The much anticipated move from the government to restrict building of shoebox apartments finally came yesterday.
In TODAY’s article titled ‘Curbs on suburban “shoeboxes”‘, from 4th November onwards, “non-landed private residential developments outside the central area will have to adhere to a formula which stipulates that the average size of homes in a particular development will need to be at least 70 sq m.”
Since shoebox units are under 50 sq m, the new guidelines are forcing the developers to mix these small units with bigger ones.
What puzzles me is the reason behind URA’s move — shoeboxes “strain the local road infrastructure”, cause “severe traffic congestion, shortage of car parks and double-parking”.
More cars is the result of more residential projects appearing in that area. What has that to do with the size of the units?
A family of five living in a 3-bedroom unit versus three singles staying in three shoebox units, do you think the family or the singles need a car more? Which case is likely to own more than one car?
These days many new condos cannot even guarantee one parking lot for each unit, citing reason of proximity to public transportation, single expatriates’ preference to take cabs, etc. As a result, only bigger units are assigned a parking lot.
I’m surprised that the government only concerns about the impact of shoebox developments on the neighborhood, instead of pointing straight to the implications of people buying or staying in such units.
The real problem is: buyers of shoeboxes are unaware of what they are buying into.
After URA announced the new guidelines, some buyers/would-be-buyers may even think that prices of shoebox units will go up because of more restrictions and thus limited supply in the future.
Most of the buyers buying for their own stay have never lived in a shoebox unit before. And I doubt any investor have tried to rent out such units when times are bad.
Developers have taken their share of profit, leaving individual owners holding onto their units to test the market.
These tiny units may look affordable to buyers during a time when property prices go sky-high. But when prices go south, with tons of choices, why would buyers/tenants want to cramp into a shoebox?
Remember we once have these walk-up apartments that are very affordable too. What happen to them now?
When people realize that they have overpaid for a property and have ‘subsidized’ tenants for too long, are they willing to fork out more for future maintenance?
With the aging of the property, how to get agreement from so many individual owners to go enbloc? How to convince developers to buy enbloc and build even smaller units to maximize the plot ratio?
Supporters claim that shoebox units is the property trend.
Will the number of singles, single expatriates, DINKs, etc. continue to increase in the future?
Yes, most likely.
Will the demand for shoebox units grow as fast as their TOP?
No, I don’t think so.
Leave a Reply