- The proposal to use a 30-year building age for redevelopment under the URA Bill is unsound.
- Many buildings can last well beyond 30 years with proper maintenance, making age an unreliable indicator.
- This approach risks unnecessary demolitions and financial burdens on homeowners without clear evidence of structural safety concerns.
URA’s 30-year ‘trigger point’ to invoke redevelopment based on myth
indepth
Updated:



.jpg)




