Toward the Smart City Concept in the Built Environment of Ayutthaya by Nunticha Yuncharoen

Abstract The smart city is one of the essential strategies to tackle with various urban issues. Therefore, the dissertation explores how to develop the built environment of Ayutthaya, which is the heritage city of Thailand, by using the smart city concept. To this purpose, dissertation methodologies for collecting data (site visit, site observation, and questionnaire) and analytical stage of data (case study site and questionnaire analysis) are applied in this dissertation to help to suggest the smart city design framework of Ayutthaya. As a result, the implementation of the smart city concept in Ayutthaya city, which help to develop the city urban environment, will affect to enhance the citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; well-being and preserve the heritage identity of the city.

Acknowledgements First of all, I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Mazin Al-Saffar, for his guidance and encouragement to me throughout the study process. Secondly, I would like to acknowledge the excellent support from my family during the academic year. Next is that I would like to thank Mr. Apinunt Nartnaruemit to spend his time and support me while I was visiting the case study site in Ayutthaya. Thirdly, I also would like to thank to all my questionnaire participants for spending their time to complete the questionnaire for me. Lastly, I would like to thank my friends for their great motivation to me to complete my dissertation. The dissertation would not have been possible without the guidance, encouragement, and support from all of them. Nunticha Yuncharoen

Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................ii Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... viii List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................ xii

Chapter 1: Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Questions ................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Aims ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Problems .................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Methodologies ............................................................................................................................................ 8 1.5 Dissertation Structures .............................................................................................................................. 11

Chapter 2: Literature Review

................................................................................................................ 15

2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.1 The smart city concept ............................................................................................................................. 17 2.1.1 The definition of smart city ............................................................................................................ 17 2.1.2 The smart city dimensions ............................................................................................................ 18 2.1.3 The smart city in Thailand .............................................................................................................. 21 2.1.4 The conclusion of the smart city concept ...................................................................................... 21 2.2 The Ayutthaya urban transformation .......................................................................................................... 24 2.2.1 Before the establishment of Ayutthaya .......................................................................................... 24 2.2.2 The establishment of Ayutthaya .................................................................................................... 25 2.2.3 Ayutthaya urban transformation from the beginning to the end ...................................................... 26 iii

2.2.4 The conservation after the fall of Ayutthaya ................................................................................... 27 2.2.5 The conclusion of Ayutthaya urban transformation ........................................................................ 29 2.3 The heritage value of Ayutthaya in both tangible and intangible ............................................................... 32 2.3.1 The classification of the heritage in both tangible and intangible ................................................... 32 2.3.2 The classification of the heritage in term of value .......................................................................... 32 2.3.2.1 The heritage’s symbolic value ...................................................................................... 33 2.3.2.2 The heritage’s knowledge value ................................................................................... 33 2.3.2.3 The heritage’s belief value ............................................................................................ 33 2.3.2.4 The heritage’s economic value ..................................................................................... 34 2.3.3 The conclusion of the Ayutthaya heritage value in both tangible and intangible ............................. 34 2.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture .......................................................................................................... 36 2.4.1 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1488 ........................................................ 36 2.4.2 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1488 and 1629 ........................................................ 37 2.4.3 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1629 and 1708 ........................................................ 38 2.4.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1732 and 1767 ........................................................ 39 2.4.5 The comparison of Ayutthaya architecture between 1350 and 1767 .............................................. 40 2.4.6 The conclusion of Ayutthaya heritage architecture ........................................................................ 42 2.5 The chapter conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 42

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

......................................................... 45

3. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 47 3.1 The Case Study Site Analysis .................................................................................................................... 47 3.2 The Site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone A ............................................................................ 48 3.2.1 Historical and Architectural Value in zone A (Architectural Types) ................................................. 48 3.2.2 Land uses in zone A ...................................................................................................................... 50 iv

3.2.3 Building height in zone A ............................................................................................................... 51 3.2.4 Structural condition in zone A ........................................................................................................ 52 3.2.5 Specific observation in zone A ....................................................................................................... 54 3.3 The Site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone B ............................................................................ 55 3.3.1 Historical and Architectural Value in zone B (Architectural Types) ................................................. 55 3.3.2 Land uses in zone B ...................................................................................................................... 56 3.3.3 Building height in zone B ............................................................................................................... 58 3.3.4 Structural condition in zone B ........................................................................................................ 60 3.4 The Site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone C ............................................................................ 61 3.4.1 Historical and Architectural Value in zone C (Architectural Types) ................................................. 61 3.4.2 Land uses in zone C ...................................................................................................................... 62 3.4.3 Building height in zone C ............................................................................................................... 64 3.4.4 Structural condition in zone C ........................................................................................................ 66 3.4.5 Structural condition in zone C ........................................................................................................ 67 3.5 The Site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone D ............................................................................ 69 3.5.1 Historical and Architectural Value in zone D (Architectural Types) ................................................. 69 3.5.2 Land uses in zone D ...................................................................................................................... 70 3.5.3 Building height in zone D ............................................................................................................... 72 3.5.4 Structural condition in zone D ........................................................................................................ 74 3.5.5 Structural condition in zone D ........................................................................................................ 75 3.6 The Site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone E ............................................................................. 76 3.6.1 Historical and Architectural Value in zone E (Architectural Types).................................................. 76 3.6.2 Land uses in zone E ...................................................................................................................... 77 3.6.3 Building height in zone E ............................................................................................................... 78 3.6.4 Structural condition in zone E......................................................................................................... 79 v

3.7 Questionnaire ............................................................................................................................................ 81 3.7.1 General questions.......................................................................................................................... 81 3.7.2 The general factors that represent Ayutthaya ................................................................................. 83 3.7.2.1 The main features of Ayutthaya Ayutthaya ..................................................................... 83 3.7.2.2 Transportation ............................................................................................................... 83 3.7.2.3 Public facilities .............................................................................................................. 84 3.7.3 The smart city characteristic in Ayutthaya ...................................................................................... 85 3.7.3.1 The smart government in Ayutthaya .............................................................................. 85 3.7.3.2 The smart economy in Ayutthaya ................................................................................... 85 3.7.3.3 The smart mobility in Ayutthaya ..................................................................................... 86 3.7.3.4 The smart environment in Ayutthaya .............................................................................. 86 3.7.3.5 The smart people in Ayutthaya ................................................................................................ 87 3.7.3.6 The smart living in Ayutthaya .................................................................................................. 87 3.8 The chapter conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 88

Chapter 4: Design Framework

............................................................................................................ 91

4. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 93 4.1 The smart city design framework for Ayutthaya ......................................................................................... 93 4.1.1 The smart government in Ayutthaya ............................................................................................... 93 4.1.2 The smart economy in Ayutthaya ................................................................................................... 95 4.1.3 The smart mobility in Ayutthaya ..................................................................................................... 97 4.1.4 The smart environment in Ayutthaya .............................................................................................. 99 4.1.5 The smart people in Ayutthaya ..................................................................................................... 101 4.1.6 The smart living in Ayutthaya ....................................................................................................... 101 4.2 The chapter conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 103 vi

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

................................................................................................105

5. Dissertation conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 107 5.1 The conclusion of the dissertation questions and aims ............................................................................ 107 5.1.1 The smart city .............................................................................................................................. 107 5.1.2 The Ayutthaya heritage ................................................................................................................ 108 5.1.3 The Ayutthaya urban transformation............................................................................................. 108 5.1.4 The Ayutthaya urban physical condition....................................................................................... 108 5.2 The conclusion of the dissertation problems ............................................................................................ 109 5.3 The conclusion of the dissertation methodologies ................................................................................... 109 5.3.1 The quantitative method .............................................................................................................. 109 5.3.2 The qualitative method ................................................................................................................. 109 5.4 The dissertation result and further study .................................................................................................. 109

Bibliography

..............................................................................................................................................113

Appendices

...............................................................................................................................................125

Appendix 1 The English version of questionnaire .......................................................................................... 127 Appendix 2 The Thai version of questionnaire ............................................................................................... 130

vii

List of Figures Figure 1.1 Site location ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1.2 No public transport services in some local residential areas ............................................................. 6 Figure 1.3 Motorcycle taxis park on the car lanes .............................................................................................. 6 Figure 1.4 The pavement obstacles .................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 1.5 Cycling on the pavement .................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 1.6 Difficulties in moving baby stroller .................................................................................................... 6 Figure 1.7 Location of figure 1.2 to 1.7 ............................................................................................................... 6 Figure 1.8 Three stages of survey ...................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 1.9 Qualitative method ............................................................................................................................ 6 Figure 2.1 The smart city dimension ................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 2.2 Thailand 4.0 ................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 2.3 The first settlement of Ayothaya ...................................................................................................... 23 Figure 2.4 The second settlement of Ayothaya ................................................................................................ 24 Figure 2.5 The first settlement of Ayutthaya ..................................................................................................... 25 Figure 2.6 The grand palace of Ayutthaya ....................................................................................................... 25 Figure 2.7, 2.8 The urban settlement of Ayutthaya between 1350 and 1767 ..................................................... 26 Figure 2.9 Ayutthaya land use in 1967 ............................................................................................................ 27 Figure 2.10 Ayutthaya land use in 2009 ........................................................................................................... 28 Figure 2.11 The building control laws: the height restriction of buildings in three zones .................................. 29 Figure 2.12 The heritage value in four pillars ................................................................................................... 33 Figure 2.13 The Prang and Viharn of Wat Ratchaburana ................................................................................. 36 Figure 2.14 The Bell Shape chedi and Viharn of Wat Phra Sri San Phet ........................................................... 37 viii

Figure 2.15 The Khmer Prang of Wat Chai Wattanaram and Yor Mum Mai Sibsong Chedi of Wat Kudidao ...... 38 Figure 2.16 The Square-Based Chedi of Wat Phu Kao Thong .......................................................................... 39 Figure 2.17 The comparison of Ayutthaya architecture between 1350 and 1767 ............................................. 40 Figure 3.1 Five zones of the case study site of Ayutthaya: Zone A, B, C, D and E .......................................... 48 Figure 3.2 A The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) ........................................ 49 Figure 3.2 B The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) ........................................ 49 Figure 3.3 A Land Uses in Zone A ................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 3.3 B Land Uses in Zone A ................................................................................................................... 51 Figure 3.4 A Building Height in Zone A ............................................................................................................ 52 Figure 3.4 B Building Height in Zone A ............................................................................................................ 52 Figure 3.5 A Structural Condition in Zone A ..................................................................................................... 53 Figure 3.5 B Structural Condition in Zone A ..................................................................................................... 53 Figure 3.6 Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone A .............................................................. 54 Figure 3.7 A The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) ........................................ 55 Figure 3.7 B The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) ........................................ 56 Figure 3.8 A Land Uses in Zone B ................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 3.8 B Land Uses in Zone B ................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 3.9 A Building Height in Zone B ............................................................................................................ 59 Figure 3.9 B Building Height in Zone B ............................................................................................................ 59 Figure 3.10 A Structural Condition in Zone B ................................................................................................... 60 Figure 3.10 B Structural Condition in Zone B ................................................................................................... 60 Figure 3.11 A The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) ...................................... 61 Figure 3.11 B The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) ...................................... 62 Figure 3.12 A Land Uses in Zone C ................................................................................................................. 63 Figure 3.12 B Land Uses in Zone C ................................................................................................................. 64 ix

Figure 3.13 A Building Height in Zone C ......................................................................................................... 65 Figure 3.13 B Building Height in Zone C ......................................................................................................... 65 Figure 3.14 A Structural Condition in Zone C ................................................................................................... 66 Figure 3.14 B Structural Condition in Zone C ................................................................................................... 66 Figure 3.15 Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone C ............................................................ 68 Figure 3.16 A The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone D (Architectural Types) ...................................... 69 Figure 3.16 B The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone D (Architectural Types) ...................................... 69 Figure 3.17 A Land Uses in Zone D ................................................................................................................ 71 Figure 3.17 B Land Uses in Zone D ................................................................................................................. 72 Figure 3.18 A Building Height in Zone D ......................................................................................................... 73 Figure 3.18 B Building Height in Zone D ......................................................................................................... 73 Figure 3.19 A Structural Condition in Zone D ................................................................................................... 74 Figure 3.19 B Structural Condition in Zone D ................................................................................................... 74 Figure 3.20 Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone D ............................................................ 75 Figure 3.21 A The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone E (Architectural Types) ....................................... 76 Figure 3.21 B The Historical and Architectural Value in Zone E (Architectural Types) ....................................... 76 Figure 3.22 A Land Uses in Zone E ................................................................................................................. 77 Figure 3.22 B Land Uses in Zone E ................................................................................................................. 78 Figure 3.23 A Building Height in Zone E .......................................................................................................... 79 Figure 3.23 B Building Height in Zone E .......................................................................................................... 79 Figure 3.24 A Structural Condition in Zone E ................................................................................................... 80 Figure 3.24 B Structural Condition in Zone E ................................................................................................... 80 Figure 3.25 The participants’ age groups ........................................................................................................ 81 Figure 3.26 The participants’ genders ............................................................................................................. 82 Figure 3.27 The participants’ education qualifications ..................................................................................... 82 x

Figure 3.28 The participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; reasons for visiting and living ............................................................................. 82 Figure 3.29 The main features of Ayutthaya ..................................................................................................... 83 Figure 3.30 Modes of transportation ................................................................................................................ 84 Figure 3.31 Public facilities ............................................................................................................................. 84 Figure 3.32 The smart government in Ayutthaya .............................................................................................. 85 Figure 3.33 The smart economy in Ayutthaya .................................................................................................. 85 Figure 3.34 The smart mobility in Ayutthaya .................................................................................................... 86 Figure 3.35 The smart environment in Ayutthaya ............................................................................................. 87 Figure 3.36 The smart people in Ayutthaya ..................................................................................................... 87 Figure 3.37 The smart living in Ayutthaya ........................................................................................................ 88 Figure 4.1 The smart government design framework for Ayutthaya ................................................................. 94 Figure 4.2 The smart economy design framework for Ayutthaya ...................................................................... 96 Figure 4.3 The smart mobility design framework for Ayutthaya ........................................................................ 98 Figure 4.4 The smart environment design framework for Ayutthaya ............................................................... 100 Figure 4.5 The smart people design framework for Ayutthaya ....................................................................... 101 Figure 4.6 The smart living design framework for Ayutthaya .......................................................................... 102 Figure 4.7 Adjustable walkway and flood wall ............................................................................................... 103

List of Tables Table 2.1: The smart city dimension ................................................................................................................ 19 Table 2.2: The Ayutthaya urban transformation ............................................................................................... 30 Table 2.3: The comparison of Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1767 .................................. 41

xii

Chapter 1: Introduction

Figure 1.1: Site location Source: Author, 2020 according to https://www.google.co.th/maps/ 3

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.Introduction Ayutthaya is the second capital city of the Siamese kingdom or now known as Thailand following Sukhothai (UNESCO, 2017). Ayutthaya city has a total area of 2556.64 square kilometres (Sorikul, 2015). Moreover, UNESCO (2017), since 1991, one part of Ayutthaya city named Ayutthaya Historical Park in the entire area of 2.9 square kilometres has been announced as the world heritage site by UNESCO. In 1997, the Ayutthaya Historical Park enlarged to the total area of 4.8 square kilometres; however, the expanded part does not herald as the world heritage site by UNESCO (UNESCO, 2017). Saipradist and Staiff (2008) cite that the establishment of the city centre of Ayutthaya was at the confluence of three rivers, the Chao Phraya, Pasak and Lopburi (Figure 1.1). At Ayutthaya city centre, the urban primarily involves Ayutthaya Historical Park, housing, and other city contexts. The field of study will concentrate on the current Ayutthaya’s city centre in the total area of 8.5 square kilometres.

Ayutthaya’s main characteristic is recognized as its heritage city. In addition, Ayutthaya has been promoted within the tourism industry as a world heritage site and a tourist destination (Ongkhluap, 2012). According to Salazar and Zhu (2015), most of the heritage around the world is converted to be the destination and attraction for tourism by both private and public organisations. Portoles (2018) supports this view and suggests that the cultural heritage has been realised in its potential for economic development contribution. Although Ayutthaya has been marketed for tourism, it still has many obstacles for tourists and local citizens for travelling and living in the city. Hence, the Ayutthaya built environment should be improved by applying the smart city concept.

The Smart City concept ‘is a place where traditional networks and services are made more flexible, efficient, and sustainable with the use of information, digital and telecommunication technologies, to improve its operations for the benefit of its inhabitants’ (Mohanty et al., 2016:1). Moreover, according to Borda and Bowen (2017), the smart cultural city is the participation of people with the identity of place and community by using advanced information in the preservation of the cultural city and tourism. The aim of this dissertation is to explore how to integrate the smart city concept to develop the Ayutthaya built environment to enhance a better quality of life of both local citizens and tourists as well as preserving the Ayutthaya heritage identity.

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Questions 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3

What is a smart city? What is the value and identity of Ayutthaya heritage? How can smart city dimensions apply to the Ayutthaya heritage citiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; built environment?

1.2 Aims 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5

To clarify a better understanding of the smart city dimensions To clarify a better understanding of the value of the Ayutthaya heritage in terms of both tangibility and intangibility, as well as Ayutthaya architecture identity To study the urban transformation of Ayutthaya To study the urban physical condition of Ayutthaya To apply the smart city concept in Ayutthaya to enhance peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s better quality of life

1.3 Problems 1.3.1

Transportation and accessibility - Non-integrated network of transports creates some difficulties in travelling. For instance, there are lacking public transports in some local areas (Figure 1.2). - Unorganized of public transports services disturb other modes of mobilities. For example, motorcycle taxis park on the car lanes (Figure 1.3). - Walking and cycling modes of transports do not reach the standard since there are many obstacles on pavements and bicycle lanes (Figure 1.4 and 1.5). - The universal design (concerning of handicap and baby stroller) for transport modes have not been concerned (Figure 1.6).

Chapter 1: Introduction

Figure 1.2: No public transport services in some local residential areas Source: Author,2020

Figure 1.3: Motorcycle taxis park on the car lanes Source: Author,2020

Figure 1.4: The pavement obstacles Source: Author,2020

Figure 1.5: Cycling on the pavement Source: Author,2020

Figure 1.6: Difficulties in moving baby stroller Source: Author,2020

Figure 1.7: Locations of figures 1.2 to 1.7 Source: Author,2020 according to https://www.google.co.th/maps/

Chapter 1: Introduction 1.3.2

The weather - Chan and Ryan (2009) confirm that the weather can affect the participation of physical activity. Moreover, Scott and Lemieux (2010) insist that the climate has a vital impact on environmental conditions that can deter tourists. In Ayutthaya, the maximum temperature, in the summer season from February to May, is 36.8 degree Celsius which is an effect by southern winds and south-east monsoon (Jica Kokusai Kogyo, no date). Therefore, the hot climate may affect outdoor activities of local people and tourists in Ayutthaya.

1.3.3

Flooding - According to Ghozali et al. (2015), Ayutthaya is located in the lower basin of the Chao Phraya river. Since the geographic characteristic of the land is the slope, it had affected the massive flood in 2011 and many flooding experienced in the past (Ghozali et al., 2015). In addition, in the rainy season, the water would overflow the canals and flood the plain area of the province (Jica Kokusai Kogyo, no date). As a result, Duangthima and Hokao (2013), prove that the flooding in Ayutthaya, especially in 2011, has its negative effects on the physical, economic, social and environmental damages.

1.3.4

Air pollution -According to Jica Kokusai Kogyo (no date: 4-73), it analyses the air quality from air quality monitoring stations in Ayutthaya, and it found that ‘the dust of PM-10 exceeds environmental standards. It also mentions that ‘the causes of high PM-10 levels are assumed to be: 1) open burning of agricultural wastes in paddy fields, and 2) dust from road traffic, 3) dust from loading and unloading cargo at river ports.’

1.3.5

Green area - From the observation by the author on the 3rd January 2020, most of the green areas in the Ayutthaya city centre are belonging to public organizations that do not allow general people to access (more details in chapter 3).

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.4 Methodologies Macdonald and Headlam (2009), describe that the research methods can be classified into two types: quantitative and qualitative methods. In addition, Clark and Creswell (2008: xvi), according to Tashakkori and Creswell (2007: 4), define that â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;research in which the investigator collects and analysed data, integrates the findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches or methods in a single study or program of inquiryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is the mixed methods. 1.4.1

Quantitative method According to Macdonald and Headlam (2009), to collect quantitative data, which can be sorted, classified, and measured, the research technique called quantitative method is used. Quantitative method is used to quantify data and measure outcomes from a sample group of population chosen. Moreover, one of the important quantitative methods is a survey, which is used to collect the primary data. (Macdonald and Headlam, 2009). According to Pazzaglia et al. (2016), there are three stages of survey: survey development, sample selection and survey administration, and data analysis and reporting (figure 1.8). In this dissertation, the urban design of the case study site (Ayutthaya city centre), will be examined by using a quantitative survey.

Survey development

Sample selection and

Data analysis

survey administration

and reporting

Figure 1.8: Three stages of survey Source: Author, 2020 according to Pazzaglia et al. 1.4.1.1 A quantitative survey The survey of this dissertation aims to collect the primary data in the topic of Ayutthaya (case study) urban design. Moreover, the dissertation will endeavour to gather data from various population groups in terms of ages, genders, and educational levels, who visited Ayutthaya by using questionnaire.

Chapter 1: Introduction 1.4.1.2 Aggregation and analysis of the quantitative data All responded questionnaires will be collected and transform into numbers and statistics, which after that will be analysed and illustrated into graphs. Moreover, the analysed data will take an important role in suggesting the solutions of the built environment of Ayutthaya. 1.4.2

Qualitative method According to Mohajan (2018), the qualitative research method concentrates on social judgement on the way people understand and feel of their experiences to clarify social reality of individuals. The numerical analysis and calculation do not be included in the qualitative research method. In addition, the data analysis begins after all qualitative data have been collected (Mohajan, 2018).

1.4.2.1 Observation The observation is one of research method that is used to collect data by using an individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s senses in a meaningful way (Smit and Onwuegbuzie, 2018). According to Al-Saffar (2018), walking tool and serial vision can be performed during observation. Therefore, in this dissertation, observation, walking tool and serial vision will be used for collecting data during visiting case study of Ayutthaya. 1.4.2.2 Walking tool Al-Saffar (2018), according to Sinclair (2003) and Careri (2002), walking is the best way and useful for exploring the city. The walking tool will be used while observing of the case study area such as the Ayutthaya Historical Park, local residential area, and commercial area in order to understand the case study urban environment. 1.4.2.3 Serial vision Al-Saffar (2018: 9), according to Cullen (1961) indicates that â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;the term serial vision was developed by Gordon Cullen to illustrate what a pedestrian experience when moving through spaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. In addition, Al-Saffar (2018) mentions that the sequence of photos is a method of collecting visual data. Thus, the serial vision and taking photos will be performed while walking and observing Ayutthaya. 9

Chapter 1: Introduction

Figure 1.9: Qualitative method Source: Author, 2020 1.4.2.4 Aggregation and analysis of the qualitative data Mohajan (2018) according to Clifford (1997), the qualitative data analysis is challenging because the researcher needs to conduct an- in-depth analysis and present it concisely and logically. The illustration of the qualitative data analysis in this dissertation will be in the form of sequences of photos with mapping and texts.

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.5 Dissertation structure Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Literature Review

1. Introduction 1.1 Questions 1.2 Aims 1.3 Problems 1.4 Methodologies 1.4.1 Quantitative method 1.4.2 Qualitative method 1.5 Dissertation structures 2. Introduction 2.1 The smart city concept 2.1.1 The definition of smart city 2.1.2 The smart city dimensions 2.1.3 The smart city in Thailand 2.1.4 The conclusion of the smart city concept 2.2 The Ayutthaya urban transformation 2.2.1 Before the establishment of Ayutthaya 2.2.2 The establishment of Ayutthaya 2.2.3 Ayutthaya urban transformation from the beginning to the end 2.2.4 The conservation after the fall of Ayutthaya 2.2.5 The conclusion of Ayutthaya urban transformation 2.3 The heritage value of Ayutthaya in both tangible and intangible 2.3.1The classification of the heritage in both tangible and intangible 2.3.2 The classification of the heritage in term of value 2.3.3 The conclusion of the Ayutthaya heritage value in both tangible and intangible 2.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture 2.4.1 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1488 2.4.2 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1488 and 1629 2.4.3 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1629 and 1708 2.4.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1732 and 1767 2.4.5 The comparison of Ayutthaya architecture between 1350 and 1767 2.4.6 The conclusion of Ayutthaya heritage architecture 2.5 The chapter conclusion

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3. Introduction 3.1 The case study analysis structure 3.2 The site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone A 3.2.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) 3.2.2 Land Uses in Zone A 3.2.3 Building Height in Zone A 3.2.4 Structural Condition in Zone A 3.2.5 Specific Observation in Zone A 3.3 The site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone B 3.3.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) 3.3.2 Land Uses in Zone B 3.3.3 Building Height in Zone B 3.3.4 Structural Condition in Zone B 3.4 The site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone C 3.4.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) 3.4.2 Land Uses in Zone C 3.4.3 Building Height in Zone C 3.4.4 Structural Condition in Zone C 3.4.5 Specific Observation in Zone C 3.5 The site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone D 3.5.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone D (Architectural Types) 3.5.2 Land Uses in Zone D 3.5.3 Building Height in Zone D 3.5.4 Structural Condition in Zone D 3.5.5 Specific Observation in Zone D 3.6 The site analysis of the city centre of Ayutthaya zone E 3.6.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone E (Architectural Types) 3.6.2 Land Uses in Zone E 3.6.3 Building Height in Zone E 3.6.4 Structural Condition in Zone E 3.6.4 Structural Condition in Zone E 3.7 Questionnaire 3.7.1 General Questions 3.7.2 The general factors that represent Ayutthaya 3.7.3 The smart city characteristics in Ayutthaya 3.8 The chapter conclusion

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 4: Design Framework

4. Introduction 4.1 The smart city design framework of Ayutthaya 4.1.1 The smart government in Ayutthaya 4.1.2 The smart economy in Ayutthaya 4.1.3 The smart mobility in Ayutthaya 4.1.4 The smart environment in Ayutthaya 4.1.5 The smart people Ayutthaya 4.1.6 The smart living in Ayutthaya 4.2 The chapter conclusion

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

5. Dissertation Conclusion 5.1 The conclusion of the dissertation questions and aims 5.1.1 The smart city 5.1.2 The Ayutthaya heritage 5.1.3 The Ayutthaya urban transformation 5.1.4 The Ayutthaya urban physical condition 5.2 The conclusion of the dissertation problems 5.3 The conclusion of the dissertation methodologies 5.3.1 The quantitative method 5.3.2 The qualitative method 5.3 The dissertation result and further study

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2. Introduction Ayutthaya city in Thailand is well-known because the Ayutthaya historical park in its the city centre has been announced as one of the world heritage sites by UNESCO organisation (UNESCO, 2020). To be listed as the world heritage site, Ayutthaya must have an ‘outstanding universal value’ and meets ‘at least one out of ten selection criteria’ (UNESCO, 2020: online). Moreover, the Ayutthaya historical park has reached the third criteria. The requirement shows that the site has ‘to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilisation which is living, or which has disappeared’ (UNESCO, 2020: online). However, from the site visit and observation by the author in 2020, there are many issues as discussed previously (chapter 1.4) in the city context of Ayutthaya that should be improved by applying the smart city concept. Therefore, the dissertation will reveal how the smart city can develop the Ayutthaya built environment to enhance the better quality of life of both local citizens and tourists in Ayutthaya as well as preserve the heritage city identity through the design framework (chapter 4). Before reaching the chapter 4, the critical literature review in the area of (2.1) the smart city concept, (2.2) the Ayutthaya urban transformation, (2.3) the heritage value of Ayutthaya in both tangible and intangible, and (2.4) the Ayutthaya heritage architecture will be clarified.

2.1 The smart city concept 2.1.1 The definition of smart city According to Batty et al. (2012), the smart city concept has emerged as a combination of information and communication technologies (ICT) that improve the cities in many aspects. Madakam and Ramaswamy (2014: 38) cite that ‘there is no single global level accepted definition of a smart city, but most rely on the use of technology and evidence to improve cities or city inhabitant’s services.’ Riganti (2017) supports their view and suggests that the definition of a smart city is the use of new digital technologies to coordinate and integrate ICT with traditional infrastructures. Furthermore, according to Rajab and Cinkler (2018), the internet of things (IoT), is the heart of the operation of smart cities because it supports the smart city concept in terms of advancing communication of the city and citizens.

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.1.2 The smart city dimensions The smart city involves six dimensions: smart people, smart city economy, smart mobility, smart environment, smart living, and smart governance (Kumar et al., 2017), (figure 2.1). Several perspectives support that the smart people dimension is the most vital among other dimensions. “Smartness” starts with people since smart people are able to have a better quality of life and can make smart decisions by using technology (Woetzel et al., 2018). Albino (2015: 11) supports this view and suggests that ‘smart city should refer to the capacity of clever people to generate clever solutions to urban problems.’

Figure 2.1 The smart city dimension Source: Author, 2020 according to (Al-Saffar, 2018)

Chapter 2: Literature Review The concept of each smart city dimension has concluded (Table 2.1) Conception

The smart city dimensions 1. Smart Bifulco et al. (2016), Governance - A smart governance pays attention to citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; contribution to urban decision-making processes and the co-creation of new services for an improved citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s quality of life. Kumar et al. (2017), - A smart city practices responsibility and transparency in its governance. - A smart city modernizes e-governance for the advantage of all its citizens. - A smart city develops its capacity to deliver public services efficiently and effectively. - A smart city has an active, sustainable urban development policy and assessments known to all. - A smart city includes effective, efficient, and people-friendly urban management. - A smart city features E-Democracy to accomplish better development outcomes for all. 2. Smart Bifulco et al. (2016), Economy The smart economy groups all attribute related to economic competitiveness, such as private enterprise, innovation, productivity, and flexibility of the labour market, as well as the world-wide growth of the local economy. Kumar et al. (2017), - A smart city prepares for economic globalization. - A smart city supports a national brand as well as invest in strategic assets. - A smart city enlightens entrepreneurial leadership and allowing citizens to diverse economic opportunities. - A smart city is where tourists want to visit (tourism). - A smart city has flexibility in the labour market and welcome human resources. 3. Smart Mobility Kumar et al. (2017), - A smart city has a balance transportation options. - A smart city can deal with the traffic congestion, and having rapid mass services such as metro rail, high-speed mobility, etcetera. - A smart city has integrated network for mobility. - A smart city provides seamless mobility for disabled people. Viechnicki et al. (2015), the concepts of smart mobility ecosystems are described as following. 19

Chapter 2: Literature Review -

4. Smart Environment

5. Smart People

6. Smart Living

The smart mobility ecosystems aim is an on-demand mobility system that would make availability for people to decide for public and private transport providers. - The elements of smart mobility ecosystems include ridesharing or carpooling (to fill empty passengers’ seats), bicycle commuting, carsharing (car rental by the hour), and on-demand ride services such as Uber and Lyft. Al-Saffar (2018: 184), - ‘The environmental dimension considered as a key element of smartness that determines well-being increases the availability of green areas in cities and leads towards a sustainable environment.’ Kumar et al. (2017), - A smart city preserves an ecological system. - A smart city has accessibility to green spaces and outdoor living room. - A smart city has an efficient water management system. - The smart people concept is essential as it covers different qualities such as schooling, lifelong learning, social and ethnic plurality, flexibility, broad-mindedness, and public participation. Bifulco et al. (2016), - The role of ICTs and data management functionalities are significant as they are used by people, the so-called human component. Kumar et al. (2017), - Smart people have a high Human Development Index. - Smart people have the creativity to find a unique solution for challenging issues. Bifulco et al. (2016), - A smart living city has associated with life’s quality, housing, culture, well-being, the vacation industry, and a specific interest in the search for high levels of social interconnection. Kumar et al. (2017), - A smart city affords the essential security to women, children, and senior citizens. - A smart city has high-quality public services and amenities. - A smart city supports art, cultural, and natural heritage in the city. Table 2.1: The smart city dimension

Author, 2020 according to (Al-Saffar, 2018, Bifulco et al., 2016, Kumar et al. ,2017, and Viechnicki et al., 2015) 20

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.1.3 The smart city in Thailand Since the policy of “Thailand 4.0” was announced, the smart city in Thailand became well known. According to Huawei (2019), Thailand 4.0 is a policy by the Thai government for economic benefits and social challenges. It also indicates that a smart city and IoT will facilitate the transition from the old (Thailand 3.0) to the new (Thailand 4.0) because the smart city supports technology advancement and digitalization ecosystem development in Thailand. There are four stages for the economic development of Thailand (figure 2.2). The first stage is Thailand 1.0, an agriculture-based economy. The second stage is Thailand 2.0, the economy based on the light industry. The third stage is Thailand 3.0, dependent on massive industry-based economy as the engine of growth. The last stage is the Thailand 4.0 development policy (Louangrath,2017). As stated by Anuroj (2018), Thailand 4.0 is Thailand economic model as innovation-driven technology that will focus on investment policies in technology and innovation, people, productivity enhancement, and development in some targeted areas. In 2019, there are seven cities in Thailand designated for smart city models, including Phuket, Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, Chonburi, Rayong, Chachoengsao, and Bangkok (Huawei, 2019). All in all, though the smart city concept has begun to be applied in several cities in Thailand, the Ayutthaya city as the key historical city of Thailand also needs the smart city development plan. The reason is that according to Madakam and Ramaswamy (2014), the smart city concept will improve the city urban context, and citizen’s quality of life. 2.1.4 The conclusion of the smart city concept The smart city chapter can be concluded that the smart city concept can create a better quality of citizen’s life. Moreover, the smart city model can be driven by ICT and IoT. Furthermore, the smart concept relies explicitly on smart people who can use ICT and IoT to develop and solve the problems in the city. According to the National Statistical Office (2019), most of the population of Ayutthaya aged six and above have access to the internet. It also indicates that more than 70 per cent of citizens graduate at least high school. Therefore, there is a high possibility to apply the smart city concept, which is related to people who can use ICT and IoT to develop the heritage city of Ayutthaya. As a result, having smart people (as the most important smart city dimension discussed previously) as a part of smart governance, which can set the policies to develop smart mobility, smart living, smart environment, and smart economy will result in creating well-being of Ayutthaya citizens.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Figure 2.2: Thailand 4.0 Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.2 The Ayutthaya urban transformation 2.2.1 Before the establishment of Ayutthaya Around 10,000 years before the establishment of Ayutthaya, this area was the sea since there was an archaeological excavation, and archaeologists found deep-sea zone aquatic animals fossils in this area which became a land due to geological sedimentation (Boonkong, 2018). Lohapetcharat (2018), states that before the establishment of Ayutthaya, there was a group of houses located to the East and adjacent to the centre of Ayutthaya in the area called “Ayothaya Sriram Thep Nakorn” or “Ayothaya.” (figure 2.3). Since at that time, it was the great plague, the majority of the population died. Then the king of Ayothaya, named U-Thong, organized the migration of his people to settle in Phutthaisawan area (figure 2.4).

Figure 2.3: The first settlement of Ayothaya

Figure 2.4: The second settlement of Ayothaya

Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.2.2 The establishment of Ayutthaya Lohapetcharat (2018) affirms that around three years after the second settlement of Ayothaya, the king UThong ordered the migration of his citizens into a new area called “Krungthep Thrawaravadi Sri Ayutthaya” or “Ayutthaya’’ (figure 2.5). Moreover, there are many historical records citing that Ayutthaya was established on March 4th, 1350 by King U-Thong (figure 2.5) (Lohapetcharat, 2018). At that point in time, the Thai population of the king had settled in the adjacent area “Nong-Sano,” now named “Pharam Swamp.” The Grand Palace was built in the north adjacent to Phraram Swamp (Boonkong, 2018) (figure 2.6). Furthermore, according to the Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning (2002), the land on the East of the Ayutthaya city was excavated for constructing the canal for enclosing the city as an island (figure 2.6).

Figure 2.5: The first settlement of Ayutthaya

Figure 2.6: The grand palace of Ayutthaya

Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.2.3 The Ayutthaya urban transformation from the beginning to the end According to the Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning (2002), between 1350 and 1767, many canals were built for transportation as the main benefit. The vertically and horizontally gridiron pattern of the Ayutthaya city was shaped by those canals. Moreover, the monuments, temples, and houses of people were built along with the growth of the city (the Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning, 2002) (figure 2.7 and 2.8).

Figure 2.7, 2.8: The urban settlement of Ayutthaya between 1350 and 1767 Source: Author, 2020

Regarding the Royal Thai Army War College (2020), in 1767, Ayutthaya was colonized by Burma, and many temples and buildings were damaged because of that incident. After that, in the same year, Ayutthaya became an independent city by the authorization of the king Tak who also established the new capital city of Thailand in another city called Thonburi. Consequently, during that time, Ayutthaya was abandoned, leaving many ancient ruins (the Royal Thai Army War College, 2020). 26

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.2.4 the conservation after the fall of Ayutthaya According to Taengpun (2012), in 1957, the population in Ayutthaya had dramatically increased, and the behaviours of the local citizens had changed from doing business along the rivers to the city centre island. Consequently, there were improvement in public transportation and infrastructure in order to support people living and doing businesses in the city centre island (Taengpun, 2012). Moreover, regarding Taengpun (2012), the growth of the Ayutthaya city between 1957 and 1967 had caused construction into the historical site; there was, therefore, concern about the historic buildingsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; conservation in those days. Hence, in 1967, the Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning released Ayutthaya land use in order to preserve land use of the historical site. Moreover, the land use was divided into three different zones: red for new city, yellow for both historical and residential, and green for the historical zones (figure 2.9) (Taengpun, 2012).

Figure 2.9: Ayutthaya land use in 1967 Source: Author, 2020 according to (The Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning, 1967)

Chapter 2: Literature Review Low-Density Residence Medium-Density Residence Commerce and High-Density Residence Rural Area and Agriculture Rural Area and Agriculture Conservation Reorganize for Agriculture Recreation and Environment Conservation Education Culture and Art Conservation Religious Government

Figure 2.10: Ayutthaya land use in 2009 Source: Author, 2020 according to (The Ministry of Transport, 2019)

The last updated version of land use of Ayutthaya, which has been released in 2009 (figure 2.10), has minor changes from the land use announced in 1967 (figure 2.9). According to both figure 2.9 and 2.10, the majority land uses of the site are historical zone (70%) in 1967 or now named culture and art conservation zone (50%) from 2009, while the second majority of land use in both land uses are residential areas.

Siripratan et al. (2019) according to Building Control Act in 1979, indicates that the height restriction of buildings in the city centre of Ayutthaya must be limited to no more than 12 metres (zone 1 and 2) or 15 metres (zone 3), (figure 2.11). However, there are some illegal constructions in Ayutthaya, which construct the height of buildings over 12 or 15 metres. Moreover, the heritage sites are now obscured by the buildings, which are higher than the height restriction; hence, those buildings are the reasons why UNESCO has been considering withdrawing Ayutthaya from the world heritage lists from 2017(Siripratan et al., 2019).

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Figure 2.11: The building control laws: the heights restriction of buildings in three zones Source: Author, 2020 according to (Siripratan et al. 2019)

2.2.5 The conclusion of Ayutthaya urban transformation

The study of Ayutthaya urban transformation from the past until now shows that between 1767 and 1967, the heritage site had been abandoned until there were constructions intruded into its site. Consequently, the Department of Public Works and Town and Country Planning has recognised the importance of its cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; s heritage contexts and tried to preserve the city centre of Ayutthaya for the heritage site and low-rise buildings such as local residence in order to keep the character of the heritage city of the past. Hence, to preserve the Ayutthaya city as the world heritage site, applying the smart city concept in this city may need to concern with the local buildings control laws and the heritage contexts.

Moreover, the study of the Ayutthaya urban context in the past is challenging because from the maps of Ayutthaya in the past when it was the capital city of Thailand between 1350 and 1767 were all illustrated by foreigners, especially the Westerners. They expressed some similarities in some essential points, such as the location of the grand palace; however, the specific contexts were different. Therefore, the urban transformation illustrations (figure 2.3 to 2.8) have been visualized by the author by studying and overlapping some similarities from many historical documentaries. 29

Chapter 2: Literature Review The conclusion of Ayutthaya urban transformation (Table 2.2)

Table 2.2: The Ayutthaya urban transformation (Author, 2020, The Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning, 1967, The Ministry of Transport, 2019 and Siripratan et al. 2019) 30

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.3 The heritage value of Ayutthaya in both tangible and intangible 2.3.1 The classification of the heritage in both tangible and intangible In term of the heritage classification, UNESCO (2017) states that cultural heritage can be defined as tangible and intangible. Moreover, another view according to Timothy and Boyd (2003), heritage can be divided into three resources: tangible immovable resources (such as buildings, rivers, and natural areas), tangible movable resources (such as the heritage objects, and documents), and intangible resources (such as festivals, arts, and cultural events). To conclude, the tangible heritage is physical elements that can be recognized of its heritage value from the first perception. In contrast, the intangible heritage consists of non-physical elements whose heritage value is not appreciated immediately, but only after further analysis.

2.3.2 The classification of the heritage in term of value

Diaz-Andreu (2017) states that the meanings and values that people give on the heritage is the definition of the heritage value. Moreover, there are many pieces of literature of this subject which show different perspectives through the heritage value classification. For instance, Feilden (2003) identifies the value in the heritage in three major parts: emotional, cultural, and use values. Another example, Timothy and Boyd (2003) claims that the value of the heritage can be classified in four main parts: economic, social significance, political significance and scientific significance. In addition, after a critical review of the literature cited before and others which are, (Marmion, 2012), (Hua, 2010), and (Lenzerini, 2011), the heritage value can be analyzed through four pillars: symbolic, knowledge, belief, and economic values (figure 2.12).

Chapter 2: Literature Review

(Physical elements) 1.Symbolic value

The Heritage Value

4.Economic value

2.Knowledge value

3.Belief value (Non-physical elements)

Figure 2.12: The heritage value in four pillars Source: Author, 2020 2.3.2.1 The heritage’s symbolic value The first pillar of the heritage value is symbolic. The symbol of the heritage is cultural products (Graham and Howard, 2018). In the case of Ayutthaya, the cultural artefacts are temples, palaces, and monuments which locate in the Ayutthaya historical park; Hence, they can be deemed as the tangible heritage value. 2.3.2.2 The heritage’s knowledge value The second pillar of the heritage value is knowledge. Torre (2002:11) states that ‘the educational value of heritage lies in the potential to gain knowledge about the past’. However, learning of history may not create any value if the learners do not apply the knowledge to create the future. To conclude, the value of knowledge cannot realize directly but can be achieved after further knowledge applying; therefore, it is considered as the intangible heritage value. 2.3.2.3 The heritage’s belief value The third pillar of the heritage value is belief. Aulet and Vidal (2018: 238) state that ‘the sacred spaces are those sites that serve in some way to articulate the relationship between the community and its religious practices and to manifest the relationship between the human and the transcendent, the divinity’. Consequently, 33

Chapter 2: Literature Review belief or relationship between the individual and divine spirit in the temple or sacred place is related to the supernatural that can be classified as the intangible heritage value. 2.3.2.4 The heritageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economic value The fourth pillar of the heritage value is economic. Timothy and Boyd (2003) reveal that the heritage and culture have been taken 40 per cent of all international trip realized by The World Tourism Organisation (WTO). Moreover, the National Statistics Organisation of Thailand (2020), reported that between 2016 and 2017, there was a rise of both Thai and foreign tourists in Ayutthaya from 7,216,514 to 8,349,613; hence, there had been a 9.4 per cent increase in two years. Moreover, the heritage tourism in Thailand, including Ayutthaya, has been one of the primary sources for generating countriesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; revenue (Effinity, 2016). It can, therefore, see that the heritage tourism has had positive impacts on the national economy. To conclude, the value of the heritage in term of economy is intangible since it depends on the tourism industry. 2.3.3 The conclusion of the Ayutthaya heritage value in both tangible and intangible

The difference between tangible and intangible heritage value is that the tangible heritage is direct, meaningful touchable things as well as expressing some identities such as the heritage buildings and arts; however, the intangible heritage is indirect meaningful things or aspects that can be touchable or untouchable. The perception analysis is required to understand the intangible heritage value (figure 2.12). Hence, from the heritage value classification as discussed previously, the pillar of symbolic heritage value is the only tangible value out of the other three pillars: knowledge, belief, and economic value (figure 2.12). To conclude, the tangible heritage artefacts of Ayutthaya such as temple and monument should be preserved because of its symbolic or tangible value. Moreover, if there is no tangible heritage, the intangible heritage value will not occur. For example, the tangible heritage such as the heritage temple is the place where people can study story from the past in order to create a better future (knowledge value), do religious practices for their spirit (belief value), and promote for tourism which is one of important countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s income sources (economic value).

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture According to Visudharomn (2014), the characteristic of Ayutthaya architecture principally reflects Buddhism belief and can be classified into four periods according to the reigns of kings of Ayutthaya, which are outlined below. 2.4.1 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1488 Lopburi art was the main inspiration of Ayutthaya architecture from the reign of King U-Thong to King Pra Boromatrai Lokanaht of Ayutthaya between 1350 and 1488 (Visudharomn, 2014). The important architectures that were inspired from Lopburi art were Prang and Viharn, which was located in front of Prang (figure 2.13). Moreover, Niladech (2016) asserts that the Prang was generally surrounded by cloisters (figure 2.11). The temple (Wat) that outstandingly illustrates Ayutthaya architecture in this period is Wat Ratchaburana (figure 2.13).

Figure 2.13: The Prang and Viharn of Wat Ratchaburana Source: Author,2020 according to http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watratchaburana.html

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.4.2 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1488 and 1629 As stated by Visudharomn (2014), from the reign of King Pra Boromatrai Lokanaht to King Pra Chow Song Tam of Ayutthaya between 1350 and 1488, Ayutthaya architecture in this period was inspired by Sukhothai art. The Round Chedi or Bell Shape Chedi was the key architecture that was influenced by Sukhothai art (Visudharomn, 2014) (figure 2.14). Moreover, according to Niladech (2016), the other vital architecture is Viharn which had a higher base and a huge shape when compared with other Viharn in the previous period (figure 2.14). Wat Phra Sri Sanphet is an example of the Ayutthaya architecture during this stated period (figure 2.14).

Figure 2.14: The Bell Shape Chedi and Viharn of Wat Phra Sri Sanphet Source: Author,2020 according to http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watphrasisanphet.html

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.4.3 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1629 and 1708 According to Visudharomn (2014), from the reign of King Prasaht Thong to king Pra Chow Tai Sa of Ayutthaya between 1629 and 1708, the Khmer architecture adopted in Ayutthaya architectural design. Niladech (2016) indicates that the Khmer Prang and Yor Mum Mai Sibsong Chedi became the vital architecture for this period (figure 2.15). The significant temples that describe the Ayutthaya architecture in this mentioned period are Wat Chai Watanaram, which has the Khmer Prang as the main architectural component, and Wat Kudidao, which has Yor Mum Mai Sib Sibsong Chedi located at the centre of its temple layout plan (figure 2.15).

Figure 2.15: The Khmer prang of Wat Chai Watanaram and Yor Mum Mai Sibsong Chedi of Wat Kudidao Source: Author,2020 according to http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watchaiwatthanaram.html http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watkudeedao.html 38

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.4.4 The Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1732 and 1767 From the reign of King Boromakoht to the end of the Ayutthaya dynasty between 1732 and 1767, the king Boromakoht preferred to renovate instead of creating the new architectural style (Visudharomn, 2014). However, from the historical evidence, the Square-Based Chedi’ was established in this period (Visudharomn, 2014) (figure 2.16). The example of the temple which has the ‘square-based chedi’ in Ayutthaya is Wat Phu Kao Thong (figure 2.16).

Figure 2.16: The Square-Based Chedi of Wat Phu Kao Thong Source: Author,2020 according to http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watphukhaothong.html

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.4.5 The comparison of Ayutthaya architecture between 1350 and 1767 According to Phungtian (2000), during 11th -13th century A.D., the Khmer dominion expanded over the central part of Thailand, where the centre of Lopburi was. Hence, the style of early Buddhist art, both in architecture and, sculpture in Lopburi had affinities with the Khmer art (Phungtian,2000). Thus it can be seen that Prang, one of significant Ayutthaya architectures which took inspiration from Lopburi art during 1350 to 1488, has some similarities to the Prang between the period of 1629 and 1708 which was inspired from Khmer (figure 2.17 and table 2.3). In addition, there are buildings, Viharn and Ubosot which have different functions, in the layout plan of Wat in Ayutthaya from 1350 to 1767. As stated by Ruangkanjanawit (2002), Viharn is the building where it has a Buddha statue, whereas Ubosot is the building for Buddhism activities. However, in some temples, there is no Viharn, or its function has been changed to be Ubosot (Ruangkanjanawit, 2002).

Figure 2.17: The comparison of Ayutthaya architecture between 1350 and 1767 Source: Author,2020

Chapter 2: Literature Review The comparison of Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1767 (Table 2.3)

Table 2.3: The comparison of Ayutthaya heritage architecture between 1350 and 1767 Author,2020 based on http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/ayutthaya.html http://www.qrcode.finearts.go.th/index.php/th/historicalpark 41

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.4.6 The conclusion of Ayutthaya heritage architecture Baker and Pongpaichit (2017) cite that in 1767, Ayutthaya city and its historical records were destroyed by Burmese armies. Hence, now many ruins can be seen in the heritage city of Ayutthaya. However, the understanding of the Ayutthaya heritage architecture in four different periods, as discussed previously is vital to identify which parts of the city are Ayutthaya heritage architecture and should be conserved. Moreover, the understanding of the architecture of Ayutthaya will be a knowledge base for further study in the dissertation, especially for the case study site analysis of Ayutthaya in the next chapter.

2.5 The Chapter Conclusion The chapter discusses the literature reviews in the subjects of (2.1) the smart city concept, (2.2) the Ayutthaya urban transformation (2.3) the heritage of Ayutthaya in both tangible and intangible, and (2.4) the Ayutthaya heritage architecture. It has asserted that the strategy for developing Ayutthaya built environment can become valid by using the smart city model. Moreover, it has indicated that the tangible heritage of Ayutthaya such as temple, palace and monument should be conserved, because of its value and advantages, along with developing smart city model. Furthermore, the understanding of the heritage architecture and urban development of Ayutthaya are the indispensable starting point for the further chapters.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3. Introduction

The existing physical condition of Ayutthaya, which has been chosen as the case study of this dissertation, will be comprehensively analysed in this chapter. In addition, this chapter will clarify the methodologies for gathering data such as map, photograph, and questionnaire and the analytical stage of the data, which will be illustrated through graphs and texts. Moreover, the aim of this chapter is to evaluate the current physical conditions of Ayutthaya.

3.1 The Case Study Site Analysis Structure Since the case study site of Ayutthaya city centre is large with an approximate area of 8.5 SQ.KM., the survey and analysis of its current physical environment will be divided into five zones: Zone A, Zone B, Zone C, Zone D, and Zone E according to five elements outlined below. 1. Historical and Architectural Value 2. Land Uses 3. Building Height 4. Structural Condition 5. Specific Observation In addition, each zone as outlined below has a different character that will be clarified in detail through each zone site analysis in this chapter. Zone A: Household area Zone B: Household and the abandoned heritage area Zone C: The hearth of the heritage city Zone D: The centre of the commercial area Zone E: Household and hotel area 47

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.1: Five zones of the case study site of Ayutthaya: Zone A, B, C, D and E Source: Author, 2020

3.2 The Site Analysis of The City Centre of Ayutthaya Zone A 3.2.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) In zone A, the buildings have been identified in five categories according to their historical and architectural values (Ayutthaya heritage architecture inspired by heritage buildings at Lopburi, Sukhothai, Khmer, Ayutthaya heritage architecture at the period of renovation, and non-heritage buildings) (figure 3.2). The vast majority of buildings (78%) are non-heritage buildings, whereas 2.4% and 7.2% of heritage buildings were inspired by the sites at Lopburi and Sukhothai respectively. Moreover, The Square-Based Chedi, which was used commonly in Ayutthaya from 1732 to 1767, can be recorded at 2.4% of all buildings in the area. However, there is no heritage architecture which was inspired by Khmer in Zone A area. (figure 3.2) 48

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.2 A: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.2B: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone A (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020 49

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.2.2 Land Uses in Zone A The land uses in zone A can be divided into seven categories: museum, hotel, terraced house (in Thailand, this housing type is commonly for mix uses of commerce and private residence), detached house, educational place, palace and monument, and temple. Detached house is the vast majority of land uses in Zone A, 70%, whereas the temple, which is the second majority of the land uses in this zone, is just below 10%. In addition, there are less than 8 % in each of the other five land uses. (figure 3.3)

Figure 3.3 A: Land Uses in Zone A Source: Author, 2020 50

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.3 B: Land Uses in Zone A Source: Author, 2020

3.2.3 Building Height in Zone A According to the Building Control Laws, as discussed in the chapter 2.2.4, the height restriction of buildings in the city centre of Ayutthaya must be limited to no more than 12 metres (zone 1 and 2) or 15 metres (zone 3) (figure 3.4). Hence, in this area, there are no buildings (excluding temples and monuments) of more than three storeys. From zone A site survey, the vast majority (70%) of buildings are used as private residences, which has the height between one and two storeys. Moreover, the survey indicates that the percentage of three stories buildings in this area is 18 %. However, the exceptional architectural styles of the temples and monuments in this area makes it complicated to identify their heights. In addition, they can be recorded at 12% of zone A area. (figure 3.4)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.4 A, B: Building Height in Zone A Source: Author, 2020

3.2.4 Structural Condition in Zone A The structural assessment of the buildings in zone A can be classified into seven categories: renovation process, very good, good, acceptable, poor, deteriorated, and ruins (figure 3.5). The result indicates that 54% of all buildings are in acceptable condition. Furthermore, twenty-two per cent of all buildings are in good condition. However, in Ayutthaya, most of the heritage temples have been destroyed; therefore, the heritage temples in this area are classified deteriorated (4.5%) and ruins (2.5%). On the other hand, 2% of heritage buildings in this area are under renovation. (figure 3.5)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.5 A: Structural Condition in Zone A Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.5 B: Structural Condition in Zone A Source: Author, 2020 53

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.2.5 Specific Observation in Zone A (Figure 3.6) 1-7: Pedestrians walking from Wat (temple) Lokaya Sutharam (3,4) to the local street (7), pass a bicycle parking area (1) on the pavement and tuk-tuks (2) (tourist-oriented public transport), parked beside the pavement. Although there is bicycle parking in this area, the bicycle path cannot be seen. Continue to walk through Wat Lokaya Sutharam (3), almost of its physical elements of heritage buildings are ruins (4). Moreover, there is no clear walking path; therefore, visitors need to walk from Wat (3) to the local street (7) through the green area (5). 7-10: At the local street (7,8,9), there is no car parking for visitors; hence, they need to park their cars at the vacant area (8) nearby. In addition, there is no clear walking, cycling and vehicle paths at the local street (9). 11-14: These parts of the site survey show that the infrastructure of the local streets at the local residential areas are in poor condition since there are no public transportation facilities such as bus stop.

Figure 3.6: Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone A Source: Author, 2020 54

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3.3 The Site Analysis of The City Centre of Ayutthaya Zone B 3.3.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) In zone B, according to historical and architectural values of the buildings, buildings have been classified into five categories (the same criteria as discussed in the chapter 3.2.1) (figure 3.7). The outcome of the survey shows that almost 80% of all buildings are non-heritage buildings, while the heritage buildings which were inspired by the sites at Lopburi and Sukhothai are 4.5% and 18% respectively. In addition, there are no heritage buildings which were built between 1629 and 1767 in Zone B area. (figure 3.7)

Figure 3.7 A: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020 55

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.7 B: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone B (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020

3.3.2 Land Uses in Zone B The land uses in zone B can be categorised into six categories: public department, hotel, terraced house, detached house, hospital, and temple (figure 3.8). From the observation, the majority of land uses in this area are detached house and temple, 48% and 27% respectively. The survey also shows that there are some commercial buildings, which are shops (10%) and hotel (6%), located along the river. Moreover, in this zone, it is the location of the vital public hospital for a whole Ayutthaya city centre area that can account for 7% of all zone B area. (figure 3.8)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.8 A: Land Uses in Zone B Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.8 B: Land Uses in Zone B Source: Author, 2020

3.3.3 Building Height in Zone B From zone B site survey, there are buildings starting from one level up to five. The majority of buildings are one to two storeys since they are the local residences, 56% (figure 3.9). However, the survey indicates that the percentage of three stories buildings is 12 %. In addition, temples are recorded at 27% of this area. The outcome of the investigation shows that there is a hospital (5%), which has four to five storeys, and its height is over the limit of the building height restriction in this area. (figure 3.9)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.9 A: Building Height in Zone B Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.9 B: Building Height in Zone B Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.3.4 Structural Condition in Zone B The structural assessment of the buildings in zone B was done by utilising seven categories (renovation process, very good, good, acceptable, poor, deteriorate, and ruins) (figure 3.10). The result indicates that the majority (33%) of all buildings, which are assessed in this area, are in the acceptable condition (figure 3.10). The second highest building condition in this area is deteriorated (22%), which is the heritage temple. Moreover, ruins temples have been accounted for 5% of all buildings in this zone. In addition, these temples in deteriorated and ruins conditions are now neglected; therefore, conservation and renovation should be required. (figure 3.10)

Figure 3.10 A, B: Structural Condition in Zone B Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3.4 The Site Analysis of The City Centre of Ayutthaya Zone C 3.4.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) In zone C, the buildings have been divided into five groups according to their historical and architectural values (figure 3.11). The outcome of the survey shows that the vast majority (75%) of buildings are non-heritage buildings, while 15% and 10% of heritage architectures were inspired by Lopburi and Sukhothai, respectively. In addition, there is no heritage architecture which were built between 1629 and 1767 in Zone C area. (figure 3.11)

Figure 3.11 A: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020 61

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.11 B: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone C (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020

3.4.2 Land Uses in Zone C The land uses in zone C can be assessed with eight categories: museum, hotel, leisure place, terraced house, detached house, educational place, palace and monument, and temple (figure 3.12). The field investigation shows that the majority (30%) of land uses in this area is the heritage buildings, which are temples and palace. The educational places (just below 30%) are the second majority of land uses in this zone. The third majority of land uses, which is just above 25%, is a detached house. Another notable survey is that there are similar percentages of both museum and terraced houses in this area, around 7%. However, there are minority uses of land for hotels located along with the river and leisure place, 2% and 1% respectively. (figure 3.12)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.12 A: Land Uses in Zone C Source: Author, 2020 63

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.12 B: Land Uses in Zone C Source: Author, 2020

3.4.3 Building Height in Zone C From zone C site survey, the building heights in this area are from one to five storeys. The majority of buildings are one to two storeys which are detached houses, 55% (figure 3.13), whereas the percentage of three stories buildings which are used for education and commerce is 18 %. In addition, temples are recorded at 20% of zone C area. The result of analysis shows that 7% of buildings (university and school) have four to five storeys, which their heights are over the limit of the building height restriction in this zone. (figure 3.13)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.13 A, B: Building Height in Zone C Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.4.4 Structural Condition in Zone C The structural evaluation of the buildings in zone C can be classified into seven categories: renovation process, very good, good, acceptable, poor, deteriorate, and ruins (figure 3.14). It is clear that most of all buildings conditions in this zone are acceptable (45%) and good (35%) respectively. However, only 2% of all buildings are in very good condition. Furthermore, the heritage temples and royal palace, which have been destroyed, were examined as deterioration (12%) and ruins (5%), respectively. However, these temples and palace in deteriorated and ruins conditions are now the most vital tourist attraction of Ayutthaya; hence, conservation and renovation are required for these buildings since their structural conditions may be damaged by superficial tourism. (figure 3.14)

Figure 3.14 A, B: Structural Condition in Zone C Source: Author, 2020 66

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.4.5 Specific Observation in Zone C (figure 3.15) 1-6: Pedestrians walking from the Ayutthaya historical parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; car parking (1) to Viharn (temple) Phra Mongkol Bophit (6), the quality of walking paths (2,4) are acceptable; however, some pedestrians have been closed for renovation (3). Moreover, since there are many visitors in this zone, the pavilion (5) is provided for them to have a break during their visit. 7-11: there is one good condition of the souvenir market in this area (7,8) which is located adjacent to the park (9,10). However, the park seems to be just the transition area for people from the souvenir market to the main road (11). For instance, there is no public furniture provided for visitors to spend their time in this park. 12-18: Walking and cycling modes of transports do not reach the standard since there are many obstacles such as electricity post (12) and car parking (17) on the pavement and elephant riding for tourism on the bicycle lane (14,15). In addition, the universal design (concerning of handicap and baby stroller) for transport modes have not been concerned (16).

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.15: Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone C Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3.5 The Site Analysis of The City Centre of Ayutthaya Zone D 3.5.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone D (Architectural Types) In zone D, according to the Tourism Authority of Thailand (2020), Chan Kasem Palace is only building, which was built in 1544 when Ayutthaya was the capital city of Thailand. It had been destroyed in 1767 by the Burmese and was rebuilt in the mid-19th century (Tourism Authority of Thailand, 2020). To conclude, it is the only heritage building which can be recorded at 2.5% of all buildings in zone D. (figure 3.16)

Figure 3.16 A, B: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone D (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.5.2 Land Uses in Zone D There are a variety of activities in zone D area because according to Ayutthaya land use in 2009, this area is mainly used for residence and commerce. Therefore, the land use of this area can be examined with various categories: public department, museum, hotel, department store, market, terraced house, detached house, educational place, palace and monument, and temple (figure 3.17). The field investigation shows that the majority (33%) of land uses in this area is house. The terraced house, which is mix use of commerce at the ground level and private residence on the upper floors, is the second majority (18%) of land uses in this area. Moreover, the survey shows that the hotel is 16% of land uses in this area. Next is the land uses for education which has been recorded at 12% of zone D area. Another notable survey is that temples (10%) in this area have been built after the fall of Ayutthaya; therefore, they are not Ayutthaya heritage buildings. In addition, there are two fresh markets for the whole city centre, which are located in this zone and can be recorded at 5% in zone D area. However, there are minority land uses of the public department (3%), palace (2.5%) and museum (1%) respectively. Lastly, there is only one department store in Ayutthaya city centre, and it is located in zone D area. (figure 3.17)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.17 A: Land Uses in Zone D Source: Author, 2020 71

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.17 B: Land Uses in Zone D Source: Author, 2020

3.5.3 Building Height in Zone D From zone D site survey, the vast majority of building height is between one and three storeys, which can account for 89.5% of this area. (figure 3.18). However, the result of the analysis shows that less than 1% of land uses in this zone is the department store, which has five storeys, and its height is over the limit of the building height restriction in this zone. (figure 3.18)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.18 A, B: Building Height in Zone D Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.5.4 Structural Condition in Zone D The structural assessment of the buildings in zone D shows that there is no deteriorated and ruins structure in this zone (figure 3.19). In addition, the result of the survey indicates that the majority of building structures are in acceptable (40%) and good condition (35%) respectively. Moreover, twenty per cent of the building structures in this area, which are the temples, are in very good condition. The poor conditions of structural buildings are fresh markets, which can be recorded at 5% of this zone. (figure 3.19)

Figure 3.19 A, B: Structural Condition in Zone D Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.5.5 Specific Observation in Zone D (figure 3.20) 1-5: Pedestrians walking from Amporn Department Store (1) to the fresh market (5), unorganised of public transports services, which disturb other modes of mobilities, can be seen. For example, public transports such as tuk-tuks (2) and motorcycle taxis (4) park on the car lane (2). In addition, people need to cross the road anywhere (3) since there is no pedestrian facilities such as zebra crossing, pedestrian signal light to support them. Another issue is that the fresh market structural condition (5) is in poor quality and lacking of hygiene. 6-8: Continue to walk in zone D, the pavement is used for commercials such as street vending and seating areas for motorcycle taxisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; driver; hence, people need to walk on the car lane. 9-10: Observing the residential zone, the common transport modes for people living in this area are motorcycling, cycling, and walking; however, the pedestrian and vehicle paths are in poor quality. In addition, there is no facility to support disabled people in this area. 11-12: this road is used for van and tour bus parking (public transport for Ayutthaya with other cities in Thailand) since there is no appropriate parking areas provided for them.

Figure 3.20: Observation of the Ayutthaya built environment in Zone D Source: Author, 2020 75

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3.6 The Site Analysis of The City Centre of Ayutthaya Zone E 3.6.1 Historical and Architectural Value in Zone E (Architectural Types) In zone E, according to their historical and architectural values, the buildings have been identified in five categories (figure 3.21). The vast majority of buildings (98%) are non-heritage buildings. On the other hand, there is only one heritage temple (Wat Khun Mueng Jai), which was built at the early period of Ayutthaya (Leksukhum, 2020) in this area, which can account for 2% of this area. (figure 3.21)

Figure 3.21 A, B: Historical and Architectural Value in Zone E (Architectural Types) Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.6.2 Land Uses in Zone E The land uses in zone E can be divided into six categories, which are public department, hotel, terraced house, detached house, educational place, and temple (figure 3.22). The detached house is the vast majority (60%) of land uses in Zone E, whereas the hotel, which is the second majority of the land uses in this zone, is onefourth of the residential land uses. In addition, there are less than 10 % in each of the other four land uses. (figure 3.22)

Figure 3.22 A: Land Uses in Zone E Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.22 B: Land Uses in Zone E Source: Author, 2020

3.6.3 Building Height in Zone E According to the survey of zone E, we can see that the majority of the building heights are one to two storeys (58%) since they are the local residential buildings (figure3.23). The survey also shows that 26.5% of all buildings have three storeys. However, the result of the survey indicates some schools, which are 6.5% of land uses in this zone, have four to five storeys; hence, their heights are over the limit of the building height restriction in this area. (figure 3.23)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.23 A, B: Building Height in Zone E Source: Author, 2020

3.6.4 Structural Condition in Zone E The structural assessment of the buildings in zone E shows that most of the buildings, which are residence and commerce, are in acceptable (45%) and good conditions (37.5%) respectively (figure 3.24). Moreover, from the survey, it shows that 10% of all buildings are in very good structural condition. However, the poor condition of building structures has recorded at 5%, which are the street restaurants and shops located along the river. (figure 3.24)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.24 A: Structural Condition in Zone E Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.24 B: Structural Condition in Zone E Source: Author, 2020 80

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

3.7 Questionnaire

The questionnaire in the subject of Ayutthaya physical environment, will be analysed and illustrated in this dissertation part. In addition, it will be an essential guide for the design framework in the next chapter. The questionnaire will be divided into three parts outlined below. 1. General questions 2. The main factors that represent Ayutthaya 3. The smart city characteristics in Ayutthaya 3.7.1

General questions

In this section, the questions aim to understand the citizens’ characteristics: ages, genders, education qualifications, and reasons for visiting and living in Ayutthaya. The dissertation will show some significant information about the participants of the questionnaire. In term of ages, the result shows that the majority of participants (40%) were aged between 21 and 30 (figure 3.25). Moreover, the percentage of females participating in this survey was 40%, whereas the rate of males was 60% (figure 3.26). As for the participants’ education qualifications, the investigation illustrates that 65% of participants have an undergraduate degree (figure 3.27). In addition, the survey of reasons why participants were visiting and living in Ayutthaya reveal that 50 % of them have been to Ayutthaya for tourism (figure 3.28).

Figure 3.25: The participants’ age groups Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.26: The participants’ genders Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.27: The participants’ education qualifications Source: Author, 2020

Figure 3.28: The participants’ reasons for visiting and living Source: Author, 2020

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.7.2

The general factors that represent Ayutthaya

In this part, the survey of general elements in Ayutthaya will be illustrated and will be divided into three topics: Ayutthaya main features, transports, and public facilities. 3.7.2.1 The main features of Ayutthaya In this part, the question was asked (How do you rate the main factors represent in Ayutthaya?) in order to examine the quality of the main features of Ayutthaya. The outcome of this question indicates that the majority of participants (80%) agreed that the historical value of the case study area is excellent (figure 3.29). In addition, tourism in this area was 65% agreed with good quality. However, seventy-five per cent of survey contributors voted the public facilities between very poor and satisfied. Therefore, the result of this question shows that the case study area requires the improvement plans of the public facilities. (figure 3.29)

Figure 3.29: The main features of Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 3.7.2.2 Transportation In this section, the quality of transports modes in Ayutthaya will be examined; therefore, the question was asked (How do you rate modes of transportation?). From the figure 3.30, the good quality of transport modes in this area were car and motorcycle (agreed by 50% and 45% of respondents respectively). However, the participants asserted that the public transport in this area was satisfied with a score of 45%. However, eighty-five per cent of both cycling and walking were voted in the quality between very poor and satisfied. Hence, the result shows that the public transport, cycling, and walking in Ayutthaya need a development policy. (figure 3.30)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.30: Modes of transportation Source: Author, 2020 3.7.2.3 Public facilities From the question â&#x20AC;&#x153;how do you rate public facilities?â&#x20AC;?, the result shows that the religious facility was rated from good to very good quality with a score of 70%. On the other hand, education, working place, health care, community, leisure, government and tourist facilities were mostly agreed with satisfied levels, and their percentage were in between 50 and 65. As a result, all public facilities must be developed. Moreover, although the religious facility was rated between very good and good qualities, it must be renovated and preserved. (figure 3.31)

Figure 3.31: Public facilities Source: Author, 2020 84

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.7.3

The smart city characteristics in Ayutthaya

In this section, the questions of the smart city concept in Ayutthaya will be analysed according to six smart city dimensions: the governance, economy, mobility, environment, people, and living in Ayutthaya. 3.7.3.1 The smart government in Ayutthaya From the question â&#x20AC;&#x153;how do you rate the current governing in Ayutthaya?â&#x20AC;?, the result shows that the government provides the modern methods to communicate with citizens and participate with neighbourhoods in satisfied level with a score of 40% and 45% respectively. (figure 3.32)

Figure 3.32: The smart government in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 3.7.3.2 The smart economy in Ayutthaya In this part, the question was asked (how do you rate the current economy in Ayutthaya?). As a result, 40% of participants agreed with satisfied level of efficient technology for business and commerce, and thirtyfive per cent of them agreed with the poor level. (figure 3.33)

Figure 3.33: The smart economy in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 85

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire 3.7.3.3 The smart mobility in Ayutthaya In this section, the question “how do you rate the current mobility in Ayutthaya?” was asked. The outcome indicates that the integrated network in the city and with the neighbourhoods were mostly rated from very poor to satisfied level with a score of 70% and 80% respectively. In addition, the majority of respondents (90%) voted safety of mobility between very poor and satisfied level. Moreover, the reduced pollution from transport (100%) and traffic congestion (90%) were in between very poor and satisfied levels. Hence, all smart mobility indicators asked in this part must be improved since most of them have reached just a satisfied level. (figure 3.34)

Figure 3.34: The smart mobility in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 3.7.3.4 The smart environment in Ayutthaya From the question “how do you rate the current environment in Ayutthaya?”, the outcome shows that the water quality, air quality and green space were mostly rated for satisfied levels with a score of 55%, 50% and 55% respectively. However, eighty-five per cent of participants rated the waste management from the levels of very poor to satisfactory. As a result, there were a minority of levels from good to very good in all smart environment indicators asked in this section; hence, all of them must be developed. (figure 3.35)

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.35: The smart environment in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 3.7.3.5 The smart people in Ayutthaya In this part, “how do you rate people in Ayutthaya?” was asked. The result indicates that the majority of Ayutthaya citizens were believed to have lifelong learning in 35% in both satisfied and poor levels. Nevertheless, life and workings skills of those citizens were rated between good (30%) and satisfied (60%) levels, respectively. (figure 3.36)

Figure 3.36: The smart people in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 3.7.3.6 The smart living in Ayutthaya The living in Ayutthaya will be examined from the result of the question “how do you rate living in Ayutthaya?”. The outcome indicates that the majority of votes was satisfactory with all smart living indicators asked: healthy living (55%), safe living (45%), public facilities for living (50%), and housing (75%). As a result, all smart living indicators asked in this section must be improved since most of their qualities were satisfied and poor levels. (figure 3.37) 87

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Figure 3.37: The smart living in Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020

3.8 The Chapter Conclusion This chapter has been divided into two major sections. The first section, from chapter 3.1 to 3.6, has examined and illustrated the case study analysis in the Ayutthaya city centre in five zones: zone A, B, C, D and E, while the second section (chapter 3.7) has clarified the issues facing Ayutthaya by the questionnaire. Moreover, the result of both sections will help to suggest the design framework in the next chapter.

The first section, which is the case study analysis shows that there are valuable historical buildings in all zones except zone D. Moreover, almost all of them are in the deteriorated and ruins structural conditions. In term of land uses, the majority of land uses in zone A, B, D, E is residence, whereas the majority of land uses in zone C are temple and palace. In addition, the majority of the local residences structural conditions are rated between poor and acceptable conditions. As for building height, almost all buildings are under the control of the height restriction laws, which are not over 12 to 15 metres as discussed previously; however, there are some schools (zone C and E), universities (zone C), a hospital (zone B) and a department store (zone D) which have the height over the limit of the building height restriction. Furthermore, from the specific observation in some areas, there is no integrated networks of mobility, facilities design for disabled people, pedestrian facilities and proper car parking areas in many areas such as the heritage buildings sites, local residence zones, and in the commercial areas. Notably, from figure 3.14, the only public park in the city centre which is located in zone C area has no public furniture provided for visitors to use. 88

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire The second section is the evaluation of the questionnaire that can be divided into three parts: the general questions, the general factors that represent Ayutthaya, and the smart city characteristics in Ayutthaya.

The first part of the questionnaire shows the general characteristics of the citizens visiting Ayutthaya. The result shows that the respondents are varieties in terms of ages, genders, education qualifications, and reasons for visiting and living in Ayutthaya.

The second part of the questionnaire, which presents the main factors that represent Ayutthaya, reveals that Ayutthaya has the excellent historical value; however, there are many built environment issues that must be improved. To begin with mobility, the outcomes of the questionnaire shows that all modes of transportation, especially for walking and cycling modes, need an urgent development plan. Furthermore, the public facilities must be developed, preserved, and renovated depending on their structural conditions.

The third part of the questionnaire examines the smart city characteristics in Ayutthaya. The outcome shows that the smart government must be required to provide better modern methods to communicate with citizens and participation with neighbourhoods. In addition, in term of the smart economy, the majority of respondents voted for the efficient technology for business and commerce from very poor to satisfied; therefore, it must be enhanced. Next is the smart mobility dimension, which shows that its indicators such as reduced pollution, traffic congestion, improved safety, integrated transport networks within the city and neighbourhoods are mainly rated between very poor and satisfied levels by the citizens; therefore, they must be improved. As for the smart environment dimension, a vast number of respondents agreed that in order to improve the well-being of citizens, it is vital to enhance the better quality of water and air, green space, and waste management. Moreover, in order to develop the smart people dimension in the city, lifelong learning (Elearning) is one of the essential elements. Lastly, the smart living dimension should be integrated in the city since it will develop the better healthy and safe living in Ayutthaya city.

Chapter 3: Case Study Site Analysis and Questionnaire

Chapter 4: Design Framework

4. Introduction The design framework for developing the built environment of Ayutthaya will be produced in this chapter. As a result, the design framework will create a better quality of life of the citizens and preserve the heritage context of Ayutthaya.

4.1 The Smart City Design Framework for Ayutthaya 4.1.1 The Smart Government in Ayutthaya The E-governance, which utilizes advanced technology to enhance efficiency in governing city, plays a key role in developing the smart city of Ayutthaya. To start with the data collection, the Ayutthaya government must effectively collect the important information in city such as numbers of employment, the income per household, and educational levels of citizens. Moreover, the government must be able to analyze the information in order to provide policies to solve the problems and create the well-being of citizens. Furthermore, the government must provide transparency in showing data to citizens, in addition, to allow citizens to participate and making decision in any city issues. Furthermore, the government must collaborate with neighbourhood in developing city of Ayutthaya. The smart government will create a better quality of life, economy, education, city services, mobility, and many other issues. (figure 4.1)

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.1: The smart government design framework for Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 94

Chapter 4: Design Framework 4.1.2 The Smart Economy in Ayutthaya According to the chapter 2.1.2, nowadays, Thailand 4.0 policy, which can be achieved by integrating the smart city concept, has a positive impact on the Ayutthaya economy. To begin the smart farming, which is the part of Thailand 4.0 policy, is about using technology and innovation to increase the agricultural productivity. However, the understanding of Thailand 4.0 policy and the smart farming do not publicized in the wide range; therefore the framework of smart city of Ayutthaya is to educate Thailand 4.0 policy (specific in the smart farming) to Ayutthaya citizens, and especially to farmers. The next design framework is to reintroduce the OTOP, which is the policy of the Thai government from the year 2001 since it has been disregarded when changing to the new government. The OTOP policy is about to promote the local businesses such as basketwork, silk and local processed food of Ayutthaya to achieve worldwide market by using ICT and IoT to advance the productivities and services. The last smart economy framework is to enhance the smart tourism in the city centre, especially in the Ayutthaya Historical Park. The ICT and IOT will improve the quality of travelling of tourists that will affect in rising numbers of them and create job opportunities to the local citizens. (figure 4.2)

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.2: The smart economy design framework for Ayutthaya (smart farm and OTOP) Source: Author, 2020 96

Chapter 4: Design Framework 4.1.3 The Smart Mobility in Ayutthaya The problem of mobility in Ayutthaya begins with walking mode since there are many obstacles in every steps of walking, such as lack of pavements in many areas. Therefore, standard pavements, which also design for disabled accessibility, must be provided in all areas, in addition, to have the shade of trees and shading devices at the pedestrian zones. Moreover, people in all areas must be able to reach the public transportation within walking distance, and the traffic infrastructures such as zebra crossing, pedestrian signal light must be provided in all city areas. Next issue is that the integrated cycling network must be designed since there are cycling paths in a few places nearby visitor attractions. The improvement of walking and cycling modes of transport will lead to reduce traffic congestion and pollution because people will be encouraged to not using cars and motorcycles. Another method to reduce car traffic and pollution is the implementation of smart mobility ecosystem such as ridesharing, carsharing, and on-demand ride. The other notable issue is to provide proper car parking areas for public transports such as motorcycle taxis, van taxis and tour buses instead of parking on the pavements, and car lanes. The last issue is that the elephant riding business, which is one of visitor transport modes in the Ayutthaya historical park, must be cancelled since it is the exploitation of animal. (figure 4.3)

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.3: The smart mobility design framework for Ayutthaya Source: Author, 2020 98

Chapter 4: Design Framework 4.1.4 The Smart Environment in Ayutthaya The design framework of the development of the physical urban environments and preserving the heritage context of Ayutthaya is the main aim of the dissertation. The main strategy is to lead a city environment into a sustainable environment, increase green spaces and preserve the historical urban context. The first is the sustainable environment strategy that the city needs to promote the design for reusability and recyclability in order to reduce the waste emission. Moreover, the smart mobility ecosystem, as discussed previously, must be implemented in order to reduce pollution impacts on the transportation modes. The second strategy is to increase the accessibility to the qualified green area in the local residential area. Furthermore, the developing of Pharam park, which is the only park in the study area must be required since the current design is in poor quality, which affect to have a few people in the area. The increasing of green area and using smart mobility system will affect a better air quality of Ayutthaya. The last strategy is to preserve the historical buildings and elements and avoid the superficial tourism in order to protect the heritage buildings deterioration. (figure 4.4)

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.4: The Smart environment design framework for Ayutthaya (Pharam Park) Source: Author, 2020 100

Chapter 4: Design Framework 4.1.5 The Smart People in Ayutthaya The smart people dimension is vital because the smart people are able to suggest the solution to the city problems and have a well-being of life. Moreover, the smart people, who have the lifelong learning, plays an important role to achieve the smart city project of Ayutthaya since they are able to apply their lives to the new technology and access to the urban services. Therefore, the improvement of the education standard in Ayutthaya, and enhancing lifelong learning must be implemented since the city can be smart by the smart citizens. (figure 4.5)

Figure 4.5: The smart people design framework for Ayutthaya (Lifelong learning) Source: Author, 2020 4.1.6 The Smart Living in Ayutthaya Firstly, the safety city, which is about the way city is designed to prevent violence for all ages people, especially for young, women, elderly, and disabled people, is one of the important parts to create the smart living in Ayutthaya. For example, to begin with the safety experience of walking down a street, street lighting, basic urban facilities and services with proper design measures must be provided. Secondly, the healthy living can be achieved while living in a healthy environment. For instance, people are able to walk and to cycle in the less pollution roads. Moreover, the safety and healthy living designs must be implemented in all areas such as residential, commercial, and the historical park areas. The next issue is to protect flooding, which will cause damaging of the heritage buildings, by installing the adjustable walkway (figure 4.7) that may adjust to be the floodwall during flooding around the heritage site. Lastly, the social isolation in housing groups, which means that there is no social interaction between each household, can be tackled by increasing the communal areas in those housing groups. The increasing of social connection will have a positive impact on both of physical and mental health of Ayutthaya citizens. (figure 4.6)

101

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.6: The smart living design framework for Ayutthaya (residential area) Source: Author, 2020 102

Chapter 4: Design Framework

Figure 4.7: Adjustable walkway and floodwall Source: https://www.matichon.co.th/region/news_295482

4.2 The Chapter Conclusion The chapter has generated the design framework of the smart city of Ayutthaya. The smart government dimension must collaborate with the smart people dimension since smart people can contribute to the urban solutions. Consequently, the smart government can provide the effective policies for the economy, mobility, environment, and living development that will affect the well-being of Ayutthaya citizens, and visitors.

103

Chapter 4: Design Framework

104

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

5. Dissertation Conclusion The final chapter of the dissertation of the smart city concept in the built environment of Ayutthaya will conclude and clarify the dissertation questions, aims, problems, and methodologies, which were implemented and examined during the study. Moreover, this chapter will involve the result of the dissertation and further future research to be conducted.

5.1 The conclusion of the dissertation questions and aims 5.1.1 The smart city This topic was presented in chapter two and four 5.1.1.1 Question 1: What is a smart city? (chapter 2.1) The smart city is one of the urban concepts, which integrate ICT and IoT with a city infrastructure in order to improve a city in many aspects. 5.1.1.2 Aim 1: To clarify a better understanding of the smart city dimensions. (chapter 2.1) There are six smart city dimensions: smart governance, smart economy, smart mobility, smart environment, smart people, and smart living. The smart people dimension is the most vital because smart people are able to suggest the policies in order to develop the smart government, economy, mobility, environment, and living in the city. 5.1.1.3 Question 3: How can smart city dimensions apply to the Ayutthaya heritage citiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; built environment? (chapter 4) The smart city concept can be applied in Ayutthaya city without disturbing the physical heritage contexts of the city. For example, developing of the smart environment in the city such as increasing green area which will help to decrease air pollution from car traffic nearby the heritage sites. 5.1.1.4 Aim 5: To apply the smart city concept in Ayutthaya to enhance peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s better quality of life. (chapter 4) All smart city dimensions can help to develop the Ayutthaya physical environment. The delightful environment will create a well-being of people living in it. 107

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion 5.1.2 The Ayutthaya heritage This topic was presented in chapter two 5.1.2.1 Question 2: What is the value and identity of Ayutthaya heritage? (chapter 2.4) Ayutthaya heritage architecture is valuable since, according to UNESCO (2020), it bears unique of cultural tradition and civilisation.

5.1.2.2 Aim 2: To clarify a better understanding of the value of the Ayutthaya heritage in terms of both tangibility and intangibility, as well as Ayutthaya architecture identity. (chapter 2.3 and 2.4) The tangible value of Ayutthaya heritage, which can express its unique identity, is Ayutthaya heritage physical elements or buildings. Moreover, the tangible value of the heritage can create an intangible heritage value in terms of knowledge, belief, and economic value. 5.1.3 The Ayutthaya urban transformation This topic was presented in chapter two 5.1.3.1 Aim 3: To study the urban transformation of Ayutthaya (chapter 2.2) The city centre of Ayutthaya has a slightly urban transformation process because land uses have been allocated mainly for the heritage sites surrounded by local residences. In addition, there are some specific laws for the city centre of Ayutthaya in order to conserve the character of the heritage city. For instance, the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s height is limited to no more than 12 to 15 metres. Therefore, the development of physical environment of Ayutthaya city by using the smart city concept must be performed along with the conservation of the heritage city context. 5.1.4 The Ayutthaya urban physical condition This topic was presented in chapter three 5.1.4.1 Aim 4: To study the urban physical condition of Ayutthaya (chapter 3) The comprehensive study of Ayutthayaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current urban physical condition is required in order to find out Ayutthaya urban problems before solving them by suggesting the smart city design framework.

108

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

5.2 The conclusion of the dissertation problems To conclude, the Ayutthaya urban problems, which were mentioned in chapter one and discovered in chapter three, can be solved by using the smart city concept. In addition, there are various urban problems such as poor quality of public infrastructure, natural environment, mode of transportation and many others, which urgently require development design framework.

5.3 The conclusion of the dissertation methodologies The mixed methods of both quantitative and qualitative methods were implemented in this dissertation. 5.3.1 the quantitative method The questionnaire of the current situation and problems of Ayutthaya urban design was conducted. The questionnaire results have been transformed into numerical reports (graphs) for further analysis. 5.3.2 the qualitative method In order to understand Ayutthaya urban environment, site observation, walking tool, and serial vision were conducted at the same time by the researcher. Observation of the city by walking is an effective tool to explore and sense the urban environment. Moreover, the photos have been taken to record the urban visual experiences and using them for the analysis and mapping part.

5.4 The dissertation result and further study The study result shows that the majority of people agreed with poor and satisfying levels of the Ayutthaya urban environment, whereas agreed with the high value of the historical buildings to be preserved. Hence, the dissertation endeavours to develop the smart city design framework to improve the Ayutthayaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s built environment and preserve the urban heritage context. Furthermore, the further study, which will advance this dissertation, is described as followings. 1. To study the sustainability smart city concept 2. To provide comprehensive details of the smart city design framework in both short- and long-term policies 3. To make Ayutthaya smart city as a model for another heritage city in Thailand 109

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion Since there are various cities in Thailand that have started the Smart City model, including key economic cites such as Phuket, Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, Chonburi, Rayong, Chachoengsao, and Bangkok (Huawei, 2019). However, there is no heritage city appeared on the lists; therefore, the smart heritage city has been chosen to study in the dissertation (the case study of Ayutthaya). In addition, the scope of smart city concept which has already studied in the dissertation has a potential to be implemented in another heritage city of Thailand or Sukhothai, which was the first capital city of Thailand and has its unique heritage Sukhothai style art and architecture (UNESCO, 2020). In addition, Ayutthaya and Sukhothai have some similarities in urban physical contexts such as heritage architecture and low-rise household buildings. Hence, the design framework of Ayutthaya Smart City can be an example model for further study of smart city design framework of Sukhothai.

110

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

111

Chapter 5: Dissertation Conclusion

112

Bibliography

Bibliography Albino, V., Beradi, U. and Dangelico, R. M. (2015) ‘Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives.’ Journal of Urban Technology, 22:1, pp.3-21 [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2014.942092 Al-Saffar, M. (2018) Toward an Integrated Smart Sustainable Urbanism Framework in The Historic Centre of Bagdad (Old Rusafa as a Case Study). PhD. Manchester Metropolitan University. Angelidou, M., Karachaliou, E. Angelidou, T. and Stylianidis, E. (2017) ‘Cultural Heritage in Smart City Environments.’ In school of Spatial Planning and Development. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. Volume XLII-2/W5. 2017 26th International CIPA Symposium 2017, Ottawa, Canada, 28 August–01 September 2017, pp.27-32. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] DOI: 10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-27-2017 Anuroj, B. (2018) Thailand 4.0 – a new value-based economy. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] https://www.boi.go.th/upload/content/Thailand,%20Taking%20off%20to%20new%20heights%20@%20belgiu m_5ab4e8042850e.pdf Aulet, S. and Vidal, D. (2018) ‘Tourism and religion: sacred spaces as transmitters of heritage values.’ Church, Communication and Culture. 3:3, pp.237-259. [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] https://doi.org/10.1080/23753234.2018.1542280 Baker, C. and Phongpaichit, P. (2017) A History of Ayutthaya. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barua, K. (2018) Ayutthaya, Thailand, East of Venice. [Online] [Accessed on 18th January 2020] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327798519_Ayutthaya_Thailand_East_of_the_Venice Batty M., Axhausen, K., Fosca, G., Pozdnoukhov, A., Bazzani, A., Wachowicz, M., Ouzounis, G. and Portugali, Y. (2012) ‘Smart cities of the future.’ The European Physical Journal, Special Topics, 214, pp. 481–518. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2012-01703-3 115

Bibliography

Bifulco, F., Tregua, M., Amitrano, C. C. and D'Auria, A. (2016) ‘ICT and sustainability in smart cities management.’ International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29:2 pp.132-147. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295249578_ICT_and_sustainability_in_smart_cities_management Boonkong, S. (2018) The History of 417 years of Ayutthaya. Nonthaburi: Book stone. Borda, A. and Bowen, J. (2017) Smart Cities and Cultural Heritage – A Review of Developments and Future Opportunities. [Online] [Accessed on 16th January 2020] https://openresearch.lsbu.ac.uk/download/7f6fd2694969dc9830d492d25de97953c5d32b067da4fba0c15f60a 75773bc4a/740244/ewic_eva17_heritage_paper1.pdf Careri, F. (2002) Walkscapes: Walking as an Aesthetic Practice. Barcelona: GG. Chan, C. and Ryan, D. (2009) ‘Assessing the Effects of Weather Conditions on Physical Activity Participation Using Objective Measures’. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 6:10, pp. 2639–2654. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] DOI: 10.3390/ijerph6102639 Clark, V and Creswell, J.W. (2008) The Mixed Methods Reader. The United States of America: SAGE Cullen, G. (1996) The concise townscape. Oxford; Boston: Butter Worth-Heinemann. Diaz-Andreu, M. (2017) ‘Heritage Values and the Public.’ Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage. 4:1, pp.2-6. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2016.1228213 Duangthima, W. and Hokao, K. (2013) ‘Assessing the Flood Impacts and the Cultural Properties Vulnerabilities in Ayutthaya, Thailand.’ Procedia Environmental Sciences, 17, pp.739-748. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] DOI: 10.1016/j.proenv.2013.02.091

116

Bibliography

Efinity. (2016) 10 years national tourism development project. [Online] [Accessed on 25th January 2020] https://secretary.mots.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/policy/article_attach/02FinalReportDirection10Year.pdf Feilden, B. (2003) Conservation Historic Buildings. 3rd ed., Oxford: Architectural Press. Fine Arts Department. (1976) The area of Ayutthaya Historical Park announced in 1976. [Online image] [Accessed on 21st January 2020] http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2519/D/102/2149.PDF Fine Arts Department. (2019) The Ayutthaya Historical Park, Ayutthaya. [Online image] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] http://www.qrcode.finearts.go.th/index.php/th/historicalpark Graham, B. and Howard, P. (2008) The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Ghozali, A., Ariyaningsih, Sukmara, R., and Aulia, B. (2016) ‘A Comparative Study of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation on Flood Management between Ayutthaya City (Thailand) and Samarinda City (Indonesia).’ Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227, pp.424-429. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.096 Haradhan, M. (2018) ‘Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects.’ Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7:1, pp.1-29. [Online] [Accessed on 26th March 2020] https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/85654/1/MPRA_paper_85654.pdf Hua, S. (2010) ‘World Heritage Classification and Related Issues—A Case Study of the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.’ Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2:5, pp.6954-6961. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.05.048

117

Bibliography

Huawei (2019) Smart City Framework and Guidance for Thailand. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] https://www.huawei.com/mediafiles/MediaFiles/5/B/9/%7B5B9F4D7B-3F7E-4ED4-A9EE3ECD47D38554%7DSMART%20CITY%20FRAMEWORK%20AND%20GUIDANCE%20FOR%20THAILAND_S MART%20CITY%20SERVICES%20FOR%20PHUKET_EN.pdf James, H. (2005) ‘The Fall of Ayutthaya: A Reassessment.’ The Journal of Burma Studies. 5:4, pp.75-108. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://www.niu.edu/burma/publications/jbs/vol5/Abstract4_JamesOpt.pdf Jeanette, A. (2014) Education, Values and Ethics in international heritage: Learning to Respect. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Jica Kokusai Kogyo. (no date) PEQMP for Ayutthaya. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/11897691_03.pdf Kumar, T.M. and Dahiya, B. (2017) Smart Economy in Smart Cities. Berlin: Springer. Leksukhum, S. (2020) Wat Khun Mueng Jai. [Online] [Accessed on 15th March 2020] http://www.icomosthai.org/m_news/santi/watKhun_.pdf Lenzerini, F. (2011) ‘Intangible Cultural Heritage: The Living Culture of Peoples.’ European Journal of International Law. 22:1, pp.101-120 [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chr006 Lohapetcharat, K. (2018) The history for travelling of Ayutthaya. Bangkok: Lukebakhasibsee. Louangrath, P. (2017) Thailand4.0 Readiness. Bangkok University International. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319006594_Thailand_40_Readiness Macdonald, S. and Headlam, N. (2009) Research Methods Handbook. Manchester: CLES 118

Bibliography

Madakam, S. and Ramaswamy (2014) Smart city- Six dimensions. [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289868190_Smart_Cities__Six_Dimensions_A_Scholarstical_Articles_Review Marmion, M.M. (2012) Understanding heritage: multiple meanings and values. PhD. Bournemouth University. Matichon. (2016) Flood Wall. [Online] [Accessed on 23rd March 2020] https://www.matichon.co.th/region/news_295482 Mohajan, H. (2018) Qualitative research methodology in social sciences and related subjects. [Online] [Accessed on 24th June 2020] DOI: 10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571 Mohanty, S., Choppali, U., Kougianos, E. (2016) Everything You Wanted to Know about Smart Cities. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306098132_Mohanty_IEEEMCE_Smart-Cities Morelli, J. (2011) ‘Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals.’ Journal of Environmental and Sustainability. 1:1, pp. 1-9 [Online] [Accessed on 16th March 2020] https://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=jes Nam, T. and Pardo, T. (2011) ‘Conceptualizing Smart City with Dimensions of Technology, People, and Institutions.’ In Digital Government Research Conference. The Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference. University at Albany, State University of New York, U.S., 12th June, pp.282-291. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://intaaivn.org/images/cc/Urbanism/background%20documents/dgo_2011_smartcity.pdf Niladech, S. (2016) ‘Art in Ayutthaya period, 19th century Buddhist era 2310’. Najua: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture. 14, pp.73-82. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] https://www.tcithaijo.org/index.php/NAJUA-Arch/article/view/46199/38224 119

Bibliography

Ongkhluap, S. (2012) ‘Tourism Impacts on the Ayutthaya World Heritage Site: Measuring the Perceptions of the Host Community.’ International Thai Tourism Journal, 8:1, pp.31-55. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] https://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jitt/article/view/25372/21585 OTOP. (2015) The Handbook of The New Entrepreneurs of OTOP. [Online] [Accessed on 21st March 2020] http://www.oic.go.th/FILEWEB/CABINFOCENTER2/DRAWER091/GENERAL/DATA0000/00000183.PDF Pazzaglia, A., Stafford, E., and Rodriguez, S. (2016) Survey methods for educators: Analysis and reporting of survey data (part 3 of 3). [Online] [Accessed on 26th March 2020] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED567753.pdf Phungtian, C. (2000) Thai-Cambodian Culture Relationship through Arts. Ph.D. Magdh University. Portoles, J. (2018) Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Cities. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] http://www.agenda21culture.net/sites/default/files/report_7_-_cultural_heritage_sustainable_development__eng.pdf Rajab, H. and Cinkler, T. (2018) ‘IoT based Smart Cities’. Rome: IEEE. Riganti, P. (2017) ‘Smart Cities and Heritage Conservation: Developing a Smart Heritage Agenda for Sustainable Inclusive Communities.’ International Journal of Architectural Research, 11:3, pp.16-27. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v11i3.1398 Ruangkanjanawit, A. (2002) Architectural Design of Ubosatha and Vihara in Late Ayutthaya Period (A.D. 1630-1767). Master. Silapakorn University. Saipradsit, A. and Staiff, R. (2008) ‘Crossing the Cultural Divide: Western Visitors and Interpretation at Ayutthaya World Heritage Site, Thailand.’ Journal of Heritage Tourism, 2:3, pp.211-224. [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] https://doi.org/10.2167/jht061.0 Salazar, N. and Zhu, Y. (2015) Global Heritage: A Reader. Wiley: Blackwell. 120

Bibliography

Scott, D. and Lemieux, C. (2010) ‘Weather and Climate Information for Tourism’. Procedia Environmental Sciences 1, pp.146-183. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] DOI: 10.1016/j.proenv.2010.09.011 Sekkhunthod, S. (2020) To Enchance the Local Government to Digital Government by The Policy of Digital Thailand. [Online] [Accessed on 21st March 2020] https://www.dga.or.th/upload/download/file_d888c5368c0e354f9c96d6330236c831.pdf Sinclair, I. (2003) Lights out for the territory: 9 excursions in the secret history of London. London: Penguin. Siripratan, Y., Pradapsilp, N., Nakkasem, O., and Chaimongkol, S. (2019) Pattern of Improper Building Use in The Ayutthaya City Island. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] http://geo.soc.ku.ac.th/box/document/267/145_Ayutthaya-Article.pdf Smit, B. and Onwuegbuzie, A. (2018) ‘Observations in Qualitative Inquiry: When What You See Is Not What You See.’ International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, pp.1-3. [Online] [Accessed on 26th March 2020] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1609406918816766 Sorikul, A. (2015) The Evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan Implementation: A Case Study of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Comprehensive Plan. Master. Suranaree University of Technology. Taengpun, P. (2012) The urban development and the monument conservation of Ayutthaya ancient city and its environs, 1939-2001. Master. Srinakarinwirot University. Tansukanan, P. (2016) Urban Conservation. Bangkok: Chula Press. The Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning. (1967) Ayutthaya land use in 1967. [Online image] [Accessed on 21st January 2020] http://pvnweb.dpt.go.th/ayutthaya/index.php/2017-12-20-05-03-45 Thailand 4.0. (no date) Thailand 4.0. [Online image] [Accessed on 22nd March 2020] https://sites.google.com/site/kdbuprawatithephfutbxl/thailand-4-01?tmpl=%2Fsystem%2Fapp%2Ftemplates%2Fprint%2F&showPrintDialog=1 121

Bibliography

Thanvisitthpon, N. (2016) ‘The Tourism Development Policy for Thailand’s Ayutthaya Historical Park on the Locals’ Livelihoods and Government Responsibility.’ Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 16:2, pp.1-20. [Online] [Accessed on 16th January 2020] https://doi.org/10.14456/sujsha.2016.24 The Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning. (2002) Town planning in the past. [Online] [Accessed on 12th January 2020] http://www.dpt.go.th/knowledges/TCplanning/txt/act1.pdf The Ministry of Transport. (2019) Ayutthaya land use in 2009. [Online image] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] http://www.thailandtod.com/files/Ayutthaya/3.pdf The National Statistical Office. (2019) Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Provincial Statistical Report: 2019. [Online] [Accessed on 3rd February 2020] http://ayuttaya.nso.go.th/images/attachments/article/220/%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A5%E0%B9%88%E0%B8% A1%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8 %96%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%B4%20%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%B5%202562_compressed.pdf The National Statistics Organization of Thailand. (2020) the tourism statistics of Ayutthaya. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] http://ayuttaya.old.nso.go.th/nso/project/search/result_by_department.jsp The Royal Thai Army war college. (2020) Army in Ayutthaya. [Online] [Accessed on 12th January 2020] https://www.awc.ac.th/suggestionCommadant/box4/swb5.pdf The Toursim Authority of Thailand. (2019) Ayutthaya. [Online] [Accessed on 15th March 2020] https://www.thailandtourismus.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Ayutthaya.pdf Timothy, D. and Boyd, S. (2003) Heritage Tourism. New York: Pearson Education. Torre, M. (2002) Accessing the values of cultural heritage. Ph.D. The Getty Conservation Institute.

122

Bibliography

UNESCO. (2017) Culture. [Online] [Accessed on 25th January 2020] http://www.unesco.org/new/en/cairo/culture/tangible-cultural-heritage/ UNESCO. (2017) Ayutthaya Historical Park. [Online] [Accessed on 16th January 2020] https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/ayutthaya-historical-park UNESCO. (2020) The Criteria for Selection. [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] https://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/ UNESCO. (2020) World Heritage List. [Online] [Accessed on 2nd February 2020] https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/ Visualhistoricalpark. (2019) Wat Chai Watanaram. [Online image] [Accessed on 14th February 2020] http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watchaiwatthanaram.html Visualhistoricalpark. (2019) Wat Kudidao. [Online image] [Accessed on 14th February 2020] http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watkudeedao.html Visualhistoricalpark. (2019) Wat Phra Sri Sanphet. [Online image] [Accessed on 14th February 2020] http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watphrasisanphet.html Visualhistoricalpark. (2019) Wat Phu Kao Thong. [Online image] [Accessed on 14th February 2020] http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watphukhaothong.html Visualhistoricalpark. (2019) Wat Ratchaburana. [Online image] [Accessed on 14th February 2020] http://virtualhistoricalpark.finearts.go.th/ayutthaya/360/watratchaburana.html

123

Bibliography

Viechnicki, P., Khuperkar, A., Fishman T., and Eggers, W. (2015) Smart mobility Reducing congestion and fostering faster, greener, and cheaper transportation options. [Online] [Accessed on 26th January 2020] https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/smart-mobility-trends/DUP_1027_SmartMobility_MASTER1.pdf Visudharomn, K. (2014) history of Thai architecture. Assumption: Assumption University. 48-page handout, distributed on 8th October 2014. Visudharomn, K. (2014) history of Thai architecture. Assumption: Assumption University. 31-page handout, distributed on 29th October 2014. Wadhwa, M. (2015) â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Understanding the Impact of Smart Cities and the Need for Smart Regulations.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; SSRN Electronic Journal, pp.1-11. [Online] [Accessed on 9th February 2020] DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2908299 Woetzel, J., Remes, J., Boland, B., Lv, K., Sinha, S., Strube, G., Means, J., Law, J., Cadena, A. and Tann, V. (2018) Smart Cities: Digital Solutions for A More Livable Future. [Online] [Accessed on 24th January 2020] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/smart-cities-digitalsolutions-for-a-more-livable-future

124

Appendices

Appendices Appendix1: The English version of questionnaire

127

Appendices

128

Appendices

129

Appendices Appendix2: The Thai version of questionnaire

130

Appendices

131

Appendices

132