“Gated communities” means the particular development, its facilities and services including infrastructure (roads, drains, etc) within the development are privately managed and owned.
Usually some form of physical barrier surrounds the boundaries to the development. By contrast, guarded communities refer to communities where residents employ private security to provide security services to an area which includes public spaces.
Advocates of this security barrier have used the verdict to validate their reasons to put up security barriers, even at areas that were not certified as gated communities.
It certainly made things worse for DBKL as there was a rush by RAs to establish their own security scheme with boom gates, security fences, perimeter fencing and guard houses.
Residents even registered their associations with the Registrar of Societies (ROS) and put up barriers almost immediately without fulfilling DBKL guidelines.
According to DBKL, from 2011 to July 2017, 158 residents associations in Kuala Lumpur implemented the guarded security scheme, but only approved 65.
This means 58.8% of the RAs are operating their security scheme illegally.
While DBKL was willing to accommodate the requests as permitted by law, clearly the situation got out of hand at some neighbourhoods today.
Bukit Bandaraya resident Mitra Logan said some of the barricades were questionable. “Steel fencing permanently block public roads, including roads that lead to public parks, sports facilities and schools,’’ she said.
This proliferation of “walled” communities, Mitra said, was having far-reaching consequences on a community and, in some cases, divided residents.
“I live in Bangsar and sometimes I am treated like an outsider in my own neighbourhood. “It’s even worse when family and friends visit. They are made to feel like criminals,’’ she said, adding that her sister was asked to produce her ID by the guard.
“What happens if there is a medical emergency or fire, the ambulance and fire engines cannot access the area because someone decided to permanently close up a public road?
Senior citizens Peter Yap, 67, and Ronnie Loh, 59, from Taman Desa complained that the nearest route to their neighbourhood playground was permanently blocked by a steel gate.
“So now, instead of walking to my park, I have to drive there,’’ Yap lamented. “It never used to be this way,’’ Loh said, adding that it was inconvenient and illegal.
Residents of Desa Aman Cheras who do not pay for the neighbourhood security scheme claim that they are forced to use a different road when entering and exiting their homes, which violates their rights as residents.
Following a barrage of complaints from unhappy residents, StarMetro went to the ground to check out the problem.
Re-auditing security schemes
Kuala Lumpur mayor Tan Sri Mohd Amin Nordin Abdul Aziz said neighbourhoods with guarded schemes approved by DBKL would be checked again and re-audited.
He said the scheme was implemented to improve public safety and security, and never should it be an excuse to break the law.
“We need to relook at some of the guarded schemes as there is certainly room for improvement, particularly in cases where public roads are blocked,” he said.
“The problem starts when there is a payment issue and the RAs use the system to punish non-payers,’’ he said, adding that dividing communities was not DBKL’s intention.
He added that it was important to ensure that non-paying residents were not penalised in any way or even made to feel like outsiders in their own area.
“You cannot stop a person from entering a public road and there should never be segregation in any way that could lead to animosity among the residents,” he stressed. Abd Hamid said roads leading to public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, public parks, sports facilities and community halls cannot be cordoned off.
“You cannot prevent anyone from getting to this places and you cannot permanently seal off any public road,’’ he said.
He added that if there was a strong request from residents to close a road, only a local road would be considered and the RA must offer an alternative route for residents and the public which must be a reasonable distance not exceeding 150m. That is also subject to the RA securing 100% consent from residents.
“You see it is not easy to simply close roads in the city, we make it very hard to do so,’’ he said. Abd Hamid said DBKL had demolished illegal barriers in Taman Desa twice in a row, but the persons involved put them (gates) up yet again.
He added that some RAs would bring in their lawyers to argue their point during meetings to justify their reasons (for blocking roads). “Even I was asked to provide ID when carrying out a site visit in a guarded community in Jalan Kemaris Bangsar recently. “I was travelling in a DBKL car,’’ Abd Hamid said, adding that it was illegal to ask a person to hand over their MyKad.
“While we realise the need for people to feel secure in their own homes, there is no doubt that RAs are struggling to manage the scheme properly and this has resulted in conflict and disagreements, which is not what we anticipated’’ he said.
METRO NEWS
By Bavani M
Thursday, 15 Mar 2018
https://www.thestar.com.my/
TAGS / KEYWORDS:
Central Region , Guarded Security Scheme
Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/metro/metro-news/2018/03/15/dbkl-no-intention-to-divide-communities-local-authority-to-review-security-schemes-in-residential-ar/#aKHAOFRSLdYBsMaQ.99
_____________________________
REPLY TO GeRA's LETTER TO RESIDENTS (DATED 7 MAY 2019)
Please don't be confused by the letter from RA. Here's why:
1. The title "Permohonan Skim Komuniti Berpagar" in the letter (dated 7 May 2019) to the residents is inaccurate & misleading (the correct one should read "Permohonan Skim Komuniti Kad Akses Otomatik" instead. There is no problem with the perimeter fencing erected by Sime Darby Property, the only problem now is the usage of Card Access system which is prohibited by the local council (it is illegal and prohibited unless they have the consent of all residents here which they do not have).
2. The RA is also manipulative in trying to get what they want by fear mongering. Now threatening the residents on the removal of the perimeter fencing by MPKlang. *Please note: (Actually MPKlang only wants to remove their illegal card access system/ autogate and any illegal barriers - not the entire perimeter fencing that was already up 3 years ago.)
3. From the circular, we also found out that (as mentioned in their letter), despite the ongoing scheme implemented by the RA, an untoward incident still happened a few weeks back to one of the houses here. That only goes to proof that the current scheme implemented by the RA is still ineffective and unable to prevent or address any security concerns. (No RA can guarantee our safety and security anyway).
4. We can also conclude that the RA has been operating this scheme illegally here without getting the necessary approvals from MPKlang first. It is only now that the RA is trying to get the necessary approval from the local council after being served a show cause/letter of warning. This also shows that the RA has no regards for the laws, guidelines or the authorities.
5. We can also say here that the RA did not try to obtain the necessary consent from the residents first. They also have no regards for all the residents here, but only their selfish agenda. The RA does not respect the rights of everyone, but only theirs and those who subscribe to their scheme.
6. The RA's conduct is irresponsible as they did not follow the guidelines, rules and regulations as required by the local councils and the related ministry before implementing their scheme. Either they have no regards for the law or they don't know what they are doing.
7. We must not let them change our land title to Strata. (As only "Strata" titles can implement proper "Gated & Guarded" Schemes). It will be to our disadvantage if our land title is being converted to "Strata" - which will mean that all maintenance (such as garbage collection, drains, roads, streetlights, etc will no longer come under MPKlang, and we would have to pay for them in the future). *We strongly urge you to act wisely and to ensure that this would not happen to us here!
8. Please think carefully before signing your rights away on whether you want to allow this irresponsible and selfish RA to represent us all. The neighbourhood here now is no longer harmonious in nature and we need to correct the situation. This RA has caused social disunity and anger among us in this residence.
Please do not think that this is the only scheme available to manage the security concerns here. Let the police PDRM handle it and let them do their jobs. Do not take laws into your own hands. And there are also other ways to foster a better harmonious relationship with your neighbours here such as Rukun Tetangga. Thank you.
