Kamelia @ Bandar Sri Damansara — the developer’s own filings call it RESIDENSI KAMELIA
One 26-storey block, 602 serviced apartments on a 2.31-acre parcel inside Land & General’s own Bandar Sri Damansara township. The licensed developer is SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD (110516-H), a subsidiary of Bursa-listed Land & General Berhad — not the listed company itself, which is what one portal’s developer field wrongly says. And the honest centre of this page: not one statutory particular has ever been published for this project by anyone.
I reply with the documents and the blanks, not a brochure.
Kamelia @ Bandar Sri Damansara at a glance
Fourteen facts, each with the source that published it. Where nobody published a figure, the row says so instead of filling the gap — and on this project that is most of the statutory rows.
- Name the developer itself uses
- RESIDENSI KAMELIAMicrosite body copy and, more importantly, Land & General Berhad’s own Bursa-facing media releases of 26 Feb 2026 and 29 May 2026. Not verified against a filing — no KPKT filing for this project could be located at all. The developer’s own two sites carry four different names for one building.
- Licensed developer
- SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD (110516-H)Printed twice on the developer’s own microsite, in the developer line and the copyright line. A subsidiary of Land & General Berhad, in the developer’s own words — the listed company is the parent, not the licensee. No new 12-digit SSM number is printed anywhere.
- Total units
- 602Developer’s own stat block (“Total Units No.: 602 Units”), corroborated by StarProperty and EdgeProp. One portal’s prose says “64 double-storey homes”, which is template contamination — see the honesty section.
- Blocks and storeys
- 1 block · 26 storeys“Total Storeys: 26 STOREYS” on the developer’s stat block; the single block is confirmed by PropertyGuru and by the developer’s own imagery. No filed Bilangan Tingkat exists.
- Land area
- 2.31 acres“Land Size: 2.31 ACRES” on the developer’s stat block. Independently corroborated: IQI prints 100,623 sq ft, which converts to 2.3100 acres — the two agree exactly.
- Density
- About 261 units per acre602 ÷ 2.31 acres. This arithmetic is mine, and 2.31 acres is this project’s own parcel. A high-density product, and no source claims otherwise. Two wrong denominators are in circulation — see the honesty section.
- Layout
- 553 sq ft · 2 bedrooms · 1 bathroomType A and Type A1, both the same. The only product in the building. EdgeProp says 549 sq ft on both types — a systematic 4 sq ft disagreement. About 51.4 m² is my conversion; the developer publishes no metric figure.
- Approving authority (PBT)
- Not published — MBPJ is inferredNo approving authority and no building plan approval reference is published by anyone. The Edge says the township comes under Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya, in an article from April 2021 about 1,200 acres. Medium confidence at best.
- State
- Selangor — by weight of evidence, not by filingSix independent sources file it in Selangor; IQI alone files it in Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur because the postal code is 52200. A postcode is a Pos Malaysia delivery code, not a jurisdiction.
- Tenure
- Freehold — portal-sourced, not filedEdgeProp, PropertyGuru and IQI all say freehold, and The Edge calls the township freehold. The developer’s own microsite never states tenure, and no title, PT or lot number is published by anyone.
- No. Lesen Pemaju · APDL
- NOT PUBLISHED by anyoneNeither number, and neither validity period, exists in the public record. So whether the advertising permit is current or lapsed cannot be assessed at all. See the statutory register below for every route that was tried.
- Price
- Not published on this pageNo filed statutory Unit Selling Price range exists in the public record, and no government register carries one. What circulates is a portal headline and one subsale asking price — two publishers and one agency, no statutory source. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. Ask me for the price list and the SPA.
- Expected completion
- No filed date — four answers in circulationIQI: 18 March 2028. EdgeProp header: 2028. EdgeProp description on the same page: December 2027. A year field on that record: 2027. The developer prints no completion date at all.
- Sales gallery as published
- Sales Gallery (Kamelia), THE FLO, Jalan Persiaran Perdana, Bandar Sri Damansara, 52200 Kuala LumpurThe developer’s own microsite, which gives a gallery address and an office address — and never gives the project site’s own street address, state, district or mukim.
Jump to what you came for
This page is organised the way a buyer actually asks questions — starting with the fact that the statutory paperwork for this project is not public anywhere.
Eleven things about this project that do not add up — and the source for each
None of this is rumour. Every item below comes from the developer’s own website, from Land & General’s own Bursa-facing media releases, from a named published article, or from a portal record you can open yourself. Where the developer’s own two websites disagree with each other, both are shown.
No statutory particulars exist publicly — and there is nowhere for them to hide
Malaysian law expects a licensed housing developer’s advertisement to carry filed particulars. For this project no developer licence number, no APDL, no licence or permit validity, no approving authority, no building plan reference, no land title or PT/lot number, no mukim, no filed building type, no filed completion date and no filed price band is published by anyone. And this is not a search failure: the microsite’s own WordPress page index returns exactly one page, the homepage. There is no statutory page, no disclaimer page and no terms page for a block to sit on. The sibling microsite and the corporate site were checked too — Land & General publishes no statutory block on any of its websites.
