Almost two years ago, a number of residents affected by the proposed development by Gasing Meridian Sdn Bhd (GMSB) were at a meeting with the Director of Planning for DBKL. We were informed that DBKL had approved the sub-division of land owned by GMSB in October 2007. We were informed that it was only an administrative approval and not a development order. There was no need to be concerned. The impression given to us was that he welcomed our input at the meeting and would take note of the petitions already submitted to DBKL. He assured us that DBKL would be diligent and apply stringent conditions on the development, including having further dialogue with us.

On 11th Feb 2008, 108 residents filed for a Judicial Review by the High Court on DBKL’s rejection of their request for a public hearing. They were concerned about the possibility that not doing so will result in DBKL having a “free hand” in endangering their lives and property.

The facts as they now stand are:

  • The “administrative” approval for sub-division of land is part of a development order
  • 3 days after that meeting, on the 17th November 2007, a further development order for erection of hoarding was given
  • The welcoming of input and suggestions for further dialogue replaced by hand delivered notice to residents on the 31st December 2007, rejecting our request for public hearing
  • Assurance of stringent conditions transformed to issuance of a further development order for earthworks on 31st January 2008, under “Sekysen 70 Akta Jalan, Parit dan Bangunan 1974( AKTA 33) dan Undang Undang Kecil Kerja Tanah (Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur) 1988.

Medan Damansara – Damansara 21

IMGA0027

The Mayor of KL, Datuk Ahmad Fuad Ismail, together with Ikram and FT Ministry representatives met with Medan Damansara residents on Thurs 22nd October 2009.

The Mayor of KL, Datuk Ahmad Fuad Ismail, together with Ikram and FT Ministry representatives met with Medan Damansara residents on Thurs 22nd October 2009. The message to the residents appears to be that it’s up to the residents to submit a memorandum to DBKL if they do not wish to have the development.

It is curious that the Mayor had said “Something must be done without further delay. However, it is not easy for us to make a decision at this juncture as we do not want to be seen as siding with either the developer or the residents”. As the key person tasked to work for the welfare of the residents of KL, should he not have taken the side of the residents and not permit development until such firm regulations and ability of his officials to monitor, assure and enforce safe hillside development are in place?

DBKL do not appear to be concerned about how lives were put at risks due to failures in approvals given for developer to commenced development, nor were they interested in revealing how they will make the developer (and consultants) liable for inadequacies revealed in Ikram’s investigation into the landslide that affected 2 homes in August 2008.

IMGA0065

The Ikram consultant, En. Mohd Taufik Haron, went to great length to demonstrate how thorough Ikram had been in investigating the causes of failures.

The Ikram consultant, En. Mohd Taufik Haron, went to great length to demonstrate how thorough Ikram had been in investigating the causes of failures and the “stringent” standards they have demanded. The fact that it took 4 proposals before Ikram could be satisfied need not necessarily imply that the development will be safe. Perhaps it does more to demonstrate how developers and consultants are woefully incapable of providing safe proposals for hillside development.

In attempting to justify Ikram’s thoroughness in investigations, hill slopes were presented as inherently unsafe and comparison was made to how by development, the hill slopes would be made safer. Fortunately, the Medan Damansara residents were quick to rebut the over enthusiasm with a terse reminder that they were happily feeling save without any landslides affecting them for over 50 yrs and it took less than a year before development almost caused lives.

Damansara 21 development is 5.75 acres with almost 15% above 35 degrees gradient.

Will Bukit Gasing Proposed Development be approved on the same basis as Damansara 21?

GMSB’s proposed development covers 15.52 hectares (38.35 acres) with almost 50% of the slopes above 25 degrees gradient. In addition, there is a 23 million litre water reservoir adjacent to the proposed development with a 2 m diameter x 400m pipeline running along the boundary of the proposed development.

It took residents at Bukit Gasing 13 months to get a grant of leave for a Judicial Review by the High Court. Yet, DBKL and the developer are determined not to allow a public hearing to address our now amply justifiable concerns for safety. They have appealed against the grant of leave for Judicial Review.

DBKL and the developer’s appeal will be heard coming Monday, 9th November at the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya, commencing 9am.

When one considers the plight of residents of Medan Damansara and the performance of DBKL that lead to the disaster of landslide at Damansara 21. Can anyone be surprise at the measures taken by DBKL to avoid transparency?

1Malaysia Logo E

Our PM has called of a 1Malaysia, Performance Now, People First to his administration. I wonder what our refrain should be. Any suggestions? Could 1Devexxper, Performance no-nxxd, People lxxt be appropriate for DBKL?

Gary Yeoh

JAC for Bukit Gasing

From other blogs: Damansara 21 Stop Work Order Lifted: Developer Boleh Again

Advertisements