part 3 - building the future

PART 3BUILDING THE FUTURE

MOHD PETER DAVIS

T H E R M A L C O M F O R T H O N E Y C O M B H O U S I N G

PART 3Building The Future


147

To be accepted, new technology has to be enthusiastically promoted to all sec-

tions of the community. There are none better at this task than the inventors who devel-

oped the new ideas. The new technology is after all their baby. Over the last two years we

have become increasingly successful in convincing consumers, developers and Govern-

ment that ‘Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing’ is not just a little bit better but dramati-

cally better than rectilinear town planning as typified by terrace housing. Our Malaysian

invention is a general solution for housing, not just for Malaysia but for any country in the

world, although improved housing for developing countries where the need is greatest has

always been our social aim.

Malaysia has a young population:

half are under 23. For several decades the

population has been increasing by 500 000

every year (a new Malaysian is born every

minute!). This means there are around a

quarter of a million couples who get mar-

ried every year. After the honeymoon is

over they begin to realize they are the poor-

est section of the working population. They

receive the lowest income and after paying

for food, the never-ending repayments on a

car, petrol and then the monthly rent, they

have almost nothing left over. Then the

babies start arriving! They are in a poverty

trap. How are they ever going to buy their

own home?

Is it possible, as a sort of national

wedding present, to provide them with the

opportunity to buy their own quality home?

After all, they are the future and the sooner

we can get them comfortably settled the

better they can plan their lives and play a

useful role in developing their country.

A Quality Home for Every Malaysian Family

t h e r m a l c o m f o r t h o n e y c o m b h o u s i n g

148

At first glance, all this sounds

rather idealistic and not part of the ‘real

world’.

However, Australia back in the

1960s and 1970s proved it was possible.

They improved the efficiency of the hous-

ing industry so that the monthly repayments

on a new house were about the same as

the rent on old houses. High quality hous-

ing using new fast-track building systems

was developed in well planned townships.

‘Why rent when you can buy?’ queried the

housing developers. That made sense to

the public. As if by magic home ownership,

the ‘Australian Dream’, became achievable

for millions of young working couples, both

the native born and previously poor immi-

grants from England and Europe. Providing

mass housing did not have to be an eco-

nomic burden on society but could become

a wealth-generating process. By creatively

satisfying the needs of the poorest section

of the working population the housing in-

dustry became a powerful engine of growth,

stimulating around one hundred related in-

dustries and providing mass jobs for a new

generation of building workers, who soon

acquired skills and earned good pay. The

army of building workers became the most

enthusiastic customers for the very houses

they built. The Australian housing industry

had recreated Henry Ford’s discovery: pay

American car workers top wages and they

work efficiently and creatively and can af-

ford to buy the car they mass produce.

Contrast this once economically

healthy situation in Australia with the cur-

rent Malaysian housing industry, based on

low technology and low-paid foreign work-

ers, socially isolated in miserable construc-

tion site huts, and building houses which

80% of Malaysian families cannot sensibly

afford to buy.

If the Malaysian housing indus-

try can rise to the challenge and provide

quality housing in the affordable range

of RM 80 000 to RM 150 000 it will find a

profitable and secure local market as the

population expands gradually to around 40

million over the next 50 years.

Low-cost Housing Although the present low-cost

houses and walk-up flats stipulated by the

Government housing policy are in plentiful

supply and very affordable to the working

population, they are not the answer. The

low-cost houses and flats are generally re-

garded as quite inferior and often become

slums which socially stigmatize the occu-

pants. The public is not keen to buy them

and most developers would actually make

more money by not building them. Check

out the auction advertisements for low-cost

apartments in the daily papers. You can bid

for any number of repossessed low-cost

flats in the Klang Valley with reserve prices

between RM 10 000 to RM 20 000, well

below their original purchase prices. The

current owners are stuck with flats which

The Malaysian housing industry is currently based on low technology and low-paid foreign workers building houses which 80% of Malaysian families cannot afford to buy.

b u i l d i n g t h e f u t u r e

149

are losing value and many are in ‘nega-

tive mortgage’, owing the bank more than

the resale value. Simply walking out of the

dump does not solve their problem. The

bank auctions the flat for anything it can get

and burdens the previous owner with the

balance of the mortgage. What a miserable

situation for all concerned. There has to be

a better way.

To be fair, the Malaysian Govern-

ment’s low-cost housing programme once

played an invaluable role in overcoming

the squatter housing problem, but the pro-

gramme has now outlived its usefulness.

For the benefit of first-time home buyers,

I have a suggestion. Can the Government,

supported by the banks, extend the 4%

fixed-interest housing loans long enjoyed

by government servants? Can the hous-

ing industry get its act together and provide

something more inspiring than the low-cost

terrace houses that look like army barracks

(Figure 1.1) and the depressing walk-up

flats? Instead of low-cost homes which

lose value, can we find a way of supply-

ing a range of ‘affordable quality housing’ in

well-planned neighbourhoods that steadily

appreciates in value?

This was the spirit of the challenge

to Malaysia’s architects and developers

by Sarawak’s newly-appointed Minister

of Housing, Dato Sri Abang Zohari in an

opening address to a Housing Conference

in Miri in November 2004. We took up the

Minister’s challenge and with his encour-

agement designed the smallest Thermal

Comfort Honeycomb House that fulfills all

the basic requirements for raising a family

in a well-planned neighbourhood, including

the potential to generate a good profit for

the owners over 10 to 15 years. Only then

did we work out its likely selling price.

Figure 1.1 Can the housing

industry get its act together and provide

something more inspiring than the

‘army barracks’ style low-cost ter-

race houses?

The Government’s low-cost housing programme has now outlived its

usefulness.


150

‘My First Home’ Our new cluster house designs

mark a vast improvement on present low-

cost and medium-cost houses. ‘My First

Home’ at the bottom of the range has a

price tag of RM 80 000 (where land cost is

low). This ‘quadruplex’ is the Kancil of the

housing market: cute, functional and af-

fordable, even for young working couples

on modest pay. It comes as a 2 1/2 storey

quarter-detached house in a Honeycomb

courtyard and looks like a semi-D from

the front view. The other two houses in the

same block ingeniously face a separate

courtyard. Each house is a corner lot with

662 sf on two floors. It is small but cosy,

with three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and

a wet and dry kitchen, with a bonus 300 sf

unfinished attic for future extension as the

kids get bigger. The whole house, includ-

ing the liveable attic, is designed with our

technology to remain thermally comfort-

able without air conditioning (Figure 1.2).

The scale model of My First Home

and the Honeycomb Courtyard concept

created great interest at the SARBEX 2005

Housing Exhibition in Kuching. In fact 80%

of the respondents in the market survey

conducted by UPM wanted to buy one of

our Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Houses

priced between RM 80 000 and RM 150 000

(Figure 1.3).

Figure 1.2‘My First Home’ and the Honeycomb Courtyard Concept(See floor plans on page 142)

Figure 1.3 Market surveys are essential to convince the Industry and the Government.

In a UPM Market Survey inKuching, Sarawak

80%

of 169 respondents

wanted to buy

a Thermal Comfort Honeycomb House

priced at RM 80 000 to RM 150 000


151

A Good Location We had created a consumer de-

mand for our range of designs for My First

Home. Now we began to think how the

houses might appreciate in value over

the years. The Honeycomb layout, with

its courtyard parks and tree-lined streets,

creates safe and friendly neighbourhoods

for children as well as parents, reminiscent

of kampongs and small towns where the

people are king, not the cars. Under these

more civilized conditions the residents walk

around informally much more often and be-

gin to co-operate on all levels. They take

pride in their community, looking after not

only their own houses and gardens but also

‘their’ parks and streets and they volunteer

in the development of the community, tak-

ing part in religious activities, school and

sports committees, and patronizing the

local shops and restaurants. The visitors,

their friends and relatives, start noticing the

improved and friendly lifestyle and the good

environment for raising happy children.

Some would like to move into the communi-

ty and want to know when any houses come

up for sale. It is this human process, the ac-

tive life and environment outside the home,

that add value to the houses, not the bricks

and mortar, nor the geographical location of

the suburb. The real estate professionals

tell us the three most important factors de-

termining the price of a house are location,

location, location! We agree. What creates

the location and increases the house values

are the residents themselves and their con-

scious efforts to improve the human society

in their communities. Honeycomb town plan-

ning, far better than the rectilinear planning

of terrace housing, provides the necessary

Figure 1.4 Location, location,

location!

The Honeycomb layout with its

courtyard parks and tree-lined

streets creates safe and friendly,

neighbourhoods for children as well as

parents, reminiscent of kampongs and

small towns where the people are king,

not the cars.


152

infrastructure for this wealth creating proc-

ess to take place. Who benefits? The resi-

dents themselves who created the wealth.

The residents can relax with the comforting

thought that their homes are good invest-

ments, steadily increasing in value. Any-

one wishing to sell a house will make a tidy

profit to help finance a larger house. Offer

to sell your house to your next-door neigh-

bour, who can then renovate both to make

a grander home. You will have good friends

to visit for years to come, your link to your

old community.

Political Interest The Sarawak Ministry of Housing

and the housing developers took an increas-

ing interest in our ‘friendly neighbourhood’

concept and opened the doors for detailed

discussions with the government housing

authorities. We were able to convince them

that Honeycomb layouts, although radi-

cally different from conventional terrace

housing, nonetheless still conformed to all

the Sarawak planning by-laws and require-

ments, such as space between buildings,

hierarchy of roads and access to fire en-

gines. A big breakthrough came with the

public endorsement of Thermal Comfort

Honeycomb Housing by the Chief Minister

of Sarawak, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud,

in his opening speech to a State Housing

Seminar in July 2005 attended by 200 gov-

ernment officials and housing profession-

als. Given this green light by the Sarawak

Government, important housing develop-

ers we had been chasing for months, re-

sponded positively. They wanted to see us

in their office, ‘tommorrow’. We agreed im-

mediately!

Meanwhile, the Sarawak Minister

of Housing announced in the press that his

Figure 1.5 Honeycomb Courtyard Neighbourhood Environment

Breakthrough came with the public endorsement of the Chief Minister of Sarawak.


153

Ministry intended to introduce the Thermal

Comfort Honeycomb concept for all gov-

ernment housing projects during the Ninth

Malaysia Plan, commencing in 2006 with a

show project in Kuching (Figure 1.6).

A major change in the housing

policy of Sarawak was thereby made in

just nine months. Clearly, where the politi-

cal will exists and consumers and industry

players are convinced of the mutual ben-

efits, acceptance of new ideas and innova-

tive technology can be rapid.

Peninsular Malaysia is a much big-

ger pond and is taking longer to penetrate,

but our patient work is beginning to bear

fruit. Our two-year active promotion has

consisted of articles in newspapers and

industry magazines, scientific seminars,

many exhibitions and even more presenta-

tions to a wide range of developers, gov-

ernment bodies, NGOs, housing industry

groups, architects, town planners, and

students. This promotion, spurred on by

Sarawak’s recent acceptance, is leading

Figure 1.6 Honeycomb Layout

at Demak Laut, Kuching, Sarawak

to private housing projects in Malacca and

others on the drawing board in and around

Kuala Lumpur. Interestingly, our promotion

is also opening up potential projects in de-

veloping countries, especially as Malaysian

entrepreneurs hunt for new markets.

Apartment Living Although a house with a garden in

a leafy suburb may be the family dream,

well-designed apartments with good social

amenities also have considerable advan-

tages for family living. Apartments have a

legitimate place in towns and cities, espe-

cially if they are well served by public trans-

port. The higher population density is then

able to support a wide range of commercial

activities and industries, providing nearby

employment opportunities as well as com-

munity services such as kindergartens,

schools, clinics, hospitals, shops, restau-

rants, food courts, and entertainment and

recreation outlets, all within easy walking

distance or accessible by short trips in

The Chief Minister plans to adopt the Thermal Comfort

Honeycomb Concept in the 9th Malaysia Plan for Sarawak.


154

buses or trains. This greatly benefits the

children and young people, who are able to

get around town safely without turning their

parents into taxi drivers. Indeed Singapore,

a city state with mass transit and an excel-

lent bus service, is proof that owning a car

or a motor bike is not a necessity in a well-

designed city. Instead of the monthly repay-

ments on a car, and expenditure on petrol,

insurance, road tax and maintenance (plus

all the hassles with parking) it can be much

cheaper to simply hire a car or a van when

your family needs one for special outings

and holidays. But how can you manage the

regular marketing and supermarket shop-

ping and all those heavy bags without a

car? No problem! Take the bus to the mar-

ket or shops. When you are finished wheel

your shopping trolley to a taxi stand, load

all the bags into the boot and whiz back

home.

Four and five-storey medium-cost

apartments with suitable amenities have

proved to be socially acceptable for fami-

lies around the world (Figures 1.7 and 1.8).

However, high-rise apartments are gener-

ally only suitable for singles and older cou-

ples whose children have left home.

Honeycomb Apartments After long experience constructing

10 000 space-efficient, low-cost and me-

Figure 1.7 Honeycomb Apartment Blocks with Central Courtyard

Figure 1.8 Four and five storey medium cost apartments with suitable amenities have proved to be socially acceptable for families around the world.

Apartments have a legitimate place in towns and cities especially if they are well served by public transport.


155

dium-cost apartments, Arkitek M. Ghazali

has recently designed hexagonal 5-storey

apartment blocks incorporating thermal

comfort and novel social features. This is

a generic solution and can be applied to

apartments of various sizes, the smallest

for a family of five being 750 sf with 3 bed-

rooms and 2 bathrooms (Figure 1.9).

• Honeycomb courtyards. On each

floor the apartments are entered from a cen-

tral courtyard. This well lit and airy courtyard

serves as a semi-private meeting place for

the residents on each floor and as a giant

playpen for the smaller children. Parents

can sit and supervise the children from the

small private space in front of each apart-

ment or watch them from their apartments.

Our intention with Honeycomb courtyards,

which will be tested in sociological surveys,

is to help create small communities and

friendly neighbours but without sacrific-

ing family privacy. This social amenity in-

curs no extra costs: It results from putting

the considerable walkway space required

by linear aparment blocks to better use

(Figures 1.10 and 1.11).

• Internal clothes drying. The Gov-

ernment has long been concerned about

the unsightly washing hanging out of apart-

ment windows and has challenged archi-

tects to find a way to dry clothes out of sight

and without getting wet again when it rains.

Figure 1.9 Honeycomb

Apartment Floor Plan (shown

without veranda or balconies)

750 sf with two entrances and a utility room for

washing and drying clothes.

A generic solution for apartments of various sizes has been developed.


156

This is our proposed solution:-

We have a special utility room,

which also serves as a second entrance to

each apartment. Clothes can be washed at

night and dried during the day in the util-

ity room using our mechanical ventilation

system (on a time clock) which circulates

warm, dry air from the air-well during the

hot part of the day. In the evening the fresh

dry clothes can be ironed whilst the day’s

dirty clothes are washed and hung out on

stacked plastic hangers. We hope this in-

vention will make apartment life easier…

and make space for the following innova-

tion.

• Outdoor Gardens

To keep the sun off the walls, a 4-foot wide

veranda wraps around the outside of each

apartment. This is just wide enough for

some pot plants and for sitting outside to

enjoy the view. Imagine each apartment

block festooned with plants and flowers,

with water baths and kitchen scraps to at-

tract the birds. Treat the birds well and they

will visit you throughout the day, adding

pleasure to your life. Don’t cage the birds,

let them be free. Adopt wild birds as a hob-

by. Prove that nature can be brought back

into dense urban areas. Display Malaysia

as a tropical garden nation from your apart-

ment veranda!

Figure 1.10 The central ‘Honeycomb Courtyard’ comes at no extra cost. It results from putting the considerable walkway space required by linear apartment blocks to better use.


157

• Walk-up Apartments with Lifts

Walk-up apartments really need lifts, not so

much for the able-bodied, who benefit from

the exercise, but for families with small chil-

dren. The only safe way for them to climb up

and down stairs is for a parent to hang onto

the railing and one child. However, this safety

precaution cannot always be taken with the

amount of everyday gear families need, such

as pushchairs, tricycles, nappies, clothes and

milk bottles. Another group, the over 50s, of-

ten suffer from joint pains and also need lifts.

For those who become handicapped and

just cannot manage the stairs, the choice

is a hopeless one. Either they move out of

their walk-up apartment and sadly leave their

neighbourhood or they have to be carried up

and down flights of stairs. This situation is far

from ideal. Society should plan for 10% of

the population becoming handicapped. The

problem is you never know who it will be. The

fail-safe way is to provide basic handicap in-

frastructure like lifts for all apartment dwell-

ers. For blocks of Honeycomb apartments

we allocate space for a small lift, additional to

the stairs. The cost can be recovered by the

developer in the following way. The undesir-

able higher floor apartments which currently

sell for less than those on the ground and the

first floor, can now command higher prices

and this will be enough to pay for the lift.

Figure 1.11 Honeycomb

courtyards are designed to help

create small communities and

friendly neighbours but without

sacrificing family privacy.


158

Overcoming Developers’ Resistance In general the developers, especial-

ly their marketing professionals, like the con-

cept of Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Hous-

ing. They see it as superior to present terrace

housing and respond with enthusiasm much

like ordinary members of the public. How-

ever, they are businessmen and must take

account of the risks involved. One slip and

they lose a lot of money or go broke.

Developers are not so worried about

our thermal comfort technology, which is

appealing to consumers and is backed up

by a large body of experimental evidence.

However, Honeycomb developments have

not yet been built and the risks have to be

considered from all angles. After we give our

presentations to developers these are the

most common responses:-

• ‘Honeycomb is a good concept but

the houses will cost more.’

• ‘Honeycomb housing is environ-

ment friendly but you will get fewer houses

per acre.’

• ‘I like the concept but the authorities

(planning departments, Bomba, etc.) will re-

ject it.’

• ‘It is better than terrace housing but

the infrastructure (the water supply, sewage

and electrical cables, etc.) will cost more.’

• ‘The Honeycomb layout is novel but

visitors will get lost in the maze.’

Figure 1.12 Terrace House Layout, Kajang, Selangor

Developers generally accept Honeycomb as superior to terrace housing but would like to see a completed project before committing themselves.


159

These commercial objections

can easily become sterile debates (‘Yes

it will, no it won’t’) between us and the

developer’s consultants. As a highly

professional group the consultant archi-

tects, engineers and quantity surveyors

are a hard nut to crack. After all, they

are in their comfort zone with terrace

housing, drawing on Malaysia’s impres-

sive fifty years’ experience with urban-

izing the country. They want to see a

Honeycomb project before they commit

themselves; we can’t start a Honeycomb

project because developers won’t com-

mit themselves! How to break this frus-

trating deadlock?

A progressive developer, Datuk

Eddy Chen of Metro Kajang and ex-chair-

man of the Housing Developers‘ Associa-

tion, provided us with a generous opportu-

nity. ‘I will consider adopting Honeycomb

housing for my next project if you can

prove you can get more houses per acre

and if you can also prove the infrastructure

will cost no more’. We accepted the chal-

lenge and conducted a collaborative study

comparing Datuk Chen’s newly completed

mixed housing project in Kajang with our al-

ternative Honeycomb housing plan for the

same site. We rolled up our sleeves and

got down to some serious design work with

our team of architects and our consultant

Figure 1.13 Honeycomb Layout Equivalent, Kajang,

Selangor


160

engineer, C.T. Sia and quantity surveyor,

Edmund Foo, who willingly responded to

the challenge (Figures 1.12 and 1.13).

The results exceeded our expec-

tations. Compared to terrace housing the

water reticulation system for Honeycomb

housing was 1% less, for the roads and

drainage 10% less and for the sewage sys-

tem 11% less. Overall, Honeycomb hous-

ing would save the developer RM 413 000

(11%) on a RM 3.7 million infrastructure

bill. The Honeycomb layout also resulted in

24 more housing units, providing 8% extra

sales (Figures 1.14 and 1.15).

Of course the thermal comfort clus-

ter houses we proposed are quite different

from the actual terrace and semi-detached

houses built on the rather hilly Kajang site.

Datuk Chen, in reviewing our infrastructure

evidence, then asked if we could provide

a costing for our cluster houses and show

how they could be economically built on the

hilly land. This further study is underway.

We find this patient scientific ap-

proach with a collaborating and enthusias-

tic developer to be very fruitful in building

confidence in Honeycomb housing and

overcoming the legitimate concerns of

housing professionals.

Collaborating with Town Planners In order to design new Honey-

comb townships, towns, and eventually

cities, our concept design architects must

increasingly discuss and collaborate with

town planning professionals. A valuable

neighbourhood study of Shah Alam has

been conducted by town planners Habsah

Hashim from Universiti Technologi MARA

(UiTM) and her postgraduate student Nor

Azlina Jamil (2005). They analysed differ-

ent types of terrace layouts in Shah Alam

in terms of neighbourhood facilities such as

the ratio of population to schools, walking

distances to schools and shops, suitability

of road and traffic systems, etc. We scored

their findings on a 1-10 scale and superim-

posed our estimate, as fairly as we could,

of how a proposed Honeycomb layout for

Kuching would perform.

Of course we are comparing real

terrace house layouts with a honeycomb

design waiting to be built. Nonetheless, the

result is very encouraging. The Honeycomb

layout scores 9.7 out of ten compared to

only 4.2 out of ten for the typical ‘iron grid’

layout of terrace housing (Figure 1.16). The

hexagonal culs-de-sac need less space

for roads and efficiently interlock to form a

Honeycomb layout with parks and commu-

nity services within easy reach. We have

now recreated the Malay kampong but in

a more compact, scientifically designed ur-

ban form.

Naturally, when the real thing

comes along and Honeycomb housing gets

built, our undergraduate students will live-

test the residents in our house-to-house

satisfaction survey, comparing Honeycomb

residents with terrace house residents.

Honeycomb Housing theoretically scores 9.7 out of 10!


161

Figure 1.14 Comparison of

infrastructure works for Kajang project:

costs per house and total costs for the

project.

Figure 1.15 Advantages of

Honeycomb Layout at Kajang, Selangor

INFRASTRUCTURE WORKSKajang Project

Honeycomb will save this DeveloperRM 412 000

on Infrastructure!

HONEYCOMB HOUSINGAdvantages to DEVELOPER

• 8% More Houses (Kajang Example) Terrace Honeycomb 304 Units 328 Units

• 18% Savings on Infrastructure, per house

• Plus 8% More Sales 24 houses @ say RM 150 000 = RM 3.6 million

Reference: Mazlin Ghazali, et al. (2005)


162

This is how we like to do things; start first

with a scientific approach and measure

something, then test the results directly in

groups of affected residents in a well con-

structed sociological survey.

Wildlife Technology The great thing about the creative

process is that it becomes self-generating;

one good idea leads to another, and then

another. Honeycomb housing produced

sufficient space for a neighbourhood park

in front of the houses. Now we could grow

trees without their roots becoming stunted

by the drains and sewer pipes surround-

ing terrace housing. Ten foot nursery trees

could now be planted in the small park and

grow to their full genetic height, their roots

extending deep under the road and even

under the houses. The large mature trees

would provide a canopy, shading the ther-

mal mass of the roads from direct solar ra-

diation and providing natural solar powered

evaporative cooling to the outdoor environ-

ment, thereby reducing the urban heat is-

land effect. Trees would also provide food

and habitat for insects and birds, enriching

the local ecosystem. We were exploring

this idea at Universiti Putra Malaysia in an

experimental ‘Urban Wildlife Sanctuary’. At

one stage our friend, Dr Zainal Zainuddin

at the Department of Wildlife and National

Parks, suggested we all go and visit James

Kingham’s tree nursery in Tanjung Malim

(Figure 1.17). We soon found that James,

a retired planter, together with just a hand-

ful of dedicated weekend naturalists, had

quietly collected 600 species of wild fruit

and berry trees from Malaysia’s rainforests

over a ten-year period and was propagat-

Figure 1.16 Comparative neighbourhood analysis between Honeycomb planning and terrace house layouts.

Small nursery trees planted in Honeycomb courtyards will soon mature into large trees and shade the roads, reducing the urban heat island effect.

UITM’S ‘NEIGHBOURHOOD ANALYSIS’Conventional versus Honeycomb LayoutsShah Alam (completed) Score out of 10 Iron Grid 4.2 Kuching (design stage) Honeycomb 9.7Reference: Habsah Hashim (2005)


163

ing them in polybags in large numbers, ex-

porting some to Singapore.

What an achievement, what a dis-

covery! Now we had a simple and practical

way of bringing birds and small wildlife into

dense urban areas. By selecting the right

fruit-bearing tree for Honeycomb parks

we could support the particular species

of birds, insects and animals that lived off

the fruits. This natural food could be sup-

plemented with kitchen scraps and even

bird seed provided by the residents. With

600 fruit-bearing tree species to select

from (soon to become 1000 according to

James who is getting into high gear as he

approaches his 70th birthday) it means that

each Honeycomb park in a township could

be different, creating a diverse tropical

garden ecosystem.

We began to rethink the problem

of birds and animals displaced by man’s

necessary urbanization. With power comes

responsibility. As the ‘brains’ of nature it is

our responsibility to defend the rest of na-

ture. All species, man included, face com-

mon threats. At the end of the day it is not

so much man that exterminates species

but the blind forces of nature itself. Natural

selection acts along with the mighty natural

changes to the earth’s biosphere, such as

volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, asteroid

collisions, sun spots and frequent ice ages,

which are far greater than man’s industrial

and urban impact. With our technology,

humanely applied, we can give the rest of

nature a much needed helping hand. With

our technology we can produce wildlife for

our pleasure in much the same way that

Figure 1.17 UPM Wildlife

Technology group’s visit to the Nursery of James Kingham

(3rd from right). (October 2004)


164

mankind has mass-produced domestic

animals for food over the last 10 000 years

of agriculture. Honeycomb townships can

now provide the three essential ingredients

for protecting and propagating endangered

species of birds (and potentially many oth-

er small animals) namely food, habitat and

human kindness. The practical aim of our

‘Wildlife Technology’ is to help civilize a jun-

gle: the semi-barren, overheated, terrace-

house, concrete jungles where 70% of the

urban population live.

Environment Friendly Townships

In January 2000, we held a Work-

shop at UPM on ‘Environment Friendly

Townships for Developing Countries’. The

opening sentence of the opening paper

with the same title stated:

‘There is a great human need for

about 500 million new houses, mainly in de-

veloping countries. Every family on earth,

if it is to lead a healthy lifestyle, clearly

needs a modest home with enough space,

electricity, water and sanitation in a pleas-

ant environment with parks, playgrounds,

community services and public transport.

This necessary social development is often

perceived as threatening the environment.’

The paper continued in this vein.

‘Is it possible to accelerate socially

necessary development and simultane-

ously protect the environment and indeed

repair some of the global environmental

damage created since the Industrial Revo-

lution? This is the question at the heart of

this workshop. Can billions of people be

both adequately housed and at the same

time live in a greener environment?’

Over the last five years, in the

course of our scientific and architectural

work on housing and the environment, we

have become even more convinced that

the answer to this question is a resounding

YES!

