SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING & DESIGN Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Architecture
THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE & URBANISM (ARC 61303) PROJECT 2: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY
NAME: NG ZHENG SI STUDENT ID: 0322585 TUTOR: MR. PRINCE
Table of Content
1.0 Introduction 1.1 Site Introduction
2.0 Comparative Analysis 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
Public Spaces and Plazas Alleys Walkway Building Scale
3.0 Conclusion
4.0 References
1.0 Introduction According to Jan Gehl, the importance of a street as a public open space is one of the most critical characteristic within the public realm in cities. In this comparative analysis essay, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman of Kuala Lumpur and Jalan MH Thamrin of Jakarta will be compared. The comparison will be focused on the social and physical attributes, as well as the contact points and its intensity along the streets based on observation and data gathered.
1.1Site Introduction
Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman was the main street in Kuala Lumpur at one time. It was originally known as Bata Road. Later, it was renamed Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman. It is the city’s longest road with shops set up in pre-war buildings along both sides. These buildings reflect changing trends in architectural design. is located in the city center of Kuala Lumpur. This street is a vibrant textile shopping street which is visited by tourists, also by the locals during the weekends. Jalan TAR has become a weekend hangout spot for families and friends. This street is not just a shopping street, but a street which is rich in cultural and historical context. Buildings along the street are mainly heritage building.
Jakarta is the capital and most populous city of Indonesia. The selected street, Jalan MH Thamrin is the heart of Jakarta which runs through the Central Business District for 2.5km long. The street is one of the best area for pedestrians in Jakarta. It is wide enough, clean and low in crime because police patrols regularly. It is the hub of Jakarta where people travelling around the city will need to pass by the road. Highclass social life and activities are more prominent although there are some number of low class commercial points for the workers to have food, rest or hang out.
2.0 Comparison Analysis 2.1 Public spaces and plazas Public spaces outside of the mall act as transition spaces between the outdoor and indoor environment. Yet for Plaza Sarinah and Sogo, the open public plaza has become a spot where all kinds of informal activities are involved. This feature has created a point form concentration at the outdoor plaza, creating crowd with the concept that Jahn Gehl proposed, which is activities attract people and people attract people. Informal activities such as street performance and food vendors in these two plazas are able to enhance the vitality of the city, providing more variety of activities for the people to engage in the city. In the public plaza, people who engage in street performance are either earning a living (necessary activity) or showcasing their talent to public (optional activity). The plaza has become a gathering spot for people with the same interest to share their ideas and thoughts, providing an outdoor interaction space for this community. This creates a moderate to high contact intensity which happen among acquaintances and friends. Street performances are the attractions which collect a large crowd as these human activities are the greatest object of attention and interest for people to see and hear.
Figure 2.1.1: Sectional diagram of Plaza Sarinah
Figure 2.1.2: Activities happening outside Sogo, showing how activities attract people and people attract people.
Figure 2.1.3: Street art at public plaza outside Sogo.
The design and arrangement of facilities is one of the factors to control the crowd at the area. Steps and staircase at the outside which leads to the mall have become supplementary seating where people can rest or enjoy the performance at the public plaza. According to Jahn Gehl, benches that provide a good view of surrounding activities are frequently used, especially the one located at sidewalk. The arrangement of facilities encourages social interaction between the audience and the performers. The strategic location of this two contact points also contributed for them to be potential outdoor public plaza. Both of these plazas are located at the junction, which is the intersection of roads that has high pedestrian flow. Attractive human activities and the built environment, which is the supplementary seating that act as resting area, are the features to capture the pedestrian flow, increasing the possibility of crowds stopping by to be involved in the activities. According to Jan Gehl, source of inspiration, an offer of stimulating experience is one of the opportunities for the happening of contact among people. Thus, the opportunity to see, hear, and meet others can be shown to be one of the most important attractions on the pedestrian streets. This could increase the chance of passive contact as people carry out human-seeing activities while they stop by the public plaza. Crowd could also interact with the street performers which increases the contact intensity level. The form of contacts mentioned here comes from social activities and optional activities.
Figure 2.1.4: Supplementary seating as resting area, facing the street performance area.
Also, the pattern of human activities in the open plazas for both cities are affected by the exterior condition, which is the climate climate. Only under favorable exterior conditions, broad spectrum of human activities is possible. Yet, this is also related to the human culture of the city. In Sogo, people prefer to go outdoor for optional and social activities after evening due to the cooler temperature at this hour. On the other hand, in Jakarta, car free day is only on the weekend. Thus people will come out and enjoy and be involved in the events and performances held in Plaza Sarinah despite the hot weather. When it rains, these activities will not be carried out in both plazas as people will stay indoor instead of outdoor
2.2 Alleys
Figure 2.2.1: Jalan Kebon Sirih with food stalls.
A lot of social activities happening in Jalan MH Thamrin, which is the main road that runs through the central district of Jakarta. Yet, there are also social activities with higher intimacy level happening in the alley braches out from the main road. Jalan Kebon Sirih,also known as the food street involves low activity frequency but high contact intensity due to the eatery stalls arranged in a linear typology alongside the alley that attract users from varied social class. Vendors carry out necessary activities while users with close relationship such as friends or family come for optional activity. High class people come for the taste and low class people come for the price.
Figure 2.2.2:Lorong TAR night market, showing the dense crowd along the alley, creating a high contact intensity contact point.
This condition same goes to Jalan TAR. Jalan TAR is the main textile shopping street while there are more social activities with higher intimacy level happening in the alleys. Lorong TAR, also known as the night market street involves high frequency of activities and high contact intensity among the visitors. There are variety of stalls in Lorong TAR such as stalls selling food, clothes, textile and more. The night market in Lorong TAR became a family and friends hangout hotspot, creating a high contact intensity at this contact point. Vendors carry out necessary activities while users carry out optional and social activities such as shopping, gathering and more. The pattern of social activities in Jalan Kebon Sirih and Lorong TAR are affected by the paths and the circulation pattern in the city. According to Jahn Gehl’s “Life Between Building�, the statement of human activities and people are able to attract other people is proved in these two contact points. The human activities that are involved are different from the main activities in the main road, attracting people to enter the alleys although they are just secondary circulation path. Furthermore, alleys are potential to create unexpected encounter, increasing passive contact and chance contact among people. Narrow alley creates an enclosed space which increases the intimacy level among people. Yet, high maintenance and larger variety of stalls in Lorong TAR create greater attraction for people to come over to this contact point to involve and engage in activities.
2.3 Walkway Built environment is an important factor that affects the pattern of social activities. Both of these cities have different degrees of walkability due to different built environment. As we know, walkway can be defined by passage or path that acts as the connection between places which is meant for circulation and pedestrian movement. Sometimes, walkway is privatized and used for other means, creating a space for people to interact, work, or rest. This could affect the walkability of the walkway, safety of pedestrian and the activity pattern of users. In Jalan TAR, five foot walkway is the main corridor as it provides shade for pedestrians. Five foot width corridor can fit two-way circulation. Yet, observed from one of the contact point which is at the Muaz textile shop, some of the shop owners privatize the five foot walkway by expanding their storefront, which causes obstruction at the walkway. This has narrowed the walkway and only allows one-way circulation or even worse, disconnecting the path. Eventually, pedestrians are forced to walk on the exterior pedestrian walkway. Some sections without exterior pedestrian walkway, users are even forced to walk on the road, which is likely to endanger pedestrian’s safety. Yet, five foot walkway could also be a communal space which provides a platform for the activities to be carried out. Necessary activities are carried out by the shop owner. By showcasing their goods and products at the five foot walkway, pedestrians will be attracted by their products, thus slowing down their walking pace and creating pit stops for them. They might even stop by at a shop to buy things, thus carrying out optional activity. This could provide a chance for the pedestrians to have contact with the shop owners.
Figure 2.3.1:Privatization of walkway at one of the contact point in Jalan TAR by expanding the storefront.
Figure 2.3.2: Five-foot walkway being privatized and walkway is blocked.
Sections of Jalan TAR with exterior pedestrian walkway is wide and primary seating is provided. Thus, people could rest while observing the surrounding environment at the same time. By having the opportunity to see, hear, and meet, users while resting, the walkway is not just a circulation path, but become a communal space which allows all kinds of contact and interaction among people. The degree of contact intensity is moderate.
Figure 2.3.3: Expanded exterior pedestrian walkway is more favorable and seating are provided.
In Jalan MH. Thamrin, the walkways are all exterior, yet vegetation along the road acts as shading creating a more favorable walking environment. Although there is vegetation as shading, walkway is less used when the The size of the walkway is wide enough for two way circulation. There is no obstruction along the pathway, thus the linearity of the road is emphasized, inducing pedestrian to move in a faster way to walk to their destination. Primary seating such as benches are provided along the walkway. Although there are primary seating, yet people prefer to sit on secondary seating such as planter boxes and curb. This is because the distance between primary seating is too large. . The benches are oriented facing the road, creating opportunity for users to carry out human-seeing activity while they are resting.Thus, passive contact happens. Optional activities such as resting, smoking and more is carried out. Different from Jalan TAR, the pedestrian walkway is far away from the buildings. This could create a gap between occupants in the building with the pedestrians. The contact among them is decreased.
Figure 2.3.4: Proper seating benches are provided along the walkway. Vegetation act as shading.
Figure 2.3.5: Planter box become secondary seating.
By comparing the walkways in these two cities, we could see that although walkway in Jalan MH. Thamrin is much more pedestrian friendly, yet the distance between building and the sidewalk is far which hinders the involvement of pedestrian with the activities happening in the building. This also creates a barrier for the social interaction between the building occupants and the pedestrian. The consistency of the linear pedestrian walkway articulates the linear movement of the pedestrian, quickening the walking pace. The lack of activities as attraction has decreased the chances of people to stop by. On the other hand, pedestrian in Jalan TAR has contact with building occupants due to the five foot walkway, thus creating a more intimate contact and interaction among people. The five-foot walkway has unintentionally become a communal public space for interaction, instead of just a circulation channel. Also, Jalan TAR is a street which is rich in social and cultural content as the shops are mostly used for activities like textile selling, food selling and street performance , increasing the chance for people to linger and stop by while Jalan MH Thamrin is mainly used by office workers. Thus, the contact intensity in Jalan TAR is higher than Jalan MH. Thamrin due to the variety of activities in Jalan TAR.
2.4 Building Scale Gehl stated that building scale and proportion of a city urban life should always in context and sympathetic with the human scale and senses, an urban formation should always consider from the perspective of the human eyes as it would form a definite degree of closeness of people to the surrounding built environment. Indirectly, it has an effect on the experience and usage to the public spaces adjacent to these buildings. Based on observation at Jalan TAR, the building scales are remained humane. The human scale buildings are able to keep a good contact with the human eye level, creating an enclosure spaces between buildings. At one of the contact point at Jalan TAR, which is the colourful rainbow heritage building, people could sense a familiarity and sense of place. This could also give the users a sense of intimacy, forming a sense of relation of the users to the surrounding context. People will feel that they are being taken into account in the context, thus increasing the chance of engagement of activities in Jalan TAR.
Figure 2.4.1: Rainbow heritage buildings at Jalan TAR showing the sense of place with its scale.
For Jalan MH Thamrin, the buildings are mostly high rises which disrupt the user’s view. At Bundaran HI,users will feel unconnected with the site context, decreasing the chances of people to linger and engage themselves in activities.
Figure 2.4.2: Highrises around Bundara HI give a sense of intimidating to users, and feel unconnected to site
Figure 2.4.3:Jalan TAR (Left) vision and Jalan MH Thamrin (Right) vision
3.0 Conclusion Based on the comparison of different aspect between Jalan TAR and Jalan MH Thamrin, there are similar characteristics in their public spaces. Yet, due to different built environment, culture and climate, the pattern of social activities and level of contact point varies. In my point of view, Jalan MH Thamrin which is much based on the infrastructure and facilities prepared or designed for public uses is a more favorable environment for public. Yet due to its scale which causes the loss of intimacy between buildings and users causes less variety of activities. This causes a lower contact intensity at contact points. Although Jalan TAR might not be the best environment to carry out different activities, yet due to its small scale and the richness of sociocultural context, people would feel much more related to the context and engage themselves in the city. The variety of activities along the street has injected vitality into the city, no matter what is the intensity level of contact at each contact points. Perhaps, the urban planning for Jalan TAR should be more thoughtful in order to enhance the walkability on site, create a more favorable environment for people to explore the heritage site.
4.0 References Gehl, J., & Koch, J. (2011). Life between buildings: using public space. Washington, DC: Island Press. Improving Walkability within Existing Urban Design. (n.d.). Retrieved July 04, 2017, from https://carmanah.com/improving-walkability-within-existing-urban-design
INDONESIA'S URBAN STUDIES. (n.d.). Retrieved July 04, 2017, from http://indonesiaurbanstudies.blogspot.my/
Dewi, F. P. (n.d.). DEKONSTRUKSI DALAM DESAIN URBAN STUDI KASUS : PLAZA E'X, JALAN M.H. THAMRIN, JAKARTA PUSAT. Retrieved July 04, 2017, from http://papers.gunadarma.ac.id/index.php/mcivil/article/view/15801
(n.d.). Retrieved July 04, 2017, from http://www.dbkl.gov.my/pskl2020/english/urban_design_and_landscape/
An Urban Outdoor Environment in the 'Textile District' of Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman, K. Lumpur. (n.d.). Retrieved July 04, 2017, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042812004466
JALAN TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN- Urban Design Rationale. (n.d.). Retrieved July 04, 2017, from http://jalakmas.blogspot.my/2007/05/jalan-tunku-abdul-rahman-urban-design.html