Inconsistencies and Non-Compliance: The Retaining Wall Issue at Vistana Heights

 


Since 2022, inquiries sent to LPPB (Housing and Town Development Authority) and DBKK ( Kota Kinabalu City Hall) regarding the requirement for a retaining wall at Vistana Heights received no response.

A soil test conducted by Applied Geotechnics (Sabah) Sdn. Bhd. before November 1997 recommended a retaining wall, which was incorporated into the development plan, including the final amended development plan of 2018. 

The plan stipulated a retaining wall along boundaries with a minimum 6-foot setback from the land title boundary (MPKK No. S/1045 (7), dated 14.11.1997).

In 2014, Topwira Corporation’s director, Ms. Jessie Lee, assured house buyer Faisal that a retaining wall would be built.

During the application for the occupancy certificate, Topwira Corporation’s engineer submitted Form A/RS, confirming supervision of the retaining wall’s construction per approved specifications and plans, accepting full responsibility for design, soil investigation, and implementation.

Subsequently, DBKK’s engineering department issued a Certificate of Completion for Retaining Wall & Slope Protection, signed by an engineer and a DBKK director.

However, no retaining wall was constructed, rendering the certification misleading.

At a DBKK meeting on 5 May 2025, the director general stated that no retaining wall was mandated in the development plan. Minutes from a subsequent meeting on 11 June 2025 noted that the structural plan for Taman Vistana did not indicate a retaining wall behind Lot S9. Ir. Heng Kok Keong, a consultant from Zaidun Leeng (S) Sdn Bhd, (the same engineer who submitted form A/RS confirming supervision of the retaining wall) confirmed no need for a retaining wall at this location, contradicting his earlier certification of its completion.

 

Location: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bad experience with Sabah architects

Image
The lady in the photo above is 5 feet 2 inches. The as-built survey plan says the height difference between the road height and the house platform height is 1 foot. Are the architects blind? I refer to the views expressed by the Chairman of PAM (Sabah chapter) in Forum on 2.3.2025. The Chairman stated that the Daily Express report on over-certifying projects unfairly generalized architects and risked damaging the reputation of the entire profession.  
Read more

SPRM (MACC) and Vistana Heights

Image
  Someone asked me how the MACC is involved in the Vistana Heights case if I don’t have any proof that corruption is involved. That is an excellent question. We all assume that corruption is only when a bribe is involved. However, a closer look at the brochure from the MACC shows the following:                                                                                                                   Please click on the image above. ...
Read more

Are architects liable for fabricated documents submitted to authorities

Image
In 2020, many of my well-meaning friends told me that I have no course of action against the professionals involved in obtaining the Occupancy Certificate for Vistana Heights project with fabricated as-built survey plan. I believe all those involved, including DBKK senior officers, LPPB (Lembaga Pembangunan Perumahan Dan Bandar) and its GM Rosemary Ahping, Arkitek LYS, Lembaga Juruukur Sabah etc. will be answerable for how the Occupancy Certificate was issued. Hopefully, my complaint to SPRM (MACC), LJS, DBKK, Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia will be looked into.
Read more