Leong Sze Hian

I refer to HDB’s latest BTO, Straits Vista@Marsiling launched on 10 June. (“HDB’s challenge: low-cost housing, condo-like flats” (ST, Jun 11)) (“Marsiling goes BTO :Straits Vista project launched as HDB wins UN award” (Today, Jun 11)).

Why is it that the problem of all applicants rejecting BTO HDB flats offered, resulting in leftover flats, is only a recent phenomena over the last year or so ?

Is it because not only has HDB 4-room flat prices increased by an average of 40 to more than 100 per cent from about two years ago, and the price range has also widened ?

For example, the price range for BTOs at Straits@Marsiling is from $116,000 to $164,000 (3-room) and $184,000 to $257,000 (4-room), and $ 234,000 to $ 305,000 (4-room) for Punggol Sapphire.

This is a difference of $ 73,000 or 40 per cent between the lowest and highest price at Straits@Marsiling (4-room), and 41 per cent between the lowest and highest price for a 3-room flat.

If an applicant can only afford a cheaper-range flat, but is offered one with a much higher price, is it fair to penalise the applicant after two rejections ?

If one is offered only second floor flats, which nobody wants because of the noise level, the difficulty to sell in future, and generally much slower appreciation in value relative to higher floors, is it fair to penalise applicants too ?

As a flat may probably be the biggest asset that one may own in one’s lifetime, wouldn’t it be natural for applicants to decline accepting flats beyond their affordability, or almost certain relative depreciation in market price and marketability in the future ?

Instead of offering more land sites for private developers to tender and build HDB flats, I would like to suggest that the HDB continue to focus on its historic role to build affordable housing to meet Singaporeans’ needs, as the price of private-development HDB flats tend to be higher than HDB- developed flats.

Is it any wonder that as at end March, 250 of the 714 flats available at City View @ Boon Keng under HDB’s Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS), were still unsold, with prices up to $ 727,000 for a 5-room flat?

In view of the current shortage in the supply of HDB flats to meet rising demand, private developers may tender at higher prices, which may translate into even higher priced flats.

I can understand the rationale to allow private property owners to own a HDB flat as well, when there used to be as many as 16,000 surplus HDB flats that could not be sold.

Now that surplus flats available have dwindled, and demand is arguably at record highs, with the problem of many home buyers being unable to meet the “cash above valuation”, I would like to suggest that the policy of owning both a HDB flat and private property be reviewed.

In this connection, I understand that in other countries, citizens are generally not allowed to own both public and private housing.

————-

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Hunger is the key

Make sure that our young people are hungry. If our young people…

Singapore and Indonesia signs bilateral investment treaty to promote stronger economic ties

Singapore and Indonesia has signed an Agreement on the Promotion and Protection…

媒体人访谈揭新闻审查确实存在(附完整视频)

本社前日在脸书专页上载了一段主流媒体人在一场研讨会上的谈话剪接视频,揭示本地新闻界同仁新闻价值观和他们面对的新闻审查。对此,有读者要求本社上载完整视频,读者可点开以下的脸书链接,观赏完整现场录影。 有关访谈片段是录制于2016年,主题为《所有关于你想知道、却不敢问的电视与媒体业界情况》对话会上。 对话会由新加坡科技设计大学(SUTD)人文学院讲师罗林(James Rowlins)主持,邀请《亚洲新闻台》“Talking Point”主持人暨编辑Steven Chia、“局内人”数码团队制作人蓝淑珊(译音),以及高级制作人罗敏敏(译音),和学生听众分享在媒体业界的经验。 完整视频时间全长40余分钟,有兴趣者可点开脸书链接观赏,本文也节录与原先剪接视频相关的访谈的内容。 除了聆听受访媒体人分享新闻制作经验,讲师罗林抛出尖锐问题,指出新加坡有严重的新闻审查现象,新闻自由全球排名仅154,还落后于印尼和马国,询问在新加坡的媒体,是否有自我审查的现象? “媒体不扮演监督角色” 对此,Steven Chia在回答时表示,新加坡做的一套都有原因,媒体并不肩负“看门狗”(监督)政治领袖和政府的角色。 “我们有做政治宣传吗?有的!政治宣传也不是贬义词,政治宣传就是让民众知道发生了什么。很多时候我们也协助政府传达信息。”…

Ten reasons why Ben should be granted his deferment

It doesn’t seem like the “defer or not defer” saga in relation…