wild places | wild happenings | wild news
make a difference for our wild places

home | links | search the site
  all articles latest | past | articles by topics | search wildnews
wild news on wildsingapore
  Straits Times 28 Jun 07
The Case for 23 Amber Road: Heritage conservation can make good economic sense
By Tan Kar Lin , Ho Weng Hin , Dinesh Naidu

HERITAGE conservation through 'adaptive reuse' of a historic building is a well-established architectural and development strategy.

This involves upgrading services and facilities to fulfil current needs, structural consolidation to ensure building stability, as well as cleaning, repairs and restoration to original finishes. Attention is paid even to floor materials, interior decoration and furniture, to ensure the integrity of the building's heritage value. In many cases, varying degrees of new architectural additions are introduced in the process, giving rise to a synthesis of old and new.

As a strategy that aims to meet competing needs - conservation, the market, and architectural aesthetics and function - an adaptive reuse proposal can be assessed in terms of its architectural merit, integrity of heritage value and commercial viability.

Architectural merit

ADAPTIVE reuse projects with new additions in contemporary materials such as glass and steel are architecturally successful when the juxtaposition is sensitive and well-considered - significantly, it communicates a meaningful dialogue between the historic 'old' and the 'new'.

A good example is the Central Fire Station at Hill Street.

Regrettably, the juxtaposition of 'old and new' in the 23 Amber Road proposal is incongruous. Not only is there a mismatch between scale and design, but also it is exacerbated by the proximity and immediacy of the disparity.

Rather than engaging in dialogue, the two conflicting architecture styles appear grafted together in a Frankensteinian fashion. Instead of complementing each other, old and new are seriously compromised in a forced marriage of agendas as yet reconciled.

Heritage integrity

ONE of a small and diminishing number of stately historic family houses, 23 Amber Road exemplifies the sea-fronting residential architecture that evolved with the development of the Katong area in the early 20th century.

The charmingly laid-back yet cosmopolitan character of the eastern coastal enclave gave rise to a distinct ambience and a rich cultural heritage that is still palpable today.

In response to its coastal context, architect R.A.J. Bidwell, of the eminent local European firm Swan and Maclaren, designed the house with generous sea-facing verandas, extended along curved 'butterfly' wings to maximise both views and sea breeze circulation, creating an inimitable crescent-shape structure unlike any other along the seashore.

The house has two dissimilar fronts - one facing the main road, the other embracing the seafront in symmetrical crescent curves. Although the shoreline has receded from the house with successive reclamation, the building remains key to the history of Katong, which is at risk of losing its characteristic appeal to an increasing number of indifferent new constructions.

In the proposal put up by the developer which bought the land, only the part facing the main road is to be retained. The signature crescent wings will be demolished, to be replaced by the new condominium.

Even though a portion of the building will be 'saved', by disregarding the critical historic significance of the building, the proposal debases the integrity of the heritage value of the house, and that of the Katong historic enclave.

Commercial viability

THE current proposal for 23 Amber Road is clearly tilted towards commercial concerns: It seeks to 'conserve' plans for the new condominium before making any accommodation for heritage purposes.

The initiative of Goodland Development is commendable, and the efforts of the URA to negotiate between various government departments for waivers and concessions are well appreciated.

Still, it is apparent that these concessions are meant only to save, literally, the leftover remains of the house after ensuring the economic sanctity of the condominium development.

Even then, it is questionable if the effort will be worth it, for the unsatisfactory architectural solution has the effect of undermining the very act of heritage conservation it set out to achieve.

The disembodied remains of the house would end up consuming valuable space without a corresponding payback in terms of heritage value and prestige to the new development.

Rather than a win-win solution, we could end up over-compromising all round in a lose-lose situation.

Rethinking priorities

THERE are many ways to approach adaptive reuse projects, but the common principle centres on the integrity of the historic building, which should form the basis of the design, regulatory, or commercial decision.

The best adaptive reuse projects are those that manage to strike a sensible and sensitive balance between the three factors of integrity of heritage value, commercial profitability and architectural merit, through considered commercial programming and innovative design, facilitated by sophisticated conservation policies and regulatory flexibility.

Most importantly, these are premised upon the care and priority placed on history and built heritage by all parties.

As such, heritage conservation projects speak volumes about the importance that a society places on history, how it relates to its past, and where its values lie.

Not unlike the Cathay Building, 23 Amber Road suffers the unfortunate fate of belated conservation, after development plans have been set in motion.

Given the limitations in such cases, we hope that solutions outside the proverbial box can be explored, especially by the URA, including floor area ratio substitution or even property swop.

Even if compromise is unavoidable, we hope it will be a meaningful and dignified one.

Rethinking architectural heritage

MUCH as original manuscripts and paintings are one-off and irreplaceable evidence of history, architecture constitutes an important material heritage.

Most of the time, it is impossible to even reconstruct due to the loss of traditional craftsmanship and building materials that are no longer in production, such as the Malayan rubber tiles in the old Supreme Court.

The significance and communicative power that a tactile and spatial experience of a properly restored heritage structure provides cannot be substituted, whether by virtual simulation, paper documentation, commemorative plaques, or by saving totemic building parts.

To break out of the confusion that often confronts the pro-development state of conservation, it is necessary to challenge the notion that heritage conservation means stagnation and an obstacle to progress.

In many post-industrial economies, including the United States, Britain, Scandinavia and the European Union, heritage conservation has become a highly developed and progressive industry. It has spawned its own research and development fields, as well as exportable high- end technology and specialised services, playing an increasing role in the economy beyond tourism.

Heritage conservation projects are more labour-intensive compared to new constructions of similar finance.When heritage rehabilitation occupies a larger share of the construction industry, it generates proportionately more skilled and specialised employment.

Singapore is well past the phase of massive urban development that was necessary to address its housing shortage.

There is no better time than now to actively address the shortfall in the state of heritage conservation.

We should aim to move beyond totemic efforts that belie an uncompromising stance towards profit-making, at the expense of a healthy appreciation of our history.

The writers are with the Singapore Heritage Society.
links
Related articles on Singapore: general environmental issues
about the site | email ria
  News articles are reproduced for non-profit educational purposes.
 

website©ria tan 2003 www.wildsingapore.com