The rape of Ipoh’s Kinta Valley
- Mariam Mokhtar (MAY 3, 2010)

Ipoh is surrounded by beautiful limestone hills. Last month, a property developer unveiled a project called “The Haven,” which comprises three tower-blocks, each 26-storeys high, beside a four-acre natural lake next to a 280 million–year-old limestone formation. Destroying our hills serves a narrow set of business interests.

It is the hills’ beauty that has attracted these unscrupulous profiteers. They have blasted hills for their marble or calcium carbonate products to make cement, or in this case, as a pretty backdrop for their high-rise dwellings. It is ironic that they are attracted by the hills but they destroy this beauty in the pursuit of profit.

The company’s chief executive officer claimed that the development “will be an icon for Ipoh” and that “no projects in the world will be able to replicate it for the next three to five years, as land with natural settings is scarce”.

Naturally! Other companies will apply for building permits and the tower-blocks will no longer be in a beautiful setting but in a concrete jungle.

How ironic, too, that although the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is on a nationwide hunt for sand thieves, it conveniently ignores the daylight robbery and rape of the Ipoh countryside. The sand smuggled into Singapore is worth billions and has resulted in a 20 per cent increase in the size of the island. Does the MACC consider the intensive quarrying of Kinta’s limestone hills a trivial domestic matter?

The MACC is right to apprehend the sand thieves who have caused massive erosion and environmental damage. Entire beaches have been removed and transported by barge or road, for land reclamation in Singapore. For years, bribes and sexual favours fuelled these smuggling activities. Are the limestone hills of Ipoh worthless in comparison?

These hills are of huge biological importance but we have failed to prevent the rape of these geological treasures. Commercial human activity generates the most conflict — quarrying and blasting have obliterated cave formations, and destroyed historical artefacts from Malaya’s ancient civilisations, including the flora and fauna that thrive on these outcrops.

Passive industries like tourism or recreation provide jobs but do preserve the hills.

Driving along the highway towards Ipoh and seeing the mists hugging the hills, is magical. Light shining on the rock surface at different times of the day reflect different hues, like a watercolour painting coming alive. A tour of Gua Tempurung will help us appreciate the hills’ beauty and splendour, which are comparable to Mulu in Sarawak or Ha Long Bay in Vietnam. These limestone formations are only found in a few sites in South-East Asia.

Building tower-blocks near hills is an ecological disaster. The Haven’s multimillion-ringgit development of 489 units, would be the tallest buildings in Perak. The other amenities include the usual trappings of a condominium like a swimming pool.

The developers allege to be the first to harvest nature’s renewable, sustainable resources such as wind, water, bio-gas and pro-active mechanical resources to power and maintain common areas. Solar panels and wind technology will be used. Water from the lake will be used for “common washing areas”. The developers claim that the lake water is drinkable as it surpasses the World Health Organisation’s requirements.

The biodiversity of a limestone outcrop and the surrounding area is very fragile. Any removal of water will result in an imbalance in the equilibrium and affect the groundwater or water table. There is good quality drinking water in the lake now. Can the same be guaranteed after human habitation? If this project is green, why is rainwater not collected on the roof and funnelled into a tank in the basement?

Will the building design incorporate passive ventilation methods and will the biogas generation plant convert sewage into alternate energy and fertiliser? Is there a grey-water recycling system to irrigate its landscaped areas? Will the residents practice garbage recycling?

A chlorinated swimming pool is not green unlike a natural pond with reed beds to maintain the water quality. It is doubtful if the residents of these luxury apartments will swim in waters with insects and other pondlife, as well as oxygenating weeds present, as in a natural pool.

The developers claim to care for the environment and reduce its carbon footprint. Air-conditioning of the apartments is not a “green” alternative. Air-conditioning has a high energy and chemical requirement. These will negate any carbon footprint reduction. The true green alternative would be adequate ventilation from ventilation holes or double slats in the eaves, like in traditionally constructed “kampong” houses which are “green”.

The residents will drive to work or to the shops. Only an efficient public transport system which transports huge volumes of people in one vehicle, or as an alternative, car-pooling, can be considered green. Individual car usage adds to the carbon footprint. Incidentally, Ipoh’s public transport is abysmal.

Why was this controversial project not aired for public scrutiny earlier? Kuala Lumpur, or Singapore may have acute land shortages. Ipoh’s uniqueness is the serene hills surrounding them. If Bali and parts of New Zealand have strict height restrictions on the buildings to preserve the beauty of their islands, why can’t we?

This project should be criticised by the public, politicians and environmental groups, and be rejected, if necessary. Greedy developers are determined to destroy the pristine hills, the pride of Ipoh, either by blasting or building high-rises. Why can’t Ipoh maintain a height restriction for their buildings and leave their children and grandchildren a beautiful legacy?

Why has the state government not stepped in to protect our hills? It has failed to manage the hills effectively and sensitively. These geological treasures should be protected under the National Park Act 1980, Wildlife Protection Act 1972, and gazetted a world natural heritage by Unesco (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation).

Tower-blocks do not enhance the character of our hills. Tower-blocks are evidence of greedy companies and ignorant local government colluding for short term interests. They reject what nature took millions to build. Sadly, Ipohites won’t get a second chance.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication.