Well you guys would pretty much know that KL’s Urban form is decisively moulded by the physical planning policies of DBKL, which in turn are ‘influenced ’ at the federal level, by Malaysia’s commitment to position the city in the global network of cities
Malaysia is arguably anxious to play an important role in the global economy. As such, its realigning KL’s physical planning policies and restructuring its institutions. The emergence of global institutions within KL’s ‘Golden Triangle’ potentially affects its spatial transformation and is a result of the globalization of KL’s urban economy.
The repositioning of KL within the global web of cities has brought about changes and adjustments. Global functions and services catering to supranational clienteles (eg. big foreign banks, big oil companies, big car makers, big technology providers etc..) are becoming increasingly important, so spatial readjustments are vital in attracting their direct investment.
As we progress, the Malaysian government responds to global opportunities.(eg. lowering of tariffs, expansion of trade, tourism and cultural exchange, deregulation and privatization.) Over time, the competitive advantage of KL may decline if it is unable to upgrade its property stock through development or redevelopment to meet the requirements of international service industries and new technology.
In the context of industrialized countries, research has shown that the urban landscape is characterized by a major reorganization of production and distribution. To meet demands of more fluid movements, infrastructures such as motorways, airports and high speed rail are expanded and upgraded to the detriment of existing socio-spatial structure.
On the social issues side, growth has marked consequence on neighbourhood links and the microstructure of communities – whose property heritage, culture and local economies come under severe pressure from office space development and other new forms of urban progress.