Land Use Allocation Beyond 2030 Singapore’s Strategic Planning

Introduction

The Singapore Land Use Plan 2030 is a conceptual plan that serves to set out the broad developmental direction for Singapore over the next 40-50 years. The Concept Plan review, carried out in 2011, included discussions undertaken by the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) on population issues. The formulation of the Land Use plan, detailed in a 69-page document, complements the Population White paper which seeks to provide and sustain a high quality living environment for a possible population of 6. 5 to 6. 9 million by the year 2030. 1 Beyond that, the Land Use Plan takes into account potential national needs beyond 2030 by setting aside land and room for future growth and opportunities.

Success of Singapore’s Land Use Plan 2030

The success of the Singapore’s Land Use Plan 2030 are far reaching. The following section will address two positive aspects. Addressing Limited Space for Rising Population In a straits time article dated 4 Feb 2013, “White Paper all about ‘planning ahead”, Minister Lim Swee Say had suggested that a lot of today’s infrastructural bottlenecks could have been averted if Singapore had, 10 years ago, discussed on the possibility of having a population of 5. 4 million.

White Paper, complemented by the Land Use Plan, therefore serves as a ‘good exercise’ to help Singapore identify and allocate space for a potential rising population. Land reclamation carried out mostly around Tuas and Pulau Tekong was identified as a key plank to ensure quality of life amid growth. Beyond that, the Land Use Plan 2030 seeks to look within its existing developed land spaces. By recycling and maximising the potentialities of these land parcels, underutilised spaces can be further urbanised, intensified, or repurposed for more optimal land usage. For instance, existing farmlands and golf courses that are deemed less productive are reutilised and rezoned for intensified usages. The Land Use Plan 2030 has also been successful in optimising the various industries through clustering and centralisation efforts, particularly in the shipping and industrial sectors. The plan to decant the existing container port facilities to the western end of Singapore, Tuas, opens up valuable land for further redevelopment at the southern end of Singapore.

Recently, the announcement of the relocation of the Paya Lebar Airbase in 2030 will also free up at least 800ha of land, and remove the existing height restrictions at the eastern swathe of Singapore, thereby providing redevelopment opportunities around the vicinity.

Enhancing our Biodiversity Network Contrary to the belief that Singapore is a small country with no natural resources, but a manicured garden city, its forests, green areas and coastal belts are teeming with life, even if it is not immediately obvious or easily spotted. Singapore is home to a rich array of biodiversity despite its small land mass. There are at least 2, 000 native vascular plant species, some 57 mammals species, 98 reptile species and 25 different amphibian species recorded to date across the island. Some 355 species of birds also soar through the nation’s skies, along with 282 over species of butterflies.

The Land Use Plan 2030 seeks to further expand its Green & Blue Network. This provides relief to the highly densified city landscape and serves to connect the coastal and inner environments, whilst providing a purifying water environment and diversified recreational and decorative urban spaces. More importantly, this provides increased educational opportunities for its citizens to engage with the nature in its own backyard, further spreading the awareness of biodiversity conservation and protection efforts. About 900 hectares of reservoir and 100km of waterways will be open for recreational activities and more than 60km of "nature ways" will serve as ecological highway to link green spaces for birds, butterflies and small animals. Singapore’s conservation efforts have been successful thus far, with sightings of otters now being a common sight. These animals serves as a testament of the clean water and habitat its nature areas provide.

Inadequacies of Singapore’s Land Use Plan 2030 While the Land Use Plan 2030 has been successful in plotting out a gleaming future for Singapore, there were several lacks. The following section will identify and provide possibilities for two areas for improvement. 1) Potentialities for a more resource-resilient Singapore Singapore remains a vulnerable society no matter how sophisticated we get, if it does not address the security of our water, food and energy supplies. Moving forward, it is important for Singapore to constantly relook and address how it can be more resilient towards unexpected shocks and increase its own self-sufficiency.

