政府不会坐视不理，会兴建新的替代公路，弥补国阵联邦政府无法提供槟城一个高效率的公共交通系统。- 光华

林冠英：完成招标工作 槟海底隧道势在必行

（北海2日讯）槟州首席部长林冠英表示，槟城海底隧道计划经已完成招标工作，势在必行，竣工后收费也将等同槟城第二大桥的收费！

“北京城建集团与本地公司组成的联营公司Consortium Zenith BUCG私人有限公司，在13家公司的竞标中脱颖而出，获得槟州政府的‘两岸三通一槟城’计划，报价是63亿令吉，远比我们预算的80亿令吉来得低，而这就是公开招标的好处。”

他补充，该63亿令吉的计划除了兴建衔接新关仔角及峇眼亚占的6.5公里长的海底隧道外，也包括衔接亚依淡及敦林苍佑大道的通道（4.6公里）、衔接敦林苍佑大道及新关仔角通道（4.2公里）及衔接丹绒武雅及直落巴巷的替代道路计划（12公里）。

“槟州政府在该计划内并没支付该联营公司任何现金，却只需以一片100依格的土地作为交换，这对槟州政府而言非常划算，北京城建集团也是北京鸟巢体育馆的承建者，因此，技术与实力不容置疑。” - 光华

Getting developers’ houses in order

RECENTLY, we were consulted about some property developers and asked what we thought about their business models and, more importantly perhaps, how to value them accurately.

The key things that most investors look at are:-

● Where they are located?

● How high they price their developments for sale?

● When they choose to market their developments?

When we began scrutinising these developers, we drilled deeper into some of the key features that they chose to highlight how they worked, which were as follows:

● First, they claimed that they were able to complete a four-tower residential development within two years;

● Second, they had a license to increase the density of their built-up area, also known as gross plot ratio, from nine persons per site to 3,000 persons on the same site; and

● Third, they had special construction skills, which would ensure that the building would stand firm despite landslides or earthquakes.

Each of the above claims is a tall order, so you might well ask whether we are stretching the truth with these statements. Ludicrous as they may seem, we assure you that the developers claimed all these in their marketing documents. We went through each statement carefully, evaluating if each of their claims can indeed be substantiated.

Their first assertion, that they can complete a four-tower development within 24 months, can be dealt with simply enough. A back-of-the-envelope calculation would tell you that for such a development to be built so quickly, construction would have to take place 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Our first question was to the authorities. Aren't there laws against building after 7pm daily, and which allow only six days of construction a week, to spare the public the noise, dust and other such disturbances? And according to our research findings, as the development in question is a private property, these building rules do apply.

As to their claim that they are able to increase their gross plot ratio so significantly, we queried them on:

● How do you actually increase plot ratio by so much?

● Surely you would need a detailed procedure and transparent process to do so?

● How would you ensure that everything needed to support such intensive building would run smoothly?

● How would you manage traffic to smoothen operations?

● We also asked an off the wall question; how would you arrange basic sanitation facilities so the builders could cope with the increased need for water as well as the efficient disposal of waste from the site?

Last but certainly not least, we wondered how the developer could guarantee that the development would be landslide and earthquake-proof?

The developer's representative said happily that their buildings could even withstand a tsunami. So we prodded them as to whether or not they used some super form of steel or concrete. His response? They were not sure “what kind of cement is used for their buildings and the buyers would have to trust them”.

We then enquired further as to how they would ensure that the building materials would always be as hardy as claimed. Did they, for example, have audit checks on the quality of cement used? In reply, the representative said, “Of course not - all that we do is based on trust. After all, we are property developers.”

Anyone could see from such responses that one cannot take their words at face value. So we concluded that developers such as these:

● Would probably have no interest in ensuring proper road and other infrastructural support, or arranging proper drainage to cope with the increased waste flow;

● Would probably not adhere to existing laws and regulations;

● Might not have in place proper audit procedures on the amount and quality of building materials being used; and

● Might also not have proper audit procedures on their statements and promises to buyers.

As investors, we can of course avoid companies that flout the law like this.

As homebuyers, we can set a standard by boycotting companies that are not willing to improve the levels of transparency at which they operate.

For example, there is no point looking at where they locate their developments, because if such irresponsible developers can increase the plot ratio of their developments arbitrarily, then one can assume that the developers next door can do the same. This means that the sea view you enjoy today will probably wind up as a view of the pantry of the apartment across from you in the not very distant future.

