Tesseract: Time Based Home Ownership Incentivisation Model

M A R C H

T H E S I S

E 0 0 0 3 8 4 2

S U P E R V I S O R

T T I M E

B A S E D

E

S

\

\

B R Y A N T

P R O F E S S O R

S

E1 R

T e s s e r a c t

O W N E R S H I P

L A U

C H O

A

C

L I A N G I M

C H E N G

S I K

T

I N C E N T I V I S A T I O N

M O D E L

For The People, By The People

P R E F A C E

This thesis is dedicated to my late grandmother - a poor but strong woman who literally paved the way ahead in Singapore by working on tarmac roads, despite her tiny and fragile body frame. Regretfully, she was separated from her local Hainanese community when we moved, spending her last few remaining years isolated from her close friends, only to die alone in her apartment. No Architecture model existed previously to mitigate the issues that arises from moving homes - until now. I would like to share with you the solution that I have come up with: The Tesseract Typology - which adopts a time based ownership incentivisation model. * The Teserract typology is the final outcome derived from this thesis: an alternative housing model that commodifies time at varying levels to redefine ownership at the individual, communal and urban levels; allowing renewal to take place at the micro and meso scale instead of the macro scale alone. This proposal also serves as a critique to the current public home ownership model in Singapore, which is mainly governed by a 99 years leasehold. It seeks to investigate the ramifications that arises from the existing model, by examining value depreciation, transient communities and urban dichotomy between the older and newer estates through hardware, orgware and software components. The design process involves exploration of prototypical unit types and configurations that would accommodate various types of user groups, beyond the predominant family nucleus group intended by HDB.

Beyond incentivising ownership through the reinterpretation of time - this thesis also examines the possibilities of integrating both private and public homes together as one to enhance the living quality of communities. The dichotomy existing between private and public homes in Singapore could also be loosely translated as the inequality existing between the rich and poor, mainly in the form of elitism - which is only to become more relevant in the years to come. Coming from both worlds myself, it is my utmost desire to share my work with you, and through it - contribute to the overall discourse of social division and inequality in Singapore.

5 T e s s e r a c t

T e s s e r a c t

T y p o l o g y

P e r s p e c t i v e

V i e w

6 T e s s e r a c t

C O N T E N T

PART I:

RESEARCH ISSUES & ANALYSIS

9

Introduction: Background and Framework Dilemma of a 99 years Leasehold Ownership Model Time Discrepancy within Public Housing Realm In Singapore Conclusion: Reinterpretating Time

PART II:

DESIGN INTERVENTION & PROPOSAL

37

Premise: Time Based Ownership Incentivisation Model Process: The 5 Phases of Community Participation System: Kits Of Parts Across All Scales Coalescence: Individuals Coming Together As Community Conlusion: Discourse on Inequality

PART III: DESIGN PROCESS & EXPERIMENTATIONS Visual Draft: Weeks leading up to Interim 2 Visual Draft: Weeks leading up to Interim 3 Visual Draft: Weeks leading up to Interim 4 Visual Draft: Weeks leading up to Final Critique Session Process Models: Incremental Development

7 T e s s e r a c t

79

8 T e s s e r a c t

PART I: RESEARCH ISSUES & ANALYSIS

9 T e s s e r a c t

T A B L E

O F

C O N T E N T S

1.

Introduction

1.1.

Background of Singapore’s Public Housing Ownership Model

1.1.1. Implications at the Individual, Communal and Urban levels

Thesis Framework

1.2.

1.2.1.

Research Framework 1.2.2 Design Framework 2.

Dilemma of a 99 years Leasehold Ownership Model

2.1.

The case for 99 years leasehold

2.1.1. Significance of Urban Renewal

Polarities of 99 years leasehold and Urban Renewal

2.2.

2.2.1.

Value Depreciation 2.2.2.

Transient Communities 2.2.3.

Urban Dichotomy 3.

Time Discrepancy within Public Housing Realm in Singapore

3.1.

A Brief Introduction: Singapore’s HDB Housing Landscape

3.1.1. Evolution of HDB Housing: High Rise, High Density

3.1.2 Current HDB landscape: Accelerated Urban Renewal

Unsustainable Cycle: Failings of a 99 years leasehold

3.2.

3.2.1. Dissipating Economic Value: X Curve / Demand Curve

3.2.2. Polarizing Renewal Measures: HIP 1, HIP 2 and VERS

3.2.2.1.

Obsolete Renewal Measures: Lifespan constraints

3.2.2.2.

Delaying depreciation through Renewal Measures:

Public vs Private

10 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.3. Ownership Pattern of Downgrading: Community Disruption

3.2.4. Embracing Downgrading: Case Studies

3.2.4.1.

3 Gen Flat: Sky Terrace

3.2.4.2.

3 Gen Flat: Conventional Model

3.3.

Urban Dichotomy of time: Paradox of urban renewal

3.3.1. Precinct Value and Development Timeline

3.3.2. Precinct Time Dichotomy between old and new estates

3.3.3 Reinterpreting Dichotomy of time: Case Studies

3.3.3.1.

15 – 45 Years lease: 2 room flexi-flat

3.3.3.2.

60 years lease: The Hillford

3.3.4.

Urban Decentralization

3.3.4.1.

Difficulties of Decentralized Offices and Businesses

3.3.4.2. Decentralized Home Businesses 3.3.4.3. Centralized Communal spaces 4.

Conclusion

4.1.

Reinterpretation of Time

4.1.1. Directives at the Individual level

4.1.2. Directives at the Communal level

4.1.3. Directives at the Urban level

11 T e s s e r a c t

1 .

I N T R O D U C T I O N

“My Primary preoccupation was to give every citizen a stake in the country and its future. I wanted a home-owning society.”

1.1.

-Lee Kuan Yew Background of Singapore’s Public Housing Ownership Model

The success of home ownership in Singapore can be observed from an astonishing 90% home ownership rate found in Housing Development Board (HDB) flats, where up to 80% of Singapore’s total resident population now reside in (HDB, 2014). These numbers constitute as one of the highest among the world, made possible through the economic implementation of Central Provident Fund (CPF) which facilitates down payments and monthly repayments (CPF, 2018). Since 1964 and even today, home ownership has served as a major nation building policy, due to how it instils a sense of belonging for the country through built, physical manifestation (Singapore Government, 2017). However, the impressive 90% home ownership rate in Singapore translates to a gini coefficent of 0.417, a high measurement of social inequality (Seow, 2018). Thus, an entirely different set of problems and agendas comes from the success of the current HDB housing model, and thus requires a throughout investigation.

1.1.1 Implications at the Individual, Communal and Urban levels

The current housing model has key Implications at the individual, communal and urban levels, largely due to its 99 years leasehold. Finite and bounded by the constraints of time (HDB, 2014),the model has been critiqued by most residents as simply a form of extended rental (Sim, 2018), instead of providing authentic ownership that HDB proclaims. Concerns on this form of ‘rental’ largely stems from economic depreciation over time, which leads to an urgency to move out after a certain period of occupation (Silvam, 2018). This leads to community disruption as time for communities to bond and form is compromised. Inevitably, an urban dichotomy forms between the older and newer precincts, due to lower demand for older flats and higher demand for newer flats. With the lease for the first batch of HDB flats in Geylang and Queenstown due to end soon in 2020 (Au, 2017), the urgency and opportunity to redefine the current 99 year’s leasehold HDB housing model is now.

12 T e s s e r a c t

1.2.

Thesis Framework

1.2.1. Research Framework

This thesis seeks to investigate the ramifications that arises from the 99 year leasehold housing model in Singapore. The research component relies on a combination of empirical data, mappings, theories and case studies to identify varying conditions that emerge from the dissipating value of home ownership. The overarching framework is governed by hardware, orgware and software components.

1.2.2 Design Framework

The design process relies heavily on exploring and experimenting on unit and tower typologies at varying scales. Other guiding principles for the design process includes customization and flexibility in relation to pattern of ownership uncovered in the research. The overaching framework is governed by Micro, Meso and Macro scales.

Through these processes, an alternative housing model with a time based approach is proposed to redefine ownership to enhance the quality of living at the individual, communal and urban levels.

13 T e s s e r a c t

S i n g a p o r e S o u r c e :

D a n i e l

C h i a ,

2 0 1 4 ,

H D B

S o n y

14 T e s s e r a c t

P h o t o g r a p h y

A w a r d s

2 .

D I L E M M A

O F

A

9 9

Y E A R S

L E A S E H O L D

O W N E R S H I P

M O D E L

2.1

The case for 99 years leasehold

HDB public housing first flats adopted the 99 years leasehold model mainly for urban renewal. When the lease expires, the Government reclaims both the land and estate before demolishing the buildings to build over these land with newer technologies to serve the newer generations better (Ong, 2018). Given Singapore’s small land area of 721.5km² and population density of 7697 persons per km², this mode of recycling land is especially important in order to meet demands for future population (Data Government SG, 2018 & Singstat, 2018). However, urban renewal is not without its drawbacks: it leads to value depreciation, transient communities and urban dichotomy at the individual, communal and urban levels.

2.2.

Polarities of 99 years leasehold and Urban Renewal

A wholesome and thorough examination is required due to complex relationships that exist between value depreciation, transient communities and urban dichotomy. The first implication of the 99 years leasehold model occurs at the individual level via value depreciation.

Beyond just providing a house to stay and a place to call home, HDB flats also functions as a form of asset and commodity that can be monetized through transaction. However, instability results from depreciation of this asset over time due to a shelf life, enticing the individual to move out (Silvam, 2018). This contradicts the sense of belonging that was intended via the national housing ownership policy and decreases the chances of achieving ownership for a full 99 years duration. With more reasons to move out than stay put, more residents are starting to move out of older estates in recent times. The emergence of this trend compromises the social aspect of HDB flats, due to insufficient time for communities to bond and form, leading to transient communities without roots (Lee, 2011). Consequently, the demand for newer flats surges while older flats are shunned, further accelerating urban renewal in the process. The pronounced use of urban renewal also leads to divide between older and newer estates. With increased height and density, the newer flats towers over older ones seemingly as a form of built oppression, further dividing the newer and older communities in these estates. To mitigate these conditions at the individual, communal and urban levels, a critical relook at both the 99 years leasehold model and urban renewal must be undertaken.

15 T e s s e r a c t

U r b a n S o u r c e :

R e n e w a l N a t i o n a l

O v e r

L i b r a r y

16 T e s s e r a c t

t h e o f

Y e a r s

S i n g a p o r e

3 .

T I M E

D I S C R E P A N C Y

I N

S I N G A P O R E

W I T H I N

P U B L I C

3.1.

A Brief Introduction: Singapore’s HDB Housing Landscape

3.1.1. Evolution of HDB Housing: High Rise, High Density

H O U S I N G

R E A L M

Starting from the very first HDB flats that were 7-stories high in Queenstown back in 1960s; the number of floors has steadily increased over the years to 50-stories (Teo, 2018).With high-rise, high-density housing blocks serving as the predominant building typology that we see in Singapore today; it’s beneficial to demolish older flats to replace with newer, intensified flats to meet the population demands of our small nation via urban renewal.

3.1.2 Current HDB landscape: Accelerated Urban Renewal

Urban Renewal is essentially accomplished through two key components: demolishment and intensification mainly in the form of Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) and Built-To-Order (BTO) flats respectively today. SERS refers to the Government buying back the land and estate from the residents, regardless of the number of years of lease left, while BTO refers to the current public housing model, where a subscription rate of 70% (50% as of 2011) must be met for the building to be built (HDB, 2018). The irony of the 99 years lease model lies here: instead of undertaking urban renewal only after 99 years as intended, urban renewal occurs even before the lease ends, with 7883 flats taken back by the Government as of now (Teo, 2018). This accelerated form of urban renewal is accentuated by the fact that most flats in Singapore have yet to hit the halfway mark for lease, with 70,000 flats over 40 years old facing lease expiry in only about 50 years (Silvam, 2018). These conflicting agendas results in an accelerated form of urban renewal within the current housing landscape in Singapore, proving that the current 99 years leasehold housing model is obsolete to a certain extent.

17 T e s s e r a c t

18 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.

Unsustainable Cycle: Failings of a 99 years leasehold

3.2.1. Dissipating Economic Value: X Curve / Demand Curve

The depreciation of economic value throughout 99 years for HDB public housing flats is determined by 2 variables: market price and mortgage payments. By examining the market price, it can be observed that the economic value of HDB flats will only depreciate over time, with a steep decline when the lease is left with 35 years (Wong, 2017). However, the pattern for mortgage payment goes in the opposite direction: it only goes up albeit at a slow but steady pace due to accrued interest (Roy, 2014).

By charting the market price and mortgage payments of HDB flats against one another, they intersect at 64 years of ownership. A lopsided outcome otherwise known as the X Curve / Demand curve is observed here, where the individual is compelled to pay more than what the value of his or her own HDB flat is in the market (Marshal, 2018). The scenario of the X curve / Demand curve essentially proves that the remaining 35 years lease of a HDB flat makes it practically worthless from an economic point of view. From these observations, it becomes clear that time is the true commodity of home ownership; as it is the deterministic factor for establishing economic value.

19 T e s s e r a c t

20 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.2. Polarizing Renewal Measures: HIP 1, HIP 2 and VERS

HDB has implemented renewal measures at specific years to ensure that buildings are still liveable over time even as they dilapidate, but these measures do nothing to address the immense decline of economic value in the last 35 years. These renewal measures often takes place at micro and meso scales, such as upgrading of pipes or tiles, through Home Improvement Programme 1 (HIP 1) when a building is 30 years old and Home improvement Programme 2 (HIP 2) when a building is 60-70 years old. Recently, Voluntary En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) was also introduced, allowing the community to vote and sell their property back to the Government when the building is 70 years old or beyond (Leong, 2018).

Oddly enough, HIP 2 and VERS were introduced just a few years before and after the 35 year mark where HDB housing flats experiences a steep decline in value. This suggests the contradictions of the economic decline in the last 35 year: the individual can only either choose to ignore the decay of economic value and stay till the end of the lease or simply relinquish it back to the Government for little compensation. However, to begin with; can one even live long enough to experience these complications when a HDB flat is only left with 35 years?

3.2.2.1.

Obsolete Renewal Measures: Lifespan constraints

Apart from urban renewal, part of the agenda of a 99 years leasehold was to facilitate ownership that will last beyond death (Ong, 2018). By adjusting the life expectancy rates of Singaporeans for males at 80.7 years and females at 85.2 years to the average age range of purchasing a HDB flat at 25-35 years, these numbers prove to be relatively true – one will only be able to experience home ownership for roughly 50-60 years before passing away, excluding outliers (HDB,2018 &Singstat, 2018). Thus, the likelihood of residents facing the immense drop in economic value is low; but at the same time they are unable to benefit from renewal measures such as HIP 2 and VERS physically due to reaching the end of their lifespan, rendering these measures redundant to some extent.

21 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.2.2.

Delaying depreciation through Renewal Measures:

Public vs Private Although the implementation of renewal measures for public housing has its flaws, it is not without its merits. It is important to note that these measures are non-existent in private housing developments, and they play a vital role in influencing economic value. Beyond HDB flats, the pattern of depreciating value also exists in freehold and leasehold private properties. Even though HDB flats depreciate 1% faster than the other 2 property types in the first 10 years, it has been observed that HDB flats depreciate less after 21 years and above at around 3%, whereas the other property types stands at 10%. Further analysis reveals that HDB flats depreciate at an even slower rate after 30 years or more, due to maintenance of the HDB buildings and surroundings, which the other 2 property types lacks (Agarwal, 2019).

However, this lower rate of depreciation still does not prevent the ramifications when a building hits the remaining 35 year mark, thus making it necessary to examine the first 64 years for capitalization possibilities.

22 T e s s e r a c t

23 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.3. Ownership Pattern of Downgrading: Community Disruption

Aging processes and opportunities to monetize HDB flats in the first 64 years has further shortened the average probable duration of home ownership from 50-60 years to a mere 30-40 years. This shorter trend of home ownership was derived from plotting the average age range of purchasing HDB flats at 25-35 years old to the median age of 30.3 years old when mothers give birth and the time it takes for the new generation to grow up and purchase their own HDB flats (Channel NewsAsia, 2017 & HDB, 2018). Cross analysis reveals an age range of 5565 years old for parents when their children is ready to move out, which correlates strongly with statistics of those aged 55 and above, where 9 in 10 downgraded to a 2 room flexi flat (Wong, 2018). These trends come as no surprise considering how parents have no use for vacant rooms after their children moves out, providing them with more reasons to monetize their HDB flats to avoid depreciation over time. However, this leads to a discrepancy between not just older and newer flats but also smaller and bigger housing flats.

The current housing model has yet to encompass the gap in numbers between bigger and smaller flats due to downgrading, even though projections of Singapore’s old-age support ratio is set to deteriorate from 4.7 in 2016 to 2.3 in 2030 (SingStat, 2018). Initiated in 2001, the current BTO housing model is prefix with a 70% subscription rate (50% since 2011) before it can proceed on to build (HDB, 2018).This model was conceived to avoid surplus of units, such as in 2000 when 40 000 flats were left unsold due to the Asian Crisis in 1997 and Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak in 2003 (Teo, 2018). Even though the current BTO model gives residents more control in customization and prevents the Government from over supplying, it has contributed to a uncomfortable division between bigger and smaller flats.

With preference for bigger flats, 32% and 24.1% of HDB residents now lives in 4-room flats and 5-room executive flats compared to only 5.6% and 18.2% of HDB residents living in 1-room / 2-room flats and 3-room flats (AsiaOne, 2018). With the growing trend of residents opting for downgrading, the number of smaller flats would be insufficient in the coming years. Yet, if smaller flats were build up front as new flats; it doesn’t cater to new families and might never be able to hit the 50% subscription rate to even be build. A vicious cycle results: due to the discrepancy inherent within size and time in HDB flats, the process of urban renewal is once again further accelerated, proving that the current BTO model and its 99 years leasehold is truly unsustainable in the long run.

24 T e s s e r a c t

3.2.4. Embracing Downgrading: Case Studies Fortunately, the significance of incorporating downgrading in newer flats has already been identified by the Government via an alternative housing model known as 3 Gen flats; meant to house all 3 generations together under one roof (HDB, 2018). SkyTerrace at Dawson served as the pilot programme, followed by much more simplified 3 Gen models after (Au,2018).

3.2.4.1.

1 s t

F l o o r

3 Gen Flat: Sky Terrace

P l a n

2 n d

F l o o r

P l a n

The 3 Gen Model in SkyTerrace encompasses a double volume space that serves as the connecting volume between the units of the older generation on the 2nd floor and the units of the younger generation on the 1st floor, with the interface between them separated by 2 doors (The Straits Times, 2018). This configuration allows the older and younger generation units to combine when necessary, but still retain a certain level of privacy. Even when access to the double volume space is denied to older generation units, visibility still retains at the 2nd floor through window openings. However, the success of this feature came with a price: the double volume space is not only expensive but wasteful of space, and was eventually eradicated in the future 3 Gen Models.

25 T e s s e r a c t

T y p i c a l

5

R o o m

E x e c u t i v e

3.2.4.2.

P l a n

3

G e n

U n i t

P l a n

3 Gen Flat: Conventional Model

The 3 Gen Models that followed were much simpler in design: they eradicated the 2 floors design found in SkyTerrace and replaced it with one big flat on a single floor instead (Au, 2018). However, the level of segregation in terms of privacy in the newer 3 Gen flats between the new and older families is almost non-existent; and functions very much like that of a 5 room executive flat apart from minor layout changes. This includes placing the room for the older generation in the opposite end of newer generation rooms, interjected by the living room in between (Refer to Figure 7 & 8, highlighted in red). Despite the good intentions of trying to maximize space, the newer 3 Gen flats does not facilitate privacy and does not differ much from a typical 5 room executive flat.

Furthermore, the 3 Gen model is limited by policies such as resale procedure made applicable to only multi-generational families; which further deteriorates the disconnect between bigger and smaller flats due to niche demographics (Ong, 2017). Although the 3 Gen model encourages the nucleus family to live together, it does nothing to address other communities, thus the issue of transient communities still persist. Despite the relatively successful integration of older and newer generations, 3 Gen flats do not integrate old and new housing forms together, as it is still governed by a 99 leasehold. Hence, the implications of constant urban renewal is still very much at large, especially at the urban levels.

26 T e s s e r a c t

P r e i n c t

P r e c i n c t

V a l u e

T i m e l i n e

D e v e l o p m e n t

27 T e s s e r a c t

3.3.

Urban Dichotomy of time: Paradox of urban renewal

3.3.1. Precinct Value and Development Timeline

Extensive usage of urban Renewal results in an aggregated dichotomy between older and newer estates, and the economic value is just one of the many implications that comes with it. With a shelf life of 99 years, the newer flats will almost always be more valuable economically compared to the older flats. Yet, the difference in economic value goes beyond the divide between old and new housing estates, but also between central and non-central areas at the urban levels. The closer the housing estate is to the central, the higher the cost is; with a price differential of up to 2.5 times between a central and non-central area (Squarefoot, 2018). Contradicting conditions forms here: older flats that are supposed to be less valueble are mitigated due to advantages of a centralized region; yet newer flats that are supposed to be more valueble are hindered by the disadvantages of a decentralized region. This leads to an added dimension of social diversion, apart from the ones already existing between private and public housing, along with older and newer estates.

The timeline for precinct developments also demonstrates that housing estates in Singapore began in the central regions, before branching outwards in the non-central regions. Eventually, this outwards urban development stopped in the 1990s, as evidenced by newer precinct developments that did not materialize in entirely new towns, but in closer proximity to older, existing ones (Teo, 2018). These conditions demonstrates that Singapore has generally ran out of space for newer developments, making urban renewal a necessity to some degree given Singapore’s context. This is evidenced by how 72 SERS sites were identified between 1995 and 2007, compared to only 10 SERS sites between 2008 and 2018. At this rate, a total of 306 years are requried to replace all 241,343 flats that were built between 1971 and 1980.

Time is truly of essence here.

28 T e s s e r a c t

P r e c i n c t

T i m e

D i c h o t o m y

3.3.2. Precinct Time Dichotomy between old and new estates With no new land to develop and only older ones to redevelop, the urban dichotomy of time in the form of built manifestation exist between older and newer precincts. Urban renewal has often been referred to by the Government as neighbourhood rejuvenation, but in reality only segregates the older and newer neighbourhoods further apart. With intensification, newer flats are much taller and denser, casting a big shadow over the older and shorter flats, leading to a built form of social oppression. Communities are also displaced when older buildings are demolished; and even in the rare cases where they stay, they are disorientated with the newer generations due to a severe age gap. For older flats that have been brought over by the Government, some were even left vacant for decades, such as the case of “Chap Lau Chu�, one of the first batch of 10-storey HDB flats built in Commonwealth (Tai, 2018). This results in ghost towns which hampers urban connectivity and alienates communities. Fundamentally, urban renewal does not translate to instantaneous demolishment and intensification; and even when it does demolish old buildings, it takes 5 years or so for new buildings to be built to integrate new communities (HDB, 2018). Despite the benefits of urban renewal, major community disruptions still arises from time discrepancy and thus requires a re-examination of the 99 years lease.

29 T e s s e r a c t

2

R o o m

F l e x i

P l a n

3.3.3 Reinterpreting Dichotomy of time: Case Studies

3.3.3.1.

15 – 45 Years lease: 2 room flexi-flat

The 99 years leasehold housing model was redefined with 15 - 45 years leasehold in the case of 2 room flexi flats; specifically conceived for elderly Singaporeans to cater to trends of downgrading. This scheme is only applicable for applicants aged 55 years and above, with the option to choose leases in relation to their age, from anywhere between 15 to 45 years with differences of 5 years in between (Ho, 2016). Unlike 3 Gen flats, they are not restricted by strict resale policies and allows provisions for parents whom do not want to live with their children, and vice versa. This model has garnered much success with 8.5 booking applications per unit in 2015, proving that a reinterpretation of the 99 years leasehold model can be beneficial (Wong, 2018). However, even though the 2 room flexi flats caters to downgrading and helps bridge the gap between bigger and smaller units, it is still fundamentally a new unit and thus does not help much in mitigating the dichotomy between older and newer precincts and the case of accelerated urban renewal.

30 T e s s e r a c t

‘

D u a l

3.3.3.2.

2

K e y

F l o o r

P l a n

60 years lease: The Hillford

Another reinterpretation of the 99 years leasehold housing model comes in the form of a 60 years leasehold model, pioneered through The Hillford, a private development. This private housing was conceived as Singapore’s first “private retirement housing product” through Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). Even though The Hillford is located in a relatively expensive area inUpper Bukit Timah, the 60 years lease managed to lower the upfront cost of purchasing the units to $980 per Square Foot. Compared to other developments in the area, The Hillford cost 40% less than the freehold site of The Creek and over 20% less than the 99 years leasehold of The Skywoods. Furthermore, the median price of The Hillford was 31% less than The Creek and 12% less than The Skywoods since their launch back in 2013 (The Business Times, 2014). These numbers proves that lowering the number of years for leasehold definitely translates to lowering the upfront cost of purcahasing housing flats. However, due to a relatively prime location, The Hillford did not fulfil the original agenda of catering to retirement for the elderly, as most of the buyers were in their 20s and 30s, who purchased the flats in their parent’s names (Ong, 2014). The change of demographics for the buyers in The Hillford can be largely attributed to its location near the central region, thus its success can only be truly verified if it is located in a decentralized location instead.

31 T e s s e r a c t

P r e c i n c t

D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n

3.3.4. Urban Decentralization

In recent years, Singapore has started to experience urban decentralization in the form of commercial and business developments through urban renewal. The emergence of this trend originated from both the prominence and congestion of the central region, specifically in the Central Business District (CBD) in Singapore (Chia, 2016). Since urban renewal is largely driven by the opportunity to recreate and enhance value, central regions are highly sought after compared to outer regions due to higher economic advantages and dilapidation of old age. This is reflected in the term ‘selective’ in SERS; the decision for the Government to reclaim land has always been primarily based on prime and valuable land (Teo, 2018).This modus operandi might lead to neglect of outer regions, further compromising the communities who live there and segregating communities further apart. Therefore, urban decentralization must be harnessed as it provides the opportunity to mitigate the gap in value not just between central and non-central regions, but also between older and newer precincts.

32 T e s s e r a c t

3.3.4.1.

Difficulties of Decentralized Offices and Businesses

Regretfully, urban decentralization has not been successful at all over the years, as reflected in the costing comparisons of more recent HDB flats between centralized and decentralized areas mentioned previously (Teo, 2018). This is largely caused by a narrow rental gap of a mere 34% that exists between good quality office spaces in centralized district and non-centralized districts. To put this number into context, the ratio of Grade A Office stock in centralized areas to decentralized tightened from 5:1 in 2007 to 10:1 in 2016, with the rental gap dropping only by 56% in 2007 to 34% in 2016 (Singapore Business Review, 2017). These numbers simply do not make up for the loss of ease of convenience within decentralized areas. Furthermore, decentralized office spaces also face competition from factory spaces that could double up as office spaces (TinkerTax, 2017). If this is the case, could working and office spaces then take advantage of lower HDB costing in decentralized areas by integrating together with them?

3.3.4.2.

Decentralized Home Businesses

Urban decentralization of commercial and business developments aligns well with the growing trend of working at home, but the current HDB model only accommodates it at the policy level without any built form whatsoever (HDB, 2018). Home business policies exists only to regulate activities among neighbours instead of providing any tangible form of support. This contradicts the rising funding deals provided by the Government to encourage start-ups at home (Tegos, 2018). Upon closer examination, start-up businesses generally follow a pattern of 7 stages, with exist stages occurring at different timings, which coincides with urban renewal as they both share the conditions of temporality (Zarhosky, 2018). In fact, the average duration for both business funding and renting is the same as the minimum occupancy period in HDB flats: 5 years (3E Accounting & HDB, 2018). To top it off, this 5 years serves as a divisible unit of measurement across all existing policies inherent in the current HDB model itself.

Apart from similarities shared between home businesses and urban renewal, endowment of home businesses also strengthens the local community, which is severely at stake due to the emergence of transient communities.

33 T e s s e r a c t

3.3.4.3.

Centralized Communal spaces

With the growing trend of hybrid public spaces, communal spaces could increase in performance usage (Carmona, Matthew. 2010) through integration of home businesses. Doing so would allow new life to be injected to the community, especially when considering how the provisions of communal spaces in HDB estates has been relatively lacklustre in recent years. Rather than taking advantage of precinct decentralization, communal spaces in HDB estates have gravitated towards centralization at precinct levels instead (Tay, 2012).Communal spaces that have served HDB estates well in the past such as corridors and void decks have diminished in recent years, replaced by centralized pavilions and gardens within the precinct at ground levels for maximization of space for units. Centralization of communal spaces has been met with lukewarm response due to proximity reasons; and becomes even more critical with the intensification of HDB flats, where housing blocks are further segregated from the ground levels due to their height. The preferred mode of communal spaces for residents is reflected via a survey conducted in Pinnacle and SkyVillage; where 65% of the residents preferred isolated common spaces rather than centralized communal spacesat only 15% (Samant et al, 2018).This needs to be accounted for, since frequency of amenities usage has been proven to have a strong correlation to instilling a sense of belonging; a vital quality for enhancing ownership within the public housing domain in Singapore (Cho, 2018).

Thus, a reassessment of communal spaces in HDB flats is equally important, apart from re-examining time inherent within the 99 years leasehold model. .

34 T e s s e r a c t

4 .

4.1.

C O N C L U S I O N

Reinterpretation of Time

A time based housing approach that reinterprets the 99 years leasehold model is imperative, since the implications occuring at the individual, communal and urban levels all originated from the 99 years time frame itself.

4.1.1. Directives at the Individual level

Adjusting the years of leasehold all but gurantees a direct improvement at the individual level. Directions on how this can be done has been suggested in case studies of the 2 room flexi-flat and The Hillford under chapter 3.3.3. To achieve the flexibility of time, both expansion and shrinkage must be enabled to fit changing lifestyles. Currently, limited expansion possibilities exists in HDB flats, with only corridor expansions which reduces communal spaces. The lack of expansion alternatives also results in over projection for young couples; where they opt for bigger flats with more rooms to plan ahead and cater for their future children.

This leads to a waste of economic resources for the years that the room stays vacant, and contributes to the discrepancy in numbers and demand between bigger and smaller flats.

Shrinkage only exist in the current HDB flats via the form of sub-renting, but rarely done so as residents are reluctant to live with strangers. This is largely why residents many chose to sell and downgrade their flat instead, leaving the community behind and contributing to a discrepancy between older and newer estates. However, if residents can sell or rent their vacant rooms without compromising their way of living, the likelihood of staying in a familiar estate and aging peacefully would be higher.

35 T e s s e r a c t

4.1.2. Directives at the Communal level

The biggest impact that comes from readjusting the number of years of leasehold lies at the communal level. If the number of years of leasehold is shortened, transient communities will only end up being even more temporal. Nevertheless, conditions of temporality in transient communities is shared by both start-up businesses and urban renewal themselves, offering opportunities for integration. By harnessing temporality, communities can potentially achieve constant rejuvenation, unlike those of older estates. To do so, a mix of enduring and transient communities is required, made possible by introducing private housing to public housing. This is due to how it is easier for communities in private housing to negotiate for leasehold renewal, thus the chances of staying a longer time is higher; fulfilling the criteria of an enduring community. However, complications such as social diversion between residents of public and private housing might occur, thus a win-win situation must be established between the two through shared amenities such as home businesses and social spaces in a decentralized manner.

4.1.3. Directives at the Urban level

Conflicting urban conditions exist currently, regardless of whether or not the leasehold is adjusted. By shortening the number of years in a leasehold to better accommodate both the individual and community, urban renewal would be further accelerated in theory. However, even if the number of years of leasehold is left untouched, accelerated mode of urban renewal will occur anyway in order to meet demands. The biggest victim here is actually the Government, especially when considering that HDB housing is already a form of subsidized housing (HDB, 2018). Even though the Government can still benefit from intensification after demolishment theoretically, the losses would be cut if urban renewal only occurs after the whole 99 years lease if up. Yet, it is also wise to initiate urban renewal now in a periodic manner, to avoid facing over demand for HDB flats when the lease ends for entire housing precincts that was constructed at a certain time. However, doing so basically only proves that the 99 years leasehold model doesn’t work, since urban renewal begins even before the 99 years leasehold ends, leading to a more severe urban dichotomy of time among older and newer flats. However, if time can be consolidated at the urban level by integrating both the older and newer flats together, this dichotomy can be mitigated To achieve this, varying years of leasehold must be integrated within housing flats to facilitate urban renewal that prioritizes micro and meso renewal over macro renewal.

36 T e s s e r a c t

PART II: DESIGN INTERVENTION & PROPOSAL

37 T e s s e r a c t

T A B L E

O F

C O N T E N T S

1.

Premise: Time Based Ownership Incentivisation Model

1.1.

Urban Conditions

1.1.1.

Urban Directive 1.1.2.

Urban Flexibility 1.1.3.

Site Plan

1.2

.

Unit Configurations 1.2.1. Tesseract Unit Set - Up

1.2.2.

Sky Bridge

1.2.3. Tesseract Floor Plans

1.3.

Intensification Over Time

2.

Process: The 5 Phases of Community Participation

2.1.

Overall Community Participatory Process

2.1.1. Process 01: Participate

2.1.2. Process 02: Coordinate

2.1.3. Process 03: Customize

2.1.4. Process 04: Time

2.1.5. Process 05: Reward

3.

System: Kits Of Parts Across All Scales

3.1.

Overall System

3.2.

Premise and Unit Types

3.3.

Cluster Rules

3.4.

Toolkit Rules ( Micro, Meso, Macro )

38 T e s s e r a c t

4.

Coalescence: Individuals coming together as Community

4.1.

Isonometric Overall Clusters

4.1.1. Farmers Village Cluster

4.1.2. Experimentalists Village Cluster

4.1.3. Craft Village Cluster

4.1.4. Arts Village Cluster

4.1.5. Start - Up Village Cluster

4.1.6. Retail Frontage Village Cluster

4.2.

Perspective Section

4.3.

Perspective View

4.4.

Model Photos

5.

Conclusion

5.1.

Discourse on Inequality

39 T e s s e r a c t

1 .

P R E M I S E

T I O N

:

T I M E

B A S E D

O W N E R S H I P

I N C E N T I V I S A -

M O D E L

1.1.

Urban Conditions

1.1.1. Urban Directive

This project is conceived as prototype model set within a proxy site that compiles all urban conditions commonly found in decentralized areas. The urban strategy here invovles consolidating all of these conditions within a building block before proceeding on to facilitate urban diffusion within a precinct to enhance urban flow at the ground levels.

1.1.2. Urban Flexibility

Part of the objective here is to faciliate urban flexibility in varying precinct scales, by allowing housing blocks to have flexibiltiy that goes beyond the typology of a point block. This flexibility is made available due to the Tesseract Concept where space can increase in relation to time.

1.1.3. Site Plan

The premise of this design hinges on how a building can achieve intensification over time.

Here, the site plans examines this development on the ground levels; via the spaces carved in between blocks. These spaces were derived from a consolidation of existing white spaces, which can only be activiated via time when planning rules change. Schools are highlighted here and suggested as possible developmental plans at a smaller scale - since elite schools have always been dependent on promixity to centralized regions / more expensive homes.

Here, the site plan proposes a fairer way of examining schools, beyond housing itself.

40 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 1 . 1 .

U r b a n

D i r e c t i v e

41 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 1 . 2 .

U r b a n

F l e x i b i l i t y

42 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 1 . 3 .

S i t e

P l a n

43 T e s s e r a c t

1.2.

Unit Configurations

1.2.1. Tesseract Unit Set - Up

The main objective of this project lies in creating more space within the same volume through time when Plot Ratio increases - similar to that of the geometry of the Tesseract via the 4th Dimension of time. To provide the framework to do so, sealed up staircases are released and scattered around the building in conjucture with fragmentized green areas that are GFA exempted at 45 Degree cuts. This strategy provides the backdrop to create more space for expansion, since it is considered “invisible” space as it doesn’t count as build up ratio.

From here onwards, other expansions directed by the notion of time are then introduced and integrated together with units, ranging from corridor, internalized, and amalgamated expansions. Amalgamated expansion refers to either selling / renting part of your homes or acquiring part of your neighbour’s homes. Private units adopts a slightly different system where they are given more freedom in customization; similar to that of a semi-detached house etc on ground levels.

1.2.2. Sky Brdige

By breaking apart centralized green areas; it accomodates individuals more as reflected in surveys mentioned in the research of how residents prefer isolated spaces more than centralized ones due to proximity and privacy issues. Due to this set up of double volume configurations, Individual expansions creates communal spaces for everyone when activiated, and contributes to the Sky Bridge / corridor / green that is spread throughout the entire building, serving as anti-capitalistic built form.

1.2.3. Teserract Floor Plans

The plans demonstrates how structural components and pipes are not affected by the expansions at all. Minimal adjustments are required to enable them.

1.3.

Intensification Over Time

With all of the micro and meso expansions added up, it is possible to hit increased plot ratio in relation to time, thus reducing the need for demolishment of an existing building.

44 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 2 . 1 .

U n i t

S e t

-

U p

45 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 2 . 2 .

S k y

B r i d g e

46 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 2 . 3 .

T e s s e r a c t

F l o o r

P l a n s

47 T e s s e r a c t

1 . 3 .

I n t e n s i f i c a t i o n

O v e r

T i m e

48 T e s s e r a c t

2 .

P R O C E S S

:

T H E

5

P H A S E S

O F

C O M M U N I T Y

P A R T I C I -

P A T I O N

2.1.

Overall Community Participatory Process

2.1.1. Process 01: Participate

The Community is determined by shared interests and agenda, giving residents the power to decide and determine the kind of commercial spaces that they want as a collective whole.

2.1.2. Process 02: Coordinate

With a vast variety of units to choose from, one must decide the room type he or she wants in relation with his or her neighbours. Extra half a room forms due to releasing internalized staircases and breaking centralized green spaces into smaller components.

2.1.3. Process 03: Customize

Once one’s own unit is determined, a multitude of possibilities results, going beyond the conventional limitations of interior design alone. The power of deciding the exterior of one’s own house is no longer a privilege for the private home owners, but public ones as well.

2.1.4. Process 04: Time

Units adapt in relation to time, catering to the users depending on their needs and wants. In a fast changing world, with a multitude of factors influencing our pattern of ownership, this is necessary.

2.1.5. Process 04: Reward

The whole process concludes with customization that goes beyond one’s own apartment; but communal spaces too. A Bottom-up approach is adopted, instead of the typical Topdown approach of communal spaces “forced” onto the residents themselves in current HDB settings.

49 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 .

O v e r a l l C o m m u n i t y P a r t i c i p a t o r y P r o c e s s

50 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 .

O v e r a l l

C o m m u n i t y

P a r t i c i p a t o r y

P A R T I C I P A T O R Y

P r o c e s s

P R O C E S S

51 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 . 1 .

P r o c e s s

0 1 :

P a r t i c i p a t e

52 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 . 2 .

P r o c e s s

0 2 : C o o r d i n a t e

53 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 . 3 .

P r o c e s s

0 3 :

C u s t o m i z e

2 . 1 . 4 .

P r o c e s s

0 4 :

T i m e

54 T e s s e r a c t

2 . 1 . 5 .

R e w a r d

55 T e s s e r a c t

3 .

S Y S T E M

:

3.1.

Overall System

K I T S

O F

P A R T S

A C R O S S

A L L

S C A L E S

The overall system examines conditions across varying scales to assemble a 6 storey cluster as the ideal proportion for interaction and visibility. It consists of up to a maximum of 18 public units and 3 private units, depending on how the participatory process goes.

3.2.

Premise and Unit Types

The premise, as mentioned earlier, starts off by opening up sealed stairway spaces to combine with fragmentized green areas. By opening up sealed staircases and scattering it around the building, the spaces underneath the staircases that are underutilized are now combined with units to create extra half a space, with pitch roof conditions that not only enhances the spatial quality but at the same time allow more wiggle room for internalized intensification.

3.3.

Cluster Rules

Village clusters are conceived as 6 levels to maximize interaction and visibility; and adopts the point block dimensions of 25M by 25M to maximize sunlight, ventilation and views. These numbers were derived from prior research. Rules are established and categorized in 3 components: 1) Permanence (structural, core, pipes), 2) Partial Permanence (Sky Bridge, Co-working, Private location), and Impermanence (Communal, Units amalgamation). Private units set at every floor is highlighted here to maximize interaction between public and private user groups. Facility expansions conducted by private units leads to a green roof communal space to benefit everyone as a measure to reduce feelings of segregation / jealousy. Private units are also able to rent these spaces out to public users, facilitating a win win situation.

3.4.

Toolkit Rules (Micro, Meso, Macro)

Housing is broken down into smaller components in kits of parts that can be transported via the lift core itself, reducing the need for cranes which can be a hindrance to the daily lives of residents. Options for customization goes beyond what is shown; anything goes as long as it is conceived within the allocated volume and space allowed.

56 T e s s e r a c t

3 . 1 .

O v e r a l l S y s t e m

57 T e s s e r a c t

3 . 2 .

P r e m i s e

a n d

U n i t

T y p e s

58 T e s s e r a c t

3 . 3 .

C l u s t e r

R u l e s

59 T e s s e r a c t

3 . 4 .

T o o l k i t

R u l e s

( M i c r o ,

M e s o ,

M a c r o )

60 T e s s e r a c t

4 .

C O A L E S C E N C E

:

I N D I V I D U A L S

C O M I N G

T O G E T H E R

A S

C O M M U N I T Y

4.1.

Isonometric Overall Clusters

The overall clusters designed are scenario based - demonstrating just 1 possibility that can arise from the Tesseract system. Due to the way the system is formulated and directed by human participation; it is in theory impossible for computational architecture to calculate the number of possibilities that can happen. This set - up proves that the creativity and involvement of mankind as a community can be superior to that of a computer - and that we can truimph over machine; as long as we work together. The possibilities here are truly infinite; with limitless permutations.

4.1.1. Farmers Village Cluster

4.1.2. Experimentalists Village Cluster

4.1.3. Craft Village Cluster

4.1.4. Arts Village Cluster

4.1.5. Start - Up Village Cluster

4.1.6. Retail Frontage Village Cluster

4.2.

Perspective Section

The section demonstrates how even though the tower is divided into clusters of different interests and agendas, there is still a consistent flow between them, connected via the sky corridor. Here, the value of individuals working together as a community is emphasized: as long as everyone expands, a continuous urban plane and street scape at the vertical level can be formed in the form of the sky corridor, that also doubles up as green spaces.

4.3.

Perspective View

The perspective view attempts to show how the quality of living at a high-rise, high-density setting can still be enjoyable and of substantial quality, even though research have proven how low-rise buildings offers a better quality of living.

61 T e s s e r a c t

62 T e s s e r a c t

63 T e s s e r a c t

64 T e s s e r a c t

65 T e s s e r a c t

66 T e s s e r a c t

67 T e s s e r a c t

68 T e s s e r a c t

69 T e s s e r a c t

70 T e s s e r a c t

71 T e s s e r a c t

72 T e s s e r a c t

73 T e s s e r a c t

74 T e s s e r a c t

75 T e s s e r a c t

76 T e s s e r a c t

5 .

5.1.

C O N C L U S I O N

Discourse on Inequality

This core focus of this project lies in attempting to mitigate dichotomies of varying factors through the notion of time. As examined in the research phase and as shown in the design phase, this project can help to mitigate the divide between private and public housing, big and small units and old and new precincts. Beyond these differences, the project also attempts to mitigate the gap in value between the units at the top and the ones at the bottom. Due to decentralized urban conditions, business spaces are generally more expensive when they are closer to the ground levels; unlike those in CBD areas where they are more expensive as you go up higher due to better views of the Skyline. By merging co-working spaces with units vertically, there is a certain reversal of value: units at the top are pricer but co-working spaces are cheaper; whereas units at the top are cheaper but co-working spaces are pricer. Fair play results due to a homogeneous setting.

In conclusion, this design aspires to soften the divide between the rich and poor, mainly in the form of elitism. This issue is especially significant in our nation, given Singapore’s context of competitive / elitist culture due to the limited footprint of a small island. I hope that the architecture intervention that I have proposed that revolves around the concept of time can contribute to this overall discourse.

77 T e s s e r a c t

78 T e s s e r a c t

PART III: DESIGN PROCESS & EXPERIMENTATION

79 T e s s e r a c t

T A B L E

O F

C O N T E N T S

1.

Micro Scale: Unit Typologies

1.1.

Urban Conditions

1.1.1.

Urban Directive 1.1.2.

Urban Flexibility 1.1.3.

Site Plan

1.2

.

Unit Configurations 1.2.1. Unit Set - Up

1.2.2.

Sky Bridge

1.2.3. Tesseract Floor Plans

1.3.

Intensification Over Time

2.

Meso Scale: Cluster Relationships

2.1.

Overall Community Participatory Process

2.1.2. Process 01: Participate

2.1.3. Process 02: Coordinate

2.1.4. Process 03: Customize

2.1.5. Process 04: Time

2.1.6. Process 05: Reward

3.

Macro Scale: Building Typologies

3.1.

Overall System

3.2.

Premise and Unit Types

3.3.

Cluster Rules

3.4.

Toolkit Rules ( Micro, Meso, Macro )

80 T e s s e r a c t

81 T e s s e r a c t

82 T e s s e r a c t

83 T e s s e r a c t

84 T e s s e r a c t

85 T e s s e r a c t

86 T e s s e r a c t

87 T e s s e r a c t

88 T e s s e r a c t

89 T e s s e r a c t

90 T e s s e r a c t

91 T e s s e r a c t

92 T e s s e r a c t

93 T e s s e r a c t

94 T e s s e r a c t

95 T e s s e r a c t

96 T e s s e r a c t

97 T e s s e r a c t

98 T e s s e r a c t

99 T e s s e r a c t

100 T e s s e r a c t

101 T e s s e r a c t

102 T e s s e r a c t

103 T e s s e r a c t

104 T e s s e r a c t

105 T e s s e r a c t

106 T e s s e r a c t

107 T e s s e r a c t

108 T e s s e r a c t

109 T e s s e r a c t

110 T e s s e r a c t

111 T e s s e r a c t

112 T e s s e r a c t

113 T e s s e r a c t

DENSITY TIME

X, Y, Z Axis

EMPOWERED

TRIFECTA

Axis Vertice

DIVERSITY

Axis Aresta

Tesellation

Basic

Diagonal

Triangular

Maximization Spiral

Frame

Triangulation Adjustment A

PANEL

Scale 1 : 100

DIMINISHING

Lift Lobby

Corridor

Sky Garden

Void Deck

Scale 1 : 100

MISSING OR PROBLEMATIC

Work at Home

Divide against Commercial, Private, Podium Towers

Precinct Pavilion

PANEL

Fractal

01

EXISTING BUT UNDERUTILIZED

Expansion

Adjustment B

Monotonous Facade

02

114 T e s s e r a c t

Interject / Meet

Parti

Liberate

Spiral

Straight / Facade

Diffuse

PANEL

Scale 1 : 100

03

115 T e s s e r a c t

Corner / Turn

UNIT C Work Live Seperation

CIRCULATION

CLUSTER

01

UNIT A Retail Frontage

UNIT B Double Volume / Attic Space

Schematic Section

FARMING

Scale 1 : 200

PANEL

Scale 1 : 100

04

Frame Frame

UNIT B Double Volume / Attic Space

UNIT C Work Live Seperation

Strategy

Strategy

PANEL

Scale 1 : 100

05

116 T e s s e r a c t

BASIS

DOUBLE

Q U A R T ER

CLOSED

HELIX

SPIRAL

SPIRAL

PANEL MACRO

07

SPIRAL

117 T e s s e r a c t

HONEYCOMB

ROTATE

118 T e s s e r a c t

Precast Cluster

Cast on Site

Precast Component

Precast Volumetric 3D Print Core Crane System

High Rise

Proposed Model

PANEL

PROTOTYPICAL

Low Rise

10

REPLICATION

45 Degree Cut Green GFA Exemption

Space Under Stairs Underutilized

1.2 M Corridor Width

Hidden Units

PANEL

11

Orgware Manipuation Scale 1 : 100

119 T e s s e r a c t

PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT

4:1

3 x ( (4 : 1) X 1)

Public to Private Housing Ratio

Half a Cluster gets to pool resources to develop legitimate programming ( Clinic, Playground, Commercial Gym Etc )

PRIVATE UNIT

X

4

1

COURTYARD

=

CO - WORKING

PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT

(4 : 1) X 1

X

Co-Working Space Ratio

7

PUBLIC UNIT

PRIVATE UNIT

HALF A CLUSTER

X

2

=

CO - WORKING

PUBLIC UNIT

1

PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT PUBLIC UNIT

PRIVATE UNIT

CO - WORKING

PANEL

Cosmo Relationships

13

120 T e s s e r a c t

CLUSTER

=

1

T O WE R

42 Floors x Cluster 2 ( 3 x ( (4 : 1) X 1) ) = Sky Garden Link Bridge 4 1 Tower forms 1 / 4 of a 30M X 30M COURTYARD

TO

ROTATE MAXIMIZE

GREEN

AT

X-Y-Z AXIS MICRO LEVEL

PANEL

15

Tower Variations Scale 1 : 1000

121 T e s s e r a c t

AT

X-Y-Z AXIS MESO/MACRO LEVEL

URBAN

DIVIDE

URBAN

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing, Business & Residential Sectors

& Further Urban Decentralization

PANEL

Scale 1 : 2000

INTERNALIZED

CONSOLIDATION

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

INTENSIFICATION

17

GARDEN

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing,

IN

CITY

>

CITY

IN

GARDEN

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

Business & Residential Sectors

& Further Urban Decentralization

PANEL

Scale 1 : 2000

18

122 T e s s e r a c t

PANEL

20

Personalized Modifications Scale 1 : 200

123 T e s s e r a c t

Interject / Meet

Parti

Liberate

Spiral

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

YEAR

0-5

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

YEAR

15 - 30

Straight / Facade

Diffuse

Corner / Turn

50 % 50 %

Low Usage of Centralization of Shared Amenities

Tower podium Segregation

Low Usage of Centralization of Shared Amenities

PREMISE

Tower podium Segregation

&

Private / Public Housing Segregation

CONCEPT

FLEXIBLE PERMANENT

Office Segregation

MICRO

TOOLKIT

MICRO

Scale 1 : 100

MESO

TOOLKIT

MESO

Scale 1 : 100

VARIATIONS

MICRO

Scale 1 : 200

VARIATIONS

MESO

Scale 1 : 500

MOUTAIN

COMBINATIONS

YEAR

MICRO

Scale 1 : 200

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

31 - 40

COMBINATIONS

TRANSITION

Scale 1 : 200

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

MESO

Scale 1 : 500

TIME

TIME

Scale 1 : 500

41 - 99

TRANSITION &

1 : 200

TYPOLOGY URBAN

DIVIDE

URBAN

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing,

& Further Urban Decentralization

TOWER

LOW

RISE

HIGH

DENSITY

INTERNALIZED

INTENSIFICATION

GARDEN

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing,

TOOLKIT

Scale 1 : 100

RISE

MACRO

HIGH

IN

CITY

>

VARIATIONS

MACRO

COMBINATIONS

Scale 1 : 10000

124 T e s s e r a c t

MACRO

IN

& Further Urban Decentralization

DENSITY

Scale 1 : 1000

CITY

GARDEN

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

Business & Residential Sectors

HIGH

MACRO

CONSOLIDATION

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

Business & Residential Sectors

PODIUM

TIME

TRANSITION

Scale 1 : 5000

MICRO

TOOLKIT

MICRO

Scale 1 : 100

MICRO

VARIATIONS Scale 1 : 200

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

15 - 30

COMBINATIONS

MICRO

Scale 1 : 200

125 T e s s e r a c t

TIME

TRANSITION

Scale 1 : 200

MESO

TOOLKIT

MESO

Scale 1 : 100

MESO

VARIATIONS Scale 1 : 500

YEAR

0-5

YEAR

5 - 15

YEAR

31 - 40

YEAR

41 - 99

COMBINATIONS

MESO

Scale 1 : 500

126 T e s s e r a c t

TIME

Scale 1 : 500

TRANSITION &

1 : 200

YEAR

15 - 30

MOUTAIN

PODIUM

TOWER

LOW

HIGH

MACRO

TOOLKIT

RISE

MACRO

Scale 1 : 100

URBAN

HIGH

RISE

VARIATIONS

DIVIDE

URBAN

& Further Urban Decentralization

INTENSIFICATION

GARDEN

MACRO

127 T e s s e r a c t

IN

CITY

>

CITY

IN

GARDEN

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

Business & Residential Sectors

COMBINATIONS

CONSOLIDATION

Compartmentalization of Urban "Toolkit" to achieve proximity

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing,

Scale 1 : 10000

DENSITY

Scale 1 : 1000

Business & Residential Sectors

MACRO

HIGH

DENSITY

Between New & Old Public Housing, Private & Private Housing,

INTERNALIZED

TYPOLOGY

& Further Urban Decentralization

TIME

TRANSITION

Scale 1 : 5000

DEFAULT

ALTERNATIVE

CLUSTER

Scale 1 : 200

CLUSTER

CONFIGURATION

CONFIGURATION

Scale 1 : 200

128 T e s s e r a c t

(1

O P T I ON )

LANDSCRAPER

CONFIGURATION

Scale 1 : 1000

SKYSCRAPER

CONFIGURATION

Scale 1 : 1000

129 T e s s e r a c t

MACRO

POSSIBILITIES Scale 1 : 1000

PRIVATE

PUBLIC Scale 1 : 200

130 T e s s e r a c t

SET-UP

URBAN

TOWER

/

CONSOLIDATION Scale 1 : 5000

PRECINCT

RELATIONSHIP

Scale 1 : 5000

131 T e s s e r a c t

PLAN

TOWER

/

PRECINCT

Scale 1 : 5000

RELATIONSHIP

132 T e s s e r a c t

ISO

Corner / Turn

50 % 50 %

Low Usage of Centralization of Shared Amenities

Tower podium Segregation

Low Usage of Centralization of Shared Amenities

PREMISE

Tower podium Segregation

&

Private / Public Housing Segregation

CONCEPT

FLEXIBLE PERMANENT

Office Segregation

MICRO

Scale 1

MESO

T

MACRO

T

Scale 1

Scale 1

133 T e s s e r a c t

134 T e s s e r a c t

135 T e s s e r a c t

136 T e s s e r a c t

137 T e s s e r a c t

138 T e s s e r a c t

139 T e s s e r a c t

140 T e s s e r a c t

141 T e s s e r a c t

B I B L O O G R A P H Y

Agarwal, S. 2019. “HDB flats above 30 years depreciate less than private non-landed housing: NUS study”. Channel News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/hdb-flats-depreciate-better-private-non-landedhousing-nus-study-11237604.

AsiaOne. 2016. “More Singaporeans Living In Condos, Younger Generation Staying Unmarried Longer: Survey”. Asia One.

http://www.asiaone.com/singapore/more-singaporeans-living-condos-younger-generation-staying-unmar-

ried-longer-survey.

Au, Rachel. 2018. “Larger 3Gen HDB Flats For Multi-Generation Families Popular, With 8 In 10 Units Booked”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/housing/larger-3gen-hdb-flats-for-multi-generation-familiespopular-with-8-in-10-units.

Au, Rachel. 2017. “Understanding What Happens At The End Of A 99-Year Lease”. The Straits Times. https://www. straitstimes.com/singapore/housing/understanding-what-happens-at-the-end-of-a-99-year-lease.

Carmona, Matthew. 2010a. “Contemporary Public Space: Critique and Classification, Part One: Critique.” Journal of Urban Design 15 (1): 123–148. doi: 10.1080/13574800903435651.

“Celebrating Home Ownership”. 2014. HDB. http://www20.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10320p.nsf/ar2014/home-ownership. html.

Channel News Asia. 2018. “Number Of Singaporean Babies Born Last Year Lowest Since 2014 Read More At Https://Www.Channelnewsasia.Com/News/Singapore/Singapore-Babies-Born-In-2017-Lowest-In-3-Years-FertilityRate-10763660”. Channel News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-babies-bornin-2017-lowest-in-3-years-fertility-rate-10763660.

Chia, Rachel. 2016. “Singapore’s Road Congestion Improves: Index”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes. com/singapore/transport/singapores-road-congestion-improves-index.

Cho, I. S. (2014). Study on Impact of the Built Environment. Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities (National University of Singapore).

Craighead, G. (2009). High-rise Building Definition, Development,

CPF. 2018. “Public Housing Scheme”. Central Provident Fund Board. https://www.cpf.gov.sg/Members/Schemes/ schemes/housing/public-housing-scheme.

142 T e s s e r a c t

Data Government SG. 2018. “Total Land Area Of Singapore”. Data Government SG. https://data.gov.sg/dataset/ total-land-area-of-singapore.

Fan, Jason. 2018. “S’Poreans Using CPF For Public Housing Since 1968 With Public Housing Scheme Launch”. Mothership. https://mothership.sg/2018/05/cpf-public-housing-scheme-history/.

HDB. 2018. “HDB History And Town”. Housing & Development Board. https://www.hdb.gov.sg/cs/infoweb/about-us/ history.

HDB. 2018. “Minimum Occupation Period”. Housing & Development Board. https://www.hdb.gov.sg/cs/Satellite?c= Page&cid=1383799236311&d=Touch&pagename=InfoWEB%2FPage%2FArticleDetailPage.

Ho, Tomothy. 2016. “Guide To HDB 2-Room Short-Lease Flexi Flat For Retirees”. Dollars And Sense. https://dollarsandsense.sg/guide-to-hdb-2-room-short-lease-flexi-flat-for-retirees/.

Lee, Kuan Yew. 2011. “Speech By Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew At The Launch Of Tanjong Pagar Town Council’s Five-Year Masterplan And Opening Of ABC Waters At Alexandra Canal, 19 March 2011”. Prime Minister Office Singapore.

https://www.pmo.gov.sg/newsroom/speech-minister-mentor-lee-kuan-yew-launch-tanjong-pagar-town-

councils-five-year.

Marshal, Alfred. 2018. “Derivation Of The Demand Curve In Terms Of Utility Analysis”. Economics Concept. http:// www.economicsconcepts.com/derivation_of_the_demand_curve.htm.

Ong, Cheryl. 2014. “All 281 Units Of Retirement Resort Sold Out Within Hours”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/all-281-units-of-retirement-resort-sold-out-within-hours.

Ong, Justin. 2018. “NDR 2018: Why Are HDB Leases 99 Years Long? PM Lee Explains”. Channel Newsasia. https:// www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ndr-2018-hdb-lease-99-years-flat-national-day-rally-10631442.

Ong, Ryan. 2017. “3 Things To Consider Before Saying “Yes” To A 3Gen HDB Flat”. 99.Co. https://www.99.co/blog/ singapore/3-things-3gen-hdb/.

Poh, Joanne. 2018. “SERS & VERS – Complete Guide To “HDB En Bloc Sale” Schemes 2018”. Money Smart. https:// blog.moneysmart.sg/property/sers-vers-hdb-en-bloc-sale-schemes/.

143 T e s s e r a c t

Roy, Ngerng. 2014. “Truth Exposed: The Dirty CPF-HDB Scheme To Trick Singaporeans”. The Heart Truths. https://thehearttruths.com/2014/04/02/truth-exposed-the-dirty-cpf-hdb-scheme-to-trick-singaporeans/.

Samant et al., Swinal. 2018. “A Tale Of Two Singapore Gardens”. Council On Tall Buildings & Habitat. http://global. ctbuh.org/resources/papers/download/3374-a-tale-of-two-singapore-sky-gardens.pdf.

Seow, Joanna. 2018. “Parliament: Gini Coefficient Here Higher Than Countries Which Impose Greater Overall Taxes”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/parliament-gini-coefficient-here-higher-than-countries-which-impose-greater-overall-taxes.

Silvam, Prabhu. 2018. “Old HDB Flats: Assets Losing Their Value?”. Channel Newsasia. https://www.channelnewsasia. com/news/singapore/old-hdb-flats-assets-losing-their-value-10224402.

Sim, Royston. 2018. “PM Lee Hsien Loong Refutes Notion That 99-Year HDB Lease Is Extended Rental, Not A Sale”.

The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/pm-lee-hsien-loong-rebuts-notion-that-99-year-hdb-lease-isextended-rental-not-a-sale.

Singapore Business Review. 2017. What’s hampering Singapore’s push for decentralisation?.Singapore Business Review. https://sbr.com.sg/commercial-property/news/whats-hampering-singapores-push-decentralisation.

Singapore Government. 2017. “Do HDB Flat Buyers Own Their Flat?”. Singapore Government. https://www.gov.sg/ factually/content/do-hdb-flat-buyers-own-their-flat.

Singstat. 2018. “Singapore Population”. Singstat. https://www.singstat.gov.sg/infographics/population/population. html.

SingStat. 2018. “Death And Life Expectancy”. Department Of Statistics Singapore. https://www.singstat.gov.sg/ find-data/search-by-theme/population/death-and-life-expectancy/visualising-data.

SingStat. 2018. “Understanding Old Age Support Ratio”. Statistics Singapore. https://www.singstat.gov.sg/modules/ infographics/-/media/3319F7A1A1D44386BCEF53D6D007AD0D.ashx.

