Park Green

Maybe those who wants 2nd transponder disc should have a COE bidding system hahah ... Management can release a certain no. of extra disc and those who need it can start bidding.

Whatever amount u bid would be for the monthly amount u have to pay to the managemnt for the extra disc hahah .. and the COE expires in 1 yr after that we have another bidding and see who willing to pay most.

Would be interesting is see if someone actually bid $500 for a lot hahaha .. funds collected can help in the Sinking fund oso mah ! win win situation!
 


The motion to get PG owners to pay for 2nd car park was brought up during 2006 GM together with the car washing issue.

Not much owners turn up to vote for the support on the motion. It was quickly dismissed by owners with second car who were present.

I would think the car parking problem will worsen as the security do not keep an record of non-resident cars parking overnight. Some of my neighbours even invited their siblings to park in PG so to save HDB carpark fee when their siblings are overseas.

I hope you all do notice some vans and vehicles park for long period in the visitor carpark without transporder disc.
 
I remember seeing that each unit is entitled for 1 car in one of the condo documents. And since there are some minority residents who don't own the car, instead MA has acceded the request for the 2nd car request for some of the units. So one day if some of the minority residents decided to buy a car, where are they going to park their car if they are being entitled for.

Structurely, we are constrained by the space, there is no way to further expand the carpark, can't even dig further down for the next level, so we will need to compromise with what we have left for us.

One option is to convert all the visitor lots to resident lots, that means, no more visitor car to the condo, they will need to park somewhere else. This may be abit too extreme.

Another option for visitor cars, they can only stay till around 11 pm, no overnight parking allowed so that residents who came back late still have the lot for them.

Lastly, to incentise those without car, they can pay lower maintenance fees while those having 2nd car will need to pay the extra, same logic as getting a HDB carpark. This should be fair for everyone.

I have contribute mine. Anybody has better suggestion to solve this crunch?
 
I think we should not touch the visitor lots. cos the problem of second car will still come back sooner or later due to limited lots. Also, we are sacrificing our exisitng rights for our visitors for the benefit of the others. HDB has no such rules and also I have not seen any condo restricting visiting time.

Thus, to be fair, those who need the 2nd lot should pay more (e.g. to those who are not using the lots) as waht arigato suggested. Further, the lot allocated must be specific and away from their unit. And it should be clear tt their ability to use the second lots is not guaranteed. This way, we can control the available lot such that the principle of one car per resident is adhered to. I think this is fair and/or what other condo do.
 
Previously, when i was staying in Sydney, what the mgt committee did for my apartment was to allocate one lot per unit, and each of unit would get one transponder, no more, no less. Those with no cars are then entitled to 'rent' their lots to other residents with more than 1 car - the going rate then was about $200-300 a month.

This made sense since everyone is paying maintance fees, so why should those with 2-3 cars be enjoying their extra lots FOC? Of cos, if the non-car unit decides to get a car, the carpark tenant is back to square one with no lot!

NTUC Choice Homes should have made some contingency planning & built more lots to begin with! After all, this is Seng Kang & not an expat area like Orchard - most of the residents are young families with little kids & would need a car for convenience.
 
hello all.
i jus chance upon this thread.. i was searching for the mgmt off tel nbr .
i was trying to wash my car but i cant find any water point to use!! all lock? do u all use the washing car svc provided?
 
hello missylan,
i always see yr internet connection on my wifi list
happy.gif
..
which blk are u staying?
i dun mind organising playgroup for the kids.. is everyone working full time or SAHM? our playgroup will be more interesting than the AGM
happy.gif
 
Spoke to Roland on the carpark issue. He said as MA, he cannot make the decision how to go forward. It is Park Green MC to make the decision.

Please take note of the following facts on the parking lot issue in PG.

1) 2nd/3rd/4th vehicle owners have been taking advantage of the leniency of PG owners. These owners have not paid a cent on the additional car park lots for the last 3 years.

2) According to Roland, a substantial number of 2nd/3rd/4th vehicle owners protested to MA of getting back the 2nd transponders and some refused to give back.

3) Many of these 2nd/3rd/4th vehicle owners do not favour the paying of the the 2nd/3rd/4th parking lot.

So it is up to the PG residents to stand together and make the decision. So please attend the MC meeting on this issue this Thursday. You will need to register with Roland if you want to attend.
 
Quote "He said as MA, he cannot make the decision how to go forward. It is Park Green MC to make the decision."

Funny...isn't MA the one who make the decision to issue 2nd car transponder in the first place against the guidelines stated in the handbook?

Quote" 2nd/3rd/4th vehicle owners have been taking advantage of the leniency of PG owners." shouldn't it be leniency of MA?

Assuming both quotes are true, so shouldn't MA be the one cleaning the mess?
 
Make a list of those residents who refused to return the 2nd transpondants, and paste it on the notice board and inside every lifts! Let everyone knows who these people are!

THE 2nd TRANPOSNDANT IS NOT A ENTITLEMENT!
 
Somehow, I doubt people would care if their units & names are posted in the notice board/in the lifts. At worst, they will just tear the paper down! Not a big deterrent since most of the neighbours won't know who they are anyways...Since they can quietly raise our maintence fees, they should just raise the maintenence fees of people who are holding on to the 2nd transponder & leave it as that!
 
hi Park Green Residents

I currently have some Nestle NAN. NAN2 at $26.50 expire on 01sep2009, NAN3 at $25 expire on 18dec2009.(cheapest compare to Rivervale Plaza)Free delivery for 6can order.
Interested please PM me. Thanks you.
 
4 observers attended the meeting on the Car park issue.

Statistics of car park
391 carpark lot in PG including disable lot.
14 visitor car park lot
Total 405 car park lost in PG.

BUT our MA issued 465 car transporders in total to any residents who ask for it.

There are many residents who refused to give back the transponder to MA and stating below reasons.

#17-14, "I paid more than other residents for a Penthouse. MA is obligated to give more than 2 free car park lots"

???? "I own a company !" "If you take back my car transporders, where am I going to park my 3 vans/lorries"

???? "I have a 4 children living here having their own vehicles" I deserve more car park lots than other"
 
Only 3 reasons from 4 observers. What happen to the last one?

My first reaction to the reasons given: Like that also can :0
 
The 4th person is Merci puku lah ...kekeke

My reaction to those comments:-

"I paid more than other residents for a Penthouse. MA is obligated to give more than 2 free car park lots"
- If you can afford to buy a penthouse, then what is the cost of 2 more lots to you? peanuts right?

"I own a company !" "If you take back my car transporders, where am I going to park my 3 vans/lorries"
- Then park at your office. This is a residential property.

"I have a 4 children living here having their own vehicles" I deserve more car park lots than other"
- If I have 10 children, then can I have 10 more lots ???!!
 
Hee...me blur. Sorry.

Good reply! Ah eng!

Nowadays, I see cars parking at lots not meant for cars (e.g. a single lot but the leftover space not big enough to draw another lot).

So, I think nothing concrete came out of the meeting. Am I right, Merci Puku?
 
Ah Eng and Aries,

The observers at the meeting did not voice the views stated. In fact, all four observers support the idea to take back all 2nd/3rd/4th transporders.

The three reasons are just example from a list of 30 over reasons given by residents.

Actually, MC is just considering this drastic unpopular option as they are afraid to anger the residents who are abusing this privilege.

To really consider this option, major support from general residents will be required.

Isolated complaints where resident cannot find car park lots at night does not help.

Screaming and shouting in the internet does not help. Residents will need to stand forward to support the taking back of extra transporders.

MC need to rely majority vote from residents to carry out this as they are afraid they get their cars scratch by unhappy residents.

Some residents even take the opportunity to park at handicap lot till the MC makes a decision.
 
"MC need to rely majority vote from residents to carry out this" - So any idea when the MC is getting the residents to vote?
 
I raised the EGM issue earlier. I think the MC should have called a meeting to deal with this. I gave up on them long ago.

I was talking with someone many days ago and we both shake heads over how the whole issue is dealt by the MA.

Lastly, I will show my support if a meeting is called to vote, baring emergency cases.

For me, I gave up hope on the MA many moons ago.

I have more faith in the cleaners and gardeners etc who are doing a better job and showing more committment in making PG a better place to live in.
 
Serene, a meeting or a letter to explain the situation to all the resident e.g. how it happen, what the rules are, who bend the rules and on what basis etc will help answer your question and clear my doubt or impression of the MA. The solution will also come naturally.

As to whether MA is doing a good job overall, perhaps it is time the MC to conduct a survey for Chairman's decision in reappointing them.
 
Hi All,
Please hold your horses. MC and MA has commited during the meeting that they will resolve this matter by the next AGM Sept 2008. It will be good if more residents turn up for the meeting to understand more.

Actually, MC and MA has met several times all this. It is just too difficult to come to a decision out of various options to make everyone happy.

I personally think that there isn't one in reality.
 
For those who refused to return the 2nd/3rd/4th transporders, why not the MA or MC just invalidate these extra transporders given. I believe each transporder is serialised, so they can identify which are the extras given to each unit and to invalidate them. Unless the MA did not maintain a record when they distribute the transporder and it is technically impossible to invalid the transporder.
 
Good idea, Taka. Then we need not be inefficient and hold our horses.

Btw, yesterday, I receive a brochure from an agent saying a unit in PG is selling. Can open house some more.

PG can sell already meh, and some more with so much pubilicity.
 
i think we badly need to call for an EGM instead of waiting for AGM to come around. We cant afford to resolve issues on annual basis. Worse, sometimes issues drag on beyond this annual basis, for e.g our poor reading room. Our car park is really in a mess now.. last nite, I cant find a lot near blk 2 at 10.30pm...

any idea how we can propose an EGM?
 
Merci puku,

With the circular from MA on the parking issue sent yesterday to all resident's mailbox, does that mean that the line "MC and MA has commited during the meeting that they will resolve this matter by the next AGM Sept 2008" is no longer valid?

Should we still hold our horses?
 
From the circular, I believe MC and MA have already came to a plan to initiate the first step to take back all 2nd/3rd/4th transponders, stop visitors from parking after 11pm, and ensure that every unit has 1 carpark lot by reducing visitors lots from 20 to 10.

The objective is to ensure every resident has a car lot for their cars.

If it does not work, the second step is then to charge for 2nd car lot or something else.
 
Thanks Merci for the clarification. I don't quite understand the "stop vistors from parking after 11 pm" will help in ensuring every resident has a car lot for their cars.

Visitors are not equal to resident. If we stop visitors from parking after 11 pm, I will assume all visitor lots should be empty after 11 pm. i.e. no resident can park there even you are the 2nd car owner to ensure equal rights to owners with only one car given same maintenance fees.

Based on what you said earlier, we have 465 transponder and 405 car park lot including 14 visitor. Of the 60 extra transponder, you are assuming that only 4 owner has the third car. So it does not help to solve the issue.

Now it is known public that all owners are entitled to a 2nd car lot, and given higher COE prices, more kids growing up to own cars, do you agree that I should book my second lot with MA first or else someone eat my entitlement.
 
"Visitors should park at the visitor lots. Visitor's vehicles will not be allowed to park overnight. They must leave by llpm each night,otherwise will be subjected to wheel clamp and a penalty of $100.00 for its release"

Got such thing meh??
If u dare wheel clamp my guest, I will wheel clamp your guard house without mercy!
 
Bravo Ah Beng! Tell me when you want to do it!

I will lend a hand! But why clamp the guardhouse? It is not their fault. They should be praised to carry out their duties faithfully. We should clamp the persons who started all this mess!
 
According to MA, guardhouse visitors records shows that there are a number of visitor vehicles parking illegally in PG for more than a week. Some for more than 1 month.

MA has admitted their mistake of giving out 465 transponders in an estate of 391 residents base on registered address in IC.

Their plan is to take back all 2nd transporders and only give out 2nd car paper discs only to those cars with LTA registered addresses to PG.

If the 14 visitor carpark and 18 unconsumed car park for residents still cannot accommodate the 2nd car residents, then other options can be considered.

From what I know from the last monthly meeting, this will be the MC plan.

Aries and ahbeng, perhaps you can suggest a better resolution to this car park issue during the upcoming April 24 MC meeting. I believe MC and MA will be more than willing to hear your suggestion.
 
Merci,

Not that I do not want to attend the meeting. However, is it useful with only 2 of us, and in the end the decision is still lie in the hands of a few persons and not based on majority?

From the circular, it is clear that whether we go the meeting does not matter. In my opinion, it is a decision that cannot work in theory and does not consider the rights of majority of residents: -

Based on the no of car park lot, it is already clear that the no of 2nd car will outstripped demand.

By allowing 2nd car label freely and taking away the visitor lots, it is a clear disregard of the rights of the majority. (I believe based on the no, many of us are owning no or only one car).

In the end, the majority takes initiatives to protect themselves until they have a chance to change it.
 
Halo Aries yah you are right. If my guests kana wheel clamp, then lim peh should clamp the person who started all this mess.

NB KKN, so who are these people who started all this mess?Who? Who are they?

Park Green in the begining is so nice. So quiet, no war, no parking problem, then now this parking problem making people lives so miserable!

Now when I come back late at night, lim peh cannot find one parking lot for my car!

Even all the disable lots are taken up! U are luck if u can even find one corner and park your car!

Even Lim peh go and F*** the security guards, they also bak bodoh and say they cannot do anything. Si beh tu lan!

Then now u want to wheel clamp my guests?
Are you telling that my brotherhood cannot enter their car to Park Green to majiong with me after 11pm?

This is the WORLD MOST STUPIDIEST IDEA leh!

LIM PEH SI BEH HOT NOW!!
 
MC is our neighbours too, they are also in a difficult position to come out the best solution without the support from the majority. The solution that MC and MA they have working out is still not the best, otherwise, why are there still so much unhappiness. Our MC (our neighbour, appointed to do this type of shit job) need support from the residents, so if you are unhappy with their approach, plse attend their meeting to make your say, no point standing behind and wait for things to happen.
 
Agrigato,

In my opinion, if MC is so concerned with majority right, they should convene a meeting and pursuade all to attend, not just the small meeting room and on a week day night. Forgive my ignorance, until now, I still have to thank Merci Puku for letting me know when is the official date of the next meeting.

I did not attend the last meeting simply because I do not know my basic rights can be changed so easily by the minority, as gathered from agrigato. I think there are some residents like me.

Hving said that, agrigato's views still have some value. We should stand up now and let MC know we are unhappy. I can't dictate how but if MC know that we are unhappy by us emailing or banging table, clamping other car, they cannot ignore us esp if the no of feedback is large.

Please do your part. I know that MC's decision does not affect some resident's for now, but if this method of doing things continue, it may sooner or later touch you, as life is full of unpredictability.
 
Lim peh have no time to attend your meeting.

You do not regards the right of the rest of the residents , lim peh also will not regrads your WORLDS STUPIDIEST RULE!

Now Lim Peh do not care liao. If u dare wheel cramp any of my guest, lim peh will come and wheel cramp whoever initiate this stupid idea!
 
When I come back late after 12MN from work, almost on a daily basis, because my shop closes at 11pm, I have difficulty finding a parking lot. Sometimes have to park at the bin collection area. The parking problem is real. When my relatives from M'sia came visiting the last month, I bought them overnight parking coupons to park at the HDB carpark just across the road. After the rule of no overnight parking has been reinforced, I am now at least able to find a space at the visitor lot. I am currently thinking of getting a 2nd car but if consensus is to allow only 1 carpark space per house, so be it. Maybe we can explore season parking at the opposite HDB carpark (hopefully HDB allows).
 
kyosho,

question is as a resident, why must we downgrade to become visitor?

is there a consensus to have 1 carpark space per house? I thot the decision is to have 2 carpark spaces per house.

Actually, u prompt me thinking: -

If I as a one car owner cannot find a parking lot and have to park at HDB carpark, will MA or MC compensate me of the extra time spent, inconvenience, parking fees, lower security level (HDB carpark has no security guard)?

Anyone can enlighten me?
 
i am a resident, driving 1 car and holding on to 2 transponder as the other car is no more already.

my undertaking in letter to the MA office when i applied for the additional transponder was that upon notice, i will surrender the 2nd disc if another resident needs it.

i have yet to return it but i take it there may be 2nd/3rd car owners who can access the parking without the discs becoz the maths just don't add up in the current circumstances.

anyhow, i am also not fully convince the recall of physical dics to be replaced by paper labels will resolve the issue of the lack of 1 entitled parking space for each household if management cannot enforce the measure to monitor and disallow unauthorised parking.

then you have another issue of the fair and just allocation of the additional disc(s) to residents who owns/drives additional cars. when demand outstrip supply (that physical parking lots i.e.), no amount of controls over the right to park via paperwork can resolve the matter.

the carpark lots to household ratio is not making things easier from the very start. as unpopular as it may sound, i'll say any additional parking given is a privilege not to be abused. likewise, parking entitlement should be the same for each and every household, and that may be applicable for visitor parking availability taken into consideration of the limited allowance for that. that means, any household with or without a car should not have to give up the luxury of hosting visitors conveniently just to make way for 2nd/3rd car residents.

in simpler terms:
- 1 household 1 lot allocated
- you want more, apply for it and be subjected to whatever allocation rules is applicable
- visitor parking regulations to be considered
- some kind of monitoring over visitors' parking to allow a degree of flexibility for overnight parking IF the designated visitors lots are available.

and there's probably many other solutions we can explore but we all know any single solution will never satisfy the whole lot. some kind of democracy in the decision-making process is probably the middle-ground. i'll just keep a lookout for some kind of polling date or something and will try to make time to attend to at the very least try to vote down grossly unfair solution. ;P

meantime, take it easy lar...

cheers
a
 
The 2nd disc should and must be removed and made payable if any family wants to apply for it. If they can afford another car, why not pay for another disc? My friends who wants to come over after 11pm, have to ride and not drive.. very pai sai.... I think the visitor lots which now numbered to about 10, should allow visitors to park till morning, maybe 4am? By then BBQ n majong should be over. To restrict till 11pm is not right. What about BBQ on weekends and public holidays?
 
BTW, when is the next meeting? and where? Interested to see that company boss who own 3-4 lorries and the family with 4 kids.... In this world, still got such reasoning!
 
in all fairness, i think the MA/MC had the most difficult task to make a unpopular decision. I gave them cluedos for the fact that they are finally willing to stick out their necks and make a difficult decision.

I think the decision made was the right one, except for the 11pm rule for visitors. I think it may be a bit too harsh especially for weekends when friends and visitors can hang out till late in the night..

my suggestion is that the 11pm rule should be held when the visitors' lots are full.. and a request should be made known to the units with visitors to request them to remove their cars. this makes sense to enforce the rule.. if not, merely going by the book to clamp all vehicles by 11pm sounds offensive... there should be a cut-off timing to remove the cars and if this laspses, the clamp should kick in. At least, the visitors have a chance to remove....

just my 2 cents.. if you guys have any issues, can write to the park-green email address, think they welcomce feedback from the residents.. everytime i write in, they are very prompt in their responses.... think they are trying their best to help.. but they probably can't make decisions which will please everyone...
 
Last week, there are 3 open house in Park Green. Does that mean we can sell our house in Park Green alreadi? Thought got to wait for 5 years before we can sell?
 
I don't know about other condo properties, but the impression I get is that we paid a reasonable price for Parkgreen at the expense of a smaller common area, incl fewer carpark spaces & absence of above ground parking like Rivervale Condo. 1 carpark space for each household is our right and should be guranteed. For multi-cars owners, they should take into consideration the limited parking spaces for the other residents/visitors. Season parking at the opposite multistorey HDB carpark should be considered seriously.
 


Wow, there have been so much discussions about the parking lot problem here! I din know tat so many pple are so "hot" here (in particular Ah Beng) and are venting their frustrations here.

I personally do not own any car (thou I've been contemplating buying one after I get my licence). If I really do buy a car, who do I go to insist on my right of a parking lot if all lots are taken up? And mind u, I've been paying the same maintenance fee just like any one of those who own a car (or MULTIPLE CARS) for the past 3 yrs. Shld we (the non-car owners) be entitled to a reduction in the maintenance fee ($90 will be a reasonable amt since season parking cost tat much)? If not, then make those who own more than a car pay for the lot shld they wish to continue to park their 2nd/3rd/4th cars in PG. In fact, I am strongly against the idea of issuing 2nd or 3rd car labels cos tat surely doesn't solve the prob.

I agree wif 5wd on the 1 lot per household and the flexibility of allowing overnight parking if there are excess lots to spare for tat night. I oso agree tat the "Must exit by 11 pm" rule is impracticable and stupid. How to u expect us to tell our guest "eh, u all must leave now, or else go park ur cars else where cos it's 11pm now. If not my security guards are going to clamp ur vehicle" How more classic can this be? -_-" It is an utter embarrassment not only to us, the host, and oso to the development (cos who in the world came up wif such a dumb "guests can only park till 11pm" rule?).

I think the most effective and correct way of letting the MA/MC hear our views is to ATTEND THE MEETING next week (am I right, Merci?) rather than to rant here. And since all of u have very good and reasonable opinions/suggestions, I urge all of u to attend the meeting. Having said tat, I shall make an effort to be present for the meeting next week, cos I wld oso like to voice out my dissatisfaction to the MA/MC on the recent "solution" to the parking lot woes.

Let's not let this be just empty talks and support them wif actions. Pls be present at the meeting next week so tat they can hear ur great suggestions and/or immense dissatisfaction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
WTS Banquet Dinner 14 Feb 2026 at Park Royal Pickering
Replies
1
Views
399
jmjmjm
J
D
Panamericana Liquidation
Replies
0
Views
435
dewykuah
D
B
Honest feedback from couples getting married or who got married at The Singapore Edition Hotel.
Replies
1
Views
158
babyritoboy
B
P
Edward Foong - Fantastic Experience!
Replies
0
Views
583
pinkbeanjy
P
B
WTS MinJiang (Goodwood Park Hotel) Wedding Dinner, 14 December 2024 (Sat)
Replies
2
Views
1K
cxrthxrsis
C

Back
Top