And while the price of a property is a foremost consideration, we would urge you to focus too on a property's sustainability. If developers are clogging up drains and causing traffic jams due to their crunched construction schedule, their developments are not going to stay well maintained for long. Sooner or later, barely sustainable living conditions will have the tenants of the apartments moving out and their landlords will be forced to sell their units at lower prices just to get rid of their properties.

As for the time developers choose to sell such developments, one thing is for sure, any developer that claims to be able to put up four towers of 20-storey apartments within two years has got to be cutting corners. Prospective investors should, at the very least, demand that a safety review be done on the development in case of any structural cracks. This concern would be augmented if the development is near limestone caverns and hillsides.

If Malaysia is to become a much sought-after destination for property investors, its developers will have to get their houses in order first by adhering to all laws, monitoring quality strictly and making promises they can keep and, in general, have the highest standards of transparency and accountability.

Let us not allow a few bad apples rot the basket.

Datuk Shireen Muhiudeen is managing director of Corston-Smith Asset Management in Malaysia, a fund management company that makes investment decisions based on corporate governance. - The Star

Free legal fees – fact or myth

An erroneous understanding of the matter exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.

FREEBIES have been advertised and offered to woo purchasers to buy developers' property because choices are now in abundance though pricing is on the exorbitant side.

Some of the freebies include air-conditioners, kitchen cabinet, automatic gate, club membership and legal fees. The list is not exhaustive as property development is a competitive game.

However, among the freebies offered to purchasers, legal fees require objective analysis. The freebie on legal fees normally appears in sale brochures and advertisements as “free legal fees” or “legal fees borne by developer” or words to that effect.

Now, what is “free legal fees”? Is it a freebie in the truest sense of the word?

Meaning of free legal fees

Generally, “free legal fees” would mean that the developer will pay for the legal fees on the S&P (sale and purchase) agreement. However, the offer of free legal fees may not cover disbursements such as stamp duties, searches fees, registration fees, printing charges, purchase of documents costs, etc. The purchaser will have to pay for them.

In other words, the offer of “free legal fees” would in its plain and obvious meaning suggests that the legal fees the purchaser would have to pay to the solicitor would instead be paid by the developer. It would, therefore, be understood that if the purchaser had appointed a solicitor, the developer would pay for the solicitor's fees.

However, is this what happens actually when a purchaser buys property from a developer who offers “free legal fees”?

What happens actually is quite different. An erroneous understanding of “free legal fees” exists in the housing development industry, much to the dismay of purchasers having disputes with developers.

Developer's solicitor

In offering “free legal fees”, the developer would recommend to the purchaser a law firm on the developer's panel to attend to the S&P agreement and its related transaction. Correspondingly, the same law firm will be tasked with the loan documentation as a packaged deal. If the purchaser chooses that law firm, the developer will supposedly absorb the legal fees. Quite obviously, the developer takes the view that such arrangements represent a cost-saving to the purchaser as well as facilitate and expedite dealings.

Now the irony is the solicitor of the law firm attending to the sale and purchase agreement would not normally scrutinise the agreement for the purchaser to understand in layman language, but would say that it is a standard agreement'. Instead, the solicitor would ensure that the developer's rights and interests in the agreement are intact and the purchaser duly signs the agreement and thus, is bound by it.

From a legal point, the solicitor acting in such a manner would actually be acting for the developer. The solicitor is therefore the developer's solicitor, and this being the case, the developer would have to pay the solicitor's fees. Therefore, there is nothing free about it as far as the purchaser is concerned. It can only be considered free if the buyer receives independent legal representation and does not have to pay for it.

Hence, there is no solicitor acting for the purchaser to scrutinise and protect the purchaser's rights and interests in the agreement. The purchaser is without legal representation. Since the purchaser has no solicitor acting for the purchaser in the agreement, there is no legal fees for the purchaser to pay.

Unfortunately, many purchasers realise this rather late in the day.

The purchaser normally realises this fact when a dispute arises and the purchaser asks the solicitor for help and is informed that the solicitor who attended to the sale and purchase agreement is actually the developer's solicitor. Purchaser's solicitor

What would happen if the purchaser appoints another solicitor who is not on the developer's panel of solicitors to attend to the sale and purchase agreement? How would the offer of “free legal fees” be affected?

