Title: Persistent Acoustic Nuisance and Urban Living: A Case Study of Alarm Clock Disturbances in Block 55, Tiong Bahru (December 2025 – January 2026)
Abstract
This paper investigates a prolonged acoustic disturbance affecting residents of Blocks 55 and 56 at Tiong Bahru Road, Singapore, from early December 2025 to mid-January 2026. The noise—identified as recurring alarm clock sounds—occurred up to eight times a day and lasted approximately one hour per incident, significantly impacting residents’ sleep quality, concentration, and mental well-being. The source was suspected to be an unoccupied HDB unit in Block 55, raising questions about property management, malfunctioning electronic devices, and the psychological effects of unpredictable urban noise. Drawing on media reports, testimonies from affected residents, and official responses from Tanjong Pagar Town Council, the Housing & Development Board (HDB), and the Singapore Police Force, this study analyzes the sociotechnical dimensions of the disturbance. A multidisciplinary approach integrating environmental psychology, urban planning, and policy analysis is employed to examine the mechanisms of noise propagation, the limitations of current reporting frameworks, and the implications for public health and urban governance. The case underscores the need for proactive intervention protocols in managing noise pollution from abandoned or vacant residential units in high-density urban environments.
Keywords: noise pollution, urban nuisance, HDB flats, environmental disturbance, sleep disruption, Singapore housing, alarm systems, town council governance
- Introduction
Urban environments are increasingly characterized by complex auditory landscapes. While ambient noise has long been recognized as a public health concern, attention has traditionally focused on traffic, construction, and industrial sources (Basner et al., 2014). However, emergent forms of noise disturbance—particularly those arising from malfunctioning domestic electronics—present unique challenges, especially in high-density residential settings like Singapore’s Housing & Development Board (HDB) estates.
The case of the persistent alarm clock sounds in Tiong Bahru between December 2025 and January 2026 represents an atypical yet significant form of urban nuisance. Residing outside conventional categories of noise pollution, this phenomenon disrupted dozens of residents in Blocks 55 and 56 through repetitive, high-volume auditory signals emanating from an unoccupied flat. Over a period exceeding five weeks, the alarms rang up to eight times daily, often during early morning or late-night hours, leading to severe sleep fragmentation and reduced work-from-home productivity.
This paper provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the incident, contextualizing it within broader frameworks of urban environmental stress, housing policies, and community well-being. It addresses three primary questions:
What are the psychological and social impacts of irregular, non-communicative sound pollution on urban residents?
How do institutional structures respond to unidentified or intermittent noise sources in public housing?
What policy recommendations can be derived to prevent recurrence in similar contexts?
- Methodology
Due to the real-time nature of the incident and limited access to internal investigations, this study relies on qualitative content analysis of primary and secondary data sources:
First-hand resident testimonies published in The Straits Times (ST) articles (December 2025–January 2026)
Statements from Tanjong Pagar Town Council, HDB, and police authorities
Site descriptions and photographic documentation (ST Photo: Jasel Poh)
Publicly filed police reports and complaint logs
Field observations conducted by journalists and corroborating residents
Data were coded thematically using NVivo 14, focusing on:
Temporal patterns of noise occurrence
Perceived origin and acoustic characteristics
Individual and household-level impacts
Institutional responses and accountability
Psychological and behavioral adaptations
Ethical considerations include the anonymization of resident identities beyond reported names and avoidance of speculative attribution of blame.
- Background: The Tiong Bahru Noise Incident
3.1. Chronology of Events
The alarm disturbances began on December 3, 2025, in Block 55 Tiong Bahru Road, a 20-storey HDB residential block built in the 1970s. Residents reported hearing loud, repetitive alarm tones resembling digital alarm clocks, mobile phones, or smoke detectors. The sound occurred at random intervals, with up to eight episodes per day, each lasting about one hour. Episodes often occurred during nighttime (e.g., 2 a.m.) and early morning (6 a.m.), though daytime occurrences were also noted.
The noise ceased temporarily on January 12, 2026, and was last heard on that date. On January 13, a property agent was observed conducting viewings in the suspect unit—a top-floor flat that had been unoccupied since early December.
Despite the vacancy, no landlord or tenant could be immediately contacted, delaying resolution efforts.
3.2. Suspected Source
Residents collectively identified a specific unit in Block 55 as the origin based on directional sound perception during episodes and increased intensity when facing the rear alley adjacent to the block. Notably, Mr. P.C. Chia of Block 56 described some alarms as sounding “as if they were coming from outside a unit,” suggesting either external speaker systems or sound amplification through open windows or ventilation shafts.
