Report on Vistana Heights Retaining Wall and Related DBKK Correspondence

 

Background:

The inquiry pertains to concerns regarding a potential retaining wall at Vistana Heights, where a cliff exceeds 20 feet in height behind residential properties, and associated interactions with the Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu (DBKK). I raised questions about the necessity and planning of a retaining wall, discrepancies in development plans, and DBKK’s lack of response to specific queries.

Details of Correspondence and Meetings: 

Meeting on May 5, 2025: During the first meeting with DBKK, I directly asked whether DBKK mandated a retaining wall behind the houses at Vistana Heights due to the cliff’s height (over 20 feet).

The question was recorded in the meeting minutes and assigned as an actionable item for the Director of the Planning Department and the Engineering Department.

DBKK representatives, including Sr. Lifred Wong, reportedly stated they had no knowledge of a planned retaining wall. However, I noted that the developer claimed a retaining wall would be constructed, highlighting a contradiction.

 

Email on May 14, 2025: I sought clarification on the preparation of the 2018 Development Plan (DP) and whether an As-Built Survey (ABS) is required before amending a development plan.

Specific concern was raised about a 9-foot (2.74m) drainage reserve indicated in the ABS and 2018 DP, which does not appear to align with the actual site conditions, where the ledge behind the houses is less than 4 feet wide in most areas.

A section of the ABS diagram showing the drainage reserve was attached to the email.

No response has been received to this query.

 

Email on May 29, 2025: I reiterated the discrepancy between DBKK’s statement (no knowledge of a retaining wall) and the developer’s claim that a retaining wall would be built.

A direct request was made for DBKK to confirm whether a retaining wall was intended.

No written reply has been received.

 

Meeting on June 11, 2025: The minutes of the May 5, 2025, meeting was provided to me during this second meeting.

However, the minutes were unsigned by Sr. Lifred Wong.

No answer was provided regarding the retaining wall query assigned to the Planning and Engineering Departments from the first meeting.

The minutes of the June 11, 2025, meeting have not been provided despite a request.

 

Emails on June 16 and June 25, 2025: I requested a signed copy of the May 5, 2025, meeting minutes from Sr. Lifred Wong.

Follow-up requests were made on both dates, but no reply or signed minutes have been received.

 

Key Issues: 

Lack of Response: DBKK has not addressed critical questions regarding the retaining wall’s mandate, the 2018 DP preparation, or the discrepancies in the drainage reserve as shown in the ABS versus actual site conditions.

Unsigned Minutes: The minutes of the May 5, 2025, meeting remain unsigned, and no minutes have been provided for the June 11, 2025, meeting.

Contradictory Information: The developer’s claim of a planned retaining wall conflicts with DBKK’s stated lack of knowledge, raising concerns about planning transparency and safety.

Site Discrepancy: The 9-foot drainage reserve indicated in the ABS and 2018 DP does not match the observed ledge width of less than 4 feet, suggesting potential planning or compliance issues.

Bahasa Malaysia:

 

Latar Belakang:

Siasatan ini berkaitan dengan kebimbangan mengenai kemungkinan pembinaan tembok penahan di Vistana Heights, di mana tebing melebihi 20 kaki tinggi di belakang hartanah kediaman, dan interaksi berkaitan dengan Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu (DBKK). Saya telah menimbulkan soalan mengenai keperluan dan perancangan tembok penahan, percanggahan dalam pelan pembangunan, dan kekurangan respons DBKK terhadap soalan-soalan tertentu.Butiran Surat-Menyurat dan Mesyuarat:

Mesyuarat pada 5 Mei 2025:

Semasa mesyuarat pertama dengan DBKK, saya secara langsung bertanya sama ada DBKK mewajibkan tembok penahan di belakang rumah-rumah di Vistana Heights kerana ketinggian tebing (melebihi 20 kaki). Soalan ini dicatat dalam minit mesyuarat dan ditetapkan sebagai item tindakan untuk Pengarah Jabatan Perancangan dan Jabatan Kejuruteraan. Wakil DBKK, termasuk Sr. Lifred Wong, dilaporkan menyatakan mereka tidak mempunyai pengetahuan mengenai tembok penahan yang dirancang. Walau bagaimanapun, saya menyatakan bahawa pemaju mendakwa tembok penahan akan dibina, menyerlahkan percanggahan.

Emel pada 14 Mei 2025: Saya meminta penjelasan mengenai penyediaan Pelan Pembangunan 2018 (DP) dan sama ada Tinjauan As-Built (ABS) diperlukan sebelum meminda pelan pembangunan. Kebimbangan khusus telah ditimbulkan mengenai rizab saliran 9 kaki (2.74m) yang ditunjukkan dalam ABS dan DP 2018, yang nampaknya tidak selari dengan keadaan sebenar di tapak, di mana tebing di belakang rumah-rumah adalah kurang daripada 4 kaki lebar di kebanyakan kawasan. Seksyen rajah ABS yang menunjukkan rizab saliran telah dilampirkan pada emel tersebut. Tiada respons diterima terhadap soalan ini.

Emel pada 29 Mei 2025: Saya mengulangi percanggahan antara kenyataan DBKK (tiada pengetahuan mengenai tembok penahan) dan dakwaan pemaju bahawa tembok penahan akan dibina. Permintaan langsung dibuat untuk DBKK mengesahkan sama ada tembok penahan dirancang. Tiada balasan bertulis diterima.

Mesyuarat pada 11 Jun 2025: Minit mesyuarat 5 Mei 2025 telah diberikan kepada saya semasa mesyuarat kedua ini. Walau bagaimanapun, minit tersebut tidak ditandatangani oleh Sr. Lifred Wong. Tiada jawapan diberikan mengenai soalan tembok penahan yang diberikan kepada Jabatan Perancangan dan Kejuruteraan dari mesyuarat pertama. Minit mesyuarat 11 Jun 2025 tidak diberikan walaupun telah diminta.

Emel pada 16 dan 25 Jun 2025: Saya meminta salinan minit mesyuarat 5 Mei 2025 yang ditandatangani dari Sr. Lifred Wong. Permintaan susulan dibuat pada kedua-dua tarikh tersebut, tetapi tiada balasan atau minit yang ditandatangani diterima.

Isu Utama:

Kekurangan Respons: DBKK tidak menangani soalan-soalan kritikal mengenai mandat tembok penahan, penyediaan DP 2018, atau percanggahan dalam rizab saliran seperti yang ditunjukkan dalam ABS berbanding keadaan sebenar di tapak.

Minit Tidak Ditandatangani: Minit mesyuarat 5 Mei 2025 kekal tidak ditandatangani, dan tiada minit diberikan untuk mesyuarat 11 Jun 2025.

Maklumat Bertentangan: Dakwaan pemaju mengenai tembok penahan yang dirancang bercanggah dengan kenyataan DBKK yang tidak mengetahui, menimbulkan kebimbangan mengenai ketelusan perancangan dan keselamatan.

Percanggahan Tapak: Rizab saliran 9 kaki yang ditunjukkan dalam ABS dan DP 2018 tidak sepadan dengan lebar tebing yang diperhatikan kurang daripada 4 kaki, menunjukkan kemungkinan isu perancangan atau pematuhan.