In principle, the solicitor so appointed will scrutinise the sale and purchase agreement for the purchaser. The solicitor will act for the purchaser and consequently there are legal fees for the purchaser to pay the solicitor.

In this situation, the developer and purchaser will each have their respective solicitors. Each party will have solicitor's fees to pay.

If the developer's offer of “free legal fees” were taken seriously, the developer would have to pay for the purchaser's solicitor's fees. It is arguable that the developer's offer of “free legal fees” is broad enough to cover such a situation. The purchaser would therefore be entitled to claim on the offer and have the developer pay for the purchaser's solicitor's fees.

However, most developers would refuse to pay for the purchaser's solicitor's fees. The reason given normally for the refusal is that the offer of “free legal fees” is subject to the condition that the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer's panel of law firm to attend to the S&P agreement.

When this happens, the developer's offer of free legal fees would seem hollow and the developer may possibly be exposed to being sued for misrepresentation and damages. Legal Profession Act

Section 84 of the Legal Profession Act 1976, stated that a solicitor who acts for the developer in the sale of property under a housing development must not act for the purchaser in the same transaction.

Furthermore, under the sale and purchase agreement, namely Schedule G and Schedule H, the developer and purchaser must pay its own solicitor's costs.

The above laws clearly suggest that the developer's solicitor must not act, or purport to act, for the purchaser. The purchaser has a right to appoint his/her solicitor. Each party bears its own solicitor's costs.

Thus, is the developer's offer of “free legal fees” legal? Readers should ponder on the arguments.

The reality

Meantime, two situations would possibly arise from the developer's offer of “free legal fees”.

First, where the purchaser is unrepresented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, the offer of “free legal fees” is not really “free” because the purchaser has no solicitor acting on his behalf. There is thus no legal fees to pay.

Second, where the purchaser is represented by a solicitor in the S&P agreement, he has a solicitor acting on his behalf and thus has legal fees to pay. The developer would be bound to honour the offer of “free legal fees” and pay the solicitor's fees or possibly risk being sued for mispresentation and damages.

In reality, most developers fail to honour the offer of “free legal fees” in the second situation. Instead, the purchaser is asked to pay the solicitor's fees and is informed that the offer only applies if the purchaser chooses the solicitor on the developer's panel to attend to the S&P agreement.

In summary, is “free legal fees” fact or myth? I leave that for your pondering and own conclusion.

Hopefully, the next time you buy a property from a developer and read about “free legal fees” or words to that effect, you would remember reading this article and exercise your rights accordingly.

What are the prevalent legal fees in property transaction when you buy from a housing developer? Are legal fees discounted for standardised S&P or housing loans)

In a case where the purchase transaction is governed by the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act, 1966 (HDA transaction), or where a loan is obtained to finance a HDA transaction, the following lower scale of fees will apply:

● RM250 if purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is RM45,000 or below;

● 75% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM45,000 but not more than RM100,000;

● 70% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is above RM100,000 but not more than RM500,000; and

● 65% of the applicable scale fee specified above, if the purchase price or the loan sum (as the case may be) is in excess of RM500,000.

(See table for a simplified version of formula for the fees scale.)

Why must you use your own lawyer?

The first rule of conveyancing is “buyer and seller must engage own lawyer”. Consult a lawyer right from the start and not after you have paid the deposit. The reason being, under the law you are deemed to have read and understood every document you have signed.

Furthermore, promises made by the seller or someone else about the deal may not be enforceable if the promises are not in writing unless you are able to provide proof of the same.

A lawyer cannot represent both the vendor and purchaser. If you are using the vendor's panel lawyer, often, when disputes happen, the lawyer is unlikely to represent you against their bigger client.

A lawyer in a general practice will be able to complete your purchase; however, lawyers with a focused real estate/conveyancing practice may prove a better choice if you are unsure of what to do, or have complications in your purchase agreement or mortgage. While you may think that you cannot afford the services of your own lawyer, consider whether you can afford not to.

● Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association (HBA) www.hba.org.my, a non-profit, non-governmental organisation (NGO) manned by volunteers. He is also a NGO councillor at the Subang Jaya Municipal Council. - The Star

CM flayed over approval of RM8bil project despite objections

GEORGE TOWN: The DAP-led state government should explain to therakyat why it approved the RM8bil road and undersea tunnel project even though several non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are against it.