We can have our cake and eat it:

not as the green environmental movement

advocates, by going back to nature (and the

Stone Age!) but by going back to science

(as practiced worldwide in the post-war

economic boom of the1950s and 1960s)

— back to the optimism of the great bio-

sphere scientist Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-

1945) and his concept of the Noösphere

— the sphere of human reason within the

biosphere, permitting sustainable develop-

ment of both humans and the global envi-

ronment.

‘Now we live in the period of a new

geological evolutionary change in the bio-

sphere. We are entering the ‘Noösphere’….

Therefore we may face the future with con-

fidence. It is in our hands. We will not let it

go.’ (Vernadsky 1943) (Figure 1.18).

The successful urbanization of

Malaysia over the last 50 years is an im-

portant example for other developing coun-

tries to follow (minus, of course, the mis-

takes identified in this book). To provide

economically the quantum of infrastructure

‘Wildlife Technology‘ aims at civilizing the urban, overheated, concrete jungle!

‘Noösphere’ is the sphere of human reason within the biosphere permitting sustainable development to both humans and the global envirornment.


165


that every family needs (the roads, water,

electricity, schools, shops, hospitals, etc.)

means that the population in each country

needs to be concentrated in towns and cit-

ies, not scattered thinly and in poverty over

the whole territory. For the developing world

this means around 1000 new cities need to

be constructed as soon as possible.

Honeycomb Cities of the Near Future

Readers may have noticed that we

have made a rather sudden leap to cities.

This book started off by describing my deci-

sion to abandon Kuala Lumpur and move

to my wife’s kampong in Rembau. Now,

20 years later, we are singing the praises

of new Honeycomb cities; not just one or

two but a thousand of them! Have we be-

trayed our environmental principles? Surely,

building this number of cities will destroy the

earth, gobbling up outrageous amounts of

land, transforming nature into urban con-

crete jungles and evicting wildlife from their

rightful homes?

Let us look at the situation from a dif-

ferent angle. Every family on earth needs a

modern home where the next generation can

be raised as happy, creative human beings

each with a secure future. This means the

world needs a staggering 500 million new

houses and apartments for some 3 billion

Figure 1.18 Vladimir I.

Vernadsky, (1863-1945)

pioneered the concepts of

‘biosphere’ and ‘noösphere’ .


166

people. Half the world’s population, most of

them in poor rural countries, needs to be

urbanized to get them out of poverty. This

cannot be achieved with our rather romantic

notion of ‘Environment Friendly Townships’,

the concept we presented at a UPM work-

shop just five years ago. Of course we can

have such towns scattered well outside the

city limits but the large mass of the world’s

people will live in cities each housing several

million.

This migration to urban areas, after

all, is man’s history, particularly over the last

10 000 years of agriculture and technological

progress from a few million Stone Age hunt-

er-gathers to 6 billion people today. Indeed,

highly urbanized, mankind has a bright new

future as does the world’s wildlife and all oth-

er living species. Advances in biotechnology,

genetic engineering and animal production

now mean we can greatly intensify our ag-

riculture and increase the diversity of plants

and animals for human food. This will liber-

ate vast areas of agricultural land, in fact the

best land on earth, and return it to its near

natural state for man’s enjoyment. It is also a

very good deal for the wildlife; we give them

back their land, borrowed for man’s agricul-

ture. Wildlife technology will protect endan-

gered species and guarantee their survival.

Meanwhile, our concept of Thermal

Comfort Honeycomb Housing brings back

nature to urban areas. This is the new wave

of scientific environmentalism to replace the

‘Green’ variety launched by Rachel Carson

in 1962 in her anti-technology book ‘Silent

Spring’. (For a fuller account of this provoca-

tive topic, see the research paper, ‘Bio-

sphere Technology’, by Mohd Peter Davis).

Mazlin Ghazali and his team of

young creative architects are just begin-

ning to design Honeycomb Cities. An early

concept design for a new city in Sarawak is

shown in Figure 1.19.

The Eurasian Landbridge Where do we locate these gleam-

ing new cities? In general along the ancient

trade routes, along the old Silk Road, by ex-

panding the villages, towns and cities that

already exist in the most suitable geographi-

cal locations. The modern version of the Silk

Road is the Eurasian Landbridge concept

pioneered by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche

following the examples of intercontinental

railways in America and the Trans-Siberian

Railway across Russia (Figure 1.20).

The Eurasian Landbridge is the in-

terconnection of the existing national railway

systems upgraded for high speed freight and

passenger trains, such as Maglev. However,

it is more than just a super railway network:

it will become the world’s development cor-

ridor, perhaps 100km wide and interconnect-

ing the productive and intellectual activity of

all the cities, towns, factories and intensive

agriculture. It represents a stunning Vernad-

sky-inspired development of the Biosphere

for the benefit of all humanity and all other

living species. Given the political will it is

technologically possible to transform Eura-

sia over the next 50 years.

The Eurasian Landbridge will be more than just railway networks:it will be the world’s development corridor.


167

Figure 1.19Early Concept

Proposal for a new Satellite City near

Kuching.


168

The large majority of the world’s population lives in Eurasia (Figure 1.20). There are no ‘natural’ or un-

bridgeable cultural or racial differences; we are all human and have a common destiny and a common heritage.

We all need the same things; food, clothing, housing, well-paid satisfying jobs and happiness.

LaRouche hits the nail on the head “You cannot have six and a half billion, living on this planet, without

them participating in scientific and technological progress. You just can’t do it!” (Berlin Dialogue, 29 December

2005, www.larouchepub.com)

Malaysia has a golden opportunity to actively participate in the physical reconstruction of Eurasia. With

a united effort and a ‘crash science program’ (similar to America’s Man on the Moon mission back in the 1960s

of President Kennedy), Malaysia is well positioned to play a leading role as the Designer and Builder of energy

efficient Honeycomb Cities for the developing world.

We can only agree with Vernadsky:-

“The future is in our hands. We will not let it go.”

Figure 1.20 Eurasian Landbridge proposed by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche.

LIST OF FIGURESBIBLIOGRAPHYACKNOWLEDGMENTSABOUT THE AUTHORSREVIEWS & WHAT WE THINK


List of Figures

PART 1THERMAL COMFORT

Chapter 1Figure 1.1 Sheep in this experimental animal shed at Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) are more thermally comfortable than humans in terrace houses. (Author 1998)Figure 1.2 Sheep grow very fast when heat stress is prevented. (Author 1998)Figure 1.3 UPM students at the ‘Hilton Hotel for Sheep’.(Author 1998)Figure 1.4 Overheated houses are a community health problem. (UPM Random Household Surveys 1998)Figure 1.5 Defects of terrace houses. (UPM Random Household Surveys 1998)Figure 1.6 Kuala Lumpur got hotter and hotter from 1975 to 1995. This temperature monitoring of KL and other cities deserves to be updated every 10 years and the public informed. (Google Search 2003)Figure 1.7 UPM Students with Dr. Ahmad Hariza Hashim (left), conducted random household surveys and discovered that terrace houses are too hot on about half the days of the year. (Author 2000)Figure 1.8 How can we stop Kuala Lumpur from overheating? (Gregers Reimann,

Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis, December 1999)

Chapter 2Figure 2.1 Kampong houses are beautifully cool at night in Chembong, Rembau. (Author 1998)Figure 2.2 Mohd Peter’s Cool Bungalow (Anjung Seri 1998) Figure 2.3 Large Veranda and Awnings (Author 1998)Figure 2.4 Mohd Peter’s thermal comfort bungalow was designed to stay cool without air-conditioning in Bandar Baru Bangi, Selangor. (Author 1998)Figure 2.5 Family living positioned on the ground floor, where we spent most time during the day. (Author 1998) Figure 2.6 Experiments prove that cool houses can be designed for the Malaysian humid tropics without heart-stopping electricity bills. (Author 1998)


171


172

Chapter 3Figure 3.1 Nelson Mandela wants Malaysia’s help in designing and building houses for Africa. (Google Search 2004)Figure 3.2 House prices have become ridiculous: 80% of Malaysian families cannot afford to buy a house. (Author 1998)

Chapter 4Figure 4.1 Malaysia is a young growing nation and will need a good supply of houses for the next two generations. (United Nations 2004)Figure 4.2 Malaysia has plenty of room to grow when compared to other Asian countries. (United Nations 2004)Figure 4.3 Malaysia has a very satisfying rate of growth but needs a balanced distribution of population densities between states. (United Nations 2004)Figure 4.4 We have to plan now for the housing needs of these children… and their children! According to leading world economist and American statesman, Lyndon LaRouche, two generations (25 to 50 years) of forward planning are needed for a nation to be successful. — see www. larouchepub.com (Author 1998)

Chapter 5Figure 5.1 Indoor Thermal Comfort. (UPM Random Household Surveys 1998)Figure 5.2 The genetic differences between the people of the world are extremely small. We all experience and suffer from heat in the same way. Skin colour makes no difference. (Google Search 2005)Figure 5.3 Cooling Effect of Fans. Contrary to popular opinion, a ceiling fan does not cool a room. But it certainly makes us feel about 20C cooler. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 1999)Figure 5.4 Before electricity a ceiling fan (called a punkah) required a man at the end of a rope. What a boring job! (Google Search 2004)

Chapter 6Figure 6.1 Daily Temperature Cycle. The outdoor temperature in Malaysia is hot for sure. However, for 14 hours out of every 24 hours the temperature is within the human thermal comfort zone. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 1999)Figure 6.2 Humidity Prediction Equation. As the temperature goes up the humidity

comes down. (Malaysian Society of Animal Production 1995:264-265)Figure 6.3 Three ‘cool’ researchers: Mohd Peter, Gregers Reimann and Nor Azian Nordin. (Author 2000)Figure 6.4 Maximum and Minimum Temperatures in Kuala Lumpur During the Year The data are misleading : they simply imply that each month is more or less the same (see text). (Google Search 2004)Figure 6.5 Malaysian Reference Weather Year. Every day in Malaysia is hot but

some days are hotter than others. The heat pattern in Malaysia is best visualized by dividing each month into 10 day periods. This reveals the regular heat waves at the beginning of March and the end of May. These hot months cause two to three times more thermal discomfort than the ‘cool’ months (September, November and December). (Gregers Reimann, Mohd Peter Davis, A. Zain Ahmad 2000)

Figure 6.6 Malaysian Weather Year : Thermal Discomfort Units (every 3 days) Planning a wedding? Check out this table. It forecasts how much your

guests will suffer on different days of the year.(Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 1999)

l i s t o f f i g u r e s

173

Figure 6.7 Thermal Discomfort (1989-1998) Petaling Jaya Meteorological Station, Selangor. A spectacular heat wave occurred in Malaysia in 1998 (January to May). It was part of the worldwide ‘El Nino’ effect. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 22 May 2000)

Chapter 7Figure 7.1 Digital Temperature Data Logger. The size of a match box. (Author 2000)Figure 7.2 Internal View of Digital Temperature Data Logger. We routinely set the sensor to record the temperature every 24 minutes for 2 weeks. At the end of the experiment the data are downloaded into a computer for analysis. (Author 2000)Figure 7.3 Temperature Inside a Concrete House. For most of the time the temperature inside a concrete house is much hotter than outdoors. This is the fundamental design fault of 2 million urban houses in Malaysia. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 1998)Figure 7.4 Alcohol Thermometer. (Google Search 2005) Figure 7.5 Traditional Wooden Kampong House. The temperature inside traditional wooden kampong houses closely follows the outdoor temperature. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 1998)

Chapter 8Figure 8.1 A Kampong House. Kampong houses, unfortunately, cannot be renovated to make them cool all day without destroying their character. (Author 2000)Figure 8.2 A Typical Concrete House. A concrete house can be kept cool by air- conditioning it throughout, but the electricity bill over 40 years may exceed the cost of the house. (Author 2000)

Chapter 9Figure 9.1 Effect of Roof Wind Turbines on the Indoor Environment of a Double Storey Terrace House, Subang Jaya. The question on everyone’s lips : Do wind turbines work? Our experiment shows they have no effect. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)Figure 9.2 Wind Turbine Experiment. Two neighbouring terrace houses in Subang Jaya. Temperature taken at 2pm on 13 October 2000. Wind turbine salesmen claim wonderful benefits. We disagree. Check our evidence. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Chapter 10Figure 10.1 The website for Bsim, the Danish indoor climate software. (Google Search 2003)Figure 10.2 Gregers Reimann, a post-graduate student from the Technical University of Denmark, created the Malaysian Weather Year. He won the highest award ever given by his university for this fine piece of work. (Author 2000)Figure 10.3 Validation of BSim 2002. Success! The Malaysian version of Bsim

software agrees with our actual temperature experiments. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)


174

Chapter 11Figure 11.1 BSim Tests and Results. Computer simulation can be used to design

cool houses for Malaysia before they are built.(Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 11.2 Sensible design using computer simulation dramatically improves the indoor climate. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 11.3 Three postgraduate students (Tryggvi in blue, Kenneth in black and Kasper in white came from freezing Denmark to help Mohd Peter & Nor Azian (centre) design cool houses for hot Malaysia. This team perfected ‘Cool House Technology’ using computer simulation and the Malaysian Weather Year developed earlier by Gregers Reimann. The experimental house in the background incorporated the older technology such as low- pitched roof, louver windows and wind turbines. (Author 2000)

Chapter 12Figure 12.1 Understanding this graph is important. Change your habits! Close doors

and windows during daytime to keep out hot outdoor air. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 12.2 Computer Simulation Study on Ventilation Strategy (Aiming to achieve zero thermal discomfort). This is the scientific proof. Mechanically ventilate house overnight (at least 14 air changes/hour). Keep doors and windows closed during daytime. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Chapter 13Figure 13.1 How 1.5 million Terrace Houses in Malaysia Heat Up on Hot Days. Solar

radiation causes houses to heat up from the roof down. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 13.2 Steel roofs from Bluescope Steel (Malaysia) come with a 20-year waranty against rust. Marketed under Lysaght® and Colorbond® brand names. (Author 2001)Figure 13.3 A simple test rack was constructed to measure the surface temperature of steel roofing in bright sunlight. White reflects heat while dark colours absorb heat and the temperature of the white surface was 110C cooler. (Author 2001)Figure 13.4 Cool Roof is made up of three main componens, optimized by computer

simulation to block solar heat gain. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2001)

Figure 13.5 Proof that Cool Roof completely blocks solar heat gain. (Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2001)

Figure 13.6 Dr. Lam’s comments on the effectiveness of his Cool Roof after 2 years. (Author 2001)Figure 13.7 Important test. If the roof leaks the insulation will get wet and waterlogged. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2001)Figure 13.8 The ‘Roxul’ insulation used to keep out heat also keeps out rain noise when heavy rain hits the metal cool roof. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter

Davis 2001)Figure 13.9 Proof that Cool Roof reduced thermal discomfort by 80 per cent.

(Gregers Reimann, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 200)Figure 13.10 Dr. Lam’s house in Subang Jaya with a new white ‘Cool Roof’. (Author 2001)


175

Chapter 14Figure 14.1 Computer simulated performance of Quarter-D houses during the

hottest month of the year. (M. Ghazali, Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2002)

Figure 14.2 Conclusion : Thermal Comfort 21/2 storey house costs the same per square foot as hot double storey terrace house. (Mohd Peter Davis, Nor Azian Nordin, 2000)

Figure 14.3 Model of ‘Quarter-Detached’ house (4 corner lot houses under one roof). (Author 2001)Figure 14.4 Expected performance of a UPM Cool bungalow on the hottest day of the year compared to the same bungalow without UPM Cool House technology. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2002)Figure 14.5 The aim of the design is to reduce thermal discomfort to zero units per 24 hours. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2002)Figure 14.6 On the hottest day of the year the master bedroom of the UPM Cool

Bungalow is expected to be 4.70C cooler (daytime) and 2.60C cooler (night-time) than in a conventional bungalow. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 14.7 Even during the coolest month the UPM Bungalow will be much cooler. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)

Figure 14.8 UPM Thermal Comfort Bungalows nearing completion. (Author 2005)Figure 14.9 Pigeon-hole Flats (Author 2004)Figure 14.10 UPM Cool House technology applied to flats and apartments looks

highly promising. (Nor Azian Nordin, Mohd Peter Davis 2000)Figure 14.11 Energy Efficient House According to Our Computer Simulations This Thermal Comfort cluster house (see Figure 14.1) will stay cool without air-conditioning, saving RM 228 per month on electricity compared to an existing terrace house. The electricity savings over 30 years pay for the house!


176

PART 2HONEYCOMB HOUSING

Chapter 1Figure 1.1 Houses laid out around a central space to form a small neighbourhood. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 1.2 All houses in the neighbourhood face a communal garden. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 1.3 In the quarter-detached block, two houses face one courtyard; the other two face a different courtyard. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 1.4 The neighbourhoods can be arranged in an interlocking pattern. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 1.5 A Honeycomb Precinct (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 1.6 Snowflake (Google Search 2005)Figure 1.7 A typical terrace of houses. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 1.8 A typical terrace house layout. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 1.9 Ground Floor Plan (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 1.10 First Floor Plan — All terrace house designs are variations of this theme. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 1.11 Low density terrace house layout with a loose ‘organic’ plan form at Bukit Jelutong, Shah Alam, Selangor. (Kumpulan Guthrie Group) Figure 1.12 High density clustered terrace houses where communal spaces are created between blocks in Desa Park, Petaling Jaya, Selangor. (Taman Desa Brochure)Figure 1.13 Arlington Row, Bibury, Gloucestershire in England, built in the 16th century for farm workers, was probably the first such terrace. (Google Search)Figure 1.14 A national survey dertermined crime was the biggest worry. (New Straits Times, 18 September 2004)Figure 1.15 Pruitt Igoe was hailed as a shining example of Modern Architecture. (Newman, 1996)Figure 1.16 Pruitt Igoe, a 3000 unit public housing high-rise development, was demolished only 10 years after its construction, owing to social problems. (Newman, 1996)Figure 1.17 Oscar Newman in Defensible Space argued for design strategies to change the public spaces around homes from ‘no man’s land’ into ‘shared’ spaces. (Newman, 1972)Figure 1.18 We must design safe playing areas outside the house that are free from traffic hazard and crime, and are suitable for our children of pre-school and early school age. (Google Search 2004)Figure 1.19 The housing layout comprises a hierarchy of public, semi-public, semi- private and private spaces. It is intended to give residents a sense of ownership of communal spaces, reduce the dominance of vehicle traffic in the residential areas, and provide green spaces where they are most wanted, in front of houses. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)


177

Chapter 2Figure 2.1 Three types of regular tessellation. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 2.2 Simple examples of irregular tessellation. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 2.3 Islamic (Moorish) Tile Pattern (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 2.4 The seemingly complex pattern in Figure 2.3 is achieved by tessellating a single basic tile design. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 2.5 An example of tessellation by Escher. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 2.6 Another example by Kepler. (www.totally tessellated.com)Figure 2.7 A hexagonal neighbourhood tile comprising housing units, roads and green areas, tesselated from a single tile. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 2.8 The basic neighbourhood tile is tessellated to form the layout of a housing precinct. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)

Chapter 3Figure 3.1 The central courtyard in a Honeycomb neighbourhood. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.2 An example of an ‘efficient’ theoretical terrace house layout. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.3 An example of a theoretical Honeycomb layout. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.4 16 Units of Quadruplexes and Duplexes (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.5 16 Terrace Houses (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.6 5 Units of Quadruplexes and Duplexes (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.7 5 Terrace Houses (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.8 Cul-de-sac at the end of a row of houses. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.9 A shortened cul-de-sac creates undesirable and uneven lot shapes. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.10 A more even distribution of lots is achieved by a cul-de-sac in a circular lot. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 3.11 Circles do not tessellate, so there are gaps. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)

Chapter 4Figure 4.1 The Honeycomb housing lot, subject to the same setback requirements, produces a higher buildable area than the conventional 60’ x 100’ lot. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.2 The Honeycomb housing lot provides a wider building frontage than the conventional 60’ x 100’ lot. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.3 A narrow-frontage house on 60’ x 100’ land. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.4 A wide-frontage back-to-back duplex on 3200 square feet of land. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.5 Types of units in Honeycomb Housing (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.6 Triplex Houses (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.7 Cluster House with 4 units (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.8 Cluster houses laid out in rows. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.9 Sextuplex Houses (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)Figure 4.10 Blocks with small footprints can better fit a sloping area. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2003)


178

Chapter 5Figure 5.1 Location Plan of Demak Laut Industrial Estate. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.2 Planning parameters for housing in Sarawak: road widths, setbacks and densities. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.3 The Quadruplex/Sextuplex Courtyard ‘Tiles’ (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.4 The Quadruplex/Sextuplex Block ‘Tiles’ (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.5 Laying the ‘tiles’ on the site. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.6 My First Home Type A Sextuplex. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.7 My First Home Type B Sextuplex. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.8 My First Home Type D Quadruplex. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2004)Figure 5.9 Newspaper Splash. From left, Assistant Housing Minister Dr. Soon Choon Teck, Mohd Peter Davis, Chief Minister Pehin Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, Mazlin Ghazali, Deputy Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Alfred Jabu, and Housing Minister Dato Sri Abang Hj Abdul Rahman Zohari Tun Abang Hj Openg. (Photo by Jeffri Mostapa, The Borneo Post,19 July, 2005)


179

BUILDING THE FUTURE

Figure 1.1 Can the housing industry get its act together and provide something more inspiring than the ‘army barracks’ style low-cost terrace houses? (Image©DigitalGlobe 2005)Figure 1.2 ‘My First Home’ and the Honeycomb Courtyard Concept (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.3 Market surveys are essential to convince the Industry and the Government. (Mohd Peter Davis 2004)Figure 1.4 Location, location, location! (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.5 Honeycomb Courtyard Neighbourhood Environment (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.6 Honeycomb Layout at Demak Laut, Kuching, Sarawak (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.7 Honeycomb Apartment Blocks with Central Courtyard (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.8 Four and five storey medium cost apartments with suitable amenities have proved to be socially acceptable for families around the world. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.9 Honeycomb Apartment Floor Plan (shown without veranda or balconies). 750 sf with two entrances and a utility room for washing and drying clothes. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.10 The central ‘Honeycomb courtyard’ comes at no extra cost. It results from putting the considerable walkway space required by linear apartment blocks to better use. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.11 Honeycomb courtyards are designed to help create small communities and friendly neighbours but without sacrificing family privacy. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.12 Terrace House Layout, Kajang, Selangor (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.13 Honeycomb Layout Equivalent, Kajang, Selangor (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.14 Comparison of infrastructure works for Kajang project: costs per house and total costs for the project. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.15 Advantages of Honeycomb Layout at Kajang, Selangor (Mohd Peter Davis 2005)Figure 1.16 Comparative neighbourhood analysis between Honeycomb planning and terrace house layouts. (Mohd Peter Davis, Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.17 UPM Wildlife Technology group’s visit to the Nursery of James Kingham (3rd from right). (Mohd Peter Davis, Arkitek M. Ghazali, October 2004)Figure 1.18 Vladimir I. Vernadsky, (1863-1945) pioneered the concepts of biosphere and noösphere. (Google Search 2005)Figure 1.19 Early Concept Proposal for a new Satellite City near Kuching. (Arkitek M. Ghazali 2005)Figure 1.20 Eurasian Landbridge proposed by Lyndon & Helga LaRouche. (EIR Special Report 1997)

180

Bibliography

Part 1THERMAL COMFORT

Anjung Seri. (May 1998) Rumah Uji Kaji, pp. 8-15. Kuala Lumpur: Berita Publishing.

Davis, M.P. (2005) Biosphere Technology. International Advance Technology Congress 6th-8th December, Putrajaya.

Davis, M.P. and Nordin, Nor Azian (2002) UPM Cool Roof : A National Plan for Renovating Two Million Overheated Houses. Building and Investment, April. Kuala Lumpur.

Davis, M.P., Shanmugavelu, S., Yahaya, Nurizan and Nordin, Nor Azian (2000). Upper Thermal Comfort Level Reference. Construction Industry R&D Achievement Seminar, The Mines, Sri Kembangan.

Davis, M.P.; Nordin, Nor Azian; Kamal, Mustafa; Yahaya, Nurizan; Babjee, Shaik Mohamad Amin; Abdullah, Abdul Salam; Ghazali, Mazlin and Durack, Michael James (2004) Thermal Comfort Housing for Hot Climates — Placemaking and Sustainable Communities in Urban Development. Workshop 4, Commonwealth Association of Planners Conference, 5th-7th July, Renaissance Hotel, Kuala Lumpur.

Fanger, P.O. (1970) Thermal Comfort – Analysis and Applications in Environmental Engineering. Copenhagen: Danish Technical Press.

Hashim, Habsah (2005) Harmonious Community Living in Urban Neighbourhoods: A Case of Central Shah Alam. University Technology MARA. 8th International Conference of the Asian Planning Schools Association, University Science Malaysia (USM), 11th-14th September, Penang, Malaysia.

Koenigsberger, O.H.; Ingersoll, T.G.; Mayhew, Alan and Szokolay, S.V. (1973) Manual of Tropical Housing and Building, Part 1: Climatic Design. p. 216. London: Longman.

Reimann, G. (2000) Malaysian Weather Data (TRY) for Energy Simulations in Buildings. pp. 571-574. World Renewable Energy Congress, Brighton.

Reimann, G; Davis, M.P., and Ahmed, A.Zain (2000) Workshop Proceedings: Environment Friendly Township for Developing Countries. Universiti Putra Malaysia and University Technology MARA, January 31, Ideal Conference Centre, Universiti Putra Malaysia.

Wells, Spencer (2002) The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.


181

Part 2HONEYCOMB HOUSING

Abas, A.B. and Sugianto,I.N., (2004) Break-ins in Malaysian Houses. Current: Reflection of Society, Proceedings Silpakorn Architectural Discourse 3rd Symposium. 18th-19th March, Bangkok.

Gehl, Jan (1971) Life Between Buildings. Denmark: The Danish Architectural Press.

Ghazali, Mazlin (2005) Affordable Honeycomb Housing. Kuala Lumpur: www.tessellar.com.

Ghazali, Mazlin (2005) From Frank Lloyd Wright’s Quadruple House to Honeycomb Housing. Kuala Lumpur: www.tessellar.com

Ghazali, Mazlin; Durack, Michael J.; Davis, Mohd Peter (2005) Tessellation Planning and Honeycomb Housing. Vol. 3, pp.71-98. Kuala Lumpur: Planning Malaysia, Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners.

Ghazali, Mazlin et al. (2005) Honeycomb Housing - Reducing the Cost of Land and Infrastructure in Housing Development. Kuala Lumpur: www.tessellar.com

Mercer, Charles (1975) Living in Cities. Baltimore: Penguin.

Newman, Oscar (1996) Creating Defensible Space. US Department of Housing and Urban Studies.

Newman, Oscar (1972) Defensible Space. New York: Macmillan.

Newson, John & Elizabeth (1968) Four Years Old In An Urban Community. England:Penguin.

Radzi, Ahmad Nizam and Chen Voon Fee, Ed. (1998) Large Scale Housing and High-rise Development. Encyclopedia of Malaysia, Vol. 5 Architecture. Singapore: Archipelago Press.

Southworth, Michael; Ben-Joseph, Eran (2003) Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities. Washington: Island Press.

Part 3BUILDING THE FUTURE

Tennenbaum, Jonathan (1997) EIR Special Report, The Eurasian Land-Bridge : The New Silk Road — Locomotive for Worldwide Economic Development, p. 5. January. Washington D.C. : Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Washington D.C.

Vernadsky, V.I. (1943) Some Words About the Noösphere. pp. 16-21. Reprinted in 21st Century Science and Technology, Spring 2005, Washington D.C.

182

AcknowledgementsPART 1 - THERMAL COMFORT

Mohd Peter Davis would like to thank all the collaborators named in this book (especially my wife, Dr Zainur Alsmi Sharif) and the many hundreds of Malaysians who cheerfully took part in our experiments and surveys. Since 1989, this research has been supported largely by Government IRPA grants. Thanks are due to Universiti Putra Malaysia, especially Professor Tan Sri Dr Syed Jalalauddin Syed Salim, Professor Dato’ Dr Mohd Zohadie Bardaie, Professor Dr Abdul Salam Abdullah, Professor Dr Mohamed Ali Rajion and Professor Dr Muhamad Awang. Without their generous and principled intervention at critical stages, this research could not have been completed. The Industry has played a very supportive role. Special thanks are due to Bluescope Steel Malaysia, in particular Gary Hook, Shayne Blake and David Surveyor for donations of roofing material, sponsorship of industry seminars and for a major contribution to the production costs of this book. We thank Roxul Asia for book sponsorship and for Rockwool insulation. We also would like to thank Poly Glass Fibre Malaysia, ICI Paints, National Panasonic, and Horne Wind Turbine for donation of materials and products. For donating display booths at Housing Exhibitions, we thank Charlie Chan and Norman Nathan of SK Brothers Realty and the Housing Developers’ Association of Sarawak. We thank our publisher, the Institute of Advanced Technology, Universiti Putra Malaysia and its Director, Professor Dr. Wan Ishak Wan Ismail, for support. Many thanks are due to Sumangala Pillai of UPM Press for valuable advice and to Anniz Bajunid for layout and graphics. Their professional work greatly improved the quality and readability of the book. However, all responsibility for any errors rests with the authors.

PART 2 - HONEYCOMB HOUSING

Mazlin Ghazali would like to thank all his staff at Arkitek M. Ghazali, in particular Mohd. Erwan Othman, Teo Ling Ling, How Peak Yen, Mohd. Hairi Jamaluddin, and Norhaslinda Mohd. Nor for the illustrations in Part 2, as well as Ong Lay Poh for typing the text. He would also like to thank Michael James Durack and Erwan Sulaiman for contributing to his mathematical understanding of tessellations. Finally thanks to Malaysian Venture Capital Berhad for their grant under the ‘cradle’ programme to help develop software relating to tessellation planning.


183

About the Authors... Mohd Peter Davis, born and educated in England with a degree in Biochemistry and then a Masters in Biotechnol-ogy from Australia, has worked at Universiti Putra Malay-sia since 1989. He lives in a Thermal Comfort bungalow in Bangi with his wife, a Malaysian scientist, and two children. [[email protected]]

Mazlin Ghazali, born in Kuala Lumpur, studied at the Welsh School of Architecture, and now runs Arkitek M. Ghazali. He lives in a cul-de-sac in Ampang Jaya with his wife and five children. [[email protected]]

Nor Azian bin Nordin, born and educated first in Kelan-tan, obtained a degree in Food Science from Universiti Putra Malaysia and continued as a research assistant at the Centre for Thermal Comfort for another seven years. Now a Lecturer at Kuantan Polytechnic (POLISAS), he is married with two children. [[email protected]]

www.tessellar.com

“Upon first reading the text, I am inclined to suggest that the title of the book be changed to ‘The Sustainable Alternative to Terrace Housing’. In an era where many parties are looking at ways to achieve sustainable development, this research document may be one of the answers that those involved in human settlement issues in Malaysia are looking for. The book is written out in sim-ple logical terms that even the layman in the street would understand. Davis’ account of his research which was based on his need to live in a much cooler conditions (being a foreigner!), but with reduced energy costs, is one basic need which many of us Malay-sians also want, and yet never knew how. His discovery based on basic needs, and then set out to prove by his experimenta-tions, and told in simple terms will be very much accepted.

Book Review

The thermal cooler home is then transcribed into spatial form by Ghazali who then thought out the best way to lay out these houses within a much more conducive physical environment. Therein was born the honeycomb concept of a residential layout. Although this concept has yet to be imple-mented, I feel that it has merit in its claims to offering a better environment for residential areas vs. the common features we see eve-rywhere of ‘barrack’ style of terrace hous-ing. The honeycomb layout also claims to achieve the same if not higher density. Cer-tainly, having more spaces for greens and central nodes for tree planting would further reduce the local temperatures. For want of any better and more innovative patterns of urban housing, I think that this concept is worth further exploration as well as implementation so that the subject of the elements of sustainability of housing will be proven.”

KHAIRIAH TALHA, PAST PRESIDENT, MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS

“I suggest the title of this book be changed to

The Sustainable Alternative to Terrace Housing.”

184

“The monograph Thermal Comfort Honey-comb Housing: The Affordable Alternative to Terrace Housing, by Mohd Peter Davis, Mazlin Ghazali with Nor Azian Nordin is nei-ther a casual work, nor one to be dismissed lightly. It is a happy collaboration of two highly qualified professionals who are at-tempting to offer practical solutions to one of man’s woes — i.e., the lack of affordable and comfortable housing. We have all seen, and maybe some of us have experienced, the discomfort, even the terrors of high-density urban living. One en-counters the terrace house here in Malaysia or the high-rise structures ‘poxing’ large ur-ban areas throughout the world. We sooner or later come to the conclusion that the solution of Le Corbusier’s ‘Unité’ theory to man is impracticable, sociologically danger-ous and a waste of money — generally the taxpayers! Is there a solution to high-den-sity housing? The work reviewed, is divided into three parts: Part 1 – ‘Thermal Comfort’ by Mohd Peter Davis, Part 2 – ‘Honeycomb Housing’ by Mazlin Ghazali and the third part ‘Build-ing the Future’ by Mohd Peter Davis. ‘Part 1’ is the more technical of the parts, but, nonetheless readable in its sometimes chat-ty approach. Numerous tables and graphs are found in this section. They may become somewhat daunting to the uninitiated. But, don’t let that stop you! Things of value are not always achieved easily! The material contained within this part is meaty and offers solutions to a number of problems encoun-tered when one lives in the tropical latitudes. We are taken from the pre-eminent, ecologi-

FEDRICK W. BUNCE, M.F.A.,PhD., PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ART, INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, USA

cally suitable kampong house to ubiquitous, ecologically problematical ‘terrace house’. The focus is upon creature comfort — i.e., ‘Thermal Comfort’ — and suggested ways of achieving it. ‘Part 2 – Honeycomb Housing’ by Mazlin Ghazali is dedicated to a design solution revolving around the availability of suitable land, the high cost of such land and the cost of a single family dwelling. Planners have long searched for solutions given these pa-rameters. Malaysia has a burgeoning popu-lation and a finite amount of suitable building sites. The solution has been the unsuitable terrace house with all its inherent problems. Mazlin Ghazali has arrived at what seems to be an eminently suitable solution — i.e., the honeycomb plan. In this design he has tack-led the parameters with élan. Less space is dedicated to suitable high-density housing, if such a thing exists at all. Also, as applicable as the honeycomb solution appears to be, one wonders if it is appropriate to the varied topography of much of Malaysia. In Malaysia, the wanton destruction of forests is seconded by the pulling down, terracing or leveling of hills and ridges. Nonetheless, Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing: The Affordable Alternative to Ter-race Housing, by Mohd Peter Davis, Mazlin Ghazali with Nor Azian Nordin is a welcome addition to the problems of housing, not only in Malaysia, but wherever the ‘housing boom’ exists. Whether or not zoning authori-ties wish to apply this creative solution re-mains to be seen.”

185

“The Honeycomb

Plan seems to be an eminently suitable solution

to the terrace house with all

its inherent problems.”

Book Review

Unlike Dr. Ken Yeang’s academic books on thermal comfort, this book is written in the first person in order to set up an ‘interac-tive’ atmosphere almost conversational in tone to impart the serious scientific formu-las and principles. I would categorize this book in the same group as Professor Mario Salvadori’s structural explanations in ‘Why buildings Stand Up’ and Professor Eugene Raskin’s ‘Architecturally Speaking’ where he expounded about the important field of Architectural Psychology. Malaysia has too few books in this genre as professors in the local universities in the professional fields do not feel that writing for public awareness is a noble endeavour to create a more aware and civilized society. The same goes to professionals like engineers and architects who spend most of their time canvassing for projects and project delivery. There are too few people like Architect Mazlin Ghazali and Academic Peter Davis in this country. There are two main parts to the book. The first part is an experiential exposition by the scientist Peter Davis in his struggle to come to terms with the house of his dream in the tropics which resulted in many experiments and academic studies. The second part of the book presents Architect Mazlin Ghazali’s solution of honeycomb housing as a serious challenge to the accepted idea of terrace houses.