The Singapore Land Use Plan 2030 provisions for the agricultural and farming sector was minuscule, taking up only 0. 9% of land area in comparison to other land requirements listed in the table below. Land usage allocated for the agricultural sector was colour-coded collectively with open and recreational spaces in the Illustrative Land Use Allocation Beyond 2030 Diagram. Beyond that, the Land Use Plan seeks to consolidate activities that require large land parcels (farming) to release more land for other uses. While this suggests an approach towards on intensified production using lesser land, there still lies a lack of emphasis towards increasing resiliency and self-sufficiency in our food supplies; a necessity that is arguably of equal importance in comparison to water, another scarce resource of this small island nation. While it might be unrealistic to envision a fully self-sufficient Singapore in terms of food production today, the local production serves as a ‘critical buffer against global supply shocks for key food items’. “I think we have almost given up on the idea that we can produce much food ourselves, ” Mr Cheng Hsing Yao, Managing Director of GuocoLand Singapore, who has also held leadership positions at the Centre for Liveable Cities and the URA.

The same could have been said of the nation’s water narrative. One of Singapore’s greatest challenge was a lack of portable water. However, through heavy investments in water technology and research and development, Singapore has developed new efficient technology in the field and is now at the forefront of water reclamation industry. Besides being able to quench the thirst of its growing population, it is on track to meeting 85% of Singapore’s future water demand by 2060. More than a resource, it is now an asset waiting to be harnessed. 8 There is immense potential for this tiny nation to similarly create a food narrative to go along with its ‘water narrative’. The local food production sector has an important national duty and continues to play an important role in ensuring Singapore’s food security. Food production can be part of Singapore’s future and will play a vital role in strengthening Singapore’s food supply resiliency. As an urbanised nation, Singapore can be at the forefront promoting the development of urban farming solutions and progressive farming technologies. A revamped looking farming sector, transformed through the implementation of technology can occur. No longer a lowly skilled job shunned by future generations, the future of food production is one of a high-tech, innovative, highly intensive and productive, with the ability to do more with less.

Greater Mobility through Alternative Transport Methods

The Singapore Land Use Plan 2030 has been successful in highlighting the move towards a public transport centric system. Given the severe limitation of land, restraining private transport usage, in particular private car usage, is critical in preventing further congestion. The approach adopted by the Land Use Plan 2030 seeks to expand the existing public transport system in a bid to increase its coverage. This is further complemented by infrastructural provision (eg. bicycle paths and shelter walkways) to complete pedestrian’s last mile travel. However, the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, the backbone of the public transport system has been in operation since 1987 and has been plagued with train disruption issues amidst improvement works. Despite being an indispensable portion of their daily travel, many commuters found the experience on the MRT increasingly arduous, with dense crowds gathering on train platforms, unable to squeeze onto the overcrowded carriages.

The Land Use Plan 2030 approach towards increased reliance on public transportation is commendable, however, it points to the single reliance on the backbone of the public transport system, the MRT network. While the MRT network is the most space efficient way of transporting large number of people, alternative travel options could be considered to further support such a crucial network, and in situations of breakdown, provide redundancy options. With the increase popularity amongst Singaporeans in personal mobility devices (PMDs), the need for safer and dedicated PMD routes becomes more apparent. The Land Use Plan 2030 has identified cycling as an alternative mode of transportation and has proposed intra town networks of off-road path away from vehicular routes to make it a safer option for users of all skill levels. Moving forward, the provision of amenities such as parking facilities and showering facilities at pit stops can be considered to further enhance such alternative clean private-mode of transportation. With the improvement in disruptive technology, shareable transportation such as zero-emission autonomous vehicles and car sharing platforms can also be considered as alternative travel modes to complement the public transportation network. The public transport network should not be a single linear chain of transportation options (walk-bus-MRT), but rather a multi-layered array of public transportation provisions, to provide freedom of choice and redundancy.

The success of Singapore’s urban planning is largely pivoted on a planned and strictly controlled land development approach by the Singapore’s Government. Planning rest primarily in the hands of experts instead of its citizens and actual users. However, with the public’s growing desire to have a say in the country’s development, planners find themselves looking for various methods to facilitate these voices to be heard.