Penang Barisan Nasional chairman Teng Chang Yeow (pic) said the state government should make public the traffic master plan that “shows a tunnel is required to be built.”

“Have they considered the traffic volumes that would be generated on the Penang Bridge and the second Penang bridge by the end of this year?

“Is there any proper planning by the state authority on such an important infrastructure project?” he said in a statement yesterday.

On Thursday, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng announced that the state had awarded an RM8bil tender to Malaysia-China joint venture Consortium Zenith BUCG Sdn Bhd.

The project consists of a 6.5km Gurney Drive-Bagan Ajam undersea tunnel, a 4.2km Gurney Drive-Lebuhraya Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu bypass, a 4.6km Lebuhraya Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu-Bandar Baru Air Itam bypass and a 12km road connecting Tanjung Bungah and Teluk Bahang.

Lim had also said the construction company would be given 44.51ha of reclaimed land in Tanjung Pinang on four conditions, one of which was that the concession period for the third link would only be for 30 years and the toll charges must be similar to the second Penang bridge.

Penang MCA party adviser Datuk Koay Kar Huah also criticised the state government for proposing toll charges for the proposed undersea tunnel after they had earlier promised to abolish all tolls in their 2008 general election.

State MCA secretary Lau Chiek Tuan reminded Lim to come up with a solution for the long-standing traffic woes.

“Rather than having to fork out a massive RM8bil in tax payers’ fund, the state should improve the public transport system,” he said. - The Star

Batu Kawan poised for growth with Penang’s new second link

ONCE a quiet backwater, Batu Kawan in south Seberang Prai is undergoing massive transformation after it was picked as the land connection for the second Penang bridge.

Coconut, rubber trees and sugarcane which were once part of the area’s landscape for close to a century slowly made way for oil palm plantations in the 1960s.

Now, the plantations are vanishing and being replaced with concrete structures.

Modern landmark: The State Stadium in Batu Kawan

When the Batu Kawan land was acquired by the state investment arm, Penang Development Corporation (PDC) some 30 years ago, large tracts of land were cleared including for the construction of the State Stadium.

The stadium project and the setting up of an industrial estate were one of the early impetus for the development of Batu Kawan.

Now, the area which faces the South Channel of Penang has become a strategic location following the construction of the RM4.5bil second Penang bridge which links Batu Kawan and Penang island.

Longest in the region: A view of the second Penang bridge under construction set against fishermen's boats at a jetty in the foreground. The new bridge links Batu Kawan to Batu Maung on Penang island

The 24km bridge, which is the longest in South-East Asia, will open to the public in September. The travelling from Penang island to south Seberang Prai will take a mere 20 minutes with the new bridge compared to more than an hour now.

The bridge project has sparked various economic activities including the mushrooming of new housing projects.

Many people on Penang island are buying properties there since the price is believed to be cheaper than that of the island.

New industrial sites, commercial areas and residential schemes slated in Batu Kawan town are expected to create thousands of jobs.

Batu Kawan is heading towards a bustling industrial hub just like the Bayan Lepas Free Industrial Park and the Prai Industrial Area.

It has been touted to be Penang’s third satellite township after Bayan Baru and Seberang Jaya.

Three big companies — Robert Bosch, Boon Siew Honda and VAT Manufacturing Malaysia — have pledged investments totalling about RM10bil to site their manufacturing plants in this town.

The PDC acquired 2,680ha of land from private owners including oil palm plantation owners for the creation of a Batu Kawan Industrial Park that would be developed over 30 years.

Growing population: A general view of the Butterworth Outer Ring Road passing through Prai town. The existing Penang Bridge links Prai to the island

The state had last year announced an ambitious plan to build 11,800 medium-cost housing units under its RM2.7bil Bandar Cassia Affordable Housing Scheme, which would be modelled after Singapore’s Housing and Development Board (HDB) housing schemes.

While many are bowled over by the mega development plans for Batu Kawan town, local resident T. Karunanithi, 38, from Taman Tanjung Mutiara, said he hoped some basic facilities would be put in place in Batu Kawan town.

“The residents need a market, hospital, fire station, petrol kiosks, a shopping centre, post office and banks.