“The book, as far as I know, is one of the very few of its kind to explain the funda-mental principles of thermal comfort in the tropical climate to Malaysians of many back-grounds. It attempts to explain the complex scientific facts into easy to understand language of the layman. Since there are so few books around to explain some of the principles of design in architecture to the public this book deserves a thumbs up by virtue of its very existence. The book also explains much information about housing and a few important issues related to that subject matter. The work by two academ-ics and an architect is highly commendable since Malaysians have been stuck with a single alternative to affordable housing that is the terrace typology which acts more as an oven to many of us rather than a nesting place signifying coolness and security. Aside from the books by the renowned ar-chitect and academic, Dr. Ken Yeang, who attempts to explain the rationale behind his many experiments and designs of the bio-climatic high rise or skyscrapers for use as offices and apartments, there is no book to date to reach out to the public conscience on affordable housing in a thermal comfort zone. The simple rules of thumb set out by the scientist Peter Davis are useful not only to architects but also quiet easy to under-stand by those without the technical training.

PROF. DR. MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN M. RASDI, FACULTY OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT, UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

186

“This book deserves a

thumbs up... It attempts to explain the

fundamental principles of

thermal comfort in the tropical

climate in easy to understand

language for the layman.”

Book Review

In the first part of the book, Peter Davis walks us through the intricate ideas and principles of thermal comfort with graphs and tables of temperature data in order to drive home some simple facts about living in the tropics. I find much of what he says invaluable to many of the basic suspicions I have had about the effects of ventilation and the problem of attic overheating. His discov-ery of a special roofing system to lower the attic temperature and the savings that we as a nation would benefit is something that we must seriously consider. Apart from the thermal comfort knowledge, there is also a sprinkling of information on house financ-ing and costs that is useful to the layman in their first purchase of a house. The second part is about how Architect Mazlin Ghazali discovered the honeycomb house idea. The author went through great pains rationalizing the form of the honey-comb shapes but I believe this may have been a bit too much. It would have been bet-ter if the author had simply stated that there are many forms that can serve as an alterna-tive to the terrace house concept. I am not convinced that the honeycomb shape is the best for Malaysian housing but it is certainly a strong and novel way to tackle various is-sues such as clean and defensible spaces. The second part seems more like an ex-tended ‘tourist brochure’ but its content

serves some purpose of conforming to the public issues about design and may show a housing that actually has a community and a center. As a designer, I can appreciate the proposal but also as a designer I can see the possibilities of other forms of buildings as alternative to the terrace house. Anyway, for me, terrace houses has yet to be exhausted in their designs to address many issues such as privacy violations, cultural needs, crime and child safety. Here at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, we are experimenting with various terrace house forms that may address the said needs. To sum up, I must give my highest recom-mendation that this book be read by all es-pecially by policy makers, developers and architects. It should also be taken up by any-one who has yet to or already owns a house so that they can benefit from the many tips and ideas presented in the book. Once again I applaud the efforts of both scientists and architect for their vision and crusade. Lastly, for those who may dismiss the book as a mere sales pitch, I must remind them that the book could even be considered as a badly needed lifeline to our ailing housing condition. If there ever was a time for us to re-look and rethink our housing policies and architecture, all I can say is… we’re overdue for an overhaul.”

187

“I must give my highest

recommendation to this book...It should be read by all

policy makers, developers and

architects...and by anyone

who has yet to or already owns a

house.”

“A biologist and his multi-disciplinary team of architects and engineers use surveys, market analyses, onsite measurements and computer simulations to develop an improved, energy efficient and environmentally friendly housing standard that cater well to the Malaysian market demands with respect to functionality, spatial layout, thermal comfort and costing.”

— GREGERS REIMANN, CONSULTANT, INTERNATIONAL ENERGY NETWORK (IEN), DENMARK/MALAYSIA

“When I was first told about Honeycomb Housing I was a little apprehensive. As I become more exposed to the research behind the idea and as I hear the testimony of developers who believe that the system will result in savings in land and innovation in house design, I have no hesitation in recommending the Honeycomb Housing scheme. It is bound to add value to a housing development project. I am pleased to note that the Sarawak Government will be the first State Government in Malaysia to embrace Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing in their State Housing Projects.”

— CHARLIE CHAN, CEO, S.K.BROTHERS GROUP OF COMPANIES

“I have been associated with this project from the early stage of its development and I am very happy to note that by leaps and bound the project is now being seriously considered and is reaching the implementation stage. In my mind Honeycomb Housing will be the answer to the ‘greening of the desert land’ and ‘a cool home for the Arab World’. I will endeavor to make a special effort to recommend the Cool Honeycomb scheme to Governments in the Middle East and the Gulf Region for its effective implementation.”

— B. NORMAN NATHAN, GOODWILL AMBASSADOR, BAHRAIN MALAYSIA INTERNATIONAL (BMI)

188

What we think...

“If adopted enthusiastically by the Malaysian Government and Developers, Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing can become world class.”

— TAN SRI RAMON NAVARATNAM

vvvvv

“This book is the result of many years of patient research at Universiti Putra Malaysia in collaboration with industries. Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing is a novel invention now poised to spread rapidly throughout Malaysia, improving the way we live and opening up great opportunities for the Malaysian Housing Industry, especially in building towns and cities for other developing countries.”— PROFESSOR DATO’ DR. MOHD. ZOHADIE BARDAIE, VICE CHANCELLOR,

UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA (2001-2005)

“I saw the beautiful book on the new Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing concept. It certainly looks like it is set to go in a big way.”

— MIKE BILLINGTON, ASIA DESK, EXECUTIVE INTELLIGENCE REVIEW, WASHINGTON D.C.

“Your book is an inspiring story of how human creativity and deter-mination can solve a problem that will change the lives of many people for the better. As ‘honeycomb housing’ becomes a reality in Sarawak, I think the idea will catch on, to build comfortable housing around the world — and to tackle other very solvable development challenges.”

— MARJORIE MAZEL HECHT, MANAGING DIRECTOR, 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

“Many of us have the wonderful experience of living in cool kampong or village houses especially those with attap roofs. Why can’t we have cool dwellings without air-conditioning? … This book has cleverly used simple science to explain the effect of sunlight on houses, and the use of technology to improve thermal comfort and cost effectiveness. The novel and innovative honeycomb housing arrangement will achieve better community living, improved neighbourliness and security.”

— IR. DR. GUE SEE SEW, PAST PRESIDENT, THE INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERS, MALAYSIA

HEAD COMMISSIONER, ASEAN ENGINEERS REGISTER (2003 – 2006)

www.tessellar.com

vvvvvvvvvv

“Housing should, like the new Honeycomb Housing Concept, emphasise the need for community living and enable people to have a feeling of neighbourliness.”

— PEHIN SRI DR HJ ABDUL TAIB MAHMUD, CHIEF MINISTER OF SARAWAKTHE BORNEO POST, 19 JULY 2005

The Malaysian outdoor temperature rarely reaches 350C yet the roof space in our concrete houses can reach 490C overheating all the living spaces… and causing misery to millions.This book tells the story of how researchers at Universiti Putra Malaysia joined later by a practicing architect designed a new generation of houses fea-turing Thermal Comfort, which can keep houses and apartments acceptably cool... without air-conditioning. They went on to tackle the ‘urban heat island effect’ with the Honeycomb concept: a stunningly simple invention for subdividing land into hexagons which interlock like the bees’ honeycomb. Hexagonal neighbourhoods with affordable cluster houses facing a small park planted with giant shady trees now interconnect to form cool green suburbs with winding no-through roads, safe once again for small children… Result: a modern scientific way to recreate Lat’s idyllic kampong… bringing nature back into dense urban areas!

“Developers should seriously look at the proposition presented by Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing. This is certainly a step in the right direction as far as promoting sustainable housing development is concerned!”

— DATUK EDDY CHEN LOK LOI, GROUP MANAGING DIRECTOR METRO KAJANG HOLDINGS BERHAD,IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT, REAL ESTATE HOUSING DEVELOPERS’ ASSOCIATION MALAYSIA

Malaysia has two million overheated terrace housesKuala Lumpur is now a serious ‘Urban Heat Island’

There has to be a better way…

“The Sarawak Ministry of Housing will be introducing the Thermal Comfort Honeycomb concept in the Ninth Malaysia Plan.”

— DATO SRI ABANG HJ ABDUL RAHMAN ZOHARI TUN ABANG HJ OPENG, SARAWAK MINISTER OF HOUSING

“An environmental breakthrough… starting from energy efficient and land efficient hexagonal housing cells this book shows how new Honeycomb suburbs, towns and even cities can be built up… but without destroying the environment in the process.”

— MUHAMAD AWANG, PhD., PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA, LANGKAWI AWARD WINNER (2000)

9 789833 455386

ISBN 983-3455-38-7

INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI MAJUINSTITUTE OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

part 3 - building the future

Documents