Let's make S'pore a funky town
Design and cultural events can create vibrant city

FROM frumpy to funky, from staid to sensational.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Jurong GRC) wants Singapore to let its hair down and spice things up.

'The Ministry of National Development must aim to make Singapore a 'WOW' city,' she said yesterday.

It should design more distinctive buildings to reflect Singapore's multi-cultural heritage and 'stand up to the best-designed buildings in other cities'.

'If we keep building boring and so-so-looking buildings, Singapore will soon become a so-so city,' she said.

So the Republic must benchmark itself against the best cities to live and work in, study them in great detail and aim to be at the top in five to 10 years' time.

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said that turning Singapore into a 'WOW' city was not the sole responsibility of his ministry - but it will play its part in that effort.

It has already organised international design competitions, such as the one for the Duxton Plain high-density public housing project, as a way of attracting unusual ideas for land use here.

To add vibrancy to the city area, the Urban Redevelopment Authority is creating a cultural and activity hub around Marina Bay, that already includes the Esplanade and One Fullerton.

'Singaporeans can look forward to even more world-class attractions, to art and cultural activities along the waterfront,' he promised.

Moving away from concrete vistas, the Government also plans to provide another 1,200 ha of parks and park connectors - equivalent to 20 Bishan Parks.

Existing parks like Labrador and Pasir Ris will be extended and previously- unexplored areas like the central catchment will be opened to the public.

'With all these initiatives and programmes in place, there should be no reason for Singaporeans to complain that there is nothing to do in Singapore,' he said, to laughter from the House.

His ministry also said the National Parks Board is to set up a Garden City Fund for more recreational facilities in parks.

Singapore need more "funky" talls:D

I dunno if "Funky" means wierd towers, but they are certainly sorely lacking rite now. :)

Singapore needs it.:)

maybe it does. but not too many

i think Singapore needs. But The Esplande Theatres i s very nice,it seems like ''nangka'' a type of fruit:D

is the first pic real??The Esplande Theatres looks really unreal:?

Dont worry, lah...i bet "funky" and taller skyscrapers will be built in the reclaimed CBD area...:)

btw, does anybody have a real picture (not rendering) of the SIA building?? thanx

I think most of Sing's buildings are pretty smart looking, but more business-like. There are hardly any spired buildings to be seen..and certainly not the shocking neon light show of HK. But I would like to see a bit more creative designs..or designs that provoke reactions

The Durians are one example..the MayBank Tower is also quite nice but not weird..but more of these would be nice..Parkview Square also stands out.

btw Capital Tower is one of the first few buildings to have coloured lights that change

http://www.bca.gov.sg/industry_programmes/awards/best_design_awards/past_winners/images/0101.jpg

http://www.sky.s64.pl/home/W/Sing/sbn05.jpg

I don't think Singapore needs 'funky' building because Sing's skyline is classy and business-like and that's what makes it Singapore.

Maybe a little bit but not too much...

I think the Concourse is one of Singapore's most uunrealistic buildings, it's even larger than life!
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=4789&drawingID=4787

nice pics of Capital Tower!!!!!!!!!!

Every City Should attempt to have in own desgine and influances When building any element
Some have managed to
other have lost to stronger out side infleances

I find these cool and funky. In fact Singapore does have some historical gems that qualify as such.

'Art-Deco' shophouse
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/2/103dscn1140.jpg

'Flatiron-style' shophouse
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/504/103ct5.jpg

Esplanade Theatres that look like durians
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/2/103s9.jpg

anymore?

my gawd i never noticed how funky those shop houses looked look at that enormous bicycle cog !!!!! :eek:

Great pic of the porcupine.. umm i mean Esplanade ;)

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/2/103s9.jpg

This idea suddenly popped into my head. Why not have our own modern day shophouses with contemporary architecture? It would be cool wouldn't it :)

Striving for "funky" is ridiculous. :bash:

If Singapore keeps/restores the remaining Shophouses (you can tell I'm totally in love with them, and thanks for introducing me to them, Raffi and Huaiwei! :love:) there will be no need for the authorities to launch attempts at "funky." :D

Historic buildings give a place CHARACTER. Who needs funk? :D

Haha! I supposed its a modern day fad or something? People seem not to treasure what we had before, but want things we dunt have.

TropicalSQ744, your "modern-day" shophouse will probably look no different from a row of terrace houses seen today, albeit with (yet another) row of shops on the first storey! Yiaks! :puke: :D

I remember seeing one really funky building in Singapore when I was last there in 2001. I remember seeing it from UWC (United World College) and it had the Singtel logo on the top of it.
It was a regular rectangular building but with blocks "sticking out" if that makes any sense.
Does anyone here know which one Im talking about?
Sorry I cant give you any more information, all I know is that its visible from the UWC campus.

That sounds like comcentre....is it the tall building to the left as seen in this picture?

http://matt.peterson.org/photo/rtw_2002/singapore/cityscape2.jpg

No, it was a different building, Sorry.
I dont remember seeing any other high rises around it which struck me as being odd, but that made it stand out even more.

....I wasn't halucinating, at least I dont think so.:cheers:

Thanks for trying to find the building Hitesh alluded to, Huaiwei! :) I believe the tall building in that picture is also featured somewhere in ROT. I call it the Toaster Building because of the white stuff sticking out at the top--needless to say it doesn't rank very high among my favorites. ;)

Originally posted by Hitesh

No, it was a different building, Sorry.
I dont remember seeing any other high rises around it which struck me as being odd, but that made it stand out even more.

....I wasn't halucinating, at least I dont think so.:cheers:

Hitesh > I remember that building too! ;)

Huaiwei > I know which one he's saying! It is one of Singtel's 'technical' building......or something like that! (I think it was you whom told me the name but I forgot .....I think)

It is the one that is on a hill which the shape is kinda irregular, much like a 3D version of the lower-cased 't'. :D

Okay....I just found out....it is the Ayer Rajah Telecommunications Tower :D

The Parkview tower is obviously a homage or inspired by the Art Deco/Moderne buildings of the 1920s & 1930s.

Re funky - YES - Sing needs it, badly. Funky need NOT be weird to the point of SHIT, but Sing needs GOOD, CHALLENGING ARCHITECTURE becos there's just not enough of it on the ground.

And don't pat yourselves on the back for the Esplanade Theatres - they're not registering too highly in international architectural circles, from what I can tell (I may be wrong - but while they are unique, they are not exactly stunning).

Well, as anyone will tell you, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When is something considered "good" and "challenging"? Does the winning of international architectural awards account to reflecting excellent architecture, as, for eg, the Republic Plaza as an example of this?

Does trying to build energy-efficient buildings in a tropical climate, which would mean the avoidance of all-glass facades, for eg, account to being a challenge in itself, rather then a cheap copy of whatever can be found in the west?

Would you consider Parkview Square as an example of something we should see more of over here? If so, why?

Does something need to be "stunning", and "unique", before it becomes regocnised in architectural circles? And does a building need to be recognised by those "professionals" for it to be appreciated by the laymen on the streets, be it the local populance, or the international community?

And finally, does a building need to be "pretty" in the first place to land itself a name in being a human creation of form and structure?

:D

Originally posted by Blabbyboy
And don't pat yourselves on the back for the Esplanade Theatres - they're not registering too highly in international architectural circles, from what I can tell (I may be wrong - but while they are unique, they are not exactly stunning).

Since when do we have to wait for the international architectural critics to voice their opinion for us to then come up with our own opinions? On the street or in the forum. And heaven forbid that we should wait for others to give their view so that we can just agree with them.
The Esplanade Theatres is just one example of a building that manages to evoke a reaction from people; positive or negative. That to me in one sense, is architecture!:cheers:

"Buildings are often loved or hated purely on the basis of their looks, and despite all the sophisticated technical input that goes into their realization, without some spiritual interaction between the structure and its city and people, it can only be regarded as a failure."
- Hijjas Kasturi

The Gallery Hotel ,Robertson Quay.

http://www.galleryhotel.com.sg/images/ph2.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/6.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/27.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/7.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/8.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/30.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/33.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/15.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/38.jpg
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/arts/architecture/evason/12.jpg
http://www.sia.org.sg/architect/ici/2000/images/cat-a3.jpg

Hey redstone!! I notice you are new! Welcome to the sg forums, and that is one heck of a building you introduced to us! ;) :wave:

I've been at the skyscraperpage.com forum for almost a year now.But I'm new here!:D

Welcome to the forums redstone! Glad to see you made it over:guns1:

btw I didnt know that was a hotel! It kinda reminds me of a building in Japan consisting of stacked cubicles, only this is nicer and more colourful.

Those colorful, chunky window frames give the building a lot of charm and character! :banana: Too bad the main facade remains so boring ... :(

Good show, redstone! :okay: And welcome from me, too! :wave:

i dont think it does not yet any way:)

Back to the original question...

Nope we don't need more funky buildings. What we need are buildings that can help identify what Singapore is really about. Perhaps buildings that could reflect and enhance the lifestyle of Singaporeans. Forget about funky forms, flashy materials or branded architects. If buildings are not designed with users in mind, they don't work.

Do you think ordinary folks should have more say in how larger public projects should look like or work in the manner people want them to be?

I voted yes. I suppose when anyone looks as questions like this, the knee-jerk reaction is to say we want the voice. We want the consultation. The people knows best and so on.

Yet at the same time, we have to be aware that sometimes the public just don't get it. Its like playing Simcity. The simcitizens sometimes make various demands, but in the end, it is up to the player to exercise some descretion in whether to listen to their views or not.

I suppose Architects are supposed to be trained in their fields to be mindful of certain issues with regards to the build form. Kit himself might give us better insight into this, while I am just guessing. Probobly they see things we do not, especially in terms of functionality. But when it comes to artisitic interpretation of the final product, which the vast majority of laymen tend to focus their attention on, it is probably more open to contestation.......

Just some tots running through my muddled head. Next better player please! :D

Yes, not for the design, but so that people are proud of their architecture.

I think the public should not only have a say in the design of the project but also whether it should be built in the first place. It not only helps give people a sense of belonging to S'pore, it also makes them feel that their opinions do matter. ;)

But of course there is a tendency that we Singaporeans being very "kiasu" and preferring not to take risks, might make wrong decisions. I guess that's where the Government comes in. :)

They will choose very simple and functional designs

This is one question that haunts me from the very first day of my education till now. After 5 years, I still can't get to a satisfactory conclusion. I once asked a tutor what constitutes good architecture. She said exercising good judgement in the process of design. I asked how do I know if my judgement is correct/good. She said that's what you're spending 5 years of your time in Uni for.

In architecture, maybe with the exception of technical concerns, we deal with very subjective issues. Given the same information on say....... social issues, 2 individuals could have a totally different interpretation because the process of coming to a solution itself is subjective.

I'm a firm believer that the functionality of a building has to be the utmost concern because it is something that people use. Others might disagree. This is where problem arises. How do I know if the building will work? Pure speculation.

Aesthetics......... what's considered good looking to you guys? Funky form? Flashy cladding? Or a well lit building?

Look at the Esplanade. 2 technologically advance, funky looking(depending on who you ask), not to mention very expensive glass domes that look like fly eyes, durians, pair of microphone, whatever. What do you think they symbolise? Compare them to the Sydney Oprah House. Do you think the Esplanade stand a chance? Is there a building in Singapore that's worth being published in El Croquis?

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/talk/story/0,4386,221580,00.html?

What you guys think? Is he an optimist or does he need to get real and start realising the Esplanade is a white elephant afterall?

Originally posted by huaiwei

I suppose Architects are supposed to be trained in their fields to be mindful of certain issues with regards to the build form. Kit himself might give us better insight into this, while I am just guessing. Probobly they see things we do not, especially in terms of functionality. But when it comes to artisitic interpretation of the final product, which the vast majority of laymen tend to focus their attention on, it is probably more open to contestation.......


We are taught the fundamentals, history, theory, technology, etc. it is up to us to manipulate what's been taught and hopefully, it will result in something that really interests us. We can't make everybody happy. There's bound to be criticism in whatever we do. We have to deal with that. Sometimes, I can sense tremendous resentment towards architects who have been accused of getting it all wrong. What you guys think? We've been talking about favourite architects. What about architects you dislike? Not personally but the work they produced.

I tend to gauge a building not so much by how it look but more importantly (I think), how it feels and function. How does it feel to be at one particular spot of the building? Daniel Libeskind's Jewish Museum is a good example. A series of spaces that depict pain and suffering during the holocaust, nothing else.

Originally posted by Kit

Aesthetics......... what's considered good looking to you guys? Funky form? Flashy cladding? Or a well lit building?

Look at the Esplanade. 2 technologically advance, funky looking(depending on who you ask), not to mention very expensive glass domes that look like fly eyes, durians, pair of microphone, whatever. What do you think they symbolise? Compare them to the Sydney Oprah House. Do you think the Esplanade stand a chance? Is there a building in Singapore that's worth being published in El Croquis?

Sorry, I can't answer your question for I do not know it my self, but for the following questions, I will tell you what I feel.

Nothing is really considered good looking or not, in fact every building in the world is bound to go through massive consideration and preliminary processes. (Except for HDB Blocks #2 and above:D). To me, architecture is good when functionality can be combined well with design. Also, it's not just how good looking it may be, the building must flow with it's surroundings, not just scream for attention. But for a definite answer to your subjective question, I say I like creativity in a building, not the sort of tackiness you see in some, but something like you cut a section out of a box to produce Maybank Tower, you twist a box to produce the Turing Torso, or even something as simple as the idea of the Linear, long and modern.

Comparing with the Sydney Opera House, the Esplanade is short of significance. The Sydney Opera House sits on the bay; it has white shell resembling sails of a ship, while the Esplanade just uses bold architecture to try to get the same inspiring result. But it does prove itself for functionality, as the metal 'spikes' provide shade from the sun in an extremely efficient and creative way. Unlike the opera house which just uses concrete to cover up the whole thing. This, with respect to Esplanade, is very impressive, as it brings out the tropical feeling of Sunny but warm Singapore, yet maintaining the modern style of architecture that it is.

Yes there are many buildings in Singapore that are worth being published in El Croquis. Buildings like The Esplanade, Millenia Walk, the Gateway, The Light at Cairnhill, and many others, I feel all can be published in the magazine.

So that's my 2 cents:D

Yes, if public funds are being used in the project then of course the public should have a say in the process. Like in any decision-making, there should be compromise between all parties involved that would ideally take into account cost, aesthetics, environmental considerations etc.

Originally posted by Cliff

Sorry, I can't answer your question for I do not know it my self, but for the following questions, I will tell you what I feel.

Nothing is really considered good looking or not, in fact every building in the world is bound to go through massive consideration and preliminary processes. (Except for HDB Blocks #2 and above:D). To me, architecture is good when functionality can be combined well with design. Also, it's not just how good looking it may be, the building must flow with it's surroundings, not just scream for attention. But for a definite answer to your subjective question, I say I like creativity in a building, not the sort of tackiness you see in some, but something like you cut a section out of a box to produce Maybank Tower, you twist a box to produce the Turing Torso, or even something as simple as the idea of the Linear, long and modern.

Comparing with the Sydney Opera House, the Esplanade is short of significance. The Sydney Opera House sits on the bay; it has white shell resembling sails of a ship, while the Esplanade just uses bold architecture to try to get the same inspiring result. But it does prove itself for functionality, as the metal 'spikes' provide shade from the sun in an extremely efficient and creative way. Unlike the opera house which just uses concrete to cover up the whole thing. This, with respect to Esplanade, is very impressive, as it brings out the tropical feeling of Sunny but warm Singapore, yet maintaining the modern style of architecture that it is.

Yes there are many buildings in Singapore that are worth being published in El Croquis. Buildings like The Esplanade, Millenia Walk, the Gateway, The Light at Cairnhill, and many others, I feel all can be published in the magazine.

