TODAY understands that there have been past complaints of errant balls hitting and injuring passers-by.
Residents in the surrounding blocks said that both the nails and the barricades have been in place for several years, and agreed that the measures were effective in reducing the frequency in which school children played there.
However, they had mixed opinions on whether the measures were necessary.
“I think it’s a good measure so they won’t kick so hard. When they play, they’re not so violent because they know there are nails,” said 57-year-old driver Roger Ng, who lives in a HDB block beside the multi-purpose hall.
Still, Mr Ng has no problems with children using the space to play in general.
“As kids, we all like to play. As long as they’re not out doing bad things, it’s good for them to get together, pass time and grow up. It’s healthy,” he said.
Another Pasir Ris resident who wanted to be known only as Ms Diana said that she feels “sad” about the town council discouraging kids to play there, as they might not have other options near their homes for such activities.
The 32-year-old who works in the education sector pointed to the cost of booking “proper” courts for games like football, adding that the booking process on these platforms can be competitive too.
“I feel like it’s just part of community living. I don’t mind (the hall) being a bit dirty or noisy – just let people play, it’s a shared space,” she said.
IS THERE A BETTER WAY TO SETTLE DISPUTES?
The tendency for conflicts to arise is a natural outcome of high-density living, said sociologist Shannon Ang of Nanyang Technological University (NTU).
“The more people you put together, the more likely practices from one neighbour will conflict with the needs of another,” he said.
But, Dr Ang observed, the ways in which Singaporeans choose to handle disputes are not ideal – like the common pattern of relegating the resolution of community conflicts to the state by submitting complaints to MPs or taking legal action, for instance.
Agreeing, Ms Suzanah Murad, who lives in an older HDB estate in Jurong, told TODAY that she believes Singaporeans can be “very rigid” in their approach to resolving disputes.
“Maybe it’s the way we’ve been educated or how we grew up. Our mindset is to complain about anything – the town council is first, then we go to our MP, then we go to the ministry,” said the 53-year-old executive assistant.
“Instead of thinking out of the box or finding other avenues to solve the issue, we’ll go to the town council… and it’ll be their fault if the problem isn’t solved.”
Indeed, in response to TODAY’s queries, MP for Mountbatten Lim Biow Chuan said that in his experience, most residents are “generally tolerant” of noise at common areas, but they would file a complaint to the town council if the situation “becomes excessive”.
In such cases, the town council will engage the parties involved to try to resolve the matter amicably. “A lot will depend on parties willingness to give and take. After all, many of them are fellow residents and neighbours,” said Mr Lim.
Assoc Prof Faishal had said in Parliament that certain interventions brought about by town councils in order to resolve disputes “may seem harsh”, but they are “necessary to balance the interests of all residents”.
Dr Ang added that due to society’s strong emphasis on self-reliance over the years, people tend to be primarily concerned about improving themselves and their immediate families, seldom extending their efforts to the wider community.
This leads Singaporeans to “generally keep to themselves unless they are being inconvenienced in some way” he said.
“This means that community organising is often not front-of-mind for most people as a potential solution to most things in Singapore.
“Without regular and considered interaction in the community, it is little wonder that conflicts tend to escalate when they arise.”
Last year, Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong announced that disputing neighbours in some cases, such as those involving noise, will be required to go for mandatory mediation – with penalties imposed on them if they fail to show up.
“But this doesn’t really address the fact that neighbours don’t know how to deal with each other directly and (have to) rely on external parties,” said Dr Ang.
One way to work out a common solution amid communal friction is by taking an educational approach to the matter, said Assistant Prof Tan of NUS.
“Residents could be engaged in workshops to build consensus around which types of uses should be supported or restricted in void decks – and to brainstorm possible solutions to deconflict different functions,” she said.
Doing so could have multiple benefits of building community through engagement processes, she added.