PDA

View Full Version : Another controversy … A 9 Storey Commercial Building at USJ 6!!!



joebloke
04-05-2008, 09:49 PM
Certain residents of USJ 6 has recently received a letter dated 21/4/2008 from MPSJ informing them of an application from one Tetuan Pujangga Budiman Sdn Bhd to build a 9 storey cum 2 sub-basement car park Office Block at the existing Telekom site of USJ 6. Residents have up to 21 days to voice their objection.

As it is now, many people who work in Taipan areas are parking their cars opposite Taipan at USJ 6. I cannot imagine if this project is allowed to proceed, what would be the traffic situation going to be like in the area.

USJ 6 is a full residential area and there is no place for a multi-storey commercial building.

The increased traffic would pose a danger to the residents, particularly the elderly and children especially when there a few existing kindergartens in the vicinity.

Why is this letter sent only to a few households bordering the Telekom building? MPSJ fails to understand that the proposal would also affect all those USJ 6 residents who use the 2 exit roads (near Telekom building) to go out.

It is likely that this project was hatched during the previous administration.

If we allow this project to proceed, it will set a precedent and who knows, your area might be next.

Let us all stay united and object to this proposal.

The letter from MPSJ is attached.

pcyeoh
04-05-2008, 10:50 PM
Quickly form an action committee and get involve people beyond the 20 houses MPSJ would normally sent their letters to inviting them for their feedback. It is very usual that on record they say they are informing the 20 houses but in reality only a handful will actually receive the letter.

Photostat MPSJ letter and personally walk the street and talk to the rest of the nearby residents seeking for their support as numbers count. I am sure they will support you as they too will be greatly affected. Also get ready to seek their signature when you embark on a signature campaign. Meanwhile collectively get to see En Ismail, the Pengarah of Perancang Bandar and request from him more detailed information about the plan submitted by the owner of the land. You notice they purposely do not reveal the address of the location. Who the hell can relate to Lot number and the mukim. Also rope in our ADUN immediately. At all time be mindful of the deadline.

But one thing you can be considered yourself lucky - the state government is no longer run by Khir Toyo, the Semua nya OK guy. Or else the outcome is so predicable. Look at the two buildings in Taipan which is still under construction. So blantant disregard to the density of the surrounding building and traffic.

And best of luck.

pywong
05-05-2008, 08:07 AM
joebloke,

Wouldn't it be simpler to get Hannah to call Ronnie Liu to freeze all planning approval for applications for development proposals until the new MPSJ councillors come in?

Then we prepare a request to the new councillors how on civil society should be consulted in the consideration of new projects that will affect them. There should be a public hearing with adequate public notice to everyone in the MPSJ territory. New projects means more cars. More cars means more traffic congestion. Everyone is affected, not just the 20 neighbours.

We need a review of whether we need any more projects. Subang Jaya is over-developed as it is. Until such time as the road system can clear the existing traffic jams, we shouldn't even be thinking of new projects.

That means: Step back. Have an overview. Re-look the Selangor Draft Master Plan. Then decide on the next step.

besitai2007
05-05-2008, 08:32 AM
Wow, these guys are devious. I did not receive any letter but read about it in this forum only. Someone should contact Hannah Yeoh. :mad:

AllUrban
05-05-2008, 08:41 AM
Wow, these guys are devious. I did not receive any letter but read about it in this forum only. Someone should contact Hannah Yeoh. :mad:Contact Derek Fernandez and get his advice as well. He is a very experienced planning lawyer.

As for Subang Jaya being overdeveloped...I disagree. Development in Subang Jaya has been done very reasonably. It is the actions of Malaysians (double parking, indiscriminate parking, driving everywhere, cutting queues) that are causing the majority of problems. When parking spaces are available people still double park and park indiscriminately.

Ironically, when people see this parking and have to face the jams they call for better enforcement but then continue to park in this way, thinking that their own self-centred actions wont hurt anyone.

Cheers, m

joebloke
05-05-2008, 09:58 AM
Wow, these guys are devious. I did not receive any letter but read about it in this forum only. Someone should contact Hannah Yeoh. :mad:

We have contacted Hannah Yeoh's office and will meet up with her this Tuesday 8pm at her DAP service centre (24A, 1st Floor, Jalan SS14/1A, 47500 Subang Jaya)

All concerned residents (whether directly affected or otherwise) are invited to be at the centre to give support and feedback.

A signature campaign has already started and for those who want to help with the campaign, kindly contact Lim (012-2886380) or Philip (019-6226668).

On another note, the announcement by Ronnie Liu, state Exco in charge of local government that minutes of majlis meeting will be made public on the website will be a significant move towards transparency.

besitai2007
05-05-2008, 01:52 PM
I have emailed YB Hannah Yeoh and she has replied that she has been informed about this. She will meet with MPSJ this Wednesday.

coogee
05-05-2008, 03:05 PM
Contact Derek Fernandez and get his advice as well. He is a very experienced planning lawyer.

As for Subang Jaya being overdeveloped...I disagree. Development in Subang Jaya has been done very reasonably. It is the actions of Malaysians (double parking, indiscriminate parking, driving everywhere, cutting queues) that are causing the majority of problems. When parking spaces are available people still double park and park indiscriminately.

Ironically, when people see this parking and have to face the jams they call for better enforcement but then continue to park in this way, thinking that their own self-centred actions wont hurt anyone.

Cheers, m

I fully fully agree with you on this ! Until and unless Malaysians drivers (including those kopi and non kopi licenced ones) observe proper driving ethics, no point complaining since we are the ones that contribute to ALL the jams. It is easy for us to always blame the authorities but time and time again I have observed most drivers are just plain selfish and self centred, from illegal & haphazard parking, illegal turns, don't give a damn driving & overtaking and no use of turning indicators (Malaysian drivers are oh so telepathic, always knows others will give way). I always suggest to friends who drive without using their indicators to buy their next car minus that function, can get discount - no use why pay for it?

joebloke
13-05-2008, 09:30 PM
Up to Monday (12/5/08), more than 120 signatures were collected from residents who stayed near the Telekom building and objected to the proposed project. The objections have been duly submitted to MPSJ.

According to an officer from MPSJ, it only sent out notices to 60 householders who live beside the telekom building, eventhough the proposed project would affect most of the residents in USJ 6. The officer also mentioned that the same developer had previously submitted the plan but was rejected by MPSJ and this was a resubmission.

Some residents have misunderstood that the project is for a car park building. It is ACTUALLY a 9 storey office block cum 2 sub-basement car park.

The notice sent to the resident stated that "....Cadangan Pembangunan 1 blok Bangunan Pejabat 9 Tingkat Berserta 2 Sub-Basemen Tempat Letak Kereta......"

Fabe18
14-05-2008, 12:21 AM
Actually, the existing local municipal requirement for number of car park per commercial unit is not enuf.. Someone mentioned to me before that minimum requirement is 2-3 parking lot per unit... So developers allocated only that much loh since it's still enuf to get approval.... Maybe someone can verify this...

if it's true, 2-3 parking lots per unit is NEVER going to be enuf... That's wy SS15 and Taipan always no parking.. even the Taipan multi storey car park oso getting filled up pretty often...

besitai2007
14-05-2008, 07:39 AM
The Taipan multi-storey carpark has been underused because most people prefer to park elsewhere for free. Lack of enforcement allowed illegal parking to occur. If the new complex on USJ 6 is built you will still see selfish people parked along roadsides in front of people's houses irrespective of whether there is a carpark or not.

joebloke
14-05-2008, 11:57 AM
When the multi-storey building next to the fitness centre is completed, it will add to an already chaotic traffic situation, especially for cars coming into Taipan from Persiaran Perpaduan and cars emerging from True Fitness.

If the proposed 9 storey commercial storey building is allowed to proceed (with the entrance and exit facing Persiaran Perpaduan), we dare not imagine the consequences.

Fabe18
14-05-2008, 10:58 PM
The Taipan multi-storey carpark has been underused because most people prefer to park elsewhere for free. Lack of enforcement allowed illegal parking to occur. If the new complex on USJ 6 is built you will still see selfish people parked along roadsides in front of people's houses irrespective of whether there is a carpark or not.

Well the last time I parked there was a working weekday a month ago, I have to park on the upper floor and that level also almost full. Is that considered underused? There is just simply not enuf parking lots in Taipan even with the multi storey car park. In a way, it's like you wanna pay money to park oso no more space..

yvonnefoong
15-05-2008, 12:08 AM
As a comment to the opinion that reckless drivers are to be blamed....


