Common Services Tunnels Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

4.25 pm

The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time".

With this Bill, we are introducing new legislation to ensure the safe and efficient operation of common services tunnels (CSTs). A CST is an underground tunnel which houses multiple utilities to serve an area. There is, currently, one CST in Singapore, located under the roads at Marina Bay. The tunnel was built in 2007 by the state and continues to be owned and operated by the state, working with utility suppliers and developments in the area. It contains the electricity cables, telecommunications cables, water pipes and district cooling pipes for the air-conditioning of buildings in the area.

We decided to build the CST because it offers many advantages over the conventional way utility networks are laid. Traditionally, different utility lines are laid separately under the roads. This means that the road has to be opened whenever there is a need to lay a new utility line, or to maintain and repair existing lines, for example, when there is a burst pipe. This can lead to repeated traffic disruptions and diversions, as well as nuisance to pedestrians and other users.

Furthermore, because the utility lines are spread out in an ad hoc manner as and when they are laid, there is a risk that subsequent construction or road works may lead to accidental damage to pipes and cables and potentially disrupt utility supplies in the area.

The CST is intended to mitigate these risks and issues. Once the tunnel is built, utility lines can be installed and maintained in the tunnel without opening up the road again, thereby, eliminating lane closures and disruptive works. When there is a fault in any of the utility lines, repairs can be carried out simply by entering the tunnel.

The tunnel also enhances the reliability of services as it provides robust protection for the utilities housed within it. By consolidating all utilities within the CST, we also optimise the use of underground space, leaving room for other infrastructure like pedestrian underpasses. The CST, therefore, improves the efficiency and reliability of utility services while raising the quality of our urban living environment.

This way of planning and building infrastructure calls for new operational and administrative practices. So far, we have relied on contractual and administrative arrangements to facilitate the maintenance and operation of the CST in Marina Bay. Drawing on our experiences with the Marina Bay CST, we are introducing this new CST Bill to make these arrangements clear in the law, to clarify any grey areas and enhance our regulatory practices to ensure the safe and efficient operation of CSTs.

The Bill will apply to any gazetted "CST area". For now, the only gazetted CST area will be Marina Bay and the intention is to gazette the area containing all developments which receive their utility supplies from the CST. If and when they build new CSTs in the future, we will also apply the provisions of the Bill to them.

Let me now go through the key provisions of the Bill.

First, the Bill makes clear that all utilities in the CST area are to be laid within the CST, unless approval is given to do otherwise. This is already the case at Marina Bay, where utility suppliers are not allowed to lay their lines directly into the ground.

Second, to facilitate the efficient functioning of the CST, the Bill gives authorised persons power to enter any land or premises in the CST area for the purposes of operating and maintaining the CST.

Access to the CST is provided through ancillary structures located on private land, such as entrances, passageways connecting entrances, and ventilation shafts. These entrances and ventilation shafts are integrated with buildings adjacent to the CST. This was how we planned for the CST at Marina Bay. We did so consciously so that we would not have unsightly standalone structures spoiling the streetscape or taking up space.

To operate and maintain the CST, various persons will need access to these ancillary structures to get into the CST. These will include technicians from utility companies to lay or maintain their lines, public officers to carry out inspections and contractors to operate the facilities in the tunnel and to perform routine functions like cleaning or security checks.

Currently, access is secured administratively through agreements with individual building owners and occupiers, but these agreements will not automatically be passed on to subsequent owners and occupiers. So, this provision in the Bill ensures access to the CST through ancillary structures for operations and maintenance, regardless of building ownership and occupiers.

Third, to ensure that access to and functioning of the CST are not impeded, the Bill also empowers officers to require persons to remove obstructions to entrances and ventilation shafts and to return these structures to their original condition. If the specified person fails to comply, the officer can rectify the situation and recover the costs from that person.

In addition, the Bill requires building owners or their tenants to take reasonable measures to maintain the ancillary structures on their land. Officers may require such persons to carry out works reasonably deemed necessary to keep these structures in working order. If they fail to comply, officers or their contractors may carry out the required works and recover the costs. This provision is necessary because the integrated ancillary structures are physically part of the private building, built by the owner, and wear and tear generally results from the usage and occupancy of the building. It is the responsibility of the building owner to maintain the building, including the ancillary structures within it.

Finally, to safeguard the CST against damage, the Bill introduces a "CST protection zone" of any land within six metres of the CST, and any construction works within this zone will require prior approval. This is similar to the "railway protection zone" under the Rapid Transit Systems Act, which safeguards MRT tunnels against damage. This is necessary as damage to the CST could cut off the power or water supply to buildings in these areas. In key areas like Marina Bay, this could have severe economic consequences.

In issuing their approval, officers may impose conditions deemed necessary to prevent damage or adverse impact on the operation of the CST. If the works are carried out without approval, officers may order the works to be stopped or require rectification works to be carried out.

