Rilek1Corner

Tag: HDB

  • P1 Registration: Child Must Live At Declared Address For At Least 30 Months From Jul 2015

    P1 Registration: Child Must Live At Declared Address For At Least 30 Months From Jul 2015

    A new rule requiring children to live for at least 21/2 years at the addresses they used to apply for primary school has been introduced, with parents largely supportive of the change.

    Beginning this year, those who gain priority admission to schools based on distance need to live at the address for at least 30 months from the start of the Primary 1 registration exercise.

    Those with a yet-to-be-completed property also have to live at the new address for as long, but this can start only from when they move in and not from the registration, subject to certain limits.

    The Ministry of Education (MOE) did not set any specific time period previously. If this condition is not met, MOE may transfer the child to another school.

    When asked, MOE said the distance priority has always been given with the expectation that the family will live at the address declared for Primary 1 registration.

    While the MOE’s intent is that this should be for as long as the child is in primary school, it “recognised the practical challenges of imposing an explicit ‘minimum stay’ that would meet the policy intent while not making it overly onerous and rigid”.

    The news, reported by Chinese daily Lianhe Zaobao yesterday, has sparked a lot of discussion. Parents felt the rule would deter people from renting homes and moving away shortly after their children get spots in schools, and said it will not affect them as they do not plan to move soon.

    But some who rented properties near schools may be stuck if their leases do not last 30 months.

    For Primary 1 registration, schools conduct a ballot when the number of applicants exceeds available places. Those who live nearer the school – usually within 1km – get priority in the ballot.

    A handful of parents have taken advantage of this to get their children into popular schools. A father who lied about where he lived to get his daughter into a top school in 2013 was given two weeks’ jail this year.

    Property agents said the rule is unlikely to affect rental or home prices. One agent, Mr Jack Tam, said those who rent places near popular schools are rare.

    Horizon Real Estates’ key executive officer Lena Low agreed, but said those who rent homes may need to get longer-term leases.

    Some who just want the address get cheaper studio apartments without living there, she said. If they have to move in now, they need a bigger place, she said.

    Housewife Shellin Tan, 38, who has a six-year-old son, said the rule is fair but “those who want brand-name schools will still find properties with longer leases or buy homes near them”.

    Mr Lim Biow Chuan, chair of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Education, said the rule ensures families live near their kids’ schools. But the period may be too long as some may genuinely need to move, he added.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • MND: Most Wiling To Pay More Than Average Price Of Flats

    MND: Most Wiling To Pay More Than Average Price Of Flats

    In a recent survey of nearly 1,500 residents, MND said it showed that majority of prospective flat buyers are willing to pay more than the current average prices.

    However, the survey also showed that people continue to view the new BTO flats as expensive. The survey was conducted in November last year.

    Last year, the average price of a 4-room HDB flat in a non-mature estate was $295,000. Eighty per cent went for under $350,000.

    MND said a third of the respondents did not know how much such flats cost, while 40% overestimated the price. The most common estimate MND said, was between $300,001 and $400,000 for a 4-room unit.

    That estimated price range was higher than the average $295,000, MND said.

    The survey also found that those who intend to buy a flat in the next 1 to 2 years are willing to pay as much as or more than actual BTO prices in non-mature estates:

    • 3-room flats (avg price $186,000 in 2014) – 58% willing to pay more than $200,000
    • 4-room flats (avg price $295,000 in 2014) – 61% willing to pay more than $300,000
    • 5-room flats (avg price $391,000 in 2014) – 51% willing to pay more than $400,000

    However, it’s not known if MND is aware that a person willing to pay more does not necessarily mean he is happy to do so. The 2 matters are not the same.

    In any case, the better approach to measure affordability of a flat is to take the ratio of the price of the flat over the annual household income of the owners.

    Many BTO HDB flats still remain unaffordable

    After Mr Khaw Boon Wan took over the job as National Development Minister from Mah Bow Tan in 2011, Mr Khaw told Parliament that more would be done to reduce BTO flat prices relative to income, so as to reduce the financial burden of housing on the young. He said [Link]:

    “Many are now clamoring for the HDB to return to basics and its original mission of helping Singaporeans own a basic home. But what does ‘returning to basics’ mean?

    The primary mission of HDB to offer an affordable flat for the majority of Singaporeans will remain unchanged. Fortunately this is within our control as we set BTO prices and HDB is the largest housing developer.

    We have stopped BTO prices from rising by delinking them from resale prices. We can now pause and see what else we can do to bring BTO prices in non-mature estates to, say, around 4 years of (annual) salaryas it was before the current property cycle started.

    One thing is clear. We are committed to restoring and maintaining the affordability of new HDB flats to the vast majority of first-timer Singaporean households. Their Singapore Dream of owning their own flats, like their parents’, is safe. We will make sure of that.”

    Note that Mr Khaw used the term “restoring” the affordability of new HDB BTO flats, which implies that in his predecessor’s time (i.e. Mah Bow Tan), the HDB BTO flats were already unaffordable.

    In the 70′s, a graduate’s starting pay was around $1,000 per month. Then, in Marine Parade HDB estate, the price of a new 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flat was $17,000, $20,000 and $35,000 respectively. A young graduate could easily afford a 5-room flat at a Price-to-Annual Income Ratio, also known as the Affordability Ratio (AR), of slightly under 3 (i.e. 3 years of annual income to match the price of the house). Even households earning $500 a month could easily afford a 3-room flat priced at $17,000 (AR under 3).

    The World Bank considers a ratio of 5 or under as affordable for local residents, while the United Nations has set the bar lower, at 3 (see Link). In any case, anything above 5 is considered unaffordable by both the World Bank and the United Nations.

    By 1990, the average price of a new 5-room flat was $70,000 and a young graduate earned about $2,000 a month. The AR then was still under 3 – very affordable.

    Examining the affordability of current new HDB BTO launches

    TRE took the opportunity to examine the affordability of new HDB BTO flats launched in November last year. A total of 7,568 flats were launched by HDB for sale in a mix of mature and non-mature towns on 25 Nov 2014 [Link]. This was HDB’s final sales exercise for 2014.

    Sembawang Sun Breeze

    Typical 2-room (I):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 1.6

    Typical 2-room (II):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $50,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 2.6

    Typical 3-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
    • Price to annual household income = 3.8

    Typical 4-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $240,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
    • Price to annual household income = 4.8

    Sengkang Anchovale Fields

    Typical 2-room (I):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $45,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 2.3

    Typical 2-room (II):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $70,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 3.6

    Typical 3-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $135,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
    • Price to annual household income = 4.5

    Typical 4-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $270,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
    • Price to annual household income = 5.4

    Yishun

    Typical 2-room (I):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 1.6

    Typical 2-room (II):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $45,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 2.3

    Typical 3-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
    • Price to annual household income = 3.8

    Typical 4-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $240,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
    • Price to annual household income = 4.8

    Typical 2-room (I):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 1.6

    Typical 2-room (II):

    • Nett selling price less grants = $50,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
    • Price to annual household income = 2.6

    Typical 3-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
    • Price to annual household income = 3.8

    Typical 4-room:

    • Nett selling price less grants = $235,000
    • Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
    • Price to annual household income = 4.7

    Conclusion

    For 2-room and 3-room BTO flats in Sembawang and Yishun, they are considered affordable at 4 years of applicants’ median annual salary or less. However, for 4-room flats, the AR is 4.7 to 4.8, way above Mr Khaw’s own target of 4.

    In this case, 4-room BTO flats should be priced around $201,600 (4 x $4,200 x 12) instead of the current $235,000 to $240,000 in Sembawang and Yishun (i.e, prices after grants).

    For Sengkang, the situation is worse. 2-room flats are priced below AR of 4 but 3-room and 4-room flats have ratios of 4.5 and 5.4 respectively, again, above Mr Khaw’s own target of 4.

    In fact, Sengkang 4-room BTO flats (AR of 5.4) are considered unaffordable by the standards laid down by the World Bank and the United Nations. Sengkang 4-room flats, instead of selling for $270,000 (after grants), ought to be selling at $201,600 (4 x $4,200 x 12). They are overpriced by 34%.

    One can only conclude that Mr Khaw has yet to fulfill his promise of bringing down ALL the BTO prices in non-mature estates to 4 years of annual salary, especially for first-time Singaporean buyers. The middle-income group appears to be squeezed by the higher new HDB flat prices for 4-room and above. For mature estates, the AR of new BTO flats would naturally be even worse.

    So, regardless of what MND is trying to say in its recent survey, the fact of the the matter is, new BTO flats remain expensive and not affordable even by Mr Khaw’s own measure, generally speaking.

     

    Source: www.tremeritus.com

  • DBSS Flat Owners At Trivellis May Get Goodwill Package From Developer

    DBSS Flat Owners At Trivellis May Get Goodwill Package From Developer

    Residents of the Trivelis development in Clementi may get a goodwill package after complaining about problems with their new premium flats.

    Their Member of Parliament Sim Ann told over 200 residents at a townhall meeting last night at the Trivelis pavilion that the developer has agreed to look into giving a package, though she did not have details of what it includes.

    The 888-unit Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) project is developed by local firm EL Development (ELD).

    Trivelis was advertised as having “choice fittings” and “quality floor finishes”.

    A unit costs between $370,000 and $800,000.

    But some of the owners, who started collecting their keys in January, found various problems with their units – from defective stove knobs and rusty dish racks to poor quality laminate flooring and even shower glass panels that shattered easily.

    The common corridor along 40 units was also prone to flooding with 4cm-deep water when it pours. The water seeped into several units.

    Some units also differ from the showflats. For instance, there was no sanitary pipe in the service yard in the showflat but such pipes were eventually placed there.

    Ms Sim told reporters yesterday at the two-hour meeting with residents: “Right from day one, when residents started moving in, we realised that there were quite a number of issues that residents felt disappointed by.

    “Having met many of them and also visited many of their homes, I feel that many of our residents do have a point… I feel that a meaningful gesture from the developer would change things.

    “(On Wednesday), we were informed by the developer that they are considering some sort of package… I think that’s a move in the right direction.”

    When contacted yesterday, a spokesman for ELD said it is in touch with the Trivelis Residents Working Committee to discuss what could be done for residents on a goodwill basis.

    He also told The Straits Times that ELD has received about 300 e-mails from residents, but that not all were complaints.

    He assured residents that ELD would continue to repair or replace defective items, and engage them.

    “We have tried our best to deliver the units in good condition to our residents. However, there will be lapses on defects that we may have not covered,” said the spokesman.

    “We deeply regret that we have failed to meet the expectation of the residents… We cannot claim that our design is perfect but we have built the units in accordance to specifications in the sales and purchase agreement.”

    The Trivelis residents’ committee was formed in February by home owners to put their concerns to the developer and the authorities. The Housing Board said that it first received feedback from the residents in March and asked ELD to address them.

    The Straits Times understands that some residents are hoping that HDB would do more than just voice residents’ concerns on the defects to the developer.

    Resident Steven Kee, a 42-year-old programme coordinator, told The Straits Times: “It’s been very disappointing but I’m glad we have a dialogue to talk about things and at least get some answers.

    “I hope the authorities can do more stringent checks and follow up on the issue too.”

    Regulatory affairs executive Kenny C., 29, said: “I’m waiting to see what the developer will offer in the goodwill package.

    “That’s something to look forward to… I thought everything should be done up in a DBSS flat and I didn’t expect to have to do so many rectifications.”

    [email protected]

    BACKGROUND STORY

    Shattered shower screens, rusty lift door…

    When Mr Wilson Yew bought his $633,000 four-room flat at Trivelis, a Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) project, he did not expect to have to replace the furnishings it came with.

    The 33-year-old senior research officer said: “We bought the DBSS at a higher price and it was supposed to be all done up. In the end, we had to pay even more to tear some existing items down.”

    Mr Yew, who moved in two weeks ago, replaced his kitchen cabinet, which did not have space for a normal-sized oven. He also changed the doors of the wardrobe in a common room to a sliding one. This was because there was not enough space for the doors to open when a bed was placed in the room.

    “I’m not an unreasonable person and I don’t expect luxurious fittings. But some of the things they provided were really unacceptable,” he said.

    A recent circular by the Trivelis Residents Working Committee listed issues such as defective stove knobs, rusty dish racks, stain-prone kitchen countertops and poor quality laminate flooring.

    Some residents also complained of shower glass panels that shattered.

    Mr Kevin Teh, a spokesman for the committee, explained that the group was working with the developer, EL Development, and the relevant agencies to resolve some of the issues. “There has been some good progress,” he said.

    Veteran lawyer Amolat Singh said: “Developers have a duty to do things properly and the furnishings must be of a satisfactory quality. The (legal) argument may even be that the fixtures are unsafe – in the case of the shattered shower screens.”

    LIM YI HAN

    About the Design, Build and Sell Scheme

    THE Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) was launched in 2005 to offer higher-income flat buyers homes with better designs and finishes.

    Built on government land, DBSS flats are designed and sold by private developers, and typically come with fittings and better finishings than standard Build-to-Order flats. But unlike private condos, these projects do not have facilities such as pools and gyms.

    The DBSS was suspended in 2011 after a public outcry over high indicative price tags for units at Centrale 8 in Tampines.

    The developer had given an initial price of $880,000 for a five-room unit, which was later lowered to $778,000.

    Pasir Ris One, launched in April 2012, was the last project offered under the scheme before it was suspended.

    There have been 13 projects under the DBSS scheme.

    A Housing Board spokesman said the scheme is “currently not a priority”.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Bishan Maisonette Sold For $1.05 Million

    Bishan Maisonette Sold For $1.05 Million

    Despite the declining resale flat price index, an executive flat in Bishan has sold for more than a million dollars this month.

