Kota Madani: Do We Want Another Smart City or a Loveable One?

By Saleh Mohammed

Kudos to the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Federal Territories) for launching a bold new initiative, Madani City (MC) a RM4 billion, 102-acre smart city project in Precinct 19, Putrajaya. Touted as a major people-centric and environmentally sustainable development, it will feature 10,000 high-density residential units designed to house over 30,000 residents. The blueprint includes vertical schools, integrated AI systems, green mobility infrastructure, and architectural elements that preserve local culture.

Developed by Putrajaya Holdings Sdn Bhd (PJH) through a public-private partnership under the Build, Lease, Maintain and Transfer (BLMT) model, the project claims to not use public funds in its initial stage. It will eventually be transferred to the government after 25 years. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim launched this initiative as a model to address civil servant housing needs and shape future urban development.

But one can’t help but wonder:

Why do we need a smart city within an already established smart city?

Putrajaya is already envisioned and branded as Malaysia’s administrative capital a city built from the ground up as a modern, green, and intelligent urban space guided by the Putrajaya Smart City Blueprint. Are we carving out a new identity within this brand just to make way for another ‘showpiece’ one where cars travel underground and buildings reach for the sky?

Let’s revisit Anwar’s own statement from last year. He called for prioritising housing development in Kuala Lumpur to benefit the public and cautioned against grand and superficial mega-projects. He stressed the responsibility of the Federal Territories Department in ensuring affordable homes for B40 and M40 groups, not just civil servants.

In fact, we already have the Perumahan Penjawat Awam Malaysia (PPAM) a dedicated agency for civil servant housing. So why duplicate?

And while it’s claimed that no government funds will be used initially, PJH is owned by state-linked entities:

Petronas (64.4% via KLCC Holdings), Khazanah Nasional, and Kumpulan Wang Amanah Negara (KWAN).

In effect, this is public money. Let’s not forget that Petronas is currently under pressure to reduce its workforce by 10%. So even if it’s structured as an investment, the burden will circle back to the rakyat.

We don’t need another RM4 billion mega-development to house a few thousand civil servants.

We need affordable housing for all.

We need flood mitigation, accessible healthcare, better public education, and measures to contain the rising cost of living.

We need well-maintained warungs, food stalls, and small restaurants, which are the heartbeat of the rakyat’s daily life. These are the humble yet powerful drivers of grassroots economic upliftment.

Real wages have been stagnant for decades. A fresh graduate today earns around RM2,000, RM3,000, barely higher than the RM1,300 from 1984. According to Khazanah Research Institute (KRI), absolute poverty includes households earning less than RM2,589 a month.

So, how can MC be a true MADANI icon a hub of innovation and progress, if it fails to address the substance of people’s struggles?

Interestingly, the upcoming Urban Renewal Act (URA) also carries the CHASE (clean, healthy, advanced, safe, and sustainable) framework. But more than that, it calls for human values, community welfare, and cultural soul in our urban planning.

We can start by revitalising some of the 139 urban sites earmarked for redevelopment. Why not implement the MC concept there and transform these neglected spaces into thriving neighbourhoods?

More importantly, what truly differentiates Madani City from past smart city models?

If it’s just density and tech, we’ve seen it before.

What we need now is a pivot, from a liveable city to a loveable city. One that is inclusive, caring, and built around people, not just infrastructure.

And strangely, we already see developers using different names for MC to market it. That’s an early sign of potential disconnection from its original vision.

Let’s not end up “yang dikejar tak dapat, yang dikendong berciciran” — chasing the new and losing what truly matters.

What say you?