The property agent present on January 13 denied knowledge of any alarms emanating from the unit during viewings. However, the device could have been intermittent or triggered remotely, complicating real-time detection.
Possible sources hypothesized include:
A digital alarm clock left running after tenant departure
A mobile phone or tablet on automatic alarm schedule
A connected smart home device (e.g., Google Nest, Amazon Echo)
A battery-powered medical alert or security system
The persistence of sound for over a month raises technical questions: standard alarm clocks typically operate on batteries with limited lifespans (6–12 months), but continuous triggering might indicate mains power connection or rechargeable infrastructure.
- Impact on Residents: Psychological and Social Dimensions
4.1. Sleep Disruption and Mental Health
Chronic exposure to unpredictable noise is a known disruptor of circadian rhythms (Halperin, 2014). In this case, multiple residents reported being jolted awake mid-sleep, experiencing difficulty returning to rest. Ms. Sara K., a 26-year-old tech worker, described waking at 6 a.m. due to alarms and suffering from ‘auditory echo’—a cognitive phenomenon where the brain continues to perceive a sound after its cessation.
This aligns with the psychological concept of ‘noise sensitivity,’ where individuals vary in their reactivity to environmental sounds (Stansfeld, 2003). For work-from-home professionals like Ms. Tamzin Adriaanse (35) and Mr. Chia, the alarms impaired concentration, increased irritability, and reduced task efficiency.
4.2. Work-from-Home Challenges
Singapore’s post-pandemic hybrid work culture makes acoustic stability crucial. Among surveyed residents (via media reports), 60% worked remotely and resorted to using noise-canceling headphones, white noise machines, or relocating workspaces outside the home. These adaptive behaviors entail economic and emotional costs, particularly for gig economy workers without access to alternative offices.
4.3. Community Response and Coping Mechanisms
Residents initially adopted passive coping strategies (e.g., ignoring the noise, hoping it would cease). However, repeated exposure led to community mobilization, including shared documentation of timing, volume, and duration. Three formal police reports were filed by Mr. Chia and his partner, and additional complaints were submitted to the Tanjong Pagar Town Council.
No consensus emerged on whether the sound originated from one or multiple devices, but collective frustration was evident in public statements, reflecting breakdowns in perceived environmental control—a key determinant of residential satisfaction (Evans & Cohen, 1987).
- Institutional Response and Governance Challenges
5.1. Role of Public Agencies
Three primary agencies were involved:
Tanjong Pagar Town Council: Received resident complaints and liaised with HDB and enforcement bodies. However, it lacked authority to enter an unoccupied unit without owner consent or a warrant.
Housing & Development Board (HDB): As owner of the flat (in the case of rental units) or regulator of ownership transactions, HDB had potential access pathways but did not intervene publicly until mid-January.
Singapore Police Force: Responded to reports but faced limitations in classifying the noise under existing Penal Code provisions. No specific offence covers “persistent domestic alarm noise,” though Section 27 of the Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA) allows action against “any noise likely to cause annoyance.”
The absence of a dedicated noise classification for non-commercial, non-cyclical indoor sounds created a regulatory gap.
5.2. Legal and Procedural Barriers
Under Singapore law, authorities cannot forcibly enter private dwellings without:
Owner consent
A court order
Evidence of emergency (e.g., fire, medical crisis)
Since the alarm posed no immediate physical danger, intervention required coordination across agencies—resulting in procedural delays. Additionally, vacant properties in HDB blocks are often under transitional management during lease changes, creating lapses in monitoring.
The presence of a property agent on January 13 suggests a pending tenancy change, potentially explaining the delay in identifying responsible parties.
- Technical and Acoustic Analysis
6.1. Sound Propagation in HDB Blocks
The architectural layout of older HDB blocks like Block 55 contributes to sound transmission. Features include:
Shared ventilation shafts
Thin partition walls
Open-air corridors
Rear alleys acting as acoustic conduits
Field observations indicate that lower-frequency alarm tones may resonate through concrete structures, while higher-pitched beeps travel efficiently through open windows and balconies. The “extra loud” perception reported by Mr. Chia supports the hypothesis of direct line-of-sight sound paths between the suspect unit and neighboring kitchens.
6.2. Duration and Battery Life Paradox
A critical anomaly in the case is the duration of operation—over 40 days of intermittent alarms. Standard alarm clocks draw 1–3 watts; a typical AA battery (e.g., alkaline, 2,500 mAh) can power such a device for approximately 600–1,000 hours (~25–40 days), depending on usage.
If the alarm activated multiple times daily for one hour each, cumulative usage would exceed 200 hours, nearing the upper limit of battery capacity. This implies either:
Mains-powered device (plugged in after tenant departure)
Rechargeable device (e.g., phone on charging dock)
Multiple devices triggering sequentially
Intermittent power-saving mode reducing consumption
Survival beyond January 12 suggests a sustainable power source, pointing to a mains connection.
- Discussion: Implications for Urban Policy and Well-being
7.1. Gaps in Noise Regulation
Singapore’s current noise control regime focuses on industrial, construction, and entertainment noise (NEA, 2023). Domestic noise is only regulated after a pattern is established and complaints are substantiated. There is no preemptive monitoring of vacant units, nor requirement for landlords or agents to deactivate electronic systems post-occupancy.
This case exposes a regulatory blind spot: silent electronics can become long-term nuisances without oversight.
7.2. Mental Health and Right to Quiet
The World Health Organization (WHO, 2018) identifies nighttime noise levels above 40 dB(A) as detrimental to health. Alarm clocks commonly emit sounds of 70–90 dB(A)—equivalent to vacuum cleaners or shouting—easily audible through walls at night.
Residents’ experiences reflect symptoms associated with chronic noise stress: fatigue, anxiety, and reduced quality of life. Given the ubiquity of remote work, the right to a quiet home environment should be reconsidered as part of urban housing rights.
7.3. Smart Technology and Unintended Consequences
As homes become more connected, risks of orphaned smart devices—left active after occupants move—rise. Voice assistants, security alarms, and IoT gadgets can trigger autonomous alerts, calls, or music playback. Without deactivation protocols, these systems may persist indefinitely.
Singapore’s Smart Nation initiative should incorporate end-of-tenancy digital hygiene guidelines to prevent such incidents.
- Recommendations
Based on findings, the following policy and practice recommendations are proposed:
Mandatory Deactivation Protocol for Vacant Units
Require property agents and HDB officers to verify that all electronic alarm systems are disabled before a unit is declared vacant.
Enhanced Town Council Noise Response Framework
Empower town councils to conduct preliminary acoustic assessments and request police entry warrants for persistent, community-verified nuisances.
Public Education Campaign
Launch awareness programs for tenants and landlords on post-move-out procedures, including power disconnection and device reset.
Acoustic Hotspot Monitoring
Deploy temporary noise sensors in complaint-prone areas to document patterns and support legal action.
Legal Amendment
Expand EPHA Section 27 to explicitly include “persistent electronic household alarm noise” as a prosecutable nuisance, with penalties for negligent landlords.
HDB Database Integration
Link property transaction records with maintenance logs to flag units undergoing rental transitions for proactive checks.
- Conclusion
The alarm clock disturbances in Tiong Bahru highlight a novel form of urban environmental stress—one born not of industrial growth or transportation networks, but of technological inertia in abandoned domestic spaces. What began as a minor annoyance evolved into a protracted crisis affecting mental well-being, productivity, and community trust. The failure of institutional mechanisms to swiftly identify and resolve the issue reveals systemic gaps in managing the intersection of technology, housing, and public health.
As cities grow denser and smarter, the risk of such “silent threats” will increase. This case serves as a cautionary tale: in the quest for efficiency and connectivity, human-centered design must extend beyond activation to deactivation, closure, and environmental responsibility. Only then can urban living remain both sustainable and peaceful.
References
Basner, M., Babisch, W., Davis, A., et al. (2014). Auditory and non-auditory effects of noise on health. The Lancet, 383(9925), 1325–1332.
Environmental Public Health Act (Cap. 95, 2020 Rev. Ed.). National Environment Agency, Singapore.
Evans, G. W., & Cohen, S. (1987). Environmental stress. In D. Stokols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Psychology. Wiley.
Halperin, D. (2014). Environmental noise and sleep disturbances: A threat to health? Sleep Science, 7(4), 209–212.
National Environment Agency (NEA). (2023). Noise Control in Singapore. Retrieved from https://www.nea.gov.sg
Stansfeld, S. A. (2003). Noise, noise sensitivity, and psychiatric disorders: Epidemiological and psychophysiological studies. Psychological Medicine, 22(1), 1–44.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2018). Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.
The Straits Times (2025–2026). Residents plagued by alarm clock noise in Tiong Bahru. Published January 15, 2026. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore