Gillman was a Reserve Site until 2025
Did you know?
Gillman was never meant for housing. It had a Reserve Site status until the 2025 URA Master Plan rezoned it for residential land use, both private and public housing.
It was supposed to be a lifestyle enclave that benefit current and future communities. Stated in the 2022 announcement: "Gillman Barracks will be transformed into a vibrant enclave. Families, cyclists, hikers, arts enthusiasts, nature lovers, as well as the working community and residents in Alexandra and Telok Blangah, and future residents at the earlier announced Greater Southern Waterfront, can look forward..."
Today not only are we losing a distinctive space of identity and respite, but the housing plan extends beyond the barracks. The total site area of 47 hectares includes a bio-diversity rich, hill forest habitat that's part of the Southern Ridges.
In my opinion, removing spaces of public good feels like an urban planning mistake. I thought society needed a variety of spaces to thrive. I thought natural heritage is part of our identity too. And I expected a successful nation to provide a better quality of life beyond the basics.
Human-wildlife conflict occurs when faunal habitat is removed or encroached. Monkeys have been sighted in Gillman forest and the adjacent nature reserve. That could be a new issue unless we preserve existing wildlife habitats; keep the existing boundaries and build new homes on non-forested lands.
Is it truly impossible to plan the 47 hectares development in a way that keeps the existing 22 hectares forest and existing identity nodes intact? Are housing projections made by the 2024 Committee of Supply still accurate today after considering:
• AI disruption to labour projections
• Economic uncertainty
• Climate change resilience
Near-term housing needs nearby?
• Depot Lane Industrial Estate is already vacated to make way for housing.
• Greater Southern Waterfront's Berlayar Estate alone will provide 10,000 new housing
• At least another 8 ongoing projects for new housing within 0.5km to 4km radius. Full list in petition.
It's also worth noting that Greater Southern Waterfront megaproject is 30km worth of brownfields along Singapore's southern coastline. That is plenty.
👉 Do we need PMO Prime Minister's Office to step in for executive oversight?
MND is bound by developmental targets. Therefore, perhaps the Ministry of National Development should not be the entity that decides the footprint of forest preservation. Even more so when the current EIA framework that's supposed to guide urban planning excludes climate change resilience parameters.
Unfortunately MSE seems to be out of the picture. Reaffirmed by the Minister of Sustainability and Environment too.
"When more than 20 parliamentary questions were filed by MPs from both sides of the House, it has clearly become more than a constituency matter. It has become a national policy question". I agree with the former Nominated Member of Parliament who said this on socials.
So many people have voiced out. Ordinary people ❤️ across Singapore. Because we are saying that our remaining secondary forests and community havens are as valuable as the national monuments and other assets that are currently off-limits.
We are saying look elsewhere, look harder. Think outside the status quo. Reduce land sales for condo, purchase empty private land, renew aging estates, rezone other sites, there are other ways.
This discussion goes beyond Gillman. It is rightfully a national question about land-use policy islandwide. A good read in the Straits Times: Singapore's City In Nature vision needs more space for its forests suggests that the government stop viewing forests as a developmental loss.