Urban Planning Committee | Owners should be more involved in conservation efforts

Yesterday’s Urban Planning Committee meeting

The Urban Planning Committee discussed 15 buildings as well as the conditions of planning land plots in its plenary meeting yesterday.  Patane, the Catholic Cemetery and Taipa’s new town center as well as the site near the airport were key areas of discussion.
Drawing on the fact that private property rights are often partially embedded with historical and cultural values and acknowledge surrounding land plots that are part of the landscape, some committee members indicated that incentive policies are needed to encourage owners to participate in heritage conservation and to develop land plots for pubic use.
Citing the successful heritage conservation practice in European countries and in Singapore, some members stressed that a historical building must be used properly rather than being maintained as idle and vacant, whilst some indicated that the property owners and citizens also need to uphold their own social responsibility to watch over and safeguard the city’s cultural values.
On the other hand, some members questioned the possibility of mobilizing owners to develop their private properties and spaces for public use, as they pointed out that some proposed conservation plans such as building a green park on the side of the street may not be sufficiently practical and feasible.
Furthermore, some mem-
bers warned that the city’s uncertain prospects in terms of fiscal revenue may suggest a declining budget in protecting historical buildings, and thus the allocation of funds in conservation must be well planned. Others also suggested that developers should be allowed to build underground spaces as an incentive for them to develop vacant land plots.
During the meeting, representatives from the Cultural Institute (IC) also introduced their requests to revamp dilapidated heritage buildings, a process which will entail retaining the front façade, restoring the dismantled part and demolishing the unauthorized building structure.  It will be judged as to whether the absence or affixation of a structure will reduce the building’s original cultural value.
Regarding some historical buildings whose structures and features are no longer complete, some members questioned why the government would rather rebuild a “counterfeiting” structure to protect them rather than having protected the original building in time.