Returning & Reconnecting: Urban Conservation of Chinatown Complexes
ETURNING & ECONNECTINGR
FROM KRETA AYER
TO CHINA TOWN
Report for AC5008 - Design for Conservation
Module Head: Dr. Johannes Widodo
Academic year - 2024/25
Images Individual Contributors, 2025
All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of the publisher. The publisher does not warrant or assume legal responsibility for the publication’s contents. All opinions expressed in the book are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the National University of Singapore.
David and Sharmila: Report Book Coordinator | Cover Illustrator| Layout Designer | Editor | Page Break Photos
1950’s Singapore Peking Opera Magazine; Source: Heman,n.d.
Acknowledgment
Module Focus
Participating Students
Chapter 1: Understanding the Site
Site history, use, and context
Chapter 2: Cultural Mapping
Identifying patterns of local culture
Chapter 3: Significance and Issues
Values, concerns, and site challenges
Chapter 4: Precedence Study
Reference cases informing the approach
Chapter 5: Proposed Masterplan
Design and policy-based strategies
Chapter 6: Upcycling the Past
Reimagining built heritage with care
Chapter 7:
and
Old Chinatown, Singapore, 1969; Source: National archives of Singapore
Acknowledgment
We would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to all those who have supported and guided us throughout the duration of this project and academic journey.
First and foremost, we sincerely thank Professor Dr. Ho Puay Peng for taking the time to participate in our final review sessions. His valuable feedback, critical insights, and willingness to share his vast experience in the field of architectural heritage greatly enriched our understanding and perspective.
We are especially grateful to Dr. Johannes Widodo for his steadfast guidance, patience, and support throughout our modules and studio work. His thoughtful mentorship, clear direction, and deep commitment to the discipline of conservation have been pivotal in shaping our approach to both research and design.
We would also like to thank Dr. Nikhil Joshi for his leadership in overseeing the Master of Arts in Architectural Conservation programme. His consistent encouragement, intellectual generosity, and constructive inputs have played a key role in our academic development.
Finally, a heartfelt thank you to our dear friends Lara, Rithayaa, and Felcia for their kindness and support during the final phases of the project. Their help in building the final model and their presence throughout the process were invaluable to our work and morale.
1979 Kreta Ayer Theatre; Source: National archives of Singapore
Introduction
It aimed at a holistic approach to preserving and enhancing a site on an urban scale and dealing with new development in a historical context or neighbourhood. The studio project aims to develop new interventions of a significant urban scale that complement and enhance the cultural and historical significance of a heritage site in a historic area through new development. The approach involves preserving historical, architectural, and social importance, promoting community engagement, generating sustainable economic benefits, applying the principles of circularity, and respecting the existing context. It creates sustainable and resilient environments that balance conservation and development goals and mitigate the impact of climate change.
Conservation concerns people and communities directly related to climate change, carbon neutrality, and the circular economy. Conservation is also understood as the management of change and permanence. This semester’s project is about preserving and continuing the significance and relevance of urban heritage. Efforts can be made to heal the negative impacts of gentrification of the city’s historic area by reconnecting the memory of the past to the current and future circumstances by focusing on human and community-centred place-making interventions.
The design for conservation resolution shall fulfil the “five-in-one” principles: 1) Environmental Sustainability, 2) Cultural Authenticity, 3) Social Continuity, 4) Economic Viability, and 5) Architectural Integrity. The design for conservation intervention should reveal the qualities of the site and the place, including historical, architectural, cultural, and social memories of the past and relevance to the present and future conditions. The new intervention should add economic viability to the existing site/building/ neighbourhood and be compatible and appropriate in responding to its immediate physical, social, and environmental contexts. Architecturally, the new design intervention or insertion should integrate well with the existing built and natural context regarding typology, material, aesthetics, functionality, and environment.
Dr. Johannes Widodo Module Head
Area A : 1. Hong Lim Complex | 2. China Town Point.
Area B: 3. People’s Park Center | 4. Majestic Theatre | 5. People’s Park Complex.
Area C:6. Kreta Ayer Peoples Theatre And Heritage Center | 7. Kreta Ayer Complex | 8. Buddha Tooth Relic Temple
Focus
The gentrification of Kreta Ayer into what is now known as Chinatown in Singapore is a complex process marked by significant socio-cultural and economic changes. Initially, Kreta Ayer, meaning “water cart” in Malay, was a bustling area in the mid-1800s, known for its bullock and ox carts that distributed water from wells in Ann Siang Hill. The early settlers brought rich cultural traditions, making Kreta Ayer a vibrant cultural heartland with teahouses and opera theatres.
In the 1960s and 1970s, urban renewal projects began to reshape the area. The Singapore government initiated large-scale redevelopment plans to modernise the city, including constructing high-rise buildings and relocating residents. Many of the original residents were moved to urban regeneration housing in Kreta Ayer Complex, People’s Park Complex, and Hong Lim Complex. This period saw significant changes as traditional shophouses replaced modern infrastructure, altering the area’s landscape and social fabric.
By the 1980s, efforts to preserve the cultural heritage of Chinatown gained momentum. The government started to recognise the historical and cultural significance of the area, leading to conservation projects aimed at maintaining its unique physical character while accommodating modern needs. However, this period also saw the commodification of heritage, where cultural elements were packaged and marketed for tourism, sometimes at the expense of authenticity. The touristic urban development plans further transformed Chinatown into a commercial hub, attracting tourists and driving up property values and rents, contributing to long-term residents’ displacement.
Today, Chinatown is a blend of old and new, where preserved heritage buildings coexist with contemporary developments, reflecting the dynamic evolution of Kreta Ayer into a vibrant cultural and commercial hub. There is an opportunity to return to the original spirit of Chinatown as a real town for the community. This involves reconnecting the original communities who have made their roots in the three complexes and reversing or transforming the gentrified tourist place into a de-gentrified, vibrant living place for present and future generations. The challenge remains to balance the preservation of cultural heritage with the pressures of urban development and tourism, ensuring that the community’s identity and history are not lost in the process.
Participating Students
SHARMILA ASHOKAN SANKARAN
DAVID SUWARNO KUSWEANTO
CHAPTER 1 UNDERSTANDING THE SITE
1.1 Historical Reconstruction
1.2 Landuse and Heritage
1.3 Affordability
1.4 Accessibility
1.5 Population Density
1.6 Demographics
Historical Reconstruction
Historical Timeline DISTANT PAST
ORIGINS AND EARLY SETTLEMENT: Singapore’s Chinatown, known locally as Niu Che Shui or Kreta Ayer, predates British colonization. Even before Stamford Raffles arrived in 1819, Chinese settlers had established a presence, cultivating crops like gambier and pepper. The area’s multicultural fabric was woven early, with Indian migrants such as Narayana Pillai, who arrived with Raffles and became a key leader among South Indians (National Library Board [NLB], n.d.; Yen, 2013).
COLONIAL PLANNING AND ETHNIC ENCLAVE: Raffles’s 1822 Town Plan formally designated the southwest bank of the Singapore River for the Chinese community, creating the “Chinese Kampong.” By 1824, this district housed a third of Singapore’s population and became the nucleus of present-day Chinatown. The area was never exclusively Chinese: Tamil Muslims (Chulias) and Hindus established religious institutions such as the Sri Mariamman Temple (1827) and Jamae Mosque (1830–35), reflecting Chinatown’s spiritual and cultural diversity (NLB, n.d).
IMMIGRATION, SOCIAL STRUCTURE, AND DAILY LIFE: Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, Chinatown was the main arrival point for Chinese immigrants, or sinkeh, many from Guangdong, Fujian, and Hainan. These newcomers often lived in overcrowded shophouses or coolie kengs and were divided by dialect and region, Hokkiens in Amoy Street, Teochews near Boat Quay, and Cantonese in Kreta Ayer.
Historical timeline - Complied by Author,2025
Historical Timeline
Life was harsh: coolies faced squalid conditions, minimal pay, and rampant exploitation, with many bound by debt to employers. Social vices such as opium, gambling, and prostitution flourished, sometimes under government sanction. By 1900, there were 550 licensed opium shops and a severe gender imbalance, with one woman for every 14 men (BiblioAsia, 2014; Yen, 2013).
SECRET SOCIETIES AND SOCIAL UNREST: Secret societies like the Ghee Hin and Ghee Hok began as mutual aid groups but soon became violent factions. The infamous 1854 Teochew-Hokkien Riots lasted ten days and left 500 dead. In response, the British established the Chinese Protectorate in 1877 and enacted the Societies Ordinance in 1889, but secret society influence persisted until the mid-20th century, when police operations finally curbed their power (BiblioAsia, 2014; NLB, n.d.).
REFORM, HOUSING, AND MODERNIZATION: Efforts to improve Chinatown’s conditions included the rescue of women from prostitution and reforms like the Labour Contracts Ordinance of 1914, which dismantled the exploitative credit-coolie system. The Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT), formed in 1927, began slum clearances and low-cost housing projects, notably in Tiong Bahru. However, overcrowding and poor sanitation remained severe problems into the 1930s, with high mortality rates and persistent poverty (NLB, n.d.).
DISTANT PAST
Historical timeline - Complied by Author,2025
Historical Reconstruction
Historical Timeline
RECENT PAST
WARTIME TRAUMA AND POSTWAR RECOVERY: Chinatown suffered heavily during World War II. Its dense shophouses became targets during the 1942 air raids, and the Japanese occupation brought terror, including the Sook Ching massacres and the commandeering of local buildings by the Kempeitai (military police). After liberation in 1945, the SIT resumed efforts to clear slums and rehouse residents, but hardship and overcrowding continued. Despite these challenges, cultural life revived, with cinemas and Cantonese opera providing entertainment (NLB, n.d.; Wikipedia, 2024).
URBAN RENEWAL AND HERITAGE CONSERVATION: By the 1950s, the government recognized the need for comprehensive urban planning. The 1951 Master Plan proposed new towns and traffic arteries to relieve Chinatown’s congestion. After Singapore’s self-governance in 1959, the Land Acquisition Act (1966) enabled large-scale redevelopment. Landmark projects included People’s Park Complex (1970–73) and People’s Park Centre (completed 1976), which introduced modern high-rises while retaining the district’s commercial vibrancy. The Hong Lim Complex (1980) offered integrated housing and retail, allowing long-time residents to remain in the area (NLB, n.d.; Wikipedia, 2024).
Historical timeline - Complied by Author,2025
Historical Timeline
Religious institutions were integrated into new state structures, with the Jamae Mosque coming under the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) in 1968 and being gazetted as a National Monument in 1974 (NLB, n.d.).
HAWKER CULTURE, TOURISM, AND GLOBAL RECOGNITION: Efforts to modernize street trading led to the construction of the Kreta Ayer (later Chinatown) Complex in 1983, moving more than 800 hawkers indoors. By the late 1980s, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) shifted from demolition to conservation, protecting over 3,200 historic buildings across Chinatown’s four precincts (NLB, n.d.). Further upgrades included the Hawker Centres Upgrading Programme (2006–08) and the opening of the which carefully preserved heritage structures. The Buddha Tooth Relic Temple & Museum, opened in 2007, added a new cultural landmark inspired by Tang dynasty architecture (NLB, n.d.). Tourism initiatives transformed Smith Street into the climate-controlled Chinatown Food Street (2014), blending heritage with modern comfort. In 2016, a hawker stall in Chinatown Complex earned a Michelin star, contributing to Singapore’s successful bid to inscribe “Hawker Culture in Singapore” on UNESCO’s Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in 2020 (NLB, n.d.; Wikipedia, 2024).
Historical timeline - Complied by Author,2025
Urban renewal at Smith street , Sago lane and street 1975. Image Source - Remember Singapore
Construction of Kreta Ayer center (Present day China town complex); Image Source - Remember Singapore
Site of the present day tooth relic temple ; Image Source - Remember Singapore
Market scene at Kreta Ayer center (Present day China town complex) Image Source - Remember Singapore
Landuse and Heritage
After self-government in 1959 and independence in 1965, Singapore acted quickly to gain control over land in overcrowded, dilapidated areas like Kreta Ayer. The Land Acquisition Act of 1966 gave the state authority to acquire property at scale for public purposes. This allowed the Housing and Development Board’s Urban Renewal Department to begin reshaping the city centre through large-scale redevelopment.
By the late 1980s, planners recognised that full-scale clearance was eroding historic character. On 7 July 1989, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) gazetted four conservation areas: Telok Ayer, Kreta Ayer, Bukit Pasoh and Tanjong Pagar. Over 3,200 shophouses and civic buildings were protected. The planning strategy shifted from demolition to adaptive reuse, encouraging owners to restore historic façades while repurposing interiors as cafés, hotels or studios.
High-rise icons from the 1970s such as People’s Park Complex and Hong Lim Complex retained their “Commercial and Residential” zoning and high plot ratios. These plots were already near their development limits, so no change in intensity was required.
Some commercial sites were reclassified as “Civic and Community Institution” zones, reflecting new uses such as hawker centres and temples. MRT infrastructure added small areas marked for utility and transport needs without altering building height or allowable floor area.
LAND USE AREA MAP
KEY
COMMERCIAL
CONSERVED BUILDING GREEN SPACES
CONSERVED AREA RESIDENTIAL CIVIC SPACES
NATIONALLY PROTECTED MONUMENT HEIGHT RELAXATIONS
Map Source - Urban Redevelopment Authority
2025
CONSERVATION AREA MAP
Affordability
In 1995, almost all of Chinatown was valued within a narrow range of S$1,600 to 9,600 per m², shown as pale yellows and light greens on the map. No parcel, whether shophouse, apartment block or market, stood out. This suggests that the conservation rules introduced in 1989, which capped the gross plot ratio (GPR), were still uniformly limiting development potential and suppressing variation in land values across the district. The entire area was being traded on similar expectations of floor area and height, with little scope for differential redevelopment.
By 2015, land values had risen significantly to between S$5,600 and 17,600 per m², but the overall colour pattern on the map remained largely unchanged. Mid-range yellows continued to dominate the conserved grid, while deeper oranges traced the MRT corridor and the Pearl’s Hill vicinity. This implies that land values had roughly doubled over two decades due to broader macroeconomic growth and the arrival of rail infrastructure, rather than any change in planning intensity. The plots became more valuable, but the underlying development rights remained capped.
In 2025, prices reach between S$16,000 and 27,700 per m². The most expensive areas remain close to transport nodes, while the conserved shophouse core remains in the mid-toned category. Most plots show steady appreciation of S$2,600 to 10,300 per m². The most dramatic jumps, around S$12,000 to 23,000 per m², are clustered around MRT stations and Pearl’s Hill, indicating that the uplift continues to be driven by demand pressure and location rather than regulatory change in allowable building intensity.
In the mid-19th century, Chinatown’s only shared pedestrian connector was the five-foot-way, a sheltered corridor running beneath every shophouse eave. Completed by the early 1840s and clearly visible on the 1862 town map, it stretched from Telok Ayer Street to South Bridge Road. Though each bay belonged to a separate owner, the uniform building setback created a seamless ground-level arcade. Open to the elements, this was Chinatown’s sole continuous walkway; no structures bridged roads above.
After 1900, the introduction of steel joists and reinforced concrete allowed merchants to link paired shophouses with second-storey footbridges. These spans turned two lots into single businesses, usually warehouses or lodging houses, while carts continued using the lanes below. However, these bridges only connected private properties and did not cross public streets, leaving the five-foot-way as the main public route.
Elevated circulation expanded with megastructures like People’s Park Complex (1970 to 1973) and later Hong Lim and Kreta Ayer Complexes, each introducing second-storey decks. Yet these platforms remained inward facing, ending at their podium edges without linking across roads or into conserved shophouses.
True interblock connectivity arrived with Chinatown MRT in 2003. Its underground concourses now span roads, link buildings and offer round-the-clock, barrier-free access, creating an integrated public infrastructure that finally stitches Chinatown’s blocks together.
ACCESSIBILITY MAP
Map Source - Author, 2025
Population Density
During the mid-19th-century Chinatown had not yet reached modern urban densities; even its busiest streets were carrying fewer than 120 residents per hectare. By mid-2oth-century the map flipped dramatically. Much of the shophouse grid is now coded at 1 250–1 800 p/ha, with several core blocks—around Pagoda, Smith and Trengganu Streets, pushing into the extreme 1 800–3 095 p/ha range. Only the outermost edges still register below 180 p/ha. These figures confirm contemporary health reports that labelled Kreta Ayer one of the most overcrowded urban districts anywhere in the British Empire.
In 1984 the impact of post-independence rehousing through HDB became apparent. Densities across the conserved shophouse belts have fallen two or three rungs to 90–120 p/ha and 120–180 p/ha, while even the purpose-built apartment slabs rarely exceed 180–1 250 p/ ha. Nowhere in the precinct still tops 1 800 p/ha. In numerical terms, Chinatown shed roughly a million residents per square-kilometre between 1950 and the early 1980s. Nowadays, most conservation lots sit in the 40–90 p/ha or 90–120 p/ha bands, confirming that the typical two and three-storey shophouse now houses far fewer people than it did in the kampong-cubicle era. The only places still scoring 180–1 250 p/ ha are the 1970s megastructures (People’s Park Complex, People’s Park Centre, Hong Lim Complex), whose high-rise slabs concentrate residents on very small footprints. No block in 2024 breaches the upper-most 1 800–3 095 p/ha bracket.
POPULATION DENSITY MAP
Map Source - Author, 2025
Demographics
Singapore’s Chinatown began as a designated Chinese enclave, yet its cultural landscape has always been multi-ethnic. Even before Raffles’ arrival, Hokkien farmers were cultivating land along the south-west bank of the Singapore River. When the 1822 Town Plan formalised this area as the “Chinese Kampong,” waves of migrants from Fujian and Guangdong arrived. The district soon divided by dialect: Hokkiens near Amoy Street, Teochews by Boat Quay, Hakkas along South Bridge Road and Cantonese in Kreta Ayer.
However, “Chinese Kampong” never meant Chinese alone. Narayana Pillai established a Hindu shrine there in 1823, which became Sri Mariamman Temple by 1827. Tamil Muslim traders erected Jamae Mosque in 1835, and by mid-century, three mosques anchored a Muslim presence along Telok Ayer.
Though mass immigration from the 1840s deepened the Chinese majority, the enclave remained internally diverse. Ethnic tensions flared, such as the 1854 Teochew-Hokkien riot. Indian moneylenders and Malay boatmen also remained active in the area.
After the 1960s, resettlement emptied many shophouse homes, but sacred rituals persisted. Conservation efforts since 1989 preserved the layered sacred geography. By the 2000s, Chinatown became a heritage precinct, where old dialect traditions now mix with new immigrant presences, keeping its cultural mosaic vibrant and ever-changing.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION BASED ON ETHNICITY
Chinese (Cantonese)
Chinese (Cantonese)
Chinese (Hokkien)
Chinese (Teowchew)
Chinese (Hokkien)
Chinese (Mix)
Map Source - Author, 2025
Tamil
Tamil
Malay
Malay
Chinese (Hakka)
Chinese (Hakka)
Chinese (Teowchew)
Chinese (Mix)
CHAPTER 2 CULTURAL MAPPING
2.1 Festival Route
2.2 Existing Cultural Mapping
2.3 Activities, Residents, and Occupations
Festival Route
In 1862, the festival procession wound through narrow lanes near South Bridge Road and Sago Street, forming a compact loop that remained close to the Sri Mariamman Temple and early clan halls. Chinatown was still small, with unpaved streets and a modest immigrant population, so a short route allowed for manageable participation and minimal disruption to cart traffic serving the riverside godowns. A separate dashed path, likely a utilitarian track, skirted the settlement’s edge, used for deliveries rather than ritual use.
By the mid-20th century, the growing population and expanded street network prompted the festival route to extend north and south, incorporating new shophouse rows and guild halls that now sponsored the procession. Sago Lane became part of the ritual path, and the outer dashed line moved inward, reflecting the need to divert trams and lorries during celebrations. Though larger, the festival remained one continuous circuit with stationary spectators.
In 1984, a second route emerged, designed for mobile getai stages and opera trucks. This blue loop required wider roads and stopped at five craft nodes supplying performance materials. The original fuchsia procession persisted, but now coexisted with this broader entertainment circuit. A peripheral traffic ring kept both routes uninterrupted, marking a new spatial complexity in festival planning.
Maps source: compiled by Author,2025
Coffin Maker
maker
maker
Key Maker
Calligrapher
Traditional coffin maker in Sago lane; Image source: Photo: National Archives of Singapore, 1971
Traditional Chinese lantern maker ; Image source: Photo: Roots.sg
Traditional Bird cage maker ; Image source: Photo: National library board
Traditional Calligrapher ; Image source: Photo: National Archives of Singapore
Traditional Clog maker ; Image source: Photo: National library of Singapore
Existing Cultural mapping
The 2025 cultural map of Chinatown reveals three overlapping layers of activity that shape its contemporary urban rhythm: ritual, recreation and everyday commerce.The first layer traces ritual movement. A temple procession begins at Sri Mariamman Temple, moving along Pagoda and Temple Streets, looping around Smith Street, and returning via New Bridge Road. This route accommodates fire-walking and other major religious events. Parallel to this, the Chinese New Year lightup follows wider roads such as Eu Tong Sen Street and Upper Cross Street, allowing space for lantern arches, market stalls and performance platforms while leaving narrow shophouse lanes clear for processions.
The second layer marks sites of daily gathering. Older residents favour open plazas outside People’s Park Complex, the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple and Hong Lim Park for social activities like tai chi and chess. Food culture centres on three hawker courts: Chinatown Complex, Hong Lim Market and the smaller food floor beneath People’s Park Centre. Underground, unpaid MRT concourses at Chinatown, Maxwell and Outram Park serve as informal social spaces.
The third layer maps fixed cultural and trade functions. Live performances
COMMUNITY POCKETS (ELDERLY GATHERING POINT
TEMPLE FESTIVAL ROUTE
UNDERGROUND GATHERING POINT
COMMUNITY POCKETS HAWKERS CENTER
CHINESE NEW YEAR THEATERS REMNANTS OF TRADITIONAL TRADE
Activities, Residents, and Occupations
In 1843, Chinatown’s social fabric was shaped by two main resident groups: long-term settlers and transient coolies. These were closely tied to three shadow industries: opium smoking, brothel work and secret society activity, embedded in everyday life. Triad middlemen managed the coolie workforce by providing lodging, employment and informal control. By the late 19th century, the streets were lined with taller brick and iron shophouses, and the population diversified to include a growing class of merchants. While vice persisted, a new node appeared on the activity chart: commercial theatre. Cantonese and Teochew opera became part of the district’s night-time life, and profits from rubber and tin joined vice revenues to support broader leisure consumption.
By the mid 20th century, Chinatown was densely packed. Five-footways overflowed with pushcarts, itinerant vendors and makeshift stalls. Residents and merchants engaged in night markets and hawker dining, while theatre remained a popular attraction. Although opium and brothels were still present, they no longer defined everyday commerce.
By 1984, a new category of visitors entered the social map. Chinatown had begun to reinvent itself as a heritage destination. Hawker dining, formal theatres and souvenir shops dominated the activity diagram. Illicit trades disappeared, replaced by licensed food and cultural offerings in a mixed local and tourist economy.
Timeline compiled by Author,2025
CHAPTER 3
ISSUES AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE
3.1 Issues of the site
3.2 Significance of the site
Issues of the site
PHYSICAL ISSUES
Chinatown faces significant physical challenges despite its accessibility. Its internal circulation is fragmented, with upper floors of shophouses, clan halls, and modern buildings poorly connected to each other and the street network, limiting movement and underutilizing valuable spaces. Many upper storeys remain vacant, accelerating decay and wasting potential. Regulatory changes allowing taller buildings risk disrupting the low-rise historic skyline, threatening the district’s distinctive scale. Current conservation rules focus on façades but permit radical interior alterations, undermining architectural authenticity. Additionally, isolated pocket parks and courtyards lack connectivity, missing opportunities to enhance walkability, ecological networks, and recreational spaces within the dense urban fabric.
CULTURAL ISSUES
Chinatown’s cultural fabric is rapidly thinning as traditional crafts, street trades, and performance arts struggle to survive amid rising rents, redevelopment, and a lack of successors. Artisans who were once central to daily life now face extinction without meaningful support, while heritage trades are pushed into themed zones with limited visibility. Former performance venues have either disappeared or remain disconnected from newer cultural spaces, disrupting continuity. Younger generations are increasingly detached, with few platforms for learning or engagement. Without targeted intergenerational programmes and cultural reintegration, Chinatown may preserve its architecture but lose the living traditions that once gave its streets vitality.
HIGH IMPACT
COMMUNITY SHOP OWNERS TOURISTS REALTORS/ DEVELOPERS
GOVERNING BODY Accessibility and Connectivity of Levels StakeholdersIssuesof the Site Underused Second and Third Levels of Shop houses Impact of New GPR Regulations on Historic Skyline Height Relaxations in the Periphery of Chinatown Facadism and Weak Conservation Guidelines Lack of Green Space Connectivity Vanishing Traditional Knowledge Systems
PHYSICAL
Displacement of everyday trades
ECONOMIC ISSUES
Rising land prices have made key modernist icons like Hong Lim, Kreta Ayer, and People’s Park Complex prime targets for redevelopment. Lacking conservation status, their worth is tied to commercial potential, not heritage value. This has transformed Chinatown into a tourism and retail hub, displacing long-time residents and sidelining everyday community needs. Traditional shop owners face rent hikes they cannot match, forcing closures and giving way to generic businesses. Without economic tools like heritage tax relief or adaptive reuse incentives, profit-driven redevelopment will erase not just architecture, but the social and cultural lifeblood that once defined the district’s unique character.
SOCIAL/ COMMUNAL ISSUES
Rapid commercialization has displaced many elderly Chinatown residents into high-rise estates like Kreta Ayer Complex and People’s Park Complex. Once part of a tight-knit community in shophouses and backlane tenements, they are now separated from familiar routines and social support. With their departure, everyday public spaces have been lost or repurposed into café terraces. New gathering areas, often on the district’s edges, lack the fluid social interaction once found along five-foot-ways and temple courtyards. Meanwhile, tourism reshapes the neighbourhood, replacing daily trades with souvenir shops and themed hostels. Local life fades, and Chinatown risks becoming a backdrop to its own history.
Conversion of Historic Theaters into Commercial Complexes Lack of Intergeneratioanl connectivity Disconnection Between Cultural and Civic Spaces High Land Prices and Development Pressures Gentrification and Commercialization of Chinatown Lack of Incentives for Traditional Shopowners Gentrification Leading to Community Loss of Community Spaces for the Elderly Over-Tourism and Cultural Imbalance
compiled by Author,2025
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE
Image compiled by Author,2025
Significance of the Site
Chinatown holds deep historical significance as a product of the 1822 Raffles Town Plan, evolving into a dynamic settlement shaped by successive waves of Chinese migration. Its streets, temples, clan houses, and civic buildings reflect the aspirations, struggles, and collective identity of a multicultural migrant community. Over time, Chinatown became a crucible of trade, religion, food, and performance, offering a window into Singapore’s layered urban and social history.
Architecturally, Chinatown displays a rare continuity from conserved shophouses to bold modernist icons like People’s Park Complex and Hong Lim Complex. These post-independence mega structures embody the ideals of urban renewal and public housing integration, blending living, trading, and gathering functions within one built form. Together with the preserved low-rise vernacular fabric, they narrate a full arc of Singapore’s urban development from colonial order to modern nationhood.
Culturally, the area was once a thriving centre for traditional Chinese opera, dialect theatre, and martial arts. Institutions like the Kreta Ayer Theatre symbolised cultural vitality and intergenerational transmission. Today, however, these traditions face decline due to ageing demographics, disuse of performance spaces, and a shift toward tourism-focused programming. Reviving these cultural nodes is key to safeguarding Chinatown’s intangible heritage.
Communally, markets, kopitiams, and community halls formed the social glue of daily life. While some of this vibrancy remains, the displacement of residents and traditional trades by commercial tenants threatens its soul. Reinforcing communal infrastructure and reconnecting civic life across Chinatown’s built forms is essential for inclusive regeneration.
HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
COMMUNAL SIGNIFICANCE
Images compiled by Author,2025
CHAPTER 4 PRECEDENCE STUDY
4.1 Case Study 1: Muziris Heritage
Project, Kerala
4.2 Case Study 2: HDB Prime and Plus
4.3 Case Study 3: J-Walk
Case Study 1: Muziris Heritage Project, Kerala
The Muziris Heritage Project (MHP) is India’s largest heritage conservation and tourism initiative in collaboration with UNESCO, covering 150 square kilometres between North Paravur and Kodungallur in Kerala. Rather than isolating select monuments, MHP treats the entire cultural landscape as an open-air museum. Over 20 historic structures, including Kottappuram Fort, the Paravur Synagogue and the Paliam Dutch Palace, have been conserved with minimal intervention, focusing on structural safety and material authenticity. Visitors travel between sites by boat, retracing ancient maritime trade routes. Architect Benny Kuriakose’s master-plan introduces subtle steel-and-glass pavilions that support new functions without overwhelming the vernacular architecture. The project also celebrates intangible heritage through the Spice Route Initiative, connecting Muziris with 30 global ports via cultural exchanges, residencies and workshops. Local schools and cooperatives are actively involved, ensuring that conservation benefits nearby communities.
In parallel, the Kochi-Muziris Biennale (KMB), India’s first international contemporary art exhibition, activates Fort Kochi’s historic warehouses with site-specific installations. Each edition features a new curatorial theme and includes outreach such as the Students’ Biennale and “Art by Children.” These efforts transform disused godowns into cultural spaces. Attracting over half a million visitors per cycle, the Biennale shows how heritage settings can nurture both creative expression and local regeneration.
Middle: Heritage center for Muzris; Bottom: Archaeological excavations at the Ancient site of Muzris. Images Source: Muzris heritage project
Tabula Peutingeriana ( Ancient map of the Muzris); Images Source: Digital Maps of the Ancient World.
Top: Image of rejuvenated wet market; Middle: Image of the promenade near the lake : Bottom: Image of the boat jetty . Images Scorce: Muzris heritage project
Images of the art installation and the street. Images Source: Muzris heritage Binnale ; Muzris heritage project
Case Study 2: HDB Prime and Plus
In October 2024, Singapore’s Housing & Development Board (HDB) introduced a new three-tier framework: Standard, Plus and Prime. This replaced the previous “mature/non-mature estate” labels and classifies new Build-To-Order (BTO) projects based on location factors such as connectivity, centrality and nearby amenities. Each tier comes with varying levels of subsidies and resale conditions to ensure affordability, reduce speculative gains and promote social diversity in popular areas.
Plus flats are located near desirable amenities such as MRT interchanges, town centres or waterfronts. These receive higher subsidies than Standard flats but are subject to stricter rules, including a 10-year Minimum Occupation Period (MOP), a restriction on renting out the entire unit, and a requirement to return part of the subsidy when sold. Resale buyers must meet income limits of S$14,000 for families or S$7,000 for singles, and must wait 30 months after selling private property before they can purchase.
Prime flats are situated in the most attractive locations, such as inner-city areas with strong transport and lifestyle offerings. They come with the highest subsidies and the most stringent conditions, including the same 10-year MOP, rental restrictions and a higher subsidy-recovery amount, keeping public housing accessible to middle-income Singaporeans.
Newly proposed HDB that houses prime and plus apartments; Images Source: Strait Times
Newly proposed HDB at turf club that houses prime and plus apartments; Images Source: Property Guru
Case Study 3: J-Walk
The J-Walk programme is primarily an architectural strategy that elevates pedestrian movement to the second storey, connecting major developments in Jurong Gateway through a continuous, sheltered walkway. Central to this is a system of Elevated Pedestrian Links (EPLs) six to nine metres wide that bridge roads and integrate directly into malls, offices and the elevated MRT station. Designed with a 5.7-metre clearance above roads, these links align with the train platform level, enabling seamless transfers without returning to ground level. Vertical circulation is handled by lifts and escalators at building edges, ensuring barrier-free access to streets and bus interchanges.
Buildings must align interior floor levels with the walkway to maintain a smooth flow. Knock-out panels in boundary walls allow future bridges to connect as new sites are developed, supported by structural stubs sized in advance. Widths are optimised using pedestrian-flow simulations, with broader links near high-traffic areas such as Jurong East MRT.
Way finding is built into the architecture through sight-lines, consistent ceiling heights and strategic voids, supported by clear signage. Each developer constructs their segment, gradually forming a “second-storey street” that links malls, civic spaces and future office towers. J-Walk shifts Jurong’s focus from vehicles to pedestrians, offering a flexible, weatherproof urban network above street level.
Proposed J walk ; Images Source: Urban redevelopment Authority
Artist’s impression of the Proposed J walk; Images Source: Urban redevelopment Authority
CHAPTER 5 PROPOSED MASTERPLAN
Proposed Master Plan
GENERAL MASTERPLAN
The proposed master plan knits Chinatown’s dispersed fragments into a three-level circulation grid while locking in social anchors and steering new density to the precinct’s edge. At street level, a network of fresh pedestrian links is plotted to bridge today’s dead-ends: new ground-floor passages join the Buddha Tooth Relic forecourt to Sago Lane, splice People’s Park podiums into the shophouse grid and thread the Kreta Ayer food court directly to Pagoda Street. Above that, second-storey walkways extend the existing gallery decks of People’s Park Complex and Hong Lim Complex, allowing residents to move between blocks under cover and without negotiating traffic.
Below ground, additional MRT concourse openings and underpasses fan out from Chinatown and Maxwell stations, giving barrier-free access to every major hawker centre and heritage cluster. The plan also earmarks five informal gathering nodes—three for elderly chess and chat circles, one beside the hawker centre and another in front of Chinatown Complex—for surface upgrades and weather protection, ensuring that displacement does not erode longstanding social habits.
To temper gentrification pressure, a rent-control corridor envelopes the shophouse belts most critical to traditional trade; within these lines owners who cap rents gain transferable development rights they can sell to an under-developed receiver plot on Pearl’s Hill, where two new residential towers (capped at a gross-plot-ratio of 8.8) absorb surplus floor area without casting shadows on the conserved core.
The same conservation-incentive zone underwrites an “affordable heritage hospitality precinct”: selected ground-floor bays may be amalgamated into budget boutique hotels provided original façades and five-foot-ways are restored and kept publicly accessible. Finally, three dotted thematic trails overlay the functional grid. A performing-arts spine links restored theatres and planned streetopera pockets; a food-craft loop guides visitors past hawker courts, pop-up craft yards and clan-hall tea rooms; and an architectural trail circles key modernist landmarks slated for façade cleaning and structural reinforcement. Together these interventions align mobility, affordability and storytelling so that intensified land use can coexist with a living, publicly legible heritage landscape.
Design level Intervention
Refurbishment of Kreta Ayer and Hong Lim Complexes shall incorporate the HDB Standard–Plus–Prime model through spatial zoning and circulation design. Deep-core flats, least accessible to MRT exits, are designated as Standard units with minimal alteration, preserving original typologies. Plus flats must reconfigure internal layouts for flexible family living and community-oriented corridors, fronting key
MRT-adjacent façades. Prime flats,corner stacks with panoramic views,shall fund upgrades through higher resale premiums, their interiors designed with integrated services to reduce future retrofitting costs.
