Freedom, GEABSOLUTE POWERS CORRUPT ABSOLUTELY, General Election (GE15), Malaysia, Politics, polling Nov 19: Destroy Umno for the betterment of Malaysia, race, religion, Solidality, support Aliran for Justice

Share This

Showing posts with label Housing Development Board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Housing Development Board. Show all posts

Thursday, 21 June 2012

A durian tree became a thorny issue in Singapore flat residents!

Root of a problem: A resident looking at the durian tree that has become a bone of contention among neighbours in Moulmein Road, Singapore.
SINGAPORE: A durian tree in Moulmein Road, Singapore, became a thorn in relations among residents of a HDB block of flats nearby when fights ensued over who could claim the fruits.

The Straits Times reported that the dispute began three years ago when a resident, known only as Chua, said he was just looking at the tree when another resident, R. Lim, shouted at him to stay away from “his tree”.

He claimed his father planted the tree 20 years ago.

Last week, resident Lily Wee called police after Lim, a businessman in his 50s, shouted expletives at her when she wanted to take a durian.

“There are three kinds of people in this world – the good, the bad and the ugly. He belongs to the last group,” said Wee, calling Lim a “durian bully”.

Residents would wait under the tree each fruiting season, sometimes for hours, to take the ripened fruits.

“We can always get fruit from Geylang, but we choose to wait here to kio liu lian,” said a resident known as Patrick, referring to a Hokkien phrase expressing the thrill of getting free durians.

About 100 durians could be harvested each year from the single tree, which first bore fruit seven years ago.

Frustrated over the fiasco, some residents had asked for the tree to be chopped down, but the Moulmein-Kallang municipal council had let the tree be.

It will, however, put up two notices stating that the neighbourhood trees belong to the Housing Board and are maintained by the town council.

Resident Peter Yang approved of not chopping the tree, and said neighbours had begun to bond as they queued and chatted while waiting for the fruits to fall.

“Despite a little bit of nonsense, you still get some good out of it,” he said.

- The Star/Asia News Network

Related posts:



Singaporeans living in shoebox, the ‘Mickey Mouse’
Bridging the rich-poor gap in Singapore
Singapore millionaires who don't feel rich
Foreign worker flow choked in Singapore

Saturday, 16 June 2012

Singaporeans living in shoebox, the ‘Mickey Mouse’

Living in a shoebox

Singapore’s ‘Mickey Mouse’ flats are not conducive for raising a family.

A NEW trend has arrived in land-scarce Singapore and it is coined the “shoebox condo” – a tiny apartment just about the size of half a badminton court.

The Singapore government has pledged to put an end to it but private developers have sold nearly 7,000 of these flats that measure less than 500sq ft to young Singaporeans desperate to buy a condo.

They buy them either as a lifestyle choice or but more likely for economic considerations. Property prices have spiralled out of reach for most people.

To developers, this is a potential goldmine if they are allowed to go on, getting a bigger bang for their investments.

But with land growing scarcer, downsizing people’s homes remains a long-term certainty to accommodate the mass influx of foreigners.

The trouble is that these “Mickey Mouse” homes have serious social implication for a nation that desperately needs to get young people to procreate more.

Shoebox condos may be ideal for renting out to foreigners but they are not the best way for the Singapore family and children.

“People have to think hard before buying one,” advises a property agent. “If you decide to settle down and raise a family in future, you’ll find it difficult to do so.”

They also make for a reduced quality of life and the government is trying to discourage the trend through persuasion before taking action. It may, for example, impose a special tax on these units.

So far, these baby apartments have not made an appearance in Singapore’s public Housing Development Board (HDB) estates, which house 80% of the population.

HDB housing, too, has undergone some long-term reduction in size, but is relatively controlled.

According to official statistics quoted by a local newspaper, the average size of a five-room flat in one estate had dropped from 103sq m in 1989 to 91sq m in 2006 – a 12% fall.

In perspective, Singapore’s family size has shrunk even more — from 4.9 to 3.5 persons per family — during the same period, a drop of 28%. As a consequence, officials say, each Singaporean actually has a larger space.

National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wah said he knew of no downsizing of HDB flats during the past 15 years.

The government wants to “maintain a good quality of life” and has no plan to do so.

Home downsizing is a sensitive issue in Singapore, given people’s increasing unhappiness with the government’s immigration open door policy.

The two — housing woes and foreign intake — are related.

Already Singapore, with 7,023 persons living in each sq km of space, has overtaken Hong Kong (6,346 persons) as the third densest-populated city in the world, behind Macau and Monaco.

The former National Development Minister, Mah Bow Tan, had assured Singaporeans that the island was big enough for a 6.5-million population.

There was no need for a massive across-the-board change in development density, he added. The minister was accused of under-building public housing before he was replaced last year.

Shoebox condos are actually not a new invention. Studio apartments had long made the scene in central Singapore.

The smallest recent one measuring only 24sq m (or 258sq ft) is due for completion next year.

A brochure lists this “Mickey Mouse” unit as consisting — believe it or not — of a kitchen, a dining area, bathroom, master bedroom and a living area.

Not only has the average property size in Singapore been reduced to squeeze in more homes, the buildings are being built higher.

In central Singapore, a public residential complex known as The Pinnacle@Duxton has been built consisting of seven 50-storey connected towers.

Singapore is also using more underground space. In more parts of the city, shopping malls, train networks, civil defence shelters and pedestrian links as well as ammunition and oil storage have been built or planned.

Even discounting baby condos, which are a special breed, the average size of a normal private apartment on the island republic has been shrinking over the years.

In the 1970s, a 1,700sq ft flat was considered average; today it is a luxury.

The private property market is fast going the way of Hong Kong and Japan.

Some 30 years ago when I was a working as a journalist in the then British colony, I was living in a 600sq ft two-roomer in the heart of Causeway Bay.

One of my first articles was on housing. It pointed out that the world standard was for a minimum of 55sq ft of space per person.

“Hong Kong provided 24sq ft for each of its residents – slightly bigger than the size of a coffin,” I wrote then.

The official attitude towards baby condos between 2010 (when the government was dealt a strong election rebuff) and this year has changed.

Then Housing Minister Mah seemed happy with its appearance.

He said: “If people want to buy shoebox units and are prepared to pay those prices, why should we stop them?”

His Penang-born successor Khaw, however, wants to discourage the flow.

Singapore’s living density may already be affecting its image abroad. The Ireland-based International Living magazine now ranks Singapore — one of Asia’s wealthiest states — a lowly 70th position among top places to live in.

Is there any sign of change? Unlikely. The former top city planner, Liu Thai Ker, has advised Singaporeans to expect “higher population density”.

“We are near the saturation point of unbearable congestion,” wrote one critic. “Beyond this, Singaporeans may not put up with this kind of stressful living.”

Insight Down South By SEAH CHIANG NEE cnseah05@hotmail.com

Sunday, 27 November 2011

Housing supply and demand – are we nearing equilibrium?

Photo of the Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Image via Wikipedia

REALTY CHECK By DATUK ABDUL RAHIM RAHMAN

Is there any equilibrium point in housing market, considering the many factors influencing demand and supply?

The main determinants of the demand for housing are demographic. Population size and population growth are the core demographic variables. However, family size, the age composition of the family, the number of children, net migration, non-family household formation, the number of double family households, death rates, divorce rates, and marriages are other demographic variables that would influence demand for housing. Other factors such as household income, price of housing, cost, availability of credit, consumer preferences, investor preferences, price of substitutes and price of complements all play a role in determining demand for housing.

Income is an important determinant of demand as shown by a study conducted by De Leeuw in 1971 that showed positive income elasticity of demand in North America ranging from 0.5 to 0.9, meaning the market demand for housing grew as real income rose. The price of housing is also an important variable influencing demand for housing, where in terms of elasticity just like any normal goods it is negative increase in price will result in decrease in demand.

As for supply, the quantity of incoming supply is typically influenced by cost, price of existing stock of houses, and the technology used in the construction, where material costs tend to contribute the largest share of the construction cost, about 30% to 40%. In the short run, supply tends to be very price inelastic increase in cost will have less effect on supply. However, over a longer period, it tends to be very price elastic increase in cost will lower supply.

A study conducted by Fallis in 1985 showed price elasticity of supply was estimated at 8.2, indicating increased in cost would lower supply significantly. The degree of elasticity depends on the elasticity of substitution and supply restrictions. For example, the use of capital intensive technology has been employed to reduce the rising labour cost, thus having less impact on the supply of housing.

As at first half of 2011, Malaysia had 4,466,062 units of housing, an increase of 1.7% from the total of supply in the first half of 2010. About 24,709 units were completed in the first half of 2011, a lower number compared to 50,611 units completed in the first half of 2010. Kuala Lumpur and Selangor accounted for 6,567 units or 27% of the total new stock. Kuala Lumpur and Selangor had 414,436 and 1,285,192 homes, reflecting an increase of 2.0% and 1.7% respectively from the total as of first half of 2010.



Other states which showed significant number of units completed are Sarawak (2,612), Penang (2,507) and Perak (2,184). The incoming supply in the country was recorded at 560,636 units, where Selangor is the largest contributor (134,143 or 24% of the total) followed by Johor (76,429 or 14%) and Negri Sembilan (65,227). Kuala Lumpur has 39,656 units coming on stream.

In terms of transactions recorded as of first half of 2011 for the country, there were 133,984 transactions in the residential category, out of which the largest transacted numbers were priced in the range of RM100,000 to RM150,000, which accounted for 22,857 units, followed by units priced between RM250,000 and RM500,000, which accounted for 21,559 units.

Selangor recorded the highest number of transactions at 38,424 units, followed by Johor (15,015 units), Penang (13,832 units), and Kuala Lumpur (11,522 units). The most popular units transacted in Selangor, Kuala Lumpur, and Penang were for units priced between RM250,000 and RM500,000, while in Johor, the highest transactions recorded were for units priced between RM100,000 and RM150,000.

This brief analysis gives an indication that the total number of units coming into the market needs to be in line not only with the level of affordability of potential buyers in the area the projects are to be launched but also the demographics of Malaysian population.

As of July 2010, total population was estimated to be 28.25 million and the population is expected to grow at a rate of 2.4% per annum, where about 65% of the population is urban population. Today, less than 4% of Malaysians live in poverty and it is estimated that about 2.0% of the total urban population in Malaysia lives below the poverty line, earning monthly household income of equal or less than RM750. Low income households (earning income equal or less than RM2,000 per month) represents 75% of the median income in Malaysia.

The national average household income is estimated at RM4,000 per month. It should also be noted that about 65% of Malaysia's population is below the age of 35, thus there would definitely be strong demand for housing.

Due to continuous movement in the factors affecting supply and demand for housing, policy intervention is necessary to ensure that the majority of the population has equal access to own homes. Singapore's public housing policy is often cited as the most successful example of affordable housing provision in Asian cities. A study conducted in 2000 estimated that about 85% of the total population lived in public housing with nearly 95% of them owning the flats they occupied.

By centralising its public housing effort under a single authority, Housing Development Board, Singapore has circumvented the typical problems of duplication and fragmentation of duties, and bureaucratic rivalries associated with multi-agency implementation. This centralised function also serves as a mechanism to ensure supply and demand are checked.

It is hoped that the provision of affordable homes as announced in Budget 2012 would achieve its main objective of increasing home ownership among the majority of the population.

Senator Datuk Abdul Rahim Rahman is the executive chairman of Rahim & Co group of companies.