Scope and methodology
This blog post will analyse the Government Land Sales (GLS) residential site at Tanjong Rhu Road, awarded to CDL Constellation Pte. Ltd. and Bedrock Ventures Pte. Ltd. in February 2026, and from there estimate the expected future selling price (launch pricing and a forward scenario toward completion). The analysis triangulates three lenses:
First, it anchors site economics on URA’s official tender award facts (site area, maximum GFA, tender price) and converts these into the market-standard land metric $psf per plot ratio (psf ppr).
Second, it benchmarks the new site against a few selected Katong Park-facing cluster comparables (The Waterside, The Line @ Tanjong Rhu, Fulcrum, Arina East Residences) using the price trend chart provided from PropNex’s Protrend.
Third, because “using each comparable’s land cost in psf ppr” is not consistently possible for older resale developments (original land acquisition rates are often not publicly reported in a usable way), a land-cost-to-selling-price translation is built using documented land-rate benchmarks that are observable and close in nature:
– the closest freehold land benchmark in the same micro‑locale (La Ville → Arina East Residences) with published land rate;
– Two District 15 leasehold GLS benchmarks with clear land rates and achieved launch pricing (Tembusu Grand; Grand Dunman).
Where assumptions are required (construction costs, efficiency ratio, profit margin), they are stated explicitly and sensitivity-tested using ranges that reflect Singapore’s high construction-cost environment (supported by BCA tender price index trends and industry cost commentary).
GLS tender outcome and site economics
| LOCATION | ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT | SITE AREA | MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE GROSS FLOOR AREA (GFA) | SUCCESSFUL TENDERER | TENDERED PRICE ($PSM OF GFA) |
| Tanjong Rhu Road | Residential | 12,239.3 m² | 45,286 m² | CDL Constellation Pte. Ltd. and Bedrock Ventures Pte. Ltd. | $709,252,000.00 ($15,661.62) |
Award facts and computed land rate
URA’s media release (published 10 Feb 2026) states that URA awarded the tender for the Tanjong Rhu Road residential land sale site to CDL Constellation Pte. Ltd. and Bedrock Ventures Pte. Ltd. The same release also states that the site was launched for tender on 26 Nov 2025 and closed on 5 Feb 2026, with the following characteristics
– on a 99-year lease;
– has site area 12,239.3 m² and maximum permissible GFA 45,286 m²;
– awarded at a tendered price of S$709,252,000, shown also as S$15,661.62 per m² of GFA.
From URA’s tendered price per m² of GFA, the market-standard land rate metric $psf ppr is:
- S$15,661.62 per m² GFA ÷ 10.7639 = ~S$1,455 psf ppr (conversion from m² to ft²)
The implied gross plot ratio (GPR) from URA’s own site area and GFA is:
- 45,286 m² ÷ 12,239.3 m² ≈ 3.70
This aligns with the site’s Gross Plot Ratio (GPR) of 3.7 as reflected in URA Space.
Strategic significance of the site
A key reason this GLS matters is its scarcity value: it is the first private-housing GLS opportunity in Tanjong Rhu in nearly 30 years / since the late 1990s, and the achieved land rate is among the highest in its segment.
On connectivity, the site sits within the catchment of the Thomson–East Coast Line (TEL) Stage 4 stations, which opened on 23 Jun 2024, including Tanjong Rhu and Katong Park stations. The opening of TEL4 structurally strengthens the “city-fringe + lifestyle coast” positioning by compressing travel times and reducing reliance on private transport for access to the CBD.
Finally, the site is estimated to yield approximately 525 units, a factor that will shape the absorption strategy and position competitively against nearby boutique freehold developments.
Katong Park cluster comparables
Observed pricing levels in the micro-cluster
From the chart, the current pricing landscape (based on approximately the past 12 months of transactions where available) can be summarised as follows:
- The Waterside (Freehold, completed early 1990s): transacted within approximately S$2,074–S$2,294 psf, averaging around S$2,195 psf.
- The Line @ Tanjong Rhu (Freehold, TOP 2016): transacted within approximately S$2,025–S$2,421 psf, averaging around S$2,328 psf.
- Fulcrum (Freehold, TOP 2016): transacted within approximately S$1,711–S$2,407 psf, averaging around S$2,067 psf. It is important to note that the lower psf outlier is attributable to a one-bedroom unit with double-volume ceiling height, which distorts the psf calculation.
