In an expert report, Ms. Liu, who was representing herself, claimed that the noise level in her ground-floor apartment was higher than what the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended for community noise in particular settings.
The board took notice of the information in the report that suggested there were additional noise sources besides the pump and the water feature, such as foot and vehicle traffic and noise from the nearby Greenwich V shopping center.
The board also observed that Ms. Liu acknowledged, during cross-examination, that her bedroom was noisier than her balcony, which was next to the pump, because of the noise from the mall’s parking lot.
She produced an audio recording of the purported noise, but she acknowledged that it was only the sound of the running water, which was her original reason for buying the unit.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) does not currently have any regulations dictating the noise levels of water pumps or other features in residential areas.
In an expert report, the MCST—represented by Mr. Daniel Chen and Mr. Drashy Trivedi of Lee & Lee—stated that the noise level was within the NEA guideline on boundary noise emission limits for mechanical ventilation and air conditioning systems in non-industrial buildings.
The MCST expert proved during the hearing that Singapore could not meet the WHO guidelines, which state that bedrooms should not have any noise level higher than 30 weighted decibels, or dbA.
A quick audio recording during a quiet moment in the room yielded a weighted decibel reading of 44.7.
This implies that WHO guidelines “may not be practicable in a highly urbanized city-state like Singapore,” according to the board.
It also mentioned that levels recommended by the US and UK urban sound guidelines are higher than those recommended by the WHO.
The board stated that the applicant had not demonstrated, on the balance of probabilities, that the noise levels of the fountain pump were objectively undesirable under the facts of the case.
On May 31, 2021, Ms. Liu, who resides with her aging parents, purchased the apartment through a resale transaction.
The family previously resided in a HDB apartment in Yishun, but she stated she made the decision to move to a condo in order to give her parents, who are retired, a “more peaceful environment.”
She felt that the sound of the water had a calming effect, so she bought the unit that was next to the swimming pool.
Shortly after moving in, in July 2021, Ms. Liu and her parents complained to the then-manager of the condominium about noise.
According to her, the sound came from a water feature that features water pouring into a feature pool from the top of a wall. In the feature pool, the pump is hidden beneath a grating, and the wall faces away from her unit.
Given that Ms. Liu had seen the water feature several times prior to making the purchase, the MCST contended that she had purchased the unit with her eyes wide open.
It also mentioned that the unit’s previous owners, who had occupied it for more than six years, had not filed any complaints with it.
The board noted in its ruling that noise tolerance levels are arbitrary and that what is tolerable to one person may not be to others.
On the other hand, it stated that it must make decisions regarding noise from an impartial and moral standpoint.
The board also expressed sympathy for Ms. Liu’s situation and wished her family an amicable resolution.
