Foreshore is the area that is exposed to the air at low tide and underwater at high tide. For development on the coastal zone, a construction setback of 60 metres is normally observed. Setback is a guideline to developers on how far to site permanent structures behind the shoreline in order to avoid problems with short-term coastal response and flooding problems during rough weather.
If we strictly follow the guidelines from Department of Drainage and Irrigation Circular 1987, no permanent structures should be permitted within this setback zone. Guidelines for the width of the setback zone arise from Department of Drainage and Irrigation Circular 1987, which specifies 60m on the open coast.
The 60m setback creates a costal buffer zone that should remain in the public domain. This coastal buffer zone effectively allows public access to the foreshore.
The land of any development site that fails to observe this requirement should be considered as foreshore land. Or in another words, the land of any development site that falls within the 60m setback from the foreshore line is consider as foreshore land.
The minutes on the land conversion reveal that the state legal advisers had reminded LGE that the site is foreshore land, that under the National Land Code proviso it cannot be converted from leasehold to freehold status. In converting the land, Lim has referred to section 76(aa)(iii) of the NLC which says land could be converted “where the State Authority is satisfied that there are special circumstances which render it appropriate to do so” . What are the special circumstances that LGE referred to in justifying the land conversion?
The special circumstances that Lim has cited for justifying the conversion are as follows:
1) That the project was neglected and in an “abandoned” state
2) That the equity held by PDC has been raised from 49 per cent to 50 per cent
3) That the cost of equity conversion is borne by YTL Hotels & Properties Sdn Bhd
Lim failed to address public concern over the sale of our foreshore land to private interests.
On Oct 15, 2008, in a press statement, Lim promised that the state government would not follow the footstep of his predecessor in circumventing the National Land Code proviso that prohibits the conversion of foreshore land from leasehold to freehold status.
The sad truth is that the Chief Minister who once fought alleged land scams committed by the previous state government is now personally involved in a questionable land conversion. This is a treacherous betrayal of the people by Lim.
Lim hoped by releasing the minutes on the land conversion, he can divert the attention of the people on the questionable land conversion. As usual he took the opportunity to blame Koh Tsu Koon for the land conversion. If Lim sincerely believes that what Koh did was wrong, he should not go ahead with the land conversion.
This most disturbing incident comes after Lim openly promised not to cheat Penangites of their foreshore land. Disturbing because Lim loves to continue what Koh did, but will blame the latter whenever he is criticised for whatever decisions he makes.
It is important for Penangites to understand why he made the decision that he made. Lim should walk Penangites through the reasoning why that decision was made. The special circumstances that Lim referred to are hardly special at all.
Ong Eu Soon reads The Malaysian Insider.
No comments:
Post a Comment