Photo courtesy of SJ Echo
[Article from The Star, Metro on May 20 2009]
RESIDENTS in USJ 6 in Subang Jaya have reiterated their objection to a proposed nine-storey office development on a piece of land belonging to TM Facilities, and are appealing to the authorities to rescind the approval.
The proposed development is within Telekom Malaysia’s telecommunication exchange premises in Persiaran Perpaduan, USJ 6.
“We filed a request at the Appeals Board on Monday seeking the necessary information and documents from the Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ),” said pro tem committee spokesman Philip Soong.
“We have been requesting for these information since the public hearing at the MPSJ on the project last June, but have yet to receive them.”
The residents are requesting for the development proposal report (including the Traffic Impact Assessment study), proposed layout plan and detailed information with supporting documents on the conversion of the land.
Their hearing at the Appeals Board is scheduled for May 28.
Soong said the residents were objecting to the project because the area in question lacked sufficient infrastructure support and its proximity would affect residents in USJ 6 and the surrounding area.
“Motorists who frequent Taipan (opposite USJ 6) also park their vehicles illegally in our residential area.
“The plot of land was originally designated for public amenities, and we are questioning how that land has since been alienated for commercial purposes,” he said.
It was reported that the project on a 0.35ha plot of land is a joint venture between TM Facilities and developer Pujangga Budiman Sdn Bhd, which would build the commercial development with two levels of basement car park.
Subang Jaya assemblyman Hannah Yeoh said she had raised the issue with the state assembly in March 2009, and subsequently wrote to the state planning committee and Selangor Mentri Besar’s office when she did not receive a reply at the state assembly.
She questioned how the land status was changed from its original public utilities status to commercial within a two-year period.
“The MPSJ had received an application for a sub-division of the said land, but rejected it twice during the November 2005 and February 2006 full board meetings after concluding that the land was a Telekom reserve.
“Two years later, an application was submitted for the proposed project, along with the land title that stated that it is located on commercial land.
“However, when I checked with the land office, the status of the land is still earmarked as a Telekom reserve,” said Yeoh.
“The residents don’t recall ever being informed of a public hearing on the conversion of land status, and we want to see the notices from the landowners if ever such a public hearing was held.”
“I urge the state planning committee to revoke the proposed project under Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1976, and for the MPSJ to furnish the information and documents that the residents have asked for.
“I will also bring up the issue at the next Selangor Economic Action Council (MTES) meeting to explain the issue in detail to Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and the 10 state executive councillors who sit in on MTES.”
Soong said the residents hoped that Khalid and the state government would take action soon as the issue affected some 5,000 residents in USJ 6.