Singaporeans Care for the Best House Fcaing Direction

Housing programmes of the Singapore government

HDB residences in Bishan town

SkyVille@Dawson, a public housing development completed in 2015

Public housing in Singapore is subsidised, congenital and managed by the Government of Singapore. Starting in the 1930s, the country's first public housing was built by the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT) in a like way to contemporaneous British public housing projects, and housing for the resettlement of squatters was built from the late 1950s. In the 1960s, under the Sit down'due south successor the Housing and Development Board (HDB), public housing consisting of small units with bones amenities was constructed every bit quickly and cheaply as possible at loftier densities, and was used for resettlement schemes. From the belatedly 1960s, housing programmes focused more on quality, public housing was congenital in new towns, and a scheme allowing residents to own their flats was introduced. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, more public housing options were provided for the center form and efforts to increase community cohesion within housing estates were made. From the 1990s, the government began portraying public housing as an asset, introducing large-scale upgrading schemes and loosening regulations on the resale of public housing while boosted housing programmes for the sandwich classes and elderly residents were introduced. Rise housing prices led to public housing beingness seen every bit an investment from the 2000s, and new technologies and eco-friendly features were incorporated into housing estates.

In the early 2020s, Singapore'due south public housing is located in new towns, in communities that are intended to be self-contained, with services nearby housing blocks, and is either owned by or rented to residents. Owner-occupied public housing is sold on a 99-twelvemonth lease and can be sold on the private resale market nether certain restrictions. Rental housing consists of smaller units and is mainly meant for lower-income households. Housing grants are provided to lower-income applicants for apartment purchases while flats with shorter leases and lease monetisation schemes accept been implemented for elderly homeowners. Housing estates are managed and maintained by Town Councils, and older housing estates are improved by the Housing and Development Board nether the Estate Renewal Strategy.

As of 2020, 78.seven% of Singapore residents live in public housing, decreasing from a high of 88.0% in 2000.^[1]

History [edit]

Under the Singapore Improvement Trust [edit]

Early forms of private housing built past the Sit down in Tiong Bahru in the 1950s.

The offset public housing in Singapore was congenital in 1936 by the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT), which began focusing more on public housing provision from the late 1940s.^[two] The public housing built past the SIT was similar in terms of density and living space to British public housing projects of the time, and housed nine per cent of Singapore's population by 1959.^[3]

The Sit down faced multiple problems in its provision of public housing; rents for SIT flats were unaffordable for most of the local population^[iii] and by 1949, new flats were non being congenital quickly enough to keep up with demand.^[4] By 1958, the SIT was unable to financially sustain its public housing programme and delays in approval of new housing projects slowed structure even further. Consequently, plans to replace the Sit down with a new housing dominance were drawn upwards in the late 1950s,^[5] and in February 1960, information technology was replaced with the Housing and Evolution Board (HDB).^[6]

Emergency housing and resettlement schemes [edit]

In 1953, the Sit down reluctantly started constructing emergency housing for displaced kampong dwellers because the flats it ordinarily built were proving expensive to construct. These houses were poorly received so in 1955, the Sit scaled back its emergency housing construction,^[7] merely resuming in the late 1950s after fires at Kampong Koo Chye and Kampong Tiong Bahru. The Singapore authorities took over the burn down sites and instructed the SIT to build flats on them.^[8] The Sit too envisioned a resettlement programme in Kampong Tiong Bahru after the fire, acquiring additional land for emergency flats and renting out the flats to the kampong dwellers.^[9] These schemes were also poorly received by the displaced kampong residents.^[10]

When the HDB was formed in 1960, it announced a five-twelvemonth housing plan with high aspirations^[6] and continued the SIT's emergency housing programme from November 1960, adopting a strategy of building 1-room flats for resettlement schemes. In May 1961, in the aftermath of a subsequent burn in Bukit Ho Swee, the regime immediately took over the burn down site, set up bated most of the emergency flats in Kampong Tiong Bahru for the rehousing of displaced kampong dwellers, and adult a housing estate on the site of the kampong that was completed between 1963 and 1965.^[xi] The Bukit Ho Swee estate was used to rehouse other squatters displaced by fires or evolution schemes, paving the way for further urban renewal and resettlement schemes in the Central Expanse.^[12] By 1965, more than 50,000 flats had been constructed and 23% of Singapore's population lived in public housing.^[13]

