TENGAH and Simpang might be the next townships to be developed, Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan said yesterday.

‘Flat buyers need not fear that there are not enough flats,’ Mr Mah said. ‘When Punggol is fully built up, we will consider building in new areas such as Tengah and Simpang.’

The two areas – Simpang in the north-east, and Tengah in the west – were fielded as potential development sites as early as the 1990s.

Simpang town first made its appearance on the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s 1991 Concept Plan, where it was mentioned as one of the next possible housing estates in the same breath as Punggol, Sembawang, and Sengkang.

Simpang town is located on the coast, bounded by the Strait of Johor to the north, Sembawang town to the west, Yishun town to the south and the mouth of the former Sungei Seletar to the east.

In the URA’s Simpang development guide plan, the area was meant to be a waterfront town, featuring waterfront homes and sea sports facilities.

There were even plans for a light rail system through the area.

These grand plans were evidently shelved, however, as the area remains a mixture of forest and swamp. The Simpang training grounds were at one point in use by the Singapore Armed Forces artillery as a training ground.

There have been fewer designs on the area at Tengah – bounded by Brickland Road, the KJE, PIE and Bukit Batok Road.

Today, the forested piece of land remains an excellent source of wild durians.

However, a spokesman for the Ministry of National Development stressed that there are no concrete plans to develop the areas yet. He stressed that Mr Mah highlighted the two areas only to demonstrate the adequacy of housing space.

‘(The) towns will only be developed at the appropriate time when there is sufficient demand,’ said a spokesman for HDB. ‘There was no prior commitment to develop both towns.

Source: Straits Times, 6 Mar 2010

A MAN did not want to sell his apartment in a proposed collective sale, but his wife wanted to – and had signed on the dotted line to say yes.

The sale of the Joo Chiat property thus hung in limbo for three years while the lone dissenter, Mr Goh Teh Lee, 52, took his fight all the way to the highest court in the land.
En route, the couple divorced.

Yesterday, he lost the battle. The Court of Appeal threw out his case, paving the way for the sale.
The court, comprising Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, Andrew Phang and V. K. Rajah, were unanimous in deciding that Mr Goh, as a co-owner, did not have the right – known in legal parlance as locus standi – to be heard in court, since he and his now ex-wife had to act as one in the en bloc sale.

Despite being told this, Mr Goh, who represented himself in court, insisted he had a strong case for objecting to the sale on the basis of procedural irregularities and unfairness.

But Justice Chao remarked: ‘We are extremely doubtful that your case is strong. Most, if not all, of the points you raised are without merit.’Justice Rajah piped in: ‘And we are being polite.’

The property in question comprised 24 apartments in a four-storey block known as Koon Seng House and nine pre-war terrace houses on one plot of land. The collective sale was mooted at a residents’ meeting in November 2006, when the Gohs were going through their divorce.

The sales proceeds, $21.12 million, were to be divided equally among the 33 units. The terrace houses were owned by a single owner, and the apartments, by different individuals.

Mr Goh asserted that there were discrepancies in the collective sale agreement, such as dodgy signatures.
He contended that the deal was not transparent as the minutes of the first meeting were not circulated to all owners and that the sale committee had acted too hastily by appointing the property agent and lawyer for the deal on the same night the panel was formed.

He also alleged that the majority owners made false declarations to the Strata Titles Board (STB).
The STB disagreed and ordered the sale in December 2008. Mr Goh appealed to the High Court to reverse the decision.

When the High Court also ruled against him, he went to the Court of Appeal.
While he was not ordered to pay legal costs, Mr Goh will have to pay $3,000 for the sales committee’s expenses for the appeal.

The appeals court also ruled that if he does not sign the sales papers, the Registrar of Supreme Court will sign them on his behalf.

Source, Straits Times 3rd March 2010

THE lifestyle hub that was supposed to come up in Sembawang – troubled from the start – may now be on its last legs.

Two anchor tenants have pulled out, and a third is making tracks to leave.

If that third one goes, all that will remain of the planned leisure hub on Admiral Hill will be a childcare centre and a 40-table steamboat restaurant.

Already, what was touted in 2007 as the Dempsey of the north is looking run-down.

Last month, its biggest tenant, the 900-seat Chinese restaurant Dragon Phoenix, threw in the towel.

Its owner Chris Hooi said he had sunk $1 million into renovating the 15,000 sq ft site, and was already more than $500,000 in the red.

The first to quit was Admiral Bar & Grill, which closed in November last year. It had been bleeding about $3,000 a month.

The next to go could be The Tanjong poolside cafe. Its owner, Mr Lim Hong Wee, said he does not intend to stay on for more than three months.

The developer of Admiral Hill, the Yess Group, won a Singapore Land Authority (SLA) tender to develop the site in 2007. It beat other bidders by offering to pay $40,000 a month in rent, more than $5,000 above the guide rent.

Yess had big plans: It said it would bring in tenants to run restaurants, a country club, rock-climbing facilities, beauty and health centres, and a golf driving range, among other things.

But instead of these lifestyle facilities, an illegal school and a workers’ dormitory came up on the site.

Both were ordered to shut.

Mr Hooi, the owner of Dragon Phoenix, said that without the lifestyle attractions, few people came.

He said he had been told to expect corporate functions and families coming in for horse riding, for example.

‘You think I wanted to leave? I’ve put so much money into it,’ he said.

In anticipation of corporate clients, Mr Hooi had added seminar rooms to his restaurant and kitted them with audio-visual hardware for meetings.

But no one came.

‘I had no choice. There were no customers and there was too much space. We were bleeding,’ he said, adding that he met Yess several times to discuss the matter, without success.

Admiral Bar & Grill owner Victor Teo, 41, had a similarly grim tale to tell.

He pumped $150,000 into renovations, but was losing money from the time he opened for business in late 2007.

‘There is nothing here to pull in the crowds,’ he said.

However, promise seemed to lie in the karaoke rooms, which he said Yess approved. Business picked up when the rooms were added. But Mr Teo said that Yess told him later that an entertainment licence from the SLA was needed for the rooms to continue operating, and that it would help him apply for it.

Mr Teo said he pressed Yess to get the licence to reflect the change of use, but this was not done.

Meanwhile, The Tanjong cafe’s Mr Lim said he handed in his quit letter last November, but Yess pleaded with him to stay.

The deal they struck allows the cafe to be open only on weekends and pay only minimal rent.

Mr Lim, 55, said: ‘They asked me to stay because they needed someone to service the pool.’

He now sees that the pool is maintained, on top of running the cafe. But even he wants to go in two to three months because there are so few customers.

Contacted yesterday, Yess declined comment.

In a statement, the SLA said it was aware of the recent closures, but stressed that it would not interfere as it is a ‘commercial matter between a master tenant and its sub-tenants’.

‘It is not appropriate for SLA to speculate on reasons for the cessation of business operations or to interfere, as long as there are no breaches in the terms of the tenancy agreement,’ said a spokesman.

He added that Yess had taken action to rectify its past breaches.

Analysts contacted said it was unlikely the area would ever take off at this rate.

Mr Colin Tan, director of research and consultancy at real estate consultancy Chesterton Suntec International, said it was ‘highly unlikely that such a leisure hub would materialise’.

The site is also home to the two-storey Old Admiralty House, a national monument, which was built to accommodate Royal Navy officers in 1939, before being converted into a seafood restaurant in the 1970s after the British pulled out.

The house now stands empty.

Source, Straits Times 20 January 2010

CapitaLand’s wholly-owned serviced residence arm, The Ascott Ltd, yesterday launched its first Citadines project in Malaysia.

The Citadines Kuching Uplands, along with others that are due to open in Malaysia, will more than double Ascott’s current portfolio there from 455 units to a total of 1,168 units by 2013.

Recent deals include a management contract for a second Ascott branded serviced residence in Kuala Lumpur, and a third Somerset property which will open next year.

Alfred Ong, Ascott’s managing director for South-east Asia and Australia, said that the presence of the group’s three brands – Ascott, Somerset and Citadines – will enable it to cater to a wider range of customers in Malaysia. Other potential areas for growth include Penang, Petaling Jaya and the Iskandar region.

Citadines Kuching Uplands is scheduled for completion by the first half of 2012. It is located in the Jalan Simpang Tiga area which is slated to be a hub for education and local federal government administration offices.

The property is also a 10-minute drive from the Samajaya Free Industrial Zone with many multinational and local companies.

Citadines Kuching Uplands will offer a total of 215 apartment units, ranging from studios to one and two-bedroom units. The serviced residence, developed and owned by Kenbest Sdn Bhd, is part of a mixed development project which features 200,000 sq ft of retail space.

Besides Citadines Kuching Uplands, Ascott manages Somerset Gateway in Kuching and seven other properties in Kuala Lumpur.

Source: Business Times, 17 Dec 2009

Affluent S’poreans have cut down on consumption: survey

Affluent Singaporeans are the biggest savers in Asia despite being wealthier than they were six months ago, a survey has found.

They save 33 per cent of their monthly income, up 5 per cent from six months ago, while cutting back on consumption and daily expenses, an HSBC Affluent Asian Tracker survey found.

Compared to the first survey done in April, Singaporeans have cut their consumption by 4 per cent to 21 per cent and trimmed their daily expenses by 3 per cent to 45 per cent. Consumption refers to spending on dining, entertainment, clothing, travel and electronics.

Yet more than half of those surveyed reported a rise in net worth compared to only 23 per cent six months ago. Those who save the least, at 17 per cent, are the Indonesians and Australians.

The survey of more than 1,700 affluent individuals aged 30-55 took place in eight markets with 200 polled in Singapore. The survey gauges the views of people in the top 10 percentile of the population by income or liquid assets. Affluent in Singapore is defined as having a monthly income of at least $6,000 and $200,000 of liquid assets.

On preferred financial investments over the next six months, 68 per cent of Singaporeans surveyed voted for the stock market, followed by local or foreign currency deposits, unit trusts and life insurance.

Asked about the next big splurge, 56 per cent mentioned travel and 30 per cent said property. Buying a car was the least favoured, with only 10 per cent inclined to do so.

Indonesians were the biggest property fans at 56 per cent.

As for the sources of financial information, 47 per cent of Singaporeans said they relied on independent financial advisers, followed by the financial media (39 per cent), banks (32 per cent) and family/relatives (27 per cent).

Taiwanese relied most on the financial media (44 per cent) for financial information but only 8 per cent of Indonesians found it reliable. Indonesians prefer getting financial advice from family/relatives.

A third of affluent Singaporeans have family living abroad and close to half plan to live abroad in the next 10 years, with Australia/New Zealand as the most favoured destination.

About half of respondents in Malaysia and India feel the same way and 62 per cent of mainland Chinese – the highest proportion in the survey – plan to live abroad in the next 10 years.

Sebastian Arcuri, HSBC Singapore head of personal financial services, said the Asian diaspora will evolve into a new movement, led by the affluent who not only work and study abroad, but who now explore new wealth opportunities.

‘We are seeing this with our HSBC Premier clients as we help them to purchase a second home abroad, expand their businesses internationally or invest globally in multiple locations.’

Source: Business Times, 8 Dec 2009

CHANGE is coming, but is change always a good thing? I read the report, ‘Pasir Panjang Village Centre to go’ (Nov 13), with great dismay.

I am a resident of Pasir Panjang estate, and for at least the past five years, there has been a slew of construction works around my home continuously. I cannot recall a moment of peace.

Every time a condominium is built, the piling and drilling noise is enough to drive me out my home. I am a student, and it is hard to find an ideal spot to study, especially during examination times. My parents are just as frustrated as they cannot stay at home to rest.

Also, Pasir Panjang Village Centre has always been a one-stop convenience centre for residents. We do grocery shopping at Cold Storage, dine at the restaurants and drop off our laundry at the laundromat.

Soon, the nearest amenities will be a good 10-minute drive away, in West Coast Plaza or VivoCity. Our family doctor will also have to move.

The reason we live in Pasir Panjang is for its tranquillity. ‘Revitalising’ the area with yet another development may not be in the best interests of residents.

Source, Straits Times, 23 Nov 2009

Last chance to sign up for October night classes!

Don’t be driven by last minute rush to take your CES exams. This intake will prepare participants for the November CES exams.

Commencement Date/Time:
15th Oct 2009 (Evening class: 6.30 – 9.30 pm)
Every Tues and Thur
Duration: 10 lessons (inclusive of Mock tests)

Venue: HDB HUB
Course Fees: $270^, Admin Fees: $30, Materials: $50
^ Terms and conditions apply for WDA-RE/MAX funding.

For more details: CALL 9107 7773
email: eunicelim@remax.net

Those without ‘O’ Levels have up to Dec to take their CES exam.
WDA funding for CES valid till December 2009!

PROPERTY speculators have been in the firing line of late, but the hefty losses some suffered earlier this year suggest they might be deserving of some sympathy.

A number seem to have been caught out when prices fell as the awarding of a project’s temporary occupation permit (TOP) neared.

Instead of flipping the property for a gain, some speculators were caught out and took a hit when they offloaded some of the popular sub-sale projects, according to Savills Singapore.

While the data showed that sub-sale deals typically rise in projects nearing completion, sellers may not always gain.

Take Casa Merah in Tanah Merah. There were 71 sub-sale deals done this year with 16 resulting in losses averaging $30,601. One seller suffered a loss of $142,790.

Most sellers made gains at Rivergate, which was completed in the first quarter of the year, but 10 suffered hefty losses. One ‘flipper’ took a massive hit of $985,000, with the average loser suffering red ink to the tune of $371,355.

At popular projects like The Sail @ Marina Bay, eight out of 19 sub-sale deals this year were done at an average loss of $949,343.

Regardless of market condition, prices may rise near completion time because people looking for immediate occupation will typically prefer to buy a brand-new home while tenants usually like to move into a new property, said Savills Residential director Phylicia Ang.

She added that this ‘TOP effect’ is more obvious in a rising market, and especially if the completed development turns out to be better than expected. But these factors did not apply earlier this year as the market was very weak, she said.

‘Some people were selling earlier this year because they panicked. No one knew how the market would turn out,’ said Cushman & Wakefield managing director Donald Han.

‘They wanted to sell before the project was completed so that they did not have to take up a loan.’

There was considerable fear around the market then – which coincided with the global meltdown in share markets – with speculators concerned that they would not be able to find loans to match the high prices they bought at during 2007, he said.

In the first quarter, high-end home prices were down 35 per cent from prices at the peak of the market early last year, while mid-tier and mass-market homes were down 25 per cent and 15 per cent respectively.

Buyers were looking at steep discounts with the result that some of the lowest prices seen recently were in the first three months of the year, said experts.

The market has moved up from those dark days, so sub-sale deals since then would have closed in positive territory.

It was the case with the new launches this year. Savills Singapore found that the sub-sale deals for the major and most popular projects launched this year nearly all closed at a profit.

The six sub-sale deals done at Alexis in Alexandra Road this year had average gains of $62,833.

Prices of most mass-market homes now are nearly hitting the peak seen in the first quarter of last year. The mid-tier market is about 10 to 12 per cent below that high point, while the high-end market is about 20 per cent away, said Mr Han.

‘Whoever comes into the market now would be looking into a medium-term window of two to three years,’ he said.

Those looking to flip within a year may have it tough, as the window of making a quick killing has closed because of the Government’s recent introduction of measures to cool the market, he added.

Source, Straits Times 23 Sep 2009

For married couple Dai Xue Yong and Zhang Zhi Ying, Geylang was the perfect location to set up their food business, Orient Garden Restaurant.

The one-year-old homestyle eatery, which serves Shanghainese cuisine, sits alongside several other Chinese restaurants.

‘We know that Geylang is a food haven. We thought we could offer another variety of Chinese cuisine,’ said Ms Zhang, 40.

Indeed, on week nights and weekends, their eatery is packed with China nationals who go there for a taste of home.

Singaporeans and tourists are among the patrons as well.

Ms Zhang said she and her 43-year-old husband had considered setting up shop in Chinatown, but a scouting trip to Geylang last year led them to do so in Lorong 39 instead.

They have been in Singapore for a year now and used to run a trading company in Shanghai.

‘We felt that Chinatown attracts more of the tourist crowd whereas in Geylang, you get the people who live and work here,’ she said. ‘We just see so much potential in Geylang.’

The couple hired two chefs and two waitresses from China. They will consider opening a branch when business picks up.

They are now making small profits after paying the monthly rent of about $8,250, Ms Zhang said.

The couple live in the upstairs unit of the shophouse that is home to their restaurant. They like the location because they can get both local and China products easily.

‘If I feel like eating prata, there’s a stall just down the street. If I want to eat Chinese food like dianxin, it’s also easily available here,’ she said.

Source: Sunday Times, 13 Sep 2009

For four years, Geylang has been both home and workplace for Shandong native Wu Min.

He lives in a condo in Lorong 31 with his wife, also a Shandong native. She is a nurse at the Singapore General Hospital.

They met in Singapore four years ago through a friend when Mr Wu was studying for a degree at the Singapore Institute of Materials Management.

They registered their marriage here last year and have a four-month-old daughter, who lives with his parents in China.

He opened a provision shop here after he found the work at a logistics company, which he had joined after his studies, too stressful and the pay low.

The 29-year-old said he chose to do business in Geylang because of its large Chinese population, wide variety of food and convenience of travel.

He used to visit restaurants in the area on weekends.

Sited between Lorong 11 and 13, his provision shop sells local products and China imports. The minimart, called Ba Fang Guo Huo, has another outlet between Lorong 40 and Lorong 42.

The two outlets were set up with $100,000 borrowed from his parents. Every month, he pays about $6,000 in rent for each of his shops, and income is just enough to cover costs now.

About 60 per cent of his customers are China nationals.

‘It’s more like ‘Chinatown’ than the real Chinatown. You see Chinese here every day, not like in Chinatown, where perhaps the Chinese may visit on weekends,’ said Mr Wu.

Given a choice, however, he said he would not want to live in Geylang. He is considering moving to Tampines, where he lived for about two years as a student.

‘Geylang is a good place to run a business but it’s not so ideal for a home,’ he said, referring to the red-light district.

Source: Sunday Times, 13 Sep 2009