# Singapore Is Trying To Bring Orchard Road Back To Life — But We’ve Forgotten What Made It Work In The First Place

- **Source:** Stacked Homes
- **Published:** 2026-07-26T14:15:13.000Z
- **Author:** Ryan J. Ong
- **Original:** https://stackedhomes.com/singapore-is-trying-to-bring-orchard-road-back-to-life-but-weve-forgotten-what-made-it-work-in-the-first-place/
- **Topics:** Commercial & Industrial, Government & Policy, Regional Markets

## Featured rationale

Successful rejuvenation may require affordable space, diverse independent retailers and leisure venues that encourage visitors to linger, potentially supporting footfall beyond conventional shopping demand.

## AI summary

Orchard Road rejuvenation proposals focus on redeveloping ageing malls, adding mixed-use developments and improving public spaces after the district became increasingly commercial and standardised.

## Original article

As an older Singaporean, my initial response to turning Orchard into a live-work-play area was: are you joking?

Personally, I find it a bit irritating because I recall a time when Orchard Road was a vibrant live-work-play area in Singapore. Back then unique subcultures found a place along the retail corridor, and Orchard Road resembled what Bugis / Midtown is like today.

An Orchard Road scene that attracted young and old? Check. A time when people saw it as a place to really hang out with friends, or express themselves? Check. A time when it was as much about social events as it was about shopping? Most definitely. And as I recall, we made extensive efforts to stomp it all out.

Consider the now demolished Ming Arcade. Today, most people who remember it at all will remember a run-down building with a KTV, or perhaps associate it with cheap beer buckets and chicken wings. But in the 1980s, Ming Arcade housed Rainbow Lounge, which was formative to Singapore’s early music scene. Local bands such as The Quests and Tokyo Square performed there, not because URA designated the area as an arts precinct, but because the conditions were right for such venues to take root.

Ming Arcade definitely wasn’t celebrated for this. It had a reputation for being rowdy, noisy, and attracting an unruly crowd (because a lot of the men kept long hair. I kid you not, ask your parents or grandparents). Ming Arcade was often targeted by the police and authorities.

Around the same time, Orchard Road also became home to another phenomenon: the Centrepoint Kids.

Hundreds of teenagers used to gather around Centrepoint, Far East Plaza and Daimaru. They came to meet friends, browse record stores, watch breakdancers, and just hang out together.

Much like Ming Arcade, they weren’t embraced. I recall multiple news reports (though you’ll likely have to search NLB archives to find them now) that portrayed them as a social nuisance. Shopkeepers complained they scared away customers. Security guards regularly chased them off.

Despite the name, they weren’t confined to Centrepoint. These youths were part of a developing subculture in the Orchard area, which was actively discouraged. So it’s ironic that, decades after they’re gone, we see efforts like *Scape trying to lure back youth into the shopping district.

This was also around the time when the Christmas Lights along Orchard started to become a big event. While it’s still featured today, it was almost an annual pilgrimage for some back then. Couples came for dates, friends met to soak in the atmosphere, and families would walk down the whole street.

My point here isn’t nostalgia. There was a time when people went to Orchard not to buy something but to hang out and socialise. Now, after sterilising it to make it an almost purely commercial zone, there are top-down efforts to bring it back.

Many of the proposals to do this seem to focus on refreshing old malls.

Redeveloping ageing properties, introducing more mixed-use developments and improving public spaces are all sensible ideas. I agree that most ageing malls today are due a makeover, becoming a place to experience rather than simply shop. Amidst all of this, I can’t help but feel we’re overlooking the obvious.

Orchard Road once possessed many of the qualities we’re now trying to engineer back into it. And perhaps it’s time to go back and identify what it had, prior to becoming a more sterile (yet slick looking) retail district.

Not because we should recreate the Orchard Road of the 1980s, but because knowing the cultural and economic conditions that once made Orchard Road feel alive, we might have a stronger start in its rejuvenation.

First, Orchard Road used to have better retail diversity.

An example is the now demolished Tanglin Shopping Centre, which housed a mix of antique dealers, specialist retailers, family-run restaurants – and at some parts of its history there wasn’t even a single anchor tenant – before it was demolished in December 2024.

That kind of commercial diversity attracts a wide range of people into the area, but unfortunately it’s hard to sustain this type of retail business model today. Most of the major malls along Orchard Road are now owned or managed by REITs and large developers. That’s not inherently a bad thing: they’ve professionalised mall management.

The challenge is that those same entities can also make Orchard Road feel stiflingly standardised. If every mall uses the same formula of international brands and familiar chains, then Orchard Road will remain a slick-looking gallery for tourists.

To some extent there is an awareness of this, with pop-up stores allowing for newer players with smaller budgets to make their presence felt along the shopping belt. Orchard also has existing strata malls (Lucky Plaza, Far East Plaza, Far East Shopping Centre, and Orchard Plaza) and spaces like *Scape. The question is whether we’re willing to embrace commercial inefficiencies to enable small or niche businesses to sprout there and thrive.

Perhaps we might go so far as to provide support or incentives for select strata-titled malls, to give them a facelift and support the niche businesses they carry (not shady massage parlours and the like obviously, but the family-owned eateries, antique stores, and niche hobby shops).

If these strata malls are demolished, it’s unlikely that expensive new modern malls can attract the same kind of small businesses.

Second, Orchard needs more businesses that give people reason to linger

How about we start with putting some benches back, especially in the malls here? If we want people to hang out, especially retirees and teenagers, we can’t expect them to keep buying $7.60 lattes just to sit down and talk.

That aside, the biggest challenge with Orchard Road is getting people to linger.

Ironically, *Scape already demonstrates many of the ideas we’re trying to encourage across Orchard Road. Its management deliberately provides free seating and gathering spaces. It encourages youth-led communities, and even instructs security officers to adopt a lighter touch. Yet from the linked article, we can see it’s still a major challenge, partly due to the retail and restaurant mix as mentioned above.

As an aside, the decline of cinema has really made things harder. Movies were once a reason for friends to gather for longer periods, both before and after showings. At this point, art studios, escape rooms, cooking classes, board game cafés, and live music spaces may have to be deliberately incentivised.

It’s going to be a long, slow process, and highly dependent on how much each industry player wants to co-operate and contribute. It’s also much tougher now that land values along Orchard Road are so high. It’s not like Joo Chiat or Tiong Bahru, where undervalued plots or properties allowed independent businesses, artists and cafés to transform the area.

But if we do make it, perhaps we’ll also remember the mistake of stomping it out to begin with, and not repeat that.

Meanwhile in other property news…

Skypark Kepler is the first Banyan Group managed, luxury launch in JB. Should Singaporeans buy in? We took a quick tour.

The October 2026 BTO launch is around the corner; check out our earlier preview on the various offerings, and the likely Plus and Prime spots

Check out the flash estimated for the private residential market in Q2, and what it could mean for you going forward

How did Legenda @ Joo Chiat end up having the best performing two-bedders, despite being a freehold boutique condo? Join us on Stacked Pro to find out.

Weekly Sales Roundup (13 – 19 July)

Top 5 Most Expensive New Sales (By Project)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

SKYWATERS RESIDENCES | $17,343,000 | 2949 | $5,880 | 99 yrs

THE CONTINUUM | $5,351,000 | 1905 | $2,809 | FH

ONE MARINA GARDENS | $5,321,200 | 1647 | $3,231 | 99 yrs (2023)

PROMENADE PEAK | $5,068,200 | 1421 | $3,567 | 99 yrs (2024)

UNION SQUARE RESIDENCES | $4,473,000 | 1518 | $2,947 | 99 yrs (2024)

Top 5 Cheapest New Sales (By Project)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

NARRA RESIDENCES | $1,296,000 | 560 | $2,315 | 99 yrs (2025)

LENTOR GARDENS RESIDENCES | $1,412,300 | 689 | $2,050 | 99 yrs

COASTAL CABANA | $1,650,000 | 915 | $1,803 | 99 yrs (2024)

THE SEN | $1,654,000 | 678 | $2,439 | 99 yrs (2025)

VELA BAY | $1,675,000 | 592 | $2,829 | 99 yrs (2025)

Top 5 Most Expensive Resale

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

THE NASSIM | $14,000,000 | 3122 | $4,485 | FH

HILLTOPS | $11,450,000 | 3208 | $3,570 | FH

THE CLAYMORE | $8,220,000 | 2680 | $3,067 | FH

THE ARCADIA | $5,256,000 | 3821 | $1,375 | 99 yrs (1979)

CONCOURSE SKYLINE | $4,780,000 | 2282 | $2,095 | 99 yrs (2008)

Top 5 Cheapest Resale

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

TROPIKA EAST | $742,000 | 441 | $1,681 | FH

VETRO | $775,000 | 829 | $935 | 999 yrs (1882)

MANDALE HEIGHTS | $780,000 | 570 | $1,367 | FH

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | FH

THE FLORENCE RESIDENCES | $868,001 | 527 | $1,646 | 99 yrs (2018)

Top 5 Biggest Winners

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE NASSIM | $14,000,000 | 3122 | $4,485 | $4,200,000 | 10 Years

THE CLAYMORE | $8,220,000 | 2680 | $3,067 | $4,020,000 | 20 Years

DORMER PARK | $3,550,000 | 1668 | $2,128 | $1,925,000 | 19 Years

THE BLOSSOMVALE | $3,150,000 | 1356 | $2,323 | $1,781,000 | 30 Years

OASIS GARDEN | $2,655,000 | 1475 | $1,800 | $1,536,000 | 17 Years

Top 5 Biggest Losers

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE M | $1,028,000 | 441 | $2,329 | -$131,400 | 6 Years

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | -$51,000 | 14 Years

FOURTH AVENUE RESIDENCES | $1,530,000 | 624 | $2,451 | -$42,000 | 7 Years

THE MONTANA | $1,230,000 | 614 | $2,005 | -$36,110 | 12 Years

AFFINITY AT SERANGOON | $904,000 | 538 | $1,680 | -$19,888 | 2 Years

Top 5 Biggest Winners (ROI%)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE CLEARWATER | $2,050,000 | 1389 | $1,476 | 224% | 27 Years

SEASONS VIEW | $1,725,000 | 1141 | $1,512 | 208% | 20 Years

COTE D’AZUR | $2,200,000 | 1421 | $1,548 | 202% | 24 Years

THE TROPICA | $1,573,888 | 1227 | $1,283 | 197% | 20 Years

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,350,000 | 1324 | $1,775 | 153% | 17 Years

Top 5 Biggest Losers (ROI%)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE M | $1,028,000 | 441 | $2,329 | -11% | 6 Years

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | -6% | 14 Years

THE MONTANA | $1,230,000 | 614 | $2,005 | -3% | 12 Years

FOURTH AVENUE RESIDENCES | $1,530,000 | 624 | $2,451 | -3% | 7 Years

AFFINITY AT SERANGOON | $904,000 | 538 | $1,680 | -2% | 2 Years

Transaction Breakdown

Follow us on Stacked for news and updates on the Singapore market.

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: grok_cli

### 新加坡正试图让乌节路重焕生机——但我们已忘记当初是什么让它成功

作为一名年长的新加坡人，我对把乌节路打造成宜居宜业宜游区域的第一反应是：你在开玩笑吗？就我个人而言，这有点令人恼火，因为我记得曾有一段时间，乌节路本身就是新加坡充满活力的宜居宜业宜游地带……

作为一名年长的新加坡人，我对把乌节路打造成宜居宜业宜游区域的第一反应是：你在开玩笑吗？

就我个人而言，这有点令人恼火，因为我记得曾有一段时间，乌节路本身就是新加坡充满活力的宜居宜业宜游地带。那时，独特的亚文化在零售走廊上找到了落脚点，乌节路的模样更接近今天的武吉士／中城（Bugis / Midtown）。

一个能吸引老少的乌节路场景？有。人们把它当作真正和朋友闲逛、或表达自我的地方？有。那里既是社交活动场所，也是购物之地？绝对是。而据我回忆，我们曾花大力气把这一切统统踩灭。

想想现已拆除的明阁购物中心（Ming Arcade）。今天，多数还记得它的人，只会想起一座破旧建筑里的KTV，或把它与廉价啤酒桶和鸡翅联系在一起。但在1980年代，明阁购物中心曾是Rainbow Lounge的所在地，对新加坡早期音乐场景具有塑造意义。本地乐队如The Quests和Tokyo Square曾在此演出——并非因为市区重建局（URA）把该区指定为艺术区，而是因为条件合适，这类场所才能生根。

明阁购物中心显然并未因此受到推崇。它以喧闹、嘈杂、吸引不守规矩人群而闻名（因为很多男性留长发。我没开玩笑，去问问你父母或祖父母）。明阁购物中心经常成为警方和当局的重点整治对象。

大约在同一时期，乌节路还出现了另一现象：Centrepoint Kids。

成百上千的青少年曾聚集在先得坊（Centrepoint）、远东广场（Far East Plaza）和大丸（Daimaru）一带。他们来见朋友、逛唱片店、看霹雳舞者，只是一起闲逛。

和明阁购物中心一样，他们并未被接纳。我记得多篇新闻报道（尽管你现在可能得去国家图书馆管理局NLB档案里找）把他们描绘成社会滋扰。店主抱怨他们吓跑顾客。保安经常把他们赶走。

尽管名字如此，他们并不局限于先得坊。这些年轻人是乌节一带正在形成的亚文化的一部分，却遭到积极打压。因此颇具讽刺意味的是，几十年后他们已不在，我们却看到*Scape等项目试图把年轻人重新吸引回购物区。

也是在那段时间，乌节路圣诞灯饰开始成为大型活动。尽管今天仍有亮灯，但当年对一些人来说几乎是年度朝圣。情侣来约会，朋友来感受氛围，家庭会整条街走下去。

我要说的不是怀旧。曾有一段时间，人们去乌节不是为了买东西，而是为了闲逛和社交。如今，在把它消毒成几乎纯粹的商业区之后，又有自上而下的努力想把它“请回来”。

许多相关提案似乎聚焦于翻新老商场。

重建老化物业、引入更多混合用途发展、改善公共空间，都是合理想法。我同意，如今多数老化商场确实该翻新，成为体验之地，而非仅仅购物。但在这一切之中，我忍不住觉得我们忽略了显而易见的一点。

乌节路一度具备我们如今正试图重新“工程化”植入的许多特质。或许是时候回头辨认：在它变成更无菌（却看起来更光鲜）的零售区之前，它曾经拥有什么。

不是因为我们应重现1980年代的乌节路，而是因为了解曾让乌节路充满生机的文化与经济条件，我们或许能在复兴中有更扎实的起点。

首先，乌节路曾经有更好的零售多样性。

一个例子是现已拆除的东陵购物中心（Tanglin Shopping Centre），里面曾有古董商、专精零售商、家庭经营餐厅的组合——在其部分历史阶段甚至没有单一主力租户——直至2024年12月被拆除。

那种商业多样性会把更广泛人群吸引进该区，但遗憾的是，这类零售商业模式如今很难维持。乌节路沿线多数大型商场现由房地产投资信托（REIT）和大型发展商拥有或管理。这本身并非坏事：它们把商场管理专业化了。

挑战在于，这些同一批主体也可能让乌节路显得压抑地标准化。如果每座商场都套用国际品牌与熟悉连锁的同一套公式，乌节路就会继续成为面向游客的光鲜展示廊。

在某种程度上，人们已意识到这一点：快闪店让预算较小的新玩家也能在购物带上露脸。乌节也有现成的分层产权商场（Lucky Plaza、Far East Plaza、Far East Shopping Centre和Orchard Plaza），以及*Scape这类空间。问题是，我们是否愿意接纳一定的商业低效，好让小型或小众生意在此萌发并茁壮成长。

或许我们甚至可以为部分分层产权商场提供支持或激励，给它们整容翻新，并扶持它们承载的小众生意（显然不是那些灰色按摩店之类，而是家庭经营食肆、古董店和小众兴趣店）。

如果这些分层产权商场被拆除，昂贵的新现代化商场不太可能再吸引到同类小型企业。

其次，乌节需要更多让人有理由停留的业态

不如先从把一些长椅放回来开始，尤其是这里的商场里？若我们希望人们闲逛——尤其是退休人士和青少年——就不能指望他们为了坐下来聊天，不断买下7.60新元的拿铁。

除此之外，乌节路最大的挑战是让人愿意停留。

讽刺的是，*Scape已经展示了许多我们试图在整条乌节路推动的理念。其管理方刻意提供免费座位和聚集空间，鼓励青年主导的社群，甚至要求保安采取更轻柔的处理方式。但从相关文章可见，这仍是重大挑战，部分原因正是上文提到的零售与餐饮组合。

顺便一提，电影院的衰落确实让事情更难。电影曾是朋友聚在一起更长时间的理由——开场前与散场后皆是。到了这一步，艺术工作室、密室逃脱、烹饪课、桌游咖啡馆和现场音乐空间，或许必须被刻意激励。

这将是一个漫长而缓慢的过程，高度取决于各行业参与者愿意合作与贡献的程度。如今乌节路沿线地价如此之高，也更难了。它不像如切（Joo Chiat）或中峇鲁（Tiong Bahru），那里被低估的地块或物业曾让独立生意、艺术家和咖啡馆改变了片区面貌。

但如果我们真的做成了，或许我们也会记得当初把它踩灭的错误，并且不再重蹈覆辙。

与此同时，其他楼市新闻……

Skypark Kepler是悦榕集团（Banyan Group）在新山管理的首个豪华项目。新加坡人该不该买？我们做了一次快速参观。

2026年10月预购组屋（BTO）即将推出；可查看我们早前对各项目供应的预览，以及可能的Plus与Prime地段

查看私人住宅市场第二季的快闪预估，以及这对你未来意味着什么

为何Legenda @ Joo Chiat作为免费hold精品共管公寓，却成为表现最佳的两房单位？加入Stacked Pro一探究竟。

每周成交汇总（7月13日–19日）

五大最贵新盘成交（按项目）

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

SKYWATERS RESIDENCES | $17,343,000 | 2949 | $5,880 | 99 yrs

THE CONTINUUM | $5,351,000 | 1905 | $2,809 | FH

ONE MARINA GARDENS | $5,321,200 | 1647 | $3,231 | 99 yrs (2023)

PROMENADE PEAK | $5,068,200 | 1421 | $3,567 | 99 yrs (2024)

UNION SQUARE RESIDENCES | $4,473,000 | 1518 | $2,947 | 99 yrs (2024)

五大最便宜新盘成交（按项目）

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

NARRA RESIDENCES | $1,296,000 | 560 | $2,315 | 99 yrs (2025)

LENTOR GARDENS RESIDENCES | $1,412,300 | 689 | $2,050 | 99 yrs

COASTAL CABANA | $1,650,000 | 915 | $1,803 | 99 yrs (2024)

THE SEN | $1,654,000 | 678 | $2,439 | 99 yrs (2025)

VELA BAY | $1,675,000 | 592 | $2,829 | 99 yrs (2025)

五大最贵转售

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

THE NASSIM | $14,000,000 | 3122 | $4,485 | FH

HILLTOPS | $11,450,000 | 3208 | $3,570 | FH

THE CLAYMORE | $8,220,000 | 2680 | $3,067 | FH

THE ARCADIA | $5,256,000 | 3821 | $1,375 | 99 yrs (1979)

CONCOURSE SKYLINE | $4,780,000 | 2282 | $2,095 | 99 yrs (2008)

五大最便宜转售

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

TROPIKA EAST | $742,000 | 441 | $1,681 | FH

VETRO | $775,000 | 829 | $935 | 999 yrs (1882)

MANDALE HEIGHTS | $780,000 | 570 | $1,367 | FH

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | FH

THE FLORENCE RESIDENCES | $868,001 | 527 | $1,646 | 99 yrs (2018)

五大最大赢家

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE NASSIM | $14,000,000 | 3122 | $4,485 | $4,200,000 | 10 Years

THE CLAYMORE | $8,220,000 | 2680 | $3,067 | $4,020,000 | 20 Years

DORMER PARK | $3,550,000 | 1668 | $2,128 | $1,925,000 | 19 Years

THE BLOSSOMVALE | $3,150,000 | 1356 | $2,323 | $1,781,000 | 30 Years

OASIS GARDEN | $2,655,000 | 1475 | $1,800 | $1,536,000 | 17 Years

五大最大输家

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE M | $1,028,000 | 441 | $2,329 | -$131,400 | 6 Years

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | -$51,000 | 14 Years

FOURTH AVENUE RESIDENCES | $1,530,000 | 624 | $2,451 | -$42,000 | 7 Years

THE MONTANA | $1,230,000 | 614 | $2,005 | -$36,110 | 12 Years

AFFINITY AT SERANGOON | $904,000 | 538 | $1,680 | -$19,888 | 2 Years

五大最大赢家（投资回报率%）

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE CLEARWATER | $2,050,000 | 1389 | $1,476 | 224% | 27 Years

SEASONS VIEW | $1,725,000 | 1141 | $1,512 | 208% | 20 Years

COTE D’AZUR | $2,200,000 | 1421 | $1,548 | 202% | 24 Years

THE TROPICA | $1,573,888 | 1227 | $1,283 | 197% | 20 Years

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,350,000 | 1324 | $1,775 | 153% | 17 Years

五大最大输家（投资回报率%）

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE M | $1,028,000 | 441 | $2,329 | -11% | 6 Years

8 BASSEIN | $835,000 | 452 | $1,847 | -6% | 14 Years

THE MONTANA | $1,230,000 | 614 | $2,005 | -3% | 12 Years

FOURTH AVENUE RESIDENCES | $1,530,000 | 624 | $2,451 | -3% | 7 Years

AFFINITY AT SERANGOON | $904,000 | 538 | $1,680 | -2% | 2 Years

成交明细

关注Stacked，获取新加坡市场新闻与动态。