In the 1960s, the HDB's housing was intended to be congenital every bit quickly and cheaply as possible, and consisted mainly of one- and two-room flats.^[14] These were built at loftier densities to brand the almost of the limited land bachelor for public housing.^[half-dozen] Housing estates built during this menstruation had express amenities;^[14] they were congenital at the edge of the Fundamental Area, whose facilities and services residents relied on.^[15]

Through the development of public housing, the government attempted to change the behaviour of the kampong residents with prohibitions on modifying or subletting flats, and to take more control over them.^[xvi] The government intended to build harmony between Singapore's racial groups; the new housing estates had no racial distinctions, different the settlements that preceded them.^[17] Nevertheless, the intended residents resisted the resettlement schemes^[18] and many residents loathed the ane-room emergency flats.^[13] The government attempted to provide housing to all people and organisations affected by the schemes.^[xviii] The HDB shifted abroad from amalgam ane-room flats from the late 1960s.^[13]

Development of new towns [edit]

Housing blocks in Bukit Ho Swee, a public housing estate built in the 1960s

In 1964, a home buying scheme was introduced but it was poorly received at first considering most public housing residents were unable to afford the flats. Applicants could use their Cardinal Provident Fund (CPF) contributions to pay for their flats from 1968, and by 1984, 62 percent of flats were owned.^[19]

The HDB started amalgam its offset new town in 1965; it was located nearly 5–8 km (iii.1–5.0 mi) from the metropolis center, and had a town centre with amenities and industrial areas to provide employment to residents.^[20] From the tardily 1960s, the HDB began focusing on the quality of public housing, edifice larger flats and providing more amenities in housing estates.^[21] In add-on, the 1966 Land Acquisition Act gave the regime wide powers to take over country and fabricated more land available for public housing.^[18]

From the 1970s, public housing was constructed further abroad from the Fundamental Area, more amenities were provided in new towns and flat sizes continued to increment.^[twenty] Owners were allowed to sell their flats on the resale market from 1971,^[22] and from the mid-1970s, the designs of public housing developments became more various.^[23] Flats were built by the Jurong Town Corporation in Jurong and Sembawang between 1968 and 1982,^[24] and the Housing and Urban Development Company (HUDC) was fix in 1974 to provide flats for center-course residents. The HUDC's housing estates had layouts like to those of individual condominiums, and were initially well-received.^[25]

In the late 1970s, in an effort to build a sense of community within housing estates, Residents' Communities and the precinct concept were introduced.^[26] Ascent construction costs during this period resulted in designs again becoming more than compatible and from the early 1980s, housing construction started incorporating more prefabricated sections to reduce costs.^[23] The 1980s saw the introduction of larger executive flats^[27] while the HDB, which took over the HUDC in 1982, stopped structure of HUDC flats considering HUDC prices were budgeted those of private property and the middle course was able to buy HDB flats.^[28] In the low-cal of falling demand for smaller flats, those in older housing estates were enlarged while older housing blocks that did non run across the HDB'south standards were torn down.^[27] Flat modification regulations were relaxed and housing estates were upgraded on an ad hoc basis.^[26]

To ensure people of dissimilar races were evenly distributed across public housing estates, a limit on Malay residents was introduced for new flats. This proved insufficient to prevent the germination of racial enclaves so in 1989, the limits were extended to all races and also to the resale market place.^[29]

Upgrading schemes and new housing programmes [edit]

From the 1990s, the Singapore regime started portraying public housing every bit an nugget and every bit a useful tool for safeguarding retirement. The regime pursued measures for upgrading and "asset enhancement", and loosened restrictions on the public housing resale market.^[30] The first of these schemes, a big-scale, S$15 billion upgrading scheme, was announced in 1989. The scheme'due south aim was intended to make older housing estates more bonny to younger people, and included the creation of differentiated precincts, the provision of more than civilities, and upgrades to blocks and flats. Town councils and residents were able to determine the nature and extent of the upgrades to their estates.^[31] Subsequently a trial on vacant housing blocks and a demonstration stage on selected blocks, the scheme was initiated in 1993.^[32]

A less-extensive interim upgrading plan was carried out in newer estates and several boondocks councils carried out their own amenity-upgrading schemes. In 1995, the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme to redevelop selected housing blocks in older estates was introduced.^[33] These upgrading schemes were subsequently used for political ends; politicians from the ruling People's Action Party stated estates with college proportions of votes for the ruling party would be prioritised for upgrading schemes.^[34]

Besides the upgrading programmes, additional housing schemes were introduced in the 1990s. These included executive condominiums with similar amenities to private condominiums for the sandwich class, along with Blueprint Plus and Blueprint and Build flats, which had higher-quality fittings and designs, and were designed with feedback from private architects.^[28] Blueprint and Build flats were likewise developed by individual architects and building contractors.^[35] In 1997, smaller studio apartments that were fitted with elderly-friendly features were introduced.^[36] Both public and individual housing were congenital within the aforementioned new towns from the 1990s,^[37] while from 1995, HUDC estates were privatised, and residents took over the direction and ownership of the estates.^[28]

The 2000s, 2010s and 2020s [edit]

Facing a glut of flats in the housing market, the HDB significantly reduced public housing construction in the early 2000s, and housing was built but when demand was nowadays.^[38] The 2000s also saw the incorporation of new engineering and eco-friendly features in public housing estates, and their planning was aided by calculator simulations.^[39] The Design, Build and Sell Scheme, nether which the pattern, construction and auction of flats is handled past private developers, was introduced in 2005.^[twoscore]

Additional upgrading programmes, such every bit the Lift Upgrading and Home Comeback Programmes, regarding direct lift access and flat interiors respectively, were also introduced.^[41] Remaking Our Heartland, an extensive development scheme for existing new towns, was introduced in 2007.^[42] Public interest in public-housing provision increased; public consultations on community building in housing estates waqs held in 2006, and residents could give feedback and vote on estate improvements under the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme, which was introduced in 2007.^[43] The proportion of permanent residents in public housing also increased and in 2010, a quota on non-Malaysian permanent residents was introduced to prevent the formation of enclaves.^[44]

In 2011, the HDB released its Roadmap to Ameliorate Living, setting out its plans for housing in the 2010s; it aimed to provide well-connected, unique and sustainable housing estates.^[45] More public housing was built in response to increased need.^[46] Attempts to increase residents' interest in upgrading schemes were made under the poorly received 2013 Building Our Neigbourhood Dreams! programme, under which residents could brand suggestions near manor improvements.^[47] In the late 2010s and early on 2020s, the HDB made further efforts to make housing estates unique and sustainable through the introduction of blueprint guides for each new town^[48] and the HDB Dark-green Towns Programme respectively.^[49] Community Care Apartments for the elderly with intendance services for residents were introduced.^[50]

Physical organisation [edit]

Overview of Bukit Batok, an example of a new town adult past the HDB

Singapore'south public housing is constructed within new towns,^[51] which are intended to role equally independent communities. These new towns are planned on the basis of zoning of land for multiple uses, and house upwards to 300,000 residents. Each new town is divided into neighbourhoods, which are farther subdivided into precincts. Each precinct has about 400 to 800 flats within seven or viii housing blocks.^[52] Up to half of the state area in the new towns is set aside for amenities, which are provided on levels ranging from the town middle to the individual housing block and, according to certain guidelines, allowing facilities to be located near residents.^[53] Dissimilar flat types are spread out across new towns to forestall the concentration of people of a sure income group in whatever area.^[29]

Design [edit]

Under the Singapore Improvement Trust, public housing design followed Western architectural styles such equally Streamline Moderne and the International Way while incorporating features suited to Singapore's tropical climate. These features are derived from the designs of shophouses, and include 5-human foot ways, dorsum lanes and spiral staircases.^[54]

With an emphasis on quantity, public housing congenital during the HDB'southward initial years was very basic and consisted of small housing units that were barely fitted out,^[21] and housing estates were provided with few amenities.^[55] Quality improvements in public housing started in the late 1960s with the inclusion of landscaping, and more amenities such as open spaces and auto parks within housing estates.^[21]

As new towns were built further away from the Central Area from the 1970s, amenities such as retail and industrial areas were provided within the new towns to give them a degree of cocky-sufficiency. A prototype new-town model dictating the distribution of services was too adopted.^[56] Efforts to distinguish neighbourhoods through the employ of numbering schemes and pigment schemes for housing blocks were made.^[57] Access corridors in housing blocks were divided into multiple parts for resident privacy,^[58] housing-block designs were made less uniform and more visually appealing,^[21] and the footing floors were left empty and unfinished. The HDB intended this "void deck" to be used for communal activities.^[17]

From the 1980s, public housing design was intended to requite estates a unique character through the variation of block heights inside estates and the incorporation of traditional architecture elements into housing block design.^[59] Block layouts in new towns were varied with a shift in emphasis away from solar orientation^[57] while as function of the precinct concept, groups of blocks were built closer together and open areas were added to foster community interaction.^[59]

Public housing pattern in Singapore began to shift abroad from a modernist style in the 1990s, with elements from multiple architectural styles added to housing blocks through upgrading schemes.^[35] In addition, more effort was made to differentiate housing cake designs, while college quality fittings inside housing units were also introduced.^[37] Multiple types of services were also provided within integrated developments, while additional community spaces were added in housing estates.^[36]

In the 2000s, Singaporean public housing began incorporating technology such as pneumatic waste collection, sensor-activated lights, and eco-friendly and free energy-efficient features. Housing estates began to incorporate more greenery while additional recreation facilities such as cycling tracks and natural features were provided.^[forty] The 2010s brought an increased focus on estate identity and quality of life; historical and natural aspects of the locations of estates were used as inspiration for their design.^[60]

Housing types [edit]

Owner-occupied public housing [edit]

Near public housing in Singapore is owner-occupied. Under Singapore'southward housing ownership programme, housing units are sold on a 99-year leasehold to applicants who meet certain income, citizenship and holding ownership requirements. The estate's land and common areas proceed to be endemic by the government.^[61] As of 2022^[update], new owner-occupied flats are sold under the Build-To-Order and Sale of Rest Flats programmes. ^[62] Executive condominiums, although considered private housing and constructed and sold by private developers, have similar leases and requirements to owner-occupied public housing.^[63] For those in the lower-income groups, grants are available from the government to aid them pay for their apartment purchase. These grants are adjusted based on household income.^[64]

While the SIT allocated public housing using a points system from 1947,^[65] allotment in the HDB'south initial years used a ballot system, under which applicants could country their preferred flat type and full general location, and reject upwards to two ballots. People who were displaced by resettlement schemes were given priority. Subsequently, applicants were able to select from flat types and areas in which flats were available.^[66] In the early 2000s, in lite of increasing numbers of unsold flats, the HDB suspended its earlier flat allotment system, switching to the Build-To-Order programme, in which flats are only built when demand is present.^[67]

From the late 1990s, in light of the increasing number of elderly homeowners, schemes to enable them to monetise their flats, starting with reverse mortgages, were put into place. These schemes were poorly received and were withdrawn.^[68] In 2009, the HDB introduced the Charter Buyback Scheme, under which the HDB buys a proportion of the housing unit'due south lease at current resale prices. Additional schemes, such as the Silverish Housing Bonus, under which the homeowner moves to a smaller flat, and the two-room Flexi scheme consisting of smaller flats with shorter leases, were introduced.^[69]

Resale public housing [edit]

Possessor-occupied public housing tin be sold in a resale marketplace, subject area to restrictions. The government does not regulate prices inside the resale market.^[63]

Initially, owners were only able to sell their housing units back to the HDB but afterwards 1971, the auction of flats on the individual market was allowed. After that, sellers on the individual marketplace could only sell flats to buyers who satisfied the requirements for purchasing new flats. Sellers were required to have lived in their flats for a minimum time, and were prevented from applying for new flats for a certain fourth dimension, which was known as the debarment menstruation. In 1978, the restriction on new flat purchase was replaced by a resale levy.^[22]

Resale restrictions were loosened in the late 1980s; income limits were removed, and permanent residents and property owners were allowed to buy resale flats in 1989. In 1991, the resale marketplace was opened to unmarried people older than 35. CPF housing grants for the resale market place were introduced in 1994.^[lxx] These measures led to a rapid rise in resale prices past the mid-1990s; in response, the HDB introduced additional taxes and restrictions ^[38]

Increasing housing prices and government statements regarding public housing every bit assets that tin exist enhanced resulted in public housing being perceived as an investment.^[64] In the late 2000s, with the trend of increasing housing prices, the government introduced measures such as boosted taxes and restrictions to reduce investment demand for housing.^{[64] [71]} The regime as well tried non to dissuade the utilise of public housing every bit an investment.^[46] Rising resale prices for public housing in prime areas led to the government placing boosted purchase and resale restrictions on newly congenital public housing in prime areas from 2021.^[72]

Rental public housing [edit]

A public housing block in Singapore undergoing upgrading works as role of the Lift Upgrading Programme

The HDB also provides public housing for rental, which consists of smaller units, such as 1- and ii-room flats, and is mainly provided for lower-income households and households waiting for their purchased flats. Rental public housing has lower income requirements than owner-occupied public housing.^[63]

Maintenance and renewal [edit]

In Singapore, public housing estates are maintained by Town Councils, which are divided forth political constituency lines and headed by a Member of Parliament, and take full-time estate-management staff.^[73] Funding for town councils' maintenance work comes from government grants, and maintenance fees paid by estate residents and businesses.^[74]

Improvement works in older estates are carried out under the HDB's Estate Renewal Strategy. These improvement works consist of the upgrading of civilities and infrastructure to see modern standards, and the addition of features and facilities similar to those constitute in newer housing estates.^[75]

See as well [edit]

• Public housing
• Public housing in Hong Kong

References [edit]

1. ^ Department of Statistics, Ministry of Trade & Industry, Republic of Singapore (September 2021). "Population Trends, 2021, ISSN 2591-8028" (PDF). Singapore Department of Statistics. Archived (PDF) from the original on xix January 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
2. ^ Fraser, James Thousand. (April 1952). "Town Planning and Housing in Singapore". The Town Planning Review. Liverpool University Press. 23 (1): viii. doi:10.3828/tpr.23.1.v7327214j63750w3. JSTOR 40102143.
3. ^ ^{a b} Lim 1984, p. 319.
4. ^ "14,000 families in Due south.I.T queue". The Singapore Free Press. Singapore. 23 August 1949. p. 5. Retrieved 16 October 2021 – via NewspaperSG.
5. ^ "The Housing Trouble". The Straits Times. Singapore. 12 September 1958. p. 8. Retrieved 16 October 2021 – via NewspaperSG.
6. ^ ^{a b c} Lim 1984, p. 320.
7. ^ Loh 2009, p. 97.
8. ^ Loh 2009, p. 98–99.
9. ^ Loh 2009, p. 99–100.
10. ^ Loh 2009, p. 100.
11. ^ Loh 2009, p. 100–101.
12. ^ Loh 2009, p. 102.
13. ^ ^{a b c} Loh 2009, p. 103.
14. ^ ^{a b} Ooi 1992, p. 171.
15. ^ Ooi 1992, p. 172.
16. ^ Loh 2009, p. 101.
17. ^ ^{a b} Goh 2001, p. 1590.
18. ^ ^{a b c} Phang & Helble 2016, p. vii.
19. ^ Lim 1984, p. 326.
20. ^ ^{a b} Ooi 1992, p. 173.
21. ^ ^{a b c d} Teo & Kong 1997, p. 442.
22. ^ ^{a b} Phang & Helble 2016, p. 11.
23. ^ ^{a b} Lim 1984, p. 324.
24. ^ Kuah 2018, p. 45.
25. ^ Teo & Kong 1997, p. 446–447.
26. ^ ^{a b} Teo & Kong 1997, p. 442–443.
27. ^ ^{a b} Ooi 1992, p. 173–174.
28. ^ ^{a b c} Teo & Kong 1997, p. 447.
29. ^ ^{a b} Chua 1991, p. 348.
30. ^ Phang, Sock Yong (Baronial 2015). "Singapore's Housing Policies: Responding to the Challenges of Economical Transitions". Singapore Economic Review. 60 (3): 8. doi:10.1142/S0217590815500368.
31. ^ Teo & Kong 1997, p. 443–444.
32. ^ Teo & Kong 1997, p. 445.
33. ^ Teo & Kong 1997, p. 446.
34. ^ Teo & Kong 1997, p. 450.
35. ^ ^{a b} Goh 2001, p. 1597.
36. ^ ^{a b} Kuah 2018, p. 48.
37. ^ ^{a b} Goh 2001, p. 1597–1598.
38. ^ ^{a b} Phang & Helble 2016, p. 13.
39. ^ Kuah 2018, p. 48–49.
40. ^ ^{a b} Kuah 2018, p. 49.
41. ^ Cheong 2016, p. 106–107.
42. ^ Cheong 2016, p. 108.
43. ^ Cho et al. 2017, p. 322.
44. ^ Phang & Helble 2016, p. 18.
45. ^ Cheong 2016, p. 112–115.
46. ^ ^{a b} Phang & Helble 2016, p. 17.
47. ^ Cho et al. 2017, p. 322–323.
48. ^ Choo, Cynthia (4 September 2018). "All 24 HDB towns to get unique design guides, first one released for Woodlands". Today. Singapore. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
49. ^ Ng, Michelle (18 February 2020). "Singapore Budget 2020: New plan to ensure sustainable living in HDB estates". The Straits Times. Singapore. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
50. ^ Lin, Cheryl (10 December 2021). "New flats for the elderly to be launched in Feb BTO do, with subscription to care services". CNA. Singapore. Retrieved 6 November 2021.
51. ^ Yuen 2009, p. 6.
52. ^ Yuen 2009, p. eight–9.
53. ^ Yuen 2009, p. 8.
54. ^ "Design of Tiong Bahru Flats". roots.gov.sg. National Heritage Board. Retrieved 30 October 2021.
55. ^ Ooi 1992, p. 171–172.
56. ^ Liu, Thai Ker (July 1974). "Reflections on problems and prospects in the 2d decade of Singapore's public housing". Ekistics. 38 (224): 43. Retrieved 23 October 2021.
57. ^ ^{a b} Ooi 1992, p. 174.
58. ^ Liu, Thai Ker (July 1974). "Reflections on problems and prospects in the 2nd decade of Singapore's public housing". Ekistics. 38 (224): 44. Retrieved 23 October 2021.
59. ^ ^{a b} Teo & Kong 1997, p. 443.
60. ^ Cheong, Koon Hean (2018). "Nation-Building, Singapore-Mode: Better Living Through Density". CTBUH Journal (Interview). Interviewed past Daniel Safarik. Retrieved xxx Oct 2021.
61. ^ Phang 2007, p. 29.
62. ^ "Modes of Sale". hdb.gov.sg. Housing and Evolution Lath. Retrieved 22 October 2021.
63. ^ ^{a b c} Phang 2007, p. 30.
64. ^ ^{a b c} Phang & Helble 2016, p. 14.
65. ^ Fraser, James M. (April 1952). "Town Planning and Housing in Singapore". The Town Planning Review. Liverpool University Press. 23 (ane): 19. doi:10.3828/tpr.23.1.v7327214j63750w3. JSTOR 40102143.
66. ^ Chua 1991, p. 347.
67. ^ Phang 2007, p. 27.
68. ^ Phang & Helble 2016, p. 20.
69. ^ Phang & Helble 2016, p. 21.
70. ^ Phang & Helble 2016, p. 12.
71. ^ Phang & Helble 2016, p. 14–xv.
72. ^ Ng, Michelle (27 October 2021). "Subsidy clawback, ten-year MOP for new prime location HDB flats to go along them affordable, inclusive". The Straits Times. Singapore. Retrieved 6 November 2021.
73. ^ Ooi 1992, p. 175.
74. ^ Ooi 1992, p. 176.
75. ^ Kuah 2018, p. 49–50.

Bibliography [edit]

• Cheong, Koon Hean (2016). "Chapter 7: The Evolution of HDB Towns". In Heng, Chye Kiang (ed.). 50 Years of Urban Planning in Singapore. World Scientific. pp. 101–125. ISBN978-981-4656-48-1.
• Cho, Im Sik; Nasution, Ivan; Lee, Jihye; Mascarenhas, Nina (2017). "Mechanisms for facilitating customs participation in Singapore's neighbourhood-planning framework". Periodical of Architectural and Planning Enquiry. 34 (iv): 320–335. JSTOR 44987240.
• Chua, Beng-Huat (1991). "RACE RELATIONS AND PUBLIC HOUSING POLICY IN SINGAPORE". Journal of Architectural and Planning Research. viii (four): 343–354. JSTOR 43029053.
• Goh, Robbie B.H. (August 2001). "Ideologies of 'Upgrading' in Singapore Public Housing: Mail service-modern Mode, Globalisation and Class Structure in the Built Environment". Urban Studies. 38 (9): 1589–1604. doi:ten.1080/00420980120076821. JSTOR 43196729. S2CID 143688718.
• Kuah, Adrian T.H. (2018). "Tropical Urbanisation and the Life of Public Housing in Singapore". ETropic: Electronic Journal of Studies in the Tropics. 17 (1): 41–59.
• Lim, William Siew Wai (July–August 1984). "Public housing and community development in Singapore". Ekistics. 51 (307): 319–327. JSTOR 43621881.
• Loh, Kah Seng (2009). "five The Politics of Fires in Mail service-1950s Singapore and the Making of the Modernist Nation-State". In Aljunied, Syed Muhd Khairudin; Heng, Derek (eds.). Reframing Singapore: Retentiveness - Identity - Trans-Regionalism. Amsterdam University Printing. pp. 89–108. ISBN978-90-485-0821-1. JSTOR j.ctt45kf1j.9.
• Ooi, Giok Ling (1992). "Managing Change and Continuity in the Public Housing Procedure in Singapore". Ekistics. 59 (354/355): 170–179.
• Phang, Sock Yong (2007). "The Singapore Model of Housing and the Welfare State". In Groves, Richard; Murie, Alan; Watson, Christopher (eds.). Housing and the New Welfare Country: Perspectives from East Asia and Europe. Ashgate Publishing. pp. 15–44. ISBN9780754644408.
• Phang, S.-Y.; Helble, One thousand. (2016). "Housing Policies In Singapore". Tokyo: Asian Evolution Banking concern Institute.
• Teo, Siew Eng; Kong, Lily (March 1997). "Public Housing in Singapore: Interpreting 'Quality' in the 1990s". Urban Studies. 34 (three): 441–452. doi:10.1080/0042098976069. JSTOR 43083375. S2CID 154318656.
• Yuen, Belinda (2009). "Reinventing Highrise Housing in Singapore". Cityscapes. 11 (1): 3–18. JSTOR 20868687.

External links [edit]

• Public housing in Singapore on eresources.nlb.gov.sg
• Housing in Singapore detailed analysis about evolution of SIT and HDB typical floor plans from 1930s to nowadays, statistics, listing of BTO, DBSS, EC and more.

parkerwhatiall.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore

Share this post