Lovely condo...Pathetic Gym
93 views
Skip to first unread message
Julian Touhig
Aug 17, 2012, 12:24:46 AM8/17/12
to chewlin wong, Thiru, Chuan Park Residents
Dear All,
My apologies for carpet bombing all of your emails regarding an issue separate from the en bloc discussions. Thiru, in the event that this does not reach the residents, could I request your assistance in forwarding this to them and all commitee members please. : )
I thought we the residents will be the ideal forum to raise issues pertaining to Chuan Park and its facilities. I am only doing this after getting no satisfactory response from the management office or via a discussion with Mr Chan (Chairman of the Chuan Park Management Commitee). I am using my husbands email to access this group.
Whilst I am extremely delighted that the tennis courts and swimming pool have/are being upgraded, I am rather disappointed that the gym has been neglected for so long. I have attached 3 pictures of our pathetic gym and hope they will speak for themselves. I have plenty more stored on my i phone if anyone wishes to see them.
I am a regular gym user and I believe the current facility is not only inadequate and outdated but unsafe and certainly unsanitary. Over the last years I have fed back to various people at the Chuan park management office about the conditions at our gym and indeed very minor, insignificant changes have been made. It therefore seems that they are content to do patch up job after patch up job to avoid incurring larger expenses with an upgrade. I am baffled, as to me, this seems counterproductive
I admit that I haven't appealed directly to the committee in the past after being informally informed by some of those on it that almost all requests for any gym upgrading expenditure were blocked. I believe the majority of the committee seem to be against regular enhancements especially of the gym facilities (further proven by the lack of a men's working sauna etc). As such I was pleased to actually bump into Mr Chan outside the gym. However despite voicing my concerns, I was rather appalled by his defensive, unreceptive and dismissive attitude. He seemed to be under the impression that as long as gym users used their own towels to wipe down the equipment after use everything would be 'fine'.
I raised these valid and pertinent issues as a concerned resident who is keen to get her value for the maintenance fees and facilities paid for and was rather disappointed to be viewed as a ‘trouble maker’ of some sort.
These are my major concerns:
1. Cleanliness & Health and safety:
The equipment in the gym is rusty and dirty. Does the management realize that if someone scratched themselves on the rusty equipment and gets an infection from it, that Chuan Park would be liable for medical costs?
Streaks of dried up sweat and dirt adorn the exercise machines which are rarely cleaned raising the chances for infections and illness.
The current condition of the multi –gym with 2 inch thick dust, broken parts makes it a serious safety hazard.
Mr. Chan mentioned bringing a second towel to wipe off sweat after working out. He took great pride in telling me that he used one for his face and the other to wipe the equipment. This is a bizarre request since the equipment is rusty, dirty and unclean over and above the sweat issue. In most gyms, there is a bottle of anti bacterial spray and a roll of paper towels that users can use to clean the equipment after use.
2. Increasing costs of Maintenance
There seems to be a lack of insight that proper/thorough maintenance and cleaning will only help save our condo money in the future. As they say, a stitch in time, saves nine.
Any new equipment (often second hand/ on hire from the contracted company) also deteriorates rapidly because of the lack of maintenance and cleanliness. Within weeks rusting appears.
I was shown a receipt for a new bicycle seat to be valued at almost $400. Are we getting the right quotes from the right people?
3. Air conditioning the gym:
I would like to point out that there are no non air-conditioned gyms in any known current condominiums in the area.
Despite being told by the equipment maintenance company that lack of air con would be detrimental to the equipment due to the Singapore humidity, there seems to be no progress made on this front.
Chuan park has residents from Australia, U.K, India and a variety of other countries and many of us struggle with the heat and humidity. Working out at the gym between 12 noon and 2pm on a hot sunny day is exactly like being in a Sauna. On many occasions, I have felt dizzy, dehydrated and unable to work out under those conditions.
To those that believe weight loss is more rapid in a hot zone (and this is infact true: ) ), I suggest hot yoga intead! : )
I was told by Mr. Chan that a survey was conducted in the past and they concluded that the bulk of residents were against the air conditioning of the gym. I would like to know more details of this survey (when was it conducted, how many people did they speak to) since neither my husband or I as residents are not aware of any such poll and were even asked for our input on this matter.
4. Faulty and/or insufficient equipment.
Currently, the exercise bikes have poor pressure and resistance and some seats are taped.
The cross trainer is a particularly popular piece of equipment and we need at least one more such machine. If one of the many treadmills were taken away, we would still have plenty for use even during peak hours.
The muti-gym has missing parts and is in a poor state.
Many of the exercise machines are squeaking and just faulty
I do hope that at least some residents share the same concerns and are willing to speak up to better things.
Warm Regards,
Meera
81881572
________________________________________
From: chuanpark...@googlegroups.com [chuanpark...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of chewlin wong [chew...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 17 July 2012 14:02
To: Thiru; Chuan Park Residents
Subject: Re: [Chuan Park Enbloc Update-:133] Re: Chuan Park Collective sale update 17
Hi Thiru
Appreciate your clarification and the Committee's effort for the work done thus far. I have voted for the collective sale. Hope the other SPs would also be in favour of the sale.
Rgds
CL
From: Thiru <thir...@gmail.com>
To: Chuan Park Residents <ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12:33 AM
Subject: [Chuan Park Enbloc Update-:125] Re: Chuan Park Collective sale update 17
Two points to clarify in case it causes further confusion.
1. Land Mark Tower's Enbloc price of close to $1300psf/ppr includes
the lease top up charges. So the SPs of Land mark are getting lesser
than that. The 30% premium we used and the resultant value we
illustrated i our case is net of all of that.
2. If a CSA is signed and the committee's mandate extended we can
always amend the CSA later and get the signatures all over again.
Without that this committee will step down come 7 Jan 2013. And we
will have to re initiate another EOGM and get he signatures all over
again.
Cheers
Thiru
On Jul 17, 12:08 am, Thiru <thiru...@gmail.com<mailto:thiru...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Ok. Its time to clear up the air on several issues. Just the facts so
> that we can all be on the same page. And I trust that all of you will
> keep this to yourself and not circulate it to outsiders! Its going to
> be a long message so get ready!
>
> 1. If you want to try to get the plot ratio raised ... this is what
> we need to do.
>
> a. Do a baseline search submission by engaging a Qualified Person By
> URA Definition. A QP in URA's definition is "refers to a person who
> is registered as an architect under the Architects Act (Cap. 12) And
> has in force a practicing certificate issued under that Act"... Fees
> involved $2500 +GST Processing fee to URA + Architects professional
> fee (Few Thousand Dollars depending on who we engage!)
>
> b. Because the development of Chuan Park was approved before 1989, we
> need to Request for GFA verification from SLA.. Fee $250 + GST. The
> Chuan Park Management Council can do that for us if they agree.
>
> c. Submit an outline application to URA asking for increase in plot
> ratio... Fees Involved 50% of Normal development application fees,
> which works out to be 50% of $88,340... which is $44170 and that is
> just the URA's processing fees !!!. Add to that the professional fee
> of the QP and it’s probably close to $50K.
>
> ( Seehttp://edanet.ura.gov.sg/dcd/OutlineApplication/OAMainPage/OAfaq.jsp#...
> ) for details of this computation.
>
> Upon our application, URA will take about 4 weeks to consider our
> appeal and there is no guarantee that the authorities will approve the
> application. It depends on their plan for the area, the capacity of
> the general supporting infrastructure like roads and amenities,
> schools etc. (As stipulated in the Master Plan) and the details of the
> plans we submit and how compelling a case we make out to them.
>
> Further more this fee will not be offset if a detailed development
> plan is then submitted if approval of the Increase in plot ratio is
> given! In other words this is just money down the drain either way!