- Arina East Residences (Freehold, new launch): new sale prices range from approximately S$2,744 to S$3,007 psf, with an average of S$2,843 psf.
Collectively, these data points form a clear “stair-step” pricing structure within the cluster:
- Older, larger-format freehold resale stock (e.g., The Waterside) anchors the low-S$2,000S psf range.
- Newer (circa 2016) freehold resale developments (The Line and Fulcrum) cluster in the low- to mid-S$2,000S psf range.
- Brand-new freehold developments (Arina East Residences) establish pricing closer to the ~S$3,000 psf level.
Notably, despite its age, The Waterside continues to demonstrate pricing resilience, largely supported by its rarity in offering largely unblocked sea views—an attribute not fully replicated by the other developments, which typically offer only partial sea views.
Note that the outlier in Fulcrum’s psf pricing (2026) is attributed to a transaction involving a one-bedroom unit with double-volume ceilings in both the living area and bedroom.
Tenure nuance: why a leasehold newcomer can still “price up”
Even though our comparable set is entirely freehold and the GLS site is 99-year leasehold, tenure alone is not a complete pricing determinant in Singapore, particularly at the newer end of the lifecycle.
Two tenure-related reference points are helpful:
SLA’s leasehold relativity framework (“Bala’s Table”) is used to compare leasehold land value as a percentage of freehold value across remaining lease terms; for a 99-year lease, the published relativity cited in the paper is ~96% of freehold value (i.e., only a small discount at lease start).
Table (‘Bala’s Table’). Image credit: Juan Velasco, Centre for Liveable Cities
Separately, a peer-reviewed hedonic study on Singapore private non-landed prices finds a statistically negative relationship between remaining lease and price (i.e., lease decay matters), but also indicates that other variables (area and infrastructure such as MRT accessibility) significantly affect price and can change the observed price elasticity.
In practical market terms, this supports two simultaneous truths for Tanjong Rhu: – A brand-new 99-year product can compete strongly on freshness, facilities, layout efficiency, and MRT proximity, even against freehold resale stock.
– Over a long holding period, tenure will increasingly reassert itself through lease decay, especially as the remaining lease compresses.
Land-rate-to-selling-price translation
What “psf ppr” captures
“PSF PPR” (per square foot per plot ratio) is a land-pricing convention that expresses land price relative to the maximum allowable gross floor area (GFA), enabling comparison across sites with different plot ratios.
For this GLS, URA provides the land price already normalised per m² of GFA, which translates cleanly into ~S$1,455 psf ppr.
Observable benchmarks for “land rate → launch price” in District 15
To infer a plausible selling price for the Tanjong Rhu GLS development, it is useful to observe the “all-in uplift” from land rate to achieved launch pricing for nearby/analogous District 15 launches:
Leasehold GLS benchmark: Tembusu Grand (D15) – Land rate: S$1,302 psf ppr
– Launch achieved average selling price: ~S$2,465 psf (developer press release and market coverage).
– Implied uplift (price – land rate): ~S$1,163 psf
Leasehold GLS benchmark: Grand Dunman (D15) – Land rate reported around S$1,350 psf ppr.
– Launch achieved an average selling price of around ~S$2,500 psf.
– Implied uplift: ~S$1,150 psf
Freehold micro-locale benchmark: La Ville → Arina East Residences (Tanjong Rhu) – En-bloc translated land rate: ~S$1,540 psf ppr (and ~S$1,477 psf ppr after bonus GFA and DC adjustments).
– Early new-sale deal range: ~S$2,890–S$3,250 psf, average cited ~S$3,008 psf.
– Implied uplift (using ~S$3,008 – S$1,540): ~S$1,468 psf (higher than the leasehold GLS benchmarks—plausibly reflecting freehold scarcity, boutique positioning, and/or launch window dynamics).
These benchmarks suggest that in District 15, a typical uplift from land rate to average launch selling price has historically been roughly ~S$1,150–S$1,470 psf, depending on tenure, product, and timing.
Why the uplift may be higher in 2026–2031 than in 2022–2024
Even if the land-rate uplift were stable, construction and delivery costs are not.
BCA’s published Tender Price Index (2010=100) shows a step-up from ~130.7 (2022) to ~139.1 (2025), after a sharp run-up from earlier years—evidence of a higher cost base for building works compared to the 2022 GLS vintage. In addition, Edgerpop reporting (Turner & Townsend research) indicates that construction cost inflation will continue.
Separately, developer platform costs and risk constraints matter. MOF and professional tax commentary note that licensed housing developers are subject to ABSD on residential land, comprising remittable and non-remittable components, with remission conditional on meeting timelines (commence, complete, sell-out). This incentivises disciplined launch pricing (to ensure absorption) but also raises the “must-achieve” economics, especially when land is expensive.
Expected selling price for the new Tanjong Rhu GLS development
Bottom-up feasibility model
A practical way to estimate the expected selling price is to translate the land rate into a required average selling psf using a simplified but standard development feasibility stack.
Known from URA: – Maximum GFA: 45,286 m² (≈ 487,454 ft²)
– Land price: S$709.252m
– Land rate: ~S$1,455 psf ppr
Key modelling assumptions (made explicit): – Net saleable efficiency (saleable strata area as % of GFA): ~0.80–0.85 (depends on design efficiency, unit mix, common area intensity). – Construction cost: modelled as ~S$350–S$450 per ft² of GFA (range reflects Singapore’s high cost environment and uncertainty around basement works/finishes; supported directionally by BCA tender price index inflation and industry cost commentary).
– Soft costs (consultants, financing, marketing, contingency, authority fees): ~15–20% of (land + construction). – Non-remittable developer ABSD component modelled as ~5% of land price as an economic cost; remission components are treated as timing/financing risk rather than a permanent cost if conditions are met (structure consistent with ABSD regime descriptions).
– Target profit: ~15% on total development cost (common hurdle assumption; actual hurdle varies by developer/market).
Under these ranges, the resulting required average selling price tends to cluster around:
- Base case: ~S$3,000–S$3,150 psf
- Wider sensitivity band: ~S$2,900–S$3,300 psf
This base case aligns with market commentary that launch prices could start around the high-S$2,000S and average into the low-S$3,000S.
Point estimate and recommended pricing range
What Is Given So Far:
– the very high land rate for an RCR pure residential GLS,
– the stronger accessibility post‑TEL4 opening,
– and the local new-launch freehold reference point (Arina East transacting around ~S$3,008 psf in early tranches),
A reasonable expectation for the CDL/Bedrock development is:
Expected average launch selling price (2027–2028 launch window):
~S$3,050 psf (midpoint), with a plausible range of ~S$2,950–S$3,200 psf.
Interpretation: – The low end (~S$2,950) likely implies either strong early-bird pricing to drive absorption quickly, thinner margins, or unusually efficient cost control versus the market. – The high end (~S$3,200) is more feasible if the project captures a true “waterfront + MRT + scarce supply” premium and/or if construction/financing costs remain elevated into the build period.
Forward price scenario toward completion
Beyond estimating the developer’s initial launch pricing, it is also useful to project potential resale prices at or shortly after completion—typically when the project transitions from primary sales to the broader secondary market.
Recent URA flash estimates and market commentary indicate that private residential price growth has moderated through 2025–Q1 2026, with quarterly growth trending in the low single digits. This suggests that forward price performance will remain highly sensitive to macroeconomic conditions.
Taking S$3,050 psf as an indicative launch midpoint, and applying a set of simple appreciation scenarios (for illustration rather than prediction) over an assumed ~3-year period toward early occupation in the early 2030s:
- Conservative scenario (1% p.a.): ~S$3,140 psf
- Base scenario (3% p.a.): ~S$3,330 psf
- Bull scenario (5% p.a.): ~S$3,530 psf
These growth assumptions are intended to bracket a range of possible outcomes—anchored on the current moderated environment (low single-digit growth) versus more expansionary market cycles—rather than to replicate any specific URA data point.
Impact on the Katong Park–Tanjong Rhu cluster and the four comparables
Expected price gaps versus today’s resale/freehold comparables
Taking the ~S$3,050 psf expected average launch price as a working midpoint, the implied premiums over current observed pricing are large for the resale comparables:
- Versus The Waterside (~S$2,195 psf avg): ~+39% premium
- Versus The Line (~S$2,328 psf avg): ~+31% premium
- Versus Fulcrum (~S$2,067 psf avg): ~+48% premium (Do take note of anomaly)
- Versus Arina East (~S$2,843 psf average tranche): ~+7% premium
This creates a two-tier micro-market:
A new-launch tier around ~S$3,000+ psf (Arina East and the forthcoming GLS), and a resale tier around low‑S$2,000s psf (Waterside / Line / Fulcrum).
How the GLS launch can move (or fail to move) resale prices
The new GLS development’s pricing can affect the resale comparables through three main channels:
A “price-anchoring” effect is plausible: a high-profile CDL-led launch at ~S$3,000+ psf can raise the perceived replacement cost of living in the enclave, encouraging resale sellers to hold out for firmer prices. This effect is most likely for The Line and Fulcrum because their unit sizes are more “new-launch comparable” (smaller/mid-sized apartments) than Waterside’s larger-format stock, and because their absolute quantum overlaps more cleanly with new launch buyer budgets.
A “substitution” effect can run the other way in the short term: buyers prioritising newness, facilities, and developer warranty may shift demand away from resale—especially if the GLS project launches with attractively structured early-bird pricing. This could temporarily dampen resale liquidity unless resale units offer a compelling discount-to-new-launch and/or unique attributes (e.g., very large layouts at Waterside).
Tenure interacts with MRT accessibility: while freehold is structurally valuable, empirical work and market observations indicate that accessibility and amenities can narrow the performance gap between leasehold and freehold, particularly earlier in a property’s life. In other words, a brand-new 99-year project with excellent rail access can blunt the “freehold advantage” in the near-to-medium term.
Why Arina East becomes the immediate pricing “sparring partner”
Among our four comparables, Arina East Residences is the most direct competitive reference because it is: – the newest freehold project in the same broader pocket, and – already transacting near ~S$3,000 psf early tranches.
The land economics are close as well: – Arina East’s underlying land rate is around ~S$1,540 psf ppr, – while the GLS land rate is ~S$1,455 psf ppr.
That difference (~S$85 psf ppr) is meaningful but not enormous; therefore, product positioning (views, layout efficiency, facilities mix, brand) and tenure optics (freehold vs 99-year) are likely to be the decisive differentiators, not raw land cost alone.
A key takeaway: if the GLS is priced materially above Arina East while being leasehold, it will need to justify the premium through a superior “total package” (scale/amenities, design, unblocked waterfront/park views, finishings, brand trust). If it prices slightly below Arina East, it can become the “value” new-launch option and potentially pull forward demand from resale projects.
Risks and sensitivities that can swing the price outcome
Construction cost risk remains one of the most material sensitivities. BCA’s tender price index shows the post-2020 cost step-up persisted through 2025, and industry commentary expects further inflation into 2026 in some forecasts. If costs surprise on the upside, developers either (a) push pricing upward, (b) accept lower margin, or (c) redesign to defend feasibility.
Policy and execution constraints matter. The ABSD framework for developers materially penalises slow sell-through (via remission conditions and timeline rules), raising the cost of being wrong on pricing and pace; MOF and tax commentary describe the structure and the importance of meeting sell-out timelines for remission.
Macro demand risk is real, given that private home price growth moderated into late 2025 and Q1 2026 in flash estimate commentary, even though the broader level remains high. A weaker macro window at launch could pull the feasible pricing closer to the lower end of the range (~S$2,900–S$3,000 psf), while a stronger window with tight supply could support the upper band.
Tenure perception can reassert itself quickly if buyers become more price-sensitive. Even though a new 99-year lease can be close to freehold in theoretical frameworks at inception, actual willingness to pay can widen the discount when buyers have multiple alternatives or when the market narrative shifts toward capital preservation.
Disclosure: This post is for educational and analytical purposes. It is not financial advice. Projections are based on the provided ProTrend graph values, our inferred prices and comparability assumption, and indicative prices (accurate as of 4th April 2026). Actual construction costs, timelines, and market conditions may vary.
Article contributed by Jerry Wong.
Jerry Wong is a realtor at Propnex Realty, bringing a rich background in interior and lighting design to his work. He loves exploring diverse spaces and observing the transformative power of real estate. Beyond his professional role, Jerry finds his greatest fulfillment in connecting people with the right properties, gaining immense satisfaction from helping clients achieve their dreams.
