Which healthcare or healthcare-adjacent use should you pursue for this property? Eight uses are screened at this address — GP Clinic (heartland and CBD), Dental, Aesthetic, TCM, Community Pharmacy, Chiropractic, and Veterinary — and ranked by how the location fits each use's own benchmark sample. Read the landlord decision matrix first, then the per-use detail and the diligence checklist. The scan reads site-level public land-use data; it does not inspect the specific unit.
Which healthcare use is the strongest tenant play for this property? Read the matrix across, then drill into one use's full data below.
| Healthcare use | Location fit | Leasing potential | Premises / use status† | Main approval path | Immediate action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Community Pharmacy pharmacy | Strong 99th percentile · 268 comparable sites | Strong Strong · 99th percentile location fit · low pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- Community Pharmacy uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | HSA retail-pharmacy licence (operator) · property side: URA change-of-use route if required | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, Community Pharmacy is a credible target tenant to approach. |
2. Dental Clinic dental | Strong 85th percentile · 269 comparable sites | Strong Strong · 85th percentile location fit · low pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- Dental Clinic uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | MOH HCSA Outpatient Dental Service licence (operator) · property side: URA change-of-use route if required | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, Dental Clinic is a credible target tenant to approach. |
3. Chiropractor chiropractor | Strong 84th percentile · 269 comparable sites | Strong Strong · 84th percentile location fit · low pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- Chiropractor uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | No MOH/HCSA licence applies to chiropractic (self-regulated profession, not an HCSA service) · property side: premises use to be confirmed with URA/HDB — chiropractic is not classed as an HCSA medical clinic | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, Chiropractor is a credible target tenant to approach. |
4. TCM Clinic tcm | Moderate 74th percentile · 268 comparable sites | Moderate Moderate · 74th percentile location fit. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- TCM Clinic uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | TCMPB practitioner registration (MOH) -- TCM clinics are not yet HCSA-licensed · property side: premises use to be confirmed with URA/HDB | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, TCM Clinic is a credible target tenant to approach. |
5. Aesthetic Clinic aesthetic | Moderate 67th percentile · 269 comparable sites | Moderate Moderate · 67th percentile location fit · moderate competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- Aesthetic Clinic uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | MOH HCSA licence for medical-aesthetic services (operator) · property side: URA change-of-use route if required | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, Aesthetic Clinic is a credible target tenant to approach. |
6. Vet Clinic vet_clinic | Moderate 55th percentile · 268 comparable sites | Moderate Moderate · 55th percentile location fit · low pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- Vet Clinic uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | AVS (NParks) licence to operate a veterinary centre + licensed veterinary surgeon (operator) · property side: premises use and animal-premises/building rules to be confirmed with URA/HDB and the building owner | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, Vet Clinic is a credible target tenant to approach. |
7. GP Clinic (Heartland) gp_clinic | Limited 32nd percentile · 269 comparable sites | Weak Weak · 32nd percentile location fit · high pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- GP Clinic (Heartland) uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | MOH HCSA Outpatient Medical Service licence (operator) · property side: URA change-of-use route if the unit is not already established for clinic use | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, GP Clinic (Heartland) is a credible target tenant to approach. |
8. GP Clinic (CBD / Office) gp_clinic | Weak 7th percentile · 269 comparable sites | Weak Weak · 7th percentile location fit · high pressure competition within 300m. | Commercial / retail-viable at site level -- GP Clinic (CBD / Office) uses are not obviously inconsistent with the parcel's Master Plan zoning. The unit's own established use is unknown. | MOH HCSA Outpatient Medical Service licence (operator) · property side: URA change-of-use route if the unit is not already established for clinic use | Confirm the unit's established use with URA; if it is already commercial, GP Clinic (CBD / Office) is a credible target tenant to approach. |
† Site-level zoning only -- this scan does not know the specific unit's current established use. Reading the matrix: 'Location fit' ranks this site within each format's own benchmark sample of comparable sites (percentile). 'Leasing potential' is a synthesis of that location fit with the format's measured competition pressure -- an indicative read for marketing the space, not a rent or lease projection. 'Premises & use status' reflects only what the scan can see from public Master Plan zoning at the parcel level; it does not know this unit's established use, floor plan, or landlord/strata consent. 'Main approval path' is general/format-level guidance, not a determination for this unit.
Every format below is scored against the SAME shared site signals -- shown here once. The regulatory and premises-use screening below then adds what the signals cannot: known licensing requirements and the zoning position for each format. Screening flags are advisory -- they do not confirm that a use is lawful in the specific unit.
A moderate immediate catchment — about 8,816 residents within the primary ring.
Residents are area-weighted estimates assuming uniform density within each subzone (Census 2020).
The nearest MRT station is FARRER PARK, estimated within a 0-5-minute walk on the mapped street network.
Estimated walk time is from the site's geocoded coordinate on the mapped street network — not a building entrance. Route and frequency data is outside this tier's scope.
The nearest carpark is about 135m away with 16 lots.
These figures describe parking supply (capacity), not availability — no live occupancy data exists.
The FARRER PARK subzone carries about 12,196 residents per km²; roughly 8,816 residents within 500m. Resident density: 37.8/100 against all published Singapore subzones, and ~52nd percentile among the 269 commercially zoned peer sites — the catchment is not among Singapore's very densest residential subzones, but it is unusually resident-dense for a commercially zoned peer site.
Resident counts are area-weighted estimates assuming uniform density within each subzone (Census 2020). Resident density is not pedestrian footfall.
The FARRER PARK subzone's residents live predominantly HDB — 90% in HDB flats, 3% in condominiums. The surrounding subzones vary across the same mix.
Dwelling type is a Census 2020 resident-population SHARE by subzone — it is not a household-income or affordability measure, and housing type must not be equated with income.
Ranked by demand relevance for a this concept: the top anchor is City Square Mall (Mall), 322m away. 8 curated anchor types named within 2km.
Anchors are a curated/licensed subset (MOE/ECDA/curated lists) — not exhaustive; unlisted categories may still exist nearby.
Walkable reach exceeds the circular benchmark: Within a 10-minute walk the modelled pedestrian network reaches 17,196 residents — 103% of what an equal-area circle would hold. At this scale the network does not produce an unusually constrained catchment relative to that circle; actual entrance routes, crossings and indoor mall circulation remain unverified.
A moderate immediate catchment — about 8,816 residents within the primary ring. About 38,886 residents within 1km. The catchment's highest-relevance anchors are City Square Mall and RAINFOREST SCHOOLHOUSE PTE LTD — see Anchors mode for the full ranked list.
Verify on site: Walk the primary ring and confirm footfall at the site's main access points.
Transit is a major structural advantage, but proximity to the interchange does not prove passenger flow reaches this unit. The decision turns on entrance placement, shelter, crossings, and whether morning commuters pass the proposed frontage.
Verify on site: Check the actual walking route, shelter and crossing points between the site and the nearest station.
Parking supply is substantial on paper, but it is unlikely to be the site's primary access advantage given the stronger interchange proposition. The nearest carpark's ~135m distance may also reduce convenience for very short visits. Peak occupancy and the route from the carpark entrance remain unmeasured.
Verify on site: Confirm actual lot availability and entry/exit flows at peak hours on site.
High resident density around the site is a supporting factor for a value format, but density does not equal footfall at this specific frontage. What is unmeasured is how much of that density passes this unit rather than dispersing to other outlets.
Verify on site: Observe where pedestrian flow concentrates around the site across dayparts.
A predominantly HDB resident base supports value-led daily visits, but housing mix alone does not predict spending or footfall. What is unmeasured is whether residents choose this unit over nearer coffee shops.
Verify on site: Walk the surrounding estate and confirm the mix of public and private housing you actually observe.
Mall co-location, nearby childcare and school access may reinforce family and weekday demand. The more distant college and park are secondary influences unless their pedestrian routes pass the unit. Which anchor flows actually enter the relevant part of the mall remains to be verified.
Verify on site: Confirm each anchor's operating status and pedestrian connectivity from the site.
The modelled 10-minute pedestrian reach covers a large resident base — a supporting factor — but it is computed from the geocoded point, not a building entrance. Barriers, crossings and indoor mall circulation are unmeasured and could reverse the read.
Verify on site: Walk the actual routes from the site's entrances — the zones here start at the geocoded point, not an entrance.
Powered by OneMap · © Singapore Land Authority
Source: Map: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Subzone boundaries: URA/SingStat
Zoning is not the same as this unit's established use. This scan knows the address and the surrounding Master Plan zone from public land-use data (URA Master Plan 2025, gazetted 1 Dec 2025). It does NOT know the specific unit's existing use, its floor plan, any building-level medical-use quantum, or landlord/strata consent. A consistent zone is therefore a screening signal, not a determination: it cannot confirm that a healthcare use is in fact lawful in this exact unit. That requires checking the premises' established use and the operator's licence with the relevant authorities before commitment.
Four separate questions. Regulatory fit for a healthcare use runs through four distinct levels and this scan speaks only to the first: (a) site-level zoning under the Master Plan (what this scan reads); (b) the specific unit's established use and any lease/strata constraints (landlord lease, URA/commercial-property records -- not in this scan); (c) change-of-use, where a proposed use differs from the unit's established use (URA approval route -- not assessed here); and (d) the operator's own licence for the activity (MOH/HCSA, SLA, AVS, etc. -- listed per format below, with its screening status). A clean read at one level does not clear the others.
Every format below is screened with one of four states -- No immediate conflict identified, Further approval may be required, Unable to verify from available data or Not assessed. The flags are advisory: they narrow plausible fit and never remove or reorder a format.
Unable to verify from available data -- buildability and approvals (e.g. floor area, layout, fire-safety and any landlord/strata consent) cannot be assessed from public data; they must be confirmed with the relevant authorities before commitment.
Each member below is scored against ITS OWN profile's expectations -- its own signal weights and category calibration -- so RAW SCORES ACROSS DIFFERENT VERTICALS are NOT on a directly comparable scale, and a higher raw number does NOT mean 'better fit for this unit' across rows. Cross-format comparison should be read on each member's PERCENTILE where one is shown: a percentile ranks this site's score within that profile's own historical benchmark sample of comparable commercial sites -- 'this site ranks higher among GP-clinic sites than among dental sites' is a meaningful statement, '82 beats 71' is not. A percentile is relative to that profile's sample (see the sample size and date), not an absolute claim of commercial success. A member without a benchmark corpus shows its raw score only, with no percentile.
Shared site signals are computed once for 8 uses; 6 distinct measured competition settings → 6 live Google Places call(s) at generation.
8 healthcare and healthcare-adjacent uses are screened against one shared set of site signals (affluence, resident demand, transit, anchor mix, zoning). The matrix synthesises each use's location fit (benchmark percentile), a leasing read, and the format-level approval pathway. The scan does NOT inspect the specific unit: premises/use conclusions are site-level only, and every unit level item is listed as an open follow-up in the diligence checklist.
Lead with the formats whose location fit and leasing read are strongest at this site:
Weakest fit for this location on the current signals:
The parcel's Master Plan zoning is commercial/retail-viable and the demand signals are strong -- a defensible site-level basis for approaching tenants in the recommended formats. State it as exactly that: this is a zoning read for the parcel, not confirmation that the specific unit may run the use. The unit's established use, any change-of-use approval, and the tenant's own licence must each be confirmed before any agreement.
Supporting data for each use in the matrix above — benchmark percentile, category breakdown, competition, and this format's own requirements. Rows are in evaluation order.
This site's 83.3/100 sits at the 32nd percentile of 269 comparable GP Clinic (Heartland) sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-02).
7.5 points below the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 30% | 28.3 |
| elderly population share | 20.7 | 20% | 20 |
| children share | 10.9 | 10% | 10 |
How easily customers can reach the site without a car
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| transit connectivity | 78.7 | 10% | 10 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 15% | 15 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 0 | 15% | 0 |
Competition (live Google Places data). 87 nearby doctor-category listings matched in our measured category (doctor) within 300m · High pressure (0/100). This is a count of Google Places listings in the broad 'doctor' category (GPs, specialists and clinics), not a verified GP-clinic count.
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's guidance treats private medical clinics as an allowable use in commercial buildings within the commercial floor-area of sites zoned Commercial & Residential, White, Residential with 1st-storey commercial, Hotel and Business Park -- subject to a floor-area cap for medical-clinic use (3,000 sqm or 20% of the building's commercial floor area, whichever is lower). Converting a unit to a clinic still normally requires URA approval for the change of use unless the small-scale exemption applies. This screening does not confirm that this specific unit is established for a clinic -- the unit's own existing use must be checked with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 44.6/100 sits at the 7th percentile of 269 comparable GP Clinic (CBD / Office) sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-02).