>
> The total cost to make this appeal comes up to be about $55,000 to
> $60,000. How many of you are in favour of forking out this money with
> no guarantee of result? If only 80% of the SPs support this proposal
> this will require and upfront payment of between $120 to $170 per
> household that supported this collective sale process because those
> that not for it will not want to pay! (This cost can be off set
> against the sales proceeds when successful but that is a different
> story altogether) Do we want to pay this or do we let the developer
> bear this risk?
>
> This is why I kept saying that the developer would be in a better
> position to make this appeal to the authorities. The big boys can
> engage world-renowned architectural firms like What Capital Land did
> for the Sky Habitat In Bishan and make a more compelling case for an
> increase in the plot ratio. The more integrated and innovative the
> proposal the more likely that the authorities might consider the
> proposal favourably. This is still a gamble and a business risk that
> the developer must be willing to take. But how much he will factor
> that in his computations when bidding for the land is always a
> question mark.
>
> Contrary to what most of you think the minimum price that was
> suggested is by no means a reduced price in todays market! What most
> of you are failing to take into consideration is the additional
> development charges and lease top up charges that the developer will
> have to pay on top of the price he agrees to pay us. This works out to
> be an additional amount in the region of $170 million and that is just
> a conservative estimate based on the current plot ratio of 2.1. With
> a higher plot ratio the DC Charges are significantly higher.
>
> Based on the 30% premium illustrated even if the developer were to be
> successful in getting the plot ratio raised on his own accord after
> succeeding in securing the site, his final psf/ppr that he would have
> paid would work out to be $1079 psf/ppr. Add to that his legal
> acquisition, construction and financing costs his break even psf price
> becomes more than $1500psf/ppr and that does not even take into
> consideration his own profit margin and the ABSD of 10% that he would
> have paid. And if he does not manage to sell all of the units within 5
> years he cannot get this ABSD remitted adding more to his costs! The
> successful developer will have to create another iconic project and
> price it like CapitalLand's Sky Habitat in Bishan just to break even!
>
> If the developer is successful in getting the plot ratio raised then
> his break even psf/ppr gets reduced to about $1250 psf. And even then
> it is way above what the recent successful bids of between $500 and
> $600 psf/ppr for the Government land sales has been! So even at 30%
> premium it is a big stretch to get any developer to bite and given
> that we are sitting on a leasehold aging estate it is not a reduced
> premium as some of you make it out to be. Consider this in relation to
> the recently launched Landmark Tower collective sale which, if
> successful, is priced at around $1300 psf/ppr and that project is in a
> prime location in town and in close proximity to, not one but Two, MRT
> Stations!!!
>
> On another note of this plot ratio issue, I just spoke to a URA
> official today and he indicated to me that the new master plan would
> only probably be out towards the end of next year and not around April
> 2013 as we had anticipated, as they have not got any news yet. The
> most we can do is give them feedback when they ask for it closer
> towards the finalisation of the plan, sometime late next year and how
> effective our voices will be is anybody's guess! Whilst the CSC was
> hoping to lend its voice and submit arguments to the SLA/URA to get
> the plot ratio raised when the time comes this has become somewhat
> moot as this CSC's mandate runs out by 7 Jan 2013 if we do not get the
> CSA out and signed with at least one signature by then. On the other
> hand if we do get the CSA out and get at least one signature the life
> of this committee will get extended by another 12 months and we might
> still be able to make representations to the authorities when the time
> comes.
>
> I was refraining from putting all of these details down but given the
> way these discussions have been going I felt that I have to clear the
> air once and for all. If any one has any other information contrary to
> what I have laid out here please feel free to enlighten us. And better
> yet if you feel that you can contribute in anyway please volunteer
> your services and not just stop at giving suggestions.
>
> The objective of this non-binding poll was not to shortchange anyone.
> Rather it was to enable us to be able to engage the marketing agents
> and developers more effectively and to gauge their willingness to
> participate in the tender process given those numbers. The CSC members
> are all SPs themselves and we are working to maximise the value of our
> estate because it is our home too!
