| 4. In which ways is the initiative creative and innovative?
|
|
Key to the successful execution and implementation of HDB’s ERS has been the integration of public participation and consultation into the various processes.
Upgrading projects: Selected projects are announced by their respective Adviser (a Member of Parliament), usually at a local event for the residents, after which the Adviser forms a Working Committee (WC) comprising representatives from the local town council, grassroots leaders, HDB staff and the appointed design consultant for the project. Interested residents are also invited to attend the WC meetings which are held regularly to deliberate on the proposed design solution and upgrading package. In formulating the preliminary package, all factors are taken into consideration – residents’ preferences, budget, technical recommendations, maintenance issues, and physical site constraints. The proposed design solution is presented to the residents at an exhibition where residents are able to view models and mock-ups of the proposed improvements and then vote on whether they accept the package. HDB staff also personally visit the residents to explain the improvements to them, and the costs involved. A 75% majority support for the package is required for upgrading work to proceed.
Before construction begins, consultants and contractors make house visits to understand better the internal conditions and the concerns of home owners. The WC continues to meet throughout the construction phase, to deliberate on technical and people management issues that crop up. Once the work is completed, a celebratory ceremony is held for the residents and all involved. Post upgrading, HDB carries out surveys to assess the effectiveness of the programme and if it has met the needs of residents.
SERS projects: Selected SERS sites are announced by the government. This is followed by exhibitions or precinct consultation exercises where residents can provide feedback, obtain clarification, and provide suggestions and ideas to shape their new living environments. HDB staff also visit each household to explain the SERS programme, process, compensation packages and financial plans. Once their decision is made, residents are invited to register and select a new replacement flat. After the new housing precinct is completed, and the residents have settled into their homes, welcome parties are organised to mark a new beginning for them. In addition to ad-hoc surveys conducted during the process, biennial surveys are conducted after the SERS journey to obtain feedback for policy review and service improvement.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkoObY0f43I&index=1&list=PLhySiLSCu8FigCtgZt7YyCBI24boxwQfp)
ROH Projects: The announcement and implementation of ROH plans are customised to the selected towns/estates. The first batch of ROH towns was announced by the Prime Minister in 2007. Being a new programme with innovative ideas, a massive main exhibition was held followed by roving exhibitions to the selected towns, and intensive public consultation was carried out via focus groups, public forums and various other similar platforms. As one of the selected sites was a coastal town, a design competition was held to generate fresh and innovative design ideas for high-rise public housing along the waterway. The competition, opened to professional local and foreign architectural firms, secured the best housing design for the first waterfront parcel, and introduced new sustainable development concepts to realise the theme of ‘Green Living by the Waters’.
Subsequent ROH announcements and exhibitions take place on a localised basis. And public consultation continues to be a key feature.
|
|
| 5. Who implemented the initiative and what is the size of the population affected by this initiative?
|
|
As the ERS touches residents’ lives in very tangible and personal ways, successful implementation of the programmes hinge on their participation and consultation, especially for upgrading which requires entry into residents’ homes. Their understanding is crucial, as well as their cooperation as a community to obtain the 75% consensus required.
The local Adviser and grassroots organisations are staple partners in the execution and implementation of the ERS. They play the valued role of representing residents’ collective interests, as well as bringing the benefits of the ERS to residents using outreach methods more comfortable and accessible to residents, for example over coffee or while chatting at the market.
Whilst engaging the ‘heartware’, that is the residents themselves, HDB also ensures that the hardware aspects of all ERS projects are integrated by bringing aboard relevant experts. Every project entails working closely with public agencies that manage services within the affected sites. For ROH for example, HDB works with public agencies like the Ministry of National Development, Ministry of Environmental and Water Resources, Land Transport Authority, and the National Environment Agency, in formulating and implementing proposals.
To provide variety and options in the various ERS programmes, the private sector is also invited to participate. In the Punggol Waterfront Housing Design Competition for the first public housing parcel along Punggol Waterway, more than 100 private firms participated and half of them were foreign. HDB also invited local architectural firms to generate exciting designs for two public housing precincts in Dawson Estate, another ROH project.
Where relevant, NGOs are included to help realise certain initiatives. Under the ROH plans, requirements for planning cycling routes for example, needed to be reviewed and a steering committee was set up with representatives from cycling enthusiast groups. Civic groups were also engaged to look into proposals for heritage preservation.
|
| 6. How was the strategy implemented and what resources were mobilized?
|
|
The ERS is heavily funded by the Government with the belief that no HDB household should be denied an improved living environment and quality of life because of financial constraints.
The cumulative grant of S$8,200 million (up to 31 March 2014) is drawn from the Government for upgrading projects. Nevertheless, upgrading programmes operate on a co-share basis with the Government bearing from between 55%-90% of the cost, with the remaining cost split between the residents and their local town council. The varying percentages would depend on the size of the flat and the upgrading package of improvements that the residents choose. This co-sharing approach encourages greater ownership and responsibility among residents for their living environment. In line with other public housing policies, bigger flat types receive fewer subsidies, and various financial assistance measures are available for residents who need help with the upgrading costs.
The bulk of the costs of the upgrading projects are financed by grants from the Government. The upgrading projects could be very comprehensive, involving both sold and rental residential properties as well as commercial properties. The scope of works not only varies across projects, but also among blocks and flats within a project. There are different costing principles for different property types and upgrading projects. Such complexity required the development of well-integrated computer systems to capture and share critical information such as the improvement items chosen by residents to enable accurate billing when the upgrading works for a project are completed.
Funding is needed for SERS projects to make fair compensation to the owners for the acquisition of their flats. There are also costs involved in demolishing vacated old blocks. The costs for 17 SERS sites announced from 2006 to 2012 was about S$2.7 billion (excluding demolition costs). Funding is also needed for the development of the replacement precinct, which comprises land and construction costs. These costs are defrayed by the sale proceeds of the new flats.
Government funding for ROH plans is allocated to the various public agencies to drive and implement the respective ROH proposals under their purview. Rejuvenation of our Town Centres (TC) and Neighbourhood Centres (NC) for example is spearheaded by HDB. Under Batch 2 of the ROH programme, 3 TCs and 21 NCs were identified for rejuvenation and each TC and NC was allocated S$3m and S$2m respectively.
All programmes under the ERS and as well as the ROH programme are massive and human-resource intensive. However, as most of the technical professionals are from HDB and the other relevant government agencies, the human resource costs are borne by the individual agencies themselves. In addition for each ROH launch which usually involves intensive public communication and consultation, HDB will provide the necessary budget which comes up to about S$1 billion per ROH batch of estates [see appended press article http://news.asiaone.com/print/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20110109-257152.html].
|
|
| 7. Who were the stakeholders involved in the design of the initiative and in its implementation?
|
|
Economic Stability
As towns/estates are rejuvenated and upgraded, the overall living environment for residents is enhanced with new facilities and amenities. Residents’ housing assets appreciate and businesses thrive in a renewed and vibrant town centre. HDB towns become homes of choice for citizens and businesses. These contribute to economic stability and sustainability in the long run as the Government continues to sustain its upgrading and rejuvenation efforts. One good example is Clementi, an HDB town that has benefitted from SERS. Over the past 16 years, some 2,800 households have moved into their new SERS replacement flats. Today, HDB flats in Clementi are highly sought after. At the Town Centre is the new Clementi Mall, part of a mixed development project that brings together shopping, dining, and transport amenities, as well as the new HDB homes of many residents from former SERS blocks in the vicinity. The mixed development project has won international awards including the international FIABCI Prix d’Excellence Award, in recognition of its exemplary design and benefits it brings to the community.
Social Cohesiveness
HDB towns are homes to the majority of the population. Residents form life-long attachments to the towns and estates that they grew up in, where they raised families, and where they formed strong friendships with their neighbours. Through the public housing programme, members of Singapore’s diverse society can share common experiences and forge a common identity. This is something the ERS has been able to support by allowing residents to continue living in the towns they have grown accustomed to, where they have forged strong community links, and where they feel a sense of belonging, increasing the sense of rootedness and pride among residents. The ERS is a sustainable living solution that allows residents to age-in-place in a comfortable, familiar, yet vibrant environment.
Environmental Sustainability
Programmes like SERS have allowed for the optimisation of land use to overcome the constraint of land scarcity. In addition, the ROH programme brings a more holistic planning approach to the transformation of older towns. With a greater range of facilities, like markets, shops, schools, recreational hubs, and community spaces provided, in addition to the integration of transportation networks, the ERS is a vital means of improving the self-sufficiency of the towns and convenience for the residents.
|
|
| 8. What were the most successful outputs and why was the initiative effective?
|
|
Programmes under the ERS are massive and wide-reaching, thus new programmes are usually launched with a demonstration phase to test concepts, refine strategies, and evaluate public response.
As the ERS is heavily Government-funded, accountability is carefully assigned. Steering committees are usually helmed at Ministry level, at HDB level by the CEO/Deputy CEO, or by top management level of relevant government agencies. They keep track of the programme’s overall direction and provide guidance on policy issues and sensitive matters. At ground level, project/working committees are key drivers in monitoring and moving implementation forward by engaging residents with dialogue and feedback, resolving problems, and by keeping close tabs on the actual upgrading work.
Public consultation occupies a central place in the implementation of the ERS and the views/feedback obtained before, during, and after a project is launched and completed, provides valuable input in evaluating the programmes and determining the shape and form of subsequent projects.
Upgrading Projects
Upgrading projects like HIP are essentially HDB-run. This makes it easier to coordinate work areas, monitor results and evaluate processes as internal communication lines are accessible and convenient. HDB’s Deputy CEO (Building) takes the lead in overseeing implementation and regular meetings among the various internal stakeholders keep upgrading projects on track. As residents’ feedback and support for upgrading is central in monitoring the programme’s implementation and success, HDB also helps drive meetings at the ground level, coordinating Working Committee meetings with residents, Advisers, town councils and other stakeholders.
SERS Projects
Due to the sensitive nature of SERS, dedicated teams of HDB staff are formed early in the process to attend to feedback and residents’ concerns. Interactions are personalised and face-to-face. HDB ‘handholds’ residents throughout the SERS process, which could take 5 to 6 years, to ensure that the transition is smooth and to monitor closely any problems which can then be quickly resolved. In addition to ad-hoc surveying of residents currently going through the process, HDB also conducts biennial surveys on residents who have completed the SERS journey to obtain feedback for policy review and service improvement.
ROH Projects
Inter-agency ROH Steering Committees and Task Forces steer the programmes and monitor progress of the various projects. Regular meetings ensure the scope of work is properly defined to achieve the objectives set. ROH projects also attract strong media interest and through this platform HDB is able to gauge public response and sentiment to the various proposals.
|
|
| 9. What were the main obstacles encountered and how were they overcome?
|
|
Underlying ERS is the aim to minimise inconvenience to residents while completing the various projects in the shortest time possible, especially for upgrading which takes place without moving residents out of their homes. Work inside homes must be completed within 10 days with the provision of portable bathrooms/toilets, and air-conditioned common areas for rest/study to keep things comfortable for residents. Prefabrication and dry construction methods minimise dust, noise and other inconveniences to residents during upgrading. For example, prefabrication of steel shafts off-site allows for on-site erection in just a day or two, reducing pollution and shortening the construction period.
Indeed, people management is the ERS’s biggest challenge. With residents living in their homes amidst improvement works, daily activities become a source of irritation and unhappiness. Site staff are trained to be accommodating and flexible to residents’ requests and personal schedules, with a public relations office on site to manage residents’ feedback and queries.
Managing residents sensitively is crucial with SERS projects because it involves involuntary displacement of residents whose homes are compulsorily acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. Residents are apprehensive and anxious about moving from familiar surroundings and concerned about the financial implications of buying new flats. Understanding the emotions involved, steps are taken early to reach out to residents. House visits are particularly important in the process as staff take special care to communicate personally in different languages and dialects, using visuals and graphics to explain the rehousing benefits and packages.
As ROH proposals comprise multi-agency efforts, clarity of issues and coordination among implementing agencies are important. Funding, ownership and maintenance issues have to be sorted out upfront. This is where good inter-agency networking, relationship-building and cooperation come into play. With all sharing the common objective of rejuvenating the towns, ROH plans are able to proceed smoothly.
|