The Kuala Lumpur Heritage Agenda Reviews & Recommendations for theKuala Lumpur Draft Structure Plan 2040 & Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020 by ICOMOS Malaysia 1

KLDSP2040 & KLCP2020Review CommitteeChairpersonDatin TPr. Anne YuenAdvisorDato’ Ar. Hajeedar bin Abdul MajidReview CoordinatorsDr. Indera Syahrul Mat RadzuanMariana IsaReviewersFaisal Abd. RahmanAr. Dr. Goh Ai TeeAr. John KohAr. Mustapha KamalLAr. Dr. Rohayah Che AmatAr. Rosli Dato’ Mohd AliShahariah Norain ShahruddinShaiful Idzwan ShahidanSecretariat OfficerMuhammad Ridzwan AbdullahPublished byICOMOS MalaysiaNo. 99L, Jalan Tandok59100 Bangsar, Kuala LumpurT: +603-2202 2866E: [email protected]: www.icomos-malaysia.orgApril 2020All rights reserved. No part of this publicationmay be reproduced, stored in a retrievalsystem, transmitted in any form or by anymeans, electronic or mechanical, withoutprior permission from ICOMOS Malaysia.2

Contentsi Overview 01 Kuala Lumpur – the Heart of the Nation 102 History of Kuala Lumpur 703 Heritage Conservation for Sustainability 9 1304 Kuala Lumpur as ‘A City for All’ 05 Authenticity and Sensitivity 1506 Economic Values 1707 Heritage Incentive Schemes 1908 Cultural and Creative District 2309 Old Town Centres 2910 Urban Archaeology 3111 Intangible Heritage 35 3912 Cultural Urban Tourism 13 Historic Landscape 4314 Heritage Trees 5115 Traditional Villages: Unplanned & Planned 5316 Historic Housing Development Schemes 5717 Zoning & Categorisation of 63 Heritage Buildings/Sites18 Conclusion 77 AppendicesA Bukit Persekutuan Statement of Significance 86B Kg. Lee Kong Chian: Significance & Recommendations 93C JWN’s List of Heritage Buildings in KL, 2018 99 3

OverviewA review exercise was undertaken by ICOMOS Malaysia to assess heritage policiespublished in the Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020 (KLCP2020), gazetted in November 2018and the Kuala Lumpur Draft Structure Plan 2040 (KLDSP2040), launched in February 2020.Twelve ICOMOS Malaysia members and associates of diverse professional backgroundsformed an expert committee that met from October 2019 to April 2020. Our primary concernis the protection of Kuala Lumpur’s tangible and intangible heritage in the context of KualaLumpur as the capital of Federated Malay States (1896), the Federation of Malaya (1948)and the Federation of Malaysia (1963), and in the long-term impacts that the aspirations ofthe ‘World Class City’ (KLCP2020) and ‘A City for All’ (KLDSP2040) plans would have on thehistory, character and uniqueness of Kuala Lumpur.None of the six goals outlined in KLDSP2040 address the future of Kuala Lumpur’s heritagespecifically or the role that heritage could play in shaping a city that is for all. Such lack ofemphasis prompts us to express concerns about the protection of the city’s heritage identityfor Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) to take into serious consideration.In total, we found 20 subchapters in KLDSP2040 with direct references on the city’s built,natural and cultural heritage: albeit most being supplementary objectives/complimentarymentions.• PPB3 Neighbourhood Plan• PPB6 Kuala Lumpur City Communications Plan• IP1.2 Making Kuala Lumpur an Urban Tourism Destination by Improving Tourism Sector’s Value Added Activities Empowering Kuala Lumpur as a Cultural and Creative City• IP1.3 Driving Entrepeneurship Development for Urban Economic Growth• IP1.6 Providing a Variety of Affordable Premises for Entrepreneurs and Professionals• IP2.3 Strengthening Kuala Lumpur’s role as a Global City• IP3.1 Intensifying the Regeneration of Old Established Housing Areas• IS.1.4 Increasing the Green Intensity of Kuala Lumpur• SV1.3 Increasing Active and Creative Use of Urban Space• SV2.2 Re-beautifying Strategic Areas of Kuala Lumpur• SV2.3 Green Network and City Heritage• SV3 Promoting the Implementation of Kuala Lumpur Heritage Trail• SV3.3 Providing Urban Design Guidelines• SV4.3 Encouraging Infill Development in High Demand Areas• BM1.2 Regeneration of Old Areas• BM2 Improving Quality and Reactivating Old Areas through Area Improvement • BM2.1 Programs Creating Development Opportunities in Urban Renewal Areas Re-Enabling Function of Old Buildings• BM2.2 Planning Quality Development in Traditional Villages and Other Villages• BM2.3 • BM5.2 4

While the policies stated in the 20 subchapters are sound, they come across rather generic– applicable to any other city in the world. It is Kuala Lumpur’s heritage character that sets itapart from the rest – we strongly recommend the insertion of a new goal, Rooted in Heritage,that addresses heritage protection, strengthening and enhancement. This move will drive allfuture plans/developments to be sensitive towards the city’s heritage assets and settings.Recommendation of this new goal is also in view of DBKL’s past failures in protecting ourunique historic fabric from demolition; Bok House, Serani Row and Pudu Jail, to name a few.Heritage protection is not against development – it can go hand in hand rather sucessfullyif plans are conceived with heritage in mind. We want a city that could recognise itself,developed not at the expense of our historic chronology and better quality of life. As theguardian of Kuala Lumpur’s history and heritage, DBKL must make obvious attemptsto safeguard the city’s heritage assets. Unless a focus is placed on heritage matterstransparently, the ‘City for All’ will end up just another conceptual slogan and what lies aheadwould be the same problems and issues we have yet to solve.We bring forward our Kuala Lumpur Heritage Agenda to address a void that we haveidentified in KLDSP2040. Our feedback are in reflection of the contents presented in the20 mentioned subchapters – how they could be strengthened to support the new goal,Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage, which we believe will also be in line with all that is propagatedin the Sustainable Development Goals and New Urban Agenda. Overall, heritage strategiesunder this new goal include the production of a Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan emphasisingthe concept of authenticity and sensitivity, the formation of DBKL’s Conservation Office, arevamp of heritage planning and economic incentives – introducing Force-Acquirement,Transfer of Development Rights and a 100% minimum tax exemption for conservationof heritage buildings. We have also highlighted specific areas that ought to be givenconsiderable attention – Old Town Centres, Urban Archaeology, Intangible Heritage,Cultural Urban Tourism, Historic Landscape, Heritage Trees, Traditional Villages andHistoric Housing Development Schemes. Two special historic areas that we would like topush forward are the Klang-Gombak River Confluence and Bukit Persekutuan. Apart fromthat we deem Kampung Lee Kong Chian suitable to be considered as a Planned TraditionalVillage. We also urge for a comprehensive heritage listing by DBKL, covering areas beyondthe gazetted heritage zones.Some recommendations may not apply to KLDSP2040’s policies but are relevant for SpecialArea Plans and Action Plans. Examples given are not exhaustive, merely guides for DBKL’sfurther actions. Should our comments be repetitive of policies that are already in place, it isonly because they were not conveyed succesfully in KLDSP2040 – communication can beimproved with wider promotion and transparency.This paper, The Kuala Lumpur Heritage Agenda, is ICOMOS Malaysia’s official feedbackon the KLDSP2040 and KLCP2020 documents, upon DBKL’s invitation to the public thatwas announced on 18 February 2020. Each chapter ends with a list of recommendations. Asummary of all our recommendations are compiled in Chapter 18: Conclusion, pp. 77. 5

01Kuala Lumpur – the Heart of the Nation1.1 Kuala Lumpur developed from an almost uninhabited stretch of jungle to its presentcity status in a period of less than 120 years, primarily due to its role as a vibrant administrativeand commercial centre. Historically, the development of Kuala Lumpur as a centre ofgovernance may be summarised as follows:• 1880 Capital of the State of Selangor• 1896 Capital of the Federated Malay States (FMS)• 1948 Capital of the Federation of Malaya• 1963 Capital of the Federation of MalaysiaThus, its special place in the history of the Nation, evolving from the formation of the FMS in1896 (Perak, Pahang, Selangor and Negeri Sembilan) to the formation of Federation of Malayain 1948 (9 Malay States + 2 Straits Settlements) leading to the Declaration of Independenceon 31 August 1957 and six years later on 16 September 1963 to include Sabah, Sarawak andSingapore into the formation of Malaysia (the third parted ways in 1965).1.2 The significance of Kuala Lumpur as a capital centre since year 1880 and its role inthe country’s early steps towards nationhood are not amplified in KLDSP2040. One mustbe made aware that Kuala Lumpur is inseparable from the country’s multi-cultural identity,political changes and economic trends. The city’s history and heritage is a potrayal of thecountry’s – an aspect too great to lose if taken for granted. Its heritage integrity intact, KualaLumpur forms the genius loci (spirit of place) of Malaysia.1.3 Its Place in the History of the Nation1.3.1 The pivot being the early seat of governance centred around the Padang (todayDataran Merdeka) – fronting it was the Chief Secretary Office (Federal Secretariat), SanitaryBoard, the Surveyor’s Office, Chartered Bank, Post & Telegraph Building, the RecreationClub and Selangor Club with the Parade Ground doubling as a cricket ground, flanked bythe St. Mary’s Church. Looming above all these were the Police headquarters and barrackson higher ground. The Public Garden (Lake Gardens/Taman Botani Perdana) led to LakeClub and the residential British quarters culminating with Carcosa, the residence of Sir FrankSwettenham, first Resident-General of FMS.1.3.2 Kuala Lumpur’s role as the long time political centre of the country is apparent. TheFederation Agreements of 1948 & 1957 were signed in Kuala Lumpur. Independence andthe formation of Malaysia were proclaimed at Stadium Merdeka on a hillock part of BukitPetaling where the Istana Negara was located along Jalan Istana. Following the country’s1st general elections in 1955, members of the Federal Legislative Council convened in KualaLumpur, continued by Parliament members from 1959 onwards. Kuala Lumpur is indeed,the pulse of the Nation.1.4 Kuala Lumpur’s heritage is the soul of the city and while it still exists, it certainlyhas been mutilated by poor planning decisions and insensitive developments. Instead ofpositioning the city’s heritage components as planning tools throughout the eight chapters1

