More than 50% of the biggest flood mitigation pond in Kota Damansara will be reclaimed to build 1,186 units of apartment !!!

IT IS NO LONGER A RUMOUR .... SEGI COLLEGE IS THE CULPRIT!!!

Water retention pond at Section 3 of Kota Damansara, infront of Sekolah Sri KDU will have to give way for a MASSIVE development proposed by SEGI Education Sdn Bhd???

If you are the affected residents round Kota Damansara or parents with children studying at Sekolah Sri KDU, please join us in this protest to MPPJ.

SEGI Education Sdn Bhd has on 13 June 2005 submitted to MPPJ application for Development Order to construct 1,186 units of mixed-development .....

3 blocks of apartment 26-33 story ( 528 units )
1 block of studio apartment with 5 story shoplot ( 278 unit studio apartment and 80 unit shoplot )
3 blocks of condominium 34 - 35 story ( 300 units )

However, this is NOT just any normal proposed residential developement .....

The irony is, these apartments will be constructed in the middle of a water retention pond which has been zoned for recreational purposes under the Kota Damansara Master Plan. More than 50% of the water retention pond water body will be reclaimed for this purpose.

The affected residents around this water retention pond are objecting this proposed development based on following reasons:

1. Efficiency of Retention Pond and flood mitigation measures compromised

The proposed site is a retention pond reserve which is part of a comprehensive river and drainage network for Kota Damansara and the greater upstream PJ Utara areas. The Kota Damansara masterplan alone totals an area of about 3,000 acres. The reduction of more than 50% (15.201 acres out of the total water body of about 30acres) of this pond will inevitably affect the efficiency of its ability to retain surface and storm water run-off and the overall flood mitigation masterplan would be compromised. Detailed studies need to be conducted not only for the said development site but the entire riverine network, drainage and surface water discharge systems both upstream and downstream to ascertain the impact of such a reduction.

2. Reduction of public open space

Retention ponds are considered as part of the open space network in a development. Therefore, in any planning submission, retention ponds are deemed to contribute to 30% of the overall open space required by the Local Planning Authority guidelines for open space which is 10% of the total land area. Through the elimination of 15.201 acres of retention pond area, this essentially also reduces the open space network for the entire development by 4.56 acres of open space/ nature park as a public amenity.

3. Change of Landuse not of public interest

The change of landuse of public reserve designated for retention pond to development land requires careful planning and consideration by the Authorities. By virtue of the above reasons, this is fundamentally wrong since there are many areas which are zoned residential and not fully developed todate. The revocation of reservation for retention pond should not be considered for projects which do not benefit the public. Converting and disposing public infrastructure and amenity for a private condominium and commercial development is not in keeping with general development policies and guidelines. The proposed development is private in nature and will deprive the public from being able to enjoy its original natural ambience.

The developer claims that Jabatan Pengairan Selangor has given approval for the development of 15.201 acres of retention pond reserve vide letter ref. Ruj.: (17) dlm. JPS SEL. 012C/9/3/455 dated 10 June 2005. However, item f) of the said letter states clearly that it is merely a consent in principle for consideration of the proposed development which does not automatically grant approval to any site plan and development details attached with the application until further studies have been carried out. Based on this, the content of the letter has been misconstrued by the applicant.

4. Impact on long term sustainability

The lack of integrated and comprehensive studies of such developments in relation to the overall Kota Damansara masterplan is detrimental to long term sustainability of planned communitites, public amenity, efficiency of infrastructural systems as well as the loss of natural green lungs, flora and fauna. This development proposal is ‘piecemeal’ in nature and not in keeping with the intent of the original masterplan.

5. Development justifications outlined in Section 7 of‘Laporan Cadangan Pemajuan' are weak:

i) Claims that JPS has given consent on the development of land totaling 15.201 acres is not correctly reported as detailed in Item 1 above.

ii) The development claims to be suitable with its residential surrounds and states that it is in keeping with the development trend favouring highrise to maximize landuse citing Casa Indah and Sunway Pelangi as examples. The reasons are invalid:

* The immediate surrounds are low rise low density residential and institutional zones. The proposed 25-35 storey highrise towers are not in keeping with the immediate surrounds in terms of density, building scale, image and skyline although MPPJ does not have a clear policy of height limit.

* There is no such thing as a highrise trend, more like maximizing profit. Developments generally do maximize landuse but care must be given to ensure public interest and development sustainability

* Examples cited are not standalone parcels like the proposed development. These highrise examples are part of a larger masterplan that provides for a variety of residential mix. Casa Indah for example is part of the Damansara Indah Masterplan totaling 409 acres developed by Damansara Impian Sdn Bhd which includes the Seri Selangor Golf Course, bungalows, Semi-detached, terrace houses and the Casa Indah apartments and the overall density is very much lower ie less than 10 units/acre. These highrise blocks are only 18 storeys. The Sunway development is developed in a similar nature combining both landed and strata development.

iii) This development may be providing more than the required carparks based on MPPJ guidelines which is very ‘conscientious’. However, in this scenario the total no. of carparks is 2709 and no. of motorcycle parks is 611. The total no. of vehicle park provided is 3320. This will add to the traffic congestion as these vehicle volume is not considered in the initial traffic studies and road network planning and will further put pressure on these secondary roads.

iv) The LCP states that there is no landuse conflict and physical constraint with its surrounds. Basically, there was never meant to be a development of such nature (ie high density, high rise apartment) which is bringing in a total of additional 1186 units (equivalent to 5930 population) and 3320 vehicles. The immediate surrounds are schools, colleges and institutions. The heavy traffic will cause congestion along this road and will be a safety hazard to school children. This in itself is very much in conflict with the surrounds.

v) The justification that this will contribute to the housing stock in MPPJ is not viable since there are a lot of housing schemes within Kota Damansara and there is should be no pressure to build on public reserve.

vi) Other justifications such as providing residential for middle income sector, the nearby workforce and elevating living standards are very vague. Essentially, broad Government objectives must be achieved through integrated developments ensuring long term sustainability of liveable and balance communities. To provide housing stock through the destruction of natural attributes and public amenities are detrimental to the environment and against Local Government acts and policies.

Read what ADUN Kota Damansara cum Selangor State EXCO for Housing and Local Government Datuk Mokhtar Dahlan has to say about this proposed development .... click here