An advisory board had assessed the single-storey bungalow, built in 1898 in central Singapore, as worthy of preservation, the National Heritage Board and the Singapore Land Authority said in a statement, saying it “bore witness to pivotal events in the 1950s that marked Singapore’s transition from a colony to an independent nation.”
The advisory board “found the site to be of national significance, with great historic merit, and worthy of preservation”, the statement said, adding that it would be converted into a public space such as a heritage park if the site is “preserved and acquired”.
Lee, who died in 2015, had publicly said he wanted the house to be demolished. He included that request in his will, and added if that could not happen then he wanted it closed to anyone except family and descendants.
Preserving the site did not obligate the government to preserve all buildings and structures in their current state, and all options would be considered, the government statement said.
“Regardless of the option taken, the government will respect Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes, and will remove all traces of Mr Lee’s and his family’s private living spaces from the buildings.”
Dispute between Lee’s children
The question of what to do with the house became a major issue in a public spat between Lee’s three children after his death.
Eldest son Lee Hsien Loong, who stepped down as the country’s third prime minister last year, thought it should be up to the government to decide what to do with the property, including potentially retaining it as a heritage landmark.
His sister Lee Wei Ling and brother Lee Hsien Yang said the bungalow should be demolished in accordance with their father’s wishes.
In a 2018 report, a ministerial committee had said there was no need to make an immediate decision on the house as Lee Wei Ling was still residing there.
After his sister’s death last year, Lee Hsien Yang applied for permission to demolish the house.
Lee Kuan Yew told the Straits Times newspaper in 2011 that he wanted the house demolished because it would “become a shambles” if it were opened to the public, and he hoped its removal would improve land values in the neighbourhood.