15.7 points below the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 10% | 4.2 |
How easily customers can reach the site without a car
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| transit connectivity | 78.7 | 25% | 27.8 |
Office (Daytime-Worker) Density leads this category
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| office (daytime-worker) density | 16.2 | 35% | 12.6 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 0 | 20% | 0 |
Competition (live Google Places data). 87 nearby doctor-category listings matched in our measured category (doctor) within 300m · High pressure (0/100). This is a count of Google Places listings in the broad 'doctor' category (GPs, specialists and clinics), not a verified GP-clinic count.
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's guidance treats private medical clinics as an allowable use in commercial buildings within the commercial floor-area of sites zoned Commercial & Residential, White, Residential with 1st-storey commercial, Hotel and Business Park -- subject to a floor-area cap for medical-clinic use (3,000 sqm or 20% of the building's commercial floor area, whichever is lower). Converting a unit to a clinic still normally requires URA approval for the change of use unless the small-scale exemption applies. This screening does not confirm that this specific unit is established for a clinic -- the unit's own existing use must be checked with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 93/100 sits at the 85th percentile of 269 comparable Dental Clinic sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-03).
17.9 points above the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 20% | 21.6 |
Mall Proximity leads this category
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| mall proximity | 78.6 | 20% | 28.6 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 15% | 21.4 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 93.3 | 15% | 21.4 |
Partial basis. This Dental Clinic score of 93/100 is a partial basis. The signals this site could supply carry about 70% of this format's profile weight -- the unrepresented balance was not scorable here (see the location-signals section), so the score is computed on that reduced weight only. Treat it as a directional read on the signals available at this site, not a full multi-factor assessment.
Competition (live Google Places data). 1 nearby dental clinic matched in our measured category (dentist) within 300m · Low pressure (93.3/100).
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's guidance treats private medical clinics as an allowable use in commercial buildings within the commercial floor-area of sites zoned Commercial & Residential, White, Residential with 1st-storey commercial, Hotel and Business Park -- subject to a floor-area cap for medical-clinic use (3,000 sqm or 20% of the building's commercial floor area, whichever is lower). Converting a unit to a clinic still normally requires URA approval for the change of use unless the small-scale exemption applies. This screening does not confirm that this specific unit is established for a clinic -- the unit's own existing use must be checked with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 50/100 sits at the 67th percentile of 269 comparable Aesthetic Clinic sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-03).
10.0 points above the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
Mall Proximity leads this category
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| mall proximity | 78.6 | 30% | 50 |
| tourist/heritage precinct | 0 | 30% | 0 |
Partial basis. This Aesthetic Clinic score of 50/100 is a partial basis. The signals this site could supply carry about 60% of this format's profile weight -- the unrepresented balance was not scorable here (see the location-signals section), so the score is computed on that reduced weight only. Within that measured set, 'mall proximity' accounts for essentially all of the points. Treat it as a directional read on the signals available at this site, not a full multi-factor assessment.
Competition (live Google Places data). 6 nearby aesthetic clinics matched in our measured category (skin_care_clinic) within 300m · Moderate (60/100).
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's guidance treats private medical clinics as an allowable use in commercial buildings within the commercial floor-area of sites zoned Commercial & Residential, White, Residential with 1st-storey commercial, Hotel and Business Park -- subject to a floor-area cap for medical-clinic use (3,000 sqm or 20% of the building's commercial floor area, whichever is lower). Converting a unit to a clinic still normally requires URA approval for the change of use unless the small-scale exemption applies. This screening does not confirm that this specific unit is established for a clinic -- the unit's own existing use must be checked with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 83.8/100 sits at the 74th percentile of 268 comparable TCM Clinic sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-03).
9.4 points above the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| elderly population share | 20.7 | 35% | 38.7 |
| resident population density | 37.8 | 25% | 25.2 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 15% | 20 |
Partial basis. This TCM Clinic score of 83.8/100 is a partial basis. The signals this site could supply carry about 75% of this format's profile weight -- the unrepresented balance was not scorable here (see the location-signals section), so the score is computed on that reduced weight only. Treat it as a directional read on the signals available at this site, not a full multi-factor assessment.
