HERITAGE is a value that can be handed down the generations. It could be in the form of customs, culture, locality, buildings, archives and manuscripts.
They represent a bygone era, and the innate characteristic and values of a society and nation.
Heritage buildings are a good example of this as they exude unique architectural, aesthetic, political and social features of a different time.
These heritage buildings exude their own emotions through their unique historical identity. Hence, the conservation of heritage buildings is pertinent, especially in enhancing the society’s knowledge on history.
However, at times I feel sad as there are some who neither appreciate these heritage buildings nor take the effort to protect and preserve them.
Malaysia achieved independence almost six decades ago with the colonial powers like the British, Dutch and Portuguese leaving behind their legacy through the many buildings built during the pre-independence days.
The Dutch and Portuguese colonial legacy can be seen from a number of heritage buildings that they left behind in Malacca, including the Porta de Santiago Gateway built in 1511, the remnants of St Paul’s Church (1590), and Christ Church (1753).
However, historical legacy is no match to the lure of the present day real estate boom. Together with rapid development and urbanisation, the whole scenario poses a constant threat to heritage buildings in the country.
While the public and conservationists consider these buildings historical and should be preserved, owners, realtors and developers often view heritage buildings as a threat or hurdle to development.
Moreover, most heritage buildings in Kuala Lumpur are located in prime locations where the land fetches a hefty premium. This poses a challenge to the owners and developers who view the locations as a goldmine as they could provide lucrative returns through redevelopment.
However, a detailed study and observation will show that the heritage buildings play an important role and are the ones that add value to a location.
Their economic potential could be realised through heritage tourism. These tourism products are not limited to buildings alone, they include nature’s heritage, archaeological heritage and intangible heritage. All these heritages could generate income for the nation.
However, at the end of the day, the need for development supersedes everything else. There are good examples of this.
Several heritage structures like the Bok House and Pudu Jail in Kuala Lumpur have paved the way for high value redevelopment.
However, the value of heritage buildings are difficult to quantify. The Pudu Jail was demolished without mercy and without studying its historic value to society. The building is part of the nation’s history and should have been preserved for the coming generations.
The prison structure, in fact, had potential to be developed. Development could be implemented through practical adaptation where the structure could have been maintained and only its function changed to suit economic pursuits. By preserving the structure, we could have maintained its legacy for the coming generations.
Just see how some countries have preserved their old prisons that now serve as tourist attractions. Among them is the world renowned Alcatraz in San Francisco, built in 1850, and New Zealand’s Dunedin Prison, built in 1896.
Both now draw tourists due to their captivating buildings and surroundings, and this goes to show that through the right approach, potential of heritage buildings could be realised.
Apart from conserving buildings, we should also consider ideas on how we could find a balance between new development and preserving the national heritages.
We may take a leaf from Macau, a tourism haven. Through the appropriate mechanism, Macau has succeeded in preserving its national heritages while continuing with new developments and fulfilling its population’s needs.
Through close cooperation among related agencies, heritage buildings could be protected and conserved in Malaysia. The effort, in turn, would bring economic returns through the increase in the value of heritage assets or by the economic returns they generate through heritage tourism.
Conserving heritage buildings is an artwork itself that needs careful study and patience.
However, the outcome will make us proud one day. A heritage building’s value is not quantifiable. Once it’s lost, it can never be replaced and can be considered gone for good.
I’m hopeful that one day the conservation of heritage buildings will be given serious consideration and not taken lightly.