Hostile Architecture – A solution? PART ONE

I was wondering , Why were these laws in the void deck implemented in the first place.  There’s always a rationale behind it!

And the reasons are disappointing.

Its because Singaporeans lack a sense of responsibility. How should we go about proving this is otherwise?

Here are some evidence.

The usual during Chinese New Year – Bring the mess from your home to outside your home! [ Come, I clap for you ]

Image result for void deck rubbish

“Aww come on!  This is a shared space!”

Not sure if this is a Dada art piece for a community gallery or vandalism. 

It really seems that the Singaporean Attitude is also an issue we should tackle!

Yo yo, this just in.

The article states: 

I refer to the letter “Allow ball games at void decks to promote healthy lifestyle, bonding” (Sept 2). I agree with the point about infusing kampung spirit into the heartlands. However, I can understand the reasons the relevant authority has restricted ball games, especially football, from being played at void decks.

A couple of years ago, we lived at a block where we had to access the car park through a function hall. Teenagers played soccer illegally in this hall very frequently, ignoring the “No ball games” sign. On a few occasions, residents, including myself, were almost hit by a ball that was coming towards us at ferocious speed. I cannot imagine the extent of the injury sustained if one were to get hit. The residents had to make sure they had the attention of the players when accessing the car park to avoid any unnecessary mishaps.

Moreover, when players are immersed in the game, they are oblivious to danger to their own lives and may run after the ball across the road and kick it too hard or too high. This has, at times, resulted in damage to property and created negative sentiments among neighbours.


I suppose that makes sense. But also, this type of measures can be easily tackled.

[ Hostile Architecture ] An issue in Singapore?



The issue is direct , Singapore’s Kampong Spirit is dying. The social construct is conservative to the point, neighbours are no longer considered important to sustain each other. Unlike in the past [during the kampong days] , neighbours relied heavily on each other for daily providence [ borrowing food and money] to baby sitting and running errands.

In came the HDB and there is evidence that trust has been lost over the years. I myself do not know my neighbours yet alone trust them.

However the open concept of kampong houses has been replaced by closed metal gates. This is physiologically influencing neighbours to keep a distance from each other.

But one thing is certain , as a child, I had the privileged to run in voidecks , which had walls that were nails free. Playing in open spaces that allowed me and the children in my neighbourhood to run free and play traditional games like ‘ Water and ice’ , ‘ Police and Theif’ , ‘Twist!’ , ‘ Hop scotch’ just to name a few.

And often where there were children , there would be elderly. Sitting around for a chit chat  or playing chess at the facility provided.

These spaces were planned for a purpose. They were planned for interaction due to proximity. But also, they were a reflection of the culture of friendship.

But I was also in the generation that saw the changes implemented by the government with regard to these space.

Imagine, going down as a kid to play soccer and seeing the constructions lathering the walls with cement and placing the nails one by one.

BUT … Is it fair to blame the lack of kampong spirit on hostile architecture alone? 

lol,  I don’t think so. Its the same as blaming a smoker for the world’s air pollution. Outrageous.

There are so many other factors such as a change in interest , an increase of technologically savvy children. Such that no child would want to play at the void deck but rather play fifa on their xbox.

But hostile architecture still plays a heavy contributor to this issue. Given that Singapore has such little land and spatial constraints and an increasingly alarming culture of diverting confrontation, it does not make sense that they would barricade and lesson the function of a space that is necessary, not only for interaction but also so the physical support of the building itself. Legit. Period. 

I mean its already there right, why not use it to the fullest potential.



Research source: