SINGAPORE – Singapore has placed the Padang and civic buildings surrounding it on the country’s tentative list of Unesco World Heritage Sites, which indicates interest in nominating the area for World Heritage Site status in the future.

In announcing the listing of the site – which the National Heritage Board (NHB) calls the Padang Civic Ensemble – on March 9, NHB said that Singapore stands to benefit in areas such as a stronger sense of national identity.

But the board noted that inscription may also come at a price – the redevelopment potential of the site and its vicinity might be impacted.

The Straits Times unpacks some implications of Singapore’s potential bid for a second Unesco World Heritage Site.

How may Unesco World Heritage Site inscription impact redevelopment in the civic district?

Should inscription be pursued, the exact boundary of the site will have to be determined.

In addition, Unesco requires World Heritage Sites to be protected by a buffer zone, “wherever necessary for the proper protection” of the sites. Where no such zone is proposed, the nomination should explain why a buffer zone is not required.

The United Nations body states that the buffer zone should have complementary legal and/or customary restrictions placed on its use and development, so that – among other things – important views remain clear of obstruction.

The Singapore Botanic Gardens – Singapore’s first World Heritage Site – has a buffer zone around it that extends as far as about 800m west of the inscribed site.

The height and form of buildings, including those within the buffer zone, are controlled using the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s master plan, which ensures that important views from the gardens remain unobstructed.

Similarly, a buffer zone will likely have to be established around the Padang and its surrounds if the area becomes a World Heritage Site.

If height controls are in place, the redevelopment potential of properties in this buffer will be impacted, as developers are unlikely to be allowed to redevelop buildings to be taller than they already are.

Due to such opportunity costs, the NHB said that the Padang and its surrounds will be a “challenging nomination”. It cited the Historic Centre of Vienna, a World Heritage Site in Austria that was in 2017 placed on Unesco’s list of World Heritage Sites in danger because of concerns over the height of new developments.

The board told ST on March 20 that it will work with other agencies to explore possible design solutions and site management measures that can protect the outstanding universal value – a quality that all World Heritage Sites possess – of the Padang and surrounding civic buildings.

On whether nearby skyscrapers might affect the suitability of the site for nomination, NHB said that its research thus far has indicated that the site “has a good chance of demonstrating the outstanding universal value to meet the criteria for a World Heritage Site”, adding that more research will be done.

The Padang and many buildings around it are national monuments. Will gazetting them a World Heritage Site confer additional protections?

Unesco relies on local laws of each state to protect World Heritage Sites.

In Singapore, gazetting a building or site a national monument gives it the highest level of protection under local laws. Besides 75 national monuments, the country also has more than 7,200 conserved buildings.

Each national monument is issued a set of preservation guidelines prepared by the NHB that spell out exact features of the property which must be preserved.

NHB’s monument inspectors also carry out inspections on the monuments once every two years.

In comparison, conserved buildings are largely not issued specific guidelines, although works on these buildings need to comply with a set of general conservation guidelines. Inspections are done selectively.

Should the Padang and its surrounds be designated a World Heritage Site, current local legislations are unlikely to provide additional or significantly different protections, as many sites and properties in the area are already national monuments.

These include the Padang, St Andrew’s Cathedral, Victoria Theatre and Concert Hall, Old Parliament House, and the former City Hall and Supreme Court. The Singapore Cricket Club is a conserved building.

That said, Assistant Professor Hamzah Muzaini, a cultural geographer in the National University of Singapore’s (NUS) South-east Asian Studies Department, highlighted that should the Padang area be inscribed, potential threats to the site – such as development projects – “would now be answerable to stakeholders around the world rather than just locally”.

He added that Unesco inscription also “offers additional protection on the off chance that the state may rescind the national monument status in the future – for instance, should these sites have to give way to other more critical needs of the nation”.

How would Singapore benefit from having a second Unesco World Heritage Site?

Associate Professor Johannes Widodo, director of graduate programmes in architectural conservation at NUS, said that Unesco’s goal is to identify and protect cultural and natural sites of outstanding universal value for future generations, and by doing so, contribute to sustainable development.

“World Heritage Sites are not for city branding or tourism promotion purposes, but for education and fostering peace and understanding through cultural exchanges,” he said.

Nevertheless, NHB said that the designation will “help increase Singapore’s international visibility as a choice cultural destination for international travellers and further develop our tourism sector”.

According to the National Parks Board, annual visitor numbers to the Singapore Botanic Gardens have increased from 4.4 million in 2015 to about five million today.

Prof Hamzah hopes that marketing and tourism purposes would be secondary to getting Singaporeans more interested in local heritage sites.

He is optimistic that the potential nomination will raise awareness and public knowledge about the less visible and intangible aspects of Singapore’s heritage, rather than just the “Instagrammable” tangible aspects of the historic buildings and areas.

Prof Hamzah said that putting together a nomination also allows Singapore to better understand its history.

To this end, the Padang’s pre-colonial history – unveiled through previous archaeological studies – should be scrutinised, he suggested, adding that studies leading up to the potential nomination are a good opportunity to show and learn from the negatives – such as racism, prejudice and discrimination – as much as the positives of colonialism.

“Given Unesco’s focus on education, to not highlight some of these perhaps risque teachable lessons from the colonial period would be a missed opportunity, if not a stark oversight,” said Prof Hamzah.

He added: “The Padang and its environs are also a history of the people and of its underbelly. Underlying the spectacular buildings and architecture is the story of Singapore as a penal colony and also of its working classes.

“In writing up the potential nomination for the Padang and its environs, it would be imperative that this is included as much as the usual stories. The listing could thus be a channel whereby we can further expand our Singapore story.”

Is the Padang, together with its surrounds, really that unique?

The NHB considers the site “an outstanding example of a British colonial civic square in the tropics”.

In its submission to Unesco for tentative list addition, the board said that there are other sites which share commonalities with the Padang – in terms of colonial architectural and urban features – currently on the World Heritage List, albeit as part of larger sites.

It noted that civic squares, urban parks, open fields, parades and sporting grounds can be found in historic centres throughout Britain’s former imperial cities, but the Padang is “unique in how it gives prominence to an open space, which remains a vulnerable and under-represented nomination category on the World Heritage List”.

One other open space currently within a World Heritage Site is Penang’s Esplanade – a square field next to the sea, beside a town hall and city hall – which is part of the jointly inscribed cities of Melaka and George Town.

NHB said that the Esplanade and the Padang have had similar functions as a defensive esplanade, a parade and recreational ground, and a commemorative and cultural space.

The board noted that the Esplanade was described in nomination documents as under-utilised at the time of nomination in 2008, but has since gained additional civic functions with the addition of a Speaker’s Square in 2010.

Another open space on Unesco’s list is Mumbai’s Oval Maidan, an elongated field that is part of the inscribed Victorian and Art Deco Ensemble of Mumbai.

NHB said the field serves as a unifying element and visual centrepiece for a series of buildings, but unlike the Padang, the civic and municipal dimension of the Oval Maidan is “far less pronounced and largely overshadowed” by its primary designation as a recreational ground.

The board will conduct further studies so that it can fully illustrate and justify the outstanding universal values of the Padang and its surrounds.