Old schoolhouse to become hip hotel

Source : Straits Times - 17 Jul 2008

ITS rooms once housed students thumbing through textbooks and reciting Chinese poetry.

But next year, a pre-war building in Little India will start hosting well-heeled travellers keen on spending a night or two in hip luxury.

A hotelier known for his unconventional tastes is giving the Dickson Road building, famous for its facade of ornate tiles, a facelift.

The four-storey conservation building, the former premises of the Hong Wen School - one of Singapore’s oldest Chinese schools - was bought by Mr Loh Lik Peng this year.

He was behind boutique hotels New Majestic and 1929, both in Chinatown, which have been lauded in the international media for their fashionable interior designs. They, too, are in conservation buildings.

In the same vein, the as-yet-unnamed hotel will be pitched at young, trendy, high-spending travellers. Mr Loh has given three local design studios free rein to craft one floor each.

The building is expected to open as a 29-room hotel by the end of next year.

Guests, who will pay between $250 and $400 a night for a room, can expect eclectic graphics featuring spaceships, monsters and local retro imagery.

‘It’s not something that everyone will like, but that’s radical design for you,’ said Mr Loh.

He estimated the building was built in the 1920s or 1930s, going by its architectural style. It features European art nouveau-inspired tiles used on a scale that is unique to Singapore, said the Urban Redevelopment Authority, which gave the building conservation status in 1989.

It served as a residential complex until 1945, when Hong Wen School moved in, according to former student Lim Kim Yiang.

When the school moved to its current premises at Victoria Street in 1981, the Singapore Buddhist Federation took over the building.

The building joins a number of old schools that have recently been converted for commercial use. They include the former Methodist Girls’ School premises and the former Trinity Theological College campus.

Both are situated on Mount Sophia and have been turned into art complexes.

The new hotel joins a growing number of low- to mid-range places that have sprouted up in the area recently.

Here today, dust and rubble tomorrow?

Source : Straits Times - 16 Jun 2008

Don’t just conserve, educate the public too

BUILDINGS are not just bricks and clay; They tell stories. But only the few which hold significant tales of our cultural identity are conserved.

These are chosen for different reasons. Whether it’s the AIA Insurance Building, the first high-rise office building in Singapore, or shophouses in Chinatown, all conserved landmarks highlight an event in our history.

However, the Government cannot stop at the mere conservation of landmarks. They have to educate the public on why these buildings are conserved.

This should be done so that the landmarks do not become empty shells of a history that we do not appreciate.

Owen Yeo, 20, has a place to read Social Sciences in Singapore Management University.

How should we decide which places to keep?

SINGAPORE’S emphasis on the preservation of our important landmarks and historic buildings seems very parochial.

On the one hand, there are commendable projects such as the restoration of colonial government quarters and houses, like at Seletar airbase and Townerville.

It is nostalgic to see these houses still around, well maintained and well used by the families who rent them.

On the other hand, there are pieces of our past that have been lost. The National Library was demolished to make way for the Fort Canning Tunnel. The Fullerton Building, once home to the nation’s first General Post Office, the Singapore Club and the Chamber of Commerce, has been transformed into a hotel. Chijmes, a former convent school, is now a popular entertainment and nightlife venue.

There must be a better way to determine what is worth preserving to benefit future generations.

Tabitha Mok, 21, is a fourth-year medical student at the University of Western Australia.

Embrace our cultural history in architecture

AS I walked along the uneven sidewalks of Bangkok, it struck me that the city’s unabashed grime - the litter, flies and mongrels - was part of its character. There is a certain realism about its imperfections that makes for a very seductive personality.

In Singapore, city planners seem to have been over-zealous in their pursuit of cleanliness, perfection and comfort at the expense of the nation’s culture and history.

The National University of Singapore, for instance, always has some construction work going on, whether it is to upgrade facilities or to build larger, sleeker buildings.

Contrast that with Thailand’s Chulalongkorn University, where some buildings are not re-built; only maintenance work is done.

While NUS students enjoy the modern facilities on campus, there isn’t the same sense of pride and history when they talk about it, as compared to the Thai students, who have proudly shown me their traditional, stupa-roofed buildings, complete with tales of the campus history.

Perhaps, contrary to what the authorities seem to think, Singaporeans may prefer older buildings which reflect our cultural history much more than modern ones.

There are so many modern, cosmopolitan cities in the world. If Singapore begins to look just like any of them, without buildings of unique and authentic cultural history, how can Singaporeans feel at home?

Lee Xin En, 21, is currently on an exchange programme at Thammasat University in Bangkok. She is a South-east Asian Studies major at the National University of Singapore.

Establish more museums instead

IT IS impractical to try and conserve all of Singapore’s historical landmarks, given our land constraints.

Why not have more museums instead?

Museums take up less space, but still preserve our heritage.

Furthermore, they are tourist attractions and very educational.

This idea has been employed by Japan’s Edo-Tokyo Open Air Architectural Museum and California’s Heritage Square Museum, both of which showcase historic buildings.

Why not Singapore too?

Admittedly, the experience of visiting a landmark first-hand cannot be replaced. But given Singapore’s constraints, museums may be a more viable option.

Anna Wong, 22, is a third-year psychology student at the National University of Singapore.

Put old landmarks to good use

RECENTLY, I was miffed to discover the fates of two of my former schools - Serangoon Garden South (SGSS) and Westlake Secondary.

The former was bought over by the French school, while the latter remains vacant.

Established in the 1940s, SGSS was situated in two estates. Exit through the main gates and you entered a pleasant ‘village’ of houses, five-foot walkways and cobblestone roads. Go through the back and you reached typical heartland with good food and ambience.

Though saddened by their disappearance, I am happy that one of them was revived by the French school. It is a chance for new experiences to be forged.

Another example of this is the Bencoolen area, which used to be filled with older folk visiting the temple there. Now, it has been given new life with arts and business students who have formed new attachments to old surroundings.

What makes a place more meaningful is what you do with it.

Aisha Mostafa, 22, is an art honours graduate from the University of Huddersfield.

Reminders of a city’s spirit and longevity

GREAT cities are not just fleeting centres of commerce sprouting one gleaming tower after another. They are built on the backs of fierce grit and tenacity.

Old buildings represent that resilience. These buildings should be preserved where possible, as they are a mirror into a city’s soul, echoing its past, good and bad times, reminding its inhabitants that their city is eternal.

Eef Gerard Van Emmerik, 19, has a place to read Law in Singapore Management University.

Chinatown Complex: Make it accessible to all

Source : Straits Times - 12 Jun 2008

I REFER to the reply, ‘NEA working to improve ventilation in hawker centre’ (June 2). I am heartened to learn that the National Environment Agency (NEA) is taking steps to improve the poor air quality in that section of the upgraded wet market in Chinatown Complex.

I understand the NEA, the manager of this project, can begin construction work only when the proposed building plans have been approved by the authorities, especially the Singapore Civil Defence Force fire-safety department.

After incorporating any requirements into the plans and once they are finally cleared, NEA starts construction. I understand the constraints NEA faces, for example, working within the budget and meeting the completion deadline.

May I offer my humble suggestions to avoid problems like those in the wet market? It costs much more to retrofit a completed job than do it from scratch. It is a waste of taxpayers’ money and resources, and causes inconvenience to occupants.

After the building plans are cleared, the project team should do a final evaluation of whether requirements imposed by other authorities will affect the environment (especially air quality), accessibility and so on. If the answer is yes, take pre-emptive measures at the planning stage to solve the problem.

I live in Chinatown Complex and my mother is wheelchair-bound. There are many elderly and infirm folk in my block. Some are also wheelchair-bound.

I urge the planning committee and our MPs to take a personal interest in this upgrading so that accessibility for the physically challenged is not compromised.

I salute NEA for an excellent job incorporating numerous accessibility features in the upgraded Chinatown Complex. Going around in a wheelchair is now a breeze.

However, the old folk in my block await with trepidation the completion of the enclosed lift lobby on the ground floor. For more than 20 years, we have enjoyed an open-concept lift lobby. Old folk, some with weak limbs or in wheelchairs, can reach the lifts effortlessly.

To follow fire-safety rules, walls have been built around the lift lobby on the ground floor of the two apartment blocks and heavy doors are fixed at all staircases. Access to the lifts is now via two heavy fire doors - supposedly to be kept closed at all times.

Many old folk fear such imposing features will curtail their independence. Not to mention the wheelchair-bound who need someone to wheel them. If there is no one to hold the door open, they will be stranded.

Julie Chia (Ms)

Don’t let it die

Source : Weekend Today - 28 Jun 2008

Shouldn’t technology be able to save the New 7th Storey Hotel?

I REFER to “It’s the end of the Storey” (June 27) and I want to express my utmost disappointment at the imminent demolition of the New 7th Storey Hotel (picture) along Rochor Road.

It is hard to understand that with the advance in building technology why this is the only engineering solution to resolve the situation; we have even seen an MRT station built under a huge canal in the Chinatown area. Many countries have succeeded in merging new and existing buildings through tactful architectural intervention (we can count our own Bugis Junction as an example of this, as well).

Then again, this is yet another painful reminder of other similar examples - the most recent being the demolition of the red-brick National Library building.

Another is now fading away in most memories - the beloved former National Theatre, which was just a few streets away.

I hope the Government remembers that the collective historical memory of Singapore belongs to the nation and her people, and must be treated with great respect. Architectural history is an important component in the fabric of the people’s collective memory and these threads should not be so easily removed under the tag of “progress”.

Is it any wonder that increasing numbers of younger Singaporeans are finding it harder to take root in the country? It will of interest to hear the comments of the Urban Redevelopment Authority, the National Heritage Board and other relevant authorities on this matter.

‘Kitschy’ Chinatown, authentic Little India

Source : Sunday Times - 25 May 2008

CHINATOWN

The Singapore Tourism Board’s latest numbers show that Chinatown ranks as Singapore’s second most popular free attraction after Orchard Road, drawing 51 per cent of all visitors in 2006.

Little India was third with 36 per cent while Kampong Glam, Singapore’s other Malay and Islamic enclave, drew 8 per cent.

While Chinatown is certainly more successful than the Malay Village, its critics have accused it of being too artificial following the nearly $100 million spent revitalising it in the late 1990s.

Famous architect Tay Kheng Soon, for instance, had described it as ‘kitsch’.

While facades of pre-war shophouses from Mosque Street to Neil Road were preserved under the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s conservation movement, many lament that the enclave has lost its original flavour and soul.

Today, souvenir shops and stands dot the focal areas in Pagoda Street and Trengganu Street while the other streets are filled with outlets like restaurants, antique shops and beauty parlours.

A Chinatown Heritage Centre, food street and night market are also frequented by mostly tourists.

Nearly all 10 shopkeepers interviewed agreed Chinatown no longer retains its character.

‘It’s too tailored for tourists. We go overseas, to Malaysia and China, to find the Chinese ambience,’ said Mr Gary Kor, 33, who runs Isle boutique in Pagoda Street.

Tourists say that they do not get a sense of local Chinese heritage.

Said South African tourist Gus Greeff: ‘The shops are too similar, and I don’t think they are really helpful in improving my knowledge of the Chinese culture here.’

LITTLE INDIA

Keep the old trades, let businesses sprout on their own, cater to locals and tourists. That is its success formula as an ethnic enclave.

Mr A. Jothilingam, 30, owner of textile shop Nalli, said Little India works because of its variety of traditional trades and goods and its celebration of Indian festivals.

‘The Indians will always have a reason to come back, to buy flowers and traditional textiles for weddings,’ he said.

Little India Shopkeepers and Heritage Association chairman Rajakumar Chandra hopes to retain the area’s buzz, while it is being spruced up with pedestrian streets and improved sidewalks. There are also plans for a heritage centre.

‘We don’t want it to become like Chinatown with those umbrella shops,’ he said about plans to turn Campbell Lane into a pedestrian street.

Even without a heritage centre, Mr Rajakumar, in his late 40s, feels the area showcases local Indian culture. He said: ‘You still see the old Indian goldsmiths at work, merchants grinding spices…It looks untidy but it adds colour to the area.’

As for the $180 million Tekka Mall, touted as ‘the jewel of Little India’ by its owner DRB-Hicom, it has not lived up to expectations.

Businesses were supposed to have a distinctly ethnic flavour. Instead, Sheng Siong supermarket and Guardian Pharmacy are there.Ms Sakunkhala Elizabeth, 51, who has run a beauty salon there since the mall opened in 2003, said business at her Buffalo Road outlet is brisker. ‘There’s nothing uniquely Indian about Tekka Mall.’

It is understood DRB-Hicom plans to spend between $4 million and $9 million to rebrand the six-storey mall located between Serangoon and Sungei roads.