Sumita 2

3 METHODOLOGY

Methodology

45

3.1 Introduction

Figure 3.1 An overall diagram of the research process

In their book Architectural Research Methods, Groat and Wang discuss the

use of a diagrammatic structure which places the literature review in relation

to the overall research process.89Figure 3.1 illustrates the research process

that forms this thesis. The diagrammatic described by Groat and Wang is as

follows:

“The researcher looks in two directions. On one hand there is the question

being pursued; on the other there is the audience that must ultimately receive

the research results. The research question is accessed by means of

research strategies and tactics. The arrows drawn from the literature to the

various junctures of the research process indicate literature review; it is

evident that literature review contributes to every aspect of the process. The

research result relates to the literature by expanding it. The process is a

dynamic one: The relationship between the topic of inquiry, the actions taken

to access it, and the researcher’s own thinking is an ever-changing reality.”90

89 Groat, L & Wang, D 2002, Architectural Research Methods, John Wiley & Sons, USA, pp.47-48.90 Ibid.

Methodology

46

Figure 3.2 outlines the research methodology derived from the research

process shown in Figure 3.1. The scope of data studied for this project was

sourced from various documents and publications, as well as some empirical

observations. In order to address the problem statement more efficiently, it

was intended for the selected research methods to contribute towards the

gaps of knowledge in regards to the reasons behind the lack of

environmentally sustainable elements in Malaysia’s terraced housing

developments. The study is focused on housing developments completed or

scheduled for completion between 2006 and 2010.

Figure 3.2 Outline of research methodology

The following methodologies employ a qualitative and quantitative approach,

to suit the range of gathered data:

a) A questionnaire was created to obtain personal opinions and

perceptions of the participants on the topic of terraced housing design

in Malaysia with a focus on environmental sustainability. Further

details are available in section 3.2.

Methodology

47

b) Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the willing participants

in the form of further discussions on the responses given in the

questionnaire. Further details are available in section 3.3.

c) Categories of case studies were formed to group the various housing

projects that were looked at in order to examine the terraced housing

in Malaysia. The categories consist of typical terraced housing

developments, terraced housing developments purporting to adopt

environmentally sustainable elements and alternatives to the current

form of terraced housing. Further details are available in section 3.4.

The questionnaire and interviews are a qualitative approach as the outcome

consists of identifying values and perspectives of the participants which are

subjective and would not be possible via a quantitative approach. However,

the statistics compiled from the questionnaire responses are quantifiable, and

a quantitative approach is also used to analyse images and diagrams which

are a key element of the case studies. The research outcome is the result of

a combined analysis of the data obtained from using both qualitative and

quantitative methods.

The use of both a qualitative and quantitative approach via the data collection

and analysis process involving the literature review, questionnaire, interviews

and case studies, develops a triangulation in the method. Defined as data

collection using multiple methods such as observation, interviewing and

record review, and subsequent examination of the data for congruence

across methods, triangulation is a technique used to achieve

comprehensiveness in data collection.91 Fellows and Liu state that as

triangulated studies employ two or more research techniques, qualitative and

quantitative approaches may be employed to reduce the disadvantages of

each individual approach, whilst gaining the advantages of each as well as

the combination which provides a multi-dimensional view of the subject.92

91 Downs, F 1999, Readings in Research Methodology, 2nd edn, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp.55. 92 Fellows, R & Liu, A 2008, Research Methods for Construction, 3rd edn, Wiley-Blackwell, United Kingdom, pp.28.

Methodology

48

3.2 Questionnaire

The questionnaire was developed based on the research aim, which is to

determine the feasibility of successfully introducing environmentally

sustainable attributes into future housing developments for Malaysia’s

masses. This questionnaire was constructed upon reference to a

questionnaire on sustainable building, design and construction, by

M.Landman, as the format was suitable and time constraints prevented the

development of a better suited format93.

The Plain Language Statement and Consent Form94 for the participants

stated that the purpose of the questionnaire was to summarise the current

significance of environmentally sustainable design in Malaysian mass

residential development. The participants were informed that they were

invited to participate as their views on environmentally sustainable design in

relation to Malaysia’s terraced houses would aid in drawing a conclusion on

the feasibility of introducing the green factor into housing for the masses.

The process of completing the questionnaire involved reading a Fact Sheet

attached at the beginning, briefly defining sustainable building and

highlighting the status of the terraced house in the Malaysian residential

statistical context. A complete questionnaire set provided to all participants,

including the Fact Sheet is attached as Appendix 3.

The participants of this questionnaire were identified solely by their

profession or status in relation to Malaysia’s housing scene. The three main

target groups were developers, architects and home owners. A letter of

invitation to participate in the questionnaire and interview was sent out to

individuals from the various target groups.95

93 Landman,M, Questionnaire on Sustainable Building Design, retrieved 13 November 2007, <http://www.egret.net/sbquestionnaire.htm> 94 Refer to Appendix 3 for Plain Language Statement & Consent Form. 95 Refer to Appendix 4 for Letter of Invitation.

Methodology

49

Target Groups No. of individuals contacted

No. of responses

Developers 7 2

Architects / Interior

Architects

10 7

Home Owners 10 7

Others 8 2

Total 35 18

Table 3.1 Questionnaire target groups and number of responses received96

8 of the 17 participants filled in the questionnaire in the author’s presence.

The remaining 9 participants submitted their responses via mail and e-mail.

