Yes, go west and make Tuas the new mega port, if a proposal to free the Tanjong Pagar port area for a waterfront makeover gets the green light, experts suggest.

Although the lease at Tanjong Pagar, Keppel and Pulau Brani terminals ends only in 2027, it was a proposal by the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) last week that sparked the buzz among shipping and property analysts.

The ESC had mooted turning Tanjong Pagar into a new waterfront development. It also called for a study on the long-term possibility of consolidating current port facilities at Tuas into a mega container port.

The Tanjong Pagar port area currently boasts an area of 85ha and a quay length of 2.3km.

The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) said that under the Government’s Concept Plan review, it will assess the feasibility of a consolidated mega port.

The MPA will take into account its need to achieve best-in-class efficiency and sustain Singapore’s long-term competitiveness.

Mr Ho Eng Joo, executive director of investment sales for real estate consultancy Colliers International, said giving the go-ahead would be good both for the Tanjong Pagar and Tuas areas.

He said: ‘With its good location and easy access to Raffles Place and Shenton Way, Tanjong Pagar will be a very exciting waterfront and developers will be interested in it.

‘Tuas, mostly industrial, will have the complementary infrastructure for a port.’

Mr Karamjit Singh, managing director of Credo Real Estate, said it makes sense to relocate the port as it is unproductive to have it so close to the heart of town as the land could be better used.

‘Tanjong Pagar will be of interest to developers and investors alike,’ he added.

Dr Thomas Menkhoff, practice associate professor of organisational behaviour and human resources at the Singapore Management University’s Lee Kong Chian School of Business, said many ports elsewhere have moved because they were no longer competitive at their original location or because of ’strategic common sense’.

Citing the German city of Bremerhaven, he said its new riverside quay on the mouth of the River Weser enhanced the competitiveness of the city’s port.

Associate Professor (Practice) Tan Kok Choon from the department of decision sciences at the National University of Singapore Business School, said Singapore’s main container traffic is now distributed over two locations: Tanjong Pagar and Pasir Panjang.

He agreed that if all container traffic could be concentrated at one place, efficiency and utilisation will go up.

Prof Tan said the new port must have such capabilities as turning around container vessels fast and getting vessels to berth quickly on arrival.

‘As Singapore’s container volume continues to grow beyond 2027 to become a super mega trans-shipment hub, the new location should be large enough to cater to more container vessels calling at Singapore,’ he said.

He added that given Singapore’s geography, the new port will most likely have to be along the southern coast, which leaves Tuas as the ideal choice since Changi Airport is in the east.

Dr Menkhoff said: ‘The Jurong Island project and the successful extension of the Tuas Peninsula over the last few years show that the western area has what it takes to have new port facilities.

‘However, concerns might include balancing development needs and protecting marine life as the waters around Tuas contain dozens of marine species.’

At least one shipping line is keen to see such a move.

Mr Teo Siong Seng, president of the Singapore Shipping Association and managing director of Pacific International Lines, said most of the container goods movement is towards factories in Tuas.

‘So a port in Tuas would save on road transport greatly. It’s a good plan and we definitely welcome it.’

Source: Sunday Times, 7 Feb 2010

Vacate the flat at once, project supervisor Ashirafur Rahaman Khan said he was told by a group of six people just before midnight.

It happened more than a week ago, the 37-year-old said. He was with his wife in their rented flat’s corridor in Yishun Street 81.

His wife, eight months pregnant and who had recently flown in from Bangladesh, was exercising in the corridor.

The group of six men and women who confronted the couple included the landlord and his son.

‘One of the men said I didn’t pay my rent, so I had to move out. But I had already paid for the month and even gave some advance payment,’ said the permanent resident, who rented the flat for $1,400 a month with a fellow tenant who was not present during the encounter.

Part of the group then entered the flat, saying they were removing the furniture.

Seeing his wife agitated, Mr Ashirafur then agreed to leave. ‘I said, ‘Don’t touch the furniture. We’ll move it ourselves’,’ he said.

So in the wee hours of the morning, the flat’s occupants scrambled to find lodging with friends, Mr Ashirafur said.

When contacted, the landlord’s son, who did not give his name, said it was his father who had decided on the course of action.

But he said: ‘Let’s say you rented a house. If anyone else comes (to stay), the owner should be informed.’

Mr Ashirafur told The Sunday Times his wife and his sister had flown in from Bangladesh. His sister had come along to take care of her.

He said his next move is to go to the Small Claims Tribunal, taking along his tenancy agreement, which states that one month’s notice is required for a mutually agreed termination of tenancy.

In recent years, more tenants – and to a lesser extent, landlords – have approached the tribunal for help to settle rental disputes.

This increase took place after it extended its jurisdiction in February 2006 to include disagreements on contracts for homes rented out for two years or less.

The tribunal was set up in 1985 to resolve small claims between consumers and suppliers.

Last year, 1,349 rental disagreement claims were lodged, more than three times the 401 claims filed in 2006. In 2008, 1,137 claims were lodged.

The majority of such claims – 84 per cent of last year’s cases, for example – are filed by tenants, statistics from the Subordinate Courts showed.

Prior to 2006, such aggrieved parties settled disputes such as unpaid rents or leaky ceilings between themselves or through the courts – a time-consuming and usually expensive process.

The Small Claims Tribunal handles cases involving sums of up to $10,000, though this limit can be raised to $20,000 if the parties agree.

Once a claim is lodged, the tribunal arranges a consultation before a registrar who will mediate the claim. The case goes to a hearing if there is no settlement during the meeting.

The time taken to resolve a claim depends on the nature and circumstances of each case, said the Subordinate Courts’ spokesman.

From the date of filing to the first consultation, the waiting period is usually between 10 and 14 days. From the final consultation to the hearing, the waiting period is usually within 10 working days.

When contacted, a Housing Board spokesman said it advises flat owners and tenants to settle their differences amicably when disputes come to its attention.

‘HDB will usually advise the complainant to lodge a claim with the Small Claims Tribunal. If mediation is not an option, the complainant may choose to take a private suit against the other party,’ she said.

The spokesman added that common disputes included issues over payment of rental, forfeiture of deposits and the termination of tenancies without sufficient notice.

Various types of rental disputes have hit the news in the past several years. At times, tenants returned to their flats only to find the locks changed.

Landlords have also suffered. When the economy dipped last year, tenants reportedly skipped town without paying the rent. They left the keys in the flats’ letterboxes.

‘Nowadays, such cases are common. Why? Because the tenant can’t afford to pay, or the landlord has some reasons to get back his place and finds an excuse,’ said Mr Andrew Tan, a senior division director from real estate agency Dennis Wee Group.

Rental agents who spoke to The Sunday Times said tenants and landlords should exercise due diligence and abide by proper tenancy procedures – to protect themselves if a dispute arises.

For example, tenants should ensure that their landlords are the actual owners of the flats and have approval to rent the units out. Landlords, on their part, should check their tenants’ particulars.

Proper tenancy agreements should be drawn up, setting out detailed terms and conditions. Stamp duty has to be paid too.

‘If everything is done in the right manner, the tenant should have no fear at all,’ said Mr Richard Sim, an agent with real estate agency ERA.

Mr Tan also advised tenants to pay the monthly rental using bank transfers, so ‘there’s a record’.

‘It’s not advisable to pay cash. Even if you had written a receipt, the owner can say he didn’t sign it,’ he said.

Above all, said ERA agent Paul Ravie, tenants and landlords must honour the tenancy agreement.

‘This is an important document, but many people don’t really take it as a serious, binding contract,’ he said, adding that agents must take care to explain the terms to both parties ahead of the signing.

Source: Sunday Times, 7 Feb 2010

As someone who works with like-minded individuals to help and raise awareness of the homeless in Singapore, I am heartened by last Sunday’s article, ‘Number of homeless people doubles’, which gave the issue a much-needed public airing.

Among several shortcomings is the treatment of the homeless by some agencies which purport to help them.

For instance, some of the homeless people tell us they are treated rudely by National Parks Board (NParks) officials.

Also, a pregnant mother of two told us that when she went to the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports to seek help, she was advised to rent a room at a backpackers’ hotel for $20 per night.

One of us managed to find her a place at a homeless shelter.

We also learnt that two families who were taken to and stayed overnight at the Angsana Home, a home for the destitute mentioned in another article (‘Govt help turned his life around’), were not informed of the involuntary confinement there.

Even though two of the family members had jobs, they were not allowed to report for work the next day.

It is also relevant to consider whether the Angsana Home, with its high fences and heavy police presence, and which has inmates who may be prone to violent behaviour, is a good place to house people who, apart from a lack of shelter, can care for themselves.

Also, why were HDB flats suddenly leased out as shelters to the homeless, when the authorities must have known about their increasing numbers for a long time?

And if there is a reasonable explanation for the shortage of shelters, why are NParks officials chasing the homeless away from the beaches, knowing full well they have nowhere else to go?

Another article, ‘Strict housing policies, illness and divorce leave some stuck’, suggests that the homeless are irresponsible and cannot plan for their future, by stating that they do not save for crises like unemployment or illness.

In fact, some of the homeless people spend their entire income on the bare necessities, so it would be impossible to have enough money to service a housing loan.

Finally, if the financial crisis is not to be blamed for the increase in the number of homeless people, is it possible that there are many people who cannot afford public housing any more?

Joshua Chiang

Source: Sunday Times, 7 Feb 2010

I refer to last Sunday’s sidebar, ‘What properties can PRs buy?’, alongside the article on what permanent residents look for when buying resale flats (‘When PRs buy HDB resale flats, key considerations are cost, location’).

The sidebar stated that ‘PRs are allowed to buy resale HDB flats – but not new flats – without housing and mortgage subsidies’.

This is not entirely true.

Single Singaporeans over the age of 35 are allowed to buy resale HDB flats, but a single PR cannot do so.

I have appealed against this ruling for the last year or so, but have been unsuccessful.

I am nearly 59 and divorced, but am contributing to Singapore by teaching English and creative writing. I was born and raised in Singapore and was a citizen.

Nearly 30 years ago, I married an Englishman, and later took up British citizenship. I did so not because I was disloyal to Singapore, but because Singapore did not permit dual citizenship.

Five years ago, I divorced my husband. I have two sons who have served national service and retained their Singapore citizenship. They now live here.

I decided to come back to Singapore to live when my grandchildren were born. My sons managed to help me get PR status here.

I applied for an HDB flat as I could not afford a private apartment. I went to see the Housing Board, but my application was rejected. This year, I made an appeal and it was rejected too. So I have to stay with my family when I am in Singapore.

I understand the need for stringent housing rules so that people do not abuse the system, but I feel that some cases have to be reviewed with humanity.

Josephine Chia (Ms)

Source: Sunday Times, 7 Feb 2010

Last Wednesday, Credo Real Estate sealed the first collective sale of the year.

Four owners of a Balestier industrial plot benefited when they sold their Jalan Ampas site – which can be converted into residential use – for $27.5 million.

More such deals are likely to be inked this year, after a dry year when just one collective sale was done. That was Block 18 of Dragon Mansion, completed in early December.

But the success rate will depend a lot on the market and owners’ expectations, consultants said.

Already, property consultants say many owners are again placing their hopes on hitting the collective-sale jackpot, in line with the improved property market and brighter economic outlook.

‘More estates are now forming sales committees to either start the sale process or re-start the process for those that had not been transacted successfully previously,’ said CKS Property Consultants’ investment manager Chia Mein Mein.

An industry observer pointed out that most developers are running out of land for mass market projects, so they are very keen to buy.

‘But prime land is another story. They still have quite a lot of it.’

Credo Real Estate’s deputy managing director Tan Hong Boon said: ‘We should see more activities towards the end of this year as many owners are keen to start the collective-sale process now.’

With more inquiries coming in, property consultants are busy pitching for jobs.

Many keen estates are those that had tried to sell en bloc but failed in the previous peak in 2007, the consultants said.

These include Pender Court off West Coast Highway, Royalville in Bukit Timah and Hawaii Tower in Meyer Road.

Collective-sale launches so far this year include the 11-unit Holland Hill Lodge, which was put up for sale en bloc last month at an indicative price range of $15 million to $16 million, or $1,038 to $1,107 per sq ft per plot ratio.

More launches can be expected from the second quarter, said Mr Tan.

A total of 116 collective sales were done at the peak of the property boom of 2007.

This figure slipped to only eight in 2008 amid the global financial crisis.

This year, there will certainly be more sales, consultants predict. However, some owners of prime or mid-end projects continue to hope for prices that are above the previous peak, they said.

Now that resale prices are moving up, more people are worried that they cannot get a similar replacement property, explained a consultant who declined to be named.

Still, the problem is the gap between buyers and sellers’ expectations.

‘There’s still a great mismatch in prices. Developers are quite cautious,’ he said.

Source: Sunday Times, 7 Feb 2010

A BOOMING property market on the back of a broad if tentative economic recovery last year has boosted the results of two mainboard-listed developers.

Guocoland posted a net profit yesterday of $60.4 million in its second quarter ended Dec 31 last year – a dramatic jump from just $861,000 earned in the same quarter a year earlier.

Boosted by positive sentiment and strong property sales, Guocoland’s revenue leapt 284 per cent to hit $363.7 million from the same period a year earlier.

Wing Tai Holdings posted a more modest 7 per cent rise in net profit to $22.3 million in its second quarter in the same three-month period. Revenue shot up 93 per cent to $177 million.

Guocoland said yesterday that its strong performance was mainly due to the strong sales of projects in China, especially Nanjing’s Ascot Park.

China’s property market has rallied in the recent year, in tandem with its growing economy. Asian markets have been leading a broad global recovery following the 2008 financial crisis.

For the half year ended Dec 31, Guocoland had a net profit of $72.8 million, reversing a net loss of $2 million in the same period a year ago. Revenue was also up 85 per cent to $459.4 million.

Closer to home, the group launched Sophia Residence in the Dhoby Ghaut area and Elliot on the east coast, which chalked up more than 90 per cent and 70 per cent sales respectively.

Earnings per share for the group were 7.27 cents for the second quarter, up from 0.1 cent previously. The group’s net asset value was $2.32 as of Dec 31, compared to $2.37 as of June 30.

Brisk sales in Singapore’s private residential market also gave Wing Tai’s financial performance a lift.

The group said it sold more homes at its Belle Vue Residences at Oxley Walk and The Riverine by the Park at Kallang.

For the half year, its net profit rose 28 per cent to $68.7 million, while revenue rose 101 per cent to $454.3 million.

Earnings per share for the group for the second quarter were 2.87 cents, up from 2.67 cents in the same quarter a year earlier. Its net asset value per share was $2.06 as of Dec 31, up from $2.03 as of June 30 last year.

Guocoland’s share price closed 12 cents down at $2 yesterday, while Wing Tai Holdings closed four cents lower at $1.76.

Source: Straits Times, 6 Feb 2010

PROPOSAL: Where do you go when you are running out of available land to build on?

Underground, according to the sub-committee of the Economic Strategies Committee that looked into raising land productivity.

It suggests that vast quantities of underground space can be carved out for new development once a national geology office is set up to conduct surveys, update geological maps, develop a subterranean land rights system and determine how underground areas can be priced.

Such an office could act as a repository for all information on underground Singapore, and provide expert advice to the public and private sectors.

It could reduce the uncertainty involved for developers looking to build underground. And, by providing better information, developments above and below ground could be synchronised.

The state could supplement its ‘land bank’ via the creation of such spaces alongside new underground infrastructure projects such as MRT stations. This will help create new spaces to locate emerging industries.

In true Singapore fashion, the vision is accompanied by an ‘underground masterplan’, somewhat like what the Government draws up regularly to determine the uses and density permitted for specific plots of land (above ground) over a 10- to 15-year period.

POSSIBILITIES: Granite and sedimentary rocks such as sandstone and limestone cover about two-thirds of Singapore, according to the Institution of Engineers Singapore (IES), and it is within these formations that developments can be constructed.

The upside is that technology for such work is established, although experts fear it will take some time before people are willing to accept the idea of living more than six feet underground.

But IES suggests that underground space could be used to house power stations, sports facilities, warehouses, wafer fabrication factories, laboratories, research centres and even incineration plants.

Moving such facilities underground would free up land for housing, parks and open spaces, thereby raising the quality of life.

Furthermore, the legal foundations for the development of subterranean land rights already exist, says Associate Professor Kelvin Low from the Singapore Management University’s School of Law. At present, the owner of a plot of land has the right to build both skywards and into the ground via the creation of basements. This existing framework can easily be adapted for underground developments.

In order to allow two projects on each plot of land, the Government could subdivide state-owned land so that the underground portion is treated separately from that above ground. In the same way, a private owner of land can apply for permission to subdivide his or her plot to allow for dual above- and below-ground construction.

PRECEDENTS: Singapore currently uses underground space to accommodate shopping malls, train networks, new highways, civil defence shelters, pedestrian links, and storage for ammunition and oil. Think CityLink underground mall, which links City Hall MRT station to Suntec City, and the 12km-long Kallang-Paya Lebar Expressway, of which 9km runs underground.

And subterrestrial success stories abound across the world.

The Canadian city of Montreal is well-known for its underground city called Reso. Inhabitants can live, work, eat, exercise and be entertained there without setting foot above ground, where temperatures can slip below 10 deg C for six months of the year.

More than 30km of underground tunnels and ground-level interior walkways link the offices, hotels, malls, movie theatres and museums which are part of this network.

The Japanese city of Osaka also has an integrated underground city centre and no fewer than six underground malls, all of which are connected by rail. The walkways, and office and department store basements form a labyrinth-like subterranean network, adorned with artificial rivers, sunken gardens and glass facades to direct natural light to the basement level.

PRACTICAL PROBLEMS: Despite technological advances, building underground is inherently difficult. Extensive geotechnical studies and mapping are required, plus feasibility studies to ensure projects are viable.

Cost is another big factor, as depending on soil conditions, such developments can end up costing up to three times more than comparable surface structures.

Property consultant Knight Frank’s managing director Danny Yeo feels cost considerations will restrict large underground developments to areas where land costs are high, like Orchard Road.

How to protect existing surface-level property could also prove to be another stumbling block.

According to SMU’s Prof Low, owners of properties next to underground sites are protected by law, given that subterranean developers are deemed liable for any damage to their buildings resulting from construction, even if it is not due to carelessness.

Such liability, he notes, is stricter than that found in some other common law countries like Canada and New Zealand, which require proof that the developer was negligent before he can be made liable.

While Singapore’s stricter regime safeguards the interests of those with terrestrial property, it could render subterranean development more expensive here if neighbouring buildings were shoddily built and hence more easily damaged, he notes.

Source: Straits Times, 6 Feb 2010

PAYING big money does not necessarily get you everything these days, at least when it comes to buying a private apartment.

New homes going for as much as $2,600 per square foot can offer designer furnishings and place you in a coveted district, but they may no longer come with large common spaces or even tennis courts traditionally associated with a private address.

In the core central region (CCR), home seekers would not find tennis courts in projects such as Marina Bay Suites, Sophia Residence and Illuminaire on Devonshire.

Further from town, buyers have paid as much as $1,345 psf at Alexis or $1,514 psf at Suites@Guillemard, where there is just a margin of space around the buildings, and swimming pools and gyms congregate on the rooftop. Tennis courts are also missing from the picture.

Nowadays, ‘you don’t really get developments with sprawling grounds, where there’s openness’, observes DTZ executive director Ong Choon Fah. ‘Those are actually more difficult to come by.’

Many projects cannot offer large landscaped grounds or a full range of facilities simply because their sites are not big enough. A tennis court alone measures 78 ft by 36 ft, taking up 2,808 sq ft. According to EL Development managing director Lim Yew Soon, a developer could try to tuck a court just nicely into a smallish site, but it could become a ‘disamenity’ to residents living too close to the noise.

In fact, there are buyers who do not expect to see tennis courts for smaller projects within or near town, he adds. ‘Even if they really see, they’ll be asking if it will be too near their units.’

EL Development has three projects in CCR which do not have tennis courts – Illuminaire on Devonshire, Parc Centennial and Rhapsody on Mount Elizabeth – but they are sold out.

Many projects are still able to command high prices because of their location. This is especially so if owners intend to rent the apartments out.

The absence of a tennis court, for instance, may mean a longer search for a tenant but consultants say rents are unlikely to be dented much. ‘That’s about property investment. Location is everything,’ says Savills residential director Phylicia Ang.

GuocoLand is banking on Sophia Residence’s location near Dhoby Ghaut MRT station to attract buyers. The project does not have a tennis court, but home seekers’ ‘main buying criterion was to be in the city, to have easy MRT access to all parts of Singapore and also a property which offered attractive rental yield’, it told BT. The development will be where Sophia Court used to be and the latter also did not have a tennis court.

Beyond site constraints, high land prices may be prompting developers to cut back on common spaces and certain facilities.

‘With land costs so high, most developers want to maximise the saleable area,’ says ERA Asia Pacific associate director Eugene Lim.

But that’s not to say that all developers have free rein on the site design. The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) has rules on site coverage, which indicate how much space buildings can occupy.

For developments classified as flats/apartments and condominiums, site coverage cannot exceed 40 per cent. Mixed-use developments are the ones which are not subject to this rule.

Still, developers are careful to keep features which most residents cannot seem to do without, namely swimming pools and gyms. Faced with a smaller site, ‘the priority is given to swimming pools’, says DP Architects director Tai Lee Siang. But ‘where possible, it is likely that developers will still want to incorporate tennis courts’.

As it becomes harder to find prime projects offering large ground spaces and complete facilities, existing developments with these features are likely to stand out. ‘One of the reasons why Ardmore Park is so popular is because it has a beautiful landscaped garden, and the grounds are sprawling. You don’t get many of these, these days,’ says DTZ’s Mrs Ong.

Source: Business Times, 6 Feb 2010

Resorts World at Sentosa has been awarded its casino licence. It is the first of Singapore’s two integrated resorts to get the go ahead for its casino operations.

Although the opening date of the casino at Resort World has not been announced, preparations are in full swing.

Resorts World Sentosa chairman Lim Kok Thay said: “We are very happy to have received the casino licence. This was made possible by the dedicated team, consultants, contractors and government officials, especially the Casino Regulatory Authority, which worked tirelessly to set up the regulatory framework within a very agressive timeline.”

Lunar New Year decorations have already been put up at the lobby of the casino.

Resorts World staff were in the midst of an orientation when the MediaCorp news team visited.

Although the doors remain shut, visitors are excited about the prospect the casino may be opening soon.

Some are hoping the casino will be open in time for the Lunar New Year which begins on February 14.

While foreigners do not have to pay the US$100 levy before entering the casino, locals will have to do so at this booth.

Before arriving at the booth, visitors to the casino will be segregated according to whether they are Singaporeans or overseas guests.

The S$6.6 billion integrated resort at Sentosa is opening in phases, starting with its hotels last month.

Many are also waiting for the theme park, Universal Studios Singapore to open.

Some of the staff at the resort have been busy testing out the amusement rides and more.

Andrea Teo, vice president, Entertainment, Resorts World Sentosa, said: “We are in full swing, getting ready for the theme park. We have been testing and commissioning the rides. Some of our people have been experiencing this – going from ride to ride to ride and having a very good time. And we have all been eating at restaurants, trying out the food at very good prices.

“We are at various percentages of finishing the different rides and resorts. But I would say that we are on an actually pretty fast track to completely everything. Our hotel opened on the January 20 and since then, we’ve had 90 per cent occupancy. Festive Hotel and Hard Rock have been fully booked. And for Chinese New Year, we are fully booked.”

And while casino staff are busy gearing up for the opening day, Singapore’s Police have also been started serving the Exclusion Orders to those with a history of crimes such as those related to drugs and illegal moneylending.

So far, about 3,500 people with serious criminal records have been barred from the two casinos when they open.

The latest exclusion orders are on top of what the National Council on Problem Gambling has issued.

Some 28,000 undischarged bankrupts and those on public assistance have also been banned from entering casinos.

Source: Channel News Asia, 6 Feb 2010

A UNIT of City Developments (CDL) lodged the highest bid for a Sengkang site in a hotly contested tender that attracted some of the biggest names in property development.

Sunmaster Holdings trumped its nine rival bidders with an offer of $200.5 million, or $365.26 per square foot (psf) of potential gross floor area, for the 182,986 sq ft plot.

This was 185 per cent above the reserve price of $70 million or $128 psf, said Mr Li Hiaw Ho, executive director at CB Richard Ellis Research.

The Sunmaster Holdings bid for the 99-year leasehold residential site at the corner of Sengkang West Avenue and Fernvale Link was followed by Tuas Hi-Tech Park’s offer of $177 million.

Frasers Centrepoint was just $92,000 behind at $176,908,000.

Other bidders included a joint venture between Hoi Hup Realty and Sunway Developments, First Changi Development, Allgreen Properties, CEL Development and Lippo Estates, with the lowest bid at $115.6 million.

‘The healthy number of bids received shows that developers remain confident of the market for mass-market homes,’ said the director of research and advisory at Colliers International, Ms Tay Huey Ying.

Ngee Ann Polytechnic real estate lecturer Nicholas Mak pointed out that although developers ‘are still somewhat hungry for good development sites’, most bids were reasonable.

This is possibly because of the ample supply of government land sales projects coming up in the first half of the year, he said.

The site is estimated to be able to accommodate up to 465 condominium units and has a maximum allowable gross floor area of 50,996 sq m or 548,916 sq ft. It is near the Layar LRT station on Sengkang West Avenue.

Based on breakeven estimates of $650-$700 psf, Mr Li expects selling prices at the new development to range from $750 to $800 psf.

Units at another condominium in the vicinity, the Quartz, had been transacting at prices averaging $745 psf since last October, Ms Tay said.

With five-room and executive resale HDB flats in Sengkang selling for $400,000 to $500,000, Mr Li believes that there should be demand from HDB upgraders whose flats have or will soon turn five years old.

Demand could also come from the nearby Seletar private estate, he said.

The Housing Board will award the tender within the next two weeks.

Source: Straits Times, 5 Feb 2010