Squatters No More: Singapore Social Housing For World Bank 3 rd Urban Research Symposium Brasilia, Brazil, 4-6 April 2005 Singapore Today A/P Belinda Yuen, PhD National University of Singapore 2 UBIQUITOUS PUBLIC HOUSING, GARDEN CITY LIVING Not always so, no different from many other fast growing cities 3 4 Official figures referred to about 250,000 people living in slums and another 300,000 in squatter areas on the city fringe in 1959. The bulk of the poor lived in Chinatown. Mr Lim Kim San, Chairman of HDB, account of his 1 st visit to Chinatown in the early 1960s: I went into a three-storey shophousewith one lavatory and two bathrooms. We counted 200 tenants living there. It was so dark and damp. It was an inhuman and degrading existence. Underneath the staircase was a single plank. A man was lying on the plank. He had rented it. That was his home! And he was lying down covered by a blanket; the thick red blanket made in China. I paused to ask him if he was sick: Why are you covering yourself with a thick blanket? He replied: I am covering myself out of respect for you. I am wearing only undershorts. My brother is wearing my pants. They were too poor to afford clothing. In those days, there were shops which pulled clothing and shoes off the dead to sell them. My God, I thought to myself, I really must help those people. (The Straits Times, 9 Aug 1997) 5 6 1
Talk Outline Introduction to Singapore public housing The key instruments The outcome Singapore Land area: 690 sq km Population: 4 million (3.2m resident population) Economy: Newly Industrializing GDP per capita: USD 20,767 Ranked 25 on UN Human Development Index 2002 7 8 Poverty? UN 2002: hardly any population living below poverty line Almost miniscule compared to other cities: About 170-300 people make the streets their home every year (Streats ) About 4% of resident population (or 120,000) living at or close to poverty line in 1998 (Dept of Statistics) Poverty reduction strategies Financial assistance government schemes, welfare organizations, etc Promotion of family values e.g. for children to take care of ageing parents Employment training and job creation Housing government the policy maker, master planner and provider 9 10 Core objective of public housing intervention To make housing affordable and accessible to the lower income families, which until then suffered from discriminatory actions Squatters no more 2 major interventions: Physical Financial 11 12 2
The key instruments Not just housing in new town Comprehensive planning and development Government: the policymaker and master planner of affordable housing Choice of housing to meet housing needs Low rent, transparent allocation rules Encourage home ownership New town model Good living conditions 13 14 Table 3: Land use distribution and gross density of new town prototype new town (60,000 dwelling units) land use commercial (town centre and neighborhood centre)* residential** Schools open space sports complex Institutions industry*** major roads utilities and others Total gross new town density: 92 dwelling units per hectare Source: HDB (2000a) land area (ha) 30 347 62 26 7 15 44 89 30 650 percentage 4.6 53.4 9.5 4.0 1.1 2.3 6.8 13.7 4.6 100.0 15 The outcome Improved housing Unique occupation with improved facilities Housing ownership not the exclusivity of the rich and middle class Landscape: 50% built-up high-rise, high-density 16 High-rise living is the present norm Evolving architecture: In the Past Low-rise shop houses 85% of resident population now live in public housing, in the process, they moved from lowrise to high-rise living 17 18 3
New housing, Increasing height Now In the private sector In the public sector 19 20 In the future The tallest is 30-storey and going taller More people will get to live on high floors currently only 35,000 live above 20 th storey (URA, 2001) 40-storey public housing under construction 50-storey public (and private) housing under design 70-storey private housing in the city 21 22 What is life in high-rise like? How do residents view high-rise living? 23 24 4
Adjustments For some residents: had to study the habits and cultures of other races (HDB, 2000) For some farmers: some were seen coaxing their pigs up the stairs chickens and ducks to rear in the kitchen They did this for 10 years until they moved into another flat (Lee, 2000) For some others: It was quite scary at first to look down. I didn t want to live so high up on the 10 th floor but what to do? We d already picked this flat in the ballot (The Straits Times 9 Aug 2001) Research Focus to explore residents attitudes towards tall building living, their concerns and willingness to live in tall buildings Do residents prefer high or low floor living? Why? What concerns them most in tall building living? How can we improve tall building livability? 25 26 Profile Majority living in 4-room (54%) and 5-room (41%) 2% had moved from private housing, 98% from another public housing unit, 24% personal preference, 26% family decisions, 50% government policy 75% moved from a smaller flat 51% had lived on 6 th -10 th floors in their previous accommodation Reflected national proportions of different ethnic groups: 80% Chinese, 14% Malay, 7% Indians 27 How we ask Focus group discussions, held in school and in church Household survey using questionnaire of closed and open-ended questions Revisited families in 30-storey block for further discussions spouse and rest of family also joined in 28 What we find <9% were very unsatisfied with their present floor level 63% stated that present floor level was just right 3% of those living on 26 th -30 th floor felt their floor level was too high No one living on 5 th floor or below felt that their floor level was too high Between the ages Older people (65 and >) were more inclined to rate present floor level as just right, appeared to favor lower storey units, more concerned with safety issues Younger people (15-24) were more inclined to consider their present floor level as not high enough, appeared to favor high-rise living, view it as prestigious lifestyle 29 30 5
Key reasons for desiring high-rise living Scenic view Breeze Privacy: on top of the world feeling No dripping water from upper floors 31 32 What are residents concerns? 5 biggest worries (N=332): Lack of neighborhood facilities: 24% Lift breakdown: 17% Crime in the lift: 15% Who they have as their neighbor: 11% Fire risk: 10% Few concerned about Collapse of building: 7% Power failure: 4% Traveling time in lift: 2% Height of building: 1% Generally expressed good faith in the provisions: If I were concerned with the collapse of the building, I would not have chosen to live in high-rise buildings. 33 34 What did we learn about tall building livability? As more people become used to high-rise living, more are seemingly confident and willing to live higher Respondents concerns with tall building living were not necessarily the result of whether a person thinks a building is tall Top floor residents appear to prefer and were more willing to live on higher floors of taller buildings Not one but several factors There are several factors of consideration: Environmental factors like block cleanliness and openness Convenience Individual dwelling characteristics such as flat layout and orientation Many of these are a direct response to their living experience and concerns 35 36 6
In the final analysis Designers of tall buildings must recognize and take account of the different preferences among age groups physical and social aspects of high-rise living: Importance of neighborhood facilities Concern about lift breakdown, crime in lift, who they have as their neighbors and fire risks 37 7