Orchard Boulevard land tender draws five bids, with a $14 million lead

The highest bidder for a residential land parcel at Orchard Boulevard put $181.86 million on the table—roughly $14 million more than its nearest rival. Intrepid Investments Pte. Ltd. and TID Residential Pte. Ltd. submitted the leading offer among five bids when the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) closed the tender on 29 October 2026.

For buyers watching future housing options around Orchard Boulevard, this is a site that URA estimates could yield about 110 homes, near Orchard Boulevard MRT station. The tender gives an early view of what developers are prepared to offer for the land; the next step is URA’s evaluation and award decision, rather than an apartment launch.

How far ahead was the top bid?

The closest competing offer came from GRC Development Pte. Ltd., at $167,850,000. Against the leading consortium’s exact bid of $181,861,924, that leaves a difference of $14,011,924.

Using the runner-up’s bid as the denominator, the calculation is $14,011,924 ÷ $167,850,000 × 100, giving 8.35%. In everyday terms, the leading consortium offered about $1.0835 for every dollar offered by its nearest competitor. These are calculations from the tendered amounts, not a comparison of completed home sales.

That makes the lead more substantial than a narrow last-dollar contest. The full field also shows why the runner-up is the useful comparison: it measures how much higher the leading offer was than the next available bid for precisely the same parcel, under the same published site parameters.

What all five bidders offered

Here is the complete bid order from URA’s Annex A. The final column expresses each land offer per square metre of permissible gross floor area, or GFA—the floor-area allowance used in the tender’s pricing measure. All dollar amounts are in Singapore dollars.

The names, rankings and figures above follow the official tender record. Several entries contain multiple legal tenderers; they remain single joint bids, so this is a field of five offers, not a count of five individual companies.

Across the field, offers ranged from $139.9 million to $181.86 million, a calculated spread of approximately $41.96 million. The useful observation is the range itself: bidders attached markedly different amounts to the same development opportunity. Their individual reasons are not set out in the bid table.

What the land-price figure actually buys

The parcel has a 99-year lease, a land area of 3,438 sqm and a maximum permissible GFA of 9,627 sqm. URA identifies its allowable development as residential, while its launch announcement estimates a potential yield of about 110 residential units. That is an estimated yield, rather than a final apartment inventory.

The distinction between land area and floor area matters here. The $18,890.82 rate in the top row is measured against permissible GFA, not against the 3,438 sqm footprint of the plot. Dividing the leading total offer by the 9,627 sqm maximum GFA reproduces that published rate after rounding.

Converted to square feet, the same land-cost measure is approximately $1,755 per square foot per plot ratio. It describes the bid spread over permissible development floor area; it is not an apartment selling price. Comparing that number directly with a home’s advertised price per square foot would mix two different measures.

For someone considering a future home here, the tender therefore answers a specific question: how much has the highest bidder offered for this development site? It does not supply a home’s purchase price, size or layout. The official figures describe the land opportunity and its estimated housing capacity.

What happens after the tender closes?

URA launched the site for public tender on 13 August 2026, then closed bidding on 29 October 2026. Those dates mark the bidding window, not the start of apartment sales.

The dated official closing notice, captured for this report on 2 November 2026, explicitly distinguishes the tender close from an award. URA says the bid will be evaluated and its decision publicised later. The leading consortium should therefore be described as the highest bidder, not as the confirmed purchaser on the strength of this notice.

The next consequential development is that award decision. It will determine whether the $181.86 million offer moves beyond the bid table; for now, the clearest result is an 8.35% lead over the runner-up for a site with the potential to add about 110 homes.