Squarefoot. 2018. “HDB Price (Per Sqf) Nearby MRT Within 500M”. Doctor Wealth. https://www.drwealth.com/singapore-property-prices-along-mrt-lines/.

144 T e s s e r a c t

Tai, Janice. 2015. “Pioneer Estate Now A Ghost Town”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ housing/pioneer-estate-now-a-ghost-town.

Tay, Suan Chiang. 2012. “The Vanishing Void Deck Shared Pavilions Taking Its Place”. St Property. https://www.stproperty.sg/articles-property/hdb/the+vanishing+void+deck/a/47440.

Tegos, Michael. 2016. “How Singapore’S Startup Ecosystem Has Grown Up In The Last 5 Years (INFOGRAPHIC)”. Tech In Asia. https://www.techinasia.com/singapore-startup-ecosystem-growth-infographic.

Teo, Alida. 2018. “List Of Sers Sites”. Housing In Singapore Research And Databases Made By Teoalida. https://www. teoalida.com/singapore/serslist/.

TinkerTax. (2017). “How to Save on Office Rent in Singapore”. TinkerTax. https://tinkertax.com/office-rent-singapore/ The Business Times. 2014. “Hillford’s 60-Year Lease May Pose Financing Hurdle”. The Business Times. https://www. businesstimes.com.sg/top-stories/hillfords-60-year-lease-may-pose-financing-hurdle.

The Straits Times. 2015. “In Pictures: Stylish BTO Projects At Dawson’s Skyterrace And Skyville”. The Straits Times. https:// www.straitstimes.com/singapore/housing/in-pictures-stylish-bto-projects-at-dawsons-skyterrace-and-skyville.

Wong, Derek. 2018. “Nine In 10 Senior Flat Buyers Opt For Shorter Leases For Two-Room Flexi Flats: HDB”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/housing/nine-in-10-senior-flat-buyers-opt-for-shorter-leases-for-tworoom-flexi-flats-hdb.

Wong, Siew Ying. 2017. “Will You Still Love Your HDB Flat When It’s Over 64?”. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/will-you-still-love-your-hdb-flat-when-its-over-64.

Zahorsky, Darrell. 2018. “The 7 Stages Of Starting And Running A Business”. The Balance Small Business. https://www. thebalancesmb.com/find-your-business-life-cycle-2951237.

3E Accounting. 2018. “Singapore Business Startup Schemes And Grants”. SME Portal SG. https://www.smeportal.sg/ content/smeportal/en/stages/plan/2018/singapore-business-startup-schemes-and-grants.html.

.

145 T e s s e r a c t

L I S T

O F

Figure 1.

F I G U R E S

Singapore HDB Sony Photography Awards

(Source: Daniel Chia)

Figure 2.

Urban Renewal Over the Years

(Source: National Library Singapore)

Figure 3.

Value Depreciation over 99 Years

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 4. Renewal Measures & Life Expectancy Rate (Source: Author’s own)

Figure 5.

Ownership Pattern & Unsustainability

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 6.

SkyTerrace 2nd Floor Plan

(Source: Renonation)

Figure 7. SkyTerrace 1st Floor Plan (Source: Renonation)

Figure 8.

Typical 3 Gen Flat

(Source: If Only Singaporeans Stop to Think, Colouring done by author)

Figure 9.

Typical 5 Room Executive Flat

(Source: Renonation, Colouring done by author)

Figure 10.

Precinct Value

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 11.

Precinct Development Timeline

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 12.

Precinct Dichotomy of Time

(Source: Author’s own)

146 T e s s e r a c t

Figure 13.

2 Room Flexi Floor Plan

(Source: HomeRenoGuru)

Figure 14.

The Hillford 2 room Floor Plan

(Source: The Hillford Condo,Colouring done by author)

Figure 15.

Precinct Decentralization

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 16.

Threshold of Time

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 17.

Expansion & Shrinkage Possibilities

(Source: Author’s own)

Figure 18.

Urban Frame

(Source: Author’s own)

147 T e s s e r a c t

148 T e s s e r a c t

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to those around me whom have supported me throughout this whole year and made this thesis possible.

Firstly, I would like to thank my supervising professor, Dr. Cho Im Sik, for her guidance, kindness and patience through this whole semester. Without her insightful feedback and intense questions, this thesis would not be as clear and coherent as it is now.

Next, I would like to thank my course mates, especially those whom stay overnight in school with me often; for spurring each other on in times of crisis. Special thanks go out to Jason Khoo, Kirsten Seah and Ong Zhen Wei for supporting and assisting me throughout this entire ordeal.

I would also like to take this chance to thank the people whom I have talked to regarding the issue of HDB housing flats. Even though their feedback did not translate directly into this report, their opinions have provided me with knowledge on what truly matters for the public.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my family for being there for me regardless of how dire the circumstances are, and for supporting and believing in me throughout my entire education in Architecture.

149 T e s s e r a c t

FINISHED.

150 T e s s e r a c t

151 T e s s e r a c t

E P I L O G U E

This project might have taken place over the course of an entire year; but in reality it is also the final conclusion for many of projects that I have completed over the years. These projects includes work done in Bachelors of Architecture in National University of Singapore from 2015 - 2018, Diploma of Architecture in Singapore Polytechnic from 2010 - 2013, and over 35 International Competitions completed in the last 9 years (with most of them done while I was serving National Service).

My interest in housing largely stems from unit typologies and prototypes; as to why I am interested in these areas - I am unsure of myself. Perhaps housing is the one factor that can benefit mankind the most, beyond density itself but also time; since one is going to spend the majority of his or her life in a home, sometimes paying more than half of what they earn throughout their lives for it. I firmly believe that the fundamental purpose of Architecture is to improve people’s lives - so housing naturally became my scope of my interest.

I have included selected works over the years that have played a big part in leading up to this project; with ideas that were never truly complete in previous designs. I am happy to say that the Tesseract typology was able to absorb most of these ideas in a more thorough and complete manner. Often times I have been criticized by peers for seemingly doing the same thing; but in reality there was always a specific agenda for each project - be it pushing for micro, meso or macro development in housing. What has satisfied me the most in this process was how they all ended up leading up to this one final project, allowing me to graduate in peace and fulfilment.

152 T e s s e r a c t

Conglomeration 2017

Void Mountain 2018

Collaborative Tower 2016

Work Live Green Divide

Vertical Top Bottom Reversal

Anti Capitalistic Expansion

Missing Toolkit Time Based Approach

Tesseract 2019

Volumetric Amalgamating Configuration

Communal Configuration

Blurring Interior & Exterior

Absence: Missing Walls 2017

House Without Rooms 2012

Amalgamation 2010

Eco-Cubes 2011

153 T e s s e r a c t

COPYRIGHT Š 2019

BY BRYANT LAU LIANG CHENG All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced, redistributed, or transmitted in any form by any means, without the prior written permission and agreement by the Author.

This Thesis design project is under the supervision of Prof. Cho Im Sik of National University of Singapore, School of Design & Environment, Department of Architecture.

Disclaimer:

Some of the photos or images were extracted from online and external sources in order to construct the framework of this research. Therefore, this publication does not own the full credit of the materials and its owner remain their full credit with citation.

154 T e s s e r a c t

155 T e s s e r a c t

F O R

T H E

P E O P L E

\

B Y

T H E

P E O P L E

Is the current 99 years HDB leasehold HDB the optimal version for Singaporeans in today’s context?

Can the dichotomy between both private housing and public housing be mitigated to some extent?

Can elitism be fair and just; considering how enrolment in top schools is based on proximity to more expensives homes closer to the central areas of Singapore? If so, can homes in decentralized regions then compete with centralized regions instead?

This thesis - a compilation of research and design - attempts to address these burning questions. It concludes with the Tesseract typology: a model that allows time to be commodified, extended, shortened and shared in various ways. One of the key objectives of this model involves the empowerment of residents to express their indiviudality and identity to achieve a stronger sense of belonging and ownership. Beyond time itself, this model also encompasses people of niche demographcis whom has been exlucded previously from the family - orientated HDB model: from widows, divorcess, LGBT couples and career driven single bachelors - just to name a few. It aspires to also shed more light on the growing divide between the rich and poor, mainly in the form of elitism - which is only going to become more relevant in the years to come.

It is often said that we shape our buildings - therefore our buildings shape us. But do we actually get to shape our buildings at all? The ways in which we question conventions defines and determines the solutions available to us. This Thesis does not simply aim to provide answers: it is an invitation for everyone to participate and contribute to the overall discourse on housing, urban plannng and inequality in Singapore. It is also the conclusion of an entire year’s worth of work for Masters, a consolidation of many of my previous housing projects done in National University of Singapore in the past 3 years, and a compilation of 35 International Competitions completed in the last 9 years - all leading up to this one final project.

156 N A T I O N A L

T e s s e r a c t

U N I V E R S I T Y

O F

S I N G A P O R E