Developer6%

Home Owner41%Architect

41%

Other12%

Figure 3.3 Percentage breakdown of participants

The participants are all Malaysians, mainly from Kuala Lumpur. The Architect

category also includes Interior Architects. The industry professionals

contacted were identified based on their involvement with residential projects.

The intention was to obtain a similar number of participants representing

each category.

Home Owners and Architects were easiest to access, each representing 41%

of the participants. 12% of the participants are represented by Others, which

consist of individuals related to the construction industry via an academic

background. Developers are least represented, taking up only 6%.

96 Due to unforeseen circumstances prior to the questionnaire responses being tabled, a questionnaire from one developer was lost and unable to be replaced, resulting in a total of 17 responses.

Methodology

50

Question 1 aimed to gauge the level of familiarity of the participants on the

subject of environmentally sustainable design prior to reading the attached

Fact Sheet. This question would aid in identifying the current significance of

sustainable building issues in the context of Malaysian housing.

Question 2 aimed to obtain the participants’ viewpoint on the importance of

having housing estates adopt environmentally sustainable principles into the

design and construction phase.

Question 3’s intention was to obtain some insight on the mindset of the

participants on the factors that influenced the adoption of sustainable

principles.

Questions 4 to 6 sought a response on the issue in relation to higher

authority. These questions would help identify the role of guidelines and laws

affecting the environmentally sustainable elements of housing.

Question 7 allowed for the participants to rate the current housing estates,

enabling a conclusion to be made on the factors that appear to be controlling

the outcomes of the present housing developments.

Questions 8 to 11 aimed to identify the significance of the various groups

involved in Malaysia’s housing scene, in relation to the adoption of

environmentally sustainable attributes into future housing developments for

the masses.

With this research task, a quantitative approach is applied to the data

collection and analysis of the questionnaire which involves making

measurements.97 Interval data and ordinal data, both quantitative in nature

are obtained from parts of the questionnaire. Interval data involves the

measurement of variables on an independent scale with equal units of

97 Fellows, R & Liu, A 2008, Research Methods for Construction, 3rd edn, Wiley-Blackwell, United Kingdom, pp.97.

Methodology

51

measurement98, as reflected in the questionnaire by Question 8. Ordinal data

is used as a means of assigning order or ranks to a set of data99, as reflected

in the questionnaire by Question 3.

3.3 Interviews

The interview involved the participants expressing their thoughts and

opinions on the areas covered by the questionnaire. The semi-structured

nature of this interview section resulted in participants occasionally getting

side tracked with the content of their responses. Notes were taken by the

author documenting the responses from the participants.

From the range of the participants who responded to the questionnaire, those

who were willing to continue with the semi-structured interviews were all

architects. From the 8 respondents who filled in the questionnaires in the

author’s presence, only 3 proceeded with the interview.

3.4 Case Studies

Robert Yin defines a case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a

contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context especially when the

boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.”100 The

selection of the following case studies was driven by the content of the

literature review:

Category 1 – Typical terraced housing

Case Study 1 - Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Case Study 2 - Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Case Study 3 - Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses

98 Holt, G 1998, A guide to successful dissertation study for students of the built environment, 2nd edn, The Built Environment Research Unit, United Kingdom, pp.101. 99 Ibid. 100 Yin, RK 2003, Case Study Research, 3rd edn, Sage Publications, United Kingdom, pp.13.

Methodology

52

Category 2 – Connecting with the environment

Case Study 4 - 20 Trees 3 Storey Terraced Houses

Category 3 – Alternative Options

Case Study 5 - Affordable ‘Idaman’ Homes – Honeycomb Housing Concept

Case Study 6 - The Raised Floor Prototype

All the case studies, with an exception of Case Study 6 have been completed

or are scheduled for completion in this 5 year bracket : 2006 – 2010.

Category 1 represents a range of typical double storey terraced houses

catering for the lower and higher ends of the Malaysian housing market.

Category 2 represents a housing development promoting a connection of the

house with the surrounding natural environment. Category 3 represents

alternative housing concepts, breaking away from the existing Malaysian

terraced house typology, while matching its density levels.

The information obtained for these case studies is what is made available to

the general public via published media, sections sourced from the architect or

developer and/or developers show units.

Case Study Data Sources

1 Site Visit, Home Owners Drawings, Developer’s website

2 Developer’s website, Other websites

3 Developer’s website, Other websites

4Site Visit, Developer’s Sales Brochure, Developer’s website, Other websites,

Newspaper articles

5Interview with Architect, Architect’s website, Developer’s website, Other

websites, Newspaper articles

6 Published papers, Websites, Newspaper articles

Table 3.2 Data sources for case studies

The case studies are of a linear-analytic structure and are partly descriptive

and partly explanatory.101 The key question the case studies will try to answer

101 Yin, RK 2003, Case Study Research, 3rd edn, Sage Publications, United Kingdom, pp.152.

Methodology

53

are how the design of the house / housing development affects the end-user

and environment.

3.5 Analysis of Data

With the questionnaires, the tabled responses are analysed based on the

content of the response, quantities of responses as well as the type of

participant. Several questions use itemised rating scales to obtain a

measurement of attitudes.102 These rating scales provide interval data as

numbers are allocated to each response, allowing for an easy and versatile

analysis of the data.103

The interview responses have been edited and omitted where they

overlapped with the responses given in the questionnaire, resulting in a

summary of key points made by the 3 participants. This summary

supplements the results obtained from the questionnaire responses.