    The 149sqm executive maisonette in Blk 192, Bishan Street 13, changed hands for $1.05 million, according to the Housing & Development Board’s online data.

    Built in 1987, the two-storey unit between the 22nd and 24th floors, has 71 years left on its 99-year lease.

    Another maisonette at Bishan St 22 sold this month was priced at $812,000. The 146sqm unit is between the 7th and 9th floors.

    Bishan is known for its record-beating HDB flat prices, but it now has competition from Pinnacle@Duxton.

    Two HDB flats sold for more than a million dollars this month at the Pinnacle@Duxton.

    One of the 107sqm units, located between floors 46 and 48 of Block 1A, was sold for $1.05 million, while another unit between floors 28 and 30 of Block 1G went for $1.06million.

    All of the transactions for five-room flats at that development this year breached $900,000, and six went for a million or more.

    At the project’s launch years ago, five-room units at the Pinnacle@Duxton were priced at $345,100 to $439,400.

    The flats at the 50-storey Pinnacle@Duxton have just crossed their five-year minimum occupation period (MOP), and are in a highly sought-after location.

    But the older Bishan flats have consistently fetched high prices, and the housing estate holds the record for the most expensive flat ever sold – a maisonette at Block 194 that went for $1,088,888 in October last year.

    Another unit in nearby Block 190 fetched $1 million in December.

    Despite the sky-high prices for these desirable units, the resale price index for HDB flats has fallen for the last seven quarters since mid-2013.

    It slipped by another one per cent in the first quarter this year, reports revealed last week.

    While the index is trending downwards, the price for larger executive flats has gone up by one per cent in the last quarter, according to an SRX report. Location also plays a part.

    In Bedok, a 143sqm executive maisonette went for $570,000 this month. Also built in 1987, the unit in Block 145 is located between floors one and three.

    Another 28-year-old maisonette – at Bukit Batok St 31 between floors seven and nine – went for $610,000.

     

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • HDB Survey Finds More Eyeing Bigger Flats Or Private Homes

    HDB Survey Finds More Eyeing Bigger Flats Or Private Homes

    Upgrading aspirations have risen over the years, with fewer Housing Board (HDB) households content with smaller flats and more aspiring to bigger flats or private property.

    But even as they wanted bigger homes, most were happy with the state of public housing here, with nine in 10 saying their flats were value for money.

    These findings were captured in the latest HDB Sample Household Survey, which is conducted once every five years.

    The report, which surveyed 7,800 HDB households in 2013, tackled issues related to public housing ranging from HDB residents’ satisfaction with their physical surroundings, to their family ties and aspirations.

    Of those surveyed, 57.5 per cent said they were content with their present flat type.

    But 35 per cent would be content only with better housing, up from 28.6 per cent in 2008.

    Households headed by someone younger than 35 had the highest aspirations.

    Three in 10 of such households aspired to own private property, compared with the overall average of 15.9 per cent.

    Existing home owners’ aspirations may have risen along with house prices, said R’ST Research director Ong Kah Seng.

    “Many buyers understand that the flats they own have seen paper gains due to increases in flat prices, so they would like to cash out and top up ‘a bit more’ for a better living experience.”

    But while many continued to believe that flats were good value for money, pride in their homes slipped. Seven in 10 said they were proud of their homes, down from eight in 10 five years before.

    The study also found that one in five young married couples under the age of 35 chose to rent instead of buying their first home.

    Experts said this could be due to couples waiting for flats to be completed or to be able to afford an ideal home, and did not indicate that they were shunning home ownership.

    With about 3.06 million Singaporeans living in public housing – or about eight in 10 Singaporeans – the survey findings closely tracked the overall demographics of the country.

    Households were getting older, with the median age of HDB residents at 39, up from 37 in 2008.

    Households also had more income earners. On average, there were 1.8 income earners per household in 2013, slightly higher than the 1.7 in 2008.

    Four-room units were the most common type of flat sold, making up 41 per cent of the total stock.

    The study also showed that bonds in families staying in HDB estates remained strong.

    Nine in 10 married children visited their parents at least once a month, with 19.5 per cent doing so on a daily basis.

    Similarly, filial piety in the form of financial support for parents remains a virtue in many households.

    Nearly three in four younger married residents provided regular financial support to their parents in 2013, up from 70.2 per cent in 2008. The average quantum given to their parents went up from $336 to $400.

    The generally positive reviews of public housing come even though the population density has risen, noted the HDB.

    “Despite the increase, survey findings showed that residents liked most aspects about the HDB living environment,” it said.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com