In the shophouse fabric, a new adaptive-reuse overlay permits 15–25room boutique hotel conversions, conditional on preserving partywall timber, façades, and five-foot ways. Courtyards shall be shared across amalgamated plots, programmed with community crafts, kitchens, or performance alcoves to anchor guest–local exchange.
All major interventions must deliver barrier-free access through tactile-paved five-foot ways, lifts or stair upgrades connecting three levels, and a minimum one publicly accessible mid-block link to pedestrian trails. These links may incorporate passive shading, seating, and signage drawn from a district-wide palette.
Design along the heritage-trail network must follow approved storefront proportions, lighting temperature, and paint tones. On trail routes, tenancies must support visibility into food prep, art-making, or rehearsal activities.
Buildings over 2,500 m² GFA shall integrate a 5% “community connector”: a rooftop, atrium, or colonnade furnished for multi-age use. These spaces are operated by a Shopkeepers & Owners Cooperative, with architectural cues inviting intergenerational use and storytelling. Spatial strategies must express conservation as lived, shared, and evolving heritage.
PROPOSED UPGRADES AND ADDITIONS: Plus & Prime Flats. Structural Reinforcement & Vertical Integration. Interconnection of Blocks
Policy level Intervention
The plan proposes a multi-pronged heritage-led development strategy for Chinatown that balances preservation with economic viability. First, Kreta Ayer and Hong Lim Complexes would be reclassified for first-storey mixed-use while maintaining their current gross plot ratio. This allows full commercial activation at the ground level without risking demolition of the modernist superblocks—thus locking in both heritage and revenue potential. By treating GPR as a conservation tool, the strategy reframes these complexes as valuable architectural artefacts, not redevelopment targets.
Second, a rent-control scheme is paired with a Transfer-of-DevelopmentRights (TDR) mechanism. Shophouse owners who cap rent increases on select units receive tradable development credits, which can be transferred to designated under-built sites at the district’s edge. Modelled on a 5% uplift in GFA, this move monetises restraint, offering both heritage protection and S$3.98 million in potential land value appreciation for receiving plots. At the same time, capped rents sustain smaller operators, adding roughly S$5,843 in affordable lease value each cycle.
These are bolstered by a streetscape-sensitive zoning code, incentives for licensed “heritage artists,” and a cooperative of shopkeepers and owners that channels public funds into repairs, shared equipment, and youth apprenticeships. Together, these policies entwine profit and preservation, crafting a resilient, culturally rooted future for Chinatown.
DEVELOPMENTAL POLICY:
Conserving Kreta Ayer and Hong
Lim Complex (Economic Value):
Adjusting Gross Plot Ratio (GPR) and land use.
SUPPLEMENTARY HERITAGE GUIDELINES:
Introduce grading systems, preserve skyline views, and ensure architectural harmony in new developments.
SHOPKEEPERS & OWNERS
COOPERATIVE : Establish a cooperative for rent regulation, financial support, and public-private collaboration.
TDR & RENT CONTROL :
Implement zoning, rent control, and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) to balance conservation and growth.
SUPPORT FOR TRADITIONAL CRAFTS & BUSINESSES:
Provide incentives, dedicated spaces, and protection for artisans and heritage shop.
CHAPTER 6
UPCYCLING
THE PAST
6.1 Development, Conservation, and economics
6.1 Upcycling Hong Lim Complex
6.2 Upcycling Kreta Ayer Complex
Development, Conservation, and economics
To work out the Land Betterment Charge (LBC) you first identify the site’s baseline gross-floor-area (GFA) and use group (i.e. the parameters of the most intensive development already approved for the land). Next, take the proposed scheme’s GFA and use group and look up the dollarper-square-metre rates for both in URA’s bi-annual LBC rate tables, which list 118 geographical sectors and 13 use groups. Multiply each GFA by its corresponding rate to obtain a baseline land value and a proposed land value; the charge payable is the difference between the two figures, if positive. In equation form: LBC = (GFA_new × Rate_new) − (GFA_baseline × Rate_baseline). If only the use changes (no extra floor area), apply the same GFA for both steps; if the calculation returns a negative number, no LBC is due. The Chief Valuer may adjust values for unusual cases, and any payable amount must be settled before planning permission is issued. From this calculation we can compare the value of land prior to development and after the redevelopment.
While it is true that based on the LBC, the land value of the Kreta Ayer Complex and Hong Lim Complex are reduced because of the downsizing of the GPR in the masterplan, the reality is not that simple. The supply and demand often stabilizes itself, in this case the less of supply from those two housing complexes, the higher the price due to the demand. The point of this redevelopment is to obtain the same value with the one of the highest in the area, in this case the redevelopment of Pearl Bank.
In order to cover up the loss of the potential value from the market on both complexes while simultaneously trying to conserve them, there needs to be incentives to conserve them. The incentives will be in the form of additional GFA and changing the status of the building into HDB plus and prime.
$1,383,955,981.03 $2,299,176,078.46-$915,220,097.43 Images compiled by Author,2025
$1,027,445,144.1
$600,328,203.05 $783,627,777.98
Up cycling Hong Lim
Completed in 1980, Hong Lim Complex is an L-shaped, mixed-use HDB development that fronts both Upper Cross Street and South Bridge Road Above a four-storey podium of shops, offices and the well-known Hong Lim Market & Food Centre rise three slab blocks—Blocks 531, 532, 533 and 536—each 14 to 18 storeys high and together containing about 540 flats Lift cores positioned at the elbows of the “L” link residents direc tly to the podium concourse, so the complex func tions as a self-contained ver tical neighbourhood within Chinatown’s conservation grid The complex itself also have two parking buildings in between the blocks. In order to conserve the complex, there needs to be an addition of GFA that is in the form of additional units being put on top of the parking buildings
Opened in October 1983 and renamed Chinatown Complex the following year, Kreta Ayer Complex is a single, purpose-built municipal block that occupies the entire island site bounded by Smith, Trengganu, Pagoda and Sago Streets. Inside, it concentrates roughly 1,200 commercial units: a basement wet market with about 250 fresh-produce stalls, a groundfloor ring of some 250 lock-up shops, and Singapore’s largest hawker centre on the second storey, where 700-plus cooked-food stalls wrap around a U-shaped light well; two upper decks are given over to multistorey car parking. At its western end, the building is physically linked to the Kreta Ayer People’s Theatre—a 1,000-seat venue opened in 1969 (and refurbished in 1994) that remains the city’s principal stage for Cantonese opera, getai shows and community galas. Shared foyers and pedestrian bridges connect the theatre directly to the hawker and market floors, making the complex a self-contained hub for food, retail and traditional performing arts at the heart of Chinatown. In order to conserve the complex, there needs to be an addition of GFA that is in the form of additional units being put on top of the parking buildings. Some of the units also can be transformed into budget hotel, creating more economic value inside the complex.
SCHEMATIC
Images compiled by Author,2025
BUDGET HOSTELS
PRIME: PLAY AREA + AMENITIES
Images compiled by Author,2025
CONNECTING PLAY AREAS
PLUS: PENTHOUSE TERRACES+ GARDENS
Images compiled by Author,2025
CHAPTER 7
UPCYCLING THE PAST
7.1 Red Thread festival
7.2 Heritage Trail
7.3 Supplementary Conservation Guidelines
Red Thread Festival
Weaving Faith, Memory, and Place
The Red Thread Festival celebrates the rich cultural fabric of Chinatown through an immersive evening of heritage, artistry, and collective memory. Rooted in the symbolic “red thread” that connects people across time and tradition, this year’s edition highlights the beautifully interwoven histories of Chinese, Tamil, and Malay communities that have long coexisted in this vibrant precinct.
As six streets in the heart of Chinatown are pedestrianised for the evening, the festival space transforms into a living archive of shared customs and creative exchange. Participants can savour Tang-yuan while listening to Tamil percussion, witness lion dances and kolam designs side by side, and join pottery workshops inspired by Peranakan and Malay motifs. Storytelling, craft, and performance come together to honour the everyday artisanship and intangible heritage of each culture, not as isolated threads, but as an interconnected.
From temple courtyards to five-foot ways, the Red Thread Festival invites all to walk, taste, and create in a space where past and present, memory and motion, tradition and reinvention harmoniously intersect. It is a festival that celebrates difference not as division, but as dialogue; an experience of streets shared, stories crossed, and cultures lovingly intertwined.
1 KRETY AYER HERITAGE CENTER & KRETA AYER PEOPLE’S THEATRE
2. KRETA AYER COMPLEX
3. CHINA TOWN VISITORS CENTER
4. BUDDHA TOOTH RELIC TEMPLE
5. SRI MARIAMMAN TEMPLE
6. JAME MOSQUE
7. HONG LIM COMPLEX
8. CHINA TOWN POINT
9. MAJESTIC THEATRE
10.PEOPLE’S PARK COMPLEX
1. RED THREAD THERE SHOW
2. ART STALL
3. PRACTICE LION/DRAGON DANCE
4. FOOD/COOKING STALL
5. SPONTANT SHOP
Red Thread Festival
Weaving Faith, Memory, and Place
REVENUE GENERATION FOR THE FESTIVAL
On the designated festival evening — from 4 p.m. to 10 p.m. — six streets in Chinatown (Mosque, Pagoda, Temple, Smith and Trengganu Streets, plus the inside lane of South Bridge Road) will be closed to vehicles and handed over to pedestrians. Traffic counts show that diverting 86 cars from the inner lanes and 4 432 cars from South Bridge Road during this six-hour window will impose about S $313.65 in direct “internal” time-loss on local motorists and S $6 259.62 in wider network impacts, for a one-off pedestrianisation cost of S $6 573.27.
Within the car-free zone a slate of heritage-focused events is programmed. A Tang-yuan cooking class for 98 participants yields a surplus of S $4 508 after covering ingredients and instructors, while lion-dance and dragon-dance practice sessions taken up by 23 and 18 enthusiasts respectively bring in a combined S $1 038. Two evening art workshops — one on seal-carving (163 heads) and another on pottery (66 heads) — add another S $4 483 to the balance sheet. The Kreta Ayer People’s Theatre hosts a 634-seat Biennalestyle performance, clearing about S $3 369 once production costs are met.
Street life is further animated by spontaneous pop-up shops that occupy vacated kerb space; with an estimated 4 432 shoppers they turn S $44 320 in takings against set-up costs of S $12 663, generating a robust profit of S $31 657.14. Nearby multi-storey garages at Hong Lim and Chinatown Complex absorb the displaced parking demand and post a six-hour operating surplus of S $6 204.80.
Adding up all revenues — workshops, pop-up retail, theatre tickets and parking — the festival evening is expected to gross about S $50 960. After subtracting total operating expenses, including the S $6 573.27 traffic-diversion bill, the event finishes with a net surplus of roughly S $44 687. Those proceeds will be reinvested in future editions and in micro-grants for Chinatown’s traditional artisans, demonstrating that a carefully managed six-hour pedestrianisation can enliven the precinct, showcase cultural skills and more than pay its own way.
CALCULATION FOR LOSSES DURING TRAFFIC
REROUTING
CALCULATION OF REVENUE FOR RED THREAD FESTIVAL
Image compiled by Author,2025
Heritage Trails
Weaving Food, Architecture, and Culture
ECHOES OF STAGE : At key junctions within the AR experience, visitors can activate vibrant festival scenes, such as animated overlays of Chinese New Year celebrations, lion dances, or Teochew opera performances. By scanning murals, signs, or temple facades, users can unlock artifact animations that reveal layers of cultural lore, provide translations of Chinese inscriptions, and explain the symbolic meanings behind various motifs. Additionally, designated story hotspots allow visitors to trigger immersive firstperson AR oral histories, where ghostly elders appear to recount personal tales about traditional rituals, vanishing trades, or memories of migratiWon, bringing the rich heritage of the community to life in a deeply engaging way.
TASTE AND TRADES : Visitors can scan street corners or stalls to activate AR Food Pop-Ups, where long-lost hawker setups like dim sum carts and satay vendors come to life in 3D, recreating the vibrant food scenes of the past. By hovering over QR markers, users can access interactive menus that reveal stories, traditional recipes, and short videos demonstrating how classic dishes were once prepared. The experience also features a Then & Now Dish Comparison, allowing users to tap on dishes to explore how their ingredients, prices, and preparation methods have changed over time. In Photo Mode, users can virtually “plate” historical dishes in AR and capture souvenir snapshots, complete with filters inspired by the nostalgic aesthetics of old Chinatown.
BUILT TO LAST : An immersive AR heritage tour that brings lost architecture and layered histories to life. As you walk through familiar streetscapes, watch long-demolished structures like opium dens, clan houses, and early shophouses reappear before your eyes through Ghost Structures. Use the Tap to Time-Travel feature to explore how each location transformed from the 1890s to the 1950s and into the present. Point your device at conserved buildings to uncover Layered Facades, revealing hidden architectural details and vintage signage. Guided by mini AR audio tours, hear the voices of former residents and architects narrate personal stories and the evolution of the built environment,blending memory, design, and place.
Supplementary Conservation Guidelines
PLANNING PEOPLE REUSE MEMORY HERITAGE CULTURE
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
HERITAGE GRADING SYSTEM WITHIN CONSERVATION AREAS:
It is proposed that the buildings within conservation areas shall be officially listed and graded under the established Heritage Grading System (Grade I, II, III). A Heritage Advisory Committee (existing) shall oversee classification and updates based on periodic heritage assessments. Any alterations, additions, or redevelopment within a conservation area shall be approved by the relevant heritage authority. This system ensures that both individual structures and the broader townscape are protected, conserved, and appropriately managed.
RECOGNITION OF 20TH-CENTURY HERITAGE:
This is undertaken so the buildings from the modern era (20th century onward) shall also be assessed based on historical, architectural, and socio-cultural value. Modern heritage shall be classified under the same grading system (Grade I, II, III) to ensure appropriate conservation measures.
All developments within heritage precincts or their vicinity shall adhere to the URA Guidelines, ensuring that the built environment remains cohesive, contextually appropriate, and sensitive to the area’s historic significance. The proposed guidelines would be a supplementary guidelines for historic district.
PROPOSED MASTER PLAN - CONSERVATION
PEOPLE’S PARK COMPLEX
100% INTACT
KRETA AYER COMPLEX
100% INTACT UPGRADED IN 2016
SRI
MARIAMMAN TEMPLE
MAJESTIC THEATRE
JAME MASJID
100% INTACT
HERITAGE GRADING
GRADE 1
Strict preservation measures apply; original features must be retained. No major alterations or additions are permitted; restoration must follow best conservation practices. Adaptive reuse may be considered only if it does not compromise authenticity. New developments must respect the historical context and skyline.
For the conservation of modern structures, buildings that have high socio-cultural value shall be listed as Grade 1 to safeguard the integrity of the social and communal value.
Icon of Tropical Brutalism: Singapore’s earliest mixed-use mega structure. A landmark of postindependence urban modernity and social life.
Cultural Anchor for Chinese Opera: Vital for preserving dialect traditions and performing arts in the heart of Chinatown.
Pioneer Tamil Muslim Landmark: a spiritual and architectural beacon serving early Indian Muslim settlers since the 1820s
Cultural-Art Deco Gem; originally built in 1928 for Cantonese opera, blending Shanghaistyle Art Deco with Chinese motifs.
Singapore’s Oldest Hindu Temple: continuous place of worship and cultural sanctuary for the South Indian community since 1827.
CHINA TOWN COMPLEX
100% INTACT
Integrated HawkerHousing Hub: exemplifies 1980s modernism and Singapore’s approach to centralised urban life
100% INTACT
HONG LIM COMPLEX
100% INTACT
Vertical Urbanism Pioneer: a mixed-use development blending residential, retail, and civic life, marking Singapore’s shift toward integrated city living in the 1970s.
GRADE 2
Intelligent conservation is required to retain key architectural features. Adaptive reuse permitted with strict guidelines ensuring integrity.
Alterations or extensions are allowed if they respect the existing style and proportions. New developments in the vicinity must be sensitive to the heritage context.
Cultural Echo Chambers: secondary heritage venues that supported grassroots performance traditions, fostering collective identity across dialect groups.
CHINA TOWN POINT
100% INTACT
Modern-heritage Transition Node: commercial center that bridges conserved precincts with contemporary Chinatown development.
SHOP HOUSES
Street scape Anchors: iconic urban typologies combining commerce and residence, essential to Chinatown’s rhythmic street character and communal memory.
GRADE 3
Retention of primary features is encouraged while allowing modifications for functionality. Adaptive reuse and alterations are permitted with design controls to ensure harmony. Sensitive infill developments may be allowed while preserving the area’s overall character.
Demolition or major structural changes are discouraged unless necessary and justified
Conclusion
The present study demonstrates that Singapore’s Chinatown, long celebrated for its nineteenth-century shophouse fabric, also possesses a layered twentieth-century and modern heritage whose social, architectural and economic values demand equal attention. Archival reconstruction confirms a settlement trajectory that runs from pre-colonial agrarian outpost to immigrant entrepôt, through waves of overcrowding, secret-society turbulence and post-war slum clearance, to today’s internationally recognised conservation district. Yet field surveys and mapping reveal persistent structural shortcomings: fragmented pedestrian circulation, under-used upper storeys, rising land prices that accelerate gentrification, and the erosion of artisanal and performing-arts traditions.
Responding to these findings, the proposed master plan advocates a three-level circulation grid, ground passages, second-storey skywalks and sub-surface MRT links—that reconnects modern megastructures with conserved shophouse lanes while safeguarding long-standing social nodes. A calibrated policy package couples rent control, transferabledevelopment-rights corridors and HDB’s new Plus–Prime housing tiers to arrest displacement, incentivise adaptive reuse and cross-subsidise the conservation of Hong Lim and Kreta Ayer complexes. Design-level interventions, including barrier-free retrofits, budget-hotel adaptive reuse and mandatory community connectors, anchor inter-generational exchange and everyday affordability.
Cultural programming, most visibly a six-hour annual heritage festival and two AR-enabled thematic trails, translates these physical upgrades into lived experience, directing visitor spending towards licensed “heritage artists”, pop-up craft yards and revitalised performance venues. A graded listing system for twentieth-century buildings closes gaps in statutory protection, ensuring that landmark modernist blocks and contributory townscape fabric are conserved alongside earlier architecture.
Financial analysis indicates that, when carbon offsets and transferable floor-area premiums are accounted for, conservation-led up-cycling yields competitive land values while avoiding the environmental costs of wholesale redevelopment. Taken together, the research, policy toolkit and pilot designs set out in this publication offer a replicable model for dense, multicultural quarters facing similar pressures worldwide. They demonstrate that mobility, affordability and heritage can be aligned to sustain Chinatown as a living, economically vibrant landscape in which historic shophouses, modernist towers and intangible cultural practices continue to evolve in concert rather than in conflict.
View of the street market along Trengganu Street in Chinatown in 1962; source: National archives of Singapore
Annexure DOCUMENTATION
Joint Site visit
Final Design Review
Joint Site Visit
Joint site visit to Kreta Ayer and the historic precinct of China town was conducted on 21 January 2025.
Final Review
Final design review on Kreta Ayer and the historic precinct of China town was conducted on 29 April 2025.
1. Buckley, Charles Burton. 1984. An Anecdotal History of Old Times in Singapore. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
4. Dunlop, Peter K. G. 2000. Street Names of Singapore. Singapore: Who’s Who Publishing.
5. Environment, Ministry of Sustainability &. 2020. “Stepped Up Enforcement Checks on Safe Management Measures at Food and Beverage Premises,” September 15, 2020. https://www.mse.gov.sg/ latest-news/press-release-on-safe-management-measures-at-f-b-premises.
6. Frost, Mark Ravinder, and Yu-Mei Balasingamchow. 2009. Singapore, A Biography. Singapore: Editions Didier Millet & National Museum of Singapore.
7. International, Times Books. 1983. Chinatown, an Album of a Singapore Community. Singapore: Archives and Oral History Department.
8. Khong, Swee Lin, and Carl-Bernd Kaehlig. 2001. Chinatown, Rhythm & Blues. Singapore: Times Media Pte Ltd.
9. Liu, Gretchen. 1999. Singapore, A Pictorial History 1819 – 2000. Singapore: National Heritage Board & Editions Didier Millet.
10. LTA. n.d. “Thomson-East Coast Line Journeys to the East.” LTA. https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltagov/en/upcoming_projects/ rail_expansion/thomson_east_coast_line.html.
11. Singh, Reena. 1995. A Journey Through Singapore, Travellers’ Impressions of Time Gone by. Singapore: Landmark Books.
12. Turnbull, C. M. 2009. A History of Modern Singapore 1819 – 2005. Singapore: NUS Press.
13. Wong, Ah Yoke, and Anjali Raguraman. 2021. “Chinatown Food Street Closes, Business Hit Badly by Lack of Customers amid Covid-19 Pandemic.” The Straits Times, October 26, 2021. https:// www.straitstimes.com/singapore/chinatown-food-street-closesbusiness-hit-badly-by-lack-of-customers-amid-pandemic.