Whether the advertising permit has lapsed cannot be assessed
The usual test on these pages is to read the permit number and its validity period and check it against today’s date. Here there is no number and no validity period in existence publicly, not even a redacted placeholder, because there is no filing to carry one. So nothing on this page claims the permit is current. The only evidence the project is lawfully selling is circumstantial: Land & General’s media releases of 26 February and 29 May 2026 name Residensi Kamelia as an ongoing development recognising revenue and sales in FY2026. Strong circumstance. Not the document.
Two unrelated projects are called Kamelia, and one portal carries both
This Kamelia is 602 serviced apartments in one 26-storey block in Bandar Sri Damansara by Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd. The other is 238 detached and terraced houses of 1,291 and 1,701 sq ft with four bedrooms, by KLK Land Sdn Bhd, in Kuala Selangor — EdgeProp record 53197, and PropertyGuru’s “Kamelia by KLK Land”, ID 22873. A third hub, “Residensi Camelia 2”, is unrelated again. EdgeProp’s own search collapses them. Nothing from any of those records is on this page. If you are reading specifications for four-bedroom houses, you have the Kuala Selangor project.
The developer is not the listed company, and one portal gets it wrong at law
EdgeProp’s developer field reads “Land & General Berhad”. That is the Bursa-listed holding company. The entity that holds the licence, signs your SPA and owes you liquidated damages is SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD (110516-H), a subsidiary. EdgeProp’s own description text on the same page says Sri Damansara Sdn. Bhd. — so it contradicts itself within one page, and it repeats the identical error on the sibling Damansara Livista record. PropertyGuru gets it right; IQI names no developer at all. A buyer who thinks they are contracting with a listed company is mistaken.
Four names for one building, all from the developer’s own two websites
Residensi Kamelia on the microsite and in the media releases. Kamelia Bandar Sri Damansara on the corporate property index. DAMANSARA KAMELIA in the corporate register-interest dropdown — the only one that follows the house convention of Damansara Foresta, Seresta, Laverra and Livista. And, in the microsite’s own second paragraph, “Residence Kamelia”, a typo on its own project name. The same page prints “all righs reserved” and “Kindergarden”. EdgeProp coins a fifth name, Kamelia Residence, that appears on no developer material. Worth knowing before you trust any single figure on that microsite.
The state, and even the local council, are inference rather than filed fact
Six independent sources file this township’s developments in Selangor, and The Edge adds that the township is under MBPJ. IQI alone hard-codes Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur into its URL, because the postal code is 52200 Kuala Lumpur — and the developer itself writes “52200 Kuala Lumpur” for its own office and sales gallery. A postcode is a Pos Malaysia delivery code, not a jurisdiction. But The Edge’s MBPJ statement is about a 1,200-acre township in a 2021 article, not about this parcel, and the one document that would settle it — the building plan approval reference — is not published. So: Selangor on the weight of evidence; MBPJ at medium confidence; mukim, daerah and the plan reference not published at all.
Louis’s own agency’s page for this project is the contaminated one
This is uncomfortable to print and it belongs here anyway. The IQI Global page for Kamelia says the project “features 64 double-storey homes” — a 26-storey, 602-unit tower is not 64 double-storey homes. Its footer carries an unrelated section about Mantin, Negeri Sembilan. It hard-codes the state as Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, and it credits the project with a 5.21-acre park that cannot fit on the site. That page is template-contaminated and nothing from its prose is used here. What IQI does contribute, and it is useful, is a land-area field of 100,623 sq ft that independently corroborates the developer’s 2.31 acres.
The 5.21-acre park cannot be this project’s facility, and must never be the density denominator
IQI credits Kamelia with “5.21 acres of lifestyle park”. The whole site is 2.31 acres. A 5.21-acre park cannot sit inside it, and the developer’s own microsite does not mention it at all. The 5.21 acres is Senses Park, public open space on the MRT-station parcel — a township amenity, not a facility of this development. It matters arithmetically too: dividing 602 units by 5.21 acres gives 116 units per acre, less than half the true figure, and dividing by the township’s 1,200 acres gives half a unit per acre. Only 2.31 acres is this project’s own parcel, and the honest density is about 261 units per acre.
“Affordable” is marketing here, not a statutory category
Land & General’s own publicity and the press call this an affordable serviced apartment project. But Kamelia carries no Rumah Selangorku, RSKU, RUMAWIP or Residensi Wilayah branding on any source, and a browse of Selangor’s LPHS eHartanah affordable-project register surfaced no Kamelia record and no Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd record — weak evidence rather than a clean negative, because that register ignores its own search parameter and returned unfiltered rows. A second reason to doubt a statutory classification: 553 sq ft is below the minimum built-up of both the Rumah Selangorku apartment types and the Residensi Wilayah programme. So no income ceiling, eligibility rule, quota or resale moratorium is published — and nobody states that none exists either.
The gym exists only in advertising prose, and a shop exists only on one portal
The developer’s own sentence promises you will “stay fit in the state-of-the-art gym”, and EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and IQI all tick a gym. It is absent from the developer’s own by-level facilities schedule — no level, no floor area, no equipment, and no gym image in a 42-item media library. The strongest-worded facility claim on the site is the least evidenced one. Separately, EdgeProp lists a “shop within the premises” that appears on no other source and is absent from the developer’s own ground-floor schedule. If retail lots exist they would be strata commercial parcels in the same building, and the HDA position — Schedule G, Schedule H or a non-HDA contract — is undocumented. Unresolved, and worth a written question.
Kamelia has won nothing, and the eight award logos in the file system belong to other projects
The developer’s media library holds eight award-logo images, and the live page renders no awards section at all — they are unused template leftovers. Read against Land & General’s own milestone register, every one belongs to the company or to a different project: FIABCI 1996 to the township, the 2013 landscape awards to Damansara Foresta, the 2016 landscape award to Astoria Ampang, iProperty IDEA 2018 to Damansara Seresta, and the Forbes, Edge, Focus Malaysia and Property Insight items at company level. Not one post-dates 2020, and Kamelia launched in 2024. Green certification: the developer claims nothing at all, and nothing was found — with the caveat that both registries were partly unavailable on 8 October 2026.
What is actually being built, and the dated record behind it
The statistics band carries only figures a named source published, with my own arithmetic flagged as mine. The facilities schedule is the developer’s own by-level list, which is better disclosure than most projects in this series and is credited as such — including the four floors it leaves out. The timeline is built from the developer’s Bursa-facing media releases and named reporting, because no filed dates exist.
Facilities — the developer’s own by-level schedule, and the four floors it leaves out
Credit where it is due: the developer publishes its facilities as a text schedule assigned to levels, not merely as a graphic, and no portal assigns levels at all. No facility is marked shell or space-only. What follows is that schedule as published, followed by what is claimed elsewhere but is not in it.
Ground Floor
- Guard House
- Mail Room
- Lift Lobby
- Management Office
- Kindergarden — the developer’s own spelling, reproduced as published
- Child Care Centre
- Surau (prayer room)
- Multipurpose Room
Level 5
- Playground
- Jogging Track
- Changing Room
- Swimming Pool
- Wading Pool
- Barbeque Areas
Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4
- No source describes these four floors at all. For a 26-storey tower with 602 units and no published car park count, that is a four-floor hole in the published description. Podium parking is the natural reading and the developer never says so, so this page does not say it either.
Claimed somewhere, but absent from the developer’s own by-level schedule
- Gymnasium — claimed in the developer’s own marketing sentence (“stay fit in the state-of-the-art gym”) and ticked by EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and IQI, but absent from the developer’s own by-level schedule. No level, no floor area, no equipment list, and no gym image in a 42-item media library. The only place this gym is committed is a sentence of advertising copy.
- Landscaped gardens — the developer’s prose promises “the lush surroundings of our landscaped gardens” and its imagery is garden-themed, but no level, no area and no landscape architect is published.
- “Shop within the premises” — EdgeProp alone lists retail. The developer’s own ground-floor schedule lists no shops. If retail lots exist they would be strata commercial parcels in the same building, which is a different legal animal from your home. Unresolved.
- “Multipurpose hall” (EdgeProp) versus “Multipurpose Room” (the developer). A room and a hall are not the same commitment, so this page prints the developer’s word.
- “BBQ pit”, singular (EdgeProp) versus “Barbeque Areas”, plural (the developer).
- A 5.21-acre lifestyle park — IQI alone. Arithmetically impossible as a facility of this project, because the whole site is 2.31 acres. See the honesty section above.
Not published for facilities, therefore not on this page
- What Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4 contain. The developer assigns facilities to the Ground Floor and to Level 5 only. Four floors of a 26-storey tower are described by nobody at all.
- Car park bays in total, bays per unit, motorcycle bays, visitor bays and EV charging provision — on a 553 sq ft product this is a first-order question and no source answers it
- Lift count, lift capacity and the lift-to-unit ratio for 602 units
- The gym: its level, its area and its equipment
- The landscaped gardens: level, area, landscape architect, planting or hardscape schedule
- Prayer-hall capacity; the kindergarten and child care centre operator and capacity, and whether either is a strata parcel sold to a third party or management common property
- Security beyond the two words “Guard House” — no CCTV, no access control, no gated-and-guarded specification
- Refuse chute or bin centre, laundry, co-working or study room, generator back-up, water tank capacity
- Service charge and sinking fund rates, quit rent and assessment estimates, strata title timing and the management-corporation arrangements
Dated record — the developer’s own disclosures and named reporting, because no filed date exists
One product, 602 times — and the schedule that does not exist
There is no filed built-up schedule for this project, so there is no filed figure for built-up area, bedroom or bathroom count, car park allocation, or per-type unit count. What follows is the marketed schedule, with each source named and each disagreement shown. The developer does publish a per-type specification schedule, which is unusually good and is set out in full below.
Type A — 553 sq ft
The developer’s floor-plan section prints “Type A / 553 sq ft / 2 Bedrooms / 1 Bathroom” against this plan, which makes it the strongest-evidenced thing on the whole microsite — a caption rather than a file name. The built-up above comes from the developer’s floor-plan section and its type table, not from its marketing prose. EdgeProp publishes 549 sq ft for this type, a systematic four-square-foot difference that also affects Type A1, so it is not a typo on one row. This page uses 553 and attributes it. How many units are Type A is not published by anyone, and neither is any car park allocation.
Ask for the Type A plan at full resolutionType A1 — 553 sq ft
Same bedrooms, same bathrooms, same built-up, same specification schedule. The developer publishes a separate floor-plan graphic for Type A1 and a stacking graphic for the floor plate, and no text anywhere on any source explains what differs. It is presumably orientation or position on the floor plate. This page does not guess, and nor does it invent a unit split: 602 over 26 storeys averages about 23 units per floor, and if Levels 1 to 4 are podium and Level 5 is the facilities deck then about 29 per residential floor — arithmetic resting on an unsourced assumption about Levels 1 to 5, so it is presented as arithmetic or not at all.
Ask what separates Type A1 from Type ASpecification schedule, as the developer publishes it
Structure, wall and roofing: reinforced concrete, walls also brick. Windows: aluminium framed with glass. Doors: fire door and timber flush door. Sanitary fittings per unit: 1 shower point, 1 WC, 1 wash basin, 1 kitchen sink. Electrical points per unit: 9 lighting points, 3 ceiling fan points, 9 thirteen-amp socket outlets and 2 air-conditioning points, plus a TV point, door bell, water heater point, fibre socket and distribution box. Read honestly: a 2-bedroom unit with two air-conditioning points means one bedroom has no point unless the second serves the living area, and the developer does not say which rooms the two points serve. Worth asking rather than assuming.
Ask which rooms the two air-con points serveWhat a filed built-up schedule would tell you — and does not, here
Gross and net floor area as filed. The per-type unit split. Ceiling height and floor-to-floor height. Whether a balcony, yard or drying area exists at all — none is mentioned in any schedule. Orientation and view of either type. Whether units are bare, partly or fully fitted, and any finishes schedule at all: no floor tiles, kitchen cabinetry, wardrobes or sanitaryware brands are published. Total car park bays, bays per unit, motorcycle and visitor bays, EV charging. Lift count and lift-to-unit ratio for 602 units. Site plan, block layout, elevation drawings and car-park plan. None of these is published by the developer, in any Bursa filing, by any portal, or in any reachable registry record.
Send me these questions in writingMeasurement note, flagged as mine and not as filed fact: 553 sq ft is about 51.4 m² and 549 sq ft is about 51.0 m² — both conversions are mine, because the developer publishes no square-metre figure anywhere. PropertyGuru’s project hub prints a garbled built-up string from which 553 is recoverable; it is not cited here. No source claims a dual-key layout, and the developer’s own room list of two bedrooms, one bathroom, one kitchen sink and one WC would not support one. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Artist’s impressions — with the evidence for each subject stated
An honest grading note, because it changes how much these images are worth. The developer’s microsite runs on WordPress with an open content index, so every one of its 42 media items could be read and individually checked for reachability — and a deliberately bogus file path on the same server returned a clean 404, which makes a positive result meaningful. But on that site every content-management title is identical to the file name. So a confirmed title proves the file exists and what size it is; it does not confirm the subject. Only two subjects above rise above that: the location map, which the microsite uses in its location section, and the Type A floor plan, which the microsite captions in words. Every other caption above says inferred, and means it. What the library does not contain also matters: no show-unit interior photography, no construction-progress photography, no site plan, no elevation drawing, no car-park plan and no gym image — the whole set is artist impressions and graphics dated May 2024, and for a project the listed parent reports as recognising revenue in FY2026 there is no published evidence of physical progress at all.
Ask me for dated site photographsPersiaran Meranti, Bandar Sri Damansara — and the one distance two sources disagree about
The pin below is a text search on the street and township, not a filed coordinate, because no source publishes GPS coordinates for this project. The only coordinates that surface in a Kamelia search belong to the unrelated Kuala Selangor project by another developer, and they are not used here. The street name itself comes from PropertyGuru and IQI — the developer’s own microsite never states the project site’s address.
On the postcode, plainly: 52200 is a Pos Malaysia delivery code used on both sides of the Selangor–Kuala Lumpur boundary here, and the developer itself writes “Bandar Sri Damansara, 52200 Kuala Lumpur” for its own office and sales gallery. That is a postal city, not a jurisdiction, and it appears to be how one agency page came to hard-code the state as Wilayah Persekutuan. This page says Selangor.
The nearest MRT, both published answers
- Sri Damansara West (Barat) MRT, Putrajaya Line, station code SSP168 — 500 m per the developer’s own distance table, 720 m and about a 9-minute walk per PropertyGuru’s measured walking distance. PropertyGuru is 44% further. Both are printed here because both were published.
- IQI says “about 500 metres” — that is the developer’s own figure repeated, not an independent measurement, so it does not count as corroboration.
- Three similarly named stations serve this township and must not be collapsed into one: Sri Damansara Barat (West, SSP168), Sri Damansara Sentral and Sri Damansara Timur (East, SSP169). EdgeProp names only West and East, omits Sentral entirely, and gives no distances at all.
- On the second station the developer under-sells itself: it prints 3 km to Sri Damansara Sentral where PropertyGuru measures 1,598 m, about 19 to 20 minutes on foot — the developer’s figure is nearly double. That is the opposite of the usual bias and worth recording.
- The developer also promises a “Cover walkway with connection of Pedestrian Link” and never says where it goes, how long it is, who builds it, or whether it exists yet. Treat it as an unquantified claim.
The developer’s own transport table
- Sri Damansara West MRT — 500 m (see the two answers above)
- Sri Damansara Sentral MRT — 3 km (PropertyGuru measures 1,598 m)
- Sri Damansara East MRT — 4 km
- Kepong Sentral KTM Komuter — 4 km
- Damansara Damai MRT — 7 km
- PropertyGuru additionally publishes 13 bus stops within 1 km, including Prima Saujana at the doorstep and 8Trium Damansara at 156 m.
Shopping, as the developer publishes it
- The FLO Alfresco Street — 50 m. This is Land & General’s own retail street, and it is also where the Kamelia sales gallery is.
- Star Grocer — 50 m
- 8trium — 300 m. Also Land & General’s own office and retail development, and the building that houses the developer’s own head office.
- Decathlon / Courts Mammoth — 300 m
- Uniqlo Sri Damansara — 1 km
- Lotus’s Menjalara — 5.2 km · Plaza Arkadia — 5.6 km · AEON Mall Metro Prima — 6 km
- The Curve — 7.1 km · IKEA — 7.2 km · 1 Utama — 8.4 km
Education and medical, as the developer publishes it
- Sri Bestari International School and Sri Bestari Private School — 600 m each. Sri Bestari is Land & General’s own school, opened 2020 per the group’s milestone page; say so rather than treating it as a third-party amenity.
- SK Bandar Sri Damansara 2 — 850 m · SK Bandar Sri Damansara 1 — 1 km · SMK Bandar Sri Damansara 2 — 1.2 km · First City University College — 11.3 km
- ParkCity Medical Centre — 5.9 km · Damansara Specialist Hospital 2 — 6 km · Damansara Damai Medical Centre — 6 km
- Hospital Sungai Buloh — 7.2 km · Hospital Selayang — 8.8 km · Tropicana Medical Centre — 13.1 km
- Honest note on completeness: the developer’s education and medical tables carry further entries between the figures above which were summarised rather than enumerated when the microsite was read. The lists above are therefore the verified subset, not the complete table, and no entry has been filled in from memory. Ask me and I will send you the developer’s tables in full.
- Named by EdgeProp with no distance published anywhere: Krista Wangsa Permai, SK Bandar Baru Sri Damansara 2, Sekolah Sri Bestari, Aman Putri Dispensary, Klinik Kip and Klinik Surgeri Sri Damansara.
Distances nobody publishes — therefore not on this page
- Any highway or interchange at all. No distance to the LDP, DASH, Penchala Link, NKVE, MRR2, Jalan Kuching or Sprint is published by the developer, by any portal or by anyone else. For a project whose entire pitch is connectivity, the absence of a single road distance on the developer’s own site is notable, and this page does not estimate one.
- Kuala Lumpur city centre and KLCC · KL Sentral · KLIA and KLIA2 · Subang (Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah) airport
- Nearest petrol station, police station, fire station, post office, wet market or hawker centre
- Nearest public park. The only park figure in circulation is the 5.21-acre claim, which is Senses Park, public open space on the MRT-station parcel — outside this project’s 2.31-acre boundary, and arithmetically incapable of being inside it.
- Nearest mosque — a Surau on the ground floor is not the same thing — and the nearest Klinik Kesihatan
- Any international school other than Sri Bestari
Two warnings worth carrying on a public page. First, no GPS coordinate exists for this project in any source, and the only coordinates a Kamelia search returns belong to a different developer’s 238-house project in Kuala Selangor — they are not used here and must never be. Second, the one document that would settle MBPJ versus DBKL conclusively is the building plan approval reference, and it is not published by anyone; neither is the mukim, the daerah in filed form, or the PT or lot number. Density, stated honestly: 602 units on this project’s own 2.31-acre parcel is about 261 units per acre. Dividing the same 602 units by the 5.21-acre Senses Park parcel or by the township’s 1,200 acres produces a flattering figure that is arithmetic abuse, because neither of those is this project’s land.
Statutory register — RESIDENSI KAMELIA, and the block that does not exist anywhere
Malaysian law requires a licensed housing developer to file and display statutory advertisement particulars, and that filing is public. For this project no such filing is publicly reachable — and this is the first project in this series where not one statutory particular has been published by anyone at all. So rather than pretend to a filing, the three columns below set out exactly what is missing, exactly what was tried in order to find it, and exactly what the developer does publish instead. Read them together. Column A is the as-filed block that ought to exist. Column B is every route that was attempted, so nobody has to repeat them. Column C is the whole of the developer’s own disclosure. The answer a buyer actually needs comes from two documents that are not on the internet: the price list and the SPA at the sales gallery.
