Imagine, taking the lift (elevator) 30 storeys below Lobby level!

I don't know why TODAY (2 Jan) downplayed its story headlined "Masterplan in the works to probe deeper underground". It was consigned to page 4, writer Hoe Yeen Nie got only a tag-on byline, there were no pictures or graphics to draw rearders' attention to it, and yet it seemed to be an exclusive since ST did not have the story!

If I understand it right, the Singapore government -- possibly encouraged by the underground fuel storage and military-use caverns it has built and begun operating -- seems to think the subterranean geology of this Litte Red Dot may be suitable for a future "city" deep below sea level.

Here are the key elements (some parts rephrased) of the story:

The Ministry of National Development is preparing a masterplan to map out possible uses of underground space in land-strapped Singapore. Details will be released later this year.

A first step is the creation of a dedicated geology office. "The existing information is quite shallow because it's mainly targeted at infrastructure works like MRT, services or building basements. There isn't much information at deeper levels like 100m or more," said assistant director Kiefer Chiam from the MND's Building and Construction Authority's Geological Office. This office was set up in April 2010.

Its purpose is to create a database of information on Singapore's geology to facilitate future underground developments. Most current information on Singapore's geology comes from a national survey done in 1976 although there was an update in 2009.

As underground construction incurs huge costs, a masterplan is needed to coordinate future uses and integrate them with structures above ground.

Ms Adele Tan, deputy director of Planning Policies at the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), said: "As we build more things underground, there will be more competing uses and more conflicts of space. Some of these uses that come later may find that they have to go even deeper to avoid some of the uses that are already there in the shallower surfaces."

Some other challenges to be faced include the issue of land rights. In cities like Helsinki, for example, private ownership of subterranean land is limited to a certain depth. But in Singapore, the law gives private owners rights to the land stretching all the way down [Hey, I didn't know that! Wah, now if they strike oil below my condo unit...].

Ms Tan said the URA is studying other cities for models it can adapt. It is also studying how other cities pay for underground developments. In Japan, for instance, the government shares the cost with private developers. Singapore's "good rock" is buried deep underground, and are much more expensive to access.

Here's the link to the story:

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120102-0000047/Masterplan-in-the-works-to-probe-deeper-underground

---------------------------------------------

TODAY (2 Jan) also carried a clarification by the PUB on its use of "ponding". I do not think the national water agency will be so trigger-happy to use that word again the next time there are flash floods here. Here're the PUB's clarification ("No intent to dissipate flood impact"), and the editor's response:

We wish to clarify that it is not PUB's intention to dissipate the impact of the floods with the term "ponding". On Dec 23, PUB issued a media release headlined "Flash floods on 23 December 2011", contrary to Today's article, which carried the headline "No floods in Orchard Road, just 'ponding': PUB".

We described the situation on the roads as "flash floods" while the term "ponding" was used to refer only to the accumulation of rainwater at the basement areas of buildings such as Liat Towers and Lucky Plaza.

Editor's note: In its media release, PUB said: "There was no flooding at Orchard Road. However, water ponded at the open area of Liat Towers, the underpass between Lucky Plaza and Ngee Ann City and the basement of Lucky Plaza due to the sustained heavy downpour." The headline for the article "No floods in Orchard Road, just 'ponding': PUB" was based on the PUB media release.

------------------------------------------------------

A split infinitive joke that's also politically incorrect...

The two office managers are told to lay off one of their two assistants, Jack or Jane. They decide to lay off the first one to get up from his or her desk. They start their vigil.

Jane is hard at work but develops a headache. She gets some aspirin from her desk drawer and leaves her desk to get some water.

One of the managers then gets up from his desk to break the bad news to Jane. “I need to talk to you. I’ve got a problem. I either need to lay you or Jack off…”

Jane replies, “Well, jack off. I’ve got a headache.”