Current Approaches

During the review of the Concept Plan 2030, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) took into account land requirements in collaboration with the various governmental agencies. In addition, the URA attempted to foster citizen participation through a Public Consultation Exercise. Initiatives such as roving exhibition, public forums, and focus group discussions served as various channels for stakeholders and the public to address their concerns and any future plans. The review of the Concept Plan adopted a two-prong approach to ensure a wide spectrum of society is represented, with people from all walks of life involved and represented in the review of the Concept Plan.

Firstly, two focus groups, each consisting 35 members, were formed to seek feedback from the public on ideas pertaining to the provision of good quality of life, ageing in place, growing in a sustainable way, as well as retaining our identity. The members were intentionally selected from a broad segment of the population, ranging from professional bodies, non-governmental organisations, community groups, businesses, academia, and youths, etc. In-depth focus group discussions took place over a period of four months, where their preliminary findings were presented at two public forums for further public input. The ideas from Focus Group Discussion were ultimately studied and incorporated, where appropriate, into the Concept Plan. The ideas were also forwarded to the various governmental agencies for referencing when formulating future policies.

Secondly, the Public Consultation Exercise offered a variety of platforms for the general public to provide their feedback and ideas in the form of surveys (eg. Lifestyle Survey, Online survey) and roving exhibitions, where preliminary findings were presented. The feedbacks from the surveys served as added discussion considerations for the two focus groups.

Criticism on Such Approach

With increased demand for greater engagement and for opinions to be heard and considered, some argued that leaders should do more to ensure adequate citizen input in city planning the efforts as adopted in the Concept Plan review to not surmount to effective public consultation, but rather, merely the communication of plans. The general public desired more involvement and transparency in the decision making process.

Establishing public participation come in many and varied forms, with at least eight different academic models highlighting different methods and structures the public is engaged in a planning process. In Arnstein’s ladder of participation, the Concept Plan’s review approach for public participation fell into the corresponding grade of tokenism, where participants may indeed hear as well as be heard but do not have the power to ensure that their views will be heeded. Citizens in this case were involved only indirectly in city planning.

Comparison with Seoul 2030 Plan

The Seoul 2030 Plan serves as a positive exemplary to emulate. In the participation process of the Seoul 2030 Plan, conscious effort was taken to facilitate greater inputs from the public, through simplifying its Master plan for easier understanding to empowering the people to helping themselves through a series of trainings programmes and consultations. The leaders in Seoul 2030 believed that community empowerment can be achieved by transferring the decision making authority to its citizens. Citizens and residents witness and experience problems on the ground, thereby are more likely to be able to propose and develop ideas and solutions for their cities to ease their daily lives. By imparting the necessary skills and empowering the citizens, such approach can help to demystify the complex planning and architectural issues, and in turn improve accessibility of information. Beyond that, this provides a greater avenue for citizens to put forth their own solutions to problems they have identified on the ground.

Allowing greater public participation can create a greater sense of community, ownership and involvement amongst the citizens. By encouraging residents to play a pivotal role in shaping their immediate landscape, it can help to foster a sense of pride amongst the community. A ‘partnership’ approach can be considered, where citizens are more activity engaged in the discussion of trade-offs, or even, possess the decision making power. However, it is important to note that there is no one single public participation approach that is adequate, and a combination of varied degrees of participation is often more effective. A successful public participation programme should be designed to be integral to the planning process, to focus on its objectives, to function within available resources of time, personnel and budget, and to be responsive to the citizen participants.

Conclusion

Singapore has come a long way in shaping its physical landscape to what it is today. The generation today has never inherited any of these successes but are merely custodians for the future generations. To leave behind a more bustling bubble in which they can call home, it is important to engage and empower the different stakeholders to create a cohesive community collectively. The role of public participation therefore serves not just as a symbolic effort, but an integral part in a democratic decision-making process on urban planning matters.