Key Learnings from Process that Led to Conservation of Golden Mile Complex

Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the key learnings from the process leading to the landmark conservation of Golden Mile Complex in 2021; (b) whether the report on the two-year study on the conservation, or a summary thereof, can be made public; and (c) whether other modernist icons like People's Park Complex can be considered for conservation in view of heritage protection and carbon footprint reduction imperatives.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Golden Mile Complex is considered one of the most architecturally, historically and socially significant modern buildings in Singapore. It is a symbol of the architectural and engineering ingenuity of Singapore's Pioneer Generation of building professionals, including Gan Eng Oon, William Lim, Tay Kheng Soon, Koh Seow Chuan, Chan Sui Him, Joseph Wang, Woh Hup and many others. It encapsulates the people's bold vision and imagination for vibrant, inclusive and high-rise living during Singapore's early nation-building days.

The decision to conserve Golden Mile Complex in October last year was made after a careful and extensive process of study and engagement with the building owners, as well as with developers, heritage experts and other stakeholders.

Many of the learning points from these studies and engagements were unique to Golden Mile Complex, considering its specific site context, as well as its pioneering status as the first modern, large scale, strata-titled development conserved in Singapore.

For example, beyond the strong conservation merit of the building, URA had also recognised the financial interest of the building owners in this decision, as they were planning for a collective sale. To address the owners' concerns, URA had engaged the collective sale committee, industry stakeholders and relevant Government agencies to explore feasible adaptive reuse schemes for the building, as well as the unprecedented development and tax incentives to make development options for the site more attractive to potential buyers under the Conservation Scheme.

Close engagement with stakeholders, including the wider public, was key. Following URA's announcement and public exhibition of the proposal, we assessed the feedback received and further worked with the owners to refine the incentive package. Many members of the public had also written in to MND and URA to express their support for the conservation proposal. When we proceeded to conserve the building last year in October, we made public the conservation merits of the building and accompanying incentive package that had resulted from the prior years' study and engagement.

We are not at liberty to reveal the more commercially sensitive details of the incentive package, or our studies. This includes a detailed technical study and building audit that we had done for Golden Mile Complex, which we had obtained the owners' consent to conduct, on the condition that we keep the findings confidential to the owners.

There is still a learning journey ahead of us for Golden Mile Complex, even after its conservation, as the building owners seek collective sale. We will work with them and the industry to explore viable adaptive reuse outcomes for the building. We will also need to strengthen the expertise of our building industry professionals and firms to rehabilitate and conserve such buildings and work with a future developer, if any, to put the building to a meaningful new use. We will closely engage the stakeholders each step of the way.

As URA continues to study other modern buildings of heritage significance, we will likewise take a systematic, calibrated and consultative approach towards conservation, so that through both conservation and redevelopment, we can steward our limited land to meet the needs and aspirations of current, as well as future generations of Singaporeans.