To Batu 15 To Pudu11Klang River Gombak River 13 04 21 22 14 03 02 01 07 10 To 19 09 18 08 23 05 Damansara 20 17Image: ICOMOS Malaysia 06 16 12 Kuala Lumpur City Centre’s Early Character & Historical/National Landmarks 1a Commerce: shophouses/trading/ Old Settlements/Town Centres residence/assoc. /entertainment 14 Kampung Melayu/Rawa/ 01 River Confluence, genius loci of Kuala Lumpur 10 Leboh Pasar Besar/ Melaka Petaling Street 15 Kampong Bharu The Pivot: Administration Centre 16 Brickfields 02 Government offices, bank, 11 Jalan TAR (Batu Road) 17 Kampung Attap Market rest houses Central Market (Pasar Seni) National Monuments Raja Bot (Chow Kit) Market 18 Stadium Merdeka & Negara 03 Police Headquarters & Religious Institutions 19 Masjid Negara Barracks; Govt. Quarters 20 Muzium Negara Masjid Jamek 21 Parliament Building Early Government Quarters Masjid India 22 Tugu Negara 04 Old Residency Hill Sin Sze Si Ya Temple 23 Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka 05 Bukit Persekutuan Guan Di Temple 06 Jalan Bellamy Sri Mahamariamman Temple Building 07 Public Garden 12 Bkt. Petaling Early Cemeteries 2 08 Railway Land 13 Bukit Nanas Forest Reserve 09 Sports Park

of KLDSP2040, we recommend for ‘heritage protection, strengthening and enhancement’to be given priority by setting it as one of the Structure Plan’s primary goals, organised in thefollowing order*, bringing it to a total of 7 goals:Goal 1: Innovative and Productive (urban economic development)Goal 2: Inclusive and Equitable (inclusive community)Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage (heritage protection, strengthening and enhancement)Goal 4: Integrated and Sustainable Development (land use planning)Goal 5: Healthy and Vibrant (green areas, open land and urban design)Goal 6: Climate Smart and Low Carbon (environmental aspects and low carbon practice)Goal 7: Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Mobility (public transport and traffic management)*Note shuffling of goal sequence.1.5 Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage will bring an anchor to Kuala Lumpur’s heritage identity assomething to be shared and cherished by the city’s residents. and set direction for all otherplanning aspects. None of our heritage assets should be sacrificed for development be itfor transport, economy, land use, etc. With visions/objectives formed to engage with ourheritage and its connection to the world, policies under this new goal, taking heritage intoconsideration in the planning processes, will allow agencies/developers to take creativeintegrated approaches in optimising land use.1.6 A cohesive heritage plan for Kuala Lumpur which looks into, among others, the city’sidentity, culture, national monuments, heritage buildings and sites – their conservation,museums, objects, artefacts and historical narratives will help in safeguarding our heritageassets and strengthening who we are as a Nation. The Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan will raiseawareness and pride among the city’s residents, apart from fostering an understanding ofwhat makes Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur – so as to protect it, not break it apart.1.7 Attention must be given to the national monuments and heritage sites that arerelated to the formation of the country, e.g. the administrative centre at Dataran Merdeka,Bukit Persekutuan, Tugu Negara, Stadium Merdeka and Muzium Negara. Some of thesesites are in need of rehabilitation while some require new methods to engage the publicas the concept of nation building in Malaysia is now being re-constructed, to break awayfrom its long time top-down approach. A special heritage plan for the national monumentswill help create a tangible platform for nation building and empower the custodians of ournational monuments.1.8 Bukit Persekutuan probably has the largest remaining group of a building typologyfrom the period following the Japanese Occupation, marking the formation of the Federationof Malaya leading to the country’s Independence. This forgotten historical site pertains tothe country’s independence and complements the Tugu Negara, Parliament Building andStadium Merdeka. A heritage plan will be able to look into bringing out Bukit Persekutuan’shistoric significance and linking it back to Carcosa/Taman Botani Perdana.3

Image: Heritage Output Lab 1b Muzium Negara, one of theImage: www.holidify.com seven symbols of the foundation of our country, is donned with two mural master pieces by artist Cheong Lai Tong – the right depicting Malayan history since ancient times up to Independence; the left – Malayan handicrafts. Both iconic murals were visible to passers-by along Jalan Damansara until recently. An MRT station structure today blocks the Right Mural from street view. 1c Although the Muzium Negara MRT infrastructure is more than welcomed, its station design does not express much care to the architectural significance of Muzium Negara as a national symbol, covering visibility of the building’s right wing from the road. A heritage plan in place would have imposed clear design guidelines e.g. scale, visual protection. 4

1.9 The key area that showcases Kuala Lumpur’s historic role as the centreof governance is Dataran Merdeka, where the old government buildings builtsince the 1890s still stand today on the west bank of the Klang River. This waswhere all major sporting and ceremonial events of the State/country took place.Although the social focus today has shifted to KLCC, the old civic centre remains an importantsymbol. To date, measures to regain its social significance have not been explored fully.Thorough feasibility studies must be carried out to ensure the best way forward. Ad-hocplans with short-term gains are to be discouraged.1.10 DBKL must recognise that Kuala Lumpur is indeed a reflection of Malaysia. Howwe articulate the relationship between the city’s past, present and future not only sets abenchmark for other cities in the country, but is also representative of who we are to theworld. Summary of Recommendations 01: Kuala Lumpur – the Heart of the Nation 1. Introduce heritage protection and enhancement as one of KLDSP2040’s primary goals – Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage. 2. A comprehensive Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan to respond to future challenges in the city’s heritage preservation and protection. 3. A special heritage plan for national monuments/symbols/sites related to the formation of the Federation of Malay States, Federation of Malaya and Federation of Malaysia – Bukit Persekutuan included. 4. Conduct a thorough feasibility study on how to regain Dataran Merdeka’s social significance.5

Image: Wikipedia; Mulberry Leaves 1d The old King’s House/IstanaImage: Wikipedia; Haakon S. Krohn Tetamu, today Seri Negara, was where the signing of the 1948 & 1957 Federation Agreements took place. The building is often confused with Carcosa – apparent in that Carcosa is listed by the Department of National Heritage (JWN) as a ‘National Heritage’, while Seri Negara is only listed as a ‘Heritage’ structure. The building suffers from neglect and is in dire need of repair/restoration. 1e The Merdeka Parade, an annual national event since the country’s Independence in 1957 is no longer held at Dataran Merdeka. The Government is seemingly in favour of holding it at the country’s new administrative capital, Putrajaya. A great number of large heritage trees that dotted the area were felled – there is almost no shade to rest under during the day. 6

02History of Kuala Lumpur2.1 A City for All includes its Past2.1.1 Most discussions on cities today look into the future without considering thepast. Kuala Lumpur has a unique narrative that is under appreciated, and we riskundervaluing lessons learned long ago if we continue our lackdaisical attitude towardsthe city’s history. There should be an emphasis on the dynamic long term habitation thatis reflected in Kuala Lumpur’s urban setting – of stories that live on as lessons throughwhat generations have left behind. Respect for the elders and the past is an inherent valueof ours – wouldn’t it be meaningful for our planning policies to be able to reflect that?.2.1.2 An honest recollection of our history will reveal the roles that each communityand personality had contributed to the growth of Kuala Lumpur – establishing a sense ofbelonging towards our shared history and heritage. There has been an upsurge of interestamong the public towards the history of Kuala Lumpur of late, however there isn’t a centralinstitution that is able to provide full range assistance.2.1.3 It is only appropriate for DBKL, as the custodian of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage, to takethe lead as the reliable source in matters concerning the city’s early formation and planninghistory. The Kuala Lumpur Library managed by DBKL would be the most suitable centreto research and collect information on events that took place in 20th & 21st century KualaLumpur. An adequate financial allocation will allow the library to build a full collection ofreports and publications on the city. A repository of old documents and photographs madeavailable to the public will also garner enough interest for joint-ventures from relevantorganisations such as Arkib Negara Malaysia and Persatuan Sejarah Kuala Lumpur. This willbe in line with the open data portal proposed under KLDSP2040: PPB6 Kuala Lumpur CityCommunications Plan; Chapter 2-21.2.2 Comments for KLDSP2040: Kuala Lumpur a City for All; Chapter 2-62.2.1 A timeline of Kuala Lumpur’s growth is presented in KLDSP2040: Kuala Lumpur aCity for All; Chapter 2-6. We suggest for the timeline to also cover the expansion of KualaLumpur’s boundaries in the 1920s and 1950s; the city’s master plan conceived by CharlesReade in the 1920s; the Municipality status received in 1948 (the first in FMS); the eradicationof squatters and construction of public housing in the 1960s-1980s; and under the heading‘1984-1990s’, make mention of Menara Maybank being the tallest building in Kuala Lumpurduring that period as this building too reflects the image of a ‘World Class City’. Furtherelaboration such as these provides a better understanding of Kuala Lumpur’s planninghistory which in turn would help all parties to grasp the city’s complex layers and take noteof the earlier planning initiatives that ought to be continued into the future.2.2.2 The historical narrative presented should also take into account of Kuala Lumpur’s roleas a capital administrative centre since 1880 and events related to Malaysia’s Independence,as the city’s significance in history goes beyond being a tin trading hub.7

2.2.3 We wish to highlight several errors in the timeline, as the KLDSP2040, once gazetted,should serve as a trustworthy reference:‘The opening of KL by Sutan Puasa or Sutan Naposo who came from Mandailing Sumatera.’Although Sutan Puasa may have been a pioneer of Kuala Lumpur, historical evidence showsthat he was not the sole individual in charge. One also must not forget that Kuala Lumpur wasunder the reign of Sultan Selangor at the time. Should Sutan Puasa’s name be mentioned asa pioneer of Kuala Lumpur, it is only fair that his partners/contemporaries, Hiu Siew and AhSze (Keledek), be included in the picture. Presenting an incomplete hypothesis as facts willmislead and confuse residents of Kuala Lumpur.‘1857 – Kuala Lumpur was once a tin mining centre developed by Yap Ah Loy’.Raja Abdullah, the District Chief of Klang, and his men ventured into tin mining in KualaLumpur commercially in 1857. Yap Ah Loy, one of the more prominent personalities involvedin developing the tin mines arrived in Kuala Lumpur in 1862.‘1880 – J.G Davidson, the Selangor Resident chose Kuala Lumpur as the capital of the Stateof Selangor’The Selangor Resident who moved Selangor’s capital to Kuala Lumpur in 1880 was CaptainBloomfield Douglas who served that position from 1876 to 1882. James Guthrie Davidsonwas Selangor’s Resident from 1875 to 1876.‘1886 – The construction of the railway from Kuala Lumpur to Klang was completed tosupport the export of tin ore’.The 1886 railway line connected Kuala Lumpur to Bukit Kuda, near Klang’s town centre.2.3 Most of our city’s history can be unfolded through its street names (old and new).Changes to existing names of places, streets and buildings within Kuala Lumpur shouldno longer take place so that the city’s connection with its past can be retained. Whereestablished areas are totally redeveloped, its new streets or building names ought to linkwith the area’s history. Street names after air crafts, for example, would be appropriate forthe new roads within the upcoming Bandar Malaysia, built on the site of Kuala Lumpur’searliest airport strip. Summary of Recommendations 02: History of Kuala Lumpur 1. Kuala Lumpur Library to play a central role in researching Kuala Lumpur’s planning history – establish a repository of old documents and photographs, open to public. 2. Include narratives related to Kuala Lumpur’s role as a capital centre and venue for events that led to Independence as part of Chapter 2’s timeline. Corrections upon verification of historical facts presented in KLDSP2040. 3. Preserve existing names of streets/buildings/places within the city and encourage new street names to link with the site’s history. 8