The case studies fall within the general framework of correlational research

as causal-comparative studies. Causal-comparative studies define the case

studies as comparable physical environments have been selected prior to the

collection of data on a variety of relevant variables.104 Groat and Wang state

that “the purpose of selecting comparable examples is to isolate the factor(s)

that could reveal a ‘cause’ for significant differences in the levels of measure

variables.”105 The data representing each house put forward as a case study

has been analysed under the following sections:

Greenery Areas in Malaysia which are generally turned into housing developments vary

from natural rainforests and wetlands to agricultural plantations and former

102 Brace, I 2004, Questionnaire Design, Kogan Page, United Kingdom, pp.79. 103 Ibid. 104 Groat, L & Wang, D 2002, Architectural Research Methods, John Wiley & Sons, USA, pp.215. 105 Ibid.

Methodology

54

mining grounds. This section looks at the condition of the natural

environment before and after the site has been developed.

Spatial Organisation Said, Shaminan and Salleh from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia’s Department

of Architecture, point out in the their paper on terraced housing that terraced

houses are generally single or double storey, but a high demand for such

housing has brought about 2 and a half and three storey versions since

1991.106 The case studies are mostly double storey terraced houses.

These houses generally comprise 5 rooms, 3 bathrooms, a living area, dining

area, kitchen, front yard and back yard. The front yard typically contains a car

porch and a garden. The back yard is typically used for laundry, outdoor

storage and in most cases an extension of the kitchen. This section of the

analysis examines the spatial allocations and adjacencies of each house

from a utilitarian perspective.

Thermal Comfort “Thermal comfort is subjective. It is said to exist where 80% of those persons

exposed to an environment indicate that it is ‘comfortable’ on the following

scale : cold – cool – comfortable – warm – hot.”107 M.P Davis, a visiting

scientist at the Universiti Putra Malaysia, concludes that the thermal comfort

zone for Malaysia is within 24 to 28 degrees Celcius, based on simple

experiments conducted on the university grounds.108 This section of the

analysis estimates how the design and building materials of the houses affect

the levels of thermal comfort in the interior spaces.

Energy Consumption M.P.Davis states that the ceiling fan commonly used in all terraced houses,

does not cool a room but creates an artificial wind which makes us feel 2

106 Said, I, Shahminan, R & Salleh, R, Reintroduction of Ventilation Components for Terrace Houses in Malaysia,Department of Architecture, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, retrieved 14 August 2008, <http://www.arch.hawaii.edu/site/Events/Symposia/EW99/pdfs/said.pdf > 107 Davis, MP, Ghazali, M & Nordin, NA 2006, Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, pp.27. 108 Ibid.

Methodology

55

degrees Celcius cooler by evaporating moisture on the skin, thus enabling

tolerance towards a 30 degree Celcius room temperature.109 With a large

number of the general urban population working in indoor environments, the

daily exposure to air-conditioned interiors has caused the reliance on air-

conditioned interiors to increase. This is possibly a main reason behind the

increasing presence of air-conditioning units in terraced houses.

The ceiling fan generally consumes 1/10th of a wall-mounted air-conditioning

units wattage (depending on the models). Reducing the need for air-

conditioning units and maximising the use of available natural light in a house

will significantly reduce levels of energy consumption. This section of the

analysis estimates how the design and building materials of the houses affect

the energy consumption levels of the occupants in regards to cooling and

lighting.

The following chapter presents the results of the data analysis.

109 Davis, MP, Ghazali, M & Nordin, NA 2006, Thermal Comfort Honeycomb Housing, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, pp.30.

4 RESULTS

Results

57

4.1 Results : Questionnaire

1. How familiar were you on the subject of environmentally sustainable design prior to reading the attached fact sheet?

Very Somewhat Barely Not at all

Developer 1 - - -

Home Owner 1 4 2 -

Architect 1 5 1 -

Other 1 1 - -

Number of Participants 4 10 3 0

Table 4.1 Response to Question 1

Very24%

Somewhat58%

Barely18%

Not at all0%

Figure 4.1 Percentage breakdown of response to Question 1

58% of the participants claim to be somewhat familiar. With 41% of the

participants represented by Architects, this outcome is a fairly predictable

one. There was however one architect who responded with being barely

familiar. The percentage of participants who are very familiar and barely

familiar with the subject only differ by 6%.

Having an equal number of participants represent each category would have

allowed for a comparison to be done based on the participants profession.

With no participants claiming to know nothing at all on the subject, I believe

an issue which could potentially affect the accuracy of the responses is that

Results

58

the participants may have responded based on what they think they should

know, as opposed to what they actually know.

2. Should future housing estates aimed at the masses, adopt environmentally sustainable principles into the design and construction phase?

Yes No

Developer (D) 1 -

Architect (A) 7 -

Home Owner (H) 7 -

Other (O) 2 -

Number of Participants 17 0

Why? 1. To help to play a part in the world to minimise global warming

2. We should adopt a more responsible response to the environment in order to safeguard the future of our livelihood on this planet.

3. With climatic changes (due to global warming), there is an increase of energy used to cool houses down. More clients are looking for alternatives to save electricity costs.

4. Being an architect who is involved in hill development, I view environmental resources very seriously or the lack of care given to the environment currently.

5. A considerably large amount of homes built in the country are designed for the masses and have a large impact on the land in the country.

6. Adopting sustainable environmental conscious ideas and materializing it in general are appropriate for most massing project development not only specifically for housing estate alone. A development is ought to consume less energy, however in most circumstances, in order to attain a complete self-sustainable development, the upfront cost tends to be on the high-side.

