Ara Damansara

Prior to my previous post of  “I am feddup of Pakatan Rakyat bullshit”. I received a letter from Mr. Peter Chong, the Private Secretary to YB R SIvarasa:-

Dear Jeff Ong,

I refer to your opinion posted in the Aradamansara.com posting titled “I am feddup with Pakatan Rakyat bullshit”.

I would like the opportunity to put across certain facts which you may not have been privileged to know before posting your opinion.

Both YB Dr Nasir and YB Sivarasa have been against this development at the existing plot ratio of 3:9. From day one, when I was first approached by the Ara Damansara Action Group, we have been working closely and listening to the views and opinions of the residents. When the group made their presentation to both Dr Nasir and Sivarasa, the group was assured of the YBs support.

In order to have a fair opinion, SIvarasa had also met with the said developer, Dr Lim of the Ara Green Wellness Project.

I myself have attended almost all the residents objection hearings as well as the One Stop Center (OSC) Committee meetings and MBPJ Fullboard meetings discussing this particular issue.

Both Dr Nasir and Sivarasa have spoken in support of the residents with regards to this particular project.  We are also supporting the residents’ objections to the neighbouring project by Penchala.  I must also add that your local councillor, Sdr Khairul Anuar, has spoken up loud and clear in all the meeting  in support of the resident’s objections.

Unfortunately the project was initially approved at an OSC meeting where the councilors were not fully informed by the MBPJ Planning Department of the provisions in the draft RKK for Ara Damansara which only provided for a plot ratio of 2.

When this was raised later by YB Sivarasa, it was then sent back by the MBPJ full board meeting  to the OSC to be reviewed.

The last OSC meeting to discuss this project decided that the plot ratio would only finally be determined after a full traffic study as demanded by JKR and that no building plans would be approved until the plot ratio was settled.  It ought to have been quite clear to all that at this stage no Borang C should  be issued.

However some individuals in the Planning Dept  caused the Borang C to be issued.

This Borang C was issued despite the fact that the Full Board did not endorse the approval of the project when it was presented for information of the full board. The MBPJ fullboard had actually requested the OSC to re-look  the proposal and its approval.

I must point out here that the OSC Committee is made up of the Mayor, 4 councillors plus heads of the various departments and agencies including the Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR). Of the councilors involved,  only Sdri Tiew W.K. has been vociferous in her support of this project from the beginning and arguing for the approval  at plot ratio 3.9.  However,  the other councilors have been objecting to the approval of plot ratio of  3.9 on the basis that  the maximum ratio of 4 in RTPJ2 can only be considered at optimum conditions and the draft RKK now specifies only 2. In this case, the project proposal does not qualify for optimum conditions as the basic JKR requirement of a comprehensive traffic study of the area, to include the Old Airport Road has not been fulfilled.

In fact, Mr Derek Fernandez in the last MBPJ full board meeting questioned why the Borang C was approved and also pointed out that several important points were omitted from the minutes of the OSC meetings presented to the full board.

Both Dr Nasir and Sivarasa’s opinions on this issue is that the JKR requirement for the traffic  study must be carried out and that the plot ratio of 1:2 as proposed in the Draft Special Area Study should also be given due consideration although the RTPJ2 has proposed the plot ratio of 1:4 which ratio is to be treated as a maximum ratio under optimum conditions.

Please also note that this kind of healthy deliberation within the council and in the OSC exists only in the Pakatan Rakyat led administration where the voices of the residents are heard. This would not happen under Barisan National and in fact the questionable change in land use for this particular project happened during the BN rule.

If BN had been transparent and governed responsibly, this piece of land would be the recreational park for the benefit of the Ara Damansara residents.

I hope that the above facts will give you a clearer picture of the stand of both your State Assemblyman  YB Dr Nasir and your Member of Parliament YB Sivarasa.

May I reiterate once again that we are not against development; we are supportive of sustainable development and respecting the voice and the rights of the majority.

As a responsible blog moderator I hope that you will ensure the correct facts are presented to your residents and readers when available. Freedom of expression comes also with responsibility and thus I hope that you will allow this response to be posted in its entirety. Please allow your readers  make their own conclusions after having been given the facts.

May I take this opportunity also to thank you and your fellow residents for your  support of Pakatan Rakyat .  YB Sivaras  looks forward to your continued support to bring real and sustainable change to our country.

Peter Chong

Private Secretary to YB R SIvarasa

Member of Parliamnet for Subang

1) My name is spelled with a single “f”, so it’s Jef Ong.

2) Whatever excuses you’re giving is really none of my concern. The fact is Ara Damansara residents is against with the plot ratio of 1:3.9 but MBPJ gave a Borang C with a condition of plot ratio of 1:3.9 instead of 1:2. That is a FACT.

3) “Freedom with speech comes with responsibility”, I truly agree and please point out in anyway I have failed to convey the truth to my readers. I will admit and correct myself.

I am sure all the residents of Ara Damansara will continue to throw their support to State Government, including myself. I don’t care what BN has done, the past is the past, we expect CHANGE now. That is what PR promised. Be Pakatan Rakyat and not “Push Responsibility”. We look forward to see CHANGE in this coming months.

As I understand the due date was 10th March 2011. Assuming the developer have not responded to the conditions, is the approved Borang C voided? Have they requested for extension?

As for “Competency, Accountability and Transparency”, can you kindly explain to us on “However some individuals in the Planning Dept  caused the Borang C to be issued.” . Do keep us updated, thanks!

-Jef Ong