IMHO, a location should not develop to a point that a multi-storey carpark needs to be build to solve traffic problems. There should be enough normal parking lots to cater for consumers, and the function of the location as an important variable. Subang Jaya was firstly a residential township. It was designed that way.

ie. SS15 being more commercialized should have more parking lots, than say, shoplots located inside USJ2.

When there are more cars than the plan can support, then it is over-developed. The population needs to be spread out.

USJ27Resident
15-05-2008, 12:17 AM
There is just simply not enuf parking lots in Taipan even with the multi storey car park. In a way, it's like you wanna pay money to park oso no more space..

Buddy, CBD Perth has a working mobile population of ... like almost 250,000 people during office hours... guess how many cars are in the city or guess how many parking lots are there in the city....??

The problem with traffic in commercial areas boils down to the LACK of proper public transportation and the implementation of stupid parking rules.

One doesn't NEED to go for a LAWATAN SAMBIL BELAJAR to know this...and how to overcome it...

ps: some say, even if these officials did go for the LAWATAN SAMBIL BELAJAR trip, they were too busy with the LAWATAN part instead of BELAJAR part... :p

yvonnefoong
15-05-2008, 12:42 AM
, and the implementation of stupid parking rules.


It is perplexing why the council bother issuing summones when there is no where to park.

AllUrban
15-05-2008, 11:25 AM
As a comment to the opinion that reckless drivers are to be blamed....

IMHO, a location should not develop to a point that a multi-storey carpark needs to be build to solve traffic problems. There should be enough normal parking lots to cater for consumers, and the function of the location as an important variable. Subang Jaya was firstly a residential township. It was designed that way.

ie. SS15 being more commercialized should have more parking lots, than say, shoplots located inside USJ2.

When there are more cars than the plan can support, then it is over-developed. The population needs to be spread out.No one needs to blame anyone, but people do need to take responsibility for their actions.

If there are more cars than the plan can support, there are basically two choices...spread development out or use less cars. Spreading things out is the easy choice but it is not a long term solution. Eventually, you run out of land and create more problems.

Your humble opinion that development should be spread out is based on the "automobile culture" which allows us to travel further distances but accelerates urban sprawl and environmental and social damage at the same time.

Cheers, m

yvonnefoong
15-05-2008, 11:55 AM
Hi AllUrban.

I am envisioning a spread out of all neccessities and infrastructure. Meaning, have more towns spread out, each town have their own resources.

bslee
15-05-2008, 12:29 PM
It is perplexing why the council bother issuing summones when there is no where to park.

I've always assumed the amount of fines collected is like a revenue generating scheme. Its NOT a punitive measure and the typical scenario doesn't show its changed the motorist's mindset. We are the ones stupid enough to kena saman, pay fines and contribute to councils coffers.

AllUrban
15-05-2008, 02:14 PM
Hi AllUrban.

I am envisioning a spread out of all neccessities and infrastructure. Meaning, have more towns spread out, each town have their own resources.
ah, the "new town" concept.

It is a worthwhile idea...if it is based on short distances and pedestrian-friendly development.

Too bad that in most cases, the "new town" just turns into another automobile focused suburb.

Compare the mix of development in PJ vs. SJ, SJ vs. USJ and USJ vs. Kota Kemuning.

The trend is towards more isolation and reduction of services...and to get anywhere you must drive.

This is not the type of planning that should be promoted in an era where the price of oil is ever-increasing and the government is spending development money on subsidies that are never-ending.

Cheers, m

coogee
15-05-2008, 06:45 PM
In regard to 'lack' of car park spaces I do not think the provision of more carparks itself is enough to solve congestion problems. As I mentioned earlier the typical Malaysian drivers must change their mindset and have proper driving ethics before issues of congestion can be resolved. This may not be a complete answer but a damn good start.

Good example is the indiscriminate parking along roadsides, even middle of the road beside dividers outside of 1Utama Shopping Complex (and many others complexes, offices etc) despite availability of plenty parking spaces inside and outside the complex. I'm sure they don't it for cost saving reason since it only cost RM1 to park. All it takes is one lane less and there you go, jam. Drivers are just bloody plain lazy and think they are pandai screwing the law (unfortuntely the "LAW" do allow it to happen) It just goes to show a lot of MALAYSIANS drivers SUCKS big time!! Kill this mentality and I 'm sure all of us will have a better drive!

yvonnefoong
15-05-2008, 07:52 PM
ah, the "new town" concept.

It is a worthwhile idea...if it is based on short distances and pedestrian-friendly development.

Too bad that in most cases, the "new town" just turns into another automobile focused suburb.


I see your point and I agree with it. Boils down to poor planning.

yvonnefoong
15-05-2008, 07:54 PM
In regard to 'lack' of car park spaces I do not think the provision of more carparks itself is enough to solve congestion problems. As I mentioned earlier the typical Malaysian drivers must change their mindset and have proper driving ethics before issues of congestion can be resolved.

Honestly, I've not seen any places where parking lots are left empty while cars double-park by the roadside.

It is always full wherever I go. There may have been places I have not seen. Who knows.

joebloke
15-06-2008, 09:55 PM
MPSJ has finally fixed the public hearing date for the objection as follows:

Date: 17/6/2008 (Tuesday)

Time: 2.30pm

Venue: Aras 3, Bilik Mesyuarat 2, Bangunan MPSJ

Chairperson : Tuan Mohd Yusoff B Ghazali, Timbalan Yang Dipertua

We urge residents especially from USJ 6, to turn up in drove to voice your objection to the proposed project and to give support to the pro-tem committee (formed by the residents) who will be presenting the case.

This is a last chance to have your SAY before it is too late.

Longfellow
16-06-2008, 08:18 AM
Am I right that the piece of land belong to Telekom Malaysia? In this instance, it must be a private developer offer to build rather then Telekom themselves. Who is that party?

joebloke
16-06-2008, 12:11 PM
Am I right that the piece of land belong to Telekom Malaysia? In this instance, it must be a private developer offer to build rather then Telekom themselves. Who is that party?

Developer is Pujangga Budirman Sdn Bhd

AllUrban
18-06-2008, 11:13 AM
Stop All Plans for More Commercial Buildings in Subang Jaya, says ADUN (http://www.sjecho.com.my/article.php?id=376)

Here's hoping they dont forget about the 3 buildings planned for Sunway...18 storeys and above!

Cheers, m

joebloke
20-06-2008, 01:50 PM
Stop All Plans for More Commercial Buildings in Subang Jaya, says ADUN (http://www.sjecho.com.my/article.php?id=376)

Here's hoping they dont forget about the 3 buildings planned for Sunway...18 storeys and above!

Cheers, m

Today's Star online has an article on the residents meeting with MPSJ last Tuesday

There are enough commercial buildings in Taipan, say USJ 6 residents ( http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/6/20/central/21587493&sec=central)

pcyeoh
26-06-2008, 01:15 AM
In response to a question posed by Mr. Soong, the spokesman for the all the residents affected whether this is the first time MPSJ received such a proposal to develop this plot of land into a commercial complex, the Timbalan YDP having consulted En Ismail, Head of Planning Dept of MPSJ replied that MPSJ received this proposal first time. In Star Metro, the former Subang Jaya assemblyman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng claimed that when he was sitting as Chairman of the Planning Committee, there were two or three applications submitted to him to develop the piece of land. Surely one of them is lying and I know that the Tim.YDP was not telling the truth. He tried to put a veil to his reply further by adding that they had verbally tried to seek approval. This must be a joke. How can a developer sought approval verbally? Furthermore everyone was told that the project cost around the region of RM 15 million.

Dato Lee also commented that “There was no need for a public hearing as I had rejected it outright then, because it's a waste of public funds and time (to organise a hearing).” I have the same opinion as LHB. The MPSJ should throw the proposal out of their window (I will pay for the broken glass window) as it makes a mockery of the town planning effort that a land zoned as telco can be converted to commercial and a 9 storey building can be built smack in a pure residential area. It is like raping your daughter in front of your eyes.

And to add insult to injury, Dato Lee also speculated that Telekom Malaysia could have bought the land at a low price at that time. I say he was wrong. I would say Telekom could have bought the land for a song and the house buyers around the area actually paid the purchase subsidy since SIME-UEP is not a charitable company would have built the cost into the selling price of the houses. And the slap in the face of the residents is when Telekom have the cheek to now enter into a joint venture to erect a 9 storey commercial building right in the face of the resident.

And the climax is the bombshell the Tim.YDP dropped on the residents was when he announced that Telekom can erect that 9 storey building as the land usage have been changed from Telecommunication to Commercial. I don't remember MPSJ called for a public hearing for this conversion exercise or may be the Tim.YDP or his boss the YDP has learnt the trick of the Islamic Religious Affairs Department who is fond of secret conversion.

So I think Mr Soong should call for another press conference to challenge the YDP of MPSJ to explain why his deputy said that that was the first time they made the proposal and also to show proof that proper procedure have been taken to convert the land usage failing which we should call him and his merry men not truthful and a band of ....... Dato Lee need not worry that these people can bulldoze and hookwink the state government as we have taken care of that on March 8. It is the Pakatan Rakyat government now so such nonsense cannot be tolerated unlike the days of Khir Toyo where semua nya OK.

pywong
26-06-2008, 07:47 AM
It is the Pakatan Rakyat government now so such nonsense cannot be tolerated unlike the days of Khir Toyo where semua nya OK.
If I am not mistaken, the YDP is still appointed by the Federal Govt, not the State Govt.

joebloke
05-03-2009, 05:28 PM
After a long lapse, residents of USJ 6 surrounding the Telekom building finally received the bad news recently by MPSJ that the proposed project is to go ahead. Residents worst fear have been confirmed and this is a dark moment in the USJ community. Despite the residents' concerted objection during the public hearing last year, MPSJ still went ahead to approve the project. Many arguments have been put forward before in this forum as to why the project should not be allowed to proceed.

Fellow residents, the protem committee together with some affected residents will be staging a peace protest this coming Saturday 5pm (7/3/09) at the proposed site of the project. We need your support. Please come in drove. Gathering place is near the traffic lights in front of Telekom Exchange, opposite True Fitness. Bring along banners and placards.

Sentinel
05-03-2009, 06:11 PM
In the 90s, when I was then resident at USJ4, there was an announcement that the playground at USJ4 and at USJ9 I think, were targetted for condominium blocks. Residents set up tents and camp there on weekends with placards etc. There was a community show of strength and even the MB then (Mat Tyson) came to talk to the residents camping there. What happen to the USJ community spirit? Tunggu orang lain bikin kah?

besitai2007
06-03-2009, 05:16 AM
I'll be there. These miscreants are throwing a sucker punch when we are not looking. I thought Hannah Yeoh was looking into this problem and had the thing under wraps? What about our councilor in charge of the area?

peace_relax
06-03-2009, 07:04 PM
To think that (I heard) Hannah Yeoh was a former USJ 6 resident. :( If she is reading this, I will say: THIS IS YOUR TEST. LETS SEE WHETHER YOU CAN PASS THIS ONE.

About the protest, don't worry. I will be passing the message to my fellow residents and neighbours. We will show our the strengh of our 'semangat kejiranan'!

Sentinel
06-03-2009, 07:16 PM
To think that (I heard) Hannah Yeoh was a former USJ 6 resident. :( If she is reading this, I will say: THIS IS YOUR TEST. LETS SEE WHETHER YOU CAN PASS THIS ONE.

About the protest, don't worry. I will be passing the message to my fellow residents and neighbours. We will show our the strengh of our 'semangat kejiranan'!Not like that lah, Brader!

Hannah is the ADUN, she will succeed only if all of you give her full support by showing up and backing her, alone she will not be able to handle those powerful lobbyists...

Gang up and show your full strength behind Hannah (also long time never see USJ residents go down on the street frighting lah...)

joebloke
08-03-2009, 12:17 PM
Despite the gloomy weather and the slight drizzle, some 50 residents turned up for the peaceful protest. The Protem Committee would like to thank the residents for their support.

Today's (8/3/09) Nanyang Siang Pau (Metro Section, page 4) has a big article on the residents' protest.

Hannah Yeoh was at the protest scene yesterday and you can read about what she has to say in her blog:

Residents' Protest at USJ 6 (http://hannahyeoh.blogspot.com/2009/03/protest-in-usj-6.html)

Sentinel
08-03-2009, 03:04 PM
Despite the gloomy weather and the slight drizzle, some 50 residents turned up for the peaceful protest. The Protem Committee would like to thank the residents for their support.

Today's (8/3/09) Nanyang Siang Pau (Metro Section, page 4) has a big article on the residents' protest.

Hannah Yeoh was at the protest scene yesterday and you can read about what she has to say in her blog:

Residents' Protest at USJ 6 (http://hannahyeoh.blogspot.com/2009/03/protest-in-usj-6.html)Only 50 residents? Thats mediocre....

Have the whole USJ people there, call the MILO canteen van to come, and tell them if they donwan, you will call the Vico van, how?

Call Gardenia's Marketing Manager and ask for 300 to 400 hot tausar and coconut buns... donwan to give, we will call High 5 to give, how?

Ready-make 200 cardboard placards and have 2 - 3 multi-lingual banners.... TAK NAK! Kami Tak Nak ini dan itu....

jimmyay
08-03-2009, 11:06 PM
Well the last time I parked there was a working weekday a month ago, I have to park on the upper floor and that level also almost full. Is that considered underused? There is just simply not enuf parking lots in Taipan even with the multi storey car park. In a way, it's like you wanna pay money to park oso no more space..

Go straight to the 2nd floor and there will be ample parking. The Ground and 1st will definitely be full during working days. If u go to 3rd floor, even more space.

jimmyay
08-03-2009, 11:14 PM
Despite the gloomy weather and the slight drizzle, some 50 residents turned up for the peaceful protest. The Protem Committee would like to thank the residents for their support.

Today's (8/3/09) Nanyang Siang Pau (Metro Section, page 4) has a big article on the residents' protest.

Hannah Yeoh was at the protest scene yesterday and you can read about what she has to say in her blog:

Residents' Protest at USJ 6 (http://hannahyeoh.blogspot.com/2009/03/protest-in-usj-6.html)

Congratulation on this. All the best.
MPSJ need to know that BOSS already changed and they need to BUCKLE UP and CHANGE FOR THE RAKYAT.

joebloke
09-03-2009, 07:51 PM
Only 50 residents? Thats mediocre....


Thank you for your words of encouragement, Mr Sentinel.

Well, we actually did have another 5000 people who were at the PPSMI march in KL but were blocked by the FRU in KL from joining us in USJ !!

Jokes aside. We have a lot of people in this community, forumers included, who talk a lot but when it comes to actually doing it, all disappear.

Sentinel
09-03-2009, 08:17 PM
Thank you for your words of encouragement, Mr Sentinel.

Well, we actually did have another 5000 people who were at the PPSMI march in KL but were blocked by the FRU in KL from joining us in USJ !!

Jokes aside. We have a lot of people in this community, forumers included, who talk a lot but when it comes to actually doing it, all disappear.Like I said, you must also send reminders... drop off some 1/4 page A4 reminders in their letter box a day or two before the event. Call Milo to come with their van and get Gardenia to throw in 500 hot-off-the-oven coconut buns (cost them RM200 onlah!). I do not mean to criticise you, I was hitting at the rest of the forumers and USJarians... biasalah, cakap sahja!

p.s. I am now outsider, no more staying in USJ but still keeping a house in USJ4...

MasterQ
09-03-2009, 11:20 PM
"When we first bought our houses in the early 1990s, this 0.61ha plot of land was designated for public amenities. In fact, it is still earmarked as such in the MPSJ draft local plan.

“A telecommunications ex**change belonging to Telekom Malaysia now stands on the land.

“However, we were told last year that the land use in the title was changed from utility to commercial and the commercial tower will be built on 0.35ha of the land,” pro tem committee spokesman Philip Soong said
http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2009/3/9/central/3436247&sec=central

What happened here is this. In every large scale development project, the developer is forced to contribute land for utility company such as TM, TNB or even IWK at a give away price in order for the utility companies to set up their infrastructure. In the case f USJ 6, TM was fortunate enough to get more than they required. In fact the extra land is for future expansion. If they have abandoned their expansion plan, they should revert the land for public use or maintain it as a green lung. But they chose to JV with a private company God knows who owns the company to erect the 9 storey commercial block. This guy must have cable more powerful than TM fibre optic cable that in spite of strong objection from the residents there who are actually TM customers, TM nevertheless throw whatever corporate governance it has to the wind and screws its own customers. And that guy in the Planning Dept in MPSJ inspite of the strong objection by the residents chose to approve the project. I was there at the objection hearing. The guy from the developer came with just a piece of A4 paper and absolutely no presentation slide managed to convince the director of planning that his development project would not cause any traffic congestion to the area. He couldn't even count either as he was unable to answer all the questions posed to him. If I have rotten eggs, I would have pelted him for treating us like fools. Mr Soong the leader of the group pointed to him and MPSJ that the small piece of land there is designated for public amenities in the Structure Plan - period. Don't try to convince us about your utopic traffic dispersal plan. You just cannot built anything else except telco infrastructure there.

