Singapore Keeps Forest Sites in Housing Pipeline
Singapore will proceed with housing development at part of Maju Forest near Sunset Way and at the former Gillman Barracks military complex. Final layouts, housing yields, density and construction schedules have not been approved, but the government has confirmed that both sites will remain in the residential pipeline. About 15 hectares of vegetation may be cleared at Sunset Way and at least 10 hectares at Gillman Barracks. Lawmakers have challenged the selection of the sites, the alternatives considered and the extent to which public consultation can still change the projects.
Lawmakers Question the Selection of Both Sites
Singapore’s August 4, 2026 parliamentary order paper contained 18 questions directly related to Sunset Way and Gillman Barracks. Members asked whether the development footprints could be reduced, more forest retained, housing density reconsidered and alternative state-owned land used.
Other questions covered urban heat after forest clearance, greenhouse-gas emissions, the effectiveness of wildlife corridors and the level of environmental harm that would be sufficient to rule out a site. Lawmakers also challenged the decision to announce housing development on the same day the formal consultation period opened.
The order paper referred to environmental assessments that identify major negative residual impacts for particular components. That finding does not apply uniformly to the entire developments. The ratings differ by species, habitat, impact and construction phase.
Minister of State for National Development Alvin Tan said the detailed plans had not been finalised. After formal feedback closes on August 6, agencies will continue engagement and may change the layouts, the amount of greenery retained and the heritage buildings conserved.
The underlying land-use decision, however, has been made. Asked whether cancelling the developments remained an option, Tan said the sites had been set aside for housing and that the government would proceed.
Sunset Way Will Retain About Eight Hectares
The Sunset Way study area covers approximately 23 hectares in Clementi. It is commonly referred to as Maju Forest, although official environmental documents use the Sunset Way site name. Most of the land has been zoned for residential use since the 1980 Master Plan.
The environmental assessment identifies several habitat types. Abandoned-land forest covers about 9.98 hectares, native-dominated secondary forest 4.7 hectares and Albizia-dominated secondary forest 4.49 hectares. The remaining land includes scrub, managed vegetation and waterbodies.
The preliminary proposal retains around eight hectares. The area includes a natural freshwater stream, its vegetated riparian buffer, forest patches and land around the former Jurong railway. A nature route is being studied to connect the old railway corridor with other green areas in Clementi.
Researchers recorded 286 plant species, including 49 of conservation significance, and 113 animal species, including six of conservation significance. They include the globally critically endangered straw-headed bulbul, buffy fish owl, changeable hawk-eagle, oriental magpie-robin, bamboo bat and long-tailed macaque.
Proposed controls include phased directional clearance, wildlife checks before tree felling, relocation of selected plants and specialist intervention for animals that cannot be guided safely into neighbouring greenery. Other measures address night work, stream pollution, noise and lighting directed towards the forest.
Sunset Way Impacts Vary by Project Stage
The environmental report does not conclude that all post-mitigation effects will be major. During pre-construction and construction, residual biodiversity impacts range from major negative to no significant impact, depending on the affected receptor.
During the operational phase, biodiversity impacts are expected to range from minor negative to no significant impact. Residual effects on surface hydrology are rated minor, while water-quality impacts fall to slight or no significant impact.
The mitigation measures do not replace the lost forest. About 15 hectares may still be occupied by buildings, roads and infrastructure. The remaining habitat will also face stronger edge effects from light, wind, noise, people and domestic animals.
Gillman Barracks Is Not a Continuous Forest
Gillman Barracks is a former British military complex created in the mid-1930s and later adapted for galleries, restaurants, offices and public facilities. The development therefore affects a mixture of previously built land, heritage structures and secondary woodland.
The environmental study covered about 47 hectares. Around 40 hectares fall within the indicative future development boundary, while another seven-hectare green area lies north of Telok Blangah Heights.
Developed land accounts for 32.9% of the study area. Exotic-dominated secondary forest covers 21.1%, abandoned-land forest 14.6% and native-dominated secondary forest 9.8%. The remainder includes scrubland, urban vegetation and waterbodies.
The survey identified 293 plant species and 178 animal species. Twenty-two native plant species have conservation significance, including two classified as critically endangered in Singapore, seven as endangered and 13 as vulnerable. Eleven conservation-significant animal species were recorded, including the straw-headed bulbul, violet cuckoo and bamboo bat.
The native-dominated secondary forest and forest stream were assessed as the areas of highest ecological value. These are the habitats the authorities propose to prioritise for retention.
The Eight-Hectare Green Area Includes New Habitat
The Gillman Barracks plan proposes retaining most of the native-dominated secondary forest. This wording does not apply to all woodland: parts of the abandoned-land and exotic-dominated forests will be cleared.
An east-west ecological connection would link Telok Blangah Hill Park with HortPark. A new corridor at least 30 metres wide would be created towards Berlayar Creek and Labrador Nature Reserve.
The total green area of about eight hectares combines existing retained habitat with land where habitat will be created. It should not be described as eight hectares of untouched existing forest. The new planting is intended to establish a continuous, multilayered native structure and strengthen newly exposed forest edges.
Other measures include bird-friendly building design, restrictions on access to part of the retained forest between 7pm and 7am and continued habitat monitoring.
Major Residual Risk Remains for Particular Species
After mitigation, the loss of forest habitat at Gillman Barracks is generally rated between no change and moderate negative. Microclimatic changes in retained forests may remain minor to moderate negative, while the introduction of exotic plant species is rated moderate negative.
The outlook is more severe for particular plants. Even after salvage and transplantation measures, mortality risk for some species may remain major negative.
A similar distinction applies to fauna. The loss of habitat and food sources may remain major negative for individual species. Other risks, including direct mortality, reduced connectivity, light disturbance and human-wildlife conflict, are generally expected to fall to moderate or minor levels.
It is therefore accurate to say that major residual impacts remain in parts of the assessment, but inaccurate to apply that rating to every environmental effect.
Heritage Buildings Will Be Partly Integrated
The heritage assessment examined 86 buildings across seven clusters. Four were classified as having exceptional significance and 27 as having high significance. The preliminary proposal retains all four exceptional buildings and 21 of the 27 high-significance structures.
Six high-significance buildings may be removed because they occupy land needed for roads or other infrastructure, or are close to the rail station where planners intend to use land more intensively.
More than 20 heritage buildings could be incorporated into the new neighbourhood and adapted for commercial or community uses. The authorities intend to retain most of four historically important clusters around Preston Road, Lock Road and Malan Road.
Gillman Barracks currently has 11 arts tenants and 13 food, beverage and lifestyle tenants. Their leases expire progressively by the second quarter of 2030, and the housing plans will not terminate those agreements early.
The Official Housing Yield Has Not Been Disclosed
Sunset Way is intended for public housing developed by the Housing and Development Board. Gillman Barracks is expected to contain both public and private homes.
The authorities have not announced the number of units, building heights, density, public-housing classification or development schedule. Analyst estimates that the two sites could accommodate as many as 18,000 public flats are not an approved government target.
The government attributes continuing demand to smaller households and rising housing aspirations. The two projects form part of a much larger supply programme: HDB plans to launch about 19,600 Build-To-Order flats in 2026 and is prepared to offer more than 55,000 flats from 2025 through 2027 if necessary.
The scale of the national programme does not remove the long-term need for land. It does mean that the specific benefit of developing Sunset Way and Gillman Barracks cannot be measured until the expected housing yield is published.
Most Proposed Alternatives Were Rejected
Residents and lawmakers suggested the former Institute of Technical Education headquarters in Dover, the Cross Island Line construction site, Maju Camp and the Depot Lane industrial estate.
The government said the former institute site was already intended for public and private housing. The rail construction site could be considered only after the line is completed. Maju Camp remains necessary for defence, while Depot Lane is already included in the future housing pipeline.
The ministry concluded that no other suitable sites were available to meet demand in the two areas within the required period. A single public comparison showing housing capacity, cost, delivery time, carbon emissions and biodiversity loss for all alternatives has not been released.
Consultation Can Change the Plans, Not Cancel Them
The formal consultation period for the environmental and heritage studies closes on August 6. The government has promised further engagement with residents, nature groups and heritage advocates.
Possible changes include building positions, density, retained greenery, ecological corridors and the list of heritage structures. Clearance and construction requirements will also depend on the final environmental management and monitoring plans.
The consultation does not offer a full choice between development and complete preservation. The government has confirmed that both sites will be used because it considers them necessary to meet housing requirements over the coming decade.
As International Investment experts report, Singapore faces genuine land constraints and sustained housing demand, but the consultation began after the fundamental development decision had already been made. Wildlife corridors, plant salvage and phased clearance can reduce losses but cannot replace the area and connectivity of cleared forests. The main weakness is that no official housing yield or comprehensive comparison of alternatives has been published. Without those figures, it is not possible to determine whether the environmental cost is proportionate to the expected housing benefit.