Jump to content
Find Professionals    Deals    Get Quotations   Portfolios
Sign in to follow this  
Cnocturnum

Car Parking Space In Ec And Pte Condos

Recommended Posts

Car park spaces are slowly being reduced in ECs and pte condos. Nowadays it's one lot for one unit, and a few extra for visitors, disabled, etc.

I am wondering what are the current management practices and what SHOULD be THE fairest practice?

In many cases, owners pay their mnthly Conservancy Fees and an extra amount for each additional car.

I feel that this is unfair to owners without a car as they are "paying" for a lot that is compulsorily allowed to them to use, BUT IT'S THEIR OWN FAULT AND LOSS IF THEY DO NOT HAVE A CAR!

I believe are there are fairer ways, eg :

1. Only those owners with cars are required to pay for use of parking lots. This is the HDB practice.

2. Every owner is given the right to a lot and if he does not own a car, he has the right to lend it or rent it to another owner who requires an additional lot.

What are your views and suggestion?

ps: I live in HDB, own a car and pay for a season lot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join 46,923 satisfied homeowners who used renotalk quotation service to find interior designers. Get an estimated quotation

I used to stay in a private condo and have to put up the frustration for the lack of carpark lot when I return home late. In that condo that I lived, residents can park 1st car near to the condo blk but 2nd or 3rd car must park at unpopular carpark lots further away.

There is no fair system. I don't use the facilities like the gym or tennis courts or book the function rooms but still need to pay for them. So I think the residents dont see the carpark as a problem as it is part of the facilities offered by the condo to the residents.

Thus we cant compare with HDB.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carpark is a communual facility, just like pool, children's playground. Is not a pay per use facility.

Charging for extra cars is about managing demand for a limited resource.Is not about fairness.

By your definition, if u don't have kids, that means u shd not be responsible for the upkeep of the children's playground?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not about comparing pte condo living against HDB living. It is about finding a fair way to deal with a problem that deserves airing in the local newspapers. Just living in a pte condo does not mean one is so rich that one has to give in to unreasonable conditions that are unfair. To go along with such unfair means for such a reason is unbelievable!

Of course, every pte condo unit owner must pay for ALL the communal facilities. He is well aware and doubly informed that he is required to pay his share, whatever his situation. He knows full well he has to pay his fair share so as to maintain the premises and facilities in order to maintain the value of the condo. So of course he pays for kids' playground even if he is a bachelor; for swimming pool even if he is handicapped and unable to swim; for gym even if he ... you get the idea.

There should be fairness in the "more than usual" use of the communal facilities. Which is what this thread is intended to encourage discussion. For example, residents (in pte condo) can use tennis court FOC during day times, but need to pay for night time use as it involves use of high cost lighting. If it is very crowded and popular, perhaps use of the tennis courts even during day time may need to be charge a minimal sum; or a limit set on users like once a week etc.

The use of BBQ facilities always involves proper cleaning up which the resident always never able to do well enough, so it is only fair that a fee be imposed.

So, certain facilities may need additional cost implication.

In the case of car ownership, it is quite clear that there are 500 parking lots for 500 units, which is very clear that one unit owner has the use of only one parking lot. Whether he has a car or not is immaterial. Of course owners without a car also has to pay a bit towards the maintenance of the car park as it is communal facility.

So therein lies the matter to be discussed. Just talking only. Let's not sweep problems under the rug.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  


×