I smell something fishy out there.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v732/pcyeoh/TMusj6.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v732/pcyeoh/usj6demo.jpg
Demostrasi di bawah pokok. In no time the pokok will be tebang

joebloke
14-03-2009, 02:59 AM
QUOTE=MasterQ ".... If I have rotten eggs, I would have pelted him for treating us like fools. Mr Soong the leader of the group pointed to him and MPSJ that the small piece of land there is designated for public amenities in the Structure Plan - period. Don't try to convince us about your utopic traffic dispersal plan. You just cannot built anything else except telco infrastructure there.....

I smell something fishy out there...Demostrasi di bawah pokok. In no time the pokok will be tebang"[/QUOTE]

We are proud that USJ 6 has a "democracy tree" too , though it is not as tall and shady as compared to the one in Ipoh.. :). While the plague in Ipoh has been vandalised, our banner was stolen 2 days ago. :(

The whole MPSJ is rotten to the core. During the public hearing last year, when asked by the residents, the Deputy President of MPSJ denied that the there were any previous applications to build high rise commercial building on the same site, contrary to our reliable sources which confirmed that previous applications to develop the site were rejected.

Sentinel
14-03-2009, 04:24 PM
Pathetic lah... USJ (incl. Putra Heights) has 100,000 residents and only a handful at the demo... aiyah, like that where got loud enough? Where they scared?

Remember the food court incident for the USJ8 Police Station? That was more like it lah...

C'mon USJarians, walk the talk and let us hear you scream "Tak Nak!"

peace_relax
20-03-2009, 05:03 PM
QUOTE=MasterQ ".... If I have rotten eggs, I would have pelted him for treating us like fools. Mr Soong the leader of the group pointed to him and MPSJ that the small piece of land there is designated for public amenities in the Structure Plan - period. Don't try to convince us about your utopic traffic dispersal plan. You just cannot built anything else except telco infrastructure there.....

I smell something fishy out there...Demostrasi di bawah pokok. In no time the pokok will be tebang"

We are proud that USJ 6 has a "democracy tree" too , though it is not as tall and shady as compared to the one in Ipoh.. :). While the plague in Ipoh has been vandalised, our banner was stolen 2 days ago. :(

The whole MPSJ is rotten to the core. During the public hearing last year, when asked by the residents, the Deputy President of MPSJ denied that the there were any previous applications to build high rise commercial building on the same site, contrary to our reliable sources which confirmed that previous applications to develop the site were rejected.[/QUOTE]

No wonder.......I thought someone was ordered by MPSJ to take it (the banner) down..... :eek:

joebloke
29-05-2009, 04:14 PM
The heat on this controversial project has gone up by a few notches. Today Malaysiakini has an article/video on this much debated project.
It is a case of David vs Goliath

Please click the link below:
USJ 6 Folks Battle (http://www1.malaysiakini.com/news/105366)


In the meantime, USJ 6 folks are appealing to residents out there with legal/town planning background to assis them (on a pro bono basis) in their appeal to the State Appeal Board. Case has been fixed for mention in July 2009.

Sentinel
29-05-2009, 06:22 PM
Go police station and ask for a permit to organize a sit-in this Sunday and carry placards denouncing the project. We did that in the 90s to protect the playground at USJ4 (between USJ4/6 and USJ4/9) and even the MB then (Abu Hassan Omar) came to visit the residents camping there... let's see if the new USJ residents are made of better stuff than we old folks then... :D

chookyan
01-06-2009, 08:10 PM
Any body got any ideal what is going on? This afternoon passed by and saw a lorry unloading soil testing equipments at the padang in USJ 6/6F. In the evening on the way saw the equipment has been set up in the padang itself just next to the basketball court. Can't be for LRT, something is brewing.....