So I found myself at a recent tea session with some friends, all of whom were not in the occupation of architecture or urban planning. Over the course of the afternoon, it came to me that my friends had some interesting and very relevant concerns – literally a storm brewing in a teacup – they were worried about 23 Amber Road.
To feed both the frenzied redevelopment fever and strong public sentiment for the conservation of old buildings, the “winning formula� employed by the developers of 23 Amber Road emerged as a confused, mangled mish-mash – take one half of an old colonial bungalow, and finish the other half with an ungainly glass-and-steel skyscraper condominium.
Thankfully, this is still trapped in the amber of the moment – it has not gotten the green light to go ahead.
Some members of the public are outraged that an iconic and landmark building has even been slated for redevelopment. Even the average Joe (or Beng) in the streets would agree, that the newly-proposed building clearly looks like an oddity slapped onto the site. It is certainly not aesthetically pleasing. Architects and planners debate on its shape and form; what should be preserved and what should not (apparently there’s a right half and a wrong half to the old bungalow).
But let’s leave the aesthetic arguments aside. I am more disturbed by the very IDEA of the “slapped-onâ€? building, in classic Bladerunner-style. A short recap of this 1982 film – the future city of Los Angeles in 2019 is highly overcrowded and decayed. To create more space within the shortest time, new buildings are haphazardly slapped onto old ones. It works for the moment, but the city is clearly doomed. The tension between the past, present and the future is apparent.
Perhaps this tension is what we are facing now. Ideally, we can still hold on to the past while planning ahead for the future. But what I fear is that in the midst of the recent property (re)development surge, certain decisions are being made too quickly and albeit harshly to please everyone from the outraged, outspoken sentimentalist to the voiceless new guy trying to find a space in the city.
It is also interesting to note – this mirrors into the contest for space between an old icon and (some say) an unmemorable, “facelessâ€? new building.
In the grand urban scheme of things, 23 Amber Road appears a small and almost insignificant site. The proposed new-look isn’t really as degenerative as Bladerunner’s slapped-on skyscraper typology. But we should also bear in mind that any cell is always part of a bigger organism; and once cancerous cells form, they spread to other parts of the body.
It was heartening to know that my friends, and other members of the public, were actually concerned about our architectural heritage. So, are all we ready to drink up more of the proposal?
You can have a say – send in your feedback on the proposed scheme for 23 Amber Road to the Ministry of National Development by 7th July, via the HARP website. -FFW
Another Interesting link:
http://23amber.blogspot.com/
Also consider joining the SAVE 23 AMBER ROAD Campaign. Please email HARP at mrshelenkhoo@pacific.net.sg, autobahn_tez@yahoo.com or mail@irenelow.com
Actually, why are we still wondering about the decision to keep 23 Amber Road’s facade? Haven’t we stopped wondering about whether any building older than 50 years is going to survive? If the Singapore govt gave two hoots about old and historic buildings, many structures and venues (National Theatre, National Library, National Stadium, just to name a few) will still be standing today. At a recent dinner, a learned friend said, “If Singapore’s leaders can’t even be bothered to keep the building that they were schooled in (the original Raffles Institution building), then all others that make Singapore look either i) like it had a colonial past, or ii) a 3rd world country that’s not fit for foreign investment, are doomed.”
While some would say that it is perhaps pointless to attempt to save anything in this country, I beg to differ. I think that each one of us has a responsibility to put right what we feel is wrong.
It is an attitude that I have personally seen around me where people concede defeat and accept it as a way of life and then, we end up complaining about it. While we cannot save what is already gone, the least we can do is to remind people of the situation and make our very own contribution of instigating changes in mindset.
If we truly believe that our heritage is worth saving and that the built environment around us is more than merely concrete, glass or steel, than shouldn’t we at least make an attempt to educate those that are not yet enlightened?
As architects, designers, and stakeholders in the built environment, i feel it is up to us to make a difference. If we who live in the built environment don’t care, who will?
Some may suggest that our efforts will fall flat and fail but consider the alternative where nothing is ever done. Consider the situation where we allow all the memories and emotions that we have for our built environment to be destroyed and taken away without resistance. Isn’t a life full of beautiful memories worth the time and effort? Isn’t an environment filled with joy and delight worth fighting for?
“why are we still wondering… haven’t we stopped wondering?”
i wonder if everyone thinks the same way. if so, i fear that we’re truly doomed. progression begins with wondering. wondering if life/ things can be better, in which case is debatable. which is what we ought to be doing – debating and making an effort for what we feel is the right thing, despite the odds stack against it.
somewhere in the future, does one wish to look back and wonder then about what could have happened if u’d done something?