1. 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT
This project calls for a thorough comparative analysis between the findings from PART 1 case study –
Petchaburi Road , Bangkok, Thailand and local site research – Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman (TAR) ,
Kuala Lumpur. The key analysis factor lies in determining the similarities and dissimilarities based on
the patterns of social activities, types of contact points and the varying degrees of contact intensity
between the two cities.
2. INTRODUCTION
Behaviour is influenced by the built environment. To what extent this is exhibited in
Petchaburi Road and Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman? Through a comparative analysis, a comparison is
drawn between the two sites in regards of their social pattern, type of activities and the
identification of contact points and contact intensity to explore the similarities and dissimilarities
with the implementation of Jan Gehl’s theories in the urban environment of the two cities on
different ends of the world.
Petchaburi Road, located in the bustling streets of Bangkok, Thailand, is a busy major
vehicular road that stretches from West side of Bangkok all the way to the East Side, linking
Phitsanulok Road to Phatthanakan Road, as one of the longest road in Bangkok. Jalan Tunku Abdul
Rahman is a street located at the heart of Kuala Lumpur and is also known as Jalan TAR. The site is
particularly known for its heavy traffic during peak hours and its heritage value within an urban
context, and it is well-known for its textile trading and night bazaar which takes place at the whole
stretch of Lorong TAR during weekends. Activities within the site that shifts throughout the day are
notable contact points with varing degrees of contact intensity supported by locals and visitors. Jalan
TAR is the local site research and will serve as the primary site for comparison against Petchaburi
Road.
Figure 1 : Deformed grid and urban grain pattern in Jalan TAR causes diffusion of movement pattern
Figure 2 : Petchaburi Road ( red line ) became an active activity spine due to its proximity to
Pratunam and Chidlom-Ploenchit
3. URBAN FORMS AND SOCIAL PATTERNS
In regards to urban form, as observed from the figure ground diagram (Figure 1 and 2)
for both cities, the building footprint for Petchaburi Road and Jalan TAR does not follow a definite
rectilinear grid arrangement, although there is slight evidence of linear geometry for both such as
the site, Jalan TAR is still defined by sub paths like Jalan Masjid India, Lorong Tunku Abdul Rahman ,
Lorong Gombak, Jalan Bunus and Jalan Raja Laut. Thus a more meandering approach is applicable to
the deformed grid of both Petchaburi Road and Jalan TAR.
Figure X Presence of five foot ways along Jalan TAR as an indentation and setback into the building
Figure X Petchaburi Road mainly consists of high rise buildings which mainly are shopping malls and high
density of traffic could be seen in between the buildings.
A notable dissimilarity between the two cities would be the difference in built
form. Buildings located along Petchaburi road are predominantly masonry units and high rise
buildings with the lack of setback. On the other hand, buildings in Jalan TAR are designed with a side
walk and setback feature called the five – foot way. Although the other side of Jalan TAR which is
Jalan Raja Laut consists of high rise buildings as similar to the landmarks of Petchaburi Road which
mainly are massive scale shopping malls – Platinum Fashion Mall, Centara Grand @ Central World ,
etc., the shop houses and residential buildings still remains the set back and five – foot way that has
been there for years.
4. The five – foot way, indented to the ground floor of the building, provides a shaded
pedestrian walkway. Both walkways are primary forms of circulation and are equally conducive for
passive contact, however, two notable difference are identified. First, crowds have a high likelihood
to gather under the five-foot ways of Jalan TAR and Jalan Masjid India than the unshaded sidewalks
of Petchaburi Road ( tents are set up only when there is a bazaar or special event takes place along
the road ) ; second, without the five-foot way, pedestrians of Petchaburi Road have more visual
continuity than pedestrians of Jalan TAR and Jalan Masjid India whose field of vision may be
obstructed by the overhead structure, hence the method of crowd engagement between two cities
is evidently different.
As Jan Gehl’s theories discussed the likelihood of outdoor and social activity is highly
correlated to the quality of outdoor space, the five- foot way of Jalan TAR is perfect evidence – it
provides ample shade and respite from the sun and safety from the vehicular traffic – resulting to a
high quality space as compared to the open, unshaded outdoor spaces in Petchaburi Road. Hence,
there is a greater tendency for pedestrians to use and gather in five-foot way which potentially
formed a high intensity contacts instead of the passive contact common in city streets.
The existence of a setback in built form has a significant impact in the methods of
pedestrian engagement which highly affects the social patterns of the city. In Petchaburi Road, the
visual connection between a pedestrian and the façade is maintained, Hence, engaging and
illustrative façades might serve as an effective attraction. However, this method is not applicable
with the presence of the five-foot way due to the overhead structure. Pedestrians in Jalan TAR rarely
look at the storefront visuals and façade aesthetics, but are more attracted to the trade activity
occurring at the same street level. Hence, as observed from the site, merchandise is often sold in an
open manner, distorting the boundaries between public and private realms. This brings about the
topic of street level engagement as practiced in both cities, further iterated upon discussing
activities and contact points below.
Figure X The dissimilarities in methods of pedestrian engagement due to the difference in built form. Store
front façade visuals might be not as effective for five-foot way users as compared to sidewalk users.
5. Contact points, as defined here is a spot or a place where people get to meet one
another and allow more intimate levels of interactions to happen. The type of contact points varies
accordingly due to the degree of contact forms between individuals. In Kevin Lynch’s “Image of the
City” , a strategic focus points for orientation like squares and junctions is defined as a node (Lynch,
1960). The surfacing intention of a contact point is pretty similar to Kevin Lynch’s way of defining a
node where physical form is not necessary needed to the recognition of a concentration of a place,
they are both defined through the vision of the people way finding hue and orientation while
contact point is formed through the experience of the visual and intimate sensory established in
connection between people. Stemmed from a wide spectrum of activities carried out in the city, the
contact points found in the two cities are evidently formed due to different reasons and activity.
6. Figure X It has become a norm for people to gather at the staircase outside SOGO shopping complex as a
resting spot or to enjoy the music and art performance.
Figure X The open air communal space at Shibuya Pratunam is occupied by food vendors which forms a denser
crowd attraction and becoming an informal market place.
Iterated by Gehl, a high quality outdoor space is the key determinant in influencing the
duration of time people spent outdoors, and such can be illustrated in Jalan TAR where the
community is attracted to a communal space – the open plaza outside SOGO shopping complex
showcases the passive and active engagement where art and music combines , curb and wide
staircases outside the shopping complex used as informal seating for the public , be it enjoying
performances or as a resting spot or even a social place.
In similarity , Shibuya Pratunam and Talad Neon are examples of open air communal
space where its is a place for the food vendors. By borrowing the popularity of Shibuya Mall next to
it, the food stalls formed a covered bazaar targeted at shoppers, creating a crowd where people
attract people. Just like SOGO shopping complex, the walkway in front of Platinum Fashion Mall is
converted into an informal market place which draws locals and tourists forming a bigger crowd and
enhance the intimacy between the community. This is where the differences comes in whereby the
users stop more than circulating around (Figure x) while the people walk around to shop at the
bazaar in Shibuya Pratunam which enhances the circulation than dwelling.
7. Figure X Bazaar is in a linear typology , due to being enclosed by buildings there are no seatings provided.
Figure X Talad Neon bazaar was established at an open site with a centralised linear typology, due to the wide
area, there are seatings provided which makes users stop for a longer period.
The most interesting point to note would be the similarities in contact points
between the two sites, as they seem to be predominantly established from the food ,market and
shopping culture of both cities, with examples of contact points being at an open food joint or a
location in close proximity to the market ( open spaces, curbs) Hence, from this it is inference that
the overarching similarity between the two sites is the strong market culture and identity due to the
presence of Neon Night Market Petchaburi ( Talad Neon ) , Muslim District Petchaburi Soi 7 (Darul
Aman Mosque and night bazaar and stalls (daytime) along Lorong TAR which stretches out towards
its connecting main road Jalan TAR. Pedestrians seem to be more attracted to places with an
established activity and people, which can be supported by Gehl’s theory of how people are
naturally attached to people and other perceivable human activity.
STREET CULTURE AND SOCIAL PATTERNS
From the previous point, it is evident that the market culture contributes a certain
identity to both cities. Both Petchaburi Road and Jalan TAR portray a similar street culture between
the market precinct and their non-market counterparts. From observation, there is high pedestrian
volume in and near Talad Neon and Lorong TAR night bazaar and in their vicinity, pedestrians simply
weave through the traffic, walking and spilling the roads from the sidewalks that are accommodated
for them just to get to the other side. This interesting social pattern exhibited is unique to the
vicinity of Talad Neon and Lorong TAR night bazaar where pedestrians exude more dominance on
the steets, portraying a stronger claim of the path than vehicles. Small vehicles like motorcycles are
still permissible at Talad Neon, but in Lorong TAR, the entire street is occupied by street vendors
with no access to vehicles after certain hours till the night as long as the bazaar continues.
8. Figure XX Curb culture could be seen at Lorong TAR Figure X Proper seatings at Talad Neon market
Upon the similarity of market culture between the two cities, there are still
differences within its culture which is the curb culture which is more apparent in Jalan TAR. Curb
culture is unique to the market vicinity of Jalan TAR, pedestrians are seen eating and socializing,
proper seatings are not provided due to the narrow walkway along the night bazaar in Lorong TAR
and the high density of food stalls among each other. As for Talad Neon, seatings are set up by food
vendors to offer proper seating space for customers amongst the crowd in the market. In the
presence of curb culture, it was developed due to the unmet demand for public benches and lack of
public space for enjoying eat-as-you-go street food, as most hawkers do not provide seating
arrangements.
The similarity and dissimilarity of street culture and social patterns between the
two cities is interesting to note as they stem from the design of public spaces, reinforcing Gehl’s
theory regarding the importance of designing quality outdoor spaces.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Petchaburi Road and Jalan TAR reinforces the idea that human
behaviour is shaped by the built environment, social patterns and street culture are results the way
public spaces are designed
