‘Concrete City?’: Singaporeans condemn HDB’s plan to raze much of Maju Forest

SINGAPORE: The Housing and Development Board’s (HDB) plans to plow down 15 hectares of the 23-hectare Maju Forest in Clementi to make way for the Sunset Way public housing developments has attracted negative reactions.

HDB announced the plans on Friday (July 10) and said the site has been earmarked for residential development since the Master Plan 1980.

While a large part of the forest will be cleared, the Government agency said around eight hectares will be preserved to support biodiversity and allow wildlife to continue moving through the area.

The retained section will include a natural freshwater stream as well as vegetation identified as having high biodiversity value. Land surrounding the former Old Jurong Line will also remain intact, with studies underway for a proposed four-kilometre nature trail.

As part of its mitigation measures, HDB said it will salvage conservation-significant plant species wherever feasible before construction begins. It also intends to carry out site clearance in phases so that animals have time to relocate safely to neighbouring green spaces.

The new housing estate is also expected to incorporate biophilic landscaping using native plant species, with the aim of maintaining ecological links between surrounding green areas.

HDB said the preserved forested areas, together with Clementi Neighbourhood Park, the planned Clementi Nature Trail and the Old Jurong Line Nature Trail, are intended to provide recreational spaces for future residents while supporting the area’s ecological network.

HDB has published the full environmental and heritage study reports for the Maju Forest site and another proposed development site on HDB InfoWEB. Members of the public can review the reports and submit their feedback between Jul. 10 and Aug. 6, 2026.

HDB said comments received during the public consultation period will be taken into account as it further refines the development plans for both sites.

While the public consultation is underway, initial reactions on social media range from unease to outrage.

Many commenters questioned how the project aligned with Singapore’s environmental ambitions, with one of the most widely supported remarks reading: “One hand wants to grow 1 million trees, on the other hand clear forest.”

Another similarly popular comment asked, “How is this environmentally friendly and green?”, reflecting concerns that clearing an existing forest appeared at odds with wider sustainability efforts.

Several commenters also challenged HDB’s reliance on a land-use plan dating back more than four decades. One argued that “the masterplan 1980” was drawn up under very different circumstances and “may not be applicable now”, urging the authorities not to “implement blindly just because it was proposed years ago”.

Instead, the commenter said the area should be left untouched to provide “more clean air and greenery”.

Echoing that sentiment, another questioned how planning studies from 1980 could still be relevant when Singapore now has far fewer forested areas than it did then.

Others suggested that alternative approaches should be explored before sacrificing one of the country’s remaining green spaces. One commenter proposed expanding the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), arguing that many older estates were built at lower densities and could accommodate substantially more homes through redevelopment while making use of existing infrastructure.

Although acknowledging that such an approach would likely cost more, the commenter argued that forests, along with the biodiversity and wildlife habitats they support, cannot be replaced once they are cleared, and said existing built-up areas should be fully utilised before developing natural spaces.

Some focused on the potential impact on wildlife, with one remarking, “Don’t blame the monkeys if they’re everywhere,” while another wrote, “The monkeys lost their home again…”, suggesting that animals displaced by the development could increasingly venture into nearby residential areas.

The scale of the planned clearance also drew attention. One commenter pointed out that a hectare is roughly equivalent to 1.4 football fields, encouraging others to visualise what clearing 15 hectares would mean in practical terms.

Another lamented that Singapore “may as well change its nickname to The Concrete City”, while others urged the authorities to “Preserve the forest”, arguing that the country needs more “oxygen” rather than additional housing developments.

Some commenters also questioned whether other sites could be prioritised instead, asking why older buildings or underused facilities were not being redeveloped before clearing greenery.

Others dismissed HDB’s explanation altogether, with one describing the situation as “a joke.”

With such negative reactions at the outset, it remains unclear at this point whether HDB will alter its plans or whether the erasure of over half of Maju Forest will go ahead as intended.