G&G - Approvals needed

[Joe Gomez]

We are thinking of starting a G&G in Sunway.

Guys,
Need some inputs on the requirements insofar as the authorities are concerned ......

Please tell me :

1 ) What is the percentage of residents within the area that have to agree ?
80% ? 85%? OR 100% ?

2 ) MPSJ will need to see the result of # (1) above ..... and will only "AMBIL MAKLUM" .....right ?

3 ) If we intend to erect a fence around the perimeter, I am told, that we would need to get a TOL from the Land Office. Is that right ?

4 ) If we intend to put up a pondok we wld need to do the same as in # (3) above. Is that right ?

Has anyone had the experience of going through the entire process of dealing with the authorities in this context ?

YOUR INPUTS WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED ..... :)

[kwchang]

answer to #1 is above 80%
answer to rest of the questions is YES

[Joe Gomez]

chang,
In a manner of speaking, the first question was an unfair one ... apologies ....... :o

I should have added that at a recent taklimat session (with CPO of Selangor, Datuk Khalid )at MPSJ, YB Hannah mentioned that there is a certain category of security implementation that requires 100% agreement from the residents.
What added to the confusion was that at an earlier session for newly appointed JKP chaps, held at MPSJ, the following was mentioned by the MPSJ facilitator :

(a) If we intend to implement a guarded thingey we need to get at least 80 % to agree.
(b) If we intended a gated AND guarded thing, then we need to get 85% to agree

Hence when YB Hannah said 100% as above, I was totally confused :confused:

Subsequently upon asking around, I heard that such requirement i.e. 100% is applicable to those communities like Tropicana where the security arrangement comes with the territory.

So I wld like to know whether there are indeed 3 categories ( as above ) with 3 distinct requirements i.e. 80%, 85 % and 100%. It will be useful if the relevant, authoritative source is also mentioned ..............
ANY TAKERS ?? PLEEEEEEEEASSE . :) :)

Councillor Rajiv,
I was told that you are quite conversant with the guidelines for gated and guarded implementation.
Would you be able to throw some light please ?

[SCCheah]

My two sens.

Basically almost all fenced and guarded (FnG) as well as gated and guarded (GnG) communities are illegal for the simple reason that the internal roads are all public roads. The only exception is the landed strata properties.

Even Tropicana is not a fully gated and guarded community.

Gated and guarded generally refers to those developments that were developed from the start as a GnG community. So when I used GnG in my other comments in this website it was not correctly used.

It should be fenced and guarded- the new term by the Selangor state government for all those townships/housing schemes like Bandar Sunway, Subang Jaya, USJ which originally started with an open concept but some phases have now been fenced up and guarded. In fact some people would say it should be called fenced, guarded and gated - because they look like a prison. All sorts of obstacles are thrown in.

It is the FnG that I am opposed as the RAs simply block here and there etc. Some forummers got confused and probably thought I am against all GnGs.

So back to your question.

You must have 85 per cent approval from the residents to do FnG.
Please read this Friday's NST Property section (Jan 29) where this hot topic will be discussed by five prominent industry players. How I wish we can have more prominent people to take part in future. We tried calling police chiefs but they could not make it.

As for 100 per cent approval- I believe it refers to the GnG like Tropicana.

Point is so long as the roads are public roads, even local councils cannot override the National Land Code. So even if you have 100 per cent residents' approval it is still illegal. The law must be amended - in fact there are suggestions to surrender internal roads in a development to the residents but this will cause lots of problems like who is going to collect rubbish, repair roads etc if the residents take over the roads?

Correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks.

[Joe Gomez]

tq SCCheah.
The Friday 29th NST shd be interesting reading .... :)

Meanwhile, standing by for Councillor Rajiv's inputs as well.

cheers

[SCCheah]

Sorry Joe,

The article is coming out next Friday Feb 5. got mixed up.

[Joe Gomez]

Thanks SCCheah

[birdy]

Point is so long as the roads are public roads, even local councils cannot override the National Land Code. So even if you have 100 per cent residents' approval it is still illegal. The law must be amended - in fact there are suggestions to surrender internal roads in a development to the residents but this will cause lots of problems like who is going to collect rubbish, repair roads etc if the residents take over the roads?
If it is illegal, then why are authorities not taking action? If you go to places like Tmn Emas or Tmn Megah .. they simply close the road as if they own the road.. this has actually caused unnecessary traffic congestion. Please advise if a public (or rather road user) can file complain for such case? :mad:

[Joe Gomez]

If it is illegal, then why are authorities not taking action? If you go to places like Tmn Emas or Tmn Megah .. they simply close the road as if they own the road.. this has actually caused unnecessary traffic congestion. Please advise if a public (or rather road user) can file complain for such case? :mad:Hi birdy, when I began this thread, it was not my intention to discuss the merits and demerits in implementing a G&G or the inaction ( or otherwise) of the authorities when such implementation is done in a callous manner in some communities. There is another thread discussing it.
I wanted some input on the steps ( to the extent known ) to be taken towards implementation of G&G.
Thats all.

[rajiv]

We are thinking of starting a G&G in Sunway.

Guys,
Need some inputs on the requirements insofar as the authorities are concerned ......

Please tell me :

1 ) What is the percentage of residents within the area that have to agree ?
80% ? 85%? OR 100% ?

2 ) MPSJ will need to see the result of # (1) above ..... and will only "AMBIL MAKLUM" .....right ?

3 ) If we intend to erect a fence around the perimeter, I am told, that we would need to get a TOL from the Land Office. Is that right ?

4 ) If we intend to put up a pondok we wld need to do the same as in # (3) above. Is that right ?

Has anyone had the experience of going through the entire process of dealing with the authorities in this context ?

YOUR INPUTS WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED ..... :)

Hi Joe,

Before we go into specifics, it needs to be made clear that
1. What was presented during the JKP seminar was MPSJ's proposed guidelines, which has yet to receive endorsement from the state govt.
2. All guidelines can be challenged in court, and acts passed in parliament overrides guidelines whenever there's a conflict.
3. MPSJ embarked on creating guidelines to regulate G&G. There was a long debate, and MPSJ is not outlawing G&G simply because the police can't ensure security & even the police is endorsing G&G.

In this insecure times, we are taking a position to not stand in the way of neighborhoods taking security into their own hands, but aim to regulate it to minimize inconvenience to others, be it non-paying residents or outsiders.

Now to your questions.

Q1
State existing guidelines
85% gated
100% guarded

MPSJ's proposed guidelines
80% gated
85% guarded.

Q2
MPSJ will only ambil maklum

Q3&4
TOL - Fence, no. Guardhouse, yes.
Both also needs MPSJ's permission

[Joe Gomez]

Hi birdy, when I began this thread, it was not my intention to discuss the merits and demerits in implementing a G&G or the inaction ( or otherwise) of the authorities when such implementation is done in a callous manner in some communities. There is another thread discussing it.
I wanted some input on the steps ( to the extent known ) to be taken towards implementation of G&G.
Thats all.Guys and Gals, pls give me some breathing space lah.
Pls refrain from commenting, on this thread, on the relative merits and demerits of implementing the F&G / G&G.
THAT IS NOT MY INTENTION.
And as I said earlier: There is another thread discussing it.

Dont hijack this thread ....... :mad:

[Joe Gomez]

Hi Joe,
....................................
Now to your questions.

Q1
State existing guidelines
85% gated
100% guarded

MPSJ's proposed guidelines
80% gated
85% guarded.In both the existing and the proposed guidelines I dont understand why implementing "GATED" (that could potentially elicit stronger and more unfavourable reactions compared to "GUARDED" ) needs a lesser proportion of the resident population to agree.
Further doesnt "GATED" assume "GUARDED" ? As in, someone ( a guard probably) has to be employed to open the "GATE" right ?
Have you inadvertently reversed the percentages ? Kindly clarify, sir.
Q2
MPSJ will only ambil maklumOK this came thru very clearly during the briefing session. TQ.
Q3&4
TOL - Fence, no. Guardhouse, yes.
Both also needs MPSJ's permissionDont they "AMBIL MAKLUM" only ?

Thank you very much, Councillor Rajiv for responding.
I plead with all forummers here not to rope Councillor Rajiv into a debate on the pros and cons of the G&G concept .......... at least not on my thread.
May I suggest that you take that over to the thread entitled " Tell it to your Rajiv, your MPSJ Councillior "

3 additional questions, if I may ......
Question A: Does the boom gate need TOL ?
Question B: Do the guidelines specify that the boom gate has to be cleared with the Polis ?
Question C: TOL application ( where relevant) to be submitted to the Pejabat Tanah ..... right ?
Thank you very much.

[rajiv]

In both the existing and the proposed guidelines I dont understand why implementing "GATED" (that could potentially elicit stronger and more unfavourable reactions compared to "GUARDED" ) needs a lesser proportion of the resident population to agree.
Further doesnt "GATED" assume "GUARDED" ? As in, someone ( a guard probably) has to be employed to open the "GATE" right ?
Have you inadvertently reversed the percentages ? Kindly clarify, sir.OK this came thru very clearly during the briefing session. TQ.Dont they "AMBIL MAKLUM" only ?

Thank you very much, Councillor Rajiv for responding.
I plead with all forummers here not to rope Councillor Rajiv into a debate on the pros and cons of the G&G concept .......... at least not on my thread.
May I suggest that you take that over to the thread entitled " Tell it to your Rajiv, your MPSJ Councillior "

3 additional questions, if I may ......
Question A: Does the boom gate need TOL ?
Question B: Do the guidelines specify that the boom gate has to be cleared with the Polis ?
Question C: TOL application ( where relevant) to be submitted to the Pejabat Tanah ..... right ?
Thank you very much.

1. I'm sorry Joe, my mistake in typing, the smaller percentage for guarded, the bigger for gated.

2. As far as I know, there is no such thing as TOL for boom gate

3. Do the guidelines specify that the boom gate has to be cleared with the Polis ? - no mention of this

4. TOL application to Pejabat Tanah

[Joe Gomez]

1. I'm sorry Joe, my mistake in typing, the smaller percentage for guarded, the bigger for gated.

2. As far as I know, there is no such thing as TOL for boom gate

3. Do the guidelines specify that the boom gate has to be cleared with the Polis ? - no mention of this

4. TOL application to Pejabat Tanahtq v m indeed Councillor Rajiv

[rajiv]

tq v m indeed Councillor Rajiv

You're welcome