03Heritage Conservation for Sustainability3.1 Alignment with Principles of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the NewUrban Agenda (NUA)3.1.1 SDG11.4 calls for strengthening efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s culturaland natural heritage. KLDSP2040 aligns its vision with this SDG principle and the New UrbanAgenda, committing DBKL to address the challenges of heritage conservation in the city. Thefollowing are 6 clauses extracted from the NUA that form the basis of our recommendationsin the following chapters:Clause 13(h): Protect, conserve, restore and promote their eco-systems, water, naturalhabitats and biodiversity, minimize their environmental impact and change to sustainableconsumption and production patterns.Clause 32: We commit ourselves to promoting the development of integrated and ageand gender responsive housing policies and approaches across all sectors, in particularthe employment, education, health-care and social integration sectors, and at all levelsof government — policies and approaches that incorporate the provision of adequate,affordable, accessible, resource efficient, safe, resilient, well-connected and well-locatedhousing, with special attention to the proximity factor and the strengthening of the spatialrelationship with the rest of the urban fabric and the surrounding functional areas.Clause 38: We commit ourselves to the sustainable leveraging of natural and culturalheritage, both tangible and intangible, in cities and human settlements, as appropriate,through integrated urban and territorial policies and adequate investments at the national,subnational and local levels, to safeguard and promote cultural infrastructures and sites,museums, indigenous cultures and languages, as well as traditional knowledge and thearts, highlighting the role that these play in rehabilitating and revitalizing urban areas and instrengthening social participation and the exercise of citizenship.Clause 60: We commit ourselves to sustaining and supporting urban economies to transitionprogressively to higher productivity through high-value-added sectors, by promotingdiversification, technological upgrading, research and innovation, including the creation ofquality, decent and productive jobs, including through the promotion of cultural and creativeindustries, sustainable tourism, performing arts and heritage conservation activities, amongothers.Clause 94: We will implement integrated planning that aims to balance short-term needswith the long term desired outcomes of a competitive economy, high quality of life andsustainable environment. We will also strive to build flexibility into our plans in order to adjustto changing social and economic conditions over time. We will implement and systematicallyevaluate these plans, while making efforts to leverage innovations in technology and toproduce a better living environment.9

Clause 125: We will support the leveraging of cultural heritage for sustainable urbandevelopment and recognize its role in stimulating participation and responsibility. We willpromote innovative and sustainable use of architectural monuments and sites, with theintention of value creation, through respectful restoration and adaptation. We will engageindigenous peoples and local communities in the promotion and dissemination of knowledgeof tangible and intangible cultural heritage and protection of traditional expressions andlanguages, including through the use of new technologies and techniques.3.2 Managing Expectations in Heritage Conservation3.2.1 To strengthen the management and conservation of designated heritage areasand buildings, a dedicated Conservation Office, complete with laboratories and relevantexpertise would be able to ensure the safeguarding of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage and itsdirection towards fulfilling the requirements of SDG11.4. This ought to be set up underDBKL’s wing to steer clear of unwarranted influences and to build better judgements amongin-house experts.3.2.2 Among responsibilities to be held by the Conservation Office are: i. Management of threats/risks of disasters for heritage buildings/areas e.g. flash floods. ii. Conservation Statements to outline significance of heritage buildings/sites. iii. Work on strengthening heritage appreciation through education. iv. Heritage training and capacity building. v. Method study on local building restoration/repair/maintenance. vi. Scientific studies on local building materials/historical/archaeological sites. vii. Conservation Management Plans for heritage buildings/areas. viii. Technical assistance to local stakeholders and heritage building owners. ix. A complete database for Kuala Lumpur’s tangible and intangible heritage. x. Heritage Impact Assessment reviews.3.2.3 Heritage zones such as Dataran Merdeka demand ample attention to ensure thestructural integrity of buildings in the area are protected. Forming an Advisory Committeeunder the Conservation Office from amongst DBKL’s in-house experts and heritageconsultants from the private sector would help in framing effective conservation strategiesfor specific areas.3.3 Public Engagements/Consultations3.3.1 As outlined in NUA: Clause 125, public engagement and consultation are necessaryto ensure well-thought, thorough and robust policies. Public engagement, for a long time,has not been one of DBKL’s strengths. We hope further efforts are undertaken together withrelevant agencies to involve key stakeholders and experts on issues concerning heritage.The formation of a Conservation Office will be of great assistance to this. 10

3.3.2 Strategies to retain heritage buildings/sites – allowing people to connect to themmeaningfully are covered in KLDSP2040: SV2.2. Increasing Active and Creative Use ofUrban Space. We suggest relevant content from SV2.2 to be adopted under Goal 3: Rootedin Heritage. Summary of Recommendations 03: Heritage Conservation for Sustainability 1. To establish a Conservation Office that shall look into safeguarding Kuala Lumpur’s heritage in all aspects. 2. Training and capacity building for long-term management and best practice conservation for the preservation of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage. 3. To form an Advisory Committee to develop strategies in achieving SDG11.4 and effectively protecting Kuala Lumpur’s heritage. 4. Increase public engagement sessions in matters related to the city’s heritage. 5. Adopt relevant content from KLDSP2040: SV2.2 Increasing Active and Creative Use of Urban Space under Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage.11

Image: Ar. Steven Thang Boon Ann 3a Brick walls of the old GPOImage: ICOMOS Malaysia building at Jalan Raja are under threat of further deterioration from pollution, humidity and traffic vibration. The recommended Conservation Office will be able to look into scientific and method studies to repair the building’s flaking bricks. 3b The old Chow Kit & Co. building/ Industrial Court is currently vacant. At the moment its facade shows vegetation growth and peeling paint, among others. The recommended Conservation Office will be able to advice on how to best treat the brick walls, carry out material tests and plan for a detailed conservation budget. 12

04Kuala Lumpur as ‘A City for All’4.1 KLDSP2040 explains the Kuala Lumpur as a City for All concept in Chapter 2,emphasizing on maintaining Kuala Lumpur’s position as a global city – looking at areas ofeconomic value, research and development, digital technology and artificial intelligencewhile enhancing interaction with local culture, elevating the well-being of urban people,increasing the quality of the built and natural environment and increasing the level ofaccessibility. We wish for Chapter 2’s content to explore the placement of Goal 3: Rootedin Heritage in maintaining Kuala Lumpur’s global city status; how heritage protection,strengthening and enhancement resonate into the City for All concept.4.2 Image and Identity4.2.1 KLCP2020 does not give enough emphasis on historic and heritage buildings beingthe image and identity of Kuala Lumpur. The overall description of Kuala Lumpur’s rangeof historic architecture in KLCP2020: Vol 1; 9.7 is rather vague – inadequate in representingits built heritage, let alone form good basis for policies to protect them. It could havemade mention of the city’s various architectural style – Mughal-Eclectic, Art Deco, ModernVernacular; Hindu and Chinese Temples, Gothic Churches; vernacular timber houses andtropical government quarters; among others, to reflect the city’s rich mix. Unfortunately,KLDSP2040 does not address the matter either – in fact it misses out completely at makinga general statement. An honest description on all the architectural and historical influenceswhich shaped Kuala Lumpur’s outstanding heritage values will help in recognising aspectsthat have to be preserved/protected. A detailed analysis on the significance of all KualaLumpur’s heritage assets is much needed to form a precise picture of the city’s identity andcultural image that we ought to hold on to.4.3 Heritage to Promote Unity and a Sense of Pride4.3.1 It gives one a sense of pride to bring to memory the achievements and contributionsof an individual or community. The promotion to preserve the tangible as well as theintangible heritage, seeks to pass down from our forefathers things of intrinsic cultural valueworthy of preservation so that the rich knowledge of heritage gives the younger generationthe hope and vision that they would want to imitate – good deeds, the culture and examplesof benevolence of our forefathers. Communities that exhibit the spirit of unity of wanting tostay together as one, undivided, should be reserved as examples to the younger generationto never give up, but only to desire to go through all challenges in life, uniting them throughshared experiences and memories.4.3.2 Kuala Lumpur was at one time the centre for one of the world’s largest tin and rubberindustries. Its earlier residents were all driven to it partly due to this, and our contribution to theworld’s commercial industry should be promoted and reminded so that we remain inspiredto achieve similar success. The shared heritage that bonds Kuala Lumpur’s community willstrengthen their resilience and identity as a society, encouraging them to seize opportunitiesin this city and prosper together.13

4.3.3 Documents and materials that would bring out a sense of unity and pride shouldbe made accessible or brought back into public domain. One example would be thecommemorative plaque for the designation of Kuala Lumpur as a Federal Territory in 1974,removed from its original location at Masjid Jamek. This document’s detailed content isrelatively unknown despite it being an important piece of artefact in the formation of KualaLumpur as a Federal Territory.4.3.4 Heritage brings together people from all walks of life, uniting them throughshared experiences and memories. A City for All recognises the rich and vibrant culturalbackground of its communities be it Kuala Lumpur’s historical buildings, neighbourhood,festive celebrations or food. Equal value should be given to all types of heritage and culturewithin Kuala Lumpur to anchor our unique multi-cultural identity and traits. Therefore, thedefinition of what constitutes as Kuala Lumpur’s heritage outlined in KLDSP2040 has to bebroader, encouraging inclusivity and diversity. Summary of Recommendations 04: Kuala Lumpur as a City for All 1. Carry out a detailed analysis on Kuala Lumpur’s built heritage. 2. Include an overall statement of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage architecture, its values and significance in KLDSP2040. 3. Bring forward documents/materials that would bind the community together into public domain. 4. Outline broader definitions for Kuala Lumpur’s heritage to encourage inclusivity and diversity. 14