Competition is not assessed for this format -- Competition is not assessed for this profile -- No sufficiently reliable Google Places type exists for TCM clinics -- zero paid calls were made
Zoning. Further approval may be required Whether URA treats a TCM clinic as a medical-clinic use (needing a change of use) or as a shop-type use is not clearly documented in URA's published guidance; MOH's TCM Practitioners Board directs practitioners opening a clinic to check premises approval with URA/HDB. Confirm the specific unit's use class with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 92.7/100 sits at the 99th percentile of 268 comparable Community Pharmacy sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-03).
23.3 points above the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 30% | 22.7 |
How easily customers can reach the site without a car
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| transit connectivity | 78.7 | 15% | 15 |
Mall Proximity and Hospital Proximity lead this category
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| mall proximity | 78.6 | 20% | 20 |
| hospital proximity | 100 | 10% | 10 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 15% | 15 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 73.3 | 10% | 10 |
Competition (live Google Places data). 4 nearby pharmacies matched in our measured category (pharmacy) within 300m · Low pressure (73.3/100).
Zoning. Further approval may be required A pharmacy is a retail/shop use, not a clinical use. Retail is a standard commercial use within a building's commercial floor-area, but changing a unit's use to retail can still need URA approval depending on the premises; confirm the specific unit with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 98.1/100 sits at the 84th percentile of 269 comparable Chiropractor sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-06).
9.5 points above the peer median.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 25% | 31.5 |
How easily customers can reach the site without a car
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| transit connectivity | 78.7 | 15% | 20 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 20% | 26.7 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 100 | 15% | 20 |
Partial basis. This Chiropractor score of 98.1/100 is a partial basis. The signals this site could supply carry about 75% of this format's profile weight -- the unrepresented balance was not scorable here (see the location-signals section), so the score is computed on that reduced weight only. Treat it as a directional read on the signals available at this site, not a full multi-factor assessment.
Competition (live Google Places data). 0 nearby chiropractic clinics matched in our measured category (chiropractor) within 300m · Low pressure (100/100).
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's published development-control guidance addresses private medical clinics, not chiropractic premises, and chiropractic is not an HCSA medical-clinic service, so the medical-clinic floor-area cap may not apply the same way. Whether URA treats chiropractic premises as a shop/office service use or requires a change-of-use application is not clearly documented in its published guidance. Confirm the specific unit's use class with URA. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This site's 85.5/100 sits at the 55th percentile of 268 comparable Vet Clinic sites in the reference sample (generated 2026-09-06).
Broadly in line with the peer median, sitting 3.4 points above it.
Relative location fit within the modelled comparison corpus — not a probability of approval, profitability, or business success. It only compares sites of the same format.
The size and spending power of the resident catchment
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| resident population density | 37.8 | 30% | 30.3 |
How easily customers can reach the site without a car
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| car access | 30.6 | 15% | 15.3 |
Whether the site itself is retail-viable
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| zoning suitability | 61.5 | 15% | 20 |
Room to enter given nearby competitors
| Signal | Value | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| competition level | 100 | 15% | 20 |
Partial basis. This Vet Clinic score of 85.5/100 is a partial basis. The signals this site could supply carry about 75% of this format's profile weight -- the unrepresented balance was not scorable here (see the location-signals section), so the score is computed on that reduced weight only. Treat it as a directional read on the signals available at this site, not a full multi-factor assessment.
Competition (live Google Places data). 0 nearby veterinary clinics matched in our measured category (veterinary_care) within 300m · Low pressure (100/100).
Zoning. Further approval may be required URA's 'Pet Shop' use definition includes a veterinary clinic: URA states that 'Pet shops are premises used for the sale of live animals normally kept as domestic pets' and that the use 'includes a veterinary clinic and pet grooming service' (it does not include pet hotel or pet boarding). A veterinary centre is therefore a recognised URA use class. This does not mean every pet-shop-zoned or pet-shop-use unit automatically permits one: whether this specific unit's established use or change-of-use allows a veterinary centre, plus any building or strata rules restricting animals on site, must be confirmed with URA and the building owner. Verify the specific use class and the unit's existing use with URA's e-services before commitment.
This scan reads public land-use data at the parcel level. It does not inspect the unit. Each gap below is a concrete follow-up for the landlord or their agent -- the report points to what to check, it does not check it for you.
Work through these in order before committing to a tenant type: