Templer Residence @ Anggun City

No, and unusually for a Malaysian project the reason is settled rather than arguable, because the developer has put the decisive fact in writing.

Selangor opens only strata and strata-landed property to purchase by a foreign interest. Landed residential held on an individual title is closed to non-citizens at any price whatsoever. There is no consent application, no minimum price and no company structure that changes that for a residential landed lot.

Templer Residence is individual title, and it is the developer that says so. Its own buying guide states that its Freehold – Individual Title status offers long-term security and freedom for future renovations. The Edge, reporting the project in September 2024, describes it as an individual titled, gated development of 1,000 terraced houses over five phases. That is as close to settled as this question gets in Malaysia.

The price test would also fail independently. Rawang is in the Gombak district, approved by Majlis Perbandaran Selayang, which puts it in Selangor Zone 1 at a RM2,000,000 floor for residential purchases by foreign interests. Belmont runs RM1,111,000 to RM1,879,000, so even the most expensive Belmont lot falls short by RM121,000.

Two independent gates, both closed. For completeness: foreign interest includes Malaysian permanent residents. If you are a non-citizen looking at Rawang generally, the only projects on this site where the price test is even passed are Setia Eco Templer’s upper phases and The Rise at Emerald Rawang — and The Rise is individual title too, so it fails on the same gate this one does.

Selangor circulars change without much warning. Have your own Malaysian lawyer confirm the current position before you act on any of this.

The honest answers are: probably not yet, and no. Both come from the developer’s own material.

The Belmont page lists a clubhouse with a swimming pool, gym, pickleball courts, cafe, pool table and table tennis. The same page then states, in terms, that the Club House is a private property of the Vendor and/or its nominee, that at all times, the Club House shall be deemed to remain the sole and exclusive property of the Vendor, that access and membership may be offered to selected persons at the sole discretion of the Vendor, and that the vendor reserves the right to impose, revise, and collect subscription fees, usage charges, or any other payments.

So it is not common property. On an individual-title estate there is no management corporation and no share units, which means the clubhouse is a private asset the developer can charge for, restrict access to, or in principle sell. That is legally normal for individual-title landed. It is also very different from what most buyers assume when they see a facility list.

On whether it exists: the site plans for the completed Phase 1 and Phase 2 label it Proposed Clubhouse, Proposed Clubhouse Entrance and Proposed Linear Park, under a future-development note. No photograph of a finished clubhouse building appears anywhere on the developer’s own domains, even though the developer photographs its construction diligently in every other respect. Draw the reasonable conclusion, and then verify it on site.

Three questions to ask, in writing: is the clubhouse built and operating today; what is the current subscription or usage fee; and is there any contractual undertaking in the sale and purchase agreement that it will be built at all. If the answer to the third is no, price the clubhouse at zero and be pleasantly surprised later.

It is the most important question on this page, and the reason it can be asked precisely is that the developer published both numbers itself.

The developer’s own buying guide cites Brickz data for April 2024 to March 2025: 1,151 transactions, a median Rawang house price of RM430,000 and a median of RM310 per square foot. Belmont, on the same developer’s permit, is RM1,111,000 to RM1,879,000.

Some of that gap is not really a gap. A median across 1,151 transactions in a town like Rawang is dominated by older terraces on smaller lots, low-cost flats and estates from the 1990s and 2000s. New freehold individual-title terraces in a gated estate with 22-foot frontages and four bathrooms are simply not the same product, and new landed always transacts well above a town median.

Some of it is a real gap and you should size it. Take Belmont Type A: 1,837 sq ft built-up on a 1,540 sq ft lot. If the entry price of RM1,111,000 attaches to it, that is roughly RM605 per square foot of built-up — against a Rawang median of RM310. You are paying about double the town median rate, in exchange for new, freehold, individual title, gated, and a town centre the same group built and operates.

The test is not whether that is justified today. It is whether the next buyer, in eight or ten years, will pay a similar premium in a town whose median may or may not have moved. Look at how Phase 1 Richmond units, launched from RM699,000 and handed over in November 2023, are transacting now — that is real evidence from this exact estate, and I will pull the transaction records for you.

Credit where it is due: a developer that publishes the town median right next to its own price list is not hiding from this question.

No. Different developer, different site, different tenure, different side of Rawang. The shared word is the Templer name that attaches to a large area of the Gombak district.

Templer Residence is by Pura Development Sdn Bhd of the Hong Bee Land group, on 73 freehold acres with individual titles, inside Anggun City in Rawang town, about two kilometres from the NKVE toll. Belmont is RM1,111,000 to RM1,879,000, completing April 2028.

Setia Eco Templer is by Setia Eco Templer Sdn Bhd, a joint venture between an S P Setia subsidiary and Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor, on 194 leasehold acres — 99 years expiring 4 October 2116 — at KM20 on the Ipoh road beside Templer Park, about eleven kilometres east. Its current Richmond Gate phase runs RM1,630,000 to RM3,104,000, completing February 2029.

There is a third one that also causes confusion: D’Templer Hilltop Residences by OCR Group Berhad, a separate project again. If someone quotes you a Templer price without saying which of the three, ask.

One genuine connection does exist, and it runs the other way. Hong Bee Land, the group behind Templer Residence, previously partnered S P Setia on Setia Eco Gardens, a 765-acre township in Iskandar Puteri launched in 2007. So the two companies know each other well — they just are not building this together.

The published data is unusually good for answering this, because the developer gives both built-up and land area for all six codes.

All six are four-bedroom, four-bathroom. What changes is land: Type A on 1,540 sq ft, B from 1,887, B5 on 1,884, D on 3,800, C from 3,400 and C1 from 4,500. Built-up barely moves across that range — 1,837, 1,875, 1,845, 2,147, 2,102 and 2,167 sq ft respectively.

Read that carefully. Going from Type A to Type C1 nearly triples your land and adds only 330 sq ft of house. In a freehold individual-title estate, land is the part that appreciates and the house is the part that depreciates, so the wide-lot codes are structurally the better long-term hold — provided the price step is proportionate.

The step between D at 3,800 sq ft of land and C1 at 4,500 is where the sharpest question lies, since D carries almost the same built-up as C1. If D is meaningfully cheaper, D is very likely the rational buy in that group.

The obstacle is that Hong Bee Land publishes a band of RM1,111,000 to RM1,879,000 for the phase and not a per-type price. Without that, no honest per-square-foot comparison can be made, so this page does not attempt one.

Send me the two or three lot numbers you are considering. I will get the per-lot prices, work out land rate and built-up rate for each, and show you which one is actually mispriced within the phase.

Broadly reliable, with one measurable slip. That is a better answer than most Malaysian developers can evidence.

Phase 1 Richmond, 243 units, was handed over in November 2023 against a permit target of December 2023 — on time, arguably early. Phase 2 Kensington, 245 units, was completed in November 2025 against a permit target of August 2025 — about three months late, with no published explanation.

A three-month slip on a 245-unit landed phase is a mild delay by Malaysian standards, and the fact that it is measurable at all is because the developer leaves the old permits on its site so you can compare. Most developers quietly remove them.

Belmont carries an expected completion of April 2028 and a permit valid to 18 May 2028. Applying the Kensington precedent, a realistic personal planning date is somewhere in the second half of 2028. Do not sign a tenancy that ends in April 2028 on the strength of a permit date — that is true of every off-plan purchase in Malaysia, not just this one.

What genuinely supports confidence here is the photographic record: Belmont progress photographs dated 15 July 2026, Kensington dated 2 October 2025, Richmond dated August 2024. A developer that publishes dated site photographs of a phase it is currently selling is one you can hold to a schedule.

No — it is the opposite of a problem, but it does require you to read carefully.

The developer’s permits page carries a separate statutory block for every phase it has ever sold, including Phase 1A whose permit expired 14 January 2024 and Phase 1B whose permit expired 13 November 2022. The current one, for Belmont Phase 3A, is 10459-6/05-2028/0361(A)-(L), valid 19 May 2026 to 18 May 2028. The developer licence 10459/01-2028/0004(A) runs to 14 January 2028.

Leaving expired permits published is an unusual and, on balance, good practice — it is how you can independently reconstruct the price history: Phase 1A at RM839,194 to RM1,110,249, Phase 1B at RM839,194 to RM1,224,714, Phase 2A up to RM2.1 million, Phase 3A at RM1,111,000 to RM1,879,000. Almost no other Malaysian developer lets you do that.

The risk is only one of misreading. The page does not sharply separate current from archival, so a casual reader could take an old price band for a live one. Always match the permit block to the phase you are actually buying, and verify the number yourself at teduh.kpkt.gov.my.

For contrast: at Tamansari’s Murraya phase there is no permit block at all, and at Emerald Rawang the developer’s project microsite could not be read on 12 August 2026 because it sits behind a bot wall. Too much disclosure is a much better problem than none.

No maintenance figure is published anywhere on the developer’s domains, and the security mechanics are structurally different from a strata scheme — this is worth understanding before you sign.

On a strata development there is a management corporation, mandatory share units, a statutory sinking fund and a charge every owner must pay. On an individual-title gated estate like this one, none of that machinery exists by law. The gates, guards and CCTV are typically run by a residents’ association or a management company under a private contract, and participation is, strictly speaking, voluntary.

That has two practical consequences. First, a neighbour who declines to pay cannot be pursued the way a strata management corporation can pursue a defaulter, so collection rates matter enormously to whether the guardhouse is still manned in fifteen years. Second, the local council must approve the gating arrangement, and the roads may remain public.

The developer states gated and guarded with 24-hour security and perimeter CCTV. It does not publish a monthly charge, a collection mechanism, or who runs it after handover.

Ask three things before the booking fee: what the monthly security charge is today at Richmond and Kensington, what the actual collection rate is in those completed phases, and whether the residents’ association is already formed. The first is a number the sales team will have. The second is the one that tells you the truth.

Separately, the clubhouse fee is not the same as the security charge — see the clubhouse question above.

Not directly. The published overhang is a different product class. But there is a second-order effect worth naming.

NAPIC’s first quarter 2026 Selangor figures: residential overhang 3,745 units, completed and unsold serviced apartments 2,407, new launches 1,904, secondary market average transacted price RM559,935.

The overhang is dominated by strata serviced apartments in the mature urban corridors. Templer Residence sells freehold individual-title landed in Rawang. Those buyers barely overlap, and an oversupply of small strata units in Cyberjaya or Puchong does not put a single unsold house on your street.

The second-order effect is about capital rather than product. When a state carries a large completed overhang, banks tighten, developers discount elsewhere, and the buyer who might have stretched to a RM1.5 million terrace looks harder at a RM900,000 one. That pressure reaches every segment eventually, including this one.

The most useful evidence remains local and specific: Kensington is marked 95% sold after completing in November 2025, and Richmond sold out. That is real absorption in this exact estate, and it is worth more than any state-level statistic.

Use the current NAPIC quarter when you read this. These are 1Q2026 figures and they will be superseded.