“For now, we have to travel over 2km to the nearest town, Simpang Ampat, for such facilities,” he said.

So far, he said, there is only a police station, a Klinik Rakyat 1Malaysia, a few schools and mini markets in the town. There is also the majestic State Stadium.

Resident N. Gobalakrishnan, 48, from Taman Rasa Ria, Bukit Tambun hoped Penang’s famed seafood restaurants in Bukit Tambun could be further promoted to tourists.

There are some 20 seafood restaurants there. Many people from Penang island make a beeline to the restaurants especially during weekends and public holidays.

Apart from the Bukit Tambun state constituency, the Batu Kawan parliamentary constituency also comprises Bukit Tengah and Prai state constituencies.

The densely populated Bukit Tengah constituency is home to many small and medium-scale industries located in the Bukit Minyak Industrial Park, Penang Science Park, Juru Light Industrial area and Bukit Tengah Light Industrial area.

The factories here provide jobs to many locals here, some of whom live in Perkampungan Juru new village as well as in the fast developing Juru town.

Businessman Ng Boon Theng, 60, from Taman Juru, said rapid development in the last 40 years had transformed the former rubber estate into a modern and busy town.

He said Highway Auto-City Juru, which houses over 60 automobile brand showrooms, food and beverage outlets, entertainment and shopping outlets has become a major landmark in Seberang Prai for its ‘one-stop’ concept.

Ng, however, lamented the terrible traffic congestions in the Auto-City vicinity and between Jalan Juru and Jalan Bukit Minyak during peak hours.

“We hope PLUS can widen some of the road stretches here, especially the slip road turning into Auto-City from the south-bound stretch of the North-South Expressway, which is often a bottleneck.

“We also hope the traffic lights at Auto-City can be better synchronised and the drainage systems in Kampung Tok Panjang and Taman Limau Manis upgraded to prevent flooding there,” he said.

Contractor Abdul Rahim Che Rus, 50, from Bukit Kecil, Juru said police patrolling should be increased especially in the Taman Pelangi flats area where many foreign workers live.

“We also hope the Immigration detention depot for illegal immigrants can be shifted out of Perkampungan Juru.

“Once, there was a leptospirosis outbreak in the depot and it alarmed residents in the neighbouring area,” he said

Abdul Rahim said apart from the million-ringgit caged-fish rearing business in Sungai Udang nearby, there were also some 500 fishermen who made a living off the coasts in Bukit Kecil, Kuala Juru and Sungai Semilang.

“Many locals hope the authorities can build affordable housing units, especially in Sungai Semilang area, for those from the middle income group, like me,” he said.

The Prai state constituency, where the first Penang Bridge is located, also boasts of another iconic bridge — the Prai Bridge — which is part of the RM525mil Butterworth Outer Ring Road (BORR) project that was completed in 2006.

This 1.85km bridge connects Prai old town with Bagan Dalam in Butterworth town.

Another old bridge, the Tunku Abdul Rahman Bridge, which connects Prai town and Butterworth town, is still utilised as part of the main Federal Route One trunk road.

Former factory manager Loh Lau Kee, 66, from Chai Leng Park, Prai recalled how the Prai Industrial Area was developed from a swamp land back in the 70s, with Malayawata and the Pen-Group of companies among the earliest factories there.

“The Chai Leng Park and Prai Garden residential schemes were also developed in the 70s to cater to the growing need for housing, especially among those employed in the Prai Industrial area.

“The Malayan Sugar Manufacturing Co Sdn Bhd (MSM) factory, which was established in Prai old town in 1959, still maintains a unique railway line that runs through its premises to transport goods to other states,” he said.

Loh said while the roads in the Prai Industrial Area needed to be better maintained and lighted, he was relieved that the perennial flooding in Chai Leng Park had been resolved over the last 10 years.

“We hope that the authorities can build a Chinese secondary school on a vacant piece of land behind the Chai Leng Park multipurpose hall to cater to the growing Chinese population here,” he said.

Hawker Lee Kuai Seng, 46, who has been selling hokkien mee in the Chai Leng Park market for over 30 years, said he hoped traffic lights could be re-instated at the Jalan Baru-Jalan Kurau junction to attract more motorists from Bukit Mertajam to turn directly into Chai Leng Park.

“The move will help boost business activities here. We hope the drains around the market too can be regularly cleaned to overcome the rat problem,” he said.

The Batu Kawan parliamentary seat would likely see a three-cornered fight between Barisan Nasional, Pakatan Rakyat and Parti Cinta Malaysia. Independent candidates are also eyeing the seat making it either a four-cornered or five-cornered fight. - The Star

Survey:Improved property sentiment in Malaysia

Poll shows two-thirds of developers plan launches of below RM500,000

Yam (left) and Tong at the briefing on the property market survey by Rehda

PETALING JAYA: In its industry survey on the second half of 2012, Real Estate Housing Developers Association (Rehda) has found that two-thirds of the developers responding intended to launch their residential properties below the RM500,000 price mark in the first half of this year.

The survey also found that the average residential selling prices nationwide are expected to range between RM250,000 and RM350,000, with Kuala Lumpur property selling in the range of RM500,000 to RM1mil and Negri Sembilan and Kelantan selling at the cheapest end at RM100,001 to RM250,000.

In Peninsular Malaysia, Selangor and Penang can expect the most expensive residential launches going at above RM1.5mil. Selangor, however, will also have property sold within the RM350,001 to RM500,000 range.

The survey also showed improved property market sentiment and outlook for the first half of this year.

Speaking at a briefing on the survey, Rehda president Datuk Seri Michael Yam said that one of the key trends among buyers now were green features and good branding.

“Buyers are now more discerning of brands, design concept and how they can build the lifestyle they want around their homes,” he said, noting that the young demographics in Malaysia was important.

While the secondary property market continues to do well, Yam believes there is more capital appreciation potential buying into the primary market.

“The potential of upside is better if you buy a new unit (because) the primary market is not delivering as many units as the market wants,” he said, estimating the shortage of new units to be around 100,000.

Malaysia's homebuyer profile was largely domestic buyers for owner occupation, Rehda pointed out.

On the outlook for the first half of 2013, Rehda national treasurer Datuk N.K. Tong said there was an upward trend in future launches, as 60% of respondent developers planned to launch projects in the first half of this year compared to 48% in the previous six-month period.

“Among those who are launching in the first half, 61% anticipate to sell above 40% of their total units within the period,” he said of the 21,409 units planned for launch.

Residential property would still be the anchor of the industry, dominating 96% or 20,074 units in the forecast period.

Among the 172 respondents, 67% had projects with unsold units after six months from the date of launch. And within that group, 4% had more than 50% unsold units. More than half of these units were above the RM500,000 price range.

Elaborating on the survey, Tong said the main reasons for unsold units were the increasing number of unreleased bumiputra lots and low demand for higher-end property.

“The number of unreleased bumi units have grown from 39% in the first half to 47% in the second half of the year,” he said, adding that developers from Selangor, Johor and Penang had higher unreleased bumi units.

To this, Yam said there needed to be a revision in the policy for bumi lots to ensure that bumi titles were properly catered to those eligible.

“Likewise, low-cost housing schemes need to be reviewed, as the demand for low-cost housing is also not as strong anymore as people have stigmatised it,” he said.

According to the survey, most developers revealed that the cost of doing business had also increased by between 10% and 20% as compared to the first half of 2012, with labour shortage being cited as the biggest challenge. - The Star

View properties in person, buyers advised

KUALA LUMPUR: Buyers should view the property they intend to purchase instead of making their decision solely based on online information, said Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Chor Chee Heung.

He said this advice was in view of the many reports received regarding false promises and advertisements for online purchases of other products.

“Besides looking at information online, I would encourage property buyers to visit Malaysia and view the properties to ensure that everything is all right,” he said after the launch of online siteMalaysia.SouFun.com here yesterday.

Property developers, he said, should also organise tours for buyers to view their properties.

The ministry, added Chor, also welcomed foreign clientele, who were mainly from China.

Aside from the Malaysia My Second Home programme, which was gaining popularity among foreigners, he said the country was heading towards becoming an education hub in the region, attracting many parents from China and South-East Asia wanting to buy residential homes for their children studying here.

There were also currently no plans to increase the RM500,000 minimum price for foreigners to purchase properties in Malaysia despite the rise in prices of linked houses in Petaling Jaya and Kuala Lumpur, he said.

The Government, he said, had mulled raising the minimum price but found that the number of foreigners acquiring properties in this country was still low less than “two digit” in terms of overall percentage, with Singaporeans making up around 5%.

“However, the Government may review it again in future,” he said.

Meanwhile, SouFun Malaysia managing director Suzanne Ooi said it hoped to provide a platform for quick access to information.

Since it was set up in November, SouFun Malaysia had concluded more than RM20mil in sales for the primary market of Malaysia property deals, she said.

Aiming to turn itself into the largest Chinese real estate website platform, the company hoped to achieve RM200mil of overseas purchase for Malaysian properties by the end of next year, she said. - The Star

Eye on Malaysia as HK, Singapore curb property investments

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 19 — Iskandar Malaysia, Kota Kinabalu, Kuala Lumpur and Penang are set to become hotspots for foreign property investors as the Hong Kong and Singapore governments “cool” their respective overheated property industries.

Malaysia has become a preferred country for foreign property investors and is now the main focus after Hong Kong and Singapore imposed 15 per cent levies to slow down foreign investments that had overheated their property markets.

These “cooling” measures have shifted some of the surging demand for residential and other properties to Malaysia, including a Malaysian-Singapore joint-venture iconic wellness project to be launched in Iskandar Malaysia later today.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his Singaporean counterpart Lee Hsien Loong will be accompanied by the largest gathering of Cabinet ministers from both side of the Causeway for the wellness project launch, according to officials involved in the venture.

A survey carried out by iProperty revealed that Malaysia is fast becoming a preferred investment destination for Singaporeans.

In the survey conducted among 2,099 Singaporeans, 42 per cent chose Malaysia as the number one destination for overseas investment, with Australia and the United Kingdom following close behind.

“According to Bloomberg, the Singapore dollar has risen more than 5.5 per cent in the past 12 months, the second-best performer among 11 Asian currencies.

“With a stronger currency, it is likely that even more respondents would pick Malaysia’s comparatively weaker currency (increased from 33 per cent to 42 per cent) over Australia (14 per cent) as their preferred overseas property location,” stated the iProperty Asia Market Sentiment Report (H1) 2013.

Fiabci Asia Pacific executive director Dr Yu Kee Su agrees that the cooling measures will drive up Malaysia’s property market and increase purchases in Malaysia and Australia.

“These two countries are the region’s investment grade countries for property investors from China,” he said.

He pointed out that Iskandar Malaysia, Kota Kinabalu, Kuala Lumpur and Cyberjaya will be the main hotspots that foreign investors are looking at.

Fiabci Malaysia national committee member Michael Geh concurred, saying that Kota Kinabalu and Iskandar will be the fastest growing spots due to both destinations’ flight connectivity to China.

“These two destinations are in the top tier of investments with new launches but this will not necessarily drive up prices as these investors will soak up the supply of new launches to keep the industry alive,” Geh said.

iProperty chief executive officer Shaun Di Gregorio seemed to have the same view by stating investments from Singaporeans will only have a marginal impact on property prices here.

Geh said foreign investors will only form the 10 to 15 per cent of the buyers.

“This is actually good for Malaysia’s property industry with external money coming in especially at a time when our domestic market is experiencing a credit crunch and liquidity,” he said.

Meanwhile, Malaysia Property Incorporated (MPI) said only up to three per cent of property investors in Malaysia are foreigners.

MPI agreed that the tightening of property investment regulations in Singapore and Hong Kong will like draw more foreign buyers to Malaysian shores.

“Internally, Malaysia has also improved in the Doing Business 2013 report which would boost investors’ confidence in the country’s growth so this could help in attracting more foreign direct investment into the country and possibly translate into some property purchases,” MPI said.

MPI also said a large portion of foreign property owners in Malaysia are Singaporeans.

On whether this could somehow drive up prices in the housing industry, MPI said the industry in Malaysia was not a speculative market.

“Looking at our historical house price index, we can see that we have had steady appreciation in prices over the years with no peaks or troughs, unlike the more speculative markets of Singapore, Hong Kong or Shanghai which experience acute fluctuations during the recent economic crisis,” MPI said.

According to Smart Investors Club co-founder Jeffery Lam, Malaysia’s property industry is still one of the most affordable in the Southeast Asia region and that it still has a very huge potential to grow.

“Malaysia will definitely be one of the shining stars in the region and this is surely a good sign for the country’s economy,” he said. - The Malaysian Insider