05Authenticity and Sensitivity5.1 Authenticity from the context of cultural heritage conservation highlights integralcomponents that makes a building or site contain certain or particular historical anecdotalvalues. Introducing the concept of ‘authenticity’ in heritage practices or developments asa guide for all parties who wish to develop or maintain these heritage properties, will alsoimprove the understanding on heritage significance and may reduce the desire to exploitthe economic potential of their sites.5.2 New developments within heritage sites or buildings in Kuala Lumpur includingrecent ones, are largely insensitive towards the original settings and the intangible aspectsof heritage buildings. The intangible part is what the buildings were originally intended orassigned for – their purposes, uses, spaces, layouts, etc. The spatial functions and engineering‘loading’ were designed and calculated for their initial purposes. The engineering significanceto the buildings, plus the types of materials used, whether they can dilapidate, rot or decayover time, is a concern often overlooked when rehabilitating old (heritage) buildings foradaptive reuse.5.3 Construction wise, methods were based on the availability of materials, fit for themethods of practices and skills required for each different type of trades. There may not bemany skilled tradesmen around due to the current change for uses of ‘manufactured items’and practices. But, they are still available when called, from those who have learnt to acquirethe old trade knowledge. It is a matter of supervision, and to comply with specifications.5.4 Present view cones, roof heights, vantage sights and contextual references ofheritage buildings are hardly taken into consideration, as the understanding of ‘authenticity’or ‘sensitivity’ is clearly lacking. We propose that DBKL introduces these two principles in theKLDSP2040 as guidelines.5.5 We hope DBKL discourages new buildings to cast ‘faux design’, as this indicatestransgression by reflecting existing heritage designs. This approach for one, may limit designpotential and could be understood as encouraging replicas of the past. Underlining it all,should be promotion for good articulate designs and sensitivity towards the authenticity andthe significance of a place.5.6 Authentic historicalresourceswillalso influence Kuala Lumpur’s tourism development,to be supported by enhanced interpretive services as a way to appreciate authenticitywhile also providing an engaging experience. Heritage tourism products, services andexperiences that revolve around the value of historical authenticity should be looked into byDBKL’s Tourism Bureau.5.7 The significance of heritage assets needs to be identified and described thoroughlyvia a compulsory Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) in predetermined areas. This is inaccordance with the National Heritage Act 2005 (Section 40, Article 4):(4) The Commissioner shall advise the local planning authority to impose conditions when15

approving planning permission or a development order involving a heritage site which mayinclude: (a) requiring compliance with any conservation guidelines and procedures issued by the Minister; (b) requiring the making good of any damage caused to any heritage site after the works authorized by the planning permission or the development order are completed; or (c) requiring the protection and retention of any specified feature of the heritage site.5.8 However, KLDSP2040: BM2.3 paragraph on Special Action Plan requires HeritageImpact Assessment (HIA) only ‘if necessary’. We proposed that HIA be made compulsory forproposals involving all types of heritage buildings and their neighbouring structures, if notin the form of a report, a brief Heritage Impact Statement; but preferably, in an open publicforum. It is important that Heritage Impact Assessments or Statements are able to assistProject Owners and Planning Officers to understand the implications of these proposals,public voices (even if minimal), and report to DBKL’s Design Review Panel.5.9 Open Public invitees should also be invited, depending on the nature of the culturalheritage, whether it is of cultural context or evolving through time. Authenticity Judgementsmay be linked to the worth of variety of sources of information. Aspect of sources suchas form and design, may include those from material and substance, use and function,traditions and techniques, location and setting, spirit and feeling; and other internal/externalfactors. The use of these sources permits elaboration of specific artistic, historic, socialand scientific dimensions of the cultural heritage to be examined. Thus, open to people ofbroader capacities, with knowledge and experiences.5.10 Listing of all heritage assets within the city’s boundary according to DBKL’s ownunique criteria for Kuala Lumpur will help identify these properties in advance – refer toChapter 17. Summary of Recommendations 05: Authenticity and Sensitivity 1. Introduce/promote the concept of authenticity in Kuala Lumpur’s heritage conservation. 2. Emphasise on sensitivity towards existing heritage/historical elements when addressing new design interventions. 3. Discourage design replication of old buildings. 4. DBKL Tourism Bureau to explore heritage tourism products, services and experiences that revolve around Kuala Lumpur’s historical authenticity. 5. Heritage Impact Assessment/Statement to be made compulsory for all types of heritage buildings/sites. 6. An open public forum to engage stakeholders and public to assess and understand the Heritage Impact Assessments. 16

06Economic Values6.1 New developments in Kuala Lumpur’s city centre give focus on large-scale projectsthat contradicts with the economic potential of existing historic commercial areas. Statisticspublished by Knight Frank Malaysia [2019] presents an oversupply of office spaces in KualaLumpur while rental rate has dropped 0.2% due to oversupply and difficulty in attractingnew tenants. The future threat is the oversupply of everything not relevant to the needs ofpeople living in Kuala Lumpur. Measures to unlock the real estate potential of abandoned,neglected and under-utilised heritage buildings are addressed in KLDSP2040: BM2.3Re-Enabling Function of Old Buildings. We are pleased that DBKL is viewing renovation,restoration and adaptive reuse as tools for future developments. The Inventory of OldBuildings in that chapter however only mentions those in need of reactivation. An initialinventory which covers all kinds of heritage buildings within the boundary of Kuala Lumpurwould be more useful as a database, especially if it includes property values.6.2 KLDSP2040: BM2.3 initiates detailed guidelines for the activation of places, coveringsuitable activities, restoration and protection of cultural and heritage values. The guidelinesshould put some emphasis on the authenticity of architectural features that make a buildinghistoric. The difference between restoration and adaptive re-use approaches must beelaborated as these definitions are used rather loosely in some paragraphs. The Row atJalan Doraisamy is given as a Best Practice example. Although it is indeed a successfulretail catalyst to the area, quite a number of renovation works carried out removedoriginal features and detailing, unreflective of what the paragraph describes The Row tobe – “building facade physical restoration”. Guidelines must not be vague to avoid loss ofhistorical fabric that forms unique characteristics and lends historical real estate value to aplace. The old Art Deco townhouses along Changkat Bukit Bintang and Jalan Doraisamyfor example, have been overly renovated to an extent that all the elements that gave thosestreets their old charm have disappeared. Major renovations of old (heritage) buildings tofit specific business needs must also be guided or controlled so that it remains flexible forother uses in the future.6.3 KLCP2020: Vol 2; 4.3.3 Secondary Heritage Zones allows certain flexibility fordevelopments within Secondary Zones that do not involve heritage buildings Category 1& 2: i) exemption from car park provision for the first 7 storey of a new/additional structure;ii) exemptions from road surrender along the frontage and rear of the building. Theseexemptions however do not outline specific terms to retain heritage buildings, and were notbrought forward to KLDSP2040.6.4 We would like to extend the idea of Force-Acquirement for neglected heritagebuildings. The Compulsory Acquisition of Listed Building Regulation is the best reference onhow England’s local authorities have powers to compulsorily acquire a listed building if theowner is unable to safeguard its long-term preservation. Under this regulation, the buildingcondition must be in some form of disrepair; the owner must be shown to be unwilling orunable to carry out the repairs; and it must be proven that the building will be better offunder the ownership of the local authority. Such properties acquired are best for publicfacilities as purchases will be financed using tax funds, and compensation paid to owners.17

Image: Wikimedia (2020) 6a A row of heritage shophouses along Leboh Ampang with dilapidated frontages – missing windows, etc. Should the building be left by the owners to deteriorate further, and found to pose a danger to public safety, Force-Acquirement will allow DBKL to purchase the property at a fair compensation, if necessary, for the building’s long-term preservation. 6.5 1P2.3 Providing a Variety of Affordable Premises for Entrepreneurs and Professionals advocates premises in the heritage zone of Medan Pasar and its vicinity to be developed for adaptive reuse purposes e.g. to be occupied by digital and creative entrepreneurs or tourism related activities. Our stand is to welcome such reactivation as long as measures are taken to ensure that the quality of Medan Pasar’s historic environment and authenticity of the heritage buildings there are protected. We would also like to encourage for the original face brick feature on the remaining shophouse facades to be restored, complementing Kuala Lumpur’s face brick Mughal-Eclectic buildings built during the same period. 6.6 We are relieved that KLDSP2040 did not bring out high density as a goal and we wish that the plans do not revisit KLCP2020’s emphasis on high iconic buildings. Summary of Recommendations 06: Economic Values 1. Extend Inventory of Old (Heritage) Buildings to cover all aspects, not limiting it to only those in need of reactivation. 2. Give emphasis on authenticity and sensitivity in guidelines. 3. Make a clear difference between restoration and adaptive reuse terms as it affects the potential and limitation of a heritage building/site. 4. Outline terms in relation to maintenance and conservation of old buildings that are to be redeveloped. 5. Force-Acquirement of abandoned heritage buildings to be explored. 18

07Heritage Incentive Schemes7.1 Neither the KLCP2020 nor the KLDSP2040 elaborates on heritage incentivemechanisms that will be applied to safeguard the tangible/intangible heritage of KualaLumpur. KLDSP2040: BM2.3 Re-Enabling Function of Old Buildings only has one line onsuch development incentives, “providing incentives suitable with old buildings’ restorationprogramme conducted.” The word ‘restoration’ is loosely thrown in. Current incentivemechanisms and sources are found to be inadequate/minimal, relying heavily on privateinitiatives. Large portions of conservation expenditures are heavily borne by property owners.7.2 At present, public financial incentives are often limited to certain types of conservationworks such as roof standardisation, facade improvement to enhance a building’s aestheticappeal; and renovation works mainly to its main structure, walls, windows, roofs and stairs.Other aesthetic efforts provided by the Government consist of improvements to pedestrianwalkways, beautification, tree planting along streets and rivers, outdoor street lamps,installation of roof lamps, landscape, signages, arch-gates and other public utilities. Long-term benefits to stakeholders/owners of heritage buildings remain vague as the currentpublic incentive packages lack innovation and are deemed unattractive to them. It isessential for DBKL to draw out the importance of an effective incentive policy in guidinglocal conservation efforts for Kuala Lumpur’s economic development.7.3 In Malaysia, it is common for the Federal Government’s investment companies suchas Think City to provide financial assistance including booster grants, repayable grants,matching grants, capacity building grants and technical assistance. However, these are notnecessarily extended to DBKL to grant for the protection of heritage buildings.7.4 Where cultural heritage incentives are lacking, such schemes implemented in othercities e.g. Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Melbourne, Jaipur can be referred to. The followinglist are examples of Heritage Incentive Tools carried out in several countries, which couldbe considered for Kuala Lumpur, adapted from Heritage Strategies International [2012] andMalaysia [2011].• Australia Heritage building property tax based on actual use rather than ‘higher and best’ use. • Austria Properties built before year 1880 are assessed at 30% of value for property tax purposes.• Belgium Restoration grants of up to 40% of costs for privately owned monuments.• Brazil Low interest loan programmes to private owners of historic buildings.• Canada Grants for 50% of facade restoration.• Denmark More favourable schedules for deducting repair expenditures on heritage buildings for income tax purposes.19

Image: ICOMOS Malaysia 7a Facade restoration works carriedImage: ICOMOS Malaysia out on a heritage shophouse along Leboh Pasar Besar in 2018 was enabled with a grant from Think City. However, the funds are limited. A 100% tax exemption for conservation works carried out onto heritage buildings will encourage building owners to initiate similar initiatives on their own. 7b The Sin Sze Si Ya Temple owns a row of shophouses along Jalan Tun H.S Lee. A grant from Think City allowed a full facade restoration of the shophouse units, using appropriate methods and materials. Think City’s grant covered approximately 30% of the facade restoration costs. 20

• France Listed historic monuments that are open to the public can deduct 100% of expenses (including maintenance, loan interest and property taxes) while those not open to the public can deduct 50%.• Germany Donations to foundations for the restoration of heritage buildings are tax deductible up to 10% of total income.• Japan Grants to owners of historic properties to install fire-prevention facilities.• Netherlands Property owners subscribe to regular inspection services. When repairs are needed, about half of the funding comes from national and provincial governments.• Singapore Individual owners can raise money and issue tax-exempt receipts to donors for restoration of listed monuments.• South Korea The transmission system for the Living Human Treasures gives not only economic compensation to the performers but also greater prestige and individual self-respect to ensure preservation of intangible cultural heritage.• United Kingdom Churches and charities are exempted from VAT for major construction projects if approved.7.5 Stakeholders must be made to understand the type of benefits they would enjoyby retaining and maintaining their heritage assets well. We suggest that DBKL looks intoproviding financial assistance for conservation of heritage buildings e.g. bank loans anddevelopment charges. This would require further consultation with banking and financialinstitutions. DBKL could, for example, introduce issuance of attractive tax exemptions forspecific conservation/restoration works of heritage buildings. We suggest a minimum of100% tax exemption, noting that this would involve approval from relevant Ministries.7.6 A Public Heritage Fund for conservation of heritage buildings could be set up, similarto what has been outlined for parks in KLDSP2050: SV4.1 Establishing a Public Trust Fund forParks and Green Areas.7.7 Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) by building/land owners can also beimplemented in the case of Kuala Lumpur. TDR is a zoning technique used to permanentlyprotect land with conservation values (e.g. a heritage area, community open space, or othernatural/cultural resources) by redirecting development that would otherwise occur on thisland (the sending area) to an area planned to accommodate growth and development(the receiving area). TDR permits purchasing landowners to develop their ‘receiving’ parcelat a higher density than what would be legally impossible otherwise. TDR programmes21

financially compensate landowners for choosing not to develop some or a full portion oftheir land. These landowners are given an option under municipal zoning to legally sever thedevelopment rights from their land and sell these rights to another landowner or a real estatedeveloper for use at a different location. The land from which the development rights havebeen severed is permanently protected through a conservation easement or a restrictivecovenant. The development value of the land where the transferred development rightsare applied is enhanced by allowing for new or special uses; greater density or intensity;or other regulatory flexibility that zoning without the TDR option would not have permitted.TDR removes some of the windfalls and wipeouts associated with conventional zoning byallowing landowners in areas typically zoned for very low-density residential use to capturesome of the same financial rewards available to landowners located in areas zoned forsuburban and urban land uses.7.8 Provision of creative incentive packages from DBKL specific for the protection andstrengthening of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage assets would certainly be a catalyst to boostthe image and identity of Kuala Lumpur that will be a good reference and benchmark forheritage governance in Malaysia. Summary of Recommendations 07: Heritage Incentive Schemes 1. Explore means to provide financial assistance to heritage building owners/ stakeholders who wish to conserve their properties. 2. Introduce Cultural Heritage Incentive Tools/Schemes. 3. Establish a public fund for the conservation of heritage buildings. 4. Apply Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). 5. Introduce 100% minimum Tax Exemption for conservation/restoration of heritage buildings. 22

08Cultural and Creative District8.1 KLDSP2040: IP1.3 Empowering Kuala Lumpur as a Cultural and Creative City presentsa strategy for economic injection into the city’s historic core using creativity as a factor.Honestly, the IP1.3 chapter does not explain the Cultural and Creative City plans well, andit was not until we contacted agencies in charge of the Kuala Lumpur Creative & CulturalDistrict (KLCCD) Strategic Master Plan that we gained a slightly better understanding of theproposal. We suggest a further elaboration on KLCCD in Chapter IP1.3 and urge for detailedplans of the KLCCD to be shared with the public so that people can assess their impactsonto the existing community better.8.2 The IP1.3 chapter reads to be economy driven, heavier on revitalisation of places,less on the significance of present activities. We would like to understand whether KualaLumpur’s cultural/creative strengths have been identified and if so, what are the exact plansto move them forward. There are existing self-organised cultural and creative industriesconcentrated in areas other than the designated district – plans should also take them intoconsideration, ensuring that they too are able to naturally develop and will not miss out onthe incentives.8.3 Kuala Lumpur’s historic core was identified suitable as a KLCCD not only becauseit needs economic regeneration but as it also presents cultural significance. As it is theintrinsic values in culture that attract or inspire the Creatives, we suggest that KLCCD’s titlebe revised to Kuala Lumpur Cultural and Creative District instead – ‘culture’ before ‘creative’to give priority to the area’s existing contextual character and activities.8,4 Absorb a portion of KLCCD into Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage8.4.1 KLCCD’s boundary overlaps with the heritage zones gazetted in KLCP2020. We’repleased that it has also identified national monuments in its plans (also within gazettedheritage zones), in line with the strengthening of Kuala Lumpur’s position as the heart ofthe Nation. The reactivation, upgrades and conservation plans outlined in chapter IP1.3 isexpected for the gazetted heritage zones. We suggest for IP1.3 Empowering Kuala Lumpuras a Cultural and Creative City, combined with SV2.2. Increasing Active and Creative Useof Urban Space Elements, be adopted into our recommended Goal 3: Rooted in Heritagewhere the planning tool can be given more prominence, and expanded to cover othercultural clusters in the city, especially Kuala Lumpur’s old town centres such as Sentul andPudu (see Chapter 9). Elements from KLCCD could be placed under the Kuala LumpurHeritage Plan, which should also include a strategic master plan for museums, galleries andperforming art centres throughout the whole city.8.4.2 The Goal 1: Innovative and Productive chapter can then place stronger emphasisand detailed elaboration on KLCCD’s strategic economic plans for the creative sectorsthat DBKL wishes to attract into Kuala Lumpur’s historic core, together with technologicalinsfrastructure this sector would require.23

8.5 KLCCD Precincts8.5.1 The present south-western boundary of KLCCD follows Jalan Damansara. Werecommend that the boundary be extended to the historical Bukit Persekutuan being anarea of old government housing quarters that were part of Lake Gardens-Carcosa’s earlydevelopment. Within the 74ha of green area are the Galeria Sri Perdana (former PrimeMinister’s residence), Malaysian Nature Society’s Rumah Tapir, 113 nos. of old governmentquarters and three State palaces. We are also proposing Bukit Persekutuan as a dedicatedheritage zone – details of its significance are shared in Chapter 17; 17.9 and Appendix A.8.5.2 We noticed that some KLCCD precincts are named after the historical religiouslandmarks in each area e.g. Sin Sze Si Ya Temple Precinct; Masjid India & Bunus Precinct.These we assume form the anchors of each precinct and urge that adequate financialassistance/heritage incentives be provided to each religious institutions to conserve, repairand maintain their historic structures.8.6 Heritage Building Classification8.6.1 KLDSP2040: IP1.3; Figure 3.17 presents two heritage building classifications, i) JWN’sHeritage Class and ii) DBKL’s Heritage Class – implying to the different regulations/guidelinesimposed by the two agencies. We suggest that DBKL, as the local authority, produces itsown unique listing criteria for all heritage structures within Kuala Lumpur which JWN couldlater source upon (see Chapter 17; 17.7).8.6.2 There is a mention in IP1.3 of a Media City Plan within the vicinity of Angkasapuri.We hope the plans involve conservation of the Angkasapuri building, one of Malaysia’spriceless modern architectural heritage. We recommend for the building to be listed asKuala Lumpur’s heritage.8.7 Heritage Schools8.7.1 Perhaps in relation to education being one of the tools for the development ofcreative industries, IP1.3 mentions plans to conserve historical education institutions, thoughwe see from IP1.3; Figure 3.17 that these plans would be limited to those within the KLCCDboundary. Heritage schools (non-missionary & missionary) are part of Kuala Lumpur’s historicurban fabric and cultural heritage, reflecting early education in the city for girls as much asboys since the 1880s. Further assistance ought to be provided in outlining the architecturaland historical significance of these heritage schools, with accompanying programs to helpthe staff and students manage their historic environment better. Extra-curricular activitiesthat have been going on for decades such as campfires and military tattoo nights shouldalso be supported.8.7.2 3 heritage schools within KLCCD ‘s historic core and significant sites boundaries are: i. SM (P) Convent Bukit Nanas, Jalan Bukit Nanas (est 1899, current building 1914). 24

ii. St. John’s Institution, Jalan Bukit Nanas (est. 1904, current building 1908). iii. Victoria Institution, Jalan Hang Tuah (est. 1894, current building 1929).8.7.3 5 heritage schools at the fringe of KLCCD’s boundaries worth including: i. SK Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah, Jalan Dato’ Onn (est. 1888 as Malay School, current building 1963). ii. SM (P) Methodist KL, Jalan Cenderasari (est. 1896, current building 1948) iii. SM (L) Methodist Kuala Lumpur, Jalan Hang Jebat (est. 1897, current building 1905). iv. Confucian Private Secondary School, Jalan Hang Jebat (est. 1906, current building 1920s). v. SJK (C) Jalan Davidson, Jalan Hang Jebat (est. circa 1928).8.7.4 Notwisthanding, there are other heritage schools located beyond the KLCCD areathat are just as significant as the above schools – respected education centres with theirown traditions that have nurtured many generations of Kuala Lumpur’s residents. Wesuggest that upon absorption into Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage, a special program/incentiveis dedicated to all the heritage schools within the city as they struggle to cope with the costof maintaining their historic buildings.8.8 Creative District8.8.1 Art of course is important for the future of cities as they help develop urbancultures. A Creative Disctrict would encourage self-organised places of artistic and culturalproductions to participate directly in city politics. Pulling in the creative class of talented andeducated professionals who may also work in knowledge-based industries has its pros andcons. We hope measures are taken to look into how to avoid inequality and other issues thatcomes along with it should creative workers end up colonising the best spaces in the city,pushing out existing service workers/communities. Policies to tackle such issues should beput forward before they take place, promoting inclusivity.8.8.2 Infrastructure and public realm improvements should at the end of the day not beabout how attractive they are to the new cluster of creative class that DBKL is trying toattract into the historic core but how they could improve the lives of existing communitiesand industries – people who live and work in the area for decades.8.8.3 We suggest for IP1.3 to invite existing art, cultural and creative institutes such asAkademi Seni Budaya & Warisan Kebangsaan (ASWARA) at Padang Merbok, Temple of FineArts in Brickfields, Yan Keng Benevolent Drama Association at Jalan Hang Jebat to anchorcreative activities, apart from long-time active organisations such as the Hainan Associationand Kuala Lumpur Scouts Association. Their programs and events would go hand in handwith the growth of creative industry assets identified in IP1.3 – Istana Budaya, KLPAC andPetronas Philharmonic.25

Image: Heritage Output Lab 8a SJK (C) Chin Woo in Pudu,Image: www.zafigo.com established by the Selangor Chinwoo Athletic Association in 1929. It has occupied its present site since 1938, nurturing students and athletic talents. In 2013, the Ministry of Tourism & Culture called for the land to be evicted to build a new Cultural Village. Measures must be taken to protect our heritage schools from such insensitive development proposals. 8b Pasar Seni, the town’s old wet market building, was saved from demolition and adapted as an art market in 1985. It once housed many watercolour and portrait artists, being the city’s hub of craft and creative activities until early 2000s. Today the number of artists centred there have decreased, relocated along a lane outside Pasar Seni. The Creative District plans should reactivate Pasar Seni’s role as the town’s creative hub. 26

8.8.4 Central Market, one of the earlier arts and cultural centre in Kuala Lumpur, haspotential as an anchor for the Creative District, given its strong association with the growth oflocal artists and talents in 1980s and 1990s. The local portrait artist community for example,is still identified with Central Market, albeit their fast decreasing numbers.8.8.5 Wisma Yakin at Jalan Masjid India, completed in 1973 to re-organise the old MalayBazaar traders has built its reputation as a destination for traditional Malay clothing andaccessories and is in need of continuous support. This centre also has potential as an anchorfor the Creative District.8.8.6 Dataran Merdeka as Kuala Lumpur’s long time celebration venue also makes a stronganchor for the Creative District, especially given that its underground retail space, formerlyPlaza Putra, has not been successfully reactivated since the 2003 flood incident.8.8.7 Although we are sure that creative sectors do exists within the proposed KLCCD, weare not actually convinced that the present concentration is high. Again there are other self-organised creative clusters within the city that requires attention and support e.g. Bangsar(art galleries). Perhaps there would eventually be more than one creative district in the city,and if that is the case, the document/plans should reflect that.8.8.8 On top of the creative industries listed in IP1.3 e.g. fashion design, film making,publication, music and performances, we would like to suggest that the cultural and creativetourism community e.g. tour operators and hospitality services, be regarded as part of thecreative sector.27

Summary of Recommendations 08: Cultural and Creative District1. Elaborate on KLCCD plans further and share with the public.2. Take into consideration existing self-organised cultural and creative clusters inother areas.3. Change KLCCD’s title to ‘Kuala Lumpur Cultural and Creative District’.4. Absorb a portion of KLCCD into Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage; to be expanded underthe recommended Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan, and extend to other areas.5. Stronger emphasis on strategic economic plans for the creative district underKLDSP2040: Goal 1 Innovation and Production.KLCCD Precincts6. Extend KLCCD’s south-west boundary to Bukit Persekutuan.7. Provide adequate financial assistance to historic religious centres within thedistrict to repair/conserve/maintain their historic properties.Heritage Building Classification8. DBKL to produce a comprehensive list of heritage buildings based on KualaLumpur’s own unique criteria.9. Include Angkasapuri building on Kuala Lumpur’s heritage list and ensure itsconservation in the Media City plans.Heritage Schools10. Add three heritage schools along Jalan Hang Jebat into KLCCD. All schoolswithin the district should receive the same programming11. Under Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage, include a special program for all heritageschools within Kuala Lumpur.12. Outline architectural and historical significance of heritage schools and provideassistance on how to manage/maintain their historic properties.Creative District13. Ensure policies to tackle possible issues of inequality are looked into in advance.14. Policies to also focus on enhancing the lives of present communities in thedistrict.15. Include/invite established cultural institutes/organisations such as Temple ofFine Arts, ASWARA, Yan Keng Benevolent Drama Society, Hainan Association toplay a role.16. Look into Central Market, Wisma Yakin and Dataran Merdeka as anchors for theCreative District.17. Include the cultural and creative tourism community e.g. tour operators andhospitality services, as part of the creative sector. 28

09Old Town Centres9.1 While most parts of Kuala Lumpur are perceived to be ‘fast-paced’ due to their hecticactivities and movements, the city’s old town centres should be embraced as ‘slow-paced’places, temporary halts or breathing spaces that offer moments of silence and calmnessthat intertwine harmoniously with daily activities and lifestyle of local communities. KualaLumpur’s old town centres are facing serious threats of losing their local characteristicsdue to the massive regeneration/development schemes that have taken place withinand around their surroundings. We have identified the need for a paradigm shift in urbanconservation among stakeholders, to move away from beautification projects towardsregeneration of heritage values, achievable by maintaining the sense of place of these oldtowns. New developments should focus on assisting local communities to continue livingthe lifestyle they are accustomed to, with newly revitalised physical settings through goodconservation efforts.9.2 We call for the renewal of old commercial hubs such as the old town centres ofSungai Besi, Pudu, Bangsar, Batu and Sentul to preserve the local distinctiveness thatreflects the genius loci and character of these old towns.9.3 The existing policies and guidelines for old town centres presented in both KLCP2020and KLDSP2040 are generic – they need to address the on ground situation at these oldtown centres. Public engagements, cultural mapping, survey of all sorts will help conceiveeffective heritage strategies that are to be adopted under the Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan,mitigating displacement and social inclusion, and safeguarding local cultural heritage values.A comprehensive urban design framework for future developments should take the KualaLumpur Heritage Plan into account.9.4 Public awareness on safeguarding historic fabric must be an integral part of the urbanconservation process, alongside the effective role of stakeholders/DBKL in the design andenforcement of policies.9.5 We recommend for the KLDSP2040 to identify dominant areas in old town centresthat are dilapidating, abandoned, neglected and would definitely require some form ofintervention. Summary of Recommendations 09: Old Town Centres 1. Conduct public engagements, cultural mapping, surveys in old town centres to produce effective heritage strategies under the Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan. 2. Produce a comprehensive urban design framework for future developments, taking the Kuala Lumpur Heritage Plan into account. 3. Safeguard local intangible cultural heritage values via local community involvement in determining the direction of future developments.29

Image: Heritage Output Lab 9a Old terrace houses at JalanImage: Google Maps, 2020 Brunei, off Jalan Pudu, built circa 1920s with face brick finish around the windows, were recently gutted for development. Valuable building materials e.g. timber trusses, clay roof tiles were disposed of. Internal elements were not recorded prior to demolition. Although of heritage value, these units are not within KLCP2020’s gazetted heritage zones. 9b Tangible and intangible elements of the old Sungai Besi town centre is under threat with the ongoing new residential and commercial developments in surrounding areas, affecting the town’s physical outlook and social fabric. A heritage plan for the old town centre will be able to cushion the impacts, while strengthening heritage characters. 30

10Urban Archaeology10.1. The definition of ‘heritage’ in both KLCP2020 and KLDSP2040 should not be limitedto built and natural heritage, but also extended to archaeological heritage. Archaeology is asystematic study of human history through the discovery, exploration and investigation of itsmaterial cultures such as artefacts, structures, and other physical remains. In the city area,urban archaeology is used to illustrate the application of archaeological methods to thestudy of major towns, cities, urban areas, and the process of urbanisation. It is an undeniablefact that archaeological investigations within Kuala Lumpur are almost unheard of, reflectingall the missed opportunities which we could have had in unlocking the city’s history. Despitepresent national policies and guidelines on heritage protection, potential archaeologicalsites within Kuala Lumpur are primarily overlooked and threatened, a continuous challengein the local field of heritage conservation. We suggest for Urban Archaeology, an areatotally missed out in KLDSP2040, to be included under our recommended Goal 3: Rooted inHeritage. The following paragraphs elaborate our views on this matter further.10.2 Kuala Lumpur’s transformation from a small settlement in the mid-19th centuryto become Malaysia’s most prominent city in the 20th century also brought along thecomplexity of architecture, culture and heritage, which we have yet to comprehend fully.Rapid development since the 1960s removed a large portion of historical layers that werebeneath our city streets, making remaining potential areas with archaeological resources,although limited, certainly worth investigating prior to new construction works taking place.The misconception that archaeology goes against development must be corrected as theyboth actually go hand in hand. Note that investigating/preserving the sub-surface history ofKuala Lumpur through proper archaeological studies will not only enrich its history but alsolikely enhance the value of the new developments e.g. via urban integration of archaeologicalheritage. Outputs, including public archaeology programs, will be supportive of local culturalcomponents such as the Kuala Lumpur Museum suggested in Chapter 11; 11.2, culturalurban tourism activities and the Cultural & Creative District plans (concentrated but notrestricted to the city’s heritage zones).10.3 DBKL will be able to conduct advanced surveys/studies of potential archaeologicalsites in Kuala Lumpur through joint ventures with relevant agencies if not through its ownConservation Office. Off the top of our heads, areas within the city with archaeologicalpotentials may include: i) Medan Pasar – the site of Kuala Lumpur’s earliest town market, 1870s to 1880s. Evidence of lifestyle, market building foundation & food anticipated. ii) Kampong Bharu – a settlement opened in 1900, likely to undergo redevelopment plans. Areas along Bunus River have potential for evidence of earlier settlements. iii) The Bukit Nanas Tunnel – a human-made earthen tunnel partially discovered in 2014, believed to have been constructed during the Klang War (1872-1873). Study of its construction and GPR scanning to determine its original route suggested. iv) Areas around Petaling Street, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman where the earliest settlements were established. v) Old shophouses - evidence of lifestyle within the interior, especially at the internal yards/airwells.31

Image: www.thinkcity.com.my 10a Medan Pasar was named asImage: Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur, 2015 Old Market Square in 1893 in remembrance of the market activity sited there before the Town Market was relocated after 1885 to Pasar Seni’s current site. The site has a huge potential of uncovering the daily activities of past Kuala Lumpur residents, achievable through proper archaeological excavation. 10b Discovered in 2014, the Bukit Nanas Tunnel is believed to have been used as a secret passageway during the Klang War (1872-1873), presumed to be stretching from the hill towards the bank of Klang River. Archaeological documentation could enlarge the prospect of such a place, contributing not only towards historical tourism, but more so to understand Kuala Lumpur’s past societies. 32

10.4 It is common for cities to impose archaeological assessments as requirementsfor developers applying for building permit – Singapore, Toronto, London to name a few.The current and prevalent trend in an urban, non-World Heritage Site in Malaysia is thata Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is only conducted after an archaeological discoveryhas been made at site, not before the commencement of a development. In KLDSP2040,there is only one mention of a HIA requirement and that is accompanied by an additional‘if necessary’ clause. It is essential for HIAs to be included as an important element in theplanning process, to be implemented before a development takes place. Therefore, weurge that KLDSP2040’s planning policies and decisions to be sympathetic to local historyand archaeology, especially for the city’s heritage sites regardless whether they are on theDepartment of National Heritage’s registrar.10.5 A proposed development on a site (within or outside the city centre) with a potentialof archaeological/heritage assets, should only be approved with a proper HIA. A developershould be made to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary,a field evaluation, having been made aware of the importance of Kuala Lumpur’s archaeo-history. It will be in the public’s best interest for DBKL to require developers to record anadvanced understanding of the significance of any heritage assets that are to be lost (whollyor in part) in a manner proportionate to their importance and impact, and to make suchevidence (including those that are archive generated) publicly accessible. However, theability to record evidence of our past should not be a factor in deciding whether such lossshould be permitted.10.6 Any artefact discovered should eventually be returned to the city, perhaps under thecare of the suggested Kuala Lumpur Museum. The Nisan Acheh discovered within MasjidJamek’s compound in 2016 for example, is understood to be under the care of PerbadananAdat Melayu & Warisan Negeri Selangor (PADAT) at the moment. We support the call for itseventual return to cultural agencies based in Kuala Lumpur as the artefact belongs to thecity. Summary of Recommendations 10: Urban Archeology 1. Introduce planning policies that are supportive of urban archaeology with possible placement under the recommended ‘Goal 3: Rooted in Heritage’. 2. Conduct survey/mapping to identify potential urban archaeological sites (within and outside designated heritage zones) to produce a historic environment record of Kuala Lumpur. 3. Conduct public archaeology/heritage engagement programs where relevant. 4. Create awareness among Key Developers on the importance of Kuala Lumpur’s archaeo-history. 5. Include requirements for archaeological investigations in Heritage Impact Assessments with appropriate desk-based assessments and field evaluations. 6. Call for the return of Kuala Lumpur artefacts that are currently under the care of other States or countries.33

Image: Perbadanan Adat Melayu & Warisan Negeri Selangor (PADAT) 10c Nisan Aceh is a form ofImage: ICOMOS Malaysia gravestone used for Malay royals and dignitaries. The Nisan Aceh pictured here was discovered by chance at Masjid Jamek in 2016 during ROL construction works, devoid of proper context and significance. To date, this is the only Nisan Aceh ever found in Kuala Lumpur. Archaeological assessments before the commencement of work could safeguard priceless heritage like this better. 10d The site of Masjid Jamek was one of the earliest centralized Muslim burial ground in Kuala Lumpur. The ‘accidental’ discovery of numerous ceramic shards, gravestones, particularly one Nisan Aceh during the refurbishment of the compound signifies the classic neglect of archaeology and HIA in Kuala Lumpur’s development and planning. No in-situ archaeological documentations were carried out at the site. 34

11Intangible Heritage11.1 While many aspects of culture have been influenced by globalisation, intangiblecultural heritage remains important for Kuala Lumpur as a city of contrast and diversity. WillKuala Lumpur take the lead by putting culture back into the life of the city and its society?A City for All should embrace its rich multi-culturalness evident in our festive celebrations,handicrafts, artworks, food offerings, customs, performing arts, literature, rituals, slang-language expressions – the heritage of living. The recommended Goal 3: Rooted in Heritagewill open opportunities to examine all aspects of Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage,including its contemporary pop cultures – revealing what makes KLites, KLites, and evenmore important, what makes us Malaysian.11.2 Over the years Kuala Lumpur has systematically lost its intangible heritage assetse.g. Bangsawan and Chinese opera. For a great number of reasons, the interest and passionis lost on us and so traditional knowledge/practices are fast dissapearing. In this regard,education plays a vital role in nurturing arts and culture among the young. Under theKuala Lumpur Heritage Plan, it will be a good idea for DBKL to work closely with NGOs,schools, universities, government agencies and other heritage-related bodies to conductcomprehensive research in preserving and facilitating transmission of the city’s intangibleheritage to the next generation, while encouraging it to evolve and adapt with the times.We suggest the establishment of a special museum to collect/house/preserve our city’shistorical assets and cultural heritage – a Kuala Lumpur Museum.11.3 Development of cultural heritage programmes related to intangible heritage ismuch needed e.g. training for traditional music/dance, Malaysian cuisine, calligraphy, batik,Malaysian crafts, etc. Ideally, these training centres should be located within the heritagezones/KLCCD to encourage participation among the public and various agencies.11.4 Areas in Kuala Lumpur are culturally unique and different from each other in terms ofhistory, cultural practices and ethnic composition. Extensive cultural mapping as suggestedin Chapter 12; 12.3.2, will help identify cultural characters of areas like Cheras, Bandar TunRazak, Seputeh, Segambut, Batu, Lembah Pantai and Titiwangsa. Results from detaileddocumentation can provide the basis for a more targeted heritage-focused recommendation.11.5 KLDSP2040: SV2.2 Increasing Active and Creative Use of Urban Space envisionsKuala Lumpur as a centre for cultural services and creative industry. Spatial accommodationto support Kuala Lumpur’s popular urban culture such as outdoor eateries, street shoppingand street music are more than welcomed. A hawker’s centre with outdoor seatings plannedfor every 5km within the city centre, for example, accommodates local eating lifestyle better.11.6 There are existing cultural heritage festivities that require further support. Religiousprocessions in Kuala Lumpur such as Corpus Christi by the Roman Catholics, Maulidur Rasuland Maal Hijrah by the Muslims, deity’s procession by the Buddhist and Thaipussam by theHindus, are celebrated annually by locals and visitors from near and far. We recommend aspecial plan to look into pedestrian facilities and infrastructure along the procession routesto improve the cultural experience further (e.g. decorative lighting, rest stations).35

Image: @keenchannel, www.picuki.com 11a Thaipussam is celebratedImage: St. John’s Institution Naval Cadet Band (Rain) annually in Kuala Lumpur since 1889. The procession starts at Sri Maha Mariamman Temple in Jalan Tun H.S Lee. The focus is usually the end destination 15km away, Batu Caves. Along the Kuala Lumpur route, infrastructure to facilitate the procession is minimal. 11b The Selangor Police Band was formed in 1890, the first in Kuala Lumpur. March bands have long been popular among local schools and associations. Dataran Merdeka is commonly used as the venue for local, national and international march band competitions. Unfortunately, of late, such competitions are hardly held in Kuala Lumpur with Organisers citing lack of financial support, proper amenities and platform. 36

11.7 There are also events and competitions that have been organised in Kuala Lumpurfor decades which can be highlighted such as the annual school march band competition,police band and military tattoo performances. Facilities for them are to be improved.11.8 Kuala Lumpur’s eateries, especially the long established ones, need support andrecognition. At one time, the city centre was popular with outdoor night eateries – todaymost of them have moved out to the fringe of the city.11.9 Street and festive shopping culture is also synonym with Kuala Lumpur. People fromother States would come all the way to town e.g. Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman, Jalan MasjidIndia, for Hari Raya and Deepavali shopping. Relocating the established festive street mallsto a different area e.g. to Dataran Merdeka in 2019, disorientates loyal customers and takesaway the cultural shopping experience that has long been associated with those areas.11.10 A number of organisations in Kuala Lumpur established since the 1880s are still activeand relevant among the locals e.g. Hainan Association, YMCA, Boy Scouts, Royal SelangorClub, Sultan Suleiman Club. These form part of Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage.11.11 A strategic heritage plan for Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage will strengthenthe city’s identity as a whole. DBKL should engage with museums/heritage interpretationsectors for a framework that is able to articulate Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage well. Summary of Recommendations 11: Intangible Heritage 1. Conduct a comprehensive research on Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage, including contemporary pop cultures – involve cultural mapping to identify existing cultural characters to form detailed basis for heritage-focused recommendations. 2. Establish a Kuala Lumpur Museum. 3. Work closely with other agencies to preserve and facilitate transmission of Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage - set up a Training Centre within the heritage zones/KLCCD. 4. Produce policies to allow spatial accommodations that support the city’s urban culture e.g. hawker’s centre, religious processions, march band competitions. 5. Conduct further study on existing cultural sites and activities in Kuala Lumpur: • Map out religious celebration areas/routes (e.g. Thaipussam procession route). • Map out existing food centres/outdoor eateries (.e.g. Medan Selera Sri Bunus, relocated from Jalan Benteng in the 1980s). 6. Maintain/preserve spaces that are occupied by cultural activities – improving quality of places without taking away their essence. 7. Recognise historical cultural organisations as part of Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage. 8. Engage with museums and interpretation sectors to produce a strategic heritage plan that articulates Kuala Lumpur’s intangible heritage well.37

Image: ICOMOS Malaysia 11c Queen’s Restaurant at Jalan PeelImage: ICOMOS Malaysia is a popular kopitiam/hawker’s center in operation since the 1950s. Its surrounding area has been heavily developed but the restaurant remains the last few places that holds the soul of Jalan Peel’s history. Long time loyal customers frequent the restaurant regularly, as the establishment is already a part of their lifestyle. 11d Street musicians are synonymous to Kuala Lumpur, attracting crowds from all walks of life. However, the number of a group of older street performers, such as the blind musicians whose music we have enjoyed for decades along Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman has reduced dramatically. Those street performers make up a nostalgic ambience to the street and deserve more support and opportunity. 38

12Cultural Urban Tourism12.1 Assessing and Monitoring Sustainability12.1.1 KLDSP2040: IP1.2 Making Kuala Lumpur an Urban Tourism Destination by ImprovingTourism Sector’s Value Added Activities highlights 6 categories of tourism products,which conforms to the Kuala Lumpur Tourism Master Plan 2015-2025. Although the term‘sustainable tourism’ was used, we feel that tourism should not only be concerned withproducts and the economic dimension. In KLDSP2040, there is little emphasis on theassessment and monitoring of the impacts of tourism onto the environment and the qualityof life of residents. Therefore, it is vital to have/develop mechanisms of sustainabilityindicators which will focus on intangible results, impacts, legacies, social and environmentalbenefits of urban tourism in Kuala Lumpur. This will be in line with the global tourism sectorwhich has been seeing an increasing number of travellers and travel agents who activelyseek out sustainable destinations. We suggest the introduction of sustainable urban tourismindicators with appropriate implementation mechanism.12.2 Expanding the Definition of Urban Tourists12.2.1 Similar to the Kuala Lumpur Tourism Master Plan 2015-2025, we see that KLDSP2040has also taken the perspective of mainly focusing on international tourists in its planning oftourism products. It should be worth to note that currently the bulk of international touristscoming to Malaysia are mass tourists through packaged tours. This type of tourists areusually spatially polarised, seasonal and contribute little to local economies. We suggest fortourism planning in KLDSP2040 to widen the definition of urban tourists to include domestictourists (from other parts of Malaysia) and more importantly, residents as tourists. With therecent Covid-19 pandemic, we see the importance to balance international inbound touristswith domestic travelling (resident and non-resident). In fact, many of the tourist productsshould take the approach of ‘for residents first’ and ‘for tourists, second’.12.3 Making Authentic Culture the Driving Force of Urban Tourism12.3.1 One of the 6 tourism product categories mentioned is ‘Culture and Heritage’. Thiscategory includes various cultural and heritage products including culinary tourism, heritagetrails, cultural enclaves, events and art scene, museum network, heritage building andcultural practice. However, the other 5 tourism product categories need to also have a localcultural flavour and characteristics in them.12.3.2 In cultural and heritage tourism, conscious marketing in attracting tourists willchange the nature of the cultural attraction. Therefore, the identification, regeneration anddevelopment work needs to be sensitive to the tendency of commodification of culture.Missing in the plan is to have proper and effective mechanisms to include local communityparticipation in the localization of tourism products. We suggest a wider elaboration ofculture – in particular that of Kuala Lumpur and by extension Malaysia. Collaborative culturalmapping exercises should be undertaken in various enclaves in Kuala Lumpur to record anddemonstrate their cultural characteristics.39

Image: ICOMOS Malaysia 12a Spotted along Jalan Sultan, thisImage: ICOMOS Malaysia embedded column signage in Chinese letters reads ‘Wah Yik Travel Lodge’, informing us of the building’s past use. Every element from the past has a story to tell. Cultural mapping involving local community participation will lead to a larger understanding of what a place means to the community. 12b The popular outdoor street dining off Jalan Pudu, located less than 1km away from the Pudu LRT Station is a popular attraction for domestic and resident tourists but seldom promoted as a local food destination. 40

12.4 Suburban Tourism and Commuter Belt Cultural Tourism12.4.1 The KLDSP2040 areas designated for culture and heritage tourism are mainly theRiver of Life, Arts and Cultural Zone (Titiwangsa) and Cultural Zone (Conlay, Central Market),apart from the central historic zone. We propose to also include and highlight destinationsbeyond the city core. All Kuala Lumpur suburban areas, enclaves and neighbourhoods areunique to themselves. They can be developed and promoted as cultural tourism destinationsin order to encourage visits by residents, domestic tourists, lengthen visitors’ stays, increaserepeat visitations and distribute more of the economic benefits generated outside the centraltourism zones. For example, Singapore has developed more than 40 heritage trails, andmost of them are outside its core zone e.g. Ang Mo Kio Heritage Trail, Bedok Heritage Trail,Pasir Ris Heritage Trails. These trails focus not only on early history, but also the history anddevelopment since the 1940s right up to present day. As such, we recommend a baselinecultural map of Kuala Lumpur’s neighbourhoods and suburban areas to be conducted, toascertain and document their cultural characteristics.12.4.2 We propose for a belt of heritage tourism trails and routes in Kuala Lumpur to centrearound public rail transportation. As node and transportation points, the MRT, LRT and KTMKomuter stations can be hubs for this ‘metropolis commuter belt cultural tourism’, where thestations can act as interpretation centres and display artwork to depict the cultural charactersof their neighbourhood or suburban areas. For example, this type of tourism could includeculinary routes and historical routes. This is a way to spread the concentration of tourists andtourism products across Kuala Lumpur and also address the issues of seasonality. Therefore,we propose that this initiative be implemented in collaboration with transportation agenciesor operators.12.5 Expanding Trails to Entire Kuala Lumpur12.5.1 KLDSP2040: SV3.3 Promoting the Implementation of Kuala Lumpur Heritage Trailhighlights the need for development and improvement of heritage trails specifically centredaround existing heritage buildings in the central historic core of Kuala Lumpur. Missing inthis action plan is the involvement of community and stakeholders in the development ofthe trails. The development approach seems to be top-down. We believe that heritage trailsare the unifying mechanism for tourism, community development and building pride of aplace. Global tourism trends have seen rapid growth of co-creation of tourism experiences.Authenticity and community involvement are essential in the success of tourism.12.5.2 Trails should also be expanded to other parts of Kuala Lumpur with appropriatemechanisms to empower local residents, associations, businesses and social institutionsthrough the collection and sharing of personal stories and documenting memories ofthe past as common shared history. These are fundamental in creating authentic culturalheritage trails. Trails could be self-guided or with tourist guides. Trails should also includebicycle heritage routes or using public transports.41

12.5.3 Separate neighborhood, enclaves and suburban trails could be connected later viathe green city network. However, we feel there should be ongoing engagement to ensurethat these trails will have local business collaborations, arts and educational programmesand proper maintenance of safety, comfort and interpretation. Through the creative class inKLCCD, develop a world leading digital visitor experience via the implementation of tourism4.0 technologies e.g. virtual reality, internet of things.12.6 The labelling of ‘Culture & Heritage Attractions/Tourism Products’ in KLDSP2040:IP1.2; Figure 3.16 needs to be reconfirmed: 1. Loke Yew Cemetery < to check official name – Loke Yew Family Graveyard/Loke Yew Memorial. 6. Taman Warisan Tun Abdul Razak < Taman Botani Perdana. 8. Little India <to take the name of the area, which is Brickfields, not the theme. 9. Kwang Tung Cemetery < to check boundary and include other historic cemeteries in the area. Summary of Recommendations 12: Cultural Urban Tourism 1. To consider the introduction of sustainable urban tourism indicators with appropriate implementation mechanism. 2. To widen the definition of urban tourists to include domestic and resident. 3. To conduct a collaborative cultural mapping exercise in various enclaves, neighbourhood and suburban areas in Kuala Lumpur to record and demonstrate their cultural characteristics. 4. To consider introducing a public-transport based commuter belt of heritage tourism trails and routes. 5. To develop thematic heritage trails and encourage local participation in suburban areas and neighbourhoods, enhanced with the use of technology. 6. Cultural and heritage intepretation outputs to be supported by creative sectors working in the Creative District. 7. Reconfirm labels in KLDSP2040: IP1.2; Figure 3.16. 42

13Historic Landscape13.1 Kuala Lumpur’s unique historic landscape features were not given strong emphasisin KLDSP2040. We are highlighting four elements in this chapter – the Klang-Gombak RiverConfluence, hillsides, historic recreational fields and historic cemeteries for DBKL’s attentionand further action.13.2 Klang-Gombak River Confluence as Kuala Lumpur’s Genius Loci13.2.1 Kuala Lumpur had its beginnings at the confluence of the Klang and Gombak riverswhich had existed long before the city’s establishment. The confluence was the naturalelement that influenced the location of Kuala Lumpur’s early town centre, being thefurthest extent a heavy loaded sampan could pass through before the river got too shallow.Traditional local beliefs in the past also identified the confluence suitable for a settlement.This was the spot that made Kuala Lumpur recognisable, being the town’s main river arrivalpoint in late 19th century. This confluence is what forms the genius loci (spirit of place) ofKuala Lumpur. The image of Masjid Jamek’s unique Moghul-Eclectic design at the riverconfluence, marking the town’s old river entrance, is a unique townscape character not seenin other cities. Unfortunately, the presence of the two rivers, especially at this significantconfluence, cannot be fully appreciated today as the design of their concrete embankmentsgive an appearance of a large drain. This surely makes it hard to build up public attachmentto the rivers and has been a matter of public concern the past two decades.13.2.2 On top of being Kuala Lumpur’s natural water resources, both the Klang and Gombakrivers should be protected as our city’s natural and cultural heritage. It certainly makes goodsense for the Klang-Gombak river confluence, the genius loci of Kuala Lumpur, together withits surrounding historical context, to be listed as a cultural heritage site – this will also protectit from unwanted interventions in the future. We suggest that DBKL submits this nominationto the Department of National Heritage (JWN) in due course. Cultural mapping exercisesin heritage districts along the rivers for figure ground analysis, core urban elements andintangible heritage will help the nomination and would later provide useful data to supportcultural urban tourism content.13.2.3 Particularly, if we want to turn the Klang-Gombak river confluence into a viableidentifiable heritage zone, taking a position going forward, we really need to have lessand less advertisement signages in the area. Signages may be a revenue, but it creates adifferent identity. Visible also from the river is the very intrusive Masjid Jamek LRT Stationstructure on Jalan Tun Perak. Very sensitive landscaping on high elevation is needed tosoften its presence.13.2.4 Landscaping along the two rivers are important. Not only will we create an ambiencethat encourages nice pedestrianised promenade if proper trees are grown but also preventsoil erosion which can add to the muddy river apart from pollution.13.2.5 KLDSP2040: Figure 5.5: Goal 3 presents the Implementation of Green Drainage inKuala Lumpur; Implementation Focus for Riparian Ecosystem Rehabilitation (River of Life43

Image: ICOMOS Malaysia 13a The Klang-Gombak RiverImage: Malaysian Nature Society (MNS) confluence, the genius loci of Kuala Lumpur. Its hard, straightened concrete banks have many locals dubbing it a big longkang (drain) for years. An appropriate design treatment for the concrete edges to enhance the aesthetic experience of the viewer/visitor, should be put in place. 13b MNS’ management plan proposes the Bukit Persekutuan Urban Community Forest (red boundary) to be part of the KL Green Network (green boundary) as stated in the KLCP2020: KL Green Network. Further suggestions for a bigger green network is to include the Taman Tugu extension, Bukit Tunku and Taman Duta remnant forests (yellow boundaries). This will complement the KL City centre (white boundary). Source: UCF Booklet, MNS. 44

Project). To what we understand, a Riparian Ecosystem Rehabilitation focuses on humaninfluences that affect multiple ecological processes in order to attain greater restorationof riparian habitat and species of interest. Natural disturbances are to be recognised asa fundamental property of riparian areas and must be accounted for by reference sites.The range of variation arising from natural causes such as climate, topography, andgeomorphology can be assessed by considering a number of individual sites within riparianclasses. Understanding the ideals, we have no knowledge of the detailed plans that are totake place in the future. Not much details of the mentioned riparian rehabilitation are madeavailable on the project’s website or other online sources. The public is surely keen to such adevelopment – we strongly call for the Riparian Ecosystem Rehabilitation plans to be sharedwith the public so that expectations can be managed better.13.3 Preservation of Hillsides13.3.1 Kuala Lumpur was at one time bounded on the north-west, north, east and south eastby jungle and forest-covered hills ranging from 1,500 to 2,700 feet and an isolated group ofhills adjoining the urban area on the west rose to a height of 1,000 feet. The remainder of thelow lying areas were extensively mined for tin. The city’s topography has drastically changedover the decades – hills leveled, forests developed. The preservation of hillsides like BukitPetaling, Bukit Persekutuan, Bukit Kiara and Bukit Nanas are very important as their earlyhistorical associations are slowly massaged with ‘regeneration’ projects. We must treasurethe hills and appreciate Kuala Lumpur’s natural geography.13.3.2 KLDSP2040: Figure 5.1: Goal 3 categorises forests into two: i) Urban Forest and ii)Permanent Forest Reserve. The Urban Forest areas are inclusive of Taman PersekutuanBukit Kiara and Hutan Rimba Bukit Kerinchi while the Permanent Forest Reserve lists in BukitSungai Puteh, Bukit Sungai Besi, Bukit Nanas and Bukit Lagong Tambahan. Bukit Petalingand Bukit Persekutuan are not included under either categories and we fear this wouldexpose them to heavy developments/interventions in the future.13.3.3 Bukit Persekutuan (a.k.a Federal Hill) is also part of Kuala Lumpur’s urban forest andgreen lung, which is currently demarcated as ‘green open space’ and not ‘forest cover’. Itmakes up an area of 6.2% of total land area of Kuala Lumpur. It has an impressive number ofspecies, including mammals, amphibians, birds, moths and butterflies and forest species offlora with rare plants, endemic trees [Biodiversity Survey by MNS, 2008]. Besides that, BukitPersekutuan’s ecological heritage, its history, with representation of eight States in the roadnames (Selangor, Kelantan, Kedah, Terengganu, Negeri Sembilan, Johor, Perlis and PulauPinang) and its government quarters (113 nos.) should be conserved.13.3.4 The hills play an important role in connecting people to nature and providingopportunities for education. Special attention for its biodiversity conservation has to bepaid to these hills (Bukit Petaling, Bukit Seputeh, Bukit Persekutuan, Bukit Kiara and BukitNanas) because of their high importance for nature conservation, catchment areas andbiodiversity. The preservation of hill land like Bukit Petaling, Bukit Persekutuan, Bukit Nanas45