7. They are the greatest contributors to either

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Results

59

sustainable or non-sustainable practices, which gives the largest impact in terms of volume.

8. Housing for the masses need enormous amounts of resources and use up a lot of land which will have a great impacts on all environmental issues (whether negatively or positively) and eventually affect the well-being of the whole country.

9. Our environment is depleting by the day. We must do our part to sustain livability on Earth.

10. We need to be cognisant of the environmental impact on our lives & take care of it.

11. Play their part in protecting the environment.

12. It will mark a permanent departure from the traditional design methods which are not environmentally friendly & for the betterment of future generations.

13. Reduce global warming.

14. Reduce environmental impact such as encouraging public transport use and reducing power usage for cooling/heating.

15. N/A

16. Environmental sustainability may be new to Malaysia, but the concept has been practiced widely in many countries such as UK, US and I believe Australia has their share in improving their construction in terms of better sustainability. Malaysia should not be left behind in this global interest. Apart from protecting the environment, sustainable principles will benefit the social and economic as well, in longer term.

17. Rapid depletion of natural resources due to factors like greedy developers; at the expense of environment.

D

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

O

O


The accuracy of the responses to this question may be affected as the

participants may have been obliged to answer ‘Yes’ based on the nature of

Results

60

this questionnaire. The aim of the second half of this question was to

discourage biased responses.

The various responses do have a slight overlay which can be summarized

with the following:

(i) the need to protect and be responsible towards the condition of the

environment.

- though generic, this response represents 46% of the participants.

(ii) reducing the impact of global warming.

- though this does not relate directly to the question, it is a

response given by one Architect and one Home Owner.

(iii) reducing levels of energy consumption.

- this response is given by 2 Architects and 1 Home Owner,

representing 18% of the participants.

(iv) acknowledging that the scale of housing estates for the masses will

significantly contribute to the condition of the environment.

- this response is given by 2 Architects and 1 Developer,

representing 18% of the participants.

3. Based on the question above (Q2), rank the influence of the following factors: Construction Costs, End-user comfort, Aesthetics, Maintenance Costs.

Scale Frequency Analysis

1 2 3 4 < 2.5 > 2.5

Factors

Number of Participants % %

Rank

Construction Costs 10 2 2 3 71 29 1

End-user comfort 6 5 5 1 65 35 2

Maintenance Costs 0 8 5 4 47 53 3

Aesthetics 1 2 5 9 18 82 4


The ranking results represent the influence of the factors on the adoption of

environmentally sustainable principles into the design and construction phase

of future housing estates for the general public. Based on Table 4.3,

Results

61

Construction Costs is the most influential factor and Aesthetics is the least

influential factor.

Construction Costs ranked as Most Influential factor

Aesthetics ranked as Least Influential factor

Developer 1 -

Architect 2 5

Home Owner 5 4

Other 2 -


Table 4.4 Further Breakdown of Response to Question 3

The majority of participants who nominated Construction Costs as the most

influential factor are Home Owners. A total of 5 out of 7 participants from the

Architect category, and 4 out of 7 participants from the Home Owner

category nominated Aesthetics as the least influential factor.

4. Would you support the incorporation of environmentally sustainable principles for residential buildings into the current Uniform Building By-Laws?

Yes No

Developer (D) 1 -

Architect (A) 6 1

Home Owner (H) 7 -

Other (O) 2 -

Number of Participant

s16 1

Percentage 94% 6%

Why? 1. It is a topic I would want the Malaysian by-laws to consider and enforce. There is a lot of talk about it, but nothing has

A17. Will prefer a

different set of documents which

A

Results

62

been pushed forward.

2. To force change.

3. Inclusion of this in the UBBL (Uniform Building By-laws) will make owners, architects and developers contribute towards creating a sustainable environment. Perhaps the local authority/government can encourage developers by giving tax exemptions if they adopt green building concepts, hence creating more awareness among the public.

4. Because the environmentally sustainable principles would protect the environment as the current by-laws only protect the users.

5. Regulate and govern the use of the term and control the use of the types of materials used.

6. Responsibility and sense of right and wrong.

7. This will force all developers, designers & builders to conform to sustainable principles in the interest of the whole community.

8. We have to play our part as home owners if we are to see viable changes in restoring our environment. Home owners are the first port of call to make this happen.

9. Put your money where your mouth is.

10. Personal contribution towards the environments protection.

11. Because people are expected to follow the laws & thus change mind-sets.

12. Can implement objectives.

13. To make it mandatory for developers to incorporate said principles in their projects.

14. This can make sure all new application of building approval fulfill the environmental sustainable requirements.

15. The lack of enforcement is the major

A

A

A

A

A

D

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

acts as a guideline only. Not a set of laws. As environmental sustainable principles should also be flexible to enable creativity, not inflexible like a set of laws.

Results

63

setback for sustainable construction implementation. By incorporating this principle in the by-laws, it will make it regulatory for the builders to incorporate this principle in their projects.

16. Currently there exist; eg. public hearing. But very minimal. Should also incorporate into construction to ensure developers follow.

O

O





discourage biased responses.

The 94% of ‘Yes’ responses do have a slight overlay which is the perception

that laws would enforce change that was necessary in regards to

environmental sustainability. This perception is shared by 69% of the

participants who answered ‘Yes’, with the majority represented by the

Architect category.

The 1 participant who responded with a ‘No’ is an architect who feels that

laws are restrictive and would be more comfortable with an official set of

guidelines.