So that's my 2 cents:D

Thanks for your 2 cents.:moods:

I totally agree that creativity doesn't mean complexity or funky forms. I love boxes.:moods:

The Esplanade....... when I first saw it, I thought that's it. That's what Singapore needs...... badly. However, upon close look, the large expenditure seems needless and money could be better spent. For one, why place glass domes over 2 theatres that doesn't need natural lighting in the first place? They're created 2 huge green houses for which they have to fill up with cool air. Because of that, you need sunshaders......... isn't that inventing something to solve a problem which shouldn't exist in the first place? Sure, I'm all for natural lighting but is it necessary to have natural lighting over spaces that doesn't require it?

I fully understand the motive behind the design of the Esplanade but to me it just "cannot make it". They seem to have put in a lot of effort and money on something that gives a "wow" impression but sadly, that impression doesn't last, at least for me.

The Esplanade, to me is a textbook example of the Asian view where "hardware rules", nothing else matters.

Originally posted by Kit

Thanks for your 2 cents.:moods:

I totally agree that creativity doesn't mean complexity or funky forms. I love boxes.:moods:

The Esplanade....... when I first saw it, I thought that's it. That's what Singapore needs...... badly. However, upon close look, the large expenditure seems needless and money could be better spent. For one, why place glass domes over 2 theatres that doesn't need natural lighting in the first place? They're created 2 huge green houses for which they have to fill up with cool air. Because of that, you need sunshaders......... isn't that inventing something to solve a problem which shouldn't exist in the first place? Sure, I'm all for natural lighting but is it necessary to have natural lighting over spaces that doesn't require it?

I fully understand the motive behind the design of the Esplanade but to me it just "cannot make it". They seem to have put in a lot of effort and money on something that gives a "wow" impression but sadly, that impression doesn't last, at least for me.

The Esplanade, to me is a textbook example of the Asian view where "hardware rules", nothing else matters.

Well, I'm sure thae Esplanade has it's reasons for that design, maybe opening up to the world and the people with it's translucent facade? A solid building will not appeal to everyone, it does not give a sense of welcoming, but rather of mystery, as you want to know what's going on inside. But for the Esplanade, that extra layer of glass 'brings' the people in, you feel one with the building, you don't feel like you are unwelcome, this and it still adds privacy with the enclosed theatre within. You step into the lobby, you see the shell, you're inside, not like you step into a lobby, and you see a wall with huge doors, you are just not 'in' the building.

To me, the Esplanade looks more over powering than welcoming. Actually, the shells do not appear to be translucent at certain spots, where the angle of the sunshaders are less steep. Also, creating 2 huge green houses in the tropics makes me wonder how energy efficient they are.

I appreciate the notion of immaterialising a building to make it look more welcoming but do we need such an expensive solution? There are more successful projects achieving much more for much less.

You do have a point there.

I think we're getting O.T. I do apologise if I sounded less than desirable.

I must admit I do have a strong view on this project, especially after meeting some of those people who's running it. They appeared to be more interested in pushing the Esplanade as a piece of hardware with little consideration to its contents. Because of the high building costs, I'm not sure how many local production houses can actually afford to use that place.

600 million dollars to build a piece of hardware is extravagant considering how much starving artists get from the government. Money could have been better spent.

Very interesting discussion. But let me touch on the Esplanade first.

I do not noe if you guys are aware but the original design actually did NOT have those spikes. It is amazing how the professionals could think of creating two glass domes in the tropics. And mind you, they arenot translucent. They are was clear as normal glass would. I have been inside the esplanade on many occasions, and I actually love to stare through the glass shell at the skyine!

The architect himself realised, perharps a tad too late later, that those glass domes are going to be greenhouses. He personallly added the spikes later, and funnily, it was the spikes that caused the uproar. Now people are demanding why the spikes are there. It is like a clash between issues of functionality and asthetics, a very common dillemma.

Come to think of it, during the Esplanade design competition phase, and when this design won, I recall people writing into the press complaining that those "blobs of dough" do not look deserving of a win! The architects explained they wont look like those simple "blobs", that they would be detailed and so on. On reflection, they actually did plan to have a simple glass canopy....and no spikes!

As for comparison with the Sydney Opera House, I think we have to be reminded that it was a classic case of asthetics over functionality. No doubt, the tiling of the shells was an engineering marvel and all. The glass was the longest continous pieces or something? But the fact is that they overlooked even the most fundamental things like carparking. Many of my friends who are visitors to that place tell me....beyond those shells, there is really nothing you can do there as a visitor, other then attending performances.

I feel our esplanade did realise its important role as a civic institution. Since its inception, it planned to become a focal point for the general public to just walk around outside and in for the heck of it. From personal observations, I actually think it succeeded overwelmingly in this regard, despite the fact that the mall was puny in size. (I recall on the grand opening day, thousands upon thousands of people descended on it thinking they have a huge mall to walk in, and had to be urshered out of dead-end corners).

Ths esplanade transformed the character of the Marina Promenade forever. Today, you walk along it in the evening, and I can assure you it has become one of the top destinations for people to congregate just to enjoy the view and for simple relaxation. I personally love the Library in the Esplanade. It was a destination in itself. The eateries has already earned a name for themselves, and are doing exceptionally well. People descended on it just to look "up-market" I suppose!

For that, I personally feel the Esplanade has scored top marks for becoming a civic institution to be loved. It brings art to the masses by the regular and frequent free performances, some during the lunch hour for the office workers, and others during the evenings and weekends for families. At the same time, it reserves the feeling of exclusivity for paid performances. You know you are going to a good performance when you pay, because they are selective with who gets to perform. It became a top target for photographers, and sooner or later, those images will filmly stick it to us as a Singaporean icon recognisable the world over.

I do not wish to sound like I am over defending this thing. If you ask me, I think it could have been better designed. There are things lacking here and there. But for all its shortcomings, I think its the human feel that won me over.

Originally posted by Kit

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/talk/story/0,4386,221580,00.html?

What you guys think? Is he an optimist or does he need to get real and start realising the Esplanade is a white elephant afterall? Err....let me go read my hardcopy version first before I think about it! ;) I hate reading off the PC screen. :D

p.s. maybe you might want to just copy and paste the whole articel here. STI has a irritating policy of forcing us to pay after 3 days, and the link wont work by then.

That's a fair assessment I must say.

Yeah, I remember seeing pics of the model. It was white and "bald" with absolutely nothing to suggest how its going to look after completion. Some said they looked like papayas. The Esplanade might have fulfilled its role as a civic destination but what about the role it was designed to play? I mean, really spending 600 million on 2 theatres with a combined seating capacity of less than 4000 with bits and pieces of retail and restaurants plugged in? Do we really need to spend such a fortune for what it does? I don't think so. Given the economy situation, I'm not sure how many Singaporeans can still afford to look "up-market". Might be wrong though.

The omission of carparks was seen as a major flaw in the case of the opera house. However, having spent the last week in Sydney, I began to wonder if they actually need more cars to enter the Sydney CBD. The Sydney Opera House sits right next to Circular Quay with access to trains, buses, taxis and ferries, so getting there is certainly not a problem. In fact, judging from the current situation in Sydney, taking public transportation might just be the better way in and out of the city. I would say perhaps a major flaw is a blessing in disguise. I do agree that there's nothing much else to see though.

At the risk of sounding like a snob, the Esplanade has been operating for a more than a year. Yet, I haven't seen any significant architectural publication featuring it, which is quite unusual given Singapore's status in the world stage.

I don't mind but will that be an infringement?

Originally posted by Kit

I don't mind but will that be an infringement? Of coz not. Everybody do it all the time. It is prefrable to state the source and the writter thou, not just bec of issues of "copyright", but also for others to form opinions based on the source of the articles. ;)

Ok, here goes.....

THE E-MAIL INTERVIEW: BENSON PUAH
Who says I'm arty farty
By Wong Kim Hoh

IT'S not an easy job running the Esplanade - Theatres on the Bay.

You have to fob off critics who think the $600 million arts complex is either an eyesore, an elitist extravagance or a white elephant.

You have to contend with tart remarks about your programming. You have to grovel for funds. And you have to make sure it makes money.

Small wonder that one Sars-scarred year and a deficit of $3.67 million later, there are rumours aplenty that the Esplanade's chief executive Benson Puah is throwing in the towel.

He says he's not. 'So long as I am able to drive the Esplanade forward, I am happy to continue contributing,' he told The Straits Times last month.

And the 46-year-old is doing so in his inimitable, stoic style.

'We knew there would be people who would be sceptical and take every opportunity to criticise or belittle us but, you know, fair game. We do what we must do. What we are trying to do is not self-serving.'

He prefers to concentrate on the positives - eight million visitors and nearly two million in attendance, both ticketed and non-ticketed, since it opened.

A pragmatic man, Mr Puah believes 'the results of the Esplanade's value will be realised, but probably not in this generation. It won't happen today, perhaps because it is too close to us; it's too sudden a transformation'.

But he doesn't mind being in the hot seat. 'Somebody's got to do it.'


Q Your signature style is a jacket thrown over a T-shirt. Very Sonny Crockett. You're not a rabid fan of Miami Vice, are you?


A It's what I wear to work but my true signature style is beach shorts and a comfortable T-shirt, preferably worn on a nice beach somewhere. Possibly Miami.

Q Last year, 25 statues by Chinese artist Yue Minjun dotted the Esplanade and they all bear an uncanny resemblance to you. Not a blatant exercise in egocentrism, was it?

A Actually, they bore an uncanny resemblance to a man with a receding hairline, slanted eyes and a big toothy smile. I thought the statues by Yue Minjun were great. They were actually his self-portraits. And I've been told I do look like him, or him me.

Q You drive an aubergine-coloured Lexus. According to one website, people who like purple have 'a degree of vanity' and 'are easily incensed, and verbose when witnessing misfortune'. Does that describe you?


A Really?! Must be a website for the sidewalk pyschoanalyst! I've also driven white, black, silver, red, green and blue cars.

I do admit to a fondness for cars. I choose the colour that, in my view, best suits the car. I don't have a favourite colour.

Q Do you use the F-word a lot? After all, funds and funding are rather thorny issues with the Durian.

A Absolutely - funds and funding frequently! I also use a lot of other words, a lot. I find it keeps me mentally alert, to try words composed with other letters of the alphabet... It helps greatly when pleading for funds.

Q My neighbourhood mee pok man cannot understand why the Government is spending millions to fund the Esplanade. He thinks it's a wasteful edifice built for elitist pursuits and indulgences which alienate his salt-of-the-earth compadres. What would you say to him?

A If he's the famous chap at that corner coffee shop in Siglap, I would tell him it takes longer waiting for his mee pok than it does to catch a show at the Esplanade. I would also tell him that when his compadres tell him they can't make it for their weekend kopi sessions, it's probably because they're spending their time at one of our many shows.

Q Since you run the Esplanade, can one assume you breathe Rachmaninov and know every soliloquy from Macbeth? Are you arty farty, a true blue culture vulture?

A Safer not to assume anything about me. I enjoy all sorts of art forms and always with an open mind. I'm a romantic at heart, so yes, Rachmaninov does press some buttons, but so do many other artists.

My taste is eclectic and my CD collection defies description. It ranges from opera to heavy metal and most things in between. Arty farty, culture vulture tags alienate people because they're labels. Art isn't supposed to do that; it's meant to bring people together.

Q Artistes and performers have been known to be temperamental and imperious. How do you deal with difficult stars?

A They are also people. They are artists because they fly off the sensitivity scale. They have precious gifts and they translate their inner sensitivities in ways that we can relate to and which bring pleasure to many. We therefore naturally treat stars and all artists with great care.

Difficult is relative. Some of the reputedly most difficult stars have been through our doors and have been easier to handle than amateur artists.

Q You have said that the value of the Esplanade will not be recognised in this generation. You are either a masochist or a martyr to take the hot seat...

A Someone has to do it.

Q Do you catch every act that performs at the Esplanade? What if someone said he had caught you nodding off at a performance?

A I try to catch most acts and, yes, I do have moments when I'm really challenged. Or I could say, who you really saw nodding off was Yue Minjin, or one of many small, Chinese men with receding hairlines, slanted eyes and big toothy smiles! We're all over the place!!

Q Do you harbour any great artistic fantasies? Do you, for instance, think you would have made a great Cirque du Soleil trapeze artist or African tribal dancer?

A I can do a great impersonation of a famous artist who had 25 statues at Esplanade recently. OK, I did use to play quite a few instruments, danced, acted, and then realised very quickly that I would starve as an artist, being totally devoid of any talent. Better to promote talent than try to be one.

Q Finally, is it Espla-naid or Espla-nard?

A Esplanade in the old days was always Espla-naid, as in lemonade. This was the place that people used to go for simple pleasures like chiak hong, literally 'eating wind'. We are the renewed Esplanade for this generation and the future, taking off from the Esplanade of old, and you can still come and 'eat wind' - this time with music wafting through!

Actually i tot singapore was never even considered an architectural haven, or was I wrong? Did our buildings feature that often in those international publications? I remember someone saying the Esplanade did start appearing in some global architectural publications or something...or was it the press that said so? It has been one year...my memory is fading. :D

For Sydney, wat I am aware of was the fact that downtown parking is almost never an option, simply because it was far too expensive. Most people would rely on public transport. But come to think of it. What kind of market segment does the SOH serve? If they happen to be well-heeled folks, surely they can afford downtown parking. Just an assumption. :D

As for the 600 million, I actually do not know if it is considered too large a sum. Is there an industrial standard to compare with? Not too sure in this, but if we use it to compare with local spending, I suppose it is kinda unfair. A building of this size will definitely cost alot, and for that matter, it costs even more to maintain. They were in a lost (as expected) in their first year of operation as was reported not too long ago, and some belt-tightening can be expected.

But if you were to ask me as an arts patron, I cant say I think the money is not well-spent! The experience was fantastic. No longer do I have to put up with the squeeze in the Victoria Concert Hall. And basically, it does mean the entry of many well-known and world class international acts which previously would never have come.

On the other hand, I also remember there were arguments that the Esplanade actually kills smaller arts groups. There is still no mid-sized performance venues, which would have catered more to them and so on. The Esplanade is far too selective to promote startups, contrary to the general argument that it is supposed to encourage the spawning of the arts here. If there were any benefits, I feel it was largely a "trickle-down" effect. The exposure to world-class acts might make us more descerning viewers, and this might up the pressure on upstarts to improve on themselves. Perhaps it becomes the dream of every arts group to finally earn the reputation good enough to perform in THE Esplanade! ;)

Ok thanks. Gimme about 30 mins or so while I go for my lunch and read the papers. Come to think of it, do you have MSN or something? We seem to be using this like Instant Messenging! :D

Just send me a private message if you dont mind sharing your icq or MSN number/email. Mine is already in my profile as well for your added convenience. ;)

2 examples I can think of.

Federation Square in Melboure. Costs - A$500 million (This figure us taken when the exchange rate between SGD and AUD was almost on par).

Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao. Costs a "mere" US$100 million (Which translate to roughly about $170 million SGD).

Also, there're reports that the actual building costs of the Esplanade is close to 1 billion. Outstanding debts owned to sub contractors and such.

Going for a dinner appointment now. More later.:D

The Marine Parade C.C. and Hotel Grand Evason (both by William Lim) was featured in Monument, an australian publication.

In Sydney, you can still find parking as long as you're willing to pay. About $20 for an overnight spot. The problem is getting into and around the city especially during peak hours. Its gridlock so public transportation is a more sensible way of getting around the city.

The Esplanade was planned with the intention of nurturing an artistic culture in Singapore. So to suggest that local artists have to "improve" themselves to fit into the venue kinda defeats the purpose of having the Esplanade in the first place. Moreover, I think there are many deserving local artists around, they just can't afford such expensive venues.

My point is, the Esplanade is not an all rounded venue that can cater to different needs so how can it be described as the nurturing ground for arts in Singapore. If you asked me, 600 million dollars spent on serving a niche market is not worth it, not at all.

The interview with Benson Phua revealed that the Esplanade suffered a deficit of more than 3 million in its first year of operation. Mind you, they spent 13 million on the opening night alone. Those money can definitely be better spent.

Hmm....I just read the article, and frankly, it looks more tongue-in-cheek then a more realistic assessment of the situation! :D

I do not think the Explanade is an all-rounder when it comes to offering venues for the performance arts, although it does indeed have a smaller recital studio, other smaller rooms, and outdoor performance areas. I recall there were initially plans for a third mid-sized theathe, but that, unforunately, was taken out.

BTW, there is also a possiblity that this is just the first phase of the arts centre. Apparantly space has been set aside for its future expansion, or the introduction of another complimentary insitution in the empty space beside it towards the Benjamin Sheares Bridge.

In a nutshell, perhaps we should not be too uptight over the costs spent on this project? I mean....you need money for good stuff, and it often gets to nowhere when people argue if a certain sum of money was well-spent or not. I personally dunt really want to judge it base don how cheap it costs to built it, and how much it costs to promote it. I think the one huge lump sum spent on the opening festival was actually a success in itself, because for one, I get to enjoy an unforgetable experience on the opening day itself. And in the subsequent one month of special performances, I could not believe it when I failed to get seats to watch the London as well as the NY Philhamonic performances, when both sold out within 2 weeks. Attendance for the performances was far higher then expected.

I was really sceptacle of it myself, I have to say, when it opened. As I watched the crowds around me during opening day, I kept wondering if these people are going to come back in future. I wondered if this will be the only day the Esplanade sees people walking through its premises. I wondered if the seaside promendade will lapse back into a ghost town. I have to say that my fears were surprisingly unfounded. You have to come back and walk around that area more often to get what I mean. ;)

I think eveyrone also expected the centre to have a deficit in the first year of operation. In fact, I expected a deficit for many more years. I think that is quite normal? Not sure of this, but are there major arts venues overseas that earn a profit from day one?

Originally posted by huaiwei
I was really sceptacle of it myself, I have to say, when it opened. As I watched the crowds around me during opening day, I kept wondering if these people are going to come back in future. I wondered if this will be the only day the Esplanade sees people walking through its premises. I wondered if the seaside promendade will lapse back into a ghost town. I have to say that my fears were surprisingly unfounded. You have to come back and walk around that area more often to get what I mean. ;)


Got to agree with huaiwei. The place is proving itself very popular as a venue to draw the crowds, be it for the indoor mall, Library, the restaurants or the waterfront. I myself always head there whenever I can. Indeed, I sense a vibrancy from the people whenever I walk along the Esplanade and I cant really think of a similar location as strategic in Singapore so near the business district.
In fact, I notice that the place is rather popular with young people (as well as old) and thats important from the former's point of view as it can be a place where memories are shared and forged, and I daresay the place will definitely be an important anchorpoint in the civic consciousness of Singaporeans and foreigners. Hence it is rather too short term to label it an embarrassment or white elephant.

Power to the People!:cheers:

Hmm........ I guess if the building truly reflects its worth then its ok but so far, the Esplanade doesn't, at least to me. I'm not against expensive buildings as long as its bang for the money.

Like I've said before, there are so many precedents out there that have done so much more for much lesser. The 2 projects I've mentioned above costs significantly lesser than the Esplanade but have much much greater impact.

I for one wouldn't forsee myself paying to see a performance in the Esplanade. Stage performances aren't my thing and I wouldn't want to spend money to go and pretend I really enjoy it (if you know what I mean). :D So if I were paying tax, how can I enjoy my tax dollars? Use the open spaces? Give me back the old Esplanade and satay club anytime.

Very few art venue earn profit in their first year of operations. The point is how much can you get from your dollar and be smart about it. Straighten out the priorities.

Originally posted by huaiwei
BTW, there is also a possiblity that this is just the first phase of the arts centre. Apparantly space has been set aside for its future expansion, or the introduction of another complimentary insitution in the empty space beside it towards the Benjamin Sheares Bridge.


Yup..saw it in the URA's masterplan to revitalize the bay and turn it into an entertainment and cultural loop.

I believe the first step has been taken, and more good things are to come. Already someone astutely pointed out (huaiwei or tropical) that the Marina Square area was purpose built to house hotels and entertainment to take advantage of the skyline etc.

With such an asset as our waterfront, we should go all out to embrace it.:cool:

Originally posted by RafflesCity

Yup..saw it in the URA's masterplan to revitalize the bay and turn it into an entertainment and cultural loop.

I believe the first step has been taken, and more good things are to come. Already someone astutely pointed out (huaiwei or tropical) that the Marina Square area was purpose built to house hotels and entertainment to take advantage of the skyline etc.

With such an asset as our waterfront, we should go all out to embrace it.:cool:

Well, then let's all hope they don't throw in good money again and hop for the best.

Originally posted by Kit

Well, then let's all hope they don't throw in good money again and hop for the best.

Well..I do agree that the esplande was a bit on the extravagant side, but I do realise its significance and I am sure its a one-off. I wonder what we will say of it say..20 years down the road?
As for the future plans, lets see if the public get more say in it:guns1:

Sure hope it'll prove its worth for time to come because judging from the response from architectural publications, it doesn't have much value at all.

Originally posted by Kit

Sure hope it'll prove its worth for time to come because judging from the response from architectural publications, it doesn't have much value at all. I think I understand your grievance, and it is actually a common refrain amongst most people here who, as being typical Singaporeans, tend to see things in monetary terms.

I too, hope the centre goes back to profitability soon, not because it will "gain more monetary worth", but because it might signal that the arts has taken a filmer root here. I am very much an advocate of the arts, even if I do not claim to be "Arty-farty" or that I appreciate every form of it. I am just someone who enjoys whatever sounds good or looks good to me. (this has no relations to the fact that I am from the arts faculty. :D)

Anyway, I tink dunt fret too much if it dosent gain much acceptance in the architectural circles. As we often say...the architectural field sometimes seems to be at odds with the wider community. Just because they appreciate something, it dosent mean the rest would, and vice versal. And I do not think architects share the same views about buildings in general either.

Originally posted by RafflesCity

Well..I do agree that the esplande was a bit on the extravagant side, but I do realise its significance and I am sure its a one-off. I wonder what we will say of it say..20 years down the road?
As for the future plans, lets see if the public get more say in it:guns1: As they say....the huge amount they spent on the opening fiesta was one-off too. In suppose in this kind of thing, you only have one chance to show it to the world. Cut it down, and it makes us wonder if we should have done something better before. I think I sound kinda drama-drama now, but as I watched the fireworks racing across the entire Marina Bay, I almost felt like screaming for joy at what I so very much hope to see here, and that was the acceptance and maturity of a city that noes how to forget about the economy (remember it opened during an economically traumatic period), forget about dollars and sence, and just spludge and enjoy ourselves. ;)

And btw, this looks unlikely to be the only major civic institution here to get so much attention. Watch out for the two prominent sites at the New Downtown, both of which might very well upstage the Explanade in this regard.

BTW..after reading the article, it dosent sound like a very serious interview was it? ;)

Originally posted by huaiwei

BTW..after reading the article, it dosent sound like a very serious interview was it? ;)

It's more of an informal Q&A session. ;)

Yeah I dont think I would make some form of analysis from this interview about the esplanade? ;)

Originally posted by Kit

Back to the original question...

Nope we don't need more funky buildings. What we need are buildings that can help identify what Singapore is really about. Perhaps buildings that could reflect and enhance the lifestyle of Singaporeans. Forget about funky forms, flashy materials or branded architects. If buildings are not designed with users in mind, they don't work.

That is a good point. The best is if we can combine practicality with interesting details and somehow get it to fit/enhance its context. Not sure if the new Supreme Court would be up to it, although it does scream for attention.

Speaking of architecture, there are 2 books on Singapore architecture. One is a hardcover book with detailed fllor plans/diagrams called 'Singapore - Architecture of a Global City' and a new one forgot the name, but it has quite a lot of entries, especially old ones that redstone should like.

The first book I've read before in the library.

The other book ,is it red paper-back.The cover featuring detailed shot of the Hill Street Police Station?

Originally posted by RafflesCity

Speaking of architecture, there are 2 books on Singapore architecture. One is a hardcover book with detailed fllor plans/diagrams called 'Singapore - Architecture of a Global City'

I like that book!!! But I can't afford it, its S$70+ at Kinokuniya's Architecture section.

Go to Bashir at Brash Basah. Probably cheaper and I can find some really good publications that aren't available in Page One. E.g. Page One is hopeless in getting JA publications.

Heres interesting reading.

How much say should public have over public buildings?

Arthur Sim, The Straits Times, Singapore

When The Straits Times published a computer-generated picture of new Supreme Court complex last week; it generated a series of Forum letters. Perhaps the most vocal was of architect Tay Kheng Soon, who feels the design could have been better if the public had engaged in a dialogue on it.

PIONEER architect Tay Kheng Soon has once again spoken out strongly about architecture in Singapore.

The last time the 61-year-old took a stand, it was about the demolition of the National Library in Bras Basah. He was opposed to its demolition but could not argue for its preservation.

He has now made a cause celebre of the design of the new Supreme Court complex in the former Colombo Court site.

His sentiments, published in a Forum letter in The Straits Times on April 25, could not be less emphatic. He wrote: 'I was appalled by the design.'

PWD Consultants is the project coordinator behind the new Supreme Court complex, which is scheduled to be completed in 2004. British design consultancy, Foster and Partners, was selected from a shortlist of 13 international architectural firms drawn up by PWD Consultants.

The design of public buildings often becomes controversial as members of the public feel they have a right to be consulted. But design is not an easy entity to qualify and exactly who should be held accountable is even less clear.

One of Tay's major grievances is that being a potentially important civic building, the public should have been allowed to give its feedback at the onset of the design, and not after the design had been approved for construction.

Apart from obtaining government approval, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), the nation's planning authority, does not actually require that the Supreme Court make the design public.

However, the URA did have certain safeguards against 'appalling' designs in the civic district. But its design advisory panel, the now-defunct Architectural Design Panel (ADP), was dissolved in 2000.

A URA spokesman confirms that the design of the Supreme Court had not undergone the panel's scrutiny. He says: 'The ADP had been dissolved in 2000, before the Supreme Court was designed.'

The ADP has since been replaced by the Design Advisory Committee (DAC) and the International Panel of Architects and Urban Planners (IPAUP).

http://www.postcolonialweb.org/singapore/images/expomrt.jpg

Like the ADP, the DAC and IPAUP provide design guidelines along major corridors, to ensure that new structures are sensitive to the existing context. But unlike the ADP, clearance from the DAC and IPAUP is no longer required on important buildings as a condition of URA's planning approval.

Speaking to an audience of architects in April 2000, Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan, who announced the ADP's dissolution, said: 'With the maturing of our architectural profession and a better appreciation of the value of good design, there is a general consensus that the panel may no longer be necessary.'

Indeed, the URA's position is not to dictate design, and more bureaucracy is certainly not the answer either.

But the president of the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA), Mr John Ting, thinks that consultations with relevant professional bodies are useful. The SIA is the only professional body recognised by the government which represents the architects and the profession. Tay was himself a former SIA president.

Of the controversy over the design of the new Supreme Court complex, Ting feels the SIA should have been consulted.

'The more learned among us should be party to the formulation process rather than be standing on the outside, reacting to the design,' he says.

But he acknowledges that a more comprehensive consultation process with the SIA could still have resulted in a design that is not so different from the final one.

He says: 'Yes, the building might be the same in the end, but at least they would have made the effort to inform the audience.'

OTHER DESIGNS IN QUESTION

BUT not all architects agree with him on the final design of the Supreme Court.

Tay is one of the more vocal exponents of the architecture scene, but his is by no means the only voice calling for a more considerate approach to civic planning.

Architect Tan Hock Beng gave Parkview Square, a building opposite Bugis Junction, the thumbs down.

In an interview with The Straits Times on Feb 4, he said: 'It seems too out of place and has bad elements of Las Vegas and Hollywood put together.'

The building, a 24-storey office block, is not a public one, so there was even less need to consult the public on the design.

But more serious, perhaps, are his views about public buildings like the 'aesthetically confused' The Esplanade - Theatres On The Bay.

He says: 'If you take the roof off, no one would be able to tell what the building is. The roof is just a little hood, multiplied a hundred times. The form has no sense of the activity, energy or jubilation it contains.'

THE ISSUE OF FOREIGN TALENT

THAT both The Esplanade and Parkview Square were designed by foreign architects is perhaps a particularly prickly thorn-in-the-side of many Singaporean firms.

Briton Michael Wilford was responsible for The Esplanade and American James Adam for Parkview Square. Both parties, however, collaborated with local firm, DP Architects.

It is not said explicitly, but many architects here feel developers still believe only a foreign architect can produce good work.

Architects like Tan argue that getting a foreigner is no guarantee of a good building, regardless of the firm's reputation.

He says that of the many big-name architects who have built in Singapore, like I M Pei, Kenzo Tange and Philip Johnson, 'not a single building designed by them for Singapore is internationally acclaimed'.

http://www.postcolonialweb.org/singapore/images/milleniawalk.jpg

Tange designed the UOB Plaza and the Indoor Stadium; Pei was behind Raffles City while Johnson conceptualised Millenia Walk.

Is the problem of design in Singapore just a matter of transparency?

Tan thinks not.

'It's a question of the design brief. If you have a conventional brief, you can't expect spectacular architecture,' says Tan, pointing his finger at developers.

Robert Powell, a former lecturer at the Department of Architecture, National University of Singapore, agrees that it is not simply a matter of whether an architect is local or foreign.

'We should not put the blame for mediocrity solely on foreign architects. Local architects, too, have produced much mediocrity. The Parliament House, which could have been a landmark for the nation, is a timid building with no presence.'

Like Tan, Powell also feels that the quality of architecture depends on the working relationship between the client, architect and building authorities.

'If there are too many compromises or any failure of nerve, the Supreme Court will end up like others, for example The Esplanade, a good rather than great building.'

But no matter who is assigned the blame, many still feel the architecture in Singapore is, at best, mediocre.

Having had a closer look at the model of the Supreme Court complex, Tay now feels that the design lacks an 'appropriate design symbolism'.

Left with no clue on how to understand and read the architecture, or how designs evolve, important landmarks are reduced quickly to the level of caricature.

The Esplanade, with its two distinctive parts, is already fast becoming referred to as the 'durian' or 'fly' building.

And in the case of the Supreme Court, some question why the same floating disk appears in the design of another local building - the Expo MRT station at the Singapore Expo in Changi, which was also designed by Foster and Partners.

Unfortunately, this is probably not a question that will be answered as the design for the building has already been approved and it is now waiting to be built.

BUDDING HOMEGROWN FIRMS

BUT not all hope is lost. On April 30, over 200 competition entries for the design of the much-touted Duxton Plain public housing went on display at the URA Centre in Maxwell Road.

The event was publicised widely eight months ago, in Singapore and internationally, and drew contestants like internationally-acclaimed architects Tange, Zaha Hadid and Will Alsop.

It might not be the most important public building, but it will certainly be the biggest.

Tay himself took part in the competition. But the first prize went to ARC Studio, a very young and small Singapore firm.

With the competition, it seemed every possible measure was taken to ensure the best design was selected. This meant a judging panel that included several renowned architects. The competition was also the first for public housing in Singapore.

With so much effort made to get the perfect design for Duxton Plain, will Singapore get a good example of local architecture finally?

Tay, who was present at the exhibition, did not want to comment. It seems the public will have to decide.

Philippine artist turns Alkaff Bridge into Singapore's first 'art bridge'

29 Jan 2004

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/imagegallery/store/phpiyqmB7.jpg

SINGAPORE: The Alkaff Bridge is now covered in paint of every colour you can imagine. But it's not graffitti. It's the result of one month of painstaking work by an artist and a team of rope specialists. They've turned the dull grey bridge into a one-of-a kind structure.

They looked like they're gearing up to climb a mountain.

But they're actually preparing to put the final touches to their labour of love.

For Philippine artist Pacita Abad, the chance to use Alkaff Bridge as a gigantic canvas was simply too good to pass up.

But it took plenty of preparation before a single drop of paint was applied.

Matin Tran of the Singapore Tyler Print Institute, said: "It's a big challenge, to put this together. There's a lot of requirement to fulfil in order to do this project. We had to seek approvals from LTA and get permits from various agencies and the STB was very supportive and helped us get the approvals."

Said artist Pacita Abad: "I love colours, it's my obsession. We should have more colours so we can enjoy life and loosen up. I think it's important when you walk in and you smile or you just get angry, at least you get a reaction to it."

And that's exactly what she got.

"Oh candies, I totally love candies so this is really my type of bridge, very colourful like candies and cookies," said a Singaporean.

Quipped another: "I think it's really cool, adds some colour to the Singapore River which is what this place needs."

The artist and her crew of helpers used 52 different colours and more than 900 litres of the industrial strength paint.

And the paint makers said Singaporeans will be able to enjoy the vibrant colours for at least the next five years. - CNA

Playground? Dunno but I am sure kids will like it. It looks so naughty and fun! LOL:colgate:

But I am sure even adults will feel like they are walking into a playground? :D

LOL..kinda I guess.

Heres a pic showing the powerful night lighting effects of The Concourse. Not many buildings are lighted up at night like this one is.

http://photo.starblvd.net/Raffles/1-5-3-1077724452?m=1&pg=0&ro=4&co=2

Those are very bright lights. :eek: Does anybody worry about the cost of electricity in Singapore? I assume it's an office building--otherwise, how could people sleep? Yea, I know ... bedroom towards the inside ... but still. ;)

Now this pedestrian bridge. Is the superstructure new? Looks to me like it doesn't fill any sort of engineering purpose, plus stylistically the bridge itself seems to have little to do with the superstructure, which is sort of bulky and awkward. It's strange, looks sort of like air-filled rubber, which adds to the idea of a playground structure. But the patterns and colors are delightful! :banana::banana::banana:

Yea for more playful, colorful fun in our cities! :okay:

Your eyes would pop out when you see the Parkview Square at night!:cool:

Too bad I do not have a night shot.

I readily believe it, redstone! :)

Is The Concourse, the brightly lit building Raffi shows, part of Parkview Square?

Going back to my last post, I note the pedestrian bridge minus the colorful playgroundish superstructure--that settles some of my questions.

Don't worry that you can't show a picture of Parkview Square at night, redstone--I'm sure somebody will come up with one when the occasion arises. :cool:

Oh, the colourful stuff actually supports the bridge. I works the same wasy as a suspention bridge, the top horizontal curvy tubes are suspended from either side, then the vertical ones hold the deck itself.

Ah. Thanks, Cliff! :) I suspected I hadn't understood that one properly. ;)

But it's a fun bridge now! :banana:

somehow i think it looks better grey.. even better if by takashi murakami + louis vuitton

grey? I think that would take the punch and kinkiness out of it.

Many of Singapore's buildings lack colour. Lets injects bits of colour here and there without making everything look too tacky!

@WH, nope, The Concourse is not part of Parkview Square. I will try my best to get parkview pics at night, failing which I can always snap pics in sg:)

Originally posted by heirloom

somehow i think it looks better grey.. even better if by takashi murakami + louis vuitton

Yes, I think it looks better in grey, although that particular picture makes it look better.

Originally posted by RafflesCity

LOL..kinda I guess.

Heres a pic showing the powerful night lighting effects of The Concourse. Not many buildings are lighted up at night like this one is.

http://photo.starblvd.net/Raffles/1-5-3-1077724452?m=1&pg=0&ro=4&co=2 I really love this photo, but then again, do take note that night shots dont always reflect the true brightness of lights! :D Still, I am also often wondering why they bother to light up a non-prime building so much......

yup..but its just amazing when seen from the expressway..it stands alone in splendid isolation, looking like shafts of ice, or the pillar of salt :eek:

FUNKY!

Originally posted by Whose Homepage

Now this pedestrian bridge. Is the superstructure new?Actually the entire bridge was very new...built only a few years ago, along with several other foot bridges across the river. They are meant to encourate pedestrain traffic along the upper reaches of the Singapore River. ;)

Now that the Duxton Plains thing has been out for so long, do we feel the public has any say in it?

Originally posted by huaiwei

Now that the Duxton Plains thing has been out for so long, do we feel the public has any say in it?

I'm not sure..I guess those really interested do get to air their opinions. But even if the public can have a say, I dont think the average ah-ter and ah-kao will bother:angel1:

It seems like public opinion didnt have that much of a role in this project? However, I do remember they had public consultations and so on...

Building a S'pore style

While some may complain about a lack of originality in S'pore architecture, most in the industry take heart in constant efforts to develop a uniquely local style. UMA SHANKARI gathers some views

http://business-times.asia1.com.sg/mnt/media/image/launched/2004-03-18/umarchitect-215408.jpg
the Esplanade (above) is cited as an interesting outcome of architects' experiments with S'pore architecture


IT'S seen as vital to develop a 'Singapore' style of modern architecture that suits our climate. And the quest to discover this style is something that's a priority for most architects here.

While many of them feel there's still no original local style when it comes to recent architecture, there's a general feeling of optimism about the direction the search is moving in.

Architects are beginning to realise that Singapore's hot, humid weather merits a style all of its own, thus moving forward from just copying styles from Europe and the US. As a result, architects here are innovating a lot more - and have been winning accolades from abroad.

'We mustn't forget that we're one degree north of the equator,' says William Lau, an architect with A.Alliance. He believes that what will work best in Singapore is a style he refers to as 'modern tropical'. But there's no definitive style yet. 'I'm still searching, together with all my colleagues,' Mr Lau says.

He feels, however, that the standard of architecture here has improved over the past few years. He cites such reasons as higher expectations from customers, and better-equipped developers.

But not everyone is totally convinced.

According to John Ting, president of the Singapore Institute of Architects: 'There's some evidence that the standard of architectural work has been progressively improving over the years. But not enough of it.'

In Mr Ting's opinion, Singapore architects still have a long way to go before they make a mark on the international scene. Still, he reckons this is understandable as the scene in the country is young. 'You don't expect a country that's 39 years old to be culturally developed,' he says.

What he dislikes, however, is that instead of trying to search for a solution that suits Singapore, most architects simply seem to lift trends and ideas from the West.

For example, the current trend of modernity is one that can be credited to the West. Here, living and working in glass boxes is still the flavour of the moment, according to most architects. The extensive use of glass in building design is part of the trend towards modernity, with its emphasis on clean lines and liberal use of glass and steel.

The glass effect

'Glass has been big for the past 10 years and it will continue to be big,' says Chia Huiteen, an architect with SAA Architects.

This is despite a general feeling that the trend of constructing buildings with large amounts of glass is impractical, especially in tropical weather.

'The idea doesn't make sense. It's environmentally irresponsible,' says Mr Ting. He explains that buildings made mainly of glass tend to trap heat quickly, and thus raise the internal temperatures considerably. Energy is therefore wasted when homes and offices turn up the air-conditioning to compensate for the heat gain caused by liberal use of glass.

While Mr Ting believes that this may be acceptable in places such as restaurants and offices, which aren't used around the clock, maintaining homes with large amounts of glass is impractical, he says. 'It's more worthwhile to use the energy for consumption or for manufacturing purposes.'

In some cases, home-owners try to beat the problem of excessive heat gain by putting up blinds and curtains, thus defeating the purpose of having glass panels in the first place - which is to let in light.

But unlike Mr Ting, others believe that if techniques such as sun-shading are used correctly, the glass won't trap as much heat. Mr Lau, for one, believes that the trend towards glass and steel is inevitable given that apartments here are getting smaller and smaller. Glass makes spaces look bigger, and thus will continue to be big in Singapore.

Chan Soo Khian, managing director of SCDA Architects, calls the trend towards modernisation part of the process of the 'internationalisation' of architecture. He feels it's too simplistic to say Singapore architects are copying from the West. 'Asia is influencing Europe and America as well,' he says.

He also believes the modern look can be achieved here without competing with the environment. As an example, he offers the recently completed Lincoln Modern, a 30-storey condominium in the Newton area. According to him, this building shows how, if the right type of glass and shading is used and the design is handled correctly, glass can be practical in sunny Singapore. Architects from other firms also cite this work as an exemplar of architecture suitable for Singapore.

What's important, according to most, is that architects here keep experimenting until a uniquely Singapore solution is found. Interesting outcomes such as the Esplanade, while they may not be to everyone's taste, are nonetheless iconoclastic and provide learning opportunities.

'There are some inklings, some beginnings, but we are not there yet. But at least we are moving,' says Mr Ting.

KK Women's and Children's Hospital:

Architect:Tay Kheng Soon ,Akitek Tenggara
Client: Public Works Department
Hospital Planning Consultant: McConnell Smith & Johnson, Australia
Main Contractor: Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co Ltd
Structural Engineer: Public Works Department
M & E Engineer: Public Works Department
Quantity Surveyor: Public Works DepartmentSite Area: 4.8 ha
Site Coverage: 56.3 %
Plot Ratio: 1 : 2.23
Gross Floor Area: 107,033.54 sq m


The KKH's design philosophy:

http://archnet.org/library/imgdownloader/jpg/37547/big/IAA8638.JPG
http://archnet.org/library/imgdownloader/jpg/37548/big/IAA8639.JPG
The podium edge is tapered. The intention is to sweep the eye upwards and to achieve a gentle merging of the building with the landscape
http://archnet.org/library/imgdownloader/jpg/37549/big/IAA8640.JPG
http://archnet.org/library/imgdownloader/jpg/37550/big/IAA8641.JPG
http://archnet.org/library/imgdownloader/jpg/37551/big/IAA8642.JPG
Facade detail showing stunning sunshades.The recessing of the lower floors at the ends of the blocks allows their articulation by soaring columns, which act as vertical linking elements between the podium and the towers.
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kk9.jpg
Covered walkways
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kk6.jpg
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kk7.jpg
The centralised core which is placed on the axis of the building efficiently connects the two halves of the hospital.
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kkelevation2.jpg
Cross-section
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kksection_small.jpg
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kk11.jpg
http://www.akitektenggara.com/projects/kk/kk2.jpg

In 1988, the practice won a competition for the redevelopment of the old Kandang Kerbau Hospital in Singapore. The project has a chequered history. The original plan was to demolish the old hospital and to build a replacement Maternity Hospital on the same site. Subsequently, a decision was made to add a Children's Hospital. Then, in a surprising turn of events, the competition jury's verdict was overturned and the commission was given to the Public Works Department (PWD). At Tay Kheng Soon's request, Mr S Dhanabalan, the Minister for National Development, intervened and a compromise was worked out whereby the design work would be done by Akitek Tenggara and the hospital design consultants McConnell Smith and Johnson, with the Public Works Department (PWD) as Principal Co-ordinator carrying out the post-contract administration.


In the design of the hospital, the practice was in its element. The project was fraught with morphological problems derived from site limitations, density of floor space to be accommodated and height constraints.


There was an extensive site selection process once it was decided that the hospital could not be located in the grounds of the existing hospital where it was originally planned to be. With the addition of a children's hospital to the overall brief, a new site had to be found. Numerous preliminary spatial studies had to be undertaken to exhaust the possible sites. Eventually the client settled for a 4.8 ha. site, close to its original location, at the junction of Kampong Java Road and Bukit Timah Road.


Settling the brief onto the site presented another challenge. A height limitation of 8 storeys for the ward blocks imposed a restriction on floor heights to 4.2m which made the detailed design and co-ordination of interior planning onerous. These challenges obviously called for a novel approach. Akitek Tenggara, the architectural design consultants for the project, took the lead in the generation of the Master Plan, in consultation with McConnell Smith and Johnson (MSJ), the hospital consultants. The PWD as project co-ordinator played a significant part in liaising with the end-users and the client.


Though they had not designed a hospital previously, Akitek Tenggara's grounding in morphological studies enabled them to zoom in and out between micro and macro design issues to find the optimum geometry for the layout, taking a fresh view but with the constant support of expert consultants. The architect's morphological expertise was further demonstrated in the decision to implement the race-track plan form for the wards. Its inherently large perimeter length allows for better lighting and ventilation compared to, say, a triangular ward-plan configuration favoured by some hospital planners. Morphological understanding is believed by Akitek Tenggara to be the central requirement in archi-tecture for through its mastery, all the other variables and contingencies can be arrayed.


The decision to cluster the support services with the diagnostic and operating thea-tres in the centre of the overall plan-form was an important strategic decision around which all the other planning issues subsequently revolved. The elevator cores emanating from this central mass is able to efficiently connect the two halves of the hospital.


The simplicity and legibility of the plan form stems from this decision. The centrality of the plan arrangements led to the arrangement of the ward blocks in relationship to the core, allowing each a separate identity. The proximity of the children's and women's ward blocks permitted a series of sky bridges to span between the blocks, adding functional connectivity for hospital personnel.


Urban design considerations are not normally present at this stage of a hospital design process, which essentially involves hospital specialists and departmental heads, unless the site in question is vested with guidelines already established by the city planners. In this case, no such guidelines existed prior to the initiation of the design process on the site. Akitek Tenggara exercised its own urban design considerations in relation to the context. These suggested a pulling back of the building masses away from the traffic junctions around the site to create legible nodal spaces at the road traffic junctions and to reduce the impact of building mass when viewed from perimeter approaches.


Accommodating the specialist consultation rooms and dispensary and other admi-nistrative rooms suggested a series of large depth floor plates. These were composed logically into a compact 4-storey podium. The multitude of rooms was organised around a primary circulatory, top-lit corridor system. An important architectural decision was made to taper the tiered podium edges. This was also suggested by urban design considerations. It is also intended to sweep the viewer's eye upwards from the surrounding green space, to achieve a gentle merging of the building with the landscape. The incorporation of taut-edged pre-cast concrete shading blades supported by an elegant concrete bracketing system articulated the tiered design in a visual dialogue with the metal shading devices and window system of the ward blocks above.


The circular ends of the ward blocks were both an urban design consideration and an expressive architectural device to create an aesthetic of line and edge with continuity around the block. It was also inherited from the original competition-winning design. The recessing of the lower floors at the end of the blocks allowed their articulation by soaring columns which act as a vertically linking element between the podium and the towers.


In terms of the visitor and patient sequence of entry, the centralised individual elevator cores which are spaced apart on the axis of the building mass, naturally result in the location of the main lobby and its logical bifurcation into the two separate lobbies for the women's and children's hospitals. Legibility was the prime concern. MSJ's idea of separating ambulant and non-ambulant patients was put to good effect in the upper and lower level lobbies. Ambulant patients use the upper and non-ambulant the lower lobby.


An entrance water feature, visible from both lobbies, provided general visual transparency of one level to the other and avoided any confusion. The hospital was eventually completed in 1997 and despite the separation of project responsiblities, the clarity of the design by Akitek Tenggara has been realised. The project takes the notion of Line, Edge and Shade to a new level of sophistication. The façade is designed as a sun-breaker system using lightweight metal louvres and maintenance gangways. The effect is of a skeletal line and edge aesthetic in contrast to the main building structure. In addition to serving a functional purpose, the horizontal louvres and baffles are visually exhilarating.

Now how's that for a hospital!:cool:

Fun-looking shophouse! :happy:

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/ssc1819/shh.jpg

i think locally influenced architecture is the best - eg esplanade :D or anything by WOHA architects :D:D:D

Ever wondered what is "local architecture" thou? :D

anything with sunshades :D esp cute ones

anything with sunshades :D esp cute ones
Oh boy.....seems like some like to define it with lots of OPEN space to let sunlight in, along with tonnes of vegetation! :D

well the architect of this is Dr Ken Yeang, a Malaysian..not exactly local but regional:D

what did WOHA Architects design?

moulmein rise, the museum mrt station and the mrt station at the stadium :) yay

Okay. Interesting. I look forward to more interesting architecture in the city or around.

But the so called "local" architecture can be "economicaly unrealistic" too.

naw... only japanese architecture is economically unrealistic...

Elaborate?

If economics alone dictated the architecture here I'd shudder to think what our cityscape would look like.

what did WOHA Architects design?

Also take a look at Mod Living in Bras Basah.

Elaborate?

If economics alone dictated the architecture here I'd shudder to think what our cityscape would look like.

I wonder what dictates architecture in Singapore. Economics? Yes, but definitely not only that. Aesthetics?..... nahhhhh....... :) On the pragmatic point of view, probably a combination of the client's requirement, architect's vision, local building code and economics.

naw... only japanese architecture is economically unrealistic...

Care to elaborate? Which project in particular do you find economically unrealistic?

Come to think of it, if a project is economically unrealistic....... would it be built in the first place?

um i wasn't serious in saying that... but thinking of economically unrealistic projects (sorry not architecture - but related right?), japan comes to mind... eg... that bridge that dives into the sea to become a tunnel halfway.... and kansai airport... maybe kansai airport's location is necessary but look how deep osaka's debt is... worse still, it's got sinking problems

I wonder what dictates architecture in Singapore. Economics? Yes, but definitely not only that. Aesthetics?..... nahhhhh....... :) On the pragmatic point of view, probably a combination of the client's requirement, architect's vision, local building code and economics.

No aesthetics? LOL

But seriously from my impression it seems there is a gradual increasing awareness of creating unique designs especially for new landmark projects. The new 245m apartment seems one of them. I wouldnt have thought they would ever have such a curvy looking highrise in the CBD.

But I would like to see more ethnic designs..if theyre economically realistic of course. I suppose ethnic designs are more limited to houses.

No aesthetics? LOL

But seriously from my impression it seems there is a gradual increasing awareness of creating unique designs especially for new landmark projects. The new 245m apartment seems one of them. I wouldnt have thought they would ever have such a curvy looking highrise in the CBD.

But I would like to see more ethnic designs..if theyre economically realistic of course. I suppose ethnic designs are more limited to houses.

You know? Aesthetics is very subjective and can be directly affected by good and bad fortune, for architects at least. A fortunate architect would have a trusting client that doesn't have a pre determine design and is open to all options. Architects work around the client's brief. That would be the best scenario.

My office recently received a fax which includes an invitation to bid for the reconstruction of a detached housing. Together with the invitation is a stack of plans and a few diagrams of a yacht. Essentially the owner had already designed the house and wanted it to look like a yacht. Architects are invited to suggest refinements and of course, adminstrate the contract and oversee the construction process. The fax went to the bin.

I guess what I'm trying to say is good design stems from a good brief from the client.

The company rejected the client? :eek:

I suppose individual small scale projects are more fussy, but when it comes to important landmark sites in the city then all parties should pay heed to the context and the visual impact of the building too.

You know? Aesthetics is very subjective and can be directly affected by good and bad fortune, for architects at least. A fortunate architect would have a trusting client that doesn't have a pre determine design and is open to all options. Architects work around the client's brief. That would be the best scenario.

My office recently received a fax which includes an invitation to bid for the reconstruction of a detached housing. Together with the invitation is a stack of plans and a few diagrams of a yacht. Essentially the owner had already designed the house and wanted it to look like a yacht. Architects are invited to suggest refinements and of course, adminstrate the contract and oversee the construction process. The fax went to the bin.
I see that you already have a job as an architect! Good for you! :)

um i wasn't serious in saying that... but thinking of economically unrealistic projects (sorry not architecture - but related right?), japan comes to mind... eg... that bridge that dives into the sea to become a tunnel halfway.... and kansai airport... maybe kansai airport's location is necessary but look how deep osaka's debt is... worse still, it's got sinking problems
Er...the Kansai airport case seems more to be a technical problem then architectural. And it is the kind of money you have to spend as opposed to trying to find space in the urban jungle.

But I have not heard of that bridge? :eek:

I guess what I'm trying to say is good design stems from a good brief from the client.
But economics might just prompt other companies in taking up the project...

The company rejected the client? :eek:

Its not unusual since it was only a fax and he probably sent it to a dozen other architects.

I wouldn't consider my company as fussy. We are involved in many small scale projects from designing linkways, toilet renovation, to bungalows mostly. My boss didn't speak about the project, they probably didn't want it at all.


I suppose individual small scale projects are more fussy, but when it comes to important landmark sites in the city then all parties should pay heed to the context and the visual impact of the building too.

Yup but try knocking that into those who were involved in some of the city's landmark projects.

I see that you already have a job as an architect! Good for you! :)


Thanks. :)

But economics might just prompt other companies in taking up the project...

Yeah, which is kinda sad but that's how things work for some firms. You get some projects that's good enough to slip into your portfolio and you get others that you wouldn't even want to mention them to your friends. Those unfortunately, are usually the bread and butter projects.

Yeah, which is kinda sad but that's how things work for some firms. You get some projects that's good enough to slip into your portfolio and you get others that you wouldn't even want to mention them to your friends. Those unfortunately, are usually the bread and butter projects.
I figured that is how things might happen in the realistic world out there, where there is no "code of ethics" of sorts which is firmly entrenched in the industry? So long that money alone speaks more for some clients and/or architects, as well as any other individuals or groups of people who might have an influence, then I suppose asthetics will often have to take a backseat....

Still...it does raise questions when even high-profile and high-budget projects get revolting designs sometimes, and these are theones I find absolutely repulsive! :bash: :puke: :D

I figured that is how things might happen in the realistic world out there, where there is no "code of ethics" of sorts which is firmly entrenched in the industry? So long that money alone speaks more for some clients and/or architects, as well as any other individuals or groups of people who might have an influence, then I suppose asthetics will often have to take a backseat....

Still...it does raise questions when even high-profile and high-budget projects get revolting designs sometimes, and these are theones I find absolutely repulsive! :bash: :puke: :D

Well, there's certainly a code of ethnics but that mainly oversees the architects responsibilities in terms of contract administration which includes, financial management, time management and other techinical details. Other things like design and sensitivity to the surrounding are pretty subjective and depending on where your project sits on. No hard and fast rules to govern them, just guidelines. So if you fall within the guidelines(aka being safe with your design), there won't be any problem usually. At the end of the day, the performance of a project is gauged on how well it function as perceived in the design stages. I've personally encountered who potato stamp one design on a few projects with some amendments of course but hey they work so nobody could really fault her.

Peck Hay Mansion

It has been around since the 80s.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v133/RafflesCity/peckhaymansion.jpg

Can you take pictures of Balestier Point?


It's very cubic and funky.:cool:

Unlike Balestier Point which is so over-hyped and over-seen, that Peck Hay thingy was a pleasant surprise! :eek:

Still, nothing beats Colonade! :cool:

hehe..I will try to get a snap of Balestier Point although I dont really notice it.

This Peck Hay Mansion used to have a facade of maroon tiles :cool:

Like Balestier?

I'm not sure what color is the Balestier one..light pink or beige right?

maroon is dark red.

http://www.rdca.com.sg/images/projects/balestier-point01.jpg
"With this building, recipient of an SIA Award, RDC attempted to merge the commercial and the residential into one. Building further on the ideas of Moshe Safdie, Balestier Point ascends in steps from a single-storey street frontage to a maximum height of 18 storeys. This gradation provides an opportunity to build up the viewer's expectation and also the visual link between the shopping block and the apartments above. The four-storey podium block contains two levels of shops and two car park levels. It is linked aesthetically to the main block by means of the square grid and cascading modules. The concept for the shopping complex stems from the recognition that the shaded "five-foot way" which in the past provided the sense of intimacy and scale typical of tropical shopping can be abstracted in the form of a framed hollow cube, used here as a mod-ule upon which the overall scale is based. For the apartments, the recession allows a reduction in traffic noise from the road below. The colors are chosen to denote inner and outer planes of the facade."

Paiseh, forgot the colour...

Balestier is pink lah...no way similar to this one! ;)

Hmmmm...... just wondering...... does that pattern on Pech Hay "spills" into its interior? Any influence on space planning inside? Or is it just the facade that looks interestingly different? Where is it btw?

I dunno about the inside..next time I will walk to its back.

It is at Peck Hay Rd, on a hill. Near ACJS, near Anthony Rd/Cairnhill/Newton MRT that area

you should have a look at the gateway (145m) too i find it rather fascinating. it's just behind parkview square from bugis mrt station.

http://user.chollian.net/~cnu2001/Asia-Singapole/WFAasi%20Singapore-The%20Gateway-01.jpg



incredibly sharp
http://sehsuan.clubsnap.org/gallery/03-06-03-gateway-pinnacle.jpg



http://sehsuan.clubsnap.org/gallery/03-06-03-gateway-horizontal.jpg



http://www.pluto.dti.ne.jp/~iao-tkm/jpg/5-3.jpg



that shit building beside it is still there but the clay-coloured sands are of course green now
http://www.uni-kassel.de/ag-welt/pei.jpg



http://www.pcfandp.com/a/v/tb/8019-t2.jpg

Heir, do you know that that little building was built in 1953?

Considered very tall for Singapore then, when most buildings were just 5 storeys max.

um no i didnt know... but it sure looks out of place!

The entire row beside it, as well as behind it, and where PVS now stands were shophouses.

uh... i'm glad parkview square took over..

i think the current number of shophouses are quite sufficient for heritage purposes actually.. those shophouses along that sultan mosque road should really be refurbished. they look like they're falling apart. i was quite shocked to see such a state of decay in this day and age.

Those beside the New Seventh Storey Hotel are gone for some reason whilt the hotel still stands.

Business Times - 09 Sep 2004

URA relaxes guidelines on rooftop usage

By ANDREA TAN

DRAB or plain rooftops of commercial buildings and hotels could give way to food and beverage outlets as the Urban Redevelopment Authority relaxes its guidelines on roofs.

URA said it loosened the guidelines to encourage more innovative and better design of rooftops. It has relaxed gross floor area (GFA) exemption guidelines for rooftop covers from September 6. For uses such as F&B outlets, the space used would be considered as GFA.

However, for commercial and hotel developments that share common boundaries with homes, URA says there should not be any activity-generating uses such as restaurants on the rooftops.

URA will also allow for the screening of mechanical and electrical services and car parks on roofs and building facades within the Central Area, except for homes in Newton and River Valley. The GFA exemption for covered mechanical and electrical areas is for one floor only.

'The roofscape is one of the elements that contributes to a city's memorable skyline,' URA said in a circular.

'Besides the screening of unsightly air-conditioning cooling units and water tanks at the roof tops, it is desirable to have varied and well-articulated roof forms.'

The new rules will not be applicable to conservation buildings, areas with urban design guidelines for roof forms such as Tanjong Rhu and Singapore and landed housing areas.

In a separate circular, URA has revised guidelines on GFA exemptions for covered public spaces. This is to encourage more varied covered public spaces and to allow for more gathering places and centres of activities in the city-state.

'As more buildings provide covered public spaces, our city will become more pedestrian-friendly, more memorable, exciting and thriving with many gathering spaces for social interaction,' URA said.

URA's definition of major public space include office, shopping, hotel and institutional developments and tertiary educational institutions. They must also be located within commercial areas in the central area, regional centres such as Tampines and Jurong East and major commercial areas around the MRT stations of Bishan, Buona Vista, Paya Lebar and Serangoon.

The areas must also be open to the public at all times, and cannot be enclosed or converted to other uses in the future.

URA said both sets of relaxed rules were in response to feedback received at the URA Power (Public Officers Working to Eliminate Red-tape) session held in September 2003.

Copyright © 2004 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved.

Maybe we would get more rooftop decks soon.

Perhaps one would open atop Swissotel? :D

Time is GMT + 8 hours
Posted: 10 September 2004 1945 hrs

Touch of Singapore comes to Venice for architectural biennale
By Joanne Leow, Channel NewsAsia

SINGAPORE : Singapore is taking part for the first time in the Venice Architectural Biennale, a prestigious bi-annual event that showcases cutting-edge work by architects from around the world.

The Singapore pavilion, which features projects by 13 local firms and the National Parks Board, was opened by Information, Communications and the Arts Minister Lee Boon Yang.

But Venice is just the first step.

Dr Lee, who is in Italy, announced that Singapore will also take part in the World Expo in Japan next year.

The projects being featured in Venice have touched the lives of the people who live, work and study in them.

The S$39 million Victoria School, designed by CPG Consultants, is one such project.

Green and lush, it is an inspiration to students.

"After school we can drop by the pond and we can also look at the pond and it helps us relax," one student said.

"It's different from other schools; it's unique," another said.

The seven-storey building has a unique green belt or eco-street running through it.

Patrick Tan, an architect at CPG Consultants, explained, "The space that is created actually has different functions. It softens the environment. It's like a living room for the school and it's also a living laboratory; the students can actually do hands on experiments.

"By putting it right in the heart of the school, we get a lot of circulation around it as well as across and through it."

In Pasir Ris lies the green oasis of Sungei Api Api, a specially-landscaped project that blends the natural mangrove habitat with a public housing estate.

This is another project being showcased at the Venice Biennale and the curators behind the Singapore's exhibition there see this as a representative work of how Singaporean architects incorporate nature into their designs.

Another architect, Tan Kok Hiang, is also determined to have a distinctly Singaporean feel to his work.

He is behind the unusual Assyafaah Mosque in Admiralty.

"It's a religious space, it's a place where if you went in there you'd expect to be put into a state of contemplation," said Mr Tan of Forum Architects.

"Your eye is led by the arches, to the base of the arches, but as your eyes follow the arches it goes up to the wall. The mirab wall is cantered ... it's coming over you and that gives you a sense of being put into your place in the house of God. And there is also natural light, which is always very important in any spiritual building."

And while the mosque's lack of a dome turned some heads, worshippers don't seem too bothered.

"For me, it's more airy given the columnless hall and it's makes us feel closer to nature where you can feel the winds, breeze when we are inside the mosque doing our prayers," one person said.

Other works featured include the Esplanade, the Church of Mary of the Angels, and the canopy walks in nature reserves.

Photographs, models and videos of the chosen projects are on display in Venice for two months until early November. - CNA

Copyright © 2004 MCN International Pte Ltd

Maybe we would get more rooftop decks soon.

Perhaps one would open atop Swissotel? :D

I think the top of the swissotel is a helicopter pad..........so perhaps not possible.......:yes:

hmmm..for such a tall building like Swissotel perhaps a helipad might come in useful for evacuation of those on the higher floors....

Thinking Design

17 Sep 2004

GEOFFREY EU checks out the Architecture Biennale in Venice where S'pore made its debut

LOVE it or hate it, The Esplanade provoked plenty of healthy debate on the state of architecture in Singapore when it was built two years ago - and if there's one thing worse than controversy, it's indifference. 'The Durian' may have raised a stink, so to speak, but it also raised the international profile of the arts and architecture in the country to the nth degree.

Last week, architecture in Singapore received another significant boost when - with the city of Venice as a fabulous Renaissance-era backdrop - Singapore made its official debut in the 9th Venice Biennale of International Architecture, a highly regarded exhibition which stands as a beacon for cutting-edge architecture and a showcase for works by some of the world's best architects.

The Esplanade made it to La Biennale - as part of the display in the Singapore Pavilion, which features the works of 13 Singapore-based firms, plus the National Parks Board. The main exhibition, meanwhile, dedicated a section to about 40 concert halls from around the world, dating back half a century and leading up to the completion of US architect Frank Gehry's celebrated Disney Hall in Los Angeles, which opened in 2003. In the company of the big boys, the Esplanade looks positively prosaic.

The Architecture Biennale is held every other year and alternates with the Art Biennale, which first started in 1895 and had Singapore artists taking part in 2001 and 2003. The theme for this year is Metamorph, a title intended to reflect the profound changes taking place in world architecture. These shifts signal the advent of a new era in architecture, writes Biennale director Kurt Foster in his notes to the exhibition.

More than 50 countries are taking part in the Biennale, which runs until Nov 7. While many of the more established countries in the exhibition featured pavilions that took an abstract view of the main theme - Japan's contribution, for example, focused entirely on the comic-book culture of Manga (while its architectural prowess was revealed elsewhere at the Biennale) - Singapore's approach was somewhat more practical.

Its exhibit is based on the theme 'Second Nature' and depicts the relationship between architecture and nature in the tropical context. The show - organised by the DesignSingapore Council in conjunction with the National Heritage Board and the National Arts Council - comprises two galleries housed in a former workshop space.

The first presents an overview of the city and its architectural heritage, including a photo-mosaic that forms a wall-size picture of the city skyline, while the main room houses panels, architectural models and audio-visual displays of 15 representative projects. On display are a diverse range of public and private sector works - from existing high-profile buildings like the Singapore Exchange Centre (Architects 61) and the Church of St Mary of the Angels (WOHA Designs), and yet-to-be-completed projects like LaSalle-SIA College of the Arts (RSP Architects) to nature projects like the Sarimbun Scout Camp (Akitek Tenggara) and concept works like the Heng Chun Botanic Gardens (Kay Ngee Tan Architects).

The Singapore Pavilion is housed in a quiet compound just across from the main international exhibition in the Corderie dell'Arsenale, part of a vast former naval shipyard for the Venetian fleet that dates back to the 13th century. A short distance away at the eastern end of Venice is Giardini - the gardens where country exhibits are housed in custom-built pavilions.

The Corderie and the Italian Pavilion in Giardini are two of the main focal points of the Biennale - and possibly the most impressive elements of the show. The former exhibits, in stunning fashion, recent projects that have transformed the face of contemporary architecture while the latter invites visitors to experience architecture as art, with various beautifully imaginative, installation-like works to illustrate the innovative face of architecture. A third exhibit, Cities on Water, examines 20 cities that are sited on or near bodies of water, such as Bilbao and Seoul. The entire exhibit is on a floating pavilion moored in the basin of the Arsenale.

Baby steps

So how does Singapore architecture figure at La Biennale and what is its place in the context of world architecture? It wasn't a great leap forward in the architectural sense, but at least they were baby steps in the right direction. 'Our participation in Venice is one of a series of international promotional activities undertaken by DesignSingapore to present and profile Singapore design talents and their works at important design platforms,' said Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Lee Boon Yang in his inauguration speech in Venice last week. Dr Lee added that the government has set aside some $200 million over the next five years to nurture and grow the creative industries.

'Our pavilion is a more human scale approach to architectural space in context with the setting,' said Rita Soh, president of the Singapore Institute of Architects. 'In the Biennale, there is a lot of emphasis on 'skin' architecture (computer-generated shapes, complex roofs, etc) - I'm not sure how it addresses the end user but it is fascinating, it creates the 'wow' factor.' She added: 'As a whole, our architects, with this exhibition, make a statement that we do have the design talent to compete on a world platform.'

Wong Yunn Chii, assistant professor at the NUS Department of Architecture and curator of the Singapore Pavilion, said the projects selected were the best in relation to the theme. 'The whole culture of the Biennale is based on change, innovation and works by young architects. I wanted to come close to the main curatorial brief - Metamorphosis - so the architecture per se is not that important. Even though some of the projects were built a few years ago, there is a common set of issues that create a coherent narrative for the viewer.'

The 'wow' factor could be improved on, said Mr Wong, but as this is Singapore's first time here, the exhibition should fulfill some more basic goals. 'Some people don't know anything about Singapore. In the Corderie, you're seeing huge gestures whereas what we have are the small things that address relevant issues - we may not have those fantastic forms but we are making an account of ourselves,' said Mr Wong. 'The Biennale is an exercise whose significance is to show that design still matters, that design can make a difference and be delightful. It is an exhibition of inventiveness that raises the human spirit.'

The exhibits selected for the Singapore Pavilion were all 'safe' projects, and thus not that exciting, said a Singapore architect who declined to be named. 'Venice is not about seductive imagery - the Biennale is a platform for countries to show their cutting edge.' Still, he said projects such as the Sarimbun Scout Camp show that it is possible to do beautiful things with a small budget. 'It's high time that architecture is considered as art and not real estate.'

There is a marked absence of right angles in the featured exhibits in the Corderie, said Tan Kok Hiang, a partner at Forum Architects whose recently completed Assyafaah Mosque attracted much positive attention in the Singapore Pavilion. 'All the works are anti-gravity - it is really stretching boundaries. It is thinking in an abstract fashion, state-of-the-art aspiration in architecture that need not manifest itself in any particular project. That's what we in Singapore lack - we're all too busy doing real work.'

The conditions in Singapore are not conducive for producing flights of architectural fancy, said Mr Tan. 'It's not because we lack the architectural talent. We have to set the correct conditions, extend boundaries - the powers that be in any country have to be visionary for this kind of architecture to happen.' He added: 'We have to change mindsets and take a certain amount of risk in order to encourage more lofty ideas - right angles are too conventional.'

It is now the beginning of a great time in architecture, said Albrecht Bangert, owner of a Rome-based magazine on architecture for the entertainment industry who was visiting the Singapore Pavilion. 'The Biennale shows a new trend that organic architecture is establishing itself as a leading direction, where you can use the computer to manufacture anything. Suddenly you can do something that people were only dreaming about.'


New ideas

He added: 'Asia needs to find its own way, it shouldn't copy or reflect European tradition, even though all over the world architects have a similar purpose. The Biennale is the absolute leading brain pool for new ideas.'

In a discussion session with members of the Singapore travelling media, Minister Lee Boon Yang said The Esplanade had already done its part by attracting millions of visitors purely because of its thought-provoking design. 'As Singaporeans become more aware of the impact of design, those who are in the business of providing such facilities would put a greater emphasis on design.'

He added: 'Over time, I believe our designers will begin to create designs that reflect Singapore society. Good design should be part of our national culture - later on, the Singapore accents will come into it.'

if i were a dictator i would build a government run shopping centre as pretty as uhhhh the guggenheim museum in bilbao and set up my own shops temporarily until enough people are living there then let it be privately run.

uhm not too related but my dictator flats will also be as pretty as newton suites or something.

And where would all the money come from?

huh because i'm the govt i dont have to make too high a profit mar. look at duxton plains and all the profit they're making. i believe a project's desirability is determined other than location - aesthetics play a very big role. the currentn situation in punggol is like no one wants to live there because location is shit and amenities are lacking. i believe these drawbacks can be somewhat compensated for with nicer apartments and uh very duh but prettier and better quality amenities. the pretty mall might make losses for a number of years but its like subsidising an infant industry - you do so for later returns.

I'm saying yes but could someone elaborate on 'funky'?

I am not quite clear what it actually means here....

Got this by entering "funky" in http://www.yourdictionary.com

1. a. Having a moldy or musty smell: funky cheese; funky cellars. b. Having a strong, offensive, unwashed odor.
> I don't think this is what they meant...

2. Music a. Of or relating to music that has an earthy quality reminiscent of the blues. b. Combining elements of jazz, blues, and soul and characterized by syncopated rhythm and a heavy, repetitive bass line.
> Nope...

3. Slang Earthy and uncomplicated; natural: "At the opposite end of Dallas's culinary spectrum is funky regional fare" (Jacqueline Friedrich).
> Means this?

4. Slang a. Characterized by originality and modishness; unconventional: "a bizarre, funky [hotel ] dressed up as a ship, with mock portholes and mirrored ceilings over the beds" (Ann Louise Bardach). b. Outlandishly vulgar or eccentric in a humorous or tongue-in-cheek manner; campy: "funky caricatures of sexpot glamour" (Pauline Kael).
> Seems... 4a. is the definition of "funky" here...
------------
Word History: When asked which words in the English language are the most difficult to define precisely, a lexicographer would surely mention funky. Linguist Geneva Smitherman has tried to capture the meaning of this word in Talkin and Testifyin: The Language of Black America, where she explains that funky means "[related to] the blue notes or blue mood created in jazz, blues, and soul music generally, down-to-earth soulfully expressed sounds; by extension [related to] the real nitty-gritty or fundamental essence of life, soul to the max." The first recorded use of funky is in 1784 in a reference to musty, old, moldy cheese. Funky then developed the sense "smelling strong or bad" and could be used to describe body odor. The application of funky to jazz was explained in 1959 by one F. Newton in Jazz Scene: "Critics are on the search for something a little more like the old, original, passion-laden blues: the trade-name which has been suggested for it is 'funky' (literally: 'smelly,' i.e. symbolizing the return from the upper atmosphere to the physical, down-to-earth reality)."
------------

Hmmm... maybe, use a simpler term? :)

I like the terms outlandish and eccentric :cool:

Syncopated has a nice ring to it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/artc.jpg

Singapore needs more classy buildings.

agree :yes:

I hope new downtown will have more of those classy/glassy buildings.

do you think Parkview Square is classy? :)

not really classy... it's rather decorative... :)

I have no architecture words for it... should exude elegance in any angle/light... that's what I meant. ;)

not really classy... it's rather decorative... :)

I have no architecture words for it... should exude elegance in any angle/light... that's what I meant. ;)

hehe..like OUB?

Parkview Square...yeah...although too decorative might be gaudy...:cool:

Parkview Square is gaudy, but in a positive way. Very Gotham city-like opulence.

hehe..like OUB?

Parkview Square...yeah...although too decorative might be gaudy...:cool:

Maybe... But, UOB facade is getting old and greyish... needs some cleaning, I feel...

I like the lift "shooting up" at night though... nice... :)

I like the lift "shooting up" at night though... nice... :)

That was the first time I saw it!!!

its kinda cute, kinda rocket-like when seen moving at night...:D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/colonadecondo.jpg
Colonnade by Paul Rudolf.

..........

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/funky.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/funky2.jpg

I find the Colonnade ugly but I like the Infineon!

It is lighted up spectacularly at night too! :banana:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/funky.jpg



This is the biggest piece of shit along PIE. The fabric sunshaders aren't even done properly.

Interesting to see fabric being part of the facade! :D :cool:

Is it just me, or do I see that some fabric are missing?:?

http://www.ura.gov.sg/skyline/skyline04/skyline04-06/images/p17_01.gif
http://www.ura.gov.sg/skyline/skyline04/skyline04-06/images/p18_01.jpg

Cities like London, New York, Manchester, Bilbao, Sydney and Melbourne have reaped tangible economic benefits from investing in the promotion of good design.
Make Singapore a “wow” city instead of a “so-so” city. This call for excellence over mediocrity was sounded by Mrs Yu-Fu Yee Shoon, Mayor of South West Community Development Council District, at a Parliamentary budget debate in 2003 on the Ministry of National Development estimates.

This is really the task URA has set itself – to make Singapore distinctive. Fun Siew Leng, URA’s Deputy Director of Urban Planning and Design said: “Before we can promote architectural excellence, we must first educate Singaporeans on what good design is, on the value of good design. If people know what good design is, they will be more demanding. If they are demanding, the standard of architectural design in the country will go up.”

URA is actively pursuing public education. It wants not only to heighten awareness and appreciation of design among the public but also to encourage a more vibrant design community. It is broadening its programme of public activities that include exhibitions, talks, seminars, publications and competitions.

http://www.ura.gov.sg/skyline/skyline04/skyline04-06/images/p19_01.jpg

The challenge: creating that x-factor for our city
In his address when he opened the URA exhibitions, PM Lee laid down a challenge for the next phase of Singapore’s development.
“What should distinguish our city is boldness, experimentation, setting new standards and pushing new frontiers… ... it is the only way to catch the attention of the world, and stand a chance of acquiring the ‘X-factor’.”

PM Lee also listed the promotion of good design as one of the possible ways to acquire the ‘X-factor’. “Design will play an increasingly important role as an avenue for conveying the image of modernity, vitality and elegance,” he said.

Commenting on URA’s future challenges, URA CEO Mrs Cheong Koon Hean said, “URA has the vital mission of exciting and inspiring Singaporeans about their future living environment. This is an enormous challenge. It means offering Singaporeans more choices in their living, working and recreational environment. It also means we hold out to Singaporeans, especially the next generation, the hope of a better and higher quality of life in the future.”

I've said this so many many times. We can create good designs, people here do know hot to make good designs. Where it fails terribly is for people to recognise and differentiate good design from what they see everyday. Stop being safe and stop being so bloody precious with what we have now.

I've said this so many many times. We can create good designs, people here do know hot to make good designs. Where it fails terribly is for people to recognise and differentiate good design from what they see everyday. Stop being safe and stop being so bloody precious with what we have now.



I would like to think Singaporeans are very acceptable to avant-garde building designs as compared to Malaysians or Thais although there is a larger of variety of buildings in KL and in Bangkok. ;)

That is why Singapore have very funky architecture like Infineon, The Esplanade Theatres and Columnade. ;)

How can you define good architecture? You can't. Architecture is just like art....too subjective. In fact I would consider a work a great work of architecture if it is worth debating for doesn't matter if I like it or not. A great work is a conversation piece. So the durian buildings are great work of art! :D

IMO I think it is grossly unjustified for you to say that the Infineon building looks like a piece of crap as some liked it like me. It was love at first sight for me when I passed thru the building last week along PIE and I remember asking Raffie or Stan what that building. :)



Have you heard: "One man's meat is another man's poison" ;)

I would like to think Singaporeans are very acceptable to avant-garde building designs as compared to Malaysians or Thais although there is a larger of variety of buildings in KL and in Bangkok.

You might want to come down and meet some of my clients. Nuff said.

BTW, architecture is a mixture of arts, science and social issues. Art alone don't make good architecture. That's why buildings here don't work. Buildings should be judged not just based on their appearances. You can define good architecture, just with different definitions. Personally, I don't think "funky" looking ones will necessarily become good pieces of architecture. I look beyond.

and oh, I'll say this again...... The Infineon building is a piece of crap..... I'm sorry if you liked it.

Does OUB Centre have lifts with windows?

Yes, on the Raffles Place side.

and oh, I'll say this again...... The Infineon building is a piece of crap..... I'm sorry if you liked it.


Do you have to be this childish? :ohno:

You don't have to be so rude in the first place. We're all here to LEARN and have fun so please do respect all forumers here a bit. Thank you :yes:


This thread is about 'funky architecture' and if I understood correctly, 'funky' is a very aesthetic-based word. So if you're in-line with what we're discussing here you would know that I am not talking about architecture in general but more on the aesthetic side. So I am sorry if you have meant something else and that you're posting in in the wrong thread ;)

How can you define good architecture? You can't. Architecture is just like art....too subjective.

IMO I think it is grossly unjustified for you to say that the Infineon building looks like a piece of crap as some liked it like me. It was love at first sight for me when I passed thru the building last week along PIE and I remember asking Raffie or Stan what that building. :)



I just find it quite ironic and extremely hypocritical for someone to say architecture is subjective but at the same time, jumping at someone else's comment about a particular building. So much for subjectivity for you I guess.

and mind you, my initial about the Infineon building was directed at the work itself and not anybody in particular on this forum. Point out in what way was I rude or disrespectful.

You might have find it funky. I personally find it done in bad taste. That's my view on it. So if you were to follow your own advise on being respectful to other people's opinion, we wouldn't be having this discussion would we?

I just find it quite ironic and extremely hypocritical for someone to say architecture is subjective but at the same time, jumping at someone else's comment about a particular building. So much for subjectivity for you I guess.


Thanks for twisting what I meant :wave:

If you read carefully, I am not jumping at you for disliking the building. I am however is critical of your subsequent statement of repeating that you do not like it in a rude way. Maybe that's natural to you but I do take your sarcasm personally cause you directed that at me.

and oh, I'll say this again...... The Infineon building is a piece of crap..... I'm sorry if you liked it.


Why do you have to repeat again? You think I am blind? That is very rude & childish IMO. :ohno:

IMO I think it is grossly unjustified for you to say that the Infineon building looks like a piece of crap as some liked it like me. It was love at first sight for me when I passed thru the building last week along PIE and I remember asking Raffie or Stan what that building. :)


You might not be blind. Neither am I. This is said before I made the comment about the building for the second time. I see objections about what I said but not how I said it.

and mind you, my initial about the Infineon building was directed at the work itself and not anybody in particular on this forum. Point out in what way was I rude or disrespectful.

You might have find it funky. I personally find it done in bad taste. That's my view on it. So if you were to follow your own advise on being respectful to other people's opinion, we wouldn't be having this discussion would we?


Why do you keep misinterpreting whatever I've typed? :? I did not in anyway say that you are rude in your initial opinion about Infineon. I was just saying that it is unjust for you to shoot down the architecture of the building by saying that as a piece of shit. Of course you have all the rights to say such thing but I was just trying to say that I like it ....that's all. No harm intended.

So in conclusion - I did not say you we're rude in your opinion here:

IMO I think it is grossly unjustified for you to say that the Infineon building looks like a piece of crap as some liked it like me. It was love at first sight for me when I passed thru the building last week along PIE and I remember asking Raffie or Stan what that building.

Maybe you aren't sure what does 'IMO' stands for? :D Did I in anyway say that you are wrong? I just said it was 'unjustified' and it was an opinion. Read carefully the next time. :)

You just jump into conclusion by lumping everything I said which I find it grossly unjustified as well.

You might not be blind. Neither am I. This is said before I made the comment about the building for the second time. I see objections about what I said but not how I said it.


I dun see how you got so jumpy on my post then? :? You just misunderstood my post I think.

Maybe you're trying too hard to be right? If I offended you in anyway please do tell me and I would gladly admit my mistake. I have no problems in admitting that I am wrong. Please tell me :)

Can we have peace here, please?:)
Anyway, I love OUB Centre.:D

Can we have peace here, please?:)
Anyway, I love OUB Centre.:D


Thanks Cliff! :wave:

So how's your exams?

Monday we are getting.:)

Hmm......have you noitced that the lighted corridoors of older hdb blocks make them look like the entire building is lighted up? Like those opening days of office buildings.

Why do you keep misinterpreting whatever I've typed? :? I did not in anyway say that you are rude in your initial opinion about Infineon. I was just saying that it is unjust for you to shoot down the architecture of the building by saying that as a piece of shit. Of course you have all the rights to say such thing but I was just trying to say that I like it ....that's all. No harm intended.

So in conclusion - I did not say you we're rude in your opinion here:



Maybe you aren't sure what does 'IMO' stands for? :D Did I in anyway say that you are wrong? I just said it was 'unjustified' and it was an opinion. Read carefully the next time. :)

You just jump into conclusion by lumping everything I said which I find it grossly unjustified as well.

Like I said, perhaps you should heed your own advise. Weren't you the one who said architecture was subjective? I don't really care how you felt about that building but I do have a problem you telling me how I should feel about it while on the other hand, preaching about accommodating different opinions.

I've obviously hit some frail egos when I criticised something you like. Maybe I should rephrase it just to pacify you? Ok, the Infineon building is not a piece of crap. Its a pair of klunky blobs with cheap looking cloths hanging on its sides. There you go. I'll let you wiggle your way out of this one.

Like I said, perhaps you should heed your own advise. Weren't you the one who said architecture was subjective? I don't really care how you felt about that building but I do have a problem you telling me how I should feel about it while on the other hand, preaching about accommodating different opinions.

I've obviously hit some frail egos when I criticised something you like. Maybe I should rephrase it just to pacify you? Ok, the Infineon building is not a piece of crap. Its a pair of klunky blobs with cheap looking cloths hanging on its sides. There you go. I'll let you wiggle your way out of this one.


There you go again....keep changing your focus on the subject at hand and are always twisting what I have to say. I am tired of explaining every word I said to ya already so let's end here k? :angel:

Colonnade looks very confusing... :dizzy:
Would like to see some floor plans... :yes:

There you go again....keep changing your focus on the subject at hand and are always twisting what I have to say. I am tired of explaining every word I said to ya already so let's end here k? :angel:

Much like nothing more to say? Yeah, I'll let you end the mess you started.

Colonnade looks very confusing... :dizzy:
Would like to see some floor plans... :yes:

I just love buildings like the Colonnade.
Its pretty simple really, the architect just designed 3 quarter floors, and copy and pasted 4 times to make 3 whole floors, and copy and pasted sommore to get the building.:D

It does have an amazing penthouse, look at the exposed staircase linking from the roof garden!!!:eek:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/colonadecondo.jpg

Much like nothing more to say? Yeah, I'll let you end the mess you started.


Yalah yalah nothing much to say lah - You win lah......happy?. :D

The last time about Canon DSLR also I am the one who concede first for the forum's sake. So please stop all your last minute rebuttal and get on with life....geez....some people just doesn't know when to quit it seems..... :ohno:

Last time I checked, it was you who couldn't answer your own contradictions. At your wits end, you called it quits. How typical.

Last time I checked, it was you who couldn't answer your own contradictions. At your wits end, you called it quits. How typical.


Hello? Now that Canon already had the type of camera that I've been raving about (which you strongly disagreed that they would have such camera)....did I brought it to your attention again? No. Because I wouldn't wanna get into another senseless fight with ya. So please quit it this time okay? :ohno:

Ok since you want to start that again.......

The new 1D mkII and 1DS mkII are still targeted at different ends of the market with different performance based. You were raving an all in one camera. I still don't see that from Canon. Of course, you could wiggle your way out of this one as well.

Ok since you want to start that again.......

The new 1D mkII and 1DS mkII are still targeted at different ends of the market with different performance based. You were raving an all in one camera. I still don't see that from Canon. Of course, you could wiggle your way out of this one as well.


You wouldn't wanna quit don't you? You're still biting on the fact that they are targetting at different market segment but you failed to see Canon's long term strategy. I may not be a professional photographer but I do know my stuffs. And this isn't a forum to argue on cameras so please quit it. I hate thread-jacking.

You are someone with vast experience in architecture and photography so many forumers wanted to learn from your knowledge in both field. You're greatly respected by many Singaporean forumers and I appreciate your contribution to the forums. But sometimes people of your caliber need to be humble a bit. It is okay to be wrong once in a while.......heck.....no one ...not even Albert Einstein is always right. I am not trying to teach you how to lead your life but what I would like to point out is that it is okay to be wrong and that we have to accept failure with a positive attitude :)

You wouldn't wanna quit don't you? You're still biting on the fact that they are targetting at different market segment but you failed to see Canon's long term strategy. I may not be a professional photographer but I do know my stuffs. And this isn't a forum to argue on cameras so please quit it. I hate thread-jacking.

You are someone with vast experience in architecture and photography so many forumers wanted to learn from your knowledge in both field. You're greatly respected by many Singaporean forumers and I appreciate your contribution to the forums. But sometimes people of your caliber need to be humble a bit. It is okay to be wrong once in a while.......heck.....no one ...not even Albert Einstein is always right. I am not trying to teach you how to lead your life but what I would like to point out is that it is okay to be wrong and that we have to accept failure with a positive attitude :)


Thread-jacking? If memory serves, it was you who brought up the matter over here again, not me. On a side note, you might want to double check on the stuff you know.

If I've made an error, I would gladly accept it and move on.In fact, I make errors all the time in my course of work but I'm still here. I don't mind my point of view being challenged but if you want to do so, don't do it the hit and run way. I appreciate the fact that we all have our point of views and differences once in a while but I don't appreciate people going into denial about comments they made in attempt to pretend nothing has ever happened. On one hand architecture was subjective. On the other, making mudshots at other people's comment and then coming over to say its not what it seems to be. Come on, you own yourself better than that.

Coming to the matter of repeating myself twice. I'm sorry if you considered that a rude gesture but seriously if you considered that rude, you honestly need to get out more often. Like I said before, my comments were directed to buildings, not forumers be it the first or second time. Probably, its the architectural education I've received. We all can be pretty rude (or passionate) but at the end of the day, no harm done. Now you point out to me...... where was I wrong in my previous comments?

You are right, I certainly don't need you to tell me how to live my life and I don't appreciate it one bit about what you said in the previous thread even though I'm not too sure(don't even care) about why you said it.

Thread-jacking? If memory serves, it was you who brought up the matter over here again, not me. On a side note, you might want to double check on the stuff you know.

If I've made an error, I would gladly accept it and move on.In fact, I make errors all the time in my course of work but I'm still here. I don't mind my point of view being challenged but if you want to do so, don't do it the hit and run way. I appreciate the fact that we all have our point of views and differences once in a while but I don't appreciate people going into denial about comments they made in attempt to pretend nothing has ever happened. On one hand architecture was subjective. On the other, making mudshots at other people's comment and then coming over to say its not what it seems to be. Come on, you own yourself better than that.

Coming to the matter of repeating myself twice. I'm sorry if you considered that a rude gesture but seriously if you considered that rude, you honestly need to get out more often. Like I said before, my comments were directed to buildings, not forumers be it the first or second time. Probably, its the architectural education I've received. We all can be pretty rude (or passionate) but at the end of the day, no harm done. Now you point out to me...... where was I wrong in my previous comments?

You are right, I certainly don't need you to tell me how to live my life and I don't appreciate it one bit about what you said in the previous thread even though I'm not too sure(don't even care) about why you said it.


Fine lor if you insist on such behavior.

It first started off by a little comment I made about yours on Infineon. Then you saw that and would want to insist your view is the paramount of all views thus this mess. It doesn't have to be over-blow to such proportionI've apologised. Again I would apologised to the other forumers that have to put up with these silly arguments.

You often drag an argument and love to exarggerate things. I despise that and I prefer peace in the forum. Certainly not the case of hit and run you love to associate me with. I believe others hate to see senseless debates going on around in these forums. Thus I suggested many times over to move on but we are still coming back to such attacks. You want to be right? Okay......I'll gladly admit all I've said above and previously with you wrong. I would even admit that I was wrong in 'correcting' you. I'll take everything back and nullified everything I've said. Have it your way then.

Anyway don't try to be so noble and righteous and thinking everyone would respect that. Let us just move on and stop wasting my time. :) Good day!

Look who's getting all noble and righteous here. Calling it deuce after lighting a fire? Btw, I didn't come here expecting everyone to respect my views. If that's what you want to believe then its out of my hands. Do point out that point in time where I insisted that my "view is the paramount of all views". There are no instances that I can recall on commenting your views on the bulding. I don't really care for any apologies really, they don't mean anything. Just pissed off with hit and runs.

I still think The Concourse is very funky! ;) ......IMO the funkiest tall building in Sg :D

And the plus side is that it is litted up nicely in the evening :okay:


http://pwp.maxis.net.my/szehoong/pix/spore/The_Concourse/concoursepano1modsm.jpg

The Esplanade Theatres is still ma fav funky buildings in Singapore......they looked special in certain angle. This picture shows the theatres in a unique way coupled with extraordinary lighting ;) Looks a bit like jellyfish hehehe :D


http://pwp.maxis.net.my/szehoong/pix/spore/esplanade_theatres/DSCN7444sm.JPG

Esplanade looks so different from that angle! I've got to try this angle one day!

Very creative!!! Very funky!!!

Esplanade looks so different from that angle! I've got to try this angle one day!

Very creative!!! Very funky!!!



Welcome to the forums! :wave:

I love Aston Martin Vanquish a lot as well :okay:

Yea...this angle is really special ;)

:cool:

It's absolutely a beauty inside out! Never seen one on Singapore roads before... would be really cool to see one.

Oh, Infineon just got its sunshades replaced! :D

I wonder what happened to them, blown away by the wind? :D :lol: :jk:

http://img115.exs.cx/img115/9301/inf3hl.jpg
New sunshades! :D :banana:

looks more spiky now

like the Esplanade! :happy: :banana:

Don't compare the two. Esplanade is many times better.

I wonder what happened to those sunshades...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/redstone2/funky.jpg
Missing shades...

New $3m fund will promote urban design

8 Mar 05

URA seeks to raise private-sector role in developing local architecture with co-funding scheme

By ARTHUR SIM

THE Singapore government is setting aside $3 million to encourage a bigger role by the private sector in promoting good urban design and architecture here.

The move, welcomed by the design community, is the latest Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) initiative and will be called the Architecture + Urban Design (A+UD) Promotion Programme.

The programme was announced by Minister of National Development (MND) Mah Bow Tan in Parliament yesterday.

Recognising that good urban design and architecture 'add value to the environment', he said that 'there is a need for our people to embrace design excellence and quality as a way of life'.

Private-sector applicants can seek co-funding for activities such as exhibitions, tours, lectures, conferences and workshops. Publications, relevant research studies, design competitions and multimedia productions such as TV documentaries are also eligible for funding.

Successful applicants will receive up to 50 per cent of the total expenditure of the activities. The first application window opens on April 4 and closes on June 3 this year. A second window will open on Aug 8. Further details are available on URA's website at www.ura.gov.sg.

Rita Soh, president of the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA), said, 'It's an encouraging start for the promotion of good design and a programme that the private sector can leverage on.'

She hopes this will be 'the begining of more being done towards making Singapore a major global city, a city with the 'X' factor that our Prime Minister talked about'.

'If the funding is available, SIA would definitely be interested in organising more architecture design events like research programmes, design awards and design competitions,' she added.

To some extent, the private sector has already taken some initiative towards promoting local creative talent.

Recently, City Developments Ltd (CDL) launched a sculpture design competition to find art to grace the public courtyard of its upmarket condominium The Sail @ Marina Bay. Chia Ngiang Hong, CDL group general manager, added that it also sometimes holds 'closed competitions' for invited architectural firms to submit design proposals for future developments. 'If the government is prepared to subsidise this, we will definitely be encouraged to organise more,' he added.

Small organisations and individuals stand to gain the most. Architect Look Boon Gee, who recently won the URA Southern Ridges Competition to design a bridge, said that his dream had always been to organise a group exhibition of regional architects' work. 'Time and money,' he said, had always held him back.

Now, with the programme, this exhibition need not be just a dream.

Oh, Infineon just got its sunshades replaced! :D

I wonder what happened to them, blown away by the wind? :D :lol: :jk:

Cool it's called Infineon? I remember this building because I keep seeing it from the PIE, but I never knew what it was called.

Do you have more pics? :)

The infineon building should change its colour scheme.

Infineon building is lit up very brightly at night, looking like a hot piece of blob

Strangely, it has ALL it's lights on...

^

maybe its new

most new buildings tend to blast all their lights initially

Habitat 1

http://img219.exs.cx/img219/3393/habitat17ye.jpg

A la Balestier Point....

Those funky buildings look great!

Lets not let Singapore end up like a lame house like New York!

no building beats this yet -
http://img8.exs.cx/img8/3510/gateway0ja.jpg

I would not consider the Gateway funky ^^
It looks very formal and classy to me, although in a very good way ;-)

Sorry - came to thread late. Yes, I've been saying this for years - there are too many mediocre new projects in Singapore from an architecture & design point of view. Sad to say, you can throw money at new projects, but that doesn't necessarily create the identity that you're looking for. Not much of what I've seen in Singapore has really captured anything that I would consider is "cutting edge" architecture. The Infineon, The Esplanade Theatres and Columnade is different, but IMHO none of them do it for me. They are so insignificant that even the new entrance to the Singapore Zoo is arguably "better" architecture than these projects.

Esplanade is the highest profile disappointment. Some people go on and on about how great it is, when in fact it doesn't even register in international circles - except in the numerous advertisements that are paid for. IMHO Infineon, Columnade and Habitat 1 are crap. The new library and court buildings are also huge disappointments. Szehoong (and everyone else), this has nothing to do with what Kit said - it's just my opinion. You are welcome to disagree. But what do I know about architecture and design? I follow my nose. My nose tells me that there are very few skyscrapers in Singapore that I can get excited about - Capita is OK, so are 2 of the big 3. Almost everything new on the other side of the Sing river from the CBD is crap or mediocre. And from a design perspective, almost everything on the main stretch of Orchard Road is looking increasingly anachronistic and dated - harking back to a different period. Please try to change my point of view by posting pictures of something that was built in the last 10 years in Singapore that I can get excited about.

Same with that flying saucer MRT station - yes, you can bring in a top international architect, but that doesn't necessarily buy good design. Republic Plaza is a case in point. Not bad, but not brilliant. Same with Norman Foster - Mr Hit and Miss. The other point is - wouldn't it be better to foster a home-grown local architecture & design sensibility, rather than pay big $$$ for international architects to give you a hotch potch? If you award more projects to local architects, then they can cut their teeth. Maybe that's a model that Singapore should be pursuing - consider countries like the Scandinavian countries are so small, such low population, but they lead the world in various fields of design.

This is not a trade-off between maintaining heritage structures and having cutting edge contemporary architecture & design. They are not mutually exclusive. Anyone who reads my posts will know that I lurve heritage, but I also lurve good contemporary architecture. IMHO Singapore has a long way to go yet in the way of contemporary design, because for the last 20 years, Singapore has been conspicuously identified as one of the most forward looking cities with the most mediocre new projects. Compare to regional cities of similar size and means, but without naming them (and causing an uproar), Singapore could do *way* better. OK - I admit, KL is one of the cities that I think has better recent architecture than Singapore in, say, the last 5 years. Great design can turn cities around - there are many models in recent times. Want to be identified as being more arts oriented, want to build up the Singapore arts brand, want to develop a new high value design industry, want to attract more tourists, want to inspire an entrepreneurial streak traditionally lacking in local society? So in answer to this poll, I must say: yes, sing desperately needs more funky architecture, if funky means "good" or "cutting edge". The alternative is to risk being identified as being too staid, boring, no guts, etc - you name your favourite Singaporean stereotype.

Maybe I am weird........ but when I first saw Infineon.....I was like whoa! :eek: Raffie and Stan could testify for that. It is spontaneous........

I first saw Columnade in 1991 as a naive teenager whom know nuts bout architecture and yet I go WHOA!

And when I talk to my friends about the Esplanade.....yea.....I must admit most say it looked weird but ALL of em knew which building I am talking about despite not knowing the name.

Be it gaudy, weird or out of this world ....we all need to know that this thread is about funky architecture. Funky doesn't mean popular. I could say that a building is funky while others say it is shit (which in a way is funky) :D

BTW I didn't enforce in this thread that everyone should respect my opinion and shouldn't say all buildings are crap. I am just pointing out that it is unfair to say so and then I pointed out my reasons. Some people just can't take it cos I quoted his statement about architecture and thus the little misunderstanding here. :ohno:


I just find it tasteless and rude when people say this crap and that crap without any explanation. It is grossly unjustified for the building and the architecture and to those whom love em ;)

Get over it already. Just too bad if the rest don't agree with you. Noboby owns you any explanation for everything they disagree on.

nobody's to blame here. there's no clear definition of what funky architecture is supposed to be anyway. it's a very subjective and abstract matter. just don't take all comments/remarks too personally/seriously here. go easy, pals.

Get over it already. Just too bad if the rest don't agree with you. Noboby owns you any explanation for everything they disagree on.


I don't have a problem when people dun agree with me. But you do on many an occasion. You don't have to get all jumpy when I request for justification for what you've said. You could have just kept quiet. I have the rights to ask for any explanation wether you like explaning it or not. And if you have gotten over it then you wouldn't be posting about this again won't you?

I don't have a problem when people dun agree with me. But you do on many an occasion. You don't have to get all jumpy when I request for justification for what you've said. You could have just kept quiet. I have the rights to ask for any explanation wether you like explaning it or not. And if you have gotten over it then you wouldn't be posting about this again won't you?

This is amazing. On one hand you call it deuce while on the other, you continue throwing mudshots and you accuse of me dragging this on??? As I see it, you did not as for any justification till now. Your comments were directed to my personal views on the building which is ironic because you were the one who said architecture is subjective. Given this, why should I keep quiet about it? If you've got your rights to request for justifications, then I've got the same amount of rights to rebutt what you said.

Talking about justifications, how come I don't see you justifying your comments on the building? Nope, "love at first sight" doesn't cut. Just because I have a different view (though negative), I have to justify myself??? Are you so full of yourself, you can't hear others talk? Or are you too engaged in self congratulatory acts, you can't bear to read something negative about things you like? Either way, snap out of it.

This is amazing. On one hand you call it deuce while on the other, you continue throwing mudshots and you accuse of me dragging this on??? As I see it, you did not as for any justification till now. Your comments were directed to my personal views on the building which is ironic because you were the one who said architecture is subjective. Given this, why should I keep quiet about it? If you've got your rights to request for justifications, then I've got the same amount of rights to rebutt what you said.


Well there you are......You kept on rebutting thus I replied to your rebuttals as well. ANything wrong with it? It was you whom refused to justify your comment so why make noise in the end? Just keep quiet lah.






Talking about justifications, how come I don't see you justifying your comments on the building? Nope, "love at first sight" doesn't cut. Just because I have a different view (though negative), I have to justify myself??? Are you so full of yourself, you can't hear others talk? Or are you too engaged in self congratulatory acts, you can't bear to read something negative about things you like? Either way, snap out of it.


Hahaha.....well......obviously you have not done your homework. Ask any regular forumers here if I always give blank comments. Oh I always wanted to justify my comments on Infineon but I've been sidetracked and got distracted.

But since you brought it up now I don't feel like justifying my comments now and I would exercise my rights to keep quiet about it. No harm done. :)

Well.....I would have deleted most of the Malaysian Forums thread should I dislike all things negative on things I like :lol: Joker lah you! :rofl:

Really, you should stop arguing for the sake of it. You can't even answer my rebuttals. You did not ask for any sort of justifications until now and you saying I refuse to justify myself? Save yourself from looking stupid.

Really, you should stop arguing for the sake of it. You can't even answer my rebuttals. You did not ask for any sort of justifications until now and you saying I refuse to justify myself? Save yourself from looking stupid.


I refuse to rebutt at most times because I wanted things to end many times. (as opposed to your accusation of me being a hit and run type of person). It seems like you always want to have the last word to boost your ego. Yea......I admit I started it this time in my post in respond to Blabbyboy's comments. But look at you now. I know this wouldn't end until I forced my self to shut up for the sake of forum peace. I am responsible for I started this round. I would have it a bit hard to swallow my ego a bit.

Have what you say.....have your last word and good day! :)

I refuse to rebutt at most times because I wanted things to end many times. (as opposed to your accusation of me being a hit and run type of person). It seems like you always want to have the last word to boost your ego. Yea......I admit I started it this time in my post in respond to Blabbyboy's comments. But look at you now. I know this wouldn't end until I forced my self to shut up for the sake of forum peace. I am responsible for I started this round. I would have it a bit hard to swallow my ego a bit.

Have what you say.....have your last word and good day! :)

Ya, calling it deuce and throwing mudshots at the same time..... that really sounded like you wanted to end it. Your attempts in self victimisation is quite an achievement I must say.

Thought you wanted to exercise your rights to keep quiet? Time is better spent to nurse that bruised ego I think.

@Blabbyboy

I won't agree with the esplanade being disappointing, I've been liking it more and more since it has been built and its surroundings have become one of my favorite chill out spots in Singapore... As for the rest... Yeah, somehow. I also share the view that none of Singapore's big 3 is as striking as can be some of the biggest KL or HK projects.

Now as about the last 10 years, Petronas as well as Menara Telekom are both almost 10 years old if I am not mistaken. Actually I can't really think of any recent project in KL that is really WOW-OMG-WTF ^^ Except Berjaya Times Square, but well, its architectural design is more rambo-esque than sexy ^^
Same with HK, many recent projects are completely huge and awe inspiring, but if you want to talk about architecturally striking ones, what's left ? Bank of China ? Central Plaza ? The Centre ? All of those are aging. 2IFC is huge but not nearly as nice-looking as 1IFC imo.

Then again, probably it's only a matter of taste, but I'm rather satisfied with some recent projects in Singapore such as the Esplanade, One Marina Boulevard, Parkview Square. I'm looking forward to see how the new projects such as the Sail, the future development at Orchard MRT and the casino complex will look like. So yeah, it's not mega-projects such as HK's Union Square, Shanghai WFC or Dubai, but it seems reasonable for a city such as Singapore with a rather mature economy.

Now maybe we could get a clearer view of what you find disapointing in Singapore's modern achitecture if you could give examples of what you like and you dislike (in Singapore or outside).

@Blabbyboy
Same with HK, many recent projects are completely huge and awe inspiring, but if you want to talk about architecturally striking ones, what's left ? Bank of China ? Central Plaza ? The Centre ? All of those are aging. 2IFC is huge but not nearly as nice-looking as 1IFC imo.


Though I really hate his projects here, Foster's HSBC is pretty timeless I think. They are so proud of it they don't even mind you taking pictures of the interiors. This is a bank we are talking about. BOC wasn't very well received when it first stood from the fengshui point of view, even Pei admitted he overlooked this issue. That being said the demolishing of the old HSBC building to make way for the new Foster tower coincides with the stock plunge of HK in the 80s. Still, the HSBC is considered to be of good fengshui.

Ya, calling it deuce and throwing mudshots at the same time..... that really sounded like you wanted to end it. Your attempts in self victimisation is quite an achievement I must say.

Thought you wanted to exercise your rights to keep quiet? Time is better spent to nurse that bruised ego I think.


That is because you doesn't want this to end so I play along too.

Anyway thank you for your kind words. It is a waste that you ain't a lawyer :D

That is because you doesn't want this to end so I play along too.

Anyway thank you for your kind words. It is a waste that you ain't a lawyer :D

Yeah, doing a darn good job at wiggling your way out of this and that.

I make a good living now out of photography and architecture. Who needs to be a lawyer?

Yeah, doing a darn good job at wiggling your way out of this and that.




Thank you! :)

Architecture of everyday life

9 Apr 05

Monumental architecture doesn't have to be big and shiny. It can be a little house, ARTHUR SIM learns

WHEN an Italian gives an opinion, it often sounds good. So when Luca Molinari, curator of the latest architecture exhibition at the Urban Redevelopment Authority, says he reckons the New Supreme Court building looks like a big padella - or, put more plainly, a frying pan - you don't feel in the slightest bit let down.

http://business-times.asia1.com.sg/mnt/media/image/launched/2005-04-09/asura9-222317.jpg
Significant works: Award-winning designs on display at the Gold Medal For Italian Architecture Exhibition include the Auditorium and Music Park in Rome by Renzo Piano (above) and the municipal incinerator in Milan by Studio Quattroassociati (next)
http://business-times.asia1.com.sg/mnt/media/image/launched/2005-04-09/asura9-222232.jpg


He doesn't think much of our durians either. But astonishingly, he likes our 1970s architecture. You know? The architecture that some like to tear down.

'When I arrived I was impressed by your architecture of the 70s. The buildings by Paul Rudolph, Tange, People's Park Complex, Pearlbank in Pearls Hill,' says Mr Molinari. 'Those buildings have a strong character and iconic presence.'

He is in town for the opening of his exhibition 'Gold Medal For Italian Architecture', which was commissioned by the Milan Triennale in 2002 and has since been travelling the world.

An exhibition of Italy's best architecture between 1995 and 2003, it features not only the works of big names like Renzo Piano - one of the architects behind the famed Centre Pompidou in Paris - but also obscure young architects whose efforts, Mr Molinari says, are shaping the landscape of modern Italy.

When he first envisioned the exhibition, 'the idea was to promote excellence in architecture . . . Not masterpieces, but the architecture of everyday life'. But of course, the 'architecture of everyday life' tends to be more beautiful in Italy, as do many other things. Yet as Mr Molinari explains, good architecture need not cost very much.

The exhibition grew out of architecture from the 1990s, when Italy's lagging economy forced municipal governments to cut back on large, expensive monumental architecture. That decade was also marked by the passing of great Italian architects such as Aldo Rossi and the emergence of a new generation.

Projects were much smaller - a school, a library, an incinerator - but no less special. 'The municipal governments decided that we would do small things but do them well,' Mr Molinari explains. Instead of designing monuments, the emphasis was on environmental, social and ecological consciousness.

Besides, Italians have always been uneasy with modernity. 'To imagine a huge modern building in Rome is not easy,' says Mr Molinari. 'To arrive at a masterpiece, we first had to arrive at a social consciousness of modernity.'

Indeed, it is humbling to know that a culture with a history of 3,000 years of iconic architecture is still grappling with modernity.

Mr Molinari doesn't consider any of the examples of architecture in his show a monument or an icon. And perhaps there's a lesson to be learned from this. 'Monumental architecture doesn't have to be big and shiny. It can be a little house,' he says. 'Monumentality is a perception of what is important.'

The Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao is, of course, big and shiny. But for Mr Molinari, it's just a 'fantastic solution to relaunch a dead city. Fortunately, Rome does not have that problem'. He concedes that every city needs its own masterpiece (Rome has many), but points out that, 'this cannot be built out of a desert'.

The problem, he suspects, may be 'globalism' and the attendant issues of 'identity'. 'Everywhere I go, people seem to be looking for an identity,' he says.

And Singapore is no different, except that Mr Molinari believes Singaporeans are better prepared to handle it. 'Here in Singapore, modernity is the language of your identity and soul,' he says. 'It's how you look at the city and its beginings. Singapore can produce an Asian architecture that is its own. Discovering your own identity may take a longer time but the results will be much better.'

yup, KK is widely acclaimed...I remember seeing its design featured in many renowned international architecture and medical journals.

This is actually an old office building, but I thought its facade looks unique..

http://tinypic.com/72zvqo.jpg

Looks like a max security prison!!!!!!!!!! :puke:
What's with those grilles LIKE THAT???!!! :eek:

i'd like it if it werent painted yellow

i like navy blue, how about having it repainted in navy blue?

i like navy blue, how about having it repainted in navy blue?

that would look very cheap! Blue is great on glass though.

I just find those exterior details interesting and wonder if they have a function.

Newton Suites is also going to have some exterior elements, and the new Supreme Court has those.

talking about the supreme court, i went there today. the viewing gallery and 9th floor were so omg! the star trek retro theme was really quite amusing and quite apt i thought. the harsh white lights too. did anyone try the long bench on the 9th floor? it makes really interesting echoes :)

Can't stand Grand Building.

It's the exact opposite of 'grand' and looks like a max security prison!!!!!!!!!!!

Haha... I featured Infineon Building, instead of Esplanade Theatres in my portfolio and I could see the expression on the lecturer's face. ^^

LOL...what happened?

Time to revisit this thread. Since the Esplanade Theatres, there's been lots of talk about iconic and funky buildings. Here are some examples of what's been constructed and what's under development.

Foster's Supreme Court

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j67/RCSSC/supremefoster.jpg

LaSalle School of the Arts (pic by Jonathan Tay)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v730/jonathantay/2135333662_2f749aca1b_o.jpg

Reflections by Daniel Libeskind
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7100/reflections1xp9.jpg

ION Orchard
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/project/uploaded_files/1863_ION.jpg

Iluma @ Bugis by WOHA
http://www.ura.gov.sg/skyline/skyline08/skyline08-04/images/page1_main.jpg

Singapore Arts School by WOHA
http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j67/RCSSC/arts1.jpghttp://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j67/RCSSC/arts2.jpghttp://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j67/RCSSC/arts3.jpg

NTU Arts Building

http://www.architecturelist.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/school-of-art-nanyang-singa.jpg

Fusionopolis 2

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/fusionopolissingapuraih.jpg

Development at Chinatown by WOHA
http://www.satokogyo.com.sg/Obj/SKC0805001/Images/pickering_st.jpg

South Beach by Foster
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p12/ylstan04/Beach%20Road%20Rendering/beachroad_image.jpg


Do they qualify as funky?

Very nice pics Raffles. Is the Fusionopolis Phase 2 design confirmed or is it just an artist impression ? Looks nice, but quite similar to SMU with the curve surfaces and overhanging plants. But I like it. :banana:

What about the development in Chinatown by WOHA - is that confirmed too? or just competition photos. Are they gonna build it? It is definitely funky, but not as classy as the others. The fake rock at the bottom somehow just doesn't blend with the sticks of ice-cream on the top part :ohno:

The south bridge development is indeed funky, but the angular building design . . . :ohno:

The art school at NTU is very cool, just like the marina barrage - do you know whether both are designed by the same architect ?

My favorite funky buildings are those at the Art and Science City in Valencia, Spain by Santiago calatrava -

http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/mle0ng/Valencia1.jpg


http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/mle0ng/Valencia2.jpg


http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/mle0ng/Valencia3.jpg


http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/mle0ng/Valencia.jpg


The only Singaporean equivalent would be the Marina Bay Sands - hopefully, Las Vegas Sands survive the financial crisis and not go bankrupt - Their stock prices falls more than 90% from US$144 a year ago to yesterday less than US$10 (market cap from US$50 billion to less than US$5billion) - imagine if they pledge their shares to raise funds to build the IR which cost US$5 billion, gosh :nuts: and the banks stop the funding, imagine the half built IR - that's sucks :bash:

Personally I hate the design of the Sup Court and the IRs.