LETTER | The proposed Urban Renewal Act (URA), awaiting its first reading in Parliament, aims to establish a regulatory framework for the redevelopment of ageing and abandoned buildings, thereby mitigating urban decay.

The 13th Malaysia Plan also reinforces this agenda by intensifying the provision of affordable housing through the redevelopment of dilapidated and abandoned areas, in line with the proposed URA legislation.

It is agreed that rejuvenating ageing and underutilised areas is critical for unlocking local economic development.

However, the current proposal appears to tilt more towards developers’ interests than those of the communities it affects, privileging investment-driven renewal over a genuinely community-centred urban renewal.

With guidelines such as only requiring 75 percent owner consent for redevelopment and using a 30-year benchmark to demolish old buildings, URA could potentially increase the risks of overdevelopment, gentrification and residents’ displacement.

Urban renewal is necessary, but it should not come at the expense of the very communities it is meant to serve.

Anchored to households, not profit

Redevelopment should not be driven by profit alone. It must prioritise protecting existing residents and delivering long-term benefits to communities living there.

Therefore, the adoption of URA must be anchored to households, with a vision to improve the quality of life for households and neighbourhoods.

If the URA is adopted, we must ask what kind of development it is encouraging. For example, will low-cost flats such as the walk-up flats be demolished and replaced with high-end apartments?

If so, will these new homes remain affordable to the original communities over time, especially when it comes to maintenance? After all, poor workmanship and inadequate maintenance are what led many high-rise buildings to require renewal in the first place. We cannot afford to repeat this cycle.

There are also other concerns. Will the original communities be retained or displaced? Are their voices and lived experiences being genuinely heard and respected?

Most importantly, are we planning for what happens post-redevelopment, such as ensuring that there is adequate infrastructure to support increased population density?

For the URA to create long-term value, it must be underpinned by robust regulation and genuine, early-stage community involvement.

More must be done to safeguard residents’ interests. Where redevelopment does proceed with full community consent, residents must receive fair compensation, viable relocation options, and clear guarantees that housing will remain affordable and maintainable in the years ahead.

Local authorities, including mayors and councils, must also play a stronger role in identifying appropriate areas and projects and ensuring fair implementation.

Without these protections, redevelopment risks benefiting mainly developers and leaving vulnerable communities behind.

Return financial, societal gains to communities

The social costs of urban renewal should never outweigh the benefits. Financial and societal gains from urban renewal should be retained or returned to the families and communities within the designated renewal areas.

Past experiences have shown how things can go wrong, with cases of forced evictions, rising property prices and gentrification pushing long-time residents out of their neighbourhoods.

For example, the redevelopment of the Kampung Kerinchi flats into Residensi Kerinchi in Bangsar and Flat Pekeliling into 1Razak Mansion has revealed some concerning post-redevelopment impacts.

In several cases, residents were forced to vacate despite opposing the project. Those who agreed, on the other hand, faced long waiting periods (between six and eight years) to get their new units and increased maintenance fees.

Surrounding property values and rental yields have surged, and areas like Bangsar have undergone gentrification, hence raising the overall cost of living.

If urban renewal is to be just and sustainable, its financial and social dividends must accrue first and foremost to the communities that call these places home.

Redevelop only when necessary

This is why any redevelopment initiative must begin with a rigorous, needs-based assessment. Not every ageing building needs to be demolished.

In many cases, a well-planned maintenance or refurbishment programme could be sufficient.

Redevelopment should only be pursued when clearly necessary, when refurbishment is no longer cost-effective or safe.

Importantly, it must be carried out in a way that places communities at the centre, treating residents as active partners in shaping the future of their desired neighbourhoods.

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