>
> Whether you agree with all that I said or not I still need all of you
> to vote one way or the other. You can also get your neighbours and
> fellow SPs to vote ASAP by forwarding them the email. Sitting on the
> fence and not voting either way is not going to be useful. Besides I
> am trying to make sure that we have a complete contact details and
> emails of all SPs so that future outreach efforts will be more
> efficient and cost effective.
>
> So Vote and get others to vote too!
>
> Sincerely
>
> Thiru
> Chairman
> Chuan Park CSC
My apologies for carpet bombing all of your emails regarding an issue separate from the en bloc discussions. Thiru, in the event that this does not reach the residents, could I request your assistance in forwarding this to them and all commitee members please. : )
I thought we the residents will be the ideal forum to raise issues pertaining to Chuan Park and its facilities. I am only doing this after getting no satisfactory response from the management office or via a discussion with Mr Chan (Chairman of the Chuan Park Management Commitee). I am using my husbands email to access this group.
Whilst I am extremely delighted that the tennis courts and swimming pool have/are being upgraded, I am rather disappointed that the gym has been neglected for so long. I have attached 3 pictures of our pathetic gym and hope they will speak for themselves. I have plenty more stored on my i phone if anyone wishes to see them.
I am a regular gym user and I believe the current facility is not only inadequate and outdated but unsafe and certainly unsanitary. Over the last years I have fed back to various people at the Chuan park management office about the conditions at our gym and indeed very minor, insignificant changes have been made. It therefore seems that they are content to do patch up job after patch up job to avoid incurring larger expenses with an upgrade. I am baffled, as to me, this seems counterproductive
I admit that I haven't appealed directly to the committee in the past after being informally informed by some of those on it that almost all requests for any gym upgrading expenditure were blocked. I believe the majority of the committee seem to be against regular enhancements especially of the gym facilities (further proven by the lack of a men's working sauna etc). As such I was pleased to actually bump into Mr Chan outside the gym. However despite voicing my concerns, I was rather appalled by his defensive, unreceptive and dismissive attitude. He seemed to be under the impression that as long as gym users used their own towels to wipe down the equipment after use everything would be 'fine'.
I raised these valid and pertinent issues as a concerned resident who is keen to get her value for the maintenance fees and facilities paid for and was rather disappointed to be viewed as a ‘trouble maker’ of some sort.
These are my major concerns:
1. Cleanliness & Health and safety:
The equipment in the gym is rusty and dirty. Does the management realize that if someone scratched themselves on the rusty equipment and gets an infection from it, that Chuan Park would be liable for medical costs?
Streaks of dried up sweat and dirt adorn the exercise machines which are rarely cleaned raising the chances for infections and illness.
The current condition of the multi –gym with 2 inch thick dust, broken parts makes it a serious safety hazard.
Mr. Chan mentioned bringing a second towel to wipe off sweat after working out. He took great pride in telling me that he used one for his face and the other to wipe the equipment. This is a bizarre request since the equipment is rusty, dirty and unclean over and above the sweat issue. In most gyms, there is a bottle of anti bacterial spray and a roll of paper towels that users can use to clean the equipment after use.
2. Increasing costs of Maintenance
There seems to be a lack of insight that proper/thorough maintenance and cleaning will only help save our condo money in the future. As they say, a stitch in time, saves nine.
Any new equipment (often second hand/ on hire from the contracted company) also deteriorates rapidly because of the lack of maintenance and cleanliness. Within weeks rusting appears.
I was shown a receipt for a new bicycle seat to be valued at almost $400. Are we getting the right quotes from the right people?
3. Air conditioning the gym:
I would like to point out that there are no non air-conditioned gyms in any known current condominiums in the area.
Despite being told by the equipment maintenance company that lack of air con would be detrimental to the equipment due to the Singapore humidity, there seems to be no progress made on this front.
Chuan park has residents from Australia, U.K, India and a variety of other countries and many of us struggle with the heat and humidity. Working out at the gym between 12 noon and 2pm on a hot sunny day is exactly like being in a Sauna. On many occasions, I have felt dizzy, dehydrated and unable to work out under those conditions.
To those that believe weight loss is more rapid in a hot zone (and this is infact true: ) ), I suggest hot yoga intead! : )
I was told by Mr. Chan that a survey was conducted in the past and they concluded that the bulk of residents were against the air conditioning of the gym. I would like to know more details of this survey (when was it conducted, how many people did they speak to) since neither my husband or I as residents are not aware of any such poll and were even asked for our input on this matter.
4. Faulty and/or insufficient equipment.
Currently, the exercise bikes have poor pressure and resistance and some seats are taped.
The cross trainer is a particularly popular piece of equipment and we need at least one more such machine. If one of the many treadmills were taken away, we would still have plenty for use even during peak hours.
The muti-gym has missing parts and is in a poor state.
Many of the exercise machines are squeaking and just faulty
I do hope that at least some residents share the same concerns and are willing to speak up to better things.
Warm Regards,
Meera
81881572
________________________________________
From: chuanpark...@googlegroups.com [chuanpark...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of chewlin wong [chew...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 17 July 2012 14:02
To: Thiru; Chuan Park Residents
Subject: Re: [Chuan Park Enbloc Update-:133] Re: Chuan Park Collective sale update 17
Hi Thiru
Appreciate your clarification and the Committee's effort for the work done thus far. I have voted for the collective sale. Hope the other SPs would also be in favour of the sale.
Rgds
CL
From: Thiru <thir...@gmail.com>
To: Chuan Park Residents <ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12:33 AM
Subject: [Chuan Park Enbloc Update-:125] Re: Chuan Park Collective sale update 17
Two points to clarify in case it causes further confusion.
1. Land Mark Tower's Enbloc price of close to $1300psf/ppr includes
the lease top up charges. So the SPs of Land mark are getting lesser
than that. The 30% premium we used and the resultant value we
illustrated i our case is net of all of that.
2. If a CSA is signed and the committee's mandate extended we can
always amend the CSA later and get the signatures all over again.
Without that this committee will step down come 7 Jan 2013. And we
will have to re initiate another EOGM and get he signatures all over
again.
Cheers
Thiru
On Jul 17, 12:08 am, Thiru <thiru...@gmail.com<mailto:thiru...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Ok. Its time to clear up the air on several issues. Just the facts so
> that we can all be on the same page. And I trust that all of you will
> keep this to yourself and not circulate it to outsiders! Its going to
> be a long message so get ready!
>
> 1. If you want to try to get the plot ratio raised ... this is what
> we need to do.
>
> a. Do a baseline search submission by engaging a Qualified Person By
> URA Definition. A QP in URA's definition is "refers to a person who
> is registered as an architect under the Architects Act (Cap. 12) And
> has in force a practicing certificate issued under that Act"... Fees
> involved $2500 +GST Processing fee to URA + Architects professional
> fee (Few Thousand Dollars depending on who we engage!)
>
> b. Because the development of Chuan Park was approved before 1989, we
> need to Request for GFA verification from SLA.. Fee $250 + GST. The
> Chuan Park Management Council can do that for us if they agree.
>
> c. Submit an outline application to URA asking for increase in plot
> ratio... Fees Involved 50% of Normal development application fees,
> which works out to be 50% of $88,340... which is $44170 and that is
> just the URA's processing fees !!!. Add to that the professional fee
> of the QP and it’s probably close to $50K.
>
> ( Seehttp://edanet.ura.gov.sg/dcd/OutlineApplication/OAMainPage/OAfaq.jsp#...
> ) for details of this computation.
>
> Upon our application, URA will take about 4 weeks to consider our
> appeal and there is no guarantee that the authorities will approve the
> application. It depends on their plan for the area, the capacity of
> the general supporting infrastructure like roads and amenities,
> schools etc. (As stipulated in the Master Plan) and the details of the
> plans we submit and how compelling a case we make out to them.
>
> Further more this fee will not be offset if a detailed development
> plan is then submitted if approval of the Increase in plot ratio is
> given! In other words this is just money down the drain either way!
>
> The total cost to make this appeal comes up to be about $55,000 to
> $60,000. How many of you are in favour of forking out this money with
> no guarantee of result? If only 80% of the SPs support this proposal
> this will require and upfront payment of between $120 to $170 per
> household that supported this collective sale process because those
> that not for it will not want to pay! (This cost can be off set
> against the sales proceeds when successful but that is a different
> story altogether) Do we want to pay this or do we let the developer
> bear this risk?
>
> This is why I kept saying that the developer would be in a better
> position to make this appeal to the authorities. The big boys can
> engage world-renowned architectural firms like What Capital Land did
> for the Sky Habitat In Bishan and make a more compelling case for an
> increase in the plot ratio. The more integrated and innovative the
> proposal the more likely that the authorities might consider the
> proposal favourably. This is still a gamble and a business risk that
> the developer must be willing to take. But how much he will factor
> that in his computations when bidding for the land is always a
> question mark.
>
> Contrary to what most of you think the minimum price that was
> suggested is by no means a reduced price in todays market! What most
> of you are failing to take into consideration is the additional
> development charges and lease top up charges that the developer will
> have to pay on top of the price he agrees to pay us. This works out to
> be an additional amount in the region of $170 million and that is just
> a conservative estimate based on the current plot ratio of 2.1. With
> a higher plot ratio the DC Charges are significantly higher.
>
> Based on the 30% premium illustrated even if the developer were to be
> successful in getting the plot ratio raised on his own accord after
> succeeding in securing the site, his final psf/ppr that he would have
> paid would work out to be $1079 psf/ppr. Add to that his legal
> acquisition, construction and financing costs his break even psf price
> becomes more than $1500psf/ppr and that does not even take into
> consideration his own profit margin and the ABSD of 10% that he would
> have paid. And if he does not manage to sell all of the units within 5
> years he cannot get this ABSD remitted adding more to his costs! The
> successful developer will have to create another iconic project and
> price it like CapitalLand's Sky Habitat in Bishan just to break even!
>
> If the developer is successful in getting the plot ratio raised then
> his break even psf/ppr gets reduced to about $1250 psf. And even then
> it is way above what the recent successful bids of between $500 and
> $600 psf/ppr for the Government land sales has been! So even at 30%
> premium it is a big stretch to get any developer to bite and given
> that we are sitting on a leasehold aging estate it is not a reduced
> premium as some of you make it out to be. Consider this in relation to
> the recently launched Landmark Tower collective sale which, if
> successful, is priced at around $1300 psf/ppr and that project is in a
> prime location in town and in close proximity to, not one but Two, MRT
> Stations!!!
>
> On another note of this plot ratio issue, I just spoke to a URA
> official today and he indicated to me that the new master plan would
> only probably be out towards the end of next year and not around April
> 2013 as we had anticipated, as they have not got any news yet. The
> most we can do is give them feedback when they ask for it closer
> towards the finalisation of the plan, sometime late next year and how
> effective our voices will be is anybody's guess! Whilst the CSC was
> hoping to lend its voice and submit arguments to the SLA/URA to get
> the plot ratio raised when the time comes this has become somewhat
> moot as this CSC's mandate runs out by 7 Jan 2013 if we do not get the
> CSA out and signed with at least one signature by then. On the other
> hand if we do get the CSA out and get at least one signature the life
> of this committee will get extended by another 12 months and we might
> still be able to make representations to the authorities when the time
> comes.
>
> I was refraining from putting all of these details down but given the
> way these discussions have been going I felt that I have to clear the
> air once and for all. If any one has any other information contrary to
> what I have laid out here please feel free to enlighten us. And better
> yet if you feel that you can contribute in anyway please volunteer
> your services and not just stop at giving suggestions.
>
> The objective of this non-binding poll was not to shortchange anyone.
> Rather it was to enable us to be able to engage the marketing agents
> and developers more effectively and to gauge their willingness to
> participate in the tender process given those numbers. The CSC members
> are all SPs themselves and we are working to maximise the value of our
> estate because it is our home too!
>
> Whether you agree with all that I said or not I still need all of you
> to vote one way or the other. You can also get your neighbours and
> fellow SPs to vote ASAP by forwarding them the email. Sitting on the
> fence and not voting either way is not going to be useful. Besides I
> am trying to make sure that we have a complete contact details and
> emails of all SPs so that future outreach efforts will be more
> efficient and cost effective.
>
> So Vote and get others to vote too!
>
> Sincerely
>
> Thiru
> Chairman
> Chuan Park CSC
Thiru
Aug 17, 2012, 2:22:54 AM8/17/12
to ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com, chewlin wong, Thiru
Hi Meera, I can understand your frustration but Please do not use this forum to reach out for other issues...other than for the enbloc matters... The rest of the residents may not like it... and may then decide to unsubscribe to this group if everyone starts raising all sorts of issues not relevant to the collective sale.
The right forum will be the AGM that wil be coming up soon.. Table a motion with the MC and bring it up during the AGM....
I hope this puts an end to such matters being brought up in this group.
Thank you for your understanding..
Thiru
Chairman
CSC Chuan PArk
Rudy Tan
Aug 18, 2012, 10:41:31 PM8/18/12
to Thiru, ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com, chewlin wong
Dear All
Good news for our SP, just got theinfo from a resident agent, Last few units transacted Blk 250 Unit 05-06@ $1.19m July2012 , blk 250 Unit 05-03 @$1.09m an Blk 250 Unit 07-06 @ $1.08.
Cheers Happy holidays
Rudy Tan
Aug 18, 2012, 10:54:19 PM8/18/12
to sunme...@pacific.net.sg, Chuan Park Residents
Exact is 1014 per s ft. Finally CP has cleared the hurdle $1000 psf , new bench mark. Location is important.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:49 AM, <sunme...@pacific.net.sg> wrote:
Can I know pr per sq ft ,fr tgese sales thanks rudySent via BlackBerry from SingTel!From: Rudy Tan <rudyt...@gmail.com>Sender: chuanpark...@googlegroups.comDate: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 10:41:31 +0800To: Thiru<thir...@gmail.com>Cc: <ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com>; chewlin wong<chew...@yahoo.com>Subject: Re: [Chuan Park Enbloc Update-:172] Re: Lovely condo...Pathetic Gym
Soh Seng Hooi
Aug 21, 2012, 9:15:10 PM8/21/12
to Julian Touhig, chewlin wong, Thiru, Chuan Park Residents, MCST Plan No. 1278 - Chuan Park
Meera,
Good morning.
I like to address your concern raised in this email. I go to public gym
regularly and yoga(hot too for 4 years), with ceiling 2 1/2 storey height,
well equipped facilities, etc. Most of the public gym with air conditioning
operates on long hours and during gym closing time. With 8 to 9 hours of
closure, the cold air condenses with a high ceiling height, chances of
moistures form is a lot lower with cold air ventilated to warmer places. In
places where gym is regular 2.5 to 3m height, with air con on and off,
condensation forms a lot faster and thus rust. The rubber floor marks are
users who have chose to move the gym equipment closer to fan, etc.
The mentioned gym equipment in the picture, central station is old, no
doubt, but, very costly to replace. We have explored many times in the past
to lease rather than buy, cost wise due to term of contract for mini gym,
numbers does not equate. Shorter term means equipment provided are of lower
grade. We will look into cost of repair for upholstery. Residents, please
bear in mind, this is a common gym used by an estate with limited space to
house more gym equipment. We have explored other area of relocation for gym
in the past, ie. Function hall on level 3, etc...lots of cost required to
host estate level gathering event, AGM, Birthday party, etc.
As for the maintenance fee, in a central location, Chuan Park has the lowest
I have ever seen. Unless, estate willing to vote in favour increasing the
fee to higher value for an old estate, please feel free to raise them during
AGM.
The yearly financial report is precise for the view of the estate SPs. We
are operating on a very tight budget monthly with inflation exponentially
increasing over the past few years.
I like to assure you the council and MA closely scrutinize as much aspects
of the estate as possible. I have known Mr Chan for close to 6 years and for
residents who have known him well enough, Mr Chan gave balance views on
subject matter concerning the estate and not out of abrupt. If there is a
need to address your concern further, please call my cellphone at
96183150(after office hours), I will walk through and address your concern
appropriately.
Cheers.
Soh Seng Hooi
The current condition of the multi -gym with 2 inch thick dust, broken
Good morning.
I like to address your concern raised in this email. I go to public gym
regularly and yoga(hot too for 4 years), with ceiling 2 1/2 storey height,
well equipped facilities, etc. Most of the public gym with air conditioning
operates on long hours and during gym closing time. With 8 to 9 hours of
closure, the cold air condenses with a high ceiling height, chances of
moistures form is a lot lower with cold air ventilated to warmer places. In
places where gym is regular 2.5 to 3m height, with air con on and off,
condensation forms a lot faster and thus rust. The rubber floor marks are
users who have chose to move the gym equipment closer to fan, etc.
The mentioned gym equipment in the picture, central station is old, no
doubt, but, very costly to replace. We have explored many times in the past
to lease rather than buy, cost wise due to term of contract for mini gym,
numbers does not equate. Shorter term means equipment provided are of lower
grade. We will look into cost of repair for upholstery. Residents, please
bear in mind, this is a common gym used by an estate with limited space to
house more gym equipment. We have explored other area of relocation for gym
in the past, ie. Function hall on level 3, etc...lots of cost required to
host estate level gathering event, AGM, Birthday party, etc.
As for the maintenance fee, in a central location, Chuan Park has the lowest
I have ever seen. Unless, estate willing to vote in favour increasing the
fee to higher value for an old estate, please feel free to raise them during
AGM.
The yearly financial report is precise for the view of the estate SPs. We
are operating on a very tight budget monthly with inflation exponentially
increasing over the past few years.
I like to assure you the council and MA closely scrutinize as much aspects
of the estate as possible. I have known Mr Chan for close to 6 years and for
residents who have known him well enough, Mr Chan gave balance views on
subject matter concerning the estate and not out of abrupt. If there is a
need to address your concern further, please call my cellphone at
96183150(after office hours), I will walk through and address your concern
appropriately.
Cheers.
Soh Seng Hooi
Thiru
Aug 22, 2012, 9:58:01 AM8/22/12
to ChuanPark...@googlegroups.com, Julian Touhig, chewlin wong, Thiru, MCST Plan No. 1278 - Chuan Park
I hope this is the end of this thread of discussion in this forum... For now I would prefer that we do not air our grievances with regards to the Chuan Park maintenance and admin and any other shortcomings here.. There are lots of residents in this grouping who would not want to be disturbed with such issues and any posting on such matters will be considered irrelevant for now and may provoke their ire and may motivate them to remove themselves from this group......
So please do not post your comment on this matter anymore...take it off line ...and directly to the relevant involved people...
Thank you
Thiru
Charlie Tan
Sep 18, 2012, 10:51:57 AM9/18/12
to chuanpark...@googlegroups.com
Hi
Two questions:-
1. What further cost will be involved in the next phase of the CS process; given 80% positive responses?
2. Who will bear this cost?
Tks & Rgds
Charlie Tan
Two questions:-
1. What further cost will be involved in the next phase of the CS process; given 80% positive responses?
2. Who will bear this cost?
Tks & Rgds
Charlie Tan
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages