INGENIEUR
Planning Approval Stage
a) Approving plans with structures on unstable
ground hazard areas
Planning is about the arrangement of a built
environment. The planning authority is guided by the
Town and Country Planning Act and several Planning
Guidelines to evaluate planning submissions
prepared by town planners or architects for
approval. Again, some understanding of the site is
important as there are still projects being approved
at unsafe hill sites or ex-dump sites. Examples of
these are the recent Klang Valley bungalow project
on hill slope (steep slope with previous landslide
in 2008) and the Lembah Subang Flats and PPR
Apartment with the threat of methane gas arising
from a thick waste dump beneath the ground.
b) Approving a build environment on a flood prone
plain
Development projects on flood prone areas such
as Taman Sri Muda create social problems for
the residents and occupants. They also create
additional burden on the local Government which
has to install and maintain huge pumping facilities
to pump out floodwater on a periodical basis.
Recommendation
a) Planning authorities should be careful when
approving planning permission for new projects.
Where hill slopes or sensitive areas are involved,
for example ex-dump sites, wetlands and peat
soil areas, they should insist on comments from
PEs with relevant experience. Alternatively,
town planners submitting plans for planning
permission approval must attach an engineer’s
report on ground suitability for hill slopes or
sensitive areas.
Building Plan Approval Stage
a) Architects submitting building plans with
structural elements
Architects have been submitting building plans
with structural elements such as roof trusses,
6
28
VOL
2019
VOL 78
55 APRIL-JUNE
JUNE 2013
lintels or high walls while there is no clear line
drawn yet on the eligibility of architects and
engineers to submit plans for some structural
elements. The list of projects/components
issued jointly by the Board of Architects and
Board of Engineers places roof trusses under
List C, meaning both architects and engineers
can submit plans for these. The Streets, Drainage
and Building Act defines structural elements
as those components of a building that carry
moment and force. Although there is no reported
failure of short roof trusses for houses, the
long span roof truss is beyond an architect’s
competence. In the case of the timber roof truss
failures involving long spans and usage of splices
at a Kulim property development project, both
the architects and engineers tried to distant
themselves from the responsibility.
b) Incompetency of design engineers
There are several cases where design errors have
been detected during and after construction, such
as a trade centre in KL, a school project in Cheras,
a Government training centre building in Bangi, a
private college in Petaling Jaya, a linkway bridge
in Petaling Jaya, among others. In the case of two
Government projects, the design engineers had
only a few years’ experience and had just started
their Engineering Consultancy Practice (ECP)
when they obtained PE status. Error in design is a
common cause where wrong parameters are used
or wrong analyses are applied on a structure.
Some projects were awarded to consultants
without the required experience and resources to
undertake complex structures such as the space
frames for big complexes.
There are also cases discovered by BEM
Professional Practice Committee where electrical
engineers signed for civil and structure plans.
c) Insufficient soil investigation for geotechnical
related work
There have been cases where little or no sub-
surface investigation was conducted for structures
in a geotechnical setting. The retaining wall
failures at a Kulim housing project revealed the
absence of any soil investigation.