A Comparison for the Layout Planningof the Public Housing in China andSingapore to Explore How to Improvethe Living Standard for Low-income

1 Introduction:

Housing is one of the most basic needs for humans.

Although in the past thirty years, Chinese residents'

living conditions has changed tremendously, China still

suffers from an interruption between housing price and

citizens’ affordability. The housing area per person

increased from 6.7 square meters in 1978 to 36 square

meters in 2012, in addition nearly one third citizens

live in the regular house （ Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences ， 2012 ， China housing development report ） . Chinese

government aims to promote urban shantytowns and

inhabitable houses transformation in the ‘12th Five Year

Plan’. There are several strategies taken by the

government，such as the policy of housing security，build

the affordable housing and low-rent houses for improving

living standard for the poor. Therefore comparing the

living issue with other countries， there are still some

considerable points ， not only about the policies. The

faults on plan choosing and layout may lead to some

social problems. To design affordable houses should

consider the needs of people on low-incomes and the

balance of population structure. This project firstly

compare the two different public housing estates in China

and Singapore, then analyze the advantages and

disadvantages of the two public housing, finally assesses

the solution of public housing design.

2 Definition of Public Housing

Public housing is houses built by the government. The

type of public housing is usually flats and has

affordable selling price or rent for a large majority of

citizens, especially for low-income persons. Although the

common goal of public housing in different country is to

provide affordable houses, the details and the criteria

for allocation are various different situations.

3 Failure Example：Tin Shui Wai in Hong Kong

Tin Shui Wai in 1992 Tin Shui Wai in 2005

Tin Shui Wai New Town is located in northwestern of Hong

Kong. It is the second built new town in Yuen Long

District of New Territories and the eighth built new town

of Hong Kong. It comprises an area of 4.3 km². As of

2011, the New Town has a population of 287,901and the

density of the New Town is 66,953/km2.

The early period Planning concept of the Tin Shui Wai New

Town was built two large-scale park in the north and

south area, in addition the residential area and the

infrastructures built around the park. Ng Kang-ching

describe the New Town was constructed on 2.4 km² of

reclaimed wetland and fishponds in addition conceived of

housing 140,000 people in 1987. The government began to

develop the south part in 1990 and in the same year, the

land reclamation process in the New Town was completed.

The first public housing estates was finished building in

1993. There are also private housing estates in south.

However, when the government developed the northern town,

they launched the construction of 85,000 housing units

per year housing policy. Therefore, the north built extra

7,000 public housing. As the result of this, the

population of the New Town increased rapidly thus the

density and the building height of the north part higher

than the south part. It was criticized that the public

facilities in the north cannot follow the rise of the

population. Over 85% residents in the north live in

public housing, and large amount of them are new

immigrant families, which family members lived in Shen

Zhen ever and have admission to Hong Kong for family

reunion. Many of their family formation are old husband

and young wife, which the men are low-income.

There are several negative factors in Tin Shui Wai New

Town. Employment should be considered in first place. The

great majority of new immigrant families are low

education level and difficult to find jobs near their

home. In addition, the transport cost to the central city

is very expensive and unaffordable. It is accessible this

situation lead to a vicious cycle of people’s living

standard. Due to the lack of community support and

difficulty of adjust environment for the new immigrant

families, numerous serious family and social issues,

which including mental illness, domestic violence and

suicide occurs, happened in the town. Hence, reputation

of the area went down in Hong Kong. Mrs Carrie Lam who is

the Director of Social Welfare labeled Tin Shui Wai "City

of Misery" in July 2006 because of the accumulation of

events.

4 Succeed Example：Public Housing in Singapore

Overview of Bukit Batok, an example Woodlands New Town built justbeside the of large-scale new towns built from the Causeway to Johor Bahru.ground up by the HDB.

To solve the problem of hosing lack in 1960s, Singapore

government established the Housing and Development Board

that is responsible to resettled the residents into low-

cost state-built housing. During these years development,

today as much as 82% of citizens choose to live in public

housing supplied by HDB (HDB History. Retrieved 28 June

2013). Singapore's public housing system may be most

successful housing security system around the world.

Compared with other countries, public housing in

Singapore cannot consider as a signal of low living

quality or poverty. Even though they have cheaper price

than private house, they build in high quality and

provide to middle incomes. These housing estates are

located in outskirts of city and constructed as self-

contained satellite towns with hospitals, schools,

shopping malls, supermarkets, sports and leisure centers.

To some extent, the housing estate is a self-sufficiency

system of city. Because of this, although the majority of

Singapore people live in public housing, very few of them

are under the poverty line.

Based on the plan concept of public housing in Singapore,

every HDB town design is very scientific and rational.

They locate in the rural area instead of the business and

commercial districts. Each HDB town is self-sustainable

with sufficient supporting public infrastructure so that

there is no need to go to city center to meet the common

needs of daily life. Even employment can be found in in

several towns that are near the industrial districts.

Singapore has a very satisfying comprehensive public

transportation system. Subways and buses used in

combination provide convenient conditions for the

residents travel. On the basis of general design

principle, there is a metro station near public house

within eight minutes walking distance in addition there

is a bus station within four hundred meters to make

travel conveniently. Based on this, majorities of public

housing build around the public transport lines, which

saves residents travel costs and relieve downtown traffic

pressure. This also attracts more citizens to choose

public housing.

5 Evaluations and Experience

To compare Tin Shui Wai New Town in Hong Kong and HDB

town in Singapore, it

is easy to find some similarities. They are both

satellite towns of the main part of city and big

residential estates with large population. By analyzing

Tin Shui Wai New Town, there are three main reasons of

low living standard and tragedy happenings. Firstly, the

Hong Kong government recomposes the New Town plan to

contain more low-incomes for political reasons without

considering the feasible capacity of the residential

estates. In addition, they ignore the population

structure of the residential estates. According to the

provisions of the Hong Kong Property, flats have looser

restrictions on the household population and the public

housing must accommodate more people. Except the high

density of public housing estates, Tin Shui Wai New Town

also has distant location form city center, high cost for

transportation and limited employment opportunities.

Furthermore, the government has been criticized for

insufficient level of services and facilities to fulfill

the rapid population growth in Tin Shui Wai. Some people

argue that the large number of new immigrants from

Mainland China in the New town, which struggling to

adjust to the social dynamics in Hong Kong, contributes

to the family tragedies.

Depend on the residential relocation economics analysis,

there are four factors affect low-income people choose

where to live. Firstly is employment factor, the main

reason of low-level employability of the low-incomes may

be low education level and old age. Therefore they may

suffer unstable employment and wish to have steady living

standard for the basis of life. As a result of this

situation, the planner should consider to locate the

public housing estates near the urban conventional

service sector or the industry districts to avoid a

mismatch between living and employ. Secondly, the family

income limits persons’ way of travel. The low-income

group prefers to choose inexpensive transportation such

as walk, bicycles, buses and undergrounds. In condition

of the cheap house usually build in remote areas, low-

income families travel inconvenient and cost extra living

expenses, some of the low-income families cannot improve

their living standard even reduce it. So the site

selection of the public housing must near the transit hub

and have great bus line systems to decrease the cost of

transportation for low-incomes. Thirdly, social supports

and services are very important for the low-income group.

The scope of their social activities may be confine to

the residential area and the nearby parts. To maximize

the compression of household expenses, they choose to see

a doctor, go to school and meet the daily needs in the

neighboring area. In addition they extremely rely on the

public facilities. Consequently the government should

plan more prudent public expenditure on infrastructures

for public housing. The layout of public housing should

near the areas that already have comprehensive public

facilities or try to establish the most-inclusive

infrastructures for new public housing estates. It can

ensure low-income people go to supermarkets, schools and

clinics conveniently with low cost. The final factor is

social space. To gain more information about employment,

low-income should closely contact with others. In

addition others also need the services from cleaners,

attendants, labors and housekeepers. Therefore, to

promote the integration of different level people is not

only for improvement of low-income group but also for

others who need services.

To draw a conclusion, the basic principal is to mingle

the public housing and private house justifiably in

addition to avoid the hierarchy isolation. In city

center, the government can renovate and reform the urban

villages. Moreover, it is necessary to build satellite

town with convenient transportation system and enough

infrastructures.

6 Conclusions

Conclusions main idea:

1.repeat thesis: Considerations of public housing – low-income needs

& population structure balance

2.summary of main idea: experiences learn from the examples

Reference:

Hong Kong Housing Society, http://www.hkhs.com/

HDB Info WEB, http://www.hdb.gov.sg

Public housing ： Current trends and future developments, Clapham

D.&English J. 1987, Publisher: London: Croom Helm,

Shelton B., Karakiewicz J. & Kvan T., 2011, The Making of

Hong Kong, Routledge Press

TEO P. & HUANGA S.,1996, Sense of Place in Public Housing: a Case

Study of Pasir Ris, Singapore

Aratani Y., 2010, Public housing revisited: Racial differences, housing

assistance, and socioeconomic attainment among low-income families

Yuen B., Yeh A. et al, 2006, High-rise Living in

Singapore Public Housing, Urban Studies

Brams R.M., Equity and efficiency in the allocation of public housing to

eligible families