I have described the key provisions in the Bill. The Bill also sets out the maximum penalties for violations of these provisions which are set at $20,000 and up to $1,000 a day for continuing offences. For obstructing officers in the course of duty, the penalty also includes a jail term of up to six months.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill provides for the operation of CSTs in Singapore. This is an underground infrastructure which will enable us to improve the way we lay and maintain utility networks and utility lines in Singapore. It will help us to optimise the use of space, it will enable us to build a better city and, ultimately, improve the quality of life for Singaporeans. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

4.33 pm

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Bill.

Urban planning engineers often refer to the maze of pipes and conduits and shallow urban underground spaces as the spaghetti subsurface problem: a criss-crossing, multi-layered mess of water pipes, sewers, gas conduits, power lines, telephone and television cables that sit below many of our road surfaces today.

Many would also have encountered the constant sight of digging, resurfacing and re-digging of the subsurface by multiple agencies and companies in the past. So, the CST, or multi-utilities tunnel, as they are called overseas, offers a sustainable solution that permits simple and safe operations on the infrastructures, avoiding recurring street works that are necessary for direct burial trenches.

However, CSTs face a key barrier. The high upfront infrastructure capital cost involved, as well as the time required to build such a structure. I am given to understand that the two phases of the Marina Bay CST (MBCST) had planning begin as early as 1998 and, coupled with the district cooling plant, base infrastructure cost has amounted to over $330 million so far.

As such, I would like to ask the Minister what the key challenges for the construction of the MBCST have been, as the construction face difficulties, thus, leading to the prolonged construction period. Has maintenance of the tunnels been difficult for a largely reclaimed bay area? If the area is also fast developing, has right of access been an issue so far that the Ministry has had to deal with? What has been the feedback from current building owners that have to provide access to ancillary facilities of the CST through their buildings? Has there been resistance from utility providers? Has there been an increase in the initial investment costs for laying of cables and pipes compared to the usual trench burial method?

It is right that with such a large capital investment and the large number of utilities that a CST supports, that the Government regulates and sets down as law the guidelines for access and adoption of use by building owners and utility-providers. However, CSTs are not new in the international sphere and have been planned for in Singapore since the late 1990s. Is there a reason for the long time lapse before the introduction of this Bill before the House? Is it in response to violations or potential violations?

Last year, the Minister also announced that by 2019, the URA will be releasing the pilot projects under the underground masterplan. Does the Ministry see the CST as a future model for new developments, both commercial and residential, as well as redevelopment sites?

Jurong Lake District has been identified as one such area for the introduction of the CST, together with the Punggol Digital Corridor. Will the Ministry also consider residential towns, such as Bidadari, Tengah and the freed-up Paya Lebar airbase, as new areas for the introduction of CST, in place of the traditional trench burial techniques? How will the Ministry ensure that there can be economies of scale, considering the very high upfront infrastructure costs that accompany CST projects?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.

4.36 pm

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Alex Yam for rising in support of the Bill and for his comments on the Bill.

As Mr Alex Yam noted, most of the provisions of the Bill serve to formalise practices which are already in place today. We had taken some time to learn from the experience in Marina Bay, the operational experience, the regulatory experience, before we decided to put together and codify all of these into the Bill that we have today.

Mr Alex Yam asked if the Government has faced challenges constructing, maintaining and operating the Marina Bay CST. Indeed, it is a long-term project. It took time for us to plan ahead and to make the investments in the project. So far, where maintenance and operations are concerned, we have enjoyed the cooperation of utility suppliers, developers and building owners. But if we have to do a new project, if we have to work with new parties, or if we are going to build a new CST elsewhere, we would want the legal and regulatory framework to be very clear, so that we can continue to provide utility services of the highest standards, without any hiccups. Hence, we are now putting these provisions into the Bill.

When formulating the Bill, we had consulted the building owners at Marina Bay. They provided useful feedback, for instance, on the way the CST could be better designed and constructed and, where possible, we will take this feedback into account for future developments.

Mr Alex Yam asked whether the Government sees the CSTs as a model to serve new development areas in the future, be it for commercial or residential areas. Indeed, there is potential for CSTs in new developments. But as significant capital investment is required for the CST, it would make more economic sense to do this in an area of sufficient size with major new developments that need to be serviced by multiple utilities. We can then bring together all the utility lines underground and then better optimise the use of space. Preliminarily, we see potential for CSTs in newer developments like Jurong Lake District and Changi Airport Terminal 5. But more detailed studies will be needed to determine the cost-benefits of such a project.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe I have addressed the points raised by the Member and I thank him for his support of the Bill. As I have mentioned earlier, this Bill clarifies and enhances the Government's regulatory practices to ensure the safe and efficient operation of CSTs in Singapore.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Lawrence Wong].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.