| (A) The as-filed block — every field, as it stands | (B) Every route tried, so nobody repeats them | (C) The developer’s own project microsite, in full |
|---|---|---|
| Nama Skim / Pemajuan NOT PRINTED — the developer’s own most formal name is Residensi Kamelia, which is not a filing Pemaju (full name and registration number) NOT PRINTED in a filing. The microsite prints Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd (110516-H) No. Lesen Pemaju NOT PRINTED Tempoh sah lesen NOT PRINTED No. Permit Iklan dan Jualan (APDL) NOT PRINTED Tempoh sah APDL NOT PRINTED — so the lapse check cannot be performed at all Pihak Berkuasa yang Meluluskan NOT PRINTED — MBPJ is inferred from township-level reporting only No. Kelulusan Pelan Bangunan NOT PRINTED — the one document that would settle the local authority conclusively Jenis Bangunan NOT PRINTED — four different labels circulate; see column C Pegangan Tanah NOT PRINTED, and not stated by the developer either. Freehold comes from three portals plus township-level reporting Hakmilik / PT / lot / mukim / daerah NOT PRINTED Sekatan Kepentingan NOT PRINTED Bebanan / chargee NOT PRINTED — no bank, charge or caveat is named by any source Jumlah Unit (and per block) NOT PRINTED in a filing. 602 in one block comes from the developer’s stat block Bilangan Tingkat NOT PRINTED in a filing. 26 comes from the developer’s stat block Tempat Letak Kereta NOT PRINTED Tarikh Dijangka Siap NOT PRINTED by the developer; four unfiled answers circulate Harga Jualan Unit (minima–maksima) NOT PRINTED. No filed statutory band exists in the public record, and no government register carries one Jadual keluasan binaan NOT PRINTED in a filing Keluasan Tanah NOT PRINTED in a filing. 2.31 acres / 100,623 sq ft comes from the developer and is corroborated by an agency land field Jadual Perjanjian (G / H / I / J) NOT PRINTED — do not assume Schedule H Diskaun Bumiputera NOT PRINTED — there is no filed field, so there is nothing to withhold | Developer licence serial, needed to walk the KPKT HIMS filed-advertisement path — not published by any source, so the walk could not be attempted KPKT HIMS indexed brochure search — no hit for Kamelia or Residensi Kamelia KPKT TEDUH developer page for Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd — no indexed page found; the route needs the same serial The usual portal route, where a portal transcribes the licence serial — FAILED here. The EdgeProp record for this project prints no developer licence number, no APDL, no approving authority and no building plan reference. Checked twice. Its sibling Damansara Livista record is equally bare, so this portal does not transcribe licence serials for this developer’s projects at all The developer’s own statutory page — does not exist. The microsite’s own content index returns exactly one page: the homepage. No statutory page, no disclaimer page, no terms page. There is nowhere for a block to hide The sibling microsite and the corporate site — checked for the same reason, because this developer reuses templates. Neither carries a developer-licence page, an APDL page or a buyer-guide statutory block. Land & General publishes no statutory block on any of its websites Selangor LPHS eHartanah affordable-project register — no Kamelia row and no Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd row. Weak evidence, not a clean negative: that register ignores its own search parameter and returned unfiltered rows. It is an affordable-schemes register in any case Government open data — aggregate statistics on licences and permits issued only; no project-level register Bursa Malaysia contract awards — no award naming Kamelia found on Bursa, klsescreener, The Edge or EdgeProp. Two contractor leads were checked and both are different projects Construction database — a same-developer, same-township record exists for a Serviced Apartment @ Bandar Sri Damansara (Phase 2) at 29 storeys and 344 units, against Kamelia’s 26 and 602. A different scheme; none of its contractor, consultant or lot details may be attributed here, and its developer and lot fields are behind a subscription in any case Green registries — the GreenRE platform reported itself temporarily unavailable and returned zero rows for the entire register; the GBI directory returned a server error. Inconclusive, not a negative — and the developer claims nothing to check | What the developer publishes, in total: its company name and registration number, its office address, a telephone and fax number, a privacy-policy link, three summary statistics, a by-level facilities schedule, a per-type specification schedule, four distance tables, two floor-plan graphics and a page of marketing prose. That is the entire statutory-adjacent content of the microsite Land Size 2.31 ACRES · Total Storeys 26 STOREYS · Total Units No. 602 Units Developer line SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD (110516-H) — A Subsidiary Of Land & General Berhad Office address as printed 8trium, Level 18, Menara 1, Jalan Cempaka SD 12/5, Bandar Sri Damansara, 52200 Kuala Lumpur Sales gallery as printed Sales Gallery (Kamelia), THE FLO, Jalan Persiaran Perdana, Bandar Sri Damansara, 52200 Kuala Lumpur The project site’s own street address, state, daerah, mukim, PT or lot number, and PBT NOT STATED ANYWHERE ON THE MICROSITE Building type never stated in words by the developer. The circulating labels are “Service Residence”, “service apartments”, “Condominium/Apartment”, and “Highrise” with Category: Commercial Tenure never stated by the developer Completion date never stated by the developer Price never stated by the developer Car park never stated by the developer, and not in the per-type specification schedule either, which does list sanitary and electrical points — a material omission on a 553 sq ft product Levels 1 to 4 never described by the developer, or by anyone else Gymnasium in the marketing prose; absent from the developer’s own by-level schedule Awards eight award logos sit in the media library; the live page renders no awards section, and every logo belongs to the company or to a different project Green certification no green, sustainability, energy or water claim of any kind Proofreading the same page prints “Residence Kamelia” for its own project name, “Kindergarden”, and “all righs reserved” — worth knowing before trusting any single figure on it |
Column A is not a gap this page papered over — it is the finding. Between them the developer, its Bursa-listed parent, three property portals, one agency and two government registries publish no developer licence number, no advertising and sales permit, no approving authority, no building plan reference, no land title and no filed price band for this project. The practical consequence for you is specific: you cannot verify from any public source that the licence and the permit are current, you cannot check a marketed price against a filed band because there is no band, and you cannot confirm which local authority approved the building. All three are answerable — by asking Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd for its licence and permit numbers in writing and verifying them on the KPKT TEDUH portal, and by reading the price list and the SPA at the sales gallery. That is what I will do with you.
No price appears in this register, because no filed statutory Unit Selling Price minimum and maximum exists in the public record for this project, and no government price register carries one. What circulates is a portal headline figure repeated by a second portal and one agency page, plus a single subsale asking price from one agent listing on a portal that simultaneously reports zero sale transactions in the last twelve months. On an independence check that reduces to two publishers and one agency, with no government or statutory source at all. Louis’s standing rule is the SPA price and nothing else, and nothing where the price cannot be established — so this page carries no figure. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Can a foreigner buy here?
On the weight of evidence this project is in Selangor, where the thresholds for foreign purchase are: Zone 1 and Zone 2 — RM2,000,000, and strata property and gated landed strata only; Zone 3, meaning Hulu Selangor and Sabak Bernam — RM1,000,000. Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory sit at RM1,000,000 with EPU consent. That contrast is exactly why the Selangor-versus-Kuala-Lumpur question on this page is not academic — the two jurisdictions carry different thresholds and different consent routes, and the state here is an inference from six sources rather than a filed fact. A 553 sq ft unit at this project’s positioning is very unlikely to clear the Selangor RM2,000,000 threshold, so a foreign buyer should expect the answer to be no. Because no source states the foreign-ownership position for this project explicitly, this page asserts nothing. Ask me and I will put it to the developer in writing.
Construction progress — what percentage is built?
No built-percentage figure is published by any source — not by the developer, not by its listed parent in either media release, not by any portal, and not in any reachable registry record. No dated site progress photograph exists either: the developer’s entire 42-item media library is artist impressions and graphics registered in May 2024, with no construction photography at all. What is on the record is indirect: Land & General’s media releases of 26 February and 29 May 2026 name Residensi Kamelia as an ongoing development contributing to FY2026 property revenue recognition and sales. For a project at that stage, the complete absence of published physical progress is itself worth knowing. Ask me and I will go and look.
What this page does not publish, and why
Louis’s standing policy, applied to every project page on this site: no discount, no rebate, no nett price, no promotion, no freebie, no incentive, no commission, no Bumiputera figure, no leaseback or guaranteed-rental rate, and no yield or ROI projection is published here, ever. Those are matters for a conversation, where they can be stated accurately and for your specific case rather than scraped off a page months later. Beyond that, this page leaves blank everything no named source published: the developer licence and APDL numbers and their validity, the approving authority and the building plan approval reference, the land title, PT or lot number and mukim, the restriction in interest and any charge over the land, the filed building type and tenure, the schedule the SPA runs under, the filed completion and vacant possession dates, liquidated damages, the housing development account and the DLP, any filed price band, the service charge and sinking fund, quit rent and assessment, strata title timing and the management-corporation arrangements, the per-type unit split, the take-up rate, the project-level gross development value, car park bays and ratios, what Levels 1 to 4 contain, the gym’s level and area, lift counts and ratios, ceiling heights, the fitting-out level and any finishes schedule, balcony or yard, orientation, the site plan, elevations and car-park plan, every contractor and consultant, the kindergarten and child-care operators and whether either is a strata parcel, the security specification, and where the pedestrian link goes. One more, specifically: a project-level gross development value was reported in the press in 2024 and this page does not print it either, because dividing it by 602 units manufactures an implied average price with no filed band to check it against, and an implied price is still a price. Every one of these is a question I will put to Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd in writing for you.
Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd (110516-H), a Land & General subsidiary — and why the distinction matters
The licensed developer of Residensi Kamelia is SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD, company registration number 110516-H. That name and number are printed twice on the developer’s own microsite — once in the developer line, SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD (110516-H) / A Subsidiary Of Land & General Berhad, and again in the copyright line. The number is an old-format Companies Act number, and no new 12-digit SSM registration number is printed anywhere by anyone. The microsite files the developer’s office at 8trium, Level 18, Menara 1, Jalan Cempaka SD 12/5, Bandar Sri Damansara, 52200 Kuala Lumpur, with a telephone and fax number, and the sales gallery at THE FLO, Jalan Persiaran Perdana, in the same township.
It matters that the licensee is not Land & General Berhad. Land & General Berhad is the Bursa-listed holding company; Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd is the subsidiary that holds the developer’s licence, signs your SPA, owes you liquidated damages if the building is late, and against which any statutory recourse runs. EdgeProp’s developer field for this project nevertheless reads “Land & General Berhad”, which is wrong at law — and its own description text on the same page correctly reads “Sri Damansara Sdn. Bhd.”, so the page contradicts itself. The identical error appears on its record for the sibling Damansara Livista. PropertyGuru names the subsidiary correctly; IQI names no developer at all. When the agreement is in front of you, check that the company number reads 110516-H, and ask to see that company’s developer licence.
On the group behind it: Land & General has developed Bandar Sri Damansara, a freehold township of about 1,200 acres, since the mid-1990s, per The Edge’s township cover story, which also places the township at the Selangor–Kuala Lumpur border and under Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya. Several of the amenities in the location section are the group’s own assets — The FLO retail street at 50 m, 8trium at 300 m, and Sri Bestari school at 600 m — and this page says so rather than presenting them as independent third-party amenities. They are genuine amenities and they are also the developer’s own. No joint venture, landowner-developer arrangement or profit or unit share is published by anyone for this parcel; because it sits inside the group’s own township, an in-house landbank parcel is the natural reading, and that is inference, not a sourced statement.
On what the group says about this project in its own Bursa-facing disclosures: the media releases of 26 February 2026 and 29 May 2026 both name Residensi Kamelia as an ongoing development, the second explicitly as contributing to FY2026 property revenue recognition and sales. They give no land title, no PT or lot number, no mukim or daerah, no tenure and no completion date, and the group-level unbilled sales and planned launch figures in them are not attributable to this project, so they are not printed here. These releases are useful for exactly two things: they prove the project is live and selling, and they are the only reason this page can say even circumstantially that a licence and a permit are likely to be in force.
On contractors and consultants, the honest answer is nobody is named. No main contractor, piling contractor, architect, C&S or M&E engineer, quantity surveyor, master planner, landscape architect or interior designer is published for Kamelia by any source, and no Bursa contract award naming Kamelia was found. Two leads were checked and ruled out: a 2018 award for two 21-storey blocks in Damansara Damai under a different group employer, and a contractor’s own listing of Ativo Suites in this township at 668 units over two blocks of 33 and 28 storeys. Neither is Kamelia. A construction database also carries a same-developer, same-township record for a Serviced Apartment @ Bandar Sri Damansara (Phase 2) at 29 storeys and 344 units — against Kamelia’s 26 storeys and 602 units. It is a different scheme and nothing from it is borrowed here.
On awards and green certification, the honest category is nothing. Residensi Kamelia has won nothing. The developer’s media library contains eight award-logo images and the live page renders no awards section at all — they are unused template leftovers. Read against Land & General’s own milestone register, each belongs elsewhere: the FIABCI Malaysia Property Award 1996 to the township; International Property Awards 2013 for landscape architecture, Malaysia and Asia Pacific, to Damansara Foresta; the 2016 residential landscape award to Astoria Ampang; iProperty IDEA 2018 for best residential high-rise to Damansara Seresta; and Forbes Asia Best Under A Billion 2014, The Edge Top Property Developers 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020, Focus Malaysia Best Under Billion 2019 and Property Insight Top 100 2019/2020 at company level. Not one post-dates 2020 and Kamelia launched in 2024. On green: the developer makes no green, sustainability, GBI, GreenRE, energy or water claim of any kind, and none was found — with the caveat that both public registries were partly unavailable on 8 October 2026. Note also that the group’s 2019 Best Sustainability Reporting award is a corporate reporting award, not a building certification, and the two must not be confused.
Developer particulars read from the developer’s own project microsite, from Land & General’s media releases of 26 February and 29 May 2026, and from the group’s own corporate milestone register, all on 8 October 2026. Award attributions are taken from that milestone register, project by project. GreenRE and the Green Building Index directory were checked the same day; both were partly unavailable, which is recorded as inconclusive rather than as a negative.
Questions buyers actually ask about Residensi Kamelia
Where exactly is Kamelia @ Bandar Sri Damansara, and is it in Selangor or Kuala Lumpur?
Which local council approves it — MBPJ or DBKL?
What is the registered scheme name?
Is this the Kamelia with the landed houses?
Who is the licensed developer? Is it Land & General Berhad?
Is the developer’s licence number and the APDL published anywhere?
Has the advertising permit lapsed?
What is the price?
How many units, how many storeys, and how dense is it?
What layouts are there?
What is actually in the unit?
What facilities are there, and on which floor?
How far is the MRT really?
Is it an affordable-housing scheme? Are there eligibility rules?
When will it be completed?
Is it freehold?
Can a foreigner buy here?
Has it won awards, or is it green-certified?
Who built it, and who designed it?
Is the building residential, or is part of it commercial?
What does this page deliberately not publish?
Want the documents rather than the brochure?
I will send you the developer’s own specification and facilities schedules, its distance tables and its floor plans as published, plus Land & General’s media releases naming Residensi Kamelia. And I will put every blank on this page to Sri Damansara Sdn Bhd in writing on your behalf — starting with the developer licence number, the APDL and its validity period, the approving authority, the building plan reference, and the price list and the SPA.
Louis Koh · Director, LK Group Marketing · IQI Realty Sdn Bhd · Registered Estate Agency. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Louis Koh
Director, LK Group Marketing · IQI Realty Sdn Bhd · Registered Estate Agency
I work Kuala Lumpur and Selangor new launches, and I publish the filed statutory particulars rather than the brochure copy — including, as here, a project where not one statutory particular has been published by anyone at all, where the developer’s own two websites carry four names for one building, and where my own agency’s page for the project is the contaminated one. If a figure on this page matters to your decision, ask me for the document it came from and I will send it. If a blank on this page matters, I will go and ask the developer in writing.
Published 8 October 2026 · Last verified 8 October 2026 · Built from the developer’s own project microsite, Land & General Berhad’s media releases of 26 February and 29 May 2026, the group’s corporate milestone register, The Edge, StarProperty, EdgeProp and PropertyGuru, all read on 8 October 2026. No filed KPKT advertisement particulars exist in publicly reachable form for this project, so no licence number, permit number or permit validity period is stated anywhere on this page. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Worth putting beside this one
Ask a specific question
If you would rather not use WhatsApp, use this. I answer them myself. Only your name and one contact method are required.
Developer: Land & General (3 developments on this site)
Where it is: Bandar Sri Damansara, Selangor