Car Park conversion
as residents are aware, all units are only alloted one parking bay per unit (as per confirmation by andrew peris of bjd on saturday). we are still awaiting their allotment plans for scrutiny to confirm this as well as to ascertain where the other visitors parking bays are. as per dbkl's statement, there should be around 93 bays alloted to visitors and that the management plans to sell some of the visitors parking lots to residents. shall we have a "show of hands" those who approve of these plans as well as those who object to this? i, for one, am inclined towards a rental scheme by open tender subject to a maximum allocation of 50% of the visitor car park bays and that the visitors car parks be repainted a different colour. p.s. - andrew has indicated that proceeds from the sale (or rental) of these bays will be deposited into our maintenance account/sinking fund. p.p.s. - my vote should be for rental subject to a maximum 20% instead of as stated (without limitation) since the poll has been edited to include a percentage.

How about including "Not for Sale or Rental" ? If DBKL by-laws says we need 10% or 93 lots for visitors, there must be a reason for this.

as at today (29/11) there's a 62.5% vote (5 votes) in favour of renting the lots as opposed to 37.5% (3 votes)against. so i wonder how did bjd come to the conclusion that there is an overwhelming demand for the car parks to be sold (0%). perhaps if a system of rental is to be implemented, an annual open tender exercise be conducted. that way the best offer secures. :) anybody has any idea what a reasonable rental rate is? perhaps the annual rental rate should be paid in advance to avoid rent defaulters? any suggestions?

GOSH!!! Y? Y? Y?!!!...
I diagree of renting/selling visitor parking lots to resident. Q1; Why should we let BJD to earn extra$$$ on that lot?! Q2; How may visitors lots to sell/rent?(eg. 20, 40?) Q3; sell/rent by auction/tender or first come first serve basis?! Q4; Any research carries out...if we sell/rent, how many residents issue solved? (eg. maybe 10-30 homes. so, what about others?! we have 930units, my dear!...) Besides, I personally think that the recent pratice, such as limit the visitors to park overnight and/or by 11:00pm, they MUST DRIVE OFF and bla bla bla..... IS NONSENSE!! Ppl, we are staying in Apt and NOT JAIL (ie.schedule for visitors to visit)??!! YES. I agree that some residents is utilising the visitor lot for their 2nd car. and YES I agree its not fair to other residents who comes in/home late, so they might not even have the chance... BUT ppl, to be frank, there's nothing fair in this world! And I would think this is a very minor issues. lets give some tolerance and no point of wasting time to drack till so long?! Well, speaking out...You guys might think I'm parking at visitor parking lot too and hence, speaking to myself! BUT I"M NOT! I JUST FEEL that we should gives tolerance. Obviously, there isnt enough parking lot even outside the JD Apt. IF WE GO TOO HARD on this minor issues.....there will be a BIG PROBLEM and MORE COMPLAINTS in future. Why I'm saying this?! BCOS, the surrounding of JD Apt (outside parking) is already pack, currently we are having difficulties to exit our JD entrance(specially in the morning). and once the road fully open (main road on the left of JD Apt). the cars no longer can park freely,hence they will just park where ever there's space. and it'll become congested (similar to "Anjung Hijau Apt" - some cars just park middle of the road). With this foreseen, I"m VERY SURE the COMPLAINTS from JD residents will NEVER END! We look forward to live in a harmony and warm environment!! Not like taking revenge or fighting for goodself!!

Hi all, I suppose BJD is saying that there's a demand for carpark lots to be sold (ie bought by residents) must have been based on the initial registration by owners when they first obtained the keys in late 2004. There simply isn't enough car park to be sold/rented to everyone. I am quite sure almost every unit has more than 1 car, assuming there are at least 2 working person in each unit. How do we then allocate who gets to buy or even rent the lots? I mean, I would also want to have additional carpark, but in the fairness of it all, every single owner should be entitled to extra carpark lots by purchasing it (only if available to every single one of us). Otherwise, no deal. Should not based on drawing lots/first come first serve. We can't stop people from parking at the visitors car park. First come first serve lar, what to do. Thanks.

kalau bagi residen parking memang bagus. kalau sewa/jual cuma yg kaya je dpt extra lot. tapi kalau siapa siapa pun boleh guna visitor carpark mcm mana nak kawal kenderaan keluar masuk? mcm mana nak tau siapa residen siapa bukan? apa jadi kalau ada org saja park tempat org lain? bukankah ini akan menimbul lebih banyak masalah? kita nak buat car park kita org mcm kat 1utama? pi rounding sampai ada kereta keluar? kalau takde kereta keluar parking je kat tepi? mcm mana jaga nak kawal...... semua org pun nak masuk. i tak tau mcm mana u rasa tapi i betul betul panas baran bila balik nampak ada org punya kereta parking kat tempat i atas alasan ingat takde org park kat sana sebab dah pukul 3 pagi. dahlah org kena balik lambat.... parking pun kena sapu org lain. dah berapa kali i ingat nak parking kereta i betul betul depan gate sebab takde tempat lain nak parking!!!! i rasa kalau siapa pun boleh guna visitor parking masalah ni akan lebih serius lagi. biar je parking kat luar..... jalan kaki sikit. tak mati. jalil damai bukan mcm anjung hijau / arena green..... cuma sebelah tepi je sepatutnya jln utama. lebih baik mintak dbkl tukar je tempat pejalan kaki/basikal buat tempat letak kereta. bukannya ada org guna jalan tu. kalau ada pun parking kereta je.......

sori le...... i tak dpt 'a' utk semua matapelajaran terutamanya ejaan. buatlah apa u rasa...... i tak kisah. i ni kan bodoh. apa i kata tak relevan. tau merepek je. asalkan takde org park kat tempat i. kalau i tangkap, walaupun letak satu minit, jgn salahkan sesiapa kalau kereta kena calar/tayar kena puncit.

i'm with dc on this damn issue. "kalau bagi residen parking memang bagus. kalau sewa/jual cuma yg kaya je dpt extra lot. tapi kalau siapa siapa pun boleh guna visitor carpark mcm mana nak kawal kenderaan keluar masuk? INI BUKAN ALASAN! WE HAVE GUARD RECORD IN LOG BOOK OF ALL CARS ENTER AS VISITOR." " mcm mana nak tau siapa residen siapa bukan? AS I SAID THAT IS A VISITOR PARKING MY DEAR...AND GUARD NOTED DOWN THE CAR NO. & UNIT NO. WHY U WANNA KNOW WHO IS THE RESIDENT?," ************************************ - have you actually seen the record or log book yourself?? Do you think they actually sieve through it or is it just there to please management. Having a log book is one thing but tracking down culprits/residents with their 2nd or 3rd car in visitor parking is another matter. Maybe you are not doing it but what about the rest? A resident or unit which utilizes visitor park everyday... do you consider this vehicle in the compound as visitior or visitor with PR status? Thats why having the log book is compulsary but does anyone actually look at it and track these vehicles down? I have seen these things in other apartments. I'm sure its also happening here in BJD except that where i used to stay, this problem is very very minimum. ******************************************** "apa jadi kalau ada org saja park tempat org lain? bukankah ini akan menimbul lebih banyak masalah? kita nak buat car park kita org mcm kat 1utama? pi rounding sampai ada kereta keluar? kalau takde kereta keluar parking je kat tepi? mcm mana jaga nak kawal...... semua org pun nak masuk. i tak tau mcm mana u rasa tapi i betul betul panas baran bila balik nampak ada org punya kereta parking kat tempat i atas alasan ingat takde org park kat sana sebab dah pukul 3 pagi. dahlah org kena balik lambat.... parking pun kena sapu org lain. dah berapa kali i ingat nak parking kereta i betul betul depan gate sebab takde tempat lain nak parking!!!! THIS IS OUT OF THE ISSUE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE "VISITOR PARKING LOT" AND NOT "RESIDENT LOT"" ********************************** - maybe a bit off topic but in reality it is a chain reaction so dc isnt really out of the issue. same comment as above. *********************************** "i rasa kalau siapa pun boleh guna visitor parking masalah ni akan lebih serius lagi. HALO MY FREN! VISITOR PARKING IS MEANT TO OPEN FOR ALL. OF COS, IF YOU'VE REGISTERED AT GUARD HOUSE, YOU ARE ENTITLE TO ENTER THE PREMISES." ***************************** -agreed that visitor parking is open for all but then again, visiting everyday won't make you a visitor anymore right. thats why there should be rules/regulation to check on this i.e. by 11pm if visitor isnt leaving , he/she should inform security that he will be a bit late. after all he/she should have recorded his/her entry at security. **************************** "biar je parking kat luar..... jalan kaki sikit. tak mati. NOT TO SAY "jalan kaki sikit. tak mati" THE ISSUE HERE IS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, WE ARE FOCUSING TO MINIMISE FUTURE CONGESTION!" ****************************** - maybe a bit harsh but then again, perhaps dc is refering to the "everyday visitors" like me. So perhaps he isnt wrong to say this. Everyday visitors are wolves in sheep's clothing. So these so called visitors should be doing what dc is saying. ****************************** if following your suggestion that anyone can come in and utilise the visitor car park, then probably BJD would be like the low cost apt in front of us!! and thats how parking issues are resolved over there.... 1st come 1st serve.... would you like that? if you like it that way, then we might as well tear down our fencing parameters and open our visitor car parks to them as well...... maybe they are also utilising our visitor car parks as we speak as no one actually checks the logbook entries...who knows!!??? point to ponder as well right!!??? cheers

Note to aaronfs. monitoring log book is "security cum management" responsibility. If so, and I do agree, some resident utilised visitor parking for their 2nd or 3rd car and so on. STILL IS "security cum management" responsibility. THEY should take action against the resident who utilise the lot. Its not fair to tie-up or limit of time for other resident who really has visitor staying overnight and so on....And I think is not secure to inform security about the duration of nights stays by the visitors. who knows,,, might be giving out chances for criminal happens at JD if its too opens or if they are too familiar with our time frame. Lastly, YES we are not staying in "LOW COST APT". neither we are in "HIGH COST CONDO"?!! If you are not clear where we are.....WE ARE IN "LOW-MEDIUM RANGE APARTMENT". We are not in the HIGH CLASS APARTMENT OR CONDOMINIUM" what we ask or request, I personally think is too much and over esteem!

my point of view:- 1. Agree to let visitor carpark "IF" the number of lot is really 93 as i think 93 of visitor car park is a bit too much. just imagine, 93 can easily occupy up to 3-4 levels of covered car park! is there really so many of visitors everyday? such a big waste! p.s. Can the develper shows the prove of 93 visitor car park? 2. since there are so many different view among the residents, i will suggest to let on yearly/half-yearly and balloting basis. Let whoever intereted ballot the car park every year/half-yearly. This suggestion maybe a bit naive to some of the users here :P 3. Not agree to let residents use visitor car park. especially now there are only about 20 lot usable. before the security enforce the new rule i did see almost every night/saturday/sunday the visitor car park fully occupied. Do you think those visitor who r not familiar with this area know where to park their car if the visitor car park is full and no choice got to park outside? my sister in-law did complaint to me next time don't want to come becos got to park the car so far at the other end of the main road outside and to walk so far just to visit you. Yes, blk A & B maybe not too far but blk D & E yes to some VISITORS.

fact: there is a car park bay no. 1023 at block f the ACTUAL number of car park bays have not been verified (i do not have personal knowledge as to whether the bays are in running order). fact: developer promised to identify the number and location of the designated visitors' car park bays and erect signages accordingly. the developer HAS NOT identified these. there are many "unaccounted" lots for which the developer has yet to explain to management of its purpose. NO, these so called visitors' car park bays are not grouped in a particular spot but are sporadically positioned. why? only bjd knows... fact: visitors' log is the responsibility of the security/management the management hardly, if ever, inspects this log. the truth is discrepancies were discovered by the committee to the surprise (?) of the management. fact: some residents DO have more than one access stickers the present management attributes this to the previous management but HAS NOT addressed the issue. most of these residents are parking at vacant lots (allocated to units which are still vacant) or supposedly vacant lots, as in the case of dc. hence, there are in fact wolves in sheeps' clothing amongst us. fact: even if false/genuine visitors park beyond the so called 11pm ruling, there is absolutely NO enforcement. and yes, i do agree the 11pm ruling IS pretty absurd anyway. fact: jalil damai apartments IS a low medium cost apartment so is arena green, vista komanwel, endah ria, endah regal etc (prices may have appreciated since but they all started as low medium cost apartments) but from personal experiences, their level of security is much tighter than ours. my personal opinion: if there are in fact 93 visitors' parking bays, then allowing residents to utilise some of these bays is reasonable. the question really is how are we going to regulate/monitor this? as you know, our guards cannot be depended upon to carry out their EXISTING tasks and implementing such a system will definitely add to their existing responsibilities. anyway, to allow residents a free for all first come first serve will only transform external traffic woes into internal parking problems. let's not kid ourselves. i think a walk around the apartments at night will reveal to you that at present, there ARE cars parked along the road shoulders and along non designated areas within the car parks. just my two cents (hmm... looks more like RM10) worth. last but not least, all views are welcomed in this forum. let's not get personal, shall we? and dc, i think you will know that the best brains and richest men in these world were all college dropouts. :wink:

has anyone looked at the visitors log to see on average how many visitors per day we have before we start allowing some of these to be taken up ? if the visitors lots are sporadic - can we ask the management to re-group and reallocate the lots - ie 1 to 1 swap ?

there are, on average, about 30-40 persons registered... out of which, 75% of whom register in the evening (after 7pm). so i guess the current 22 designated visitors car bays are just about enough for these visitors. :roll:

Note to Katml : monitoring log book is "security cum management" responsibility. - correct as you mentioned but you assume that they are doing a fine job. This is what you are saying judging by your words.. so everything must be in order. If so, and I do agree, some resident utilised visitor parking for their 2nd or 3rd car and so on. STILL IS "security cum management" responsibility. THEY should take action against the resident who utilise the lot. - correct again as you mentioned but you assume that they are doing a fine job ..... SO EVERYTHING MUST REALLY BE IN ORDER Its not fair to tie-up or limit of time for other resident who really has visitor staying overnight and so on....And I think is not secure to inform security about the duration of nights stays by the visitors. who knows,,, might be giving out chances for criminal happens at JD if its too opens or if they are too familiar with our time frame. - you are damn right about this. BJD is a good place to harbour criminals, crooks, terrorists etc. Lastly, YES we are not staying in "LOW COST APT". neither we are in "HIGH COST CONDO"?!! If you are not clear where we are.....WE ARE IN "LOW-MEDIUM RANGE APARTMENT". We are not in the HIGH CLASS APARTMENT OR CONDOMINIUM" - correct we bought a cheap apartment in the neighbourhood with some sort of security that you assume is going well. If this is what you assume,then we dont need to have these discussions at all. Everybody should do as they please.... ASSUMPTION is the mother of all fuck ups.. hope you know that. Screw the system and policy, everyone can have it their way. what we ask or request, I personally think is too much and over esteem! - u know best in assuming, maybe you should assume yourself to the BJD Management. -the problem with BJD seems to be security and management not who gets or doesn't get the car park. we need to fix the root cause of the issues....which is the security/management. Even if you had a brilliant idea, it wouldnt work with the current management.... Everything needs a foundation to stand on, where is ours in this sense?? we don't have it _________________ Katml