5. Would you support a local Green Building Council which had a mission to promote

the adoption of environmentally sustainable principles into mainstream design, construction and operation of buildings?

Yes No

Developer (D) 1 -

Architect (A) 7 -

HomeOwner (H) 6 1

Results

64

Other (O) 2 -


Percentage 94% 6%

Why? 1. Putting theory into action.

2. To benefit the environment and the population.

3. Having guidelines would allow architects who want to design green buildings have a model or prototype as a reference.

4. Because you need a group who can constantly re-interpret the protections & measures needed for our ever changing environment.

5. There is a need for a strong body to work with relevant bodies such as PAM on this matter.

6. Responsibility and sense of right and wrong. To be able to share my opinion too.

7. Only if qualified people are on the council, and their decision shall not be final. Check and balances are essential.

8. People first need to be educated on environmentally sustainable principles, and a Green Building Council lends credibility and emphasizes the urgency for their application.

9. The council acts as the middle man between the home owners & government, therefore their role is of utmost importance.

10. Becomes part and parcel of development. As the unleaded fuel campaign has achieved its aims.

11. Personal contribution towards the environments protection.

12. To secure environmental consciousness at decision making levels.

13. As a form of education.

14. The current ministry department in

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

D

H

H

H

H

H

H

1. Can be incorporated in existing framework.

H

Results

65

charge should be more proactive not only at policy level but also at implementation level.

15. The lack of enforcement is the major setback for sustainable construction implementation. By incorporating this principle in the by-laws, it will make it regulatory for the builders to incorporate this principle in their projects.

16. A comprehensive adoption will increase the rate of success. Citizens will benefit better living with reduced impact to the environment.

O

O





discourage biased responses.The 94% of ‘Yes’ responses do have a slight

overlay which can be summarised with the following:

(i) the presence of the council would provide a sense of guidance and

authority in a positive manner.

- this response, with the majority from the Architect category

represents 37.5% of the participants who answered ‘Yes’.

(ii) the council would aid in contributing towards the protection and

preservation of the environment.

- this response represents 25% of the participants who answered

‘Yes’.

(iii) the role of an educator on the subject of environmental

sustainability would be created for professionals and the general

public.

- this response is given by 1 Developer and 1 Home Owner,

representing 12.5% of the participants who answered ‘Yes’.

The 1 participant who responded with a ‘No’ is a home owner who feels that

a green building council should be part of the existing local government

authorities.

Results

66

6. Based on the questions above(Q4+Q5), rank the following factors in order of importance: A Healthy Surrounding Environment, Building Aesthetics, Health of

Building Occupant, Comfort of Building Occupant, Preservation of the Environment for Future Generations.


1 2 3 4 5 < +3 > +3

Factors

Number of Participants

% %

Rank

Health of Building Occupant 8 3 6 0 0 100 0 1

A Healthy Surrounding Environment

5 7 4 1 0 94 29 2

Preservation of the Environment for

Future Generations

3 5 3 5 1 65 53 3

Comfort of Building Occupant 1 2 4 9 1 41 82 4

Building Aesthetics 0 0 0 2 15 0 100 5


The ranking results represent the importance of the listed factors in relation

to the adoption of environmentally sustainable principles into the design and

construction phase of future buildings via authoritative bodies. Based on

Table 4.7, Health of Building Occupant is seen as the most important factor

and Building Aesthetics is seen as the least important factor. The Health of

Building Occupant factor in this question is meant to represent physical

health.

Health of Building Occupant ranked as Most Important

factor

Building Aesthetics ranked as Least Important factor

Developer 1 -

Architect 3 6

Home Owner 3 7

Results

67

Other 1 2



7. Based on current housing estates, how would you rank the following factors in

order of importance : Construction Costs, Aesthetics, Thermal Comfort, Efficient space utilisation.


1 2 3 4 < 2.5 > 2.5

Factors

Number of Participants % %

Rank

Efficient Space Utilisation 5 8 4 0 76 24 1

Construction Costs 9 3 5 0 71 29 2

Thermal Comfort 1 5 4 7 35 65 3

Aesthetics 2 1 4 10 18 82 4


The ranking results represent the importance of the listed factors based on

the participants’ perception of current housing estates. Based on Table 4.9,

Efficient Space Utilisation is ranked as the most important factor and

Aesthetics is ranked as the least important factor.

Results

68

Efficient Space Utilisation ranked as Most Important factor

ConstructionCosts ranked as Most Important

factor

Aesthetics ranked as Least Important factor

Developer - - - -

Architect 2 3 4 4

HomeOwner 3 3 3 5

Other - 2 2 1


5 ( scale rank: 1)

8 ( scale rank: 2)

9 ( scale rank: 1)

10 ( scale rank: 4)


There is another interpretation that would make Construction Costs the most

important factor. This interpretation is derived by comparing the responses

under ranking number 1, whereby the most amount of responses, totaling at

9, fall under the Construction Costs factor. In terms of the least important

factor, this method still tallies with the result of Table 4.10 as the most

amount of responses under ranking number 4 fall under the Aesthetics factor.

The Home Owner category represents the majority of participants who

nominated Efficient Space Utilisation as the most important factor, and the

Architect category represents the majority of participants who nominated

Construction Costs as the most important factor.

The accuracy of the responses to questions 8-10 may be affected as the

participants may have been obliged to answer at the higher end of the scale

based on the nature of this questionnaire.

Results

69

8. How important do you think it is for us to reduce our impact on the environment and live more sustainably?


1 2 3 4 5 < 3 > 3

Question


% %

How important do you think it is for us to reduce our impact on the environment and live more sustainably?

0 0 0 2 15 0 100

Note : 1 = Not important 5 = Very important


On the scale of 1 to 5 with 1 representing ‘Not important’ and 5 representing

‘Very important’, the Frequency Analysis shows that the majority of the

participants acknowledge the importance of reducing our impact on the

environment and adopting a more sustainable lifestyle. Another interpretation

of Table 4.11 shows that 88% of the participants nominated number 5 and

12% nominated number 4.The 2 who ranked ‘4’ consisted of 1 Architect and

1 Home Owner.

9. How viable is it to adopt environmentally sustainable principles into the design and

construction phase of new homes, where:


1 2 3 4 5 < 3 > 3

Question


% %

Rank

(a) the materials, fixtures and fittings have positive environmental outcomes

0 1 3 6 7 6 76 2

(b) the ongoing maintenance and operating costs are minimised

0 0 7 6 4 0 59 3

(c) the energy costs are reduced 0 0 3 8 6 0 82 1

Note : 1 = Not viable 5 = Very viable


Results

70

Question 9 (a) Question 9 (b) Question 9 (c)

Developer - 1 1

Architect 3 3 3

Home Owner 3 3 3

Other 1 - 1

Number of Participants 7 7 8

Majority preference scale rank: 5 scale rank: 3 scale rank: 4


For Question 9a, on the scale of 1 to 5 with 1 representing ‘Not viable’ and 5

representing ‘Very viable’, 41% of the participants nominated 5, 35%

nominated 4, 18% nominated 3 and 6% nominated 2. The Frequency

Analysis column indicates that 76% of the participants deem it viable for

materials, fixtures and fittings with positive environmental outcomes to be

specified in future homes.

For Question 9b, 24% of the participants nominated 5, 35% nominated 4 and

41% nominated 3. The Frequency Analysis column indicates that 59% of the

participants deem it viable for environmentally sustainable principles to be

adopted into the design and construction phase of new homes, where it

results in minimising the ongoing maintenance and operating costs of the

homes.

For question 9c, 35% of the participants nominated 5, 47% nominated 4 and


participants deem it viable for environmentally sustainable principles to be

adopted into the design and construction phase of new homes, where it

results in minimising the energy consumption costs of the homes.

Based on the final ranking column, the most viable factor of the three

presented is the reduction of energy costs.

Results

71

10. How significant is a developer’s role in shaping the market demands for the future?


1 2 3 4 5 < 3 > 3

Question


% %

How significant is a developer’s role in shaping the market demands for the future?

0 0 1 5 11 0 94

Note : 1 = Not significant 5 = Very significant


On the scale of 1 to 5 with 1 representing ‘Not significant’ and 5 representing

‘Very significant’, 65% of the participants nominated 5, 29% nominated 4 and


participants believe that developers play a significant role in shaping the

market demands for the future.

Scale Rank: 3 Scale Rank: 4 Scale Rank: 5

Developer - - 1

Architect - 2 5

Home Owner 1 3 3

Other - - 2

Number of Participants 1 5 11

Table 4.15 Breakdown of Response to Question 10

Results

72

11. What are the key factors that would encourage the adoption of environmentally sustainable principles into the design and construction phase of homes?

Factors Number of Participants Percentage

i. An increased level of awareness among clients on the subject

13 76%

ii. An increased level of awareness among industry professionals on the subject

11 65%

iii. Easily accessible/affordable training/education in sustainable design/construction

5 29%

iv. Support from government bodies

[ linked to Q11(a) ]

14 82%

v. Other: 1. Increasing awareness from the public & suppliers on environmentally sustainable principles.

2. An increased level of awareness among the end-users who will eventually dictate the marketability of the houses/housing which are environmentally sustainable.

A

D

Note : A = Architect D = Developer


11 - i 11 - ii 11 - iii 11 - iv 11 - v

Developer 1 1 1 1 1

Architect 5 4 2 5 1

HomeOwner

5 4 1 6 -

Other 2 2 1 2 -

Number of Participants 13 11 5 14 2


Results

73

The factors that would encourage the adoption of environmentally

sustainable principles into the design and construction phase of homes

ranked in order of popularity are:

1. Support from government bodies.

2. An increased level of awareness among clients on the subject.

3. An increased level of awareness among industry professionals on the

subject.

4. Easily accessible/affordable training/education in sustainable

design/construction.

5. Other factors:

i. Increasing the awareness of the public and product/service suppliers for the

construction industry.

ii. Increasing the awareness of the end-users who will eventually dictate the

marketability of environmentally sustainable housing.

11. (a) What form of support should the government provide?

1. A Provide booklets, research and training to architects and designers.

2. A -Formal government body to protect the interests of the environment.

-Financial incentives for those who incorporate green principles in their work.

3. A -More support like the ‘Suria 1000’ government project, where subsidies are given to home owners who install solar panels for electricity.

-Tax exemptions for using certain materials.

-Impose a law to have each house fitted with rainwater storage for the garden and car wash.

- Provide more ‘green’ products. Limited range currently available.

4. A -PR-informative messages from the government.

-Financial & tax incentives

-Using government projects to illustrate environmentally sustainable principles.

5. A Financial support, approvals and rebates on land and design matters.

6. D Promote and educate the pubic on the merits of sustainability issues and on how their lives will be afftected by them, and at the same time provide planning concessions/some form of economic incentives to developers who incorporate sustainability principles in their development.

7. H Green the earth in every housing development.

Results

74

8. H Tax concessions.

9. H -Facilitating approvals/legislation

-Raising awareness

-Tax incentives

10. H -Effective legislation & proper governance plus enforcement

-Creating the need and awareness

- Licensing of responsible developers

11. H Master plan & enforcement

12. H Subsidies and provision/support for training needs.

13. O Incentives to developers. Or the incorporation of this principles in the building by-laws.

14. O Adoption and enforcement of laws regarding the matter and subsidy of architectural / sustainable elements; e.g. Solar panels.

Note : A = Architect D = Developer H = Home Owner O = Other

Table 4.18 Response to Question 11(a)

The 82% of participants who nominated ‘Support from government bodies’ as

a key factor in encouraging the adoption of environmentally sustainable

principles into the design and construction phase of homes, listed their

suggestions in Table 4.18, on the form of support which should be provided

by the government.

The responses have a slight overlay which can be summarized with the

following:

(i) Providing financial incentives (e.g. subsidies, tax rebates).

- this response, with the majority from the Architect category,

represents 71% of the 82% of participants who nominated

‘Support from government bodies’.

(ii) Promoting and providing information on the subject

- this response represents 29% of the 82% of participants who

nominated ‘Support from government bodies’.

Results

75

(iii) Setting up and enforcing laws relating to the subject.

- this response, with the majority from the Home Owner category,

represents 43% of the 82% of participants who nominated

‘Support from government bodies’.

4.2 Results : Interviews

The main content of the interviews were reiterations of views presented in the

questionnaire. This outcome was anticipated as the participants were asked

to elaborate on issues related to the content of the questionnaire. The key

points extracted and summarized from the interview sessions are as follows:

1. Malaysia’s general public lacks awareness on the importance and

relevance of environmental sustainability.

2. Upcoming government housing projects should adopt environmentally

sustainable elements. The Industrialised Building System promoting the

use of prefabricated components covered in the Ninth Malaysia Plan

should be developed and implemented by the government.

3. The construction industry is capable of pursuing an environmentally

sustainable path; it just requires a push from the right direction, with the

implementation of standards and regulations by the government.

Results

76

4.3 Results : Case Studies

4.3.1 Category 1 : Typical Terraced Housing

Case Study 1 : Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses Development : Bukit Prima Pelangi ( Prima Pelangi Hill )

Mixed Development – Terraced Houses &

Condominiums

Developer : Harmony Property Sdn(Pty) Bhd(Ltd)

- a Brem Holding Bhd(Ltd) sudsidiary

Location : This housing development is located adjacent to the

northern suburbs of Kuala Lumpur.

Tenure : Freehold

Approving authority : Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (Kuala Lumpur City

Hall)

Selling Price : RM 488 000 – RM 748 500

Figure 4.2 Site Plan – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Home Owner

Results

77

Figure 4.3 Location Map – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Google Maps, retrieved 13 June 2008, <http://maps.google.com>

Greenery Figures 4.3 and 4.4 indicate the extent of the natural rainforest that has been

destroyed with a cut and fill process of the hilly land to make way for the

housing development. The surrounding greenery diminishes with such

developments. Looking at the streetscape, there is hardly any greenery

provided by the developer to compensate for what was destroyed to allow for

the development.

Figure 4.4 Streetscape – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : S.Jayapalasingam’s photograph - 2008

Results

78

Figure 4.5 Intermediate Lot Layout Plan – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Source : Home Owner

Spatial Organisation This 22’ x 75’ (6.7 x 21.3m) plot, on the ground floor, has a car porch, front

garden, an open living and dining area, a guest room, a bathroom, and a

kitchen which opens out to the backyard. The first floor has a family area, a

master bedroom with an en-suite bathroom, wardrobe area and balcony, and

two bedrooms which share an en-suite bathroom.

The narrow backyard is not an effective use of space. Figure 4.6 shows how

2 houses have extended the kitchen and guest room on the ground floor into

the backyard. The layout provided by the developer does not provide the

Results

79

occupants with a suitable laundry area. This will result in the occupants

having to utilise the front porch as a drying yard. A possible solution would

have been to have one wall in the center of the back lane, dividing the 2 rows

of houses, providing the occupants with a functional back yard.

Figure 4.6 Rear of houses and back lane – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Source : S.Jayapalasingam’s photograph - 2008

Figure 4.7 This adjacent housing development, by the same developer shows how the occupants use the front porch as a drying yard due to

the inefficient allocation of space in the backyard. Source : S.Jayapalasingam’s photograph - 2008

Results

80

In the case of this house being occupied by a family of four, the guest room

on the ground floor will end up being used as a store room or utility area

which may have to accommodate a live-in domestic helper. The option for a

separate study or home office which could function as a guest room exists

only in a situation where only 1 room is used to accommodate the children.

The master bedroom balcony is more of a decorative architectural element,

as the area is insufficient to be uitlised by the occupants for any household

activity. The second house from the left corner in Figure 4.8 shows how the

balcony area has been closed up to increase the bedroom area.

Figure 4.8 Streetscape – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : S.Jayapalasingam’s photograph – 2008

Figure 4.9 Intermediate Lot Elevations – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Source : Home Owner

Results

81

Thermal Comfort The standard construction methods and materials do not provide the end-

user with a suitable level of thermal comfort in this equatorial climate. There

are louvered glass windows above the staircase to accommodate the release

of hot air that has risen. This element does not provide a significant change

to the level of thermal comfort in the house as the remaining areas do not

have sufficient natural ventilation. The air-conditioned interiors are

considered the norm in this development as the developer does provide

electrical points for air conditioning units.

Energy Consumption The absence of effective natural ventilation will encourage the constant use

of fans as well as air conditioning. The design does not maximise the use of

the available natural light, therefore artificial light will be utilized for longer

periods of time.

Figure 4.10 Intermediate Lot Cross Section – Bukit Prima Pelangi 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Source : Home Owner

Results

82

Case Study 2 : Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Development : Bandar Saujana Putra ( Saujana Putra Town )

Mixed Development – Terraced Houses & Apartments

Developer : LBS Bina Group Berhad (Limited)

Location : This self-contained township is located in the Petaling

district of Selangor in the vicinity of Puchong and UEP

Subang Jaya.

Tenure : Leasehold

Selling Price : From RM 135 315

Figure 4.11 Location Map – Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Google Maps, retrieved 13 June 2008, <http://maps.google.com>

Greenery This brownfield development is in the vicinity of a former tin mining area. Built

on previously cleared land, the developer has not significantly decreased the

amount of greenery in the area as compared to Case Study 1. A portion of a

former mining pool is visible at the bottom-left corner of Figure 4.11. Minimal

planting of new trees are a part of the streetscape as shown in Figure 4.12.

Spatial Organisation This 20’ x 60’ (6.1 x 18.3m) plot, on the ground floor, has a car porch and

front garden. An open plan links the living and dining area with the kitchen

that opens out to the backyard. There also is a utility room and a bathroom

Results

83

on the ground floor. The first floor has a master bedroom with an en-suite

bathroom, and two bedrooms which share an en-suite bathroom.

Figure 4.12 Streetscape – Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : For Sale In Malaysia, retrieved 27 June 2008, < http://for-sale-in-

malaysia.blogspot.com/2007/06/terrace-house-corner-lot-saujana-putra.html>

Figure 4.13 Intermediate Lot Layout Plan – Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : For Sale In Malaysia, retrieved 27 June 2008, < http://for-sale-in-


Results

84

In the common case of this house being occupied by a family of four, the

utility room on the ground floor will end up being used as a store room which

may have to accommodate a live-in domestic helper. The option for a

separate study or home office which could function as a guest room exists

only in a situation where only 1 room is used to accommodate the children.

The living and dining area on the ground floor are the only areas for the

family to socialise together. Though this house has a smaller plot area

compared to Case Study 1, the area allocated for the back yard makes it

more functional and the back lane does not exist in this development.

Figure 4.14 Front Facade – Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : For Sale In Malaysia, retrieved 27 June 2008, < http://for-sale-in-


Figure 4.15 Rear of houses – Opal 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : For Sale In Malaysia, retrieved 27 June 2008, < http://for-sale-in-


Results

85


user with a suitable level of thermal comfort in this equatorial climate. The

interiors will have to be air-conditioned to achieve a comfortable level of

thermal comfort. The developer does not provide electrical points for air

conditioning units. Case Study 1 is better of with levels of thermal comfort

which is part of the reason why it costs more.




periods of time.

Case Study 3 : Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses Development : Crescentia Park

Mixed Development – Residences : Terraced Houses,

Semi-detached Houses, Bungalows & Condominiums

Developer : Abad Naluri Sdn Bhd

-an Equine Capital Bhd associate company

Location : This housing development is a part of Bandar Cassia,

a new self contained township being developed in

Penang.

Tenure : Leasehold

Approving authority : Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai (Seberang Perai

City Council)

Selling Price : Approx. RM 75 000

Results

86

Figure 4.16 Location Map – Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Google Maps, retrieved 20 October 2008, <http://maps.google.com>

Greenery The exact location of this development has not been indentified. Based on

the show unit location photos, the development appears to be located at a

former palm oil plantation. Being a medium low cost development, the

developer will plant minimal amounts of greenery along the streetscape.

Results

87

Figure 4.17 Intermediate Lot Layout Plan – Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses

Source : Equine Capital, retrieved 20 October 2008, <http://www.equine.com.my/crescentiaPark/residential/studioM/details_studioM.html>

Spatial Organisation Due to the medium low cost bracket which this house falls under, the built-up

area is not as generous as the previous two projects. This 16’ x 58’ (4.9 x

17.7m) plot, on the ground floor, has a car porch and front yard. The living

area is open to the dining and kitchen area. The kitchen opens out to the

back yard. The bedroom on the ground floor prevents a direct visual

connection between the living area and kitchen. It is most likely that this room

on the ground floor will end up being used as a store room or utility area. The

first floor has a master bedroom and another bedroom. The only bathroom in

this house is located on this level.

Results

88

Figure 4.18 Show Unit Front Facade – Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Equine Capital, retrieved 20 October

2008, <http://www.equine.com.my/crescentiaPark/re

sidential/studioM/details_studioM.html>


user with a suitable level of thermal comfort in this equatorial climate. The

interiors will have to be air-conditioned to achieve a comfortable level of

thermal comfort. The developer does not provide electrical points for air

conditioning units, however the show unit interiors are air-conditioned.

Figure 4.19 Show unit interior – Studio M 2 Storey Terraced Houses Source : Equine Capital, retrieved 20 October 2008,

<http://www.equine.com.my/crescentiaPark/residential/studioM/details_studioM.html>

Results

89




periods of time. The corner unit will have higher levels of natural light in the

dining area as indicated in the show unit. (Figure 4.19)

Sumita 2

Documents

Transcript of Sumita 2