Developing Gillman Barracks and Sunset Way: The Case for Not Mourning Some Lost Green Space

On 10 July, the Housing and Development Board announced plans to build new homes at Gillman Barracks and Sunset Way, following the completion of environmental and heritage studies on the impact of development on some 25 hectares of native forest.

Gillman Barracks, a former military site with heritage buildings off Alexandra Road, and part of the forest nearby will be developed into a 40ha mixed-use residential neighbourhood with public and private homes. The Sunset Way site in Clementi will be developed for public housing.

In the initial plans, developed with the involvement of nature groups, about 40 per cent of the green spaces in Gillman Barracks and 35 per cent in Maju Forest at Sunset Way would be retained. Not surprisingly, the plans drew public outcry from residents and nature groups.

Following public feedback, the government said more green spaces at both sites would be retained, with the trade-off being that fewer homes can be built. Still, a rally at Hong Lim Park held shortly afterwards saw participants calling for greater transparency in land-use decisions and voicing concerns over the loss of green spaces.

The government’s adjustment can arguably create a win-win outcome, Yee writes: new homes still get built to meet housing needs, while the concerns of residents and nature groups are addressed. But on reflection, he suggests what has unfolded may hold worrying signs.

Residents do love having green spaces nearby, and easy access to them boosts physical and mental well-being. Still, he asks, could some passionate calls to preserve green spaces near one’s home be driven partly by owners wanting lush greenery around their residences because it helps push up the prices of their properties? In a nation with a high homeownership rate, a home accounts for a large part of the net worth of many resident households.

He raises two further concerns. Might urban planners go slow when drawing plans to transform areas, because they fear intense public scrutiny and even incurring the public’s wrath? And might residents affected by future development plans become increasingly vociferous in pushing back?

Given its land scarcity, Singapore likely has to continuously transform its cityscape to support the economy. A strong economy creates good jobs and generates tax revenue to fund the needs of an ageing population, and new developments that meet housing, business and leisure needs help draw businesses and talent to the Republic.

Finding land to build homes to meet rising demand from household formation and population growth is a must. In 2025, Singapore’s total population was about 6.11 million, up 7.5 per cent from around 5.69 million in 2020 and 10.4 per cent from around 5.54 million in 2015.

The number of resident households was about 1.49 million last year, up 8.3 per cent from around 1.37 million in 2020 and 21.4 per cent from around 1.23 million in 2015. Average household size has fallen steadily, from 3.7 persons in 2000 to 3.06 in 2025, as more singles and couples seek to live independently. More homes are needed to meet that demand.

Yee notes that while many young Singaporeans can become homeowners, those in many global cities struggle to achieve such dreams, in part because objections by existing homeowners to new developments help create a housing shortage. Housing shortages in those cities cause social cohesion to fray and the economy to be hurt.

Government actions play a major role in the local housing market, and the government can be both friend and foe to property developers and owners. Homebuyers face tough measures aimed at preventing speculation. When an area is developed, some residents may be negatively affected, whether through the loss of precious green space nearby or greater congestion from new homes.

On the positive side, homeowners often benefit substantially from development plans. New MRT stations, parks, healthcare facilities, malls and sports amenities near residential properties add significant value to those homes. Perhaps even more importantly, if the government can constantly transform Singapore to meet changing live, work and play needs, the economy thrives and housing prices generally rise.

Taking in the views of residents, nature groups and heritage advocates is critical, Yee writes, but no plan can please everyone, and some ideas benefit many people while hurting others. His conclusion: Singapore needs to progress and transform, and we should not shed tears when beloved physical spaces are carefully and sensitively, yet boldly, transformed to meet the growing and changing needs of people and businesses.