Bukit Gasing assemblyman Edward Lee speaking to residents at Save Bukit Gasing Family Day.


by Kimberley Lau, theSun – News without borders, Monday April 14, 2008

PETALING JAYA: Bukit Gasing residents braved a downpour yesterday afternoon to picket in protest against developer Gasing Meridian Sdn Bhd for not complying with a stop-work order issued by the High Court on April 6.

GMSB plans to build 71 bungalows on a 15.52ha on the hill.

The residents also voiced anger over a letter the developer had sent to the residents, thanking them for their support.

About 150 people young and old turned up in their raincoats and umbrellas at the Gasing Indah playground to protest the development of the hill by GMSB.

Among them was Medona Netto, 57, and her husband, Aloysius, 60. The Nettos. who live in Gasing Indah, were among the first residents in the area.

“The developer clearly has no regard for the stop-work order or the fact that we are very worried,” she said, “it started putting up hoardings on the hill last month,” said Medona, who has lived there since 1993.


Asked if they are prepared to move out from the house should the developer proceed with the project. Aloysious said, “I have spent a lifetime here. I will not move out”.


According to Joint Action Committee for Bukit Gasing member Gary Yeoh, the Kuala Lumpur City Hall had in a news report last week, expressed concern for the developer’s financial losses.

“Why are they worried about that? They should instead be concerned about the residents’ safety,” said Yeoh.


He said the residents had also wanted to show support for the 108 property owners from Gasing Indah, Cameron Towers, Maxwell Towers, Frasers Towers and Petaling Gardens Neighbourhood watch who had sought a judicial review against DBKL, compelling the mayor to hold a public hearing on the application by GMSB for a development order. The High Court granted the residents leave for a judicial review and set April 23 for an inter-parte hearing.

Bukit Gasing assemblyman Edward Lee said that while it was not compulsory for the developer to be at the hearing, the developer had requested to be heard