SINGAPORE — A temporary closure of a street football court in Bedok North has been met with a volley of approval and criticism, which rivalled the racket that the move was aiming to curb.

On the ground, it looked like the problem went beyond just some young football players making a din, so much so that a handful of residents even went knocking from door to door to check if their neighbours were similarly feeling disturbed by the goings-on in their backyard and getting some semblance of support.

The background: In response to reports of “groups of inconsiderate street soccer court users” creating noise late into the night, Mr Tan Kiat How announced via social media on Dec 12 that the court at Block 422, Bedok North Road will be closed for a while.

Mr Tan is Senior Minister of State for National Development, Member of Parliament (MP) for East Coast Group Representation Constituency — in particular, the MP in charge of the Kampong Chai Chee division where the court is — and vice-chairman of East Coast Town Council.

The town council on Tuesday (Dec 26) said in a Facebook post that the issues related to the improper use of the space went beyond noise concerns, including users of the football court urinating in public areas and getting into heated disputes with residents. 

It also said that disagreements between this group of users and the residents have “significantly worsened” in recent years and the temporary closure would be an “interim measure”. It asked for more police patrols in the area as well.

Mr Tan wrote on his social media accounts: “Residents also told me that many of these players don’t live in the area and have become a nuisance by damaging common property and hurling vulgarities at our residents.” 

News of the short-term closure drew online attention and debate, with some people saying that it was “extreme”, while others thanked Mr Tan for taking some action. 

In a follow-up, Mr Tan posted on social media on Tuesday to say that he welcomed “the opportunity to add colour to this decision” and said that alternatives to closing the court were being explored. 

One option is to repurpose the former Kampong Chai Chee Community Centre as a youth hub, while the community spaces closer to the housing block may then be reconfigured for "senior-friendly, inter-generational use", the town council said.

On Wednesday, TODAY spoke to nine residents living in Block 422, some of whom described the closure as long overdue in addressing what they deemed as a nuisance, while others maintained that the court is a valuable community resource they will be sad to see go if the space were to be revamped for other uses.

A DECADES-LONG MISSION

Some residents defended the decision to close the court and said that it has successfully controlled the noise disturbances so far. 

For long-time Chai Chee resident Yusof Musa, it is a welcome outcome of his 20-year-long campaign to address noise pollution in the area.

The 68-year-old who works at a data centre and lives at Block 422 said that the noise from children screaming and playing football is “unbearable”. Living on the lower floors of the block, he is unable to get adequate rest with the noise after working the night shift. 

He added that imposing a curfew would not be enough because action may not be taken against some of the court's users, and he had been rebuffed by them when he had previously confronted them about the noise. 

Mr Yusof was one of the residents who organised an exercise to knock on doors in the block this year, where they asked people living nearest to the court for their experience of noise in the area.

Another resident, Mr Steven Low, also one of the organisers, said that they had canvassed more than 50 residents on Aug 29 and 85 per cent of them were amenable to demolishing the football court. 

Mr Low said that the court became popular among non-residents last year after Covid-19 restrictions were lifted, with screaming sounds from 1pm to 7pm that interrupted his family members studying or working from home.

The 45-year-old civil servant continued: “You build something for the kids around your neighbourhood to use. But the problem now is it’s not the kids around your neighbourhood using (it) but people from elsewhere and they're dirtying up the whole place.” 

He added that he had seen signs of public urination at the lift landing facing the court and Milo chocolate drink powder being littered around the void deck of the block.

“To me, you don’t live there, you’ll never know... how will you feel when you can’t even do your work at all at home?”

NOSTALGIC COMMUNITY LANDMARK

However, some residents expressed concerns that permanently removing the court would deprive younger residents of a valued recreational space and eliminate a nostalgic community landmark. 

Many residents who did not live directly facing the court said that they were largely unaffected by the noise from football players. 

For 34-year-old civil servant Tan Jing Han, who has lived in the estate since he was a teenager, the football court is a nostalgic play area and he would be “a bit sad” if it were gone.

He added that the court was well-known in the community and is a common meeting point listed on e-marketplace Carousell for when sellers and buyers meet to complete online transactions.

He suggested that the noise complaints might be managed by regulating the court's opening hours with an electronic lock instead of permanently demolishing it.

Ms Appavoo Ramasamy Sumathi, a 51-year-old retiree who has lived in Block 422 for more than 30 years, has not heard complaints from her immediate neighbours.

She does not mind the occasional noise she hears coming from the court because she thinks that it is healthy for children to engage in sports. 

“Sunday, Saturday, school holidays are very noisy, but I don’t care. Let them play. Where else will the children go? Here, there’s no playground or anything. And now, if they close this (court), it’ll be no good,” she added. 

IS IT TIME FOR A CHANGE? 

Most residents welcomed the idea of transforming the football court into other community-focused facilities, should alternative spaces for young people be provided. 

Mr Tan the MP said that many housing blocks in the area were more than 40 years old, with many residents likely having frequented the court as children. 

“But as the residents’ profiles change, I can imagine that their needs may be different now, for example, wanting inter-generational space for them and their grandkids, exercise equipment for seniors, community garden,” he added. 

Agreeing, Ms Zunaidah Shahul Hamid, 59, a senior manager, said that the ageing community was a key reason why she supported the court’s closure and proposed changes to include facilities that are more friendly for elders and people with disabilities.

“People are saying we are being very unreasonable. I don't think it is unreasonable.

"It’s about embracing everybody within the community and looking after each other. It's just that the demographic has changed, their needs have changed.”

Mr Patrick Goh, a 68-year-old architect, said that the location of the court is too close to the lower floors of Block 422 directly facing it.

It would be more appropriate to convert the court into a community garden, which would be quieter and give older residents a place to gather, he proposed.

Similarly, 40-year-old teacher Hazel Lin said that she tolerates the level of noise from the court but she would welcome elder-friendly adaptations of the space because her father now frequents facilities located at other blocks. 

That is provided there is a replacement area for young people’s leisure, such as the idea to repurpose the Kampong Chai Chee Community Centre into a youth hub, she added.

However, some residents said that converting the common facilities would not be enough to prevent disamenities. 

For 70-year-old retiree Cheng Meng Huat, changing the infrastructure alone will not completely address their concerns. He believes that more emphasis should be placed on getting children to be more self-disciplined and considerate.  

“We should teach our kids how to respect people and live with other people in harmony… It’s the software part,” he said.

“You can talk about the hardware, build so many aircons or sound diffusers but if people like to make noise, they can still make noise outside the facilities.”