Over the years, Sarawak has seen both successes and disappointments in the area of heritage protection and urban development. Looking back, one cannot help wondering whether some of the tensions, regrets and controversies we experienced might have been reduced if we had earlier adopted a process known internationally as Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA).
Many people are already familiar with Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), where the environmental implications of a major project are studied before decisions are made. HIA works in a somewhat similar way, except that it focuses on heritage, culture, historical character, streetscape, social memory and sense of place.
It is important to emphasise that HIA is not anti-development. It does not automatically suggest projects cannot proceed. Rather, it encourages developers, planners, government agencies and communities to think more carefully about possible impacts before major changes take place.
When we reflect on some well-known cases in Kuching and Sarawak, the relevance of such a process becomes clearer.
The recent debate surrounding the Old Nurses Quarters (ONQ) showed how strongly people can feel about a place that carries historical, architectural and emotional significance. Earlier generations of nurses lived and trained there. The building formed part of the story of Sarawak’s healthcare development. Yet much of the public discussion only intensified after demolition plans had already advanced considerably. Happily with advocacy by the Sarawak Heritage Society and strong public support, there was eventual decision to conserve and repurpose the main block of the ONQ.
Similarly, many older Kuchingites still remember the old wet markets along Jalan Gambier, once full of life, sound, colour and community interaction. Their demolition altered not only the physical landscape, but also the social character and memory of the area.
Others still may remember the demolition of the old colonial-style Secretariat building (on Barrack Road) and a nearby row of traditional shophouses to make way for what later became the Plaza Merdeka mall.
At the time, perhaps heritage awareness was not yet as developed as it is today. But one wonders whether a more structured heritage assessment process might have identified ways to retain more of the historical streetscape while still allowing development to proceed.
Then there is the gradual, ad hoc demolition of individual traditional shophouses in older parts of Kuching, some replaced by taller and visually incompatible buildings.
While each project may seem small on its own, over time the cumulative effect can significantly alter the character and human scale of an entire heritage precinct.
These are not simple issues. Cities must evolve. Economic growth and modernisation are important. Property owners also have rights and commercial realities to consider. But perhaps the lesson here is that development and heritage should not always be treated as opposing forces.
Many cities around the world today are increasingly recognising that heritage-sensitive planning often produces more sustainable and culturally distinctive urban environments, attractive to both locals and visitors.
Perhaps it is time for Sarawak to seriously explore the adoption of some form of Heritage Impact Assessment framework, especially for projects affecting historic buildings, heritage precincts and culturally significant areas.
At the very least, it may help us ask better questions before irreversible decisions are made. After all, once a building, streetscape or heritage environment disappears, it is often gone forever.
James S L Yong
May 2026
James S L Yong is a member of the Sarawak Heritage Council and former President of the Sarawak Heritage Society.
This article was first published by the author on his ‘Sarawak Heritage Matters‘ Facebook page on 18 May 2026.
Some other buildings can be recalled here:
